Health Journal Online

Tag: Study

  • New Study Finds Intermittent Fasting Produces Similar Weight Loss to Calorie Counting

    New Study Finds Intermittent Fasting Produces Similar Weight Loss to Calorie Counting

    Intermittent fasting produced comparable weight loss to traditional daily calorie restriction over 18 months — but people following intermittent fasting did so without the same constant feeling of needing to monitor and limit their food intake, according to a new study from Adelaide University published in the journal Clinical Nutrition.

    That distinction may matter more than the weight loss numbers alone. Difficulty sticking to a diet — not the diet’s biological effectiveness — is the primary reason people abandon calorie-restriction programs, researchers said. And the study, led by Professor Leonie Heilbronn of Adelaide University’s School of Medicine and the South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, found that intermittent fasting could offer an alternative pathway specifically for people whose eating behaviors make sustained calorie counting feel impossible.

    Why This Matters

    Calorie counting — the most widely recommended dietary strategy for weight loss — asks people to track every gram of food consumed, stay below a daily energy target, and resist overeating at every meal, every day, indefinitely. That cognitive and emotional workload is substantial, and research consistently shows it is the primary reason people abandon the approach.

    “While many diets can result in weight loss, they may be difficult to stick to and this makes keeping that weight off long-term more challenging,” Professor Heilbronn said in an Adelaide University release.

    More than 100 million Americans are estimated to be living with obesity, and the vast majority have attempted dietary interventions at some point. The repeated cycle of dieting, initial weight loss, and gradual regain is one of the most common and frustrating experiences in clinical weight management. A strategy that produces comparable results through a different behavioral mechanism — without the constant cognitive burden of restricting every meal — could be more sustainable for specific types of patients.

    What We Know So Far

    The Adelaide University trial enrolled more than 200 adults with obesity over an 18-month period and randomized them into three groups: intermittent fasting with time-restricted eating, daily calorie restriction, or a control group receiving standard healthy-eating advice.

    The intermittent fasting protocol used in the study was specific: participants ate 30% of their normal daily energy intake during a window between 8 a.m. and noon on three non-consecutive days per week, followed by a 20-hour fast. On the remaining four days, they ate normally. The calorie-restriction group reduced their total daily intake by approximately 30% every day.

    Both dietary intervention groups lost similar amounts of weight over the study period. The key divergence was behavioral: calorie restriction participants reported consciously having to monitor their eating, avoid overeating, and restrain themselves at meals — and that improved dietary control accounted for approximately 15% of their weight loss. Intermittent fasting participants did not report the same need for constant behavioral restraint to achieve comparable results.

    The study found no evidence that intermittent fasting caused the concerns sometimes cited against it: participants did not report increased irritability, obsessive thoughts about food, or binge eating on non-fasting days, according to research coverage by ScienceDaily.

    “Psychological and behavioral effects have a major influence on people’s abilities to adhere to diets,” Professor Heilbronn said. “Intermittent fasting may help people achieve weight loss through ways that are less dependent on consciously restricting intake.”

    Where the Benefit Is Most Relevant

    The study’s findings are most applicable to people who:

    • Have tried calorie-counting diets and found the constant monitoring unsustainable
    • Repeatedly lose and regain weight (sometimes called “yo-yo dieting”)
    • Struggle with eating restraint at every meal but can manage structured fasting windows
    • Are not in a clinical category that makes fasting dangerous (see risks below)

    “If someone finds it difficult to improve eating behaviors, intermittent fasting might be better to help them still lose weight,” Professor Heilbronn told Healthline. “Previous research shows that people who improve their relationship with food and gain better control over cravings lose more weight — regardless of the specific diet they undertake.”

    What Researchers Say

    Professor Heilbronn, who has led multiple randomized trials of intermittent fasting protocols over more than a decade, was careful to frame the study’s findings as an option for specific patients rather than a universal recommendation. “Future trials should be designed to identify individuals who struggle to improve eating behaviors, as they may do better with intermittent fasting diets, enabling more personalized weight management,” she said.

    “Although intermittent fasting is a popular diet, experts agree that it’s not for everyone,” Heilbronn told Healthline. People with a history of eating disorders, those who are pregnant or nursing, people with diabetes who take insulin or sulfonylureas (where skipping meals can cause hypoglycemia), and people with certain medical conditions should discuss any significant dietary change with a clinician before starting.

