Eat for Health: Gesund abnehmen, jünger aussehen, länger leben – Die Verjüngungskur für Körper und Geist
Das Ende aller Diäten
Eat for Health: Gesund abnehmen, jünger aussehen, länger leben – Die Verjüngungskur für Körper und Geist
Das Ende aller Diäten
By Dr. Mercola
Recently, news headlines were ablaze with startling information that eggs are nearly as bad for your arteries as cigarettes. After surveying more than 1,200 seniors, the researchers concluded that eating egg yolks on a regular basis is approximately two-thirds as bad as smoking with regards to the build-up of arterial plaque.1
That’s an incredible claim―especially once you know the rest of the story, as Paul Harvey used to say.
The rest of the story is this: the „study“ is based on interviews of stroke patients and their recollection of egg intake and admission of smoking history.
The authors do acknowledge that the results are weak because they’re dependent on the patients‘ self-reporting, memory, and honesty. They also say the finding that people with heart disease shouldn’t consume eggs is just a hypothesis and should be tested further. That hasn’t stopped the conventional media from running with it though, without any further scrutiny.2
First of all, the study was funded by the Heart & Stroke Foundation of Ontario, and the Heart & Stroke Foundation of Canada. Although these are two different entities, they use the same donors list in their annual reports3, and they are both heavily funded by Big Pharma—to the tune of AT LEAST $7 million a year for heart and stroke recovery, and $4.4 million for the Research Center’s Heart & Stroke Spark Together for Healthy Kids™ project.
A number of „studies“ that have come out of the Research Center support very aggressive drug treatment of stroke and heart attack patients, including this one, entitled „Treating Arteries Instead of Risk Factors4,“ in which the authors actually advocate skipping the risk factors altogether and just aggressively treating with pharmaceuticals. The study says they:
„… ensured that patients with vascular disease were using an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor. For those not able to use angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors because of cough or angioedema, we ensured that they were using an angiotensin receptor blocker, unless they had contraindications to these classes of drugs.“
Next, let’s look at the study authors. Two of the three researchers in question, have declared interests in statins. David Spence and Jean Davignon have received honoraria and speaker’s fees from several pharmaceutical companies manufacturing lipid-lowering drugs. Now do you think the companies that make statins might have a vested interest in getting you to be afraid of eggs and cholesterol? Of course they do.
The third researcher, David Jenkins, helped create the vegan „Portfolio Diet,“ which only allows egg substitutes and then only sparingly.
So what’s the bottom line when you look at who funded the study and who the authors were? They all have heavy involvement with, and funding from, pharmaceutical companies, so how can you expect anything but massive conflict of interest? With this background information you could EASILY predict the outcome of the study well before it even began.
There is a major misconception that you must avoid foods like eggs and saturated fat to protect your heart. While it’s true that fats from animal sources contain cholesterol, this is not necessarily something that will harm you. Cholesterol is in every cell in your body, where it helps to produce cell membranes, hormones, vitamin D and bile acids that help you to digest fat. Cholesterol also helps in the formation of memories and is vital for your neurological function.
Besides asking seniors to recollect their past egg consumption with any amount of accuracy, there are other major problems with this study. Mark Sisson posted a humorous and accurate take on it on his blog, stating:5
„Those who ate the most eggs also smoked the most and were the most diabetic. To their credit, the authors tried to control for those factors, plus several others. Although they tried to control for sex, blood lipids, blood pressure, smoking, body weight index, and presence of diabetes, the study’s authors didn’t – couldn’t – account for all potentially confounding variables. In their own words, ‚more research should be done to take in possible confounders such as exercise and waist circumference.‘
Hmm. ‚Possible‘ confounders, eh?
- Exercise reduces inflammatory markers of atherosclerosis6
- Exercise even reduces markers of atherosclerosis in pre-pubertal obese children!7
- Exercise reduces thickness of the carotid arterial wall8
It doesn’t get much clearer than that. Exercise is a massively confounding variable that the authors failed to take into account.
What about waist circumference?
- A high waist circumference predicts atherosclerosis of the carotid artery.9
Or how about stress, which also wasn’t considered?
- Perceived daily psychological demands – the amount of crap you perceive to be heaped on your plate – are associated with progression of carotid arterial plaque.10
Yeah, it’s not like the size of a person’s waist, whether or not they move of their own volition or sit in an easy chair all day, and how much stress they endure have any impact on their risk of developing atherosclerosis. Those things may be linked, and I’m sure the authors would have loved to include them in their analysis, but there just wasn’t enough space on the questionnaire. Besides, it’s not like a little physical activity and mediation could even undo the damage wrought by 4.68 sinful egg yolks per week. Why, that’s nearly a half dozen!“ [Emphasis mine]
Another interesting analysis has been made by Ned Kock, who specializes in nonlinear variance-based structural equation modeling. Using a model to test for the „moderating effect,“ he demonstrates how the egg consumption data from the featured study actually shows that egg consumption promotes health.11
By looking into the effect that the number of eggs consumed per week had on the association between LDL cholesterol and plaque formation, the data shows that the highest amount of plaque is associated with the lowest LDL cholesterol levels… This is interesting, to say the least, since egg yolks are „supposed to“ raise your LDL (bad) cholesterol levels thereby causing plaque buildup.
„What is happening here? Maybe egg consumption above a certain level shifts the size of the LDL particles from small to large, making them harmless. (Saturated fat consumption, in the context of a nutritious diet in lean individuals, seems to have a similar effect.) Maybe eggs contain nutrients that promote overall health, leading LDL particles to „behave“ and do what they are supposed to do. Maybe it is a combination of these and other effects.“
One of the curious features of this study was the singling out of eggs without paying any attention to other foods. What about trans fat consumption, for example, which is now widely known to increase cardiovascular health risks? Or processed sugars and grains?
