Daily Aspirin Linked to Lower Risk for Deadly Skin Cancer in Women

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
By Steven Reinberg
HealthDay Reporter

MONDAY, March 11 (HealthDay News) -- Older women who take an aspirin regularly may be lowering their risk of developing the deadly skin cancer melanoma, a new study suggests.

And the longer postmenopausal women take aspirin, the more melanoma risk appears to diminish.

The effect is only seen with aspirin, not with other pain relievers such as acetaminophen (Tylenol), the researchers noted.

For the study, the research team collected data on nearly 60,000 white women who were part of the Women's Health Initiative, a long-term national study. The women, aged between 50 and 79, were asked about what medications they took and other lifestyle preferences.

Over 12 years of follow-up, the investigators found that women who took aspirin had a 21 percent lower risk of developing melanoma compared to women who didn't take aspirin.

But it's too soon to make firm conclusions, a researcher cautioned.

"Aspirin could be potentially used to prevent melanoma, but a clinical trial is needed," said lead author Dr. Jean Tang, an assistant professor of dermatology at Stanford University School of Medicine in Palo Alto, Calif.

This type of population-based study can only show an association between aspirin and the reduced risk for melanoma, not that aspirin actually helps prevent it.

Tang doesn't believe women should start taking aspirin solely to try to prevent melanoma. "It's too early to say this," she said.

It is possible that aspirin's anti-inflammatory properties might be responsible for lowering the risk of melanoma, Tang suggested. "Aspirin may also promote cell death of melanoma cells," she added.

Whether a protective effect also occurs in men is not known, said Tang, who plans to look at that in her next study.

The new report was published in the March 11 online edition of Cancer.

The study found that women who took aspirin for at least five years had their melanoma risk drop by 30 percent, compared to women who didn't take aspirin.

To try to isolate the effect of aspirin on melanoma, Tang's group accounted for other factors such as skin tone, tanning and use of sunscreen.

Each year in the United States there are nearly 77,000 new cases of melanoma and more than 9,000 deaths from it, according to the U.S. National Cancer Institute.

One expert doesn't see any problem taking aspirin to prevent melanoma, especially for people with a family history of the disease.

Prolonged use of aspirin is not without risks, including stomach bleeding, but the benefits of preventing melanoma outweigh the risk for vulnerable people, said Dr. Michele Green, a dermatologist at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City. She praised the new research.

"I think it's fantastic. It's really a remarkable study," Green said.

"If you have a family history of melanoma, I don't see any downside of taking aspirin for this," she said. "I would urge my patients who have a family history of melanoma to take aspirin based on this study."

Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCES: Jean Tang, M.D., Ph.D., assistant professor of dermatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, Calif.; Michele Green, M.D., dermatologist, Lenox Hill Hospital, New York City; March 11, 2013, Cancer, online

View the original article here

Health Tip: Protect Your Hips From Arthritis Damage

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

(HealthDay News) -- Osteoarthritis can strike the hip following years of wear and tear that causes damage to the joint. Protecting the hips from further stress can help reduce damage.

The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons lists these suggestions to help slow the progression of hip arthritis:

Allow your hips to rest, and don't overuse the joints.Practice a physical-therapy regimen that includes gentle exercises such as swimming, cycling and water aerobics to maintain joint function and motion.Try taking nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.Make sure you get plenty of sleep every night.If you are overweight, lose weight.Consider using a cane to ease strain on the joint if your arthritis worsens.

-- Diana Kohnle
Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

View the original article here

Flu Infections Continue to Decline

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
By Steven Reinberg
HealthDay Reporter

FRIDAY, March 8 (HealthDay News) -- The flu season may not be over, but the worst of it seems to be.

Flu activity, although still elevated, declined in most parts of the United States during the week ending March 2, U.S. health officials reported Friday.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention:

Four states experienced moderate flu activity: Illinois, Michigan, Vermont and Virginia. Thirteen states experienced low fIu activity: Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, Hawaii, Indiana, Mississippi, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Texas and Utah. New York City also experienced low activity.Thirty-three states experienced minimal activity: Alaska, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Wyoming.

The flu continued to hit older people hard, with slightly more than 50 percent of hospitalizations involving those 65 years and older.

Eighty-seven children have died from the flu this season, with six deaths reported last week, the CDC said.

There is no system to report adult deaths from flu, but the agency said the number of deaths remains higher than the threshold used to declare a flu epidemic.

The predominant strain of circulating flu this season continues to be influenza A H3N2, which typically poses bigger problems for young children and the elderly, according to the CDC. But predominant strains can vary across states and regions of the country, the agency noted, with more B strains appearing last week.

The 87 pediatric deaths so far compare to 153 deaths reported during the 2003-04 season, which was another H3N2 season, the agency noted.

An estimated 36,000 people die from the flu and its complications in a typical season, according to the CDC. From 1976 to 2006, estimates of flu-associated deaths in the United States ranged from a low of about 3,000 to a high of about 49,000 people.

Flu season usually peaks in late January or early February.

The best defense against the flu remains the flu vaccine, the CDC said. The agency recommends that everyone 6 months of age and older get vaccinated.

Two antiviral medications, Tamiflu and Relenza, can reduce flu symptoms and the course of the disease. To be effective, however, they must be started within 48 hours after symptoms appear.

Flu symptoms include fever, cough, fatigue, head and body aches, and runny nose. People at particular risk for flu and its complications include pregnant women, those 65 and older and anyone with a chronic illness. The CDC urges these people to get the flu vaccine, which is available as an injection or nasal spray and in a stronger dose for seniors.

Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCE: March 8, 2013, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, FluView

View the original article here

Does Chewing Gum Give Your Brain an Edge?

FRIDAY, March 8 (HealthDay News) -- That wad of gum you're chewing may be more than a breath-freshener -- it might also boost your powers of concentration, a small new study suggests.

According to British investigators, prior research has found that the act of chewing gum could boost concentration when doing sight-related memory tasks. Their new study looked at the effects of chewing gum during a hearing-related memory test.

The experiment included 38 people who were split into two groups, each of which performed a 30-minute task that involved listening to a list of numbers from one to nine read aloud in a random order. The participants were scored on how accurately and quickly they were able to detect a sequence of odd-even-odd numbers, such as seven-two-one. One group chewed gum while doing the task.

Overall, participants who chewed gum had quicker reaction times and more accurate results than those who didn't chew gum. This was especially true toward the end of the task, according to the study, which was published March 8 in the British Journal of Psychology.

"Interestingly, participants who didn't chew gum performed slightly better at the beginning of the task but were overtaken by the end," Kate Morgan, of Cardiff University, said in a journal news release. "This suggests that chewing gum helps us focus on tasks that require continuous monitoring over a longer amount of time."

-- Robert Preidt
Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCE: British Journal of Psychology, news release, March 8, 2013

View the original article here

Was Heart Disease the Mummies' Real Curse?

