wellnessindie.com » Featured

3 Critical Reasons To Get Out Your Seat And Move Something

Jeff — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 08:15:17 +0000

For those of you that have office jobs or jobs where you sit down for most of your day, it is imperative that you break your day up by moving around. The constant drumbeat of data supporting the dangers of being sedentary start at work since so much time is spent there. Add to that sitting in the car (or public transportation) and then parking yourself on the couch in the evening, and you have a perfect storm of inactivity that leads to obesity, changes in metabolism, and a myriad of related diseases.

Every living organism on the planet has a basic rule etched into their DNA: adapt or die. At a very basic level, it’s no different with our bodies. Our cells will collectively adapt to what we do or don’t do. It doesn’t take an expert in biomechanics to realize that our bodies were designed to be on the move. Only 10,000 years ago agriculture became the dominant lifestyle for our ancestors. Prior to that, we were mostly nomadic and were either foraging or hunting for food. Both of these activities required a significant amount of movement.

To put this in perspective, the earth is estimated to be 3.5 to 4 billion years old. The Hominid species, to which we belong, has existed for approximately 4 to 6 million years. Modern humans, commonly referred to as Homo Sapiens, have been around for about 200,000 years according to scientists. So the 10,000 years agriculture has existed is a relative blip on the evolutionary timeline. Even then, there was more physical activity as we tended our gardens and fields where crops grew. The point is that our bodies have really had no time to adapt to sedentary lifestyles. And, why would one want it to when it’s designed for and capable of so many physical feats?

Add delivery food, scooters, cars, elevators, escalators, public transportation and the like to the equation, and it’s easy to see why we hardly have to move anymore. The unfortunate reality is that some of this is necessary because of how society has evolved around work. So, it is up to each one of us to take the initiative to get our bodies moving before natural selection gets the best of us (question to self: would our bodies ever really adapt to sloth, Big Macs, and pizza?). Following are 3 reasons to engage in some sort of physical activity during the work day:

Obesity - Studies continue to support the undeniable link between inactivity and gaining unhealthy weight. The primary reason is food choice and how our body adapts to energy metabolism. Essentially, the less active we become, the less efficient our bodies become at utilizing glucose (sugar) and lipids (fats). And, if your meals resemble the S.A.D. (Standard American Diet) in any fashion, then highly-processed carbs are undoubtedly the cornerstone of you’re diet. In addition to the plethora of diseases that arise from the inflammation caused by processed carbs, there is a more obvious and immediate impact. When you consume a diet dominated by processed carbs and your activity level is too low, those extra calories that are not used by critical body systems (eg – nervous system) or stored as glycogen are stored as fat. In simple tems, if you eat too many calories (processed carbs, in particular) and don’t move enough, you will get fat.

Venous Thromboembolism- In addition to the obvious obesity risk, sitting for prolonged periods of time poses another, more subtle (but no less deadly) danger. Deep vein thrombosis (DVT)/pulmonary embolism (PE), or venous thromboembolism, is basically a blood clot in a deep vein. We’ve all heard that we should get up and walk around on long flights. DVT and PE is the reason experts recommend this. This 2008 study conducted in New Zealand examined the link between seated immobility (office, home, flights) and venous thromboembolism.

Heart Problems – A recent study published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, suggests that sitting for long periods of time can lead to heart issues and worse. The interesting part of this study was that scientists discovered that it may be more beneficial to spread your activity throughout the day as opposed to one long exercise session per day. Many folks are relatively sedentary throughout the day, but exercise for a specific period of time after work. Ironically, this may not be an efficient use of the time you set aside for physical activity. Some of you are aware that exercise is cumulative. For instance, if you performed 3, 10-minute bouts of activity, some experts say that equals 30 minutes of exercise for that day (take the steps, walk around your building, etc.). Add a moderate or intense bout of exercise to that, and that should be sufficient for your daily activity.

In short, it would behoove you to get off your behind frequently throughout the day. Inactivity breeds inactivity. We can all find time during work to chat, surf the internet, or talk on the phone. Do yourself, your health and your figure a favor – get up and move something.

W.H.O. Was Complicit In Unfounded H1N1 Hype?

