The Number of People Who Don’t Wear Sunscreen Will SHOCK You

Photo: Courtesy of MIMI

Are you tired of hearing that you should be wearing SPF? Newsflash: If you wore it, we wouldn’t have to keep telling you to! So we took to the street (er, the beach) to see just how many millennials actually wear sunscreen. Our findings were not promising. Watch below and see for yourself.

 

A few lessons we can learn:

• While SPF 4 is something, in the grand scheme of things, it’s nothing. That SPF is in your oil so you can talk yourself into believing you’re doing the right thing. You’re not.
• Applying sunscreen to your face to protect against wrinkles and sunspots is a good start, but it’s not enough. Apply sunscreen to your whole body to protect against skin cancer.
• You know all those scary advertisements where kids pull their teeth out to get a pack of cigarettes? Same thing applies here. Skin cancer is deadly, and in my opinion, being bronze is not worth dying over.
• According to the Environment Working Group, SPF 50 is the highest effective protection. Don’t worry about shooting for SPF 100 and know you’re not settling by using an SPF 45.
• It’s never too late to start wearing SPF. It’s as easy as buying moisturizer and foundation with SPF 30 for daily protection and applying (and reapplying) at the beach.
• But there is good news: You don’t necessarily have to give up your oil habit. Sunscreen brand SuperGoop! created an oil spray with an SPF 50 that actually works—trust me.

Unfortunately, this video is representative of a recent survey that showed nearly four out of five millennials don’t use sunscreen regularly. Try holding yourself, your family, and your friends accountable (like the last guy!) and if you do get burned, follow our tips for a speedy recovery.

This story originally appeared on MIMIChatter.com

MIMI Chatter is an endless stream of beauty content. We bring together the must-knows and the how-tos from your favorite sites, beauty influencers, our editors, and YOU.

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1HV7QAF

Many Young Cancer Patients Unaware of Fertility Preservation Options

MONDAY, July 27, 2015 (HealthDay News) — Many young cancer patients — especially females — have limited awareness about options to preserve their fertility, a new study shows.

Cancer and cancer treatments may leave some people infertile, making it important for young patients and their doctors to discuss the issue and ways to deal with it, the study published online July 27 in the journal Cancer noted.

Researchers gave questionnaires to almost 500 teens and young adults who were diagnosed with cancer in 2007 or 2008. More than 70 percent were told that cancer treatment may affect their fertility, the study found.

But males were more than twice as likely as females to say that they discussed options with their doctor. Nearly one-third of males said they made arrangements to preserve their fertility. That rate is four to five times higher than among females, the researchers said.

Other factors that affected the likelihood that patients and doctors would discuss fertility risks or take action to preserve fertility were education level, insurance status and whether patients already had children.

Those least likely to discuss fertility preservation with doctors were those without insurance, those who had children and males who received treatment that posed little to no risk to their fertility.

Among males, those least likely to make fertility preservation arrangements didn’t have a college degree, didn’t have private insurance or already had children. A similar analysis was not possible for females because too few made fertility preservation arrangements.

The researchers did find that between 2007 and 2008, both male and female patients reported an increase in discussions with doctors about the effects of cancer treatment on fertility and fertility preservation options.

The study highlights “the need for decreased cost, improved insurance coverage, and partnerships between cancer healthcare providers and fertility experts to develop strategies that increase awareness of fertility preservation options and decrease delays in cancer therapy as fertility preservation for adolescent and young adult cancer patients improves,” study author Dr. Margarett Shnorhavorian, of the University of Washington, Seattle Children’s Hospital, said in a journal news release.

More information

The U.S. National Cancer Institute has more about cancer treatment and fertility.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1I4FUYV

Teens Using E-Cigs More Prone to Take Up Smoking: Study

By Amy Norton
HealthDay Reporter

MONDAY, July 27, 2015 (HealthDay News) — Teenagers who use electronic cigarettes may be more likely to smoke the real thing, new research suggests.

The study, which included almost 2,100 California high school students, found that one-quarter had ever “vaped” (tried e-cigarettes). Ten percent of the teens were currently using e-cigarettes. And those current users were much more likely than their peers to also smoke cigarettes. One-third of e-cigarette users also smoked tobacco cigarettes, versus 1 percent of kids who’d never vaped.

Researchers said the findings do not prove e-cigarettes act as a gateway to tobacco use.

