Magnesium cream found to successfully treat high blood pressure without resorting to dangerous prescription medications

Using a magnesium cream may serve as an alternative or an add-on to drug treatment against high blood pressure, a study in PLOS One revealed.

According to the researchers at the University of Hertfordshire in the U.K., only 86 percent of the general population meet the recommended magnesium intake. The health experts noted that the essential mineral boosts immune function and heart health.

The scientists also stressed that adequate magnesium levels help prevent the onset of metabolic syndrome, a condition characterized by a combination of high blood pressure, diabetes and obesity.

To carry out the study, the researchers teamed up with the Centre for Magnesium Education and Research in Hawaii to examine a group of participants who were given either a magnesium cream or a placebo. The participants were instructed to apply two five ml spoonfuls of cream each daily for two weeks.

The experts then collected the participants’ urine sample after 12 to 14 days. The results showed that volunteers who applied magnesium cream exhibited a significant increase in magnesium levels in the blood. The scientists did not observe a similar increase in those who applied the placebo cream.

The findings may show potential in alleviating hypertension, which puts people at an increased risk of heart disease, stroke, and vascular dementia. Hypertension currently affects 75 million Americans and 16 million people in the U.K.

“This study is the first to look at the absorbency of transdermal magnesium creams in human subjects, so is a significant step in determining whether or not these creams could potentially be used as an alternative to oral supplements. Our initial findings indicate that magnesium creams could well be a viable and effective alternative to taking oral magnesium supplements in tablet form,” study author Lindsy Kass told Daily Mail online.

“Low magnesium intake has been shown to cause many health problems, including high blood pressure and cardiovascular issues, so these creams could potentially be a good way to contribute to the increase in magnesium levels and therefore help in reducing the associated health problems. Many people do not like taking pills or have difficulty ingesting them, whereas a cream could be used easily on a daily basis – for example by rubbing it into the skin after showering,” Kass added.

However, the research team noted that these findings warranted further investigation.

Previous study shows magnesium intake promotes heart health

The recent findings on magnesium’s efficacy as a topical treatment were reflective of previous studies demonstrating the mineral’s cardiovascular benefits.

For instance, a meta-analysis published in December 2016 showed that a diet rich in magnesium may reduce the odds of developing heart disease and diabetes.(Related: Magnesium can improve heart health and prevent heart attack deaths (Opinion).)

As part of the study, a team of Chinese researchers pooled data on dietary magnesium intake and chronic disease prevalence from 40 studies published between 19999 and 2016.

The results showed that people with the highest dietary magnesium intake were 10 percent less likely to develop heart disease, 12 percent less likely to have a stroke, and 26 percent less likely to develop diabetes than those who had lower magnesium levels.

However, increasing magnesium levels by up to 100 milligrams a day helped reduce the odds of these adverse events. The research team noted that raising magnesium levels by the said amount slashed the risk of heart failure and stroke by 22 and sevent percent, respectively.

The health experts also said that increasing magnesium intake may result in a 19 percent reduction in diabetes risk and a 10 percent decrease in all-cause mortality risk.

“Increasing dietary magnesium intake is associated with a reduced risk of stroke, heart failure, diabetes, and all-cause mortality, but not CHD [coronary heart disease] or total CVD [cardiovascular disease]. These findings support the notion that increasing dietary magnesium might provide health benefits,” the researchers wrote in BMC Medicine.

Sources include:

DailyMail.co.uk

Reuters.com

Journals.PLOS.org

BMCMedicine.BioMedCentral.com

Is this why so many city dwellers have health issues? Air pollution found to radically increase stress hormones and alter metabolism

There really is something to be said for getting out into the fresh country air for a day. There is a tangible difference in how much better one feels in the country than in the city, especially if you have a very demanding job. While the stresses and strains of fast-paced city life may partly explain this feeling, new research by Dr. Haidong Kan and colleagues from Fudan University in Shanghai, China, indicates that the air pollution found in industrialized cities also causes a spike in stress hormones, resulting in the development of diseases like stroke, diabetes and heart disease, and ultimately shortening lifespan.

Reuters is reporting that the study, which was published in the journal Circulation, focused specifically on the long-term health effects of the inhalation of particulate matter (PM) smaller than 2.5 micrometers in diameter from industrial pollution. While the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that the level of 2.5 PM be kept below 10 to maintain the health of city residents, in some cities these levels exceed 50.

