The shake is fine for pregnant and lactating women to get added nutrition. We
don’t recommend that they try to lose weight though, as the baby needs
the calories. This is why we don’t recommend Vi-Trim or Vi-Slim, as babies don’t
need hunger control or metabolism support. Neuro is low caffeine, but it depends
on if the woman wants that or not.
Vi-Pak – Omega Vitals and Multi Vitamins are fine but for the Anti-aging and
Super Charged Antioxidant they should talk to their individual doctors (see
below). Nutra-Cookie is fine for them to consume too.
Soy:
Our soy has been specially processed to remove the isoflavones that can
impact estrogen, so it is not a problem for those who worry about fibroids, on
chemo, etc. Here is some information on soy:
Of the concerns over soy, there are a few common ones.
First, is
referring to raw soybeans, that can contain a form of phytic acid that
can block certain minerals’ absorption. However, that is based on massive
consumption quantities, and of the raw soybean and only occurs in those animals
that lack the digestive enzyme phytase. It is only an issue for people who
consume those foods to get minerals in their diet, and in massive quantities.
The issue is in developing countries, and may have a genetic basis as well
because they are lacking the digestive enzyme (which can be supplemented and
therefore alleviate the concern). It is not an issue for our products because of
how we process the ingredients.
The second common concern with soy are due to some of the components
of soy, particularly the isoflavones genistein and dadzein which can
affect and inhibit thyroid peroxidase which is necessary for the production of
T3 and T4. Thus there is some evidence that it could lead to thryoid enlargement
(Goiter) . Our soy has been processed to remove the isoflavones, so this is not
an issue.
A third common concern about soy is the effect it may have on
estrogen levels in the body. This is again due to the isoflavones,
which we have had removed. So this is a non-worry. We should note that many
menopausal women do supplement with isoflavones, as it has been shown to help
them experience fewer side effects of menopause.
Lastly, our Soy is not genetically modified (it is non-GMO).
Many people worry about genetically modified soy, and if any of the ingredients
got altered in the pollination process. We use the most natural form we can get,
that has not been genetically modified.
Why use soy? It is a
complete protein, easily digested, has no fat, low carb and more important,
adequate consumption of soy can help the body lower cholesterol as well as
c-reactive protein.
Supplements:
The U.S. Government did 2 studies (23,000 people) over a 2 year period of
time to see how well Americans are at getting nutrition and eating
healthy.
Sadly, only 10% of Americans eat a healthy diet. They
found 93% are deficient in vitamin E, 44% deficient in Vitamin A, and 1/3 in
Vitamin C..just to name a few. The reason is it is hard to get enough nutrients
from our food, especially given the American Diet today. The average American
consumes 156 pounds of sugar each year, but only 28 pounds of lettuce, and much
of our diet is high fat, sodium and processed.
The reason our Vitamins are unique is that they are chelated to make
them more absorbable (this is expensive, so most companies do not do
this).
Then we have added nutrients that others don’t include like green
tea extract, alpha lipoic acid, and glutathione and glutathione
precursors…powerful anti-aging ingredients. Our fish oil is distilled
at the molecular level to remove toxins, and we add evening primrose,
pumpkinseed and flaxseed to make a very robust 12:1 ratio of Omega 3:6.
Meaning…you get high quality nutrients. This is one reason Dr. Seidman was
awarded a patent, and has clinicals showing that the Vi-Pak helps reverse
age-related hearing loss by 7-12 decibels. I like to say if it can do that for
my hearing..wow..think of what else it can help with. We have many of Dr.
Seidman’s studies on our website:
For the Vi-Pak, the omegas and multi are great for pregnant or
lactating women. Some doctors do not want women taking the antioxidant
if pregnant so it varies by doctor. The anti-aging tablet we also recommend they
talk to their doctor about first as every pregnancy is different.
Dr. Seidman on Supplementing:
The pros and cons of supplementing with vitamins, minerals and similar
substances are no less confusing. In spite of thousands of studies examining the
effects of various supplements, experts still disagree. As a practicing
physician and scientist, I believe I have a responsibility to present what I
feel is a strong case for supplementation.
It is clear that proper nutrition is essential for optimum health. We need to
eat from the basic food groups, and consume significant amounts of fruits and
vegetables as part of a sensible diet. Unfortunately, the Standard American
Diet, with its emphasis on processed and prepared foods and large amounts of
fat, salt and refined ingredients, does not come close to meeting these
standards. The majority of Americans are clearly not going to obtain adequate
nutrition from this diet.
To complicate matters, more than 60 percent of Americans are now considered
overweight or obese, and roughly the same proportion of the population is
sedentary. Stress, another major health factor, takes a toll on nutritional
status, as does aging. Additionally, while working for the CDC (reviewing
grants), there was compelling data to support that 1/3 of the WORLD population
has a micronutrient deficiency.
While genetics certainly play a role in health, we do not have the option of
changing our genes, at present. Meanwhile, many of the health issues we face are
social and lifestyle choices. The end result can be seen in these statistics:
Cancer – the second most common cause of death in the United States – claims
more than 550,000 lives each year. Yet two-thirds of these cancer deaths are
considered preventable through lifestyle changes – quitting smoking and all
tobacco use, consuming 5 to 10 servings of fruits and vegetables daily, reducing
intake of meat, fatty foods and dairy products, exercising moderately and
supplementing appropriately.
