Avoid These Drinks to Help Prevent Brain Shrinkage, Dementia, and Strokes


Source: NaturalSociety.com
Julie Fidler
May 26, 2017

One of the keys to keeping your brain nice and plump and in proper working order is avoiding soda – and not just the sugar-sweetened kind, either. Drinking sodas, whether regular or diet, is bad for brain health, 2 recent studies show. [1]

One study showed that people who drank diet soda every day were three times more likely to have a stroke or develop dementia over 10 years compared with those who didn’t consume any diet soda.

The second study showed that people who drank at least one diet soda daily had smaller brain volumes than people who didn’t drink any diet soda. The same study found that people who consumed more than two sugary beverages a day, such as soda or fruit juice, had smaller brain volumes and worse memory function compared with non-sugary beverage drinkers.

Study #1

For the first study, researchers interviewed about 43,000 people, age 45 and older, three times over seven years, and asked them whether they drank any diet or sugar-sweetened beverages. Toward the end of the study, the researchers started tracking the participants’ health for cases of stroke and dementia. This monitoring continued for 10 years.

During the monitoring period, 97 people had a stroke, and 81 developed dementia. Sixty-three of the 81 had dementia consistent with Alzheimer’s disease.

Read: How Diet Sodas Mess with Your Brain (video)

The scientists concluded that diet beverage consumption – but not sugary drink consumption – was associated with a higher risk of stroke and dementia over a 10-year period.

It’s not clear why; however, diet drinks have been linked in past studies to obesity and diabetes, which might also be linked with poor blood circulation. Circulation problems may increase a person’s risk of stroke or dementia because a constant flow of blood is necessary for proper brain functioning.

Source: The Washington Post

Study #2

In the second study, researchers looked at brain scans and results of cognitive tests conducted on about 4,000 people. Participants self-reported whether they drank any diet or sugary beverages, and if so, how much.

Researchers uncovered a link between the consumption of both sugary and diet drinks and smaller brain volumes. An additional link between the consumption of sugary beverages and poorer memory was found. All are considered risk factors for Alzheimer’s disease, according to the researchers.

The team controlled for cholesterol, smoking, diabetes, blood pressure, and various other health and behavioral factors. [2]

As in the first study, the mechanisms behind the decline in brain volume and memory may be tied to poor circulation, as previous research has linked high sugar intake with diabetes and high blood pressure. Both conditions are linked to compromised blood circulation that may negatively affect brain health. [1]

Lead author Matthew P. Pase, a senior research fellow at Boston University, says of the results of the second study:

“Although we can’t prove cause and effect, these data suggest that we should be cautious about drinking sugary beverages. They’re empty calories that contribute to weight gain and metabolic disease.” [2]

Read More At: NaturalSociety.com

Sources:

[1] Live Science

[2] The New York Times

Is This Food a Cancer Killer?

Source: iHealthTube.com
May 17, 2017

New research is indicating a common food might help the fight of one of the world’s most common cancers. Also learn about ways you can help prevent the most common form of arthritis and find out how you can also help cut the duration of the common cold!

Huge organic farm under threat; County will invade and spray Roundup

Alert
Source: NoMoreFakeNews.com | JonRappoport.wordpress.com
By: Jon Rappoport
May 15, 2017

“I have a great idea. We’re the Sherman County government. We have power. Let’s claim Azure Farms can’t control their weeds. Let’s come in and invade them with Roundup and other toxic chemicals. Let’s destroy their organic farm. We know the spraying won’t wipe out the weeds—it’ll make the situation worse. But who cares? Let’s open up ourselves to massive lawsuits. I’m sure Monsanto will give us some legal help. We can set a fantastic precedent. No organic farm is safe. No organic farmer has the right to protect his land from the government. Isn’t that a terrific idea?”

Government trespass, invasion?

So far, I have seen no coverage of this issue in Oregon newspapers. Why not? Also, I find nothing on the Sherman County, Oregon, government website about a massive spraying program.

