ASK
BONNIE for June 2003
Question #1:
Which
oils are safe for cooking?
Answer #1:
For
bread:
Better butter (8oz whipped butter, 4 oz canola or olive oil)
For high cooking temp:
Safflower/Canola oil
For salads and low cooking temp:
Olive oil
Question #2:
Lately I have been hearing and reading about cautions
surrounding soy - can you give me some advice on this?
The
cautions are regarding concentrations of the phytoestrogens and increased risks
of breast cancer.
Answer #2:
This is not true - in fact, it is just the opposite. Phytoestrogens are cancer preventives, not causative agents. The Okinawan's and Japanese have the lowest rate of breast cancer of any industrialized country (much lower than the US) and soy is a staple in their diet. I recommend fermented soy (tofu/tempeh/miso/soymilk) over heavy soy protein concentrates. Too much soy protein can cause digestive allergic reactions.
Question #3:
What nutrient can you take to keep the mosquitoes from
biting?
Answer #3:
B-1 50mg and/or garlic help.
Question #4:
What's your thoughts on coral calcium?
Answer #4:
I
did answer this a few months ago. Although, this article recently appeared and I
feel it says it all...
From the Depths
Many Experts Don't Swallow Extraordinary Claims for Calcium Supplements Derived
From Sea Coral
By Judy Packer-Tursman
Special to The Washington Post
Tuesday, May 20, 2003; Page HE01
If you believe the recent flood of Internet ads, infomercials and
health-food-store promotions for coral calcium -- and many apparently do -- this
dietary supplement is not just the best way to ensure strong bones. It is also a
weight-loss aid and a potential fix for more than 200 illnesses, including heart
disease, diabetes, Alzheimer's, arthritis and cancer.
Dozens of U.S. and Canadian sellers of the product base their claims on what
they say are the long and healthy lives led by people on the Japanese islands of
Okinawa, where drinking water contains large amounts of calcium derived from the
surrounding coral reefs. Americans, say these marketers, can follow suit by
buying pills that cost as much as $1 a day -- some 20 times the cost of basic
calcium carbonate pills.
According to SPINS, a San Francisco-based market research firm, calcium derived
from coral has grown into at least a $6.5 million business over the past year.
"Tens of millions of people are using it," claims Bob Barefoot, 59, of
Wickenberg, Ariz., the most prominent U.S. marketer of coral calcium, which he
sells under such names as Coral Calcium Supreme and Best Coral Calcium Supreme
Plus. "Can they all be wrong?"
Quite possibly, according to a wide array of academic experts, mainstream and
alternative medicine clinicians and even dietary supplement industry reps. They
say there is no evidence to support many claims made about coral calcium:
Several studies suggest Okinawans more likely owe their longevity to such
factors as a diet rich in vegetables, grains and fish; an active lifestyle; and
strong social networks for the elderly.
Some skeptics also voice concern that coral calcium could trigger dangerous
reactions -- such as hives, breathing difficulties or swelling -- in people with
allergies to shellfish because coral reefs are often home to such organisms.
Paul Takahashi, a geriatrician at the Mayo Clinic, cautions such patients
against taking the product. He also worries that the product -- like all dietary
supplements, it is only lightly regulated by the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) -- may contain harmful amounts of heavy metals such as lead, mercury and
cadmium, which over time could cause digestive problems, kidney damage, nerve
disorders and muscle and joint pain.
"It's the hottest quack product in the last 50 years," says retired
Allentown, Pa., psychiatrist Stephen Barrett, who posts blistering critiques of
alternative medicine on his "Quackwatch" Web site. "I've never
seen such intense promotion in my life."
The Council for Responsible Nutrition, a trade group representing about 65
dietary supplement makers and suppliers, sought federal action against Barefoot
and other manufacturers making what it calls "egregious" claims.
"The problem with coral calcium is [that] many of the claims are over the
top, with no scientific validity," said John Hathcock, the group's vice
president for scientific and international affairs.
