Reply To: Scripts 2014

Published by EK on

Forums Herbalist Scripts Scripts 2014 Reply To: Scripts 2014

Avatar photoEK

    The Photoprotective and antioxidative properties of luteolin are synergistically augmented by tocopherol and ubiquinone.
    Planta Med. 2013 Jul;79(11):963-5
    Authors: Wölfle U, Haarhaus B, Schempp CM
    Ultraviolet radiation induces DNA damage and oxidative stress which can result in skin inflammation, photoaging, and photocarcinogenesis. [F3]The flavonoid luteolin that is present in high amounts in the dyers weld, Reseda luteola, is one of the most potent antioxidative plant metabolites and also has ultraviolet-absorbing properties.The aim of this study was to determine whether tocopherol and ubiquinone add synergistic antioxidative values to luteolin. None of the substances showed cytotoxic effects in concentrations from 0.25 to 4 µg/mL. The photoprotective and antioxidant effect of equivalent concentrations of luteolin, tocopherol, and ubiquinone and their combination in a ratio of 4 : 4 : 1 were studied in solar simulator irradiated human skin fibroblasts. Luteolin had a half-maximal radical scavenging concentration of 2 µg/mL, whereas tocopherol and ubiquinone were only effective at higher concentrations. None of the substances showed a phototoxic effect, and only luteolin had a moderate photoprotective effect at 2 µg/mL. The combination of luteolin, tocopherol, and ubiquinone exerted a synergistic radical scavenging effect already at a concentration of 0.25 µg/mL and a complete photoprotection at 2 µg/mL.In summary, our findings suggest that the potent antioxidant and photoprotective effect of flavonoids like luteolin may be further increased by the addition of low concentrations of other antioxidants such as tocopherol and ubiquinone. –PMID: 23839819 [PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]
    Using things like hawthorn-rosemary or sage which has a good source of Luteolin by fusing this in oil and then add Cq 10 and vitamin E ( fuse in either almond oil or olive oil which has vitamin E in them naturally) and use –the ratio is 4:4:1 4 parts luteolin-4 parts vitamin E and 1 part cq 10
    100ml would be 4 ml of luteolin- 4 mil Vitamin E 1 mil of Cq 1o
    Codex Alimentarius-Regulation on food Safety-Lack there of
    The concept of “certified organic” goes deeper, though, than a display of governmental avarice. It’s a weapon in the hostile takeover of the food supply, ala Codex Alimentarius. Here are a few highlights of Codex, according to a Natural News article by Dr. Gregory D’Amato:
    * All nutrients (vitamins and minerals) are to be considered toxins/poisons and are to be removed from all food because Codex prohibits the use of nutrients to “prevent, treat or cure any condition or disease”
    * All food (including organic) is to be irradiated, removing all toxic nutrients from food (unless eaten locally and raw).
    * Nutrients allowed will be limited to a Positive List developed by Codex which will include such beneficial nutrients like Fluoride (3.8 mg daily) developed from environmental waste. All other nutrients will be prohibited nationally and internationally to all Codex-compliant countries [2].
    * All nutrients (e.g., CoQ10, Vitamins A, B, C, D, Zinc and Magnesium) that have any positive health impact on the body will be deemed illegal under Codex and are to be reduced to amounts negligible to humans’ health [3].
    * All advice on nutrition (including written online or journal articles or oral advice to a friend, family member or anyone) will be illegal.
    * All dairy cows are to be treated with Monsanto’s recombinant bovine growth hormone.
    * All animals used for food are to be treated with potent antibiotics and exogenous growth hormones.
    * The reintroduction of deadly and carcinogenic organic pesticides that in 1991, 176 countries (including the U.S.) have banned worldwide including 7 of the 12 worst at the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pesticides (e.g., Hexachlorobenzene, Toxaphene, and Aldrin) will be allowed back into food at elevated levels [4].
    * Dangerous and toxic levels (0.5 ppb) of aflotoxin in milk produced from moldy storage conditions of animal feed will be allowed. Aflotoxin is the second most potent (non-radiation) carcinogenic compound known to man.
    * Mandatory use of growth hormones and antibiotics on all food herds, fish and flocks
    * Worldwide implementation of unlabeled GMOs into crops, animals, fish and trees
    TOP A
    Show of the Month March 8 2o14
    The Power of Local Unity: Small US Town Enacts Free Food Trade
    Scientists find genetic mechanism linking aging to specific diets
    The Photoprotective and antioxidative properties of luteolin are synergistically augmented by tocopherol and ubiquinone
    Damiana – Turnera diffusa
    Noah’s Ark
    Monsanto “Goes Organic” and Wins “Sustainability Award”
    The Power of Local Unity: Small US Town Enacts Free Food Trade
    Sunday, February 2nd, 2014. Filed under: Activism
    Sedgwick, Maine, the first town in the US to legalize any kind of food transaction as free and legal in order to keep the right to produce raw milk, organic produce, free-range eggs, and more, is revolutionizing the way America keeps its food rights – including saying no to GMOs. In other words, it is the first town to declare food sovereignty while opposing both state and federal laws.
    The town has passed an ordinance that protects citizens’ rights to “produce, sell, purchase, and consume any food of their choosing.” The ordinance laughs in the face of FDA regulations and their hodge-podge way of giving food a rubber stamp of approval, especially GMO. Three additional towns in Maine are expected to pass similar ordinances as well.
    The move is somewhat similar to a move one England town made, where the citizens transformed their entire town’s landscape into a giant food-producing garden. Both are great examples of moving toward food sovereignty.
    It isn’t just a declaration on the whim of a few city council members. There is a warrant added: “It shall be unlawful for any law or regulation adopted by the state or federal government to interfere with the rights recognized by this Ordinance.” This means that federal interference is prohibited in our food supply – at least in Maine. If you can’t get Monsanto out of the government, take the government out of your food. It’s a brilliant way around the convoluted system now in place that almost gave Monsanto the right to be exempt from federal prosecution for its poison food and which tries to hoist it upon the whole Nation without consent.–David Gumpert reports-“What about potential legal liability and state or federal inspections? It’s all up to the seller and buyer to negotiate. “Patrons purchasing food for home consumption may enter into private agreements with those producers or processors of local foods to waive any liability for the consumption of that food. Producers or processors of local foods shall be exempt from licensure and inspection requirements for that food as long as those agreements are in effect.” Imagine that–buyer and seller can agree to cut out the lawyers. That’s almost un-American, isn’t it?”—A simple seller and buyer agreement is entered into where federal regulations can be bypassed by the seller agreeing to consume food grown by their neighbors organically in their garden or by the farm up the street with their own hormone-free dairy cows that customers have known for decades. It takes the feds and their dirty Monsanto money right out of the game. It is commercially grown food that is killing us all, after all – not locally grown food.–For those with their heads in a noodle about bypassing federal laws, the citizens of Maine have stated, “We the radicals who concocted this mutinous act of infamy believe that according to the Home Rule provisions of our State Constitution, the citizens of Sedgwick have the right to enact an ordinance that is “local and municipal in character.”–n Maine, citizens can take advantage of local bounty, seasonal organic crops, and the good-old-fashioned way we used to produce food without Big Ag and commercial interference. Rural America is putting the big city budget of Monsanto to shame with this innovative way of taking down the monopolizing food giant. It’s about time ‘radicals’ in every small town across this nation did the same.
