So What is Health Food?

Before we conclude this weblog research project, we feel that it is necessary to look back and reminisce on the dawning of health food stores, which brings us to contemplate the fundamental question “What is health food?” Surprisingly, there proves to be evidence of the emergence of ‘health food’ dating all the way back to the late eighteenth century, where the relationship between diet and health was a primitive but revolutionary concept.

Now let's go back in time a moment for a brief history lesson: In the year 1773, British Captain James Cook supplied fresh citrus fruits and sauerkraut to his sailors to prevent them from obtaining scurvy, a potentially lethal disease caused by vitamin C deficiency. Although no one knows for sure whether or not this was the spark that began the health food revolution, we do know that ever since then there has been an increasing intrigue and awareness of the connection between diet and certain ‘health foods.’

Another contributor to the development of health food, Sister Ellen White served as a founder of the Health Reform Institute and a leader of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church during the late 1800s. She aided in the sponsorship of vegetarianism and triggered various movements devoted to this cause. It may have been this advocacy and activism that resulted in the need for the first health food stores. In fact, further proof of this claim lies in the Adventists’ creation of the first meat analogs (meat substitutes like veggie burgers) in the United States.

Yet another early health food promoter was Reverend Sylvester Graham. He traveled the country giving lectures on the benefits of whole grains, while simultaneously conveying the idea of reducing meats and fats in one’s diet. Though he passed away at the age of 51, many are still familiar with his legendary graham cracker, a rather tasty and nutritional snack that he invented in 1829.

Following this, in the 1920s and 1930s, entire stores dedicated to selling health foods began to appear throughout the nation. You may be familiar with some of the original health products, as most of them are still around today. Some of the first foods sold were brewer’s yeast, powdered skim milk, blackstrap molasses, wheat germ, and yogurt. Then in 1950, Jerome Rodale published Prevention Magazine which, along with his popular book on organic gardening, thrusted the health food industry forward by publicizing the term ‘health food.’

Lastly, what qualifies a particular food as ‘health food’? Generally, the products displayed in the health food section of a store share common characteristics such as minimal processing, chemical additives, preservatives, and colorings, contain less white flour and sugar, have more organic ingredients, and are sugar-free, salt-free, and so on.

So, to answer the initial question “What is health food?,” there is no true definition of the actual term ‘health food,’ but most associates of the industry consider them to be specific produce that enhances health or provides optimum nutrition to the consumer. However, as illustrated by previous weblog posts, this may not be the most reliable source of information.

[Information taken from HealthNotes]

Alternative vs. Conventional Treatments―How Do They Work?

With each passing day, conventional medicine is abandoned more and more often as patients choose to turn to alternative methods. Nevertheless, while both types of medicine are used to treat illnesses, especially terminal ones, alternative treatments are not scientifically proven and therefore open the door to a variety of hazardous risks. Still, there exist many more differences between these two approaches, which Breastcancer.org attempts to explain.

In a nutshell, conventional treatments are those that are aimed to treat a specific problem, a specific complaint, or a definable disease, such as breast cancer. It aims to make an accurate diagnosis and to cure the patient of the disease. Also, conventional medicine relies on outside agents to do the healing. For example, breast cancer treatment uses the combination of surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation.

While conventional medicine uses external factors to mend the body, alternative medicines “view the person as a force unto herself, a holistic unity, where mind and spirit are as intimately involved in healing as the body.” Alternative therapies aid the body in healing itself by unblocking blocked energies or by balancing essentials in the process of healing. Health is promoted through “herbs, potions, purges, acupuncture, massage, biofeedback, hypnosis, visualization, laying on of hands, prayer, meditation, music, movement, or a particular diet.”

However, without clinical studies it is extremely difficult for doctors to support alternative therapies. Therefore the actual efficiency of alternative therapies can be easily questioned.

Why Not Start Early? Eat Healthy!

