ReportWire

Tag: Rheumatoid arthritis

  • Can Olive Oil Compete with Arthritis Drugs? | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    What happened when topical olive oil was pitted against an ibuprofen-type drug for osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis?

    Fifty million Americans suffer from arthritis, and osteoarthritis of the knee is the most common form, making it a leading cause of disability. There are several inflammatory pathways that underlie the disease’s onset and progression, so various anti-inflammatory foods have been put to the test. Strawberries can decrease circulating blood levels of an inflammatory mediator known as tumor necrosis factor, but that doesn’t necessarily translate into clinical improvement. For example, drinking cherry juice may lower a marker of inflammation known as C-reactive protein, but it failed to help treat pain and other symptoms of knee osteoarthritis. However, researchers claimed it “provided symptom relief.” Yes, it did when comparing symptoms before and after six weeks of drinking cherry juice, but not any better than a placebo, meaning drinking it was essentially no better than doing nothing. Cherries may help with another kind of arthritis called gout, but they failed when it came to osteoarthritis.

    However, strawberries did decrease inflammation. In fact, in a randomized, double-blind, crossover trial, dietary strawberries were indeed found to have a significant analgesic effect, causing a significant decrease in pain. There are tumor necrosis factor inhibitor drugs on the market now available for the low, low cost of only about $40,000 a year. For that kind of money, you’d want some really juicy side effects, and they do not disappoint—like an especially fatal lymphoma. I think I’ll stick with the strawberries.

    One reason we suspected berries might be helpful is that when people consumed the equivalent of a cup of blueberries or two cups of strawberries daily, and their blood was then applied to cells in a petri dish, it significantly reduced inflammation compared to blood from those who consumed placebo berries, as you can see below and at 2:02 in my video Extra Virgin Olive Oil for Arthritis.

    Interestingly, the anti-inflammatory effect increased over time, suggesting that the longer you eat berries, the better. Are there any other foods that have been tested in this way?

    Researchers in France collected cartilage from knee replacement surgeries and then exposed it to blood samples from volunteers who had taken a whopping dose of a grapeseed and olive extract. They saw a significant drop in inflammation, as shown below and at 2:30 in my video.

    There haven’t been any human studies putting grapeseeds to the test for arthritis, but an olive extract was shown to decrease pain and improve daily activities in osteoarthritis sufferers. So, does this mean adding olive oil to one’s diet may help? No, because the researchers used freeze-dried olive vegetation water. That’s basically what’s left over after you extract the oil from olives; it’s all the water-soluble components. In other words, it’s all the stuff that’s in an olive that‘s missing from olive oil.

    If you give people actual olives, a dozen large green olives a day, you may see a drop in an inflammatory mediator. But according to a systematic review and meta-analysis, olive oil—on its own—does not appear to offer any anti-inflammatory benefits. What about papers that ascribe “remarkable anti-inflammatory activity” to extra virgin olive oil? Their evidence is from rodents. In people, extra virgin olive oil may be no better than butter when it comes to inflammation and worse than even coconut oil.

    So, should we just stick to olives? Sadly, a dozen olives could take up nearly half your sodium limit for the entire day, as you can see below and at 3:47 in my video.

    When put to the test, extra virgin olive oil did not appear to help with fibromyalgia symptoms either, but it did work better than canola oil in alleviating symptoms of inflammatory bowel disease. Unfortunately, I couldn’t find any studies putting olive oil intake to the test for arthritis. But why then is this blog entitled “Can Olive Oil Compete with Arthritis Drugs?” Because—are you ready for this?—it appears to work topically.

    Topical virgin olive oil went up against a gel containing an ibuprofen-type drug for osteoarthritis of the knee in a double-blind, randomized, clinical trial. Just a gram of oil, which is less than a quarter teaspoon, three times a day, costing less than three cents a day, worked! Topical olive oil was significantly better than the drug in reducing pain, as you can see below and at 4:37 in my video.

    The study only lasted a month, so is it possible that the olive oil would have continued to work better and better over time?

    Is olive oil effective in controlling morning inflammatory pain in the fingers and knees among women with rheumatoid arthritis? The researchers went all out, comparing the use of extra virgin olive oil to rubbing on nothing and also to rubbing on that ibuprofen-type gel, and, evidently, the decrease in the disease activity score in the olive oil group beat out the others.

    Doctor’s Note

    For more on joint health, see related posts below.

    What about eating olive oil? See Olive Oil and Artery Function.

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • The Largest Study on Fasting in the World  | NutritionFacts.org

    The Largest Study on Fasting in the World  | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    The Buchinger-modified fasting program is put to the test.

    A century ago, fasting—“starvation, as a therapeutic measure”—was described as “the ideal measure for the human hog…” (Fat shaming is not a new invention in the medical literature.) I’ve covered fasting for weight loss extensively in a nine-video series, but what about all the other purported benefits? I also have a video series on fasting for hypertension, but what about psoriasis, eczema, type 2 diabetes, lupus, metabolic disorder, rheumatoid arthritis, other autoimmune disorders, depression, and anxiety? Why hasn’t it been tested more?

    One difficulty with fasting research is: What do you mean by fasting? When I think of fasting, I think of water-only fasting, but, in Europe, they tend to practice “modified therapeutic fasting,” also known as Buchinger fasting, which is more like a very low-calorie juice fasting with some vegetable broth. Some forms of fasting may not even cut calories at all. As you can see below and at 1:09 in my video The World’s Largest Fasting Study, Ramadan fasting, for example, is when devout Muslims abstain from food and drink from sunrise to sunset, yet, interestingly, they end up eating the same amount—or even more food—overall.

    The largest study on fasting to date was published in 2019. More than a thousand individuals were put through a modified fast, cutting daily intake down to about ten cups of water, a cup of fruit juice, and a cup of vegetable soup. They reported very few side effects. In contrast, the latest water-only fasting data from a study that involved half as many people reported nearly 6,000 adverse effects. Now, the modified fasting study did seem to try to undercount adverse effects by only counting reported symptoms if they were repeated three times. However, adverse effects like nausea, feeling faint, upset stomach, vomiting, or palpitations were “observed only in single cases,” whereas the water-only fasting study reported about 100 to 200 of each, as you can see below and at 2:05 in my video. What about the benefits though?

