Rather Be Healthy

Want to Decrease Your Risk of Breast Cancer? Forgo Screening, Expert Says

In the US, women are still urged to get an annual mammogram starting at the age of 40, despite the fact that updated guidelines set forth by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force in 2009 urge women to wait until the age of 50, and to only get bi-annual screening thereafter.

Unfortunately, many women are completely unaware that the science simply does not back up the use of routine mammograms as a means to prevent breast cancer death.

What’s worse, the “new and improved” tomosynthesis mammogram, which provides a three-dimensional (3D) image of the breast,1 is now being hoisted on women across the US as “the answer” to mammography’s failing efficacy rates and pattern of harmful misdiagnosis…

Please, don’t get suckered into further doubling your risk for radiation-induced breast cancer by signing up for annual 3D tomosynthesis.

New 3D Mammography is NOT the Solution Women have Been Waiting for…

The primary hazard of conventional 2D imaging is ionizing radiation. According to a 2010 study,2 annual screening using digital or screen-film mammography on women aged 40–80 years is associated with an induced cancer incidence and fatal breast cancer rate of 20-25 cases per 100, 000.

This means annual mammograms CAUSE 20-25 cases of fatal cancer for every 100,000 women getting the test. Now, 3D tomosynthesis also exposes you to ionizing radiation—and much more of it!

First, in order to achieve the three-dimensional image, the machine moves in an arc around your breast, taking multiple x-rays along the way, which are then computed together into a 3D image. Second, women are still advised to get a conventional 2D mammogram.

How is this addressing the hazards of breast cancer screening using ionizing radiation?

Well, it’s not. After all, that’s what the cancer screen is supposed to do, yet studies have repeatedly shown that mammography causes more widespread harm than good, and has not resulted in reduced breast cancer mortality rates. The hope is that these 3D images will boost the accuracy of diagnosing cancer; alas… this is probably not going to happen.

Why?

Because there’s no way to tell if a little spot on an x-ray (3D or not) is actually cancerous or benign. As image technologies have improved, false positives have increased along with it. Furthermore, what good will it do to identify more and more tiny tumors if the incidence of cancer starts to skyrocket as a result of ever increasing amounts of radiation exposure?

Want to Decrease Your Risk of Breast Cancer? Forgo Screening, Expert Says

In my view, 3D tomosynthesis is a false solution. It’s a sad, flailing attempt to avoid having to admit mammograms are useless, if not dangerous. This truth is absolutely devastating to the cancer industry, which is why they’re fighting tooth and nail to deny it.

“The most effective way to decrease women’s risk of becoming a breast cancer patient is to avoid attending screening,” writes Peter C. Gotzche, MD of The Nordic Cochrane Centre and author of Mammography Screening: Truth, Lies and Controversy. “Mammography screening is one of the greatest controversies in healthcare, and the extent to which some scientists have sacrificed sound scientific principles in order to arrive at politically acceptable results in their research is extraordinary. In contrast, neutral observers increasingly find that the benefit has been much oversold and that the harms are much greater than previously believed.”

This fact was revealed in a 2011 meta-analysis by the Cochrane Database of Systemic Reviews, which found that mammography breast cancer screening led to 30 percent overdiagnosis and overtreatment, which equates to an absolute risk increase of 0.5 percent.

As recently reported by The Los Angeles Times,3 yet another study is now putting the thumb-screws on the industry, concluding that women who follow the American Cancer Society’s guidelines to get annual mammograms starting at age 40 not only receive NO additional protection against aggressive breast cancer, but actually experience greater harm through increased false positives and unnecessary treatments, when compared to women who get bi-annual mammograms between the ages of 50 and 74 only (which is what the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force now recommends).

The article goes on to estimate that if all American women between 66-89 received annual mammograms instead of biannual testing, this results in a staggering 3.86 million more false-positives and 1.15 million more biopsies. This is great for profits. Not so great for you though, who has to pay financially, physically, and emotionally…

“Even after researchers adjusted for confounding factors such as age, place of residence and race, they found no benefit to more frequent screenings,” the LA Times reported.

Analysis of 30 Years of Breast Screening Shows Mammograms Do More Harm than Good

Last November, the New England Journal of Medicine4 also published a shocking analysis of the effects of breast cancer screening in the US over the past three decades, which found that 1.3 million women were misdiagnosed and mistreated as a result. The number of early-stage breast cancers detected have doubled over the past 30 years since the advent of mammography, from 112 to 234 cases per 100,000. Late-stage cancer incidence has decreased by eight percent in the same time frame, from 102 to 94 cases per 100,000.