But they raise the possibility that e-cigarettes are encouraging a more tobacco-friendly culture among kids, said study leader Jessica Barrington-Trimis, a researcher at the University of Southern California.

The study also found that most kids who used e-cigarettes also had friends or family members who used them. And about half believed these products were harmless.

Those positive attitudes, in turn, were linked to a greater risk of kids’ smoking cigarettes as well.

The study, published online July 27 in the journal Pediatrics, comes on the heels of a federal report showing that e-cigarettes are soaring in popularity. Between 2011 and 2014, use of the devices tripled among U.S. middle school and high school students.

The good news in that report was that cigarette smoking was down: It seems many kids who use e-cigarettes have never smoked the traditional version.

That was true in the current study. While many e-cigarette fans also smoked, about 40 percent of current users said they’d never lit up a traditional cigarette.

That pattern is “disturbing,” because it suggests that some kids who otherwise wouldn’t smoke are still being exposed to nicotine, said Vaughan Rees, director of the Center for Global Tobacco Control at the Harvard School of Public Health, in Boston.

“It represents evidence of the failure of traditional tobacco-control measures to prevent adolescents’ experimentation [with] e-cigarettes,” said Rees, who was not involved in the study.

Most U.S. states ban e-cigarette sales to minors, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. But for now, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration does not regulate the devices, unless they are specifically marketed for “therapeutic purposes,” meaning smoking cessation.

The agency hopes to expand its authority over e-cigarettes — a move that could put a national ban on sales to minors and require federal approval of all e-cigarette devices and the flavored nicotine “juices” used in them.

According to Rees, the current lack of regulation over e-cigarette marketing is a problem.

“We are seeing adolescents who might not smoke a conventional product — because of the health risk and social stigma — using e-cigarettes,” he said.

Rees acknowledged that the potential health risks of e-cigarettes, themselves, are “not yet fully understood.” The battery-powered devices produce no tobacco smoke, but they do contain nicotine — the drug that makes tobacco products so addictive.

Whether that nicotine is any danger to kids is unclear. “The greater concern,” Rees said, “is the potential for tobacco manufacturers to target young adult e-cigarette consumers — who may be vulnerable to tobacco-industry messaging because of their dependence on nicotine.”

David Abrams, executive director of the Schroeder Institute for Tobacco Research and Policy Studies, an anti-tobacco group, said, “It is troubling that a lot of kids are experimenting with e-cigarettes.”

However, he also said the consequences of that experimentation are not clear. This study does not show whether kids’ e-cigarette use, or positive attitudes toward it, had any bearing on their cigarette use.

Plus, “current use” was defined as any e-cigarette use over the past month, Abrams pointed out. The real concern, he said, would be habitual use — an indicator of nicotine dependence.

All of that said, “we still don’t want kids using these things,” Abrams stressed.

“It’s a concern because nicotine is a drug, it’s not harmless,” he said. “And we can’t know who is going to end up being hooked.”

Abrams agreed that tighter regulation would help. “The FDA should hurry and put some controls over the advertising and distribution of [e-cigarettes],” he said.

Still, there are cases where e-cigarettes are the less hazardous path, Abrams added. Some kids who are already smoking might try e-cigs as a “gateway out” of the habit. And parents might want to be open to that, he said.

More information

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has more on e-cigarettes.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1S7qXzm

New Moms Often Get Poor Advice on Baby Care: Study

By Tara Haelle
HealthDay Reporter

MONDAY, July 27, 2015 (HealthDay News) — New mothers get conflicting advice from medical professionals, family members and the media when it comes to key parenting topics, a recent study found.

And that advice often goes against American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommendations for breast-feeding, vaccines, pacifier use and infant sleep, researchers say.

“In order for parents to make informed decisions about their baby’s health and safety, it is important that they get information, and that the information is accurate,” said the study’s lead author, Dr. Staci Eisenberg, a pediatrician at Boston Medical Center.

“We know from prior studies that advice matters,” Eisenberg said. Parents are more likely to follow the recommendations of medical professionals when they “receive appropriate advice from multiple sources, such as family and physicians,” she added.

The study was published online July 27 in Pediatrics.

The researchers surveyed more than 1,000 U.S. mothers. Their children were between 2 months and 6 months old. Researchers asked the mothers what advice they had been given on a variety of topics, including vaccines, breast-feeding, pacifiers and infant sleep position and location.

Sleep location included whether babies sleep in their own bed or share a bed with parents, and if they sleep in their own room or their parents’ room. Sources of advice included doctors, nurses at the hospital where they gave birth, family members and the media.

