These small changes can benefit your health and longevity in profound ways and you should incorporate them into your lifestyle. But perhaps the most important thing you can do to improve your health is to consume more omega-3 fatty acids.

Omega-3 fatty acids are vital for your brain and your heart. They can boost your immunity. They can increase lung function and athletic performance. They can alleviate depression and improve critical thinking. They can also tame inflammation and quell oxidation.

In fact, there are more positive, peer-reviewed studies about the benefits of omega-3 fatty acids than any other food or nutrient – by far. You would be hard pressed to find a single health condition that cannot be improved by optimal omega-3 levels in the body.

On the flipside, the risks of every degenerative disease increase when omega 3s are deficient in your diet. Unfortunately, our modern diet is chronically deficient in these healthy and essential fats.

Want to Lose Fat? Take Your Fish Oil…

Contrary to the government’s faulty Food Pyramid, not all fats are created equal. Certainly, some fats can increase your risk of cancer and heart disease and cause you to gain weight. But healthy fats – including omega 3s – not only help improve the health of your heart and protect against cancer, they can even help you lose weight.

The Journal of Nutrition published a study where rats ate diets rich in DHA (a type of omega-3 fatty acid). The researchers found that these rats experienced a significant decrease in body fat mass, compared to rats that did not receive the supplement.

Other studies have shown why this takes place. First, DHA prevents undifferentiated cells from becoming preadipocytes. These are the precursor to fat cells. DHA also inhibits the fat-storage capacity of adipocytes (the cells that store fat). So, not only does DHA decrease the total number of fat cells, it also diminishes the ability of these cells to store more fat.

It is also important to note that when rats are fed corn oil (omega-6 fatty acids) they accumulate fat. By the same token, if you eat a lot of processed food, fried foods and conventionally raised meats, you are probably consuming far too many omega-6 fats and too few omega 3s. If you are carrying too much fat, this could be one reason why.

Why Flaxseed Oil Is NOT the Best Source of Omega 3s

When it comes to omega 3 the question often arises, what is the best source?

As always, food is the optimal source for any nutrient. The very best food sources of omega 3s are wild salmon and sardines. These fish have several times the amount found in most other fish. And they have extremely low levels of pollutants compared to other fish. Grass-fed beef, buffalo and wild game are also good sources of omega 3s (although not nearly as rich a source as salmon and sardines).

But for a nutrient as important as omega 3 that is so deficient in the food supply, it also makes sense to supplement your diet. In that case, you might have heard that flaxseed oil is the best source. This is not true.

Flaxseed oil does contain omega 3s. But the omega 3s found in plant-based sources are short chain fatty acids (ALA). The fatty acids your body needs most for cardiovascular, brain and skin health are the long chain fatty acids (EPA and DHA).

Your body can convert ALA to EPA and DHA, but it is a very inefficient process. And while many factors can impact the amount you convert, most studies show that about 15 percent of the ALA you consume is converted to EPA. Then only five percent of that amount is converted to DHA.

In other words, to get the all-important DHA your body needs, you would have to consume a huge amount of flaxseed oil.

Or… you could take fish oil. Fish oil is made up almost entirely of usable EPA and DHA. So, if you want the antioxidant and anti-inflammatory benefits of omega 3s, take fish oil, not flax oil.

Does Fish Oil Contain Dangerous Mercury?

The next question that often comes up is that of safety. After all, if fish are contaminated with mercury, wouldn’t the oil from those fish also contain mercury? In fact, NHD reader SC writes:

“I took salmon oil for several years but recently stopped after I read that wild salmon is one of the biggest carriers of mercury. How much mercury are you ingesting from salmon oil? And is there a safe fish oil? Mercury toxicity is serious business. What are your thoughts?”

First, it should be noted that wild Alaskan salmon is one of the few fish that is predominantly free of mercury. It is farm-raised salmon that commonly contains mercury, PCBs and dioxins. Do not eat farm-raised salmon.

So what about fish oil?

Fish oils are produced by a process called “molecular distillation.” By its very nature this process removes most contaminants, including mercury. A few years ago, the nutritional supplement testing company Consumer Labs tested 41 leading brands of omega-3 fish oil. They found that EVERY brand tested was free of mercury.

However, a few brands were spoiled (fish oil is susceptible to oxidation). And one brand only had half of the claimed omega 3s. That’s why you should always stick to a reputable brand.

And here’s one more study that should drive home the importance of consuming omega 3s…

Fatty Fish Shown to Prevent Kidney Cancer

Scientists at Sweden’s famed Karolinska Institute discovered that eating fatty fish just a few times per month can significantly reduce the risk of kidney cancer. In the late 1980s, these researchers carefully surveyed 90,000 Swedish women about their diet. Then they followed up with the women more than 10 years later.

What they found is that the women who ate at least one portion of fatty fish per week reduced their risk of kidney cancer by 74 percent compared to women who never ate fatty fish. That is a remarkable risk reduction. But here is the important part. The scientists found NO risk reduction from consuming lean, white-fleshed fish.

So, what’s the difference? According to an article by noted cancer researcher Dr. Ralph Moss, “Oily fish contains up to 30 times more omega-3 fatty acids and three to five times more vitamin D than lean fish.”

Take Your Fish Oil…

We’ve only scratched the surface in regards to the benefits of omega 3s, but we hope that we have helped to emphasize their importance.

Boost your consumption of these healthy and essential fats by consuming wild Alaskan salmon and sardines. If you eat beef, be sure that it is grass fed.

And do your health a favor by taking a fish oil supplement. Carlson’s lemon flavored is the brand we recommend. It tastes great and the liquid is much easier to stick with than swallowing capsules every day. In the Consumer Labs report, Carlson’s received the highest marks for purity and quality.

And if you listen to the candy and snack food manufacturers, beverage companies, the processed food industry and fast food restaurants, our growing waistlines have very little to do with how much or the types of food we put in our mouths.

At least that’s the “spin” these companies tried to put on the situation when the Department of Health and Human Services recently drafted new recommendations on health and obesity.

The food and beverage industry was concerned that the government might recommend eating less processed junk food (Gasp!). So they mobilized their full army of lobbyists to shape the government’s message to their benefit.

Not surprisingly, the government soon adopted the talking points handed to them by the food industry. It is just more evidence that the institutions of government have been captured by the companies they are mandated to regulate.

If You’re Heavier Than You Want to Be, It’s Not Because of This…

According to these groups, the reason why we are so fat is that we have become too lazy and sedentary. We don’t exercise enough.

Now, we won’t argue that most of us should be more active. But that is NOT the reason we are so fat.

In fact, studies show that exercise is quite ineffective when it comes to weight loss. But more on that in a moment…

The first point to consider is that studies have shown that physical activity has NOT declined significantly in the last thirty years. We may sit in front of the computer more today, but before that it was the television. And the numbers of people who have gym memberships and participate in workout programs are near all-time highs.

