Skip to content

 The research finding of dogs having elevated levels of the endocrine disruptor bisphenol A (BPA) from eating canned food mirrors what is happening to humans - eating canned food raises BPA levels in a person. The study also found that elevated BPA levels resulted in changes in the gut microbiome (the community of microbes living in the gut). Specifically, they found the abundance of a number of bacteria species increased or decreased depending on BPA levels in the dogs. This is not good.

This is of concern because BPA  is linked to a variety of health problems. [See all posts.] So it's best to minimize exposure to BPA, BPS, and other hormone disrupting chemicals, and also "BPA-free" products (which usually contain BPS). The BPA is in the lining of the cans used in canned food, and this leaches into the food. Unfortunately, dog food cans thought to be BPA-free in the study also contained BPA, which then leached into the dog food.  From Futurity:

Dogs have 3X more BPA after eating canned food

Researchers saw a three-fold increase in BPA levels in dogs who ate canned dog food for two weeks. They also saw changes in the dogs’ gut microbesBisphenol A (BPA) is a widely used industrial chemical found in many household items, including resins used to line metal storage containers, such as food cans. The chemical can disrupt hormones and is linked to a range of health problems. “Bisphenol A is a prevalent endocrine-disrupting chemical found in canned foods and beverages,” says Cheryl Rosenfeld, an associate professor of biomedical sciences in the University of Missouri College of Veterinary Medicine....

Dog owners volunteered their healthy pets for the study. Blood and fecal samples were collected prior to the dogs being placed on one of two commonly used, commercial canned food diets for two weeks; one diet was presumed to be BPA-free. Robert Backus, an associate professor in the veterinary medicine and surgery in the College of Veterinary Medicine, and other researchers on the team then analyzed the cans and the food contained in the cans for BPA levels and performed gut microbiome assessments.

“The dogs in the study did have minimal circulating BPA in their blood when it was drawn for the baseline,” Rosenfeld says.“However, BPA increased nearly three-fold after being on the either of the two canned diets for two weeks. We also found that increased serum BPA concentrations were correlated with gut microbiome and metabolic changes in the dogs analyzed. Increased BPA may also reduce one bacterium that has the ability to metabolize BPA and related environmental chemicals.”

“We share our homes with our dogs,” Rosenfeld says. “Thus, these findings could have implications and relevance to humans. Indeed, our canine companions may be the best bio-sentinels for human health concerns.”

A chemical frequently used in place of BPA called BPS (bisphenol S) and found in "BPA-free" products is also an endocrine disruptor. This also has negative health and behavioral effects. In this study the effects were seen in mice, but they are worrisome. Makes you wonder, what are all the effects in humans? From Science Daily: Plastics compound, BPS, often substituted for BPA, alters mouse moms' behavior and brain regions

In the first study of its kind, environmental health scientists and neuroscientists examined the effects of the compound bisphenol S (BPS) on maternal behavior and related brain regions in mice. They found subtle but striking behavior changes in nesting mothers exposed during pregnancy and lactation and in their daughters exposed in uteroBPS, found in baby bottles, personal care products and thermal receipts, is a replacement chemical for BPA and was introduced when concern was raised about possible health effects of that plastic compound.

Both males and females should consider trying to lower their exposure to endocrine disrupting chemicals (hormone disrupting chemicals) when contemplating pregnancy. These chemicals are found in many personal care, food packaging, and plastic products. They can interfere with natural hormone function and are linked to a wide assortment of health problems. Evidence (like this study) is mounting that higher levels of endocrine disruptors in the body have a negative effect on the developing embryo. So men - an important time to try to lower your exposure to endocrine disruptors is the 3 months preconception (it takes about 3 months for sperm to mature), and for women it's the entire pregnancy period (from conception to birth). You can't totally avoid endocrine disrupting chemicals (they're detected in almost all of us), but you can lower your exposure.