According to the authors:

“Despite substantial increases in the number of cases of early-stage breast cancer detected, screening mammography has only marginally reduced the rate at which women present with advanced cancer. Although it is not certain which women have been affected, the imbalance suggests that there is substantial overdiagnosis, accounting for nearly a third of all newly diagnosed breast cancers, and that screening is having, at best, only a small effect on the rate of death from breast cancer.”

The lead author, Dr. Archie Bleyer, recently defended his team’s findings against industry nay-sayers who criticized the analysis, stating:5

“We are disappointed by the comments from the leadership of the mammography community. They reiterate three ‘talking points’ that were voiced after our report was published. First, we undercorrected for an underlying incidence trend of invasive cancer. Since 1986, there has not been an obvious increase in the incidence of invasive cancer. Even if we had used their number — based on data from Connecticut in the years 1940 through 1980 — we would still estimate that from 1979 through 2008 and in 2008 alone, there was an overdiagnosis of breast cancer in 878,000 and 34,000 women, respectively.

Second, it was stated that our data do not reflect the real world. We would argue that it is hard to get more ‘real’ than three decades of data from the world’s preeminent cancer surveillance program.

Third, they say that DCIS should have been excluded. How could we estimate overdiagnosis without including an abnormality that is essentially detected only with mammography and is treated as cancer? And yet the authors of this letter characterize our research as ‘dangerous.’ We are disappointed because to mitigate the problem of overdiagnosis, primary care practitioners, surgeons, oncologists, and the public health community will all need the help of our colleagues in mammography. And the first step in addressing any problem is to acknowledge it.”

Only ONE in 2,000 Women Undergoing Regular Mammogram Screening Will Benefit from it

So what are your chances of being that lucky person who actually benefits from regular mammograms? According to recent findings by the Nordic Cochrane Center, only ONE out of 2,000 women screened regularly for 10 years will actually benefit from screening due to early detection of breast cancer.

Meanwhile, 10 healthy women (out of those 2,000 screened for a decade) will be misdiagnosed, turned into cancer patients, and will be treated unnecessarily.These women will have either a part of their breast or the whole breast removed, and will typically receive radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy. This treatment (for a cancer that was non-existent) subsequently increases their risk of dying from complications from the therapy and/or from other diseases associated with radiation and chemo, such as heart disease and cancer. So, to recap, in order for mammographic breast screening to save ONE woman’s life:
•2,000 women must be screened for 10 years
•200 women will get false positives, and
•10 will receive surgery and/or chemotherapy even though they do not actually have cancer

Just because you were treated for cancer does not mean you’re a cancer survivor. If you really didn’t have cancer to begin with, then you’re really just a “cancer treatment survivor.” Yet all women treated for cancer who survive become part of the “cancer survivor” statistic…

Breast Cancer Prevention Strategies

Cancer screening does NOT equate to cancer prevention, and although early detection is important, using a screening method that in and of itself increases your risk of developing cancer is simply not good medicine… Preventing breast cancer is far more important and powerful than simply trying to detect it after it has already formed, which is why I want to share my top tips on how to help prevent this disease in the first place.

In the largest review of research into lifestyle and breast cancer, the American Institute of Cancer Research estimated that about 40 percent of US breast cancer cases could be prevented if people made wiser lifestyle choices.6, 7 I believe these estimates are far too low, and it is more likely that 75 percent to 90 percent of breast cancers could be avoided by strictly applying the recommendations below.
•Avoid sugar, especially fructose. All forms of sugar are detrimental to health in general and promote cancer. Fructose, however, is clearly one of the most harmful and should be avoided as much as possible.
•Optimize your vitamin D. Vitamin D influences virtually every cell in your body and is one of nature’s most potent cancer fighters. Vitamin D is actually able to enter cancer cells and trigger apoptosis (cell death). If you have cancer, your vitamin D level should be between 70 and 100 ng/ml. Vitamin D works synergistically with every cancer treatment I’m aware of, with no adverse effects. I suggest you try watching my one-hour free lecture on vitamin D to learn more.

Remember that if you take oral vitamin D3 supplements, you also need to increase your vitamin K2 intake, as vitamin D increases the need for K2 to function properly. See my previous article What You Need to Know About Vitamin K2, D and Calcium for more information.

