Re: Re: 06-16-04 Day 1 Theron

[Guest guest]

Hi Theron. Me again. You know there are two philosophies of health.

One is the germ theory, the other is the terrain theory. With the germ

theory you look for cooties and find ways to kill them and blame them

for all the ills of the world, besided birth defects and accidents, etc.

With the terrain theory, which is what Naturopathic medicine is based

on, the terrain (bowel and body condition)

is everything. With the proper bowel health, lack of toxins and proper

bacterial balance and proper ph and proper nutrients, etc. there is no

cootie that can harm you. Just chaning your ph will kill truck loads of

bad guys.

So while you are killing the offenders, you might want to consider the

terrain and make it a hostile enviroment. The things that make you

thrive, make the offenders die. Nice system.

Just something to consider

Blessings

Donna

http://www.excellentthings.com

rhymetofree6 wrote:

>All of them! If it's in there, I want it DEAD!

>

>Best regards,

>

>Theron

>

>

>

>

>

>>what's the target microbe making you proceed (Hiv, hep-c, herpes,

>>etc) ?

>>

>>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Dears,

This is Whitneay. All infections, accept yeast

infections are related to too much fire in the body.

This is called Pitta in Ayurvedic (India) medicine.

Without getting rid of the heat, you cannot fully

be free of the infection, or another will take its

place.

Heat can be removed, not with electronic devices

as electricity itself is heat, but with diet change,

and cleansing programs. The length of the healing

process is also related to the length that the person

has had the disease.

Many Blessings,

Rev. Whitneay T. Vanwells

FusionMasters TM Ltd.

Products & Services:

http://www.newspiritservices.com/orderindex.html

Personal Growth Phone Sessions: http://www.newspiritservices

com/phonesessions.html

New Identity & Healing Seminars Coming Soon!

http://www.newspiritservices.com/Class.html

-- Re: 06-16-04 Day 1 Theron

Does the ENT, knowing how long this is going on, and with ability to

test, suspect an infection causing the swelling, and if the

infection ceased, then the problem would go away?

I don't mean to dampen enthusiasm, as there's lots of good to come

of what you are doing, but it may not be what you wanted handled,

even if other benefits occur. I've seen it happen that some issue

isn't resolved but all the warts and things since birth suddenly

vanish, etc, leaving the person much better off, but searching again

for something to address the thing that got them interested in first

place. Your electrification, though, can't really be all bad idea.

AT least you won't walk into complications.

bG

> > I see, so around the head area, ear, lymph node swelling, long-

> term

> > stubborn infection or tendency towards infection. Assuming

teeth

> > are not involved (* who knows). Good luck with it.

> >

> > bG

> >

[Guest guest]

Hi Theron,

Have you ever tried X Clear Nasal wash for infection? I have used my own

version of this on nasal/ear infections in the past with great success.

Below are some links and research excerpts.

Xylitol is a naturally occurring food substance. It is found in many fruits

and vegetables; a plum has about half of a gram. It is about as sweet as table

sugar (sucrose) with a third less calories.

It is classed as a " sugar alcohol, " but properly it is neither a sugar nor an

alcohol. It looks like sugar; it tastes like sugar. But it is O.K. for

diabetics. A molecule of xylitol (without all of the hydrogen atoms) looks like

the

model in the picture at the top, but it is very flexible.

It is commonly used as a food supplement because of its natural sweetness.

The World Health Organization and the FDA (Sec. 172.395 (21 CFR 172.395)), have

given it safe ratings as food supplements. It is commonly available

commercially without restriction and is found in many health food stores.

It is made in the human body. An average sized person makes about 10 grams of

xylitol every day.

Xylitol is slowly absorbed when eaten and if a person eats more than a

teaspoon or so at one time they are likely to have a few loose stools, just like

what happens with sorbitol, the most commonly used of the sugar alcohols.

People who use xylitol regularly learn to deal with it better and it doesn't

cause this problem.

People in Turku, Finland ate about one-fourth cup daily in a dental study and

had no significant problems.

The xylitol that is absorbed is rapidly metabolized, but it has very little

effect on blood sugar levels. Asano and his associates looked at this in the

early 70’s when xylitol was being considered for use in diabetics. He gave

healthy people 5 grams of xylitol, but could not detect any in their blood an

hour

later.

Xylitol costs about ten times as much as regular sugar. If there is more

demand I am sure that price will come down. I think this is one reason it is not

used more. With the current epidemic of diabetes, due in large part to the

combination of inactivity and sugar heavy soft drinks, xylitol is a very

attractive food supplement.

Xylitol is available in some countries in IV solutions. It is used in

diabetics and in some critical care situations such as burns. In papers prepared

for

the FDA the usual IV dose is 0.25 grams per kilogram per hour and the safe

dose is double that. For a 154 pound person that is the equivalent of about 800

to 1600 plums a day.

Xylitol and Diabetes

This was the first medical use of xylitol. Xylitol is metabolized into

glycogen which can be stored in our cells until we need to make it into glucose

for

energy. Glucose is the bodies preferred energy sugar and is a problem for

diabetics because it requires insulin to get into the cells. The glycogen from

the xylitol is already inside the cells and does not need the insulin.

The glycemic index of xylitol is 7. The glycemic index is a measure of how

rapidly particular foods are turned into glucose after we eat them and of how

much insulin is required for the body to use that food. It is useful information

for diabetics and many can control their diabetes just by not eating foods

with a high glycemic index. If you are interested in more information about the

glycemic index this link will take you to Rick Mendosa's web page which has

the best information I have found on the web.

Xylitol is interchangeable with sugar for most cooking applications. Yeast

cannot metabolize it so it won't work if you are baking bread or anything else

with yeast. (Doctors inclined toward natural treatments have recommended the

use of xylitol to prevent yeast infections for this reason.)

Xylitol and Finland

The Finns began using xylitol because of the sugar shortages caused by the

Second World War. Originally it was made from the birch trees that are plentiful

in Finland.

