Recent Posts
Recent Comments
    Archives
    Categories
    Meta
    « Older Entries

    No good for your heart: Good cholesterol doesn’t lower cardiac arrest risk

    May 17th, 2012 | Author: admin

    By
    Dinesh C Sharma and Claire Bates


    PUBLISHED:

    10:45 EST, 17 May 2012

    |

    UPDATED:

    10:50 EST, 17 May 2012


    Have a balanced meal to cut down on bad cholesterol

    Have a balanced meal to cut down on bad cholesterol

    We all know lowering ‘bad cholesterol’ – known as Low-Density Lipoprotein or LDL – helps the heart.

    But scientists say raising levels of ‘good cholesterol’ may not protect you from cardiac disease.

    In a challenge to conventional wisdom, a team from Harvard Medical school found no direct link between raising good cholesterol levels – or HDL – with a lower risk of a heart attack.

    The study published in the medical journal The Lancet compared heart-attack risk among people who inherited known genetic variants that gave them higher HDL levels.

    This should mean they had a lower risk of coronary disease. However, the study of more than 50,000 people found no such link.

    This implies that it is best to focus on lowering the levels of LDL in order to tackle heart disease.

    ‘Ways of raising HDL cholesterol might not reduce risk of myocardial infarction,’ Dr Sekar Kathiresan from Massachusetts General Hospital, who led the study, said.

    ‘With drugs or lifestyle changes to raise HDL, we cannot automatically assume that risk of myocardial infarction will be reduced,’ he added.

    HDL is known as ‘good’ cholesterol because its higher concentrations have been associated with lower risk of heart attacks in some studies, but its exact mechanism has always been uncertain.

    In the new research, scientists studied genes involved in raising HDL in about 170,000 individuals and found that 15 HDL-raising genetic variants they tested do not reduce the risk of heart attack.

    good-fat-graphic.jpg

    It was found that there was no difference in heart attack risk of individuals who carried genes involved in elevated HDL than those without the genetic variant.

    ‘It is an interesting study which goes against prevalent evidence about HDL. Increasing HDL, in any case, is difficult, whether by lifestyle or exercise. So our primary target is lowering LDL cholesterol,’ Dr Anoop Misra, head of Centre of Internal Medicine at Fortis Hospital, said.

    Dr D. Prabhakaran, executive director, Centre for Chronic Disease Control, said: ‘Heart attack is multifactorial and not confined to one single risk factor like low HDL.

    ‘While understanding genetics to develop new drugs may be useful, it would be wrong not to address other risk factors such as high blood pressure, high blood glucose, obesity and tobacco.’

    Here’s what other readers have said. Why not add your thoughts,
    or debate this issue live on our message boards.

    The comments below have not been moderated.



    • Newest


    • Oldest


    • Best rated


    • Worst rated

    You’d have got green arrows in the first article on this today – Julie, Hull, England – I guess you picked the wrong one. But you are correct, the best way to stay healthy is to avoid the medical profession like the plague. For one thing there’s a whole bunch of sick and contagious people in doctor’s waiting rooms and pharmacy lines, let alone all the nasty chemicals they want you to put in your body.

    Report abuse

    In my days a a drug rep, British Consultants told us that American Researchers would complete a study then hand it over to the Drug Company to massage the statistics and write the report. I didn’t doubt them then and I don’t doubt them now. He who pays the piper calls the tune and Statins are big, big business. Northern Ireland always used the HDL/LDL ratio and got good results. Triglycerides were known to have a negative effect, but are conveniently shunted out of the way here to sex-up the bad LDL’s. Stinks.

    Report abuse

    The biochemistry textbooks will have to be re-written then. They’ve been wrong for about 20 years.

    Report abuse

    We get fed rubbish while the so-called experts comstantly change their minds about EVERYTHING they’ve allegedly previously researched. Some years ago, in the USA, there was a 15 year research programme studying the effects of fats on the human body. 50% of the people in the programme were on a low-fat diet and 50% on a high fat diet. It was cancelled after 10 years because the people who were having the most health problems – were the ones on the LOW- fat diet! THEY KNOW NOTHING Just ognore it all – and get on with your lives! All things in moderation.

    Report abuse

    Dalcetrapib was a relatively weak HDL-raising drug and the trial was in people who were already on a statin so any effect had to be very big to be identifiable. The trial was too small to show an effect so was stopped for futility. That does not prove increasing HDL does not work. It only shows that a small increase may not be enough…

    Report abuse

    I never take any notice of the daily dose of medical research cr*p. As for taking statins, that is something that will never ever cross my mind, or enter into my daily routine. I simply refuse to take part in any ‘body check-ups’ and am simply happy to take my chances. I maintain a healthy weight, and eat sensibly. My belief is that when your time is up, it is up, and pumping yourself full of potentially harmful medication just to satisfy statistics, is not worth the side effects. People who have had statins forced upon them have endured all kinds of nasty permanent side effects. My mother was prescribed Aspirin to keep her blood thin, and ended up having a stomach bleed because she was given 3 times the right dose. I questioned it, but was told the doctors were right.

    Report abuse

    - George, London, 17/5/2012 19:15 As a first year medicine student I hate to say we spend about a month on cholesterol and its effects and everything you just said is utter rubbish…
    - Reason, Glasgow, 17/5/2012 19:29
    =============================================================
    As a Scot, you should be aware that a Scottish doctor, Malcolm Kendrick, would disagree with you – he published a great book. Statins, have a statistically insignificant effect on life expectancy (measured in days, not weeks). He belongs to a group keeping an eye on the statin (cholesterol) industry, but they are running scared of the financial power of the pharmaceutical industry (they could be sued in English courts, but probably not Scottish courts). If you think lowering cholesterol is a good thing, try engaging your brain – you might learn something.

    Report abuse

    - George, London, 17/5/2012 19:15
    As a first year medicine student I hate to say we spend about a month on cholesterol and its effects and everything you just said is utter rubbish…

    Report abuse

    Create continuous change to cause confusion. This is yet another way they are attacking our minds.

    Report abuse

    Cholesterol is good for you. It was discovered about 140 years ago in the arteries of cadavers that showed signs of disease. Nothing was thought about it until the 20th century when it was decided that the association of arterial lesions and cholesterol was a simple case of cause and effect, and that cholesterol should be lowered (cue the statin industry). The only problem was that it was an association. Cholesterol repairs lesions, it is not the cause of lesions. It is like saying that there is an association between fire engines and house fires, and that the best way to stop house fires is to ban all fire engines. Cholesterol has a stupendously bad rap from the medical profession who should hang their heads in shame. If there are any doctors reading this, they should ask themselves how they learned about cholesterol. I bet it took up no more than 5 minutes in their first year at university and that they never questioned it since.

    Report abuse

    The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.

    Article source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2145877/No-good-heart-Good-cholesterol-doesnt-lower-cardiac-arrest-risk.html?ITO=1490

    Posted in News | No Comments »

    Why EVERYONE over 50 needs to be taking statins: Cholesterol-busting pills cut risk of heart attack or stroke

    May 17th, 2012 | Author: admin

    By
    Jenny Hope


    PUBLISHED:

    18:23 EST, 16 May 2012

    |

    UPDATED:

    20:55 EST, 16 May 2012

    All over-50s should take statins to cut their risk of suffering a heart attack or stroke, researchers claim.

    A major study shows the drugs – usually only given to high-risk patients – provided clear benefits among healthy ones too.

    Researchers reviewed findings from 27 trials involving 175,000 people, some of whom were at low risk of heart problems.

    Wide-reaching: Benefits of statins extend to a much lower-risk group of people than previously thought

    Wide-reaching: Benefits of statins extend to a much lower-risk group of people than previously thought

    They found that the positives greatly exceeded any side-effects from taking the drugs, such as muscle weakness, diabetes and depression.

    More than eight million adults are already taking statins, with some experts predicting that one in four will soon be taking the drugs for life.

    Borislava Mihaylova, of the University of Oxford, lead author of the study, said: ‘In the UK, current practice is generally to give people a statin only if they have had or are considered to be at “high risk” of having a heart attack or a stroke.