What to avoid and what to do? Read the ingredient lists of all personal care products and try to avoid those with phthalates, parabens, triclosan, bisphenol-A (BPA), BPS, triclocarbon, and oxybenzone (BP-3). Try to buy "unscented" or "fragrance-free" products. Canned foods are considered one of the most significant routes of human exposure to bisphenol A (BPA), so limit canned foods. Note that "BPA-free" cans and plastic containers also contain endocrine disruptors. Another way to lower exposure to endocrine disruptors is to buy and store food not in plastic containers, but in glass containers or stainless steel. Don't microwave food in any sort of plastic containers. Avoid products with fragrances in them, including air fresheners and dryer sheets. Avoid flexible vinyl (e.g. shower curtains). [For all posts on endocrine disruptors, and an article from National Institutes of Health. Also check ewg.org for lists of products]. From Environmental Health News:

Are plastic chemicals in dads hurting embryos?

Turns out, moms, it's not just about you staying off alcohol and avoiding potentially harmful chemicals while pregnant or trying to become so. Your partners' exposure to plastics and packaging could play an important role in your ability to conceive a child. A father’s exposure to chemicals commonly found in plastics, personal care products and food packaging might decrease the quality of embryos produced by their sperm, according to a new study out of Massachusetts.

The study, published today in the journal Human Reproduction, is the first to examine dads’ exposure to phthalates and embryo quality through five days of in vitro fertilization (IVF). The lower quality embryos had fewer signs of the type of progress that leads to a fetus. The findings suggest men’s exposure to the chemicals—used in vinyl products, food packaging, fragrances and in other plastics to make them pliable—might hamper the development of their unbornEmbryos are the result of a fertilized egg in a woman and are the precursor to the fetus. About 12 weeks into pregnancies, the unborn is considered a fetus.

Most people have phthalates in their bodies and the compounds disrupt the endocrine system—interfering with hormones that are crucial for reproduction.While the study doesn’t prove phthalates in men lead to poor quality embryos, it adds to mounting evidence that the ubiquitous chemicals may impact pregnanciesSperm mature over 72 days on average, almost three months,” said senior author of the study, Richard Pilsner, an epidemiologist and assistant professor at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. “During that time, we may tell men to maybe try to avoid phthalates. There’s no way to totally escape exposure but you could minimize it.

Led by Pilsner, researchers collected 761 immature eggs from 50 couples undergoing IVF at the Baystate Medical Center in Springfield, Mass., and checked their progression to embryos. They tested embryos at three days and five days after the eggs were fertilized, and collected urine samples from the couples on the same day as the semen sample and egg retrieval to test for phthalate metabolites, substances formed after the body processes phthalates. At day five, high exposure to phthalates in men was linked to fewer—or no—signs of the type of development that eventually leads to a fetus and placenta compared to men with lower exposure.

Phthalate exposure for fetuses has been linked to genital defects, lower IQs and miscarriages but it’s not clear what impacts this poor embryo quality could mean for the unborn. Russ Hauser, a professor of reproductive physiology at Harvard University, said in an email that the impacts might range from pregnancy loss to effects on children's health later in their life.

Shanna Swan, a professor of reproductive science at Mount Sinai Hospital in New York who was not involved in the study, said the study is limited in that it is small, and not representative of the general population because it only included couples undergoing IVF. They also didn’t see any association with the women’s exposure and decreased embryo quality. But this isn’t the first study to report a male-only effect. Higher phthalates in father’s urine was associated with an increased time for couples to conceive, according to a 2014 study. Swan said the current study was strengthened in that it is “remarkably consistent” with the 2014 study. Some phthalate metabolites linked to impacts in both studies are known to target male reproductive hormones, she said.

