Sunday, December 27, 2015

Germs in Your Intestine - Something New in Medicine!

One of the biggest new stories in medicine is the relationship between the gut bacteria, also known as the microbiotome, and your health.

In previous posts I have mentioned how changes in these germs can increase risk for:

  • Obesity
  • Asthma
  • Diabetes
  • Ulcerative Colitis and Inflammatory Bowel Disease
  • Melanoma

Now more provocative information has been published.

Microbiotome can affect your response to Cancer Chemotherapy:
In an immune therapy for Melanoma, researchers found that only in the presence of a certain gut bacteria would the therapy be able to cure the cancer!
Anthony L. Komaroff, MD Reviewing Snyder A et al., Science 2015 Nov 27; 350:1031

Also, stool transplants (frozen capsules of stool bacteria) has become the most effective treatment for a potentially fatal colon infection (Clostridium).

The medical has been responding to this news - antibiotic use has decreased by about 25% between 2000 and 2011 in the US,
Thomas Glück, MD Reviewing Frenk SM et al., J Antimicrob Chemother 2015 Oct 12

Look for more news as we learn more about the unique relationship between gut microbiotome and disease. One day forms or probiotics will become adjunctive or primary treatment for many diseases!

Saturday, December 26, 2015

Too Many C-Sections

Many people think that the US is doing too many Cesarean sections; for many reasons including malpractice concerns, convenience, and financial gain.

But is this reality? What is the appropriate rate?

When looking at smaller numbers we realize that every delivery is different. However, in a recent study, researchers looked at cesarean delivery rates and morbidity and mortality data from 194 World Health Organization member nations from 2005 to 2012. They found that rates of about 19% were associated with the lowest maternal and neonatal mortality. This is counter to the 15% rate many have suggested as ideal.

So how are we doing? Very poorly. In 2013, the CDC reports that 32.3% of all births were by C-section. In Puerto Rico it was 49%; Louisiana, Florida and New Jersey were close at 38%. The best states were Utah, Idaho, Hawaii and Alaska at rates of 22-25%.

In Canada, the rate was 17% in 1995, but has now climbed to 27%.

So yes, we are doing too many C-sections. If you can. check out your doctors record and willingness to allow labor to proceed when the mother and child are not in danger. Not only are many C-section unnecessary, but they are actually harmful to the mother and child!

JAMA, December 1, 2015, Vol 314, No. 21
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2473490

"Idiocracy" and The Idiot Box


In 2006 Mike Judge wrote and directed a movie, "Idiocracy" based on a concept that 500 years in the future humanity would have evolved downward towards lower intelligence.

In a recent study, Steven Dubovsky, MD Reviewing Hoang TD et al., JAMA Psychiatry 2015 Dec 2, the researchers discovered that we are dumbing ourselves through our lifestyle.

They reviewed self reports on TV watching and exercise of over 5,000 adults who had been followed for 25 years. After adjusting for factors such as illness and smoking, they found a long-term pattern of low physical activity was associated with significantly slower processing speed. Watching television for >3 hours/day had significant associations with slower processing speed and poorer executive function. Participants with the lowest level of physical activity and the most television watching had the slowest processing speed and worst executive function.

This study began in early adulthood; one can only guess about what effect it is having on our children!

Perhaps less intelligent people watch more TV and exercise less because they are less intelligent. But would you take that chance with your kids?

Screen time should be restricted in children (and adults), and regular exercise strongly encouraged. Next time you go out to dinner count how many people are not on a device - it will be easier than those with their faces in their phones. Perhaps if we don't change soon Mr. Judge's prophesy will become reality!

Friday, December 4, 2015

Environment Health and Good Germs

More studies are beginning to show that our bodies are actually in quite a delicate balance with our environment; and this can easily be destabilized by medical intervention.

We already know that changes in the bacteria, or germs, that grow in our intestines can lead to obesity and autoimmune diseases. As well, there is a severe intestinal infection, known as Clostridia, which results from antibiotic treatment, is best treated by changing the bacteria in our gut (using a "stool transplant" in a frozen prepackaged capsule).

In a recent study, researchers found that children at high risk for asthma (defined as wheezing and positive skin prick tests at age 1 year) had received more courses of antibiotics during their first year of life, were more often born by caesarian section and were more often exclusively formula fed. They found that certain bacteria were less likely to be found in their intestines.

Sci Transl Med 2015 Sep 30; 7:307fs39

In a second, JAMA Pediatr 2015 Nov 9, researchers gave probiotics during the first month of life to a group of infants who had a genetic marker associated with type 1 diabetes. They found that there was a 40% decrease in development of diabetes in these children during the 10 year followup.

