Contradicting Previous Announcements That Obesity Among Kindergarteners Is Declining, New Research Shows Severe Obesity Is on the Rise

By Dr. Mercola

As recently as February, a study by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published in JAMA¹ declared that obesity rates among two- to five-year olds declined by 43 percent in the past decade, dropping from 14 percent in 2003 to eight percent in 2012.

Obesity rates among other age groups were found to have "stabilized." The findings were broadcast on all of the nation's major news stations and in most major newspapers^{2, 3, 4} with many claiming "victory" in the fight against childhood obesity.  Alas, the celebration was short-lived.

Severe Obesity on the Rise Among American Youth

On April 7, another team of researchers published a report in the journal JAMA Pediatrics,^{5, 6} showing a very different picture—despite the fact that they used the same National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data as the CDC. The difference was that this study included another four years' worth of data (1999 to 2012). As reported by WebMD:⁷

"Contrary to a recent report with encouraging figures on childhood obesity in the United States, a new study presents a more sobering picture of the nation's pediatric weight problem.

Severe obesity, which sets kids up for a lifetime of health problems, has increased over the past 14 years, North Carolina researchers found... Severely obese children are the ones most likely to have type 2 diabetes as teens and other problems such as heart disease later in life. They are also the children who will require millions of dollars in health care costs..."

As of 2011, just over 17 percent of American children between the ages of two and 19 were obese, classified as having a body mass index (BMI) exceeding that of 95 percent of same-sex peers of the same age.

Nearly six percent of youths met criteria for class 2 obesity, classified as having a BMI greater than 120 percent of the 95th percentile (or a BMI of 35). More than two percent of children fell in the class 3 obesity category, indicating they had a BMI of 40 or greater.

Such extreme obesity during youth can really set you up for a lifetime of very serious health problems. WebMD quotes Dr. David Katz, director of the Yale University Prevention Research Center, saying:⁸

"'This paper will come as a sobering reality check for any who believed the recent headlines about childhood obesity rates plummeting,' he said. 'Severe obesity in children is rising, he said, adding that this is a critical piece of information.'"

What's Causing Rise in Severe Obesity Among the Very Young?

Clearly, the anti-obesity campaign is NOT working, even though the US government would love you to think their "efforts" are paying off. The truth is that federal policies that stand to have the greatest impact on human health have not been addressed at all.

For example, the US government (and your tax dollars) still subsidizes the growing of genetically engineered (GE) corn and sugar beets, which fuels the production of cheap, processed junk food that fatten up our youth and cause cascading health problems, courtesy of the insulin resistance such a diet brings. 

It's not rocket science to figure out that the American diet is primarily to blame for our expanding waist lines and declining health. It contains the same "nutritional balance" used for decades to purposefully fatten up livestock. Why would anyone think that sugar, grains, artificial sweeteners, hormones, and low-dose antibiotics would suddenly produce different results when consumed by humans?

As just one example, virtually all beef sold in American grocery stores comes from cattle injected with hormones. Corn fattens the cattle, but consumers don't like all that gristle and fat, so hormones are used to make the animal produce more lean muscle tissue.

This improves profits, as it increases the animals' growth by about 10 percent. Ironically, it's the corn that makes the cattle fat, so if we didn't feed them corn, we wouldn't have to give them hormones to minimize fat production!  

Processed food manufacturers also have a lot to answer for, as they refuse to replace harmful ingredients with more natural ones. The US diet is chockfull of ingredients that have been banned in other countries due to their health risks. The dietary factors that have probably done the greatest amount of damage over the past decades include:

• Trans fats
• High fructose corn syrup (HFCS)
• Artificial sweeteners
• Growth promoting drugs such as hormones and antibiotics used in food animals
• Agricultural chemicals such as glyphosate, used on conventionally grown food crops, and genetically engineered crops in particularly high amounts

ALL of these have one thing in common, and that is that they destroy your gut health by killing off beneficial gut bacteria, thereby promoting obesity and metabolic dysfunction, along with virtually every other disease known to man. Without beneficial gut bacteria, most diseases—including mental or neurological problems—will worsen.   

Foods That Destroy Gut Health Also Promote Weight Gain and Poor Health

Your gastrointestinal tract houses some 100 trillion bacteria—about two to three pounds worth. In all, the bacteria in your body actually outnumber your cells by about 10 to one. Researchers have discovered that microbes of all kinds play instrumental roles in countless areas of your health—both physical and mental.  For example, beneficial bacteria, also known as probiotics, have been shown to:

• Modulate your immune response and reduce inflammation
• Produce vitamins, absorb minerals, and eliminate toxins
• Control asthma and reduce risk of allergies
• Benefit  your mood and mental health
• Boost weight loss

Beneficial bacteria also control the growth of disease-causing bacteria by competing for nutrition and attachment sites in your colon. This is of immense importance, as pathogenic bacteria and other less beneficial microbes can wreak havoc with your health if they gain the upper hand. It can also affect your weight.

One hypothesis states that your gut bacteria may in fact be in control of your appetite. Recent research⁹ suggests there's a positive-feedback loop between the foods you crave and the composition of the microbiota in your gut that depend on those nutrients for their survival.

Microbes that thrive on sugar, for example, can signal your brain to eat more sweets. Other studies^{10, 11} have shown that certain bacteria found in your gut can produce insulin resistance and weight gain by triggering chronic low-grade inflammation in your body. Food processing, pasteurization, and sterilization also have a detrimental effect on your microbiome. For all of these reasons, and more, I always recommend a diet rich in whole, unprocessed foods along with cultured or fermented foods.

Coca-Cola Vows to Rev Up Marketing Efforts in Face of Declining Soda Sales

Sweetened beverages are probably among the worst culprits. Whether sweetened with sugar, HFCS, naturally-occurring fructose, or artificial sweeteners, sweetened beverages of all kinds cause obesity and related health problems, including diabetes, heart and liver disease, just to name a few. Ditching ALL of these types of beverages can go a long way toward reducing your risk for chronic health problems and weight gain.

Fortunately, soda consumption has now dropped to its lowest point since 1995,¹² with diet sodas taking the greatest hit. Sales of carbonated beverages in general fell three percent in 2013, while diet Coke and diet Pepsi both dropped by nearly seven percent. Emerging market sales, such as those in India and China, have also slowed. Sadly, Coca-Cola Company is not about to give up their relentless pursuit of raising soda-chugging consumers—health ramifications be damned. As reported by Daily Finance:¹³

"The Atlanta-based company said it would intensify its cost-cutting to produce another $1 billion in savings by 2016, much of which would be reinvested into marketing. 'We know our business responds to marketing,' CEO Muhtar Kent said in a call with reporters... Although Coca-Cola and PepsiCo are tapping emerging markets for growth and sell a wide array of beverages, pressure is mounting for the two companies to figure out how to get soda sales moving in the right direction at home... [Kent] expressed confidence that soda in North America can still grow and just needs improved marketing, innovation and on-the-ground sales execution."

Kent was also quoted by the Wall Street Journal,¹⁴ saying that: "'Coca-Cola remains magical. We need to work even harder to enhance the romance of the brand in every corner of the world,'' Mr. Kent told investors in February. He regularly refers to flagship Coke as the company's 'oxygen' and 'lifeblood.'"

Turning Childhood Into an Illness

As recently discussed on KevinMD.com,¹⁵ childhood itself is being turned into an illness, courtesy of corruption and collusion between the food industry, Big Pharma, and politicians. As noted by psychiatrist Dr. Allen Frances in his article, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has tripled in two decades, and autism now affects an estimated one in 50 children between the ages of six and 17, according to the most recent CDC data.¹⁶ The causes for all these behavioral problems have been debated for years. But according to Dr. Frances, one of the primary factors driving such trends is our own refusal to do what's necessary for health. He writes:

 "Don't believe the statistics: They are wildly exaggerated. Our kids are... too often mislabeled for behaviors that used to be considered part of normal variation. We are turning childhood into an illness. The surest proof of misplaced diagnostic exuberance comes directly from the classroom.

