Food Safety: Replacing One Poison With Another

Removing cancer-causing chemicals from where they could harm you is a good thing. Replacing them with other cancer-causing chemicals isn’t. But that’s exactly what appears to have happened.

And there’s a very good chance it affects you and your family, because you probably come into contact with these chemicals every day.

The chemicals are bisphenols. One form – BPA – has been used in plastic products for years. Including water bottles, baby bottles, and lots of food packaging products.

But BPA is an endocrine disruptor. Which means it messes with your hormones. And it’s linked to a higher risk of cancer. Something we’ve known for years.

The good news is they’ve taken BPA out of baby bottles… and it’s slowly phasing out from other products, too.

Now for the bad news…

The phase-out is moving very slowly. And the chemicals replacing BPA may be just as bad. Or even worse.

Use First, Prove Later

We’ve seen this scenario before. It was the 1980s, and consumer advocates were out to save us from saturated fat. So they lobbied and lobbied… and got “tropical oils” pulled out of many food products.

Tropical oils – like coconut oil – are saturated fats. But they don’t act like animal fat… because they have a different structure. It turns out these medium-chain triglycerides may actually be good for you.

While the replacement the consumer advocates called for wasn’t. You see, in most foods, they replaced tropical oils with trans-fats.

So, what are the replacements for BPA? Other bisphenols. And some studies say they’re even worse than BPA.

Now, you may have heard that these replacements are safe. Because there’s been a lot of coverage of a recent University of Iowa study. But that study only found BPF and BPS – the two most common replacement bisphenols – don’t appear to trigger obesity. Which BPA can.

But, as this study’s authors point out, “little is known on the potential impact of BPF and BPS exposure in humans.”

In other words, we’ve rushed in replacements for a poison that we’re not sure aren’t also poisons.

Guess what? They are.

The Evidence Mounts… And It Ain’t Pretty

In 2015, a team of French scientists tested BPF and BPS on mice and human tissue. They found that even tiny amounts affected testosterone production. These chemicals also affected Insl3 – a protein linked to insulin.

In fact, this study found BPF was even worse than the BPA it’s replacing!

A 2015 review of studies by the Endocrine Disruption Exchange found BPF and BPS are “as hormonally active as BPA, and they have endocrine-disrupting effects.”

In February 2017, Japanese researchers reported on an animal study of BPF. They compared the effects of BPA and BPF on the offspring of mothers exposed to either chemical during pregnancy.

BPF had a worse effect than BPA… suggesting we’re going from the frying pan into the fire.

A June 2017 study in Pediatric Research linked BPS to higher insulin resistance and antioxidant stress in children. Kids exposed to the chemical were also more likely to suffer kidney and blood vessel damage.

The good news comes from a new international study that found BPF and BPS are somewhat less estrogenic than BPA. But they have clear estrogenic effects. Which is one of BPA’s big links to cancer.

How to Protect Yourself and Your Loved Ones

The first lesson here is that “BPA-free” doesn’t mean “safe.” At best, it may mean a product is somewhat safer than one with BPA… but only in certain ways.

Your best and safest course of action is to avoid prepackaged foods as much as possible. Choose fresh vegetables – ideally from an organic farm. If you must buy packaged foods, look for options in glass jars or bottles. The lids may contain bisphenols, but you’ll cut your overall exposure.

Don’t buy bottled water. Installing a filtration system in your kitchen will save you money in the long run. Besides, using a filter system works out to pennies for a gallon of clear, clean water.

Buy a stainless steel (double-walled) water bottle. Make it a habit to bring it with you  any time you might buy a bottle of water. Fill it at home with your filtered tap water, and it will pay for itself in just weeks.

Plus, a double-walled stainless steel bottle will keep your drink cold for hours. I throw in a couple of ice cubes, and my morning water is still cold at lunchtime… even living here in southern Florida.

They may be heavy and breakable, but glass baby bottles are the way to go. They worked fine for many generations before you… and they’re much better for your baby’s (or grandbaby’s) health.

Here’s the bottom line: Avoiding bisphenols will lead you to eat a healthier diet and save you money in the long run. So you win no matter how you look at it.

Especially if it means you dodge the cancer bullet.

About the Author: Jason Kennedy is a celebrated investigative health writer and the author of The X-Factor Revolution and Beyond the Blue Zone. With over 10 years of experience working with today’s leading alternative and anti-aging doctors, Jason shares his insider status and access to the latest breakthroughs with thousands of readers from around world.


“University of Iowa study examines link between obesity, food container chemical subsitutes,” University of Iowa, via Eurekalert.org. Jun 9, 2017.

Eladak, S., et al,  “A new chapter in the bisphenol A story: bisphenol S and bisphenol F are not safe alternatives to this compound,” Fertil Steril. Jan 2015; 103(1): 11-21.

Rochester, J.R. and Bolden, A.L., “Bisphenol S and F: A Systematic Review and Comparison of the Hormonal Activity of Bisphenol A Substitutes,” Environ Health Perspect. Jul 2015; 123(7): 643-650.

Ohtani, N., et al, “Adverse effects of maternal exposure to bisphenol F on the anxiety- and depression-like behavior of offspring,” J Vet Med Sci. Feb 28, 2017; 79(2): 432-439.

Mesnage, R., et al, “Transcriptome profiling reveals bisphenol A alternatives activate estrogen receptor alpha in human breast cancer cells,” Toxicol Sci. Jun 7, 2017. doi: 10.1093/toxsci/kfx101.


© Copyright 2017 Discovery Health Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter
Posted in Diet, Hormones Tagged with: , ,

This Common Medical Practice Destroys Arthritic Joints

Doctors have been injecting steroids into arthritic joints for years. Most of mainstream medicine treats these injections as just another tool to ease the pain of arthritis.

But steroid injections have a dark side. To begin with, they’re not as effective as you might think. Some people get no relief at all. In others, the relief only lasts a couple of months… and then they need another injection. That may be good for the doctor’s bottom line, but is it good for you?

The answer, it turns out, is an emphatic “NO!” A just-released study shows this common arthritis treatment may be one of the worst things you can do to relieve aching joints.

Here’s what you need to know about this “treatment.” Plus, I’ll reveal an alternative that works… plus two more that show promise.

“Doctor, My Knees Hurt. Would You Destroy Them for Me, Please?”

Your arthritic knees are killing you. NSAIDs give you only limited relief. So your doctor suggests a steroid injection.

