Participants who ate the most vegetables and consumed the fewest processed foods, sugary drinks and unhealthy fats shed the most kilograms
The amount and quality of food and not a person’s genetics will lead to weight loss, a US study has found.
It has been suggested that variations in genetic makeup make it easier for some people to lose weight than others on certain diets.
To test this theory researchers at Stanford University conducted a randomised control trial involving 609 overweight adults, who all underwent genetic and insulin testing before being randomly assigned to either a low-fat or low-carb diet for 12 months.
Gene analysis identified differences are connected with how the body processes fats or carbohydrates. But weight loss averaged around 5kg to 6kg at follow-up regardless of genes, insulin levels or diet type.
What seemed to make a difference was healthy eating, researchers said.
Participants who ate the most vegetables and devoured the fewest processed foods, sugary drinks and unhealthy fats lost the most weight.
Prof Lennert Veerman from the School of Medicine at Griffith University in Queensland said the study presented there was probably no such thing as a diet right for a particular genetic make-up.
” We feed to fill our belly and, if that’s with veggies, we tend to lose weight, whereas if it’s with chocolate or French fries, flushed down with a soda, we gain weight ,” Veerman said.
The study was published Tuesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Participants had 22 health education class during the study and were encouraged to be physically active but the focus was on what they ate.
They were advised to choose high-quality foods but were not given indicated calorie restrictions nor were they provided with specific foods. Outcomes are based on what they reported eating.
Fat intake in the low-fat group averaged 57 grams during the study versus 87 grams beforehand, while carb intake in the low-carb group averaged 132 grams versus 247 grams previously.
Both groups reduced their daily calorie intake by an average of about 500 calories.
The leading Australian nutritionist Dr Rosemary Stanton, from the school of medical sciences at the University of New South Wales, said the “excellent” study highlighted the importance of eating plenty of vegetables.
Stanton advises people to attempt professional help to choose quality foods because the macronutrient content of of a diet” does not really matter “.
” Some previous studies that have damned carbohydrates have not taken note of the foods that rendered it ,” Stanton said.” For instance, lentils and lollies are both’ carbs’ but one is a nutrient-dense high quality food while the other is junk. Simply calling them’ carbs’ does not provide this vital distinction .”
While most diets worked, the real challenge was sticking with them, Veerman said.
” Instead of’ going on a diet’ it would be better to find new, healthier habits ,” he said.
Impaired smell in later life can be an early warning of neurodegenerative and heart diseases, research suggests
Olfactory tests could help physicians spot older adults who find themselves in greater risk of developing dementia, researchers say.
The sense of smell is known to deteriorate with age. However, researchers have previously procured it might also hint at health problems: older adults who struggle to identify odours have a greater chance of dying in the near future regardless of how old they are.
Other studies have found older adults who have difficulties in identifying and remembering reeks are more likely to have characteristics linked to a greater risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease even if there is no current sign of cognitive decline.
It is thought the sense of smell is one of the first faculties affected by certain neurodegenerative diseases.
Now experts say they have probed further, and those cancers alone do not explain why a poor sense of smell might bode ill.
” My mistrust is[ the] process of aroma in older adults probably has much broader potential health implications than what we already know about ,” said Prof Honglei Chen, a co-author of the research from Michigan State University. He suggested it could be linked to conditions of the immune system and even psychiatric disorders.
Writing in the Annals of Internal Medicine, researchers in the US and Sweden report how more than 2,200 people aged between 71 and 82 undertook stench identification exams near the turn of the millennium, which were then followed up over 13 years. The test involved participants reeking 12 different common odours, such the aroma of strawberries, and choosing the identity of each from four possible answers.
The team then grouped participants into ” good “, ” moderate” or “poor” sense of smell, depending on how many correct answers they gave. They also looked at the causes of death among participants who passed away during the research period. When the team took into account factors including age, sexuality, race, smoking and general health at the outset, they found that a poor sense of smell was linked to a 46% greater risk of dying within 10 years compared with those ranked as having a good sense of smell.
The researchers concluded that this trend held regardless of the sexuality or race of participants, but the link was only present among those who were in very good health in the early stages of the study.
