Health

Essential Oils Class with Leta

Fall Essentail Oils Class.jpg

Hey guys!

I'll be offering a free essential oils class this month over at Alex's office in Sand Springs. We're going to talk about how essential oils can help you find your focus for the new school year. Whether you're in the classroom, supporting a student. or working on your own projects this is a great time of year to refine your focus and help yourself get to work!

I'll be highlighting a couple of specific doTERRA oils that can help you focus, concentrate, get better sleep, help with memory support, and so much more. I hope you can come join us for a fun evening - call to reserve your spot at (918) 246-5808. See you there!

- Leta (The Yogi)

Statins for Women? Follow up article.

Statins for Women? Not for My Patients

Blog By: Kelly Brogan, M.D. Holistic Women’s Health Psychiatry, NYC

Sometimes, pharmaceutical companies and their doctorly friends collectively make a bold move that shows their hand. Usually, this is in the form of indiscriminately and categorically broadening the eligible candidates for the suddenly lifesaving benefits of a pre-existing product. Recent changes in guidelines put forth by the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology aim to expand the recommendations of lipid-modifying statins to include those for whom there is a stated “10-year risk of 7.5 percent or more” of cardiac events, based on a calculator that now eliminates LDL targets. Many thoughtful clinicians have come forth to express their concerns about the impact of this expansion of prescription treatment to 70 million patients, including Dr. Redberg and John Abramson, for the New York Times, stating:

We believe that the new guidelines are not adequately supported by objective data, and that statins should not be recommended for this vastly expanded class of healthy Americans. Instead of converting millions of people into statin customers, we should be focusing on the real factors that undeniably reduce the risk of heart disease: healthy diets, exercise and avoiding smoking. Patients should be skeptical about the guidelines, and have a meaningful dialogue with their doctors about statins, including what the evidence does and does not show, before deciding what is best for them.

I’d like to talk about what this means, as a women’s health psychiatrist,  for my people — women, in America, suffering from depression, anxiety, and symptoms of mental illness. Several times a week, I “discuss” (euphemism) with colleagues, including integrative doctors, the fact that I do not want a single one of my patients on statins, for any reason, ever.

Here’s why:

Wrong-Headed Indication

As discussed by Dr. Tom O’Bryan, there is a 17-year lag between availability of paradigm-shifting data and implementation. Misconceptions about dietary — cholesterol and saturated fat — drivers of heart disease still linger despite widespread abandonment of this perspective. This was discussed in an important, recent BMJ commentary by British cardiologist, Dr. Malhotra, who states:

Virtually all the truths about preventing heart attacks that physicians and patients have held dear for more than a generation are wrong and need to be abandoned.

Based on unabated rates of cardiovascular disease despite a generation of statin users, and studies that demonstrate that patients presenting to the hospital with heart attacks don’t have elevated total cholesterol, but they do have (66 percent of the time) metabolic syndrome, or a constellation of findings such as obesity, high triglycerides, low HDL, and insulin resistance. This phenomenon is driven by sugar and trans fat, not dietary, naturally-occurring saturated fat, and not by a lack of statins, but, perhaps, is exacerbated by the statins themselves, and particularly, in women.

This is why, even in the only demographic that has been shown to benefit from statin use (men who have had a previous heart attack) 82 will experience no benefit before one will.  This is at the expense of interference with energy production in every cell because of coQ10 depletion, an unintended but tragic side effect.  In that 83rd patient, anti-inflammatory effects of statins (and not cholesterol-lowering) are thought to drive benefit. These effects are highly achievable in more benign and widely beneficial ways.

Inexcusable Risk

Contrary to what is demonstrated in industry studies, intolerable side effects occurred in 20 percent of those treated with statins in an eight-year retrospective cohort study. Given the total lack of demonstrated benefit in women, as a demographic, we are now, in the realm of iatrogenesis, or doctor-induced harm, which may include decreased cognitive function, cataracts, sexual dysfunction, depression, muscle pain, and now, diabetes. Understanding the pathogenisis of cardiovascular disease, induction of diabetes in women, who will then be put at risk for cardiovascular events, is inexcusable. We have known, at least since this study in the Archives of Internal Medicine, that the risk of new onset diabetes in postmenopausal women was increased by 48 percent. Plain and simple: “Statin medication use in postmenopausal women is associated with an increased risk for DM.”