    This study shows that the benefits of statins extend to a much lower-risk group of people than previously thought.’

    The research, co-ordinated by Oxford and the University of Sydney in Australia, looked at more than two dozen studies using statins to cut levels of low-density lipoprotein or ‘bad’ cholesterol in the blood. The drugs cut the risk of heart attacks, strokes and operations to unblock arteries by one third or more.

    a lifesaver for £16 a year

    The benefits were gained no matter what level of cholesterol patients started out with. Healthier people who were given statins also had lower overall death rates than those who were given a placebo.

    The study, published online by the Lancet, was funded by the British and Australian medical research councils and the British Heart Foundation.

    Its authors say the imminent revision of NHS guidelines on the use of statins should be used to widen those eligibile for routine therapy. At present, statins are restricted to those with at least a 20 per cent risk of having a heart attack or stroke over the next ten years.

    However, a commentary in the Lancet says most over-50s are likely to be at higher risk of cardiovascular disease, and so it would be ‘pragmatic’ to use age to prescribe statins instead of costly medical tests.

    Professor Colin Baigent, from the Medical Research Council, said: ‘It is not just about treating raised cholesterol after middle-age.

    The benefits of statins in people who are currently healthy, but are for some reason at increased risk of a heart attack or stroke, are substantial, and much greater than any of the known risks.

    Effective: Over-50s are likely to be at higher risk of cardiovascular disease, and so it would be ¿pragmatic¿ to use age to prescribe statins, experts said

    Effective: Over-50s are likely to be at higher risk of cardiovascular disease, and so it would be ¿pragmatic¿ to use age to prescribe statins, experts said

    ‘People who are at increased risk, perhaps because they are overweight, or smoke, or have high blood pressure, would be better off with lower cholesterol, even if their cholesterol is not considered to be particularly high.’

    Professor Baigent believes the routine use of statins would lead to 10,000 fewer heart attacks and strokes a year, including 2,000 fewer deaths in the UK.

    The small cost of the drugs would be outweighed by NHS savings due to the reduced number of heart attacks and strokes.

    June Davison, of the British Heart Foundation, said: ‘Those who already have heart disease, or are at high risk, are offered statins because it’s well established they help to lower cholesterol and reduce the risk of heart disease.

    This large-scale research found even people at low risk of heart disease could benefit.’

    The report does warn that patients may be at a slightly higher risk of diabetes, but adds that ‘the definite benefits of statins greatly outweigh these potential hazards’.

    A Department of Health spokesman said: ‘We keep all new research under consideration. NICE [the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, which assesses the cost-effectiveness of NHS treatments] regularly reviews its published guidance in order to take account of new evidence.’

     

    Here’s what other readers have said. Why not add your thoughts,
    or debate this issue live on our message boards.

    The comments below have not been moderated.



    • Newest


    • Oldest


    • Best rated


    • Worst rated

    Don’t underestimate the side effects of these drugs that can be devastating. I think it’s essential that everyone is fully aware of these before they are offered statins, muscle problems and memory loss seem to be the most common, but increased incidence of cancer also seems to be indicated, approach with utmost caution!

    Report abuse

    What nonsense…..its like saying everyone over 50 has the same health problems and they are ALL obese and don’t take enough exercise…..time for a re-think.

    Report abuse

    Am in late fifties. Had a mild heart attack 13 months ago due to stressful overwork and too strenuous exercise. Diet was relatively poor due to lack of time. Have spurned drugs with the exception of aspirin. diet has been drastically improved, much less meat and minimal dairy and now copious amounts of fruit and veg and raw garlic. Bake own bread, in great and tasty variety with the help of a Panasonic bread maker using only olive oil for fat. No tea or coffee either.
    Daily angina pains have gone. Aspirin consumption has declined from twice a day to averaging no more than half once a month.
    Positive side effects include: Loss of weight, digestive system massively improved and no other illnesses including colds etc.
    By contrast, an friend, who has an angina problem, has relied on NHS drugs rather than change his lifestyle. As a consequence he has put on weight and seen his level of medication increase. Now use of a stint is being considered.
    My advice is do not rely on drugs.

    Report abuse

    STUFF THE STATINS. Given the choice of dying of a heart attack or cancer, I choose the heart attack. I watched my Dad die of cancer – it is a cruel slow death.

    Report abuse

    My neighbour, who is now 97 y/o, worked as a pharmacist all his life. Although he filled prescriptions he himself refused to take any type of tablets. He felt that tablets were a synthetic “cure-all” with too many adverse side effects. He preferred a healthy eating regime, supplemented by natural plants and herbs.
    His only physical disability now is incontinence and blindness.

    Report abuse

    So many people I know have or are stopping taking statins due to muscle pains. They would rather risk a heart attack. I take a natural product called Bergamet which is supposed to give the same result.

    Report abuse

    So we’ve now reached the bizarre situation where we’re looking a prescribing statins to the whole population to cover up the artery-clogging effects of the supposedly “heart-healthy” diet that the NHS and BHF has been pushing down our throats for the last 30 years.
    In the words of Dr Richard Feinman:
    “Dietary carbohydrate restriction is the single most effective method (except for total starvation) of reducing triglycerides, and is as effective as any intervention, including most drugs, at increasing HDL and reducing the number of small-dense LDL particles. Beyond lipid markers, carbohydrate restriction improves all of the features of metabolic syndrome.”
    So basically thet are telling you to take statins to mitigate the effects of “healthy wholegrains”. Madness.

    Report abuse

    Beware, take statins, even when your cholesterol is not high, will increase your insurance costs. Holidays become more expensive. Companies insist that if a Dr. prescribes statins then you are at higher risk and so must pay more.

    Report abuse

    This is the worst piece of advice I have ever seen .
    These drugs can effect certain people so badly , that a heart attack would be a good thing .
    Please do your research before offering such bad advice .

    Report abuse

    Ah, the great cholesterol scam. No doubt money is once again the motive behind this. What the drug companies and their political lackies not making enough or something?

    Report abuse

    The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.

    Article source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2145558/Why-EVERYONE-50-needs-taking-statins-Cholesterol-busting-pills-cut-risk-heart-attack-stroke.html?ITO=1490

    Posted in News | No Comments »

    Soft drink tax ‘would cut heart attacks and rising levels of obesity’

    May 16th, 2012 | Author: admin

    By
    Jenny Hope


    PUBLISHED:

    21:14 EST, 15 May 2012

    |

    UPDATED:

    01:31 EST, 16 May 2012

    Slapping a 20 per cent ‘fat tax’ on soft drinks would cut consumption and help curb rising levels of obesity in the UK, claim experts at Oxford University.

    Dr Oliver Mytton and Dr Mike Rayner of the Department of Public Health at Oxford said a tax of around 20 per cent – roughly equivalent to extending VAT – could lead to a drop in obesity-related diseases.

    Estimates suggest taxing sugary drinks and other unhealthy foods could cut up to 2,700 heart disease deaths a year.

    Unhealthy: Experts suggest that taxing sugary drinks and other unhealthy foods could cut 2,700 heart disease deaths a year and combat rising levels of obesity

    Unhealthy: Experts suggest that taxing sugary drinks and other unhealthy foods could cut 2,700 heart disease deaths a year and combat rising levels of obesity

    Denmark became the first country in the world to introduce a fat tax last October, with a surcharge on foods high in saturated fat, while France has taxed sweetened drinks.

    Prime Minister David Cameron has said the coalition would consider following its example as a way of tackling Britain’s growing obesity levels.

    In a summary of evidence in the British Medical Journal the researchers claim poor diets in the UK must be tackled.

    Dr Rayner said ‘Obesity has rocketed recently and if anything our diet is getting worse. We need to take steps to tackle this problem as a nation.

    It’s affecting our health and it’s affecting our wallets through the increased burden on the NHS and the taxpayer.

    ‘David Cameron said that he wanted to look at fat taxes last October. He should now commission an independent review of the existing evidence that looks at the options for taxing unhealthy foods.’

    The Oxford team claim government intervention such as taxation can be justified when the market fails to provide the ‘optimum’ good for society’s well-being, as with the duties on alcohol and tobacco, for example.

