The most significant advance in health science in your lifetime.

News Release

Health Sciences Seminar
The most significant advance in health science in your lifetime.

Media Contact:sams@bestselfusa.com
 239/591-4565 

Monday Health Sciences Seminar

Monday, October 4th 7 PM

PLEASE RSVP 591-4565 Seating limited!

10202 Vanderbilt Dr (NE Corner at 102nd Ave) Naples, Fl 34108

This is an educational meeting,
not a sales meeting.

Open to the public. MENSA membership not required

The science behind this breakthrough:

Unlocking the secrets of biological aging is perhaps the ultimate scientific quest—and significant progress has occurred in the last decade in the understanding of the aging process. Scientists and the general public have become aware of the compelling research on a compound found in red wine called resveratrol, and its ability to extend lifespan in many different laboratory studies.

• Help protect and repair cellularDNA

• Positively impact genetic regulators

• Promote mitochondrial biogenesis

• Slow AGE protein formation

___________________________________

ALSO: Learn about Nutrition’s 20 year Landmark Study!

Recently the University of California at Berkley did a long term (20 year) study of the effectiveness of supplements. The scientists who conducted this research are leaders in their field.
The study was published in a peer reviewed scientific journal:

Gladys Block, Christopher D Jensen, Edward P Norkus, Tapashi B Dalvi, Les G Wong, Jamie F McManus and Mark L Hudes.
Nutrition Journal , 6:30doi:10.1186/1475-2891-6-30


Want to live longer and feel better?

Learn about Nutrition’s 20 year Landmark Study

We will reveal and discuss this research and shed some light on such questions as:
* What supplements can I use that have the highest safety & effectiveness?
* Is there a significant difference between the health of high quality supplement users & non users?
* Are there certain kinds of vitamins that can actually damage my health?
* How can I get started on a simple, easy-to-manage, scientifically validated supplement regimen?
Already Feeling Good? Here’s how to stay that way!
Bring your friends to our Health Sciences Seminar!

Our meeting will get down to the scientific truth about the effectiveness of nutritional supplementation.



New Study Shows Post-Exercise Protein Increases Muscle Mass and Strength

New Study Shows Post-Exercise Protein Increases Muscle Mass and Strength
A new research study showing the benefits of ingesting protein after a workout for increasing muscle mass and strength was published in the May 2008 issue of Fitness Management, (www.fitnessmanagement.com) a publication for the fitness industry.

Study authors Wayne L. Westcott, PhD, William F Martin, PhD, Rita La Rosa Loud, and Susan Stoddard conducted the research at the South Shore YMCA in Quincy, MA. The following is a study summary and the published manuscript will be available shortly on the Shaklee MD Resources website.

Background of the Study

In the last decade, significant research has been published relative to protein supplementation, recovery from exercise, and muscle development. Clinical research demonstrated that a protein-carbohydrate complex consumed immediately after exercise enhanced recovery from exercise when compared to consuming carbohydrate alone. More recent work has shown significantly greater gains in muscle mass and strength when protein is ingested immediately following resistance exercise.

After age 35, adults may lose 3-8 percent of their muscle mass per decade. Evidence suggests that an average muscle loss of 5 pounds per decade is associated with a 3-percent per decade reduction in resting metabolism which can predispose individuals to a dramatic increase in body fat. So it makes sense that strength training programs might be an important factor in weight management. In fact, Dr. Westcott’s previous research has demonstrated the ability of previously sedentary adults to gain muscle and elevate resting metabolic rate which could result in the ability to expend an additional 100 calories per day in a 175 lb individual!
Study Design

