Welcome to Sott.net
Thu, 20 Feb 2020
The World for People who Think

Health & Wellness


Why you're so confused about what to eat

10 commandments
Everyone's a nutrition expert these days. Wherever you turn, you'll find a legion of pundits lining up to tell you what to eat, from your co-worker to your latest Internet guru. Then there are the official experts. They have all got something to say — and it's all different.

Why not just trust the experts? Why are we even having this conversation?

Because people are not convinced that they can trust official dietary advice. In theory, these guidelines are unbiased, impartial and evidence based. In reality, they are a morass of bias, partiality and powerful commercial interests.

Comment: See also:

Microscope 1

Immune discovery 'may treat all cancer'

Breast cancer cells
© Science Photo Library
The new technique could kill a wide range of cancer cells, including breast and prostate.
A newly-discovered part of our immune system could be harnessed to treat all cancers, say scientists.

The Cardiff University team discovered a method of killing prostate, breast, lung and other cancers in lab tests.

The findings, published in Nature Immunology, have not been tested in patients, but the researchers say they have "enormous potential".

Experts said that although the work was still at an early stage, it was very exciting.

Comment: See also:


Sunscreen chemicals absorbed into body, study finds

sunscreen kids summer
The chemicals in sunscreens help shield people from the sun's rays, but they are also absorbed into the body at levels that raise some safety questions, a new study confirms.

The study, by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), is a follow-up to a 2019 investigation. Both reached the same conclusion: The active ingredients in popular sunscreens can be absorbed into the blood at levels that exceed the FDA threshold where they can be presumed safe.

However, both the agency and skin cancer experts were quick to stress that there is no proof that sunscreen ingredients cause any harm. And people should keep using the products to prevent sunburn and curb the risk of skin cancer, they said.

Comment: Note that this is the exact opposite of the precautionary principle. The burden of proof is on the manufacturers to prove the chemicals are harmless before releasing them onto an unsuspecting public, not to encourage their use until they're proven dangerous (whenever they get around to it).

Comment: So now a second study has found hormone-altering chemicals in sunscreen are absorbed into the skin in levels higher than the FDA's arbitrarily set safety levels, but don't worry because it's only a little bit. Keep using sunscreen, because the big fiery ball in the sky that's been there for the entire existence of life on planet earth is going to kill you, while man-made chemicals of dubious safety are good for you. Makes perfect sense.

See also:


Separation of plate and state: Keeping diet dogma out of the classroom

separation of plate and state

Pamphlets and booklets proselytizing an animal-free diet for climate mitigation are being distributed to schools at an alarming rate. Keep reading to learn how important it is to speak with your children about agricultural production, livestock, and how there is a responsible and environmentally beneficial way to consume animal products.

A child attending an Oregon public school was recently given a booklet called Fight Climate Change With Diet Change. The content of the booklet was completely against consuming animal products, lacking any information about how livestock can be used to build topsoil and sequester carbon. It even went on to say that not only is going vegan better for the planet, it is also better for human health.

The booklets are funded and distributed by the Factory Farm Awareness Coalition and an activist group called Vegan Outreach. Established in 1993, Vegan Outreach is known for distributing their literature on college campuses. To a person with no background in nutrition or agriculture, it is easy to understand how the pamphlets could be very convincing, especially for children. They are attractive and colorful while offering seemingly simple solutions for reducing climate impact like claiming that reducing meat consumption reduces water consumption. As we've noted on Sacred Cow, beef is not the water hog that most pro-vegan groups claim.

Comment: The insidious propaganda continues, and the ideologues shamelessly target children as an easy target. Protect yourself, protect your kids, stay informed.

See also:


Eating red meat 'vital' for health, expert says

meat counter

The Royal College of Surgeons' expert said she is 'concerned' with the 'dramatic reduction' in red meat consumption
A decline in nutrition levels in plants and fish means it is more important than ever for the public to eat red meat for health reasons.

This is according to Professor Alice Stanton, who is a cardiovascular pharmacology expert at the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland.

She is set to tell delegates at tomorrow's Oxford Farming Conference about the essential nutrients found in red meat.

Comment: Recognizing the vital nutrition in red meat is important to point out. It's too bad the professor still gives a nod to the greenhouse gasses lie.

See also:

Snowflake Cold

Human body temperature has declined steadily over the past 160 years

body temperature
It's a number everybody knows by heart — our bodies are supposed to be an average 37°C. But that number may be outdated, according to a new analysis of body temperature records going back to 1860. The study suggests the body temperature of the average U.S. man has dropped by 0.6°C since the Civil War, KQED reports. (A similar drop was found in women.) Other studies had already established these newer, lower baselines, blaming faulty thermometers for the discrepancy.

