Skip to content

Author: Sima

Published on Leave a comment on Low Vitamin D Levels Associated With Cognitive Decline Among Older Adults

New research has found that low vitamin D levels among older adults is associated with accelerated cognitive decline and impaired performance (particularly in areas of memory and executive function). The next research in this area will have to look at whether vitamin D supplementation will change (slow down) the decline. Please note that it is widely accepted that an average daily intake of 1000 IU  of D3 daily is safe. The best source of  vitamin D is sunlight. From Science Daily:

Low vitamin D among elderly associated with decline in cognition, dementia

Vitamin D insufficiency among the elderly is highly correlated with accelerated cognitive decline and impaired performance, particularly in domains such as memory loss that are associated with Alzheimer's disease and dementia, researchers with the UC Davis Alzheimer's Disease Center and Rutgers University have found. The effect is "substantial," with individuals with low vitamin D declining at a rate three times faster than those with adequate vitamin D levels. 

The researchers said their findings amplify the importance of identifying vitamin D insufficiency among the elderly, particularly high-risk groups such as African-Americans and Hispanics, who are less able to absorb the nutrient from its most plentiful source: sunshine. Among those groups and other darker-skinned individuals, low vitamin D should be considered a risk factor for dementia, they said. "Independent of race or ethnicity, baseline cognitive abilities and a host of other risk factors, vitamin D insufficiency was associated with significantly faster declines in both episodic memory and executive function performance," said Joshua Miller...

The large, longitudinal study was conducted in nearly 400 racially and ethnically diverse men and women in Northern California participating in longitudinal research at the Alzheimer's Disease Center in Sacramento, Calif. Fifty percent of participants were Caucasian and 50 percent were African-American or Hispanic. The participants had a mean age of 76 and were either cognitively normal, had mild cognitive impairment, or dementia.The participants' serum vitamin D status was measured at the beginning of the study.... Overall, 26 percent were deficient and 35 percent were insufficient. Among Caucasians, 54 percent had low vitamin D, compared with 70 percent of African-Americans and Hispanics.

Over five years of follow-up, vitamin D deficient individuals experienced cognitive declines that were two-to-three times faster than those with adequate serum vitamin D levels. In other words it took only two years for the deficient individuals to decline as much as their counterparts with adequate Vitamin D declined during the five-year follow-up period.

Exposing the skin to sunlight is the major source of vitamin D. Racial and some ethnic minorities are at greater risk of low vitamin D because the higher concentration of melanin that makes their skin darker -- and protects against skin cancer in sunny climates -- also inhibits synthesis of vitamin D. Diet is the other major source of vitamin D. Dietary vitamin D is obtained particularly through dairy consumption. The intake of dairy products is especially low among minority groups, with only 6.5 percent of African-Americans and 11 percent of Mexican-Americans nationwide consuming the recommended three daily servings of dairy products, the study says.

Published on Leave a comment on Health Benefits From the Flavanols in Chocolate

Image result for dark chocolate So far all the studies I've seen in the past 2 years about cocoa and chocolate have found various beneficial health effects from regularly eating small amounts of cocoa and chocolate. Now 2 new studies found benefits from the flavanols found in cocoa beans and chocolate. The studies found that consuming cocoa flavanols lowers blood pressure, increases flow-mediated vasodilation,improves blood cholesterol profile, and that regular dietary intake may reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). However, note that chocolate and cocoa contain other compounds besides flavanols and these may also be exerting positive effects.

So now the question becomes, which chocolates have high levels of flavanols? Modern processing removes some of the flavanols - in fact, the more it undergoes processing, the more flavanols are lost. But it appears that dark chocolate and cocoa that has not undergone Dutch processing is best. According to a Medscape article on cocoa flavanols: "Traditional processing methods that yield "modern chocolate," especially alkalinization (dutching or Dutch processing, to mellow flavor), strips flavanols from cocoa. The bitterness from cacao mostly comes from flavanols. With the emerging recognition of the beneficial effects of flavanols there has been a shift in commercial production towards chocolate forms with high flavanol content." A recent study by Consumer Lab, which compared flavanol levels across many cocoa and chocolate products, also found that some chocolate brands were contaminated with cadmium (a toxic heavy metal), but that cocoa nibs had significantly lower levels. At any rate, the medical evidence does not support gorging on chocolate, but instead consuming chocolate or cocoa in moderation. From Science Daily:

