Vitamin D While Pregnant Won’t Boost Most Infants’ Bone Health, Study Says

WEDNESDAY, March 2, 2016 (HealthDay News) — Taking vitamin D supplements during pregnancy does not improve a baby’s bone density, according to a new British study.

But for babies born in the winter, “sunshine vitamin” supplementation may help counteract low levels caused by seasonal loss of sunlight, the researchers said.

Some previous studies have suggested that higher vitamin D in mothers during pregnancy are associated with greater bone density in babies, and guidelines in the United Kingdom recommend vitamin D supplements for all pregnant women.

However, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists only recommends supplements for mothers-to-be who are deficient in vitamin D.

This study included more than 1,100 British women, 14 to 17 weeks pregnant, with low to normal levels of vitamin D. Half took a 1,000 International Unit vitamin D capsule daily until they had their baby, while the other half took a placebo.

Overall, there were no significant differences in bone mass between babies born to women who took vitamin D supplements and those who took the placebo, researchers reported.

But among babies born in the winter, those whose mothers took vitamin D supplements had greater bone mass than those whose mothers took the placebo.

The researchers also found that among mothers who delivered in the winter, vitamin D levels fell between 14 and 34 weeks of pregnancy in the placebo group, but not in the vitamin D supplementation group.

That suggests that for women in the late stages of pregnancy during winter, vitamin D supplements may counteract the decrease in normal vitamin D levels caused by lack of sunlight, the researchers said.

The study results were published March 1 in The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology.

“Babies’ bones strengthen during the last stages of pregnancy. Since sunlight is our most important source of vitamin D, mothers’ levels of vitamin D tend to drop from summer to winter, and babies born in the winter months tend to have lower bone density than those born during the summer,” said study co-author Nicholas Harvey. He is a professor of rheumatology and clinical epidemiology at the University of Southampton.

This study “has given us the first evidence that supplementing mothers with vitamin D during pregnancy counteracts the seasonal drop in maternal vitamin D levels and may help to ensure good bone development in these winter births,” Harvey said in a journal news release.

Low maternal concentrations of vitamin D in pregnancy have been associated with gestational diabetes, pre-eclampsia, infants who are small for their gestational age, and lower child bone mass, Ian Reid wrote in an accompanying journal editorial.

As this and other trials of vitamin D supplementation are being completed, “these offer the possibility of determining which associations represent causation, and of guiding clinical practice,” said Reid, a professor of medicine at the University of Auckland in New Zealand.

Reid concluded that “in pregnancy and other contexts, we should be moving to targeted supplementation with vitamin D in individuals likely to have [low vitamin D concentrations] and away from mass medication, which is without proved benefit.”

More information

The Harvard School of Public Health has more about vitamin D and health.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1OPq5Y4

Low Vitamin D Levels May Signal More Aggressive Prostate Cancer

By Steven Reinberg
HealthDay Reporter

WEDNESDAY, March 2, 2016 (HealthDay News) — Prostate cancer may be more aggressive in men who are deficient in vitamin D, new research suggests.

A study of nearly 200 men having their prostate removed found those with low vitamin D levels were more likely to have rapidly growing tumors than those with normal levels of the “sunshine” vitamin.

“If men with vitamin D deficiency are more likely to have [more advanced disease] at the time of prostate surgery, then perhaps men should be tested for this when they are diagnosed with prostate cancer and subsequently supplemented with vitamin D if they are deficient,” said researcher Dr. Adam Murphy. He is an assistant professor of urology at Northwestern University in Chicago.

However, another expert isn’t ready to go that far.

This study can’t prove that vitamin D deficiency causes aggressive prostate cancer, only that the two are associated, said Dr. Anthony D’Amico, chief of radiation oncology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston.

But D’Amico thinks the results are important enough to spur further study into the possible connection between vitamin D and prostate cancer. “It’s a hypothesis that’s worth testing,” he said.

For now, though, D’Amico doesn’t think enough evidence exists to recommend vitamin D supplements to prevent prostate cancer or make it less aggressive.

Murphy said he has been exploring the link between prostate cancer and vitamin D for some time. He said racial distinctions were noted in this study, too, with black men having more aggressive tumors and lower vitamin D levels than white men.