Research shows that the youngest kids in class are much more likely than the oldest to be diagnosed as having ADHD, and to receive stimulant treatment. It is shameful that simple immaturity due to being younger is now mislabeled as mental illness and mistreated with a pill... What makes more sense: Promiscuous use of pills or smaller class sizes and more facilities for physical activity that allow kids to blow off steam?"

I certainly believe that more kids than ever before are suffering neurological harm from a grossly inadequate diet, lack of exercise, and an onslaught of environmental toxins. But Dr. Frances makes a good point: improved diagnosis and increased use of medication is NOT the answer. It in no way, shape, or form addresses any of the root causes. If our government was really intent on providing better health for children, they'd face reality and address the root causes head on. But they choose not to. Probably because it would require a major transformation of the entire food system, for starters. It would also require reverting back to more traditional school systems that includes plenty of physical education.

Teach Your Kids the Basic Tenets of Optimal Health

While the situation appears bleak when viewed from the perspective of what the "authorities" are doing (or not doing), I urge you to consider your own role. YOU have the power to make the needed alterations within your own family. Leading by example is also one of the most effective teaching tools there is, which will set your children up to be better equipped to maneuver an increasingly toxic world as they themselves become parents.

First and foremost, I believe we need to teach children what "real food" actually is. Remember, wholesome food is "live" and typically raw food, and the hallmark of live food is the fact that it will wilt and decompose. If you're unsure about how to get your family on the right track, my optimized nutrition plan offers a step-by-step guide to feeding your family right. You can find even more help in the book I wrote on the subject, called Generation XL: Raising Healthy, Intelligent Kids in a High-Tech, Junk-Food World. As a quick overview, here are some of the most important lifestyle strategies you can teach your child that will serve him or her well for the rest of their life:

1. Proper food choices: For a comprehensive guide, see my free optimized nutrition plan. Generally speaking though, you'll want to focus your diet on whole, ideally organic, unprocessed, or minimally processed foods. For the best nutrition and health benefits, you will want to eat a good portion of your food raw.

Avoid refined sugar and processed fructose in particular. All forms of sugar have toxic effects when consumed in excess, and drive multiple disease processes in your body, not the least of which is insulin resistance, a major cause of chronic disease and accelerated aging. I believe the two primary keys for successful weight management are severely restricting carbohydrates (sugars, fructose, and grains) in your diet, and increasing healthy fat consumption. This will optimize insulin and leptin levels, which is key for maintaining a healthy weight and optimal health. Sources of healthy fats include:

Olives and olive oil	Coconuts and coconut oil	Butter made from raw grass-fed organic milk
Raw nuts, particularly macadamia	Organic pastured egg yolks	Avocados
Grass-fed meats	Palm oil	Unheated organic nut oils

2. Regular exercise: Along with core-strengthening exercises, strength training, and stretching, I highly recommend doing Peak Fitness exercises two or three times a week. This is where you raise your heart rate up to your anaerobic threshold for 20 to 30 seconds, followed by a 90-second recovery period. High-intensity interval-type training boosts human growth hormone (HGH) production, which is essential for optimal health, strength, and vigor. HGH also helps boost weight loss.
3. Stress reduction: Your emotional state plays a role in nearly every physical disease -- from heart disease and depression, to arthritis and cancer. Meditation, prayer, social support, and exercise are all viable options that can help you maintain emotional and mental equilibrium. I also strongly believe in using simple tools such as the Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT) to address deeper, oftentimes hidden, emotional problems.
4. Drink plenty of clean pure water.
5. Maintain a healthy gut: About 80 percent of your immune system resides in your gut, and research is stacking up showing that probiotics—beneficial bacteria—affect your health in a myriad of ways; it can even influence your ability to lose weight. A healthy diet is the ideal way to maintain a healthy gut, and regularly consuming traditionally fermented foods is the easiest, most cost-effective way to ensure optimal gut flora.
6. Optimize your vitamin D levels: Research has shown that increasing your vitamin D levels can reduce your risk of death from ALL causes. Sun exposure is the best way to optimize your vitamin D levels as your body has built-in "fail-safe" mechanisms that prevent detrimental side effects from occurring. For more information on how to safely and effectively optimize your vitamin D levels, please see my previous article, "How Vitamin D Performance Testing Can Help You Optimize Your Health."

If you opt for oral vitamin D supplements, make sure you use D3, not prescription D2, as the latter may do more harm than good. Also, if you take supplemental vitamin D, you're creating an increased demand for K2—not K1 that is typically in vegetables as it will not work synergize with vitamin D. Vitamin K2 deficiency is actually what produces the symptoms of vitamin D toxicity, which includes inappropriate calcification that can lead to hardening of your arteries.Together, vitamin D and K2 help strengthen your bones and improve your heart health.

7. Avoid as many chemicals, toxins, and pollutants as possible: This includes tossing out your toxic household cleaners, soaps, personal hygiene products, air fresheners, bug sprays, lawn pesticides, and insecticides, just to name a few, and replacing them with non-toxic alternatives.
8. Get plenty of high-quality sleep: Regularly catching only a few hours of sleep can hinder metabolism and hormone production in a way that is similar to the effects of aging and the early stages of diabetes. Chronic sleep loss may speed the onset or increase the severity of age-related conditions such as type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, obesity, and memory loss.

The Bitter Truth About Sugar

By Dr. Mercola

Dr. Robert Lustig, a Professor of Clinical Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology at UC San Francisco, has been on the forefront of the movement to educate people about the health hazards of sugar and fructose in particular, for a number of years now.

In the video above, he discusses how low-fat recommendations have led to a dramatic increase in sugar consumption, and it is in fact sugar, not fat, that drives heart disease.

Excess sugar is also a primary factor in countless other chronic disease states. This is a topic he delves into in-depth in his new book, Fat Chance: Beating the Odds Against Sugar, Processed Food, Obesity, and Disease.

The excessive amount of “stealth” sugar in processed foods has quite literally become the backbone that supports America’s disease care business.

According to the Credit Suisse Research Institute’s 2013 study¹ “Sugar: Consumption at a Crossroads,” up to 40 percent of US healthcare expenditures are for diseases directly related to the overconsumption of sugar! 

Sugar Masquerading as Breakfast, Lunch, and Dinner...

A major problem with processed food is that when you look at the label, you have no way of knowing how much of the sugar is natural to the food itself, versus the sugar that was added.  

Even foods that are typically considered “healthy” can contain shocking amounts of added sugar or fructose, typically in the form of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS).

Clinical trials have shown that those who consume HFCS tend to develop higher risk factors for cardiovascular disease within as little as two weeks, so if I had to pick out the worst culprit among sugars, it would be fructose.

According to Dr. Lustig, it’s important to distinguish between natural food-based sugars versus added sugar.

For example, he notes that a small serving cup of plain yogurt has about seven grams of sugar in the form of lactose, a natural sugar found in dairy, which does not cause any major harm.

A fruit flavored yogurt on the other hand, contains about 19 grams of sugar, 12 grams of which is added sugar. This equates to eating a small cup of plain yoghurt with a bowl of Frosted Corn Flakes.

According to Dr. Lustig, we “abdicated rational nutrition when we went to processed foods.” The low-fat craze has been particularly harmful, because when the food industry removed the fat, they had to put lots of sugar in. Without either fat or sugar, the food is unpalatable and no one would buy it.

We now know that good nutrition includes healthy fat, and quite a bit of it, and that sugar is a primary driver of chronic inflammation and related health problems, including obesity, diabetes, and heart disease.

In short, by removing fat and adding sugar, the processed food industry has created a smorgasbord of made to order disease... Besides enormous amounts of sugar, processed foods are also loaded with ingredients that have been banned in other countries, such as trans fats, artificial sweeteners, genetically engineered ingredients, and glyphosate.

Soda Companies’ Secret Business-Building Strategy—Soda Increases Thirst!

According to Dr. Lustig, there’s a conspiracy around the sugar in soda. Soft drinks contain caffeine, a mild diuretic that makes you urinate more, thereby eliminating water from your body. It also contains about 55 mg of salt, and when you take in salt and excrete water, you get thirstier.

