Keith Connects The Dots

Ultrasound Used to Predict Heart Attack Risk

Keith — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:08:23 GMT

Ultrasound Used to Predict Heart Attack Risk
Provides noninvasive way to identify plaques, improve effectiveness of therapy

TUESDAY, Aug. 19 (HealthDay News) -- Inexpensive ultrasound imaging may be a simple way to help determine who's at high risk for a heart attack or other cardiovascular issues, a new study says.

Researchers conducted ultrasound imaging on the carotid arteries -- the two vessels that supply blood to the head and neck -- of 1,268 patients who were asymptomatic but at high risk for cardiovascular disease. They found that nearly half the patients had carotid artery disease.

The findings are published in the September issue of the journal Radiology.

"Determining the degree of stenosis, or how much the artery has narrowed, is insufficient to predict patient risk," lead researcher Dr. Markus Reiter, of the Department of Angiography and Interventional Radiology at Medical University Vienna in Austria, said in a news release issued by the journal. "We know that the majority of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events occur in patients whose blood vessels are less than 70 percent narrowed."

Reiter and his team used ultrasound images and computer-assisted gray scale median (GSM) measurements to determine the density of the plaque lining the carotid arteries. Plaques that appear dark on ultrasound images and have a low GSM level are thought to be associated with an increased risk for clinical complications and seem to represent unstable plaques, which are more likely to rupture or burst.

Follow-up ultrasounds done several months later showed that the conditions of the arteries in 40 percent of the patients had grown worse. Of those, 37 percent had a major cardiovascular event, such as a heart attack, stroke or coronary artery bypass, within three years of the second ultrasound.

Of the others whose ultrasounds appeared better on the follow-up, 28 percent experienced a major adverse cardiovascular event.

The authors noted their findings showed that vulnerable plaque in the carotid artery indicated not only an increased risk of stroke downstream, but also was linked to cardiovascular disease progressing elsewhere in the patient.

While more studies are needed, Reiter said serial ultrasound exams may be a noninvasive way to identify whether vulnerable plaques exist and improve the effectiveness of various therapies.

"This technique will give us additional information to use in selecting patients that need aggressive treatment," he said.

More information

The American Academy of Family Physicians has more about heart attack warning signs and risk factors.

-- Kevin McKeever

SOURCE: Radiological Society of North America, news release, Aug. 19, 2008

Last Updated: Aug. 19, 2008

http://www.healthday.com/Article.asp?AID=618458

Obesity Rates Up in 37 States

Keith — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 19:02:07 GMT

Obesity Rates Up in 37 States: Report
At least 20% of adults are obese in every state except Colorado

TUESDAY, Aug. 19 (HealthDay News) -- The obesity epidemic in America has gotten worse -- not better -- in the last year, despite public service campaigns warning about the health risks posed by carrying too much weight, a new report found.

Adult obesity rates increased in 37 states, while there were no decreases in any states, according to the annual report released Tuesday by the nonprofit Trust for America's Health and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

The obesity rates rose for a second consecutive year in 24 states and for a third consecutive year in 19 states, according to the report, F as in Fat: How Obesity Policies Are Failing in America, 2008".

More than 25 percent of adults are obese in 28 states, up from 19 states last year. And more than 20 percent of adults are obese in every state except Colorado. In 1991, no state had an obesity rate greater than 20 percent.

Eleven of the 15 states with the highest obesity rates are in the South. Northeastern and Western states have the lowest obesity rates.

"Despite widespread acknowledgement that obesity is endangering the health of millions of Americans, the country is still failing to respond clearly or comprehensively," Dr. Risa Lavizzo-Mourey, president and chief executive officer of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, said in the news release. "We must work together, governments, schools and communities, to improve nutrition and increase physical activity for all ages. We must ensure that strong policies are implemented and enforced in every state, not only to help reverse existing obesity rates, but to prevent obesity among our nation's children and generations to come."

The five fattest states and their obesity rates are Mississippi (31.7 percent), West Virginia (30.6 percent), Alabama (30.1 percent), Louisiana (29.5 percent) and South Carolina (29.2 percent). The five slimmest states are Colorado (18.4 percent), Hawaii (20.7 percent), Connecticut (20.8 percent), Massachusetts (20.9 percent), and Vermont (21.1 percent), according to the report.

An estimated two-thirds of Americans are now overweight or obese. That compares to 1980, when the national average of obese adults was 15 percent.

Obesity is defined as a body mass index -- BMI, a ratio of weight to height -- of 30 or more. A person who is 5-feet, 8-inches tall and weighs 197 pounds has a BMI of 30.

The report said that rates of type 2 diabetes -- a disease typically associated with obesity -- increased in 26 states last year. Four states now have diabetes rates above 10 percent. And all 10 states with the highest rates of diabetes and high blood pressure are in the South.

Besides type 2 diabetes, obesity has been linked to coronary heart disease and stroke, cancer, osteoarthritis, gall bladder disease, liver disease and pregnancy complications, according to the U.S. National Institutes of Health.

The report also noted a relationship between poverty and obesity rates. It found that seven of the 10 states with the highest obesity rates are also among the 10 states with the highest poverty rates.

While a number of promising policies designed to promote physical activity and good nutrition have been introduced in communities, the report's findings suggest that these policies aren't being adopted or implemented at levels sufficient to reverse the obesity epidemic.

"America's future depends on the health of our country. The obesity epidemic is lowering our productivity and dramatically increasing our health care costs. Our analysis shows that we are not treating the obesity epidemic with the urgency it deserves," Jeffrey Levi, executive director of Trust for America's Health, said in a news release. "Even though communities have started taking action, considering the scope of the problem, the country's response has been severely limited. For significant change to happen, combating obesity must become a national priority."

Among the report's other findings:

While all 50 states and the District of Columbia have passed laws related to physical education and/or physical activity in schools, only 13 states include language to enforce the laws. Of these states, only four have sanctions or penalties if the laws are not implemented.
While the Dietary Guidelines for Americans were updated in 2005, the U.S. Department of Agriculture school meal program has yet to adopt the recommendations.
Eighteen states have enacted laws requiring school meals to exceed USDA nutrition standards. But, only seven of these laws have specific enforcement provisions, and only two state laws include sanctions if its requirements aren't met.
Ten states do not include specific coverage for nutrition assessment and counseling for obese or overweight children in their Medicaid programs.
Twenty states explicitly do not cover nutritional assessment and consultation for obese adults under Medicaid.

The report offered a series of recommendations to combat the obesity epidemic, including investing in community-based disease-prevention programs that promote physical activity and good nutrition; improving the nutritional quality of foods available in schools and child-care programs; increasing the amount and quality of physical education and activity in schools and child-care programs; encouraging employers to provide workplace wellness programs; and requiring public and private insurers to provide preventive services, including nutrition counseling for children and adults.

More information

The U.S. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases has more about obesity.

-- Robert Preidt

SOURCE: Trust for America's Health, news release, Aug. 19, 2008

Last Updated: Aug. 19, 2008

http://www.healthday.com/Article.asp?AID=618600

Early respiratory disease linked to later anxiety

Keith — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 18:55:22 GMT

Early respiratory disease linked to later anxiety

Last Updated: 2008-08-19 13:00:49 -0400 (Reuters Health)

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Respiratory illness in early childhood is associated with an increased risk of anxiety disorders in adulthood, study findings suggest.

Dr. Renee D. Goodwin, of Columbia University, New York, and colleagues reviewed the medical histories, and assessed rates of anxiety and depression, in 720 adults who were an average of 33 years old.

Forty-six of the study subjects experienced any respiratory disease at age 1 year and 97 had either suspect or definite respiratory disease at age 7 years. Overall, 79 subjects (7.4 percent) met the diagnostic criteria for generalized anxiety disorder and 80 (7.5 percent) reported receiving treatment for anxiety at age 34. Moreover, 250 subjects (23.5 percent) met the criteria for depression and 150 (14.1 percent) reported receiving treatment for depression.

According to Goodwin and colleagues, a higher respiratory disease rate at 4 months of age was associated with a greater than twofold increased risk of receiving treatment for anxiety by 34 years of age. Having had respiratory disease at 1 year of age was associated with almost a threefold increased likelihood of being treated for anxiety.

Having respiratory disease at both 1 year and 7 years of age was associated with nearly a 20-fold increased risk of receiving treatment for anxiety.

Respiratory disease was not associated with mood disorders.

