Looking for the Master Plan

My passion, professionally that is, is helping people maintain and improve their health. Chiropractic care is the first line of treatment I use, obviously. It's what I've spent my career doing and it's the best way I know to get and stay healthy. But, there is more to being healthy than structural therapy.

Like I wrote about in an earlier blog post, us Chiropractors look at the "Triad of Health" a.k.a the Body-Mind-Chemical balance theory.

In this is a three part theory, Chiropractic adjustments handle the "body" piece, and other practitioners are typically taking care of the "mind" piece. But what about the "chemical"/nutrition piece? That's a huge part of health, obviously. And it became more evident through the years to me and my partner (Dr. David Monson), that this was worth exploring more in depth.

Why, you ask? Well, first of all, to improve the results we were getting with patients pain symptoms in general. So, we started the journey to learn more about nutrition therapy. I have to say, it's been a long and bumpy ride. Last year I added up the hours we've taken over the last 20 years and it was right around 1000 for each of us. Considering that a weekend seminar has 8-12 hours of training....that's a lot of weekends!

Taking seminars is work, but it can be so interesting. To me, the harder part is figuring out how to fit the knowledge into what you already know. And... how to implement it into your practice. I've taken enough seminars to know that when the brochure states "you'll be able to start using this on Monday morning." Well, that's wishful thinking at best. But still the quest continues... even for one more seminar or system that will make sense of all you've learned to date.

Sometimes, the one piece you're looking for is there all the time, but you may not have been ready to explore it. I believe that in my case, I have figured out what that is for me. See, the last year or so, I've been using Hair Analysis testing. Not that it tells all, but because it sets up a plan to follow, its a great place to start. And at certain intervals the test is repeated, maybe several more times too, until you reach a point of "homeostasis." That's a kind of fancy way of saying balance, but it has more to do with bodily systems and function.

One big reason I find this type of testing so useful for my baseline nutrition work is that it helps me set up a plan. In health care talk, we call this a "treatment plan." It's so easy to get caught up in patients changing symptom patterns that you overlook the core issues.

Hair Mineral Analysis works on the theory that the vast majority of people on this stressful polluted planet we live on have toxic overload of heavy metals which impede the healthy uptake of nutrient minerals and vitamins leading to poor glandular health. Glands, meaning thyroid and adrenal mainly, but not exclusively. So that's why the repeat testing, because you need to get rid of the bad/toxic/heavy metals first.....OR maybe you have to replenish as best you can the glands first if the persons adrenal glands are really tanked.

No the word tanked isn't a medical term, but I think you get the picture.

Anyway, I've been using this work for about 1.5 years and all results have been positive. It's a process, like all journeys to health, but the results are encouraging. And the latest case (I really don't like to think of my patients as "cases," they're people!) is particularly exciting. And I did get an okay to mention this individual's case in my blog. (I do respect my patients privacy!)

This individual has been struggling with high-stress situations for the last few years (was out of work, etc.) Even though he takes care of his health pretty well, the stress had taken a toll with sleep issues, mind-racing, and he was unable to relax. It was all really starting to affect his ability to perform at a new high-stress job, one with lots of overtime. When we reviewed his results, it revealed exhausted adrenal glands, blood sugar issues and plenty of other baddies. With the report and chart right there for him to see, we could map out a plan. First things first, we started him on new vitamins. The very next day I got a phone call from him saying that he already noticed a big change in his symptoms.

Over the next week other positive results started to appear. And this is the way it's been for pretty much everyone, myself and Dr. Dave included. Oh, there's ups and downs, but that's to be expected.

I don't really have a nifty wrap-up here.  Just that this is the most useful functional tool I've found to start patients on that are looking for a nutritional advice and want to get on a system. Because systems are what make the most sense. Otherwise, you're just symptom-chasing--Oh, you can't sleep--let's try this, etc... That is just a time waster. And I don't want to waste anyone's time, including my own.

Get Fit Or Die Trying? There Are Better Ways.

I was scanning the obituaries the other day (a sure sign I'm over 50) and saw side-by-side stories on two recently deceased individuals.

Both very different stories and very different people.

