CLOSE
Sunday, May 5, 2024
Stroke

by -
0 443

The cold and flu season is starting to rear its ugly head, and we cannot seem to get away from the coughing and sneezing. But why are we more prone to these infections during the colder months?

Viral infections that cause the common cold or flu can range from a nuisance to a serious health threat.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), “common colds are the main reason that children miss school and adults miss work.”

Although most cases of the common cold and flu tend to go away by themselves, every year, flu kills an estimated 290,000 to 650,000 people worldwide.

What do scientists know about how plummeting temperatures allow these viruses to spread, and what is the best way of preventing colds and flu? We investigate.

Common cold vs. flu

First, we need to distinguish between the common cold and flu, because the viruses that cause these do not necessarily behave in the same way.

Most of the time, the common cold manifests with a trilogy of symptoms: a sore throat, a blocked nose, and coughing and sneezing. There are more than 200 viruses that can cause the common cold, but coronaviruses and rhinoviruses are by far the most common culprits.

There are four human coronaviruses that account for between 10% and 30% of colds in adults. These are in the same family of viruses as SARS-CoV-2, which causes COVID-19. However, it mostly causes only mild illness.

Interestingly, around a quarter of people who have an infection with a common cold virus do not experience any symptoms at all.

The flu develops due to the influenza virus, of which there are three different types: influenza A, influenza B, and influenza C.

Common colds and flu share many symptoms, but an infection with influenza also tends to manifest with a high temperature, body aches, and cold sweats or shivers. This may be a good way to tell the two apart.

As with the common cold, a significant number of people who have an influenza infection do not show any symptoms.

So, now that we know the difference between the common cold and flu, we will look at when we tend to be most vulnerable to an infection with these viruses.

Seasonal patterns

The CDC monitor flu activity closely. Influenza can occur at any time of year, but most cases follow a relatively predictable seasonal pattern.

The first signs of influenza activity usually start around October, according to the CDC, and peak at the height of winter. However, in some years, flu outbreaks can stick around and last until May.

The peak month for flu activity in the seasons spanning 1982–1983 through 2017–2018 was February, followed by December, January, and March.

Other temperate locations across the globe see similar patterns, with cold temperatures and low humidity being the prime factors, according to one 2013 analysis. The same cannot be said for tropical areas, however.

In those regions, there may be outbreaks during rainy, humid months or relatively consistent levels of flu cases all year round.

This may seem counterintuitive. Indeed, although influenza data do support such a link, scientists do not fully understand how viruses are able to exert their maximum damage at both low and high temperature and humidity extremes.

There are several theories, however, ranging from the cold affecting how viruses behave and how well our immune system copes with infections to spending more time in crowded places and getting less exposure to sunlight.

Cold air affects our first line of defense

Common cold and flu viruses try to gain entry into our bodies through our noses. However, our nasal lining has sophisticated defense mechanisms against these microbial intruders.

Our noses constantly secret mucus. Viruses become trapped in the sticky snot, which is perpetually moved by tiny hairs called cilia that line our nasal passages. We swallow the whole lot, and our stomach acids neutralize the microbes.

However, cold air cools the nasal passage and slows down mucus clearance.

Once a virus has penetrated this defense mechanism, the immune system takes control of fighting off the intruder. Phagocytes, which are specialized immune cells, engulf and digest viruses. However, researchers have also linked cold air to a decrease in this activity.

Rhinoviruses actually prefer colder temperatures, making it difficult not to succumb to the common cold once the thermometer plummets.

In one laboratory study, these viruses were more likely to commit cell suicide, or apoptosis, or to encounter enzymes that made short work of them when grown at body temperature.

Vitamin D and other myths

During winter, levels of UV radiation are much lower than in summer. This has a direct effect on how much vitamin D our bodies can make.

There is evidence to suggest that vitamin D is involved in making an antimicrobial molecule that limits how well the influenza virus can replicate in laboratory studies.

Consequently, some people believe that taking vitamin D supplements during the winter months can help keep flu at bay. Indeed, a 2010 clinical trial showed that school children who took vitamin D3 daily had a lower risk of contracting influenza A.

A systematic review concluded that vitamin D provided protection against acute respiratory infection.

However, there have been no large-scale clinical trials to date, and discrepancies between individual studies make it difficult for scientists to draw firm conclusions.

Another factor that may contribute to cold and flu infections in the fall and winter months is that we spend more time indoors as the weather becomes less hospitable.

This might lead to two effects: crowded spaces helping spread viruses-laden droplets from person to person, and central heating causing a drop in air humidity, which — as we have already seen — is linked to influenza outbreaks.

However, many of us live our lives in crowded spaces all year round, and in isolation, this theory cannot explain flu rates.