For their study, researchers divided 55 healthy college students from the city of Shanghai, which has moderate pollution levels compared to other Chinese cities, into two groups. Functioning air purifiers were placed in the dorm rooms of one group, while non-working units were placed in the remaining students’ rooms for nine days. After a 12-day gap the machines were swapped and another nine-day test was conducted. The participants were given blood and urine tests at the end of each nine-day period to determine their exposure to PM.

Interestingly, the scientists determined that even over just the nine-day period, levels of the stress hormones cortisone, cortisol, norepinephrine and epinephrine rose when the participants were exposed to the dirtier air. Their blood sugar, amino acid, fatty acid and lipid levels also rose, as did their blood pressure levels. The students also exhibited other indicators of molecular body tissue stress. This combination of stressors would likely lead to heart disease, diabetes and other health problems over time. (Related: Discover other ways in which our environment affects our health at Enviro.news)

“This research adds new evidence on how exposure to PM could affect our bodies, which may (ultimately) lead to higher cardiovascular risk,” Dr. Kan told Reuters Health. “Our result may indicate that particulate matter could affect the human body in more ways than we currently know. Thus, it is increasingly necessary for people to understand the importance of reducing their PM exposure.” (Related: Deep breathing of polluted air puts bike riders at higher risk of lung cancer and strokes.)

Exposure to pollution may not be the only way in which cities can negatively impact our health.

A 2014 study by researchers from the Central Institute of Mental Health in Mannheim, Germany, set out to determine the impact of stress on city dwellers’ brains. They discovered that in comparison to their country cousins, city slickers did not handle stress well at all.

The researchers purposely induced stress in study participants and then studied its effects on two areas of the brain: The amygdalas and the perigenual anterior cingulate cortex (pACC).

The Guardian explains their findings:

The amygdalas are known to be involved in assessing threats and generating fear, while the pACC in turn helps to regulate the amygdalas. In stressed citydwellers, the amygdalas appeared more active on the scanner; in people who lived in small towns, less so; in people who lived in the countryside, least of all.

And something even more intriguing was happening in the pACC. … Again, those with rural childhoods showed the least active pACCs, those with urban ones the most. In the urban group moreover, there seemed not to be the same smooth connection between the behaviour of the two brain regions that was observed in the others. An erratic link between the pACC and the amygdalas is often seen in those with schizophrenia too. And schizophrenic people are much more likely to live in cities.

Clearly, living in the city is not the best choice when it comes to either our mental or physical health. For those of us who have no option, however, it is important to get out into the country and breathe that fresh, clean air as often as possible.

Sources include:

Reuters.com

TheGuardian.com

The Conspiracy Against Saturated Fat: Dr. Jack Wolfson responds to the American Heart Association’s ignorant attack on coconut oil

Over the weekend, a news story based on the American Heart Association’s tired, worn-out and scientifically obsolete war on healthy fats went viral, claiming that coconut oil was somehow bad for cardiovascular health. Remember, the AHA is the same nutritionally illiterate organization that, for decades, told heart attack victims they could eat unlimited processed sugar and artificial sweeteners as long as they didn’t consume a single gram of fat. All fats were declared unhealthy by the AHA, including plant-based “good” fats like the kind found in avocados, flax seeds and chia seeds.

Now, the AHA is at its old “retread” tricks again, declaring war on coconut oil for the simple reason that coconut oil helps millions of American avoid the need for prescription drugs made by the very companies that funnel millions of dollars to the AHA. As coconut oil has become more mainstream, it’s cutting into the profit model of the corrupt “heart attack industry” which depends on people getting sick and staying sick by eating heavily processed foods devoid of real nutrition.

But the AHA’s propaganda effort is thinly veiled. Almost no one is fooled, and only the most nutritionally illiterate people believe anything the AHA (or the AMA, for that matter) has to say about nutrition, health or disease prevention. Any organization funded by Big Pharma is, by definition, nothing more than a group of prostitutes and shills for pharmaceutical interests.