    Following their lead: David Cameron has said Britain could copy Denmark and France in introducing the taxes

    Following their lead: David Cameron has said Britain could copy Denmark and France in introducing the taxes

    ‘It is basic economic theory that raising the price will change consumption, and we already use the taxation system in this way to influence behaviour’ said Dr Rayner.

    ‘We have taxes on unhealthy goods such as tobacco and alcohol. And we don’t have taxes on books as they can be seen as a public good to be encouraged.

    ‘There would be benefits for the healthcare system too. It would save taxpayers’ money through reduced NHS costs as well as combat diet-related disease such as obesity and heart disease.

    ‘It is also likely that a tax on unhealthy foods would act as an incentive to encourage manufacturers to change what goes into their products and make them healthier over time’ he added.

    A tax on sugary drinks is not going to cure obesity by itself, said Dr Rayner, there needs to be a strategy to deal with the affordability, the availability and the promotion of unhealthy foods.’

    VAT is already applied to some foods and drinks in this country, but it is done inconsistently – as the recent pasty tax debate revealed.

    ‘VAT should be totally reformed in line with health goals’’ says Dr Rayner.
    Taxes can have untoward or unexpected effects, and it is possible that a tax on saturated fats, like that introduced in Denmark, could be counter-productive, suggests Dr Rayner.

    In avoiding some foods high in saturated fat, people could replace them with foods high in carbohydrates – food that also tends to be high in salt. The overall effect on health might be negative.

    That is why Dr Rayner believes a tax on sugary soft drinks is the best option. Even if people moved to diet drinks instead, it would still be beneficial for health.

    ‘A tax on sugary drinks is one measure that is a sure, safe bet that would change how many calories people consume across the nation and have a significant effect on obesity levels,’ says Dr Rayner.

    Research published in the British Journal of Nutrition last year said a 10 per cent ‘fat tax’ would drive down sales of sugary drinks and encourage consumers to swap to healthier alternatives.

    A similar rise in the price of full-fat milk would lead to people drinking reduced fat milks instead.

    Here’s what other readers have said. Why not add your thoughts,
    or debate this issue live on our message boards.

    The comments below have not been moderated.



    • Newest


    • Oldest


    • Best rated


    • Worst rated

    Say you have £80 to spend on food per week after you pay the bills. The tax means you will buy less food for your money, meaning less profit for supermarket, less profit for the manufacturer of food product, meaning a reduction in 20% of staff made redundant, more people out of work means more benefits paid out meaning the government will not make a penny out of this system and mass unemployment will result.

    Report abuse

    Food will be next, I can hardly afford to eat now, I’m down to two small meals a day. I’m constantly hungry. Get the condems out please.

    Report abuse

    These experts are wrong.

    Report abuse

    Give the public plenty of brainwashing and propaganda then they will believe anything but it is just another tax scam. Just buy a few items of fruit less then you have more money to buy more soft drinks, you get your soft drink the tax man gets his extra money. Are we to believe that any item with tax on is there to prevent us buying it.

    Report abuse

    Just an excuse for more tax, tax tax and more tax!.

    Report abuse

    Cameron, just stop for two minutes and think for a change, if that’s possible. We ALL know where are taxes are going and we totally disagree with it. Our taxes MUST stay in this country for the people who deserve and paid them. You are going to create anarchy, if you persist in taxing the people to death.

    Report abuse

    Dr Oliver Mytton and Dr Mike Rayner of the Department of Public Health at Oxford….Who pays your wages? The taxpayers. We then pay you to suggest ways of taxing us further! You couldn’t make it up.

    Report abuse

    Prime Minister David Cameron has said the coalition would consider following its example as a way of tackling Britain’s growing obesity levels….The only luxury that I have left. A glass of cola at night and I can’t even afford the brand name.

    Report abuse

    If parents can afford to let their children poison themselves with sugary muck, I say ‘let them’.

    Report abuse

    i am not fat,i have five children and they are not fat so why on earth should we have to pay a fat tax,Cameron just dose not live ithe real world,the sooner the public schoolboy goes the better.

    Report abuse

    The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.

    Article source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2145065/Soft-drink-tax-cut-heart-attacks-rising-levels-obesity.html?ITO=1490

    Posted in News | No Comments »

    Why mid-life health kicks can WRECK men’s bodies: Jogging and low-fat food will make you fatter and damage your heart

    May 16th, 2012 | Author: admin

    By
    Louise Atkinson


    PUBLISHED:

    16:52 EST, 14 May 2012

    |

    UPDATED:

    16:52 EST, 14 May 2012

    Hitting 40 marks a turning point for many men and their health.

    Their metabolism slows, leading to the dreaded belly and the first signs of ageing and long-term disease — raised blood cholesterol and high blood pressure — begin to appear.

    Last week, came the gloomy prediction that almost two thirds of men aged between 40 and 100 will be obese by 2040, risking type 2 diabetes, heart disease, stroke and early death.

    David Cameron runs the Sport Relief Mile

    Boris Johnson on his morning run

    Running into trouble? David Cameron, 45, and Boris Johnson, 47. Jogging is almost as much a rite of passage for the middle-aged man as buying a fast car

    The thickening waist and heightened sense of mortality is often enough to kick start a new regimen, which usually means choosing low-fat foods and taking up jogging (indeed, jogging is almost as much a rite of passage for the middle-aged man as buying a fast car, with David Cameron and Boris Johnson recently spotted pounding the pavements).

    But these are actually the worst things the middle-aged man can do, says Dr Charles Clark, a consultant surgeon and expert on diabetes.

    Like a growing number of experts, Dr Clark (an honorary research fellow at the University of Glasgow), says low-fat diets could be making our long-term health worse.

    That’s because they are often high in sugar and carbohydrates.

    Dr Clark and others believe sugar, and its effect on the hormone insulin, is the real dietary evil behind our ever-rising obesity levels and our frightening incidence of heart disease.

    In a new book, he claims that controlling insulin is the key to protecting a man’s heart, and also protecting him against a host of potential killers — raised cholesterol, diabetes, cancers — as well as reducing his risk of arthritis and obesity, and even boosting his libido.

    It is a controversial view, but Dr Clark has strong medical credentials, having published more than 80 scientific research articles in high-profile journals such as  the British Medical Journal.

    As for jogging, Dr Clark says if you’re unfit, it’s a quick-fire way of destroying your hip and knee joints and placing a tremendous strain on your heart and lungs.

    But all is not lost, for Dr Clark believes men can dramatically improve their health, and reduce their risk of killer diseases, in as little as two weeks by making a few very simple changes.

    Here are some of his key recommendations.

    AVOID ‘LOW-FAT’ FOODS

    Dr Clark says low-fat diet foods are very often pumped with extra sugar (file picture)

    Dr Clark says low-fat diet foods are very often pumped with extra sugar (file picture)

    We’ve long been told that high-fat  foods (such as cream and cheese) clog up the arteries. So, for most men, going low-fat would seem the obvious way to eat healthily.

    But Dr Clark says dietary cholesterol accounts for just 15 per cent of the total cholesterol in our bodies — the rest is manufactured by the liver.

    As he explains it, the problem is sugar. In response to sugar in the blood, the body produces the hormone insulin.

    This in turn instructs the liver to metabolise dietary fat and convert any extra food in the blood into triglycerides (a form of blood fat).

    These triglycerides are bundled into globules transported through the blood to be taken up by the fat cells. That’s how excess food makes us fat.

    Insulin also controls the extent to which the liver creates and pumps out cholesterol. Scientists believe high insulin levels are more likely to trigger the production of ‘bad’ LDL cholesterol.

    When insulin levels are reduced, the liver cells find it harder to convert the fat in food into cholesterol and tends to pump out more ‘good’ HDL cholesterol.

    Dr Clark says low-fat diet foods (yoghurts, ready-meals, biscuits, even salad dressings) are very often pumped with extra sugar to make them palatable and people on low-fat diets are very likely to fill up on carbohydrates, both of which raise insulin levels, increasing LDL and triglycerides.

