92% effective…Relief after a single dose…

The best back pain remedy you’ve never heard ofAnd how you can help bring it back!

By Jonathan V. Wright, M.D.

Copy Nature™ Vol. 16, Issue 3 • May 2009

NUTRITION & HEALINGNUTRITION & HEALINGDr. Jonathan V. Wright’s

Jim couldn’t have come tothe Tahoma Clinic at a bet-ter time. It was about 25

years ago that he hobbled in,hunched over, leaning to one side—and obviously in considerable pain.He’d been diagnosed with a slippeddisc but insisted that he didn’t wantto be “cut on” if there was any al-ternative.

As it turned out, there was analternative—one I’d just learnedabout. And according to the re-search, not only did it alleviateback pain without surgery in 92percent of the people who tried it,but, more often than not, thatpain relief was permanent.

When I told Jim about it, hisreaction was the same one youlikely just had: “Give me some ofthat!” Unfortunately, these daysit’s not quite that simple. But be-fore I tell you about the currentobstacles—and how you can over-come them—let’s talk some moreabout the remarkable experiences

that Jim and thousands of otherpeople have had with this naturalback pain reliever.

The beginnings of abreakthrough

Like a lot of life-changing ad-vances in this country, we cancredit Ben Franklin with bringingthis pain-relieving breakthroughto the United States. At the time,this remedy—derived from anherb called Colchium Autum-nale—was used to treat joint painand gout (which Ben Franklin suf-fered from). But its use goes backmuch further. In fact, the herb it-self has been used since the Mid-dle Ages, and even as far back asancient Egypt.

Then, in 1820, scientists iso-lated the active compound—calledcolchicine—from the Colchiumplant. Since then, colchicinetablets have been used—very suc-cessfully—for gout treatment.And in the 1950s, colchicine was

made available in purified, liquidform for intravenous (IV) treat-ment of acute gout.

Three years later, MichaelRask, M.D., an orthopedic sur-geon, made a discovery thatwould change the lives of peoplebattling back pain for decades tocome.

The surprising “side effect”giving new hope to back

pain sufferersIn 1953, one of Dr. Rask’s pa-

tients told him that the back painhe’d had for years suddenly wentaway after Dr. Rask had treatedhim for gout with IV colchicine.

Dr. Rask tried IV colchicine forseveral other patients who’d beenexperiencing low back pain, butnot gout, and most of them gotbetter as well. He checked theirblood for high uric acid levels(uric acid crystals in joints causegout pain) but found they were allnormal. He concluded that thecolchicine must be working di-rectly on their spinal discs.

As Dr. Rask kept track of thesepatients, he observed that the re-lief from the disc damage—pain,muscle spasm, and weakness—wasn’t temporary. In fact, somepatients even had complete relieffrom their pain after a single dose

(continued on next page)

IN THIS ISSUE:DHEA for erectile dysfunction:Why those supplement capsules won’t work so well—and whatwill . . . .5

ClinicalTip 144:Zinc lozenges do tackle colds faster—if you use the right ones . . . . . . . . . .5

The age-defying memory booster science hasbeen ignoring for 500 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

The new prostate cancer risk ratio every man needs to know . . . . . . . . . . .7

NAH-0509:NAH-0509 3/27/09 2:01 PM Page 1

2 Nutrition & Healing May 2009 www.wrightnewsletter.com

Editor:Jonathan V.Wright, M.D.

Publisher:Paul Amos

Managing Editor:Amanda L. Ross

Copy Editor:Ken Danz

Designer:Gerrit Wessendorf

Customer Service Specialist:Greg Madison

© Copyright 2009 Healthier News, L.L.C., 702 CathedralSt., Baltimore, MD 21201. Reproduction in whole or partis prohibited without written permission of the pub-lisher. Dr. Jonathan V. Wright’s Nutrition & Healing ispublished monthly by Healthier News, L.L.C., 702 Cathe-dral St., Baltimore, MD 21201. Subscription rates are $74per year ($6.16 an issue). POSTMASTER: Send addresschanges to Dr. Jonathan V. Wright’s Nutrition & Healing,702 Cathedral St., Baltimore, MD 21201.

For questions regarding your subscription, please callreader services at (915)849-4605 (9 a.m.-6 p.m. EDTMon.-Fri.), fax (410)230-1273 or send an e-mail to serv-ice@HealthierNews.com. Send cancellations to P.O. Box206, Baltimore, MD 21203.

Our mission:Nutrition & Healing is dedicated to helping you keep

yourself and your family healthy by the safest and most ef-fective means possible. Every month, you’ll get informa-tion about diet, vitamins, minerals, herbs, naturalhormones, natural energies, and other substances andtechniques to prevent and heal illness, while prolongingyour healthy life span.

