A new type of dieting was recently studied by the University of Illinois at Chicago. While restricting daily calorie intake is a common plan to help obese and overweight people slim down to healthier weights, this would generally require a 15-40 percent calorie reduction, which makes sticking to the diet hard for many.
Researchers in Chicago have found that a modified version of a plan called "alternate-day fasting" may be easier for most people and that it has the added bonus of improving cardio health. The findings appear in the November 1 issue of The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
"This diet has been around about 20 years, but its effect on weight loss hadn't really been studied," said Krista Varady, assistant professor of kinesiology and nutrition, who led the UIC research team. The 10-week trial studied 16 clinically obese people -- 12 women and four men -- between the ages of 35 and 65 who all weighed more than 210 pounds, had kept their weight stable for the previous three months, and had body mass indexes of between 30 and 39.9.
On fast days, participants ate the equivalent of between 20 and 25 percent of their normal daily energy needs. Weight loss ranged from 10 to 30 pounds; the researchers expected an average loss of only five pounds. Blood pressure and heart rate were also lowered, along with total cholesterol and circulating fat levels.
Varady hopes now to study the effects of staying on the diet for at least six months, looking for evidence of self-motivation and to see if the diet helps in maintaining proper weight. "Why are some able to do it but others not? It takes about two weeks to adjust to the diet, after which people don't feel hungry on the fast day," she said.
Dave
Monday, November 9, 2009
Friday, November 6, 2009
Children Who Drink Full-Fat Milk Weigh Less
A recent thesis presented at the University of Gothenburg, Sweden, shows that eight-year-old children who drink full-fat milk every day have a lower Body Mass Index (BMI) than those who seldom drink milk. The study showed that children who drink full-fat milk every day weigh on average just over 9 lbs less.
"This is an interesting observation, but we don't know why it is so. It may be the case that children who drink full-fat milk tend also to eat other things that affect their weight. Another possible explanation is that children who do not drink full-fat milk drink more soft drinks instead," says dietician Susanne Eriksson, author of the thesis.
The scientists also discovered a difference between overweight children who drink full-fat milk every day and those who do not. Children who often drink milk with a fat content of 3% are less overweight. The thesis shows also that the children eat more saturated fat than recommended, but those children who have a high intake of fat have a lower BMI than the children with a lower intake of fat.
Susanne Eriksson has investigated the nutrition, body composition and bone mineralization of 120 healthy 8-year-olds. Much of the results can now be used as a standard to determine what is normal for healthy children at that age. The children recounted what they had eaten during the previous day, and answered questions concerning how often they ate certain foods. Various risk markers in the children's blood were also measured.
"Many of these children had been examined when they were four years old, and we discovered that their eating habits were pretty much unchanged four years later. It appears to be the case that eating habits are established early", says Susanne Eriksson.
The thesis found that 62% of the children had low levels of vitamin D in their blood. The general guideline value for all people for vitamin D is 75-100 nmol/l, but most children had less than this. High levels of vitamin D are found in oily fish, while certain dairy products have been fortified with additional vitamin D. It can be difficult to obtain sufficient levels of the vitamin through the diet.
"We could not determine whether the children's level of vitamin D is correlated with their consumption of fish, but we did see that those children who ate oily fish, such as salmon and mackerel, at least once a week have higher values of the long-chain fatty acids EPA and DHA in their blood. This shows how important it is to eat such fish, instead of processed fish such as fish fingers", says Susanne Eriksson.
Dave
"This is an interesting observation, but we don't know why it is so. It may be the case that children who drink full-fat milk tend also to eat other things that affect their weight. Another possible explanation is that children who do not drink full-fat milk drink more soft drinks instead," says dietician Susanne Eriksson, author of the thesis.
The scientists also discovered a difference between overweight children who drink full-fat milk every day and those who do not. Children who often drink milk with a fat content of 3% are less overweight. The thesis shows also that the children eat more saturated fat than recommended, but those children who have a high intake of fat have a lower BMI than the children with a lower intake of fat.