The mechanism for the association between respiratory disease in childhood and anxiety in adulthood is not known. "One possibility is that a suboptimal immune system may predate the onset of both respiratory disease and mental disorders," the investigators point out.

"It could also be that some combination of environmental and genetic risk factors leads to the co-occurrence of respiratory disease and anxiety disorders," they note.

All in all, they conclude, the findings "may have implications for prevention or early intervention with groups at high risk for anxiety disorders."

SOURCE: Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, August 2008.

http://www.reutershealth.com/archive/2008/08/19/eline/links/20080819elin031.html

Impotence drug treats prostate enlargement

Keith — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 18:53:44 GMT

Impotence drug treats prostate enlargement: study

Last Updated: 2008-08-19 9:56:15 -0400 (Reuters Health)

WASHINGTON (Reuters Life!) - Impotence drugs may be able to help reduce the symptoms caused by enlarged prostates, such as trouble urinating, U.S. researchers reported on Tuesday.

Men who took Eli Lilly and Co's Cialis every day had fewer symptoms, such as urinary frequency, urgency, intermittence, straining, incomplete emptying or a weak urinary stream, they reported in the journal Urology.

With about 50 percent of men over 50 suffering from some version of this problem, the study suggests a large potential market for erectile dysfunction drugs.

Researchers at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, Northwestern University in Chicago and Lilly Research Laboratories tested more than 1,000 men with enlarged prostates -- a condition known as benign prostatic hyperplasia or BPH.

Some got various doses of Cialis, known generically as tadalafil, while some got a placebo. Those who got Cialis were more likely to report their symptoms had improved, and a relatively low dose of 5 mg a day did the trick, reported the researchers, led by UTSW's Dr. Claus Roehrborn.

Cialis caused relatively few side effects, they added, in contrast to the drugs now used to treat BPH.

"Although they are effective, each of these drug classes can produce unwanted side effects, including dizziness, hypotension (low blood pressure) and sexual dysfunction," they wrote.

http://www.reutershealth.com/archive/2008/08/19/eline/links/20080819elin027.html

Chicken collagen may ease rheumatoid arthritis

Keith — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 18:52:21 GMT

Chicken collagen may ease rheumatoid arthritis

Last Updated: 2008-08-19 9:53:15 -0400 (Reuters Health)

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - The protein collagen derived from chickens is nearly as effective as low doses of the drug methotrexate in reducing pain and stiffness in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, Chinese investigators found in a study.

Collagen is the basic building bock of tendons and cartilage. Rheumatoid arthritis occurs when the immune system, for unknown reasons, mistakenly attacks the joints, leading to inflammation, swelling and pain. Over time, this process erodes the bone and soft tissue within the joints. Methotrexate is often used to treat rheumatoid arthritis.

Dr. Wei Wei at Anhui Medical University in Hefei and colleagues conducted a randomized 24-week trial comparing chicken collagen (0.1 milligrams daily in pill form) and methotrexate (10 milligrams per week) in 236 patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Other "second-line" drugs for rheumatoid arthritis had been discontinued, but patients were allowed to continue use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs.

Patients in both groups saw a decrease in pain, morning stiffness, number of tender and swollen joints, and improvement in their health-related quality of life.

Methotrexate proved to be more effective, with significant differences apparent at the midpoint of the trial. At the end of the trial, 41 percent of patients treated with chicken collagen and 58 percent of those treated with methotrexate met the "ACR50" criteria for improvement -- that is a decrease of at least 50 percent in the number of both tender and swollen joints.

However, adverse effects occurred less frequently and were less severe in the chicken collagen-treated group.

Chicken collagen treatment "is appealing because of the few side effects and easy clinical implementation of this approach," Wei and colleagues note.

SOURCE: Arthritis & Rheumatism, July 15, 2008.

http://www.reutershealth.com/archive/2008/08/19/eline/links/20080819elin025.html

B vitamins fail to curb risks in heart patients

Keith — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 18:44:13 GMT

B vitamins fail to curb risks in heart patients

Last Updated: 2008-08-19 16:13:17 -0400 (Reuters Health)

CHICAGO (Reuters) - Reducing levels of the amino acid homocysteine with folic acid and B vitamins failed to prevent serious complications in patients with heart disease, Norwegian researchers said on Tuesday.

The study was the latest of several large trials to show that lowering homocysteine through vitamin therapy offered no benefit to people with heart disease.

Other research had found a link between high concentrations of homocysteine in the blood and heart attacks and strokes.

But the researchers said the failure of their study and others like it suggests that homocysteine may be a marker for heart risks, and not a cause.

"Our findings do not support the use of B vitamins as secondary prevention in patients with coronary artery disease," Dr. Marta Ebbing of Haukeland University Hospital in Bergen, Norway, and colleagues wrote in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Ebbing's team studied 3,096 patients with coronary artery disease in two Norwegian hospitals between 1999 and 2006 who were having procedures to remove blood clots that were blocking the flow of blood to the heart.

They divided patients into four groups, testing different combinations of B6 and B12 vitamins with or without folic acid. The vitamins were given in addition to other treatments.

Patients were scheduled for follow-up visits with an interview, clinical examination and blood sampling at one month, one year, and at a final study visit.

The study was stopped early because preliminary results from a similar study in Norway found no benefits from the therapy and an increased risk of cancer associated with B vitamins.

Based on the data they collected, Ebbing and colleagues found no sign that a combination of folic acid plus vitamin B12 or B6 helped reduce the risk of death or major heart events, such as heart attacks or strokes.

They did find a trend toward fewer strokes and a higher risk of cancer in groups receiving folic acid, but they said the numbers were not statistically significant.

http://www.reutershealth.com/archive/2008/08/19/eline/links/20080819elin023.html

For mosquitoes, DEET just plain stinks

Keith — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 18:41:39 GMT

For mosquitoes, DEET just plain stinks

Last Updated: 2008-08-19 13:18:46 -0400 (Reuters Health)

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - DEET, the widely used mosquito repellent, does not block the insects' sense of smell but simply stinks to them, U.S. researchers reported on Monday.

This in turn could help in the development of better mosquito repellents, according to the team at the University of California, Davis.

They managed to record the signals from individual neurons in the antennae, which mosquitoes use to smell, and determined that they were not blocked but stimulated in a way that suggested the odor was simply unpleasant.

"We found that mosquitoes can smell DEET and they stay away from it," said Walter Leal, a professor of entomology who led the work. "DEET doesn't mask the smell of the host or jam the insect's senses. Mosquitoes don't like it because it smells bad to them."

DEET, the common name for N,N-diethyl-3-methylbenzamide, is the most common active ingredient in insect repellents. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other health groups recommend DEET as the best way to avoid the bites of mosquitoes, ticks and other disease-carrying insects.

It was developed by scientists at the U.S. Department of Agriculture and patented by the U.S. Army in 1946.

Most experts believed DEET worked by blocking the insect's ability to detect 1-octen-3-ol, a volatile substance that is contained in human sweat and breath. That would mean that the insects, which find their human victims by smell, would fly right on by a DEET-disguised arm or ankle.

Writing in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Leal and his group described how they tested this theory.

Collaborator Zain Syed discovered the precise neurons on the antennae of mosquitoes that detect DEET, and found they are right next to the neurons that sense 1-octen-3-ol.

The DEET neurons reacted strongly to DEET, and more strongly when more DEET was used, the researchers reported. They would not have been stimulated if DEET was merely blocking them.

"I was so delighted when I first encountered the neuron that detects DEET, a synthetic compound," Syed said in a statement. "I couldn't believe my eyes because it goes against conventional wisdom."

It also reacted, even more strongly, to compounds known as terpenoids, which help make up the distinctive aromas of eucalyptus, cloves, menthol and camphor.

"In the future, this new knowledge can be incorporated into developing new repellents and maybe in control strategies," Major Dhillon, president of the American Mosquito Control Association, said in a statement.

http://www.reutershealth.com/archive/2008/08/19/eline/links/20080819elin010.html

Study confirms berberine benefits for diabetics

Keith — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 18:38:13 GMT

Study confirms berberine benefits for diabetics

Last Updated: 2008-08-19 14:00:17 -0400 (Reuters Health)

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Berberine, an herbal medicine commonly used to treat diarrhea, can also significantly reduce blood sugar and cholesterol levels in people with type 2 diabetes, Chinese researchers report based on a study they conducted.

"Berberine cannot provide adequate single drug therapy for all diabetic patients because the patients in the present study had relatively mild diabetes," they say, but it may be at least useful as an add-on to standard therapy.