The researchers say that could be because those in poor health had many factors that might influence the length of their life, overwhelming any effect linked to a poor sense of smell.” On the other hand, poor olfaction among older adults with excellent to good health may be an early warning sign for insidious adverse health conditions that eventually lead to death ,” the authors write.
They observed a poor sense of smell was linked to death from dementia and Parkinson’s cancer, with some signs that poor stench might also be linked to death from cardiovascular disease. There was no link between poor sense of smell and death from cancer or respiratory diseases.
Further analysis revealed 22% of the overall increased risk of demise among those with a poorer sense of smell was down to neurodegenerative diseases, with 6% down to weight loss.
The team said the remaining association with mortality was probably down to health conditions that had not yet been identified as being linked to smell. Once that was unpicked, said Chen, it could be worth adding a stench test to general health screening.
However, others point out here that it was unclear if the results held among younger adults, while the sense of smell was only tested once. What’s more, the apparent link between the sense and mortality could be down to factors that affect both but were overlooked.
Prof Jayant Pinto, from the University of Chicago, who has carried out previous research in the area, welcomed the study.” While we still need to understand what exactly a poor sense of smell is signalling in terms of specific mechanisms that lead to increased risk of demise, it seems clear that impaired olfaction is an early warning sign of both cancers such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s, as well as heart disease ,” he said.
” I’m an advocate of more widespread employ of smell testing in general practice since it can signal these major health problems in the future ,” he added.” Even if we don’t yet have therapies for[ Alzheimer’s or Parkinson’s disease], better scrutiny of such patients might help us care for them and plan for the future for patients and families .”
Participants who ate the most veggies and ingested the fewest processed foods, sugary drinks and unhealthy fats shed the most kilograms
The amount and quality of food and not a person’s genetics will lead to weight loss, a US study has found.
It has been suggested that variations in genetic makeup make it easier for some people to lose weight than others on certain diets.
To test this theory researchers at Stanford University conducted a randomised control trial involving 609 overweight adults, who all underwent genetic and insulin testing before being haphazardly assigned to either a low-fat or low-carb diet for 12 months.
Gene analyses identified differences are connected with how the body processes fats or carbohydrates. But weight loss averaged around 5kg to 6kg at follow-up regardless of genes, insulin levels or diet type.
What seemed to make a difference was healthy eating, researchers said.
Participants who ate the most veggies and ate the fewest processed foods, sugary beverages and unhealthy fats lost the most weight.
Prof Lennert Veerman from the School of Medicine at Griffith University in Queensland said the study demonstrated there was probably no such thing as a diet right for a particular genetic make-up.
” We feed to fill our stomach and, if that’s with vegetables, we tend to lose weight, whereas if it’s with chocolate or French fries, flushed down with a soda, we gain weight ,” Veerman said.
The study was published Tuesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Participants had 22 health education class during the study and were encouraged to be physically active but the focus was on what they ate.
They were advised to choose high-quality foods but were not given suggested calorie limits nor were they supplied with specific foods. Results are based on what they reported eating.
Fat intake in the low-fat group averaged 57 grams during the study versus 87 grams beforehand, while carb intake in the low-carb group averaged 132 grams versus 247 grams previously.
Both groups reduced their daily calorie intake by an average of about 500 calories.
The resulting Australian nutritionist Dr Rosemary Stanton, from the school of medical sciences at the University of New South Wales, said the “excellent” study highlighted the importance of eating plenty of vegetables.
Stanton advises people to attempt professional help to choose quality foods because the macronutrient content of of a diet” does not really matter “.
” Some previous studies that have damned carbohydrates have not taken note of the foods that furnished it ,” Stanton said.” For instance, lentils and lollies are both’ carbs’ but one is a nutrient-dense high quality food while the other is junk. Simply calling them’ carbs’ does not provide this vital distinction .”
While most diets ran, the real challenge was sticking with them, Veerman said.
” Instead of’ going on a diet’ it would be better to find new, healthier habits ,” he said.
Britain is right to take a more cautious approach than the US, but we should be prepared to fund a range of treatments, says GP Ann Robinson
Imagine a neurological condition that affects one in 20 under-1 8s. It starts early, causes significant distress and ache to the child, injuries families and limits the chances of leading a fulfilled life as an adult. One in 20 children are affected but only half of these will get a diagnosis and a fifth will receive treatment. If those stats related to a familiar and well-understood illness, such as asthma, “theres been” little debate about the need to improve intervention rates. But this is attention deficit hyperactivity disorder( ADHD ), and the outcry is muted. If anything, we hear warnings that too many children are being labelled this route, and too many given prescriptions.
