Nature, infants, and Cholesterol

Science and Mainstream nutritional education sometimes have gaps big enough to drive a Mac Truck through them. Take the case regarding the breast feeding debate. The fact that there is even a debate reveals this gap. If you could ask a baby, there would not be any debate. So, the debate is more about the Mother and Society than about the baby. Baby Formula companies say their products are scientifically formulated for healthy infants although the latest research favors breast feeding. Below is one aspect that may have far reaching deductions, even for Adults.

Looking at cholesterol levels between breast feed infants versus formula fed infants reveals shocking differences. Cholesterol levels are higher in breast fed infants. ref Human milk is naturally high in cholesterol while formulas largely leave it out. Add in another fact, that the AHA says higher cholesterol during childhood leads to adult heart disease. ref Thus, putting these two facts together would lead to breast feed infants having greater heart and artery disease as adults. But, this expected result is just the opposite of the real situation. Formula fed infants who have much lower cholesterol levels starting out have greater Cardiovascular Disease as adults. One theory is that the body early on has to develop a pathway to generate greater amounts of cholesterol to compensate for the lower dietary amounts in formulas. ref 

Low cholesterol is not healthy for the infant. ref  A reading of about 200 for cholesterol is the best level to develop a sound immune system. Does this amount also carry over for adults as well. (Why, YES it does!)

 Studies have demonstrated a number of important health benefits to breastfeeding. Among them:

• Breast-fed children are more resistant to disease and infection early in life than formula-fed children
  
  
• Breast-fed children are less likely to contract a number of diseases later in life, including juvenile diabetes, multiple sclerosis, heart disease, and cancer before the age of 15
  
  
• Mothers who breastfeed are less likely to develop osteoporosis later in life, are able to lose weight gained during pregnancy more easily and have a lower risk of breast, uterine and ovarian cancer

Could some of these advantages be linked to the higher level of Cholesterol in breast fed infants?

Human milk has significantly more cholesterol than cow's milk. For the first 6 months, breastfed babies have higher Total Cholesterol and LDL's than formula or mixed fed babies. ref Then a change happens that is beneficial. The HDL to LDL ratio goes up in breastfed babies. This probably represents a better development of liver enzymes handling of cholesterol pathways over what occurs in formula fed infants. This effect is not just from the natural cholesterol, but from the natural fatty acid profile from breast milk that many formulas do not match. Why do formula companies refuse to add cholesterol to bottle formulas? ref ref

As children grow older, cholesterol levels gain more association with beginning artery plaque growth indicating artery damage. Nutritionists just assume, wrongly, that infant cholesterol levels contribute to this process as well. Science needs to catch up. But then they would have to admit that cholesterol palys a positive role in preventing disease such as infections. This would bring into question the wisdom of why it should be drastically lowered? Benefits and risks! When one looks at the mortality facts concerning cholesterol levels, the overall healthiest level is just over 200.  article Interestingly, this is just about the level that breast fed babies naturally develop.

NATURE, INFANTS, AND MOTHERS MILK

If you were amazed about the cholesterol findings above, this next topic blows the lid off any debate issues about the merits of breast-feeding versus bottle formula feeding. This can be summed up in one word: Oligosaccharides. Click on the term for easy reading about the critical value of infants getting these unique oligosaccharides only produced in human breast milk and their value to the health of the growing infant.

Human Milk Enigma

Scientists analyzing human breast milk were dumbfounded to find this class of simple carbohydrates that the immature infant digestive tract was incapable of digesting. Why would Nature put oligosaccharides in breast milk if the infant could not digest them? 

After years of research, Scientists finally made a significant discover. The oligosaccharides were not essentially for the infant at first, they were there to feed and help bacteria grow in the infant's developing intestinal tract. After lactobacillus in the small intestines and bifidobacteria in the colon used the oligsaccharides to grow more numerous, the bacteria could breakdown these carbohydrates into forms that the infant body could absorb and utilize as simple sugars. While many different bifidobacteria were able to digest a few oligosaccharides, there was only one strain of this bacteria that was capable of 100% digestion of human milk oligosaccharides and that bacteria strain is Bifidobacterium Longum subsp. Infantis. 

Heading for Extinction in Breast Milk

In the past, B. Infantis was dominate in the intestinal tract of every human infant born. In the U.S. today, it is found in only about 1 in 10 infants. Plus, it is also absent in most Mothers. This reduction was a gradual process over many generations. The causes for this decline are numerous; use of antibiotics, C-section births, low fiber diets, processed foods, bottle formula feeding, sterilization and sanitation procedures, etc.

Scientists are now conducting research to find out if any of the numerous complaints growing in numbers for infants might be related to the dissapearance of this vital bacteria to infant health.

