Creating Wellness Blog

We tend to make our decisions based on what we’re told by our healthcare providers is best for our families. So, what do we do when science starts proving what we’ve been told for more than 50 years may be wrong?

Studies are showing that fluoride might not be good for our teeth; in fact, it’s probably the opposite. In order for fluoride to bond to teeth, it must remove calcium and that process is called fluorosis. Fluorosis is defined as an abnormal condition caused by excessive intake of fluorides and is characterized in children by discoloration and pitting of the teeth. In adults, fluorosis is characterized by pathological bone changes.

In January of 2011, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services recommended lowering the accept- able level of fluoride to 0.7 milligrams per liter of water. This “remarkable turnabout” is a result of streaking or spotting on the teeth of 2 out of every 5 adolescents, which the government is calling only a “cosmetic problem.” Additionally, according to a recent Center for Disease Control report, nearly 23% of children ages 12 to 15 had fluorosis between 1986-1987 and that number rose to 41% in a study covering 1999 to 2004.

Finally, according to a 1998 U.S. patent by the pharmaceutical company Sepracor, fluoride activates the very oral “G proteins” that have been determined to lead to chronic gingivitis, periodontal disease and ultimately tooth loss. Considering this latest information on fluoride, maybe it’s time to take a closer look at some other products we put in our mouths.

Originally created to be a powerful surgical antiseptic by Dr. Joseph Lister in 1879, mouthwash was given to dentists for their patient’s oral care in 1895, but it never was a true success until the 1920’s when its advertisers created a new medical condition, “Chronic Halitosis,” for which it was the only known cure. In just seven years, Listerine’s revenues rose from $115,000 to more than $8 million.

The basic ingredients found in Listerine include:

• Menthol
• Thymol
• Methyl salicylate
• Eugalyptol
• Ethanol

 

The basic ingredients found in Scope are similar but start with an alcohol content of 15WT%. Crest doesn’t have an ingredients list; they only list what they are required to – Cetylpyridinum Chloride 0.7%.

In addition to their specific ingredients, most mouthwashes contain water, food coloring and artificial flavors, and as with all toothpastes, all mouthwash bottles contain a warning to seek assistance or contact a point control center immediately if accidentally ingested.

While the American Dental Association and the U.S. National Cancer Institute do not believe that the alcohol content in some mouthwashes contribute to oral cancers, the Australian Dental Journal reported in December 2008 that “there is now sufficient evidence to accept the proposition that developing oral cancer is increased or contributed to by the use of alcohol-containing mouthwashes.”

Andrew Penman, chief executive of The Cancer Council New South Wales “called for further research in the matter,” and research supported by Stanford University suggests that the alcohol in antiseptic mouthwashes might increase the risk of oral cancer as frequent rinsing can weaken the lining of the gums and oral cavity.

One of the most commonly used tooth fillings, amalgam has been in use for 150 years. Containing 50% mercury, 30% silver and differing amounts of tin, zinc and copper, amalgam is made by blending almost equal parts of elemental liquid mercury with an alloy powder of different metals.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention mentions on their website, “Amalgam can release small amounts of mercury vapor over time. Patients can absorb these vapors by inhaling or ingesting them.” The CDC also says, “Possible symptoms of mercury poisoning include irritability, memory loss, tremors, poor physical coordination, insomnia, kidney failure, and anorexia.”

They also claim reports that suggest mercury from amalgam causes the above-mentioned symptoms, conditions and other diseases like Alzheimer’s or multiple sclerosis, are not backed up by current scientific evidence. However, if we consider that amalgam must be treated as a toxic-biochemical once removed by the patient, then it probably shouldn’t be in the patient.

In a report published in the International Journal of Hygiene and Environment Health entitled, “Amalgam Studies: Disregarding basic principles of mercury toxicity,” Mutter, et al. stated that most amalgam studies are basing their findings on blood and urine toxicity levels. Since mercury rapidly moves to tissue, testing blood and urine is not going to accurately reflect mercury toxicity levels meaning that the “current scientific evidence” on which the CDC is basing their findings is misleading.

Other filling types, or composites, also contain chemicals that should be checked for compatibility with a patient prior to being used. Such as: formaldehyde, phenol, polyurethane and acrylates.

Holistic Dentists

As research has begun to expound on the potential dangers in amalgam fillings and other routine dental practices, wellness families are beginning to look for alternatives: non-fluoride toothpastes, organic mouth- washes and fillings that are compatible with their own body’s chemistry.

