According to the theory, it is in our best interest to make sure we eat more alkaline foods than acid foods, so that we end up with an overall alkaline load on our body. This will supposedly protect us from the diseases of modern civilization, whereas eating a diet with a net acid load will make us vulnerable to everything from cancer to osteoporosis. To make sure we stay alkaline, they recommend keeping track of urine or saliva pH using pH test strips.
In this two-part series, I will address the main claims made by proponents of the alkaline diet, and will hopefully clear up some confusion about what it all means for your health.d
Will eating an alkaline diet make you and your bones healthier? #alkalinediet #bonehealth
Foods Can Influence Our Urine pH
Before I start dismantling this theory, I want to acknowledge a couple things they get right. First, foods do leave behind acid or alkaline ash. The type of “ash” is determined by the relative content of acid-forming components such as phosphate and sulfur, and alkalis such as calcium, magnesium, and potassium. (1, 2) In general, animal products and grains are acid forming, while fruits and vegetables are alkali forming. Pure fats, sugars, and starches are neutral, because they don’t contain protein, sulfur, or minerals.
It’s also true that the foods we eat change the pH of our urine. (3, 4) If you have a green smoothie for breakfast, for example, your pee a few hours later will likely be more alkaline than that of someone who had bacon and eggs. As a side note, it’s also very easy to measure your urine pH, and I think this is one of the big draws of the alkaline diet. Everyone can probably agree that it’s satisfying to see concrete improvements in health markers depending on your diet, and pH testing gives people that instant gratification they desire. However, as you’ll see below, urine pH is not a good indicator of the overall pH of the body, nor is it a good indicator of general health.
Foods Don’t Influence Our Blood pH
Proponents of the alkaline diet have put forth a few different theories about how an acidic diet harms our health. The more ridiculous claim is that we can change the pH of our blood by changing the foods we eat, and that acidic blood causes disease while alkaline blood prevents it. This is not true. The body tightly regulates the pH of our blood and extracellular fluid, and we cannot influence our blood pH by changing our diet. (5, 6) High doses of sodium bicarbonate can temporarily increase blood pH, but not without causing uncomfortable GI symptoms. (7, 8) And there are certainly circumstances in which the blood is more acidic than it should be, and this does have serious health consequences. However, this state of acidosis is caused by pathological conditions such as chronic renal insufficiency, not by whether you choose to eat a salad or a burger. In other words, regardless of what you eat or what your urine pH is, you can be pretty confident that your blood pH is hovering around a comfortable 7.4.
A more nuanced claim has been proposed specifically regarding bone health, and this hypothesis is addressed somewhat extensively in the scientific literature. It supposes that in order to keep blood pH constant, the body pulls minerals from our bones to neutralize any excess acid that is produced from our diet. Thus, net acid-forming diets (such as the typical Western diet) can cause bone demineralization and osteoporosis. This hypothesis, often referred to as the “acid-ash hypothesis of osteoporosis,” is what I will discuss for the rest of this article. I’ll address some of the other health claims in part two.
Like what you’re reading? Get my free newsletter, recipes, eBooks, product recommendations, and more!
The Kidneys—Not Bone—Regulate Blood pH
While more reasonable than the first claim, the acid-ash hypothesis seems to completely disregard the vital role the kidneys play in regulating body pH. The kidneys are well equipped to deal with “acid ash.” When we digest things like protein, the acids produced are quickly buffered by bicarbonate ions in the blood. (7) This reaction produces carbon dioxide, which is exhaled through the lungs, and salts, which are excreted by the kidneys. During the process of excretion, the kidneys produce “new” bicarbonate ions, which are returned to the blood to replace the bicarbonate that was initially used to buffer the acid. This creates a sustainable cycle in which the body is able to maintain the pH of the blood, with no involvement from the bones whatsoever.
Thus, our understanding of acid-base physiology does not support the theory that net acid-forming diets cause loss of bone minerals and osteoporosis. But just for argument’s sake, let’s say that our renal system cannot handle the acid load of the modern diet. If bones were used to buffer this excess acid, we would expect to see evidence of this taking place in clinical trials. Alas, that is not the case.
Clinical Trials Do Not Support the Acid-Ash Hypothesis of Osteoporosis
At first glance, some of the studies may look convincing, because higher acid diets often increase the excretion of calcium in the urine. Some researchers assumed that this extra calcium was coming from bone. (8) However, when calcium balance (intake minus excretion) was measured, researchers found that acid-forming diets do not have a negative effect on calcium metabolism. (9) Some studies found that supplementing with potassium salts (intended to neutralize excess acid) had beneficial effects on markers for bone health, which would tend to support the acid-ash hypothesis. However, these results were only observed in the first few weeks of supplementation, and long-term trials did not find any benefit to bone health from these alkalizing salts. (10)
Finally, even though the hypothesis holds that higher intakes of protein and phosphate are acidifying and therefore detrimental to bone health, multiple studies have shown that increasing protein or phosphate intake has positive effects on calcium metabolism and on markers for bone health. (11, 12) Summarizing the clinical evidence, two different meta-analyses and a review paper all concluded that randomized controlled trials do not support the hypothesis that acidifying diets cause loss of bone mineral and osteoporosis. (13, 14, 15)
So, it appears that neither physiology nor clinical trials support the acid-ash hypothesis of osteoporosis. But again, just for argument’s sake, let’s suppose that these trials are imperfect (which they are, of course; no science is perfect!), and thus we can’t depend on their conclusions. If the acid-ash hypothesis of osteoporosis were true, we would expect to see an association between net acid-producing diets and osteoporosis in observational studies. Yet again, this is not the case.
Observational Studies Do Not Support the Acid-Ash Hypothesis of Osteoporosis
Observational studies have not found a correlation between dietary acid load and bone mineral density (BMD) or fracture risk, nor have they found a correlation between urine pH and BMD or fracture risk. (16, 17, 18) Additionally, higher protein intakes are correlated with better bone health in multiple studies, even though high-protein diets are generally net acid forming. (19) In fact, animal protein in particular (the most acid-forming food of all) has been associated with better bone health. (20, 21) Imagine that! One study included in a recent meta-analysis did find an association between higher protein intake and greater risk for fracture (22), but compared to the numerous more recent studies showing the opposite, this evidence isn’t very strong. Overall, the acid-ash hypothesis of osteoporosis is not supported by physiology, clinical trials, or observational data.
Hopefully I’ve given you a decent understanding of how our bodies handle pH balance, and have reassured you that you don’t need to worry about the acidity of your urine with regards to bone health. Click here for part two, where I tackle some of the other claims of the alkaline diet!
Better supplementation. Fewer supplements.
Close the nutrient gap to feel and perform your best.
A daily stack of supplements designed to meet your most critical needs.
I love your stuff, but can you please stop inhibiting science literacy by using the word “theory” to describe things that are not theories? I know you’re using it in the vernacular, but still. It’s not helping the cause of real science.
Here’s a nice definition from James Krupa, “a theory is a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence generating testable and falsifiable predictions.”
Hello James,
I was having a lot of UTI’s last year, I am 67 years old, I read about d-mannose, the last UTI I had was 3 months after the last UTI, I immediately started taking the d-mannose 5 times per day and started to get relief in about 6 hrs. I did that for about 5 days, that was 10 months ago, I now take d-mannose with a week cup of week coffee in the morning, which I can’t seem to give up, if my urine has an unusual smell to it I may take another d mannose during the day. The D-mannose has been a life saver since no one wants to take antibiotics every 3 months. ..but I also suffer from incontinence, I use to take a lot of vit c, but I noticed it seem to make my incontinence worse, ..I do take DHEA in very small amounts, 6 mlg, by accident one day i took 12 mlg but noticed my incontinence had improved. the new DHEA is the one that is supposedly non hormonal. 7 keto DHEA, but I would be taking it for a long time, (not sure if it is safe to take the 12 mlg) do you have any knowledge about this nutrient? Thank you…Pat
Hi Patricia,
D-mannose is great for UTIs. It does not kill the bacteria causing the infection but rather prevents the adherence if bacteria to the urinary tract walls. Just like real cranberry juice or blueberry juice does.
I also like the herbs uva ursi or manzanita leaves, which actually kill the bacteria. These plants contain aglycones, consisting of an antiseptic hydroquinone bound to a glucose molecule. Uva ursi contains 2 while manzanita leaves contain 16. These aglycones remain intact until they reach the kidneys then the aglycone is split releasing the antiseptic hydroquinones in to the urinary tract. This kills the bacteria in the urinary tract without affecting other parts of the body like conventional antibiotics do and thus these herbs do not cause secondary infections like pharmaceutical antibiotics.
Taking the herbs with some calcium citrate will enhance the effects by further alkalizing the urine since the hydroquinones work best in an alkaline environment.
Synthetic vitamin C does give some people urinary tract problems. Possibly from the oxalic acid it can form. I knew one lady that always got urinary tract infections when she took even small amounts of synthetic vitamin C.
I have not really looked much in to 7 keto DHEA since I don’t like fooling with isolated hormonal substances. I know that this is not supposed to directly convert in to testosterone, which could then be converted in to estrogen by aromatase. But it does convert in to DHEA-S, which can explain the androgenic effects of 7 keto DHEA.
James
Hi James,
What do you think about intermittent fasting?
I can only comment that I am seeing a holistic dietician that supports intermittent short (24-48 hr.) fasts. I have fasted several times for 24 hrs and experienced a feeling of well being afterwards.
Hi B,
There are various levels of fasting from complete no food to minimal amounts of something to help the body and prevent blood sugar from dropping.
Personally I do not believe in strict fasts at all. The way I see it is that this is simply putting more stress on the body. For example, if a person goes on a diet where they don’t eat what happens? The metabolism simply slows down to try and conserve energy. Then the body turns around and creates more fat with the food it gets later in anticipation of future starvation periods.
If someone is going to fast I recommend a limited fast such as still taking in some juice or nutritional herbs to reduce stress on the body, prevent blood sugar drops and to prevent the body from going in to a starvation mode.
James
i beg to differ. fasting is almost always good. and you can fast for much longer than most people realize. just drink water. most people say they feel Great! on a fast.
senses become attenuated, thinking and skin clear up,
energy increases, toxins decamp, and sleep is deeper.
fasting is the oldest curative we have; all animals fast when not feeling well.
natural, temporary stress is a good thing. we rev ourselves up at the molecular level and become more efficient. the body quickly adjusts and blood markers improve as biochemistry reboots.
it’s not just all about what you eat. we eat too often and too much, which backs up the system causing congestion, an under appreciated cause of disease.
this congestion results in (i speculate) chronic stress, which is not good.
Buddhi: “i beg to differ. fasting is almost always good. and you can fast for much longer than most people realize. just drink water. most people say they feel Great! on a fast.
senses become attenuated, thinking and skin clear up,
energy increases, toxins decamp, and sleep is deeper.”
…….Stress is put on the body, the body’s metabolism slows down then when eating resumes more weight is put on to prepare for future starvation periods, there is a decrease in the intake of needed nutrients………
Hi Laura,
The whole cancer cannot live in an alkaline environment is BOGUS!!!!! Cancer forms in an alkaline environment all the time. What people are confusing is the fact that in the later stages of cancer the immediate area around the tumor becomes acidic. Therefore, some people have mistook this to mean that cancer thrives in an acidic environment.
Alkalinity drives cancer cell growth and malignant transformation:
Role of the Intracellular pH in the Metabolic Switch Between Oxidative Phosphorylaiton and Aerobic Glycolysis-Relavance to Cancer. Cancer 2011;2(3):WMC001716
Na+/H+ exchanger-dependent intracellular alkalinization is an early event in malignant transformation and plays an essential role in the development of subsequent transformation-associated phenotypes. FASEBJ 2000
Nov;14(14):2185-97
Tumorigenic 3T3 cells maintain an alkaline intracellular pH under physiological conditions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1990 October; 87(19): 7414–7418
31P NMR analysis of intracellular pH of Swiss Mouse 3T3 cells: effects of extracellular Na+ and K+ and mitogenic stimulation. J Membr Biol 1986;94(1):55-64
Extracellular Na+ and initiation of DNA synthesis: role of intracellular pH and K+. J Cell Biol 1984 Mar;98(3):1082-9
Keep in mind that the blood is kept in an alkaline state except in very rare circumstances. Yet cancer cells form in this alkaline state. Even tissues that are normally acidic, such as the stomach and colon have a higher risk of cancer when they become too alkaline.
When the cancer cells start to grow they produce hydrogen ions (protons) just as healthy cells do as part of their energy production, which involves both glycolysis and oxidative phosphorylation also as with healthy cells. The highly alkaline internal pH of cancer cells though increases the use of glycolysis over oxidative phosphorylation in cancer cells.
The protons do generate acidity so they are removed or buffered by the body. The body can only do so much though to keep up. In the early stages of the cancer the body can keep up with the export of the acidic protons from both healthy cells and malignant cells maintaining the normally alkaline tissues in an alkaline state. As the tumor continues to grow though there comes a tipping point where the higher metabolic rate of the tumor produces more protons than the body can remove or buffer and the LOCALIZED area around the tumor becomes acidic as the tumor cells rapidly export the protons out to maintain the internal alkalinity they need to survive and thrive. If the proton pumps of cancer cells are blocked the cancer cells become acidic killing them:
Vacuolar H(+)-ATPase in Cancer Cells: Structure and Function. Atlas of
Genetics and Cytogenetics in Oncology and Haematology Sept. 2011
Vacuolar H+-ATPase in human breast cancer cells with distinct metastatic
potential: distribution and functional activity. Am J Physiol Cell
Physiol 286: C1443–C1452, 2004
Targeting vacuolar H+-ATPases as a new strategy against cancer. Cancer
Res 2007 Nov 15;67(22):10627-30
Vacuolar H(+)-ATPase signaling pathway in cancer. Curr Protein Pept Sci
2012 Mar;13(2):152-63
Another very common myth is that cancer cells secrete lactic acid. Cancer cells secrete non-acidic lactate, not lactic acid. These ARE NOT the same thing even though the two terms get used interchangeably all the time, even by researchers who should know better:
Tumor metabolism of lactate: the influence and therapeutic potential for MCT and CD147 regulation. Future Oncol 2010 Jan;6(1):127-48
Enzymes involved in L-lactate metabolism in humans. Mitochondrion 2013 Sep 9. pii: S1567-7249(13)00244-4
Tumor metabolism: cancer cells give and take lactate. J Clin Invest 2008 Dec;118(12):3835-7
Mitochondrial fission induces glycolytic reprogramming in cancer-associated myofibroblasts, driving stromal lactate production, and early tumor growth. Oncotarget 2012 Aug;3(8):798-810
Therefore, the localized acidity around malignant tumors IS NOT from the secretion of lactic acid, but rather the rapid export of protons by the cancer cells to maintain their internal alkalinity.
There have been studies where attempts to alkalize cancer cells to kill them has been tried.
Attempts to alkalize with cesium chloride showed that the cesium chloride DID NOT kill cancer cells. To the contrary cesium chloride was found to not only cause cancer being a mutagen, but also to promote the growth of existing cancers. Cesium chloride was also found to increase the risk of death from heart issues and could cause liver damage. The whole concept of using cesium chloride stems from very faulty studies by one doctor who used more than one therapy on cancer patients then attributed the survival of the few that did survive to cesium chloride while ignoring the other therapies. And the myth that parts of the world where cesium levels are high in the soil and water have lower cancer rates. I checked the cancer rates in those areas they claim were low and found the cancer rates were normal to extraordinarily high compared to other parts of the world.
Alkalizing with lithium chloride showed no effect on cancer cells.
Alkalizing by the ingestion of baking soda (sodium bicarbonate) showed no killing of cancer cells, but did inhibit metastases by reducing the localized acidity needed for the body’s proteolytic enzymes to allow cancer metastases.
The problem with this though is that the study only looked at the short term effects of baking soda ingestion. To generate an alkaline effect at all the stomach acid and other buffers need to be overwhelmed. One role of stomach acid is to prevent infection by ingested pathogens, which include those that cause cancer. Another role is the absorption of nutrients, which include those required for a process known as methylation. Methylation is involved in about 4,000 reactions in the body. Among these are immune function, hormone balance and DNA repair. Therefore, neutralizing the stomach acid by ingesting baking soda actually increases not only the development of cancer but also cancer growth by decreasing methylation in the body.
Many people will refer to the quack Simoncini who claims cancer is a fungus and who also claims Aspergillus and Candida are the same thing. That is all another story though. Simoncini has had some luck though injecting concentrated baking soda solutions directly in to tumors. People are assuming this is helping because of alkalizing, although alkalizing has NOTHING to do with it. In fact, the reaction of the baking soda with the acidity around the tumor will just form another acid called carbonic acid. The reason this can work is because the concentrated solution is causing such as strong osmotic shift on the cells that it will kill cancer cells as well as healthy cells. This is the same principle as destroying varicose veins, which are still normal cells, by injecting a concentrated saline solution in to them.
As for diet helping, the answer is yes. But not from alkalizing since diet DOES NOT alkalize the body. Healthy foods are rich in immune stimulating nutrients such as ascorbic acid and pantothenic acid, as well as antioxidants and antivirals (the vast majority of cancers are viral in origin) such as tannic acid, chlorogenic acid, etc. Inflammation is also a key factor in cancer and healthy foods can contain anti-inflammatories such as omega 3 fatty acids and salicylic acid. Notice what all these compounds have in common? Fibers in these foods help with detox and are fermented by the flora that account for most of our immune system in to beneficial acids such as lactic acid, acetic acid and other fatty acids.
Speaking of acids I would love to see any of these people promoting the cancer loves acid and low oxygen levels explain how that works since alkalinity DECREASES oxygen levels. Acidity is needed to release oxygen from hemoglobin and to maintain circulation. People die from severe alkalosis due to the above reasons and due to the fact that severe alkalosis induces severe spasm contractions of the lungs preventing the person from breathing. So how do they explain their paradox that cancer cells thrive in low oxygen that would be induced by alkalinity but also supposedly thrive in acidity, which increases cancer cell oxygen levels?
Speaking of which the cancer loves low oxygen levels is also a major myth. Cancer cells are highly reliant on oxygen for survival and growth. Cancer cells die in the absence of oxygen stimulating a process known as angiogenesis to increase oxygen levels to surviving cancer cells spurring their growth:
Reliance of cancer cells on oxygen:
Oxygen Consumption Can Regulate the Growth of Tumors, a New Perspective on the Warburg Effect. PLoS One 2009 Sep 15;4(9):e7033
Choosing between glycolysis and oxidative phosphorylation: a tumor’s dilemma? Biochim Biophys Acta 2011 Jun;1807(6):552-61
Comparison of Metabolic Pathways between Cancer Cells and Stromal Cells in Colorectal Carcinomas: a Metabolic Survival Role for Tumor-Associated Stroma. Cancer Res January 15, 2006 66;632
Akt Stimulates Aerobic Glycolysis in Cancer Cells. Cancer Res June 1, 2004 64; 3892
That cancer growth is inhibited by low oxygen levels an die in the absence of oxygen:
Oxygen consumption can regulate the growth of tumors, a new perspective on the Warburg effect. PLoS One 2009 Sep 15;4(9):e7033
Anoxia is necessary for tumor cell toxicity caused by a low-oxygen environment. Cancer Res 2005 Apr 15;65(8):3171-8
Relationship between oxygen and glucose consumption by transplanted tumors in vivo. Cancer Res 1967 Jun;27(6):1041-52
Death of cancer cells by lack of oxygen and angiogenesis stimulation to increase the growth rate of tumors by increasing oxygen levels to the tumor:
Computational models of VEGF-associated angiogenic processes in cancer. Math Med Biol 2012 Mar;29(1):85-94
Blood Flow, Oxygen Consumption, and Tissue Oxygenation of Human Breast Cancer Xenografts in Nude Rats. Cancer Res 47, 3496-3503, July 1,1987
A Mathematical Model for the Diffusion of Tumour Angiogenesis Factor into the Surrounding Host. Tissue Math Med Biol (1991) 8 (3): 191-220
The History of Tumour Angiogenesis as a Therapeutic Target. University of Toronto Medical Journal Vol 87, No 1 (2009)
In fact, cancer cells have a higher affinity for oxygen than healthy cells due to their reliance on oxygen:
Utilization of Oxygen by Transplanted Tumors in Vivo. Cancer Res 1967;27:1020-1030
Growth-related changes of oxygen consumption rates of tumor cells grown in vitro and in vivo. J Cell Physiol 1989 Jan;138(1):183-91
I cover the use of herbs and touch on diet in this write up:
http://www.medcapsules.com/info/Cancer.htm
But with any cancer especially metastasized and aggressive cancers my first choice will always be ozone therapy:
http://medcapsules.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=89
http://medcapsules.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=6804&pid=9900&mode=threaded
You can also run a search on the word “ozone” on the MedCapsules site fr more research on ozone.
James
Some cells can’t self destruct because of low ATP production. Alkalinity both increases excretion of some carcinogens(The top two oldest documented women smoked almost their whole lives) and increases ATP production. Cells that couldnt pull the trigger to commit suicide before now can. There are also some pancreatic enzymes(cancer eating) that appear to require a minimum alkalinity to activate, just as pepsinogen in the stomach requires acidity to activate. This is why pancreatic cancer has one of the lowest survival rates of any cancer. Also predicted by alkalinity…the heart gets blood first and highest PH, virtually zero cancer, the lungs receive the lowest PH blood, highest rate of cancer.
Bo Jangels: “Alkalinity both increases excretion of some carcinogens(”
Which carcinogens? And please back your claim with some credible evidence.
Bo Jangels: ”
Bo Jangels: “and increases ATP production.”
That would be a pretty good magic trick since ATP formation is dependent on oxygen levels. During hypoxic glycolysis only 2 molecules of ATP are formed. As were with oxidative phosphorylation (OxPhos) there is 32 molecules of ATP formed. But excess alkalinity would increase glycolysis and decrease OxPhos since the release of oxygen to cells is ACID dependent . This is one of the reasons that severe alkalosis can kill a person from a lack of oxygen. The other reasons is that alkalosis decreases circulation by constricting blood vessels, which further reduces tissue oxygenation. In severe cases of alkalosis the lungs also go in to spasm contractions preventing respiration.
Acidosis actually increases tissue oxygenation and thus increased ATP formation in most cells.
Bo Jangels: “There are also some pancreatic enzymes(cancer eating) that appear to require a minimum alkalinity to activate, just as pepsinogen in the stomach requires acidity to activate.”
Which enzymes specifically are you referring to? The only pancreatic enzymes I can think of that require alkalinity for activation digest sugar molecules, not cancer cells.
Bo Jangels: “This is why pancreatic cancer has one of the lowest survival rates of any cancer.”
The reason that pancreatic cancer is so aggressive has NOTHING to do with pH. Pancreatic cancer is aggressive due to the high blood flow and thus high oxygen delivery to the cancer cells. Cancer cells are so dependent on oxygen for survival and growth that they have a higher affinity for oxygen than healthy cells.
Also same reason the initial death of the center of malignant tumors from a lack of oxygen stimulates the process of angiogenesis. The angiogenesis in turn increases the level of oxygen to the surviving cancer cells stimulating their growth.
Same reason that liver cancer and small cell lung carcinoma have the same to lower survival rates as pancreatic cancer.
Cancer itself arises in an alkaline environment all the time. In fact, research has also shown that when healthy cells are made excessively alkaline the healthy cells morph in to cancer cells.
Also keep in mind that cancer cells have a more alkaline internal pH than healthy tissues. People keep mistaking the external acidity that occurs around cancerous tumors during the LATER stages of growth as meaning cancer cells are acidic or that acidity causes cancer. Neither claim is true.
To maintain their alkalinity cancer cells rapidly export acidic protons in to the external matrix making the micro-environment just around the outside of the tumor acidic when the tumor finally grows large enough that the proton export exceeds the removal rate. This is what people commonly mistake for acidic cancer cells. When the proton pumps of cancer cells are blocked the cancer cells become acidic killing them.
Bo Jangels: ” Also predicted by alkalinity…the heart gets blood first and highest PH, virtually zero cancer, the lungs receive the lowest PH blood, highest rate of cancer.”
That is a severely flawed hypothesis.
First of all if you knew how the heart worked then you would know that there are parts of the heart that pump well oxygenated blood, and parts that pump de-oxygenated blood. So according to your faulty hypothesis of pH being dependent on oxygen levels then how could the heart be completely alkaline when it has both oxygenated and de-oxygenated blood? According to your faulty hypothesis there should be well oxygenated high pH areas decreasing cancer, but there would also be low oxygenated, low pH, areas that should be causing cancer. So clearly your hypothesis is wrong.
Oh by the way have you ever taken in to consideration what is formed during ATP formation? Acidic hydrogen ions (protons).
As for lungs there is also the same flaw in your hypothesis. Keep in mind that the lungs are exchanging carbon dioxide for oxygen and thus the lungs have both high and low oxygen levels.
Actually I have been working on my own hypothesis along the lines of ATP formation for a number of years and have put together a lot of evidence to back it up. You may get there some day if you drop the pH myths about cancer.
By the way, how would you explain blood cancers when the blood is kept in alkaline state? And what about lymphatic cancers since the lymphatic system is kept more alkaline than the blood? And what about cancers in much of the intestine, which is also mainly alkaline? Actually the majority of tissues that do develop cancer have alkaline pH levels. And science has shown that areas of the body that are normally acidic for health have an increased risk of cancer when they become too alkaline.
Hi James, obviously you have a very firm grasp of textbook, human physiology, respiration being the primary mechanism of body ph control, etc. After an open minded perusal of the general thrust of your take on this, I am left with the feeling that there is something you are missing in the big picture of the ultimate effect of diet on overall body ph. If what you say is true, that the ph of the food we eat, ultimately has little to no effect on, let’s say our blood ph, then it should be true in the most extreme of cases. So you are saying then…. that if one went on a “fast” consuming only large quantities of water with sodium bicarbonate in it… that at the end of say 3 weeks time of consuming only SBC solution, that that alone would have ZERO effect on anything except possibly stomach/intestinal ph? Would not affect our blood ph AT ALL? Or, the opposite, consuming only water and strong acetic acid solution for the same period of time, would not have some blood ph lowering effect at all? ZERO? Honestly I find that hard to imagine though I’m open to being wrong. If you accede that it ultimately would, if taken to an extreme have an effect, then it’s not hard to imagine then, that it would also have a more subtle, though not well understood, effect under normal conditions? Because saying that though “alkaline food is good for us”, it has NOTHING what so ever to do with it’s ph level, it just strikes me as highly possibly being… “iffy”. After all, just a few years ago MD’s and accepted physiology claimed that eggs caused heart disease, and now “we” pretty much know it’s much more complicated than that. I’m not “settled” either way on this, just looking for feedback. Btw, I never was taken in by the 4K water machines 🙂 Thanks.
Hi Allan,
In general you are right that if you go on a fast and take nothing but water and baking soda or water and vinegar this is not going to change your blood pH one bit. Again the body can only live in a very narrow pH range, which is why the body has so many redundant systems to keep the pH within that narrow range. And tiny fluctuation is met with an increase in respiration to reduce acidity or decrease in respiration to increase acidity. If the lungs cannot keep up the kidneys can take up a lot of the slack. If they cannot keep up then the body still has various other means to keep the pH in balance.
Now, there have been cases where people have developed acidosis or the even more dangerous alkalosis by ingesting too much acid, such as lots of kombucha, or by ingesting too much baking soda or calcium carbonate. But these are extremely rare cases because this requires overwhelming the body’s pH buffering system, which is very difficult to do.
Also keep in mind that neither baking soda nor vinegar are really foods. And I have been talking about foods not alkalizing the body. As I pointed out several times already ALL foods get metabolized in to acids. Many of those acids are also what make up your body, allow your cells to produce energy, that help with detoxification, that maintain your circulation and blood pressure, that allow oxygenation of tissues,…………. People need to stop fearing the acids we derive from food and that are formed by the body. Most are not evil, they are essential!!!
http://www.nature.com/hr/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/hr201523a.html
“Association between the markers of metabolic acid load and higher all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in a general population with preserved renal function”
Although metabolic acid load has been associated with many well-known risk factors for mortality, its clinical implications are not yet clear.
To evaluate the association between biomarkers of metabolic acid load, such as serum bicarbonate, serum anion gap and urine pH and mortality, we analyzed the health records of 31 590 adults who underwent a health screening between January 2001 and December 2010 and had an estimated glomerular filtration rate greater than or equal to60 ml min−1 per 1.73 m2.
Urine pH was measured by a dipstick test performed on fast morning urine sample and categorized as acidic (urine pH less than or equal to5.5), neutral and alkaline (urine pH greater than or equal to8.0).
Using the Cox proportional hazard model, the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of all-cause mortality of the lowest quartile of serum bicarbonate was 1.460 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.068–1.995) compared with the highest quartile, after a median follow-up of 93 months.
The aHRs of cardiovascular and cancer mortality of the lowest quartile of serum bicarbonate were 2.647 (95% CI 1.148–6.103) and 1.604 (95% CI 1.024–2.513), respectively, compared with the highest quartile.
Acidic and neutral urine pH were significantly associated with a higher all-cause mortality (aHR 2.550, 95% CI 1.316–4.935; aHR 2.376 95% CI 1.254–4.501, respectively), compared with an alkaline urine pH.
In conclusion,higher metabolic acid load was associated with an increased all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in a healthy population.
The association between metabolic acid load and mortality and the causality of the relationship need to be confirmed.
Unfortunately I haven’t as yet been able to read the full text but I think most people after reading the abstract, they may want to reconsider the importance of increasing intake of frut and vegetables and reducing meat intake?
Urine pH is an indicator of dietary acid-base load, fruit and vegetables and meat intakes: results from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)-Norfolk population study.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18042305
Ted Hutchison,
Do you understand the fact that we have been discussing blood pH and the urinary pH discussed in this article DOES NOT reflect blood pH as has been pointed out so many times.
Furthermore, your comment about increasing the intake of fruit and vegetables and reducing meat is irrelevant since as also pointed out diet DOES NOT alkalize the blood. ALL foods get metabolized in to acids.
James
The brain is 60% fat therefore I conclude that the average body is 60% fat. Its not enough just to look at the blood.
Why are you bringing up fat, which is not being discussed? And by the way there is more water than fat in the body. So how can the body be 60% fat? Since there is more water in the body even a 61% water content would be an impossible 121% not even including other things such as minerals and amino acids. So once again your hypothesis is very faulty.
This is a very well researched and detailed article against the validity of the ash alkaline diet. I have read other articles, both in support of and against it, but very few of them are this well thought out, refuting the effectiveness of the diet, point by point. However, I will add this. In all the articles that say that the alkaline diet plan does not really work, they all concede that there are some claims in the theory that are actually valid and are based in science. So the inability of any argument I have read to completely refute the legitimacy of the alkaline diet, tends to make me believe that parts of the alkaline
diet are actually real.
The only benefits of the so-called “alkaline diet” are the higher nutritional value, which includes numerous beneficial acids and the higher fiber intake, which are fermented in to more beneficial acids.
I am sorry but there is too much information out there that absolutely supports alkalizing…..including other holistic doctors….i was so thrilled to read Kris’s article on magnesium stearate in supplements but this article throws all his information into question for me. Seems everyone has an angle and when presented singly it makes the most sense….oh well Kris you have dropped a few notches in my book….
Just FYI, he spells it Chris.
I understand what you are trying to say, and I do agree that the alkaline diet is not well founded, or necessary based on current scientific knowledge. However, as a biochemist, I must ask that you revise you paragraph titled “Kindneys – not none – regulate blood pH.” It suggests that metabolic processes in the kidneys have nothing to do with bone health, which is simply untrue. I would hate to see the focus of the article stray away from “debunking” the Alkaline diet, however this paragraph could cause some confusion, and as a result negate some of the article’s credibility. Here are some websites that can better explain the role of the kidneys in calcium metabolism.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18591745
http://courses.washington.edu/conj/bess/calcium/calcium.html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9763881
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4104095/
Effects of natural mineral-rich water consumption on the expression of sirtuin 1 and angiogenic factors in the erectile tissue of rats with fructose-induced metabolic syndrome
https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/hmbci.ahead-of-print/hmbci-2014-0032/hmbci-2014-0032.xml
Natural mineral-rich water ingestion improves hepatic and fat glucocorticoid-signaling and increases sirtuin 1 in an animal model of metabolic syndrome
Isn’t what we are seeing here what actually happens when the acidifying effects of fructose are adequately buffered with alkalizing mineral waters?
Ted Hutchison: “Isn’t what we are seeing here what actually happens when the acidifying effects of fructose are adequately buffered with alkalizing mineral waters?”
No.
First of all you ignoring the fact that mineral rich waters can be acidic or alkaline.
Secondly, minerals in water can produce all sorts of beneficial effects on the body even though they are not doing anything to alter blood pH. For example, magnesium common in mineral waters can help regulate blood sugar among numerous other things since magnesium is required for about 300 processes in the body. These are not related to alkalizing the blood.
You are also overlooking various other facts. For example, why are fruits considered alkalizing when they contain fructose, which you say is acidifying?
The fact is that ALL foods get metabolized in to acids regardless of what the food is.
So what keeps us from becoming overly acidic? Not diet, that is for sure. And minerals in water really play little if any role.
As pointed out our pH is maintained primarily by respiration followed by hydrogen ion retention or elimination by the kidneys. These account for virtually all pH regulation of the blood.
A person can sit and drink highly mineralized water all day long and this still would not alter their blood pH since the blood buffers the blood constantly to prevent acidosis and the significantly more dangerous alkalosis.
By the same reasoning consuming fructose DOES NOT induce acidosis either. Therefore, highly mineralized water is not buffering any acidosis from fructose since acidosis from fructose is not occurring in the first place.
So if an acid state has no impact on the absorption of calcium that means that when we drink milk the body is NOT leaching calcium from our bones in an attempt to re alkaline the body!?????
So dairy is safe to drink….?
does dairy inhibit the absorption of any vitamins and mineral such as calcium??
Yes. The high protein content of milk blocks calcium absorption from milk, which is why dairy is actually a bad source for calcium. The high phosphorus content of mil leads to calcium loss from bone making things even worse.
Calcium in milk will also block iron absorption.
James… it is a bit off the topic but would you please share your opinion on the pine pollen and testosterone hormone metabolism?
Kind regards,
Jadgpanther
Hi Jadgpanther,
Pollen in general is a good source of sterols, which can help with testosterone production. It does not need to be pine pollen.
There are numerous other sterol sources as well, some much higher than pollen such as jiaogulan, which id the highest source I have ever found.
If you want to maintain testosterone levels it is also a very good idea to combine an aromatase inhibitor such as nettle root. This blocks the conversion of testosterone in to estrogen.
James
Dear James:
Do you have any helpful advice you can offer for a 75 year old man with rheumatoid arthritis?
Hi Sherie,
Here is a link to my article on autoimmunity:
http://medcapsules.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=24454
Rheumatoid arthritis has been linked to a form of chlamydia bacteria, but also involved adrenal dysfunction.
James
I have wondered if the “alkaline” diet folks understand the digestive process, whereby food is broken down into small molecules, first in an acidic environment, then in an alkaline one. The body is not a “black box.”
I think we are all able to read and understand what actually happens when we take young people and some elderly folk and change their diet from a high protein to a high vegetable diet and then swap the diets.
Try reading the full text of this paper.
Effect of diet composition on acid–base balance in adolescents, young adults and elderly at rest and during exercise
http://www.nature.com/ejcn/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ejcn2014245a.html
and then consider this article
Small change in blood acidity could prove detrimental to kidney disease patients
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/01/150106081518.htm
Then bear in mind what % of the population have asthma, COPD, Pulmonary dysfunction or low vitamin d status all of which mean lung function is not optimal.
Just because someone has asthma, COPD (which includes asthma), pulmonary dysfunction (which includes COPD) or low vitamin D this DOES NOT mean they will also have acidosis. Nor does this mean they have kidney dysfunction in the first place, which is what your link is saying acidity can be a problem with.
Self regulating blood ph may be a normal function of a healthy person, but what about when the body is plagued by illness? From my understanding most bacteria prefer a acidic environment and the body has to spend energy regulating blood ph which takes away from it’s capability to heal from illness and vice versa. This is especially true in cancer patients because the cancer produces large amounts of lactic acid which can put extra strain on your liver, kidneys, and body systems. Prescription medicines for these sorts of illnesses will also put extra strain on the liver. Ultimately this will have an acidifying effect on all systems in the body. Reference: http://www.mercola.com/article/sugar/sugar_cancer.htm
In my opinion Mercola is far from a credible source of health information.
First of all even if the body is plagued with illness this DOES NOT make the blood acidic. And most pathogens thrive in alkalinity, not acidity. Stomach acid for example kills many pathogens as do acids from our flora. On the other hand bacteria tend to alkalize tissues and fluids to survive. For example, Helicobacter pylori secretes highly alkaline ammonia to protect itself. The bacteria that cause urinary tract infections secrete urease to split urea to form highly alkaline ammonia to protect themselves from the acidity.
As for cancer, the cancer cells secrete lactic acid myth was dispelled decades ago.
Cancer cells secrete lactate, not lactic acid:
Tumor metabolism of lactate: the influence and therapeutic potential for MCT and CD147 regulation. Future Oncol 2010 Jan;6(1):127-48
Enzymes involved in L-lactate metabolism in humans. Mitochondrion 2013 Sep 9. pii: S1567-7249(13)00244-4
Tumor metabolism: cancer cells give and take lactate. J Clin Invest 2008 Dec;118(12):3835-7
Mitochondrial fission induces glycolytic reprogramming in cancer-associated myofibroblasts, driving stromal lactate production, and early tumor growth. Oncotarget 2012 Aug;3(8):798-810
Cancer DOES NOT make the body acidic, only the immediate microenvironment around the tumor becomes acidic. This is due to to the cancer cells rapidly exporting the acidic hydrogen ions in to the extracellular (outside the cell) to maintain the alkaline internal pH that allows the cancer cell to survive and to drive glycolysis in the cancer cells.
Introduction to the molecular basis of cancer metabolism and the Warburg effect
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25672512
Here are a couple of paragraphs from the above paper that may interest readers here.
There is also evidence suggesting that due to the Warburg effect and the production of lactate cancer cells possess a selective advantage over normal cells in their microenvironment.
It has also been shown that lactate is a key driver of angiogenesis and is critical for the development
and growth of cancer cells.
Further in the paper they explain,
“When tumors increase in size, blood vessels supplying
nutrients and oxygen relative to the size of the tumor is
often not enough to sustain the development of the tumor.
As a result of the Warburg effect, reduced oxygen supplied to the tumor acts as a compromise, ultimately leading to hypoxia.
When molecules of ATP lactate are yielded as a result of aerobic glycolysis in cancer cells, lactate is secreted into the tumor microenvironment.
The consequence of the release of lactate leads to the development in growth and proliferation of cancer cells, also increasing the likelihood of metastasis
Cancer cells will use some of that lactate as a fule source as lactate is one of various fuel sources for cancer cells. The others being glucose, fructose, ketones and some amino acids.
And yes, hypoxia will develop as the tumor grows, but only in parts of the tumor. This is due to the erratic vasculature within the tumor, which leaves parts of the tumor highly oxygenated and other parts hypoxic. It is these hypoxic regions that chemo and radiation therapies tend to fail due to the lack of oxygen radical formation to kill the cancer cells.
One area I really disagree with is the claim that lactate promotes metastases. Metastases is driven by proteolytic enzymes such as hyaluronidase. But these enzymes are activated by acidity, which comes from the excess hydrogen ions secreted by the cancer cells. Lactate itself IS NOT acidic and thus would not activate the enzymes needed to drive metastases.
Dear James,
“Cancer as a metabolic disease” book brings forth the wide academic proof that the cancer causes the mitochondrial damage and irreversibly cancer cell mitochondria consume sugars even if the oxygen is widely available. For that reason, they have supercharged blood veins in order to consume so much sugar to create so little energy. Not my claim. But frankly, I bought that idea. I do respect your approach and experience and let me listen to you why you subscribe to such opinion and whether it is based on personal experience or something else. I ll cling on to that until you persuade me to something else.
Kind regards,
Jadgpanther
Cancer does involve changes to the genes of the cells. But these changes, most often from viral insertion, are the cause of the cancer, NOT the result of the cancer.
And yes, cancer cells will feed on glucose and fructose even in the presence of high oxygen levels (the reverse Warburg effect), but you overlooked my point. My point was that sugars are only ONE potential fuel source for cancer cells. Cancer cells also utilize some amino acids, lactate and ketones for fuel sources. So even if blood sugar levels are reduced the cancer cells still feed and grow.
Not sure what you mean by “supercharged blood veins”. In actuality the vascular structure of malignant tumors is very poor and erratic. This is why there are areas of malignant tumors are well oxygenated and other areas are hypoxic. Same reason most chemotherapy drugs and radiation therapy tend to have such low success rates. Most rely on a free radical principle to kill the cancer cells. The oxygen saturated areas therefore are more prone to oxidative destruction of the cancer cells. But the hypoxic regions tend to be chemo and radiation resistant due to the hypoxia inhibiting the production of oxygen radicals to kill the cancer cells.
That same erratic vasculature is going to inhibit glucose delivery just like oxygen delivery is inhibited.
Here is the research showing cancer cells using glucose, amino acids, lactate and ketones for fuel:
Ketones and lactate “fuel” tumor growth and metastasis: Evidence that epithelial cancer cells use oxidative mitochondrial metabolism. Cell Cycle 2010 Sep 1;9(17):3506-14
Glucose-Independent Glutamine Metabolism via TCA Cycling for Proliferation and Survival in B Cells. Cell Metabolism, 2012; 15 (1): 110
Glycine consumption and mitochondrial serine hydroxymethyltransferase in cancer cells: the heme connection. Med Hypotheses 2013 May;80(5):633-6
Energy transfer in “parasitic” cancer metabolism: mitochondria are the powerhouse and Achilles’ heel of tumor cells. Cell Cycle 2011 Dec 15;10(24):4208-16
The autophagic tumor stroma model of cancer: Role of oxidative stress and ketone production in fueling tumor cell metabolism. Cell Cycle 2010 Sep 1;9(17):3485-505
Autophagy and senescence in cancer-associated fibroblasts metabolically supports tumor growth and metastasis via glycolysis and ketone production. Cell Cycle 2012 Jun 15;11(12):2285-302
Ketone bodies and two-compartment tumor metabolism: stromal ketone production fuels mitochondrial biogenesis in epithelial cancer cells. Cell Cycle 2012 Nov 1;11(21):3956-63
Pyruvate kinase expression (PKM1 and PKM2) in cancer-associated fibroblasts drives stromal nutrient production and tumor growth. Cancer Biol Ther 2011 Dec 15;12(12):1101-13
Warburg meets autophagy: cancer-associated fibroblasts accelerate tumor growth and metastasis via oxidative stress, mitophagy, and aerobic glycolysis. Antioxid Redox Signal 2012 Jun 1;16(11):1264-84
Do Ketones Fuel Cancer? The Low-Carb Experts Respond
http://livinlavidalowcarb.com/blog/do-ketones-fuel-cancer-the-low-carb-experts-respond/10124
Restricting carbohydrates to fight head and neck cancer—is this realistic?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4197426/
Nice OPINION piece. Where is the research to back his view. All I see him referencing are other opinion articles. Again, where is the REAL research countering the studies that show ketones are a fuel source for cancer?
In addition, you are still overlooking the fact that cancer cells can also use other fuel sources other than sugars and ketones. This includes amino acids that can be supplied by a ketogenic diet. So you keep focusing on looking at one tree while ignoring the rest of the forest.
Ted Hutchinson: “http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4197426/”
Once again you post something that you expect someone to go through and try to guess what point you are trying to make instead of stating what you are getting at in the link and quoting what you think is true. So all I can do is guess that this is the quote from the study you posted that you wanted me to see:
“Despite the evidence outlined above showing how CHO restriction counteracts tumor glycolysis, accounts for the altered metabolism of the tumor-bearing patient and may even improve the tolerability of radiation treatment, some authors still question the scientific rationale for the KD and deny any possible benefits171.”
I think this is a very important debate and those with a cancer diagnosis will have to take extremely seriously.
It’s important they consider all sides of the debate and not think James’ view are the only opinions that matter.
I see absolutely no point in debating issues with those whose minds are closed to reason or evidence.
Of course such is the nature of consensus medical opinion it will be many years before the use of ketogenic diets to assist cancer therapy become commonplace.
If we look at the history of ketogenic diets for epilepsy we can trace it back to 500years BC but despite a period in the 1920s it’s been ignored until perhaps the last 20 years but still we see it’s mainly used a last resort after drug therapies have been tried and failed.
When lots of money is involved in medical treatments it’s not patient safety or common sense that come first.
It may help to understand the issue from the perspective of someone fighting brain cancer.
http://greymadder.net/2014/04/28/fight-cancer-with-a-ketogenic-diet-book-review/
Ted Hutchison: “It’s important they consider all sides of the debate and not think James’ view are the only opinions that matter.”
Stop trying to make this about me. I AM NOT the topic. I am merely providing evidence that REAL science has already shown. I am not in to opinion pieces as “evidence”.
Ted Hutchison: “I see absolutely no point in debating issues with those whose minds are closed to reason or evidence.”
If there was REAL evidence presented in the first place then maybe I would reconsider. Posting opinion articles IS NOT “evidence”. I posted actual research showing cancer cells use ketones as one of various fuel sources. That is an example of REAL evidence.
Ted Hutchison: “it will be many years before the use of ketogenic diets to assist cancer”
If ever. Again, so far the only REAL evidence that has been presented shows ketones fuel cancer. Why put so much effort in to trying to make an argument for something where real evidence is lacking when we already have things that have been proven to work on cancer such as ozone therapy?
Ted Huthison: “If we look at the history of ketogenic diets for epilepsy we can trace it back to 500years BC”
A of things we use today can be dated back to ancient times. Are you aware that electrotherapy and even thermography principles were being used back in Greek and Roman days? The reason they are in use today is because there was an actual rational for their use backed by REAL science and not some hypothesis that goes against what real science has already shown.
http://bionews-tx.com/news/2015/03/13/md-anderson-researchers-discover-that-glucose-starvation-may-be-vital-to-tumor-suppression/
MD Anderson Researchers Discover that Glucose Starvation May Be Vital to Tumor Suppression
“May Be Vital to Tumor Suppression”
“May be”? Do you understand this this means hypothetical, not proven?
Even if you red through the article they are still pointing out this is all hypothetical.
In addition, it sounds like they did a Petri dish study, which IS NOT the same as in a living body since a Petri dish DOES NOT have a metabolism. See, in an actual human body if glucose is restricted guess what happens? The body can generate its own glucose from a variety of things including glycogen, amino acids from proteins, fats and lactate. The process is known as gluconeogenesis. This is why one cancer therapy, known as hydrazine sulfate (HS), is used in some countries to treat cancer. HS helps to prevent the conversion of lactate in to glucose thus helping to reduce fuel to the cancer cells.
But again, cancer cells can use various fuel sources including ketones. Therefore, a Petri dish study DOES NOT reflect what actually happens in the human body.
When they put the cancer cells in a Petri dish and withhold glucose there are no secondary fuel sources to feed the cells as occurs within the human body. And there is no response to low blood sugar from the adrenals and thus no glucose generation by the liver as in the actual human body.
Petri dish studies ARE NOT proof of anything. They are great manipulation tools though to try and prove a point or to get more grant money because most people don’t understand that these types of studies mean very little.
As an example of where I said “try and prove a point” there was a study reported all over the media a while back claiming vitamin C caused infertility. How did they come to this bogus conclusion? They put vitamin C directly on semen in a Petri dish killing the semen. Of course semen is alkaline to survive the acidic pH of the woman’s reproductive organs, but still it can only take so much acidity. If this bogus study were true then none of us would exist since we also need vitamin C to exist and survive.
James, what are you trying to say about the Ketogenic Diet?
What do you know about it and it’s relation to cancer?
I am not saying one way or the other about the ketogenic diet. I simply pointed out the well known fact that cancer cells use more than glucose as a fuel source. These include ketones, fructose, lactate, some amino acids and fatty acids.
And truly, from healthy to disease, isn’t it a spectrum? Not black and white? Perhaps tissues and blood do get acidic?
Blood can become acidic, but this is an EXTREMELY rare occurrence.
As for tissues, some tissues need to be acidic to keep them healthy. For example the skin and colon.
Normally alkaline tissues again rarely become acidic. An example would be an accumulation of uric acid. The body routinely produces uric acid, which is done to not only protect us from highly alkaline and highly poisonous ammonia but is also one of the body’s primary antioxidants. Excess uric acid can be produced and/or accumulate in certain instances such as antifreeze poisoning, dehydration, some medications, hypothyroidism, etc.
James :”The body does not become acidic from a lack of minerals. Again the body’s primary means of pH regulation are respiration followed by kidney retention or elimination of hydrogen ions”
To relate this to the overly touted RO water systems with remineralization filters…Many claim that they have superior systems because in RO systems without remineralization filters, you are left with acidic water, which is “bad for you”.
James, do you have any thoughts bout this topic?
Hi Amy,
Purified waters (distilled, reverse osmosis) do go rapidly acidic as they absorb gases from the air. When water absorbs carbon dioxide this forms carbonic acid. As the water absorbs nitrogen and sulfur oxides from the air various nitrogenous and sulfurous acids are formed.
Are these harmful? Not really. The acidity is pretty minor and the only potential danger would be to the tooth enamel.
As with other acids in foods, drinks and stomach acid these acids will simply be neutralized in the chyme as the chyme leaves the stomach. This is a normal part of the digestive process. As chyme leaves the stomach the pancreas releases bicarbonate to neutralize acids in the chyme so the acids will not harm the intestines.
James
Thanks for your thoughts on this topic, James. The way you explained it makes sense. It should not be surprising that some companies utilize fear tactics to try and reel us in. A quick example, I stumbled upon
an RO system that markets itself as superior to all others and gives two major reasons:
” Reverse osmosis (RO) systems do an outstanding job eliminating a wide range of toxins, Unfortunately, they are not discriminating and strip the good with the bad. We’re then left with super clean water, but water that is acidic, dead and biologically damaging.
The —-(company x) uses RO for its filtration basis, but then adds our healthy Mineral Mix to the water. By using a specially designed cartridge with slow release minerals and ceramics (no worries about kidney stones or overdosing) we are able to create water with high pH levels, ionized antioxidant benefits and the same light, super hydrating properties found using electric water ionizers.”
When I first read this, I felt stuck. RO systems seem to be the only way to be rid of the more harmful aspects of municipal water- chlorine, chloramine, and fluoride (etc.). Yet most RO systems produce water that is “acidic, dead and biologically damaging.” With the exception of company x, who will provide perfectly balanced pH etc…
Still another article argued against RO altogether and recommended high quality spring water.
Sounds like I should take all of this with a big grain of salt.
It is confusing to say the least. Do you have any further thoughts on this?
Hi Amy,
Personally I prefer a good spring water with the minerals still intact over any other water. This is not always available though so my second choice would be a reverse osmosis system. All you need to do is to add a little trace element slat such as Real Salt (Himalayan salt) to the water. To my water bottles I just add a pinch. This reduces the solvency of the water as well as reduces the dangerous osmotic shift that can occur with purified waters. And that tiny amount does not make the water taste salty. my other favorite is to add a spoon full of food grade diatomaceous earth to a gallon of water and let it settle out. Then I drink the water part way down then refill the jug and let the DE settle out again repeating this process over and over. The DE is left in the bottom all the time and each time you add new water traces of silica in the DE is dissolved, which is extremely beneficial to the body.
And neither of these will dangerously neutralize the stomach acid like ionized alkaline waters or waters highly alkalized with carbonates or oxides.
Both the trace element salt or DE are cheap, safe and effective means to reduce health problems that can occur from drinking purified waters.
James
James, thank you once again for your time and knowledgeable feedback. I also read your responses to Ian. One of the main takeaways from reading your comments is the fact that water ionizers alkalize water through the formation of unhealthy mineral hydroxides…
Example: Magnesium carbonate is converted in to magnesium hydroxide.
So, water that is naturally alkaline through minerals etc…is the way to go. Or with an RO system, I just need to “take it with a grain of salt”, real Himalayan, that is.
I do have another question for you. Before receiving your recent feedback, I continued my research of RO systems and found an interesting one by AquaLiv. It promises all the bells and whistles sans electric water ionizers. They seem to be on the same page with you regarding the dangers of water ionizers.
(AquaLiv)“All common alkaline water ionizers provide hydrogen derived benefits. However, they also provide artificial pH side effects. It is not possible for any common alkaline water ionizer to separate the two. If an alkaline water ionizer uses electricity, it’s the type you want to avoid.”
Instead, they utilize “ActivMag”, which looks to be magnesium bound to oxygen (see below)…
“The AquaLiv Water System uses ActivMag™ Technology to ensure the water you drink has a proper, naturally alkaline pH through the addition of trace amounts of magnesium. The magnesium used in ActivMag™ is pre-oxidized (bound to oxygen) in order to create a self-regulating pH system. Because the magnesium is oxidized, it is not readily available to dissolve in water. It first needs to react with the naturally occurring H+ ions in the water. The more H+ in the source water, the more acidic that water is. When the H+ ions interact with the magnesium, it frees the magnesium from the oxygen and allows it to dissolve, increasing the water’s alkalinity.
“In addition to slightly increasing the pH, a small amount of the magnesium reacts with water to produce molecular hydrogen, H2. The world’s first and best antioxidant. ActivMag™ Technology is the next best thing to water flowing down mineral deposits in a mountain stream.”
Do you think the above method would produce water akin to the dangerous ionized alkaline waters or waters highly alkalized with carbonates or oxides?
AquaLiv makes many enticing promises:
• Leaves in the beneficial minerals that reverse osmosis systems strip away
• Creates Energized Structured Water
• Creates a healthful, stable alkaline pH 1(8-9.5)
• No electricity needed to run the system
• System is eco-friendly—no water is wasted unlike reverse osmosis water filters 2
• Increases circulation and blood oxygen levels 3
• Stabilizes blood sugar 4
• Safe for people and pets of all ages
• Increases Dissolved Hydrogen level in water
• Improves Oxidation Reduction Potential
• Provides Magnesium to the body (NO MENTION OF CALCIUM?)
I was excited to see a potential RO system that seemed to meet real health standards- but I’m skeptical due to all that I’ve been learning. Thanks again for your part in that learning! Out of curiosity, do you have a science background?
For now, I’ll look for some good New England spring water and await your congenial responses.
Hi Amy,
This is just more bogus sales hype and made up science.
For example if they released the oxygen from the magnesium then they would have elemental magnesium, which would not alkalize the water.
They can form magnesium hydroxide, which like other hydroxides is still caustic. Just not as caustic as other hydroxides. That is why you can ingest magnesium hydroxide (Milk of Magnesia) but not potassium hydroxide (Drano).
Simply putting magnesium oxide in water forms magnesium hydroxide. So if they are claiming magnesium bound to oxygen then it sounds like this is exactly what they are doing. Adding magnesium oxide to form magnesium hydroxide. I buy magnesium oxide for about $16 for a 50 pound bag. No need for a machine costing thousands of dollars. Although magnesium oxide is still caustic and poorly absorbed. Adding an acid such as citric acid will neutralize the caustic nature and increase its absorbability.
As for the hydrogen claim this is more sales hype. Hydrogen gas is formed in the body as part of the fermentation process by our flora. If hydrogen was such a good antioxidant and prevented disease then disease would be nearly non-existent.
The body produces various antioxidants that are much better. And we get more from diet and supplements.
Also keep in mind that an excess of antioxidants increases the risk of disease including cancer.
Amy, the whole debate about alkaline water and RO is very much a marketer’s dream becasue most people have never had the need to really learn about something that most people simply take for granted. james is correct about RO. I t does acidify the water. It’s known as ‘hungry water’.
Water ionizers do not actually alkalize water. they simply concentrate the alkaline minerals in the existing supply. The pH of these units comes about through electrolysis.
The active ingredient in water from a water ionizer be it natural or electric is molecular hydrogen, and the therapeutic effects of H2 have nothing at all to do with alkalinity.
The problem electric ionizers have – it’s really a design problem – is that to get high H2 infusion in output water, the user has to increase the electricity in the electrolysis chamber to a point where the pH can go over pH 10, making it rather nasty to consume. There are now new technologies that give more H2 with less pH – even neutral pH.
Ian Blair Hamilton: “Amy, the whole debate about alkaline water and RO is very much a marketer’s dream becasue most people have never had the need to really learn about something that most people simply take for granted. james is correct about RO. I t does acidify the water. It’s known as ‘hungry water’.”
Purified waters are not known as “hungry water” because they become acid. It is because the more pure water is the more solvent it becomes and it will try to saturate with whatever it can.
Ian Blair Hamilton: “Water ionizers do not actually alkalize water. ”
Actually they do through the formation of mineral (metal) hydroxides.
Ian Blair Hamilton: “they simply concentrate the alkaline minerals in the existing supply. ”
Again not true. The minerals that are naturally occurring in the water, which are usually carbonates, are artificially altered in to synthetic mineral (metal) hydroxides, which are what create the high pH in these waters.
For example, calcium carbonate that is common in many tap waters is concerted in to calcium hydroxide, used to make cement. Magnesium carbonate is converted in to magnesium hydroxide, which is used as a laxative in part because it chemically burns the intestinal wall. If you have potassium in your water like our water contains naturally you will form potassium hydroxide commonly sold as Drano. Or if you have sodium in your water you will form sodium hydroxide commonly sold as Red Devil Lye. Note all these compounds are caustic to the tissues and dangerously neutralize the stomach acid when ingested. Neutralization of stomach acid can lead to food allergies and nutrient deficiencies from improper digestion of foods. A lack of stomach acid also decreases methylation increasing the risk of cancer, heart disease, immune suppression, depression, hormone imbalances, arthritis, decreased cellular energy production, etc.
In addition these hydroxides dissociate forming a dangerous free radical.
In short people are just asking for health issues by drinking ionized alkaline water, especially in the long term. But as you said “most people have never had the need to really learn about something that most people simply take for granted.”
Ian Blair Hamilton: “The pH of these units comes about through electrolysis.”
Yes, that is true. The alkalinity comes from the electrolysis forming caustic mineral (metal) hydroxides, not from concentrating alkaline minerals.
During the electrolysis process water is split leaving the positively charged hydrogen and the negatively charged hydroxyl group. Since opposite charges attract they have to be kept separated so they don’t simply form back in to water. So the negatively charged hydroxyl group looks for a positive charge to balance and gets that from the positively charged metals of the minerals in the water. Calcium (Ca+) for example reacts with the negatively charged OH to form CaOH2. See, the calcium in the water was not concentrated, it is was simply transformed in to a dangerous and synthetic hydroxide to make the water alkaline.
Ian Blair Hamilton: “The active ingredient in water from a water ionizer be it natural or electric is molecular hydrogen, and the therapeutic effects of H2 have nothing at all to do with alkalinity.”
That is not what all the water ionizer sales hype is claiming. They have been claiming for decades that it has to do with the alkalinity, which really is rubbish. The fact is that the alkalinity of the ionized alkaline waters is actually quite harmful to the body as I pointed out above.
Truly Chris,
You are one of the best Alternative Medicine practitioners in the field of all health studies. That you also support Brian Peskin’s studies into Omega oils lends credence to your endeavours.
All the standard medical profession has to offer are chemicals that address the symptoms yet do nothing to heal the problem itself.
There are a lot of great natural health providers on the net but many of them get caught up in the confines of their beliefs and studies, and though they offer some excellent support, they fail to continue to reach beyond their own set of interests and background of studies as you and a few other natural healers do.
I also like Dr Mercola who never fears to step beyond his past understandings. For example, he has proposed, since 2008, that the noon day sun (10 AM to 3 PM) is the best time for healthy sun exposure (UVB) to ensure healthy Vitamin D and skin. The other hours of the day have the dangerous, intense sun rays, UVA, that damages skin and seems to be the cause of skin cancers.
I was a believer of the alkaline/acid use of baking soda to change my alkalinity. I do find that it does calm my eczema when the itch occurs, but now I know to be careful, and not over do the amount I take at one time, though with the information on Omega oils, my need to clear the itch is much lessoned.
The protocols of Professor Peskin and you regarding the negative nature of fish oils and the better use of plant based Omega oils have very much helped my skin. I have now a salve mixture of MSM, vitamin C and oils that is finally taming the itch and healing my eczema for the first time in the seven or so years I have had this plague. (This past holiday season the skin from my elbows and knees down fell off and I was in the worst health and pain of my life. Nothing helped, except alkalising with backing soda water, until I found yours and Prof Peskin’s information.)
My skin was certainly better this summer when I was getting the noon time sun suggested by Dr Mercola and now I am trying to get the immediate 12 O’clock sun in the warmer days of winter in my norther country. Along with proper Omega oils, now, I think I can beat the blight that makes my life, at times, unbearable.
Namaste and care,
mhikl
MHIKL … could you kindly provide your salve “recipe” in detail…which oils,quantities, etc Thanx !
My research has led me to believe that the foundation of good health requires good mineral nutrition. And that without it the body becomes acidic due to the gradual depletion of it’s mineral reserves and all types of health stress can occur. And that the goal is to move pH back into the ideal range. I also thought it had been clinically established the urine’s pH is an accurate reflection of the whole body’s acid/alkaline status. I thought urine pH was directly correlated to both tissue oxygen levels an soft tissue levels of minerals (calcium, magnesium, trace elements). That these minerals are the basic currency of exchange for literally every cell in the body. Thoughts?
The body does not become acidic from a lack of minerals. Again the body’s primary means of pH regulation are respiration followed by kidney retention or elimination of hydrogen ions. Since these do not require any kind of reserve we do not deplete these pH regulation methods.
As for urinary pH, no urinary pH does not reflect the pH of the blood or other tissues whatsoever. Urinary pH is affected by hydration levels, certain supplements and medications, exercise, things in diet or by degradation of food products and by bacteria in the urine. Urinary tract infections lead to highly alkaline urine as the bacteria use the enzyme urease to split urea in to highly alkaline ammonia. The alkalinity helps the bacteria, as with most pathogens, to survive.
Therefore, urinary pH does not tell us anything about tissue oxygenation or mineral levels either.
The pH of the blood does affect tissue oxygen levels though. Excess alkalinity leads to decreased tissue oxygen levels by both constricting blood vessels leading to decreased circulation and by inhibiting oxygen release from hemoglobin. Excess acidity has the opposite effect.
It makes sense when Chris says sugars are neutral, but why does everyone think sugar is the most acidic food?
Because too many people are getting their health information from bogus propaganda sites.
Hi James,
At the start of each day, my wife whisks up a cup of matcha, eat probiotics, vitamin c and spirulina to cleanse and energize her body. I am concerned if these can be consumed together in one go and if matcha is indeed effective as there aren’t much scientific research to begin with. Do you know of any research which supports claims of its benefits?
Does having alkaline foods (in general) have the counter effect of causing the stomach to work harder and secrete excess acid?
Hi Clement,
I am not big on green tea, including matcha, for several reasons. Green tea is very high in fluoride, which can lead to thyroid suppression. The tea plant is also high in tannins, which can block nutrient absorption and could adversely affect the probiotic bacteria. If she is going to drink the matcha then it needs to be done away from supplements and probiotics.
Green tea does have benefits, such as the antioxidant effect. Unfortunately those same antioxidants can interfere with nutrient, supplement and medicine absorption.
And the high fluoride content is also an issue. I prefer other teas such as jiaogulan, nettle leaf, rooibos, etc.
Vitamin C should also be taken away from probiotics as the vitamin C could also harm the probiotics.
How do you get the kidneys to function properly?
When your body is acidity?
Any recommendation’s?
Hi Vickie,
I support my kidneys’ filtering/cleansing function by taking occasionally doTERRA’s Zendocrine Detox Complex (herbal blend of dandelion roots, clove buds, burdock root, etc). I know also of essential oil blend of clove, rosemary, grapefruit and geranium that can do the same job as above. Also, Juniper Berry essential oil is a kidney oil. It can be applied topically or internally to support the kidneys. Let me know if you’re interested. Shot me an email at [email protected]. Nannette
I sense the pungent smell of spam 😉
Aromatic oils for “health” are an MLM snake-oil hoax
Hi Bagsimon,
You can find published health benefits of essential oils and herbs at Pub-Med.gov, plenty of them. It is good to be cautious but don’t close your eyes completely about these products because you miss a lot through sheer lack of credible information and understanding.
In such a situation, the challenge is to find an honest supplier. Thankfully, in a wold geared to sole profit, there are still a few out there who could be trusted.
Sincerely,
Nannette
I disagree with you. Aromatic oils for health are real and I am a living testimony. I will not give the name of the company but I have been taking a few drops of Thieves every night since March of 2013 and have not gotten sick once. I also put a drop of cloves essential oil in my tea and Roma hot drinks. One time I was in someone’s kitchen in the winter so all the windows and doors were closed. She started smoking and after an hour I had to leave. My throat felt irritated. I put less than a nano-drop of this Thieves on my fingertip and stuck it down my throat. In an instant everything cleared up and never returned. Also, I had a slight histamine reaction to some unknown thing and I took an empty gelatin capsule and added four drops each of Lavender, Lemon, and Peppermint. Then swallowed it. This acts as a natural anti-histamine. No more symptoms. OK, so much for the remarks about condemning essential oils. They are great and lots of companies make real good ones.
Christine, that is some good information you gave, along with your experiences.
It is SO important for us to know that science and the medical establishment will ALWAYS lag behind the truth about health and healing……and the truth of how to heal ourselves of anything is available to all.
Oh bee ess, she may be spamming but to say essential oils for health are a hoax is just ignorant. Just one example, essential oil of Oregano kills parasites. That alone makes you full of it. I suppose all botanical herbs are “for health” are a hoax too, EH? Note (?) many pharmaceuticals are synthesized compounds based on phyto-chemicals. Sweeping generalizations much?
Vickie, what I find very helpful is fresh celery juice. I take one whole bunch and pulverise it in my blender and then pass it to my juicer. I keep it in the fridge and drink it regularly.
When I first started using this I drank a complete celery bunch every day for quite a few days—don’t remember exactly how long, but it was at least a week in length. Now I probably down two bunches a week and I use another one or more in my cooking as well.
The improvements I found was an ease and strength in urine flow. There were other indicators but it is so long ago since I began this protocol that I do not remember. When I go off it, it takes months for problems to re-occur, but I have learned my lesson and it is a mainstay to my health.
Here are 2 sites I just found in a Google search that you might find interesting:
http://juicing-for-health.com/basic-nutrition/healing-vegetables/health-benefits-of-celery.html
http://www.kidney-cares.org/ckd-nutrition-recipe/1246.html
Namaste and care,
mhikl
Supporting the kidneys is not that hard. One of the best herbs for the kidneys is nettle leaf. I also like schisandra berry.
Maybe there in USA alkaline is myth, here in Germany, if u get ill, your doctor first test your body acidness, then if its high, you must first make your body alkaline, then come back for medicaments. Usually 90% dont come back to doctor, because illness is gone when body is alkaline.
So why would acidosis be so common in Germany and EXTREMELY rare in the rest of the world?
And why is it that so much disease only occurs in an acidic body in Germany yet in the rest of the world mos disease occurs in the normally alkaline blood bodies?
Because in Germany many people think “Naturopaths” are doctors and many doctors use naturopathic nonsense to to get the patient to make lifestyle changes, which the patients would not believe in if the doctor told them the truth… that it is their own fault for eating wrong, drinking to much and exercising too little. If you tell the patient their malaise is his own fault he will go to someone else. If you tell them its toxins and acid, they are more likely to follow the advice about diet and exercise.
Yes, Bangsimon, it is so much better when doctors, who are ignorant as to the cause of an ailment, prescribe pharmaceuticals to mask symptoms rather than use any of that “naturopathic nonsense” to deal with the root cause.
Here is this country naturopaths actually have a lot more medical training than MDs. In fact, i know quite a few MDs that went and got the additional training to become naturopaths because allopathic medicine has a ton of flaws in their thinking and approach to what they call “healing”.
Regardless, what someone is told is not going to change their pH. So the question remains why is acidosis supposedly so common in Germany and so rare in the rest of the world?
Beer?
Beer is not going to induce acidosis any more than broccoli, which is not at all.
What do you guys do to make your body alkaline?
I take alkaline electrolytes. Potassium Sodium Magnesium and Calcium. Alkaline Booster.
(http://www.alkaway.com.au/shop/alkaline-booster/)
I also refrain from grains and sugar.
It’s not easy… it involves two really big steps… are you ready?
Take a deep breath…
Exhale.
Repeat.
PaleoHuntress has is correct.
You are not going to alkalize by taking supplements or through diet. The body’s main means of pH regulation is through respiration followed by hydrogen ion retention or elimination by the kidneys. This accounts for virtually all pH regulation in the body and why you will likely never meet anyone who has acidosis.
When people try to force their pH one way or the other all they do is put more stress on the body as the body now has to work harder to deal with the imbalance the people are actually creating.
Perhaps that’s why Yoga is so good for you! We do a lot of breathing in yoga class!!
Heres an interesting study. It agrees with my experience, the other day I was working under the hot sun all day with a guy 20 years younger than me. Despite eating no breakfast or lunch(only taking some alkaline electrolytes), I felt fine. He got heat stroke at one point, lips white, losing vision and had to sit out the rest of the day. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3186938
You really should spend a little while searching on pubmed for studies looking at anion gap or low urinary PH, it might surprise you.
Here’s another little gem
http://jn.nutrition.org/content/138/2/415S.full
“The skeletons of land vertebrates contain a massive reserve of alkaline mineral (hydroxyapatite), which is ultimately available to buffer metabolic H+ if acid-base balance is not maintained within narrow limits. The negative impact of acidosis on the skeleton has long been known but was thought to result from passive, physicochemical dissolution of bone mineral. This brief, selective review summarizes what is now known of the direct functional responses of bone cells to extracellular pH. We discovered that bone resorption by cultured osteoclasts is stimulated directly by acid. The stimulatory effect is near-maximal at pH 7.0, whereas above pH 7.4, resorption is switched off. In bone organ cultures, H+-stimulated bone mineral release is almost entirely osteoclast-mediated, with a negligible physicochemical component. Acidification is the key requirement for osteoclasts to excavate resorption pits in all species studied to date, and extracellular H+ may thus be regarded as the long-sought osteoclast activation factor. Acid-activated osteoclasts can be stimulated further by agents such as parathyroid hormone, 1,25-dihydroxycholecalciferol, and receptor activator of nuclear factor κB ligand.”
That agrees with the PH range of 6.9-7.4 of intracellular fluid that accounts for 70% ish of the human bodies fluids.
Bo Jangles: “Here’s another little gem”
The study is being misinterpreted.
They are talking primarily about the acids released by bone cells that are involved in the bone remodeling process. This is essential to maintaining proper bone health and strength.
There is also a major error in the study where they assume bones are a major pH buffer. Bones are only used as a very last resort and therefore would require such severe and prolonged acidosis that the person would be on their death bed. Acidosis itself is extremely rare and acidosis that bad is even more rare. So rare that most doctors will never see such as case that severe in their entire careers.
I understand that heat therapy is also a standard treatment for cancer there, do you know if this is true?
Sounds like you are referring to hyperthermia, which has been around since about the 1960s.
The process used radiofrequencies to heat up and literally cook the tumors. Since tumors cannot dissipate heat as efficiently as healthy tissue only the tumor gets cooked.
I have osteoporosis and I have been reading and researching alternative methods of treating it, rather than using the pharmaceutical drugs like Fosamax etc. I’ve been studying this issue for about a year. So much of what I have learned convinced me that an alkaline diet was the key. So, imagine how interesting I found this article which debunks the theory. One of my particular issues is that when I’ve had the 24hr urine test done, I am losing more calcium in my urine than normal. I was guessing this was due to an acidic body/diet. Even though I’ve increased my vegetables and eat a relatively healthy diet; no processed foods, I am still excreting more calcium in my urine than the normal range. One Dr. suggested that I start taking even more calcium but that didn’t seem necessarily wise to me. I take supplements and I eat tons of kale, broccoli, etc Any ideas anyone?
First of all eating a lot of kale is not a good idea since it is high in oxalic acid, which binds calcium preventing its absorption.
As for why you are losing so much calcium the main reasons for this are hyperparathyroidism and pseudohyperparathyroidism.
Did the doctor check your parathyroid hormone (PTH) levels?
Hi Jessie.
I agree with James.
I had a high blood calcium and high urinary calcium. A high PTH level confirmed hyperparathyroidism caused by a benign parathyroid tumor.
All was resolved with a simple surgery to remove the one affected parathyroid gland ( most people have 4)
I had my surgery done by Dr Norman @ http://parathyroid.com because no one in my area was doing the type of procedure that he was doing with minimal scarring.
These benign parathyroid tumors that cause hyperparathyroidism have been linked to low vitamin D levels. I would try supplementing with Vitamin D3 and NO supplemental calcium before I would undergo surgery.
Supplementing with magnesium malate or citrate can also help counter side effects of high calcium.