The environmental influences of intestinal bacteria are related to breast feeding, as well as normal behavior where children "taste" everything. We have discovered that exposure of babies to "dirt" or things they normally pick up is a normal adaption that actually prevents autoimmune diseases and allergies.

We need to, within reason, allow our babies to be "dirty", try and breast feed for at least 6 months (a year is preferred), and avoid antibiotics unless absolutely necessary. This includes eating foods or meats that have been treated with antibiotics.

Wednesday, November 25, 2015

Genetic Engineering (GMO) comes to animal products

The FDA has approved the first genetically modified (GMO) animal product, AquAdvantage Salmon, to be used for food. This version of Atlantic salmon grows faster than non-GMO farm-raised Atlantic salmon.

However, in their approval they stated "food from AquAdvantage Salmon is as safe to eat and as nutritious as food from other non-GE Atlantic salmon and that there are no biologically relevant differences in the nutritional profile of AquAdvantage Salmon compared to that of other farm-raised Atlantic salmon."

The GMO salmon may be raised only in land-based hatchery tanks in two facilities in Canada and Panama.

I understand there is no evidence (yet) that this is dangerous; but on the other hand there have to be some differences and I would prefer not to risk possible harmful effects. As well, there was no comment on flavor.

I think this should be labelled. To avoid the GMO salmon stay with wild salmon (and hope it is not mislabeled!).

http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm473249.htm

"Hypoallergenic" - inaccurate and misleading

There are many products labelled hypoallergenic. But there is no standard; and, in a recent publication, many of these are found to contain a potent allergen ans skin sensitizer!

Methylchloroisothiazolinone (MCI) and methylisothiazolinone (MI) are preservatives in cosmetics and personal hygiene products. They can be potent skin sensitizers and are included in many patch tests used by allergists and dermatologists.

In this study, it was found that the low concentrations in patch testing could miss many patients who were actually sensitive in higher levels that are often found in cosmetics and creams. In a review of over 700 patients about 10% were found to be allergic in spite of negative patch tests at current concentrations. Three quarters of them responded to elimination of the products.

But the real frightening issue is the number of products that do contain these, and are very often labelled hypoallergenic!

Dermatitis 2013; 24:2

Partial list: (go to http://www.hindawi.com/journals/drp/2014/132564/
for a more complete list

Huggies Natural care baby wipes “Hypoallergenic"

 One & done refreshing baby wipes “Alcohol-free, gentle ingredients"

 Simply clean baby wipes “Alcohol-free, gentle ingredients"

Nice-Pak Products Baby wipes “Hypoallergenic, alcohol-free"

Parent's Choice Fragrance-free baby wipes “Hypoallergenic with aloe"

Fresh scent baby wipes “Hypoallergenic with aloe"

Rockline Inc. Pure ’n Gentle antibacterial hand wipes
“Hypoallergenic & alcohol-free with natural aloe & vitamin E"

Equate Antibacterial hand wipes “Hypoallergenic, with vitamin E & aloe"
Galvin & lvin London Kids Dubble trubble 2-in-1 shampoo & body wash “Certified organic"

Suave Kids body wash “Dermatologist-tested, gentle, tear-free, dye-free"

Sanrio Hello Kitty bubble bath “Tear-free, gentle, hypoallergenic formula"

Neutrogena Pure & free baby sunscreen SPF 60+ “100% naturally sourced sunscreen ingredients, #1 dermatologist-recommended suncare"

Sunday, November 15, 2015

Marijuana and Reefer Madness

Marijuana and Reefer Madness

Forty years ago, when I was in college, I would never have believed that marijuana would ever have become legalized. Now that it appears decriminalization is inevitable, I should remind you that although it is quite safe, it is not without some issues.

Reefer Madness ( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0028346/ ) was a 1936 movie that exaggerated the dangers of marijuana. However, in a recent study that compared siblings and identical twins, one of whom was a regular marijuana user, found there was an almost double risk of psychotic events and schizophrenia. In susceptible individuals chronic use can be dangerous. As well, there are certain compounds in marijuana that can be riskier, while others that may actually help; the problem is there is no standardization among different strains.

Goldman D., JAMA Psychiatry 2015 Aug 26;

In a second study of children who were at risk for schizophrenia (based on genetics) there was also a significantly increased risk in marijuana users (French L et al., JAMA Psychiatry 2015 Aug 26).

And now E-cigarettes are being used to smoke pot. About 6% of 3800 high school students in Connecticut admitted to using hashish or other oils to smoke marijuana through and E-cigarette. The authors are concerned that this relatively ease of use may induce more adolescents to smoke pot. In previous reviews it has been shown that smoking marijuana in teens can produce permanent brain changes. (Morean ME et al., Pediatrics 2015 Sep 7)

To summarize, like other psychogenic agents (like alcohol) recreational occasional use in adults is probably safe. Any use in children and adolescents is inappropriate. Chronic use is unhealthy!