I've been asked whether vegan diets are safe during pregnancy. And I've always said that I don't know, but that avoiding all meat, fish, eggs, and dairy concerns me. Vegan diets are diets without meat, fish, dairy, honey, and eggs (no animal derived food), but while vegetarian diets also avoid meat, they do include eggs, honey, milk, and dairy products. Thus it is very important that anyone following a vegan diet plan meals carefully to get all the necessary nutrients. For example, soda and french fries are vegan, but are not good nutritionally.

There are a number of nutrients that probably need to be supplemented in vegan diets during pregnancy, especially B-12, iron, zinc, iodine (can get by using iodized salt), and omega-3s, and that's not even discussing micronutrients. So it was good to see this article by Dr. Drew Ramsey (Columbia University, NY) raising those same concerns about nutrient deficiencies during pregnancy, and pointing out that very few studies have looked at vegetarian and vegan diets in pregnancy - that the evidence is "scant". This topic is so controversial that as of today there were 85 comments by health professionals after the following Medscape article - both strongly pro and con, and studies given that show that vegans tend to have lower levels of a number of nutrients measured (zinc, iron, omega-3s, etc).

There are also reports of babies exclusively breast-fed by vegan mothers (here and here) who did not take vitamin supplements that developed nutritional deficiencies (especially B-12, vitamin K, and vitamin D). This is because what a mother eats is what the baby gets during pregnancy and breast-feeding.

On the other hand, the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics came out with a position statement in 2016 stating that "appropriately planned vegetarian, including vegan, diets are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits for the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. These diets are appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, adolescence, older adulthood, and for athletes". But that article (in the Journal of Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics) then goes on in depth about several nutrients that can be lower or deficient in vegan diets unless supplements are given (B-12, iodine, etc). From Medscape;

Are Vegan and Vegetarian Diets Safe During Pregnancy?

Are vegan and vegetarian diets safe during pregnancy?....Vegan and vegetarian diets are plant-based diets....Plants, in general, are a great choice, especially colorful plants, because they tend to be more nutrient-dense. Plant-based diets have been linked to a number of health benefits, such as lower body mass index and lower rates of obesity and diabetes, as well as conferring some benefits. Certainly, vegan and vegetarian diets have higher amounts of certain nutrients like magnesium, folate, and fiber, all of which are generally consumed in very low quantities in Western diets.

Focusing on pregnancy, there are two important papers to note. The first, which got me very interested in this issue, was a series of pooled case reports by Drs Dror and Allen in 2008.[1] They looked at 30 cases of severe vitamin B12 deficiency during pregnancy in vegan women with pernicious anemia. Among the 30 vegan women who had B12 deficiency during pregnancy, about 60% of their offspring had severe developmental delays and 37% had cerebral atrophy.... The clinical importance of this is to partner with our patients who are eating plant-based diets and ensure that they have adequate levels of vitamin B12, as well as iron, zinc, and long-chain omega-3 fats during pregnancy.

The second article to take a peek at is from the British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology in 2015.[2] This was a systematic review that looked at all of the literature after screening out the papers. The authors found about 13 papers focusing on maternal and infant outcomes, and about nine of those looked at nutrient deficiency. The main headline of this review is that there are no randomized clinical trials of vegan or vegetarian diets in pregnancy. It is very hard to make a clear clinical recommendation. The epidemiologic data were heterogeneous. As the researchers called it, it was "scant." That is certainly true. Overall, there were no clear associations with bad outcomes. There was some increased risk for hypospadias in one of the larger trials that looked at vegan and vegetarian diets during pregnancy.

The main concern is that vegan and vegetarian diets put patients at risk for a number of nutrient deficiencies—vitamin B12 in vegan diets (and even for vegetarians), iron, zinc, and the long-chain omega-3 fats. Just a quick moment on the long-chain omega-3 fats: Dietarily, these only come from fatty fish and seafood. They are bioconcentrated. They start in algae, but they get bioconcentrated in our food supply via seafood. It is very hard to get those during pregnancy. Certainly, a lot of healthy babies have been born to vegetarian and vegan women. You can supplement, but given the benefits we see with omega-3 fats in patients with things like mood disorders or a history of psychotic disorders, I think it is important to consider the long-chain omega-3 fats. If someone is not going to get those in their diet but has a history, risk, or propensity toward mood disorders, think about supplementation. 