In the United States, ADHD is diagnosed at more than twice the incidence in Britain. The true prevalence is likely to be the same on both sides of the Atlantic. So what’s the story? Is the US too gung-ho, or is the UK dragging its heels? Are American doctors too quick to medicate infants, or British physicians too slow?
Emily Simonoff, co-author of a new meta-analysis in the publication the Lancet Psychiatry, says the problem in the UK is” predominantly about undermedication and underdiagnosis “. Her study examined a range of drug treatments compared to placebo, and it shows that methylphenidate( better known by for the purposes of the brand name Ritalin) works best for children and amphetamines for adults.
It can seem counterintuitive that stimulants work for ADHD. In fact, both therapies are thought to increase the activity of the chemicals dopamine and noradrenaline in the brain, neurotransmitters that play a role in executive functions such as learning, planning and exerting control over our behaviour and believes. The side-effects such as agitation, weight loss, sweating, sleep disorder and high blood pressure can occur whether you take the drugs for ADHD or recreationally. The difference is that people with ADHD are more likely to benefit, and prescribed dosages are carefully controlled and monitored. As an NHS GP, I can only prescribe these medications employing a special protocol that lays down follow-up arrangements. The idea that we dole them out in a cavalier manner is just not true.
ADHD isn’t some sort of catch-all term for bad behaviour, but a clearly identifiable defined of symptoms( including inattention, impulsivity and hyperactivity ), with strict diagnostic criteria and evidence-based treatment alternatives. People with neurodevelopmental disorders such as ADHD, autism, dyslexia, dyspraxia and dyscalculia have brains that are structurally and functionally different to those of neurotypical people. It’s a widespread misconception that ADHD equates to disruption in classrooms; a more common presentation is anxiety and difficulty with learn.” A kid with ADHD may be well-behaved and academically able ,” says Tony Lloyd of the ADHD Foundation. Identifying that there is a problem and providing the right subsistence is critical.
So where does the scepticism about ADHD come from? Perhaps it’s an understandable reluctance to label kids while they are still developing, or a wariness about medicalising normal variation in behaviour. Oftsted’s chief inspector, Amanda Spielman, speaks for many when she voices concerns that the narcotics used in the treatment of ADHD are a” chemical cosh”, are overprescribed and disguise bad behaviour that should be managed in other ways.
There is no doubt that rates of prescription for ADHD in the UK have risen significantly since the 1990 s. The prospect of a US-style situation in which one in ten children aged two to 17( rising to one in five sons aged 14 to 18) are diagnosed with ADHD, and two-thirds of those diagnosed are on medication, creates justifiable questions. But this scenario is a long way from current realities in the UK, where the NHS enforces vigorous diagnostic guidelines and, crucially, there are no financial incentives for NHS doctors to write prescriptions.
Caution about the action of psychoactive drugs on developing brains is entirely appropriate. The short-term safety data we have is reassuring, though more research is needed into long-term impacts. But this caution has to be weighed against the harms, if other therapies aren’t suitable or effective, of doing nothing. Without diagnosis and treatment, infants become prone to anxiety, self-harm and school failing. Around a third will continue to have problems into adulthood and some people will only be diagnosed once they are adults.
Earlier this year a Demos report highlighted the social and economic cost to society of adult ADHD, as impulsivity, poor concentration and risk-taking behaviour interfere with work and relationships. The inability to regulate feelings and tendency to become overloaded by external stimulu has been described as” like driving a Ferrari with bicycle brakes “.
Treatment for ADHD doesn’t always or only mean drug; the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence’s guidelines recommend a multimodal approach including support for mothers, cognitive behavioural therapy( CBT) and stress-reduction strategies. Lloyd says the Nice guidelines are great but mostly aren’t being followed. My experience as a GP would certainly back that up. Children tend to be seen quicker than adults, but often the only treatment dedicated is medication, with other interventions such as parenting support and CBT failing to materialise.