Additionally, while the subjects were reportedly asked about medications, drug use was not evaluated to see if there were any correlations between drugs and increased risk of arterial plaque build-up. After all, the subjects were all stroke patients, and are therefore likely to be on statins. Statins, we now know, are associated with an increased risk of diabetes, and heart disease is the number one killer of diabetics. So is the increased plaque build-up really caused by egg consumption, or is it related to drug-induced diabetes?
In a previous paper12, the researchers even point out a study showing that participants who developed diabetes during the course of the study doubled their risk of heart disease with regular egg consumption, while egg consumption had no impact on heart disease risk in non-diabetics.13 Overall, the idea that eggs are unhealthy is a complete myth, one that’s easily debunked if you look at the evidence.
For example, previous studies have found that:
- Consumption of more than 6 eggs per week does not increase the risk of stroke and ischemic stroke14
- Eating two eggs a day does not adversely affect endothelial function (an aggregate measure of cardiac risk) in healthy adults, supporting the view that dietary cholesterol may be less detrimental to cardiovascular health than previously thought15
- Proteins in cooked eggs are converted by gastrointestinal enzymes, producing peptides that act as ACE inhibitors (common prescription medications for lowering blood pressure)16
- A survey of South Carolina adults found no correlation of blood cholesterol levels with „bad“ dietary habits, such as use of red meat, animal fats, fried foods, butter, eggs, whole milk, bacon, sausage and cheese17
Ideally, the yolks should be consumed raw as the heat will damage many of the highly perishable nutrients in the yolk. Additionally, the cholesterol in the yolk can be oxidized with high temperatures, especially when it is in contact with the iron present in the whites and cooked, as in scrambled eggs, and such oxidation contributes to chronic inflammation in your body, which is definitely associated with increased risk of plaque formation and heart disease.
However, if you’re eating raw eggs, they MUST be organic pastured eggs. You do not want to consume conventionally-raised eggs raw, as they’re much more likely to be contaminated with pathogens such as salmonella. Organic pastured eggs are also far superior when it comes to nutrient content. In a 2007 egg-testing project, Mother Earth News compared the official U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) nutrient data for commercial eggs with eggs from hens raised on pasture and found that the latter typically contains:
1/3 less cholesterol 2/3 more vitamin A 3 times more vitamin E 1/4 less saturated fat 2 times more omega-3 fatty acids 7 times more beta-carotene
The dramatically superior nutrient levels are most likely the result of the differences in diet between free ranging, pastured hens and commercially-farmed hens. An egg is considered organic if the chicken was only fed organic food, which means it will not have accumulated high levels of pesticides from the grains (mostly GM corn) fed to typical chickens. It’s important to realize that an egg can be organic without being pasture-raised. „Pastured“ means the chickens have been allowed to forage for its natural food sources outside, and is your best guarantee of a high quality egg. A deep yellow or orange yolk is a telltale sign of high-quality organic pastured eggs.
The key to getting high quality eggs is to buy them locally, either from an organic farm or farmers market. Fortunately, finding organic eggs locally is far easier than finding raw milk as virtually every rural area has individuals with chickens. Farmers markets are a great way to meet the people who produce your food. With face-to-face contact, you can get your questions answered and know exactly what you’re buying. Better yet, visit the farm and ask for a tour. To locate a free-range pasture farm, try asking your local health food store, or check out the following web listings:
If you absolutely must purchase your eggs from a commercial grocery store, look for ones that are marked free-range organic. They’re like still going to originate from a mass-production facility (so you’ll want to be careful about eating them raw), but it’s about as good as it gets if you can’t find a local source.
I would strongly encourage you to AVOID ALL omega-3 eggs, as they are some of the least healthy for you. These eggs typically come from chickens that are fed poor-quality sources of omega-3 fats that are already oxidized. Also, omega-3 eggs perish much faster than non-omega-3 eggs.
As discussed by Mark Sisson:18
„…hens given an unnatural industry-standard diet high in omega-6 containing grains (soy and corn) produce less healthful eggs than hens on a more natural diet of grains lower in omega-6 with supplementary antioxidants.19
When subjects ate two of the soy/corn-fed eggs a day, which were high in omega-6 fats, their oxidized LDL levels were increased by 40 percent. Subjects who ate two of the other eggs each day, which were low in omega-6 fats, had normal levels of oxidized LDL (comparable to subjects in the control group, who consumed between two and four eggs a week). Since the oxidation of LDL particles is strongly hypothesized to be a crucial causative factor in atherosclerosis, it’s conceivable that eating normal, industrial eggs could have a negative effect on carotid plaque.“
Heart disease, just like type 2 diabetes, is one of the easiest diseases to prevent and avoid, BUT you simply must be proactive. I find one of the most important risk factors to be your cholesterol to HDL ratio.
Contrary to popular belief, your total cholesterol level is just about worthless in determining your risk for heart disease, unless it is close to 300 or higher. And, perhaps more importantly, you need to be aware that cholesterol is not the CAUSE of heart disease. If you become overly concerned with trying to lower your cholesterol level to some set number, you will be completely missing the real problem. In fact, I have seen a number of people with levels over 250 who actually were at low heart disease risk due to their HDL levels. Conversely, I have seen even more who had cholesterol levels under 200 that were at a very high risk of heart disease based on the following additional tests:
- Your HDL/Cholesterol ratio: This percentage is a very potent heart disease risk factor. Just divide your HDL level by your cholesterol. Ideally, it should be above 24 percent. Below 10 percent, it’s a significant indicator of risk for heart disease.
- Your Triglyceride/HDL ratios. You can also do the same thing with your triglycerides and HDL ratio. This ratio should be below 2.