Mothers got most of their advice from doctors. But much of that advice contradicted the recommendations of the AAP on these topics.

For example, as much as 15 percent of the advice mothers received from doctors on breast-feeding and on pacifiers didn’t match recommendations. Similarly, 26 percent of advice about sleeping positions contradicted recommendations. And nearly 29 percent of mothers got misinformation on where babies should sleep, the study found.

“I don’t think too many people will be shocked to learn that medical advice found online or on an episode of Dr. Oz might be very different from the recommendations of pediatric medical experts or even unsupported by legitimate evidence,” said Dr. Clay Jones, a pediatrician specializing in newborn medicine at Newton-Wellesley Hospital in Massachusetts. He said inaccurate advice from some family members may be unsurprising, too.

“But I’m not so sure most parents realize how much recommendations differ from doctor to doctor and nurse to nurse, or that many of us give medical information that is just plain wrong,” said Jones, who was not involved with the study.

Mothers got advice from family members between 30 percent and 60 percent of the time, depending on the topic. More than 20 percent of the advice about breast-feeding from family members didn’t match AAP recommendations.

Similarly, family advice related to pacifiers, where babies sleep and babies’ sleep position went against the AAP recommendations two-thirds of the time, the study found.

“Families give inconsistent advice largely because they are not trained medical professionals and are basing their recommendations on personal anecdotal experience,” Jones said.

Less than half the women said the media was a source of advice, except when it came to breast-feeding. Seventy percent of mothers said they got advice from the media on breast-feeding, and much of it didn’t match recommendations.

In addition, more than a quarter of the mothers who got advice about vaccines from the media received information that was not consistent with AAP recommendations.

“Mothers get inconsistent advice from the media, especially the Internet, because it is the Wild West with no regulation on content at all,” Jones said.

The possible consequences of bad advice depends on the topic and the advice, Jones said.

“Not vaccinating your child against potentially life-threatening diseases like measles is an obvious example,” he said. “Others may result in less risk of severe illness or injury but may still result in increased stress and anxiety, such as inappropriately demonizing the use of pacifiers while breast-feeding.”

Mothers who look for information online should stick to sources such as the AAP, the American Academy of Family Physicians or the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Eisenberg suggested.

Eisenberg and Jones agreed the best source for advice remains the child’s doctor.

“While our findings suggest that there is room for improvement, we did find that health care providers were an important source of information, and the information was generally accurate,” Eisenberg said. “But I would encourage parents to ask questions if they don’t feel like their provider has been entirely clear, or if they have any questions about the recommendations.”

More information

For advice recommended by medical experts about these topics, visit the American Academy of Pediatrics.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1I4FUYP

School’s Out, Fattening Behaviors Are In

SUNDAY, July 26, 2015 (HealthDay News) — Your kids probably will eat more sugar, watch more TV and eat fewer vegetables over summer vacation, a new study finds.

These weight-gaining behaviors are common for both rich and poor children, the researchers said.

“Although obesity-promoting behaviors are generally more common during the summer break, the differences in obesity behaviors between income groups were not exacerbated during the summer break,” said Dr. Claire Wang, co-director of the Obesity Prevention Initiative at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health in New York City.

Researchers analyzed data collected from more than 6,400 American children and teens in grades 1 to 12 between 2003 and 2008. They found they watched an average of 20 minutes more television a day and drank three ounces more of sugar-sweetened beverages a day during their summer break than during the school year.

Physical activity levels were about the same, with an average of five minutes more a day during the summer break than during the school year.

However, high school students got significantly more exercise during the summer than during the school year, and those from higher-income families were particularly likely to get moderate-to-vigorous exercise during the summer.

Teen girls in lower-income families were much less likely to get moderate-to-vigorous exercise during the summer, the researchers said.

The study was recently published online in the Journal of School Health.

“The school environment remains essential for shaping healthy eating and active living behaviors, and schools can play a leadership role in fostering a healthy transition from the school year to summer breaks,” Wang said in a school news release.

“We see from our results a need for school-based obesity prevention efforts to go beyond the school day and the school year,” she concluded.

More information

The U.S. Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion explains how to keep children at a healthy weight.

---

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

Low-Nicotine Cigarettes Won’t Necessarily Help Smokers Stop

SATURDAY, July 25, 2015 (HealthDay News) — Low-nicotine cigarettes alone don’t help smokers quit over the long term, a new study finds.