In fact, holistic-minded doctors are raging against the AHA’s ignorant, dangerous advice that’s actually designed to promote heart disease rather than prevent it. Along those lines, I’m publishing an exclusive commentary piece authored by Jack Wolfson, DO, FACC, author of The Paleo Cardiologist and founder of TheDrsWolfson.com. Here’s what he has to say about the AHA’s mindless attack on coconut oil…

The Conspiracy Against Saturated Fat

by Jack Wolfon, DO, FACC

Have you heard the latest study showing coconut oil increases heart attacks? That’s right. You haven’t. Because it doesn’t and there is no such study.

But the American Heart Association (AHA) keeps trotting out the same message from the 1970’s: Saturated fat is the villain when it comes to cardiovascular disease.

The news media eats it up as the news relies on advertisers.

We can blame the fake news on Corporate America. It is the corporations who control the lobbyist groups like the AHA. That’s right. I said it. The AHA is a lobbyist group. They collect nearly 1 billion dollars every year to push the agenda of Big Pharma and Big Agriculture.

The small coconut oil vendor and grass-fed beef farmer don’t have much of a lobby.

Enough of the political and capitalist manifesto.

What is saturated fat

First, I want to explain exactly what saturated fat is. What we think of fat is really a tiny particle called a triglyceride. Tri means 3. So, 3 fatty acids are attached to a glycerol backbone. These fatty acids can be monounsaturated, polyunsaturated, or saturated. For some reason, the mono’s and the poly’s are safe, yet the sat fat is dangerous.

Yes, that is the same saturated fat found in the mammary gland of all nursing females: humans and animals alike. Yes, that is the same saturated fat found in eggs, the nourishment that brings birds and reptiles to life (try raising a chicken on oatmeal).

Second, humans have been eating saturated fat for millions of years. As hunter-gatherers, all humans in history ate meat and/or seafood. All animals eat meat, seafood, or insects.

When did sat fat become bad for us?

In the mid-20^th century, doctors looked at coronary plaque in the heart arteries. In the plaque was cholesterol. Cholesterol comes from animals. Therefore, don’t eat animals. Cholesterol was found at the scene of the crime and branded guilty without a trial.

Well, there actually was a trial based on cherry-picked data by Dr. Ancil Keys. Corporate America ran with this fake science and pushed sugar, artificials, and large amounts of grain into our lives.

America’s health has suffered.

Enough science? Is saturated fat bad for us?

In 2010, a study in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition was published. This is the biggest nutrition journal in the world. They looked at over 500,000 people regarding saturated fat. The conclusion: saturated fat is not linked to coronary disease. (1)

Fast forward to 2016. Same journal, more evidence…. Turns out that saturated fat actually LOWERS cardiac risk. (2)

In 2015, the AJCN reported saturated fat IS linked to heart disease, unless the saturated fat came from fish, dairy, or plants. From those sources of food, saturated fat is not an issue. (3)

Here is what the study authors concluded about their results.

“It should be acknowledged that other dietary components in the food sources containing SFAs may have played a role in the observed associations, such as refined carbohydrates in pastries or salt in processed foods.” Essentially, it’s the other crap in the food, not the saturated fat.

A side note from this 2015 study: The more fat you ate, the lower your heart attack risk and the chance you had of dying. (So much for the low fat gurus)

What About Cholesterol?

The recent statement by the AHA asserts that saturated fat raises LDL-cholesterol (4) and further asserts that LDL is the cholesterol that causes arterial blockage. That’s right, they say CAUSES, when LDL does NOT cause and has not been proven to cause heart disease. That is Big Pharma speak.

Why would all animals produce LDL? To cause heart attacks? Preposterous. LDL has many functions, most of which science is clueless to explain. LDL delivers nutrients around the body, is an anti-inflammatory, an anti-oxidant, and works for the immune system.

The fact that LDL works for the immune system is demonstrated by the fact it is found in plaque. Coronary disease is autoimmune. Wrap your head around that paradigm, cardiologists.

When it comes to LDL, size matters. Small, dense particles when elevated are strongly correlated to heightened risk of heart disease. Previous studies measure total LDL. That data is irrelevant. What matters is the ratio of LDL versus HDL. The more HDL particles versus LDL, the better. That science is settled.

Sadly, the average cardiologist missed that lecture from the drug reps.