About twenty years after the war they realized that the people who used

xylitol had less tooth decay. The Turku Sugar Studies, done at the University of

Turku, confirmed this observation:

For two years one hundred seventeen subjects ate specially prepared diets

sweetened with sucrose (table sugar), fructose, or xylitol. The group eating

xylitol ate an average of 57 grams a day, about half the amount of sugar

consumed

by the average American. The study looked at the change in decayed surfaces,

fillings or missing teeth over the two years. The bar graph above shows the

results of that study. Those eating the sucrose diet fared the worst. Those

eating fructose had less but still substantial decay, while those eating the

xylitol had none.

The results of this study were exciting to the Finns and they increased their

use of xylitol. They also did more studies. One of the things they did that

made both of these easier was making gum with xylitol. Chewing the gum releases

the xylitol over a short period of time in the mouth where it is effective.

Most of the studies on tooth decay since that time have used gums as the

delivery because it is easy to dose and to measure how much is given (and

because

they were funded by the company making the gum. The web site at www.xylitol.net

is maintained by the company manufacturing the gum in Finland and has a lot of

information about this and other uses of xylitol.

Peldyak was involved with some of the studies looking at xylitol and

tooth decay done through the University of Michigan Dental School. He recently

summarized the studies with this gum and the prevention of tooth decay—regular

frequent use is the key. Chewing xylitol flavored gum once a day had little

benefit. Twice a day reduced cavities by 40%, three times a day by 60% and by

chewing this gum five times a day cavities were reduced by more than 80%. The

chart below is Dr. Peldyak's summary of eleven clinical studies showing how well

xylitol does at preventing tooth decay.

Tooth decay is caused by bacteria, Streptococcus Mutans (S. Mutans) is the

main one, that live in the mouth and on the teeth. These bacteria actually build

the plaque that is on the teeth; it is their home. They take sugar (glucose)

from the food we eat and metabolize it. In the process they make an acid that

eats through the enamel surfaces of our teeth. This is the beginning of a

cavity.

How xylitol prevents tooth decay.

Dental researchers looked at what happened when xylitol and the bacteria were

put together.

The bacteria eat the xylitol, but can’t use it, so they have to get rid of

it. This takes energy and gives the bacteria what we humans experience as

indigestion.

It also blocks the ability of these bacteria to hold on to the surfaces in

our bodies. They can hold onto the plaque, that is their home, but they have a

harder time holding on to the host cells. This is an important concept and will

be discussed further in a page about how such sugar-like foods effect

bacteria and infection—it's part of a science called glycobiology. The

additional

research on xylitol's effect on S. mutans will be discussed there as well.

Xylitol and ear infections.

After another 20 years of increased use the Finns also found that xylitol

decreased ear infections. Matti Uhari's group in Oulu, Finland studied this and

reported their findings in the British Medical Journal in 1996; and in

Pediatrics in 1998, where they used a syrup for those too young to chew gum.

They showed that ear infections in children could be reduced by up to 40%

with 8-9 grams of oral xylitol every day.

Both the prevention of tooth decay and the reduction of the ear infections

are by interactions of xylitol with the bacteria—in the mouth where they cause

tooth decay, and in the nose where they cause ear, sinus, and bronchial

infections.

Uhari’s group looked at what happened when the bacteria in the nose were

exposed to xylitol.

The three main problem causing bacteria that frequently colonize the nose

are Streptococcus Pneumoniae (S. Pneumo.), Haemophilus Influenzae (H. Flu.),

and Moraxella Catarrhalis (M. Cat.).

The nose is the only place they live without causing infection. The back of

the nose is called their reservoir.

S. Pneumo. got indigestion from the xylitol, and so, to a lesser extent, did

beta strep, the bacteria that cause strep throat. This is not surprising

because they already knew that this was the effect on S. Mutans and these

bacteria belong to the family of streptococci and are closely related. All of

the

studies done comparing the effect of xylitol on S. Mutans and S. Pneumoniae show

similar effects.

Bacterial indigestion was the reason they gave for the decrease in ear

infections.

Remember that in these studies the xylitol was given orally. That means that

the xylitol had to get absorbed into the blood and carried back to the nose

where the bacteria live.

That's not very effective—One American doctor figured that a child would have

to chew close to a thousand pieces of gum at a cost of about $100.00 to

prevent one ear infection.

Either he was exaggerating or the price of the gum has come down. It's

only about 40$.

But it works much better than that when it is put in the nose, where the

bacteria live, and it works in other ways as well.

The Finnish doctors did another study that was reported in between the two on

ear infections. In this study, the group, led by Tero Kontiokari, looked at

how xylitol effected the adherence of the major problem bacteria to cells from

the nose.

Bacteria must hang on to cells in the nose (or anywhere else for that matter)

in order to cause infection—if they cannot hold on they are washed out and

don't cause problems.

This study looked at that adherence.

They took cells from the nose and several strains of the bacteria that cause

most of the infections. Dividing each into two groups they put a 5% solution

of xylitol in one group of the cells and the bacteria.

Then they put the different groups together, let them sit for a while then

spun them to get rid of unattached bacteria.

Finally, they actually counted the bacteria attached to each cell. The graph

shows what they found.

The 68% decrease in the adherence of S. Pneumo shows it to be the most

sensitive to the presence of xylitol. This is probably why they only saw a

30-40%

reduction in ear infections. That is about the percent caused by S. Pneumo.

Giving xylitol by mouth is not a very effective means of getting it to the nose

because it must be absorbed into the blood then carried to the nose, but even

the small amount getting there was able to effect these bacteria.

There are several important things about this study:

These are significant bacteria—they kill people.

The Center for Disease Control (CDC) estimates that infections with S. Pneumo

cause the death of more than 40,000 people every year in the U.S. with many

of them being infants and small children.

They cost our health care system billions of dollars every year, to say

nothing of the countless days of lost work due to personal or family illness.