While there are many alternative therapies that have not been properly studied and thus propose unknown risks, it has been proven that maintaining a healthy diet may prevent or reduce the risks of breast cancer. Many women believe that, because breast cancer does not run in their families, they have no chance of acquiring the disease. In fact, in 90 to 95 percent of breast cancer cases, the cause is unknown. Women can protect themselves from increasing their risks of getting breast cancer by following specific dietary guidelines. These include avoiding large amounts of alcohol, increasing the intake of soy products, and eating fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and low-fat foods.

The University of Virginia Health System explains why such a diet should be followed: "Studies have shown a relationship between alcohol consumption and an increased risk for breast cancer. An average of more than 1-2 alcohol drinks per day appears to increase the risk of breast cancer." Unlike alcohol, the consumption of soy products should be increased to protect women from developing breast cancer; "Soybeans and soy products such as tofu, tempeh, soymilk and soy nuts contain compounds that can help lower elevated cholesterol and may play a 'cancer protecting' role in the diet." Women should also eat lots of fruits, vegetables and whole grains, since they are known to keep the body healthy and less prone to diseases like breast cancer. The foods also provide a great source of antioxidants, which repair damage that occurs naturally in cells. Low fat diets can also help prevent breast cancer.

Therefore, women should take into careful consideration what they eat because it may prevent or, conversely, aid in the development of breast cancer.

Green Tea's Anti-Cancer Properties Looking Green...

Green tea consumption has been linked to several health benefits, including preventing some types of cancer. In fact, it is most likely for this reason that green tea has become more popular in the United States in recent years. However, despite all the scientific literature that supports these health benefits, the FDA still holds strict guidelines over health claims on green tea products. The FDA asserts its disapproval of health claims for green tea and reduced risk of all cancers, with the exception of breast and prostate cancer, in a June 2005 news release:

Two studies do not show that drinking green tea reduces the risk of breast cancer in women, but one weaker, more limited study suggests that drinking green tea may reduce this risk. Based on these studies, the FDA concludes that it is highly unlikely that green tea reduces the risk of breast cancer.

...

One weak and limited study does not show that drinking green tea reduces the risk of prostate cancer, but another weak and limited study suggests that drinking green tea may reduce this risk. Based on these studies, FDA concludes that it is highly unlikely that green tea reduces the risk of prostate cancer.

More details on this verdict can be found within the FDA's response to a petition by Sin Hang Lee, MD. In section IIA, entitled Assessment of Observational Studies, results of numerous studies on green tea and certain types of cancers are referenced. The cancers involved in the studies were breast cancer, prostate cancer, gastric cancer, lung cancer, colon/rectal cancer, esophageal cancer, pancreatic cancer, ovarian cancer, liver cancer, bladder cancer, and skin cancer. The FDA pointed out flaws in an overwhelming majority of the studies and stated that no scientific conclusions could be drawn from them. In the remaining studies (those of breast cancer and prostate cancer), there existed no replications which suggested any correlation between green tea and reduced risk of cancer. Consequently, the FDA ranks the evidence in the studies as the lowest level for a qualified health claim. This allows for health claims on green tea "provided that the qualified claims are appropriately worded so as to not mislead consumers." While a qualified health claim from the FDA is nice, ranks of the lowest level are not very impressive nor convincing. Therefore, while green tea is often widely acclaimed for its health benefits, the evidence supporting its role in these advantages, such as reduced cancer risks, is still lacking.

Are You Supplement-Safe?

“When choosing a dietary supplement, remember the first rule for evaluating any health claim: If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.” [Quotation source]

In the past, it was the responsibility of the supplement manufacturers to prove to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that their products were safe and effective. Now, however, this obligation has been reversed and it is up to the FDA to, instead, prove that a supplement is harmful or falsely advertised. The flaw of this method is that it is highly probable for a product to cause harm before the FDA can take action (declaring a supplement dangerous and subsequently proving this claim in court), due to the vast array of new supplements introduced to the market and the limited resources of the FDA.