Jeff — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 04:27:09 +0000

For the better part of January, numerous media outlets have reported that the World Health Organization (W.H.O.) is being investigated for perpetuating a global H1N1 pandemic that, by most accounts, amounted to nothing more than a mild flu for the vast majority of folks. This fear-mongering led to people seeking out the vaccine in droves. Detractors will point to the vaccine thwarting a global pandemic. I’d challenge that argument by referencing the EU countries (eg – Poland) and villages throughout the world that refused the vaccine. Why hasn’t there been an epidemic in any of those places? (As I wrote in a previous article, my family and I decided not to get the dangerous vaccines and we’ve all been fine. A couple of children at my daughter’s daycare provider had a short bout with the alleged swine flu. I can’t speak for those children, but my daughter got sick for about a day or two without any complications. And, without unnecessary vaccines or ineffective drugs).

The person who is leading this investigation in Europe is Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, a German-born physician and chairman of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) Health Committee. Specifically, he is holding a hearing this week to ascertain if Big Pharma used its considerable global influence to convince the W.H.O. to lower the alarm threshold and essentially scare countries into buying absurd amounts of the vaccine (incidentally, these same countries are trying to sell of the surplus). Apparently, this hearing is going to be held in secret for obvious reasons. With billions of dollars in profits at stake and medical ethics in short supply for the five manufacturers (GlaxoSmithKline, AstraZeneca, Sanofi-Aventis, Novartis and CSL Ltd.) of the poison vaccine, it’s easy to see how and why this could happen. It’s a classic case of “problem, reaction, solution”.

Proving that the Big Drug Cartel and the W.H.O. colluded to propogate fear for vaccines will be a daunting task, to say the least. Drug companies’ reach is far and wide, but their close ties with large media conglomorates is one of their most insidious connections. According to a very in-depth article on Infowars (Sherry Kane), “PharmaMedia” will not let this investigation see the light of day. James Murdoch (son of Rupert - CEO, News Corp.) is the chief executive of News Corp in Europe and Asia, and was appointed non-executive director at GlaxoSmithKline. Thomas Glocer (CEO, Reuters) has been elected to Merck & Co.’s board of directors. Admittedly, these loose associations are circumstantial, so the burden of proof falls on Dr. Wodarg. However, I always say ‘follow the money trail.’ I wouldn’t be surprised if these guys made a significant amount of coin as the stocks of drug companies shot up.

Additionally, one need to look no further than local and national media coverage on this story. Because of the hype surrounding swine flu, it’s only natural to think that similar attention would be given to allegations of this magnitude. Real coverage has been relegated to Youtube and online radio. Perhaps this story isn’t as important as following the “Jersey Shore” cast or Simon Cowell moving on to greener pastures. In a fair world, everyone who was saturated with propaganda about the swine flu would be aware of the charges. These days, it seems that whoever writes the check gets to decide what fair is.

Use Shoes, You Lose – Barefoot Running Is A Better Alternative

Jeff — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 05:30:04 +0000

My Story

I’ve been pretty active since the age of 13, so I’ve owned my fair share of athletic shoes. It has always amazed me how manufacturers continue to outdo each other in the never-ending “foot” race for a more lightweight, responsive, comfortable, cushion-y shoe. Much of the technology centered around the most efficient way to implement shock absorption in the shoe to protect lower extremities from acute and chronic injury when running on hard surfaces like concrete and asphalt. In that respect, manufacturers succeeded. Ironically, buying these types of sneakers may turn out to be one of the worst decisions you can make for your legs and feet.

As I showed my 20s the door, I continued to maintain a very high level of activity. Aside from shin splints and occasional acute injuries like a rolled ankle, I hadn’t had any major problems with my legs or feet. This all changed not too long after 30 came knocking, however. It was surreal, almost like my mind subconsciously believed all the overblown social hype about 30 being some magic age when your body begins to break down. My list of chronic injuries would’ve kept the athletic trainer of any professional sports team very busy. It read like some bizarre physical therapy research project – plantar fasciitis, achilles tendinitis, medial tibial stress syndrome (shin splints), patellar tracking disorder, chondromalacia, plica, lower back pain. As soon as I figured out how to fix one problem another one sprung up in it’s place.

It got so bad that I reluctantly decided to undergo microfracture surgery on my knee at the behest of an orthopedic surgeon who’d worked on some players from the Washington Redskins. Big mistake. It was my fault though, my approach to dealing with my issues used the very same logic that I detested from allopathic doctors – I was playing the cat and mouse game of treating the symptoms, not the root cause. After spending an untold amount of money on OTC inserts, custom orthotics and supplements, I decided I needed to drastically change my whole plan of attack. That’s when I discovered barefoot running and had my “eureka” moment.