The reason why soda contains so much sugar is because they have to mask the taste of the salt... “They [the soda companies] know what they’re doing, and this is very specific,” Dr. Lustig says, “because they have made it so that you will buy more. This is their business strategy.”

Unfortunately, it’s a business strategy that is slowly killing customers... Adding insult to injury, sugar has also been found to be eight times as addictive as cocaine,² which also ensures that you’ll stay hooked on processed foods and sweet drinks.

Your Body Can Only Handle a Limited Amount of Sugar

The main problem with sugar, and processed fructose in particular, is the fact that your liver has a very limited capacity to metabolize it. According to Dr. Lustig, you can safely metabolize about six teaspoons of added sugar per day. But the average American consumes 22 teaspoons of added sugar a day.

All that excess sugar is metabolized into body fat, and leads to all of the chronic metabolic diseases we struggle with, including but not limited to:

• Type 2 diabetes
• Cardiovascular disease
• Hypertension (high blood pressure)
• Dementia
• Cancer

According to a study published in JAMA³ earlier this year, Americans get, on average, about 350 calories a day from added sugar in the diet. (This equates to about 22 teaspoons of sugar, as noted earlier, which amounts to 25 percent of the average American’s daily calorie intake.)

In this study, people who consumed 21 percent or more of their daily calories in the form of sugar were TWICE as likely to die from heart disease compared to those who got seven percent or less or their daily calories from added sugar.

The risk was nearly TRIPLED among those who consumed 25 percent or more of their daily calories from added sugar. Approximately 10 percent of Americans consume added sugars at this tripled-risk level...

Four grams of sugar is equivalent to about one teaspoon, and I strongly recommend limiting your daily fructose intake to 25 grams or less from all sources, including natural ones like fruit. That equates to just over six teaspoons of sugar a day.

If you’re among the 80 percent majority who have insulin or leptin resistance (overweight, diabetic, high blood pressure, or taking a statin drug), you’d be wise to restrict your total fructose consumption to as little as 15 grams per day, until you’ve normalized your insulin and leptin levels.

Sugar-Cancer Connection Revisited

Hospitals are notoriously ignorant of the metabolic damage associated with sugar and processed foods. Even cancer hospitals serve up processed high-carb diets to their patients, despite the fact that the science quite clearly shows that sugar feeds cancer.

Cancer cells need glucose to thrive, and carbohydrates turn into glucose in your body. In order to starve the cancer cells, you have to eliminate its primary food source, i.e. the sugars, which include all non-vegetable carbohydrates. Otto Warburg actually received a Nobel Prize back in 1934 for his research on cancer cell physiology, which clearly demonstrated cancer cells require more sugar to thrive. Unfortunately, very few oncologists appreciate or apply this knowledge today.

The latest World Cancer Report,⁴ issued by the World Health Organization (WHO), predicts worldwide cancer rates to rise by 57 percent in the next two decades. But the report also notes that half of all cancers are preventable and can be avoided if current medical knowledge is acted upon. Diet (and exercise) is included in their list of known cancer prevention strategies.

I firmly believe that reducing sugar and processed food consumption is part and parcel of the long-term answer. Even in terms of treatment, cancer has been shown to respond to diet alone. A ketogenic diet, which is high in healthy fat and very low in sugar, has been shown to reverse cancer in many cases, and a lot of very exciting research is being done in this area. It can be very useful in addressing the underlying insulin resistance. Once the insulin resistance resolves, the ketogenic diet is typically not required.

New Study Reveals Sugar Also Initiates Cancer Growth

Oncologists will surely have to start paying closer attention to the issue of sugar if they want to purport to practice science-based medicine. Not only is there a solid scientific basis for the claim that sugar feeds existing cancer; according to a study⁵ published in the Journal of Clinical Investigation in January, sugar also appears to initiate cancer growth. As reported by GreenMedInfo.com,⁶ this study:

"’...provide[s] evidence that increased glycolytic activation itself can be an oncogenic event...’ That is to say, the activation of sugar-based metabolism in a cell – driven by both the presence of increased quantities of glucose and the increase glucose receptors on the cell membrane surface (i.e. ‘overexpression of a glucose transporter’) – drives cancer initiation.

Moreover, the study found that ‘Conversely, forced reduction of glucose uptake by breast cancer cells led to phenotypic reversion.’ In other words, interfering with sugar availability and uptake to the cell causes the cancer cell to REVERSE towards its pre-cancer structure-function (phenotype).

Tips for Reducing Your Added Sugar Intake

As mentioned in the featured video, the easiest way to dramatically cut down on your sugar and fructose consumption is to switch to a diet of whole, unprocessed foods, as most of the added sugar you end up with comes from processed fare; not from adding a teaspoon of sugar to your tea or coffee. But there are other ways to cut down well. This includes:

• Cutting back on the amount of sugar you personally add to your food and drink
• Using Stevia or Luo Han instead of sugar and/or artificial sweeteners. You can learn more about the best and worst of sugar substitutes in my previous article, “Sugar Substitutes—What’s Safe and What’s Not”
• Using fresh fruit in lieu of canned fruit or sugar for meals or recipes calling for a bit of sweetness
• Using spices instead of sugar to add flavor to your meal

Take Control of Your Health to Avoid Becoming a Statistic

Research coming out of some of America’s most respected institutions now confirms that sugar is a primary dietary factor driving chronic disease development. So far, scientific studies have linked excessive fructose consumption to about 78 different diseases and health problems,⁷ including heart disease and cancer.

Having this information puts you in the driver’s seat when it comes to prevention... As a general rule, a diet that promotes health is high in healthful fats and very, very low in sugar and non-vegetable carbohydrates, along with a moderate amount of high-quality protein. For more specifics, please review my free optimized nutrition plan, which also includes exercise recommendations, starting at the beginner’s level and going all the way up to advanced.

Feds Vow to Publicize Vaccine Injuries Claim Program

By Dr. Mercola

If you or your child were to be seriously injured after receiving a routine US government-recommended vaccination, your only recourse would be to apply to the federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP).

Suing the vaccine manufacturer (or the doctor when the vaccine was given negligently) to obtain financial compensation for medical care, pain, and suffering is out of the question, as Congress and the Supreme Court have banned vaccine product liability and vaccine injury malpractice lawsuits in the US.

Instead, vaccine injury claims are awarded or denied by US Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) officials using US Department of Justice (DOJ) attorneys or adjudicated by “special masters” in the US Court of Federal Claims.

Why Vaccine Injury Compensation Program Was Created

The VICP was created by Congress in 1986 under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act because vaccine manufacturers threatened to stop producing vaccines if they weren’t protected from vaccine injury lawsuits.

It was created as an alternative to a civil court lawsuit, giving partial liability protection to vaccine manufacturers, pediatricians, and other vaccine providers from civil liability for injuries and deaths caused by federally recommended childhood vaccines.¹

If the injured party was denied compensation or dissatisfied with the amount of the award, they could then proceed with a civil lawsuit with certain restrictions, depending upon the case.

Unhappy with this partial liability protection, drug companies kept pushing for complete liability protection and, in 2011, convinced the US Supreme Court majority to rule that federally licensed and recommended vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe” and that the VICP should be the “sole remedy” for all vaccine injury claims.²

I think it’s worth repeating, in case you just glossed over it: The reason you cannot sue a vaccine manufacturer for injury or death is because vaccines are “unavoidably unsafe.”

This also means that even if it can be proven that a government recommended vaccine that injured or killed someone in America was defectively designed and could have been made less reactive, no one can sue the drug company in question.³

Funds for the VICP come from a 75 cent fee added to the cost of every dose of vaccine (so the combination MMR vaccine has a $2.25 fee tacked on to it because that shot contains three vaccines).

In effect, Congress gave the pharmaceutical industry a free ride when it comes to drug companies having any financial accountability for the safety of vaccines they sell, and vaccine users and US taxpayers are the ones paying for this program.