Cocoa flavanols lower blood pressure and increase blood vessel function in healthy people

Two recently published studies in the journals Age and the British Journal of Nutrition (BJN) demonstrate that consuming cocoa flavanols improves cardiovascular function and lessens the burden on the heart that comes with the aging and stiffening of arteries. The studies also provide novel data to indicate that intake of cocoa flavanols reduces the risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD).

As we age, our blood vessels become less flexible and less able to expand to let blood flow and circulate normally, and the risk of hypertension also increases. Arterial stiffness and blood vessel dysfunction are linked with cardiovascular disease -- the number one cause of deaths worldwide....Cocoa flavanols are plant-derived bioactives from the cacao bean. Dietary intake of flavanols has been shown to have a beneficial effect on cardiovascular health but the compounds are often destroyed during normal food processing. Earlier studies have demonstrated that cocoa flavanol intake improves the elasticity of blood vessels and lowers blood pressure....These two studies in Age and BJN are the first to look at the different effects dietary cocoa flavanols can have on the blood vessels of healthy, low-risk individuals with no signs or symptoms of cardiovascular disease.

Cocoa flavanols increase blood vessel flexibility and lower blood pressure - In the study published in Age, two groups of 22 young (<35 years of age) and 20 older (50-80 years of age) healthy men consumed either a flavanol-containing drink, or a flavanol-free control drink, twice a day for two weeks. The researchers then measured the effect of flavanols on hallmarks of cardiovascular aging, such as arterial stiffness (as measured by pulse wave velocity), blood pressure and flow-mediated vasodilation (the extent to which blood vessels dilate in response to nitric oxide). They found that vasodilation was significantly improved in both age groups that consumed flavanols over the course of the study (by 33% in the younger age group and 32% in the older age group over the control intervention). In the older age group, a statistically and clinically significant decrease in systolic blood pressure of 4 mm Hg over control was also seen.

Improving cardiovascular health and lowering the risk of CVD - In the second study, published in BJN, the researchers extended their investigations to a larger group (100) of healthy middle-aged men and women (35-60 years) with low risk of CVD. The participants were randomly and blindly assigned into groups that consumed either a flavanol-containing drink or a flavanol-free control drink, twice a day for four weeks.

"We found that intake of flavanols significantly improves several of the hallmarks of cardiovascular health," says Professor Kelm. In particular, the researchers found that consuming flavanols for four weeks significantly increased flow-mediated vasodilation by 21%. Increased flow-mediated vasodilation is a sign of improved endothelial function and has been shown by some studies to be associated with decreased risk of developing CVD. In addition, taking flavanols decreased blood pressure (systolic by 4.4 mmHg, diastolic by 3.9 mmHg), and improved the blood cholesterol profile by decreasing total cholesterol (by 0.2 mmol/L), decreasing LDL cholesterol (by 0.17 mmol/L), and increasing HDL cholesterol (by 0.1 mmol/L).

The researchers also calculated the Framingham Risk Score -- a widely used model to estimate the 10-year cardiovascular risk of an individual -- and found that flavanol intake reduced the risk of CVD. "Our results indicate that dietary flavanol intake reduces the 10-year risk of being diagnosed with CVD by 22% and the 10-year risk of suffering a heart attack by 31%," says Professor Kelm.

The combined results of these studies demonstrate that flavanols are effective at mitigating age-related changes in blood vessels, and could thereby reduce the risk of CVD in healthy individuals. The application of 10-year Framingham Risk Scores should be interpreted with caution as the duration of the BJN study was weeks not years and the number of participants was around 100, not reaching the scale of the Framingham studies. That being said, Professor Kelm comments that "the reduction seen in risk scores suggests that flavanols may have primary preventive potential for CVD."

Published on Leave a comment on Natural Anti-Tumor Ingredients in Foods?