My Experience

When my patients replace starchy carbs and sugars with fat, they feel great, they look great, and their lab tests are great. LDL particles go lower. HDL particles go higher. Inflammation is lower. Blood sugar is better. They lose weight and feel great.

Conclusion:

How many times are we going to hear this same retread story? When will the AHA get their head out of the sand? Probably never. After all, the AHA, American Diabetes Association, and other disease-oriented societies all live off sickness.

In the end, you decide what diet is right for you: the diet of our ancestors over millions of years or the diet advice of any organization run by paid shills from Big Ag and Big Pharma.

For more, check out my book, The Paleo Cardiologist, The Natural Way to Heart Health.

1. http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/91/3/535
2. http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/early/2016/01/20/ajcn.115.122671
3. http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/102/6/1563.long

Is that late night snack putting you at risk for diabetes and heart disease?

 A recent study conducted by researchers from the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania revealed that snacking late at night may increase the risk of diabetes and heart disease. To carry out the study, the research team examined nine healthy-weight adults who were instructed to consume three meals and two snacks between 8:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. for eight weeks. The participants were also instructed to eat the same meals, but this time between noon and 11:00 p.m. for another eight weeks. In order to control for sleep, the participants were instructed to sleep between 11:00 p.m. to 9:00 a.m. during the study’s duration.

The study revealed that the participants produced appetite-stimulating hormones when they ate during the day, which made them feel fuller for longer. However, the research team found that late-night eating not only spurred weight gain, but also resulted in higher insulin, blood glucose, and blood cholesterol levels among the participants. Late-night snacking was also associated with increased risk of heart disease or heart attack among participants.

“These early findings, which control for sleep, give a more comprehensive picture of the benefits of eating earlier in the same. Eating later can promote a negative profile of weight, energy and hormone markers – such as higher glucose and insulin, which are implicated in diabetes, and cholesterol and triglycerides, which are linked with cardiovascular problems and other health conditions,” lead author Namni Goel said in Telegraph.co.uk.

Another study links meal timing to diabetes and heart disease

Another study, published early this year revealed that people who skipped breakfast and those who ate late in the evening were at an increased risk of suffering heart attack or stroke. The study also revealed that people who had irregular meal schedules were likely to put on excess weight. According to researchers, the timing of meals remain important as long fasting periods between meals may tempt people to binge on unhealthy food items such as junk foods high in sugar and fat. (Related: Eating breakfast may actually slash heart risk)

“Eating patterns are increasingly varied. Typical breakfast, lunch, and dinner meals are difficult to distinguish because skipping meals and snacking have become more prevalent. Such eating styles can have various effects on cardiometabolic health markers, namely obesity, lipid profile, insulin resistance, and blood pressure. Meal timing may affect health due to its impact on the body’s internal clock. In animal studies, it appears that when animals receive food while in an inactive phase, such as when they are sleeping, their internal clocks are reset in a way that can alter nutrient metabolism, resulting in greater weight gain, insulin resistance and inflammation. However, more research would need to be done in humans before that can be stated as a fact. We suggest eating mindfully, by paying attention to planning both what you eat and when you eat meals and snacks, to combat emotional eating,” Dr. Marie-Pierre St-Onge, associate professor of nutritional medicine at Columbia University, said in Express.co.uk.

However, Prof. St-Onge noted that the findings warrant further investigation. The findings were published in Circulation, the flagship journal of the American Heart Association. 

Sources include: 

Telegraph.co.uk

Express.co.uk

Circ.AHAJournals.org

Reverse heart disease without meds

Most of us are used to the age-old saying “Live and learn,” but when you’re providing care to people with preventable chronic disease, you realize very quickly that we don’t have that luxury indefinitely. So, that saying changes to “Learn and live.”

In the next 20 years, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) projects that heart disease deaths will increase sharply.1

In that same time, the AHA estimates that the percentage of the US population living with heart disease will reach over 40%.

According to a recent estimate by the AHA, the cost of treating this preventable disease will skyrocket from $171 billion to $275 billion. These figures make it clear that if we want to keep living, and living well, we need to start learning how to protect our health.

Thankfully, it’s possible to live well while pursuing heart health. Studies by Dr. Dean Ornish, a leading researcher in the field, found that many patients can avoid major surgery and lessen their medication by making changes to their diet and lifestyle.