Excerpts from the review study (mentioned above) in BJOG: Vegan-vegetarian diets in pregnancy: danger or panacea? A systematic narrative review.

To review the literature on vegan-vegetarian diets and pregnancy outcomes [in healthy pregnant women]....None of the studies reported an increase in severe adverse outcomes or in major malformations, except one report of increased hypospadias in infants of vegetarian mothers. Five studies reported vegetarian mothers had lower birthweight babies, yet two studies reported higher birthweights. The duration of pregnancy was available in six studies and was similar between vegan-vegetarians and omnivores. The nine heterogeneous studies on microelements and vitamins suggest vegan-vegetarian women may be at risk of vitamin B12 and iron deficiencies.

CONCLUSIONS: The evidence on vegan-vegetarian diets in pregnancy is heterogeneous and scant. The lack of randomised studies prevents us from distinguishing the effects of diet from confounding factors. Within these limits, vegan-vegetarian diets may be considered safe in pregnancy, provided that attention is paid to vitamin and trace element requirements.

1

 Two recent reviews of studies looked at erectile dysfunction from different angles. The first review found that regular exercise or physical activity improves erectile function  (especially if the person has heart disease or has had their prostate removed) - with improvements similar to what people see with a medication. Other studies have found similar results (see here and here). The other review found that having chronic periodontitis (gum disease) is linked to a higher incidence of erectile dysfunction, with one study finding that treating the periodontitis improves erectile dysfunction symptoms. Bottom line: get regular physical activity and exercise, and get regular dental care (and treat any periodontitis).

From Medscape: Erectile Dysfunction May Improve With Exercise

Men who have difficulty maintaining erections may benefit from exercise or physical activity, according to a new analysis. A growing body of evidence has suggested physical activity could improve erectile function, but the authors of the new report say that until now, no one had looked at all the studies together....The prevalence of erectile dysfunction ranges from 8 percent among men in their 20s and 30s, up to 37 percent among men in their early 70s.

For the new study, the researchers searched for randomized controlled trials testing exercise and physical activity as a therapy for erectile dysfunction. They found seven studies published between 2004 and 2013 that included a total of 505 men, who were tracked for anywhere from eight weeks to two years. Average ages ranged from 43 to 69 years. Altogether, 292 men were randomly assigned to complete aerobic exercises, pelvic floor muscle exercises or a combination of exercises. The other 213 men were not told to exercise.

Erectile function was measured using the International Index of Erectile Function. Scores range from 5 to 25; men with no erectile dysfunction have scores of 22 to 25, and those with the most severe dysfunction score between 5 and 7. Overall, men who exercised had their scores increase by an average of 3.85 points, compared to men who did not exercise. Exercises specific to pelvic floor muscles didn't seem to yield a benefit. Among men with an increased cardiovascular risk, coronary heart disease or prostate removal, however, any type of exercise led to improved erectile function scores.

A take-home message from this analysis is that exercise should have a role in the treatment of erectile dysfunction, said Dr. Landon Trost, who is head of andrology and male infertility at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota....He told Reuters Health that the average increase in erectile function score would likely be similar to what people see with a medication.

From Medscape: Periodontitis Tied to Risk of Erectile Dysfunction

Erectile dysfunction is more common in men with chronic gum disease, according to a new review of existing studies. Periodontitis has been tied to a higher risk of cardiovascular disease and general inflammation, which in turn have been tied stroke and atherosclerosis, which are associated with erectile dysfunction (ED). 

