Butter is not back: Limiting saturated fat still best for heart health

Butter melting

For immediate release: September 28, 2015

Boston, MA ─ People who replace saturated fat (mainly found in meats and dairy foods) in their diets with refined carbohydrates do not lower their risk of heart disease, according to a new study led by researchers at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. On the other hand, those who replace saturated fats with unsaturated fats (found in vegetable oils and nuts) or whole grains lower their heart disease risk.

Many people fall back on carbs, especially refined carbs like white bread, when they reduce saturated fat in their diets, said senior author Frank Hu, professor of nutrition and epidemiology. This may in part explain findings from a controversial 2014 paper that called into question recommendations for limiting saturated fat for heart health, and led to headlines promoting the return of butter.

“Our research does not exonerate saturated fat,” said Hu. “In terms of heart disease risk, saturated fat and refined carbohydrates appear to be similarly unhealthful.”

The study appears online September 28, 2015 in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

This is the first prospective analysis to directly compare saturated fat with other types of fats and different types of carbohydrates in relation to heart disease risk.

Hu and colleagues looked at diet and health information from participants in two long-running observation studies, the Nurses’ Health Study (84,628 women) and the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (42,908 men), who were free of diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and cancer at baseline. Diet was assessed by food frequency questionnaires every four years. During follow-up, the researchers documented 7,667 cases of coronary heart disease (CHD).

They estimated that replacing 5% of energy intake from saturated fats with equivalent energy intake from either polyunsaturated fats, monounsaturated fats, or carbohydrates from whole grains was associated with 25%, 15%, and 9% lower risk of CHD, respectively. On the other hand, swapping 5% of saturated fat calories for the same amount of refined carbohydrates and sugars was not associated with CHD risk. These analyses took into account cardiovascular risk factors such as age, body mass index, smoking, and physical activity.

“Our findings suggest that the low-fat, high-carb trends of the 1980s and 1990s are not effective in reducing risk of CHD,” said Yanping Li, co-first author along with Adela Hruby, both researchers in the Department of Nutrition. “It means that individuals should not replace saturated fat with refined carbs or vice versa. Dietary recommendations to reduce saturated fats should specify their replacement with unsaturated fats or with healthy carbohydrates, such as whole grains,” said Li.

Other Harvard Chan School authors of the study included Sylvia Ley, Dong Wang, Stephanie Chiuve, Laura Sampson, Eric Rimm, and Walter Willett.

The study cohorts were supported by grants of UM1 CA186107, R01 HL034594, R01 HL35464, R01 HL60712 and UM1 CA167552 from the National Institutes of Health.

“Saturated fat as compared to unsaturated fats and sources of carbohydrates in relation to risk of coronary heart disease: A prospective cohort study,” Yanping Li, Adela Hruby, Adam M. Bernstein, Sylvia H. Ley, Dong D. Wang, Stephanie E. Chiuve, Laura Sampson, Kathryn M. Rexrode, Eric B. Rimm, Walter C. Willett, Frank B. Hu, Journal of the American College of Cardiology, online September 28, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.07.055

Visit the Harvard Chan School website for the latest news, press releases, and multimedia offerings.

Daily sugary drink habit increases risk of type 2 diabetes, heart attack, stroke

Drinking one or two daily sugar-sweetened beverages can lead to excess weightgain and a greater risk of developing type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, according to a new study by researchers at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. In the most comprehensive review of the evidence on the health effects of sugar-sweetened beverages to date, the researchers also took a closer look at the unique role that the sweetener fructose may play in the development of these conditions.

The paper was published online September 30, 2015 in the Journal of theAmerican College of Cardiology.

Fructose is metabolized in the liver where it can be converted to fatty compounds called triglycerides, which may lead to fatty liver disease and insulin resistance, a key risk factor for developing diabetes and cardiovascular disease. The major source of fructose in the diet comes from fructose-containing sugars—sucrose and high fructose corn syrup—found in sugar-sweetened beverages, according to the researchers.

In the new paper, which reviewed recent epidemiological studies and meta-analyses of these studies, the researchers found that people who consumed one or two sugary drinks a day had a 35% increase in risk for heart attack or fatal heart disease, a 16% increase in risk for stroke, and a 26% increased risk for developing type 2 diabetes, when compared with people who drank fewer sugar-sweetened beverages.

“Our findings underscore the urgent need for public health strategies that reduce the consumption of these drinks,” said Frank Hu, professor of nutrition and epidemiology and lead author of the paper. Research scientist Vasanti Malik co-authored the study.

Read study abstract: Fructose and cardiometabolic health

Read American College of Cardiology press release: New research exposes the health risks of fructose and sugary drinks

Sugar-sweetened drinks increase risk for diabetes, heart disease, stroke (UPI)

Ground Beef Contains Dangerous Bacteria

updated: Aug. 24, 2015 1:18 PM

Ground Beef
Getty Images

You may want to pay attention to the type of beef you buy

Store-bought ground beef often contains a variety of bacteria that can make humans sick and is resistant to the drugs used to treat it, according to new data from Consumer Reports.

