Watchman News

Balance problems affect millions of older adults, yet most people assume the trouble starts solely in the muscles, joints, or inner ear. A study published in Gait & Posture points to a contributor that gets far less attention — the health of the gut barrier.1 Researchers set out to test whether a compound produced by beneficial gut bacteria could measurably influence how steady, strong, and mobile men remain as they age.

That compound is butyrate, a short-chain fatty acid (SCFA) made when bacteria break down certain carbohydrates. Scientists have studied it for years because of its role in maintaining the intestinal barrier — the lining that keeps the contents of the digestive tract separated from the rest of the body — and in supporting communication between the gut and other systems.
The catch is that aging tends to work against this ecosystem: levels of butyrate-producing bacteria often decline over time, frequently alongside a weakening intestinal barrier and a gradual loss of physical performance.

That overlap raises a question worth taking seriously. If the gut barrier erodes at the same time strength and stability decline, are the two more connected than they appear, and could supporting the intestinal lining translate into better physical function? To find out, researchers gave older men oral butyrate and tracked what happened to their balance, strength, walking speed, and gut barrier markers over the next four months.

The Gut and Muscle Connection Became Harder to Ignore

The study enrolled 130 older men and examined whether taking 300 milligrams (mg) of oral butyrate daily for 16 weeks would affect balance, muscle strength, walking speed, and markers of intestinal barrier health.2 Participants were randomly assigned to either a butyrate group or a placebo group. The researchers wanted to determine whether strengthening intestinal integrity translated into measurable improvements in everyday physical function.*

• The men who took butyrate performed better after four months — Participants in the butyrate group experienced significant improvements in postural balance, handgrip strength, and gait speed, while the placebo group did not show the same changes. These findings suggest that supporting the gut environment was associated with improvements in several physical abilities that become increasingly important with age.
• Better balance was closely linked to stronger muscles and faster movement — Researchers found that participants with stronger balance scores also tended to have higher handgrip strength and faster walking speeds. Grip strength is often used as a simple indicator of overall muscle function, while gait speed reflects how efficiently the body coordinates strength, stability, and movement.
The fact that all three improved together suggests they draw on shared underlying systems rather than working in isolation — a hint that what changed wasn’t muscle alone, since steady balance depends on coordination across the body, not just leg strength.
• Improvements in physical function occurred alongside improvements in gut-related markers — By the end of the study, participants taking butyrate showed lower levels of zonulin and lipopolysaccharide-binding protein (LBP), two markers researchers used to evaluate intestinal barrier integrity. Zonulin is a protein that controls the tight junctions between the cells lining your gut, essentially how snugly those seams are held together.
When zonulin climbs, the junctions loosen and the barrier grows more permeable; when it falls, the seams tighten. LBP rises when fragments of gut bacteria slip across the barrier into the bloodstream, so a lower reading points to less of that crossing.
Both markers falling, then, points the same direction: a more intact barrier. Men with stronger balance scores generally had lower levels of these markers, while those with poorer balance tended to have higher levels. The relationship between these measurements became one of the strongest findings in the study.
• Researchers proposed a possible gut-to-body pathway — Aging is often accompanied by changes in the intestinal barrier. When that barrier becomes less effective, bacterial compounds from the gut gain greater access to circulation.
Butyrate is the primary fuel source for the cells lining the colon — they essentially run on it. Well-fueled lining cells hold the seams between them more tightly, helping maintain separation between the contents of the digestive tract and the rest of the body. Researchers proposed this as one possible explanation for the improvements observed in balance, strength, and mobility.
• The findings point toward a broader view of healthy aging — Rather than treating balance as a problem caused solely by weaker muscles, the study suggests that physical performance depends on multiple interconnected systems. At the same time, the researchers noted important limitations. The study included older men only, so the findings can’t automatically be applied to women.
In addition, C-reactive protein (CRP) and 8-isoprostane — markers commonly associated with inflammation and oxidative stress — didn’t change. As a result, the strongest conclusion is that better intestinal barrier integrity was associated with better physical function, not that butyrate acted as an anti-inflammatory treatment.

*These findings are from research conducted in clinical settings. Results may not apply to all individuals.

Support Your Gut to Support Your Strength

The study highlighted a simple but important idea: your muscles don’t operate in isolation. The condition of your intestinal barrier appears closely connected to balance, walking speed, and strength. If your goal is to stay steady on your feet and maintain physical independence as you age, focus first on supporting the systems that influence muscle function from the inside out.
The most effective strategy isn’t chasing symptoms but addressing the underlying factors that affect gut health, muscle function, and cellular energy production.

• Help your gut make its own butyrate — Your long-term goal isn’t simply to take butyrate — it’s to create the conditions that allow your gut bacteria to produce it for you. A healthy microbiome naturally manufactures butyrate, which is why rebuilding your gut ecosystem deserves more attention than any supplement.
If your digestion is relatively healthy, begin with fermented foods such as sauerkraut, kimchi, kefir, and full-fat yogurt (choose raw or traditionally fermented dairy where possible). These foods help increase microbial diversity and provide the metabolic building blocks (like acetate and lactate) that support resident bacteria involved in butyrate production. Grass fed butter, ghee, and aged cheeses also contain small amounts of butyric acid itself. Introduce fermented foods gradually and pay attention to how your body responds.
If your gut has been disrupted by years of digestive problems, repeated antibiotic use, or chronic inflammation, a butyrate supplement may serve as a temporary bridge while you restore a healthier microbiome. Food and microbial restoration remain the ultimate objective because your body is designed to rely on beneficial bacteria for butyrate production.

If you do use a supplement, note that some butyrate formulations are designed to release in the colon rather than earlier in the digestive tract — though food-based and microbial restoration remain the primary goal.

• Repair your gut before adding large amounts of fiber — Counterintuitively, loading up on fiber when your gut is already irritated often backfires. Foods such as beans, raw vegetables, and whole grains frequently create excessive fermentation in an imbalanced gut, leading to bloating, gas, and discomfort.
Instead, focus first on easy-to-digest carbohydrate sources such as whole fruit and white rice. These foods provide steady fuel while placing less stress on your digestive system. If your digestion has been compromised for years, this simpler approach often helps create a better foundation for recovery.
As your symptoms improve, gradually introduce foods that nourish butyrate-producing bacteria. Cooked and cooled potatoes and green bananas provide resistant starch, a type of carbohydrate that reaches the colon intact and serves as fuel for beneficial microbes. From there, add foods such as onions, garlic, and leeks. These foods help feed bacteria that produce SCFAs, including butyrate, helping restore a healthier gut environment over time.
• Eliminate seed oils that disrupt gut bacteria — If your meals regularly include soybean, corn, canola, safflower, cottonseed, or sunflower oil, you’re making it harder for beneficial bacteria to thrive. These seed oils are rich in linoleic acid (LA), which may disrupt microbial balance and contribute to conditions that interfere with gut health.
Remove processed foods made with these oils whenever possible. That includes many restaurant foods, packaged snacks, salad dressings, sauces, and convenience meals. Replace them with more stable fats such as grass fed butter, ghee, and tallow. This shift helps create a healthier environment for the bacteria responsible for producing butyrate and maintaining intestinal integrity.
• Build and maintain muscle every week — The men who demonstrated better balance also tended to have greater handgrip strength and faster gait speed. That means muscle quality matters. I recommend incorporating resistance training twice a week to preserve and build strength as you age.
If traditional weightlifting feels intimidating, start with bodyweight exercises, resistance bands, carrying groceries, climbing stairs, or chair stands. Another option is blood flow restriction (BFR) training, also known as KAATSU training.
This approach uses specialized bands to partially restrict blood flow during low-intensity exercise, allowing you to stimulate muscle growth and strength gains with much lighter weights. That makes it especially useful if joint pain, balance issues, or limited mobility make heavy lifting difficult. Every small improvement compounds over time.

Support that training with adequate protein. Aim for approximately 0.6 to 0.8 grams of protein per pound of ideal body weight, with about one-third coming from collagen-rich sources such as homemade bone broth, gelatin, and collagen supplements. Strong muscles provide the foundation for confident movement and long-term independence.

• Walk every day and combine it with sunlight — Walking speed improved alongside balance and grip strength in the study. A daily walking habit strengthens the connection between your muscles, nervous system, and balance centers while helping maintain mobility.
Turn walking into a personal challenge. Track your time, distance, or daily step count and work toward gradual improvements, building to a one-hour walk each day. Small goals build momentum and help you stay consistent. Whenever possible, walk outdoors in natural sunlight.
Sun exposure supports cellular energy production, helps regulate your circadian rhythm, and promotes healthy mitochondrial function. Better cellular energy supports the tissues and systems that keep you moving confidently throughout life.

FAQs About Butyrate, Balance, and Muscle Strength in Older Men

Q: What is butyrate, and why does it matter as I get older?
A: Butyrate is an SCFA produced by beneficial gut bacteria when they break down certain carbohydrates. It helps support the intestinal barrier, which acts as a protective lining between the contents of your digestive tract and the rest of your body. As you age, levels of butyrate-producing bacteria often decline, which coincides with changes in gut health, strength, mobility, and overall physical function.

Q: Did butyrate improve balance and strength in the study?
A: Yes. In the study, older men who took 300 mg of oral butyrate daily for 16 weeks showed significant improvements in postural balance, handgrip strength, and walking speed compared to men who received a placebo. Researchers also found improvements in markers associated with intestinal barrier integrity.

Q: How are gut health and physical performance connected?
A: The study found that men with better balance tended to have stronger grip strength, faster walking speeds, and healthier intestinal barrier markers. Researchers believe that when the intestinal barrier becomes less effective, bacterial compounds gain greater access to circulation, which affects systems involved in physical performance. Strengthening the gut barrier appears to support healthier function throughout your body.

Q: What foods help support natural butyrate production?
A: Fermented foods such as sauerkraut, kimchi, kefir, and full-fat yogurt help support microbial diversity and create an environment that favors butyrate-producing bacteria. Resistant starch sources such as cooked and cooled potatoes and green bananas also provide fuel for beneficial microbes. Foods such as onions, garlic, and leeks further support bacteria that produce SCFAs, including butyrate.

Q: What else supports balance and muscle strength as I age?
A: The study highlights the importance of looking beyond muscles alone. Daily walking, regular resistance training, adequate protein intake, and maintaining a healthy gut environment all work together to support strength and mobility. BFR, or KAATSU training, offers another option for building strength with lighter weights, which is especially useful if heavy lifting is difficult because of joint discomfort or limited mobility.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Consult a qualified health care provider before making changes to your health regimen.

Test Your Knowledge with Today’s Quiz!
Take today’s quiz to see how much you’ve learned from yesterday’s Mercola.com article.

Does the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) currently ban dental amalgam in children?

Yes, for every child under 15
No, it only recommends avoiding it when possible
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) identifies children as a higher-risk group and recommends nonmercury fillings when appropriate, but its guidance does not legally prohibit amalgam use. Learn more.
Yes, but only in government clinics
No, because it has issued no guidance

You’re taking your calcium. You’re doing weight-bearing exercise. Your doctor says your bone scan “looks fine for your age.” Then one day you sneeze, turn the wrong way, or trip on a curb — and your wrist shatters. The ER doctor tells you it’s osteoporosis, but here’s what no one answered: what was actually happening inside your bones for the past decade while your scans still looked acceptable?

For decades, osteoporosis has been treated as an inevitable loss of mineral — a calcium problem that stays hidden until a hip or wrist breaks. Conventional care concentrates on measuring damage after it has already occurred, offering little insight into what drives the slow decay in the first place. That narrow focus leaves a key question unanswered: why does bone strength begin to fail long before fractures appear?

A growing body of metabolic research points to a signaling breakdown involving a molecule most people associate with mood: serotonin. While serotonin helps regulate your emotional state in your brain, approximately 90% of your body’s serotonin is actually produced in your gut and circulates through your bloodstream — what researchers call “peripheral serotonin.”

This peripheral serotonin has completely different effects than brain serotonin: instead of influencing mood, it acts as a stress signal that directly communicates with bone tissue. That peripheral serotonin communicates directly with bone tissue, acting less like a feel-good chemical and more like a systemic stress signal. When those signals intensify, bone integrity declines in a measurable and orderly way. This shift moves osteoporosis from inevitable consequence to preventable metabolic dysfunction.

By focusing on serotonin chemistry rather than mineral density alone, osteoporosis begins to look less like an unavoidable consequence of aging and more like a detectable metabolic state. That sets the foundation for understanding how bone deterioration develops, accelerates under stress, and leaves clues long before standard scans reveal structural damage.

Serotonin Markers Signal Bone Loss Long Before Fractures Appear

For a study published in the journal Biomolecules and Biomedicine, researchers investigated whether blood markers related to serotonin could identify and predict osteoporosis in postmenopausal women, beyond what standard bone scans reveal.1 The team analyzed clinical data and blood samples from 287 postmenopausal women and grouped them by bone status: normal bone density, osteopenia, and osteoporosis.

Women with osteoporosis showed higher markers of bone breakdown and formation occurring at the same time — a pattern known as high bone turnover. While bone is constantly remodeling throughout life, high turnover means this process is running too fast, like a factory operating in overdrive. The problem: when the cycle speeds up under stress, breakdown consistently outpaces repair, resulting in net bone loss.

• Serotonin-related markers rose consistently as bones weakened — Blood levels of serotonin, its immediate precursor 5-HTP, and its breakdown product 5-HIAA were all higher in women with osteoporosis than in those with osteopenia or normal bone density. The worse their bones, the higher their serotonin markers — a progression that suggests direct causation, not coincidence.
• Higher serotonin markers aligned with faster bone breakdown and poorer bone strength — The researchers compared these blood markers to established bone turnover markers that show how fast bone is being broken down and rebuilt. Higher serotonin, 5-HTP, and 5-HIAA tracked with higher levels of markers that rise when bone remodeling speeds up.
At the same time, higher serotonin markers matched lower bone density in the spine and hip, the two sites most associated with disabling fractures. When researchers adjusted for years since menopause, bone density, and bone turnover markers, serotonin, 5-HTP, and 5-HIAA still emerged as independent risk factors for osteoporosis.

Women who were 12 years or more past menopause showed significantly higher levels of serotonin markers than those earlier in menopause. These elevated levels tracked with faster progression toward osteoporosis and shorter time to diagnosis.

• The relationship worked in both directions, strengthening confidence in the finding — As serotonin-related markers increased, bone density decreased. As bone density decreased, bone turnover markers increased. These relationships held across every measurement, every analysis, every comparison — the kind of consistency that suggests a fundamental biological mechanism rather than statistical noise.

• Higher marker levels translated into faster progression toward osteoporosis — When researchers divided women into high and low marker groups using defined cutoffs, those with higher serotonin-related markers developed osteoporosis sooner. Women with elevated serotonin markers showed roughly two- to three-fold higher risk over time compared to those with lower levels.

• Peripheral serotonin acts on bone cells — The study described how serotonin produced outside your brain interferes with osteoblasts, the cells responsible for building new bone. At the same time, it supports processes that increase bone resorption, tipping the balance toward net bone loss. In simple terms, higher peripheral serotonin tells bone to break down faster than it rebuilds.

These findings document the what — serotonin markers predict and track osteoporosis progression. But they stop short of fully explaining the why. How exactly does elevated serotonin in your bloodstream translate into weakened bones? This is where bioenergetic researcher Georgi Dinkov’s analysis becomes important, as he traces the specific hormonal cascade that connects high serotonin to active bone destruction.2

Serotonin Activates Stress Pathways That Break Bone

In his commentary on the Biomolecules and Biomed study, Dinkov described age-related bone loss as a stress-driven process. He framed the results through the lens of chronic hormonal strain rather than mineral deficiency, emphasizing that the serotonin elevations observed in postmenopausal women act upstream of bone breakdown.
His central point was that serotonin is not just associated with osteoporosis in the study — it provides a mechanistic explanation for why bone loss accelerates with aging and menopause.

• Serotonin stimulates the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, which raises cortisol levels — Dinkov explained that the serotonin elevations documented in the study activate what’s called the HPA axis — a chain reaction that starts in your brain and ends with your adrenal glands pumping out cortisol, your body’s primary stress hormone.

Think of it as your body’s emergency broadcast system, designed to mobilize resources during genuine threats. Activation of this axis increases cortisol, and cortisol is a catabolic hormone that breaks down tissue. In other words, elevated serotonin doesn’t just correlate with bone loss — it causes bone loss by triggering the exact hormonal cascade that dismantles skeletal tissue.

• Cortisol directly weakens bone structure over time — Dinkov linked the high-serotonin profiles observed in the study to sustained cortisol exposure, which suppresses bone-forming cells while increasing bone resorption. He noted that this mechanism mirrors what’s seen in cortisol-excess conditions such as Cushing’s syndrome, offering a clear biological explanation for the faster bone turnover and lower bone density reported in the paper.

• Blocking serotonin interrupts this destructive loop — Using evidence from existing drug research, Dinkov explained that blocking serotonin signals shuts down the cortisol response that breaks bone, and in experimental studies this leads to bone loss slowing or reversing. This directly supports the study’s conclusion that serotonin is not merely a biomarker of osteoporosis but a driver of the process identified in postmenopausal women.

• This framework explains why bone loss worsens with time since menopause — Dinkov emphasized that the longer serotonin remains elevated — as shown in women further from menopause in the study — the longer cortisol acts on bone tissue. This explains why your bone scan can look “borderline” for years before suddenly showing osteoporosis — the damage has been accumulating invisibly all along, driven by stress chemistry that standard scans never measure.
Dinkov pointed out that serotonin measurements reflect active biological stress on bone, whereas bone density scans identify damage only after it has accumulated. In the context of the Biomolecules and Biomedicine findings, this suggests a way to identify and monitor osteoporosis risk earlier and more safely.

• Serotonin signals from the brain directly influence bone cells — Separate research published in Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology explains that bone is not an inert structure but is richly supplied with nerve fibers that actively regulate bone-building and bone-breaking cells.3

The researchers describe functional pathways that allow bone tissue to both respond to and regulate serotonin uptake, meaning serotonin acts as a neural signal that directly alters bone metabolism rather than working only through hormones or circulation. This finding shows that changes in brain signaling, mood regulation, and drugs that affect serotonin do not stay confined to your nervous system — they transmit instructions straight to bone cells, shaping bone mass across the lifespan.

Steps That Target the Root Cause of Bone Loss

If you’re reading this and recognizing symptoms — anxiety, digestive issues, sleep problems, osteopenia — understand that these aren’t separate conditions requiring separate treatments. They’re all downstream effects of the same metabolic dysfunction. The conventional approach treats each symptom in isolation: antacids for digestion, SSRIs for anxiety, and bisphosphonates for bones.

But if elevated serotonin is the common driver, that approach is like mopping the floor while the faucet is still running. What follows are interventions that address the source — not by adding more serotonin (which most antidepressants do), but by addressing the stress chemistry that’s elevating it in the first place.

1. Shut down chronic stress signals that keep your bones in breakdown mode — If you’re surviving on adrenaline and coffee, waking up exhausted, or lying awake at 3 a.m. with racing thoughts, your stress hormones aren’t just elevated — they’re actively cannibalizing your skeleton to fund your body’s emergency operations — and this directly prevents bone repair. Your body is prioritizing immediate survival over long-term structural maintenance.
The solution isn’t complicated: establish regular sleep and wake times, get morning sunlight exposure on your bare skin (this resets your circadian rhythm), and eat at consistent, predictable times. These aren’t relaxation tips — they’re metabolic interventions that directly shut down the stress cascade dismantling your bones. As your stress chemistry normalizes, those bone-destroying signals quiet down, and your body finally gets the message that it’s safe to rebuild.

2. Boost calming brain chemistry to counter excess serotonin — Here’s what most doctors won’t tell you: when you’re experiencing anxiety, irritability, impulsiveness, or constant worry, your serotonin levels are likely running high while your calming neurotransmitter gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) is running low. This matters tremendously for your bones.
Here’s the key relationship your doctor has likely never mentioned: GABA and serotonin operate like a seesaw in your brain. When GABA is high, you feel calm and emotionally stable — and serotonin naturally stays in its healthy range. But when stress depletes GABA, serotonin floods your system unchecked.
This isn’t just about mood: that excess serotonin is simultaneously triggering anxiety in your mind and dismantling your skeleton. The women developing osteoporosis fastest aren’t necessarily calcium-deficient — they’re GABA-deficient. Both natural and supplemental GABA sources show promise. GABA-rich foods like fermented foods and certain teas provide a natural way to increase intake, while supplements offer more precise dosing options.

3. Eat in a way that stops gut-based serotonin production at the source — When you eat hard-to-digest carbohydrates — like grains, legumes, or fibrous vegetables — with an irritated gut, they pass through your stomach incompletely broken down. Once they reach your intestines, they become food for gram-negative bacteria — the problematic species that thrive in an unhealthy gut. As these bacteria multiply, they release endotoxin (specifically lipopolysaccharide, or LPS) into your intestinal wall.
Your body treats endotoxin as an emergency signal, and one of its primary responses is converting the amino acid tryptophan into serotonin right there in your gut lining. This gut-derived serotonin then enters your bloodstream as peripheral serotonin — the bone-destroying hormone we’ve been discussing.
The solution? Eat meals that digest fully and comfortably in your stomach. This means choosing easily digestible carbohydrates to start, including fruit and white rice. Eat slowly, chew thoroughly, and pay attention to how your body responds. When digestion happens where it should — in your stomach — you dramatically reduce endotoxin production and shut off serotonin synthesis at its primary source.
Further, Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium probiotic strains produce GABA directly in your gut. This creates another mechanism linking gut health to bone health: a healthy microbiome both reduces endotoxin-driven serotonin production and increases GABA availability.

4. Maintain consistent energy and nutrient intake to prevent metabolic panic — If you avoid carbohydrates, you’re sending your body an emergency signal. This immediately raises stress hormones like cortisol, which then elevates serotonin signaling — and your bones pay the price. Your body interprets carbohydrate restriction as famine and begins breaking down bone tissue to liberate stored minerals and amino acids — a survival mechanism that’s destroying your structural foundation.
The fix is straightforward but crucial: eat steady, adequate calories every day, and include quality carbohydrates at each meal. Aim for 250 grams of healthy carbs daily. This signals safety to your body and keeps cortisol and serotonin in their proper ranges, allowing your bones to maintain their integrity instead of being cannibalized for survival.

In addition, while stress chemistry drives bone loss, three nutrients work downstream to support bone rebuilding once that stress cascade is addressed: magnesium, vitamin D3, and vitamin K2. Magnesium deserves first mention because it does double duty — it directly dampens the stress response while also being required for vitamin D activation and calcium regulation, and chronic stress depletes it faster than any other mineral.
Without adequate magnesium, your body can’t properly use vitamin D or direct calcium into bone. Vitamin D — ideally from proper sun exposure — is required for calcium absorption and bone mineralization, but supplementation without adequate magnesium can worsen soft tissue calcification.
Vitamin K2 activates proteins that bind calcium to bone matrix and prevent calcium deposition in arteries and soft tissues. These three nutrients work synergistically — none can compensate for deficiency in the others, and none can overcome chronic cortisol elevation — but once you’ve addressed the stress chemistry driving bone breakdown, they become essential for directing the rebuilding process properly.

5. Use gentle strength work to signal safety to bone tissue — Your bones respond to consistent mechanical signals, not punishment. Loading them gently but regularly sends the message: “This structure is needed. Maintain and reinforce it.” Gentle, consistent resistance training — such as body-weight movements, light weights, KAATSU, or resistance bands — is ideal for this purpose.

This type of movement lowers stress chemistry rather than amplifying it, especially when paired with adequate fuel and recovery. If you’re rebuilding after bone loss, regular low-intensity strength work sends a powerful message: the environment is stable, load is appropriate, and bone preservation is required.
When serotonin levels drop, stress chemistry settles, and both your gut and nervous system stabilize, your bones receive a clear biochemical signal to stop breaking down and start holding their ground. This isn’t about swallowing more calcium while your stress chemistry continues eroding your skeleton from the inside. This isn’t about waiting until a fracture forces you to finally address what’s been breaking down for years.
This is about addressing the metabolic dysfunction that’s driving bone loss in the first place. Your bones aren’t separate from your metabolism — they’re actively participating in it. When you calm chronic stress, heal your gut, and restore neurotransmitter balance, you’re not “treating osteoporosis.” You’re removing the signals that were commanding your bones to break down in the first place. The rest happens automatically.

FAQs About Serotonin and Osteoporosis

Q: What does serotonin have to do with osteoporosis?
A: Serotonin is widely known for its role in mood, but most of it circulates outside your brain as a hormone. Research shows that higher levels of this peripheral serotonin send stress signals directly to bone tissue, accelerating bone breakdown and reducing bone density over time.

Q: Why isn’t calcium the main issue in osteoporosis?
A: Calcium matters for bone structure, but it doesn’t explain why bone loss accelerates under stress. Studies show that bone density declines even when calcium and phosphorus levels are normal. The deeper issue is signaling — specifically stress-related chemistry that tells bone cells to break down faster than they rebuild.

Q: How does menopause affect serotonin and bone loss?
A: After menopause, stress signaling becomes more dominant. Research shows that women further from menopause have higher serotonin-related markers and faster progression toward osteoporosis. The longer these signals stay elevated, the more bone erosion accumulates.

Q: Why are standard bone scans not enough?
A: Bone density scans detect damage only after it has already occurred. They don’t reveal the biological signals driving bone loss. Serotonin-related blood markers reflect active stress on bone tissue, offering insight into risk much earlier in the process.

Q: What daily habits help lower serotonin-driven bone loss?
A: Regular sleep, consistent meals, adequate carbohydrate intake, calm digestion, and gentle strength training all reduce stress chemistry. These habits lower excess serotonin signaling, stabilize cortisol, and create an internal environment where bone maintenance and repair resume.

Hyponatremia, or low sodium in the blood, is one of the most common electrolyte disorders seen in clinical settings, and its effects are anything but minor. Sodium keeps your nerves firing and your muscles working. When levels dip, even slightly, you feel drained, confused, or shaky. Push it further and symptoms like nausea, seizures, or fainting start to appear. In severe cases, sodium imbalance drives long hospital stays, lasting cognitive decline, and death.

Antidepressants such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are routinely prescribed for mood disorders, but what often gets overlooked is how they disrupt sodium balance in your body. This translates into real-world risks like falls, broken bones, and worsening mental health. Older adults, especially women, are hit the hardest, with even short-term use setting off dramatic shifts in sodium control.

The severity of harm varies depending on the drug, the dose, and how long it’s used, yet the outcome is always unpredictable — and sometimes catastrophic. Research makes it clear that these medications disrupt sodium balance in dangerous ways, and a major study to track this problem shows exactly how quickly and severely those drops in sodium occur.

Large Study Links Antidepressant Use to Severe Sodium Imbalances

A study published in the European Journal of Endocrinology investigated the connection between antidepressant use and a severe drop in blood sodium levels.1 Researchers examined data from 234,217 adults who had just started taking SSRIs or venlafaxine, brand name Effexor, to see how often sodium levels fell dangerously low.

• Thousands developed dangerously low sodium — Among the participants, 3,999 went on to develop hyponatremia, defined in this study as blood sodium levels dropping below 125 mmol/L. For perspective, normal sodium sits between 135 and 145 mmol/L, so a fall to 125 is not just a small shift — it represents a level at which seizures, confusion, and hospitalization are likely. That’s why this condition is classified as “profound.”

• Risk spikes quickly after starting medication — The data showed that the highest danger occurred in the first 14 days of treatment. In fact, people who had just begun antidepressants were more than 10 times more likely to develop profound hyponatremia compared to baseline.

• Older adults and women were hit hardest — Elderly women stood out as the most vulnerable group, with nearly 1 in 15 women over 80 years old developing profound hyponatremia after starting treatment. This shows how important age and sex are when predicting side effects — factors that often get overlooked in quick prescribing decisions.

• The problem is too much water retention — SSRIs and venlafaxine disrupt sodium levels through a condition called syndrome of inappropriate antidiuresis (SIADH). In plain terms, these drugs cause your body to release excess antidiuretic hormone, which signals your kidneys to hold onto water.

When your body retains too much water, the sodium in your blood becomes diluted — much like watering down soup — causing the sodium concentration to fall below the level your nerves and muscles need to function properly. The study tracked hospital admissions related to this known mechanism.

Antidepressant-Induced Low Sodium Triggers Anxiety

Bioenergetic researcher Georgi Dinkov points out a troubling reality: antidepressants that are supposed to calm anxiety actually cause it by lowering sodium levels in your blood.2 This condition produces the same agitation, panic, and fear that define anxiety disorders — essentially fueling the very illness these drugs are prescribed to treat.

• A cycle that feeds itself — When sodium levels crash, patients often feel more restless, fearful, or paranoid. Instead of realizing this is a drug reaction, doctors frequently mislabel it as “worsening anxiety,” leading to higher doses or additional prescriptions. In this way, the treatment creates the very problem it claims to fix.

• A danger long known, but ignored — According to Dinkov, the risks of SSRI-induced hyponatremia have been documented for decades. Yet, warnings remain hidden in fine print, dismissed as rare side effects rather than recognized as central dangers. This silence, he argues, amounts to deliberate negligence: the system profits when patients stay stuck in a loop of drugs and worsening symptoms.

• Sodium is your brain’s power source — Think of sodium as the electrical charge that keeps your brain’s circuits running smoothly. When that charge falls, the system falters — like a phone trying to operate at 5% battery. The result? Mood swings, irrational fears, and panic attacks that are indistinguishable from a severe anxiety disorder.

• Why recognizing the pattern matters — If your anxiety spikes shortly after starting one of these drugs, don’t assume it’s “your condition getting worse.” It’s likely your brain running out of its electrical fuel. Knowing this gives you the power to ask the right questions, demand sodium checks, and avoid being trapped in the cycle of drugs for symptoms the drugs themselves created.

Meta-Analysis Confirms Class-Wide Sodium Risks Across Antidepressants

Research published in BMC Pharmacology and Toxicology brought together findings from 38 separate studies, covering more than 3.9 million people worldwide.3 This type of review, called a meta-analysis, is powerful because it combines data across many studies to reveal patterns that smaller trials might miss. The goal was to measure how strongly antidepressants as a drug class are linked to low sodium levels.

• About 6% of antidepressant users developed hyponatremia — Across all studies, around 6% of people who used antidepressants developed clinically significant hyponatremia. That means about six out of every 100 people prescribed these medications ended up with dangerously low sodium levels. At a global scale involving tens of millions of users, the result translates into millions of people being affected.

• Certain drugs were more dangerous than others — The review ranked specific drugs according to their risk. Fluoxetine (Prozac) and venlafaxine (Effexor) were the most dangerous, producing higher rates of hyponatremia than other antidepressants. By comparison, sertraline (Zoloft) and duloxetine (Cymbalta) carried lower, though still significant, risks.

A separate nationwide analysis of 17,439 patients revealed that sodium problems are not just “rare events.”4 About 1 in 10 users developed hyponatremia within three years, with duloxetine standing out as the highest-risk drug in this study. By contrast, bupropion (Wellbutrin XL) and paroxetine (Paxil) had the lowest risk.

• Older adults remain the most vulnerable group — Age was again a decisive factor in this analysis. Elderly populations, especially those over 65, faced the steepest risk of sodium depletion. This means that anyone caring for an aging parent or grandparent taking antidepressants needs to be vigilant for symptoms like dizziness, confusion, or sudden changes in mood — signs that are often mistakenly dismissed as “just getting older.”

Sertraline Linked to Dangerous Drop in Sodium Levels

A report in Cureus shared the story of a 68-year-old woman who collapsed at her assisted living home about a month after beginning the antidepressant sertraline.5 Tests showed her blood sodium was only 104 mmol/L, far below the healthy range. At that level, your brain and body often shut down, leading to seizures, coma, or death. Her first warning signs were dizziness, nausea, and fainting.

• The drug caused her body to hold onto too much water — Doctors found that sertraline triggered SIADH. Her urine tests showed she was losing sodium through urine while her body was still holding onto water — exactly the wrong combination.

• Intensive care was needed to bring her back to safety — To fix the problem, she was admitted to the intensive care unit and given a strong salt solution through an IV, while her fluid intake was limited to just 1 liter a day. Her sodium was raised slowly so her brain wouldn’t swell from sudden changes. Doctors stopped the sertraline permanently, and her sodium levels returned to normal over several days.

• Low sodium raises your risk of falls and broken bones — The woman’s collapse wasn’t just bad luck. Severe hyponatremia makes bones weaker and increases the chance of falls. This creates a cycle of injuries, hospital stays, and declining health. In older adults, even a small imbalance in sodium often sets off serious complications.

Anxiety Itself Didn’t Drop Sodium — the Drugs Did

A population study in Medicine examined anxious adults in Israel to see if low sodium was tied to anxiety itself or to starting an SSRI drug.6 Researchers compared 3,520 people with diagnosed anxiety who later received an SSRI to 6,985 matched adults without anxiety or SSRI use, and they also rechecked labs after SSRI start to see what changed.

• Before any SSRI, anxious people had normal sodium like everyone else — Mean sodium was essentially the same before treatment in both groups, and true hyponatremia was actually a bit less common in the anxiety group than controls (2.2% versus 3.3%). That means anxiety alone was not the driver of low sodium in this dataset; the baseline labs didn’t point to overhydration from nervous drinking either.

• After starting an SSRI, sodium dipped and low-sodium cases rose — Once treatment began, average sodium fell slightly, and the share with hyponatremia went up by about 50%, from 2.6% to 3.9%. The shift happened after the drug, not before it — so if you felt worse or dizzier following a new SSRI, sodium loss is a concrete thing to check.

• Borderline low sodium also became more common on SSRI therapy — “Borderline” low sodium (just under normal but not severely low) increased from 35.3% to 40.7% after SSRI initiation, signaling a wider move toward lower sodium even if not everyone crossed the line into full hyponatremia.

• Anxiety’s “water-drinking” myth didn’t hold up here — The study did not find evidence that anxious adults were overhydrated at baseline; indirect hydration markers were similar to controls, and sodium looked stable before medication start. This shifts attention from the anxiety water-drinking myth — the idea that people with anxiety naturally drink too much water — to medication effects as the actionable point.

Drug-Free Steps to Rebuild Your Mood and Energy Naturally

Antidepressants don’t solve the underlying reasons you feel low. They mask symptoms while creating new problems, like disrupting your body’s sodium balance. A better approach is to nourish your body so it generates steady energy, supports brain health, and helps you feel calm without side effects. Here are practical, drug-free strategies I recommend.

1. Fuel your brain with the right foods — Your mind depends on a steady supply of energy. If your cells aren’t producing enough, fatigue and low mood take over. Give your body easy-to-use carbs such as fruit and white rice. Most people do well with around 250 grams per day, and if you’re athletic, you’ll likely need more.

Cut out seed oils and packaged foods high in linoleic acid (LA), which damage your mitochondria — the engines inside your cells. Instead, cook with stable saturated fats like butter from grass fed cows, ghee, or beef tallow. When your cells are properly fueled, your mood and focus naturally improve.

