By: Jennifer Corbett Dooren
Source from: http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20110628-712090.html
WASHINGTON (Dow Jones)--Treating people at risk of developing diabetes with a common diabetes drug metformin lowered the risk of developing the disease, along with slightly cutting health-care costs, according to an analysis of a landmark diabetes prevention program.
The cost analysis of the National Institutes of Health funded program showed that an intensive lifestyle intervention was more effective at cutting the risk of developing diabetes compared to metformin, but at a cost of about $1,500 over 10 years. The analysis was presented Tuesday at the American Diabetes Association's annual meeting.
Doctors said the lifestyle intervention cost is similar to treatment with cholesterol-lowering medications that aim to prevent heart attacks and strokes, and far cheaper than things like kidney dialysis needed by many patients with advanced stages of diabetes.
The diabetes prevention program was a 10-year study that compared the diabetes drug metformin and a lifestyle intervention that was aimed at helping people lose at least 7% of their body weight through diet, exercise and behavioral counseling, compared to people in a placebo group.
Patients in the study were overweight and had elevated blood sugar levels, which put them at high risk of developing type 2 diabetes, the most common form of the disease. About 26 million Americans have diabetes.
One of the diabetes prevention program's researchers, William Herman, a professor of medicine at the University of Michigan, explained that a criticism of the initial study was that the lifestyle intervention likely wouldn't replicated on a broader scale because it would be too expensive. So Herman looked the cost of medical care in and outside of the study including the cost of metformin and the lifestyle intervention.
The lifestyle intervention started with a 16-lesson curriculum covering diet, exercise and behavior modification that was taught by case managers on a one-on-one basis, followed by monthly individual sessions and group sessions with case managers.
During the first three years of the study the lifestyle intervention cut the risk of developing diabetes by 58% while metformin cut it by 31%, compared to patients where nothing was done. The study was then extended for another seven years with a less intensive lifestyle intervention and metformin.
Over the entire 10 years of the study, those in the lifestyle intervention group had a 31% reduced risk of developing diabetes while those on metformin had a 19% reduced risk compared to patients in the placebo group.
Metformin is an inexpensive generic drug and is usually the first drug given to newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes patients. Herman's analysis showed that giving metformin to patients at high risk of developing the disease reduced overall healthcare costs by about $30 over 10 years.
Herman said it is likely that a lifestyle intervention similar to the one used in the diabetes prevention study conducted on a group basis instead of individually would save the healthcare system money.
Indeed, researchers at Indiana University developed such a program. It is currently being rolled out at YMCAs nationwide with funding from UnitedHealth Group (UNH).
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Sunday, June 26, 2011
Weight Loss Supplements Over Liposuction
Some people believe that the only way to loose a couple of pounds is through the use of liposuction. To some people, this is there only resolution to excess fat and saggy legs. They never considered any other healthy alternatives in order to feel well and to look great. A liposuction can have an altering effect in your life especially when you do not consider its negative effects. There are some cases, although rare, which were about failed liposuction operations. Several patients experienced infections and post operative stress due to the sudden loss of body mass. That is actually one of the best reasons why people should be more on the natural way of weight loss rather than the operative approach. Rather than using a costly operation, people should consider weight loss supplements and other healthy alternatives which are known to have fewer side effects and more on the positive results.
Supplements are effective but they would only work if you have the right discipline. The first step is to consider the supplements that are for you. There are supplements which are based on a certain vitamin such as Vitamin C and B. Some are rigged with several minerals such as iron and calcium. If you should choose then try the one which has all the vitamins and minerals. However, they are costlier than other supplements so you should be careful. There are also supplements that are for several diseases. For instance, if you are lacking RBC or Red Blood Cells then you should consider one which would have an added iron. This would help you regain the lost platelets in your body. If you want to gain some extra pounds then there are also several supplements which have protein contents. They would help you gain the muscles that you want in well over a couple of months.
Most supplements are based on products found in nature. For instance, fruit and vegetable supplements obviously came from vegetable extracts and from pulps from fruits. The extract coming from vegetables and fruits are collected by manufacturers in order to create several supplements. They are still as potent as actual fruits and they have all the necessary vitamins that your body needs. So, if you want to loose weight and be healthy at the same time, you should stick with supplements rather than engage in costly operations. Through using the natural means, you will be able to avoid any dangers in the future.
