Skip to content

Published on

Two studies that found a link with air pollution and health effects.The first found a narrowing of the carotid arteries (that bring blood to brain). This narrowing (stenosis) occurs prior to strokes. While this could be explained by other factors (for example, by especially poor diets or cigarette smoking), the link between high air pollution and heart attacks and strokes has been noted since the 1950s. From Medical Xpress:

Pollution levels linked to stroke-related narrowing of arteries

Air pollution has been linked to a dangerous narrowing of neck arteries that occurs prior to strokes, according to researchers at NYU Langone Medical Center. The scientists analyzed medical test records for more than 300,000 people living in New York, New Jersey or Connecticut. They found that people living in zip codes with the highest average levels of fine-particulate-matter pollution were significantly more likely to show signs of narrowing (stenosis) in their internal carotid arteries, compared to those living in zip codes with the lowest pollution levels.

Fine particulate matter pollutants, also called "PM 2.5 pollutants," are particulates with diameters less than 2.5 millionths of a meter. They are mostly by-products of combustion engines and burning wood. "We spend a lot of time thinking about traditional risk factors for stroke such as high blood pressure, cholesterol, diabetes and smoking—but our data underscore the possibility that everyday air pollution may also pose a significant stroke risk," said senior investigator Jeffrey S. Berger, MD, an assistant professor in NYU Langone Medical Center in the Department of Medicine, Leon H. Charney Division of Cardiology.

Medical researchers have noticed since the 1950s that episodes of high air pollution can bring temporary jumps in local heart attack and stroke cases. More recent studies have linked heart attack and stroke risks to long-term pollution exposures as well, including PM 2.5 exposures.

The two internal carotid arteries are situated on either side of the neck and provide most of the brain's blood supply. Strokes often result when accumulated plaque breaks off from a narrowed section of an internal carotid artery and blocks smaller vessels in the brain.

In the study, the carotid narrowing data came from vascular ultrasound tests performed on 307,444 tri-state area residents during 2003-2008 by Life Line Screening, a leading community-based health screening company focused on evaluating risk factors for vascular disease...The researchers' analysis showed that subjects in the top fourth of tri-state zip codes, ranked by average PM 2.5 levels, were about 24 percent more likely than those in the bottom quarter to have shown signs of stenosis—defined as a narrowing by at least half—in either internal carotid artery.

"Our study was a population study, so it can't establish cause and effect, but it certainly suggests the hypothesis that lowering pollution levels would reduce the incidence of carotid artery stenosis and stroke," says Dr. Newman. Scientists aren't yet sure how air pollution contributes to vascular disease. Studies have indicated that it may do so in part by causing adverse chemical changes to cholesterol in the blood, by promoting inflammation, and by making blood platelets more likely to form clots."

It has long been known that diesel exhaust has negative health effects. From Science Daily:

Researchers uncover a mechanism linking inhaled diesel pollution and respiratory distress

Researchers have, for the first time, shown how exhaust pollution from diesel engines is able to affect nerves within the lung...Diesel exhaust is a significant component of urban air pollution, containing a complicated mixture of gases and airborne particles. "Studies have shown that exposure to these diesel particles is associated with harmful health effects," says Mr. Robinson. "These particles are very small -- down to 20 nanometres in diameter -- and are therefore not only invisible to the naked eye, but can penetrate deep into the lungs.

Published on

For years there has been discussion about curcumin's anti-inflammatory, anti-bacterial, and anti-cancer effects, but more research is needed (some trials are going on now). Curcumin is a chemical compound found in turmeric. Turmeric is a member of the ginger family. It is used as a spice and is a common ingredient in Indian cooking, but also used in Middle Eastern and South Asian recipes.From Medical Xpress;

Curcumin proved effective at combating cancer

WA scientists have helped re-affirm that curcumin, a chemical compound found in turmeric, is a safe and promising treatment for most cancers and other inflammation-driven diseases.The international review considered past clinical trials using curcumin to treat cancer patients and concluded curcumin was a safe and effective molecule to treat cancer.

A/Prof Sethi says curcumin is exceptionally effective for multiple myeloma patients and those suffering from the particularly lethal pancreatic cancer, for which there are no drugs. However, curcumin was not found to be as effective in breast cancer patients being treated with the chemotherapeutic agent cyclophosphamide. According to the research, curcumin can counteract the effect of cyclophosphamide.

A/Prof Sethi says curcumin is possibly the only drug that can be given at high doses—up to 12g—without any toxicity.... A/Prof Sethi says the only known side effect of the agent is blood thinning, and therefore advises against taking curcumin if undergoing surgery.