    In the modified fasting study, participants self-reported improvements in physical and emotional well-being, along with a surprising lack of hunger. What’s more, the vast majority of those who came in with a pre-existing health complaint reported feeling better, with less than 10 percent stating that their condition worsened, as you can see in the graph below and at 2:24 in my video

    However, the study participants didn’t just fast; they also engaged in a lifestyle program, which included being on a plant-based diet before and after the modified fast. If only the researchers had had some study participants follow the healthier, plant-based diet without the fast to tease out fasting’s effects. Oh, but they did! About a thousand individuals fasted for a week on the same juice and vegetable soup regimen and others followed a normocaloric (normal calorie) vegetarian diet.

    As you can see below and at 2:54 in my video, both groups experienced significant increases in both physical and mental quality of life, and, interestingly, there was no significant difference between the groups.

    In terms of their major health complaints—including rheumatoid arthritis; chronic pain syndromes, like osteoarthritis, fibromyalgia, and back pain; inflammatory and irritable bowel disease; chronic pulmonary diseases; and migraine and chronic tension-type headaches—the fasting group appeared to have an edge, but both groups did well, with about 80 percent reporting improvements in their condition and only about 4 percent reporting feeling worse, as you can see below and at 3:25 in my video

    Now, this was not a randomized study; people chose which treatment they wanted to follow. So, maybe, for example, those choosing fasting were sicker or something. Also, the improvements in quality of life and disease status were all subjective self-reporting, which is ripe for placebo effects. There was no do-nothing control group, and the response rates to the follow-up quality of life surveys were only about 60 to 70 percent, which also could have biased the results. But extended benefits are certainly possible, given they all tended to improve their diets, as you can see below and at 4:00 in my video.

    They ate more fruits and vegetables, and less meats and sweets, and therein may lie the secret. “Principally, the experience of fasting may support motivation for lifestyle change. Most fasters experience clarity of mind and feel a ‘letting go’ of past actions and experiences and thus may develop a more positive attitude toward the future.”

    As a consensus panel of fasting experts concluded, “Nutritional therapy (theory and practice) is a vital and integral component of fasting. After the fasting therapy and refeeding period, nutrition should follow the recommendations/concepts of a…plant-based whole-food diet…”

    If you missed the previous video, check out The Benefits of Fasting for Healing.

    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • Is Our Life Expectancy Extended by Intermittent Fasting?  | NutritionFacts.org

    Is Our Life Expectancy Extended by Intermittent Fasting?  | NutritionFacts.org

    [ad_1]

    Alternate-day modified fasting is put to the test for lifespan extension. 

    Is it true that alternate-day calorie restriction prolongs life? Doctors have anecdotally attributed improvements in a variety of disease states to alternate-day fasting, including asthma; seasonal allergies; autoimmune diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis; infectious diseases, such as toenail fungus, periodontal disease, and viral upper respiratory tract infections; neurological conditions, such as Tourette’s syndrome and Meniere’s disease; atrial fibrillation; and menopause-related hot flashes. The actual effect on chronic disease, however, remains unclear, as I discuss in my video Does Intermittent Fasting Increase Human Life Expectancy?
     
    Alternate-day fasting has been put to the test for asthma in overweight adults, and researchers found that asthma-related symptoms and control significantly improved, as did the patients’ quality of life, including objective measurements of lung function and inflammation. As you can see in the graphs below and at 0:56 in my video, there were significant improvements in peak airflow, mood, and energy. Their weight also improved—about a 19-pound drop in eight weeks—so it’s hard to tease out the effects specific to the fasting beyond the benefits we might expect from weight loss by any means. 

    For the most remarkable study on alternate-day fasting, you have to go back more than a half-century. Though the 2017 cholesterol findings were the most concerning data I could find on alternate-day fasting, the most enticing was published in Spain in 1956. The title of the study translates as “The Hunger Diet on Alternate Days in the Nutrition of the Aged.” Inspired by the data being published on life extension with caloric restriction on lab rats, researchers split 120 residents of a nursing home in Madrid into two groups. Sixty residents continued to eat their regular diet, and the other half were put on an alternate-day modified fast. On the odd days of the month, they ate a regular 2,300-calorie diet; on the even days, they were given only a pound of fresh fruits and a liter of milk, estimated to add up to about 900 calories. This continued for three years. So, what happened? 
     
    As you can see below and at 2:16 in my video, throughout the study, 13 participants died in the control group, compared to only 6 in the intermittent fasting group, but those numbers were too small to be statistically significant. 

    What was highly significant, though, was the number of days spent hospitalized: Residents in the control group spent a total of 219 days in the infirmary, whereas the alternate-day fasting group only chalked up 123 days, as you can see below and at 2:38 in my video


    This is held up as solid evidence that alternate-day fasting may improve one’s healthspan and potentially even one’s lifespan, but a few caveats must be considered. It’s not clear how the residents were allocated to their respective groups. If, instead of being randomized, healthier individuals were inadvertently placed in the intermittent fasting group, that could skew the results in their favor. As well, it appears the director of the study was also in charge of medical decisions at the nursing home. In that role, he could have unconsciously been biased toward hospitalizing more folks in the control group. Given the progress that has been made in regulating human experimentation, it’s hard to imagine such a trial being run today, so we may never know if such impressive findings can be replicated. 

    Well, that was interesting! I had never even heard of that study until I started digging into the topic.  

    Check out my fasting series and popular videos on the subject here.  

    For more on longevity, see related videos below.



    [ad_2]

    Michael Greger M.D. FACLM

    Source link

  • The Most Mysterious Cells in Our Bodies Don’t Belong to Us

    The Most Mysterious Cells in Our Bodies Don’t Belong to Us

    [ad_1]

    Some 24 years ago, Diana Bianchi peered into a microscope at a piece of human thyroid and saw something that instantly gave her goosebumps. The sample had come from a woman who was chromosomally XX. But through the lens, Bianchi saw the unmistakable glimmer of Y chromosomes—dozens and dozens of them. “Clearly,” Bianchi told me, “part of her thyroid was entirely male.”

    The reason, Bianchi suspected, was pregnancy. Years ago, the patient had carried a male embryo, whose cells had at some point wandered out of the womb. They’d ended up in his mother’s thyroid—and, almost certainly, a bunch of other organs too—and taken on the identities and functions of the female cells that surrounded them so they could work in synchrony. Bianchi, now the director of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, was astonished: “Her thyroid had been entirely remodeled by her son’s cells,” she said.