A graduate of Harvard University and the Universityof Michigan Medical School (1969), Dr. Jonathan V.Wright has been practicing natural and nutritionalmedicine at the Tahoma Clinic in Renton, Washington,since 1973. Based on enormous volumes of library andclinical research, along with tens of thousands of clini-cal consultations, he is exceptionally well-qualified tobring you a unique blending of the most up-to-date infor-mation and the best and still most effective natural thera-pies developed by preceding generations.

Nutrition & Healing cannot improve on these famouswords:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that allmen are created equal, that they are endowed by theircreator with certain unalienable rights, that amongthese are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

The inalienable right to life must include the right tocare for one’s own life. The inalienable right to libertymust include the right to choose whatever means wewish to care for ourselves. In addition to publishing thebest of information about natural health care, Nutrition& Healing urges its readers to remember their inalien-able rights to life, liberty, and freedom of choice inhealth care. This information is published to help in theeffort to exercise these inalienable rights, and to warnof ever-present attempts of both government and pri-vate organizations to restrict them.

All material in this publication is provided for informa-tion only and may not be construed as medical advice orinstruction. No action should be taken based solely onthe contents of this publication; instead, readers shouldconsult appropriate health professionals on any matterrelating to their health and well-being. The informationand opinions provided in this publication are believed tobe accurate and sound, based on the best judgmentavailable to the authors, but readers who fail to consultwith appropriate health authorities assume the risk ofany injuries. The publisher is not responsible for errorsor omissions.

Moving? Missed an issue? Please let us knowwithin 60 days of moving or if you have not re-ceived an issue. (International subscribers, pleasenotify us within 90 days.) After this time period,missed issues can be purchased for US$6.50 each.Postage costs may apply to international requests.

of IV colchicine. And the pain didn’t come back!For the next several years, Dr. Rask studied a series of 50 pa-

tients who had previously been diagnosed with herniated discdisease. He found that most of these 50 patients progressed tocomplete or near complete pain relief. By 1980, he’d given IVcolchicine to 500 patients with spectacular results: 92 percenthad complete or near-complete relief.1

During this time, Dr. Rask also made a few other observa-tions. First, he discovered that if a patient had had prior backsurgery, the colchicine wasn’t as effective. Of the 40 patients whohadn’t responded to the IV colchicine, 30 had previously under-gone back surgery. Dr. Rask also found that colchicine seemed towork better on acute pain: The response was slightly worse inpeople who’d been suffering from chronic pain for months oryears. Although he didn’t know for sure, he theorized thatcolchicine worked in eight specific ways to relieve back and discpain. Dr. Rask theorized that IV colchicine:1.) reverses inflammation in the disc2.) reverses inflammation in the adjacent spinal nerves3.) inhibits the attraction of pro-inflammatory white

blood cells to the disc4.) helps eliminate uric acid and calcium pyrophosphate

deposits5.) increases the production of endorphins (internally

produced pain-killing molecules related to opiates)2

6.) helps reverse allergic aspects of disc disease7.) shrinks spinal discs3

8.) inhibits amyloid deposits in the disc

2,700 success stories—and counting!In 1985, Dr. Rask presented an analysis of 3,000 patients

treated with IV colchicine, demonstrating the same good re-sults.4 But Dr. Rask wasn’t the only one seeing such spectaculareffects from colchicine. That same year, four other orthopedicsurgeons published the findings of a study they’d conducted onIV colchicine and disc pain.5 Thirty-eight patients with resistantdisc disorders participated in the study. Seventeen of them re-ceived IV colchicine, 21 received placebo. Of the 17 receivingIV colchicine, 14 (that’s 82 percent) responded promptly andpermanently!

What makes this particular study even more noteworthy isthat it was an FDA “approved” investigation complete with aninvestigational new “drug” (IND #21807) application. Withthat sort of clout, colchicine should have made newspaperheadlines and the 11 o’clock news. But even specialty medicaljournals mostly ignored it for the same reason so many effec-tive natural therapies get ignored today: Because colchicinewas—and is—definitely not patentable. But we’ll talk moreabout that in just a bit. Right now, let’s get back to colchicine’simpressive resume.

(continued from page 1)back pain remedyDr. Jonathan V. Wright’s

NUTRITION & HEALING

NAH-0509:NAH-0509 3/27/09 2:01 PM Page 2

3Nutrition & Healing May 2009www.wrightnewsletter.com

9 out of 10 people get fast,permanent relief

The results of the FDA-approvedIND study were so overwhelminglypositive that one of the primary in-vestigators, Dr. Vincent Guidice, de-cided to abandon doing spinalsurgery altogether and began offer-ing his patients IV colchicine instead.