A local government is going to decimate a huge organic farm with herbicide?

Azure Farms, a 2000-acre organic farm in Oregon, states it is under threat from the local Sherman County government. Why? Because Sherman County officials are re-interpreting a law concerning the “control of noxious weeds,” so it means “eradication.”

These weeds can be controlled on an organic farm, but the only way they can be eliminated (according to conventional “science”) is by spraying. And that means Roundup and other toxic chemicals. That would decimate the organic nature of the farm. That would decertify it as an organic farm.

Further, according to Azure, Sherman County plans to put a lien on the farm, forcing it to pay for the spraying.

The deadline for expressing opposition is May 22. A better deadline is May 17.

Here is the complete press release from Azure Farms and the ways to register your concern:

Azure Farms is a working, certified organic farm located in Moro, central Oregon, in Sherman County. It has been certified organic for about 18 years. The farm produces almost all the organic wheat, field peas, barley, Einkorn, and beef for Azure Standard.

Sherman County is changing the interpretation of its statutory code from controlling noxious weeds to eradicating noxious weeds. These weeds include Morning Glory, Canada Thistle, and Whitetop, all of which have been on the farm for many years, but that only toxic chemicals will eradicate.

Organic farming methods – at least as far as we know today – can only control noxious weeds—it is very difficult to eradicate them.

Sherman County may be issuing a Court Order on May 22, 2017 to quarantine Azure Farms and possibly to spray the whole farm with poisonous herbicides, contaminating them with Milestone, Escort and Roundup herbicides.

This will destroy all the efforts Azure Farms has made for years to produce the very cleanest and healthiest food humanly possible. About 2,000 organic acres would be impacted; that is about 1.5 times the size of the city center of Philadelphia that is about to be sprayed with noxious, toxic, polluting herbicides.

The county would then put a lien on the farm to pay for the expense of the labor and chemicals used.

Contact Sherman County Court before May 17 when the next court discussion will be held.
Contact info:
1. Via email at lhernandez@co.sherman.or.us or
2. Call Lauren at 541-565-3416.

Show Sherman County that people care about their food NOT containing toxic chemicals.

Overwhelm the Sherman County representatives with your voices!

—end of Azure Farms statement—

Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor to jonathanturley.org, has been covering this story. He reached out and obtained a devastating letter from agricultural scientist, Charles Benbrook. Benbrook has his critics within the conventional pesticide and GMO research community. Here is Smith’s piece and Dr. Benbrook’s letter:

Yesterday I fielded an article concerning a rather distressing mandate by an Oregon county weed control agency seeking to force the application of hazardous herbicides onto a 2,000 acre organic farm owned by Azure Farms. Sherman County Oregon maintains this scorched earth policy is necessary to abate, or more specifically “eradicate”, weeds listed by state statute as noxious.

Now, the scientific community is responding to this overreaching government action by acting in the interests of health and responsible environmental stewardship through advocacy in the hopes that officials in Sherman County will reconsider their mandate.

Dr. Charles Benbrook is a highly credentialed research professor and expert serving on several boards of directors for agribusiness and natural resources organizations. Having read news of Sherman County’s actions, he penned an authoritative response I believe will make informative reading for those concerned by present and future implications in the forced use of herbicides under the rubric of noxious weed eradication, and the damage to organic farming generally arising from such mandates.

Charles Benbrook has a PhD in agricultural economics from the University of Wisconsin-Madison and an undergraduate degree from Harvard University. He currently is a Visiting Professor at Newcastle University in the UK…

He was a Research Professor at Washington State University from 2012-2015, and served as the Chief Scientist of The Organic Center from 2006-2012. He was the Executive Director of the Board on Agriculture in the National Academy of Sciences from 1984-1990. He was the staff director of the Subcommittee on Department [USDA] Operations, Research, and Foreign Agriculture of the House Committee on Agriculture (1981-1983). He worked as an agricultural and natural resources policy expert in the Council for Environmental Quality in the last 1.5 years of the Carter Administration. He began Benbrook Consulting Services (BCS) in 1990, and continues to carry out projects with a wide range of clients via BCS

He coauthors an informative website Hygeia-Analytics.com.

