Food, Body + Health Naturopathic Nutrition Expert

Food, Body + Health Naturopathic Nutrition Expert Jan Purser is a retired naturopathic nutritionist, award-winning author and health educator. She is no longer seeing patients as of 25.06.2026.

Permanently closed.

Jan is a highly experienced naturopathic nutritionist, health writer and award-winning author. Her mission is your nutrition and her approach is practical, simple and effective. Jan completed her naturopathic nutritional medicine qualifications at Nature Care College in Sydney in 1996, and has been in practice since that time, first in a busy Sydney practice and in Perth since 2002. Jan is also a

Bredesen trained ReCODE practitioner having completed additional training with Dr Dale Bredesen from MPI Cognition and the Institute of Functional Medicine in the USA on reversing cognitive impairment and early Alzheimer’s disease. Jan has authored eight books on cooking, meditation and natural health. Her latest two books have won international awards. The Eat Well Cookbook, a fabulous gluten-free and dairy-free book, follows fast on the heels of The Detox Cookbook, which is an essential guide to doing a detox well with delicious recipes. Jan is passionate about helping her clients achieve optimal health and nutrition, so they can feel the best they can, using a balanced, achievable and effective approach. To address the underlying issues of a health concern, Jan uses a range of tests, including dietary and nutritional assessments.

A great informative post by Kerry Bone.
02/03/2026

A great informative post by Kerry Bone.

A new analysis led by researchers at University College London (UCL) suggests that Alzheimer disease (AD) may depend far more heavily on one gene than scientists once believed. The study estimates that more than 90% of Alzheimer cases might not develop without the influence of a single gene called APOE. Moreover, the impact appears to extend beyond AD alone. Researchers found that nearly half of all dementia cases may also rely on this gene’s contribution.

The APOE gene has been linked to Alzheimer’s disease for many years. It exists in three common forms, or alleles, known as ε2, ε3, and ε4. Each person inherits two copies of APOE, which results in six possible combinations of these variants. The six combinations of the APOE gene are: ε2+ε2; ε2+ε3; ε2+ε4; ε3+ε3; ε3+ε4; ε4+ε4. The variants are more commonly referred to as APOE2, APOE3, APOE4, which more correctly describes the APOE protein type produced from the gene (apolipoprotein E). APOE4 is thought to be the ancestral form; APOE3 and APOE2 evolved later.

Research in the 1990s established that people who carry one or more ε4 variants (producing mainly APOE4) face a much higher risk of AD compared with those who have two copies of the more common ε3 variant. People with ε2 generally had a lower risk than ε3 carriers. However, the new study goes much further than this.

Lead author Dr. Dylan Williams (UCL Division of Psychiatry and Unit for Lifelong Health and Ageing at UCL) said: “We have long underestimated how much the APOE gene contributes to the burden of Alzheimer’s disease. The ε4 variant of APOE is well recognised as harmful by dementia researchers, but much disease would not occur without the additional impact of the common ε3 allele, which has been typically misperceived as neutral in terms of Alzheimer’s risk.

“When we consider the contributions of ε3 and ε4, we can see that APOE potentially has a role in almost all Alzheimer’s disease. Consequently, if we knew how to reduce the risk that the ε3 and ε4 variants confer to people, we may be able prevent most disease from occurring.”

The study represents the most detailed modelling so far of how common APOE variants contribute to Alzheimer’s and dementia across the population. Researchers combined evidence linking the ε3 and ε4 alleles to Alzheimer’s disease, all-cause dementia, and the brain changes that precede Alzheimer’s.

A critical element of the analysis was access to data from four very large studies involving more than 450,000 participants. This allowed researchers to identify a sizable group of people with two ε2 copies, an uncommon but low risk group, and use them as a reference point in their calculations for the first time in this type of research. Specifically, the researchers analysed electronic health record data from 171,105 older adults in the UK Biobank cohort and 289,150 older adults in the FinnGen study to determine Alzheimer and all-cause dementia diagnoses. They also examined baseline amyloid PET scans of 4,415 participants in the A4 trial and analysed data from 5,007 participants in the Alzheimer's Disease Genetics Consortium (ADGC) of autopsy-confirmed Alzheimer cases and controls to provide a comprehensive view.