The following studies reinforce the advice that people should eat a variety of fruits and vegetables, as well as olive oil (part of the Mediterranean diet).

Studies find that consumption of fruits, vegetables, herbs, and extra virgin olive oil have various health benefits, and the following studies, even though not done with humans, suggest some reasons for their health benefits.

Luteolin appears to have anti-tumor effects, and so may reduce cancer risk. Dietary sources of luteolin include celery, broccoli, green pepper, parsley, thyme, dandelion, perilla, chamomile tea, carrots, olive oil, peppermint, rosemary, navel oranges, and oregano. Extra-virgin olive oil contains the ingredient oleocanthal, which appears to kill a variety of human cancer cells without harming healthy cells.

From Science Daily: Natural compound could reduce breast cancer risk in some women

The odds of women being diagnosed with breast cancer increase in postmenopausal women who have taken a combined estrogen and progestin hormone replacement therapy; these women also have an increased risk of developing progestin-accelerated breast tumors. Now, researchers have found that luteolin, a natural compound found in herbs such as thyme and parsley as well as vegetables such as celery and broccoli, could reduce the cancer risk for women who have taken hormone replacement therapy.

 "Nevertheless, research has proven that a higher incidence of breast cancer tumors can occur in women receiving therapies that involve a combination of the natural component estrogen and the synthetic progestin. Most older women normally have benign lesions in breast tissue," Hyder said. "These lesions typically don't form tumors until they receive the 'trigger'-- in this case, progestin--that attracts blood vessels to cells essentially feeding the lesions causing them to expand." His newest study shows that when the supplement luteolin is administered to human breast cancer cells in the lab, benefits can be observed including the reduction of those vessels "feeding" the cancer cells causing cancer cell death.

.... the natural compound exerts its anti-tumor effects in a variety of ways. Then, Hyder further tested laboratory mice with breast cancer and found that blood vessel formation and stem cell-like characteristics also were reduced in vivo, or inside the body.

From Medical Xpress: Ingredient in olive oil kills cancer cells with their own enzymes

A Rutgers nutritional scientist and two cancer biologists at New York City's Hunter College have found that an ingredient in extra-virgin olive oil kills a variety of human cancer cells without harming healthy cells. The ingredient is oleocanthal, a compound that ruptures a part of the cancerous cell, releasing enzymes that cause cell death.

Paul Breslin, professor of nutritional sciences in the School of Environmental and Biological Sciences, and David Foster and Onica LeGendre of Hunter College, report that oleocanthal kills cancerous cells in the laboratory by rupturing vesicles that store the cell's waste....Scientists knew that oleocanthal killed some cancer cells, but no one really understood how this occurred. Breslin believed that oleocanthal might be targeting a key protein in cancer cells that triggers a programmed cell death, known as apoptosis....  

After applying oleocanthal to the cancer cells, Foster and LeGendre discovered that the cancer cells were dying very quickly – within 30 minutes to an hour....LeGendre, a chemist, provided the answer: The cancer cells were being killed by their own enzymes. The oleocanthal was puncturing the vesicles inside the cancer cells that store the cell's waste – the cell's "dumpster," as Breslin called it, or "recycling center," as Foster refers to it. These vesicles, known as lysosomes are larger in cancer cells than in healthy cells, and they contain a lot of waste. But oleocanthal didn't harm healthy cells, the researchers found. It merely stopped their life cycles temporarily – "put them to sleep," Breslin said. After a day, the healthy cells resumed their cycles.  

Published on Leave a comment on Overdiagnosis of Thyroid Cancer?

The issue of overdiagnosis and overtreatment rears its head again - this time in a study looking at thyroid cancer detection and death rates. The death rate from thyroid cancer has stayed the same since 1935, as has the number of thyroid cancers presenting with symptoms of thyroid cancer. But...the number of new cases of silent thyroid cancer -- the kind where patients have no symptoms -- almost quadrupled in recent years, and these are the tiny cancers that probably won't cause a problem in the person's lifetime. The researchers then discuss how NOT to find these tiny silent thyroid cancers, so as to avoid overdiagnosis and the harms of overtreatment. From Science Daily:

Increased detection of low-risk tumors driving up thyroid cancer rates, study finds

Low-risk cancers that do not have any symptoms and presumably will not cause problems in the future are responsible for the rapid increase in the number of new cases of thyroid cancer diagnosed over the past decade, according to a Mayo Clinic study published in the journal Thyroid. According to the study authors, nearly one-third of these recent cases were diagnosed when clinicians used high-tech imaging even when no symptoms of thyroid disease were present.

