Results of medication studies in top medical journals may be misleading to readers

By Enrique Rivero
erivero@mednet.ucla.edu

UCLA-Harvard study highlights 3 types of confusing outcome measures

Studies about medications published in the most influential medical journals are frequently designed in a way that yields misleading or confusing results, new research suggests.

Investigators from the medical schools at UCLA and Harvard analyzed all the randomized medication trials published in the six highest-impact general medicine journals between June 1, 2008, and Sept. 30, 2010, to determine the prevalence of three types of outcome measures that make data interpretation difficult.

In addition, they reviewed each study's abstract to determine the percentage that reported results using relative rather than absolute numbers, which can also be a misleading.

The findings are published online in the Journal of General Internal Medicine.

The six journals examined by the investigators— the New England Journal of Medicine, the Journal of the American Medical Association, The Lancet, the Annals of Internal Medicine, the British Medical Journal and the Archives of Internal Medicine — included studies that used the following types of outcome measures, which have received increasing criticism from scientific experts:

Half of Americans sip sugary drinks daily

By Madison Park, CNN

August 31, 2011 -- Updated 1747 GMT (0147 HKT)

(CNN) -- When it was first invented, soda pop was a treat most people had once in a while for special occasions.

Now it's a daily fixture in American life -- in bright containers glowing inside vending machines, chugged from 32-ounce bucket-like containers at self-service stations and served as the default beverage in fast-food meals.

In today's carbonation nation, half of the U.S. population over age 2 consumes sugary drinks daily, according to a report released by National Center for Health Statistics.

The sugary drinks include sodas, sweetened waters, and energy, sports and fruit beverages. Not included in the total were diet drinks, 100% fruit juices, sweetened teas and flavored milk. The report states that sugary drinks have been linked to "poor diet quality, weight gain, obesity, and in adults, type 2 diabetes."

Male teens are the most frequent consumers and guzzle about 252 to 273 calories every day from various drinks, the report says. Their one-day consumption is more than half the weekly intake suggested by the American Heart Association, which recommends no more than three 12-ounce cans of soda in one week (equivalent to 450 calories).

The consumption of such sugary drinks has increased over the last 30 years, the report stated.

A 2003 study published in the Journal of the American Dietetic Association found that soda drinking for youths between the ages of 6 and 17 was at 37% in the 1970s and then 56% in the 1990s. This latest research from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention suggests that from 2005 to 2008, consumption increased again.

"If you look at male children, 70% consume on a given day," said lead author Cynthia Ogden, a CDC epidemiologist who specializes in obesity.

The analysis was based on 17,000 participants who were asked to recall what they ate in the last 24 hours in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.

The American Beverage Association denied that its products fueled obesity: "Contrary to what may be implied ... sugar-sweetened beverages are not driving health issues like obesity and diabetes."

It pointed to market data indicating that the calories in beverages decreased by 21% from 1998 to 2008, while obesity rates climbed. It also stated that sugar-sweetened beverages account for 7% of calories in the average American diet.

"That means Americans get 93 percent of their calories from other foods and beverages," the group stated.

The latest CDC research released Wednesday also found similar results: Kids and teens get about 6.7% to 8.2% of their daily caloric intake from the beverages, and adults get about 5% to 8%.

Belly bacteria boss the brain

 

 

By Tina Hesman Saey


Friendly intestinal bacteria not only keep the gut happy, they may help keep their host happy, too, a new study in mice finds.


Mice fed broth fortified with a type of friendly intestinal bacteria called Lactobacillus rhamnosus behaved less anxiously than mice fed broth without bacteria. Those behavior changes were accompanied by differences in levels of a brain-chemical sensor and stress hormones.

The bacteria telegraph these brain-chemical and behavior-changing messages via the vagus nerve, which connects the brain stem to various internal organs, researchers report online August 29 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Some studies have suggested that changing the mix of bacteria in the intestines could influence behavior (SN: 6/18/11, p. 26). The new research goes a step further to investigate how those changes come about, says Paul Patterson, a neuroimmunologist at Caltech in Pasadena, Calif. “Most people haven’t gone that far to look at what’s happening in the brain,” he says.

The research team — led by John Bienenstock of McMaster University in Hamilton, Canada, and John Cryan of the University College Cork in Ireland — looked at the mice’s brains to examine levels of the GABA receptor, a protein that senses and responds to an important brain chemical messenger called GABA. Alterations in the way GABA and other brain chemical systems work influence behavior. Mice fed bacteria-containing broth had higher levels of the receptor protein in some parts of the brain and lower levels in other parts than did mice fed sterile broth.

Another Reason to Ignore the Warnings About This Super Food

By Dr. Mercola

The idea that eggs, as a source of saturated fats, are unhealthy and promote heart disease is a complete myth. While it's true that fats from animal sources contain cholesterol, this is not necessarily something that will harm you. On the contrary, the evidence clearly shows that eggs are one of the most healthful foods you can eat, and can actually help prevent disease, including heart disease.

For example, one 2009 study discovered that the proteins in cooked eggs are converted by gastrointestinal enzymes, producing peptides that act as ACE inhibitors (common prescription medications for lowering blood pressure). This certainly flies in the face of 'conventional wisdom,' and the latest findings support the stance that eggs are in fact part of a heart-healthy diet.