The cautious UK approach to ADHD may be preferable to the more enthusiastic US one. But it would be a shame to let scepticism get in the way of good medication. And that entails casting aside any doubt that ADHD is a medical condition, and demanding funding for a range of treatments, including but not limited to drugs. Unfortunately, it seems that is still a long way off.
Eating a moderate amount of carbohydrates best for healthy lifespan, say researchers
Eating either a low-carb diet or a high-carb diet creates the risk of an early death, according to a major new study which will dismay the many people who have ditched the likes of bread, rice and potatoes for weight loss or health reasons.
Researchers who pooled the results of eight big studies have found that eating a moderate sum of carbohydrates is best for a healthy lifespan. Less than 40% or more than 70% of calories from carbohydrates carried a higher risk of mortality.
Not all low-carb diets are equal, however. People who ate a lot of meat and fats instead of carbohydrates, such as lamb, chicken, steak, butter and cheese, had a higher mortality risk than those who got their protein and fats from plant-based foods such as avocados, legumes and nuts. Popular weight loss diets such as Atkins and Dukan include a substantial amount of meat-based foods.
Quick guide
Carbohydrates in your diet
Low carb diets have become a trend. Cutting the carbs can lead to weight loss for a few weeks, but while there are bad carbs we don’t need, such as sugary beverages and sweets, there are also good “starchy” carbs that we do, because they are high in fiber and vitamins and minerals and give us a slow and steady release of energy throughout the day. These include wholewheat pasta and flour, vegetables with their skins on, and beans and lentils.
Low carb diet
Low carb diets have become very popular for weight loss, but you have to make up for the loss of filling carbs with extra protein and fats. Low carb diets tend to advocate animal proteins and fats, like steak and cheese. While they don’t include sugary treats and soft drinks, they are also usually light on vegetables and fibre. Popular low carb diets include: Atkins, Paleo, South Beach, Dukan and ketogenic.
High carb diet
Not a weight loss diet, clearly, but a way of life. The general diet of people in Asian countries, particularly those with low incomes, tends to be high in carbs because of the amount of white rice that is eaten. Those in more affluent western countries who eat a lot of carbs are likely to be overdoing the sugary beverages and snacks.
Moderate carb diet
Most people in the western world get around half their calories from carbohydrates, which is how it should be, say nutritionists. That’s 50 -5 5% of your energy from carbs. The issue, however, is over which carbs these are. The famously healthy Mediterranean diet, for example, contains lots of fibre-rich whole grains and beans. A diet in which the carbs come from biscuits and soft drinks and has little in the way of fruit and veg is not good, however moderate the carbohydrate uptake is.
” Low-carb diets that replace carbohydrates with protein or fat are gaining widespread popularity as a health and weight loss strategy ,” said Dr Sara Seidelmann, a clinical and research fellow in cardiovascular medication from Brigham and Women’s Hospital inBoston, who led the research published in the Lancetpublichealth journal.
” However, our data suggests that animal-based low-carbohydrate diets, which are prevalent in North America and Europe, might be associated with shorter overall life span and should be discouraged. Instead, if one chooses to follow a low-carbohydrate diet, then exchanging carbohydrates for more plant-based fats and proteins might actually promote healthy ageing in the long term .”
Seidelmann, who is both a cardiologist and a nutritionist, told the Guardian the team had published a substantial body of work” to exhaustively answer a question and not simply offer merely one piece of the picture “.
” Nutrition is high up on everybody’s intellect but there is such embarrassment about what we should eat. One day, a study is coming out telling us high carb is better, another day a study is telling us low carb is better .”
Trials to compare low-carb and high-carb diets immediately are not possible, because they have to be carried out over many years and people find it hard to stick to a diet over any duration of period. Instead, her squad carried out observational research with more than 15,400 people, aged 45 to 64, from diverse socio-economic backgrounds from four US communities who were enrolled in the atherosclerosis risk in communities study. Those people filled out questionnaires on their eating patterns on two occasions, six years apart. Their health was followed up for 25 years, allowing for factors that might alter the results, such as smoking, income and diabetes.
These results were pooled with seven other observational studies carried out in various regions of the world, involving a total of more than 430,000 people.
