Dr. Mark Hyman's 10-Episode Broken Brain Series

[Wayne]

Below is the email I got from Mark Hyman describing his new brain series, and how to watch them. -- Dr. Hyman is really into functional medicine, and presents what he feels are revolutionary ways to approach, understand, and treat various brain and immunological health issues.

I watched the first episode, which gives an overview of what's coming in more detail, and liked a number of various functional medicine doctors who spoke and participated in this series.
..........................................................................

Welcome! Thank you for signing up to watch my free new docu-series, Broken Brain 2.

I’m so excited to share my latest docu-series with you! Broken Brain 2: The Body-Mind Connection will change the way you care for your brain and how you support the complex connections throughout your entire body.

This cutting-edge series is unlike anything you’ve seen before.

My team and I worked tirelessly to continue the conversation about what it takes to create real, lasting, vibrant brain health. With over 70 experts and 17 real patient testimonials, the information found in Broken Brain 2 is absolutely revolutionary—-a real game changer.

Episode 1 is live! Click here to watch.
Episode 2 is live! Click here to watch.

Here is what to expect:

April 3: My Story: The Power of the Body-Mind Connection

April 4: Protecting Your Brain from a Toxic World

April 5: Rising Above and Healing from Toxic Beliefs and Trauma

April 6: The Secrets Behind the Heart-Brain Connection

April 7: Cooling the Fire Within: The Immune-Brain Connection

April 8: How to Personalize Your Diet and Understand Your Genetics

April 9: Optimizing Your Brain Health and Innovative Therapies

April 10: The Step-by-Step Brain Reset

Here’s everything you need to know about accessing the episodes:

• Each episode will be available, for free, to stream for 24 hours. At the end of that period, the episode will expire.
• You will be sent an email daily with the link to the current episode at 6 pm Eastern Time (US). Emails may take up to 30 minutes to arrive.
• Episode 1 starts April 3rd at 6 pm EST.
• To ensure you receive our emails, add admin@brokenbrain.com to your email contacts. Please be sure to check your Promotions, Spam, and Junk folders.
• Each episode varies in length from one to two hours.
• You will receive a daily “Brain Health Challenge” email with my favorite brain health tidbits to start immediately boosting your brain health along with an episode reminder.

Here’s a little more about Broken Brain 2:
In this 8-episode series, we dive deeper into the complex and extraordinary organ called the brain, and reveal the powerful bidirectional connections it has with the rest of the body. Fascinating interviews with a range of renowned experts will teach you how environmental toxins, the immune system, heart health, toxic beliefs, diet, and so much more can sabotage our brains.

Most importantly of all, we’re going to tell you how to reclaim your brain and your health with this groundbreaking research.

For example, did you know that our toxic beliefs and traumas can create physical symptoms? Or that there is a profound connection between the heart and the brain that directly correlates to your stress responses? What about the fact that there is a lymphatic system in the brain? There is so much life-changing information in this docu-series that will blow your mind—and help you elevate it at any age.

I’m thrilled to share this information with you, thank you for joining me.

Wishing you health and happiness,

Mark Hyman, MD

P.S. Vibrant health is best when shared with others. Let your friends, family, and loved ones know about this life-changing docu-series. Please share it!

 

[Hip]

This article takes a more critical view of functional medicine, and the claims of Dr Mark Hyman.

 

[Judee]

This article takes a more critical view of functional medicine, and the claims of Dr Mark Hyman.

The only thing is that the author and commenters in that article are totally negative on him. That in itself becomes a red flag to me. I would ask them, "You mean nothing he believes in has any merit whatsoever?"

I'm just saying that I'm leery of all or nothing thinking. I don't completely trust everything presented by doctors like Mark Hyman but neither do I trust the doctors that say he's a quack.

There is a lot of error in medicine all around. Plus, most of those doctors calling him a quack think we're nuts too because we believe that ME/CFS is a real disease. From what I've heard about Functional medicine doctors at least they listen and believe the patient.

 

[Wayne]

This article takes a more critical view of functional medicine, and the claims of Dr Mark Hyman.

For those who didn't click on the above link, it takes you to the website: "Science-Based Medicine". From my brief visits over there in the past, I've found it to be about as arrogant, self-indulgent, narrow-minded a website as you're bound to ever come across. Not to mention they seem to be nothing but obedient pawns for the corrupt corporate and government power structures that negatively affect our lives in so many ways.

