Skip to content

  In the past few months there has been a lot of discussion about early screening tests for cancer (when there are no symptoms)  versus diagnostic tests (testing once symptoms appear), especially for prostate cancer and breast cancer. Because unfortunately screening also has harms - it is not without significant risks. So the following 2 articles discussing breast cancer are real eye openers. The first article discusses a large study that found that no matter how early the screening and no matter how tiny the cancer and extensive the treatment (e.g, mastectomy of both breasts), in a certain percentage of women the cancer will reappear in a deadly fashion and eventually kill about 3.3% even though they are treated early. The Medscape article points out that it is thought that 28% of early stage breast cancers will progress or reappear as deadly metastatic cancer (even years later) no matter the treatment.

As Dr. Welch has pointed out in his book Overdiagnosis and Less Medicine, More Health - these aggressive cancers are like "birds" - they fly away throughout the body and are deadly no matter when they are diagnosed. A certain percentage of tiny cancers regress (disappear) on their own, others just sit there doing nothing, others grow very slowly (and can be treated successfully when symptoms appear), and then there are those that are so very aggressive that they go throughout the body from the beginning (the birds). And we don't know which will be the aggressive ones when we first find them. So sad..... Meanwhile try to eat healthy foods, get enough sleep, lose weight if overweight, live a healthy lifestyle (don't smoke or drink to excess), and get plenty of exercise in hopes of cancer prevention. I also like to think that each week eating some turmeric (in foods), broccoli famiy foods, olive oil, and berries may also help. Do go read the full original articles. From NY Times:

Early-Stage Breast Condition May Not Require Cancer Treatment

As many as 60,000 American women each year are told they have a very early stage of breast cancer — Stage 0, as it is commonly known — a possible precursor to what could be a deadly tumor. And almost every one of the women has either a lumpectomy or a mastectomy, and often a double mastectomy, removing a healthy breast as well. Yet it now appears that treatment may make no difference in their outcomes. Patients with this condition had close to the same likelihood of dying of breast cancer as women in the general population, and the few who died did so despite treatment, not for lack of it, researchers reported Thursday in JAMA Oncology. 

Their conclusions were based on the most extensive collection of data ever analyzed on the condition, known as ductal carcinoma in situ, or D.C.I.S.: 100,000 women followed for 20 years. The findings are likely to fan debate about whether tens of thousands of patients are undergoing unnecessary and sometimes disfiguring treatments for premalignant conditions that are unlikely to develop into life-threatening cancers.

Diagnoses of D.C.I.S., involving abnormal cells confined to the milk ducts of the breast, have soared in recent decades. They now account for as much as a quarter of cancer diagnoses made with mammography, as radiologists find smaller and smaller lesions. But the new data on outcomes raises provocative questions: Is D.C.I.S. cancer, a precursor to the disease or just a risk factor for some women? Is there any reason for most patients with the diagnosis to receive brutal therapies? If treatment does not make a difference, should women even be told they have the condition?

A majority of the 100,000 patients in the database the researchers used, from a national cancer registry, had lumpectomies, and nearly all the rest had mastectomies, the new study found. Their chance of dying of breast cancer in the two decades after treatment was 3.3 percent, no matter which procedure they had, about the same as an average woman’s chance of dying of breast cancer, said Dr. Laura J. Esserman, a breast cancer surgeon and researcher at the University of California, San Francisco, who wrote an editorial accompanying the study.

The data showed that some patients were at higher risk: those younger than 40, black women, and those whose abnormal cells had molecular markers found in advanced cancers with poorer prognoses. D.C.I.S. has long been regarded as a precursor to potentially deadly invasive cancers, analogous to colon polyps that can turn into colon cancer, said Dr. Steven A. Narod, the lead author of the paper and a researcher at Women’s College Research Institute in Toronto. The treatment strategy has been to get rid of the tiny specks of abnormal breast cells, just as doctors get rid of colon polyps when they see them in a colonoscopy.

But if that understanding of the condition had played out as expected, women who had an entire breast removed, or even both breasts as a sort of double precaution, should have been protected from invasive breast cancer. Instead, the findings showed, they had the same risk as those who had a lumpectomy. Almost no women went untreated, so it is not clear if as a group, they did worse. But some women who died of breast cancer ended up with the disease throughout their body without ever having it recur in their breast — many, in fact, had no breast because they had had a mastectomy. Those very rare fatal cases of D.C.I.S. followed by fatal breast cancer, Dr. Narod concluded, had most likely already spread at the time of detection. As for the rest, he said, they were never going to spread anyway.

