Men's Hair Replacement

Do you know a man whose hair piece is in need of a makeover? Our very own hair replacement master stylist creates customized hair for every type of lifestyle! Like swimming, working out or riding a motorcycle? No worries! Ricky has you covered! Take a look at the hair Ricky created for our client Brandon!

8 Foods for Thicker and Stronger Hair

Are you frustrated about loosing hair? This could be caused by stress or medical treatment or heredity according to the American Academy of Dermatology.

A rich and nutritious diet is here to rescue. For thinker and stronger hair, it is important to consume in certain foods, which not only is good for hair growth but overall health.

1. Avocado

Rich in copper, avocado contributes greatly to hair growth. Copper increases collagen growth and elastin of the skin, which holds the hair follicle. Copper also improves hormonal balance so hair could grow strong. Shellfish, beef, whole grains, dark leafy greens, beans and legumes are also rich in copper.

2. Pumpkin seeds

Pumpkin seeds contain zinc, which promotes cellular turnover that help to form keratin, a protein that is found naturally in hair. The additional benefits found are preserving hair color and preventing dandruff. You could add these seeds into your salad or cereal or take them as snack.

3. Edamame

Edamame is a great option to increase protein intake. Having adequate protein intake in your diet is important to generate keratin. You can toss them in your salad or stir fry with other vegetables.

4. Lentils

Lentils are plant-based sources of iron, which supply oxygen to hair follicles that give us thicker hair. It is beneficial to pair with high vitamin C foods such as oranges, tomatoes, or Swiss chard so to increase the absorbance of the iron.

5. Chia seeds
Low fat diet could contribute to dry scalp, which could lead to hair loss. Chia seeds are great sources for increasing your healthy fat intake. Other options are wild salmon, walnuts or flaxseed.

6. Shellfish

Clams, crabs, and mussels are rich in vitamin B12, which aid in the production of keratin. If you are not a fan of shellfish, try turkey, milk and yogurt.

7. Almonds

Have you notice that biotin is fortified in many new hair products? That’s because it helps hair growth and healthy scalp. Biotin rich foods are nuts, particularly almonds, and eggs.

8. Bell peppers

Rich in vitamin C, these bright color bell peppers are excellent sources for improving hair, nail and skin health. If you are experiencing hair loss, try to bump up your intake in vitamin C.

Task Force Issues New Breast Cancer Screening Recommendations

Cari Nierenberg

Women who have an average risk of breast cancer should have mammograms every two years from ages 50 to 74, according to the latest recommendations released today by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF).

Women in this 50-to-74 age group are the most likely to benefit from regular breast cancer screenings, suggested the USPSTF, a 17-person, government-appointed panel of medical experts that makes recommendations on the effectiveness of preventive health services.

Average-risk women in their 40s also may benefit from getting mammograms, but their overall likelihood of seeing a benefit is smaller, and the potential for harm is larger than for average-risk women age 50 and older, according to the USPSTF's recommendations, published online today (Jan. 11) in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine.

These latest USPSTF guidelines are basically the same as those the panel released in 2009. But since that time, there has been greater agreement among the guidelines of several major groups of experts, such as the American Cancer Society, the American College of Physicians and the American Academy of Family Physicians, said Dr. Albert Siu, chair of the task force and a professor of geriatrics and palliative medicine at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City. [6 Things Women Can Do to Lower Breast Cancer Risk]

These groups have independently concluded that mammography is effective and that its benefits increase particularly in women age 50 and over, Siu told Live Science.

All of the groups recognize that there is a role for starting mammograms in women in their 40s and support the idea of a personal, informed choice for women in this age group, he said.

"The decision to start mammogram screening before age 50 should be an individual one" for average-risk women, the new guidelines state.

In other words, women ages 40 to 49 should consider starting breast cancer screenings, but their doctors should inform them about the potential benefits and possible harms of the screening test so that they can weigh both sides in making their decision.

After reviewing the newest scientific evidence on mammograms, the task force found that the number of deaths from breast cancer that the screening test can prevent in average-risk women under 50 is smaller than that in older women, and that the number of false-positive results and unnecessary biopsies is larger.