"We are spotting more cancers, but they are cancers that are not likely to cause harm," says the study's lead author, Juan Brito Campana, M.B.B.S., an assistant professor of medicine at Mayo Clinic. "Their treatment, however, is likely to cause harm, as most thyroid cancers are treated by surgically removing all or part of the thyroid gland. This is a risky procedure that can damage a patient's vocal cords or leave them with lifelong calcium deficiencies." Dr. Brito says harm is not limited to physical suffering. "Treatment can cause financial hardship for patients and their families and for society as a whole, as millions of dollars are spent for unnecessary and problematic surgeries," he says....At the same time, the incidence of thyroid cancer is increasing more rapidly than that of any other cancer and is on track to become the third most common cancer in women.

In this study, Dr. Brito and his colleagues drew on data from the Rochester Epidemiology Project. They analyzed the records of 566 men and women who were diagnosed with thyroid cancer in Olmsted County, Minnesota, between 1935 and 2012. Specifically, they examined the number of new cases of thyroid cancer, the deaths due to the disease, and the method of diagnosis.

Researchers found that the number of new cases of thyroid cancer doubled in recent years -- from 7.1 per 100,000 people from 1990 to 1999 to 13.7 per 100,000 people from 2000 to 2012. Over the same period, the number of new patients with thyroid cancer presenting with symptoms of thyroid cancer remained the same. In contrast, the number of new cases of silent thyroid cancer -- the kind where patients have no symptoms -- almost quadrupled. The proportion of patients with thyroid cancer who die of the disease has not changed since 1935.

The study found that the most frequent reasons for identifying silent thyroid cancer were review of thyroid tissue removed for benign conditions (14 percent); incidental discovery during an imaging test (19 percent); and investigations of patients with symptoms or palpable nodules that were clearly not associated with thyroid cancer, but triggered the use of imaging tests of the neck (27 percent)."We are facing an epidemic of diagnosis in thyroid cancer," says Dr. Brito. 

Researchers say one approach to curtail the detection of these lesions would be to limit the use of certain imaging technologies. Another tactic would be to engage patients in deliberating their treatment options. In many cases, active surveillance may be preferred over surgery by patients with small, relatively benign cancers that could take decades to grow to any appreciable size or cause life-threatening problems. Dr. Brito thinks something as simple as not using the word "cancer" to refer to these small and silent thyroid lesions could reduce the number of unnecessary treatments for patients with a more favorable prognosis. Rather than calling these lesions thyroid cancer, he would recommend a less emotionally charged term, such as papillary lesions of indolent course.

Thyroid gland. Credit: Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research

Published on Leave a comment on How Many Healthy Years Do You Have Left?

The following article posted average life expectancies for both men and women in countries throughout the world. But what was interesting is that it also gave the average years that a person would be healthy and also unhealthy (which is typically the last years of life). And no matter which country one looks at and the average life expectancy of men and women, it turns out that on average people spend about one eighth of their life in a disabled or unhealthy state. Or between 10 to 20% of their life disabled or unhealthy.

So looking at the United States, it is expected that the average women will live 81 years, but about 13 of those years will be in poor health. Men in the USA will live on average 76 years, but of that about 11 years will be unhealthy. Which means, don't wait until retirement to travel and do all those things you want to do, because you may have health issues preventing you from doing those things - so get out there NOW and DO IT ALL. The "bucket list" should be started now. (Note: I only copied information for 5 countries, but the actual chart has 188 countries. Do go check it out.) From NPR News:

Check Out Life Spans Around The World — And Likely Years Of Ill Health

How Long Will You Live — And How Many Of Those Years Will Be Healthy?

Here are the life expectancies in 188 countries — and the number of unhealthy years a person faces. No matter where you live, the range for years of healthy life is 80 to 90 percent.