I reached out to Dr. Benbrook and received permission to reprint his letter in the hope that with more attention, including that from the scientific community, we can arrive at a reasonable solution to the county’s concerns. Here is Dr. Benbrook’s letter:…

Tom McCoy
Joe Dabulskis
Sherman County Commissioners
Lauren Hernandez
Administrative Assistant
Sherman County, Oregon
Rod Asher
Sherman Country Weed District Supervisor
Moro, Oregon
Alexis Taylor
Director
Oregon Department of Agriculture

Dear Ms. Hernandez el al:

I live in Wallowa County. I learned today of the recent, dramatic change in the Sherman County noxious weed control program and the plan to forcibly spray a 2,000-acre organic farm in the county.

Over a long career, I have studied herbicide use and efficacy, public and private weed control efforts, the linkages between herbicide use and the emergence and spread of resistant weeds, and the public health and environmental impacts of herbicide use and other weed management strategies.

I served for six years, along with fellow Oregonian Barry Bushue, past-president of the Oregon Farm Bureau, on the USDA’s AC 21 Agricultural Biotechnology Advisory Committee. Issues arising from herbicide use were a frequent topic of discussion during our Committee’s deliberations.

I have published multiple scientific papers in peer-reviewed journals on glyphosate, its human health risks, and the impact of genetically engineered crops on overall herbicide use and the spread of resistant weeds. In a separate email, I will forward you copies of my published research relevant to the use of herbicides, and glyphosate in particular.

The notion that Sherman County can eradicate noxious weeds by blanket herbicide spraying is deeply misguided. I cannot imagine a single, reputable university weed scientist in the State supporting the idea that an herbicide-based noxious weed eradication program would work (i.e., eradicate the target weeds) in Oregon, or any other state. To hear another opinion from one of the State’s most widely known and respected weed scientists, I urge the County to consult with Dr. Carol Mallory-Smith, Oregon State University.

I also doubt any corporate official working for Monsanto, the manufacturer of glyphosate (Roundup), would agree or endorse the notion that any long-established weed in Sherman County, noxious or otherwise, could be eradicated via blanket spraying with Roundup, or for that matter any combination of herbicides.

Before proceeding with any county-mandated herbicide use justified by the goal of eradication, I urge the County to seek concurrence from the herbicide manufacturer that they believe use of their product will likely eradicate your named, target, noxious weeds.

Given that almost no one with experience in weed management believes that any long-established weed, noxious or otherwise, can be eradicated with herbicides, one wonders why the County has adopted such a draconian change in its noxious weed control program. I can think of two plausible motivations – a desire by companies and individuals involved in noxious weed control activities, via selling or applying herbicides, to increase business volume and profits; or, an effort to reduce or eliminate acreage in the Country that is certified organic.

Weeds are classified as noxious when they prone to spread, are difficult to control, and pose a public health or economic threat to citizens, public lands, and/or farming and ranching operations. Ironically, by far the fastest growing and mostly economically damaging noxious weeds in the U.S. are both noxious and spreading because they have developed resistance to commonly applied herbicides, and especially glyphosate.

There is near-universal agreement in the weed science community nationwide, and surely as well in the PNW, that over-reliance on glyphosate (Roundup) over the last two decades has created multiple, new noxious weeds posing serious economic, environmental, and public health threats.

In fact, over 120 million acres of cultivated cropland in the U.S. is now infested with one or more glyphosate-resistant weed (for details, see http://cehn-healthykids.org/herbicide-use/resistant-weeds/.