These findings suggest that one reason black men have higher odds of developing — and dying of — prostate cancer is because of their “higher propensity for having vitamin D deficiency from the sun-blocking effects of melanin and perhaps dietary intake differences,” Murphy said. The study could not prove this, however.

The human body gets vitamin D from certain foods. These include fortified products (such as milk, orange juice and cereal), and certain fish (such as salmon), according to the U.S. National Institutes of Health. The body also makes the vitamin when the skin is exposed to sunlight. Dark-skinned people have more melanin, which prevents burning.

Murphy said men with dark skin, low vitamin D intake or low sun exposure should be tested for vitamin D deficiency when diagnosed with prostate cancer or elevated PSA (prostate specific antigen), which is associated with the cancer. He believes supplementation is warranted for those with low vitamin D levels.

The study included 190 men having prostate surgery. The researchers found that nearly 46 percent of the men had aggressive cancer, and these men had vitamin D levels about 16 percent lower than men with slower-growing tumors.

After accounting for age, PSA levels and abnormal rectal exams, Murphy and his colleagues found that vitamin D levels below 30 nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL) of blood were linked to higher odds of aggressive prostate cancer.

The report was published online recently in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

More information

For more about prostate cancer, visit the American Cancer Society.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1OPq32G

Detoxing: the good, the bad and the informative

 

Before you jump on the detox bandwagon, it’s important to look into the potential side affects to a full body cleanse. Here, the experts help us unpack the pros and cons to this weight loss phenomenon.

 

Starving yourself is not the way to go

Most detoxes promote a reduced calorie intake, which can quickly turn into starvation mode. According to GP Dr Fran Bruce of Wesley LifeShape Clinic, most detoxes are “low in protein which can result in fatigue, dehydration, light headedness, headaches, mood swings and constipation.

Our bodies are capable of detoxing on their own

As our liver and kidneys work together to remove toxins from our systems, our bodies naturally go through a detoxification phase. If you’re thinking laxatives are the way to go, think again. Unless discussed with a medical practitioner, they can lead to some serious complications down the track, says Gastroenterologist, Dr Phillip Chang.

Detoxing is not a quick fix

Although detoxing can promote fat loss, this weight loss isn’t always fat loss. “You can expect to lose weight, but mainly due to water and muscle loss after depriving your body of essential nutrients such as protein, says Dietitian Lyndi Polivnick.

Before you ditch the idea of the detox, there are ways to healthily cleanse your body.

Fuel your body with wholesome goodness

There’s even more reason to head to the fresh food aisle of your supermarket because the most simple detox tactic is to avoid highly processed foods, says Dr Bruce. Avoid “foods that are high in fats and sugar, reduce your alcohol intake (if it exceeds the recommended guidelines) and limit caffeine consumption for a week or so.” Keep those energy levels high with nutrient dense wholefoods.  

Go green

While most detoxes miss the mark on fibre and protein, get more from “natural, minimally process foods such as fruit, leafy green vegetables (cabbage or kale) and psyllium (natural insoluble fibre)” in you, says Dr Chang.

Don’t detox for the long haul

When it comes to intense detoxes, short term is better than long term, says Polivnick. Opt for raw foods rather than juices to help out with your fibre intake and befriend water. Lots of it. “Supercharge your body’s natural ability to clear toxins…drink plenty of water, get exercising,” she says.

A little evaluation never hurt anyone

If you’re looking to reassess your habits, you can benefit from a process of elimination. Stewart suggests, eliminating ‘all animal protein products including eggs,” which can slow down the detoxing process. The Liver Cleansing Diet focuses on high quality nutrients including veggies, fruits, grains, nuts and seeds, which are important for your metabolism.

Full article by Hannah Blamey, featured in the January edition of Women’s Health and Fitness Magazine.

 

{nomultithumb}

 

Source Health & Beauty http://ift.tt/1WUgDc0

To Dramatically Improve Your Health, Do 1 of These 4 Things

Photo: Getty Images

Now that March is here, your weight loss resolutions may be long gone. If that’s the case, don’t sweat it: Diets usually don’t work anyway, says neuroscientist Sandra Aamont, PhD. Aamont gave a TED Talk that went viral about the risks of our obsession with dieting, and now she’s got a book coming out called Why Diets Make Us Fat ($28, amazon.com). Her message—based on the latest research—is simple: Healthy is better than thin, and drastically improving your health could be simpler than dropping dress sizes.