Life expectancy compared with global average:

COUNTRY       MALE    UNHEALTHY YEARS       FEMALE       UNHEALTHY YEARS

GLOBAL            68                  8                                     74                       10

CANADA           79                 10                                     83                       12

CHINA               73                   8                                     79                         9

MEXICO             72                  9                                      78                       11

RUSSIA               65                 7                                       76                       10

USA                    76                 11                                      81                       13


Credit: Christopher Groskopf and Alyson Hurt/NPR     Notes: — Life expectancies are estimated for individuals born in 2013.  

Source: Global, regional, and national disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) for 306 diseases and injuries and healthy life expectancy (HALE) for 188 countries, 1990–2013: quantifying the epidemiological transition

It's one of those good news/bad news stories. A study in the medical journal The Lancet found that people around the world — in countries rich, poor and in the middle — are living longer. But here's the rub. You can't count on living those extra years in good health.

In the first of what will be an annual look at health along with life span around the world called the Global Burden of Disease Study, researchers found that between 1990 and 2013, life expectancy rose by 6.2 years. The average life span at birth across the globe is now 71.5 years, though rates vary tremendously by region. People live the longest, according to the Lancet study, in Andorra, in southwestern Europe, or an average of 83.9 years. People die the youngest, an average of 48.3 years, in Lesotho, in Africa.

But regardless of socioeconomics, geography or total number of years lived, the study shows what appears to be a universal part of the human condition: people live an average of one-eighth of their lives in a disabled or unhealthy state.

"What's interesting is that wherever you go around the world, about seven-eighths of life expectancy is healthy," says Peter Byass, professor of global health at UmeaUniversity in Sweden. "I'm not sure we totally understand why.We probably can't do a lot about decreasing this part of life that's not healthy," he adds. "That pretty much appears to be a part of being human."

Healthy life — the measure researchers used, called HALE, or healthy life expectancy years — ranged from a high of 73.4 years in Japan to a low, again in Lesotho, of 42 years. Not much is known about when those years of ill health occur. "A lot of the unhealthy stuff is around end of life," says Byass.

Spending more money on health care doesn't seem to reduce the proportion of life spent in ill health. The study was based on regional data and showed that in high-income North America, men live an average of 76.64 years, but only 66.17 of those years are healthy; women live an average of 81.62 years, but experience good health in only 68.85 of those years. The United States, which spends more on health care than any other country, is part of that high-income region. "This is seen even in places where there's a high investment in health care," says Byass, who wrote a commentary accompanying the Lancet study.

Countries where people die the youngest have the highest rates of communicable diseases like AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis as well as high rates of maternal and childhood mortality and malnutrition. "If we want to have a healthier global population, more equal health, the world has got to invest in getting rid of those avoidable problems in poorer countries, mainly in Africa," says Byass.

Published on Leave a comment on Coffee Appears To Have Lots of Health Benefits

A nice summary article about the benefits and risks of coffee consumption. Summary of effects of drinking coffee: 1) May potentially increase blood pressure, but also may lower the risk for coronary disease, and protect against heart disease. 2) May cut stroke risk by as much as 25%, 3) Linked to  improved glucose metabolism, reduced risk for type 2 diabetes, and promotion of weight loss in overweight patients. 4) May reduce the risk for several cancers. 5) Appears to slow the progression of dementia and Parkinson's disease. 6) A significantly decreased risk of developing depression. 7) Slows progression in alcoholic cirrhosis, hepatitis C, and NAFLD (non-alcoholic fatty liver disease). 8) May be beneficial in dry-eye syndrome, gout, and in preventing MRSA infection. 9) May increase blood pressure, anxiety, insomnia, tremor, withdrawal symptoms, and potential increased risk of glaucoma. From Medscape:

How Healthy Is Coffee? The Latest Evidence

Earlier this year, the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC) released a report[1] stating that up to five cups of coffee per day, or up to 400 mg of caffeine, is not associated with long-term health risks. Not only that, they highlighted observational evidence that coffee consumption is associated with reduced risk for several diseases, including type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease (CVD), and neurodegenerative disorders. The body of data suggesting that moderate coffee—and, in all likelihood, tea—consumption is not only safe but beneficial in a variety of mental and medical conditions is growing fast.