The reviewers analyzed data from five studies published between 2009 and 2014, including one randomized controlled trial. In total, the studies covered 213,000 participants aged 20 to 80. Each study found erectile dysfunction was more common among men being treated for chronic periodontitis, particularly for those younger than 40 and older than 59. After accounting for diabetes, which can influence both gum disease and sexual function, erectile dysfunction was 2.28 times more common for men with periodontitis than for men without it, according to the report in the International Journal of Impotence Research....One study in 2013 found that treating periodontitis improves erectile dysfunction symptoms.

The new review did have limitations, including the fact that erectile dysfunction and chronic periodontitis are caused by similar risk factors, such as aging, smoking, diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease. While some studies did account for diabetes, most did not account for smoking or alcohol consumption, which can also affect oral health and sexual function, the authors write. Even after an exhaustive search, the evidence linking periodontitis and ED is limited, they write. 

New research further confirms a link between higher lutein levels (as measured in the blood) and the preservation of "crystallized intelligence" in older adults.  Crystallized intelligence is the ability to use the skills and knowledge one has acquired over a lifetime. Lutein is in foods such as leafy green vegetables, cruciferous vegetables (broccoli, brussels sprouts, cauliflower, and cabbage) and egg yolks. Lutein is also found in small amounts in other fruits and vegetables. Bottom line: eat a variety of fresh fruits and vegetables daily. [Original study.]Medical Xpress:

Study links nutrition to brain health and intelligence in older adults

A study of older adults links consumption of a pigment found in leafy greens to the preservation of "crystallized intelligence," the ability to use the skills and knowledge one has acquired over a lifetime.

Lutein (LOO-teen) is one of several plant pigments that humans acquire through the diet, primarily by eating leafy green vegetables, cruciferous vegetables such as broccoli, or egg yolks, said University of Illinois graduate student Marta Zamroziewicz, who led the study with Illinois psychology professor Aron Barbey. Lutein accumulates in the brain, embedding in cell membranes, where it likely plays "a neuroprotective role," she said. "Previous studies have found that a person's lutein status is linked to cognitive performance across the lifespan," Zamroziewicz said. 

The study enrolled 122 healthy participants aged 65 to 75 who solved problems and answered questions on a standard test of crystallized intelligence. Researchers also collected blood samples to determine blood serum levels of lutein and imaged participants' brains using MRI to measure the volume of different brain structures. The team focused on parts of the temporal cortex, a brain region that other studies suggest plays a role in the preservation of crystallized intelligence.

The researchers found that participants with higher blood serum levels of lutein tended to do better on tests of crystallized intelligence. Serum lutein levels reflect only recent dietary intakes, Zamroziewicz said, but are associated with brain concentrations of lutein in older adults, which reflect long-term dietary intake. Those with higher serum lutein levels also tended to have thicker gray matter in the parahippocampal cortex, a brain region that, like crystallized intelligence, is preserved in healthy aging, the researchers report..... "Our findings do not demonstrate causality," Zamroziewicz said. "We did find that lutein is linked to crystallized intelligence through the parahippocampal cortex."

Magnesium is a mineral found in the human body that is necessary for good health. New research analysed 40 studies and found that a diet rich in magnesium is associated with a reduced risk of stroke, heart failure, diabetes, and death ("all cause mortality").

Even though there are many magnesium rich foods, it is estimated that many people don't get enough magnesium in the diet, especially if they eat a lot of processed, low-fiber foods. Current Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDAs) are 320 mg daily for adult females and 420 mg daily for adult males (NIH magnesium fact-sheets - here and here). Especially good sources of magnesium are green leafy vegetables, legumes (beans), nuts, seeds, chocolate, and whole grains. In general, foods containing dietary fiber provide magnesium.From EurekAlert:

Dietary magnesium associated with reduced risk of heart disease, stroke and diabetes

A diet rich in magnesium may reduce the risk of diseases including coronary heart disease, stroke and type-2 diabetes according to a new meta-analysis published in the open access journal BMC Medicine. This analysis of the evidence on dietary magnesium and health outcomes is the largest to date, involving data from more than one million people across nine countries.