Dr. Guang Ning, of Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine in Shanghai and colleagues randomized 116 diabetes patients to receive one gram of berberine daily or placebo for 3 months.

Fasting blood sugar fell from markedly in patients on the herb, they report. Among the patients on berberine, average hemoglobin A1C -- a measure of long-term blood sugar control -- dropped from 7.5 percent to 6.6 percent.

Patients on the herb also showed significant reductions in total and "bad" LDL cholesterol. Blood pressure also fell in patients taking berberine.

Patients on the herb lost 2.3 kilograms (5.1 pounds), on average, compared to 1.3 kilograms (2.9 pounds) for the placebo group.

All of the differences seen among patients on berberine were significantly greater than those for patients on placebo.

No serious side effects were seen among patients in the study, although patients taking berberine were more likely to report constipation, and two patients in the berberine group had their dosage reduced for this reason.

Given the benefits of berberine in lowering blood sugar, cholesterol, body weight, and blood pressure, "we speculate that berberine may be used for patients with type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome," the researchers conclude.

SOURCE: Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, July 2008.

http://www.reutershealth.com/archive/2008/08/19/eline/links/20080819elin003.html

Bigger belly may up smokers' lung cancer risk

Keith — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 18:35:13 GMT

Bigger belly may up smokers' lung cancer risk

Last Updated: 2008-08-19 13:00:25 -0400 (Reuters Health)

By Anne Harding

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Smokers who carry more weight around their waistlines may be at greater risk of lung cancer, according to a new study.

The finding, along with the fact that lung cancer risk is actually higher among leaner smokers, provides "intriguing" evidence that how a smoker stores fat could play a role in his or her likelihood of developing lung cancer, Dr. Geoffrey C. Kabat of the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in the Bronx, New York, told Reuters Health.

Several studies have found that a lower body mass index (BMI) means a higher lung cancer risk among smokers. "Reflex explanations" for the link include the fact that smokers are skinnier than non-smokers, Kabat noted in an interview, as well as the tendency for people to gain weight after they quit smoking. Another proposed mechanism for the relationship is that people lose weight when they develop lung cancer.

But careful analysis of the data doesn't bear out these explanations, Kabat said. To better understand the relationship, he and his colleagues looked at data from the Women's Health Initiative.

Over the course of 8 years, 1,365 of the study's 161,809 participants developed lung cancer. When the researchers looked at BMI after adjusting for weight circumference, they found that both smokers and ex-smokers with lower BMIs had a greater lung cancer risk.

But when they looked at waist circumference independent of BMI, they found that a larger waistline conferred a greater likelihood of lung cancer for smokers and ex-smokers. There was no relationship between BMI or waist circumference and lung cancer risk among never-smokers.

The findings, reported in the American Journal of Epidemiology, must be confirmed by other investigators, and don't offer any clues on the mechanism behind the relationship, Kabat noted.

However, he speculated, "it may have to do with the storage, the mobilization, and the metabolization of carcinogens. These carcinogens ... tend to be stored in fat tissue. That may play a role in the development of lung cancer. It may be that it's linked to smoking but that it plays a role on top of smoking."

He added: "We're not ready to give people advice, because overall the advice would not be changed. We're not advocating that people lose weight so that they have a lower risk of lung cancer. Smoking is so far and away the dominant risk factor."

SOURCE: American Journal of Epidemiology, July 15, 2008.

http://www.reutershealth.com/archive/2008/08/19/eline/links/20080819elin002.html

Disability rates may not increase with very old age

Keith — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:14:46 GMT

Disability rates may not increase with very old age

A report published online this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences confirmed that increasing rates of disability may not be inevitable among the very old, who are the fastest growing population segment in the Western world. In an article entitled, “Exceptional longevity does not result in exceptional levels of disability,” researchers in Denmark and at the Max Planck Institute in Germany conclude that the concern regarding an increased burden of care-giving associated with more people joining the ranks of the very old may be unfounded.

Kaare Christensen at the Danish Aging Research Center at the University of Southern Denmark and colleagues studied 2,262 Danish men and women born in 1905. The subjects were surveyed in 1998, and in 2000, 2003, and 2005 to evaluate physical functioning, cognitive function, and depression levels.

At the beginning of the study, 39 percent of the subjects were classified as independent: defined as being able to perform activities of daily living without assistance and having adequate cognitive function. This percentage declined by an additional 6 percent by 2005 among the 166 surviving participants, an amount considered “modest”.

The authors write that with improved medical treatment and education, as well as a reduction in the number of those who smoke among those entering the oldest-old population, a decrease in disability among this age group can be expected.

“It has been postulated that life extension would provide only increased chances of being frail and existing in a vegetative state, with huge personal and societal costs,” the authors write. “Our study does not support this grim prediction. On the contrary, our findings suggest that the characteristics of a cohort do not change much in an age range from 92 to 100 years in central domains such as physical and cognitive functions and depression symptomatology.”

“Our finding also suggests that individuals who survive into the highest ages have a health profile that is similar in many aspects to that of individuals who are 7 or 8 years younger,” they conclude. “This suggests that most individuals can expect to experience physical decline before they die, but the postponement of this individual decline makes it possible for us to live into the fourth age.”

Prevention

The National Academy of Sciences published three reports showing that the effects of aging may be partially reversible with a combination of acetyl-L-carnitine and lipoic acid (Hagen et al. 2002). One of these studies showed that supplementation with these two nutrients resulted in a partial reversal of the decline of mitochondrial membrane function while consumption of oxygen significantly increased. This study demonstrated that the combination of acetyl-L-carnitine and lipoic acid improved ambulatory activity, with a significantly greater degree of improvement in the old rats compared to the young ones. Human aging is characterized by lethargy, infirmity, and weakness. There is now evidence that supplementation with two over-the-counter supplements can produce a measurable antiaging effect.

The second study published by the National Academy of Sciences showed that supplementation with acetyl-L-carnitine and lipoic acid resulted in improved memory in old rats. Electron microscopic studies in the hippocampus region of the brain showed that acetyl-L-carnitine and lipoic acid reversed age-associated mitochondrial structural decay. In the third National Academy of Sciences study, scientists tested acetyl-L-carnitine and lipoic acid to see if an enzyme used by the mitochondria as biologic fuel could be restored in old rats. After 7 weeks of supplementation with acetyl-L-carnitine and lipoic acid, levels of this enzyme (carnitine acetyl-transferase) were significantly restored in the aged rats. Supplementation also inhibited free radical-induced lipid peroxidation, which enhanced the activity of the energy-producing enzyme in the mitochondria. The scientists concluded that feeding old rats acetyl-L-carnitine and lipoic acid can ameliorate oxidative damage, along with mitochondrial dysfunction.

http://www.lef.org/newsletter/2008/0819_Disability-Rates-May-Not-Increase-with-Very-Old-Age.htm?source=eNewsLetter2008Wk34-1&key=Article&l=0#article

Armchair Olympics fuels obesity fears in China

Keith — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 05:30:33 GMT

Armchair Olympics fuels obesity fears in China

By Belinda GoldsmithFri Aug 15, 10:10 AM ET

Armchair athletics may not be an Olympic sport but it's the most popular activity in China this month, fuelling concerns about rising obesity rates.

Chinese media has even given its army of TV Olympic spectators a name -- otaku -- a Japanese word that means "venerable house" and usually refers to someone nerdy who is totally devoted to a hobby to the point of not leaving home.

Figures have shown about 840 million of China's 1.3 billion population tuned in to watch the August 8 opening ceremony of the Beijing Games and interest is expected to stay high to August 24.

Increased TV viewing, less physical jobs and a shift away from a traditional Chinese diet rich in vegetables and carbohydrates with little animal-sourced food to a more Western diet heavier in meat, eggs and dairy has piled on the pounds.

"Lots of mothers don't know what to feed their children anymore," said Zhao Hua, who was having lunch with her 6-year-old son Tanning at a massive McDonald's in the Olympics site.

"In the past it was good to be a bit fat because it was a sign of strength but now children are getting too fat."

Figures show about a quarter of Chinese adults are obese or overweight, which is lower than many other countries but has jumped from 13 percent in 1991 with forecasts it could double by 2028.

By comparison World Health Organization figures show 65 percent of adult Americans in 2005 were overweight or obese.

A University of North Carolina study, published in the July/August issue of the journal Health Affairs, showed of all developing countries, only Mexico's rate of obesity was growing faster than that of China.

The World Food Program says a 6-year-old boy in China is now 13 pounds (6 kgs) heavier and almost two-and-a-half inches (6.4 cms) taller than a 6-year-old was 30 years ago.