Although egg yolks are relatively high in cholesterol, numerous studies have confirmed that eggs have virtually nothing to do with raising your cholesterol. For instance, research published in the International Journal of Cardiology showed that, in healthy adults, eating eggs every day did not produce a negative effect on endothelial function (an aggregate measure of cardiac risk); nor did it increase cholesterol levels.

A number of people have cholesterol levels that are too low. While eating egg yolks is a great idea for a number of reasons, it will not increase your cholesterol level. If you need to do that a fairly reliable method is to use coconut oil. Usually about 2-4 tablespoons a day are required to increase your cholesterol.

Low Vitamin D Linked to Earlier First Menstruation

ScienceDaily (Aug. 12, 2011) — A study links low vitamin D in young girls with early menstruation, which is a risk factor for a host of health problems for teen girls as well as women later in life.

Researchers from the University of Michigan School of Public Health measured the blood vitamin D levels in 242 girls ages 5-12 from Bogota, Colombia, and followed them for 30 months. Girls low on vitamin D were twice as likely to start menstruation during the study than those with sufficient vitamin D, said epidemiologist Eduardo Villamor, associate professor in the U-M SPH.

How to Reduce Your Risk of Cancer By 50%

I have some vital information for you that can literally save your life, save you from dying from cancer; not just from getting cancer, but from dying from it. I came across this absolutely vital information while researching my new book called, Dark Deception, info which is just too important to keep under wraps until the book's release in a year's time.

Cancer is now the number one cause of death in the country, having surpassed heart disease a few years ago.

Please check out the graph in the video that illustrates the relationship between latitude, sun exposure and death rates from cancer. Remember the vertical axis shows the number of cancer-related deaths per 100,000, while the horizontal axis indicates latitude. It clearly shows that cancer-deaths go up significantly, the farther away from the equator one lives.

Here's why. With sun exposure, UVB radiation from the sun converts cholesterol to vitamin D, one of the most potent anticancer vitamins. See the connection? Please keep your vitamin D levels in a healthy range. If you're taking oral vitamin D in cod liver oil or a supplement, you need to measure your vitamin D blood levels to avoid overdosing. Take a simple blood test to help you keep your vitamin D levels in a safe, optimal range, and go to my vitamin D testing page for more details

While in Maui this winter, I heard a number of heartbreaking stories from folks there, who told me of close relatives who either had cancer, were dying from it or had died from it. How tragic! With this new information about vitamin D in mind, I said to them, "I don't know your relative." I asked, "But did they stay in the sun? Do they have a tan?", and even though some of these people lived in Maui, it seems every one of these people did not get much sun and were pale. This was a giant clue, empirically confirming what I was learning about sun exposure.

The best and safest way to get vitamin D is from the sun. The safe way to get sun exposure is to just go out enough so that your skin turns the very lightest pink. You'll also need enough of your skin exposed to sun. Exposing only your face and hands while going from office to car is not enough for conversion into vitamin D. We must remain sensible in our approach to this issue. This means: PLEASE DON'T GET SUNBURNED!

Bear in mind unique risk factors for dark-complexioned individuals. So if you're African-American, from the Middle East or India and live in America or Europe or in a very northern latitude, you're at very high risk for developing these cancers, as high as four times the risk. Darker skin serves as a filter, causing the need for two to five times as much sunlight as someone with very pale skin.


Also be careful about using most sunblocks as they are dangerous.
If you are looking for a safe one I have researched this and recommend Active Full Spectrum Sun Block. If you can't easily find it I put it in my store for your convenience.


In light-skinned individuals, overexposure to sun can also be problematic.

Normally, skin cancer is not going to be the melanoma type, for which there are multiple causes. Follow the link below to learn more. But having sun exposure can increase the risk of other types of skin cancers, which while not as dangerous as melanoma, are easily avoided with cautious sun exposure

BOTTOM LINE: NEVER GET SUNBURNED!

Really? The Claim: For Better Hydration, Drink Coconut Water

Not long ago, few athletes had heard of coconut water, but sales have skyrocketed, largely because of its reputation as a healthy and natural source of electrolytes.

Pure coconut water contains many electrolytes, like sodium, the critical one lost during sweating. But many commercial varieties have less sodium than is found in juice straight from a coconut or in traditional sports drinks. An 8.5 ounce serving of Vita Coco 100% Pure Coconut Water, for example, contains 30 milligrams of sodium and 15 grams of carbohydrates. An eight-ounce serving of Gatorade Pro 02 Perform is equal in carbs (14 grams) but has more sodium (200 milligrams).

A recent study by Consumerlab.com, an independent laboratory, found that two of the most popular varieties, Vita Coco and O.N.E. Coconut Water, contained even less sodium and magnesium than advertised. Only Zico Natural contained the amount of sodium listed on its label (160 milligrams).

Few studies have looked directly at coconut water and exercise. In one, researchers had subjects run for 90 minutes in hot temperatures and then tested the effects of plain water, a sports drink, coconut water or a sodium-enriched coconut water in the two hours after exercise. While all remained “somewhat dehydrated,” the sodium-enriched coconut water worked as well as the sports drink.

Sports drinks serve a purpose among elite athletes and those who exercise for long periods. But for those who exercise at a moderate intensity for an hour or less, water is probably the better choice.