Susanne Eriksson has investigated the nutrition, body composition and bone mineralization of 120 healthy 8-year-olds. Much of the results can now be used as a standard to determine what is normal for healthy children at that age. The children recounted what they had eaten during the previous day, and answered questions concerning how often they ate certain foods. Various risk markers in the children's blood were also measured.
"Many of these children had been examined when they were four years old, and we discovered that their eating habits were pretty much unchanged four years later. It appears to be the case that eating habits are established early", says Susanne Eriksson.
The thesis found that 62% of the children had low levels of vitamin D in their blood. The general guideline value for all people for vitamin D is 75-100 nmol/l, but most children had less than this. High levels of vitamin D are found in oily fish, while certain dairy products have been fortified with additional vitamin D. It can be difficult to obtain sufficient levels of the vitamin through the diet.
"We could not determine whether the children's level of vitamin D is correlated with their consumption of fish, but we did see that those children who ate oily fish, such as salmon and mackerel, at least once a week have higher values of the long-chain fatty acids EPA and DHA in their blood. This shows how important it is to eat such fish, instead of processed fish such as fish fingers", says Susanne Eriksson.
Dave
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Green Tea Extract as Chemoprevention Agent for Oral Cancer
Researchers at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center have been working with green tea extracts, and recently published the news that this extract has shown promise as a cancer prevention agent for oral cancer in patients with a pre-malignant condition known as oral leukoplakia.
Their study has been published online in Cancer Prevention Research, and is the first to examine green tea as a chemopreventative agent in this high-risk patient population. In studying the data after the study, researchers found that more than half of the oral leukoplakia patients who took the extract had a clinical response. This is significant because according to the American Cancer Society, more than 35,720 are expected to be diagnosed annually with oral and/or pharynx cancer and the five-year survival rate is less than 50 percent.
Green tea is rich in polyphenols, which have been known to inhibit carcinogenesis in preclinical models, and it has long been investigated in laboratory, epidemiological and clinical settings for several cancer types. We've written up many of these reports in this blog. Still, clinical results have been mixed.
"While still very early, and haven't yet had definitive proof that green tea is an effective preventive agent. These results certainly encourage more study for patients at the highest risk for oral cancer," said Vassiliki Papadimitrakopoulou, M.D., professor at M. D. Anderson and the study's senior author. "The extract's lack of toxicity is attractive - in prevention trials, it's very important to remember that these are otherwise healthy individuals and we need to ensure that agents studied produce no harm."
This was a Phase II dose-finding study, and 41 M. D. Anderson oral leukoplakia patients were randomized between August 2002 and March 2008 to receive either green tea extract or placebo. Participants took the extract, an oral agent, for three months at one of three doses, for three times daily. To best assess biomarkers, participants also underwent a baseline and 12-week biopsy, an important component in the design of the study, the researchers say.
Of those taking green tea at the two highest doses, 58.8 percent had a clinical response, compared with 36.4 percent in the lowest extract dose and 18.2 percent in the placebo arm. At an extended follow-up with a mean of 27.5 months, 15 participants had developed oral cancer, with a median time to disease development of 46.4 months.
Although not statistically significant, the green tea extract also improved histology and trended towards an improvement in a number of biomarkers that may play a vital role in predicting cancer development.
Another important finding, say the researchers, was that that the extract was well tolerated. Side effects, including insomnia and nervousness, were mostly seen in the high-dose group but produced no significant toxicity.The researchers said that the green tea extract studied in this trial was exclusively developed as a pharmaceutical.
Dave
Their study has been published online in Cancer Prevention Research, and is the first to examine green tea as a chemopreventative agent in this high-risk patient population. In studying the data after the study, researchers found that more than half of the oral leukoplakia patients who took the extract had a clinical response. This is significant because according to the American Cancer Society, more than 35,720 are expected to be diagnosed annually with oral and/or pharynx cancer and the five-year survival rate is less than 50 percent.
