Hair loss? Gut health issues? Dr. Nicole Saphier reveals smart fixes
Fox News contributor Dr. Nicole Saphier recently discussed natural ways to prevent and treat hair thinning — plus how to maintain a healthy gut — and shared her own experiences on the matters.
Thinning hair can be caused by many factors, said Saphier. These include hormonal or metabolic changes, age, medications and stress.
The doctor said she herself experienced hair loss some years back due to a medication she was taking for an autoimmune disorder.
5 Excellent Protein Sources That Aren't Meat, According To Nutritionists
"I had a hard time putting my hair up in a ponytail. It was really upsetting emotionally," she said on "Fox & Friends Weekend."
She began looking for natural remedies, as opposed to trying anything invasive such as hair transplants, she said. After much research, she began massaging olive oil and rosemary oil into her scalp at night to stimulate it.
Read On The Fox News App
"It took some patience, but I began seeing significant regrowth and improvement within one to two months of doing this regimen and I haven't stopped!" she told Fox News Digital.
"My personal experience has continued to reinforce my belief in the power of integrative care."
She said she also put together a collection of liquid natural herbs including gotu kola, horsetail and biotin.
To promote blood flow to the scalp - which helps with hair growth - the doctor said she increased her green tea intake and focused on exercising and hydrating.
"As long as you are eating healthy and living healthy, your hair, your skin and your nails will have the nutrients that they need to grow," she said on "Fox & Friends Weekend."
Hair Growth Could Slow Down With This Popular Diet Plan, Study Reveals
It's important to consult a medical professional if experiencing any issues, she stressed, so that the healthcare provider can find and address the root cause of the issues.
Saphier also discussed gut health.
"Gut health is tied to everything," said Dr. Saphier.
"Your entire body's wellness focuses on your gut, and we have destroyed our guts with antibiotics and processed foods and all these other things."
Chef Says 'Horrible Stomach Problems' Led Him On Maha Journey
She said she really likes a comprehensive approach to gut health. This includes nourishing the gut with probiotics, which can be found in foods such as yogurt, kimchi and pickles - anything that's fermented.
"But you also have to give yourself prebiotics," she said.
Click Here To Sign Up For Our Health Newsletter
Prebiotics give the nutrients to the probiotics and those good bacteria in your gut.
They can be found in such things as garlic and blueberries.
"I actually take liquid garlic every single morning," Saphier said.
In terms of liquid garlic vs. capsules, the doctor said that in liquid form, garlic is more bioavailable, meaning the body can absorb and use its benefits more efficiently than with capsules.
For more Health articles, visit foxnews.com/health
Another important aspect of diet is fiber. Among the best foods for fiber are raspberries, lentils and avocado, said Saphier.
Finally, she said she promotes gut motility (the coordinated muscular contractions that move food and waste through the gastrointestinal tract) with ginger, plus staying hydrated and exercising.
"You do all of that and your gut is going to be as healthy as can be," she said.
What about the impact of stress on hair loss and gut health? The doctor said that stress isn't just a feeling; it's an actual physiological effect on the body.
"To manage stress, I prioritize daily movement, whether it's a quick workout or a walk outside. I also practice mindfulness, ensuring I take moments to breathe and reset," she said.
She also focuses on quality sleep and proper nutrition, she said, as these directly impact energy and resilience.