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
Not So (O)Lean: Eating Faux Fat Makes Rats Real Fat
By COURTNEY HUTCHISON, ABC News Medical Unit
Source from http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Diet/eating-fake-fat-makes-real-fat-olestra-study/story?id=13893613
Another diet myth bites the dust: Products containing the calorie-less fake fat Olean, of fat-free potato chips fame, may make you gain weight, not lose it.
In a new study released today by Purdue University, researchers found that rats who were fed Olean-containing potato chips as part of a high-fat diet ate more overall and gained more weight than those who were fed a high fat diet and regular, full-fat potato chips.
This counter-intuitive finding shakes the conventional wisdom that substituting lower calorie, lower fat foods for the full-fat versions will help reduce overall caloric intake and encourage weight loss.
"Fat substitutes can interfere with the body's ability to regulate what it eats, and that can result in overeating," said Susan Swithers, lead author and psychology professor at Purdue University.
But overeating may not be the only reason why fat substitutes make you pack on the pounds. Researchers suspect that fake fats actually mess with our body's ability to digest and metabolize food, making us more likely to retain weight from what we eat.
"Our bodies make predictions on what to prepare to digest based on taste and how food feels in our mouth," Swithers said. When something tastes sweet or fatty, our body gears up to digest a high density of calories, stimulating the metabolism and triggering a chain of hormonal secretions to process the fat, calories, and nutrients.
"When we get cues that something is fatty, but no calories arrive -- like with fat substitutes -- our body gets confused," Swithers said. "This confusion can make the body stop preparing to digest fatty food when it does come."
Olean is the brand name for Olestra, a calorieless, fat-free fat-substitute discovered accidentally by Procter & Gamble in 1968. Olestra was approved for use as a food additive in snack foods in 1996 and soon after became famous for its negative gastrointestinal side effects, including intense diarrhea and anal leakage.
High Fat Versus Low Fat Diets and Olestra
In the Purdue study, researchers put rats on either a high fat or low fat diet and allowed them to eat as much as they wanted. The rats were also fed a few grams of potato chips a day: Half the rats received only regular chips, while the other half got a mixture -- some days they got full fat, some days they got fat-free Olestra chips.
Researchers found that rats that ate Olestra-containing chips consumed more of their regular food and gained more weight than those rats that ate the higher-calorie, full-fat potato chips.
At first, this effect didn't seem to hold true for rats on a low-fat diet, until researchers gave these rats access to a high-fat chow. Even though all the rats had stopped being fed potato chips, fat-free or otherwise, those rats that had been consuming Olestra tended to eat more and put on more weight when they were later exposed to a high-fat diet.
This suggests that eating Olestra was changing the way the rats' bodies learned to respond to food, interfering with their natural ability to regulate how much fat was "enough."
"It goes against what you might think -- you remove calories from food and you'll lose weight, but at the end of the day the chemical manipulation of food leads to increased weight. We don't understand exactly why yet, but research continues to show this is true," ABC News Medical contributor Dr. Marie Savard said.
Swithers warned that while rat findings can't be directly applied to humans, rats have very similar biological responses to food as humans. The study was published today in the APA journal Behavioral Neuroscience.
Calls made to Procter & Gamble for comment were not immediately returned.
Source from http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Diet/eating-fake-fat-makes-real-fat-olestra-study/story?id=13893613
Another diet myth bites the dust: Products containing the calorie-less fake fat Olean, of fat-free potato chips fame, may make you gain weight, not lose it.
In a new study released today by Purdue University, researchers found that rats who were fed Olean-containing potato chips as part of a high-fat diet ate more overall and gained more weight than those who were fed a high fat diet and regular, full-fat potato chips.
This counter-intuitive finding shakes the conventional wisdom that substituting lower calorie, lower fat foods for the full-fat versions will help reduce overall caloric intake and encourage weight loss.
"Fat substitutes can interfere with the body's ability to regulate what it eats, and that can result in overeating," said Susan Swithers, lead author and psychology professor at Purdue University.
