Health Education: disease

Showing posts with label disease. Show all posts

The Best Pledge We Can Make

I was at the school rec center last week when a few people were registering as guests. I overheard the staff person as he was asking them to sign a liability waiver. He said, <div><blockquote class="tr_bq">"This just means that you are taking responsibility for your body." </blockquote>    I smiled when I heard it and I have thought about it ever since.  What an awesome concept. What if every person, better yet, every middle school child, signed a pledge committing to take care of their body.</div><div>   This commitment could be similar to those kids make about not smoking or doing drugs.  DARE to be healthy, if you will.</div><div>   Even better, it could be something required of us, before we get health insurance. </div><blockquote class="tr_bq"> I hereby agree to take care of my body.  I will eat well, exercise daily and avoid all forms (active and passive) of tobacco smoke.  I will consume alcohol responsibly and protect myself from environmental toxins/radiation (e.g., sun, xrays, pollution, coal emissions). </blockquote><div>(The government needs to help us out with the last few). </div><blockquote class="tr_bq"> I do these things in order to prevent disease and to promote my healthy active life.  </blockquote><div> </div><div>   Now if we can find away to 'police' that... ok, enforce .. ok encourage... though my radical, nanny self wants to add, </div><blockquote class="tr_bq">and if I willingly break this vow, I will be responsible for my own health care bills and or higher insurance premiums and copays!</blockquote><div> </div><div>   Seriously, I do pledge to do every thing in my power to live a healthy life and if by no fault of my own, I get sick.. I hope someone will take care of me :)  Ok - even if its my 'fault'... I hope someone will take care of me... just saying.</div>

The Best Pledge We Can Make

I was at the school rec center last week when a few people were registering as guests. I overheard the staff person as he was asking the...

8:17 PM

Let's Talk About Sex

The research that I am referring to today can be found in the online version of BMJ and this particular article is available for free. Lindau and Gavrilova 340 (92): c810. (2010) <a href="http://www.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/340/mar09_2/c810">http://www.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/340/mar09_2/c810</a> The researchers are from Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Chicago, 5841 S Maryland Avenue, MC2050, Chicago, IL 60637, USA, and Chicago Core on Biomeasures in Population-Based Aging Research, University of Chicago Centre on Demography and Economics of Aging. The scientists reviewed data from two different sources, surveys and interviews of two large groups of men and women in the USA. The purpose of the study was to investigate sexual activity and satisfaction as we age. I am thrilled with a new concept that they present. You are familiar with the term active aging and active or healthy life expectancy etc etc. The purpose of my blog is to support and encourage healthy active aging. These researchers have determined markers of "sexually active life expectancy." How cool is that? And what exactly determines your sexually active life expectancy? According to the researchers any amount of sexual activity with a partner (snicker snicker) counts. So if you stop having any sex at all, your sexually active life years are over. The researchers determined that on average, at age 55 - (life expectancy at that age is about 24 more years for men and 27 more years for women) men have about 15 more years of sexually activity and women have only ten. But there are MANY reasons why that might be. Let me also say that the study discusses any sexual activity, satisfying sexual activity, interest in sexual activity and frequency of sexual activity. Also, I did not read every word of this study, but in what I did read, I could not find any statement on whether or not this was only a heterosexual study, but it appears to be. So, men who are healthy in middle age tend to live longer than men who are not. These men are usually married in later life and engage in sex with that partner on a pretty regular and satisfying basis. Men in this group have more interest in sex than women tend to at the same age, and also have options for enhancing their sexual ability through the use of pharmaceutical therapies. On the other hand, many women who are in old old age, 80 and up - tend to be widowed and thus do not report sexual activity as it seems that in the group of people studied, having a partner (or being in a relationship) was one of the biggest predictors of sexual activity. Men who are in poor health do not share the same sexually active life expectancy. Women, even unhealthy women, tend to live longer than men. Women's sexual health has not gotten the same attention as men's, but perhaps this study will provide some impetus for that. OF note, women have hormonal shifts in late middle age that lesson sexual desire and enjoyment - this is something that may be addressed in the future. In this study they did find that men's attitudes now are very different than they were ten years ago and that this could be related to ED drugs.

