Skip to content

Category: healthy living

Published on

Excellent way to lower breast cancer risk. From Science Daily:

Postmenopausal breast cancer risk decreases rapidly after starting regular physical activity

Postmenopausal women who in the past four years had undertaken regular physical activity equivalent to at least four hours of walking per week had a lower risk for invasive breast cancer compared with women who exercised less during those four years, according to new data.

"Twelve MET-h [metabolic equivalent task-hours] per week corresponds to walking four hours per week or cycling or engaging in other sports two hours per week and it is consistent with the World Cancer Research Fund recommendations of walking at least 30 minutes daily," said Agnès Fournier, PhD, a researcher in the Centre for Research in Epidemiology and Population Health at the Institut Gustave Roussy in Villejuif, France. "So, our study shows that it is not necessary to engage in vigorous or very frequent activities; even walking 30 minutes per day is beneficial."

Postmenopausal women who in the previous four years had undertaken 12 or more MET-h of physical activity each week had a 10 percent decreased risk of invasive breast cancer compared with women who were less active. Women who undertook this level of physical activity between five and nine years earlier but were less active in the four years prior to the final data collection did not have a decreased risk for invasive breast cancer

"We found that recreational physical activity, even of modest intensity, seemed to have a rapid impact on breast cancer risk. However, the decreased breast cancer risk we found associated with physical activity was attenuated when activity stopped. As a result, postmenopausal women who exercise should be encouraged to continue and those who do not exercise should consider starting because their risk of breast cancer may decrease rapidly."

Fournier and colleagues analyzed data obtained from biennial questionnaires completed by 59,308 postmenopausal women who were enrolled in E3N, the French component of the European Prospective Investigation Into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study. The mean duration of follow-up was 8.5 years, during which time, 2,155 of the women were diagnosed with a first primary invasive breast cancer.

Published on

I've posted on whether probiotics can be used to treat mental disorders (see Probiotics and Psychobiotics- Part 1 and 2). But this article poses the interesting reverse question of whether the microbes are engaging in "microbial manipulations"? From NY Times:

Our Microbiome May Be Looking Out for Itself

Your body is home to about 100 trillion bacteria and other microbes, collectively known as your microbiome. We’ve come to appreciate how beneficial our microbes are — breaking down our food, fighting off infections and nurturing our immune system. 

But in the journal Bioessays, a team of scientists has raised a creepier possibility. Perhaps our menagerie of germs is also influencing our behavior in order to advance its own evolutionary success — giving us cravings for certain foods, for example. Maybe the microbiome is our puppet master.

The idea that a simple organism could control a complex animal may sound like science fiction. In fact, there are many well-documented examples of parasites controlling their hosts. How parasites control their hosts remains mysterious. But it looks as if they release molecules that directly or indirectly can influence their brains.

Our microbiome has the biochemical potential to do the same thing. In our guts, bacteria make some of the same chemicals that our neurons use to communicate with one another, such as dopamine and serotonin. And the microbes can deliver these neurological molecules to the dense web of nerve endings that line the gastrointestinal tract.

A number of recent studies have shown that gut bacteria can use these signals to alter the biochemistry of the brain.Compared with ordinary mice, those raised free of germs behave differently in a number of ways. They are more anxious, for example, and have impaired memory.Adding certain species of bacteria to a normal mouse’s microbiome can reveal other ways in which they can influence behavior. Some bacteria lower stress levels in the mouse. When scientists sever the nerve relaying signals from the gut to the brain, this stress-reducing effect disappears.

Some experiments suggest that bacteria also can influence the way their hosts eat. Germ-free mice develop more receptors for sweet flavors in their intestines, for example. They also prefer to drink sweeter drinks than normal mice do. Scientists have also found that bacteria can alter levels of hormones that govern appetite in mice.

Different species of microbes thrive on different kinds of food. If they can prompt us to eat more of the food they depend on, they can multiply. Microbial manipulations might fill in some of the puzzling holes in our understandings about food cravings, Dr. Maley said. Scientists have tried to explain food cravings as the body’s way to build up a supply of nutrients after deprivation, or as addictions, much like those for drugs like tobacco and cocaine. But both explanations fall short.