He recommends people use turmeric more often in everyday cooking. A/Prof Sethi says it would be ideal to combine curcumin with other drugs or natural compounds, like piperine, an alkaloid found in pepper to increase its bioavailabilty..

A/Prof Sethi says there is a lack of data to explain the underlying mechanism of its effect, however, it is known for its anti-inflammatory effects. "It has been shown that most chronic diseases, including cancer, are caused by inflammation and can be treated by anti-inflammatory agents."He says more work needs to be done to improve curcumin's viability, as body tissues quickly absorb it. 

Published on

A lengthy review of homeopathy studies found that homeopathy is worthless, not effective, don't bother with it. This total lack of effectiveness also applies to those homeopathic products sold for sinusitis. Don't bother with them. If you think homeopathy has worked for you - it's probably the placebo effect, wishful thinking, or just the natural course of healing. From Smithsonian:

1,800 Studies Later, Scientists Conclude Homeopathy Doesn’t Work

Perhaps you remember when scientists debunked homeopathy in 2002. Or 2010. Or 2014. But now a major Australian study analyzing over 1,800 papers has shown that homeopathy, the alternative treatment that relies on super-diluted substances and the principle of “like cures like” is completely ineffective.

 

After assessing more than 1,800 studies on homeopathy, Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council was only able to find 225 that were rigorous enough to analyze. And a systematic review of these studies revealed “no good quality evidence to support the claim that homeopathy is effective in treating health conditions.”

The Australian study, which is the first position statement relying on such an extensive review of medical literature, strikes the latest blow at a 200-year-old alternative treatment developed by a German physician with “no interest in detailed pathology, and none in conventional diagnosis and treatment.” The Washington Post reports that the study’s authors are concerned that people who continue to choose homeopathic remedies over proven medicine face real health risks—including the nearly 4 million Americans who use homeopathic “medicines.”

News of the Australian study comes on the heels of newly released National Health Interview Survey data showing a “small but significant” increase in the use of homeopathy during 2012. And recently, a Canadian homeopathic college came under fire for taking an anti-vaccination stance and promoting homeopathic “nosodes” as an alternative to vaccines.

Published on

Something new and complex to think about. We humans  have genes (about 20, 000), and then the microbes (bacteria, viruses, fungi) within us have genes (between 2 million and 20 million) . And now it looks like some of their genes have slipped into our genes (horizontal gene transfer). An example: the genes that determine blood types (A, B, O) . Whew....Another totally new thing to think about in our evolutionary history. From Time:

You may be your germs: Microbe genes slipped into human DNA, study says

Evolutionary diagrams usually connect humans and monkeys with common primate ancestors, but now, scientists say there's a missing link that deserves a spot on that family tree -- our bacteria, fungi, and viruses. Though most of our genes come from primate ancestors, many of them slipped into our DNA from microbes living in our bodies, says British researcher Alastair Crisp. It's called horizontal gene transfer. Scientists have known of examples of this for a long time: Bacteria slip genes to each other, and it helps them evolve. 

Some researchers have disputed that microbes have swapped genes with the cells of complex animals, such as humans. But a new study at the University of Cambridge indicates it has probably happened a lot. Humans may have as many as hundreds of so-called foreign genes they picked up from microbes.

"Surprisingly, far from being a rare occurrence, it appears that (horizontal gene transfer) has contributed to the evolution of many, perhaps all, animals and that the process is ongoing, meaning that we may need to re-evaluate how we think about evolution," Crisp said.

That may not surprise microbiologists.We humans and other complex animals are full of microbes, gajillions of them. People have so many that microbe cells living in our bodies outnumber our own vastly. A body has about 10 trillion human cells, says microbiologist Rob Knight. The microbe cells living inside of us number around 100 trillion. That's a ratio of 10 to one. The biggest collection is in our gut.

They're mostly helpful, and we we'd have a hard time living without them. Their genetic material dwarfs ours. The human genome adds up to 20,000 genes. The collective genomes of the many varieties of microbes in our bodies adds up to between 2 million and 20 million, Knight says.

In recent decades, scientists laid down genomes -- a detailed description of gene sequences -- for all kinds of species, including humans. The Cambridge researchers compared the genomes of various species of fruit flies, worms and primates, including humans.

They calculated similarities and differences between the genes across those species to look for ones that stuck out as not being part of a smooth evolutionary lineage, but instead probably popped in at some point. They found 128 formerly unidentified "foreign" genes in humans and confirmed 17 that had previously been reported. Most of them play a role in digestion. But the scientists also found that the gene that determines blood types -- A, B and O -- is "foreign." Some "foreign" genes that transferred in from microbes help our bodies' immune systems defend against microbial infections like bacteria and fungi.