    Additional Sources:
    – See more at:
    Scientists find genetic mechanism linking aging to specific diets
    Sean Curran and Shanshan Pang studied C. elegans, a one-millimeter-long worm that scientists have used as a model organism since the 1970s.Your best friend swears by the Paleo Diet. Your boss loves Atkins. Your sister is gluten-free, and your roommate is an acolyte of Michael Pollan. So who’s right? Maybe they all are.-In new research published this month in Cell Metabolism, USC scientists Sean Curran and Shanshan Pang identify a collection of genes that allow an organism to adapt to different diets and show that without them, even minor tweaks to diet can cause premature aging and death.-Finding a genetic basis for an organism’s dietary needs suggests that different individuals may be genetically predisposed to thrive on different diets — and that now, in the age of commercial gene sequencing, people might be able to identify which diet would work best for them through a simple blood test. “These studies have revealed that single gene mutations can alter the ability of an organism to utilize a specific diet. In humans, small differences in a person’s genetic makeup that change how well these genes function, could explain why certain diets work for some but not others[F4],” said Curran, corresponding author of the study and assistant professor with joint appointments in the USC Davis School of Gerontology, the USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences, and the Keck School of Medicine of USC.-Curran and Pang studied Caenorhabditis elegans, a one-milimeter-long worm that scientists have used as a model organism since the ’70s. Decades of tests have shown that genes in C. elegans are likely to be mirrored in humans while its short lifespan allows scientists to do aging studies on it.-In this study, Curran and Pang identified a gene called alh-6, which delayed the effects of aging depending on what type of diet the worm was fed by protecting it against diet-induced mitochondrial defects. [F5]”This gene is remarkably well-conserved from single celled yeast all the way up to mammals, which suggests that what we have learned in the worm could translate to a better understanding of the factors that alter diet success in humans,” Curran said. Future work will focus on identifying what contributes to dietary success or failure, and whether these factors explain why specific diets don’t work for everyone. This could be the start of personalized dieting based on an individual’s genetic makeup, according to Curran. “We hope to uncover ways to enhance the use of any dietary program and perhaps even figure out ways of overriding the system(s) that prevent the use of one diet in certain individuals,” he said.–Story Source–The above story is based on materials provided by University of Southern California. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. -Journal Reference-Shanshan Pang, Sean P. Curran. Adaptive Capacity to Bacterial Diet Modulates Aging in C. elegans. Cell Metabolism, 2014; DOI: 10.1016/j.cmet.2013.12.005
    Damiana – Turnera diffusa.
    J Ethnopharmacol. 2014 Jan 24;
    Authors: Szewczyk K, Zidorn C
    ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE: Half a dozen of the currently accepted 135 Turnera species are used in traditional medicine, most notably Turnera diffusa Willd. ex Schult. which is one of the most highly appreciated plant aphrodisiacs. Other traditional uses of Turnera L. species include the treatment of anaemia, bronchitis, cough, diabetes, fever, fungal disease, gastrointestinal complaints, pain, pulmonary and respiratory diseases, skin disorders, and women’s health problems. Additionally, Turnera species are used as abortives, expectorants, and laxatives.
    PHYTOCHEMISTRY: Flavonoids (22 different compounds), maltol glucoside, phenolics, cyanogenic glycosides (7 different compounds), monoterpenoids, sesquiterpenoids, triterpenoids, the polyterpene ficaprenol-11, fatty acids, and caffeine have been found in the genus Turnera.
    BIOACTIVITY: Bioactivities experimentally proven for members of the genus Turnera encompass antianxiety, antiaromatase, antibacterial including antimycobacterial, antidiabetic, antioxidant, adapatogenic, antiobesity, antispasmodic, cytotoxic, gastroprotective, hepatoprotective, and aphrodisiac activities. Most of these activities have so far been investigated only in chemical, cell based, or animal assays. In contrast, the antiobesity activity was also investigated in a study on healthy human subjects and with a herbal preparation containing among other ingredients T. diffusa leaves. Moreover, the enhancement of female sexual function was assessed in humans; again the product contained besides T. diffusa other potentially bioactive ingredients. However, with only few exceptions, most of the traditional uses and the experimentally verified bioactivities can currently not be related to a particular compound or compound class. A notable exception is the flavonoid apigenin, which was identified animal experiments as the antinociceptive (An antinociceptive factor reduced the sensitivity to a painful stimuli for the individual.”) principle of T. diffusa. CONCLUSION: In this review, the current knowledge on ethnobotanical uses of members of the genus Turnera, the secondary metabolites reported from Turnera, and experimentally documented bioactivities from Turnera extracts and pure compounds derived from Turnera extracts are compiled. Moreover, some of the most interesting avenues for future research projects are being discussed briefly. These include in particular the aphrodisiac activity of T. diffusa and the antibiotic activity potentiating effect of T. ulmifolia L. against aminoglycoside resistant bacteria.–PMID: 24468305 [PubMed – as supplied by publisher]
    Noah’s Ark
    Everything I need to know, I learned from Noah’s Ark .
    ONE: Don’t miss the boat.
    TWO: Remember that we are all in the same boat!
    THREE: Plan ahead. It wasn’t raining when Noah built the Ark.
    FOUR: Stay fit. When you’re 60 years old, someone may ask you to do something really big.
    FIVE: Don’t listen to critics; just get on with the job that needs to be done.
    SIX: Build your future on high ground.
    SEVEN: For safety’s sake, travel in pairs.
    EIGHT: Speed isn’t always an advantage. The snails were on board with the cheetahs.
    NINE: When you’re stressed, float awhile.
    TEN: Remember, the Ark was built by amateurs; the Titanic by professionals.
    ELEVEN: No matter the storm, when you are with God, there’s always a rainbow waiting.
    Monsanto “Goes Organic” and Wins “Sustainability Award”
    Posted By ANH-USA On February 18, 2014 @ 3:00 pm In Real, Not Phony Food Safety, Say No to GMO |
    This isn’t a spoof. In addition to this story, we’ll provide you with a round-up of GMO-related news, including why your neighbor may shortly be planting GMO grass right next to you. Action Alerts! –We won’t spend time in this article reiterating past research on why genetically modified organisms [1] (GMOs) are dangerous—you probably already know that they can randomly produce toxic effects [2]; introduce alarming levels of chemicals [3] into our ecosystems and diet; and have been shown to cause [4] serious health problems—but there have been some recent developments in GMO politics, science, and regulation that we want to share with you.