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
By E.J. Mundell
HealthDay Reporter

SUNDAY, March 10 (HealthDay News) -- Unwrapping the mysteries of the leading killer of modern-day humans, researchers have found evidence of heart disease in ancient mummies from around the globe.

The study also questions assumptions about what causes the illness, since it seems to have plagued civilizations with lifestyles that were very different than those of today.

"Heart disease is a serial killer that's been stalking mankind for 4,000 years," lead investigator Dr. Randall Thompson said at a press briefing Sunday at the American College of Cardiology annual meeting, in San Francisco.

"What we found is that heart disease is present, and not hard to find, in all of these cultures," said Thompson, who is a professor of medicine at the University of Missouri and a cardiologist at the Mid-America Heart Institute in Kansas City. The study was also published online simultaneously in The Lancet.

To investigate the ancient history of atherosclerosis (hardening of the arteries), Thompson said he and his colleagues "gathered some forensic evidence from a 21st century instrument, a CT scanner, looking for residue in the form of calcium in arteries."

"We looked up some cold cases, some very cold cases," he said.

In total, the researchers scanned the arteries of 137 mummies -- 76 from Egypt, 51 from Peru, five from the ancestral Puebloan cultures of the American Southwest (formerly known as the Anasazi), and five from the hunter-gatherer culture of the Alaskan Aleutian islands.

The time period encompassed was enormous, from about 2,000 B.C. for the oldest Egyptian mummies to the late 1800s A.D. for the Aleutian individuals.

"Roughly 34 percent of our mummies had atherosclerosis, either probable or definite, including more than 80 percent of the Egyptians, 25 percent of the Peruvians, two of the five ancestral Puebloans, and three of the five Aleutians," Thompson said.

The study's biggest surprise occurred with findings of extensive artery deposits among the Aleutian mummies -- people who led very traditional, highly physical lives hunting for foods such as sea urchins and fish. One Aleutian woman, aged about 50, had "extremely extensive [arterial] calcification," Thompson said, and might have been a candidate for bypass surgery if she had lived today.

All of this brings up complex questions for modern humans.

"When you look at these mummies, much of what we think we know [about heart disease] is wrong, and if you open your eyes we can learn a lot," co-researcher Dr. Samuel Wann of Columbia St. Mary's Healthcare, in Milwaukee, told reporters.

He stressed that the investigators can't say for sure that the calcified arteries they discovered meant that the people had suffered heart attacks or strokes. However, one Egyptian medical papyrus text from 1550 B.C. does describe a patient having a heart attack, he said, "and there are paintings on some tombs in Egypt that show people falling over clutching their chest, as if they are having a heart attack."

The research team concluded that heart disease is potentially as old as mankind itself, and is probably an inevitable part of aging, not just a product of sedentary lives and fatty foods.

But that doesn't give modern people a pass to be slothful, and to eat whatever they want.

"On the one hand [the study shows that] we may have less control of this disease than some people would like to think we do," Wann said. "But that's all the more reason to control the risk factors that we think we can control."

One cardiologist not connected to the research agreed with that advice.

The study "supports the notion that humans may be genetically predisposed to atherosclerosis or heart disease," said Dr. Kevin Marzo, chief of cardiology at Winthrop-University Hospital in Mineola, N.Y. "We have no way to change our genetic makeup, so the best we can do in the meantime is to control our fates: eat healthy, not smoke, exercise and, yes, avoid the trans fats."

Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCES: Kevin Marzo, M.D., chief, cardiology, Winthrop-University Hospital, Mineola, N.Y.; March 10, 2013, presentation, American College of Cardiology annual meeting, San Francisco, with Randall Thompson, M.D., professor, medicine, University of Missouri, and cardiologist, Mid-America Heart Institute, Kansas City; Samuel Wann, M.D., Columbia St. Mary's Healthcare, Milwaukee; March 10, 2013, The Lancet, online

View the original article here

Health Tip: Teach Kids to Prevent Overuse Injuries

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

(HealthDay News) -- Young children can be susceptible to overuse injuries due to repetitive activities during sports competitions and practices.

The safekids.org website lists these tips to help kids reduce the risk of overuse injuries from sports:

Always warm up with jogging or light exercise for about 10 minutes before play.Gently and slowly stretch the muscles before and after playing.Promptly recognize and address injuries.Make sure to allow the body to rest for one to two days per week and at least 10 weeks during the off-season each year.Encourage children to play a variety of types of sports, and always begin a new sport slowly and carefully.Always use protective equipment designed for your particular activity when playing.

-- Diana Kohnle
Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

View the original article here

Abdominal 'Chemo Bath' May Extend Survival in Ovarian Cancer Patients

HealthDay Reporter

SATURDAY, March 9 (HealthDay News) -- Women with advanced ovarian cancer who receive intense chemotherapy directly into their stomach area may live at least one year longer than women who receive standard intravenous chemotherapy, a new study says.

But this survival edge may come at the expense of more side effects.

"The long-term benefits are pretty significant," said study author Dr. Devansu Tewari, director of gynecologic oncology at the Southern California Permanente Medical Group, in Orange County. "There is no study of ovarian cancer treatments that has shown a greater survival advantage."

Intraperitoneal chemotherapy involves bathing the abdominal area with chemotherapy agents. By contrast, intravenous (IV) chemotherapy is delivered throughout the body via the bloodstream. The U.S. National Cancer Institute currently recommends intraperitoneal therapy for women with ovarian cancer who have had successful surgery to remove the tumor.

The 10-year follow-up data from two studies of nearly 900 women with advanced ovarian cancer will be presented Saturday at the annual meeting of the Society of Gynecologic Oncology, in Los Angeles.

In 2013, more than 22,000 American women will be diagnosed with ovarian cancer, and more than 14,000 will die from the disease, according to the U.S. National Cancer Institute. There are no early screening tests for ovarian cancer, which is why it is often diagnosed when the cancer has already spread outside of the ovaries. For this reason, survival rates tend to be very low.

In the new study, women who received the intraperitoneal treatment were 17 percent more likely to survive longer than those who got IV chemotherapy. On average, women in the intraperitoneal group survived for more than five years, while those who received IV chemotherapy survived for about four years, the study found.

But survival benefits aside, intraperitoneal chemotherapy does confer a greater risk of side effects -- such as abdominal pain and numbness in the hands and feet -- and not all women can tolerate this high concentration of cancer-killing drugs. The drugs are also absorbed more slowly, providing more exposure to the medicine. The same properties that make the intraperitoneal therapy more effective likely play a role in causing more side effects, the researchers said.

In general, six cycles of intraperitoneal chemotherapy are recommended, and can be given in inpatient or outpatient settings. The more cycles the women completed, the greater their survival advantage, the study showed. After five years, close to 60 percent of women who completed five or six cycles of intraperitoneal therapy were still alive, compared with 33 percent of those who completed three or four cycles and 18 percent of those who completed one or two cycles. Women can switch back to IV chemotherapy if the side effects prove too harsh. Still, the researchers said, some intraperitoneal chemotherapy is better than none.