In 1998, Dr. Guidice wrote abouthis 5-year clinical experience with756 cases of disc herniation. He re-ported a 91 percent success rate inpatients that had no prior spinal sur-gery, and a 69 percent success ratein those who previously had backsurgery. He retired in 2006 at age94 after personally administering25,000 colchicine treatments! LikeDr. Rask, he never saw abnormalblood chemistry or unanticipatedside effects from IV colchicine. Theonly negative side effect either ofthem came across was “colchicineburn,” which occurs if the IV fluidcontaining the colchicine escapesfrom the vein and soaks into the sur-rounding tissue (this is almost al-ways due to poor IV technique).While they are often painful and canlast up to six or seven days, accord-ing to both doctors, these “burns”always healed without any perma-nent side effects.

Also in 1988, Michael Margoles,M.D., an orthopedic surgeon andprofessor, published a paper abouthis experience with IV colchicine.Of the 200 patients he administeredthis therapy to, 90 percent hadsuccess.6

Two years later, another double-blind study reported that IVcolchicine was significantly more ef-fective than placebo in relieving lowback pain from disc disease.7

Only one publication reportedthat colchicine was ineffective forthe relief of disc pain.8 Although itwas double-blind and placebo-con-trolled, these researchers had appar-ently not read the work of Dr. Rask

and others, as the colchine wasgiven orally, not intravenously. (Tobe fair, it’s possible that these re-searchers were hoping that IV usewouldn’t be necessary, as IV isn’tnearly as convenient.)

By 1989 Dr. Rask, had beentreating patients with IV colchicinefor nearly 35 years. In his final pub-lication of the subject, he wrote thathe had treated 6,000 patients withan overall success rate of 92percent.9 He reported that besidesbeing extremely effective, colchicineis an exceedingly safe medication.He wrote, “over the many years ofmy use of this drug, I have found itto be infinitely more efficacious and,indeed, safer to use than aspirin.”

Used for years, now gonefor good?

Despite its demonstrated efficacyand enormous potential for backpain sufferers, IV colchicine therapyhas never become part of conven-tional medical practice. Becausecolchicine is unpatentable, the usualpatent medication advertising ma-chine (which has no trouble sellingeven ineffective, toxic treatments—as long as they’re profitable) nevergot going for it. And the sad fact isthat many mainstream physiciansget the majority of their informationabout treatments from patent medi-cine advertising.

However, since Dr. Rask’s veryfirst publication in 1979, naturallyoriented physicians, including my-self, have used colchicine with goodeffect for many, many individuals.

I can attest to the tremendoussuccess Dr. Rask and the other doc-tors witnessed in their patients. Jim,who I told you about at the begin-ning of this article, was the very firstpatient to receive IV colchicine atthe Tahoma Clinic. And by the endof his very first treatment, he wasable to get up and walk to my officewithout a single twinge of pain. In

fact, his pain started to fade afterjust half an hour. And, until a cou-ple of years ago, hundreds of otherTahoma Clinic patients had thesame results.

Unfortunately, since 2008, it’sbeen almost impossible to treat any-one—no matter how much painthey’re in from slipped discs or discdisease—with intravenous colchicine.And if you’ve read even the past fewissues of Nutrition & Healing youcan probably guess why…

You got it—los Federales!On February 7, 2008, the FDA

dictated that individuals and compa-nies must stop making colchicine forIV use within 30 days and stop ship-ping colchicine for IV use within sixmonths. After that, IV colchicinewould require FDA “approval.”And since, as I mentioned above,colchicine is natural and can’t bepatented, it’s highly unlikely thatany company would be willing tospend the 10 to 15 years of re-search—not to mention the $800+million—that it takes to get sub-stances “approved” by the FDA.

But you’re probably wonderingwhy los Federales decided to bansuch a valuable treatment for backpain—especially one that had an“approved” investigational newdrug application behind it and hadbeen effective for hundreds of thou-sands of people since the 1950s…

FDA throws out the baby withthe bathwater

Unfortunately, it was a typicalFDA over-reaction to three cases ofaccidental colchicine overdose in2007, overdoses which resulted froma single compounding pharmacy’s la-beling error. As an unpatentablemedication, IV colchicine was nolonger made by patent medicinecompanies, just compounding phar-macies, and los Federales seized thisepisode to condemn not only allcompounding pharmacies but one of

NAH-0509:NAH-0509 3/27/09 2:01 PM Page 3

4 Nutrition & Healing May 2009 www.wrightnewsletter.com

their most useful IV products aswell.