    What the Evidence Shows — and What It Does Not

    This study was designed primarily to examine the psychological and behavioral effects of the two diets — eating behaviors, mood, sleep, and quality of life — rather than weight loss magnitude as its primary outcome. That design choice means the study provides strong insight into how people experience the diets differently, but does not change the existing evidence base on the magnitude of weight loss produced by each approach.

    The weight loss outcomes were comparable between groups — the study was not designed to determine whether one approach is numerically superior. The key new finding is the behavioral mechanism: the two diets appear to work through different psychological pathways, which has practical implications for patient selection.

    The protocol used — intermittent fasting on three non-consecutive days per week with a specific morning eating window — is one of several intermittent fasting approaches. Results may not apply to other IF formats such as 16:8 daily fasting, alternate-day fasting, or the 5:2 protocol.

    MedicalDaily Evidence Check

    • Study type: Randomized controlled trial
    • Published: Online May 15, 2026, Clinical Nutrition (DOI: 10.1016/j.clnu.2026.106686); ScienceDaily coverage July 8, 2026
    • Institution: Adelaide University School of Medicine; South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute
    • Protocol: 3-day intermittent fasting (30% intake 8am–noon, 20h fast) vs. 30% daily calorie restriction vs. control; 18 months; 200+ adults with obesity
    • What it found: Both groups lost similar amounts of weight; intermittent fasting participants showed less reliance on conscious eating restraint; no increase in irritability, food obsession, or binge eating in IF group
    • What it did not find: Evidence that IF produces more weight loss than calorie restriction; evidence that any IF protocol is universally superior to all other approaches
    • Key limitation: One specific IF protocol tested; results may not apply to all IF approaches; conducted in Australia with predominantly Australian participants
    • What readers should know: IF may be a viable alternative for people who struggle to sustain daily calorie counting; not appropriate for everyone; consult a clinician before significant dietary change

    Who This Finding Is Most Relevant For

    The study’s implications are most directly relevant to:

    • People with obesity who have repeatedly attempted calorie-counting diets without sustained success
    • People who find constant meal monitoring cognitively or emotionally burdensome
    • Individuals without medical contraindications to meal timing changes (diabetes on insulin, eating disorder history, pregnancy, certain medications)

    For people who are already successful at calorie counting and maintaining weight loss, there is no evidence from this study that switching to intermittent fasting would produce additional benefit.

    For people currently prescribed GLP-1 medications for obesity management, dietary strategy remains an important complement to medication — whether that is calorie restriction or intermittent fasting. This study’s findings do not change medication recommendations.

    Intermittent Fasting: Who Should Be Cautious

    Not all people should attempt intermittent fasting without medical guidance. Consult a clinician before starting if you:

    • Have Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes and take insulin or sulfonylurea medications (risk of hypoglycemia during fasting windows)
    • Have a history of eating disorders or disordered eating patterns
    • Are pregnant or planning to become pregnant
    • Take medications that require food to be taken with them
    • Are underweight or have a history of malnutrition
    • Have kidney disease, liver disease, or other conditions where meal timing and nutrient intake are closely medically managed

    What You Can Do Now

    • Identify your pattern. If you have repeatedly started calorie-counting diets and found the constant monitoring unsustainable, the adherence advantage of IF may be relevant to you.
    • Consider the specific protocol tested. This study used a 3-day-per-week approach with eating limited to the morning hours (8 a.m. to noon) on fasting days. This is different from the popular 16:8 approach. Both exist; the evidence for this specific protocol is what this trial tested.
    • Talk to a clinician before starting, particularly if you have any of the conditions listed above.
    • Don’t combine IF with severe restriction on non-fasting days. The protocol tested involved eating normally on non-fasting days. Extreme restriction on all days defeats the behavioral advantage the study identified.
    • Be realistic about weight loss magnitude. Intermittent fasting produced comparable weight loss to calorie restriction — roughly 3% to 5% of body weight over months in most trials. It is not a rapid weight loss strategy.
    • Pair dietary change with physical activity. All randomized weight loss trials produce better outcomes when participants also increase moderate exercise.

    Cost and Access: What Patients Should Know

    Intermittent fasting costs nothing in terms of products or services. It requires no meal replacement products, supplements, apps, or program subscriptions to implement. However, for people with obesity seeking medical support for weight management, several resources are available:

    • Primary care physicians can refer patients to registered dietitians, who can support implementation of either dietary approach
    • Most insurance plans cover at least one visit per year with a registered dietitian when a medical diagnosis (such as obesity or pre-diabetes) is present
    • Free dietary guidance is available through the 2020–2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans and the CDC’s Healthy Weight resources

    What Happens Next

    Professor Heilbronn’s research team has called for future trials designed to identify specific patients who are most likely to benefit from intermittent fasting versus calorie restriction — a step toward more personalized dietary prescribing. That research has not yet been announced or registered.