 

[pamojja]

None of my insurance paid docs have the time to talk about science. If I challenged their recommendations with science, they always showed no understanding of such basic science concepts, like relative or absolute percentage, NNT, the differences between different study designs, etc. With them it is as if 'science based medicine' is a real oxymoron.

Now it can be completely different with paid out of the pocket docs (which functional medicine docs usually are), which I could not afford myself on a ongoing basis, but have some experience by assisting clients.

Therefore the distinction certainly does not run between conventional or functional medicine. But does the doc had time, beside his rigorous pharmacological studies, to also had the inclination to get a grasp of science? Had he had exposure to the now in other sciences established underpinnings of system-theory? And therefore does consider all body systems in the etiology of a chronic disease? Does the doc have time to consider in-dept the medical history leading up to a chronic disease?

The answer for me will always be the same: haven't found one science-oriented insurance paid doc jet. Even those willing to learn new stuff, usually they only can give it 3 minutes at the most. Where no in-dept evaluation is ever possible.

Only out of the pocket money could buy them. From any orientation in medicine.

 

[pamojja]

Also taking the study in consideration which found that scientific findings take in average 17 years to arrive in medical practice (excluded those which never found investors for the necessary expensive trials to get it approved. Which practically includes every naturally occurring compound, which can't be patented. And therefore never would cover the costs of an investor), does show that it needs an exceptional physician inclined to self-education.

Standard curriculum of conventional medicine is in average 17 years behind, not only excludes worthwhile findings not gone through the billionares-process of getting it approved, but even chastise anyone clinically succesfully employing such alternatives (ie. loss of medical license), and obviously doesn't needs any understanding of science. Just of what's approved and a prescription pad.

 

[jesse's mom]

I watched the first episode and I will continue to listen to more. I am one to take it all in and take what I can use an leave the rest. I am willing to be open to anything that might help us.
I am sick and tired of being sick and tired.

Every person willing to stand up and say something even vaguely original in medicine has critics.

 

[jesse's mom]

Thanks for posting this @Wayne

 

[ljimbo423]

Functional medicine and conventional medicine are, for the most part at odds to each other. Functional medicine looks for and treats the root cause of disease.

Where conventional medicine treats mostly symptoms because that's where the pharmaceutical companies make most of their money. Their first obligation is to make money, not do what's best for public health.

As I understand it, many functional medicine doctors often use medications as well herbs, supplements, diet etc. to treat patients. So they would be better classified as integrative doctors rather than functional medicine doctors.

My own personal view is that integrative medicine(using both supplements, diet etc and medicine) is the future of medicine. It's the best of both worlds and both have very important roles to play in helping people to get or stay healthy.

 

[jesse's mom]

It was when I changed my primary care physician to a DO instead of a DR that I began to come out of some of the brain fog and can communicate with people better. Depression is lifting, I still get sad, but that is just sadness of losing all these years and quality of life.

A DO and a DR both are MDs and have completed medical school. Here is a link describing more on the difference.

 

[Hip]

For those who didn't click on the above link, it takes you to the website: "Science-Based Medicine". From my brief visits over there in the past, I've found it to be about as arrogant, self-indulgent, narrow-minded a website as you're bound to ever come across.

I find such criticism can be useful to help balance out some the exaggerated claims that you may get on other side of the equation, in this case some of the claims of functional medicine.

My own approach to treating ME/CFS and its accompanying illnesses has followed the general ideas of functional medicine (or ecological medicine as it is called in the UK). I have not seen a functional doctor, but the way I approach my own treatment has roughly followed functional ideas. So I am certainly not condemning functional medicine, as I like its approach.

But there are some unjustified claims (or we might call them wishful thinking) that functional medicine makes, so it's good to be aware of those. For example, as @ljimbo423 explains:

Functional medicine and conventional medicine are, for the most part at odds to each other. Functional medicine looks for and treats the root cause of disease.

Of course nobody would question that the future of medicine must be to discover the root cause of disease, and treat the root cause, rather than just trying to handle the consequences and the symptoms produced by that root cause. As our understanding of the body advances, I am sure in 500 years from now we will be knowledgable and capable enough to treat nearly all diseases by addressing their root cause.

