Dr. Steve Chaney

Is It Too Late To Save Your Mind?

by

What Does A Brain Healthy Diet Look Like?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney 

Memory loss due to Dementia and Alzheimer’s disease with the medical icon of a tree in the shape of a human head and brain losing leaves.

Age-related cognitive decline is increasing at an alarming rate. For example:

  • Newly diagnosed cases of Alzheimer’s disease in Americans over 65 reached 6.5 million in 2022.
  • That’s expected to double by 2060.

We have known for years that a whole food, primarily plant-based diet significantly reduces the risk of cognitive decline and Alzheimer’s.

But in our 20s and 30s we tend to ignore that advice. We feel immortal. Aging is something that affects our grandparents – not us.

When we reach our 40s and 50s reality kicks in. Some of our parents, aunts, and uncles start to show symptoms of cognitive decline. Some of our grandparents are suffering from dementia and Alzheimer’s. Maybe we aren’t immortal.

We start to think about changing to a healthier diet and lifestyle. But then the troubling thoughts creep in. “Is it too late? Should I have made those changes in my 20s? Has that ship already sailed?”

A recent study (Y Song et al, Alzheimer’s & Dementia, 2023) was designed to answer that question

How Was This Study Done?

clinical studyThe authors used data from the New York University Women’s Health Study. They studied 5116 women (average age = 46) who enrolled in the study between 1985 and 1991 and were followed for an average of 33 years (average age at the end of the study = 79).

At the beginning of the study, each participant filled out a questionnaire about demographics (age, gender, ethnicity, income, education, and marital status), physical activity, reproductive history, cancer history, and medication use. They also filled out a food frequency questionnaire.

Using the foods reported in the food frequency questionnaires, the scientist rated each woman with respect to adherence to the DASH diet. The women were then separated into quartiles based on their adherence to the DASH diet.

The participants filled out follow-up questionnaires every 3-5 years. Those who did not return the questionnaires were contacted by phone. The last two follow-up questionnaires included a survey of subjective cognitive complaints (SCCs) such as:

  • Recent changes in the ability to remember things.
  • Difficulty remembering recent events.
  • Difficulty remembering a short list of items, such as a shopping list.
  • Difficulty understanding or following spoken instructions.
  • Difficulty following a group conversation or a plot in a TV program.
  • Difficulty navigating familiar streets.

Previous studies have shown that the SCCs survey is an accurate predictor of future dementia and Alzheimer’s.

Finally, the scientists looked at the correlation between adherence to the DASH diet at age 46 with the number of subjective cognitive complaints at age 79.

Is It Too Late To Save Your Mind?

This is what the authors reported:

  • There was an inverse association between adherence to foods in the DASH diet (which was called “DASH adherence” by the authors of this study) at age 46 and subjective cognitive complaints (SCCs) at age 79.
  • Women in the highest quartile of DASH adherence at age 46 had a 17% reduction in 2 or more SCCs at age 79.
  • Every quartile increase in DASH adherence increased the risk of 2 or more SCCs by 7%.

The most frequently reported SCCs were:

  • Recent changes in the ability to remember things (40%).
  • Difficulty remembering a short list of items (19%).
  • Difficulty remembering recent events (17%).

When they looked at the effect of different foods on SCCs (subjective cognitive complaints):

  • Consumption of sweets, red meat, and processed meats were associated with an increased risk of SCCs, with sweets having the largest effect.
  • Consumption of fruits, vegetables excluding potatoes, legumes and nuts were associated with a decreased risk of SCCs at age 79, with fruits having the largest effect.

There were two other findings of interest:

  • The effect of DASH adherence was stronger for Black women than for White women.
  • The protective effect of DASH adherence was stronger in women with no previous history of cancer.

The authors concluded, “We found that a higher level of adherence to the DASH diet in mid-life was associated with lower SCCs later in life among women. These findings suggest that improvements in diet quality in mid-life…may have a role in maintaining an optimal subjective cognition among women…”

What Does This Study Mean For You? 

Questioning WomanLet me start by putting this study into perspective:

  • The strength of this study is that it has the longest follow-up period (33 years) and most diverse population of any study on this topic.
  • It is consistent with several previous studies with shorter follow-up periods, including the Nurses Health Study which also looked at the effect of DASH adherence at mid-life on SCCs later in life.
  • Several studies have shown that the Mediterranean diet protects against cognitive decline. And one recent study showed that mid-life adherence to the Mediterranean diet also offers similar protection against late-life cognitive decline in men.
    • This suggests that any whole food, primarily plant-based eating pattern, is likely to offer similar benefits. That is important because most of us find it easier to focus on foods rather than rigid diets.
  • Three studies that just compared DASH adherence and SCCs when subjects were already in their 60s to 90s, found no protective effect of DASH adherence.
    • This suggests that if we wait until old age and are already starting to experience mental decline, switching to a healthier diet may not be as beneficial for protecting our mind as we would like it to be. However, I would never advise anyone to just throw up their hands and say, “I might as well eat what I like and die happy.” That’s because:
      • Healthy dietary patterns have a multitude of health benefits. Cognitive benefits are just the tip of the iceberg.
      • Statistics report averages, and none of us are average. Some people will experience much better cognitive benefits than others by switching to a healthier diet, even if they wait until their “golden years” to do so.
  • There aren’t any clinical studies looking at adherence to a healthy diet in our 20s or 30s and cognitive outcomes in our 70s. The time span is just too great for clinical studies.
    • So, while we can confidently say, “It’s not too late to save your mind” by switching to a healthier diet pattern like DASH or Mediterranean in middle age, there are no clinical studies showing we might get even better results if we started eating healthy in our 20s or 30s. However, logic tells us that is a likely outcome.
  • This and most studies on this topic have been done with women. That’s because two thirds of Alzheimer’s patients are women.
    • However, the few studies that have been done with men have reported similar results. So, guys, this affects us too.
  • Finally, the fact that DASH adherence was more effective in women who have not had a cancer diagnosis is interesting.
    • In my opinion this is likely because many cancer treatments leave residual “brain fog” and increase the risk of cognitive decline as we age. As someone who spent his life in cancer research, I consider a healthy diet and healthy lifestyle vitally important in helping the body recover from the ravages of cancer treatment.

What Does A Brain-Healthy Diet Look Like? 

According to the most recent US News & World Health ratings of the best diets in various categories, the top 4 diets for brain health are:

  • MIND diet (The MIND diet combines the best of the Mediterranean and DASH diets with an emphasis on brain healthy foods such as berries.)
  • Mediterranean diet.
  • Flexitarian diet (a flexible version of a semi-vegetarian diet).
  • DASH diet.

My Comments:

  • All four diets are whole food, primarily plant-based diets.
  • Although the MIND diet was specifically designed for brain health, it does not perform significantly better than the Mediterranean and DASH diets in slowing cognitive decline.

Of course, most people prefer to think in terms of foods rather than diets. In terms of brain-healthy foods, a recent Harvard Health Review suggests these are the foods we should emphasize for brain health:

  • Green Leafy Vegetables: Kale, spinach, broccoli, and collards are rich in brain-healthy nutrients like vitamin K, lutein, folate, and beta-carotene.
  • Fatty Fish: Salmon, trout, sardines, and mackerel provide omega-3 fatty acids, which are crucial for brain function and for reducing dementia risk.
  • Berries: Blueberries, strawberries, and blackberries contain antioxidants that have been shown to delay cognitive decline.
  • Nuts and Seeds: Walnuts are high in omega-3 fatty acids (ALA), while others provide vitamin E.
  • Healthy Fats: Olive oil is recommended as the primary cooking fat.
  • Whole Grains and Legumes: Oats, quinoa, beans, and lentils provide a steady, slow release of glucose for brain energy. Plus, their fiber supports the growth of friendly bacteria that produce brain-healthy nutrients (This is sometimes referred to as the gut-brain axis).
  • Other Foods: Avocados (monounsaturated fats), beets (nitrates for blood flow), and cocoa (flavonoids) are beneficial.

The Bottom Line 

A recent study showed that adherence to a healthy eating pattern like the DASH diet at middle age can help protect our brain from cognitive decline 30 years later.

For more information on this study and what it means for you, read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

_______________________________________________________________________________

My posts and “Health Tips From the Professor” articles carefully avoid claims about any brand of supplement or manufacturer of supplements. However, I am often asked by representatives of supplement companies if they can share them with their customers.

My answer is, “Yes, as long as you share only the article without any additions or alterations. In particular, you should avoid adding any mention of your company or your company’s products. If you were to do that, you could be making what the FTC and FDA consider a “misleading health claim” that could result in legal action against you and the company you represent.

For more detail about FTC regulations for health claims, see this link.

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/health-products-compliance-guidance

 _______________________________________________________________________

About The Author 

Dr. Chaney has a BS in Chemistry from Duke University and a PhD in Biochemistry from UCLA. He is Professor Emeritus from the University of North Carolina where he taught biochemistry and nutrition to medical and dental students for 40 years.

Dr. Chaney won numerous teaching awards at UNC, including the Academy of Educators “Excellence in Teaching Lifetime Achievement Award”.

Dr Chaney also ran an active cancer research program at UNC and published over 100 scientific articles and reviews in peer-reviewed scientific journals. In addition, he authored two chapters on nutrition in one of the leading biochemistry text books for medical students.

Since retiring from the University of North Carolina, he has been writing a weekly health blog called “Health Tips From the Professor”. He has also written two best-selling books, “Slaying the Food Myths” and “Slaying the Supplement Myths”. And most recently he has created an online lifestyle change course, “Create Your Personal Health Zone”. For more information visit https://chaneyhealth.com.

For the past 54 years Dr. Chaney and his wife Suzanne have been helping people improve their health holistically through a combination of good diet, exercise, weight control and appropriate supplementation.

Can You Cut Your Risk Of Heart Disease By 90%?

by

The Effect Of Ultra-Processed Foods On Heart Disease Risk
 

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

strong heartHeart disease is a killer. It continues to be the leading cause of death – both worldwide and in industrialized countries like the United States and the European Union. When we look at heart disease trends, it is a good news – bad news situation.

  • The good news is that heart disease deaths are continuing to decline in adults over 70.
    • The decline among senior citizens is attributed to improved treatment of heart disease and more seniors following heart-healthy diets.
  • The bad news is that heart disease deaths are starting to increase in younger adults, something I reported in an earlier issue of “Health Tips From the Professor.”
    • The reason for the rise in heart disease deaths in young people is less clear. However, the obesity epidemic, junk and convenience foods, and the popularity of fad diets all likely play a role.

Everyone has a magic diet to reduce the risk of heart disease. The American Heart Association tells us to avoid fats, especially saturated fats. Vegans tell us to avoid animal protein. Paleo and Keto enthusiasts tell us carbs are the problem.

But what if we eliminated junk and convenience food AND switched to a really healthy diet? How much would that reduce heart disease risk? A recent study (Y Willett et al, The American Journal of Medicine, in press, 2026) looked at the first part of that question. It looked at the effect of ultra-processed food (what we call junk and convenience foods) consumption on the risk of developing heart disease.

How Was This Study Done?

Clinical StudyThe scientists analyzed data from 4787 participants in the most recently published (2021 to 2023) National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). The average age of participants in the survey was 55 years, with 56% of them being women.

All the participants in this study had completed a dietary survey of everything they ate over the last two days. They also reported whether they had ever experienced a heart attack or stroke.

Ultra-processed foods were defined as foods that are industrially modified and loaded with added fats, sugars, starches, salts, and chemical additives.

The percentage of ultra-processed foods in their diet was calculated, and the participants were divided into quartiles based on the percentage of ultra-processed foods they consumed.

Participants with the highest quartile of ultra-processed food consumption were compared to those in the lowest quartile with respect to the risk of cardiovascular disease (self-reported heart attack or stroke). The data were corrected for age, sex, race, ethnicity, smoking status, and income.

The Effect Of Ultra-Processed Foods On Heart Disease Risk

Fast Food DangersThe results were striking:

  • The participants in the highest quartile for ultra-processed food consumption had a 47% higher risk of heart disease compared to those in the lowest quartile for ultra-processed food consumption.

The authors concluded, “Adults who consumed the highest amount of ultra-processed foods had a statistically significant 47% increased risk of heart disease. Large scale randomized trials are needed, but in the meantime, health care providers should advise patients to decrease consumption of ultra-processed foods in addition to adopting other therapeutic lifestyle changes and adjunctive drug therapies of proven benefit.”