Based on their analysis, the researchers estimated that 72 to 93% of Alzheimer cases would not have occurred without the ε3 and ε4 variants of APOE. They also found that roughly 45% of all dementia cases might not arise without the gene’s influence.

These estimates exceed earlier assessments of APOE’s impact, largely because the new study evaluated the combined effects of both ε3 and ε4 rather than focusing only on ε4.

Results differed somewhat across the four studies included in the analysis. These differences reflected how AD and dementia were defined and measured, including whether cases were identified through medical diagnoses, other dementia classifications, or signs of amyloid buildup seen on brain scans. Variation in follow-up length and possible recruitment biases also contributed. When considered together, the evidence suggests that APOE is likely responsible for at least three quarters of Alzheimer cases, and potentially more.

The findings indicate that APOE should receive greater attention in research aimed at understanding disease mechanisms and developing new treatments and prevention options.

APOE is a lipoprotein-binding protein that helps transport cholesterol, triglycerides and phospholipids. It acts as a ligand for LDL (low density lipoprotein) receptors and related receptors, helping shuttle lipids between tissues, particularly the brain, the vascular system and the liver. In the brain, APOE is produced mainly by astrocytes and helps redistribute cholesterol to neurons for membrane repair and synapse maintenance.

The APOE ε4 variant is thought to increase dementia risk by impairing amyloid-β clearance, amplifying tau pathology and neuroinflammation, disrupting brain lipid transport and synaptic repair, and compromising vascular integrity, thereby lowering the brain’s resilience to age-related neurodegenerative stress over time. Further research is needed to confirm these processes and to explain why ε3 increases dementia risk compared with ε2.

Despite its strong influence, APOE is not the sole cause of Alzheimer or other dementias. Even among people with the highest genetic risk, those who carry two ε4 variants, lifetime risk of AD is still estimated to be below 70%. See my recent posting on the 14 modifiable risk factors in AD and the key role they play.

This invites some more sober commentary on the study’s findings. For example, claiming that most Alzheimer cases would not occur without the contribution of APOE was a bit like saying most road traffic deaths wouldn't occur without the contribution of cars, according to geneticist Dr Timothy Frayling of the University of Geneva. (This is not entirely true because only ε3 and ε4 appear to account for risk.) "People should not worry if they have the risk versions of the gene, because 99.4% of us do," he added.

To my mind, the true value of this study lies in the mechanistic lens it provides. Specifically, are there any natural interventions that can mitigate the risk imposed by APOE variants? See my next posting for a few promising leads.

For more information see: https://bit.ly/40837KO
and
https://scitechdaily.com/one-overlooked-gene-may-shape-nearly-all-alzheimers-risk/

Micro plastics are very troubling and yet we can do something about it right now which is great news. Read on...https://...
05/11/2025

Micro plastics are very troubling and yet we can do something about it right now which is great news. Read on...

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1BRzozhSM8/

Two recent online articles have highlighted the need for a greater awareness of the potential health benefits of reducing micro- and nanoplastic exposure. The emergence of microplastics (1 µm to 5 mm) and nanoplastics (less than 1 µm) has raised alarms about their harmful effects on human health. Nanoplastics are especially hazardous due to their smaller size and enhanced ability to infiltrate the human body.

The first article reviews a recent paper by Sarah Sajedi and colleagues, published in the Journal of Hazardous Materials, which examines the science around the health risks posed by single-use plastic water bottles. They are serious, she says, and seriously understudied.

In her analysis of more than 140 scientific papers, Sajedi reports that people ingest an estimated 39,000 to 52,000 microplastic particles each year. For those who rely on bottled water, that number climbs even higher, about 90,000 additional particles compared to people who primarily drink tap water.

According to Sajedi, the health risks are significant. Once inside the body, these small plastics can pass through biological barriers, enter the bloodstream and reach major organs. Their presence may contribute to chronic inflammation, cellular oxidative stress, hormone disruption, reproductive issues, neurological damage, and some cancers. Still, their long-term impacts are not fully understood, largely because of limited testing and the absence of standardised ways to measure and track them.

Sajedi says: “Drinking water from plastic bottles is fine in an emergency but it is not something that should be used in daily life. People need to understand that the issue is not acute toxicity—it is chronic toxicity.”