Theoretically, this makes sense. “Corticosteroids” mimic the hormone cortisol to lower inflammation. Less joint inflammation should equal less joint pain. So tens of thousands of arthritis sufferers have had steroids injected directly into their joints to ease pain.

According to the Arthritis Foundation, these injections don’t work at all for some people. And they may be the lucky ones. Because new research shows regular steroid injections into major joints have a down side.

They accelerate joint damage… while usually offering only limited and short-term relief.

A new study in The Journal of the American Medical Association shows steroid injections may do more harm than good.

The study looked at osteoarthritis sufferers getting steroid injections in their knees. Every 3 months for 2 years, volunteers got either a steroid injection or a placebo. Researchers found steroids offered no more pain relief than the placebo.

But there was a difference. Knee cartilage in the steroid group broke down faster than in the placebo group.

In other words, steroid injections aren’t much help. But they will leave you a lot worse off than you were.

So, are you just stuck with arthritis pain?

Mother Nature to the Rescue

Major joints – such as your knee – aren’t just places where bones meet. Cartilage prevents bone from grinding against bone. And fluid-filled sacs provide cushioning.

One of the key elements of this cushioning fluid is hyaluronic acid (HA).

Since HA naturally occurs in your joints, doctors working outside the mainstream wondered if HA could ease joint pain. Just this year, doctors in India reported on a study of HA vs. steroids.

The doctors gave 40 volunteers with knee osteoarthritis standard steroid injections. 42 other arthritis sufferers got HA injections instead.

For the first 4 weeks, both groups felt about the same. Then the HA group began reporting better results than the steroid group in areas such as joint flexion and stability. By week 12, the HA group was doing much better with pain, too.

In fact, after week 12, the steroid group went downhill fast in terms of pain. At 6 months, the HA group were faring much better than the steroid group.

Italian researchers followed 1,022 volunteers with hip arthritis for up to 7 years. Using 5 measurements, they found improvements were significant and long lasting with HA injections at least every 6 months.

I’ve seen several other studies that suggest HA injections in to major joints can ease the pain and stiffness caused by arthritis. Side effects are relatively uncommon and usually minor.

This is pretty good, but two other natural treatments also show promise.

Is This the Next Breakthrough in Arthritis Relief?

In 2016, Asian doctors combined HA with platelet rich plasma (PRP) for arthritis of the knee.

56 volunteers received HA plus PRP. 45 got HA only. After 6 months, the doctors compared performance on an international measure of pain, function, and flexibility. The HA plus PRP group scored far better.

So what is PRP?

Sports stars have been using PRP to speed recovery from injuries for years. Doctors take some of the person’s own blood. They then use a centrifuge to “spin down” the blood till the concentration of platelets is abnormally high.

Platelets are best known for helping blood to clot. But they also contain growth factors. Scientists believe the high concentration of these growth factors in PRP may stimulate repair of injuries… including arthritic damage.

Just this year, doctors in Australia reviewed PRP studies. They found PRP appears to be effective for at least 12 months. (There are no longer studies yet.) So far, they say, it seems to be safe for use in arthritic joints. But with years of safe use in professional sports, that’s no surprise.

So HA plus PRP may be the next breakthrough. But scientists are already working on one beyond that.

The Next “Next Big Thing” for Joint Pain Relief

Doctors in Latvia are getting way ahead of the curve. They’re working on an even newer and potentially more promising way to beat arthritis pain.

Their secret is mononuclear cells from bone marrow. These cells work as part of your immune system. It’s not entirely clear how they ease arthritic pain… but they do.

A team from several universities and hospitals compared mononuclear cells to HA in arthritic knee joints. Over 12 months, both treatments were effective at easing joint pain. But the mononuclear cells were better in the long run in improving overall function. And both treatments proved safe.

You aren’t likely to find a doctor using mononuclear cells… yet. And PRP isn’t commonly used for arthritis in the U.S. But HA is commonly available, well tested, natural… and it isn’t likely to damage your joints.

If you’re at your wits’ end with joint pain, HA may offer significant relief. And it seems an awful lot safer than steroids.

About the Author: Jason Kennedy is a celebrated investigative health writer and the author of The X-Factor Revolution and Beyond the Blue Zone. With over 10 years of experience working with today’s leading alternative and anti-aging doctors, Jason shares his insider status and access to the latest breakthroughs with thousands of readers from around world.


Morelli, J., “Use of Corticosteroids in Osteoarthritis,” Arthritis Foundation.

“Findings Do Not Support Steroid Injections for Knee Osteoarthritis,” JAMAnetwork.com. May 16, 2017.

Vaisha, R., et al, “Intra-articular hyaluronic acid is superior to steroids in knee osteoarthritis,” J Clin Orthop Trauma. Jan-Mar 2017; 8(1): 85-88.

Migliore, A., et al, “HyalOne® in the treatment of symptomatic hip OA – data from the ANTIAGE register: seven years of observation,” Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. Apr 2017; 21(7): 1635-1644.

Saturveithan, C., et al, “Intra-articular Hyaluronic Acid (HA) and Platelet Rich Plasma (PRP) injection versus Hyaluronic acid (HA) injection alone in Patients with Grade III and IV Knee Osteoarthritis (OA),” Malays Orthop J. Jul 2016; 10(2): 35-40.

Bennell, K.L., et al, “Platelet-Rich Plasma for the Management of Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis,” Curr Rheumatol Rep. May 2017; 19(5): 24.


© Copyright 2017 Discovery Health Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter
Posted in Uncategorized

Don’t Get Caught In This $765 Billion Healthcare Boondoggle

Here in the U.S., we spent $2.5 trillion on healthcare in 2009. Would you like to know how much of it was wasted?

According to the Institute of Medicine – one of the National Academies of Sciences – waste accounts for one-third ($765 billion) of our healthcare spending.

Unnecessary tests and pointless drugs make up about $210 billion of that number. That’s about $650 for every man, woman, and child in the country! Every year.

So what’s going on here? In the next few moments, I’ll reveal why we’re spending this money needlessly. And how you can avoid getting caught in the trap.

Pointless and Potentially Harmful

Acute upper respiratory infections – or AURIs – infect countless millions every year. If you have a “common cold,” you’ve been hit with an AURI.

They’re most often caused by viruses. And every doctor knows antibiotics are useless against viruses. Yet doctors still routinely prescribe antibiotics for viral AURIs. In fact, researchers discovered doctors in Ontario, Canada gave seniors with viral AURIs 46% of the time.

A typical viral AURI will clear up in 7 – 10 days with rest and fluids. Add in an antibiotic, and you’ll cut your recovery time to about 7 – 10 days. But that prescription isn’t benign.