The Onion, a Natural Alternative to Artificial Preservatives

Some components of the onion have antioxidant and antimicrobial properties, making it possible to use this bulb for food preservation. This is demonstrated by researchers from the Polytechnic University of Cataluña (UPC) and the University of Barcelona (UB) in a study that has just been published in the International Journal of Food Science and Technology.

"The antioxidant and antimicrobial properties of the flavonoids of the raw onion make it a good candidate for use in food preservation," says researcher Jonathan Santas from the Department of Nutrition and Bromatology at UB and co-author of a project carried out in the Department of Agrifood Engineering and Biotechnology at UPC.

The study, that has just been published by the International Journal of Food Science and Technology, shows that the flavonoids of onion, in addition to having beneficial properties for health, increase the life of foods, and so "they are a natural alternative to artificial additives used in the food industry." Flavonoids are phenolic compounds (with the phenol group) which are synthesized by plants.

The results confirm that, especially the yellow variety, is "a good source of these types of substances, and there is a positive correlation between the presence of flavonoids and their antioxidant capacity."

"The onion can be effective for delaying lipid oxidation in emulsions of oil and water -a model system of foods like margarines and mayonnaises-, and it also inhibits the growth of microorganisms that alter foods," Santas indicates.

The scientific team analysed onions of the White varieties "Fuentes de Ebro" and "Calçot de Valls" and the yellow variety "Grano de Oro." Using them the researchers demonstrated that phenolic compounds in the onion prevent the development of bacteria such as Bacillus cereus, Staphylococcus aureus, Micrococcus luteus and Listeria monocytogenes, microorganisms typically associated with the deterioration of foods.

Previous studies indicate that flavonoids have beneficial effects for health due to their antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, cardioprotective, vasodilatory and anti-carcinogenic properties, making it of special interest in the prevention of chronic illnesses, such as cardiovascular illnesses, and some types of cancer.


A more stable component


The flavonoids of the onion are more stable than some of its other components, such as sulphur compounds. Traditionally it was indicated that these sulphuric compounds are good for the health, as they are responsible for the characteristic taste, aroma and lacrimogenic effects of the plant. These substances, which are very volatile and unstable, are released when the onion is damaged or cut.

The onion (Allium cepa) is one of the most cultivated and consumed vegetables on the planet (around 66 million tonnes in 2008, of which 1.1 million were produced in Spain, especially in Castilla-La Mancha), and one of the main ingredients of the Mediterranean diet.

Eggs' Antioxidant Properties May Help Prevent Heart Disease and Cancer, Study Suggests

While eggs are well known to be an excellent source of proteins, lipids, vitamins and minerals, researchers at the University of Alberta recently discovered they also contain antioxidant properties, which helps in the prevention of cardiovascular disease and cancer.

Jianping Wu, Andreas Schieber and graduate students Chamila Nimalaratne and Daise Lopes-Lutz of the U of A Department of Agricultural Food and Nutritional Science examined egg yolks produced by hens fed typical diets of either primarily wheat or corn. They found the yolks contained two amino acids, tryptophan and tyrosine, which have high antioxidant properties.

After analyzing the properties, the researchers determined that two egg yolks in their raw state have almost twice as many antioxidant properties as an apple and about the same as half a serving (25 grams) of cranberries.

However, when the eggs were fried or boiled, antioxidant properties were reduced by about half, and a little more than half if the eggs were cooked in a microwave.

"It's a big reduction but it still leaves eggs equal to apples in their antioxidant value," said Wu.

The findings were published in the peer-reviewed journal Food Chemistry.

The discovery of these two amino acids, while important, may only signify the beginning of finding antioxidant properties in egg yolks, said Wu, an associate professor of agricultural, food and nutritional science.

"Ultimately, we're trying to map antioxidants in egg yolks so we have to look at all of the properties in the yolks that could contain antioxidants, as well as how the eggs are ingested," said Wu, adding that he and his team will examine the other type of antioxidant already known to be in eggs, carotenoids, the yellow pigment in egg yolk, as well as peptides.

In previous research, Wu found that egg proteins were converted by enzymes in the stomach and small intestines and produced peptides that act the same way as ACE inhibitors, prescriptions drugs that are used to lower high blood pressure.

That finding defied common wisdom and contradicted the public perception that eggs increased high blood pressure because of their high cholesterol content. Additional research by Wu suggests the peptides can be formulated to help prevent and treat hypertension.

Wu is convinced the peptides also have some antioxidant properties, which leads him to suggest that when he completes the next step in his research, the result will likely be that eggs have more antioxidant properties than we currently know.

How Bright Promise in Cancer Testing Fell Apart

When Juliet Jacobs found out she had lung cancer, she was terrified, but realized that her hope lay in getting the best treatment medicine could offer. So she got a second opinion, then a third. In February of 2010, she ended up at Duke University, where she entered a research study whose promise seemed stunning.

Doctors would assess her tumor cells, looking for gene patterns that would determine which drugs would best attack her particular cancer. She would not waste precious time with ineffective drugs or trial-and-error treatment. The Duke program — considered a breakthrough at the time — was the first fruit of the new genomics, a way of letting a cancer cell’s own genes reveal the cancer’s weaknesses.