2. Replenish nutrients tied to emotional balance — Low levels of certain vitamins and minerals are often overlooked drivers of depression. Magnesium, for example, helps your nervous system relax and is commonly depleted in stressed individuals.
B vitamins are also important: lack of niacin (B3) is linked to paranoia and agitation, while too little thiamine (B1) contributes to irritability and poor sleep. Load your plate with nutrient-dense foods like grass fed eggs and leafy greens. If diet alone isn’t enough, which is often the case for magnesium, targeted supplements help restore these reserves.

3. Make movement a daily habit — Physical activity is one of the most reliable ways to lift mood naturally. Even light activity such as walking, stretching, or cycling at an easy pace increases circulation, balances hormones, and stimulates feel-good brain chemicals. You don’t have to do long gym sessions — short bursts of enjoyable movement done consistently will lead to results.

4. Let the sun reset your mind and body — Exposure to natural sunlight does more than generate vitamin D — it also boosts endorphins and charges your cellular energy. Aim for outdoor time daily, especially in the morning to set your internal clock.

Blood levels of vitamin D between 60 and 80 ng/mL are ideal for mood stability, so test to see where you stand. If you’ve eaten a diet heavy in seed oils, your skin is more prone to burning; stick with gentler light in the early morning or late afternoon until you’ve eliminated these oils for several months.

5. Restore balance through sleep and relaxation — Sleep is your body’s repair window, and without it, emotional health unravels. Step outside shortly after waking to anchor your circadian rhythm, then create an evening ritual that signals bedtime: dim lights, avoid screens, and make your room completely dark.

During the day, manage stress through practices like slow breathing, meditation, or Emotional Freedom Techniques (EFT). These tools train your body to stay calm so stress hormones don’t dominate your brain.

If you’re feeling desperate or have any thoughts of suicide and reside in the U.S., please call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline by dialing 988, call 911, or go to your nearest hospital emergency department.

U.K. and Irish helpline numbers can be found on TherapyRoute.com. For other countries, do an online search for “suicide hotline” and the name of your country. You cannot make long-term plans for lifestyle changes when you’re in the middle of a crisis.

FAQs About Antidepressants and Low Sodium

Q: What is hyponatremia and why does it matter?
A: Hyponatremia means your blood sodium is too low. Sodium is like the battery charge for your nerves and muscles — without enough, your body and brain can’t function properly. Symptoms range from fatigue and confusion to seizures, falls, and even death in severe cases.

Q: How do antidepressants cause low sodium?
A: Drugs like SSRIs and venlafaxine trigger your body to release too much antidiuretic hormone. This tells your kidneys to hold on to water, which dilutes sodium levels in your blood — like watering down soup. The drop happens fast, especially in the first two weeks of treatment.

Q: Who is most at risk for antidepressant-induced hyponatremia?
A: Older adults — particularly women — are the most vulnerable. In one large study, nearly 1 in 15 women over 80 developed dangerous sodium drops after starting antidepressants.7 But anyone on these drugs, even younger adults, can be affected.

Q: Why do doctors often miss the warning signs?
A: Low sodium looks a lot like worsening anxiety or depression: agitation, paranoia, mood swings, and confusion. Because of this overlap, patients are often given more medication instead of being checked for sodium imbalance — creating a harmful cycle.

Q: What are safer, drug-free ways to protect mood and energy?
A: Instead of masking symptoms with pills, support your brain by fueling your body properly, restoring key nutrients like magnesium and B vitamins, moving daily, getting sunlight, and prioritizing restful sleep. These steps target root causes of low energy and anxiety without creating new risks.

Children sit in a dental chair with little say over the material placed in their mouth. The choice may depend on the dentist they see, what their insurance covers, or which government program pays for the procedure. Parents may simply hear “dental filling” and consent without being told that dental amalgam is made with approximately 50% mercury.

Mercury is the most vaporous of the heavy metals, and dental amalgam releases small amounts of it as a vapor that can be inhaled and absorbed through the lungs. Exposure to high levels of mercury vapor is associated with harmful effects on the brain and kidneys, and developing neurological systems may be more sensitive to mercury’s neurotoxic effects.1 Children are therefore among the last people who should face avoidable mercury exposure.

Policy changes in other countries show that progress is possible, yet amalgam remains available for use in children in the United States and Canada. Consumers for Dental Choice, led by executive director Charlie Brown, has spent decades working to end that unequal system and make mercury-free dentistry available to everyone. As the organization marks its 16th Mercury-Free Dentistry Week, the focus turns to the children and communities still being left behind.

Government Warnings Have Been in Place for Years

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Health Canada have each addressed children and dental amalgam in official regulatory documents rather than in research of their own. What those documents say, and how much force they carry, determines what a child is offered at an appointment today.

• The FDA named children as a higher-risk group in 2020 — On September 24, 2020, the agency released a safety communication2 identifying seven populations that may face greater risk of harmful effects from mercury vapor released by amalgam fillings, and children, especially those younger than 6 years old, are on it.

The other groups are pregnant women and their developing fetuses, women planning to become pregnant, nursing mothers and their infants, people with pre-existing neurological disease such as multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s, people with impaired kidney function, and people with a known allergy to mercury or the other components of amalgam.

• The recommendation to dentists carries no obligation — The FDA recommended that nonmercury materials, including composite resins and glass ionomer cements, be used whenever possible and appropriate in people who may face greater risk. Those qualifiers leave the final decision with the patient and dental provider. The safety communication itself does not prohibit a dentist from placing amalgam in a young child or establish a federal penalty for doing so.

• Mercury is the largest single ingredient in the filling — According to the FDA, approximately half of dental amalgam by weight is elemental mercury. The remaining material consists mainly of a powdered alloy containing silver, tin, zinc, and copper. Calling amalgam a “silver filling” emphasizes its appearance while failing to accurately describe its composition, which is why the term is misleading.3

• The agency acknowledges how little is known about young children — The FDA states that studies involving children under 6 are very limited and that their developing neurological systems may be especially sensitive to mercury vapor exposure. It also maintains that most available evidence does not show harmful effects in the general population, while identifying young children and several other groups as potentially more vulnerable.4

• Health Canada reached the same conclusion about baby teeth in 1996 — Health Canada’s position statement advises that “non-mercury filling materials should be considered for restoring the primary teeth of children where the mechanical properties of the material are suitable.”

The statement was reaffirmed through an updated risk assessment completed in 2020, but the recommendation itself remains conditional and does not prohibit dentists from using amalgam in children’s primary teeth.5

Six years after the FDA’s safety communication and 30 years after Health Canada’s, dentists in both countries continue to place amalgam in children. The American Dental Association and the Canadian Dental Association have both continued to defend its use.6,7

The Fight to Make Mercury-Free Care Available Regardless of Income

Amalgam remains most difficult to avoid for people who have the least control over where they receive dental care and what treatment their coverage allows. Patients who can choose another dentist or pay for a mercury-free material have options that are often unavailable to people who depend on government programs, institutional systems, or limited insurance networks.

That divide was captured in testimony before Congress by a representative of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), who described American dentistry as “choice for the rich and mercury for the poor.”

• Government programs still shape who receives amalgam — Despite the FDA’s own safety communication, the single biggest purchaser of dental amalgam in the United States is the federal government, whose dental programs continue to place it in service members, institutionalized people, and families on Medicaid.8

• Children of color and low-income children bear more of the burden — In the United States, children of color are more likely to receive amalgam than white children, while children in low-income families are more likely to depend on public dental programs that continue to cover the material. Their exposure may therefore be shaped by race, income, and the limits of the system providing their care.9

• Indigenous communities have also been affected — The Indian Health Service has long provided dental care to American Indian and Alaska Native communities, and its own phase-down plan included measures to stop amalgam use in primary teeth and reduce purchases across its dental programs. The agency has since announced that its facilities will end amalgam use by 2027, showing that government systems can change when policy moves beyond recommendation.10

• The central issue is therefore larger than whether amalgam remains legally available — The issue is whether every patient has a meaningful choice. As long as mercury-free care depends on income, insurance, or the government program providing treatment, the people with the least power will continue to bear the greatest burden.

Changing that system requires pressure on the government programs, insurers, and dental policies that continue to limit access to mercury-free care. Brown has helped lead that effort through Consumers for Dental Choice and, internationally, through the World Alliance for Mercury-Free Dentistry.

For the 16th consecutive year, I am matching every donation to Consumers for Dental Choice, dollar for dollar, through midnight EST on August 22, 2026, up to a total of $150,000. Your contribution helps the organization continue pressing government programs, insurers, and policymakers to make mercury-free care available to everyone. You may click the button below to donate online:

> > > > > Click Here > > > > Click Here

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) has quietly become one of the most widespread health issues of our time, yet most people have no idea they’re living with it. What begins as silent fat buildup in your liver often goes undetected until it’s too late, when damage has already advanced. This condition is now a central driver of cirrhosis, liver failure, and even the need for transplants.

What makes this so dangerous is how easily fatty liver slips under the radar. You might feel perfectly fine while your liver is already under heavy strain, and by the time symptoms surface, permanent scarring has often set in. That’s why understanding the root causes — and how to reverse them before the damage is locked in — is so important.

My own research is deeply tied to this problem. I’m currently in the process of publishing a scientific paper that takes a deep dive into liver health, revealing how choline and reducing mitochondrial toxins can help. However, another nutrient also stands out as a key factor in whether your liver recovers or declines: vitamin D. Its role extends far beyond bone health, influencing how your body handles blood sugar, inflammation, and fat storage.

This brings us to a new line of research that explored what happens when vitamin D is optimized in people already struggling with fatty liver. The results reveal how changing this one factor shifts the entire trajectory of liver function — a discovery that reshapes how we think about both prevention and recovery.

Vitamin D Supplementation Leads to Measurable Liver Improvements

Research published in Frontiers in Pharmacology pooled findings from 16 randomized controlled trials to examine how vitamin D supplementation influences people with NAFLD.1 By combining data across multiple studies, the researchers were able to see clear trends in how this nutrient affected both body composition and key blood markers.

• Vitamin D supplementation lowered multiple risk markers — Across the pooled trials, vitamin D supplementation consistently led to improvements compared with placebo. People taking vitamin D saw reductions in body weight, body mass index, and waist circumference, pointing to shifts in fat distribution and metabolic balance.

In addition, fasting blood sugar levels and HOMA-IR — a measure of insulin resistance — improved, indicating better blood sugar control. Liver enzymes also decreased, suggesting less active damage within the liver.

• Protective effects reached beyond the liver — The review showed that vitamin D increased HDL cholesterol, the “good” cholesterol that helps clear fats from the bloodstream. This means the benefits extended into heart health, reducing the load on the cardiovascular system at the same time that liver health improved.

Beyond bone health, vitamin D helps regulate blood sugar, calm inflammation, and keep fat metabolism in balance. When levels run low, your liver takes a hit — inflammation gets worse, fat piles up, and scarring speeds along.2

• Consistency emerged across different trials — While individual studies had mixed findings, this large-scale analysis confirmed that the benefits were not isolated results but part of a broader pattern. Improvements were seen regardless of study duration or location, with especially strong effects in trials lasting longer than 12 weeks or using higher vitamin D doses.

• Overall, the review positioned vitamin D as a low-cost, effective strategy — By addressing weight, blood sugar, cholesterol balance, and liver enzymes at once, vitamin D created a ripple effect across multiple systems. For people with fatty liver disease, this means that restoring vitamin D status is more than a supportive step — it directly influences the disease process.

Vitamin D Deficiency Strongly Linked to NAFLD Severity

Research published in Cureus examined 100 adults with NAFLD and found that vitamin D deficiency was both widespread and directly tied to how severe the condition became.3 Nearly half of the patients (45%) were vitamin D deficient, and another 16% had insufficient levels. That means more than 6 in 10 participants fell below what’s considered healthy. This wasn’t a side finding — it emerged as a central feature of NAFLD in the group studied.

• Worse deficiency meant worse disease — The more severe the vitamin D deficiency, the more advanced the liver problems. Patients with the lowest levels were significantly more likely to have enlarged liver, enlarged spleen, and fluid buildup in the abdomen. These conditions signal progression beyond simple fat accumulation toward more serious stages of liver dysfunction.

• Obesity and deficiency overlapped — Among overweight participants, 91.7% were deficient in vitamin D compared to 39.1% of those with normal body weight. This points to a strong interplay between excess body fat, vitamin D status, and the worsening of fatty liver disease.

• Liver fat and vitamin D were directly correlated — Ultrasound findings showed that patients with more severe fatty liver consistently had lower vitamin D levels. The statistical link was strong, confirming that deficiency isn’t just present in NAFLD patients but tied to how much damage is visible inside the liver.

• Vitamin D deficiency linked to insulin resistance — Patients with low vitamin D also had higher levels of insulin resistance, one of the main drivers of NAFLD. This means deficiency could worsen not only liver outcomes but also the broader metabolic problems that often travel with fatty liver disease, such as diabetes and high blood pressure.

• Liver enzymes reflected the same pattern — Vitamin D-deficient patients were more likely to have elevated enzymes that signal liver injury. This shows the deficiency wasn’t just linked to structural changes on imaging but also to active, ongoing liver damage.

Taken together, this study highlights vitamin D deficiency as a powerful predictor of NAFLD severity. Rather than being an incidental finding, low vitamin D was consistently tied to worse liver outcomes, greater metabolic dysfunction, and faster progression of disease.

How to Address What’s Really Driving Liver Dysfunction

If your liver isn’t working the way it should, the goal isn’t just to manage symptoms — it’s to remove the stressors that caused the damage in the first place. Your liver is your body’s central detox organ, and when it’s overloaded with harmful fats, toxins, or nutrient gaps, it struggles to process everything else. The following steps target the root causes of liver dysfunction so you can restore balance and help your body heal from the inside out.

1. Eliminate vegetable oils and alcohol — If you’re eating packaged foods made with soybean, canola, corn, sunflower, or generic “vegetable oil,” your liver is under nonstop attack. These oils are high in linoleic acid (LA), a polyunsaturated fat that oxidizes and turns into toxic byproducts that damage your mitochondria — the “engines” of your cells.

Alcohol is just as destructive, since it breaks down into a substance that injures your liver cells. The fastest way to give your liver breathing room is to cut both alcohol and vegetable oils right now. For cooking, switch to grass fed butter, ghee, tallow, or coconut oil.

2. Eat choline-rich foods to support liver health — Think of choline as traffic control for your liver. Without it, fat builds up inside your liver cells, leading to dysfunction and damage. Choline helps package up fats and ship them out so your liver doesn’t become clogged. The best food sources are pastured egg yolks and grass fed beef liver. If you regularly skip these foods, there’s a good chance your liver isn’t getting the support it needs.

3. Use a choline supplement if your diet falls short — If you don’t eat eggs or meat, reaching adequate choline intake through food alone is a challenge. In that case, supplementation is not optional — it’s required. Citicoline is one of the most effective forms, and doses between 500 milligrams (mg) and 2,500 mg per day have been shown to help your liver export fat while also boosting brain function. If you’re noticing brain fog, low energy, or signs of fatty liver, this is a simple but powerful step.

4. Repair with sunlight and smart vitamin D use — Your skin is designed to make vitamin D from sunlight, and daily exposure supports not only your bones and immune system but also your liver’s ability to metabolize fat. But here’s the catch: if you’re still using vegetable oils, the LA stored in your skin increases your risk of sun damage.

Eliminate those oils for at least six months before getting peak sun exposure (10 a.m. to 4 p.m.). When sunlight isn’t an option, supplement with vitamin D3.4

5. Test and track your vitamin D to stay on target — Instead of guessing, check your vitamin D levels with a simple blood test at least twice a year. Aim for 60 to 80 ng/mL (150 to 200 nmol/L). This range supports healthy liver function, balanced immunity, and energy production. Testing gives you a clear starting point and a way to measure progress over time.

FAQs About Fatty Liver and Vitamin D

Q: What makes fatty liver so dangerous if I don’t feel any symptoms?
A: Fatty liver often develops silently, with little to no warning signs. By the time symptoms appear, your liver likely already has permanent scarring or advanced damage. That’s why catching it early — and addressing the root causes — is key.

Q: How is vitamin D connected to liver health?
A: Vitamin D isn’t just for strong bones. It regulates blood sugar, reduces inflammation, and helps manage how fat is stored and used in your body. Low vitamin D levels make liver damage worse, speeding up fat buildup, scarring, and inflammation.

Q: Do people with fatty liver usually have low vitamin D?
A: Yes. Studies show that vitamin D deficiency is common in people with fatty liver, and the worse the deficiency, the more advanced the liver problems tend to be. In fact, over 60% of patients in one study had low vitamin D levels, and those with the lowest levels also had the worst liver outcomes.5

Q: Besides vitamin D, what else should I do to heal my liver?
A: The biggest step is removing what damages your liver in the first place. Cutting out vegetable oils and alcohol, adding choline-rich foods like pastured egg yolks and grass fed beef liver, and using sunlight or supplements, if necessary, to restore vitamin D are all powerful ways to reduce stress on your liver and help it recover.

Q: How do I know if I’m getting enough vitamin D for my liver?
A: The best way is to test your blood levels twice a year. Aim for a range of 60 to 80 ng/mL (150 to 200 nmol/L). This ensures you’re supporting your liver, your metabolism, and your overall health without relying on guesswork.

Tramadol, a synthetic opioid, is one of the most widely prescribed pain medications in the U.S., with more than 30 million prescriptions written each year. It’s often considered “safer” than stronger opioids like oxycodone or morphine, yet more effective than over-the-counter options such as Tylenol or ibuprofen. That “middle ground” reputation has made it a routine part of care for people with chronic pain.1

For years, tramadol has been handed out in emergency rooms, pain clinics, and primary care offices with relatively little hesitation. But that long-standing trust is starting to shift. An analysis conducted by a research team in Denmark has called its safety and effectiveness into question, raising concerns about how well it really works and at what cost.2 If you’re currently using tramadol, or it’s been recommended to you, it’s worth examining the evidence more closely.

What Is Tramadol and How Does It Work?

Tramadol was first developed in the early 1960s in Germany and later approved for use in the United States in the mid-1990s. It entered the U.S. market as a non-scheduled medication, meaning it was not initially classified as a controlled substance. This designation reflected the belief that tramadol carried a lower risk of misuse compared to other opioids.3,4,5

• Reclassified after rising reports of misuse — In 2014, after growing reports of abuse and dependency, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration reclassified it as a Schedule IV controlled substance, a category that recognizes medical use but acknowledges risk of abuse and dependence and imposes prescribing and refill restrictions. However, by that point, tramadol was already widely embedded in pain management.

• Unlike traditional opioids, tramadol works through a dual mechanism — It binds to the same opioid receptors in the brain as drugs like morphine or oxycodone, which helps dull the sensation of pain. But it also inhibits the reuptake of two neurotransmitters — serotonin and norepinephrine — which are involved in mood regulation and the body’s natural pain control pathways.

Think of neurotransmitters as chemical messengers that travel between nerve cells. Normally, after delivering their message, they’re recycled back into the sending cell — that’s “reuptake.” Tramadol blocks this recycling process for serotonin and norepinephrine, leaving more of these mood- and pain-regulating chemicals active in your nervous system.

This second mechanism is similar to how some antidepressants work, which is why tramadol is sometimes referred to as an SNRI-like opioid. That dual action is part of what sets it apart early on and led to the perception that it was both effective and less likely to lead to addiction, respiratory depression, or overdose.

• Tramadol is prescribed for a wide range of pain conditions — It’s often used for moderate to moderately severe pain, either alone or in combination with other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). It has been commonly prescribed for chronic conditions such as osteoarthritis, fibromyalgia, chronic low back pain, and even for premature ejaculation.

• Some people misuse tramadol for its opioid effects — Although it is classified as a Schedule IV drug with lower misuse potential, its label still warns of risks involving misuse and addiction. Its effects may include euphoria and feelings of relaxation, often referred to as a “tramadol high.”

According to the 2022 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, roughly 14.6 million people aged 12 and older used tramadol in the past year, and about 9.4% of them reported using it in ways not directed by a clinician. In that same age group, an estimated 6.1 million individuals were living with an opioid use disorder during the past year.6

While tramadol is less potent than many opioids, that does not make it inherently safer. Lower potency refers to the drug’s ability to produce analgesia at a given dose, not to the likelihood of side effects, complications, or dependency. Newer evidence shows that even at these lower potency levels, tramadol can still carry meaningful risks.

What Did the Evidence Find About Tramadol’s Benefits vs. Harms?

A 2025 systematic review and meta-analysis published in BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine evaluated the effectiveness and safety of tramadol for chronic pain by analyzing 19 randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials conducted between 1998 and 2024, involving 6,506 adults with a range of chronic pain conditions.7

• Tramadol produced only a slight reduction in pain intensity — Across the included studies, tramadol lowered pain scores by an average of 0.93 points on a 10-point scale compared with placebo. Although statistically significant, this fell short of the researchers’ predefined minimal important difference of 1 point. This means the average change was unlikely to be noticeable or meaningful for most patients.

• Even this modest benefit was based on low-certainty evidence — The researchers described tramadol’s effect as “slight,” and nearly all trials were judged to be at high risk of bias. Design flaws and inconsistencies raised the possibility that benefits were overstated or harms underreported, further weakening confidence in the findings.

• Trials showed no meaningful improvement in daily function or quality of life — Chronic pain treatment aims to improve how you function day to day, including mobility, energy, and overall quality of life. In this analysis, the available trial data were insufficient to demonstrate functional or quality-of-life improvements in people taking tramadol, limiting the clinical relevance of its small reduction in pain scores.

• Serious adverse events were significantly more common with tramadol — The analysis showed that people taking tramadol were more than twice as likely to experience a serious adverse event compared with those receiving a placebo, with cardiovascular outcomes such as chest pain, coronary artery disease, and congestive heart failure accounting for most of the increased risk.

• Non-serious side effects were frequent and disruptive — Nausea, dizziness, constipation, and drowsiness occurred more often with tramadol. Although labeled “non-serious,” these effects commonly interfere with normal functioning and may require additional treatment.

• Researchers noted a higher risk of neoplasms — Neoplasms are abnormal cell growths that may be benign or cancerous. However, because the trials were short in duration, this finding was flagged as uncertain. Longer studies would be needed to determine whether tramadol contributes to cancer risk over time.

Overall, the study concluded that tramadol’s benefits for chronic pain are minimal, while its risks — both serious and non-serious — are significant enough to outweigh those benefits. The study’s authors called for minimizing the use of tramadol and urged clinicians to consider alternative treatments before prescribing it. See the table below for a quick summary of the study’s findings:

Evidence Snapshot: Tramadol vs. Placebo

Outcome
Tramadol vs. Placebo
Notes

Pain reduction
Average reduction of 0.93 points on a 10-point scale
Below the 1-point threshold for minimal clinically important difference

Serious adverse events
More than 2x higher with tramadol
Increased risk of cardiac events, including chest pain, heart disease, and heart failure

Common side effects
Higher rates of nausea, dizziness, constipation, and drowsiness
Frequently disruptive to daily functioning; labeled “non-serious” but clinically relevant

Other Tramadol Side Effects to Watch For

Tramadol’s side effects go well beyond occasional nausea or stomach upset. Because it affects multiple systems in your body, it can produce a wide range of adverse events that may influence your safety, quality of life, and even long-term health, such as:8,9,10

1. Seizures — Tramadol is associated with an increased risk of seizures, especially at higher doses or when combined with other medications that lower the seizure threshold (the level of stimulation at which the brain is more likely to trigger a seizure), such as certain antidepressants or antipsychotics. This makes it a higher-risk option for anyone already vulnerable to neurological instability.

2. Serotonin syndrome — Because tramadol influences serotonin levels in the brain, it can contribute to serotonin syndrome when taken with other drugs that affect serotonin, such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). Serotonin syndrome is a serious condition marked by agitation, rapid heart rate, sweating, muscle stiffness, tremor, and confusion.

If left unaddressed, it can lead to high fever, seizures, or loss of consciousness. For this reason, people already taking psychiatric medications need to avoid tramadol.

3. Respiratory depression — Opioids like tramadol can slow breathing by acting on the brain’s respiratory centers. This effect is more likely when tramadol is taken at higher doses or alongside other central nervous system (CNS) depressants such as benzodiazepines, barbiturates, or alcohol. In severe cases, respiratory depression can be life-threatening and may necessitate emergency care.

4. Mood, cognitive, and neuropsychiatric effects — Tramadol’s action on central neurotransmitter systems has been associated with a broad range of mental and behavioral changes. Reported effects include emotional blunting, increased anxiety, episodes of euphoria, agitation, restlessness, hallucinations, abnormal dreams, and uncontrolled excitement.

Cognitive effects such as impaired concentration, memory lapses, and slowed thinking have also been documented, along with more severe psychiatric reactions, including suicidal thoughts or behavior, particularly in people with preexisting mental health conditions or those taking other psychoactive medications.

5. Urinary and kidney-related effects — This may include decreased urine output, painful or difficult urination, blood in the urine, and fluid retention with swelling of the hands, ankles, or feet. These effects are more concerning in people with pre-existing kidney disease.

6. Dependence and withdrawal — With ongoing use, your body may adapt to tramadol’s presence, leading to physical dependence. If tramadol is reduced abruptly or stopped, withdrawal symptoms can occur, which include anxiety, sweating, tremors, sleep disturbances, irritability, and flu-like sensations.

7. Overdose — Tramadol overdose is possible and carries the same fundamental danger seen with other opioids, including slowed or stopped breathing, loss of consciousness, coma, and death. The U.S. age-adjusted death rate involving synthetic opioids like tramadol rose sharply from 0.5 deaths per 100,000 in 2003 to over 22 per 100,000 by 2021.11

Deaths attributed specifically to tramadol poisoning have also been reported in peer-reviewed case series documenting hundreds of fatal tramadol-associated deaths in the medical literature, often involving mixed drug toxicity with other CNS depressants.12

For a deeper look at the risks linked to opioid use, including outcomes that extend beyond overdose, read “Opioid Deaths Continue to Rise Despite Drop in Prescriptions.” For a quick reference, the table below summarizes common tramadol side effects alongside those that carry more serious or life-threatening risks:

Common vs. Serious Tramadol Side Effects

More common side effects
Serious side effects

Headache
Seizures

Dry mouth
Serotonin syndrome

Sweating
Respiratory depression

Fatigue
Overdose

Sleep disturbances
Cardiac complications (e.g., chest pain, heart failure)

Mild confusion or disorientation
Severe neuropsychiatric effects (hallucinations, suicidal thoughts)

Urinary retention or difficulty urinating
Acute kidney complications or fluid overload

Emotional changes (irritability, mood shifts)
Physical dependence and severe withdrawal

How Are Opioids Linked to Fatal Car Crashes?

The danger of opioids extends beyond the risk of side effects or overdose. Since these medications slow reaction time, dull alertness, and affect coordination, they make it harder to stay in your lane while driving, respond to traffic changes, or avoid hazards. These effects are present even at therapeutic doses and are especially concerning when they’re combined with alcohol or other medications that affect the CNS.

• Drug involvement in fatal crashes surpasses alcohol in some data sets — Data compiled by the Governors Highway Safety Association and the Foundation for Advancing Alcohol Responsibility show that in 2015, drugs were involved in 43% of fatal car crashes, a rate higher than the 37% of fatal crashes involving illegal amounts of alcohol. Prescription painkillers are part of that drug-related share.13

• Opioid-positive drivers in fatal crashes increased sharply over two decades — Research has documented a sevenfold rise from 1995 to 2015 in the proportion of drivers killed in crashes who tested positive for opioids. Among male drivers killed, the presence of narcotic pain relievers increased from 1% to 5%, and among women from 1% to 7% over the same period.14

• Prescription opioid use is strongly associated with initiating fatal crashes — A 2019 analysis of more than 18,000 fatal two-vehicle crashes found a significant link between prescription opioid use and crash initiation. The most common driving error was failing to stay in the proper lane. This pattern was consistent across ages and both genders, emphasizing how opioid impairment affects driving performance.15

• Declines in prescribing did not eliminate the risk — Although opioid prescribing has decreased, dangers behind the wheel remain. Yale researchers found that nonfatal crashes involving prescription opioids declined by nearly half between 2014 and 2018, yet fatal crashes did not drop accordingly. This suggests that when opioids are involved in deadly incidents, impairment may be more severe or compounded by other factors.16

For your safety and the safety of others, avoid getting behind the wheel if you’re using opioids, especially when starting a new medication, adjusting your dose, or combining it with other substances. Beyond the dangers for people who may need to drive, there are specific demographics that carry greater vulnerability to tramadol’s harm and warrant added caution.

Who Faces the Highest Risk from Tramadol?

Safety guidance and clinical warnings show that tramadol poses unacceptable risk for certain groups, even when taken exactly as prescribed. In these situations, the likelihood of serious harm is high enough that tramadol should not be used. These include:17

• People with significant breathing problems — Tramadol should be avoided in people with severe asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, sleep apnea, or other conditions that impair breathing. Because tramadol can suppress respiratory drive, baseline breathing vulnerability increases the risk of dangerous oxygen deprivation, particularly during sleep.

• Children and adolescents in specific settings — Tramadol is not recommended for children below 12 years of age and should not be taken by anyone under 18 following tonsil or adenoid surgery. Serious breathing problems and deaths have been reported in these groups, leading to explicit safety restrictions in prescribing guidance.

• Pregnant or breastfeeding individuals — Use during pregnancy can lead to neonatal opioid withdrawal syndrome, with symptoms such as abnormal crying, tremors, feeding difficulties, and poor weight gain in newborns. During breastfeeding, tramadol use is discouraged because the drug and its active metabolites can pass into breast milk and cause life-threatening effects in infants.

• People with liver or kidney disease — Tramadol is processed by the liver and eliminated through the kidneys, and impaired function in either organ can cause the drug to accumulate. This raises the likelihood of adverse reactions even at standard doses.

• Individuals with a history of seizures or head injury — Because tramadol lowers seizure threshold, prescribing guidance advises caution or avoidance in people with epilepsy, prior seizures, brain injury, or conditions that increase intracranial pressure. Risk increases further when other neurologically active medications are present.

• People taking multiple medications that affect the CNS — Taking tramadol alongside sedatives, tranquilizers, antidepressants, antipsychotics, or other psychoactive drugs increases the risk of dangerous interactions.

• Individuals with a history of substance use disorder — Tramadol carries the same misuse and dependence risks as other opioids, and prescribing guidance highlights increased danger in people with prior drug or alcohol misuse. In these cases, exposure can escalate more quickly and be harder to reverse safely.

• People with certain hormonal or metabolic conditions — Conditions affecting adrenal function, blood sugar regulation, or electrolyte balance warrant caution, as tramadol has been linked to disruptions in these systems during treatment.

Taken together, these precautions show that tramadol requires individualized assessment rather than routine prescribing. For people who fall into these categories, alternative pain management strategies deserve careful consideration before tramadol enters the picture.

What Are Safer Alternatives for Pain Relief?

Given the limited benefits shown in clinical trials and the breadth of documented risks, nondrug and non-opioid approaches deserve consideration for anyone managing chronic pain, not only those at highest risk from tramadol. In many cases, changes in diet, movement, and targeted therapies can meaningfully reduce pain while avoiding the cumulative risks associated with long-term medication use. Here are some safe and effective options you can consider:

1. Acupuncture — This traditional practice involves inserting thin needles into specific points on the body to help regulate pain signals and restore balance in the nervous system. Clinical studies show acupuncture can reduce chronic pain from conditions like back pain, osteoarthritis, and fibromyalgia.18

It’s also been found to stimulate the release of endorphins and modulate inflammatory pathways. When used consistently, acupuncture may lower the need for medication and improve quality of life.19

2. K-Laser therapy — This high-intensity infrared laser penetrates deep into soft tissues, helping to reduce inflammation, stimulate blood flow, and accelerate healing. It’s commonly used for injuries, joint pain, and nerve-related conditions, and has been shown to help reduce reliance on painkillers when used as part of a broader recovery plan.20

3. Physical therapy and posture correction — Guided movement programs that include stretching and strengthening exercises help improve joint function, reduce inflammation, ease strain on overworked tissues, and support healthier movement patterns. Therapists often use diagnostic techniques to pinpoint imbalances and tailor interventions that support long-term healing.21

4. Massage therapy — A comprehensive review in Pain Medicine22 found that massage consistently reduced pain from a range of sources, including musculoskeletal pain, fibromyalgia, and headaches. It performed better than no treatment, and held up well even compared to physical therapy and acupuncture. Massage was also linked to lower anxiety and improved overall well-being, with minimal risk of side effects.

5. Herbal options — Many plant-based compounds have demonstrated anti-inflammatory, analgesic, and antioxidant properties. These include:

• Willow bark
• Ginger
• Turmeric (Curcumin)
• Rose hips
• Devil’s claw
• Boswellia (Frankincense)

• Feverfew
• Ashwagandha
• Black cohosh
• Corydalis
• Rosemary
• Thunder God vine

For a deeper dive into how these herbs work, check out my article “An Herbal Guide to Natural Pain Relief,” where I discuss in detail how these herbs can help ease your symptoms.

6. Nutritional support — Several key nutrients support musculoskeletal health and the body’s anti-inflammatory and pain-modulating systems:

• Magnesium — Helps relax muscles, support nerve function, and reduce pain sensitivity.
• Vitamin D — Plays a role in immune balance and bone health; low levels are linked to heightened pain perception.
• Choline — Supports healthy nerve signaling and neurotransmitter balance. Deficiency may worsen chronic pain symptoms, especially in athletes, vegans, and postmenopausal women.

7. Stress-reducing practices — Chronic stress increases pain by activating the sympathetic nervous system and heightening inflammation.23 Techniques such as mindfulness meditation, breathing exercises, yoga, and tai chi have been shown to ease physical discomfort by calming the nervous system and improving body awareness.

Some approaches focus on helping your body and mind respond more calmly to pain and stress. Biofeedback uses real-time monitoring of signals like heart rate and muscle tension to help you recognize and consciously regulate physical stress responses.24 Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) helps you identify unhelpful thought patterns and replace them with strategies that reduce distress and improve coping.25

Emotional freedom techniques (EFT) take a more hands-on approach. The practice involves gently tapping on specific acupuncture meridian points with your fingertips while speaking affirmations. This process helps release emotional tension, calm the nervous system, and restore balance to the body’s energy flow.

8. Daily habits that support pain relief — Small shifts in how you eat, move, and manage stress help lower inflammation, reduce discomfort, and create routines that support steadier, longer-term improvement. These include:

• Keeping daily linoleic acid (LA) intake under 5 grams. That means avoiding industrial seed oils like soybean, corn, canola, safflower, and sunflower oil, and choosing stable saturated fats such as butter, ghee, tallow, or coconut oil.

• Avoiding processed foods made with LA-rich oils, restaurant foods cooked in them, as well as nonorganic chicken and pork. These meats tend to be high in LA thanks to the animals being fed LA-rich grain feed.

• Cutting back on grains and refined sugars to lower inflammation and reduce pain triggers.

• Adding high-quality omega-3 fats like krill oil or wild-caught fish, like Alaskan salmon, into your diet to support anti-inflammatory processes.

• Getting daily sun exposure to maintain healthy vitamin D levels and support immune and neurological health. For safe exposure guidance, review my recommendations in this article.