Younger and healthier women were among the most likely to complete the regimen.

"If after surgery all of the visible cancer has been removed and there is no cancer that is greater than 1 centimeter left in any one area, a woman is an immediate candidate [for intraperitoneal chemotherapy]," Tewari said. "If someone is older and in good shape and handled the operation well, they are also candidates."

Growing numbers of doctors and women with ovarian cancer are opting for intraperitoneal therapy, she said. And it may offer even greater benefits when paired with some of the newer therapies for ovarian cancer that are moving through the drug development pipeline.

"Its use can and should increase," said Tewari, who also is an assistant professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of California, Irvine, School of Medicine.

Dr. Jubilee Brown, a spokeswoman for the Society of Gynecologic Oncology and an associate professor of gynecologic oncology at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, said the new findings are exciting.

"This is long-term follow-up data that confirms what we expected," Brown said. "We have been waiting for years to determine if the results are short-lived or if we see it years later, and now we know that we see the survival benefit 10 years out."

"Doctors are used to giving IV chemotherapy, so this is a new skill set in terms of giving the drugs," she said. "It comes with different equipment and patient instructions and side effects. As individual physicians and centers become more comfortable and confident with learning how to manage the side effects, its use will increase."

Dr. Elizabeth Poynor, a gynecologic oncologist at New York City's Lenox Hill Hospital, agreed. "The toxicity and intensity is greater than with IV therapy, so some people can't tolerate it," she said. "But for those who do, survival is clearly benefited."

"It's a tradeoff," Poynor said. "There are more side effects, but there are also survival benefits. You don't know how you will tolerate it until you try -- and if it's not for you, you can back off."

Because this study was presented at a medical meeting, the data and conclusions should be viewed as preliminary until published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCE: Elizabeth Poynor, M.D., gynecologic oncologist, Lenox Hill Hospital, New York City; Jubilee Brown, M.D., associate professor, department of gynecologic oncology, division of surgery, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston; Devansu Tewari, M.D., director, gynecologic oncology, Southern California Permanente Medical Group, Orange County; March 9, 2013, presentation, Society of Gynecologic Oncology annual meeting, Los Angeles

View the original article here

Obese New Mothers May Have Higher Heart Attack, Stroke Risk

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

MONDAY, March 11 (HealthDay News) -- Obese young women who have recently given birth have a greatly increased risk of heart attack and stroke, according to a new study.

Researchers analyzed data from more than 273,000 women in Denmark with an average age of 30 who had given birth between 2004 and 2009. None of the women had a history of stroke, heart disease or kidney problems. During up to six years of follow-up, 68 of the women had a heart attack and 175 had a stroke.

Obese women were twice as likely as those with normal weight to suffer a heart attack or stroke within four to five years after giving birth. This increased risk among obese women remained even after the researchers accounted for other pregnancy-related complications or cardiovascular risk factors, including smoking.

Although heart attack and stroke are very rare among women in this age group, a clear and strong link exists between being overweight and increased risk, the researchers said. The study did not, however, prove a cause-and-effect relationship between the two.

They also discovered that women who were underweight had a slightly increased risk for heart attack and stroke.

The study was presented Saturday at the American College of Cardiology annual meeting in San Francisco.

"Young women need to be aware that there are serious health risks associated with obesity and poor lifestyle habits, and these [negative effects] appear to set in early," lead investigator Michelle Schmiegelow, a Ph.D. student at the University of Copenhagen, said in an American College of Cardiology news release.

"This study is important because although the incidence of heart disease is declining overall, this downward trend doesn't seem to apply to women 35 to 44 years of age," she said. "In fact, coronary artery disease seems to be on the rise in this group, however it is still very rare."

Although this study included only women who had given birth, Schmiegelow said she believes the findings apply to all young, healthy women.

Because the research was presented at a medical meeting, the data and conclusions should be viewed as preliminary until published in a peer-reviewed journal.

-- Robert Preidt
Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCE: American College of Cardiology, news release, March 7, 2013

View the original article here

New Drugs Might Give Heart Patients an Edge

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
By E.J. Mundell
HealthDay Reporter

SUNDAY, March 10 (HealthDay News) -- In the search for better medicines to safely help heart patients, clinical trials testing three new drugs appear to offer some promise.

Two of the drugs, cangrelor and inclacumab, might improve outcomes for patients undergoing cardiac interventions such as angioplasty or stenting, while a third drug, Inspra, seems to lower heart patients' odds for death and heart failure following a heart attack.

All three trials were funded by the respective drugs' makers, and all three were presented Sunday at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology (ACC) in San Francisco.

In the first trial, researchers compared an as-yet approved blood thinner called cangrelor against the current standard medication, Plavix (clopidogrel), for patients who have recently had a stent implanted in an artery to help improve blood flow.

According to the ACC, more than 600,000 coronary artery stent procedures are conducted in the United States each year, but doctors have long sought safer alternatives to Plavix to help prevent clots. Plavix comes with one big drawback for patients rushed to the hospital with suspected heart attack: It is taken in pill form, and its anti-clotting effects (with accompanying bleeding risk) may not wear off for up to a week.

That means that pre-treating a new patient with Plavix can trigger long delays in needed heart surgery, as the patient waits for the bleeding risk to subside.

Cangrelor may help get around that issue. Even though it is delivered intravenously and begins acting quickly, its anti-clotting effects also fade quickly -- within an hour -- should any bleeding complications occur, the study authors said.

So, doctors might feel free to give heart patients cangrelor upon admittance to the hospital and then send them immediately for angioplasty -- a minimally invasive procedure to reopen clogged vessels -- or stenting, if needed.

In the trial, which was funded by cangrelor's maker, New Jersey-based The Medicines Company, researchers compared short-term outcomes for 11,000 patients who underwent stent placement at one of 153 centers around the world.

Some of the patients got cangrelor, while others got Plavix. The study was also published online Sunday in The New England Journal of Medicine.

The research team reported that cangrelor reduced by 22 percent the odds of a patient dying, having a heart attack or having a clot develop in the stented vessel within two days of the procedure, compared to patients who took Plavix. Safety profiles were similar: Severe bleeding at 48 hours after the stenting procedure occurred in 0.16 percent of those on cangrelor and 0.11 percent of those given Plavix.

Commenting at a press conference on Sunday, Dr. Cindy Grines, a cardiologist at Detroit Medical Center, said that if cangrelor receives U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval it could have a "huge impact" for heart patients.

The new study "shows that we do not necessarily have to pre-treat these patients, but once they get to the lab we can give them a very rapidly acting medication with rapid-onset action and rapid offset," she said.

There's one caveat, however: cost. Lead researcher Dr. Deepak Bhatta, chief of cardiology at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, told reporters that cangrelor's price has not yet been set, but it likely will carry a much higher price tag than Plavix. But, he believes the cost of the drug would be offset by savings gained as patients avoid lengthy pre-surgery hospital stays, waiting for the effects of Plavix to wear off.

