(READING TIPS:  For fast reading, scan through the topic headings in BOLD BLACK, important conclusions in BOLD BLUE, and " Must Know " in BOLD RED. To jump to specific sections in this article, click on the respective LINKS in the Contents.)

Introduction

"Doctors Are the Third Leading Cause of Death In the US"

Seems hard to believe, but the most widely circulated medical periodical in the world, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), published this information July 26, 2000. The author is Dr. Barbara Starfield of the Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health. According to Dr. Starfield, 225,000 deaths per year are due to causes induced by a physician's activity, manner, or therapy. These deaths include 12,000 from unnecessary surgery; 7,000 from hospital medication errors; 80,000 from hospital infections; 20,000 from hospital errors, and 106,000 from non-error but negative effects of drugs.

These estimates are for deaths only and do not include negative effects that are associated with disability or discomfort.

225,000 deaths per year constitute the third leading cause of death in the United States, after deaths from heart disease and cancer.


Are You Getting the Best Healthcare Possible?

Evidence from a few studies indicates that as many as 20% to 30% of patients in America are receiving inappropriate care.

Of 13 countries in a recent comparison, the United States ranks an average of 12th (second from the bottom) for 16 available health indicators. More specifically, the ranking of the US on several indicators was:

• 13th for years of potential life lost (excluding external causes) 
  
• 10th for life expectancy at 40 years for females, 9th for males 
  
• 7th for life expectancy at 65 years for females, 7th for males 
  
• 10th for age-adjusted mortality
  

The poor performance of the U.S. health was recently confirmed by a World Health Organization study, which used different data and ranked the United States as 15th among 25 industrialized countries.

Could this poor standing be explained by the lack of medical technology, the lack of able doctors, or the lack of financial resources? 

Lack of technology is certainly not a contributing factor to the U.S.'s low ranking. Among 29 countries, the United States is second only to Japan in the availability of magnetic resonance imaging units and computer tomography scanners per million population. Japan, however, ranks highest on health, whereas the US ranks among the lowest.

Lack of medical education is not a contributing factor. The average American doctor spends 8-10 years in medical training prior to practice in their field of specialty. This is longer than most countries in the world. The quality and intensity of residency training programs cannot be questioned as well.

Lack of financial budget is not a contributing factor. As a percentage of gross national product, the amount of money spend on health care in the US ranks among the top in the world.

There is an obvious problem. What are the missing pieces that contribute to this low standing? 


Progression of Chronic Disease

80 percent of the most common cause of death in age related illness results from cardiovascular disease, strokes, and cancer. These degenerative diseases get their start years before outward symptoms are detectable. The average cancer takes 20-30 years to develop before a lump is felt or clinically detectable under current technology.

A lifetime of poor nutrition, stress, and environmental pollution erodes cellular protection, repair, and replacement - the very foundation of health. While outwardly one may appear "normal " and therefore considered "healthy" by traditional standards, inward cellular damage and insult is taking place daily from pollution, stress, and cellular oxidative process, coupled with endogenous and exogenous free radical attacks from age 25 onwards for most people. By age 50, as much as 30% of our cellular protein has been damage by free radical attacks. Fortunately, the body has endogenous self-repair mechanisms. However, this repair mechanism is not 100 percent. Damages that escaped repair can lead to cellular mutation and ultimately cancer.

It is possible to be seriously ill and symptom-free. Autopsy studies of those who die of sudden death from cardiac arrest have repeatedly shown a large proportion with clean coronary vessels. 

Obviously, modern laboratory and detection methods are far from perfect and lack the sensitivity to pick up danger signs early enough to warn us of impending danger. Modern medicine is usually useful only when symptoms turn catastrophic - when chest pain occurs, or brain function fails, or a lump appears. Until then, "normal" current testing results simply reinforce our denial that for those over 25 years old who appear "healthy" have, in reality, already entered into a sub-clinical state of aging with multiple diseases well in place but only undetectable. These progressive sub-clinical disease states, including hypertension and hyperglycemia, confounds traditionally educated doctors, who are thought to think in terms of demonstrable pathology to define illness. 