A low-fat, plant-based diet, regular exercise and stress-reducing activities like meditation have all been found to reduce the risk of heart disease.

Many people may see adopting a new diet and exercise regimen as something they have to force themselves to do. However, the most effective changes are those that are done step-by-step and gradually integrated into a person’s regular routine until they become a habit.

These changes can benefit everyone, at every stage of life, no matter your age or health status.

Coronary heart disease is not an inevitable consequence of aging, as was once thought. Sixty years ago, scientists began to discover that arterial damage may begin in childhood and progress throughout a person’s life. Still, many people think of heart disease as an old person’s illness.

In “Prevent a Second Heart Attack,” author Janet Brill, PhD, confirms that heart disease is largely caused by lifestyle factors that begin in childhood. She goes on to explain that “A toxic mix of calorie overload, especially of processed foods high in damaging fats, sugars, and salt, coupled with inactivity instigates the long, slow process of arterial damage that results in a heart attack.”

Experts are increasingly beginning to understand the importance of teaching heart-healthy behaviors to children.

While attempts to make school lunches healthier may have an impact, ultimately the most significant way to positively affect your child’s health is by making changes at home.

The most important step you can take to protect the health of your heart and your family’s hearts is to adopt a low-fat, plant-based diet.

A flesh-based diet contains an overabundance of saturated fats and cholesterol that contribute to atherosclerosis, or hardening of the arteries, that leads to a heart attack.

Fruits, vegetables and whole grains on the other hand are naturally low-fat, low-calorie foods that are rich in phytonutrients, vitamins, minerals and fiber.

Because your body gets the nutrients it needs and keeps you feeling full longer due to the fiber, plant foods may help control weight and blood pressure, both risk factors for heart disease.7

The fiber in plant foods also helps to carry cholesterol out of your body, instead of into your bloodstream.

Numerous studies have compared life-long vegetarians in the Seventh Day Adventist community to control groups eating the SAD.

Overwhelmingly, the results have indicated that diets containing more fresh fruits, vegetables and whole grains decrease the risk of diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol and obesity, which are all risk factors for heart disease.

A study by the Loma Linda School of Public Health found that vegetarians are 36% less likely to develop heart problems, diabetes or stroke compared to meat eaters.

The study included participants across the dietary spectrum, from people who ate meat frequently, to people who ate meat occasionally, and people who abstained from meat completely. They found that the closer a person was to being vegetarian, the lower their health risk became.

The more you experiment with healthy, whole food recipes the more you’ll experience how tasty a plant-based diet can be.

The more you engage in preparing and eating healthy meals with your loved ones, the more you’ll appreciate their health and well being.

The more you involve yourself with outdoor activities, the more you’ll discover the joy of being surrounded by life on all sides.

“Learn and live” begins to take on another, deeper meaning. As we learn new strategies for health, we not only increase our longevity, but we also increase the fullness and richness of our life experience.

We may be motivated at first by the desire to learn and survive, but as our habits change and we broaden our experience, we may find that, by learning, we have begun to truly live.

Aloha!

Source
www.asanediet.com
www.dresselstyn.com
www.pritican.com

Obesity? Heart Disease? Diabetes? Cancer? Maybe it’s not your genes–it’s your lifestyle

For so long, we’ve been conditioned to think our genes are rigid and unchangeable; and they alone define our health and longevity. We expect chronic disease to be treated like the common cold. Take a pill and go back to work.

You can’t fix obesity or diabetes with a pill; some pills (like statin drugs) actually raise your risk of developing diabetes or having a heart attack, and if you consume the typical American diet that consists of over one hundred pounds of refined white sugar and corn syrup per year—you are actually enabling diabetes. And for diabetics who have been conditioned to think diet sodas and artificial sugar will keep your blood sugar stable—think again. Sugar substitutes are toxic chemicals that kill your nerves. Literally—it excites them to death.

We have been deliberately conditioned to look to someone outside ourselves for answers—when all we really need to do is look within. In ancient times, we had our tribe, our family, and our community. We passed our inherited knowledge from generation to generation, and everything that brought us joy, that healed us, that made us wiser and stronger—is encoded within our DNA. We must simply remember.