    The woman’s case wasn’t a one-off. Just about every time an embryo implants and begins to grow, it dispatches bits of itself into the body housing it. The depositions begin at least as early as four or five weeks into gestation. And they settle into just about every sliver of our anatomy where scientists have checked—the heart, the lungs, the breast, the colon, the kidney, the liver, the brain. From there, the cells might linger, grow, and divide for decades, or even, as many scientists suspect, for a lifetime, assimilating into the person that conceived them. They can almost be thought of as evolution’s original organ transplant, J. Lee Nelson, of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle, told me. Microchimerism may be the most common way in which genetically identical cells mature and develop inside two bodies at once.

    These cross-generational transfers are bidirectional. As fetal cells cross the placenta into maternal tissues, a small number of maternal cells migrate into fetal tissues, where they can persist into adulthood. Genetic swaps, then, might occur several times throughout a life. Some researchers believe that people may be miniature mosaics of many of their relatives, via chains of pregnancy: their older siblings, perhaps, or their maternal grandmother, or any aunts and uncles their grandmother might have conceived before their mother was born. “It’s like you carry your entire family inside of you,” Francisco Úbeda de Torres, an evolutionary biologist at the Royal Holloway University of London, told me.

    All of that makes microchimerism—named in homage to the part-lion, part-goat, part-dragon chimera of Greek myth—more common than pregnancy itself. It’s thought to affect every person who has carried an embryo, even if briefly, and anyone who has ever inhabited a womb. Other mammals—mice, cows, dogs, our fellow primates—seem to haul around these cellular heirlooms too. But borrowed cells don’t always show up in the same spots, or in the same numbers. In many cases, microchimeric cells are thought to be present at concentrations on the order of one in 1 million—levels that, “for a lot of biological assays, is approaching or at the limit of detection,” Sing Sing Way, an immunologist and a pediatrician at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital, told me.

    Some scientists have argued that cells so sparse and inconsistent couldn’t possibly have meaningful effects. Even among microchimerism researchers, hypotheses about what these cells do—if anything at all—remain “highly controversial,” Way said. But many experts contend that microchimeric cells aren’t just passive passengers, adrift in someone else’s genomic sea. They are genetically distinct entities in a foreign residence, with their own evolutionary motivations that may clash with their landlord’s. And they might hold sway over many aspects of health: our susceptibility to infectious or autoimmune disease, the success of pregnancies, maybe even behavior. If these cells turn out to be as important as some scientists believe they are, they might be one of the most underappreciated architects of human life.

    Already, researchers have uncovered hints of what these wandering cells are up to. Way’s studies in mice, for instance, suggest that the microchimerism that babies inherit during gestation might help fine-tune their immune system, steeling the newborn body against viral infections; as the rodents age, their mother’s cells may aid in bringing their own pregnancies to term, by helping them see the fetus—made up of half-foreign DNA—as benign, rather than an unfamiliar threat.

    Similarly, inherited microchimerism might help explain why some studies have found that people are better at accepting organs from their mother than from their father, says William Burlingham, a transplant specialist at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. In the early ’90s, Burlingham treated a kidney-transplant patient who had abruptly stopped taking his immunosuppressive medications—a move that should have prompted his body’s rejection of the new organ. But “he was doing fine,” Burlingham told me. The patient’s kidney had come from his mother, whose cells were still circulating in his blood and skin; when his body encountered the transplanted tissues, it saw the newcomers as more of the same.

    Even fetal cells that meander into mothers during pregnancy might buoy the baby’s health. David Haig, an evolutionary biologist at Harvard, thinks that these cells may position themselves to optimally extract resources from Mom: in the brain, to command more attention; in the breast, to stimulate more milk production; in the thyroid, to coax more body heat. The cells, he told me, might also fiddle with a mother’s fertility, extending the interval between births to give the baby more uninterrupted care. Fetal delegates could then serve as informants for future offspring that inhabit the same womb, Úbeda de Torres told me. If later fetuses don’t detect much relatedness between themselves and their older siblings, he said, they might become greedier when siphoning nutrients from their mother’s body, rather than leaving extra behind for future siblings whose paternity may also differ from theirs.

    The perks of microchimerism for mothers have been tougher to pin down. One likely possibility is that the more thoroughly embryonic cells infiltrate the mother’s body, the better she might be able to tolerate her fetus’s tissue, reducing her chances of miscarriage or a high-risk birth. “I really think it’s a baby’s insurance policy on the mom,” Amy Boddy, a biological anthropologist at UC Santa Barbara, told me. “Like, ‘Hey, don’t attack.’” After delivery, the cells that stick around in the mother’s body may ease future pregnancies too (at least those by the same father). Pregnancy complications such as preeclampsia become rarer the more times someone conceives with the same partner. And when mothers send cellular envoys into their babies, they might be able to cut Mom a break by upping a child’s sleepiness, or curbing their fussiness.

    Microchimerism may not always be kind to moms. Nelson and others have found that, long-term, women with more fetal cells are also more likely to develop certain kinds of autoimmune disease, perhaps because their children’s cells are mistakenly reassessed by certain postpartum bodies as unwanted invaders. Nelson’s former postdoctoral fellow Nathalie Lambert, now at the French National Institute of Health and Medical Research, has found evidence in mouse experiments that fetal microchimeric cells may also produce antibodies that can goad attacks on maternal cells, Lambert told me. But the situation is also more complicated than that. “I don’t think they’re bad actors,” Nelson said of the interloping fetal cells. She and her colleagues have also found that fetal cells might sometimes protect against autoimmunity, leading a few conditions, such as rheumatoid arthritis, to actually abate during and shortly after pregnancy.

    In other contexts, too, fetal cells might offer both help and harm to the mother, or neither at all. Fetally derived microchimeric cells have been spotted voyaging into the cardiac tissues of mice who have experienced mid-pregnancy heart attacks, settling the pancreases of newly diabetic mouse moms, and lurking inside human tumors and C-section scars. But scientists aren’t sure whether the foreign cells are causing damage, repairing it, or simply bystanders, discovered in these spots by coincidence.

