ReportWire

Tag: heart health

  • There’s going to be lots of snow and ice to shovel this weekend. Don’t overdo it – WTOP News

    As the D.C. region braces for significant snow and ice this weekend, doctors are urging residents to approach shoveling with caution.

    It’s been a while since the D.C. region was hit with the kind of snow and ice forecast for the upcoming weekend, and it’s exactly why doctors are now issuing warnings to not overdo it Sunday when it gets to shoveling time.

    “After big snowstorms like this, we sometimes see folks that come in for heart attacks,” said Dr. Sudip Saha, a cardiologist with Kaiser Permanente. “We tend to see more after they try to do a strenuous exercise or activity, like trying to shovel their driveway.”

    He said people who might be older, and perhaps not at the physical peaks they once were, need to be especially careful.

    “In cold environments, our blood vessels tend to constrict more, it raises our blood pressure,” Saha said.

    “And when we suddenly try to do something like shoveling snow, it could … put a lot of stress on things like our heart and our blood vessels, and these are times where it’s more likely to have a heart attack.”

    He said it’s better to think of shoveling snow like exercise. You want to warm up first, and even do some stretching — something that will get your heart rate up a bit before you bundle up and go outside.

    Saha said that normally when people exercise, “we tend to listen to our body a little more and stop when we feel tired.”

    “With snow shoveling, we oftentimes will just want to keep doing it until the job is done. So I tell folks, if they do try to shovel their own snow, to try to do it in intervals. Try to do a little bit at a time, rest and then listen to your body,” Saha said.

    He said if you feel chest pain or pressure, you shouldn’t keep shoveling. Instead, get ready to call 911.

    Other symptoms to watch out for include severe shortness of breath, lightheadedness or dizziness.

    (Another easy way to avoid all that? Find a teenager down the street looking to make some extra money.)

    Get breaking news and daily headlines delivered to your email inbox by signing up here.

    © 2026 WTOP. All Rights Reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.

    John Domen

    Source link

  • DR MARC SIEGEL: How faith and gratitude can still work wonders in a fractured nation

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    At a time of great political division, we need common ground to bring us back together. Most of us believe in miracles. A recent Gallup poll revealed that three in four Americans identify with a specific religious faith – a majority as Christians, and nearly half say that faith is very important in their lives. We can use this to unite us as a country.

    When we learn that someone has miraculously survived a cardiac arrest — as NFL safety Damar Hamlin did on a football field in Cincinnati in 2023, or Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., did on a baseball field following a gunshot back in 2017 — the last thing we think about is whether they are a Democrat or a Republican.

    As I describe in my new book, “The Miracles Among Us,” in Rep. Scalise’s case, the doctors who performed the combined interventional radiological and surgical procedure to repair his badly torn iliac artery after transferring 50 units of transfused blood both said this was the most miraculous event of their careers. They also believe that Scalise’s “gratitude to God” played a direct role in his recovery.

    DR MARC SIEGEL: MY PERSONAL MIRACLE: A PHYSICIAN’S LESSONS IN FAITH AND HEALING

    Scalise told me, “I never felt fear. Once I put my life in God’s hands, an unbelievable calm and ease came over me. My mind went to a different place. Whatever was going to happen that day was up to God, and he got me through, and I felt Him throughout my recovery.”

    Several of the subjects in my book report that when experiencing a miracle, a calm comes over them knowing that their lives are in God’s hands. 

    House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., walks with his wife Jennifer from the House chamber to his office in the Capitol on his first day back in Congress on Thursday, Sept. 28, 2017. Scalise was shot during baseball practice for the Congressional Baseball Game in June 2017.

    Dr. Robert Montgomery, chief of surgery at NYU, experienced seven cardiac arrests before having a heart transplant. “In these experiences, I feel a connection to a vastness, a connection to something much bigger than my experiences on earth. I start becoming aware of my own breath, and at first, I’m not sure what the sound is. And just before the moment when all my thoughts and memories are coming back, I am conscious of transcendence that’s way beyond anything that’s human or of this planet Earth we are on. I feel calm and serene. I feel my soul right before I am in my body. As I am waking up there is this overlap of awareness of this vastness and then knowing that I am a living being.”

    Several of the subjects in my book report that when experiencing a miracle, a calm comes over them knowing that their lives are in God’s hands. 

    Montgomery says this experience helps him to be at peace with who he is, and has enabled him to be a far more effective doctor and surgeon. 

    Jordan Grafman, a neurophysiologist at Northwestern University, has recently discovered via functional MRI imaging and brain lesion mapping that belief in miracles relies on similar networks in the right side and the front part of the brain as partisan political belief does. Moreover, both politics and spirituality are experienced similarly and lead to a desire to be part of a common community — suggesting one can sometimes replace the other. 

    DAMAR HAMLIN SUFFERED CARDIAC ARREST DURING GAME, HEARTBEAT RESTORED ON FIELD, BILLS SAY

    Indeed, I do not believe a rigid separation of church and state is good for either patient care or for society. Why should a deeply religious physician leave his or her vestments or tallis at the door of the hospital or medical office? Why shouldn’t a pious physician pray with his or her patients the way that Congressman Scalise’s doctors did?

    Damar Hamlin in the hospital

    Damar Hamlin watching the Buffalo Bills from his hospital bed on January 9, 2023. (Credit: @HamlinIsland / SPORTS REPORT+ /TMX)

    Consider that the acknowledgment of a higher being who is in charge may lessen a person’s desire to fear or contest another. “Fear God, not your fellow man” is the lesson from both Scalise’s and Montgomery’s experiences. It is a common theme in many religions– and it can help to ease the anger that fuels our politics.

    My father, age 102, survived an emergency bowel and hip operation, a high output fistula, a month on a ventilator, and more than three years on dialysis because of love for my mother, age 100.

    CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

    Last week he explained to me how he had lived so long: “When someone throws a punch, I duck,” he said.

    Dr. Marc Siegel and The Miracles Among Us book cover.

    Split of Dr. Marc Siegel and The Miracles Among Us book cover. (FNC)

    Praying for my patients means understanding that they are more than just bodies to be fixed — that they also have precious souls to be nurtured.

    CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

    This is the secret to great doctoring, and it keeps me from writing off any of my patients too soon. In each case, there may still be one more miracle to be had.

    Belief in miracles is also a path forward towards mutual respect, regardless of political affiliation in today’s tortured and divided times.

    CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM DR. MARC SIEGEL

    Source link

  • Donald Glover’s Stroke Highlights a Troubling Trend for Young People

    Donald Glover, the 42-year-old musician and actor, revealed recently that he had a stroke while on tour in 2024. Though strokes are rare in younger adults, Glover is among a growing number who are suffering from them. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said in a 2024 report that the prevalence of strokes had increased by almost 15% among people aged 18 to 44 over the past decade or so. 

    “We are definitely seeing more young people coming in with strokes,” says Dr. Joshua Willey, a stroke neurologist at NewYork-Presbyterian/Columbia University Irving Medical Center (who didn’t treat Glover). “But they often come delayed to the hospital because the last thing on their mind is that they’re having a stroke.”

    Here’s what to know about Glover’s health incident and the rising risk of stroke in younger people.

    What happened to Donald Glover?

    Glover, whose stage name is Childish Gambino, shared details about the stroke he suffered during a Nov. 22 performance at the Los Angeles music festival Camp Flog Gnaw. The five-time Grammy winner told the crowd that he had experienced a “really bad pain in my head” while on tour last year before but had performed a show in New Orleans anyway. Glover said he “couldn’t really see well,” so when he got to the next stop on the tour, he went to get evaluated at a hospital. “The doctor was like, ‘You had a stroke,’” said Glover, according to videos posted to social media.

    “The first thing I thought was like, ‘Oh, here I am still copying Jamie Foxx,’” Glover joked, referring to the stroke that Foxx, a fellow actor and musician, suffered in 2023. Foxx was 55 at the time.

    He also told fans that doctors had found a “hole” in his heart and that he had undergone two surgeries. He didn’t provide further medical details.

    Willey, the NewYork-Presbyterian neurologist, says that one known cause of stroke in younger people is a heart defect known as patent foramen ovale (PFO), which is a small hole between the two upper chambers of the heart. This hole usually closes soon after birth but in about 1 in 4 people, it can remain open. PFOs don’t usually cause complications but can contribute to strokes and low blood oxygen in some people. Some people may require surgery to seal the hole. 

    Glover hasn’t specified if he had a PFO. His agent hasn’t responded to an immediate request for comment.

    What is a stroke? 

    A stroke is a medical emergency that occurs when a blood vessel that carries oxygen and nutrients to the brain is either blocked (known as an ischemic stroke) or bursts (known as a hemorrhagic stroke). When the flow of blood to the brain is disrupted, brain cells start to die within minutes. 

    A transient ischemic attack (TIA), or “mini stroke,” is a temporary blockage of blood flow to the brain. TIAs can be a warning sign of a future stroke.

    What causes strokes, and why are more young people having them? 

    Stroke is the fifth leading cause of death in the U.S., and more adults of all ages are suffering from them. 

    The CDC said in its 2024 report—which compared data from two time periods, 2011-2013 and 2020-2022—that stroke prevalence had risen nationally by almost 8%. But among people aged 18 to 44, the prevalence of stroke increased by almost 15%, and among people aged 45 to 64 it increased by nearly 16%. (Having a stroke young is still relatively rare, affecting only about 1% of people aged 18 to 44 in 2020-2022.)

    The greatest risk factor for any type of stroke is hypertension, also known as high blood pressure, Willey says. “Other risk factors include diet, physical inactivity, tobacco use, and the use of stimulants like cocaine and amphetamines,” he says. 

    Obesity, diabetes, and high cholesterol are other important risk factors, according to the CDC. 

    PFOs and other underlying conditions including clotting disorders and some autoimmune diseases can increase a younger person’s stroke risk, Willey says. But the sharp rise in recent years of the number of younger adults with other risk factors such as high blood pressure, diabetes, and obesity is likely driving the growing number of people in their 50s and younger who are suffering from strokes, he says. 

    Almost 24% of U.S. adults aged 18 to 39 had high blood pressure, according to a CDC report of 2021-2023 data.

    Read More: Are Plastic Cutting Boards Safe?

    “In the past, a risk factor like hypertension didn’t develop until people were in their 30s and 40s, so we wouldn’t see an event like a stroke until quite a bit downstream, when people were in their 60s or 70s,” says Dr. Adam Kelly, a professor of neurology at the University of Rochester Medical Center. But now, hypertension is being diagnosed at a higher rate in younger people, including children and teenagers. “It is worrisome that this whole timeline is being shifted earlier and earlier,” Kelly says. 

    Kelly says that it is possible that part of the increase in stroke prevalence among younger people could be attributed to better diagnoses of the condition, thanks to improved MRI technology and greater public awareness of strokes and stroke risks. “But I don’t think that explains all of the data,” he says.

    How can you prevent strokes, and what symptoms should you be alert for?

    The American Heart Association has a list of eight essential steps that everyone should take to optimize their cardiovascular health, which in turn would help reduce stroke risk. These steps are: eating better, being more physically active, quitting tobacco, sleeping well, managing weight, controlling cholesterol, and managing blood sugar and blood pressure. 

    “I don’t think it’s ever too early to think about stroke prevention,” says Kelly. 

    As for stroke symptoms, Kelly advises keeping the acronym BE FAST in mind. 

    B for balance: Sudden loss of balance or lack of coordination.

    E for eyes: Sudden changes in vision in one or both eyes.

    F for face: Drooping or numbness of one side of the face.

    A for arm: Weakness or numbness in one arm.