On the other hand, other studies have shown that increased food energy is more than sufficient to explain the U.S. epidemic of obesity.

Beyond that, the role of exercise in weight loss has been wildly overstated. In fact, studies clearly show that exercise is quite ineffective when it comes to weight loss. But it’s even worse than that. If you exercise the way most weight loss specialists, government agencies and medical organizations tell you to, you will probably GAIN weight!

The typical recommendation from these organizations is what we call chronic cardio. For example, in 2007 the American College of Sports Medicine and the American Heart Association issued a joint statement recommending “60 to 90 minutes of physical activity” for weight loss. And they did not mean per week… that was per day!

In this article, we will tell you why exercise is not the key to weight loss. We’ll also show you why the wrong kind of exercise (chronic cardio) will actually undermine your weight loss efforts. But first, let’s make something clear…

We are strong advocates for exercise.

The health and emotional benefits of regular exercise are undeniable. Countless studies show that exercise (even low-level exercise) can dramatically reduce your risk of cancer, heart disease and diabetes. It helps to alleviate chronic pain. It can improve your mental health and cognitive ability. It improves your energy, stamina and longevity. And the list goes on. So you SHOULD exercise.

Just don’t expect it to work wonders when it comes to fat loss…

The problem with long-duration cardio, in particular, is that while it burns calories, it can also make you ravenously hungry. And not only does cardio exercise make us hungrier. It also makes us feel as if we are entitled to make bad food choices. Just think about how many times you have heard someone say, “Well, I deserve this [insert decadent dessert here]. I worked out today.”

Studies Clearly Show That People Who Exercise More Tend to Eat More

One study of 538 students, published in the International Journal of Obesity, found that when kids start to exercise, they eat more – an average of 100 calories more than they burned during exercise. Talk about getting “stuck on a treadmill.”

The problem is that it can take only minutes to consume far more calories than you burn during exercise. It takes about five minutes to eat a few slices of pizza and wash them down with a tall glass of soda, for example. That’s about 1,000 calories. Now consider what it would take to burn off those calories.

The table below shows how many calories a 130 pound person and a 190 pound person would burn engaged in various physical activities.

As you can see, even the most strenuous activity levels are no match for poor food choices and an overactive appetite. When you consider that you would have to burn 3,500 calories to lose just one pound of fat, it becomes clear that exercise is NOT the most important part of the equation.

To burn that number of calories would require about five hours of full court basketball for an average man! That might sound fun, but there are better ways to lose weight.

Take a look again at the table above, and consider what you would have to do to burn off the energy consumed in these foods:

• Starbucks Frappucino Coffee with Whipped Cream: 550 calories
• Dunkin Donuts Sesame Seed Bagel with Cream Cheese: 570 calories
• McDonald’s Big Mac, Large Coke and Large Fries: 1,624 calories

It really puts into perspective the claims of fast food and junk food manufacturers that we are fat simply because we don’t exercise enough.

Exercise Alone Is Not Effective for Weight Loss

In one study, published by the Public Library of Science, LSU researchers randomly assigned 464 overweight, non-exercising women to four different groups. Women in three of those groups worked out with a personal trainer for 72 minutes, 136 minutes and 194 minutes per week for six months. The fourth group maintained their usual level of physical activity. All of the women were asked not to change their dietary habits (but to record what they ate).

The study showed that women in all of the groups lost weight. But the women who worked out with a trainer several days a week for six months lost only slightly more than the women in the control group. And many of the women in the exercise groups actually gained weight.

Probably the most comprehensive study of the impact of exercise on weight loss was performed by researchers known as the Cochrane Collaboration. Their review included 43 studies. The average amount of exercise prescribed in these studies was 45 minutes, three to five days a week. The studies lasted from three to 12 months.

The studies that compared diet alone to exercise alone showed that the “dieters” lost between six and 30 pounds, while the “exercisers” lost between one and nine pounds. Other studies in this review compared the effect of diet and exercise to diet alone. These studies showed the average weight loss for diet and exercise combined was eight to 39 pounds. The groups that focused on exclusively on diet lost between five and 37 pounds.

Many other studies with various methodologies suggest the same results: Exercise alone is quite ineffective for weight loss. And in many cases, it can actually be counterproductive.

The Best Exercise for Fat Loss and Long-Term Health

None of this is meant to suggest that exercise is not important to your health. It is extremely effective and beneficial for improving just about every measurable risk factor for disease.

And in fact, the right kind of exercise can help a great deal with fat loss and body composition. So what is the “right kind” of exercise? The same kind of exercise our biological ancestors engaged in for thousands of years.

That would include lots of moving around at a low level of exertion… occasionally lifting heavy things… and occasionally exerting ourselves near our maximum capacity for short periods of time.

The way to model this in the modern world is to walk frequently and often. Sprint occasionally. And lift weights or engage in other resistance and weight-bearing exercises times per week. Further detail is beyond the scope of this article, but we believe Dr. Sears’ PACE Program is an excellent and highly effective way to exercise for health and fat loss. His book contains a treasure trove of information as to why this is so.

But the bottom line is that exercise is only part of the equation when it comes to weight loss – probably no more than 80 percent of it. It is what you eat – not how hard you try to work it off – that matters.

So what should you eat?

The diet we recommend is one that is rich in protein and healthy fats. These foods keep you full and satisfied for longer, they stimulate muscle growth, and they do very little to boost blood sugar and insulin (the fat storage hormone). Your carbohydrates should come from low-glycemic sources like whole fruits and vegetables.

The mainstream mantra for weight loss is: Eat less and exercise more.

Forget that.

Your mantra should be: Eat better and exercise smarter.

[Ed. Note: If you are already eating better and exercising smarter, and still can't seem to lose weight, you may be unaware that three "chemicals" in your body may be making you fat. Fortunately, once you know what they are and how they work, you can take control of your fat loss… and finally reach the weight you've been striving for. We've prepared a special video that explains everything. Click here to watch it now...]

When this inflammation occurs ON your body, the signs are easy to recognize. Redness, swelling, warmth and pain are all associated with an inflammatory response.

But inflammation that occurs WITHIN your body does not come with such obvious signs. Think of it like a house that is being eaten by termites. Although, the house may look fine from the outside, the structure underneath is becoming soft, rotten and unsound.

Chronic internal inflammation is the cornerstone of physical aging. It is one of the primary causes of every degenerative disease, including diabetes, cancer, arthritis, macular degeneration, Alzheimer’s and heart disease.

The Best Biological Marker for Inflammation

Internal inflammation is difficult to measure. However, when it is present within the body, your liver secretes a substance called C-reactive protein (CRP). And that can be measured. When inflammation is high, CRP increases. When inflammation falls, so does CRP.

C-reactive protein is the best biological marker for sub-clinical inflammation. And because inflammation is so strongly related to heart disease, that makes CRP a very accurate indicator of your risk for heart attack and stroke. It is far more reliable than LDL cholesterol.