Because most of those prescriptions are for so-called “broad spectrum” antibiotics. Our first line of defense against bacteria. Prescribing them when they’re not needed raises the risk of breeding drug-resistant bacteria. So these weapons may not be effective when we really need them.

Antibiotics aren’t the only problem, either.

Harvard Health Publications reported on a 2014 study that showed doctors routinely order cancer screenings for seniors the screenings won’t help.

According to Harvard’s Howard LeWine, M.D., experts don’t recommend such screenings for patients with a life expectancy under 10 years. He notes a study of 27,000 older adults with a high risk of near-term death showed many had undergone needless screenings.

Some of these screenings may be done out of an abundance of caution. Others, no doubt, are motivated by money. But a 2015 study showed we waste a lot of healthcare dollars for a very silly reason.

The Left Hand Doesn’t Know What the Right Hand Is Doing

In Matthew 6, Jesus said your charitable acts should be secret. Do them “so your left hand doesn’t know what your right hand is doing.”

That’s great advice for charitable giving. But it’s terrible if it’s happening with your health care. But that’s pretty much what a Johns Hopkins study revealed.

To put it simply, too many people have too many doctors acting too independently. This lack of coordinated healthcare, the authors say, leads to about $600 billion in unnecessary spending.

The authors point out the average Medicare patient sees two primary care doctors and five specialists – for a total of 13 visits – per year. They called our current system “fragmented,” and said it “may make it harder for their providers to make the best decisions.”

But sometimes both hands know exactly what they’re doing. It’s just that what they’re doing is wrong.

According to a report from National Public Radio, 300,000 nursing home residents are on antipsychotic medications because of dementia or Alzheimer’s disease.

Except these drugs aren’t meant to be used for these issues. In fact, many of these drugs carry a warning. They can increase the risk of infections, heart failure, and death in dementia patients.

But nursing homes use them anyway, because they keep their patients quiet. But don’t put all the blame on the nursing home. A doctor had to write the prescription.

And the doctor, at the very least, should know it’s illegal to prescribe an antipsychotic just to make life easier for an institution’s employees.

The studies I’ve mentioned here are just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. But they should serve to reveal the waste in our healthcare system, and a few of the ways that waste puts you and your loved ones at risk.

Don’t Become a Victim – Financially or Physically

If you’ve been reading my rants for a while, you know I’m always saying you should ask questions. And I realize questioning a doctor’s advice can be intimidating. But who else will look after your interests?

Most doctors – especially primary care doctors – genuinely want you to be healthy. If you’re tactful and respectful, very few will take offense. I’ve often heard doctors complain they wish patients would take more interest in their own care.

Well, here’s your chance. You can start by making sure your doctor has all the information he or she needs.

  • Bring a list of all the drugs and supplements you take to every doctor’s visit.
  • Also list any diagnostic procedures you’ve undergone recently.
  • Include any conditions you’re being treated for on your list. Just in case the doctor isn’t aware.

If the doctor recommends a diagnostic procedure, ask why. The same goes for any prescription he or she writes. Just politely explain you want to be as involved as you can in your care.

You can’t end healthcare waste single-handedly. But you can protect yourself from many of the excesses of our “fractured” system. And perhaps save yourself a few bucks in the process.

About the Author: Jason Kennedy is a celebrated investigative health writer and the author of The X-Factor Revolution and Beyond the Blue Zone. With over 10 years of experience working with today’s leading alternative and anti-aging doctors, Jason shares his insider status and access to the latest breakthroughs with thousands of readers from around world.


Nelson, B., “Waste: Unnecessary Overuse of Medical Care Causes Both Waste and Harm,” The Hospitalist. 2015;19(6):1, 23-27.

Silverman, M., et al, “Antibiotic Prescribing for Nonbacterial Acute Upper Respiratory Infections in Elderly Persons,” Ann Intern Med. 2017.

LeWine, H., “Many seniors get unnecessary and potentially harmful cancer tests,” Harvard Health Publications. Aug 19, 2014.

“Medicare Records Study Affirms Link Between Disjointed Care and Unnecessary Medical Procedures,” Johns Hopkins Medicine. Jun 11, 2015.

Jaffe, I. and Benincasa, R., “Old And Overmedicated: The Real Drug Problem In Nursing Homes,” National Public Radio. Dec 8, 2014.


© Copyright 2017 Discovery Health Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter
Posted in Uncategorized

The Shocking Truth About Drug Safety

What if every third item in your local grocery store could make you sick? Would you be comfortable shopping there? And what if it were every third item in every grocery store?

Well, that’s sort the situation we have. Except it’s not in grocery stores. It’s in drug stores.

You see, a new study has found almost one-third of all new drugs have a “postmarket safety event.” That’s fancy language for something bad coming to light after the FDA has approved a drug for use.

Here’s what you should know…

Dangers on Top of Known Side Effects

Bad reactions to prescription drugs cause about 4.5 million visits to emergency rooms and doctors’ offices every year. The Institute of Medicine also notes adverse drug reactions are the fourth leading cause of death in the U.S.

Most of these problems are linked to known side effects. You’ll find them listed in tiny print on the inserts in drug packaging. And buried deep in drug company websites.

Various drugs have been linked to stroke, cancer, and many other potentially fatal health issues. But “postmarket safety events” (PSEs) are a different animal altogether. They’re a sort of “whoops-we-missed-one” situation.

Sometimes they’ll just trigger a warning letter. The drug company may have to add another item to the side effect list. Other times, a drug may be pulled from the market.

We might like our drug-approval system to be perfect. But most of us recognize nothing involving humans will ever function at peak efficiency 100% of the time.

However… getting it right only two-thirds of the time? That shouldn’t be an acceptable track record in almost any field. Let alone drug approvals.

So what, exactly did this study find?

Potentially Life-Threatening Side Effects

Doctors at Boston’s Brigham and Women’s Hospital looked at new drugs approved from 2001 – 2010. The 222 new drugs approved during that time shared 123 total PSEs. 32% of the drugs approved were involved.

The FDA required 61 boxed warnings added to products – signifying a serious risk. Three drugs were withdrawn from the market altogether.

On average, problems were discovered just over four years after approval. Certain categories showed higher-than-average rates of PSEs…

  • Biologics – as opposed to chemically synthesized medications
  • Psychiatric drugs
  • “Fast-Track” approval drugs
  • Those approved close to the deadline for FDA review.

