DIM May Be Nature's Viagra

Prostate health is a major concern these days for quite a few men as it should be. The prostate's importance is generally over looked until in the latter years of life for most men. It is during this time we begin to understand the important role the prostate plays in the overall health and well-being of the body in general and its importance in sexual matters specifically.

In general, the prostate helps to control and regulate the actions of certain hormones like testosterone. Many aspects about what typically makes a man a man, like muscle mass or chivalrous aggression, are affected by the prostate.

Specifically, the prostate helps to control just how much estrogen and testosterone there will be at any given time in a man's body if it is in proper working order.

One way to keep the prostate in proper working order is to supplement with diindolymethane (DIM).

Prostate Health

Inflammation of the prostate is becoming more and more common in men especially those who are in their mid to late 40’s and beyond. A lifetime of red meat consumption coupled with stress and other adverse lifestyle habits will usually take its toll on the prostate. Significant inflammatory issues can arise and can eventually lead to cancer. As previously mentioned DIM could step in and help correct some prostate conditions because it is a very powerful anti-inflammatory. DIM’s ability to reduce inflammation in the prostate specifically has been demonstrated in scientific testing. In research documented in the January 2008 Journal of Nutrition DIM proved effective in reducing the release of pro-inflammatory mediators in macrophages in addition to reducing the release of nitric acid and other inflammatory substances.

Erectile Dysfunction

Erectile dysfunction (ED) has garnered much mainstream attention for two reasons. First, it has become an unfortunate reality for many men. Second, because pharmaceutical companies have flooded the airwaves with commercial after commercial touting little pills that are very expensive and sales very well. But what if there was a natural and safe way to overcome erectile dysfunction?

 ED could be a sign of testosterone conversion gone wrong. As men age we tend to convert testosterone into estrogen more readily. If too much testosterone is converted sexual dysfunction is sure to follow. Even so, a man with a healthy prostate would not produce nearly enough estrogen necessary to induce ED. A man with a failing or poorly functioning prostate will, however. DIM may be the right supplement needed as it has demonstrated the ability to slow down or bring into correct balance the conversion of testosterone to estrogen. In short, the more testosterone a man is able to hang on to the less chance he has of developing or maintaining ED.

Conclusion

The health of the prostate is important for many reasons but let's be honest. Erectile dysfunction is a driving force in some men's lives and the pharmaceutical sales reports are available to prove it. Here is just one way that could potentially put a man back in the sexual driver’s seat naturally and with little to no side effects at all.

*Be sure to consult with your medical professional before beginning any supplemental regimen

Medical Conspiracies - Are We the Crazy Ones?

I would like to start this article with a true story whose point will become clear a little later so please bear with me. In 1932 the U.S. Public Health Service began a clinical trial to track the natural progression of a disease known as syphilis. History records that a total of 600 men “participated” in the study. You will notice that the word participated is in quotes. That is because the men were not told they were participating in a syphilis experiment (more on this later). 301 of the men contracted syphilis before the study and the other 299 afterwards because they were intentionally infected. None of the men were told they had syphilis and treatment was withheld which was ultimately a death sentence for most. At the time of the trial there were no known cures but a few treatments were available. Left untreated syphilis can ultimately lead to senility, organ failure and death. Ironically, sadistically, and sadly, free burial insurance was given to all participants. The study lasted 40 years even after a new and successful form of treatment was discovered.

An article recently went out through the mainstream media (Rueters, Associated Press, etc) about medical conspiracies and how many Americans believe them. In a nutshell the premise is this: Medical conspiracies do not happen and if you believe in them you should have your head examined because you are a total whack job. I will admit the emphasis is mine but one cannot help but draw a similar line to this synopsis due to the tone of the articles. Some of them do graciously point out that most of the people are not completely crazy but just a little crazy. They also tend to be a "little" poor and a "little" uneducated and just to make sure the insults cover as many people as possible they are often minorities (please refer back to the introductory paragraph to possibly explain the last insulting point since it involved African American men exclusively).

There are two issues at hand and they are worth delving into. The first issue is the premise that medical conspiracies do not and have not existed. The second issue is that all conspiracy theorist are tin foil hat wearing goobers and if you happen to believe that it is possible for a group of people to take advantage of another group of people then you are a goober too. Each point will be addressed in detail for our edification and thoughtful analysis.

This article will be in three parts with this being part I. Parts II and III will follow shortly.

Multivitamin Use Absurd and Dangerous? I Think Not Part I

Do you remember Christmas as a child with that jolly red nosed Santa who most kids idolized in every sense of the word? Or maybe for you it was the tooth fairy, the great pumpkin or even Peter Cottontail. Any or all of these myths seemed to be real to us and for some the realization that they don't exist was quite the shock. Banished to the realm of make believe our childhood idols went and now some would have us believe another one of our cherished beliefs (that is actually a fact) should be relegated to the same place we put St. Nick and the others.

