Dr. Arturo M. Volpe

When it comes to drugs we think are safe, aspirin has to be at the top of the list. It’s been around forever and, yes, we all know it can cause ulcers if taken to excess, but no one thinks of it as dangerous. Can it actually cause cancer?

This is exactly what a recent study seems to imply. The study published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute (June 1, 2005, Vol. 97, No. 11: 805-12) evaluated data on some 114,000 women aged 22 to 85 who participated in the California Teachers Study.

Researchers concluded that women who took an aspirin a day for five years or longer suffered a dramatic increase in non-hormone-sensitive breast cancer. Not only that, the study concluded that women who took ibuprofen every day for the same period also experienced a rise in breast cancer rates, in this case of all types of breast cancer.

The first to be surprised were the researchers themselves, who had expected to discover another hidden benefit of these drugs. University of Southern California researcher Sarah Marshall stated: “We were expecting ibuprofen to reduce the risk, and the same for aspirin.” Although the American Cancer Society issued a statement suggesting the results of this study may be due to chance, this seems unlikely considering the very large size of the population analyzed.

From a natural medicine point of view there has never been a need for daily aspirin or ibuprofen and, in fact, certain types of digestive enzymes taken between meals seem to do everything these medications do – except better. A detailed discussion of the benefits of enzymes can be found in the book The Aspirin Alternative, by Michael Loes, MD available from www.amazon.com.

But could enzymes also cause some kind of mischief with long-term use? The question is worth raising although the answer is most likely to be negative because in every direction we look enzymes seem to work by strengthening the immune system, reducing inflammation, and promoting recovery from injury. A different, but related type of enzymes is being used as the critical component of a non-toxic cancer treatment program that has been validated by research. If you are interested in learning more about enzyme therapy in cancer I suggest you visit www.dr-gonzalez.com.

Tags: Cancer, Immune System
Comments Off on An aspirin a day causes breast cancer?

Many of us remember what seemed at the time to be an isolated case of an autism epidemic in the early 1990’s in Brick Township, New Jersey. At first, contaminated drinking water was the Number One suspect because chemical wastes dumped in the town’s landfill over a period of years had contaminated the city’s drinking water with the chemicals bromoform, chloroform, and tetrachloroethylene.

However, a detailed analysis conducted by scientists from the U.S. Government concluded that the level of these chemicals in water was simply not sufficient to have damaged the nervous systems of developing infants of even fetuses.

When the Brick Township autism epidemic merged into a national epidemic many of us forgot about it or concluded that maybe it wasn’t really any different from what was going on nationwide.

However, new research is sparking a renewed interest in the Brick Township story. As it turns out, in reaching their conclusions the government scientists only analyzed the effects of each chemical on its own whereas, quite obviously, exposure was to all three of them at the same time.

Carol Reinisch, an expert in chemical-induced neurotoxocity, wondered if looking at these chemicals together might tell a different story. Her lab started to research this combination using surf clam embryos as models. The reason why research done on embryonic development of clams is considered valid for humans is that the most basic early nervous system development is the same across all species.

Her findings are truly disturbing. When tested individually or in pairs, these chemicals produce no damage, even at much higher concentrations than those found in the water at Brick Township. However, when all three are present at the same time they alter nervous system development. To read about this research go to http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/docs/2005/113-6/forum.html#trip.

To more conclusively establish whether these chemicals actually caused the autism epidemic, the study should be repeated using some type of mammal.

This type of study does make me wonder what exactly is going on throughout our country and the world. A brand new study that analyzed ten samples of umbilical cord blood in the U.S. found 287 chemicals, including 209 never before detected in cord blood. These chemicals included mercury, fire retardants, pesticides, and Teflon. Find a detailed report about this study at http://www.ewg.org/reports/bodyburden2/newsrelease.php.

Knowledge is often the first step towards recovery and the new website www.scorecard.org offers some interesting data. You can go there and find the environmental contaminants that are most prevalent in your area, as well as how your county stacks up against the rest of the country. Predictably, Harris County doesn’t look too good.

Tags: Autism, Chemicals & Environmental Issues, Immune System
Comments Off on New evidence on harm from chemical mixtures

Excessive or uncontrolled appetite may be contributing to the obesity epidemic in our country more that anyone seems willing to recognize. Try telling someone who is hungry all the time that he or she should eat less and exercise more. What do you think is likely to happen?

Realistically, what can you do if you never feel like you had enough to eat? How should you deal with your child who constantly asks for more food even a few minutes after a full meal?

To understand what is going on in these situations, it is important to realize that satiety – or the feeling that we have had enough to eat – does not come from the stomach being full. In fact the stomach will stretch almost endlessly! Instead, satiety comes from a series of hormonal events that send signals to the brain when we are full.

It is common knowledge in physiology that the hormones leading to satiety are triggered only when there is enough protein in a meal or snack. If you are not convinced of this, experiment on yourself. Try having a pure carbohydrate snack when you are hungry, for example chips or even a “healthy” snack such as a bowl of fruit, and see what happens to your appetite. Another time try having an egg or two and observe the difference. Also take note of how long it takes each time before youíre hungry again.

Another way to look at this is to ask yourselves when was the last time you saw someone bingeing on hard-boiled eggs. By comparison, how many times have you seen people binge on chips or popcorn, the ultimate high-carb foods?