Published on

This review study suggests that the effect from loneliness and social isolation on mortality is equivalent to obesity, and that past studies put it into the same category as being an alcoholic, or smoking 15 cigarettes a day. Bottom line: Friendships and having a social network are important to health! Note that the study also found: "...loneliness and social isolation better predict premature death among populations younger than 65 years." From Medical Xpress:

Prescription for living longer: Spend less time alone

Ask people what it takes to live a long life, and they'll say things like exercise, take Omega-3s, and see your doctor regularly. Now research from Brigham Young University shows that loneliness and social isolation are just as much a threat to longevity as obesity. Loneliness and social isolation can look very different. For example, someone may be surrounded by many people but still feel alone. Other people may isolate themselves because they prefer to be alone. The effect on longevity, however, is much the same for those two scenarios.

The association between loneliness and risk for mortality among young populations is actually greater than among older populations. Although older people are more likely to be lonely and face a higher mortality risk, loneliness and social isolation better predict premature death among populations younger than 65 years.

The study analyzed data from a variety of health studies. Altogether, the sample included more than 3 million participants from studies that included data for loneliness, social isolation, and living alone. Controlling for variables such as socioeconomic status, age, gender, and pre-existing health conditions, they found that the effect goes both ways. The lack of social connections presents an added risk, and the existence of relationships provides a positive health effect. 

Previous research from Holt-Lunstad and Smith puts the heightened risk of mortality from loneliness in the same category as smoking 15 cigarettes a day and being an alcoholic. This current study suggests that not only is the risk for mortality in the same category as these well-known risk factors, it also surpasses health risks associated with obesity.

Published on

Are there differences between male and female gut microbiomes? (NOTE: gut microbiome is the community of microbes living in the gut.) I always thought YES, based on that there seem to be so many biological differences between males and females. But according to this blog entry from uBiome (a microbiome sequencing service which has analyzed thousands of gut microbiomes - the microbes living in the gut ) there aren't. They only looked at gut microbiomes (by analyzing fecal samples), and not at other body sites in this comparison. Other past studies have found  that other body sites have bacteria differences. Even the comments after the post were interesting. From the uBiome Blog:

A Surprising Comparison of Male vs. Female Microbiomes

I must admit, I was curious. So I went over to the desk of our brilliant Lead Data Scientist, Dr. Siavosh Rezvan-Behbahani, to find out. Could you look at all of uBiome’s gut samples, I asked, and see what the difference in microbiome composition is between men and women? And the corollary, is it possible to predict from microbiomial data whether the person giving the sample was male or female? With human DNA, of course you can determine gender based on the chromosome signature XX vs. XY. But does the microbiome have a gender signature too?

Siavosh dove in. He spent many hours analyzing, plotting numbers, running different machine learning classifier algorithms. He looked at healthy male and female samples in part of our dataset, all the way down to genus level. And here’s what he found, which blew my mind.

It turns out that in our dataset, there is no statistically significant difference between male microbiomes and female microbiomes. And, given a random sample, we would not be able to determine if it came from a man or a woman.

This result is fascinating to me, because it suggests that maybe men and women aren’t that different in some ways. We all have two eyes, and belly buttons, and similar proportions of bacteria swimming around inside our intestines.

(Of course there’s the standard disclaimer that this is just what we observe in our gut dataset, and may not be representative of the entire human population. It’s also possible that there is a difference but it’s much more subtle than we expect. In any case, this result is encouraging me to think up other questions to ask!)

Published on

Can you have too high levels of vitamin D? The researchers themselves say that the results show there is a J shaped curve linking vitamin D levels in the blood and mortality - both too high and too low levels are linked to higher levels of mortality. From Science Daily:

High levels of vitamin D is suspected of increasing mortality rates

The level of vitamin D in our blood should neither be too high nor to low. Scientists have now shown that there is a connection between high levels of vitamin D and cardiovascular deaths.

In terms of public health, a lack of vitamin D has long been a focal point. Several studies have shown that too low levels can prove detrimental to our health. However, new research from the University of Copenhagen reveals, for the first time, that also too high levels of vitamin D in our blood is connected to an increased risk of dying from a stroke or a coronary.