    These questions are so difficult to answer, Way told me, because microchimeric cells are so challenging to study. They might be in all of us, but they’re still rare, and frequently hidden in tough-to-access internal tissues. Researchers can’t yet say whether the cells actively deploy to predetermined sites or are pulled into specific organs by maternal cells—or just follow the natural flow of blood like river sediments. There’s also no consensus on how much microchimerism a body can tolerate. In a vacuum of evidence, even microchimerism researchers are steeling themselves for a letdown. “A very large part of me is prepared to think that most if not all microchimerism is completely benign,” Melissa Wilson, a computational evolutionary biologist at Arizona State University, told me.

    But if microchimeric cells do have a role to play in autoimmunity or reproductive success, the potential for therapies could be huge. One option, Burlingham told me, might be to infuse organ-transplant patients with cells from their mother, which could, like tiny ambassadors, coax the body into accepting any new tissue. Microchimerism-inspired therapies could help ease the burdens of high-risk pregnancies, Boddy told me, many of which seem to be fueled by the maternal body mounting an inappropriately aggressive immune response. They might also improve the experience of surrogates, who are more likely to experience pregnancy complications such as high blood pressure, preterm birth, and gestational diabetes. The cells’ stem-esque properties could even help researchers design better treatments for genetic diseases in utero; one research group, at UC San Francisco, is pursuing this idea for the blood disorder alpha thalassemia.

    Before those visions can be enacted, some questions need to be resolved. Researchers have unearthed evidence that microchimeric cells from different sources might sometimes compete with, or even displace one another, in bids for dominance. If the same dynamic plays out with future therapies, doctors may need to be careful about which cells they introduce to people and when, or risk losing the precious cargo they infuse. And, perhaps most fundamental, scientists can’t yet say how many microchimeric cells are necessary to exert influence over a specific person’s health—a threshold that will likely determine just how practical these theoretical treatments might be, Kristine Chua, a biological anthropologist at UCSB, told me.

    Even amid these uncertainties, the experts I spoke with stand by microchimerism’s likely importance: The cells are so persistent, so ubiquitous, so evolutionarily ancient, Boddy told me, that they must have an effect. The simple fact that they’re allowed to stick around for decades, while they grow and develop and change, could have a lot to teach us about immunity—and our understanding of ourselves. “In my mind, it does alter my concept of who I am,” Bianchi, who herself has given birth to a son, told me. Although he’s since grown up, she’s never without him, nor he without her.

    [ad_2]

    Katherine J. Wu

    Source link

  • Ins and Outs of Rheumatoid Arthritis

    Ins and Outs of Rheumatoid Arthritis

    [ad_1]


    Pain, swelling, and stiffness – things you’re familiar with if you have 

    rheumatoid arthritis (RA)

    . You may wonder what causes these symptoms, how to treat them, and if alternative therapies can help.




    In the WebMD webinar, “
    Ins and Outs of Rheumatoid Arthritis,
    ” Stanley B. Cohen, MD, broke down all things RA, including people most often affected, risk factors for additional health issues when you have RA, and lifestyle habits that can help. 


    Cohen is a clinical professor in the Department of Internal Medicine at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical School. He directs the rheumatology division of Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital in Dallas and serves as co-medical director of the Metroplex Clinical Research Center.


    “People with untreated rheumatoid arthritis who have ongoing, active inflammation have a higher risk of cardiovascular outcomes, similar to diabetics,” he says.


    “We’ve worked a great deal on things that we can manage, such as inflammation, hypertension, and elevated cholesterol. And we’ve been successful. Our therapies have shown a reduction in premature death risk and at this point, the mortality rates are more similar to the normal population.”


    Poll Question


    Cohen explained how lifestyle changes often help RA symptoms. A webinar poll found 31% of viewers used low-intensity exercises to reduce RA symptoms. Eating healthy foods and staying informed about RA were nearly tied for the second most common response.



    Question: Lifestyle habits that ease my RA symptoms are:


    • Doing low-intensity exercises: 31%

    • Eating healthy foods: 28%

    • Staying informed: 26%

    • Not smoking: 9%

    • Having support from family and friends: 7%


    Viewer Questions



    Is the COVID vaccine linked to RA?



    How does hydroxychloroquine work to help RA?



    Do RA meds sometimes stop working after long-term use?


    With any vaccine, adverse events occur. But in general, the answer is no, the COVID vaccine isn’t linked to RA and doesn’t cause it. Can it happen? Yes.


    There’s some information showing that, rarely, after COVID vaccination, there have been some new cases of RA and other forms of inflammatory arthritis. We saw a handful of people, early only on in COVID, who developed musculoskeletal symptoms that often lasted for a few months and then resolved.


    Continued


    There probably are some cases, however, of actual RA that do develop. But I think the benefits of the vaccine far outweigh the risks.


    Hydroxychloroquine works in a complicated way. It’s quite effective therapy for RA.


    You have a normal immune system that helps you fight infection. But in RA, your immune system goes on autopilot. It starts to upregulate and won’t turn off. It keeps creating antibodies and leads to the development of disease.


    We believe that hydroxychloroquine tries to turn off your overactive immune system.


    Sometimes medications do stop working. We frequently cycle through therapies to continue to achieve low disease activity.


    There’s probably a third of people who do great on their therapy and stay on it forever. But the other groups of people do require cycling of medication.



    Why does RA often lead to mental health issues?



    What other health conditions can look like RA?



    What should you not do during an RA flare?


    Having a chronic illness can be tied to anxiety and depression. The fact that you can’t function in your daily activities, or you may be limited in your ability to be productive at work, may cause issues with your mental health. 


    Adults with arthritis are more likely to have anxiety or depression. Treating these mental health disorders can also help your arthritis treatment and management succeed.


    Other types of inflammatory arthritis, like psoriatic arthritis, can mimic RA. People with lupus might have similar musculoskeletal complaints. Fibromyalgia, which isn’t associated with joint swelling, also has chronic musculoskeletal pain and fatigue like RA. And axial spondyloarthritis, which is an inflammation of your spine, can have peripheral joint involvement, too.


    During an RA flare, you need a rest. You need to rest yourself and also rest your joints that are flaring. Don’t go to the gym and work out. Contact your provider and let them know you’re flaring. 


    They may want to give you a short course of steroids, and they might modify your treatment. If you’re flaring, that says your treatment isn’t working.