Please consider joining one of GrassrootsHealth’s D*Action’s vitamin D studies to stay on top of your vitamin D performance. For more information, see my previous article How Vitamin D Performance Testing Can Help You Optimize Your Health.
•Get plenty of natural vitamin A. There is evidence that vitamin A also plays a role in helping prevent breast cancer.8 It’s best to obtain it from vitamin A-rich foods, rather than a supplement. Your best sources are organic egg yolks,9 raw butter, raw whole milk, and beef or chicken liver.
•Lymphatic breast massage can help enhance your body’s natural ability to eliminate cancerous toxins. This can be applied by a licensed therapists, or you can implement self-lymphatic massage. It is also promotes self-nurturance.
•Avoid charring your meats. Charcoal or flame broiled meat is linked with increased breast cancer risk. Acrylamide—a carcinogen created when starchy foods are baked, roasted or fried—has been found to increase breast cancer risk as well.
•Avoid unfermented soy products. Unfermented soy is high in plant estrogens, or phytoestrogens, also known as isoflavones. In some studies, soy appears to work in concert with human estrogen to increase breast cell proliferation, which increases the chances for mutations and cancerous cells.
•Improve your insulin receptor sensitivity. The best way to do this is by avoiding sugar and grains and making sure you are exercising, especially with Peak Fitness.
•Maintain a healthy body weight. This will come naturally when you begin eating right for your nutritional type and exercising. It’s important to lose excess body fat because fat produces estrogen.
•Drink a half to whole quart of organic green vegetable juice daily. Please review my juicing instructions for more detailed information.
•Get plenty of high quality animal-based omega-3 fats, such as krill oil. Omega-3 deficiency is a common underlying factor for cancer.
•Curcumin. This is the active ingredient in turmeric and in high concentrations can be very useful adjunct in the treatment of breast cancer. It shows immense therapeutic potential in preventing breast cancer metastasis.10 It’s important to know that curcumin is generally not absorbed that well, so I’ve provided several absorption tips here.
•Avoid drinking alcohol, or at least limit your alcoholic drinks to one per day.
•Breastfeed exclusively for up to six months. Research shows breastfeeding can reduce your breast cancer risk.
•Avoid wearing underwire bras. There is a good deal of data that metal underwire bras can heighten your breast cancer risk.
•Avoid electromagnetic fields as much as possible. Even electric blankets can increase your cancer risk.
•Avoid synthetic hormone replacement therapy. Breast cancer is an estrogen-related cancer, and according to a study published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, breast cancer rates for women dropped in tandem with decreased use of hormone replacement therapy. (There are similar risks for younger women who use oral contraceptives. Birth control pills, which are also comprised of synthetic hormones, have been linked to cervical and breast cancers.)

If you are experiencing excessive menopausal symptoms, you may want to consider bioidentical hormone replacement therapy instead, which uses hormones that are molecularly identical to the ones your body produces and do not wreak havoc on your system. This is a much safer alternative.
•Avoid BPA, phthalates and other xenoestrogens. These are estrogen-like compounds that have been linked to increased breast cancer risk
•Make sure you’re not iodine deficient, as there’s compelling evidence linking iodine deficiency with breast cancer. Dr. David Brownstein,11 author of the book Iodine: Why You Need It, Why You Can’t Live Without It, is a proponent of iodine for breast cancer. It actually has potent anticancer properties and has been shown to cause cell death in breast and thyroid cancer cells.

For more information, I recommend reading Dr. Brownstein’s book. I have been researching iodine for some time ever since I interviewed Dr. Brownstein as I do believe that the bulk of what he states is spot on. However, I am not at all convinced that his dosage recommendations are correct. I believe they are too high.

Take Control of Your Health to Avoid Becoming a Statistic

Many women are completely unaware that the science backing the use of mammograms is sorely lacking, and that more women are being harmed by regular mammograms than are saved by them.

Peter C. Gotzche, MD of the Nordic Cochrane Centre’ recently published a groundbreaking book Mammography Screening: Truth, Lies and Controversy. It offers a comprehensive take on the evidence, and a critical look at the scientific disputes and the information provided to women by governments and cancer charities. It also explains why mammography screening is unlikely to be effective today.

Many also do not realize that the “new and improved” 3D tomosynthesis mammogram actually ends up exposing you to MORE cancer-causing ionizing radiation than the older version. Please understand that there are other screening options, each with their own strengths and weaknesses, and you have a right to utilize those options. Also remember that in order to truly avoid breast cancer, you need to focus your attention on prevention.

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.