Brain and Hormone Sabotage

As a women’s health psychiatrist, I am principally concerned with the effects of a low fat diet, poor cholesterol production, and medication-disrupting lipid effects because cholesterol is a primary component of cell membranes, acting as both a filter and a structural reinforcer. Cell membranes are where all of the action is at including receptor function and trafficking of nutrients and toxic elements. Cholesterol is also the precursor to vitamin D, and to pregnenolone and the sex hormones that derive from it, making it critical for appropriate production, feedback, and balance. I discuss these relationships, and its relevance to risk of depression, here:

Perhaps related to these vital functions, perhaps to others yet undiscovered, low cholesterol has also been linked to suicide and depression. (Kunugi et al, Biol Psych, 1997) (Modai at al, J Clin Psych, 1994) ( Lindberg et al, BMJ, 1992) In patients hospitalized for affective episodes, significantly more patients than controls were noted to have low plasma cholesterol. Another looking at the Melbourne Women’s Midlife Health Project suggested that improved performance on memory testing was achieved with increased total cholesterol in women longitudinally monitored.

Controlling for multiple confounding variables, 300 women in Sweden were found  to be significantly more depressed when they had the lowest percentage of total cholesterol in the cohort. This is a concerning correlation in light of recommendations that aim to throw women under the cholesterol-sabotaging bus.

Better Medicine for Healthier Brains and Hearts

Cardiovascular disease is a multi-factorial inflammatory problem with disparate drivers in different people. Lifestyle medicine is the best and most sophisticated intervention, and the only one indicated here, with no exceptions for women.  This begins with good old exercise and diet. I advocate for no grains and sugar, consistent with what our genome is expecting to see. This is a naturally high fat approach with a focus on pastured meats, wild fish, eggs, nuts, and seeds. Know that any increase in cholesterol that may occur is consistent with beneficial profiles, and improvement in inflammatory markers.  Most of the time, however, I am aiming to increase cholesterol to support my patient’s mental and hormonal health, working at improving liver synthesis and healthy dietary fats.

Most of my patients know that I’m a huge eggophile. Studies such as this one that noted three eggs (yolks) daily with carbohydrate restriction resulted in improvement in all lipid parameters and HDL help to support my assertion that whole, natural foods do not promote diseases that have only come into existence since the gifts of the industrial revolution and Snackwells over bacon type recommendations.

We all know, intuitively, that exercise is a critical answer to the burning question of how do we heal ourselves, and particularly, in a population concerned about cardiovascular disease and the Interheart study demonstrated that 90 percent of first cardiac events could be prevented by lifestyle modification. The known and validated benefits of exercise, however, may be eclipsed by use of a statin, which is just the cherry on top!

What are the parameters that relate, in a predictive manner, to metabolic syndrome and associated inflammation? Unfortunately, none of these figure into the handy calculator the AHA is planning to use for the new statin indications.  These include:

  • fasting insulin
  • hemoglobin A1C
  • homocysteine
  • NMR or VAP lipid profiles which screen for particle density
  • hsCRP
  • fasting glucose

Balancing thyroid function is an important and vastly overlooked variable, particularly in women, because of its role in the enzymatic processing of LDL cholesterol in the liver — i.e., you don’t have a “cholesterol problem” if you also have a “thyroid problem,” which is grossly overlooked by most conventional physicians, as I discuss here.

Strategic implementation of activated B vitamins such as B12 and folate and vitamin D can also mitigate inflammatory compounds such as homocysteine and hsCRP.

All told, we have here an unsafe, unnecessary product that will now be recommended to healthy people to make them sicker, all when simple, health-fortifying lifestyle changes have been proven to be effective and globally transformative in ways no pill could ever hope to be. Women, listen up, and listen good to those trying to save you from a pharmaceutical fate. It’s a depressing, confusing, libido-less, fat, and potentially lethal destiny, and there’s a path to vitality paved with common sense. Walk it.

Statins, is the Help Worth the Harm?

Cracking the Cholesterol Myth: How Statins Harm The Body and Mind

by Kelly Brogan, MD and Sayer Ji

A new study finds the chemical war against cholesterol using statin drugs was justified through statistical deception and the cover up of over 300 adverse health effects documented in the biomedical literature.

Better safe than sorry, right? This is the logic that defines the grasp that the pharmaceutical company has on our psyche. Perhaps your mother, father, brother, and boyfriend have been recommended cholesterol-lowering medication, just to help hedge their bets around a possible chest-clutching demise. In fact, recent guidelines have expanded the pool of potential statin medication recipients, so that there are very few of us who seem to be walking around with acceptable levels of artery clogging sludge.

But how is it that drug companies got a foothold? How have they convinced doctors that their patients need these medications, and need them now? They are banking (literally) on the fact that you haven’t brushed up on statistics in a while.