Relying on history, physical exams, laboratory test, x-rays, and other diagnostic procedures to confirm the presence or absence of disease is the mode of operation endorsed by the western scientific community in the past century. Anything else is considered unscientific. In the absence of measurable pathology, there is no disease. By the time the illness is detected, many diseases are in the advanced stage and are irreversible.

Within the current medical framework of thinking, "normal" or "healthy" simply means the absence of detectable illness. It does not recognize the myriad of diseases that is in the sub-clinical state of development (such as heart disease and cancer). Although much improved as compared to before, current tests lack the sensitivity to detect pathology early enough for these diseases. As technology advances, the very definition of normal vs. abnormal will no doubt change rapidly. 

Health in realty comprises a full spectrum of wellness, a continuum that ranges from severe sickness at one end to optimum health at the other end. Traditional medicine tends to label a person as sick once they cross the threshold of "normal" laboratory reference based on data derived from general population statistics. Until one crosses the threshold, they are considered "normal".

A patient who does not exhibit symptoms of scurvy, for example, can't possibly have a deficiency of vitamin C. A patient with no symptoms of pellagra obviously does not have a niacin problem. This all-or-nothing mindset in the diagnosing of disease is narrow-minded at best and is obviously deficient from a common sense perspective. Our body is not a light switch that flips from normal one day to become abnormal the next. Cancer takes years to develop and is not an all-or-nothing proposition.


Aging - A Chronic Disease?

The fact is that our body reaches it peak health around age 20-25. After that, the natural progression of aging sets in as organ by organ, we start entering the sub-clinical phase of aging and the many disease states that comes along with it. Most of our hormones, for example, decrease after reaching a peak in our 20s. The gradual decline in hormonal health is first unnoticeable. The pace of deterioration picks up as aging progresses. By age 35-45, outward symptoms are clearly detectable. The gradual decline of thyroid hormone leads to hypothyroidism; decline of growth hormone leads to a lack of energy and accelerated aging; decline of insulin leads to diabetes; and the most obvious - the decline of estrogen - leads to menopause. This continuum takes place over a 20-30 year period. The longer you can extend this continuum, the later you age and the younger you stay. It is that simple.

Until the traditional medical community reorients themselves to think of disease as a continuum of this phase and to start treating disease much earlier than currently is the standard, many who are told "normal" may actually have the disease, but that of which is in a sub-clinical state of development. Sending these patients home with a false pretense of normalcy is a modern day medical disaster of epidemic proportion.


From Research to the Public

It takes an average of 30-50 years before a new "theory" becomes accepted into mainstream medicine, having to pass clinical trials, studies, taught to medical students, and waiting for such students to mature into respected physicians to disseminate the information to the general population.

Take the free radical theory for example. First advanced in the mid 1950s, it was not accepted by the mainstream medical community. Dr. Linus Pauling, a two time Nobel Laureate said, " I believe that you can, by taking some simple and inexpensive measures, extend your life and your years of well-being. My most important recommendation is that you take vitamins everyday in optimum amounts, to supplement the vitamins you receive in your food." Dr. Pauling started taking 2,000-3,000 mg of vitamin C daily as early as mid 1960s. In his later years, he increased his intake to as much as 18,000 mg a day. He died at the age of 94 and contributed the last 20 years of his life to supplement intake.

Yet, it is not until the past 2 decades where technology has developed to a point where it can be proven that indeed free radicals exist. This is when the traditional medical community starts to take it seriously, and mostly so because the public is demanding more knowledge and found the average physician grossly inadequate to take care of their nutritional needs. Imagine the number of lives that could be saved if the traditional medical community had embraced this concept earlier.


Treating Diseases in Sub-Clinical Stages?

The traditional medical approach to diagnosing diseases does not take into consideration sub-optimum nutrition, which has reached epidemic proportions worldwide. Nor does it acknowledge widespread sub-clinical (present but clinically undetectable due to technological lag) malnutrition, which will eventually contribute to the death of 80 percent of all Americans.

