took me into a "health food store" for the first time. I was looking at a calcium supplement for my mother who would have been pushing 70 at the time. I bumped into a woman in that area and asked her why she (possibly 25 years of age) would be looking at a calcium supplement as such a young age. Her response?? Oh, this is for my daughter... dayam I said, YOUR DAUGHTER?? She responded with "Yes, her doctor (possibly one trained in the ways of Bastyr University though this is only a guess) had managed to get her grades from D's to A's and B's.
I am assuming there was a diagnosis of ADHD at this point but I didn't pry. From there one and with my father being chemoed and radiated to death (Not the physicians' fault) I decided that I had better learn and learn fast. So I did. I have read many many books on this topic of preventive nutrition and I am so glad that I did, I feel empowered to make intelligent decisions regarding my "healthspan".
Anyway, the point I have been trying to get across, the thing I have most fervently tried to transfer on this board is that after 15 years of knowing this stuff, for example the crazy application of lutein, zeanthinin, DHA, Pycnogenol and others at doses that cannot be achieved through the diet since no one can eat the quantities of foods that contain these miraculous molecules that would be required to provide many many GRAMS of them per day.... hence, dietary supplements exist that can do the trick. This is not to say that there aren't risks associated with wanton hogging of all sorts of products that "claim" to do XYZ. In all things there are risks.
Your kidneys and liver can only do so much, and they need to be respected.. however, I am not reading (as of yet) anything regarding kidney damage or stress with the eye institute's protocols.
Recently there was a paper denoting the effects of N-Acetylglucosamine and MS. the results were more than good. Glucosamine itself is used for arthritis and or IBD.... however there are precautions that must be observed.... such as:
Precautions:
http://www.umm.edu/altmed/articles/glucosamine-000306.htm>>Because of the potential for side effects and interactions with medications, dietary supplements should be taken only under the supervision of a knowledgeable health care provider.
Studies suggest that glucosamine is safe, and causes only minor side effects, such as stomach upset, heartburn, indigestion, gas, bloating, nauseau, and diarrhea. If these occur, try taking glucosamine with food. People with peptic ulcers should take glucosamine sulfate with food.
Glucosamine sulfate may contain high amounts of sodium or potassium. People on a restricted diet or who take potassium sparing diuretics should carefully check the label before taking glucosamine supplements.
People with diabetes should have their blood sugar checked regularly. Glucosamine may cause insulin to work less effectively.<<
The nutritional interventions in degenerative eye diseases however have me very very excited. It seems to me that NO ONE would want to dicker on this one. No one would want to make hay over whether or not there is something there for them when faced with the facts that there are few if any interventions for these concerns.
The reason for there not being any pharmaceutical interventions (that work well) is because it is a disease of deficiency... perhaps due to malabsorption... perhaps due to a McDonald's world, perhaps due to genetics that involve pathways that involve trafficking of lutein to the eye on a molecule of cholesterol... perhaps due to cholesterol being "too low". I don't have these answers however I do know for a fact that the results that these eye institutes are achieving are based on truth and the sooner maintstream medicine acknowledges it the better for all of us.
That's the plan, to get this sort of intervention into the mainstream so that your motherinlaw, brother, cousin or daughter might retain or even regain better vision. There is no price you can put on this.... oh wait, there is.
The price of the pharmcos not being able to patent lutein and associated eye protective natural molecules and the associated refusal of the health insurance companies to cover their use. This cost weighs heavily on all of us and legislation needs to be passed to correct this injustice. If it works, cover it, if it has been proven to improve vision stop trying to pass it off as snake oil. If it needs to be used in therapeutic doses, prescribe it. If you cannot prove that it doesn't work, oh wait, you cannot.
First they ridicule you, then they fight you, then they chime in, then you win.