DOCTOR YOURSELF Newsletter (Vol. 4, No. 20, for September 20, 2004)

[Guest guest]

> " Andrew W. Saul " <drsaul

 

> DOCTOR YOURSELF Newsletter (Vol. 4, No. 20,

> for September 20, 2004)

> Wed, 25 Aug 2004 12:38:49 -0400

>

> To for free:

> dynewsletter-

>

> " Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean they're

> not all out to get you. "

>

> (A favorite psychiatrist's joke.)

>

> The DOCTOR YOURSELF NEWSLETTER (Vol. 4, No. 20, for

> September 20, 2004)

>

> " Free of charge, free of advertising, and free of

> the A.M.A. "

>

> Written and copyright 2004 by Andrew W. Saul of

> http://www.doctoryourself.com , which welcomes 1.5

> million visitors

> annually. Commercial use of the website or the

> contents of this Newsletter

> is strictly prohibited.

>

> SOY, OH BOY, OH BOY!

>

> My ever-vigilant readers will not let me get around

> this topic, so here we

> go.

>

> B. E. writes:

>

> " I have read in numerous places that soy is bad for

> you. I would appreciate

> any info you can provide about this. I cannot think

> that lecithin would be

> harmful but there are reports about soy products

> being bad or poisonous to

> the body. What is the truth on this? "

>

>

> A. T. writes:

>

> " I have been reading some articles about soybeans, I

> would like to have your

> opinion on these articles.

> http://www.westonaprice.org/soy/tragedy.html

> http://www.westonaprice.org/soy/lecithin.html "

>

> Many of what I consider to be reputable sources

> (including the Weston Price

> Foundation and Dr. Joseph Mercola, among others)

> have come out against soy.

> I have considerable respect for these writers, as do

> many of my regular

> readers. I am not a soy boy, but I do think that for

> most healthy people,

> eating some soy products does not qualify as

> high-risk activity. That word

> again is " some. " I am not looking for a jousting

> match here. As W.C. Fields

> said, let's take the bull by the tail and face the

> situation: don't the

> wildly high hormone counts in meat and milk cry out

> for our more immediate

> concern? By comparison, it's my true view that tofu

> harms too few. (Say THAT

> three times fast.)

>

> I propose a pair of soy " litmus tests. "

>

> First, a CON-TEST:

>

> Ask anyone opposed to soy specifically what protein

> sources they'd prefer

> that you do eat. If they allow feed-lot meat and

> factory-farm milk, that's

> not logical. Of course, if they say no to those too,

> what's left? Avoiding

> meat, avoiding dairy products, AND avoiding soy may

> place an unreasonable

> crimp on peoples' food choices. Not everyone has the

> money to buy organic;

> not everyone can (or wants to) hunt wild game. Too

> much perceived

> prohibition sometimes leads the public to the oldest

> junk-food diet excuse

> there is: The " what the heck; we've all got to go

> sometime, so let's go eat

> at McNothing's " attitude.

>

> I think that is the real danger.

>

> To me, eating tofu, tempeh, miso, and the occasional

> TVP meat substitute is

> better than eating the meat. My experience tells me

> that real people living

> real lives are going to crave one or t'other.

>

> That, or go nuts. Yes, nuts may be the protein

> source we can all get along

> with. Truth is, they are generally and unfairly

> portrayed as high-fat (or

> worse, as salted, or " honey roasted " ). Nuts as a

> main dish makes the protein

> issue moot. Unsalted, dry roasted or raw, nuts are

> good food when well

> chewed.

>

> Now, the PRO-TEST:

>

> Ask any soy-booster exactly how much soy they

> actually eat. If it is a

> tofu-enhanced meal twice a week, is that really so

> bad? I concede without

> hesitation that OVER consumption of soy is unwise.

> But having raised my

> kids, and myself to this day, on the periodic tofu

> " hotdog " and bean-curd

> stir fry, I think we are spending too much time

> barking up the wrong tree.

>

> Let's go after the big stuff, and here it is:

>

> 1) High fiber (bean and whole grain based) diets

> enhance excretion of excess

> hormones, including estrogens. Vegetables and

> vegetable juices do likewise.

> This is good news whether or not you are a soy fan.

>

> 2) A Medline search for " soy, cancer " yielded 644

> studies, some of which

> claim harm and some which claim benefit. While these

> studies date from as

> early as 1975, soy research has only really taken

> off quite recently. It is

> fair to say that this question will not be answered

> to everyone's

> satisfaction anytime soon, and almost certainly not

> by me.

>

> There are many well-designed studies showing that

> soy products help fight

> cancer, and in my opinion these cannot be

> disregarded. It seems to me that

> the studies that show soy benefits look at soy as

> part, and only part, of a

> good non-Western diet. The negative studies involved

> high soy consumption.

>

> You know what I'm going to say next, don't you.

>

> 3) I am against excessive consumption of practically

> anything, including

> soy. Like meat, milk or eggs, soy could well fit the

> role of a condiment.

> Simple truth: None of these should be eaten to

> excess. What we should be

> consuming in vast quantity are fruits, vegetables,

> whole grains, and

> beans/nuts. These are the " New Four Food Groups "

> endorsed by Physicians for

> Responsible Medicine

>

http://www.pcrm.org/health/veginfo/vegetarian_kids.html

> and

>

>

http://www.pcrm.org/health/veginfo/vegetarian_foods.html

> and especially

>

> http://www.pcrm.org/health/veginfo/vsk/index.html

>

> 4) I am yet to be convinced that soy is the ultimate

> culprit behind our

> American epidemic of health problems, including

> thyroid

> (http://www.doctoryourself.com/thyroid.html) and

> infertility issues (see

> Item 10 at

>

http://www.doctoryourself.com/pregnancy_lactation.html).