Scientists continue to study seasonal patterns of respiratory infections to tease out how different factors may influence their spread.

In the meantime, what is the best way to protect ourselves from these viruses?

How to prevent viruses and treat symptoms

A person’s chance of catching a cold this winter is very high. In fact, the CDC estimate that adults have two to three colds each year.

The best way for people to protect themselves is by:

  • frequently washing the hands with soap and water
  • not touching the eyes, nose, or mouth
  • staying away from people who are already sick

If a person does have a cold, the CDC recommend staying at home and avoiding contact with others.

These rules also apply to influenza. However, receiving a yearly flu shot is the best way of preventing flu.

“Getting a flu vaccine during 2020–2021 will be more important than ever,” the CDC advise.

However, should a person contract a winter virus, here are eight home remedies to consider to help ease the symptoms.

A person should contact a doctor if they experience:

  • difficulty breathing
  • persistent chest or abdominal pain
  • severe muscle pain or weakness
  • seizures
  • difficulty urinating
  • a fever or cough that keeps returning
  • persistent dizziness or confusion
  • a worsening of an existing chronic medical condition

We also have a guide on how to tell the difference between flu, the common cold, and COVID-19.

by -
0 597
1187813695

Data spanning more than 11 years suggest that testosterone injections could be a novel treatment for obesity in men. The results show that long-term testosterone therapy may be comparable to weight loss surgery, with a lower risk of complications.

Over 42% of adults in the United States have obesity, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Obesity has links to several chronic health conditions, including heart disease and type 2 diabetes.

Recent findings that obesity may also worsen outcomes in COVID-19 have encouraged some governments to create entirely new public health strategies to encourage people to lose weight.

However, obesity is a complex issue with both medical and social causes, and achieving lasting weight loss can be challenging for many people. This means researchers are looking for new strategies to help treat obesity — beyond merely cutting calories.

Data recently presented at the virtual European and International Congress on Obesity support the use of testosterone therapy to treat men with obesity.

Long-term testosterone treatment reduced body weight by 20% on average.

11 years of data

The pharmaceutical company Bayer and Gulf Medical University in the United Arab Emirates led the research, using 11 years’ worth of data.

The researchers collected data since 2004 of 471 men with functional hypogonadism, or low testosterone production, and obesity from a German urological practice.

Around 58% of the men received an injection of testosterone every 3 months for the duration of the study, while the remainder chose not to have the treatment and therefore acted as controls. The average age of the participants was 61.57.

Medical staff administered and documented all injections at a doctor’s office, which assures that all participants received the treatment in a consistent manner. No participants dropped out of the study.

20% bodyweight reduction

The men who received testosterone lost on average 23 kilograms (kg) (equivalent to 20% body weight) during the study period, while those who did not receive treatment gained an average of 6 kg.

Body mass index (BMI) correspondingly decreased by an average of 7.6 points in those who received testosterone therapy, compared with an increase of 2 points in the control group.

Waist circumference, which is a risk factor for cardiometabolic disease, decreased by an average of 13 centimeters (cm) in the treatment group, compared with a 7 cm increase in the control group.

The testosterone-treated men also had less internal (visceral) fat by the end of the study period. They may have had a lower risk of cardiovascular disease than those who did not receive treatment.

Overall, 28% of men in the control group had a heart attack, and 27.2% had a stroke during the study period. There were no major cardiovascular events in the men who received testosterone therapy.

Likewise, while more than 20% of the control group developed type 2 diabetes during the study period, nobody in the treatment group developed the condition.

Commenting on the results, Farid Saad of Bayer said: “Long-term testosterone therapy in hypogonadal men resulted in profound and sustained […] weight loss, which may have contributed to reductions in mortality and cardiovascular events.”

An alternative to surgery?

The researchers also presented data specific to men who were eligible for bariatric surgery. This is a surgical treatment for obesity, which encompasses gastric band, gastric bypass, and gastric sleeve surgery.

Rates of bariatric surgery are on the rise in the U.S., with more than 250,000 people undergoing weight loss surgery in 2018 alone.

Although bariatric surgery is a proven means of achieving weight loss, there are serious risks associated with the surgery, which does not always have positive outcomes.

This part of the study included 76 men with class 3 obesity (a BMI of 40 or above), making them eligible for bariatric surgery. Of these, 59 received testosterone treatment and lost 30 kg on average.

The BMI of the men also reduced by an average of 10 points, which could be enough to take them out of the highest obesity class, provided their BMI was less than 50 to begin with.

According to Saad, these results suggest testosterone therapy could be as effective as surgery for weight loss — but without the risk of serious complications.