Monday, November 9, 2015

Preventing Cancer

With the US Health department reminding us that processed meats, like hot dogs, can increase your risk of cancer, I decided to mention three recent articles concerning foods and cancer.

It is well known that the Mediterranean Diet (rich in vegetables, grains and olive oils - look it up) can lower your risk for heart disease. Now researchers have discovered that this diet, with use of extra virgin olive oil (not sure why it specified "extra virgin") was associated with a 40-60% lower risk in women for breast cancer. It seems the more olive oil had the lowest risk!

Andrew M. Kaunitz, MD Reviewing Toledo E et al., JAMA Intern Med 2015 Sep 14;

Have you ever wondered if those insecticides sprayed in your home are dangerous? Well in a small study researchers found that children exposed to pesticides in their home (but not those sprayed outside) or herbicides that were sprayed in their lawn, caused a significantly increased risk of lymphoma and leukemia (25% for herbicides and 50% for pesticides). Something to think about!

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/136/4/719

Finally, the controversy about alcohol use continues. Many studies have shown that small amounts of alcohol daily (up to two drinks for men and one for women) probably lower our risk of heart disease, but higher amounts lose that benefit. Now researchers have found that even in light drinkers there was a small but significant increased risk of breast cancer in women - about 30-40%. In men the risk of cancer was only increased in smokers.

Paul S. Mueller, MD, MPH, FACP reviewing Cao Y et al. BMJ 2015 Aug 18. Rehm J. BMJ 2015 Aug 18

So eat a proper diet, with plenty of extra virgin olive oil. Don't drink too much alcohol. Don't smoke. And don't use herbicides in your yard or pesticides in your home. I would think that the "natural" pesticides such as peppermint or chili spray, or diatomaceous earth may be OK

Saturday, November 7, 2015

Sleep, Genes, Behavior and Illness

Scientists have struggled with why we sleep. A general consensus is that it allows a rejuvenation of the body, repairing and removing toxins, as well as allowing our brains to consolidate information.

Recently, a couple of studies have been published showing some unexpected adverse effects of poor sleep.

In the first, researchers tried to evaluate why some young children seem to sleep less, and asked if this can affect behavior. They found that a certain gene seemed to create a risk for these effects.

A significant association was found between short sleep duration during the first 3 years of life and frustration, fear, discomfort, sadness, and inattention in children with the 5-HTTLPR short allele but not in others!

Martin T. Stein, MD Reviewing Bouvette-Turcot AA et al., Pediatrics 2015 Oct 136:e914

In a second study, 164 volunteer adults were studied in a sleep lab, then infected with the cold virus by nasal spray. They found that those with less than 7 hours sleep, on average, were four times more likely to develop symptoms! They did not do a genetic analysis.

Thomas Glück, MD Reviewing Prather AA et al., Sleep 2015 Sep 38:1353

It appears that sleep duration can affect behavior and risk of illnesses. We do not know what else it may affect. Just try and get enough!

Tuesday, October 27, 2015

The FDA and Big Pharma

In many cases we have seen drugs either approved, or allowed to remain on the market when they have had unacceptable side effects (for example Vioxx), or been shown to be essentially ineffective (The new female sex pill). In addition, when President Bush passed part D (drugs) coverage for Medicare, the law was amended to specifically prohibit negotiating prices with drug companies (as do every other government sponsored plan throughout the world).

Many have surmised this is related to the powerful drug lobby. And it does seem to be so. That is why it is so disturbing that the FDA, our supposed independent agency that regulates the drug companies, has appointed Dr Robert Califf to head the agency.

He received received roughly $200,000 in consulting fees from pharmaceutical companies from 2009 to 2015, and has spoken out against regulation by the government. An interesting choice.

Check out New York Times Article

Wednesday, October 21, 2015

Colon Cancer and Aspirin

In the past, aspirin and NSAID (motrin, aleve, etc) use has been shown to decrease the risk of colon cancer by 20-40%. Although the mechanism is obscure, some believe it is related to the prostaglandin receptors in the colon.

Few of us take full dose aspirin or NSAIDs on a daily basis, and there had been no studies using 81mg or baby aspirin which is much more commonly taken.

Now, in a new report researchers showed that continuous use of low-dose aspirin (75–100 mg per tablet) for ≥5 years was associated with a 27% reduction in colorectal cancer risk. Long-term use of nonaspirin NSAIDs (≥2 prescriptions annually for ≥5 years) was associated with a 36% reduction in risk. There was no clear benefit from irregular use.