According to an Iowa State University Extension entitled Food and Nutrition, a mere three members of the entire FDA personnel are currently appointed to evaluate unsafe or undesirable outcomes in the $12 billion dietary supplement industry. The website remarks that “it would be pretty hard for only three FDA staff members to monitor the supplement industry when the Harris Poll in 2002 reported that seven out of ten U.S. adults take supplements.”

In addition, the website defines health fraud as “a business that sells false hope [and] preys on people who are victims of diseases that have no medical cures, such as HIV/AIDS, Alzheimer’s, arthritis, multiple sclerosis, diabetes, and certain forms of cancer.” This, in most part, explains the reasoning behind the enormous prosperity of the dietary supplement ‘business’: it guarantees quick and easy solutions to better health or personal appearance.

In order to help prevent such deception, the website also lists some of the typical phrases and marketing strategies used to mislead consumers, such as “miraculous cure,” “ancient remedy,” or “secret ingredient,” impressive-sounding terminology to disguise a lack of scientific proof, or undocumented case histories claiming fantastic results.

Unreported Use of Alternative Medicines

As reported by the University of Florida Shands Cancer Center, while nearly half of all cancer patients use complementary or alternative medicines, the majority of these people do not report the use of these items to their doctors. To clear up some confusion, alternative medicines are those used in place of conventional ones, while complementary medicines are those used to supplement conventional ones. Cancer patients use complementary or alternative medicine to treat side effects or just as a method of treating the cancer directly. However, patients usually do not report the use of complementary or alternative medicines, claiming they are afraid that their doctors will not approve of or do not know enough about these forms of therapy. The university of Florida conducted a study to evaluate both the use and the reporting of alternative/complementary treatments. They interviewed a total of 487 cancer patients and found that:

• 48% reported at least one CAM (complementary and alternative medicine) therapy during treatment; the most common reason being “general overall health."
• 65% of patients receiving chemotherapy alone reported CAM use, compared to 35% receiving radiation therapy alone.
• Almost 90% of the patients reported satisfaction with CAM as a cost efficient approach.
• The most common therapies were vitamins, herbs, and botanical supplements.
• Only 10% of CAM users receiving radiation therapy alone and 16% receiving chemotherapy alone were given information about CAM by their physicians.

The majority of the surveyed patients did not report the use of alternative or complementary medicines and therefore were unaware of the risks and adverse effects involved. Furthermore, they should be considered extremely lucky since their specific products proved to be non-toxic and non-inter-reactive with concurrent medical treatment. Nevertheless, not everyone can be as lucky.

An 'Attractive' Alternative Treatment

Although they may not be as prevalent in health food stores, one type of alternative healing product involves using magnets to ease pain in the body. The NCCAM site features a page devoted to the use of magnets. The sellers of these products claim that a magnet's magnetic fields can help treat symptoms of certain diseases and conditions. However, despite many testimonials of the effectiveness of such treatment, the use of magnets has not been scientifically proven. One key point on the NCCAM site says:

"Scientific research so far does not firmly support a conclusion that magnets of any type can relieve pain. However, some people do experience some relief. Various theories have been proposed as to why, but none have been scientifically proven."

For this reason, the FDA has not approved any products with claims to benefit health. Some theories of the magnet's effects on the body have been tested and the site contains summaries of six of them. Few of the experiments seem to prove some of the theories, but more rigorous testing still must be conducted. One example of an experiment that supported this theory was conducted by Johnson et al. in 2001. Johnson exposed human and rat white blood cells to an electromagnet and observed an increased rate of multiplying suggesting that magnets may increase the capacity of the body to fight off infection and inflammation. Actually, magnets have a popular history in treating certain forms of pain, especially that caused by rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, or fibromyalgia. A 1999 survey of patients with these conditions showed that 18% had used magnet or copper bracelets, making it the second most popular complementary or alternative treatment for them after chiropractic. Visit the NCCAM site in the link previously provided for more information on magnets in health.