A false positive is a result that suggests a woman may have cancer but additional testing and procedures later show that she does not. False-positive findings can be stressful and provoke anxiety, and they may lead to the possibility of overdiagnosis and overtreatment.

Still, the task force supports the decision of women who want to start screening in their 40s, and the new guidelines note that the risk of problems from screening may increase decrease as women move from their early 40s to their late 40s, Siu said.

Weighing risks and benefits

Various organizations that make breast cancer recommendations have come to relatively similar conclusions in the areas where the science is fairly black and white, Siu said.

Where the groups diverge is in their different interpretations of the gray areas, where studies have not been done, or the areas for which the groups weigh the benefits and risks differently, he said.

For example, one gray area is whether average-risk women in the 45-to-55 age group should start mammograms and, if so, how frequently they should get them, he noted.

Unlike the USPSTF recommendations to start mammograms at age 50 and rescreen every two years, the American Cancer Society advises women to begin mammograms at age 45 and to have them yearly until age 54. Then, at age 55, women should get mammograms every two years, according to the group's latest recommendations, released in 2015.

Recommendations from other groups, such as the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (a worldwide alliance of cancer centers), call for yearly mammograms in average-risk women age 40 and older.

The differing recommendations about when and how often to get mammograms can leave women feeling confused, but ultimately, the decision all boils down to personal choice and consideration of the benefits and risks, Siu said.

The majority of American women fall into the average-risk breast cancer category, Siu said. Women are considered to have average risk if they do not show symptoms of breast cancer, such as a breast lump or high-risk breast lesion, have never had breast cancer, do not have a known genetic mutation for breast cancer, such as a BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation, and did not receive chest radiation at an early age.

The average-risk group also includes women age 40 and over who have breast cancer in their family, such as a mother, sister, aunt or daughter who was diagnosed with the disease, but did not have a genetic mutation for it.

New to the USPSTF guidelines this year was the group's evaluation of the effectiveness of three-dimensional mammography, as well as an evaluation of the effectiveness of adjunctive treatment for dense breasts with MRI, ultrasound or 3D mammograms, Siu said. The task force made no recommendations in these two areas because they found insufficient evidence to determine the balance of benefits and harms. [6 Foods That May Affect Breast Cancer Risk]

The task force also said that there was insufficient evidence to recommend that average-risk women age 75 and over continue getting mammograms.

Mammography is an effective but imperfect tool, Siu said. Over the past decade, science has begun to recognize that there are potential harms from cancer screening, including overdiagnosis, or the detection and treatment of cancer in people who would have never been bothered by the disease in their lifetimes, he explained.

There is increased recognition that overdiagnosis does exist, and it may be on the order of one in five women diagnosed with breast cancer over approximately 10 years, Siu said.

Even knowing this chance for overdiagnosis, the task force recognizes that many women, especially women under 50, may choose to get screened more often, but they should be aware and informed of the risks, he said.

The 25 Best Fitness Apps for 2016

• BY JILL DUFFY

Staying fit and healthy and losing weight were the two most popular New Year's resolutions for 2015, and doubtless the same is true for 2016, too. If your idea of a new you for the new year includes ramping up your fitness and trimming down your waist, you'll want some tried-and-true fitness apps on your phone to help keep you on track.

Mobile apps are ideal assistants for health, fitness, and weight-loss resolutions because they are always with you and they're quite personal. Fitness isn't something we can take care of in just one day. It requires daily habits and lifestyle changes, and a few little nudges in the right direction from your mobile phone might make all the difference.

Whether you're trying to lose weight, walk more steps in a day, or make time for a seven-minute morning workout in your living room, fitness apps can help.

Some of the apps highlighted here are tracking tools. You can log workouts, count calories eaten, and collect stats about all your runs to see overtime how you're improving. Fitness apps can also be coaching apps that put you in touch with a personal trainer or nutritionist who will check in with you once a week. And some, of course, combine all these things.

One of my personal favorite apps for health and fitness is MyFitnessPal. This free app lets you count calories that you consume as well as tally up the calories you expend every day. It's compatible with a number of fitness trackers, which means MyFitnessPal can keep track of the calories you burn automatically by pulling them in from your tracker. MyFitnessPal is wonderful at helping you become more aware of your eating habits and just how much exercise it takes to burn off the food you eat.