    The existing evidence base on intermittent fasting continues to grow across multiple research groups. Future meta-analyses pooling this and other trials will provide stronger evidence on who benefits most and under what protocols.

    The Bottom Line

    An 18-month Adelaide University trial found that intermittent fasting and calorie restriction produce comparable weight loss — but through meaningfully different behavioral pathways. Calorie counters rely heavily on conscious restraint; intermittent fasters do not. For people who have repeatedly failed to sustain calorie-counting diets because of the cognitive burden, this study suggests intermittent fasting may offer a more tolerable path to the same destination. It is not a universal solution and is not appropriate for everyone — but the evidence that adherence, rather than biology, is the primary obstacle to sustained weight loss points clearly toward a more personalized approach to dietary counseling.

    Source link

  • GLP-1 Drugs Like Ozempic Are Showing a 47 Percent Reduction in Breast Cancer Risk in a Major New Study — and Weight Loss May Not Explain It

    GLP-1 Drugs Like Ozempic Are Showing a 47 Percent Reduction in Breast Cancer Risk in a Major New Study — and Weight Loss May Not Explain It

    The list of conditions that GLP-1 receptor agonists appear to protect against keeps getting longer. These drugs — which include semaglutide (Ozempic, Wegovy), tirzepatide (Mounjaro, Zepbound), and the newly approved orforglipron (Foundayo) — were originally developed for type 2 diabetes before emerging as transformative obesity medications. Then cardiovascular outcome trials showed they reduce heart attacks and strokes. Then the sleep apnea approval added obstructive sleep apnea to the indication list. Then studies suggested reductions in kidney disease progression, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, and alcohol dependence.

    And now, a major study presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting in Chicago in early June 2026 and reported widely on June 10, 2026 has added breast cancer to the rapidly expanding list of conditions that GLP-1 drugs appear to protect against — with an effect magnitude that has stunned the oncology community.

    The study, which analyzed real-world data from a large cohort of women with type 2 diabetes or obesity who were treated with GLP-1 receptor agonists, found that GLP-1 drug use was associated with a 30 to 47 percent lower risk of developing breast cancer compared to women who did not use these medications. The lower end of that range (30 percent) emerged from analyses adjusted for body mass index and weight change — meaning even when researchers accounted for the weight loss that GLP-1 drugs produce, a significant protective signal remained. This finding strongly suggests that GLP-1 drugs may be protecting against breast cancer through mechanisms that go beyond simply reducing body fat — mechanisms that may include direct anti-tumor effects, reduced insulin resistance and associated growth factor signaling, or anti-inflammatory pathways.

    Why This Finding Is Biologically Plausible

    The biological connection between metabolic dysfunction, obesity, insulin resistance, and breast cancer risk is well established. Adipose tissue (fat) produces estrogen through a process called aromatization, making obesity a direct driver of estrogen-dependent breast cancers. Hyperinsulinemia — the elevated insulin levels that accompany insulin resistance in type 2 diabetes and obesity — activates the insulin-like growth factor (IGF-1) pathway, which promotes cancer cell proliferation and survival. Chronic inflammation from adipose tissue dysfunction activates oncogenic pathways that promote tumor growth.

    GLP-1 receptor agonists address multiple of these pathways simultaneously. They reduce body fat (reducing aromatization and adipose inflammation), improve insulin sensitivity (reducing hyperinsulinemia and IGF-1 signaling), and have direct anti-inflammatory effects. Preclinical studies have also documented direct GLP-1 receptor agonist activity on cancer cell lines, suggesting GLP-1 receptors may be expressed in breast cancer tissue and may mediate direct anti-proliferative effects when activated.

    The study’s finding that the protective signal persists even after adjustment for weight and BMI is the most provocative result, because it suggests the drug’s biological effects — beyond simple caloric restriction and fat mass reduction — are contributing to cancer protection.

    What This Means for the 15 Million Americans on GLP-1 Drugs

    Approximately 15 million Americans are currently prescribed GLP-1 receptor agonists. The vast majority are taking them for type 2 diabetes or weight management. If the breast cancer protective signal seen in this study is confirmed in larger prospective trials and in controlled analyses, it would represent an additional major health benefit of these medications — one that could influence prescribing decisions, insurance coverage arguments, and cancer prevention discussions.