    FORGET JOGGING

    Exercise plays an important role in keeping insulin levels under control.

    But while jogging is an excellent form of exercise when you are fit, it is also an excellent way of precipitating a heart attack when you’re not, says Dr Clark.

    If you are overweight with poor muscle tone, jogging is a fast track to ruining your hip and knee joints and put unbearable strain on your heart and lungs.

    Instead, start exercising slowly and build up your fitness gradually by walking for 20 minutes five times a week, and adding some gentle muscle-building exercises (such as lifting light weights) and stretching.

    EXERCISE YOUR SMOOTH MUSCLE

    We all start to lose our muscle tone with age, but while exercise will help, don’t forget your smooth muscles. These make up the intestines, the bladder and the muscle in internal organs and their health is vital. Like any other cell, they need food and oxygen.

    These come in the form of nutrition from your diet and good profusion, or blood flow, to the tissues. Healthy smooth muscle prevents constriction of the arteries by cholesterol and stress.

    To ‘exercise’ the smooth muscles, you need roughage (such as green vegetables). This stretches the muscle fibres and helps to press food through the bowel. If you don’t have roughage in your diet, the bowel isn’t stimulated and it becomes dormant — a major cause of bowel cancer.

    Water is also vital — drink regularly, not just when you feel thirsty. This keeps the bowel’s contractor muscle moving, prevents constipation and prevents many of the typical diseases that occur in middle age such as cancer, irritable bowel syndrome, colitis and peptic ulcers.

    SIT UP STRAIGHT

    Correct posture is vital for the health of bones and muscles — but Dr Clark says sitting and standing properly are also crucial for the internal organs to function effectively. It enables unrestricted expansion of the internal organs, allowing for blood flow, breathing and gastroeintestinal function.

    So be aware of your posture at all times. When sitting, standing or walking, consciously pull your shoulders back and lift your head to draw the body into a balanced position and help prevent upper and lower back pain.

    Additionally, learn to sit with the feet directly in front with the toes pointing forward. This will help stop excessive rotation in the hip joint, which can lead to injury, and prevent strain on the hip muscles.

    BREATHE DEEPLY

    When we’re under stress, the body produces the hormone cortisol.

    One of its actions is to force the liver to release sugar into the blood, providing instant energy to help you fight or flee. This triggers yet more insulin, high levels of which can lead to obesity and disease.

    If you’re under constant stress, your insulin levels will inevitably be high.

    Stress can cause such powerful chemical changes in the body that it can trigger the start of diabetes, raise blood pressure (cortisol also instructs the arteries to narrow, forcing the heart to pump harder and faster), reduce your immunity, affect your testosterone levels, and even increase the risk of osteoporosis and certain cancers.

    De-stressing is therefore vital: eat healthily and at regular intervals (hunger and poor diet put extra stress on the body), get plenty of sleep and exercise, and try relaxation techniques and deep breathing exercises.

    Sit quietly for five minutes each day, close your eyes and focus on nothing but your breathing and your heartbeat, and try to breathe evenly and slowly.

    For days when negative thoughts take over, use ‘stress Elastoplasts’ such as a good book (reading something of interest to you for as little as six minutes can reduce stress by 68 per cent), listening to music (it can lower stress by 32 per cent) or massage (a weekly massage brings down stress levels by 27 per cent).

    DRINK WINE, NOT FRUIT JUICE

    Dr Clark recommends alcohol consumption is limited to two small glasses of red wine per day

    Dr Clark recommends alcohol consumption is limited to two small glasses of red wine per day (file picture)

    Dr Clark recommends drinking at least ten cups of water a day. He says fruit juice is ‘far too high in sugar for general consumption’, coffee causes dehydration and should be restricted to two cups a day, tea to three cups (herbal tea is unlimited), but alcohol is allowed, in moderation.

    ‘Beers have high carbohydrate content and therefore a greater likelihood of promoting the development of diabetes than those drinks with a low carbohydrate content, such as red wine,’ he says, recommending alcohol consumption is limited to two small glasses of red wine per day.

    SAVE YOUR SEX LIFE

    Testosterone levels naturally fall with age (at a rate of 1-2 per cent per year after the age of 40), but a dwindling libido can also be a symptom of excessive stress and poor diet.

    Poor nutrition causes physical and mental fatigue, leaving little left over for social interest, let alone sexual activity.

    Obesity itself also limits libido. In one French study, obese men were 69 per cent less likely to have had more than one sexual partner in a year than men of normal weight.

    Another problem at this age can be impotence, which can be an early sign of coronary heart disease and diabetes. It can also be due to atherosclerosis, a systemic condition where plaque builds up inside the arteries, leading to restricted blood flow in the penis.

    So how to resolve a flagging libido? Once again the process is simple, says Dr Clark: Reduce refined carbohydrates, reduce stress levels and take more exercise. All will help ensure the body is working at optimum levels. 

    TUCK INTO A STEAK

    For every meal, energy should, instead, come from protein

    For every meal, energy should, instead, come from protein

    Modern diets have become dangerously carbohydrate-heavy, says Dr Charles Clark.

    All carbohydrates consist of sugar molecules joined together — the typical Western diet can contain as much as 66 teaspoons of sugar in one day.

    While public health advice recommends carbohydrates form a major part of a healthy, balanced diet, most carbohydrates are completely surplus to our bodily requirements, Dr Clark suggests.

    Refined carbohydrates such as white bread, pasta and rice provide only energy, he says.

    They don’t provide any form of nutrition at all. What’s more, if your diet is dominated by these you could be producing too much insulin.

    Insulin is the master hormone for weight management, commanding the body to convert excess sugar in the bloodstream into fat — which is stored primarily in the abdomen.

    Keep carbohydrates to no more than 50g a day (a slice of wholemeal bread has 18g of carbs; a small, 5cm diameter, baked potato has around 15g).

    For every meal, energy should, instead, come from protein (in the form of meat, fish, eggs and cheese) and a wide variety of fruit, vegetables and salads.

    When we consume proteins, the body breaks them down into amino acids, which are absorbed through the wall of the bowel and form skin, bones, muscles, tendons, and all the organs such as the brain and the heart.

    Avoid all refined carbohydrates for two weeks to kick-start any healthy-eating plan.

    Adapted from Health Revolution For Men by Dr Charles Clark and Maureen Clark (Piatkus, £12.99).

    © 2012 Dr Charles Clark and Maureen Clark. To order a copy for £10.99 (incl. pp) call 0843 382 0000.

    Here’s what other readers have said. Why not add your thoughts,
    or debate this issue live on our message boards.

    The comments below have not been moderated.



    • Newest


    • Oldest


    • Best rated


    • Worst rated

    “…almost two thirds of men aged between 40 and 100 will be obese by 2040, risking type 2 diabetes, heart disease, stroke and early death” – Yes, DM…100 really is a life cut tragically short, isn’t it? The rubbish your journos come out with!

    Report abuse

    @ resident, somewhere in America ….. you’re quite correct, any fad diet is foolish, and moderation is the key to healthy eating. I’ve never heard of a ‘Cut this out, cut that out’ diet that wasn’t eventually found to cause problems of one kind or another. Moderate amounts of food from all food groups, plus a moderate amount of exercise, is the way to maintain a sensible weight and a healthy body. The trouble is people don’t want to be told this, they prefer to think there’s a magic solution that doesn’t require self-control or getting up out of their armchair. PS – beware of any diet guru with a book to sell!

    Report abuse

    These fad diets are for fools. As I have read them, they are of two types: “avoid all fat”, and “avoid all carbs”, yet all studies say you lose equal weight following either one. There is good reason. These two fad ways of dieting seem to be completely opposite, until you read their respective diets. The anit-carb diets say you must avoid all carbs and the list includes: Soda pop, cakes, cookies, candies, beer, alcohol, and packaged snacks; then they say you are losing weight because you gave up bread. The anti fat diets say you must avoid all foods with fat, and the list includes: Soda pop, cakes, cookies, candies, beer, alcohol, and packaged snacks; then they say you are losing weight because you gave up meat. Does anyone really believe that if you simply cut your calories in half you wouldn’t lose weight? Don’t eliminate food groups. No fats then no fat soluble vitamins. Grains have all essential amino acids. Like grandma said, a little of everything, and everything in moderation.