Another app I love is The Johnson & Johnson Official 7 Minute Workout because it helps anyone get some amount of exercise in a very short amount of time. Unlike other seven-minute workout apps, The Johnson & Johnson app adjusts its level of difficulty based on your current fitness level. It also has workouts that are longer than seven minutes for days when you have a little more time. It's great for busy travellers, too, because it doesn't require anything more than a chair, so you can easily bang out this workout in a hotel room.

Not everyone in the market for a great fitness app wants to count calories or get coached through a quick workout. Some are just looking for a little music to motivate them. Music workout apps were a hot item in 2015. FIT Radio, for example, specializes in create playlists that you can play over your headphones for a variety of workouts, such as running and yoga. All the songs in the playlist have a consistent beat. The music streaming service and app Spotify has a great feature for Premium subscribers that lets them find their running tempo and get songs with a beat that match it. Once the app finds your tempo, it leaves the beats-per-minute setting alone, so your music becomes a metronome of sorts. RockMyRun has a similar feature, only the music it plays speeds up and slows down in real time as your cadence changes.

Other apps tap into your competitive side to motivate you to work out. For example, Strava is a running and bicycling app that lets you compete against every other person who has signed up to use the app. You use Strava to track your runs and bicycle rides, and other Strava members do the same. The app collects everyone's routes and times, breaks them into segments, and then tells you who has the best time along different stretches of roads and trails. If you're the fastest on the road, everyone else using Strava near you will know it.

Another superb app for competitive types is Pact (formerly called GymPact), you can wager money on whether you'll go to the gym as often as you say you will. The app uses your GPS location to verify whether you actually made it to the gym and stayed to work out. If you hit your goal, you'll earn a chunk of change.

Perhaps you're more motivated by helping others than by winning a pot of cash yourself. There's an app for that, too. Charity Miles is a workout tracking app for runs, walks, and bicycle rides that donates a little money for every mile you complete. The app developers find corporate sponsors who make donations on your behalf for any charity you choose from a list.

No matter what kind of motivation or daily prodding you need to meet your fitness goals, there's an app that can push you in the right direction.

Charity Miles
Free

Earn money for charities every time you run, walk, or bicycle by using the free Charity Miles app. Corporate sponsors (whose information you'll see as a backdrop image in the app) agree to donate a few cents for every mile you complete. Browse the app's list of charities, find the one that you support, and then hit the road. When a lot of people use Charity Miles, those little bits of money add up.

Cyclemeter
Free, $4.99 upgrade optional

The best bicycle-ride tracking app I've tested is Cyclemeter by Abvio. This iOS-only app collects a wealth of data, is very accurate, contains several well-thought-out features, and appeals to fitness enthusiasts who participate in more than one sport. Despite the name, you can use Cyclemeter to track walks, runs, and other activities. It does not include a calorie-counting component, but it is packed with data about your biking outings.

See the rest of the list here: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2485287,00.asp

What Causes Women's Hair Loss? 10 Things That Might Be To Blame

1. Hormonal Changes

2. Birth Control Pills

3. Childbirth

4. Thyroid Conditions

5. Certain Kinds Of Hairstyling

6. Extreme Stress

7. Vitamin Deficiencies

8. Certain Medications

9. Auto Immune Disorders

10. Genetics

Who's Mad About The New Dietary Guidelines? Cancer Experts, for One

Maggie Fox

The U.S. government's latest eating guidelines came out Thursday — only to be greeted with the usual accusations that they go too far, or don't go far enough, or leave out something important.

But this time some of the hottest criticism comes from cancer researchers. And other experts are upset that the guidelines don't say more about eating less meat.

"We are pretty disappointed the report doesn't recommend limiting red and processed meat because of the link to cancer," said Katie McMahon of the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network.

Evidence goes back decades linking diets high in red and processed meats (like bacon and sausage) to cancer, McMahon told NBC News.

The guidelines do, in fact, mention this — but don't blame meat specifically. "Strong evidence from mostly prospective cohort studies but also randomized controlled trials has shown that eating patterns that include lower intake of meats as well as processed meats and processed poultry are associated with reduced risk of cardiovascular disease in adults," they say.