But the research at Duke turned out to be wrong. Its gene-based tests proved worthless, and the research behind them was discredited. Ms. Jacobs died a few months after treatment, and her husband and other patients’ relatives have retained lawyers.

The episode is a stark illustration of serious problems in a field in which the medical community has placed great hope: using patterns from large groups of genes or other molecules to improve the detection and treatment of cancer. Companies have been formed and products have been introduced that claim to use genetics in this way, but assertions have turned out to be unfounded. While researchers agree there is great promise in this science, it has yet to yield many reliable methods for diagnosing cancer or identifying the best treatment.

Instead, as patients and their doctors try to make critical decisions about serious illnesses, they may be getting worthless information that is based on bad science. The scientific world is concerned enough that two prominent groups, the National Cancer Institute and the Institute of Medicine, have begun examining the Duke case; they hope to find new ways to evaluate claims based on emerging and complex analyses of patterns of genes and other molecules.

So far, the Food and Drug Administration “has generally not enforced” its regulation of tests created by individual labs because, until recently, such tests were relatively simple and relied heavily on the expertise of a particular doctor, said Erica Jefferson, a spokeswoman for the agency. But now, with labs offering more complex tests on a large scale, the F.D.A. is taking a new look at enforcement.

Dr. Scott Ramsey, director of cancer outcomes research at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle, says there is already “a mini-gold rush” of companies trying to market tests based on the new techniques, at a time when good science has not caught up with the financial push. “That’s the scariest part of all,” Dr. Ramsey said.

Doctors say the heart of the problem is the intricacy of the analyses in this emerging field and the difficulty in finding errors. Even well-respected scientists often “oversee a machine they do not understand and cannot supervise directly” because each segment of the research requires different areas of expertise, said Dr. Lajos Pusztai, a breast cancer researcher at M. D. Anderson Cancer Center at the University of Texas. As a senior scientist, he added, “It’s true for me, too.”

The Duke case came right after two other claims that gave medical researchers pause. Like the Duke case, they used complex analyses to detect patterns of genes or cell proteins. But these were tests that were supposed to find ovarian cancer in patients’ blood. One, OvaSure, was developed by a Yale scientist, Dr. Gil G. Mor, licensed by the university and sold to patients before it was found to be useless.

The other, OvaCheck, was developed by a company, Correlogic, with contributions from scientists from the National Cancer Institute and the Food and Drug Administration. Major commercial labs licensed it and were about to start using it before two statisticians from M. D. Anderson discovered and publicized its faults.

The Duke saga began when a prestigious journal, Nature Medicine, published a paper on Nov. 6, 2006, by Dr. Anil Potti, a cancer researcher at Duke University Medical Center; Joseph R. Nevins, a senior scientist there; and their colleagues. They wrote about genomic tests they developed that looked at the molecular traits of a cancerous tumor and figured out which chemotherapy would work best.

Other groups of cancer researchers had been trying to do the same thing.

“Our group was despondent to get beaten out,” said Dr. John Minna, a lung cancer researcher at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center. But Dr. Minna rallied; at the very least, he thought, he would make use of this incredible discovery to select drugs for lung cancer patients.

First, though, he asked two statisticians at M. D. Anderson, Keith Baggerly and Kevin Coombes, to check the work. Several other doctors approached them with the same request.

Dr. Baggerly and Dr. Coombes found errors almost immediately. Some seemed careless — moving a row or a column over by one in a giant spreadsheet — while others seemed inexplicable. The Duke team shrugged them off as “clerical errors.”

And the Duke researchers continued to publish papers on their genomic signatures in prestigious journals. Meanwhile, they started three trials using the work to decide which drugs to give patients.

Dr. Baggerly and Dr. Coombes tried to sound an alarm. They got the attention of the National Cancer Institute, whose own investigators wanted to use the Duke system in a clinical trial but were dissuaded by the criticisms. Finally, they published their analysis in The Annals of Applied Statistics, a journal that medical scientists rarely read.

The situation finally grabbed the cancer world’s attention last July, not because of the efforts of Dr. Baggerly and Dr. Coombes, but because a trade publication, The Cancer Letter, reported that the lead researcher, Dr. Potti, had falsified parts of his résumé. He claimed, among other things, that he had been a Rhodes scholar.

“It took that to make people sit up and take notice,” said Dr. Steven Goodman, professor of oncology, pediatrics, epidemiology and biostatistics at Johns Hopkins University.

In the end, four gene signature papers were retracted. Duke shut down three trials using the results. Dr. Potti resigned from Duke. He declined to be interviewed for this article. His collaborator and mentor, Dr. Nevins, no longer directs one of Duke’s genomics centers.

The cancer world is reeling.

The Duke researchers had even set up a company — now disbanded — and planned to sell their test to determine cancer treatments. Duke cancer patients and their families, including Mrs. Jacobs’s husband, Walter Jacobs, say they feel angry and betrayed. And medical researchers see the story as a call to action. With such huge data sets and complicated analyses, researchers can no longer trust their hunches that a result does — or does not — make sense.

LET THE SUN SHINE – VITAMIN D

The sunshine vitamin beams in the health news spotlight with mega health benefits.