Tramadol’s risks are often downplayed, but the evidence shows they’re real — and for many people, they outweigh the drug’s modest benefits. Whether you’re managing pain from a chronic condition or recovering from an injury, safer options exist. Staying informed, asking better questions, and making steady changes to how you approach pain can help you avoid unnecessary harm.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) About Tramadol’s Safety

Q: Is tramadol safe for chronic pain?
A: Tramadol is often prescribed for chronic pain, but research found it only provides a slight reduction in pain scores, falling short of what most people would consider meaningful relief. At the same time, the risk of serious side effects was more than twice as high compared to placebo. For many people, the risks may outweigh the modest benefit, especially when used long-term.

Q: Does tramadol increase heart disease risk?
A: Yes. The BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine meta-analysis found that tramadol was linked to a significantly higher rate of serious cardiovascular events, including chest pain, coronary artery disease, and congestive heart failure. These effects were among the most common serious harms reported across the studies.

Q: Can tramadol cause serotonin syndrome if I’m on SSRI?
A: Yes. Tramadol increases serotonin levels in the brain and can trigger serotonin syndrome when combined with other serotonergic drugs, including SSRIs and certain migraine or psychiatric medications. This serious condition involves agitation, muscle stiffness, rapid heartbeat, confusion, and high fever.

Q: Can I drive after taking tramadol?
A: You should avoid driving while taking tramadol, especially during the early stages of treatment or when your dose changes. Like other opioids, tramadol impairs reaction time, coordination, and alertness. Opioid use has been linked to a sharp rise in fatal car crashes, and tramadol is included in that risk category.

Q: Who should avoid tramadol?
A: Tramadol poses elevated risks for people with certain health conditions or medication use. This includes anyone with:

• Breathing problems
• Liver or kidney disease
• A history of seizures or brain injury
• Mental health conditions or substance use disorder
• Pregnancy or breastfeeding
• Current use of other CNS depressants or serotonergic drugs
• Children and adolescents in specific settings

Q: What are common vs. serious tramadol side effects?
A: Common side effects of tramadol include headache, nausea, dry mouth, sweating, dizziness, fatigue, constipation, and mild confusion. More serious reactions may involve seizures, respiratory depression, serotonin syndrome, overdose, hallucinations, suicidal thoughts, cardiac events, kidney dysfunction, and severe withdrawal symptoms.

Q: Is tramadol less addictive than other opioids?
A: Tramadol is often considered lower risk, but that perception is not strongly supported by evidence. It still activates opioid receptors and can lead to dependence, misuse, and withdrawal symptoms. People with a history of addiction or mental health instability are especially vulnerable.

Q: What are safer alternatives to tramadol for long-term pain?
A: Nondrug therapies like acupuncture, K-Laser therapy, physical therapy, and massage have been shown to relieve chronic pain without the risks of opioids. Nutrients such as magnesium, vitamin D, and choline support nerve and muscle function, while herbal remedies help reduce inflammation naturally. Stress-management tools also play a role in reducing pain perception and improving daily function.

Q: Can I stop taking tramadol suddenly, or do I need to taper off?
A: Tramadol should not be stopped abruptly, especially if you’ve been using it regularly for more than a few weeks. Sudden discontinuation can trigger withdrawal symptoms such as anxiety, sweating, tremors, sleep disturbances, irritability, nausea, and flu-like sensations. To reduce these effects and avoid unnecessary discomfort, clinicians typically recommend gradually tapering the dose under medical supervision.

Walk any supplement aisle and you’re basically walking through a contest of numbers; 1,000 milligrams of this, 5,000 units of that. High potency. Extra strength. Mega dose. The entire pitch rests on a single unspoken promise: that more is better, and the biggest number on the bottle wins.
Most people sense, somewhere, that this can’t be the whole truth. And there’s an everyday clue. Take a high-potency multivitamin or B-complex in the morning, and an hour later your urine has turned a vivid, almost neon yellow. The joke writes itself — you’re just making expensive pee. That neon color comes almost entirely from riboflavin,1 that your body didn’t need at that moment.
You flooded your system, your body took the small amount it could use right then, and the rest went straight through. The bright color isn’t proof your B vitamins are “working.” It’s a “receipt” for the part you paid for and your body couldn’t use.
Riboflavin just happens to be one of the few nutrients whose surplus you can actually see leaving the body. It belongs to the family of water-soluble vitamins — the B vitamins and vitamin C — which, with a few exceptions, the body holds onto only in small amounts. Take in more than you can use in the moment and there’s nowhere to put the surplus, so it’s filtered out and sent on its way.
The glow in the bowl is simply the most colorful version of something that happens, invisibly, with much of what’s packed into a high-dose supplement.

Why More Stops Working

A recurring theme across nutrition research is diminishing returns: your body takes up a smaller relative percentage of a nutrient as the dose climbs. You may still absorb a little more in total from a bigger dose, but it’s not proportional. Double the dose and you’re left with a much larger pile from which a shrinking fraction is actually used, and a growing share is simply wasted.
In a systematic review of magnesium supplements, for example, the proportion absorbed depended on the dose rather than holding steady.2 But past a certain point, piling on milligrams simply inflates the bill you pay without raising the amount your body can use.
Follow that logic and the mega-dose promise falls apart. Doubling the size of the labeled dose doesn’t double what your body absorbs. Past a certain point it mostly enlarges the share that gets wasted — you spend more, swallow more, yet little changes in terms of your health. Too often, the “more is better” mindset makes you pay for nutrients your body may never receive.

Your Body Pushes Back

With some nutrients, the body doesn’t just passively let the excess go — it actively limits how much it will admit at once. Iron is the clearest example. Using stable-isotope tracers and the body’s own iron-regulating hormone, hepcidin, researchers have shown that a large oral dose of iron triggers a protective rise in hepcidin that throttles how much of the next dose can be absorbed — an effect that lingers for the better part of a day.3
The practical consequence runs almost opposite to the label logic: past a threshold, taking iron in large daily amounts, or splitting it into several doses through the day, can actually lower the fraction you take up from any given dose. Smaller amounts — or the same amount spaced out to alternate days — tend to be absorbed more efficiently and to cause fewer digestive complaints.4
That is the whole principle in miniature. Your body is not a bucket you can fill faster simply by pouring more into it. It has gates, transporters, and feedback loops that decide how much to let in and when. Flooding the system doesn’t override those controls; it mostly overwhelms them, and the difference ends up in the toilet rather than in you.

Form Changes the Equation

So, if piling on milligrams isn’t the answer, what is? The far more useful lever is the one the numbers game ignores: the form the nutrient comes in, and how well your body can take it up. The same magnesium review mentioned earlier found that the form matters as much as the dose — organic forms were generally better absorbed than inorganic ones.5
A head-to-head clinical comparison made the point even more concretely: when several magnesium preparations were given to the same volunteers, the rise in blood levels differed markedly depending on which form was used, and a better-delivered form produced a higher, steadier increase.6 Same mineral — very different amounts actually reaching the bloodstream.
Some compounds make the point even more starkly. Curcumin, the pigment that gives turmeric its color, is notoriously hard to absorb in its raw form — so poorly that little of a plain dose survives the trip. In laboratory and animal studies, repackaging the very same curcumin into lipid- or nanoparticle-based delivery systems raised its absorption many times over compared with the unformulated powder.7
The molecule didn’t change at all; only its packaging did. It’s a vivid reminder that “how much is in it” tells you very little until you also ask how much of it can actually get absorbed.
When a nutrient is delivered in a form your body can genuinely take up and use, the entire equation changes. You stop needing a giant dose to compensate for everything that gets lost, because far less is being lost in the first place. The result is the opposite of the mega-dose strategy: the right amount, in a form that reaches the cells that need it, so you can take less and get more from it.
That’s the premise we’re now embracing for our own product line. In practice, that means choosing well-absorbed forms and sizing the dose to what the body can use rather than to what looks most potent on a label. It’s a less flashy approach — there’s no giant number to brag about. But it’s more useful, and, frankly, better for your wallet. You’re no longer paying for the overflow.
You’re paying for what you actually keep. This also reframes what “potency” even means. Real potency is what can be used, and that’s a question of form and delivery at least as much as the amount.

The Bottom Line

The old industry sold you on dosage amounts because it’s easy to print on a label and easy to market. But your body doesn’t read labels; it absorbs what it can, in the form it’s given, throttles what it doesn’t want, and lets the rest go — which is exactly what that neon-yellow urine is showing you.
We’d rather give you something more useful: less to take, less waste, and the simple confidence that what you’re putting in is actually landing instead of getting flushed down the toilet. Not more. Just enough, in a form that your body can use best.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Why does my urine turn bright yellow after a multivitamin?
A: That color is largely riboflavin — passing through. In testing, B2 was the one vitamin of 16 tested that clearly altered urine fluorescence in the analysis. It’s harmless, but it’s also a visible sign that you took in more B2 than your body could use in that moment, so the excess got flushed out.

Q: Does a bigger dose mean I absorb more?
A: Not proportionally, and sometimes barely at all. As the dose rises, the fraction your body actually takes up generally falls. So, doubling the milligrams on the label doesn’t double what reaches you — it often just increases the amount that’s excreted.

Q: Does it matter how and when I take a supplement, not just how much?
A: Often, yes — sometimes as much as the dose itself. With iron, for instance, spacing the same total amount out rather than piling it on can improve how much your body actually absorbs and ease digestive side effects. Timing, the form a nutrient comes in, and what you take it alongside can all influence how much truly reaches the cells that need it, which is why we pay attention to forms and delivery and not just the dosage amount.

Q: If more isn’t the answer, what is?
A: The form the nutrient comes in and how well it’s delivered. Studies comparing different forms of the same mineral show meaningfully different amounts reaching the bloodstream. A well-absorbed form at a sensible dose can do more for you than a much larger dose of a poorly absorbed one.

Q: Isn’t a smaller dose just “less”?
A: The number that matters isn’t how much you swallow — it’s what your body can absorb and use. Our aim is to provide the right amount in a form that reaches your cells best, not a big number for its own sake; most of which you pay for and then excrete.

These statements have not been evaluated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
This article is for general education. The products described are dietary supplements intended to support normal health and wellbeing as part of a food-first lifestyle. They are not a substitute for a varied diet, a healthy lifestyle, or the advice of your physician. If you are pregnant, nursing, taking medication, or managing a health condition, talk with your healthcare provider before beginning any supplement.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Consult a qualified healthcare provider before making changes to your health regimen.

Test Your Knowledge with Today’s Quiz!
Take today’s quiz to see how much you’ve learned from yesterday’s Mercola.com article.

About how many people worldwide have chronic kidney disease?

344 million
544 million
844 million
Chronic kidney disease affects hundreds of millions of people worldwide, yet many cases still go undiagnosed. Learn more.
1.2 billion

Have you ever wondered what’s in the slimy, watery liquid that surrounds raw chicken in its packaging? Is it just water, or are there hidden chemicals in there?

When you’re standing in the grocery store aisle, examining packages of chicken breasts, thighs, and drumsticks, what you see is just the final product. What remains invisible are the numerous chemical processes that conventional chicken undergoes before reaching your shopping cart.

If you’re someone who carefully selects nontoxic cleaning products for your home, you might be surprised — and concerned — to learn about what’s used to “clean” the chicken on your dinner plate.

Most of us have become disconnected from our food system. We purchase neatly packaged meat without understanding the journey it took to reach the store shelf. This disconnect has allowed industrial chicken processors to implement practices that prioritize efficiency and shelf life over consumer health and animal welfare.

As someone who runs a farm cooperative, Nourish Food Club, I’ve gained firsthand insight into meat production processes through weekly communication with butchers and regular visits to processing facilities. This hands-on involvement has revealed a startling reality: conventional meat processing relies heavily on chemical interventions that many consumers are completely unaware of.

The Scale of Industrial Chicken Processing

To understand why chemicals are so prevalent in conventional chicken processing, we need to grasp the massive scale of operations. Take Tyson Foods, one of America’s largest poultry processors. An average Tyson plant processes approximately 1.25 million chickens daily, with larger facilities handling up to 2 million birds during peak production periods.

Let’s take a second to visualize this. A fully grown meat bird takes up about 1 square foot of space, so 2 million chickens would cover about 46 acres — roughly the size of 35 football fields packed with chickens! Now, stacking those chickens side by side in a line would span about 380 miles, which is the length of the state of Colorado from west to east. This just isn’t right!

This industrial-scale processing creates unique challenges. When thousands of chickens are processed hourly, maintaining hygiene becomes increasingly difficult. So, yes, chemical interventions are needed to clean up! Rather than addressing root causes of contamination — overcrowding in confinement buildings, poor nutrition, and stressful living conditions — large processors have turned to chemical solutions.

When production is mass-produced in overcrowded conditions, prioritizing quantity over quality, it’s no surprise that unsanitary conditions arise, leading to the need for chemical interventions to control harmful pathogens.

Processing Steps

After slaughter and defeathering, chicken carcasses are typically immersed in large water baths called “chill tanks.” The primary purpose is to quickly lower the temperature of the meat to prevent bacterial growth.

However, what many consumers don’t realize is that some of these tanks in conventional processing plants contain chlorine solutions. Many chickens tumble together in the mixture, so the chlorine helps prevent bacterial cross-contamination and foodborne illnesses such as salmonella.

The USDA permits chlorine levels of up to 50 parts per million (ppm) in these chill tanks. For perspective, that concentration is 5 to 50 times higher than what’s recommended for residential swimming pools (1 to 3 ppm according to CDC guidelines). While the chicken is rinsed before packaging, questions remain about chemical residues and whether this practice merely masks unsanitary conditions rather than addressing them.

Muscle meat is porous and can absorb liquids it comes into contact with, including chlorine solutions used in processing. When chicken is dunked in a chlorine bath, some of that solution can be absorbed into the meat through its micropores.

While the USDA and industry claim that chlorine residue is ‘minimal and safe,’ the European Union (EU) has banned the import of U.S. chlorinated chicken. In fact, the EU banned the use of chlorine baths for chicken processing way back in 1997.

EU regulators determined that chlorine washing masks poor hygiene earlier in the production process rather than preventing contamination at its source.
They concluded that this practice allows producers to maintain lower animal welfare and hygiene standards throughout the supply chain.
The EU approach instead emphasizes stricter hygiene standards throughout the entire production process.

As a result, U.S. poultry cleaned with chlorine is not permitted in EU markets. This international perspective raises an important question: If chlorine-washed chicken isn’t considered safe enough for European consumers, why should Americans accept it?

Now, chlorine isn’t always used — in fact, the industry has received some backlash regarding this chlorine usage. But that doesn’t mean your conventional chicken is chemical-free. Whether it’s chlorine or its chemical cousins, conventional chicken processing is caught in a cycle of chemical dependence. It’s not just about what’s being sprayed on your dinner — it’s about why these treatments are deemed necessary in the first place.

Think of these chemical baths as a massive band-aid on a broken system. Instead of raising chickens in naturally healthy conditions, industrial producers are playing catch-up with chemistry. The problems start long before any chemical touches the meat.

Imagine thousands of chickens packed together like sardines in a confined building, where diseases spread like wildfire. Now add to that a processing line moving at breakneck speed, where proper sanitation becomes more wish than reality. Tools get missed in the cleaning rush, and workers, pressured by time, might skip that extra handwashing step.

But rather than pump the brakes and rethink the system, the industry’s solution is to douse everything in chemical solutions — a quick fix for a complex problem. It begs the question: In our quest for cheap, abundant chicken, have we strayed too far from the coop?

If it takes a chemistry degree to understand what’s keeping our food ‘safe,’ perhaps we’ve wandered too far from the simple wisdom of traditional farming. It is time to question whether industrial efficiency has come at too high of a cost.

And speaking of costs, there’s a clever sleight of hand happening right under our noses. Those chemical treatments aren’t just about sanitizing — they’re part of a process that quite literally waters down your dinner.

The industry calls it “plumping” or “enhancing,” which sounds innocent enough until you realize what’s really happening: Your chicken is being injected with a cocktail of water, salt, and phosphates that can boost its weight by up to 15%. In other words, you’re paying premium chicken prices for what’s essentially added water.

But the water weight isn’t just hitting your wallet — it’s affecting your dining experience too. Ask any chef worth their salt (pun intended), and they’ll tell you there’s something off about conventionally processed chicken. That rubbery texture and peculiar taste? It’s not your imagination.

When you cook this chemically-enhanced meat, all that added water leaches out, taking with it not just the artificial solutions, but also the natural flavors and nutrients that make chicken, well, chicken. It’s a far cry from the succulent, naturally flavorful bird that used to grace our dinner tables.

For consumers trying to make informed choices about their food, perhaps the most frustrating aspect is what remains hidden. When you pick up that neatly wrapped chicken at the grocery store, you won’t find any mention of chlorine baths, organic acid sprays, or antimicrobial treatments on the label.

Current regulations don’t require processors to disclose these sanitation ingredients, leaving shoppers in the dark about what their dinner has been through before reaching their cart. It’s a glaring information gap that effectively denies consumers their fundamental right to know how their food is processed.

The True Cost of Cheap Chicken

Conventional chicken typically costs less at the register, but this apparent savings comes with hidden costs:

Potential health impacts from chemical residues
Environmental degradation from industrial farming practices
Lower nutritional quality due to poor raising conditions
Higher intake of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) due to the increased usage of high-PUFA feed ingredients like soy, seed oils, and dried distiller grains, leading to a change in the final fatty acid profile of the meat you consume
Compromised animal welfare
Water weight that disappears during cooking (meaning you’re getting less actual meat)

When we factor in these hidden costs, the slightly higher price tag of pasture-raised, naturally processed chicken may represent better value in the long run.

The Healthier Alternatives — What to Look For

If you are buying chicken at the grocery store, something to look for is “air chilled.” Some processors now use air chilling rather than chemical baths, a process that involves hanging chicken carcasses in cold chambers where circulating air reduces the temperature. This method eliminates water immersion, which can spread contamination between carcasses, and avoids water retention, resulting in more flavorful meat.

Air chilling is often followed by gentle vinegar and water rinses instead of harsh chemicals. While the chicken may still be raised in confinement conditions, this process ensures that no chemical baths are used. However, the only way to be 100% certain about how your chicken was raised and processed is to know your farmer.

This might involve joining a farm cooperative or CSA (Community Supported Agriculture) program, visiting local farmers markets and asking specific questions, developing relationships with local butchers who can verify their sourcing, or researching farms online to look for transparency about their practices. By taking these steps, you can gain confidence in the sourcing and care behind the food you’re consuming. Some questions you could ask producers include:

How were these chickens raised? (Look for terms like “pasture-raised” or “free-range”)
What was their diet? (Organic, non-GMO feed is preferable)
How were they processed? (Look for “air-chilled” or ask about chemical use)
Can the vendor trace this meat back to a specific farm?
What specific antimicrobial treatments, if any, were used during processing?

Smaller-scale poultry operations that raise birds on pasture generally don’t rely on chemical washes. Instead, they prioritize better living conditions, providing access to fresh air and sunlight, along with lower stocking densities to prevent overcrowding.

These operations also focus on cleaner, less rushed slaughter processes and natural diets that support stronger immune systems in the birds. This approach helps ensure that the poultry is raised in a more humane and natural environment, without the need for chemical treatments.

Supporting a Healthier Food System

The prevalence of chemical processing in conventional chicken production represents a significant departure from traditional food preparation methods. Whether it’s chlorine, peracetic acid, cetylpyridinium chloride, or organic acids, these chemical interventions are symptoms of a food system that prioritizes volume and efficiency over quality and transparency.

While these chemicals may help industrial processors manage safety concerns in high-volume operations, they raise important questions about food quality, transparency, and long-term health impacts. The fact that processors can simply switch from one chemical to another when consumers become concerned about a specific treatment highlights the fundamental issue: the industrial system itself requires these interventions.

As consumers become more aware of these practices, they gain the power to make more informed choices. By supporting smaller-scale producers who prioritize natural processing methods and animal welfare, we can collectively shift the market toward healthier, more transparent food production. By choosing chicken from regenerative farming systems instead of factory farms, consumers can:

Support farmers who prioritize animal welfare and environmental stewardship
Encourage transparency in food processing
Vote with their dollars for chemical-free food production
Improve their own health through higher-quality nutrition
Contribute to more sustainable agricultural practices

Every purchase is a vote for the kind of food system you want to support!
About the Author

Ashley Armstrong is passionate about helping others restore metabolic health through healthy food and healthy habits. She is also on a mission to create an alternative food system rooted in regenerative farming practices that supports human and environmental health.

Armstrong is the co-founder of Angel Acres Egg Club, which specializes in low-PUFA (polyunsaturated fat) eggs that are shipped to all 50 states. Laboratory testing has confirmed that Angel Acres eggs are low in linoleic acid (an omega-6 high in seed oils), and are completely free of glyphosate!

This achievement reflects a commitment to quality and a unique partnership with row crop farmers who practice regenerative agriculture practices to produce the low-PUFA chicken feed ingredients and do not use agrochemicals.

Armstrong also co-founded Nourish Food Club, which ships low-PUFA chicken, low-PUFA pork, beef, cheese, A2 dairy, and traditional sourdough to all 50 states. While the egg club has memberships open, Nourish Food Club has a temporary waiting list which you can join to be notified when new spots open up!

Many people think of heart disease as something that shows up suddenly — a heart attack out of nowhere. In reality, it often builds slowly, fueled by common habits that go unchecked for years. High blood pressure, poor metabolic health, and chronic inflammation don’t just affect your heart. They hijack your entire system from the inside out, long before any symptoms appear.

What’s alarming is how routine these problems have become. Walk into any pharmacy or clinic, and you’ll see rows of people managing blood pressure, blood sugar, or cholesterol, typically using a variety of prescription drugs. But very few are asking why these imbalances developed in the first place — or how to reverse them at the foundational level.

If you’re in your 30s or 40s, you still have time to change course. If you’re already over 50 or 60, it’s not too late, but the clock is ticking. The real question is: What actions will give you not just more years, but better years, free from the slow grind of cardiovascular disease? Let’s unpack what the latest research reveals about heart risks, resilience and what it actually takes to live longer without disease.

Heart Risks at 50 Steal More Than a Decade of Disease-Free Life

A global study published in the New England Journal of Medicine tracked the health records of more than 2 million adults from 133 different cohorts across 39 countries and six continents.1 Researchers aimed to determine how five major cardiovascular risk factors — high blood pressure, cholesterol, diabetes, obesity, and smoking — affect life expectancy and time lived free of heart disease.

• Participants with no risk factors had the longest and healthiest lives — The study grouped people by how many of these five risks they had at age 50, then followed them to estimate how long they lived without cardiovascular disease and without dying from any cause.

Women who had none of the five risk factors lived an average of 14.5 more years without early death and 13.3 more years free of heart disease. Men gained 11.8 years free of premature death and 10.6 years free of cardiovascular disease compared to those who had all five risks.

• Each additional risk factor shaved years off healthy lifespan — The more risk factors present at age 50, the greater the loss in years lived without heart disease. Having all five meant a dramatically shorter life span. The research showed that risk compounds — one or two factors already began to reduce lifespan, but once you hit three or more, the downward spiral steepened sharply.

• Even small improvements made a measurable difference — Participants who managed to reduce just one major risk in their 50s saw a significant improvement in expected healthy years.

For example, among adults aged 55 to 60, lowering high blood pressure gave the biggest gain in years lived without cardiovascular disease, while quitting smoking led to the most years added free from early death. These findings suggest that it’s smart to take action to live healthier at any age — and even one positive change pays off.

Why These Risks Are So Damaging at the Cellular Level

The earlier you address these risks, the better. The study found that while midlife interventions were still helpful, waiting until your 60s or later meant fewer years gained. That’s because by then, cardiovascular damage often becomes worse, and your cellular energy could also be depleted.

• No single factor acts alone — they interact and compound harm — One of the most important insights from the study was how these risk factors amplify each other. For example, obesity increases your odds of developing high blood pressure and diabetes. Smoking affects cholesterol and inflammation.

It’s not just five separate problems — it’s a tangled web that accelerates aging and disease progression when left unaddressed. Further, keep in mind that cholesterol is involved in essential bodily functions, including cell membrane structure, hormone production and vitamin D synthesis, making optimization — not necessarily lowering — the goal.

• The damage is mitochondrial at its core — Though the paper didn’t explore biological mechanisms, the outcomes align with what we already know. These risks compromise cellular energy production. Smoking floods your body with toxins that disrupt mitochondrial respiration.

High blood sugar from diabetes damages blood vessels and stresses cell metabolism. Chronic inflammation from obesity alters how mitochondria produce adenosine triphosphate (ATP), your body’s main energy currency that your cells need to survive and repair.

• High blood pressure starves tissues of oxygen and promotes oxidative stress — High blood pressure forces your heart to pump harder, thickening your heart muscle and stiffening arteries. This reduces oxygen delivery to tissues and increases reactive oxygen species, which damage cell membranes and mitochondrial DNA. Over time, this damage makes it harder for your body to repair itself, increasing your vulnerability to disease and shortening your lifespan.

• Tobacco toxins degrade cell membranes and trigger metabolic chaos — Cigarette smoke contains thousands of chemicals that damage nearly every organ system. On a cellular level, these toxins degrade lipid membranes, interfere with mitochondrial function and promote widespread oxidative stress.

• Excess fat and blood sugar fuel a vicious metabolic loop — Obesity and diabetes are signs of broken metabolic signaling. High insulin, elevated triglycerides and impaired fat metabolism interfere with how your cells process fuel. Mitochondria lose efficiency, inflammation rises and the entire system becomes overworked.

Restricting Vegetable Oils Is Part of the Secret to a Long, Healthy Life

To protect your heart and live longer, it’s not enough to just manage your blood pressure or quit smoking. Those matter, but there’s a deeper root cause almost nobody talks about — and it lives inside your cells. Your body’s ability to produce energy efficiently is the foundation of your health. And one of the biggest threats to that process is something most people eat every day without thinking: linoleic acid (LA), a polyunsaturated fat found in vegetable oils.

The truth is, your mitochondria — the tiny energy factories in every cell — are constantly under attack from modern processed food. LA in vegetable oils damages your mitochondrial membranes, disrupts how your cells generate ATP and triggers the kind of oxidative stress that sets the stage for high blood pressure, insulin resistance, and heart disease.

If you’re already dealing with blood sugar issues or excess weight, this information is especially important. If you’re ready to start fixing the cause instead of chasing symptoms, here’s what to do:

1. Eliminate LA from your diet — If you only do one thing, make it this. LA hides in almost all processed food, restaurant meals, salad dressings, chips, baked goods and even so-called “healthy” snacks. If you’re eating packaged, fast food or fried food — even if it’s organic — you’re likely overdosing on vegetable oils. Swap all vegetable oils for saturated fats like grass fed tallow, ghee, or butter.

Also avoid olive and avocado oil, as they’re often mixed with vegetable oil and contain high amounts of monounsaturated fat, which causes similar mitochondrial stress. I recommend keeping your total LA intake below 5 grams a day. If you can get it below 2 grams, that’s even better. Track your intake for a few days using an online nutrition tracker to get a sense of where you are.

2. Track your HOMA-IR score — not just your glucose — Don’t rely solely on standard fasting glucose tests to evaluate your metabolic health. Insulin resistance starts long before your blood sugar becomes abnormal. One of the simplest and most reliable ways to gauge how well your body handles insulin is through a test called HOMA-IR, short for Homeostatic Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance.

HOMA-IR only requires two basic blood tests done first thing in the morning before you eat: one for fasting glucose and one for fasting insulin levels. These tests are relatively affordable and widely available at most labs. Armed with those numbers, you then plug them into a straightforward formula to get your HOMA-IR score:

HOMA-IR = (Fasting Glucose in mg/dL × Fasting Insulin in μU/mL) / 405

The goal is to see just how hard your body is working to keep your blood sugar in check. If your HOMA-IR is higher than 1.0, it’s generally a warning sign that you might be edging into insulin resistance territory. The lower your score, the better your insulin sensitivity, so even values that hover around 1.0 deserve some attention if you’re looking to optimize your health.

3. Consume enough healthy carbs — If you’ve been on a low-carb or keto diet, you could be unknowingly worsening mitochondrial dysfunction. Carbohydrates play a key role in supporting your mitochondrial function.

Glucose, derived from carbohydrates, serves as your cells’ preferred fuel source for energy production. Instead of restricting carbs, focus on eating 250 grams of the right types, such as whole fruits, white rice, root vegetables, and well-tolerated whole grains. If you have unbalanced gut bacteria, or dysbiosis, avoid fiber, including whole grains, until your gut is healed.

4. Prioritize walking at least an hour each day — Movement is nonnegotiable for restoring metabolic health. Walking boosts mitochondrial energy production, improves blood flow, supports detox pathways and lowers blood pressure without stressing your system. If you’re sedentary or spend most of your day sitting, start with shorter walks after meals to help control blood sugar. Build up to 60 minutes daily, ideally outdoors in natural light.

5. Get sunlight every day — but avoid peak hours until you’ve reduced vegetable oils — Sunlight is one of the most powerful tools to increase cellular energy and improve metabolic health. It triggers nitric oxide release, supports circadian rhythm and boosts melatonin in your mitochondria.

But if you’ve been eating vegetable oils, your skin is full of fragile fats that oxidize in the sun. That’s why sunburn risk skyrockets for most people. It’s best to avoid direct sunlight during peak hours (10 a.m. to 4 p.m.) until you’ve cut back on LA for at least six months.

If you’re trying to reverse years of metabolic damage or simply want to prevent disease before it starts, these five steps are key. Instead of just covering up symptoms, you’ll restore your body’s cellular energy production and fix the energy crisis at the root of nearly every chronic disease.

FAQs About Heart Health Risk Factors

Q: What are the five major heart risk factors I need to watch for by age 50?

A: The five key risks highlighted in the study are high blood pressure, imbalanced cholesterol, diabetes, obesity, and smoking. Having all five by age 50 is linked to losing more than a decade of life, both in terms of dying earlier and living fewer years free of heart disease. Consumption of vegetable oils, which are high in LA, is another significant risk factor to be aware of.

Q: How much longer can I live if I avoid these heart risks by midlife?

A: According to the study, women who had none of the five risks lived an average of 14.5 more years free from early death, while men gained 11.8 years. These individuals also lived more than a decade longer without cardiovascular disease.

Q: Is it too late to make changes if I already have one or more of these risks?

A: Not at all. Modifying even one factor in your 50s — especially lowering blood pressure or quitting smoking — adds years to your life and helps prevent heart disease. The sooner you act, the greater the benefit.

Q: What’s the root cause behind all these risk factors?

A: At the core is impaired cellular energy production. This is often caused by excess consumption of LA from vegetable oils, which damages mitochondria and drives inflammation, oxidative stress and metabolic dysfunction — all precursors to heart disease and aging.

Q: What steps should I take to protect my heart and extend my life?

A: Start by cutting vegetable oils and limiting LA in your diet. Prioritize whole foods, including healthy carbs, walk for 60 minutes daily and get regular sun exposure — avoiding peak hours until after you’ve eliminated vegetable oils for six months. These foundational steps support your mitochondria and help reverse the deeper drivers of chronic disease.

You grab a soda or energy drink without a second thought, but those tasty sips are hiding a big health bill. Most of these drinks are sweetened with refined fructose — typically in the form of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) — which causes serious long-term health damage.

Sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) are everywhere, and they’re causing trouble worldwide. If you want to stay well and avoid chronic disease, it’s important to understand how sugary drinks hurt your health, where they hit hardest, and what you can do about it.

SSBs loaded with added sugar include things like sodas, energy drinks, fruit punches and sweetened lemonades. They’re not 100% fruit juices or iced tea with no sugar. Here’s a jaw-dropper: one can of soda packs 10 teaspoons of sugar.1 Picture dumping that into your morning tea. That’s way more sweetness than your body needs in one go.

Why Processed Fructose Is a Danger to Your Health

Not all sugars behave the same in your body — and fructose, when stripped from whole foods and concentrated in drinks or snacks, causes unique problems. Unlike natural fructose in fruit, which is slowly digested with the help of fiber and nutrients, processed fructose hits your system hard and fast. This sudden flood forces your liver to work overtime and sets off a cascade of stress responses throughout your body.

• Whole fruits are not the issue — When you eat fruit, the natural fructose is bundled with fiber, water and antioxidants. This slows down sugar absorption, which gives your body time to process it without stress.

• Processed fructose is a different story — In sugary drinks and many processed foods, fructose is separated from glucose and delivered in large amounts all at once. This includes sweeteners like HFCS.

• Your liver takes the hit — Unlike glucose, which is used by nearly every cell in your body, fructose is handled mainly by your liver. Too much fructose overwhelms it, forcing your liver to turn the excess into fat.

Over time, this leads to fatty liver disease, and a vicious cycle begins. When your liver is overloaded, it no longer regulates blood sugar or fats properly. This worsens insulin resistance — a key driver of Type 2 diabetes — and contributes to inflammation and metabolic disease.

• Processed fructose ramps up mitochondrial stress — Your mitochondria — the tiny energy factories in your cells — get overwhelmed by the byproducts of excess fructose. This creates what’s known as reductive stress, leaving your cells less able to make energy and more likely to get damaged.

The bottom line? It’s not just the sugar itself — it’s the form and source that matter. Fructose, when isolated and added to drinks and processed foods, pushes your liver and mitochondria past their limits, silently driving disease over time.

Why Should You Care?

SSBs (sugar-sweetened beverages) don’t just quench your thirst — they overload your body with sugar. It’s like piling extra bags onto a suitcase. At first, you might manage, but soon it’s too much to carry.

When that sugar is processed fructose, your liver ends up doing most of the heavy lifting. All that refined sugar makes you gain weight and raise your chances of serious health problems like Type 2 diabetes and heart disease. These aren’t minor issues; they’re big deals that change your life.

A study published in Nature Medicine investigated SSBs in 184 countries from 1990 to 2020.2 The findings? These drinks are linked to millions of new disease cases worldwide. It’s not just a personal problem — it’s a global one. To see how big this issue really is, let’s look at the numbers.

How Do Sugary Drinks Impact Health Around the World?

The numbers tell the story. In 2020, SSBs were tied to 2.2 million new cases of Type 2 diabetes — almost 1 in 10 new cases globally. For heart disease, they caused 1.2 million new cases, or about 1 in 30. Imagine 10 friends getting Type 2 diabetes — one could be due to their soda habit.

That’s a lot of people affected by something as common as a soft drink. Overall, the study found sugary drinks caused 80,278 deaths from Type 2 diabetes and 257,962 deaths from cardiovascular disease — that’s 338,240 deaths that could have been avoided.

What Are Type 2 Diabetes and Heart Disease?

Not sure what these common diseases linked to sugary drinks are? Here’s the breakdown:

• Type 2 diabetes — Your body struggles to handle sugar, so your blood sugar climbs too high. This leaves you tired and, over time, hurts your organs like your kidneys or eyes.

• Cardiovascular disease — This covers heart and blood vessel issues, like heart attacks or strokes — conditions that stop you in your tracks.

Both often sneak up on you and make life tougher than it needs to be. SSBs not only make you sick — they steal your good years. In 2020, they cost the world 12.5 million healthy years, called disability-adjusted life years. That’s time you could’ve spent feeling great, lost to illness or even early death. It’s a wake-up call about what’s in your cup.