This is because the federal government is the biggest purchaser of vaccines provided in public health clinics. When everything is said and done, vaccine manufacturers have virtually no incentive whatsoever to ensure the safety and effectiveness of vaccines that are recommended by federal health officials and mandated by state health officials.

Feds Vow to Publicize Vaccine Injuries Claim Program

Unfortunately, while the VICP was originally set up to give vaccine-injured Americans an expedited, non-adversarial, less expensive administrative alternative to a civil court lawsuit, the process usually only adds more suffering.

Many vaccine victims are left waiting without support and financial assistance for years on end, while their case snakes its way through the red tape. Some VICP claimants even say they felt “attacked” by the government that was supposed to help them.

Another problem has been a lack of public awareness that this program even exists. Reportedly, federal officials operating the VICP have now vowed to publicize the program better,⁴ promising improvements in its literature to make it easier to understand, and improvements to its website.

They’ve also stated they will seek to increase awareness among health care providers, parents and expectant parents, older adults, Spanish speaking adults, as well as civil litigation and plaintiff’s attorneys.

What actually happens remains to be seen. Several years ago, a comprehensive consultant report about publicizing the VICP was created at a cost of $300,000.⁵ Few recommendations were ever implemented however. At present, less than $20,000 of the VICP’s $6.5 million annual budget is spent on public outreach.

Moreover, VICP directors didn’t begin taking action on publicity until after a congressionally requested Government Accountability Office (GAO) inquiry began earlier this year. Public outreach has also been largely ignored since the program’s inception. A direct quote from the book, The Vaccine Court: The Dark Truth of America's Vaccine Injury Compensation Program reads:

“One of the most OVERLOOKED provisions of the act was the requirement that the HHS Secretary conduct public awareness and outreach programs to inform the general public about the program and the eligibility to file a claim for either a vaccine-related injury or death. …This provision has been greatly ignored by the HHS Secretary.”

The Associated Press⁶ also claims it found evidence suggesting that “the government seems intent on keeping the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program’s public profile low.”

Judge Warns Publicity May Further Exacerbate Process Delays  

The judge who oversees the special vaccine court in the US Court of Federal Claims warns that greater publicity may result in a greater number of filings, which means the process may take even longer than it already does.

As noted in a recent article by Insurance Journal,⁷ compensation through the VICP can be painfully slow—at times stretching out over a decade—and that’s if your case is even approved for compensation. Most aren’t. According to the Associated Press:⁸

“Overall, the government says it distributed $2.8 billion [from 1988] through March 2014. In recent years, the program has received more than 400 claims annually.

Claims are supposed to be resolved within 240 days, with options for another 150 days of extensions. But between the court's opening in 1988 and the end of 2012, less than 7 percent of 7,876 cases not including those claiming a vaccine caused the developmental disability autism met the 240-day target...

Hundreds have surpassed the decade mark. Several people died before getting any money.”

Vaccine Injury Denialists Object to Publicizing Reality of Vaccine Injuries

Another concern among vaccine proponents is that increased publicity around the compensation program may be “misinterpreted” as a public message that vaccines can cause harm, which might dissuade people from vaccinating.

Well, the truth is vaccines can cause harm. The fact that the VICP has kept such a low profile for this long means that most people have no idea that billions of dollars have in fact been paid out to vaccine injured individuals. This is the truth, and however people want to interpret that, it deserves to be widely known that vaccine injuries can and do occur.

Unfortunately, some legal experts still vehemently deny the reality of vaccine injuries and are working overtime to remove the ability for parents to make informed vaccine decisions for their children. For example, UC Hastings law professor Dorit Reiss has been quite vocal in her opposition to changes in the VICP that would allow more vaccine injured children to be compensated.⁹

She’s also advocating for the elimination of vaccine exemptions and has, in fact, been using her position to claim that there is no evidence vaccines cause harm, and that parents refusing to give their children all government recommended vaccines should be held criminally liable for deaths causes by infectious diseases.¹⁰ Journalists are also being manipulated into only reporting information about vaccines that the CDC, FDA, and other government agencies give them, which clearly adds to the lack of transparency on questions about vaccine safety.

According to a July 16 issue of the Nieman Reports,¹¹ “Public health reporters say federal agencies are restricting access and information, limiting their ability to cover crucial health issues.” Fed up with the perceived censorship, a group of journalists have formed a new organization called Stop the New American Censorship¹² to raise awareness about this problem. Even students are being blackmailed into not reporting the truth about vaccine injuries. If they write about it, they can get charged with academic misconduct, as evidenced by this recent report¹³ about a Master of Science student in Australia who wrote a thesis giving evidence for the fact that the whooping cough vaccine isn’t working.

Adult Flu Vaccine Injuries Dominate VICP Claims

According to the GAO’s report, while the VICP was established to assist children injured by government-recommended childhood vaccines, most claims are now filed by adults suffering vaccine injury after receiving influenza vaccine. The flu vaccine was added to the VICP in 2005.¹⁴ Most cases involve adults developing Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS)—a crippling condition in which your immune system attacks your nerves. GBS has been a known side effect of influenza  vaccines for nearly 40 years.

According to the book, The Vaccine Court: The Dark Truth of America's Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, the swine flu vaccine program was cut short in 1976 when it became clear that the swine flu vaccine was associated with serious neurological side effects such as GBS and transverse myelitis. Congress also passed the “Swine Flu Act” that same year, which transferred liability for vaccine injuries associated with the swine flu vaccine from the vaccine manufacturers to the federal government. Some influenza vaccines, including the adult high-dose flu vaccine for seniors sold under the name Fluzone, also list GBS as a potential side effect in its package insert.¹⁵

All Vaccines Carry Risks

It's important to understand that ALL vaccines carry a risk for provoking an immediate acute adverse reaction, such as anaphylactic shock, fainting, or having a seizure, which could be truly life threatening if you're driving a car or crossing a street after you have left the store where you got vaccinated, for example. Further, vaccines can impair and alter immune system responses and can also cause brain inflammation (encephalitis or encephalopathy) that may lead to permanent brain damage.

In addition, as Institute of Medicine Committees have pointed out in published reports, some individuals are more susceptible to suffering harm from vaccines because of biological, genetic, and environmental risk factors but, most of the time, doctors cannot predict who will be harmed because there are few scientific studies that have evaluated vaccine risks for individuals.¹⁶ Here are just some of the ways vaccines can impair or alter immune responses and brain function:

• Some components in vaccines are neurotoxic, including heavy metals such as mercury preservatives and aluminum adjuvants; residual toxins like endotoxin and bioactive pertussis toxin; and chemicals like formaldehyde and phenooxyethanol.
• The lab-altered and genetically engineered viruses and bacteria in vaccines may impair immune responses and do not stimulate the same kind of immunity that occurs when the body responds to an infectious disease
• Foreign DNA/RNA from human, animal and insect cell substrates used to produce vaccines may trigger serious health problems for some people
• Vaccines may alter your T-cell function and lead to chronic illness
• Vaccines can trigger allergies by introducing large foreign protein molecules into your body that have not been properly broken down by your digestive tract (since they are injected). Your body can have an allergic reaction to these foreign particles

In the video below, Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the non-profit National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), interviews a Connecticut artist and her mother, a former professor of nursing, who developed GBS after getting a seasonal flu shot in 2008. She became permanently disabled with total body paralysis.

It’s really important to understand what influenza and flu shot risks are, so that you can ask yourself, “Does my (or my child’s) risk of getting influenza and developing complications outweigh the risks of getting a flu shot and developing complications?” In the end, it is up to you to become fully informed about all risks and make informed vaccine and other health care decisions for yourself or your child if you are a parent.