    S for speech: Slurred speech or trouble speaking

    T for time: Time is of the essence. If any of these symptoms are present, particularly if they come on suddenly, call 911 and seek immediate medical attention. The faster a stroke is diagnosed and treated, the higher the likelihood of a good outcome. 

    A sudden, severe headache can also be a symptom of a stroke. “Many patients can have more than one of these symptoms, but the presence of even one can be strongly predictive of a stroke, and they should get to the hospital as quickly as possible,” says Willey. 

    He adds that young people shouldn’t dismiss any of these symptoms because of their age: “There’s a common misperception among younger individuals that, ‘Oh, this can’t be happening to me.’”

    Dominique Mosbergen

    Source link

  • Can a One-Time Gene Therapy Lower Cholesterol?

    Lowering cholesterol is one of the most effective ways to reduce your risk of heart disease, and it may soon be possible to get a one-and-done gene therapy to keep cholesterol and triglyceride levels down throughout your lifetime.

    That’s the hope of a small new study led by Dr. Luke Laffin, a preventive cardiologist in the department of cardiovascular medicine at Cleveland Clinic, and senior investigator Dr. Steven Nissen, chair of cardiovascular medicine at Cleveland Clinic. In the trial, 15 people received the innovative gene therapy. All of the patients had high cholesterol, high triglycerides, or both, despite being treated with currently available medications, including statins. They received a one-time infusion of a CRISPR-based gene-editing therapy designed by CRISPR Therapeutics, a company that already has an approved CRISPR therapy to treat sickle-cell disease and a form of beta thalassemia. The participants received varying doses of the CRISPR therapy, since the early Phase 1 trial was designed to primarily evaluate whether the gene editing was safe and provide hints about its potential effectiveness.

    Those who received the highest dose had a 50% decrease in their LDL, or bad cholesterol levels that can contribute to heart disease, compared to when they began the study, and a 55% drop in their triglyceride levels after six months.

    “My view is that this is a very big deal,” says Nissen. “This is the first time anybody has ever edited a gene related to cholesterol metabolism and published results in a peer-reviewed journal. And the results are pretty spectacular.”

    Read More: How to Lower Your Cholesterol Naturally

    The treatment targets a gene called ANGPTL3, which scientists have previously found is mutated in people who have low cholesterol and triglyceride levels; this type of mutation seems to lower rates of heart disease, without being linked to other health issues. In people who don’t have the mutation, researchers speculate that disrupting this gene with CRISPR by cutting it makes it non-functional, potentially leading to lower cholesterol and triglyceride levels.

    That’s what the Cleveland team saw in the first patients to receive the therapy. The CRISPR infusion included a package of genetic instructions, encased in a fat particle, that contained instructions to find liver cells where cholesterol is made. Inside the particle were a set of molecular scissors with specific genetic instructions to cut the ANGPTL3 gene.

    By measuring the levels of the protein made by the gene in the blood, the researchers verified that the gene alteration was doing its job. “We confirmed there was less ANGPTL3 [protein] by knocking out the gene,” says Sam Kulkarni, CEO of CRISPR Therapeutics, which sponsored the study. “And it was in a nicely dose dependent fashion—the higher the dose went, the lower the levels of ANGPTL3 we were seeing.”

    The research team sees several potential benefits in the CRISPR-based therapy over current treatments. Many people with high cholesterol levels, for example, rely on statins, but they have to take a pill every day. Studies have shown that about half of people who start statin therapy stop after a year because of side effects and difficulties with compliance. A more powerful way of addressing cholesterol involves another gene involved in cholesterol metabolism, PCSK9. The PCSK9 protein degrades the receptors that cells have for LDL, which is important for clearing LDL from the blood; inhibiting the protein allows more cells to retain the receptors and contributes to lowering LDL levels. There are several approved treatments that inhibit PCSK9 activity, but they require regular injections, and compliance can still be a challenge. Additionally, PCSK9 only addresses cholesterol, while ANGPTL3 reduces both LDL and triglycerides.

    Read More: The Obscure Genetic Cholesterol That Can Impact Your Heart Health

    Animal studies conducted by CRISPR Therapeutics show that monkeys treated with the gene editing kept their cholesterol and triglyceride levels low for two years; the current human study showed people were able to maintain lipid control for up to six months, and the company plans to follow them long term. (The FDA recommends, but does not require, 15 years of follow-up time for gene-editing therapies, including those involving CRISPR.)

    CRISPR holds tremendous power to provide one-time treatments for gene-based conditions, but that potential also comes with risks. Intellia Therapeutics, which was studying a CRISPR treatment for a rare genetic heart condition, stopped its trial after participants developed severe liver toxicity. 

    Kulkarni says that not all CRISPR approaches are the same, with each company developing its own delivery and gene-editing package. “We have made improvements in all components of our CRISPR therapy,” he says. “And we have been absolutely thorough in making sure that there was no off-tissue editing and all of the editing happened in the liver and nowhere else, and that even in the liver, that we weren’t getting an edit where we shouldn’t.”

    One participant in the current trial died six months after receiving the therapy, but Nissen says the patient had advanced atherosclerotic disease and “nobody involved thinks [the death] had anything to do with the therapy. Still, vigilance is required here. These are promising results, but [the therapy] needs to be studied in a larger patient population.”

    Read More: How to Keep Your Heart Healthy in Your 20s, 30s, 40s, and Beyond

    Both Kulkarni and the doctors involved in the study believe a broader population of people with high cholesterol and triglycerides could one day benefit from the CRISPR therapy. While the current study focused only on those who couldn’t control their lipids, the one-time gene editing could potentially be expanded to more people to help them control cholesterol and triglycerides and even protect them from having heart events. “If we have someone in their 30s or 40s with a severe family history of coronary disease, we know these patients may not be taking preventive therapies like statins, since we know 50% discontinue statins,” says Laffin. “If there is a one-and-done treatment that can lower their cholesterol over a lifetime, that would be a dream.” 

    Kulkarni says the company is planning to move into the next phase of studies with a larger group of patients, focusing first on those who have not responded to current lipid-lowering therapies, but eventually studying the therapy as a way to prevent heart disease in people who might be at higher risk but haven’t yet had any symptoms. “If you ask me where the world is 20 years from now, I see someone at high risk of heart disease who in their 30s has this gene-editing therapy so they don’t get heart disease in the future,” he says. “They won’t have to wait until they are 50 and have a heart attack to get this treatment. In some ways, cutting-edge CRISPR should actually be the first line of defense.”

    If the results from the next phase of studies are as encouraging, a gene-editing therapy for controlling lipids may not be far off. “I can’t hold back my excitement over the ability to fix this gene and change lipids permanently,” says Nissen. “There are a lot of people out there we are just not able to fully treat. If we can do this once, then people will potentially have lifelong benefits.”

    Alice Park

    Source link

  • What to know about melatonin use and heart failure

    (CNN) — Long-term use of melatonin supplements may be linked with a higher risk of heart failure, according to new research — but does that mean people taking it as a sleep aid should stop using it now?

    In a review of electronic medical records, thousands of adults who had chronic insomnia and took melatonin for a year or longer had a 90% higher chance of heart failure over the next five years, compared with participants who had the same health factors but didn’t take melatonin. Melatonin users were also more than three times as likely to be hospitalized for heart failure and about twice as likely to die from any cause.

    But experts suggest holding off on seeing melatonin as a definite danger. The research had significant limitations, was not designed to be able to prove cause and effect, and contradicts previous studies that indicated positives for heart health.

    The research also hasn’t yet been peer-reviewed or published in a journal but will be presented at the American Heart Association’s Scientific Sessions 2025 meeting taking place November 7-10.

    “Melatonin supplements are widely thought of as a safe and ‘natural’ option to support better sleep, so it was striking to see such consistent and significant increases in serious health outcomes, even after balancing for many factors,” Dr. Ekenedilichukwu Nnadi, lead research author and chief resident in internal medicine at SUNY Downstate/Kings County Primary Care in Brooklyn, said in a news release.

    However, “while the association we found raises safety concerns about the widely used supplement, our study cannot prove a direct cause-and-effect relationship,” Nnadi said. “This means more research is needed to test melatonin’s safety for the heart.”

    Naturally occurring melatonin in the brain is a hormone produced by the pineal gland in response to darkness, to help the body wind down for sleep.

    The melatonin in supplements can be extracted from the pineal glands of animals or synthetically produced via a chemical process.

    In the United States, because melatonin is sold as a dietary supplement, manufacturers aren’t subject to the level of scrutiny involved in the US Food and Drug Administration’s safety measures and approval processes for drugs. This means melatonin supplements can contain significantly more of the active ingredient than advertised or necessary, as well as harmful hidden additives.

    Chronic insomnia, experienced by 10% of the global population, is defined by taking more than 30 minutes to fall asleep or fall back to sleep up to three times weekly for more than three months. It can lead to problems with memory, daytime energy, mood, thinking and concentration, work or school performance, and one’s social life.

    A doctor can help one determine whether insomnia is occurring on its own or because of an underlying factor, such as a medical condition or stressful life circumstance, and therefore determine the best ways to treat it — whether that’s adjusting your sleep routineundergoing therapy for mental or emotional distress or cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia, taking medication, or treating a medical condition.

    Melatonin use and heart health

    Melatonin supplements are often marketed as a safe sleep aid, but there hasn’t been sufficient data on long-term safety for cardiovascular health, the authors said.

    The research team assessed more than 130,000 adults with health records in the TriNetX Global Research Network, a large international electronic database. They were about 55 years old on average, and 61.4% were women. Participants with melatonin use documented in medication entries in their health records for more than a year were classified as the melatonin group, whereas those without any record of melatonin use were in the “non-melatonin group.”

    These factors lend themselves to a few important limitations, the authors and independent experts pointed out.

    The database includes patients in countries that require a prescription for melatonin, such as the United Kingdom, and those that don’t, including the United States — so the control group may unknowingly include adults who take melatonin without a prescription, which wouldn’t be reflected in their medical records, Dr. Carlos Egea, who wasn’t involved in the research, said in a statement provided by the Science Media Centre. Egea is president of the Spanish Federation of Sleep Medicine Societies.

    The researchers also didn’t have details on the severity of participants’ insomnia or whether they had any mental health issues, both of which can influence melatonin use and heart health risks, Nnadi said.

    Insomnia has been associated with a higher risk of having a heart attack or stroke. Disrupted circadian rhythms — our body clocks in which melatonin plays a role — and insufficient sleep have been linked with greater odds of cardiovascular issues including heart failure.

    Other limitations include a lack of information on dosage, the Council for Responsible Nutrition, a trade association for the dietary supplement and functional food industry, said in a statement. “Decades of consumer experience and multiple clinical studies indicate that low-dose, short-term supplementation is safe for healthy adults when used as directed,” the association added.

    The research challenges previous studies, including a March analysis of four studies that found melatonin supplementation improved heart failure patients’ quality of life and cardiac function, Egea said.

    Melatonin is also an antioxidant, and antioxidants help protect against damage to DNA by oxidative stress, an imbalance between free radicals and antioxidants in the body.

    Before you take sleep aids

    Many people turn to melatonin as a short- or long-term solution to sleep woes. But for some people, the supplement has been linked to various side effects including headaches, nausea, dizziness, drowsiness, stomach aches, confusion or disorientation, tremors, low blood pressure, irritability, mild anxiety and depression.

    Before resorting to supplements, “speak to your doctor first about, for one, getting a proper diagnosis for your sleep difficulty and then discussing the appropriate course of treatment,” Dr. Marie-Pierre St-Onge, director of the Center of Excellence for Sleep & Circadian Research in the department of medicine at Columbia University Irving Medical Center, said in the American Heart Association news release. “People should be aware that (melatonin) should not be taken chronically without a proper indication.”