A second study focused on the drug eplerenone, marketed by Pfizer as Inspra. The drug is currently FDA-approved to help lower high blood pressure and to ward off heart failure after heart attack. In the new Pfizer-funded trial, slightly more than 1,000 patients who had had a heart attack caused by complete blockage of an artery took either Inspra or a placebo in addition to standard treatments.

Patients were followed for an average of a bit more than 10 months. Researchers led by Dr. Gilles Montalescot of the Pitie-Salpetriere Hospital in Paris reported that those taking Inspra were 38 percent less likely than those on a placebo to have outcomes such as death by cardiovascular causes, rehospitalization due to heart failure, irregular heart rhythms or other indicators of heart failure.

Commenting on the results at a news conference, Dr. Miguel Quinones, chair of cardiology at Methodist DeBakey Heart and Vascular Center in Houston, said the study showed a "striking" short-term benefit for patients, but it's unclear if it would be sustained over time. Use of Inspra could be "a game-changer if we could demonstrate three to five years later that we have significantly improved outcomes," he said.

A third and smaller trial, published simultaneously online in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology, looked at another still-unapproved drug, the anti-inflammatory agent inclacumab, for use in patients undergoing angioplasty.

The ACC noted that more than 1 million Americans each year undergo angioplasty. But angioplasty can also trigger damage to heart tissues, and it was thought that the new drug might help minimize that risk.

In the study, which involved 322 patients with a common form of heart attack, participants got either various doses of inclacumab or a placebo about an hour before their angioplasty.

The research team assessed changes in levels of troponin I -- a protein found in the blood that indicates heart damage -- as a means of telling whether the drug was effective or not.

The researchers reported that 24 hours after the procedure, patients who had gotten the highest dose of inclacumab saw their troponin I levels drop by more than 24 percent compared to those on a placebo -- indicating less heart tissue damage. Levels of another marker of heart tissue damage, called CK-MB, fell by more than 17 percent over 24 hours compared to placebo, the team added.

There was also "no bad signal [from the data] in terms of increased rates of bleeding or infection" with the use of inclacumab, study author Dr. Jean Claude Tardif, director of the Research Center at the Montreal Heart Institute, told reporters.

One expert agreed, but said more study is needed. "This looks to be very promising, [and] I hope we get to see this continuing in larger trials," Dr. Neal Kleiman, medical director of the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratories at the Methodist DeBakey Heart and Vascular Center in Houston, said at the press briefing.

Tardif said that such a trial is being planned. The current study was funded by the drug's developer, Hoffman-La Roche Ltd.

Findings from studies that have only been presented at medical meetings, such as the Inspra trial, are typically considered preliminary until published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCES: March 10, 2013, press briefing, American College of Cardiology annual meeting, San Francisco, with Deepak Bhatta, M.D., chief, cardiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, and professor, medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston; Cindy Grines, M.D., cardiologist, Detroit Medical Center; Miguel Quinones, M.D., chair, cardiology, Methodist DeBakey Heart and Vascular Center, Houston; Jean Claude Tardif, M.D., director, Research Center at the Montreal Heart institute, and professor, medicine, University of Montreal, Canada; Neal Kleiman, medical director, Cardiac Catheterization Laboratories at the Methodist DeBakey Heart and Vascular Center, Houston

View the original article here

Certain Diabetes Medications May Lower Heart Failure Risk

HealthDay Reporter

SUNDAY, March 10 (HealthDay News) -- A newer class of diabetes drugs may offer an extra benefit: A new study suggests these medications lower the odds of suffering heart failure.

Researchers from Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit found that patients taking so-called GLP-1 drugs -- including brand-name medications such as Byetta, Januvia and Victoza -- were more than 40 percent less likely to be hospitalized for heart failure than patients prescribed other blood sugar-lowering medications. GLP-1 diabetes drugs have been in use for only the last several years and are considered second-line treatments after well-established medications such as metformin, physicians said.

"I don't think we can say this will magically prevent all heart failure deaths, but the strength of the association warrants more investigation," said study author and cardiologist Dr. David Lanfear. "Heart failure is a very common disease . . . but something about diabetics make them definitely at increased risk for developing heart failure."

The study is to be presented Sunday at the American College of Cardiology's annual meeting in San Francisco. Evidence presented at medical meetings has not been peer-reviewed and is considered preliminary.

According to the U.S. National Institutes of Health, about 6 million Americans suffer from heart failure, which occurs when the heart can't efficiently pump blood through the body. Diabetics, who now number 25 million in the United States, are between two and four times more likely than those without the condition to die of heart disease, which includes heart attacks, heart failure and other cardiac problems.

In the retrospective study, Lanfear and his colleagues examined data from more than 4,400 patients taking diabetes medications between 2000 and 2012. About 1,500 were taking GLP-1 medications and nearly 3,000 were not.

Over an average nine-month follow-up period, patients taking GLP-1 medications were 41 percent less likely than others to be hospitalized with heart failure. Additionally, these patients were 44 percent less likely to be hospitalized for any reason, and 80 percent less likely to die of any cause.

But neither Lanfear nor a doctor not involved with the research could point to reasons why this newer class of diabetes drugs seems to dampen the risk of heart failure.

"We don't know the mechanism yet. It's under active investigation," Lanfear said. "There are clues, but they would be a guess."

Lanfear noted that of the total 20,000 patients at Henry Ford Hospital identified as taking diabetes drugs during the study period, only about 1,500 were taking GLP-1 medications, or about 7 percent.

"We were surprised a little bit by the strength of the association [between the GLP-1 drugs and lower heart failure], but the results still need to be confirmed by other studies," he said. "We can't take this as an endorsement of these drugs."

Calling the study promising, Dr. David Friedman, chief of heart failure services at North Shore-LIJ's Plainview Hospital in Plainview, N.Y., said future research should be prospective instead of analyzing past data.

"Heart failure is a huge problem among diabetics. Every year, there are about a half-million new heart failure patients, and a tremendous portion are those who've survived heart attacks and a fair number have diabetes," Friedman said.

"With diabetes and obesity issues constantly on the radar now, and with the onset of more heart failure cases, we need to find more novel approaches," he added. "If we can improve outcomes in this way, we'll have more hope for these patients."

Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCES: David Lanfear, M.D., cardiologist and researcher, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit; David Friedman, M.D., chief, heart failure services, North Shore LIJ's Plainview Hospital, Plainview, N.Y.; March 10, 2013, presentation, American College of Cardiology annual meeting, San Francisco

View the original article here

Study: Mega Vitamins Won't Help After Heart Attack, Chelation Treatment Might

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
By E.J. Mundell
HealthDay Reporter

SUNDAY, March 10 (HealthDay News) -- There's mixed news from a much-anticipated clinical trial for people who've suffered a heart attack: While a study found that daily high doses of vitamins and minerals did nothing to improve patient outcomes, there was a hint that controversial "chelation" therapy might.