The researchers, from Zhejiang University and Zhengzhou University in China, found that people in the highest category of dietary magnesium consumption had a 10% lower risk of coronary heart disease, 12% lower risk of stroke and a 26% lower risk of type-2 diabetes compared to those in the lowest category. Their results also indicate that an extra 100 mg per day of dietary magnesium could also reduce risk of stroke by 7% and type-2 diabetes by 19%.

Magnesium is vital for human health and normal biological functions including glucose metabolism, protein production and synthesis of nucleic acids such as DNA. Diet is the main source of magnesium as the element can be found in foods such as spices, nuts, beans, cocoa, whole grains and green leafy vegetables.

Original study. from BMC Medicine: Dietary magnesium intake and the risk of cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and all-cause mortality: a dose–response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies

Increasing dietary magnesium intake is associated with a reduced risk of stroke, heart failure, diabetes, and all-cause mortality, but not CHD [coronary heart disease] or total CVD [cardiovascular disease]. These findings support the notion that increasing dietary magnesium might provide health benefits....Magnesium is essential to all living organisms, as it controls the function of many crucial enzymes, including those that utilize or synthesize ATP ....

 Uh oh....A recent study found that every baby teether tested (and they tested 59 teethers), including all those labeled "BPA free", leached various parabens, bisphenols (including BPA or bisphenol A), and other endocrine disrupting chemicals. Infants chew and suck teethers to soothe the pain from their teeth emerging in the first year of life.

The researchers tested for 26 chemicals in three different types of teethers (solid plastic, gel-filled, and water-filled), and found parabens and bisphenols leaching from all of them. To see what leaches from the teethers, they placed the teethers into water - this is similar to what happens when babies mouth teethers and their saliva is exposed to chemicals in the teethers. The gel filled teethers leached the most chemicals overall. Even though 48 of the 59 teethers were labeled “BPA-free,” the results showed that the labels were misleading, because in this study BPA migrated (leached out) from all the teethers.

Endocrine disrupting chemicals can interfere with natural hormone function and are linked to a wide assortment of health problems (see posts on them). Even though the levels of the chemicals found were low, it is important to remember that effects from endocrine disrupting chemicals (hormone disruptors) are from very low levels. So exposing developing infants to these chemicals is of concern. What was disturbing is that these study results were far worse than a small study of teethers in Europe where the standards regarding endocrine disrupting chemicals are stricter than in the US. What should be done? Manufacturers should design products without using problem ingredients right from the start. Problem solved! From Science Daily:

Baby teethers soothe, but many contain low levels of BPA

Bisphenol-A (BPA), parabens and antimicrobials are widely used in personal care products and plastics. The U.S. and other governments have banned or restricted some of these compounds' use in certain products for babies and kids. But the compounds' presence in and leaching from teethers hasn't been thoroughly investigated. Now a study in the ACS journal Environmental Science & Technology reports that all tested plastic teethers contained BPA and other endocrine-disruptors that leached at low levels.

Studies have shown that in animals, endocrine-disrupting compounds (EDCs) -- which include BPA, parabens and antimicrobials -- can potentially interfere with hormones and have harmful developmental, reproductive and neurological effects. As a result, the European Commission in 2011 restricted the use of BPA in baby bottles. The U.S. followed suit a year later, banning it from baby bottles, and also from children's drinking cups....But very few if any studies have investigated whether the compounds are used to make teethers and if the compounds leach out of these products, which are designed to soothe babies' gums when their teeth come in. Kurunthachalam Kannan and colleagues wanted to see if the products contained EDCs and if the compounds could migrate out.