A study of men, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, showed that those with higher levels of CRP have a three times greater risk of heart attack than those with normal levels. The research also shows that people with very low CRP levels rarely suffer heart attacks.

Heart Disease Is Not a Plumbing Problem – It Is an Inflammation Problem

Most cardiologists explain plaque buildup and narrowing of the arteries as a plumbing problem: Fat and cholesterol stick to the walls of the arteries and build up. The arteries then become stiff and narrow.

But this is only partially true. And it does not explain why fat and cholesterol stick to the walls of your arteries in the first place.

You see, your arteries bear only a superficial resemblance to pipes. A closer examination reveals smooth muscle tissue, sandwiched between two “structural” layers. These muscles and connective tissues are vulnerable to inflammation. When inflammation strikes, it occurs within – not on – the arterial walls.

When it is persistent – as a result of nutritional deficiencies or eating foods that are not native to your physiology – the inflammation causes damage.

The cholesterol and fat that stick to your arteries are part of your body’s repair mechanism. These “plaques” help to cover up and heal the damage. However, as they build up over the years, blood flow to your tissues becomes restricted. The blood vessels become stiff and blood pressure rises. And when these plaques dislodge, they can cause a heart attack or a stroke.

You don’t reduce plaque buildup in your body by reducing cholesterol and healthy fat in your diet. You reduce plaque buildup by controlling the inflammation that causes damage in the first place. So how do you do that?

Stop the Raging Fires of Inflammation…

There are two steps you MUST take to reduce inflammation:

? Reduce your omega-6 fatty acids and increase your omega-3s. The omega-6 fatty acids found in vegetable and seed oils, processed foods and conventional meats are highly inflammatory. Omega-3 fatty acids, on the other hand, are anti-inflammatory.

Researchers at the University of San Diego recently showed the anti-inflammatory power of omega-3s in an experiment on two groups of mice. One group was fed a diet rich in omega-3s, while the other group ate a diet low in omega-3s. At the end of the study the mice on the high omega-3 diet showed major reductions in inflammation (not to mention, increased insulin sensitivity), while those on the low omega-3 diet showed increased levels of inflammation.

Unfortunately, most people do not consume nearly enough omega-3s. And on top of that, the modern food processing industry has introduced an abundance of omega-6 fats into our diet. This unnatural imbalance is the primary cause of inflammation for most people.

The solution is to avoid processed foods along with vegetable and seed oils, while increasing your consumption of omega-3s. Excellent sources of omega-3 fatty acids are wild salmon, sardines, grass-fed beef and, of course, fish oil.

? Just say “no” to sugar and eat a low-glycemic diet. Spikes of blood sugar and insulin cause a cascade of biochemical and hormonal changes that result in inflammation. A recent study from Harvard showed that women who ate foods with the highest glycemic load had nearly twice the inflammation of those who ate lower glycemic foods. Follow a low glycemic diet by avoiding fruit juices, sugar-sweetened drinks and desserts and carb-rich foods like mashed potatoes, pasta, white rice, bread and cereals.

Follow these two steps, and you will eliminate the primary causes of inflammation. And by doing so, you will dramatically reduce your risk of every disease associated with aging.

And don’t assume that inflammation isn’t affecting you because you “feel okay.” Take measures to curb inflammation. And then have your C-reactive protein levels measured so you can stay on top of the issue. According to several doctors we consulted, less than 1.0 mg/dL is optimal, but the lower the better. Anything higher than 1.0 and your risk of disease increases.

[Ed. Note: We've put together 146 of the most effective secrets to keeping yourself youthful and vibrant for years to come. These natural healing secrets can help relieve or COMPLETELY END the CURRENT HEALTH PROBLEMS that you have with your energy level, body weight, sexual performance, eyesight, hearing, memory, joint pain, concentration, blood sugar and other health problems. For all the details, please watch the special video presentation we've prepared right now...]

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) recommends three glasses of milk a day. Why? Because milk builds strong bones and combats osteoporosis. At least that’s what the government tells you.

But significant studies show that there is no positive association between milk and bone strength. And some studies may even link it to cancer.

The Milk Myth

Milk is considered one of nature’s great building blocks. That’s because it has enjoyed heavy endorsement for many years. Much of that promotion comes from the USDA Food Guide Pyramid. But several of the “experts” who designed the pyramid are dairy industry insiders.

According to Dr. Mark Hyman, family medicine practitioner and Advisory Board member of the Food as Medicine Program at Georgetown University’s School of Medicine, USDA dietary recommendations primarily protect industry interests… not your health.

The government tells us that milk is good for us because it:

• Builds strong bones
• Combats osteoporosis
• Rebuilds muscle

Here is the government’s argument for you: Milk is rich in calcium. Calcium builds strong bones and teeth. Therefore, milk will strengthen your bones.

However, many leading experts hotly refute this. In fact, two studies conducted by leading nutritional scientist and Harvard University researcher Dr. Walter Willet provide evidence that eating dairy does not reduce the risk of fracture.

In fact, one of these studies – an extensive 12-year review of 78,000 women – concluded that dairy may actually increase the risk of fractures by 50 percent.

“Milk is a primary source of calcium and vitamin D and therefore might be expected to decrease osteoporotic bone loss and fracture risk, yet research has not generally supported this assumption,” concluded the study.

Dr. Willet’s follow-up study was published six years later in 2003. It showed that milk consumption “conferred a weak, non-significant reduction in fracture risk.” The study also found that with “higher daily intakes of milk, there was still no evidence of a protective effect.”

Some experts believe that the idea that osteoporosis is caused by calcium deficiency was created to sell dairy products. It’s not surprising that they believe there is no truth to it, when you consider that American women are among the biggest consumers of calcium in the world, and yet they still have one of the highest levels of osteoporosis in the world.

Vitamin D More Effective Than Calcium for Preventing Fractures?

Research also shows that Africa and Asia have the lowest rates of osteoporosis. These countries also consume the lowest rates of dairy and calcium.

Although dairy and calcium were not shown to reduce the risk of fractures, Dr. Willet’s Harvard study did identify a compound that can help.¹ According to the study, “An adequate vitamin D intake is associated with a lower risk of osteoporotic hip fractures in postmenopausal women.”

The study suggests fatty fish – such as wild salmon, sardines, and mackerel – as good food sources of vitamin D. While these are the best food sources, they still do not contain nearly the amount of vitamin D your body needs. By far, the best way to get the vitamin D you need is to allow direct sun exposure to your skin (without burning).

Credible Link between Calcium and Cancer?

As you can imagine, you can get too much of a good thing. In fact, some studies show an association between cancer and excess calcium in the diet.

One of these studies reviewed the links between dairy and prostate cancer. The research concluded that the more dairy a man consumes, the more it raises his risk of cancer – by up to 50 percent.