Recently several studies were analyzed that purport to firmly establish the "fact" that multivitamin supplementation is at best useless and at worst detrimental to your health to the point of causing harm. Harm from vitamins? Let us explore the article and the studies it cites in an effort to keep vitamin supplementation out of the realm of make believe.

The Researchers

Eliseo Guallar and his colleagues recently analyzed three studies and came to a shocking conclusion. They have stated, unequivocally, that multivitamin supplementation has no clear benefit and could prove harmful to your health. The group of researchers went on to say that multivitamins should not be used in the prevention of chronic disease and that "enough is enough" when it comes to the silly people who erroneously use these vitamins (emphasis mine). After you get past the initial shock that vitamin supplementation is harmful or useless and wrestle with the condescending tone of the abstract written by the researchers you are left to ponder things that you have held to be true: that vitamins are good for you. Should vitamins head off to the island of misfit beliefs with the rest of our childhood idols? Intuitively you know the answer but let us spell a few things out for the sake of clarity and sound reasoning.

The conclusion of these researchers has been published in the Annals of Internal Medicine and is chock full of assumptions. One of these assumptions provided by Guallar et al is that the average western style diet provides adequate nourishment to the masses to the point that vitamin and mineral supplementation is unnecessary. Surely, there are a percentage of westerners who eat pretty healthy by consuming clean, pure water and either natural or organic foods while limiting processed foods but this does not pertain to the vast majority especially in America. In addition, due to soil depletion and over-farming mineral and vitamin levels in fruits, vegetables and grains have been on a decline for decades.

Aside from the assumption let us to take a look at what really lies at the heart of the matter for the people who take great interest in their health. An analysis of the three studies is appropriate and fundamental so we can understand what the researchers saw and what the newspapers, online publishers and television programs failed to report.

The Studies

Three studies were cited by the researchers and here is where we really have to pay attention which is unfortunate. It is unfortunate because there is a sense among most people in the general public that studies are impartial, truthful and therefore should be taken as gospel. Since the word gospel literally means "good news" some of these studies should be taken as the anti-gospel. Let us review

Cardiovascular Disease and Cancer Study

The first study mentioned in the article is the "Vitamin and Mineral Supplements in the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease and Cancer". I know it's a mouthful but bear with me. Researchers in this study wanted to establish whether cardiovascular issues and cancer was actually preventable through supplementation. It appears to be a noble endeavor on the surface even with flawed results (an explanation on why it is not noble will present itself a little later). It was acknowledged that the results of this study did not pertain to individuals with nutrient deficiencies or others that would be considered high risk. The article cited above would have you believe the results of this trial pertained to everyone. When you consider that most people are nutrient deficient the article becomes just plain misleading.

At one point in the analysis of the trial the researchers had to admit that the study was actually set up to measure results in a drug trial not a nutrient trial which may skew the data. In addition, it was noted that the difference between examining optimal levels of a nutrient intake and "normal" levels may have established a different result. In other words studying minimum nutrient supplementation may not be in the best interest of the general public. Then the question becomes "Why do the study in this way if the results do not apply to most people"? Great question!

Cognitive Function in Men

This study was a misnomer from the very start. Called "Long Term Multivitamin Supplementation and Cognitive Function in Men: A Randomized Trial"  it looked at a very particular group of men: doctors. The importance of this will become clear in a moment. The intent of this study was to assess cognitive function in men and whether multivitamin supplementation would improve it. The conclusion was that multivitamin supplementation does not improve cognitive function or prevent dementia.

There are three interesting points to consider regarding this study. The first is that physicians were studied and this poses a problem. It has been long established that people who pursue academics have a lowered risk of developing dementia. Secondly, most older physicians generally eat very healthy and are able to afford the best, most nutritious foods. Proper nourishment combined with a high level of education diminishes the likelihood of developing dementia which is a great thing but it makes you wonder why this study was used to attack multivitamin use. There was not much of any chance to see any improvements from multivitamin use because of the group of men that were studied. The third, and perhaps the most disturbing aspect of this study was the fact that actual dementia or any cognitive dysfunction was never tested for. None of the participants were assessed for any level of dementia either before, during or after. How do you purport that something does not work (multivitamins) if you never test for the dysfunction you are looking to improve (cognition)?

Trial to Assess Chelation Therapy

This study set out to assess whether or not high doses of vitamins and minerals help prevent a another occurrence of a second myocardial infarction (heart attack). Two things of import to note for this one.

The first is that the people studied had a high incidence non-adherence. This is a fancy way of saying more than enough people failed to do what was requested of them ultimately affecting the data collected. In addition, the participant dropout rate was also high. It becomes a difficult task to honestly document and extract accurate information to convey to the public when so many people involved in the study fail to comply with the instructions or complete the program. It puzzles me that Eliseo Guallar and his colleagues used this study or any of the previously mentioned ones to attack vitamins and minerals.