They found that 50 -year-olds eating a moderate carb diet, with half their energy coming from carbohydrates, had a further life expectancy of 33 years, which was four years longer than those on low-carb diets and one year longer than those who feed a high-carb diet.
The writers said they could not prove cause and effect, because of the nature of the studies. However, they said people who embraced western-type diets that heavily restricted carbohydrates often ate fewer veggies, fruit, and grains and more animal proteins and fats. Some of those animal products have been implicated in stimulating inflammatory pathways, biological ageing and oxidative stress, and could be a contributing factor to the increased risk of mortality.
High-carb diets are common in Asian and poorer nations, they said, where people eat a lot of refined carbohydrates such as white rice. Those also contribute to a chronically high glycaemic load and worse metabolic outcomes.
” These findings bring together several strands that ought to have controversial. Too much and too little carbohydrate can be harmful but what counts most is the type of fat, protein, and carbohydrate ,” said Walter Willett, a prof of epidemiology and nutrition at Harvard T H Chan School of Public Health and the co-author of the study.
Low-carb diets are popular for weight loss because they work quite well in the short term, said Seidelmann, and they are usually meat-based. The study was not set up in a way that would make it possible to compare moderate carb with low-carb plant-based diets but, said Seidelmann,” the more plant-based[ the diet was ], the lower the mortality “.
” No facet of nutrition is so heatedly argued on social media than the carb versus fat debate, despite the long term evidence on health benefits firmly supporting the higher carb argument ,” said Catherine Collins, an NHS dietitian.
The” cult of low carb high fat eating” was based on a lifestyle choice and the flimsiest of evidence, she said. Its devotees were” at odds with advice from WHO and government health bodies globally- including the UK’s Public Health England- that recommend a carb intake to provide around half our daily calorie needs “.
She added that it the findings raise questions about the current hyping of low-carb diets for people with diabetes.” The feting and promotion of GPs promoting often bizarre low carb diets to manage diabetes has gained much media traction ,” she said.” If nothing else, this study offer some redress to this one-sided debate, and adds caution to such practice for long term management .”
In a commentary in the publication, Dr Andrew Mente and Dr Salim Yusuf, from McMaster University in Canada, said it was not possible to rule out altogether all the factors that might skewed the results, but that the findings were that logical and moderate carbohydrate intake was likely to be better for people than low or high-carb diets.
” Essential nutrients should be consumed above a minimal level to avoid deficiency and below a maximal level to avoid toxicity. This approach maintains physiological processes and health( ie, a so-called sweet spot ). Although carbohydrates are technically not an essential nutrient( unlike protein and fats ), a certain amount is probably required to meet short-term energy demands during physical activity and to maintain fat and protein uptakes within their respective sweet places ,” they wrote.
Participants who ate the most vegetables and ate the fewest processed foods, sugary beverages and unhealthy fats shed the most kilograms
The amount and quality of food and not a person’s genetics will lead to weight loss, a US study has found.
It has been suggested that variations in genetic makeup make it easier for some people to lose weight than others on certain diets.
To test this theory researchers at Stanford University conducted a randomised control trial involving 609 overweight adults, who all underwent genetic and insulin testing before being randomly assigned to either a low-fat or low-carb diet for 12 months.
Gene analyses identified variations are connected with how the body processes fats or carbohydrates. But weight loss averaged around 5kg to 6kg at follow-up regardless of genes, insulin levels or diet type.
What seemed to make a difference was healthy eating, researchers said.
Participants who ate the most veggies and ate the fewest processed foods, sugary drinkings and unhealthy fats lost the most weight.
Prof Lennert Veerman from the School of Medicine at Griffith University in Queensland said the study presented there was probably no such thing as a diet right for a particular genetic make-up.
” We feed to fill our stomach and, if that’s with veggies, we tend to lose weight, whereas if it’s with chocolate or French fries, flushed down with a soda, we gain weight ,” Veerman said.
The study was published Tuesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
Participants had 22 health education class during the study and were encouraged to be physically active but the focus was on what they ate.
They were advised to choose high-quality foods but were not given suggested calorie restrictions nor were they provided with specific foods. Results are based on what they reported eating.
Fat intake in the low-fat group averaged 57 grams during the study versus 87 grams beforehand, while carb intake in the low-carb group averaged 132 grams versus 247 grams previously.