    Continued



    Is it OK to drink alcohol when you have RA?



    Is intermittent fasting helpful or hurtful for RA?



    Can medical marijuana help RA?


    With alcohol, moderation is fine. When we first started using methotrexate in the ‘80s, we said you can’t have any alcohol. But later studies show that moderate alcohol consumption isn’t a problem.


    As for intermittent
    fasting,
    I don’t think there’s data saying it makes a long-term impact on RA. But it’s okay to pursue it. Weight reduction in people who are obese and don’t respond as well to medications can be helpful. If intermittent fasting helps this, then it can also help with RA.


    I don’t think medical marijuana will help the inflammation. We have no data saying it can help with that. But from a pain standpoint, a stress standpoint, or an anxiety standpoint, it might have some benefit for RA.


    Who Gets Rheumatoid Arthritis?


    It’s unclear exactly why certain people get RA. But there are some 

    factors

    that put you at a higher risk:


    Genetics. Your genes may put you at a higher risk for RA. 


    “We know there are certain genes involved in the immune system which lead to regulation of the immune system. These are more common in people who have RA,” says Cohen.


    Environment. Certain things in your environment may trigger RA. This could be something as simple as an infection, smoking, or being exposed to silica.


    “One of the greatest risk factors for developing RA is smoking. If you have the genetic makeup for RA and you’re a smoker, your risk for developing RA is increased 20- to 40-fold,” he says. 


    Treatment for Rheumatoid Arthritis


    RA isn’t curable, but there are effective 

    treatments

    . The goals are to avoid damage to your joints, lower inflammation, lessen symptoms, and achieve remission. 


    Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), steroids, disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), and biologics can provide relief.


    Lifestyle. Lifestyle changes can also help. They include:


    • Physical therapy

    • Occupational therapy

    • Quitting smoking

    • Losing weight (if you’re overweight or obese)

    • Eating a balanced diet

    • Getting social support

    • Staying informed

    • Reducing your stress

    • Doing low-impact exercises


    In some cases, surgery may help. But one of the goals of proper treatment is to avoid that.


    Watch a replay of “

    Ins and Outs of Rheumatoid Arthritis

    .”


    Watch other free

    WebMD webinars

    by leading experts on a variety of topics.



    WebMD Feature


    © 2023 WebMD, LLC. All rights reserved.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Taking Care of Your Mental Health When You Have RA

    Taking Care of Your Mental Health When You Have RA

    [ad_1]




    Rheumatoid arthritis can take a toll on your mental health. Jennifer Holder, community leader of Webmd’s Facebook RA group, talks about how her friends get her through the tough days – and how accomplishments both big and small are worth celebrating.


    Video Transcript


    JENNIFER HOLDER: RA can take a toll on us mentally because when you have those days where you’re unable to do even just normal, everyday, basic things like hold a toothbrush or a hairbrush, or even tie your shoe, when your fingers, your joints and your fingers are swollen, those are really hard things to do. That takes a toll on us mentally. If we dwell on it every day, all day, those negative thoughts take a toll, and it makes RA more scary. But if you take control and find a happy place wherever you can, I think it helps.
    My girlfriends are amazing. None of them have RA, but they were always supportive, always helpful, and understanding when I was not able to do something. If my friends were going out and I’m tired, they understand that sometimes people with RA are very tired. It’s not always just work. Sometimes with RA, there’s days you just can’t do a whole lot.
    And they were understanding. When I had bad days, I was able to pick any one of them and just vent. They were my lifelines. And I’m always forever grateful to them.
    If there’s one thing I have learned in having RA, you have to pamper yourself. You have to. Now that I’m in remission and I’m able to do a lot more, I don’t want to miss out on anything. And so I go for massages. I take myself on a solo girl’s day– get my nails done, get a massage, get a facial. I go on vacation a lot. That’s my thing.
    I love to travel. It’s something I always wanted to do. And I didn’t think that I would get the opportunity to do so because in my mind I always thought that at this age I would not be able to move around and do the things that I wanted to do. So I’m always on the go. I’m always looking for the next place to visit in the world.
    The biggest victory for me is that I’m here still reaching for my goals and doing what I want to do with my life. And I guess a small victory for me would be back in 2021, I hiked a trail on Oahu in Hawaii. That was pretty– it was hard. [LAUGHS]
    I did it with my oldest son. He made it to the top faster than I did. But the fact that I was able to climb that hiking trail was big for me. The whole time I was doing the hike, all I could think about was how when I first had started symptoms of RA and what I went through to get a diagnosis, and remembering how in my early 30s I would envision myself at this age crippled or bedbound, and that was pretty scary.
    So the whole time that I was doing the hike, I just kept thinking about how far I’ve come. And I feel like I have a second chance at life. So I’m taking every chance I can.


    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Doctors Suddenly Got Way Better at Treating Eczema

    Doctors Suddenly Got Way Better at Treating Eczema

    [ad_1]

    Up until a few years ago, Heather Sullivan’s 14-year-old son, Sawyer, had struggled with eczema his entire life. When he was just a baby, most of his body would be covered in intensely itchy rashes that bled and oozed when he couldn’t help but scratch. His family tried steroid creams, wet wraps, bleach baths, and all of the lotions. They tore up their carpet and replaced their sheetrock in hopes of eliminating triggers. At 15 months, he went on cyclosporine, a powerful immunosuppressant usually given to organ-transplant patients. It cleared him up, but the drug comes with potentially dangerous side effects over time. Doctors, Sullivan recalls, were “just appalled that my child would be on this amount of medicine at this age”—but his eczema came roaring back as soon as he went off it.

    When a new eczema drug called Dupixent finally became available to Sawyer a few years ago, his turnaround was fast and dramatic. Within a week, his itchiness and redness started calming down. He felt and looked better. The condition that had dominated their lives began to fade into the background.

    Doctors who treat severe eczema now speak of pre- and post-Dupixent eras: “It changed the landscape of having eczema forever,” says Brett King, a dermatologist at Yale. Today, a half dozen novel treatments are available for the skin condition, all of which work by quieting the same biological pathway in eczema; dozens more are in clinical trials. Unlike older drugs, these new ones are precisely targeted and in many cases startlingly effective.