Sadly, those three overdoses werefatal, which gave los Federales an ex-cuse to review the very small amountof adverse effect data on colchicine.They found that between 1983 and2007, overdoses of IV colchicine re-sulted in 23 deaths and 27 other non-lethal toxic reactions. Of course, evenone death from overdose is toomany, but it’s also important to lookat ALL the figures.

As Dr. Rask wrote in 1989:“6,000 patients with painful disk andother spinal disorders have beentreated…using colchicine for the past35 years. The overall success rate forthis type of atraumatic [no surgeryrequired] and harmless treatmentmethod (for disk disease) is 92 per-cent! Colchicine is effective in reliev-ing the patients’ neck, back, and limbpain, and allows the patient to returnto his former employment withoutcomplications.”

Dr. Guidice, Dr. Margoles, andmany others have treated thousandsmore patients with the same results.The fact is, when it’s used properly,intravenous colchicine is both safeand effective.

Eliminating a treatment that hasrelieved serious pain for hundreds ofthousands of individuals because of23 deaths and a total of 50 negativereports is like “throwing out thebaby with the bath water”! Espe-cially when you consider that inevery instance of toxicity, the recom-mended maximum therapeutic dosewas exceeded.

But according to los Federales,“…FDA believes that the safety risksassociated with IV colchicine out-weigh any potential benefit in usingthe drug for back pain.” (I’m notkidding! This amazing conclusioncan be found in the on-line docu-ment Questions and Answers AboutFDA’s Enforcement Action AgainstUnapproved Injectable ColchicineProducts.)

And yet, the risks of patent med-ications that have proven themselvesdeadly over and over again don’tseem to outweigh their benefits, ac-cording to the actions—or more pre-cisely, the inactions—of los Federales.FDA estimates that 10,000 to 20,000Americans die every year from non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs,including aspirin and Tylenol. But it’snot just anti-inflammatories that un-necessarily put people in harm’s way.

As you know, the list goes on andon. Over the last few decades, hun-dreds and hundreds of lethal FDA-“approved” patent medications haveeither remained on the market orhave been finally been withdrawnafter the death toll rose so high itcouldn’t be ignored. One of the mostwell-known examples is Prempro, thesynthetic hormone replacement med-ication. It increases the risk of inva-sive breast cancer and researchersestimate that synthetic HRT medica-tions, including Prempro, could beimplicated in 100,000 additionalcases of breast cancer over 10 years.But Prempro is still on the market.More recently, the patented diabetesmedication Avandia made headlineswhen researchers found that it in-creases heart attack risk by 43 per-cent and increases risk of death by 64percent. Dr. David Graham, a seniorFDA scientist, testified that Avandiamay have caused 30,000 to 40,000heart attacks and/or strokes since1993. Yet Avandia is still being soldto this day.

Let’s compare for a moment…Avandia: 30,000 to 40,000 deaths in16 years—still on the market. IVcolchicine: 23 deaths in 24 years—banned by los Federales. Guesswhich one is sold by a patent medi-cine company, and which one wassold by compounding pharmacies?But I digress…

What’s even worse is that all ofthese patent medicines—and manymore—have been associated withdeaths even at regular doses. Yet IV

colchicine, whose proper use hasnever resulted in a single death, hasnow become unavailable.

How one of the biggest healthinjustices of the decade got

swept under the rugBut if colchicine hasn’t been avail-

able since 2008, you might be won-dering why you haven’t heard about ituntil now. Well, one reason is that themajority of us don’t have disc-relatedback pain. But the more likely expla-nation is the FDA’s ban on colchicinehappened at about the same time astheir much more heavily publicized at-tack on bio-identical hormones, whichwas a major part of los Federales’ on-going campaign against compoundingpharmacies. In the tremendous uproarthat followed the kick-off of los Fed-erales’ actions against bio-identicalhormones, which affected literally mil-lions of women, the equally unjusti-fied banning of IV colchicine wentunnoticed except by the relativelysmall number of physicians—andtheir patients—who know how effec-tive it is when properly used.

There’s absolutely no question thatan excessive dose of IV colchicine istoxic and dangerous, but almost anydrug or substance, including water,becomes toxic when used in excess.Instead of banning IV colchicine en-tirely, an agency truly devoted thehealth of the public health wouldhave responded to these tragic andpreventable deaths by working to en-sure that IV colchicine is used safely.That should be los Federales’ goal forany treatment—including IVcolchicine, other natural medicines,and thousands of patent medicines.

Instead, their goal seems to be toprotect patent medicine profits—notpeople.

