Everett Chiropractic Center Blog

May 5, 2020

“Scientific” Standards

Now that everyone is an authority, and everyone believes that their logic and rational is “scientific” and reasonable (acting or recommending – think Policy pronouncements – based on the best available “science” and out of an “abundance of caution”), we should all be that much more careful who we actually trust. More often than not we are confronted with the limitations of science.

Unfortunately, the more you dial down the scientific microscope on a subject or issue, the less its claims hold up to scrutiny: witness the mask-or-no-mask debate that currently rages. Here one element of the international chiropractic “scientific” community takes issue with statements put out by another element within the profession – they do include a link to authoritative recommendations on mask wearing too, by the way.

Critical thinking is critical; having a good idea what a scientific thought process would look like is essential; and recognizing a logical fallacy when it is offered is just as necessary. Put all of that together with good quality, objective, science and you have the ability to make really well informed decisions about personal choices and about policy. This convergence is rarely seen, however, and when has personal choice and policy not been influenced heavily by politics and profit motives among the vocal proponents? And when have we, or they for that matter, not gotten emotional about it?

In the end you have to decide what you will believe and what you will do – in the absence of scientific certainty. Here we are usually talking about what promotes health – usually beginning with what provides relief from back, neck and headache pain. We offer what evidence we come across, both about what does not work, and what does work as far as we can tell. In this country you do not have to believe it. And you can choose whatever you like. But who can you trust? And how far? When the limits of science have been exhausted, we should face up to that; then make the best decision we know how to at the time.

March 18, 2020

More Good News

I love this site: https://www.olivetomato.com/the-healthy-greek-mediterranean-pantry/?fbclid=IwAR1T7wDcAjpXIwKXoZ3n1zuoxI9rzbwdn_NZ3rg4c8j2d3ln_VnXHuMdH_U

March 8, 2020

LECTINS: Finally a Decent Answer to the Questions Raised

The meat eaters have popularized a villainous role for lectins: they raised some decent questions, but stopped short of answers.

Here the other side offers perspective… and balance. A reasoned look, based on both the benefit of time (face it the Mediterranean Diet has been around a while), and science.

Have a look.


March 6, 2020

Are You Vulnerable?

This may be a good time for you to review your policies and procedures related to preventing disease and promoting health (not the same thing). Likely you are already an expert on washing hands and wearing gloves and masks.

If you breathe through your mouth, are you more or less vulnerable? You can think of every one of your policies and procedures (“habits” from now on) in terms of a cost-benefit analysis. It is a matter of risks and odds, health economics, if you will. Hopefully, we can agree that breathing through your nose is not about convenience or cost.

Speaking of breathing, what is your policy on air quality: are you trusting the indoor air quality, or are you filtering the indoor air that you breath, as a matter of habit, at home or in your work space? If you are not cleaning the air you breath, then you are taking the risk that you can afford that cost.

It is the same questions and the same thought process for a long list of habits: are you in the “habit” of Best Practices when It comes to the big three: physical, chemical, and emotional (mental) factors?

Is it a cost or an investment for you to wash your hands after using the toilet? Ok, it costs time, soap, and water. Most would consider it a wise investment in staying healthy. Staying in the bathroom, what about the thoughtful two-to-three times per week habit of doing a saline nasal wash (the Nedi Pot)? Are you more or less vulnerable if you do? Cost? Benefit? Risk? What would be a good “best practice” for you? (Actually, before we even get there, are you more or less vulnerable if you filtered that shower water in the Nedi Pot? No chlorine or other contaminants breathed into your lungs or allowed in or on your body? Cost? Benefit? Risk?)

Consider oil pulling in the same light, as another possible example. And consider that you may not know enough to make an “informed” decision. Getting informed is a cost. (Or is it an investment?)

I was in the office a local chiropractic doctor yesterday. He had produced a flyer for his reception room that reframed the current bug battle into an opportunity to market JuicePlus+ products – focusing, like all good chiropractors, on promoting health rather than fighting disease. JuicePlus+ is whole food, proven (like chiropractic adjustments) to enhance the immune system – making you less vulnerable.

When I got home there were fresh fruits and vegetables all over the kitchen table, just in from a shopping trip. I was thinking how mentally reassuring it is to know that they will all be washed with 2.5 pH and then 11.5 pH Kangen water before we eat them. A healthy habit, a best practice, but also the product of a very long cost-benefit-risk analysis – based on knowledge that informs the choice – in this case, to make the investment.