Researchers believe that as calcium increases in the blood, vitamin D drops. Vitamin D has been shown to have amazing anti-cancer properties. Therefore, by decreasing those levels in the body, the risk of cancer potentially increases.

Digesting Dairy

Then there are the more commonly recognized problems with dairy. It’s reported that approximately 75 percent of the world’s population² is unable to properly digest lactose (a type of sugar found in milk). This “lactose intolerance” lies in our origins: We didn’t domesticate animals – or drink their milk – until about 10,000 years ago. Ten thousand years is the blink of an eye in evolutionary terms. Our ancient genetics haven’t evolved to match our modern diets.

Furthermore, most humans stop producing significant amounts of lactase – the enzyme needed to metabolize lactose – between the ages of two and five. Simple conclusion: we weren’t meant to digest milk on a regular basis.

The Migraine-Milk Connection

Intolerance to milk and dairy can manifest itself in many different ways. Milk became a real headache for one concerned mother.

“When my son started kindergarten he developed what looked like acne around his mouth,” explained “Sarah.” “We discovered it was caused by the milk he was drinking at school. We never gave him milk at home, because our family has a history of lactose intolerance. We started giving him a lactase pill every day so he could have all the dairy he wanted at school….we didn’t want him to feel left out on ice cream day. But he started having headaches that became more and more severe as he got older. They eventually turned into migraines that were so bad he could hardly function and was getting them about every five days.”

When the doctor couldn’t provide a solution, Sarah researched the connection between migraines and milk link for herself.

“I discovered that dairy can cause migraines in people who are allergic to milk. My doctor apparently was unaware of this. We immediately put my son on a dairy-free diet and the migraines disappeared. He is now a very different little boy… no migraines, doesn’t miss school, and is happier.”

Campaign Claims Not Backed by Science

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently requested that the USDA back up the “milk mustache” campaign claims with science. The panel of scientists concluded the following:

• There was no compelling proof that dairy builds strong bones.
• Dairy causes digestive problems for the 75 percent of people with lactose intolerance.
• Dairy aggravates irritable bowel syndrome.
• Milk doesn’t offer sports benefits. It does not improve athletic performance.
• Dairy may be linked to prostate cancer.

Given all the findings about dairy, it’s probably a good idea to get your vitamin D, potassium, protein, and healthy fats from other food sources, including lean meats, wild fish, fruits and vegetables… and of course, frequent sun exposure.

References:
¹ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12540414
² http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-27939567_ITM

Tamoxifen is one example. This drug is generally prescribed to high-risk women to prevent breast cancer. But according to a study published in the International Journal of Gynecological Cancer,¹ tamoxifen can actually cause uterine cancer and increase the mortality rate from the disease.

Or consider diabetes drugs, like Avandia. Results from the ACCORD trial (Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes) showed that aggressive blood sugar management with these drugs resulted in a 22% increased risk of death in diabetic patients.²

And now, new research shows that the most commonly used drugs for lowering blood pressure actually raise it. That’s right: the drugs that most hypertension patients count on are putting them in harm’s way.

But not to worry, because another recent study confirms that one safe, natural remedy can drastically lower your blood pressure in just three hours.

Blood Pressure Meds Elevate Blood Pressure

The study, which was published in the American Journal of Hypertension, followed the progress of 945 patients over 17 years.

These patients took one of two anti-hypertensive drugs. One was a calcium channel blocker which lowers blood volume. The other was a beta blocker, or ACE inhibitor. These are often called “R” drugs, because they lower the levels of an enzyme called renin. This enzyme is secreted by the kidneys and plays a key role in maintaining blood pressure.

The study showed that the drugs actually spiked blood pressure. And the highest spikes were found in patients with low renin levels.

Researchers at Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University say doctors are too quick to use a one-drug-treats-all option.

“Every clinician knows that there’s a variation in response to antihypertensive treatment,” says study author Michael Alderman, MD. Dr. Alderman is the former president of the American Society of Hypertension. “Some patients will have an elevation in blood pressure.”

Until now, this has been blamed on patients not taking their drugs. Other times doctors put it down to random events.

“But this data shows that it’s not a random event,” he says. “It’s due to a mismatch between the patients’ renin status and the drug.”

Root Remedy Offers Hope

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says one in three Americans over the age of 20 have hypertension. And it lands over 40 million people in the hospital each year.

According to the American Heart Association, elevated blood pressure increases the risk for:

• Heart attack
• Angina
• Stroke
• Kidney failure
• Peripheral artery disease

And while doctors are prescribing drugs that make the problem worse, one simple root can make it better.

A recent UK study – published in the American Heart Association journal Hypertension – says that beetroot juice can significantly lower high blood pressure.

The study was conducted by the famous Queen Mary’s William Harvey Research Institute and headed up by Professor Amrita Ahluwalia.

Researchers gave beetroot juice to healthy volunteers. They compared their blood pressure responses and the biochemical changes in their circulation.

They found that not only does beetroot juice lower blood pressure… it does so quickly.

Professor Ahluwalia found that patients lowered their blood pressure within three hours of drinking their daily dose… and the effects lasted for 24 hours!

And the best thing is that consuming beets works best for those who need it most. The researchers found that “the higher the blood pressure, the greater the decrease.”

Researchers also tested a second group of patients with daily nitrate tablets. They too were able to lower their blood pressure. The high nitrate content in beetroot may be one of the reasons it’s so effective in lowering blood pressure. And why the research group has called it an essential “superfood.”

“Beeting” Out the Competition

Beetroot is rich in iron, boron, and folic acid. It also contains betanene, which is why it has such a deep purple color. Betanene is a powerful antioxidant. In fact, it’s even more potent than polyphenols which are believed to be the reason that diets rich in leafy vegetables also lower blood pressure.

Research member Professor Ben Benjamin says that beetroot absorbs and stores super high levels of nitrate. These are found in soil and our bodies use them to control blood pressure.

“When nitrate is present in saliva, bacteria on the tongue converts it into nitrite,” he says. “When the nitrite is swallowed, it’s converted into nitric oxide.”

Nitric oxide is a chemical produced by our blood vessels to help them relax and lower blood pressure.

“Increasing the levels of nitrate with beetroot juice increases this effect,” Professor Benjamin says.

True Stories of Success

“Currently, treatment for high blood pressure involves a cocktail of aspirin, statins, beta blockers, and angiotensin converting enzyme [ACE] inhibitors,” says Professor Benjamin. “People don’t like taking all the tablets. They don’t feel well and the treatment is lifelong.”

But he says beetroot is a healthy and safe alternative. The study also found that, like aspirin, beetroot juice prevents blood clots and protects the lining of blood vessels.

People are already putting this superfood to the test.

Sixty-year-old David Kelsall, from Stoke-on-Trent, England, was amazed by the results.

“I discovered my blood pressure was high when my doctor was testing for something else,” he says. “It was not life-threatening but I was anxious to do something about it.”