Reclaim your right to safe,effective back pain relief

Last month you read about howpyridoxamine (a natural form of

(continued on page 8)

NAH-0509:NAH-0509 3/27/09 2:01 PM Page 4

5Nutrition & Healing May 2009www.wrightnewsletter.com

Nearly all the focus on hor-mones and erectile dysfunc-

tion has been on testosterone. Butthere’s another hormone that may bejust as important. In the December2008 issue, you read about howDHEA can give women a dramatic li-bido boost. Well, as I briefly men-tioned in that article, this hormonealso plays a role in erectile dysfunc-tion. In fact, several years ago, Russ-ian researchers found a significantcorrelation between lower serum lev-els of DHEA sulfate (one measure-ment of DHEA) and erectile functionin men with chronic prostatitis, re-gardless of the man’s age.1

But it’s not necessary to have this

problem for DHEA to work for you.It offers a simple, natural solution foranyone battling erectile dysfunction—if it’s used in the correct way. But theDHEA capsules you’ll find in yourlocal pharmacy or vitamin shoparen’t the best option…

Following the natural courseWhen your body makes its own

DHEA, it is produced in your adre-nal glands, then released into thebloodstream, where it goes straightto the heart. The heart then pumpsthe unchanged DHEA molecules toevery cell in your body. So every cellthat can use DHEA gets its supply ofthese unchanged molecules, and usesthem exactly as Nature intended.

But when you swallow DHEA, itgoes to your intestines first, thenstraight to your liver. For DHEA—and for all other internally secretedsteroids, including testosterone, es-trogens, and progesterone—the liverserves mostly as a “garbage dis-posal,” adding other molecules (aprocess technically termed “conjuga-tion”), which act as “routing tickets”for the steroids, mostly routing themback out of the body again throughthe intestines and kidneys.

So the closest way to mimic theeffects of naturally produced DHEAis for it to be absorbed through themucous membranes right around and

DHEA for erectile dysfunction: Why those supplement capsuleswon’t work so well—and what will

(continued on page 8)

The last thing you probably want to think about right nowis coming down with a cold. But we hear about quite a fewcases of springtime headcolds at the Tahoma Clinic, so Ithought it might be a good opportunity to remind you aboutsome of the most effective ways to ward them off—and to re-cover faster if you do happen to come down with one. (Andthis will be equally effective next fall and winter, too!)

I’ve written about cold prevention several times in previousissues ofNutrition &Healing (most recently in the October2007 issue).And if you’ve been following the recommenda-tions in those articles—including not eating any sugar, stayingaway from any food allergies you may have, exercising, andtaking your vitamins D and C, as well as other immune boost-ers including echinacea andAmerican ginseng—you may noteven need the advice laid out in the rest of this article.

But, just in case, it’s a good idea to know about some re-cent research about one of the easiest, most inexpensive reme-dies available. It’s one of the items you read about back inOctober 2007, but last March (of 2008) another randomized,double-blind, placebo-controlled report confirmed zinc acetatelozenges’ cold-fighting abilities.1

Fifty volunteers used either a zinc acetate lozenge or aplacebo every two to three hours. Compared with the placebo

group, volunteers in the zinc group had a shorter duration ofcolds (4.0 vs. 7.1 days); shorter cough duration (2.1 vs. 5.0days) and shorter duration of nasal discharge (3.0 vs. 4.5 days).

Just be sure you read the label to make sure that thelozenges are zinc acetate, not zinc gluconate, zinc gluconate-glycinate, zinc ascorbate, zinc aspartate, or any other form ofzinc!

In zinc lozenges, the zinc is always combined with anothermolecule (acetate, gluconate, ascorbate, etc.). But the moleculethat kills cold germs is “ionic zinc”—the positively chargedzinc molecule that has been detached (in chemistry-talk, disso-ciated) in your saliva from it’s accompanying molecule. Theless zinc dissociates, the less germs it will kill!

The “acetate” form of zinc dissociates 100 percent, leavingall the zinc available to kill those cold germs. Unfortunately,none of the other combinations are quite as effective. The “glu-conate” form dissociates approximately 72 percent, the “glu-conate-glycinate” form 57 percent or less, and the “citrate,”“ascorbate,” and “aspartate” forms are close to 0 percent.

Zinc acetate lozenges are available as Zinx® at natural foodstores, compounding pharmacies, and from the Tahoma ClinicDispensary (see “Resources,” page 8). (I am not affiliated inany way with the manufacturers of Zinx®.)

Clinical Tip 144Forget what you’ve heard!