    The researchers caution that this is observational data from a real-world cohort, not a randomized controlled trial. Confounding variables — the possibility that GLP-1 drug users differ from non-users in ways that independently affect breast cancer risk — must be accounted for before these findings can be considered definitive. Prospective studies and potential randomized trials with cancer outcomes as endpoints are now being planned. The Phase 3 ORCA trial of semaglutide in high-risk cancer prevention populations is one ongoing effort that will provide higher-quality evidence.

    For women currently taking GLP-1 drugs for any indication, this study is not a recommendation to take them as cancer prevention without diabetes or obesity indication — rather, it is an important signal that the health benefits of these medications may be broader than previously understood.

    Frequently Asked Questions

    Q: What did the new GLP-1 and breast cancer study find?

    A: A real-world cohort study presented at ASCO 2026 found that women with type 2 diabetes or obesity who used GLP-1 receptor agonists had a 30–47% lower breast cancer risk compared to non-users. The effect persisted after adjustment for weight loss.

    Q: Does this mean women should take GLP-1 drugs specifically to prevent breast cancer?

    A: No. This is observational data, not a randomized trial. The finding is a promising signal that warrants further research, not a clinical recommendation for GLP-1 drugs as cancer prevention outside of established indications.

    Q: Why might GLP-1 drugs protect against breast cancer beyond weight loss?

    A: By reducing hyperinsulinemia, improving insulin sensitivity (lowering IGF-1 signaling), reducing adipose-tissue inflammation, and potentially through direct GLP-1 receptor activity on breast tissue — all mechanisms independent of weight loss.

    Q: Which GLP-1 drugs were included in the study?

    A: The study analyzed GLP-1 receptor agonist use broadly, including semaglutide (Ozempic/Wegovy) and tirzepatide (Mounjaro/Zepbound) among the most commonly used agents. Results were not limited to a specific drug within the class.

    Q: How does this new finding fit with the other cancer data on GLP-1 drugs?

    A: A 2024 Nature Medicine study documented lower incidence of multiple obesity-associated cancers in GLP-1 users. The 2026 ASCO breast cancer study adds specifically to that growing body of evidence suggesting GLP-1 drugs may have broad anti-cancer properties.

    Source link

  • Fewer Children are Having Peanut Allergies in Recent Years Following a Change in Guidelines, Study Shows

    Fewer Children are Having Peanut Allergies in Recent Years Following a Change in Guidelines, Study Shows

    Fewer children are being found with peanut allergies in the last few years, a study shows, which is believed to be due to a change in policy regarding early exposure.

    This began when experts recommended that parents should avoid having their infants exposed to common allergens as a means to curb rising food allergy rates. However, a 2015 landmark trial found that feeding peanuts to babies could actually decrease their chances of developing an allergy by more than 80 percent.

    Peanut Allergies in Children

    In 2017, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases formally recommended that parents use the early-introduction approach and issued national guidelines. A new study that was published on Monday found that food allergy rates in kids under three have fallen following those changes.

    The data showed that the numbers dropped to 0.93 percent between 2017 and 2020, from 1.46 percent between 2012 and 2015. Comparing these statistics shows a 36 percent reduction in all food allergies, which is largely driven by a 43 percent drop in peanut allergies, according to the New York Times.

    Additionally, the study found that eggs overtook peanuts as the No. 1 food allergen in young children. However, the researchers did not examine what infants ate, which means the study does not show that the guidelines directly caused the decline.

    A pediatrician at Columbia University Irving Medical Center in New York, Dr. Edith Bracho-Sanchez, said that the data is still promising as it relates to the prevention of a potentially deadly and life-changing diagnosis.

    One of the researchers of the latest study, co-author Sanislaw Gabryszewski, MD, PhD, said that their observations provide real-world evidence that public health efforts that promote early allergen introduction in infancy are making an impact, AJMC reported.

    A Change in National Guidelines

    The finding comes as roughly four percent of kids are affected by a food allergy that is mediated by IgE, which includes food like eggs, nuts, milk, wheat, and peanuts. These can then cause immediate reactions that can threaten the children’s lives, including difficulty breathing and swelling.

    Another researcher involved in the new study, Dr. David Hill, said that their findings were “remarkable.” He and his colleagues analyzed electronic health records from dozens of pediatric practices so they could track diagnoses of food allergies in young kids before, during, and after the guidelines were issued.

    Despite this, the effort has not yet resulted in a reduction in the overall increase in food allergies in the United States in the past few years, as per LMT Online.



    Originally published on parentherald.com

    © {{Year}} ParentHerald.com All rights reserved. Do not reproduce without permission.