How Intermittent Fasting Stacks Up Among Obesity-Related Myths, Assumptions, and Evidence-Backed Facts

Is it a good idea to “starve” yourself just a little bit each day? The evidence suggests that yes, avoiding eating around the clock could have a very beneficial impact on your health and longevity.

What we’re talking about here is generally referred to as intermittent fasting, which involves timing your meals to allow for regular periods of fasting.

It takes about six to eight hours for your body to metabolize your glycogen stores and after that you start to shift to burning fat. However, if you are replenishing your glycogen by eating every eight hours (or sooner), you make it far more difficult for your body to use your fat stores as fuel.

It’s long been known that restricting calories in certain animals can increase their lifespan by as much as 50 percent, but more recent research suggests that sudden and intermittent calorie restriction appears to provide the same health benefits as constant calorie restriction, which may be helpful for those who cannot successfully reduce their everyday calorie intake (or aren’t willing to).

Unfortunately, hunger is a basic human drive that can’t be easily suppressed, so anyone attempting to implement serious calorie restriction is virtually guaranteed to fail. Fortunately you don’t have to deprive yourself as virtually all of the benefits from calorie restriction can be achieved through properly applied intermittent fasting.

Three Major Mechanisms by which Fasting Benefits Your Health

While fasting has long gotten a bum rap for being one of the more torturous ways to battle the bulge, it really doesn’t have to be an arduous affair. We’re NOT talking about starving yourself for days on end. Simply restricting your daily eating to a narrower window of time of say 6-8 hours, you can reap the benefits without the suffering. This equates to 16-18 hours worth of fasting each and every day — enough to get your body to shift into fat-burning mode.

Many studies have evaluated daily intermittent fasting, and the results are compellingly positive. Three major mechanisms by which fasting benefits your body, as it extends lifespan and protects against disease, include:
1.Increased insulin sensitivity and mitochondrial energy efficiency – Fasting increases insulin sensitivity along with mitochondrial energy efficiency, and thereby retards aging and disease, which are typically associated with loss of insulin sensitivity and declined mitochondrial energy.
2.Reduced oxidative stress – Fasting decreases the accumulation of oxidative radicals in the cell, and thereby prevents oxidative damage to cellular proteins, lipids, and nucleic acids associated with aging and disease.
3.Increased capacity to resist stress, disease and aging – Fasting induces a cellular stress response (similar to that induced by exercise) in which cells up-regulate the expression of genes that increase the capacity to cope with stress and resist disease and aging.

Is Daily Fasting the Key to Permanent Weight Loss?

As reported by George Dvorsky1 in a recent article, one of the most important studies in support of daily intermittent fasting was published just last year by biologist Satchidananda Panda and colleagues at Salk’s Regulatory Biology Laboratory. They fed mice a high-fat, high-calorie diet but altered when they were able to eat.

One group had access to food both day and night, while the other group had access to food for only eight hours at night (the most active period for mice). In human terms, this would mean eating only for 8 hours during the day. Despite consuming the same amount of calories, mice that had access to food for only eight hours stayed lean and did not develop health problems like high blood sugar or chronic inflammation2. They even had improved endurance motor coordination on the exercise wheel. The all-day access group, on the other hand, became obese and were plagued with health problems including:
•High cholesterol
•High blood sugar
•Fatty liver disease
•Metabolic problems

This suggests that your body may benefit from the break it receives while fasting, whereas constant eating may lead to metabolic exhaustion and health consequences like weight gain. Researchers said their latest work shows it’s possible to stave off metabolic disease by simply restricting when you eat with periodic fasting, or even by just keeping to regular meal schedules rather than “grazing” off and on all day. They concluded:

“[Time-restricted feeding] is a nonpharmacological strategy against obesity and associated diseases.”

What the Research Says about Intermittent Fasting

Dvorsky highlights other research into fasting that point to similar conclusions, such as:
•Research by Valter Longo3 at the University of Southern California’s Longevity Institute shows that intermittent fasting has a beneficial impact on IGF-1, an insulin-like growth factor that plays a role in aging. When you eat, this hormone drives your cells to reproduce, and while this is good for growth, it’s also a factor that drives the aging process. Intermittent fasting decreases the expression of IGF-1, and switches on other DNA repair genes. In this way, intermittent fasting switches your body from “growth mode” to “repair mode.”
•Krista Varady with the University of Illinois has been researching the impact of fasting on chronic diseases like cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and cancer. Her work also compares the effects of intermittent fasting with caloric restriction, which is known to benefit health and longevity. Animal studies using alternate-day fasting4 have shown it lowers the risk of diabetes, at rates comparable to caloric restriction. Alternate-day fasting has also been shown to reduce cancer rates by reducing cell proliferation.
•Research by Mark Hartman and colleagues5 indicates short-term fasting can trigger production of human growth hormone (HGH) in men, and reduce oxidative stress that contributes to disease and aging; benefits brain health, mental well-being, and clarity of thought