>

> SOY LECITHIN

>

> M. R. writes:

>

> " I have estrogen-positive breast cancer. My

> oncologist told me I have to

> totally eliminate soy, soy protein, soy lecithin and

> soybean oil from my

> diet. Could you please tell me if " lecithin " is the

> same as " soy lecithin " ?

> Many food products contain " lecithin " and I do not

> know if that means soy or

> not. "

>

> You can assume that lecithin, whether as liquid,

> granules, or capsules, is

> made from soy unless the label clearly states

> otherwise. I know of no other

> commercial source.

>

> T. L. writes:

>

> " Would lecithin increase estrogen in men since it is

> soy based? I suffer low

> testosterone, I think from my alcohol binges, and am

> being treated with

> AndroGel. "

>

> For both writers, I personally think there is

> precious little chance of

> hormones hiding in your lecithin, a highly refined

> end product that bears

> almost no chemical resemblance to a soybean. I would

> think you'd want to

> stay away from hormone-loaded commercial cow's milk

> and hormone-laden

> commercial dead cow muscles. I wonder if your

> beef-and-dairy-P.R.-fed

> doctors have mentioned that? However, just to be

> " soytain, " (N'yuk, n'yuk)

> you can take a " purified lecithin " (phosphatidyl

> choline) supplement if you

> prefer and can afford it. (Note to my new readers: I

> will make neither brand

> nor purchase suggestions.)

>

> I think lecithin supplementation is truly important,

> bordering on essential.

> Lecithin is a cornerstone of the Dr. Rinse

> artery-clearing therapy. In

> addition to essential fatty acids, lecithin contains

> a large quantity of

> choline, which your body makes into the

> neurotransmitter acetylcholine.

>

> Acetylcholine, lecithin and your nerves

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/nerves.html

>

> Lecithin and Parkinson's disease

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/parkinson.html

>

> Some lecithin is found in egg yolks (about 5%), and

> animal brains are loaded

> with it. And I forgot my spoon! Makes eggs, or even

> soy, look pretty good by

> comparison, eh?

>

> How I take my lecithin

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/lecithin.html

>

> For now, this constitutes my soy-related message as

> clearly as I can put it.

> I am not a physician, and certainly not an

> endocrinologist. But you've

> relentlessly asked for my viewpoint, and there you

> have it.

>

> Of course I'm going to get a slew of mail on this

> one, so go ahead: make my

> day. (Email drsaul) In previous

> issues, I have already

> annoyed a bevy of Registered Dieticians, the Price

> Pottenger people, and who

> knows who else. A sampling of soy letters received

> will likely appear in

> future issues of the Doctor Yourself Newsletter.

>

> " FOOD FOR THOUGHT FOR CANCER PATIENTS: Andrew Saul

> will discuss alternative

> cancer therapies next Thursday at Seymour Library. "

>

> by ELLIOTTE BOWERMAN ebowerman

>

> Messenger-Post Newspapers

>

> It can strike anyone, anywhere and at any time. It

> comes in many forms -

> breast, prostate and lung, to name just a few. For

> many, just hearing the

> word scares them. Cancer. Andrew Saul, author of

> DOCTOR YOURSELF: Natural

> Healing that Works,

> (http://www.doctoryourself.com/saulbooks.html)

> believes

> people diagnosed with cancer need to take more

> control over their treatment

> and to remember " your doctor works for you. " He said

> people need practical

> information about easy, inexpensive and effective

> ways to fight cancer.

> Research, Saul said, has proven these methods to be

> somewhat successful, but

> many doctors remain unaware of them. Next week at

> Seymour Library, Saul will

> outline the research supporting the use of vitamin

> supplements and diet in

> the fight against cancer. " We're going to be lucky

> to have him here, " said

> Steve Huff, library director of programming. Huff

> said he began the

> library's talk series with Saul because many people

> have questions and

> concerns about cancer treatments. " People are

> beginning to realize that when

> you have an illness, you don't just throw yourself

> at the mercy of your

> doctors, " Huff said. Saul has a Ph.D. in behavior

> and taught science and

> writes for the peer-reviewed Journal of

> Orthomolecular Medicine. He said his

> talks empower and inform people about alternative

> treatments of illnesses.

>

> " More Americans live off cancer than die from it, "

> Saul said. " It's become,

> unfortunately, a business. " Nutritional research, he

> said, has been

> overshadowed by drug studies funded by

> pharmaceutical companies. " I don't

> think there's a magic-bullet cure for anything, "

> Saul said. " The answer to

> cancer is not in a pharmaceutical product. " Saul

> said research has shown

> that healthy eating improves the immune system,

> making it stronger against

> attacking cancer cells. Saul, a Holley resident,

> believes cancer patients

> should combine chemotherapy and radiation treatments

> with vitamin

> supplements and a near-vegetarian diet. Saul said

> people need to eat less

> food in general, and fat, sugar, junk food and

> chemical additives in

> particular. Plants should be the majority of the

> diet. The former dairy

> farmer said milk, cheese and meat are healthy when

> considered " condiments, "

> just added for flavoring. " One of the few free

> choices we have is what we

> will or won't eat every day, " Saul said. " You can't

> hurt yourself from

> eating right. " Saul said studies has found high

> levels of vitamin C can

> improve cancer treatment, and sometimes even help

> cure the disease. Some

> people question the safety of taking large doses of

> vitamins, but Saul said

> no one has ever died from taking too many

> supplements. He emphasized he has

> no affiliation with any aspect of the supplement or

> pharmaceutical industry.