The authors recognized the difficulty of making those changes in a world where ultra-processed foods are ubiquitous and cheap.

However, they drew parallels to tobacco use in this country. They said, “Just as it took decades for the dangers of smoking to become widely accepted, reducing reliance on ultra-processed foods may take time. This is partly due to the influence of large multinational companies that dominate the food market. In addition, many people face limited access to healthier food options.”

They went on to say, “Addressing ultra-processed foods isn’t just about individual choices – it’s about creating environments where the healthy option is the easy option.”

Can You Cut Your Risk Of Heart Disease By 90%?

The short answer is, “probably not”. But you can reduce the risk of heart disease by a lot – and probably by a lot more than 47%.

That’s because this study did not look at what the participants were replacing the ultra-processed foods with. Some participants may have replaced them with whole food, primarily plant-based diets. Others may have replaced ultra-processed foods with whole food, meat-based diets high in saturated fats.

So, let’s look at the other side of the equation – how much you can reduce your risk of heart disease by eating a healthier diet. In a recent issue of “Health Tips From The Professor”, I reviewed a meta-analysis published in 2022 that looked at 99 clinical studies with tens of thousands of participants that measured the associations between foods or food groups and heart disease risk.

That study reported that:

  • Processed Meat: A single serving of processed meat increased heart disease risk by 27% to 44%.
  • Red Meat: Unprocessed red meat increased heart disease risk by as much as 27% – but only at ≥3 servings per day. The results with lower intakes were inconsistent – some studies showed increased risk, but others did not.
  • Poultry, Eggs, and Dairy Foods: They did not appear to affect heart disease risk.
  • Fish: Two to four servings per week of fatty fish decreased heart disease risk by around 12%.
  • Fruit: Two servings per day of fruit reduced heart disease risk by 21-32%.Vegan Foods
  • Vegetables: Two servings of vegetables per day reduced heart disease risk by 18-21%.
  • Legumes (beans and peas): Four servings per week reduced the risk of heart disease by around 14%.
  • Nuts: One serving (a handful) per day reduced the risk of heart disease by around 25%. 
  • Whole Grains: Two servings of whole grains per day reduced the risk of heart disease by 25%-34%.
  • Overall: When heart-healthy foods were consumed as part of the Mediterranean diet heart disease risk was reduced by 47%. Similar overall reductions in heart disease risk are likely with other heart-healthy diets like DASH, MIND, Flexitarian (flexible semi-vegetarian), and vegan diets.

In summary:

  • The first study shows that eliminating ultra-processed foods (junk and convenience foods) from your diet can decrease heart disease risk by 47% – but doesn’t tell us what the ultra-processed foods were replaced with. And it would take a much larger study to determine which food swaps were most effective at reducing heart disease risk.
  • The second study was a meta-analysis that told us that eating more fish and plant foods in the context of a heart-healthy diet can decrease your risk of heart disease by 47% – but doesn’t tell us what those healthy foods were replacing. And many of the individual studies included in the meta-analysis were conducted when ultra-processed food consumption was much less than it is today.

It would be tempting to add 47% plus 47% and conclude that eliminating ultra-processed food consumption and replacing ultra-processed foods with heart-healthy foods could decrease your risk of heart disease by 94%. But it’s not that simple. There are too many unanswered questions from these studies.

But it is safe to say that if we eliminated ultra-processed foods AND replaced them with heart-healthy foods in the context of a heart-healthy diet, we should be able to reduce our heart disease risk by more than 47% – perhaps much more.

What Do These Studies Mean For You?

There are two important lessons from these studies:

#1: Eliminating ultra-processed foods from your diet will significantly decrease your risk of heart disease.

And it isn’t just heart disease. Other recent studies have shown that eliminating ultra-processed foods from your diet helps you:

  • Control your weight (It is perhaps the most important lifestyle change to make if you want to maintain GLP-1-aided weight loss).
  • Reduce your risk of cancer.
  • Reduce your risk of diabetes.
  • Reduce your risk of inflammatory diseases.
  • Reduce anxiety and depression.
  • Increase your healthspan (your healthy years).

In short, ultra-processed foods are killers.

#2: Replacing ultra-processed foods with heart-healthy foods (fruits, vegetables, legumes, nuts, whole grains, and fish) in the context of a healthy diet (Mediterranean, DASH, MIND, Flexitarian, and vegan, for example) is likely to decrease your risk of heart disease even more.

  • And if your diet consists of mostly heart-healthy foods, you can add moderate amounts of heart-neutral foods (poultry, eggs, and dairy).
  • And the latest evidence suggests that you can even add small amounts of red meat in the context of a heart-healthy diet (As I have said in previous issues of “Health Tips From the Professor”, plant foods contain the antidotes to all the bad things about red meat.)

Finally, you might ask why I emphasize both heart-healthy foods and heart-healthy diets. There are two reasons:

  • Most of us think in terms of foods rather than diets.
  • The food industry is only too happy to provide us with ultra-processed foods for “heart-healthy” diets like the vegan and Mediterranean diet.

The Bottom Line

Two recent studies have shown how each of us can dramatically reduce our risk of heart disease.

  • The first study showed that eliminating ultra-processed foods from our diet can significantly decrease our heart disease risk – but didn’t tell us what the ultra-processed foods were replaced with.
  • The second study showed that eating more heart-healthy foods in the context of a heart-healthy diet can significantly decrease our risk of heart disease – but didn’t tell us what those healthy foods were replacing.

Taken together, those studies show us a clear path for dramatically decreasing our heart disease risk.

For more details about these studies and what they mean for you, read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

 _____________________________________________________________________________

My posts and “Health Tips From the Professor” articles carefully avoid claims about any brand of supplement or manufacturer of supplements. However, I am often asked by representatives of supplement companies if they can share them with their customers.

My answer is, “Yes, as long as you share only the article without any additions or alterations. In particular, you should avoid adding any mention of your company or your company’s products. If you were to do that, you could be making what the FTC and FDA consider a “misleading health claim” that could result in legal action against you and the company you represent.

For more detail about FTC regulations for health claims, see this link.

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/health-products-compliance-guidance

_______________________________________________________________________

About The Author 

Dr. Chaney has a BS in Chemistry from Duke University and a PhD in Biochemistry from UCLA. He is Professor Emeritus from the University of North Carolina where he taught biochemistry and nutrition to medical and dental students for 40 years.  Dr. Chaney won numerous teaching awards at UNC, including the Academy of Educators “Excellence in Teaching Lifetime Achievement Award”.

Dr Chaney also ran an active cancer research program at UNC and published over 100 scientific articles and reviews in peer-reviewed scientific journals. In addition, he authored two chapters on nutrition in one of the leading biochemistry text books for medical students.

Since retiring from the University of North Carolina, he has been writing a weekly health blog called “Health Tips From the Professor”. He has also written two best-selling books, “Slaying the Food Myths” and “Slaying the Supplement Myths”. And most recently he has created an online lifestyle change course, “Create Your Personal Health Zone”. For more information visit https://chaneyhealth.com.

For the past 45 years Dr. Chaney and his wife Suzanne have been helping people improve their health holistically through a combination of good diet, exercise, weight control and appropriate supplementation.

 

Is A Little Alcohol Good For You?

by

How Were We Lead Astray?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney 

You have probably heard that moderate alcohol consumption is healthier than complete abstinence from alcohol. It is certainly a popular viewpoint.

It is also a scientific paradigm. By that I mean:

  • It is supported by multiple clinical studies.
  • Elaborate metabolic explanations have been proposed to support this paradigm.
  • It is the official position of most medical societies, scientific organizations, and health information sites on the web.
  • It is the recommendation of most health professionals.
  • It has been repeated so often from so many trusted sources that everyone assumes it must be true.

But is it a myth? You may have been surprised if you saw the headlines saying, “Having an alcoholic drink or two per day is not healthier than abstaining.”

Today I will review the study (J Zhao et al, JAMA Network Open, 6(3): e236185, 2023) behind the headlines and tell you what it means for you.

But first, I want to explain to you how the scientific method works. That’s because this study is a perfect example of the scientific method in action.

How Were We Lead Astray?

I have described the scientific method in detail in my books “Slaying The Food Myths” and “Slaying The Supplement Myths”, which you will find here.

Today, I will just give you a brief synopsis of the scientific method.

  • Most scientific studies are designed to disprove existing scientific paradigms. This is such a study.
    • In the scientific world, there is no glory in being the 10th person to prove that a scientific paradigm is correct. The glory comes from being the first person to disprove a scientific paradigm and create a new paradigm in the process.
    • This constant testing of existing paradigms is one of the most important strengths of the scientific method.
  • There is no perfect study. Every study has its flaws.
  • “Confounding variables” are flaws that can be the Achilles Heel of any association study.

Now let me explain the significance of these statements in the context of the current study:

  • All the studies supporting the current paradigm were association studies. Association studies measure the association between a selected variable and an outcome. For these studies, the selected variable was alcohol consumption, and the outcome was increased mortality.
  • Association studies try to statistically correct for other variables known to affect the outcome. For example, diseases like heart disease, diabetes, and cancer increase the risk of premature death. These are known variables that would be corrected for in any well-designed study of alcohol consumption and mortality.
  • “Confounding variables” are unknown variables that also affect the outcome of the study. But since they are unknown, they are not corrected for.

Let me give you a simplistic example of a confounding variable. Let’s say you were doing a study of dietary habits, and you found an association between ice cream consumption and mortality. You might conclude that ice cream consumption is bad for you. It increases your risk of dying.

But then you might remember that ice cream consumption increases during the summer. And then you might reason that people swim more during the summer, and there is a correlation between swimming and drowning deaths.

Swimming could be a confounding variable. To make sure that your initial conclusion that ice cream increases the risk of dying was correct, you would need to correct your data for swimming deaths during the summer and see if you still found a correlation between ice cream consumption and mortality.

Could The Current Paradigm Be Incorrect?

SkepticYou might be thinking, “What does this have to do with studies on the correlation between alcohol consumption and increased mortality?” Let me explain.

The baseline group for these comparisons was the abstainers – the group consuming no alcohol. Previous studies have compared the mortality risk associated with various amounts of alcohol consumption with the mortality risk of the abstainer group. This sounds like a reasonable approach.

But the investigators challenging the current paradigm noted that the “abstainer group” in previous studies included both lifetime abstainers and former drinkers who had become abstainers. They hypothesized that the “former drinkers” group may have become abstainers because of health issues related to excess alcohol consumption.

In short, they hypothesized that the “former drinkers” group was a confounding variable that biased the results of the previous studies. They hypothesized that the “lifetime abstainers” group was a more appropriate baseline group for this kind of study. They then set out to prove their hypothesis.

How Was This Study Done?

clinical studyThe investigators searched the literature and found 107 studies with 4.8 million participants published between 1980 and July 21, 2021, that:

  • Assessed the correlation between alcohol consumption and mortality.
  • Had data that allowed the investigators to separate lifetime abstainers from former drinkers who had become abstainers.

The investigators divided alcohol consumption into low, moderate, high, and very high categories based on the ounces of alcohol consumed per day. Since ounces of alcohol is not an easy measure for most of us, I have converted ounces/day to drinks/day based on the CDC definition of a drink (a 12-ounce beer, 5-ounce glass of wine, or 1.5 ounces of a distilled spirit like gin or vodka). And to make it even simpler, I have rounded to the nearest whole number. With that said, here are the classifications.

  • Low alcohol intake = 1-2 drinks/day.
  • Moderate alcohol intake = 2-3 drinks/day.
  • High alcohol intake = 3-4 drinks/day.
  • Very high alcohol intake = >4 drinks/day.

The risk of death associated with each of these intake levels was compared the risk of death of their preferred baseline group, the “lifetime abstainers”.

Finally, the data were corrected for other variables known to influence the correlation between alcohol consumption and mortality, namely age, sex, heart health, social status, race, diet, exercise, BMI, and smoking status. [These are known confounding variables and had been adjusted for in most previous studies.]

Is A Little Alcohol Good For You?

Red WineWhen the investigators compared the mortality risk of former drinkers who had become abstainers with lifetime abstainers:

  • The former drinkers were 31% more likely to die, and this difference was highly significant.
  • This is consistent with their hypothesis that the “former drinkers” group was a confounding variable that may have biased the conclusions of previous studies.