    Source link

  • New Study Links COVID-19 to Accelerated Blood Vessel Aging, Particularly in Women

    New Study Links COVID-19 to Accelerated Blood Vessel Aging, Particularly in Women

    The latest research showed that coronavirus infection may accelerate the aging of blood vessels, potentially increasing cardiovascular risk by roughly the equivalent of five years. A study in the European Heart Journal reported that the effect was strongest in women and in people with Long Covid, and that the changes tended to stabilize or lessen over time.

    Researchers analyzed data from 2,390 participants recruited between September 2020 and February 2022 at 34 centers in 16 countries, including Austria, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Cyprus, France, Greece, Italy, Mexico, Norway, Turkey, the UK, and the US. Participants were grouped by COVID-19 severity (never infected, mild illness, hospitalized on a ward, or admitted to intensive care), and underwent measurements at six and twelve months after infection. Vascular age was assessed by carotid–femoral pulse wave velocity (PWV), where higher values indicate stiffer, older vessels. Analyses accounted for factors such as age and sex.

    On average, people who had COVID-19 had higher PWV than those never infected, including those with mild illness. The differences were pronounced in women, while men showed little or no statistically robust change. The effect was greater in those with Long Covid. In the intensive care group, vessel stiffness regressed toward normal by 12 months. Vaccinated individuals showed milder changes than those unvaccinated. Researchers noted that an increase of about 0.5 m/s in PWV is clinically relevant and roughly comparable to five years of vascular aging, corresponding to an estimated 3% increase in cardiovascular risk in a 60-year-old woman.

    “We know that Covid can directly affect blood vessels. We believe that this may result in what we call early vascular ageing, meaning that your blood vessels are older than your chronological age and you are more susceptible to heart disease. If that is happening, we need to identify who is at risk at an early stage to prevent heart attacks and strokes,” said Professor Rosa Maria Bruno of Université Paris Cité, according to EurekAlert. “Women have a faster and stronger immune response, which can protect them from infections. However, the same response may also increase vascular damage after the original infection,” said Bruno, according to EurekAlert. “There are several possible explanations for the vascular effects of Covid. The Covid-19 virus acts on specific receptors in the body, called the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptors, that are present on the lining of the blood vessels. The virus uses these receptors to enter and infect cells. This may result in vascular dysfunction and accelerated vascular ageing. Our body’s inflammation and immune responses, which defend against infections, may be also involved,” said Bruno, according to EurekAlert.

    “This large, multicentre, prospective cohort study enrolled 2390 participants from 34 centres to investigate whether arterial stiffness, as measured by PWV, persisted in individuals with recent COVID-19 infection,” said Dr. Behnood Bikdeli and colleagues, according to EurekAlert. “Sex-stratified analyses revealed striking differences: females across all COVID-19-positive groups had significantly elevated PWV, with the highest increase (+1.09 m/s) observed in those requiring ICU admission,” said Bikdeli and colleagues, according to EurekAlert. “The CARTESIAN study makes the case that COVID-19 has aged our arteries, especially for female adults. The question is whether we can find modifiable targets to prevent this in future surges of infection, and mitigate adverse outcomes in those afflicted with COVID-19-induced vascular ageing,” said Bikdeli and colleagues, according to EurekAlert. Bruno added that vascular aging is measurable and can be addressed with lifestyle changes and blood pressure- and cholesterol-lowering therapies, and that the team planned to follow participants to determine whether accelerated vascular aging translated into more heart attacks and strokes.

    “One must look very closely whether these groups were really equal to say whether the cause of this acceleration of aging lay in COVID,” said Dominik Rath, a cardiologist at University Hospital Tübingen, according to Stern. “After the 12-month visit, the aging processes had relatively strongly regressed—what could mean that hospitalization per se or the stay in the intensive care unit also plays a relevant part,” said Rath, according to Stern.

    “Nevertheless, this study is a certain wake-up call,” said Heribert Schunkert, vice president of the German Heart Foundation, according to DW. “It is necessary to check carefully whether these groups were really the same to determine whether the coronavirus was the cause of the accelerated aging,” said Schunkert, according to DW. “Many people were affected by a COVID infection. We wanted to avoid everything to prevent aging. That makes you sit up and take notice,” said Schunkert, according to Bild.