    Here are the news items we’ll cover:
    Monsanto Wins Award for…“Sustainability”? [5]
    GMOs Aren’t Enough—Monsanto Wants to Monopolize Conventional and Organic Crops, Too. Action Alert! [6]
    Is Someone Growing Unregulated GMO Grass Right Next to You? Action Alert! [7]
    All Eyes on New Global Precedent for GMO Contamination [8]
    Industrial Herbicides Are Even More Toxic Than We Thought [9]
    Is Industry Persuading Scientists to Quash Chilling Scientific Findings? [10]
    Monsanto Wins Award for…“Sustainability”?
    When most of us think of sustainability, we think of environmental practices that will allow current and future generations to enjoy nutritious, locally farmed foods, clean water, pure air, and a non-toxic, natural world. As the concept has developed, it’s also become applicable to other realms, including economics and healthcare. For example, ANH-USA advocates for [11] sustainable healthcare—practices that allow you to naturally maintain your health and extend your lifespan.
    To the EPA, [12] sustainability “creates and maintains the conditions under which humans and nature can exist in productive harmony,[F7] that permit fulfilling the social, economic and other requirements of present and future generations.”–Taking these definitions into account, it may surprise you to learn that last month, Monsanto—yes, the same Monsanto whose expensive seeds caused an estimated 125,000 Indian farmers [13] to commit suicide—was recognized [14] as one of 2014’s Global 100 Most Sustainable Corporations in the World.[F8]–Monsanto was ranked 37th on overall sustainability, 5th among American companies, and 5th globally in the materials industry by an organization called Corporate Knights [15] (CK), a media and investment advisory company whose flagship magazine has one of the world’s largest circulations and is published quarterly as inserts in the Washington Post and the Globe and Mail (UK).
    Ubiquitous as CK is, we find their criteria for “sustainability” [16]—also called their “key performance indicators”—more than a little absurd:
    Energy productivity
    Carbon productivity
    Water productivity
    Waste productivity
    Innovation capacity
    Percent tax paid
    CEO to Average Employee Pay
    Pension fund status
    Safety performance
    Employee turnover
    Leadership diversity
    “Clean capitalism” pay link (rewards “companies that have set up mechanisms to link the remuneration of senior executives with the achievement of clean capitalism goals or targets”)
    As one University of Toronto business ethics professor noted, [17] “Only the first four actually have something to do with what most of us mean by ‘sustainability.’ The rest are…not relevant to the question of sustainable use of resources, or to the notion of sustainable economic growth that is compatible with environmental conservation.”–And even the first four have nothing to do with the environment, and everything to do with profits. After all, the award-givers define “energy productivity” as how much revenue companies can squeeze out of one unit of energy. The health of the environment literally has nothing to do with it.–For the countless natural health practitioners, organic farmers, consumers, and activists who unceasingly fight and sacrifice to “walk the walk” of sustainability, the bastardization of this important term is not a joke. It is offensive.–Perhaps “excellence in sustainability” is CK’s code for “excellence in propaganda.” As we’ve consistently reported, there is nothing sustainable about Monsanto and their GMO seeds. For example, GMOs do not increase crop yields [18]. A 2009 Union of Concerned Scientists report [19] found that GMO soybeans do not produce increased yields, that GMO corn only marginally increases yields, and that no GMO crop has even been found to have intrinsic yield (meaning, yield in “real life,” and not laboratory, conditions).—We’re not quite sure who CK thinks they’re fooling, or what they get out of this nonsense. A more interesting question is why Monsanto is trying so hard to “greenwash” its image. –Meanwhile the Geneva-based Covalence group placed Monsanto dead last on a list of 581 global companies ranked by their reputation for ethics. For more on this, see chapter 11 of Crony Capitalism in America 2008–12 [20], a book recently published by ANH-USA’s board president, Hunter Lewis.
    GMOs Aren’t Enough—Monsanto Wants to Monopolize Conventional and Organic Crops, Too. Action Alert!
    Since it purchased the company in 2008 [21], Monsanto has been quietly cultivating its Seminis brand, as well as several other semi-anonymous brands, to breed and sell seeds that aren’t GMO. –To create these seeds, Monsanto and its minions are claiming to use nothing more than traditional crossbreeding [22] (where plants with desirable qualities are laboriously “mated” until they yield progeny with the targeted traits). This process takes quite a bit of “time, land, and patience [23].”–Don’t be fooled: Monsanto isn’t using your grandparents’ crossbreeding. They’re engaging in a highly technical process that appears to takes place in a lab, not a field, and also appears to involve manipulation on the genetic level [24].Worse yet, they don’t seem to want to make foods healthier. For example, Monsanto is attempting to breed fruits and vegetables that taste sweeter than their traditional counterparts [25]. Read: they’re engineering a way to add more sugar than nature intended. The last thing that most people need is more sugar or fructose in their diet.–Is this a blatant attempt to win back the “hearts and minds” of consumers? According to one Monsanto official, “There isn’t a reputation silver bullet, but it helps.”–There is another important question to ask here: If Monsanto truly believes that GMOs are the future, why are they investing in conventional crops?–There’s no way to know for sure, but it’s possible that Monsanto doesn’t have faith in its own product: the company is already facing consumer pressure and emerging long-term health problems associated with GMOs.–For this reason, they could simply be hedging their bets. What if, in the future, the scientific consensus is that GMOs are harmful, or there’s a GMO-sparked environmental disaster, or the government decides to intervene? They may think they have to prepare for the possibility that GMOs may eventually fail. Seminis and its sister subsidies are Monsanto’s “insurance:” if GMOs crash and burn, they have a conventional cash cow to fall back on.[F9]
    Is Someone Growing Unregulated GMO Grass Right Next to You? Action Alert!
    In July 2011 [27], the USDA—often characterized as a power-hungry agency [28]—gave GMOs a regulatory hall pass. The agency determined that, thanks to a tiny technical loophole [29], they had no oversight over GMO Kentucky bluegrass [30]. This meant that the grass—and any GMOs created via the same GMO technique [31]—could be planted anywhere, at anytime, with zero government oversight.–The public backlash was immediate, though we knew at the time that the true extent of this disastrous decision wouldn’t be felt for years to come. Unfortunately, we were right.–Late last month, Scott’s Miracle-Gro quietly announced [32] that their employees will “test” the Roundup-resistant GMO grass by planting it in their home lawns in Marysville, Ohio. Scott’s hopes to have thousands more consumers planting their GMO grass by 2016—and thanks to the USDA, there’s no framework in place to keep this from happening.