The first one was of a gentleman who'd passed away peacefully at the age of 94. He was a pioneering research scientist in the field of nutrition who was still working into his eighties. His specialty was Essential Fatty Acids, indeed he named them "Omegas."  Likely he really loved what he did for a living and practiced what he preached.

The other obit was of a women, who, apparently, also practiced what she preached. And died doing it. This gal collapsed of a heart attack at the gym, doing her daily workout. She was 44. One person remarked, "She was really healthy as far as we knew." She was considered quite "fit."

Hmm... that's doesn't seem quite right in my book. "Fit" means sound mentally and physically healthy. You don't drop dead of a heart attack at 44 if you're healthy.

So, what's my take-away from this? When it comes to exercise, don't overdo it. It's not the end all be all for "Fit"ness. In fact, fitness experts recommend at least a day off a week from active training. Walking doesn't count - a daily walk is beneficial.

And when it comes comes to nutrition, maybe look at the guy in the first obit again... he specialized in the field and lived until he was 94.

Now, I'm not saying food, or what we ingest is more important than exercise.

They are both very important and together make a world of difference. For most people who want to make a change, it's a lot easier to start exercising than it is to change eating habits.

For starters, it's cheaper. You just need to get a pair of shoes and appropriate clothing for the weather and take a walk.  Or if you can't walk, swim. Whatever gets you out of your chair. Then, when you can, add in some resistance training. As in, get some dumbbells to start with and do simple exercises.

That's enough to start. And you'll do great things for you body.

It's the eating healthy thing takes more work.

Someone told me recently that when asking their MD for advice on proper diet, he was told this: "Eat food that rots. And nuts."

Oh, if only it were that easy. I mean, that's a start, but that doctor is clearly someone who isn't trained in nutrition! It's a good sound bite, though.

Teaching people how to incorporate nutrition in their life is one of the things I help individuals with in my practice quite regularly. You can save a lot of time and money by seeking knowledgeable people. And we all like to save time and money!

Organic or Conventionally Grown Food: Is There A Difference?

I don't know if you heard about the recent Stanford University study which compared vitamin and mineral levels in organically grown versus conventional foodstuffs.

Here's the jist:

Produce, dairy and meat were analyzed and compared and they found that there was very little difference between conventional and organically grown items.

It's not hard to believe that not much difference was found, actually, because in most croplands in the United States, the topsoil has been severely degraded over the last 50-100 years. I'd much rather see differences between long-standing organic farmland such as the rice-growers "Lundberg Farms" in California and a box of instant rice from the shelf. With that, there's so much more at stake than vitamin/mineral status.

I've eaten organic products since picking up tiny, spotted apples in a Nutrition World at Har-Mar Mall in Roseville... that's Roseville, Minnesota, not California. This was way before the USDA standards were imposed in 2002. Matter of fact, America's oldest certification program, Maine Organic Farmers and Growers Association (I love the acronym, MOGFA), was formed in 1971.

I think it's important to point out what national standards regulate. The following are prohibited in organic products: artificial colors, flavors and preservatives; added growth hormones, antibiotics, pesticides, insecticides, sewage sludge (do you remember the fight over that? the good guys won), radiation and genetically modified foods (GMO's).

Sounds like stuff you don't want in your kitchen, on your table, or in your mouth, right? So before I give you my opinion on the findings, I just want to point out that even if the thought of eating this stuff doesn't bother you, just having less of a toxic load in the environment they're produced in is better in general. Be kind to Mother Nature. As one of my patients put it recently, "It's better for the earth, too!"

But back to the study. It was a "meta-analysis," which means that the results of a bunch of papers were added up. One of my issues with the study was pointed out by the "Organic Consumers Association," an advocacy group based in Finland, Minnesota. They discovered that there were papers included in the study which pre-dated the onset of the USDA standards formulated in 2002. This harms the credibility of the data, obviously. If there are no standards in place, there's no way to compare products.

I would not stake my decision of whether or not to eat organic foods on this study's findings. The chemical residues and hormones in conventional products and the integrity of the farmland which is being threatened by the use of GMO crops is a much more important issue to base a decision. Where is that study, eh?

Well, it's time to go make dinner: Organic rice with tofu, homemade pesto with homegrown basil, yummy stuff. Must have some veggies in the fridge to throw in there...