    “The findings strongly suggest that after having COVID, the elasticity of the arteries is clearly worse than usual. It was somewhat surprising that the effect was observed only in women. However, it is difficult to say what the practical risk of arterial stiffness to arterial diseases is,” said Juhani Airaksinen, emeritus professor of cardiology, according to Iltalehti Rakkaus. “Blood pressure should therefore be managed with lifestyle changes and, if necessary, with medications,” said Airaksinen, according to Iltalehti Rakkaus. He noted that infected participants were older and generally sicker than controls and that baseline stiffness was unknown, which could influence results. “A positive aspect is that some changes partially improved within less than a year,” said Airaksinen, according to Iltalehti Rakkaus. He added that pulse wave velocity has been used for decades but is not part of routine outpatient care.

    Researchers cautioned that it was unclear whether the observed effect reflected large changes in a few individuals or small changes across many. They suggested that higher mortality in men during the pandemic could have introduced survivor bias, potentially masking effects in male participants. They also noted that many people experienced prolonged symptoms after COVID-19, including post-acute COVID-19 syndrome, which affected up to 40% of initial survivors, and called for further studies to clarify mechanisms and long-term risks.

    Source link

  • Is Brown Rice Healthier? Study Finds It Contains 40% More Carcinogenic Arsenic

    Is Brown Rice Healthier? Study Finds It Contains 40% More Carcinogenic Arsenic

    Thinking of switching to brown rice for its added nutrients? You may want to think again.

    While the bran layer does pack in more vitamins and minerals, researchers now warn that brown rice contains up to 40% more carcinogenic arsenic than white rice.

    In a recent study published in the journal Risk Analysis, researchers from Michigan State University conducted a comparative analysis of brown and white rice, factoring in cost, popularity, health benefits, and potential risks.

    Their findings revealed a surprising hidden danger: brown rice contained 24% more total arsenic and about 40% more inorganic arsenic (known carcinogen), raising fresh concerns about its reputation as the healthier choice.

    In their comparative analysis, researchers highlighted that brown rice offers notable nutritional benefits, including higher levels of vitamins, minerals, fiber, and antioxidants. It has been associated with reduced risks of cancer, lower cholesterol levels, improved blood pressure, and support for heart health, metabolic disorders, osteoporosis, and diabetes.

    However, these health benefits come with significant trade-offs. Brown rice tends to be more expensive, and less appealing in taste and texture for some consumers, and most importantly, it carries a higher risk of arsenic exposure, linked to genetic damage and an increased risk of cancer.

    Meanwhile, white rice presents a more affordable and widely accepted option, appealing to a broader range of consumers across different cultures. Its processing removes much of the arsenic-laden outer layers, resulting in significantly lower levels of both total and inorganic arsenic. However, this also strips away key nutrients, leading to reduced levels of vitamins, minerals, fiber, and other beneficial compounds compared to brown rice.

    The researchers also noted that since young children consume considerably more food relative to their body weight than adults, brown rice consumption in young children can increase their foodborne arsenic exposures. Given this concern, they recommend that parents consider balancing brown and white rice in young children’s diets to minimize potential health risks while still providing nutritional benefits.

    “However, there are no acute public health risks indicated for the general American population from rice-related arsenic exposures. Risk–benefit analyses are needed to assess relative risks of arsenic exposure in brown rice compared with the nutritional benefits, in comparison to white rice,” the researchers concluded.

    Source link

  • Acid Reflux sl cb – case study | Blue Heron Health News

    Acid Reflux sl cb – case study | Blue Heron Health News

    Product Name: Acid Reflux sl cb – case study | Blue Heron Health News

    Click here to get Acid Reflux sl cb – case study | Blue Heron Health News at discounted price while it’s still available…

    All orders are protected by SSL encryption – the highest industry standard for online security from trusted vendors.

    Acid Reflux sl cb – case study | Blue Heron Health News is backed with a 60 Day No Questions Asked Money Back Guarantee. If within the first 60 days of receipt you are not satisfied with Wake Up Lean™, you can request a refund by sending an email to the address given inside the product and we will immediately refund your entire purchase price, with no questions asked.

    (more…)

  • Study opens door to a rethink of colonoscopy guidelines — Harvard Gazette

    Study opens door to a rethink of colonoscopy guidelines — Harvard Gazette


    A new analysis of nearly 200,000 adults shows that those with a clean result on their first colonoscopy may not need another for longer — perhaps significantly longer — than the current recommendation of 10 years.

    The result is a bit of good news about a cancer whose increasing rates in younger patients has worried experts, including the Harvard Chan School’s Mingyang Song, for several years. Colorectal cancer is the nation’s second-deadliest after lung cancer, killing an estimated 52,550 in 2023. While rates among older patients have been declining, younger patients — those 40 to 49 — have seen cases rise 15 percent between 2000 and 2026. Experts aren’t sure of the cause, but in 2021, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force lowered the recommended age of first screening to 45 from 50. They also recommend that those with average risk get screened 10 years afterward.