Let's Talk About Sex

The research that I am referring to today can be found in the online version of BMJ and this particular article is available for free. Lind...

4:48 PM

Mandatory Health Insurance

I do no follow every word of the health care debate, nor do I know the intricacies of the proposals. I probably hear as much as you do and I try my best to stay away from the vitriol. I can tell you that the system is not okay and that I'd rather they do something than nothing. I sense that there is much waste and that addressing it, (billing fraud, entitlement fraud and abuse, polypharmacy and unnecessary pharmacy, vanity drugs and procedures, and treatment spent on preventable conditions) would probably give us the money we need to expand coverage and care. But unequivocally I believe that health insurance should be mandatory. I was reminded of my belief when a certain Congressman was speaking on CSPAN last night. I do not recall who he was or where he was from, except it wasn't Florida because I remember looking to see. Anyway, this person implied that forcing people to have health insurance coverage was not at all like forcing them to have car insurance. He said that if individual states, like MA decided to do it that was fine, but a federal program was an invasion of privacy. He said that people had a right NOT to have the insurance. Well, I say NO they don't. I know those of you who are healthy as a horse do not think you should pay for something that you do not need today. I understand that your plan is to pay for your health care on an as needed basis, but the ability of REAL people to do that, just doesn't exist. Of course, because there is great health disparity in the USA (and most countries) the people who need the most care have the least money. (and yes, many smokers are in that category, which is why tobacco should be outlawed, but I digress) My counterpoint to the Congressman is more simple than that. He said that people should not be mandated to have health insurance - but that only works if the health care force can refuse to treat, and they can't. SO it is not American to mandate coverage, but it is American to mandate care. When people are in a health crisis, they CAN NOT be turned away - they will be treated and that means EVERYBODY will pay more for health care,. Those with health insurance will continue to cover that care in sky rocketing premiums, and all of us will see higher taxes. (i.e. we are already paying!) Not having health insurance is sort of like shop lifting . When someone takes without paying, the ones who do pay, pay more. It is not an acceptable option. I do like the idea of insurance pools, interstate coverage and all that jazz - it absolutely should be like car insurance however, as Medicaid and Medicare are sorely lacking in reach and oversight. PS a second "hey wait a minute" political moment occurred this morning when a radio show was discussing passage of the jobs bill, I think. The point was that the politicians worked together and something was passed. But that was not how the guest referred to this positive outcome, no, he noted that one of the sides "defected". Since when is working together to solve the worlds problems an act of treason?

Mandatory Health Insurance

I do no follow every word of the health care debate, nor do I know the intricacies of the proposals. I probably hear as much as you do and ...

3:38 PM

Medicine

My plan for tonight's blog does not seem to be materializing. I could use some of my ideas that I have for later in the week, or expand one of the Odds and Ends I have put aside, but I am pretty stubborn that way- and don't want to do that. So I will explain where I was going to go with today's post first, then I will mention the article I was going to blog about before I had that "brilliant" idea that didn't pan out.. And THEN I will just call it a day. I came across a term teaching a class last night and the meaning escaped me - which bothered me. The word was anxiolytic. It got me thinking about analgesics, antibiotics, anti inflammatories, diuretics,psychotropics, anesthetics, antiemetics etc . I know analgesics reduce pain but I couldn't for the life of me recall what an anxiolytic did. It is an anti anxiety medication or chemical - duh, but we always call them that -anti anxiety drugs- not anxiolytics. I was hoping to find a list of drugs by their scientific names and then to describe them all, but that list doesn't really exist. Surely there is a fancy name for a fever reducing drug, but I couldn't find it. Just to be thorough, since I did mention a few- I will explain them. The first is a pain reliever, the second fights bacterial infections, the next, inflammation, diuretics are fluid pills, psychotropics are drugs that can affect ones mood, anesthetics reduce consciousness and antiemetics are anti vomit medications. So that's all I have for that thought. Yesterday I was intrigued by a brief story regarding Medco which is a pharmacy benefits management company. In other words, a health insurance company might use Medco to review and determine what medications are on the formulary and what copayments apply to them. Medco was the company that first reported a drug interaction between a proton pump inhibitor and plavix. The company CEO has stated that they are going to spend more resources - staff and money - on independent research in the coming year. I know a lot of people get upset about benefits managers telling us which drugs we should take, especially because all those commercials we see make the newest drugs appear to be the best, but I for one am GRATEFUL for comparative research, and if it saves money that is all the much better because the country's insurance premiums seem to rise in unison.