Unless you have a bleeding disorder, or a contraindication such as an ulcer, taking a baby aspirin a day, starting at about age 40, may be beneficial. You should discuss this with your physician to be sure this is OK for you.

Douglas K. Rex, MD Reviewing Friis S et al., Ann Intern Med 2015 Sep 1; 163:347

The Mammography Controversy

Today a new recommendation about mammograms was published by the American Cancer Society (ACS).

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/21/health/breast-cancer-screening-guidelines.html?_r=0


We used to do yearly tests starting at age 40; but there was really no hard evidence about how often and when to start. The US Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) started recommending every other year beginning at age 50.

http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/UpdateSummaryFinal/breast-cancer-screening

The basis for these decisions is mainly the cost-effectiveness of the procedure and the risks involved. The risks are very minimal; the adverse complications from a negative biopsy are minuscule. We do not know the rate of false positives, which can result in unnecessary mastectomies. Cost benefit analyses are relatively arbitrary, but generally if the cost of finding one case exceeds $250,000 it is considered not cost effective.

In an editorial in the Journal of the American Medical Association, they commented:

"Because the risk of breast cancer is low for women in their 40s and to some extent women in their 50s, the modest relative benefit of 15% translates to a very small absolute benefit (approximately 5 of 10 000 women in their 40s and 10 of 10 000 women in their 50s are likely to have a breast cancer death prevented by regular mammography). The absolute benefit will be higher for women with a higher absolute risk of breast cancer, underscoring the importance of identifying higher-risk women. Especially for average-risk women, decisions to undergo regular mammography screening must also consider the harms of mammography—most notably the possibility of overdiagnosis and resultant overtreatment (age-specific estimates of which are lacking) and also the risks of false positives and unnecessary biopsies (known to be greater in younger women and women screened more frequently).
Despite the vast literature on screening mammography, the evidence needed to help women make decisions remains incomplete. "

For now, I would recommend continuing with yearly mammograms until the age of 75; and considering dropping to every second year after about age 60. But hard evidence is lacking and, as we develop better mammography methods it may be difficult to really know what to do.

Friday, September 11, 2015

Genetically Modified Foods - More Concerns

Genetically modified foods (GMO) are created differently than the traditional selection of hybrids done in the past. Here, farmers have the availability of DNA from anywhere on the planet to incorporate into their crops.

In some cases this can be beneficial; allowing food yields to increase and developing resistance t salty water.

Although one of the initial concerns was the production of toxic proteins and changes in the plants, this does not appear to have occurred (although the jury is still out). Currently more than 90% of the corn and soybeans in this country are GMO.

The United States still does not require GMO labeling on our foods, unlike 64 other countries.


The most common GMO modification is the creation of "Round-Up" (a weed and plant killer) resistant crops; allowing farmers to spray their plants at any time. Naturally this has produced round-up resistant weeds, and now the use of 2-4D, a herbicide derived from Agent Orange has increased. In fact, a new product, called Enlist Duo, a combination of 2-4D and round-up has been approved by the FDA.

However, the  International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified round-up as a probable carcinogen, and 2-4D as a possible carcinogen.

Why are we spraying and eating foods with cancer causing agents, and why doesn't the government require labeling to inform us. Why does the FDA so easily approve a probable cancer causing herbicide for use on foods? These are interesting questions.

I would recommend that GMO foods be avoided.

GMOs, Herbicides, and Public Health

Philip J. Landrigan, M.D., and Charles Benbrook, Ph.D.
N Engl J Med 2015; 373:693-695August 20, 2015DOI: 10.1056/NEJMp1505660

Monday, September 7, 2015

Does Enough Sleep Prevent Colds?

Many medical studies obtain lots of press; and this one was no different.

In this small study, 160 volunteers had their sleep measured, then were exposed to cold viruses. About 50 of the patients developed clinical colds; those who slept less than 6 hours were four times more likely.

We know the cold virus thrives on cooler temperatures. Perhaps during sleep our nasal temperature increases. Also, it is possible that both groups were similarly infected, but the sleepers cleared the infection more efficiently.

Most people need at least 6 hours sleep a night, and this will promote good health. If you are one of the very few that get less than that; and are not fatigued, this is probably OK for you as well.

Prather AA, Janicki-Deverts D, Hall MH, Cohen S. Behaviorally assessed sleep and susceptibility to the common cold. SLEEP 2015;38(9):1353–1359.