Dr. Esserman said that if deadly breast cancers started out as D.C.I.S., the incidence of invasive breast cancers should have plummeted with rising detection rates. That has not happened, even though in the pre-mammography era, before about 1980, the number of women found to have D.C.I.S. was only in the hundreds. Nearly 240,000 women receive diagnoses of invasive breast cancer each year.

Those facts lead Dr. Narod to a blunt view. After a surgeon has removed the aberrant cells for the biopsy, he said, “I think the best way to treat D.C.I.S. is to do nothing." ... Others drew back from that advice.

From Medscape:  The Mystery of a Common Breast Cancer Statistic

A commonly cited breast cancer statistic — that 30% of all early-stage breast cancers will progress, despite treatment, to deadly metastatic disease — appears to have no strong contemporary evidence to back it up. Nonetheless, the statistic appears widely...."It is estimated that 20% to 30% of all breast cancer cases will become metastatic," said the MBCN in response, repeating a statistic from its own website.

The primary source for this declaration is a 2005 CME review on metastatic disease published in the Oncologist by prominent medical oncologist Joyce O'Shaughnessy, MD, from Baylor University in Houston."Despite advances in the treatment of breast cancer, approximately 30% of women initially diagnosed with earlier stages of breast cancer eventually develop recurrent advanced or metastatic disease," Dr O'Shaughnessy wrote.

According to the National Cancer Institute (NCI), the definition of early-stage breast cancer is that which has not spread beyond the breast or the axillary lymph nodes. The range includes stage I, stage IIA, stage IIB, and stage IIIA disease....According to experts, early breast cancers are known to metastasize at 20 years or beyond.

 

Dr Brawley worked with two ACS epidemiologists to examine the issue. They looked at breast-cancer-specific mortality (as identified on death certificates) in 12 health districts in the United States from 2008 to 2012. They were surprised by the finding: "28% of the women who died of breast cancer during that time period had localized disease at diagnosis," said Dr Brawley. The result was unexpected. "We all thought 30% was too high," said Dr Brawley.

(NOTE: Photo credit: Wikipedia Commons of Edouard Manet- Blond Woman With Bare Breasts.)

Disturbing results from a study looking at data from over 1 million women enrolled in Medicaid before pregnancy from 2000 to 2007. More than four of five (82.5%) pregnant women were prescribed at least one medication, and 42.0% were prescribed a drug that is potentially harmful to the developing fetus.From Medscape:

Prescription Meds Common in Pregnancy; Maybe Too Common

Although most physicians acknowledge the complexity of prescribing drugs to pregnant women, they nonetheless prescribe them frequently. More than four of five (82.5%) pregnant women were prescribed at least one medication, and 42.0% were prescribed a drug that is potentially harmful to the developing fetus, researchers found in a large, population-based study.The study, which details the type and timing of medications prescribed to pregnant Medicaid patients, presents a disturbing pattern, according to Kristin Palmsten, ScD, from the University of California, San Diego, in La Jolla, and colleagues. 

Dr Palmsten and colleagues found that the most commonly dispensed medications are those used to treat infections. They also report that dispensing is more common for younger pregnant women and white women. The researchers examined data for women enrolled in Medicaid before pregnancy (n = 1,106,757), using 2000 to 2007 Medicaid Analytic eXtract data for prospectively collected medication information. The analysis included over-the-counter medications dispensed by a pharmacist, but excluded medications purchased over the counter directly or prescribed during hospitalizations.

The most commonly dispensed medications were nitrofurantoin (21.6%), metronidazole (19.4%), amoxicillin (18.0%), azithromycin (19.9%), and promethazine (13.5%). Other frequently dispensed medications include promethazine cephalexin and codeine with acetaminophen.....The investigators also note that nine of the 20 most commonly dispensed medications are rated as having limited to fair data quality and quantity to inform human teratogenic risk assessments by the Teratogen Information System.

Dr Palmsten and colleagues also found that 42.0% of pregnant women filled a prescription for a former US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) category D or X drug during pregnancy. Category D medications are associated with evidence of human fetal risk based on adverse reaction data. The top five most commonly prescribed category D medications were codeine (11.9%), hydrocodone (10.2%), ibuprofen (4.9%), sulfamethoxazole (4.0%), and hydrocortisone (4.0%). The authors note that some of those agents are considered category B or C drugs, depending on the circumstances of use.