Medicine

My plan for tonight's blog does not seem to be materializing. I could use some of my ideas that I have for later in the week, or expand...

4:07 PM

There is a Guideline for That

Medical and voluntary health organizations as well as governmental organizations and departments of health often propose guidelines for treating specific diseases. The guidelines are meant to offer a treatment outline that is based on the best data available on efficacy and safety. Not all recommendations refer to the use of drugs. There can be guidelines for treating sports conditions for example that physical therapists follow in regards to exercises to prescribe. I am most versed in the Clinical Practice Guidelines for Treating Tobacco Use and Dependence because it is my job to promote them. They ARE backed by our Department of Health and Human Services and the CDC as well as some medical organizations. Two other guidelines that come to mind are for the treatment of hypertension and the treatment of high cholesterol. Today I read the Guidelines for Treatment of Erectile Dysfunction. Yup, I am all about promoting penile health. These guidelines are not the official position of any other agency at this time, but they are formed out of research from several random controlled clinical trials and they are offered by the American College of Physicians to whom I give some clout. In the analysis of existing studies, the scientists have determined that hormonal therapy for erectile dysfunction is not recommended as a first line therapy, but may be applied to individual patients based on their presenting symptoms. Erectile Dysfunction is defined as not being able to maintain or sustain an erection sufficient for satisfactory sexual performance, consistently over time. Treatment is indicated if the problem exists for three months or more. In other words, if a man cannot get an erection after being out all night drinking, that is not ED. Of course, I like the phrase "satisfactory sexual performance" - is that subjective or does the partner get to offer an opinion?? These guidelines recommend the use of erectile dysfunction medications such as Viagra, Levitra and Cialis as well as two more. Can you believe that there are 5 different medicines for this condition?! The drug names are sildenafil, vardenafil, tadalafil, mirodenafil, and udenafil. They are Viagra, Levitra, Cialis, no brand name yet - drug under study, and Zydena which is not for sale in the USA (respectively). The class of drugs is referred to as phosphodiesterase type 5 or PDE-5. I am beginning to doubt my professors who assured us that you have to have a drug that treats an illness more completely or safely then an existing drug or a drug to treat a condition that is not yet treated in order to get an approved new drug application from the FDA. Why are there FIVE or at least THREE in the US. The research shows that all five are equally as effective and have minimal side effects. The clinical guidelines do NOT recommend one drug over the other and say that the decision should be based on patient and doctor preference, side effect profile and / or cost. [I am going to guess the patient will request the one that had the best commercial] Here is a link to more info on ED [it does discuss hormonal therapy but the guidelines state that the evidence for benefit is inconclusive] <a href="http://www.medicinenet.com/impotence_ed/article.htm">http://www.medicinenet.com/impotence_ed/article.htm</a> ED can be associated with age, weight, diabetes, heart disease, depression, prostate cancer, low testosterone levels and smoking.

There is a Guideline for That

Medical and voluntary health organizations as well as governmental organizations and departments of health often propose guidelines for trea...