But overeating may not be the only reason why fat substitutes make you pack on the pounds. Researchers suspect that fake fats actually mess with our body's ability to digest and metabolize food, making us more likely to retain weight from what we eat.
"Our bodies make predictions on what to prepare to digest based on taste and how food feels in our mouth," Swithers said. When something tastes sweet or fatty, our body gears up to digest a high density of calories, stimulating the metabolism and triggering a chain of hormonal secretions to process the fat, calories, and nutrients.
"When we get cues that something is fatty, but no calories arrive -- like with fat substitutes -- our body gets confused," Swithers said. "This confusion can make the body stop preparing to digest fatty food when it does come."
Olean is the brand name for Olestra, a calorieless, fat-free fat-substitute discovered accidentally by Procter & Gamble in 1968. Olestra was approved for use as a food additive in snack foods in 1996 and soon after became famous for its negative gastrointestinal side effects, including intense diarrhea and anal leakage.
High Fat Versus Low Fat Diets and Olestra
In the Purdue study, researchers put rats on either a high fat or low fat diet and allowed them to eat as much as they wanted. The rats were also fed a few grams of potato chips a day: Half the rats received only regular chips, while the other half got a mixture -- some days they got full fat, some days they got fat-free Olestra chips.
Researchers found that rats that ate Olestra-containing chips consumed more of their regular food and gained more weight than those rats that ate the higher-calorie, full-fat potato chips.
At first, this effect didn't seem to hold true for rats on a low-fat diet, until researchers gave these rats access to a high-fat chow. Even though all the rats had stopped being fed potato chips, fat-free or otherwise, those rats that had been consuming Olestra tended to eat more and put on more weight when they were later exposed to a high-fat diet.
This suggests that eating Olestra was changing the way the rats' bodies learned to respond to food, interfering with their natural ability to regulate how much fat was "enough."
"It goes against what you might think -- you remove calories from food and you'll lose weight, but at the end of the day the chemical manipulation of food leads to increased weight. We don't understand exactly why yet, but research continues to show this is true," ABC News Medical contributor Dr. Marie Savard said.
Swithers warned that while rat findings can't be directly applied to humans, rats have very similar biological responses to food as humans. The study was published today in the APA journal Behavioral Neuroscience.
Calls made to Procter & Gamble for comment were not immediately returned.
Sunday, June 19, 2011
Weight Loss Supplements for Obese People
Weight loss supplements are one of the most widely searched phrases in various search engines nowadays. And from the statistics, it is not women alone who search for this phrase—even men type in these keywords in order to learn more about supplement that could help them burn fat.
Actually, these type of supplements are most needed by people who are suffering from serious medical conditions like obesity. Obesity seems like a norm in many countries like the US where a whopping 34% of the entire population is said to be obese (according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). What statistics like this one, people are getting used to seeing obese and overweight people and that makes the condition somehow more of a laughing stock and less of a condition that needs medical attention. But people need to be vigilant about it. Obesity can cause various health problems like heart failure or Diabetes. And just before you consider undergoing surgery to instantly remove all of the fat in your body, it would be best to try natural methods first such as taking weight loss supplements. The first benefit is that you do not have to spend too much for a surgical operation for fat removal. The second is that supplement therapy will be able to help burn fat while keeping you healthy. You get twice the benefit by simply taking these supplements.
Fruit and vegetable supplements will be able to help the body get enough energy to get going throughout the day. Even with a significant cut in the carbohydrate intake of the obese person, these supplements will provide the nourishment the body needs for a fairly strenuous day of working out in the gym. There is no need to be afraid of suddenly fainting in the midst of the workout. With enough hydration and healthy food served when needed, a person will be able to endure the workout
If you are obese and you believe this is the best time to make a change your life, go to your dieticians and ask for advice on how you should revise your diet. Most likely, you will get a referral to a nutritionist who will then give you the supplements you need in order to keep your body healthy while aiding your metabolism throughout the whole process of losing weight. It will take some time before an obese person can cut a significant bulk of his weight but it will all be worth it.
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Sleep position may affect stillbirth risk
By Kate Kelland
Resource: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/14/us-pregnancy-sleep-idUSTRE75D6WH20110614
(Reuters) - Women who do not sleep on their left side on their last night of pregnancy have double the risk of late stillbirth compared with women who do sleep on their left side, according to a study from New Zealand.