"We need to find the right investments and regulations to encourage people to adopt a healthy lifestyle, or we risk facing higher rates of death, disease, and disability and the related costs," warned researcher Barry Popkin.

The Chinese diet has changed, with hundreds of McDonald's and KFC outlets in China, but experts also blame a drop off in physical activity, with more cars and less bikes on the roads.

Chinese newspaper the People's Daily said China has fewer than seven training fields for every 10,000 Chinese, compared with 200 sports fields for every 10,000 people in United States, and Japan.

"Now all the teenagers just like to play video games and watch television and our children like McDonald's. It is not healthy," said Yu Yanbing who was tucking into some fries at McDonald's with his 3-year-old son Zixi.

(Editing by Alex Richardson)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080815/hl_nm/olympics_obesity_dc;_ylt=Auu8WmvVvTcekDa3SiVoBPbVJRIF

Vitamin D's wild days: Who to test, what to take?

Keith — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 05:22:29 GMT

Vitamin D's wild days: Who to test, what to take?

By LAURAN NEERGAARD, AP Medical WriterMon Aug 18, 4:04 PM ET

Don't be surprised if your doctor orders a vitamin D test during your next physical. Blood tests to check levels of the so-called sunshine vitamin are on the rise as doctors and patients react to headline-grabbing research that suggests having too little may not only hurt your bones — it might increase your risk of certain cancers or heart disease.

But there are problems with deciding next steps: As intriguing as the research is, it's far from proof that vitamin D really is that powerful. Also, it's not clear just how much is enough — and megadoses can harm.

Nor are there guidelines on exactly who should be tested, or how. Test during winter, for example, and in much of the country people will harbor considerably less vitamin D than if they were tested in the sunny summer.

Still, "the hope is so high that it will have some effect that everybody's asking for it," says Dr. Clifford Rosen of the Maine Medical Center, who is helping government researchers evaluate the research. "It's pretty much the wild, wild West right now."

There is no count of how many people get their vitamin D checked. But at testing giant LabCorp, the volume of vitamin D tests doctors order has, on average, doubled every year for the past four, says spokesman Eric Lindblom. So far this year, test orders are up another 90 percent. At competitor Quest Diagnostics, the volume of D tests approximately tripled between May 2006 and last May.

Dr. James Underberg, a New York University internist, once checked vitamin D levels mostly in people at risk of thinning bones. Over the past year, he's begun screening more patients, especially those at risk of heart disease, as he closely watches the evolving research.

"We don't have any data yet that says taking an otherwise healthy adult who's vitamin D deficient and supplementing them prevents cancer, reduces the risk of heart disease," Underberg acknowledges.

"You just have to keep your eyes and ears open to make sure something doesn't show up counterintuitive to what people thought," he adds, noting that other once-touted heart protections — estrogen therapy after menopause, for example — failed when more rigorously researched.

Dr. Ann Marie Gordon, a Washington, D.C., internist, isn't hesitating. She has made a vitamin D test a routine part of every physical, and she estimates that 60 percent of her patients are low.

"Any kind of deficiency needs to be addressed. Whether patients are convinced or the medical world is convinced that vitamin D goes beyond bones is irrelevant," she says.

Vitamin D and calcium go hand in hand. You need a lifetime of both to build strong bones. We get D in three ways: sun exposure, dietary supplements or certain foods, particularly D-fortified milk, orange juice and cereals.

Scientists have been interested in vitamin D's possibly broader effects for decades, since noticing that cancer rates between similar groups of people were lower in sunny southern latitudes than in northern ones. In recent years, studies have linked low levels of vitamin D with breast, prostate and colon cancer, heart disease, diabetes and certain other ailments — as well as an overall increased risk of death.

Much of the evidence is circumstantial. There's a chicken-or-egg question: Does correlating how much vitamin D is in someone's blood at a certain time really mean it triggered or worsened a disease — or did the disease, or other risk factors, trigger the low vitamin D? Being a couch potato, for instance, is a key risk for heart disease, and also keeps you out of the sun.

Moreover, not all vitamin D studies find that the nutrient helps. The disappointing ones seldom make headlines.

But the increasing interest in vitamin D parallels increasing concern that people aren't getting enough — and increasing confusion about how much that might be.

Currently, the government and other health authorities recommend consuming anywhere from 200 to 600 international units a day from food or supplements, depending on your age — levels that many vitamin D proponents say are too low.

There's no consensus on how to balance the risk of skin cancer from sun exposure with vitamin D needs. Some specialists recommend 10 to 15 minutes daily without sunscreen. Others say sunscreen doesn't completely block vitamin D production so sunscreen users will get enough. Regardless, time of day, season and geography play a role.

There's not even good agreement on what's a low level — different studies use different definitions, notes a newly published research review sponsored by the National Institutes of Health.

The government has begun discussions with the Institute of Medicine to determine if the daily recommended intake needs changing.

Meanwhile, because megadoses may be toxic, the government considers 2,000 IUs a day the upper limit, although doctors may recommend 10,000 or even 50,000 IUs for a short period if someone needs a rapid boost.

___

EDITOR'S NOTE — Lauran Neergaard covers health and medical issues for The Associated Press in Washington.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080818/ap_on_he_me/med_healthbeat_vitamin_d;_ylt=AjLuAPkeSZUiQ2zFTqGsJULVJRIF

Newly Discovered Air Pollutants May Cause Lung Problems

Keith — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 15:01:59 GMT

Newly Discovered Air Pollutants May Cause Lung Problems
Cancer, cardiopulmonary diseases might be tied to persistent free radicals, study says

By Steven Reinberg
HealthDay Reporter

MONDAY, Aug. 18 (HealthDay News) -- Recently discovered so-called free radicals that are attached to small particles of air pollution could cause lung damage and perhaps even lung cancer, researchers report.

If confirmed through further research, the finding could help to explain why nonsmokers develop tobacco-related diseases like lung cancer, said lead researcher H. Barry Dellinger, the Patrick F. Taylor Chair of environmental chemistry at Louisiana State University.

It has been known for years that free radicals exist in the atmosphere, and these atoms, molecules and fragments of molecules can damage cells. It had been thought that these particles, which can be produced by combustion, exist for less than a second and then disappear.

"What I found out is that combustion-generated particles contain environmentally persistent free radicals," said Dellinger. "When the radicals are associated with particles, they can apparently exist indefinitely."

These free radicals are remarkably similar to the free radicals found in cigarette tar, Dellinger said. "The implication is you can have the same environmentally related diseases by exposure to airborne fine particles that you can get from cigarettes," he said.

Dellinger noted, however, that one would have to smoke about 300 cigarettes a day to be exposed to the same level of environmental free radicals found in moderately polluted air.

The findings were to be presented Monday at the American Chemical Society annual meeting, in Philadelphia.

The persistent free radicals (PFRs) discovered by Dellinger's team attach themselves to small particles of air pollution as they leave smokestacks, car exhaust pipes and household chimneys, and continue to exist as free radicals. Particles of air pollution containing metals, such as copper and iron, are more likely to remain in the atmosphere and can carry these PFRs great distances, Dellinger said.

As PFRs are inhaled, they're absorbed by the lungs and other tissues and cause cell damage that can lead to problems such as asthma, emphysema and lung cancer. However, there's still no direct evidence linking PFRs to any of these diseases, he said.

Dr. Neil Schachter, a professor of pulmonary medicine at Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York City, thinks it's premature to blame persistent free radicals for the adverse effects of air pollution.

"These airborne free radicals are of interest, but I am not sure we are at a point where our scalpel is sharp enough to dissect the individual components of air pollution that cause problems for people," he said.

It's possible that persistent free radicals are responsible for the respiratory damage caused by pollution, Schachter acknowledged. "There are studies that show that modifying free radicals can alter the course of disease," he said. "But the implications of this -- what it means to clinics, what it means to doctors, what it means to regulators -- I think we are a long way from pulling that together."

More information

For more on the health risks posed by air pollution, visit the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

SOURCES: H. Barry Dellinger, Ph.D., the Patrick F. Taylor Chair of Environmental Chemistry, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge; Neil Schachter, M.D., professor, pulmonary medicine, Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York City; Aug. 17, 2008, presentation, American Chemical Society annual meeting, Philadelphia

Last Updated: Aug. 18, 2008

http://www.healthday.com/Article.asp?AID=618381

High Incidence of Suicidal Thinking Among College Students

Keith — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:56:23 GMT

High Incidence of Suicidal Thinking Among College Students: Survey

More than half of 26,000 college students who completed a Web survey said they had thought about committing suicide at least once in their lives, University of Texas at Austin researchers say.