What Does A Balanced Lifestyle Mean To You?

 What's the big deal about balance and what does a balanced lifestyle mean to you? 

It varies from person to person. And within each persons life, too. Let's start by looking at what the word actually means.

I looked it up. Along with weights and measures, there's this:

Balance = A means of judging or deciding

I liked that. What it tells me is that achieving some balance isn't impossible, and that it depends largely on the decisions we make regarding exercise, diet, and other things that are in control. We truly have the ability to change one of these parts, or components, if something isn't working.

Oh, yes, components.

Chiropractors have been talking about the components of a healthy (balanced!) lifestyle for around 100 years. We call it the "Triad of Health."

We break it down into the following three parts.

1) Structural - physical components, such as the spinal column, joints (This is the Body)
2) Emotional - or Spiritual (This is the Mind|)
3) Chemical - or Nutrition

That covers it, if you think about it. And they're all interconnected. If one is ailing, the effects will show up in the other two.

So, when I'm evaluating a patient, whether it's their first visit or fiftieth, or just listening to their concerns, I keep all of those in mind.

Because you have to keep it in balance.

Is There a 'CURE' In The House?

Cure... is a word I truly dislike. To me, it's one of those four-letter words.

I don't use this word in my professional life, or private life, for that matter. I have to be honest: I'm actually not allowed to use that word professionally because my "scope of practice" in Minnesota, where I'm licensed, says I can't. As a matter of fact, only health care practitioners who are overseen by the state Medical Board can use the word in reference to their work - folks like M.D.'s, D.D.S.'s and D.O.'s.

That's okay with me, though. Because I'm allowed to say other things.

I can say that my therapy helps alleviate pain; assists the body's return to health from various conditions and injuries; helps restore normal function to the nervous system and helps restore normal motion to the spine and other joints in the body.

Research over many decades has shown Chiropractic therapy and adjusting can do that and so much more. Those are pretty great others in my opinion. And it's so gratifying to see it work!

So... back to that word I dislike: cure. Why do i dislike it so much? It gives all the power to the practitioner. I, like many Chiropractors, prefer this six-letter word: innate.

According to Merriam-Webster, here's the definition:

Innate: existing in, belonging to, or determined by factors present in an individual from birth.

Chiropractors use innate like this: "You body has an innate ability to heal itself."

Wow! Who has the power now?!

This doesn't mean if you break you leg or they have a nasty disease I'm the doc to see. But for many conditions including pain, inflammation and loss of normal bio-mechanical function, Chiropractic care can help immensely.

And because I'm trusting the innate to finish the job I start, I'm showing my respect for this wondrous creation we use to navigate this world, our physical bodies.

To your health!
http://northwestminneapolischiropractor.com

Hamburger Stuffing? Really?!

I've decided it was time I wrote a light-hearted post. Enough of the information-heavy articles for a while. It's holiday time, right?

For me that means it's time to start getting out the recipes to figure out what I'm baking and sending off to far-away loved ones.

So, I'm cruising the Sunday newspaper coupon inserts a couple of weeks ago looking for coupons, and there it was....a full page ad with a recipe that read:

"A New Tradition 90 Years in the Making!"

Wow! 90 Years? What could that be? Sounds intriguing, right? Then, I read on. The recipe was for stuffing. And the NEW ingredients?                            

10 Hamburgers

No pickles

Woah!! What the heck!? Really, I thought it was a joke.

I mean, stuffing isn't difficult to make. Bread crumbs, onions, broth/butter (yes please butter) herbs and spices. And nuts if you like, maybe sausage.

But hamburger from a fast food joint?

Here's the rest of the recipe I know of for stuffing:
 

 1 1/2 cups of celery, diced

1 1/4 tsp. ground thyme

1 1/2 ground sage
3/4 tsp. coarse ground pepper

1/4 chicken broth

Looks like it would be pretty dry to me. And bland. Anyone out there care to try it and let me know how it turned out?

I know this a short blog, but this recipe really bugged me. I mean, hamburgers? How gross? Let me know what you think.

Yours in health,

Dr. Jeanne

W: http://northwestminneapolischiropractor.com
P: 612.259.7323

Follow Boulevard Natural Healing Arts, P.A. on Facebook!