“We believe testosterone therapy should be discussed with patients as an alternative to surgery and should be considered for male patients who cannot undergo surgery.” – Farid Saad, Consultant in Medical Affairs Andrology, Bayer AG

This study is based on data exclusively from men, and all participants had clinically low testosterone levels. Scientists need to conduct further studies to validate the use of this approach in other populations.

by -
0 475
535150115

A study of older adults in the United Kingdom finds that people who are lonely are more likely to develop type 2 diabetes, independent of other risk factors such as smoking, alcohol consumption, and weight.

Loneliness, in which a person’s social needs are not met, may be on the rise. A recent report found that almost half of people in the United States sometimes or always feel alone.

Loneliness is even more common among younger generations, with almost 80% of Gen Z and more than 70% of millennials experiencing this feeling.

Some believe that technology may play a part in feelings of loneliness among younger generations, with social media and other forms of online communication increasingly replacing genuine human connection.

Beyond the negative emotional impact of feeling isolated, loneliness is also a major risk to physical health. Research has associated loneliness with coronary heart disease and found that loneliness may be a greater threat to health than obesity.

One study even suggested that people who are lonely have a higher mortality risk than individuals who do not feel alone.

A new study from Kings College London in the U.K. adds to the list of health concerns associated with loneliness, finding that people who are lonely may be more likely to develop type 2 diabetes.

The researchers found that loneliness was a significant predictor of diabetes. This finding held when they took account of potential confounding factors, such as age, sex, ethnicity, wealth, smoking, physical activity, body weight, alcohol consumption, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease.

The findings appear in the journal Diabetologia.

The cohort

The study, which is the first to find an association between loneliness and type 2 diabetes, is based on data from more than 4,000 people aged 50 years and above, with an average age of 65 years. The collection of the data took place during the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing.

At the start of the current study, none of the participants had diabetes, and they all had blood glucose levels within a healthy range.

During a follow-up period of 12 years, 264 people in the study (roughly 6% of the sample) developed type 2 diabetes.

The researchers found that the level of loneliness that people experienced at the start of the study was a significant predictor of who would go on to develop diabetes.

Loneliness predicts diabetes onset

The assessment of loneliness occurred at the start of the study using a scale that a psychologist at the University of California, Los Angeles, developed. The scale requires people to rate questionnaire items such as “How often do you feel that you lack companionship?” and “How often do you feel part of a group of friends?”

The researchers found a significant association between loneliness and the onset of type 2 diabetes, even when they controlled for confounding factors, including smoking, alcohol consumption, weight, blood pressure, and cardiovascular disease.

The association was also independent of mental health factors, such as depression and whether a person lived alone.

“The study also demonstrates a clear distinction between loneliness and social isolation, in that isolation or living alone does not predict type 2 diabetes, whereas loneliness, which is defined by a person’s quality of relationships, does,” explains lead author Dr. Ruth Hackett.

This finding highlights the importance of the quality of human interactions that a person has, rather than the quantity.

Stress-related mechanism?

Although the reason for this association is not yet clear, the researchers suggest that it could be related to how the body manages stress.

Previous research has shown, for example, that loneliness is associated with changes to levels of the stress hormone cortisol, which plays a role in diabetes.

“If the feeling of loneliness becomes chronic, then every day you’re stimulating the stress system, and over time, that leads to wear and tear on your body, and those negative changes in stress-related biology may be linked to type 2 diabetes development,” explains Dr. Hackett.

However, it is important to note that this is currently only a hypothesis. Although this study provides a correlation between loneliness and type 2 diabetes, it does not show a causative link between the two factors.

Other limitations of the study include the fact that there was only one measurement of loneliness during the study. Also, the data on type 2 diabetes were based on self-reporting, rather than objective medical records.

The authors also note that the overall strength of the association between the two factors was small. Nevertheless, the study highlights loneliness as a potential risk factor for type 2 diabetes and provides a basis for future studies to investigate this connection in more detail.

by -
0 480

A study in the United States demonstrates that mortality rates from heart failure are higher in counties where people face more poverty and social deprivation.

Heart failure, sometimes called congestive heart failure, is a chronic condition in which the heart is unable to pump enough blood around the body to meet its needs.

The condition is irreversible, although there are treatments that can help people live longer, more active lives.

About 5.7 million people in the U.S. have heart failure, according to the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

A new study suggests that the risk of dying from the condition is not spread evenly across the country, but that mortality rates are higher in poorer, more socially deprived areas.

Researchers at University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, OH, analyzed 1,254,991 deaths from heart failure across 3,048 counties between 1999 and 2018.

They used two standard indices of social deprivation: the Area Deprivation Index (ADI), which takes into account multiple local measures, including employment, poverty, and education, and the Social Deprivation Index (SDI), which is based on income and housing.