But at the moment, for the most part we simply do not have the understanding and capabilities of treating diseases by their root cause, firstly because in most cases we do not even know what the root cause is, and secondly because even if we did know, we do not yet have the medical technology to target and treat that root cause.

So when functional medicine doctors tell you that they treat the root cause, it's a nice idea, it sounds a good thing to aim for; but the reality is that we are usually not technologically capable of addressing root causes.

Though I think sometimes functional medicine can be good at addressing some of the intermediate, upstream causes of disease, even if it cannot get to the root cause itself.

As I understand it, many functional medicine doctors often use medications as well herbs, supplements, diet etc. to treat patients. So they would be better classified as integrative doctors rather than functional medicine doctors.

Functional medicine doctors are very similar to integrative doctors. Here is the difference:

What is Integrative Medicine?

Integrative medicine uses a combination of modern healthcare practices to diagnose and treat a patient. Treatments may include such modalities as acupuncture, yoga, or massage. This medical practice also focuses on the nutritional and exercise habits of the patient to curb factors related to obesity and diabetes. Integrative medicine physicians believe poor lifestyle choices are the root cause of many modern chronic diseases.

What is Functional Medicine?

Functional medicine embraces much of the philosophy of Integrative medicine as described above but also employs a systems-oriented medical approach that works to identify and understand the underlying or root causes of a disease. This discipline takes into account the personalization of healthcare, as each patient care plan is distinct and unique.

Source: here.

So the main difference is that functional medicine has this philosophy of treating the root cause of disease.

 

[Hip]

For example, did you know that our toxic beliefs and traumas can create physical symptoms?

I am not too happy with this statement by Dr Mark Hyman.

The Wessely School psychiatrists set back ME/CFS biomedical research by 30 years with their theory that ME/CFS is simply caused by the thoughts and beliefs of the patient.

I think we have to be very careful with such statements. Maybe in some people a learned stress response may contribute to their illness; but suggesting that one's beliefs cause the symptoms of a disease puts you on a slippery slope.

 

[ljimbo423]

But at the moment, for the most part we simply do not have the understanding and capabilities of treating diseases by their root cause, firstly because in most cases we do not even know what the root cause is, and secondly because even if we did know, we do not yet have the medical technology to target and treat that root cause.

This is where you and I fundamentally disagree. Just as a basic example in my own life. I got the shingles a few years ago (a reactivation of the chicken pox).

Had I gone to a conventional doctor they would have given me an anti-viral of some kind. Even though they know that shingles are caused by a lowered immune system.

All they have to treat it are drugs that don't boost the immune system. I took 1,200 -1500mg a day of echinacea extract and within one-two days the blisters stopped forming and within a week they were gone!

This is one the problem that conventional medicine has. They don't have the drugs to treat or prevent the root cause of disease even when they know what it is.

Scientific research also shows that chronic inflammation is the root cause of many chronic diseases. Increased intestinal permeability (leaky gut) is known to cause chronic low grade inflammation and yet most conventional doctors don't even believe it exists!

How can conventional doctors treat the root cause of any disease that is caused by chronic inflammation and a leaky gut when most don't even believe it's real?

There are many studies that have found a leaky gut causes low grade chronic inflammation. Here are some.

 

[Hip]

Had I gone to a conventional doctor they would have given me an anti-viral of some kind. Even though they know that shingles are caused by a lowered immune system.

All they have to treat it are drugs that don't boost the immune system. I took 1,200 -1500mg a day of echinacea extract and within one-two days the blisters stopped forming and within a week they were gone!

Even if we assume that the Echinacea did boost your immune system to help you more quickly fight off the shingles viral reactivation, you still did not address the root cause.

The root cause of shingles is not due to a lack of Echinacea, just as the root cause of depression is not a lack of Prozac.

If your shingles is due to temporarily weakened immunity, you need to find it why your immune system became weak, not just take a medication to boost immunity. Like any conventional doctor, with Echinacea you are only addressing the symptoms (weakened immunity), not the cause.

Scientific research also shows that chronic inflammation is the root cause of many chronic diseases.

Inflammation may be behind some diseases, but it's not the root cause. Inflammation is just the response of the immune system to something in the body, such as tissue injury or a pathogenic infection. Or it could be autoimmune inflammation. If you want to find the root cause, you would need to figure out why the inflammation is occurring in the first place, and then address that issue.

I agree that it's a good idea to address inflammation, but it's not the root cause, it's only the intermediate upstream cause that I mentioned earlier. The root cause might be for example a low-level infection in the tissues.