In her famous talk, Aamont cited one study published in the Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine that looked at four specific healthy habits and mortality risk over a 14-year period: The researchers found that overweight people in general had a higher risk of death from any cause. But overweight people who had adopted just one healthy habit had a risk of death similar to normal weight people. In other words, the number on the scale made little difference. This is good news for anyone who is struggling to lose weight and keep it off, Aamont explained, because it means “you can take control of your health by taking control of your lifestyle.”

Curious about those healthy habits included in the study? We were too. Here, the four potential life-lengtheners.

Eat at least 5 servings of fruits and veggies

While you may think you’re consuming plenty of produce, you may want to double-check: The USDA’s dietary guidelines recommend 5 to 13 servings a day. And according to the CDC, less than 18% of adults eat enough fruit, and less than 14% get enough veggies. Luckily, there are plenty of ways to sneak more produce into your diet. For example, you could start your morning with a smoothie; snack on carrots and hummus; or swap pasta for spaghetti squash. Even better? Try our 31-Day Eat-More-Veggies plan.

RELATED: 13 Veggies You Only Think You Don’t Like

Drink in moderation

It’s possible that a little alcohol may do you body good, and red wine in particular has been linked to health perks. But still, experts say it’s best to limit the booze. The USDA defines “moderate” alcohol consumption as up to one drink per day for women, and up to two for men. (When you order a drink at a restaurant or bar, it helps to be conscious of serving sizes.)

Exercise regularly

By the study’s standard, that’s more than 12 times a month (or three to four times a week). Even if all you’ve got is a few spare moments, you can still squeeze in a challenging workout, like this four-minute tabata routine, or this 10-minute head-to-toe toner by Tracy Anderson. You could also set up a home gym. Forget expensive machines—you can get all you really need for less than 50 bucks.

RELATED: Train with Tracy Anderson at Health‘s Wellness Weekend April 22-24

Quit smoking

This one goes without saying. But if you’re still stuck on those cigs, consider quitting ASAP. Tried and failed in the past? You might want to look into different strategies.

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1QSbYJa

Parents, Take Heed: Your Kids Copy Your Heart Health Habits

TUESDAY, March 1, 2016 (HealthDay News) — If you eat poorly and exercise rarely, it’s highly likely that your kids will adopt at least some of these bad habits, endangering their hearts.

That’s the finding from new research involving nearly 1,500 children, aged 8 to 16, and 1,020 of their adult caregivers.

The study, to be presented Tuesday at a meeting of the American Heart Association in Phoenix, found that kids often take after their parents or other caregivers when it comes to unhealthy habits that then raise the odds for obesity, high blood pressure, high blood sugar and high cholesterol.

One expert wasn’t surprised by the finding.

“Although there is clearly a genetic component to heart disease, this study demonstrates how risk factors are often learned lifestyle behaviors, and occur from how kids are taught to live,” said Dr. Suzanne Steinbaum, a preventive cardiologist at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City.

“Heart disease needs to be looked at as a true family issue,” she said, “and intervention needs to take place within the behaviors of the home.”

The study was led by Mercedes Carnethon, an associate professor of preventive medicine-epidemiology at Northwestern University in Chicago. Her team found that when caregivers were obese, boys were nearly seven times more likely to be obese themselves, while girls were about four times more likely to be obese.

Further analysis showed that kids were likely to be similar to their caregivers in terms of body fat, blood pressure and cholesterol.

And when caregivers had at least one cardiovascular risk factor, children in their homes were twice as likely to also have a cardiovascular risk factor, compared to children with healthier caregivers.

“Cardiovascular disease — which is truly a lifestyle disease — is a problem that affects the family, as behavior is often emulated and passed down from caregiver to their children,” Steinbaum added.

Another expert agreed.

“The study data makes the case for having more nutrition education programs that target families, particularly families with adults who have metabolic risk factors,” said Pamela Koch, executive director of the Tisch Center for Food, Education, and Policy at Columbia University in New York City.

“With good, quality nutrition education there is the opportunity to reverse these trends and help all children to be able to grow into adults who can stay free of preventable metabolic diseases and have increased quality of life and reduced medical costs,” she said.