Good Foot, Bad Foot

I researched exhaustively about the biomechanics of barefoot running and studies that seemingly supported its efficacy. It all made so much sense after I processed all that information. In a well-cited 1905 study published in the American Journal of Orthopedic Surgery, doctors sought out to examine the functional difference between a naturally bare foot and a foot that dons shoes (called shod by some folks). They studied native people in Africa and the Philippines, and came to some interesting conclusions.

(Doctors noted how the toes of the native people are spread out which provides a more stable base for standing, walking and running. Additionally, they noticed that an imaginary line could be drawn from the heel, through the ball of the foot, to the big toe).

(Doctors noticed the obvious anatomical difference between the barefoot and shod groups of people. They observed that the foot took the shape of the person's shoe. No imaginary line can be drawn from the heel to the big toe. The foot is narrow and the toes are crowded - not an optimal base for movement).

In the 1960 Olympics, Ethiopian Abebe Bikila ran a world-record 2:15:17 marathon. Barefoot.

Clearly, our feet are not meant to be restricted inside a shoe. Because it is quite literally our physical foundation, a narrow and anatomically incorrect foot is a one way ticket to chronic leg, foot and lower back issues. You’ll be on a first name basis with your orthopedic doctor. Fortunately, my feet were nowhere near this bad. But, I knew I was on to something.

Conventional athletic shoes make a heel-toe gait feel natural with all the high-tech cushion that manufacturers use. Without shoes, a heel-toe strike can result in a collision force 1.5 to 3 times body weight. A heel-toe gait is really only optimal for walking. Comparatively, barefoot native populations use a much more natural midfoot or forefoot gait when running, which results in much less force…and potentially less injuries. The Newton running shoe site has a good animated depiction of this.

Barefoot Alternatives

Armed with all this new information, I felt empowered enough to seek out a shoe that fit the bill. The concrete jungle, full of miscellaneous debris doesn’t afford many of us the luxury of actual barefoot movement. I found a decent compromise. I initially chose Nike Free, which I think is a good transition shoe since working out barefoot will definitely require an adjustment period. After I felt like my feet were strong enough, I bought two pairs of Vibram Five Fingers (KSO and Sprint models). I’m proud to say that, I haven’t had any of the aforementioned chronic problems since going barefoot.

If you do decide to try barefoot alternative shoes, I would personally recommend adding some variety to the surfaces on which you run, however. Hard, man-made surfaces like concrete and asphalt can be a problem for some folks with preexisiting joint issues. If you can find more “compliant” surfaces like a trail, sand, grass or a park with recreational artificial turf fields, your joints will be grateful and the change in locale will make your workouts more interesting.

Recent Studies Make the Argument Stronger

In December 2009, the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation reported “increased joint torques at the hip, knee, and ankle were observed with running shoes compared with running barefoot”.

Another very recent study published in the journal Nature adds even more scientific, empirical data to the argument that supports barefoot running. Daniel Lieberman, a human evolutionary biology professor at Harvard University, conducted the study and published the findings. He posits “…actually you can run barefoot on the world’s hardest surfaces without the slightest discomfort and pain…It might be less injurious than the way some people run in shoes” (To be clear, Mr. Lieberman is referring to actual barefoot running…sans shoes of any kind). This may be true, but somewhat impractical for those that live in urban environments because of the loose debris that litter so many streets and sidewalks. This is where barefoot alternative shoes are worth the investment.

Apparently, more research is needed before any definitive conclusions are drawn regarding running barefoot. But, while scientists conduct more studies to prove once again that Mother Nature had it right all along, I’ll keep my feet naked (or use lightly shod alternatives).

It worked for me and that’s all the evidence I need.

Source(s):

Scientific American

No related posts.

Yet Another Reason To Avoid Soda

Jeff — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 23:27:14 +0000

As if there could be any more reasons to avoid soda altogether, a recent study conducted by microbioligists from Hollins University discovered that 48% of the soda fountain machines at various restaurants they tested contained coliform bacteria. Pretty gross, huh? Hold on, that’s not even the bad part. This bacteria is typically found in feces. And to make matters worse, this family of bacteria were resistant to the 11 antibiotics tested. The water and ice tested negative, so no one is sure of the source. The scientists’ best guess is that the bacteria have been growing in the plastic tubing that hook to the soda fountains. The findings were published in the International Journal of Microbiology.

