Be Your Own Dentist! Heal Cavities, Gum Disease, AND Whiten Teeth With This Natural Homemade Toothpaste


While dentistry wasn’t a profession in the US until 1828, and before then little attention was paid to the health of our teeth, we’ve since done an about face. People now know how important a healthy mouth AND a good smile are. But, there is always room for improvement.

So, for those of you out there who love taking control of your health AND love to DIY- here’s an amazing natural toothpaste recipe for you using the awesome power of turmeric! Turmeric is a bright yellow spice with a peppery, warm and (somewhat) bitter flavor. It’s got a mild fragrance similar to orange and ginger, and packs a powerful punch. Long used in the Chinese and Indian systems of medicine as an anti-inflammatory agent, it has been used to treat a wide variety of conditions: flatulence, jaundice, menstrual difficulties, bloody urine, hemorrhage, toothache, bruises, chest pain, and colic. And, there’s one more benefit- it can treat inflamed gums and help to whiten teeth!


  • 1 tablespoon of coconut oil
  • 2 capsules of turmeric
  • A couple drops of peppermint oil (to desired taste/liking)


  • Add 2 capsules of turmeric to one tablespoon of coconut oil. Add a couple drops of peppermint oil and mix (you may need to play with the amount of peppermint, but start small).
  • Apply to your toothbrush and use as normal.

For those with sensitive teeth, turmeric is great for inflammation so using this on a regular basis should help to alleviate the problem. Let me know what you think if you make and use this chemical free, good for you, toothpaste recipe. And post pics in the comments!

XO- Erin
Source: Health Herbs 365

This article can be republished with attribution to authors and, keeping all links and bio intact.

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of GreenMedInfo or its staff.

Woman Shrinks Inoperable Mass and Heals Her Thyroid Disease With Cannabis Oil


(Editor’s Note: Lindsay Bunn Rogers was diagnosed with hyperthyroidism in May of 2011 and immediately put on medication. However, the medication made her feel unwell and like so many people I know, the options the medical community gave her left her feeling defeated. Armed with a strong desire to not just cover up or cut out what was going on, but to treat it and have her full life back, she did research that led her to some “outside the box” thinking. That freedom to take control of her life led her to cannabis oil and her eventual cure. Read this story and feel encouraged, there is a large and growing community of people who want more than just to medicate themselves and their loved ones. There is help and support out there! Never give up!)



“In May 2011, it was discovered through a blood test at a routine Dr. visit that I was pregnant and also displaying signs and symptoms of Hyperthyroidism . Immediately I was placed on medication to control my thyroid and that is when my problems really started. I stayed very sick on the medication and my Dr. felt my concerns of being ‘poisoned’ were over-exaggerated. I felt like I was dying, but I was afraid to go against the doctors orders as I was still suffering terribly inside from the loss of my last pregnancy. I had lost my last baby in my 5th month of pregnancy and no one had any answers ‘why’ or what had went so wrong. That kept me sad and secretly confused – I did everything ‘by the book’, there was NO REASON for the miscarriage, and no explanation of any kind except the repeated phrase ‘Only God knows why’.

PS Editor’s note: check out MY video on my cannabis experience below:

With this new diagnosis I did my own research and realized I must have been suffering from Hyperthyroidism during my last pregnancy. By not treating it correctly, the side effect was miscarriage late in pregnancy. I was NOT going to let that happen again so, I followed doctor’s orders, stayed on my medication and remained extremely sick the entire pregnancy. I was told the masses on my thyroid were growing, but intervention couldn’t happen until the baby was born. One of the masses had a high level of blood flow and the risk of bleeding to death was high so an emergency surgery was scheduled to happen within 2 weeks after delivery. My entire thyroid was covered in the masses, some even wrapping around it and it was impossible to remove the masses without removing the entire thyroid. I would be on the thyroid medicine that had kept me feeling ‘poisoned’ for THE REST OF MY LIFE. I was beyond devastated and began searching for alternatives. With each natural alternative I discussed with my doctors I was reassured there was NOTHING NATURAL ever going to fix my thyroid.

I delivered a healthy baby in Dec 27th 2011. Surgery was scheduled for Jan. 11th 2012. Days before the surgery happened, I cancelled it and RAN. I had a 6 month supply of thyroid medicine and I decided to wean myself off and see what happened. Over the next 9 months the masses continued to grow. They gotten to the point that they were choking me so, feeling defeated, I agreed to schedule the surgery and get it over with. Before surgery was scheduled, my husband offered to buy me some cannabis oil to give it a shot and see if it worked. We ordered a 7.5 gram tube from a reliable source. The first tube worked great and my husband agreed to try to purchase me a tube each month for as long as we could afford it. I had people suggesting to get up to a gram a day but, at almost $45.00 a gram there was NO WAY I could ever afford that amount. I had made my first 7.5 grams last over a month.