These are the bacteria that are the primary reason for prescription

antibiotics and those prompting concern about antibiotic resistance.

Xylitol, a food substance, reduces the adherence of these bacteria – and

without this adherence there is no infection.

It focuses on the inside of the nose. Because of Asano’s study showing that

xylitol is rapidly removed from the blood stream we can tell that giving

xylitol orally is not a very good way to get reasonable amounts to the bacteria

living in the nose.

Finally it shows that the indigestion model is not a sufficient explanation

for the reduced adherence. If the effect were only on the bacteria the arm of

this study where the cell, but not the bacteria, was exposed to xylitol would

not have been as effective. But the reduction in adherence was not

significantly different. In fact adherence was less (21 vs. 25) when the cells

were

exposed to the xylitol. So its most likely place of action is the interface

between

the cells and the bacteria. This interface is the subject of the page dealing

with glycobiology.

At the end of this study Kontiokari states the following:

" These observations are consistent with the fact that monosaccharides are

able to inhibit adherence only at high concentrations that are easily achieved

in

the oral cavity. "

Notice two things here:

High concentrations are needed. If high concentrations are needed in the nose

the best way to get them is to put it there – just like the gum puts it in

the mouth.

He did not specify xylitol, but implied this was a property of

monosaccharides (sugars) in general.

What he is referring to is the fact that several other sugars share this

ability to interfere with bacterial adhesion.

Again if bacteria cannot adhere, hold on to our cells, they can't infect us.

Is this a way to prevent infections? YES! Read more in the section on

glycobiology.

Return to HOME Continue with GLYCOBIOLOGY

_________________________________________________________________________

References:

Diabetes 1973 Apr;22(4):279-81

Xylitol absorption in healthy men.

Asano T, Levitt MD, Goetz FC

PMID: 4696096

Am J Clin Nutr 1997 Apr;65(4):947-50

Metabolic response to lactitol and xylitol in healthy men.

Natah SS, Hussien KR, Tuominen JA, Koivisto VA

Helsinki University Central Hospital, Department of Medicine, Finland.

Sugar alcohols are used in food products, yet their metabolic effects in

humans are poorly known. We examined plasma glucose, insulin, and C-peptide

responses and changes in carbohydrate and lipid oxidation after the ingestion of

25

g lactitol, xylitol, or glucose. Eight healthy, nonobese men were studied

after an overnight fast. After the ingestion of lactitol or xylitol, the rise in

plasma glucose, insulin, and C-peptide concentrations was less than after the

ingestion of glucose (P < 0.02), with no difference between the two polyols.

With the glycemic index of glucose as 100, the indexes of xylitol and lactitol

were 7 and -1, respectively. A reactive hypoglycemia was observed 3 h after

glucose ingestion, but not after the ingestion of sugar alcohols. There were no

significant changes in the carbohydrate or lipid oxidation as determined by

indirect calorimetry after the ingestion of sugar alcohols. After glucose

ingestion, the rise in carbohydrate oxidation was nearly significant (P = 0.07).

In

conclusion, lactitol and xylitol cause smaller changes than does glucose in

plasma glucose and insulin concentrations and thermogenic response. A small

hormonal response and the lack of a thermogenic effect may be beneficial when

these

sugar alcohols are used in food products. The small glucose and insulin

responses also suggest that lactitol and xylitol are suitable components of the

diet for diabetic patients.

Publication Types:

Clinical trial

Randomized controlled trial

PMID: 9094877

Acta Odontol Scand 1976;34(4):179-216

Turku sugar studies. V. Final report on the effect of sucrose, fructose and

xylitol diets on the caries incidence in man.

Scheinin A, Makinen KK, Ylitalo K

The purpose was to study differences in the caries increment rate as

influenced by various sugars. The trial involved almost complete substitution of

sucrose (S) by fructose (F) or xylitol (X) during a period of 2 years. There

were

no significant initial differences as to caries status between the prospective

sugar groups; 35 subjects in the S-group, 38 in the F-group, and 52 in the

X-group. During the entire study 10 subjects discontinued or were excluded. The

clinical and radiographical observer error was reported and discussed. After 2

years the mean increment of decayed, missed and filled tooth surfaces was 7.2

in the S-group, 3.8 in the F-group, and 0.0 in the X-group. The weakness of

the DMFS-index in not showing the development of new secondary caries and the

increase in size of the lesions was overcome by expressing the caries activity

in terms of indices showing the total quantitative and qualitative development.

The results showed a massive reduction of the caries increment in relation to

xylitol consumption. Fructose was found to be less cariogenic than sucrose.

It was suggested that the non- and anticariogenic properties of xylitol

principally depend on its lack of suitability for microbial metabolism and

physico-chemical effects in plaque and saliva.

Publication Types:

Clinical trial

Randomized controlled trial

PMID: 795260

Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1995 Aug;39(8):1820-3

Effect of xylitol on growth of nasopharyngeal bacteria in vitro.

Kontiokari T, Uhari M, Koskela M

Department of Pediatrics, University of Oulu, Finland.

Xylitol is known to reduce caries by inhibiting the growth of Streptococcus

mutans. We hypothesized that xylitol could also affect the growth of other

nasopharyngeal bacterial flora, which could be important when considering

respiratory infections caused by these bacteria. We studied this in vitro by

adding

xylitol to the medium and observed that 1 and 5% xylitol reduced markedly the

growth of alpha-hemolytic streptococci, including S. pneumoniae. It reduced

slightly the growth of beta-hemolytic streptococci but not that of Haemophilus

influenzae or Moraxella catarrhalis. The inhibitory growth pattern was similar

to

that previously seen with S. mutans, which may indicate a similarity in the

enzymatic processing of five-carbon sugars such as xylitol. This sugar alcohol

is a widely used sweetener, and the concentrations used in our experiments are

easily achieved in the oral cavity. If xylitol reduces the growth of S.

pneumoniae in the nasopharynx, it could also reduce the carriage of this

pathogen

and thus have clinical significance in the prevention of pneumococcal diseases.