Government regulators have also taken note. As far back as 1999, the FDA issued
a warning letter to a coral calcium marketer for unfounded therapeutic claims on
its product labels. No further enforcement action was taken, according to an
agency spokeswoman.
Under federal law, dietary supplements are not required to go through the same
pre-market testing as do drugs to show safety and efficacy, but manufacturers
are supposed to supply accurate and truthful labeling. If the FDA finds a
supplement to be unsafe, the agency can call for a voluntary recall or force
products off the shelves.
Recently, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which regulates product
advertising, has signaled interest in coral calcium sales tactics.
Coral calcium "is certainly an area that historically, priority-wise, we
would be very interested in," said Rich Cleland, assistant director of the
FTC's division of advertising practices. "It's a widely marketed product,
and there are some very strong therapeutic claims being made by some
marketers."
A Hunger for Calcium
Coral calcium marketers and their
critics agree on two points: Calcium plays an important role in the body, and
Americans aren't getting enough of it. Some evidence from recent studies
suggests that calcium, besides maintaining bone strength, may be good for the
heart, help lower blood pressure and improve blood lipid levels. An American
Cancer Society study published in February also found that calcium may modestly
reduce the risk of colorectal cancer. Federally funded researchers are
recruiting patients for a study on whether high-dose calcium supplementation --
750 milligrams twice a day for two years -- improves the health of overweight
adults.
Eating calcium-rich foods, such as milk, dairy products and leafy green
vegetables, is the preferred way to get calcium, say many clinicians and
researchers. But the May 2001 Wellness Letter published by the University of
California, Berkeley, found that, instead of getting the daily 1,000 milligrams
that experts recommend for men and premenopausal women (post-menopausal women
need 1,200 to 1,500 milligrams), the typical American woman gets 625 milligrams
and the typical man 865. Calcium supplement sales accounted for $775 million in
2001, according to the Nutrition Business Journal, making calcium the
third-highest-selling dietary supplement category, behind multivitamins and
combination herbal products.
Barefoot, who received a two-year diploma in chemical technology in 1967 from
Canada's Northern Alberta Institute of Technology, says he
"discovered" coral calcium in the medical literature in 1982 and
introduced the product in the United States in 1997. Last year, after selling
his products largely online, he began a TV campaign that he says has helped
boost monthly sales from 200,000 to 5 million bottles. In his infomercial and
books, including "The Calcium Factor: The Scientific Secret of Health and
Youth," "Barefoot on Coral Calcium" and "Death by
Diet," he promotes calcium as "the nutrient of the 21st century."
Experts, however, contest many of the claims made by him and fellow coral
calcium marketers, including these:
Absorption Barefoot claims the calcium in his product is more easily absorbed by
the body, thanks to "70 trace nutrients and the perfect amount of
magnesium." Coral calcium, he says, is "70-plus [percent] absorbable
by the body," compared with what he claims is 1 percent for the
calcium-containing antacid Tums.
Robert Heaney, a professor of medicine at the Creighton University School of
Medicine in Omaha, isn't buying that without proof. Heaney, who helped revise
government recommendations on calcium intake in 1997, said he has asked Barefoot
for data, without success.
Heaney also dismisses as "utter nonsense" Barefoot's assertion that
Tums is 1 percent absorbable. Disbelief is also the reaction of Adrianne
Bendich, clinical director of calcium research at GlaxoSmithKline, the maker of
Tums. Heaney, who has tested the absorption of calcium products in the body,
says pure calcium carbonate is 30 to 35 percent absorbable -- no matter how it
is sold.
After an initial phone conversation, Barefoot did not return follow-up calls
made to relay critics' comments and seek his response.
Kurt Althof, product manager of Coral Inc., in Incline Village, Nev., which
sells the bulk raw material for coral calcium products, similarly claims coral
calcium is better absorbed than other calcium supplements. He concedes, however,
that he has no data to support this claim. Testimonials on coral calcium's
benefits "have been so strong," he said, that "it almost doesn't
need that science."
Calcium absorption is a less than straightforward matter.