A 2012 study of over 400,000 people, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, reported that coffee consumption is associated with a 10% reduction in all-cause mortality at 13-year follow-up.... It's important to note that much of the evidence on the potential health effects of coffee, caffeine, and other foods and nutrients is associational and doesn't prove causality—observational investigations come with limitations and often rely on error-prone methods such as patient questionnaires. However, the sheer volume of existing observational data linking coffee and/or caffeine with various health benefits—as well as, in many cases, evidence of a dose response—suggests that the most widely consumed stimulant in the world has positive influences on our health. 

Cardiovascular Disease:...However, when caffeine is ingested via coffee, enduring blood pressure elevations are small and cardiovascular risks may be balanced by protective properties. Coffee beans contain antioxidant compounds that reduce oxidation of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, and coffee consumption has been associated with reduced concentrations of inflammatory markers. Moderate coffee intake is associated with a lower risk for coronary heart disease as far out as 10 years, and data suggest that an average of two cups per day protects against heart failure.

Cerebrovascular Disease and Stroke: The vascular benefits of coffee are not lost on the brain. According to a 2011 meta-analysis, consuming between one and six cups per day reportedly cut stroke risk by 17%. A 22%-25% risk reduction was seen in a large sample of Swedish women followed for an average of 10 years.

Diabetes:...Numerous studies have linked regular coffee drinking with improved glucose metabolism, insulin secretion, and a significantly reduced risk for diabetes. Most recently, findings from a long-term study published this year suggest that coffee drinkers are roughly half as likely to develop type 2 diabetes as are nonconsumers, even after accounting for smoking, high blood pressure, and family history of diabetes.

Cancer: ...Evidence suggests that moderate to heavy coffee consumption can reduce the risk for numerous cancers, including endometrial (> 4 cups/day), prostate (6 cups/day), head and neck (4 cups/day), basal cell carcinoma (> 3 cups/day), melanoma,and breast cancer (> 5 cups/day). The benefits are thought to be at least partially due to coffee's antioxidant and antimutagenic properties.

Neurodegeneration: Beyond the short-term mental boost it provides, coffee also appears to benefit longer-term cognitive well-being. A 2012 study reported that patients with mild cognitive impairment and plasma caffeine levels of > 1200 ng/mL—courtesy of approximately three to five cups of coffee per day—avoided progression to dementia over the following 2-4 years. On a related note, a study from last year reported that caffeine consumption appears to enhance memory consolidation....Caffeinated coffee has long been thought to be neuroprotective in Parkinson disease (PD)....—as well as in multiple sclerosis. 

Depression: A 2011 study suggests that a boost in coffee consumption might also benefit our mental health: Women who drank two to three cups of coffee per day had a 15% decreased risk for depression compared with those who drank less than one cup per week. A 20% decreased risk was seen in those who drank four cups or more per day. Newer work also suggests that regular coffee drinking may be protective against depression.

Liver Disease: The liver might help break down coffee, but coffee might protect the liver (in some cases). Evidence suggests that coffee consumption slows disease progression in patients with alcoholic cirrhosis and hepatitis C, and reduces the risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma. A 2012 study reported that coffee intake is associated with a lower risk for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), while work published in 2014 found that coffee protects against liver fibrosis in those with already established NAFLD.

And That's Not All…: An assortment of other research suggests that coffee intake might also relieve dry-eye syndrome by increasing tear production, reduce the risk for gout, and potentially fight infection. Coffee and hot tea consumption were found to be protective against one of the medical community's most concerning bugs, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). While it remains unclear whether the beverages have systemic antimicrobial activity, study participants who reported any consumption of either were approximately half as likely to have MRSA in their nasal passages.

And Finally, the Risks: As is often the case, with benefits come risks, and coffee consumption certainly has negative medical and psychiatric effects to consider. Besides the aforementioned potential increase in blood pressure, coffee can incite or worsen anxiety, insomnia, and tremor and potentially elevate glaucoma risk. Also, given the potential severity of symptoms, caffeine withdrawal syndrome is included as a diagnosis in the DSM-5.