Where Do Sugary Drinks Cause the Most Trouble?

Some places feel the SSB sting more than others. For example:

• Colombia — Almost half of new Type 2 diabetes cases (48.1%) and 23% of cardiovascular disease cases are SSB-related.

• Mexico — 30% of Type 2 diabetes and 13.5% of cardiovascular disease cases.

• South Africa — 27.6% of Type 2 diabetes and 14.6% of cardiovascular disease cases.

That’s a huge number of health problems tied to something you can buy at any corner store. Additional statistics revealed in the study also show how everyday drinks turn into major health risks.

• Latin America and the Caribbean — 24.4% of new Type 2 diabetes cases and 11.3% of new cardiovascular disease cases come from SSBs.

• Sub-Saharan Africa — 21.5% of Type 2 diabetes and 10.5% of cardiovascular disease cases are linked to these drinks.

Why are these areas hit so hard? It’s a mix of factors:

• Habits — People often sip soda with meals like it’s water.

• Marketing — Drink companies blast ads everywhere, making SSBs look appealing.

• No clean water — In some spots, grabbing a sugary drink is easier than finding safe water. In some cases, it’s not just about choice — it’s about what’s around you.

Who’s Most at Risk from Sugary Drinks?

You might think health problems hit older people most, but sugary drinks target the young, too. People aged 25 to 29 are especially at risk — 15.6% of their Type 2 diabetes cases tie back to these drinks. Why? They guzzle more SSBs. Picture a young worker chugging energy drinks or soda to power through the day. Over time, that habit leads to health trouble. Men edge out a bit here. It’s close, but men might grab that extra soda can more often.

• Men — 10.1% of Type 2 diabetes cases link to SSBs.

• Women — 9.5% of Type 2 diabetes cases.

City Life and Education

Where you live and your schooling matter, too. In places like Africa and Latin America, city-dwellers and people with more education face bigger SSB risks. Why? They’ve got cash to spend and see ads pushing those drinks. If you’re in a bustling town, you might notice soda machines everywhere — and for some, it’s hard to resist.

Lifestyle and marketing also play a big role. Busy city dwellers or young men bombarded with soda ads are more likely to sip without thinking. It’s not just about you — it’s about what’s targeting you.

How Have Sugary Drink Health Risks Changed Over Time?

A global shift has occurred in recent decades. From 1990 to 2020, SSB troubles grew a little. Type 2 diabetes cases linked to them rose by 1.3%, while cardiovascular disease cases stayed steady. It’s not a huge leap, but it shows the problem isn’t going away. However, zoom into regions, and the story shifts:

• Sub-Saharan Africa — The biggest spike — 8.8% more Type 2 diabetes cases and 4.4% more cardiovascular disease cases tied to SSBs.

• Colombia and the U.S. — More Type 2 diabetes cases over the years.

• Nigeria and Russia — More cardiovascular disease cases.

What’s driving this? In some spots, sugar drinks sales are booming. In others, like Mexico, policies like taxes are slowing things down. It’s a tug-of-war between habits and regulations.

What Can You Do About Sugary Drink Health Risks?

Soda and other sugary drinks are cheap, tasty and all over the place. Without a nudge, it’s easy to keep sipping them. Some places are fighting back with soda taxes, as higher prices may make you think twice before grabbing that can.

• Mexico — A soda tax made drinks pricier, so some people skip them.

• South Africa and the U.K. — They’ve got taxes, too, nudging people away from sugar overload.

Ultimately, however, it’s up to you to take control of your health and make the choice to eliminate sugary drinks and other forms of processed fructose from your diet.

Natural Sugar vs. Added Sugar — A Recap

• Natural sugar — The good stuff — As mentioned, not all sugar is bad. Natural sugar found in fruits and veggies comes paired with beneficial nutrients like fiber. Take an orange — it gives you sugar plus fiber to keep your energy steady and your gut happy. It’s a win-win.

• Added sugar — The troublemaker — Added refined fructose is different. It’s dumped into soda and other beverages without adding any beneficial nutrition. Refined fructose — especially in the form of HFCS — floods your liver with more sugar than it can safely handle. A HFCS-laden soda slams your system with processed fructose fast, spiking your blood sugar with no benefits to balance it. It’s like a sugar bomb with no shield.

When consumed, HFCS’s fructose component bypasses normal sugar metabolism and goes directly to your liver where it’s stored as fat, while providing no satiety signals to your brain, contributing to overconsumption.

• Why it matters — Natural sugar in whole foods like fruit is fine in moderation — it’s how nature intended. But added sugar in SSBs piles on risks like Type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Next time you’re craving something sweet, grab an apple over a fruit drink. Raw honey and maple syrup are also acceptable sweeteners, but make sure to choose pure varieties — not those with added HFCS.

How to Kick the Sugary Drink Habit

Want to kick soda and other sugar-sweetened beverages to the curb? The Nature Medicine study suggested several big-picture solutions, including adding warning labels about health risks to SSBs, limiting advertising to children and making clean water accessible in schools and elsewhere. Here are additional steps to take on an individual level:

1. Start with swaps — Instead of a sugary soda, try a sparkling water with a splash of juice. It’s about small, manageable changes.

2. Hydrate with water — Sometimes, you likely reach for a soda because you’re thirsty, not necessarily because you want the sugar. Keep a glass or stainless steel water bottle with you and refill it throughout the day. Add some lemon, lime or cucumber slices for a little flavor boost. You’ll be surprised how much your cravings decrease when you’re properly hydrated.

3. Read labels — Before you grab a drink, take a peek at the nutrition label. You’ll be shocked at how much sugar is hiding in some “healthy” drinks like fruit juices or flavored tea. Understanding what you’re actually consuming is a huge first step.

4. Find healthy alternatives you actually enjoy — Maybe it’s herbal tea, unsweetened iced tea or even just plain sparkling water. Experiment with different flavors and combinations until you find something you genuinely like. A good alternative makes it easier to resist the sugary options.

5. Plan ahead and be prepared — When you’re out and about, it’s easy to grab a soda on impulse. Bring your own water or pack a healthy drink from home. If you know you’ll be in a situation where sugary drinks are tempting, have a plan in place. Little preparations go a long way.

FAQs — Quick Answers to Your Sugary Drink Questions

Q: What Are Sugar-Sweetened Beverages (SSBs)?

A: SSBs are drinks with added sugar — sodas, energy drinks, fruit punches — not 100% juices.

Q: How Do Sugary Drinks Affect Your Health?

A: They overload you with refined sugar like high-fructose corn syrup, boosting risks for weight gain, Type 2 diabetes and heart disease.

Q: Which Places Are Most Affected by SSBs?

A: Latin America, the Caribbean and sub-Saharan Africa top the list with the biggest health hits, but the consequences are being felt globally.

Q: Are Younger People More at Risk from soda and sugary drinks?

A: Yes. Ages 25 to 29 face higher risks since they drink more — 15.6% of their Type 2 diabetes cases are linked to these drinks.

Q: What’s the Difference Between Natural and Refined Sugar?

A: Natural sugar in fruit comes with fiber and is part of a healthy diet; added sugar like HFCS in SSBs has no nutritional benefits and is harmful for health.

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), a heart attack occurs every 40 seconds throughout America. This totals to around 805,000 people every year — 605,000 of them experience it for the first time, while the remaining 200,000 are repeat cases. Moreover, 1 in 5 people don’t know they’ve already had a heart attack.1

But what exactly happens when you have a heart attack? Simply put, blood flow to the heart becomes severely restricted usually due to a buildup of plaque in the coronary arteries. Once a complete blockage occurs, cardiac muscles die as they also don’t get blood flow. From here, symptoms such as chest pain, cold sweats, fatigue, nausea, and shortness of breath manifest.2

Treatment is centered on restoring blood flow as soon as possible to prevent further tissue death. Here lies a question that has bothered researchers for years now — once a heart attack occurs, can cardiac tissue regenerate on its own and achieve optimal function again? Evidence shows that there’s a sliver of hope, but it needs to be fleshed out further.

The Human Heart Can Regrow Cardiomyocytes After a Heart Attack

Experts have long been aware that certain animals can regrow their own heart cells after a heart attack. One example is zebrafish, which can actually do a complete regrowth. Meanwhile, mice have shown the ability to induce mitosis (dividing and multiplying of cells) in the affected area.

The human heart, on the other hand, was believed to be different. According to Sean Lal, Ph.D., a professor of clinical and molecular cardiology at the University of Sydney and coauthor of the featured study, medical students are generally taught that the number of heart cells you’re born with remains the same throughout your lifespan or until you suffer a heart attack.3

Now,4 a team of Australian researchers found that this may not be the case. Their study, published in the journal Circulation Research, made a big breakthrough that deepens the understanding of what we know about the human heart. Specifically, they discovered how it can regenerate new heart muscle cells (cardiomyocytes).5

To test their hypothesis, the researchers used a heart that sat in storage for almost two decades. It was donated by the family of a 48-year-old man who suffered from a severe heart attack. He was brain-dead and on life support, but the damaged heart couldn’t be transplanted into someone else.

The heart was preserved and frozen in liquid nitrogen to preserve tissue quality. “Essentially, the tissue and cells were ‘frozen in time,'” according to lead researcher Rob Hume, Ph.D.6

• Analysis of the heart — Using an array of analytical techniques, the researchers were able to determine how the heart underwent mitosis. According to Lal, the samples they collected from the donor heart showed a mitosis rate of 7% to 8%. But to be able to repair the heart back to its optimal state, the mitosis rate should ideally be 25% to 50%.
In the image below, you can see that the pink area is where a cardiomyocyte is regenerating. This was triggered by adding certain antibodies into the tissue, which attached to proteins that are expressed during mitosis:

Source: The Age, January 18, 2026

• A theory on why regeneration happens — Lal explained that hypoxia could be the factor that triggers mitosis in the heart muscles. Basically, the very same oxygen-deprived environment caused by a heart attack also triggers regeneration in the affected area. This supports his initial theories regarding fetal hearts, noting that, “Fetal hearts make tonnes of new heart cells in utero, which is an oxygen-low environment.” He connects this to his research about adult hearts:7

“It’s almost like the heart has some inbuilt memory. Maybe when you have low oxygen after a heart attack, you reprogram your heart cells to make new cells like you did when you were in utero. That is what we are exploring.”

While the experiment shows promise, the researchers acknowledge that their findings still won’t be able to prevent a heart attack. However, they do hope to continue following up on their findings to create therapies that can promote better mitosis in heart cells.8

Heart Muscles Turn on Renewal Switches Under the Right Conditions

A related study published in Circulation also looked at how your heart can make new muscle cells. The study tracked DNA signatures inside cardiomyocytes to measure actual new cell formation, not just cell enlargement.9

According to the researchers, the goal was to determine whether the adult human heart has what they called a “latent cardiomyocyte regenerative potential” and whether certain conditions activate it. The findings? Your heart’s ability to replace lost cells varies dramatically depending on your physiological state, with some patients showing dramatic surges in renewal when conditions improve.

• Framework of the analysis — A group of patients with advanced heart failure provided the data for this analysis. The study compared their heart tissue with healthy adult hearts and then separated those who received left ventricular assist device (LVAD) support — a mechanical pump that takes workload off the heart — to see how different environments affected cardiomyocyte renewal.
• The enormous contrast between healthy and failing hearts — In a normal adult, cardiomyocyte turnover sits at about 0.5% per year, meaning a small but steady replacement of muscle cells. This results in an almost 40% replacement during the entire lifespan of a human — a contrast to the theory proposed in the earlier featured study, wherein the number of cardiomyocytes remains the same.
In end-stage heart failure, that renewal rate collapses. The study reports that cardiomyocyte generation drops 18 to 50 times lower compared with healthy controls. This means once heart failure advances, your heart’s natural repair machinery slows to a crawl, making recovery harder unless something shifts the internal environment dramatically.

• A deeper look at the data — In failing hearts, renewal fell to 0.03% per year for nonischemic cardiomyopathy and even to 0.01% per year in ischemic cardiomyopathy — the type tied to heart attacks. This corresponds to the lower rate of regeneration mentioned earlier.
Everything changes, however, in patients whose hearts recovered function with LVAD support. Among those individuals, cardiomyocyte renewal rose dramatically to 3.1% per year. This means some hearts aren’t only stabilizing under better conditions — they are rebuilding themselves at a faster rate than healthy hearts normally do.

• What’s happening inside heart muscle cells — The researchers documented that in the worst heart failure cases, DNA synthesis inside cardiomyocytes mostly produced polyploidy — extra DNA copies inside the same cell — rather than creating entirely new muscle cells.
In other words, your heart might look active at the molecular level even while failing, but the activity is misdirected. Instead of replacing lost cells, the damaged heart tends to enlarge existing cells or add extra nuclei, a process that does not restore lost pumping strength.

• A roadblock to regeneration — The researchers mentioned cytokinesis (the final step in cell division where one cell splits into two) as a key chokepoint. This means that many heart cells are already entering the repair cycle, but they fail to complete it. They copy DNA, they prepare to divide, but they do not finish the split. Your ability to rebuild heart muscle depends on helping cells complete that final step.
• Suggestions for future studies — While the researchers were able to detect the regenerative rate in cardiomyocytes, they didn’t go deep into solutions. However, they did offer suggestions that can be used as a launching pad for other experts and expand known facts in this field:10

“[M]echanical unloading might reverse metabolic cascades that increase reactive oxygen species production. This, in turn, can reduce oxidative DNA damage and activation of the DNA damage response pathway that causes cell cycle arrest in cardiomyocytes. Indeed … a successful approach for cell replacement strategies could be to selectively stimulate cytokinesis in already cycling cardiomyocytes.”

Don’t Wait for a Heart Attack to Happen — Boost Your Cardiovascular Health Now

As I often say, it’s better to prevent a disease from happening in the first place instead of treating it, and this also applies to heart attacks. That said, here are my recommendations to keep your heart in top shape:

1. Minimize your intake of linoleic acid (LA) — In 2025, I published a paper in the World Journal of Cardiology regarding the health effects of excess LA consumption on cardiovascular health. In it, I describe how LA becomes integrated into the cardiolipin in your mitochondrial membranes, where it becomes a substrate for lipid peroxidation. This causes harmful reactive oxygen species (ROS) that eventually results in clogged arteries.
In light of this information, cutting back on LA is one of the smartest things you can do for your cardiovascular health, not to mention your overall well-being. I recommend keeping your intake below 5 grams a day, but if you can keep it below 2 grams, that’s even better.
As much as possible, avoid all ultraprocessed foods, as they are cooked in LA-rich vegetable oils, such as soybean, corn, safflower, and cottonseed. To help you monitor your intake, sign up for the upcoming Mercola Health Coach app. It contains a feature called the Seed Oil Sleuth, which will track the LA in your food to a tenth of a gram.

2. Track your weight — Even if your body mass index (BMI) is in a supposedly healthy range, that doesn’t mean you’re in the clear. As I noted in my previous article, intermuscular fat eventually promotes inflammation, which increases your risk for heart attack, as well as heart failure.
Instead of relying on BMI, it’s better to track your overall body fat percentage. You can use body fat calipers, which gives you a hands-on approach by measuring skinfold thickness in key areas throughout your body. When used consistently, they are reasonably accurate.
You can also use smart scales, which work by using bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) to measure body fat. While your current hydration levels can affect the results, they’re also generally helpful for getting an overall picture of your body fat composition. But the better approach here is combining the two methods for even better tracking accuracy.

3. Start building muscle — Now that you’ve gotten an idea on your current fat levels, how do you lower it? One effective method, which you can start doing right away, is resistance exercise or strength training.
Research shows that consistent resistance exercise decreases fat infiltration in your muscles. In addition, the eventual increase in your overall muscle density is linked to better cardiovascular health and longevity.11,12
However, take care when it comes to lifting weights — it would be wise to keep it in moderation. In my interview with Dr. James O’Keefe, he noted that 130 to 140 minutes of strength training per week makes you lose the longevity benefits of exercise. Based on our conversation, the sweet spot for lifting weights is 40 minutes once a week, or 20 minutes twice a week on non-consecutive days.

4. Know the signs of a heart attack — Even if you do everything correctly, it’s still wise to familiarize yourself with the signs of a heart attack. This will allow you to get proper help right away.
For more in-depth information on this topic, read “How to Spot and Treat a Heart Attack.” It contains other helpful tips that can help reduce tissue damage once a heart attack occurs, such as keeping methylene blue and sublingual melatonin close to you.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) About Cardiomyocyte Regeneration After a Heart Attack

Q: Can the human heart regenerate after a heart attack?
A: Yes, research shows the heart has regenerative capacity, albeit limited. Australian scientists found 7% to 8% of heart muscle cells actively going through mitosis in damaged cardiac tissue, though full repair would require 25% to 50%. Low oxygen during heart attacks may trigger this regeneration.

Q: How does heart failure affect the heart’s ability to repair itself?
A: Heart failure dramatically reduces regeneration. Healthy hearts replace about 0.5% of muscle cells yearly, but advanced heart failure drops this to 0.01 to 0.03%, which is up to 50 times lower than normal.

Q: Can mechanical heart pumps improve cardiac regeneration?
A: Yes. Patients using left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) showed renewal rates of 3.1% per year — six times higher than healthy hearts. Based on the findings, reducing the heart’s workload allows natural repair machinery to function better.

Q: Why do heart cells fail to complete regeneration?
A: The main roadblock is cytokinesis, which is the final step where one cell splits into two. Many heart cells copy DNA but cannot complete division. Future therapies may target this chokepoint.

Q: What can I do to prevent heart attacks?
A: Minimize linoleic acid (LA) intake (below 5 grams daily) by avoiding ultraprocessed foods, track body fat percentage, engage in moderate resistance training (40 minutes weekly), and learn to recognize heart attack warning signs.

Chronic kidney disease, characterized by damaged kidneys that gradually lose their ability to filter waste from your blood, affects 844 million adults worldwide and is projected to become the fifth leading cause of death globally by 2040.1 The condition often develops silently, but common signs include fatigue, swelling in your legs or ankles, changes in urination, high blood pressure, and difficulty concentrating. Left unchecked, it increases your risk of heart disease, kidney failure, dialysis, and premature death.

Yet the most unsettling problem with chronic kidney disease is not how widespread it’s become — it’s who the medical system keeps overlooking. A growing body of evidence points to a pattern that has gone largely unexamined for decades: women living with kidney disease are diagnosed less often, enrolled in research less often, and treated based on data that was rarely gathered with them in mind.

The result is a mismatch between who actually develops the disease and whose bodies shaped what doctors know about treating it. How that gap formed, why it has stubbornly resisted correction, and what it means for the millions of women managing kidney disease today is the story the newest research is finally beginning to tell.

Women Face Delays at Every Stage of Kidney Disease Care

A Series review paper (the second of three papers) published in The Lancet examined how biological sex influences kidney health, disease progression, diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes.2

They concluded that current treatment approaches often ignore important differences between women and men, even though those differences affect how kidney disease develops and how treatments perform.

• Women encounter barriers even when disease is present — Chronic kidney disease remains one of the most underdiagnosed health conditions worldwide, and women face an additional burden. In this featured Series published in The Lancet, researchers reported that up to 30% to 50% of chronic kidney disease cases go undiagnosed in high-income countries.

Women and nonwhite individuals are up to twice as likely to remain undiagnosed as white men, while nine out of 10 people who have chronic kidney disease don’t know they have the condition.

• Testing and referrals happen less often for women — Women are less likely to receive kidney disease testing, specialist referrals, and cardiovascular risk management even when their clinical results are similar to those of men. From a practical standpoint, this means you could have the same laboratory findings as a male patient yet be less likely to receive the same level of attention or follow-up care.

• Research participation does not reflect who actually has the disease — Fewer than 45% of participants in kidney disease trials are women, and representation falls to roughly one-third in some studies involving kidney medications. If treatments are tested primarily in men, doctors have less information about how those therapies affect women in real-world settings.

• Important treatment differences emerge when scientists examine women separately — The paper described several examples where women responded differently than men. In the SONAR trial, the drug atrasentan provided greater kidney protection in women, but women also experienced more heart failure events.

In the REGENCY trial, which involves lupus nephritis, a kidney disease caused by autoimmune dysfunction, women responded substantially better to the drug obinutuzumab, while men achieved better outcomes without treatment. These findings suggest that averaging results across both sexes can hide clinically important differences that directly affect treatment decisions.

• Biology helps explain why one-size-fits-all medicine falls short — Genetics, hormone levels, kidney structure, and drug metabolism differ between women and men. Drug metabolism refers to how your body absorbs, processes, and eliminates medications.

Because those processes differ between sexes, the same medication can produce different benefits, risks, and side effects. The researchers argue that future studies should routinely analyze women and men separately so treatment recommendations better reflect how real patients respond.

Nearly 3 Decades of Research Left Women Underrepresented

For an analysis published in Clinical Kidney Journal, researchers examined 192 chronic kidney disease clinical trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov and published between 1995 and 2022.3 Together, those studies included 147,136 participants.

Instead of looking at how a specific treatment worked, the researchers asked a different question: Were women being enrolled in kidney disease trials at rates that matched how often women actually experience the disease? The answer revealed a persistent mismatch that stretched across nearly three decades of research.

• The numbers showed a consistent enrollment gap — Across all 192 trials, women accounted for 66,875 participants, or 45.4% of those enrolled. At first glance, that might sound reasonably balanced. However, the researchers compared trial participation against the real-world burden of disease and found women represented about 55% of the global chronic kidney disease population.

To measure this discrepancy, they calculated something called the participation-to-prevalence ratio. That score compares how many women are enrolled in studies versus how many women actually have the disease. A perfect match would score 1.0. Instead, the average score was 0.75, showing women consistently appeared in trials at lower rates than expected.

• The imbalance remained regardless of study design — Underrepresentation remained similar whether studies focused on earlier or later stages of kidney disease, whether participants received dialysis or not, whether trials were funded by industry or other organizations, and whether the intervention involved drugs, devices, or other approaches.

Europe showed the largest imbalance, with a participation-to-prevalence ratio of just 0.65. Even more concerning, the researchers found no meaningful improvement between 1995 and 2022. Decades passed without solving the problem.

• Researchers rarely analyzed women separately — If you enjoy tracking your own health data, imagine combining your results with someone else’s and not separating them again. That’s essentially what happened in most of these trials. Only 39 of the 192 studies, just 20%, reported effectiveness outcomes separately for women and men.

When researchers fail to separate results by sex, important differences become invisible. The review found only one trial that identified a meaningful difference between women and men after performing sex-specific analysis. That finding alone illustrates how much information remains hidden when investigators don’t look.

• Safety data were almost completely missing — Not a single trial reported adverse events — unwanted reactions or complications that occur during treatment — separately for women and men. This matters because the paper highlighted evidence from broader drug-safety databases showing that women often experience different side effects than men due to differences in how medications move through and interact with the body.

Factors such as hormone levels, body composition, and drug metabolism influence those responses. Without sex-specific safety reporting, doctors and patients are left with an incomplete picture of risk.
• The study identified practical fixes for the future — The researchers outlined several ways to improve research quality. They argued that clinical trials should plan sex-specific analyses before studies begin, include enough women to make those analyses meaningful, and remove enrollment barriers that disproportionately affect women.

The authors also noted that caregiving responsibilities, communication barriers, and study designs that unintentionally favor male participation all contribute to lower enrollment rates. Addressing those obstacles would give women a stronger voice in research and generate treatment data that better reflects the patients who actually live with the disease.

The Hidden Barriers That Limit Women’s Access to Advanced Kidney Care

A commentary published in Kidney International Reports examined a puzzling pattern seen around the world: women appear frequently in the earlier stages of kidney disease, yet men dominate dialysis and transplant programs.4

The authors reviewed findings from the Chronic Kidney Disease Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (CKD-DOPPS) and explored why women become less visible as disease progresses. The paper looked at the human side of health care access and the factors that influence who ultimately receives advanced treatment.

• Disease progression tells only part of the story — According to the analysis, men experienced a faster decline in kidney function in CKD-DOPPS clinics located in Brazil, France, Germany, and the U.S., helping explain why more men reached kidney replacement therapy, meaning dialysis or transplantation. However, the researchers emphasized that biology alone doesn’t explain the entire gap.

They pointed out that many important events occur before a patient ever reaches a specialist kidney clinic, including whether primary care providers recognize the disease and whether patients receive timely referrals. For you as a patient, this highlights the importance of identifying kidney problems early rather than waiting until advanced disease develops.

• Family responsibilities often compete with personal health — Researchers surveyed kidney specialists from 22 countries and found recurring themes that limited women’s access to advanced care. Economic inequality, caregiving duties, and family responsibilities repeatedly surfaced as obstacles. Many women spend years helping spouses, children, parents, and grandchildren while delaying their own medical appointments.

The paper suggests that this pattern contributes to later diagnoses, fewer specialist visits, and reduced access to treatment when compared with men.

• Social support and financial resources influence outcomes — Women were less frequently employed than men, creating additional challenges in health care systems where insurance or health care access is tied to employment status. Men were also more likely to be married, which often translates into greater logistical support during illness.

Transportation, appointment scheduling, treatment adherence, and emotional support all become easier when another person helps coordinate care. These factors aren’t medical measurements, but they still influence who receives treatment and when.

• Pregnancy complications create an overlooked warning sign — Another important finding centered on hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, including preeclampsia and pregnancy-induced high blood pressure. These conditions involve elevated blood pressure during pregnancy and are associated with a greater risk of future kidney disease and cardiovascular disease.

The global number of pregnancies affected by these disorders increased from 16.3 million to 18.08 million between 1990 and 2019. That means a pregnancy complication from years ago isn’t simply a past event. It can serve as an early warning sign that your kidneys deserve closer monitoring later in life.

• Earlier intervention offers one of the biggest opportunities for change — Unlike many discussions that focus only on dialysis or transplantation, this paper emphasized the value of acting long before severe disease develops. Identifying high-risk women earlier, especially those with a history of pregnancy-related complications, creates opportunities to slow disease progression and reduce future complications.

They also suggested that educating primary care providers about kidney disease risk factors could improve recognition and treatment at earlier stages. Viewed through that lens, one of the most powerful tools isn’t a new drug or procedure. It’s recognizing risk sooner and responding before kidney damage advances.

Take Charge of Your Kidney Health Before Problems Escalate

One of the biggest lessons from this research is that many women don’t receive timely testing, referrals, or treatment, which means that, until the system catches up, knowing your own numbers and asking for the right tests is a form of self-protection. High blood pressure deserves special attention because it’s both a major cause of kidney disease and a consequence of declining kidney function.

Over time, elevated pressure damages the tiny blood vessels inside your kidneys, reducing their ability to filter waste efficiently. The earlier you address the factors that drive high blood pressure and kidney strain, the greater your opportunity to protect kidney function for years to come.

• Restore a healthy sodium-to-potassium balance — If you’re dealing with high blood pressure, focus on mineral balance rather than simply eliminating salt. Blood pressure regulation depends heavily on the balance between sodium and potassium. The larger problem is that most sodium comes from ultraprocessed foods that contain very little potassium.

Replacing those foods with whole foods such as ripe fruit, root vegetables, and well-cooked greens helps restore this balance and reduces stress on your kidneys. At the same time, eliminating ultraprocessed foods lowers exposure to phosphate additives, excess sugar, seed oils, and other compounds that increase your kidneys’ workload.

• Optimize your vitamin D status through sensible sun exposure — Vitamin D helps regulate the hormonal system that controls blood pressure and fluid balance. When vitamin D levels remain low, that system may become overstimulated, which can increase vascular tension and place additional strain on your kidneys. Regular sun exposure is the most effective way to maintain healthy vitamin D levels.

If you still consume seed oils and other major sources of linoleic acid (LA), avoid intense midday sun for at least six months, since LA is a polyunsaturated fat that oxidizes easily, builds up in your skin, and increases your risk of skin damage. Aim for a vitamin D level between 60 and 80 ng/mL (150 to 200 nmol/L) and monitor it throughout the year. If regular sunlight isn’t available, vitamin D3 supplementation helps maintain healthy levels.

• Move every day and lower your stress response — Regular movement improves circulation, supports healthy blood sugar levels, and reduces pressure on your kidney’s filtering units. An hour of walking, cycling, swimming, or similar activity each day supports kidney health without excessive strain. If you’re just getting started, even 10-minute sessions create momentum.

I also recommend addressing the emotional side of high blood pressure. Chronic stress triggers hormones that constrict blood vessels and drive blood pressure upward.
One simple strategy is box breathing: inhale for four seconds, hold for four seconds, exhale for four seconds, and hold again for four seconds. Practice for 10 minutes daily to help calm your nervous system and reduce unnecessary pressure on your blood vessels.

• Reduce kidney stress from stones and excess phosphorus — If you have a history of kidney stones, pay attention to your oxalate intake. Foods particularly high in oxalates include spinach, almonds, peanut butter, sweet potatoes, and figs. Pairing oxalate-containing foods with calcium-rich foods helps bind oxalates in your digestive tract so fewer reach your kidneys. Low-oxalate greens such as kale work well for this purpose.

Boiling high-oxalate foods and discarding the cooking water further lowers the oxalate load. At the same time, reduce phosphorus from processed foods, colas, and fast-food meats. Excess phosphorus disrupts mineral balance and places additional strain on kidney tissue.

• Stay hydrated and screen early if risk factors apply to you — Hydration helps your kidneys dilute waste products and reduces the risk of stone formation. Thirst is usually a reliable guide, while pale yellow urine generally reflects adequate hydration. If you have high blood pressure, diabetes, obesity, a history of pregnancy-related blood pressure disorders, or a family history of kidney disease, make kidney screening part of your routine health maintenance.

Here, self-advocacy matters more than you might expect. Because women are tested and referred less often than men even when their lab values match a man’s, the most reliable protection is to ask by name. At your next checkup, request two specific tests: eGFR (estimated glomerular filtration rate, a blood test of how well your kidneys filter) and urine albumin (which checks for protein leaking into your urine).

Ask what the numbers are rather than waiting to be told something is wrong. These simple tests detect damage long before symptoms appear, and finding problems early gives you a far greater opportunity to slow progression before permanent damage occurs. The system may not flag you, so flag yourself. Lastly, talk to your health care provider about whether this testing is appropriate for you.

FAQs About Women and Kidney Disease

Q: Why are women less likely to receive a kidney disease diagnosis?
A: Research shows women are less likely to be tested, referred to specialists, and enrolled in studies that guide kidney disease treatment. As a result, many women remain undiagnosed even when signs of kidney disease are present. In high-income countries, an estimated 30% to 50% of chronic kidney disease cases go undiagnosed, and women face an even greater risk of being overlooked.5

Q: Why does it matter that women are underrepresented in kidney disease research?
A: Women make up about 55% of the global chronic kidney disease population but represented only 45.4% of participants in kidney disease clinical trials. When treatments are tested primarily in men, researchers have less information about how those therapies affect women, including differences in effectiveness, side effects, and long-term outcomes.6

Q: What factors increase a woman’s risk of kidney disease?
A: High blood pressure, diabetes, obesity, and a family history of kidney disease are well-known risk factors. Women with a history of preeclampsia or pregnancy-related high blood pressure also face a higher risk later in life. These pregnancy complications often serve as early warning signs that kidney function deserves closer monitoring.

Q: How does high blood pressure damage the kidneys?
A: High blood pressure places constant stress on the tiny blood vessels that filter waste from your blood. Over time, that pressure damages the kidneys’ filtration system, reducing their ability to remove waste and regulate fluid balance. Kidney disease can also worsen high blood pressure, creating a cycle that accelerates further damage.

Q: What are the most important steps to protect kidney health?
A: Focus on the root causes of kidney damage by maintaining a healthy sodium-to-potassium balance, avoiding ultraprocessed foods, optimizing vitamin D levels, staying physically active, managing stress, staying hydrated, and monitoring kidney function if you have risk factors. Early screening with blood and urine tests offers one of the best opportunities to identify problems before permanent kidney damage develops.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Consult a qualified health care provider before making changes to your health regimen.

Test Your Knowledge with Today’s Quiz!
Take today’s quiz to see how much you’ve learned from yesterday’s Mercola.com article.

What is dental amalgam more commonly called?

Ceramic fillings
Silver fillings
Dental amalgam has long been called a “silver filling,” even though the material contains mercury. Learn more.
Composite fillings
Porcelain fillings

In an audacious move of brazen deception, the American Dental Association (ADA), an amalgam patentholder, promoted dental amalgam as “silver fillings” — and doubled down on the cover-up by adopting a rule of conduct that barred dentists from discussing the (obvious) toxicity of mercury.

Well, I’m here to tell you that the “silver” filling is in actually a mercury filling. Mercury is not only toxic, but the most vaporous of the heavy metals, and can reach to the brain, the kidneys, the placenta, and breast milk.

The ADA’s callous and irresponsible promotion of mercury-based dentistry — when the alternatives are technically better now and much more tooth friendly — continues to have severe health, workplace, and environmental consequences. Modern dentists never use dental amalgam. If your dentist still places amalgam in any dental patient, it’s time to take your business elsewhere.

Consumers for Dental Choice Brought a Revolution to American Dentistry

When Charlie Brown, executive director for Consumers for Dental Choice, and I started working together, the federal government and the states sat firmly, on dentistry matters, in the pocket of the ADA. Similarly, international agencies were in the pocket of the pro-mercury World Dental Federation. With tenacity, Charlie built a worldwide nonprofit powerhouse, and with strategic brilliance, found the path to dismantle the pro-amalgam machine.

Amalgam is now banned across Europe, and in several African and Asian nations. Both the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the World Health Organization have switched from being amalgam advocates to amalgam opponents. Convincing either FDA or WHO to switch from support to opposition of a profitable product is extremely rare; changing both of these impenetrable colossi is, well, unprecedented in my experience.

Millions and millions of American consumers — and billions worldwide — have been spared from the health risk of mercury-based fillings as a result of Charlie’s efforts. Three decades ago, the late mercury-free dental pioneer Hal Huggins asked him to help a billion people. It now appears he has done so.

But as I explain below, we still do not have mercury-free dentistry for all. We must keep the momentum going to banish use of this primitive, pre-Civil War pollutant from our planet.

So, for the 16th consecutive year I am stepping up to match every dollar donated to Consumers for Dental Choice from now until midnight EST on August 22, 2026, up to $150,000 total. Let’s give Consumers for Dental Choice the resources it needs and merits. You may click this button below to donate online:

> > > > > Click Here

1 How long did participants drink hydrogen-rich water during the trial?

4 weeks
8 weeks
According to the study in Medicina, participants drank hydrogen-rich water daily for eight weeks, although the small trial produced preliminary results. Learn more.
12 weeks
16 weeks

2 Why are powdered supplements usually easier to take consistently?

They can be mixed into food or drinks
Mixing a powder into water, yogurt, oatmeal, or a smoothie connects the supplement to a meal you already have. Learn more.
They always contain fewer ingredients
They never need to be measured
They work faster than capsules

3 Which protein acts as a master switch for antioxidant protection?

Hemoglobin
Collagen
Nrf2
Nrf2 activates genes that help limit oxidative stress, control inflammation, and support cellular repair. Learn more.
Melatonin

4 Which heavy metal was often higher in organic dark chocolate?

Mercury
Arsenic
Aluminum
Cadmium
Organic certification does not control cacao percentage or growing region, which are major factors affecting cadmium levels. Learn more.