It turns out that a common sleight of hand in the medical literature is the popularization of claims around “relative risk reduction” which can make an effect appear meaningful, when the “absolute risk reduction” reveals its insignificance.  In this way, 100 people are treated with statin medications to offer 1 person benefit, and the change from a 2% to a 1% heart attack rate is billed a 50% reduction rather than a 1% improvement, which is what it actually is.

Perhaps this would still qualify as better safe than sorry if these medications weren’t some of the most toxic chemicals willfully ingested, with at least 300 adverse health effects evident in the published literature so far, with at least 28 distinct modes of toxicity, including:

Beyond the known fact that statin drugs deplete the body of two essential nutrients: coenzyme Q10 and selenium, they are also highly myotoxic and neurotoxic. Because the heart is one of the most nerve-saturated muscles in the human body, these two modes of toxicity combined represent a ‘perfect storm’ of cardiotoxicity – a highly ironic fact considering statin drugs are promoted as having ‘life-saving’ cardioprotective properties.

A powerful expert review by Diamond and Ravnskov decimates any plausible indication for these cholesterol-lowering agents, giving full consideration to the above mentioned side effects.

They plainly state:

“Overall, our goal in this review is to explain how the war on cholesterol has been fought by advocates that have used statistical deception to create the appearance that statins are wonder drugs, when the reality is that their trivial benefit is more than offset by their adverse effects.”

The Cholesterol Meme

It’s tempting to look the number one killer of Americans in the eye, and say, “WHO did this? Who is responsible?” It is also consistent with American perceptions of health and wellness to demonize a natural and vital part of our physiology rather than look at lifestyle factors including government subsidies of inflammatory food products.

Not only is low cholesterol a problem, but it puts an individual at risk for viral infection, cancer, and mental illness because of the vital role that lipids play in cell membrane integrity, hormone production, and immunity.

A broadly toxic xenobiotic chemical, statin medications have only been demonstrated to be of slight benefit by statistical manipulation. For example, Diamond and Raynskov elucidate that:

  • The JUPITER trial of Crestor vs placebo resulted in increased fatal heart attacks in the treatment group which were obscured by combing fatal and nonfatal infarctions.
  • In the ASCOT trial was used to generate PR copy boasting Lipitor’s 36% reduction of heart attack risk, a figure arrived at through use of relative risk reduction from 3 to 2%.
  • The HPS study has 26% drop out rate prior to the beginning of the trial (which also demonstrated a 1% improvement with treatment), so that those with significant side effects were functionally excluded from the study.

While no study has ever shown any association between the degree of cholesterol lowering and beneficial outcomes described in terms of absolute risk reduction (likely because they would be perceived as insignificant), the adverse effects are not only always presented in these terms, but are also minimized through the technique of splitting common side effects up into multiple different categories to minimize the apparent incidence.

These side effects are real and common and include “increased rates of cancer, cataracts, diabetes, cognitive impairment and musculoskeletal disorders”.  Their paper focuses on three primary adverse effects, all of whichare likely to land you in the “sorry to have thought I would be better safe than sorry” category.

Cancer

In at least four trials, statistically significant increases in cancer incidence was found, and handily dismissed by all authors as insignificant because they claimed “no known potential biological basis” is known.  This may be because the authors are still thinking of cancer as a genetic time bomb that has nothing to do with mitochondrial dysfunction, loss of lipid integrity, or environmental exposures.

With statistically significant increases in cancer incidence and deaths, in some trials, the minimal cardiovascular benefit is far eclipsed by the cancer mortality. In one of the only long-term trials, there was a doubling of the incidence of ductal and lobular breast cancer in women taking statins for more than ten years. One of many reasons that women should never be treated with these medications.

Myopathy

As one of the more well-known side effects of statins, muscle breakdown and associated pain, or myopathy has also been obscured in the literature.  Despite an incidence up to 40% in the first months of treatment, researchers only catalogue patients who had muscular symptoms in addition to elevations in a blood measure called creatine kinase (CK) at ten times normal for two measures (not 9.9, not 8, and not one measure).

In fact, a 2006 study in the Journal of Pathology found that statin therapy induces ultrastructural damage in skeletal muscle in patients without myalgia,” indicating that statin-associated muscle damage may be a universal, albeit mostly subclinical problem for the millions put on them.

Central Nervous System Dysfunction

Linked to suicide in men, depression including postpartum, and cognitive dysfunction, low cholesterol is not a desirable goal for the average psychiatric patient, aka half of the American population.