New Changes to VAERS

The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are also proposing changes to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Public comments are accepted until January 23, 2015.¹⁷ In recent years VAERS has received about 30,000 vaccine-injury reports annually. The suggested changes to the VAERS reporting form are intended to “improve reporting efficiency and data quality.”  Significant changes include:

• A special box for military-related vaccine injuries
• The addition of check-boxes to indicate more specifically the location where the person was vaccinated (e.g., nursing home, pharmacy, school health clinic, etc.)
• Boxes to report pre-existing conditions the person may have had prior to vaccination, such as allergies, other illnesses, and long-standing chronic health conditions
• A box to list any over-the-counter and prescription drugs the person was on, as well as a list of dietary supplements or herbal remedies they may have been taking

VAERS is another critical resource that has not been given due publicity or attention. In 1999, FDA Commissioner David Kessler, MD wrote in The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) that physicians failed to report up to 99 percent of all serious adverse reactions to vaccines and medications,¹⁸ and it still remains that way today. At best, a maximum of 10 percent of adverse reactions are ever reported. At present, the VAERS database¹⁹ lists 8,000 different adverse vaccine reactions, from localized swelling and anaphylactic shock to autism, coma, and death.²⁰

According to Dr. Kessler, physicians should report when there is a suspicion that the drug may be related to a serious event; they do NOT have to establish the connection or wait for more compelling evidence. Unfortunately, most doctors today are pressured by public health officials and medical trade organizations to push vaccines and consider preventing disease through vaccines to be a primary goal of their profession.²¹ Some doctors go so far as to “fire” patients who refuse to get every government recommended vaccine even when patients report they have suffered reactions after previous vaccinations! If doctors would instead actively look for and report serious adverse health outcomes following vaccination, including hospitalizations, injuries and deaths, instead of dismissing them as a “coincidence,” it could go a long way toward building a clinical evidence base that will reveal the whole truth about vaccine risks.

The Demise of Science? Hundreds of Computer Generated Studies Have Been Published in Respected Scientific Journals

By Dr. Mercola

Many health care professionals rely on published research to make treatment recommendations, and large numbers of patients can be affected when false findings make their way into otherwise respected journals.

Unfortunately, this happens more frequently than you might think. In recent years, it's become quite clear that the scientific field has a major problem on its hands, as seriously flawed, and worse, outright falsified, research is entering the system at an increasing rate.

Bad information is usually worse than no information at all, especially when we're talking about health and treatment protocols that affect hundreds of thousands of patients.

Today, a majority of public health, diet, and medical treatment recommendations are flat out wrong, and this is precisely why allopathic care continues to become progressively more dangerous, killing patients rather than making them well.

The prevalence of anti-scientific science is also how we've ended up in a world of toxic chemical-based agriculture and subsidized junk food that deteriorates rather than supports health.

Industry and Medical Journals Are Destroying Credible Science

The problem, to a great extent, can be traced back to industry-based and industry-funded research, which has overtaken most scientific fields of inquiry. Independent research, where funding is unrelated to findings, has become a rarity, and the end result is a dramatic deterioration of credible science.

Chemical technology companies like Monsanto also fund colleges and universities, thereby gaining control over research, science, policy, and public opinion.

As an example of the quick deterioration of reputable science, consider the following: between 1966 and 1997, 37 percent of scientific retractions were due to scientific misconduct,¹ which includes data falsification or fabrication, questionable veracity, unethical author conduct, or plagiarism.

Fast-forward a little more than a decade and that number skyrockets to 72 percent!² The highest number of incidents of scientific misconduct occurred in the drug literature, where nearly 75 percent of the drug studies retracted between 2000 and 2011 were attributed to misconduct. Gone are the days when bad research was primarily due to honest human error, it seems.

Fake Science Run Amok

In recent years, a number of individuals have taken it upon themselves to prove just how easily the system can be fooled by fake science. One "sting operation" was concocted by a science journalist at Harvard University who wanted to test how likely it would be for bad research to be published in Open Access journals. 

The bogus paper described a simple experiment supposedly showing that lichens can slow cancer cell growth.³ More than half the journals—157 of the 304—accepted the fake paper for publication. The other half rejected it. The result of his "experiment" was published in Science magazine.⁴

However, traditional pay-for-access journals are not immune to publishing flawed studies. Most are also beholden to drug companies in one way or another. Investigations have repeatedly shown that studies funded by drug companies favor drugs 80 percent of the time.

This makes such conflicts of interest between Big Pharma and medical journals a major hurdle when it comes to upholding scientific excellence. Earlier this year, a study was published that showed nearly ONE MILLION Europeans were killed over a five-year span through the inappropriate prescription of beta blockers for non-cardiac surgery.

The research serving as the basis for this deadly prescription guideline was published in prestigious peer reviewed journals.

It's also important to realize that all research is NOT published. And it should come as no surprise that drug studies funded by a pharmaceutical company that reaches a negative conclusion will rarely ever see the light of day. This is equally, if not more, detrimental to science-based medicine.

Hundreds of Computer Generated Studies Have Been Published

But it actually gets worse. The featured article in Slate magazine,⁵ headlined "How Gobbledygook Ended Up in Respected Scientific Journals," is an ominous warning of what is happening to the scientific field as a whole.

"In 2005, a group of MIT graduate students decided to goof off in a very MIT graduate student way: they created a program called SCIgen that randomly generated fake scientific papers. Thanks to SCIgen, for the last several years, computer-written gobbledygook has been routinely published in scientific journals and conference proceedings," Slate magazine reports.

"According to Nature News,Cyril Labbé, a French computer scientist, recently informed Springer and the IEEE, two major scientific publishers, that between them, they had published more than 120 algorithmically-generated articles.⁶

In 2012, Labbé had told the IEEE of another batch of 85 fake articles. He's been playing with SCIgen for a few years—in 2010 a fake researcher he created, Ike Antkare, briefly became the 21st most highly cited scientist in Google Scholar's database."

So, just how many papers containing computer generated nonsense have been published? It appears no one knows. The creators of SCIgen made the program available by free download, and other people, besides its three creators, have been using it, too.⁷

Labbé, mentioned above, developed a way to detect SCIgen generated manuscripts, and have alerted publishers about 205 of them so far. But there's no telling how many people, researchers included, have used SCIgen or how many of its papers have actually been accepted for publication. Nature⁸ writes:

"'The papers are quite easy to spot,' says Labbé, who has built a website⁹ where users can test whether papers have been created using SCIgen. His detection technique, described in a study¹⁰ published in Scientometrics in 2012, involves searching for characteristic vocabulary generated by SCIgen."

How Academic Publishing Contributes to Demise of Science

As reported in the featured Slate article,¹¹ other major contributing factors to this deterioration of scientific merit is the fact that a) academic publishing has became incredibly lucrative, and b) in order to advance your academic career, you have to publish lots of papers.¹² As explained by Slate magazine:

"Today, the most critical measure of an academic article's importance is the 'impact factor' of the journal it is published in. The impact factor... measures how often articles published in a journal are cited...¹³ There is an analogy here to the way Google and other search engines index Web pages. So-called search-engine optimization aims to boost the rankings of websites...

Scientists routinely add citations to papers in journals they are submitting to in the hopes of boosting chances of acceptance. They also publish more papers... in the hopes of being more widely cited themselves. This creates a self-defeating cycle... The only solution, as Colin Macilwain wrote in Nature¹⁴ last summer, is to 'Halt the avalanche of performance metrics.'"

NIH Vows to Tackle Science's Reproducibility Problem

In March 2012, Reuters¹⁵ reported the shocking finding that the vast majority of the "landmark" studies on cancer cannot be reproduced, and that a high proportion of those unreliable studies come from respectable university labs. Former drug company researcher Glenn Begley looked at 53 papers in the world's top journals, and found that he and a team of scientists were unable to replicate 47 of the 53 published studies—all of which were considered important and valuable for the future of cancer treatments! The allegations appeared in the March 28, 2012 issue of the journal Nature.¹⁶

"It was shocking," Begley told Reuters.¹⁷ "These are the studies the pharmaceutical industry relies on to identify new targets for drug development. But if you're going to place a $1 million or $2 million or $5 million bet on an observation, you need to be sure it's true. As we tried to reproduce these papers we became convinced you can't take anything at face value."

