ScienceDaily: Whole-grain Breakfast Cereal Associated With Reduced Heart Failure Risk
Eating whole-grain breakfast cereals seven or more times per week was associated with a lower risk of heart failure, according to an analysis of the observational Physicians’ Health Study. Researchers presented findings of the study today at the American Heart Association’s 47th Annual Conference on Cardiovascular Disease Epidemiology and Prevention. For the present study, breakfast cereals that contain at least 25 percent oat or bran content were classified as whole grain cereals.
So it really is good for you? I would guess that other healthy breakfasts have similar results. I eat whole grain cereals, but wouldn’t want to do it 7 days a week.
Five Food Myths Exposed - Forbes.com
“It’s unfortunate, not only because you end up getting less pleasure out of the meals but also because it’s not good for your health,” says Barry Glassner, author of the new book The Gospel of Food: Everything You Think You Know About Food Is Wrong. “You get more out of a meal physically and emotionally when it’s a pleasure to eat.”What’s more, in chasing down a healthy diet, Glassner says, Americans have accepted as fact a number of myths and half-truths that need debunking.
The myths in question are:
- Fresh is best
- Vitamin-enhanced foods are better
- A meal is worthy for what it lacks
- Natural means less processed
- Some foods are inherently bad for you
You can read the article to learn why these myths should be busted.
AP Wire | 02/27/2007 | Antioxidants don’t help you live longer
Antioxidant vitamins taken by tens of millions of people around the world won’t lead to a longer life, according to an analysis of dozens of studies that adds to evidence questioning the value of the popular supplements. The large review of separate studies on thousands of people found no long-life benefit from vitamins A, E and C and beta carotene and selenium.
On the other hand, they might kill you.
Then again, there is no guarantee the study is correct.
Dr Ioannidis wrote: “Published research findings are sometimes refuted by subsequent evidence, with ensuing confusion and disappointment.” He argued that there is increasing concern that in modern research, false findings may be the majority or even the vast majority of published research claims, and went on to try and prove that most claimed research findings are false.
However, in this week’s PLoS Medicine, Ramal Moonesinghe (US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) and colleagues demonstrate that the likelihood of a published research result being true increases when that finding has been repeatedly replicated in multiple studies.
So there you have it.
ScienceDaily: Reduction Of Body Iron Stores And Cardiovascular Outcomes
“There were no significant differences between treatment groups for the primary (all-cause death) or secondary (death plus nonfatal MI and stroke) study end points,” the authors report. “All-cause deaths occurred in 148 patients (23 percent) in the control group and in 125 (20 percent) in the iron-reduction group. Death plus nonfatal myocardial infarction and stroke occurred in 205 patients (32 percent) in the control group and in 180 (28 percent) in the iron-reduction group.” The researchers also examined whether effects of iron reduction differed across subgroups. They found apparent improvement with iron reduction among younger patients, those without diabetes and in smokers.
They say more studies need to be done, but this one is encouraging for meat-eaters.
Miracle Muffins sent from the Heavens - The Diabetes Blog
Miracle is a strong word. However, when you see the impact these muffins have on blood sugar — you’ll agree it’s miraculous. Ramsey wanted to create a muffin that his diabetic mother could enjoy without the rise in her sugar. He concocted a recipe that contains generous amounts of fiber, healthy soy protein, low-glycemic sweeteners, and very low in fat. Another fact for good measure - the muffins fit comfortably into the diet programs of Weight Watchers, Atkins, South Beach, LA Weight Loss, Nutra System and Zone.
The muffins look similar to megamuffins, but less nutritious. While megamuffins take longer to prepare (slightly) it is probably worth the effort. Still, these could be a handy backup for when one is either short on ingredients or time.