Class X medications have been tested in animals or humans and found to cause fetal abnormalities. The five most commonly prescribed category X drugs were hormonal contraceptives (4.9%), temazepam (0.11%), atorvastatin (0.07%), simvastatin (0.04%), and warfarin (0.04%).

Moreover, the researchers note that many of the most commonly dispensed medications have limited or low-quality data available regarding safety during pregnancy. “Lack of unambiguous safety information may lead to the use of medications with potential to cause adverse pregnancy outcomes, whereas beneficial medications may be avoided,” they write. Many opioids are category N, meaning the FDA has not classified the drug. 

Although the solution to the complex problem of drug use by pregnant women is not clear, the FDA has made a change that is designed to better inform healthcare providers and patients about the risks of drugs. As of June 30, 2015, the FDA has changed the way it labels human prescription medications and biologic preparations for use in pregnancy and lactation. The new labels will include a summary of the risks of the drug during pregnancy.

This article discusses the fungi living on our skin. Recent research (using state of the art genetic analysis) has found that healthy people have lots of diversity in fungi living on their skin. Certain areas seem to have the greatest populations of fungi: in between toes (average of 40 species), the heel (average of 80 species), toenails (average of 80 species), and the genitals. Currently it is thought that there are "intricate interactions between fungi and immune cells on the skin surface", and that often this mutualistic relationship is beneficial, but at other times dysbiosis (when the microbial community is unbalanced or out of whack) can lead to diseases. If the populations get too unbalanced (e.g., antibiotics can kill off bacteria, and then an increase in fungi populations take their place) then ordinarily non-harmful fungi can become pathogenic. Note that: Mutualistic relationship is a relationship between two different species of organisms in which both benefit from the association. From E-Cronicon:

From Head to Toe: Mapping Fungi across Human Skin

The human microbiota refers to the complex aggregate of fungi, bacteria and archaea, found on the surface of the skin, within saliva and oral mucosa, the conjunctiva, the gastrointestinal. When microbial genomes are accounted for, the term microbiome is deployed. In recent years the first in-depth analysis, using sophisticated DNA sequencing, of the human microbiome has taken place through the U.S. National Institutes of Health led Human Microbiome Project. 

Many of the findings have extended, or even turned upside down, what was previously known about the relationship between humans and microorganisms. One of the most interesting areas related to fungi, especially in advancing our understanding about fungal types, locations and numbers and how this affects health and disease....some parts of the body have a greater prevalence of bacteria (such as the arms) whereas fungi are found in closer association with feet.  

A variety of bacteria and fungi are found on the typical 2 square meters that represent the surface of the skin, and within the deeper layers, of a typical adult. These can be considered as ‘residential’ (that is ordinarily found) or ‘transient’ (carried for a period of time by the host.) The resident microorganism types vary in relation to skin type on the human body; between men and women; and to the geographical region in which people live.

The first observation is that many locations across the skin contain considerable populations of fungi. Prime locations, as reported by Findley and colleagues, were inside the ear canal and behind the ear, within the eyebrows, at the back of the head; with feet: on the heel, toenails, between the toes; and with the rest of the body notable locations were the forearm, back, groin, nostrils, chest, palm, and the elbow.

The second observation is that several different species are found, and these vary according to different niches. Focusing on one ecological niche, a study by Oyeka found that the region between toes, taken from a sample of 100 people, discovered 14 genera of fungi. In terms of the individual species recovered, a relatively high number were observed (an average of 40 species.)....the greatest varieties of fungi are to be found on the heel (approximately 80 different species.) The second most populous area is with the toes, where toe nails recover around 80 different species.....With the genitals, where early investigations had suggested that Candida albicans was the most commonly isolated yeasts. However, an investigation of 83 patients by Bentubo., et al.  showed more variety, with high recoveries of Candida parapsilosis, Rhodotorulamucilaginos, Rhodotorulaglutinis, Candida tropicalis and Trichosporoninkin.

The importance of the investigative work into the human skin fungi helps medical researchers understand more fully the connections between the composition of skin-fungi and certain pathologies. Here the intricate interactions between fungi and immune cells on the skin surface is of importance; often this mutualistic relationship is beneficial, at other times dysbiosis can lead to the manifestation of diseases especially when there is a breakdown of the mutualistic relationship.