The researchers analyzed 59 solid, gel-filled or water-filled teethers purchased online in the U.S. for 26 potential endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Although most of the products were labeled BPA-free or non-toxic, all of them contained BPA. In addition, the researchers detected a range of different parabens and the antimicrobials triclosan and triclocarban in most of the teethers....Based on estimates of average use time and the body weight of a 12-month-old baby, calculations suggest that exposure to BPA and other regulated EDCs in teethers would be lower than the European standards for temporary tolerable daily intake levels. However, these thresholds are set for individual compounds. Current regulations do not account for the accumulation of multiple EDCs, note the researchers. Additionally, not all chemicals measured in the study are regulated.

A large review of nut studies found that people eating a daily handful of nuts (about 20 g) have a lower risk of heart disease, cancer, stroke, premature death, and death from respiratory disease, type 2 diabetes, and infectious disease. Truly impressive. Benefits seem to be for all nuts, and also peanuts - which are called nuts, but are actually legumes (other posts about nut consumption benefits). An earlier post discussed how some of these effects could be to nuts lowering systemic inflammation throughout the body. Bottom line: try to eat a handful of nuts every day or most days a week for your health. And make it a variety of nuts - walnuts, almonds, hazelnuts, cashews, pistachios, pecans, Brazil nuts, and peanuts. From Science Daily:

A handful of nuts a day cuts the risk of a wide range of diseases

A large analysis of current research shows that people who eat at least 20g of nuts a day have a lower risk of heart disease, cancer and other diseases. The analysis of all current studies on nut consumption and disease risk has revealed that 20g a day -- equivalent to a handful -- can cut people's risk of coronary heart disease by nearly 30 percent, their risk of cancer by 15 percent, and their risk of premature death by 22 percent. An average of at least 20g of nut consumption was also associated with a reduced risk of dying from respiratory disease by about a half, and diabetes by nearly 40 percent, although the researchers note that there is less data about these diseases in relation to nut consumption.

The study, led by researchers from Imperial College London and the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, is published in the journal BMC Medicine. The research team analysed 29 published studies from around the world that involved up to 819,000 participants, including more than 12,000 cases of coronary heart disease, 9,000 cases of stroke, 18,000 cases of cardiovascular disease and cancer, and more than 85,000 deaths. While there was some variation between the populations that were studied....the researchers found that nut consumption was associated with a reduction in disease risk across most of them.

The study included all kinds of tree nuts, such as hazel nuts and walnuts, and also peanuts -- which are actually legumes. The results were in general similar whether total nut intake, tree nuts or peanuts were analysed. What makes nuts so potentially beneficial, said Aune, is their nutritional value: "Nuts and peanuts are high in fibre, magnesium, and polyunsaturated fats -- nutrients that are beneficial for cutting cardiovascular disease risk and which can reduce cholesterol levels. "Some nuts, particularly walnuts and pecan nuts are also high in antioxidants, which can fight oxidative stress and possibly reduce cancer risk. Even though nuts are quite high in fat, they are also high in fibre and protein, and there is some evidence that suggests nuts might actually reduce your risk of obesity over time."

The study also found that if people consumed on average more than 20g of nuts per day, there was little evidence of further improvement in health outcomes. [ORIGINAL STUDY]

Tobacco use is a leading cause of cancer and early death in the U.S. and throughout the world. According to a new study looking at people 70 years old and older, the good news is that quitting smoking at any time in life (even as late as the 60s) is better for immediate health and also reduces the risk of death.

The study compared people who had never smoked to people currently smoking - and found that in the 6 year follow up period current smokers were more than three times more likely to die than people who had never smoked. Furthermore, quitting smoking at any age was associated with a lower risk of death. Former smokers who quit smoking earlier in life received the largest benefit from quitting smoking. But even people who quit during their 60s were at substantially decreased risk of death (when compared to people who continued to smoke). Bottom line: It's never too late to quit smoking. But best is to never even start smoking. From MedicalXpress:

Quitting smoking at any age reduces the risk of death after 70

Tobacco use continues to be a major cause of cancer and premature death. Most studies of cigarette smoking and mortality have focused on middle-aged populations, with fewer studies examining the impact of tobacco cessation on disease and mortality risk among the elderly. A new study published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, found that people aged 70 or older currently smoking were more than three times more likely to die than never-smokers, while former smokers were less likely to die the sooner they quit.