Multi-Vitamin Test Gets An "F" In My Book!

Are You Taking Multi-Vitamins? Do you have a death wish or something??!! If you happen to have bought into recent "studies" on this subject matter, then maybe you do.

I, however, don't think taking multi-vitamins will kill you. I think reading "studies" that are full of questionable data might though.

Allow me to explain myself...

According to a report in the October 10th issue of Archives of Internal Medicine, consuming dietary supplements, including multivitamins, folic acid, iron and copper, among others, appears to be associated with an increased risk of death in older women.

The conclusion was that use of common multi-vitamins (including Calcium, Iron and Copper ... which are actually minerals, in case you're wondering) have an increased risk for causing death to those to take them. Conversely, Calcium was associated with decreased mortality (death).

There was a lot of press about this study (probably because it freaked millions of older women out!) and even made the home page of Yahoo! at the time.

But the one little thing this study failed to mention, was what sort of stuff they didn't account for during this study to ascertain these SHOCKING results.

You see, there are studies and there are "studies." The "study" cited in the article was named the "Iowa Woman's Health Study." It's what's called a "Retrospective Study of Already Collected Data."

Sounds impressive, right?

Not really. Basically, surveys were sent to 38,772 postmenopausal women (average age at start of study was 61.2 years) in 1986, 1997 and 2004. Then, Iowa death records were checked for accuracy about mortality rates, and roughly forty percent of those women had died during those eighteen years.

The data collected in the "study" included the following: diet, supplement usage [those are vitamins, ya'll], weight, smoking history, hormone replacement therapy history and history of heart or diabetes.

Oddly, some chronic and/or degenerative diseases weren't on the list. Hmm, not wanting to know whether any of these ladies have CANCER seems a little fishy, no? This seems like a pretty big omission doesn't it?

There are two aspects to this omission that I feel are significant to mention:

• Cancer, like heart disease and diabetes (included in the surveys), is a chronic/degenerative disorder. So why wasn't it included? It just doesn't make sense.

• Also, no questions were asked as to WHY these women were taking supplements. It would be safe to assume that there were some women who started taking supplements after a diagnosis of cancer (or indeed, any other scary diagnosis).

Trust me, as a chiropractor who's been offering nutritional advice for close to 20 years, this is extremely common. I'll even go out on a limb here and say that the majority of people who use supplements, do so out of trying to fend off a syndrome or disease after they've been diagnosed, arguably late in the game.

But that's what I've seen. So, that's gnawing away at me, why didn't they record data about Cancer and why these women were taking supplements?

Some of the conclusions back up previous studies, such as supplementing with iron and copper - if unneeded by the patient - can have toxic effects due to the generation of free radicals (that's why anti-oxidants are often recommended).

Also, significant benefit was found with the following supplements: B, C, D, E and Calcium. But the way the data on this "study" was merged with the rest was... well... perhaps a little flawed. (More detail on this can be found at the "Life Extension Foundation" website).

This here is just my opinion.

But wait, there's more. Want to know my real beef?  Or tofu, for the vegetarians out there? The term "Retrospective"

So, a survey is sent out 3x over 18 years, and that's supposed to be trusted to be accurate information? As a clinician who hands out questionnaires, like a ceiling fan's blades whip through the air, I know how flawed this is. Most people's memory regarding their health is typically fuzzy because hey, they have lives to lead and don't really want to think about their health. It takes a geek like me to want to do this type of work!

As an example, I myself can't remember what supplements I was taking 3 months ago, although I should mention I'm continuously tweaking the recipe!

I look at this "study" as a snapshot, as just some marginally useful information, but certainly not ammunition for the "Vitamins Will Kill You Crowd."

Thanks also to Alliance for Natural Health USA for information and perspective on this. Sometimes it helps to get a second opinion when reading these types of articles.

I'd be interested in hearing your comments and thoughts on this matter. Do you take multi-vitamins and other nutritional supplements? And why?

Yours in health,

Dr. Jeanne

W: http://northwestminneapolischiropractor.com 
P: 612.259.7323  
Follow Boulevard Natural Healing Arts, P.A. on Facebook!