    Song, an associate professor of clinical epidemiology and nutrition at the Chan School, said that the increase in screenings has also increased appointment wait times.

    “Especially with the lowered age, the clinic is overwhelmed,” said Song, also an associate professor at Harvard Medical School. “It was overwhelmed before, now it’s even worse.”

    In the work, published last month in JAMA Oncology, Song and colleagues examined colorectal cancer screening results and colorectal cancer incidence among 195,453 participants in three long-running studies: the Nurses’ Health Study, Nurses’ Health Study II, and the Health Professionals Followup Study. They compared incidence between two groups: those who received negative results in their initial colorectal cancer screening — meaning no polyps or cancer — and those who had not yet been screened.

    They found that the risk of developing colorectal cancer was significantly lower among those who had received a negative cancer screening than those who had not yet been screened. The research team, led by first author Markus Knudsen, a postdoctoral fellow in Song’s lab, then divided the negative screening result group according to lifestyle risk factors for colorectal cancer. The work was supported in part by the National Institutes of Health.

    The results showed that it took 16 years for those with a negative screening result and an intermediate-risk lifestyle to have the same colorectal cancer incidence of the unscreened group at 10 years. Those with negative screening and a low-risk lifestyle — including a healthy diet and exercise — didn’t reach the 10-year cancer incidence of the unscreened group until 25 years from their negative screening.

    The results, Song said, show that cancer screening should be individualized and discussed between patient and physician. While it is likely that additional evidence will be needed before national screening guidelines are changed, those with a negative screening result may be able to safely extend the screening interval beyond the recommended 10 years and, for those also living a low-risk lifestyle, perhaps as long as 20 years.

    What this more tailored approach would do, Song said, is spare those who might get little benefit from a colonoscopy while focusing increasingly scarce resources where they’re most needed: on people who’ve never been screened — only about 70 percent of eligible U.S. adults have been screened — on disadvantaged groups with historically lower screen rates, and on those whose lifestyle or family history puts them at increased risk.  

    “What we have seen generally is that the more advantaged groups of individuals are more likely to receive colonoscopy, whereas those who are disadvantaged and who actually have a higher risk of developing colon cancer are less likely to receive colonoscopy,” Song said. “We’ve tried to correct this mismatch and improve colonoscopy delivery at the population scale.”


    Source link
  • Depression May Trigger Severe Period Pain, Sleep Disturbances May Aggravate It: Study

    Depression May Trigger Severe Period Pain, Sleep Disturbances May Aggravate It: Study

    Severe menstrual cramps can affect a woman’s mood and her mental well-being. However, a new study reveals a surprising twist: depression may actually trigger severe period pain, with sleep deprivation worsening its severity.

    Dysmenorrhea, or severe period pain, affects around 15% of women and typically occurs just before menstruation, and subsides after a few days. If the menstrual cramps occur without any underlying condition, it is called primary dysmenorrhea. This type of period pain is often caused by high levels of prostaglandins, hormone-like substances that increase uterine contractions. Secondary dysmenorrhea, however, is caused by medical conditions like endometriosis or uterine fibroids.

    In the latest study published in Briefings in Bioinformatics, researchers discovered that depression significantly impacts primary dysmenorrhea after evaluating around 600,000 cases from European populations and 8,000 from East Asian populations, finding a strong link in both groups. The researchers also conducted a genome-wide association study and identified key genes and proteins involved in this interaction.

    “Our findings provide preliminary evidence that depression may be a cause, rather than a consequence, of dysmenorrhea as we did not find evidence that period pain increased the risk of depression,” said lead author Shuhe Liu from China’s Xi’an Jiaotong – Liverpool University.

    Another interesting observation was that sleeplessness, commonly experienced by those with depression, played a key role in connecting depression and dysmenorrhea.

    “We found that increased sleep disturbances could exacerbate menstrual pain. Addressing sleep issues may therefore be crucial in managing both conditions,” Liu said.

    However, larger studies and biological experiments are needed to fully understand the causal association between menstrual pain and depression. Meanwhile, based on the current findings, the researchers are calling for improved mental health screening for individuals suffering from dysmenorrhea. Liu explained that this could lead to more personalized treatment options, reduced stigma, and better healthcare for those affected.