The Legality of Advice Obtained from Health Food Stores

While the vast majority of health food store employees have had no professional training in the areas of nutrition or health care, they often offer advice regarding important health matters. These people are practicing medicine and pharmacy without a license, both actions prohibited by state law. While this practice is illegal, it can also be misleading because the information supplied by health food store employees is often incorrect. Don't Trust Advice from Health-Food Retailers! reports investigations of health food stores who have ignored these laws and continue to provide patients who do no know any better with incorrect, and sometimes harmful, information.

In fact, research brings to light a continuous pattern of this practice since the seventies; in 1976, National Inquirer reporter Eric Faucher went to 16 different health food stores across America, complaining of weight loss, insomnia, afternoon fever, and fatigue-symptoms―common precursors of cancer. Only one employee recommended that he see a doctor. The others diagnosed him themselves as having "high blood pressure," "imbalance of energy," and "hypoglycemia." One clerk didn’t know what to say so she called her mother for advice who prescribed vitamin E without even seeing Faucher. The same, still, occurred in 1993; the website reads:

Armed with a hidden camera, "Inside Edition" visited four health-food stores in New York City to ask whether they had anything for fatigue and headaches; blurred vision; arthritis; shortness of breath of a "grandmother who just had bypass surgery"; strengthening the immune system; improving memory; and/or "cleansing the blood." Products were recommended in response to every question. When asked for a product that could help people with AIDS, one GNC store manager recommended an amino acid product that he said was one of the store's top sellers. He also said the product was supposed to "help block the chemical inhibiting the growth of the virus" and did not have the toxic side effects of AZT. When confronted later, however, he denied recommending the product for AIDS.

Health food stores today continue to provide illegal and misleading advice. Therefore, the best possible prescription for any health problem is to see a qualified physician.

What Health Food Store Employees 'Forget' to Mention

Health food store employees will most likely be eager to tell any inquiring customer about the benefits of various natural products, such as herbal medicines and supplements. However, they may not be as willing to inform the customer about a particular herb's side effects or possible drug interactions. Taking a look back at a previous post entitled "Why is Alternative Medicine so Popular?" we see that reason 11 accurately describes this situation. It states, "Many advocates of alternative medicine refuse to admit failure." As vendors of alternative medicine, health food store employees speak to customers with a biased point of view leaning towards the benefits. A 1999 American Academy of Family Physicians publication tells us about some information alternative medicine vendors may not disclose:

A growing number of Americans are using herbal products for preventive and therapeutic purposes. The manufacturers of these products are not required to submit proof of safety and efficacy to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration before marketing. For this reason, the adverse effects and drug interactions associated with herbal remedies are largely unknown ... Physicians must be alert for adverse effects and drug interactions associated with herbal remedies, and they should ask all patients about the use of these products.

This publication by Melanie Johns Cupp addresses the situation stated above by providing information about the adverse effects and drug interactions of Ginkgo biloba, St. John's wort, Ephedra, Ginseng, and Kava. Although its target audience is mainly family physicians, it would not hurt to visit the site and inform yourself. Some of the adverse effects that the publication highlights are spontaneous bleeding associated with Ginkgo biloba, in addition to chances of experiencing insomnia, nervousness, tremors, headaches, hypertension, seizures, arrhythmias, heart attacks, strokes, and even death associated with Ephedra. The site also stresses that Ginkgo biloba may interact with garlic, vitamin E, and medication with antiplatelet or anticoagulant properties. Moreover, it states that supplements with Ephedra should not be taken by people with cardiovascular disease, hyperthyroidism, diabetes mellitus, benign prostatic hypertrophy, or glaucoma.

Hence, as with conventional medicines, it would be wise to speak to your physician about the possible side effects or drug interactions you may experience before taking herbal medicine, bearing in mind that these little bits of information are just somethings that health food store employees simply 'forget' to mention.

Essiac, a Cure for Breast Cancer?