    Eczema, also known as atopic dermatitis, is characterized by red, itchy, and inflamed skin. It’s a very common condition, estimated to affect 10 percent of Americans. Of those, a large minority suffer from moderate to severe eczema that seeps into everyday life. “Just imagine scratching endlessly,” King says. “You wake up from sleep scratching. Your sheets are bloody in the morning.” The most basic eczema advice is to moisturize, and moisturize often, to protect the barrier of the skin. But scientists now know that eczema’s cause is not in the skin alone. Many patients also have “an over-reactive or overzealous immune system,” says Dawn Davis, a dermatologist at the Mayo Clinic. Their immune cells release chemicals that irritate nerves, causing itch, and even degrade the skin itself.

    Topical steroids, such as over-the-counter hydrocortisone cream, can tamp down the immune reaction that flares in eczema. If these fail, doctors have resorted to more powerful oral steroids, such as prednisone, or other oral immunosuppressants, such as the aforementioned cyclosporine. The drugs can calm eczema, but because they suppress the overall immune system, they also do much more. Prednisone, for example, makes you more prone to infections as well as bone fractures, high blood pressure, and glaucoma when taken in the long term. Of course, for many people, eczema is a chronic condition that requires long-term treatment. “Prednisone is kind of like carpet bombing,” says Peter Lio, a dermatologist at Northwestern University. It blasts eczema away, but at a cost.

    In contrast, the newer drugs, Lio says, are more like shotguns that target specific parts of the immune system—with less collateral damage. They fall into two broad classes. Monoclonal antibodies, such as Dupixent, intercept the immune-signaling molecules that trigger itch and skin inflammation. And then JAK inhibitors, which include pills such as Rinvoq and the topical cream Opzelura, scramble the signal after cells have received it. The development of these drugs came after years of research zeroed in on some of the key immune molecules dysregulated in eczema. But serendipity played a role too: The first such drugs were originally developed for other conditions, such as rheumatoid arthritis—only to be repurposed when researchers realized that they targeted the very pathways involved in eczema. The breakthroughs in eczema treatment, in fact, are part of a broader revolution in treating inflammatory disorders; both classes of new drugs are now used to tune the immune system in a whole host of different conditions.

    The monoclonal antibodies and oral JAK inhibitors may have their own serious side effects, such as blood clots, which, Lio says, give some doctors unfamiliar with the new drugs—especially the latter type—pause. But the traditional drugs are not great either. “I’m frustrated that a lot of clinicians are very cavalier about prednisone and cyclosporine … They’re like, ‘Oh, they’re our old friends,’” he told me. “Then they get nervous about JAK inhibitors.” In his mind, the new drugs are simply the better option in terms of safety and efficacy.

    Jonathan Silverberg, a dermatologist at George Washington University who specializes in eczema, says he now rarely uses the old oral steroids and immunosuppressants. When he does revert to them, it’s not for medical reasons: He ends up prescribing older (that is, generic and therefore cheaper) drugs for uninsured patients who can’t afford the new ones, or for patients who have insurance but are nevertheless denied coverage. “Insurance says, ‘Can it be fixed with a $10 medicine? Or does it really need the $1,000 tube?’” King told me. Getting patients these newer drugs can mean a lot of time fighting with insurance.

    For now, these drugs have most dramatically improved the lives of patients with moderate to severe eczema—at least those patients who can access them. But doctors told me that topical JAK inhibitors, which are safer than the oral version, could one day be first-line treatments for mild eczema as well. “In a perfect world, I would love it if I never had to prescribe a topical steroid again,” Silverberg said, citing the side effects that come with long-term use. Topical steroids can thin the skin, causing stretch marks, fragility, and poor healing. But at the moment, steroids are also cheap and easily available. They’re not going anywhere as long as the new treatments still come with hefty price tags.

    [ad_2]

    Sarah Zhang

    Source link

  • Life With RA: You Are Your Best Advocate

    Life With RA: You Are Your Best Advocate

    [ad_1]

     

    For the first decade of her life, Saada Branker enjoyed a normal, active childhood in Montreal. But after a year of unexplained pain in her shoulders, hands, and feet, her doctor diagnosed her with polyarticular juvenile rheumatoid arthritis, now called juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), when she was 12.

    That news 40 years ago surprised Branker’s parents. It was uncommon then — as it is today — to hear of children with arthritis. By the time Branker entered high school, her condition was severe enough to often leave her stuck on the sidelines.

    “The toughest part was sitting in gym class, watching the students do the things that I used to do,” says Branker, a freelance writer and editor in Toronto. “I was sitting on this skinny bench on the side of the gym for 40 minutes, watching them do the things I couldn’t do.”

     

     

    Branker disliked feeling like an outcast so much that she spent years covering up her disease. Only several dozen American children under 16 out of 100,000 have it. The type Branker had is rarer still. Polyarticular means the disease affects five or more big and small joints, such as in the ankles and feet.

    As Branker approached adulthood, her JIA became classified as rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The condition took a toll not just on Branker’s body but on her mental well-being. “I started to feel very self-conscious, I felt different. In high school, you don’t want to be different, you want to blend in.”

    The discomfort seeped into other parts of Branker’s life. It followed her to Ryerson University’s journalism program in Toronto, where she found the transition to college “life-altering and stressful” with RA. “Even though I was looking forward to it, it impacted me physically,” she says.

    The pain and stiffness from RA slowly made impossible the most routine of daily tasks. She could no longer twist her dreadlocks or drive her friends downtown. At her most pessimistic point, Branker simply assumed that she’d eventually lose her mobility and independence.

     

    Branker started her first job out of college as a program assistant at the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation just after having surgery on her elbow because of RA. Her duties included lifting and moving items, something her doctor advised her to avoid. But Branker was reluctant to confide to her employer.

    “I didn’t want anyone to know,” she says. “My challenge all the time was, ‘How do I look able-bodied like everyone else?’ What was more important to me at the time was fitting in and doing the job.”

    In fact, Branker kept her illness a secret — until she couldn’t. One morning in June 2001, she realized that she couldn’t put on her clothes.

    “When I went to get dressed, I couldn’t raise my arms to get the blouse on. I had to call my roommate to help dress me. That was the morning I decided I’m just going to tell everyone at work that I’ve been struggling with this disease.”