"Managing stress isn't about eliminating it. It's about finding balance and supporting your body through it," she said.Original article source: Hair loss? Gut health issues? Dr. Nicole Saphier reveals smart fixes
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 hours ago
- Yahoo
Common menopause medication might prevent breast cancer while treating hot flashes
A drug intended to treat menopause symptoms could double as breast cancer prevention. New research from Northwestern University in Illinois found that Duavee, a Pfizer-made drug, "significantly reduced" breast tissue cell growth, which is a major indicator of cancer progression. A phase 2 clinical trial included 141 post-menopausal women who had been diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), also known as stage 0 breast cancer, according to a press release from Northwestern. Prostate Cancer Drug Now Available To More Patients With Aggressive Form Of Disease This non-invasive breast cancer affects more than 60,000 American women each year, often leading to an outcome of invasive breast cancer. The women were separated into two groups — one received Duavee and the other took a placebo for a month before undergoing breast surgery. Read On The Fox News App Duavee is a conjugated estrogen/bazedoxifene (CE/BZA) drug, which combines estrogen with another medication that minimizes the potential harmful side effects of the hormone. "The key takeaway from the study is that CE/BZA slows the growth (proliferation) of cells in milk ducts of DCIS that expressed the estrogen receptor significantly more than placebo," Dr. Swati Kulkarni, lead investigator and professor of breast surgery at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, told Fox News Digital. Experimental Women's Cancer Drug Boosts Survival Rates In Notable Study Another major finding is that the quality of life did not differ significantly between the two groups, but patients who took the CE/BZA reported fewer hot flashes during the study, she noted. "This would be expected, as the drug is FDA-approved to treat hot flashes." Kulkarni presented the study last week at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting in Chicago. The findings are preliminary and have not yet been published in a medical journal. "What excites me most is that a medication designed to help women feel better during menopause may also reduce their risk of invasive breast cancer," said the doctor, who is also a Northwestern Medicine breast surgeon. Women who face a higher risk of breast cancer — including those who have experienced "high-risk lesions" — and who also have menopausal symptoms are most likely to benefit from the drug, according to Kulkarni. "These women are typically advised against standard hormone therapies, leaving them with few menopausal treatment options," the release stated. The researchers said they are "encouraged" by these early results, but more research is required before the medication can be considered for approval as a breast cancer prevention mechanism. "Our findings suggest that CE/BZA may prevent breast cancer, but larger studies with several years of follow-up are needed before we would know this for sure," Kulkarni told Fox News Digital. Dr. Sheheryar Kabraji, chief of breast medicine at the Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center in Buffalo, New York, was not involved in the study but commented on the findings. "While intriguing, this study is highly preliminary, and more research will be needed before we can conclude that conjugated estrogen/bazedoxifene (CD/BZA), a form of the hormone estrogen commonly prescribed to address symptoms of menopause, prevents invasive breast cancer or is effective at reducing cancer risk," she told Fox News Digital. Click Here To Sign Up For Our Health Newsletter Kabraji also noted that the study focused on reducing levels of one specific protein, "which does not always predict reduced recurrence of breast cancer." "This study did not directly show that CE/BZA treatment reduces the risk of DCIS recurrence or development of invasive cancer," she noted. "Importantly, however, patients who received this therapy experienced no worsening of quality of life, and saw improvement in vasomotor symptoms, such as hot flashes. If found to be effective in preventing breast cancer, CE/BZA is likely to have fewer side effects than current medications used for breast cancer prevention." For more Health articles, visit Lead researcher Kulkarni emphasized that this medication is not for the treatment of invasive breast cancer or DCIS. "Right now, we can say that women who are concerned about their risk of developing breast cancer can consider this medication to treat their menopausal symptoms," she article source: Common menopause medication might prevent breast cancer while treating hot flashes
a day ago
RFK Jr. has promoted 'freedom of choice' while limiting vaccines, food
Prior to becoming Health and Human Services Secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. had espoused the idea of "medical freedom," the ability of people to make personal health decisions for themselves and their families without corporate or government coercion. It's an idea supported under Kennedy's Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement to reduce the prevalence of chronic disease in the U.S. by making healthier lifestyle choices. On topics, such as vaccines, Kennedy has said he wouldn't prevent children from being able to receive vaccines but would leave the choice up to parents. "I'm a freedom-of-choice person," Kennedy told Fox News host Sean Hannity during an interview in March. "We should have transparency. We should have informed choice, and if people don't want it, the government shouldn't force them to do it." Some public health experts told ABC News, however, that the HHS has been limiting choices on some products for many Americans despite Kennedy's talk about "freedom of choice." Just last week, Kennedy announced the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would no longer recommend the COVID-19 vaccine for certain groups. Additionally, Kennedy has called on states to ban recipients of food stamps from being able to use them to purchase soda. He has also praised states for banning fluoride from public drinking water and indicated he will change federal guidance on recommending adding fluoride. The public health experts said Kennedy's actions are setting up a dichotomy on public health. "I think that RFK Jr. has done a really good job of identifying some of the problems [in public health], but it's the solutions that are problematic," Dr. Craig Spencer, an associate professor of the practice of health services, policy and practice at Brown University School of Public Health, told ABC News. "What you're seeing with RFK Jr. and his approach to health is an individualization of public health. It's this idea that you can make decisions for your health, and that's always been true." He went on, "We need to be able to follow their guidance, not just have them tell us, 'Follow your own science.' As the focus shifts from community to individuals, we're losing a lot of that