David Roll, director of dietary supplements for the Rockville-based U.S.
Pharmacopeia, which sets voluntary quality standards for dietary supplements,
explains that a tablet of 1,500 milligrams of calcium carbonate contains about
600 milligrams of calcium (40 percent of the total) that is available to be
absorbed by the body -- of which perhaps 200 milligrams would actually be
absorbed. The recommended daily intake of 1,000 milligrams of calcium, he says,
is the amount experts say you should ingest, not how much would actually be
absorbed.
Indeed, there's a limit to how much calcium can be absorbed at one time. John
Swartzberg, clinical professor of medicine at Berkeley's School of Public Health
and editor of the Wellness Letter, puts that limit at about 500 milligrams of
calcium carbonate; some experts set it slightly higher. For this reason, experts
recommend spreading calcium doses out over the course of the day.
Under a standard that became effective in 1995, Roll said, calcium carbonate
products bearing labels of the U.S. Pharmacopeia (USP) must dissolve within 30
minutes, and dissolution is needed for absorption to occur. "No coral
calcium products have the USP label as far as we know," he added. The Mayo
Clinic's Takahashi said he recommends calcium carbonate for most of his patients
because it is both effective for maintaining bone health and cheap. For those
who find calcium supplements constipating, he recommends somewhat costlier
calcium citrate supplements, which may be absorbed a bit more easily, meaning
people may not not need to take as much. Incidentally, vitamin D aids calcium
absorption; magnesium doesn't; "that's been thoroughly tested" by
researchers, Heaney said.
Blood acidity Barefoot and other coral calcium marketers claim that their
products work by neutralizing the bloodstream's acidity, making it slightly
alkaline, which helps to revitalize cells and promote health.
"That's absolutely bogus," says Swartzberg. He explains that the pH of
the bloodstream is tightly controlled by the body and kept within a range of
7.38 to 7.42. He says there is no evidence that coral calcium can change the
blood's pH or that such a change would be healthier. Indeed, he says, cells
can't work optimally if the body is too alkaline or too acidic.
Product contents and pricing Barefoot say his product is worth the $17 to $20
per bottle for which it sells online because it contains "marine
coral," which sells for $44 per kilo. He said large retailers are able to
market coral calcium for about $6 a bottle because they are "only buying
dirt," using an inferior "rock coral" that sells for $1 a kilo.
That distinction is lost on Brent Bauer, chairman of the Mayo Clinic's
complementary and integrative medicine program. He suspects that coral calcium
products contain the same inexpensive calcium carbonate found in regular
supplements, with "chunks of limestone, sandstone and debris that doesn't
do anything."
Because dietary supplements are so lightly regulated in the United States, there
is no independent testing of product contents and no way for consumers to know
if they're getting what the seller says they are -- assuming those contents had
therapeutic value.
Science Barefoot cited a few recent Japanese studies that he said showed coral
calcium's benefits. But Swartzberg and others said the studies were very small
(one, cited widely on coral calcium Web sites, involved 12 people), poorly
designed and not controlled. The Wellness Letter dismissed coral calcium in its
February issue, saying promotional statements were based on "zero
science."
"Everything we write about tends to be evidence-based," said
Swartz-berg. "No matter how hard we tried to keep an open mind on coral
calcium, we could see no redeeming feature."€
Judy Packer-Tursman is a Washington area journalist who writes frequently about
alternative medicine.
© 2003 The Washington
Post Company
Have a happy, healthy day.
|
Past Ask Bonnie entries: 1999 June,
July,
Aug,
Sept,
Oct,
Nov,
Dec, |
|
|
ASK BONNIE appears each month on http://www.nutritionalconcepts.com
© Copyright 2003 Nutritional Concepts, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction of any page on this website in whole or in part without permission is prohibited. Disclaimer: The information contained on this website is not intended as a substitute for medical advice nor is intended to diagnose, cure, mitigate, or treat any disease. For health problems relating to individual needs, consult your physician before adopting any suggestions made by the website.