Tag Archives: nature

Vitamin D and Cancer – Vitamin D Outperforms Pharmaceuticals at Treating Cancer


Everyone is deathly afraid of coming down with cancer, yet the very lifestyle that promotes cancer is the most popular. Cancer has been one of the leading causes of death in the United States, UK, and many other nations for years. Something is terribly wrong, as the war on cancer is failing miserably. The use of pharmaceutical drugs is not the answer, and the idea of prevention is seldom voiced. Luckily, making some dietary changes can reduce your cancer risk significantly. One example is showcased with research showing that a relationship between vitamin D and cancer exists; raising vitamin Dlevels can be more effective and much safer than dangerous pharmaceutical drugs and treatments. It costs a whole lot less as well.

Vitamin D and Cancer

Angus Dalgleish, a consultant medical oncologist residing in a city known as Tooting in south-west London, tests all of his patients for vitamin D levels and prescribes supplements for when the levels are low. Dalgleish noticed that patients at his clinic at St Georges suffering from melanoma, the deadliest form of skin cancer, almost all were vitamin D deficient. Not only does the medical oncologist prescribe vitamin D for his melanoma patients, but he also prescribes the vitamin for other patients who are stricken with other types of cancer.

“If we supplement people who are low they may do better than expected. I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if vitamin D turns out to be more useful in improving outcomes in cases of early relapse than drugs costing £10,000 a year,” said Professor Dalgleish. “I spent a decade studying interferon for which the NHS paid £10,000 annually per patient for years for very little benefit. Vitamin D is much more likely to give a benefit in my view.”

Other research from the University of Leeds showed similar connections between vitamin D and cancer, specifically melanoma. Patients with the lowest vitamin D levels had the gloomiest outlook and were also 30 percent more likely to suffer from the disease in the future than those with higher vitamin D levels.

At Creighton University in Nebraska, Joan Lappe, a professor of medicine, also noticed a strong link between vitamin D and cancer. He took note of the vitamin d and cancer relationship when cancer patients who received vitamin d and calcium supplementation increased their survival rates significantly. Although the trial was originally meant to evaluate the effects of supplements on osteoporosis, this accidental finding led Lappe to examine  the effects of supplements on cancer.

You May Not Be Getting the Vitamin D You Think You Are

Of course, none of this matters if you aren’t giving your body the necessary amount of vitamin D to work with. Foods fortified with vitamin d contain a synthetic, potentially harmful type of vitamin D called vitamin D2. Vitamin D2 is both inferior and could be harmful, so you may not want to search for fortified foods like milk and cereal just yet. Instead of chomping down on fortified foods, consume foods that naturally possess vitamin D such as cod liver oil, eggs, and seafood such as salmon, oysters, catfish, sardines, or shrimp. However, be careful when consuming fish, as most fish is toxic due to contaminates and chemicals residing in the water.

The best source of vitamin D is the sun, but the amount of vitamin D produced from sun exposure can vary greatly. Getting sun exposure in the summer when the rays are very strong can produce a lot of vitamin D – as much as 10,000 IU’s in just 20-30 minutes (a bit longer for dark skin). But soaking up the rays in winter months will not produce the same amount as the sun is less powerful.

One last thing to remember is to avoid using sunscreen if possible. Not only does research show that sunscreen causes cancer, but lathering on sunscreen also compromises your body’s ability to produce vitamin D from UV rays.

Additional sources:

Creighton University

The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

Vitamin D Association

Read more:
Article Source:

American Families Abandoning National Parks


 I am happy to say that as a family, we have visited 3 National Parks in the last 6 months. First, in October, we went to Yosemite National Park, what an amazing place!  My children loved it and my wife and I were able to enjoy nature without all the influences of  cell phones and the web.

Just this evening, we arrived home from a 10 day trip that started in Southern California.  We journeyed to the Grand Canyon, the Petrified Forest, Roswell and the JFK Museum in Dallas.  The Grand Canyon and Petrified Forest National Parks were amazing and once again, my children were able to see some of the most  beautiful places on earth.

