Blood pH and diet

Blood pH is relatively constant at around 7.4 because the body will strip calcium from bones, if necessary, to buffer it in the absence of alkaline-forming food components. That is not homeostasis. But blood pH does vary (typically within a range of 6.8 to 7.8, with potentially lethal effects beyond that range) and affects urine pH, which we can easily measure. 

Dietary compounds formed in the body affect blood pH; not the contrasting pH levels in the digestive tract (acid in the stomach and neutral in the small intestine) or the apparent acidity of foods, but what happens after digestion. The minerals or weak acids (citrates, et al) in alkaline-forming foods are used to make alkaline compounds in the body, which won't happen efficiently with a processed food or a non-plant-derived diet. Scientists have measured this effect and doctors have utilized it in practice, so it's not theoretical or based on pH limited to areas of the digestive tract. https://www.drrusselljaffe.com/7-principles-eating-alkaline-way/ 

"An advanced understanding of acid–base physiology is as central to the practice of critical care medicine, as are an understanding of cardiac and pulmonary physiology. Intensivists spend much of their time managing problems related to fluids, electrolytes, and blood pH. Recent advances in the understanding of acid–base physiology have occurred as the result of the application of basic physical-chemical principles of aqueous solutions to blood plasma. This analysis has revealed three independent variables that regulate pH in blood plasma. These variables are carbon dioxide, relative electrolyte concentrations, and total weak acid concentrations. All changes in blood pH, in health and in disease, occur through changes in these three variables. Clinical implications for these findings are also discussed." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC137247/ 

Foods and Supplements for a Ketogenic Diet

Ketosis occurs when the body is largely starved of carbohydrates but has an alternate energy source. Ketogenic products encourage the burning of fat in place of sugar/carbohydrates as a caloric source. The key is to avoid rises in blood sugar and insulin, while providing alternate fuels.

There are numerous keto-friendly products; these are considered to be those that contain fewer than 10 calories per serving of net carbohydrates (minus fiber). Fiber doesn’t raise blood sugar and insulin response, so is neutral and not counted when looking at labels. Most dietary supplements fall into the category of being ketogenic neutral; that is, they neither contain significant carbohydrate sources nor directly contribute ketogenic stimulating substances like fat. The main ketogenic products are fats: MCT and coconut oils (both contain MCTs) are the most important ones. Some take beta-hydroxybutyric acid, a ketone, directly.

Ketogenic diets tend to decrease electrolytes and increase the need for water. This increases the need for magnesium, potassium, and even sodium. If blood sugar drops too low, the kidneys can create blood sugar by converting the proteins (i.e. the amino acid glutamine) into glucose (gluconeogenesis), so high protein diets are also discouraged. This leaves non-starchy vegetables and fats as the most desirable parts of the diet, along with some protein and fiber. Nuts and seeds are often okay, but some are more starchy; check the labels. Dairy is largely out due to its lactose content, but non-dairy foods and beverages may be okay if also low carb. Fish oil supplements are desirable. Green foods are important; supplements like chlorella or spirulina can be very useful, as can wheatgrass or barley grass.

Other supplements used on a ketogenic regime include green tea and EGCg capsules, L-glutamine if exercising (it can convert to sugar, so use sparingly), 7-keto DHEA, collagen or gelatin or bone broth. Anti-inflammatory substances may also be helpful: turmeric and curcumin, ginger, etc.

Unless eating natural or fortified sources of vitamin D, or getting adequate sun exposure, supplementation of this vitamin is recommended. A multiple vitamin is the best source, assuming it has enough for your needs,  as it also supplies other nutrients needed for metabolism of fats and energy production. Calcium supplementation may be needed unless consuming lots of green vegetables. Look for digestive enzymes that supply lipase if consuming lots of fat (not needed for MCT oil). Supplements containing ox bile (also in some digestive enzyme formulas) may be needed if inadequate gall bladder function is suspected or known. Don’t forget the electrolytes!