PMID: 7486925

: BMJ 1996 Nov 9;313(7066):1180-4

Xylitol chewing gum in prevention of acute otitis media: double blind

randomised trial.

Uhari M, Kontiokari T, Koskela M, Niemela M

Department of Paediatrics, University of Oulu, Finland.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether xylitol, which reduces the growth of

Streptococcus pneumoniae, might have clinical importance in the prevention of

acute

otitis media. DESIGN: A double blind randomised trial with xylitol administered

in

chewing gum. SETTING: Eleven day care nurseries in the city of Oulu. Most of

the children had had problems with recurrent acute otitis media. SUBJECTS: 306

day care children: 149 children in the sucrose group (76 boys; mean (SD) age

4.9 (1.5) years) and 157 in the xylitol group (80 boys; 5.0 (1.4) years).

INTERVENTION: Either xylitol (8.4 g a day) or sucrose (control) chewing gum for

two months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The occurrence of acute otitis media and

antimicrobial treatment received during the intervention and nasopharyngeal

carriage of S pneumoniae. RESULTS: During the two month monitoring period at

least

one event of acute otitis media was experienced by 31/149 (20.8%) children who

received sucrose compared with 19/157 (12.1%) of those receiving chewing gum

containing xylitol (difference 8.7%; 95% confidence interval 0.4% to 17.0%; P =

0.04). Significantly fewer antimicrobials were prescribed among those

receiving xylitol: 29/157 (18.5%) children had at least one period of treatment

versus 43/149 (28.9%) (difference 10.4%; 0.9% to 19.9%; P = 0.032). The carriage

rate of S pneumoniae varied from 17.4% to 28.2% with no difference between the

groups. Two children in the xylitol group experienced diarrhoea, but no other

adverse effects were noted among the xylitol users. CONCLUSION: Xylitol seems

to have a preventive effect against acute otitis media.

PMID: 8916749

Pediatrics 1998 Oct;102(4 Pt 1):879-84

A novel use of xylitol sugar in preventing acute otitis media.

Uhari M, Kontiokari T, Niemela M

Department of Pediatrics, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.

BACKGROUND: Xylitol, a commonly used sweetener, is effective in preventing

dental caries. As it inhibits the growth of pneumococci, we evaluated whether

xylitol could be effective in preventing acute otitis media (AOM). DESIGN:

Altogether, 857 healthy children recruited from day care centers were randomized

to

one of five treatment groups to receive control syrup (n = 165), xylitol

syrup (n = 159), control chewing gum (n = 178), xylitol gum (n = 179), or

xylitol

lozenge (n = 176). The daily dose of xylitol varied from 8.4 g (chewing gum)

to 10 g (syrup). The design was a 3-month randomized, controlled trial, blinded

within the chewing gum and syrup groups. The occurrence of AOM each time the

child showed any symptoms of respiratory infection was the main outcome.

RESULTS: Although at least one event of AOM was experienced by 68 (41%) of the

165

children who received control syrup, only 46 (29%) of the 159 children

receiving xylitol syrup were affected, for a 30% decrease (95% confidence

interval

[CI]: 4.6%-55.4%). Likewise, the occurrence of otitis decreased by 40% compared

with control subjects in the children who received xylitol chewing gum (CI:

10.0%-71.1%) and by 20% in the lozenge group (CI: -12.9%-51.4%). Thus, the

occurrence of AOM during the follow-up period was significantly lower in those

who

received xylitol syrup or gum, and these children required antimicrobials less

often than did controls. Xylitol was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Xylitol

sugar, when given in a syrup or chewing gum, was effective in preventing AOM and

decreasing the need for antimicrobials.

PMID: 9755259

J Antimicrob Chemother 1998 May;41(5):563-5

Antiadhesive effects of xylitol on otopathogenic bacteria.

Kontiokari T, Uhari M, Koskela M

Department of Paediatrics, University of Oulu, Finland.

The exposure of either epithelial cells or pneumococci or both to 5% xylitol

reduced the adherence of pneumococci. Exposure of epithelial cells or bacteria

alone to xylitol did not reduce the adherence of Haemophilus influenzae,

although the exposure of both cells and bacteria to xylitol reduced the

adherence

significantly. The adherence of Moraxella catarrhalis remained low

irrespective of the exposure.

PMID: 9630410

J Dent Hyg. 2002 Fall;76(4):276-85.

Xlear Nasal Spray:

Is a patented saline nasal spray with xylitol. The bacteria Streptococcus

Pneumoniae, Haemophilus Influenzae and Moraxella Catarrhalis are the major

causes

of ear infections in children and sinus and bronchial infections in adults.

Research in Finland has shown that a 5% xylitol solution reduces Strep. Pneumo

by 68% and H. Flu bacteria by 50%. The studies indicated only a small effect

on Moraxella Catarrhalis. Since the nose is a major entry point for colds and

flu it makes sense to keep it clean and free of bad bacteria. The immune

systems first response to any irritant is to wash it away which is why we get a

stuffed or running nose when the airway is irritated. Stomach irritants lead to

diarrhea or vomiting. Bladder irritation or infection causes frequent urination

and irritants in the bronchia causes coughing. Traditional treatments however

do not aid the immune system in washing out the contaminants. The use of

antihistamines works to dry up the washing away process by removing our immune

system's natural sinus washer-our histamines. Our nose may not be running as

much

but the irritant has not been removed. Antibiotics can be taken but the

irritants often adapt to the medicine and become antibiotic resistant.

Antibiotics

also deplete beneficial bacteria in the digestive tract. These good bacteria,

or flora, are needed by the body and enhance the immune system. Antibiotics

should only be used as a last resort and used sparingly. This spray however, is

an outstanding nasal wash that flushes out these bacteria that are causing

inflammation within the ear-nose-throat system. This washing greatly aids the

immune system and relief comes quickly.

