Skip to content

Category: healthy living

Published on

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.

Published on

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.

Published on

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

Published on

For many years it was thought that yo-yo dieting resulted in higher cancer risk. So the findings of this study are a relief. Researchers looked at weight cycling (yo-yo dieting) and incidence for all cancer and 15 individual cancers among more than 132,000 participants during 17 years of study and found NO association with overall risk of cancer or any individual cancer. So feel free to diet and lose weight for the health benefits. From Science Daily:

Yo-yo dieting not associated with increased cancer risk

The first comprehensive study of its kind finds weight cycling, repeated cycles of intentional weight loss followed by regain, was not associated with overall risk of cancer in men or women. The study by American Cancer Society investigators is the largest to date to investigate weight cycling with cancer risk....Weight cycling was also not associated with any individual cancer investigated. The authors of the study say people trying to lose weight should be encouraged to do so even though they may regain it.

With almost half of American adults reporting they are trying to lose weight, and with most weight loss not maintained, weight cycling is very common. Previous studies in animals and humans had suggested that weight cycling may affect biological processes that could lead to cancer, such as increased T-cell accumulation, enhanced inflammatory responses in adipose tissue, and lowered natural killer cell cytotoxicity. However, many of these findings have not been replicated, and at least two previous studies showed no associations between weight cycling and cancer.

For the latest study, researchers led by Victoria Stevens, PhD, American Cancer Society Strategic Director, Laboratory Services, examined weight cycling and cancer among more than 132,000 men and women enrolled in the Cancer Prevention Study II Nutrition Cohort. Begun in 1992/1993, the Nutrition Cohort gathered detailed dietary information from men and women ages 50 to 74 participating in the Society's larger Cancer Prevention Study II, to explore nutrition's effect on and cancer incidence and mortality. Investigators looked at weight cycling and incidence for all cancer and 15 individual cancers. More than 25,000 participants developed cancer during 17 years of study.

Published on

Research found that more time spent standing rather than sitting is associated with improved blood sugar, fats in the blood and cholesterol levels, and replacing time spent sitting with time walking is associated with a smaller waistline and body mass index (BMI). The researchers' motto: Stand Up, Sit Less, Move More.

Activity adds up over the course of a day as Dr.Lopez-Jimenez of the Mayo Clinic points out: "A person walking while at work for two hours, standing for another four hours, and performing some daily chores at home for another hour will burn more calories than jogging or running for 60 minutes. From Medical Xpress:

Get up for your heart health and move for your waistline

More time spent standing rather than sitting could improve your blood sugar, fats in the blood and cholesterol levels, according to a new study published today (Friday) in the European Heart Journal. The study also shows that replacing time spent sitting with time walking could have additional benefits for your waistline and body mass index (BMI).

Researchers in Australia gave activity monitors to 782 men and women, aged 36-80 years, who were taking part in the Australian Diabetes, Obesity and Lifestyle Study. The monitors were capable of determining, very accurately, how long each participant spent sleeping, sitting or lying down, standing and stepping (which includes walking and running)....participants each wore an activity monitor on their thigh for 24 hours a day over a seven-day period. .

An extra two hours per day spent standing rather than sitting was associated with approximately 2% lower average fasting blood sugar levels and 11% lower average triglycerides (fats in the blood). Extra standing time was also associated with 0.06 mmol/L higher average levels of the "good" type of cholesterol, HDL, and a 6% lower average total/HDL cholesterol ratio, which indicates an improvement in the total amount of HDL cholesterol in relation to "bad" LDL cholesterol.

Replacing two hours a day of sitting time with stepping was associated with an approximately 11% lower average BMI and a 7.5cm smaller average waist circumference. In addition, average blood sugar levels fell by approximately 11% and average triglycerides by 14% for every two hours spent walking rather than sitting, while HDL cholesterol was 0.10 mmol/L higher. There was no significant effect on BMI or waistline of replacing sitting time with standing.

"However, it is important to say that not all sitting is bad; but if people can incorporate alternatives to sitting wherever possible, it may benefit their heart and metabolic health. Our message is to 'Stand Up, Sit Less, Move More'."She said the study had also produced evidence of how common standing is during the waking day. "Standing takes up nearly a third of waking hours, and among this group of participants who could choose when they sat, stood or walked, the standing had health benefits.