 By Deborah Tukua, www.chiropractorswritehand.com

Sunshine on his shoulders made John Denver so happy he sang its praises.  When you read all the health benefits that keep vitamin D beaming in the health news spotlight, you should be singing its praises too.  A friend recently told me how much more energetic and happy she feels now that she’s spending time sunbathing outside this summer. My friend, Valerie also said, “I finally came to realize that the sun is natural. It’s there for our wellbeing.” Why was this fact something Valerie just recently accepted? Because like most consumers, she’s listened to the barrage of beauty and skin experts advise us for years to totally ban sun exposure. We are advised to slather on sunblock, sunglasses, hats and gear every time we step outside, as though we’re entering a toxic zone. Fortunately, there are health professionals willing to speak the truth despite current mainstream trends. 

A rise in malignant melanomas in the US heightened the scare of sun exposure in the 1970s and ‘80s.  It was assumed that skin cancers were the result of over exposure to UVB rays from the sun.   However, we have since learned that, “Skin cancer is also caused by UVA rays, which most sun blocks don’t block. Thus, by making people vitamin D deficient, they inadvertently increased people’s risk of developing all forms of skin cancer, including the deadly malignant melanoma,” states Dr. Russell Blaylock, MD, author of the Blaylock Wellness Report.

What is vitamin D and its Benefits

This Cooking Oil is a Powerful Virus-Destroyer and Antibiotic…

You've no doubt noticed that for about the last 60 years the majority of health care officials and the media have been telling you saturated fats are bad for your health and lead to a host of negative consequences, like elevated cholesterol, obesity, heart disease and Alzheimer's disease.

Meanwhile during this same 60 years the American levels of heart disease, obesity, elevated serum cholesterol and Alzheimer's have skyrocketed compared to our ancestors, and even compared to modern-day primitive societies using saturated fat as a dietary staple.

Did you know that multiple studies on Pacific Island populations who get 30-60% of their total caloric intact from fully saturated coconut oil have all shown nearly non-existent rates of cardiovascular disease?^[1]

Clearly, a lot of confusion and contradictory evidence exists on the subject of saturated fats, even among health care professionals.

But I'm going to tell you something that public health officials and the media aren't telling you.

The fact is, all saturated fats are not created equal.

The operative word here is "created", because some saturated fats occur naturally, while other fats are artificially manipulated into a saturated state through the man-made process called hydrogenation.

Hydrogenation manipulates vegetable and seed oils by adding hydrogen atoms while heating the oil, producing a rancid, thickened oil that really only benefits processed food shelf life and corporate profits.

The medical and scientific communities are now fairly united in the opinion that hydrogenated vegetable and seed oils should be avoided.

These unsaturated fats, artificially manipulated into saturated fats, are also called trans fats, and no doubt you've heard about them lately. Some cities and states have now outlawed their use. There is no controversy anymore regarding the health dangers of these artificially saturated fats.

And guess what?

These are the same damaged trans fats that have been touted as "healthy" and "heart-friendly" for the last 60 years by the vegetable and seed oil interests!

But the truth finally came out. Trans fat was rebuked, debunked, and revealed as the true enemy to good health that it has always been, regardless of what the seed- and vegetable oil shills told the American public for the last half century.

Unfortunately, this rightful vilification of hydrogenated saturated fats has created a lot of confusion regarding naturally occurring saturated fats, including coconut oil.

If one form of saturated fat is bad for you, the argument goes, then all saturated fat must be bad.

Right?

Nothing could be further from the truth!

Scientists Discover That Antimicrobial Wipes and Soaps May Be Making You (and Society) Sick

By Rob Dunn | Jul 5, 2011 06:59 AM | 22

A few weeks ago as I was walking out of a Harris Teeter grocery store in Raleigh, North Carolina, I saw a man face a moment of crisis. You could see it in the acrobatic contortions of his face. He had pulled a cart out of the area where carts congregate, only to find that its handle was sticky with an unidentifiable substance. He paused and looked at the handle, as if to imagine the nature of the offense. Gum? Meat juice? Chewed marshmallows? So many vulgar possibilities. Forlorn, he reached for an antibiotic wipe conveniently placed by the door. He scrubbed his hands VERY diligently and then pushed the cart back for someone else to rediscover [1].

Scenarios like this one are playing out all over America. There is an epidemic of sticky, dirty and otherwise gross handles on shopping carts. But it isn't just carts. Disgusting doorknobs have also been found, as have cryptically damp table-tops in restaurants and even, sad as it is, slimy back rests on the weight machines in gyms! Increasingly, the world seems to be rife with contamination. Fortunately, all of the main companies producing hygiene products have offered a solution--sanitary, antibacterial, antimicrobial, antibiotic, wipes, and soaps to kill anything that dares to creep into our wholesome lives. These salves will cure us of the demons that dare to grow near us.

The really intriguing news--a kind of breakthrough--is that the main compounds in antibiotic wipes, creams and soaps, triclosan and/or the chemically similar triclocarban, have also been sprinkled around our lives more generally. A recent study notes that triclosan is now used to "impregnate surfaces and has been added to chopping boards, refrigerators, plastic lunchboxes, mattresses as well as being used in industrial settings, such as food processing plants where walls, floors and exposed machinery have all been treated with triclosan in order to reduce microbial load." You can now go home, wipe your world down and live a happier life, surrounded by an antibiotic force field. Be especially sure to wipe your children down. Children are just about the grimiest thing in the world.