Still, the lead researcher said he's not ready to recommend chelation therapy, in which doctors give patients high-dose vitamins along with special infusions that seek to leach heavy metals from the body.

"These findings should stimulate further research, but are not by themselves sufficient to recommend the routine use of chelation therapy and high-dose vitamins in most patients," said Dr. Gervasio Lamas, chief of the Columbia University Division of Cardiology at Mount Sinai Medical Center, in Miami Beach, Fla.

The trial, which was funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health, looked at whether chelation therapy might help patients who'd suffered a heart attack. The findings were presented Sunday at the American College of Cardiology (ACC) annual meeting, in San Francisco.

The expensive treatment, which involves dozens of arduous infusions conducted over a period of years, has been offered by certain clinics for decades but has yet to gain U.S. Food and Drug administration approval for heart patients.

However, its reputation got a boost in November when preliminary results from the same trial were presented at the annual meeting of the American Heart Association. Those results did show a modest benefit from chelation therapy for some patients.

The trial involved more than 1,700 patients from the United States and Canada who had suffered a prior heart attack. Most were already taking standard therapies such as daily aspirin, cholesterol-lowering statins or blood pressure medications.

Because chelation therapy also involves daily high-dose vitamins and minerals, Lamas explained that the new analysis tried to separate out the effects of the supplements from that of the chelation itself.

The patients therefore were randomly selected to receive one of four regimens: high-dose vitamin/mineral supplements plus chelation, vitamins/minerals plus a placebo ("dummy") chelation therapy, chelation with placebo vitamin/minerals, or a placebo/placebo group (no actual therapy given). Chelation therapy consisted of 40 three-hour sessions with the IV infusion spread over 18 months, and the doses of vitamins and minerals given were much higher than recommended daily intakes.

After an average follow-up of more than four years, the researchers found no benefit for people who took the daily high-dose vitamins/minerals alone.

"We cannot recommend high-dose oral vitamins and minerals as adjunct therapy for people who have had [heart attacks]," Lamas said at an ACC press briefing on Sunday.

However, the team did see a slight benefit among the group who took the vitamins/minerals in combination with chelation therapy. Twenty-six percent of people in this group experienced some kind of cardiovascular event such as heart attack, stroke or hospitalization for angina (chest pain) -- less than the 32 percent seen among those who got placebo/placebo therapy only.

Still, the gap was not huge and Lamas, who does not use chelation therapy in his own practice, said he cannot recommend it at this time.

"The message really is a cautious message," he said. "We brought something that has been an alternative medicine treatment into the realm of scientific inquiry and found unexpected results that may merit future research. However, we don't think that the results of any single trial are enough to carry this novel hypothesis into daily use for patients."

Two experts who were not connected to the study were less than impressed by the findings.

"Many Americans think that a multivitamin a day is the cure-all to most ailments," said Dr. Tara Narula, associate director of the Cardiac Care Unit at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City. However, "when it comes to heart disease, this appears to be a myth," she said. "There is no evidence that vitamin and mineral supplementation can be beneficial to cardiac patients."

Dr. Sripal Bangalore is assistant professor in the department of medicine at NYU Langone Medical Center, in New York City. He agreed with Narula that high-dose vitamins are of no help to heart patients, and added that the finding regarding chelation therapy is an isolated one and "needs to be studied further."

For her part, Narula said that "although it is noteworthy that chelation may be helpful, it is an expensive treatment and does carry significant side effects."

Findings presented at medical meetings are considered preliminary until published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCES: Tara Narula, M.D., associate director, Cardiac Care Unit, Lenox Hill Hospital, New York City; Sripal Bangalore, M.D., assistant professor, department of medicine, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York City; March 10, 2013, press briefing, American College of Cardiology annual meeting, San Francisco, with Gervasio Lamas, M.D., chief, Columbia University Division of Cardiology, Mount Sinai Medical Center, Miami Beach, Fla.

View the original article here

'Violent Behavior' Occurs in Many Adult Sleepwalkers, Study Finds

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
By Kathleen Doheny
HealthDay Reporter

FRIDAY, March 8 (HealthDay News) -- Adults don't always outgrow sleepwalking, and among those who don't, 58 percent may become violent and sometimes injure either themselves or their sleeping partner, a new study shows.

Not only that, these sleepwalkers suffer a host of health problems during their waking hours, the researchers noted.

"Daytime sleepiness is a frequent problem in adults affected with sleepwalking," said study author Dr. Yves Dauvilliers, director of the sleep lab at Gui-de-Chauliac Hospital in Montpelier, France.

That's among the more obvious problems, he said. They also may experience depression, anxiety and lower quality of life.

Injuries, both to sleepwalkers and their bed partners, happen 17 percent of the time, Dauvilliers said. "Some patients have jumped out of windows," he said. "Some have walked on the house roof. And others fell down the stairs, with legs broken."

The study is published in the March issue of the journal Sleep.

For the research, Dauvilliers evaluated 100 adult sleepwalkers who came to the hospital sleep disorders clinic. The median age was 30. They were all evaluated on video one night in the sleep lab. The patients answered questions about any problems with sleep, fatigue, anxiety, depression and overall quality of life.

The patients also divulged details on possible known triggers for sleepwalking, such as stress, strong emotions, drinking alcohol or engaging in intense physical activity in the evening.

The researchers also interviewed 100 healthy people who did not sleepwalk and compared the results.

Of the sleepwalkers, nearly 23 percent did so nightly and 43.5 percent did it weekly. The median age for starting the habit was 9 years. More than half reported a family history of sleepwalking.

Compared to those who didn't sleepwalk, the sleepwalkers were more likely to have daytime sleepiness, fatigue, insomnia, symptoms of anxiety and depression, and to feel their quality of life was lower.

In 17 percent of patients who became violent while asleep, medical care was needed for at least one episode of such behavior. The researchers defined violent behavior as "physically aggressive or potentially dangerous behaviors for patients and co-sleepers." They noted that for six patients (five males), a bed partner needed medical care after being attacked.

The findings are not a surprise to Dr. Maurice Ohayon, a professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Stanford University, who has published his own studies on sleepwalking. In his research, he has found that about 4 percent of the adult population sleepwalks.

The sleepwalkers studied by Dauvilliers, he said, are more severe cases than he found in his look at the general population. The study patients had been referred to a sleep clinic. Even so, he said he found some of the same issues with the sleepwalkers he studied. They often had a family history of the problem, and they reported depression and the need for sleeping pills due to insomnia.

How to reduce sleepwalking? People need to avoid the triggers, Dauvilliers said. Severe cases may require medication such as benzodiazepines, which are drugs that have sedating effects, he explained.

Ohayon agreed that both medication and paying attention to habits can help. "For example, reducing stress, keeping a regular sleep-wake schedule and getting enough sleep" all help, he said.