If you’re old enough to remember the incredibly popular “Marlboro Man” television advertisement campaign (1955-1999), you remember those smokin’ hot cowboys—that showed us that filtered cigarettes weren’t just for martini sipping housewives. When the ads first appeared in 1955, sales were $5 billion. Two years later, they were $20 billion. If you remember, those scientific studies on safety of smoking, conducted by none other than the same Phillip Morris tobacco company who sold the cigarettes—“PROVED” that smoking didn’t cause lung cancer. Of course, the studies were scientific– those trusted nighttime news anchors that reported the results wouldn’t lie to us. And then five of the cowboy ad “hunks” died of cancer and smoking related lung diseases. There were six total. Cigarettes became known as the “Cowboy Killers.” And maybe—just maybe the science was a little skewed—since the tobacco company had a huge stake in the outcome. And then we learned that even second hand smoke was bad for us. Remember coming home from a restaurant and your clothes and hair smelled like an ashtray?

But we learned our lesson didn’t we? We no longer blindly believe pseudo science, paid for and conducted by tobacco companies to sell us cancer-causing cigarettes; or pharmaceutical companies to sell us cancer drugs that give us cancer; or foods laden with pesticides that poison our gut. We learned right? And after all, we now have legit TV doctors to explain the latest research so we can trust the validity of new drugs and food safety.

We. Learned. Right?

The study of immunology is relatively new. Just a couple decades ago—no one understood the importance of the gut micro biome in the prevention of chronic disease. You could say the greatest predictor of true immune system health is the state of the gut. Trust it! The antibodies in your immune system contain the memory of all the diseases that your ancestors overcame. Everything you need to know is already inside you—made possible by the evolution of cellular DNA memory and your mother’s breast milk.

What thousands of epigenetic studies have taught us, is that merely possessing a specific gene, does not guarantee the expression of it. Telomeres are DNA pieces at the end of chromosomes that act as protective end caps. Every time a cell divides, the chromosome end cap gets shorter. Once a chromosome gets too short, it dies. This process has been associated with rapid aging and death. We now have the science to   show that people who consistently maintain high levels of physical activity have significantly longer telomeres than those with a sedentary lifestyle. High physical activity gives you a biological aging advantage of nine years over those who are sedentary!  (Study listed below)

Lifestyle choices can engage our cells to perform at their peak. All of us can consciously choose to engage in behaviors that enable our genes to heal us, not harm us.

In the words of Deepak Chopra and Rudi Tanzi:
“You will always have the genes you were born with, but genes are dynamic, responding to everything we think, say, and do. Suddenly they’ve become our strongest allies for personal transformation. When you make lifestyle choices that optimize how your genes behave, you can reach for a state of health and fulfillment undreamed of even a decade ago. The impact on prevention, immunity, diet, aging, and chronic disorders is unparalleled.” (From the book, Super Genes, link below—highly recommend)  

Resources

http://www.whatisepigenetics.com/what-is-epigenetics/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/672

http://time.com/4776345/exercise-aging-telomeres/

Researchers claim commuting to work on a bike cuts your risk of cancer by almost half

Researchers from the University of Glasgow have delivered good news for avid cyclists everywhere. Taking your bike to work could reduce your risk of cancer by 45 percent, as well as your risk of heart disease by 46 percent, the investigative team revealed.

For the purposes of their study, the researchers evaluated the data of over 264,337 people from the UK Biobank project, an international health resource. The team then questioned the participants on their methods of traveling to work. From there, the researchers maintained contact with the participants for five years. The average age of the participants was 53 years at the beginning of the study. Any cases of heart attacks, cancer, and deaths that occurred during that time period were carefully analyzed and then connected to the participants’ mode of travel, reported CNBC.com.

By the end of the study, the researchers discovered that commuters who covered ground by way of a bicycle had a 41 percent reduced risk of premature death. Similarly, walking to work had been linked to lowered risks of developing heart disease (27 percent) and dying from heart disease (36 percent); there were no significant reductions to the risks of cancer nor premature death, however. According to the Independent.co.uk, of the 2,430 people who died during the course of the study: 496 deaths were from hearth disease while 1,126 deaths were from cancer. Moreover, 3,748 people developed cancer over five years while 1,110 underwent events that related to heart disease, like a stroke or heart attack.