Keeping your inflammation levels low is key if you want to reduce your risk of heart disease (as well as many other chronic diseases). It’s important to realize that there are different sizes of LDL cholesterol particles, and it’s the LDL particle size that is relevant (which Ned Kock’s modeling mentioned above indicates as well). This is because small particles get stuck easily and cause more inflammation, whereas large particles do not get stuck. Statins do not modulate LDL particle size. The only way to make sure your LDL particles are large enough to not get stuck and cause inflammation and damage is through your diet. In fact, it’s one of the major things that insulin does. So rather than taking a statin drug, you really need to focus on your diet to reduce the inflammation in your body, which is aggravated by eating:
- Oxidized cholesterol (cholesterol that has gone rancid, such as that from overcooked, scrambled eggs)
- Sugar and grains
- Foods cooked at high temperatures
- Trans fats
A few more recommendations that can have a profound impact on reducing inflammation in your body and reducing your risk of heart disease include:
- Optimizing your insulin levels. If your fasting insulin level is not lower than three consider limiting or eliminating your intake of grains and sugars until you optimize your insulin level.
- Optimizing your vitamin D levels. Most people are not aware that vitamin D can have a profoundly dramatic impact on lowering your risk for heart disease. Your best source of vitamin D is through your skin being exposed to the sun. In the wintertime, I recommend using a safe tanning bed. If you opt for a vitamin D supplement, make sure you’re taking the right form of vitamin D—D3, not D2—in the appropriate amounts to reap the benefits, and remember to get your vitamin D levels tested regularly. For more information, please see this previous article.
- Balancing your omega-6 to omega-3 fat ratio. Most Americans eating a standard American diet have a ratio of 25:1, which is highly unbalanced. The ideal ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 fats is 1:1. Therefore, you’ll want to lower the amount of vegetable oils in your diet, and make sure you have a high-quality, animal-based source of omega-3s, such as krill oil.
- Exercising regularly. Exercise a great way to lower inflammation without any of the side effects associated with medications. High intensity interval exercises are particularly beneficial
- Normalizing your weight, or better yet, your waist size. If you’re a woman with a waist measurement of over 35 inches or a man with a waist of over 40 inches, you probably have high inflammation. Whittling a few inches off the waist by reducing your portions and increasing activity can go a long way toward solving that problem.
- Addressing your stress. Feeling stressed can create a wide variety of physiological changes, such as impairing digestion, excretion of valuable nutrients, decreasing beneficial gut flora populations, decreasing your metabolism, and raising triglycerides, cholesterol, insulin, and cortisol levels
31 Conversation with History
32 Interview The Common Cold – The Beginning
36 Nutrition in Cancer – How RDA came about – No Toxicity – Perspectives by Linus Pauling
1963 Friedensnobelpreis – 1954 Chemie Nobelpreis
Der Vertrag über das Verbot von Kernwaffenversuchen in der Atmosphäre trat am 10. Oktober 1963 in Kraft. Unmittelbar danach wurde Prof. Pauling für 1962 rückwirkend der Nobelpreis für den Frieden für seine Anstrengungen, Kernwaffentests zu beenden, verliehen.
1966 – Irwin Stone Letter
Pauling’s life and work took another dramatic shift in 1966 when he made the acquaintance of Irwin Stone, initially through correspondence. Stone met Pauling in 1966, after an acceptance speech for the Carl Neuberg Medal, awarded for Pauling’s assessment of sickle cell anemia as a molecular disease. At the talk on “Science and World Problems” delivered in New York, Pauling had made mention of a desire to live another fifteen years, so that he might be able to witness some of the major advances that he foresaw as being on the close horizon. Stone was in the audience and sent Pauling a hugely influential letter that detailed a “High Level Ascorbic Acid Regimen” that could “help you achieve this goal and possibly tack on a few extra decades.”
Harvard Mecical School – Take 3 Grams against the Common Cold
Bias of Prof. Victor Herbert
In late 1969, however, convinced by the theoretical arguments of Irwin Stone and impressed by his own success in preventing colds, Pauling began expanding his comments to include the subject of ascorbate and general health, noting in a speech he gave to physicians at the Mt. Sinai Medical School his success with the use of vitamin C as a cold preventive. His comments were reported in the newspapers.
That is how it began. Then, two things happened. First, he received a “very strongly worded” letter from Dr. Victor Herbert, a leading clinical nutritionist and a man who helped set the U.S. recommended daily allowances (RDAs) for vitamins, who assailed Pauling for giving aid and comfort to the quacks who were bleeding the American public with unsupported claims about the benefits of vitamins. Where, Herbert asked, were the carefully controlled clinical studies to prove that ascorbic acid had a real effect on colds?
Pauling was taken aback. He had not, in fact, carefully reviewed the literature on vitamin C, limiting his reading to a few of the citations in Irwin Stone’s original papers. But now, “sufficiently irritated by this fellow Herbert,” he began a typically comprehensive tour of the scientific journals.
Second, a writer for Mademoiselle magazine contacted Pauling to get his comments on vitamin C for an article on its health benefits. Pauling offered the reporter the general observation that “optimal amounts of vitamin C will increase health and intelligence” and referred readers to his paper on orthomolecular psychiatry. When the article appeared in November 1969, he found his statement rebutted by Frederick Stare, a professor of nutrition at Harvard, who said Pauling “is not an authority on nutrition” and that there was no evidence that increased C helped prevent the common cold; in fact, just the opposite was true. A large-scale study done with five thousand students in Minnesota twenty years earlier, Stare said, had proven definitively that vitamin C had no effect on colds.