    Healthy sleep hygiene involves limiting light exposure, screen time and consumption of food and alcohol in the few hours before bed. Your bedroom should be dark, cool and quiet.

    If you still choose to supplement melatonin, pharmaceutical grade melatonin is best, experts told CNN in a 2022 report — look for a stamp showing that the independent nonprofit US Pharmacopoeia’s Dietary Supplement Verification Program has tested the product.

    Kristen Rogers and CNN

    Source link

  • Chronic Melatonin Use May Raise Risk of Heart Failure, Study Suggests

    Melatonin is a well-known go-to sleep aid, but researchers are still teasing out the supplement’s side effects, especially as long-term use becomes increasingly common. And now, a preliminary study out today suggests taking melatonin for more than a year may be linked to heart problems and early death.

    Researchers studied the medical records of people with chronic insomnia, finding that those who were prescribed melatonin for at least a year were more likely to develop heart failure and more likely to die from any cause. The study has important limitations, the authors note, but the findings are motivation for scientists to look further into melatonin’s potential health risks.

    “These findings challenge the perception of melatonin as a benign chronic therapy and underscore the need for
    randomized trials to clarify its cardiovascular safety profile,” the researchers wrote in the study.

    A hidden danger?

    Our bodies naturally produce melatonin. Among other things, the hormone helps regulate our sleep-wake cycle.

    In some countries like the U.K., officials have approved a synthetic version of melatonin for treating insomnia in people over 55, while in the U.S., melatonin is widely available over-the-counter as a supplement. Using melatonin for a night or two—say to beat jet lag— seems to be generally safe for adults (although not necessarily for children). But scientists know little about its long-term safety, particularly when it comes to the heart.

    The authors analyzed data from the TriNetX Global Research Network, a large, international database containing tens of thousands of medical records. They specifically focused on adults diagnosed with chronic insomnia who were prescribed melatonin for a year or more—some 60,000 people. They then compared this group to similar people who had insomnia but who were not prescribed the sleep aid.

    Over a five-year follow-up period, about 4.6% of melatonin patients developed heart failure, compared to 2.7% of non-melatonin patients—almost double the odds. People on melatonin also had a higher risk of being hospitalized for heart failure and were nearly twice as likely to die in general.

    Caveats and caution

    The team’s findings are set to be presented this week at the American Heart Association’s annual Scientific Sessions conference, but it carries some significant limitations.

    The study is still preliminary, and it hasn’t gone through the typical peer review process. It is also observational and retrospective, meaning it can only demonstrate a correlation between chronic melatonin use and heart disease. And though the authors did try to control for important variables like where a patient lived, there are potential pitfalls in the data.

    The database used in the study covers multiple countries, including places like the U.S. where melatonin is widely available over the counter. As a result, the authors admit that it’s entirely possible that some patients who weren’t prescribed melatonin were taking the supplement regardless, muddying the findings.

    This research is far from a smoking gun proving the dangers of chronic melatonin use. But studies like this can build the case for more definitive research—ideally randomized and controlled trials—to find out for sure.

    Ed Cara

    Source link

  • This Health Syndrome Affects Nearly All Americans. So Why Haven’t You Heard of It?

    Chances are, you’re probably in the dark about a health problem that affects nearly every adult in America. A new survey shows that almost 90% of Americans have never heard of the recently defined syndrome known as cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic, or CKM, syndrome.

    The Harris Poll conducted the online survey in August on behalf of the American Heart Association. Based on responses from more than 4,000 people, the survey found that only 12% were previously aware of CKM syndrome. The findings suggest that few people are on the lookout for this condition, despite the vast majority of Americans having some form of it.

    “We want people to know that it’s really common to have heart, kidney and metabolic risk factors at the same time,” said Eduardo Sanchez, the American Heart Association’s chief medical officer for prevention, in a statement from the organization.

    Interconnected organs

    The AHA coined the term “CKM syndrome” in October 2023. The label is meant to reflect the reality that our kidneys and heart depend heavily on each other, and that both in turn are heavily affected by our metabolism.

    It broadly combines four other conditions and their associated risk factors: heart disease, kidney disease, type 2 diabetes, and obesity, all of which can be connected to the others. Someone living with obesity, for instance, is more likely to develop the other three conditions. CKM is further broken down into four stages, depending on the level of risk factors or related diseases a person has. Someone with stage 1 CKM, for example, has no apparent symptoms but does have excess body fat, particularly around the belly.

    Past research has found that about 90% of Americans meet the criteria for CKM syndrome, with about 50% in stage 2. Many people also have risk factors that can make them vulnerable to all of the diseases under the umbrella of CKM, such as hypertension, high blood sugar, high cholesterol, and excess weight.

    In the dark, but willing to learn more

    In addition to most not knowing about CKM, 68% of respondents in the survey wrongly believed that it’s best to take care of these conditions separately or weren’t sure about how to manage them. About 42% also incorrectly believed that a healthy heart couldn’t be affected by other organs or weren’t sure.

    “The heart, kidney and metabolic systems are connected and, as such, should be treated in a coordinated way,” Sanchez said. “These results reveal the need to emphasize those connections and help patients understand the importance of collaborative care.”

    On the bright side, though most Americans might be unaware about the existence of CKM, plenty in the AHA survey were curious once they were told about it. Over two-thirds felt it was important to learn more about the syndrome or their overall CKM health.

    The AHA has just launched a public health campaign on CKM, which includes a dedicated website and short YouTube video. Early next year, the organization will also release the first formal guidelines on the syndrome.

    Ed Cara

    Source link

  • A Longer Life on Statins?  | NutritionFacts.org

    What are the pros and cons of relative risk, absolute risk, number needed to treat, and average postponement of death when taking cholesterol-lowering statin drugs?

    In response to the charge that describing the benefits of statin drugs only in terms of relative risk reduction is a “statistical deception” created to give the appearance that statins are more effective than they really are, it was pointed out that describing things in terms of absolute risk reduction or number needed to treat can depend on the duration of the study.

    For example, let’s say a disease has a 2% chance of killing you every year, but some drug cuts that risk by 50%. That sounds amazing, until you realize that, at the end of a year, your risk will only have fallen from 2% to 1%, so the absolute reduction of risk is only 1%. If a hundred people were treated with the drug, instead of two people dying, one person would die, so a hundred people would have to be treated to save one life, as shown below and at 1:01 in my video How Much Longer Do You Live on Statins?.

    But there’s about a 99% chance that taking the drug all year would have no effect either way. So, to say the drug cuts the risk of dying by 50% seems like an overstatement. But think about it: Benefits accrue over time. If there’s a 2% chance of dying every year, year after year, after a few decades, the majority of those who refused the drug would be dead, whereas the majority who took the drug would be alive. So, yes, perhaps during the first year on the drug, there was only about a 1% chance it would be life-saving, but, eventually, you could end up with a decent chance the drug would save your life after all.

    “This is actually the very reason why the usage of relative risk makes sense…” Absolute risk changes depending on the time frame being discussed, but with relative risk, you know that whatever risk you have, you can cut it in half by taking the drug. On average, statins only cut the risk of a cardiovascular “event” by 25%, but since cardiovascular disease is the number one killer of men and women, if you’re unwilling to change your diet, that’s a powerful argument in favor of taking these kinds of drugs. You can see the same kind of dependency on trial duration, looking at the “postponement of death” by taking a statin. How much longer might you live if you take statins?

    The average postponement of death has some advantages over other statistics because it may offer “a better intuitive understanding among lay persons,” whereas a stat like a number needed to treat has more of a win-or-lose “lottery-like” quality. So, when a statin drug prevents, say, one heart attack out of a hundred people treated over five years, it’s not as though the other 99 completely lost out. Their cholesterol also dropped, and their heart disease progression presumably slowed down, too, just not enough to catch a heart attack within that narrow time frame.

    So, what’s the effect of statins on average survival? According to an early estimate, if you put all the randomized trials together, the average postponement of death was calculated at maybe three or four days. Three or four days? Who would take a drug every day for years just to live a few more days? Well, let’s try to put that into context. Three or four days is comparable to the gains in life expectancy from other medical interventions. For example, it’s nearly identical to what you’d get from “highly effective childhood vaccines.” Because vaccines have been so effective in wiping out infectious diseases, these days, they only add an average of three extra days to a child’s life. But, of course, “those whose deaths are averted gain virtually their whole lifetimes.” That’s why we vaccinate. It just seems like such a small average benefit because it gets distributed over the many millions of kids who get the vaccine. Is that the same with statins?

    An updated estimate was published in 2019, which explained that the prior estimate of three or four days was plagued by “important weaknesses,” and the actual average postponement of death was actually ten days. Headline writers went giddy from these data, but what they didn’t understand was that this was only for the duration of the trial. So, if your life expectancy is only five years, then, yes, statins may increase your lifespan by only ten days, but statins are meant to be taken a lot longer than five years. What you want to know is how much longer you might get to live if you stick with the drugs your whole life.

    In that case, it isn’t an extra ten days, but living up to ten extra years. Taking statins can enable you to live years longer. That’s because, for every millimole per liter you lower your bad LDL cholesterol, you may live three years longer and maybe even six more years, depending on which study you’re reading. A millimole in U.S. units is 39 points. Drop your LDL cholesterol by about 39 points, and you could live years longer. Exercise your whole life, and you may only increase your lifespan by six months, and stopping smoking may net you nine months. But if you drop your LDL cholesterol by about 39 points, you could live years longer. You can accomplish that by taking drugs, or you can achieve that within just two weeks of eating a diet packed with fruits, vegetables, and nuts, as seen here and at 5:30 in my video

    Want to know what’s better than drugs? “Something important and fundamental has been lost in the controversy around this broad expansion of statin therapy.…It is imperative that physicians (and drug labels) inform patients that not only their lipid [cholesterol] levels but also their cardiovascular risk can be reduced substantially by adoption of a plant-based dietary pattern, and without drugs. Dietary modifications for cardiovascular risk reduction, including plant-based diets, have been shown to improve not only lipid status, but also obesity, hypertension, systemic inflammation, insulin sensitivity, oxidative stress, endothelial function, thrombosis, and cardiovascular event risk…The importance of this [plant-based] approach is magnified when one considers that, in contrast to statins, the ‘side effects’ of plant-based diets—weight loss, more energy, and improved quality of life—are beneficial.” 

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • The Real Benefits of Statins and Their Side Effects  | NutritionFacts.org

    A Mayo Clinic visualization tool can help you decide if cholesterol-lowering statin drugs are right for you.

    “Physicians have a duty to inform their patients about the risks and benefits of the interventions available to them. However, physicians rarely communicate with methods that convey absolute information, such as numbers needed to treat, numbers needed to harm, or prolongation of life, despite patients wanting this information.” That is, for example, how many people are actually helped by a particular drug, how many are actually hurt by it, or how much longer the drug will enable you to live, respectively.

    If doctors inform patients only about the relative risk reduction—for example, telling them a pill will cut their risk of heart attacks by 34 percent—nine out of ten agree to take it. However, give them the same information framed as absolute risk reduction—“1.4% fewer patients had heart attacks”—then those agreeing to take the drug drops to only four out of ten. And, if they use the number needed to treat, only three in ten patients would agree to take the pill. So, if you’re a doctor and you really want your patient to take the drug, which statistic are you going to use?