In October 2012, a divine intervention occurred! Friend, Peter Otoole, contacted me and invited me to Cannabis Camp- Offering to help me if I became a legal MMJ Patient. I ran for my cure straight to Michigan! He quickly got me up to a gram a day and using an infused coconut oil topically. I was feeling great in no time- The swelling was gone, the masses were shrinking and all my symptoms of thyroid disease were disappearing. In May 2013, ultrasounds concluded the masses were all stable, nothing had grew and my doctor considered my disease as ‘stable’ saying I no longer qualified for emergency surgery! I cut my daily doses of oil down to practically nothing, experimenting with how small I could dose and still have good effects. I had switched to maintenance doses of a cannabis infused coconut oil. I was only taking a small dose about once a week for the next month and then I didn’t take any oil for about 2 months after that. After being off the oil for almost 3 months, my thyroid started to swell again and the main mass started to become noticeable again.

In November 2013- GREAT NEWS… The doctor confirmed my Thyroid is functioning! Better than that, it was functioning at almost perfect levels! I was actually 5% above normal, which in his words was ‘Almost perfect, pretty much impossible and must be a FLUKE in the blood work’!

He scheduled MORE blood work and wanted to do a complete panel screen. He scheduled another ultrasound to compare the one from May. Since we were paying cash, we were waiting till after the holidays to redo the blood work and to get the ultrasound. According to the doctor, if I was a new patient, he wouldn’t even consider putting me on medication! So far, I have been off ALL the medications for almost 14 months! He can’t believe that my levels are so good! It’s the first set of perfect blood work results since this ordeal started! (Well, it’s not PERFECT but, that 5% can fluctuate so I call it perfect!)

I haven’t had any medical intervention in almost 14 months besides the scans in May so, ALL healing credit goes to CANNABIS OIL for SURE! The doctor really does think this is just a fluke and that my thyroid levels are all over the place because I’m NOT taking the meds he prescribed.

This was the same specialist that told me NOTHING ALL NATURAL was gonna HELP my thyroid- That my thyroid could NOT function properly any longer- That the masses HAD to be removed surgically with the entire thyroid, there was NO other way to treat them! He told me “STAY OFF INTERNET FOR MEDICAL ADVISE or THAT WILL BE THE DEATH OF YOU!” I LOVED it when he was writing everything down, he said ” So, the ONLY thing you have used for your thyroid in the last 14 months has been supplements over the counter”? I said -“NO. SUPPLEMENTS FROM OVER THE INTERNET!” LMAO”

Source: Prevent Disease and Facebook

This article can be republished with attribution to authors and, keeping all links and bio intact.

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of GreenMedInfo or its staff.

How Big Pharma and the Media Sell Junk Science


Here’s how to spot Big Pharma’s spin on both supplements and drugs—and where you can get the truth.

You’ve seen the headlines: “Fish Oil Supplements Can Kill!” and “New Cancer-Fighting Wonder Drug!” These days, it seems the mainstream media is always screaming about the latest study “proving” that supplements are bad and drugs are good. But more often than not, the “research” behind these headlines has been funded, manipulated, and packaged by Big Pharma.

Here are some of industry’s (and the mainstream media’s) favorite ways to distort science:

  • Publication bias. About half of all drug trials aren’t made publicly available, and positive findings are twice as likely to be published as negative findings for the same drug. So if a drug is harmful or doesn’t work, you’ll probably never hear about it. Conversely, if results are negative or can be made negative for supplements, which are thought to compete with drugs, you will certainly hear about it.
  • “Seeding” trials. Should a study designed by the marketing department really be cited as scientific evidence? Big Pharma has been known to disguise marketing schemes as legitimate drugs trials (the most well-known example of this is Vioxx’s ADVANTAGE trial). The funding of negative supplement studies is often obscured, but we can guess where the money is coming from.
  • Ghostwritten studies. Many “independent” studies are designed, conducted, and analyzed by drug companies—and then published under a physician’s name. In the case of supplements, researchers biased against supplements can readily be found, although the same names appear over and over again.
  • “Perfect” patients. Study results can also be manipulated by choosing patients who you know in advance will demonstrate the outcome desired—for example, by giving patients with no nutrient deficiencies a multivitamin, and then concluding that supplements don’t make them healthier.
  • Deceptively low doses. What’s an easy way to “prove” a dietary supplement has no impact on human health? Give it in such low doses that the result you want is guaranteed.
  • Questionable methodologies. Do you remember what you ate for dinner, every night, for the past ten years? Probably not. Yet, many studies rely on “recall”—simply asking patients about as much as five years’ worth of health habits or to self-report whether or not they complied with experiment protocols. There studies are notoriously unreliable.
  • Cherry-picking conclusions. A single study can lead to multiple—even conflicting—conclusions. Often, the media picks the most shocking conclusion, and ignores the rest. For example, when Mayor Bloomberg mandated flu shots for children under 5, he touted the vaccine’s 59% effectiveness rate. This is accurate—in a perfect, lab-controlled environment. The exact same document showed that in real-world settings, this rate tumbles to 24 to 36%.
  • Skewed meta-analyses. Meta-analyses statistically combine the data of relevant individual studies. When done correctly, they can help researchers draw comprehensive conclusions from a large, diverse body of data. However, the integrity of a meta-analysis can easily be compromised: researchers may distort results by ignoring studies that don’t agree with their hypotheses, all while hiding behind the authoritative façade of meta-analysis.
  • Tiny sample sizes. Many studies with just a few participants misleadingly claim “definitive” conclusions. But the smaller the participant pool, the less reliable the results (this is why proper meta-analyses can be so useful). Of course, many supplement studies are tiny because natural substances are not supposed to be patentable, which means that nobody will pay for a large study. This is why valid conclusions about supplements often employ the verb “may,” as in this supplement “may” improve heart health. Lab and animal studies may also provide further support for hypotheses drawn from small studies, but the FDA generally disregards them.
  • Overly brief study periods. Researchers with an agenda can toy with a study’s length or timeframe. This is a great way to trim unwanted data, or avoid reporting undesirable health effects—for example, the hundreds of studies claiming GMOs are safe focus only on very short-term exposure; the effects of long-term exposure remains unstudied. Animal studies suggest that GMOs could have epigenetic effects that may even take generations to appear.
  • Parroting press releases. In the age of instantaneous news, media outlets are eager to be the first to “get the scoop” on the latest, hottest study. In doing so, they usually simply regurgitate the study’s press release (which says what the drug company, or the researcher allied with a drug company, wants them to say) instead of spending time on independent analysis and research.
  • Reliance on Big Pharma’s advertising dollars. As newspaper and other media lose advertising to the Internet and other places, they depend heavily on drug companies (in 2012, the pharmaceutical industry spent $90 million on print advertising). Publishing articles that protect Big Pharma’s interests may be rewarded with more profits.
  • Hidden funders. University-published research is always more reliable, right? Think again: Big Food and Big Ag now fund many public and private universities. And, since the funding may be earmarked for, say, research positions, and not specific studies, rampant conflicts of interest can be easily concealed.

Armed with a critical eye, an informed reader like you can spot biases. But then how do you track down the real story?

  • Find a reliable source, such as the Life Extension Foundation (LEF). If you see a media headline or study about dietary supplements that sounds fishy, check out LEF’s website: their scientists and physicians often publish detailed analysis of the studies behind the headlines. LEF is a 501(c)3 nonprofit dedicated to finding new scientific methods to enhance and expand the healthy human life span. LEF develops research programs aimed at unlocking new anti-aging therapies and combating such age-related killers as heart disease, stroke, cancer, and Alzheimer’s, and also plays a crucial role in funding truly independent medical research. Since 75% of clinical medical research is currently funded by private industry, this is of the utmost importance. To learn more about how LEF and ANH-USA work together to defend and educate the natural health community, please click here. ANH-USA is also working on a database of reliable web sites—places that you can trust for information about natural health—that we plan to add to our website in the near future.
  • Go to the source. Read the studies themselves, and review their methods and conclusions. Remember, the data snippet that makes headlines is often just a small part of the story (like the New York Time’s flawed liver damage article). Not a scientist? Don’t worry—even the most technical studies have a short, readable abstract.
  • Look at the larger body of evidence. Media outlets aren’t interested in publicizing the obvious, which is why they’ll jump on studies that seem to buck the conventional wisdom. In reality, just one study isn’t usually enough to overthrow scientific consensus. Be sure to look at similar studies and well-structured meta-analyses testing the same hypothesis.
  • Ask: “Who paid for this?” When Big Business has a financial stake in the outcome, they work hard to create “a false and parallel science.” Look at the study’s funders to see who’s pulling the researchers’ strings (if funders aren’t listed, then you can guess what they’re trying to hide), and find studies funded by private organizations or the researchers themselves.