Both groups reduced their daily calorie intake by an average of about 500 calories.
The leading Australian nutritionist Dr Rosemary Stanton, from the school of medical sciences at the University of New South Wales, said the “excellent” study highlighted the importance of eating plenty of vegetables.
Stanton advises people to attempt professional help to choose quality foods because the macronutrient content of of a diet” does not really matter “.
” Some previous studies that have damned carbohydrates have not taken note of the foods that rendered it ,” Stanton said.” For example, lentils and lollies are both’ carbs’ but one is a nutrient-dense high quality food while the other is junk. Simply calling them’ carbs’ does not provide this vital distinction .”
While most diets worked, the real challenge was sticking with them, Veerman said.
” Instead of’ going on a diet’ it would be better to find new, healthier habits ,” he said.
US study of 12,000 people shows medication lorcaserin does not increase hazard of serious heart problems
A weight-loss pill has been hailed as a potential “holy grail” in the fight against obesity after a major study demonstrated it did not increase health risks of serious heart problems.
Researchers say lorcaserin is the first time weight-loss drug to be deemed safe for heart health with long-term utilize. Taken twice a day, the drug is an craving suppressant which works by stimulating brain chemicals to induce a feeling of fullness.
A US study ensure 12,000 people who were either obese or overweight given the pills or a placebo- with those who took the drug shedding an average of 4kg( 9lbs) in 40 months.
Further analysis depicted no big differences in exams for heart valve damage.
Tam Fry, of Britain’s National Obesity Forum, said the drug is potentially the “holy grail” of weight-loss medicine.
” I think it is the thing everybody has been looking for ,” he said.
” I think there will be several holy grails, but this is a holy grail and one which has been surely at the back of the mind of a lot of experts for a long time.
” But all of the other things apply- lifestyle change has got to be root and branch one of the purposes of this .”
Prof Jason Halford, an obesity expert at the University of Liverpool, told the Daily Telegraph newspaper that the drug’s accessibility in the UK would depend on whether it is approved by National Health Service regulators.
” We don’t have any appetite suppressants available on the NHS. We have a massive great gap between lifestyle adjustment and surgery ,” he said.
” At the moment you either get support and advice, or you get to surgery – there is nothing in between. This could be widely prescribed if it is approved by Nice( the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence) in the UK .”
The Food and Drug Administration, the US medicines watchdog, approved lorcaserin’s use in some adults in 2012.
The drug has been on sale there since 2013 under the name Belviq, where it expenses $220 – 290( PS155-225) a month.
The study into its long-term consequences was led by Dr Erin Bohula, a cardiovascular medication expert at the Harvard-affiliated Brigham and Women’s Hospital.
” Patient and their doctors have been nervous about use medications to treat obesity and for good reason. There’s a history of these drugs having serious complications ,” she said.
As well as affecting the heart, there are concerns weight-loss narcotics can lead to mental health issues.
The results of the study into lorcaserin were discussed at the European Society of Cardiology in Munich on Sunday and have been published by the New England Journal of Medicine.
The researchers found after one year 39% of participants dedicated lorcaserin had lost at least 5% of their commence weight, compared with 17% of those dedicated placebo. Analysis also depicted fewer people taking lorcaserin developed diabetes, 8.5% compared with 10.3% on placebo.
Tests for heart valve injury were done on 3,270 participants, but no significant differences in rates were identified.
Suicidal guess or behaviour was presented in 21 people taking lorcaserin compared with 11 people dedicated placebo, however those taking the weight-loss medication had a history of depression.
The researchers said:” Among overweight or obese patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or multiple cardiovascular risk factors who were being treated with dietary and exercise interventions, those who received lorcaserin had better long-term rates of weight loss than those who received placebo at a median follow-up of 3.3 years.
” The higher weight-loss rates were achieved without an accompanying increase in health risks of cardiovascular events .”
Scientists to test hypothesis that a weight loss program for breast cancer patients after medical treatment lowers danger of cancer returning
A big trial is being launched this summer to establish whether diet and exert regimes should be prescribed by doctors for women who have had breast cancer in the same way that they prescribe narcotics, to avoid the disease returning and potentially save lives.