There are dentists who recognize that a filling material that is over 150-years-old just might be outdated and are offering their patients more holistic, wellness options.

1. To find a wellness dentist in your community you can visit the following: www.mercuryfreedentists.com and enter your zip code
2. Huggins Applied Healing at www.hugginsappliedhealing.com
3. or by calling 1-866-948-4638

If you find that there isn’t a wellness dentist in your community, it’s worth it to travel a few miles or even a few hours to find a dentist that will offer you more options; since you only see a dentist twice a year or so. If you do travel, consider scheduling your family’s six-month visits during the summer and then the winter school break.

This could even be tied into a family day outing or overnight trip. Perhaps the nearby city that is home to your holistic dentist also has a great museum, zoo or aquarium. Although it is a distance and carries an expense, it can be turned into a special day for the entire family. 

Drs. Kris and Melissa Tosczak are dedicated to providing you with the absolute best in family wellness care in San Diego. So take a moment today to discuss with your Family Wellness Chiropractor any concerns you may have regarding your family’s overall health and wellness.

With worldwide obesity rates doubling in the past three decades, is it any surprise that artificial sweeteners have been gaining popularity? Beginning with the creation of saccharin, “sugar substitutes” have become the answer to a dieter’s prayer. Have your cake and eat it too, it’s a dream come true. Or is it?

This sugar-substitute was discovered in 1965 by accident while chemist, James Schlatter, was testing an anti-ulcer drug. Aspartame gained FDA approval in 1981 and was approved for use in carbonated beverages in 1983 where it is most commonly found now as the primary sweetener for most diet sodas.

This chemical accounts for over 75% of the adverse reactions to food additives reported to the FDA and has been linked with serious medical reactions. Researchers and physicians studying these reactions have concluded that the following chronic illnesses can worsen when ingesting aspartame: brain tumors, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, chronic fatigue syndrome, Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s, mental retardation, lymphoma, birth defects, fibromyalgia, and diabetes.

The most popular of all sugar-substitutes, aspartame is found in over 6,000 food items on grocery store shelves, many of which you would never expect to contain this chemical: yogurt, chewing gum, energy bars, gelatin snacks and more.

In 1976, this sugar-substitute was discovered by Tate & Lyle scientists who were working with Queen Elizabeth College when a young chemist incorrectly thought a researcher told him to taste the powder they were working with and discovered that it was incredibly sweet; as much as 600 times sweeter than standard table sugar.

Sucrolose is advertised as being made from sugar and so has avoided the “bad press” that comes with being a chemical, when in fact it’s exactly that, a chemical. Created by a patented chemical reaction (chlorination process) that, in simplified terms, removes three molecules of hydrogen and oxygen (or hydroxyls) and replaces them with chloride, sucrolose is a manufactured product.

Dr. Mercola says that sucrolose bears more chemical similarity to DDT (a banned pesticide) than it does to sugar, and since the resultant product does not exist in nature and was never intended to be consumed, our bodies don’t know what to do with it once it’s ingested.

Research has said that it’s “safe”, and McNeil Nutritionals claims that it’s not digested or metabolized by the body so it has no calories. But the latest research is showing that up to 15% is absorbed in the digestive system and into fat cells.

Saccharin – Sweet and Low

Discovered in 1879 by the researchers at Johns Hopkins University, saccharin was a “boon to food manufacturers and consumers, especially those with diabetes” as it sweetened foods without causing a glucose reaction. After World War II and on into the 1960’s, when interest in weight control developed, saccharin became even more popular.

It was only a short time later that saccharin became a health concern and a study in 1977 determined that it was causing cancer in lab mice. This resulted in a cancer warning being added to all items that contained this chemically produced sweetener. However, recent studies have been published claiming that those lab results were inaccurate or over-exaggerated and suddenly saccharin is deemed “safe”.

However, according to a report written in 1997 by the Center for the Science in Public Interest (CSPI), removing saccharin from the list of potential carcinogens is a mistake; the main concern being that doing so gives the public a “false sense of security.” The CSPI report states, “If saccharin is even a weak carcinogen, this unnecessary additive would pose an intolerable risk to the public.”

Agave

The next sugar-substitute to hit the shelves is agave and it’s possible that it’s just as bad for you as chemically created sweeteners. Made from the same plant as tequila, this syrup is generally not made from the sap as is commonly believed, but is usually made from the pineapple-like root bulb using a process very similar to how cornstarch is converted to high- fructose corn syrup.