How to use Xlear: The bottle delivers a spray if held upright, a stream if

held horizontally (which is not recommended) and delivers drops if held upside

down. Drops are OK for a child who is resisting the spray. Ensure the child

remains lying down so the drops drain to the sinus passages where bacteria

lodge.

Use Xlear regularly for preventive measures even if congestion is not

currently a problem. Bacteria won't live long in a clean nose.

http://www.xylitol.com/info/history.asp?filename=X94E74CT9Q4006Leaf

http://www.nasal-xylitol.com/xylitol.html#Xylitol%20and%20ear%20infections.

http://www.xlear.com/xlear/testimonials.asp

[Guest guest]

Hi All,

I ran into a healing method the other day, called

Reconnective Healing. Evidentally, it has been

around for a few years. It was discovered by

a chiropractor named Dr. Pearl. For some

reason, he was chosen to be a vehicle for this

healing method, and can connect the 12 strands

of DNA to the Earth grid, and to the energies of

the cosmos. This Reconnection is healing folks

all over the place. He gives seminars all over

the planet, and worth reading his book on the

subject. Also, if you are a healer, you might

want to ad this method to your stash of healing

methods. His web site:

http://www.thereconnection.com/

Blessings,

Whitneay

Many Blessings,

Rev. Whitneay T. Vanwells

FusionMasters TM Ltd.

Products & Services:

http://www.newspiritservices.com/orderindex.html

Personal Growth Phone Sessions: http://www.newspiritservices

com/phonesessions.html

New Identity & Healing Seminars Coming Soon!

http://www.newspiritservices.com/Class.html

-- Re: Re: 06-16-04 Day 1 Theron

Hi Theron,

Have you ever tried X Clear Nasal wash for infection? I have used my own

version of this on nasal/ear infections in the past with great success.

Below are some links and research excerpts.

Xylitol is a naturally occurring food substance. It is found in many fruits

and vegetables; a plum has about half of a gram. It is about as sweet as

table

sugar (sucrose) with a third less calories.

It is classed as a " sugar alcohol, " but properly it is neither a sugar nor

an

alcohol. It looks like sugar; it tastes like sugar. But it is O.K. for

diabetics. A molecule of xylitol (without all of the hydrogen atoms) looks

like the

model in the picture at the top, but it is very flexible.

It is commonly used as a food supplement because of its natural sweetness.

The World Health Organization and the FDA (Sec. 172.395 (21 CFR 172.395)),

have

given it safe ratings as food supplements. It is commonly available

commercially without restriction and is found in many health food stores.

It is made in the human body. An average sized person makes about 10 grams

of

xylitol every day.

Xylitol is slowly absorbed when eaten and if a person eats more than a

teaspoon or so at one time they are likely to have a few loose stools, just

like

what happens with sorbitol, the most commonly used of the sugar alcohols.

People who use xylitol regularly learn to deal with it better and it doesn't

cause this problem.

People in Turku, Finland ate about one-fourth cup daily in a dental study

and

had no significant problems.

The xylitol that is absorbed is rapidly metabolized, but it has very little

effect on blood sugar levels. Asano and his associates looked at this in the

early 70’s when xylitol was being considered for use in diabetics. He gave

healthy people 5 grams of xylitol, but could not detect any in their blood

an hour

later.

Xylitol costs about ten times as much as regular sugar. If there is more

demand I am sure that price will come down. I think this is one reason it is

not

used more. With the current epidemic of diabetes, due in large part to the

combination of inactivity and sugar heavy soft drinks, xylitol is a very

attractive food supplement.

Xylitol is available in some countries in IV solutions. It is used in

diabetics and in some critical care situations such as burns. In papers

prepared for

the FDA the usual IV dose is 0.25 grams per kilogram per hour and the safe

dose is double that. For a 154 pound person that is the equivalent of about

800

to 1600 plums a day.

Xylitol and Diabetes

This was the first medical use of xylitol. Xylitol is metabolized into

glycogen which can be stored in our cells until we need to make it into

glucose for

energy. Glucose is the bodies preferred energy sugar and is a problem for

diabetics because it requires insulin to get into the cells. The glycogen

from

the xylitol is already inside the cells and does not need the insulin.

The glycemic index of xylitol is 7. The glycemic index is a measure of how

rapidly particular foods are turned into glucose after we eat them and of

how

much insulin is required for the body to use that food. It is useful

information

for diabetics and many can control their diabetes just by not eating foods

with a high glycemic index. If you are interested in more information about

the

glycemic index this link will take you to Rick Mendosa's web page which has

the best information I have found on the web.

Xylitol is interchangeable with sugar for most cooking applications. Yeast

cannot metabolize it so it won't work if you are baking bread or anything

else

with yeast. (Doctors inclined toward natural treatments have recommended the

use of xylitol to prevent yeast infections for this reason.)

Xylitol and Finland

The Finns began using xylitol because of the sugar shortages caused by the

Second World War. Originally it was made from the birch trees that are

plentiful

in Finland.

About twenty years after the war they realized that the people who used

xylitol had less tooth decay. The Turku Sugar Studies, done at the

University of

Turku, confirmed this observation:

For two years one hundred seventeen subjects ate specially prepared diets

sweetened with sucrose (table sugar), fructose, or xylitol. The group eating

xylitol ate an average of 57 grams a day, about half the amount of sugar

consumed

by the average American. The study looked at the change in decayed surfaces,

fillings or missing teeth over the two years. The bar graph above shows the

results of that study. Those eating the sucrose diet fared the worst. Those

eating fructose had less but still substantial decay, while those eating the

xylitol had none.

The results of this study were exciting to the Finns and they increased

their

use of xylitol. They also did more studies. One of the things they did that

made both of these easier was making gum with xylitol. Chewing the gum

releases

the xylitol over a short period of time in the mouth where it is effective.