Changes to fungal diversity can be associated with several health conditions, including atopic dermatitis, psoriasis, acne vulgaris and chronic wounds. Diversity can alter through the over-use of antibiotics, where a decline in bacterial numbers can lead to a rise in fungal populations occupying the same space.

Moreover, research has indicted that patients who have a primary immunodeficiency are host to more populous fungal communities than healthy people. Here it is suggested that the weaknesses in the immune system allow higher numbers of fungi to survive, and, in turn these weaknesses can lead some ordinarily non-harmful species to become pathogenic. Such opportunistic fungi include species of Aspergillus and Candida.

Nice article about ticks, tickborne diseases (of which Lyme disease is one), and possible strategies for coping - whether getting rid of ticks in your yard, or minimizing risk. The only thing I disagreed with is that the author gives the time for transmission of a tick borne disease as needing over 24 hours of the tick being attached (this number is frequently given by authorities). Others disagree (as do I based on experience), and a recent article on transmission time after attachment stated that in animal research, transmission can occur in <16 hours. Some human studies also found transmission times of less than 24 hours (and as little as 6 hours of tick attachment), but so far the minimum attachment time for transmission of infection has never been established. Read the complete article for more pet and tick advice. From Mother Earth News:

How to Get Rid of Ticks and Prevent Lyme Disease 

About 300,000 people are diagnosed with Lyme disease every year, according to new estimates from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Lyme disease is caused by bacteria that multiply in the bodies of ticks, people and animals, including mice, deer and dogs....  the tiny blacklegged deer tick, which is the most common transmitter of Lyme disease.

These deer ticks pick up Lyme bacteria (Borrelia burgdorferi) when they feed on the blood of infected mice, chipmunks and other hosts. Infected ticks in both the nymphal and adult life stages can then transfer the Lyme bacteria to humans if they latch on for a meal and feed for approximately 36 hours or more. Lyme disease is highly treatable when it’s detected early, but devastating when the infection goes unnoticed for more than a few months.

Let Poultry Help with Tick Prevention  Leafy wooded areas and grassy meadows are the preferred habitats for blacklegged deer ticks and American dog ticks, which both spend their larval stage in leaf litter, their nymphal stage on small animals, and their adult stage in tall grass or other shrubby vegetation. People have learned how to get rid of ticks by keeping foraging chickens and guinea fowl on their property. In April 2015, we launched the MOTHER EARTH NEWS Chickens and Ticks Survey, and responses revealed that: 71 percent had an existing tick problem before they got poultry, 78 percent kept poultry that helped control or eliminate ticks within the birds’ feeding range, 46 percent experienced a drop in tick populations within a month after getting poultry; 45 percent saw good control after several months to a year.Many respondents noted that small bantam chickens and game hens can get into tight spots where larger birds can’t fit, resulting in better tick control....

Permethrin-Treated Clothes and ‘Tick Tubes’  If you live in one of the 13 states where Lyme disease risk is highest, learning how to get rid of ticks should be a top priority. You might want to consider using permethrin, a non-organic pesticide that repels and kills ticks. Permethrin is more potent and persistent than the organic materials we usually recommend. We suggest using a formula designed to be applied to clothing rather than misters, sprayers, foggers or other permethrin products. Clothing products that are pre-treated with permethrin are available, or you can buy permethrin with instructions for how to use it to treat your clothes. Take care to not expose kids to this pesticide...The EPA also classified permethrin as “likely to be carcinogenic to humans,” so weigh the risk of infrequent exposure to the risk of Lyme disease in your area.

You might also consider permethrin-infused “tick tubes,” which are designed to kill ticks on white-footed mice as well as chipmunks and rats, the main animals from which ticks become infected with Lyme. The tick tubes offer nesting materials impregnated with the pesticide to such critters. The animals then take the material back to their nests, where it kills any ticks that may have latched on to the adults and their young. The small amount of permethrin used in tick tubes is not water-soluble, so it’s not likely to end up anywhere but in a nest. Sold commercially as Damminix Tick Tubes, these devices are easy to make yourself....

Herbal Tick Repellents   Many of our survey respondents reported that they apply veterinary-prescribed tick preventatives on their dogs and cats, but would prefer more organic repellents. Two plant-based aromatics — sweet-scented “rose” geranium (Pelargonium graveolens) essential oil and eastern red cedar (Juniperus virginiana; also known as “red cedarwood”) essential oil — were repeatedly recommended by readers who use them as spray-on repellents for pets and family members alike....Both geranium essential oil and eastern red cedar essential oil have proven to be successful repellents against ticks in various life stages, according to the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry and the Journal of Medical Entomology, respectively.