In a statement, Dr. Jason Gill, Associate Academic at the Institute of Health and Wellbeing, said: “Cycling all or part of the way to work was associated with substantially lower risk of adverse health outcomes.”

Dr. Carlos Celis-Morales, Research Associate at the Institute of Cardiovascular and Medical Sciences, added: “Walking to work was associated with lower risk of heart disease, but unlike cycling was not associated with a significantly lower risk of cancer or overall death. This may be because walkers commuted shorter distances than cyclists — typically six miles per week, compared with 30 miles per week — and walking is generally a lower intensity of exercise than cycling.” (Related: Stunned researchers discover that the impact of walking dramatically boosts blood flow to the brain, boosting cognitive function)

If their findings are indeed causal, Gill has said that “policies designed to make it easier for people to commute by bike, such as cycle lanes, city bike hire, subsidized cycle purchase schemes and increasing provision for cycles on public transport may present major opportunities for public health improvement.”

“A shift from car to more active modes of travel will also decrease traffic in congested city centers and help reduce air pollution, with further benefits for health,” said Professor Lars Bo Andersen, a professor at the Department of Sports Medicine in the Norwegian School of Sport Sciences.

Jason Torrance, Policy Director of cycling charity Sustrans, has told the Independent.co.uk that cycling to work was “a proven way for people to improve their health, to help their local economies and to improve their productivity at work,” before adding “There’s an urgent need to improve road conditions for cyclists and transforming local roads and streets into places that people feel safe and want to be. Some cities are taking a leading role in doing that, like London and Manchester, which are doing some fantastic things. But more needs to be done.”

If there are any further developments in the world of health, then you can read all about them at MindBodyScience.news.

Sources include:

CNBC.com

Independent.co.uk

Gla.AC.uk

BMJ.com

Restricting your sodium intake does NOT reduce your blood pressure, researchers find

It has long been believed that cutting down on your sodium intake can reduce your blood pressure and your risk of cardiovascular disease. However, new findings that were announced at the Experimental Biology 2017 meeting have challenged that long-standing piece of wisdom. Lynn L. Moore, Associate Professor of Medicine at the Boston University School of Medicine, has asserted that the supposed links connecting sodium consumption, blood pressure, and cardiovascular disease “wasn’t well understood”. Moore had even gone on to call the logic supporting the links as “flawed”, as stated in the SanDiegoUnionTribune.

In collaboration with other researchers, Moore studied data from over 2,632 participants — with normal blood pressure — from the Farmingham Offspring Study, an ongoing cardiovascular cohort study in the town of Framingham, Mass. Over the course of 16 years, the investigative team analyzed the participants’ dietary records, paying close attention to systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) blood pressures. They also took into account physical activity, cigarette smoking, alcohol intake, height, age, and sex.

They found that those who consumed 2,500 mg to 4,000 mg of sodium daily had lower blood pressure than those whose sodium intakes were less than 2,500 mg a day. Additionally, the same group who displayed lower pressure were also noted to have elevated levels of magnesium, potassium, and calcium. In particular, the lowest readings came from the participants who ingested about 3,717 mg of sodium a day. Based on their findings, the researchers concluded that sodium was not the only nutrient that had an effect on blood pressure, nor was it the most important one. Participants who consumed around 3,211 mg of potassium daily also had the lowest blood pressure readings. Nutrients such as potassium, magnesium, and calcium may also play roles in determining how low and how high one’s blood pressure would become. (Related: Blaming dietary sodium for high blood pressure is too simplistic; the real problem may be mineral deficiencies)

“We saw no evidence that a diet lower in sodium had any long-term beneficial effects on blood pressure. Our findings add to growing evidence that current recommendations for sodium intake may be misguided,” Moore has said, as reported by EurekaAlert.org. In a separate statement, Moore has also remarked that, “A low-sodium diet has been popularized for a few decades, and I think it originally had to do with the observation that among people with high blood pressure, if you restrict their sodium intake, their blood pressure actually goes down. I think that led to the inference that restricting your sodium intake in general (among the public) would actually reduce your risk of developing high blood pressure.”