Green tea is rich in polyphenols, which have been known to inhibit carcinogenesis in preclinical models, and it has long been investigated in laboratory, epidemiological and clinical settings for several cancer types. We've written up many of these reports in this blog. Still, clinical results have been mixed.
"While still very early, and haven't yet had definitive proof that green tea is an effective preventive agent. These results certainly encourage more study for patients at the highest risk for oral cancer," said Vassiliki Papadimitrakopoulou, M.D., professor at M. D. Anderson and the study's senior author. "The extract's lack of toxicity is attractive - in prevention trials, it's very important to remember that these are otherwise healthy individuals and we need to ensure that agents studied produce no harm."
This was a Phase II dose-finding study, and 41 M. D. Anderson oral leukoplakia patients were randomized between August 2002 and March 2008 to receive either green tea extract or placebo. Participants took the extract, an oral agent, for three months at one of three doses, for three times daily. To best assess biomarkers, participants also underwent a baseline and 12-week biopsy, an important component in the design of the study, the researchers say.
Of those taking green tea at the two highest doses, 58.8 percent had a clinical response, compared with 36.4 percent in the lowest extract dose and 18.2 percent in the placebo arm. At an extended follow-up with a mean of 27.5 months, 15 participants had developed oral cancer, with a median time to disease development of 46.4 months.
Although not statistically significant, the green tea extract also improved histology and trended towards an improvement in a number of biomarkers that may play a vital role in predicting cancer development.
Another important finding, say the researchers, was that that the extract was well tolerated. Side effects, including insomnia and nervousness, were mostly seen in the high-dose group but produced no significant toxicity.The researchers said that the green tea extract studied in this trial was exclusively developed as a pharmaceutical.
Dave
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Reduction in Heat-Processing of Foods Reduces Risk of Chronic Disease
I found this particular news story fascinating. It appears that there is a dramatic health difference that one can make simply by eliminating certain types of cooking practices. I'm going to give this a try immediately. Antioxidants are great, but if one could eliminate the oxidants to begin with . . .
Researchers from Mount Sinai School of Medicine report that cutting back on the consumption of processed and fried foods, which are high in toxins called Advanced Glycation End products (AGEs), can reduce inflammation and actually help restore the body’s natural defenses regardless of age or health status. These benefits are present even without changing caloric or nutrient intake.
This study, published in the October/November issue of the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, provides a simple dietary intervention that could result in weight loss and have significant impact on several epidemic diseases, including diabetes, heart disease, and kidney disease.
The findings are the result of a clinical study involving over 350 people which was conducted in collaboration with, and with support from, the National Institute on Aging (NIA). The study builds on earlier research conducted in animal models that demonstrated the effective prevention of these diseases and even the extension of lifespan by consuming a reduced AGE diet.
“What is noteworthy about our findings is that reduced AGE consumption proved to be effective in all study participants, including healthy persons and persons who have a chronic condition such as kidney disease,” said the study’s lead author Helen Vlassara, MD, Professor at Mount Sinai School of Medicine.
“This suggests that oxidants may play a more active role than genetics in overwhelming our body’s defenses, which we need to fight off disease. It has been said that nature holds the power, but the environment pulls the trigger. The good news is that unlike genetics, we can control oxidant levels, which may not be an accompaniment to disease and aging, but instead due to the cumulative toxic influence of AGEs,” said Dr. Vlassara.
AGEs are harmful substances that are abundant in Western diets, and which proliferate when foods are heated, pasteurized, dried, smoked, fried or grilled. Once absorbed in the body, AGEs adhere to tissues and oxidize them, causing inflammation which in turn can lead to disease. AGEs may increase the risk of diabetes, heart disease, kidney disease and other chronic conditions.