This study was undertaken to examine the effects of a 23-week moderate strength training program, with and without the supplemental protein, on body composition in a group of 68 adults. Average age was 59 years and exercise frequency was 2 to 3 days per week. The exercise protocol was adapted from the American College of Sports Medicine guidelines and included standard use of 11 weight training machines with appropriate increases in exercise resistance and post-exercise stretches. Subjects also performed 20 minutes of endurance exercise.
All participants performed the same exercise program in the research facility under close supervision. Forty-six subjects completed the 23-week program; Twenty-four participants consumed the protein drink (Cinch™ Shake, Shaklee Corp., Pleasanton, CA) following their training session and 22 did not consume the drink, nor did they receive a placebo control. The drink was prepared by mixing 1.5 servings in water and provided approximately 270 calories, 4.5g fat, 35g carbohydrate, and 24g protein. No reasons were reported for the 22 subjects that dropped out of the study.
Study Results

After 23 weeks of moderate training, all 46 subjects showed significant improvements in body composition, including a 4.7 pound gain in lean muscle weight and 7.0 pound loss in fat weight Subjects ingesting the post-exercise Shake increased lean weight by 5.5 pounds and decreased fat weight by 9.0 pounds; a 14.5-pound improvement in body composition. Those not receiving the supplemental Shake increased lean weight by 3.9 pounds and decreased fat weight by 4.9 pounds; an 8.8-pound improvement in body composition. As shown in Figure 1, participants consuming the post-exercise protein shake added 1.6 pounds more lean weight and lost 4.1 pounds more fat weight than the no-supplement subjects.

Discussion

This study confirms the impact of a fitness program for improving body composition and anthropometric measurements. Therefore, it appears that previously sedentary adults can attain significant and consistent muscle gains and fat losses over the first 6 months of a standard exercise program.


Another finding was the greater body composition improvement seen in the participants who consumed the protein drink immediately after their workout. Subjects who consumed the post-exercise shake gained about 25 percent more lean weight and lost 50 percent more body fat. This observation reconfirms the finding that supplying the body with extra protein and carbohydrate following a combined strength/endurance exercise session promotes addition of lean tissue and loss of body fat. At present, it’s thought that protein ingestion post-exercise increases the rate of muscle proteins synthesis, which increases the amount of muscle over time.
Practical Application

This study confirms that a standard exercise program is effective for increasing lean mass and decreasing fat mass. But it’s even more interesting that consuming a post-exercise protein drink promoted favorable body composition changes (increased lean weight and decreased fat weight) associated with the standard strength/endurance exercise program.
Make strength and endurance exercise part of your regular routine, and enjoy a protein-carbohydrate shake immediately after exercise for faster recovery, to help build and maintain muscle mass, and to decrease fat mass.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Re: Shaklee Physique and the Elderly


As you know, the nutritional needs of mature individuals are unique. Digestion, muscle mass and hormonal regulation tends to decrease. Body fat and blood cholesterol levels tend to increase. Cardiovascular efficiency, blood sugar regulation and energy levels tend to decrease. This observation seems to be related to the aging process and made us ask the question "Mat factor seems to have the greatest effect on aging?"

After several years of recommending Physique to 210 elderly patients (men and women between 65 and 84) at this clinic we noticed some amazing results that we would like to share with you.

*1) 72% of people over 65 years of age who began using Physique daily had an increase in energy and * more muscle mass after 6 months.

*2) Sugar regulation in those who had been hypoglycemic or hyperglycemic returned to normal in 56% * of the cases within 3 months after starting daily use of Physique.

*3) 60% of all elderly patients following our recommended exercises had less muscle and joint ** symptoms within 3 months after daily use of Physique.

These findings can only suggest that Shaklee Physique is a very useful addition to the nutritional program of the elderly population who are physically active and taking positive steps to maintain their health. When maximizing the diet and regularly supplementing, significant benefits can be gained by the elderly using Physique.

We are very excited about these findings and hope that mature people and not just young people will take advantage of this outstanding product.

Richard Brouse, M.A., D. C, DACBN, CCN

* Ph. 503-654-3225 • 8800 SE Sunnyside Road, Suite 111 * Clackamas, Oregon 97015 USA •

Simplifying the complexities of vitamin "D" dosages

Hi Sam,




There is a lot of confusion today about how much

vitamin D we should be getting in our diet.



The official DRIs (the new term for RDAs) established

by the Food & Nutrition Board of the National Academies

of Science is around 400 IU for most adults. And the UL

(upper limit for safe use) for almost everyone has been

set at 2,000 IU for years.