“We don’t know that very low-nicotine cigarettes will not reduce nicotine dependence, but progressively reducing nicotine content of cigarettes in the way that we did, without other means of supporting smokers, did not produce the desired results,” study leader Dr. Neal Benowitz, a professor in the departments of medicine and bioengineering and therapeutic sciences at the University of California, San Francisco, said in a university news release.

The study included 135 smokers who had no immediate plans to quit, but were interested in trying low-nicotine cigarettes. Eighty of them were given cigarettes with progressively lower levels of nicotine, eventually reaching just 5 percent of the level used in regular cigarettes.

The other 55 participants continued using their regular brand of cigarettes. Both groups were told to smoke as desired, and those who were interested in quitting were given manuals on how to do so.

While smokers who used low-nicotine cigarettes lowered their nicotine intake, they were unable to reduce their smoking in the long term, the study found. Only one person in the low-nicotine group ended up quitting during the two-year study. None of the people in the regular cigarette group quit, the researchers said.

They suspect that many of the participants in the low-nicotine cigarette group also used regular cigarettes. They tested the blood levels of a substance called cotinine that’s produced when someone smokes. Levels of cotinine were higher than expected in people smoking the low-nicotine cigarettes, suggesting they may have also smoked regular cigarettes, the researchers noted.

“The results might have been different if regular cigarettes were not freely available, as would be the case if all cigarettes were mandated to be low in nicotine,” Benowitz said.

He noted that the reduction of nicotine content in cigarettes nationwide is being considered as a way to make cigarettes less addictive. But, if higher-nicotine cigarettes are also available, this strategy likely wouldn’t work, Benowitz added.

Results were published online July 22 in the journal Addiction.

“Nicotine reduction would work best in the context of public education, easy access to smoking cessation services and the availability of non-combustible sources of nicotine for those who have difficulty stopping nicotine completely,” Benowitz said.

More information

The American Cancer Society offers a guide to quitting smoking.

---

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

Move of the Week: Ab Cross-Crawl

Crunches are usually the first move that comes to mind when it comes to the journey to a strong core, but every fitness geek knows they’re not the only way to do it. If you’re bored with your go-to core moves, why not try an ab cross-crawl? Demonstrated here by Health contributing fitness editor, Kristin McGee, this workout move is something you can do at home.

RELATED: 10 Reasons Your Belly Fat Isn’t Going Away

Here’s how to do it: Start on your back, bend your knees up with shins parallel to the floor and extend your arms to the ceiling. Straighten your left leg and extend your right arm back to about 6 inches off of the floor, and then come back to the original position. Then, repeat the exercise on the opposite side.

Trainer tip: Keep your abs engaged throughout this move to really work your muscles.

Try this move: Ab Cross-Crawl

RELATED: How to Become an Exercise Addict

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

Climate Change May Be Pushing ‘Brain-Eating’ Amoeba to Northern Lakes

By Steven Reinberg
HealthDay Reporter

FRIDAY, July 24, 2015 (HealthDay News) — A deadly “brain-eating” amoeba that lives in freshwater sources may be surviving in more northern areas of the United States thanks to climate change, health experts suggest.

Minnesota health officials are still trying to confirm if the death of a Minnesota teen this summer was caused by the single-celled organism Naegleria fowleri. If confirmed, it would be the northernmost infection of Naegleria fowleri ever reported, according to the Minneapolis Star-Tribune.

The amoeba normally lives in warmer waters in the southern United States. But since climate change is generally making summers hotter, the amoeba now seems to be in northern waters, said Dr. Bruce Hirsch, an infectious diseases specialist at North Shore University Hospital in Manhasset, N.Y. “Climate change may be playing a role,” he said.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention referred to the amoeba as “heat-loving.” In the United States, more than half of infections caused by the amoeba have occurred in Florida and Texas, the CDC reports. The first known case to occur in Minnesota didn’t happen until 2010.

Although Naegleria fowleri is endemic in many U.S. lakes and rivers, the odds of the bug getting into your brain are slight. In fact, between 2005 and 2014, only 35 people were infected in the United States, according to the CDC.

The infection caused by the amoeba is called primary amebic meningoencephalitis, which destroys brain tissue, the CDC says.

So how does someone get infected? When water containing the amoeba enters the nose, the CDC said. You cannot get this infection from drinking contaminated water, according to the agency.