    Alarmingly, if your neighbor plants GMO grass, your lawn may become full GMOs, too. Cross-contamination of non-GMO crops is already a reality. Pollen can travel anywhere from the length of three football fields to thousands of miles away [33]. Given this, and the fact there’s little to no space between suburban lawns—it’s completely unrealistic to assume GMO grass will stay where it’s planted.–It will be interesting to see whether GMO lawn grass producers sue you for having their grass when it spreads into your lawn. That is what Monsanto has done for years to innocent neighboring farmers. Since suing each suburban neighborhood is presumably not a workable model, what new one will devised?–The truth is that we are at a now-or-never moment with respect to GMOs in America[F10]. The more these seeds are released into the air, neighboring farms, and now suburban lawns, the harder it will be to stop them–Write to the USDA[F11] immediately and tell the agency to stop protecting the biotech industry at the public’s expense! GMO Kentucky bluegrass shouldn’t be allowed due to a technical loophole—otherwise, GMOs created via the same GMO technique as this grass could be planted anywhere, at anytime, with zero government oversight.
    All Eyes on New Global Precedent for GMO Contamination
    GMO crops have been known to contaminate organic crops, bringing severe economic damage to small farmers. The problem has gotten so pervasive that the Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association has had to publish a seventy-page booklet [35] on how to avoid (and test for) GMO contamination.–For example, one organic corn grower [36] whose crops were contaminated was forced to sell her corn for $1.67 a bushel—far below the $4 market price for organic corn.–All eyes are now on an Australian court case [37], wherein one farmer is suing Monsanto for the GMO contamination of his organic wheat and oat crop. The episode resulted in the farmer losing his organic certification and export license (Australia has a zero tolerance policy for GMO material in organic products)—the keys to his very livelihood.–The outcome of this case could set a global precedent, and seriously affect the regulation of organics to protect the interests of GMO growers and producers (sad to say, it will almost certainly not be vice versa). We’ll continue to watch it very closely.–Meanwhile, a recent Supreme Court ruling confirmed that Monsanto can sue farmers [38] whose crops are contaminated—even if it’s not their fault, because Monsanto has promised to behave better and not take advantage of innocent farmers!
    Industrial Herbicides Are Even More Toxic Than We Thought
    The uncontrolled GMO grass “experiment” is even more alarming in light of the growing body of evidence that glyphosate [39], a main chemical component in Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide, is a major health threat.–Keep in mind that GMO Kentucky bluegrass, like some brands of [40] Monsanto’s GMO corn, cotton, and soy seeds, is engineered to be Roundup-resistant. This means that growers can apply as much Roundup as they’d like to kill the weeds they don’t want, while leaving their plants intact. The GMO seed and the herbicide enter the environment together.–Also remember that many weeds are now learning [41] to be Roundup-resistant. To compensate, growers are forced to spray more and more Roundup [42]—which that means more glyphosate in our foods, ecosystems, and bodies, or use even more dangerous chemicals.–Despite assurances by Monsanto and the EPA [43], glyphosate is a hazard to humans, animals, plants, and organic and conventional agriculture. New research published in the International Journal of Toxicology [45] found that commercial glyphosate-based herbicides—at levels far below the normal agricultural applications—are extremely toxic to human many cells, and are lethal to human liver cells.–This research confirms Dr. Charles Benbrook’s [46] and ANH-USA’s investigation into the environmental, economic, and human health effects of glyphosate. Our research found, for example, that glyphosate is toxic to fish and essentially all plant life (if you haven’t read this comprehensive case study, you can download the PDF here [1]).-We should be focusing on reducing our addiction to chemical farming, not coming up with new ways to expose ourselves to more and more toxins. We have the opportunity to solve this problem before the disastrous health effects become widespread and irreversible. Future generations will not get the same chance.
    Is Industry Persuading Scientists to Quash Chilling Scientific Findings?
    Another recent study [47], authored by French researcher Gilles-Eric Séralini and published in BioMed Research International, confirms the International Journal of Toxicity study. It too found that herbicides and pesticides—notably those that are glyphosate-based—are far more toxic than industry and the EPA would lead you to believe. Séralini found that formulations like Roundup were “several times more toxic” than their main ingredient alone (i.e., glyphosate), and that “Roundup was by far the most toxic” of the chemical formulations tested.–Just hours after the study’s publication, Dr. Ralf Reski, a BioMed editor, immediately resigned [48], stating, “I do not want to be connected to a journal that provides [Séralini] a forum for such kind of agitation.”–We wonder: is Dr. Reski really concerned about scientific sensationalism? According to his own résumé [49], his “independent” research is 53% funded by industry. Did Dr. Reski proactively protect his source of funding? Did industry threaten him?–In September 2012, Séralini published a study [50] suggesting that a long-term diet of GMO corn can cause health problems—including breast cancer and severe organ damage—in animals. After a year of artificial controversy, the paper was retracted [51], much to the dismay and protest [52] of a significant part of the scientific community.—Séralini’s peers felt the retraction was made on invalid grounds [53]. It was withdrawn for being poorly designed, despite the fact that it followed almost exactly the same protocol [54] of a trial conducted by Monsanto and published in the same journal. Moreover, they saw in the retraction evidence of undue industry influence on the scientific community: a few months before the study was retracted, a former Monsanto scientist was appointed to the journal in a newly created editorial position [55].–To be published in journals like BioMed, studies go through a thorough editor and peer-review process. BioMed requires [56] an initial review by the editorial office; approval from an editor knowledgeable about the subject in question; and a peer review by between two and five outside evaluators. That’s three layers of intense scrutiny before a study can even be published.–It now seems that Séralini, despite of the integrity of his work, has been blacklisted—a clear warning to other objective, independent researchers.
    TOP A
    TOP B
    Show of the Month March 15 2o14
    Beetroot and Hawthorn May Improve Heart Health
    1939 Cancer Act-of the UK
    Oleuropein boosts testosterone level, lowers cortisol secretion, stimulates anabolism
    Estimation of Apigenin, an Anxiolytic Constituent, in Turnera aphrodisiaca.
