✓ Fact Checked

In this training

We’re going to continue our discussion about animal research. We’re going to examine a few examples of how cancer would be different in rats than humans. Im going to explain the myth that humans don’t really need tonsils, gall bladders or “teeth scraped for tartar”? Finally, I’m going to dive deeper into the new health care solution, the health promotion solution and what the ancestral health movement have to offer us. (..Still fixated on the tartar thing? Find out next….)

Listen, if you’re serious about improving your health, living pain-free or you just don’t want to be sick anymore, here’s how to find out if I can help you. Call us at 219-769-5433, mention this show and we can begin together to find out today!

I discuss:

• Differences between human and rats mislead cancer research
• Test results that don’t apply to human: yet were marketed to believe it’s human
• The Ancestral Health Movement and newer technologies for the Health Promotion Solution

I am really excited to start you on this journey and I hope to add a lot of value to your life as a whole.

Show Transcript:

Nutrition is remarkable in its ability to have people with completely opposite views saying they have science to support completely opposite views.

Frustrating isn’t it? What are we suppose to believe?

Welcome to Dynamism Biohack, my name is Dr. Matt Hammett Wellness & Nutrition Expert, Lifestyle Trainer and Movement Enthusiast. In each week I’m going share with you how to make the right nutritious choices despite conflicting expert opinions where I help you to discover how to unlock your inner aborigine or your inner greatness. Thank you for spending this time with me today, so let’s get into the training.

Today’s training is a continuation of our last training, this is part II of Dynamism Biohack: Faulty Rat Science.

Let us examine a few examples of how cancer would be different in rats than humans. Scientists use rats and other animals to test certain chemicals used in households or factories to test cancer-causing potential or environmental pollutants. Here again, problems lie in this model; rats are poor predictors of human cancer risk for many reasons I have already covered. Some studies suggest that these tests on rats and other animals agree only 70% of the time.1 The problem with this theory is that rats are prone to different types of cancers than those affecting human beings. For example, the second leading cause of cancer death in people in the U.S. is spontaneous colon tumors but this is almost non-existent in rats and other rodent species. Why? Again the vast difference between organ structure and function, metabolism and on and on….

Were going to dive deep into this stuff with part II of Dynamism Biohack: Faulty Rat Science.

Another example for our argument includes the difference in bladder cancer between rats and humans. Male rats have two specific proteins that humans do not synthesize, which makes rats more prone to bladder cancer. It is the high concentrations of alpha-2U-globulin and albumin, found in rat urine. J.A. Swenberg, from the Chemical Industry Institute of Toxicology, writes, “Humans do not synthesize alpha-2U.2  Therefore, a direct extrapolation of rat data cannot be made”. Yet. They do it any way.

In the male rat, the liver manufactures the alpha-2U-globulin. It then gets secreted into the blood. While it is in the blood, it travels to the kidney and filters into the urine.3 This changes the entire spectrum, you can’t use a rat for cancer research; yet… we do it anyway.

RATS- TEST RESULTS DON’T APPLY TO HUMAN

I’m not alone on this, the Authors by the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine which is a group of medical doctors and Phd’s state that rat tests results do not apply to humans and are calling for newer models in research. They cite 20 distinct differences between rats and humans which make it difficult if not impossible to extrapolate rat studies to use for human standards. The result is evident. Animal test results, do not apply to humans.

The third leading cause of death in the U.S. is strokes. When we try to understand why we cannot seem to beat this disease, we need to look at our scientific disciplinary strategies. Once again, we see a problem. Strokes are rare in rats and other animals.5 In fact, even the conditions that lead up to a stroke in human rarely develop in rats and other animals. Despite these differences, science still developed animal “models” for stroke. According to the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, the scientific community has severely criticized the usefulness of animal models. Researchers at the University of Iowa and the Mayo Clinic have something to add to this position, “Although animal models of cerebral ischemia have been used extensively to test new therapies in human stroke, their record for identifying clinically effective drugs has been disappointing.”

In fact, they developed 25 different compounds in laboratory animal models of stroke, not even one of them worked on humans. These authors even add that “An over-reliance upon such models may impede rather than advance scientific progress in the treatment of this disease.”

There is one other more important difference I am going to share; I believe part of our problem in tackling the third leading cause of death in the U.S. stems from ignorance to basic science between differing species.