Whether it is breathing, bathing, buying supplements or a Kangen water machine, it is the same questions, same process. You can choose to be less vulnerable. Our Blog has over a thousand Posts that can help with the “informed” part. Start by washing your hands and breathing through your nose.

And we offer the chiropractic adjustments, JuicePlus+ (and Blue Green Algae), and Kangen water machines if you think that any of them will help you become less vulnerable.

February 22, 2020

News Flash!!!!

How Does Your Water Measure Up?

After air, water is the most important nutrient. Most people take it totally for granted, with many other things on their mind. But if we do not make water a priority in our lives, the consequences of that choice will, eventually, dominate our priorities.

Find out about water quality: the water that you now drink, and some of the waters that other people drink. Learn how they measure up heath-wise.

My job is not to tell you what your priorities are; my job is to educate you so that your choices are INFORMED.

Howard Phillips will be giving a water quality demonstration on Saturday, February 29th at 1 p.m.

This will be at located at 18920 28th Avenue W. in Lynnwood (to the south of the Mall along that perimeter road). You can text him at (425) 345-0999 to let him know that you are coming.

He does the best job of anyone that I have seen doing these demonstrations and, between the two of us, we can answer any question that you have about water. (Actually there are probably dozens of Posts on this Blog about water that will help you get the big picture and discern some of the critical details.

February 19, 2020

Saigon: My Barber Can Do More Than Cut Hair!

February 18, 2020

Is Drinking Coffee Healthy or Not?

This is from The Insight eNewletter. It might help.

Coffee, Estrogen and Health: What’s the consensus?

By Laura Neville, ND | February 18, 2020


It’s one of the most compelling questions in the field of health. Is coffee healthy or unhealthy? Coffee lovers delight in the multitude of studies which support its health benefits, while ex-coffee drinkers describe how great it is to live on the other side of dependency. Non-coffee drinkers often find the anxiety producing effect or the bitter taste to be unbearable.

The majority of research alludes to health benefits, though some studies offer conflicting results, which has led to research into each biologically active compound. Coffee contains hundreds of biologically active compounds (acids, carbohydrates, lignins, minerals, nitrogenous compounds, caramelized products, lipids, and volatile compounds), which all have different human health impacts.

In particular, coffee is known to have estrogenic activity. In fact, this was documented over 80 years ago! Although estrogen’s action on the reproductive tract, mammary glands, and ovaries is well acknowledged, it should also be noted that estrogen effects other areas of the body such as the bone, nervous system, heart, and brain.

Summary of general beneficial health findings: 

  • An inverse association between coffee consumption of 3-4 cups/day and all-cause mortality has been observed.
  • Coffee appears to lower the risk of cardiovascular disease, congestive heart failure, hypertension, neurodegenerative disease, liver disease, inflammatory disease, and cancer.
  • Therapeutic improvements in diabetes, metabolic syndrome, depression, obesity and asthma have been observed.
  • Coffee consumption has been correlated with slowing the progression of sarcopenia and promoting the regeneration of injured muscle.
  • A meta-analysis found an inverse association of coffee/caffeine with breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women.
  • Several studies indicate that caffeine consumption reduces the relative risk of various cancers.

Summary of beneficial health findings, specific to estrogenic activity of coffee constituents: 

  • Some of the constituents found in coffee (caffeic acid, chlorogenic acid, and vanilic acid) have estrogenic activity and have shown promising potential applications for bone protection and in the treatment of osteoporosis.
  • Nicotinic acid shows estrogenic potential and is correlated with protection of the cardiovascular system.
  • Caffeic acid, caffeic acid phenethyl ester (reported to act similarly to a SERM), ferulic acid (also found in black cohosh), sinapic acid, stigmasterol, and theophylline demonstrate estrogenic action and may prove beneficial in the relief of menopausal symptoms.
  • Caffeine, gallate (octyl), serotonin, beta-sitosterol, and gamma-tocotrienol show mostly estrogenic action and seem to offer neuroprotection.

While there are many studies that support coffee’s health benefits, there are also studies to suggest negative health effects.

Summary of deleterious general health findings:  

  • Coffee can increase the risk of anxiety, insomnia, headaches, tremors, and palpitations, especially in heavy users.
  • There is evidence that coffee can increase blood pressure in hypertensive individuals for approximately 3 hours after consumption; however, current evidence does not support an association between longer-term coffee consumption and increased blood pressure or between habitual coffee consumption and an increased risk of CVD in those with hypertension.
  • High coffee consumption (4+ cups daily) was associated with a small reduction the bone density of women, but that did not translate into an increased risk of fracture.
  • Coffee has shown to increase risk of low birth weight, and preterm birth during pregnancy in a dose dependent fashion.