Almost all experts agree that those levels are too low.



Some doctors (including some that are popular on TV or

the internet) have advised that everyone should be

taking 5,000 to 10,000 IU of vitamin D/day.



However, that's probably too much. Many experts warn

that some people are likely to develop vitamin D

toxicity at that level of intake.



Yet, we are hearing that anywhere from 40% to 60% of

Americans are deficient in vitamin D.



No one wants to be deficient in vitamin D, but most

people are confused. They just don't know how much

vitamin D they should be getting in their diet.



This is where Shaklee research has really led the way.



Shaklee has done three clinical studies to determine

what vitamin D intake should be and how to get the

vitamin D that you need.



In the Landmark study (Nutrition Journal, 6:30, 2007)

they demonstrated that people consuming a variety of

Shaklee supplements for 20 years or more generally had

optimal levels of vitamin D in their blood.



They followed that with a study (submitted for

publication) comparing Shaklee supplement users and

non-Shaklee supplement users and showed that 1,000 IU

of vitamin D from Shaklee supplements was associated

with optimal blood levels of vitamin D for most people.



And they have just completed a study with non-Shaklee

users showing that supplementation with 1,000 IU of

vitamin D from Shaklee supplements was sufficient to

bring their blood levels of vitamin D from inadequate

to adequate.



So you might be tempted to think that all you need to

do is get 1,000 IU of vitamin D from Shaklee

supplements and you will be fine.



It's not quite that simple.



You will notice I said that 1,000 IU of vitamin D from

Shaklee supplements resulted in an optimal blood level

of vitamin D for MOST people.



But that doesn't mean that everyone in the study had

optimal blood levels. There were some people who took

1,000 IU of vitamin D, but still had low blood levels.



That's because there is tremendous individual variation

in our need for vitamin D.



Our dietary vitamin D requirements are influenced by a

number of factors such as the time of year, our age,

our skin color, our weight, our exposure to sunlight

and where we live.



Because of that Shaklee has lead the way again with a

simple on-line quiz http://bestself.myshaklee.com/us/en/pop_VitaminD_Quiz.s.html

that anyone can take to determine

their personal vitamin D requirements and a vitamin D3

supplement to help people customize their intake to

match those requirements.



Finally, someone has taken the confusion out of vitamin

D supplementation!



However, I do have one final note of caution. There are

some genetic differences that also influence vitamin D

requirements, so I do recommend that you have your

blood levels of vitamin D3 determined at your next

doctor's visit.


To Your Health!

Dr. Stephen G Chaney

Natural health advocates speak out about best medicine

Natural health advocates speak out about best medicine
By Dayna Harpster • dharpster@news-press.com • August 24, 2010


It’s not a term that flows trippingly off the tongue: orthomolecular pharmacology. But its meaning has had tongues wagging for years. It has fed an entrenched disagreement about the best way to prevent illness and treat disease.



On one side of the table is the traditional medical establishment, where the muscle and money is behind prescription drugs.



On the other are the herbalists and natural health practitioners, where less money and muscle are behind vitamin supplements and organic foods.



The latter’s position is clear in the documentary “Food Matters,” shown recently by Sam and Bunny Sewell, directors of Best Self USA, a holistic health company in North Naples.

For more on Sam Sewell’s story, go to http://ifiredmydoctors.blogspot.com/



Its premise is a statement by Hippocrates, considered the founding father of modern medicine: “Let thy food be thy medicine and thy medicine be thy food.”



The film contends that reliable studies show large doses of vitamin C have cured cancer, that megadoses of niacin have cured depression — in Alcoholics Anonymous founder Bill Wilson, among others — and that two handfuls of cashews are as mood-elevating as a standard dose of Prozac.



But the problem starts well before a person shows symptoms of illness. Charlotte Gerson, the daughter of Max Gerson, the German doctor who claimed an ability to cure cancer through diet, founded an institute in his name. It advocates a diet grown in nutrient-rich soil, which Gerson said is nearly nonexistent at most farms.