Investigators reviewed data for more than 160,000 individuals aged 70 and over who participated in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study. They completed a questionnaire in 2004-2005 detailing their smoking use, and reported deaths were tracked until the end of 2011....For this study, participants still smoking in their 70s were identified as current smokers, and former smokers were classified by the decade of life when quitting. At the beginning of the study (2004-2005), the median age of participants was 75 years. Almost 56% were former smokers and 6% were current smokers. Males were less likely (31% vs 48% of females) to be never-smokers. 

During an average follow-up of 6.4 years, almost 16% of the participants died. While 12.1% of the never smokers died, 16.2%, 19.7%, 23.9%, and 27.9% of former smokers who quit between ages 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, and 60-69 years died, respectively. Current smokers fared the worst, with 33.1% dying. Mortality rates for women were lower than men at each level of smoking use.

"These data show that age at smoking initiation and cessation, both key components of smoking duration, are important predictors of mortality in U.S. adults aged 70 years and older," commented Dr. Nash. "In the NIH-AARP study population, younger age at initiation was associated with increased risk of mortality, highlighting the importance of youth and early-adult smoking on lifetime mortality risk, even among people who live to age 70 years. In addition, former smokers were at substantially reduced risk of mortality after age 70 years relative to current smokers, even those who quit in their 60s. These findings show that smoking cessation should be emphasized to all smokers, regardless of age."

A recent article discussed the large assortment of medications (both prescription and non-prescription) that are linked to liver injury, commonly known as "Drug-induced liver injury" (DILI). While it occurs rarely (fewer than 10 in 10,000 persons who take the drug in question), many medications can result in liver injury - especially if taken in too large doses and for too long. The scary part is that 46% of people with acute liver failure in the U.S have the liver damage from acetaminophen. Acetaminophen is the main cause of drug induced liver injury and liver failure in the U.S. Acetaminophen is found not just in Tylenol, but in many non-prescription drugs - thus it is easy to take too large a dose. The liver helps remove toxins - thus we need to take good care of it. From Science Daily:

Acetaminophen, supplements and other medications may trigger drug-induced liver injury

More than 1,000 medications, with acetaminophen being the most common, have been associated with drug-induced liver injury (DILI). Diagnosis can be challenging due to the multitude of contributing factors, and timely recognition and clinical response may mean the difference between recovery and acute liver failure or even death. DILI affects an estimated fewer than 10 people in every 10,000 exposed persons. The condition is dose-dependent or an adverse reaction to a medication, dietary supplement or other substance. 

"The liver helps remove toxins, which makes it especially vulnerable to injury from either short-term intake above recommended levels or long-term usage that allows toxins to build up," Collins-Yoder said. "Recognizing the clinical signs and symptoms is crucial to prompt treatment and effective patient care." Depending on the contributing factors and the level of damage to the liver, patients with mild and moderate signs and symptoms may recover normal liver function after the triggering substance is identified and use is discontinued. Other patients may experience more severe damage, progressing to acute liver failure.

About 46 percent of persons with acute liver failure in the United States have liver damage associated with acetaminophen, making it the most common cause of DILI. Since acetaminophen is often an ingredient in over-the-counter and prescription pain medications, patients may take higher doses than needed. A more infrequent type of DILI is triggered by an adverse reaction to prescription medications, herbal dietary supplements or other substances, including: nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), including ibuprofen, naproxen and others; antibiotics and antiviral agencies, such as amoxicillin-clavulanate, sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim and nitrofurantoin; antileptic agents, such as volproic acid and carbamazepine; statins; novel anticoagulants; proton pump inhibitors; methotrexate; azathioprine; sulfasalazine; herbal and dietary supplements.