> He said he just wants to " de-mystify medicine. " " The

> whole idea here is

> education, not medication, " Saul said.

>

> (Reprinted with the permission of Messenger Post

> Newspapers

> http://www.mpnewspapers.com).

>

>

> ARTICLE COMMENTARY:

>

> The newspaper quoted me accurately. However, they

> somewhat understated my

> position on the value of natural cancer therapies.

> And, for the record, an

> average of two kids a year die from large overdoses

> of iron supplements.

> There are no deaths from vitamins, regardless of the

> quantity taken. Deaths

> are from vitamin deficiency.

>

> For information about my book, " DOCTOR YOURSELF:

> Natural Healing that Works "

> please go to

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/saulbooks.html .

>

> IS " FREE " THE BEST WORD IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE?

>

> FREE BOOKS PAGE: Links to thousands of books that

> are free on the Internet

>

> http://users.erols.com/jonwill/freebooks.htm

>

> FATTER THAN EVER

>

> Good grief: America is now so fat that it's the

> cover story for National

> Geographic. The Geographic has always dealt with

> large subject matter,

> things like dinosaurs, manatees, oceans, glaciers

> and continents. Now it's

> our own flabby landscape that gets explored in the

> August 2004 issue. The

> excellent Geographic article brings forward an

> important and sad truth that

> the advertising-supported news media have failed to

> emphasize: Americans are

> NOT eating less fat. We are eating more fat than

> ever. The PERCENTAGE of fat

> is slightly down, but only because we are eating

> more of everything else.

> Fat consumption is up. Consumption of sugar and

> " garbage grains " (processed

> white-flour foodless foods) is really up. And our

> health? It's really down,

> especially that of our kids. (Newman C. Why are we

> so fat? National

> Geographic, August 2004, p 46-61.

>

> What to do? Become a near-vegetarian today, and drag

> you family along with

> you kicking and screaming if need be.

> (http://www.doctoryourself.com/cooking.html and

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/Toddler_Health.html)

> That, or buy your family

> plot early.

>

> There is no nice way to put this: our lifestyles are

> the enemy, and yet our

> lifestyles are within our control to change.

>

> More on weight loss:

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/weight_loss.html

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/dieting.html

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/juicefast.html

>

> BEAN DIP MADE EASY (and no-fat)

>

> Start with one cheap can of " Pork and Beans. "

> (Relax: there's even less pork

> in that can than there is pro-vitamin research in

> the Pharmaceutical

> Journal.) Empty contents of can into blender; add

> some water, chili powder,

> and, if you're making it for me, a blast of cayenne

> pepper sauce.

> Intermittently pulse-blend the mixture. Serve, not

> with potato chips, but

> with cut up celery, cucumber, zucchini, or broccoli

> as your dip delivery

> device. Most commercial bean dip has lots more fat

> and lots more salt than

> this method.

>

>

> KIDNEY STONES

>

> Are some dieticians after me again?

>

> " I have concerns regarding statements that you make

> on your website such as

> the one regarding calcium oxalate stones, where you

> write " if a person gets

> adequate quantities of B-complex vitamins and

> magnesium, this type of stone

> does not form. "

> (http://www.doctoryourself.com/kidney.html) This is

> fantastic news, since, as I am sure you know,

> approximately 85% of all

> problematic renal stones are of the calcium oxalate

> type. Could you please

> send me the study reference to back up this dramatic

> claim that you make. I

> am so glad to hear that other efforts, such as

> adequate hydration, are not

> necessary in avoiding this type of stone. I also

> find it interesting that

> you would recommend a low oxalate diet, when B

> vitamins and magnesium are

> all that is necessary to avoid this type of stone.

> However, you don't find

> it important to limit vitamin C, which is a

> potential source of oxalate that

> could contribute far more to circulating levels of

> oxalate, than dietary

> sources of oxalate, which as you know, are usually

> poorly absorbed. How do

> you justify this advice? Do you think there could be

> a chance that you give

> potentially dangerous medical advice, because of

> commercial conflicts

> between your book and scientific accuracy. That's

> the concern that this

> dietitian has with you teaching or providing medical

> advice. "

>

> Thank you for your letter. " Vitamin C, " wrote

> board-certified chest

> physician Frederick R. Klenner, M.D., " is one of the

> safest substances you

> can put in the human body. " Vitamin C is remarkably

> safe even in enormously

> high doses. Compared to commonly used prescription

> drugs, side effects are

> virtually nonexistent. It does not cause kidney

> stones. In fact, vitamin C

> increases urine flow, favorably lowers urine pH, and

> prevents calcium from

> binding with urinary oxalate. All these features

> help keep stones from

> forming. I support a low oxalate diet because there

> is no advantage in a

> high oxalate diet, and why not have an extra margin

> of safety? I also

> specifically do recommend " adequate hydration, " at

> the very webpage of mine

> that you cited

> (http://www.doctoryourself.com/kidney.html), with

> these

> words: " Maximize fluid intake. " In fact, this is

> first on my list of eleven

> " Ways for anyone to reduce the risk of kidney

> stones. "

>

> As you asked for references to back up my

> statements, you can start with

> these.

