Study: Full-Fat Dairy, Meat Reduces Risk Of Prostate Cancer

Sometimes you just have to question the logic behind some of the things that the so-called "experts" regarding health and nutrition propose to allegedly make people healthier. We've recently heard such off-the-wall ideas like a low-fat milk-making cow to help deal with obesity and disease--as if it's the FAT in the milk that is the real health threat!

But we've learned that low-fat dairy consumption can lead to infertility among other things, so removing the fat from dairy may not be such a good idea after all. And new research underscores the importance of eating full-fat dairy products to protect against one of the most dreaded diseases in the world--CANCER!

We already know that a high-fat, low-carb diet is an excellent preventative treatment for brain cancer, pancreatic cancer, esophageal cancer, kidney cancer, breast cancer, and prostate cancer. But now researchers from the University of Hawaii have evidence from a large-scale study that says consuming full-fat dairy products is a much better option for warding off prostate cancer than the reduced-fat and fat-free dairy options.

Lead researcher Dr. Song-Yi Park, from the Cancer Epidemiology Program, Cancer Research Center of Hawaii at the Honolulu-based University of Hawaii, examined data from the Multiethnic Cohort Study which took place from 1993-2002 featuring 82,483 men who were 45 years old and older at the beginning of the study. Detailed records of what each of the study members ate were recorded for Dr. Park to observe.

Overall, there were 4,404 instances of prostate cancer which the researchers determined were not caused by the consumption of calcium or vitamin D of the dairy products the study participants ate. Also, the total volume of dairy products was also not a factor in the development of prostate cancer. This was true across all racial and ethic groups.

Instead, Dr. Park and his researchers noticed something rather peculiar about the KIND of dairy products that were ingested by the study participants and how that impacted their risk for developing prostate cancer. It turns out that there was a 12 percent DECREASE in the risk of developing prostate cancer for those who drank whole milk. Conversely, there was a 16 percent INCREASE in the risk of developing prostate cancer for those who drank 2% or skim milk.

In other words, it is the FAT in the milk and dairy products consumed that provide protection against prostate cancer, which flies in the face of everything we've ever heard about diet and health. With over 500,000 new cases of prostate cancer with another 200,000 deaths annually (and the statistics have been steadily rising since the early 1990s), this research may burst the bubble on the low-fat lie we have been forced to believe for the past thirty years!

This study appeared in the October 8, 2007 issue of the American Journal of Epidemiology.

Of course, Dr. Park's research is not going to be easily accepted by those who buy into the whole notion that a low-fat diet is protective against various forms of cancer and other health ailments. But this new large-scale study is certainly going to challenge the wisdom of that hypothesis.

The researchers do admit that the only potential downside to their study is the fact that it relied on self-reporting data provided by the study participants about what they ate which has the potential for inaccuracies from poor memory of the foods consumed. But that's just a smokescreen that will be thrown up to challenge the remarkable findings.

Incidentally, Dr. Park also published a study last month that looked at the issue of prostate cancer and how meat consumption is not necessarily a contributor to it, as detailed in this Reuters story. Hoo boy, somebody better not let PETA know about this!

Dr. Park and his researchers used data from that same Multiethnic Cohort Study to see if the specific kind of fat made a difference in the prostate cancer risk. They looked at total fat, saturated fat, monounsaturated fat, and polyunsaturated fat as well as n-3 and n-6 fatty acids. The dietary cholesterol, meat (broken down to reflect total amount of meat, red meat, processed meat, and poultry) and fish consumed, and the amount of fats from meat were all recorded for the men in the study.

Of the 4,404 men who developed prostate cancer, 29 percent of them had advanced tumors. Interestingly, the researchers said the type of fat and meat consumed showed NO ASSOCIATION WITH OVERALL PROSTATE CANCER RISK or tumor development.

The researchers put it succinctly this way: "We found little evidence of any relation of fat and meat intake with prostate cancer risk within any of the four racial/ethnic groups."

It can't get much plainer than that!

This study was published in the September 15, 2007 issue of the International Journal of Cancer.

When asked to elaborate on the findings of the study, Dr. Park was cautious about recommending a high-fat diet which he claims begins a chain of events that could lead to cancer.

