Posted by Dr. Jonathan Walker on January 31, 2009 under Back pain, Chiropractic, Neck pain, Research Articles, Whiplash | 
The syndrome of whiplash was first described in litigation in 1928. Since
that time whiplash has had an unsavory reputation. Many researchers and doctors avoided involvement with whiplash injuries and opinions varied.
Over time, it became clear that complaints of patients sustaining this type of injury were, in fact, fairly consistent. The most common complaint, neck pain, could easily be understood, but other symptoms, such as ringing in the ears, dizziness, blurred vision, headaches, numbness, and back pain, were not so easily explained clinically.
According to research statistics, nearly one-third of all motor vehicle accidents are rear-end collisions. Newton’s first law of motion states that “an object continues either at rest or in a state of motion in a straight line, unless it is acted upon by an external force”. When a vehicle stopped at a red light is hit, the car is moved forward by the external force of the impacting vehicle. This force pushes the seat and driver forward. The neck, which is not in contact with the seat, remains stationary, causing hyperextension of the neck. When the front vehicle stops, the driver is thrown forward.
Although the shoulder harness prevents the driver from hitting the steering wheel or windshield, it forces the head to fly forward in a twisting motion, causing hyper flexion of the neck. Most injuries are a result of hyperextension, when the neck can exceed the maximum physiologic extension of 70 degrees by as much as 120 degrees, stretching some muscles as much as 30%.
The forces exerted on the head and neck with rear-end collisions can be quite high. For example, one G is the force exerted by the earth’s gravity which causes an object to fall at 32 feet per second. Pilots begin to pass out at 6 Gs, and at 8 Gs you are pinned to your seat. If a 150-pound person is subjected to 10 Gs, this is a force of 1,500 pounds. In crash testing, with impacts below 10 mph, the head can be subjected to 10 to 15 Gs for 100 milliseconds.
If the average head weighs 12 pounds, then it becomes a weight of 120-180 pounds. Talk about a headache!
Research involved with the actual injuries sustained by victims of whiplash show tearing of muscles, ligaments, vertebral disc derangement, tears in the ligamentous capsules surrounding the joints, damage to the sympathetic nervous system and peripheral nervous system, occult fractures, mild concussions, and micro-hemorrhages of the brain tissue and spinal cord, as well as stress disorders.
Many of these injuries are imperceptible on MRIs, CT scans, and x-rays. The symptoms range from muscle pain, headaches, jaw pain, vertigo, nausea, visual problems, forgetfulness, and unexplained numbness in the arms and legs, etc.
Symptoms may not present themselves for hours, days, months, or even years after the accident. Scientific evidence supports these characteristic of whiplash injuries. Other studies show that neck pain presents in 65% of patients within 6 hours of the accident, 28% within 24 hours, and 7% within 72 hours, though those people suffering symptoms immediately after the accident are more likely to continue to show symptoms more than 2 years following the initial injury.
People who have pre-existing conditions such as arthritis, and women due to their smaller frame and less muscle density than men, are more likely to be injured, though the speed and size of the vehicles involved, as well as the position of the seat and other factors play a significant role in determining the severity of an injury. Government reports revealed over one million injuries from rear-end collisions in 1990, and estimates project that over 25 years the prevalence of chronic pain from whiplash is more than 9% of the total U.S. population.
To lessen your risk of serious injury, wear your seatbelt, sit up in your seat with your seat in the upright position, and stop thinking of your head restraint as a headrest. The majority of people have their head restraint improperly positioned. Correctly adjusted, your restraint should be about even with eye level, and with no more than a two-inch gap between the restraint and your head.
If you are in an accident, even what appears to be a minor one, after life-threatening injuries have been ruled out, follow-up with a physician who specializes in soft-tissue trauma.
Remember, prevention is always best… drive safely, and watch out for the car behind you.
Posted by Dr. Jonathan Walker on January 16, 2009 under Nutrition, Research Articles |
The benefits of strength training are well-documented and extensive. From increasing bone density to improving cholesterol, resistance training should be included in any exercise routine. Recent research is showing that people with more lean muscle mass may be at an advantage when it comes to fighting cancer.
A study in the British medical journal Lancet found that cancer patients with increased levels of lean muscle mass lived on average 10 months longer than those with lower muscle mass. While other studies have shown that people who exercise have lower levels of cancer, it is unclear whether lifting weights prior to or after the cancer diagnosis has the greatest effect.