Another View of Healing discusses the use of alternative medicines to cure cancer. The commonly known alternative medicine for breast cancer is Essiac, which has been claimed to harden the tumor, then soften it, and lastly, break it up. Essiac is made from a combination of Indian rhubarb, slipper elm, sorrel, and burdock. Barrie Cassileth, Ph.D, Adjunct Professor of Medicine at the University of North Carolina, writes, “Although the herbs in Essiac have shown some anti-tumor effects in the test tube, this is true of many investigated compounds, the great majority of which are found not to work as anticancer agents in humans.” Unlike traditional treatments, alternative medicines such as Essiac do not have scientific support regarding both safety and efficacy. Herbal remedies do not fall under the jurisdiction of the FDA and often do not provide the patient with vital information such as side effects, risks, and interactions with other drugs.

Some herbal remedies are often outrageous. One such remedy is the Livinston-Wheeler Regimen which treats cancer patients with injections made from their own urine. The inventor of this therapy claimed that cancer was caused by a bacterium and the vaccine would attack the root of the patient’s cancer.

Cassileth advises cancer patients to not rely on unproven remedies; "Therapies that are considered alternative are by definition unproved and should be avoided," says Cassileth. While there are many theories out there about cancer, there are just as many unproven, and even dangerous, cures.

Keeping Abreast of Breast Cancer Prevention?

As discussed in The Fly in the Ointment, obesity is an established risk factor of breast cancer. Because high levels of estrogen (a female hormone) have been conclusively linked to some types of breast cancer, Dr. Schwarcz attributes the capacity of fatty tissue to not only store estrogen, but also to convert male hormones into estrogen, to the development of the disease. For this reason, estrogen production, and thus the risk of obtaining breast cancer, can be curbed with physical activity and exercise.

In fact, Schwarcz asserts that "postmenopausal women who exercise moderately for roughly two hourse per week can reduce their risk of breast cancer by as much as 20 percent. Younger women who work out for at least four hours per week during their reproductive years can reduce it by 50 percent!" More importantly, these statistics are based upon scientific research and studies, rendering them much more reliable than advice granted in a generic health food store. A news article published in June of 2005 corroborates the benefit of regular exercise, as demonstrated by a recent study led by Andrea Mastro and sponsored by the Department of Defense Against Breast Cancer:

Exercise, already shown to help prevent breast cancer, can also help women recover from surgery and other breast cancer treatments ... While the instinct may be to lie low and rest up, in fact it is better to get up and move, even [by] doing strength training ... Breast cancer patients who exercised with a trainer after surgery, chemotherapy, or radiation treatment felt better and stronger, and their immune systems appeared healthier than women who rested.

The study, indeed, illustrated a strong connection between exercise and breast cancer. Well then, I guess gullible breast cancer patients' frequent visits to the health food store had their benefits after all―the physical activity involved with getting there and strolling up and down the aisles did somewhat lower their risk of obtaining breast cancer.

A Questionnaire That's Up in the Air

During the 1980s, Great Earth Vitamin Stores was the second largest health food store chain in the nation, comprised of approximately 190 stores. Then, in 1990, the company publicized a revolutionary questionnaire called the Nutritional Fitness Profile which was composed of 29 simple questions. It was with this evaluation that the company announced that “Great Earth’s highly trained ‘Vitamiticians’ were prepared to analyze the results and tailor a nutritional support program that’s just right for each individual’s physical makeup and lifestyle.” The answer to each question would classify the severity of the customer’s problem as minor, slightly serious, or significantly serious. But, some of the questions were deemed completely irrelevant by physicians and could not have possibly helped determine any cause or solution to the customer’s illness. Moreover, not even one of the questions included in the survey was detailed enough for properly examining diet, nor was any one a rational basis for recommending supplements, not even if conducted by a licensed physician.

Few questions appeared to serve no legitimate purpose whatsoever. Question 12, for instance, inquired whether you “ate canned goods more than once or twice a week.” The consumption of one or two portions of canned products per week poses no problem at all, even taking into account the fact that they are not the best source of nutrition. Even more ridiculous, question 20 asked whether you “have one or more bowel movements every day.” Daily movements are not necessary for good health. According to James J. Kenney, Ph.D, R.D., a nutrition research specialist at the Pritikin Longevity Center in Santa Monica, California, states that “even if decreased frequency does reflect a problem, it would certainly be inappropriate for health-food-store clerks to evaluate it or recommend products to correct it.”