After adjusting for age, they found that the average death rate from heart failure per county was 25.5 deaths per 100,000 head of population.

However, counties with higher rates of socioeconomic deprivation had higher death rates from heart failure, and the association held up regardless of race or ethnicity, sex, and degree of urbanization.

The levels of deprivation that the ADI measures accounted for roughly 13% of the variability in heart failure mortality among counties. This scale of risk is similar to that of other recognized risk factors for heart failure, such as obesity and diabetes, say the scientists. Correlation with housing and income — the social factors that the SDI measures — accounted for 5% of this variability.

The study features in the latest issue of the Journal of Cardiac Failure.

Persistent inequality

The research revealed that the imbalance in survival rates between wealthy and deprived areas changed little between 1999 and 2018.

“Analysis of trends in heart failure mortality shows that these disparities have persisted throughout the last two decades,” says first author Dr. Graham Bevan, a resident physician at University Hospitals.

Bevan and his colleagues say that a range of factors may be responsible for the increased risk of dying from heart failure in poorer counties. These include reduced access to healthcare, substandard care, and poor health literacy.

They also note that the successful treatment of heart failure is dependent on patients adhering to a complex and often expensive drug regimen.

The authors write:

“Regardless of the contributing factors, the association between communities with high socioeconomic deprivation and [heart failure] mortality is strong and suggests that targeting social deprivation may be impactful in reducing [heart failure] mortality. Additionally, the yield of intensive [heart failure] preventive strategies may be higher in areas with high social deprivation.”

The American Heart Association (AHA) believe that aggressively tackling the major clinical risk factors for heart failure could significantly reduce the death toll. These clinical factors include hypertension, heart attacks, obesity, diabetes, and disorders of the heart valves.

“Living in a particular county should not mean you’re more likely to die from heart failure,” says co-author Dr. Sadeer G. Al-Kindi, a cardiologist at University Hospitals’ Harrington Heart and Vascular Institute.

“University Hospitals has a history of addressing healthcare disparities in underserved communities and, armed with the information from this study, we can thoughtfully create solutions to better serve these populations.”

One of the limitations of their study, the authors write, was that it relied on the information given on death certificates, which may not be accurate in every instance.

Also, the study was not designed to tease apart the effects of other recognized risk factors for heart failure mortality, some of which — such as lack of physical activity, obesity, diabetes, and high blood pressure — may also be associated with poverty. However, a recent study showed that these factors together failed to account for 57% of the geographical variation in deaths from heart failure among counties in the U.S.

This new study suggests that socioeconomic deprivation may help explain part of that variation.

by -
0 628

A mixture of snail slime and evaporated milk is an instant cure for stroke, claims a Facebook post shared in Nigeria.

“This works hundred percent,” it reads. “Do this mixture regularly for instant results for patients suffering from stroke.” The post has been shared more than 5,000 times.

A stroke occurs when brain cells are suddenly deprived of oxygen and die. This can happen when blockage or rupture of an artery stops blood flow to the brain.

The risk factors for stroke include hypertension, elevated lipids, diabetes and other lifestyle factors such as smoking, low levels of physical activity, an unhealthy diet and abdominal obesity. Stroke can lead to death and survivors may experience loss of vision, speech, paralysis and dementia.

But can a simple mixture of snail slime and evaporated milk cure the symptoms of stroke?

Claim ‘distracts from real therapy’
The claimed cure has been posted on several websites. But Africa Check has found no evidence in scientific literature that it is effective.

Yakub Nyandaiti, a professor of neurology at the college of medical sciences at Nigeria’s University of Maiduguri, told us there was no basis for the claim.

“There is no scientific evidence to the claim,” he said.

“I have not read about the mixture. I am not even aware that such a mixture exists as a treatment for stroke. I would not advise any stroke patient to try the mixture. My simple advice to stroke patients is to visit a neurologist.”

Njideka Okubadejo, a professor of neurology at the faculty of clinical sciences at the University of Lagos, said the claim may actually harm victims of stroke.

“When a person suffers a stroke we have a clear strategy we put in place as treatment,” she said.

“It includes three things: physical therapy, medication and lifestyle modification. This strategy is the same all over the world. Advising stroke patients to combine snail water and milk distracts them from focusing on the things that can be beneficial to their health.”

If you or someone you know suffers a stroke, consult a doctor. The condition is serious and life-threatening, and will not be cured by a mixture of snail slime and evaporated milk.

by -
0 468

If your cholesterol level has crept up over the years, you may wonder whether changing your diet can help. Ideally, your total cholesterol value should be 200 milligrammes per deciliter (mg/dL) or lower. But it is the harmful Low-Density Lipo-protein (LDL) ‘bad’ cholesterol value that experts worry about the most. Excess LDL builds up on artery walls and triggers a release of inflammatory substances that boost heart attack risk.