The majority of glyphosate-resistant weeds are in the Southeast and Midwest, where routine, year-after-year planting of Roundup Ready crops has led to heavy and continuous selection pressure on weed populations, pressure that over three-to-six years typically leads to the evolution of genetically resistant weed phenotypes, that can then take off, spreading across tens of millions of acres in just a few years.

Ask any farmer in Georgia, or Iowa, or Arkansas whether they would call “noxious” the glyphosate-resistant kochia, Palmer amaranth, Johnson grass, marestail, or any of a dozen other glyphosate-resistant weeds in their fields.

It is virtually certain that an herbicide-based attempt to eradicate noxious weeds in Sherman County would fail. It would also be extremely costly, and would pose hard-to-predict collateral damage on non-target plants from drift, and on human health and the environment. But even worse, it would also, almost certainly, accelerate the emergence and spread of a host of weeds resistant to the herbicides used in the program.

This would, in turn, leave the county, and the county’s farmers with not just their existing suite of noxious weeds to deal with, but a new generation of them resistant to glyphosate, or whatever other herbicides are widely used.

Sherman County’s proposal, while perhaps well meaning, will simply push the herbicide use-resistant weed treadmill into high gear. Just as farmers in other parts of the county have learned over the last 20 years, excessive reliance on glyphosate, or herbicides over-all, accomplishes only one thing reliably – it accelerates the emergence and spread of resistant weeds, requiring applications of more, and often more toxic herbicides, and so on before some one, or something breaks this vicious cycle.

I urge you to take into account two other consequences if the County pursues this deeply flawed strategy. Certified organic food products grown and processed in Oregon, and distributed by Oregon-based companies like Azure and the Organically Grown Company, are highly regarded throughout the U.S. for exceptional quality, consistency, and value.

Plus, export demand is growing rapidly across several Pacific Rim nations for high-value, certified organic foods and wine from Oregon. Triggering a high-profile fight over government-mandated herbicide spraying on certified organic fields in Sherman County will come as a shock to many people, who are under the impression that all Oregonians, farmers and consumers alike, are committed to a vibrant, growing, and profitable organic food industry.

Does Sherman County really want to erode this halo benefiting the marketing of not just organic products, but all food and beverages from Oregon?

Second, if Sherman County is serious about weed eradication, it will have to mandate widespread spraying countywide, and not just on organic farms, and not just for one year. The public reaction will be swift, strong, and build in ferocity. It will likely lead to civil actions of the sort that can trigger substantial, unforeseen costs and consequences. I am surely not the only citizen of the State that recalls the tragic events last year in Malheur County.

Plus, I guarantee you that the County, the herbicide applicators, and the manufacturers of the herbicides applied, under force of law on organic or other farms, will face a torrent of litigation seeking compensatory damages for loss of reputation, health risks, and the loss of premium markets and prices.

I have followed litigation of this sort for decades, and have served as an expert witness in several herbicide-related cases. While it is obviously premature to start contemplating the precise legal theories and statutes that will form the crux of future litigation, the County should develop a realistic estimate of the legal costs likely to arise in the wake of this strategy, if acted upon, so that the County Commissioners can alert the public upfront regarding how they will raise the funds needed to deal with the costs of near-inevitable litigation.

—end of Dr. Benbrook’s letter—

Yesterday, Sunday, I emailed the Sherman County government asking them whether they really intend to pursue this lunatic program. If and when I receive an answer, I’ll post it.

I also emailed Azure Farms, asking why they believe there is no coverage of this issue in Oregon newspapers. If I get an answer, I’ll post that, too.

Ordinarily, local papers will print a stories about contentious issues, however one-sided they may be. In this case, I find nothing.

Is it possible the threat of herbicide spraying has been overstated? Why would Azure issue a release claiming the spraying is imminent if it weren’t true? Why would Azure risk getting into a wrangle with the County government if the threat weren’t real? Why isn’t there any mention of the spraying program on the Sherman County website? Does the County actually think they can keep their intentions under wraps?