Stung, Pauling quickly tracked down the study and decided that Stare had gotten his facts wrong. The 1942 University of Minnesota study involved 363 student subjects who had been given either a placebo or some extra ascorbic acid over a period of twenty-eight weeks. It was true that the authors had concluded in their summary that there was no “important effect” of vitamin C on infections of the upper respiratory tract. But when Pauling took a closer look at their data, he decided they were wrong. Despite what Pauling considered the very low dose of vitamin C given the students – an average of 180 mg per day compared to the 3,000 mg Pauling was now taking – the researchers had in fact seen an effect: Subjects receiving the extra vitamin had 15 percent fewer colds, and the colds they got were 30 percent less severe than those receiving the placebo. Vitamin C was not a preventive or cure, but the results were, Pauling estimated, statistically significant.
It was confusing, especially when Pauling saw the same thing happening in other reports he found on vitamin C and colds: Partial effects were discounted. The physicians who ran the studies seemed to be looking for total cures, not an indication of an effect. The doses they used were low (150-250 mg was common in these early studies – several times the current RDA but many times lower than what Pauling and Stone considered a protective dose), and the effects they looked for were too strong.
The problem, Pauling decided, was that the researchers were looking for vitamin C to act like a drug. In traditional drug testing, small differences in dosage could have tremendous effects, and overdoses were deadly. The tendency was to use relatively small amounts and look for big effects.
But to Pauling, vitamin C was a nutrient, not a drug. When the medical researchers saw a small effect, he thought the logical next step should have been to follow up with larger doses. His literature search uncovered at least one study that showed what might happen if they did. In 1961 a Swiss researcher named Gunther Ritzel had given half of a group of 279 skiers 1,000 mg per day of vitamin C – more than five times the Minnesota dose – and the other half a placebo. Ritzel found that those skiers receiving ascorbic acid had 61 percent fewer days of illness from upper respiratory tract infections and a 65 percent decrease in the severity of their symptoms compared to the placebo group.
This, Pauling thought, was very strong evidence in favor of his ideas. Plot the dose of vitamin C along the bottom of a graph and the effects on colds up the side and you could draw a straight line from the Minnesota results (a small effect with small dose) to the Swiss findings (a larger effect with larger dose). He found a few other papers in which the results fit the pattern. True, some of the research he looked at showed no effect at all – most of these studies, Pauling estimated, were flawed because they used too low doses, too short duration, shoddy oversight, or improper blinding – but the important thing was that a small group of careful clinical studies existed that supported Pauling and Stone’s general theory of vitamin C and health: The more C you took, approaching megadose levels, the lower your chances of getting sick, and the less sick you got.
Novemberv 1970 Vitamin C and the Common Cold
Vitamin C and the Common Cold: Pauling vs. the Physicians
As a double Nobel laureate, Linus Pauling’s recommendation that everyone ingest 1 to 4 grams of vitamin C daily developed into a media frenzy. And with time, the debate took on a distinctly political flavor, with the battle over vitamin C argued on talk shows and in press releases, rather than vindicated in the lab.
Pauling’s accusations that the medical establishment was ignoring the potentially profound benefits of vitamin C in part because of a mutually beneficial relationship with Big Pharma did not, as one might expect, go over well with many medical professionals. Indeed, his work with vitamin C was written off by many as a passing craze, and Pauling was increasingly referred to as a “kook” and a medical “quack.”
As Pauling and the physicians went back and forth, the two sides sometimes found themselves citing the same data and producing opposite conclusions. Often Pauling argued that the studies under consideration – discarded by dissenting physicians for apparently showing negligible effects – actually suggested a real value to the use of vitamin C that would be amplified if only larger doses were used.
One study in particular, authored in 1942 by A.J. Glazebrook and Scott Thomson, found vitamin C to only slightly decrease the occurrence of colds and their symptoms in a sample of college students. For proponents, the work was heralded nonetheless as significant evidence in vitamin C’s favor. The problem, Pauling believed, was that physicians expected vitamin C to act like a drug, with a concomitant “tendency…to use relatively small amounts and look for big effects.” But vitamin C wasn’t a drug, it was a nutrient, and Pauling thought its effects would not be easily observed in a typical physician’s research paradigm.
In an effort to put the issue to rest, a University of Maryland study in which eleven prisoners were given 3 grams of vitamin C a day for two weeks found that, when inoculated with cold viruses, each subject became ill. While many considered this proof that Pauling was wrong, he dismissed this study as well. For one, it lacked a placebo control group and did not take the severity of symptoms into account. Pauling likewise suspected that the prisoners were infected with a cold virus potent enough to have overwhelmed any protective effect from vitamin C.
On and on the debate raged and, by the time of Pauling’s death in 1994, little consensus had been reached: Pauling stood firm in his beliefs and the physicians hadn’t from their position………….
Had Pauling invested in proving his point in the lab after the publication of Vitamin C and Common Cold, perhaps we would have a better understanding of the immune function of this nutrient today. But Pauling felt vitamin C’s protective effects against the cold were not seriously debatable and that, for him, it was time to move on. The physicians, he believed, were set in their ways – a description he often used during the long argument over vitamin C – and it was pointless for him to spend too much of his time and energy trying to disprove them.
Indeed, in Pauling’s mind, there were more important issues to take into the lab than the common cold. Because Pauling wasn’t just busy arguing that vitamin C could cure the common cold. He believed that it might cure cancer, too.
Hoffer / Osmond Booklet 1965 on High Dose B 3 with Schizophrenic-Patients mit 1000-fach and 10.000-fach the RDA –
The Minimum is clear (RDA) for ordinary poor health – But what is the Optimum-Intake? – 12 Grams? – 75 Kg Ziege = 13 Grams
The central Question of Orthomolecular Medicine.
1970 – 1992 – 32 RCT with 1.000 mg or more with pos. Results.
Die Schulmedizin geht bis kurz unterhalb der Grenze der „Toxicity“ zur maximalen Wirksamkeit des schulmedizinischen Präparats.