When they compared the mortality risk of various levels of alcohol consumption with lifetime abstainers instead of all abstainers, they found:

  • The risk of mortality associated with low (1-2 drinks/day) and moderate (2-3 drinks/day) alcohol intake was statistically identical to the risk of mortality for lifetime abstainers.
  • The high alcohol intake group (3-4 drinks/day) was 24% more likely to die than the lifetime abstainers.
  • The very high alcohol intake group (>4 drinks/day) was 39% more likely to die than the lifetime abstainers.

In short, when lifetime abstainers were used as the baseline group, low to moderate alcohol intake did not reduce the risk of dying, as previous studies had suggested. This study suggests the idea that low to moderate alcohol consumption is good for us is not accurate. It is a myth.

Finally, there was a significant gender difference in the effect of alcohol consumption on mortality.

For women:

  • Even moderate alcohol consumption was associated with an increased risk of mortality. Only low alcohol consumption posed no increase in mortality.
  • The increased risk of mortality for women was significantly higher than for men with every level of alcohol consumption.

The authors concluded, “In this…meta-analysis, daily low or moderate alcohol intake was not significantly associated with all-cause mortality risk, while increased risk was evident at higher consumption levels, starting at lower levels for women than for men.”

Of course, this isn’t the end of the story. The scientific method will continue. Old paradigms don’t die easily. Other investigators will challenge the conclusions of this study. Stay tuned. I will give you updates as future studies are published.

What Does This Study Mean For You?

QuestionsIf you like to imbibe, there are two important takeaways from this study.

The bad news is that you can no longer claim that a drink or two a day is healthier than total abstinence from alcohol.

The good news is that this and every study preceding it have found that a drink or two a day is no less healthy than total abstinence. The studies found no increase in mortality associated with low to moderate alcohol intake.

[However, low to moderate alcohol intake may increase your risk of specific diseases. For example, many studies suggest that even low alcohol intake is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer.]

This study also agrees with previous studies that high alcohol intake increases your risk of death, and women are more susceptible to adverse effects of alcohol intake than men.

So, while this study challenges the existing paradigm that low to moderate alcohol intake is beneficial, it does not change the current recommendations on alcohol intake by most health organizations.

For example, the current CDC guidelines are:

  • Adults of legal drinking age should limit alcohol intake to 2 drinks or less per day for men and one drink or less per day for women.
  • Adults who do not drink alcohol should not start. [The current study strengthens this recommendation because it takes away the excuse that low to moderate alcohol consumption is healthier than abstinence.]
  • Drinking less is better than drinking more.

The CDC guidelines also note that the risk of some cancers increases even at very low levels of alcohol consumption.

Finally, the CDC recommends that some people never consume alcohol, including:

  • Women who are pregnant or might become pregnant.
  • Anyone younger than 21.
  • Anyone with medical conditions or medications that interact with alcohol.
  • Anyone recovering from an alcohol use disorder or who has trouble controlling the amount they drink.

The Bottom Line

A recent study is a perfect example of the scientific method in action. Scientists are constantly challenging the existing scientific paradigms, and this is an important strength of the scientific method.

A group of scientists recently published a study challenging the paradigm that low to moderate alcohol intake is healthier than total abstinence from alcohol.

They hypothesized that previous studies supporting this paradigm had a common methodological flaw, corrected for the flaw, and reanalyzed the data from 104 studies with a total of 4.8 million participants.

The revised data showed no health benefit of low to moderate alcohol consumption compared to total abstinence. When you look at the data more closely, the current paradigm may be a myth.

  • This is a major change to the existing paradigm because it removes the justification for low to moderate alcohol consumption.

However, the revised data did not differ from previous studies in the following ways:

  • There is no health risk associated with low to moderate alcohol intake compared to total abstinence.
  • High alcohol intake (>3 drinks/day) is associated with increased mortality.
  • Women are more sensitive to the adverse effects of alcohol than men.

So, this study does not change current guidelines for alcohol consumption.

For more information on this study, what it means for you, and the CDC guidelines on alcohol consumption read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

_____________________________________________________________________________

My posts and “Health Tips From the Professor” articles carefully avoid claims about any brand of supplement or manufacturer of supplements. However, I am often asked by representatives of supplement companies if they can share them with their customers.

My answer is, “Yes, as long as you share only the article without any additions or alterations. In particular, you should avoid adding any mention of your company or your company’s products. If you were to do that, you could be making what the FTC and FDA consider a “misleading health claim” that could result in legal action against you and the company you represent.

For more detail about FTC regulations for health claims, see this link.

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/health-products-compliance-guidance

 ________________________________________________________________________

About The Author 

Dr. Chaney has a BS in Chemistry from Duke University and a PhD in Biochemistry from UCLA. He is Professor Emeritus from the University of North Carolina where he taught biochemistry and nutrition to medical and dental students for 40 years.  Dr. Chaney won numerous teaching awards at UNC, including the Academy of Educators “Excellence in Teaching Lifetime Achievement Award”. Dr Chaney also ran an active cancer research program at UNC and published over 100 scientific articles and reviews in peer-reviewed scientific journals. In addition, he authored two chapters on nutrition in one of the leading Biochemistry textbooks for medical students.

Since retiring from the University of North Carolina, he has been writing a weekly health blog called “Health Tips From the Professor”. He has also written two best-selling books, “Slaying the Food Myths” and “Slaying the Supplement Myths”. And most recently he has created an online lifestyle change course, “Create Your Personal Health Zone”. For more information visit https://chaneyhealth.com.

For the past 54 years Dr. Chaney and his wife Suzanne have been helping people improve their health holistically through a combination of good diet, exercise, weight control and appropriate supplementation.

 

 

 

 

 

What Your Doctor Didn’t Tell You About GLP-1 Drugs

by

Will You Get Scurvy If You Use A GLP-1 Drug?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

GLP-1 drugs have revolutionized the weight loss industry. Total spending on GLP-1 drugs in the United States exceeded $71 billion in 2023, a 500% increase in just 5 years.

Currently, there are around 33 million Americans (12% of the adult population) on GLP-1 drugs at any one time. And most of this increase has been driven by the weight-loss market.

Let me be clear. These drugs work. For people with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes or severe obesity-related health issues, they can be a godsend. But like any “quick fix” weight loss drug they are overprescribed.

And when you have millions of people taking a drug, you need to take a serious look at side effects. I have covered these in a previous issue of “Health Tips From the Professor”.

In that article I emphasized two side effects that I thought had not received sufficient attention:

  • The first is depression, anxiety, and suicidal thoughts.
    • These are symptoms that many patients may not associate with the drug, especially if they already have these tendencies.
    • And the consequences can be life threatening. There have already been reports of suicides of people on GLP-1 medications.
  • The second is loss of muscle mass.
    • This is a particular concern for seniors because they struggle to maintain muscle mass as they age.
    • And this is a silent symptom. Most seniors don’t realize they are losing muscle mass until it significantly affects their quality of life.

However, since I wrote that article these side effects have received more attention. Your doctor may have warned you about them.

But there is another concern about GLP-1 drug use that your doctor has probably not told you about.

What Your Doctor Didn’t Tell You About GLP-1 Drugs

Closeup portrait clueless senior health care professional doctor with stethoscope, has no answer, doesn’t know right diagnosis standing in hospital hallway isolated clinic office windows background.

The miracle of GLP-1 drugs is that they suppress appetite, which makes it much easier to lose weight.

  • Snacks are no longer appealing.
  • Large portion sizes leave you feeling bloated.
  • It’s tempting to skip meals because you just aren’t hungry.

You no longer have to struggle to eat less. It just comes naturally. But this miracle is also a snare. The issue becomes not how much you eat, but what you eat. The issue becomes not how many calories you eat, but how many nutrients you eat. And your doctor probably hasn’t talked to you about that.

Weight loss diets often result in nutritional insufficiencies. However, GLP-1-aided weight loss is worse.

That’s because GLP-1 is a drug, not a diet plan. It’s dispensed like any other drug.

  • Your doctor gives you a GLP-1 prescription. If you are lucky, they may give you a “one-size-fits-all” handout on how to lose weight while you are using it. For example, in a recent study:
    • Only 51% of patients received information from their doctor on how to manage side effects of GLP-1.
    • Only 20% were referred to a dietitian. The other 80% received no information on how to change their diet and lifestyle.
  • When you pick up the drug from the pharmacy, you get a package insert listing the side effects but no information on how to change your diet.

The results are predictable:

  • As I discussed in a recent issue of “Health Tips From the Professor”, a recent study found that the diets of the GLP-1 users were deficient in fiber, healthy fats, 10 essential vitamins and minerals and did not contain enough protein to prevent loss of muscle mass.

It’s All About Nutrient Density

healthy foodsYears ago, when I was researching the adequacy of the American diet I was surprised to discover that the USDA statistics showed that the diets of teenage women were suboptimal for many nutrients, while the diets of teenage boys were suboptimal for only a few.

You might ask, “What was the difference?”

  • It wasn’t that teenage boys ate a better diet.
  • If you have raised a teenage boy, you probably already know the answer. They have bigger appetites.

The message is clear, even with a lousy diet you can meet the recommended intake of most nutrients if you eat enough calories.

So, the analogy I will use is that going on GLP-1 drugs is like going from the caloric intake of a teenage boy to that of a teenage girl. Your diet will become nutritionally insufficient unless you change it.

This is where the concept of nutrient density comes in. You need to change your focus from how many calories there are in each serving of food you eat to how many nutrients there are in each serving of food you eat. You need to make every bite count.

And, just in case you were wondering where to find high nutrient density, low calorie foods:

  • Whole, unprocessed foods with no added fat or sugar are high in nutrient density and low in calories.
  • On the other hand, highly processed foods are low in nutrient density and high in calories.

The problem is that highly processed foods account for 60-70% of the calories in the typical American diet. So, if you are like most Americans GLP-1 use will result in nutritional insufficiencies unless you change your diets to focus on nutrient dense foods.

And the bonus is that that same focus on nutrient dense foods will help you keep the weight off once you quit the GLP-1 drug.

But your doctor probably hasn’t told you this.

Will You Get Scurvy If You Use A GLP-1 Drug?

Question MarkThe short answer is, “No”. It’s highly unlikely that you will ever develop scurvy while on GLP-1 drugs. You would need to have a truly horrible diet and never take multivitamins to develop a nutritional deficiency disease like scurvy.

Headlines like that are simply meant to draw you in, so you will read the article. But there are real concerns about the long-term effects of nutritional insufficiencies. For example:

  • Long term inadequacies of calcium, magnesium, and vitamin D increase the risk of osteoporosis.
  • Long term inadequacies of healthy fats, magnesium, vitamin D, and antioxidants may increase the risk of heart disease.
  • Long term inadequacies of antioxidants and phytonutrients can accelerate cellular aging.
  • Long term muscle loss due to inadequate protein intake leads to frailty and metabolic diseases as we age.

You get the point. GLP-1 drugs are not a panacea for weight loss. Unless you switch to a whole food, nutrient dense diet you may end up leaner and sicker – not healthier.

What Does This Mean For You?

The take-home message is clear. GLP-1 drugs may seem like a weight loss miracle. Your appetite decreases. You eat less. And the pounds just melt away. But the health benefits of losing weight with GLP-1 drugs may be a mirage rather than a miracle.

That is because what you eat is critical. If you just eat less of what you were eating before, you may end up leaner and sicker.

Forget calories. Instead, focus on the nutrient density of the foods you are eating. And that means eating whole, unprocessed foods that are low in fat and added sugar.

But the ads don’t tell you that. The drug labels won’t tell you that. And chances are that your doctor won’t tell you that either.

The Bottom Line

GLP-1 drugs may seem like a weight loss miracle. Your appetite decreases. You eat less. And the pounds just melt away. But the health benefits of losing weight with GLP-1 drugs may be a mirage rather than a miracle.

That’s because what you eat while you are on GLP-1 drugs may be critical to your long-term health. And your doctor probably didn’t tell you about that when they were prescribing GLP-1.

For more details about the dangers of GLP-1 drugs, read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

 ____________________________________________________________________________

My posts and “Health Tips From the Professor” articles carefully avoid claims about any brand of supplement or manufacturer of supplements. However, I am often asked by representatives of supplement companies if they can share them with their customers.

My answer is, “Yes, as long as you share only the article without any additions or alterations. In particular, you should avoid adding any mention of your company or your company’s products. If you were to do that, you could be making what the FTC and FDA consider a “misleading health claim” that could result in legal action against you and the company you represent.