The researchers who conducted the study said women should not worry because the increased risk is still very small -- the chance of the baby being stillborn rises to 3.93 per 1,000 for those who don't sleep on their left from 1.96 per 1,000 for those who do.
A significant link was also found between sleeping regularly during the day, or sleeping longer than average at night, and late stillbirth risk, the researchers said.
Tomasina Stacey of the department of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Auckland, whose study was published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ), suggested that restricted blood flow to the baby when the mother lies on her back or right side for long periods may explain the link.
But she said the findings, which were based on a relatively small number of women, needed to be confirmed by larger, more detailed studies before any public health advice could be given.
"It's a new hypothesis and means we should start to look at this problem much more closely. It's really a starting point for future research," Stacey said in a telephone interview.
If the findings were confirmed, they might offer a simple, cheap and natural way to cut the number of stillbirths, she said. "It's something that's very easily modifiable. You don't need to take any drugs and there are no side effects."
A series of studies led by researchers from the World Health Organization and published earlier this year found that more than 2.6 million pregnancies a year end in stillbirth, many of them among women in poor countries. This means that every day more than 7,200 babies are stillborn.
Stacey's team interviewed 155 women in Auckland who gave birth to a stillborn baby between July 2006 and June 2009 when they were at least 28 weeks pregnant. These women were compared to a control group of 310 women with ongoing pregnancies.
The women were asked detailed questions about their sleep positions, and about going to sleep and waking up before pregnancy and in the last month, week, and night before they believed their baby had died.
They were also asked about snoring, daytime sleepiness, whether they regularly slept during the day in the last month of pregnancy, the duration of their sleep at night, and how many times they got up to the toilet at night.
The results showed no link between snoring or daytime sleepiness and risk of late stillbirth. But a significant link was found between daytime sleeping, or sleeping longer than average at night, and late stillbirth risk.
Women who slept on their back or on their right side on the last night of pregnancy were also more likely to experience a late stillbirth, and women who got up to go to the toilet once or less on the last night were also more likely to experience a late stillbirth compared with women who got up more frequently.
In a commentary on the study in the BMJ, Lucy Chappell, lecturer in maternal and fetal medicine from King's College London, said "any simple intervention that reduces the risk of stillbirth would be extremely welcome."
But she said the results should be interpreted with caution until more work is done: "A forceful campaign urging pregnant women to sleep on their left side is not yet warranted."
Resource: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/14/us-pregnancy-sleep-idUSTRE75D6WH20110614
(Reuters) - Women who do not sleep on their left side on their last night of pregnancy have double the risk of late stillbirth compared with women who do sleep on their left side, according to a study from New Zealand.
The researchers who conducted the study said women should not worry because the increased risk is still very small -- the chance of the baby being stillborn rises to 3.93 per 1,000 for those who don't sleep on their left from 1.96 per 1,000 for those who do.
A significant link was also found between sleeping regularly during the day, or sleeping longer than average at night, and late stillbirth risk, the researchers said.
Tomasina Stacey of the department of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Auckland, whose study was published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ), suggested that restricted blood flow to the baby when the mother lies on her back or right side for long periods may explain the link.
But she said the findings, which were based on a relatively small number of women, needed to be confirmed by larger, more detailed studies before any public health advice could be given.
"It's a new hypothesis and means we should start to look at this problem much more closely. It's really a starting point for future research," Stacey said in a telephone interview.
If the findings were confirmed, they might offer a simple, cheap and natural way to cut the number of stillbirths, she said. "It's something that's very easily modifiable. You don't need to take any drugs and there are no side effects."
A series of studies led by researchers from the World Health Organization and published earlier this year found that more than 2.6 million pregnancies a year end in stillbirth, many of them among women in poor countries. This means that every day more than 7,200 babies are stillborn.
Stacey's team interviewed 155 women in Auckland who gave birth to a stillborn baby between July 2006 and June 2009 when they were at least 28 weeks pregnant. These women were compared to a control group of 310 women with ongoing pregnancies.