The authors also note most drug trials involve fewer than 1,000 people and run for less than 6 months. So long-term effects are rarely discovered before FDA approval.

And this isn’t the only study to raise a red flag.

Yale Study Finds Similar Numbers

In 2015, researchers from France and Yale University looked at a similar cross-section of drug approvals at the European Medicines Agency.

This team reviewed 161 drugs approved from 2001 – 2010. Forty-nine of the drugs – or 30.4% – were the subject of PSEs.

A 2008 study in The New England Journal of Medicine looked at drugs approved from 1993 to 2005. Drugs approved within 60 days of the review deadline were far more likely to have PSEs.

  • They had more than triple the chance of one or more dosage sizes being discontinued.
  • They were more than 4 times more likely to have a black box warning added.
  • They were withdrawn altogether at more than 5 times the rate of other drugs.

The bottom line? New drugs hitting the market are potentially dangerous.

So what can you do?

Two Simple Steps That Could Save Your Life

New drugs aren’t necessarily any more effective than competing older drugs. But they’re protected by patents. So there’s less competition, and usually no generic version available. This maximizes drug company profits.

But often does little or nothing for your health.

When your doctor recommends a brand-name drug, ask if there’s another, less-expensive option. If there’s a generic form of the drug, it should save you the most money. But there may also be an older drug that’s equally – or even more – effective.

Finally, do what many health experts do. Avoid taking any drug during its first 5 years on the market. It won’t eliminate your risk of “surprise” side effects. But it will lower it quite a bit.

About the Author: Jason Kennedy is a celebrated investigative health writer and the author of The X-Factor Revolution and Beyond the Blue Zone. With over 10 years of experience working with today’s leading alternative and anti-aging doctors, Jason shares his insider status and access to the latest breakthroughs with thousands of readers from around world.


Barry, P., “Prescription Drug Side Effects,” aarp.org. Sep 1, 2011.

“Nearly 1 in 3 Drugs Found to Have Safety Concerns after FDA Approval,” Brigham and Women’s Hospital. May 9, 2017.

Zeitoun, J.D., et al, “Regulatory review time and post-market safety events for novel medicines approved by the EMA between 2001 and 2010: a cross-sectional study,” Br J Clin Pharmacol. Oct 2015; 80(4): 716–726.

Carpenter, D., et al, “Drug-review deadlines and safety problems,” N Engl J Med. Mar 27, 2008; 358(13): 1354-1361.


© Copyright 2017 Discovery Health Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter
Posted in Uncategorized

How to Save Up to 85% on Your Prescriptions

In the past, I’ve warned you about drug company payoffs to doctors. But new research shows the problem may be far worse than we once thought.

  • About half of all doctors in the U.S. accept some form of payoff from drug companies or medical device makers.
  • In 2015, these payments added up to $2.4 billion. Including $533 million in items like partnership shares and stock options… which can easily increase in value.
  • Most major drug companies spend more on payments to doctors than they do for research.

The research shows doctors who get these payments are more likely to prescribe the maker’s brand-name drug instead of a generic. Even though the generic drug could save you up to 85%.

Here’s what you need to know…

Drug Company Geese Lay Golden Eggs

Big Pharma employs an army of sales reps. These salespeople fan out across the country, visiting clinics, hospitals, and doctors’ offices. Their goal is to convince doctors to prescribe their company’s products.

But there’s a lot of competition in the drug trade. For example, there are lots of different statin drugs to lower cholesterol. And most of them come in both brand-name and generic forms.

Now, here’s the big question: Why would your doctor prescribe a brand-name drug, if you could get the same drug in generic form for up to 85% less?

Unfortunately, the answer is simple. Because he or she may have something to lose if he or she prescribes the generic option.

Drug company salespeople frequently buy lunch for doctors and their staffs. They pay doctors to speak at conferences or to do research. Or they may hire the doctor as a “consultant.”

These payments range from an average of $2,227 per year to primary care doctors… all the way up to an average $6,879 per year to surgeons. Not only are surgeons paid more on average, they’re also 27% more likely than primary care docs to accept these payments.

The bottom line is there’s an almost 50/50 chance your family doctor is taking some form of “gift” or payment from Big Pharma. And for surgeons, it’s closer to 60/40… in favor of accepting gifts.

Now here’s the thing: Who’s going to kill a goose that lays golden eggs? If Drug Company X is shelling out a couple of grand a year in a doctor’s direction… do you think they might feel obliged to return the favor?

You betcha they do!

Little “Favors” Pay Drug Companies Big Dividends

New research shows these payments deliver big dividends. Doctors who received even just a single meal at drug company expense were more likely to prescribe their brand-name drugs.

And when the number of meals went up, so did the likelihood of prescribing the drug companies products. Here’s just a sample of what the researchers uncovered with drug companies providing four or more meals…

  • Prescriptions for the brand-name cholesterol drug rosuvastatin nearly doubled.
  • Brand-name prescriptions for olmesartan – a blood pressure drug – jumped by 450%.
  • Brand-name prescriptions for the brand-name version of the hypertension drug nebivolol climbed 5.4 times.

Think about that for a moment. A doctor and his staff get free pizza or sandwiches just 4 times in a year, and there’s a 540% greater chance you’ll pay up to 5 or 6 times more than you need to for your prescription.

If you’re thinking that stinks, you’re not alone.

But here’s the good news: You also have options.

Save Big on Common Prescriptions

One of the first steps you can take is simple. If your doctor writes a prescription for a brand-name drug, ask if there’s a generic available. If so, ask for it.

Before you fill any prescription, double-check with your pharmacist. You may find your doctor isn’t aware of a generic option. With savings of up to 85% available, it’s worth asking a few questions.

Finally, check up on any doctor you visit. Under current law, Big Pharma has to report how much they’re paying to which doctors. And consumer watchdog Pro Publica has created a database of that information.

Since 2010, Pro Publica’s “Dollars for Docs” project has listed which doctors are taking how much from various drug companies.

Just plug in the doctor and the city/town where they’re located, and you can get the scoop on how much they’ve taken from drug companies. (As of this writing, data is available through 2015.)

The data even includes the type of payment. Follow the breakdown, and you can even find out which drug companies make payments related to which drugs… and how much they’ve shelled out to promote those drugs.

Just visit https://projects.propublica.org/docdollars/ to check out any doctor. If they’re pushing a brand-name drug, and they’ve been taking money from the manufacturer, there’s a good chance you can do just as well with a generic form.

Or possibly no drug at all.