For more detail about FTC regulations for health claims, see this link.

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/health-products-compliance-guidance

 ______________________________________________________________________

About The Author 

Dr. Chaney has a BS in Chemistry from Duke University and a PhD in Biochemistry from UCLA. He is Professor Emeritus from the University of North Carolina where he taught biochemistry and nutrition to medical and dental students for 40 years.

Dr. Chaney won numerous teaching awards at UNC, including the Academy of Educators “Excellence in Teaching Lifetime Achievement Award”.

Dr Chaney also ran an active cancer research program at UNC and published over 100 scientific articles and reviews in peer-reviewed scientific journals. In addition, he authored two chapters on nutrition in one of the leading biochemistry text books for medical students.

Since retiring from the University of North Carolina, he has been writing a weekly health blog called “Health Tips From the Professor”. He has also written two best-selling books, “Slaying the Food Myths” and “Slaying the Supplement Myths”. And most recently he has created an online lifestyle change course, “Create Your Personal Health Zone”. For more information visit https://chaneyhealth.com.

For the past 54 years Dr. Chaney and his wife Suzanne have been helping people improve their health holistically through a combination of good diet, exercise, weight control and appropriate supplementation.

 

 

 

Does Meat Increase Diabetes Risk?

by

Why Does Meat Increase Diabetes Risk?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

diabetesThe statistics for type 2 diabetes are alarming. In the United States:

  • 38.1 million adults (15% of the adult population) had diabetes in 2021, with 95% of them having type 2 diabetes.
    • 8.7 million of those adults were unaware they had diabetes.
    • If current trends continue, by 2030 the number of adults with diabetes is projected to increase by 54% to around 55 million.
  • Another 96 million Americans (33% of the population) have pre-diabetes. Unless they change their diet and lifestyle, most of them are destined to progress to type 2 diabetes in the next few years.
  • Diabetes is the eight leading cause of death in this country.
  • The costs associated with diabetes in the United States are currently around $410 billion and are projected to increase to around $622 billion by 2030.

The statistics are not much different worldwide:

  • Type 2 diabetes currently affects more than 500 million people worldwide and is expected to double by 2050.
  • Diabetes is also the 8th leading cause of death worldwide.

This is a major concern because diabetes dramatically increases the risk of:

  • Heart disease and stroke.
  • Certain types of cancer.
  • Painful neuropathies.
  • Vision loss and blindness.
  • Cognitive decline and Alzheimer’s disease.

Just to name a few. Diabetes affects your quality of life, and it can shorten your lifespan by several years.

So, you are probably wondering what you can do to decrease your risk of developing type 2 diabetes. There are lots of fad diets (low carb, low fat, low glycemic, high fiber, Paleo, Keto, etc.), but the weight of evidence is that your best bet for decreasing the risk of developing diabetes is a healthy diet that:

  • Is primarily plant-based.
  • Consists mostly of unprocessed or minimally processed foods.
  • Emphasizes healthy fats such as monounsaturated and omega-3 fats.
  • Includes lots of fruits and vegetables.
  • Emphasizes whole rather than refined grains.
  • Includes plant protein sources like beans, nuts, and seeds.
  • Has a low caloric density (which it will if you follow the guidelines above), so you can lose weight slowly and naturally.

But what about meat? Here the data are less clear. Several studies have suggested that eating red and processed meat increases your risk of type-2 diabetes. Studies on poultry are mixed with some studies suggesting they increase the risk of developing type 2 diabetes, and other studies suggesting they have no effect.

Unfortunately, the data from the previous studies were inconsistent, in part because the methods used to collect and analyze the data varied widely from study to study. In addition, the studies were primarily performed in the United States and Europe, so it was unclear whether the correlation between meat consumption and type 2 diabetes was universal, or whether it was restricted to western countries.

With this in mind, the authors of the current study (C Li et al, The Lancet Diabetes and Endocrinology, 12: 619-630, 2024) decided to perform a much more comprehensive study by combining studies from all across the world that used similar methodologies.

How Was This Study Done? 

clinical studyThis study was a meta-analysis of data obtained from the InterConnect project. The InterConnect project is registry of more than 200 studies from around the world. The investigators chose 31 studies with a total of 1,966,444 individuals from 20 countries for this meta-analysis based on the following criteria:

  • Participants in the studies were adults between 40 and 60 years old.
  • Participants were excluded from the study if they already had type 2 diabetes.
  • The diets of participants in the studies were assessed by having the participants fill out standardized dietary assessment forms at the beginning of the study.
  • Participants were followed for an average of 10 years (7-15 years) to see how many developed a newly diagnosed case of type 2 diabetes. During this time 10,271 participants in these studies developed type 2 diabetes.
  • The correlation between 3 types of meat (processed meat, red meat, and poultry) and type 2 diabetes was adjusted for other factors that affect the risk of diabetes (e.g., age, sex, ethnicity, smoking, drinking, physical activity, obesity, and family history of type 2 diabetes)

Does Meat Increase Diabetes Risk? 

High Blood SugarThe results of this meta-analysis were:

  • There was a log-linear (greater than linear) dose-response correlation without any obvious threshold or ceiling effect with the risk of developing type-2 diabetes for all three meats tested in this study.
  • For processed meat each 50-gram increase (equivalent to 4 slices of smoked ham) increases the risk of developing type 2 diabetes by 15%.
  • For unprocessed red meat each 100-gram increase (equivalent to 3.5 ounces of steak) increases the risk of developing type 2 diabetes by 10%.
  • For poultry each 100-gram increase (equivalent to 3.5 ounces of chicken) increases the risk of developing type 2 diabetes by 8%. However, after correcting for other diet and lifestyle factors that increase the risk of type 2 diabetes, the effect of poultry on diabetes risk was non-significant.

When they looked at the effect of replacing one type of meat with another:

  • Replacing 50 grams of processed meat with 100 grams of unprocessed red meat decreased the risk of diabetes by 7%.
  • Replacing 50 grams of processed meat with 100 grams of poultry decreased the risk of diabetes by 10%.
  • I should note that previous studies have shown that replacing either processed meat or unprocessed red meat with vegetable protein foods (beans, nuts, and seeds) significantly decreases the risk of developing diabetes.

 

When they looked at different regions of the world:

  • The effect of both processed and unprocessed red meat on type 2 diabetes risk was seen in America, Europe, Western Pacific regions, and east Asia.
  • However, no effect of either unprocessed or processed red meat on type 2 diabetes risk was seen in the Eastern Mediterranean and South Asia.

The authors concluded, “The consumption of meat, particularly processed and unprocessed red meat, is a risk factor for developing type 2 diabetes across populations. These findings highlight the importance of reducing meat consumption for public health and should inform dietary guidelines.”

Why Does Meat Increase Diabetes Risk?

Question MarkThis study supports and strengthens previous studies suggesting that we should add red and processed meats to the list of risk factors for developing type 2 diabetes. However, unless you are a vegan, the idea of giving up all red and processed meat is probably a non-starter.

Instead, let’s ask why red and processed meats increase diabetes risk. Is it the meat itself, or something else that triggers the increase in the risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Is it:

#1: Guilt By Association: Diets high in meats are also high in saturated fats, which increase the risk of diabetes.

#2: Guilt By Omission: Diets high in meats are often low in fruits, vegetables, nuts, and seeds – all healthy foods that lower diabetes risk.

#3: Guilt By Addition: Processed meats contain additives that can increase the risk of developing diabetes. For example, nitrates or nitrites are often added as preservatives. But they can be converted in the gut to N-nitroso compounds which increase inflammation, which in turn increases the risk of developing diabetes.

#4: Guilt By Cooking: High temperature grilling and frying creates compounds that create oxidative stress, which can increase the risk of developing diabetes.

#5: Guilt By Microbiome: The microbiome (gut bacteria) of heavy meat eaters is very different from the microbiome of people who eat a more plant-based diet. If a meat eater consumes a steak, their gut bacteria convert L-carnitine in the meat to a toxic compound called trimethylamine N-oxide (TMAO). However, if you were able to convince a vegan to eat the same steak, that wouldn’t happen.

#6: Guilt By Diet Context: The fact that there was no association between red and processed meat and diabetes in Mediterranean and South Asian regions gives us an important clue. The bad effects of red and processed meats are influenced by the context of the overall diet. What do the cuisines of the Mediterranean and South Asian regions have in common? They are both primarily whole food, plant-based cuisines.

I have discussed each of these mechanisms in more detail in an article in a recent edition of “Health Tips From the Professor”.

I also discussed ways to reduce the risk of each of these mechanisms, but if you don’t want to read the article,here is a spoiler alert:

  • Plant foods are the antidotes for the bad things associated with red and processed meats.
  • We should think of meat as a garnish for a primarily plant-based meal rather than a main course with a baked potato or fries as a garnish.

The Bottom Line

A recent study looked at the effects various meats on the risk of developing type 2 diabetes worldwide. The study found:

  • For processed meat each 50-gram increase (equivalent to 4 slices of smoked ham) increases the risk of developing type 2 diabetes by 15%.
  • For unprocessed red meat each 100-gram increase (equivalent to 3.5 ounces of steak) increases the risk of developing type 2 diabetes by 10%.
  • The effect of poultry on diabetes risk was non-significant.

When they looked at the effect of replacing one type of meat with another:

  • Replacing 50 grams of processed meat with 100 grams of unprocessed red meat decreased the risk of diabetes by 7%.
  • Replacing 50 grams of processed meat with 100 grams of poultry decreased the risk of diabetes by 10%.
  • I should note that previous studies have shown that replacing either processed meat or unprocessed red meat with vegetable protein foods (beans, nuts, and seeds) significantly decreases the risk of developing diabetes.

The authors concluded, “The consumption of meat, particularly processed and unprocessed red meat, is a risk factor for developing type 2 diabetes across populations. These findings highlight the importance of reducing meat consumption for public health and should inform dietary guidelines.”

For more details on this study, why meats increase diabetes risk, and what this study means for you, read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

 _____________________________________________________________________________

My posts and “Health Tips From the Professor” articles carefully avoid claims about any brand of supplement or manufacturer of supplements. However, I am often asked by representatives of supplement companies if they can share them with their customers.

My answer is, “Yes, as long as you share only the article without any additions or alterations. In particular, you should avoid adding any mention of your company or your company’s products. If you were to do that, you could be making what the FTC and FDA consider a “misleading health claim” that could result in legal action against you and the company you represent.

For more detail about FTC regulations for health claims, see this link.

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/health-products-compliance-guidance

 ________________________________________________________________________

About The Author 

Dr. Chaney has a BS in Chemistry from Duke University and a PhD in Biochemistry from UCLA. He is Professor Emeritus from the University of North Carolina where he taught biochemistry and nutrition to medical and dental students for 40 years.

Dr. Chaney won numerous teaching awards at UNC, including the Academy of Educators “Excellence in Teaching Lifetime Achievement Award”.

Dr Chaney also ran an active cancer research program at UNC and published over 100 scientific articles and reviews in peer-reviewed scientific journals. In addition, he authored two chapters on nutrition in one of the leading biochemistry text books for medical students.

Since retiring from the University of North Carolina, he has been writing a weekly health blog called “Health Tips From the Professor”. He has also written two best-selling books, “Slaying the Food Myths” and “Slaying the Supplement Myths”. And most recently he has created an online lifestyle change course, “Create Your Personal Health Zone”. For more information visit https://chaneyhealth.com.

For the past 53 years Dr. Chaney and his wife Suzanne have been helping people improve their health holistically through a combination of good diet, exercise, weight control and appropriate supplementation.

 

Do Eggs Prevent Cognitive Decline?

by

Are Eggs Brain Food?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney 

VillainFor much of the past 10 or 20 years, eggs have villainized. We were told that their high cholesterol levels would clog our arteries and increase our risk of heart attack and stroke.

We were told to eat egg whites, egg substitutes (even though egg substitutes were a witch’s brew of chemicals), or avoid eggs altogether.

But in recent years, the ground has shifted.

  • Cholesterol is no longer viewed as the demon it once was. It is now thought of as more of a bit player in a cast of dozens of factors contributing to increased risk of heart disease and stroke.