Scientists have found that many common diets such as the Atkins diet, The Zone, and the South Beach Diet lead to an increase in protein consumption from the common 10-20% in the average American diet to 30-40% of total calories. Recent research indicates that it is this increase in protein that leads to the dietsí success in inducing weight loss, in spite of no overall caloric restriction (Lancet 2004; 364: 897-9).

What happens is that by increasing protein the satiety mechanism starts to work as it should and people just naturally eat less. Although the diets focus primarily on carbohydrate restriction, it seems to be the higher protein content that is responsible for the weight loss benefit.

Scientists recently tested this hypothesis by concocting a diet that increased protein by cutting fat, while leaving carbs unchanged. This enabled people to start out the diet consuming the same amount of calories they had been accustomed to previously. However, the higher protein content of the diet made them feel more easily satisfied and they spontaneously reduced their overall calorie intake, leading them to lose a significant amount of weight (Am J Clin Nutr 2005; 82: 41-8).

From a practical standpoint this implies that if you are having trouble with the idea of giving up some of your favorite carbohydrates, you may want to focus instead on increasing the protein content of every meal and snack you eat. The additional protein will help you feel satisfied sooner and eat less overall.

Tags: Diet
Comments Off on High protein diets curb excessive appetite

When it comes to genetics the message that most people have been getting is that if something is inherited nothing can be done about it, except maybe taking a drug for life. It’s easy to suspect that the pharmaceutical industry has had a hand in spreading this notion, but in reality the idea that inheritance sets a predetermined outcome is untrue in most cases.

In addition to true genetic defects, which are relatively rare, there are so-called “polymorphisms” – a term often abbreviated to SNPs (Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms). These are minor genetic mutations that make certain genes less efficient at doing some of their jobs but often more efficient in other ways. SNPs do not cause disease, but they may be associated with an increased susceptibility to certain illnesses given contributing environmental factors. In reality we all have our share of SNPs. They’re probably there by design, as part of the evolutionary process.

A classic example of a SNP is the so-called “thrifty gene” that makes individuals who are descended from certain American Indian tribes highly vulnerable to diabetes and obesity
when they switch to a modern diet, although they are capable of surviving in conditions of extreme scarcity.

Researchers looking at these genetic variants and trying to correlate them with diseases such as cancer or even autism have found themselves opening a Pandora’s box with no clear end point in sight. It’s not that they didn’t find genes associated with these conditions, it’s that they found too many of them and that the correlation was often too vague to draw any clear conclusions.

According to Texas A&M biochemistry professor Wallace McKeehan, “there are just a mind-boggling number of mutations associated with cancer.” This is leading some researchers to redirect their focus towards a newly emerging field known as epigenetics. See more on research on cancer and genetics at http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/3241933.

Epigenetics looks at the interaction between genes and the environment. As it turns out, environmental factors – including diet or chemicals in food, water or air – interact with genes by affecting a process called methylation, whereby “switches” on genes can be turned on or off by adding or taking away tiny compounds known as “methyl groups.”

It now appears that the interaction between genes and the environment has a much stronger impact in determining health events than genetic factors alone.

Much of our knowledge of epigenetics originated from research on identical twins who are born with exactly the same genes, but as time goes by develop growing differences and may end up becoming susceptible to different diseases later in life. To read more about epigenetic studies in twins go to http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/05/health/05gene.html (registration required).

The difference between the old notion that genes predetermined health and the new understanding of genes interacting with the environment is that when it comes to environmental factors there is a great deal we can control. For example, diet becomes a factor that can impact expression of certain genes eventually leading to – or preventing – genetically associated illnesses (as in the example of the Indians above).

Likewise, detoxification programs can compensate for a genetic susceptibility to accumulate toxins. The reason why, for example, so many children with autism improve with detoxification may be that they are genetically more vulnerable than others to toxins and that genetic switches are turned back “on” once the toxins are released.

Whatís most shocking to me about epigenetic research is the finding that detrimental effects of environmental toxins can be inherited for multiple generations. For example, researchers exposed a group of pregnant rats to a pesticide known to cause reduced fertility in males. Predictably, their male offspring suffered low fertility rates. However, their female offspring were fine and care was taken to ensure that they experienced no further exposure to pesticides.

Later on, these female rats whose mothers had been exposed to pesticides were mated to male rats with no history of pesticide exposure. Surprisingly, their male offspring experienced low fertility and this scenario was repeated one more time in third-generation offspring. The fourth generation of male rats finally reverted back to normal fertility, proving that the genes themselves had not been altered (Science, Vol 308, June 3, 2005, pgs 1466-1469).

An analogy to help us understand this study might be a theoretical case of a woman developing breast cancer because her great-grandmother was exposed to a cancer-causing chemical when pregnant.

Although this study was performed on rats, it probably applies to humans as well. It also correlates with studies showing that women whose mothers had been smokers have children with an increased rate of asthma even if they never smoked themselves. For more information, visit http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journals/esthag-w/2005/jun/science/pt_toxins.html.

The implications of this type of research could be momentous considering the ever-growing number of potentially toxic chemicals to which we are exposed. The next study Iíd like to see (but that will probably never happen) is one that looks at whether detoxification, vitamin supplementation, or diet change can help erase these environmental insults, thus halting the inheritance mechanism.

Tags: Autism, Chemicals & Environmental Issues
Comments Off on Emerging field of epigenetics sheds new light on mechanisms of inheritance