    The body derives several benefits from regular use of beef juice. It apparently could bring about a strengthening of the body without irritating the cells in the intestinal tract which might bring about a change in the nature of the lymph and the lymphatic functioning that might in turn disturb the body, causing sleeplessness and general irritation. The following readings are commentaries on it plus descriptions of how to prepare it. — “The combinations that have been indicated for the body as to diet are very good; yet we would add the greater strengthening influence without the addition of weight or of heavy foods – which would materially aid, and would not irritate those tendencies for the accumulations or separations in the active forces of mucus that has produced and does produce in the lymph those segregations and accumulations about which the body becomes so disturbed at times. These as we find may be had in the Pure Beef Juice; not broth, but prepared in this manner:
    Take a pound to a pound and a half preferably of the round steak. No fat, no portions other than that which is of the muscle or tendon or strength; no fatty or skin portions. Dice this into half inch cubes, as it were, or practically so. Put same in a glass jar without water in same. Put the jar then into a boiler or container with the water coming about half or three-fourths toward the top of the jar, you see. Preferably put a cloth in the container to prevent the jar from cracking. Do not seal the jar tight, but cover the top. Let this boil (the water, with the jar in same) for three to four hours. Then strain off the juice, and the refuse may be pressed somewhat. It will be found that the meat or flesh itself will be worthless. Place the juice in a cool place, but do not keep too long; never longer than three days, see? Hence the quantity made up at the time depends upon how much or how often the body will take this. It should be taken two to three times a day, but not more than a tablespoonful at the time – and this sipped very slowly. Of course, this is to be seasoned to suit the taste of the body.
    “Also once a day it will be most beneficial to take beef juice as a tonic; not so much the beef itself but beef juice; followed with red wine. Do not mix these, but take both about the same time. Take about a teaspoonful of the beef juice, but spend about five minutes in sipping that much. Then take an ounce of the red wine
    “Q-5. What quantity of beef juice to be taken daily?
    A-5. At least two tablespoonsful, but no fat in same. A tablespoonful is almost equal to a pound of meat or two pounds of meat a day; and that’s right smart for a man that isn’t active!” (1424-2)
    “Beef juice should be taken regularly as medicine, a teaspoonful four times a day at least, but when taken it should be sipped, not just taken as a gulp.” (5374-1)
    “As we find, we would use small quantities at a time – but take almost as medicine – of the beef juices … This is easily assimilated, gives strength and vitality, and is needed with the vital forces of the body in the present. Take at least a tablespoonful during the day, or two tablespoonsful. But not as spoonsful; rather sips of same. This, sipped in this manner, will work towards producing the gastric flow through the intestinal system, first in the salivary reactions to the very nature of the properties themselves, second with the gastric flow from the upper portion of the stomach or through the cardiac reaction at the end of the esophagus that produces the first of the lacteals’ reaction to the gastric flows in the stomach or digestive forces themselves; thirdly making for an activity through the pylorus and the duodenum that becomes stimulating to the activity of the flows without producing the tendencies for accumulation of gases.”
    IV. Nitrogenous Foods. Meat Teas, Meat Extracts, Meat Juices, Peptones And Peptonoids, And Dried Meat Powders
    (l) Foods prepared from meat are sold under the name of meat teas, meat extracts, meat juices, peptones and peptonoids, and dried meat powders. Some are supposed to have marvellous nutritive value because of the evaporation of a watery extract of the meat, or of the juice expressed from meat, into a fluid which is stated to contain the nutritive elements of the original muscle fibre in a concentrated form. Others base their claims on the predigestion of the protein before concentration. It is not invariably true that these preparations are made from meat. The absence of creatinin, in some specimens, suggests that these particular ones are purely artificial products.—Analyses of various meats show that the average percentage of protein is about 20 and that it is, therefore, impossible to concentrate meat down to less than a fifth of its bulk, if the total nutritive value of the protein is to be retained. Reference to the tables of analyses of these nitrogenous foods shows that in few instances does the percentage of protein equal that of the original meat from which the food is made, while in many it is very considerably less, even if undiluted. In those cases in which the percentage of protein is high, the food is usually given diluted with a large quantity of water. –The high percentage of extractives in many of these preparations proves that they are fluid extracts of meat. These extractives are of no nutritive value, throw an extra strain on the liver and kidneys, and are probably actively injurious. The high proportion of salts and extractives leads to thirst and diarrhoea, if these foods are given in large quantities.[F12] -A. In the ordinary process of making beef tea and clear soups the product is strained and the protein, coagulated by heat, which forms the nutritious sediment, deprived of its stimulating taste, is usually thrown away. A weak gelatinous fluid is left which is converted into a firm jelly on cooling, if the gelatin amounts to one per cent. Beef tea is often made in institutions from some one or other of the various meat extracts, instead of from fresh meat, so it is worth while to consider the nutritive value and the expense of these different preparations.
    Approximate Composition Of Beef Tea Preparations
    Water. Proteins. Extractives. Mineral Ash.
    Mason’s – strong beef tea . 8902 686 2.47 1.65
    Bovril Co. – Vril, albuminous beef tea…………… 84.00 1017 417 1.66
    Brand’s – fibrous beef tea . 83.21 11.40 452 086
    According to the Lancet analysis Mason’s beef tea contains meat fibre 3.74 per cent, soluble albuminoids and extractives 10.58, mineral salts 2.37.
    A comparison of the above preparations with beef tea, as ordinarily made, is distinctly to their advantage. Home made beef tea contains about 1.5 per cent of protein and, if made by the boiling process, may contain considerably less. An analysis of a sample of that made at St. Thomas’s Hospital yielded the following results (The Hospital, June 11, 1904) : –
    Water . . . . ….. 96030
    Fat………. 0199
    Insoluble protein and meat fibre . . . . 0.208
    Soluble proteins and gelatin . . . . . 1.342
    Meat bases …….. 0.608
    Non-nitrogenous extractive matters …. 0.843
    Mineral matters ……. 0.770
    The total dry solids amounted to 3.97 per cent and of that 1.55 per cent only, inclusive of gelatin, was of value as food.
    The price of beef tea made from various foods is given in the following table (The Hospital, June 1, 1907): –
    Name of Food. Price. Amount Required. Cost per Pint.
    Lemco …. 5s. 6d. per lb. 1 lb. for 60 pints Id. and a fraction
    Ramornie1 . 5s. „ 1 oz. „ 3 „ Ditto
    Oxo….. 3s. 9d. l 1b. „ 22 „ 2d.
    Nursing Oxo2 . 4s. „ l 1b. „ 22 „ 2 1/5d.
    Invalid Bovril . 4s. 6d. 3 oz. „ 4 „ 2 1/4d.
    Mason’s beef tea – – 3 1/2 d.
    Brand’s beef tea 10d. 31b. „ 7 „ 4 1/4d.
    Oxvil …. – – 5d.
    Foreign meat . 2d. – 3d. ,, – l 1/2 – 2d.
    These results are based on institutional prices. The price per pint is not an absolute criterion of the value, unless we regard these preparations as of such little use for nutritive purposes that the actual percentages of protein can be neglected. Probably this is true, for the amount of protein which can be taken in this form is really remarkably small.
