The study, which was headed by Dr. John Grant from the University of Minnesota Minneapolis, found that 56% of patients improved significantly when taking N-acetylcysteine, compared with 16% taking placebo. (Patients in the study took up to 2400 milligrams per day for twelve weeks). Study participants suffered from trichotillomania (the recurrent pulling of one’s hair which results in notable hair loss). N-acetylcysteine supplements may also alleviate some effects of the flu, in addition to other advantages such as protecting the brains of those prone to dementia. Of course, it is best to not treat OCD with supplements alone. If N-acetylcysteine is used with a combined approach such as the approach utilized in the Nedley program, a far greater than 60% response rate would occur.

The World Health Organization (WHO) recently stated that worldwide, less than 40% of mothers exclusively breast feed their infants during the first six months. WHO recommends exclusive breast feeding, starting within one hour of birth, as ideal for infants during the first six months of life. During this time water, other drinks, or food should not be fed to the infant. The raised immunity resulting from the implementation of these recommendations would save an estimated 13% of the 10 million under-age deaths per year, which corresponds to 1.3 million infant and young children saved per year.

These statistics underscore the need to get adequate treatment for mental disorders. One helpful treatment for such disorders is the Nedley Depression Recovery Program. This program has been shown to be more effective than medication and traditional treatments for depression and anxiety. It also saves a significant amount of funds in the long run, as medical bills go down significantly for the average attendee.

The next upcoming program is October 15-26. 2009. Due to Dr. Nedley’s schedule there may not be a spring program, so if you know of anyone struggling with depression and/or anxiety please notify them or help them get signed up for the Nedley Health Report newsletter so they will be notified of future programs.

1 pound very firm tofu*
¼ cup cashews
½ cup water
1 ½ tbsp. McKay’s chicken seasoning
½ tbsp. nutritional yeast
½ tsp. onion powder
¼ tsp. garlic powder
½ tsp. lemon juice
1/8 tsp. turmeric
¼ tsp. salt (optional)

Step by step instructions:

1.    Press the tofu between paper towels to absorb some of the water. Crumble to consistency of cottage cheese (a potato masher works well).

2.    Place tofu in a skillet and cook uncovered, so moisture from the tofu evaporates and it becomes drier. Stir occasionally to prevent sticking and promote an evening browning.

3.    In a blender, whiz all remaining ingredients until smooth. Add the blender contents to the skillet and cook about 5 minutes or until the mixture is thickened.

*Tree of Life or extra fresh-water packed tofu is preferable.

Note: An electric skillet works well for this recipe.

“In a nutshell, they’re terrible at multi-tasking,” stated researcher Dr. Clifford Nass. The study’s findings suggest that today’s array of devices which make multi-tasking possible and supposedly easy may not be a good thing.

At the start of the study, the researchers assumed that heavy multi-taskers had some innate ability that enabled them to handle several tasks at once. It was thought that multi-taskers were good at filtering out irrelevant  distractions from their environment. A simple cognitive test of such filtering overturned this assumption, however. Habitual multi-taskers, when asked to focus on the characteristics of a group of red triangles while ignoring a few extraneous blue triangles, performed even more poorly than people who did not multi-task.

Another test that measured the brain’s ability to organize and file information yielded the same type of result: when the multi-taskers were asked to switch tasks, they were actually slower than non multi-taskers at switching their attention from one task to another.

As evidenced by this study, regular multi-taskers are not actually good at what they do. The simple habit of multi-tasking can cause sensory overload, which in turn may decrease the ability to focus attention, actually causing a suppression of the frontal lobe of the brain.

Years ago, media expert Alvin Toffler stated that constant stimulation shuts down the analytical processes and ultimately the ability to face life rationally. This constant stimulation eventually leads to escape techniques involving withdrawal, apathy, and rejection of disciplined thinking when faced with difficult duties and decisions.

The fact that society is continually developing tools to make multi-tasking easier is not necessarily a good thing.  As the Stanford study indicates, the proliferation of multi-tasking tools only increases the chance that people will voluntarily overload their senses, thereby impairing their mental performance.