    The use of relative risk stats to inflate the benefits and absolute risk stats to downplay any side effects has been referred to as “statistical deception.” To see how one might spin a study to accomplish this, let’s look at an example. As you can see below and at 1:49 in my video, The True Benefits vs. Side Effects of Statins, there is a significantly lower risk of the incidence of heart attack over five years in study participants randomized to a placebo compared to those getting the drug. If you wanted statins to sound good, you’d use the relative risk reduction (24 percent lower risk). If you wanted statins to sound bad, you’d use the absolute risk reduction (3 percent fewer heart attacks).

    Then you could flip it for side effects. For example, the researchers found that 0.3 percent (1 out of 290 women in the placebo group) got breast cancer over five years, compared to 4.1 percent (12 out of 286) in the statin group. So, a pro-statin spin might be a 24 percent drop in heart attack risk and only 3.8 percent more breast cancers, whereas an anti-statin spin might be only 3 percent fewer heart attacks compared to a 1,267 percent higher risk of breast cancer. Both portrayals are technically true, but you can see how easily you could manipulate people if you picked and chose how you were presenting the risks and benefits. So, ideally, you’d use both the relative risk reduction stat and the absolute risk reduction stat.

    In terms of benefits, when you compile many statin trials, it looks like the relative risk reduction is 25 percent. So, if your ten-year risk of a heart attack or stroke is 5 percent, then taking a statin could lower that from 5 percent to 3.75 percent, for an absolute risk reduction of 1.25 percent, or a number needed to treat of 80, meaning there’s about a 1 in 80 chance that you’d avoid a heart attack or stroke by taking the drug for the next ten years. As you can see, as your baseline risk gets higher and higher, even though you have that same 25 percent risk reduction, your absolute risk reduction gets bigger and bigger. And, with a 20 percent baseline risk, that means you have a 1 in 20 chance of avoiding a heart attack or stroke over the subsequent decade if you take the drug, as seen below and at 3:31 in my video.

    So, those are the benefits. In terms of risk, that breast cancer finding appears to be a fluke. Put together all the studies, and “there was no association between use of statins and the risk of cancer.” In terms of muscle problems, estimates of risk range from approximately 1 in 1,000 to closer to 1 in 50.

    If all those numbers just blur together, the Mayo Clinic developed a great visualization tool, seen below and at 4:39 in my video.

    For those at average risk, 10 people out of 100 who do not take a statin may have a heart attack over the next ten years. If, however, all 100 people took a statin every day for those ten years, 8 would still have a heart attack, but 2 would be spared, so there’s about a 1 in 50 chance that taking the drug would help avert a heart attack over the next decade. What are the downsides? The cost and inconvenience of taking a pill every day, which can cause some gastrointestinal side effects, muscle aching, and stiffness in about 5 percent, reversible liver inflammation in 2 percent, and more serious damage in perhaps 1 in 20,000 patients.

    Note that the two happy faces in the bottom left row of the YES STATIN chart represent heart attacks averted, not lives saved. The chance that a few years of statins will actually save your life if you have no known heart disease is about 1 in 250.

    If you want a more personalized approach, the Mayo Clinic has an interactive tool that lets you calculate your ten-year risk. You can get there directly by going to bit.ly/statindecision.

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Are We Being Misled About the Benefits and Risks of Statins?  | NutritionFacts.org

    What is the dirty little secret of drugs for lifestyle diseases?

    Drug companies go out of their way—in direct-to-consumer ads, for example—to “present pharmaceutical drugs as a preferred solution to cholesterol management while downplaying lifestyle change.” You see this echoed in the medical literature, as in this editorial in the Journal of the American Medical Association: “Despite decades of exhortation for improvement, the high prevalence of poor lifestyle behaviors leading to elevated cardiovascular disease risk factors persists, with myocardial infarction [heart attack] and stroke remaining the leading causes of death in the United States. Clearly, many more adults could benefit from…statins for primary prevention.” Do we really need to put more people on drugs? A reply was published in the British Medical Journal: “Once again, doctors are implored to ‘get real’—stop hoping that efforts to help their patients and communities adopt healthy lifestyle habits will succeed, and start prescribing more statins. This is a self-fulfilling prophecy. Note that the author of these comments [the pro-statin editorial] disclosed receipt of funding from 11 drug companies, at least four of which produce or are developing new classes of cholesterol-lowering agents,” which make billions of dollars a year in annual sales.

    Every time the cholesterol guidelines expand the number of people eligible for statins, they’re decried as a “big kiss to big pharma.” This is understandable, since the majority of guideline panel members “had industry ties,” financial conflicts of interest. But these days, all the major statins are off-patent, so there are inexpensive generic versions. For example, the safest, most effective statin is generic Lipitor, sold as atorvastatin for as little as a few dollars a month. So, nowadays, the cholesterol guidelines are not necessarily “part of an industry plot.”

    “The US way of life is the problem, not the guidelines…” The reason so many people are candidates for cholesterol- and blood-pressure-lowering medications is that so many people are taking such terrible care of themselves. The bottom line is that “individuals must take more responsibility for their own health behaviors.” What if you are unwilling or unable to improve your diet and make lifestyle changes to bring down that risk? If your ten-year risk of having a heart attack is 7.5 percent or more and going to stay that way, then the benefits of taking a statin drug likely outweigh the risk. That’s really for you to decide, though. It’s your body, your choice.

    “Whether or not the overall benefit-harm balance justifies the use of a medication for an individual patient cannot be determined by a guidelines committee, a health care system, or even the attending physician. Instead, it is the individual patient who has a fundamental right to decide whether or not taking a drug is worthwhile.” This was recognized by some of medicine’s “historical luminaries such as Hippocrates,” but “only in recent decades has the medical profession begun to shift from a paternalistic ‘doctor knows best’ stance towards one explicitly endorsing patient-centered, evidence-based, shared decision-making.” One of the problems with communicating statin evidence to support this shared decision-making is that most doctors “have a poor understanding of concepts of risk and probability and…increasing exposure to statistics in undergraduate and postgraduate education hasn’t made much difference.” But that understanding is critical for preventive medicine. When doctors offer a cholesterol-lowering drug, “they’re doing something quite different from treating a patient who has sought help because she is sick. They’re not so much doctors as life insurance salespeople, peddling deferred benefits in exchange for a small (but certainly not negligible) ongoing inconvenience and cost. In this new kind of medicine, not understanding risk is the equivalent of not knowing about the circulation of the blood or basic anatomy. So, let’s dive in and see exactly what’s at stake.

    Below and at 3:55 in my video Are Doctors Misleading Patients About Statin Risks and Benefits? is an ad for Lipitor. When drug companies say a statin reduces the risk of a heart attack by 36 percent, that’s the relative risk.

    If you follow the asterisk I’ve circled after the “36%” in the ad, you can see how they came up with that. I’ve included it here and at 3:56 in my video. In a large clinical study, 3 percent of patients not taking the statin had a heart attack within a certain amount of time, compared to 2 percent of patients who did take the drug. So, the drug dropped heart attack risk from 3 percent to 2 percent; that’s about a one-third drop, hence the 36 percent reduced relative risk statistic. But another way to look at going from 3 percent to 2 percent is that the absolute risk only dropped by 1 percent. So, in effect, “your chance to avoid a nonfatal heart attack during the next 2 years is about 97% without treatment, but you can increase it to about 98% by taking a Crestor [a statin] every day.” Another way to say that is that you’d have to treat 100 people with the drug to prevent a single heart attack. That statistic may shock a lot of people.

    If you ask patients what they’ve been led to believe, they don’t think the chance of avoiding a heart attack within a few years on statins is 1 in 100, but 1 in 2. “On average, it was believed that most patients (53.1%) using statins would avoid a heart attack after statin treatment for 5 years.” Most patients, not just 1 percent of patients. And this “disparity between actual and expected effect could be viewed as a dilemma. On the one hand, it is not ethically acceptable for caregivers to deliberately support and maintain illusive treatment expectations by patients.” We cannot mislead people into thinking a drug works better than it really does, but on the other hand, how else are we going to get people to take their pills?

    When asked, people want an absolute risk reduction of at least about 30 percent to take a cholesterol-lowering drug every day, whereas the actual absolute risk reduction is only about 1 percent. So, the dirty little secret is that, if patients knew the truth about how little these drugs actually worked, almost no one would agree to take them. Doctors are either not educating their patients or actively misinforming them. Given that the majority of patients expect a much larger benefit from statins than they’d get, “there is a tension between the patient’s right to know about benefiting from a preventive drug and the likely reduction in uptake [willingness to take the drugs] if they are so informed,” and learn the truth. This sounds terribly paternalistic, but hundreds of thousands of lives may be at stake.

    If patients were fully informed, people would die. About 20 million Americans are on statins. Even if the drugs saved 1 in 100, that could mean hundreds of thousands of lives lost if everyone stopped taking their statins. “It is ironic that informing patients about statins would increase the very outcomes they were designed to prevent.”

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Should You Take Statins?  | NutritionFacts.org

    How can you calculate your own personal heart disease risk to help you determine if you should start on a cholesterol-lowering statin drug?

    The muscle-related side effects from cholesterol-lowering statins “are often severe enough for patients to stop taking the drug. Of course, these side effects could be coincidental or psychosomatic and have nothing to do with the drug,” given that many clinical trials show such side effects are rare. “It is also possible that previous clinical trials”—funded by the drug companies themselves—“under-recorded the side effects of statins.” The bottom line is that there’s an urgent need to establish the true incidence of statin side effects.

    “What proportion of symptomatic side effects in patients taking statins are genuinely caused by the drug?” That’s the title of a journal article that reports that, even in trials funded by Big Pharma, “only a small minority of symptoms reported on statins are genuinely due to the statins,” and those taking statins are significantly more likely to develop type 2 diabetes than those randomized to placebo sugar pills. Why? We’re still not exactly sure, but statins may have the double-whammy effect of impairing insulin secretion from the pancreas while also diminishing insulin’s effectiveness by increasing insulin resistance.

    Even short-term use of statins may “approximately double the odds of developing diabetes and diabetic complications.” As shown below and at 1:49 in my video Who Should Take Statins?, fewer people develop diabetes and diabetic complications off statins over a period of about five years than those who do develop diabetes while on statins. “Of more concern, this increased risk persisted for at least 5 years after statin use stopped.”

    “In view of the overwhelming benefit of statins in the reduction of cardiovascular events,” the number one killer of men and women, any increase in risk of diabetes, our seventh leading cause of death, would be outweighed by any cardiovascular benefits, right? That’s a false dichotomy. We don’t have to choose between heart disease and diabetes. We can treat the cause of both with the same diet and lifestyle changes. The diet that can not only stop heart disease, but also reverse it, is the same one that can reverse type 2 diabetes. But what if, for whatever reason, you refuse to change your diet and lifestyle? In that case, what are the risks and benefits of starting statins? Don’t expect to get the full scoop from your doctor, as most seemed clueless about statins’ causal link with diabetes, so only a small fraction even bring it up with their patients.

    “Overall, in patients for whom statin treatment is recommended by current guidelines, the benefits greatly outweigh the risks.” But that’s for you to decide. Before we quantify exactly what the risks and benefits are, what exactly are the recommendations of current guidelines?

    How should you decide if a statin is right for you? “If you have a history of heart disease or stroke, taking a statin medication is recommended, without considering your cholesterol levels.” Period. Full stop. No discussion needed. “If you do not yet have any known cardiovascular disease,” then the decision should be based on calculating your own personal risk. If you know your cholesterol and blood pressure numbers, it’s easy to do that online with the American College of Cardiology risk estimator or the Framingham risk profiler.

    My favorite is the American College of Cardiology’s estimator because it gives you your current ten-year risk and also your lifetime risk. So, for a person with a 5.8 percent risk of having a heart attack or stroke within the next decade, if they don’t clean up their act, that lifetime risk jumps to 46 percent, nearly a flip of the coin. If they improved their cholesterol and blood pressure, though, they could reduce that risk by more than tenfold, down to 3.9 percent, as shown below and at 4:11 in my video.