Using full-strength essential oil can injure human skin and overwhelm pets’ sensitive noses, so follow this simple recipe when making a liquid anti-tick spray: In an 8-ounce spray bottle, combine 10 to 20 drops of rose geranium or eastern red cedar essential oil with 1 teaspoon of vodka or rubbing alcohol. Fill the rest of the bottle with water and shake to combine. The spray can be applied to your skin or clothing....

More Tick Prevention Tricks Fencing out deer, the primary host of adult Lyme-infected ticks, can help prevent ticks from reaching your land. Low-cost, plastic-mesh deer fencing is available online and at farm stores. Ticks rarely inhabit lawns that are mowed regularly. Raking up leaves and composting them deprives overwintering ticks of shelter.

When hiking where tick populations are high, stay on the trails and dress defensively — pull your socks up over your pants. When only shorts will do, some people cut off the ankle sections of old socks, spray them with a repellent, and wear the tubes around their calves like tick-deterring leg warmers.

A study published in Experimental and Applied Acarology found that spraying outdoor areas with Safer-brand organic insecticidal soap in spring, when blacklegged deer tick nymphs are active, can provide treatment that is equally as effective as spraying with the insecticide chlorpyrifos.

After you’ve been outdoors, check your dogs for any ticks that may have latched on, and then make your way to a hot, soapy shower followed by a careful body check. You can kill any ticks that have attached to your clothing by immediately putting your clothes into the dryer for 15 minutes on the hottest setting, and then washing them. Most ticks are sensitive to dry heat, but may survive even the hottest wash. 

 Artificial trans fats in foods are bad for health in so many ways: linked to increased risk of coronary heart disease, atherosclerosis, inflammation, and risk of early death. And even though the FDA is finally phasing out partially hydrogenated oils (because they have high levels of artificial trans fats) within the next 3 years, trans fats will still be found in foods (processed foods). How can this be? Well, trans fats are still allowed to be in foods that are labeled as 0 trans fats if it is less than .5 grams trans fats per serving (a loophole allows them to round downward to zero ). And according to research by Environmental Working Group (EWG), trans fats are being used by the food industry in undisclosed ways in amounts low enough to exploit the trans fat loophole. Besides partially hydrogenated oils, they are found in other types of refined oils, monoglycerides, diglycerides and other emulsifiers, and even in flavors and colors. So when you see ZERO trans fats on the label, it doesn't actually mean that it is zero trans fats. The problem is that over the course of a day, eating a number of foods and servings that have under .5 grams of trans fats adds up to levels that research now says has negative health effects!

Artificial trans fats are found in a lot of processed foods. A EWG analysis found that harmful artificial trans fatty acids lurk in more than 27 percent of more than 84,000 processed foods common in American supermarkets.  Another 10 percent contain ingredients likely to contain trans fat. Foods most likely to have hidden trans fats are: breakfast bars, granola and trail mix bars, pretzels, peanut butter, crackers, breads, kids fruit snacks, kids cereal, graham crackers, whipped topping, non-dairy creamers, pudding mixes, cupcakes, and ice cream cones.

So what can you do? Read ingredient lists on labels and try to avoid foods with the above mentioned ingredients: partially hydrogenated oils, emulsifiers, monoglycerides, diglycerides and other emulsifiers, artificial flavors, artificial flavors, and colors. Try to cut back or avoid foods that have ingredients that are not real foods - tough to do, but it can be done.

And the amazing part, saturated fats (such as butter) are NOT linked to early death and heart disease, but trans fat in foods is. Latest research, from Science Daily:

Trans fats, but not saturated fats like butter, linked to greater risk of early death and heart disease

A study led by researchers at McMaster University has found that that trans fats are associated with greater risk of death and coronary heart disease, but saturated fats are not associated with an increased risk of death, heart disease, stroke, or Type 2 diabetes. The findings were published today by the British Medical Journal (BMJ)...."For years everyone has been advised to cut out fats. Trans fats have no health benefits and pose a significant risk for heart disease, but the case for saturated fat is less clear," said de Souza.

Saturated fats come mainly from animal products, such as butter, cows' milk, meat, salmon and egg yolks, and some plant products such as chocolate and palm oils. Trans unsaturated fats (trans fats) are mainly produced industrially from plant oils (a process known as hydrogenation) for use in margarine, snack foods and packaged baked goods.