Increasing the safety of the environment can also help reduce injury, Ohayon suggested. "A bell on the door is a good idea," Ohayon said, "but it must be loud enough to awaken the sleepwalker."

He also advises sleepwalkers to sleep on the ground floor if possible, to install extra locks on doors and windows, and to install motion detector alarms.

Dauvilliers reports receiving honoraria and travel expenses from UCB Pharma, Cephalon, Novartis and Bioprojet. He has been on advisory boards for UCB and Bioprojet. Co-authors have been advisors for pharmaceutical companies.

Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCES: Yves Dauvilliers, M.D., Ph.D., professor, physiology and neurology, and director, sleep lab, Gui-de-Chauliac Hospital, Montpellier, France; Maurice Ohayon, M.D., professor, psychiatry and behavioral sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, Calif.; March 2013, Sleep

View the original article here

More Evidence Whooping Cough Protection Wanes

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
By Serena Gordon
HealthDay Reporter

MONDAY, March 11 (HealthDay News) -- Despite high levels of vaccination, the rate of whooping cough in the United States is at its highest level in decades, and one reason may be that immunity from the vaccine diminishes each year after the fifth dose is given.

New research from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) confirms what other recent studies have found: protection against whooping cough wanes significantly between the fifth dose of the vaccine -- given sometime during the 4- to 6-year-old age range -- and the adolescent booster vaccine given at 11 or 12.

"This study provides fairly strong evidence that the trends we're seeing are real -- and a couple of other studies with similar findings have recently come out," said study lead author Sara Tartof, who was at the CDC at the time of the study and is now a researcher at Kaiser Permanente in Los Angeles.

Nonetheless, "the vaccine is still a great tool," she said. "Kids who are fully vaccinated who get whooping cough have a much milder disease than those who aren't vaccinated. Vaccines are still the best protection against disease, and the incidence of whooping cough is low."

Whooping cough, which is also called pertussis, is a highly contagious bacterial disease that attacks the respiratory system. In 2012, the United States had the highest number of whooping cough cases since 1959, according to the CDC. During 2012, the CDC received reports of 41,000 cases and 18 deaths, with most of the deaths occurring in infants.

The whooping cough vaccine also includes immunizations for diphtheria and tetanus. It's given in a five-dose series at 2, 4 and 6 months; at 15 to 18 months; and between 4 and 6 years, according to the CDC. An adolescent booster is recommended between age 11 and 12.

The current study, published online March 11 in the journal Pediatrics, looked at children born between 1998 and 2003 in Minnesota or Oregon who had received the recommended five doses of the vaccine. By using immunization records and comparing them to state health department whooping cough surveillance data for six years following the fifth dose of vaccine, the researchers were able to more accurately track how many fully vaccinated youngsters got the illness, and how much protection the vaccine offered from year to year.

In Minnesota, nearly 225,000 children born during the study period were fully vaccinated. In Oregon, there were about 180,000. In Minnesota, 458 cases of whooping cough were reported; there were 89 reported in Oregon.

The rates of whooping cough rose each year of the follow-up period. During the first year after the final vaccination, the incidence of whooping cough was 15.6 per 100,000 in the Minnesota population. By the sixth year, that rate was 138.4 per 100,000. In Oregon, a similar trend emerged, with a rate of 6.2 per 100,000 in the first year of follow-up and 24.4 per 100,000 in the last year of follow-up.

The authors said many reasons may explain why whooping cough cases are on the rise. One may be that physicians simply are more aware of the disease and may be reporting it more often. Another possible cause is the vaccine itself, they noted.

The current vaccine is an acellular vaccine, which means it doesn't contain whole cells of the bacterium responsible for pertussis infections. The previous vaccine contained whole cells of the bacterium, but was more likely to cause side effects. One of the trade-offs for reducing side effects may be a vaccine that's slightly less effective, said Dr. Kenneth Bromberg, director of the Vaccine Research Center at the Brooklyn Hospital Center in New York City.

"This study adds to the strength of argument that the acellular vaccine doesn't seem to last as long as we might have thought it would," Bromberg said.

Both experts said there are no new whooping cough vaccines currently in development, so for now it's important that everyone get vaccinated: children, teens and adults. The more people who have protection against the disease, the less chance it will have to spread.

That's why the CDC now recommends that pregnant women receive the whooping cough vaccine during the third month of pregnancy, so they can pass protection on to their babies.

Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCES: Sara Tartof, Ph.D., M.P.H., researcher, Kaiser Permanente, Los Angeles; Kenneth Bromberg, M.D., chairman, pediatrics, and director, Vaccine Research Center, Brooklyn Hospital Center, New York City; April 2013 Pediatrics

View the original article here

Health Benefits of Marriage Mostly Apply to Those Already Healthy

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

FRIDAY, March 8 (HealthDay News) -- The health benefits of marriage seem to fade when you need them most, according to a large new study.

Although marriage does seem to benefit those who are in good health, it provides less protection against death as health declines, the Ohio State University researchers found. The researchers also discovered that married people are more likely than others to overestimate how healthy they are.

"We believe marriage is still good for the health of some people, but it is not equally protective for everyone," study lead author Hui Zheng, an assistant professor of sociology, said in a university news release. "For those who are already in poor health, marriage doesn't seem to provide any extra benefits."

The findings were true for both men and women and were similar for those who were separated, divorced, widowed or never married, according to the study, which was published in the March issue of the Journal of Health and Social Behavior.

The researchers analyzed data from nearly 800,000 people who took part in the U.S. National Health Interview Survey from 1986 to 2004. Survey participants rated their own health as either excellent, very good, good, fair or poor. The researchers used follow-up data to identify the more than 24,000 participants who died between 1986 and 2006.

The study confirmed previous findings that, overall, people who are not married have a significantly increased risk of death within three years. Never-married people who rate their health as excellent are twice as likely to die within three years than married people in excellent health.

But this study also found that, as health declines, the lower risk of death for married people declines. Each unit decline in self-rated health (from good to fair, for instance) decreases the death-risk difference between married and unmarried people by 12 percent. Among people who rate their health as poor, there is no significant difference in death risk between married and unmarried people.

"These results suggest that marriage may be important for the prevention of disease, but not as helpful once people become seriously ill," Zheng said. "That's why we see a protective effect of marriage when people are in excellent health, but not when they are in poor health."

Although the study found an association between marital status and health, it didn't show a cause-and-effect relationship.

-- Robert Preidt
Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCE: Ohio State University, news release, March 5, 2013

View the original article here

Niacin Won't Help, May Harm Heart Patients: Study

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

SATURDAY, March 9 (HealthDay News) -- Combining the vitamin niacin with a cholesterol-lowering statin drug appears to offer patients no benefit and may also increase side effects, a new study indicates.

It's a disappointing result from the largest-ever study of niacin for heart patients, which involved almost 26,000 people.