Hirsch explained that the bug probably gets into the brain when water is forced into the nose as someone jumps into a lake, river or even a pool. The amoeba can then penetrate the lining of the nose and make its way through the porous bone between the nose and the brain, he explained.

Once in the brain, it can cause an infection that destroys brain cells and is almost always fatal. “There have been a few survivors, but it is a very dangerous infection,” Hirsch said.

The infection cannot be spread from one person to another, he added.

Treatment is available with several drugs, and sometimes it’s effective, Hirsch said.

“The mainstay of treatment is an antifungal, antimicrobial medicine called amphotericin,” he said. “Used in combination with other medicines given directly into the spinal fluid, if caught early, it has been able to help people survive this devastating infection,” he said.

Symptoms start about five days after infection, the CDC says. The first symptoms may include headache, fever, nausea or vomiting. Later symptoms can include stiff neck, confusion, seizures and hallucinations, the CDC says.

“The person would be totally out of it — confused — and then fall into a coma,” Hirsch said.

Most cases are from contaminated water in lakes or rivers, but some people were infected after nasal irrigation with contaminated tap water, and others have gotten infections from swimming pools, bathtubs and even a backyard Slip’N Slide using contaminated water, according to the CDC.

Among known cases, 97 percent of people infected have died. Only three out of 133 infected people in the United States from 1962 to 2014 have survived, the CDC noted.

Dr. Adriana Cadilla, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at Nicklaus Children’s Hospital in Miami, said there was a fatal case at her hospital several years ago.

Doctors are not usually looking for this infection, she said.

“Testing is not routine and that’s part of the reason that it’s difficult to diagnose, and it takes a couple of days to get results, which may be part of the reason why we don’t have as much of a success as we would like with the treatment,” she explained.

No real precautions exist beyond telling the public that a particular body of water has these amoeba, Cadilla said. The CDC cautions against getting water splashed up the nose.

“We don’t know why someone gets infected and others don’t,” Cadilla said. “We really can’t tell you what to do not to get infected.”

She stressed that this is a very rare infection and other hazards linked to water are much more common.

“There have been 35 cases, but from 2001 to 2010 there were 34,000 drownings,” Cadilla said. “There are other risks associated with water that have a higher priority.”

More information

For more information on Naegleria fowleri, visit the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

---

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

1 in 3 Colon Cancers in Young People Has Genetic Link

FRIDAY, July 24, 2015 (HealthDay News) — More than a third of colon cancers diagnosed in younger patients are caused by inherited gene mutations, a new study finds.

These patients should undergo genetic counseling to determine if their families may be at increased risk, the researchers suggested.

Hereditary colon cancers are relatively rare overall, but tend to be more common if diagnosed before age 50, the researchers said. However, their prevalence among teens and young adults has not been well documented, according to the researchers.

This study included almost 200 patients, aged 35 and younger, who were diagnosed with colon cancer and underwent genetic testing between 2009 and 2013.

“We were very surprised to find that 35 percent of that population of patients had a genetic disease, although we hypothesized the proportion would be higher in this age group relative to the general population,” study leader Dr. Eduardo Vilar-Sanchez, an assistant professor in the department of clinical cancer prevention at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, said in a cancer center news release.

The study was published July 20 in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

“Based on our findings, patients under the age of 35 need to be evaluated by a genetic counselor. Period,” Vilar-Sanchez said. If they find they have a genetic disease, they can then share that information with their parents, siblings and other family members who could benefit from knowing about the genetic risk, he said.

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in the United States, with more than 90,000 new diagnoses expected this year, the researchers said. People older than 50 will account for about 90 percent of those cases, they noted.

More information

The American Cancer Society has more about colorectal cancer.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1MNh96L

FDA OKs First of New Class of Cholesterol Drugs

By Amy Norton
HealthDay Reporter

FRIDAY, July 24, 2015 (HealthDay News) — The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Friday approved Praluent, the first of a powerful new class of injected, cholesterol-lowering drugs that experts believe could change cardiovascular care.

Praluent (alirocumab) sharply cuts levels of LDL (“bad”) cholesterol, and is one of a group of newly developed drugs called PCSK9 inhibitors, the FDA explained in a news release.

The drug is only approved for patients with heart disease and a history of heart attack or stroke “who require additional lowering of LDL cholesterol” in addition to taking a statin drug and adopting a healthy diet, the agency said.

It is also for use by patients with a condition called heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HeFH), an inherited illness that causes people to have high levels of LDL in the blood.