The "reproducibility problem" has become so great that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) recently vowed to tackle it head on, lest science lose all credibility. As reported by FierceBiotech:¹⁸

"[T]hanks to some high-profile failings in some of the world's leading journals, the call for reform has reached a fever pitch, and National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins has taken up the baton. In an essay published in Nature, Collins and Principal Deputy Director Lawrence Tabak write that 'the checks and balances that once ensured scientific fidelity have been hobbled' over the past few years, as researchers strive to be provocative at the cost of explaining their methodology.

That shoot-for-the-moon paradigm is only made worse by funding agencies, academic centers and journals, the two write, as many science financiers encourage hyperbole in hopes of snagging headlines. And while the problem starts at the preclinical level, it can quickly trickle up into the drug development world. As Reuters¹⁹ reports, Amgen found in 2011 that its researchers could confirm just 6 of the 53 breakthrough cancer studies they vetted, while Bayer said in 2012 that of 67 landmark studies in oncology, women's health, and cardiovascular disease, it could verify only 14." [Emphasis mine]

What's Being Done to Get Science Back on Track?

According to the NIH, part of the reproducibility problem stems from poor training, so a program is being developed to educate researchers on good experimental design and transparent conduct. It really is hard to imagine why researchers would not have received this type of training previously, as this is exactly the kind of training you should get when studying at some of the most respectable universities in the country. In my mind, this is yet another strong indication that industry funding research institutions is a trend loaded with potential for massive abuse.

Other strategies under consideration by the NIH include conducting more in-depth reviews to ensure appropriate scientific basis and viability of research. The NIH is also calling on journals, academics, and industry to assist in correcting current flaws. Journals, for example, are asked to highlight failed studies and corrections, while universities are urged to change priorities to avoid incentivizing premature publication in the interest of gaining tenure. Individual researchers are also urged to explain their methodology in greater detail, to facilitate evaluation of their work. Last but not least, the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology will be holding hearings in which researchers and journal editors will be interviewed to get a better grasp of the problems. If deemed necessary, policy recommendations may be issued.

The Era of Decision-Based Evidence Making Is Upon Us; Can This Trend Be Reversed?

It's become quite clear that instead of evidence-based decision making, we now have decision-based evidence making... Scientific evidence appears to be largely concocted to support an already established corporate agenda, and any scientific investigation that refutes or questions it is either suppressed or squelched by virtually any means.

The public is further deceived by clever and highly paid PR firms, disguised as scientific organizations but set up specifically for the purpose of controlling how the media reports new science and portrays industry. Two examples are Science Media Centre (SMC) and the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH), both of which are heavily funded by industry. The problem is made worse by the fact that many journalists today are not doing their due diligence in fact-checking their sources.

These organizations are anything but independent, from their scientists to their governing boards. SMC has branches all over the world, its primary purpose being to control the press using a team of not-so-independent scientists who spin science news in industry's favor. SMC "experts" (physicians, research scientists, university professors, etc.) have undisclosed and far-reaching affiliations with biotech giants, including EFSA, Bayer, Pioneer-DuPont, Syngenta, and Monsanto. You've likely seen these so-called experts on the evening news spinning scientific information more times than you can count.

Who and What Can You Trust?

The bottom line is that you need to be skeptical of ANY published study, particularly if it comes from an obscure journal. But you can no longer completely trust even the most respected journals, for all of the reasons discussed above. Always consider the source of the information... Who funded the study and where it was published? Also do not accept the findings of any single paper, as scientific results are only reliable after replication and the building of consensus through time. Always look for corroboration.

In order to determine the best course of action in any situation, you've got to use all the resources available to you, including your own common sense and reason, true expert advice, and the experience of those you trust. Remain skeptical but open. Even if it is something I'm saying, you need to realize that YOU are responsible for your and your family's health, not me—and certainly not the pharmaceutical and/or chemical technology industries who will try to sell you their wares and seduce you with innovative (but often risky) "science-based solutions."

If you're facing a health challenge, make sure your healthcare practitioners really understand health at a foundational level and have extensive experience helping others. In the meantime, be proactive! Making wise lifestyle choices will keep you healthy and decrease your odds of needing risky medical interventions in the future.

Studies Show Diet and Lifestyle Choices of Both Parents Have Multigenerational Health Effects

By Dr. Mercola

What if your lifestyle choices affected not only your own health but also your children's health, for life? What if avoiding exercise actually affected the health of your grandchildren? Would knowing this cause you to make different choices? As far-fetched as this sounds, several recent studies suggest this may be the case.

It will probably not come as much of a surprise that the health and lifestyle choices of pregnant women have been shown to affect the health of their unborn children. However, a groundbreaking new study suggests that the father's lifestyle choices and health might be just as critical as those of the mother.

Research from the University of Adelaide is turning what we thought we knew about the transmission of genetic traits on its head. The Australian study, published in the FASEB Journal,¹ found that sperm from obese fathers can raise the obesity risk for their children AND grandchildren.

Molecular signals in these "fat sperm" can somehow lead to obesity and diabetes-like symptoms in two generations of offspring—even when the offspring eat healthfully.

Researchers say this is the first report of both male and female offspring inheriting a metabolic disease due to their father's obesity. These effects appear to be the result of epigenetic processes.

Your Lifestyle Choices May Have Multigenerational Effects

We now know that your genes are malleable, not fixed, influenced and shaped by your environment, thoughts, and emotions. The big surprise is that epigenetic traits can be passed on to your children, and even to subsequent generations.

The Australian study found an increased risk of developing metabolic disease similar to type 2 diabetes for both male and female offspring. And for female offspring, there was an added risk of becoming overweight or obese.

The study also extended into second generation progeny, which showed signs of similar metabolic disorders and obesity, although it was not as pronounced as for the first generation.

Bear in mind, however, that each person has the power to alter their genetic expression based on the lifestyle choices they make, but it's interesting to note that even factors such as a parent's environment and dietary choices can predispose or give you extra protection against certain health problems.

The key to remember is that anytime you're saddled with less than ideal genetic predispositions, you then need to be more mindful about making healthy choices.

Folate Deficiency in Dads May Result in a 30 Percent Higher Risk of Birth Defects

We already know that an expectant mother's diet can affect her unborn children, but it may also affect their tendency to be overweight. One study involving more than 40,000 women and their 91,000 offspring connects the dots between maternal weight gain and childhood obesity.

Children of mothers who put on the most pregnancy weight had a BMI that was 0.43 kg/m2 higher, on average, than those whose mothers gained the least weight.² Even though BMI is not a great test, it is relatively more accurate in children. But what about dad's nutritional status—could that have similar effects? Yes!

A Canadian study led by Dr. Sarah Kimmins at McGill University reveals significant findings in terms of the impact of the father's nutritional status on his unborn child. The study, involving mice, showed that dad's folate levels (vitamin B9) might be just as important as the mom's to the health and development of their offspring.^3,4,5

Sperm carry a "memory" of the father's environment and possibly even of his diet and lifestyle choices to the embryo. Researchers were surprised to witness an almost 30 percent increase in birth defects in the offspring sired by fathers whose levels of folates were low, including severe skeletal abnormalities that included cranio-facial and spinal deformities.

Folate is important for brain and overall neurological health, the development of memory, learning, and other cognitive processes. If you are an expectant father or planning to be one, you should take Dr. Kimmins' advice to heart:

"Our research suggests that fathers need to think about what they put in their mouths, what they smoke, and what they drink—and remember they are caretakers of generations to come."

Maternal Obesity Raises Breast Cancer Risk

If you're pregnant, gaining an appropriate amount of maternity weight is not only good for your child's health, but also important for your own future breast cancer risk. Pregnancy has a life-long protective effect for the mother against breast cancer—that is, unless she gains excessive maternity weight, and then those protective benefits may be erased, according to the latest study.

When exposed to high levels of leptin (which happens with significant weight gain), pregnant women lose childbirth's protective effects against breast cancer. These women actually show an increased risk of developing breast cancer after menopause.

Pregnancy permanently turns on genes that allow healthy breast cells to protect themselves against insults that can initiate cancer. It appears that exposure to higher leptin during pregnancy prevents these protective genetic changes from occurring.⁶ The good news is that you can attenuate these risks by modifying your lifestyle, because so many risk factors are affected by the choices you make every day.