    Since the statin decision is based on your ten-year risk, what do you do with that number? As you can see here and at 4:48 in my video, under the current guidelines, if your ten-year risk is under 5 percent, then, unless there are extenuating circumstances, you should just stick to diet, exercise, and smoking cessation to bring down your numbers. In contrast, if your ten-year risk hits 20 percent, then the recommendation is to add a statin drug on top of making lifestyle modifications. Unless there are risk-enhancing factors, the tendency is to stick with lifestyle changes if risk is less than 7.5 percent and to move towards adding drugs if above 7.5 percent.

    Risk-enhancing factors that your doctor should take into account when helping you make the decision include a bad family history, really high LDL cholesterol, metabolic syndrome, chronic kidney or inflammatory conditions, or persistently high triglycerides, C-reactive protein, or LP(a). You can see the whole list here and at 4:54 in my video.

    If you’re still uncertain, guidelines suggest you consider getting a coronary artery calcium (CAC) score, but even though the radiation exposure from that test is relatively low these days, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has explicitly concluded that the current evidence is insufficient to conclude that the benefits outweigh the harms.

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • How to Keep Your Heart Healthy in Your 20s, 30s, 40s, and Beyond

    Your heart is with you for every moment of your life—but the way you care for it shouldn’t look the same at 25 as it does at 65. Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in the U.S., and heart health risks increase with age. But the good news is that much of the damage is preventable with the right habits and timely screenings.

    Here’s a decade-by-decade guide, with insights from cardiologists, for protecting your heart from young adulthood through your golden years.

    Your heart health may be the furthest thing from your mind in your twenties. But it’s the right time to build the habits that will support your heart for years to come, says Dr. Romit Bhattacharya, a preventive cardiologist at Massachusetts General Hospital. These heart-healthy habits include getting enough physical activity daily, quitting smoking or vaping, focusing on eating a plant-based diet, and getting seven to nine hours of sleep each night. 

    “These basics drive long-term heart and brain health,” he says.

    By your early 20s, the heart has reached its adult size and capacity, Bhattacharya says. Cardiac output—how much blood the heart pumps per minute—is strong, and the heart muscle is highly efficient. But research shows that even by this age, fatty streaks and cholesterol deposits (called plaques) can form in the arteries, especially if you smoke, eat a poor diet, or have a family history of heart disease.

    That’s why this is the time to start thinking about screenings, says Dr. Deepak Talreja, clinical chief of cardiology at Sentara Cardiology Specialists in Virginia.

    “Blood pressure should be screened starting at age 18, with follow-ups every three to five years if normal, or annually if elevated,” he says. “Cholesterol testing should start by age 20 if risk factors exist, and early identification of abnormal blood sugar is also key.”

    Your 30s are often peak years for career-building, parenting, and financial stress. While your heart is still strong and resilient, this decade is when subtle changes often begin to emerge.

    “Chronic stress, anxiety, depression, and poor sleep push up blood pressure and inflammation and are tied to higher heart-attack risk,” says Bhattacharya. “Job strain alone carries around a 30% higher coronary heart disease risk.”

    Read More: Why Heart Disease Research Still Favors Men

    Exercise in your 30s is particularly important, says cardiologist Dr. Lars Sondergaard, chief medical officer and vice president of Abbott’s structural heart division. “Even moderate exercise, such as brisk walking for as little as 20 minutes a day, can significantly improve a person’s health,” he says. 

    Sleep is also vital, Sondergaard adds. Deep, restorative sleep not only reduces inflammation but also supports emotional regulation, allowing you to better cope with life’s pressures. Social connection can also play a protective role as well; robust social networks correlate with lower stress levels and longer lifespan.

    And screenings remain important. Talreja highlights that stress can indirectly worsen cardiovascular health by encouraging unhealthy habits—like overeating, inactivity, and alcohol use—so maintaining routine checkups is crucial. Blood pressure, cholesterol, and metabolic markers should be monitored, and lifestyle interventions should be reinforced.

    By midlife, you may not have any noticeable symptoms, but subtle changes in blood pressure, cholesterol, or glucose can foreshadow future heart problems. 

    “Your 40s are when silent risks begin to surface, so this is the decade to move beyond ‘feeling fine’ and start measuring what matters,” says Bhattacharya. “Blood pressure, cholesterol, and blood sugar remain the foundation, but consider advanced screening” if you have a family history of cardiovascular issues. Consult your doctor if your risk is unclear.

    For those who are at higher risk, a coronary calcium scan or CT coronary angiogram can reveal early plaque long before symptoms arise, he adds.

    Monitoring your cholesterol levels continues to be crucial during this decade. “The most important cholesterol measure is LDL, also known as bad cholesterol, followed by non-HDL cholesterol,” says Dr. Jeffrey Berger, director of the Center for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease at NYU Langone Heart. “Even if HDL is high, elevated LDL increases risk for heart disease and stroke and should be lowered.”

    Read More: The Obscure Genetic Cholesterol That Can Impact Your Heart Health

    Routine monitoring—annual blood pressure checks, regular lipid panels, and glucose monitoring—can detect problems early, and implementing lifestyle changes or other interventions before serious disease develops can protect your heart. 

    Subtle warning signs can also emerge in your 40s. Fatigue, shortness of breath during activity, calf pain with walking, or unusual exercise intolerance may all signal cardiovascular issues. 

    Dr. Srihari S. Naidu, director of the cardiac catheterization laboratories and the hypertrophic cardiomyopathy program at Westchester Medical Center, says most people assume they’re asymptomatic because they don’t feel chest pain or obvious shortness of breath—but often that’s because they’ve unconsciously stopped pushing themselves. 

    “Paying attention to how your body responds during exertion is key,” he adds. 

    At this stage, hormonal changes begin to reshape cardiovascular risk. 

    For women, menopause often leads to increases in LDL cholesterol, rising blood pressure, and shifts in fat distribution from hips and thighs to the abdomen. Men experience gradual testosterone decline, which can increase risk for metabolic syndrome and diabetes. 

    “Traditionally we have believed that the loss of estrogen removes protective lipid effects, but trials of replacing hormones have shown this is more complex than once believed,” says Talreja. 

    “Because of this, hormone replacement therapy is not recommended for cardiovascular disease prevention and should only be considered for severe vasomotor symptoms.”

    Read More: Why Does Menopause Treatment Always Include a Diet?

    Testosterone replacement in men is also not advised for primary prevention due to potential risks. Instead, Berger recommends focusing on maintaining a heart-healthy lifestyle and routine screenings to identify early disease during this time. 

    “Healthy habits, especially diet and exercise—both aerobic activity and strength training—support better hormone balance and heart health,” he says. 

    By the time you reach your 60s, your heart has worked hard for decades, and the changes that began earlier in life can become more noticeable. The heart muscle may have thickened slightly, and arteries have likely stiffened, which can raise blood pressure. For women, the protective effects of estrogen subside after menopause, which is why women’s cardiovascular risk has increased by this decade.

    Because of these factors, many people already carry one or more cardiovascular diagnoses: hypertension, high cholesterol, or Type 2 diabetes. In these cases, the focus shifts from prevention alone to careful management of existing conditions.

    Read More: 12 Weird Symptoms Endocrinologists Say You Should Never Ignore

    “Even in people with risk factors or those with a strong family history, proactive management is key to avoiding disease,” says Berger. “We need to be aggressive with primary prevention (before disease develops) to avoid the development of disease and the need for secondary prevention (after a cardiac event).”

    Medication adherence, cardiac rehab after heart attacks or strokes, and vaccinations to prevent infections that stress the heart are all critical. This is also the time to recognize silent disease, Naidu says. 

    “Heart valve problems often start quietly,” he says. “Stay alert, share any changes with your clinician, and work together to decide if an echocardiogram is right for you.”

    By the time you reach your 70s, the heart has been pumping nonstop for more than 2.5 billion beats. Even if you’ve taken excellent care of it, age-related changes become more pronounced in this decade. Some shifts are normal parts of aging, while others reflect accumulated cardiovascular risk.

    Pumping efficiency declines, arteries are less flexible, valves often show significant wear, and irregular rhythms are more frequent.

    In your 70s and older, heart health becomes as much about quality of life as prevention. 

    “Aging in the 70s is no longer one uniform story,” says Bhattacharya. “Those who have maintained lifelong healthy habits often look and feel more like people in their 50s or 60s. For others, simplifying medications, setting safe blood pressure and glucose goals, and avoiding falls or drug interactions take priority.”

    Staying active, eating well, and taking medications as prescribed are still essential, says Berger. Equally important, he adds, is making sure your care is well-coordinated. Focus on mobility, safety, and activities that bring happiness, because emotional well-being directly supports heart health.

    Shared decision-making with family and care teams helps ensure medical care aligns with personal goals, especially as complex conditions accumulate. At this stage, the goal is independence and quality of life: using the fewest, most effective interventions to keep people strong, steady, and connected to the things they value most.

    “As much as possible, patients at all ages—but especially older patients—need to think about who else can help them make medical decisions when needed,” says Talreja. Consider spelling out exactly how you want your heart health (and overall health) handled at this stage, like whether you want CPR performed in an emergency or a ventilator if you are incapacitated. By making heart health a habit throughout the prior decades, considering what’s best for your heart will be second nature by now. 

    Lauryn Higgins

    Source link

  • Apple Watch Series 11 gets FDA-cleared alert for ‘silent killer’ condition

    NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

    The World Health Organization estimates that nearly 1.3 billion adults live with hypertension worldwide. Many don’t even know they have it. That’s why Apple’s latest announcement could change lives.

    Apple Watch Series 11 now includes FDA-cleared hypertension notifications. Starting next week, the feature will roll out in more than 150 locations, including the U.S., EU, Hong Kong and New Zealand. It will also come to Apple Watch Series 9 and later, plus Apple Watch Ultra 2 and later, via watchOS 26.

    Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
    Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts, and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox. Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide — free when you join my CYBERGUY.COM/NEWSLETTER 

    APPLE WINS BLOOD OXYGEN BATTLE FOR WATCH OWNERS

    Apple Watch Series 11 now includes FDA-cleared hypertension notification. (Apple)

    Apple Watch hypertension alerts explained

    Hypertension is often called the “silent killer” because it can strike without symptoms. Left unchecked, it increases the risk of heart attack, stroke and kidney disease. By adding passive blood pressure monitoring, Apple Watch aims to help millions detect early warning signs.

    Using its optical heart sensor, the watch reviews how your blood vessels respond to heartbeats over 30-day periods. If it detects consistent patterns of hypertension, you’ll get a notification. Apple expects the feature could alert more than 1 million people with undiagnosed hypertension in its first year alone.

    iPhone and Apple Watch showing hypertension alert

    Apple Watch sends users a “Possible Hypertension” alert when heart data shows consistent signs of elevated blood pressure. Paired with the iPhone, users can log blood pressure and follow up with doctors. (Apple)

    Clinical validation of Apple Watch hypertension feature

    Apple built the new hypertension notification feature on a foundation of years of health research. Since the launch of Apple Watch, heart health tools like ECG, AFib History and irregular rhythm notifications have helped users catch issues early. The hypertension notification now extends that mission by addressing one of the most common and dangerous silent conditions.

    The feature works in the background during waking hours, analyzing photoplethysmography (PPG) signals, changes in blood volume under the skin, to detect patterns that suggest chronic high blood pressure. You do not need to calibrate the feature or take direct blood pressure readings with the watch. Instead, the device tracks signals over 30 days and sends a notification if consistent signs of hypertension appear.