What Caused America to Go from Fit to Fat?

Trust for America’s Health (TFAH) and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) have released their annual report on obesity, and there’s no sunshine here. The report is aptly titled F as in Fat: How Obesity Threatens America’s Future 2011 [download PDF].

The report is released every year (since 2006) and tracks obesity rates in all 50 states. The stats below make us want to cry. Seriously, we’re headed down a path of pain and agony for tens of millions of families, and for this entire nation.

5 Foods that Keep You Thin

Take a look around any book store, and you'll find dozens of diet books lining the shelves. Despite their bright and cheerful covers, with their positive, upbeat claims, many of them are filled with information that promotes all the wrong messages.

"The word 'diet' is negative and implies people can go on and off them," said Jane Korsberg, a senior instructor in the department of nutrition at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland.

Korsberg is one nutritionist who thinks it would be better to re-think the whole concept of dieting.

"'Diet foods' are confusing to many people," she explained. "What diet is the 'diet food' geared for? Is it low-calorie, low-fat, low-sodium, low-sugar, gluten-free, et cetera?"

Besides, many of the foods that specifically target dieters seem to rarely satisfy. Take those 100-calorie snack packs, for example, made to help people control calories. Those often don't even work, Korsberg says. After all, few people actually stop at only one pack.

You don't need fancy plans or complicated point systems to be thin. All you need to do is make smart food choices, watch your portion sizes and stay active.

"Learning to eat properly for a lifetime is more beneficial," Korsberg said. "The emphasis should be on choosing healthful foods every day and changing lifestyles for the better."

So instead of sticking to diet fare, fill up on nutritious, wholesome foods. And if you need some recommendations, you can start with these five options, which are among the many delicious foods that make a good addition to healthy eating while keeping you slender.

Apples

Apples are a good source of dietary fiber. Dietary fiber not only contributes to a healthy digestive system and reduced cholesterol, but it also benefits smart eaters by yielding no calories while keeping them satisfied.

And there's something else about the fruit that might help you feel full. A study in the journal "Appetite" found that when women added either three apples or three pears to their daily meals, they lost more weight than people who added three oat cookies to their diets -- even though the fruit and the cookies contained the exact same amount of dietary fiber.

Although the reason behind this finding may be a mystery, there is something to be said for the findings. According to Alan Aragon, a nutritionist and author of "Girth Control: The Science of Fat Loss & Muscle Gain," crunchy foods in particular can trick a person into feeling fuller. The act of chewing may send satiety signals to your body, he says, making you think you've eaten more than you really have and keeping hunger at bay.

Almonds

If you're looking for a tasty midday snack, a handful of almonds are a well-regarded option. A study in 2009 in "The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition" found that women who ate nuts at least two times a week were more successful at keeping weight off than those who didn't eat this food.

One particular favorite among some nutritionists is almonds, says Aragon. One ounce of this food contains only 167 calories, plus it packs roughly 6 g of protein and 3 g of fiber, both nutrients that can make you feel full. Furthermore, like apples, almonds are crunchy and require a lot of chewing, so they, too, can make you feel like you've eaten more than you actually did and keep you fuller longer.

Salmon

If you're uncertain about fish, there's no need to fear. Seafood can be part of a healthy diet. And there's some evidence that the fat in foods such as salmon can boost satiety levels, says Aragon. For example, a study published in the "International Journal of Obesity" found that when dieters ate salmon a few times a week, they lost about two more pounds than those who didn't include seafood in their meals.

And in spite of the mention of salmon's fat content, the food is relatively low in calories. One 3-oz. serving has just 175 calories. Salmon is a good source of protein as well.

Eggs

There's no doubt that protein, like fiber, has impressive satiating powers. And while eggs seem to have a bad reputation in some circles, there can be no contesting their ability to help keep your weight in check.

Research has shown that eating eggs at breakfast can help you fight weight gain all day long. A study reported in 2008 in the "International Journal of Obesity" found that when dieters ate two eggs for breakfast for five days out of the week, they lost 65 percent more weight than dieters who consumed a bagel in the morning. Although protein is likely to fill you up whenever you eat it, some scientists suspect that having more in the morning can keep you feeling fuller all day long.

Tomatoes

It's true that most veggies make for great diet fare. Non-starchy vegetables in particular, such as carrots, celery and spinach, are filled with fiber. Like other foods high in fiber, they can help keep you feeling satiated.

Plus, they're pretty self-regulating, says Aragon. You can't really overeat with nonstarchy vegetables. After all, how many baby carrots can a person eat without needing to dunk them in some ranch dressing?

So while there are many veggies that can help you stay slim, tomatoes might be a particularly good option because they're so tasty. And, besides, with that whole a-tomato-is-a-vegetable-no-it's-a-fruit argument, you might have forgotten all about eating them. One cup of cooked, red tomatoes contains just 43 calories, but tastes just as delicious as any number of high-calorie foods.

And that's at least half the secret, finding foods that are both healthy and tasty. The good thing is, they do exist. Over time, you'll discover what wholesome, filling foods you prefer, expanding your choices while shrinking your waistline.

Are diet sodas making you fat?