While most bacteria in meat can be killed when cooked correctly, many Americans prefer to eat their meat rare, putting them at a greater risk for illness—especially when the meat comes from conventionally raised cows, which are treated with antibiotics and hormones, according to a new Consumer Reports study. The study found that nearly 20% of ground beef in the U.S. tested from conventionally raised cows had bacteria resistant to three or more classes of antibiotics. Only 9% of ground beef that was sustainably made had antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

For the report, Consumer Reports purchased and tested 300 packages of conventionally and sustainably produced ground beef sold in stores around the U.S. The meat was tested for five common types of bacteria that can be found in beef: Clostridium perfringens, E. coli, Enterococcus, Salmonella and Staphylococcus aureus. Bacteria of some kind was found in all of the beef samples, though sustainably produced beef was less likely to have harmful strains.

More than 80% of conventional ground beef had two types of bacteria and nearly 20% of the samples contained C. perfringens, which causes close to a million cases of food poisoning every year. “There’s no way to tell by looking at a package of meat or smelling it whether it has harmful bacteria or not,” Urvashi Rangan, executive director of the Center for Food Safety and Sustainability at Consumer Reports, said.“You have to be on guard every time.”

The research also found that 10% of the samples had a strain of S. aureus that produces a toxin that can make people ill and is not killed even when the meat is cooked properly. Still, cooking meat at 160 degrees Fahrenheit should kill most bacteria.

The findings suggest that consumers may want to look for ground beef that’s sustainably produced, with labels reading “no antibiotics,” “grass-fed,” and “organic,” according to Consumer Reports. Consumer Reports says “grass-fed organic” may be one of the best labels to go by since it means the cattle eat organic grass and forage and do not receive antibiotics or hormones.

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) secretary Tom Vilsacksaid in a statement that the agency has put tight food safety standards in place over the last six years to avoid public health problems. “Measures taken to improve ground beef safety include a zero-tolerance policy for six dangerous strains of E. coli, better procedures for detecting the source of outbreaks, improved laboratory testing, and more. USDA’s food safety inspectors work in every meat facility, every day, to reduce illnesses across all products we regulate, and we’re proud to report that illnesses attributed to those items dropped by 10% from 2013 to 2014,” he said.

Virus Found in Dairy Linked to Breast Cancer

Breaking Medical News
FaceBook_icon_16 Twitter Email

Virus Found in Dairy Linked to Breast Cancer

A virus found in beef and dairy products may be a possible risk factor for breast cancer, according to a case-control study published in PLoS One. Researchers examined 239 donated breast tissue samples from the Cooperative Human Tissue Network archives for exposure to the bovine leukemia virus (BLV).

BLV in breast tissue was strongly associated with breast cancer diagnosis, as the virus appeared in 59 percent of those with cancer.

The researchers found 38 percent of cows used for beef and 84 percent of cows used for dairy were infected with BLV and hope these results may point to preventive techniques in the future.

Buehring GC, Shen HM, Jensen HM, Jin DL, Hudes M, Block G. Exposure to bovine leukemia virus is associated with breast cancer: a case-control study. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0134304.

Better Than Chemo: Turmeric Kills Cancer Not Patients

Posted on:

Saturday, September 12th 2015 at 5:45 pm

Written By:

Sayer Ji, Founder

Better Than Chemo

About one hundred times less toxic than chemotherapy, turmeric extract (curcumin) was found more effective at killing colorectal cancer stem cells from patients than a popular combination of conventional drugs.

Researchers from the United Kingdom have just made a major breakthrough in cancer research by demonstrating for the first time in patient-derived colorectal cell lines that a turmeric extract (curcumin) is not only an effective adjunct agent to enhance conventional chemotherapy, but that it may be even more effective on its own.

Published this month in Cancer Letters and titled, “Curcumin inhibits cancer stem cell phenotypes in ex vivo models of colorectal liver metastases, and is clinically safe and tolerable in combination with FOLFOX chemotherapy,” the study evaluated the so-called “diet-derived agent” curcumin — the primary polyphenol in turmeric — as a possible adjunct to enhance conventional treatment of colorectal cancer with chemotherapy.

The primary role of cancer stem cells in contributing to cancer malignancy as well as resistance to conventional treatmentis addressed in the study. Whereas traditional cancer research methods focus on a treatment’s ability to reduce tumor volume (or the number of cells in a cancer cell culture), the cancer stem cell theory acknowledges that treatments have highly differential effects on the different cell types that comprise the tumor; namely, whereas the relatively benign daughter cells of a tumor may die when exposed to chemotherapy, the relatively chemotherapy-resistant cancer stem cell population (so-called “mother” cells) can actually increase in number as the tumor volume decreases, resulting in creating an albeit smaller but far more dangerous, treatment-resistant tumor.