For the study, a subset of 40 healthy participants who were either between the ages or 18 and 45 or older than 60, and another nine patients with kidney disease, were randomly assigned to one of two diets. One group followed their own regular Western diet that was rich in AGEs. The second group followed a diet of similar caloric and nutrient content, but with only one-half the amount of AGEs, known as the “AGE-less diet.” Participants in the AGE-less intervention were advised to avoid grilling, frying or baking their food and instead were instructed to poach, stew, or steam their meals. There was no change in calories or nutrient intake during this period.
After four months on the AGE-less diet, blood AGE levels, lipid peroxides, inflammatory markers, and biomarkers of vascular function declined by as much as 60 percent in healthy participants. A reduction of similar magnitude was found in kidney patients after only one month on the AGE-less diet.
The investigators believe that daily AGE consumption in the standard Western diet is at least three times higher than the safety limit for these oxidants. This could, in part, explain the changes seen in disease demographics.
Dr. Vlassara cautioned, “Even though the AGEs pose a more immediate health threat to older adults, they are a similar danger for younger people, including pregnant women and children, and this needs to be addressed. AGEs are ubiquitous and addictive, since they provide flavor to foods. But they can be controlled through simple methods of cooking, such as keeping the heat down and the water content up in food and by avoiding pre-packaged and fast foods when possible. Doing so reduces AGE levels in the blood and helps the body restore its own defenses.”
Dave
Researchers from Mount Sinai School of Medicine report that cutting back on the consumption of processed and fried foods, which are high in toxins called Advanced Glycation End products (AGEs), can reduce inflammation and actually help restore the body’s natural defenses regardless of age or health status. These benefits are present even without changing caloric or nutrient intake.
This study, published in the October/November issue of the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, provides a simple dietary intervention that could result in weight loss and have significant impact on several epidemic diseases, including diabetes, heart disease, and kidney disease.
The findings are the result of a clinical study involving over 350 people which was conducted in collaboration with, and with support from, the National Institute on Aging (NIA). The study builds on earlier research conducted in animal models that demonstrated the effective prevention of these diseases and even the extension of lifespan by consuming a reduced AGE diet.
“What is noteworthy about our findings is that reduced AGE consumption proved to be effective in all study participants, including healthy persons and persons who have a chronic condition such as kidney disease,” said the study’s lead author Helen Vlassara, MD, Professor at Mount Sinai School of Medicine.
“This suggests that oxidants may play a more active role than genetics in overwhelming our body’s defenses, which we need to fight off disease. It has been said that nature holds the power, but the environment pulls the trigger. The good news is that unlike genetics, we can control oxidant levels, which may not be an accompaniment to disease and aging, but instead due to the cumulative toxic influence of AGEs,” said Dr. Vlassara.
AGEs are harmful substances that are abundant in Western diets, and which proliferate when foods are heated, pasteurized, dried, smoked, fried or grilled. Once absorbed in the body, AGEs adhere to tissues and oxidize them, causing inflammation which in turn can lead to disease. AGEs may increase the risk of diabetes, heart disease, kidney disease and other chronic conditions.
For the study, a subset of 40 healthy participants who were either between the ages or 18 and 45 or older than 60, and another nine patients with kidney disease, were randomly assigned to one of two diets. One group followed their own regular Western diet that was rich in AGEs. The second group followed a diet of similar caloric and nutrient content, but with only one-half the amount of AGEs, known as the “AGE-less diet.” Participants in the AGE-less intervention were advised to avoid grilling, frying or baking their food and instead were instructed to poach, stew, or steam their meals. There was no change in calories or nutrient intake during this period.
After four months on the AGE-less diet, blood AGE levels, lipid peroxides, inflammatory markers, and biomarkers of vascular function declined by as much as 60 percent in healthy participants. A reduction of similar magnitude was found in kidney patients after only one month on the AGE-less diet.