He was considering drugs when he read the reports about beetroot juice.

“I drank three bottles of it a week,” he says. “Less than four weeks later, my blood pressure had already leveled out. Now, a few months later, it is under control and normal. I am still drinking the juice, and I’m going to continue doing so. It may not help everyone, but it’s helped me.”

Getting Beetroot into Your Diet

Beetroot has a medium glycemic index score of 64… but this doesn’t need to be a problem. That’s because you only need a small amount of beetroot juice to lower your blood pressure.

“We found that only a small amount of juice is needed – just 250ml – to have this effect,” says Professor Ahluwalia. That’s about one cup.

We recommend Biotta Organic Beetroot Juice. Not only does it taste delicious, but it’s also inexpensive, especially when you consider the positive benefits.

You can also blend raw beets into a morning smoothie or roast them in the oven and slice and serve over salads.

References:
¹ http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1525-1438.2007.01025.x/abstract;jsessionid
² http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa0802743#t=articleDiscussion

The common drug is sold by Merck to help treat enlarged prostates and male pattern baldness.  The FDA now says that it’s been linked to decreased sex drive and the inability to ejaculate or achieve orgasm. And according to the agency’s warning, some users reported that these side effects continued for months after stopping the drugs.

But it turns out that an impaired sex life may be the least worrisome effect.

Millions of men suffer from enlarged prostates. And many are taking this class of drugs to ease their symptoms, and stave off cancer too. But instead of preventing the disease, these drugs could put patients at even greater risk.

Preventing Cancer… or Causing It?

The US Food and Drug Administration recently reviewed two studies. It found that some drugs for enlarged prostate can protect against some forms of prostate cancer. But the drugs may also increase the risk of a high-grade prostate cancer that spreads rapidly to other organs. And these particular cancer cells are difficult to treat.

So if you’re taking one of these drugs, you may have been deceived. You could just be trading one prostate problem for another that is much deadlier.

So what drug is potentially so deadly? It’s called finasteride and it goes by the common names Proscar and Propecia. Another drug called Avodart (dutasteride) carries similar warnings. Both of these drugs are 5-alpha reductase inhibitors (5-ARIs). They contain a synthetic compound that blocks the hormone, DHT, which causes the prostate to become enlarged.

They have been marketed for many years as a cure for benign prostatic hypertrophy (BPH). That’s a condition where the prostate grows and obstructs the bladder, causing many problems. It affects men as they age. The drugs are also used as a treatment for male-pattern hair loss.

Although the FDA has revised the drug labels to warn of their dangers, they claim that the benefits outweigh the risks. “This risk appears to be low, but healthcare professionals should be aware of this safety information, and weigh the known benefits against the potential risks when deciding to start or continue treatment with 5-ARIs in men,” the agency stated.

But it’s too little too late. More than five million men have already taken the drugs. And the question is: How many will lose their lives because of it?

The Deadly Cure

Finasteride and dutasteride were approved by the FDA in 1992 and 2001, respectively.

Although the drugs were originally produced to treat enlarged prostates and baldness, researchers believed they could help prevent cancer, too.

So the FDA included them in its Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial. Two randomized studies were done on about 27,000 men considered to have an increased risk for prostate cancer.

In one study, the men took 5 mgs of finasteride daily for seven years. Those at high risk for prostate cancer were excluded. In the other study, they took dutasteride for four years. Both studies used a control group taking a placebo.

In both studies, the men who took the drugs reduced their risk of developing prostate cancer. Their risk dropped by 26% with finasteride and 23% with dutasteride.

However, those who did develop cancer while taking the drugs were more likely to have an aggressive form of prostate cancer. This prompted an earlier, lukewarm FDA warning about the drugs (before the latest warning about sexual side effects).

Dr. David Samadi is Vice Chairman of the Department of Urology at Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York. He’s also Chief of Robotics and Minimally Invasive Surgery and an expert in prostate cancer treatment. Commenting on these results, he said:

“Interestingly, both trials did show a decrease in the overall development of prostate cancer when using these medications. However, when even a slight increase is shown in the development of deadly forms of prostate cancer, it’s imperative that we investigate the use of these drugs for the treatment of BPH.”

Buyer Beware

This is another case of the FDA not acting forcefully to protect the public. Although it has pulled dozens of drugs off the market in recent years, the deadly side effects of those drugs were discovered only after they had been used by thousands – and even millions – of people.

For many, it was too late…

Remember Vioxx? In 2004, the pain medication was withdrawn from the market. Dr. David Graham is the former Associate Director for Science and Medicine for the FDA. He was the whistleblower in that case. In his testimony, he discussed a report which showed that 28,000 cases of heart attack or cardiac death had been caused by Vioxx.

Dr. Graham emphasized this estimate was conservative. He believes 88,000 to 139,000 Americans were affected and that 30-40% of them lost their lives.

At the time, the FDA was widely criticized for its negligence and ties to Big Pharma. It was also hammered for its slow response.

Yet nothing has changed…

5 Natural Prostate Protectors

If you’re a man taking drugs for an enlarged prostate, you’re probably worried that you might be at risk for a high grade of prostate cancer. If so, make sure to check with your doctor. If you are at risk, consider stopping the treatment.

To lower your risk of prostate cancer, you can add cooked tomatoes to your diet. They contain a powerful antioxidant called lycopene. It’s also found in guavas, watermelon, and pink grapefruit. Studies have shown that lycopene not only prevents prostate cancer, it can also reduce the size of tumors you may develop.

You may also consider saw palmetto as a treatment for enlarged prostate. It’s an all-natural solution that’s been used by Native Americans in the Southeast for generations. Clinical trials show that it helps maintain a healthy prostate. It’s often combined with nettle extract for its synergistic effects.

According to the University of Maryland Medical Center, “Some studies show that saw palmetto is as effective in treating symptoms as finasteride (Proscar) without side effects such as loss of libido. Other studies suggest that saw palmetto may actually shrink the size of the prostate gland.”

[Ed. Note: There are plenty of safe, effective ways to protect your prostate. Unfortunately, a lot of so-called prostate "solutions" are ineffective and even dangerous. To protect yourself, you need to know the serious mistakes modern medicine is making about prostate cancer… and the simple, natural ways you can keep yourself healthy. To learn more, please watch this special video presentation now...]

But what most doctors don’t know is that the real cause of skin cancer has less to do with the sun than it does with the foods we eat. And they certainly don’t tell you that common chemical sunscreens have no fewer than four proven carcinogens – including some that promote skin cancer!

There is no doubt that skin cancer is rampant. It is by far the most commonly diagnosed form of cancer. In fact, current research suggests that one in every five people will develop some form of skin cancer in their lifetime.

But consider the following…

Before the 1930s, skin cancer was rare. Since that time the incidence of melanoma has gone up 1,800%. In just the last 30 years, the death rate from melanoma has increased more than fourfold, while the incidence of all types of skin cancer has more than doubled.