5 Which test creates detailed images of the heart’s structure?

Blood pressure test
Electrocardiogram (ECG)
Ultrasound
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)
MRI allows researchers to examine the heart’s structure in greater detail than standard blood tests. Learn more.

6 When breathing repeatedly stops or becomes shallow during sleep, what condition may be present?

Chronic insomnia
Restless legs syndrome (RLS)
Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA)
OSA lowers oxygen intake during sleep and may cause snoring, morning headaches, poor concentration, and daytime fatigue. Learn more.
Rapid eye movement disorder

7 What should you do before greatly increasing fiber if your gut is sensitive?

Remove all carbohydrates
Improve gut health first
A weakened gut barrier may react poorly to large amounts of fermentable fiber, causing gas, bloating, and discomfort. Building gut health first allows fiber to be added gradually. Learn more.
Double your fat intake
Go on a ketogenic diet

Test Your Knowledge with
The Master Level Quiz

1 What type of water should be used with a hydrogen-generating tablet?

Ice-cold water
Lukewarm water
Sparkling water
Room-temperature water
The tablet should dissolve fully in room-temperature water, and the cloudy water should be consumed immediately before the hydrogen escapes. Learn more.

2 What is the primary building block of cell membranes?

Fats
Fats, also called lipids, form the structure of cell membranes, making the type of fat you eat important for health. Learn more.
Proteins
Minerals
Carbohydrates

3 What does glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) signal to your brain after eating?

Hunger
Fullness
GLP-1 helps you feel satisfied sooner, slows food movement through the digestive tract, and supports healthy blood sugar control. Learn more.
Thirst
Stress

4 Why does the format of a supplement matter?

It determines the product’s pricing
It changes the size of the package
It removes the need for directions
It affects how consistently people take it
A convenient format reduces counting, swallowing, packing, and scheduling problems that often cause people to miss doses. Learn more.

5 During which peak hours should you avoid direct sunlight if you consume plenty of seed oils?

6 a.m. to 9 a.m.
8 a.m. to 11 a.m.
10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
Sunlight is strongest from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. so direct exposure should be limited until seed oils have been reduced for at least six months. Learn more.
4 p.m. to 7 p.m.

6 Which gland plays an important role in immune system development?

Thymus gland
The thymus helps develop the immune system, and its decline with age is often linked to weaker immune responses. Learn more.
Thyroid gland
Adrenal gland
Pituitary gland

7 Which often-discarded food may help protect against microplastic damage?

Apple peel
Grape skin
White citrus pith
White citrus pith contains diosmin, a flavonoid that may strengthen antioxidant defenses and support working and long-term memory. Learn more.
Watermelon rind

8 Where is krill oil harvested from?

Arctic Ocean
Antarctic waters
Krill oil comes from tiny shrimp-like creatures that live in the cold waters around Antarctica. Learn more.
Mediterranean Sea
Gulf of Mexico

9 What is the complete loss of smell called?

Dysgeusia
Hyperosmia
Parosmia
Anosmia
Anosmia is the complete loss of smell and affects about 5% of adults. It is one form of olfactory dysfunction, which also includes reduced or distorted smell. Learn more.

10 Which cocoa compounds may support insulin sensitivity and blood vessel function?

Tannins
Anthocyanins
Carotenoids
Flavanols
Cocoa flavanols have been linked to better insulin sensitivity, healthier blood vessels, and lower inflammation. Learn more.

11 What dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) concentration is recommended when beginning topical use?

30%
50%
70%
A 70% DMSO solution may be diluted evenly with water at first, then increased gradually if no skin irritation develops. Learn more.
100%

12 What is the medical term for low blood pressure?

Hypotension
Hypotension can reduce blood flow to vital organs and prevent tissues from receiving enough oxygen and nutrients. Learn more.
Hypertension
Atherosclerosis
Arrhythmia

13 Which factor affected how strongly the heart responded after a marathon?

Shoe brand
Running surface
Clothing choice
Training status
Fitness and training helped explain why runners experienced different levels of heart stress after completing the same distance. Learn more.

14 What has one of the strongest effects on your metabolic health?

What you eat
Whole foods provide nutrients that support steady energy, while ultraprocessed foods can promote weight gain and insulin problems. Learn more.
Where you buy your food
When you wake up
How often you travel

15 What slang describes attention problems linked to heavy short-form video use?

Digital fatigue
Screen fog
Attention drift
Brain rot
Heavy short-form video use can train the brain to expect constant novelty and quick rewards, making sustained focus and self-control harder. Learn more.

16 Despite sleeping better, what declined the morning after participants took quetiapine?

Blood pressure and heart rate
Memory and language skills
Alertness and driving performance
In the Flinders University study, quetiapine improved some sleep measurements but led to slower reaction times and poorer simulated driving performance the next morning. Learn more.
Appetite and physical strength

17 At what temperature does liquid crystalline water make up the largest share of water?

0°C
4°C
Liquid crystalline water makes up the biggest percentage of water at 4°C, the same temperature where water is most dense. Learn more.
10°C
25°C

18 What are the chances of surviving cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) done inside a hospital?

About 8% to 10%
About 50% to 55%
About 35% to 40%
About 23% to 25%
CPR works about 23% to 25% of the time in a hospital, but only about 10% of the time when done outside. Learn more.

19 Besides fiber intake, what may influence improvements in blood sugar control?

Meal size
Timing
Making healthy dietary changes early may lead to greater and longer-lasting improvements in blood sugar control. Learn more.
Water temperature
Sleep position

20 What forms of magnesium may help improve symptoms of depression?

Magnesium citrate and oxide
Magnesium sulfate and chloride
Magnesium glycinate and malate
Magnesium glycinate and magnesium malate are well-absorbed and generally gentle on the digestive system. Learn more.
Magnesium carbonate and hydroxide

21 What condition can develop after several nights of too little sleep?

Insulin resistance
Sleeping fewer than six hours a night can impair glucose control, and healthy adults developed glucose intolerance after only four days of severe sleep loss. Learn more.
Iron deficiency
Low blood pressure
Vitamin D deficiency

Autoimmune conditions have become one of the most common and stubborn health challenges of our time. While conventional medicine often treats them as mysterious immune system malfunctions — managed primarily with harmful steroids and other immunosuppressants1 — there’s increasing evidence that many of these diseases are not random.

Rather, they’re signals of deeper dysfunctions in the body — many of which are tied to the modern lifestyle we’ve come to accept as normal.

Lifestyle Contributions to Autoimmunity

Many things in our lives that we have control over significantly affect our predisposition to autoimmunity:

• Sleep — I have previously written about the profound importance of sleep and how many different illnesses are linked to poor sleep. In practice, we frequently find that patients with autoimmune conditions also have disrupted sleep cycles, and these improve once that is addressed (e.g., by improving sleep hygiene and avoiding blue light).

Note: The treatments for sleeping issues like insomnia are discussed further here.

• Sunlight — Since the sun has no commercial lobby to advocate for it, the medical field demonizes sunlight as a cause of cancer despite a deficiency of the sun and sunlight being tied to a wide range of medical conditions (including cancers) and making individuals 60% more likely to die.2

A loss of sunlight exposure is also tied to many autoimmune conditions (e.g., multiple sclerosis). As such, we frequently find autoimmune patients improve from resuming healthy sunlight exposures (likewise, I suspect this partly explains why ultraviolet blood irradiation benefits so many different autoimmune conditions).

Note: Appropriate sunlight exposure (e.g., going outside early in the morning and having the sunlight touch your face without being obstructed by glass) is also very helpful for reestablishing the circadian rhythm and restoring healthy sleep.

• Exercise — Many of the benefits of exercise arise from the fluid circulation it creates in the body (as fluid stagnation underlies many illnesses) — many of which we suffer from due to our sedentary lifestyle.

This perspective, in turn, is corroborated by the Chinese Medical viewpoint that blood stasis causes autoimmunity and that either treating blood stasis or zeta potential (which underlies both microclotting and lymphatic stagnation) frequently improves autoimmune conditions.3

Note: Exercise and eliminating fluid stagnation frequently improve insomnia. Likewise, sunlight exposure is a critical driver of fluid circulation throughout the body,4 all of which illustrates how intertwined many of the key lifestyle factors we routinely ignore are to our health.

• Diet — Food allergens such as wheat, dairy, and nightshades frequently contribute to autoimmune conditions (particularly arthritis), and many have found food elimination diets that identify the reactive allergen to improve their condition significantly.

Additionally, in many cases, allergies arise from deficient stomach acid, as without sufficient stomach acid, proteins are often not fully broken down (allowing intact allergens to enter circulation) and triggers acid reflux (due to top of the stomach only closing when sufficient stomach acid is present), which then irritates the lungs.

Note: Many of the issues with gluten (e.g., autoimmunity or weight gain) are not experienced in countries like Italy that use more natural forms of wheat.

• Stress — Is well known to predispose one to autoimmune disorders and flares (e.g., 80% of autoimmune patients report an unusually stressful situation prior to their disease onset,5 while stress disorders increased the risk of autoimmune disorders by 46% to 129%).6

Note: Some patients will not respond to a rheumatologic drug, until they eliminate the stress in their lives.

The Global Loss of Vitality

If you review the early history of medicine, it is striking:

• How profoundly damaging many of the early Allopathic remedies were (e.g., the smallpox vaccine or mercury).

• How much healthier people were and how much more effective many natural therapies were in the past than they are now.

This second point prompted me to ask older doctors (from various medical schools) if they had observed a general decline in human vitality in the patients they saw at the start of their careers compared to the end, and all of them shared that they had. Additionally:

• They noted that beyond patients becoming much sicker and having conditions they’d never seen before, it was also much harder to treat them as each therapy they used had shifted from making a dramatic improvement to a more minuscule one, which required numerous successive treatments to bring about an improvement.

• They typically attributed this shift to a loss in human vitality. They cited a variety of correlates (e.g., the average human body temperature dropping,7 people becoming less able to mount fevers, infants being less able to produce a brisk cry,8 or increasing degrees of fluid stagnation in their patients).

Note: Typically this decline in vitality proceeds in a linear fashion and then spikes at certain times (e.g., after the introduction of the smallpox vaccine, the 1986 law which granted immunity to vaccine manufacturers9 and led to a rapid proliferation in the vaccine schedule, and after the COVID vaccines).

In each case, this increase in disease gets normalized and forgotten by the next generation of doctors (who entered practice after the last wave of sickness had become the “new normal”).

Likewise, many datasets corroborate this steady decreasing vitality in humanity over the decades (e.g., we’ve witnessed a continual increase in autoimmune disorders).

Having extensively explored this topic, we believe much of it is due to modern technology (e.g., vaccines, chronic chemical exposures or heavy metal toxicity, dentistry and surgical scars, EMFs, and widespread circadian rhythm disruption). Many of these, in turn, share a common thread — creating fluid stagnation throughout the body.

Note: After thousands of years, around 1830, blood stasis suddenly came to be viewed as a primary cause of disease in Chinese Medicine,10 which occurred shortly after the smallpox vaccine (which caused many severe injuries resembling blood stasis), which was introduced in China in 1805.11

Systemic Suppression

One of the central criticisms of Allopathic medicine by natural schools of medicine has been that anytime an external agent is used to forcefully change a process which is unfolding within the body (rather than aiding the body’s ability to resolve it) you run the risk of a minor temporary issue being exchanged for a severe chronic one — especially when this is repeatedly done throughout the course of someone’s life.

In some cases, this risk is very justified (e.g., in a life-threatening emergency or with a relatively safe drug that has limited long-term complications). At the same time, however, a general unwillingness to acknowledge this issue pervades Allopathic medicine.

I’ve thus never forgotten a conference in the 1970s at which one of the world’s leading homeopaths convened a panel to discuss the likely consequences of modern medicine routinely suppressing symptoms (e.g., aggressively using fever suppressing medications or preventing childhood febrile illnesses with vaccination).

Note: Studies have repeatedly linked preventing measles, mumps, and chickenpox to severe cancers later in life.12

At that conference, building upon the recent mass introduction of suppressive steroids, they correctly predicted that if this suppression continued to increase, in the decades to follow:

• We would see a global shift from less severe illnesses to more severe ones.

• That this suppression would cause physical illnesses to be pushed deeper into the body and be replaced with psychiatric illnesses, and in time spiritual ones (particularly when the psychiatric illnesses were also suppressed with medications) — all of which would dovetail with people being willing to do crazier and crazier things.

Now, everyone has gradually become habituated to patients “just being” sicker and sicker, and that not much can be done about it.

Suppressive Antibiotics

While steroids are one of the medications most associated with “suppressing” illness, many others are too.13 For example, for years, many natural medicine practitioners (e.g., homeopaths) also told me they’d frequently seen antibiotics “treat” an acute infection but turn it into a chronic one. I wasn’t sure what to make of this (as microbiome disruption could partially but not fully explain it), then I discovered something similar existed in Chinese Medicine:14

“The concept of Latent Heat is very old in Chinese medicine, having been mentioned for the first time in the ‘Yellow Emperor’s Classic of Internal Medicine’.

Latent Heat occurs when an external pathogenic factor penetrates the body without causing apparent symptoms at the time; the pathogenic factor penetrates into the Interior, and ‘incubates’ there, turning into interior Heat. This Heat later emerges with acute symptoms of Heat: when it emerges, it is called Latent Heat.”

Note: In modern Chinese Medicine, antibiotics15 and vaccines16 are now proposed as sources of Latent Heat.

Much later, when I read “Cell Wall Deficient Forms: Stealth Pathogens” all of this finally made sense.17 This book argued that when bacteria are exposed to lethal stressors, particularly cell wall destroying antibiotics, while most will die, some will instead enter a primitive survival mode and transform into misshapen cell wall deficient (CWD) “mycoplasma like” bacteria which can radically change their size or morphology (and hence look very different).

While these bacteria are hard to detect (and when seen, due to no one knowing they “exist,” are often mistaken for cellular debris and ignored), with the correct techniques they can be detected. In turn, the book provides a wealth of evidence that CWD bacteria:18

• Are found within many “aseptic” tissues undergoing an autoimmune attack, with specific CWD bacteria associated with many different autoimmune disorders which have no known cause.

• Once the environment is “safe” they can transform back into their normal form and cause a sudden recurrence of an infection — suggesting chronic infections are due to antibiotics creating a dormant CWD population rather than continual reinfection.

Note: Many popular alternative schools of medicine (e.g., those of Rife,19 Naessens,20 and Enderlein)21 came from microscopes which could directly observe these pleomorphic bacteria continually shifting into new morphologies, and that diseases states (e.g., cancer) correlated to specific morphologies, while other morphologies resulted in a symbiotic state of health.

Since the morphologies adopted correlated with the internal state of the body, this gave rise to the belief that treatments should aim to create “healthy terrains” within the body, which would give rise to non-pathogenic forms of the bacteria rather than antibiotics that provoked pathogen transformation.

Addressing Autoimmune Diseases

When autoimmune disorders are treated in conventional practice, we feel five errors repeatedly occur:

1. Frequently, autoimmune disorders have a cause (e.g., a chronic infection) that goes unrecognized, resulting in powerful immune-suppressing drugs being used instead, while the underlying issue progresses.

2. In many cases, lifestyle factors significantly exacerbate autoimmune conditions. If these factors were focused on, the symptoms of the autoimmune condition would significantly reduce, and the amount of medication required to manage the condition in tandem would as well.

3. Those lifestyle factors (e.g., diet) can also prevent conventional treatments from working. Because of that, in many cases where a medication that “should work” but does not, focusing on the unaddressed lifestyle factors for a patient is often what’s needed for a remission.

Unfortunately, in those instances, rather than the doctor taking a step back and asking, “What am I missing here,” the reflex often is to simply give more immune-suppressing medications. In short, if a patient has been on multiple potent rheumatologic drugs, something important was most likely missed.

4. As many of the safer autoimmune drugs with the best risk to benefit ratio are relatively new, most doctors in practice are not aware they exist (e.g., that side-effect free alternatives to methotrexate exist) or that they can be used to treat many challenging issues in rheumatology (e.g., corticosteroid pills suppressing endogenous steroid production or large rheumatoid nodules).

As such, drugs that should not be used for extended periods (e.g., steroids and NSAIDs) are instead frequently the mainstay of treatment.

Note: In some cases (e.g., for a dangerous and rapidly progressing autoimmune disease or in instances where it is not feasible for a patient to implement a natural treatment plan), immune-suppressing medications, even with their side effects, are necessary.

5. Many highly effective non-standard treatments for autoimmune conditions remain fairly unknown despite extensive scientific evidence demonstrating their efficacy (e.g., ultraviolet blood irradiation or DMSO). Likewise, since there are so many natural therapies for autoimmune conditions, it’s often so difficult to sort out which work that they all get cast under the same umbrella and ignored.

Note: Many of those therapies are both anti-inflammatory and highly effective at treating mycoplasma bacteria.

Because of these issues, the management of autoimmune conditions remains less than satisfactory for many patients — which is particularly unfortunate given that these conditions are becoming increasingly common (e.g., extensive evidence ties increasing vaccination to autoimmunity).

Conclusion

Since our medical system focuses on treating isolated symptoms with patentable pharmaceuticals rather than attempting to identify the root cause of a permanent illness, patients suffer, particularly those with chronic disorders.

In this regard, autoimmune diseases are particularly unfortunate as they force patients to choose between having a debilitating and sometimes fatal illness or a lifetime of fairly toxic immune-suppressing drugs (e.g., steroids have a wide range of severe side effects, particularly when used systemically for a prolonged period).

But here’s the hopeful part: when we start looking at the body as a whole system and work to restore its natural balance — whether through better sleep, movement, diet, or managing stress — people often feel dramatically better.

Healing isn’t always fast or easy, but it’s absolutely possible when we stop chasing symptoms and start supporting the body’s own wisdom. Likewise, while very little focus is given in mainstream medicine for producing safe treatments for autoimmunity or arthritis, many natural treatments have been developed (such as DMSO) which no longer force patients to accept a lifetime of toxic therapies to survive and be free of pain.

Author’s Note: This is an abridged version of a longer article which goes into more detail on the safest natural and conventional treatments for autoimmune disorders and musculoskeletal disorders like arthritis, the dangers of steroids and the ways to safely utilize or withdraw from steroids. That article can be read here.

A Note from Dr. Mercola About the Author

A Midwestern Doctor (AMD) is a board-certified physician from the Midwest and a longtime reader of Mercola.com. I appreciate AMD’s exceptional insight on a wide range of topics and am grateful to share it. I also respect AMD’s desire to remain anonymous since AMD is still on the front lines treating patients. To find more of AMD’s work, be sure to check out The Forgotten Side of Medicine on Substack.

Type 2 diabetes, marked by chronically high blood sugar, along with excessive thirst, frequent urination, fatigue, and blurred vision, affects hundreds of millions of people worldwide. For decades, the strategy for managing it has been essentially reactive: wait for blood sugar to climb, then work to bring it back down. A study published in Food Research International suggests that with a fiber-focused approach, when you start may matter as much as the change itself.1

The researchers worked with adults who had only recently learned they had the disease, before any medication entered the picture, and put a high-fiber nutritional program up against conventional care. What they observed points to a narrow window in the weeks and months following diagnosis, a stretch when the body appears unusually willing to change course. Starting the fiber intervention within that window, the gains seem to stick. Waiting past it, the same effort later may not carry the same weight.

That early responsiveness appears to begin in the gut. The fiber that improved participants’ blood sugar also reshaped the community of microbes living in their digestive tract, and the two shifts tracked closely together, pointing to a mechanism that has less to do with willpower or weight than with the conditions taking shape inside the gut in those first weeks.

Early Fiber Therapy Was Linked to a Reshaped Gut and Improved Blood Sugar

The study examined 34 newly diagnosed overweight or obese adults with Type 2 diabetes who had not yet started diabetes medications. Researchers wanted to determine whether a high-fiber nutritional therapy program delivered immediately after diagnosis produced better results than waiting and using conventional treatment first.

The intervention combined a seven-day very-low-calorie, high-fiber meal replacement phase with a 23-day maintenance phase and was repeated over a 90-day treatment period. The central question was simple: Does acting quickly after diagnosis create an advantage that lasts?

• The participants who started with fiber achieved the strongest results — Patients who received the high-fiber intervention first experienced substantially greater improvements in blood sugar control than those who started with conventional care. HbA1c, a marker that reflects average blood sugar levels over roughly three months, showed a substantially greater improvement in the early high-fiber group than in the conventional-treatment group.

Researchers reported a 9.45% relative reduction from baseline, compared to a 1.44% relative reduction with conventional care. Fasting blood sugar also improved substantially more in the high-fiber group. These findings suggest that the period immediately after diagnosis represents an important opportunity to influence the course of the disease.*

• Early improvements were linked to a lasting advantage — Those who started with the high-fiber program retained many of their metabolic gains even after crossing over to conventional care. In contrast, participants who began with conventional treatment failed to achieve the same level of improvement after later switching to the fiber intervention.*

Think of it like making a major correction early on a road trip instead of waiting until you’re hundreds of miles off course. The earlier correction required less effort and produced a better final outcome. According to the researchers, the timing of the intervention appeared to be just as important as the intervention itself.

• Weight loss alone didn’t explain the results — It’s easy to assume that improvements in Type 2 diabetes occur only because of weight loss. This study tells a more nuanced story.

Although participants experienced reductions in body weight and body fat, the most significant differences between groups appeared in blood sugar measurements rather than body mass index or HOMA-IR, which stands for Homeostatic Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance, a calculation commonly used to estimate how resistant your body has become to insulin.*

This finding suggests that factors beyond simple weight reduction contributed to the metabolic improvements researchers observed.
• The gut microbiome shifted in a healthier direction — Researchers analyzed the participants’ gut bacteria and found substantial changes after the high-fiber intervention. Several beneficial bacterial groups increased, including Akkermansia muciniphila, Roseburia, Blautia, Oscillospira, and members of the Eubacterium ruminantium group. These microbes are known for producing short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs), substances created when gut bacteria break down fermentable carbohydrates.*

At the same time, levels of Escherichia-Shigella, a bacterial group associated with inflammation and metabolic dysfunction, declined. Participants whose microbiomes shifted the most also tended to experience stronger improvements in blood sugar regulation.

• The study points to a possible chain of cause and effect — The high-fiber program shifted the gut toward bacteria that produce SCFAs, and those compounds appear to do real metabolic work — that may help prompt the gut to release GLP-1 (the same hormone that newer diabetes drugs imitate), support the gut barrier, and calm the low-grade inflammation associated with insulin resistance.

These specific downstream effects were not directly measured in the cited trial and represent a proposed mechanism rather than a confirmed finding. SCFAs help support communication between the gut and the rest of the body, influence how nutrients are processed, and contribute to healthier metabolic function.

Researchers concluded that the intervention enriched beneficial bacteria while suppressing lipopolysaccharide-producing microbes. Lipopolysaccharides, often abbreviated as LPS, are inflammatory compounds produced by certain bacteria. By shifting the microbiome toward more favorable species early on, the intervention appeared to help create conditions that supported healthier blood sugar control.

*These findings are from research conducted in a clinical human trial. Results may not apply to all individuals.

The Window When Your Body May Respond Best

The biggest lesson from this research isn’t simply that fiber helps. It’s that timing matters. The participants who achieved the best results acted early, before years of metabolic dysfunction accumulated. If your blood sugar numbers are climbing or you’ve recently received a Type 2 diabetes diagnosis, focusing on the health of your gut ecosystem may help address one of the underlying contributors to poor glucose control.

A healthy microbiome naturally produces SCFAs, including butyrate, which is one reason rebuilding your gut environment deserves more attention than any supplement.

If you’ve been diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes, make these changes in partnership with your doctor, not instead of medical care. Do not start, stop, or adjust any diabetes medication on your own, and if you’re on glucose-lowering drugs, work with your doctor to monitor your blood sugar as your diet changes, since the combination can lower it too far.

1. Rebuild your microbiome — Your body is designed to produce SCFAs like butyrate through beneficial gut bacteria. If your digestion is relatively healthy, start with fermented foods such as sauerkraut, kimchi, kefir, and full-fat yogurt. These foods help increase microbial diversity and provide compounds that support bacteria involved in butyrate production.

Grass fed butter, ghee, and aged cheeses also contain small amounts of butyric acid, an SCFA that serves as a primary fuel source for the cells lining your colon and helps support gut barrier function.

Introduce these foods gradually and pay attention to how you respond. If years of digestive problems, repeated antibiotic use, or chronic inflammation have disrupted your gut, a butyrate supplement may serve as a temporary bridge while you restore a healthier microbiome. If you choose a supplement, you may want to look for one formulated to deliver butyrate throughout the colon rather than releasing it early in digestion.

2. Repair your gut before increasing fiber — Many people assume more fiber is always better. In reality, fiber tends to work best when your gut environment is ready for it. If you experience bloating, erratic bowel habits, food sensitivities, or fatigue after meals, loading up on beans, raw vegetables, and whole grains often makes symptoms worse. In an irritated gut, fermentable fiber feeds bacteria that release LPS, an inflammatory endotoxin.

Think of LPS as a chemical alarm signal released when certain bacteria break apart. When your gut barrier is weakened, those inflammatory compounds move into your bloodstream and increase systemic stress. Start with easier-to-digest foods such as whole fruit and white rice while your gut stabilizes.

3. Increase fiber in stages instead of all at once — As digestion improves and bloating becomes less frequent, begin introducing foods that nourish butyrate-producing bacteria. Start with resistant starch sources such as cooked-and-cooled potatoes and green bananas. Next, add foods such as onions, garlic, and leeks. Root vegetables generally come before non-starchy vegetables, followed by starchy vegetables such as squash and sweet potatoes.

Beans, legumes, and minimally processed whole grains belong later in the process. Most adults function best with roughly 250 grams of carbohydrates daily, which helps support cellular energy production, gut repair, and microbial diversity.

Progress slowly. Diversity matters more than speed because different foods nourish different beneficial microbes.

4. Remove seed oils that work against gut repair — If your meals regularly contain seed oils like soybean, corn, canola, safflower, cottonseed, or sunflower oil, you’re creating conditions that make gut recovery more difficult. These oils are rich in linoleic acid (LA), which disrupts mitochondrial energy production and weakens the intestinal barrier when consumed in excess.

Many packaged snacks, restaurant foods, dressings, sauces, and convenience meals contain these oils. Replace them with more stable fats such as grass fed butter, ghee, and tallow. A healthier gut barrier helps beneficial bacteria thrive, improves fiber tolerance, and creates a stronger foundation for metabolic health.

5. Measure insulin resistance with the HOMA-IR test — Long before blood sugar reaches diabetic levels, insulin resistance damages blood vessels, promotes inflammation, and impairs energy production. The HOMA-IR test is a valuable diagnostic tool that helps assess insulin resistance through a simple blood test, so you can spot issues early and make necessary lifestyle changes.

Created in 1985, it calculates the relationship between your fasting glucose and insulin levels to evaluate how effectively your body uses insulin. Unlike other more complex tests, HOMA-IR requires just one fasting blood sample, making it both practical and accessible. The HOMA-IR formula is as follows:

HOMA-IR = (Fasting Glucose x Fasting Insulin) / 405, where

• Fasting glucose is measured in mg/dL
• Fasting insulin is measured in μIU/mL (microinternational units per milliliter)
• 405 is a constant that normalizes the values

If you’re using mmol/L for glucose instead of mg/dL, the formula changes slightly:

HOMA-IR = (Fasting Glucose x Fasting Insulin) / 22.5, where

• Fasting glucose is measured in mmol/L
• Fasting insulin is measured in μIU/mL
• 22.5 is the normalizing factor for this unit of measurement

Anything below 1.0 is considered a healthy HOMA-IR score. If you’re above that, you’re considered insulin resistant. The higher your values, the greater your insulin resistance. Conversely the lower your HOMA-IR score, the less insulin resistance you have, assuming you are not a Type 1 diabetic who makes no insulin.

Interestingly, my personal HOMA-IR score stands at a low 0.2. This low score is a testament to my body’s enhanced efficiency in burning fuel, a result of increased glucose availability. By incorporating additional carbohydrates into my diet, I provided my cells with the necessary energy to operate more effectively.

This improved cellular function has significantly boosted my metabolic health, which I believe reflects how strategic dietary adjustments may support better insulin sensitivity and overall metabolic performance.

Note: Talk to your healthcare provider about whether HOMA-IR or other insulin-resistance testing is appropriate for you.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Consult a qualified healthcare provider before making changes to your health regimen.

FAQs About Early Fiber Intake and Diabetes

Q: Why did the high-fiber group achieve better blood sugar control than the conventional treatment group?
A: The researchers found that participants who started the high-fiber nutritional program immediately after diagnosis experienced larger reductions in both HbA1c and fasting blood sugar. The intervention also changed the composition of their gut microbiome, increasing beneficial bacteria linked to healthier glucose regulation.

Q: Why did the timing of the intervention matter so much?
A: Participants who received the fiber-based program first maintained many of their metabolic improvements even after switching to conventional care. Those who delayed the intervention didn’t achieve the same degree of recovery later, suggesting that the weeks and months immediately after diagnosis represent an important opportunity to influence the disease’s trajectory.

Q: What role does my gut microbiome play in blood sugar control?
A: Certain gut bacteria produce SCFAs such as butyrate, which may help support gut barrier function, metabolic health, and communication between the digestive system and the rest of your body. The study found that increases in these beneficial bacteria closely tracked with improvements in blood sugar regulation.

Q: Why do some people feel worse when they suddenly increase fiber intake?
A: If your gut barrier is already compromised, large amounts of fermentable fiber often feed undesirable bacteria and increase digestive symptoms such as bloating, gas, and discomfort. Improving gut health first and then increasing fiber gradually allows beneficial microbes to grow without creating excessive digestive stress.

Q: What is the HOMA-IR test, and why is it important?
A: HOMA-IR uses fasting glucose and fasting insulin levels to estimate how effectively your body responds to insulin. Because insulin resistance often develops years before Type 2 diabetes is diagnosed, HOMA-IR helps identify metabolic problems early, when lifestyle changes are often most effective.

Test Your Knowledge with Today’s Quiz!
Take today’s quiz to see how much you’ve learned from yesterday’s Mercola.com article.

Quetiapine is approved to treat which conditions?

Bipolar disorder and schizophrenia
Quetiapine is approved for bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, although it is also commonly prescribed off-label for sleep problems. Learn more.
Anxiety and panic disorder
Insomnia and sleep apnea
Depression and memory loss

Editor’s Note: This article is a reprint. It was originally published May 31, 2025.

More people are taking antidepressants than ever before — often for years, sometimes for life. If you’re one of them, you’ve likely been told they’re safe, effective, and essential for your mental health. But there’s a growing body of evidence suggesting long-term use increases your risk of something far more dangerous than the symptoms you’re trying to manage — sudden cardiac death.

Sudden cardiac death is a fast and fatal collapse that often happens with no warning signs. While it’s more common in older adults, it’s not limited to them. In younger adults, sudden cardiac death is usually tied to electrical malfunctions or a thickened heart muscle. In older adults, it’s most often the result of narrowed arteries. Either way, the outcome is the same: a person collapses and dies within minutes, often with no time for intervention.

However, the risk profile is shifting, and some of that shift appears to be tied to medications millions rely on every day. If you’re taking antidepressants, this information could save your life. Because once you understand the risks that come with long-term antidepressant use, you can start taking steps to protect your heart and improve your mental health at the same time.

Longer Antidepressant Use Sharply Increases Your Risk of Dying from a Heart Event

Research presented at the 2025 European Heart Rhythm Association annual meeting examined how antidepressant medications are linked to fatal heart events.1 For the study, researchers reviewed the death records of every adult aged 18 to 90 living in Denmark in 2010.

Out of 45,701 total deaths recorded, 6,002 were confirmed as sudden cardiac deaths. The researchers wanted to know: were people taking antidepressants more likely to die this way? The short answer is yes — and the longer they took the drugs, the higher their risk climbed.

• Researchers specifically looked at antidepressant exposure over time — People were considered “exposed” to antidepressants if they had filled at least two prescriptions within one year, at any point during the 12 years leading up to the study. That exposure was then divided into two categories: short-term (one to five years) and long-term (six or more years).

• Risk increased the longer people stayed on antidepressants — Compared to people who had never used these drugs, those on antidepressants for one to five years had a 56% higher risk of sudden cardiac death.

But the danger didn’t plateau. It escalated. Individuals who had been on antidepressants for six or more years had more than double the risk of sudden cardiac death — specifically, a 2.2 times greater likelihood of dying suddenly from heart-related causes.

Younger Adults Face Even Steeper Risk Than Older Users

This wasn’t just a problem for older adults. Among those aged 30 to 39, people who used antidepressants for one to five years were three times more likely to die from sudden cardiac death. If they had been using antidepressants for six or more years, their risk jumped to five times higher than unexposed peers. In people aged 50 to 59, the risk doubled after one to five years of use, and quadrupled after six or more years.

• Risk levels were lower but still elevated in people over 70 — In those aged 70 to 79, taking antidepressants for one to five years was associated with an 83% increase in sudden cardiac death risk. With six or more years of use, the risk rose to 2.2 times higher than in people not using antidepressants.

Interestingly, for the youngest group (18 to 29) and the oldest group (80 and up), the data didn’t show a statistically significant increase, though the sample size may have been too small to detect it.

• The study showed a clear dose-response relationship with time — The longer you stay on antidepressants, the more likely you are to die suddenly from a heart-related cause. For instance, in people aged 40 to 49, those with six or more years of use had a 70% higher risk compared to those with one to five years. The pattern continued:

◦ 50 to 59 years old — 100% increased risk
◦ 60 to 69 years old — 40% higher risk
◦ 70 to 79 years old — 20% higher risk

• Biological and behavioral factors are driving this connection — Study co-author Dr. Jasmin Mujkanovic from Copenhagen University Hospital explained that there are multiple possible reasons for the higher risk. One factor is direct drug effects. Some antidepressants alter how electrical signals travel through your heart, which could trigger fatal rhythm disturbances.

Another possibility is that antidepressant use is a marker of more severe psychiatric illness, which itself is known to increase cardiovascular risks. Depression is also linked to delayed medical care, unhealthy behaviors, and poor heart health.

• Heart rhythm disruption is a likely mechanism of action — Many antidepressants, especially selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), affect ion channels in the heart.

These ion channels control how electrical impulses flow, which tells your heart when to beat. When these signals are disturbed, your heart slips into an abnormal rhythm known as arrhythmia. Some arrhythmias lead to sudden death if not corrected within minutes.

Antidepressants Don’t Work for Most People

Antidepressants are still handed out as a first-line treatment for everything from sadness to burnout, despite growing evidence that they rarely address the actual cause of these problems.

If you’re someone who’s been prescribed one, odds are you weren’t diagnosed with a severe mental illness like schizophrenia or psychosis. Instead, you’re likely dealing with grief, anxiety or general low mood — common human experiences that often signal deeper physical or emotional imbalances.

• Symptoms like sadness or anxiety are your body’s way of signaling that something needs attention — Feeling emotionally low isn’t always a disorder. It’s often a sign your system is under stress. You could be low in important nutrients or getting too little sunlight or too much blue light.