“I have a great idea. Let’s claim Azure Farms can’t control their weeds. Let’s come in and invade them with Roundup and other toxic chemicals. Let’s destroy their organic farm. We know the spraying won’t wipe out the weeds—it’ll make the situation worse. But who cares? Let’s open up ourselves to massive lawsuits. I’m sure Monsanto will give us some legal help. We can set a fantastic precedent. No organic farm is safe. No organic farmer has the right to protect his land from the government. Isn’t that a terrific idea?”

Read More At: JonRappoport.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________________________

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Top 10 antioxidant-rich foods you need to add to your diet

Image: Top 10 antioxidant-rich foods you need to add to your diet

Source: NaturalNews.com
Russel Davis
May 4, 2017

Antioxidants promote a healthier body by eradicating free radicals, which can weaken the immune system and lead to a variety of diseases. An article in Medium.com states that food is the primary source of essential antioxidants. Certain food groups such as berries, nuts, and leafy greens are touted for their high antioxidant content.

Below is a list of the top 10 foods with the highest antioxidant content.

  1. Berries – Berries are excellent sources of polyphenols, micronutrients, and fiber. Various studies have already established that consuming berries, whether fresh, freeze-dried, or juiced, provide superior protection against heart diseases and certain types of cancers. Blueberries are especially recognized for having the highest antioxidant levels among berries. Other sources of antioxidants include strawberries, cranberries, raspberries, and goji berries.
  2. Green tea – Green tea has been cultivated for centuries because of their high antioxidant properties that help prevent the onset of certain cancers including breast, pancreatic, colorectal, and lung cancer. Green tea is also known to reduce the risk of inflammatory diseases such as diabetes, liver disease, and inflammatory bowel disease.
  3. Leafy greens – Leafy green vegetables such as spinach and kale contain essential phytochemicals that counter the effects of inflammation and carcinogens.
  4. Pomegranates, cherries, grapes, and raisins – Grapes are best known for their high polyphenol content, which is essential in keeping certain types of cancers in check. The high antioxidant levels in grapes and raisins were also tied to lower risk of heart disease, hypertension, diabetes, and diabetes-related complications. Pomegranates and cherries are also known to contain high antioxidant levels.
  5. Dark chocolate – Dark chocolate is rich in the antioxidant flavonoids. In fact, just one oz. of dark chocolate contains twice as much antioxidants as red wine.
  6. Plums and prunes – Both plums and prunes are regarded as superfoods for their high antioxidant content. According to recent studies, one plum contains as much antioxidants as a handful of blueberries.
  7. Nuts – Nuts are an excellent source of antioxidants called polyphenols. A recent study presented at the annual meeting of the American Chemical Society revealed that walnuts contain twice as much antioxidants as those found in other nuts such as pecans, macadamias, cashews, and pistachios.
  8. Ground cloves – Spices such as ground cloves are not only packed with flavor, they are found to have very high antioxidant content. Other antioxidant-rich spices include turmeric, garlic, ginger as well as cinnamon and oregano.
  9. Kidney beans – Kidney beans have been a kitchen staple for years. These humble legumes contain high amounts of antioxidants.
  10. Artichoke hearts – Artichoke hearts are also found to contain high levels of essential antioxidants.

The research community has long established that antioxidants are essential in maintaining a healthy body. These compounds help protect the body from the harmful effects of free radicals. Free radicals are unstable body molecules that lack electrons. These molecules steal electrons from the nearest healthy cell, which in turn makes the cell sick and prompts a chain reaction within the body. Free radical formation can be caused by exposure to toxins and pollution, smoking, and other environmental factors.

An article in the GlobalHealingCenter.com likens this process to cleaning a fish a tank. The fish tank resembles the body, while the gunk and grime that form in it at are the free radicals. Antioxidants act as bottom-feeder fishes that suck up all the dirt in the tank. In the same manner, antioxidants scavenge the body for free radicals and eliminate them by slowing down or inhibiting the body’s oxidation process. High antioxidant levels in the body may help keep certain diseases in check such as cancer and cardiovascular diseases. Antioxidants were also associated with improved eye health, immune system and slower aging process.