About the Author: Jason Kennedy is a celebrated investigative health writer and the author of The X-Factor Revolution and Beyond the Blue Zone. With over 10 years of experience working with today’s leading alternative and anti-aging doctors, Jason shares his insider status and access to the latest breakthroughs with thousands of readers from around world.


Tringale, K.R., et al, “Types and Distribution of Payments From Industry to Physicians in 2015,” JM. May 2, 2017; 317(17): 1774-1784.

Steinbrook, R., “Physicians, Industry Payments for Food and Beverages, and Drug Prescribing,” JAMA. May 2, 2017; 317(17): 1765-1768.

Ornstein, C., “Public Disclosure of Payments to Physicians From Industry,” JAMA. May 2, 2017; 317(17): 1749-1750.


© Copyright 2017 Discovery Health Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter
Posted in Uncategorized

An Easy Way to Cut Your Risk of Decline… and Death

A 2015 study in JAMA Neurology found older Americans aren’t getting the vitamin D they need. In fact, fully 61.3% weren’t getting enough vitamin D.  The numbers from this study are very similar to others I’ve seen.

That means if you’re approaching retirement age, you’re probably low on a vitamin key to…

  • Maintaining healthy bones
  • Building and maintaining muscle
  • Cutting your cancer risk.

And these are just a few of vitamin D’s jobs.

Yet mainstream medicine actively encourages Americans to avoid getting the vitamin D they need.

Today, you’ll discover two more reasons to ignore the mainstream’s advice… and how to safely get all the vitamin D you need.

Age With Confidence

We all know them. Friends or family members who’ve grown unsteady… weaker…  more fragile. Most doctors will tell you it’s an unavoidable effect of aging.

Technically, these doctors are right. But what they’re not saying is you can slow this decline to a crawl. Maybe even reverse it.

That’s the finding of a study recently presented at this spring’s annual meeting of the Endocrine Society.

The study followed 3,369 men over 4 years. The volunteers ranged in age from 40 to 79.

Over the course of the study, 459 became frailer. At the same time, 206 became less frail. The difference was their levels of certain hormones. One of those hormones was vitamin D.

Men with higher levels at the start of the study were less likely to grow weaker and more fragile than those with low levels. And vitamin D’s role in building bone and muscle mass may help explain why some men actually improved as they aged.

In a few moments, I’ll show you how to take advantage of vitamin D’s benefits. But first, another new study brings even more good news.

Improve Your Chances of a Long Life With Vitamin D

If you could cut your risk of death on any given day by as much as two-thirds – with just a 30-second investment – would you be interested? Because that’s pretty much what an international study of almost 27,000 adults found.

This study was the first of its kind to use standardized measures of vitamin D status. And it found the lower your vitamin D level, the higher your risk of death. In fact, volunteers with the highest D levels were 67% less likely to die over ten years than those with the lowest D levels.

When the authors looked at heart disease, they found the numbers closely mirrored those overall. This doesn’t say vitamin D can lower your risk of heart disease. But it does suggest it may cut your risk of dying from it.

So how does mainstream medicine actively discourage you from getting enough vitamin D? In two ways…

Is the Mainstream’s Bias Setting You Up for Frailty… and Death?

Nobody lives forever. But it appears folks who get enough vitamin D tend to live longer. And remain strong and vital for more of their life.

So why does mainstream medicine discourage getting enough vitamin D? I’m not sure I can answer that question. But here’s how they do it…

#1 – The “if you eat a balanced diet” argument

It’s true that getting your nutrients from your diet is the best option. That’s the reason your doctor says, “If you eat a balanced diet, you don’t need to take vitamins.”

If you got all the nutrients you need from your diet, you wouldn’t need to take supplements. But let’s be honest here. You don’t always eat a balanced diet, do you?

Do you get 5 – 7 servings of fruits and vegetables every day? Does your daily diet include a variety of brightly colored veggies? Do you avoid sugars, starches, and processed foods? Do you eat only lean, organic free-range or grass-fed proteins?

And – for vitamin D – do you get at least 20 minutes of summer sun on your arms and face every day? (Sun exposure is the #1 source of vitamin D for humans.)

I’m guessing your answer is “no.” In which case, you probably should be taking supplements. At the very least, a multi-vitamin/mineral.

#2 – The “avoid the sun” argument

Your main source of vitamin D is the sun. When the sun’s rays hit your skin, your body makes vitamin D. For a Caucasian with “average” skin, about 20 minutes a day – in summer – is enough exposure to make all the vitamin D you need in a day.

But cancer fears – fueled by sunburn – have led doctors to tell you to avoid the sun. Which explains why almost two-thirds of adults don’t get enough vitamin D.

If you live south of Atlanta (roughly), and have that “average” skin I mentioned, just 20 minutes a day will provide plenty of vitamin D. North of Atlanta, you’ll need a supplement in the winter. That far north, the sun’s rays aren’t strong enough to trigger your skin to make D during the winter.

But don’t avoid the sun… just avoid over-exposure.

It’s Hard to Get Too Much Vitamin D

Uncle Sam recommends 800 IU (International Units) of vitamin D daily for mature adults. But some studies show this is the minimum needed to take advantage of vitamin D’s anti-aging benefits.

Fortunately, most people can take up to 4,000 IU of vitamin D a day without any negative effects. This is called the “tolerable upper limit.”

You can shoot for 1,000 IU of vitamin D – between your diet and supplements – and stay well within the safe range. Many multivitamin products include the full 800 IU Uncle Sam recommends as your goal for the day.

If you eat a diet rich in vitamin D, you can probably skip a supplement. Ditto if you get plenty of summer-strength sun every day. But about two-thirds of us don’t do either.

In which case, you may be able to cut your risk of frailty – and even death – simply by getting more daily vitamin D in your life.

About the Author: Jason Kennedy is a celebrated investigative health writer and the author of The X-Factor Revolution and Beyond the Blue Zone. With over 10 years of experience working with today’s leading alternative and anti-aging doctors, Jason shares his insider status and access to the latest breakthroughs with thousands of readers from around world.


Miller, J.W., et al, “Vitamin D Status and Rates of Cognitive Decline in a Multiethnic Cohort of Older Adults,” JAMA Neurol. 2015; 72(11): 1295-1303.

“Higher anabolic hormone levels predict lower risk of worsening frailty in men,” The Endocrine Society. April 3, 2017.

Gaksh, M., et al, “Vitamin D and mortality: Individual participant data meta-analysis of standardized 25-hydroxyvitamin D in 26916 individuals from a European consortium,” PLoS ONE. 2017; 12(2): e0170791.