4:35 PM

Prostate Cancer Discrimination

Today’s post seems to leave me and will leave you, with more questions than answers, but at the least it will raise your awareness and perhaps encourage you to seek answers. I am reviewing some mini grant proposals at my day job. We fund local programs that use community health workers to take messages of health promotion and disease prevention to the medically underserved. Today I reviewed one about prostate cancer. It was a great proposal, and in the rationale for the program the grant seeker noted that there was a disparity in prostate cancer risk and mortality for black men. While at work I looked up the statistic and found that MORE than double the rate of blacks then whites had the cancer. I could not find that same statistic these evening, I am not sure why. (but just now I did find this link from the CDC and it shows the great disparity) <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/prostate/statistics/race.htm">http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/prostate/statistics/race.htm</a> I was intrigued by the information I found tonight as well. As all the research I have reported here to date has been involving the controversy of the PSA test. What I keep reading is that the test’s value is questionable because most men die of other causes before that cancer can progress and kill them. Few cases are aggressive and debilitating and the screening may find them early and save lives, but often the screens find benign growths and the treatment is more disabling than the disease. That is what I always read. To find the information about black men, and this is world wide not just black men in the USA, you have to look specifically for it. It shouldn’t be that way. Here is what I found from the American Cancer Society. Both blacks and whites and males and females die most from lung cancer which is responsible for about 30% of all cancers. Next for men of both races is prostate cancer and for both races of women it is breast. Here the disparity shows, 9% for white men and 12% for black. For women and breast cancer it is 15 for whites and 19 for blacks. (but this is later data then above, so maybe the gap has closed a bit) I found several research articles and the hypothesis is that there may be some hormonal difference that triggers a gene expression or more aggressive form of both the prostate and breast cancer diseases. Black men are being screened and black men have heard the message that they are at greater risk than whites. I guess my biggest question was why they die of a cancer that is not supposed to be that aggressive and after reviewing the research I think I am not the only one that doesn’t know the answer. If however, the cancer is more aggressive and PSA tests will find it and black men will improve their outcomes from treatment, then in them it may be a more valid test. BTW, the ACS has some 2009 data projections on its website and lung cancer cases incidence (new cases) is actually going DOWN, it is being displaced in the top seat by the two cancers mentioned today while colon cancer, another killer of both sexes and races, is third. We can thank the tobacco control experts for that lung cancer decline. It takes 20 or more years for lung cancer rates to rise in countries after cigarettes are introduced. We had a nationwide smoking rate of about 42% in 1964 and it is down to 19% nationwide today. No matter the cancer, being a tobacco user will increase a persons risk of getting and dying from it. here is the overall chart for both races from the ACS <a href="http://www.cancer.org/downloads/stt/CFF2009_LeadingSites_Est_6.pdf">http://www.cancer.org/downloads/stt/CFF2009_LeadingSites_Est_6.pdf</a>

Prostate Cancer Discrimination

Today’s post seems to leave me and will leave you, with more questions than answers, but at the least it will raise your awareness and perha...

6:05 PM

Extreme Measures

A study was completed from 2005 to 2007 that has been analyzed and reported in the New England Journal of Medicine this week. It pertained to bariatric or weight loss surgery. Long time readers will know that I have written about this in the past and that I am 100 percent against the surgery. My main reasons for opposing it have been the high percentage of complications, the need for repeat surgeries and the terribly invasive nature of the surgery itself. In my mind, rearranging the internal workings of our bodies instead of losing weight with calorie control and exercise is far too extreme to be considered healthy or sane. I have been overweight..I have not been obese. My empathy then is very limited and I must be fair. I am especially reconsidering my position because someone I care very much about has recently had the surgery. I have always been worried about her weight and of course, encouraged her to eat fewer calories and to exercise.. but often she could not exercise because she was so heavy. Today when reading the article I was surprised to learn that some people could lose 20 years of life due to their obesity and just as with smoking, the quality of life they have before their early death is not going to be very high due to chronic disease conditions. There has been concern about adverse outcomes with both the Roux-en-Y and the gastric banding surgeries and though this study attempts to ease our minds, I do have a concern. The study, abbreviated as LABS, included a good number of persons (almost 5000) and they noted several different adverse outcomes as endpoints. These were death, VTE, having to have any additional operations or reinterventions, and not being discharged from the hospital. You do remember VTE yes? That is venous thromboemolism, or more simply a blood clot. As stated in the Medscape report, the 30 day mortality rate was .03% and the 30 day rate for one or more of the other listed adverse outcomes was over 4%. The mortality rate is low compared to other surgeries.. I looked it up. However, the 30 day endpoint is not long enough in my mind. That really doesn't tell us anything about effectiveness and serious complications. I know that we have to look at the risks of death, disease and disability from being obese as compared to the risks from the surgery, but in my heart I just cannot believe that this is better than a lifestyle approach. I will concede that the lifestyle change would likely involve a host of specialists to promote, support, encourage and monitor the patient and that the cost may be off putting to insurance companies, but until I get real long term data on outcomes, I am not convinced that this is a best practice option. The researchers did note that certain things will increase the risk of death or adverse outcome and they are an extremely high BMI, though a BMI over 40 is usually needed to be considered for surgery so I cannot imagine what extremely high would be, as well as, history of clots, chronic obstructive sleep apnea and impaired functional status.. I assume this would mean immobility. My friend, who is eating pureed food for now is keeping notes and will be one of two guest bloggers that I have on tap for you guys.. but we are going to wait a while for that one.

