Antioxidant- and Folate-Rich Foods for Depression

Antioxidant- and Folate-Rich Foods for Depression.jpeg

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the rates of all of our top 10 killers have fallen or stabilized except for one, suicide. As shown in my video, Antioxidants & Depression, accumulating evidence indicates that free radicals may play important roles in the development of various neuropsychiatric disorders including major depression, a common cause of suicide.

In a study of nearly 300,000 Canadians, for example, greater fruit and vegetable consumption was associated with lower odds of depression, psychological distress, self-reported mood and anxiety disorders and poor perceived mental health. They conclude that since a healthy diet comprised of a high intake of fruits and vegetables is rich in anti-oxidants, it may consequently dampen the detrimental effects of oxidative stress on mental health.

But that study was based on asking how many fruits and veggies people ate. Maybe people were just telling the researchers what they thought they wanted to hear. What if you actually measure the levels of carotenoid phytonutrients in people's bloodstreams? The same relationship is found. Testing nearly 2000 people across the United States, researchers found that a higher total blood carotenoid level was indeed associated with a lower likelihood of elevated depressive symptoms, and there appeared to be a dose-response relationship, meaning the higher the levels, the better people felt.

Lycopene, the red pigment predominantly found in tomatoes (but also present in watermelon, pink grapefruit, guava and papaya) is the most powerful carotenoid antioxidant. In a test tube, it's about 100 times more effective at quenching free radicals than a more familiar antioxidant like vitamin E.

Do people who eat more tomatoes have less depression, then? Apparently so. A study of about a thousand older men and women found that those who ate the most tomato products had only about half the odds of depression. The researchers conclude that a tomato-rich diet may have a beneficial effect on the prevention of depressive symptoms.

Higher consumption of fruits and vegetables has been found to lead to a lower risk of developing depression, but if it's the antioxidants can't we just take an antioxidant pill? No.

Only food sources of antioxidants were protectively associated with depression. Not antioxidants from dietary supplements. Although plant foods and food-derived phytochemicals have been associated with health benefits, antioxidants from dietary supplements appear to be less beneficial and may, in fact, be detrimental to health. This may indicate that the form and delivery of the antioxidants are important. Alternatively, the observed associations may be due not to antioxidants but rather to other dietary factors, such as folate, that also occur in plant-rich diets.

In a study of thousands of middle-aged office workers, eating lots of processed food was found to be a risk factor for at least mild to moderate depression five years later, whereas a whole food pattern was found to be protective. Yes, it could be because of the high content of antioxidants in fruits and vegetables but could also be the folate in greens and beans, as some studies have suggested an increased risk of depression in folks who may not have been eating enough.

Low folate levels in the blood are associated with depression, but since most of the early studies were cross-sectional, meaning a snapshot in time, we didn't know if the low folate led to depression or the depression led to low folate. Maybe when you have the blues you don't want to eat the greens.

But since then a number of cohort studies were published, following people over time. They show that a low dietary intake of folate may indeed be a risk factor for severe depression, as much as a threefold higher risk. Note this is for dietary folate intake, not folic acid supplements; those with higher levels were actually eating healthy foods. If you give people folic acid pills they don't seem to work. This may be because folate is found in dark green leafy vegetables like spinach, whereas folic acid is the oxidized synthetic compound used in food fortification and dietary supplements because it's more shelf-stable. It may have different effects on the body as I previously explored in Can Folic Acid Be Harmful?

These kinds of findings point to the importance of antioxidant food sources rather than dietary supplements. But there was an interesting study giving people high dose vitamin C. In contrast to the placebo group, those given vitamin C experienced a decrease in depression scores and also greater FSI. What is FSI? Frequency of Sexual Intercourse.

Evidently, high dose vitamin C improves mood and intercourse frequency, but only in sexual partners that don't live with one another. In the placebo group, those not living together had sex about once a week, and those living together a little higher, once every five days, with no big change on vitamin C. But for those not living together, on vitamin C? Every other day! The differential effect for non-cohabitants suggests that the mechanism is not a peripheral one, meaning outside the brain, but a central one--some psychological change which motivates the person to venture forth to have intercourse. The mild antidepressant effect they found was unrelated to cohabitation or frequency, so it does not appear that the depression scores improved just because of the improved FSI.