Over the years, we’ve seen our fair share of junk science. Here are some of our “favorite” (read: most outrageous) headlines, and the flawed studies behind them:

  • “Red Meat Causes Heart Disease!” A 2013 study claimed that the amino acid L-carnitine, found in red meat, supplements, and sports supplements, increases the risk of heart disease. The twist? The sample size was only six humans (in addition to some rats). Meanwhile, a much larger meta-analysis published in the Mayo Clinic Proceedings reached the exact opposite conclusion—that L-carnitine reduces the risk of heart disease! Which one do you think was headlined by the major media?
  • “Organic Food Isn’t Healthier Than Conventional!” This meta-analysis had it all: it trumpeted just one conclusion—that organic foods don’t have higher nutritional content, completely ignoring the fact that they have 30% less pesticide residue; omitted vital variables (e.g., that organics don’t contain GMOs, or that the nutritional content of food depends on the soil on which it is grown); and excluded crucial studies that proved organics are more nutritious (which the study authors claimed was “accidental”).
  • “Egg Yolk is Nearly As Dangerous as Smoking!” For this recall study, participants were asked how many egg yolks they ate a week, over a number of years (unless you’re vegan, this might be a pretty difficult metric to recall). Furthermore, the study authors had a history of financial support from Big Pharma.
  • “Raw Milk Cannot be Considered Safe, Under Any Circumstances!” The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is often guilty of scientific bias: in 2012, they claimed the rate of outbreaks from unpasteurized milk and dairy was 150 times greater than those linked to pasteurized milk and dairy. However, this study neglected the source of the milk studied–there’s a world of difference between raw milk from a CAFO and raw milk from a local farm. It also conveniently picked a timeframe that ended one year before a deadly e. coli outbreak caused by pasteurized cheese could skew their results.
  • “Fish Oil Causes Cancer, and Does Nothing for Your Heart!” Fish oil supplements are the favored scapegoat of Big Pharma and the mainstream media, perhaps because drug companies have several horses in the race including patented, prescription-only fish oil “drugs.” A 2010 study fed seniors margarine—which is full of heat-damaging trans fats—with a little fish oil added, and concluded that fish oil does nothing for the heart! In 2013, a highly-publicized study claimed fish oil supplements cause cancer, without ascertaining the quality or source of the fish oil supplements used, the study participants’ dietary habits, or showing a casual link between cancer and fish oil supplementation.Legitimate questions have been raised about possible toxicity from rancid fish oil, so do select a high quality product and, as Dr. Jonathan Wright, MD, suggests, it is best to take a mixed tocopherol (complete vitamin E) supplement with the fish oil to protect against any rancidity.
  • “Calcium Supplements Cause Heart Attacks!” In 2010, the mainstream media cried wolf on calcium supplementation, citing a study claiming that it raises heart attack risk by about 30%. Study participants were given calcium alone, and not crucial co-factors like magnesium, vitamin D, omega-3 fatty acids, and especially vitamin K2. We have pointed out for years that calcium without its co-factors poses risks to the heart. Meanwhile the World Health Organization recommended adding calcium to world water supplies, a terrible idea.
  • “Case Closed—Don’t Waste Your Money on Dietary Supplements!” In December 2013, the AMA-controlledAnnals of Internal Medicine published an opinion piece definitively claiming that supplements were, at best, totally useless. The mainstream media—misrepresenting the editorial as fact—gobbled it up. Meanwhile, the three studies that “supported” the opinion piece used absurdly low supplement doses; featured bargain-basement, Big Pharma-produced multivitamins; and failed to address the many factors of supplementation (e.g., how it works in tandem with a healthy lifestyle). One study that got ignored showed people who took multivitamins without statins experienced a 34% reduction of cardiovascular risk!

Thanks to the mainstream media’s and government’s cozy, crony capitalist relationship with Pharma and the lack of integrity in their “reporting,” it’s more crucial than ever that consumers like you conduct your own research, and come to your own conclusions in making the best health decisions for yourself and your family.

*Article originally appeared on ANH USA.

This article can be republished with attribution to authors and, keeping all links and bio intact.

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of GreenMedInfo or its staff.

Get More Sun And Live Longer?