Contrary to prevailing dietary advice, a recent evidence review found no excess cardiovascular risk associated with intake of saturated fat. In contrast, research suggests that industrial trans fats may increase the risk of coronary heart disease.

To help clarify these controversies, de Souza and colleagues analysed the results of 50 observational studies assessing the association between saturated and/or trans fats and health outcomes in adults....The team found no clear association between higher intake of saturated fats and death for any reason, coronary heart disease (CHD), cardiovascular disease (CVD), ischemic stroke or type 2 diabetes. However, consumption of industrial trans fats was associated with a 34 per cent increase in death for any reason, a 28 per cent increased risk of CHD mortality, and a 21 per cent increase in the risk of CHD.

Inconsistencies in the studies analysed meant that the researchers could not confirm an association between trans fats and type 2 diabetes. And, they found no clear association between trans fats and ischemic stroke. The researchers stress that their results are based on observational studies, so no definitive conclusions can be drawn about cause and effect.

Trans fats are commonly used in processed foods to improve taste, texture, and shelf life. Artificial trans fats are found in partially hydrogenated oils and in other ingredients, such as refined oils, emulsifiers, flavors and colors. Even those processed foods that say zero trans fats may contain trans fats - due to a loophole in labeling laws (if it has less than .5 grams per serving, then it can be rounded down to zero - thus allowing the incorrect claim of zero trans fats). Eating a variety of processed foods, each containing a little trans fats, easily adds up to eating a significant amount daily.Trans fats in the diet have long been linked to cardiovascular disease, artherosclerosis, obesity, oxidative stress, and inflammation, but now research finds that it is linked to a poorer memory in middle-aged men under the age of 45. From Science Daily:

Dietary trans fat linked to worse memory

Higher consumption of dietary trans fatty acids (dTFA), commonly used in processed foods to improve taste, texture and durability, has been linked to worsened memory function in men 45 years old and younger, according to a study.

Researchers evaluated data from 1,018 men and women who were asked to complete a dietary survey and memory test involving word recall. On average, men aged 45 and younger recalled 86 words; however, for each additional gram of trans fats consumed daily, performance dropped by 0.76 words. This translates to an expected 12 fewer words recalled by young men with dTFA intake levels matching the highest observed in the study, compared to otherwise similar men consuming no trans fats.

After adjusting for age, exercise, education, ethnicity and mood, the link between higher dTFA and poorer memory was maintained in men 45 and younger.The study focused predominantly on men because of a small number of women in this age group. However, including women in the analysis did not change the finding, said Golomb. An association of dTFA to word memory was not observed in older populations. Golomb said this is likely due to dietary effects showing more clearly in younger adults. Insults and injuries to the brain accrue with age and add variability to memory scores that can swamp ability to detect diet effects.

Trans fatty acids have been linked to negative effects on lipid profiles, metabolic function, insulin resistance, inflammation and cardiac and general health. In 2013, the United States Food and Drug Administration issued a preliminary determination that trans fats were no longer generally recognized as safe. According to the Centers for Disease Control, reducing dTFA consumption could prevent 10,000 to 20,000 heart attacks and 3,000 to 7,000 coronary heart disease deaths per year in the U.S.

Beware of big soda companies bearing gifts to scientists and their misleading messages to consumers. This time it is Coca-Cola that is trying to influence the research by funding scientists who shift blame for obesity to lack of exercise.There is a large body of evidence finding that what you eat is very important for health and weight control, and this does not mean a diet filled with highly processed foods, including soda.

Yes, exercise is important, but the overall diet is even more important. And we know that soda is not a beneficial food for the beneficial microbes within us (Feeding Your Gut Microbes). Coca Cola's sales of soda are really slipping and this Global Energy Balance Network is a major effort on their part to try to boost sales of sugary drinks. From NY Times:

Coca-Cola Funds Scientists Who Shift Blame for Obesity Away From Bad Diets

Coca-Cola, the world’s largest producer of sugary beverages, is backing a new “science-based” solution to the obesity crisis: To maintain a healthy weight, get more exercise and worry less about cutting calories.The beverage giant has teamed up with influential scientists who are advancing this message in medical journals, at conferences and through social media. To help the scientists get the word out, Coke has provided financial and logistical support to a new nonprofit organization called the Global Energy Balance Network, which promotes the argument that weight-conscious Americans are overly fixated on how much they eat and drink while not paying enough attention to exercise.  ...continue reading "Ignore Big Soda’s Message"