"Moderate evidence indicates that these eating patterns are associated with reduced risk of obesity, type 2 diabetes, and some types of cancer in adults."

The American Institute for Cancer Research (AICR), which studies the links between food and cancer, says it's clear the Health and Human Services Department and U.S. Department of Agriculture came under pressure to downplay any risks of eating meat.

"As an organization dedicated to cancer prevention, we are dismayed to see that the Dietary Guidelines have allowed lobbying efforts to supersede the scientific evidence, when it comes to meat and cancer risk," said AICR's Susan Higginbotham.

"The Dietary Guidelines have a profound and positive health impact on so many children, older adults and families in the U.S.; this failure to embrace decades of research with the potential to save thousands of American lives represents a missed opportunity."

Some nutritionists also said the federal government was pressured by the meat industry and by other lobby groups. "From my standpoint, Congress has caved in to the will of special interest food groups," said Marion Nestle, a nutrition professor at New York University.

Dr. Walter Willett, who heads the nutrition department at the Harvard School of Public Health, agreed. "Unfortunately, the USDA has censored the recommendation of the Scientific Advisory Committee to consume less red meat," Willett said.

"In fact, the dietary guidelines promote consumption of red meat as long as it is lean, which is not what the science supports. There is strong evidence that red meat consumption increases risk of diabetes, heart attacks, stroke, and some cancers (especially processed meat), and there is not good evidence that this simply due to the fat content," Willett added.

"This appears to reflect the powerful influences of the beef industry. Unfortunately, the public is being misled."

Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell says the report actually stands up to some very strong lobbying groups, especially in its recommendations to cut sugar, salt and saturated fat. These are all found in processed food or soft drinks, and some very powerful interest groups fought back hard on recommendations to limit those.

"In terms of that lobby, those aren't necessarily things they would support," Burwell told NBC News. "I think we have a strong set of recommendations."

The sugar industry was indeed unhappy. "The Committee's conclusions on 'added sugars' intake are not based on the established evidence-based review process of the full body of science, which raises serious concerns the Committee bypassed this process and hand-picked science to support their pre-determined conclusions," it said in a statement.

And Burwell noted that there are reasons besides cancer to limit processed meats. They're high in salt and unhealthful fats, for one. "You should be looking at those things and certainly processed meat does contain a lot of sodium," she said.

And Alice Lichtenstein, a nutrition professor at Tufts University who sat on the advisory committee, said that cancer wasn't a major focus of the group's deliberations. They were more concerned about heart disease, the No. 1 killer of Americans, and diabetes, she said.

"We wanted to focus on chronic disease," she told NBC News.

One high-profile recommendation that was dropped from consideration in the year-long process of drawing up the report was that people be advised to eat a "sustainable" diet that would limit bad impacts on the environment. That would include eating less meat, since producing meat uses far more water than producing crops that people eat directly.

The U.S. government's latest eating guidelines came out Thursday — only to be greeted with the usual accusations that they go too far, or don't go far enough, or leave out something important.

But this time some of the hottest criticism comes from cancer researchers. And other experts are upset that the guidelines don't say more about eating less meat.

"We are pretty disappointed the report doesn't recommend limiting red and processed meat because of the link to cancer," said Katie McMahon of the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network.

Evidence goes back decades linking diets high in red and processed meats (like bacon and sausage) to cancer, McMahon told NBC News.

The guidelines do, in fact, mention this — but don't blame meat specifically. "Strong evidence from mostly prospective cohort studies but also randomized controlled trials has shown that eating patterns that include lower intake of meats as well as processed meats and processed poultry are associated with reduced risk of cardiovascular disease in adults," they say.

"FROM MY STANDPOINT, CONGRESS HAS CAVED IN TO THE WILL OF SPECIAL INTEREST FOOD GROUPS."
"Moderate evidence indicates that these eating patterns are associated with reduced risk of obesity, type 2 diabetes, and some types of cancer in adults."

The American Institute for Cancer Research (AICR), which studies the links between food and cancer, says it's clear the Health and Human Services Department and U.S. Department of Agriculture came under pressure to downplay any risks of eating meat.