For more mental health video, see:

Anything else we can do to enhance our sexual health and attractiveness? See:

In health,

Michael Greger, M.D.

PS: If you haven't yet, you can subscribe to my free videos here and watch my live, year-in-review presentations:

Image Credit: Sally Plank / Flickr. This image has been modified.

Original Link

Antioxidant- and Folate-Rich Foods for Depression

Antioxidant- and Folate-Rich Foods for Depression.jpeg

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the rates of all of our top 10 killers have fallen or stabilized except for one, suicide. As shown in my video, Antioxidants & Depression, accumulating evidence indicates that free radicals may play important roles in the development of various neuropsychiatric disorders including major depression, a common cause of suicide.

In a study of nearly 300,000 Canadians, for example, greater fruit and vegetable consumption was associated with lower odds of depression, psychological distress, self-reported mood and anxiety disorders and poor perceived mental health. They conclude that since a healthy diet comprised of a high intake of fruits and vegetables is rich in anti-oxidants, it may consequently dampen the detrimental effects of oxidative stress on mental health.

But that study was based on asking how many fruits and veggies people ate. Maybe people were just telling the researchers what they thought they wanted to hear. What if you actually measure the levels of carotenoid phytonutrients in people's bloodstreams? The same relationship is found. Testing nearly 2000 people across the United States, researchers found that a higher total blood carotenoid level was indeed associated with a lower likelihood of elevated depressive symptoms, and there appeared to be a dose-response relationship, meaning the higher the levels, the better people felt.

Lycopene, the red pigment predominantly found in tomatoes (but also present in watermelon, pink grapefruit, guava and papaya) is the most powerful carotenoid antioxidant. In a test tube, it's about 100 times more effective at quenching free radicals than a more familiar antioxidant like vitamin E.

Do people who eat more tomatoes have less depression, then? Apparently so. A study of about a thousand older men and women found that those who ate the most tomato products had only about half the odds of depression. The researchers conclude that a tomato-rich diet may have a beneficial effect on the prevention of depressive symptoms.

Higher consumption of fruits and vegetables has been found to lead to a lower risk of developing depression, but if it's the antioxidants can't we just take an antioxidant pill? No.

Only food sources of antioxidants were protectively associated with depression. Not antioxidants from dietary supplements. Although plant foods and food-derived phytochemicals have been associated with health benefits, antioxidants from dietary supplements appear to be less beneficial and may, in fact, be detrimental to health. This may indicate that the form and delivery of the antioxidants are important. Alternatively, the observed associations may be due not to antioxidants but rather to other dietary factors, such as folate, that also occur in plant-rich diets.

In a study of thousands of middle-aged office workers, eating lots of processed food was found to be a risk factor for at least mild to moderate depression five years later, whereas a whole food pattern was found to be protective. Yes, it could be because of the high content of antioxidants in fruits and vegetables but could also be the folate in greens and beans, as some studies have suggested an increased risk of depression in folks who may not have been eating enough.

Low folate levels in the blood are associated with depression, but since most of the early studies were cross-sectional, meaning a snapshot in time, we didn't know if the low folate led to depression or the depression led to low folate. Maybe when you have the blues you don't want to eat the greens.

But since then a number of cohort studies were published, following people over time. They show that a low dietary intake of folate may indeed be a risk factor for severe depression, as much as a threefold higher risk. Note this is for dietary folate intake, not folic acid supplements; those with higher levels were actually eating healthy foods. If you give people folic acid pills they don't seem to work. This may be because folate is found in dark green leafy vegetables like spinach, whereas folic acid is the oxidized synthetic compound used in food fortification and dietary supplements because it's more shelf-stable. It may have different effects on the body as I previously explored in Can Folic Acid Be Harmful?

These kinds of findings point to the importance of antioxidant food sources rather than dietary supplements. But there was an interesting study giving people high dose vitamin C. In contrast to the placebo group, those given vitamin C experienced a decrease in depression scores and also greater FSI. What is FSI? Frequency of Sexual Intercourse.