Friday, August 28, 2015

The Female Sex Pill - An Interesting Article on How Drug Companies Manipulate the FDA

From The Montreal Gazette 8-28-2015

SEDUCED BY THE HYPE

    Montreal GazetteAugust 28, 2015Christopher Labos is a Montreal doctor who writes about medicine and health issues. Christopher.labos@mail.mcgill.ca twitter.com/drlabos

Casanova used oysters and chocolate to put his female companions in the mood. They don’t actually do anything, though. I eat them all the time and have yet to become the ladies’ man I always thought I would be.

So the promise of something that may act as an aphrodisiac would be a financial blockbuster for its manufacturer.

Enter flibanserin (soon to be rebranded as Addyi), which was just approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and seems likely to be approved by Health Canada soon enough. It is the first medication indicated to treat hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD) in women.

Only problem is, many experts contend that HSDD doesn’t actually exist, that the drug is ineffective, has terrible side effects and was approved only because of a successful lobbying campaign. It’s kind of a funny story. Flibanserin was first developed as an anti-depressant and proved to be a flop. But in reviewing the data from trials, investigators found that patients reported improvements in their sex lives. Thus, it was repackaged and became a medication to enhance sexual desire. Studies were done and the data submitted to the FDA.

But the FDA unanimously rejected the drug application in 2010. Undaunted, the manufacturer refiled in 2013. It was again rejected. It appealed and was denied.

The FDA had two fundamental problems with the drug.

First, the FDA didn’t think it worked. To measure what effect the medication had on sexual desire, researchers asked study participants to keep a daily diary. When the results were analyzed, there was no difference between flibanserin and a placebo. The only real difference was in the number of “satisfactory sexual events.” This increased by an average of 0.5 events per month. Obviously, the FDA did not consider one extra orgasm every two months to be a meaningful improvement.

To work around this problem, the manufacturer changed its methodology and asked study participants to use the Female Sexual Function Index, a questionnaire that asks subjects to recall their experiences over the previous four weeks, instead of the daily diary. It is harder to accurately remember things that happened weeks ago, and therefore a daily diary is almost always preferred. On the six-point scale, flibanserin showed a 0.3 point improvement in sexual desire. What this means in real life is hard to say.

The second major problem that the FDA had was that any small potential benefit was outweighed by the side effects. Flibanserin causes a sudden drop in blood pressure and loss of consciousness in some patients. That’s bad. What’s worse is that the symptoms are more pronounced if you mix it with alcohol. Given that alcohol precedes most sexual encounters — at least according to HBO — that particular interaction is somewhat worrisome. It also interacts with a large number of medications including birth control pills. Think about that for a second: a sex pill that interacts with alcohol and contraceptives. And yet, here we are.

Given the significant problems of two FDA rejections, the manufacturer decided to change tactics and launched a media campaign called Even the Score. The message was simple. The FDA is sexist because it approved drugs like Viagra, but not flibanserin. They also rebranded flibanserin as “Pink Viagra” or “Viagra for women.”

The message on their website states that 26 drugs have been approved for male sexual dysfunction and, now, only one for women. This is untrue. First, they have counted several different forms of testosterone (gels, patches, pills, etc.) as different drugs, which is silly. Also worth noting that testosterone has enough side effects (it increases the risk of a heart attack) that no one should be prescribing it simply to treat low libido.

Furthermore, Viagra and flibanserin are completely different medications that do completely different things. They have nothing do with another. Drugs like Viagra and Cialis don’t actually increase sexual desire. They are phosphodiesterase inhibitors, drugs that dilate arteries and improve blood flow. In this case, they improve blood flow to the penis to initiate and sustain an erection. They don’t make you want to have sex. Also, while drugs like Viagra are taken as needed, flibanserin must be taken every day long term. Comparing them is a good marketing strategy, but bad science.

Fundamentally, the difference between men and women is that with men, sexual dysfunction is a problem of ability. Age, smoking, diabetes and high blood pressure all contribute to narrowing of blood vessels, which make erections more difficult. It is a biological problem and these medications provide a biological solution. With women, sexual dysfunction is more complex and is rarely due to a single issue as it is in men. It is a complex interplay of emotional, psychological, social and environmental issues. The old joke that a woman’s sex organ is her brain has some merit.

Sometimes, medical issues can affect a woman’s sexual desire, but flibanserin was specifically studied in pre-menopausal women with no medical problems. It is also contraindicated in women taking a very very long list of medications. As part of its media campaign, many testimonials from women suffering from hypoactive sexual desire disorder were trotted out to sway the FDA. The irony, of course, is that flibanserin would not be indicated for many of them.