Herzlichen Dank für Ihre Anmeldung.
Die nachfolgende Informationsflut soll Sie nicht überwältigen. Wir erwarten nicht, daß Sie vor dem Workshop irgendeine inhaltliche Vorbereitung betreiben.
Das Informationsangebot soll vielmehr dazu dienen, daß Sie die Workshopinhalte danach leicht wieder finden können.
Das Workshoparbeitsbuch gibt es hier:
Arbeitsbuch Isernhagener Workshop „Wege zur Gesundheit“
Hier nochmal das Programm:
9/oo – 9/30 Uhr Begrüßung und Einleitung
9/3o – 11/ oo Uhr – Diplombiologe Rainer Suda (HP) – Oldenburg – Bericht über den Internationalen Vitamin C – Kongress in Bad Homburg 2017
11/oo bis 11/3o Uhr Q & A
11/30 – 12/oo Uhr – Therapiespektrum von Vitamin C
Ärzte wie Klenner, Cathcart, Hoffer, Riordan
und Wissenschaftler wie Pauling, Stone, Saul etc .
12/oo – 13/oo Uhr – Diplombiologe Rainer Suda (HP) – Oldenburg – Erfahrungen mit Vitamin C – Hochdosis – Infusionen
13/oo bis 14/30 Uhr – Mittagessen
14/3o – 15/oo Uhr – Pfarrer Sebastin Kneipp – Naturheilkunde – Gesunde Ernährung
15/oo – 17/oo Uhr – Mikronährstoffe im Spannungsfeld von Ernährung und Gesundheit – Der heutige Stand der Forschung im Hinblick auf eine vollwertige pflanzenbasierte Ernährung – Nathan Pritikin, Joel Fuhrman, Caldwell Esselstyn, Colin Campbell, John A. McDougall, Michael Greger – China Study und Hawai-Study
17/oo – 17/30 Uhr – Vitamin D
17/30 – 18/oo Uhr – Aktuelle Forschungsergebnisse zu Vitamin K 2 – MK 4 und MK 7
18/oo bis 18/30 Uhr – Zucker und Maissirup in der Lebensmittelproduktion
– danach Abendessen
Nach dem Workshop hoffen wir, daß Sie in die Lage versetzt wurden, folgende Fragen kompetent zu beantworten:
Frage 1: Wieviel Vitamin C tgl.?
Frage 2: Wieviel Vitamin D tgl.?
Frage 3: Wieviel Vitamin K 2 tgl.?
Frage 4: Was ist gesunde Ernährung?
Frage 5: Kann ein vollwertiger pflanzenbasierter Lebenstil mit den Wissenschaftsmethoden der Medizin (RCT)(RDBS) evaluiert werden?
Wer waren zu Anfang des 20. Jahrhunderts die drei berühmtesten Deutschen in einer nordamerikanischen Umfrage?
Um für die Begrüßung Zeit zu sparen, hier etwas Info vorab:
Volker H. Schendel – Verwaltungsjurist von 1979 bis 2004 in Niedersachsen, zuletzt als Ministerialrat und Justitiar des Nds. Wirtschaftsministeriums, Mitbegründer des Instituts für homöopathische Medizin e.V., Celle, zusammen mit den Herren Drachau und Becker-Platen sowie den Dres. Repschläger und Tiedemann, von 2005 bis 2011 Doktorand in der Juristischen Fakultät der Leibniz Universität Hannover (LUH) – Astrologie und Recht, Lehrbeauftragter der Juristischen Fakultät der LUH im WS 2005/2006, am 31. März 2008 Mitbegründer des Bridgeclub Hannover-Velber (BCHV). Herausgeber der Schriftenreihe „Astrologie und Erkenntnis“, seit 2011 Freier Journalist. Zuständiger Referent für die Dokumentation der Besonderen Therapierichtungen und natürlichen Heilweisen in Europa 1991.Vorsitzender der Bürgervereinigung Orthomolekulare Aufklärung Isernhagen (BOAI) und Herausgeber der Schriftenreihe Orthomolekulare Aufklärung.
Schriftenreihe „Orthomolekulare Aufklärung“
Alles, was Sie im Workshop erleben werden, gibt es danach hier:
einschließlich der Dokumentation des Vormittags, der von den Filmemachern Meiners pp. aufgezeichnet wird.
Tickets ausschließlich in der Buchhandlung Lesenest in Altwarmbüchen. Dort gibt es auch Hintergrundliteratur speziell für den Workshop.
Dr. Greger and Nathan Pritikin – The Story of NutritionFacts.org
Dr. Greger – How Not To Die – Lecture on Pritikin
Nathan Pritikin Speech 1978 — part one to six
Nathan Pritikin believed that to battle heart disease or cancer, the first thing one had to do was take charge: start exercising and eating right. ……
He took the same attitude when he had an acute angina attack in 1957. Pritikin, who had previously researched the relationship between nutrition and heart disorders, went on a low-fat diet and aerobic exercise regimen. That cleared up his cardiac condition and convinced him that “the degenerative diseases are not diseases…they are environmental poisoning from the food we eat. Specifically, I refer to the toxic amounts of fat and cholesterol.” Pritikin advocated a menu limited mainly to fresh fruits, vegetables and whole grains. Since 1976, when he opened his first center in Santa Barbara, 18,000 people have huffed and puffed through his puritanical program, while millions of others have absorbed his advice through such bestsellers as 1979’s The Pritikin Program for Diet and Exercise and 1983’s The Pritikin Promise, which has been made into a video.