Experts note that findings presented at medical meetings are typically considered preliminary until published in a peer-reviewed journal.

More information

The American Academy of Family Physicians offers tips for healthy children and families.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1oNnhFK

Lower Fruit, Vegetable Prices Might Save Lives

By Amy Norton
HealthDay Reporter

TUESDAY, March 1, 2016 (HealthDay News) — Cutting the cost of fruits and vegetables, while bumping up prices on junk food, could prevent thousands of deaths from heart disease and stroke each year in the United States, two new studies suggest.

Researchers say that policies to trim the cost of produce, such as agriculture subsidies, could make healthy eating affordable for more Americans. And that could translate into more than 500,000 lives saved over 20 years.

The projections, to be presented Tuesday at an American Heart Association (AHA) meeting in Phoenix, are based on a computer model that simulated how pricing policies could affect Americans’ dietary habits, and ultimately heart disease and stroke rates.

The studies did not prove that cutting prices on fruits and vegetables and raising prices on sugary drinks would save lives. They only showed an association.

While there is no crystal ball, experts said it’s reasonable to assume that cheaper prices would boost Americans’ fruit and vegetable intake.

“People’s lifestyle habits are affected by economics,” said Dr. Mark Creager, president of the AHA and director of the Heart and Vascular Center at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, in Lebanon, N.H.

He pointed to tobacco policies as an example.

“Taxes that increased the price of tobacco have clearly had a very favorable impact on the number of Americans who smoke,” said Creager, who was not involved in the studies.

So, it’s not a stretch to assume that cheaper prices on healthy food would also have a positive effect, Creager said.

Dr. Dariush Mozaffarian, who worked on both studies, agreed.

“An extensive [research] literature and real-world experience demonstrate the impact of changes in food prices on dietary habits,” said Mozaffarian, dean of Tufts University’s Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, in Boston.

“This is the beauty and strength of using economics,” he added. “It nudges people toward healthier choices, while also better representing the real societal price of different foods.”

For the studies, Mozaffarian and his colleagues used data on Americans’ demographics, rates of heart disease and stroke, and current fruit and vegetable intake. They estimated how various food-pricing policies could ultimately change people’s cardiovascular outlook, versus what would happen with no policy shifts.

They found that a 30 percent drop in the cost of fruits and vegetables would translate to a more than 3 percent decrease in Americans’ death rates from heart attack and stroke over 15 years. That amounts to roughly 200,000 lives saved.

But even a much smaller dip in those prices could have big benefits, the researchers added, if it were paired with an increase in the cost of junk food.

They estimated that if prices on fruits, vegetables and grains fell just 10 percent, while the cost of sugary drinks rose by the same amount, there could be 515,000 fewer deaths from heart disease and stroke over 20 years.

How would those price changes happen? Mozaffarian said they could be “readily achieved” through local, state or federal excise taxes on sugary drinks, along with government subsidies for fruits and vegetables.

“The combination is wonderful,” he said, “because it can be relatively budget-neutral, minimize the potential negative impact on the poor of taxes alone, and stimulate strong public support due to the subsidy on healthier foods.”

The AHA has long supported taxes on sugary beverages, Creager said. But, he added, food prices aren’t the whole story: Fresh fruits and vegetables, along with other wholesome foods, need to be readily available in lower-income neighborhoods across the United States — which, right now, is often not the case.

“Taking that further,” Creager added, “we also want all communities to have safe, walkable environments so people can be more physically active.”

For now, Creager said, the findings emphasize the impact that better eating could have on Americans’ health. “Whatever we can do to increase people’s fruit and vegetable consumption will save lives,” he said.

Mozaffarian sees the findings as a call to action. “We should all demand action by the government to make healthier foods more affordable, and also ensure that the price of unhealthy foods reflects their true, enormous cost on society,” he said.

More information

The American Heart Association has advice on adding fruits and vegetables to your diet.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1nhuZqw

A Daily Cup of Tea May Soothe Your Heart

By Kathleen Doheny
HealthDay Reporter

TUESDAY, March 1, 2016 (HealthDay News) — Drinking as little as a cup of tea daily may be good for your heart health, new research suggests.