"Although diet is likely to influence prostate cancer risk, the intake of total and saturated fat do not appear to be important contributors," he exclaimed. "However, because high intake of fat can lead to obesity as well as other cancers, the consumption of high fat foods should be limited."

While I can appreciate the veracity of these findings, I must respectfully disagree with Dr. Park regarding the relationship of fat consumption to obesity. As long as you keep your carbs reduced, a high-fat diet is not harmful for an increase in obesity and obesity-related diseases. I would highly recommend anyone who believes otherwise to pick up a copy of Good Calories, Bad Calories to find out why.

The above commentary regarding fat notwithstanding, Dr. Park is at least shining a light on the faulty research that has long been allowed to reign as the gospel truth because it has never been challenged. The inconsistency of the data should be the impetus for even more research that should provide more answers about the role of meat and fat in a healthy diet rather than making ludicrous dietary recommendations based on such archaic and what now seems to be irrelevant research.

Dr. Park agrees.

"Our findings did not support any association between intake of fat, fatty acids, cholesterol, or various meats and prostate cancer risk," he concluded.

Share your appreciation with Dr. Song-Yi Park for this sound research into the positive and protective role of fat as it relates to health by e-mailing spark@crch.hawaii.edu.

Why Does Viactiv Calcium Contain Sugar?

This supposedly healthy supplement wallops you with excess sugar

I enjoy participating in product surveys and personal evaluations of the latest products because I feel like it gives me the ability in some small way to influence what actually comes to the marketplace. While I am the first to admit that I'm not your "normal" person when it comes to evaluating most food and health products because I am livin' la vida low-carb, it most certainly gives me great pleasure to represent those of us who are attempting to live a healthier lifestyle.

Recently I was asked a series of questions about whether I took vitamin supplements or not. HA! Ya think! Of course, as many of you know I take a big handful of pills daily (no prescription drugs, mind you, just supplements!) ranging from a multivitamin to calcium, Co-Q 10 to fiber, fish oil tablets to chromium picolinate and much more!

Yes, I LOVE my supplements and wouldn't think of living another day of life without them. Even if they're as useless to me as a placebo, the fact of the matter is they make ME feel better about my health. And that's all that matters.

When the survey company realized I qualified for their survey about supplementation, they asked me if I would be interested in giving them feedback about a specific product that they would mail for me to try--VIACTIV! Was this some kind of joke? I had never thought much about this particular supplement because it has a slogan that states "Active Nutrition for Women by Women."

Ooooookay, since I'm not a woman, why would I take this supplement? Perhaps that was the purpose of having a male survey participant taking this product to see if they can branch off into the other half of the market to increase their portion of the revenue pie so to speak. Fair enough and I was happy to give them my HONEST feedback. They ALWAYS get that!

So the package arrives in the mail this week and they ask me to stop taking any multivitamins, Vitamin K, Vitamin D, and Calcium supplements immediately and replace it with up to 3 of the Viactiv Calcium Milk Chocolate Soft Chews daily instead. The allure of this product is that you can enjoy a delicious way to get your calcium without the "big chalky pills" that are generally associated with calcium supplements.

There's no doubt in my mind that getting adequate amounts of calcium is important for anyone and everyone living a healthy lifestyle. Some people can get enough of it in their diet, but others of us choose to bump that level up with calcium carbonate supplements. So why not do it using a tasty chocolate soft chew, right? Sounds logical enough.

Well, there was just one problem with the Viactiv: the list of ingredients! As I do with ANYTHING I put inside my mouth these days, I turned to the nutritional label on this "healthy supplement" product to see what I would be ingesting. I immediately got completely bug-eyed at what I saw and decided right then and there that there was no way on God's green Earth I would be taking these Viactiv chews for my calcium intake.

Why? Read my response to the survey people today:

"The first ingredient is corn syrup.

The second ingredient is high-fructose corn syrup.

The fourth ingredient is sugar.

Three out of the first four ingredients are what I consider poison for my body. I am not diabetic, but I am on a healthy lifestyle change where I avoid sugar and corn syrup to keep my body weight low and my blood sugar regulated."

That's right, this health supplement is LOADED with sugar, corn syrup and high-fructose corn syrup! EEEEK! Why don't they just tell people to grind up their calcium pills and melt them in the microwave on top of a Snickers bar instead?! It would be just as healthy for them as these soft chews and they'd still get their calcium by golly. Sheeez!