The researchers still are not sure exactly what causes lean mass to have a protective effect. My take would be this- lean muscle mass increases our metabolism, burning fat. Stored fat in the body produces excess estrogen, which has been linked to certain cancers (this is one of the reasons Hormone Replacement Therapy in post-menopausal women increases the risk of cancer). So by reducing fat mass the progression of cancer is slowed.
We also know that fat tissue causes the release of a variety of chemicals called cytokines. These chemicals chronically increase inflammation in the body. It has been well demonstrated that inflammation is the root cause of many types of cancer, as well as cardiovascular disease, Type 2 diabetes, and obesity. People with more lean muscle mass have lower levels of inflammation, and therefore are better prepared to stave off diseases such as cancer.
So get started today! Don’t wait until it’s too late to begin anti-inflammatory (and anti-cancer) habits. Exercise regularly with weights, eat an anti-inflammatory diet (lots of fruits, vegetables, healthy fats and protein), and supplement your diet with quality nutritional products.
If you want the support of physicians trained in natural and preventative medicine, contact our office today. Dr. Walker and Dr. Sancetta can help develop a plan of action for you to achieve your goals!
Posted by Dr. Jonathan Walker on January 7, 2009 under Nutrition, Research Articles |
Some interesting research is being brought to the forefront in the synthetic vs. whole food supplement debate. The more time I spend studying, the more intuitive sense it makes to me that natural whole food supplements are superior to their synthetic counterparts. It is impossible to replicate in a lab the nutrients the healthy foods our bodies are designed to function on.
All of the nutrients in whole food supplements, like the Optimal Health Systems line we carry in the practice, are derived from natural sources. Also, the minerals in the supplements we use are bound with amino acids to significantly increase absorption.
These studies illustrate not only the possible superiority of whole food supplements, but also the potential dangers of synthetic vitamins.
Synthetic Vitamin C Supplements May Lead to Heart Disease
Researchers from the Institute for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Research found that “regular intake of [synthetic] vitamin C pills may quicken the thickening of artery walls, a condition known as atherosclerosis”. Of the 573 men and women studied, those that had consumed at least 500 milligrams of ascorbic acid Vitamin C supplements a day, developed an inner artery wall layer 2.5 times thicker than that of people who did not take the synthetic supplements. However, the researchers found “no evidence that vitamin C from food caused heightened atherosclerosis progression. According to researcher James H. Dwyer, “When you take in vitamins from food, you take them in with a large number of other components of that food. It is plausible that the protective effective of a diet occurs because of the interaction of many components of those foods.”
Rado, Alicia. “Too much of a good thing? Large doses of vitamin C linked to atherosclerosis”. HSC Weekly, Feb 25, 2000; Vol 6, No 7.
Synthetic Vitamin E Harmful
According to a study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the synthetic form of vitamin E (alpha-tochopherol) does an incomplete job of neutralizing certain compounds and can actually block beneficial natural nutrients in the body. Stephan Christen, lead author of the study, said consuming over 100 international units of alpha-tocopherol may be harmful. Christen said he hopes vitamin/pill companies will soon begin adding gamma-tocopherol to their formulas so consumers can receive the full benefits from vitamin E.
Recer, Paul. “Vitamin E pills may pose risk.” The Arizona Republic, April 1, 1997.
Synthetic Vitamin C May Contribute to DNA Damage
According to an article published in the journal Science, researchers found that “the [synthetic] vitamin C pills taken by millions of health-conscious Americans may actually help produce toxins that can damage their DNA, a step toward forming cancer cells”. Ian A. Blair, the study’s lead author, said they found that synthetic “vitamin C was highly efficient in converting lipid hydroperoxide [a compound produced in the body from fat in the diet] into gene-damaging toxins.”
Recer, Paul. “Lab Study Finds Vitamin C Dangers.” The Washington Post, June 14, 2001.
Beta-Carotene Provides No Benefit in Cancer Prevention
“Former blue asbestos workers known to be at high risk of asbestos-related diseases, particularly malignant mesothelioma and lung cancer, were enrolled in a chemo-prevention program using vitamin A. [The goal of the study was] to compare rates of disease and death in subjects randomly assigned to [synthetic] beta-carotene or retinol.” Results of the five-year study “confirm other findings of a lack of any benefit from administration of large doses of synthetic beta-carotene.”
de Klerk NH et al. Vitamin A and cancer prevention II: comparison of the effects of retinol and beta-carotene. Int J Cancer 1998 Jan 30; 75(3):362-7.