underpinning, which has led to a lot of the gains in public health." Limiting access to COVID-19 vaccines Kennedy has repeatedly stated that he is not anti-vaccine and that he supports vaccination. Shortly after Trump's election, Kennedy said in an interview with NBC News that "if vaccines are working for somebody, I'm not going to take them away. People ought to have choice, and that choice ought to be informed by the best information." During his confirmation hearings, Kennedy said he supported the childhood vaccination schedule and that he would not do anything as head of HHS that "makes it difficult or discourages people from taking vaccines." Separately, in an opinion piece Kennedy wrote for Fox News in March on the nationwide measles outbreak, he said the measles vaccine helps protect individuals and provides "community immunity" but also called the decision to vaccinate a "personal one." However, last week, Kennedy announced the removal of the COVID-19 vaccine from the CDC's immunization schedule for "healthy children and healthy pregnant women." The CDC's immunization schedule is not just a guide for doctors but also determines insurance coverage for most major private plans and Medicaid expansion programs. Following Kennedy's announcement, the schedule was updated noting all children would be eligible for COVID vaccines, but now under a shared-clinical decision-making model -- allowing parents to choose whether their children are vaccinated alongside advice from a doctor. "Regarding the vaccines, HHS is restoring the doctor-patient relationship," HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon told ABC News in a statement. "We are encouraging those groups to consult with their health care provider to help them make an informed decision. This is freedom of choice." "If you restrict access, you necessarily restrict choice," Dr. Matthew Ferrari, a professor of biology and director of the Center for Infectious Disease Dynamics at Pennsylvania State University, told ABC News. "Those two things are antithetical. You can't do both. You can't say you're allowing choice if you're restricting access." Ferrari said the idea of "medical freedom" is catchy, but public health recommendations are made based on how to protect the most vulnerable individuals. "If you look at the outcomes, if you look at the consequences of that movement, it has been to disproportionately restrict access to -- and restrict support and infrastructure to allow people to access -- preventive medicine," he said. "It's sort of easy to say, 'Well, take the vaccine away. But [vaccines] prevent a future outcome of illness for yourself and for others in the community." Traditionally, the CDC's Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices decides if there is a benefit to a yearly vaccine and who should get it. The independent advisory committee then makes recommendations to the CDC, which has the final say. The committee was set to meet in late June to vote on potential changes to COVID vaccine recommendations. Spencer said Kennedy's bypassing of traditional avenues when it comes to changing vaccine recommendations is also taking away choice from people. "This did not go through the normal process that it should have, and he basically just made a decision for people while at the same time saying that he's going to let people make a decision," Spencer said. Restricting foods under SNAP Kennedy has also campaigned to prevent Americans from using food stamps -- provided under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program -- to buy candy and soda. "It's nonsensical for U.S. taxpayers to spend tens of billions of dollars subsidizing junk that harms the health of low-income Americans," Kennedy wrote in an opinion piece for The Wall Street Journal last September. At a MAHA event in late May, Kennedy said the governors of 10 states have submitted waivers to the United States Department of Agriculture requesting permission to ban SNAP recipients from using benefits to buy candy and soft drinks. "The U.S. government spends over $4 trillion a year on health care," Nixon said in a statement. "That's not freedom -- it's failure. Secretary Kennedy is unapologetically taking action to reverse the chronic disease epidemic, not subsidize it with taxpayer dollars. Warning Americans about the dangers of ultra-processed food isn't an attack on choice -- it's the first step in restoring it." Nutrition experts agree that sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) are unhealthy. Frequent consumption of SSBs is linked to health issues such as weight gain, obesity, type 2 diabetes, tooth decay, heart disease and kidney diseases, according to the CDC. Kristina Petersen, an associate professor in the department of nutritional sciences at Pennsylvania State University, told ABC News there is a crisis of diet-related diseases in the U.S., which increase the risk of disability and reduces lifespan. However, she said there needs to be strong evidence of the benefits of restrictive policies if they are to be put in place. "In terms of limiting people's choices, it is important to consider all the different roles that food plays in someone's life, and so obviously we want people eating nutritious foods, but also we need to acknowledge that food is a source of enjoyment," Petersen said. "A lot of social situations revolve around food. So, when we're thinking about reducing people's access to given foods, we need to think about the consequences of that." One unintended consequence could be an eligible family not signing up for SNAP benefits because of the restrictions, she said. Even if a ban on buying candy and soda with SNAP benefits does occur, Petersen said she is not aware of any evidence that shows banning certain foods leads to healthier diets. She added that the nation's dietary guidelines are written to emphasize healthy foods like fruits and vegetable rather than telling people to avoid or restrict less healthy foods. "All foods can be consumed as part of a healthy dietary pattern. It's really just the amount and the frequency that determines whether that pattern is helpful overall or less helpful," Petersen said. "People can have small indulgences, but really, we're interested in what is their pattern over a period of time." Providing incentives for purchasing healthier foods may be more effective and still allow people to have choice, Petersen said. A 2018 study used a model simulation to study the effects of food incentives, disincentives or restrictions in SNAP. One of the simulations involving incentives for foods such as fruits, vegetables, nuts, whole grains, fish and plant-based oils found to have the most substantial health benefits and be the most cost-effective. "Things like fruits and vegetables, they do tend to be more expensive, so if you incentivize them by providing more benefits … that's making the dollar go further, and it's kind of making the economic piece of this a bit stronger," Petersen said. "A lot of this is framed around personal choice. Rather than restricting access to, how can we give people more access to healthy foods? I think that's going to have the greatest benefit here."