Published on Leave a comment on Nearly 70% of Prostate Cancers Can Just Be Watched?

The issue of overdiagnosis and overtreatment has recently been in the news, especially when discussing breast cancer, prostate cancer, and thyroid cancer. Meaning too much unnecessary treatment with harms, when the best approach would have been to do nothing, as studies have suggested or actually shown. Now here is an article in Medscape suggesting that rather than be quick to operate or treat, the best approach for nearly 70% of prostate cancers may be just "watching".

The U.S. Preventive Task Force, which analyzes the value of screening tests, in May 2012 recommended AGAINST routine prostate-specific antigen (PSA)-based screening for prostate cancer for all age groups. According to them, studies do not show that benefits of routine screening of asymptomatic prostate cancer and the resulting treatment outweigh the harms of treatment (e.g., surgical complications including death from surgery, erectile dysfunction, urinary incontinence, bowel dysfunction, and bladder dysfunction), or that prostate cancer treatment even reduces mortality (deaths).

They point out that: "There is convincing evidence that PSA-based screening programs result in the detection of many cases of asymptomatic prostate cancer. There is also convincing evidence that a substantial percentage of men who have asymptomatic cancer detected by PSA screening have a tumor that either will not progress or will progress so slowly that it would have remained asymptomatic for the man's lifetime. The terms "overdiagnosis" or "pseudo-disease" are used to describe both situations." (NOTE: others have argued against this recommendation)

When reading the full Medscape article, it was pointed out that in the study being discussed, one person who was offered active surveillance but declined and was treated with an immediate radical prostatectomy, still died of metastatic prostate cancer. This was an example of a case where when the disease is truly aggressive, it may have spread "like a bird" throughout the body (in Dr. H. Gilbert Welch's terms in his books Overdiagnosed and Less Medicine, More Health) from the very beginning, and may be unstoppable no matter what is done.

I have also noticed reading other prostate cancer studies that a certain percentage of prostate cancers regress from the point of diagnosis (the PSA test and biopsy). In other words, researchers are finding that cancer can have different paths: regresses, stays the same, grows slowly (and can be treated when symptoms appear), or grows very quickly and is so aggressive and unstoppable that it goes through the body "like a bird". And we don't know which will be the aggressive ones when we first find them, thus the controversies over what to do: screen or not?, and treat or not?  ...continue reading "Nearly 70% of Prostate Cancers Can Just Be Watched?"

6

Published on 6 Comments on Update on Sinusitis Treatment

[UPDATE:  I added an Oct. 2018 update to the post The One Probiotic That Treats Sinusitis, which was originally posted in January 2015.]  Updates incorporate the latest information about treatments and products with Lactobacillus sakei  (kimchi brands, the probiotic Lacto Sinus , the sausage starter culture Bactoferm F-RM-52, etc.). According to research by Abreu et al (2012), Lactobacillus sakei is a bacteria or probiotic (beneficial bacteria) that chronic sinusitis sufferers lack and which treats chronic sinusitis. Chronic sinusitis sufferers also don't have the bacteria diversity in the sinuses that healthy people have.

Many thanks to those who have written to me about their experiences with L. sakei products and sinusitis treatment.  Please keep the updates, results, and progress reports coming. If you have had success with other kimchi brands, please let me know so that I can add it to the list. And I also want to hear if other probiotics work or don't work, or if you have found other sources of Lactobacillus sakei or new ways to use L. sakei. It all adds to the knowledge base which I will continue to update.  You can Comment after posts, the Sinus Treatment Summary page, on the CONTACT page, or write me privately (see CONTACT page).

It is now over 2 1/2 years since my family (4 people) successfully treated ourselves with Lactobacillu sakei for chronic sinusitis and acute sinusitis. We feel great! With each passing year we can tell that our sinus microbial community is bettter, and levels of inflammation are down. As a consequence, we are getting fewer colds or viruses than ever. And best of all - no antibiotics taken in over 2 1/2 years! Yes, Lactobacillus sakei absolutely works as a treatment for sinusitis.