The medical establishment was slow to credit Pritikin, who had no medical training or degree, and some doctors criticized his diet as being unnecessarily severe. But, says Dr. William Castelli, the director of the Framingham Study, which recently linked heart disease to high-cholesterol diets, “He was essentially barking up the right tree.” Many in medicine criticized Pritikin’s claim that his program could actually reverse heart ailments. Yet shortly before his death, Pritikin had developed a new machine that, in conjunction with his diet, would help clean the bloodstream of serum cholesterol. Doctors at Northwestern University will soon begin a yearlong series of tests with the device. “If he had completed his test with the machine, proving that heart disease is reversible with his diet, I think he probably would have been on his way to Stockholm,” says Dr. Monroe Rosenthal, a Pritikin endocrinologist. “It’s unheard of for a layman to receive a Nobel Prize in medicine, but I think he could have done it.”
The son of a Chicago sign salesman, Pritikin was already a millionaire before he tackled nutrition. Forced during the Depression to drop out of the University of Chicago, he became a free-lance inventor, developing a host of patents in physics, chemistry and electrical engineering for such giants as Bendix and Honeywell. “Nathan was a great researcher, a genius who was able to see clearly through mazes of information and come to conclusions that others overlooked,” says Rosenthal. Indeed, after the autopsy, Dr. Steven Inkeles of the Pritikin Center said the medical examiner was astounded at the superb condition of Pritikin’s heart. “He had the arteries,” says Inkeles, “of a preadolescent boy.” Even in death, Pritikin showed there is a better way to live.
Nathan Pritikin (August 29, 1915 – February 21, 1985) was an American inventor, nutritionist and longevity researcher.
Pritikin was born and raised in Chicago, Illinois. He attended the University of Chicago from 1933 to 1935, dropping out because of the Depression. He became an inventor and a millionaire developing patents for companies such as Honeywell and Bendix while living in Chicago and Santa Barbara, California.
After being diagnosed with heart disease in 1957, he began searching for a treatment. Based on studies indicating that people in primitive cultures with primarily vegetarian lifestyles had little history of heart disease, he created a low-fat diet that was high in unrefined carbohydrates like vegetables, fruits, beans, and whole grains, along with a moderate aerobic exercise regime. His dietary and exercise regime, the Pritikin Diet, was published in a book co-authored by Patrick M. McGrady. It has been called one of the „gold standards of American dieting success.“ 
He established the Pritikin Longevity Center in 1976 and served as its director. Now called the Pritikin Longevity Center & Spa, it offers controlled diet, counseling in lifestyle change, and exercise in a resort/spa-type setting. Pritikin also served as chairman of the Pritikin Research Foundation.
In the 1970s, Nathan Pritikin, an inventor with a passion for nutrition and fitness, began testing his then-revolutionary theory that heart disease could be treated with lifestyle changes. In leading media, including 60 Minutes, he was among the first worldwide to assert that diet and exercise, not drugs and surgery, should be the first line of defense against cardiovascular disease.
On a sunny day in April 1984, a thin, wiry man, no more than five feet, eight inches tall, with wavy black hair and a tight, serious face, hurried to the podium at New York City’s Mount Sinai Medical School and prepared to speak. His audience, composed of nearly 400 doctors, scientists, and other health professionals from all over the nation,
Natural foods instead of artificial ones loaded up with fat, sugar, and salt. Free-range, grass-fed beef rather than feedlot beef, and served as a condiment, not the main course. Much of what Nathan Pritikin espoused in this 1982 PBS interview with Dr. John McDougall is what public health authorities now recommend today.
shifted about, many of them still amazed that the prestigious Mount Sinai would deign to co-sponsor a medical conference with the man they were about to hear. He was, after all, a layman. More importantly, he was the creator of a health program that treated serious and life-threatening illnesses, not with conventional methods, but with a diet and exercise regimen that had been credited with literally thousands of “miracle” cures. It was the same program he had used to successfully treat his own heart disease.
For much of the past decade, he had carried on a very public battle with the leading government and private health agencies, as well as with the American Medical Association, in an effort to change the way serious diseases were treated. Between 1976 and 1984, he had developed a large and influential following that included a growing number of medical doctors and scientists. As his influence grew he became as controversial as the message he tried to spread: that diet was both the cause and the cure for many of the most widespread diseases of modern times. The vast majority of physicians and scientists were still not ready to accept that premise, despite the ever-increasing scientific evidence that supported it. Indeed, many of the doctors and scientists present in this room had long regarded him as an enemy of establishment medicine.
And yet, here he was in the Stern Auditorium at Mount Sinai, looking at his audience with that familiar expression of impassive, unshakable confidence, focused only on his message, which had carried him through a gauntlet of criticisms and personal attacks to his current status as the leader of the diet and health revolution.
For Nathan Pritikin, it had been a long and remarkable journey.
Pritikin: The Man Who Healed America’s Heart
By Tom Monte, Ilene Pritikin
Today, no other diet-and-exercise program has been more highly praised by the scientific community. More than 100 studies in top medical journals have found that people who adopt the Pritikin Program achieve dramatic results in just a few weeks, with more benefits long-term. The World Health Organization (WHO), Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, and U.S. Departments of Agriculture and Health and Human Services have determined that the healthiest, most effective diet for fighting the obesity epidemic and building long-term health is a diet that closely mirrors the Pritikin Program.
Starting in the 1970s, the statement above was Nathan Pritikin’s mission. He wasn’t always involved in medicine, however. As a young man in the 1940s and 1950s, his occupation was that of an inventor. He held over two dozen U.S. patents in fields as diverse as engineering, photography, and aeronautics. But since World War II, he had probed into the origins of heart disease. He had seen classified documents showing that European deaths from heart disease and diabetes had dropped dramatically during the war. How peculiar, he thought. He had always been taught that atherosclerosis-related conditions like heart disease were caused by stress. What could produce more stress than war, with its food rationing, fire bombings, and anarchy?