And when it comes to increased risk of heart disease, the AHA (American Heart Association) position on egg consumption and heart disease risk has shifted dramatically. They now recommend:

  • “Healthy adults can eat up to one whole egg per day as part of a heart-healthy diet.”
  • Diet context is very important. The AHA recommends:
    • “Eggs should not be paired with high-saturated fat foods like bacon, sausage, or butter. Instead, they should be poached, soft-boiled, or cooked in healthy fats like olive oil.”
    • I would add that recent studies have shown that if you are consuming a whole-food, primarily plant-based diet, consuming one or two eggs per day actually decreases your risk of heart disease.
  • Your body’s ability to regulate cholesterol levels is also important. For that reason, the AHA recommends:
    • “Individuals with diabetes, high blood cholesterol, or existing heart disease should be more cautious…limiting yolk consumption to 4 per week…[I would add obesity to this list].”

For more information on the studies behind these recommendations, go to https://www.chaneyhealth.com/healthtips/ and put eggs in the search box.

Are Eggs Brain Food?

There are lots of reasons to think of eggs as brain food. The authors of the study I am about to share observed:

  • “Eggs are a good source of protein (6.29 gram/medium egg), which has been linked to improved memory and reaction time in healthy young adults and reduced risk of cognitive impairment in older adults.”
  • “Egg protein is a good source of the essential amino acid tryptophan (77 mg per egg), which is converted to the neurotransmitter serotonin, involved in decision-making and memory.”
  • “Egg yolks are a good source of choline (150 mg per egg), which is a precursor to acetylcholine, a neurotransmitter involved in memory and learning. The authors went on to say, “Choline intake between 187 mg and 399 mg per day has consistently been associated with improved cognitive performance for both healthy younger and older adults.
  • “Egg yolks are also a good source of phospholipids (3.3 gm per egg), which are an important part of nerve membranes. Phospholipids modulate neurotransmitter receptors and have been linked to enhanced reaction time in healthy middle-aged men.”
  • “Egg yolks are a good source of DHA (between 25 to 50 mg DHA for commercially produced eggs and 100-150 mg of DHA for pasture-raised eggs) which has been associated with a lower risk of dementia.”

In short, there are lots of reasons to think that eggs might be good for the brain and might reduce the risk of age-related cognitive decline.

So, the authors of this study (N Sultan et al, Journal of Nutrition, Health, and Aging, 29, 100696, 2025) decided to conduct a systematic review of existing studies to evaluate the association between whole egg consumption and cognitive decline in healthy adults.

How Was The Study Done?

clinical studyThe authors set out to create a systematic review of studies looking at the effect of egg consumption on cognitive decline in older adults. This was not an easy undertaking because:

  • Most published studies in this area have looked at the effect of diets (e.g. MIND or Mediterranean diets) on cognitive decline rather than the effect of individual foods.
  • There are many ways to measure cognitive function, and no two studies used the same measures of cognitive function.

The authors utilized the top 5 databases of clinical studies and identified 10 studies with a total of >38,000 participants that investigated the effect of whole egg consumption on cognitive outcomes in healthy, older adults (average age = 68, 50% female).

Because the studies used different measures of cognitive function, the outcomes were divided into the following cognitive domains:

  • Global cognitive functioning.
  • Language functioning.
  • Verbal learning.
  • Memory.
  • Processing speed.
  • Decision-making.
  • Attention.
  • Executive function.
  • Risk-taking.
  • Reaction time.
  • Visuospacial ability.
  • Orientation.
  • Cognitive flexibility.
  • Interoception.

From these individual domains an overall cognitive function score was derived.

Do Eggs Prevent Cognitive Decline?

Memory loss due to Dementia and Alzheimer’s disease with the medical icon of a tree in the shape of a human head and brain losing leaves.

This is what the authors reported:

  • Two studies reported a reduced risk of dementia or cognitive impairment associated with moderate egg consumption (0.5-1 egg per day).
  • One study reported increased risk at high intake levels (> 1 egg per day).
  • Several studies showed improvements in memory, verbal fluency, and/or processing speed with moderate, but not high, egg intake.

The authors concluded, “This systematic review identified preliminary observational evidence that moderate habitual egg consumption may be associated with better cognitive performance, particularly in memory and verbal fluency domains, and reduced risk of cognitive impairment in adults without chronic disease…Further rigorous studies are required to determine whether egg consumption contributes to cognitive resilience and to clarify dose-response relationships. These efforts will help determine whether eggs can be recommended as part of evidence-based dietary strategies to support cognitive function in aging populations.”

As the authors said, this is not a definitive study. It is a preliminary study that lays the groundwork for future definitive studies. As someone who had dozens of publicly funded grants during my research career, I can tell you that publications like this are important, because they can be used to support requests for public funding of future research projects on that topic.

What kind of future research projects would be definitive? The authors said:

  • “Further rigorous studies are required to determine whether egg consumption contributes to cognitive resilience [as we age] and to clarify dose-response relationships.” Ideally these studies would:
    • Be designed to test the dose-response relationship.
    • Use similar measurement of cognitive function, so the study results would be easy to compare.
    • Look at diet context. For example, do eggs have the same cognitive benefits in whole food, primarily plant-based diets and diets that are high in saturated fats and processed foods?
    • Look at the effect of health status. Cholesterol build up can block arteries leading to the brain. Studies on heart health have shown eggs may not be beneficial for people who already have elevated cholesterol, diabetes, and arterial disease.

What Does This Study Mean For You? 

questionsHere are my thoughts:

  • As I outlined above, there are lots of reasons to think of eggs as brain food.
  • Moderate egg consumption may help protect against cognitive decline as we age. The current data are suggestive, but not definitive.
  • The American Heart Association now says that moderate egg consumption can be part of a heart-healthy diet. So, the major reason for avoiding eggs has been removed.
  • Egg consumption is likely to be most beneficial as part of a whole food, primarily plant-based diet. When I grew up Alabama a normal breakfast was eggs cooked in butter, sausage, grits and “red-eye gravy” (gravy made from ham fat). To say that it was probably not a brain-healthy way to eat eggs would be an understatement.
  • If you are already struggling with high cholesterol, diabetes and arterial disease, you should probably consult your doctor before increasing your egg consumption.

What Does A Brain-Healthy Diet Look Like? 

According to the most recent US News & World Health ratings of the best diets in various categories, the top 4 diets for brain health are:

  • MIND diet (The MIND diet combines the best of the Mediterranean and DASH diets with an emphasis on brain healthy foods such as berries.)
  • Mediterranean diet.
  • Flexitarian diet (a flexible version of a semi-vegetarian diet).
  • DASH diet.

My Comments:

  • All four diets are whole food, primarily plant-based diets.
  • Although the MIND diet was specifically designed for brain health, it does not perform significantly better than the Mediterranean and DASH diets in slowing cognitive decline.

Of course, most people prefer to think in terms of foods rather than diets. In terms of brain-healthy foods, a recent Harvard Health Review suggests these are the foods we should emphasize for brain health:

  • Green Leafy Vegetables: Kale, spinach, broccoli, and collards are rich in brain-healthy nutrients like vitamin K, lutein, folate, and beta-carotene.
  • Fatty Fish: Salmon, trout, sardines, and mackerel provide omega-3 fatty acids, which are crucial for brain function and for reducing dementia risk.
  • Berries: Blueberries, strawberries, and blackberries contain antioxidants that have been shown to delay cognitive decline.
  • Nuts and Seeds: Walnuts are high in omega-3 fatty acids (ALA), while others provide vitamin E.
  • Healthy Fats: Olive oil is recommended as the primary cooking fat.
  • Whole Grains and Legumes: Oats, quinoa, beans, and lentils provide a steady, slow release of glucose for brain energy. Plus, their fiber supports the growth of friendly bacteria that produce brain-healthy nutrients (This is sometimes referred to as the gut-brain axis).
  • Other Foods: Avocados (monounsaturated fats), beets (nitrates for blood flow), and cocoa (flavonoids) are beneficial.

My Comment:

  • Based on their nutrient content and studies like this one, I would add eggs (consumed in moderation) to the list.

The Bottom Line 

There are lots of reasons to think of eggs as brain food. A recent study suggests that moderate egg consumption may help slow cognitive decline as we age.

For more information on this study and what a brain-healthy diet looks like, read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

_____________________________________________________________________________

My posts and “Health Tips From the Professor” articles carefully avoid claims about any brand of supplement or manufacturer of supplements. However, I am often asked by representatives of supplement companies if they can share them with their customers.

My answer is, “Yes, as long as you share only the article without any additions or alterations. In particular, you should avoid adding any mention of your company or your company’s products. If you were to do that, you could be making what the FTC and FDA consider a “misleading health claim” that could result in legal action against you and the company you represent.

For more detail about FTC regulations for health claims, see this link.

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/health-products-compliance-guidance 

___________________________________________________________________________

About The Author 

Dr. Chaney has a BS in Chemistry from Duke University and a PhD in Biochemistry from UCLA. He is Professor Emeritus from the University of North Carolina where he taught biochemistry and nutrition to medical and dental students for 40 years.

Dr. Chaney won numerous teaching awards at UNC, including the Academy of Educators “Excellence in Teaching Lifetime Achievement Award”.

Dr Chaney also ran an active cancer research program at UNC and published over 100 scientific articles and reviews in peer-reviewed scientific journals. In addition, he authored two chapters on nutrition in one of the leading biochemistry text books for medical students.

Since retiring from the University of North Carolina, he has been writing a weekly health blog called “Health Tips From the Professor”. He has also written two best-selling books, “Slaying the Food Myths” and “Slaying the Supplement Myths”. And most recently he has created an online lifestyle change course, “Create Your Personal Health Zone”. For more information visit https://chaneyhealth.com.

For the past 54 years Dr. Chaney and his wife Suzanne have been helping people improve their health holistically through a combination of good diet, exercise, weight control and appropriate supplementation.

 

 

Is Margarine More Heart-Healthy Than Butter?

by

What Should You Put On Your Toast?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

The Checkered History Of Margarine

MargarineMany of you may have seen the recent headlines proclaiming that a recent study has shown that margarine is healthier than butter.

  • Some of you may be saying, “I don’t believe it.”
  • Others may be saying, “Of course. Hasn’t that always been true.”

So, to clear up the confusion, let me share a brief history of margarine.

  • Margarine was invented in 1869 by a French chemist in response to a request from Napoleon III to create a poor man’s butter substitute. Napoleon’s intentions weren’t entirely altruistic. He also wanted a cheaper butter substitute for his armies.
  • Margarine initially encountered a strong headwind in this country. The dairy lobby influenced congress and state legislatures to pass numerous laws designed to increase the cost and reduce the desirability of margarine.
  • In the 1950s the ground started to shift. Scientists and the medical community started to recognize that saturated fats were a major contributor to heart disease. Suddenly, butter became a villain, something to avoid.
    • But that was a problem. Butter was preferred spread for bread and toast. It was used for cooking. It was ubiquitous. You may even remember the popular “I like bread and butter” song. What was a person to do?
  • At that time margarine was made by partially hydrogenating vegetable oils (usually corn oil because it was the cheapest). The hydrogenation converted some of the unsaturated fats in vegetable oils to saturated fats so that margarine would not be in liquid form at room temperature. However, the total amount of saturated fat in margarine was less than in butter, and the ratio of polyunsaturated fat to saturated fats was more heart-healthy. Margarine took on a new luster. It was now the healthier alternative to butter.
    • Once margarine attained the “healthier” status, most of the anti-margarine laws were quickly abolished, and margarine quickly outpaced butter as the spread of choice.
  • In the 1980s the ground shifted again. A French study found the margarine increased the risk of heart disease more than butter. Further studies showed that the hydrogenation process created a novel type of fat called trans fats. By the 1990s it was widely accepted that trans fats increased the risk of heart disease even more than saturated fats.
    • Margarine became the villain, and butter was considered the more natural, healthier spread. By 2000 sales of butter once more surpassed those of margarine.
  • In 2018 the ground shifted once again. After almost 20 years of deliberation, the FDA banned trans fats from the American food supply as of 2018. Margarine no longer contained trans fats.

Today’s study (C Weber et al, Public Health Nutrition, doi:10.1017/S1368980021004511) asks whether the reformulated, trans-fat-free margarines are once again a more heart-healthy alternative to butter.

Is Margarine More Heart-Healthy Than Butter? 

Margarine-Versus-ButterThe study analyzed the fat composition of 53 margarine tub or squeeze products, 18 margarine stick products, 12 margarine-butter blend products and compared them with the fat composition of butter. The results are shown below:

 

There was no detectable trans fat in any of the margarine products. So, based on saturated fat content and the ratio of unsaturated fats to saturated fats, the margarine products were all more heart-healthy than butter. This is what the paper concluded.