Take chocolate: Many people crave it fiercely, but it isn’t an essential nutrient. And chocolate doesn’t drive people to increase their dose to get the same high. Perhaps, he suggests, the certain kinds of bacteria that thrive on chocolate are coaxing us to feed them.

John F. Cryan, a neuroscientist at University College Cork in Ireland who was not involved in the new study, suggested that microbes might also manipulate us in ways that benefited both them and us. “It’s probably not a simple parasitic scenario,” he said.

Research by Dr. Cryan and others suggests that a healthy microbiome helps mammals develop socially. Germ-free mice, for example, tend to avoid contact with other mice. That social bonding is good for the mammals. But it may also be good for the bacteria. “When mammals are in social groups, they’re more likely to pass on microbes from one to the other,” Dr. Cryan said.

If microbes do in fact manipulate us, Dr. Knight said, we might be able to manipulate them for our own benefit — for example, by eating yogurt laced with bacteria that would make use crave healthy foods. The most important thing to do now, Dr. Knight and other scientists said, was to run experiments to see if microbes really are manipulating us.

Published on

Sounds like exercising in moderation has health benefits for all people, while "to excess" can be problematic. From Science Daily:

Contrary to popular belief, more exercise is not always better

There is strong epidemiological evidence of the importance of regular physical activity, such as brisk walking and jogging, in the management and rehabilitation of cardiovascular disease and in lowering the risk of death from other diseases such as hypertension, stroke, and type 2 diabetes. The Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans recommends about 150 minutes per week of moderate-intensity exercise or about 75 minutes of vigorous-intensity exercise. But there is clear evidence of an increase in cardiovascular deaths in heart attack survivors who exercise to excess.

Paul T. Williams, PhD, of the Life Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, and Paul D. Thompson, MD, of the Department of Cardiology, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, CT, studied the relationship between exercise and cardiovascular disease-related deaths in about 2,400 physically active heart attack survivors. This study confirmed previous reports indicating that the cardiovascular benefits for walking and running were equivalent, as long as the energy expenditures were the same (although when walking, as compared to running, it will take about twice as long to burn the same number of calories).

Remarkable dose-dependent reductions in deaths from cardiovascular events of up to 65% were seen among patients who were running less than 30 miles or walking less than 46 miles per week. Beyond this point however much of the benefit of exercise was lost, in what is described as a reverse J-curve pattern.

In the same issue, investigators in Spain report on a meta-analysis of ten cohort studies aimed at providing an accurate overview of mortality in elite athletes. The studies included over 42,000 top athletes (707 women) who had participated in a range of sports including football, baseball, track and field, and cycling, including Olympic level athletes and participants in the Tour de France.

"What we found on the evidence available was that elite athletes (mostly men) live longer than the general population, which suggests that the beneficial health effects of exercise, particularly in decreasing cardiovascular disease and cancer risk, are not necessarily confined to moderate doses," comments senior investigator Alejandro Lucia, MD, PhD, of the European University Madrid, Spain. 

"Extrapolation of the data from the current Williams and Thompson study to the general population would suggest that approximately one out of twenty people is overdoing exercise," comments James H. O'Keefe, MD, from the Mid America Heart Institute in Kansas City, MO... Along with co-authors Carl "Chip" Lavie, MD, and Barry Franklin, PhD, he explains that "we have suggested the term 'cardiac overuse injury' for this increasingly common consequence of the 'more exercise is better' strategy." 

O'Keefe, Franklin and Lavie point out that a weekly cumulative dose of vigorous exercise of not more than about five hours has been identified in several studies to be the safe upper range for long-term cardiovascular health and life expectancy, and that it may also be beneficial to take one or two days a week off from vigorous exercise, and to refrain from high-intensity exercise on an everyday basis. They propose that individuals from either end of the exercise spectrum (sedentary people and over-exercisers) would probably reap long-term health benefits by changing their physical activity levels to be in the moderate range.