"As an organization dedicated to cancer prevention, we are dismayed to see that the Dietary Guidelines have allowed lobbying efforts to supersede the scientific evidence, when it comes to meat and cancer risk," said AICR's Susan Higginbotham.

"The Dietary Guidelines have a profound and positive health impact on so many children, older adults and families in the U.S.; this failure to embrace decades of research with the potential to save thousands of American lives represents a missed opportunity."

Facebook Twitter Google Plus Embed
 New Federal Dietary Guidelines: Curb Your Soda Intake 1:27
Some nutritionists also said the federal government was pressured by the meat industry and by other lobby groups. "From my standpoint, Congress has caved in to the will of special interest food groups," said Marion Nestle, a nutrition professor at New York University.

Dr. Walter Willett, who heads the nutrition department at the Harvard School of Public Health, agreed. "Unfortunately, the USDA has censored the recommendation of the Scientific Advisory Committee to consume less red meat," Willett said.

"In fact, the dietary guidelines promote consumption of red meat as long as it is lean, which is not what the science supports. There is strong evidence that red meat consumption increases risk of diabetes, heart attacks, stroke, and some cancers (especially processed meat), and there is not good evidence that this simply due to the fat content," Willett added.

"This appears to reflect the powerful influences of the beef industry. Unfortunately, the public is being misled."

Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell says the report actually stands up to some very strong lobbying groups, especially in its recommendations to cut sugar, salt and saturated fat. These are all found in processed food or soft drinks, and some very powerful interest groups fought back hard on recommendations to limit those.

"In terms of that lobby, those aren't necessarily things they would support," Burwell told NBC News. "I think we have a strong set of recommendations."

The sugar industry was indeed unhappy. "The Committee's conclusions on 'added sugars' intake are not based on the established evidence-based review process of the full body of science, which raises serious concerns the Committee bypassed this process and hand-picked science to support their pre-determined conclusions," it said in a statement.

And Burwell noted that there are reasons besides cancer to limit processed meats. They're high in salt and unhealthful fats, for one. "You should be looking at those things and certainly processed meat does contain a lot of sodium," she said.

And Alice Lichtenstein, a nutrition professor at Tufts University who sat on the advisory committee, said that cancer wasn't a major focus of the group's deliberations. They were more concerned about heart disease, the No. 1 killer of Americans, and diabetes, she said.

"We wanted to focus on chronic disease," she told NBC News.

One high-profile recommendation that was dropped from consideration in the year-long process of drawing up the report was that people be advised to eat a "sustainable" diet that would limit bad impacts on the environment. That would include eating less meat, since producing meat uses far more water than producing crops that people eat directly.

Facebook Twitter Google Plus Embed
 Government Lays Out New Dietary Guidelines For Sugar and Salt 2:09
The Center for Science in the Public Interest says some of the carefully worded language in the guidelines shows there was some attempt to resist meat industry lobbying. "Though the final Guidelines does not address environmental sustainability, the overall advice on eating less meat indicates USDA and HHS partially resisted the political pressure," it said.

The meat industry didn't seem unhappy with the guidelines. "Consumers who choose to eat meat and poultry, as 95 percent of Americans do, can continue to enjoy our products as they have in the past," said Meat Institute President and CEO Barry Carpenter.

When advisers on the guidelines issued their report a year ago, it made headlines because it said eggs and other food sources of cholesterol might not be as harmful as believed in years past.

The new report notes that it's fat in food and not cholesterol itself that raises blood cholesterol when people eat it, but also recommends limiting cholesterol-rich foods such as eggs.

"The dropping of the guideline for cholesterol is of concern because so much of the research on eggs and cholesterol (eggs are the single greatest source of dietary cholesterol) was sponsored by the egg industry," said Nestle.

And the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, which promotes a vegan diet, said it was filing suit against the government in California federal district court over the new guidelines.

"The Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee's recommendations are part of a twenty-year attempt at a cholesterol image makeover based on research funded by USDA's egg promotion program and designed specifically to increase egg consumption regardless of the health risks that may result from unlimited cholesterol ingestion," the suit reads.

Nonetheless, even critics said the report has some positive points. It aims to reduce obesity by guiding people to eat more fruits and vegetables and less sugar, white flour and other processed food.