Published on

One study points out the difficulty of weight loss in overweight adults, because so few actually are able to get down to a normal weight or even lose a mere 5% of body weight (for example. 10 pounds for a 200 pound person or 15 pounds for a 300 pound person). The annual chance of an obese person attaining normal body weight is only 1 in 210 for men and 1 in 124 for women,and the annual chance of obese patients achieving five per cent weight loss was 1 in 12 for men and 1 in 10 for women.  The second study highlights how well weight loss treats "fatty liver" (which is a problem in middle-aged overweight people). Fatty liver or nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), which affects 2 to 5 percent of Americans, can be severe and can lead to cirrhosis, in which the liver is permanently damaged and scarred and no longer able to work properly.

After reading scientific studies nonstop for the last few years, it seems that the best, easiest way to lose weight is to have lifestyle changes rather than focusing just on a "weight-loss diet": increase activity levels (yes, walking counts) and switch to a more plant based diet or Mediterranean diet (lots of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, legumes, seeds, nuts, olive oil, some fish each week) and decrease the amount of typical Western style diet (highly processed foods. lots of meat and coldcuts, lots of fat, fast foods, soda). Try to only eat within 12 hours each day (for example, 8am to 8pm) and don't eat the other 12 hours. And of course eat fewer calories (it should be easier  to do if you substitute fruits and vegetables for high calorie processed foods such as ice cream, french fries, and sweets). And yes, of course it's really hard to lose weight, but the health benefits of weight loss are enormous. From Medical Xpress:

Low chance of recovering normal body weight highlights need for obesity prevention

The chance of an obese person attaining normal body weight is 1 in 210 for men and 1 in 124 for women, increasing to 1 in 1,290 for men and 1 in 677 for women with severe obesity, according to a study of UK health records led by King's College London. The findings, published in the American Journal of Public Health, suggest that current weight management programmes focused on dieting and exercise are not effective in tackling obesity at population level.The research, funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), tracked the weight of 278,982 participants (129,194 men and 149,788) women using electronic health records from 2004 to 2014.

The annual chance of obese patients achieving five per cent weight loss was 1 in 12 for men and 1 in 10 for women. For those people who achieved five per cent weight loss, 53 per cent regained this weight within two years and 78 percent had regained the weight within five years.

Overall, only 1,283 men and 2,245 women with a BMI of 30-35 reached their normal body weight, equivalent to an annual probability of 1 in 210 for men and 1 in 124 for women; for those with a BMI above 40, the odds increased to 1 in 1,290 for men and 1 in 677 for women with severe obesity. Weight cycling, with both increases and decreases in body weight, was also observed in more than a third of patients. The study concludes that current obesity treatments are failing to achieve sustained weight loss for the majority of obese patients.

Dr Alison Fildes, first author from the Division of Health and Social Care Research at King's College London (and now based at UCL), said: 'Losing 5 to 10 per cent of your body weight has been shown to have meaningful health benefits and is often recommended as a weight loss target..... More importantly, priority needs to be placed on preventing weight gain in the first place.'

From Medical Xpress:  Weight loss for a healthy liver

Weight loss through both lifestyle modification and bariatric surgery can significantly reduce features of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), a disease characterized by fat in the liver, according to two new studies published in Gastroenterology..."we most commonly see this condition in patients who are middle-aged and overweight or obese," said Giulio Marchesini, MD, from University of Bologna, Italy, and lead author of an editorial summarizing these two studies. "These two large prospective cohort studies strengthen the evidence that, no matter how you lose weight, weight loss improves liver health. Both bariatric surgery for morbidly obese patients or lifestyle modifications are viable options."

Lifestyle modifications: Eduardo Vilar-Gomez and colleagues from Cuba report in Gastroenterology that a weight reduction of 10 percent or more, induced by a comprehensive lifestyle program, is necessary to bring about NASH resolution and reverse scarring of the liver in overweight and obese patients. To a lesser degree, modest weight loss (7 to 10 percent) reduced disease severity in certain subsets of patients, including male patients and those without diabetes. Conversely, 93 percent of the patients with little or no weight reduction (less than 5 percent) experienced worsening of liver scarring....While promising, less than 50 percent of patients achieved the necessary weight loss goal of 7 to 10 percent, providing a stark reminder of the sustainability of weight loss interventions.

Bariatric surgery: For appropriate morbidly obese patients with NASH who have previously failed to lose weight through lifestyle modifications, bariatric surgery may be considered. In the second Gastroenterology study, Guillaume Lassailly and colleagues from France report that, one year after bariatric surgery, NASH had disappeared from 85 percent of patients and reduced the pathologic features of the disease after 1 year of follow-up. NASH disappeared from a higher proportion of patients with mild NASH before surgery (94 percent) than severe NASH (70 percent). More studies are needed to determine the long-term effects of bariatric surgeryin morbidly or severely obese patients with NASH.