You could also be disconnected from your purpose, your relationships, or your body. In any of these cases, masking the symptoms with medication ignores the deeper message — and leaves the root problem untouched.

• Two-thirds of people taking antidepressants don’t get any real benefit — Even though antidepressants are routinely offered as the go-to solution for depression, the success rate is low. About 66% of people prescribed these medications do not experience meaningful symptom relief.2 And for many, the side effects — like increased risk of Type 2 diabetes,3 dementia,4 and even suicide — are worse than the symptoms they started with.

• A 2022 review showed antidepressants only work for a tiny group of people — Researchers from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) conducted the largest-ever review of antidepressant studies.5

They analyzed data from 232 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials submitted to the FDA between 1979 and 2016, including unpublished trials that drug companies never released. In total, the data covered 73,388 patients with diagnosed depression.

• Only 15% of patients benefited beyond the placebo effect — The analysis found that antidepressants outperformed placebo in just 15% of patients. That benefit was almost entirely limited to people with the most severe forms of depression. For everyone else, the improvement they felt was likely due to belief and expectation, not the drug itself.

How to Begin Tapering Off Antidepressants Safely

If you’re on an antidepressant and you’re ready to stop, don’t do it alone. Your first step is to get your prescribing doctor on board. But if they’re dismissive or untrained in tapering protocols, look for someone who takes a more biologically informed approach.

The American College for Advancement in Medicine (www.acam.org) has a referral list of physicians who combine conventional training with nutritional and metabolic insight. A holistic psychiatrist can guide you through the process and offer alternatives that support your brain, not just medicate it.

• Use trusted resources to educate yourself and plan a slow taper — You need a clear strategy. That’s where books like “Psychiatric Drug Withdrawal: A Guide for Prescribers, Therapists, Patients and Their Families” by Dr. Peter Breggin and “The Antidepressant Solution: A Step-by-Step Guide to Overcoming Antidepressant Withdrawal, Dependence, and Addiction” by Dr. Joseph Glenmullen come in.

These guides walk you through the process, explain what to expect, and offer real-life strategies to manage symptoms. The goal is to support your nervous system during the transition so you don’t rebound or crash. Once you’ve got the right support in place, taper gradually. Your doctor should know the safest dosing schedule based on your medication.

• Help loved ones build momentum when they can’t do it alone — If you have a friend or family member struggling with depression, the best thing you can do is show up — literally. Invite them outside. Offer to cook. Take a walk together. Depression makes basic decisions feel overwhelming. But the presence of another person, especially someone gently nudging them toward light, movement, and connection, is often enough to change the trajectory of their day.

• In a true crisis, act fast and get help immediately — If you’re in a place where you’re not just sad but desperate — or thinking about ending your life — this isn’t the moment to map out a supplement plan or search for a new doctor. You need to get to safety first. Call the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline or 1-800-273-TALK (8255), or head straight to your nearest emergency room. Stabilize now. The healing comes after.

Strategies for Depression That Actually Work

If you’re on antidepressants now, you don’t have to stay there forever. If you’re looking for safe, effective ways to support your mental health, without adding to your heart risk, there are many science-backed strategies worth trying. These methods support your mood at the root level by stabilizing nervous system function, reducing inflammation, nourishing your brain, and restoring biological balance. Here’s how to take action:

1. Move your body in ways that support your brain:

• Exercise does more than burn calories; it builds mental resilience — Aerobic movement, even at moderate levels like walking, helps your brain produce calming neurotransmitters like GABA while also increasing dopamine, and norepinephrine, all of which are linked to improved mood and emotional stability.

• You don’t need to go hard to see results — Research has shown that even gentle practices like yoga are effective. One study found that 90-minute yoga sessions three times a week cut major depression symptoms in half.6

2. Adjust your diet to reduce inflammation and stabilize mood:

• Inflammation makes everything worse, including your mental health — Begin by identifying and removing personal food triggers. If you’re sensitive to gluten or lectins, removing them from your diet may make a significant difference. A whole food diet that limits linoleic acid (LA) in vegetable oils to 5 grams a day or less also supports your mitochondria for long-term energy and resilience.

• Refined sugar directly impacts your mood — In one study, men consuming over 67 grams of sugar per day were 23% more likely to develop anxiety or depression than those consuming under 40 grams.7 While natural fructose in whole fruit is not a problem, processed fructose, like high-fructose corn syrup, should be avoided.

Nutrients to prioritize:

• B vitamins, especially folate (B9) and B12, which play a direct role in brain chemistry.

• Magnesium, which has been found to improve symptoms in people with depression.8 I favor magnesium glycinate and magnesium malate, as they’re well-absorbed and easy on the digestive system.

3. Get real sunlight, not just vitamin D pills:

• Low vitamin D levels are strongly tied to depression9 — Sensible sun exposure is your best source of vitamin D and also boosts melatonin production in your mitochondria and enhances circadian rhythms.

Be aware that if you’ve been eating vegetable oils, your skin is full of fragile fats that oxidize in the sun, raising your sunburn risk. So, it’s best to avoid direct sunlight during peak hours (10 a.m. to 4 p.m.) until you’ve cut back on LA for at least six months.

• Supplement only if needed — Use a vitamin D blood test to confirm your levels are in the optimal range of 60 to 80 ng/mL. If you can’t get enough vitamin D from sun exposure alone, then consider a vitamin D3 supplement.

4. Use tools that regulate your nervous system without side effects:

• Light therapy has been shown to be more effective than Prozac in treating moderate to severe depression.10 Spending time in natural daylight is free and often more powerful than artificial lightboxes.

• Gut health is directly tied to mood. Optimizing your gut microbiome supports the production of calming brain chemicals like GABA. Simple dietary changes support gut health, including proper carbohydrate intake (250 grams daily), increasing fiber gradually if your gut is healthy, and avoiding processed foods and vegetable oils.

• EFT (Emotional Freedom Techniques) is a practical self-help tool. It combines tapping on acupressure points with verbal affirmations and has been shown to reduce anxiety and depression symptoms. You can learn this at home without needing a specialist.

5. Clean up your environment and reset your nervous system:

• Minimize EMF exposure — Wireless devices like phones, tablets, and Wi-Fi routers increase free radical production and neurotransmitter imbalances by overstimulating calcium channels in your brain. Simple fixes like turning off Wi-Fi at night, using airplane mode on your phone, and keeping devices out of your bedroom go a long way.

• Improve sleep quality — Poor sleep raises cortisol and damages mental health. If you’re struggling to fall asleep or stay asleep, use these 50 tips for a better night’s rest.

• Train your mind with visualization and cognitive behavioral tools — Guided imagery and cognitive behavioral therapy have all shown benefits in shifting thought patterns that contribute to low mood.

• Don’t ignore low cholesterol — Brain serotonin receptors are made of cholesterol. If your levels are too low, it could be impairing your ability to regulate mood and suppress aggression. Low cholesterol is linked to increased suicide risk for this reason.

These strategies are not add-ons — they’re replacements. Every one of these tools moves your body toward better function and away from the kind of imbalance that puts stress on your heart and brain. If antidepressants have failed you, or you’re ready to build a healthier life from the ground up, this is where you start.

FAQs About Antidepressants and Sudden Cardiac Death

Q: Does taking antidepressants really increase the risk of sudden cardiac death?

A: Yes. A large study presented at the 2025 European Heart Rhythm Association meeting found that long-term antidepressant use is strongly associated with a higher risk of sudden cardiac death. The risk increased by 56% for those who had taken antidepressants for one to five years, and more than doubled for those with six or more years of use. The longer the use, the greater the risk — especially in adults under 60.

Q: Who is most at risk for heart complications from antidepressants?

A: Adults between the ages of 30 and 59 face the greatest increase in risk. For example, people aged 30 to 39 who used antidepressants for six or more years had a fivefold increase in sudden cardiac death risk compared to those who never used them. While risk is elevated across most age groups, it’s especially high in midlife.

Q: Do antidepressants actually work for depression?

A: In most cases, no. According to the largest-ever review of antidepressant clinical trials — covering 232 studies and over 73,000 patients — only 15% of users experienced a benefit beyond placebo. The drugs showed noticeable effects almost exclusively in people with the most severe depression. For the majority, the perceived improvement comes from the placebo effect, not the drug itself.

Q: How can I safely taper off antidepressants if I’ve been on them for a long time?

A: Start by working with a prescriber trained in tapering protocols, ideally a holistic or integrative practitioner. Lower your dose gradually to reduce withdrawal symptoms. Nutritional support, such as B vitamins and magnesium, helps stabilize your nervous system during this process.

Q: What are safer, natural alternatives for managing depression?

A: Effective strategies include daily movement, circadian rhythm alignment through morning sunlight, dietary changes to reduce inflammation, and tools like light therapy, EFT (tapping), and guided visualization. Supporting gut health, reducing EMF exposure, improving sleep quality, and checking for low cholesterol or nutrient deficiencies are also key steps in addressing depression without adding cardiovascular risk.

Prior to the COVID-19 vaccines being released, many concerns were raised about these experimental gene therapies, including their potential for causing infertility, autoimmune diseases, and cancer (e.g., many of the theoretical autoimmune issues were summarized by Stefanie Seneff shortly after the vaccines hit the market1).

So, when Pfizer’s regulatory submission to Europe’s FDA (the EMA) was leaked on December 9, 2020,2 I read through it in detail and discovered that Pfizer simply had been allowed to exempt itself from testing the vaccine for the above three key issues (despite that testing being required for gene therapies). Pfizer concluded their best option was to simply claim plausible deniability by insisting they “didn’t know” their vaccines would do all of that (because they’d “never” tested for them).

Regrettably, due to the religious fervor surrounding the vaccine (e.g., that it would rescue us from the lockdowns and return everything to normal), my arguments to wait on the vaccine largely fell on deaf ears with my colleagues and instead, excuse after excuse was made to dismiss the highly unusual and severe complications our patients kept developing immediately after vaccination (e.g., “there’s no evidence for this”).

Before long, people I knew around the country began contacting me with severe complications following the vaccination (e.g., dying suddenly or an elderly relative rapidly progressing into dementia) to ask if it could be linked to the vaccine.
Hating that there was nothing at all I could do to stop this (I felt like an ant in front of a tsunami), I then decided I needed to document all of them so that I’d at least have some type of “evidence” I could show my skeptical colleagues (as I knew the medical journals would never allow vaccine injury datasets to be published).

In the process of doing that, I came across numerous cases of cancers rapidly developing (or dormant ones that had been in remission for years coming back) immediately following COVID vaccination, including numerous unusual cases that strongly argued the two were linked. Before long, more and more people noticed similar things, and the notion of COVID-19 “turbo cancers” entered the cultural lexicon.
Since that time, the medical orthodoxy has denied that this is an issue, but more and more datasets are emerging showing it is.

Scott Adams

When Trump ran for office in 2016, initially very few people believed Trump could win (e.g., this was shown in the political betting markets). However, Dilbert’s author Scott Adams did, and rapidly built a large online following by highlighting how his training as a hypnotist allowed him to recognize that Trump was the most politically persuasive candidate and hence, Scott hypothesized, was favored to win.

As such, once Trump won, Scott pivoted to using that same lens (how persuasion shapes political events) to become a pundit on a variety of other current issues. During that process, Scott Adams made the controversial decision early on to endorse the COVID vaccine to his followers and to vaccinate.

Note: I know of multiple other instances where individuals who were long considered “experts in propaganda” made the decision to get the COVID vaccine — something which I view as a testament to just how effectively the vaccine was marketed.

Later, in January 2023, to his great credit, Scott posted a video essentially admitting he was wrong and the anti-vaxxers ended up being entirely correct.3 Then, on May 19, 2025, Scott Adams disclosed to his audience that he had terminal metastatic prostate cancer, vulnerably shared that he planned to utilize California’s medically assisted dying in the near future to reduce his suffering.

Scott eventually tried a variety of cutting-edge conventional therapies recommended by top oncologists and, among other things, had the Trump administration directly intervene on his behalf with Kaiser when his access was abruptly cut off (highlighting the challenges patients without connections routinely face in the medical system). Nonetheless, nothing worked, and he gradually became weaker and weaker until he said his final goodbyes to his followers and passed away at home on January 13, 2026.

Changing Relations with Death

“People are so afraid to die that they never begin to live.” — Henry Van Dyke

In 1976, Ivan Illich published Medical Nemesis, which critiqued the medical system and predicted many of the issues which emerged in the decades that followed. One key theme was that through the medical profession’s marketing, our cultural conception of death evolved from an intimate, lifelong companion we had no separation from to a feared, medicalized entity to be conquered by doctors with death being defined by the cessation of brain waves.4

Note: As I show here, the modern criterion for death is quite dubious, existing to support organ donations and eliminate the long-term costs of treating vegetative patients.

Illich astutely argued that this medicalization, driven by the medical profession’s growing control, stripped individuals of autonomy, turned death into a commodity, and reinforced social control through compulsory care. He also argued that this Western death image had been exported globally, supplanting traditional dying practices and contributing to societal dysfunction by alienating people from their own mortality.

Medicalized Death

Presently, one of the most common settings for death in America is within the hospital. This however is controversial as:

• End of life care is invasive and uncomfortable (e.g., CPR often breaks ribs).
• End of life care is frequently futile.
• End of life care constitutes one of the largest medical expenses in the country.
• Many individuals do not want to let their loved ones go and hence insist upon fighting for more medical care.
• Restricting end of life care is seen as the government choosing to execute people to save money.
• Doctors who administer end of life care frequently refuse it for themselves.

For example, to quote a 2016 article in Time:5

“Doctors spend more of their lives in hospitals than anyone else. But when it comes to deciding where to die, they’re less likely than the rest of us to choose a medical facility, according to new research published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.”6

Note: Another 2016 study found 27.9% of physicians vs. 32% of the general population chose to die in hospitals, and during the last six months of life physicians were less likely to have surgery (25.1% vs. 27.4%) and less likely to be admitted to the ICU (25.8% vs. 27.6%).7

Likewise, a viral 2011 essay highlighted that doctors preferred to die at home with less invasive therapies.8

“Of course, doctors don’t want to die; they want to live. But they know enough about modern medicine to know its limits. And they know enough about death to know what all people fear most: dying in pain, and dying alone. They’ve talked about this with their families.

They want to be sure, when the time comes, that no heroic measures will happen — that they will never experience, during their last moments on earth, someone breaking their ribs in an attempt to resuscitate them with CPR (that’s what happens if CPR is done right).”

Note: Many patients do not know that the overall survival rate with hospital resuscitation is around 23% to 25%, making it typically futile (while outside the hospital CPR hovers closer to 10%).

Our society has essentially put doctors into the role priests once occupied, but without the training that role typically requires. Doctors hence are frequently sought out for consultations on life and death despite not being spiritually prepared for that responsibility — which inevitably leads to issues arising. In turn, I and colleagues strongly feel:

• Medicalized deaths should be avoided.
• A case can be made hijacking the dying process is one of the most detrimental things medicine has done to humanity.
• In most cases, dying at home is ideal.

Furthermore, in many cases, hospital care is “futile” because incorrect therapies are being utilized, and modern financial incentives are set so that doctors are not sufficiently trained or supported in bringing sick patients back to health (discussed here).

Note: A major reason I am working so hard to build a robust case for and interest in forgotten therapies like ultraviolet blood irradiation and DMSO is that these therapies can radically improve hospital outcomes (e.g., UVBI frequently cures life threatening infections that do not respond to conventional treatments, while DMSO cures severe neurological injuries like strokes and traumatic brain injuries medicine has struggled with for decades — to the point dozens of readers have now shared DMSO with me saved them from a stroke and the life of “inevitable” disability that would have followed).

Fortunately, there has been some progress in this area, and the percentage of American deaths in hospitals has gradually decreased9 while hospice care has become more widely available. Unfortunately, this has dovetailed with medically assisted dying (MAID) being made more and more available (e.g., in 2024, 5.1% of deaths in Canada were from MAID10) and MAID gradually being pushed upon patients with chronic physical or psychiatric illnesses that socialized medical systems do not wish to address.11

Note: One of the most amazing stories I discovered about MAID was that some providers only allow you to receive MAID if you have been vaccinated against COVID.12

Patient Values

Because of the immense power doctors are entrusted with and the ability to harm others (particularly psychologically and spiritually), medical ethics training is vital, but has been largely neglected in modern medical education. In medical ethics, one of the foundational premises everyone is taught is that patient autonomy and values need to be respected — but as shown by events like COVID vaccine mandates, medical ethics are discarded when it’s not convenient and interferes with making money.

For example, when Scott realized his condition was terminal, he decided that he wanted to spend his remaining time engaging with his followers through his political podcast as much as possible, even when he was on the verge of death. Had I been in Scott’s position, the last thing I would be doing in my last days would be being online.
However, those were Scott’s values, so when I saw a post where Scott said he expected to pass in the near future, I wanted to honor them and asked a mutual friend to relay this message to him:

Me: Hi Scott, I asked ███ to pass this along to you. When I saw Trump’s 2015 response to the Rosie O’Donnell question at the first debate, I felt there was a real likelihood he’d win, and soon after I found your blog. Since then I’ve learned a ton from it and the perspectives I got from you were one of the things that made my newsletter possible. I wanted to thank you for the numerous times you’ve shared my work on X, and I wish you the best of luck with everything.

Scott: Thanks for passing that along. I’m so glad I helped.

Me: Thanks; you helped me a lot, and I will do my best to pay it forward.

Note: Out of respect for Scott’s autonomy, I deliberately worded my message so as not to ask for anything or project any emotional needs onto him.

A few hours after receiving that message, Scott then posted this on his page, in turn corroborating that this touched upon the core values he’d adopted at the end of life:13

Likewise, once he passed a detailed note was posted from his account stating:

• Scott made the decision on his deathbed to convert to Christianity in the hope it would help him in the afterlife (underscoring how we will all inevitably reach a point where we need a spiritual way to navigate the dying process regardless of how much the topic is ignored and put off).
• That he lived a life succeeding by conventional standards, then eventually realized what actually mattered to him was helping people and “I had an amazing life. I gave it everything I had.”
• He was profoundly grateful for all the people his work had positively impacted, and that if you at all benefitted from his work, “If you got any benefits from my work, I’m asking you to pay it forward as best as you can, that is the legacy I want.”

Note: All things considered, I feel Scott handled his dying process quite well (particularly given how much more challenging it is when a large number of people are involved in what would otherwise be a very private process) and provided many vital lessons on the healthy ways to navigate death.

What Really Matters?

Society always revolves around competing parties trying to hijack your attention and resources to gain wealth and power. Many people carry belief systems implanted in them that lead them to pursue things that do not bring joy or happiness. It is frequently only at the end of life that these unhealthy filters break, and people realize what actually mattered to them. Typically, that is some combination of:

• Helping and positively impacting the lives of others. On the opposite end, individuals who hurt others are often mentally tortured by it, particularly at death. I hence ascribe to the viewpoint many spiritual traditions have adopted — that many abhorrent things humans commit would stop if they could understand what they were doing to themselves each time they took such actions.
• Being authentic and living true to oneself rather than suppressing who they were to “succeed,” expressing what they wanted to share (e.g., “I’m sorry” or “I love you”), and allowing themselves to feel emotions they’d long bottled up.
• Being close to family and friends who genuinely cared about them.
• Pursuing meaningful things with depth rather than being trapped in society’s inane distractions.
• Taking time to care for their body and health rather than overexerting themselves in the societal rat race.

This powerfully reinforces why the medicalization of death is so problematic: the dizzying hospital process often strips away autonomy precisely when individuals most need it. Meanwhile, the clear-eyed perspectives of those nearing death offer something invaluable — a rare, unfiltered counterweight to society’s pressure to chase superficial pursuits that so many later regret.

Note: It is also often important for the dying person’s associates to resolve what they have with them before the individual passes. People normally benefit immensely from some form of resolution before death (e.g., grief will affect them for a much shorter period).

Consciousness and Death

One of the major tensions within our culture has been materialistic science (which effectively became our society’s dominant religion), rejecting the spiritual aspect of our existence. While this mechanistic model can explain many phenomena, it falls short on aspects of the human experience interwoven with spirit.

For example, to explain consciousness (and intuition), a belief was adopted that all the neurons in the brain allow it to function as a magical super computer, and because of that, consciousness spontaneously arises along with it subconsciously giving birth to key aspects of the human experience that “unscientific” people erroneously attribute to spiritual mechanisms (such as intuition).

I’ve hence tried to touch upon the evidence science has collected that undermines its materialistic paradigm, particularly in an article on organ transplantation that discussed two of the greatest mysteries in medicine, where I provided evidence that:

• Many organ transplant recipients (particularly of the heart) adopt the preferences, behaviors, memories, and personality traits of donors. These changes are often so profound that transference seems the only explanation — particularly since recipients had no prior way to know those traits came from the donor.
• When CPR is successful, it creates a modern day miracle allowing the dead to come back to life. A large volume of reports have accumulated of individuals with “near death experiences” remembering what happened while dead, with consciousness existing outside the body (e.g., seeing their body from above or recalling everything in the room while brain dead).14

These points challenge a central dogma of science’s materialistic paradigm — that consciousness resides in the brain and emerges from neural processing. This is particularly poignant for the dying process, since many who witness deaths report profound occurrences suggesting consciousness transforms and travels at death rather than vanishing into thin air once the brain “turns off.”
Likewise, this recognition of spirit persisting beyond the physical body was foundational to how every tradition which has stood the test of time navigated the death process.

Note: Numerous spiritually attuned doctors and nurses I’ve met over the years shared that this drew them into hospice care — the most fulfilling part of their careers because of how much they helped patients and the profound experiences they had (some mirroring the literature on “Shared Death Experiences”15).

Conclusion

Death is a core facet of the human experience, and like many, I deeply believe accepting it rather than denying and fearing it is critical for allowing one of the most critical moments in our life to proceed in the healthiest way possible.

Likewise, as I’ve tried to show here, I believe the medical industry’s attempt to monopolize death to increase its market share has been one of the most detrimental things the medical industry has done to humanity.

With the dying process, one of the most important things is recognizing what the dying person actually wants and honoring it. My hope is that this article will give you critical insights for drafting your own living will and advanced care directive16 so your autonomy is preserved when you’re least able to advocate for yourself.

Author’s Note: This is an abridged version of a longer article which goes into greater details on the points mentioned here, particularly the spiritual facets of dying and navigating the death transition. That article, along with the approaches we’ve learned are critical for improving the dying process can be read here.

A Note from Dr. Mercola About the Author

A Midwestern Doctor (AMD) is a board-certified physician from the Midwest and a longtime reader of Mercola.com. I appreciate AMD’s exceptional insight on a wide range of topics and am grateful to share it. I also respect AMD’s desire to remain anonymous since AMD is still on the front lines treating patients. To find more of AMD’s work, be sure to check out The Forgotten Side of Medicine on Substack.

To maintain the illusion of knowing everything, science will often choose to simply ignore phenomena which are too complex for its existing models to explain. So, despite water having a myriad of remarkable properties necessary for life, few are recognized by science and the many scientists who’ve recognized the hidden side of water are largely forgotten.

For example, German naturalist Viktor Schauberger (1885 to 1958)1 discovered that much of what water accomplishes in nature arises from its travel not in a linear manner,2 but rather in constant spirals and vortices, and created many revolutionary devices.

In parallel, a team of Russian physiologists discovered the heart causes blood to travel in spiraling vortices, which drastically increases blood’s momentum and allows the heart to precisely direct where each type of blood goes within the body.

In short, water is thought of as a uniform, evenly mixed (homogenous) substance that exists to facilitate random mixing of biochemical reactants needed for life, despite abundant data (e.g., the Russian research) showing it often is highly structured.

Liquid Crystalline Water

Classically, we are taught water exists in three states: solid, liquid, and gas. However, throughout history, many researchers have observed that water (e.g., the “protoplasm” surrounding cells) assumes a gel-like state, behaving like a liquid crystal.

In 2009,3 after noticing that microspheres placed in water would be repelled by seemingly “empty” surfaces within the water Gerald Pollack was eventually able to explain how this seemingly impossible state of water was emerging.4 Once a few critical factors were present, water would assemble into a lattice on that surface, which prevented anything from passing through it, thereby creating an “exclusion zone” of water.

For exclusion zone water to form, it requires a hydrophilic surface, usually negatively charged.5 Once this condition is met, and electromagnetic energy is present6 (particularly infrared light, which exists everywhere),7 water will store that ambient energy by assembling into many layers of offset hexagonal sheets with the formula H₃O₂ often reaching 0.1mm in depth (which molecularly, is massive).8

As Pollack describes:

“This model yields a stable structure that sticks together naturally. This model yields predictable mechanical behavior: semisolid when left alone, yet able to flow in response to an imposed shear force. Its behavior should resemble gelatinous egg white.”

Due to this lattice shape, each plane can easily slide past adjacent layers, allowing electrons to travel through the lattice with ease (resulting in conductivity approximately 100,000 times that of surrounding unstructured water).9

Since this structure is “missing” protons (it’s H₁.₅O rather than H₂O), those protons go immediately outside the exclusion zone (EZ). Therefore, a negatively charged region exists within the EZ, while a positively charged region (which is acidic due to protons present) exists outside it. This, in turn, has been corroborated by numerous researchers who have both demonstrated a persistent pH change there and successfully harnessed its charge separation to power small electronics.10

Since the negatively charged region exists in the crystalline structure, it prevents most substances and ions from existing within it. This separating quality has many uses including economical water purification and allowing cells to create the sodium potassium gradient which is necessary for life but far beyond what membrane pumps alone could accomplish (i.e., cells will continue to concentrate potassium after their membrane pumps are disabled).

Likewise, the EZ has increased viscosity, slowing substance diffusion, and can be directly observed by resonance imaging technologies detecting molecular restrictions (e.g., NMR11 and MRI12).

Note: Liquid crystalline water absorbs ultraviolet light (270 nm wavelength), radiates less infrared radiation than surrounding water, and has approximately 10% greater refractive index than bulk water. By each metric, EZ water has a higher density than normal water. It comprises the greatest water percentage at 4 degrees Celsius — the same temperature Viktor Schauberger identified as providing water’s greatest density.

This form of water is all around us in nature. For example, it forms the surface layer of water we typically associate with “surface tension” which is strong enough for water striders13 and certain lizards14 to stand upon. That layer, in turn, often behaves like a large connected sheet (best seen by observing large bodies of water from above) and when carefully examined, is actually a complex lattice that weaves through the body of water.

Note: Pollack has also made a strong case that liquid crystalline water facilitates different phase changes (e.g., freezing, water boiling, or water vapor becoming clouds).15

Cellular Structural Integrity

Typically, cells are thought to be liquid bags whose contents are dictated by membrane lipids and proteins and held together by a cytoskeleton. However, liquid crystalline water (which forms along the cell membrane and the structures within cells) plays an equally pivotal structural role as it:

• Creates the gel-like stability of cells and tissue (which prevents them from suddenly leaking and spilling out once a puncture occurs).

• Creates a (continually regenerating) protective barrier which prevents things from entering the cells (and likewise protects the lining of blood vessels from being damaged by what flows past them or the load-bearing pivot point within joints from wearing down).

• Lubricates many surfaces, allowing them to slide past each other (e.g., the tendons and fascia are covered with a layer of this water). Conversely, as it disappears, tissues start to stick together (creating problematic adhesions), arthritis onsets, and the blood vessels become vulnerable to injury and atherosclerosis begins.

Note: This lubrication can also be observed outside the body (e.g., ice skating is possible because a layer of liquid crystalline water forms between the water and ice).

• Creates non-compressible pockets throughout the body, which are essential for biomechanics (e.g., joints have a layer of liquid crystalline water in the center which bears the force and weight of movement without becoming damaged or resisting the motion).

• These non-compressible structures allow the body to utilize a tensegrity based structure where elastic lines of tissue tension throughout the body can allow any force to be equally distributed throughout the body, both protecting any single area from buckling if exposed to excessive force and allowing free motion throughout the structure (rather than being like a typical building with a largely static one which relies on a single static core).

While many of these concepts initially appear quite abstract, one French hand surgeon found a way to visualize them through magnifying images obtained during surgery:

Note: The liquid crystalline water model has been embraced by bodyworkers as it puts into words what they observe within the body.

Mysteries of Microcirculation

All of the above raises many questions, one of which is how the 4th phase of water functions inside the body? I will present some of the findings below.

A consistent pattern emerges when examining each circulatory pathway in the body. Tiny spaces with no extrinsic force driving their flow simultaneously require regular movement through them, and without that flow, life cannot function.

Note: In many cases, the blood vessels through which red blood cells travel are smaller than the red blood cell, requiring the blood cell to deform to fit — something which could not occur without substantial force pushing the blood cell forward.

As the hydrostatic pumping force of the heart is largely absent at the capillary bed, many have wondered if an alternate driver of circulation exists. For example, spontaneous circulation can be observed in a developing embryo before heart development,16 while flow and pressures observed throughout the body are frequently inconsistent with heart-generated pressure being the driving force behind blood circulation.17

When I’ve thought this question over at length, it does not seem realistic that the heart could provide enough force to move the red blood cells through every capillary in the body. What then could be causing the fluids inside the body to move?

Proton Induced Motion

Pollack and his team happened upon a chance discovery in their laboratory,18 which provided an answer to the mysteries of circulation:

“Fluid commonly flows in response to an external pressure gradient. However, when a tunnel-containing hydrogel [which contains liquid crystalline water] is immersed in water, spontaneous flow occurs through the tunnel without any pressure gradient. We confirmed this flow in a wide range of plant- and animal-derived hydrogels.”

As stated above, liquid crystalline water requires ambient infrared energy and a polar surface to form. A curious phenomenon occurs when that surface lines the inside of a tube — the liquid crystalline water lining the tube causes water to flow spontaneously through it.

“EZs [regions of liquid crystalline water] were studied previously by immersing sections of tubes made of strongly hydrophilic material, Nafion, in aqueous microsphere suspensions. A microsphere-free EZ developed adjacent to the tube surface.

In the central core of the tube, movement of microspheres demonstrated a flow, continuously sustaining itself at a velocity of ~10 μm/s in the axial direction … On the other hand, flow was not observed in tubes built of hydrophobic materials such as Teflon, which do not generate EZs.”

Since liquid crystalline water’s formation requires ambient radiant energy, its presence influences observed flow:

“We found that increased infrared energy substantially increased the flow velocity … application of ultraviolet-containing white light could boost flow velocity by up to 500%. Thus, the self-driven flow mechanism can convert radiant energy into kinetic energy.”

Pollack theorized this flow was generated by mutual repulsion between positively charged protons expelled as water (H₂O) transitions to liquid crystalline (H₃O₂) water. Several observations support this hypothesis. First, protons are continually added to water passing through:

“We found that the exiting water had a lower pH value than the entering water; the pH difference exceeded one unit and never diminished — even after 30 minutes of continuous flow.”

Second, flow was greatest in narrow tubes:

“Another prediction of the proton-gradient hypothesis is that the flow should be faster in narrower tunnels … a narrower tunnel should lead to a higher proton concentration in the core … which should lead to faster flow in the narrower tunnels.”

Note: Narrow blood vessels are the most vulnerable to their blood flow being disrupted by an impaired zeta potential, and hence where the initial subtle signs of illness often appear.

Third, flow direction was always from the narrower end to the wider end:

“A common feature shared among the various flows was the direction — always toward the region with a larger cross-section or volume.”

Each fluid conduit in the body is lined with a material recognized to create liquid crystalline water. For example, all blood vessels are lined with a protective glycocalyx, which remarkably well-suited for creating liquid crystalline water on its surface.

Likewise, liquid crystalline water generating biomolecules divide cells into compartments and simultaneously, by lining the gaps with liquid crystalline water, create a primitive circulatory system, facilitating the exchange of metabolites necessary to sustain life. The biological flow of fluids independent of a central pump has also been explored in animals:

“Blood can apparently flow without a beating heart. After the heart had been arrested, postmortem blood flow was confirmed in mice, rats, dogs, and chick embryos. The flow persisted from 15 minutes to several hours. Furthermore, some amphibian larvae could live up to 15 days following surgical removal of the heart, implying an alternative means for propelling blood.”

In short, the human vascular system is structured so that expelled protons can drive circulation, something that hydrostatic pumping alone is not sufficient to do.

Note: Other organisms also utilize this mechanism. Plants require significant internal water transportation, but they have no pumping organs. In the lab, Pollack demonstrated that the xylem creates liquid crystalline water19 and that this flow allows water to overcome gravity’s resistance and climb up tubes.20

Colloidal Stability

When a substance is mixed into water, it can fail to mix, dissolve, or form a colloidal suspension. When repelling forces overcome attractive forces, particles become suspended and a colloid forms. The behavior of chia seeds in water illustrates this concept:

In the above image, a hydrophilic gel (composed of a large amount of liquid crystalline water) forms around each seed, creating a barrier that prevents seeds from coming together and separating by gravity. However, when this gel doesn’t form sufficiently, gravity separates the seeds from the water.

Chia seeds hence, provide one of the best ways to observe liquid crystalline water directly and to conceptually understand colloidal stability (as something similar to this also occurs with particles much smaller than chia seeds).

Most biological systems, in turn, are colloidal suspensions that depend on mutual negative charges (or various types of minute barriers) to remain dispersed. In health, the disperse forces outweigh the attractive ones, but once this reverses (e.g., due to a vaccine or severe infection), fluids will begin to clump together, impairing the microcirculation, eliminating metabolic waste products, and once severe enough, give rise to small or large strokes.

Note: The heart also struggles to pump thickened blood, and many have observed restoring the physiologic zeta potential treats arrhythmias (e.g., atrial fibrillation).

In turn, a major problem with vaccinations (due to their aluminum content) and COVID-19, along with its vaccines (due to their spike proteins) is that both of these carry a very high positive charge density which overpowers the negatively charged dispersive forces within the body. As such, many childhood vaccine injuries can be traced to aluminum induced microstrokes and likewise, one of the primary issues with the COVID vaccines is the clots they create throughout the body.

Note: Once you know how to look for them, you can often find signs of a microstroke in COVID-19 vaccine recipients.

Liquid Crystalline Water and Zeta Potential

Zeta potential quantifies the negative charge maintaining colloidal stability, and since unobstructed microcirculation is so vital to health, a key part of my medical practice revolves around ways to restore the physiologic zeta potential (discussed further here). Because of this, I am always looking at how the factors in a patient’s life influence their zeta potential, and due to their many overlaps, have extensively explored the relationship between liquid crystalline water and zeta potential.

For example, virtually all colloidal systems in nature rely upon mutual negative charges for dispersion, rather than mutual positive charges, which could also create the same effect. I now believe this is due to liquid crystalline water creating a negatively charged (H₃O₂-) coating around polar particles in water, hence necessitating another negative charge to create repulsion.

Likewise, many of the same factors that increase one (e.g., alkalinity) also increase the other. As such, I believe many factors attributed to enhancing one may, in fact, enhance the other (e.g., something that increases the amount of negatively charged liquid crystalline water around a particle will also increase its negative charge and colloidal dispersion, hence also increasing the zeta potential).

Similarly, a disruption in one can often affect the other (e.g., in the smallest vessels, a loss of zeta potential which causes blood cells to clump together can obstruct the vessel and negate the blood flow generated from liquid crystalline water).