Evidently, high dose vitamin C improves mood and intercourse frequency, but only in sexual partners that don't live with one another. In the placebo group, those not living together had sex about once a week, and those living together a little higher, once every five days, with no big change on vitamin C. But for those not living together, on vitamin C? Every other day! The differential effect for non-cohabitants suggests that the mechanism is not a peripheral one, meaning outside the brain, but a central one--some psychological change which motivates the person to venture forth to have intercourse. The mild antidepressant effect they found was unrelated to cohabitation or frequency, so it does not appear that the depression scores improved just because of the improved FSI.

For more mental health video, see:

Anything else we can do to enhance our sexual health and attractiveness? See:

In health,

Michael Greger, M.D.

PS: If you haven't yet, you can subscribe to my free videos here and watch my live, year-in-review presentations:

Image Credit: Sally Plank / Flickr. This image has been modified.

Original Link

Treating Asthma With Plants vs. Pills

NF-July7 Treating Asthma with Plants vs. Supplements.jpg

In my video Treating Asthma With Fruits and Vegetables, I highlighted a landmark study on manipulating antioxidant intake in asthma. The study found that just a few extra fruits and vegetables a day can powerfully reduce asthma exacerbation rates. If the antioxidants in the plants are ameliorating asthma, then why can't we take antioxidant pills instead? Because antioxidant pills don't appear to work.

Studies using antioxidant supplements on respiratory or allergic diseases have mostly shown no beneficial effects. This discrepancy between data relating to fruit and vegetable intake compared with those using antioxidant supplements may indicate the importance of the whole food, rather than individual components. For example, in the Harvard Nurse's Health Study, women who got the most vitamin E from their diet appeared to be at half the risk for asthma, (which may help explain why nut consumption is associated with significantly lower rates of wheezing), but vitamin E supplements did not appear to help.

Men who eat a lot of apples appear to have superior lung function, as do kids who eat fresh fruit every day, as measured by FEV1 (basically how much air you can forcibly blow out in one second). The more fruit, salad, and green vegetables kids ate, the greater their lung function appeared.

Researchers are "cautious about concluding which nutrient might be responsible." There's vitamin C in fruits, salads, and green vegetables, but there are lots of other antioxidants, such as "vitamin P," a term used to describe polyphenol phytonutrients found in grapes, flax seeds, beans, berries, broccoli, apples, citrus, herbs, tea, and soy. Polyphenol phytonutrients can directly bind to allergenic proteins and render them hypoallergenic, allowing them to slip under our body's radar. If this first line of defense fails, polyphenols can also inhibit the activation of the allergic response and prevent the ensuing inflammation, and so may not only work for prevention, but for treatment as well.

Most of the available evidence is weak, though, in terms of using supplements containing isolated phytonutrients to treat allergic diseases. We could just give people fruits and vegetables to eat, but then we couldn't perform a double-blind study to see if they work better than placebo. Some researchers decided to use pills containing plant food extracts. Plant extracts are kind of a middle ground. They are better than isolated plant chemicals, but are not as complete as whole foods. Still, since we can put whole foods in a capsule, we can compare the extracts to fake sugar pills that look and feel the same to see if they have an effect.

The first trial involved giving people extracts of apple skins. I've talked about the Japan's big cedar allergy problem before (See Alkylphenol Endocrine Disruptors and Allergies), so apple extract pills were given every day for a few months starting right before pollen season started. The results were pretty disappointing. They found maybe a little less sneezing, but the extract didn't seem to help their stuffy noses or itchy eyes.

What about a tomato extract? A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled eight-week trial was performed on perennial allergic rhinitis, this time not for seasonal pollen, but for year-round allergies to things like dust-mites. There are lots of drugs out there, but you may have to take them every day year-round, so how about some tomato pills instead? After oral administration of tomato extract for eight weeks, there was a significant improvement of total nasal symptom scores, combined sneezing, runny nose and nasal obstruction, with no apparent adverse effects.