Fifteen percent of respondents said they had seriously considered suicide, and more than 5 percent said they had actually attempted to kill themselves at least once, psychologist David J. Drum and co-authors reported Sunday in a news release to coincide with their planned presentation at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association in Boston.

The survey of students at 70 colleges and universities was administered in the spring of 2006. It also found:

Six percent of undergraduates and 4 percent of graduate students said they had seriously considered suicide at least once in the prior year.
The most common reasons for suicidal thinking were: wanting relief from emotional or physical pain, problems with romantic relationships, and problems with school or academics.
Fourteen percent of undergraduates and 8 percent of graduate students who seriously contemplated suicide in the prior year actually made a suicide attempt.
Nineteen percent of undergraduate attempters and 28 percent of graduate attempters needed medical attention.
Half of those who attempted suicide tried overdosing on drugs.

http://www.healthday.com/Article.asp?AID=618543

Pneumonia vaccination important for diabetics

Keith — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:27:29 GMT

Pneumonia vaccination important for diabetics

Last Updated: 2008-08-18 13:39:08 -0400 (Reuters Health)

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Researchers from Denmark say they have "strong evidence" that diabetes is associated with a 25 percent to 75 percent increase in the relative risk of hospitalization due to pneumonia.

Writing in the journal Diabetes Care, the researchers say these results "emphasize the value of influenza and pneumococcal immunization, particularly for patients with longer diabetes duration, and the importance of improved glycemic control to prevent pneumonia-related hospitalization among diabetic patients."

Using health care databases for northern Denmark, Dr. Jette B. Kornum from Aarhus University Hospital, Aalborg and colleagues identified 34,239 individuals with a pneumonia-related hospital admission and 342,390 individuals from the general population who served as a control group.

The analysis of these data revealed that individuals with diabetes had a 26 percent higher risk of pneumonia-related hospitalization compared with those without diabetes.

The risk of pneumonia-related hospitalization was increased by 4.4-fold in subjects with type 1 diabetes and by 1.2-fold in those with type 2 diabetes.

The longer duration of diabetes with poor glycemic control, the higher the risk of hospitalization for pneumonia became, Kornum and colleagues observed. Compared with the subjects without diabetes, having diabetes for 10 years or more was associated with a 37-percent greater risk.

Diabetes combined with an A1C level of 9 percent or greater, a standard measure of blood glucose, which should be 7 percent or lower, was associated with a 60 percent increased relative risk of pneumonia-related hospital admission, while diabetics who had an A1C of less than 7 percent had a 22 percent risk, compared with nondiabetic subjects.

"Our data extend previous studies suggesting that diabetes is a risk factor for pneumonia," Kornum and colleagues conclude.

SOURCE: Diabetes Care, August 2008.

http://www.reutershealth.com/archive/2008/08/18/eline/links/20080818elin027.html

New cardio risk factors seen after joint surgery

Keith — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:26:30 GMT

New cardio risk factors seen after joint surgery

Last Updated: 2008-08-18 11:04:38 -0400 (Reuters Health)

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - In addition to confirming previously identified risk factors for cardiovascular complications after total joint replacement surgery, researchers have now found that bilateral (involving both sides of the body, such as two hip or knee replacements), as well as revision operations, are associated with increased risk.

"Revision joint replacement and bilateral surgery are much more prolonged operations than primary unilateral joint replacement," Dr. Jeffrey N. Katz, from Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, said in a statement. "These findings suggest an increased risk with more prolonged surgery."

The results, reported in the journal entitled Arthritis and Rheumatism, come from a study of 209 patients with a history of heart attack, heart failure, unstable angina (chest pain), arrhythmia (irregular heart beat), symptoms of low blood pressure, or a blot clot in the lung at admission for total joint replacement, and 209 patients matched to characteristics of the others, but did not have cardiovascular complications.

In line with prior findings, an increased risk of heart disease was 0.7-times greater in older patients, 2.6-greater in those with history of arrhythmia and 1.6-times greater in patients with a history of coronary artery disease, heart attack, heart failure, or valvular heart disease.

The strongest risk factor, however, was one of the newly identified ones, bilateral surgery, which increased the risk by 3.5-fold. Revision surgery also increased the risk by 2.2-fold.

"Clinicians can use this information to better estimate the risk of cardiovascular complications following total joint replacement surgery," Katz said, "and, ultimately, to prevent and better manage these complications."

SOURCE: Arthritis and Rheumatism, July, 2008.

http://www.reutershealth.com/archive/2008/08/18/eline/links/20080818elin026.html

Antibodies still protect 1918 flu survivors

Keith — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:23:25 GMT

Antibodies still protect 1918 flu survivors

Last Updated: 2008-08-18 11:32:16 -0400 (Reuters Health)

By Maggie Fox

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Antibodies from survivors of the 1918 flu pandemic, the worst in memory, still protect against the dead virus, researchers reported on Sunday.

The findings by a team of influenza and immune system experts suggest new and better ways to fight viruses -- especially new pandemic strains that emerge and spread before a vaccine can be formulated.

These survivors, now age 91 to 101, all lived through the pandemic as children.

Their immune systems still carry a memory of that virus and can produce proteins called antibodies that kill the 1918 flu strain with surprising efficiency, the researchers report in the journal Nature.

"It was very surprising that these subjects would still have cells floating in their blood so long afterward," said Dr. James Crowe of Vanderbilt University in Tennessee, who helped lead the study.

The antibodies also protected mice from the 1918 virus, which swept around the world at the end of World War I killing between 50 million and 100 million people, Crowe's team reports in the journal Nature.

"The antibodies that we isolated are remarkable antibodies. They grab onto the virus very tightly and they virtually never fall off," Crowe said in a telephone interview.

"That allows them to kill the 1918 virus with extreme potency, meaning it takes a very small amount of antibody."

RESURRECTED VIRUS

Dr. Christopher Basler and colleagues at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York tested the 1918 survivors and found that in most of them, the B-cells made antibodies highly attuned to the 1918 flu strain.

Dr. Terrence Tumpey at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had worked on a team that resurrected the 1918 virus taken from buried victims of the epidemic and tested this virus in mice. Mice given the antibodies from the elderly survivors lived, while those given placebos died.

Crowe said it will now be important to test other people who have had influenza to see if their immune responses are as strong. "The thought is the first influenza that you see during life is the one that you have the best immunity to," he said.

"If we can learn the rules about how these antibodies work we may be able to design antibodies to lots of other viruses."

The 1918 flu was an H1N1 strain that apparently came straight from birds. "This study tells us that human beings can make long lasting immune responses to bird influenza," Crowe said.

Crowe said his team is working to get antibodies from people vaccinated with experimental shots for the H5N1 avian influenza now circulating in Asia, Europe, the Middle East and Africa. H5N1 mostly affects birds but it has infected 385 people since 2003, killing 243.

Experts fear that, like the H1N1 virus did in 1918, H5N1 will mutate into a form that passes easily among people and spark another pandemic. No one knows if the vaccines being made now would protect against whatever form of H5N1 might emerge.

Crowe said antibodies from survivors might make a good interim treatment while a vaccine is formulated, manufactured and distributed -- a process that would take months.

http://www.reutershealth.com/archive/2008/08/18/eline/links/20080818elin009.html

Mental illness may up risk of postpartum suicide

Keith — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 14:20:53 GMT

Mental illness may up risk of postpartum suicide

Last Updated: 2008-08-18 11:59:08 -0400 (Reuters Health)

By Amy Norton

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - New mothers with a history of depression or other psychiatric disorders appear more likely than other women to attempt suicide soon after giving birth, a new study suggests.

Researchers found that among nearly 1,800 women who recently gave birth, those with a history of a psychiatric disorder were 27 times more likely to attempt suicide in the year after having their baby.

Similarly, women with a history of substance abuse had a six-fold increase in their risk of attempted suicide.

Postpartum suicide is rare, but the new findings point to a group of women who may be at greatest risk, the researchers note in the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology.

Women, their families and their doctors should be aware that past psychiatric disorders and substance abuse are risk factors for postpartum suicide, lead researcher Dr. Katherine A. Comtois, of the University of Washington School of Medicine in Seattle, told Reuters Health.