Phase Changes

Colloidal solutions can exist either as a thickened “gel” (with significant amounts of liquid crystalline water) or a fully fluid colloidal solution (a “sol”). A key innovation Gerald Pollack made is that, through releasing specific ions, the body can rapidly cycle between having its colloids in a “sol” or “gel” state, creating another way the body can harvest the energy accumulated by liquid crystalline water.

For example, in Pollack’s model, muscles produce liquid crystalline water that stretches their proteins. To contract, calcium (a zeta potential collapsing ion), is released and rapidly breaks apart the liquid crystalline water within the muscle protein, causing the stretched muscle fiber to rapidly shorten (as nothing remains to push it open). Conversely, ATP (which restores zeta potential) is used to rebuild that liquid crystalline water and “relax” the muscle by stretching it back to its resting state.

Likewise, many other cellular processes also depend upon this phase shift such as nerve cells firing (supported by the fact that local anesthetics eliminate the liquid crystalline water in their vicinity) and the rapid expulsion and expansion of vesicles by cells (all of which is discussed further here).

Note: We frequently find local anesthetics are very useful for dispersing pockets of “clumped fluid” within the body, and, due to the trauma release that often follows, we now suspect those fluid agglomerations (e.g., within the fascia) are a way the body stores trauma.

Conclusion

America’s scientific apparatus has the capacity to produce extraordinary innovations for humanity, but as independent scientists like Pollack have shown, that pioneering spirit has been replaced with a drive to secure future funding and maintain the status quo:

“Until the modern era, scientists focused on seeking foundational mechanisms. They tried to understand how the world works … The pursuit of simplicity seems to have largely evaporated from the scientific scene. In four decades of doing science, I have seen this noble culture yield to one less audacious and more pragmatic.

The chutzpah has vanished. Scientists content themselves with short-term gains in narrowly focused areas rather than seeking fundamental truths that may explain broad areas of nature.

Water occupies a place central to so many natural processes that few people can conceive that the basics could remain open to question … A third reason for the slow emergence of such fundamental principles plagues all of science: intellectual timidity.

Relying on received wisdom feels safer than dealing with the uncertainties of revolutionary disruption … A fourth reason is outright fear. Challenging received wisdom means stepping on the toes of scientists who have built careers on that wisdom.”

Making America Healthy Again, thus is much more than just a question of eliminating a few harmful toxins from our environment. Rather, it is a question of revisiting how the science our decisions revolve around is conducted to begin with.

For that reason, a major push from the MAHA leadership has been to reform how research is conducted so that discoveries that can transform science are incentivized and longstanding dogmas (e.g., the necessity of fluoride or vaccines) can be challenged rather than censored from every platform.

As such, RFK Jr. and NIH director Jay Bhattacharya have begun enacting a series of vital and long overdue policies to facilitate it. I believe it is critical that we support this endeavor, particularly since it is only through a new form of science that our society can begin to give a serious look at The Forgotten Sides of Medicine, which can allow us to realize the health each of us has been searching for.

Of these, I believe the forgotten side of water to be particularly important, as beyond it explaining many mysteries within physiology, the loss of the body’s liquid crystalline water and zeta potential (and the accompanying tissue dehydration) is one of the key degenerative processes that underlie aging.

Author’s Note: This is an abridged version of a longer article which goes into greater detail on how to increase liquid crystalline water and zeta potential within the body (which can be read here), an article on how the zeta potential concept underlies a wide range of diseases (which can be read here) and a five part series on liquid crystalline water (which can be read here, here, here, here and here).

A Note from Dr. Mercola About the Author

A Midwestern Doctor (AMD) is a board-certified physician from the Midwest and a longtime reader of Mercola.com. I appreciate AMD’s exceptional insight on a wide range of topics and am grateful to share it. I also respect AMD’s desire to remain anonymous since AMD is still on the front lines treating patients. To find more of AMD’s work, be sure to check out The Forgotten Side of Medicine on Substack.

In 2023, 10.7 million quetiapine prescriptions were dispensed in the U.S., even though the drug is approved to treat schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, not insomnia.1 That figure reflects how routinely it’s handed out for sleep. Because quetiapine carries strong sedative effects, people who can’t fall asleep or stay asleep are often given a low dose, usually with an unspoken assumption: that more sleep will deliver a sharper, more capable next day.
That assumption deserves scrutiny, especially for the millions of adults living with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). In OSA, breathing repeatedly pauses or grows shallow during sleep, so your brain and body take in less oxygen hour after hour. The condition brings loud snoring, frequent awakenings, morning headaches, poor concentration, and daytime fatigue. Left untreated, it raises the risk of cardiovascular disease, metabolic dysfunction, and memory problems.
Many people with OSA also battle insomnia — particularly the kind that wakes them repeatedly before morning — and they’re the very group most likely to reach for a nightly sedative. Research from a team at Flinders University in Australia put that exact combination to the test, and the results complicate the tidy idea that better sleep automatically means better days.2
Overnight, a single low dose of quetiapine did much of what a sleep aid is supposed to do. The trouble surfaced the next morning, in the ordinary tasks — driving, working, or staying alert — that a sleep aid is supposed to help with.
The most unsettling detail was the gap between perception and reality. Some participants didn’t feel especially impaired, yet objective testing told another story entirely. That disconnect — feeling fine while your brain lags behind — is what caught the researchers’ attention, and it’s worth a closer look.

Sleeping Pill Improved Sleep but Impaired Next-Day Performance

For the study, published in the Annals of the American Thoracic Society, researchers set out to answer what happens when people with both obstructive sleep apnea and trouble staying asleep take a low dose of quetiapine before bed. Researchers enrolled 15 adults and used a rigorous double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled crossover design, meaning every participant served as his or her own comparison.
Each person spent two separate nights in a sleep laboratory about a week apart, taking either 50 milligrams (mg) of quetiapine or a placebo before sleep.3,4 The next morning, researchers measured not only sleep quality but also reaction time and driving performance.

• Several sleep measurements improved during the night — Participants who took quetiapine experienced fewer breathing interruptions. Their apnea-hypopnea index, a measure of how often breathing slows or stops during the night, dropped from an average of 27 events per hour to 20 events.
Researchers also recorded fewer nighttime awakenings and disruptions, reflected by a reduction in the arousal index from 32 to 25 per hour. People slept more continuously and experienced fewer disturbances throughout the night.
Sleep efficiency also improved. This measures how much of the time spent in bed is actually spent asleep. Higher numbers generally indicate more consolidated sleep. In this study, sleep efficiency increased from 80% with placebo to 87% with quetiapine.
• Morning performance moved in the opposite direction — Despite the improvements recorded during sleep, the next morning told a different story. Reaction times during a psychomotor vigilance test slowed significantly after quetiapine. Researchers measured a median reaction time of 382 milliseconds after quetiapine compared to 336 milliseconds after placebo.
That difference might sound small, but when you’re driving, crossing a busy intersection, responding to an emergency, or making a split-second decision, fractions of a second matter. Researchers also found significantly worse driving simulator performance, with greater steering deviation after quetiapine. So, while participants slept better, they functioned worse.
• The findings challenge a common assumption about sleep medications — Many people assume that if a drug improves sleep quality, it automatically improves daytime alertness and performance. This study showed that those two outcomes are not always linked. You could wake up believing you had a better night’s sleep while your reaction speed, attention, and driving ability remain impaired.
That disconnect creates a problem because you might trust how you feel instead of how your brain is actually performing.
• The researchers identified a safety concern that many people wouldn’t notice on their own — Objective testing revealed performance declines that participants were unlikely to detect without specialized equipment. Unlike obvious drowsiness, slower reaction times often develop quietly.
You don’t receive a warning light telling you your brain is processing information more slowly. That makes these findings particularly relevant for anyone who drives to work, operates equipment, cares for children, or performs tasks that require sustained attention the morning after taking a sleep medication.
• The study highlights the importance of measuring outcomes that matter in daily life — From a practical standpoint, the most important question isn’t whether a medication helps you stay asleep. The more important question is whether it helps you live better the next day.
According to this study, low-dose quetiapine improved several nighttime measurements but also produced measurable declines in vigilance and driving performance. Those findings suggest that better sleep on paper doesn’t always translate into better functioning where it matters most — in the real world.

Note: These findings come from a small clinical study. Results may not apply to all individuals.

Address the Reasons You’re Not Sleeping Well

The study highlights a problem with relying on a sleeping pill. While quetiapine improved some nighttime sleep measurements, it also impaired next-day alertness and driving performance. Instead of forcing sleep through sedation, focus on creating the conditions that allow your brain and body to produce healthy, restorative sleep naturally. The goal is not simply to spend more time asleep. The goal is to wake up refreshed, mentally sharp, and fully functional the next day.

1. Anchor your body clock with a consistent sleep schedule — Your brain runs on timing. When bedtime shifts by hours from one night to the next, your internal clock struggles to predict when it should release sleep-promoting hormones and prepare you for rest. Choose a bedtime and wake-up time that you can maintain throughout the week, including weekends.
Going to bed at a consistent, earlier hour helps because much of your body’s repair and recovery happens in the first sleep cycles of the night. A predictable schedule trains your brain to become sleepy at the right time instead of depending on medication to force the process.
2. Protect your brain from artificial light after sunset — Darkness is one of the most powerful sleep signals your body receives. At night, bright indoor lighting, televisions, tablets, and smartphones send the opposite message. They tell your brain to stay alert when it should be preparing for sleep. As evening approaches, dim the lights throughout your home.
Avoid scrolling on your phone or watching screens during the hour before bed. Morning sunlight exposure is equally important because it helps set your circadian rhythm, the internal timing system that regulates sleep, hormone production, and energy levels throughout the day.
3. Give your digestive system the night off — Many people unknowingly sabotage their sleep by eating too close to bedtime. Digestion requires energy and keeps your body focused on processing food when it would be better served by recovery and repair. Finish your last meal at least three hours before going to bed.
If you regularly eat late dinners or snack in front of the television at night, moving that food intake earlier often improves sleep quality. This simple habit also supports healthier metabolic function and more stable overnight blood sugar levels.
4. Turn your bedroom into a true recovery environment — Even brief awakenings disrupt the deep stages of sleep that support physical restoration, memory processing, and brain health. The more interruptions you experience, the less restorative your sleep becomes. Keep your bedroom cool, dark, and quiet. Blackout curtains help block outdoor light.
An eye mask helps if light still enters the room. If noise is a problem, earplugs or other noise-reduction strategies help create a more restful environment. Every small improvement reduces sleep disruption and helps your brain remain asleep longer.
5. Reduce nighttime exposure to wireless devices and electronics — Modern bedrooms often contain phones, tablets, smart watches, televisions, wireless routers, and chargers. These devices create an environment that is very different from the one humans evolved in. Keep your phone out of your bedroom and place it in airplane mode before sleep. Remove unnecessary electronic devices from your bedroom as well. Turn off your Wi-Fi router overnight if practical.
If you want to go further, reducing electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure in your sleeping area creates an environment that supports deeper rest and recovery. The less stimulation your nervous system encounters during the night, the easier it becomes for your body to settle into restorative sleep naturally instead of relying on sedating medications.

FAQs About Sleeping Pills and Quetiapine

Q: What is quetiapine, and why is it prescribed for sleep?
A: Quetiapine is a prescription drug approved to treat schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. However, because it has strong sedative effects, it’s frequently prescribed off-label for insomnia and anxiety. Quetiapine is one of the most commonly used medications for sleep problems despite not being approved specifically for insomnia.

Q: Did quetiapine improve sleep in the study?
A: Yes. Researchers found that a single 50-mg dose reduced nighttime breathing interruptions, decreased sleep disruptions, and improved sleep efficiency in adults with obstructive sleep apnea and difficulty staying asleep. Participants spent more of their time in bed actually sleeping and experienced fewer awakenings throughout the night, but it led to impaired performance the next day.

Q: What concerned researchers most about quetiapine?
A: The biggest concern was what happened the next morning. Despite sleeping better, participants had slower reaction times and poorer performance on a driving simulator test. Researchers found that objective measures of alertness declined even though some participants didn’t feel especially sleepy, creating a mismatch between how they felt and how they actually functioned.

Q: Why is relying on a sleeping pill not always the best solution?
A: A sleeping pill often addresses the symptom rather than the cause of poor sleep. Problems such as obstructive sleep apnea, excessive nighttime light exposure, irregular sleep schedules, late-night eating, and an unhealthy sleep environment continue to disrupt normal sleep physiology. Addressing those underlying factors helps improve both sleep quality and daytime performance rather than simply creating sedation.

Q: What are some ways to improve sleep naturally?
A: Some of the most effective strategies include maintaining a consistent bedtime and wake-up time, reducing exposure to artificial light after sunset, finishing meals at least three hours before bed, keeping your bedroom cool, dark, and quiet, and minimizing nighttime exposure to electronic devices and wireless technology. These habits support your body’s natural sleep mechanisms instead of relying on medications to force sleep.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. It is not a recommendation to stop or adjust any medication on your own. Consult a qualified health care provider before making changes to your health regimen, especially if you have obstructive sleep apnea or another diagnosed condition.

Test Your Knowledge with Today’s Quiz!
Take today’s quiz to see how much you’ve learned from yesterday’s Mercola.com article.

Which chamber in the human heart showed the greatest temporary changes after a marathon?

Left atrium
Right ventricle
The right ventricle pumps blood to the lungs and faces increased pressure during prolonged endurance exercise. Learn more.
Right atrium
Left ventricle

Few endurance feats carry the mystique of a marathon. Cross that finish line after 26.2 miles and you’ve asked your body to do something it’s not casually built for — sustained, near-maximal effort hour after hour, with your heart laboring at the center of it.
That invites a question worth sitting with: what does a marathon actually do to your heart? Not in the figurative sense, but in the literal one. What shifts inside the organ working hardest to carry you through those final miles, and would any of those shifts give a cardiologist pause if they showed up on a test?
The answer turns out to be more nuanced than a first glance suggests, and I want to walk you through it. The details are what separate a normal response to extreme exertion from the warning signs that genuinely deserve attention, and they carry practical lessons for anyone who trains hard, whether or not a marathon ever lands on your calendar.

Your Heart Shows Measurable Stress After a Marathon

For a systematic review published in BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine, researchers pooled evidence from 69 studies involving 3,274 healthy adults to answer a simple but important question: What happens to your heart immediately after running a marathon?1
The researchers analyzed data collected over several decades from healthy adults — about three-quarters of them men, ages 27 to 63 — who completed a standard 26.2-mile (42.195-kilometer) road marathon. This larger dataset gave them a much clearer picture of the body’s immediate response than any single study alone.

• The review focused on several different ways of measuring heart health — Researchers examined blood tests that detect stress or injury to heart muscle, ultrasound images that measured how well the heart filled and pumped blood, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which creates highly detailed pictures of the heart’s structure.
Looking at all of these measurements together allowed the researchers to compare how different parts of the heart responded after extreme endurance exercise instead of relying on just one test.
• The right side of the heart carried the biggest workload — One of the most consistent findings involved the right ventricle, which is the chamber responsible for pumping blood from your heart to your lungs. After the marathon, this chamber temporarily became larger while its pumping ability declined modestly. At the same time, several measurements of the left side of the heart changed only slightly or remained stable.
During a marathon, your heart pumps many times its normal output, hour after hour without rest. The right ventricle faces an especially heavy workload because it needs to keep blood moving through the lungs while your breathing rate stays elevated for several hours.
Unlike the thick, muscular left ventricle, which is built to push blood against the high pressures of your entire body, the right ventricle has comparatively thin walls suited to a gentle, low-pressure circuit through the lungs, so when hours of hard running drive those lung pressures up, it’s asked to generate force it wasn’t structurally built to handle. That extra demand appears to explain why the right side showed the greatest temporary changes after runners crossed the finish line.
• Blood tests rose dramatically without proving permanent injury — Another important discovery involved three blood tests that doctors use to look for stress or damage to the heart. Two of these tests measure troponins, proteins that normally stay locked inside healthy heart muscle cells but leak into the bloodstream when the heart is under heavy strain, and the same markers doctors track during a suspected heart attack.
The third measures a substance your heart releases when it has to work harder than usual. All three blood markers increased substantially after marathon completion, and some values exceeded the levels doctors often use to evaluate heart attacks or heart failure.
That finding doesn’t automatically mean marathon runners suffered the same type of injury seen during a heart attack, however. The researchers emphasized that endurance athletes represent a unique situation. Although these blood markers increased consistently after races, scientists still don’t know whether they reflect temporary adaptation to extreme exercise, short-lived stress on heart cells, or another normal recovery process unique to endurance sports.
• Personal characteristics influenced the results — The researchers didn’t find one universal response that applied equally to everyone. Instead, age, biological sex, training status, and marathon finishing time all influenced how strongly heart measurements changed after the race. These individual characteristics explained part of the variation seen across the different studies.
This means comparing yourself with another runner has limited value. Two people who complete the same marathon often experience very different physical responses afterward because their fitness level, years of training, race pace, and personal physiology differ.
The findings also reinforce the value of gradual preparation. Consistent training allows your cardiovascular system to adapt over time instead of facing the enormous stress of a marathon without adequate conditioning. The review didn’t compare trained and untrained runners directly in an experimental setting, but training status clearly influenced how participants responded across the included studies.
• The changes remained relatively small — The researchers specifically noted that most structural and functional changes fell outside the range normally considered clinically meaningful in otherwise healthy adults. So, while researchers observed measurable changes, they didn’t resemble the severe abnormalities doctors associate with permanent heart damage.

Train Smarter to Protect Your Heart for Life

The marathon review showed that your heart responds to extreme endurance exercise with measurable stress. The goal isn’t to avoid vigorous exercise entirely but to give your body the right amount at the right time. More is not always better when it comes to high-intensity training. Long-term heart health comes from balancing intensity with recovery, proper nutrition, and consistent daily movement instead of treating every workout like a competition.

1. Limit high-intensity exercise but embrace moderate movement — Research from cardiologist James O’Keefe and colleagues found that people doing the highest volumes of vigorous exercise begin to lose some of the longevity benefits that exercise normally provides.2 If you’re in your 40s or 50s and regularly compete in full-distance triathlons or similar endurance events, your risk of atrial fibrillation, an abnormal heart rhythm that increases stroke risk, rises by 500% to 800%.
In contrast, moderate exercise, where you’re slightly winded but still able to carry on a conversation, follows a different pattern. The evidence shows that more moderate movement continues to improve health without showing the same upper limit. Reserve vigorous workouts for short, purposeful sessions instead of making every workout an all-out effort.
2. Build your fitness around daily movement — Walking remains one of the safest and most effective ways to strengthen your cardiovascular system. Aim for a one-hour walk daily, increasing the time gradually if you currently move much less.
Activities such as brisk walking, hiking, recreational cycling, swimming, gardening, pickleball, yoga, and tai chi improve endurance while placing far less stress on your heart than repeated high-intensity workouts. Whenever possible, spend at least two hours each week exercising outdoors so you also benefit from natural sunlight and time in nature.
3. Strengthen your muscles without chasing endless gym time — Two strength-training sessions each week, lasting about 20 to 40 minutes, provide an excellent balance between building muscle and allowing recovery. Focus on compound exercises such as squats, deadlifts, presses, and rows performed with good technique.
If heavy weights aggravate your joints, lighter-load blood flow restriction (BFR) training, often called KAATSU, stimulates muscle growth with much lighter resistance. Muscle protects against age-related muscle loss and supports healthy metabolism, but excessive strength-training volume offers little additional longevity benefit.
4. Fuel your body to support recovery instead of depletion — Your heart and muscles depend on adequate energy after demanding exercise. I recommend eating about 250 grams of carbohydrates each day for most adults, with higher amounts if you’re very active, so your glycogen stores remain full. Keep protein near 0.8 grams per pound (or 1.76 grams per kilogram) of ideal body weight, with roughly one-third coming from collagen-rich foods like slow-cooked meats or bone broth.
If you have reduced kidney function, don’t adopt this higher target without checking with your doctor — protein needs are often deliberately lower for impaired kidneys. Eliminate seed oils, which are high in linoleic acid (LA), and avoid alcohol, both of which interfere with mitochondrial energy production and undermine the cardiovascular adaptations your training is designed to build.
5. Treat recovery as part of the workout — Fitness develops after exercise, not during it. Schedule one or two recovery days after especially strenuous efforts, prioritize restorative sleep, and avoid stacking multiple hard workouts back to back. If your resting heart rate remains elevated, your performance suddenly drops, or you feel unusually fatigued for several days, reduce your training volume instead of pushing harder.
Your body adapts best when vigorous exercise, moderate movement, and recovery work together rather than competing with one another.

FAQs About Extreme Endurance Running and Heart Health

Q: Does running a marathon permanently damage your heart?
A: No clear evidence shows that a marathon causes permanent heart damage in healthy runners. The systematic review found that marathon running causes temporary changes in heart structure, heart function, and blood markers associated with heart stress. Most of these changes were modest, and researchers stated that more long-term studies are needed to determine whether repeated exposure leads to lasting changes in some endurance athletes.

Q: Why do blood tests for heart injury rise after a marathon?
A: After a marathon, blood tests that doctors often use to detect heart stress or injury commonly increase because the heart has worked at an extremely high level for several hours. Researchers found that these temporary increases don’t necessarily indicate the same type of damage seen during a heart attack, but they do show that marathon running places substantial stress on the cardiovascular system.

Q: Who experiences the greatest strain from extreme endurance exercise?
A: The review found that heart responses differed according to age, biological sex, training status, and marathon finishing time. Separate research also suggests that people who perform very high volumes of vigorous endurance exercise over many years, particularly full-distance triathletes in midlife, face a much higher risk of developing atrial fibrillation than those who exercise at more moderate levels.3

Q: What type of exercise offers the greatest long-term heart benefits?
A: Moderate exercise provides the strongest long-term balance between cardiovascular fitness and longevity. Activities such as walking, hiking, cycling, swimming, gardening, yoga, and tai chi improve heart health without exposing your cardiovascular system to the repeated high levels of stress seen with excessive volumes of vigorous endurance training. Short sessions of vigorous exercise also provide benefits when balanced with adequate recovery.

Q: How do I reduce heart stress while continuing to train?
A: Build your fitness gradually instead of dramatically increasing training volume. Balance vigorous workouts with plenty of moderate movement, strength training, and recovery days. Support your training by eating enough carbohydrates to replenish energy stores, consuming adequate protein with collagen-rich foods, avoiding alcohol and seed oils, and making restorative sleep a priority so your heart and muscles recover fully before your next hard workout.

Test Your Knowledge with Today’s Quiz!
Take today’s quiz to see how much you’ve learned from yesterday’s Mercola.com article.

What antioxidant compounds are found in dark chocolate?

Carotenoids
Terpenoids
Polyphenols
Polyphenols are natural plant compounds that contribute to dark chocolate’s reputation as a healthier treat. Learn more.
Phytosterols

Have you ever wondered why chronic diseases like diabetes, obesity, and heart disease keep rising, even with all our medical advances? In a powerful episode of The Joe Rogan Experience, Dr. Casey Means and Calley Means tackle this question head-on.1 Dr. Casey is the co-founder of Levels Health, which provides insights into metabolic health through real-time data.

Calley is the co-founder of Truemed, which enables HSA spending on healthy food, supplements, and exercise. They explore metabolic health, the impact of your diet, and how big corporations shape health policies — often at the expense of your well-being.

What Is Metabolic Health and Why Should You Care?

Metabolic health is all about how your body turns food into energy. When it works well, you feel energized and your body runs smoothly. But when it’s off, trouble starts. Dr. Casey, co-author of the book “Good Energy,” explains that poor metabolic health is behind many chronic health problems, which are widespread in the U.S.

Here’s the eye-opening part: 74% of Americans are overweight or obese, and 50% have Type 2 diabetes or pre-diabetes. That’s a huge jump from years ago when only 1% had diabetes in 1950. Young adults are getting dementia three times more often since 2012, and cancer rates are climbing too — especially in people under 50. Dr. Casey calls this a “disaster” that’s getting worse fast.

Why should you care? Because your metabolic health decides how likely you are to face these issues. It’s not just about living longer — it’s about feeling good while you’re here. The good news? You can improve it with simple changes we’ll cover later.

How Does Your Diet Affect Your Health?

What you eat shapes your metabolic health more than almost anything else. Dr. Casey and Calley point the finger at ultraprocessed foods — like sugary cereals, fast food, and packaged snacks. These aren’t just “processed” like jarred veggies; they’re loaded with seed oils, which contain linoleic acid, additives and fake ingredients that interfere with your body.

Children are hit hard — 67% of their calories come from these foods. Dr. Casey says this floods your system with added sugar and unhealthy fats, leading to weight gain and insulin problems. Over time, it throws your metabolism out of whack. Meanwhile, whole foods — like fruits, veggies, eggs, and grass fed meats — give you nutrients to keep your energy steady and your body strong. Want to boost your health? Try these tips:

• Eat more whole foods — Fill your plate with fresh foods — think colorful fruits and veggies, eggs, and grass fed dairy.

• Cut back on refined sugar — Skip sodas, candies, and high-fructose corn syrup. Use a little maple syrup or raw honey if you need sweetness.

• Check labels — If the ingredients list looks like a science experiment, put it back.

• Cook at home — Making your own meals lets you control what’s in them. Homemade meals are healthier and tastier too.

How Do Corporations Influence Your Health Choices?

You might not realize it, but big companies play a huge role in what you eat and how healthy you stay. Calley used to be a lobbyist for food and drug companies. He saw firsthand how they push unhealthy products while dodging blame.

Take soda, for example. Coke funneled money to groups like the NAACP to argue that banning soda from food stamps was unfair. Today, it’s still the top item bought with food stamps. Food companies also fund studies to downplay refined sugar’s harm, while drug companies push pills over prevention. Dr. Casey adds that this keeps the health care system focused on treating you after you’re sick — not stopping sickness before it starts. What can you do? Stay smart:

• Mix up your info sources — Don’t trust just one place. Look for honest, independent voices.

• Ask who’s paying — If a study or ad feels off, check who’s behind it.

• Push for truth — Support efforts to make companies and research more transparent.

Education is also key. Knowing this helps you see through the noise and make better choices.

Why Are Children Struggling — And What Can You Do?

Children’s health is tanking, and it’s not their fault. Autism rates jumped from 1 in 150 in 2000 to 1 in 30 today.2 Half of teens are overweight or obese. Dr. Casey ties this to junk food, chemicals like pesticides and plastics that act like hormones such as estrogen in your body. Girls are hitting puberty as young as 10 because of this “estrogen stew” they’re exposed to daily.

Parents, you’re not powerless. Cut ultraprocessed foods from your children’s diets — swap Lunchables for home-packed meals with real ingredients. Get them outside more; kids spend less time outdoors than prisoners. Sunlight and play boost their health naturally. Push your doctor for options like exercise prescriptions, not just pills.

What’s Wrong with the Health Care System?

The health care system sounds like it’s there to help, but Dr. Casey says it’s broken. She trained as a surgeon and saw doctors stuck treating symptoms — like prescribing pills or doing surgeries — without fixing what’s really wrong. Why? The system pays for how many patients you see, not how healthy you make them.

For example, if you’re tired or overweight, you might bounce between specialists — each one giving you a new drug or test. But no one looks at the big picture, like how your diet or sleep could be the real issue. It’s a money game: more treatments mean more profit, even if you don’t feel better. You can’t rely on the system alone — it’s up to you to steer the ship. Here’s how to take charge:

• Learn about your health — Read up on what’s bugging you. Ask your doctor tough questions.

• Focus on prevention — Eat well and move more to stop problems before they start.

• Find a big-picture health care practitioner — Seek someone who looks at your whole life, not just one symptom.

How Do You Take Control of Your Health?

Here’s the best part: your health isn’t up to doctors or corporations — it’s in your hands. Dr. Casey and Calley stress that small, everyday choices flip the script. You don’t need fancy gear or tons of cash — just a little know-how and effort. Try these steps to get started:

1. Track your metabolic health — Tools like glucose monitors show how food affects you. The HOMA-IR test provides a simple way to detect insulin resistance early, calculating the relationship between fasting glucose and insulin levels to evaluate your metabolic health.

2. Eat smart — Stick to whole foods that fuel you right. Test what works for your body and be sure to include enough healthy carbohydrates. Glucose, derived from carbs, serves as your cells’ preferred fuel source for energy production.

3. Move more — Walk 7,000 steps a day — it’s about 45 minutes — and cut your risk of diseases like Type 2 diabetes, Alzheimer’s and gastric reflux by up to 60%, Dr. Casey says. Ideally, work your way up to one hour daily, which can be split up into multiple shorter walks.

4. Relieve stress and sleep well — Try meditation or slow breathing to keep stress in check. Use these 33 tips to optimize your sleep routine.

5. Stay curious — Keep learning about health from solid sources you trust.

Start with one or two changes. Over time, they add up to a healthier, happier you. Dr. Casey and Calley reveal a tough truth: your health is under attack from bad food, corporate greed, and a flawed system. But you’re not helpless. By understanding metabolic health, cleaning up your diet and taking small steps daily, you can fight back. It’s not about perfection — it’s about progress. Start today, and see how strong you’ll feel tomorrow.

FAQs — Your Health Questions Answered

Q: What’s metabolic health in simple terms?

A: It’s how your body turns food into energy. When it’s good, you avoid diseases like diabetes. When it’s bad, health risks go up.

Q: How can I fix my diet fast?

A: Swap junk for whole foods — think apples over chips. Cook easy meals at home and ditch sugary drinks. Simple wins add up fast.

Q: Why’s the health care system letting us down?

A: It’s built to treat sickness, not prevent it. Doctors get paid for volume, not your health, so root causes get ignored.

Q: What’s the easiest way to take control of my health?

A: Cut processed foods from your diet. Start walking daily — 7,000 steps slashes disease risk. Add whole foods and good sleep for an even greater boost.

Q: Are kids really in danger from food and chemicals?

A: Yes — junk food and plastics are linked to obesity and early puberty. Feed your children real food and limit screen time.

Many people notice that staying focused feels different than it used to. Tasks that once held attention now break apart more easily, and quiet moments feel harder to sit with. There is often a pull toward quick stimulation, even when the intention is to stay on task. This pattern comes up across a wide range of ages and lifestyles, not limited to any one group.

Short-form video didn’t just add another entertainment option. It reshaped how digital time fills the gaps in your day. Endless feeds, instant novelty, and automatic playback train your brain to expect speed instead of depth. Many people describe this shift with the phrase “brain rot,” a term for the sense that mental sharpness erodes under constant stimulation. That phrase stuck because it captures a lived experience, not because it exaggerates one.

What’s important is what this shift disrupts. Focus and self-control are the systems that let you read without drifting, finish work without bouncing between tabs, and stay emotionally steady under stress. When those systems become strained, productivity drops, learning slows, and mental fatigue builds. This is not about confidence, personality, or intelligence. It’s about how your brain responds to the environment you repeat every day.

The good news is that clarity is now possible. Instead of guessing or arguing about opinions, researchers have begun mapping clear patterns that explain why attention falters and which mental functions absorb the greatest strain. Understanding those patterns is the first step toward regaining control.

Short Videos Strain Your Brain’s Control Center

In a study published in Psychological Bulletin, researchers examined 71 individual studies involving a combined 98,299 participants to understand how short-form video use relates to cognitive and mental health outcomes.1 This was a systematic review and meta-analysis, meaning the researchers aggregated data across many independent research teams to identify consistent patterns rather than isolated findings.

The core question was simple: when people spend more time on short-form video platforms, what happens to their ability to think, focus, and regulate behavior? The researchers examined multiple cognitive domains, including attention, inhibitory control, and broader measures of mental well-being, rather than relying on vague self-reports alone.

The studies included both youth and adults and spanned multiple short-form video platforms, not just a single app. This means the findings don’t hinge on one age group, culture, or algorithm — they appear wherever endless, fast-scrolling video formats dominate daily screen habits.

• Attention and self-control showed the strongest declines — The analysis found a moderate negative relationship between short-form video use and overall cognition. Higher use consistently tracked with weaker thinking performance. When researchers zoomed in, attention suffered the most, followed closely by inhibitory control, meaning the ability to pause, resist impulses, and stay on task.

• Impulse regulation took a particularly hard hit — Inhibitory control showed an even stronger negative association than attention. For your daily life, this translates into more difficulty stopping automatic behaviors, such as checking your phone mid-task or abandoning work that requires sustained effort in favor of quick stimulation.

• Mental health strain rose alongside cognitive fatigue — The analysis found higher levels of stress and anxiety among heavier short-form video users. There was a consistent relationship between frequent scrolling and elevated psychological strain, even when other factors vary across studies.

Interestingly, short-form video use showed no meaningful association with body image or self-esteem. The strongest effects cluster around focus, impulse control, and stress, not self-worth or appearance concerns.

• The format, not just the content, drives the effect — Researchers emphasized that endless scrolling, rapid video turnover, and constant novelty create a cognitive environment that overloads attention systems. Each swipe demands quick reorientation, which trains your brain to expect frequent rewards and undermines tolerance for slower, deeper thinking.

• Most studies captured snapshots, not long timelines — Many included studies measured participants at a single point in time rather than tracking changes over years. That limits conclusions about permanence but strengthens confidence in the consistency of the association seen right now, across contexts and populations.2

This paper shows that attention and self-regulation weaken in step with heavier short-form video use, not because of a character flaw, but because your brain adapts to the environment it repeats. When you understand that mechanism, attention becomes a skill you can protect, train, and rebuild rather than something you assume you have simply lost.

Sustained Focus Erodes with Frequent Scrolling

A narrative review published in the International Journal of Community Empowerment & Society Administration analyzed research published between 2019 and 2025 to evaluate how short-form video platforms influence sustained attention and daily functioning.3 Unlike a meta-analysis, this review synthesized findings across selected empirical studies that directly isolated short-form video use rather than general screen time.

The populations studied primarily included adolescents and young adults, with particular emphasis on Gen Z and younger Millennials who use platforms like TikTok most heavily. The findings consistently showed that frequent users struggle more with sustained attention, academic performance, and task persistence compared with lighter users.

• Attention problems intensified as daily use increased — Multiple studies summarized in the review reported a dose-response pattern, meaning attention difficulties became more pronounced as time spent on short-form video rose. Users averaging more than two hours per day showed clearer deficits in focus than those with lower exposure. This frames attention as something that degrades in steps, not all at once, which makes self-monitoring a powerful tool.

• Academic performance declined alongside focus — The review highlighted consistent links between heavier short-form video use and lower grade point averages, increased procrastination, and difficulty completing complex assignments. These outcomes reflect real-world performance, not abstract test scores. When attention fragments, learning efficiency drops even if total study time stays the same.

• Behavioral control weakened during demanding tasks — Studies cited in the review found that frequent users showed more distractibility during sustained cognitive tasks, such as reading long passages or listening to lectures. This aligns with reports from educators who observe students struggling to stay engaged without frequent stimulation changes.

• Neuroimaging findings showed changes in control and reward regions — Emerging EEG and MRI studies summarized in the review found altered activity in brain areas involved in executive control and reward processing among heavy users. Executive control regions help you stay focused and regulate behavior, while reward regions drive motivation and habit loops. Changes in these systems mirror patterns seen in other compulsive behaviors.