The final fly in the ointment is that hypoactive sexual desire disorder doesn’t actually exist. It was removed from the most recent DSM-V, the disease manual that defines medical psychiatric disorders. Many experts consider sexual desire disorders a relic from the 1950s when “frigidity” and “nymphomania” were medical diagnoses. The growing consensus is that there is no such thing as too little or too much sex.

Even so, the Even the Score campaign was successful. It got the support of 11 congressmen in the United States, mobilized feminist groups and put sufficient pressure on the FDA to provide a conditional approval for flibanserin. It is worth noting though that a few feminist lobby groups saw through the ploy and campaigned against the drug’s approval. Nevertheless, third time’s the charm for drug approval, and this will almost certainly open the door to an aggressive media campaign designed to convince women they have a disease.

And so we have a drug that doesn’t really work, with serious side effects, to treat a condition that doesn’t really exist, that was approved not because of science, but because of a media campaign.

I’d like to think Casanova would not approve.


Thursday, August 27, 2015

Testosterone Supplements - No Help!

There has been much publicity about low testosterone, mostly from the drug companies producing the supplement. But even in patients with low testosterone (now referred to as "low-T'), does supplementation actually do anything?

In an industry-supported (!) randomized trial, 306 men (age, ≥60) with morning total testosterone levels of 100 to 400 ng/dL or free testosterone levels <50 pg/mL received either testosterone gel or placebo gel daily for 3 years. Doses in the active-treatment group were adjusted to achieve total testosterone levels >500 ng/dL.

They found no differences in erectile function, a total sexual-function score, and a health-related quality-of-life score between the two groups.

Essentially, unless your testosterone level is very very low (less than 100; normal levels are often quoted at about 220) there does not appear to be any advantage of using testosterone gel.

Allan S. Brett, MD Reviewing Basaria S et al., JAMA 2015 Aug 11; 314:570

Viagra for Women - I think not

There has been a lot of publicity for the approval of the new drug - Addyi -purported to enhance sexual desire in women. It is currently only approved in pre-menopausal women. I have addressed this before and now once again am reporting on it.

This can be an issue in certain women and we have no good way to treat it. Some have used antidepressants and even low dose testosterone without much success.

Unfortunately, and contrary to all the hype, this is not the magic answer. In the studies the FDA used to approve it there was an average increase of 0.5 to 1 satisfying sexual event per month, relative to placebo. However, women also reported increased desire and decreased distress with the drug.

And there are major side effects. If taken with alcohol it can cause major drops in blood pressure and fainting; alcohol should not be taken while on this drug. Since it is taken every day this means total abstinence! In my limited experience I find a little wine to be more effective than 1/2 to 1 increased events per month!

Thursday, August 13, 2015

Do Fats in Diet cause Heart Disease?

At one time fats were considered the cause of heart disease. Then food producers started making trans-fats as a replacement; and this was discovered to be much much worse.

Now, in a recent study, researchers have found that diets containing saturated fats, which are found in nature, are not associated with heart disease; even in somewhat higher than recommended amounts.

BMJ 2015;351:h3978

Trans fats of course were a major risk factor.

Once again, this confirms that a healthy diverse diet, with moderate intake of all foods, is the way to go.

So if a low fat diet is not going to lower your risk, what can you do. Exercise, maintaining a good weight, a well balanced diet, and treating risk factors such as diabetes and smoking are the way to go. And for those with a genetic predisposition and high lipids I would consider medication.

Coca Cola and Obesity Research

There have been numerous studies showing how unhealthy the refined and excess sugars found in soft drinks are.

This has affected Coke's sales, down about 20% in the US. So I have to wonder when they start to sponsor obesity research whose goal seems to be to show that lack exercise and NOT sugar is the cause of the epidemic of obesity and diabetes.

It's sort of like the coal industry saying that carbon emissions are not responsible for global warming. But doing it by sponsoring an "independent" research agency.

The New York Times has a good article on this:

New York Times Article

Friday, August 7, 2015

Sleep Deprivation and Threat Evaluation!

Emergency personnel, soldiers, physicians and police officers often have to make split second decisions and evaluations of threatening situations; and how they evaluate it can affect their response.

In a recent study, researchers had study subjects look at threatening and non-threatening faces after a full nights sleep, or after being awake for a prolonged time. They used physiological measurements and functional MRI to evaluate how threatened the person felt.

Significantly more faces were identified as threatening and fewer as nonthreatening after sleep deprivation than after rest, and this was associated with changes in areas of the brain associated with such an emotional response.

The need for adequate sleep to reset our threat recognition could have interesting and important implications, especially when we are seeing questionable police shootings and "stand your ground" defenses!

Goldstein-Piekarski AN et al. J Neurosci 2015 Jul 15

Do spicy foods help you live longer?