One word……nasty.

Sources:

The Huffington Post

ScienceDirect (abstract from study)

ABC News

One of Americans’ Favorite Snacks Still Toxic

Jeff — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 17:06:21 +0000

Federal health investigators deemed that butter flavoring used in microwave popcorn is still unsafe and toxic. Back in 2004, a Missouri factory worker was awarded $20 million after developing a debilitating and irreversible lung condition, which required a lung transplant. He apparently got this from inhaling toxic fumes from the oil used to make the ubiquitous butter flavoring in popcorn. In July, 2005, another factory worker in Missouri was awarded $2.7 million as a result of developing the same lung condition. In 2007, a 53 year old self-professed popcorn addict developed severe breathing issues from inhaling the fumes from butter popcorn after taking it out of the microwave. According to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), a toxic chemical named diacetyl was the culprit. Consequently, popcorn manufacturers were forced to switch flavor ingredients.

According to a recent report from NIOSH, the diacetyl substitute closely resembles…..well, diacetyl. And, these new substitutes come with the same dangerous side effects as well. Tell your friends, family, and co-workers. As the saying goes, “caveat emptor.”

Sources:

MSNBC: March, 2004

The Independent: September, 2007

Sphere: December, 2009

No related posts.

BPA Linked to Impotence

Jeff — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 05:01:46 +0000

According to a recent study conducted in China, male workers who were exposed to high levels of the dangerous chemical, bisphenol A (BPA), experienced sexual dysfunction and decreased libido. The levels these workers were exposed to was reportedly 50 times higher than “typical” American men (whatever that means). BPA can be found in everything from plastic bottles to metal food cans to baby bottles. So although our levels may not compare to the Chinese men in the study, BPA is actually quite ubiquitous. Chemical industry spokespeople claimed there’s nothing to worry about, even in the face of compelling evidence and money from the U.S. government to fund new research. I don’t know about you, but I’ve always been a “where there’s smoke, there’s fire” type of guy. Knowing the lack of interest companies have in our overall well-being, I’m not willing to take that chance. Are you?

How Would You Like To Be Worry Free?

Jeff — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 07:08:45 +0000

Okay, maybe worry-free is somewhat idealistic…especially these days. Stress is an inevitable fact of life. It’s how life tests our mettle. It can actually be a good thing when put in proper perspective and used to produce positive behavior. However, stress is one of those nebulous emotional states that, if left unchecked, can literally ruin lives. More specifically, this kind of insidious stress often takes the form of worry. Family, marriage, work, money, and health (among other things) are some of the most common things that conspire to steal our joy. The folks over at Health.com (via CNN) recently published a very good article that lists some effective techniques to help you deal with stress. Some of the highlights include:

Living in the present - Stop worrying about what is out of your control.
Laugh - Studies continue to espouse the positive benefits of smiling and laughing. So, go ahead and laugh until your face hurts…it’s good for you.
Smell the roses - Newsflash: life is hectic. This forces us to sometimes rush through life, missing out on simple pleasures. Your child’s laugh, planting a garden, listening to the birds on a perfect sunny day…find a place a of peace. And visit, often.
Get off your butt - Like laughing, research is continuously finding evidence that endorphins released during physically activity have a positive effect on mood. So, what are you waiting for? Get moving.

Source: CNN.com

Swine Flu Vaccine: Avoid It Like The Flu

Jeff — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 02:07:46 +0000

With flu season upon us, there’s definitely no shortage of news stories, blog posts, general conversation and even protests about whether or not to recieve the H1N1 flu vaccination. Big Pharma profiteering and FDA/CDC/WHO fear-mongering has prompted a run on vaccines, to the point where there is a shortage in many areas. Recent children deaths go even further to stoke this fear fire. My wife and I made a conscious, informed decision not to vaccinate ourselves or our two children. Fortunately, receiving it has not been mandated, so it’s a personal choice at this point. There’s a plethora of information (and misinformation) available, so I would encourage you to educate yourself on H1N1, seasonal flu, vaccines and your options. Until then, here are four reasons to forgo this potentially dangerous drug:

It does not offer effective viral protection- Numerous studies (independent of pharmaceutical cartel influence) have been conducted regarding the efficacy of flu vaccines and the consensus is that they are largely ineffective in children, adults and the elderly. There are two types of flu vaccines: trivalent inactivated (injectable, needle) and live attenuated (intranasal, FluMist). The shot is “inactivated” because it does not contain the live virus. An attenuated nosespray essentially contains a very weak flu antigen. Both versions basically fool the body into thinking that the actual virus is present. In response to this, your body produces antibodies for future protection. According to the CDC, the seasonal flu shot is effective “in about 70%-90% of healthy persons younger than 65 years.” This is somewhat misleading. I’ll address exactly what “healthy” means in a minute, but if you parse this data, one can clearly see that the vaccine is effective in people who most likely have a very strong immune system already and would probably be better off without it. Folks with compromised (sickly, elderly) or undeveloped (infants, children) immune systems have the highest risk of succumbing to the secondary complications of the flu, but this demographic is curiously not cited in the CDC statistics.

The vaccine is not as safe as officials claim - Earlier this year, the W.H.O. declared a worldwide H1N1 pandemic. Fears about a more severe outbreak prompted drug manufacturers to rush production of a new vaccine (operative word – rush) in anticipation of the fall and winter seasons. Not only were the untested vaccines pushed through to the marketplace, but the dangerous preservative thimerosal has been included in most versions of the vaccine (read more about the dangers of thimerosal). Other jeopardous components include squalene and aluminum. Even the well tested and supposedly safe seasonal flu vaccine can lead to serious health problems: click here and here. Knowing that the H1N1 vaccine hasn’t been as rigorously tested, are you willing to take the risk?

H1N1 is not more deadly than seasonal flu- On average, the seasonal flu kills approximately 36,000 people nationwide each year. This is obviously a lot of deaths that largely go unreported or buried under “Balloon Boy” and “Jon and Kate” headlines. H1N1 isn’t more deadly per se, but since the last outbreak occurred in 1976, most young people have not been exposed, and subsequently don’t have the antibodies in their immune system to mount a defense. The next logical question is – why are these deaths even happening? A largely unknown (and unnecessary) fact about influenza is that the vast majority of deaths are not from the actual virus, but from secondary complications (eg – pneumonia). So, a person with a fully functioning immune system should be able to fight the flu without a vaccine. And don’t be fooled by medical personnel saying that “healthy” people are now dying from H1N1. I’ve discovered that the status “healthy” is used very loosely, and often times, it does not necessarily equal a heathy immune system. In general terms, ”healthy” is used by medical professionals to describe someone who has basic health indicators in a normal range (blood pressure, cholesterol, weight, etc.), so take it with a grain of salt when you hear it.

Vaccination is not your only option- If you’ve read some of my other articles, you know my approach to wellness and prevention is to let food be your medicine, exercising, reducing your toxic load (drugs, chemicals, etc.) and avoiding unnecessarily invasive medical procedures. Our bodies, down to the cellular level, have a symbiotic relationship with the environment around us. Consequently, if you feed those cells the right nutrients, you will thrive on many different levels. Your immune system stands to gain the most from this mindset. When you provide your immune system with proper nutrients, it will thrive. To this end, the first thing you must do is drastically reduce or eliminate junk food from your diet. Organic vegetables (and to a lesser extent some fruits), spices (garlic, oregano), clean water, lean meats (wild, free-range, hormone-free) are good starter options. Supplements like Vitamin C and D3 (avoid synthetic D2), herbs like astragalus, echinacea, oregano oil, and especially black elderberry all have a tremendous effect on your immune system, when used in conjunction with a whole-food based diet. Online scams abound these days with dubious cures, inferior supplements and dangerous herbs. So, do your research and make sure to buy from a reputable manufacturer. Read more about boosting your immune system here.

Don’t be fooled by the rampant fear-mongering perpetuated by the profit-drive pharmaceutical industry. The media get their information from doctors and health officials who inevitably get their information from the drug companies (or biased studies funded by them). There’s a lot of money at stake, so there’s a vested interest in keeping the public in the dark about natural ways to fight illness. Do yourself and your family a favor, and educate yourself about all the options available before you blindly subject yourself to the vaccine (or any, for that matter). If, after all your due diligence, you still decide to go with the vaccine, at the very least you made an informed decision.

Centenarian Athlete: You’re Never Too Old To Exercise…Or Break A World Record!