Women who are overweight or obese have a higher hazard of breast cancer. But accumulating proof is demonstrated that becoming fitter and losing some pounds after a diagnosis could cut the chances of a recurrence and even lower the risk of death.
A number of small studies looking at the benefits of exert and weight loss on cancer by researchers at Yale University in the US are being presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology meeting( ASCO) in Chicago.
Prof Melinda Irwin, associate director at Yale Cancer Center and professor of epidemiology at the Yale School of Public Health, said: We detected a strong connection between exercise after diagnosis and mortality afterwards.
Most interestingly, it depicted the impact on changes in activity on mortality even if youve never been active before taking regular workout seemed to show a great impact.
The studies followed women who went on a diet and started taking workout after cancer but they did not arbitrarily assign girls to a fitness regime or not, so it is possible those who did well were also better at taking their drug treatment.
But I am in the camp that says this association is causal and reversible and thats what these latest studies indicate, said Irwin.
They show that losing weight and taking up exert have a significant effect on the biomarkers of cancer. They are showing that its causal that by changing activity or weight loss it could improve your prognosis. This is crucial.
Among these small studies is one involving 144 women with ovarian cancer who did 150 minutes of aerobic exert every week for six months. Early outcomes indicate they had a drop in the levels of certain hormones linked with the growth of cancers, compared with women who did not exercise.
Another study of 221 women with breast cancer find those who lost weight on a diet had a drop in the levels of a protein that fuels tumour growth.
The trial of 3,200 women in Canada and the US, which will start on 1 August, will seek to answer the questions raised by these small studies. It will be a randomised controlled trial, allocating the participants into two groups to compare their progress. One group will be put on a diet and exert regime, supervised and supported by a fitness coach who will speak to them regularly on the phone. The other group will be given advice on healthy eating and activity.
We have known for many years that women who are overweight or obese and diagnosed with breast cancer have a higher risk of their cancer recurring and ultimately dying from breast cancer as compared to leaner women with similarly sized tumours at a similar stage with similar treatment, said Dr Jennifer Ligibel, of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, who is leading the breast cancer.
We dont actually know why that is the case but its been ensure over and over now in more than a hundred studies.
There is some preliminary evidence that helping women to lose weight after theyve been diagnosed with breast cancer could be helpful. Thats never been tested in the setting of a large-scale randomised trial.
So we are very interested in test the hypothesis that if you take women who are overweight or obese, complete their standard therapy for breast cancer and you have them take part in a weight loss program that that would lower their risk of breast cancer recurrence.
The aim is for women to lose 10% of their commence weight, through a diet of 1,200 to 1,500 calories and bout 150 minutes of activity a week over first six months. Then for women who attain that try to get them more up to 220 to 250 minutes if we can because thats truly the different levels thats been shown to help keep weight off after youve lost it, she said.
They can choose any activity they like and she expects strolling to be popular. Its a very accessible form of workout. It doesnt expense anything. You simply require a pair of shoes. My patients always ask me whats the best form of physical activity and honestly the answer is the one that youll do, she said.
The results of the trial will not be known for several years, but if it is successful, she hopes to see doctors prescribing exercising and weight loss diets as well as drugs where necessary. This would be the first time that a lifestyle programmes was truly something that was standardly prescribed as part of cancer treatment, she said.
US study of 12,000 people presents drug lorcaserin does not increase hazard of serious heart problems
A weight-loss pill has been hailed as a potential “holy grail” in the fight against obesity after a major analyze presented it did not increase the risk of serious heart problems.
Researchers say lorcaserin is the first weight-loss narcotic to be deemed safe for heart health with long-term use. Taken twice a day, the drug is an appetite suppressant which runs by stimulating brain chemicals to induce a feeling of fullness.
A US study assured 12,000 people who were either obese or overweight given the pills or a placebo- with those who took the medication shedding an average of 4kg( 9lbs) in 40 months.
Further analysis depicted no big differences in tests for heart valve damage.
Tam Fry, of Britain’s National Obesity Forum, said the drug is potentially the “holy grail” of weight-loss medicine.
” I think it is the thing everyone has went looking for ,” he said.
” I think there will be several holy grails, but this is a holy grail and one which has been surely at the back of the mind of a lot of experts for a long time.