Another study finds health benefits to eating a Mediterranean based diet (here combined with the DASH diet) - the MIND diet. The researchers found that the older adults who followed the diet best were about 7.5 years younger cognitively than those who followed it least, thus suggesting that it may slow the cognitive decline of aging. Earlier research had suggested that it may reduce a person's risk in developing Alzheimer's disease. Foods to eat: fruits, vegetables, berries, whole grains, legumes (beans), nuts, fish, a little wine, and some chicken. Foods to limit on this diet: butter, red meat, margarine, sweets and pastries, whole fat cheese, and fried or fast food. From Medical Xpress:

Eating away at cognitive decline: MIND diet may slow brain from aging by 7.5 years

While cognitive abilities naturally diminish as part of the normal aging process, it may be possible to take a bite out of this expected decline. Eating a group of specific foods known as the MIND diet may slow cognitive decline among aging adults, even when the person is not at risk of developing Alzheimer's disease, according to researchers at Rush University Medical Center. This finding is in addition to a previous study by the research team that found that the MIND diet may reduce a person's risk in developing Alzheimer's disease.

The recent study shows that older adults who followed the MIND diet more rigorously showed an equivalent of being 7.5 years younger cognitively than those who followed the diet least. The results of the study recently were published online in the journal Alzheimer's & Dementia: The Journal of the Alzheimer's Association.

The National Institute of Aging funded study evaluated cognitive change over a period of 4.7 years among 960 older adults who were free of dementia on enrollment. Averaging 81.4 years in age....residents of more than 40 retirement communities and senior public housing units in the Chicago area. .... Martha Clare Morris, ScD, a nutritional epidemiologist, and colleagues developed the diet, whose full name is the Mediterranean-DASH Diet Intervention for Neurodegenerative Delay. As the name suggests, the MIND diet is a hybrid of the Mediterranean and DASH (Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension) diets. Both diets have been found to reduce the risk of cardiovascular conditions, like hypertension, heart attack and stroke.

"Everyone experiences decline with aging; and Alzheimer's disease is now the sixth leading cause of death in the U.S., which accounts for 60 to 80 percent of dementia cases. Therefore, prevention of cognitive decline, the defining feature of dementia, is now more important than ever," Morris says.

The MIND diet has 15 dietary components, including 10 "brain-healthy food groups" and five unhealthy groups - red meat, butter and stick margarine, cheese, pastries and sweets, and fried or fast food. To adhere to and benefit from the MIND diet, a person would need to eat at least three servings of whole grains, a green leafy vegetable and one other vegetable every day—along with a glass of wine—snack most days on nuts, have beans every other day or so, eat poultry and berries at least twice a week and fish at least once a week. In addition, the study found that to have a real shot at avoiding the devastating effects of cognitive decline, he or she must limit intake of the designated unhealthy foods, especially butter (less than 1 tablespoon a day), sweets and pastries, whole fat cheese, and fried or fast food (less than a serving a week for any of the three).

Berries are the only fruit specifically to be included in the MIND diet. "Blueberries are one of the more potent foods in terms of protecting the brain," Morris says, and strawberries also have performed well in past studies of the effect of food on cognitive function.

An observational study of older adults found that the Mediterranean diet may help preserve the connections between neurons in the brain, by preserving the microstructure in the white matter of the brain. This appeared to have a strong cognitive benefit - equal up to 10 years of delayed cognitive aging in those who adhered to the Mediterranean diet most closely. So if you haven't started already, try eating what the Mediterranean diet stresses: fruits, vegetables, whole grains, seeds, nuts, legumes, olive oil, some fish, and some wine. And cut back on highly processed foods, meat, and high fat foods. It's not one or two foods, but overall diet that is important. From Medscape:

Mediterranean Diet May Preserve Brain Structural Connectivity

The Mediterranean diet may help preserve structural connectivity in the brain in older adults, results of a French study hint. Greater adherence to the Mediterranean diet was associated with preserved microstructure in extensive areas of the white matter up to a decade later, the study team found. And this appeared to be related to strong cognitive benefit, equal to up to 10 years of delayed cognitive aging for those with the greatest adherence, they say....The study was published online July 16 in Alzheimer's & Dementia. The Mediterranean diet has been associated with a lower risk for Alzheimer's disease, but the underlying mechanisms have been unclear.