>

> Gerster H. No contribution of ascorbic acid to renal

> calcium oxalate stones.

> Ann Nutr Metab. 1997;41(5):269-82.

>

> " Even though a certain part of oxalate in the urine

> derives from metabolized

> ascorbic acid (AA), the intake of high doses of

> vitamin C does not increase

> the risk of calcium oxalate kidney stones. . . (I)n

> the large-scale Harvard

> Prospective Health Professional Follow-Up Study,

> those groups in the highest

> quintile of vitamin C intake (greater than 1,500

> mg/day) had a lower risk of

> kidney stones than the groups in the lowest

> quintiles. "

>

> Also:

>

> Revusova V, Zvara V, Karlikova L, Suchanek B.

> Prognosis of urolithiasis and

> nephrocalcinosis in hypomagnesemia. Czech Med.

> 1985;8(4):207-13.

>

> Kridl J, Zvara V, Revusova V, Gratzlova J, Ondrus B.

> [inhibition of calcium

> oxalate urolithiasis with pyridoxine and magnesium

> in an experiment] Bratisl

> Lek Listy. 1984 Jan;81(1):21-8. Slovak.

>

> Ringsdorf WM Jr, Cheraskin E. Nutritional aspects of

> urolithiasis. South Med

> J. 1981 Jan;74(1):41-3, 46. Review.

>

> Schneider HJ, Hesse A, Berg W, Kirsten J, Nickel H.

> [Animal-experiment

> studies on the effect of magnesium and vitamin B 6

> on calcium-oxalate

> nephrolithiasis] Z Urol Nephrol. 1977

> Jun;70(6):419-27. German.

>

> Revusova V, Gratzlova J, Zvara V, Kridl J, Suchanek

> B, Breza J. The

> evaluation of some biochemical parameters in

> pyridoxine-treated calcium

> oxalate renal stone formers.

>

> Urol Int. 1977;32(4):348-52.

>

> Izashvili NP, Kasabian EV. [Metabolism of vitamin

> B6, citric and oxalic

> acids, calcium and magnesium in nephrolithiasis]

> Urol Nefrol (Mosk). 1973

> May-Jun;38(3):9-13. Russian.

>

> Gershoff SN. Production of urinary calculi in

> vitamin B6-deficient male,

> female and

>

> castrated male rats. J Nutr. 1970 Jan;100(1):117-22.

>

> Takasaki E, Shimano E. The urinary excretion of

> oxalic acid and magnesium in

> oxalate urolithiasis. Invest Urol. 1967

> Nov;5(3):303-12.

>

> [No authors listed] The effect of magnesium and

> pyridoxine on formation of

> calcium oxalate stones in man. Nutr Rev. 1967

> Oct;25(10):304-5. Review.

>

> Gershoff SN, Prien EL. Effect of daily MgO and

> vitamin B6 administration to

> patients with recurring calcium oxalate kidney

> stones. Am J Clin Nutr. 1967

> May;20(5):393-9.

>

> Lyon ES, Borden TA, Ellis JE, Vermeulen CW. Calcium

> oxalate lithiasis

> produced by pyridoxine deficiency and inhibition

> with high magnesium diets.

> Invest Urol. 1966 Sep;4(2):133-42.

>

> I invite my readers to print out this Newsletter and

> keep it handy. Yes, you

> too might have your vitamin C consumption called

> into question by a trained

> health professional.

>

> As they say on the TV infomercials, " But wait!

> There's still more! "

>

> E. D. (another R.D.) asks:

>

> " What are you doing promoting vitamin C megadoses,

> when the body can't

> absorb them anyway? All you get is expensive urine. "

>

> It's a myth is that your body doesn't absorb extra

> vitamin C and all you get

> from taking vitamin supplements is expensive urine.

> (http://www.doctoryourself.com/c_roberts.html) Urine

> is what is left over

> after your kidneys purify your blood. If your urine

> contains extra vitamin

> C, that vitamin C was in your blood. If the vitamin

> was in your blood, you

> absorbed it just fine. It is the absence of

> water-soluble vitamins such as

> vitamin C in urine that indicates vitamin

> deficiency. If your body excretes

> vitamins in your urine, that is a sign that you are

> well-nourished and have

> nutrients to spare.

>

> STRAINING AT A NUTRITIONAL GNAT AND SWALLOWING A

> PHARMACEUTICAL CAMEL

>

> " We estimated that in 1994 overall 2,216,000

> (1,721,000-2,711,000)

> hospitalized patients had serious Adverse Drug

> Reactions and 106,000

> (76,000-137,000) had fatal ADRs, making these

> reactions between the fourth

> and sixth leading cause of death. The incidence of

> serious and fatal ADRs in

> US hospitals was found to be extremely high. "

>

> (Lazarou J, Pomeranz BH, Corey PN. Incidence of

> adverse drug reactions in

> hospitalized patients: a meta-analysis of pospective

> studies. JAMA. 1998 Apr

> 15;279(15):1200-5.)

>

> And, according to a paper authored by two PhD's and

> three medical doctors,

> it is probably far worse than that. There may be as

> many as a million deaths

> each year caused by modern medicine.