Maybe. A recent article (cited below) received a lot of publicity which said that eating spicy foods may help you live longer.

In the actual study they followed about 500,000 Chinese for 7 years, and asked them how much spicy foods they ate.

The groups with the highest amounts (mostly Chili Peppers) had a lower mortality by 10-14%.

This is an association, not necessarily a cause and effect. Perhaps healthier people tended to eat spicier food; or the lower levels were related to stomach issues. By looking backwards on their spice intake this picture could be skewed.

The good news, however, is that spicy foods definitely did not lead to more illness. So enjoy!
BMJ 2015; 351 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h3942 (Published 04 August 2015) Cite this as: BMJ 2015;351:h3942

Friday, July 31, 2015

Natural Sugars and Diabetes

Fruits have many different sugars, and can be quite high in calories. However, as many studies have suggested, natural and unprocessed sugars are healthier for us.

In a recent study, this was once again confirmed. Using a group of women who are at higher risk for diabetes during pregnancy (gestational diabetes) they found that those fed myo-inositol, a sugar found in many fruits, developed 30% less diabetes than a similar group of controls given a placebo.

Another reason to eat natural foods and stay away from artificial and processed sugars.

Robert L. Barbieri, MD Reviewing D'Anna R et al., Obstet Gynecol 2015 Aug 126:310

Tumeric for Arthritis

Recently our 12 year old Shih Tzu developed arthritis in one of his legs. He was given an anti-inflammatory (similar to Ibuprofen or Motrin) by his vet. This worked great but gave him an upset stomach and vomiting.

That was when our friend Ria suggested tumeric. I had never heard of these properties - but there was actually a good study last year that showed, in people, that it is equivalent in efficacy to ibuprofen! And it worked! Our dog is doing much better

In that study patients were given 1500 mg of the extract daily. This is not a huge amount - and probably corresponds to about 1/2-1 teaspoon of organic tumeric daily.

Clin Interv Aging. 2014 Mar 20;9:451-8. doi: 10.2147/CIA.S58535. eCollection 2014.

I don't know why this study has not had more publicity. I have many patients who cannot take ibuprofen and need something to help their joints.

Monday, July 27, 2015

New Cholesterol Drug - Caution Advised!

The FDA just approved a new drug for cholesterol, Praluent which is an inject-able medication which lowers LDL (or "bad" cholesterol) through a different mechanism than other drugs.

However, there are no studies yet that show that this drug can lower the risk of heart disease, even though it decreases the cholesterol. In the past, other medications that had similar effects, such as Zetia, did not stop arteriosclerosis and therefore are ineffective.

Lipitor and other "statins" have been clearly shown to lower the risk of heart attacks in at risk patients. Many physicians believe that they do this through an anti-inflammatory effect and that the lowering of cholesterol is essentially a side effect. It this is true we might expect Praluent not to help.

You may see a media blitz as Sanofi-Aventis tries to convince everyone that this is the best option! It has only been tested in about 2500 patients; far too small a population to discover serious adverse effects.

I would use Praluent only as a last ditch medication in patients with known high risk factors who cannot take any statins and may be unable to change their lifestyle habits sufficiently. And with no promises of success!

Monday, July 20, 2015

Are Obese Patients Wasting Their Time dieting?

Anyone who is significantly overweight knows that it can be difficult or impossible to lose the weight and maintain the loss.

Unfortunately, a recent 10 year study confirms this. In the UK, researchers studied over 175,000 obese adults who had at least three BMI ( a more accurate way of determining obesity) measurements over a 10-year period.

For participants with simple obesity (BMI, 30.0–34.9) at baseline, the annual likelihood of attaining normal weight during follow-up was 1 in 210 for men and 1 in 124 for women. Among those who were initially morbidly obese (BMI, 40.0–44.9), the annual likelihood was just 1 in 1290 for men and 1 in 677 for women.

This is less than 1% for moderately obese individuals (about 40 pounds overweight) and close to .1% for those about 75 pounds or more overweight.

http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdf/10.2105/AJPH.2015.302773

We are all failing on this epidemic and need to find new ways to approach it.

I always used to tell my patients that obesity is probably an evolutionary advantage in the days when food was scarce. Those who could maintain a low metabolic rate and store food more efficiently lived longer. Who knows?

Even if you don't lose weight, your health will be much much better on a proper diet and exercise regimen, and avoiding fast and sugary (and diet) foods.

Ultrasounds and antibiotics - Use Only When Needed!

As modern medicine advances, we often marvel at the technological and pharmaceutical wonders. While they seem miraculous, we must only use these when indicated and generally shown to be useful!