"We have studied the level of vitamin D in 247,574 Danes, and so far, it constitutes the world's largest basis for this type of study. We have also analysed their mortality rate over a seven-year period after taking the initial blood sample, and in that time 16,645 patients had died. Furthermore, we have looked at the connection between their deaths and their levels of vitamin D," Professor at the Department of Clinical Medicine, Peter Schwarz explains.

The conclusion is clear: the study confirms that there is indeed a correlation between mortality rates and too low levels of vitamin D, but the new thing is that the level of vitamin D can also be too high.

"If your vitamin D level is below 50 or over 100 nanomol per litre, there is an greater connection to deaths. We have looked at what caused the death of patients, and when numbers are above 100, it appears that there is an increased risk of dying from a stroke or a coronary. In other words, levels of vitamin D should not be too low, but neither should they be too high. Levels should be somewhere in between 50 and 100 nanomol per litre, and our study indicates that 70 is the most preferable level," Peter Schwartz states.

Published on

This interesting study raises the possibility that eating certain foods or probiotics  (beneficial bacteria) may prevent diabetes. Note that Akkermansia is a bacteria with one species Akkermansia muciniphila . In Wikipedia:"Researchers have discovered that Akkermansia muciniphila may be able to be used to combat obesity and type 2 diabetes...The bacterium is naturally present in the human digestive tract at 3-5%, but has been seen to fall with obesity." Regarding Prevotella, in Wikipedia: "Studies also indicate that long-term diet is strongly associated with the gut microbiome composition—those who eat plenty of protein and animal fats typical of Western diet have predominantly Bacteroides bacteria, while for those who consume more carbohydrates, especially fiber, the Prevotella species dominate." From Science Daily:

Gut bacteria may contribute to diabetes in black males

African American men at elevated risk for developing type 2 diabetes may have fewer beneficial and more harmful intestinal bacteria, according to new research.

"The 'signature' of the gut microbiota -- the relative abundance of various bacteria and other microbes in the digestive system -- could be another useful tool in assessing a person's risk for developing diabetes," said Ciubotaru. Ciubotaru and her colleagues, including principal investigator Dr. Elena Barengolts,... found that a specific microbiota is associated with stable, normal blood glucose levels, while a different profile is associated with glucose levels that indicate pre-diabetes.

"The study provides additional reasons for physicians to recommend foods, such as prebiotics, which improve the growth and activity of helpful gut bacteria," said Barengolts. The gut microbiota helps digest food; fights infections; and plays an important role in keeping the immune system healthy. It is greatly influenced by genetics, diet and other environmental factors. Previous research has implicated an unhealthy or unbalanced microbiota as a contributing factor to metabolic disorders, including obesity and diabetes. The species that make up an individual's gut microbiota, as well as their abundance, can be identified by stool sample analysis.

The researchers determined the gut microbiotas of 116 African-American male veterans, age 45 to 75, participating in the D Vitamin Intervention in VA, or DIVA study. The aim of the DIVA study, which has 173 total participants and is funded by the Department of Veterans Affairs, is to determine if vitamin D supplementation can prevent diabetes in men with risk factors for developing the disease.

Participants were divided into four groups based on changes in their blood sugar levels as determined at the start and end of the one-year study. The groups included men whose glucose levels remained normal (non-pre-diabetic); those with stable levels indicative of pre-diabetes; those whose levels indicated a worsening of glucose control; and those whose levels improved. All the men provided stool samples for analysis of their gut microbiota.

Men whose blood sugar levels stayed normal over the year had more gut bacteria that are considered beneficial for metabolic health, whereas those who stayed pre-diabetic had fewer beneficial bacteria and more harmful bacteria. In addition, the group whose levels improved had more abundant Akkermansia--healthy bacteria--than the group that maintained normal blood sugar control throughout the year.

The study suggests that differences in the gut microbiota already exist in pre-diabetes, Barengolts said. Although the study found connections between composition of the gut microbiota and blood sugar control, Barengolts said further research is needed to confirm these findings and evaluate whether certain intestinal bacteria cause type 2 diabetes. However, based on other research her group has conducted and studies in animals, she speculated that the foods we eat affect our diabetes risk through our gut microbiota. If the mix of organisms in the intestinal tract is indeed responsible for the development of type 2 diabetes, she said, it may be possible to lower one's risk by changing the gut bacteria.

More details about that same study. From Medpage Today:

Prediabetes Patients Have Fewer Gut Bugs

They were put into one of four groups: those with a stable glucose tolerance, those with stable impaired fasting glucose or stable impaired glucose tolerance, those with worsened glucose tolerance, and those with improved glucose tolerance. There were significant differences in bacterial composition between the first and second groups (P=0.03) at the phylum level. Bacteroidetes was higher and Firmicutes was lower with worse glycemic control in the second group. 

