Low Levels of Vitamin D Are Common Among Healthy Children
According to a new study, many kids and adolescents who are otherwise healthy may have inadequate blood levels of vitamin D, a nutrient essential for normal growth and development. A vitamin D deficiency in childhood may lead to muscle weakness, defective bone mineralization and rickets .A new study published in the July 2007 issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition has found that many children may be at risk for a vitamin D deficiency. Vitamin D is essential for normal growth and development and is important for immune function. The researchers from Children's Hospital of Philadelphia assessed dietary and supplemental vitamin D intake, body mass, and measured blood levels of vitamin D in 382 healthy children between six years and 21 years of age living in the northeastern U.S. and found that more than half of the children had low blood levels of vitamin D. Of the subjects, 55 percent of the children had inadequate vitamin D blood levels and 68 percent overall had low blood levels of the vitamin in the wintertime. African Americans, children aged 9 and older, and those whose vitamin D intake was low were likeliest to have reduced serum vitamin D levels. "The best indicator of a person's vitamin D status is the blood level of a vitamin D compound called 25-hydroxyvitamin D," Dr. Zemel, the lead investigator noted. "Vitamin D deficiency remains an under-recognized problem overall, and is not well studied in children." The researchers added that further study is needed to determine the appropriate blood levels of vitamin D in children, as well as a review of the current recommendations for vitamin D intake. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2007 July; 86(1):150- 8.
For more information on the use of quality supplements visit
http://www.pamdunwald.com
Pam Dunwald, R.N.
Healthy Options, ltd, LLC
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
Liquid Vitamins or Tablet? Is there a Difference?
I get a lot of questions about which is better to take Liquid Vitamins or Tablets? There is a lot of "hype" and new products that promote liquid vitamins as being "better absorbed" getting into you system faster, and a lot more. Well, think about it... Does the nutrients in chicken soup get into you system faster than eating a steak? Vitamins are not absorbed in your stomach. They are absorbed in the small intestine. So, what does this mean? It means that everything has to first go through your stomach before it can make it to the small intestine and by that time everything is in the same form. Read on and I will try to explain in more detail
The scientific definition of bioavailable is: the degree and rate at which a substance (as a drug) is absorbed into a living system or is made available at the site of physiological activity. Different vitamins and minerals have different absorption rates no matter if they come from tablet, liquid, powder, or food. For example Calcium has a pretty standard absorption rate around 25-35%. The form does not generally make a significant difference.
The bottom line is - a well made tablet provides a very effective delivery system for pharmaceutical medications. Most medications come in a tablet form. This is because they have been found to be the easiest and most efficient delivery system for medications. Why would vitamin supplements be any different? Does anybody doubt that an aspirin tablet is less effective because it comes in a tablet? Tableted products can be more advantageous to take, simply because more active ingredients can be taken in one tablet(almost 3 times as much as a capsule and much more than liquid or spray). So what this means is that you can get much more nutrients in a tablet vitamin than you can in a liquid. Do the label test. Compare the amount of nutrients and dosages in the liquid vitamins compared to the tablet. Big difference. I've done it with many different liquid brands and you will see the same results.
The stability is also much better. The good quality vitamin tablets are formulated to meet USP standards requiring full disintegration within30-45 min. Tablets are also formulated to meet USP standards for dissolution. Because of the disintegration time, the vitamins and minerals found in our supplements are fully available for absorption into the body. Innovative formulations have been developed to optimize nutrient bioavailability. Each lot of a quality tablet should be tested against finished product specifications to ensure that it meets standards for: identity, target weight, hardness, thickness, disintegration, potency, purity, and (microbial counts). A quality company should be committed to providing its customers with the best nutritionals that money can buy. Formulas should be carefully designed with quality and safety in mind.
In addition, there are many factors which can affect the absorption of vitamins and minerals in the body. Some of these factors are a function of the person taking the nutrient and are dependent on the age of the person, the integrity of their digestive system, the state of their health, the time of day, the person's gender, and if they were taken on a full or empty stomach.