To effectively treat and reverse diseases that are in the sub-clinical stages of development, no drugs can be used. The degree of illness has not progress to a state where drugs are needed to control the symptoms or "cure" the disease.

To treat such disease, the physician has to learn a new discipline, that of nutritional medicine.


Doctors Practice What They Learn

While most doctors are perceived to be experts in nutrition, the reality cannot be further from the truth. According to Jean Mayer, nutritional expert and president of Tufts University in Medford, Massachusetts, "Our studies at Harvard suggest that the average physician knows a little more about nutrition than the average secretary - unless the secretary had a weight problem. Then she probably knows more than the average physician."

The reason is simple. Most doctors are never taught about nutrition. Of the 125 medical schools in the United States, only a small percentage required coursework in nutrition. And that coursework is quite short as the average medical student receives just a few hours of training in nutrition over four years.

Clearly, this is not sufficient time to cultivate a thorough understanding of the relationship between nutrition and health - a vital link in the diagnosis and treatment of many sub-clinical disease states. As a result, physicians often disregard diet and supplementation as effective means of treating and preventing disease - especially cardiovascular disease and cancer. 
Even today, many highly respected physicians still are not familiar with nutrition. It is not their fault. Most of them simply not taught or trained. Furthermore, they are pre-occupied with the traditional practice of medicine on a day-to-day basis. The ones who are knowledgeable learn it on their own time and effort.


Can Nutritional Medicine Treat Sub-Clinical Stages of Disease?

Next to air, food is the next most common contact a person makes with the environment. The average American takes in about 2,000 calories, or about 2 pounds of food a day. This translates into over 20 tons of food over a life-time. Is it possible that this intake has no effect on our body whatsoever?

Poor dietary habits lead to a wide variety of diseases, including cardiovascular disease and cancer. There is very little doubt about it. 

Sub-optimal intake of vitamin B12, while measured and reported "normal" by traditional laboratory test, can result in Alzheimer's like symptoms that quickly resolve with oral supplementation of vitamin B12. Labeling a memory impaired elderly patient "normal" based on unremarkable laboratory findings as we know it today without considering nutritional factors is a grave mistake of massive proportion. Examples of this can fill this page many times over.

Traditional medical approach to diagnose does not take into consideration sub-optimum nutrition, which has reached epidemic proportions world wide which will eventually contribute to the death of 80 percent of all Americans.

In a long-term study sponsored by the FDA, half of the 12,000 participants - who represented all ages and walks of life - had nutrients intakes below the skimpy Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDAs). Another study showed women between ages 40 and 80 suffered from chronic malnutrition. In fact, half of all Americans past 60 years old are deficient in vitamins A, C, and E even by minimum standards of RDA. Specifically, most adult women don't meet the RDAs for zinc, vitamin B6, calcium, magnesium, and vitamin E. Most adult men don't meet the RDA for zinc and magnesium. The story gets more alarming when you realize that fewer than 20% of people eat the recommended 5 servings of fresh fruits and vegetables a day. In fact, 20 percent of all Americans don't eat any fruits and vegetables at all!

After years of insulting the body with symptom-free malnutrition, it is no surprise that the body begins to develop degenerative conditions such as arthritis, cancer, diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure, and osteoporosis. Yet because they feel healthy and were told that their laboratory test is "normal," they believe that they are truly health. This fallacy leads many to become compliant and continue with an unhealthy lifestyle until symptoms emerges. When this happens, the disease has often caused significant damage and is already irreversible. It then becomes a matter of control. Until today, there is no medication that can truly cure hypertension, diabetes, diabetes, atherosclerosis, or even the common cold. The myriad of medications simply controls the symptoms.

The reality is that other than food and air, there is very little if anything you can do to treat disease states that are in the sub-clinical phases of development at this time. While our knowledge in nutritional medicine is still incomplete and will take many more decades to complete, that is all we have to work with at this time. Nutritional medicine is not a panacea for all illnesses. Furthermore, it takes months and sometimes years for it to work. Patience and a well informed mind is required. That is not what most people want to hear, but that is the best available today.