ADULT WEIGHT MANAGEMENT interview, Vitamin Retailer magazine, February, 2011

Weight management products have long been an important category for natural product retailers, partially because it is such a problem for many people to control their weight but also since many people shop in these stores because they want to use natural products that are free of potentially risky pharmaceuticals. As a gateway category for transitional shoppers that may be new to health food stores, weight management products become an important gauge of a commitment to meeting these people’s needs and thus keeping them as customers willing to try other products. Of course, nutritionists will suggest a comprehensive diet and supplement plan, rather than relying on “magic bullet” single products.

Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) regulations have gone into effect over the past several years, raising the bar on manufacturers’ quality control practices. At the same time, mandatory Adverse Event Reporting (AER) was also implemented. Both of these regulatory mechanisms should increase consumer confidence and belie the myth that the industry is “unregulated”.

I believe that the glut of stories about Americans being overweight tends to make people more aware of their own lack of exercise and dietary restraint, which contribute to their excess weight. Of course, health scares and medical crises also alert people to their mortality and tend to motivate healthy dietary and other lifestyle changes. Today’s youth-obsessed media makes people want to look young and fit even past middle age. Plastic surgery, being expensive and with some risks, is far from a perfect solution. There are no shortcuts to health, only natural aids to good health. The very visible failures of both diet drugs and illegal products pretending to be dietary supplements illustrate the depth of the market and the need for effective natural weight management products.

Consumers tend to look for something that was recommended to them, either by a person or an authority. The person could be a family member, co-worker, or an acquaintance. The authority could be someone cited in the media, on the Internet, or a trusted trainer or health professional. Top categories are controlling appetite (satiety), increasing metabolism (thermogenics), and blocking the absorption of certain food components such as carbohydrates or fats (nutrient blockers).

Natural foods and fibers are part of the solution to maintaining healthy weight and blood sugar. These foods would include whole grains as well as fibers from various sources. Some of these fibers are gluten-free and/or organic, such as Flax, Acacia, Inulin, and Psyllium. Fibers also help satiety, the feeling of being full.

Consumers today are more concerned about the quality and safety of diet support products, so are looking for assurances of adequate quality controls and testing. Some parts of this process include method validation and development, stability testing, identity testing, microbiological testing, heavy metal testing, specification development, overseeing production, procuring samples and preparing them for testing, and even raw material vendor audits.

Neil will be giving a presentation in the Oak Park, Illinois area on 4/28/2010

Less of You to Love: A Nutritionist's Secrets for Successful Weight Management


Lecture presented by Neil E. Levin, CCN, DANLA


•Principles for gradual & sustainable natural weight loss

•What to eat: Including the one essential metabolism boosting component of every meal

•When to eat: How often and how many meals a day

•How to eat: Conscious eating and digestive tips

Wednesday, April 28th - 7:00pm Meet & Greet, Lecture 7:30pm

LOCATION: Concordia University, Christopher Center, 7400 Augusta St., River Forest, IL 60305

Call 708.246.FOOD (3663) or email Contact@AmericanNutritionAssociation.org for tickets

Admission $20 - Free for ANA Members & Concordia Students / Employees

http://americannutritionassociation.org/upcomingevents

Lecture presented by the American Nutrition Association® with the cooperation of Concordia University

Risk factors in developing Type 2 (adult-onset) diabetes

Improper diet and lack of exercise are major risk factors in developing Type 2 (adult-onset) diabetes. Prolonged stress and too high proportions of carbohydrates (carbs) in the diet also contribute to blood sugar problems. The problem carbs are excess levels of sugars – especially simple sugars - and starches. Complex carbs from vegetables, whole fruits, whole grains and beans are used to fuel brain activity and other body functions without excessively elevating our blood sugar. Fiber content will also help the ability of food to make us feel full. Fiber also helps to slow the introduction of other carbohydrates into the bloodstream, reducing blood sugar “peaks” after a meal. Another bonus of whole foods is that fiber can absorb cholesterol-containing bile salts, a key way to dump excess cholesterol from the body.