Mean % of Total Fat In:
Margarine

Tub or Tube

 Margarine

Sticks

 Margarine-

Butter Blends

 Butter
SFA* 29% 38% 38% 60%
MUFA* 36% 34% 43% 26%
PUFA* 33% 29% 13% 4%
*SFA = Saturated fats, MUFA = Monounsaturated fats,

PUFA = Polyunsaturated fats

But let’s look a bit deeper. First, we should look at the fat sources.

  • The saturated fat in the margarine products comes from either palm or coconut oil. There are claims that these plant saturated fats may be healthier than saturated fats from animal sources. But there are no long-term studies to back up those claims, So, I will simply consider them equivalent to any other saturated fat for this review.

Next, we should look at the labels.

  • The labels of most butter products are simple. Butter is sweet cream and salt. Unsalted butter is sweet cream and natural flavoring (usually lactic acid). This is the way that butter has been made for hundreds of years.
  • Margarine products are manufactured foods. They didn’t come from a cow. Their labels are significantly longer. And you should read the labels carefully.
  • Some margarine products are made with natural ingredients.
  • However, many margarine products contain preservatives and artificial flavors.

So, choosing between margarine products and butter is not as simple as looking at saturated fat content alone.

But what if you didn’t have to choose between margarine and butter? What if there were other options to consider?

What Should You Put On Your Toast?

Peanut Butter and Jelly Sandwich on Whole WheatOnce you decide to look beyond margarine and butter you will find lots of healthy options. For example:

  • If you have ever eaten at a fine Italian or Greek restaurant, you may have had your bread served with olive oil to dip it in. Of course, this may be a better option for lunch and dinner than for breakfast. (I don’t think jam would pair well with olive oil.)
  • Nut butters are an excellent choice any time of day. Peanut and almond butters are the most popular, but there are many other nut butters to choose from.
  • Avocado is another excellent choice.
  • This just scratches the surface. There are healthier options for almost every palate.

If you look at the fat composition of my top four suggestions, you can readily see why they are healthier choices than either margarine or butter. They are much lower in saturated fat and high in heart healthy monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats.

Mean % of Total Fat In:
Olive

Oil

 Almond

Butter

 Peanut

Butter

 Avocado
SFA* 14% 9% 22% 16%
MUFA* 74% 64% 53% 71%
PUFA* 12% 27% 25% 13%
*SFA = Saturated fats, MUFA = Monounsaturated fats,

PUFA = Polyunsaturated fats

But that is just part of the story:

  • Nut butters are also a good source of protein. And both nut butters and avocados provide nutrients, phytonutrients, and fiber you don’t find in margarine or butter.

There are also labels to consider:

  • Avocados are whole foods and don’t require labels. There are no other ingredients. What you see is what you get.
  • Olive oil is a bit more complicated. It is often blended with cheaper oils to reduce the cost, and that doesn’t always show up on the label. My best advice is to get extra virgin olive oil from a brand you trust.
  • With nut butters, you should read the label. For example, the ingredient label for almond butter should list almonds as the sole ingredient. Peanut butter should just list peanuts. However, some brands add other oils, sugar, emulsifying agents, etc. These are the brands you should leave on the shelf.

Our “go-to” spread is almond butter. I like it with cinnamon sprinkled on top, although sliced bananas and cinnamon is another excellent choice.

As for butter, we still like it on baked sweet potatoes and corn on the cob. We freeze our butter and cut off a slice whenever we need it. A stick of butter lasts us many months.

The Bottom Line

Now that trans fats have been removed from margarine products a recent study revisited the question as to whether margarine or butter was the healthier choice. On the basis of their saturated fat content, the study concluded that margarine products were healthier than butter.

However, that is just part of the story. When you look at the labels:

  • The labels of most butter products are simple. Butter is sweet cream and salt. Unsalted butter is sweet cream and natural flavoring (usually lactic acid). This is the way that butter has been made for hundreds of years.
  • Margarine products are manufactured foods. They didn’t come from a cow. Their labels are significantly longer. And you should read the labels carefully.

So, choosing between margarine products and butter is not as simple as looking at saturated fat content alone. But what if you didn’t have to choose between margarine and butter? What if there were other options to consider?

Once you decide to look beyond margarine and butter you will find lots of healthy options. I discuss my top 4 choices above.

For more details, read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

_____________________________________________________________________________

My posts and “Health Tips From the Professor” articles carefully avoid claims about any brand of supplement or manufacturer of supplements. However, I am often asked by representatives of supplement companies if they can share them with their customers.

My answer is, “Yes, as long as you share only the article without any additions or alterations. In particular, you should avoid adding any mention of your company or your company’s products. If you were to do that, you could be making what the FTC and FDA consider a “misleading health claim” that could result in legal action against you and the company you represent.

For more detail about FTC regulations for health claims, see this link.

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/health-products-compliance-guidance

___________________________________________________________________

About The Author 

Dr. Chaney has a BS in Chemistry from Duke University and a PhD in Biochemistry from UCLA. He is Professor Emeritus from the University of North Carolina where he taught biochemistry and nutrition to medical and dental students for 40 years.  Dr. Chaney won numerous teaching awards at UNC, including the Academy of Educators “Excellence in Teaching Lifetime Achievement Award”. Dr Chaney also ran an active cancer research program at UNC and published over 100 scientific articles and reviews in peer-reviewed scientific journals. In addition, he authored two chapters on nutrition in one of the leading Biochemistry textbooks for medical students.

Since retiring from the University of North Carolina, he has been writing a weekly health blog called “Health Tips From the Professor”. He has also written two best-selling books, “Slaying the Food Myths” and “Slaying the Supplement Myths”. And most recently he has created an online lifestyle change course, “Create Your Personal Health Zone”. For more information visit https://chaneyhealth.com.

For the past 54 years Dr. Chaney and his wife Suzanne have been helping people improve their health holistically through a combination of good diet, exercise, weight control and appropriate supplementation.

 

Are Polyphenols Good For Your Heart?

by

What Are Polyphenols And Why Do We Care?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

Polyphenol-rich foods have taken on a hero status. If we believe the headlines, they:

  • Reduce the risk of cancer, diabetes, and heart disease.
  • Enhance gut health.
  • Reduce inflammation and blood sugar levels.
  • Fight oxidative stress, which may slow the aging process.

One could write a book on the accuracy of these claims. However, in this article I am just going to focus on the correlation between polyphenol intake and heart disease.

Several recent reviews have suggested that consumption of polyphenol-rich foods is associated with a reduced risk of heart disease.

However, each of those studies has limitations because:

  • Most of the diet recalls used in these studies relied on food databases that included only a few polyphenols in their database.
  • Most of the studies did not measure polyphenol levels in blood or urine. That’s important because absorption of polyphenols from the digestive track is often poor.

The study (Y Li et al, BMC Medicine, 23:645, 2025) I will review in today’s issue of “Health Tips From the Professor” is a significant improvement over previous studies because it relies on a database with over 500 polyphenols for its diet analysis and it measures polyphenol metabolites in the urine to confirm the data obtained from the dietary recalls.

But first let’s discuss what polyphenols are and why they are important.

What Are Polyphenols And Why Do We Care?

Simply put, a phenol is a ring of carbon atoms with at least one OH group attached. Polyphenols consist of multiple ring structures. Resveratrol, shown on the left, is an example of a polyphenol structure.

However, that downplays the complexity of polyphenols. There are over 8,000 polyphenols structures found in plants and over 500 in common foods. And each of these structures has unique chemical and biological properties.

However, there are also some commonalities.

In fruits and vegetables, polyphenols are most commonly found in the skins or peels and protect them from UV light, pests, and disease pathogens.

In our bodies polyphenols:

  • Improve blood flow and reduce blood pressure.
  • Lower LDL (bad) cholesterol.
  • Improve insulin sensitivity.
  • Are antioxidants that neutralize free radicals and reduce inflammation.

Finally, most polyphenols are colored, which is why we are told to eat a variety of colorful fruits and vegetables.

How Was This Study Done?

clinical studyThe study included 3110 participants from the TwinsUK registry who completed the EPIC-Norfolk Food Frequency Questionnaire.  The participants were predominantly female (96.7%) and white (99%), with an average age of 52 years and an average BMI of 25.4%.

  • The TwinsUK registry aspect of the study was not important. Twin information was not utilized in the data analysis.
  • However, the EPIC-Norfolk Food Frequency Question was important. The EPIC Food Frequency database is particularly robust, and it is designed to be country specific. The EPIC-Norfolk version was designed to include 130 commonly eaten foods in the Norfolk area of England where the study was centered.

The polyphenol content of the foods in the EPIC-Norfolk Food Frequency Questionnaire was calculated using the most recent version of the Phenol-Explorer database which measures the amounts of 500 different polyphenols in 400 foods.

The investigators then developed a polyphenol-rich dietary score, PPS, based on the relative intake of the top 20 polyphenol-rich foods in the English diet.

  • To be clear, in the dietary portion of the study, the investigators measured:
    • The amount of 500 individual polyphenols in each participant’s diet.
    • And the overall polyphenol dietary score (PPS) of each participant.

The investigators also measured cardiovascular risk factors (blood pressure, total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, and LDL cholesterol) for each participant.

  • These data were used to calculate an ASCVD risk score and a HeartScore for each participant. These are two of the leading risk estimators for heart disease.

Finally, the investigators measured the content of polyphenol metabolites in the urine of a subset of 200 participants chosen at random.

  • These data were meant to correct for absorption of polyphenols from the intestine and confirm associations seen from the dietary data.

Are Polyphenols Good For The Heart?

Prescription for good health overhead with stethoscope, healthy fresh food and exercise equipment, with copy space.

Here is what the study showed:

  • Participants with higher PPS scores (a diet rich in polyphenol-containing foods) had significantly lower risk of heart disease by both the ASCVD risk score and the HeartScore.
  • When the investigators looked at individual classes of polyphenols, high intake of flavonoids and phenolic acids appeared to be particularly beneficial, as did a high intake of the stilbenoid, resveratrol.
  • Measurement of polyphenol metabolites in the urine confirmed this association.
  • Consuming a diverse array of polyphenol-rich foods (a high PPS score) was a better predictor of heart health than eating any individual food or class of polyphenols alone.

The authors concluded, “Longitudinal data indicate that higher adherence to polyphenol-rich diets is associated with lower long-term cardiovascular risk in predominately middle-aged women.

The PPS dietary score, reflecting adherence to polyphenol-rich diets, showed the strongest association with CVD risk compared to individual polyphenol intakes or specific polyphenol-rich food sources.

The cardioprotective effects of flavonoids and phenolic acids, estimated from the EPIC-Norfolk FFQ, were further confirmed through urinary metabolite analysis within the same polyphenol classes.”

What Does This Study Mean For You?

Questioning WomanThis study is consistent with several previous studies showing that high intact of polyphenol-rich foods correlates with a reduced risk of heart disease. However, this study is important because it is the strongest study to date because:

  • It uses a very robust database for estimating both the total polyphenol content of foods and the amount of 500 different polyphenols in each food.
  • It includes an analysis of polyphenol metabolites in the urine to account for differences in absorption of polyphenols from the gut and to confirm the asssociations between polyphenol intake and heart disease risk based on dietary data.

But you are probably wondering, “How do I use this information I don’t know the polyphenol content of the foods I eat.”

There are two ways you could think about the data.

grape polyphenols#1: You could ask, “What should I eat to get plenty of flavonoids, phenolic acids, and resveratrol in my diet?” That’s a fairly easy question to answer.

  • The top food sources of favonoids are berries (blueberries, strawberries), tea (green and black), dark chocolate/cocoa, red wine, citrus fruits (oranges, lemons), leafy greens, onions, and soybeans.
  • The top food sources of phenolic acids are coffee, berries (especially chokeberries and blueberries), herbs/spices (cloves, peppermint), cocoa, and whole grains.
  • The top food sources of resveratrol are red grapes (especially the skin), blueberries, raspberries, mulberries, peanuts, dark chocolate, and red wine.

#2: You could ask, “What would a polyphenol-rich diet look like for me?”

  • You should start with the oft-repeated recommendation to eat a variety of highly colored fruits and vegetables.
  • Then add foods like tea, coffee, dark chocolate, and others from the list above.