    CAN YOUR APPLE WATCH DETECT PREGNANCY?

    Study results confirm accuracy of hypertension alerts

    Apple developed the algorithm using data from more than 100,000 study participants across diverse ages, races, body types, and health statuses. The company then validated its accuracy through a pivotal clinical study with over 2,000 participants, who wore Apple Watch alongside an at-home cuff to compare results.

    The validation study showed the feature achieved a specificity rate above 92%, meaning it minimized false positives. Sensitivity rates were especially strong for Stage 2 hypertension, the more severe form of the condition, where the feature identified more than half of users at risk. That accuracy could help prevent strokes, heart attacks and kidney disease in those who may not otherwise know they have hypertension.

    Importantly, the study confirmed that the feature performed consistently across age groups, genders, races and skin tones, making it reliable for Apple’s global user base. Apple also ran usability testing to fine-tune onboarding and notification language so people understand the alerts and what actions to take next.

    By passively monitoring and flagging possible signs of hypertension, Apple Watch helps fill a dangerous gap in diagnosis. Hypertension often goes unnoticed for years, but now, you can be alerted within just one month of wearing the watch. 

    man holding apple watch series 11

    Apple CEO Tim Cook holds up the new Apple Watch Series 11 during a launch event at Apple Park in Cupertino, California, on Sept. 9, 2025. (David Paul Morris/Bloomberg)

    Expert cardiologist weighs in on Apple Watch hypertension alerts

    Cardiologist and scientist Dr. Harlan Krumholz of Yale University and Yale New Haven Hospital told CyberGuy,

    “I’m glad to see Apple turning attention toward hypertension—the number one preventable cause of heart attack and stroke. Their approach automatically flags signals that suggest you may have high blood pressure and encourages you to check it out. That’s especially important because so many people remain undiagnosed. The feature also provides a way to archive blood pressures, so if people are measuring at home, they can bring that information to their doctor. This isn’t a one-stop solution, but it has the potential to help consumers take charge of their health and identify hypertension earlier. The caveat is that people shouldn’t rely on it exclusively—regular care remains essential.”

    EVEN WITH TRUMP’S TARIFF BLESSING, APPLE HIKES IPHONE PRICES

    Close-up of Apple Watch sensor glowing green

    By using optical sensors, Apple Watch monitors blood volume changes under the skin to passively detect hypertension trends in the background. (Apple)

    How to respond to Apple Watch hypertension alerts

    If you receive a hypertension alert, Apple recommends:

    • Log blood pressure daily for seven days with a third-party blood pressure cuff
    • Share your results with your doctor at your next appointment.
    • Follow American Heart Association guidelines for further evaluation.
    Runners wearing Apple Watches

    Apple Watch Series 11 and Ultra 3 are built for both fitness and health—now including FDA-cleared hypertension alerts for active users worldwide. (Apple)

    How to update your Apple Watch to watchOS 26

    The new hypertension notifications aren’t limited to Apple Watch Series 11. If you own an Apple Watch Series 9 or later, or an Apple Watch Ultra 2 or later, you’ll also get access once you update to watchOS 26.

    Updating is simple:

    • Keep your Apple Watch on its charger and connected to Wi-Fi.
    • Open the Watch app on your iPhone.
    • Tap General, then Software Update.
    • Follow the on-screen steps to install watchOS 26.

    After the update, you can enable hypertension notifications in the Health app, allowing your watch to start passively monitoring for signs of chronic high blood pressure.

    Apple Watch showing digital clock face

    The Apple Watch Series 11 features a sleek design and cutting-edge health tools, including passive blood pressure monitoring designed to detect hypertension early. (Apple)

    Apple Watch Series 11 release date and preorder details

    Apple Watch with pink and purple bubbles on screen

    Apple Watch Series 11 is available for preorder starting today, with in-store availability beginning Friday, Sept. 19. (Apple)

    You can preorder Apple Watch Series 11 today, with in-store availability starting Friday, Sept. 19. Prices start at $399.

    The lineup includes:

    Apple Watch Series 11: The flagship model comes in aluminum or titanium finishes, with FDA-cleared hypertension notifications and all the latest health and fitness tools. It’s the best choice for most people who want the newest design and features.

    Apple Watch Ultra 3: Built for outdoor adventures, the Ultra 3 offers extra durability, a larger display, and longer battery life. It’s designed for athletes, hikers, and anyone who needs a tougher smartwatch. It also comes with FDA-cleared hypertension notifications.

    CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

    Kurt’s key takeaways

    Apple Watch is stepping up in a big way. With hypertension notifications now cleared by the FDA, it’s no longer just about tracking workouts or closing rings. It’s about giving you a heads-up on one of the biggest silent health risks out there. For millions who rarely visit a doctor, this could be a life-saving tool. Hypertension often goes unnoticed, but now, your watch can help flag risks before they become emergencies. While Apple Watch isn’t a substitute for medical care, it adds another safety net to your daily routine.

    Would you trust your smartwatch to be the first to alert you to a serious health risk, such as hypertension? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below. Let us know by writing to us at Cyberguy.com/Contact

    Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
    Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts, and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox. Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide — free when you join my CYBERGUY.COM/NEWSLETTER

    Copyright 2025 CyberGuy.com. All rights reserved. 

    Source link

  • Your Apple Watch Can Now Detect Hypertension

    Your Apple Watch can now alert you if you’re showing signs of hypertension—a new feature cleared by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Sept. 11.

    The feature does not diagnose high blood pressure or take blood pressure readings. Instead, it relies on the watch’s optical heart sensor to analyze how the blood vessels contract and expand in response to the heart’s pumping. Over time, the data collected can reveal signs of hypertension and trigger an alert. Users can see a report generated by the data and consult their doctor for further evaluation.

    The hypertension feature will soon be available on all Apple Watch Series 9 models and Apple Watch Ultra 2 models—plus their newer versions—in more than 150 countries.

    According to the American Heart Association (AHA), about half of U.S. adults have high blood pressure, and a significant proportion of them don’t know they have the condition. Only about a quarter are keeping their blood pressure under control. Uncontrolled hypertension can lead to more strain on the blood vessels, which could weaken the heart and lead to serious health problems like strokes, heart attacks, and kidney disease. Health officials have estimated in the past that these health consequences of hypertension cost about $131 billion annually.

    The clearance for the Apple Watch feature was based on a series of studies involving thousands of adults. In one study, more than 2,000 adults without hypertension wore the watch for 12 hours a day for almost a month and also measured their blood pressure with a blood pressure cuff every day, twice a day. The study showed that the Apple Watch’s hypertension notification was as accurate as the cuff in detecting signs of high blood pressure.

    Read More: 12 Weird Symptoms Endocrinologists Say You Should Never Ignore

    Awareness and early diagnosis can help bring blood pressure under control before it leads to more lasting and damaging effects on the body, says Dr. Daniel Jones, chair of the writing committee for the 2025 AHA and American College of Cardiology (ACC) High Blood Pressure Management Guidelines (who was not involved in the creation of the Apple Watch feature). “We’ve known for a long time that high blood pressure is the major cause of heart disease, stroke, and major chronic kidney disease,” he says. “And recently there is validation of data showing that lowering blood pressure also reduces the risk of dementia.” That makes it crucial for even young adults “to have their blood pressure measured and to know their blood pressure at least once a year with a validated device.”

    People can control hypertension with dietary changes, such as reducing their salt intake; by losing weight; and increasing physical activity to strengthen the heart and vessels. Medications can also help in many cases.  

    Devices like the Apple Watch and its latest feature are welcome additions to improving health, says Jones, but he cautions that in the case of blood pressure, such devices are not yet considered validated ways to measure and monitor blood pressure by the AHA and ACC. That means that the information they provide should be viewed with a caveat: It could be helpful, but, he says, people should not rely on it as their only source of information on their blood pressure.

    “Understanding whether blood pressure is normal or not normal is much more complex than detecting irregular heart rhythms,” he says. “I would not recommend that any patient depend on a watch-based device for warnings about blood pressure, unless it’s been validated by an external [medical] organization.”

    The AHA and ACC guidelines currently recommend that otherwise healthy adults get blood pressure measured at least once a year, either in a doctor’s office or pharmacy, with a validated device like a blood-pressure cuff or by using an at-home kit approved for measuring blood pressure.

    If people use the Apple Watch hypertension feature, Jones recommends verifying the information with one of these validated tools. That way, people can avoid false-positive or false-negative readings.

    Alice Park

    Source link

  • Smart Swaps and Budget-Friendly Ingredients for Heart-Healthy Meals

    (Family Features) – Rising food costs can make healthy eating a challenge for many families. In fact, a poll conducted by Research!America found about 60% of Americans cite the cost of healthy food as their single biggest barrier to achieving better nutrition.

    “Food is deeply rooted to family and community,” said Arlen Vanessa Marin, M.S., R.D., a national volunteer for the American Heart Association. “Recipes are passed down through generations, but as grocery prices rise, finding creative ways to stretch your budget while maintaining a nutritious diet is key. Simple swaps – like homemade vinaigrettes instead of sugary bottled dressings, frozen veggies instead of fresh or lentils instead of processed meat – can make a big difference without sacrificing flavor.”

    Consider these simple tips from the experts at the American Heart Association, devoted to changing the future to a world of healthier lives for all, to help you enjoy your favorite meals while keeping both your heart and wallet happy.

    Protein Without the Price Tag

    If you’re looking to add more protein without overspending, try these affordable, nutrient-packed options:

    • Beans and other legumes are protein-packed, high-fiber choices for heart-healthy meals. Add them to soups, stews or salads, or enjoy them as dips with whole-grain crackers or tortillas. Choose canned, no-salt-added varieties for a quick and healthy option.
    • Tofu and tempeh are versatile, plant-based staples that are rich in protein. Add silken tofu to miso soup, stir-fry firm tofu with garlic for a heart-smart meal or add tempeh to noodle dishes and curries.
    • Ground turkey or chicken are leaner, often more affordable alternatives to ground beef. For a budget-friendly twist, try them in dishes like turkey picadillo or homemade tacos.

    Better Grains for Your Heart

    White rice is a staple in many diets, but it can spike blood sugar. When refrigerated and reheated, it can increase resistant starch while also raising the risk of harmful bacteria. Consider these ways to keep it heart-smart:

    • Brown rice is a fiber-rich alternative to white rice that pairs well with almost any dish.
    • Quinoa is another protein-rich grain that works in soups, salads and side dishes.
    • Barley is used in many Asian soups as a whole-grain swap.

    Canned, Dried and Frozen Alternatives 

    Healthy eating doesn’t mean you have to buy everything fresh, especially when fresh food isn’t readily available. Canned, dried and frozen foods can be just as nutritious and help eliminate costly food waste from spoilage as they stay edible longer. Check nutrition labels for low-sodium, no-salt-added and no-sugar-added options.

    • Frozen fruits and vegetables are picked at peak ripeness and frozen to lock in nutrients. Use them in stir-fries, soups, smoothies or as quick side dishes.
    • Canned tuna is packed with omega-3s, wallet-friendly and easy to mix with salads, sandwiches or in brown rice bowls.

    To find more tips and budget-friendly recipes, visit recipes.heart.org.

    Courtesy of Family Features

    Source link

  • True Health Intiative: Scientific Consensus on a Healthy Diet  | NutritionFacts.org

    The leading risk factor for death in the United States is the American diet.