Although all these sites can be easily visualized online, it is important that one see them in person as there is really no comparison.  Online photos do not do the sites justice.  In addition, the quality time I was able to spend with my wife and kids is  becoming an extinct pastime for many of us as children’s  video games and long hours of work seem to keep many people away from nature.    See My Picture of Yosemite Here. 

——-

By Serena Gordon

HealthDay Reporter

FRIDAy, Feb. 8 (HealthDay News) — National parks were designed to be places where Americans could go to connect with nature, but that healthy ideal may be on the wane.

A new study published in this week’s issue of the Proceedings of the National Academies of Sciences finds the use of America’s parks and forests may be down by as much as 25 percent since 1987.

“Outdoor health activities in nature are good for you in terms of physical, emotional and psychological well-being,” said study co-author Oliver Pergams, a research assistant professor in biology at the University of Illinois at Chicago. “If they’re being replaced by videos and other indoor sedentary activities, then kids aren’t getting the good stuff. They’re replacing those healthy activities with ones that are quite the opposite in many ways.”

His team believes the decline in national park use stems from this “videophilia,” which they define as the new human tendency to choose sedentary activities involving electronics over outdoor-based recreation.

“National parks and being outside are symbolic of a healthier lifestyle than where America seems to be going these days,” added Dr. Marc Siegel, an associate professor of medicine at the New York University School of Medicine. “We’ve been oriented toward environmental control and want everything to be 70 degrees, so we’re not communing with nature as much.”

While the United States is clearly a sedentary society, said Siegel, he’s not sure that there’s a direct correlation between the declining use of U.S. national parks and a sedentary lifestyle.

“It’s an interesting fact, but it could just mean that our tastes have changed,” said Siegel.

The study authors are particularly concerned that the declining use of national parks might lead to a society that’s less concerned with conservation.

“Environmentally responsible behavior results from direct contact with the environment,” they wrote. “People must be exposed to natural areas as children if they are to care about them as adults. Extended periods spent in natural areas, as well as creating role models, seem to create the most environmentally responsible behavior.”

To evaluate the exact usage of the large parks, the researchers looked for decline in usage for 16 different time periods. They looked at national parks in the United States, Japan and Spain, as well as the number of gaming licenses issued and other indicators of camping, backpacking and hiking.

In the United States, visits to national parks steadily increased from the 1930s until 1987. Since that time, the study found the use of these parks has been declining by a little more than 1 percent each year. For some parks, that’s translated to a decline in 25 percent in visits since the 1980s.

The researchers also found that parks in Japan and Spain have experienced a similar decrease in usage.

“The trend in declining nature extends beyond U.S. political and cultural boundaries,” they wrote.

The only activity that seemed to increase was day hiking. Other activities studied, such as camping, fishing and hunting, declined during the study period.

That’s a shame because “there have been a lot of studies that show that being out in nature and participating in outdoor activities is good for you,” said study co-author Patty Zaradic, Environmental Leadership Fellow and conservation ecologist at Bryn Mawr College, in Pennsylvania.

However, based on the new findings, “there would need to be more than 70 million national park visits to get it back up to its peak,” she noted.

The good news, however, according to Siegel, is that there probably aren’t any dire health messages contained in this particular study. While people participating in fewer outdoor activities may get less sunshine, and therefore less vitamin D, Siegel said that you generally get enough sun exposure to make sufficient vitamin D just from walking to the office from your car.

And, while America is “clearly a sedentary society,” he doesn’t believe an extra visit or two to a national park will cure America’s obesity problem.

But Zaradic believes the problem runs deeper than that. “We tend to underestimate how important it is for ourselves and for our kids to get out and play in the dirt and to vacation somewhere like a state park or national park,” she said. “We have forgotten how important our relationship with the real world is for our well-being.”

More information

If you want to buck the trend and head outdoors, visit the National Park Service.