My final two recommendations are:

  • Don’t focus on just one or two polyphenol-rich foods. Remember that the study showed that eating a wide variety of polyphenol-rich foods was more beneficial than individual foods or polyphenols.
  • This applies to whole foods only. The dyes used to add color to processed foods don’t count.

The Bottom Line 

Several previous studies have shown that high intact of polyphenol-rich foods correlates with a reduced risk of heart disease. However, those studies all had limitations. In this issue of Health Tips From the Professor I discuss the strongest study on this subject to date. The study showed:

  • Participants with higher PPS scores (a diet rich in polyphenol-containing foods) had significantly lower risk of heart disease by both the ASCVD risk score and the HeartScore.
  • When the investigators looked at individual classes of polyphenols, high intake of flavonoids and phenolic acids appeared to be particularly beneficial, as did a high intake of the stilbenoid, resveratrol.
  • Measurement of polyphenol metabolites in the urine confirmed this association.
  • Consuming a diverse array of polyphenol-rich foods (a high PPS score) was a better predictor of heart health than eating any individual food or class of polyphenols alone.

For more information on this study and what it means for you, read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.

 ___________________________________________________________________________

My posts and “Health Tips From the Professor” articles carefully avoid claims about any brand of supplement or manufacturer of supplements. However, I am often asked by representatives of supplement companies if they can share them with their customers.

My answer is, “Yes, as long as you share only the article without any additions or alterations. In particular, you should avoid adding any mention of your company or your company’s products. If you were to do that, you could be making what the FTC and FDA consider a “misleading health claim” that could result in legal action against you and the company you represent.

For more detail about FTC regulations for health claims, see this link.

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/health-products-compliance-guidance

______________________________________________________________________

About The Author 

Dr. Chaney has a BS in Chemistry from Duke University and a PhD in Biochemistry from UCLA. He is Professor Emeritus from the University of North Carolina where he taught biochemistry and nutrition to medical and dental students for 40 years.  Dr. Chaney won numerous teaching awards at UNC, including the Academy of Educators “Excellence in Teaching Lifetime Achievement Award”. Dr Chaney also ran an active cancer research program at UNC and published over 100 scientific articles and reviews in peer-reviewed scientific journals. In addition, he authored two chapters on nutrition in one of the leading Biochemistry textbooks for medical students.

Since retiring from the University of North Carolina, he has been writing a weekly health blog called “Health Tips From the Professor”. He has also written two best-selling books, “Slaying the Food Myths” and “Slaying the Supplement Myths”. And most recently he has created an online lifestyle change course, “Create Your Personal Health Zone”. For more information visit https://chaneyhealth.com.

For the past 53 years Dr. Chaney and his wife Suzanne have been helping people improve their health holistically through a combination of good diet, exercise, weight control and appropriate supplementation.

Eating Of The Green

by

Why Nitrates Are Good For You

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

You may be one of the millions of Americans who are celebrated St. Patrick’s Day today. If so, you may have sung the famous Irish folk song “The Wearing of the Green”. If you are Irish, that song has special meaning for you. However, when I hear that song, I think of “Eating of the Green.”

And when I think of eating green, I don’t mean that everything we eat should be green. I am thinking of whole fruits and vegetables in a variety of colors. We have known for years that fruits and vegetables are good for our health. Consumption of fruits and vegetables is associated with a lower risk of high blood pressure, heart disease, cancer, inflammatory diseases, and much more.

For today’s health tip, I am going to focus on heart health and an unexpected explanation for how fruits and vegetables reduce our risk of heart disease.

Why Nitrates Are Good For You

spinachWe have assumed that whole fruits and vegetables lower our risk of heart disease because they are low in saturated fats and provide heart-healthy nutrients, phytonutrients, and fiber. All of that is true. But could there be more?

Recent research has suggested that the nitrates found naturally in fruits and vegetables may also play a role in protecting our hearts. Here is what recent research shows:

  • The nitrates from fruits and vegetables are converted to nitrite by bacteria in our mouth and intestines.
    • Fruits and vegetables account for 80% of the nitrate in our diet. The rest comes from a variety of sources including the nitrate added as a preservative to processed meats.
    • Although all fruits and vegetables contain nitrates, the best sources are green leafy vegetables and beetroot. [Beet greens are delicious and also a good source of nitrate, but beetroot is the part of the beet we usually consume.]
  • Nitrite is absorbed from our intestine and converted to nitric oxide by a variety of enzymes in our tissues.
  • Both reactions require antioxidants like vitamin C, which are also found in fruits and vegetables.

Nitric oxide has several heart healthy benefits. For example:

  • It helps reduce inflammation in the lining of blood vessels. Inflammation stimulates atherosclerosis, blood clot formation, and is associated with an increased risk of heart disease.
  • It relaxes the smooth muscle cells that surround our blood vessels. This makes the blood vessels more flexible and helps reduce blood pressure.
  • It prevents smooth muscle cells from proliferating, which prevents them from invading and constricting our arteries. This, in turn, has the potential to reduce the risk of atherosclerosis.
  • It prevents platelet aggregation. This, in turn, has the potential to reduce the risk of heart attack and stroke due to blood clots that block the flow of blood to our heart or brain.

It is well established that nitrates from fruits and vegetables reduce blood pressure. More importantly, they can help slow the gradual increase in blood pressure as we age.

However, few studies have asked whether this reduction in blood pressure translates into improved cardiovascular outcomes. This study (CP Bondonno et al, European Journal of Epidemiology, 36: 813-825, 2021) was designed to answer that question.

How Was This Study Done?

clinical studyThis study made use of data from the Danish Diet, Cancer, and Health Program. That program enrolled 53,150 participants from Copenhagen and Aarhus between 1993 and 1997 and followed them for an average of 21 years. None of the participants had a diagnosis of cancer or heart disease at the beginning of the study.

Other characteristics of the participants at the time they were enrolled in the study were:

  • 46% male
  • Average age = 56
  • BMI = 26 (20% overweight)
  • Average systolic blood pressure = 140 mg Hg
  • Average diastolic blood pressure = 84 mg Hg

At the beginning of the study, participants filled out a 192-item food frequency questionnaire that assessed their average intake of various food and beverage items over the previous 12 months. The vegetable nitrate content of their diets was analyzed using a comprehensive database of the nitrate content of 178 vegetables. For those vegetables not consumed raw, the nitrate content was reduced by 50% to account for the nitrate loss during cooking.

Blood pressure was measured at the beginning of the study. Data on the incidence (first diagnosis) of heart disease during the study was obtained from the Danish National Patient Registry. Data were collected on diagnosis of the following heart health parameters:

  • Cardiovascular disease (all diseases of the circulatory system).
  • Ischemic heart disease (lack of sufficient blood flow to the heart). The symptoms of ischemic heart disease range from angina to myocardial infarction (heart attack).
  • Ischemic stroke (lack of sufficient blood flow to the brain).
  • Hemorrhagic stroke (bleeding in brain).
  • Heart failure.
  • Peripheral artery disease (lack of sufficient blood flow to the extremities).

Is Nitrate From Vegetables Good For Your Heart?

strong heartIntake of nitrate from vegetables ranged from 18 mg/day (<1/3 serving of nitrate-rich vegetables per day) to 168 mg (almost 3 servings of nitrate-rich vegetables per day). The participants were grouped into quintiles based on their vegetable nitrate intake. When the group with the highest vegetable nitrate intake was compared to the group with the lowest vegetable nitrate intake:

  • Systolic blood pressure was reduced by 2.58 mg Hg (1.8%).
  • Diastolic blood pressure was reduced by 1.38 mg Hg (1.6%).
  • Risk of cardiovascular disease was reduced by 14%.
  • Risk of ischemic heart disease (angina and heart attack) was reduced by 13%.
  • Risk of ischemic stroke (stroke caused by lack of blood flow to the brain) was reduced by 14%.
  • Risk of heart failure was reduced by 17%.
  • Risk of peripheral artery disease was reduced by 31%.
  • Risk of hemorrhagic stroke (bleeding in the brain) was not significantly reduced.

Two other observations were of interest:

  • Blood pressure and risk of peripheral artery disease decreased with increasing vegetable nitrate intake in a relatively linear fashion. However, the other parameters of heart disease plateaued at a modest intake of vegetable nitrate intake (around one cup of nitrate-rich vegetables per day). This suggests that as little as one serving of nitrate-rich vegetables a day is enough to provide some heart health benefits.
  • Only about 21.9% of the improvement in heart health could be explained by the decrease in blood pressure. This is not surprising when you consider the other beneficial effects of nitric oxide described above.

The authors concluded, “Consumption of at least ~60 mg/day of vegetable nitrate (~ one serving of green leafy vegetables or beets) may mitigate risk of cardiovascular disease.”

Are Nitrates Good For You Or Bad For You?

questionsYou are probably thinking, “Wait a minute. I thought nitrates and nitrites were supposed to be bad for me. Which is it? Are nitrates good for me or bad for me?”

It turns out that nitrates and nitrites are kind of like Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. They can be either good or bad. It depends on the food they are in and your overall diet.

Remember the beginning of this article when I said that the conversion of nitrates to nitric oxide depended on the presence of antioxidants? Vegetables are great sources of antioxidants. So, when we get our nitrate from vegetables, most of it is converted to nitric oxide. And, as I discussed above, nitric oxide is good for us.

However, when nitrates and nitrites are added to processed meats as a preservative, the story is much different. Processed meats have zero antioxidants. And the protein in the meats is broken down to amino acids in our intestine. The amino acids combine with nitrate to form nitrosamines, which are cancer-causing chemicals. Nitrosamines are bad for us.

Of course, we don’t eat individual foods by themselves. We eat them in the context of a meal. If you eat small amounts of nitrate-preserved processed meats in the context of a meal with antioxidant-rich fruits and vegetables, some of the nitrate will be converted to nitric oxide rather than nitrosamines. The processed meat won’t be as bad for you.

Eating Of The Green

Vegan FoodsYour mother was right. You should eat your fruits and vegetables!

  • The USDA recommends at least 3 servings of vegetables and 2 servings of fruit a day.
  • Based on this study, at least one of those servings should be nitrate-rich vegetables like green leafy vegetables and beets.
  • If you don’t like any of those, radishes, turnips, watercress, Bok choy, Chinese cabbage, kohlrabi, chicory leaf, onion, and fresh garlic are also excellent sources of nitrate.
  • The good news is that you may not need to eat green leafy vegetables and beets with every meal. If this study is correct, one serving per day may have heart health benefits. That means you can enjoy a wide variety of fresh fruits and vegetables as you try to meet the USDA recommendations.

Finally, if you don’t like any of those foods, you may be asking, “Can’t I just take a nitrate supplement?”

  • For blood pressure, there are dozens of clinical trials, and the answer seems to be yes – especially when the nitrate comes from vegetable sources and the supplement also contains an antioxidant like vitamin C.
  • For heart health benefits, the answer is likely to be yes, but clinical trials to confirm that would take decades. Double blind, placebo-controlled trials of that duration are not feasible, so we will never know for sure.
  • Moreover, you would not be getting all the other health benefits of a diet full of fresh fruits and vegetables. Supplementation has its benefits, but it is not meant to replace a healthy diet.

The Bottom Line 

We have known for years that fruits and vegetables are good for our hearts. We have assumed that it was because whole fruits and vegetables are low in saturated fats and provide heart-healthy nutrients, phytonutrients, and fiber. But could there be more?

It is well established that nitrates from fruits and vegetables reduce blood pressure. More importantly, they can help slow the gradual increase in blood pressure as we age.

However, few studies have asked whether this reduction in blood pressure translates into improved cardiovascular outcomes. A recent study was designed to answer that question.

When the study compared people with the highest vegetable nitrate intake to people with the lowest vegetable nitrate intake:

  • Blood pressure was significantly reduced.
  • The risk of cardiovascular disease was reduced by 14%.
  • Risk of ischemic heart disease (angina and heart attack) was reduced by 13%.
  • Risk of ischemic stroke (stroke caused by lack of blood flow to the brain) was reduced by 14%.
  • Risk of heart failure was reduced by 17%.
  • Risk of peripheral artery disease was reduced by 31%.
  • Blood pressure and risk of peripheral artery disease decreased with increasing vegetable nitrate intake in a relatively linear fashion.
  • However, the other parameters of heart disease plateaued at a modest intake of vegetable nitrate intake (around one cup of nitrate-rich vegetables per day). This suggests that as little as one serving of nitrate-rich vegetables a day is enough to provide some heart health benefits.