Eating a diet composed largely of processed/refined foods means that the carb level is probably too high while nutrients that help us to deal with blood sugar (B vitamins, fiber, chromium, etc.) are stripped from our food supply. This leaves us defenseless against weight gain, abdominal obesity, high blood pressure, high blood sugar and elevated stress hormones.

Many of us are literally drowning in excess empty calories that affect our metabolism. But skipping meals doesn’t help, nor does eating meals that lack adequate protein. Both habits discourage calorie burning.

Spikes in blood sugar are the main enemy of dieters and those with blood sugar control issues. Elevated blood sugar triggers the release of the hormone insulin, which can cause low blood sugar (hypoglycemia), which makes us fatigued after a meal. If this happens too often it can create insulin resistance, eventually causing a loss of blood sugar control that can result in Metabolic Syndrome. This is a pre-diabetes condition defined as a combination of two or more of these symptoms: insulin resistance, glucose intolerance, abnormally high insulin levels, high triglycerides, low high-density lipoprotein (the "good" cholesterol), and hypertension (high blood pressure). Metabolic Syndrome increases belly fat and is a step towards developing adult-onset diabetes.

Your options are greatest when you first discover that your blood sugar has gone out of balance. If you wait until after you're on insulin or other medications, any natural means for improvement in blood sugar control could cause a dose of medicine to become an overdose. It is very important that your physician knows if you are going to try to control your blood sugar naturally, and that you test your blood sugar levels every time before taking medication in order to avoid dangerous interactions.

Going on a low-carbohydrate (low-carb) diet is the next step. The worst carbs are the simple sugars, found in processed foods, sweets, table sugar and soda pop. Processed grains and starchy vegetables are sometimes a problem, especially in excess. Flours (especially white flour) are more of a problem than whole cooked or sprouted grains. Even carrot juice is high in sugar!

If you tend to have weight gain and blood sugar problems in middle age, the good news is that you are genetically programmed to survive a famine. The bad news is that it's a prolonged feast which can kill you! Portion control and exercise are important for your health. Controlling stress will also help your sugar balance.

The balance of nutritional components within a meal regulates fat storage and fat burning. Try to balance each meal using the ZONE diet, where at least 30% of the calories in every meal are from protein, about 30% from healthy fats and about 40% from complex carbohydrates such as whole grains, fruits or vegetables. This balance will minimize blood sugar increases. Blood sugar spikes can lead to more fat storage and less fat burning, especially without enough protein to start the calorie burning cycle after a meal.

To improve the insulin response that moves sugar out of the blood and into cells for fuel instead of turning into fat, supplements of Omega-3 fish oil (or flax oil for vegetarians), Alpha Lipoic Acid and Chromium may be helpful. Phase 2®, from a white kidney bean extract, will block some digestion of starches to sugar and therefore effectively lower your carb and calorie intake. Antioxidants of all kinds are very protective for people having blood sugar issues.

Take a good multiple vitamin with a fat-containing meal to enhance absorption of the fat-soluble nutrients. If you take green foods or other nutritionally dense dietary supplements, also take them with a meal to help increase the total nutritional value of that meal.

Advice on Diet for Cancer Survivors

• avoid all animal proteins, they trigger cancer cell activity (esp. the milk protein: casein)
• organic diet
• plant based diet
• no microwaving, esp. in plastics!!!
• fish oil (molecularly distilled)
• mixed carotenoids (vs. beta-carotene) from food or supplements
• medicinal mushrooms (the common white button and portabella mushrooms will not hurt but won't help)
• low temp saunas for detoxification