The investigators believe that daily AGE consumption in the standard Western diet is at least three times higher than the safety limit for these oxidants. This could, in part, explain the changes seen in disease demographics.
Dr. Vlassara cautioned, “Even though the AGEs pose a more immediate health threat to older adults, they are a similar danger for younger people, including pregnant women and children, and this needs to be addressed. AGEs are ubiquitous and addictive, since they provide flavor to foods. But they can be controlled through simple methods of cooking, such as keeping the heat down and the water content up in food and by avoiding pre-packaged and fast foods when possible. Doing so reduces AGE levels in the blood and helps the body restore its own defenses.”
Dave
Monday, November 2, 2009
Lower Cholesterol in Men Lowers Risk of Aggressive Prostate Cancer
As with any cancer, prostate cancer affects different people in different ways. My Dad, who died of prostate cancer in his early sixties, was unfortunate in that he had what is known as a "high-grade" version of the disease. It didn't take long from the time of discovery to his death, which is unusual because prostate cancer is so often treatable. But his tumors were fueled by this high-grade, aggressive nature.
New research from Johns Hopkins has shown that if men can lower their cholesterol levels, they are less likely than those with higher levels to develop this high-grade prostate cancer - a form of the disease with a poorer prognosis, according to results of this collaborative study.
In this study of more than 5,000 U.S. men, epidemiologists say they now have evidence that having lower levels of heart-clogging fat may cut a man's risk of this form of cancer by nearly 60 percent.
“For many reasons, we know that it’s good to have a cholesterol level within the normal range,” says Elizabeth Platz, Sc.D., M.P.H. (Johns Hopkins' Kimmel Cancer Center). “Now, we have more evidence that among the benefits of low cholesterol may be a lower risk for potentially deadly prostate cancers.”
For men at prostate cancer age, normal range is defined as less than 200 mg/dL (milligrams per deciliter of blood) of total cholesterol. Platz and her colleagues found similar results in a study first published in 2008, and in 2006, she linked use of cholesterol-lowering statin drugs to lower risk of advanced prostate cancer. For the current study, Platz and her collaborators analyzed data from 5,586 men aged 55 and older enrolled in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial from 1993 to 1996. Some 1,251 men were diagnosed with prostate cancer during the study period.
Men with cholesterol levels lower than 200 mg/dL had a 59 percent lower risk of developing high-grade prostate cancers, which tend to grow and spread rapidly. High-grade cancers are identified by a pathological ranking called the Gleason score. Scores at the highest end of the scale, between eight and 10, indicate cancers considered the most worrisome to pathologists who examine samples of the diseased prostate under the microscope.
In Platz’s study, cholesterol levels had no significant effect on the entire spectrum of prostate cancer incidence, only those that were high-grade, she says. Results of the study are expected to be published online Nov. 3 in the journal Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention. Also in the journal is an accompanying paper from the National Cancer Institute showing that lower cholesterol in men conferred a 15 percent decrease in overall cancer cases.
Dave
New research from Johns Hopkins has shown that if men can lower their cholesterol levels, they are less likely than those with higher levels to develop this high-grade prostate cancer - a form of the disease with a poorer prognosis, according to results of this collaborative study.
In this study of more than 5,000 U.S. men, epidemiologists say they now have evidence that having lower levels of heart-clogging fat may cut a man's risk of this form of cancer by nearly 60 percent.
“For many reasons, we know that it’s good to have a cholesterol level within the normal range,” says Elizabeth Platz, Sc.D., M.P.H. (Johns Hopkins' Kimmel Cancer Center). “Now, we have more evidence that among the benefits of low cholesterol may be a lower risk for potentially deadly prostate cancers.”