Diet sodas: A sweet-tasting, calorie-free reprieve from the doldrums of boring diets? Apparently, not so much. Diet drinks, it turns out, might actually make you heavier, according to two new studies. Sure, the health benefits of diet drinks have been called into question before, with recent studies linking artificially sweetened drinks to an increased risk of heart disease. But many guzzlers of diet drinks have long regarded their favorite beverages as health neutral, since they lack both calories and fat. Are those dreams now dashed? Here, a brief guide to these new findings:

What did the researchers find?
Regular consumption of diet drinks expands one's waist over time, according to one study at the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio. A second study supported previously made associations between diet soda and the risk of diabetes. Researchers fed aspartame (the artificial sweetener in diet sodas) to diabetes-prone mice, and found that mice on the aspartame diet had higher blood sugar than the mice who didn't consume the chemical.

Forget the mice. How do they know diet soda expands waistlines?
Researchers recorded the height, weight, waist circumference, and diet soda intakes of 474 participants. They then measured again in three follow-up exams over two decades. Diet soda drinkers experienced 70 percent greater increases in waist circumference than non-drinkers. Those who said they were frequent drinkers — consuming two or more diet sodas a day — experienced waist circumference increases that were 500 percent greater than those who didn't drink diet soda at all.

How is that possible?
That is still unknown, but researchers speculate that the artificial sweeteners warp appetite, leaving diet soda drinkers hungry for unhealthy treats.

Does exercise play a role?
Nope. The results were the same for all diet soda drinkers, even after factors such as exercise, social class, education, and smoking were taken into account.

So, no more diet drinks?
Perhaps diet soda drinkers should consider cutting back. "The fizzy chemical cocktail can still do a number on your health," says Margaret Harmann at Jezebel. "It may be time to rethink your commitment to being comprised of 70 percent Diet Coke." Helen Hazuda, the professor who conducted the study, stopped drinking diet sodas, saying, "They may be free of calories but not of consequences."

Coffee diterpenes prevent the genotoxic effects of a toxic chemical in human derived liver cell lines. - GreenMedInfo Summary

Coffee diterpenes prevent the genotoxic effects of 2-amino-1-methyl-6-phenylimidazo[4,5-b]pyridine (PhIP) and N-nitrosodimethylamine in a human derived liver cell line (HepG2).

Aim of the present experiments was to study the genotoxic effects of coffee diterpenoids, namely cafestol palmitate and a mix of cafestol and kahweol (C+K) in human derived hepatoma (HepG2) cells. Furthermore, we investigated the potential protective properties of these substances towards carcinogens contained in the human diet, namely N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) and 2-amino-1-methyl-6-phenylimidazo[4,5-b]pyridine (PhIP). C+K and cafestol palmitate were tested over a broad dose range in micronucleus (MN) assays and no indication for genotoxic effects was seen. In combination experiments with PhIP (300 microM), pronounced inhibition (approximately 1.7-fold) of MN formation was observed with C+K and cafestol palmitate at dose levels>or = 0.9 and 1.7 microg/ml, respectively. Enzyme measurements indicate that the protection is due to inhibition of sulfotransferase, an enzyme involved in the activation of the amine, and/or to induction of UDP-glucuronosyltransferase which detoxifies the DNA-reactive metabolites of PhIP. Furthermore, a significant increase of glutathione-S-transferase was seen, whereas the activities of cytochrome P-450 1A1 and N-acetyltransferase 1 were not significantly altered. Also in combination experiments with C+K and NDMA, strong protective effects (50% reduction of genotoxicity) were seen at low dose levels (>or = 0.3 microg/ml). Since inhibition of MN was also observed when C+K were added after incubation with NDMA, it is likely that the chemoprotective effects are due to induction of DNA repair enzymes. Comparison of data on the effects of C+K on the cholesterol metabolism, which was investigated in earlier in vivo studies, with the present findings suggests that DNA-protective effects take place at exposure levels which are substantially lower than those which cause hypercholesterolemia

Yes! A dose of sun CAN protect you against skin cancer

As a fair-haired Scot with freckles and pale skin I’m a classic case to be more at risk from melanoma. Getting quite badly sunburned on my nose years ago in Spain has pushed my risk up further.

To say I’ve been wary about the sun is an understatement - I specialise in treating patients with advanced melanoma, a deadly form of skin cancer.

I was also in Australia 30 years ago at the start of the Slip-Slop-Slap campaign to warn people to keep out of the sun, and for seven years I never went swimming without being covered in sun lotion and wearing a T-shirt.

But now I believe that rather than reducing the risk of skin cancer, following these sun-avoidance guidelines could actually raise it. That’s because we need sun on our skin to make vitamin D - ironically these campaigns may have made millions chronically short of it and put them at risk. t rather than reducing the risk of skin cancer, following these sun-avoidance guidelines could actually raise it.

That’s because we need sun on our skin to make vitamin D - ironically these campaigns may have made millions chronically short of it and put them at risk. The sun’s effects might even protect against melanoma (as reported in the Mail earlier this month).

Coffee May Lower Risk Of Deadliest Prostate Cancer

For a long time scientists have wondered whether coffee might lower the risk of prostate cancer.

Previous studies have been relatively small and have shown mixed results.

But now we have results from a Harvard study that followed almost 50,000 male health professionals for more than two decades. A lot of them drank a lot of coffee, which seems to have helped.