If you are a baby-boomer, can you afford to wait, and if so, how long? If you don't start now, when? 


Should You Trust Your Doctor?

Blessed are the few who are fortunate enough to find a doctor who is well trained in nutritional medicine and understands the importance of optimum nutrition and who dispenses meaningful advice on diet and supplements. Sadly, such practitioners are a rare breed. The average physician does not live longer than the their patient. This fact speaks well for itself. It is therefore important to find a physician knowledgeable in anti-aging medicine and nutritional supplement as a first and critical step in the prevention and treatment of sub-clinical disease states. 

Mainstream medicine saves lives. There is no question about it. The long road from medical schools to residency programs that often take 10 years or more produces some of the best doctors in the world today. They are also human and subject to human errors and oversights. Despite human inadequacies, they are still the best when it comes to managing acute illness and injury that needs intervention of the highest degree.

The art of finding physicians that are experts in treating catastrophic illness is a must in any sensible health program. When you are in good health, take the opportunity to align yourself with a physician specializing in anti-aging and nutritional medicine to dispense advice on how you can slow down the aging process and reverse diseases that are in their early sub-clinical stages of development. This preventive strategy will also buy time and allow technology to keep up with the latest research if and when you need it. This two-prong approach makes the most common sense and offers the maximum chances of increasing longevity in a comprehensive anti-aging program.

It is also important to recognizing that doctors are humans and subject to mistakes. Furthermore, the practice of medicine is an art, and not an exact science. Regardless of the doctor, always seek a second or third opinion when it comes to diagnosis or treatment plans that one may not be totally comfortable with. It takes time, but in terms of optimizing health and longevity, it is worth the effort.

Message from Dr. Lam I hope you have enjoyed reading this article. If you have areas you don’t understand, comments (good or bad), or if you have a specific health concern, feel free to write to me by clicking here.

About The Author

Michael Lam, M.D., M.P.H., A.B.A.A.M. is a specialist in Preventive and Anti-Aging Medicine. He is currently the Director of Medical Education at the Academy of Anti-Aging Research, U.S.A. He received his Bachelor of Science degree from Oregon State University, and his Doctor of Medicine degree from  Loma Linda University School of Medicine, California. He also holds a Masters of Public Health degree and  is Board Certification in Anti-aging Medicine by the American Board of Anti-Aging Medicine. Dr. Lam pioneered the formulation of the three clinical phases of aging as well as the concept of diagnosis and treatment of sub-clinical age related degenerative diseases to deter the aging process. Dr. Lam has been published extensively in this field. He is the author of The Five Proven Secrets to Longevity (available on-line). He also serves as editor of the Journal of Anti-Aging Research.

For More Information

For the latest anti-aging related health issues, visit Dr. Lam at www.LamMD.com. Feel free to email Dr. Lam at dr@LamMD.com if you have any questions.


Reprint Information

This article may, in its unabridged, unaltered form and in its entirety only, be reprinted and republished without permission provided that it is for personal and non commercial education use only and further provided that credit be given to the author, with copyright notice and www.LamMD.com clearly displayed as source. Written permission from Dr. Lam is required for all other use.
 

©2000  Michael Lam, M.D. All Rights Reserved.

 
References:

Lazarou J, Pomeranz B, Corey P. Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients. JAMA. 1998; 279:1200-1205.

Leape L. Unnecessary surgery. Annu Rev Public Health. 1992; 13:363-383.

Phillips D, Christenfeld N, Glynn L. Increase in US medication-error deaths between 1983 and 1993. Lancet. 1998; 351:643-644.

Starfield, B. Journal American Medical Association Vol 284 July 26, 2000.

Weingart SN, Wilson RM, Gibberd RW, Harrison B. Epidemiology and medical error. BMJ. 2000; 320:774-777.

World Health Report 2000. World Health Organization.