On Growth Hormone and Longevity - Or Not
Growth hormone is one of those topics in which the science is fighting a slow and steady uphill battle against the marketing dollars of those making money from the application of growth hormone (or anything that they can pass off as its application). The “anti-aging” industry will make money in the short term, but being on the wrong side of the science is a losing proposition in the long term - they can’t waste time and misinform people forever. From the recent past here at Fight Aging!:Talking About Human Growth Hormone :
Growth hormone, once you cut through the irresponsible marketing, is nothing more than another fairly outmoded workhorse therapy for very specific conditions.
In any case, my attention was drawn today to further confirmation of the above viewpoints from the scientific community:No longevity benefit with growth hormone:
Liu’s team undertook a systematic review and analysis of published studies, excluding any that looked at diseases for which growth hormone is an accepted therapy. They focused solely on studies using growth hormone to treat the elderly, specifically those whose main maladies were nothing worse than age and being mildly to moderately overweight. They also included only studies that evaluated the use of the hormone in randomized, controlled clinical trials.
“From our review, there’s no data to suggest that growth hormone prolongs life, and none of the studies makes that claim,” said Liu.
Furthermore, given the allergies to bovine growth hormones developed by certain people we know, we would tend to avoid any added hormones in any form if possible.
At least one component of it might.
ScienceDaily: Does A Component Of Niacin Point The Way To Anti-aging Drugs?
Using the techniques of structural biology, the Wistar team demonstrated that a component of the common vitamin B3, also known as niacin, binds to a specific site on the sirtuin molecule to inhibit its activity. This observation suggests that drugs designed to prevent the vitamin B3 component, nicotinamide, from binding at this site could have the effect of activating sirtuins. Any such drug would, in essence, inhibit the inhibitory effect of nicotinamide. As in mathematics, the two negatives would create a positive result — activation of sirtuins.”Our findings suggest a new avenue for designing sirtuin-activating drugs,” says Marmorstein. “The jury is still out as to whether a drug of this kind might result in longer life in humans, but I’m equally excited by the possibility that such interventions might help counteract age-related health problems like obesity and type II diabetes.”
Hmm… nicotinamide? I’m thinking maybe that has something to do with nicotine? And maybe the nicotine/cancer link, which would also presumably affect longevity? Is there anyone more knowledgeable who can elaborate?
Four questions on resveratrol and other anti-aging drugs - Jan. 31, 2007
Still, many experts believe that drugs are on the horizon which could extend average life span by perhaps five to ten years. That may seem unimpressive. But their boost to life expectancy would “far exceed” that from totally eliminating cancer, says S. Jay Olshansky, a University of Illinois expert on the demographics of aging. That’s because the risk of many deadly diseases skyrockets as we age, so even if one were vanquished, the others would soon get us, limiting the gain in average life span.
Fortune says we won’t live to 250, which would at least make retirement financial planning less complicated.
I got depressing news today: Despite having lost 15 pounds recently my cholesterol levels were WAY too high for comfort. Then, to add insult to injury, I see this:
Disease Proof: Cholesterol Levels and Heart Attack
There is irrefutable evidence that high cholesterol levels are associated with increased risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). Make no doubt about it: lowering your LDL cholesterol below 100 offers powerful protection against heart disease. The evidence is overwhelming today that heart attacks, which kill half of all Americans, are entirely preventable. Heart disease is a condition that is preventable and reversible through aggressive nutritional intervention and cholesterol-lowering.The latest recommendation from most medical authorities and medical organizations such as the American College of Cardiology is to lower LDL cholesterol level below 100. This is in accordance with what has been observed for years in epidemiology studies. People in countries who ate a more simple plant-based diet did not have heart attacks and those populations are always found to have much lower cholesterol levels than was thought to be acceptable in the past. For instance, the average total cholesterol in rural China was 127 and the average LDL was below 80. Heart attacks in rural China were exceedingly rare. The same thing was observed in multiple interventional and population studies, such as the Harvard Health Study; those with LDL’s below 100 were not observed to have heart attacks.
At least it served as a wake-up call to tell me that while my progress so far is good, it is not enough.