LeanSeekers International

Maintain or regain optimal health, nutrition education, personal coaching and the most responsible products in the marketplace.

Blog

May 19, 2012

Comments

Member comments are shown instantly, comments by anonymous users must be approved before they are shown.

Recent Comments

Re: Review of Harvard Red Meat and Increased Mortality Study

I strongly believe all of these 'studies' and claims are designed to save animals, not humans. Many of the researchers are involved with animal rights organizations, such as PeTA, PCRM and HSUS, and for them, the end justifies the lies.

This is a great site! Thanks!

By Lynda Hynes on: Monday, May 07, 2012

Re: Resveratrol Facts Explained

Read again anonymous!! You cannot drink enough red wine to make a difference. That is why I said in the opening statement "Resveratrol is frequently referred to as “The active ingredient in Red Wine” but that is a serious over-simplification and the evidence is clear – there is not enough resveratrol in a glass of wine to make a difference."
Most of the Resveratrol research that has shown positive results, has used at least 100mg of 99% pure Trans-Resveratrol.
The Vivix product is 100mg of Trans-resveratrol + 1200mg of other polyphenols from other sources.
One glass of red wine contains between 477 micrograms and 1.5 milligrams of Resveratrol . So to get 100mg you would have to drink between 66 and 210 glasses.
One drop of the Vivix = 1 glass of red wine. one teaspoon of Vivix = 100 glasses of red wine.
And Finally- you cannot get 99% pure trans-resveratrol form red wine.!!!

By L. Lee Coyne on: Saturday, April 28, 2012

Resveratrol

Resveratrol is a natural compound.It really helpful in so many disease like heart attack,minimize the signs of aging. Red Wine is the core ingredients which reduce the risk of heart disease.

By Resveratrol on: Saturday, April 28, 2012

Re: World Renown Heart Surgeon Speaks Out On What Really Causes Heart Disease

Dr. Lundell´s article has received huge attention and it has caught the eye of the news media. It touches on a number of important issues concerning cardiovascular disease in general. To me the article unfortunately appears a bit like it is written by a preacher or a politician who has to sell a message whatever the costs. The article lacks the professional approach of a scientist who carefully examines available scientific data before drawing conclusions.
Please visit my blog at
www.docsopinion.com/2012/03/what-is-it-that-really-causes-heart.html

By Axel F Sigurdsson on: Saturday, March 10, 2012

Re: Daily Aspirin Is Not for Everyone, Study Suggests

This is definitely something that I have been hearing more about in recently. People may be taking too much aspirin for a number of things, like heart attack or stroke. I've seen some commercials about this issue, and started doing some personal research on it. Apparently this has become a big enough issue that there are some clinical trials for daily aspirin use. These clinical studies are looking into possible side effects from prolonged aspirin use. I think I might just take Tylenol instead.

By Stephen T on: Tuesday, January 31, 2012

Search_Blog

KeywordsPhrase

Recent Blog Entries

Facebook Login

Posted on: Tuesday, April 10, 2012

Polyphenols in Popcorn Study

Posted on: Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Review of Harvard Red Meat and Increased Mortality Study

Posted on: Tuesday, March 27, 2012

World Renown Heart Surgeon Speaks Out On What Really Causes Heart Disease

Posted on: Tuesday, March 06, 2012

Muscle Recovery and Downhill Skiing - a testimonial

Posted on: Sunday, March 04, 2012

LeanSeekers Blog

Vitamin D and Cancer Prevention

Jun 11

Written by: L. Lee Coyne
Monday, June 11, 2007 11:31 AM

Vitamin D and Cancer Prevention

The news media have been making a lot of noise this past week about the role of Vitamins and Cancer prevention. This subject has been in the scientific forefront of Cancer prevention research for several years now and a consensus seems to be forming to indicate a wise recommendation of increasing Vitamin D intake for many positive health reasons.

However – the most recent study – by JM Lappe from Creighton University, Omaha, NE. and published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition – that has resulted in an over-promotion of vitamin D – was actually a Calcium and Vitamin D study. This is important.

Quotes from the actual study:

“The purpose of this analysis was to determine the efficacy of calcium alone and calcium plus vitamin D in reducing incident cancer risk of all types.”

“The primary outcome was fracture incidence, and the principal secondary outcome was cancer incidence.”

Conclusions:

Improving calcium and vitamin D nutritional status substantially reduces all-cancer risk in postmenopausal women.”

My comments:

The study used 1400 - 1500 mg supplemental calcium/d alone (Ca-only). This is twice the Current RNI – no responsible practitioner would recommend Calcium alone – for optimum absorption Calcium needs Magnesium, phosphorous and vitamin D. They also used Calcium Carbonate only – again - not my favourite form.
They used 1100 IU vitamin D(3)/d” -- Three times the current RNI.
When you look at the Data you see that the reduction in cancer risk with Calcium only is quite significant. When you take into account that Vitamin D improves Calcium absorption it suggests that Calcium plays a significant role.

Here are my recommendation for how to get the Vitamin D and Calcium levels used in the study –

2 Vita Lea (US Vita Lea) with each meal would provide 1200 IU of Vitamin D and 1350 mg of Calcium.

Globe and Mail