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/deathmed.html

>

> READERS ALSO SAY:

>

> V. R. writes:

>

> " I am a proponent of vitamin C and take 6-8 grams

> (not mg) per day. If I

> feel something coming on, I double the dosage for a

> day or two and it never

> comes on. "

>

> Me too.

>

> R. R. says:

>

> " I have taken vitamin E 400-800 IU/day since a heart

> attack when I was 42

> years old. I am now 74. Docs find nothing wrong with

> my heart, and I am

> stronger and more active than ever. "

>

> That's what I take as well.

>

> S. C. writes:

>

> " I just wanted to say thank you!, and I love your

> fever page!

> (http://www.doctoryourself.com/fever.html) I've been

> worried about my

> daughter's fever (my mom's a Tylenol proponent and

> I'm a natural kinda gal)

> and your page helped me immensely! I'm getting the

> carrot juice going right

> away. "

>

> I appreciate your kind compliment, and good for you.

> Juicing has really

> helped our kids' health at all ages and stages.

>

>

> DOWN SYNDROME AND VITAMINS

>

> The Pioneering Work of Ruth Flinn Harrell: Champion

> of Children

>

> (Reprinted with permission from the Journal of

> Orthomolecular Medicine,

> 2004. Vol 19, No 1, p. 21-26.)

>

> The person who says it cannot be done should not

> interrupt the person doing

> it. (Chinese proverb.)

>

> Early in 1981, the medical and educational

> establishments were shaken to

> their socks. Ruth F. Harrell and colleagues, in

> Proceedings of the National

> Academy of Sciences (1), showed that high doses of

> vitamins improved

> intelligence and educational performance in learning

> disabled children,

> including those with Down syndrome. Though to many

> observers this seemingly

> came straight out of left field, Dr. Harrell, who

> had been investigating

> vitamin effects on learning for forty years, was not

> inventing the idea of

> megavitamin therapy in one paper. But she had at

> last succeeded in focusing

> much-needed public attention on the role of

> nutrition in learning

> disabilities, a problem that ink-well-era US RDA's

> and pharmaceuticals by

> the lunchbox-full have failed to solve.

>

> The start of the second World War was breaking news

> when Ruth Flinn Harrell

> conducted her first investigations into what she

> called " superfeeding. " Her

> 1942 Columbia University PhD thesis, " Effect of

> Added Thiamine on Learning "

> (2), was published by the university in 1943 and

> would be followed by

> " Further Effects of Added Thiamine on Learning and

> Other Processes " in 1947

> (3). Her research was not about enriched or

> fortified foods; " added " meant

> " provided by supplement tablets. " World War II had

> just ended when Dr.

> Harrell stated in a 1946 Journal of Nutrition

> article (4) that " a liberal

> thiamine intake improved a number of mental and

> physical skills of orphanage

> children. " By 1956, Dr. Harrell had investigated

> " The Effect of Mothers'

> Diets on the Intelligence of Offspring " (5), finding

> that " supplementation

> of the pregnant and lactating mothers' diet by

> vitamins increased the

> intelligence quotients of their offspring at three

> and four years of age. "

>

> THIAMINE (Vitamin B-1)

>

> Most everyone has heard of beri-beri, and few are

> all that passionate about

> it anymore. But beri-beri, which literally means " I

> can't, I can't, " may all

> too well describe the learning disabled child. Such

> children, recognized as

> truly disabled by the Americans with Disabilities

> Act, are not unwilling but

> rather unable to perform well in school. To see the

> physical incapacitation

> thiamine deficiency causes in impoverished countries

> is all too easy. To see

> the mental incapacitation in American classrooms is

> not difficult, either.

> Yet both may be caused by thiamine deficiency, and

> both helped by thiamine

> supplementation. Harrell zeroed in on this topic

> sixty years ago,

> demonstrating that supplemental thiamine improves

> learning. One reporter

> wrote, " An experiment was conducted by Dr. Ruth

> Flinn Harrell which involved

> 104 children from nine to nineteen years of age.

> Half of the children were

> given a vitamin B1 (thiamine) pill each day, and the

> other half received a

> placebo. The test lasted 6 weeks. It was found by a

> series of tests that the

> group that was given the vitamin gained one-fourth

> more in learning ability

> than did the other group. " (6)

>

> Carbohydrates, including sugar, increase the body's

> need for thiamine.

> Children eat a lot of sugar. An unmet increase is

> effectively the same as a

> deficiency. This may be part of the mechanism of

> ADHD and other children's

> learning and behavior disorders, as many so-called

> " food faddists " or

> " health nuts " have proclaimed for decades. Vitamin

> deficiency can become

> vitamin dependency. Chronic subclinical beri-beri

> may result in thiamine

> dependency in the same way that chronic subclinical

> pellegra results in

> niacin dependency.

>

> B-COMPLEX

>

> The B-vitamins as a group are absolutely vital to

> nerve function, and it

> would be difficult to imagine the juvenile owner of

> malnourished nerves

> performing well in school. Specifically, it is well

> established that

> thiamine deficiency causes not only loss of nerve

> function and ultimately

> paralysis, but also according to The Nutrition Desk

> Reference (7), " memory

> loss, reduced attention span, irritability,

> confusion and depression. " (p

> 43) Riboflavin (B-2) deficiency causes " nerve tissue

> damage that may

> manifest itself as depression and hysteria. " (p 45)

> Niacin (B-3) deficiency

> causes " loss of memory and emotional instability. "

> (p 46) Pyridoxine (B-6)

> deficiency results in " impaired production of

> neurotransmitters (and) mental

> confusion. " (p 48) Folic acid deficiency causes

> irritability, apathy,

> forgetfulness and hostility. (p 49). Cobalamin

> (B-12) deficiency causes

> " degeneration of the spinal cord, fatigue,

> disorientation, ataxia,

> moodiness, and confusion. " (p 51)

>

> Though these symptoms generally appear after

> prolonged deficiency, they are

> very serious and, if untreated, the ultimate result

> in each case would be

> death. Practically speaking, a shortage of any one

> of the B-vitamins can be

> seen to lead to neurological damage sufficient to

> contribute to learning and

> behavioral troubles.