It turns out that 25% of the total amount of cholesterol found in the human body is localized in the brain, most of it in the myelin sheath that coats and insulates the nerves:

 “It has been estimated that up to 70% of the brain cholesterol is associated with myelin. Because up to half of the white matter may be composed of myelin, it is unsurprising that the brain is the most cholesterol-rich organ in the body. The concentration of cholesterol in the brain, and particularly in myelin, is consistent with an essential function related to its membrane properties. “[i]

The cell membrane, specifically, is highly vulnerable to damage by statins:

“The cell membrane is an 8 nanometer thick magical pearly gate where information, nutrients, and cellular messengers are trafficked through protein gates supported of phospholipids and their polyunsaturated fatty acids. Cholesterol and saturated fat provide essential rigidity in balance with other membrane components. Without them, the membrane becomes a porous, dysfunctional swinging gate. In a self-preservational effort, cholesterol supports production of bile acids, integral to the breakdown and absorption of consumed essential dietary fats.” Source

By extension, behavioral and cognitive adverse effects may be the manifestation of this fat-based interference.  Diamond and Ravnskov state:

A low serum cholesterol level has also been found to serve as a biological marker of major depression and suicidal behavior, whereas high cholesterol is protective [54–57]. In a study by Davison and Kaplan [58], the incidence of suicidal ideation among adults with mood disorders was more than 2.5-times greater in those taking statins. Moreover, several studies have shown that low cholesterol is associated with lower cognition and Alzheimer’s disease and that high cholesterol is protective.

A review article called Neuropsychiatric Adverse Events Associated with Statins: Epidemiology, Pathophysiology, Prevention and Management discusses the state of the literature around the intersection between mental health and cholesterol control. Despite generally dismissing a strong signal for concerning psychiatric adverse events, the article seems to conclude the following:

  • Severe irritability, homicidal impulses, threats, road rage, depression and violence, paranoia, alienation, and antisocial behavior; cognitive and memory impairments; sleep disturbance; and sexual dysfunction have all been reported in case series and national registries of those taking statin medications.  Sound like the laundry list of rapidly spoken side effects at the end of a drug commercial? To anyone with a history of or current psychiatric symptoms, the role of these now ubiquitous medications should be appreciated.
  • The signal for lipophilic statins – simvastatin and atorvastatin – was stronger which makes mechanistic sense since these medications penetrate the brain and brain cholesterol deficiency has been implicated in bipolar, major depression, and schizophrenia.

Of course, none of these findings nor their suppression should be surprising because there is no pharmaceutical free lunch, and because Americans are so accustomed to interfacing with human health through the lens of a one pill-one ill model. We are yanking on that spider web and expecting only one thread to pull out.  This perspective would be less disturbing if it didn’t serve as the foundation for medical practice, determined by boards such as the American College of Cardiology and The American Heart Association , the majority of whom have extensive ties to the pharmaceutical industry. An industry that has paid out 19.2 billion dollars for civil and criminal charges in the last 5 years alone.

So, the next time you hear of a doctor recommending a cholesterol-lowering intervention, tell him you’ll take that 1% risk and spare yourself cancer, cognitive dysfunction, myopathy, and diabetes. And then go have a 3 egg omelette WITH the yolks.

The Physical Side of Stress

I found this article online and I believe it needs to be shared. We as a society have too much stress and do not do enough to relieve our anxieties. What I find so fascinating about this article is that it talks about what the body goes through when stressed and the diseases it can cause.

Hope you enjoy the read.

Stress can take a toll on our health causing anything from eating disorders to heart diseases.

From 75 to 90 percent of primary care visits are for stress-related issues.

Lower your stress by finding time for both exercise and relaxation each day.

Although female sex hormones and brain chemistry offer some protection from stress, women are more deeply affected by the physical and emotional effects of stress than men.

Women’s reactions to stress are rooted in their body chemistry. Men have higher androgen levels, while women have higher estrogen levels, says Paul J. Rosch, MD, FACP, president of the American Institute of Stress (AIS).

“Their brains are also wired differently,” says Dr. Rosch, who is also a clinical professor of medicine and psychiatry at New York Medical College, and honorary vice president of the International Stress Management Association. “Women tend to react to stress differently than men. They don’t respond with the fight or flight response — they’re more apt to negotiate.”

Stress: How Women Are Affected

The effects of the natural anti-stress hormone oxytocin, produced during childbirth, breastfeeding, and in both sexes during orgasm, are enhanced by estrogen and reduced by testosterone.

This helps women more than men, Rosch says. And nurturing activities boost oxytocin levels in women.