Beta-carotene risks over-stated

Beta-carotene risks over-stated By Neil E. Levin, CCN, DANLA A recent journal article pointed out the widely-reported danger of smokers using beta-carotene, a natural source (provitamin) of vitamin A, as part of their multivitamins. 1 In this meta-analysis the researchers have neglected to consider pre-existing dietary and serum levels of this nutrient, making their claim to control by placebo inadequate to properly isolate this variable. In fact, this failure to determine the effects of beta-carotene at a dose-dependent plasma level – and by neglecting to measure total beta-carotene intake along with the relevant synergistic antioxidants associated with it, as opposed to simply measuring supplemental intake - raises serious questions about the validity of these results. 2 There is also legitimate scientific debate over the use of trans versus cis forms of this provitamin that may affect the way it is used in vivo that dispute whether all forms are equal, which most studies simply do not address (including this meta-analysis). 3 Regarding beta-carotene safety little has been satisfactorily resolved, and the negative studies have been vigorously disputed for these and other reasons. For example, researchers have previously noted in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute that beta-carotene has been shown to not affect the risk of oxidative DNA damage in male smokers, despite its reputation as an antioxidant. But neither did the provitamin A prove to cause oxidative DNA damage. 4 It has become apparent to numerous observers that simply measuring supplementation of beta-carotene is not a good predictor of serum levels or of risk, and that a low level of total antioxidant intake may be a more valid marker in this regard. In fact, the dietary level of several antioxidants has been shown to be an independent predictor of plasma beta-carotene, especially in moderate alcohol drinkers. A recent study reports, “This may explain, at least in part, the inverse relationship observed between plasma beta-carotene and risk of chronic diseases associated to high levels of oxidative stress (i.e., diabetes and CVD), as well as the failure of beta-carotene supplements alone in reducing such risk.” 2 As the authors (Tanvetyanon, et al) of this current analysis have themselves noted, the Physicians Health Study compared the effects of taking 50 mg of supplemental beta-carotene (over 83,000 IU) every other day to a placebo in 22,071 US male physicians aged 40-84 and found no adverse health effects over a 12-year study period. 5 Likewise, the Women’s Health Study of 39,876 health professionals found no significant difference on lung cancer rates when looking at the effects of 50 mg of beta-carotene administered on alternate days over 2+ years plus a 4 year follow up period, using forms and dosing similar to the Physician’s Health Study to achieve very high serum levels of beta-carotene. 6 In a third study used in the current meta-analysis, The Alpha-Tocopherol, Beta Carotene Cancer Prevention Study Group (ATBC), an antioxidant study in Finland was halted early because of a widely reported small increase in cancer rates among male smokers taking beta-carotene that were only possibly linked to that nutrient. 7 Headlines associated this supplement with cancer risk. Despite objections that the study was flawed, beta-carotene use dropped. This study continues to be widely cited and believed, despite the researchers’ own statements that the results were most likely due to chance. A later analysis published in July 2004 took another look at that same Finnish smokers study’s data, but now taking into account total antioxidant intake, which should have cleared away some of the scientific controversy over beta-carotene. The smokers’ risk of getting lung cancer was inversely associated with total antioxidants in the diet, with more total antioxidants resulting in fewer cancers. 8 In this study a composite antioxidant index was generated for each of the 27,000 men over 14 years. The calculated amounts of carotenoids, flavonoids, vitamin E, selenium and Vitamin C were compared to actual lung cancer rates, with a clear result: a combination of antioxidants lowered lung cancer risk in male smokers. Properly reviewed, beta-carotene was not the culprit; low antioxidant status was the more relevant factor affecting cancer rates, and supplementation with a single antioxidant supplement simply failed to create enough improvement to avert deaths related to oxidative factors. Perhaps the supplementation with beta-carotene was simply a case of “too little, too late”, rather than a root cause of a slightly higher lung cancer rate in those smokers. It is notable that Tanvetyanon et al included the ATBC study but failed to even reference the later Wright et al study that largely refuted the alleged harms of beta-carotene shown in ATBC, which were shown to be more likely due to low levels of total antioxidant intake than to excessive beta-carotene intake. This later review of ATBC should be a cautionary tale concerning the lack of proper controls in nutrient studies, especially as compounded by the use of meta-analysis, and should have alerted the current authors to that all-too-common mistake in nutrient study design. Indeed, another large study has noted that high carotenoid intake, confirmed by measures of plasma, was associated with lower mortality rates among the elderly over a ten year period. 