    Report abuse

    Sugar ( and it’s more complex form – carbohydrate) has always been the enemy. Any body who disagrees has swallowed the whole BS so called healthy eating diets that have been touted for the past 50 years+.

    Report abuse

    @Liz, Elsewhere: you said that “But potatoes are nutritionally really good for you and rice is full of important B-vitamins! I get really hungry if I cut out the carbs and feel awful.”
    Potatoes and rice have a high glycaemic index, which is going to give you a massive insulin spike and cause you to feel peckish sooner afterwards than in you stick to veggies etc.: that’s the prob with carbs, eating them makes you crave more.
    Regarding you saying you feel awful if you cut out carbs, google ‘low carb flu’ for more info – I switched to the Paleo diet and it works perfectly for me, loads of fruit and veggies too (unlike the Atkins which is ridiculously strict on those). I did get low carb flu, which passed after two weeks and which I also attribute to my body learning to using protein instead of quick-release carbs for energy, as well as detoxing from my previously junky diet. I lost weight too which was a bonus.

    Report abuse

    I’m so tired of all these contradictory articules on food. Just think moderation.PS I can’t spell!

    Report abuse

    Ive just turned 38, whole bundle of fun you are today DM !

    Report abuse

    Paleo/ Primal diet it is so !!

    Report abuse

    A key problem with the modern western diet is the added sugar most of us consume in food and in drinks. Until the eighties, it used to be added sucrose (table sugar) that was the main sugar problem, followed by added glucose syrup. Now, added high fructose glucose syrup (HFGS) made from maize (what the Yanks call ‘corn’, from ‘Indian corn’) is the principal culprit. The easiest first step is for the consumer to stop adding any sucrose (table sugar) to anything we eat or drink. Th next step is to try to stop eating and drinking things that have had any sort of sugar at all added to them. This step is far, far harder. Why? Because thanks to poor labelling regulations, food manufacturers don’t have to specify the amount of sugar they add to food and drink. This makes like very difficult for the average consumer in the UK, the US and Australia.

    Report abuse

    What a pair of prize t*ssers….and to think they run our country.

    Report abuse

    The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.

    Article source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2144443/Why-mid-life-health-kicks-WRECK-mens-bodies-Jogging-low-fat-food-make-fatter-damage-heart.html?ITO=1490

    Posted in News | No Comments »

    Chocolate gave me ulcers, heartburn and made me lose 5 stone

    May 15th, 2012 | Author: admin

    By
    Anthea Gerrie


    PUBLISHED:

    17:46 EST, 14 May 2012

    |

    UPDATED:

    17:46 EST, 14 May 2012

    Sophie Jewett is a true chocoholic.

    As a child, she was so hooked on Dairy Milk she had to have a bar every day.

    She even decided to train as a chocolatier, opening her own business, York Cocoa House, last November.

    Sophie Jewett is a chocolatier, despite her diagnosis of Crohn's. When she eliminated chocolate from her diet, her symptoms dramatically reduced

    Sophie Jewett is a chocolatier, despite her diagnosis of Crohn’s. When she eliminated chocolate from her diet, her symptoms dramatically reduced

    ‘I come from a big family and was always making chocolates and biscuits for everyone,’ says Sophie, 31.

    ‘By the time I was 12 I was trying to work out how to make chocolate glossy, and became fascinated with the science of it.’

    But two years ago, Sophie made a discovery that seemed like a cruel joke.

    When she was a teen, she was diagnosed with Crohn’s disease — an inflammatory bowel disease characterised by pain, diarrhoea, vomiting, weight loss and tiredness — that can often be managed by working out what triggers the symptoms.

    In 2010, Sophie finally worked out the trigger for hers: chocolate.

    She says: ‘I was studying chocolate and I learned it is a muscle relaxant, which means it can cause acid reflux.

    ‘I’d suffered reflux — a burning sensation in my throat — since I was a teenager because of my Crohn’s, so I conducted my own experiments.

    ‘I found great irony in my conclusion.’

    Sophie, who married her partner Stephen last year, found when she eliminated chocolate from her diet, the reflux and other Crohn’s symptoms were dramatically reduced.

    ‘My symptoms have always been around my throat. If I eat a bag of Maltesers, then within an hour I develop lots of ulcers in my mouth.

    ‘I’d never made a direct link with chocolate so carried on eating it.

    ‘Every Easter when I was in my teens, I got ill — I should have twigged  what was happening.

    ‘Of course I was disappointed. I was frightened I’d never be able to eat chocolate again.’

    'I've learned to listen to my body to find out how to get the best of it. I don't avoid certain foods, but I try to balance my fibre intake,' said Sophie

    ‘I’ve learned to listen to my body to find out how to get the best of it. I don’t avoid certain foods, but I try to balance my fibre intake,’ said Sophie

    More than 60,000 Britons are thought to have Crohn’s disease.

    ‘It causes inflammation anywhere in the gastronintestinal tract,’ explains Richard Driscoll, chief executive of the charity Crohn’s and Colitis UK.

    It most commonly affects the bowel but can also affect the mouth, where it triggers inflammation in the form of ulcers, and the throat, causing acid reflux.

    Sophie grew up as a healthy child on the Isle of Wight but started experiencing unexplained symptoms when she was 14.

    ‘Just after Easter I started to get a burning sensation in the back of my throat, and I became really tired, too,’ she recalls.

    ‘I got better, but then it came back the following year.

    ‘My dad took me to AE one evening because I’d collapsed — but the doctors couldn’t find anything wrong.

    ‘I got sent home and my symptoms seemed to vanish.’

    However, Sophie continued to suffer flare-ups of acid reflux as well as terrible mouth ulcers.

    ‘By the time I took my GCSEs I had 40 of them in my mouth, the size of 10p pieces,’ she says.

    Sophie, who is 5ft 2in, lost 5st, going from 10st to half that in just five months. Concerned doctors put her on milkshakes fortified with nutrients.

    ‘One day a doctor started putting some really personal questions to me and I realised they thought I was anorexic.

    ‘I wanted to scream I wasn’t doing this to myself or making it up.’

    Just as she was about to start A-levels, Sophie was back in hospital, where doctors kept her in for two weeks, determined to make a diagnosis.

    ‘I weighed just 5st at this point,’ she says.

    ‘About halfway through my stay they discovered I had Crohn’s disease.

    ‘It was a relief, to be honest. I left hospital with lots of medication, feeling much better and able to get on with my life.’

    'Of course I can't eat chocolate every day like I'd love to... It's hard sometimes when you're surrounded by the one thing you're not allowed to have,' said Sophie

    ‘Of course I can’t eat chocolate every day like I’d love to… It’s hard sometimes when you’re surrounded by the one thing you’re not allowed to have,’ said Sophie

    There is no cure for Crohn’s. Eight out of ten patients require surgery at some point to remove the diseased part of the bowel.

    There are medications, including steroids — to reduce the inflammation — and immunosupressants, but many have side-effects. And often treatment is a case of trial and error.

    It is crucial patients identify anything that may exacerbate their condition.

    These can include stress and certain food types, says Alastair Forbes, a Crohn’s disease expert and professor of gastroenterology at University College London.

    There are no consistent findings about trigger foods — each patient is different — but wheat, dairy and coffee are often implicated and chocolate’s often cited,’ he says.

    ‘The real test is a patient’s experience. Keeping a food diary can identify patterns.’

    Sophie tried several drugs with varying success while continuing with her ambition to start a business.

    She was prescribed Infliximab to suppress the immune system, and it allowed her to complete her degree and a master’s, and even climb Table Mountain in Cape Town.

    In 2008, Sophie was prescribed Humira, an injection to block TNF-alpha, a signalling molecule that plays a role in inflammation and is abnormally high in people with Crohn’s.

    Within a year, she became almost symptom-free, and has not needed to take any drugs since 2009.

    ‘For the past three years I have never felt so well,’ she says.