    These foods may be restorative and stimulant, but they are certainly only feebly nutritive and are an expensive form of diet. The use of beef tea and meat extracts depends on the fact that in digestive disorders and in fevers, in which digestion is impaired, the appetite is bad, and the tongue furred, the patient dislikes food, but can take a hot, clean, non-cloying fluid which by virtue of the heat has some stimulating and nutritive properties [F13]. These preparations have a great influence on the minds of the patient and friends, who are apt to dread abstinence from food as a source of extreme danger and have an abounding faith in the nutritive value of beef teas, jellies and meat extracts. As a food milk is infinitely superior. There is one advantage in these foods which must not be overlooked. They encourage appetite and the secretion of gastric juice. A few tablespoonfuls of clear soup or of a diluted meat extract, taken at the beginning of dinner or just beforehand, will improve both appetite and digestion. A large amount may be harmful by unduly diluting the gastric juice. They may be regarded as concentrated flavouring substances of meat the nutritive matters being extracted. Liebig’s Extract was the first and remains the most typical of these meat extracts. As originally made it is practically free from protein and fat. It is a concentrated watery extract of meat, heated under pressure, filtered and evaporated.
    1 Liebig’s Extract of Meat as prepared by the Australian Meat Co.
    2 Peptonized.
    The Approximate Composition Of Meat Extracts
    Water. Proteins . and Gelatin Extractives. .
    Sub- Mineral stances Ash.
    References and Remarks.
    Armour’s Extract1 24.30 ! 16.08 20.55 20.06 19.03
    15.55 10.89 43.23 4.122 25.91 Food and Sanitation,l893
    Bovril 44.40 16.94 20.32 __ 18.32 Stutzer, 1897
    39.58 912 34.10 1.292 13.52 Chittenden
    Bovril Fluid Beef1 38.10 12.24 1204 19.75 17.87 –
    Invalids’ Bovril1 21.82 21.42 39.60 – 17.16 –
    21.16 16.66 16.13 29.23 16.82 Allen’s commercial analysis
    Bouillon Fleet . 61.95 11.81 9.87 3.87 12.50 Tatlock
    Brand’s Beef Bouillon 1 36.27 9.58 19.34 19.75 15.07 –
    Brand’s Essence. 87.17 10.433 1.01
    1.39 Candy, vide Hutchison, 1904. The juice of beef, mutton, veal or chicken, without any addition
    Hipi …. 42.00 43.00 – 6.60 8.40 Medical Press, 1899. A mutton extract
    Lemco1 . 17.80 16.48 3812 6.00 21.50 –
    Liebig’s Extract 20.06 0.06 55.72 0.912 24.04 Chittenden. Fat and protein free.
    18.30 9.40 30.00 18.602 23.60 Tankard
    Mason’s Essence 77.07 303 7.47 2.92 9.51 Food and Sanitation,1896 (Hehner)
    Oxine Extract1 . 62.90 13.00 4.54 – 19.60 Hutchison
    Oxo1 . . . 38.10 18.93 2031 5.35 17-31 Meat extract, albumin and fibrin, without fat
    Viking Beef Essence 90.68 3.63 1.85 2.41 1-43 Tankard
    1 Analysis given by the manufacturers.
    2 Ether extract.
    3 Half gelatin.
    4 Including extractives.
    Read more:
    Meat Extract –
    A term which in popular usage embraces several products differing considerably in character. That best known and most widely used in the preparation of “Beef tea” is the commercial meat or Beef extract obtained by simple boiling, straining and evaporation without the addition of other ingredients. It consists principally of “extractives,” or meat flavor, together with a certain proportion of mineral salts. The fat is removed, as it would in time render the extract rancid, and nearly all the valuable albuminoids are also lost – they coagulate during the stewing of the meat and are strained off together with the fibrine, etc. Dry albumin is added to some preparations in the final processes, but no attempt is made to carry through the natural Beef albumen as, under the conditions in which meat extract is ordinarily made, marketed and used, it would readily decompose and spoil the product.
    Meat extract of the type described, was formerly rated as a condensed food product of high nutritive value. That position has been entirely abandoned and it is now acknowledged that it is entirely inadequate to support life, but it has retained great importance in both the medical and commercial worlds on the more solid foundation of its indisputable merit as the basis of an agreeable and thoroughly wholesome beverage of mildly stimulating properties. Physicians find it a valuable adjunct in the care of invalids and convalescents, and its meaty taste often lends zest to the necessarily restricted diet of the sick room, exercising a highly beneficial effect by enabling the digestive organs to extract more nutriment from other foods. It is especially useful for mixing with milk – persons who cannot assimilate plain milk can nearly always digest it when flavored with a little Beef extract. Its other uses include its employment in large quantities to give a relish to the condensed foods, such as those made with pease-meal, carried by army commissaries, and its similar familiar employment in the kitchen to enhance the flavor of soups, sauces, etc. It is worth remembering that extract of meat contains those flavoring properties to which is principally due the higher market value of the choice cuts.
    Many almost worthless preparations are, however, sold as “meat extracts” and it is advisable to confine purchases to houses of known reliability.
    Somewhat similar value attaches to properly made commercial preparations of meat juices or “meat extracts,” obtained by pressure of the raw meat and then preserved without cooking.
    A third class contains the soluble albumoses (peptoses) of the meat predigested – i.e., digested by artificial means. The best of these offer food values in important percentages, but their use should be regulated by medical advice
    In spite of the fact that most people enjoy – or at all events do not object to – the strong flavor of the best extracts, their taste and odor are sometimes found quite offensive by those possessing especially delicate palates. When this objection is found by a patient, it can be obviated to a considerable extent by putting a little butter, and plenty of salt in the hot Beef tea.
    Beef tea should always be served hot – if drunk cold, or nearly so, its stimulating property is much reduced.
    Following are the standards for meat extracts and similar products adopted by the Association of State and National Dairy and Food Departments and the Association of Official Agricultural Chemists.
    (1) meat Extract is the product obtained by extracting fresh meat with boiling water, and concentrating the liquid portion by evaporation after the removal of fat, and contains not less than 75% of total solids, of which not over 27% is ash and not over 12% is sodium chloride (calculated from the total chlorine present), not over 0.6% is fat and not less than 8% is nitrogen. The nitrogenous compounds contain not less than 40% of meat bases, and not less than 10% of creatin (a compound found in muscular flesh) and creatinin.
    (2) Fluid meat Extract is identical with meat extract, except that it is concentrated to a lower degree, and contains not more than 75% and not less than 50% of total solids.
    (3) Bone Extract is the product obtained by extracting fresh trimmed bones with boiling water and concentrating the liquid portion by evaporation after removal of fat, and contains not less than 75% of total solids.
    (4) Fluid Bone Extract is identical with bone extract, except that it is concentrated to a lower degree and contains not more than 75% and not less than 50% of total solids.