The study found that people who drank a cup of tea each day were 35 percent less likely to have a heart attack or other major cardiovascular event, compared to nondrinkers.

The study also found that tea drinkers were less likely to have calcium buildup in the heart’s coronary arteries. Calcium deposits have been linked to serious conditions, such as heart disease and stroke, the researchers said.

“We found that moderate tea drinkers had a decreased progression of coronary artery calcium and a decreased incidence of cardiovascular events,” said Dr. Elliott Miller. He’s an internal medicine physician and instructor of medicine at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore.

But Miller noted that the researchers couldn’t prove a cause-and-effect relationship between tea drinking and heart disease.

“This is an observational study,” Miller said, “and we can’t say for sure it was the tea or just the healthier lifestyle of the tea drinkers.”

Miller is scheduled to present the study on Tuesday at a meeting of the American Heart Association in Phoenix. Findings presented at medical meetings are considered preliminary until published in a peer-reviewed journal. The study received no funding from the tea industry, according to Miller.

For the study, Miller and his team looked at data from more than 6,000 men and women enrolled in an ongoing study that began in 2000. At the beginning of the study, all of the volunteers were free of heart disease, Miller said.

The researchers tracked the records of the men and women to see who had a heart attack, stroke, chest pain, or died from other types of heart disease over 11 years. The investigators also measured the calcium deposits in the blood vessels over five years by comparing earlier CT scans to later ones.

The study found that people who drank a cup of tea a day had about one-third less risk of a major heart disease event during the study period than people who didn’t drink tea. Tea drinkers — those who drank from one to three cups daily — also showed a decline in the calcium buildup in their arteries.

The researchers can’t say if drinking more than three cups of tea a day would lead to even better heart health. Miller said there were very few participants who drank more than four cups of tea daily.

The men and women drank either black or green tea. But the findings weren’t separated by tea type, he said.

Miller also can’t say why the tea might help. However, the study echoes some previous work, with some experts saying plant chemicals called flavonoids, found in tea, explain the protective effect on the heart, he said.

He added that it’s premature to give advice about tea and heart health based on the study results.

“It’s too early to say drinking tea will help you have less cardiovascular events, like heart attack and stroke. But it does suggest there could be a protective nature of tea, or that tea drinkers in general are healthier individuals,” he said.

Other research has focused on the antioxidant properties of tea, said Lona Sandon, a dietitian and assistant professor of clinical nutrition at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas. Sandon wasn’t involved with the new research, but reviewed the study’s findings.

The study holds the potential of more good news for tea drinkers, she said. “I will continue to drink my daily iced tea,” she said. “Tea is a great low-calorie beverage choice as long as you do not load it up with sweeteners. And if it brings health benefits, then all the better.”

More information

To learn more about tea’s benefits, visit Harvard Health Letter.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1Qlq0Q9

Certain Jobs Hazardous to Your Heart Health, Study Finds

By Dennis Thompson
HealthDay Reporter

TUESDAY, March 1, 2016 (HealthDay News) — Your day-to-day job could influence your risk of heart disease and stroke, a new study reports.

Middle-aged employees working in sales, office or food service jobs appear to have more risk factors that can harm heart health than people with professional or managerial jobs, according to the researchers.

Police, firefighters, truckers and health care support workers also are more likely to have these risk factors, said lead researcher Capt. Leslie MacDonald, a senior scientist in the U.S. Public Health Service.

People 45 and older employed in sales and office jobs more often smoke, eat an unhealthy diet, are sedentary and suffer from high blood pressure, MacDonald said.

Food service employees ate worse than any other profession, while truckers and other materials transportation workers had the highest smoking rates, the investigators found.

“Those employed among the broad ‘service’ occupations had a significantly lower prevalence of ideal cholesterol, lower ideal blood pressure, and lower ideal body mass index,” MacDonald said. “This poor cardiovascular risk profile was especially pronounced among protective service workers, which includes security guards, police and firefighters.”

MacDonald and her colleagues studied health data on over 5,500 men and women aged 45 or older, assessing their heart health based on a set of risk factors called “Life’s Simple 7” by the American Heart Association.

The risk factors include blood pressure, cholesterol, blood sugar, physical activity, smoking, diet and body mass index (BMI, a ratio based on height and weight).