The second article in MedPage Today highlights the ubiquitous and insidious nature of micro- and nanoplastics. One of the authors (Meyer) is an emergency physician who believes it is now time to be warning patients about reducing exposure.

Teasing out the health impacts of micro- and nanoplastics requires some nuance. There is never going to be a randomised controlled trial: it is hard to conceive of a control group with no plastics exposure (given their ubiquity) and unethical to deliberately expose an experimental group to high-dose plastics. But waiting for perfect data risks ignoring an escalating health threat. Hence, much of what we know is by necessity extrapolated from animal studies and observational trials -- and there are multiple red flags.

In humans, studies are slowly emerging. In 2024, researchers followed patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy and found that those with microplastics in their plaque had a significantly higher rate of myocardial infarction, stroke or death 34 months later. More recently, decedent human brains from 2016 and 2024 were evaluated for microplastics: concentrations were significantly higher among individuals diagnosed with dementia compared to those without dementia (and plastic concentrations increased 50% from 2016 brains to 2024 brains, consistent with increasing environmental exposure). Last year, researchers at University of California San Francisco (UCSF) reviewed existing human and animal studies and found a suggestion of harm to reproductive, digestive and respiratory health in humans, as well as a possible link with colon and lung cancer.

All of this has been enough to convince Meyer that it is now time to start warning patients about microplastics. Although it would be impossible to avoid plastics altogether, there are some practical steps people can take to decrease their exposure.

To start (as per the first article), it makes sense to give up single-use plastic water bottles in favour of reusable steel or glass bottles. The water in plastic bottles has been found to contain 20 times more microplastics than tap water.

It is also a good idea to limit plastic in the kitchen, since we acquire many of our microplastics by eating and drinking them. This means using wooden cooking utensils and cutting boards over plastic ones, foil over plastic wrap, and glass food storage over plastic. If possible, avoid nonstick and plastic cookware. In situations where plastic containers are unavoidable, don't microwave food in them. And wash them by hand instead of the dishwasher, since heating plastic hastens its breakdown and chemical leaching.

At the supermarket, pack groceries in reusable cloth or paper bags, and try to avoid fruits and vegetables wrapped or packaged in plastic (admittedly challenging). And finally, limit ultraprocessed foods. Not only are they associated with increased mortality, obesity, chronic disease and malignancy, but they also come coated in plastic.

Could the demise of modern civilisation be caused by something we cannot even see?

For more information see: https://scitechdaily.com/scientists-warn-bottled-water-may-pose-serious-long-term-health-risks/
and
https://bit.ly/47TCyO3

This is really helpful for everyone to have a realistic view of what is possible in reversing cognitive decline. You can...
25/05/2025

This is really helpful for everyone to have a realistic view of what is possible in reversing cognitive decline. You can see that it is well worth pursuing the help of a ReCode practitioner.

Let’s be clear about the current best outcomes in preventing and reversing cognitive decline.

- Cognitive decline is reversible. Peer-reviewed studies confirm it. (See the research: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3233/JAD-215707)

- Gains can last for years—sometimes over a decade. This isn’t a short-term fix. It’s a new way forward. (See the evidence: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9059/12/8/1776)

- In contrast, the “breakthrough” anti-amyloid antibody drugs do not improve cognition at all, they simply slow decline modestly, while exerting side effects that include brain hemorrhage, brain swelling, and death.

- We’re not just improving memory scores — we’re reversing the disease process. Brain scans show increased volume, improved blood flow, healthier brain waves, and better biomarkers. This is actually reducing pathophysiology, not simply boosting cognition.

- Not every case is successful, especially when treatment begins too late or the full protocol isn’t followed. But this is true of any medical intervention — from antibiotics to surgeries. That’s why early intervention is critical.

- Here’s the new reality: dementia is quickly becoming optional. With the right tools, no one needs to wait for symptoms to spiral. We now have the ability to detect risk early — and act in time to prevent cognitive decline altogether.

We recommend that everyone over 35 get screened and begin a prevention program.

This chart is what we typically see based on when treatment begins. This is not speculation. This is data-driven proof. This is hope grounded in science.

Address

13 Glyde Street
Mosman Park, WA
6012

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Food, Body + Health Naturopathic Nutrition Expert posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Share