In the study, patients who added the B-vitamin to the statin drug Zocor saw no added benefit in terms of reductions in heart-related death, non-fatal heart attack, stroke, or the need for angioplasty or bypass surgeries.

The study also found that people taking niacin had more incidents of bleeding and/or infections than those who were taking an inactive placebo, according to a team reporting Saturday at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology, in San Francisco.

"We are disappointed that these results did not show benefits for our patients," study lead author Jane Armitage, a professor at the University of Oxford in England, said in a meeting news release. "Niacin has been used for many years in the belief that it would help patients and prevent heart attacks and stroke, but we now know that its adverse side effects outweigh the benefits when used with current treatments."

Niacin has long been used to boost levels of "good" HDL cholesterol and decrease levels of "bad" LDL cholesterol and triglycerides (fats) in the blood in people at risk for heart disease and stroke. However, niacin also causes a number of side effects, including flushing of the skin. A drug called laropiprant can reduce the incidence of flushing in people taking niacin.

This new study included patients with narrowing of the arteries. They received either 2 grams of extended-release niacin plus 40 milligrams of laropiprant or matching placebos. All of the patients also took Zocor (simvastatin).

The patients from China, the United Kingdom and Scandinavia were followed for an average of almost four years.

Besides showing no helpful effect on heart health outcomes, the team noted that people taking niacin had about the same amount of heart-related events (13.2 percent) as those who took a placebo instead (13.7 percent).

Side effects were common. As already reported online Feb. 26 in the European Heart Journal, by the end of the study, 25 percent of patients taking niacin plus laropiprant had stopped their treatment, compared with 17 percent of the patients taking a placebo.

"The main reason for patients stopping the treatment was because of adverse side effects, such as itching, rashes, flushing, indigestion, diarrhea, diabetes and muscle problems," Armitage said at the time in a journal news release. "We found that patients allocated to the experimental treatment were four times more likely to stop for skin-related reasons, and twice as likely to stop because of gastrointestinal problems or diabetes-related problems."

Patients taking niacin and laropiprant had a more than fourfold increased risk of muscle pain or weakness compared to the placebo group, the team noted.

Did the fault lie with the laropiprant and not niacin? Armitage is doubtful.

She pointed to a prior trial, called AIM-HIGH, which was discontinued early in 2011 when researchers found no benefit to niacin treatment. At the time, some experts said that the smaller population in AIM-HIGH masked any sign of benefit, but Armitage said the new trial's much bigger study group confirms that niacin probably does not help.

Speaking in February at the time of the journal's release of niacin's safety profile, one U.S. expert was less than impressed by niacin's performance.

The trial "confirms that, for the present moment, there may be little additional benefit with the use of niacin when patients are well treated with the lipid-lowering statin drugs," said Dr. Kevin Marzo, chief of cardiology at Winthrop-University Hospital in Mineola, N.Y.

He said that the results of the new trial, along with those from a prior large study, "now may put the final nail in the coffin on niacin-based strategies to raise HDL and lower cardiovascular events."

Other tried-and-true approaches may work best, Marzo added. "In addition to statins, our focus should be on continued lifestyle changes such as a Mediterranean diet, complemented with daily exercise," he said.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration had been waiting on the new trial results to decide whether to approve niacin/laropiprant for use against heart disease. But in December 2012, responding to preliminary findings, drug maker Merck said it no longer planned to press for approval from the FDA and in January suspended niacin/laropiprant from markets worldwide.

-- Robert Preidt
Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCES: American College of Cardiology, news release, March 9, 2013; Kevin Marzo, M.D., chief of cardiology, Winthrop-University Hospital, Mineola, N.Y.; European Heart Journal, news release, Feb. 26, 2013

View the original article here

Drug May Ease Angina in People With Type 2 Diabetes

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

SUNDAY, March 10 (HealthDay News) -- The drug Ranexa (ranolazine) may help reduce chest pain in people with type 2 diabetes, a new study finds.

The drug is approved in the United States for treatment of chronic angina (chest pain), but this is the first study to evaluate it in patients with diabetes, heart disease and angina, according to the researchers.

One expert not connected to the study said the findings are welcome news for patients.

The study "demonstrates that ranolazine is very effective in reducing angina in those with type 2 diabetes and, interestingly, is more effective in those with higher blood sugars," said Dr. Howard Weintraub, clinical associate professor in the department of medicine at NYU Langone Medical Center in New York City.

People with diabetes are at increased risk for heart disease, and people with heart disease and diabetes are more likely to have angina than those without diabetes, the researchers noted.

The study included more than 900 patients who received either 1,000 milligrams of Ranexa or an inactive placebo twice a day for eight weeks. The patients had type 2 diabetes, heart disease and at least one angina episode a week, and were already taking one or two other anti-angina drugs.

Between weeks two and eight of the study, patients taking Ranexa had an average of 3.8 angina episodes per week, compared with 4.3 episodes per week for those taking the placebo. Patients taking the drug used 1.7 doses of nitroglycerin per week, compared with 2.1 doses per week among those in the placebo group. Nitroglycerin is commonly used to treat or prevent episodes of chest pain in people who have coronary artery disease (narrowing of the blood vessels that supply blood to the heart).

The study was scheduled for presentation Sunday at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology in San Francisco. It was also published online the same day in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology and will appear in the journal's May 21 print issue.

The study was funded by Gilead Sciences, Inc., which makes Ranexa.

"Angina is associated with worse quality of life, increased risk of hospitalization and higher health care costs, and appears to be more prevalent in patients with diabetes," study lead author Dr. Mikhail Kosiborod, associate professor of medicine at the University of Missouri, Kansas City, and a cardiologist at St. Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, said in a meeting news release.

"While ranolazine was shown to be effective in reducing angina in prior studies, this is the first time it has been prospectively evaluated in patients with diabetes -- a high-risk and therapeutically challenging group," he added.

The study also found that Ranexa had the strongest effect in reducing angina episodes among patients with poor blood sugar control. Prior research has shown that the drug may lower fasting glucose levels in people with diabetes.

"Ranolazine is an effective anti-anginal drug in patients with diabetes and may also have a glucose [blood sugar]-lowering effect," Kosiborod said. "If the glucose-lowering action of ranolazine is confirmed in future studies, patients with diabetes and angina may derive a dual benefit from this drug."

Weintraub agreed. "As the focus of the treatment of angina in diabetics increasingly focuses on [drug] therapy, this may offer another choice in optimal medical care in this group of patients," he said.

The majority of the study patients were men (61 percent). Ninety-six percent had high blood pressure and 74 percent had a history of heart attack. Most patients were taking cholesterol-lowering statins (82 percent) and heart drugs such as ACE inhibitors (88 percent). Sixteen percent were smokers.