“To prevent heart disease, your LDL should be 100 mg/dL or lower,” says Dr. Jorge Plutzky, director of preventive cardiology at Harvard-affiliated Brigham and Women’s Hospital. But many Americans have LDL values that are less than optimal (100 to 129 mg/dL) or borderline high (130 to 159 mg/dL).

If you fall into either of those categories, you may be able to nudge down your LDL to a healthier level by changing what you eat, particularly if your current diet could use some improvement. However, most people with higher LDL values likely will also need to take a cholesterol-lowering drug, such as a statin, says Dr. Plutzky.

Dietary directives
Avoiding foods that are high in cholesterol isn’t the best way to lower your LDL. Your overall diet — especially the types of fats and carbohydrates you eat — has the most impact on your blood cholesterol values. “As the American Heart Association has noted, you’ll get the biggest bang for your buck by lowering saturated fat and replacing it with unsaturated fat,” says registered dietitian Kathy McManus, director of the Department of Nutrition at Brigham and Women’s Hospital.

That means avoiding meat, cheese, and other high-fat dairy products such as butter, half-and-half, and ice cream. Equally important is replacing those calories with healthy, unsaturated fats (such as those found in vegetable oils, avocados, and fatty fish) rather than refined carbohydrates such as white bread, pasta, and white rice. Unlike healthy fats, these starchy foods aren’t very filling, and they can trigger overeating and weight gain.

The other big problem with refined carbs: They are woefully low in fibre, which helps flush cholesterol out of the body.

The fibre factor
Your body can’t break down fiber, so it passes through your body undigested. It comes in two varieties: insoluble and soluble. Fiber-containing foods usually feature a mix of the two.

Insoluble fibre does not dissolve in water. While it doesn’t directly lower LDL, this form of fiber fills you up, crowding other cholesterol-raising foods out of your diet and helping to promote weight loss.

Soluble fibre dissolves in water, creating a gel. This gel traps some of the cholesterol in your body, so it’s eliminated as waste instead of entering your arteries.

Soluble fibre also binds to bile acids, which carry fats from your small intestine into the large intestine for excretion. This triggers your liver to create more bile acids — a process that requires cholesterol. If the liver doesn’t have enough cholesterol, it draws more from the bloodstream, which in turn lowers your circulating LDL.

Finally, certain soluble fibres (called oligosaccharides) are fermented into short-chain fatty acids in the gut. These fatty acids may also inhibit cholesterol production.

The “best” foods
The following 11 foods are good sources of fibre or unsaturated fat (or both). But they’re not in any particular order and are simply suggestions. Most whole grains, vegetables, and fruits are good sources of fiber. And most nuts and seeds (and the oils made from them) provide monounsaturated or polyunsaturated fats.

1. Oatmeal. This whole grain is one of the best sources of soluble fiber, along with barley (see “Grain of the month,” at right). Start your day with a bowl of steel-cut or old-fashioned rolled oats, topped with fresh or dried fruit for a little extra fiber.

2. White beans. Also called navy beans, this variety ranks highest in fiber content. Try different types of beans as well, such as black beans, garbanzos, or kidney beans, which you can add to salads, soups, or chili. But avoid prepared baked beans, which are canned in sauce that’s loaded with added sugar.

3. Avocado. The creamy, green flesh of an avocado is not only rich in monounsaturated fat; it also contains both soluble and insoluble fiber. Enjoy this fruit sliced in salad, pureed into dip, or mashed and spread on a slice of whole-grain toast.

4. Eggplant. Although not everyone’s favorite, these deep purple vegetables are one of the richest sources of soluble fiber. One idea: oven-roast or grill whole eggplants until soft and use the flesh in a Middle Eastern dip called baba ghanoush.

5. Carrots. Raw baby carrots are a tasty and convenient snack — and they also give you a decent dose of insoluble fiber.

6. Almonds. Among nuts, almonds are highest in fiber, although other popular varieties such as pistachios and pecans are close behind. Walnuts have the added advantage of being a good source of polyunsaturated, plant-based omega-3 fatty acids.

7. Kiwi fruit. Contrary to popular belief, you don’t need to peel these fuzzy, brown fruits. But to avoid the skin, slice one in half and scoop out the inside with a spoon for an easy, fiber-rich, sweet snack.

8. Berries. Because these fruits are packed with tiny seeds, their fiber content is higher than most other fruits. Raspberries and blackberries provide the most, but strawberries and blueberries are also good sources.