Learn more about plant nutrients at Nutrients.news.

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

Sources include:

Medium.com

GlobalHealingCenter.com

Blog.FoodNetwork.com

UMM.edu

Prevention.com

MedicalNewsToday.com

NBCNews.com

DailyMail.co.uk

Strawberries contain powerful anti-cancer medicines and have now been scientifically shown to prevent breast cancer

Image: Strawberries contain powerful anti-cancer medicines and have now been scientifically shown to prevent breast cancer
Source: NaturalNews.com
Rhonda Johnson
May 2, 2017

A new animal study showed that 500g of concentrated strawberry extract (equivalent to around 10 and 15 strawberries) can reduce breast cancer cell growth. Researchers noted that their findings build on existing data that prove the usefulness of strawberries in reducing blood cholesterol levels. Published in Scientific Reports, authors claimed that a diet that is rich in strawberries can potentially prevent or treat breast cancer.

“We have shown for the first time that strawberry extract, rich in phenolic compounds, inhibits the proliferation of breast cancer cells in in vitro and in vivo models,” wrote Maurizio Battino, co-author of the study, in an article on ScienceDaily.com. Battino explained the process of the study as such: cells from a highly aggressive, invasive A17 tumor line were treated with various concentrations (between 0.5 and 5 mg/ml) of Alba strawberry extract, for periods of 24, 48, and 72 hours. Battino and his team found that all cells demonstrated decreased cell viability; with the amount of change dependent on the dosage and time. Furthermore, it was seen that the strawberry extract reduced the expression of several genes associated with the invasion and metastasis of cancer cells.

In the in vivo model, the team used female laboratory mice. When these mice were one month old, they were divided into two groups. One was given a standard diet, the other an enriched diet, which was 15 percent strawberry extract. After following their respective diets for another month, all mice were injected with A17 breast cancer cells. These tumors were monitored biweekly by palpation. Battino and his team extracted the tumors after five weeks and analyzed their specific weight and volume. Data saw that a strawberry extract supplemented diet stopped the propagation of cancer cells to adjacent healthy tissue. The tumors were also significantly smaller in both weight and volume.

Despite these positive results, researchers stressed that these involved animal models and cannot be assumed to be similar for humans. Battino stressed this with the explanation that “the majority of diseases, including cancer, are complex and involve complex interactions between cellular and molecular systems that determine the development of the disease. These results are without a doubt valid for understanding potential effects of strawberries on breast cancer and the molecular mechanisms involved, but they must be complemented with clinical and epidemiological studies to verify whether humans experience the same positive effects as we have observed in mice.”

Another factor to note, authors said, is that the concentration of phenolic compounds in strawberries (which is known to be the catalyst of these beneficial health effects) vary greatly between varieties. That being said, researchers concluded their study with the suggestion that a healthy lifestyle and nutrient-dense diet can dramatically reduce the risk of developing any form of cancer.

Looking at the other health benefits of strawberries

Despite the study using strawberry extract, consuming the fresh fruit can still improve overall health. Strawberries are excellent sources of various antioxidants and contain essential nutrients and vitamins such as potassium, manganese, and magnesium. The berry is also loaded with vitamin C.

Studies have shown that consuming ample amounts of strawberries can reduce blood pressure levels by negating the effects of sodium in the body. Wellness experts also recommend the berry for diabetic patients. Strawberries score low in the glycemic food index and help regulate blood sugar. There is research that suggest eating around 37 strawberries a day can reduce diabetes-related complications such as kidney disease and neuropathy.