"For patients with heart disease, almost all should be exercising, and generally most should be exercising 30-40 minutes most days, but from a health stand-point, there is no reason to exercise much longer than that and especially not more than 60 minutes on most days," says Lavie, who is a cardiologist at the John Ochsner Heart and Vascular Institute, New Orleans, LA. 

Published on

A favorite food of financially or time strapped people and students may be problematic. Just looking at the ingredient list and nutritional information should have been a clue. From Science Daily:

Can instant noodles lead to heart disease, diabetes and stroke?

Significant consumption of instant noodles -- ramen included -- may increase a person’s risk for cardiometabolic syndrome, especially in women, research shows. The findings could shed new light on the risks of a worldwide dietary habit. "This research is significant since many people are consuming instant noodles without knowing possible health risks," one researcher said. 

Because ramen consumption is relatively high among Asian populations, the research focused primarily on South Korea, which has the highest per-capita number of instant noodle consumers in the world. In recent years, South Koreans have experienced a rapid increase in health problems, specifically heart disease, and a growing number of overweight adults. Such changes could lead to increased mortality due to cardiovascular disease, as well as increased health care costs.

Dr. Shin, who led the study on behalf of the Baylor Heart and Vascular Hospital (BHVH), found that eating instant noodles two or more times a week was associated with cardiometabolic syndrome, which raises a person's likelihood of developing heart disease and other conditions, such as diabetes and stroke.

Dr. Shin also found that those results were more prevalent in women. He said that can likely be attributed to biological differences (such as sex hormones and metabolism) between the sexes, as well as obesity and metabolic syndrome components. In addition, men and women's varied eating habits and differences in the accuracy of food reporting may play a role in the gender gap.

Another potential factor in the gender difference is a chemical called bisphenol A (BPA), which is used for packaging the noodles in Styrofoam containers. Studies have shown that BPA interferes with the way hormones send messages through the body, specifically estrogen.

Published on

This study found a link with coffee consumption and lower rates of tinnitus, so perhaps coffee drinking would help those with tinnitus? Stay tuned. From Science Daily:

Caffeine intake associated with lower incidence of tinnitus

Higher caffeine intake is associated with lower rates of tinnitus, often described as a ringing or buzzing sound in the ear when there is no outside source of the sounds, in younger and middle-aged women. "We observed a significant inverse association between caffeine intake and the incidence of tinnitus among (participating) women," said the lead author.

Specifically, researchers report that when compared with women with caffeine intake less than 150 milligrams/day (approximately one and a half 8-ounce cups of coffee), the incidence of reported tinnitus was 15 percent lower among those women who consumed 450 to 599 mg/day of caffeine. The majority of caffeine consumed among the women was from coffee and the results did not vary by age.

"The reason behind this observed association is unclear," said Curhan. "We know that caffeine stimulates the central nervous system, and previous research has demonstrated that caffeine has a direct effect on the inner ear in both bench science and animal studies. Researchers note that further evidence is needed to make any recommendations about whether the addition of caffeine would improve tinnitus symptoms.

Published on

This study supports all those people who have long complained about spending all day in a workplace with no windows and just artificial light. From Science Daily:

Natural light in office boosts health

Office workers with more natural light exposure at the office had longer sleep duration, better sleep quality, more physical activity and better quality of life compared to office workers with less light exposure in the workplace, a study shows. 

Employees with windows in the workplace received 173 percent more white light exposure during work hours and slept an average of 46 minutes more per night than employees who did not have the natural light exposure in the workplace. There also was a trend for workers in offices with windows to have more physical activity than those without windows.

Workers without windows reported poorer scores than their counterparts on quality of life measures related to physical problems and vitality, as well as poorer outcomes on measures of overall sleep quality and sleep disturbances.

There is increasing evidence that exposure to light, during the day, particularly in the morning, is beneficial to your health via its effects on mood, alertness and metabolism," said senior study author Phyllis Zee, M.D., a Northwestern Medicine neurologist and sleep specialist. 