Is Sunlight Really the “Cause” of Skin Cancer?

But how could these substantial increases be “caused” by the sun? Our sun is billions of years old. It’s not likely that the sun’s rays have suddenly changed in the last 80 years.

Nor do we spend more time in the sun than we used to. In fact, we spend far less time outdoors today than any other time in history. At the start of the twentieth century, more than 75% of people in the U.S. worked outdoors. Today, only 10% of the population works outside.

And not only do we spend less time in the sun, but in the last 30 years, the use of sunscreen has increased by orders of magnitude. Sunscreens are now a $6 billion-a-year industry.

Understanding the REAL Causes of Skin Cancer

You’re about to discover that the increase in skin cancer is not the result of changes to the world around us. Instead, it is the result of changes within us – changes that we can easily and completely control.

Because of alterations that have occurred in the human diet – particularly in the last 100 years – we have become far more vulnerable to all types of cancer, including skin cancer.

Science has proven that some foods can promote skin cancer. As a population, we now eat these foods in great abundance. On the other hand, there are other foods that strongly prevent skin cancer. Unfortunately, we now consume far too few of these foods.

In other words, we have artificially raised our risk factors for skin cancer, while simultaneously removing our natural defenses against it. Is it any wonder that the rates of skin cancer have increased?

Sunlight is simply a cofactor that comes into play only after our defenses have been compromised. But what if moderate sun exposure could actually protect us from cancer?

When it comes to melanoma (the deadly form of skin cancer), that appears to be the case.

“Sunshine Vitamin” Causes Cancer Cells to Self-Destruct

Dozens of studies have shown that those whose occupations keep them outdoors have a much lower incidence of melanoma than those who work inside. For example, construction workers, lifeguards, and farmers have much lower rates of malignant melanoma than office workers.

Population studies also show a clear inverse relationship between UV exposure and melanoma. For example, rates of melanoma are higher in Minnesota than Arizona, and higher in Norway than the South of France.

The combination of these studies would indicate that those who spend more time in the sun (without burning) have less risk of melanoma – quite the opposite of what the anti-sun proponents would have you believe.

Lab studies have also shown that vitamin D (which is highly protective against internal cancers) is also protective against melanoma. In several studies, vitamin D was shown to cause melanoma cells to self-destruct. And finally, moderate sun exposure was also shown to DOUBLE the survival rates of those suffering from the disease.

The more common (though less dangerous) forms of skin cancer – basal cell and squamous cell – are more closely associated with sun exposure than melanoma. But as you will see, the sun is merely the cofactor. It is our poor diet and nutritional deficiencies that make our skin prone to damage from UV rays.

The Role of Free Radicals in Skin Cancer

The underlying cause of most skin cancer is oxidative stress. Skin cells (like all healthy cells) are rich in oxygen. When the ultraviolet rays of the sun strike these oxygen molecules, it causes some of them to lose an electron. The result is an unstable and reactive molecule called a free radical.

Antioxidants are free radical scavengers. These electron-rich molecules donate their electrons to stabilize free radicals before cellular damage can occur.

But if antioxidants are in short supply – or if so many free radicals are formed that they overwhelm the antioxidant defense system – then tissue damage, accelerated aging and degenerative disease (i.e., skin cancer) can occur.

The Dietary Connection to Skin Cancer

For millions of years, man thrived under the sun. And for all of that time, skin cancer was rare. It has only been in the last 70 years or so that the incidence of melanoma has increased dramatically. There is a very simple explanation for this.

The standard American diet (which is rapidly becoming the world’s diet) is abundant in foods that promote the formation of free radicals… and it is deficient in the foods that provide antioxidant protection against these free radicals.

Besides the use of chemical sunscreens, the real causes for the rise in skin cancer are two primary changes in the modern diet:

1. A dramatic increase in the consumption of omega-6 fatty acids and a corresponding decrease in the consumption of omega-3s.

At the beginning of the 1900s there were almost no vegetable oils in our diet. Today, the average American consumes 70 pounds of vegetable fat. We are not designed to eat these fats in such large quantities.

The makeup of fat in the human body is normally about 97% monounsaturated and saturated. Only about 3% should be polyunsaturated (the primary fat found in vegetable and seed oils). But the fat in your diet dictates the type of fat in your cells. If you consume plant and seed oils, your cell membranes will incorporate these fat molecules.

The problem with polyunsaturated fats displacing saturated fats in cell structures is that these fats are highly unstable. They are extremely vulnerable to oxidative stress, especially in the skin, where they are exposed to oxygen and UV light.

Numerous studies have also shown that polyunsaturated fats stimulate cancer while saturated fats do not. Studies have also shown that saturated fats do not break down to form free radicals as polyunsaturated fats do. Therefore, the result of having too much vegetable, corn, and seed oil in your diet is that your skin will sunburn faster and more intensely and you will be more prone to skin cancer.

2. A lack of antioxidant-rich foods.

Research also shows that low consumption of fruits and vegetables increases your skin cancer risk. This should come as no surprise. The role of antioxidants in the protection against many forms of cancer has been clearly established.

And in the case of skin cancer, the colorful plant pigments known as carotenoids are especially protective. These compounds are literally, “Mother Nature’s sunblock.” When you consume carotenoids they are deposited in your skin, where they provide protection against sunburn and skin damage. These nutrients are also powerful antioxidants that scavenge for free radicals and repair cells that might become damaged. In other words, they reflect and protect, forming a physical barrier and a nutritional barrier against skin damage.

The leading sources of carotenoids are eggs, spirulina, chlorella, tomatoes, dark green leafy vegetables (kale, collards, and spinach), and yellow-orange fruits and vegetables (apricots, cantaloupe, carrots, sweet potatoes, yams, and squash).

If you want to slow the aging of your skin and dramatically reduce your risk of skin cancer, you must gain control over all of the factors that contribute to the degeneration process. Don’t believe the hype that skin cancer is exclusively “caused” by the sun. In fact, sun exposure is some of the best “medicine” nature ever gave us. Used wisely, it can even provide powerful protection against skin cancer.

But what if just a few days of exercise each week could increase the size of your brain… repair and restore your organs at a cellular level… and even reverse the aging process?

Well, recent research shows that it could. In fact, Canadian scientists believe they’ve discovered the fountain of youth…

The study comes from Dr. Mark Tarnopolsky, a professor at McMaster University School of Medicine in Hamilton, Ontario. He holds a PhD in cell biology and metabolism. In 2008 alone, he had over 30 peer-reviewed papers published. Much of his research focuses on the adaptations your muscles make to stress, exercise, and mitochondrial dysfunction. And his primary focus is on the effects of aging.

His research, published in the latest edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, shows that exercise prevents premature aging

The findings have been welcomed by the medical community. In fact, his team was given a standing ovation when they presented their findings at a medical conference.