The findings are based on hospital records from women who gave birth in Washington State between 1992 and 2001. The researchers identified 355 women who were hospitalized for a suicide attempt in the year after giving birth; they matched each of these women with another four who had given birth in the same year but did not attempt suicide.

Overall, Comtois and her colleagues found, the risk of postpartum suicide was markedly higher among women who'd been hospitalized with a psychiatric disorder, substance abuse problem or both 5 years before giving birth.

Such diagnoses are "clearly important risk factors" of which families and medical providers should be aware, Comtois said.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recently recommended that women be screened for depression and other "psychosocial risk factors" during prenatal care, Comtois and her colleagues note in the report.

"Future studies," they write, "should evaluate the effectiveness of screening for psychiatric and substance use disorders on decreasing adverse outcomes such as suicide attempts during the postpartum period."

SOURCE: American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, August 2008.

http://www.reutershealth.com/archive/2008/08/18/eline/links/20080818elin002.html

Protein, Part 2 - Comparing Proteins by Jon Barron

Keith — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 06:10:43 GMT

Here is part 1 of Jon's article:

http://keithconnectsthedots.com/2008/08/04/protein-part-1-by-jon-barron.aspx

Protein, Part 2 - Comparing Proteins

Date: 8/18/2008
Posted By: Jon Barron

Many people think that the usability of protein is a question of animal versus vegetable. In fact, a number of people sent in comments off the last newsletter and stated as much -- that animal protein is better than vegetable protein. And yes, as a general rule, animal protein is "more complete" than many vegetable proteins, but that does not automatically make it better. For example, beef contains only about 20% usable protein. Spirulina and chlorella, on the other hand, average 75-80% -- and are just as complete and just as bioavailable. Combine the right yellow pea and rice protein and you can hit numbers approaching 85-90% usable protein -- again with high bioavailability. In the world of protein, nothing is necessarily what it first seems. In fact, the issue of animal versus vegetable is one of the least important determiners when it comes to protein usability.

Another factor to consider when we compare proteins is that there really is no such "thing" as dairy protein or whey protein or soy protein or any other "type" of protein, for that matter. Each source of protein is actually a conglomeration of several protein fractions that we lump together under their source name. Dairy protein, for example, actually describes a group of proteins that includes casein (which itself is a conglomeration of alpha caseins 1&2, beta casein, and kappa casein), alpha-lactalbumin, beta-lactoglobulin, and bovine serum albumin. Soy protein, likewise, is a mix of a number of protein fractions, although the names for the soy fractions are more utilitarian than for dairy, less prosaic if you will. Soy protein fractions include: 28 kD, 30-34 kD, 37 kD, 49 kD, and 50 kD. It's not necessary to know the names of all the different protein fractions in the different types of protein, but it is vital to know that they exist. Why? Because the different fractions have different degrees of digestibility and promote different degrees of allergic response. The prime culprit in soy, for example, is 30-kD allergen (Gly m Bd 30). Ultimately, the quality of a protein source (and its tendency to cause allergic response) is determined by how your body handles each and every fraction in that source. Which brings us to the issue at hand.

The efficiency, or degree to which dietary proteins can be used for building parts of the human body, is determined by five primary factors, most of which we described in the last issue of the newsletter, Part 1 of the series.:

The type and relative amounts of amino acids -- particularly any shortage of a needed essential amino acid.
The size and structure of the protein molecule itself. (This relates to our discussion of protein fractions immediately above.)
The amount of branched chain amino acids (BCCAs) present. BCCAs are defined by their unique structure and include leucine, isoleucine, and valine. These three amino acids are special in that they are metabolized in the muscle as opposed to the liver. The greater their presence in a protein, the higher the protein's bioavailability.
1. Leucine is the most readily oxidized BCAA and therefore the most effective at causing insulin secretion from the pancreas. It should be noted that too much leucine can disrupt the tryptophan/niacin pathway and contribute to pellagra. It may also increase ammonia levels in the body.
2. Isoleucine stabilizes and regulates blood sugar and energy levels.
3. Valine assists in muscle metabolism, tissue repair and the maintenance of proper nitrogen balance in the body. However, too much valine can cause crawling sensations in your skin and hallucinations.
How the protein comes packaged with other components such as pectin that may inhibit its digestion.
The lack of enzymes necessary for the breakdown of that particular protein.

But beyond bioavailability, we also need to consider factors such as allergies and digestive problems such as gas, bloating, and constipation. In truth, it doesn't matter how "good" a protein is if you can't eat it.

Animal versus vegetable protein

Obviously, dismissing the issue in a sentence is not going to cut it, so let's spend a moment exploring the issue animal versus vegetable protein. Also, I'm not going to express an opinion on the morality or ethicality of eating meat -- although I definitely have one. My purpose in this newsletter is merely to evaluate the value of different protein sources, particularly as they relate to their use as a "supplemental" protein source.

As I've already said, protein bioavailability has much to do with the type and relative amounts of amino acids present in a particular protein molecule. Yes, the body has the ability to convert and make many of the amino acids it needs, but the nine essential amino acids cannot be manufactured by the body and must be supplied by the food we eat. Most animal proteins, by definition, contain all of the essential amino acids in sufficient amounts. The protein of cereals, most beans, and vegetables may contain all the essential amino acids, but the amounts in these plant foods is often less than ideal, particularly the branch chain amino acids. However, this is easy to compensate for, and it is possible to get plant proteins that are extremely concentrated. With that in mind, let's take a look at the primary sources of protein and their pros and cons.

Meat protein

When most people in the developed world think protein, they think beef. We're talking steaks, hamburgers, hot dogs, roast beef. We're talking "hungry man food." If you have any doubt, just look at pictures of a training table for most athletes. But how good is meat as a primary source of protein?

On the plus side, it's complete. It contains all the essential amino acids. And it's not particularly allergenic. On the other hand, it's not particularly concentrated -- containing only about 20% usable protein by weight. And it's not particularly nutrient dense, inflicting a significant number of calories on your body along with the protein. It also tends to promote colon cancer -- particularly if grilled at high temperatures. And unless you're buying organic grass fed beef (you absolutely want organic), it also comes complete with high levels of antibiotics, pesticides, hormones, an unhealthy ratio of Omega-6 to Omega-3 fatty acids, and the risk of E. coli contamination -- not to mention high levels of saturated fat.

You'll get about 23 grams of protein in a three ounce serving of beef, along with about 15 grams of fat. The biological value is about 70, and the net protein utilization is about 73.

Poultry protein

Chicken and turkey are considered the "lighter," "less expensive" alternatives to beef. And in fact, lean turkey or chicken, without the skin, will provide about 27 grams of protein in a three ounce serving, along with about 2-3 grams of fat. Poultry has a biological value of about 80.

But unless you're eating organic, it also contains large amounts of antibiotics, arsenic (oh yes, it's a government approved additive), and of course chicken leukosis cancer tumors.

Fish protein

Fish is a good high protein food. It contains reasonable amounts of quality protein, virtually no carbohydrates, and little saturated fat. Although the amount of fat and protein are about equal (5 grams in a 3 ounce serving), the fats tend to be highly beneficial Omega-3 fatty acids. Depending on the type of fish, its biological value ranges from 70-80, and it has a net protein utilization of 81, about the same as that found in poultry.

Unfortunately, if wild caught, it's likely to have high levels of mercury, and if farm-raised, high levels of antibiotics and dioxin.

Pork protein

I have to admit, the pork industry has had two of my favorite ads of all time. Back in the late 80's, to help turn around declining demand for pork, the National Pork Board launched their remarkable repositioning campaign, "Pork, The Other White Meat." It worked. The campaign effectively made people equate pork to chicken, as opposed to beef.

Then came the bird flu scare, and suddenly any association with chicken was unacceptable as millions of chickens were being slaughtered worldwide to prevent the spread of avian flu. At that point, the pork producers launched their, "Pork, It's Not Chicken" campaign.

You actually have to admire such shamelessness.

That said:

The old dictum that pork is unhealthier than beef or chicken simply is no longer true -- unless you are still eating pork raised in a third world country that allows pigs to feed on garbage -- or corpses for any of you who saw the movie Snatch.
Also, the old myth that pork is more indigestible than meat is likewise not true. That was just another way to warn people off pork when it was garbage fed. In fact, pork is slightly more digestible than beef.
But it's also slightly higher in fat.
It has all of the other problems associated with meat -- high in antibiotics, etc.
And "free range pork" is remarkably rare. Virtually all of the pork available in the United States comes from animal factories that are inherently cruel, literally driving the animals mad in response to their "living" conditions.