” But all of the other things apply- lifestyle change has got to be root and branch part of this .”
Prof Jason Halford, an obesity expert at the University of Liverpool, told the Daily Telegraph newspaper that the drug’s availability in the UK would depend on whether it is approved by National Health Service regulators.
” We don’t have any appetite suppressants available on the NHS. We have a massive great gap between lifestyle modification and surgery ,” he said.
” At the moment you either get support and advice, or you get to surgery – there is nothing in between. This could be widely prescribed if it is approved by Nice( the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence) in the UK .”
The Food and Drug Administration, the US medications watchdog, approved lorcaserin’s use in some adults in 2012.
The drug has been on sale there since 2013 for the purposes of the name Belviq, where it expenses $220 – 290( PS155-225) a month.
The study into its long-term consequences was led by Dr Erin Bohula, a cardiovascular medication expert at the Harvard-affiliated Brigham and Women’s Hospital.
” Patients and medical doctors have been nervous about use medications to treat obesity and for good reason. There’s a history of these drugs having serious complications ,” she said.
As well as affecting the heart, there are concerns weight-loss drugs can lead to mental health issues.
The results of the study into lorcaserin were discussed at the European Society of Cardiology in Munich on Sunday and have been published by the New England Journal of Medicine.
The researchers received after one year 39% of participants given lorcaserin had lost at least 5% of their starting weight, compared with 17% of those dedicated placebo. Analysis also demonstrated fewer people taking lorcaserin developed diabetes, 8.5% compared with 10.3% on placebo.
Tests for heart valve injury were done on 3,270 participants, but no significant differences in rates were identified.
Suicidal thinks or behaviour were reported in 21 people taking lorcaserin compared with 11 people devoted placebo, however those taking the weight-loss narcotic had a history of depression.
The researchers said:” Among overweight or obese patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or multiple cardiovascular determining factor who were being treated with dietary and exert interventions, those who received lorcaserin had better long-term rates of weight loss than those who received placebo at a median follow-up of 3.3 years.
” The higher weight-loss rates were achieved without an accompanying increase in the risk of cardiovascular events .”
Research presents a simple diet and exert scheme is more effective weight loss strategy than using Fitbit and Jawbone devices
They have become the must-have for fitness fans but wearable gadgets that track users physical activity may not help people lose weight, a new examine has found.
Instead of motivating users to do more exert over the working day, the two-year survey determined the devices were actually less effective at encouraging people to lose weight than simply following a diet and exert plan.
Scientists suspect that people become overly dependent on the gadgets to help them change their health, developing a false sense of safety and would do better by “il rely on” simple willpower.
Costing up to 150, the devices by technology firms including Fitbit, Jawbone and Misfit are worn on the wrist or arm, monitor physical activity, steps taken, calories burnt, heart rate and quality of sleep and feed the data directly into a smartphone.
The researchers tracked 470 overweight or obese people, aged 18 to 35, for 24 months. Everyone in the study was put on a low-calorie diet, given an exercise plan and invited to regular group sessions.
After six months, half the group was given a Fit Core armband, which tracks activity and feeds it into a computer programme that also allows people to log their diet. The other half were simply told to monitor their workout and diet by themselves.
The researchers, whose results are published in the Journal of the American Medical Association( JAMA ), found that patients given the armbands lost less weight than those who monitored their own activity.
The group employing the Fit Core gadgets lost an average of 7.7 lb over two years, compared with an average 13 lb in the self-monitored group.
A spokesman for Jawbone, which owns BodyMedia, the manufacturer of Fit Core, told the Daily Mail: The findings of the study do not suggest that wearable devices should not be used for positive weight loss outcomes.
In fact, the study demonstrated positive weight loss in both groups. Wearable tech helps to bridge the gap between patients who have access to instead intensive weight loss treatments and the very many who dont.
A spokeswoman for Fitbit said: The researchers point out that a limitation of their work includes the fact that they did not use a modern wearable device such as those offered by Fitbit. The upper arm device used in the study was limited to automatic data collection only.
Most wearables today, including those offered by Fitbit, is beyond data collected, offering individuals real-time access to their information, insights, motivation from associated social networks, and guidance about their health. We would strongly caution against any conclusion that these findings apply to the wearable technology category as a whole.
