Soy Can Be Hazardous to Your Fertility

From Dr. Douglass

Soy saps sperm count
It appears that Darwinism has stepped in to prevent nature from allowing more soy fans to walk the earth. According to a new report in the Journal of Human Reproduction, consumption of even small amounts of soy products can lower a man's sperm concentration. Of the men in the study, those who ate the most soy had sperm counts far lower than those who reported eating no soy at all. On average, the soy eaters had 41 million fewer sperm per milliliter. The study found that the soy eaters consumed a relatively low amount of 15 soy-based foods including tofu, soy burgers, soy ice cream (yuck), soy energy bars, and even miso soup — an average of just one serving of every other day. And remember, if the vegetarian Nazis had their way, everyone would be eating soy at practically EVERY MEAL! Of course, the soy advocates are saying this reduction in sperm is no big deal (they must be women…). They claim that if you apply this 41 million sperm per milliliter reduction to a man with an average sperm count (in the range of 80 to 120 million sperm per milliliter), that a man is still left with a sperm count that's "well above" the 20 million sperm per milliliter that's the minimum count within the normal range. That's just pure rationalization in the face of the facts if you ask me. The study's lead researcher Jorge Chavarro of the Harvard School of Public Health claims that other studies have found that soy consumption actually boosts sperm counts (I doubt it). As a result, he says, "I think there is not enough evidence to reach any strong conclusion or advise men one way or the other on whether soy foods can affect their fertility." Nonsense! None of this should be a surprise. In addition to all of the other negatives about soy that I'm always telling you about, the isoflavones in soy have long been tied to infertility in animal studies. So why should humans be any different? Take my advice: steer clear of soy if you want to keep your health – or start a family.

Milk for Weight Control?

A new reason to drink milk has been receiving attention in the news recently. Although the research is still in its early stages, some studies are finding that people who consume more calcium, particularly in the form of milk and other dairy products, tend to weigh less as they age. This is good news for milk lovers. And it may even get your teen to think about reaching for a glass of milk instead of a soda the next time he or she opens the refrigerator door.

New Research on Dairy and Weight
In the August 2004 issue of the Journal of Nutrition, researchers at the University of Hawaii reported on a study that analyzed how dairy and soda consumption affect weight and body fat among a group of teenage Asian and Caucasian girls.
The girls ranged in age from 9 to 14, and consumed about one and a half servings of dairy a day-well below the recommended three servings a day. Most of the dairy consumed was in the form of milk. Girls who drank soda averaged one large (22-ounce) bottle a day.
The authors found that some of the girls who drank milk instead of soda tended to weigh less and have lower levels of body fat, but this association was only noted in the Asian girls, who were already very thin on average. Still, the more milk they drank, the greater the effect on their weight. In contrast, girls who drank large amounts of soda tended to be heavier and have more body fat.
These findings join earlier studies that have shown similar results among other age groups. When factors like age, activity level, and total calories eaten are held steady, more and more studies are indicating that children and adults who consume more dairy products and calcium tend to have lower body weights than those in comparison groups. Keeping calcium levels high also appears to help people on diets lose weight more quickly.

Another Downside to Diabetes

From Dr. Douglass:

Dear Friend,

Over the years, I've written tons of articles about the diabetes epidemic, and often it's to bring you some good news about victories in this war, or about certain vitamins (ginseng, for example) that can keep this awful disease at bay. Unfortunately, this is not one of those articles. I'm here to tell you about a new study that's found yet another downside to obesity and diabetes: infertility.

A new report recently presented at the conference of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology has concluded that the semen from diabetics actually contains damaged DNA. What's more, it appears that this damage is irreparable.

According to one of the study's authors, Dr. Con Mallidis of Queens University in Belfast, Northern Ireland, "Diabetics have a significant decrease in their ability to repair sperm DNA, and once this is damaged it cannot be restored."

Tack this on to the long list of dangers and complications of diabetes, a disease that's blossomed into a full-blown American epidemic in recent years. But the study also found that obesity (which is, of course, closely linked to diabetes) and being underweight also cause problems with sperm. A separate study discovered that males with a high body mass index produce less seminal fluid, and more abnormal sperm.

"This is not simply a coincidence," Mallidis said. "We have shown for the first time that diabetes directly affects male fertility on a molecular level."