Milk protein

The National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) estimates that 30 to 50 million Americans are lactose intolerant. These are people who cannot digest lactose, the sugar found in dairy products. According to the FDA, symptoms include gas, stomach cramps, diarrhea, etc. However, many others are also allergic to dairy products (lactose intolerance is not technically an allergy), specifically the proteins found in milk. In any case, these poorly digested bovine antigens (substances that provoke an immune reaction) like casein become "allergens" in allergic individuals. Dairy products are one of the leading cause of food allergies, often revealed by diarrhea, constipation and fatigue. Many cases of asthma and sinus infections are reported to be relieved and even eliminated by cutting out dairy. The exclusion of dairy, however, must be complete to see any benefit. An 8 oz glass of milk will provide 20-26 grams of protein and 5-10 grams of fat. It has biological value of 80-90 and a net protein utilization of about 81.

In previous newsletters, I have made no secret of my antipathy when it comes to drinking milk, or using it as a primary source of protein, so I won't repeat it here.

Whey protein

When it comes to protein supplementation now, whey is king. It has pushed aside milk based protein supplements, egg proteins, and soy proteins to totally dominate the field. Why? Quite simply is has an extremely high biological value ranging from 90-100 for whey concentrate and from 100-150 for whey isolate. It's also high in the branch chain amino acids and is quickly absorbed by the human body.

Unfortunately, it's also highly allergenic. The problem isn't lactose or casein (a major allergen in milk) since they are both either removed or at significantly reduced levels in whey. However, the main protein fractions in whey (beta-lactoglobulin, alpha-lactalbumin, and bovine serum albumin) are all highly allergenic. In addition, whey tends to have much more cholesterol in it than would normally be recommended.

A question worth considering is how many people are actually allergic to dairy and whey? Officially, that number is only about 1-3%. However, when you redefine that number to include anyone who generates extra mucous from eating dairy, suffers from constipation from eating dairy, or feels bloated after eating dairy, you're probably looking at numbers closer to 60-70%. And if you actually expand the number to include anyone who suffers from mild systemic inflammation after eating dairy -- and thus retention of water -- I believe that number approaches 100%. There are no official studies to support these numbers; they are just the numbers I have seen working with athletes, martial artists, and even bodybuilders over the last four years.

And finally, whey contributes to two conditions, aminoacidemia and intestinal toxemia, that we will talk more about in our next issue of the newsletter.

As a side note, the entire whey industry results from a desire to extract commercial value from what was once a waste product of the cheese industry. When you curdle milk to make cheese, it splits the milk into two components, curds and whey. The curd is the "solid" part that's used to make cheese. The liquid whey used to be considered a waste product, but then manufacturers began to heat the whey to evaporate the water and concentrate the protein in it. Now, there are more advanced filtration techniques available to concentrate the protein down and leave it in forms, such as whey isolate, that are more readily used by the body. But it still has many of the same problems.

Egg protein

At one time, before sophisticated whey processing emerged, eggs were considered the optimum protein supplement. In fact, the whole biological value scale is based on egg protein ranking a benchmark 100. However, eggs are arguably the most allergenic of all proteins. Oh, and for those of you who eat only egg whites, it should be noted that the allergenic proteins are concentrated in the egg whites.

And finally, because of their high sulfur content, eggs make for really smelly intestinal gas. Though this is not necessarily a major problem if you're a single bodybuilder with no plans to ever marry or meet anyone socially.

Egg whites VS whole eggs

Okay, while we're on the subject, let's talk about the myths associated with eggs.

First of all, contrary to popular belief, because whole eggs have a better amino acid profile than egg whites, the protein is more bioavailable in whole eggs than in egg whites. Whole eggs are also much more nutrient dense than egg whites since egg yolks contain all of the vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, and Omega-3 fatty acids (if you're eating free range chicken eggs). In fact, other than protein, egg whites are pretty much nutrient dead. And as for cholesterol concerns, recent studies do not support them.

But, all that said, the protein in eggs is still highly allergic and makes for very smelly gas.

Soy protein

Soy protein is not an effective alternative. It is high in allergens (some 28 different proteins present in soy have been found to bind to IgE antibodies). It's also worth noting that the more soy protein you eat, the more likely you are to develop allergies to it -- and the more severe those allergies are likely to become. Soy also blocks the absorption of important minerals such as calcium unless the phytates have been removed, and soy contains high levels of phytoestrogens, which although beneficial in moderate amounts, can be counter-productive in large amounts -- particularly for children.

In addition, although its biological value is not bad at 70-80, it's net protein utilization at 61 is quite low. In fact, unless it has been fermented, soy protein contains potent enzyme inhibitors that block the action of trypsin and other enzymes needed for protein digestion. This can create significant amounts of gas, in addition to promoting pathological conditions of the pancreas, including cancer.

As a side note, soy protein was once considered a waste product of the soy oil industry and used almost exclusively as cattle feed.

Spirulina protein

Spirulina is one of the great super foods. It is approximately 65 to 71 percent complete protein in its natural state. This is higher than virtually any other unprocessed food. (Note: whey protein, for example, has to be extracted and concentrated from dairy to reach higher levels.) And unlike most other forms of protein, the protein in spirulina is 85-95% digestible; again, one of the highest levels available. And finally, since spirulina has no cellulose in its cell walls, it is extremely easy for the body to break it down. In fact, its amino acids are delivered to the body for almost instant absorption.

So what's wrong with it?

First, it's not inexpensive. Blue green algae (a specialized version of spirulina) runs $40-80 a lb. Generic spirulina runs $15-40 a lb.

But $15 a lb would not be too much to pay for a high quality protein source, except for the taste -- somewhere between seaweed and grass. In small amounts, 1-4 grams a day in capsule form, it's easy enough to take. But if you're an athlete or bodybuilder or someone looking to recover from injury or illness and looking for 70-200 mg a day of protein, eating that much seaweed and grass could be tough for most people to manage.

And finally, about 30% of the worlds' population can't handle spirulina -- being either allergic to it, or suffering from toxins present in the spirulina that may have been absorbed from the water (such as Klamath Lake) in which the spirulina is grown.

Chlorella protein

I actually prefer chlorella to spirulina. Not only is it a great source of protein, just slightly less concentrated than spirulina, but it offers one significant advantage over spirulina. Chlorella is one of nature's great detoxifiers, binding to heavy metals and pesticides and carrying them out of the body. I use chlorella in formulas for heavy metal detoxification as it binds very strongly to heavy metals to eliminate them from the body. There is a problem, though. Again, like spirulina, about 30 percent of people cannot tolerate chlorella, so if it makes you nauseous you should definitely avoid it. Also like spirulina, chlorella is not inexpensive ($30-50 a lb). And finally, like chlorella, it has that seaweed grass taste thing going, which makes it tough for most people to eat enough of it to use as a primary protein supplement source.

Hemp seed protein

Hemp seed protein has some unique features. First, 65% of the total protein content of hemp seed comes from the globular protein edestin, which is easily digested, absorbed, and utilized by the human body. As a side note, it closely resembles the globulin found in human blood plasma, which is vital to maintaining a healthy immune system. As such, edestin has the unique ability to stimulate the manufacture of antibodies against foreign invaders. It is also hypoallergenic.

As a complete food, hemp seed is great, one of the super foods, but as a protein supplement, less so. As straight ground hemp seed, it is only about 30% protein. Even in concentrated form it will only push to around 50% protein. Also, although the proteins in hemp (edestin and albumin) are great immune builders, they are less effective as muscle builders.

Buckwheat, millet, beans, etc.

Yes, a number of grains and beans are technically complete proteins and can serve as a foundational protein for vegetarian diets. However, they tend to be unbalanced in their amino acid ratios. This means that you have to eat them in proper combinations -- and you have to eat more of them than of animal proteins to obtain an equivalent value.

They are great for what they are (foundational foods), but they are not adequate for use as a "protein supplement" as required by athletes, people looking to lose weight, senior citizens, or people looking to recover from a prolonged illness. To build muscle mass, you need a more concentrated source of protein and a better mix of branch chain amino acids.

