All fingers are now pointing at sugars as culprit risk factors for a variety of health ailments such as cardiovascular diseases (hypertension or high blood pressure and atherosclerosis included), diabetes, some forms of cancer, various forms of body aches, etc. However, on the other hand, it is a well-established fact that carbs are the ideal source of readily available energy, for normal body functions. We need carbs and they are good for us at optimum intake levels, but excess intake brings with it numerous health problems. The challenge then is, how do we know when enough of the carbs intake is enough. Advice from our professional health care providers has been available for a while now, but the health problems said to be associated with the so-called excess intake appear to stay put in the greater part of the population world over.
The question then is, are we on the spot as to the link between carbs and our chronic illnesses and the possible appropriate intervention measures, or there is something we are missing? We might agree on the fact that sugars are the main culprit in weight gains and a risk factor to cardiovascular diseases but what I would personally not agree with, is that we can effectively fight nutrition related chronic diseases by merely manipulating our diets or food patterns alone. This is too simplistic an approach to navigate and come up with solutions to the nutrition-chronic diseases link (a very complex scenario of our health). More understanding of the nutrition-disease relationship is required to get to the root cause of the diseases, for us to come up with relevant, effective and realistic intervention approaches.
At the very basic level, most of the non-communicable chronic diseases, including those in which carbs are said to be the main culprit risk factor are all believed to be linked to the natural processes of oxidative stress and inflammation. Oxidative stress is a result of the insults on cells and body tissues by oxidants (free radicals) and are a product of metabolism. Oxidative stress occurs when there’s an imbalance between free radical activity and antioxidant activity. When there are more free radicals present than can be kept in balance by antioxidants, the free radicals can start doing damage to fatty tissue, DNA, and proteins in your body, which is indicated to be linked to most of the non-communicable chronic diseases (cardiovascular disease, diabetes, some cancers, etc.)
Given the information in the paragraph above on the relationship between oxidants and antioxidants, and development of chronic diseases, it sounds logical or reasonable to me that the best approach to confront chronic diseases will be to bring back in balance the oxidants activity and the free radical activity. The most sure way of getting desired quality and quantities of antioxidants (vitamins, phytochemicals, etc.) is through nutritional supplements intake. Getting nutrients from food alone is not a good idea and is likely unrealistic because those nutrients might be inadequate in those foods. Controlling intake of carbs is equally a huge challenge in our current food environment, but a reasonable approach might be to include the control of carbs intake approaches that improve metabolism of carbs. Several micronutrients supplements are good at that.
More in the next post.
Popular posts from this blog
The concepts of nature cure as a natural health approach was well elucidated in the early 20th Century by one of the first pioneer authors Henry Lindlahr, in one of his book series of nature cure as follows: “ It is vastly more than a system of curing aches and pains; it is a complete revolution in the art and science of living. It is the practical realization and application of all that is good in natural science, philosophy and religion. “The philosophy of Nature Cure is based on sciences dealing with newly discovered or rediscovered natural laws and principles, and with their application to the phenomena of life and death, health, disease and cure”. Use of nature cure as an enabler for being the boss of your own health (taking charge of your own health) is based on the simplicity of the nature cure approach as compared to the orthodox medical approach in addressing health matters. Lindlahr (1922) argues that nature cure is considered an “exact science”, which reduces com
The Combined Hydroxychloroquine Zinc COVID-19 Treatment Buzz - A Misunderstanding and/or Misinterpretation of Science.
The talk of the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine in treatment of COVID-19 is often advocated for by those physicians who use it in combination with Zinc (a common nutritional supplement). Many studies, including a recent report by Horbym and Landray (2020), however have indicated that hydroxychloroquine has not been shown to be effective in treatment of COVID-19. The question then is, on what grounds are those claiming hydroxychloroquine being effective in treatment of coronavirus infection emanating from? Advocates of effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine claim that evidence is obtained from their practical clinical practices. They use hydroxychloroquine in combination with zinc and have witnessed a hands on life-saving experience, attributing treatment success to hydroxychloroquine. However, are these assertions true? Apparently yes - a combination of hydroxychloroquine and zinc is believed to be effective in treating COVID-19, but of the two entities, the main player in the tr
Effects of the coronavirus infection are variably uneven around the globe. Messaging on intervention measures is also featuring in two distinct dimensions, one (inclined towards the biomedical model)represented by countries such as the USA, the UK, Brazil, etc. is centred on long term plans for the search for therapeutic drugs and vaccines against COVID-19. The second dimension is aligned to alternative or integrative health intervention approaches, represented largely by counties in the Asian region including China, advocate for inclusion of natural health healing modalities (use of foods, nutritional supplements, herbs, etc.). The challenge is: are the so called health experts and/or policy makers still guided by science-based evidence on their advisory messaging and if so, where is the science and where is the evidence to help the world contain the scourge of COVID-19 pandemic? Here are a few highlights of emerging findings of some recent studies, in support or dismissing c