Published on

Several recent studies have found that constant exposure to high levels of air pollution has negative effects on the brain. The last post described negative effects on the gray matter in brains (resulting in smaller brain volumes) of elderly women from air pollution, but this study found negative effects (lower grade point averages) in young children from high air pollution. From Environmental Health News:

Bad air means lower grade point averages in Texas

Fourth and fifth graders in El Paso, Texas, are more likely to have lower grade point averages if heavily exposed to contaminated air at home, according to a new study.It bolsters a growing body of evidence that air pollution can impair success in school.

They found that for all types of air pollution sources, more exposure corresponded with lower grade point averages. Only one type of pollution—point sources such as factories—was not significantly linked to lower grade point averages.University of Texas at El Paso researchers analyzed the grade point averages of 1,895 children and, using their home location, estimated their exposure to air toxics—such as benzene, arsenic, lead, mercury, hydrochloric acid, toluene, vinyl bromide, xylenes, and diesel particulate matter—using federal data.

“Effects appear to be insidious, since they are mild, unlikely to be perceived, and, hence, unlikely to be addressed in any way … seemingly trivial effects on children’s development may translate into substantial impacts throughout the life course in terms of physical and mental health and personal success,” the authors wrote.The researchers did control for some other things that can affect children’s grades such as poverty, mother’s age, education and ability to speak English, and the child’s race and sex.

Still, the study doesn’t prove that dirty air makes kids do worse in school. It does, however, suggest children’s developing bodies are more susceptible to air pollution, which can harm their respiratory systems and brain.Air pollution might hamper kids’ grades via two primary ways: Illnesses, mostly respiratory, that would make them miss school, and developmental problems resulting from long-term exposure, said Sara Grineski, an associate professor of sociology at The University of Texas at El Paso and co-author of the new study.

Others have found similar links between air pollution and academic performance. Three months ago Columbia University's Perera and colleagues reported that New York City children born to mothers in poverty and exposed to certain air toxics during pregnancy had lower IQs.  Perera, tracking the mothers and children since before birth, said the pollution exposure prior to birth is more strongly linked to learning and behavioral problems. 

In the current study it’s unclear if the children were exposed in their mothers’ womb—an exposure window that is critical to brain development, Perera said....Other studies support this—in February Calderón-Garcidueñas and colleagues reported Mexico City smog was linked to impaired short-term memory and IQ in children.

The city is more than 80 percent Hispanic....Previous studies have shown that El Paso’s minorities are disproportionately impacted by toxics, Grineski said. The city of 675,000 is one of the worst when it comes to particulate matter—a mix of substances emitted by combustion sources, including cars, trucks, industrial plants and wood burning—especially coarse particulates, PM10, those between 2.5 and 10 micrometers (from about 25 to 100 times thinner than a human hair, according to the EPA). El Paso’s 24-hour PM10 average is about 233 micrograms per cubic meter of air, according to the latest EPA data from 2013, which was eighth highest among more than 500 U.S. cities. El Paso, along with Laredo, has the highest carbon monoxide levels in Texas.

Published on Leave a comment on What’s In the “Natural” Flavors In Our Foods?

I've been reading and thinking about "natural flavors" ever since my earlier posts about food additives (April 20, 2015, August 19, 2014). What exactly are natural flavors and how are they different from artificial flavors?  And why are they even found in organic foods? The more I read, the more I want to avoid them , but it seems to be really, really hard to do so because they seem to be everywhere, even in what we think of as basic foods (e.g., butter). Bottom line: both are chemicals concocted in labs and manufactured in factories. Read labels and try to eat as many unprocessed foods as possible to avoid them.We know very little about many of them, and if they have health effects. Note that the term "natural flavors" may include many chemicals in the "flavor mixtures" (incidental additives) that don't have to be listed on the labels. Currently there are more than 2700 natural flavors being used in the USA. The following are excerpts from articles and a book published in 2015.

From CNN:   What are natural flavors, really?

Look at the food label of almost any packaged good you consume and odds are you'll spot the term "natural flavors." But have you ever wondered what this mysterious additive actually contains? The answer isn't as clear as you might think.Though natural flavors may sound better than their presumably chemical-laden alternative — artificial flavors — it turns out they are not actually all that different.