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
UnitedHealthcare sues The Guardian for defamation after explosive nursing home story
UnitedHealthcare is suing British newspaper The Guardian for defamation, alleging that the outlet falsely accused them of enticing nursing homes to enroll in a special program that works to restrict medical expenses for elderly patients. "The Guardian knowingly published false and misleading claims about our Institutional Special Needs Program, forcing us to take action to protect the clinician-patient relationship that is crucial for delivering high-quality care. The Guardian refused to engage with the truth and chose instead to print its predetermined narrative," UnitedHealthcare told Fox News Digital in a statement. The Guardian article, published May 21, claimed that UnitedHealthcare is pursuing cost-cutting tactics that jeopardize the health of nursing home patients. The article claims that the health insurance giant provides what amounts to secret bonuses to enroll in a program that stations medical staff that reports directly to UnitedHealthcare, and in practice works to reduce hospitalizations for patients, some of whom allegedly may urgently need the care. Unitedhealthcare Ceo Murder Suspect Luigi Mangione Indicted In New York The article also claims UnitedHealthcare financially entices nursing homes to join their "Institutional Special Needs" program, and allegedly illegally had nursing homes share confidential patient data with the insurer so that it could skirt federal law and market programs to patients – some of whom lack the capacity to make financial decisions on their own – and families. The Guardian also alleged that UnitedHealthcare leaned on nursing home staff to convince patients to sign DNR's, even if they had expressed a desire for all medical options to be used to save their life. "A recent article published by The Guardian presents a narrative built largely on anecdotes rather than facts. It is unfortunate that the article misrepresents a program that, in reality, improves health outcomes for seniors through on-site clinical care, personalized treatment plans, and enhanced coordination among caregivers. We stand firmly behind the integrity of our programs, which consistently receive high satisfaction ratings from our members," UnitedHealthcare said in a statement in response to the article in May. Read On The Fox News App The lawsuit alleged that The Guardian used a "heavily cropped screenshot" of an internal UnitedHealthcare email which they claim, when seen in full, contradicts their reporting. The suit also accuses The Guardian of "gratuitously" linking its report to the assassination of their former CEO Brian Thompson. Unitedhealth Shares Slide As Criminal Probe Report Adds To Investor Fears "The Guardian knew these accusations were false, but published them anyway," the lawsuit stated. The Guardian told Fox News Digital it stood by its reporting. "The Guardian stands by its deeply-sourced, independent reporting, which is based on thousands of corporate and patient records, publicly filed lawsuits, declarations submitted to federal and state agencies, and interviews with more than 20 current and former UnitedHealth employees – as well as statements and information provided by UnitedHealth itself over several weeks. It's outrageous that in response to factual reporting on the practice of secretly paying nursing homes to reduce hospitalizations for vulnerable patients, UnitedHealth is resorting to wildly misleading claims and intimidation tactics via the courts," a representative from The Guardian said. Click To Get The Fox News App When asked by Fox News Digital for clarification regarding the "heavily cropped screenshot," a representative for The Guardian said the image was in fact a "visual illustration" and the so-called missing information was provided "in an on-record comment and a denial from UnitedHealth" in the proceeding paragraph. The Guardian rep also claimed that UnitedHealthcare never asked the press outlet to alter the article source: UnitedHealthcare sues The Guardian for defamation after explosive nursing home story