Overall, more than 88 percent of workers 45 and older did not smoke and 78 percent had ideal blood sugar levels, the researchers found.

Unfortunately, fewer than 41 percent of the workers had “ideal cardiovascular health” in the remaining five measures, and those risk factors appear to vary depending on profession.

More than one of every five transportation workers smoked — the highest rate among the occupation groups studied.

Two of three sales or office workers had poor eating habits and bad cholesterol levels, and four out of five did not get enough exercise.

Food service workers had the worst eating habits of any profession, with nearly four out of five reporting a poor daily diet.

Nine out of 10 police, firefighters, security guards and other protective service workers were overweight or obese. Three-quarters had bad cholesterol levels, and one-third had high blood pressure.

Managers and professionals had the best heart health, based on their risk factors. One-third had an ideal BMI; three out of four were at least moderately active; and only 6 percent were smokers.

However, 72 percent of finance workers and white-collar professionals with business jobs had poor eating habits.

These results support earlier findings that have linked income and education to heart health, said Dr. Donald Lloyd-Jones, an American Heart Association spokesman.

“There tends to be generally poorer cardiovascular health for those in lower paying jobs, and better cardiovascular health in those with higher paying jobs,” said Lloyd-Jones, a professor of heart research at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago.

But the nature of a job itself also can present specific challenges to heart health, MacDonald and Lloyd-Jones noted.

For example, desk jobs can keep people from getting enough physical activity, and interfere with their ability to eat healthy, the doctors said. Long and irregular work hours, loud noise, poor air quality, temperature extremes, work-related stress, job insecurity and exposure to harmful substances also can play a role.

Workers don’t have to take this lying down, MacDonald said. Simple on-the-job changes can improve heart health, she suggested.

“We crave simple carbohydrates when fatigued and while under pressure, but they do not provide sustainable energy. So reach for whole fruit or celery sticks in place of pastry, chips or candy,” she said.

“Adding physical activity, like a lunch-time walk, can also create multiple benefits since it can help you wind down, possibly improving sleep, and reducing stress-related eating and smoking,” MacDonald added.

Employers also can play a role in protecting their workers, Lloyd-Jones explained.

“Because most of us spend at least half of our waking day in an office, we need to think about how we engineer these offices so we have good food choices and opportunities to be active at work,” he said.

The study findings were scheduled for presentation Tuesday at a meeting of the American Heart Association in Phoenix. Research presented at meetings is considered preliminary until published in a peer-reviewed medical journal.

More information

For more on heart health at work, visit the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1nhv1Pf

Pricier Football Helmets Don’t Offer Extra Protection: Report

TUESDAY, March 1, 2016 (HealthDay News) — Price and laboratory ratings don’t indicate whether a football helmet is better at protecting high school players from concussion, a new study suggests.

When University of Colorado researchers evaluated helmets and U.S. high school concussion data, the only difference that emerged concerned helmet age. Older helmets that had not been reconditioned provided less protection than newer or recently reconditioned helmets, the study found.

“All of the approved helmets evaluated in our study performed similarly. Increased cost does not necessarily translate to improved safety,” said study senior author Dawn Comstock, an associate professor at the university’s School of Public Health.

She and her colleagues also reported that helmets with higher ratings in laboratory tests did not necessarily provide better protection for players.

“We found helmets with high ratings performed similarly to helmets with lower ratings,” Comstock said in a university news release.

For the study, the researchers examined nationwide helmet and high school football player concussion data gathered from 2008 to 2013.

The average number of concussions, length of recovery, and time until a player returned to play were similar among players wearing the most common helmet makes and models, regardless of price.

All of the helmets had a National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment (NOCSAE) seal, a requirement for high school football use.

The study found that old helmets that had been reconditioned within 12 months before use offered similar levels of protection as new helmets. However, players who used old helmets that had not been reconditioned recently had concussion symptoms for a longer period of time than those who wore new helmets.

Parents of high school football players need to ensure their children are using safe helmets, Comstock said.

“Many parents don’t think to ask if the helmet issued to their child is new or previously used or, if not new, when it was last reconditioned,” she said. “Parents should be asking questions and not assuming that the helmet assigned to their child is safe.”

The study was published online recently in the American Journal of Sports Medicine.