You know, these are the kind of products that make me just wanna hurl when I see them because they fool people into thinking they are doing something GOOD for their bodies because after all "it has calcium in it so you are helping your bones" or they market it as "for those people who care about their health." GAG ME! When the product has as much sugar in it as Viactiv Calcium Milk Chocolate Soft Chews do, then it is anything BUT healthy in my book.

Being the helpful person that I am, I suggested to the survey people that the makers of Viactiv need to consider an alternative to their product that DOESN'T contain sugar. Hmmm, that's a thought!

"Perhaps Viactiv would consider making a sugar-free version of their soft chew vitamins made with sucralose, acesulfame potassium, erithyritol, and/or oligofructose instead of sugar and corn syrup. Just avoid using the sugar alcohol maltitol because it can cause an unpleasant laxative effect.

I'm sorry I could not participate in the survey, but the thought of eating all that sugar was quite repulsive to me. Come up with a sugar-free version and I'm ALL OVER IT! :) THANKS!"

Wanna know what's ironic about all of this? Guess who the parent company for Viactiv is? It's McNeil Nutritionals! Does that company ring a bell with anyone? Come on, think hard. Okay, I'll let you off the hook because you won't believe this when I tell you.

McNeil Nutritionals is the same company that makes, markets, and manufactures the most famous artificial sweetener available today--can you believe it's SPLENDA?! Isn't this so ironic that the same company behind Splenda feels the need to load up their "healthy" vitamin supplement product with sugar, corn syrup, and high-fructose corn syrup?! UGH! What's wrong with this picture?!

Get a clue, McNeil Nutritionals! Start making Viactiv with a Splenda/ACE-K blend and I betcha it'll taste just as good. But even better than that is it will be much healthier for people who are livin' la vida low-carb and diabetic, too!

Don't you wonder sometimes whether these big companies think at all?

Why don't we express our concerns and make our suggestions about Viactiv directly to McNeil Nutritionals by using their contact page. Let them hear from YOU! :)

What's The Real Deal On 'Calorie Burner' Enviga?

Coca-Cola wanted me to be one of the first to try Enviga

Earlier this month, I blogged about the very peculiar secrecy about the new energy drink called Enviga. This brand new beverage expected to be released nationwide in January 2007 as a joint venture between Nestle and The Coca-Cola Company has generated quite a bit of speculation about what the real contents of this product they are nicknaming "The Calorie Burner."

Because of the confusion about the product just two months from being released in the United States, a marketing representative from Coke contacted me last week to see if I would like to sample Enviga for myself. I agreed, but was cautious about the contents of what they were sending to me. What would be in this energy soda? Would it have the sugar I was concerned about? If not, what would it be sweetened with? These were just a few of the questions going through my head as I waited on the arrival of the package.

When it arrived this week in a bubbly, bright-green box, I was greeted by those three tall skinny cans you see in that picture at the top of this post. My wife Christine said they looked like beer cans, but I explained to her that shape of the 12-ounce can is typical for the "energy" drinks these days. "Oh," she said.

Before I dared to try one of these Enviga drinks, I read the label like a hawk and went immediately to the nutritional information. Guess what I looked for first? Yep, it was sugar. How much sugar does Enviga have? Would you believe there was ZERO sugar? As in zilch, zippo, not a bit! WOO HOO! I'm likin' the sound of that!

So then I went to the ingredients list to see what kind of artificial sweeteners that were used--once you get past all the healthy ingredients they put in this stuff (which I'll talk about in a moment), you see what they use to sweeten it. Aspartame is the third from the last ingredient and acesulfame potassium (ACE-K) is the very last ingredient. While most people who are livin' la vida low-carb don't care much for aspartame (at least I don't!), it doesn't look like they use a large amount of it in this product. I still wish they could have sweetened it with Splenda, but we already know about Coke's position on using that sugar substitute. But that's another story.

What about those "healthy" ingredients that supposedly help burn calories in this zero carb, 5-calorie per can drink? They include the following for each can of Enviga:

90mg of epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG) from concentrated natural green tea extracts. EGCG is a powerful antioxidant that combines well with caffeine to work wonders with your metabolism.