For men at prostate cancer age, normal range is defined as less than 200 mg/dL (milligrams per deciliter of blood) of total cholesterol. Platz and her colleagues found similar results in a study first published in 2008, and in 2006, she linked use of cholesterol-lowering statin drugs to lower risk of advanced prostate cancer. For the current study, Platz and her collaborators analyzed data from 5,586 men aged 55 and older enrolled in the Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial from 1993 to 1996. Some 1,251 men were diagnosed with prostate cancer during the study period.
Men with cholesterol levels lower than 200 mg/dL had a 59 percent lower risk of developing high-grade prostate cancers, which tend to grow and spread rapidly. High-grade cancers are identified by a pathological ranking called the Gleason score. Scores at the highest end of the scale, between eight and 10, indicate cancers considered the most worrisome to pathologists who examine samples of the diseased prostate under the microscope.
In Platz’s study, cholesterol levels had no significant effect on the entire spectrum of prostate cancer incidence, only those that were high-grade, she says. Results of the study are expected to be published online Nov. 3 in the journal Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention. Also in the journal is an accompanying paper from the National Cancer Institute showing that lower cholesterol in men conferred a 15 percent decrease in overall cancer cases.
Dave
Friday, October 30, 2009
"Energy Healings" - Hype or Healthy?
I live in Sedona, Arizona, a somewhat new-age community where there is an "energy healer" on every block. But in the off-chance that you may not have this luxury, let me describe what I'm talking about. There's a new study just published in a respected scientific journal that reviews the science behind a growing, worldwide interest in what the authors call "biofield therapies." These therapies are often practiced under common names such as Reiki, Therapeutic Touch and Healing Touch.
Biofield therapies, which claim to use subtle energy to stimulate the body's healing process, are promising complementary interventions for pain reduction in a number of conditions, reducing anxiety for hospitalized patients and reducing agitated behaviors in dementia, over and above what standard treatments can achieve. However, longer-term effects are less clear. Dr. Shamini Jain (UCLA) and Dr. Paul Mills (University of California, San Diego) published their review of the science behind biofield therapies in this week's Journal of Behavioral Medicine.
A significant number of patients use Reiki, Therapeutic Touch or Healing Touch despite very little which proves that they work. These techniques have been used over millennia in various cultural communities to heal physical and mental disorders. They have only recently been under the scrutiny of current Western scientific methods.
Jain and Mills did a detailed review of 66 clinical studies looking at biofield therapies in different patient populations with a range of ailments. They examine the strength of the evidence for the efficacy of these complementary therapies. While they consider the published work on this science to be of average quality, in scientific terms, they do indeed find strong evidence that biofield therapies reduce pain intensity in free-living populations, and moderate evidence that they are effective at lowering pain in hospitalized patients as well as in patients with cancer.
There is also moderate evidence that these therapies ease agitated behaviors in dementia and moderate evidence that they reduce anxiety in hospitalized patients. The authors found inconclusive evidence for biofield therapies on symptoms of fatigue and quality of life in cancer patients, as well as for overall pain reduction, and anxiety management in cardiovascular patients. It is clear from this analysis of the data that something is going on with Biofield therapy work, and that some people can benefit greatly from the practice.
Dave
Biofield therapies, which claim to use subtle energy to stimulate the body's healing process, are promising complementary interventions for pain reduction in a number of conditions, reducing anxiety for hospitalized patients and reducing agitated behaviors in dementia, over and above what standard treatments can achieve. However, longer-term effects are less clear. Dr. Shamini Jain (UCLA) and Dr. Paul Mills (University of California, San Diego) published their review of the science behind biofield therapies in this week's Journal of Behavioral Medicine.
A significant number of patients use Reiki, Therapeutic Touch or Healing Touch despite very little which proves that they work. These techniques have been used over millennia in various cultural communities to heal physical and mental disorders. They have only recently been under the scrutiny of current Western scientific methods.
Jain and Mills did a detailed review of 66 clinical studies looking at biofield therapies in different patient populations with a range of ailments. They examine the strength of the evidence for the efficacy of these complementary therapies. While they consider the published work on this science to be of average quality, in scientific terms, they do indeed find strong evidence that biofield therapies reduce pain intensity in free-living populations, and moderate evidence that they are effective at lowering pain in hospitalized patients as well as in patients with cancer.