“Soil requires 52 minerals to grow (nutritious food),” Gerson says in the film. But many of those substances are missing. “So farmers turn to chemical compounds for solutions, like pesticides and growth stimulants.” Then we cook the food, which kills the beneficial enzymes.



The result is chronic malnutrition. And malnutrition leaves us susceptible to disease. Film experts wonder aloud why serious diseases are treated with surgery, radiation and chemotherapy, but not nutrition.



The problem is that doctors’ main source of information about drugs comes from the highly profitable pharmaceutical companies, said Fort Myers herbalist and natural health practitioner Jim Occhiogrosso. They’re the first to point out that the Food & Drug Administration does not regulate vitamin supplements, so the amounts of substances in the supplements can vary widely.



That’s true, said Occhiogrosso, and taking supplements from an unknown or unresearched source can be dangerous. But reputable health practitioners and supplement manufacturers do exist.



He uses sites such as consumerlab.com and supplementwatch.com to stay on top of any negative reports. He passes those along on his Web site, www.healthnaturallytoday.com



Sam Sewell publicizes similar findings in his blog, thenaturaladvocate.blogspot.com .

Both have noticed a growing interest in non-pharmaceutical approaches to health and healing in the past few years.



“But the generation that grew up with the M.D. as a god, oh my gosh are their minds closed,” Sewell said



Middle-age and younger people are beginning to realize the value of supplements, said Occhiogrosso. They’re generally cheaper and have fewer side effects, he said.

“People will watch TV and see an ad for a new drug that says ‘Run to your doctor and ask about it.’ And then the next says, ‘If you were harmed by it, call 1-800-BAD-DRUG.”



NOT TO SUPPLEMENT



Consumer Reports’ September issue contains a cautionary article about dietary supplements, which Americans reportedly paid $26.7 billion for in 2009. The magazine identifies a “dirty dozen” to avoid due to recent or ongoing reports of adverse effects.



• Aconite, also called aconite tuber, aconitum and radix aconite. • Bitter orange, also aurantii fructus, Citrus aurantium & zhi shi.



• Chaparral, also Larrea divaricata and larreastat.



• Colloidal silver, also ionic silver, native silver, silver in suspending agent.



• Coltsfoot, also coughwort, farfarae folium leaf and foalswort.



• Comfrey, also blackwort, common comfrey and slippery root. Has been linked to liver damage and cancer.



• Country mallow, also heartleaf, Sida cordifolia and silky white mallow.



• Germanium, also Ge, Ge-132 and germanium-132.



• Greater celandine, also celandine, chelidonii herba and Chelidonium majus.



• Kava, also awa, Piper methysticum and kava-kava.



• Lobelia, also asthma weed, Lobelia inflata, pokeweed and vomit wort.



• Yohimbe, also yohimbine, Corynanthe yohimbi and Corynanthe johimbi.







TO SUPPLEMENT



Among arguments in the documentary “Food Matters” are these reasons to take vitamins and eat raw, organic food:



• Most food we buy is at least a week old and therefore has lost considerable nutritional value, said Dr. Victor Zeines, a holistic dentist and nutritionist in New York.



• The food we eat is full of “pesticides, herbicides, fungicides and larvacides,” said David Wolfe, an expert on raw foods and superfoods.



• The body reacts to cooked food as if it is a toxin, and reacts by attacking it with white blood cells, said Wolfe.



• 26 percent of hospitalized patients are more malnourished when they go home than when they arrived, said Dr. Ian Brighthope, President of the Australasian College of Nutritional & Environmental Medicine.



• Although statistics from the government and advocacy groups might seem to show that the cancer death rate has declined over the past few decades, the difference is merely in the definition of survival. Counting survivors as those who live for five years after diagnosis does not take into account those who die from cancer more than five years later. That seems to suggest that the $200-billion-a-year cancer treatment industry isn’t doing much good, said Charlotte Gerson of the Gerson Institute.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
See Video Here:
http://bestself.myshaklee.com/us/en/whyshaklee.html#/unique