Would whole tomatoes work even better? If only researchers would design an experiment directly comparing phytonutrient supplements to actual fruits and vegetables head-to-head against asthma, but such a study had never been done... until now. The same amazing study, highlighted in my video, Treating Asthma with Plants vs. Supplements?, that compared the seven-fruit-and-vegetables-a-day diet to the three-fruit-and-vegetables-a-day diet, after completion of its first phase, commenced a parallel, randomized, controlled supplementation trial with capsules of tomato extract, which boosted the power of five tomatoes in one little pill, and the study subjects were given three pills a day.

Who did better, the group that ate seven servings of actual fruits and vegetables a day, or the group that ate three servings a day but also took 15 supposed serving equivalents in pill form? The pills didn't help at all. Improvements in lung function and asthma control were evident only after increased fruit and vegetable intake, which suggests that whole-food interventions are most effective. Both the supplements and increased fruit and vegetable intake were effective methods for increasing carotenoid concentrations in the bloodstream, but who cares? Clinical improvements--getting better from disease--were evident only as a result of an increase in plant, not pill, consumption. The results provide further evidence that whole-food approaches should be used to achieve maximum efficacy of antioxidant interventions.

And if this is what a few more plants can do, what might a whole diet composed of plants accomplish? See Treating Asthma and Eczema with Plant-Based Diets.

I also dealt with preventing asthma in the first place: Preventing Asthma With Fruits and Vegetables.

The theme of whole foods being more efficacious than supplements seems to come up over and over again. See for example:

More on "vitamin P" in How to Slow Brain Aging by Two Years.

The anti-inflammatory effects of nuts may explain the Harvard Nurse's Health Study finding: Fighting Inflammation in a Nut Shell.

-Michael Greger, M.D.

PS: If you haven't yet, you can subscribe to my free videos here and watch my live year-in-review presentations Uprooting the Leading Causes of Death, More Than an Apple a Day, and From Table to Able.

Image Credit: Mike Mozart / Flickr

Original Link

The Reason We Need More Antioxidants

NF-Nov27 The Reason We Need More Antioxidants (And Why We're Not Getting Them).jpg

Glucose is the primary fuel of the human body. We consume glucose and breathe in oxygen to make the energy needed to power our bodies. Plants then take the water and carbon dioxide we breathe out to make oxygen and organic compounds like glucose--and the circle of life continues. The word carbohydrate means, basically, hydrated carbon, which is what plants use to make carbs and all that's left after we burn them for energy in our muscles and brain.

This process of oxidizing glucose to make energy is messy, though, and generates free radicals. Chugging sugar water increases the level of oxidation in our bloodstreams over the next few hours as our bodies metabolize the glucose. (Digestion isn't the only physiological source of free radicals--exercise is too. See Preventing Exercise-Induced Oxidative Stress With Watercress). Why would we evolve to have a negative reaction to our primary fuel? Because over the millions of years we evolved, there was no such thing as sugar water--all sugars and starches came pre-packaged with protective compounds: antioxidants. In nature, sugar always comes with phytonutrients.

If we drink the same amount of sugar in the form of orange juice, we don't get that spike in oxidation, because the sugar in fruit comes prepackaged with antioxidants. We can't just drink vitamin C enriched sugar water either, because it's not the vitamin C in the OJ but the citrus phytonutrients like hesperetin and naringenin that beat back the oxidation. And it's always better to eat the whole fruit than drink the juice (See Best Fruit Juice and Apple Juice May Be Worse Than Sugar Water). If those citrus phytonutrients sounded familiar to you, it's because I mentioned them before in videos like Keeping Your Hands Warm With Citrus and Reducing Muscle Fatigue With Citrus.

If we don't eat phytonutrient-rich plant foods with each meal, then for hours after we eat, our bodies are tipped out of balance into a pro-oxidative state, which can set us up for oxidant stress diseases. That's why we need to ideally eat antioxidant rich foods with every meal.

In the video, Minimum "Recommended Daily Allowance" of Antioxidants, we can see the levels of oxidized fat in our blood one, two, and three hours after sugar water ingestion, and the corresponding drop in vitamin E levels in our blood as our body's antioxidant stores are being used up. If we don't eat phytonutrient-rich foods with our meals, our body has to dip into its backup supply of antioxidants. We can't get away with that for long. So while ideally we should stuff our faces with as many phytonutrient-rich foods as we can.