The study design and results were summarized in the abstract below:

Here, we utilised patient-derived colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) to assess whether curcumin may provide added benefit over 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) in cancer stem cell (CSC) models. Combination of curcumin with FOLFOX chemotherapy was then assessed clinically in a phase I dose escalation study. Curcumin alone and in combination significantly reduced spheroid number in CRLM CSC models, and decreased the number of cells with high aldehyde dehydrogenase activity (ALDHhigh/CD133−). Addition of curcumin to oxaliplatin/5-FU enhanced anti-proliferative and pro-apoptotic effects in a proportion of patient-derived explants, whilst reducing expression of stem cell-associated markers ALDH and CD133. The phase I dose escalation study revealed curcumin to be a safe and tolerable adjunct to FOLFOX chemotherapy in patients with CRLM (n = 12) at doses up to 2 grams daily.”

As you can see above, the researchers discovered that curcumin is both a safe and effective adjunct in the treatment of colorectal cancer. They noted the significance of these findings by pointing out that this was “the first time that curcumin may enhance oxaliplatin/5-FU-based chemotherapy in models derived directly from patients for whom the treatments are ultimately intended.” Specifically, the curcumin was able to inhibit what is known as “spheroid formation,” a 3-dimensional configuration of cells that indicates cancer stem cell driven cancer progression. Curcumin was also found to down-regulate cancer stem cell associated markers (e.g., CD44 and CD166 and ALDH activity), and various other chemical signals associated with carcinogenesis (e.g., epidermal growth factor, insulin-like growth factor and Notch). All these activities, taken together, indicate that curcumin is capable of targeting the stem cells at the heart of cancer malignancy. You can learn more about this in a previous article we wrote documenting curcumin’s ability to kill cancer stem cells: “Turmeric Extract Strikes To the Root Cause of Cancer Malignancy.” We also featured turmeric extract’s ability toselectively target cancer cells while leaving healthy ones intact in a previous article titled, “Turmeric’s ‘Smart Kill’ Properties Put Chemo & Radiation To Shame.”

But what is even more remarkable about the new study is that the researchers found curcumin outperformed the combination chemotherapy treatment (5-FU/oxaliplatin) in decreasing the cancer stem cell linked spheroid formation: “In addition, curcumin alone decreased spheroid number to a greater extent than the 5-FU/oxaliplatin treatments.”

This tremendously provocative finding is given only brief mention in the paper. When you look at the toxicological risks associated with chemotherapy agents like 5-FU, which have an oral LD50 in rats of only 230 milligrams/per kilogram, and compare it to curcumin, with an LD50 in rats of 12.2 grams/per kilogram, you can begin to appreciate the revolutionary implications of this research. [Note: An LD50 is the dose required to kill 50% of a test population of animals, i.e. the lethal dose 50%.] Technically, therefore, 5-FU is 53 times more toxic than curcumin, yet according to this research, less capable in combination with oxaliplatin of killing cancer spheroids than curcumin. Oxaliplatin itself has an oral LD50 in rats of about 100 mg per kilogram, making it 122 times more toxic than curcumin. For additional information on the relative toxicity and ineffectiveness of chemotherapy in comparison to natural substances, you can also read:Research: Pineapple Enzyme Kills Cancer Without Killing You.

Clearly, findings like these reveal the conventional chemotherapy paradigm for what it is: a toxicological nightmare offering only questionable efficacy relative to food-derived compounds. The authors of the study acknowledge that, “Curcumin may provide added benefit in subsets of patients when administered with FOLFOX, and is a well-tolerated chemotherapy adjunct.”

We concur that this is true, especially considering that curcumin has been found to reduce the side effects caused by conventional treatment. But is that all? Shouldn’t curcumin be considered a first-line treatment itself? While the researchers do mention in their concluding remarks that, “Greater pro-apoptotic [inducing cancer suicide programs] and CSC [cancer stem cell] targeting efficacy was observed for curcumin than for oxaliplatin and 5-FU in a small patient subset, warranting further investigation to determine factors that influence response to curcumin,” this doesn’t seem strong enough. We believe that given the great burden not only of cancer, but cancer treatment-related morbidity and mortality, it is ethically imperative that curcumin should be investigated as the active intervention in future clinical trials compared with conventional treatment. We can no longer pretend that the reason why curcumin is not studied on par with patented chemical medicines is because of a lack of compelling research. This study proves it exists. The key is breaking through the mile high paywall (approximately 800 million dollars needed to fund the requisite clinical trials) that separates natural non-patented substances from FDA-drug approval. In the meantime, a growing population is taking their health into their own hands, and finding ways to prevent and even treat cancer through dietary interventions and related natural approaches.

For those doubtful that curcumin possesses significant anti-cancer properties, please review our curcumin database which contains over 1500 studies showing it’s value in over one hundred different types of cancer here:Curcumin research. You can also look at our research and article on Turmeric, which includes even more research on the value of this ancient healing spice: Turmeric Health Guide. Finally, use our Cancer Research Health Guide for an even more comprehensive set of data on natural interventions for a variety of cancers.