Sugar Fix

What's the BIG DEAL with SUGAR TYPES?

Most people by now have heard something about too much sugar being bad for health, with links to obesity, dental cavities, diabetes, and now maybe heart disease. ref ref  **  To overcome the negative effects of consuming too much sugar, Scientists developed sugar substitutes, some natural source and some chemical.

**copied from reference above: "Moreover, evidence suggests that sugars in general, and fructose in particular, may contribute to overall cardiovascular risk through a variety of mechanisms."

The Vitamin Industry long ago used the discovery than the form of sugar called fructose was metabolized slower and just in the Liver which suggested (incorrectly) it was favored over table sugar which is half fructose and half glucose. Glucose is metabolized all over the body. The baking industry discovered than a liquid form of sugar called high fructose corn syrup was favored in baked goods since it was easier to work with for favorable consistency and product taste. ref

High fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is only slightly higher at 55% fructose 45% glucose than table sugar at 50% each, but the molecular structure of HFCS was changed to make favorable baking characteristics. The sugar molecules in table sugar are combined into pairs while in HFCS they are all single, not combined molecules. This structural change, while seemingly an insignifcant factor, is really the biggest difference between the two sugar types since the glucose fructose ratio percentages are very close. ref 

Nutritionists have been attacking HFCS as more active in causing diseases while the HFCS companies have research that shows it is not the real culprit. Overall calories are the real cause. The truth is both forms are not beneficial in abundance. Added sugars are a problem. Sugars naturally found in food are released into the body in a slow controlled matter due to the buffering effects of the food fiber content and other macro-nutrients. With table sugar and HFCS, the immediate release overwhelms body mechanisms. Plus the metabolic pathway of fructose presents problems in such high amounts. Fat deposits in Livers, called fatty livers, are increasingly becoming an unwelcome condition.

FYI: Sugars become more of a problem as insulin resistence builds. The body needs insulin to take glucose sugar into cells for energy production. Insulin resistence means that glucose sugar does not clear out of the blood and that build up generates adverse conditions leading to diabetes. Many hormones also play roles here including the bone protein osteocalcin. Osteocalcin is involved in blood sugar regulation. ref

Yes, excess calories in the long term may be the guilty party, especially in diabetes. But Free Sugars, and especially fructose or HFCS, in any form need to be limited because of the added impact in the way the body deals with them. Plus, "empty calorie" foods should not be a significant calorie supplier. The need here is to increase beneficial nutrients and fibers that allow a normal sugar release without large sugar spikes in insulin and excess calories adding to weight gain.  ref 

ARTIFICIAL SUGAR FAILURES

Sugar substitutes are indeed another can of worms. They are proving to not be very welcome substitutes, still contributing to obesity. ref  While the chemicals are often toxic in the body as they start to break apart and form new elements, the desire for sweet foods is very often increased and the overall effect is negative. The FDA is under strong pressure to approve sugar substitutes even with some negative aspects since they help control diabetes. A better approach is to limit the amount of sweet tasting foods and increase activity to burn calories. You have to earn calories you consume by body movement so they do not form excess fat or lead to insulin resistance.

What happens to sugar calories

Calories consumed from any source have to go into one of three possible forms and places. First, they can be immediately burned up as glucose for energy if blood levels are low. Second, they can go into muscles and other organs to be stored as glycogen for use a day or two later. Third, if the first two are already full, calories are turned into fat and stored in the usual fat storage places. It is more difficult to burn or get fat out of the body after it takes this form.

Thus, the secret is to only eat the number of calories to fulfill the first two areas without overspill into fat. This is where the saying comes from that you have to earn your food calories before you eat them so there is space in muscles for more glycogen storage. It is really that simple, with one twist, the Brain. ref 

As the reference above reports, overeating for a few weeks leads to more fat storage, the same result as when you diet or eat less calories. The body goes into a survival mode and stores more calories as fat as a protective mechanism even though glycogen storage may be available.

Added Sugars simply contain too many quick calories with a low level of nutrients to satisfy body needs which keeps the appetite turned on. The body wants to balance energy as calories coming in versus calories burned. But it also needs nutrients to function. Usually with the natural level of sugars found in food, this energy balance is maintained. But look what happens when simple sugars are consistently added as in a soda consumed with meals.

ANOTHER SUGAR TARGET, NERVES

Here is a reference that talks about Osteoarthritis and the glucose induced nerve damage by MMP-13 enzymatic actions. ref    To be expanded soon.

Update on Wednesday, September 22, 2021 at 4:54PM by Team RightWay

This Sugar Fix article presents an excellent opportunity to add information about chromium. Chromium Picolinate made a big splash some time ago with evidence of blood sugar control mechanisms as well as fat loss. And low doses probably are beneficial. But, like so many nutrients, people uptick the "if some is good, more would be better" mantra. Not the case!

Chromium Picolinate soon came under fire. In the higher dosages available, increased oxidative stress with ROS production was found with potential DNA breaks in animal and test tube studies. While animal reactions are not always similar to humans, it at least conjures up the precautionary principle as a wise choice. This research article mentions a number of conditions and studies. ref  

This may be why chromium yeast or polynicotinate, slightly safer forms are recommended. But, smaller dosages have to be respected. 100 mcg. or less, not 200 mcg. or more. Here is what the new criteria recommends: "Chromium (from Yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae) or (as chromium polynicotinate, Chromemate®) or (Arginate) 50-100 mcg."

Thus, research looked into this subject. ref The findings are that at moderate dosages, no significant DNA damage was found, but little change also in sugar or lipids (fat) levels either. This represents the reasons why lower doses are preferred in the new vitamin criteria. 200 mcg is too much and not worth any possible adverse events if unique conditons prevail. Here is another study looking at animals on a high fat diet and different forms of chromium. The high fat diet increases oxidation, and the addition of chromium further increased this action for awhile. ref Some chromium compounds are less reactive than others.

Selenium is another nutrient in this same boat. Under 50 mcg. When soil is high in selenium, plants grown provide enough and supplementation is not desired. Low dose supplements are only needed when blood levels are low. The SELECT study did not find any reductin in prostate cancer rate but did find an increased diabetes risk in the selenium group. ref

Phosphate or Phosphorous also deserves to be mentioned here. Regarding the influence of sugar and other factors on dental and mouth health, especially gingivitis. A study looked into the diets of children and level of inflammatory response in mouths. Sugars and Phosphate levels were analyzed. Interestingly, both nutrients exhibited elevated inflammation markers, with phosphate actually getting the lion's share. ref 

The diets of children include many phosphate food sources, like white flour bread and cereals, most meats, peanut butter, beans, as well as cola sodas, all high in phosphates. Add in simple sugars, and it is evident to see why gingivitis and dental cavities are so wide spread.

FYI: Phosphorus is an interesting mineral. Some is needed to work with calcium to build bones. But, the most important work for phosphorus is to surround and protect nerves, the myelin sheath. Lots of phosphorus in the brain of course. But a balanced ratio is needed to not upset mineral functions. Organic Phosphorus forms in foods are often found with natural buffers like fibers. This reduces absorption to help the body control ratios between calcium, phosphorus, and magnesium.

But, like so many other nutrients, professionals have found advantages to adding phosphate additives in certain foods. In meats as a perservative, in bakery products to make creamy consistency, and in fast foods as a flavor enhancer salt. One vital difference between natural phosphorus versus inorganic phosphate additives is that the additives are absorbed at a much higher percent. This is problematic for Kidney disease patients put on phosphorus binders to limit levels.

This topic desires a separate article because it is of critical importance for nerve support, dementia, bone strength, blood pH regulation, kidney functions, as well as glucose insulin metabolism.      

If The Shoe Fits

Do not wear one pair of shoes all the time. If they have an unnatural wear or pressure point , you will eventually get a body response build up of boney material at that point to help defend against the irritation. This can result in just a few years into a very painful experience if nerves get impacted. Have 3-4 shoe options and rotate, and make one a sandal, even if only in the house if you live in colder climates. This also helps the shoes dry out between use.

Watch for changes in the shape of the feet and the buildup of calluses. These are telling a story.

Taking Medicine

When taking medicines it is prudent to know what possible side effects to watch for and if there are any interactions with foods, supplements, or other drugs. To find this information in an easy to read and understand format, go to www.drugs.com.  Type in name of drug you are on in the search box or just click on first letter of drug to bring up list of drugs and follow directions. This also works for vitamins and herbs, although somewhat limited in scope for these topics.

Vitamin Pops

There is a new form of vitamin supplement popping up on vitamin shelves. They are in a form that one starts to chew then they just POP to break apart. PLEASE do not use these vitamin forms. Vitamin C as a chewable should not be used in the acid form by anyone with adult teeth. The acid will etch away tooth enamel. PLus, the amount of sugar is another unwelcome guest, even though only in small amount. Some gummies stick to and between teeth adding to exposure time. Children and adults should be sure to brush teeth after taking gummy and liquid vitamins. But wait an hour to let dental enamal harded back up. article  Drinking through a straw helps somewhat as time on teeth is reduced. And, oxidation of vitamins hasn't even been addressed either. ref

Again, this process is being promoted for increased absorption, but misses the mark since most vitamins are absorbed in the small intestines and the air in the mouth will start to oxidize oxygen sensitive vitamins.