Extreme Measures

A study was completed from 2005 to 2007 that has been analyzed and reported in the New England Journal of Medicine this week. It pertained ...

4:48 PM

A New Flu Vaccine

There has been news recently regarding the 2009 swine flu (oops, that is Influenza A H1N1) and how we can best prepare for the second wave of this now declared pandemic. Pandemic meaning that the infection is active world wide and affects a great number of persons. There is some concern that the flu is going to hit us harder this fall and that makes sense knowing that colder temperatures (inside and out) are more appealing to the virus. What is concerning to me is that several governments, including that of the USA, are seeking vaccines for this strain of the flu by telling drug makers to rush and I have seen at least a suggestion that the makers will not be held accountable for adverse outcomes. My concern over the push for vaccines is on several levels. 1) the vaccine may not work 2) the cost of making and distributing the drug 3) the availability of the vaccine 4) adverse events associated with it and 5) haven't we done this before? We had a scare of flu in 1976 referred to as the Asian or Hong Kong flu. The then president rushed the vaccine and gave the drug makers immunity. The pandemic did not come and some cases of Guillain-Barre Syndrome, ( an auto immune disorder) were blamed on the drug. I understand that vaccines are important and have eradicated many life threatening diseases. I am grateful that my parents had me vaccinated against many diseases when I was young because as an adult I am scared of the drugs. I do get my tetanus and that is about it. I do not get sick very often. I do my best to keep my body healthy so that it can resist viruses.. however, I am also protected to some degree because other people DO get vaccinated. That is referred to as herd immunity. I don't know what to say about the new flu and the campaign to fight it.. I only know that we should consider the past. I feel that the CDC is a credible (and up to date) source for information if you would like to read more: <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/qa.htm">http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/qa.htm</a>

A New Flu Vaccine

There has been news recently regarding the 2009 swine flu (oops, that is Influenza A H1N1) and how we can best prepare for the second wave o...