© Copyright 2017 Discovery Health Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter
Posted in Vitamins Tagged with: , ,

How Drug Makers Hold You – and Your Kids – Hostage

In certain parts of the world, kidnapping is big businesses. Crooks target members of wealthy families – or those with relatives in wealthy countries. Then they make a simple demand: Pay up or they die.

Here in the U.S., we have a very similar situation. Except this hostage situation is perfectly legal. And the “kidnappers” are drug companies.

Martin Shkreli made himself the poster boy for this legal kidnapping scheme when he boosted the price of a life-saving drug from $1,700 a bottle to $75,000 a bottle!

With their lives on the line, people had no choice. It was pay up or die.

As horrible as this example is, it’s far from the only one. In the U.S., this has become standard practice for drug companies. Though most don’t make such dramatic moves.

Still, many life-saving drugs are now priced at levels hundreds of percent above the cost just a few years ago.

Insurance companies simply pay up – passing on the increase to consumers. Medicare has no bargaining power, so they have to pay up, too. And if you’re without insurance? Well, do you pay the piper… or do you make funeral arrangements?

What’s going on here? And what can you do? Let’s look at a recent example of corporate greed to learn the answer.

At Least You’re Not Allergic to Price Hikes

Sometimes, allergic reactions are mild. You accidentally touch poison ivy, and you suffer with an itchy rash for a few days. Other times, allergic reactions are far worse. You’re stung by a bee – or accidentally eat a peanut – and you die.

One thing nobody’s allergic to: price hikes. That’s the discovery Mylan – the distributor of the EpiPen – realized.

In emergencies, the EpiPen delivers a life-saving dose of the hormone epinephrine (adrenaline). And, to be honest, it’s saved countless lives. Ask anyone with an allergy to peanuts, bee stings, or any number of other allergens.

With virtually no competition in the U.S., Mylan could charge almost any price, and people would pay up. Guess what? That’s exactly what’s happened.

In Great Britain, a two-pack of EpiPens cost about $69. Here in the U.S., the price is more than $600. In France, the same two-pack runs about $100. And in Germany, the cost is about $200.

In 2007, an EpiPen cost about $57 in the U.S. Then Mylan took over marketing. In less than 10 years, the price increased more than 10-fold.

Drug makers typically blame PBMs – pharmaceutical benefits managers – rebates and rising research and development (R&D) costs for price increases. But there’s a problem with this argument.

PBMs arose in response to sharply increasing drug costs. Rebates followed a similar path. And it’s hard to blame R&D for your costs, when most drug companies spend far more on marketing than they do for research.

Especially when you look at Europeans are paying for the same drugs we buy here in the U.S.  And the competitive situation.

Let’s Play (Near-) Monopoly

Austrians have seven epinephrine auto-injectors to choose from. The Danes, French, and Finns have six. Germans can choose from among eight. Tiny Iceland has seven options. And in Sweden, there are no less than eleven options for epinephrine auto-injectors.

So why does the U.S. have only two viable options?

To begin with, Mylan is notoriously litigious. That is, they seem to sue anyone trying to enter the market for patent infringement.

In January of 2015, Mylan filed a “citizen’s petition” against a generic competitor. Although Mylan is hardly a citizen, it took the FDA 6 months to reject the petition. But in March of 2016, the FDA rejected the generic competitor’s product anyway.

So, Mylan has plenty of competition elsewhere, but it commands about 90% of the U.S. market. And from 2009, the price of EpiPens jumped by 500%.

The kicker? An EpiPen costs Mylan about $35 to produce.

Adding Insult to Injury

In October of 2016, Mylan agreed to a $465 million settlement with the government. Why? Because while treating EpiPens as a band-name drug in the marketplace, the company treated it as a generic drug with Medicare.

Brand-name status affords greater protection in the marketplace. But generic drugs pay smaller rebates under Medicare rules. So Mylan apparently tried to have it both ways – while still charging unconscionable prices for their product.

Under Medicare/Medicaid, generic drugs pay 10% less in rebates than brand-name drugs (13% vs. 23%). Plus, brand-name drugs pay even more if their price rises faster than inflation.

So Mylan was apparently making a killing on both ends. All being subsidized by you.

So what can you do? Well, you do have some leverage.

Don’t Sit Back and Take It

Congressmen and senators often seem to be indifferent to voters. But there’s one thing that scares the living daylights out of them. Losing their cushy job.

If enough voters contact them in anger, they’ll jump through all sorts of hoops to hang on to that nice post in Washington. They’ll even vote against their corporate masters.

And that’s where you have leverage.

Are you sick and tired of paying far more than the rest of the world for prescription drugs? Could you find something to do with the $531+ difference between EpiPen prices in the U.K. and the U.S.? I’m guessing you can.

One simple step you can take: Tell your congressperson and senators to pass legislation allowing Medicare and Medicaid to negotiate drug prices.

That’s right… It’s currently illegal for Medicaid and Medicare to bargain with drug companies for lower prices. And it’s a key reason you pay so much more for prescription drugs than Europeans do.

If enough of us take action, our representatives in Washington will listen. Because even millions of dollars of drug company campaign donations can’t offset voter anger. And they’ll do anything to hold onto their jobs.

About the Author: Jason Kennedy is a celebrated investigative health writer and the author of The X-Factor Revolution and Beyond the Blue Zone. With over 10 years of experience working with today’s leading alternative and anti-aging doctors, Jason shares his insider status and access to the latest breakthroughs with thousands of readers from around world.


“Epinepherin autoinjector,” Wikipedia.com. April 14, 2017.

Parker-Pope, T. and Peachman, R.R., “EpiPen Price Rise Sparks Concern for Allergy Sufferers,” The New York Times. Aug 22, 2106.

“List of the names, pharmaceutical form(s), strength(s) of the medicinal product(s), route(s) of administration, marketing authorisation holder(s) in the Member States,” Eurpoean Medicines Agency.

Koons, C., “Blame Game: The $130 Billion in Fees Mylan Says Pushes Up Prices,” Bloomberg.com. Sep 21, 2016.

Thomas, K., “Is EpiPen a Brand-Name or a Generic Drug? Mylan Casts It Both Ways,” The New York Times. Sep 2, 2016.

Thomas, K., “Mylan to Settle EpiPen Overpricing Case for $465 Million,” The New York Times. Oct 7, 2016.