9. Cauliflower. This cruciferous veggie not only provides fiber, but it can also serve as a substitute for white rice. Just shred or whirl in a food processor until it resembles rice, then sauté with a little olive oil until tender.

10. Soy. Eating soybeans and foods made from them, such as soymilk, tofu, and tempeh, was once touted as a powerful way to lower cholesterol. More recent analyses showed the effect is modest, at best. Still, protein-rich, soy-based foods are a far healthier choice than a hamburger or other red meat.

11. Salmon. Likewise, eating cold-water fish such as salmon twice a week can lower LDL by replacing meat and delivering healthy omega-3 fats. Other good fish options include chunk light canned tuna and tinned sardines.

by -
0 465

Depending on the type of fats and oils, they can either be implicated in the development of a disease or one that can prevent diseases that may be caused by another kind of fat.

For instance, fats and oils have a very significant role to play concerning the health of the arteries, the heart, and the brain. This is occasioned by their involvement in the formation of arteriosclerosis. As we already are aware, this is the deposition of plaques on the arteries that eventually lead to the blockage of the vessels. The blockage of the vessels results in coronary artery disease, heart attack, and stroke.

The type of fats implicated in the formation of arteriosclerotic plaques is saturated fats, trans fats, cholesterol, and triglycerides.

As stated earlier, cholesterol is not appreciably water-soluble and to be transported in the bloodstream, which is predominantly water-based, it has to be bound to lipoproteins. Two major kinds of lipoproteins that we are interested in are the Low-Density Lipoprotein (LDL) and the High-Density Lipoprotein (HDL). When cholesterol is bound to LDL, we have what is known as LDL-Cholesterol. HDL bound to cholesterol is known as HDL-cholesterol. The LDL when bound to cholesterol is referred to as ‘bad’ LDL-cholesterol and if it is bound to HDL, it is known as ‘good’ HDL-cholesterol. Cholesterol is never bad or good but this description has been given because of the direction of transport of cholesterol when it is bound to the lipoproteins. The LDL, which transports cholesterol from the liver to the cells, increases the risk of plaque formation as cholesterol accumulates in the blood vessels. On the other hand, the HDL transports cholesterol from the cells to the liver where it is excreted in the bile. What this means, is that, if there is more HDL-cholesterol in circulation, the risk of arteriosclerosis and heart disease will be significantly reduced. When LDL-cholesterol becomes higher, therefore, the risk of arteriosclerosis and heart attack increases.

In considering what kind of fats and oils one should be eating, the effect of the diet on HDL or LDL must never be overlooked. For example, trans fats increase LDL-cholesterol and decrease HDL-cholesterol. Polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fatty acids represented by omega 3 and 6; increase HDL-cholesterol, while decreasing LDL-cholesterol. Saturated fats increase both the ‘bad’ LDL-cholesterol and the ‘good’ HDL-cholesterol.

We also need to remember that the consistency of the fats and oils differentiate between the animal fats and plant fats. Animal fats, mainly saturated fats are solid at room temperature, while the plant fats, more often referred to, as oils are liquid at room temperature. Trans fats, which are solid at room temperature, are partially hydrogenated fat and have been described as the worst kind of fat a human being can consume. Trans fats increase LDL-cholesterol and decrease HDL-cholesterol. Examples of common trans fats are margarine and shortening. These along with oils that are used for deep-frying of things such as potatoes and chicken should be avoided.

Saturated fats tend to increase the level of cholesterol in the blood and for this reason, nutritionists advise that this kind of fats, if not avoided completely should be eaten less frequently. To be sure, I have reproduced the sources of saturated fats as a guide for us: Fatty portions of red meat, pork, chicken, and turkey eaten with the skin, butter, dairy products such as whole milk, cheese, cream, and fried and baked foods. Some prepared foods, for example, sausage, pizza, and desserts are also high in saturated fats. There are certain oils from plants like palm oil, palm kernel oil, and coconut oil that are saturated fats but do not contain cholesterol.

The best kind of fatty acids are monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fatty acids. They both increase HDL-cholesterol and decrease LDL-cholesterol. They also reduce the risk of arteriosclerosis, coronary artery disease, heart attack, and stroke. Examples of these are omega 3 and 6 and they can be found in such plants as almonds, hazelnuts, macadamia nuts, peanuts, pecans, cashew nuts, avocados, and olives.

Polyunsaturated fats are predominantly found in flaxseed, walnuts (roasted), pumpkin seeds, sesame seeds, and sunflower seed. They are also found in freshwater fatty fish such as salmon, tuna, herring, sardines, mackerel, and trout.

As I bring this article to a close, the recommendation is: Eat more of the unsaturated fatty acids – omega 3 and 6, less of saturated fats, and none of the trans fats.

by -
0 444

Moderate-intensify exercise can help improve your thinking and memory in just six months.