"We estimate that avoiding obesity could prevent almost 122,000 U.S. cases of cancer every year," said AICR's nutrition expert Alice Bender.

CSPI president Michael Jacobson said the real issue is what's on store shelves.

"The problem is that the food industry has continued to pressure and tempt us to eat a diet of burgers, pizzas, burritos, cookies, doughnuts, sodas, shakes, and other foods loaded with white flour, red and processed meat, salt, saturated fat, and added sugars, and not enough vegetables, fruit, and whole grains," he said.

What Is the 'Best Diet' for You?

Angela Haupt

What makes a diet best? In Best Diets 2016, the latest set of exclusive rankings from U.S. News, the DASH diet beat out 37 others, including Atkins, Jenny Craig and Slim-Fast, to win the "Best Diets Overall" crown. Among the 17 commercial diet programs marketed to the public, Weight Watchers and the Mayo Clinic Diet came out on top. (Our methodology explains how.) We also ranked the diets on likelihood of weight loss, ability to prevent and control diabetes and heart disease, healthiness and how easy they are to follow.

Our analysis puts hard numbers on the common-sense belief that no diet is ideal for everybody.

Take DASH, the Best Diets Overall winner. It wasn't created as a way to drop pounds, but as a means of combating high blood pressure (it stands for Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension). The federal government, which funded the research behind DASH, doesn't even call it a diet – it's an "eating plan." If losing weight is your No. 1 goal, a diet in our Best Weight-Loss Diets rankings would be a more likely choice. Or if you have diabetes, you might want to look especially hard at Best Diabetes Diets.

That's why we're giving you lots of tools. Each diet was scored by a panel of experts in short-term and long-term weight loss, on how easy it is to follow, how well it conforms to current nutrition standards and on health risks it may pose – plus its soundness as a diabetes and as a heart diet.

Besides the rankings and data, each diet has a detailed profile that tells you how it works, what evidence supports (or refutes) its claims, a nutritional snapshot – right down to daily milligrams of potassium – and, of course, a close look at the food you'd eat, with photos. All of it is reliable and easy to understand.

These tools will be at least a start at helping you, your mother, your brother – whomever – find that elusive perfect-for-me diet. Once you've whittled down your eligible diets to a few, consider your personality and lifestyle. If you're a foodie, you probably won't be happy with a plan built around frozen dinners, such as Nutrisystem and Jenny Craig, or mostly just-add-water meals, like Medifast. If cutting carbs will make you cranky and resentful, you'll want to stay away from low-carb diets such as Atkins and South Beach.

Then think about what did and didn't work the last time you were on a diet. Was it too restrictive? Lots of diets we covered don't consider any food off-limits. Didn't provide enough structure? Some plans will tell you exactly what to eat and when.

With any diet, ask yourself: How long can I stay on this? No matter how good it looks – or how good it might make you look – if you can't stick with it in the long run, you'll be right back where you started after a couple months.

And consider physical activity – an important component of any healthy lifestyle. Does your plan lay out a specific exercise program, or are you on your own?

The questions are endless. Right now, you may have no idea what will or won't work for you. That's what we're here for. We're not going to tell you what diet you should be on, but we can help lead you to a winner – the Best Diet for you.

Here's which diets came out on top in the nine different ranking lists:

Best Diets Overall

1. DASH Diet

2. MIND Diet (tie)

2. TLC Diet (tie)


Best Weight-Loss Diets

1. Weight Watchers

2. HMR Program


Best Fast Weight-Loss Diets

1. Biggest Loser (tie)

1. HMR Program (tie)


Best Diabetes Diets

1. Fertility Diet

2. Biggest Loser (tie)

2. DASH Diet (tie)


Best Heart-Healthy Diets

1. Ornish Diet

2. TLC Diet


Best Commercial Diet Plans

1. Mayo Clinic Diet (tie)

1. Weight Watchers (tie)


Best Diets for Healthy Eating

1. DASH Diet

2. TLC Diet


Easiest Diets to Follow

1. Fertility Diet (tie)

1. MIND Diet (tie)

1. Weight Watchers (tie)


Best Plant-Based Diets

1. Mediterranean

2. Flexitarian