About 347 million people worldwide have diabetes and about 90 percent of those people have type 2 diabetes. The main causes of type 2 diabetes are believed to be excess weight and lack of physical activity. One in three American adults could have the condition by the year 2050, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

-- Robert Preidt
Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCES: Howard Weintraub, M.D., clinical associate professor, department of medicine, Leon H. Charney division of cardiology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York City; American College of Cardiology, news release, March 10, 2013

View the original article here

Space Heater Safety Tips Can Help Prevent Burns, Fires

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

FRIDAY, March 8 (HealthDay News) -- Many Americans use space heaters to provide extra warmth during winter, but they can cause burns and fires if not used properly, an expert warns.

"Every year we receive patients who are victims of house fires caused by space heaters," Dr. Richard Gamelli, director of the Burn and Shock Trauma Institute at Loyola University Medical Center in Chicago, said in a Loyola news release. "So many of these injuries are preventable if simple precautions are taken," he added.

Each year in the United States, space heaters cause more than 25,000 residential fires, more than 300 deaths, and more than 6,000 burn injuries that require emergency department care, according to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission.

Loyola and the U.S. Department of Energy offer the following space heater safety tips:

Don't place space heaters on carpets or rugs. Keep heaters at least 3 feet away from furniture, curtains and bedding, and other combustible material. Place space heaters on a hard, level surface where a child or family petcannot brush up against them. Never leave a space heater on when an adult is not in the room.Never keep flammable liquids near a space heater.Electric space heaters are the safest type of space heater for the home. Plug them directly into a wall outlet. If an extension cord is needed, use a heavy-duty cord of 14-gauge wire or larger.Buy a unit with a tip-over safety switch, to shut off the heating element if the heater falls over.Do not use unvented combustion space heaters inside your home because they can produce dangerous emissions such as carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxide. Vented units that are sealed combustion heaters are safer because they are less likely to backdraft and harm indoor air quality. They are more efficient because they do not draw in heated air from the room and exhaust it to the outdoors.When using a combustion space heater, follow the manufacturer's recommendations for fueling and use only the approved fuel. Never fill a heater that is hot. Never overfill a heater; instead, allow room for fuel expansion. Store fuel outdoors.

-- Robert Preidt
Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCE: Loyola University Health System, news release, Feb. 22, 2013

View the original article here

Newly Hired Emergency Workers Who Witness Trauma May Struggle Afterward

FRIDAY, March 8 (HealthDay News) -- Repeated exposure to disturbing events can raise the risk of mental health problems in police officers and firefighters who are new to the job, a new study finds.

There is no such increased risk among those who have been in their jobs for a longer period of time, however, said the researchers from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, in Baltimore. They also found that police, firefighters and other protective services workers do not have higher rates of mental health problems than people in other occupations.

For the study, the researchers analyzed data from the U.S. National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions to compare rates of mental health problems, such as mood, anxiety and alcohol use disorders, among different groups of workers. The findings appear in the February issue of the journal Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness.

The most common types of traumatic events reported by protective services workers included: seeing someone badly injured or killed; unexpectedly seeing a dead body; having someone close die unexpectedly; and having someone close experience a serious or life-threatening illness, accident or injury.

The association between witnessing traumatic events and having mental health issues was "virtually confined to the group of early-career protective services workers," study senior author Dr. Ramin Mojtabai, an associate professor in the department of mental health, said in a Bloomberg school news release.

"Future research should examine the coping skills of protective services workers who have been in these jobs for many years, which might make them less likely to develop psychiatric complications in the face of various potentially traumatic experiences," Mojtabai added.

The researchers also said special support programs and services for newly hired protective services workers can potentially help prevent mental health problems that might cause them to leave their jobs.

-- Robert Preidt
Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCE: Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, news release, Feb. 26, 2013

View the original article here

Tattoos Can Pose Health Hazards, Doctor Warns

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

FRIDAY, March 1 (HealthDay News) -- Tattoos have become increasingly popular in the United States in recent years, but along with that comes a rise in problems such as allergic reactions and infections, an expert says.

More than one-third of Americans aged 18 to 25 report getting a tattoo, according to the Pew Research Center. But if you're thinking about getting "inked," there are some things to consider before you head to the tattoo parlor.

"Since tattoos are not regulated in any way, there are many unknowns that could pose potential problems for consumers in terms of the inks and tools used," Dr. Michi Shinohara, a clinical assistant professor of dermatology at the University of Washington in Seattle, said in an American Academy of Dermatology news release.

"It is especially important for consumers to be aware of the potential risks, report any problem that develops to the tattoo artist and see a board-certified dermatologist for proper diagnosis and treatment," Shinohara added.

Tattooing inks have changed a great deal over the years and many modern tattoo inks contain organic azo dyes with plastic-based pigments that are also used industrially in printing, textiles and car paint. Many unknowns exist about how these new tattoo inks interact with the skin and within the body.

Allergic reaction to the tattoo pigments is one of the most common problems associated with tattooing. Infections also can pose a serious threat to health. Along with localized bacterial infections, there have been reports of people being infected with syphilis and hepatitis B and C due to non-sterile tattooing practices, Shinohara said.

Skin cancer is another potential risk associated with tattoos because they can make it hard to detect cancer-related changes in moles. If you get a tattoo, make sure it's not placed over an existing mole.

A tattoo can also cause a reaction that creates a bump that resembles a type of skin cancer called squamous cell carcinoma. Because it is hard to distinguish from skin cancer, the bump could lead to potentially unnecessary and expensive skin cancer treatment, including surgery, Shinohara said.

She offered the following advice for people who want to get a tattoo:

Go to a professional tattoo parlor and to a tattoo artist who is licensed according to state requirements. Insist on seeing tattoo equipment in sterile packaging.Tell the tattoo artist if you have a reaction. If a problem lasts more than one to two weeks, see a dermatologist.People with a chronic skin condition such as psoriasis, eczema or a tendency toward keloid scarring should check with a dermatologist before getting a tattoo.Do not get a tattoo over a mole. Doing so will make it more difficult to diagnose a problem if the mole changes in the future.

-- Robert Preidt
Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCE: American Academy of Dermatology, news release, March 1, 2013

View the original article here

Health Tip: Caring for Chapped Lips

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota

(HealthDay News) -- Cold winter temperatures and bitter winds can leave your lips dry, chapped and sore.

The Cleveland Clinic lists these suggestions to help prevent and soothe chapped lips:

Moisturize lips each day with a balm or lip moisturizer that contains ingredients like cocoa butter, vitamins A and E, beeswax, petrolatum or dimethicone.Re-apply another layer of lip protection before heading out into harsh weather conditions or in dry indoor air.Protect lips from sunburn with a balm that has an SPF of 15 or higher; apply a balm under lipstick if you wear it.Choose a balm that includes an alpha-hydroxy acid to soothe and exfoliate lips that are already chapped; you can also exfoliate them by coating with lip balm, gently brushing lips with a toothbrush to remove flakes, and then wiping clean and applying more lip balm.Try not to lick your lips, because it actually dries them out.

-- Diana Kohnle
Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

View the original article here