There is also moderate evidence that these therapies ease agitated behaviors in dementia and moderate evidence that they reduce anxiety in hospitalized patients. The authors found inconclusive evidence for biofield therapies on symptoms of fatigue and quality of life in cancer patients, as well as for overall pain reduction, and anxiety management in cardiovascular patients. It is clear from this analysis of the data that something is going on with Biofield therapy work, and that some people can benefit greatly from the practice.
Dave
Thursday, October 29, 2009
The War over Hormone Replacement Therapy Evens Out
Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) to treat menopausal estrogen deficiency has been in widespread use for over 60 years. Several observational studies over the years have shown that HRT use by younger postmenopausal women has been associated with a significant reduction in total mortality. Until 2002 and the publication of a large and negative study, HRT was supported by the available evidence because it appeared to increase longevity in postmenopausal women.
That changed after the publication of the "Women’s Health Initiative" or WHI study, which received a great deal of publicity. This trial indicated increased risk for negative outcomes in older women. Since then, there has been rigorous debate regarding whether Hormone Replacement Therapy is beneficial or harmful. Now, in an article published in the November 2009 issue of The American Journal of Medicine, researchers write about a very large review of all the available data using a scientific method of analysis called "Bayesian methods." During this new research it was concluded that HRT almost certainly decreases mortality in younger postmenopausal women.
The authors pooled results from 19 randomized trials that included age-specific data from the earlier WHI trial, with 16,000 younger postmenopausal women (mean age 55 years) followed for 83,000 patient-years, and showed that the mortality relative risk was much less than had been earlier stated.
Shelley R. Salpeter, MD, says in the article, “It is clear that these findings need to be interpreted in the light of potential benefits and harms of hormone therapy. The available evidence indicates that hormone therapy in younger postmenopausal women increases the risk of breast cancer and pulmonary embolism and reduces the risk of cardiovascular events, colon cancer, and hip fracture."
The reduction in deaths from coronary heart disease, fracture, and colon cancer outweighed the increase in deaths from breast cancer, stroke and pulmonary embolism. Is it a wash in your case? Talk to your doctor. He or she may tell you that in addition to this mortality benefit, hormone therapy in younger women provides an improvement in quality-of-life measures, at least in the first few years of treatment.
Dave
That changed after the publication of the "Women’s Health Initiative" or WHI study, which received a great deal of publicity. This trial indicated increased risk for negative outcomes in older women. Since then, there has been rigorous debate regarding whether Hormone Replacement Therapy is beneficial or harmful. Now, in an article published in the November 2009 issue of The American Journal of Medicine, researchers write about a very large review of all the available data using a scientific method of analysis called "Bayesian methods." During this new research it was concluded that HRT almost certainly decreases mortality in younger postmenopausal women.
The authors pooled results from 19 randomized trials that included age-specific data from the earlier WHI trial, with 16,000 younger postmenopausal women (mean age 55 years) followed for 83,000 patient-years, and showed that the mortality relative risk was much less than had been earlier stated.
Shelley R. Salpeter, MD, says in the article, “It is clear that these findings need to be interpreted in the light of potential benefits and harms of hormone therapy. The available evidence indicates that hormone therapy in younger postmenopausal women increases the risk of breast cancer and pulmonary embolism and reduces the risk of cardiovascular events, colon cancer, and hip fracture."
The reduction in deaths from coronary heart disease, fracture, and colon cancer outweighed the increase in deaths from breast cancer, stroke and pulmonary embolism. Is it a wash in your case? Talk to your doctor. He or she may tell you that in addition to this mortality benefit, hormone therapy in younger women provides an improvement in quality-of-life measures, at least in the first few years of treatment.
Dave
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