    (5) meat Juice is the fluid portion of muscle fibre, obtained by pressure or otherwise, and may be concentrated by evaporation at a temperature below the coagulating point of the soluble proteins. The solids contain not more than 15% of ash, not more than 2.5% of sodium chloride (calculated from the total chlorine present), not more than 4% nor less than 2% of phosphoric acid and not less than 12% of nitrogen. The nitrogenous bodies contain not less than 35% of coagulable proteins and not more than 40% of meat bases.
    For a number of years after its first introduction, the greater part of both the European and American supply came from the Argentine Republic, in which country the Liebig Company, the original manufacturer, established its first factory. The United States is now one of the principal producers.
    Home-Made Beef Tea, meat Juices, etc. In contrast to that from commercial meat Extract, home-made “Beef tea,” as generally prepared, is entitled to rank as both food and stimulant, as it contains a fair percentage of protein and fat, in addition to the gelatine and
    Beetroot and Hawthorn May Improve Heart Health
    A recent study conducted by the University of Texas (UT) and Neogenis Laboratories suggests that a dietary supplement containing beetroot and hawthorn beery may boost heart health.–Beetroot and hawthorn berry both affect the body’s nitrate-nitrite-nitric oxide (NO) pathway. The resulting NO compound is important to cardiovascular health because it dilates blood vessels, thereby lowering blood pressure (one of the most significant predictors of heart disease) and improving blood flow. Researchers tested the effects of a combination of the two herbs on NO availability. Beetroot was selected for study because it contains high levels of nitrate. Similarly, hawthorn berries have a high activity of the enzyme nitrite reductase, facilitating the conversion of nitrite to NO.—Previous research on the hawthorn berry has already shown promise for its use in treating heart conditions. In a review of literature, Pittler et al. found hawthorn berry effective in improving symptoms of chronic heart failure, including impaired heart workload capacity. Other researchers found that hawthorn berry effectively reduced blood pressure in healthy subjects. The previous literature has not yet established beetroot’s effectiveness in treating heart problems.—In the UT study, 30 participants, all above the age of 40, were randomly assigned to consume either the herb blend Neo40 Daily® or a placebo twice daily for 30 days. The subjects all presented with at least three of the following known risk factors for cardiovascular disease: elevated blood pressure (hypertension), obesity, high blood lipid levels (hyperlipidemia), diabetes, family history of heart disease, sedentary lifestyle, and history of smoking.—After 30 days of therapy, the herb supplement group had significant increases in NO levels, as compared to the placebo group. Furthermore, 72 percent of the individuals in the herbal supplement group experienced statistically significant reductions in blood triglyceride levels, another risk factor for heart disease.–This study provides evidence for the herbs use in reducing risk for cardiovascular disease. However, additional research is needed to completely qualify the relationship between diet, NO availability and heart disease.
    Pittler MH, Guo R, Ernst E. Hawthorn extract for treating chronic heart failure. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Jan 23;(1):CD005312. View Abstract
    Zand J, Lanza F, Garg HK, et al. All-natural nitrite and nitrate containing dietary supplement promotes nitric oxide production and reduces triglycerides in humans. Nutr Res. 2011 Apr;31(4):262-9. View Abstract
    Simple Remedy—take hawthorn leaf and add to it beets in equal weight ( example 2 oz of each) then take either red wine or alcohol ( ethanol) and add 6 oz and then blend down for 7-10 minutes—strain and use anywhere from 1 tablespoon to 1 oz daily several times a day
    (OMNS Aug 3, 2012) Most citizens of Great Britain are totally unaware of the 1939 Cancer Act which effectively prevents them from finding out about different treatments for cancer.
    Excerpts from the UK 1939 Cancer Act:
    “4 – (1) No person shall take any part in the publication of any advertisement – (a) containing an offer to treat any person for cancer, or to prescribe any remedy therefor, or to give any advice in connection with the treatment thereof; or (b) referring to any article, or articles of any description, in terms which are calculated to lead to the use of that article, or articles of that description, in the treatment of cancer. —In this section the expression “advertisement” includes any “notice, circular, label, wrapper or other document, and any announcement made orally or by any means of producing or transmitting sounds”. [1] –Publication of such advertisements is permitted to a very restrictive group comprising members of either House of Parliament, local authority, governing bodies of voluntary hospitals, registered or training to become registered medical practitioners, nurses or pharmacists, and persons involved in the sale or supply of surgical appliances. A very tight grip, therefore, is exercised on information that is fed to citizens of Great Britain; interestingly, the Act does not apply to Northern Ireland. —That pretty much wraps it up, and wraps us (in Britain) up in the legal stranglehold that this outdated Act still exerts. Was this enacted to protect the citizens from charlatans and “quacks” or to safeguard the interests of the National Radium Trust, to whom the British Government lent money?[F14] If no one is allowed to tell us, how can we, the general public, ever find out what alternatives there are to those offered by mainstream medicine, mainly surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy?
    No Freedom of Therapy, Information, or Assembly
    My colleague, Sarah Ling, and I unwittingly found ourselves in a maelstrom when we decided to hold a convention in Birmingham, later this year, to do just that – inform the general public about some of the other ways to tackle this hideous disease than those generally doled out to their mostly trusting, but fear-filled patients. A well-justified fear of the actual treatments as well as the disease prevails. –Last year, Sarah’s sister was diagnosed with an aggressive form of cancer. Chemotherapy was the only treatment offered, which she accepted out of fear. She nearly died within hours of having it, and very sadly died days afterwards. Sarah was determined to help prevent others from enduring such trauma and so, under the umbrella of our Institute (The Cambridge Institute of Complementary Health), we organised a convention to educate people – conventional/complementary health professionals and the general public – about different ways to treat people who have cancer. —We quickly drew up a short list of speakers that we felt would have much to contribute, including Dr Stanislaw Burzynski who agreed to come and talk about his pioneering work on antineoplastins. —After posting our speakers on our web-site, one, an oncologist, pulled out due to a malevolent e-mail she had received, questioning her wisdom at sharing a platform with Dr Burzynski. She didn’t want to cause her team any controversy. We then discovered that we had attracted a lot of adverse attention that was derogatory, critical of our speakers, casting aspersions on them and on us as an organisation. Unfortunately Dr Burzynski decided not to come – so as not to expose us to the sort of attacks that he has suffered. Regrettably, the public lost an opportunity to hear first-hand of his pioneering treatments in tackling cancers, including inoperable brain tumours.[F15] –Two speakers down, we then found ourselves possibly contravening the archaic Cancer Act. We’ve had to be extremely careful in how we word any publications relating to the convention so that the Advertising Standards Agency doesn’t come down on us like a ton of bricks and prevent us from holding it at all. Britain cherishes its long-held tradition of freedom of speech, but in recent years that seems questionable. However, we can still hold debates, and that is what we are doing.