Once processed, agave has such a high fructose content that it’s almost as bad for your body as high- fructose corn syrup. Although agave has become popular in the past few years as a “natural” sweetener, the question still arises, what is the source? If it isn’t the sap taken directly from the leaves, then it should be considered unhealthy.

Natural Sweeteners

Although it’s best to leave things in its natural state, there might be times that you would like to sweeten something or perhaps you want to bake and need a good sugar substitute. For those times, many wellness practitioners would recommend Stevia.

The most natural of all low-calorie sweeteners, this plant is found in South America and has been used in Paraguay for centuries and Japan for decades. As with all sweeteners, the difference is where and how it’s produced.

Be sure to purchase all natural Stevia and avoid name-brand products (such as, Truvia, Merisant, Pure Via, etc.) as they are typically processed.

Natural sweeteners are generally anything that is found sweet in its original form and will not require a chemical reaction to make it so. This would not include “corn sugar,” which is just another name for high-fructose corn syrup and is not natural or healthy.

In Summary

Eating items that are chemically created is generally not a good idea. For example, sucrolose is created by chlorinating a sugar molecule. In nature, chlorine is found primarily as a component of salt and can be ingested as sodium-chloride. But by itself, or chemically attached to what’s left of sugar once the hydroxyls are removed, that’s another story.

Artificial (chemically created) sweeteners such as saccharin, aspartame and sucrolose have been reported to cause various adverse reactions such as the following:

• Headaches
• Migraines
• Nausea 
• Diarrhea
• Dizziness
• Blurred vision 
• Seizures

 

Furthermore, research is showing that while our taste buds may be fooled by the sweet tasting but calorie- free treats we’re allowing ourselves, our brains might not. Studies have shown that it’s possible that consuming low-calorie sweeteners may actually cause weight gain by confusing the body’s ability to estimate caloric intake and resulting in overindulgence later.

The unavoidable fact is that a diet rich in whole, living foods is the only way to ensure that you are eating healthy and living well. A good rule of thumb is, if it tastes sweet but has no calories or carbs, you can assume that it’s chemically-created-sweetness and should be avoided.

For more information on how to live a healthier lifestyle, contact your friendly neighborhood Vista chiropractors Drs. Chris and Melissa Tosczak. 

Car Seats and Strollers

While not necessarily considered an infant toy, these items are typically part of an infant’s first few years and can negatively affect their developing spine.

While in the womb the fetus’ spine develops in a “C” pattern, which is perfectly normal. As the child grows and they become weight-bearing, their spine should begin to develop a more mature curvature, almost like a stretched out “S”.

A baby’s developing spine can be affected by the repetitive positions they are put in. Car seats and strollers conform the child’s spine to the “C” pattern and, if used for long periods of time, can interfere with the normal development of the mature curvature.

During the first year of life an infant will begin by developing their large motor skills: for instance, crawling and walking. The fine motor skills are developed later.

By the age of 3 months an infant will begin reaching for objects but will typically close their hands too early or too late to actually grab the object. By 9 months they have typically developed enough hand-eye coordination to actually pick up objects. At about a year old, they can usually bang objects together and by a year-and-half be able to manipulate the objects their holding.

As a parent, it’s important to provide a baby objects that will help promote this small muscle development. The recommended toys would include rattles, stacking toys, shapes that are sorted into containers and building blocks as these will help to encourage their hand-eye coordination.

 Imported Toys

When considering what toys or items to purchase it’s important to determine whether or not the items are imported. Many times items produced in other countries will not meet the same high standards of production required for safety.

China is the leading exporter of toys worldwide to Canada, the UK, Australia and the U.S., providing 80% of the toys sold in most of these countries.

In 2007 toys received from China were determined to have a hazardous level of lead in the paint. While this was caught and a recall was put in effect, many times these warnings come too late after there has already been harm or injury to an infant.

Dangers of imported products can also include chemical treatments used to either sterilize or preserve fabrics, wood and other materials. These chemicals might be absorbed by these materials. It’s wise to take the time to thoroughly research an item prior to purchase and use.

Please visit the following websites: www.safekids.org or www.healthytoys.org to find the latest information on toy safety.

Your Doctor of Chiropractic is the only healthcare professional who recognizes the importance of spinal development and how a child improperly weight-bearing or standing can have an impact on that development.

If you are concerned about any of the items that you are letting your child use, please ask Drs. Chris or Melissa Tosczak for more information.