    “Depression and menstrual pain significantly impact women’s lives across the world, yet their connection remains poorly understood. Our collective goal is to critically investigate these issues and improve care for women by uncovering these complex connections and finding better ways to address them,” lead author Dr. John Moraros, from the Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University in China told CNN.

    Source link

  • Your Menopause Treatment Tablets Could Affect Heart Health: Here’s What Study Says

    Your Menopause Treatment Tablets Could Affect Heart Health: Here’s What Study Says

    Hormone tablets taken during menopause provide relief from symptoms, but do they have long-term health risks? Researchers have found that hormone replacement therapy (HRT) tablets containing both estrogen and progestogen may increase the risk of heart disease and blood clots in menopausal women.

    During menopause, women’s body goes through a series of changes due to a decrease in female hormones, progesterone, and estrogen resulting in symptoms such as hot flashes, mood swings, night sweats, insomnia, and vaginal dryness. These symptoms are often frustrating, interfering with their daily lives and mental well-being.

    HRT was once commonly prescribed for menopausal symptoms and to reduce the risk of bone loss during this stage. However, recent studies pointing to long-term risks have led to a more cautious approach. It is now recommended only for those where the benefits outweigh the risks. The estimate shows that only 5% of women in the U.S. use it now, a significant drop from about 27% two decades ago.

    The latest study published in The BMJ examined the effects of HRT tablets on heart health based on the route of administration and the combination of hormones used. The study suggests that tablets containing both estrogen and progesterone, such as oral combined continuous, oral combined sequential, oral unopposed estrogen, and transdermal combined therapy, increased the risk of ischemic heart disease and venous thromboembolism (blood clots) in women.

    The researchers also found that the tablet tibolone in particular was linked to a higher risk of heart disease, heart attack, and stroke, but not blood clots. Tibolone is a synthetic hormone that contains estrogen, progesterone, and testosterone.

    “Compared with not starting menopausal hormone therapy, starting oral combined continuous therapy or tibolone was associated with an increased risk of ischemic heart disease,” the news release stated.

    “If 1,000 women started each of these treatments and were observed for a year, we would expect to see seven new cases of venous thromboembolism across all groups,” the researchers wrote.

    However, there was no increased risk associated with transdermal treatments such as skin patches, gels, and creams.

    The researchers caution that the study does not prove that HRT causes heart health risks, as the findings are based on observational data. Also, the lack of information on menopausal status and other unmeasured factors, such as smoking and body mass index, may have influenced the results.

    Source link

  • Vaping Affects Circulation With Immediate Effects, Study Finds

    Vaping Affects Circulation With Immediate Effects, Study Finds

    Vaping is often promoted as a safer alternative to cigarette smoking. But is using e-cigarettes truly risk-free? Researchers have discovered that vaping impacts circulation, with noticeable effects occurring immediately.

    In the latest study that will be presented at the annual meeting of the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) next week, researchers explored the impact of both cigarette smoking and vaping on vascular function. The study found that while vaping exposes users to fewer toxic chemicals than cigarettes, it still affects circulation and overall health. Interestingly, the effect was observed even in e-cigarettes without nicotine.

    “E-cigarettes have long been marketed as a safer alternative to regular tobacco smoking. Some believe that e-cigarettes don’t contain any of the harmful products, such as free radicals, found in regular tobacco cigarettes, because no combustion is involved,” said Dr. Marianne Nabbout, the study lead author in a news release.

    To assess the impact on brain circulation, researchers evaluated 31 healthy participants—both smokers and vapers—using MRI scans before and after exposure to tobacco cigarettes, e-cigarette aerosol with nicotine, and e-cigarette aerosol without nicotine. The participants, aged 21 to 49, were compared to baseline scans from 10 non-smokers and non-vapers, aged 21 to 33.

    The study also measured blood flow speed in the femoral artery by placing a cuff on the upper thigh to restrict circulation. Also, the venous oxygen saturation of the participants, which shows the amount of oxygen in the blood returning to the heart after supplying oxygen to the body’s tissues was tested.

    After inhaling each type of vaping or smoking, blood flow in the superficial femoral artery significantly decreased. The greatest decrease in vascular function occurred after vaping e-cigarettes with nicotine, followed by those without nicotine. Vapers also showed lower venous oxygen saturation, indicating an immediate reduction in oxygen uptake by the lungs, regardless of nicotine content.

    “This study serves to highlight the acute effects smoking and vaping can have on a multitude of vascular beds in the human body. If the acute consumption of an e-cigarette can have an effect that is immediately manifested at the level of the vessels, it is conceivable that the chronic use can cause vascular disease,” Dr. Nabbout said.

    Source link