The catch-22 is that women need more oxytocin than men to maintain their emotional health. For example, Rosch explains, women are more negatively affected when they’re not touched, and also feel more stress than men in relationships.

According to the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP), stress is an expression of the body’s natural instinct to protect itself. While this may warn a woman of immediate danger, like a fast-approaching car, prolonged stress effects can negatively affect your physical and emotional health.

“Our stress response was exquisitely honed over millions of years as a protective mechanism,” said Rosch. “That was OK for our ancestors who ran into saber-toothed tigers. The tragedy is that today, it’s not that, but hundreds of things like getting stuck in traffic jams. Our bodies respond in the same unfortunate fashion, with hypertension, strokes, and ulcers.”

 

 

Stress Effects: The Physical Side

“Your stress may vary, but if you have stress with your work, your kids, your neighbors, and marriage all at once, that’s a big deal,” said Lori Heim, MD, president-elect of the AAFP and a hospitalist (a family physician who works only in a hospital) at Scotland Memorial Hospital in Laurinburg, N.C. “In women, I see this in changes in menstrual patterns — nothing else is going on except a huge increase in stress, and all of a sudden, they may be losing their hair or having menstrual irregularities, and everything points to stress as a factor.”

The AIS reports that some surveys show 75 to 90 percent of visits to primary care physicians are for stress-related complaints. According to the National Women’s Health Information Center, the effects of stress on women’s physical and emotional health can range from headaches to irritable bowel syndrome. Specific stress effects include:

  • Eating disorders. Anorexia and bulimia are 10 times more common in women than in men, says Rosch, and this may have something to do with stress levels. Like depression, this illness has been linked to low levels of serotonin and is often treated with serotonin-boosting antidepressant drugs.
  • Stomach ailments. Stress can make you reach for junk or comfort foods, or upset your stomach to the point that you feel like you can’t eat. Common stress-related stomach troubles include cramps, bloating, heartburn, and even irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). Depending on how you respond, these can lead to weight loss or weight gain.
  • Skin reactions. Stress can lead to breakouts and even itchy rashes and hives in some people.
  • Emotional conditions. From being in a blue or irritable mood to more serious mental issues like depression, your emotional health suffers when there’s stress in your life. Women are better than men at hiding some emotions like anger and aggressiveness because the parts of their brains responsible for these emotions are larger than men's, but depression strikes women twice as often as men, says Rosch, adding, “The emotional effects of stress on women can range from postpartum depression after pregnancy to depression after menopause.”
  • Sleep problems. Trouble falling or staying asleep is common in women affected by stress, and this is particularly counterproductive since a good night’s sleep can help ease stress.
  • Concentration difficulty. Stress makes it hard to focus and be effective in your responsibilities at home or work, and that can compound your problems if your stress comes from your job to begin with.
  • Heart disease. The stress of competing in today’s job market has increased women’s heart disease risk, Rosch says. Stress can negatively affect the entire cardiovascular system, and lead to high blood pressure, stroke, and heart attack.
  • Lowered immune response. One of the more complicated physical reactions to stress is your body’s lessened ability to fight off disease, whether it’s a cold or a flare-up of a chronic condition.
  • Cancer. Some studies have suggested a link between stress and the development of breast and ovarian cancer. In one study, researchers found that the risk of breast cancer was increased by 62 percent in women who had experienced more than one highly stressful life event, like divorce or the death of a spouse.

Stress Effects: Stress-Lowering Techniques

Research presented at the most recent Western Psychological Association meeting found that 25 percent of happiness hinges on how well you handle stress. And what was the most important stress management strategy? Planning — or anticipating what's going to stress you out — and having the tools in place to tamp down the tension. Here are some more tips for managing stress:

  • Improve your diet. By eating well-balanced meals and skipping junk food, you can improve your physical well-being and, in turn, your emotional health.
  • Make time for exercise. “We do know that exercise is a phenomenal way of dealing with stress and depression,” said Dr. Heim. Research shows that getting active can lift your spirits and increase the release of endorphins, a natural chemical associated with mood.
  • Find fun ways to relax. Connect with family and friends and people you enjoy being around. Rediscover favorite hobbies; recent studies link a resurgence in knitting and needlepoint to their stress-reducing effects. Other popular stress-busters include yoga, meditation, and tai chi.

Finally, if you feel overwhelmed by stress and its effects, talk to your doctor about ways to deal with it. You may learn new techniques for managing stress on your own, or you may find that therapy with a mental health professional will better help you to get it all under control.

This Article is from: http://www.everydayhealth.com/womens-health/physical-side-of-stress.aspx

-Alex The Doc