100mg of caffeine, the same amount found in a cup of coffee, to further enhance the calorie-burning process.

200mg of calcium to help people meet their daily need for strong, healthy bones.

According to the verbage on the can, not everyone will benefit from drinking Enviga.

"Three cans per day of Enviga have been shown to increase calorie burning by 60-100 calories in HEALTHY NORMAL WEIGHT 18-35 YEAR OLDS. Individual results may vary. Drinking more than three cans per day will not have an additional effect." (bold and capitalized are MY emphasis)

So, basically children, middle-aged and older adults, overweight and obese as well as people with any health problem don't need to drink Enviga to experience the "calorie burning" phenomena because it won't work in them. That's what Coke is saying right there on their packaging! They may not say it that explicitly, but it can certainly be inferred from that strange disclaimer on the can. And don't even think about trying to drink MORE than three cans in a day to burn more calories. It doesn't work that way, according to Coke. Okeydokey!

Coke says the ingredients in Enviga are recognized as "safe" by the FDA. What are those ingredients? I'm glad you asked. In the order from top to bottom on the can, they are:

Carbonated Water, Calcium Lactate, Concentrated Green Tea From Tea Leaves, Citric Acid, Natural Flavors, Phosphoric Acid, Potassium Sorbate and Potassium Benzoate (to protect taste), Aspartame, Caffeine, and Acesulfame Potassium

I like the heavy emphasis on the calcium and green tea and less on the sweeteners and caffeine. That is better than most of the energy drinks out on the market today which are loaded with caffeine and sugar that are decidedly unhealthy for you.

You probably want to know the answer to the $100,000 question--HOW DOES IT TASTE? They were kind enough to send me one of each of the flavors, including Berry, Peach and Green Tea. I drank all three of them for myself over several hours to give you my honest evaluation of each one.

So I took a big swig of the GREEN TEA flavor...



I really didn't know what to expect, so I was bracing myself. After an intial reaction to the less-than-sweet taste of the product (which is a good thing since most diet drinks these days are WAY too sweet), I liked it. The more I drank it, the better it tasted. I could feel a slight build-up of something on my tongue while drinking it, but the taste was pleasant enough to drink to the bottom of the can.

The same could be said about the PEACH flavor, although I am not a fan. Not bad, though, but my wife turned her nose up after one sip. She wasn't impressed, but she's used to drinking sugary sodas anyway.

Then I saved what I thought would be the best one for last, the BERRY flavor. Little did I know...



Puck-a-roo, what is that bittersweet wang in this flavor that made my eyeballs feel like popping out of their sockets?! It plumb made my face turn into Popeye the Sailor Man! Yuck-yuck-yuck! I think putting some spinach in this can would have made it taste better than this. But I will admit, it slowly (VERY SLOWLY!) got more tolerable as I drank it to the very bottom of the can. But watch out for that first swallow, it's a doozy! 8-O

When Coke rolls this product out in full force in January 2007, look for the distinctive sleek cans in individual, 6-packs and 12-packs. Each can of Enviga will have a suggested retail price of $1.29-1.49.

Obviously, there are very high hopes for Enviga and it should sell well thanks to the marketing muscle that both The Coca-Cola Company and Nestle will provide for it. If people don't expect too much out of the product and the alleged "calorie burning" hype that has surrounded it so far, then it may have a shot at reaching that target audience of people desiring a drink for their healthy lifestyle. People wanting to lose weight shouldn't put their hope in this drink.

I certainly don't see anything wrong with people on a healthy low-carb lifestyle drinking this product as part of their ongoing health and exercise plan since we all need to be consuming more green tea in our diets. This unique product may be exactly what you need to get more EGCG in your body to do the incredible thermogenesis process to invigorate your metabolism. And that would be a GREAT thing, don't ya think?!

A special THANK YOU to Coca-Cola for allowing me to try their Enviga product before it hits the shelves and share what the real deal is on this new product. I think most people will appreciate their attempts to provide a healthier alternative to the HFCS-laden garbage that has become the staple of the soft drink industry. Creating Enviga is a step in the right direction and I applaud Coke and Nestle for their efforts.

For more information on Enviga, visit Enviga.com.