Here again, we have controversy over how to define “supplementing
appropriately.” I think it’s important to remember that the Recommended Dietary
Allowances (RDA) – now known as the Dietary Reference Intakes (DRI) – were
established in 1941 to meet the needs of most healthy people. While these
recommendations are updated every ten years, they are neither minimal
requirements nor optimal levels. In fact, they are simply educated guesses.
Meanwhile, there is compelling science to suggest that many of the nutrients
found in routine supplements could be taken at much higher doses with an
excellent safety profile and significant health benefits.
Is it possible to get sufficient quantities of nutrients from a healthy diet?
To answer that question, let’s use vitamin E as an example. Oregon State
University’s Moret Traber dispels this notion when she states: “To obtain enough
vitamin E from food to attain a reduction in the risk of cardiovascular disease,
you’d need to consume 9 tablespoons of olive oil, 75 slices of whole wheat
bread, 40 almonds or 200 peanuts each and every day.”
Since it appears to be difficult – at best — to get a beneficial amount of
vitamin E from food, what should the supplement dosage be? There have been
numerous studies to show that an increased intake of antioxidants, such as
vitamin E, reduces heart disease and the risk of stroke, Alzheimer’s and cancer.
Vitamin E has also been shown to increase immune function and reduce
exercise-related free radical damage. When it comes to precise dosage, however,
there is no one-size-fits-all answer. The DRI recommends 30 IU, a figure
considered too low by many health experts. Indeed, some clinical trials suggest
800 to 1,200 IU may be required to affect cardiovascular health, particularly in
patients who already have the disease.
Then how do we explain conflicting findings? For example, a meta-analysis by
researchers at Johns Hopkins, which reviewed 19 previously published articles
involving 135,967 patients, suggests that consuming more than 400 IU of vitamin
E per day may increase the risk of dying by 6 percent (Miller et al Jan 4, 2005
Ann of IM vol 142 No1). While the media pounced on the ‘bad news’ aspect of the
story, the truth is the research had shortcomings. First, it consisted largely
of older individuals who were already suffering chronic illness of one sort or
another, including heart disease, hypertension, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, kidney
disease requiring dialysis, as well as a group of smokers. It’s difficult to
imagine that vitamin E alone could improve the health of these individuals.
Second, the supplements used were synthetic, and there are studies to show that
the natural forms are possibly more effective. Third, from a statistician’s
viewpoint, mixing such a wide assortment of studies together can produce
meaningless results. Finally, they eliminated 12 trials that had fewer than 10
deaths! This introduces a very serious selection bias against the benefit of
vitamin E. Essentially they randomly eliminated 12 studies where the death rate
was very low, you may call this science, but this is how science gets a bad
name. Basically, manipulating the data to support their bias. As an aside, for
our protection and safety, Visalus Sciences uses only mixed tocopherols, so it
is an all-natural group of tocopherols, not just the d-alpha tocopherol, but the
gammas, deltas, tocotrienols etc. There has been some science to suggest that it
is much better to use mixed tocopherols and tocotrienols, which is precisely
what we do at Visalus Sciences.
Note, too, that the Johns Hopkins researchers themselves pointed out that
most of the patients in these trials had chronic illness and were over the age
of 60. As a result, the authors observed that the study’s findings may not
necessarily apply to younger, healthy individuals.
In fact, in some ways, this study’s conclusion is similar to earlier research
that encouraged people to abandon butter in favor of margarine. Needless to say,
that opinion was reversed when it was determined that the trans fats in
margarine were far more toxic to us than butter.
Of course, not all studies are inconclusive. For example, the excellent work
by Rimm et al, in 1998, looked at more than 80,000 women who supplemented with
folate and vitamin B6. Researchers found a significant reduction in the risk of
heart disease. They also found that combining these supplements with one drink
per day reduced the risk even more. Further, they determined that low intake of
folate and B6 led to high levels of homocysteine, which increased heart disease.
This specific study was responsible for changing the RDAs of folic acid from 50
micrograms per day to the current 400 micrograms per day. We are now finding
that despite appropriate diets 1/3 of the planet has a micronutrient deficiency,
the most common now are Vitamin D, the B vitamins and others.
Studies like (the Rimm Study) cost millions of dollars and take many years to
complete,and are to be encouraged. But in the meantime, there is compelling
evidence in smaller clinical trials that is relevant, reasonable and should
cause us to change the way we think about diet and nutritional supplementation.
For example, my colleagues and I have conducted studies with a number of
antioxidants, including phosphatidylcholine (PPC), resveratrol,
acetyl-L-carnitine (ALCAR), and alpha-lipoic acid (ALA), among others. Our
findings: these supplements provided protection against free-radical damage
throughout the body. In other words, supplements minimized – and sometimes even
reversed – cellular assaults linked to deterioration of health and the aging
process.
A final thought: Over the last 12 years, the average annualized mortality
rates secondary to vitamins have been attributed to be one death per year, and
herbs at three deaths per year. On the other hand, 400,000 deaths per year are
attributed to smoking, and another 300,000 to poor diet. It should also be noted
that pharmaceutical errors cause approximately 100,000 deaths per year. The
bottom line is that there is an extremely remote likelihood that one would be
hurt by taking nutritional supplements, and there is certainly compelling
scientific data to support their use.
The 90 day challenge could be the main reason Visalus Sciences is expanding so quickly. The Body by Vi 90 Day Challenge is a challenge that motivates people to produce a transformation within 3 months. You will find three individual programs that you could select from depending on your objectives and quickly you intend to achieve your desired goals.