People whose nutrient needs are greater, such as growing children and pregnant and lactating women, or those who are currently deficient, may have significantly enhanced absorption rates for certain nutrients. Recently, some individuals and companies have made claims that their products are superior because they are"98-percent absorbed" or some similar number. This is a misleading statement because there are simply too many variables to say that absorption is a certain percent of the material consumed. Even absorption of minerals from food sources vary greatly. Boron, molybdenum, and iodine can be absorbed at over 90 percent while the average absorption rates of zinc, copper, and selenium can range from 30to 80 percent.
It should seem reasonable, then, that stating an average absorption rate does not make much sense. A quality company provides its vitamins and minerals in amounts and forms so that, in conjunction with a healthy diet, you will receive maximum bioavailability, full effectiveness, and uncompromised safety.
A couple of questions to ask are: The very reason we have an industry is due to large published studies in the medical and nutritional literature that have given us the knowledge and insight into these nutritional elements. With the hundreds of studies on calcium and vitamin D and bone health, it is hardly in dispute that these nutrients can prevent bone loss. If tablets weren't any good, where did we get all these positive results? If liquid or spray minerals are so much better, why are they almost never used in any legitimate studies? I would challenge anyone to go through the medical and scientific literature and provide ANY substantial evidence that spray or liquid multivitamin supplements are superior to well-made tablets. I wonder if the people promoting liquid nutritionals liquefy or puree their food into a liquid for better absorption? Keep in mind that I am speaking of multiminerals and multivitamin formulations. There may be certain products that may be appropriate in a liquid (just as some medications are liquid). However, these are the exceptions, not the rule.
One more thing. People often contend that liquids are better because they don't contain fillers (excipients used in tablets for disintegration, form, binding, coating, etc). That is a ridiculous argument since liquids can require even more "other" ingredients such as emulsifiers, solvents, preservatives, stabilizing agents, coloring, flavoring, etc. The more ingredients in a liquid supplement, the more of these are required.
Give me your feedback, I would love to hear your comments!
Pam Dunwald, R.N.
http://www.pamdunwald.com/
Email: pamdunwald@yahoo.com
The scientific definition of bioavailable is: the degree and rate at which a substance (as a drug) is absorbed into a living system or is made available at the site of physiological activity. Different vitamins and minerals have different absorption rates no matter if they come from tablet, liquid, powder, or food. For example Calcium has a pretty standard absorption rate around 25-35%. The form does not generally make a significant difference.
The bottom line is - a well made tablet provides a very effective delivery system for pharmaceutical medications. Most medications come in a tablet form. This is because they have been found to be the easiest and most efficient delivery system for medications. Why would vitamin supplements be any different? Does anybody doubt that an aspirin tablet is less effective because it comes in a tablet? Tableted products can be more advantageous to take, simply because more active ingredients can be taken in one tablet(almost 3 times as much as a capsule and much more than liquid or spray). So what this means is that you can get much more nutrients in a tablet vitamin than you can in a liquid. Do the label test. Compare the amount of nutrients and dosages in the liquid vitamins compared to the tablet. Big difference. I've done it with many different liquid brands and you will see the same results.
The stability is also much better. The good quality vitamin tablets are formulated to meet USP standards requiring full disintegration within30-45 min. Tablets are also formulated to meet USP standards for dissolution. Because of the disintegration time, the vitamins and minerals found in our supplements are fully available for absorption into the body. Innovative formulations have been developed to optimize nutrient bioavailability. Each lot of a quality tablet should be tested against finished product specifications to ensure that it meets standards for: identity, target weight, hardness, thickness, disintegration, potency, purity, and (microbial counts). A quality company should be committed to providing its customers with the best nutritionals that money can buy. Formulas should be carefully designed with quality and safety in mind.
In addition, there are many factors which can affect the absorption of vitamins and minerals in the body. Some of these factors are a function of the person taking the nutrient and are dependent on the age of the person, the integrity of their digestive system, the state of their health, the time of day, the person's gender, and if they were taken on a full or empty stomach.
People whose nutrient needs are greater, such as growing children and pregnant and lactating women, or those who are currently deficient, may have significantly enhanced absorption rates for certain nutrients. Recently, some individuals and companies have made claims that their products are superior because they are"98-percent absorbed" or some similar number. This is a misleading statement because there are simply too many variables to say that absorption is a certain percent of the material consumed. Even absorption of minerals from food sources vary greatly. Boron, molybdenum, and iodine can be absorbed at over 90 percent while the average absorption rates of zinc, copper, and selenium can range from 30to 80 percent.