This damaged DNA can result in some devastating and tragic reproductive consequences, including higher miscarriage rates and debilitating childhood diseases – including some pediatric cancers.

The cause of all these nightmares? Sugar, of course.

During the study, Mallidis said the researchers "found a class of compounds known as advanced glycation end products (AGEs) in the male reproductive tract" which are formed as the result of the addition of sugar, a process called glycation. Mallidis said that AGEs are dependent on lifestyle choices like diet, and play a role in the male reproductive system."

We still don't know how AGEs cause and contribute to DNA damage, but I'm willing to bet that the impact of AGEs on health may be a lot more far-reaching than just diabetes and its various complications.

For years I've told you how sugar and diabetes are joined at the hip. It's easy enough to avoid diabetes just by avoiding those sweet-tasting pitfalls. But easy or not, the epidemic keeps ballooning. And that means various complications from diabetes keep on growing too. Diabetes is associated with nerve damage, eye problems, and kidney damage – and now, apparently, irreparably mutated sperm. If that's not enough to get you to swear off Twinkies, I don't know what will.

"We must now try to develop strategies to protect sperm, and to diminish the accumulation of AGEs," said Dr. Mallidis. Such strategies could involve changes in diet, disrupting a step in the formation of AGEs, or increasing the body's protection against AGEs, possibly through the use of dietary supplements.

The problem is, things aren't getting better on the obesity front: the World Health Organization claims that the number of obese people will increase by a staggering 75 percent worldwide by 2015 – an estimated 700 million wide bodies. If Mallidis's study is correct, imagine the global health implications – not just of the increased number of diabetics, but of the exponentially higher number of children born with severe health issues (or not born at all) as a result of a global decline in the amount of viable sperm. It's a frightening thought.

Doling out the deal about diabetes,

William Campbell Douglass II, M.D.

Dr. Douglass on Stress

Don't sweat it: More bad news about stress

Dear Friend,

Sometimes, the best advice a doctor can give you is this: relax. It's no secret that stress isn't just unpleasant, but more and more studies are proving that it's actually downright dangerous to your health. In fact, when you say, "man, this stress is killing me," you could be more right than you know.

This is nothing new, but it bears repeating. I've had a particularly crazy week, and so this topic occurred to me as I tried to juggle a nearly impossible schedule. I'm sure you know exactly what I mean.

When I say "stress," it's important that I don't just mean stress with a capital "s" (i.e., losing your job, divorce, major illness, etc.). The little, gnat-like stresses that gnaw at us nearly every day and at every turn of modern life—long lines, minor workplace politics, noisy neighbors, and bad traffic—can be just as brutally devastating to your health. Like lots of bad things, it's not the ones and twos … it's that the ones and the twos that add up to fours, fives, sixes, and tens. Stress is cumulative.

Believe it or not, stress and health were linked for the first time back in the 1930s by the scientist Hans Seyle. Seyle was actually the man who first applied the term "stress" to the struggle of all forms of life to adapt to and deal with changes within their environment. Prior to Seyle, stress was little more than an engineering term. But oh, how evocative a term! Anyone who's experienced stress knows that there's no better way of describing how it can push you physically, mentally, or emotionally to the breaking point. It's likely not a coincidence that Seyle conducted his study of stress at what was one of the most trying periods in human history: the era of the Great Depression.

Seyle found that the hormone cortisol – which is linked closely to the adrenal glands that are activated by "fight or flight" responses – has a taxing affect on digestion, reproduction, the immune system and even physical growth. So much so that its long- term presence can have an incredibly negative effect on those functions, even shutting them down. Thus, sustained stress can cause a very real deterioration throughout your body, exposing you to everything from a case of the sniffles to a deadly cancer. Think you're losing hair because you're stressed out? Well, you may be right. But as doctors have known for years, stress is most deadly because of its impact on your heart. Depressed? That could be stress, too.

Getting the picture? It's everywhere, and could be the root cause of so many bad things that it's impossible to ignore. How often have I told you about supposed wive's tales being proven to be true by recent studies? It's not just in your mind that you feel "restored" or "recharged" after a vacation or a weekend getaway. You likely are feeling the restorative effects because your brain and your body are getting that needed break from stress.