Through further investigation, a disclaimer was found at the bottom of the questionnaire, stating that it was, in fact, “meant for educational purposes only and should not be understood as a substitute for appropriate medical advice or treatment.” Towards the bottom, it also confirmed that “individuals under a physician’s care should consult the physician before embarking on any new diet, exercise, or nutritional supplement program.” However, Great Earth’s so-called “highly trained ‘Vitamiticians’”―later established as “absolutely NOT doctors, dieticians, or licensed health care practitioners at all”―were obviously eager to sell supplements without regard for medical confirmation.

Why is Alternative Medicine so Popular?

Most of the posts in this blog talk about alternative medicine and much of the quackery that comes with it. As shown in those previous posts, some of the claims made by the vendors of certain supplements or treatments are rather ridiculous. How could a person possibly fall for these scams? A study in 1993 by The New England Journal of Medicine showed that 1 out of 3 American adults sought some sort of alternative health care in the preceding year. Furthermore, alternative health care is estimated to be a $15 billion a year business. So just how has alternative medicine become so popular? Robert Todd Carroll, creator of skepdic.com, tells us the answer on his entry for "'alternative' health practice." The eleven reasons Carroll lists and explains are, in brief:

1. The fear of surgery and drug side effects cause some to consider alternative harmless treatments
2. Alternative practitioners remain hopeful and encourage their patients to do the same even if their medicine fails
3. Alternative medicine offers hope when conventional medicine does not offer a safe and sure cure
4. Some believe that natural medicines are necessarily better than pharmaceutical ones
5. Alternative medicine is often cheaper than conventional medicine
6. Alternative medicine is often sanctioned by state governments, suggesting that it is government approved and legitimatized
7. Many doctors of conventional medicine seem to care less about the patient as a person than alternative practitioners
8. Metaphysical thought regarding nature cannot be proven wrong because it is not testable
9. Some are attracted to anti-science magical thinking
10. People think alternative medicine works claiming to feel better and cured when they may only have experienced a placebo effect
11. Many advocates of alternative medicine refuse to admit failure

It is easy to see how a person can turn to alternative medicine for a try when conventional medicine has failed them. However, one must continue to be a free-thinker and always be aware of certain quacks that they may come across.

Hormone Replacement Therapy: Hope or Hype?

“There are two main types of research studies―qualitative and quantitative…”

Women being treated for breast cancer who are considering undergoing Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT) should be cautious while relying on published research and material to formulate their decision. An article recently published in the Journal for Breast Cancer Research reveals that qualitative studies and records of the recurrence of breast cancer in breast cancer survivors taking HRT are erroneous.

While such qualitative “studies” have concluded that there is, in fact, a decreased risk of the reappearance of breast cancer in patients undergoing HRT, the authors of the Journal assert that this assumption is not valid. To explain, evidence compiled from randomized controlled trials (a type of quantitative study) indicates the exact opposite―that there is actually an increased risk of the recurrence of breast cancer in HRT patients.

Furthermore, published research has proven to be deceiving in that the positive studies “were all said to have methodological limitations that could not be controlled using statistical methods.” For instance, the women chosen to participate in HRT were supposedly healthier and their status was observed and recorded for only a very short amount of time. Additionally, it is speculated that authors only chose to publish positive results, which consequently suggests that negative results were lacking.

However, although the relationship between breast cancer and HRT is controversial, the treatment in question does function to offer relief to symptoms of menopause like mood swings, hot flushes, and increased risk of developing osteoporosis. All in all, this analysis underlines the importance of acute judgment and care while weighing the evidence either for or against the use of HRT by breast cancer survivors. So, is Hormone Replacement Therapy ultimately beneficial or detrimental? It’s up to you to decide…