© Copyright 2017 Discovery Health Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter
Posted in Uncategorized Tagged with: , ,

Reverse Aging With Less Exercise

If you ask your doctor how to fight the effects of aging, chances are good exercise will be near the top of their list. They’ll also probably tell you cardio or aerobics are the best ways to exercise. That’s great advice, except for one tiny detail…

It’s completely wrong.

That’s right. The top exercise advice of the last 50 or 60 years is – how can I say this nicely? – mostly B.S.

Don’t get me wrong. You’re better off doing cardio or aerobics than nothing at all. But why spend hours on the treadmill when you can fight aging faster… and skip the boredom?

And please don’t worry. I won’t tell you to start lifting weights in a gym full of sweaty 20-somethings. Again, lifting weights is better than no exercise. But it’s not the best exercise.

Not if you want to turn your aging clock back. Let me explain…

Not All Exercise Is Created Equal

Back in my teens, my high school had a killer cross country squad. We didn’t have a lot of superstars, but we had depth. We had enough good runners to field two competitive squads. And it was all thanks to our coach.

You see, back in the 1970s, Long, Slow Distance or “LSD” ruled. Almost every distance runner – including Olympic athletes – trained by running endless miles at a moderate pace.

Not our team. Coach had his distance runners sprinting at least a couple of days a week. Back then, these “interval” workouts were common for sprinters… but not for guys racing for 5 kilometers (3.1 miles).

This approach was unconventional. But Coach turned his squad into a perpetual winning machine.

With shorter workouts. In fact, our team was winning races by sometimes running 40% or fewer miles than the competition!

And here’s why that’s important…

A Faster Way to Reverse the Effects of Time

There’s no doubt cardio or aerobic training beats no exercise. But then, as I said, any exercise is better than none.

You see, your body tries to adapt to whatever challenge you give it. If you run lots of slow miles, your muscles, heart, and lungs will adapt to that style. A style which favors a thin frame, and a heart and lungs that only need to deal with limited stress.

But what if you train the way my high school coach worked his runners? High-intensity workouts may be shorter, but adapting to that stress means building a more athletic frame, and a heart and lungs that can move more blood and more oxygen.

Plus, studies show you’ll burn more fat in less time with shorter, more intense workouts.

 And now, even the famous Mayo Clinic is falling in line.

A Bigger Benefit from Less Effort

The Mayo Clinic recently published a study showing short bouts of high-intensity exercise can boost mitochondrial function.

Mitochondria are tiny “organelles” in your cells that produce energy. They literally power everything you do. So when you make them more efficient, you literally turn the clock back on your cells.

And that helps explain why my high school coach had such great success with short bouts of high-intensity exercise. He helped young athletes achieve their maximum potential on a cellular level.

The Mayo study shows why this trick works regardless of age.

The bottom line for you is that you can get in better shape… trigger your cells to act more like younger cells… and literally turn the clock back on the effects of aging.

Of course, you should talk to your doctor before you begin any new exercise program. Especially one involving high-intensity exercise.

But if you want to fight the effects of aging, this is the most efficient way to go. And I recommend you look into Dr. Al Sears’ P.A.C.E. program.

P.A.C.E. (Progressively Accelerating Cardiopulmonary Exertion) has already helped thousands of people just like you “turn back the clock.” Based on exercise science Dr. Sears himself helped pioneer, P.A.C.E. is the safest, most effective way I’ve found to recapture your youthful energy and drive.

About the Author: Jason Kennedy is a celebrated investigative health writer and the author of The X-Factor Revolution and Beyond the Blue Zone. With over 10 years of experience working with today’s leading alternative and anti-aging doctors, Jason shares his insider status and access to the latest breakthroughs with thousands of readers from around world.


Bergland, C., “Mayo Clinic Study Identifies How Exercise Staves Off Old Age,” Psychology Today.
Mar 08, 2017.


© Copyright 2017 Discovery Health Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter
Posted in Uncategorized Tagged with: , ,

When Health Experts Get It Wrong… And They Do

A lot of what the so-called “experts” have told you about nutrition is wrong.

Take trans fats, for instance. Back in the early 1980s, coconut oil was in practically everything. It was cheap, easy to use, and the foods it was in tasted good.

Then the experts came along. We had to stop using coconut oil, they said. It’s full of saturated fat… and it’ll wreck our hearts. Instead, they told us, use “healthy” trans fats.

The cure turned out to be far worse than the disease. Trans fats raise LDL (“bad”) cholesterol levels and lower HDL (“good”) cholesterol. Plus, the saturated fat in coconut oil doesn’t act like animal fat. Studies suggest it’s good for your heart.

That’s just one of many missteps the “experts” have made over the years. Here’s another whopper they’ve been telling you for decades…

A Calorie Is a Calorie Is a Calorie

Uncle Sam’s nutrition experts have it down to a science. The “average person” needs about 2,000 calories a day. Eat much more than that, and an average person will gain weight. Eat a bit less, and they’ll drop some weight.

Of course, your size and metabolism make a difference. But it’s a good average. Beyond that, a calorie is just a calorie.

Except it isn’t. Because different foods have different “side effects.”

For example, sugars and starches raise blood sugar. This can lead to weight gain. Even if you’re not eating too many calories. It’s just that too many of them are from the wrong source.

Fructose and high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) have a different effect. Your body processes them differently from other sugars. Fructose won’t cause blood sugar spikes. But that’s because it’s processed through your liver.

Your liver converts a lot of the fructose you eat into stored fat. Which is not what happens with other sugars. So foods with added fructose – which includes just about everything in a package these days – tend to pack on the pounds.

The end result? 100 calories from spinach have a very different effect than 100 calories from spaghetti or foods with added HFCS.

But the news isn’t all bad. Some foods are high in fat and calories, but deliver remarkable side effects. Look at avocados…

Lots of Fat… Lots of Calories… and Lots of Benefits

The latest news about avocado just came out. A review in the journal Phytotherapy Research found avocados may help battle metabolic syndrome – or “pre-diabetes.”

Besides promoting healthy cholesterol levels, avocado appears to lower triglyceride (blood fat) levels… fight high blood pressure… support artery health… promote weight loss… and much more.

In 2016, Air Force researchers reviewed 10 avocado studies. They found solid evidence that swapping avocado for other fats led to healthier blood fat levels. Triglycerides, total cholesterol and LDL levels all dropped when people began eating avocados.

Researchers at Ohio State University showed avocado has an unusual health effect. It helps you absorb some key nutrients.

In this study, people who ate avocado boosted absorption of lutein by more than 5x. And they absorbed Beta-carotene more than 15x better. Both these nutrients are key to maintaining healthy vision. Which makes adding a little avocado to your salad a great way to defend your eyesight.