The authors concluded, “Consumption of at least ~60 mg/day of vegetable nitrate (~ one serving of green leafy vegetables or beets) may mitigate risk of cardiovascular disease.”

Of course, you may have heard that nitrates and nitrites are bad for you. I discuss that in the article above.

For more details about this study and what it means for you, read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.

 _____________________________________________________________________________

My posts and “Health Tips From the Professor” articles carefully avoid claims about any brand of supplement or manufacturer of supplements. However, I am often asked by representatives of supplement companies if they can share them with their customers.

My answer is, “Yes, as long as you share only the article without any additions or alterations. In particular, you should avoid adding any mention of your company or your company’s products. If you were to do that, you could be making what the FTC and FDA consider a “misleading health claim” that could result in legal action against you and the company you represent.

For more detail about FTC regulations for health claims, see this link.

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/health-products-compliance-guidance

_____________________________________________________________________

About The Author 

Dr. Chaney has a BS in Chemistry from Duke University and a PhD in Biochemistry from UCLA. He is Professor Emeritus from the University of North Carolina where he taught biochemistry and nutrition to medical and dental students for 40 years.  Dr. Chaney won numerous teaching awards at UNC, including the Academy of Educators “Excellence in Teaching Lifetime Achievement Award”. Dr Chaney also ran an active cancer research program at UNC and published over 100 scientific articles and reviews in peer-reviewed scientific journals. In addition, he authored two chapters on nutrition in one of the leading Biochemistry textbooks for medical students.

Since retiring from the University of North Carolina, he has been writing a weekly health blog called “Health Tips From the Professor”. He has also written two best-selling books, “Slaying the Food Myths” and “Slaying the Supplement Myths”. And most recently he has created an online lifestyle change course, “Create Your Personal Health Zone”. For more information visit https://chaneyhealth.com.

For the past 54 years Dr. Chaney and his wife Suzanne have been helping people improve their health holistically through a combination of good diet, exercise, weight control and appropriate supplementation.

 

 

Give Your Heart A Valentine

by

How Can You Give Your Heart A Valentine?

Author: Dr. Stephen Chaney

Happy valentines day

Valentine’s Day is just around the corner. You have probably already selected Valentine Day cards and gifts for those nearest and dearest to you. But what about your heart. It’s your most trusted companion. Doesn’t it deserve a valentine?

The best Valentine’s gift you could give your heart would be a heart healthy diet. But what is a heart-healthy diet?

You may remember the nursery rhyme, “Jack Sprat could eat no fat. His wife could eat no lean…” You may know people who fit these extremes. And in terms of diets these extremes might represent the vegan and keto diets in today’s world.

The nursery rhyme assures us that, “…between them they licked the platter clean.” But were their diets equally heart-healthy? Which of them would have been more likely to live a long and healthy life, free of heart disease?

If you search Mr. Google – even with AI assist – you might be confused. That’s because AI bases its recommendations on the quantity of posts, not the accuracy of posts. And lots of media influencers recommend both diets, and just about every popular diet in between for heart health.

But what does good science say on the topic of heart healthy diets? Fortunately, a recent comprehensive review and meta-analysis (G. Riccardi et al, Cardiovascular Research, 118: 1118-1204, 2022) has answered that question.

How Was The Study Done?

clinical studyThe investigators reviewed 99 clinical studies with tens of thousands of participants that looked at the associations between foods or food groups and heart disease risk.

Most of the studies were “prospective cohort” studies in which:

  • Populations are divided into groups (cohorts) based on the foods they consume…
  • …and followed for a number of years (this is where the term “prospective” comes from)…
  • …and at the end of the study, the association between food and heart outcomes is measured.

However, the review also included several major randomized controlled clinical trials, including:

  • The DASH diet study.
  • The Lyon Diet Heart study.
  • The PREDIMED study.

Give Your Heart A Valentine

What is a heart-healthy diet? Here are the findings of the study. Most will sound very familiar. But you will note strong heartsome subtle differences based on recent data.

The overall summary was that for a healthy adult population:

  • Low consumption of salt and foods of animal origin…
  • …and increased intake of plant foods…
  • …are associated with reduced heart disease risk.

Of course, we have known that for years. It’s when they broke the data down further that it became more interesting.

Foods Of Animal Origin:

  • Processed meats increase heart disease risk. A single serving of processed meat is associated with a 27% to 44% increased risk of heart disease. This is not new.
  • Unprocessed red meat is also associated with increased risk of heart disease, but this association is not as consistent as for processed meats. The authors noted that some of this may be due to differences in saturated fat content or cooking methods of the red meats included in individual studies.

But this analysis also showed that the effect of red meat on heart disease risk may be dose dependent. For example:

    • The studies they reviewed suggested that consuming ≥3 servings per day of red meat is associated with a 27% increased risk of heart disease. However, consuming <3 servings per week may not increase risk, especially when consumed in the context of an otherwise heart-healthy diet.
  • White meat such as poultry does not appear to affect heart disease risk. This has been predicted by earlier reports, but this analysis strengthens those predictions.
  • Fish consumption decreases heart disease risk. This is not new. But this review added precision about recommended fish intake (2-4 servings/week) and a couple of caveats:
    • The heart benefits of fish may be due to their omega-3 content and may not apply equally to fish with lower omega-3 content.
    • The authors also expressed concerns about the sustainability of high-omega-3 fish populations. I would also add that our oceans are increasingly polluted, so contamination is another concern.
  • Egg consumption up to one egg/day does not appear to increase heart disease risk. This is consistent with the current American Heart Association recommendations.

However, the authors noted that the effect of eggs on serum cholesterol, and hence heart disease risk depends on several factors.

    • Genetics, obesity, and diabetes can make it more difficult to regulate serum cholesterol levels. For these individuals, eggs may need to be eaten only sparingly.
    • Diets low in saturated fat and high in fiber from plant foods help the body regulate serum cholesterol. Several studies suggest that eggs may decrease heart disease risk in the context of this type of a heart-healthy diet.
  • Dairy: Neither low-fat nor high-fat dairy foods appear to influence heart disease risk. This is different from the standard recommendation to consume low-fat dairy foods. But it is in line with the trend of recent research studies on dairy and heart disease.

Once again, there were a couple of caveats:

    • There is increasing evidence that fermented dairy foods may decrease heart disease risk which may explain why certain high-fat cheeses and other high-fat fermented dairy foods appear to have a neutral or slightly beneficial effect on heart disease risk.
    • As with eggs, the effect of high-fat dairy foods on heart disease risk may be influenced by genetics and diet context.

Vegan FoodsFoods Of Plant Origin: The effects of plant foods on heart health have been known for some time, and the most recent studies included in this analysis have not changed those conclusions.

  • Fruits and Vegetables consistently reduce heart disease risk in multiple studies. In each case, the optimal intake appears to be about 2 servings of each per day which provides an 18-21% risk reduction for vegetables and a 21-32% risk reduction for fruits.
  • Legumes (beans and peas) also consistently reduce heart disease risk in multiple studies. At the optimal intake of around 4 servings per week the risk reduction is around 14%.
  • Nuts also consistently reduce heart disease risk. At the optimal intake of around one serving (a handful) per day, the risk reduction is around 25%.
  • Cereals (grains) were divided into 3 categories:
    • Refined carbohydrates with a high glycemic index (e.g., white rice, white bread) are associated with increased heart disease risk in multiple studies probably due to their effect on blood sugar levels. And the increased risk is significant (Around 66% higher risk for every 2 servings).
    • Refined carbohydrates with a low glycemic index (e.g., pasta, corn tortillas) show an inconsistent effect on heart disease risk.
    • Whole grains are consistently associated with a lower heart disease risk. Two servings of whole grains per day are associated with a 25%-34% decreased risk.

Miscellaneous Foods:

  • Soft Drinks are associated with increased heart disease risk. One serving per day increases the risk by around 15-22% and recent evidence suggests that artificially sweetened soft drinks offer no heart health benefits compared to sugar sweetened soft drinks.
  • Coffee and Tea are both associated with decreased heart disease risk. For coffee the optimal benefit may occur at around 3 cups/day. Higher levels may have an adverse effect on heart disease risk.

Summary of Heart Health Recommendations

ScientistIf you think that was a lot of information, the authors provided a numerical summary of their recommendations for a heart-healthy diet. They are:

  • Two servings per day of vegetables, fresh fruits, and whole grains.
  • One serving per day of nuts and seeds, low-glycemic index refined cereals, extra-virgin olive oil or non-tropical vegetable oils, and yogurt.
  • Four servings per week of legumes and fish.
  • No more than 3 servings per week of white meat, eggs, cheese, and milk.
  • No more than 2 servings per week of high-glycemic index refined starchy foods, red meat, and butter.
  • Only occasional consumption of processed meats.

How Can You Give Your Heart A Valentine?

Of course, nobody wants to follow a “diet by the numbers”. If you are like most of us, you want flexibility and you Questionswant to be able to eat some of your favorite foods. So, let me put these recommendations into a more “user friendly” form.

If you want to give your heart a valentine:

  • Whole, unprocessed or minimally processed, plant foods are your heart’s best friends.
  • Your heart-healthy foundation should be fruits, vegetables, whole grains, nuts and seeds, healthy plant oils, and legumes.
    • Your heart-healthy foundation can also include fermented dairy foods and low-glycemic index refined grains.
    • Your “go-to” beverages should be water, tea (both caffeinated and herbal teas), and coffee. You should avoid soft drinks and other sugar-sweetened or artificially sweetened beverages.
  • Once you have achieved a heart-healthy foundation you can add a few servings per week of white meat, eggs, cheese, and dairy, even high-fat dairy.
    • If you have good adherence to the heart-healthy foundation described above and no genetic or health issues that increase your risk of heart disease, you can probably eat more of these foods.
    • Conversely, if your adherence to the heart-healthy foundation is poor and/or you are at high risk of heart disease, you may wish to consume less of these foods.
  • If you have good adherence to the heart-healthy foundation, you can also add up to 1-2 servings of high-glycemic index refined carbohydrates, red meat, or butter per week. With red meat, you may want to consider it as a garnish that adds flavor to a plant-based meal rather than the centerpiece of the meal.
    • You should eat processed meats seldom or never.

This would be the best Valentine’s gift you could possibly give your heart.

The Bottom Line

For those of you who might want to give your heart a valentine, a new comprehensive review and meta-analysis of 99 clinical studies with tens of thousands of participants has updated the correlation between foods and heart disease risk.

Many of the recommendations based on this analysis are identical to previous recommendations for a heart-healthy diet.

But there are some subtle changes to those recommendations based on the latest data.

For more details about this study and what a heart-healthy diet might look like for you, read the article above.

These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This information is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

______________________________________________________________________________

My posts and “Health Tips From the Professor” articles carefully avoid claims about any brand of supplement or manufacturer of supplements. However, I am often asked by representatives of supplement companies if they can share them with their customers.

My answer is, “Yes, as long as you share only the article without any additions or alterations. In particular, you should avoid adding any mention of your company or your company’s products. If you were to do that, you could be making what the FTC and FDA consider a “misleading health claim” that could result in legal action against you and the company you represent.

For more detail about FTC regulations for health claims, see this link.

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/health-products-compliance-guidance

______________________________________________________________________

About The Author 

Dr. Chaney has a BS in Chemistry from Duke University and a PhD in Biochemistry from UCLA. He is Professor Emeritus from the University of North Carolina where he taught biochemistry and nutrition to medical and dental students for 40 years.

Dr. Chaney won numerous teaching awards at UNC, including the Academy of Educators “Excellence in Teaching Lifetime Achievement Award”.

Dr Chaney also ran an active cancer research program at UNC and published over 100 scientific articles and reviews in peer-reviewed scientific journals. In addition, he authored two chapters on nutrition in one of the leading biochemistry text books for medical students.

Since retiring from the University of North Carolina, he has been writing a weekly health blog called “Health Tips From the Professor”. He has also written two best-selling books, “Slaying the Food Myths” and “Slaying the Supplement Myths”. And most recently he has created an online lifestyle change course, “Create Your Personal Health Zone”. For more information visit https://chaneyhealth.com.

For the past 54 years Dr. Chaney and his wife Suzanne have been helping people improve their health holistically through a combination of good diet, exercise, weight control and appropriate supplementation.

 

 

 

 

Health Tips From The Professor