You probably already know that exercising is necessary to preserve muscle strength, keep your heart strong, maintain a healthy body weight, and stave off chronic diseases such as diabetes. But exercise can also help boost your thinking skills. “There’s a lot of science behind this,” says Dr. Scott McGinnis, an instructor in neurology at Harvard Medical School.

Exercise boosts your memory and thinking skills both directly and indirectly. It acts directly on the body by stimulating physiological changes such as reductions in insulin resistance and inflammation, along with encouraging production of growth factors — chemicals that affect the growth of new blood vessels in the brain, and even the abundance, survival, and overall health of new brain cells.

It also acts directly on the brain itself. Many studies have suggested that the parts of the brain that control thinking and memory are larger in volume in people who exercise than in people who don’t. “Even more exciting is the finding that engaging in a program of regular exercise of moderate intensity over six months or a year is associated with an increase in the volume of selected brain regions,” says McGinnis.

Exercise can also boost memory and thinking indirectly by improving mood and sleep, and by reducing stress and anxiety. Problems in these areas frequently cause or contribute to cognitive impairment.

Is one exercise better than another in terms of brain health? We don’t know the answer to this question, because almost all of the research so far has looked at walking. “But it’s likely that other forms of aerobic exercise that get your heart pumping might yield similar benefits,” explains McGinnis.

A study published in the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society found that tai chi showed the potential to enhance cognitive function in older adults, especially in the realm of executive function, which manages cognitive processes such as planning, working memory, attention, problem solving, and verbal reasoning. That may be because tai chi, a martial art that involves slow, focused movements, requires learning and memorizing new skills and movement patterns.

McGinnis recommends establishing exercise as a habit, almost like taking a prescription medication. And since several studies have shown that it takes about six months to start reaping the cognitive benefits of exercise, he reminds you to be patient as you look for the first results — and to then continue exercising for life.

Aim for a goal of exercising at a moderate intensity — such as brisk walking — for 150 minutes per week. Start with a few minutes a day, and increase the amount by five or 10 minutes every week until you reach your goal.

For additional advice and tips to help you get the most from your workouts, read the Workout Workbook, a Special Health Report from Harvard Medical School.

by -
0 603

The authors of a recent study found that healthy older adults who took a daily, low dose of aspirin were at higher risk of receiving a diagnosis of advanced cancers and dying from cancer than those who took a placebo.

The findings raise the possibility that taking aspirin every day may make cancers worse once they have developed in this age group.

In recent years, there have been high hopes that taking a daily, low dose of aspirin might help protect older people from dementia, cognitive decline, and cancer.

Doctors widely prescribe daily aspirin to people at high risk of cardiovascular problems.

In addition, some clinical trials involving mostly middle-aged adults have found that aspirin may reduce the risk of developing cancer, especially colorectal cancer.

However, until recently, evidence for the drug’s use as a preventive treatment in otherwise healthy older people has been lacking.

A study originally published in March 2020 suggested that taking a daily low dose of aspirin did not protect older people from cognitive decline and dementia.

The latest study, which investigated the same cohort of individuals, reports that daily aspirin increases the risk of receiving a diagnosis of advanced cancers and cancer that has spread or metastasized.

The results found associations between daily aspirin and increased cancer mortality over the follow-up period.

The scientists published their findings in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

ASPREE trial

Researchers at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, the Berman Center in Minneapolis, MN, and Monash University in Melbourne, Australia, carried out the recent study.

They analyzed results from the Aspirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly (ASPREE) trial, which included 19,114 individuals living in Australia and the United States. None of the participants had cardiovascular disease, dementia, or physical disability at the start of the study.

Most participants were over 70 years of age, apart from African American and Hispanic participants in the U.S., who were over 65 years of age.

Researchers randomly assigned the participants to take either 100 milligrams of aspirin per day or a placebo.

An earlier analysis of outcomes in the two groups after a mean follow-up period of 4.7 years found a higher number of deaths from all causes in the aspirin group. Most of the excess deaths were due to cancer.

The latest study examined aspirin’s effect on cancer diagnoses and deaths as a result of cancer in greater detail.

Overall, 981 participants who were taking aspirin and 952 who were taking placebo developed cancer. This difference between the two groups was not statistically significant.

However, daily aspirin had associations with a 19% higher risk of metastatic cancer and a 22% higher risk of receiving a diagnosis of advanced cancer compared with a placebo.

The results also indicated that people in the aspirin group were at a higher risk of dying during follow-up due to advanced cancer.

“Deaths were particularly high among those on aspirin who were diagnosed with advanced solid cancers, suggesting a possible adverse effect of aspirin on the growth of cancers once they have already developed in older adults,” says senior author Dr. Andrew T. Chan of Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School.