Rapid Novelty Shapes How Your Brain Allocates Effort

The review described how fast, algorithm-driven content reinforces preference for immediate rewards over delayed effort.4 Each short clip trains your brain to expect quick payoff, making slower tasks feel disproportionately taxing. For daily life, this explains why long emails, deep work, or uninterrupted reading feel harder after heavy scrolling.

• Younger users showed stronger effects than older ones — The largest attention disruptions appeared in younger adolescents whose executive systems are still maturing. The review emphasized that developing brains show higher sensitivity to repeated reward cycles, which amplifies the impact of frequent short-form exposure.

• Individual differences shaped vulnerability — Not all users showed the same level of impairment. Those with stronger self-regulation skills or more varied offline activities demonstrated less severe attention problems. This finding supports a personalized approach, where you assess your own habits and limits rather than assuming uniform risk.

• The mechanisms point toward habit design, not personal failure — Platform design elements, including autoplay, endless feeds, and personalized algorithms, drive these outcomes. When you view attention as a trainable capacity influenced by environment, it becomes easier to set boundaries, track usage, and rebuild focus through intentional routines.

How to Protect and Rebuild Your Focus in a Short-Form World

So, is “brain rot” real? The evidence says the experience people describe has a real neurological basis, but the label itself oversimplifies what’s happening. What changes isn’t intelligence or motivation. What changes is how your attention system adapts to repeated exposure to short, fast, highly rewarding content. Research shows that when your brain trains on constant novelty and rapid switching, it becomes less efficient at sustained focus and self-control. That is learning, not damage, and learning works both ways.

Attention loss isn’t a willpower failure. Your brain did exactly what brains do. It adapted to the environment it was placed in. Short-form video feeds reward speed, novelty, and instant payoff, so your nervous system learned to expect those conditions. Over time, deeper focus feels harder not because you lost it, but because you stopped practicing it.

That distinction points to the solution. You protect and rebuild focus by changing the environment that trained your attention in the first place and by reintroducing conditions that reward depth, continuity, and effort. When the rules change, your brain follows. Focus isn’t gone. It’s retrainable.

1. Cut the loop at its source, not at your discipline — If you open short-form apps automatically, the root cause is the endless feed itself. I recommend removing short-form video apps from your phone entirely and accessing them only on a desktop browser, if at all. This single change breaks autoplay, frictionless scrolling, and constant novelty, which are the drivers of attention erosion.

I also recommend keeping your phone out of your bedroom. When your phone stays within arm’s reach at night or first thing in the morning, your brain never fully disengages from the reward loop.

Removing it from the bedroom reduces your exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs), protects sleep, reduces late-night and early-morning scrolling, and prevents your attention system from starting the day in a fragmented state. When the loop disappears and your sleep environment stays stimulus-free, your brain stops expecting a reward every few seconds. Over time, focus steadies and mental energy becomes easier to sustain.

2. Set a daily attention anchor that trains depth — Endless scrolling weakens the brain regions that govern focus and decision-making, which leaves you more vulnerable to stress, anxiety, and poor sleep. Try choosing one daily activity that demands sustained attention for 20 to 30 minutes without interruption. Reading a physical book, writing by hand, or completing a single uninterrupted work block all qualify.

Exercise plays a similar role for your brain. It acts like a reset button by strengthening control circuits, stabilizing stress hormones, and restoring healthier dopamine signaling so you feel more in charge of your choices.5 When you pair movement with a focused attention block, you reinforce the same control systems from two directions at once.

Think of this as resistance training for attention. You track one simple metric: did you finish the block without switching tasks. Each completed session gives you direct evidence that focus rebuilds through practice, not motivation, and that your brain responds quickly when the right conditions return.

3. Use time boxing instead of vague limits — If you’re not ready to eliminate short-form content entirely, try strict time boxing. One window per day. One device. A hard stop. For example, 15 minutes in the evening only. When time ends, the app closes. This approach respects cognitive load limits and prevents attention fatigue from spreading across your entire day. You’re not guessing or negotiating with yourself. The rule is fixed.

4. Replace fast reward with slower reward on purpose — Short-form video trained your brain to chase instant payoff. You counter this by deliberately choosing activities with delayed reward: long walks without headphones, cooking a full meal, completing a complex task start to finish. Notice how uncomfortable the first five minutes feel. That discomfort is the retraining phase. Each time you stay focused, you restore tolerance for effort and depth.

5. Turn attention recovery into a visible scorecard — Track three daily markers on paper: total short-form minutes, longest uninterrupted focus block, and evening mental fatigue level. This isn’t about perfection. It’s about feedback. When short-form minutes drop and focus blocks rise, stress and restlessness fall. Seeing that pattern builds confidence and keeps you engaged because your brain responds to progress it can see.

This approach works because it targets the cause, not the symptom. You remove the environment that fragments attention, then actively retrain the brain systems that short-form video weakened. Over time, focus stops feeling fragile and starts feeling reliable again.

FAQs About Brain Rot

Q: Is “brain rot” actually real, or is it just slang?
A: The term is slang, but the experience behind it is real. Research shows that heavy short-form video use reshapes how attention and self-control function by training your brain to expect constant novelty and rapid rewards. This is an adaptation to the environment, not a loss of intelligence or motivation.

Q: What exactly changes in my brain with frequent short-form video use?
A: The strongest changes show up in attention, impulse control, and stress regulation. Endless scrolling trains your brain to switch quickly and seek instant payoff, which makes sustained focus, task completion, and emotional steadiness harder during everyday activities.

Q: Who’s most affected by short-form video habits?
A: Effects appear across ages and platforms, but younger users and heavy daily users show the greatest strain. People with weaker self-regulation skills or fewer offline activities tend to experience stronger attention disruption, while those with structured routines show more resilience.

Q: Is attention loss permanent once it happens?
A: No. The evidence supports learning and adaptation, not irreversible damage. Attention weakens because it’s practiced less and fragmented more often. When the environment changes and depth is reintroduced, focus responds and rebuilds through repeated use.

Q: What are the most effective ways to protect and rebuild focus?
A: The most effective strategies target the cause, not willpower. Removing short-form apps from your phone, keeping your phone out of your bedroom, setting daily uninterrupted focus blocks, pairing focus with exercise, using strict time limits, and tracking progress all retrain attention systems and restore control over time.

Chocolate has a history that stretches back thousands of years. Ancient civilizations prized cacao as both a food and a ceremonial drink, and today dark chocolate is often promoted as a healthier choice because it contains antioxidant compounds called polyphenols. You break off a square or two expecting something close to a guilt-free pleasure, rich, satisfying, and backed by articles praising its benefits. What you probably aren’t expecting is a dose of toxic metal alongside it.

That’s the uncomfortable tension running through research into cocoa products. Lead and cadmium are heavy metals with no useful role in the body, and unlike many dietary concerns that pass through and clear out, they accumulate and linger. Their effects build quietly over years; lead is tied to neurological harm and developmental problems, cadmium to damage in the kidneys, bones, heart, and reproductive system.

Children and pregnant women have the most at stake, since developing brains and bodies are far more sensitive to these exposures.

What makes the problem genuinely hard to navigate is that the usual instincts for picking a “cleaner” bar may not lead where you expect. The certifications and price tags many shoppers trust as a proxy for purity don’t always tell you what’s actually inside, and two bars sitting side by side can differ more than you would ever guess from the wrapper. So, how widespread is heavy metal contamination in dark chocolate, and what did researchers discover when they took a closer look at the products people buy every day?

The Numbers Behind Chocolate Contamination

A study published in Frontiers in Nutrition examined 72 cocoa-containing products sold in the U.S. between 2014 and 2022 to determine how much lead, cadmium, and arsenic consumers were exposed to through dark chocolate and related products.1 The researchers looked at products collected across four different years to identify long-term trends and determine whether contamination was improving or worsening over time.

• The results revealed a surprisingly common problem — Researchers found that 43% of products exceeded California Proposition 65 limits for lead, while 35% exceeded the state’s limits for cadmium. It’s worth knowing these are conservative warning-label thresholds set below federal safety levels; a product exceeding them isn’t automatically dangerous, but the share crossing even a cautious line is striking.

Arsenic was a different story — none of the products exceeded Proposition 65 limits for arsenic. Even though many products remained below regulatory thresholds, the findings showed that contamination was common enough that consumers could not assume a chocolate product was free of concern simply because it was widely available on store shelves.

• The biggest issue was inconsistency between products — Median lead levels were below California limits, but certain products contained much higher concentrations than average. This means the chocolate bar you choose matters. Two products with similar cocoa percentages could expose you to very different amounts of heavy metals.

• The hidden risk comes from repeated exposure — Researchers emphasized that average contamination levels from one serving often remained below federal safety thresholds, especially for lead. However, they also pointed out that exposure doesn’t happen in isolation. If you eat dark chocolate regularly and also consume other foods that contain trace amounts of heavy metals, your total exposure increases.

The researchers specifically noted that combining chocolate with other dietary sources could push some individuals above California’s maximum allowable dose levels.

• The contamination appears to come from more than one source — Cocoa products are naturally prone to accumulating metals because cocoa plants grow in environments where these elements exist in soil. The study also highlighted evidence suggesting that contamination often increases after harvest. Processing, transportation, and manufacturing practices appear to contribute additional exposure.

This distinction matters because it means contamination is not simply a farming issue. Better quality-control measures during production could reduce the problem substantially.

• Organic labels didn’t guarantee lower heavy metal levels — Many consumers assume certifications provide extra protection, yet the study found otherwise. Organic products tended to show higher cadmium, and higher lead by weight, likely because the organic label says nothing about cacao percentage or growing region, the two factors that actually drive cadmium content.

Researchers found that certifications such as organic, fair trade, and non-GMO didn’t reliably reduce contamination levels. At the same time, the study offered one encouraging finding: Heavy metal concentrations generally declined from 2014 to 2022, suggesting that increased testing, improved manufacturing practices, and greater industry awareness are moving the market in a better direction.

The Controversy Reached the Courtroom

The nonprofit consumer advocacy organization As You Sow tested more than 469 chocolate products sold in California for contamination.2 Investigators found that 285 products contained amounts above California’s maximum allowable dose levels for one or more metals. The organization examined hundreds of items available to consumers, revealing that contamination concerns extended across a large portion of the market.

• The issue involved many familiar brands — As You Sow reported contamination findings involving products from major manufacturers and specialty chocolate makers alike. The organization subsequently filed legal notices against more than 20 companies, including Hershey’s, Lindt, Trader Joe’s, Godiva, Mars, Whole Foods, Ghirardelli, and others, alleging that products contained cadmium, lead, or both without adequate consumer warnings.

For shoppers, this reinforced an uncomfortable reality: contamination concerns were not limited to obscure brands or niche products.

• Lawsuits shifted the debate from contamination to transparency — Law firm Weitz & Luxenberg filed a class-action lawsuit against Hershey and Lily’s.3 The legal claims centered on allegations that consumers purchased dark chocolate products without knowing they contained elevated levels of heavy metals.

As attorney James Bilsborrow stated, “If you knew these products contained lead and cadmium, you likely would not have purchased them.” The lawsuits argued that consumers deserved clearer information about what was in the products they were buying.

• Industry leaders responded with a landmark settlement — In 2018, legal pressure and public scrutiny resulted in a first-of-its-kind agreement involving 31 chocolate companies, including major industry players such as Hershey, Mars, Nestlé, and Cargill.4

Under the settlement, participating companies agreed to fund an independent expert committee tasked with investigating contamination sources, identifying practical methods to reduce contamination, and recommending levels that would trigger California warning requirements. This represented one of the largest coordinated industry responses to contamination concerns in the chocolate market.

• European regulators set stricter limits as cocoa content rises — The European Union established maximum cadmium limits for finished chocolate and cocoa products through Regulation (EU) No. 488/2014, with full implementation beginning in 2019.5 Importantly, these limits apply to the chocolate product you buy rather than the raw cocoa beans used to make it.

The regulations also recognize that darker chocolate naturally contains more cocoa solids and therefore tends to contain more cadmium, which is why higher-cacao products are permitted higher cadmium limits than lower-cacao chocolates. The EU continues to fund research, farmer training, and agricultural programs in major cocoa-producing countries to reduce cadmium contamination while maintaining chocolate quality and consumer safety.

How to Reduce Your Heavy Metal Exposure from Chocolate

The goal is not to fear every piece of chocolate. The real issue is cumulative exposure. Heavy metals build up over time, so the most effective strategy is to lower your overall burden while still enjoying foods that offer benefits. First focus on reducing exposure at the source because that addresses the root cause instead of simply reacting after the fact.

1. Choose high-quality dark chocolate instead of avoiding it altogether — Dark chocolate itself is not the problem. In fact, when it comes from a high-quality source, it may offer meaningful health benefits, according to observational research. In a large observational study, people who ate five or more servings of dark chocolate a week had a 21% lower risk of developing Type 2 diabetes — an association, not proof of cause.6

Researchers point to cocoa’s flavanols as the likely explanation, since these compounds have been linked elsewhere to support insulin sensitivity, blood vessel function, and lower inflammation. The key is choosing chocolate that may deliver those benefits without unnecessary contamination.

Look for dark chocolate with a lower cacao percentage and simple, recognizable ingredients, since higher-cacao bars tend to carry more cadmium, as noted above. Avoid products that contain vegetable oils, soy lecithin, high-fructose corn syrup, or artificial flavors, and look for Prop 65 certification where available.

Give further preference to companies that openly share heavy metal testing results, emphasize ingredient transparency, and prioritize strict quality-control standards. A high-quality dark chocolate bar may provide the benefits of cocoa’s flavanols while helping you minimize exposure to unwanted contaminants.

2. Avoid assuming organic means lower contamination — Many people spend extra money on organic chocolate believing it offers greater protection. The Frontiers in Nutrition analysis found the opposite for cadmium, with organic products often showing higher levels.7 Rather than relying on a label alone, pay attention to testing data, company quality-control practices, and independent evaluations of finished products.

3. Treat dark chocolate as one source among many — Chocolate is only one contributor to your total heavy metal exposure. Tea, spices, cereals, seafood, and other foods also contain varying amounts. If you enjoy dark chocolate frequently, it would be wise to reduce unnecessary exposure elsewhere. Small reductions across multiple foods add up to a meaningful decrease in your overall burden over time.

4. Favor quality over quantity — If you eat chocolate every day, consider making it an occasional food instead of a staple. The research repeatedly highlighted the importance of cumulative exposure. A small serving a few times a week creates a very different exposure pattern than multiple servings every day. Think of it as a scorecard. Every serving counts toward your long-term total.

5. Support your body’s natural resilience and detoxification — I recommend focusing on whole foods that provide the minerals and nutrients your body needs to function well. Prioritize high-quality protein from ruminant animals, with roughly one-third of your protein coming from collagen-rich sources. Include whole fruits and other nutrient-dense carbohydrate sources that support cellular energy production.

In addition, a small study of healthy adults found that repeated sauna sessions combined with exercise increased measurable excretion of lead and cadmium through sweat, suggesting this approach may serve as an additional route for eliminating some heavy metals.8 Glutathione, your body’s primary internal antioxidant, depends on adequate protein and sulfur-rich foods such as onions and garlic.

Cruciferous vegetables such as broccoli and kale may help support the Nrf2 pathway, one of the body’s natural systems for regulating antioxidant and detoxification gene activity. Together they may help strengthen your cellular defenses. Your body is constantly exposed to small amounts of environmental contaminants.

The stronger your metabolic health and nutritional status, the better equipped you are to handle those exposures. Building a nutrient-dense diet around whole foods gives you a foundation that supports long-term health while reducing reliance on heavily processed products that often introduce additional unwanted ingredients.

*These findings are drawn from clinical and population-based research. Individual results may vary, and these findings may not apply to all individuals. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Consult a qualified healthcare provider before making changes to your health regimen.

FAQs About Heavy Metals in Chocolate

Q: What did researchers find when they tested dark chocolate products?
A: A study published in Frontiers in Nutrition analyzed 72 cocoa-containing products sold in the U.S. and found that 43% exceeded California Proposition 65 limits for lead, while 35% exceeded limits for cadmium.9 Arsenic levels were much lower and none of the products exceeded California’s arsenic limits. The study also found substantial differences between products, meaning contamination levels varied widely from one chocolate bar to another.

Q: Is dark chocolate still healthy despite the contamination concerns?
A: Yes, when chosen carefully. High-quality dark chocolate remains a rich source of flavanols, the cocoa polyphenols associated with improved insulin sensitivity, steadier blood sugar regulation, healthier blood vessels, and lower inflammation. Choose dark chocolate from companies that prioritize quality control, ingredient transparency, and heavy metal testing.

Look for products with a lower cacao percentage, Prop 65 certification where available, and simple ingredient lists that avoid vegetable oils, soy lecithin, high-fructose corn syrup, and artificial flavors.

Q: Does buying organic chocolate reduce heavy metal exposure?
A: Not necessarily. The Frontiers in Nutrition study found that organic products were more likely to contain higher cadmium levels and also showed higher lead concentrations when measured by weight. Researchers also found that certifications such as organic, fair trade, and non-GMO did not reliably predict lower contamination levels.

Q: Why are lead and cadmium in chocolate a concern?
A: Unlike many substances that pass through your body, lead and cadmium accumulate over time. Lead is associated with neurological and developmental problems, particularly in children, while cadmium has been linked to kidney damage, bone disease, cardiovascular problems, and reproductive harm. Repeated exposure from multiple foods over many years is a greater concern than a single serving of chocolate.

Q: What can I do to reduce my exposure while still enjoying chocolate?
A: Focus on quality and moderation. Choose dark chocolate from companies that openly share heavy metal testing results, avoid eating multiple servings every day, and remember that chocolate is only one source of heavy metal exposure in the diet.

Supporting your body’s natural detoxification systems through regular exercise, sauna use, adequate protein intake, sulfur-rich foods such as onions and garlic, and cruciferous vegetables such as broccoli may also help support your body’s ability to eliminate toxins.

Test Your Knowledge with Today’s Quiz!
Take today’s quiz to see how much you’ve learned from yesterday’s Mercola.com article.

Besides blood sugar control, what else may microplastics harm?

Bone strength
Lung capacity
Muscle growth
Brain health
Tiny plastic particles may enter brain tissue and contribute to insulin resistance, oxidative stress, and cellular damage. Learn more.

Ever since I first entered the medical field, something struck me as off about the relentless focus on blood pressure, and over time I noticed that the blood pressures people reported to me varied widely. While pondering this, a talented practitioner and mentor once told me that the current medical paradigm fixates on blood pressure because it’s easier to measure than blood perfusion (healthy blood flow).

Then, as I became more acquainted with the medical field, I began to notice a consistent pattern — whenever a drug existed that could treat a number or statistic, as the years went by, the acceptable number kept on being narrowed, making more and more people eligible to take the drugs that treated the number.

Conventional Blood Pressure Perspectives

Since blood vessels are elastic fluid-filled structures, that fluid holds them under pressure. Blood pressure, in turn, is typically measured by determining how much external force is needed to exceed the artery’s pressure and compress it so that blood no longer flows through it.

Low blood pressure (hypotension) is a problem because it prevents blood from reaching the areas where it’s needed, but in most cases, medicine instead focuses on the consequences of high blood pressure. Within the conventional model, those consequences are:

• Weakened blood vessels become more likely to break open and leak as higher blood pressure pushes against them. This for instance, is why Emergency Rooms aggressively lower the blood pressure of patients who show up with symptoms of “hypertensive emergency,” such as a severe headache and a significantly elevated blood pressure.
Likewise, whenever a critical blood vessel ruptures (e.g., the aorta or one in the brain), once the bleed has been confirmed, the first step in managing it is to lower the patient’s blood pressure (so less blood leaks out) after which they are sent to surgery.
• Excessive pressure on the arteries strains and damages them, causing the lining of the vessels to become damaged and gradually develop atherosclerosis.
• Excessive blood pressure damages the internal organs (termed end-organ damage), leading to premature failure and early death (e.g., from a heart attack or kidney failure) — something which also results from chronic insufficient blood flow.

Because of this, high blood pressure is viewed as one of the leading preventable causes of cardiovascular disease; therefore, ensuring that a patient achieves sufficiently reduced blood pressure is a primary focus of all medical visits. Unfortunately, that chain of logic has quite a few holes in it.

Variable Blood Pressure

Blood pressure (BP) is highly variable, especially at the periphery, where it’s typically measured. This variability — around 14 points — can lead to misdiagnoses of hypertension and unnecessary medication, which can lower BP too much, causing hypotension.1 One common form of this misdiagnosis is known as White Coat Hypertension, where the stress of visiting a doctor temporarily raises BP.

This affects 15% to 30% of patients “diagnosed” with hypertension.2 Guidelines recommend confirming hypertension with multiple measurements, including home monitoring, but this is often not done.

Measurement errors, such as using the wrong cuff size or failing to account for differences in BP between arms, contribute to the issue. It’s estimated that 25% of hypertension diagnoses are incorrect.3 Moreover, there is often a poor correlation between peripheral BP (limbs) and central BP (inside the aorta). Central BP, which is more closely linked to cardiovascular disease, can differ significantly from arm readings. Different BP medications also affect central and peripheral BP differently, adding complexity to treatment.

What Affects Blood Pressure?

If fluid at a set pressure tries to move through a tube, as the tube shrinks, the pressure it creates (e.g., on the walls of the tube) will increase, while if the tube enlarges, the pressure it exerts will decrease. The body continually controls where blood in the body goes by changing the heart rate and fully or partially constricting the arteries, allowing it to shunt blood to where it is most needed (e.g., by dilating arteries in that area).

Blood pressure is thus a product of two factors: the volume of blood in the arteries and the degree of arterial constriction or relaxation.

Note: Since arterial BP is greater than venous BP, it’s what’s measured externally (as veins compress long before arteries do, and only arterial blood has a signature pulsatile wave created by the heartbeat).

Since each heartbeat pushes blood into the arteries and thereby increases the pressure within them, two blood pressure values exist — the baseline pressure (diastolic pressure, DBP) and the pressure when the heart contracts (systolic pressure, SBP). The blood pressure values you see (e.g., 140/90) represent the maximum and minimum.

Note: One reason why this stretching is important is that when the vessels contract back to their normal size once the systolic pressure fades, that recoil pushes blood further along into the circulation.

Blood pressure lowering medications in turn work by some combination of:

Loosening the arterial walls
Reducing the total blood in circulation
Weakening the contraction of the heart

What Causes High Blood Pressure?

Most cases of high blood pressure (90% to 95% of them4) are what is known as “essential hypertension” or “primary hypertension” which is a fancy (and rarely questioned) way of saying “elevated blood pressure without a known cause.”

More importantly, the fact there is no known cause for most cases of elevated blood pressure has been a widespread belief in medicine for decades. Typically, the only cause we hear about is “not eating salt,” despite the fact that the most detailed review of this subject found that drastic salt reduction typically results in less than a 1% reduction in blood pressure and more importantly,5 that eating salt is actually critically important for health (discussed further here).

For the remaining 5% to 10% (known as secondary hypertension), recognized causes include reduced blood flow to the kidneys (which sets off a signal to raise the blood pressure because the kidneys believe there isn’t enough blood perfusion),6 sleep apnea,7 or having a rare tumor that releases a blood pressure increasing hormone.8

Since the cause of most hypertension is unclear, medicine simply focuses on risk factors like age, diabetes, salt intake, obesity, stress, and family history.

Note: Effectively addressing anxiety can often cure high blood pressure that would otherwise be perpetually medicated.

Atherosclerosis and Blood Pressure

Many of my colleagues became suspicious of the traditional blood pressure model after observing that circulatory impairments often co-occurred with rising blood pressure rather than resulting from long-term damage.

This led us to conclude that elevated blood pressure might be a compensatory response to inadequate blood flow, similar to how the kidneys raise blood pressure when they don’t receive enough blood. Several factors support this idea:

1. Arterial stiffening — Calcified arteries can’t expand as effectively, raising blood pressure as they become less able to release pressure.
2. Measurement inaccuracy — Blood pressure cuffs may overestimate pressure in stiffened arteries, particularly in those with severe atherosclerosis, resulting in higher readings than the true pressure (because hardened arteries require greater pressure to compress).
3. Endothelial dysfunction — The blood vessel lining releases nitric oxide to dilate vessels and decrease pressure. When this function fails, it precedes atherosclerosis and increases blood pressure, suggesting the problem is with endothelial health, not high blood pressure itself.9
4. Sympathetic reflex — When the body rapidly loses a significant amount of blood, a reflex triggers increased heart rate and vessel constriction to raise blood pressure, a common response in critical conditions.10

This all suggests that high blood pressure may be more of a symptom than the root cause of circulatory issues.

Note: As I show here, a strong case can also be made that the blood thickening and clumping together causes hypertension.

Changing Guidelines

When the blood pressure craze took off, there was a rush to bring the blood pressure lowering drugs to market before their benefit was actually proven (outside of a few short term studies which showed a small benefit for people with very high blood pressures).

That mindset cemented itself, and as the years went by, regardless of the evidence arguing against it, the blood pressure thresholds kept on getting lowered so more and more people could put on blood pressure lowering medications. Because of this, roughly 60 million American adults (23%) now take these drugs.11

However, excessively lowering blood pressure cuts blood flow to parts of the body that can’t function without sufficient blood flow. For example, blood pressure medications increase the risk of kidney disease,12,13
and suddenly passing out (from insufficient blood flow to the brain) is one of the most common side effects of blood pressure medications.14,15

My best guess is that this inexorable march to putting everyone on these drugs is due to some combination of the following:

• Research funding is available for these areas (e.g., from the drug manufacturers) hence being a safe area of research for academics to explore.
• It illustrates the “if you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail” phenomenon and the medical profession’s desire to find more justifications for using its tools (especially since humans tend to double down on their existing approach when it fails rather than consider a new one).

Let’s now look at how the blood pressure guidelines have changed over the years.

Note: As these guidelines show, originally the focus was on treating diastolic blood pressure under the belief that the heart had to “work harder” if there was too much blood in the circulation. I believe this is helpful to note since it was believed for decades (but now is not), and hence illustrates how arbitrary many medical dogmas are.

To quote the 2017 guidelines:16

“Rather than 1 in 3 U.S. adults having high blood pressure (32%) with the previous definition, the new guidelines will result in nearly half of the U.S. adult population (46%) having high blood pressure, or hypertension.”

Note: This rate further increases with age (e.g., 79% of men and 85% of women over 75 now have hypertension, while 71% of men and 78% of women now meet the threshold to start blood pressure medications).17

Unfortunately, “Experts” on guideline panels are paid to create recommendations that result in more and more people taking the drugs, a sadly common phenomenon in medicine.

For example, once statins entered the market (which unlike their predecessors, could effectively lower cholesterol), the acceptable blood cholesterol levels kept on being lowered, and before long almost everyone was told they would die from a heart attack unless they started a statin — despite statins having an almost non-existing mortality benefit (e.g., taking them for five years at best makes you live 3 to 4 days longer18) and causing (often severe) side effects for roughly 20% of users.

In turn, since so many people have been severely harmed by the great statin scam, more and more people, such as comedian Jimmy Dore, have begun to speak out against this:

First, they scammed you on skin cancer when the sun is good for you.Now, they’re scamming you again on cholesterol to sell you a lifetime medication.This entire narrative of cholesterol being the villain in heart disease was built on a lie.What doctors fail to tell you is… pic.twitter.com/bhhkFBBDbb — A Midwestern Doctor (@MidwesternDoc) September 11, 2024
Video Link

The Effects of Hypertensive Medications

In many cases, the actual mechanism of a drug greatly differs from the purported one (e.g., the tiny benefit statins provide is most likely due to them reducing inflammation).

In the case of blood pressure medications (each of which works in a different manner), very different degrees of benefit are observed with their use, despite producing the same drop in blood pressure. This in turn strongly argues that their benefits are not due to them lowering blood pressure, but rather how each one specifically affects the body. To illustrate:

• A 1997 paper in JAMA reviewed the literature and found significantly different benefits from the antihypertensive drugs depending on which type was used.19
• A 1998 review found that the (known) cardiovascular benefits of ACE inhibitors were not seen with calcium channel blockers, despite the latter having a more significant effect on blood pressure.20
• A 2000 study of 3577 diabetics found that a specific ACE inhibitor, despite minimally reducing blood pressure (a 2.4 reduction in SBP and 1.0 reduction in DBP) had a massive effect (a 25% reduction) on the risk of a heart attack, stroke, or cardiovascular death.21
• A 2007, eight year long (and NIH funded) double-blind study of 42,418 subjects found that when two different types of blood pressure medications were used, there was no difference in their effect on blood pressure but simultaneously found their rate of preventing heart failure varied by 18% to 80% depending on the drug, leading the investigators to conclude: “blood pressure reduction is an inadequate surrogate marker for health benefits in hypertension.”22

Harms of Hypertensive Medications

Blood pressure management typically combines multiple drugs to achieve target levels while switching medications that cause intolerable side effects. This approach is problematic because each drug has markedly different pharmacological and physical effects and should be selected based on individual patient needs rather than simply achieving blood pressure targets.

The most common side effects stem from poor perfusion. Blood pressure medications increase the risk of fainting and frequently cause lightheadedness and falls in older patients with calcified arteries who require higher pressure to perfuse the brain23 (e.g., a 2014 JAMA study of 4,961 adults over 70 with hypertension found that over three years, 9% experienced serious falls and 16.9% died).24

Note: An important Israeli study found that discontinuing an average of 2.8 drugs per elderly patient reduced their 1-year death rate from 45% to 21%.25 This is massive, and I believe a key reason for those results was reduced falls (as anti-hypertensives were one of the most successfully discontinued drug classes in the study).

Likewise, emergency medicine recognizes that aggressively treating high blood pressure can impair brain blood flow and trigger ischemic strokes. Furthermore, hypertension drugs increase the risk of an acute renal injury by 18%,26 and in patients who have end stage renal disease low blood pressure increases mortality by 39%.27

Note: Low blood pressure is particularly harmful to organs sensitive to reduced blood flow like the brain (e.g., low blood pressure is strongly linked to cognitive decline28).

Finally, each blood pressure medication works differently, offering unique therapeutic benefits but also distinct side effects. Four main antihypertensive drug classes exist:

1. Diuretics lower blood pressure by increasing urination through blocking sodium reabsorption in the kidneys. They cause electrolyte imbalances (low potassium affects 8.2% of users), gastrointestinal symptoms due to dehydration, and hypotension (low blood pressure).29 Thiazides also increase uric acid, increasing the risk of diabetes and gout.30
2. Beta-blockers slow the heart and reduce contraction force. While beneficial for patients with heart failure, they constrict peripheral arteries. Patients frequently report worsened quality of life from beta blockers, with the most common side effects including:

3. Calcium channel blockers reduce heart contraction force, dilate arteries by relaxing smooth muscle, and slow heart rate. Major issues include edema (affecting 5.7% to 16.1% of users), dizziness, lightheadedness, and constipation.31

4. ACE inhibitors block the kidney’s blood pressure cascade and are considered most beneficial (commonly prescribed for diabetes and heart failure). The most common side effect is chronic dry cough (ranging from 3.9% to 35% of users32 — this detailed review determined it was 8.0%33). Other common side effects include headaches, lightheadedness, and loss of taste.
More severe effects include a 26% increased risk of acute kidney injuries (1.5% of users),34 a 103% increased risk of hyperkalemia (4.8% of users),35 and a 19% increase in the risk of lung cancer.36

Under Recognition of Side Effects

While the numbers I just showed are quite concerning, I believe they actually underestimate the rate of side effects, as much of that data comes from industry clinical trials that deliberately find ways to downplay their drug’s side effects. Accordingly, I believe patient surveys provide a substantially better perspective on the incidence of symptomatic side effects. Consider this 1995 Swedish survey, which found roughly 1 in 5 users experience side effects:37

Likewise, a study of 370,000 patients under 65 between 2007-2014 found 23.5% stopped taking the drugs within 270 days of starting them, while 40.2% of those who continued often skipped the medications.38

Given such a high discontinuation rate of these drugs, one of the most surprising things about blood pressure drugs is how little awareness exists regarding their side effects, especially amongst doctors (e.g., the article I just cited acknowledged side effects were a reason for discontinuation but insisted it was due to patient ignorance about the importance of the drugs).39

All of that was best shown by this 1982 study (which would not be repeated in today’s political climate) that compared how patients, their families, and their doctors felt about the effects of these drugs on them.40 It found:

Conclusion

Many problems in medicine arise from illogical beliefs that become religious dogmas that can never be questioned (e.g., this perfectly characterizes vaccinology). Dr. Malcolm Kendrick, in turn, synopsized the core issue here; medicine assumes lowering blood pressure always follows a linear benefit.41 So despite it being well recognized that a blood pressure below 90 is dangerous, and no one has ever proven that benefits result from dropping a blood pressure in the 90s,42 here’s what the models say:

So, medicine continues to hold to this belief, despite it being overtly disproven by things like this study of 415,980 patients’ health records:43

This is regrettable because the same results have been observed with more modern technologies. For example, consider the results of this study of 415,980 patients obtained through their electronic health records, which again shows that rather than being linear, an age dependent threshold exists which is not at all recognized by the guidelines:44

When I initially published this article in July 2024, I genuinely wondered if they would drop the blood pressure thresholds again, as the existing trend suggested it, but the current (2017) thresholds were already on the border of causing complications for a significant portion of patients, making it unclear if they could get away with lowering it again.

Just a year later, they did, and now all blood pressures over 120 are “elevated,” 130/80 is the universal threshold for treatment and certain “high risk” patients are encouraged to go below 120/80.45

This abhorrent policy, in turn, touches upon a deeper truth. Every human being is different, and as long as medicine reduces them to fixed variables within a rigid algorithm, it will inevitably inflict many people with inappropriate care that harms them. To illustrate, in certain cases, treating blood pressure with the correct medication class that can mitigate the patient’s underlying issue is necessary.

Yet, as I’ve shown in this article, rather than guiding physicians towards identifying those situations, the guidelines simply focus on having everyone meet a numerical value and viewing all blood pressure medications as nothing more than a way to meet that target.

Fortunately, thanks to the MAHA moment, we have at last reached a point where not only is the corruption that continually births these disastrous policies being exposed to widespread scrutiny, but the real solution, empowering each person to take charge of their health (and adopt the approach that meets their unique health needs) is now being promoted by the Federal Health Agencies. It is my sincere hope that this article has provided you with the tools to do just that for your circulatory health.

Author’s Note: This is an abridged version of a longer article about the blood pressure scam which goes into much more detail on the points covered here and natural therapies for blood pressure which restore circulatory health (which can be read here). Additionally, a companion article on the dangers of statins and natural ways to treat heart disease can be read here, along with an article on the critical importance of salt and how to find healthy salt that can be read here.

A Note from Dr. Mercola About the Author
A Midwestern Doctor (AMD) is a board-certified physician from the Midwest and a longtime reader of Mercola.com. I appreciate their exceptional insight on a wide range of topics and I’m grateful to share them. I also respect AMD’s desire to remain anonymous since AMD is still on the front lines treating patients. To find more of AMD’s work, be sure to check out The Forgotten Side of Medicine on Substack.