Most of the studies on tooth decay since that time have used gums as the

delivery because it is easy to dose and to measure how much is given (and

because

they were funded by the company making the gum. The web site at www.xylitol

net

is maintained by the company manufacturing the gum in Finland and has a lot

of

information about this and other uses of xylitol.

Peldyak was involved with some of the studies looking at xylitol and

tooth decay done through the University of Michigan Dental School. He

recently

summarized the studies with this gum and the prevention of tooth

decay—regular

frequent use is the key. Chewing xylitol flavored gum once a day had little

benefit. Twice a day reduced cavities by 40%, three times a day by 60% and

by

chewing this gum five times a day cavities were reduced by more than 80%.

The

chart below is Dr. Peldyak's summary of eleven clinical studies showing how

well

xylitol does at preventing tooth decay.

Tooth decay is caused by bacteria, Streptococcus Mutans (S. Mutans) is the

main one, that live in the mouth and on the teeth. These bacteria actually

build

the plaque that is on the teeth; it is their home. They take sugar (glucose)

from the food we eat and metabolize it. In the process they make an acid

that

eats through the enamel surfaces of our teeth. This is the beginning of a

cavity.

How xylitol prevents tooth decay.

Dental researchers looked at what happened when xylitol and the bacteria

were

put together.

The bacteria eat the xylitol, but can’t use it, so they have to get rid of

it. This takes energy and gives the bacteria what we humans experience as

indigestion.

It also blocks the ability of these bacteria to hold on to the surfaces in

our bodies. They can hold onto the plaque, that is their home, but they have

a

harder time holding on to the host cells. This is an important concept and

will

be discussed further in a page about how such sugar-like foods effect

bacteria and infection—it's part of a science called glycobiology. The

additional

research on xylitol's effect on S. mutans will be discussed there as well.

Xylitol and ear infections.

After another 20 years of increased use the Finns also found that xylitol

decreased ear infections. Matti Uhari's group in Oulu, Finland studied this

and

reported their findings in the British Medical Journal in 1996; and in

Pediatrics in 1998, where they used a syrup for those too young to chew gum.

They showed that ear infections in children could be reduced by up to 40%

with 8-9 grams of oral xylitol every day.

Both the prevention of tooth decay and the reduction of the ear infections

are by interactions of xylitol with the bacteria—in the mouth where they

cause

tooth decay, and in the nose where they cause ear, sinus, and bronchial

infections.

Uhari’s group looked at what happened when the bacteria in the nose were

exposed to xylitol.

The three main problem causing bacteria that frequently colonize the

nose

are Streptococcus Pneumoniae (S. Pneumo.), Haemophilus Influenzae (H. Flu.),

and Moraxella Catarrhalis (M. Cat.).

The nose is the only place they live without causing infection. The back of

the nose is called their reservoir.

S. Pneumo. got indigestion from the xylitol, and so, to a lesser extent, did

beta strep, the bacteria that cause strep throat. This is not surprising

because they already knew that this was the effect on S. Mutans and these

bacteria belong to the family of streptococci and are closely related. All

of the

studies done comparing the effect of xylitol on S. Mutans and S. Pneumoniae

show

similar effects.

Bacterial indigestion was the reason they gave for the decrease in ear

infections.

Remember that in these studies the xylitol was given orally. That means that

the xylitol had to get absorbed into the blood and carried back to the nose

where the bacteria live.

That's not very effective—One American doctor figured that a child would

have

to chew close to a thousand pieces of gum at a cost of about $100.00 to

prevent one ear infection.

Either he was exaggerating or the price of the gum has come down. It's

only about 40$.

But it works much better than that when it is put in the nose, where the

bacteria live, and it works in other ways as well.

The Finnish doctors did another study that was reported in between the two

on

ear infections. In this study, the group, led by Tero Kontiokari, looked at

how xylitol effected the adherence of the major problem bacteria to cells

from

the nose.

Bacteria must hang on to cells in the nose (or anywhere else for that

matter)

in order to cause infection—if they cannot hold on they are washed out and

don't cause problems.

This study looked at that adherence.

They took cells from the nose and several strains of the bacteria that cause

most of the infections. Dividing each into two groups they put a 5% solution

of xylitol in one group of the cells and the bacteria.

Then they put the different groups together, let them sit for a while then

spun them to get rid of unattached bacteria.

Finally, they actually counted the bacteria attached to each cell. The graph

shows what they found.

The 68% decrease in the adherence of S. Pneumo shows it to be the most

sensitive to the presence of xylitol. This is probably why they only saw a

30-40%

reduction in ear infections. That is about the percent caused by S. Pneumo.

Giving xylitol by mouth is not a very effective means of getting it to the

nose

because it must be absorbed into the blood then carried to the nose, but

even

the small amount getting there was able to effect these bacteria.

There are several important things about this study:

These are significant bacteria—they kill people.

The Center for Disease Control (CDC) estimates that infections with S.

Pneumo

cause the death of more than 40,000 people every year in the U.S. with many

of them being infants and small children.

They cost our health care system billions of dollars every year, to say

nothing of the countless days of lost work due to personal or family illness

These are the bacteria that are the primary reason for prescription

antibiotics and those prompting concern about antibiotic resistance.

Xylitol, a food substance, reduces the adherence of these bacteria – and

without this adherence there is no infection.

It focuses on the inside of the nose. Because of Asano’s study showing

that

xylitol is rapidly removed from the blood stream we can tell that giving

xylitol orally is not a very good way to get reasonable amounts to the

bacteria

living in the nose.

Finally it shows that the indigestion model is not a sufficient explanation

for the reduced adherence. If the effect were only on the bacteria the arm

of

this study where the cell, but not the bacteria, was exposed to xylitol

would

not have been as effective. But the reduction in adherence was not

significantly different. In fact adherence was less (21 vs. 25) when the

cells were

exposed to the xylitol. So its most likely place of action is the interface

between

the cells and the bacteria. This interface is the subject of the page

dealing

with glycobiology.