5:06 PM

Weekly Wellness

Alzheimer’s Nursing Homes and Psychotropcis: There has been some press regarding off label use of anti psychotic medications in the elderly, especially older persons with Alzheimer’s disease. AD is a progressive, debilitating, brain illness. Basically the brain degenerates. Tissue actually dies and on a SPEC or PET scan one can see black spaces where brain matter should be. For whatever reason, some patients with dementia have significant behavioral problems. [Well, it actually makes sense in the same way that people who have brain trauma and lose brain matter often act out]. Sometimes in the AD cases, the behavior is related to an acute illness, like a delirium. Many times persons not familiar with geriatrics mistake these acute symptoms for a progression of the Alzheimer’s or even a chronic Alzheimer’s feature. There are actually so many things that can be happening which do lead Assisted Living Facilities or Nursing Homes to bring these residents to the ER. I say all this because I was one of the people on a multidisciplinary psychiatry in patient team who sought to stabilize these people. Our role was to manage their symptoms and return them to long term care. It was often a fight to return them to the SAME facility. It is absolutely not as simple as some consumer groups would have us think. I whole heartedly agree that zyprexa, risperdal, haldol, abilify and the like should NOT be used. I argue that acute illness be ruled out first, upon examination, i.e. bowel and bladder disturbance, renal disease, and blood sugar extremes. Just because an 80 year old has a diagnosis of dementia does not mean they don’t have a urinary tract infection. I fully support efforts to change the environment in the facilities as well. Add staff to redirect wandering, excitable, confused and scared persons. Yes, more staff. Another problem is that hospitals and facilities are scared to death of falls and thus a medicated person who won’t get up is a lot better on so many levels than a frail walking un medicated one. But I digress. That kind of hands on, low resident to staff ratio seldom occurs, in doesn’t occur in Medicare Medicaid facilities. In the hospital, physicians are pressured to get the patient out as soon as possible and the long term care facilities won’t take an aggressive restless person back so the only solution is overmedication. Family members often agree to the meds because they have no other choice for “placement” as they call it. Thus now you know, it is NOT that simple. What is simple is this. Dementia is NOT a normal part of aging. Fish – Fish OIL: Ironically, the health benefits associated with the Omega 3s in fish include heart and brain health. The question is yet unanswered as to if the fish oil capsules are as protective as the fish itself. A recent study still leaves room for doubt. It is very important again that one read beyond the headline. The study involved a small group, two groups, of women. Less than 30 people total and that is too small to allow for any type of population generalization. Any way. One group took capsules while the other got the same mg of Omega 3s in actual fish. Afterwards both groups had the same blood level concentration of Omega 3s. That does not answer the question, “ Is the effect the same?” A long term study would be needed for that and frankly; you don’t have time to wait for that. Eat your fish. They contain additional elements, protein, minerals, and yeah, well ok, a little mercury, cadmium…….. Oops. SWEET! Oh I like this study from a place called Kaleida Health in Buffalo NY. Actually more than one study and the results are also more suggestive than causal. Oxidative stress and inflammation occur often in our bodies. Bad things like smoking cause it. But good things like exercise also cause it as do necessary things like eating. There appears to be an inflammation process to all cellular activity and free radical release. The accumulation of free radicals is quite harmful and inflammation in the blood (c reactive protein, homocystiene) can be a marker of heart disease. We also have a built in clean up effect, the antioxidant process which can be enhanced when we eat foods like blue berries and fruits and vegetables. Obese persons generally have more inflammation and high fat foods themselves increase oxidative stress, acutely. A healthy, active person of normal weight may still have an oxidative response when they eat, but it abates quickly. The researchers found that normal vs. obese subjects who ate the same high fat high calorie (1800) meal [meal? That is what I eat in a DAY] had the same spike but it lasted much longer in the obese group. That will increase their already higher risk of heart disease, and heart attack. However, there was also a study in which the same 1800 calories was in high fruit and high fiber and there was NO SPIKE. I don’t recall if that included both normal and overweight persons. Radiation: It has been said that X-rays should not be used with reckless abandon as radiation exposure can change cells and damage DNA which is one way cancer can initiate. Now there is a concern about warning people who have been given radiopharmaceuticals. This would be chemotherapy as well as perhaps dyes used in bone scans. Apparently it leaves the patient a little radioactive themselves. Enough so that days and months later the person will set off an alarm at the airport. Doctors are being asked to warn persons of this possibility. Geez.

Weekly Wellness

Alzheimer’s Nursing Homes and Psychotropcis : There has been some press regarding off label use of anti psychotic medications in the elderly...