More than 5,000 of them got prostate cancer — 642 of them the most lethal form. "For the men who drank the most coffee, their risk of getting this bad form of prostate cancer was about 60 percent lower compared to the men who drank almost no coffee at all," says Lorelei Mucci, an epidemiologist at the Harvard School of Public Health and an author of the study.

When they saw the results, Mucci says, she and her colleagues said, "Wow, that's a lot!"

"Among risk factors that people have studied for lethal prostate cancer, this is one of the strongest," she told Shots.

The same group reported about a 50 percent reduced risk of dying from prostate cancer among men who exercised regularly — two or three brisk walks a week was enough.

The new study shows that getting a 60 percent reduction in risk of aggressive prostate cancer requires a lot of coffee — at least six cups a day. However, men who drank three cups a day had a 30 percent lower chance of getting a lethal prostate cancer, and that's not bad.

Only about one in 10 prostate cancers diagnosed these days is deadly. Most men get a less dangerous and curable kind. The study found no link between coffee drinking and overall risk of prostate cancer. Presumably previous studies didn't uncover the lowered risk of aggressive cancers because they didn't have enough of these cases.

Mucci says coffee drinkers got the benefit without getting buzzed on caffeine. "Whether they drank regular coffee or only decaffeinated coffee, there was the same lower risk of lethal prostate cancer," she says. "It's really the coffee; it's not the caffeine."

Another good thing is that it doesn't require decades of heavy coffee drinking to get the benefit. What mattered was how much they drank in the previous eight years.

The Harvard epidemiologist says the coffee effect persisted even after the researchers allowed for the effect of exercise, obesity, smoking and other factors that either raise or lower the risk of prostate cancer.

Neil Martin, a cancer doctor at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, was impressed with the new findings.

"Results like these are very appealing for people," he says. "It supports things that they do. ... And I guess I don't really see the downside of that. I think people should feel empowered about being able to change their risk of diseases."

And yes, in this case it is "diseases" — plural.

Earlier research suggests coffee reduces the risk of diabetes, liver disease and Parkinson's disease — possibly because of its insulin-lowering effects, its anti-oxidant qualities and other properties, including some yet to be discovered.

And just last week, Swedish researchers reported that women who drink at least five cups of coffee a day have nearly a 60 percent lower risk of a particularly aggressive breast cancer that doesn't respond to estrogen.

Mucci says more research is needed before officially urging people to drink coffee for its health benefits. Meanwhile, she says, "there's no reason not to start drinking coffee."

And no, she does not take money from the coffee industry.

Parsley, Celery Carry Crucial Component for Fight Against Breast Cancer, Study Suggests

Parsley is usually used as a decorative accent to a scrumptious meal, but don't set it aside just yet. In a new study, a University of Missouri researcher has found that a compound in parsley and other plant products, including fruits and nuts, can stop certain breast cancer tumor cells from multiplying and growing. The study was published recently in Cancer Prevention Research.

In his study, Salman Hyder, the Zalk Endowed Professor in Tumor Angiogenesis and professor of biomedical sciences in the College of Veterinary Medicine and the Dalton Cardiovascular Research Center, exposed rats with a certain type of breast cancer to apigenin, a common compound found in parsley and other plant products. The rats that were exposed to the apigenin developed fewer tumors and experienced significant delays in tumor formation compared to those rats that were not exposed to apigenin. Hyder believes this finding could impact women who are taking certain hormone replacement therapies.

"Six to 10 million women in the United States receive hormone replacement therapy (HRT)," Hyder said. "We know that certain synthetic hormones used in HRT accelerate breast tumor development. In our study, we exposed the rats to one of the chemicals used in the most common HRTs received in the United States -- a progestin called medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) -- which also happens to be the same synthetic hormone that accelerates breast tumor development."

When tumor cells develop in the breast in response to MPA, they encourage new blood vessels to form within tumors. The blood vessels then supply needed nutrients for the tumors to grow and multiply. Hyder found that apigenin blocked new blood vessel formation, thereby delaying, and sometimes stopping, the development of the tumors. Hyder also found that the compound reduced the overall number of tumors. However, while apigenin did delay tumor growth, it did not stop the initial formation of cancer cells within the breast.

Apigenin is most prevalent in parsley and celery, but can also be found in apples, oranges, nuts and other plant products. However, apigenin is not absorbed efficiently into the bloodstream, so scientists are unsure of how much can or should be ingested.

"We don't have specific dosage for humans yet," Hyder said. "However, it appears that keeping a minimal level of apigenin in the bloodstream is important to delay the onset of breast cancer that progresses in response to progestins such as MPA. It's probably a good idea to eat a little parsley and some fruit every day to ensure the minimal amount. However, you can also find this compound in pill supplements in the health food section of many stores. Of course, you should always check with your doctor before making any major changes to your diet or lifestyle."

The next phrase of studies should include human clinical trials to determine the appropriate dosage amount, Hyder said. He believes further study on humans is necessary to address any health and safety issues that might exist.

The research team included Benford Mafuvadze, doctoral student in biomedical sciences, Indira Benakanakere, research scientist Dalton Cardiovascular Research Center; Franklin Lopez, research fellow in the Department of Veterinary Pathobiology; Cynthia Besch-Williford, associate professor of veterinary pathobiology, and Mark Ellersieck, research professor of statistics in the College of Arts and Science.