    About a decade ago, the American Heart Association (AHA) expressed concern that its “2020 target of improving cardiovascular health by 20% by 2020 will not be reached if current trends continue.” By 2006, most people were already not smoking and had nearly achieved their goal for exercise. But when it came to healthy diet score, only about 1 percent got a 4 or 5 out of its diet quality score of 0 to 5, as you can see below and at 0:35 in my video, Friday Favorites: The Scientific Consensus on a Healthy Diet. And that’s with such “ideal” criteria as drinking less than four and a half cups of soda a week.

    In the last decade, the AHA saw a bump in the prevalence of the ideal healthy diet score to about 1 percent of Americans reaching those kinds of basic criteria, but, given its “aggressive” goal of reaching a “20% target” by 2020, it hoped to turn that 1 percent into about 1.2 percent. (Really, as you can see here and at 1:01 in my video.)

    So, how’d we do? According to the 2019 update, it seems we’ve slipped down to as low as one in a thousand, and American teens scored a big fat zero. No wonder, perhaps, that “for all mortality-based metrics, the US rank declined…to 27th or 28th among 34 OECD [industrialized] countries. Citizens living in countries with a substantially lower gross domestic product and health expenditure per capita…have lower mortality rates than those in the United States.” Slovenia, for example, beat the United States, ranking 24th in life expectancy. More recently, the United States’s life expectancy slipped further, down to 43rd in the world, although the United States spent the most ($3.0 trillion) on health care…”

    What is the leading risk factor for death in the United States? As seen below and at 2:04 in my video, it is the standard American diet. Those trillions in health care spending aren’t addressing the root cause of disease, disability, and death. 

    Here are some of the lung cancer death curves, below and at 2:08 in my video:

    It took decades to finally turn the corner, but it’s so nice to finally see those drops. When will we see the same with diet?

    “Approximately 80% of chronic disease and premature death could be prevented by not smoking, being physically active, and adhering to a healthful dietary pattern.” What exactly is meant by “healthy diet”? “Unfortunately, media messages surrounding nutrition are often inconsistent, confusing, and do not enable the public to make positive changes in health behaviors….Certainly, there is pressure within today’s competitive journalism market for sensationalism. There may even be a disincentive to present the facts in the context of the total body of information consumers need to act on dietary recommendations.” And there’s an incentive to sell more magazines and newspapers. The paper I’m quoting was written in 1997, before the lure of clickbait headlines. In fact, about three-quarters of a century ago, it was noted: “It is unfortunate that the subject of nutrition seems to have a special appeal to the credulous, the social zealot and, in the commercial field, the unscrupulous….The combination is one calculated to strike despair in the hearts of the sober, objective scientist.”

    Indeed, the most important health care problem we face may be “our poor lifestyle choices based on misinformation.” It is like the climate change deniers: “Analogous to outspoken cynics denying climate change and influencing public opinion, healthy lifestyle and dietary advice are overshadowed by critics, diet books, the food industry, and misguided information in the media.” Maybe we need an entity like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)—but for nutrition.

    These days, “no single expert, regardless of academic stature or reputation, has the prominence to overcome the obstacles created by confusing media messages and deliver the fundamental principles of healthy living effectively to the public.”

    What if there were “a global coalition consisting of a variety of nutrition experts, who collectively represent the views held by the majority of scientists, physicians, and health practitioners” that could “serve as the guiding resource of sound nutrition information for improved health and prevention of disease”?

    Enter the True Health Initiative, which “was conceived for that very purpose.” A nonprofit coalition of hundreds of experts from dozens of countries has agreed to a consensus statement on the fundamentals of healthy living. See www.truehealthinitiative.org.

    Spoiler alert: The healthiest diet is one generally comprised mostly of minimally processed plants.

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Cleaning Products, Air Fresheners, and Lung Function  | NutritionFacts.org

    There is a reason the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention prohibits not only smoking but also scented or fragranced products in its buildings.

    In a recent review entitled “Damaging Effects of Household Cleaning Products on the Lungs,” researchers noted: “Adverse respiratory effects of cleaning products were first observed in populations experiencing high levels of exposure at the workplace, such as cleaners and health-care workers, with a primary focus on asthma.” Occupational use of disinfectants has also been linked to a higher risk of developing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, such as emphysema.

    As I discuss in my video Friday Favorites: The Effects of Cleaning Products and Air Fresheners on Lung Function, we now know that, in addition to workplace exposures, “exposure to household cleaning products has also emerged as a risk factor for respiratory disorders in childhood,” as well potentially being “an important risk factor for adult asthma.” Common household cleaning spray use accounts for as many as one in seven adult asthma cases. The thought is that inhaling chemical irritants may cause injury to the airways, leading to oxidative stress and inflammation. What can we do about it?

    Well, it may be limited to sprays. Researchers found that cleaning products that were not sprayed were not associated with asthma. It’s also possible that environmentally friendly cleaning products “may represent a safer alternative,” though they may still present some risk.

    Ideally, safer cleaning products should be available. Unfortunately, the research suggesting harm has “seldom been heeded by manufacturers, vendors, and commercial cleaning companies.” I wonder how much of that is because “most of the workers exposed to cleaning products are women”—both occupationally and, perhaps, domestically.

    One of the problems may be the fragrance chemicals. One in three Americans surveyed “reported health problems, such as migraine headaches and respiratory difficulties, when exposed to fragranced products.” And, for about half of them, the problems were so bad they actually lost work over it, either “workdays or a job due to fragranced product exposure in the workplace.”

    “Results from this study reveal that over one-third of Americans suffer adverse health effects, such as respiratory difficulties and migraine headaches, from exposure to fragranced products. Of those individuals, half reported that the effects can be disabling. Yet over 99% of Americans are exposed to fragranced products at least once a week, from their own or others’ use.”

    The effect on asthmatics may be even worse, affecting closer to two-thirds of Americans. One compound that may be of particular concern is called 1,4-dichlorobenzene, also known as para-dichlorobenzene, which is found in many air fresheners, toilet bowl deodorants, and mothballs. It breaks down in the body into a compound called 2,5-dichlorophenol, which we pee out, giving researchers a reliable measure of our dichlorobenzene exposure. Not only may it make respiratory problems worse for those already suffering from compromised airways, but exposure to dichlorobenzene “at [blood] levels found in the U.S. general population, may result in reduced pulmonary [lung] function” in people who start out with normal breathing. What’s worse, higher exposures “were associated with greater prevalence of CVD [cardiovascular disease] and all cancers combined,” another reason to avoid it. We’d better read labels, right?

    Surprisingly, “no law in the US requires the disclosure of all ingredients in fragranced consumer products.” In fact, for laundry supplies, cleaning products, and air fresheners, manufacturers “do not need to list the presence of a ‘fragrance’ on either the label or MSDS,” the material safety data sheet. We won’t know until we smell it.

    I support the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s ban. Not only is “the use of tobacco products (including cigarettes, cigars, pipes, smokeless tobacco, or other tobacco products)…prohibited at all times,” but “scented or fragranced products are prohibited at all times in all interior space owned, rented, or leased by CDC.” I wish rideshare services like Uber and Lyft would have a similar policy. I’d even be happy with just a fragrance-free option. About one in five of more than a thousand Americans surveyed said they “would enter a business but then leave as quickly as possible if they smelled air fresheners or some fragranced product,” so it’s in the best interest of businesses, too. “Over 50% of the population would prefer that workplaces, health care facilities and professionals, hotels, and airplanes were fragrance-free.”

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Eating with Hypothyroidism and Hyperthyroidism  | NutritionFacts.org

    Is the apparent protection of plant-based diets for thyroid health due to the exclusion of animal foods, the benefits of plant foods, or both?

    Several autoimmune diseases affect the thyroid gland, and Graves’ disease and Hashimoto’s thyroiditis are the most common. Graves’ disease results in hyperthyroidism, an overactive thyroid gland. Though slaughter plants are supposed to remove animals’ thyroid glands as they “shall not be used for human food,” should some neck meat slip in, you can suffer a similar syndrome called Hamburger thyrotoxicosis. That isn’t from your body making too much thyroid hormone, though. Rather, it’s from your body eating too much thyroid hormone. Graves’ disease is much more common, and meat-free diets may be able to help with both diseases, as plant-based diets may be associated with a low prevalence of autoimmune disease in general, as observed, for example, in rural sub-Saharan Africa. Maybe it’s because plants are packed with “high amounts of antioxidants, possible protective factors against autoimmune disease,” or because they’re packed with anti-inflammatory compounds. After all, “consuming whole, plant-based foods is synonymous with an anti-inflammatory diet.” But you don’t know until you put it to the test.

    It turns out that the “exclusion of all animal foods was associated with half the prevalence of hyperthyroidism compared with omnivorous diets. Lacto-ovo [dairy-and-egg] and pesco [fish] vegetarian diets were associated with intermediate protection.” But, for those eating strictly plant-based, there is a 52 percent lower odds of hyperthyroidism.

    As I discuss in my video The Best Diet for Hypothyroidism and Hyperthyroidism, this apparent protection “may be due to the exclusion of animal foods, the [beneficial] effects of plant foods, or both. Animal foods like meat, eggs, and dairy products may contain high oestrogen concentrations, which have been linked to autoimmunity in cell and animal studies.” Or it could be because the decrease in animal protein by excluding animal foods may downregulate IGF-1, which is not just a cancer-promoting growth hormone, but may play a role in autoimmune diseases. The protection could also come from the goodness in plants that may “protect cells against autoimmune processes,” like the polyphenol phytochemicals, such as flavonoids found in plant foods. Maybe it’s because environmental toxins build up in the food chain. For example, fish contaminated with industrial pollutants, like PCBs, are associated with an increased frequency of thyroid disorders.

    But what about the other autoimmune thyroid disease, Hashimoto’s thyroiditis, which, assuming you’re getting enough iodine, is the primary cause of hypothyroidism, an underactive thyroid gland? Graves’ disease wasn’t the only autoimmune disorder that was rare or virtually unknown among those living in rural sub-Saharan Africa, eating near-vegan diets. They also appeared to have less Hashimoto’s.

    There is evidence that those with Hashimoto’s have compromised antioxidant status, but we don’t know if it’s cause or effect. But if you look at the dietary factors associated with blood levels of autoimmune anti-thyroid antibodies, animal fats seem to be associated with higher levels, whereas vegetables and other plant foods are associated with lower levels. So, again, anti-inflammatory diets may be useful. It’s no surprise, as Hashimoto’s is an inflammatory disease—that’s what thyroiditis means: inflammation of the thyroid gland.

    Another possibility is the reduction in intake of methionine, an amino acid concentrated in animal protein, thought to be one reason why “regular consumption of whole-food vegan diets is likely to have a favourable influence on longevity through decreasing the risk of cancer, coronary [heart] disease, and diabetes.” Methionine restriction improves thyroid function in mice, but it has yet to be put to the test for Hashimoto’s in humans.

    If you compare the poop of patients with Hashimoto’s to controls, the condition appears to be related to a clear reduction in the concentration of Prevotella species. Prevotella are good fiber-eating bugs known to enhance anti-inflammatory activities. Decreased Prevotella levels are also something you see in other autoimmune conditions, such as multiple sclerosis and type 1 diabetes. How do you get more Prevotella? Eat more plants. If a vegetarian goes on a diet of meat, eggs, and dairy, within as few as four days, their levels can drop. So, one would expect those eating plant-based diets to have less Hashimoto’s, but in a previous video, I expressed concern about insufficient iodine intake, which could also lead to hypothyroidism. So, which is it? Let’s find out.

    “In conclusion, a vegan diet tended to be associated with lower, not higher, risk of hypothyroid disease.” Why “tended”? The associated protection against hypothyroidism incidence and prevalence studies did not reach statistical significance. It wasn’t just because they were slimmer either. The lower risk existed even after controlling for body weight. So, researchers think it might be because animal products may induce inflammation. The question I have is: If someone who already has Hashimoto’s, what happens if they change their diet? That’s exactly what I’ll explore next.