The new findings are based on 146 nondemented older adults in the Bordeaux Three-City study, a prospective cohort initiated in 1999-2000 to study vascular risk factors for dementia. Participants provided information on their diet in 2001-2002 (at a mean age of 73 years), underwent brain MRI an average of 9 years later (including diffusion tensor imaging)...On the basis of dietary assessment, 26% of participants had a low Mediterranean diet (MedDi) score of 0 to 3, indicating poor adherence to the diet; 47% had medium scores (4 or 5); and 27% had higher scores (6 to 8) representing the best adherence to the diet.

In adjusted analysis, there was no significant association between the MedDi score and grey matter or white matter volume. However, there was a strong association between the MedDi and diffusion tensor imaging patterns, suggesting that higher MeDi adherence was associated with a "general pattern of preserved WM [white matter] microstructure in multiple bundles," the researchers say. And preserved white matter microstructure with higher adherence to the MedDi "appeared to delay cognitive aging by up to 10 years."

"Our results suggest that the Mediterranean diet helps preserve the connections between neurons, which appear to be damaged with aging, vascular brain diseases and neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer's dementia," Dr Samieri told Medscape Medical News. "In addition, the regions which appeared preserved with greater adherence to the Mediterranean diet were extended and were not specific to a particular disease, suggesting that the Mediterranean diet may have the potential to prevent not only stroke (as previously demonstrated with the PREDIMED [Prevención con Dieta Mediterránea] trial) but also multiple age-related brain pathologies," she added.

The added finding that none of the individual components of the Mediterranean diet was strongly associated with imaging results "supports our hypothesis that overall diet quality may be more important to preserve brain structure than any single food," they write.

Huh,,.who knew? It turns out that romantic kissing is not a universal, and that it varies from culture to culture throughout the world with most cultures NOT engaging in romantic kissing. Most cultures in the Middle East, North America, Europe, and Asia do engage in romantic kissing. From Science Daily:

Romantic kissing is not the norm in most cultures

For generations, passionate kisses immortalized in movies, songs and the arts have served as a thermometer of romantic affection. But current research has found that not only is romantic kissing not the norm in most cultures, some find it uncomfortable and even flat-out repulsive.

Justin Garcia, research scientist at Kinsey Institute at Indiana University, is the co-author of a new study published in the journal American Anthropologist -- "Is the Romantic-Sexual Kiss a Near Human Universal?" -- that looked at 168 cultures throughout the world to better understand where kissing does and doesn't occur. Using standard cross-cultural methods, the study found that fewer than half of all cultures surveyed -- 46 percent -- engage in romantic/sexual kissing. Romantic kissing was defined as lip-to-lip contact that may or may not be prolonged.

"We hypothesized that some cultures would either not engage in romantic/sexual kissing, or find it to be a strange display of intimacy, but we were surprised to find that it was a majority of cultures that fell into this category," said Garcia, assistant professor of gender studies in the IU Bloomington College of Arts and Sciences. "This is a real reminder of how Western ethnocentrism can bias the way we think about human behavior."

Romantic kissing was most prevalent in the Middle East, where all 10 of the cultures studied engaged in it. In North America, 55 percent of cultures engaged in romantic kissing, along with 70 percent in Europe and 73 percent in Asia.

But there was no evidence of romantic kissing in Central America, and no ethnographer working with Sub-Saharan African, New Guinean or Amazonian foragers or horticulturalists reported any evidence of romantic kissing in the populations they studied, according to the research. The research conducted by Garcia and colleagues also found a relationship between social complexity and kissing: The more socially complex and stratified a society is, the higher the frequency of romantic kissing.

 It is not clear where romantic/sexual kissing evolved from, Garcia said. Some animals engage in similar behaviors; chimpanzees, for example, are known to engage in open-mouth kissing. When it comes to humans kissing, Garcia pointed out that it does serve as a way to learn more about a partner, "whether one feels there is any 'chemistry,' or possibly to assess health via taste and smell, and in some ways to assess compatibility with each other.""There is likely a biological underpinning to kissing, as it can often involve exchange of pheromones and saliva, and also pathogens -- which might be particularly dangerous in societies without oral hygiene, where kissing may lead to spread of respiratory or other illness," he said.

Romeo and Juliet in a painting by Sir Frank Dicksee. Credit: Wikipedia