It should seem reasonable, then, that stating an average absorption rate does not make much sense. A quality company provides its vitamins and minerals in amounts and forms so that, in conjunction with a healthy diet, you will receive maximum bioavailability, full effectiveness, and uncompromised safety.
A couple of questions to ask are: The very reason we have an industry is due to large published studies in the medical and nutritional literature that have given us the knowledge and insight into these nutritional elements. With the hundreds of studies on calcium and vitamin D and bone health, it is hardly in dispute that these nutrients can prevent bone loss. If tablets weren't any good, where did we get all these positive results? If liquid or spray minerals are so much better, why are they almost never used in any legitimate studies? I would challenge anyone to go through the medical and scientific literature and provide ANY substantial evidence that spray or liquid multivitamin supplements are superior to well-made tablets. I wonder if the people promoting liquid nutritionals liquefy or puree their food into a liquid for better absorption? Keep in mind that I am speaking of multiminerals and multivitamin formulations. There may be certain products that may be appropriate in a liquid (just as some medications are liquid). However, these are the exceptions, not the rule.
One more thing. People often contend that liquids are better because they don't contain fillers (excipients used in tablets for disintegration, form, binding, coating, etc). That is a ridiculous argument since liquids can require even more "other" ingredients such as emulsifiers, solvents, preservatives, stabilizing agents, coloring, flavoring, etc. The more ingredients in a liquid supplement, the more of these are required.
Give me your feedback, I would love to hear your comments!
Pam Dunwald, R.N.
http://www.pamdunwald.com/
Email: pamdunwald@yahoo.com
Wednesday, August 8, 2007
What type of exercise is best for losing weight?
I get a lot of questions about what type of exercise is best for losing weight. Well, I can offer a few tips here.
Moderate exercise is always best. Heavy exercise while may burn more calories is hard on your body and causes excess free radicals or oxidative stress. Watch for a blog entry that will discuss athletes, recovery, and what can be done to minimize the oxidative stress for people that work out hard or are training athletes.
Back to the exercise part. Moderate exercise 4-5x per week for a duration of at least 30 minutes is ideal. Weight resistance is an excellent way for weight reductions. Here is some of the reasoning behind this.
Your large muscles burn up their fuel called glycogen, once this fuel is burned up, your muscles must go to another form of fuel to feed and produce the energy needed to peform. Once these stores of glycogen are used the body will rely on fat to produce energy. So if your exercise regime includes both weight resistance and cardio (aerobic) you should do the weight resistance exercises first then go to the cardio and you will go straight to fat burning.
One word of caution, you have a glycogen window which is a period of time about 20-30 minutes when you need to replentish your glycogen stores so your muscles recover properly and reduce soreness. You should have a low glycemic snack or meal with good carbs and protein during this window of time. There are many items on the market but watch the labels and sugar content on some of these products. Buy your products by reading the label and not by advertisement hype.
We have a certified low glycemic snack bars that are ideal to carry with you when working out.
You can learn more at http://www.pamdunwald.com/ and click on products, then Macrooptimizers.
In doing some research on work out routines that can be done in the home and following my beliefs and philosophy I have found this program called the Turbulence Work Out. You can learn more about this at:
http://120356.turbulence.hop.clickbank.net/?tid=heltopbg
Let me know what you think about the work out. Also let me know what questions you have about working out or if you have questions on low glycemic meals.
Take care, and talk to you soon.
Pam
http://www.pamdunwald.com/
Email: dunwaldpam@yahoo.com
Moderate exercise is always best. Heavy exercise while may burn more calories is hard on your body and causes excess free radicals or oxidative stress. Watch for a blog entry that will discuss athletes, recovery, and what can be done to minimize the oxidative stress for people that work out hard or are training athletes.
Back to the exercise part. Moderate exercise 4-5x per week for a duration of at least 30 minutes is ideal. Weight resistance is an excellent way for weight reductions. Here is some of the reasoning behind this.
Your large muscles burn up their fuel called glycogen, once this fuel is burned up, your muscles must go to another form of fuel to feed and produce the energy needed to peform. Once these stores of glycogen are used the body will rely on fat to produce energy. So if your exercise regime includes both weight resistance and cardio (aerobic) you should do the weight resistance exercises first then go to the cardio and you will go straight to fat burning.