A Harvard study concluded that regular consumption of anthocyanins (a type of flavonoids found in berries) can reduce the risk of a heart attack by 32 percent in young and middle-aged women. Researchers noted that women who ate three servings of strawberries or blueberries per week fared the best.

These are just a few examples of the numerous health benefits strawberries offer. It wouldn’t hurt to try integrating this delicious superfood in your diet today. Discover more news about anti-cancer food nutrients at Nutrients.news.

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

Sources include:

ScienceDaily.com

DailyMail.co.uk

FoodForBreastCancer.com

StrawberryPlants.org

OrganicFacts.net

MedicalNewsToday.com

Vitamin D may be your best defense against respiratory infections, new science finds

Image: Vitamin D may be your best defense against respiratory infections, new science finds
Source: NaturalNews.com
Earl Garcia
April 24, 2017

Vitamin D intake may help keep common colds and flu at bay, British researchers found. Various studies have previously established that vitamin D may help reduce the risk of respiratory infections, and the recent analysis further emphasizes the vitamin’s role in boosting the immune system. To test this, researchers at the Queen Mary University of London pooled data from 25 separate trials with a total cohort population of 11,321 participants.

The research team found that vitamin D supplementation provided a modest protective effect against respiratory infections. Lead researcher Dr. Adrian Martineau said vitamin D supplements helped reduce the risk of developing respiratory illnesses such as colds and flu by 10 percent. Participants suffering vitamin D deficiency were shown to benefit more from supplementation.

According to researchers, vitamin D supplementation may help prevent respiratory infection in one out of 33 individuals. In contrast, flu vaccination may prevent infection in one out of 40 individuals. This suggests that vitamin D supplementation could be a more ideal preventive against respiratory conditions. The findings were published in the British Medical Journal.

Vitamin D’s protective effects seen in more studies

Vitamin D supplementation helped reduce respiratory infections in elderly population, according to a 2016 study. As part of the study, researchers at the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus examined 107 patients with an average age of 84 years old. The patients were given either higher monthly vitamin D doses or lower daily vitamin D doses. The study revealed that patients who had higher doses exhibited a 40 percent reduction in acute respiratory diseases after a year. However, researchers stressed that the findings warrant further research.

“This finding requires a confirmatory trial…This is a potentially life-saving discovery. There is very little in a doctor’s arsenal to battle ARI, especially since most are viral infections where antibiotics don’t work. But vitamin D seems able to potentially prevent these infections. If our results are confirmed by a larger trial, high dose vitamin D, ideally using daily dosing to minimize fall risk, has the potential for substantial public health benefit through ARI prevention for the large and growing population of long term care residents,” wrote lead author Dr. Adit Ginde in ScienceDaily.com. The finding were published in the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

Another study revealed that higher vitamin D intake may cut the risk of respiratory tract infections. To carry out the study, researchers examined 140 volunteers who were given either vitamin D supplements or placebo. The researchers found that patients in the vitamin D group had a 25 percent decrease in respiratory tract infections at the end of the study period compared with those in the placebo group. The research team also found that patients who took vitamin D supplements reduced their antibiotic use by nearly 50 percent.

“Our research can have important implications for patients with recurrent infections or a compromised immune defense, such as a lack of antibodies, and can also help to prevent the emerging resistance to antibiotics that come from overuse. On the other hand, there doesn’t seem to be anything to support the idea that vitamin D would help otherwise healthy people with normal, temporary respiratory tract infections,” said researcher Dr. Peter Bergman in MedicalNewsToday.com. The results appeared in the journal BMJ Open.

A small study published in 2010 also revealed that vitamin D supplementation helped reduce the incidence of influenza A in children. To assess this, Japanese researchers examined more than 3oo children and found that the incidence of influenza-A infection was only 10.8 percent in those who took vitamin D supplements, compared with 18.6 percent in the control group. The findings were published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

Sources include: 

NaturalHealth365.com

BBC.com

NPR.org

ScienceDaily.com

MedicalNewsToday.com

ScienceNews.org