Sedentary Lifestyle Leads to Rapid Aging

The study was three years in the making. Dr. Tarnopolsky and his team studied a group of mice – ones with similar biology to humans. Just like aging people, these mice lose their hair as they age. They experience hearing loss, cataracts and enlarged hearts. Their brains and muscles also shrink with age.

The researchers began each experiment when the mice were three months old. That’s about 20 in human years. Each experiment ended when the mice were eight months old – late 60s in human years.

The researchers split the mice into equal groups. One group lived a sedentary life. The other group was forced to run on treadmills for 45 minutes, three times a week.

The final results were startling. The sedentary mice showed all the normal signs of aging. Their fur went grey. They started to go bald. Muscles atrophied and bones calcified. Eventually, they all died.

“We could see mice with grey fur and osteoporosis hunched up in the cage,” says Dr. Tarnopolsky.

How to Slow – and Even Reverse – the Effects of Aging

On the other hand, the mice that exercised three times a week remained young. Their fur was shiny. Their muscles remained firm and strong. They continued to be healthy and active. They also remained sexually productive and energetic.

“The littermate controls were running around bright-eyed and bushy-tailed,” says Dr. Tarnopolsky. “They had beautiful fur and showing every part of the body being protected. I think that says wow! This is good for me. Not just my muscles, but everything.”

The American College of Sports Medicine agrees. According to an independent study, “There is much evidence that a moderate amount of exercise is needed for the maintenance of functional integrity of the cardiovascular system, muscles, bones, and ligaments.”

But there’s something even more startling in Dr. Tarnopolsky’s results…

The exercise didn’t just slow aging. It actually reversed it.

“The brain was atrophic in the non-runners,” says Dr. Tarnopolsky. “But it was back to normal size in the runners.”

The Simple Key to Staying Healthy Longer

Dr. Tarnopolsky’s team focused on the mitochondria. This is the energy-producing “power plant” found in the cytoplasm of every cell

The purpose of the mitochondria is to convert the energy you get from food into a form that your cells can use. Among other things, that energy is used by the body to repair tissue and organs when they break down. That makes the mitochondria critical to the aging process.

But as we age, the mitochondrial DNA mutates.

This leads to a steady decline in tissue and organ function. As that happens, we start to see the physical signs of aging – grey hair, balding and a reduction in energy and muscle mass. We also become less fertile.

But Dr. Tarnopolsky and his team found that exercise somehow restores the mitochondrial DNA. In some cases, it actually strengthened it. That’s why the aging process appeared to be reversed in the active mice.

“What this really shows,” says Dr. Tarnopolsky, “is that exercise doesn’t just affect your heart and muscle. It has a potent systemic effect. What’s coming out of your muscle is having an effect on all organs in your body.”

15 Minutes a Day to Feeling Vibrant and Youthful

This study, along with many others, demonstrates that many of the changes that we attribute to “aging” are really caused by inactivity and a lack of vigorous exercise.

And keep in mind, you don’t have to be a marathon runner to enjoy the benefits. In fact, the research shows that the greatest anti-aging benefits come from short duration, high intensity exercise. And of course, any exercise is better than no exercise.

“This study clearly shows that we can get closer to the fountain of youth if we start when we’re young and do moderate exercise our whole life,” says Dr. Tarnopolsky. But he also points out that it’s never too late to start. “We know that exercise has benefits even when humans start over the age of 65.”

That’s good news for everyone. If you start late, you can gradually reverse damage at the cellular level. And if you start young, you can enjoy a lifetime of benefits.

You can begin reversing the damage right now. If you haven’t exercised in a long time, begin by walking for 10 or 15 minutes a day at a gentle pace and then build from there.

Remember, age is only a number. Your true age is how old you feel.

Exercise is just one of the all-natural, drug-free tactics you can use to slow the aging process. We’ve put together a detailed healing protocol filled with 146 age-defying secrets that you are unlikely to hear from your doctor. They can help keep your mind sharp, your skin supple, and your body in top condition… without a prescription or doctor’s visit.

Watch this video now to learn more.

Now, emerging research shows that it could be a powerful weapon against prostate cancer.

Dr. Chang-Yan Chen is a research investigator at Harvard Medical School. He specializes in cancer and hematology (the study of the blood and blood diseases). In particular, he examines the signals your body sends that cause cells to grow and die.

The results of his study on the impact of the “miracle” mushroom on prostate cancer appeared in the scientific journal PLoS One.

Mushroom Causes Cancer Cell Suicide

Dr. Chen and his colleagues had already established that the mushroom helped stop the growth of prostate cancer cells in the test tube. Their next step was to see if it worked in a living organism. The researchers injected mice with human prostate cancer cells. They were then treated with the mushroom every two days for 12 days. Although the treatment did not prevent tumors from forming, it did slow their growth.

After 12 days, the mice were again treated with the mushroom. This time, the tumors began to shrink. Analysis of the data showed that a protein – caspase-3 – had been activated. Caspase-3 is known to promote “apoptosis,” the mechanism that causes cancer cells to destroy themselves.

Other studies have found that the mushroom suppressed the formation and growth of aggressive breast cancer cells. One of those studies, published in the British Journal of Cancer, was a collaboration of the Cancer Research Laboratory at the Methodist Research Institute, the Department of Medicine at Indiana University, and the Indiana University Simon Center School of Medicine.

What makes this mushroom so promising as a cancer treatment is that not only does it promote apoptosis (programmed cell death), it also inhibits the naturally invasive behavior of cancer cells. It does this by inhibiting angiogenesis – the formation of new blood vessels that “feed” cancer cell growth.

Miracle Mushroom Unveiled

The mushroom with these impressive properties is Phellinus linteus – the Sanghuang mushroom.

For centuries, it’s been used in Asia to treat inflammation and stomach problems. And even there, its potential to treat cancer hasn’t gone unnoticed. It was lab-tested against cancer as part of a national project in Korea.

Sanghuang is available as a supplement, but it is most commonly consumed as a tea. This is currently your best option. You can buy the mushrooms and the tea online and in most Asian grocery stores.

There’s sure to be more research done on the medicinal benefits of the Sanghuang mushroom. For now, it’s certainly worth adding to any healing protocol for cancer.

But some experts say that doesn’t add up. Young men have lots of testosterone. But their levels drop as they age. So if T causes prostate cancer, why is the disease an older man’s problem?

An earlier study – put out in 1934 by Oxford University – had found that testosterone actually combats prostate cancer.

And some modern doctors now believe this is true. They say mainstream medicine took a wrong turn in 1941… and millions of men have suffered for it ever since.

One Harvard doctor has spent the last 20 years putting this theory to the test. When he went back to the original 1941 source, he discovered that the theory “was based on almost nothing at all.” Since then, he’s compiled two decades of clinical proof showing that T helps men fight prostate cancer.