Under the direction of Dr. Matthew Ellis of Washington University of Medicine in St. Louis, researchers studied 66 women with advanced breast cancer.  Study participants, who had been treated with anti-estrogens (estrogen-lowering drugs), had all experienced a relapse and their disease was progressing. Dr. Ellis found that low dose estrogen stopped the disease progression in many patients and was much better tolerated than chemotherapy would have been. Thus, low dose estrogen may help to arrest the breast cancer in women with recurrence that failed to respond to estrogen blockers (even when the tumor is estrogen-receptor positive).

I have advised my breast cancer patients to take estrogen if they are suffering from the effects of lack of estrogen and are at a very low risk of atherosclerosis  (non smoker, not hypertensive, low cholesterol levels, vegetarian, non diabetic).  They should also be estrogen receptor negative, progesterone receptor negative, HER negative.  In such cases, estrogen helps to reduce stress levels and helps treat insomnia, in addition to potentially increasing the possibility of long-term survival.

One natural source of estrogen would be soy. A number of studies, including a recent major study (published in the June, 2009 issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition), have shown that the consumption of soy reduces breast cancer risk. Researchers who studied the diets of 73,223 Chinese women over a period of 7.4 years found that those who consumed the most soy estrogens, or isoflavones, from food were 59% less likely to develop breast cancer than women who consumed the least. This cancer-fighting tendency is due to the anti-estrogenic, as well as anti-carcinogenic, properties of the isoflavones in soy. By blocking cell receptors, soy estrogens keep human estrogen levels from filling estrogen receptors to encourage the growth of cancer cells.

This causal conundrum is compounded by the fact that alcohol contributes to what has now become the leading cause of death in America (at least for people under age 85): cancer. Research has shown that alcohol consumption significantly increases the risk of cancer, which increases in tandem with lifetime alcohol intake.

People who drink once or more per day have higher risk than those who drink on a less than daily basis. Even less frequent drinking can increase the risk of some cancers. Research has revealed that people who drink one to six times per week have an 83% percent higher risk of developing cancer than those who don’t drink. Daily drinkers had a 300% increased risk of developing esophageal cancer. Researchers in a recent Canadian study found that alcohol use increased the risk of cancer of the esophagus, stomach, colon, lung, pancreas, liver, breast, and prostate.

The types of alcohol most closely associated with the development of cancer are liquor and beer. Although wine drinking involves less risk, wine still increases the risk of a certain cancers (including breast cancer in women).

Despite the fact that the average male IQ is still five points higher today, the majority of valedictorians in the U.S. are now of the female gender. A marked decrease in academic motivation among young male students has been cited as a reason for this decline. One causative factor behind the lack of motivation may be the greater sexual stimulation faced by high school and college age boys. An interesting and recently published study from New Zealand may shed some light on the subject. The researchers, who published their results in the August 2009 Australia Journal of Education, took a look at schools throughout New Zealand. The study found that in mixed schools, female academic performance far outdid male academic performance. However, the same study showed that in all boys schools, male academic performance significantly outdid female academic performance in mixed or in all girl schools.   The question is why the advantage of all boys schools on male performance?

I would like to suggest that at least one of the adverse effects of mixed schools on male academic performance would not be present if the girls in these schools would dress like girls used to during the World War Two generation and before. In the Biblical love story book entitled “Song of Solomon”, the writer charges the daughters of Jerusalem three times not to incite or awaken love  “until He pleases.” (SS 2:7, 3:5, and 8:4) This likely means until God pleases.  If this principle were followed in our schools, our country would be far ahead economically, and would also be much more advanced in creativity, inventiveness, and work ethic as males through out the country would perform at a higher level.  It stands to reason that not only would males benefit from this improvement, but females and children would as well.

Of course, provocatively dressed classmates are only one of the ways sexual stimulation is being thrown at boys and young men. Movies, video games, and the internet also play a powerful role.