Now, we must examine the essential difference between rats and humans. If you are a true doctor, you must respect natural law and the order of ecology in life; we are animated earth.

In diet, rats require 20-27% of their calories as protein for a maintenance diet.6 Our medical model view suggest humans need 8-10% of their calories as protein. Of course this is not agreed upon depending upon which expert you talk to, that is a different show altogether.

In BMI, baby rats grow 5-6 grams per day in weight. That equates to about 10% of their body weight. Human children grow much more slowly: about 5 grams per day, which is 0.00025% of their body weight.7

At this point in today’s show, there is simply no argument; rats are not miniature humans. Why don’t scientists understand the significant difference between differing species? How can we continue to attempt drug extrapolation techniques from studying different species? Once again, this rat paradigm is just not adding up.

Rats produce their milk with mammary tissue extending from the upper chest to the abdomen which would vastly change how they produce milk for the sustenance of the young when compared to humans. The ratio of a rat to human lifespan is 1 to 30.

Even the skin between species has different developmental origin, structure, and chemical composition. For example, the skin is an organ of the integumentary system made up of multiple layers of ectodermal tissue and guards the underlying muscles, bones, ligaments and internal organs. In humans, skin is useful for wound healing. The reception of estrogen promotes the speed and quality of wound healing in human skin. In rats, they have thin skin and lack the outer keratinized layer that humans have. The outer layer serves as and forms a waterproof, protective wrap over the body’s surface and most importantly serves as a barrier to infection with many other specialized cells. Therefore, infection and other protective methods of skin differ vastly and would once again compromise lab results. Rats have a non-convoluted cerebrum, while the human brain has extensive convolutions, indicating the degree of cortex development.8

Rats’ incisors grow continuously, and they do not get plaque as humans do if fed a regular diet. They also do not develop a spontaneous periodontal disease. I can only imagine medical authorities 50 years ago telling the public not to have a dentist scrape plaque off your teeth because they claim there is no evidence for this. They might add that the dentist is just after your money. Well, my father in law recently retired from dentistry and shared that story with me because when he first began practicing 50 years ago the medical community criticized dentistry making those claims against scraping plaque. Sounds very similar to what they did to Chiropractic and the Flexner report we discussed in an earlier training doesn’t it? But what’s comical about this, if your evidence comes from the Almighty Rat Study, and rats can’t get tartar and plague because of their difference in species variation; they don’t care. Technically, their evidence would support that scraping plaque is not scientific! Interesting isn’t it… And we continue to hear doctors sounding just like this today. Most of these doctors. They honestly just don’t know. This stuff is not brought up in medical school, or even chiropractic school for that matter.

If that’s not enough to convince you of the scientific bullying based on erroneous rat and animal studies; let me continue. There are significant reproductive differences between species, as well. When we compare species differences for reproduction, rats have a double-horned uterus; humans do not. They also have two cervices and 8 to 14 babies in a litter; humans have only one cervix.

There are also vital organs which rats lack, that humans possess; have you ever wondered where we got the idea that humans don’t need tonsils? Guess what…

Rats do not have tonsils.9,10 Perhaps that is where we got the idea that humans do not need their tonsils.

Boy, did we get that wrong…

Rats are more susceptible to respiratory pathogens because they are nose-breathers. They also do not have the ability to vomit, and being unable to vomit; they are more vulnerable to ingested toxins.11

These examples of differences between rats and humans explain how unique species differences in basic anatomy and organ function will always yield different results. By no means is the orchestrated science real evidence for humanity. Therefore, we need a new way to evaluate science, and thankfully other scientists from many different disciplines like the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine have begun looking into new novel ways to explore humanity.

At this point, let me stop depressing you and start focusing on the new solutions; if you haven’t figured it out yet, I’m not alone with these ideas.

Leading researchers, posted their results titled “The Western Diet and Lifestyle, and Diseases of Civilization.” They concluded that our ancestors had the following characteristics:

 Regular sun exposure (except for the Inuit, whose very high intake of vitamin D3 from fish and marine mammals may have rendered the lack of ultraviolet stimulated cutaneous vitamin D synthesis less relevant).

 Sleep patterns in sync with the daily variation in light exposure.
 Acute, as opposed to chronic, stress.
 Regular physical activity, as this was required to obtain food and water, to escape from predators, for social interaction, and to build shelters.