Zinc lozenges do tackle colds faster—if you use the right ones

NAH-0509:NAH-0509 3/27/09 2:01 PM Page 5

6 Nutrition & Healing May 2009 www.wrightnewsletter.com

New research from a team ofAustralian and British scien-

tists has uncovered what may verywell be the best natural memorybooster on earth. Studies show thissimple herb reverses brain aging andmay even beat back some of the dev-astating effects of Alzheimer’s dis-ease. But what makes thisbreakthrough even more astoundingis that scientists have been ignoringits brain-protecting potential fornearly 500 years!

That’s right—for centuries, theherb showing so much potential forpreserving memory has been mainlyused for hot flashes, excessive sweat-ing, and infections of the mouth andthroat.1 But “once upon a time”herbalists knew that sage (technicallyknown in the herbal world as Salviaofficinalis), had much more to offer.In fact, back in the 16th century,English herbalist John Gerard wrotethat sage “is singularly good for thehead and brain and quickeneth thenerves and memory.” And in 1756,famed herbalist John Hill made whatappears to be the earliest link be-tween sage and Alzheimer’s disease(AD) when he wrote that the herb“will retard that rapid progress ofdecay that treads upon our heels sofast in latter years of life, will pre-serve faculty and memory morevaluable to the rational mind thanlife itself.”2 But ironically, despitethese early writings, for the past sev-eral centuries, the memory-boostingeffects of sage have been all but for-gotten.

Luckily, when the team of Aus-tralian and British researchers de-cided to study the effects of plantson memory, the looked back to whatthese wise men had to say—and re-discovered sage.

The natural alternative toAlzheimer’s drugs

Initially, the scientists found thatsage extracts possessed significant an-tioxidant, anti-inflammatory, andcholinesterase-inhibiting activities.3Cholinesterase prevents acetylcholine,a major neurotransmitter, from doingits job by breaking it down into twoinactive metabolites. Preventing thisbreakdown helps protect mentalfunction. In fact, the current conven-tional drugs for treating AD arecholinesterase inhibitors.

The next step in their research wasto test sage in healthy young volun-teers.4 In the first trial, 20 participantsreceived 50, 100 and 150 µL of astandardized essential oil extract of aspecific type of sage called Salvia la-vandulaefolia and placebo. In the sec-ond trial, 24 participants received 25and 50 µL of a standardized essentialoil extract of S. lavandulaefolia andplacebo. In both studies, the 50 µLdose of sage essential oil significantlyimproved immediate word recall.These results were the first systematicevidence that sage was capable of im-proving memory.

The research team followed upthis early work with a pilot, open-label study in patients with AD. Thetrial included 11 patients between theages of 76 and 95 who had mild tomoderate AD. Over the course of sixweeks, the participants’ dose was in-creased from 50 µL to 150 µL. Dur-ing the study period, there were somepromising indications of a therapeuticeffect, specifically reduced neuropsy-chiatric symptoms and improved at-tention. And none of the patientsexperienced any adverse physical orneurological effects during the study.

Reverse brain agingBut the most recent addition to

this research team’s studies on sage

was a trial investigating the herb’seffects on memory and attention inhealthy older volunteers.5 The re-searchers used a randomized,placebo-controlled, double blind,crossover design to investigate theeffects of a single dose of sage over a6-hour period (with assessments at 1,2.5, 4 and 6 hours). Twenty volun-teers with an average age of around73 received one of four active dosesof extract or a placebo at each visit,with a seven-day wash-out period be-tween visits. The doses of extract usedwere 167, 333, 666 and 1,332 mg re-spectively

Compared with the placebo phase(which generally exhibited a declinein performance over the 6-hour testperiod), the 333 mg extract dose ofsage caused a highly significant en-hancement of longer-term memory atall testing times. There were also ben-efits with the other doses, but whatsurprised the researchers was that thehigher doses didn’t work nearly aswell as the 333 mg dose. The studyteam noted that this is the first timesage has been shown to improve cog-nitive function in healthy older indi-viduals. The optimum sage dosage of333 mg extract (around 2.5 g of herb)improved secondary memory byabout 30 points. The normal age-re-lated decline for the healthy grouptested was around 40 points. So, thebenefits they saw in the recent studyshowed a substantial reversal of thedeterioration in secondary memorythat typically occurs over the courseof about 50 years of normal aging.

They’re still not sure how sageworks, but all of these studies showthat it does. And even if sage isn’t theanswer for AD, it seems it can helpyou keep your brain young and yourmemory in good working order. KBCitations available upon request and on the Nutrition& Healing website: www.wrightnewsletter.com

The age-defying memory booster science hasbeen ignoring for 500 years

By Kerry Bone

NAH-0509:NAH-0509 3/27/09 2:01 PM Page 6

7Nutrition & Healing May 2009www.wrightnewsletter.com

The new prostate cancer risk ratio everyman needs to know

Q:My doctor sent me the following note:“Your di-hydrotestosterone (DHT) levels are high.