For far too long, doctors have tried to make everyone afraid of the sun and sadly, that scare tactic has worked; scientists are now finding out just how very important Vitamin D and the sun are- responsibly of course- but important none the less.

Published in the Journal of Internal Medicine, researchers found that people who get more sun tend to live longer — despite the increased risk for skin cancer those extra rays may pose — most likely thanks to that glorious vitamin D.

For the study, the team used data from 29,518 Swedish women, all who were between the ages of 25 and 64. The participants were asked detailed questions about their sun exposure, lifestyle habits like smoking, and other general health questions. The researchers then used, “advanced modeling techniques using modern survival statistics to estimate when the participants would die.” Sounds fun. Eek.

What they found was that according to the statistical model, those who avoided the sun had higher risks for death in the next 20 years than those who got at least moderate sun exposure. And specifically, those who got the extra sun were less likely to die of heart disease. Isn’t nature grand?

Now, this doesn’t mean you should spend all day long in the sun, get burned without hesitation, or become a leather version of yourself. In fact, the CDC says after just 15 unprotected minutes in the sun, that you can expect skin damage. Of course, there are plenty of ways to get responsible sun exposure and you can read about that here and here.

But also remember how protective food can be. You can eat pomegranates, cranberries, blueberries and drink green tea to take advantage of the polyphenols found in those foods, which provide anti-inflammatory and anti-oxidative protection (this fends off free radicals). Also, spinach, peanuts, wheat germ and other whole grains will fill you up with Coenzyme Q10 which acts as a shield from any free radical damage that did take place (it prevents the damage from penetrating to the cells). Then eat all the cruciferous foods you desire to combat carcinogens that can lead to cancer- including skin cancer: broccoli, cabbage, brussel sprouts, watercress, turnips, cauliflower, and radishes. And lastly, go for the foods high in Vitamin C which will produce collagen and help keep your skin looking plumper and younger. That lovely vitamin is found in mangos, strawberries, bell peppers, dark leafy greens, kiwi, broccoli, berries, citrus fruits, tomatoes, peas, and papayas!

Summer is coming and you’ve got some healthful eating to do! Enjoy the sun AND your food!

Source: Refinery 29

This article can be republished with attribution to authors and, keeping all links and bio intact.

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of GreenMedInfo or its staff.

Aspartame Patent Reveals E. Coli Feces Used


This story is both unbelievable and disgusting- all at the same time.

Though initially reported in 1999, no one seemed to care about the fact that aspartame was made from the waste product of genetically modified E. Coli bacteria (not sure how I missed that info, glad I’m not missing it now) but the info is now available online for those who like staying in the know. Oh and aspartame is made by Monsanto. Enough said, right?

While the patent originally referred to the “cloned microorganisms” it was later revealed that the organisms were genetically modified E. coli bacteria. By modifying them they produce an especially large peptide which is used to create aspartame. The process is simple: once cultivated, they just need to be fed well and then nature takes its course; the bacteria produce proteins which contain the aspartic acid-phenylalanine amino acid segment required, the waste is treated to turn the large peptide and free carboxyl group into a dipeptide, then the dipeptides are treated with alcohol and methanol to create the artificial sweetener. Just like using dirt, water and sun. Right?

Over the last couple of years people’s issues with genetically modified foods, aspartame and Monsanto have continued to grow. And that’s been in large part to the natural community who has spoken up and out against the giant and the “food” they keep trying to feed us. Let’s keep up the good work everyone! Knowledge is power!

XO- Erin

Source: UPI

This article can be republished with attribution to authors and, keeping all links and bio intact.

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of GreenMedInfo or its staff.

Why Cutting Down on Sugar Might Be the Best Health Insurance Available


By Dr. Mercola

Author and educator Gary Taubes is among a small group of health investigators who have been relentlessly spreading the word about the strong associations between sugar consumption and the rising rates of obesity and major diseases such as diabetes, cancer, heart disease, and Alzheimer’s.

Taubes’ latest book is called “The Case Against Sugar,” which covers topics such as whether sugar should be considered a food or a drug, its addictive nature, and the health ramifications of eating a high-sugar processed food diet. All of these topics are also covered in this featured lecture.

How Much Sugar Do You Eat Each Day?

If you’re like most people, you might not know the exact answer to that question, and the reason for that is because it’s in virtually all processed foods, including products you would never suspect would have added sugar in it.

For example, fruit flavored yogurt can contain upwards of 20 grams of sugar, or 5 teaspoons, per serving, and a package of sweet and sour chicken with rice contains more than 12 teaspoons (more than a can of soda).

Sugar can also hide under less familiar names, such as dextrose, maltose, galactose and maltodextrin, just to name a few.1

High-sugar meals are a problem largely relegated to the processed food industry. You don’t really have this problem when you’re cooking from scratch with whole foods, which are packed with natural flavors. Then all you need is seasoning.

Rarely, if ever, would you consider adding several teaspoons of sugar to a home-cooked meal.

Most Americans Consume FAR Too Much Sugar

According to a 2014 study,2 10 percent of Americans consume 25 percent or more of their daily calories in the form of added sugars. Most adults (71.4 percent) get at least 10 percent of their daily calories from added sugar. The ramifications of this are significant.

People who consumed 21 percent or more of their daily calories in the form of sugar were TWICE as likely to die from heart disease compared to those who got 7 percent or less or their daily calories from added sugar.

The risk was nearly TRIPLED among those who consumed 25 percent or more of their daily calories from added sugar. That means at least 10 percent of the adult population in the U.S. are in this tripled-risk category.

Personally I have chosen to consume an ultra-low carb diet with no added sugars and about 35 grams of net carbs a day (total carbs minus fiber). I prefer not to damage my mitochondria with a dirty fuel like glucose.

Sugar Recommendations

The American Heart Association and the World Health Organization recommend limiting your daily addedsugar intake to 9 teaspoons (38 grams) for men, and 6 teaspoons (25 grams) for women. The limits for children range from 3 to 6 teaspoons (12- 25 grams) per day, depending on age.

Four grams of sugar is equivalent to about 1 teaspoon, and I strongly recommend limiting your daily fructose intake to 25 grams or less from all sources, including natural sources such as fruit — regardless of your sex. That equates to just over 6 teaspoons of total sugar per day as sugar is half fructose.

If you’re among the 80 percent who have insulin or leptin resistance or who are overweight or taking statins, or who have metabolic diseases such as diabetes and high blood pressure, you’d be wise to restrict your total fructose consumption to as little as 15 grams per day until you’ve normalized your insulin and leptin levels.

The average American consumes around 20 teaspoons of added sugar a day. This is more than three times the recommended amount, and the evidence clearly indicates that this dietary trend goes hand in hand with our current epidemics of obesity and chronic disease.

Sugar Feeds Disease

As noted in Taubes’ lecture, “sugar” includes both sucrose (table sugar) and fructose in the form of high fructose corn syrup or HFCS.

While some researchers have pointed out that fructose produces more metabolic harm than sucrose, Taubes believes this is a fruitless discussion, as both act as fuel for disease when consumed in excess.

As sugar consumption has risen — especially since the advent of processed foods and drinks — obesity and diabetes rates have skyrocketed worldwide. For the first time in history, obese people now outnumber those who are underweight,3,4,5,6 and half of adult Americans have either full blown diabetes or prediabetes.

In the U.S., diabetes rates have increased 900 percent since the early 1960s, and it’s now affecting people at an increasingly younger age, whereas type 2 diabetes used to be a rare disease that hit the middle-aged and elderly.

If you go further back in time, you see that diabetes rates began to spike around the mid-1920s, and compared to that time period, diabetes rates have now risen by an absolutely astounding 9,000 percent!

According to Taubes, one of the reasons it’s gotten this bad is because health professionals have been under the mistaken assumption that they understand the causes of obesity and diabetes.

Clearly they don’t. Or else they’d have made some significant changes to their recommendations once it became clear that prevalence kept going up despite their best efforts at educating people about how to eat “right.” The truth is conventional diet recommendations have provoked these epidemics.

A major fallacy is that eating fat makes you fat. This is entirely false, and low-fat recommendations have likely ruined a significant number of lives over the past few decades.

As I’ve said many times before, eating fat doesn’t make you fat, not being able to burn fat makes you fat. To correct this metabolic imbalance, you ideally need to restrict net carbs to under 50 grams per day, limit protein to 1 gram/kg of lean body mass, and consume only high quality fat sources.

The Metabolic Impact of Sugar

All foods have metabolic and hormonal effects, but they’re not identical. Carbs are processed differently and produce different results compared to proteins and fats, for example. Different types of carbohydrates are also processed differently.

When it comes to sugar, fructose is metabolized in your liver, while glucose is metabolized in every cell of your body. According to Dr. Robert Lustig, a neuroendocrinologist who has done extensive research on the role of sugar in your body, your liver can safely metabolize only about 6 teaspoons of added sugar per day. Any excess gets metabolized into body fat.

Conventional wisdom says that obesity is caused by consuming more calories than your body can burn, and to lose weight, you have to either cut calories, exercise more, or both. As noted by Taubes, the conventional view is that there are no bad foods, only bad behavior.

As it turns out, this simply isn’t true , and Taubes isn’t the only one to bring up the idea that sugar has a toxic influence. Dr. Lustig introduced the concept of fructose being “isocaloric but not isometabolic.”

What this means is even if you get the identical amount of calories from fructose or glucose, fructose and protein, or fructose and fat, the metabolic effect will be entirely different. Different nutrients provoke different hormonal responses, and those hormonal responses determine, among other things, how much fat you accumulate.

Because it’s metabolized in your liver, which has a limited capacity to process it, fructose tends to pack on the most pounds the fastest. But excess sucrose also has detrimental effects, and promotes insulin resistance just like fructose does.

Pre-Diabetes Versus Diabetes

Pre-diabetes, also known as impaired glucose tolerance, is a term used to describe an earlier state of progressing insulin resistance. It is conventionally diagnosed by having a fasting blood sugar between 100 and 125 mg/dl. Pre-diabetes is very easy to turn around. Simply swapping processed foods for real foods lower in sugar and sugar-forming carbohydrates combined with consistent regular movement (not sitting) will quickly put you on the road to reversing this condition.

As your insulin resistance progresses, you end up with an increase in sugar and fats in your bloodstream which leads to high triglyceride levels and increased body fat–especially abdominal fat — and elevated blood pressure. Having three or more of agroup of symptoms caused by insulin (and now we also know leptin) resistance is referred to as metabolic syndrome. This group of symptoms include high triglycerides, low HDL, higher blood glucose and blood pressure, and increased belly fat.

At that point, you’re well on your way toward developing type 2 diabetes. In type 2 diabetes your pancreas is producing some insulin, in fact usually too much, but is unable to recognize the insulin and use it properly. This is an advanced stage of insulin resistance. When you have inadequate insulin signaling, sugar cannot get into your cells and instead builds up in your blood. Hence the elevated blood sugar levels.

Conventional wisdom says metabolic syndrome is associated with eating too many calories and exercising too little. But compelling research shows sugar, and fructose in particular, is the true culprit.

As Taubes points out, what is meant when he (and others) say that sugar is “toxic” is that it is not an actual poison but contributes to metabolic syndrome, which in turn can lead to obesity, type 2 diabetes, heart disease, and a number of other chronic diseases. So taken in large doses over long periods of time it will clearly result in health damage.

The Sugar-Metabolic Syndrome-Cancer Connection

Another disease associated with obesity and metabolic syndrome is cancer.

Cancer cells need glucose to thrive, and carbohydrates turn into glucose in your body. In order to starve the cancer cells, you have to eliminate its primary food source, i.e. the sugars, which include all non-vegetable carbohydrates. Physiologist Dr. Otto Warburg received a Nobel Prize back in 1934 for his research identifying cancer’s primary fuel was from anaerobic fermentation of glucose. He clearly demonstrated that cancer cells require sugar to thrive. More recent research7 has also concluded that sugar appears toinitiate cancer growth.

One of the key mechanisms by which sugar promotes cancer and other chronic disease is through mitochondrial dysfunction. When your body burns sugar for its primary fuel, far larger levels of reactive oxygen species are created, which generate secondary free radicals that cause mitochondrial and nuclear DNA damage, along with cell membrane and protein impairment. Cancer is but one potential outcome of this kind of DNA damage.

Late-night snacking, especially with carbohydrates, can increase these risks even further. There is quite compelling evidence showing that when you supply fuel to the mitochondria in your cells at a time when they don’t require large amounts, like when you are sleeping, the system that generates ATP backs up, which in turn liberates reactive oxygen species (free radicals), setting into motion the same cascade of mitochondrial and DNA damage as just described.

There’s also evidence to indicate that cancer cells uniformly have damaged mitochondria, so eating shortly before going to bed is likely a very bad idea, considering your cells need the least amount of fuel when you’re sleeping. Personally I strive for six hours of fasting before bedtime.

Along With Obesity and Diabetes, Cancer Rates Have Soared

Like diabetes, cancer used to be a rare disease — especially among native populations. The primary difference between North American immigrants and indigenous peoples in the late 1800 and early 1900 was that the indigenous peoples had very little access to sugar, whereas among Westerners sugar was becoming more widely available. Taubes includes a number of interesting graphs and charts detailing these synchronous events.