In the very least we should eat enough antioxidants to counter the oxidation of digestion. We don't want to slide backwards every day and end up with less antioxidants in our bodies than we woke up with.

A chart in the video, Minimum "Recommended Daily Allowance" of Antioxidants, shows the amount of antioxidants we need every day, depending on how much we eat, just to counter the oxidation of digestion. Men in the U.S. average about 2500 calories a day and so should be getting at least 11,000 antioxidant units a day. Women eat about 1800 calories and so should get at least 8,000 units just to stay solvent. However, the average American doesn't even get half the minimum-no wonder oxidant stress related diseases abound. We're getting so few antioxidants in our diet that we can't even keep up with the free radicals created by merely digesting our meals. We are a nation in chronic oxidative debt.

Developed societies eat a lot of food but not enough plants, which could result in exaggerated and prolonged metabolic, oxidative, and immune imbalance. This presents opportunity for biological insult that over time could supersede our defense and repair systems, and manifest in cellular dysfunction, disease, and ultimately death.

Is there a refined sweetener that doesn't cause free radical formation? Yes: Erythritol May Be a Sweet Antioxidant.

What's the best way of reaching our daily minimum of 8,000-11,000 antioxidant units a day? That's covered in my video How to Reach the Antioxidant "RDA".

Background on the role free radicals play in aging and disease can be found in my video Mitochondrial Theory of Aging. Antioxidant-rich diets can even change gene expression: Plant-Based Diets and Cellular Stress Defenses.

-Michael Greger, M.D.

PS: If you haven't yet, you can subscribe to my free videos here and watch my live year-in-review presentations Uprooting the Leading Causes of Death, More Than an Apple a Day, and From Table to Able.

Image Credit: Benson Kua / Flickr

Original Link

The Healthiest Diet for Weight Control

NF-Sep4 Why Plant-Based Might be the Healthiest Diet for Weight Control.jpg

We know that vegetarians tend to be slimmer, but there's a perception that veg diets may somehow be deficient in nutrients. So how's this for a simple study, profiled in my video Nutrient-Dense Approach to Weight Management: an analysis of the diets of 13,000 people, comparing the nutrient intake of those eating meat to those eating meat-free.

They found that those eating vegetarian were getting higher intakes of nearly every nutrient: more fiber, more vitamin A, more vitamin C, more vitamin E, more of the B vitamins (thiamin, riboflavin, & folate), more calcium, more magnesium, more iron, and more potassium. At the same time, they were also eating less of the harmful stuff like saturated fat and cholesterol. And yes, they got enough protein.

And some of those nutrients are the ones Americans really struggle to get enough of--like fiber, vitamins A, C, and E, calcium, magnesium, potassium--and those eating vegetarian got more of all of them. Even so, just because they did better than the standard American diet isn't saying much--they still didn't get as much as they should have. Those eating vegetarian ate significantly more dark green leafy vegetables, but that comes out to just two more teaspoons of greens than meat eaters on average every day.

In terms of weight management, the vegetarians were consuming, on average, 363 fewer calories every day. That's what people do when they go on a diet and restrict their food intake--but it seemed like that is how vegetarians just ate normally.

How sustainable are more plant-based diets long term? They are among the only type of diet that has been shown to be sustainable long-term, perhaps because not only do people lose weight but they often feel so much better.

And there's no calorie counting or portion control. In fact, vegetarians may burn more calories in their sleep. Those eating more plant-based diets appear to have an 11% higher resting metabolic rate. Both vegetarians and vegans seem to have a naturally revved up metabolism compared to those eating meat.

Having said that, the vegetarians in the first study mentioned were also eating eggs and dairy, so while they were significantly slimmer than those eating meat, they were still, on average, overweight. As profiled in my video, Thousands of Vegans Studied, the only dietary pattern associated on average with an ideal body weight was a strictly plant-based one. But at least the study helps to dispel the myth that meat-free diets are somehow nutrient-deficient. In fact, the editor-in-chief of the Journal of the American Dietetic Association asked, "What could be more nutrient dense than a vegetarian diet?"