So now you're thinking, "well, no kidding Dr. D – now that you've told us that day-to- day life is wearing away at our health, what exactly do you suggest I do about it?" Keep reading…


4 tips for battling stress
In addition to all of the other guidance I give you, take some time to put the following tips into your daily regimen when you can. They won't make stress go away, and they're not exactly the equivalent of a two-week Mediterranean cruise, but they'll help. Remember: it's important to battle the cumulative effects of stress, and these tips should help.

GET ANGRY!

It's OK to be annoyed; it's human. And when you bottle things up, you're just adding to the pile of cumulative stress. I'm not saying you need to flip out and scream at everyone around you, but when the going gets tough, it doesn't mean that you should just nod quietly and accept your bad luck. Tell your spouse they've upset you. Advise that co- worker that you're not fond of how they're behaving or that they're making your job more difficult. By asserting yourself and your opinion without losing control, you're actually venting stress. (Hmm…maybe that's why I'm one of the least stressed out people I know.)

SHIFT YOUR FOCUS

Get a hobby, or don't be shy about throwing yourself into the one that you already have. Don't let your schedule deny you the outlet that helps you free your mind. By concentrating your mind on the thing that brings you the most joy – whatever that may be, whether it's stamp collecting, exercise, dancing, or pottery – you're actually sloughing off stress, and giving your mind and body the time to recover. It's like a mini- vacation, and will stop the stress build up.

PUT THE CLOCK TO WORK FOR YOU

Nothing's more stressful than a deadline, and it only gets worse the closer it gets. If you can turn yourself in a better time manager, even the biggest project can be tackled with less stress. By managing your schedule, you avoid being overworked, which is often one of the most common causes of undue stress.

LAUGH OR CRY

Yup, another cliché. But like so many, it's true. Both laughing and crying are enormously effective ways to vent stress. If you've ever just busted a gut or bawled your eyes out, you know that afterwards there's often a great rush of good feeling (with a laugh) or a sense of relief (with a cry). You're human, and emotions are what make you that way. They're there for a reason: use them. Bottling them up leads to more stress. Not the usual advice I dispense, I know. But something that's always important to remember.

Taking a "chill pill" as the kids say,

William Campbell Douglass II, M.D.

August Cranky Yankee Newsletter

Avandia Warnings from House Calls by Dr. Alan Inglis
When the cure is worse than the disease

It's always with a sinking feeling that I tell you about the less-than-stellar results of drugs that have been out on the market for a while, because I realize those negative findings represent real folks who took those drugs in good faith. They followed doctor's orders to manage their diseases-and didn't understand that they were being used as guinea pigs.

A case in point involves the two popular drugs prescribed for type 2 diabetes. You've probably seen the headlines proclaiming that patients who are on either of these drugs are twice as likely to develop heart failure. Out of every 50 patients on either of these drugs, one will develop heart failure within 26 months.

There are more than 3 million diabetic patients in this country who are taking one of these prescriptions. Do the math. That's an unacceptable number of people being put at risk for heart failure.

Worse is the recent review that discovered Avandia's risks were higher than that of Actos-which I'll talk about in a minute.

While researchers knew there was a risk of heart failure associated with these drugs, they report that they didn't realize the extent of that risk. Nor, they say, did they know that the risk could occur even in the lowest dose given and among younger patients.

The risk also extends beyond patients on insulin and includes folks who were not flagged for any other heart-failure-risk factors. And even though Actos was not off the hook for higher risks, it was considered safer for insulin users compared to Avandia.

Researchers attribute the increased risk to the probability that the drugs cause fluid retention.

Unbelievably, the FDA's initial response was to dicker around, kick the dirt, and wonder if the "benefits outweigh the risks."

Apparently in its eyes, they do. But you have to read "benefits" as "profits" and "risks" as "lives."
The debate goes on about Avandia.
You have its maker, GlaxoSmithKline, kicking the ball back to the FDA regarding these newly found risks associated with their product. Take a look at this paragraph directly from the company's web site:

For some people taking Avandia, possible side effects include heart failure or other heart problems. Further information regarding potential heart-related risks is currently under review by the FDA. Talk to your doctor as FDA has made information on potential heart-related risks available to physicians on its website at www.fda.gov.

And a spokesperson for the company reportedly responded to the news of the increased risk of heart failure associated with Avandia by saying the company continues to believe in its safety. (What about Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy?)


Bickering and bull surround fate of diabetes drug

A federal drug-advisory committee got together to discuss the question of what to do about Avandia. By some appearances, it would seem that not everyone in the FDA is on the company bandwagon.