 

[Hip]

I got the shingles a few years ago (a reactivation of the chicken pox).

By the way, you might interested to know that around 2% of the ME/CFS patients seen by Dr John Chia have presumed varicella zoster virus (VZV) reactivation in their dorsal root ganglia. Such a reactivation is indicated by a shingles rash.

This VZV form of ME/CFS is one of the most easily treatable and curable types of ME/CFS. Dr Chia finds all it requires is a short course of acyclovir or Valtrex for just a few weeks.

You might like the ME/CFS patient case story in this Dr Chia video at 6:58.

The story is about a high flying executive that became a severe bedridden ME/CFS patient. Only after 11 months in this bedridden state, did Dr Chia notice two little shingles blisters appearing on this patient. He gave her some acyclovir, and within 3 weeks she was back to full-time work. Remarkable.

So seems that some cases of ME/CFS may just be due to chronic reactivation of VZV in the dorsal root ganglia, which antivirals can address.

Thus if you are an ME/CFS patient who experienced a shingles outbreak, you might like to consider whether you actually just have VZV ME/CFS, as a simple antiviral treatment might be your ticket out of here.

 

[ljimbo423]

Inflammation may be behind some diseases, but it's not the root cause. Inflammation is just the response of the immune system to something in the body, such as tissue injury or a pathogenic infection. Or it could be autoimmune inflammation. If you want to find the root cause, you would need to figure out why the inflammation is occurring in the first place, and then address that issue.

I agree that it's a good idea to address inflammation, but it's not the root cause, it's only the intermediate upstream cause that I mentioned earlier. The root cause might be for example a low-level infection in the tissues.

I agree, addressing inflammation is just treating the symptoms. The link I provided shows several studies that say a leaky gut is a common cause of chronic inflammation and quite possibly the cause of many chronic diseases.

The research showing the connection of the gut to chronic inflammation is growing every year. I feel very strongly that it's just a matter of time before the evidence is over-whelming.

 

[pamojja]

But at the moment, for the most part we simply do not have the understanding and capabilities of treating diseases by their root cause, firstly because in most cases we do not even know what the root cause is, and secondly because even if we did know, we do not yet have the medical technology to target and treat that root cause.

So when functional medicine doctors tell you that they treat the root cause, it's a nice idea, it sounds a good thing to aim for; but the reality is that we are usually not technologically capable of addressing root causes.

I think this stems from the likelihood of misunderstanding 'root cause' as one monolithic single event. In that case I would have to identify the big bang as the root-cause of every condition. And nothing I could do about. Nor will there every be technology to tackle that.

I'm sure functional-medicine practitioners understand it with much wider implications, like finding all possible contributions past or present, from each bodily system, with could contribute to a particular disease process. And by tackling each and every of them, either through the synergistic effects of easing every possible contributor, or thereby indeed hiding the check-pot (one cause of many, but fundamental to keep the patient sick), improvement is more likely, than by simply concentrating on drugs for symptoms only.

Chronic inflammation is one such contributor, though not the cause of itself, still at one point self-perpetuating enough that its resolving could be enough to stop a disease process in it's tracks. Though more likely other contributors have to be tackled first too.

From what I heard from functional medicine practitioners till now, the concept of 'root cause' only should take a practitioner to where she/he does not let even one stone unturned. Practically I never seen it used for being omniscient, as you seem to misunderstand this term.

I think we have to be very careful with such statements. Maybe in some people a learned stress response may contribute to their illness; but suggesting that one's beliefs cause the symptoms of a disease puts you on a slippery slope.

I listened to part 1 yesterday, you can rest assured that Mark Hyman meant it in above sense, of letting no stone unturned, to find each and every contributor. Not as the 1 monolithic cause, as such simpletons as Wessely School psychiatrists wrongly misunderstand.

My suggestion would be to speak only about 'root causes': One can always see many roots by digging deep enough around a tree, though to dig enough to see them all would be to much for one person (for many trees they go much too deep). But by digging one is bound to see roots=contributors, other than when doesn't even bother to look. Therefore to look for root causes rightly understood as a practitioners duty, is much more than simply a 'nice idea', its essential against chronic diseases. Which are only chronic because it isn't done.