Other recent studies suggest avocados may help protect nerve cells from damage… could have unique cancer-fighting powers… and may promote weight loss and healthy aging.

So don’t always accept “expert” advice at face value. Low-fat and low-calorie don’t always mean “healthy.”  Sometimes guilty pleasures – like avocados – turn out to be a better option.

About the Author: Jason Kennedy is a celebrated investigative health writer and the author of The X-Factor Revolution and Beyond the Blue Zone. With over 10 years of experience working with today’s leading alternative and anti-aging doctors, Jason shares his insider status and access to the latest breakthroughs with thousands of readers from around world.


“Avocados May Help Combat the Metabolic Syndrome,” Wiley News Room. Apr 10, 2017.

Peou, S., et al, “Impact of avocado-enriched diets on plasma lipoproteins: A meta- analysis,” J Clin Lipidol. Jan-Feb 2016;10(1): 161-171.

Unlu, N.Z., et al, “Carotenoid absorption from salad and salsa by humans is enhanced by the addition of avocado or avocado oil,” J Nutr. Mar 2005; 135(3): 431-436.

Ameer, K., “Avocado as a Major Dietary Source of Antioxidants and Its Preventive Role in Neurodegenerative Diseases,” Adv Neurobiol. 2016; 12: 337-354.

Ding, H., et al, “Selective induction of apoptosis of human oral cancer cell lines by avocado extracts via a ROS-mediated mechanism,” Nutr Cancer. 2009; 61(3): 348-356.

Dreher, M.L. and Davenport, A.J., “Hass Avocado Composition and Potential Health Effects,” Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition. 2013; 53: 738–750.


© Copyright 2017 Discovery Health Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter
Posted in Diet Tagged with: , ,

These “Healthy” Foods May Be Killing You

“Eating right” can be a minefield. One day, a food is good. The next, it’s a killer. A new report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has just unmasked a few unexpected killers.

The new report looks at foods that may put your blood pressure through the roof. And don’t say, “I know… don’t eat potato chips. Because salty snacks only ranked 7th on the list.

So far nobody I’ve talked to has even come close to guessing the #1 food. It’s just not on anyone’s radar. Because it’s one of the most popular “healthy” foods in the world.

But it could be slowly killing you.

Just How Much Sodium Are You Getting?

We all know chips are loaded with sodium. So is ham. And pretzels. It’s pretty easy to avoid an enemy when you know what it is. But we’re not so good at avoiding hidden enemies.

That’s why the average American eats 3,409 mg of sodium a day. And that’s sodium… not salt.

The CDC says you shouldn’t get more than 2,300 mg a day. Two-thirds of the average intake. And the American Heart Association says a maximum of 1,500 mg per day is ideal. That’s less than half of what most Americans get now.

But just a cup of soup and a turkey sandwich blows your entire day’s allotment of sodium. That’s without chips. Without oyster crackers. But it’s still 2,200 mg of sodium.

And that’s just one light meal.

Chances are you’re getting a lot more sodium than is healthy. And it’s not all coming from the foods you’ve been warned against.

For instance, take the #1 culprit in boosting your sodium intake…

The “Sodium Sneaks” Threatening Your Heart

You probably avoid salty snacks. You stay away from salty French fries. And you don’t salt your food at home.

Good for you! You’ve cut out the #7 and #22 contributors to sodium… and the only healthy salt in your diet. (Table salt is the #1 source of iodine.)

But that still leaves a whole lot of sodium in your diet. For example, the #1 source of sodium in the American diet is… bread.

That’s right. Even multi-grain breads are a major source of sodium. Plus, carbs like wheat, rice and potatoes drive up your blood sugar… and can help lead to insulin resistance and Type II diabetes.

Pizza takes the #2 spot for sodium. Pepperoni may be a popular topping, but it’s a major source of sodium and unhealthy fats. All the salt in the crust and cheese don’t help, either.

The #3 spot goes to sandwiches… because they contain bread and – often – processed/cured meats. Which may help explain why cold cuts and other cured meats take the #4 slot.

#5 goes to soups. Yup. Healthy, good-for-you-in-winter soups. They’re jam-packed with sodium

In the #6 spot, we find burritos and tacos. The growing Hispanic population is making some fairly unhealthy options very popular.

Of course, restaurants usually don’t serve the same tacos and burritos a Mexican family might eat at home. And those packaged “kits” aren’t exactly low-sodium, either. You really have to go “old school” to get a healthy burrito.

Prepare for Some Real Surprises…

One of the big surprises of the CDC report is that salty snacks – like potato chips – are way down in 7th place.  But spots 8 – 10 will probably surprise you, too.

In 8th place comes chicken. Not just fried chicken. Plain old chicken. It’s followed by cheese in 9th place.

In 10th, we have eggs and omelets.

Cheese, chicken, and eggs are all “healthy” foods… but they add a lot of sodium to the average American’s diet.

So what can you do?

Eating for Heart Health

To begin with, build your meals around fresh vegetables. Eat lots of brightly colored veggies and leafy greens. But go light on root vegetables.

Also eat two or three servings of fresh fruit every day. Focus on fruits you eat with the skin on – like berries, apples, and pears.

Include a moderate amount of unsalted nuts – an ounce or so several times a week. And 3 – 4 servings of lean protein daily. Organic, grass-fed or free-range options are best.

You need sodium to survive. But too much can harm your heart. The more you eat fresh, organic, unprocessed foods, the better. Eating this way will also help control your blood sugar.

When you go fresh, you can even add a little table salt to get the iodine your body desperately needs.

About the Author: Jason Kennedy is a celebrated investigative health writer and the author of The X-Factor Revolution and Beyond the Blue Zone. With over 10 years of experience working with today’s leading alternative and anti-aging doctors, Jason shares his insider status and access to the latest breakthroughs with thousands of readers from around world.


Quader, Z.S., et al, “Sodium Intake Among Persons Aged ≥2 Years — United States, 2013–2014,” Weekly. Mar 31, 2017; 66(12); 324–238.


© Copyright 2017 Discovery Health Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter
Posted in Diet Tagged with: ,

join us

Sign Up for Your Free Report:
Unlocking the Power of Vitamin D

Read this “Vitamin D Bombshell” now and you'll discover the hushed up evidence that makes it possible to live a vital, energetic and disease-free life.

Just enter your name and e-mail address below and click the button. Your FREE report is delivered in seconds!