Review Debunks Myths about Weight Loss, Obesity

Intermittent fasting is one of the latest weight management strategies to get a lot of press. Meanwhile, other weight loss myths are being debunked. Dr. David B. Allison, director of the Nutrition Obesity Research Center at the University of Alabama, and colleagues recently published a paper on Myths, Presumptions, and Facts about Obesity6, stating:

“Many beliefs about obesity persist in the absence of supporting scientific evidence (presumptions); some persist despite contradicting evidence (myths). The promulgation of unsupported beliefs may yield poorly informed policy decisions, inaccurate clinical and public health recommendations, and an unproductive allocation of research resources and may divert attention away from useful, evidence-based information.”

The team identified:
•Seven obesity-related myths concerning the effects of small sustained increases in energy intake or expenditure, establishment of realistic goals for weight loss, rapid weight loss, weight-loss readiness, physical-education classes, breast-feeding, and energy expended during sexual activity. These include:
◦Small things make a big difference. Walking a mile a day can lead to a loss of more than 50 pounds in five years.
◦Set a realistic goal to lose a modest amount.
◦People who are too ambitious will get frustrated and give up.
◦You have to be mentally ready to diet or you will never succeed.
◦Slow and steady is the way to lose. If you lose weight too fast, you will lose less in the long run.
•Six presumptions that have yet to be proven true or false about the effects of regularly eating breakfast, early childhood experiences, eating fruits and vegetables, weight cycling, snacking, and the built (i.e., human-made) environment, such as:
◦Diet and exercise habits in childhood set the stage for the rest of life.
◦Add lots of fruits and vegetables to your diet to lose weight or not gain as much.
◦Yo-yo diets lead to increased death rates.
◦People who snack gain weight and get fat.
◦If you add bike paths, jogging trails, sidewalks and parks, people will not be as fat.
•Nine evidence-supported facts that are relevant for the formulation of sound public health, policy, or clinical recommendations, including:
◦Heredity is important but is not destiny.
◦Exercise helps with weight maintenance.
◦Weight loss is greater with programs that provide meals.
◦Some prescription drugs help with weight loss and maintenance.
◦Weight-loss surgery in appropriate patients can lead to long-term weight loss, less diabetes and a lower death rate

What I feel is missing here is the focus on an all-around healthy lifestyle pattern. Can you lose weight on prescription drugs? Yes. Does the research support this as “fact”? Yes. But this does NOT automatically mean that recommending diet drugs is good public health policy! Will diet drugs have a beneficial impact on your health in the long run? Do potential side effects of the drugs outweigh the benefit of losing weight?

Ditto for bariatric surgery. Does it lead to weight loss? Yes! But the side effects can be severe, including death, and several studies have shown the long-term outcome in terms of overall health is not that great…

Some of the items listed as myths and presumptions are simply common-sense guidelines and “helpful tips” that can help you maintain a healthier lifestyle, which will inevitably form the foundation of good health. So I would advise you to differentiate between “established scientific fact” (such as: weight loss surgery leads to weight loss) and what amounts to holistic healthy lifestyle guidelines, as the two are not necessarily interchangeable.

If your goal is to promote health, then supporting the addition of bike paths in your communities is not a crazy idea at all. In fact, some of these myths and presumptions are sort of silly, as when you talk about things like “can adding jogging trails and parks promote healthier weight?” You also have to consider the fact that there is social conditioning at work, and people have to start to rethink how they live their daily lives in order to see a change. This can take time. Having a public policy that tells you to get bariatric surgery instead of going for a walk every day is nothing short of crazy if you really think about it…

Clinical Trial to Be Conducted to Test Whether Skipping Breakfast Leads to Weight Loss

According to the New York Times7:

“… people often rely on weak studies that get repeated ad infinitum. It is commonly thought, for example, that people who eat breakfast are thinner. But that notion is based on studies of people who happened to eat breakfast. Researchers then asked if they were fatter or thinner than people who happened not to eat breakfast — and found an association between eating breakfast and being thinner. But such studies can be misleading because the two groups might be different in other ways that cause the breakfast eaters to be thinner. But no one has randomly assigned people to eat breakfast or not, which could cinch the argument.