Intrigued, Nathan Pritikin started following the work of Dr. Lester Morrison in California, a cardiologist who in the early 1950s had placed 50 of his seriously ill heart attack patients on a diet mimicking the low-cholesterol, low-fat wartime food rationing diet that many Europeans survived on. Another 50 cardiac patients, also very ill, continued eating the typical American high-fat diet. The latter was the study’s control group.
By 1955, the cholesterol levels of the experimental low-fat, low-cholesterol group had dropped from an average of 312 to 220. The control group’s cholesterol levels had remained the same. Nearly 60% of the men in the experimental group were still alive compared to 24% of the control group. By 1960, all of the patients in the control group had died; 38% of the low-fat, low-cholesterol group were still alive.
Out of curiosity, Nathan Pritikin visited Dr. Morrison in 1956 and had his own cholesterol checked. It was over 300. But Nathan did not want to give up his three eggs every morning, his pint of ice cream after dinner, his butter, and his bowls of whipped cream. Not until, that is, Dr. Morrison gave him a stress electrocardiogram, which showed coronary insufficiency. A second cardiologist and second testing confirmed that Nathan’s arteries were indeed clogging up. He was diagnosed with substantial coronary heart disease. He was 42 years old.
A prestigious team of cardiologists gave him the standard prescription of the day: Stop all exercise, stop climbing stairs, take it easy, and take naps in the afternoon. Once again, Nathan asked questions. His readings of population studies had convinced him that dangerous arterial plaque would form at any cholesterol level over 160. If he could just get his cholesterol level down with dietary measures, he figured, he might have a chance of surviving.
Once again, he met resistance. UCLA Medical School cardiologists admonished him, saying, “You CAN’T control your cholesterol. Ridiculous!” So Nathan decided to make dietary changes on his own. He was frightened, but obstinate. By April 1958, he had become a vegetarian. He had also started running three to four miles daily. By May, his cholesterol had fallen to 162. By January 1960, his cholesterol had plummeted to 120, and a new electrocardiogram showed that his coronary insufficiency had disappeared. His test results: normal.
Emboldened by his new life – and the results of his diet and exercise program – Nathan Pritikin launched several research projects over the next 25 years that, study after study, validated the efficacy of his program. These studies on heart disease, diabetes, hypertension, and nutrition, now numbering more than 100, have been published in key medical journals, including the New England Journal of Medicine, the Archives of Internal Medicine, Diabetes Care, and Circulation.
Nathan Pritikin also wrote several books for the general public on nutrition, exercise, and health that were international bestsellers, including Live Longer Now, The Pritikin Program For Diet and Exercise, The Pritikin Weight Loss Manual, and Diet For Runners. To date, 10 books have been published on the Pritikin Program. The most recent are The Pritikin Edge: 10 Essential Ingredients For a Long and Delicious Life (paperback version released in 2010) and Understanding Common Diseases and the Value of the Pritikin Eating and Exercise Program (published in 2013).
In 1975, Nathan Pritikin opened the Pritikin Longevity Center® in California, a health resort and residential program of nutrition, exercise, and lifestyle-change education. In 1977, the television news program 60 Minutes followed three men, all with severe heart disease, as they attended the one-month program at the Center. All three patients improved dramatically. Their angina (chest pain) disappeared. They eliminated virtually all their medications. Their cholesterol, triglycerides, and blood pressures fell into normal, risk-free ranges. And, much to their joy, they regained the energy, the vitality, that allowed them to resume the lives and occupations they loved.
One year later, in 1978, 60 Minutes revisited the three men and found that all three had continued to enjoy active, vigorous lives free of the symptoms of heart disease.
In 1984, just months before Nathan Pritikin died, the National Institutes of Health published the “Lipid Research Clinical Trial,” the definitive study confirming that lowering cholesterol reduces heart disease risk. Its publication was a great source of comfort to Nathan Pritikin. Now, he knew, his work would continue, and many more lives would be saved from cardiovascular-related diseases.
When Nathan died, the results of his autopsy were published in the New England Journal of Medicine, and showed that Nathan Pritikin’s arteries were free of any signs of heart disease, and were as “soft and pliable” as a teenager’s. “In a man 69 years old,” wrote pathologist Jeffrey Hubbard, M.D., “the near absence of atherosclerosis and the complete absence of its effects are remarkable.”
Today, the Pritikin Longevity Center + Spa in Miami, Florida, continues to operate as both a lifestyle-change education program and a research center – an internationally-acclaimed laboratory for investigative work into the relationship between lifestyle and disease prevention.
So strong is the science affirming the Pritikin Program that it is now covered by Medicare for people with heart disease. Called Intensive Cardiac Rehabilitation, this Medicare-covered Pritikin Program is conducted at the Pritikin Longevity Center and is currently being established in hospital and cardiac rehab settings nationwide.
Nathan Pritikin – McDougall’s Most Important Mentor
There are only two people in my lifetime whose words of wisdom I always eagerly awaited* and one of them was Nathan Pritikin (1915 – 1985). During my final year of Internal Medicine Residency at the University of Hawaii in 1978 I was given a set of audiotape lectures. I felt a sense of relief as I listened and realized someone else had come to similar conclusions to those that I had reached during my time as a sugar plantation doctor on the Big Island of Hawaii between 1973 and 1976. As a young physician practicing general medicine, I witnessed first-generation Filipinos, Japanese, Chinese, and Koreans thriving on diets of rice and vegetables. I also saw their children and grandchildren abandon the traditional ways for meat and dairy products, and become fat and sick.
Mr. Pritikin and I first met in May of 1979. During his visit to the island of Oahu, Hawaii, I invited him to my humble tract home in Kailua for dinner. Mary served him and his wife Ilene a simple meal of whole-grain bread, pasta, red sauce, and confetti rice salad. Peach pie was our dessert. He said he liked the meal a lot. He autographed a copy of his new book, The Pritikin Program for Diet & Exercise for me.