Jeff — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 10:06:10 +0000

Excuses for not exercising are like noses…everybody has one. Well, not Ruth Frith. This sprightly, great grandmother from Brisbane, Australia broke a shot put world record at the World Masters Games, which took place in Sydney, Australia recently. According to the site, the primary difference between the World Masters Games and the Olympic Games is that World Masters are open to people of all abilities and ages rather than just elite athletes. The emphasis on participation. Did I mention that Ruth Frith is 100 years old? That’s not a typo folks. I almost hear the sighs of disbelief. Google it and let it marinate. She also participates in the hammer and javelin throw. For those who aren’t familiar with Olympic events, the shot put, hammer, and javelin throws are high-intensity, explosive movements, which is even more impressive. Apparently, she trains five time per week with 77-pound weights and doesn’t drink or smoke. Do you notice a common thread? This lady is officially my hero. She admitted that she isn’t fond of vegetables, but that’s obviously fine given her her high activity level. Jack LaLanne would be proud.

So, what’s your excuse?

Coffee Controversy: What Are The Health Risks?

Jeff — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 20:52:59 +0000

I’ve been asked this question several times by clients, colleagues, and friends. And unless you’ve literally been in a cave the last several years, you’ve probably noticed the ubiquitous Starbucks and Caribou (and other similar establishments) coffee shops that seemingly exist in every strip mall and office park. Excluding this recent recession, even a cursory look at Starbuck’s historical stock price lends even more credibility to the popularity of coffee. Our hectic lifestyles and unhealthy stress levels have lead to a severe energy deficit, in the form of less sleep or poor quality sleep. Ever the capitalists, companies take advantage of this problem by bringing to market stimulant-based products containing caffeine, vitamins, herbs or some combination thereof – and we “drink it up.” Coffee is by far the most popular option. But this begs the question, are there any health risks associated with coffee consumption?

Women’s Health

A cup of joe has never been my “cup of tea,” but I’ve read numerous studies on the subject over the years. In the past, there had been concerns about women’s health and drinking coffee. While there are studies that suggest that eliminating caffeine can affect PMS, fibrocystic breasts, and mineral absorption, none have have produced any causative, conclusive clinical link. Females during their child-bearing years and those that breast feed should exercise caution, as should be done with any chemical that you ingest since it’s passed to the fetus/infant. Proponents of coffee tout a wide array of benefits such as reduced risks of Type 2 diabetes risk, cirrhosis, heart disease, and Alzheimer’s. Some even used it to aid in weight loss. Again, all of this is circumstantial and there are much more effective ways to improve your health, so take it with a grain of salt (or sugar).

Designer Coffee

When I hear about some of the menu options at popular coffee shops these days, the ingredients sound like the dessert section of a restaurant menu. I guess coffee with cream got too boring (or the profit margins were too slim for manufacturers). Vanilla bean frappuccino and pumpkin spice latte not only sound like Italian pastries, but they can negatively affect your health if consumed in excess. High calories ingredients like HFCS and dairy won’t do your heart or waistline any favors. I’ve written about the dangers of HFCS (high-fructose corn syrup) in a previous post, and will continue to write more as this is a controversial topic. So, use some moderation as these beverages contain sneaky calories that can derail an otherwise healthy lifestyle.

Caffeine

Caffeine, coffee’s principal ingredient, is an addictive stimulant, and can result in full-fledged addiction in some people. How many co-workers do you know who simply cannot get their day started without their cup of joe? In low amounts, it does produce a sense of alertness, well-being and even euphoria. In some, it can cause insomnia, however. Although it doesn’t present the same risks, caffeine sounds eerily similar to other substances. This is because, it crosses the blood-brain barrier and increases dopamine which affects the pleasure centers in your brain. Again, its effects are not as insidious as illicit drugs , but the mechanism is the same. Also, once the “high” from caffeine wears off, consumers tend to fight fatigue and even depression. Taking all of this into consideration will hopefully make you think twice about drinking any caffeinated beverage in high amounts.

Bottom Line

A recent Harvard University study research suggests that one or two cups of coffee a day is probably not harmful. Higher amounts over a long period of time can have a negative impact on your health though. Adding sugary, high fat, high calorie ingredients coupled with a poor diet will turn your harmless cup of coffee into something altogether different and invite all the associated risks that come with it.

Does Consolidation Among Health Food Companies Affect Quality?