Proteobacteria decreased over the period in groups 2 and 4 compared with group 1 (P=0.04 for both). At the family and genus levels, in group 2 versus group 1 there was less Prevotella, and a higher Bacteroides/Prevotella ratio in the second group at 5.6 to 2.7 (P=0.05). There was also less Enterobacteriaceae (P=0.03), and more Ruminococcae (P=0.01) and Veillonellaceae (P=0.02).

"We speculate that lower abundance of Prevotella may be associated with worsening glycemia, and, conversely, higher abundance of Akkermansia might be associated with improving glycemia, thus corroborating suggestions from previous studies," the researchers said.

Published on

What was really interesting in the recent study findings was not just that vegetarian diets are associated with an overall lower incidence of colorectal cancers, but that pescovegetarians (eat fish) had the lowest risk of all compared to nonvegetarians. That is really strong support for eating fish. From Science Daily:

Vegetarian diet linked to lower risk of colorectal cancers

Eating a vegetarian diet was associated with a lower risk of colorectal cancers compared with nonvegetarians in a study of Seventh-Day Adventist men and women, according to an article published online by JAMA Internal Medicine.

Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Although great attention has been paid to screening, primary prevention through lowering risk factors remains an important objective. Dietary factors have been identified as a modifiable risk factor for colorectal cancer, including red meat which is linked to increased risk and food rich in dietary fiber which is linked to reduced risk, according to the study background.

Among 77,659 study participants, Michael J. Orlich, M.D., Ph.D., of Loma Linda University, California, and coauthors identified 380 cases of colon cancer and 110 cases of rectal cancer. Compared with nonvegetarians, vegetarians had a 22 percent lower risk for all colorectal cancers, 19 percent lower risk for colon cancer and 29 percent lower risk for rectal cancer. Compared with nonvegetarians, vegans had a 16 percent lower risk of colorectal cancer, 18 percent less for lacto-ovo (eat milk and eggs) vegetarians, 43 percent less in pescovegetarians (eat fish) and 8 percent less in semivegetarians, according to study results.

Published on

Research is accumulating that the microbial exposure from a vaginal birth, breastfeeding, and pets in the first year of life are all good for a baby's developing immune system and the gut microbiome.

From Science Daily: Breastfeeding, other factors help shape immune system early in life

Researchers say that breastfeeding and other factors influence a baby's immune system development and susceptibility to allergies and asthma by what's in their gut. The striking findings from a series of studies further advance the so-called hygiene hypothesis theory that early childhood exposure to microorganisms affects the immune system's development and onset of allergies, says Christine Cole Johnson, Ph.D., MPH, chair of Henry Ford's Department of Public Health Sciences and principal research investigator.

The gut microbiome is the collection of microorganisms in the gastrointestional, or GI, tract, and the human body has billions of these microbes... The gut microbiome is known to play an important role in immune system development, and is thought to contribute to a host of diseases like obesity, autoimmune diseases, circulating disorders and pediatric allergies and infection.

"For years now, we've always thought that a sterile environment was not good for babies. Our research shows why. Exposure to these microorganisms, or bacteria, in the first few months after birth actually help stimulate the immune system," Dr. Johnson says."The immune system is designed to be exposed to bacteria on a grand scale. If you minimize those exposures, the immune system won't develop optimally."

In six separate studies, researchers sought to evaluate whether breastfeeding and maternal and birth factors had any effect on a baby's gut microbiome and allergic and asthma outcomes. Using data collected from the WHEALS birth cohort, researchers analyzed stool samples from infants taken at one month and six months after birth. They also looked at whether the gut microbiome impacted the development of regulatory T-cells, or Treg, which are known to regulate the immune system. Highlights:

• Breastfed babies at one month and six months had distinct microbiome compositions compared to non-breastfed babies. These distinct compositions may influence immune system development. • Breastfed babies at one month were at decreased risk of developing allergies to pets. • Asthmatic children who had nighttime coughing or flare-ups had a distinct microbiome composition during the first year of life. • For the first time, gut microbiome composition was shown to be associated with increasing Treg cells.

Researchers found that a baby's gut microbiome patterns vary by: • A mother's race/ethnicity. • A baby's gestational age at birth. • Prenatal and postnatal exposure to tobacco smoke. • Caesarean section versus vaginal delivery.• Presence of pets in the home.

Henry Ford's landmark 2002 study found exposure to dogs or cats in the first year of a baby's life reduced their risk for allergies.