US Infant Death Rates Are an Embarrassment

Maternal obesity is also a factor in infant mortality. Infant mortality rates are highest for babies of obese mothers, followed by those born to overweight mothers, and lowest among healthy weight mothers.^7,8

Despite spending more money on health care than any other industrialized nation, more babies die in the US on the day they are born than almost any other developed nation. The US continues to rank 27th in infant mortality among the 30 most developed nations, according to the National Center for Health Statistics. In the US, 6.4 infants of every 1,000 will not reach their first birthday. Compare this to Iceland, where infant mortality is only 1.6 deaths per 1,000 births.^9,10,11

Yet, you don't hear politicians shouting about our abysmal infant mortality statistics like they do about abortion rates, despite the fact that more than 75 percent of these infant deaths are preventable. More than 35 percent of infant deaths are the result of premature delivery. When infant mortality is high, people actually have more children, so high infant mortality rates actually contribute to overpopulation.¹²

One Billion People Are Now Obese

A study from the UK presents a sobering new statistic on obesity. The number of overweight and obese adults in the developing world has almost quadrupled since 1980, and now hovers around one billion. Yes, one billion people on our little blue planet are overweight or obese.¹³ If mothers and fathers are able to "pass on" obesity to their children, then we have an even more significant problem on our hands as we look toward the future.

The Overseas Development Institute (ODI) report defines overweight or obese as a body mass index of greater than 25. The world's BMI grew from 23 to 34 percent between 1980 and 2008. The majority of this increase is seen in the developing world, particularly in countries where incomes are rising, such as Egypt and Mexico. In the US, 18 percent of American children between the ages of six and 11 are obese. ODI predicts a "huge increase" in heart attacks, strokes, and diabetes as a result—as if those aren't already too common in today's world.

One in five Americans now dies from obesity.¹⁴ Obesity deaths include those related to type 2 diabetes, hypertension, heart disease, liver disease, cancer, dementia, and depression, because nearly all have metabolic dysfunction as a common thread.

The number of Americans who are overweight or obese is, sadly, probably even higher because BMI is a flawed tool—it doesn't take into account body fat distribution. BMI, which simply gauges weight in relation to height, significantly underestimates obesity rates and may misclassify up to a quarter of men and nearly half of women. As far as simple indicators go, waist to hip ratio is a better predictor of heart disease risk than body weight or BMI.

What Are the REAL Culprits of the Increase in Obesity?

Although ODI is correct in their conclusion that the modern diet is largely to blame for skyrocketing obesity rates, ODI is incorrect in their conclusions about which foods are the cause. They write:¹⁵ "The ODI's Future Diets report says this is due to changing diets and a shift from eating cereals and grains to the consumption of more fats, sugar, oils, and animal products."

They are right about sugar and processed vegetable oils—those are far too prominent in today's diet. But not all fats and animal products are bad, as their statement would imply. And obesity is in large part caused by a diet too high in grains, cereals and processed foods.

A shift away from such products is actually a good thing, but people are still eating too many grains. Most people also consume the wrong types of fats/oils and animal products. I have a problem with such a blanket statement that throws all fats and animal products into one wastebasket—which only perpetuates some very dangerous myths. Saturated fat is not the culprit—processed grain and sugar is. Refined fructose, typically as some form of corn syrup, is now found in virtually every processed food you can find.

Refined fructose actually "programs" your body to consume more calories and store fat. Refined grains are another culprit, as they quickly turn to sugar in your body. These types of carbs (non-vegetable carbs) affect the hormones insulin and leptin, both of which are very potent fat regulators. It is the overconsumption of these highly processed foods that is driving obesity skyward. The last thing you need to do is consume more grains and cereals.

Instead, you need to eat more whole foods, especially vegetables, and moderate your fruit intake based on your insulin and leptin levels. High-quality fats (avocados are an ideal choice, as they're high in healthful fat with virtually no fructose), as well as high-quality animal products, sustainably raised on grass pastures instead of in CAFOs. For more about optimizing your diet, please refer to my optimized nutrition plan.

You're in Greater Control of Your Health Than You Think

A study from Oxford University highlights just how much control you have over your breast cancer risk.¹⁶ In England, black and South Asian women have lower rates of breast cancer than white women. This study attributes that difference to lifestyle and reproductive patterns. White women drink more alcohol, have fewer children, and are less likely to breastfeed. These factors, as well as obesity, contribute to higher cancer rates among white women.¹⁷

In a large study of postmenopausal women, using data gathered by the Women's Health Initiative, it was concluded that those who followed a healthy lifestyle had a third lower risk of death, including a 20 percent lower chance of dying from cancer, than women who did not practice a healthy lifestyle.¹⁸ The take-home message is that you have far greater control over your health than you might think. Lead author of the Oxford study, Dr. Toral Gathani, writes:

"It's important for women of all ethnic groups to understand what are the modifiable risk factors for breast cancer, such as obesity and excessive alcohol consumption, and to take measures to reduce their risk."

Gifts to Your Kids That Keep on Giving

You may not be able to control everything when it comes to your and your children's health. However, we are learning that more and more factors ARE under your control. No longer can you view your newborn's health as "luck of the draw," as if having a baby is like playing some sort of genetic roulette. Due to epigenetics, lifestyle choices of both parents appear to affect the long-term health of children and even grandchildren. Today's unhealthful choices may saddle future generations with health challenges—challenges that could have been prevented.

Your children might be adults but if they aren't reading this newsletter and plan on having children, it is crucial you share this information with them and get them up to date on these important new findings. These studies suggest that it's time to take more responsibility for our health, even before our children are born. If you are going to give future generations "a gift that keeps on giving," why not grace them with health and longevity instead of a life full of unnecessary health hurdles?

Korean Kimchi Recipe

By Dr. Mercola

Kimchi is a famous fermented vegetable dish from Korea. Usually served as a side dish, there are more than 300 different varieties of kimchi, depending on the main vegetable ingredient used and the region or season in which they’re made.

Nowadays, you’ll see a lot of ready-to-eat kimchi brands in supermarkets, but no matter how convenient they seem to be, many of these products are often loaded with artificial flavorings, toxic fillers, and harmful additives, and have also gone through excessive processing that may have eliminated any living organism in them.   

To make sure that you get the quality, the freshness, and all the health perks that you’re after, I encourage you to make your own kimchi at home using this recipe:

Ingredients: 4 cups of water 4 tablespoons sea salt 1 head cabbage, shredded 1 cup daikon radish grated or 1 cup asparagus cut into one-inch pieces 2 scallions, chopped 2 cloves garlic, minced 2 tablespoons fresh ginger, minced ½ teaspoon cayenne pepper Directions: In a large bowl, mix a brine of the water and salt. Mix well to thoroughly dissolve salt. Add the cabbage and daikon radish. Cover with a plate or other weight to keep the vegetables submerged. Soak for 12 hours. Drain the brine from the vegetables, reserving the brine. Taste the vegetables for saltiness. If they are too salty, you can rinse the vegetables. If they are not salty enough, sprinkle with a little more salt (one quarter teaspoon at a time). Combine the asparagus, green beans, scallions, garlic, ginger, and cayenne pepper. Add to the cabbage mixture. Put the whole mix into a jar or crock. Pour the soaking liquid over the vegetables, making sure that they are completely submerged in liquid. Tip: Don’t forget to squeeze your vegetables before putting them into the jar using your hands. "Bruising" the vegetables in this way allows the cell walls to break down and release their juices. Cover loosely with a clean cloth and set aside for three to seven days. The ideal room temperature to help with the fermentation is around 70°F. If it is colder, the fermentation takes longer. Check the kimchi daily. Make sure the vegetables stay covered in brine. After three to seven days, the kimchi will taste ripe. Once this happens, place in glass jar in the refrigerator. It will keep for months. (From Healthy Recipes for Your Nutritional Type)

Korean Kimchi Cooking Tips

1. Use only fresh and organic vegetables from your local farmer. 
2. Choose cabbages that are hard, heavy, and have densely packed leaves. The lighter, leafier varieties tend to turn into mush that doesn't ferment well.
3. Peel your vegetables to avoid getting the bitter flavor from the skin.
4. Feel free to season your ferment naturally according to your liking with bell pepper, organic Granny Smith apples, or a hot pepper like habanero (make sure you wear gloves!).
5. Add sea vegetables or seaweed to increase the mineral, vitamin, and fiber content of your fermented vegetables.
6. When adding aromatics, such as onion, garlic, and ginger, remember that fermenting increases the flavor multiple-fold, so a little goes a long way. Don't overdo it! A few medium-size cloves are enough to infuse a dozen jars or more with a mild garlic flavor.
7. Use a starter culture dissolved in celery juice to speed up the fermentation process and to ensure that your ferment gets packed with essential probiotics.
8. Make sure the veggies are completely covered with brine and that the brine is all the way to the top of the jar to eliminate trapped air.
9. Put the lids on the jars loosely, as they will expand due to the gases produced in fermentation.
10. Don’t eat out of the jar to prevent contaminating the entire batch with bacteria from your mouth. Always use a clean spoon to take out what you’re eating.