At the end of this study Kontiokari states the following:

" These observations are consistent with the fact that monosaccharides are

able to inhibit adherence only at high concentrations that are easily

achieved in

the oral cavity. "

Notice two things here:

High concentrations are needed. If high concentrations are needed in the

nose

the best way to get them is to put it there – just like the gum puts it in

the mouth.

He did not specify xylitol, but implied this was a property of

monosaccharides (sugars) in general.

What he is referring to is the fact that several other sugars share this

ability to interfere with bacterial adhesion.

Again if bacteria cannot adhere, hold on to our cells, they can't infect us.

Is this a way to prevent infections? YES! Read more in the section on

glycobiology.

Return to HOME Continue with GLYCOBIOLOGY

_________________________________________________________________________

References:

Diabetes 1973 Apr;22(4):279-81

Xylitol absorption in healthy men.

Asano T, Levitt MD, Goetz FC

PMID: 4696096

Am J Clin Nutr 1997 Apr;65(4):947-50

Metabolic response to lactitol and xylitol in healthy men.

Natah SS, Hussien KR, Tuominen JA, Koivisto VA

Helsinki University Central Hospital, Department of Medicine, Finland.

Sugar alcohols are used in food products, yet their metabolic effects in

humans are poorly known. We examined plasma glucose, insulin, and C-peptide

responses and changes in carbohydrate and lipid oxidation after the

ingestion of 25

g lactitol, xylitol, or glucose. Eight healthy, nonobese men were studied

after an overnight fast. After the ingestion of lactitol or xylitol, the

rise in

plasma glucose, insulin, and C-peptide concentrations was less than after

the

ingestion of glucose (P < 0.02), with no difference between the two polyols.

With the glycemic index of glucose as 100, the indexes of xylitol and

lactitol

were 7 and -1, respectively. A reactive hypoglycemia was observed 3 h after

glucose ingestion, but not after the ingestion of sugar alcohols. There were

no

significant changes in the carbohydrate or lipid oxidation as determined by

indirect calorimetry after the ingestion of sugar alcohols. After glucose

ingestion, the rise in carbohydrate oxidation was nearly significant (P = 0

07). In

conclusion, lactitol and xylitol cause smaller changes than does glucose in

plasma glucose and insulin concentrations and thermogenic response. A small

hormonal response and the lack of a thermogenic effect may be beneficial

when these

sugar alcohols are used in food products. The small glucose and insulin

responses also suggest that lactitol and xylitol are suitable components of

the

diet for diabetic patients.

Publication Types:

Clinical trial

Randomized controlled trial

PMID: 9094877

Acta Odontol Scand 1976;34(4):179-216

Turku sugar studies. V. Final report on the effect of sucrose, fructose and

xylitol diets on the caries incidence in man.

Scheinin A, Makinen KK, Ylitalo K

The purpose was to study differences in the caries increment rate as

influenced by various sugars. The trial involved almost complete

substitution of

sucrose (S) by fructose (F) or xylitol (X) during a period of 2 years. There

were

no significant initial differences as to caries status between the

prospective

sugar groups; 35 subjects in the S-group, 38 in the F-group, and 52 in the

X-group. During the entire study 10 subjects discontinued or were excluded.

The

clinical and radiographical observer error was reported and discussed. After

2

years the mean increment of decayed, missed and filled tooth surfaces was 7

2

in the S-group, 3.8 in the F-group, and 0.0 in the X-group. The weakness of

the DMFS-index in not showing the development of new secondary caries and

the

increase in size of the lesions was overcome by expressing the caries

activity

in terms of indices showing the total quantitative and qualitative

development.

The results showed a massive reduction of the caries increment in relation

to

xylitol consumption. Fructose was found to be less cariogenic than sucrose.

It was suggested that the non- and anticariogenic properties of xylitol

principally depend on its lack of suitability for microbial metabolism and

physico-chemical effects in plaque and saliva.

Publication Types:

Clinical trial

Randomized controlled trial

PMID: 795260

Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1995 Aug;39(8):1820-3

Effect of xylitol on growth of nasopharyngeal bacteria in vitro.

Kontiokari T, Uhari M, Koskela M

Department of Pediatrics, University of Oulu, Finland.

Xylitol is known to reduce caries by inhibiting the growth of Streptococcus

mutans. We hypothesized that xylitol could also affect the growth of other

nasopharyngeal bacterial flora, which could be important when considering

respiratory infections caused by these bacteria. We studied this in vitro by

adding

xylitol to the medium and observed that 1 and 5% xylitol reduced markedly

the

growth of alpha-hemolytic streptococci, including S. pneumoniae. It reduced

slightly the growth of beta-hemolytic streptococci but not that of

Haemophilus

influenzae or Moraxella catarrhalis. The inhibitory growth pattern was

similar to

that previously seen with S. mutans, which may indicate a similarity in the

enzymatic processing of five-carbon sugars such as xylitol. This sugar

alcohol

is a widely used sweetener, and the concentrations used in our experiments

are

easily achieved in the oral cavity. If xylitol reduces the growth of S.

pneumoniae in the nasopharynx, it could also reduce the carriage of this

pathogen

and thus have clinical significance in the prevention of pneumococcal

diseases.

PMID: 7486925

: BMJ 1996 Nov 9;313(7066):1180-4

Xylitol chewing gum in prevention of acute otitis media: double blind

randomised trial.

Uhari M, Kontiokari T, Koskela M, Niemela M

Department of Paediatrics, University of Oulu, Finland.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether xylitol, which reduces the growth of

Streptococcus pneumoniae, might have clinical importance in the prevention

of acute

otitis media. DESIGN: A double blind randomised trial with xylitol

administered in

chewing gum. SETTING: Eleven day care nurseries in the city of Oulu. Most of

the children had had problems with recurrent acute otitis media. SUBJECTS:

306

day care children: 149 children in the sucrose group (76 boys; mean (SD) age

4.9 (1.5) years) and 157 in the xylitol group (80 boys; 5.0 (1.4) years).