Summary of deleterious health findings, specific to estrogenic activity of coffee constituents:  

  • Caffeic acid at low doses and trigonelline seem to exert unfavorable effects on bone, though it is thought that low estrogen levels are a prerequisite.
  • Trigonelline, a natural component in green coffee beans and other unidentified compounds, was found to be mutagenic, especially after roasting.
  • Excessive estrogen can potentially cause endocrine disruption, and reproductive dysfunction. Such effects were reported for coffee extracts, hippuric acid, humic acid, lecithin, and β-sitosterol.
  • Acrylaminde, a substance formed during the roasting process at high temperatures in the Maillard reaction, may have carcinogenic activity.

The health effects of coffee can be traced back to each biologically active compound such as caffeine and its constituents. Though the research specific to estrogenic activity is interesting, it is likely premature to gain any solid clinical implications from it.

To make matters more complex, estrogenic coffee constituents may exert additional activities (other than just the estrogen activity). Consideration should also be given to the coffee species, roasting degree, brewing method, serving size, and any added substances such as milk and sugar, which may all have additional health effects.

Coffee consumption is generally safe within usual levels of intake, with estimates indicating the largest risk reduction for various health outcomes at three to four cups each day (300-400 mg/d of caffeine), and more likely to benefit health than harm. However, some groups, including those with hypertension or anxiety, for example, may be more vulnerable to the adverse effects of caffeine. In addition, evidence suggests that it may be prudent for pregnant women to limit coffee consumption to 3 cups/d providing no more than 300 mg/d of caffeine. Women at increased risk of fracture (possibly due to low estrogen levels), may also be more vulnerable than the general population.

Patients may seek diet and lifestyle advice following various laboratory testing findings. Practitioners can consider this article to summarize recent studies on coffee’s health effects. It is important to remember that though coffee contains constituents with estrogenic activity, this will not directly result in salivary estrogen level changes. Also, remember that coffee may impact cortisol and epinephrine levels.


Coffee consumption and health: umbrella review of meta-analyses of multiple health outcomes. BMJ. 2018;360:k194.

Cornelis MC. The Impact of Caffeine and Coffee on Human Health. Nutrients. 2019;11(2)

Hallström H, Byberg L, Glynn A, Lemming EW, Wolk A, Michaëlsson K. Long-term coffee consumption in relation to fracture risk and bone mineral density in women. Am J Epidemiol. 2013;178(6):898-909.

Kitts DD. Studies on the estrogenic activity of a coffee extract. J Toxicol Environ Health. 1987;20(1-2):37-49.

Kiyama R. Estrogenic Activity of Coffee Constituents. Nutrients. 2019;11(6)

Mesas AE, Leon-muñoz LM, Rodriguez-artalejo F, Lopez-garcia E. The effect of coffee on blood pressure and cardiovascular disease in hypertensive individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Clin Nutr. 2011;94(4):1113-26.

Venkata charan tej GN, Neogi K, Verma SS, Chandra gupta S, Nayak PK. Caffeine-enhanced anti-tumor immune response through decreased expression of PD1 on infiltrated cytotoxic T lymphocytes. Eur J Pharmacol. 2019;859:172538.

Wu X., Skog K., Jägerstad M. Trigonelline, a naturally occurring constituent of green coffee beans behind the mutagenic activity of roasted coffee? Mutat. Res. 1997;391:171–177.

February 17, 2020

How it Works: The Blue Zones Project

I don’t know if he calls it a project, but it is that. And I have been sharing details on the Blues Zones since I first read the first book on the subject. Here is sums up the whole enterprise as it stands in 2020.


February 6, 2020

Circadian what?


January 24, 2020

Arsenic in Rice: How to Reduce it by 80%


January 10, 2020

A New Phrase: Longevity Warrior!


January 3, 2020

Best Overall Diet? Mediterranean – Again (Still)

Easiest to follow. Best diet for Diabetes. Best Plant-Based Diet. Best Diet for Healthy Eating. Only the Ornish Diet beat it out for Best Heart-Healthy Diet. (This has “Blue Zones” written all over it!)

And, as far as weight loss goes, the number one diet involved meal replacement shakes – compatible with the Mediterranean Diet (and often discussed both around here (the office) and on this Blog. (If you are going to replace a meal with a shake, you might as well make it healthy shake!)

Also note that while the Keto Diet was tied for third place in weight loss, it was 34th place in best overall.

Happy New Year!



Older Posts »

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: