Kaila and I have been working on a series of patient education and self care workshops and had our first practice run on the same topic to a small invite only crew a few weeks ago. One of the attendees sent me this link with the comment that it covered some of the same materials, in much less details and “ without some real entertaining hands one demo” ( hhmmm… still trying to read into that one). At any rate, stay tuned for the next workshop in early November
New Research on the Red Meat Controversy
I have a backlog of blog topics but ended up moving this one to the top of the list after the Annals of Internal Medicine published their research two weeks ago.
Few topics of nutritional “research” have been as much of a sacred cow (no pun intended), as the idea that red meat is bad for you and needs to be consumed in extremely limited amounts (the other one being saturated fats, which is somewhere in the middle of the blog topic list). This has been a mantra for 30 years or more and has rarely been questioned by mainstream research.
The paper published by the Annals has caused an uproar - on both sides - with one camp saying it is high time to stop demonizing red meats, while the other infuriated by what they see as a dangerous regression of established dietary recommendations with possible adverse consequences for public health.
As the storm settles, it is noteworthy that critiques of the study have very little to say about the methodology and the data of the study itself, the nuts and bolts of the quality of the data, and statistical methods of interpretation. It sifts out a lot of previous studies that include population studies and self reported food intakes, which have tremendous problems with validity and re-producability, looking instead at more controlled ways of correlating actual food intakes with measurable total mortality outcomes.
So where do we stand?
Well, we all have to carefully make up our own minds and understand the benefits and limitations of research, as an evolving science. However, this study was a good wake up call that we should never be so rigid in our dietary practices so as not to revisit some ideas that we have held true for a long time, because new data may show them to be incorrect. I have been asked my opinion about this so many times in the last two weeks that I will reluctantly give you my humble opinion:
Humans are well adapted to eating animal products such as meats and derive high density nutrients from it. We have eaten meat and survived, or thrived with it a lot longer than we have with other newer foods (grains for example).
Red meats have been part of our diet for a very long time, in the form of wild harvested large ruminants and later domesticated versions of those animals. I would not necessarily say the same of processed meats, which are a more recent addition to our diet.
Eating red meats can look very different for different people. Some people eat red meats in the context of a diet rich in plants as well, while some others eat red or processed meats in the context of a highly processed junk food diet. Health outcomes will look very different in those two examples, but large scale population studies cannot differentiate the two. Lots of research points to the fact that higher red meat intake has been mostly studied in developed countries who, as part of their prosperity, are eating red meat along with highly refined diets high in other garbage (sugar, refined seed oil, refined carbs, excess alcohol, excess calories, and low fiber). The latter being possibly the culprit for the poor health outcomes while the red meat, which is actually a whole food, takes most of the blame.
The source and quality of your red meat is also important. A pound of grass fed organic beef has a different nutrient profile than something raised in a commercial feedlot. It also has a vastly different environmental profile on topsoil health, land, water pollution, and carbon/nitrogen sequestration. I am not sold on the whole processed meat part personally. There are very different types of processed meats from the natural salami drying with no preservatives for months on end versus the lunch meat packed with nitrites and sugars.
What source of red meat you eat is important, as well as what you eat along with the meat. Humans have not only eaten red meat for a very long time, they have also eaten a whole bunch of plant based foods along with their meat for a very long time. I don’t think we should take this study as an excuse to turn into exclusive carnivores. But it may set you free to add or keep this highly nutrient dense food in your diet and shore up all the other good plant based food sources as well.
Low back stretching basics
Although this article is written more from the body building perspective, it does a good job at summarizing some of the most common lumbar stretches. As in all blanket recommendations, and especially if you are having some active lumbar symptoms, you will maximize the results of your time commitment to your exercise by having your treating provider customize the stretching routine for you. In some instances, the full lumbar extension ( superman exercise especially), may need to be modified or avoided if central lumbar stenosis is present from a posterior disc osteophyte complex. Conversely, the deep lumbar flexion stretches are not compatible with acute/active lumbar disc herniations. For the rest of people, gradually implementing those in your daily routine has a lot of benefits. Our sedentary lifestyles , especially for those people required to sit 8 hours a day, creates some unnatural patterns of shortening in the anterior body that need to be balanced out.
Are Infant Cervical Injuries Related to Their Type of Birth?
http://www.cjaonline.com.au/index.php/cja/article/view/215
This article did not catch my eye until I had a chance to listen to a science podcast review about it. The question posed by the study author, whether certain types of birth (vaginal delivery, C-section, forceps, or vacuum extraction), were more likely to result in cervical strains than others. The assumption being that the more intervention, the higher the likelihood the infant may suffer some degree of injury to the cervical spine.
The results were actually a little surprising. Except for the vacuum extraction, which seemed to be almost a guarantee to result in some degree of force injury, the other three types of “intervention” births showed no statistically significant difference in cervical spine outcome. BUT, what was really surprising is that even what we could consider a “normal vaginal” delivery could result in close to 50% of children exhibiting some abnormalities of upper cervical motion.
The moral of the story is that birth, no matter how uncomplicated it may appear to be, is still a potentially physically harsh process on the baby. From my perspective as a clinician, it means that we should still be on the same degree of lookout when evaluating infants regardless of the type of birth. Get the baby checked.
Spine, Chiropractic, and Quality of Life
https://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=234826632190981;res=IELIAC
I came across this article courtesy of a colleague down under. While there is a lot of modern/current published research on chiropractic applications to more straightforward neuromusculoskeletal conditions, the first chiropractors were much more interested in chiropractic impact on the the general health and well being of their patients by affecting the spine-central nervous system connection.
In that regard, this piece of research would be more in line with “early chiropractic”. The SF36 is a broadly recognized tool to assess a person’s overall well being rather than condition specific wellness. The first aspect of the research is that spinal and neuromusculoskeletal conditions are associated with a higher reported state of decreased well being that one might expect. The second aspect is that chiropractic intervention seems to improve the SF36 and thus the state of well being independently of the concurrent decrease in pain, which seems to indicate that chiropractic care affects well being not just by decreasing pain, as has been previously reported, but also by simply normalizing input to parts of the brain involved in mood regulations. This is very much what I have observed in over 2 decades of clinical practice, when proactive patients will often return for care with a sense that “something is off”, a sensation of not feeling well that they have recognized to precede the arrival of pain symptoms by a few weeks.
Reviving the debate on the safety of water fluoridation
In the world of pediatric public health, there are some ongoing controversies about some universally recommended preventive measures. One of those measures is public water fluoridization. It is considered a staple of public health dental prevention. Proponents argue for its safety, while detractors have long raised the alarm of fluoride as an extremely powerful halogen free radical, that has the potential of adversely impacting neurological development. Few studies have definitely put the debate to rest, but some fresh research may be starting the tip the balance in one direction.
The most recent Canadian study with a cohort of 500 women, is finding a pattern of child IQ drop proportionate to the level of maternal exposure, which should frankly have us concerned, even with the limits of the type of studies conducted ( epidimiological study, which draws conclusion from correlating population data with certain variables, in this case maternal intake and urine concentration of fluoride). All the more since a 2017 Mexican study indicated very similar results.
Everyone needs to make informed decisions about their health and that of their family based on the most current information, which is often complex and sometime contradictory. I hope this piece of research will help you in that direction
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2748634
What’s the difference between ImPACT and SCAT Concussion Testing?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNoadxx37_E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qf8clRBtCNc
Most commonly known is an ImPACT (Immediate Post-Concussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing) test is utilized prior to sport participation to gather a baseline score for comparison if a concussion is suspected. The ImPACT test is a computer-based test made up of numerous memory and reaction techniques such as number, words, shapes and colors.
A SCAT (Sport Concussive Assessment Tool) exam is a face to face exam that practitioners conduct. This exam is made up of memory, focus, recall, balance, cranial nerve exam and others. This exam is most commonly done as a sideline or post-concussion evaluation.
A SCAT exam is a true physical exam while an ImPACT test is a detailed computerized only test. This difference creates a better symptom evaluation with a SCAT exam and a better statistical evaluation with the ImPACT exam. With a baseline of both an ImPACT and SCAT exam a better comparison can be made is a concussion concern arises throughout the season.
The two included YouTube video links shows how each are done.
Good luck to all this upcoming school year!
Chiropractic care in infants with colic and failure to thrive
I was listening to my usual Wednesday morning chiropractic research podcast of the week where this article was discussed. Case studies, in the pecking order of published research, are a weaker link of evidence of effectiveness for anything you study, however they are still very useful in formulating hypotheses to test out in larger numbers and controlled environments. The article is unfortunately published in an journal that requires a paid subscription for full viewing, as there were interesting details in the full article. In particular, the author questioned the description of “ easy birth” in any circumstances where an epidural was used, since the birthing mom full not be able to sense what it happening to the child, especially if there is any difficulty clearing the birth canal, if the baby gets stuck along the way, or if there are strong contractions while the baby is unable to progress. I have found that to be very true in my own practice experience, with non-medicated moms being able to describe in useful details what was happening to their child at different stages of pelvic descent. But the bottom line of the article remains: children with nursing difficulties, colic and subsequent failure to thrive may benefit for a chiropractic evaluation