A good example is ultrasound in pregnancy. This can be used to diagnose many fetal abnormalities, as well as growth issues (aside from sex of the baby, twins, and position). However all this can be achieved with two regular ultrasounds during pregnancy.

Many women routinely get an ultrasound at every visit, and often have an incredible 3-D ultrasound which can show features clearly. But this may not be without its dangers!

Most safety studies were performed on equipment made before 1992. Today's equipment emits much stronger acoustic waves than older versions. In addition, animal studies have suggested ill effects from ultrasound exposure, such as neurologic abnormalities and hyperactive behavior. And there's always the concern that too many ultrasounds can lead to false-positives.

Get your one or two ultrasounds. That's enough!

http://www.wsj.com/articles/pregnant-women-get-more-ultrasounds-without-clear-medical-need-1437141219

And again more news about antibiotics. In the past we used to give children antibiotics quite freely. Now we are seeing evidence that this can change the normal bacteria that grow in their intestines and have deleterious long term effects.

In a study in the UK researchers looked at 152 children with Juvenile Rheumatoid Arthritis, and compared them with 1520 without. The arthritis children were twice as likely to have received antibiotics, with an even higher correlation of having received these in the past year! As well another study has shown that certain cases of Ulcerative Colitis respond to "fecal transplants" which change the bacteria in the colon.


Again, treat only when necessary, not when convenient!

Sunday, July 19, 2015

Kale Scare Tactics!!

Recently there has been some talk on the Internet (must be true) that Kale is unhealthy and causes buildups of dangerous heavy metals.

http://www.delish.com/food/a43162/kale-poison-thallium/

But is this true? Actually, there is NO evidence that Kale is unhealthy, and as usual, these scare articles are full of mis-quotes and exaggerations.

Here are some rebuttals:

http://m.snopes.com/kale-not-safe/

In a study dating back to 2001, watercress, radish, turnip and green cabbage were found to be the worst culprits in absorbing thallium form the soil.

http://www.kiwiscience.com/JournalArticles/JPlantNutrition2001.pdf

Like anything else, overindulging is probably not good for you; but moderation, as usual, is the way to go!

Delayed Umbilical Cord Clamping

There have been a lot of proponents for delayed umbilical cord clamping after childbirth. In theory this will allow more of the baby's blood to return from the placenta into their body. It would seem that this could only help oxygenation.

However, we should always be careful in coming to conclusions not based on science, as sometimes the intuitive result can be false.

In a recent study researchers studied some 250 children who had been randomized to delayed cord clamping (at least 3 minutes after delivery) or early clamping (no more than 10 seconds) at birth. At roughly 4 years of age, children underwent tests measuring IQ and fine motor skills, and their parents reported on their behavior and social development.

Although there was no difference in IQ, they found that, in boys only, some measures of fine motor skills (e.g., drawing within a bicycle trail) and personal-social skills were significantly better in the delayed-clamping group. Boys are known to have a higher incidence of iron deficiency as infants, and this could be a reason.

But as important, there were no adverse effects; so there is no reason to discourage this in parents who prefer it.

JAMA Pediatr. 2015;169(7):631-638. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2015.0358.

Wednesday, July 15, 2015

Refined Sugars, Diet and Autism

There is a lot of discussion about refined sugars, and other rapidly absorbed sweets such as corn syrup being unhealthy. They rae associated with increased risk of diabetes.

The glycemic index of a food refers to how fast the sugars in the food get absorbed. Refined sugars get absorbed very rapidly; while most naturally occurring sweeteners are found in foods that have more fiber, and so have a lower glycemic index and are associated with a slower rise in blood sugar. I believe these are much healthier.

Researchers have found that higher levels of inflammatory factors, such as CRP in mothers are associated with autism. Since high glycemic foods can cause elevations of CRP, they looked at  mice that have been bred to simulate autism in humans. They found that a higher glycemic diet was associated with increased activation of autism genes and behavior.

Perhaps this is one of the reasons for the increasing incidence of ASD (Autism Spectrum Disorder). As more mothers adopt organic diets with less highly processed foods maybe we will see a change!

Barbara Geller, MD Reviewing Currais A et al., Mol Psychiatry 2015 Jun 9

Monday, July 13, 2015

Does Breastfeeding help Prevent Leukemia

A recent study looking at almost 30,000 children showed that breast feeding resulted in an 11-19% decreased incidence of childhood leukemia.

The authors speculate that antibodies, lactoferrin, oligosaccharides, or stem cells present in breast milk could contribute to a protective effect, as could the pH in the stomachs of breast-fed infants.

Even children who had been briefly breast fed had a significantly lower incidence. Nature knows bets!

JAMA Pediatr. 2015;169(6):e151025. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2015.1025