The dissenters were outnumbered, and I wasn't surprised to learn that the Big Pharma toadies won the day. They voted to recommend that the popular diabetes drug should remain on the market, despite strong evidence of its increasing heart-attack risk for diabetic patients.

I'm resigned to the fact that these FDA folks would say that the sun is a lukewarm star if their drug-company pals told them to say it. They seem to have absolutely no shame. Their justification for keeping this now more-than-questionable drug on the market? They thought that the recent studies about Avandia's inherent cardiovascular-disease risks were just too sketchy to justify yanking the drug from the market.

As I relayed to you in House Calls a couple of weeks ago, one out of every 50 patients on either Avandia or Actos will develop heart failure within 26 months. To hammer home the point that the drug is dangerous, one of the dissenters on the panel cited an estimate based on recently released studies that Avandia caused over 200,000 heart attacks and strokes over a seven-year period.

I hardly consider 200,000 heart attacks and strokes-some of them resulting in death-to be just a vague detail that can easily be dismissed! Also, bear in mind that there are many diabetics who suffer a host of health problems that can complicate even further their attempts to cope with various side effects of their disease. Now many of them take a pill that is supposed to help them but could kill them instead.

In addition, the same FDA dissenter I mentioned above estimates that for every month Avandia remains on the market 1,600 to 2,200 patients will be at risk of a heart attack or stroke.

It also seems that the FDA and GlaxoSmithKline hadn't communicated previously in order to keep their stories straight. The FDA reports that the drug company told it about these risks but that because of internal debate within the FDA (read: their fear of GlaxoSmithKline), the information never got into the hands of doctors and their patients. Meanwhile, GlaxoSmithKline continues to deny any problems with its drug.

GlaxoSmithKline, while on the one hand vehemently denying that there are any safety issues with Avandia, agreed on the other to add a "black-box" warning on the drug's label regarding the increased cardiovascular risk.

It was also revealed through agency records that Avandia has additional risks associated with it, such as liver failure and an increased risk of fractures.

But I'll bet you won't hear much about that for a while.

In the meantime, skip Avandia. There are other, safer ways to manage your diabetes. I recommend a heart-to-heart talk with your doctor. Frankly, there are very few cases of Type 2 diabetes that don't respond to careful diet and regular, vigorous exercise (including strength training with weights). Otherwise, in my opinion, metformin (Glucophage) is the preferred oral agent for diabetes. But please keep in mind that it can cause a loss of vitamins B12, folate and Coenzyme Q10, so you may need to supplement extra amounts of those nutrients.

Recipe of the Month: Quick and Easy Chocolate Pudding
A man rubbed a lamp and a genie popped out. “I can only give you one wish,”
said the genie, “so make it a good one.” The man thought for a minute and said, “Make me irresistible to women.” The genie smiled and said, “Poof, you’re a box of chocolates!”
Tools: measuring cups and spoons, mixing spoon, whisk, medium microwaveable bowl, microwave.

Ingredients:
¼ cup unsweetened cocoa powder
2 tablespoons cornstarch
1½ cups 2% milk
Sugar substitute equal to 1/3 cup sugar
1 teaspoon vanilla extract
1/8 teaspoon ground cinnamon (optional)

Directions:
Combine cocoa powder and cornstarch in the medium microwaveable bowl. Gradually whisk in the milk until mixture is well blended.
Microwave on high 2 minutes, then stir. Continue microwaving at medium-high (70% power) 3 to 4½ minutes or until thickened-stir every 1½ minutes.
Stir in sugar substitute, vanilla, and cinnamon (if desired). Let the pudding stand at least 5 minutes before serving. Stir occasionally to prevent a skin from forming on the top. Can be served warm or chilled.

Makes 4 servings @ approx. 80 calories each

Mother Nature is Cleaning up the Gene Pool?

There's been some interesting medical news lately. First came the study that showed a strong correlation between cigarette smoking and erectile dysfunction. Then came the news that Viagra impaired male fertility by making it more difficult for sperm to penetrate the egg to fertilize it. Sounds good to me--if you're stupid enough to smoke and then take Viagra to counteract the ED effects of the cigarettes, maybe you shouldn't be passing your genes on to the next generation.

Cranky Yankee April 2007 Newsletter

How nutritious is YOUR diet?