    She has also benefited from having a designated gastro nurse who helps her manage the condition and its triggers.

    Sophie says: ‘I know I will never be free of Crohn’s — and I would hate to be without the support of my nurse.

    ‘She’s a friendly voice to discuss treatment options and symptoms with.

    ‘I’ve learned to listen to my body to find out how to get the best of it.

    ‘I don’t avoid certain foods, but I try to balance my fibre intake.’

    Of her discovery two years ago that her favourite food might be making her ill, Sophie adds: ‘By then all my other symptoms were under control but the reflux was so bad my doctors were considering operating to tighten the opening from my oesophagus to my stomach.

    ‘I discovered the possible link and stopped nibbling on chocolate — and for the first time in 16 years the reflux went away.

    ‘I don’t think chocolate caused the Crohn’s disease, but maybe it exacerbated the onset of it.’

    Her experiences haven’t put Sophie off chocolate — indeed, this year she organised York’s first chocolate festival and made truffles in honour of the Queen’s visit to the city.

    ‘Of course I can’t eat chocolate every day like I’d love to,’ she says.

    ‘And it’s hard sometimes when you’re surrounded by the one thing you’re not allowed to have. But after eliminating chocolate for a while, I can now allow myself a bit here and there.

    ‘I just stop if my throat starts niggling. It’s nice to know it won’t land me in hospital.

    ‘I do still crave a bar of Dairy Milk of course. And sometimes I can’t resist a little square.’

    For more information about Crohn’s, see the Crohn’s and Colitis UK website at www.nacc.org.uk

     

    Here’s what other readers have said. Why not add your thoughts,
    or debate this issue live on our message boards.

    The comments below have not been moderated.



    • Newest


    • Oldest


    • Best rated


    • Worst rated

    I’m a chocoholic and am on a diet to try and change my eating habits – which have involved chocolate for years! But I don’t HAVE to give it up and would hate to suffer like poor Sophie: that’s the outer circle of hell, not being able to enjoy chocolate when you are surrounded by it and work with it all day because it exacerbates this awful disease.

    Report abuse

    That is cruelly ironic. I’ve several friends with Crohn’s and have seen how brutal the disease (and the side effects of treatment) can be, good to see some public awareness.

    Report abuse

    I enjoy reading about Crohn’s in the news, as I don’t think it gets enough attention. I had never heard of it when I got diagnosed with Crohn’s…which I find odd as it is surprisingly common.
    May is Crohn’s and Colitis Month so any additional exposure for the diseases is great.

    Report abuse

    I hve ulcerative colitis which is similar to crohns and am still searching for the trigger – I think crohns and colitis need more publicity because they can make you feel very alone and disgusting…thank you dm for publishing a helpful story! makes a nice change to all the celebrity emphasis :)

    Report abuse

    The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.

    Article source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2144409/Chocolate-gave-ulcers-heartburn-lose-5-stone.html?ITO=1490

    Posted in News | No Comments »

    Undearm implant that jump-starts an irregular heart

    May 15th, 2012 | Author: admin

    By
    David Hurst


    PUBLISHED:

    20:05 EST, 14 May 2012

    |

    UPDATED:

    20:05 EST, 14 May 2012


    Tragedy: Runner Claire Squires died during last month's London Marathon

    Tragedy: Runner Claire Squires died during last month’s London Marathon

    A million Britons suffer from an irregular heartbeat, or arrhythmia, and every year 70,000 die as a result.

    All ages are affected, as was shockingly demonstrated by the collapse of Bolton Wanderers footballer Fabrice Muamba in March, and the death of charity runner Claire Squires at the London Marathon last month.

    The 30-year-old hairdresser from Leicestershire had reportedly been diagnosed with an irregular heartbeat but refused to let it stop her running.

    Now a new implant is set to transform the lives of patients with arrhythmia, even allowing them to take part in ‘stressful’ events, such as marathons.

    In a healthy heart, electrical signals cause it to contract and pump blood at a regular speed.

    If there is a problem with these signals, the heart beats too slowly, too quickly or irregularly, which is known as an arrythmia.

    They are mostly harmless but can sometimes lead to a fatal sudden cardiac arrest, often during strenuous activities because the heart has to work harder, which can cause the electrical signals to go out of rhythym.

    Arrhythmia frequently affects people who have a history of congenital heart disease.

    However, the number of people with these ‘heart flutters’ is on the rise, especially among younger people, possibly caused by an increase in factors such as excessive drinking or stress.

    The Subcutaneous Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (S-ICD) is positioned under the armpit.

    It detects when the heart is beating irregularly, and has a built-in defibrillator to zap the patient back to life by giving them a controlled electric shock.

    Implanted defibrillators such as this have been used since the Eighties.

    But there are key differences between the conventional devices and the new one.

    A million Britons suffer from an irregular heartbeat, or arrhythmia, and every year 70,000 die as a result

    A million Britons suffer from an irregular heartbeat, or arrhythmia, and every year 70,000 die as a result

    The conventional version is implanted under the collarbone and monitors the heartbeat via wires that are passed through a vein directly into the heart.

    These wires pose a risk of serious infection and, because the heart muscle moves constantly, there is also a chance that the wires could fracture and need to be replaced.

    Consequently, one in five leads will have problems in fewer than ten years — and the surgery to repair this carries a further risk of infection.

    The new implant, by contrast, has just one 3mm diameter wire going across the chest under the skin outside the rib cage, meaning there is less risk of infection.

    Another advantage with the  new device is that patients are less at risk from a ‘false’ shock — around a third of the shocks given by ICDs are unnecessary, triggered by variations in heartbeat that pose no immediate danger to the patient.

    However, these shocks can be extremely painful and cause anxiety — some patients have described them as feeling like a horse kick from inside the chest.

    ‘A patient will physically jerk with shock from either the standard ICD or the S-ICD,’ says Dr Adrian Morley-Davies, a cardiologist at University Hospital of North Staffordshire in Stoke. ‘It feels very painful.’

    With the new device, the wire is positioned further away from the heart, so it is less likely to pick up the organ’s electrical ‘noise’, which can trigger a false alarm.

    ‘The new S-ICD device doesn’t appear to give the false shocks that the old one did,’ confirms Dr Andrew Grace, a cardiologist at Papworth Hospital, Cambridge, who helped to develop the new implant.

    ‘And it’s not touching the heart, so if an infection did happen, you can take it out without any problems.’

    Furthermore, because the wire is not attached to the heart, but is positioned a short distance away, the impulse can spread across the heart, giving a shock that is two-and-a-half times more effective than the standard implant, which gives only a direct ‘hit’.

    The battery is also designed to deliver higher energy.

    Fitting and maintenance of the new device is also simpler — and cheaper.

    Doctors say placing the implant is a more straightforward, one-hour procedure than with the traditional ICD, which is actually half the size but which can take up to three hours to fit (the new device is matchbox-sized).

    Studies at Papworth and in New Zealand, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, found the new device — which has been available on the NHS for the past two years — was 100  per cent successful in treating severe arrhythmias.

    Sean Rodgers, 43, was among the first in the country to have one fitted.

    The housing repair manager and seasoned runner had a cardiac arrest in March 2009, and was effectively ‘dead’ for 15 minutes.

    He was saved only because his wife Maria knew how to give chest compressions.

    Even so, he remained in a coma for a week. Maria and their two teenage children were warned it was unlikely he would survive.

    When Sean recovered, he was told he had Long QT Syndrome, a condition affecting 6,000 Britons, where the heart takes longer than normal to reset its electrics after each beat.

    He had the device fitted in January 2010 at the Northern General Hospital, Sheffield.

    Ten months later, he had another cardiac arrest. Luckily, this time, he’d had the S-ICD fitted.

    ‘The S-ICD saved my life,’ says Sean, of Mexborough, South Yorkshire.

    ‘I got up off the sofa and suddenly felt my eyes rolling into the back of my head before it went dark. But then the device must have kicked in.’

    An implanted defibrillator is not the same as a pacemaker, which sends regular electrical pulses to help keep the heart beating regularly.