But can a few doctors be right, when so many are wrong? And why do some doctors think T combats prostate cancer… while most mainstream physicians think it causes it?

Building a Modern Medical Myth

In 1941 a urologist named Charles Huggins linked high testosterone levels to prostate cancer. He even won the Nobel Prize for it and became famous for his research.

Dr. Huggins was studying the biochemistry of seminal fluid. For years, he had collected the prostatic fluid from dogs. As part of his research he’d castrated several dogs. That’s when he made a chance discovery.

In some dogs with prostate tumors, castration seemed to shrink the tumors. So he began targeting these dogs. He confirmed that chemical castration caused their prostate tumors to shrink.

He published his findings in a 1940 issue of the Journal of Experimental Medicine.

After that he applied his theory to men. In 1941, he castrated three men whose cancer had already spread to their bones. Then he tested their blood for levels of acid phosphatase – an enzyme that is elevated in men with aggressive prostate cancer.

The acid phosphatase dropped significantly after castration. So how did cutting off a man’s testicles combat prostate cancer? Dr. Huggins developed a theory that testosterone causes prostate cancer. By cutting off the testes, he cut the development of T. The decline in acid phosphatase was the “proof” that his treatment was working.

Mainstream medicine took it as gospel. They awarded Dr. Huggins the Nobel Prize and have accepted the theory ever since.

Modern Medical Mystery

When Dr. Abraham Morgentaler was in medical school at Harvard, he learned Dr. Huggins’ theory about prostate cancer and T. It was only after he graduated and began working with his own patients that he began to question this long-held idea.

On a daily basis he was working with men who had infertility and sexual problems. He found that most of them had low T. But that didn’t make sense. His education told him that T was the root cause of prostate problems.

He also found that when he gave men T, their prostate problems got better. Since his results went against mainstream thinking and he didn’t want to put his patients at risk, he began doing biopsies prior to treatment to check for cancer.

He discovered that all of his patients had low T levels. But out of the men that he biopsied, several already had prostate cancer. This surprised him because men with low T were supposed to have less risk.

So, he took his findings to a national urology meeting, where he was told, “This is garbage! Everyone knows that high testosterone causes prostate cancer.”

Dr. Morgentaler was crushed. He was a promising young doctor who had just been humiliated on a national stage for questioning conventional wisdom.

He didn’t know what to say. “These are the results we obtained,” he told the audience. “We present them here because they do fly in the face of conventional wisdom, which is why we believe they may be of interest to this audience.”

He was laughed off stage and went back to his practice. But the experience made him determined to dig deeper into the mystery. By the mid-90s he was studying the incidence of cancer amongst men with low T. He found that 14 percent of men with low T had cancer.

He started documenting his findings and published them in the Journal of the American Medical Association. It was the first paper to challenge accepted medical thinking on T and prostate cancer.

“Frankly, most experts just didn’t know what to make of our results,” says Dr. Morgentaler. “A high prostate cancer rate among men with low T didn’t fit into the existing way of thinking.”

He didn’t blame his peers. They were just accepting 70 years of dogma. But it made him wonder, how solid were the origins of the theory connecting T to prostate cancer?

What if the 1941 study had got it all wrong? What if low T actually contributed to prostate cancer?

So he went back to the origins of what he now suspected was a modern medical myth….

The Major Flaw in Huggins’s Original Research

In the basement of Harvard’s Countway Library of Medicine, Dr. Morgentaler found an old issue of the Cancer Research journal.

He pored over its pages. And what he found turned everything he thought he knew on its head. The modern medical thinking wasn’t built on a solid foundation. In fact, the actual research was paper thin.

He reports that Dr. Huggins’s research was based on just three men who had T injections. He only revealed the results for two of those men. And one of those men was already castrated before the treatment began.

So the theory that informs all modern medical thinking on testosterone and prostate cancer was based on just one patient whose acid phophatase levels happened to increase.

“Dr. Huggins’s assertion that higher T caused greater growth of prostate cancer, repeated so long and accepted as gospel, was based on almost nothing at all,” says Dr. Morgentaler.

Dr. Morgentaler points out that even the findings gained from the single test subject are flawed. That’s because acid phophatase is no longer considered a reliable test marker.

Debunking a 70-Year-Old Theory

Once he knew that the T theory of prostate cancer was based on nothing, Dr. Morgentaler began testing his own theory aggressively. He worked with hundreds of patients to combat prostate problems with T supplementation.

He published study after study in peer reviewed journals including the New England Journal of Medicine and dozens of others. And he’s connected with doctors around the world who are getting the same results and offering their findings for peer review.

“There is now a growing concern that low T is more of a risk for prostate cancer than high T,” says Dr. Morgentaler. “The relationship of T to prostate cancer has undergone a significant reevaluation… and all recent evidence [shows] that T therapy is safe for the prostate.”

While many mainstream doctors still oppose this emerging thinking, they may be forced to change as study after study supports this new view.

For example, a group of German doctors conducted a 2009 study at the University Medical Center in Ulm. The doctors noted the high prevalence of low T in men with prostate cancer. The symptoms included depression, lack of libido and decreased bone density.

Researchers analyzed four published studies. Men were given T after treatment for prostate cancer. And they found only one recurrence of cancer.

“Testosterone plays an important role,” the researchers wrote. “Based on this data, physicians cannot justify withholding [T therapy] from patients after they have been treated for prostate cancer.“

Additional research from credible sources backs this up.

Harvard Medical School published a study in 2000. The study found that men with low T had faster growing tumors and more advanced prostate disease.

“Patients with low ‘T’ had extensive disease,” wrote the researchers. “All men [with severe prostate cancer] had low testosterone.”

Another study was done by the University of Witwatersrand in Africa.

In this study of 122 patients, researchers found that men with the highest T levels had the lowest incidence of prostate disease. The patients with the lowest levels had the highest incidence of prostate disease.

“Low T results in aggressive disease and a poor prognosis in advanced prostate cancer,” concluded the researchers.

11 Easy Ways to Boost Your Own Testosterone

More and more research suggests that T therapy may help men combat prostate problems. It also shows that the balance of T to your other hormones may be vital to your general health.

Dr. Morgentaler points out that testosterone therapy has many positive benefits. These include “improvement in energy, sexual desire and performance, muscle mass and strength, bone density and mood.”

And the great news is that you can safely increase testosterone levels without doctor-regulated therapy.   Plenty of studies show that dietary and lifestyle changes can increase your body’s natural production of the hormone.

One of the easiest methods? Consume a high-protein diet. Healthful foods rich in protein include grass-fed beef, wild salmon, eggs and pastured pork and poultry.

You can also supplement your diet. Zinc and vitamin E are both great for boosting testosterone levels. Avocados and asparagus are both high in vitamin E. And great sources of zinc include kelp, mushrooms, and oysters. If you’re on the go, you can pack raw, unsalted pumpkin seeds.