DEAR DR. BLONZ: What is your opinion on the best nutrients in diet and supplements for the eye’s vitreous humor? I have had retinal tears in both eyes -- spontaneous, both in the past year, and had immediate laser surgery upon examination. I am 62 years old, and I am told there is nothing I can do to prevent this from happening. But I am not the type of person to do nothing; I am positive and proactive by nature, not to mention hopeful, and am not living in fear of a retinal detachment. I have now included daily servings of carotenoids, especially lutein, in my diet, and am looking into hyaluronic acid. Will these help, in your opinion? -- V., via email

DEAR V.: My sympathy on your vision issues. It is difficult when we attempt to do things right, only to experience bumps in the road. I am not a physician, nor do I have training in the optical health sciences. Given this, and the fact that I don’t know your health/lifestyle history and any associated issues or medications being used, I suggest reading the following two articles on the subject: tinyurl.com/jr65mcs, and tinyurl.com/glu85lz. (I am on the editorial board of the Berkeley Wellness Letter that produces these articles.)

Suffice it to say that the same whole-food, plant-based diet that works for most general health issues, along with limited stress and an active lifestyle, will be helpful here, as well. This should be a priority before you consider adding dietary supplements. At this point, I would encourage you to keep monitoring your vision as directed by your health professional. Being told that there is nothing you can do is a bit irksome, I agree. I am not sure what is or has been going on in your life, but you should ask about various health issues such as hypertension, diabetes, trauma, prior smoking, ongoing medications, etc. that may have contributed to your risk of this happening. Your doctor should be there for you as you attempt to better understand what might be going on and what you can do to lower the risk of additional problems.

DEAR DR. BLONZ: An acupuncturist suggested I drink water early in the morning with a little Himalayan salt dissolved in it. She said that mass-market iodized salt contains small particles of plastic from the polluted ocean. But I thought we needed iodized salt to get iodine. Can you please clarify? -- S.S., via email

DEAR S.S.: Small particles of plastic from the polluted ocean in commercial salt? Total nonsense! I would check into anything else you might hear from this individual, and take her statements with a grain of you-know-what. As for iodine, most people in the U.S. have little need for the iodine in iodized salt, as we get plenty from other food sources. This being said, there is no problem using salt with iodine added. The key with any salt is to avoid excess sodium intake.

Send questions to: “On Nutrition,” Ed Blonz, c/o Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO, 64106. Send email inquiries to questions@blonz.com. Due to the volume of mail, personal replies cannot be provided.

DEAR DR. BLONZ: I was intrigued by your breakdown of results to your health when you quit smoking. I was born in the 1950s to parents who smoked cigarettes. I lived 18 years in a smoke-filled environment, and probably because of that, have never touched a cigarette. What effect does that have on children’s health, both short- and long-term? Perhaps if parents understood that smoking around a newly developing human has consequences, they might reconsider such a nasty habit. -- D.D., via email

DEAR DR. BLONZ: I have a question about secondhand smoke. I quit 27 years ago, but my former wife kept on smoking until she died four years ago -- in the house, car, etc. How does this affect me? -- H., via email

DEAR D.D. AND H.: There is no safe exposure to tobacco smoke. Secondhand smoke -- that is, smoke inhaled by individuals nearby who aren’t doing the smoking -- is also dangerous. According to the CDC, there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke. This is especially true for infants, children, the elderly, and anyone with respiratory or immune system issues. There are risks for all exposed -- including pets.

A study in the October 2012 issue of the journal BMC Health Services Research reported that average annual medical costs (physician visits, physical therapy and hospital treatments) were considerably higher for children exposed to secondhand tobacco smoke at home (whether indoors or outdoors) compared with those who were not exposed. It can cause numerous health problems in infants and children, including more frequent and severe asthma attacks, respiratory infections, ear infections and sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). That should be quite sobering. For the complete list of risks from secondhand smoke, visit tinyurl.com/j2j4gsf.

But it does not stop there: There is even a risk from “thirdhand smoke.” This risk refers to exposure and possible inhalation of the smoke particulates that settle on skin, clothing and other surfaces. Thirdhand smoke is responsible for the telltale odor on objects, clothing, furnishings and areas where smoking has taken place. The odorous particles responsible can be inhaled when they become airborne (see article at tinyurl.com/zqj3nyt).

Smoking is an addiction with sticky tentacles in many aspects of our health and well-being, not to mention our pocketbooks. We become addicted not only to the chemicals in the smoke, but also to the act of smoking and the behavior adjustments it requires. All this makes it oh-so-difficult to quit, especially if you remain among others who have yet to pull the plug. I have great respect for anyone who has been able to successfully cast aside this dark force affecting their health, and the health of those around them.

Send questions to: “On Nutrition,” Ed Blonz, c/o Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO, 64106. Send email inquiries to questions@blonz.com. Due to the volume of mail, personal replies cannot be provided.

DEAR DR. BLONZ: I have arthritis, and except for pain relief, medical science has been unable to help me so far. I have heard of herbal supplements that could help, but when I bring up the topic with my medical doctor, I get a blank stare and rejection. Why is there always plenty of information on drugs, but precious little on alternatives? Science seems to move way too slowly when investigating new concepts, and hardly at all when investigating herbs. -- S.T., Oakland, California

DEAR S.T.: Funding is a key factor in determining what gets studied, since many scientists depend upon research grants from federal and private institutions to keep their laboratories in operation. These monies, from which a university takes a cut for its operating expenses, cover items such as salaries of research assistants, equipment and other costs connected with the research. Grant applications include a collection of the theories, preliminary findings and previous publications assembled in a format dictated by the funding agency. There are always more requests than money, and once submitted, funding agencies review and prioritize the applications. If a request receives a low funding priority, the applicant must look elsewhere for their research dollars if, indeed, “elsewhere” exists.

The big picture associated with this sobering reality is that we must maintain a pro-research stance and keep funding coffers flush if we want to foster scientific advances. It also helps explain the generally conservative nature of science. When new frontiers are considered, initial results may not be clear. This might lead to a reluctance to investigate new ideas. If a scientist cannot secure research funds, it limits the progress of their research efforts. This delays experimental results and the completion of scholarly publications, both of which can affect their ability to attract grants in the future.

Equally important is the need for researchers to show progress at their institution. In essence, a new professor can find themselves without secure employment (tenure) if they don’t publish. Aware of this reality, some scientists focus their research on topics with a higher likelihood of financial support. In some instances, funding can come from private sources, earmarked for particular types of research. Given that private funders are less likely to support research that makes them or their products look bad, it’s not surprising that research reporting beneficial effects from a food or product has been supported by companies involved with that substance.

The source of the funding does not automatically compromise the integrity of the research. This would more likely be the case when studies are conducted at a major university, as they tend to have policies that prohibit funding agencies from exerting overt pressures on the conduct of the research and how the findings are reported. That’s the ideal, at least. There’s additional assurance if the results appear in a quality peer-reviewed journal, as this would signify that the findings have been critically examined by other experts in the field.

It is also important that breakthroughs are then confirmed by independent researchers at other institutions. All this is meant to provide perspective on why research tends to move slowly with new theories, trends or products.

Send questions to: “On Nutrition,” Ed Blonz, c/o Universal Uclick, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO, 64106. Send email inquiries to questions@blonz.com. Due to the volume of mail, personal replies cannot be provided.