In the Environmental Working Group's Food Scores database of over 80,000 foods, "natural flavor" is the fourth most common ingredient listed on labels. The only ingredients that outrank it: salt, water and sugar. Yet, natural flavoring isn't nearly as simple as these three pantry staples."Natural and artificial flavors play an interesting role in food. They're essentially providing the taste and often they're added to make the food more appealing, or to potentially replace something that's lost through processing, storage or in some cases even from pasteurizing," says David Andrews, senior scientist at the Environmental Working Group. One place you'll often spot natural or artificial flavor is in orange juice; manufacturers will add faux flavor to juice after it's packaged in the plant, to ensure uniformity.

"The differentiation is really down to the origin of those molecules, whether synthetically processed in a lab or purified in a lab but from a natural source," Andrews says. Here's where it gets even muddier: Added flavoring, both natural and artificial, could contain anywhere from 50 to 100 ingredients. And all of the extra ingredients in flavors often aren't as innocent as you'd hope they would be."The mixture will often have some solvent and preservatives — and that makes up 80 to 90 percent of the volume [of the flavoring]. In the end product, it's a small amount, but it still has artificial ingredients," Andrews says.  ...continue reading "What’s In the “Natural” Flavors In Our Foods?"

Published on Leave a comment on Why Breastfeeding Is So Important

There has been much discussion recently about breastfeeding - why is it so important? Is it really better than formula? The answer is: YES, breastfeeding is the BEST food for the baby, and for a number of reasons. Not only is it nature's perfect food for the baby, but it also helps the development of the baby's microbiome or microbiota (the community of microbes that live within and on humans).

Specifically, breast milk transmits about 700 species of bacteria to the baby - bacteria that are important in developing the baby's microbiota, bacteria that are important for the baby's development and health in many ways (including the immune system). No formula does that. Not even close.

There is obviously much we don't know or understand yet, but finding 700 species in breast milk is a big deal. The most variety was in colostrum (the first milk), but even after 6 months (mature milk) they found hundreds of species of bacteria. What was also interesting was that the bacteria species in the breast milk varied whether the baby was born by vaginal birth, unplanned cesarean, or planned cesarean (this last had a somewhat different bacterial community which persisted through the 6 months of the study).

By the way, in the original study, the authors made a point of saying that the 700 bacteria species are NOT bacterial contaminants, but meant to be there! (for those who want to sterilize and pasteurize everything because they think that all bacteria are bad).

This study is from 2013, but well worth reading. From Science Daily: Breast milk contains more than 700 species of bacteria, Spanish researchers find

Researchers have traced the bacterial microbiota map in breast milk and identified the species of microbes taken from breast milk by infants. The study has revealed a larger microbial diversity than originally thought: more than 700 species. The breast milk received from the mother is one of the factors determining how the bacterial flora will develop in the newborn baby.

A group of Spanish scientists have now used a technique based on massive DNA sequencing to identify the set of bacteria contained within breast milk called microbiome.  Colostrum is the first secretion of the mammary glands after giving birth. In some of the samples taken of this liquid, more than 700 species of these microorganisms were found, which is more than originally expected by experts.

"This is one of the first studies to document such diversity using the pyrosequencing technique (a large scale DNA sequencing determination technique) on colostrum samples on the one hand, and breast milk on the other, the latter being collected after one and six months of breastfeeding," explain the coauthors, María Carmen Collado, researcher at the Institute of Agrochemistry and Food Technology (IATA-CSIC) and Alex Mira, researcher at the Higher Public Health Research Centre (CSISP-GVA).

The most common bacterial genera in the colostrum samples were Weissella, Leuconostoc, Staphylococcus, Streptococcus and Lactococcus. In the fluid developed between the first and sixth month of breastfeeding, bacteria typical of the oral cavity were observed, such as Veillonella, Leptotrichia and Prevotella....The study also reveals that the milk of overweight mothers or those who put on more weight than recommended during pregnancy contains a lesser diversity of species.

The type of labour also affects the microbiome within the breast milk: that of mothers who underwent a planned caesarean is different and not as rich in microorganisms as that of mothers who had a vaginal birth. However, when the caesarean is unplanned (intrapartum), milk composition is very similar to that of mothers who have a vaginal birth.

These results suggest that the hormonal state of the mother at the time of labour also plays a role: "The lack of signals of physiological stress, as well as hormonal signals specific to labour, could influence the microbial composition and diversity of breast milk," state the authors.

And yes, what you eat while breastfeeding has an effect on the breast milk. From Science Daily:  Carotenoid levels in breast milk vary by country, diet

A Purdue University-led analysis of breast milk concludes that levels of health-promoting compounds known as carotenoids differ by country, with the U.S. lagging behind China and Mexico, a reflection of regional dietary habits. Carotenoids are plant pigments that potentially play functional roles in human development and are key sources of vitamin A, an essential component of eye health and the immune system.