“Although these results suggest that we should be cautious about starting aspirin therapy in otherwise healthy older adults, this does not mean that individuals who are already taking aspirin — particularly if they began taking it at a younger age — should stop their aspirin regimen.” – Dr. Andrew T. Chan

In their paper, the researchers also point out that the increased cancer mortality risk associated with taking aspirin in their study equated to an extra 1.5 deaths per 1,000 person years. This is relatively small compared with the risk of mortality from other causes.

Blunted immune response?

Aspirin reduces inflammation in the body. The researchers write that one possible explanation for their finding may be that aspirin suppresses or “blunts” immune responses that are critical to controlling the growth and spread of cancer at later stages of its development.

They note that other research has found differences between the biology and behavior of tumors in older adults and younger individuals.

“These reports make it plausible that aspirin might also act differently, at the cellular or molecular level, in older individuals,” they write.

A meta-analysis of trials involving populations around 10 years younger than in ASPREE, published in 2019, found that taking daily low dose aspirin for around 5 years neither increased nor decreased cancer incidence or mortality.

Other research suggests that it may take at least 10 years of taking daily aspirin before there is a beneficial reduction in the incidence of colorectal cancer.

There may also be a delayed benefit in older people that only becomes apparent after a longer follow-up period. The authors of the current study write:

“Cancer molecular and genetic data give reason to suggest that the potential adverse impact of aspirin identified in ASPREE might be specific to this age group. The cohort continues to be followed to explore the possibility of a delayed reduction in cancer incidence and/or mortality that may emerge with longer-term observation.”

by -
0 456

People of African descent have up to three times the risk of dying from strokes as people of European descent, yet there has been little investigation of if and how genetic variants contribute to their elevated stroke risk.

A large international team of scientists has completed the largest analysis of stroke-risk genes ever undertaken in individuals of African descent. The new study examined the genomes of more than 22,000 people of African ancestry, identifying important genetic contributors to stroke risk. These findings will help doctors better understand stroke risk, identify those at high risk and prevent the debilitating condition.

“Given the undue burden that people of African ancestry endure from stroke and other cerebrovascular disease, the lack of investigation of risk factors in this group has been a substantial gap,” said researcher Bradford B. Worrall, MD, a neurologist at University of Virginia (UVA) Health System, United States of America (USA). “Our work is an important step toward filling that gap, albeit with much more work to be done. These findings will provide greater insight into ethnic-specific and global risk factors to reduce the second leading cause of death worldwide.”

Stroke is the leading cause of adult disability in the United States. But strokes strike African-Americans more often and at younger ages than people of European descent. In addition, African-Americans who survive strokes often face greater disability. Family history is a major risk factor for stroke, suggesting our genes play a significant role in our stroke risk. But most genetic stroke studies, until now, have primarily focused on people of European descent. And the results have not always held true in African-Americans.

The new meta-analysis comes from the Consortium of Minority Population genome-wide Association Studies of Stroke (COMPASS). The researchers revisited previous studies to identify genetic risk factors specific to people of African descent. In total, they examined the genomes of 3,734 people who had suffered strokes and more than 18,000 who had not.

The researchers discovered that a common variation near the HNF1A gene was strongly associated with increased stroke risk in those of African ancestry. The gene previously has been associated to both stroke and cardiovascular disease.

While that variant had the strongest link to stroke risk, the researchers identified 29 other variants that also appear likely to influence stroke risk.

The variants occur at 24 different locations on human chromosomes. Sixteen of the “loci,” as the locations are known, appeared also to influence stroke risk in other populations, the researchers report.

“Studies of this nature are critical given the paucity of genetic studies focused on people of African descent and other minority populations and the substantial health disparities related to stroke in these groups,” said Keith Keene, PhD, a former UVA researcher and frequent collaborator of Worrall’s who now leads the Center for Health Disparities at East Carolina University’s Brody School of Medicine.
“Furthermore, we increasingly recognize the power of looking at genetic risk factors across different race ethnic groups, known as trans-ethnic analyses, for unlocking the underlying biology of diseases like stroke. If we understand the biology, we can develop new treatment and prevention strategies.”

In a paper outlining their findings, the researchers note the importance of such studies in understanding stroke risk among minorities. These studies have “huge potential to provide insight into the mechanisms underlying stroke disparities,” the researchers write. “Our study identified novel associations for stroke that might not otherwise be detected in primarily European cohort studies. Collectively, this highlights the critical nature and importance of genetic studies in a more diverse population with a high stroke burden.”

Prev1...456...12Next Page 5 of 12
© Copyright 2015 - 9jahealth. A Cyborg Business