    We are aware that efforts will be made to stop us, from those who are not seekers of truth. If they were truly interested in the welfare of people, they would be advocating most of the alternative/complementary approaches instead of deriding them and trying to close down clinics and individuals who practise them, via the Advertising Standards Agency. This ridiculous Act affords them the guise of protecting the public and gives them ammunition that they can use against persons advocating alternatives.
    We can’t hold an open day of education on treating cancer in this country: how bizarre is that? How much longer can this information be contained?
    The Cost of Ignorance
    The UK National Health Service is overstretched and, as more and more people contract cancer (one in three presently), the rising costs of expensive and often ineffective treatments will surely mean they have to look at alternatives. —
    Conventional healthcare professionals are too often ignorant of the enormous value of unconventional treatments. How can they be otherwise, as those outside of their profession are prohibited from alluding to the fact that they can help treat cancer? Shockingly, even nutrition is most often totally overlooked during orthodox cancer treatment, and the very foods that promote cancers are given to patients in our hospitals sometimes in order to maintain calorie intake. There is frequently no advice on diet, that most crucial aspect of our health. [2] –
    Thankfully, some oncologists do recognise the benefits that alternative/complementary treatments offer. [3] Hopefully more and more will come to accept that integrating the best of conventional and complementary/alternative methods is the way forward.
    It is our opinion that a reform of the 1939 Cancer Act is long overdue. The tenacious grip that it holds on treating cancer must be relinquished, so that patients and their healthcare providers can make an informed choice as to what approach may be best for their individual needs. -(Madeline C. Hickey-Smith has an honours degree in biology and is cofounder of the Cambridge Institute of Complementary Health . The direct link to the convention page is .)
    Oleuropein boosts testosterone level, lowers cortisol secretion, stimulates anabolism
    Oleuropein is a compound that occurs naturally in olive oil and helps the body to use proteins more economically. In a Japanese study, published in the Journal of Nutritional Biochemistry, rats that had a protein-rich diet retained no less than 46 percent more protein when large amounts of oleuropein were added to their food. In addition, they produced more testosterone and less cortisol.
    Oleuropein is found in olives, olive oil and leaves of the olive tree. Supplements containing olive-leaf extracts have been on the market for years, and if you look carefully you’ll find cheap extracts containing 25 percent oleuropein.
    The structural formula of the substance is shown below on the left. With a bit of chemical tinkering you can remove the glucose group from the oleuropein molecule, leaving you with a pared-down version – chemists call it an aglycon – of oleuropein. The Japanese experimented with the natural version of oleuropein.
    Seven years ago the Japanese reported that virgin olive oil boosted the metabolism of rats.
    It was the phenol oleuropein that was responsible for this, they discovered later. [J Nutr Sci Vitaminol (Tokyo). 2008 Oct;54(5):363-70.] Oleuropein boosted the secretion of adrenalin and noradrenalin in rats, and made the brown fat cells burn more fatty acids.
    The discovery of the adrenergic effect of oleuropein prompted some manufacturers to add oleuropein to bodybuilding supplements..
    Fifteen years ago the same researchers discovered that garlic had approximately the same effect. And when the Japanese combined garlic supplementation with a protein-rich diet, they observed that the garlic boosted anabolism: lab animals retained more nitrogen, and produced more testosterone and less cortisol. That’s why the Japanese were curious whether oleuropein also had a similar anabolic effect.
    The researchers gave three groups of rats food containing 10, 25 or 40 percent protein [Casein] for 28 days. Half of the rats in each group were given food containing 1 g oleuropein per kg.
    The researchers counted the number of nitrogen molecules in the urine and droppings of the rats, which enabled them to calculate how much nitrogen the rats retained. The more nitrogen you retain, the more proteins your body builds up. Nitrogen is an essential component of proteins.
    The rats retained relatively more nitrogen, the more oleuropein they consumed. In the group that ate food containing the most protein, supplementation with oleuropein boosted the amount of nitrogen retained by 46 percent.
    In the rats that ate large amounts of protein, oleuropein tripled the concentration of testosterone in the testes, while the concentration of cortisol in the blood went down by more than half.
    The concentration of LH increased as the researchers introduced increasingly higher concentrations of aglycon made from oleuropein into the rats’ circulatory system. This increased secretion of LH may be a consequence of the higher adrenalin and noradrenalin levels caused by the oleuropein, the Japanese think.
    The researchers believe that these hormonal effects are the key to explaining the anabolic effect of oleuropein.
    “Oleuropein supplementation enhances protein anabolism and suppresses protein catabolism owing to hormonal regulation by the stimulation of steroid hormones via noradrenaline, leading to a higher testicular testosterone level and a lower plasma corticosterone level in rats fed a high-protein diet”, the researchers conclude.
    Interestingly, the rats that were given oleuropein did not put on weight. As far as the researchers could see – although they did not study the effect on body composition extensively – the rats became slimmer. Their fat deposits did shrink at least.
    So doing a quick calculation: a rat eats about 50 g feed per kg bodyweight daily. That means 50 mg oleuropein. Converted to human proportions, that means 8 mg oleuropein per kg bodyweight per day. So if you weigh 80 kg, you’d need 640 mg oleuropein daily. If you can get that quantity out of an olive leaf extract that consists of 25 percent oleuropein, you’d need about 2.6 g extract each day. –That’s manageable.
    J Nutr Biochem. 2013 May;24(5):887-93.
    Diet rich in mono-unsaturated fat boosts EPOC 17.01.2012
    Animal study: olive oil is good for (old) muscles 12.08.2011
    Your body burns unsaturated fat better after exercise 11.11.2010
    Why you stay slimmer more easily with olive oil than with saturated fats 31.10.2010
    Olive oil converts cholesterol more easily into testosterone 01.09.2009
    More adrenalin through olive oil 23.06.2009
    Estimation of Apigenin, an Anxiolytic Constituent, in Turnera aphrodisiaca.
    Kumar S, Madaan R, Sharma A.
    Author information
    An HPTLC densitometric method has been developed to estimate apigenin in Turnera aphrodisiaca aerial and its segregated parts (leaves, stems, flowers and fruits) so that plant can be standardized on the basis of its bioactive marker. The apigenin content in methanol extract of T. aphrodisiaca aerial parts was found to be about fourteen times less than acid hydrolyzed methanol extract of the plant indicating the presence of most of apigenin in glycosidic form. Amongst different plant parts, flowers possessed maximum content of apigenin followed by leaves. The apigenin content was also determined in three marketed formulations of T. aphrodisiaca viz., NLK, DWSG and SBL. DWSG contained higher content of apigenin. Aerial parts of the plant were collected at bimonthly intervals over a period of one year in the months of January, March, May, July, September and November. The plant material collected in September showed maximum content of apigenin.