“Praluent provides another treatment option for patients with HeFH or with known cardiovascular disease who have not been able to lower their LDL cholesterol enough on statins,” Dr. John Jenkins, director of the FDA’s Office of New Drugs, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, said in the news release.

Praluent may only be the first of two PCSK9 inhibitors to eventually hit the market: Earlier this month, an FDA panel also endorsed another such drug, called evolocumab (Repatha) for use in patients who are at very high risk for high cholesterol. According to the Associated Press, a decision on Repatha is due by Aug. 27.

Studies seem to back up the effectiveness of PCSK9 inhibitors in lowering artery-clogging cholesterol. One recent review of 24 clinical trials — published in the Annals of Internal Medicine — found that PCSK9 inhibitors lowered people’s LDL cholesterol by about 47 percent, on average.

More important, the drugs seemed to cut the risk of heart attack or death from heart disease, according to the researchers.

Experts did urge some caution, however: The trials so far have been short-term, and it’s not clear whether the new cholesterol drugs really do extend people’s lives, according to Dr. Seth Martin, a cardiologist at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore.

“Still, the early data are exciting, and we’re cautiously optimistic,” Martin, who co-wrote an editorial published with the study, told HealthDay.

However, until large clinical trials are completed in 2017, experts won’t have definitive proof of whether the new drugs actually reduce the risk of heart attacks and death.

Statins have long been the go-to treatment for lowering LDL cholesterol. Studies have proven they can help prevent heart attacks, strokes and other cardiovascular complications.

But for some people, statins cause intolerable muscle pain. “Those people would be obvious candidates for PCSK9 inhibitors,” Martin said.

For others, statins just don’t do the job — including people with inherited conditions like HeFH, which causes very high LDL levels and heart attacks at an early age.

“Familial hypercholesterolemia is not rare,” Martin noted. “It affects about one in 300 to 500 people.”

Of the trials covered in the Annals review, half involved people with familial hypercholesterolemia. Some of the others focused on people who’d dropped statins because of side effects.

PCSK9 inhibitors work by blocking a protein in the liver that helps regulate LDL cholesterol, according to the study. The new drugs don’t seem to cause the muscle problems that statins can.

However, that doesn’t mean they’re completely safe. Martin said the main concern that has arisen in trials of the new drugs is the potential for “neurocognitive effects.” For example, some study patients have reported problems such as confusion and trouble paying attention. But, Martin said, it’s not clear yet whether the PCSK9 inhibitors are actually the cause.

And in the FDA news release, the agency said that side effects associated with Praluent include “itching, swelling, pain, or bruising where injection is given, [colds] and flu,” as well as allergic reactions at the injection site.

For the Annals review, researchers led by Dr. Eliano Navarese, of Heinrich Heine University in Dusseldorf, Germany, pooled the results of 24 clinical trials involving more than 10,000 patients. Some compared a PCSK9 inhibitor to a placebo (inactive treatment), while others used the cholesterol drug ezetimibe (Zetia) for comparison.

Overall, the researchers found, the new drugs cut LDL to a greater degree. They also lowered patients’ risk of heart attack or death by about half.

The caveat, Martin stressed, is that the studies were short, and few people suffered complications. He said longer-term studies are needed to prove that the drugs prevent heart attacks and extend people’s lives — without serious side effects.

Dr. Suzanne Steinbaum, a preventive cardiologist at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City, agreed that the results so far are encouraging.

“For all those patients unable to take statins, finally there might be an option that can change (their) outcomes,” said Steinbaum, who was not involved in the recent review.

But, she added, “we need to patiently wait for the next phase of trials to see whether the clinical outcomes are as promising as the initial studies suggest.”

And drugs like Praluent are not without their downsides, experts said.

For one, the drugs have to be self-injected, which might put some people off. On the other hand, Martin said, the injections are done only once a month or every couple of weeks.

“Some people may prefer that to taking a pill every day,” he said.

And then there’s the cost. PCSK9 inhibitors are specialty drugs known as monoclonal antibodies, which are lab-altered versions of human antibodies. And they are not cheap.

The cholesterol drugs could cost up to $12,000 a year per patient, according to a recent estimate by CVS Health, one of nation’s largest pharmacy benefit managers.

Since so many Americans take cholesterol drugs — for years or even decades — CVS warned that the cost to the health care system could be sky-high.

More information

The American Heart Association has more on treating high cholesterol.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1MNh7Mb