[Read the updated post: The One Probiotic That Treats Sinusitis - with Oct. 2018 update]

Published on Leave a comment on Fungi and Bacteria in Household Dust

Another article from results of the crowdsourced study in which household dust samples were sent to researchers at the University of Colorado from approximately 1200 homes across the United States. Some findings after the dust was analyzed: differences were found in the dust of households that were occupied by more males than females and vice versa, indoor fungi mainly comes from the outside and varies with the geographical location of the house, bacteria is determined by the house's inhabitants (people, pets, and insects), clothes do not prevent the spread of bacteria from our bodies, and dogs and cats had a dramatic influence on bacteria in the home. In other words: where you live determines the fungi in the house and who you live with determines the bacteria in the house. From Discovery News:

Household Dust Packed With Thousands of Microbes

Household dust is full of living organisms that are determined, in large part, by where the home is located and who is living in it, finds a new study that includes some surprising revelations. Homes with a greater ratio of male occupants, for example, were found to contain large amounts of skin and fecal-associated bacteria, while women-dominated households contained an abundance of vaginally shed bacteria that somehow wound up in dust.

He and his colleagues used DNA sequencing and high tech imaging to analyze dust samples from approximately 1,200 homes across the United States. They used volunteers to help collect the material. They discovered that indoor fungi mostly originates outside of the home, such that the geographical location of any home strongly predicts the types of fungi existing within dust.“If you want to change the types of fungi you are exposed to in your home, then it is best to move to a different home, preferably one far away,” Fierer and his team said.

Bacteria, on the other hand, were largely predicted by the home’s possible inhabitants, including humans, pets and even insects. Fierer said, “Our bodies are clearly the source for many bacteria that end up in our homes.” The researchers suspect that body size, relative abundance, and hygiene practices are why men tend to shed more Corynebacterium and Dermabacter (the skin-associated species), as well as the poop-associated Roseburia.

The vaginal-linked bacteria Lactobacillus, discovered in homes with a larger ratio of women, provides evidence that clothes do not fully contain the spread of microorganisms produced by our bodies. Members of this genus are actually thought to protect against allergies and asthma, based on earlier research, but further studies are needed to confirm how this, and other bacteria found in dust, impact human health.

Dogs and cats had such a dramatic effect on dust bacterial communities that the researchers could predict, with around 92 percent accuracy, whether or not such animals were in the home, just based on bacteria alone....So far, the news is good for dog lovers, as he pointed out that “previous work conducted by other groups has shown that living with a dog at a young age can actually reduce allergies.”

Published on

This is a nice study showing cause and effect:  6 hours of sleep or less at night lowers the body's resistance so that the person is more likely to catch a cold virus. From Science Daily:

Short sleepers are four times more likely to catch a cold

A new study led by a UC San Francisco sleep researcher supports what parents have been saying for centuries: to avoid getting sick, be sure to get enough sleep. The team, which included researchers at Carnegie Mellon University and University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, found that people who sleep six hours a night or less are four times more likely to catch a cold when exposed to the virus, compared to those who spend more than seven hours a night in slumber land.

Scientists have long known that sleep is important for our health, with poor sleep linked to chronic illnesses, disease susceptibility and even premature death. Prather's previous studies have shown that people who sleep fewer hours are less protected against illness after receiving a vaccine. Other studies have confirmed that sleep is among the factors that regulate T-cell levels.

Researchers recruited 164 volunteers from the Pittsburgh, PA, area between 2007 and 2011. The recruits underwent two months of health screenings, interviews and questionnaires to establish baselines for factors such as stress, temperament, and alcohol and cigarette use. The researchers also measured participants' normal sleep habits a week prior to administering the cold virus, using a watch-like sensor that measured the quality of sleep throughout the night.

The researchers then sequestered volunteers in a hotel, administered the cold virus via nasal drops and monitored them for a week, collecting daily mucus samples to see if the virus had taken hold. They found that subjects who had slept less than six hours a night the week before were 4.2 times more likely to catch the cold compared to those who got more than seven hours of sleep, and those who slept less than five hours were 4.5 times more likely.