>

> Harrell recognized that thiamine and the rest of the

> vitamins work better as

> a team. She used two clinically effective but

> oft-criticized therapeutic

> nutrition techniques: simultaneous supplementation

> with many nutrients (the

> " shotgun " approach), and megadoses. Working on the

> reasonable assumption

> that learning disabled children, because of

> functional deficiencies, might

> need higher than normal levels of nutrients, she

> progressed from her initial

> emphasis on thiamine to later providing a wide

> variety of supplemental

> nutrients.

>

> DEFICIENCY DEBATE

>

> The only escape from the inevitability of concluding

> that vitamin deficiency

> is a serious factor in learning is the political

> one: declare a victory.

> Dodging the issue is as easy as proclaiming that,

> thanks to food

> fortification (coupled with a generous portion of

> wishful thinking), no

> child has such deficiencies. Though the processed

> food industry and its

> apologists continue to assert exactly this,

> statistics fail to bear this

> out.

>

> An analysis of National Health and Nutrition

> Examination Survey (NHANES III)

> data from 1988 to 1994 by Gladys Block, PhD,

> indicates that over 85 percent

> of American elementary school-age children fail to

> eat the recommended five

> or more daily servings of fruits and vegetables.

> " NHANES III, a federally

> sponsored survey shows that on any given day, 45

> percent of children eat no

> fruit, and 20 percent eat less than one serving of

> vegetables. The average 6

> to 11 year-old eats only 3.5 servings of fruits and

> vegetables each day,

> achieving only half the recommended 7 servings per

> day for this age group. "

> (8) Additionally, Dr. Block reports, 20% of

> children's caloric intake comes

> from junk snacks, such as soda pop, cookies, and

> candy.

>

> Though it is a stretch to say that all learning and

> behavioral disabilities

> are due to inadequate vitamin intake, it is certain

> that some are.

> Behavioral deficiency tends to show up before

> nutritional deficiency is

> recognized. Arthur Winter, MD, writes that " In

> thiamine (vitamin B1)

> deficiency, symptoms such as lack of well being,

> anxiety, hysteria,

> depression, and loss of appetite preceded any

> clinical evidence of beriberi.

> Other studies using the Minnesota Multiphasic

> Personal Index (MMPI) have

> also demonstrated that adverse behavioral changes

> precede physical findings

> in thiamine deficiency. " (9)

>

> DOSAGE DEBATE

>

> Dr. Harrell anticipated that her use of megadoses

> would result in

> " controversy and brickbats. " (10) She was right. A

> number of well-publicized

> studies (11-15) conducted to " replicate " Dr.

> Harrell's work seemingly could

> not do so. Would-be " replications " fail the moment

> they start when they

> refuse to use adequate dosages. Surely it is the

> most basic condition for

> any replication that one must exactly copy the

> original experiment, or it is

> not a replication at all. When DNA replicates, it

> forms an exact and

> indistinguishable copy of the original. Even the

> smallest of changes can

> result in dysfunction, mutation, and death. Yet

> Harrell's " replicators "

> failed to adhere to her protocol, and consequently

> but not surprisingly,

> failed to get her results. (16)

>

> Probably one of the closer replications was done by

> Smith et al (17) and

> even that study totally omitted dessicated thyroid,

> a component of the

> Harrell protocol that her coauthor Donald R. Davis,

> PhD, says was

> " emphasized to Smith (as) Harrell's subjects

> received thyroid continuously. "

> (18)

>

> F. Jack Warner, MD, a supporter the Harrell approach

> (19) writes: " Even

> today many medical professionals scoff at the

> validity of Dr. Ruth Harrell's

> study with nutritional supplements and the important

> addition of thyroid

> medication. Dr. Harrell pleaded with her replicators

> to use exactly the same

> chemical values of supplements and medications. To

> date, this still has not

> been accomplished. " (20) In spite of obvious bias,

> negative " replication "

> studies using incomplete or low doses are the ones

> that have been accepted,

> and Harrell's work shelved. This is saying that the

> results of inaccurate

> replication are more valuable than the original

> successful research. Imagine

> cloning a sheep, getting a hedgehog, and then

> claiming that it was the

> sheep's fault. Incredible. But that is what

> politicized medical apologetics

> are capable of.

>

> The Harrell study was successful because her team

> gave learning-disabled

> kids much larger doses of vitamins than other

> researchers are inclined to

> use: over 100 times the adult (not child's) RDA for

> riboflavin; 37 times the

> RDA for niacin (given as niacinamide); 40 times the

> RDA for vitamin E; and

> 150 times the RDA for thiamine. Supplemental

> minerals were also given, as

> was natural desiccated thyroid. Harrell's team

> achieved results that were

> statistically significant, some with confidence

> levels so high that there

> was less than on chance in a thousand that the

> results were due to chance (P

> < 0.001) Simply stated, Ruth Harrell found IQ to be

> proportional to nutrient

> dosage. This may simultaneously be the most

> elementary and also the most

> controversial mathematical equation in medicine.