Finally, they have lack of exposure to man-made environments.

OUR ANCIENT BONES TEACH

At this point in the training, we have a dire need for change and human research is always better than studying rats (and other various animals and species) and trying to compare rat and animal data to human data.

It’s time to look at what we have, what are tools can do, and find a new solution. One such solution into humanity for humanity; comes from studying ancient healthy humans.

Research techniques that led our discovery of dinosaurs lend a hand to our new knowledge of our ancient human ancestors. New technology has uncovered the secrets to our ancient past that was once locked away. Technologies like anatomical, biomechanical, and isotopic analyses of the different human skeletons have paved a new model toward understanding human health. By combining new technology with various academics, like the archaeological and geological evaluation of our ancient habitats, and ethnographic studies of various hunter–gatherer societies, a new method of human analysis is now possible.

I stated earlier that the Agricultural Revolution began about 11,000 years ago in the Middle East. Its method of farming sprouted many benefits to the wide-scale effort of food production and later spread to other regions of the globe.

This movement drastically altered the diet and lifestyle that had shaped the human genome (for a millennium.) Some of the more significant dietary changes were the use of cereal grains as staple foods, the introduction of nonhuman milk, domesticated meats, legumes and other cultivated plant foods, and later widespread use of sucrose, alcoholic beverages, leisure and sedentary lifestyles. Some of the more significant lifestyle changes include “medicalization of life” (modern medicine) and various synthetic compounds and pollutants mostly derived and tested from research on animals.

Nevertheless, it was the Industrial Revolution with the widespread use of refined vegetable oils, refined cereal grains, refined sugars and our comfort driven sedentary lifestyle that gave rise to the Modern Age. The “junk food” industry, generalized physical inactivity, the introduction of various pollutants mainly drugs, the avoidance of sun exposure, reduced sleep time and quality coupled with increased chronic psychological stress brought about the most disruptive and maladaptive changes of our evolutionary time in our history as a species.

These stressors are associated with chronic low-grade inflammation, which is one of the leading causes of insulin resistance. (Low-grade chronic inflammation is involved in all stages of the atherosclerotic process and is being increasingly recognized as a universal mechanism in various chronic degenerative diseases, such as autoimmune diseases, certain cancers, neuropsychiatric diseases, and osteoporosis.)

Scientists from around the world also warn of certain environmental pollutants, including pesticides and various industrial chemicals, which may act as endocrine disruptions. These forms of pollutants are suspected of playing a causal role in hormone-dependent cancers such as breast and prostate cancer, insulin resistance, type-II diabetes, obesity, and cardiovascular disease. Insufficient sleep (fewer than 6 hours per 24-hour day) is also associated with chronic low-grade inflammation and worsening insulin resistance, as well as increased risks for obesity, type-II diabetes, and cardiovascular disease.

One study showed that 28% of US adults sleep six or fewer hours per 24-hour period. Moreover, social and work pressures, as well as exposure to artificial light at atypical biologic times, induce a disruption of the normal circadian rhythm which is believed to play a key role in various diseases.12 Therefore, the relativist idea that sleep or parts of it are optional should be regarded with caution.

Regarding dietary changes, it should be mentioned that in the United States, dairy products, refined sugars, cereal grains (especially the refined form), vegetable oils, and alcohol constitute up to 70% of the total daily energy consumed. As pointed out by Dr. Loren Cordain, a scientist who specializes in the fields of nutrition and exercise physiology, “these types of foods would have contributed little or none of the energy in the typical pre-agricultural hominid diet.”

The technologies like anatomical, biomechanical, and isotopic analyses of the different human skeletons and the new model I am proposing in this training moves us toward understanding and promoting human health. Since the founding of the Five Pillars of a Dynamic Health strategy, we are not just anti-vivisection, we are pro-science and pro-alternative toward scientifically superiority with a focus on improving the health and well-being for humanity. Our message is clear: there is a better way to promote human and animal health than the current sickness/disease paradigm which is outdated, cruel, and an ineffective use of animals in research, testing, and education.

So how do you distinguish an expert opinion you may hear on the radio or see on TV. It certainly is not his or her good lucks, charisma or charm. You focus on one question. Are the studies they point to human or animal studies and are they relevant to the claims they are making. Lighten up, move better and live fuller.