… The question is: ‘Is it a causal association?’ To get the answer, he added, ‘Do the clinical trial.’

He decided to do it himself, with university research funds. A few hundred people will be recruited and will be randomly assigned to one of three groups. Some will be told to eat breakfast every day, others to skip breakfast, and the third group will be given vague advice about whether to eat it or not.”

Is Intermittent Fasting Right for You?

If you’re already off to a good start on a healthy diet and fitness plan, then intermittent fasting might be just the thing to bring you to the next level. However, you need to pay careful attention to your body, your energy levels, and how it makes you feel in general.

Please keep in mind that proper nutrition becomes even MORE important when fasting, so addressing your diet really should be your first step. Common sense will tell you that fasting combined with a denatured, highly processed, toxin-rich diet is likely to do more harm than good, as you’re not giving your body proper fuel to thrive when you DO eat.

If you’re hypoglycemic, diabetic, or pregnant (and/or breastfeeding), you are better off avoiding any type of fasting or timed meal schedule until you’ve normalized your blood glucose and insulin levels, or weaned the baby. Others categories of people that would be best served to avoid fasting include those living with chronic stress, and those with cortisol dysregulation.

Signs and Symptoms of Hypoglycemia

Hypoglycemia is a condition characterized by an abnormally low level of blood sugar. It’s commonly associated with diabetes, but you can be hypoglycemic even if you’re not diabetic. Common symptoms of a hypoglycemic crash include:
•Headache
•Weakness
•Tremors
•Irritability
•Hunger

As your blood glucose levels continue to plummet, more severe symptoms can set in, such as:
•Confusion and/or abnormal behavior
•Visual disturbances, such as double vision and blurred vision
•Seizures
•Loss of consciousness

One of the keys to eliminating hypoglycemia is to eliminate sugars, especially fructose from your diet. It will also be helpful to eliminate grains, and replace them with higher amounts of quality proteins and healthful fats. However it will take some time for your blood sugar to normalize. You’ll want to pay careful attention to hypoglycemic signs and symptoms, and if you suspect that you’re crashing, make sure to eat something.The ideal food would be coconut oil as it will not worsen your insulin levels and is metabolized relatively quickly for energy. You can try some coconut candy, for example. Ideally, you should avoid fasting if you’re hypoglycemic, and work on your overall diet to normalize your blood sugar levels first. Then try out one of the less rigid versions of fasting and work your way up.

Fasting While Pregnant is Not a Good Idea…

As for pregnant and/or lactating women, I don’t think fasting would be a wise choice. Your baby needs plenty of nutrients, during and after birth, and there’s no research supporting fasting during this important time. On the contrary, some studies8 suggest it might be contraindicated, as it can alter fetal breathing patterns, heartbeat, and increase gestational diabetes. It may even induce premature labor. I don’t think it’s worth the risk.

Instead, my recommendation would be to really focus on improving your nutrition during this crucial time. A diet with plenty of raw organic, biodynamic foods, and foods high in healthful fats, coupled with high quality proteins will give your baby a head start on good health. You’ll also want to be sure to include plenty of cultured and fermented foods to optimize your — and consequently your baby’s — gut flora. For more information, please see this previous article that includes specific dietary recommendations for a healthy pregnancy, as well as my interview with Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride.

Finding a Lifestyle Plan that Works for You Requires Trial and Error

While intermittent fasting can provide valuable health benefits, remember that fasting does not mean abstaining from ALL food for extended periods of time. Rather it involves a dramatic reduction of calorie intake at regular intervals — whether you opt for a 16, 20, or 24 hour fast once or twice a week, or fasting every other day, or simply delaying certain meals, such as skipping breakfast.

Just remember, it takes about six to eight hours for your body to metabolize your glycogen stores and only after that do you start to shift to burning fat, but only if you are already adapted to burning fat by having your fat burning enzymes upregulated by the strategy discussed above, which takes anywhere from a few weeks to a few months, depending on how healthy you are.

Always listen to your body, and go slow; work your way up to 16-18 hour fasts if your normal schedule has included multiple meals a day. Also be sure to address any hypoglycemic tendencies, as it can get increasingly dangerous the longer you go without eating to level out your blood sugar.

If you have already addressed your diet, cutting out fructose and grains and replacing them with healthful fats, then intermittent fasting could further boost weight loss and provide additional health benefits. If you’re engaged in a regular fitness program and feel like you’ve hit a plateau, then working out in a fasted state might help rev things up. For more information about exercise while fasting, please see this previous article.

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.