One word of caution, you have a glycogen window which is a period of time about 20-30 minutes when you need to replentish your glycogen stores so your muscles recover properly and reduce soreness. You should have a low glycemic snack or meal with good carbs and protein during this window of time. There are many items on the market but watch the labels and sugar content on some of these products. Buy your products by reading the label and not by advertisement hype.
We have a certified low glycemic snack bars that are ideal to carry with you when working out.
You can learn more at http://www.pamdunwald.com/ and click on products, then Macrooptimizers.
In doing some research on work out routines that can be done in the home and following my beliefs and philosophy I have found this program called the Turbulence Work Out. You can learn more about this at:
http://120356.turbulence.hop.clickbank.net/?tid=heltopbg
Let me know what you think about the work out. Also let me know what questions you have about working out or if you have questions on low glycemic meals.
Take care, and talk to you soon.
Pam
http://www.pamdunwald.com/
Email: dunwaldpam@yahoo.com
Tuesday, August 7, 2007
Blood Tests of a 20 Year Old
I received an email from a nurse that I used to work with when I was doing home health care. She has been taking the products I recommended to her for awhile now but had not had a physical done by her physician since using the products. The Omega 3 essential fatty acids raises the HDL or the good cholesterol which helps to flush out and neutralize the "bad" cholesterol or LDLs. She was very excited when her physician told her that the results of her blood work were compared to a 20 year old!! She is in her 50's. Needless to say she is very happy! Read her email and then learn more about the products she is taking by visiting:
http://www.pamdunwald.com/
Also, read my post on this blog on "Raising Your Good Cholesterol" for further info on this subject.
Hi Pam. I am still trying..especially now. I received my lab reports from the
doctor...he told me I had labs of a 20 yr old. !!Yes. But, that's not the
truly amazing thing..it's my cholesterol. Since 2000 I have taken zocor
20mg..then 40mg.....However, it became so expensive I couldn't afford it so, I
didn't get any. Then I started taking the omega threes...for what? a year and a
half? And have taken it religiously. every single day. I was hospitalized in
2000 for neck pain, left arm pain..and off the wall tryglicerides(sp) and
cholesterol.Since that time I tried the low carb diet, lots of exercise > But,
couldn't raise my HDL! it got to 37 once. Yesterday the report of total all
cholesterol was 229. Not bad!!! LDL 144 and HDL of 51!!!!!! That is soley
taking the omega...and other vitamins and minerals!!!! no zocor!! I told the
doctor that..he wants me to take the 40mg now that I have insurance..and get it
the ldl lower..and hdl higher..I'm not going to do it! I am staying with the
omega. It is truly working for me. and I am very happy. Believe me I am now
going to push these products til I am blue in the face..I never knew until the labs came
in..I am convinced! Thank you! Pat
http://www.pamdunwald.com/
Also, read my post on this blog on "Raising Your Good Cholesterol" for further info on this subject.
Hi Pam. I am still trying..especially now. I received my lab reports from the
doctor...he told me I had labs of a 20 yr old. !!Yes. But, that's not the
truly amazing thing..it's my cholesterol. Since 2000 I have taken zocor
20mg..then 40mg.....However, it became so expensive I couldn't afford it so, I
didn't get any. Then I started taking the omega threes...for what? a year and a
half? And have taken it religiously. every single day. I was hospitalized in
2000 for neck pain, left arm pain..and off the wall tryglicerides(sp) and
cholesterol.Since that time I tried the low carb diet, lots of exercise > But,
couldn't raise my HDL! it got to 37 once. Yesterday the report of total all
cholesterol was 229. Not bad!!! LDL 144 and HDL of 51!!!!!! That is soley
taking the omega...and other vitamins and minerals!!!! no zocor!! I told the
doctor that..he wants me to take the 40mg now that I have insurance..and get it
the ldl lower..and hdl higher..I'm not going to do it! I am staying with the
omega. It is truly working for me. and I am very happy. Believe me I am now
going to push these products til I am blue in the face..I never knew until the labs came
in..I am convinced! Thank you! Pat
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