The women were asked detailed questions about their sleep positions, and about going to sleep and waking up before pregnancy and in the last month, week, and night before they believed their baby had died.
They were also asked about snoring, daytime sleepiness, whether they regularly slept during the day in the last month of pregnancy, the duration of their sleep at night, and how many times they got up to the toilet at night.
The results showed no link between snoring or daytime sleepiness and risk of late stillbirth. But a significant link was found between daytime sleeping, or sleeping longer than average at night, and late stillbirth risk.
Women who slept on their back or on their right side on the last night of pregnancy were also more likely to experience a late stillbirth, and women who got up to go to the toilet once or less on the last night were also more likely to experience a late stillbirth compared with women who got up more frequently.
In a commentary on the study in the BMJ, Lucy Chappell, lecturer in maternal and fetal medicine from King's College London, said "any simple intervention that reduces the risk of stillbirth would be extremely welcome."
But she said the results should be interpreted with caution until more work is done: "A forceful campaign urging pregnant women to sleep on their left side is not yet warranted."
Monday, June 13, 2011
Ways to Supplement your Immune Support
There is no denying the fact that those who are blessed with good health have indeed a lot to be thankful for. This is one of those realities that mostly people understand when their health is under some sort of threat, leading them to feel dependent and crippled. During the time when we people lead a normal, happy and healthy life, they usually do not take the significance of developing good immunity as something worth serious attention. However, the thing that they do not understand is the fact that it is their immunity that saves their bodies from any harm that may occur due to injury or damage.
It is, therefore, one of the most essential tasks for anyone to develop a more durable immune support in order to be successful in maintaining good health conditions. This is why it is imperative for a person to be aware of and remember the numerous supplements that assist in developing a fortified immunity. The protection varies in degrees from common health problems like minor influenza and cough to terminal diseases such as Hepatitis. Doctors advise a variety of methods to revitalize the immune system as it was before by adhering to a number of ways that play the role of an immune booster to people’s health:
- Balanced diet – Every person who wants to ensure a strong immune support should ensure that his diet comprises a lot of antioxidants. These can be acquired without any difficulty through raw fruits and vegetables. Moreover, the diet should contain important fats as well as natural supplements like the Omega-3 fats that can be consumed through fish and flaxseed. By doing so, the immune system can be given a new lease on life.
Experts suggest that any food item that contains sugar in large quantities should be avoided. This is because researches have provided evidence that food items containing sugars in large amounts weaken the immune support.
- Exercising – Exercising in moderation is good for anyone who wants to maintain the strength of his body’s immunity. A lot of mistakes that people make sometimes are to either start exercising too much or too little, or to take weight loss supplements occasionally. Moderation in physical activity will help you save your body from exhaustion as otherwise it can lead to a lower immunity level.
- Reducing stress levels – While it may seem like an idealistic thing to do or say, managing your stress levels can help you attain a good support to your health. Increased stress can endanger our immunity by making us susceptible to heart ailments and hypertension. This is why people are always advised by physicians to control their stress level by engaging into different activities that help them in diverting their attention. Thus it can be a very good immune booster.
To maintain our immunity, it is compulsory for us to keep taking our diet rich in health products and complement it with the things mentioned above for optimum results.
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
Why are Nutritional Supplements Necessary for Healthy Living?
A lot of people adhere to the notion that nutritional supplements are not needed if the person has a healthy diet. In fact, a lot of people think that simply following the recommended food pyramid will make them healthy enough. However, this isn't exactly true. Even if a person has a healthy diet and gets enough servings of vegetables and fruits every day, the human body is not able to extract the nutritional benefits of these food. According to studies conducted, a portion of the nourishment that is derived from the food we eat is excreted through urine. The vitamins excreted from our system are the water-soluble type (vitamins A and C, Thiamine, Riboflavin, pyridoxine, and the rest of the B-complex vitamins).
This is where nutritional supplements come in. These supplements provide the body the needed nourishment which it cannot get from eating healthy food alone. By drinking supplements, a person is able to directly benefit from the absorption of the vitamins contained in the capsule. Unlike food which is first digested before being released to the bloodstream, supplements only need minimal interaction with the digestive acids and afterward, get distributed already to the whole body.