10:00 AM

Weekly Wellness

Children: That I’ve been able to sit on this all week is a shock even to me. In fact, as it occurred, I had to call a friend to vent as I was so flabbergasted. Later in the week when an article regarding 2 studies reported in JAMA on children’s expected disease outcomes was published, I was anything but surprised. Children, people, hell, animals, don’t generally gain weight without a significant energy imbalance. Something causes weight gain and as the studies suggest, that weight gain can causes disease and that disease can significantly decrease one’s life expectancy. (In rare situations weight is related to genetics and disease processes more than EIEO). How do children end up so heavy? Here is a real life example. A family came to the pool; mom, grandma and two young boys. One boy may have been two and the other four. The four year old was a chubby fellow. None the less, I was excited by the idea of kids coming to swim and be active. Both boys got right in. They were not speaking English so I don’t have audio with this case history. Anyways. Mother calls repeatedly to the chubby kid who has begun splashing around in the pool. He goes to her finally and she gives him hard CANDY to eat. Oh yeah, it is a choking hazard but geez he was playing not asking for sweets! So a ½ hour later I leave the pool and by all I hold dear, I kid you not, the children were sitting in the pool on the steps eating fast food burgers. I SAW the bag. And that is why there is such a thing as an obesity program at Children’s Hospital of Boston and why it is far from the only children’s hospital that treats obesity. Lies: More stunning behavior. A pharmaceutical company was highlighted in a little WSJ article this past week. The company, Sirtris, is developing a drug that might mimic a protein in our bodies called sirtuin enzyme one. People who eat low calorie diets seem to make more of this protein (enzyme) and Sirt1 seems to be protective of disease. Another compound that seems to activate the release of sirtuin is resveratrol, which is found in small, ineffective, quantities in red wine. This company and some others are working to create a chemical or pill out of resveratrol or one that acts like resveratrol but has none that will reduce disease by generating more sirtuin in the body. Still with me? They are trying to make a pill that does what the body will do on its own if one eats a low (probably reasonably low) caloric diet. That bothers me for all the reasons you already know, but it isn’t the lie. Here is the lie: In the WSJ, K. Winstein writes that the company Sirtris is doing this to make a drug to prevent diseases of aging such as: diabetes, Alzheimer’s and cancer. The FDA won’t call aging a disease so I guess the company can’t sell a drug that “treats” aging. Hear me now: diabetes, Alzheimer’s and cancer have all been repeatedly found to be most often caused by these things: overweight, too few fruits and vegetables, too little physical activity, too much inactivity, as well as genetics and environmental toxins. The above diseases are not caused by getting older! Damn it. Heart Attack: There are more heart attacks and more fatalities related to them this time of year. The holiday months. In the past I have reiterated this at Thanksgiving. This year I did not. I read a long time ago that eating large meals, a lot at one time, could increase the risk of heart attacks. It is one of those things that I never forgot. This week a reminder comes from several cardiologists, including a past president from the American Heart Association. I trust you will believe them. Heart attacks are more common for several reasons. They are more fatal at this time because people are more reluctant to seek assistance when experiencing the symptoms of a heart attack during a holiday family time. There may be less medical staff on hand as well. You can certainly make a commitment to seek help if you experience the symptoms of a heart attack. Here are some other things that you have control over. Taking your meds if you are prescribed them, continue your exercise program and watch the fat, calorie and salt content of each meal. Seriously. I am not saying to diet at Christmas, hell, diets don’t work ever, but surely not at this time of year. From L. Neergaard of the AP, I quote, “a heavy meal stresses the heart AS it is digested, salt causes immediate fluid retention which means the heart has to pump harder, same with excess alcohol”. High fat meals may actually affect the lining of arteries and many Americans have clogged arteries which already have poor blood flow. Eat wisely, now and always. You can always eat that great meal in two sittings! Fosomax: A class action lawsuit is pending as some users of this bone drug have had jaw bone degeneration. Isn’t that odd. A pill that is supposed to prevent further bone loss causing jaw bone to die. I think about the people who have osteonecrosis of their jaw with some sympathy and angst. I was on fosomax a year or so until I told my doc, the same one who gave me Vioxx, (and I really liked that doc better than any I’ve ever had), that I didn’t want to take something indefinitely which may or may not prevent a fracture if I happened to fall down sometime in the future. Especially because, I told him, we don’t know what the long term side effects may be. He said ok. I am so NOT the girl drug companies market to with their TV commercials, i.e. I ask my doctor if I can NOT take a pill. CTs: Computed Tomography. Hmm, well, it’s a scan that docs use that can help them diagnosis internal problems and it exposes the patient to radiation. This is often an unnecessary risk and I know we talked about it last year. The practice of ordering CTs too quickly continues unabated. Researches supports that these scans could increase the lifetime risk of cancer by 2%, remember that several other things we do or are exposed to also increase that risk. If you think 2% is ok you probably haven’t been diagnosed with cancer. Still, this second study confirming the risk ends with encouragement for doctors or other health care providers to try alternative diagnostics when possible. Wishing you wellness.

Weekly Wellness

Children: That I’ve been able to sit on this all week is a shock even to me. In fact, as it occurred, I had to call a friend to vent as I ...

9:44 AM

Health Education

The Best Pledge We Can Make

Let's Talk About Sex

Mandatory Health Insurance

Medicine

There is a Guideline for That

Prostate Cancer Discrimination

Extreme Measures

A New Flu Vaccine

Weekly Wellness

Weekly Wellness

Popular Posts

Blog Archive