     

     

    Branker switched from blending in to speaking up. She also began to see a social worker to learn how to manage a lifelong illness mentally. “Through that, I developed this understanding that, not only do I need to talk about it, but people need to hear about this disease.”

    Branker learned how to lean on others. “People were so kind and would help. But it was also hard for me to accept. It always took a chunk out of me.”

    Branker used to fear for her future as her disease progressed. But she now realizes that the best path is to accept the unknown.

    “Losing mobility is something that we have to be real with ourselves about. When we lose the mobility, it doesn’t mean it’s gone forever. But at that moment, you have to mourn the loss.”

    Branker urges other with RA to be kind to themselves and to make their health their top priority.

    With her newfound self-advocacy, Branker acts as a team player for her treatment. She brings a list of questions to doctors’ appointments, does her research, and speaks up for therapy that she thinks may work best for her lifestyle.

     

    “All of that started to become comfortable and then normal for me. I started looking at [the physicians] as my team and not just doctors who teach me what to do. That shift helped empower me,” she says.

    Branker also takes advantage of assistive devices, including tools to help put on her socks or to grip cooking items.

    For each task she can’t finish, Branker is determined to adapt and to gain a new perspective.

    ”Instead of looking at it as ‘I can’t do it, it’s gone forever,’ I think, ‘What can I do in place of that?’ ” she says. You “don’t have to keep walking around, thinking ‘I got to act like everyone else and act like I can do this’ when on some days, you can’t, and that’s OK.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • It’s Gotten Awkward to Wear a Mask

    It’s Gotten Awkward to Wear a Mask

    [ad_1]

    Last week, just a couple of hours into a house-sitting stint in Massachusetts for my cousin and his wife, I received from them a flummoxed text: “Dude,” it read. “We are the only people in masks.” Upon arriving at the airport, and then boarding their flight, they’d been shocked to find themselves virtually alone in wearing masks of any kind. On another trip they’d taken to Hawaii in July, they told me, long after coverings became optional on planes, some 80 percent of people on their flight had been masking up. This time, though? “We are like the odd man out.”

    Being outside of the current norm “does not bother us,” my cousin’s wife said in another text, despite stares from some of the other passengers. But the about-face my cousin and his wife identified does mark a new phase of the pandemic, even if it’s one that has long been playing out in fits and starts. Months after the vanishing of most masking mandates, mask wearing has been relegated to a sharply shrinking sector of society. It has become, once again, a peculiar thing to do.

    If you notice, no one’s wearing masks,” President Joe Biden declared last month on 60 Minutes. That’s an overstatement, but not by much: According to the COVID States Project, a large-scale national survey on pandemic-mitigation behaviors, the masking rate among Americans bounced between around 50 and 80 percent over the first two years of the pandemic. But since this past winter, it’s been in a slide; the project’s most recent data, collected in September, found that just 29 percent have been wearing masks outside the home. This trend may be long-standing on the population level, but for individuals—and particularly for those who still wear masks, such as my cousin and his wife—it can lead to moments of abrupt self-consciousness. “It feels like it’s something that now needs an explanation,” Fiona Lowenstein, a journalist and COVID long-hauler based in Los Angeles, told me. “It’s like showing up in a weird hat, and you have to explain why you’re wearing it.”

    Now that most Americans can access COVID vaccines and treatments that slash the risk of severe disease and death, plenty of people have made informed decisions to relax on masking—and feel totally at ease with their behavior while paying others’ little mind. Some are no longer masking all the time but will do so if it makes others feel more comfortable; others are still navigating new patterns, trying to stay flexible amid fluctuating risk. Saskia Popescu, an infectious-disease epidemiologist at George Mason University, told me that she’s now more likely to doff her mask while dining or working out indoors, but that she leaves it on when she travels. And when she does decide to cover up, she said, she’s “definitely felt like more of an outlier.”

    For some, like my cousin and his wife, that shift feels slightly jarring. For others, though, it feels more momentous. High-filtration masks are one of the few measures that can reliably tamp down on infection and transmission across populations, and they’re still embraced by many parents of newborns too young for vaccines, by people who are immunocompromised and those who care for them, and by those who want to minimize their risk of developing long COVID, which can’t be staved off by vaccines and treatments alone. Theresa Chapple-McGruder, the public-health director for Oak Park, Illinois, plans to keep her family masking at least until her baby son is old enough to receive his first COVID shots. In the meantime, though, they’ve certainly been feeling the pressure to conform. “People often tell me, ‘It’s okay, you can take your mask off here,’” Chapple-McGruder told me; teachers at the local elementary school have said similar things to her young daughters. Meghan McCoy, a former doctor in New Hampshire who takes immunosuppressive medications for psoriatic arthritis and has ME/CFS, has also been feeling “the pressure to take the mask off,” she told me—at her kid’s Girl Scout troop meetings, during trips to the eye doctor. “You can feel when you’re the only one doing something,” McCoy said. “It’s noticeable.”

    For Chapple-McGruder, McCoy, and plenty of others, the gradual decline in masking creates new challenges. For one thing, the rarer the practice, the tougher it is for still-masking individuals to minimize their exposures. “One-way masking is a lot less effective,” says Gabriel San Emeterio, a social worker at Hunter College who is living with HIV and ME/CFS. And the less common masking gets, the more conspicuous it becomes. “If most people met me, they wouldn’t know I was immunocompromised,” McCoy told me. “There’s no big sign on our foreheads that says ‘this person doesn’t have a functioning immune system.’” But now, she said, “masks have kind of become that sign.”

    Aparna Nair, a historian and disability scholar at the University of Oklahoma who has epilepsy, told me that she thinks masks are becoming somewhat analogous to wheelchairs, prosthetics, hearing aids, and her own seizure-alert dog, Charlie: visible tools and technologies that invite compassion, but also skepticism, condescension, and invasive questions. During a recent rideshare, she told me, her driver started ranting that her mask was unnecessary and ineffective—just part of a “conspiracy.” His tone was so angry, Nair said, that she began to be afraid. She tried to make him understand her situation: I’ve been chronically ill for three decades; I’d rather not fall sick; better to be safe than sorry. But she said that her driver seemed unswayed and continued to mutter furiously under his breath for the duration of the ride. Situations of that kind—where she has to litigate her right to wear a mask—have been getting more common, Nair told me.