Fruit and vegetable supplements are available in many drug and health stores. It is best to get these supplements from reputable stores so that you will be sure you’re getting the best quality supplements your body needs. High quality supplements such as Nuriche have higher absorption rate which means more of the vitamins gets absorbed by the body. In turn, it gives you more value for the money you are paying for each capsule or each bottle of supplement you buy. Furthermore, various professionals in the field of health and nutrition recommend getting liquid supplements or gel capsules as these would be best absorbed by the body.
So if you want to have a healthy life, do not simply depend on getting nutrition from the food that you eat. Consider getting vitamin supplements to provide you with the nourishment your body needs. Not only will you feel better by taking these supplements, you will also avert the occurrence of sicknesses and abnormalities in your body. What sounds better than living your life free from disease? So be sure to visit the nearest health store in your neighborhood to get your supplements. Also remember to consult with your primary care physician for recommendations on what supplements you should take.
Health news:Skin cancer protection starts from babies
source from: http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/health/2011-06/07/c_13915106.htm
BEIJING, June 7 (Xinhuanet) -- The changes that lead to skin cancer may actually begin during baby’s first year, according to a new report in the July issue of Pediatrics.
Sun avoidance is recommended for children under 6 months of age, and older children should avoid midday sun and wear sun-protective clothing, wide-rimmed hats, and sunglasses.
New York City dermatologist Doris Day, MD, says that “newborns, infants, and toddlers have skin that is continuing to develop.” “Their skin is still evolving and maturing and it is really important to protect it,” she says.
The ABCs of Infant Sun Protection Day recommends keeping infants and toddlers indoors when the sun is strongest, which is usually from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m., choosing clothing with built-in ultraviolet(UV) protection, and slathering on the sunscreen.
When choosing sunscreen for children, look to thicker zinc- or titanium-based products, Day says. “These are more opaque and sit on skin rather than getting absorbed." And zinc and titanium don’t irritate the eyes as much because they tend to stay in place.
“Infant and toddlers’ skin barrier protection is quite immature,” says Roya Samuels, MD, a pediatrician at the Steven and Alexandra Cohen Children's Medical Center of New York in New Hyde Park.
“A child’s skin has structural quality that makes it more vulnerable to the effects of UV radiation, and this can result in an increased risk of later skin cancer.”
The sunscreen should have an SPF of 15 or higher, she says.
Reports indicate that one blistering sunburn during childhood can more than double a person's chances of developing melanoma later in their life.
Studies have shown that a person gets about 80 percent of lifetime sun exposure by the time they are 18. Melanoma is the second most common form of cancer for young adults 15 to 29 years old.
BEIJING, June 7 (Xinhuanet) -- The changes that lead to skin cancer may actually begin during baby’s first year, according to a new report in the July issue of Pediatrics.
Sun avoidance is recommended for children under 6 months of age, and older children should avoid midday sun and wear sun-protective clothing, wide-rimmed hats, and sunglasses.
New York City dermatologist Doris Day, MD, says that “newborns, infants, and toddlers have skin that is continuing to develop.” “Their skin is still evolving and maturing and it is really important to protect it,” she says.
The ABCs of Infant Sun Protection Day recommends keeping infants and toddlers indoors when the sun is strongest, which is usually from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m., choosing clothing with built-in ultraviolet(UV) protection, and slathering on the sunscreen.
When choosing sunscreen for children, look to thicker zinc- or titanium-based products, Day says. “These are more opaque and sit on skin rather than getting absorbed." And zinc and titanium don’t irritate the eyes as much because they tend to stay in place.
“Infant and toddlers’ skin barrier protection is quite immature,” says Roya Samuels, MD, a pediatrician at the Steven and Alexandra Cohen Children's Medical Center of New York in New Hyde Park.
“A child’s skin has structural quality that makes it more vulnerable to the effects of UV radiation, and this can result in an increased risk of later skin cancer.”
The sunscreen should have an SPF of 15 or higher, she says.
Reports indicate that one blistering sunburn during childhood can more than double a person's chances of developing melanoma later in their life.
Studies have shown that a person gets about 80 percent of lifetime sun exposure by the time they are 18. Melanoma is the second most common form of cancer for young adults 15 to 29 years old.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)