More information

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has more on young athletes and concussion.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1ON2TKa

Is Type 1 Diabetes Linked to Raised Risk of Certain Cancers?

By Steven Reinberg
HealthDay Reporter

TUESDAY, March 1, 2016 (HealthDay News) — Having type 1 diabetes may raise the risk of some cancers, but lower the risk of others, a new study suggests.

A higher risk was seen for cancers of the stomach, liver, pancreas, endometrium, ovary and kidneys. But a reduced risk was seen for prostate and breast cancers, researchers reported.

In type 1 diabetes, the body cannot produce the hormone insulin, which helps regulate blood sugar levels. People with type 1 diabetes must be treated with insulin to survive.

The good news from this study, said researcher Sarah Wild, is that it doesn’t seem that insulin treatment is responsible for an increased risk of some cancers, which has been a concern.

“This pattern of cancer risk [seen in the study] is similar to that seen for people with type 2 diabetes and people who are overweight,” said Wild, a professor of epidemiology at the University of Edinburgh in the United Kingdom. “This suggests that insulin treatment for type 1 diabetes does not itself increase risk of cancer.”

And, Wild pointed out, the new findings only show an association between type 1 diabetes and an increased risk for cancer, not that type 1 diabetes is a direct cause of the increased risk.

Another diabetes expert said it’s not clear if there is a cause-and-effect relationship between type 1 diabetes and cancer risk.

“We need to take their [the authors of the new study] findings with caution,” said Dr. Joel Zonszein, director of the Clinical Diabetes Center at Montefiore Medical Center in New York City. “Patients with diabetes have enough problems, and they don’t need cancer on top of their complications.”

He said the lack of a plausible reason why type 1 diabetes might cause an increase in certain cancers makes him suspect that there could be another explanation for the study findings.

It’s possible, Zonszein said, that patients in this study were misdiagnosed or misclassified in the national registries used for this study. Some of them may have had type 2 diabetes rather than type 1 diabetes, he suggested. This confusion may have occurred because all the patients the researchers looked at were taking insulin, he said.

The report findings were published Feb. 29 in the journal Diabetologia.

For the study, Wild and her colleagues collected data from national registries on more than 9,000 cancers among people with type 1 diabetes from Australia, Denmark, Finland, Scotland and Sweden. They compared people with type 1 diabetes to people in the general population of each country.

Looking at all cancers combined, Wild’s team didn’t find an increase in cancer risk for men with type 1 diabetes. However, women with type 1 diabetes had a 7 percent increased cancer risk, the study authors said.

The lack of overall cancer risk among men with type 1 diabetes was mostly due to an apparent 44 percent decreased risk of prostate cancer, Wild said.

When data for sex-specific cancers — such as prostate and breast cancers — were removed from the analysis, an increased cancer risk was seen in both men and women with type 1 diabetes. That increased risk was 15 percent for men and 17 percent for women, the researchers said.

Type 1 diabetes was linked to a 23 percent higher risk of stomach cancer for men and a 78 percent higher risk for women, the study found. For liver cancer, the risk for men with type 1 diabetes was doubled, while it was 55 percent higher for women, the study authors said.

However, women with type 1 diabetes were 10 percent less likely to develop breast cancer, Wild said.

Because many of these cancers are rare, the actual risk is slight, Wild added.

Also, the risk for cancer appeared to be highest shortly after diagnosis of type 1 diabetes, she said. During the first year after a diabetes diagnosis, the cancer risk was more than doubled for both men and women. The longer someone had type 1 diabetes, the lower the odds of cancer diagnosis, she said.

After about 20 years, the cancer risk dropped to that of the general population for men. For women, it took only five years for the cancer risk to drop to almost normal, the study found.

The reported elevated cancer risk soon after type 1 diabetes diagnosis may owe to the detection of pre-existing cancers, the researchers suggested.

Although type 1 diabetes hasn’t been linked to lifestyle factors like type 2 diabetes has, Wild noted that lifestyle changes might help reduce cancer risk.

“Lifestyle changes to reduce cancer risk — such as avoiding smoking, [and improving] weight management and physical activity — are important for people with type 1 diabetes, particularly because several of the cancers are ones where these factors affect risk,” Wild said.

More information

For more on type 1 diabetes, visit the American Diabetes Association.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1ON2TtK