Your testosterone is high-normal…, your free fractionis fine…, but the DHT is too high…We could put youon some Proscar® or Propecia® to bring it down. Thesaw palmetto you’re taking doesn’t seem strongenough. Let me know what you want to do.”

I really don’t want to take a patent medicine for all the rea-sons you write about, but he says DHT is carcinogenic, andthat’s not good for me either. What would you recommend?

––A.H., via e-mailJVW:As your physician says, DHT is pro-carcinogenic…butnow, as Paul Harvey would have said, here’s the rest of thestory…Just like estrogens, testosterone has pro-carcinogenic and

anti-carcinogenic metabolites.While it’s true that DHT is pro-carcinogenic, the very next metabolite after DHT in this path-way, androstanediol (ann-dro-stane-dye-all), is ananti-carcinogen. In technical terms, DHT is a “de-differentiat-ing agent” (meaning that it leads to cellular disorganizationwhich can be precancerous) but androstanediol is a “re-differ-entiating agent” (meaning that it causes cellular re-organiza-tion which leads away from cancer). (To be even moretechnically correct and complete, both DHT and androstane-diol come in “alpha” and “beta” forms, but the “alpha” form isthe one that is most frequently measured.)Those of you who have been reading Nutrition & Healing

for some time, probably remember the “2/16” estrogen ratio—the ratio of anti-carcinogenic 2-hydroxyestrogen to pro-car-cinogenic 16-alpha-hydroxyestrogen. Researchers have foundthat a favorable ratio (more “2” than “16”) is associated with alower risk of breast and other estrogen related cancers.But some relatively new research shows that the ratio of

DHT to androstanediol may be just as important to monitor formen as the “2/16” ratio is for women. (As yet, this ratio has noname, so for now, I’ll call it the “DHT/Androstanediol ratio.”)Unfortunately, many well-meaning physicians who monitorDHT haven’t heard about this recent research and don’t realizethat the DHT/Androstanediol ratio may be more importantthan the DHT level itself.What’s worse, many of these well-meaning physicians

(even ones who work with bio-identical hormones) will rec-ommend patent medicines such as Propecia®, Proscar®, andAvodart® to cut down on DHT production without measuringandrostanediol, too.And there’s no way to know for sure(without measurement) what these patent medicines are doingto the DHT/Androstanediol ratio. (Although, unfortunately, I

have seen considerably unfavorable DHT/Androstane-diol ratios in many men using these patent medicines.)In fact, researchers1 have suggested (without actually using

this terminology) that neglecting the DHT/Androstanediol ratiowas a major factor in the outcome of the recent Prostate CancerPrevention Trial.2 This trial set out to prove that finasteride(Proscar®, Propecia®) would reduce risk of prostate cancer.And indeed, the researchers reported the risk of cancer in

the finasteride group was 24.8 percent less. But among themen who did get cancer, 37 percent of the cases in the finas-teride group were highly aggressive versus 22.2 percent highlyaggressive cancers in the no-finasteride group. In other words,finasteride might mean less prostate cancer risk, but when can-cer occurs when finasteride is used, it’s likely to be more ag-gressive—which translates into a greater chance dying fromthis disease, rather than outliving it as many men do.But back to your question…As a first step, I’d suggest you ask to have your androstane-

diol level measured, and your DHT/Androstanediol ratio cal-culated, so you can be better informed before making anydecision.Although there’s no absolute proof of this yet, it ap-pears logical that more “anti-carcinogen” than “pro-carcino-gen” is a very good idea, so for now it appears reasonable tosay that favorable ratios are greater than 1, and ratios of lessthan 1 indicate increased risk.In general, I recommend that men stay strictly away from

Proscar®, Propecia®, andAvodart® altogether. I’ve seen toomany men taking these patent medicines who have DHT/An-drostranediol ratios of less than 1, often much less than 1. (Butfor anyone who does decide to take one of these medications,be sure to have your DHT/Androstanediol ratio measured be-fore and shortly after starting.)You might want to consider talking to your physician about

trying one of Nature’s more gentle 5-alpha-reductase in-hibitors, such as zinc and gamma-linoleic acid, both of whichare essential nutrients as well as 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors.Of course, it’s important to note that I’ve also seen a few

cases where someone took so much saw palmetto that hisDHT/Androstanediol ratio fell below 1.And it doesn’t matterwhether the low ratio is due to a patent medicine, an herb, oranything else—the risk is the same.One testing outcome we see fairly regularly at the Tahoma

Clinic is DHT and androstanediol levels that are both too high,but still favorably balanced (with a DHT/Androstanediol ratiogreater than 1). Most of the time, lowering the dose of testos-terone the person is taking brings both of these levels back into“normal” range, while still keeping the DHT/Androstanediolratio where it needs to be.The text contained herein does not constitute medical advice.Nutrition & Healing advisesthat you consult your own physician before acting on any recommendations containedwithin this publication.