>

> There is a tone to the controversy that does more

> than merely suggest that

> Harrell's research was careless or incompetent. This

> is unlikely in the

> extreme; Dr. Harrell, formerly the chairman of the

> psychology department at

> Old Dominion University, had been studying children

> before many of her

> critics were even born. What is more likely is that

> Harrell's critics

> embrace the assumption that medicine must ultimately

> prove to be the better

> approach, and if there are any megadoses to be

> given, they shall be

> megadoses of pharmaceutical products. Vitamin

> therapy is unattractive to

> pharmaceutical companies. There is no money in

> products that cannot be

> patented. Children learn at an early age that mud

> pies don't sell. No

> investment is made, no research is done where no

> money is to be recovered.

> Drug companies do not expect to find, nor do they

> want to find, a cure that

> does not involve a drug. A tragic example is modern

> medicine's approach to

> Down syndrome.

>

> DOWN SYNDROME

>

> If there is orthodox resistance to using vitamins to

> enhance student

> learning, there is positively a fortified roadblock

> to the suggestion that

> vitamins can help children with Down syndrome.

> Nutrition, critics say, can

> not undo trisomy 21. But nutritional therapy is not

> a science-fiction

> attempt to rearrange chromosomes. Nutritional

> intervention may help the body

> to biochemically compensate for a genetic handicap.

> Roger Williams,

> discoverer of the vitamin pantothenic acid, termed

> this the " genetotrophic

> concept. " Genetotrophic diseases are " diseases in

> which the genetic pattern

> of the afflicted individual requires an augmented

> supply of one or more

> nutrients such that when these nutrients are

> adequately supplied the disease

> is ameliorated. " (1) Ruth Harrell's decades of

> research showed that it is

> plausible. Conventional Down syndrome educational

> material holds that it is

> hogwash.

>

> As of August 2003, the National Down Syndrome

> Society's " Position Statement

> on Vitamin Related Therapies " states that " Despite

> the large sums of money

> which concerned parents have spent for such

> treatments in the hope that the

> conditions of their child with Down syndrome would

> be bettered, there is no

> evidence that any such benefit has been produced. "

> (21)

>

> At the heart of the issue are the usual, and largely

> philosophical,

> front-line disagreements of definition and

> interpretation. First, what

> precisely constitutes a " deficiency " in a society

> that, as nutritional

> legend would have it, has eliminated vitamin

> deficiency? Adherents of

> conventional dietetics presuppose that anyone who

> claims that there are

> widespread vitamin deficiencies among children must

> proceed from a false

> assumption. Those who advocate vitamin therapy would

> answer that Down's

> creates a " functional deficiency " which must be met

> with appropriate

> supplementation. The very idea that doses

> sufficiently high to effectively

> do so should be 100 times the RDA is positively

> repellent to most

> investigators. When asked about whether she had

> received National Institutes

> of Health funding for her study, Dr. Harrell

> replied, " Heavens, no! Nobody

> knows anything about the area of dietary

> supplementation, but the National

> Institutes of Health knows for sure it's

> impossible. " (10)

>

> Some reviews of Down nutrition studies actually

> state that doses as low as

> 500 mg of vitamin C are unsafe, and that other

> Harrell-sized dosages are

> harmful as well. In one such article posted at the

> Down Syndrome Information

> Network, the authors conclude that " If it is

> necessary for additional

> vitamins to be given to someone with Down syndrome,

> all that is usually

> needed is a multivitamin tablet, not more than once

> a day, at a cost of

> about one penny per tablet. Meanwhile, the best

> nutritional advice anyone

> can honestly offer is to consume a varied and

> balanced diet - whether you

> have Down syndrome or not. " (22)

>

> Another popular argument is that, even allowing that

> children eat poorly,

> there is insufficient evidence that Downs is

> aggravated by poor nutrition,

> or helped by good nutrition. After all, Downs is a

> genetically-determined

> disease. But surely the genes do not operate in a

> nutrient vacuum. For

> example, vitamin E has recently been demonstrated to

> preferentially protect

> genetic material in Down patients' cells. " Vitamin E

> treatment decreased the

> basal and G2 chromosomal aberrations both in control

> and Down Syndrome (DS)

> lymphocytes. In DS cells, this protective effect,

> expressed as a decrease in

> the chromosomal damage, was greater (50%) than in

> controls (30%). These

> results suggest that the increment in basal and G2

> aberrations yield in DS

> lymphocytes may be related to the increase in

> oxidative damage reported in

> these patients. " The results would also suggest that

> antioxidant vitamin

> supplements would be an especially good idea for

> Down's individuals. (23)

>

> Although the greater question may be, can optimum

> nutrition help compensate

> for a genetic defect, the essential question must be

> this: can nutrition

> help a given Downs child? Dianne Craft, a special

> education teacher,

> comments on Harrell's 1981 research:

>

> " Dr. Harrell noted that one of the observations that

> they made during this

> study was that when there was a ten point rise in

> IQ, the family noticed it.

> When there was a fifteen point rise in IQ, the

> teachers noticed it. When

> there was a twenty point rise in IQ, the

> neighborhood noticed it.

>

> " The story of one child is particularly poignant.

> This seven year old child

> was still wearing diapers, didn't recognize his

> parents, and had no speech.

> His motor skills were relatively unimpaired and he

> could walk and run fairly

> well. In forty days, after some of the supplements

> were increased, his

> mother telephoned. . . saying, " He's turned on, just

> like an electric light.

> He's asking the name of everything. He points and

> says, 'What zis?' Finally

> he pointed to his father and said, 'zis?' I said,

> 'That's your father and

> you call him daddy, and he looked at him and said

> 'daddy.' I'm your mother;

> can you call me mommy? " She went on to say, " I think

> he saw us for the first

> time. " This little boy went on to do very well in

> his learning, and

> eventually tested with an IQ of ninety, which an

> average IQ. " (24) I have

> seen a beautiful photo in Medical Tribune (9) of Dr.

> Harrell being hugged by

> one of the study group children. The kids noticed

> their own improvement.

>

> Perhaps Harrell's dramatic IQ gains were merely due

> to the placebo effect.

> If so, I want every school district on earth to lay

> in a stock of sugar

> pills, for gains like this, in only eight months,

> are astounding. Perhaps

> success was due to Dr. Harrell's group's

> expectations or to her bedside

> manner. But, as Abram Hoffer has said, " I am nice to

> all my patients. Only

> the ones on vitamins improve. " Harrell colleague

> Donald Davis writes, " No

> amount of matching or variable control with

> Harrell's subjects could change

> their large IQ gains which are the crucial and so

> far unexplained difference

> between the Harrell group and others. " (25)

>

> When Dr. Harrell died in 1991, she was far from

> being alone in reporting

> success with high-dose nutrition therapy. Dianne

> Craft writes, " For over

> forty years, Dr. Henry Turkel (26, 27) treated

> Down's children successfully

> using orthomolecular methods. He used a combination

> of vitamins, minerals,

> and thyroid hormone replacement. His patients

> improved mentally and they

> lost the typical Down's syndrome facial appearance.

> With over 600 children

> treated, he found an eighty to ninety percent

> improvement rate. " (24)

>

> To date, the orthodox Down authorities' position may

> be summed up as, there

> is no evidence that it helps, so do not try it. Dr.

> Harrell's view would be,

> there is reason to believe that nutrition might

> help, so let's see if it

> does. The first view prevents physician reports. The

> second generates them.

>

> Theorization can only go so far. The proof is in the

> pudding, and Ruth Flinn

> Harrell's approach yielded smarter, happier

> children. Her results are

> sufficiently compelling justification for a

> therapeutic trial of

> orthomolecular supplementation for every

> learning-impaired child.

>

> ALL REFERENCES CITED ARE POSTED AT

>

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/downs.html

>

> TRIVIA TIME:

>

> Quickly now: What animal has the world's longest

> sperm?

>

> The Blue whale? The elephant? You're going to love

> the answer:

>

> Are you ready?

>

> The fruit fly.

>

> Yes, the fruit fly: Drosophila bifurca, to be

> specific. And each sperm is

> about 2.3 INCHES long, 20 times as long as the fly

> itself. The fly is found

> in Central America, Mexico and Arizona. There's

> something to think about

> before you swat again. (Source: Fruit fly dwarfed by

> its sperm. The

> Associated Press. May 11, 1995, citing an article in

> NATURE of the same date

> by Scott Pitnick et al.)

>

> Privacy Statement:

>

> We do not sell, and we do not share, our mailing

> list or your email address

> with anyone. We never send out advertisements of any

> kind. You may notice

> that there is no advertising at

> http://doctoryourself.com and no advertising

> in this newsletter. We have no financial connection

> with the supplement

> industry. We do not sell vitamins or other health

> products, except for Dr.

> Saul's books, which help fund these free public

> services.

>

> FREE SUBSCRIPTIONS FOR ALL to this newsletter are

> available with a blank

> email to

>

> dynewsletter-

>

> AN IMPORTANT NOTE: This newsletter is not in any way

> offered as

> prescription, diagnosis nor treatment for any

> disease, illness, infirmity or

> physical condition. Any form of self-treatment or

> alternative health program

> necessarily must involve an individual's acceptance

> of some risk, and no one

> should assume otherwise. Persons needing medical

> care should obtain it from

> a physician. Consult your doctor before making any

> health decision.

>

> " DOCTOR YOURSELF " " DoctorYourself.com " and " Doctor

> Yourself Newsletter " are

> service marks of Andrew W. Saul. All rights

> reserved.

>

> Copyright c 2004 and prior years Andrew W. Saul

> drsaul .

> Permission to reproduce single copies of this

> newsletter FOR NON-COMMERCIAL,

> PERSONAL USE ONLY is hereby granted providing no

> alteration of content is

> made and authorship credit is given. Additional

> single copies will be sent

> by postal mail to a practitioner or patient, free of

> charge, upon receipt of

> a self addressed envelope with THREE first-class

> stamps on it (offer good in

> the USA only), to Number 8 Van Buren Street, Holley,

> NY 14470 USA. (585)

> 638-5357.

>

>

> For information about my book, " DOCTOR YOURSELF:

> Natural Healing that Works "

> please go to

> http://www.doctoryourself.com/saulbooks.html .

>

> Subscriptions to my DOCTOR YOURSELF NEWSLETTER by

> email are free for the

> asking. Just send a blank email to

> news-

>

> " Don't feel you owe me any respect; you can listen

> or not, as you please. "

> (Benjamin Franklin)