Rice and yellow pea protein

I admit that a combination of rice and yellow pea protein sounds unappetizing. And, in fact, straight rice protein tends to be chalky in texture and unpleasantly blah in taste. But if done right, the combination of rice and pea protein actually provides one of the best tasting protein concentrates available. With that in mind…

Rice protein

Standard cooked rice has a protein content of only 5%-7%. To make concentrated rice protein, whole brown rice is ground into flour, then mixed with water. Natural enzymes are then added sequentially to break down and separate out the carbohydrates and fibers from the protein portion of the slurry. Since the process is enzyme based, temperature must be kept low to preserve the enzyme activity levels. Low temperature and chemical free processing prevent the denaturing of amino acids, as is frequently seen in soy and dairy processing. The end product is 80-90% pure, hypoallergenic, easily digested protein. After four hours, the body digests over 86% of all ingested rice protein, compared with about 57% for soy. In the end, rice protein has a biological value of between 70-80, a net protein utilization of about 76, and a total absorption ration of some 98%.

Note: rice protein is high in the amino acids cysteine and methionine, but tends to be low in lysine, which negatively impacts its bioavailability. If you can raise its lysine levels, you can dramatically increase its bioavailability.

Pea protein

When it comes to perception, more people have a problem with the "idea" of pea protein than with rice protein. But in fact, pea protein has a very mild, pleasantly sweet taste. It's one of the better tasting proteins.
Pea protein is the concentrated natural protein fraction of yellow peas. The process used for concentrating pea protein is water based, making the end product very "natural."

The combination of rice and pea proteins

As mentioned above, rice protein is high in cysteine and methionine, but tends to be low in lysine. Yellow pea protein, on the other hand, tends to be low in the sulfur containing amino acids, cysteine and methionine -- but high in lysine. The bottom line is that when used in combination, rice protein and yellow pea protein offer a Protein Efficiency Ratio that begins to rival dairy and egg -- but without their potential to promote allergic reactions. In addition, the texture of pea protein helps smooth out the "chalkiness" of rice protein. Like rice protein, it is hypoallergenic and easily digested.

On a different note, the rice/pea combo also has a nice branch chain amino acid profile -- only slightly less than whey.

	Whey	Rice/Pea
Leucine (percent of total)	8	7
Isoleucine (percent of total)	6	4
Valine (percent of total)	5	4

I have been using the rice/pea protein blend in various foods and supplements for over 4 years now. The results have been spectacular. In the next issue of the newsletter, I'll talk more about my work in developing a pure high protein supplement based on rice and pea protein that is producing some remarkable results among athletes, bodybuilders, senior citizens, and people looking to lose weight -- and it also happens to be blowing the competition away in comparison taste tests.

Protein Requirement

Let's conclude Part 2 of our series on protein with a discussion of how much protein your body actually requires. To begin with, you can throw the standard protein recommendations out the window. Most of the standards have holes in them so big you could drive a combine harvester through them.

For example, the Daily Reference Value (DRV) standard proposed by the FDA is based on a protein evaluation as a percentage of calories consumed -- with no consideration as to whether or not the calories being consumed are appropriate for the particular person consuming them. On average, the DRV for protein works out to about 50 grams per adult on a 2,000 calorie a day diet, regardless of age or sex.

The older RDA standard, on the other hand, is based on age and sex with a vague acknowledgement that special periods such as pregnancy and injury require higher levels of protein -- but no consideration for athletes or seniors, and no consideration of overall calories consumed. The RDA guidelines are as follows:

Children		Women		Men
Age	Grams	Age	Grams	Age	Grams
1-3	23	11-14	46	11-14	45
4-6	30	15-18	46	15-18	56
7-10	34	19-22	44	19-22	56
		23+	44	23+	56
		Pregnant	+30
		Lactating	+30

On the other hand, if you go to most protein supplement sites, you will find much higher recommendations based on body weight ranging from 0.8 grams protein per kg of bodyweight to 1.2-1.8 g/kg. For a 70 kg adult (154 lbs) that works out to over 100 grams of protein a day -- and according to some recommendations, as much as 300 grams a day. But can a 150 lb adult who weighs 300 lbs because they are obese really need the same amount of protein as a 300 lb football linebacker -- even if they both theoretically "work out" every day?

The truth is that most people in the developed world eat more protein than they need. Food consumption surveys show an average protein intake of approximately 100 grams per day (regardless of body type, sex, or exercise levels), with about 70% of that from high fat animal products. Most people could do with significantly less protein per day (about 45-55 grams per day is adequate for most) -- but ideally from a "cleaner" source than they are now opting for.

Then again, people with special needs such as performance athletes, active adults, senior citizens, and people recovering from illness or injury may have requirements that run up to as much as 70-100 grams a day. Beyond that, we're talking about bodybuilders looking to put on as much muscle mass as is humanly possible. And when it comes to that, each bodybuilder knows their own requirements. But even there, I would recommend exploring hypoallergenic sources. (Eliminating allergens, eliminates water retention, which improves muscle definition.)

And that's it for now. In the last part of the series, we'll talk about:

Protein allergies
Aminoacidemia
Intestinal toxemia
And take a closer look at what I consider to be the ideal protein supplement

http://www.jonbarron.org/baseline-health-program/2008-08-18.php

Here is part 1 of Jon's article:

http://keithconnectsthedots.com/2008/08/04/protein-part-1-by-jon-barron.aspx

Women And War: The Toll Of Deployment On Physical Health

Keith — Sat, 16 Aug 2008 19:59:55 GMT

Web address:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/08/
080814163558.htm

Women And War: The Toll Of Deployment On Physical Health

ScienceDaily (Aug. 15, 2008) — More than 80 percent of a sample of Air Force women deployed in Iraq and other areas around the world report suffering from persistent fatigue, fever, hair loss and difficulty concentrating, according to a University of Michigan study.

The pattern of health problems reported by 1,114 women surveyed in 2006 and 2007 is similar to many symptoms of Gulf War Syndrome, the controversial condition reported by veterans of the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

"It is possible that some unknown environmental factor is the cause of current health problems and of Gulf War Syndrome," said U-M researcher Penny Pierce.

"But it is also possible that these symptoms result from the stress of military deployment, especially prolonged and multiple deployments."

Pierce and U-M colleagues conducted a similar study of women veterans in 1992 following that war to assess the impact of deployment and combat exposure on physical and mental health.

An associate professor at the U-M School of Nursing and a faculty associate at the U-M Institute for Social Research (ISR), Pierce is also a colonel in the Air Force Reserve Program. With ISR psychologist Lisa Lewandowski-Romps, she presented the findings from the study Aug. 14 in Boston at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association.

"Women now comprise approximately 15 percent of our nation's armed forces," Pierce said. "And since the Persian Gulf War, combat roles for women have expanded substantially. This study is an attempt to understand the impact of deployment and war-related stressors on the health of military women."

The Air Force women surveyed by telephone and through mailed questionnaires were drawn from a stratified, random sample and deployed at least once since March 2003 during Operation Iraqi Freedom. Half of those sampled served in the theater of war and half served elsewhere; half had children under the age of 18 still living at home; half were active duty, a quarter in the Reserves and another quarter in the National Guard. The median age of participants was 36 years, and 45 percent were married. About 36 percent had a dependent child at the time they were sent overseas. About 70 percent were white.

Asked if they experienced any of a list of symptoms persistently in the past year, 89 percent of those surveyed reported suffering from fatigue, 85 percent from difficulty concentrating, 83 percent from fever, and 83 percent from hair loss. In addition, 35 percent reported suffering from muscle pain and stiffness, 29 percent from irritability, 26 percent from loss of energy and 25 percent from headaches.

In general, Pierce and Lewandowski found that those in the reserve and guard reported more physical symptoms than active duty personnel. Enlisted women reported more health problems than officers did.

In most cases, women serving in the theater of war were more likely to report physical health problems than were than those serving elsewhere. But in many cases, the differences were small, suggesting to Pierce that deployment-related stressors such as family separation and disruption of social support systems may play a critical role in developing stress-related physical problems.

In an earlier analysis of data from the study, presented at last year's American Psychological Association conference, Pierce and Lewandowski-Romps found that about 20 percent of the women surveyed reported at least one major symptom of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTDS).

"Deployment itself is a major stressor," she said. "The whole person is deployed---body, mind, and spirit. We don't know the precise biological mechanism, but it is generally accepted now---perhaps more so than it was in the early 1990s when Gulf War Syndrome was first reported---that persistent levels of heightened stress take a major toll on physical health.

"By identifying problems early, I hope our findings will guide policy-makers and health care professions to design interventions to support service members and their families."

The study is part of an on-going research program on women veterans funded by the TriService Nursing Research Program.

For more information:

Women Veterans Project website: http://sitemaker.umich.edu/afwomen/home

U-M Institute for Social Research: http://www.isr.umich.edu

Adapted from materials provided by University of Michigan.