Natural Response

NAH-0509:NAH-0509 3/27/09 2:01 PM Page 7

8 Nutrition & Healing May 2009 www.wrightnewsletter.com

Log-on information(MAY)

Username:may9Password: naturopathic

ALTERNATIVE HEALTH RESOURCES

American College forAdvancementin Medicine (ACAM)Phone: (888)439-6891www.acam.org

American Academy ofEnvironmental Medicine (AAEM)Phone: (316)684-5500www.aaem.com

Tahoma Clinicfor appointments onlyPhone: (425)264-0059

Tahoma Clinic DispensaryPhone: (888)893-6878to order supplements and products onlywww.tahomadispensary.com

AmericanAssociation ofNaturopathic PhysiciansPhone: (866)538-2267www.naturopathic.org

Meridian Valley LaboratoryPhone: (425)271-8689www.meridianvalleylab.com

International CollegeIntegrative MedicinePhone: (866)464-5226www.icimed.com

Nutrition & Healing onlinewww.WrightNewsletter.com

vitamin B6) was banned after apatent medicine company paid theFDA to “approve” a precise dupli-cate version of the very same vita-min, which they renamed “Pyridoril.”Pyridoril does the same thing as“regular” pyridoxamine—but itcosts much, much more. Now thatregular pyridoxamine isn’t avail-able, though, consumers have beenbacked into a corner, with Pyridorilas their only option for this valu-able nutrient.

Los Federales are also still tryingto eliminate estriol, a safe estrogenmade in enormous quantities duringevery pregnancy, while another

patent medicine company is at-tempting to get estriol “approved”under the name “Trimesta.”

And (once again) the list goes onand on!

I know you’ve read this from memany times over the past severalmonths, but it bears repeating onceagain: FDA is broken, and reform islong, long overdue. But I want to re-mind you that you can help makethat happen. Please visit www.re-formFDA.org to read much moreabout the effort being led by theAmerican Association for HealthFreedom, the Life Extension Foun-dation, and other key health organi-zations. And, if you haven’t already

done so, please consider signing thepetition!

And this month, I hope you’llalso consider helping to restore IVcolchicine for safe, effective IV use!Dr. Daniel Bies is leading the effortto make colchicine available onceagain to people suffering from backpain. Please contact him to expressyour support. Letters can be sent toDr. Daniel Bies, 687 Atlantic CityBoulevard, Bayville, New Jersey08721, or you can call (732)237-2200to find out more. JVWCitations available upon request and on the Nutrition& Healing website: www.wrightnewsletter.com

I’m very grateful to Dr. Daniel Bies, D.C., M.S., and Dr.Richard Menashe, D.O., for continuing to prod me to writethis article and supplying much of the data to do so!

outside the anal area (the same areahemorrhoids may occur). (Forwomen who use DHEA—for otherpurposes, of course—the vaginal orlabia areas also have mucous mem-brane surfaces.) When DHEA is ap-plied to these membranes, it getsabsorbed into the bloodstream,where it then follows the naturalcourse through your body, ratherthan making a detour through yourintestines and liver where much ofit is targeted for disposal.

So if you want to try DHEA tocombat erectile dysfunction, andyou want to give it the best chanceof working, consult with a physi-cian skilled and knowledgeable innatural medicine and bio-identicalhormone replacement, who canwrite you a prescription for aDHEA crème.

Fortunately the daily dose ofcrème is very small—typically just2/10 to 3/10 of a “cc” (which is adab about the size of a very smallpea). It also absorbs quite rapidly,

within just a few minutes, so it’s alot less bother than you mightimagine.

For more information on DHEA,refer back to the December 2008issue, which you can download andview for free by visitingwww.wrightnewsletter.com and log-ging on to the Archives with theusername and password listedbelow. JVWCitation available upon request and on the Nutrition& Healing website: www.wrightnewsletter.com

(continued from page 4)back pain remedy

(continued from page 5)DHEA for erectile dysfunction

NAH-0509:NAH-0509 3/27/09 2:01 PM Page 8