Anyone can lose weight in the short term on nearly any diet, but diets don't seem to work in the long-term. That's because we don't need a "diet"; we need a new way of eating that we can comfortably stick with throughout our lives. If that's the case, then we better choose to eat in a way that will most healthfully sustain us. That's why a plant-based diet may offer the best of both worlds. It's the only diet, for example, shown to reverse heart disease-our number one killer-in the majority of patients, as described in my video: One in a Thousand: Ending the Heart Disease Epidemic.

There are a number of theories offered as to why those eating plant-based are, on average, so much slimmer. Check out these videos for more information:

-Michael Greger, M.D.

PS: If you haven't yet, you can subscribe to my free videos here and watch my live year-in-review presentations Uprooting the Leading Causes of Death, More Than an Apple a Day, and From Table to Able.

Original Link

How to Boost the Benefits of Exercise

NF-Aug28 What Happens to Our Bodies After We Exercise & How to Boost the Health Benefits.jpg

We all know exercise is beneficial to our health. Then why is it that ultramarathon runners may generate so many free radicals during a race that they can damage the DNA of a significant percentage of their cells? Researchers have looked at the exercise-induced increase in free radical production as a paradox: why would an apparently healthy act--exercise--lead to detrimental effects through damage to various molecules and tissues? This arises out of somewhat of a misunderstanding: exercise in and of itself is not necessarily the healthy act--it's the recovery after exercise that is so healthy, the whole "that-which-doesn't-kill-us-makes-us-stronger" notion. For example, exercise training has been shown to enhance antioxidant defenses by increasing the activities of our antioxidant enzymes. So, during the race ultra-marathoners may be taking hits to their DNA, but a week later they can experience great benefits, as shown in my video, Enhanced Athletic Recovery Without Undermining Adaptation.

In a recent study, researchers from Oregon State University looked at the level of DNA damage in athletes. Six days after a race, athletes didn't just go back to the baseline level of DNA damage, but had significantly less, presumably because they had revved up their antioxidant defenses. So, maybe exercise-induced oxidative damage is beneficial, similar to vaccination. By freaking out the body a little, we might induce a response that's favorable in the long run.

This concept, that low levels of a damaging entity can up-regulate protective mechanisms, is known as hormesis. For example, herbicides kill plants, but in tiny doses may actually boost plant growth, presumably by stressing the plant into rallying its resources to successfully fight back.

Wait a second, though. Could eating anti-inflammatory and anti-oxidant rich plant foods undermine this adaptation response? We know that berries may reduce inflammatory muscle damage (See Reducing Muscle Soreness with Berries), and greens may reduce free radical DNA damage (See Preventing Exercise Induced Oxidative Stress with Watercress). Dark chocolate and tomato juice appear to have similar effects. How it works is that flavonoid phytonutrients in fruits, vegetables, and beans seem to inhibit the activity of xanthine oxidase, considered the main contributor of free radicals during exercise. And the carbs in plant foods may also decrease stress hormone levels.

So in 1999, a theoretical concern was raised. Maybe all that free radical stress from exercise is a good thing, and increased consumption of some antioxidant nutrients might interfere with these necessary adaptive processes. If we decrease free radical tissue damage, maybe we won't get that increase in activity of those antioxidant enzymes.

A group of researchers who performed a study on tart cherry juice and recovery following a marathon responded to this antioxidant concern by suggesting that, although it is likely that muscle damage, inflammation, and oxidative stress are important factors in the adaptation process, minimizing these factors may improve recovery so we can train more and perform better. So, there are theories on both sides, but what happens when we actually put it to the test?

While antioxidant or anti-inflammatory supplements may prevent these adaptive events, researchers found that blackcurrant extract - although packed with antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties - actually boosted the health benefits of regular exercise.

If we take antioxidant pills--vitamin C and vitamin E supplements-- we can also reduce the stress levels induced by exercise, but in doing so we block that boost in antioxidant enzyme activity caused by exercise. Now maybe we don't need that boost if we don't have as much damage, but vitamin C supplements seem to impair physical performance in the first place. With plant foods, though, we appear to get the best of both worlds.

For example, lemon verbena, an antioxidant-rich herbal tea, protects against oxidative damage and decreases the signs of muscular damage and inflammation, without blocking the cellular adaptation to exercise. In a recent study, researchers showed that lemon verbena does not affect the increase of the antioxidant enzyme response promoted by exercise. On the contrary: antioxidant enzyme activity was even higher in the lemon verbena group. In my video, Enhanced Athletic Recovery Without Undermining Adaptation, you can see the level of antioxidant enzyme activity before and after 21 days of intense running exercises in the control group. With all that free radical damage, the body started cranking up its antioxidant defenses. But give a dark green leafy tea, and not only do we put a kabosh on the damage due to all the phytonutrients and antioxidants, but we still get the boost in defenses--in fact, in this case, the boost was even greater.

Find out more on enhancing athletic recovery in this three-part video series:

1. Reducing Muscle Fatigue with Citrus
2. Reducing Muscle Soreness with Berries
3. Preventing Exercise-Induced Oxidative Stress With Watercress

Then there's my 15-video series on using nitrate-rich vegetables to boost athletic performance starting with Doping With Beet Juice and ending with So Should We Drink Beet Juice or Not?

-Michael Greger, M.D.

PS: If you haven't yet, you can subscribe to my free videos here and watch my live year-in-review presentations Uprooting the Leading Causes of Death, More Than an Apple a Day, and From Table to Able.

Original Link

Treating Breast Pain with Flax Seeds

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Treating Breast Pain with Flax Seeds

A tablespoon a day of ground flax seeds appears to improve ovarian function and is considered a first-line therapy for breast pain associated with one’s period (cyclical mastalgia).

A study I profile in my video Flax Seeds For Breast Pain on the effect of flax seed ingestion on the menstrual cycle found a tablespoon a day lengthened the luteal phase (latter half of the cycle), effectively delaying one’s next period by about a day. Flax seeds also resulted in fewer anovulatory cycles (months in which you fail to ovulate). These are the same kind of improvements in ovarian function that have been found in women eating plant-based diets. In fact, women eating vegan never failed to ovulate in a study comparing meateaters, vegetarians, and vegans, which is similar to what was found in women eating flax daily.

Since the same hormonal changes associated with eating more plant-based diets seemed to improve premenstrual and menstrual symptoms such as breast pain (see my video Plant-Based Diets For Breast Pain), researchers decided to test whether flax seeds would help as well. Although hormone treatments can be helpful, they often cause unpleasant side effects and there may be risks associated with long-term hormonal therapy.  Dietary flaxseed is therefore an attractive alternative for controlling these symptoms.

So, 116 young women with severe menstrual breast pain were randomized in a double-blind study and given either a muffin containing about 3 and a half tablespoons of flax seed or a placebo muffin with no flax, and then followed for a few cycles. There was some placebo muffin effect, but there was a significantly greater reduction in reported breast pain, breast swelling, and breast lumpiness in the flax seed group. The study concluded that “flax seed is effective in relieving symptoms of cyclical mastalgia without significant side effects and might be considered as an alternative treatment for cyclical mastalgia.”

But if flaxseed works, and there are only good side effects, why is it an alternative treatment? Why isn’t it the primary, first-line therapy? Well, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has not issued treatment guidelines, but the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada has. In their official guidelines they dispel the myth that caffeine is to blame or that vitamin E supplements are helpful. Instead, they prescribe dietary flaxseed “as a first-line therapy for cyclical breast pain.” Drugs are to be considered only if the flax doesn’t work.

So nice to see a professional medical association prioritize safe, natural therapies! See my video series that includes Medical Associations Oppose Bill to Mandate Nutrition Training to see the mentality here in the States.

Do Doctors Make the Grade? Unfortunately, Doctors Know Less Than They Think About Nutrition. This is largely due to the lack of Medical School Nutrition Education, though there also may be The Tomato Effect.

I’ve previously hailed the power of flax in videos such as:

-Michael Greger, M.D.

PS: If you haven’t yet, you can subscribe to my free videos here and watch my live year-in-review presentations Uprooting the Leading Causes of Death and More Than an Apple a Day.

Image credit: Chasqui (Luis Tamayo) / Flickr

Original Link