    Instead, it’s like a portable defibrillator that will kick-start the heart back to life if it stops beating, explains William McKenna, professor of cardiology at London’s Heart Hospital  and president of the Cardiomyopathy Association.

    ‘The S-ICD can’t pace the heart, so is unsuitable for those with advanced disease or older patients who also need pacing.’

    However, it is suitable for most younger people who have arrhythmias.

    ‘They are particularly suitable for younger people who are at risk of sudden death but who are very active,’ he adds.

    That is something that Sean Rodgers can now appreciate only too well.

    ‘The S-ICD has given me the confidence to get on with life,’ he says.

    ‘I even completed the London Marathon this year.

    ‘It has given me the security of knowing that, if needed, my heart will be given a jump-start.’

    For more information, visit bhf.org.uk and arrhythmiaalliance.org.uk

    Article source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2144422/Undearm-implant-jump-starts-irregular-heart.html?ITO=1490

    Posted in News | No Comments »

    Are People with HIV/AIDS More Prone to Sudden Cardiac Death?

    May 15th, 2012 | Author: admin

    What is the connection, if any, between sudden cardiac death and people with HIV/AIDS? And can that knowledge help prolong their lives?

    In a comprehensive, retrospective 10-year UCSF study, researchers found patients with HIV/AIDS suffered sudden cardiac death at a rate four times higher than the general population.

    “As part of my ongoing research in 2010, we were looking at every instance of sudden death in San Francisco,” said first author Zian H. Tseng, MD, an electrophysiologist and an associate professor of medicine in the UCSF Division of Cardiology. “I noticed that many of these cases involved individuals with HIV infection, who were dying suddenly. I wondered if there was some sort of connection there.”

    He posed this question to Priscilla Hsue, MD, a UCSF associate professor of medicine and the director of the HIV Cardiology Clinic at San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center (SFGH), who is one of a few cardiologists in the country who specializes in HIV. To her knowledge, no one had ever explored the link between HIV and sudden death, and that is when they began collaborating on this research.

    In a paper scheduled to be published May 15 in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Tseng, Hsue and other researchers conducted a retrospective study of 2,860 HIV patients from April 2000 to August 2009 at SFGH’s Ward 86, the first HIV/AIDS-specialized clinic, to comprehensively characterize all deaths. They studied medical records, death certificates, paramedic reports, and interviews with family members, doctors, and other clinicians.

    Sudden Cardiac Death and HIV/AIDS

    During that period, eight percent died during an average of 3.7 years of follow up. Cardiac-related deaths accounted for 15 percent of overall mortality. Of that group, 86 percent died of sudden cardiac death.

    “To put that in context, we’re able to compare the rate of sudden death in this population with the overall San Francisco population,” Tseng said. “So adjusted for age, race, demographics, and other variables, the rate of sudden death in the HIV population is more than four times higher than the general population.”

    Zian Tseng, MD, reviews the electrical activity of a patient’s heart at the UCSF Heart Vascular Center’s Electrophysiology Lab.

    “The fact that the vast majority of cardiac deaths were sudden is surprising and implies that we as clinicians need to be aware of this potential health issue among patients with HIV,” Hsue added. “Our findings also highlight many things that we still don’t know about HIV and sudden death. Did these individuals die of unrecognized coronary artery disease? What can we be doing as clinicians to identify patients at risk and to intervene beforehand?”

    Categorizing Sudden Cardiac Death

    By 2003, sudden cardiac death made up the largest number of non-AIDS deaths among HIV-positive patients in San Francisco.  These deaths were largely among individuals with evidence of well-controlled HIV disease.

    Researchers used well-published criteria for retrospectively identifying death as either HIV-related or sudden death-related. If there was any doubt, they classified sudden death as an HIV death.

    “In other words, for someone with a CD4 (T-cell) count less than 50 who died suddenly, we classified that as an HIV death, rather than a sudden death because of the profound immunodeficiency,” Tseng said.

    More than 17,000 people with AIDS in the United Stated died in 2009, and more than 619,000 people have died since the epidemic began. Still, the number of people living with HIV continues to rise. More than 1.2 million people in the United States are HIV-positive, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    A scan of a patient’s heart.

    “Now that HIV-infected individuals are living longer with the benefit of antiretroviral therapy, non-AIDS conditions are becoming increasingly important and at the top of this list is cardiovascular disease,” Hsue said.

    Researchers believe HIV changes the electrophysiology of the heart in a way so pronounced that it causes conduction abnormalities. And many HIV medications can throw off the heart’s electrical cycle, which increases the risk of sudden death. These and other variables could be contributing factors.

    “Acknowledging the limitations of a retrospective analysis, what’s interesting about this study is that it opens up many related questions we can ask in future studies, such as which high-risk patients might benefit from defibrillator implantation?” Tseng said.

    Tseng is in the middle of a prospective citywide study on sudden cardiac death, including studying HIV patients and monitoring their progress.

    Tseng is the first author of the paper; Hsue is the senior author; co-authors include Eric Secemsky, MD, of the UCSF Department of Medicine; David Dowdy, MD, PhD, ScM, of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health’s Department of Epidemiology; Eric Vittinghoff, PhD, MPH, of the UCSF Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics; Brian Moyers, MD, of the UCSF Division of Cardiology; Joseph Wong, MD, of the UCSF Department of Medicine and San Francisco VA Medical Center; and Diane Havlir, MD, of the San Francisco General Hospital HIV/AIDS Division.

    This study was supported by funds from the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH). Tseng has received minor honorarium from Biotronik. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.

    UCSF is a leading university dedicated to promoting health worldwide through advanced biomedical research, graduate-level education in the life sciences and health professions, and excellence in patient care.

    Article source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/UCSF_News/~3/LKr2sOL8bNo/are-people-hiv-aids-more-prone-sudden-cardiac-death

    Posted in News | No Comments »

    Sex and your heart

    May 11th, 2012 | Author: admin

    May 10, 2012

    Patients who do not get doctors’ advice on sexual activity
    before leaving hospital are more likely to unnecessarily refrain
    from sex, a study has found.

    Those who received guidance on sexual
    activity     after suffering a heart attack were one and a
    half times more likely to return to a healthy and happy sex
    life.

    Natasha Stewart, our Senior Cardiac Nurse,
    said: “This research highlights the need for doctors to tackle
    topics that can often cause embarrassment for
    patients, such as sexual activity after a heart attack.

    “By including information about sex in the
    rehabilitation process, doctors can make sure people are
    fully informed about how best to return to their
    normal activities.

    “However, there are many factors that may
    complicate things, such as circulation problems or some heart medicines. If you have any questions, you
    should talk to your GP or cardiac rehabilitation
    team who can offer advice and support.”

    This study was published in the
    American Journal of Cardiology.

    Article source: http://www.bhf.org.uk/media/news-from-the-bhf/sex-life-advice.aspx

    Posted in News | No Comments »

    Long-term Use of Osteoporosis Medication May Reduce Bone Fracture Risk for Some Patients

    May 10th, 2012 | Author: admin

    Continuing a popular but controversial treatment for osteoporosis could reduce spine fracture risk for a particular group of patients, but others could see little to no change if they discontinue it. Based on available evidence, a UCSF researcher reevaluated his 2006 finding from a randomized 10-year study of alendronate, a type of bisphosphonate – a class of drugs that prevent loss of bone mass.

    Dennis Black, PhD

    “Our study suggests that even after five years of therapy, if your bone density is low enough, you’re at high risk for having additional spine fractures,” said Dennis Black, PhD, professor and division chief of UCSF’s Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics’ Clinical Trials and Multicenter Studies. “And by continuing this therapy for these patients, it’s likely to decrease that risk for spine fractures.”

    The study was funded by Merck, the maker of Fosamax, a commercial version of alendronate.

    Osteoporosis is responsible for 1.5 million fractures in the United States a year at a cost of $14 billion annually. As many as half of all women and a quarter of men older than 50 will break a bone due to osteoporosis, according to the National Institutes of Health.