Would you believe that nutritional deficiencies are common in overfed people? Many micronutrients that help prevent disease and many of these get processed out of much of what we eat. Farmland in the US and many other parts of the world no longer contains many of the nutrients that plants used to absorb, which leaves those who consume the plants lacking in nutrition.
It has long been common knowledge that some forms of protein are more nutritious than others, but the authors of Superfoods Rx analyze the nutrition in various fruits and vegetables, showing that some provide more nutrition per calorie than others.
Most people are familiar with vitamins and minerals, the two best-known categories of micronutrients, and many have at least heard about phytonutrients. As their name says, these are nutrients found in plants. Many of these have been mentioned in the Drug-of-the-Week series in the weekly newsletter, but here’s a brief recap.

Polyphenols: antioxidants with anti-inflammatory and antiallergenic properties. Found in tea, nuts and berries.

Carotenoids: pigments found in red and yellow vegetables-includes beta-carotene, lutein, and lycopene. These function as antioxidants, protecting from cancer and helping defy the effects of aging. (A recent news item said that 60 now is the equivalent of 40 a few generations ago in terms of health and longevity. No wonder Social Security is in trouble-when it was started, very few people lived long enough to collect, or only collected for a few years. Now people collect for 20 years or more.)

Phytoestrogens: estrogen-like chemicals found in soy, whole wheat, seeds, grains and some fruits and vegetables, which play a role in hormone-related cancers (such as prostate and breast cancers.)

As the body burns food for energy, it creates free radicals-atoms that are missing an electron. In trying to regain stability by replacing that electron, these free radicals damage the cells they contact. Antioxidants neutralize free radicals, preventing cell damage. Medical research has shown that one of the major keys to longevity is the body’s ability to neutralize free radicals, because unchecked free radical activity has been conclusively linked to heart disease, cancer, diabetes, arthritis, vision problems, Alzheimer’s and premature aging.

Are you taking a cholesterol drug?

Are you feeling tired? Muscles achy? A recent ad for CoQ10 claimed that, since CoQ10 which is needed for energy and cholesterol are synthesized by the same system, people on cholesterol drugs need to supplement their CoQ10 because their body can't make enough of it.
Since it was an ad, Mr. Cranky was skeptical, so we asked his primary care doctor. She, unlike many MD's, is trained in nutrition and alternatives to drugs and surgery as well as the traditional medical practices. She hadn't made the connection before, but said that it did make sense and told Brian to add the CoQ10 to his diet.

Fit or Fat?

According to The Myth of Obesity thin people who are sedentary are not healthier than those who are labeled overweight (BMI over 25) but are fit and active. The current societal standard for "healthy weight" in the western world is much lower than it has ever been before, and the medical evidence shows that in most cases trying to maintain a weight lower than your body's natural set point leads to yo-yo dieting which is harder on the body than staying at a stable weight. There are some cases where losing weight is beneficial. Many diabetics find that losing weight makes it possible to maintain healthy blood glucose levels without insulin or medication, and it is possible in a society where food is abundant for people to pile on the pounds to the point where the extra weight stresses the bones, muscles, and other systems to near collapse. In the absence of health problems, staying active seems to improve longevity more than losing weight, and losing and then regaining the weight does appear to decrease longevity.

Recipe of the Month: Scalloped Sweet Potatoes

Tools: Medium saucepan, medium sauté pan, measuring cups and spoons, sharp knife, cutting board.

Ingredients: 2 medium sweet potatoes (about 1 pound)
¼ cup fresh orange juice
¼ cup vegetable stock or water
1 teaspoon ground allspice

Directions:In the medium saucepan place the unpeeled sweet potatoes and add enough water to cover them. Bring to a boil over high heat, then reduce the heat and simmer for 15 to 20 minutes, or until the potatoes just start to soften but are still relatively firm. Drain the water and let the potatoes cool until they are cool enough to handle.
Peel the potatoes and cut them into ½-inch-thick round slices (should produce about 16 slices.) Place 4 slices in the medium sauté pan, arranging them in a circle and overlapping the edges slightly. Repeat the pattern layering the rest of the slices. Mix the orange juice and vegetable stock (or water) and drizzle the mixture over the potatoes, then sprinkle with allspice. Cover the pan and set aside until ready to serve. May be reheated in the oven if needed.
Serves 4