    This is the third in a four-video series on thyroid function. The first two were Are Vegans at Risk for Iodine Deficiency? and Friday Favorites: The Healthiest Natural Source of Iodine.

    Stay tuned for the final video: Diet for Hypothyroidism: A Natural Treatment for Hashimoto’s Disease

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Skip the Salt and Shake on Potassium Chloride? | NutritionFacts.org

    Worldwide, physical inactivity accounts for more than 10 million years of healthy life lost, but what we eat accounts for nearly 20 times that. As I discuss in my video Fewer Than 1 in 5,000 Meet Sodium and Potassium Recommended Intakes, unhealthy diets shave hundreds of millions of disability-free years off people’s lives every year. What are the worst aspects of our diets? Four out of the five of the deadliest dietary traps involve not eating enough of certain foods—not eating enough whole grains, fruits, nuts, seeds, and vegetables—but our most fatal flaw is getting too much salt. To put things into perspective, our overconsumption of salt is on the order of 15 times deadlier than diets too high in soda.

    Our bodies are meant to have a certain balance of sodium and potassium intake, yet many people, including the majority in the United States, get vastly more sodium and far less potassium than the recommended amounts. Indeed, sodium and potassium goals are currently met by less than 0.015 percent of the U.S. population—close to 99.99 percent noncompliance, with only 1 in 6,000 Americans hitting the recommended guidelines.

     

    What’s So Bad About Salt?

    Of all the terrible things about our diets, high dietary sodium intake—that is, high salt intake—is the leading risk, estimated to be causing millions of deaths every year mainly through adverse effects on blood pressure and increased risks of stroke, heart attack, and kidney damage. Hypertension, known commonly as high blood pressure, is called the “silent and invisible killer” because it rarely causes symptoms but is one of the most powerful independent predictors of some of our leading causes of death. I discuss this in my video Are Potassium Chloride Salt Substitutes Effective?.

     

    How Much Sodium Is Healthy in a Day?

    Our bodies evolved to handle only about 750 milligrams of sodium a day. Nevertheless, the American Heart Association calls for us to stay under 1,500 milligrams, twice that amount. However, we’re consuming more than four times what’s natural, and it’s only getting worse, having increased over the last couple of decades. An eye-opening 98.8 percent of Americans exceed even that elevated 1,500 milligrams threshold.

     

    Daily Potassium Intake

    While many of us are consuming too much sodium, we may also be getting too little potassium, a mineral that lowers blood pressure. Less than 2 percent of U.S. adults, for instance, consume the recommended daily minimum intake of potassium based on chronic disease prevention. So, more than 98 percent of Americans may eat potassium-deficient diets. 

    This deficiency is even more striking when comparing our current intake with that of our ancestors, who consumed large amounts of dietary potassium. We evolved probably getting more than 10,000 milligrams of potassium a day. The recommendation was to get about half that amount, yet most of us don’t come anywhere close.

     

    Why Are So Many of Us Lacking in Potassium?

    We evolved consuming a diet very rich in potassium and low in sodium, but, today, this pattern has been reversed. The flip reflects a shift away from traditional plant-based diets high in potassium and low in sodium towards the standard American diet. I’m talking about a shift away from fruits, greens, roots, and tubers to an eating pattern filled with salty, processed foods stripped of potassium.

     

    Why Do We Need Potassium?

    Low potassium intake has been implicated in high blood pressure and cardiovascular disease, and several meta-analyses have confirmed that high potassium intake appears to reduce the risk of stroke. It follows that potassium is now considered a “nutrient of public health concern” because most Americans don’t reach the recommended minimum daily intake.

     

    What Is the Best Substitute for Salt?

    Potassium chloride, which is often found in zero-sodium salt substitutes. We know from randomized controlled trials that sodium reduction leads to blood pressure reduction and increasing potassium intake can also lower blood pressure. So should we be “salting” our food with potassium chloride instead of sodium chloride?

     

    What Is Potassium Chloride? Is It a Viable (and Tasty) Salt Substitute?

    Potassium chloride is a naturally occurring mineral salt, which is obtained the same way we get regular sodium salt. Since we get too much sodium and not enough potassium, this would seem to make potassium chloride a win-win solution. Consider these examples:

    • In a randomized controlled trial, households had just 25 percent of the sodium chloride salt replaced with potassium chloride. At that level, most people either can’t tell the difference or even prefer the salt with the potassium mixed in. The findings? The use of the salt substitute with one-quarter potassium chloride was associated with cutting the risk of developing hypertension in half.
    • In another study, five kitchens in a veterans’ retirement home were randomized into two groups for about two and a half years. They either salted their meals with regular salt or, unbeknownst to the cooks and the diners alike, a 50/50 blend of potassium chloride. Those in the half-potassium group cut their risk of dying from cardiovascular disease by about 40 percent and lived up to nearly one year longer. The life expectancy difference at age 70 was equivalent to that which would have naturally occurred in 14 years––meaning that just switching to half potassium salt appeared to effectively make people more than a decade younger when it came to risk of death.

     

    Side Effects of Potassium Chloride?

    As I discuss in my video Potassium Chloride Salt Substitute Side Effects, potassium chloride is “generally regarded as safe” by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Healthy individuals don’t have to worry about getting too much potassium because their kidneys excrete any excess in urine, but that’s with potassium in food. What about supplements? No adverse effects have been shown for long-term intakes of potassium supplements as high as 3,000 milligrams a day, and blood levels of potassium are maintained in the normal range by healthy kidneys, even when potassium intake is increased to approximately 15,000 milligrams a day. This isn’t surprising, given that we evolved eating so many healthy plant foods, so many fruits and vegetables, rich in potassium.

    The normal range for potassium levels in the blood is between 3.5 and 5.0. There are a small number of individuals who may run into problems, primarily those with severely impaired kidney function. That’s why there’s been such a reluctance to push potassiumbased salt substitutes on a population level. Serious issues may arise if your kidneys can’t regulate your potassium. There may be concern if you have known kidney disease, diabetes (diabetes can lead to kidney damage), severe heart failure, or adrenal insufficiency, or if you’re an older adult or on medications that impair potassium excretion. If you aren’t sure if you’re at risk, ask your doctor about getting your kidney function tested.

     

    Conclusion

    National and international health organizations have called for warning labels on salt packets and salt shakers, with messages like “too much sodium in the diet causes high blood pressure and increases risk of stomach cancer, stroke, heart disease, and kidney disease. Limit your use.” So, pass (on) the salt shaker and try some potassium chloride instead.

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Statins and Muscle Pain Side Effects  | NutritionFacts.org

    Why is the incidence of side effects from statins so low in clinical trials while appearing to be so high in the real world?

    “There is now overwhelming evidence to support reducing LDL-C (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol)”—so-called bad cholesterol—to reduce atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD),” the number one killer of men and women. So, why is adherence to cholesterol-lowering statin drug therapy such “a major challenge worldwide”? Researchers found “that the majority of studies reported that at least 40%, and as much as 80%, of patients did not comply fully with statin treatment recommendations.” Three-quarters of patients may flat out stop taking them, and almost 90 percent may discontinue treatment altogether.

    When asked why they stopped taking the pills, most “former statin users or discontinuers…cited muscle pain, a side effect, as the primary reason…” “SAMSs”—statin-associated muscle symptoms—“are by far the most prevalent and important adverse event, with up to 72% of all statin adverse events being muscle-related.” Taking coenzyme Q10 supplements as a treatment for statin-associated muscle symptoms was a good idea in theory, but they don’t appear to help. Normally, side-effect symptoms go away when you stop the drug but can sometimes linger for a year or more. There is “growing evidence that statin intolerance is predominantly psychosocial, not pharmacological.” Really? It may be mostly just in people’s heads?

    “Statins have developed a bad reputation with the public, a phenomenon driven largely by proliferation on the Internet of bizarre and unscientific but seemingly persuasive criticism of these drugs.” “Does Googling lead to statin intolerance?” But people have stopped taking statins for decades before there even was an Internet. What kinds of data have doctors suggested that patients are falsely “misattribut[ing] normal aches and pains to be statin side effects”?

    Well, if you take people who claim to have statin-related muscle pain and randomize them back and forth between statins and an identical-looking placebo in three-week blocks, they can’t tell whether they’re getting the real drug or the sugar pill. The problem with that study, though, is that it may take months not only to develop statin-induced muscle pain, but months before it goes away, so no wonder three weeks on and three weeks off may not be long enough for the participants to discern which is which.

    However, these data are more convincing: Ten thousand people were randomized to a statin or a sugar pill for a few years, but so many more people were dying in the sugar pill group that the study had to be stopped prematurely. So then everyone was offered the statin, and the researchers noted that there was “no excess of reports of muscle-related AEs” (adverse effects) among patients assigned to the statin over those assigned to the placebo. But when the placebo phase was over and the people knew they were on a statin, they went on to report more muscle side effects than those who knew they weren’t taking the statin. “These analyses illustrate the so-called nocebo effect,” which is akin to the opposite of the placebo effect.

    Placebo effects are positive consequences falsely attributed to a treatment, whereas nocebo effects are negative consequences falsely attributed to a treatment, as was evidently seen here. There was an excess rate of muscle-related adverse effects reported only when patients and their doctors were aware that statin therapy was being used, and not when its use was concealed. The researchers hope “these results will help assure both physicians and patients that most AEs associated with statins are not causally related to use of the drug and should help counter…exaggerated claims about statin-related side effects.”

    These are the kinds of results from “placebo-controlled randomised trials [that] have shown definitively that almost all of the symptomatic adverse events that are attributed to statin therapy in routine practice are not actually caused by it (ie, they represent misattribution.)” Now, “only a few patients will believe that their SAMS are of psychogenic origin” and just in their head, but their denial may have “deadly consequences.” Indeed, “discontinuing statin treatment may be a life-threatening mistake.”

    Below and at 4:46 in my video How Common Are Muscle Side Effects from Statins?, you can see the mortality of those who stopped their statins after having a possible adverse reaction compared to those who stuck with them. This translates into about “1 excess death for every 83 patients who discontinued treatment” within a four-year period. So, when there are media reports about statin side effects and people stop taking them, this could “result in thousands of fatal and disabling heart attacks and strokes, which would otherwise have been avoided. Seldom in the history of modern therapeutics have the substantial proven benefits of a treatment been compromised to such an extent by serious misrepresentations of the evidence for its safety.” But is it a misrepresentation to suggest “that statin therapy causes side-effects in up to one fifth of patients”? That is what is seen in clinical practice; between 10 to 25 percent of patients placed on statins complain of muscle problems. However, because we don’t see anywhere near those kinds of numbers in controlled trials, patients are accused of being confused. Why is the incidence of side effects from statins so low in clinical trials while appearing to be so high in the real world? 

    Take this meta-analysis of clinical trials, for example: It found muscle problems not in 1 in 5 patients, but only 1 in 2,000. Should everyone over a certain age be on statins? Not surprisingly, every one of those trials was funded by statin manufacturers themselves. So, for example, “how could the statin RCTs [randomized controlled trials] miss detecting mild statin-related muscle adverse side effects such as myalgia [muscle pain]? By not asking. A review of 44 statin RCTs reveals that only 1 directly asked about muscle-related adverse effects.” So, are the vast majority of side effects just being missed in all these trials, or are the vast majority of side effects seen in clinical practice just a figment of patients’ imagination? The bottom line is we don’t know, but there is certainly an urgent need to figure it out.

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link