On his next visit to Hawaii in October of 1982, we spent two days together. I was able to have him substitute for a scheduled speaker at the regular noontime doctor’s conference at Straub Clinic & Hospital. He was well received except for one rude physician. I thought this doctor might have felt threatened by a non-medically trained person trying to teach him about curing patients with food. The next morning I arranged for a special breakfast meeting in his honor with the medical staff and medical students at The Queens Medical Center. Only two doctors attended. One shoveled greasy bacon and eggs into his mouth. Neither seemed interested in this physically small man whose big idea was to wipe out heart disease.
That afternoon, I brought Mr. Pritikin to the Hawaii PBS TV station in Honolulu and made this remarkable recording. He has never been seen more relaxed and revealing.
Nathan Pritikin: A Casual Conversation with Dr. John McDougall, 1982
That evening we held a potluck dinner for Mr. Pritikin at the Kaneohe Yacht Club in Kaneohe, Hawaii. Over 225 people, many who were my patients, made McDougall-style meals for him to taste. He said he loved the food. After dinner we walked together to his car to say goodbye. Mary gave him approximately 100 of her recipes. At that time the food served at the Pritikin Center in Santa Monica, California had a reputation for being unimaginative and rather tasteless. He went on to use some of Mary’s recipes in his book, The Pritikin Promise (1983). An acknowledgement in this book was to Dr. and Mrs. John A. McDougall. To be honest it should have been to Mary only, for her recipe contribution. I believe that it was no coincidence that the food served at the Pritikin Center improved greatly afterwards. The last time I saw this giant in human nutrition was at his center in Santa Monica, California in 1983. My work stands solidly on his shoulders and I offer this account of our brief relationship, with my gratitude for the profound difference he made in my life.
I greatly regret his untimely death in 1985 at age 69. The world would have been a better place if he had survived another decade or two. For one, Dr. Atkins’ New Diet Revolution would have never become as big as it did in the 2000s. The world would have never heard of the most popular diets these days, the low-carb, Paleo Diets. His wisdom and strength would have stopped this “nutritional nonsense” before it ever got started. We would not be suffering the current US financial fiasco caused in large part by the worst healthcare crisis ever known. People in the United States would not be known, as they are today, for being less healthy, having more chronic disease and disability, and dying at a younger age than people living in other wealthy nations.” Maybe this remarkable man could even have delayed the earth’s inhabitants predicted demise due to climate change.
But, there is no time for remorse; the world is in dire need of a return to our traditional starch-based diets.
A Brief History of the Life of Nathan Pritikin
Born in Chicago in 1915, Nathan Pritikin was diagnosed with near-fatal coronary artery disease in his early forties. His highest cholesterol was reported to be 280 mg/dL. Research to save his own life led him to develop a low-fat, low-cholesterol, high-carbohydrate diet to treat epidemic Western illnesses. He was able to lower his own cholesterol to below 150 mg/dL and relieve all signs and symptoms of heart disease. His diet was very similar to the McDougall Diet except for the use of small amounts of skim milk products, lean beef, chicken, and fish (very small amounts). It was also lower in salt and his program emphasized strenuous exercise.
He spent his early life as an engineer and inventor, patenting chemical and electrical products for corporations like Bendix and Honeywell. He never had formal medical training. In 1958 he was diagnosed with a lymphoma (a blood cancer). His last few months of suffering, from this disease and the treatments, caused him to take his own life at age 69 in 1985.
During his career he published several national best-selling books and his team published over 100 scientific papers in some of the world’s most respected peer reviewed medical journals. He founded his longevity center in Santa Barbara in 1974, then moved it to the old Del Mar Hotel on the beach in Santa Monica in 1978. Thousands of people attending his live-in programs saw their heart disease, diabetes, arthritis, and obesity reverse, almost overnight. A variant of the original Pritikin Program is still operating in Florida.
After his death a thorough autopsy was performed and the results were published in the New England Journal of Medicine. His heart was remarkably free of disease and the coronary arteries were completely open, proving one last time that he was right.
One of my favorite writings of Nathan Pritikin was the article High Carbohydrate Diets: Maligned and Misunderstood, published in the Winter 1976 issue of The Journal of Applied Nutrition.
See also: The Lost Lectures of Nathan Pritikin.
*The other person whose every word I hung onto was Henry Heimlich, MD, founder of the Heimlich maneuver. One of my greatest honors was that when he became ill, Dr. Heimlich came to my clinic for help.
Download and play in your car. Share with friends. The information is more timely than ever.
These lectures changed my (Dr. McDougall’s) life. During my final year of Internal Medicine Residency at the University of Hawaii in 1978 I was given this set of audiotape lectures. I felt a sense of relief as I listened and realized someone else had come to similar conclusions to those that I had reached during my time as a sugar plantation doctor on the Big Island of Hawaii between 1973 and 1976. Unfortunately, this world-changing information has been lost until now.
Also see the February 2013 McDougall Newsletter for more on Mr. Pritikin and a landmark video interview by Dr. McDougall, and Nathan Pritikin: A Review of Medical Literature on Relationships of Various Degenerative Diseases to Diet and Activity
Eight-part audio series
How Not to Die: Entdecken Sie Nahrungsmittel, die Ihr Leben verlängern – und bewiesenermaßen Krankheiten vorbeugen und heilen
Die High-Carb-Diät: Abnehmen Mit Den Richtigen Kohlenhydraten
Power Foods für das Gehirn: Der wirkungsvolle 3-Punkte-Plan für ein leistungsstarkes Gehirn und zum Schutz vor Alzheimer
The 21-Day Weight Loss Kickstart by Dr Neal Barnard