The findings presented by Moore contradict the recommended daily dosage of 1,500 mg, as prescribed by the American Heart Association. Similarly, the 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans advises a daily intake of less than 2,300 mg of sodium. To this, Moore has said: “I hope that this research will help refocus the current Dietary Guidelines for Americans on the importance of increasing intakes of foods rich in potassium, calcium and magnesium for the purpose of maintaining a healthy blood pressure.”

Furthermore, Moore has said that restricting one’s daily amount of salt could lead to detrimental health effects. One of these is elevated renin levels, which can be indicative of malignant high blood pressure. Moore then added, “Other studies have shown that cholesterol goes up, triglyceride levels go up. So there are a number of effects on known risk factors for heart disease that are independent of blood pressure, that seem to be activated in a setting of salt restriction.”

Keep up to date with all the latest news about sodium and other food additives by visiting MSG.news.

Sources include:

SanDiegoUnionTribune.com

EurekaAlert.org

App.Core-Apps.com

Health.gov

Shocking study reveals patients who go to the hospital on a weekend are more likely to die within 30 days

A recent report released by the National Health Services (NHS) in the U.K. revealed that being admitted to a hospital on a weekend increased the risk of dying within 30 days. The report also showed that weekend admission elevated the odds of a longer hospital stay. As part of the research, health experts examined data on more than 16.3 million patient admissions between October 2015 and September 2016 from 133 NHS trusts.

The research team found that patients admitted during the weekends had increased odds of 30-day mortality. The experts also found that patients admitted during “transition” days of Monday and Friday have higher mortality risk compared with those admitted during Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday. The report further revealed that patients discharged on a Friday or over the weekend were at an increased risk of experiencing emergency readmission within a week. An NHS official stressed that up to 11,000 deaths per year were associated with this “weekend effect.”

According to the researchers, this weekend effect stemmed from a lack of inpatient and outpatient services during weekends. The experts stressed that more seasoned senior doctors were rarely available on Saturdays and Sundays. The report highlighted the staff shortage during weekends, which negatively impacted certain procedures such as x-rays, blood tests, and vital scans.

“It might be about how quick people get to hospital, how many porters or other non-medical staff are working. It might be that people are sicker when they get to hospital, because they may have been sitting at home for longer waiting for a GP appointment — we just do not know,” said Professor Mike Grocott, a critical care specialist at the University of Southampton in an article in DailyMail.co.uk.

Other studies demonstrate “weekend effect”

Numerous studies have previously established of link between weekend hospitalization and higher mortality risk. A study conducted by researchers at the Bristol University in the U.K. revealed that older patients with fractured hips who underwent surgery on a Saturday had a 10 percent higher risk of dying within a month following the procedure. The research team also found that hip surgery patients who were discharged on a Sunday had a 51.5 percent increased likelihood of dying within 30 days after the procedure. (Related: Want to live longer? Read some of the articles at Longevity.news).

A 2015 study also showed a correlation between weekend admission and higher mortality risk, especially among patients with cancer, heart problems, or stroke. As part of the study, researchers analyzed 14 million patients admitted to U.K. hospitals between 2013 and 2014. The study revealed that patients who were admitted on a Sunday were 15 percent more likely to die compared to those admitted on a Wednesday. The research team also found that patients admitted on a Saturday had a 10 percent increased risk of dying.

“We have shown a clear association between weekend admission and worse patient outcomes. Our analyses show that an increased proportion of higher risk patients are admitted on Saturday and Sunday, when services inside and outside the hospital are reduced. There is evidence that junior hospital doctors feel clinically exposed during the weekend and that hospital chief executives are concerned about levels of weekend cover…Patients generally accept the risks associated with their condition and with any necessary treatment, but they should never have to accept an increased risk because of the way healthcare services are designed and delivered,” the study authors wrote in the British Medical Journal. 

A study published in BMC Health Services Research also found that weekend hospitalization was an independent risk factor in increased mortality risk, especially among patients who had elective admissions. To carry out the study, researchers examined more than 1.5 million elective admissions and found that the mortality rate was 0.77 percent in those who were on weekend admission, compared with only 0.52 percent in those who had weekday admission. However, the research team stressed that the findings warrant further assessment.

Sources include: 

DailyMail.co.uk

TheGuardian.com

BMCHealthServRes.BioMedCentral.com