Published on

The following is from a presentation from The American Association of Diabetes Educators Annual Meeting August 6-9, 2014 by M.Jardin and C.Kafity. But the coffee and tea statement is different from what I've read elsewhere, specifically that coffee is beneficial, is a source of soluble fiber, and may keep pathogenic bacteria in check. From Endocrinology Today:

Plant-based diet helps grow healthy microbiota, halt diabetes disease process

With research mounting on the onslaught the body’s microbiota take from human eating patterns and the environment, making choices to maintain inner ecosystem health is essential, according to presenters at the American Association of Diabetes Educators Annual Meeting. Choosing a plant-based diet is one way people can increase the diversity of bacteria in their biome, reduce inflammation and begin to reverse the diseases processes involved in obesity and diabetes — often in just a few days.

“We know obesity and diabetes have increased tremendously in the last 20 years and we know that our genes haven’t changed, so that can’t account for the change,” Meghan Jardine, MS, MBA, RD, LD, CDE, RDN, of Parkland Health and Hospital System, said during a presentation. “Many scientists believe the changes in our diet and physical activity can’t really account for the change either, that there’s something else at work here.”

Weighing at least two kilograms in all and accounting for more than 3 times the amount of the body’s human cells, gut bacteria is colonized after birth, stabilized by age 3 years but influenced by a number of external factors, Jardine explained. Areas of influence include nutrition and immune function, both priorities in treating obesity and diabetes.

“Microbiota releases enzymes that digest food so we can absorb nutrients, produces vitamins, combats opportunistic infections and works with the immune system,” Jardine said. “About 70% of our immune systems are in our gut.”

People who consume plant-based diets have “healthy” gut microbiota in terms of global parameters and functional and compositional features, Christina Kafity, RN, BSN,CHC... “Children and elderly individuals who consumed more plant carbohydrates versus the typical standard American diet had rapid, reproducible alterations of the gut microbiota for the better, and this happened within 24 hours to a week,” Kafity said.

Growing good bacteria depends on creating an environment in which they can thrive, Kafity explained, including choosing foods that contain certain fibers intact in plants and probiotics; among them are soluble, insoluble and functional fibers as well as psyllium and inulin.

Intake of cruciferous vegetables including Brussels sprouts, kale and cabbage can help boost healthy microbes and, further, provide glucosinolates to help to reduce inflammation, Kafity said. Yogurt, kefir and probiotics also promote the growth of good bacteria, Kafity noted, while some popular beverages may not be much help. “We’re considering that coffee and teas may actually sterilize the bacteria.”

Published on

Finally, a study that looked at both positives and negatives of video game playing. As with so many things in life, the key seems to be indulge "in moderation". From Science Daily:

Video-game playing for less than an hour a day is linked with better-adjusted children, study finds

A new study suggests video game-playing for less than an hour a day is linked with better-adjusted children and teenagers. The research found that young people who indulged in a little video game-playing were associated with being better adjusted than those who had never played or those who were on video games for three hours or more.  The study finds no positive or negative effects for young people who played 'moderately' between one to three hours a day.

However, the study, published in the journal Pediatrics, suggests that the influence of video games on children, for good or for ill, is very small when compared with more 'enduring' factors, such as whether the child is from a functioning family, their school relationships, and whether they are materially deprived.

This is thought to be the first study to examine both the positive and negative effects of gaming using a representative sample of children and adolescents. It involved nearly 5,000 young people, half male and half female, drawn from a nationally representative study of UK households. Participants, between 10 and 15 years old, ...

The results suggest that three in four British children and teenagers play video games on a daily basis, and that those who spent more than half their daily free time playing electronic games were not as well adjusted. It speculates that this could be because they miss out on other enriching activities and possibly expose themselves to inappropriate content designed for adults. Meanwhile, when compared to non-players and those who played very frequently, those who played video games for less than an hour (estimated to be less than one-third of their daily free time), were associated with the highest levels of sociability and were most likely to say they were satisfied with their lives. They also appeared to have fewer friendship and emotional problems, and reported less hyperactivity than the other groups.