Comment: It's possible that this drop from what was the norm is not a good thing, after all, the human body raises its temperature to kill off viruses so does this mean people will be more susceptible and less able to fight them off? What seems clear is that even with all the modern conveniences and medical advances people seem to be unhealthier than ever before - even if they may be living longer: Also check out SOTT radio's: The Health & Wellness Show: The benefits of cold adaptation

SOTT Logo Radio

Objective:Health #41 - GMO Stevia - Ruining the Sweetener We Don't Really Need

O:H header
A recent article on Mercola.com decries the sad fact that much of the stevia on the market at this point is genetically modified. Anyone who cares a modicum about their health (and presumably stevia users would fall in this category) is likely outraged that this natural sweetener has been degraded in such a way.

This highlighted the subject of alternative sweeteners for us here at Objective:Health, causing us to look a little deeper. Are alternative sweeteners really all they're cracked up to be? Is stevia, even in its whole plant form, completely innocuous and safe? Are large quantities of isolates normally found in small quantities in nature OK to be bingeing on?

Join us for our newest deep dive into sweeteners. Do we even need stevia?

And check us out on Brighteon!

For other health-related news and more, you can find us on:
♥Twitter: https://twitter.com/objecthealth
♥Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/objecthealth/
♥Brighteon: https://www.brighteon.com/channel/objectivehealth

And you can check out all of our previous shows (pre YouTube) here.

Running Time: 00:28:59

Download: MP3 — 26 MB


Low doses of radiation used in medical imaging lead to mutations in cell cultures

ct scanner
Common medical imaging procedures use low doses of radiation that are believed to be safe. A new study, however, finds that in human cell cultures, these doses create breaks that allow extra bits of DNA to integrate into the chromosome. Roland Kanaar and Alex Zelensky of Erasmus University Medical Center and Oncode Institute and colleagues report these new findings in a study published 16th January in PLOS Genetics.

Scientists have long known that exposing cells to high doses of ionizing radiation generates mutations by creating double-strand breaks that let in external segments of DNA. These extraneous fragments of DNA can occur in the nucleus, left over from natural processes, such as genomic DNA repair and viral infections. In the new study, researchers investigated whether low doses of ionizing radiation have damaging side effects by irradiating human and mouse cells grown in the lab. When they counted the cells that had taken up foreign DNA, they found that low doses of radiation, in the upper range of common diagnostic procedures, create mutations through inserted DNA even more efficiently than the much larger doses studied previously.

While the new results in cell cultures are potentially concerning, the study's authors stress that translating radiation's effects on lab-grown cell cultures to effects in the body is premature. Future experiments using animal models will be necessary to determine the full effects of low-dose radiation, and whether its use in medical imaging has an impact on patient health. If the same phenomenon does occur inside the body, then doctors may need to take into account levels of extraneous DNA, such those resulting from a long-term viral infection, when assessing a patient's risk from a procedure that requires radiation.

"Most molecular radiobiological research is focused on high doses of ionizing radiation relevant to cancer treatment, while effects of physiologically relevant doses of radiation on the cell are notoriously difficult to study at the molecular level," said author Roland Kanaar. "Our discovery that mutagenic insertion of foreign DNA into cell's genome is remarkably responsive to doses encountered during diagnostic, rather than therapeutic, procedures provides a new simple and sensitive tool to study their consequences and revealed surprising molecular genetic details of how cells cope with natural amounts of DNA damage."

Comment: See also:


Bees absolutely love cannabis and it could help restore their populations

Bees and cannabis
Bees are major fans of hemp and a recent study has found that the taller the hemp plants are the larger the number of bees that will flock to it.

The new research, spearheaded by researchers at Cornell University and published last month in Environmental Entomology, shows that humans aren't the only fans of weed. The findings also reinforce a study published last year at Colorado State University that discovered the same thing.

The study shows how bees are highly attracted to cannabis due to the plant's plentiful stores of pollen, and it could pave the way for scientists to figure out new ways to support their struggling population as well as floral populations.

According to the study, the greater the area covered by the hemp plant the greater the chance that bees will swarm to the area. Additionally, those hemp plants that are taller have a much greater likelihood of attracting bees with the tallest plants attracting a stunning 17 times more bees than the shortest plants.

Comment: See also: Bee population recovering due to regenerative farming, producers say


Many aging doctors undergo memory tests to keep patients safe

The number of doctors over the age of 65 in the United States has almost quadrupled since 1975 reaching more than 300,000, according to the American Medical Association. And those figures have led to more questions after a new report shows that many aging doctors are experiencing significant memory loss.

A group of researchers at Yale University presented results from a three-year program where doctors over the age of 70 were tested for memory skills, according to a new report in the Journal of the American Medical Association. The hospital administrators used a variety of neurocognitive tests to detect age-related memory problems.

Doctors who wanted to renew their appointment to the medical staff had to meet a specific score to continue to see patients without any supervision.

In the program, the group examined 141 healthcare providers over three years between the ages of 69 and 92. About 57% of those tested were allowed to continue working, while 24% were required to be closely monitored as they showed mild memory impairments. Meanwhile, 13% of the healthcare workers were found to have more severe memory impairments where they were required to be either supervised or asked to retire from working with patients.