9 This model measured results of consuming both supplements and foods, not solely supplement input, and when combined with plasma levels should therefore be regarded as a far more robust type of science for measuring vitamin effects than a meta-analysis of simply supplementation. As in the long-term Physicians Health Study, there was no observable risk of lung cancer noted in this report. The fourth study used in the current meta-analysis used very high doses of both beta-carotene (30 mg, equal to 50,000 IU) plus 25,000 IU of pre-formed vitamin A. 10 These amounts are extremely high; the Upper Limit for vitamin A is 10,000 IU, though there is none for beta-carotene because of its historic safety record. The amount of beta-carotene used in the eye vitamins were high only because the authors selected solely formulas designed for eye health that typically provide more beta-carotene than ordinary multivitamins. This distinction is not clear in their calling such formulas “multivitamins”, because that name is typically given to full-spectrum formulas containing a full range of the essential vitamins with minerals, not system-specific formulas like those sold for eye health. Such formulas have proved to be beneficial in maintaining eye health and the combination of antioxidants have been stronger antioxidants than beta-carotene, which is potentially a pro-oxidant at times and could thus be used more safely – and effectively - in combination with other antioxidants. 11 Most importantly, the authors have not shown why they assume that “multivitamin” use would be associated with the supposed risks of beta-carotene used singly, even if those risks for the solo provitamin are assumed to be true. Nor have they adequately demonstrated the alleged dangers of taking eye formula supplements, or even the danger of lung cancer rates increasing in those taking mixtures of beta-carotene combined with other antioxidant nutrients. In the case of multivitamins most studies have shown overwhelmingly positive effects, such as one report evidencing reduced infections in nursing homes with vitamins over placebo (73% vs. 43%; P < 0.001). Intervention was with a multivitamin containing beta-carotene. Infection-related absenteeism was higher in the placebo group than in the treatment group (57% vs. 21%; P < 0.001). Perhaps most importantly, 93% of participants with diabetes mellitus reported an infection versus only 17% of those receiving supplements (P < 0.001). 12 These huge reductions in potentially serious infections among our elderly citizens should be measured against the relatively slight and mostly theoretical risk of increased lung cancer rates associated with beta-carotene supplementation. A study reported in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute looked at death rates in a population given multivitamins or other nutrients. 13 After supplements were given for 5.25 years in the general population trial of 30,000 people, significant reductions in total [relative risk (RR) = 0.91] and cancer (RR = 0.87) mortality were observed in subjects receiving beta-carotene, alpha-tocopherol, and selenium combined. The same researchers reported on a subgroup of 3,318 persons with esophageal Dysplasia (a precursor to esophageal cancer) that was given either a multiple vitamin-and-mineral supplement or a placebo for 6 years. In this portion of the trial, small reductions in total (RR 0.93) and cancer (RR = 0.96) mortality were observed but were not significant. In any case, no increase in cancer rates was noted in the group taking multivitamins; there was actually a possible small benefit in terms of reducing this risk. The participants getting the multivitamin took a daily beta-carotene capsule along with two multivitamin tablets. This was a group of subjects at high risk of getting throat cancer. 14-15 It is a leap of faith to assume that a single nutrient would have identical effects to a combination of nutrients without substantial supporting evidence, which is still lacking; confounded by conflicting evidence and multiplying variables in meta-analyses. Since nutrients are both synergistic and present in the diet, it is important to factor those known variables into a proper study design. All too often, researchers do not consider this fundamental difference between drug and nutrient research and unwittingly introduce extra variables that undermine their conclusions. 