Past research on non-interactive forms of entertainment have led to recommended time limits for how long children play video games, yet the study argues that such guidelines have little scientific basis. It suggests the relative benefits or risks of games vary widely in how they are structured and in the incentives they offer players.

Published on

Very interesting. Gives people a way to eat red meat, but not increase their colorectal cancer risk (by also eating resistant starch, e.g., potato salad or beans). From Science Daily:

Eating resistant starch may help reduce red meat-related colorectal cancer risk

Consumption of a type of starch that acts like fiber may help reduce colorectal cancer risk associated with a high red meat diet, according to a study. "Red meat and resistant starch have opposite effects on the colorectal cancer-promoting miRNAs, the miR-17-92 cluster," said one researcher. "This finding supports consumption of resistant starch as a means of reducing the risk associated with a high red meat diet.

Unlike most starches, resistant starch escapes digestion in the stomach and small intestine, and passes through to the colon (large bowel) where it has similar properties to fiber, Humphreys explained. Resistant starch is readily fermented by gut microbes to produce beneficial molecules called short-chain fatty acids, such as butyrate, she added.

"Good examples of natural sources of resistant starch include bananas that are still slightly green, cooked and cooled potatoes [such as potato salad], whole grains, beans, chickpeas, and lentils. Scientists have also been working to modify grains such as maize so they contain higher levels of resistant starch," said Humphreys.

After eating 300 g of lean red meat per day for four weeks, study participants had a 30 percent increase in the levels of certain genetic molecules called miR-17-92 in their rectal tissue, and an associated increase in cell proliferation. Consuming 40 g of butyrated resistant starch per day along with red meat for four weeks brought miR-17-92 levels down to baseline levels.

The study involved 23 healthy volunteers, 17 male and six female, ages 50 to 75. Participants either ate the red meat diet or the red meat plus butyrated resistant starch diet for four weeks, and after a four-week washout period switched to the other diet for another four weeks.

Published on

Fish consumption was beneficial for the brain, but brain differences among the groups not correlating with blood omega-3 levels was a surprise. From  Science Daily:

Eating baked, broiled fish weekly boosts brain health, study says

Eating baked or broiled fish once a week is good for the brain, regardless of how much omega-3 fatty acid it contains, according to researchers. The findings add to growing evidence that lifestyle factors contribute to brain health later in life. Scientists estimate that more than 80 million people will have dementia by 2040, which could become a substantial burden to families and drive up health care costs.

"Our study shows that people who ate a diet that included baked or broiled, but not fried, fish have larger brain volumes in regions associated with memory and cognition," Dr. Becker said. "We did not find a relationship between omega-3 levels and these brain changes, which surprised us a little. It led us to conclude that we were tapping into a more general set of lifestyle factors that were affecting brain health of which diet is just one part."

Lead investigator Cyrus Raji, M.D., Ph.D., who now is in radiology residency training at UCLA, and the research team analyzed data from 260 people who provided information on their dietary intake, had high-resolution brain MRI scans, and were cognitively normal at two time points during their participation in the Cardiovascular Health Study (CHS), a 10-year multicenter effort that began in 1989 to identify risk factors for heart disease in people over 65.

"The subset of CHS participants answered questionnaires about their eating habits, such as how much fish did they eat and how was it prepared," Dr. Raji said. "Baked or broiled fish contains higher levels of omega-3s than fried fish because the fatty acids are destroyed in the high heat of frying, so we took that into consideration when we examined their brain scans."

People who ate baked or broiled fish at least once a week had greater grey matter brain volumes in areas of the brain responsible for memory (4.3 percent) and cognition (14 percent) and were more likely to have a college education than those who didn't eat fish regularly, the researchers found. But no association was found between the brain differences and blood levels of omega-3s.

"This suggests that lifestyle factors, in this case eating fish, rather than biological factors contribute to structural changes in the brain," Dr. Becker noted. "A confluence of lifestyle factors likely are responsible for better brain health, and this reserve might prevent or delay cognitive problems that can develop later in life."