 

[ljimbo423]

My suggestion would be to speak only about 'root causes': One can always see many roots by digging deep enough around a tree, though to dig enough to see them all would be to much for one person (for many trees they go much too deep). But by digging one is bound to see roots=contributors, other than when doesn't even bother to look. Therefore to look for root causes rightly understood as a practitioners duty, is much more than simply a 'nice idea', its essential against chronic diseases. Which are only chronic because it isn't done.

You make good points. I agree that it's rarely one root cause that's behind chronic disease. Toxins(air, food, water etc.), stress, diet, the right supplements, in the right dosages, medications, etc.

These are all things that I address an a daily basis and feel much better because I do. Although dealing with stress, is something I just recently started to do. I have noticed definite improvements from it though!

My anxiety is much lower and I feel better physically too from daily meditation and other stress techniques. I think one of the things functional medicine does, is looks at the body as a whole. Seeing that everything is connected.

 

[bjl218]

I am currently seeing a functional medicine doctor. My second as a matter of fact. The first was one of Dr Hyman's associates at the UltraWellness center. It was *very* expensive. I made some progress, but I plateaued at which point it was no longer worth what I was paying. But I learned quite a bit. They don't take insurance, but they'll give you a superbill so you can submit it yourself. A surprising amount was covered (e.g. traditional labs). None of the non-traditional tests were covered. Office visits were covered as out of network, but phone visits were not covered at all. Their offices are only 2 hours from my home and about 10 minutes from my mother in law's home so getting there was not that much of a hassle for me. People come from all over the world to be seen there although I'm not sure that's still true since Dr Hyman stopped seeing patients.

My new functional medicine doctor is local to me and takes insurance. However, he is also a concierge practice. The "membership" fee is $59/month (less for each additional family member). So this is just a different business model.

The model of trying to find the underlying root causes of an illness is obviously superior to the "map the name of an illness to some drug" model. But what I really like about them is their willingness to work with you. If I read something or think of something and say, "Hey, what do you think about trying this?", he's open to that. That's in addition to understanding and believing in the nature of inflammation and its contribution to health issues.

On the other hand, I've detected a different type of arrogance in functional medicine doctors in their view of traditional medicine. The notion that "they just don't get it, but we do" is a little dangerous in my opinion. That's why my functional medicine doctor is not my primary care doctor...yet. Although he will act as a PCP which is also very unusual for functional medicine doctors.

So just like @jesse's mom , I'm sort of hedging my bets and taking it all in without completely committing to one side or the other just yet.

 

[Hip]

I think this stems from the likelihood of misunderstanding 'root cause' as one monolithic single event. In that case I would have to identify the big bang as the root-cause of every condition.

Some researchers believe that type 1 diabetes is caused by coxsackievirus B infection of the insulin producing cells of the pancreas, which destroys these cells by two proposed mechanisms: viral lysis and virally-induced autoimmune attack on the beta cells. So in this theory, T1D is caused by the following chain of cause and effect events:

CVB infection of beta cells ➤ kills many beta cells by lysis and autoimmune attack ➤ results in insufficient insulin ➤ causes blood glucose to rise ➤ causes the symptoms and tissue damage of T1D

We do not have any antiviral which can clear CVB from the beta cells, so instead we just treat upstream events in this causal chain, namely by replacing the insulin by insulin injections.

Functional doctors are no better than regular doctors in treating T1D, because they are not able to address events earlier on in this causal chain, in spite of their philosophy of wanting to treat root causes.

It's a good philosophy, but unfortunately it's often not actually feasible.

A functional doctor thought might be more helpful for type 2 diabetes, which has more nebulous causes, including possible dietary factors (very low calorie diets may improve T2D).

But what I really like about them is their willingness to work with you. If I read something or think of something and say, "Hey, what do you think about trying this?", he's open to that.

I agree that can be a desirable thing if you have some of your own ideas about how to tackle a health problem.

Therefore to look for root causes rightly understood as a practitioners duty, is much more than simply a 'nice idea', its essential against chronic diseases. Which are only chronic because it isn't done.

I have to disagree here. People have incurable chronic diseases not because their doctor failed to explore some complex mesh of all possible causal factors, but simply because science does not have any treatments for these diseases.

I've seen no studies indicating that a functional approach to medicine can cure diseases that other doctors cannot. Maybe if you are lucky a functional doctor might find for example some supplement that helps you, but functional doctors are not able to cure the incurable.