16 This current meta-analysis of 4 studies - only one of which unquestionably shows a slight increase in lung cancer risk but does not actually measure isolated beta-carotene risk; two others are well-designed and robust studies looking at serum levels of those taking a high dose of beta-carotene but show no increased risk in lung cancer rates, and the fourth has been largely shown to be moot by a later and more complete re-analysis of the data - does not support the hypothesis that beta-carotene increases rates of lung cancer and that multivitamins are therefore dangerous. Thus, there is no sound basis in the current review for suggesting that warning labels may be needed for multivitamins or eye health supplements containing beta-carotene along with other nutrients that have been shown in well-designed studies to help protect the eyesight – and independence - of our aging population. REFERENCES: Tanvetyanon T, Bepler G. Beta-carotene in multivitamins and the possible risk of lung cancer among smokers versus former smokers: a meta-analysis and evaluation of national brands. Cancer. 2008 Jul 1;113(1):150-7. PMID: 18429004 Valtueña S, et al. The total antioxidant capacity of the diet is an independent predictor of plasma beta-carotene. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2007 Jan;61(1):69-76. Epub 2006 Jul 12. PMID: 16835597 [Supported by the European Community IST-2001–33204 'Healthy Market', the Italian Ministry of University and Research COFIN 2001 and the National Research Council CU01.00923.CT26 research projects.] Andreas Schieber, Reinhold Carle. Occurrence of carotenoid cis-isomers in food: Technological, analytical, and nutritional implications. Trends in Food Science & Technology, Volume 16, Issue 9, September 2005, Pages 416-422 van Poppel G, Poulsen H, Loft S, Verhagen H. No influence of beta carotene on oxidative DNA damage in male smokers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1995 Feb 15;87(4):310-1. PMID: 7707423 Hennekens CH, Buring JE, Manson JE, et al. Lack of effect of long-term supplementation with beta carotene on the incidence of malignant neoplasms and cardiovascular disease. N Engl J Med. 1996 May 2;334(18):1145-9. PMID: 8602179 Lee IM, Cook NR, Manson JE, Buring JE, Hennekens CH. Beta-carotene supplementation and incidence of cancer and cardiovascular disease: the Women's Health Study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1999 Dec 15;91(24):2102-6. PMID: 10601381 The effect of vitamin E and beta carotene on the incidence of lung cancer and other cancers in male smokers. The Alpha-Tocopherol, Beta Carotene Cancer Prevention Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1994 Apr 14;330(15):1029-35. PMID: 8127329 Wright ME, et al. Development of a comprehensive dietary antioxidant index and application to lung cancer risk in a cohort of male smokers. Am J Epidemiol. 2004 Jul 1;160(1):68-76. PMID: 15229119 Buijsse B, et al. Plasma carotene and alpha-tocopherol in relation to 10-y all-cause and cause-specific mortality in European elderly: the Survey in Europe on Nutrition and the Elderly, a Concerted Action (SENECA). Am J Clin Nutr. 2005 Oct;82(4):879-86. PMID: 16210720 Omenn GS, Goodman GE, Thornquist MD, et al. Effects of a combination of beta carotene and vitamin A on lung cancer and cardiovascular disease. N Engl J Med. 1996;334:1150–1155. Bartlett H, Eperjesi F. Age-related macular degeneration and nutritional supplementation: a review of randomised controlled trials. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt. 2003 Sep;23(5):383-99. Review. PMID: 12950886 Liu BA, et al. Effect of multivitamin and mineral supplementation on episodes of infection in nursing home residents: a randomized, placebo-controlled study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2007 Jan;55(1):35-42. Erratum in: J Am Geriatr Soc. 2007 Mar;55(3):478. PMID: 17233683 Blot WI, Li IY, Taylor PR, et al. Nutrition intervention trials in Linxian, China: supplementation with specific vitamin/mineral combinations, cancer incidence, and disease-specific mortality in the general population. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993:8ı:1483-92 Li JY, Taylor PR, et al. Nutrition intervention trials in Linxian, China: multiple vitamin/mineral supplementation, cancer incidence, and disease-specific mortality among adults with esophageal dysplasia. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993 Sep 15;85(18):1492-8. PMID: 8360932 Blot WI, et al. The Linxian trials: mortality rates by vitamin-mineral intervention group. Am J Clin Nutr. 1995 Dec;62(6 Suppl):1424S-1426S. PMID: 7495242