What Type of Vegetables Can Be Fermented?

Sandor Katz, author of Wild Fermentation, said that while all vegetables can be fermented, not all will produce wonderful results. Here are some practical fermentation pointers I learned from him:

• Summer squash – Because it’s extremely watery, fermentation makes it go soft and mushy in a short amount of time.
• Radish and cabbage – Sandor’s biggest batch of fermented vegetables every year is made up from daikon radishes, which he gets from a farmer friend who plants them as cover crop and who invites him every year to harvest truckloads of them. He then throws in cabbages, chili peppers, and garlic to enhance its taste.
• Dark green vegetables – While kale, broccoli, and other dark green vegetables can be fermented, oftentimes their high chlorophyll content gives off a really strong flavor that not everyone finds appealing. Sandor recommends using them as a minor ingredient rather than a major one. This way, you’ll still get hold of their valuable nutrients without having to put up with their overpowering taste.

I suggest fermenting vegetables that grow abundantly in your area. Try different vegetable combinations. You can never go wrong. As Sandor said, your imagination is really the only limit when it comes to what you can concoct.

What Type of Container Should You Use?

Where you store your kimchi and other fermented vegetables is also important. Ideally, you want to get a container that’s wide enough to fit your hands when you press down the vegetables. Here are some excellent options you can choose from:

• Glass jars or Mason jars
• Ceramic crocks
• Wooden barrels

Stay away from containers made of plastic or metal. Plastic containers have potentially toxic chemicals such as bisphenol-A (BPA) and phthalates, while metals may corrode when they come into contact with salt. Note that even if you don't add salt, most vegetables have some natural salts in them.

Korean Kimchi Nutrition Facts
Calories	67
Carbohydrates	16 g
Protein	3 g
Fat	0 g

Why Is Korean Kimchi Good for You?

Kimchi is lauded for its valuable nutritional benefits and potent antioxidant properties, due to its fresh vegetable ingredients that are packed with:

• Vitamins A and C
• Healthy fiber
• Lactobacilli, and lactic acid
• Capsaicin, the active antioxidant component in chili peppers
• Allicin, the cancer-fighting chemical in garlic
• Indole-3-Carbinol in Chinese cabbage

Kimchi, along with other fermented foods, are important building blocks of Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride’s Gut and Physiology (GAPS) Diet. Dr. Campbell-McBride has used this unique nutritional protocol to heal countless kids and adults from a wide range of diseases, including:

Autism	Arthritis	Multiple sclerosis	Celiac disease
Attention-deficit disorder (ADD) and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)	Severe food allergies and intolerances	Obesity	Chronic digestive symptoms such as flatulence, stomach pain, burping, reflux, and diarrhea
Epilepsy	Depression	Type 1 diabetes	Leaky gut syndrome

All these are made possible by fermented foods’ powerful chelating properties (which effectively get rid of harmful chemicals and heavy metals in your body), and impressive levels of probiotics, which are proven to:

• Improve the production and absorption of vital nutrients such as B-vitamins and vitamin K2, which keeps calcium in the bones and out of your arteries
• Regulate dietary fat absorption
• Lower your cancer risk
• Enhance mood and mental health
• Modulate your immune response and reduce inflammation
• Control asthma and reduce risk of allergies

Nutritional consultant Caroline Barringer says eating just as little as a quarter to one half cup of fermented vegetables one to three meals every day can deliver dramatically beneficial impacts on your health. But Dr. McBride believes this may be too overwhelming for individuals who are suffering from serious digestive disorders due to the compromised condition of their gut. She suggests starting with the juice of the ferment first and then slowly working your way up until you’re ready to take small amounts of vegetables.

A Merry Christmas Message from Dr. Mercola to You

By Dr. Mercola

Christmas day is a time for family, friends, and others who have touched our lives deeply.

On this day, I hope you are sharing in the joy of the season with those who matter most to you, and I want to let you know that, each and every day, I am grateful for subscribers like you, who are helping to support and share our vision for a naturally healthier, happier world.

Mercola.com seeks to be your primary trusted source of reliable and accurate health information. But it is only because of you, our family of subscribers, that our influence has spread not only in the United States, but in other countries as well – now serving over 10 million unique visitors each month.

With your help, we have been able to help educate the public and to help you make informed health choices for yourselves and your families. We hope that with our continuous service, you will stay motivated to take control of your health.

With every article you read here, you are building your knowledge base of how to address the roots of disease before it even starts. Within your own sphere of influence, you have the power to help others preserve and enhance their health by sharing these health tips, and we know that many of you eagerly do.

Enjoy One of My All-Time Favorite Movies: It’s a Wonderful Life

Released in 1946, It’s a Wonderful Life still captures the hearts of new viewers over six decades later. This movie is also a wonderful metaphor for your power to change the world. It’s one of my personal all-time favorites.

In the film, George Bailey (Jimmy Stewart) spends his entire life giving up his big dreams for the good of his town, Bedford Falls. But come one Christmas Eve, he is dismayed and suicidal over a misplaced loan, and the plotting of the evil millionaire, Mr. Potter, who wants to take over the town.

Just when George’s spirit is about to be broken, his guardian angel, Clarence, falls to Earth, and shows him how his town, family, and friends would’ve turned out had he never been born.

The ending to this movie, if any of you still haven’t seen it, will bring tears to your eyes and remind you of how many lives YOU touch every day. So this Christmas, I want to thank youfor your loyalty and support, and wish you peace, joy and health on this special day.

I’d like to leave you with one final thought – an idea for what to gift those on your Christmas list, as quoted by novelist Oren Arnold. The best part? These gifts don’t come from a store and they keep on giving all year long.

“Christmas Gift Suggestions:
To your enemy, forgiveness.
To an opponent, tolerance.
To a friend, your heart.
To a customer, service.
To all, charity.
To every child, a good example.
To yourself, respect.”
 

I greatly appreciate your continued support and I believe we can all be proud of the amazing progress our united front has achieved in our common goal to secure a happy, healthier future, not only for ourselves but for generations to come.

 I look forward to continuing to inform and support you in the New Year on our journey toward empowering everyone to take control of their health.

Together Are Moving Mountains…

With every article you read here, you are building your knowledge base of how to address the roots of disease before it even starts. Within your own sphere of influence, you have the power to help others preserve and enhance their health by sharing these health tips, and we know that many of you eagerly do.

And on a larger scale, your continued support of Mercola.com reaches much further than that. We have partnered with some of the top non-profit health groups who aim to educate you on important health, food safety, and informed consent issues.

Together we have formed Health Liberty, a non-profit coalition that aims to help protect your freedom to make voluntary health choices. And, as we have grown, we are able to take part in successful fundraising campaigns, which many of you have participated in.

We are making a difference together. We are making landmark changes for vaccine awareness, GMO labeling efforts, mercury-free dentistry, water fluoridation, and much more. We couldn’t have done it without you!

Thank you for joining our initiatives, together we will change our world.