Breast cancer cases started rising about a decade after diabetes started spiking. Prior to 1967, the number of Inuit women diagnosed with breast cancer was zero. Today, 1 in 8 American women will develop breast cancer, and people who move to the U.S. start experiencing the same rates of cancer as other Americans within a matter of two generations.

As pointed out by Taubes in the above video, epidemiological research suggests that as much as 80 percent of all cancers are preventable through diet and lifestyle, and diet accounts for as much as 70 percent of this effect. So what is it about our diet that drives these disease statistics? The weight of the evidence points to sugar.

Even in terms of treatment, cancer has been shown to respond to diet. A ketogenic diet, or more accurately called a high fat burning diet, which is high in healthy fat and very low in sugar, has been shown to help eliminate cancer in many cases, and a lot of very exciting research is being done in this area. Part of its success is due to the fact that it effectively addresses the underlying insulin resistance. Once your insulin resistance resolves, a ketogenic diet is typically not required to maintain good health.

Tips for Reducing Your Added Sugar Intake

One of the most important  ways to dramatically cut down on your sugar and fructose consumption is to simply eat real food, as most of the added sugar you end up with comes from processed fare: not from adding a teaspoon of sugar to your tea or coffee. Other ways to cut down on the sugar in your diet includes:

  • Rapidly working towards eliminating sugar you personally add to your food and drink or consume in the form of processed foods
  • Using Stevia or Lo-Han instead of sugar and/or artificial sweeteners. You can learn more about the best and worst of sugar substitutes in my previous article, Sugar Substitutes — What’s Safe and What’s Not
  • Using fresh fruit in lieu of canned fruit or sugar for meals or recipes calling for a bit of sweetness
  • Using spices instead of sugar to add flavor to your meal

Reducing Sugar May Be the Best Form of Health Insurance

Research coming out of some of America’s most respected institutions now confirms that sugar is a primary dietary factor driving chronic disease development. So far, scientific studies have linked excessive fructose consumption to about  dozens of different diseases and health problems,8 including heart disease and cancer.

As a general rule, a diet that promotes health is high in healthy fats and very, very low in sugar and net carbs (total carbs minus fiber), along with a moderate amount of high quality protein. In my view, the single most important driver of obesity and chronic disease is consuming over 50 grams of net carbs a day, along with excessive protein.

Once you get net carbs well below 50 grams, with a protein intake of about one-half gram of protein per pound of lean body mass, along with high quality fat, your body will start to wake up its fat burning metabolism and over time it will become virtually impossible to be overweight.

For more specifics, please review my free optimized nutrition plan, which also includes exercise recommendations, starting at the beginner’s level and going all the way up to advanced. Organic foods are generally preferable, as this also cuts down on your pesticide and GMO exposure. Many grocery stores now stock a fair amount of organic foods. The following organizations can also help you locate healthy farm-fresh fare. provides lists of certified organic farmers known to produce safe, wholesome raw dairy products as well as grass-fed beef and other organic produce.

Here you can also find information about local farmers markets, as well as local stores and restaurants that sell grass-fed products.

Weston A. Price Foundation Weston A Price has local chapters in most states, and many of them are connected with buying clubs in which you can easily purchase organic foods, including grass fed raw dairy products like milk and butter.
Grassfed Exchange The Grassfed Exchange has a listing of producers selling organic and grass-fed meats across the U.S.
Local Harvest This Web site will help you find farmers’ markets, family farms, and other sources of sustainably grown food in your area where you can buy produce, grass-fed meats, and many other goodies.
Farmers’ Markets A national listing of farmers’ markets.
Eat Well Guide: Wholesome Food from Healthy Animals The Eat Well Guide is a free online directory of sustainably raised meat, poultry, dairy, and eggs from farms, stores, restaurants, inns, and hotels, and online outlets in the United States and Canada.
Community Involved in Sustaining Agriculture (CISA) CISA is dedicated to sustaining agriculture and promoting the products of small farms.
FoodRoutes The FoodRoutes “Find Good Food” map can help you connect with local farmers to find the freshest, tastiest food possible. On their interactive map, you can find a listing for local farmers, CSAs, and markets near you.
The Cornucopia Institute The Cornucopia Institute maintains web-based tools rating all certified organic brands of eggs, dairy products, and other commodities, based on their ethical sourcing and authentic farming practices separating CAFO “organic” production from authentic organic practices.


*Article originally appeared on Mercola. Reposted with permission.

This article can be republished with attribution to authors and, keeping all links and bio intact.

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of GreenMedInfo or its staff.