    Balancing Risks vs. Benefits

    Treating osteoporosis with bisphosphonates, particularly for more than five years, has been linked to some side effects, including atypical femur fractures. Public concerns led the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to hold a hearing last September about the drug. The organization is expected to publish its guidelines in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) this week, alongside Black’s perspective.

    “Any decrease in spine fracture risk will need to be balanced against a possible but unknown increase in other side effects including atypical femur fractures,” Black said.

    “It is clearly established that three to five years of bisphosphonates are beneficial in reducing fractures, particularly in women with existing low bone density,” he added. “However, whether treatment should continue after five years has been controversial. I think the FDA is going to say that there’s limited data that continuing bisphosphonates long-term will further reduce fracture risk, and many people can safely discontinue after three to five years.”

    Black hopes his perspective will give physicians and patients specific information about who might benefit by continuing and specifically what that benefit might be.

    Studying Risk of Spine Fracture

    The original study by Black and colleagues studied a total of 6,459 women for up to five years, comparing alendronate to a placebo. That study showed less fracture risk of spine, hip and other major bones and led to FDA approval of alendronate in 1997.

    In a newer 2006 continuation study, 1,099 of the women who had taken alendronate for an average of five years at the start of the continuation study were randomly assigned to five more years of alendronate or a placebo. Those who continued on alendronate showed lower risk of spine fractures but no difference in risk for non-spine and hip fractures.

    “Our study suggests that at least for women who are at very high risk for spine fractures, they will benefit by continuing alendronate therapy to decrease the number of spine fractures,” Black said.

    This spine X-ray shows a patient who has osteoporosis.

    Elevated public concerns about the possible link between alendronate and femur fractures, as well as other side effects such as osteonecrosis of the jaw – bone death caused by poor blood supply to the area – have compelled the FDA to address the issue this week. While the FDA perspective includes information about possible risks of long-term use, Black’s study specifically examined long term fracture benefits.

    “Each patient and her physician need to weigh the benefits versus the risks, but the purpose of our analysis was to try to give people a sense of what the benefits might be and in whom they would be highest,” Black said.

    The study by Black and colleagues examined one type of bisphosphonate: alendronate. The drug had been developed and the studies funded by Merck, which sold the drug under the name Fosamax. In 2008, alendronate became generic and now is most commonly used in generic form. Black cautioned that other bisphosphonates including risedronate and ibandronate, have not been studied long-term with respect to their benefits for those with previous spine fractures.

    Black is the first author of the paper; the senior author is Clifford J. Rosen, MD, of the Maine Medical Center Research Institute; co-authors include Ann V. Schwartz, PhD, of the UCSF Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics; Douglas Bauer, MD, of the UCSF Department of Medicine; and Steven R. Cummings, MD, of California Pacific Medical Center.

    The original and continuation studies were carried out from 1991 to 2004 by Black and colleagues at UCSF with funding to UCSF from Merck. The current analysis published in the New England Journal Perspective was performed independently of commercial sponsorship and the sponsor did not have any input in this analysis.

    UCSF is a leading university dedicated to promoting health worldwide through advanced biomedical research, graduate-level education in the life sciences and health professions, and excellence in patient care.

    Article source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/UCSF_News/~3/AYe1EBGYb14/long-term-use-osteoporosis-medication-may-reduce-bone-fracture-risk-some-patients

    Posted in News | No Comments »

    Living near a motorway hikes your risk of dying after a heart attack

    May 9th, 2012 | Author: admin

    By
    Daily Mail Reporter


    PUBLISHED:

    10:18 EST, 8 May 2012

    |

    UPDATED:

    01:48 EST, 9 May 2012

    Living close to a major road poses a significant risk to heart attack survivors, a study has found.

    Researchers found heart attack survivors living less than 100 metres from a carriageway had a 27 per cent higher risk of death within 10 years than survivors living at least 1,000 metres away.

    The team from Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston added that the risk receded to 13 per cent for those living between 200 and 1,000-metres from the traffic.

    Harmful highway?

    Harmful highway? The study is the latest to suggest long-term exposure to roadways can worsen health for those with heart disease

    Lead author Dr Murray Mittleman said: ‘Living close to a highway is associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes in those with underlying cardiac disease.

    ‘Besides air pollution, exposure to noise could be a possible mechanism underlying this association.’

    The study of more than 3,500 heart attack survivors in 64 medical centres recorded 1,071 deaths over 10 years. Of that total, 63 per cent of the patients died of cardiovascular disease, 12 percent died of cancer and four per cent died from respiratory disease.

    Researchers analysed factors such as personal, clinical and neighborhood-level characteristics such as income and education.

    Dr Mittleman said: ‘People with lower levels of education and income are more likely to live in communities closer to a major roadway, so they are bearing a larger burden of the risk associated with exposure than people with more resources.’

    In a study published earlier this year, a team led by Dr Mittleman found air pollution, even at levels generally considered safe by federal regulations, increases the risk of stroke by 34 per cent.

    Exposure to ambient fine particulate matter, generally from vehicle traffic, was associated with a significantly higher risk of ischemic strokes on days when the EPA’s air quality index for particulate matter was yellow instead of green.

    These finding provide new evidence that long-term exposure to roadways is associated with an increased risk of death in patients with underlying cardiovascular disease.  Writing in the latest edition of Circulation

    ‘Clinicians need to educate their patients on the risks posed by particulate matter pollution and encourage patients with cardiovascular disease to avoid unnecessary exposure to traffic,’ said Dr Mittleman.

    ‘On a public policy level, city planners should consider locating housing developments away from the most heavily trafficked roadways.’

    Dan Costa from the U.S Enviromental Protection Agency, said: ‘This study adds to the growing knowledge linking roadways and traffic to health problems, even death, especially among those with pre-existent disease – in this case a previous heart attack.’

    Here’s what other readers have said. Why not add your thoughts,
    or debate this issue live on our message boards.

    The comments below have not been moderated.



    • Newest


    • Oldest


    • Best rated


    • Worst rated

    I live fairly close to a motorway(M2) am not poor or deprived!!!!!!

    Report abuse

    I live fairly close to a motorway(M2) am not poor or deprived!!!!!!

    Report abuse

    I live by a 24/7 busy road and it creates tension in me. Only in the middle of the night is it at bearable levels with a few stretches of silence and the sense of calm and relaxation felt really makes me conscious of the fact those cars and their night-owl drivers are killing me….probably others too. We need to cut it down HUGELY. The craving for silence is huge.

    Report abuse

    The U.S. uses miles and yards in measurement so what’s this with metres ?.

    Report abuse

    The biggest problem here is carbon monoxide. It’s toxic because it ties up your haemoglobin and thus decreases your capacity to carry oxygen in the bloodstream. If you’ve already lost part of your heart muscle to a heart attack, that’s a decrease in pumping capacity added to a decrease in oxygen capacity – a most unfortunate and dangerous combination.

    Report abuse

    Must be all the smokers in the cars, it can’t be anything to do with motor vehicles.

    Report abuse

    Shocker. Wonder how many heart attacks were CAUSED by the stress of a noisy environment? Loud traffic, extra loud “performance” mufflers, quads, motorbikes, stereos, etc. – there is no end to the noise and no getting away from it, anywhere.

    Report abuse

    Air Pollution from vehicles is known to cause more deaths than smoking yet the government dont ban cars. It has been well known for many years that those living next or near to busy roads have a higher chance of heart disease, cancer or respiratory problems. Removing lead from petrol did not make the exhaust fumes healthy, just cut down the risk of lead poisoning.

    Report abuse

    What a nonsense and they are suppose to be the clever , more like Muppets.

    Report abuse

    In that case, all motorway users should pay an extrra £1.5, plus VAT as compensation, Indeed, they should pay £1.5k up front to benefit those living adjacent to motorways. I’m going to write to Gideon to make sure he puts it in his budget; after all motorway users are really selfish. All they think of is saving money and time. Gideon must tax vehicles using motorways extra.

    Report abuse

    The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.

    Article source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2141330/Living-near-motorway-hikes-risk-dying-heart-attack.html?ITO=1490

    Posted in News | No Comments »
    « Older Entries

    Log in
    Copyright 2012 Heart to Heart. All Rights Reserved.