The carotenoid content of a woman's breast milk is determined by her consumption of fruits and vegetables such as squash, citrus, sweet potatoes and dark, leafy greens.

Published on

 The following article supported what I have been reading over the past few years: that medical tests and treatments also have downsides, that it is possible to "know too much", that more harm than benefits can occur from certain tests, procedures, and medicines, and lifestyle changes (eat a less processed more plant-based diet, move more, and don't smoke) can be better than some medicines or certain procedures. The doctor mentioned in this article (Dr. H. Gilbert Welch) recently published a book aimed at the general public which I just read and highly recommend: Less Medicine, More Health. Dr. Welch is an academic physician, a professor at Dartmouth Medical School, and a nationally recognized expert on the effects of medical testing. In 2012 he published the well regarded and more technical and in-depth book on this issue: Overdiagnosed: Making People Sick in the Pursuit of Health. From The Atlantic:

The Downside of Medical Screening

If you had a disease, and you could find out sooner rather than later, why wouldn’t you?Medicine has long focused on early detection of diseases as part of a move toward preventive care. But imperfect tests, false positives, and overdiagnosis mean that sometimes the tests do more harm than good, and in recent years, there have been more recommendations to reduce some kinds of screening, including pap smears, colonoscopies, mammograms, and even annual pelvic exams.

“This is something we all need to understand, the two sides of early detection. It does help people, but it’s almost guaranteed to harm others,” said H. Gilbert Welch, a professor of medicine, public policy, and business administration at Dartmouth College, and author of the book Should I Be Tested for Cancer? (He reveals his answer in the book’s subtitle: “Maybe not.”)

The more you look for disease, the more you find it. And in the case of cancer, it’s hard for doctors to know if what they find is dangerous and needs to be addressed, or if it’s just a small tumor that won’t grow and poses no threat. “We can’t be sure which is which, so we treat everybody,” Welch explained at the Aspen Ideas Festival’s Spotlight Health session. “That means we’re treating people who will never experience problems from their disease.”

But they may experience problems from the treatment.The panel gave the example of prostate cancer, which is very common in men—one in seven American men will be diagnosed with it in their lifetimes. “But it turns out a lot of these cancers are very indolent,” said Jessica Herzstein, a preventive-medicine consultant and member of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Around 30 to 40 percent of men who’ve been treated for prostate cancer likely had “slow-growing tumors that would never have become a threat to the man’s lifespan or health,” according to the Prostate Cancer Foundation.

In other words, “you’re going to die with them, not of them,” Herzstein said, “and the treatments are very very harmful.” Radiation therapy, for example, can cause incontinence and erectile dysfunction, and hormone therapy can cause osteoporosis and depression.

The possibility of a false positive is another downside. Not only could it lead to more invasive follow-up tests or treatments that aren’t needed, but it can also give patients unnecessary anxiety.“If we resolve the test by saying ‘The test was wrong, you’re fine!’, that’s one thing,” Welch said. “But most false alarms aren’t resolved that way. [It’s more like] ‘You don’t have cancer, but you have some abnormality that possibly puts you at a higher risk for cancer, but we’re not going to do anything about it. I think that’s where there can be [mental] harm.”

Ultimately, it comes down to a weighing of the benefits and the harms, and, in the absence of clear evidence, the preferences of the patient. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force helps identify which tests are beneficial by evaluating and grading them. It gives tests an A if there’s a high certainty of substantial benefit, a B if there’s moderate certainty of substantial benefit, a C if there’s moderate certainty of a small benefit, a D if there’s moderate or high certainty of no benefit, and an I if the evidence is just too insufficient to say.

The task force gave prostate cancer screening a D. HIV screening got an A. For breast cancer screening, an always-controversial topic, the results vary. Breast self-exams got a D. Mammograms got a B, but only for women between 50 and 74 years old. For women in their 40s, the grade is a C, meaning the task force recommends patients and physicians discuss and decide together.

Before getting a screening test, patients should think about what would happen if they get a positive result, and if they’d be ready for it, Welch advised. “If I were to go through this, and have this diagnosis, would I want to have this surgery?” Herzstein asked, posing a hypothetical. Would you want to undergo the biopsy, the chemo, whatever treatments come next? “Maybe you don’t even want to go there if there is no treatment for the disease,” she added. Welch gives an example. “With Alzheimer’s disease that’s a fundamental question: What are you going to do with a positive result?” he asked.