    Masking has been weighed down with symbolic meaning since the start of the pandemic, with some calling it a sign of weakness and others a vehicle for state control. Americans have been violently attacked for wearing masks and also for not wearing them. But for a long time, these tensions were set against the backdrop of majority masking nationwide. Local mask mandates were in place, and most scientific experts wore and championed them in public. With many of those infrastructural supports and signals now gone, masking has rapidly become a minority behavior—and people who are still masking told me that that inversion only makes the tension worse.

    San Emeterio, who wears a vented respirator when they travel, recently experienced a round of heckling from a group of men at an airport, who started to stare, laugh, and point. Oh my god, look at what he’s wearing, San Emeterio recalls the strangers saying. “They clearly meant for me to hear it,” San Emeterio told me. “It didn’t make me feel great.” Alex Mawdsley, the 14-year-old son of an immunocompromised physician in Chicago, is one of just a handful of kids at his middle school who are still masking up. Since the start of the academic year, he’s been getting flak from several of his classmates “at least once a week,” he told me: “They’re like ‘You’re not gonna get COVID from me’ and ‘Why are you still wearing that? You don’t need it anymore.’”

    Alex’s mother, Emily Landon, told me she’s been shaken by the gawks and leers she now receives for masking. Even prior to the pandemic, and before she was diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis and began taking immunosuppressive drugs, she considered herself something of a hygiene stan; she always took care to step back from the sneezy and sniffy, and to wipe down tray tables on planes. “And it was never a big deal,” she said.

    It hasn’t helped that the donning of masks has been repeatedly linked to chaos and crisis—and their removal, to triumph. Early messaging about vaccines strongly implied that the casting away of masks could be a kind of post-immunization reward. In February, CDC Director Rochelle Walensky described masks as “the scarlet letter of this pandemic.” Two months later, when the administration lifted its requirements for masking on public transportation, passengers on planes ripped off their coverings mid-flight and cheered.

    To reclaim a mask-free version of “normalcy,” then, may seem like reverting to a past that was safer, more peaceful. The past few years “have been mentally and emotionally exhausting,” Linda Tropp, a social psychologist at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, told me. Discarding masks may feel like jettisoning a bad memory, whereas clinging to them reminds people of an experience they desperately want to leave behind. For some members of the maskless majority, feeling like “the normal ones” again could even serve to legitimize insulting, dismissive, or aggressive behavior toward others, says Markus Kemmelmeier, a social psychologist at the University of Nevada at Reno.

    It’s unclear how the masking discourse might evolve from here. Kemmelmeier told me he’s optimistic that the vitriol will fade as people settle into a new chapter of their coexistence with COVID. Many others, though, aren’t so hopeful, given the way the situation has unfolded thus far. “There’s this feeling of being left behind while everyone else moves on,” Lowenstein, the Los Angeles journalist and long-hauler, told me. Lowenstein and others are now missing out on opportunities, they told me, that others are easily reintegrating back into their lives: social gatherings, doctor’s appointments, trips to visit family they haven’t seen in months or more than a year. “I’d feel like I could go on longer this way,” Lowenstein said, if more of society were in it together.

    Americans’ fraught relationship with masks “didn’t have to be like this,” Tropp told me—perhaps if the country had avoided politicizing the practice early on, perhaps if there had been more emphasis on collective acts of good. Other parts of the world, certainly, have weathered shifting masking norms with less strife. A couple of weeks ago, my mother got in touch with me from one such place: Taiwan, where she grew up. Masking was still quite common in public spaces, she told me in a text message, even where it wasn’t mandated. When I asked her why, she seemed almost surprised: Why not?

    [ad_2]

    Katherine J. Wu

    Source link

  • Genetic twist: Medieval plague may have molded our immunity

    Genetic twist: Medieval plague may have molded our immunity

    [ad_1]

    Our Medieval ancestors left us with a biological legacy: Genes that may have helped them survive the Black Death make us more susceptible to certain diseases today.

    It’s a prime example of the way germs shape us over time, scientists say in a new study published Wednesday in the journal Nature.

    “Our genome today is a reflection of our whole evolutionary history” as we adapt to different germs, said Luis Barreiro, a senior author of the research. Some, like those behind the bubonic plague, have had a big impact on our immune systems.

    The Black Death in the 14th century was the single deadliest event in recorded history, spreading throughout Europe, the Middle East and northern Africa and wiping out up to 30% to 50% of the population.

    Barreiro and his colleagues at the University of Chicago, McMaster University in Ontario and the Pasteur Institute in Paris examined ancient DNA samples from the bones of more than 200 people from London and Denmark who died over about 100 years that stretched before, during, and after the Black Death swept through that region.

    They identified four genes that, depending on the variant, either protected against or increased susceptibility to the bacteria that causes bubonic plague, which is most often transmitted by the bite of an infected flea.

    They found that what helped people in Medieval times led to problems generations later — raising the frequency of mutations detrimental in modern times. Some of the same genetic variants identified as protective against the plague are associated with certain autoimmune disorders, such as Crohn’s disease, rheumatoid arthritis and lupus. In these sorts of diseases, the immune system that defends the body against disease and infection attacks the body’s own healthy tissues.

    “A hyperactive immune system may have been great in the past but in the environment today it might not be as helpful,” said Hendrik Poinar, an anthropology professor at McMaster and another senior author.

    Past research has also sought to examine how the Black Death affected the human genome. But Barreiro said he believes theirs is the first demonstration that the Black Death was important to the evolution of the human immune system. One unique aspect of the study, he said, was to focus on a narrow time window around the event.

    Monica H. Green, an author and historian of medicine who has studied the Black Death extensively, called the research “tremendously impressive,” bringing together a wide range of experts.

    “It’s extremely sophisticated” and addresses important issues, such as how the same version of a gene can protect people from a horrific infection and also put modern people — and generations of their descendants — at risk for other illnesses, said Green, who was not involved in the study.

    All of this begs the question: Will the COVID-19 pandemic have a big impact on human evolution? Barreiro said he doesn’t think so because the death rate is so much lower and the majority of people who have died had already had children.

    In the future, however, he said more deadly pandemics may well continue to shape us at the most basic level.

    “It’s not going to stop. It’s going to keep going for sure.”

    ———

    The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

    [ad_2]

    Source link