INTERVENTION: Either xylitol (8.4 g a day) or sucrose (control) chewing gum

for

two months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The occurrence of acute otitis media and

antimicrobial treatment received during the intervention and nasopharyngeal

carriage of S pneumoniae. RESULTS: During the two month monitoring period at

least

one event of acute otitis media was experienced by 31/149 (20.8%) children

who

received sucrose compared with 19/157 (12.1%) of those receiving chewing gum

containing xylitol (difference 8.7%; 95% confidence interval 0.4% to 17.0%;

P =

0.04). Significantly fewer antimicrobials were prescribed among those

receiving xylitol: 29/157 (18.5%) children had at least one period of

treatment

versus 43/149 (28.9%) (difference 10.4%; 0.9% to 19.9%; P = 0.032). The

carriage

rate of S pneumoniae varied from 17.4% to 28.2% with no difference between

the

groups. Two children in the xylitol group experienced diarrhoea, but no

other

adverse effects were noted among the xylitol users. CONCLUSION: Xylitol

seems

to have a preventive effect against acute otitis media.

PMID: 8916749

Pediatrics 1998 Oct;102(4 Pt 1):879-84

A novel use of xylitol sugar in preventing acute otitis media.

Uhari M, Kontiokari T, Niemela M

Department of Pediatrics, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.

BACKGROUND: Xylitol, a commonly used sweetener, is effective in preventing

dental caries. As it inhibits the growth of pneumococci, we evaluated

whether

xylitol could be effective in preventing acute otitis media (AOM). DESIGN:

Altogether, 857 healthy children recruited from day care centers were

randomized to

one of five treatment groups to receive control syrup (n = 165), xylitol

syrup (n = 159), control chewing gum (n = 178), xylitol gum (n = 179), or

xylitol

lozenge (n = 176). The daily dose of xylitol varied from 8.4 g (chewing gum)

to 10 g (syrup). The design was a 3-month randomized, controlled trial,

blinded

within the chewing gum and syrup groups. The occurrence of AOM each time the

child showed any symptoms of respiratory infection was the main outcome.

RESULTS: Although at least one event of AOM was experienced by 68 (41%) of

the 165

children who received control syrup, only 46 (29%) of the 159 children

receiving xylitol syrup were affected, for a 30% decrease (95% confidence

interval

[CI]: 4.6%-55.4%). Likewise, the occurrence of otitis decreased by 40%

compared

with control subjects in the children who received xylitol chewing gum (CI:

10.0%-71.1%) and by 20% in the lozenge group (CI: -12.9%-51.4%). Thus, the

occurrence of AOM during the follow-up period was significantly lower in

those who

received xylitol syrup or gum, and these children required antimicrobials

less

often than did controls. Xylitol was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Xylitol

sugar, when given in a syrup or chewing gum, was effective in preventing AOM

and

decreasing the need for antimicrobials.

PMID: 9755259

J Antimicrob Chemother 1998 May;41(5):563-5

Antiadhesive effects of xylitol on otopathogenic bacteria.

Kontiokari T, Uhari M, Koskela M

Department of Paediatrics, University of Oulu, Finland.

The exposure of either epithelial cells or pneumococci or both to 5% xylitol

reduced the adherence of pneumococci. Exposure of epithelial cells or

bacteria

alone to xylitol did not reduce the adherence of Haemophilus influenzae,

although the exposure of both cells and bacteria to xylitol reduced the

adherence

significantly. The adherence of Moraxella catarrhalis remained low

irrespective of the exposure.

PMID: 9630410

J Dent Hyg. 2002 Fall;76(4):276-85.

Xlear Nasal Spray:

Is a patented saline nasal spray with xylitol. The bacteria Streptococcus

Pneumoniae, Haemophilus Influenzae and Moraxella Catarrhalis are the major

causes

of ear infections in children and sinus and bronchial infections in adults.

Research in Finland has shown that a 5% xylitol solution reduces Strep.

Pneumo

by 68% and H. Flu bacteria by 50%. The studies indicated only a small effect

on Moraxella Catarrhalis. Since the nose is a major entry point for colds

and

flu it makes sense to keep it clean and free of bad bacteria. The immune

systems first response to any irritant is to wash it away which is why we

get a

stuffed or running nose when the airway is irritated. Stomach irritants lead

to

diarrhea or vomiting. Bladder irritation or infection causes frequent

urination

and irritants in the bronchia causes coughing. Traditional treatments

however

do not aid the immune system in washing out the contaminants. The use of

antihistamines works to dry up the washing away process by removing our

immune

system's natural sinus washer-our histamines. Our nose may not be running as

much

but the irritant has not been removed. Antibiotics can be taken but the

irritants often adapt to the medicine and become antibiotic resistant.

Antibiotics

also deplete beneficial bacteria in the digestive tract. These good bacteria

or flora, are needed by the body and enhance the immune system. Antibiotics

should only be used as a last resort and used sparingly. This spray however,

is

an outstanding nasal wash that flushes out these bacteria that are causing

inflammation within the ear-nose-throat system. This washing greatly aids

the

immune system and relief comes quickly.

How to use Xlear: The bottle delivers a spray if held upright, a stream if

held horizontally (which is not recommended) and delivers drops if held

upside

down. Drops are OK for a child who is resisting the spray. Ensure the child

remains lying down so the drops drain to the sinus passages where bacteria

lodge.

Use Xlear regularly for preventive measures even if congestion is not

currently a problem. Bacteria won't live long in a clean nose.

http://www.xylitol.com/info/history.asp?filename=X94E74CT9Q4006Leaf

http://www.nasal-xylitol.com/xylitol.html#Xylitol%20and%20ear%20infections.

http://www.xlear.com/xlear/testimonials.asp