Showing posts with label health. Show all posts
Showing posts with label health. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Buying Supplements with a Tight Budget
Here is a suggestion of what supplements you could by to stay healthy and why I suggest this particular protocol.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
40,000 deaths a year due to junk food, says health watchdog Nice
By Rebecca Smith, Medical Editor
Published: 10:00PM BST 21 Jun 2010
Retrieved 12:04 PM eastern standard time USA
The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice) says that unhealthy foods have wreaked a “terrible toll of ill health” on the nation and placed a “substantial” strain on the economy.
For the first time, the organisation publishes landmark guidance on how to prevent the “huge number of unnecessary deaths” from conditions such as heart disease that are linked to the consumption of ready meals and processed food.
It says “toxic” artificial fats known as trans fats, which have no nutritional value and are linked to heart disease, should be banned. The organisation says that ministers should consider introducing legislation if food manufacturers failed to make their products healthier.
Nice says it has brought together all the available evidence to illustrate the link between unhealthy food and public health, partly in response to increasing concern about obesity in Britain, particularly among children.
It says there are about five million people in the country suffering the effects of cardiovascular disease — a “largely avoidable” condition that includes heart attacks, heart disease and stroke — and that it causes 150,000 deaths annually. Nice says 40,000 of these deaths could be prevented, and hundreds of millions of pounds saved, if its measures were introduced.
The guidance, which was commissioned by the Department of Health, also recommends that:
• Low-salt and low-fat foods should be sold more cheaply than their unhealthy counterparts, through the use of subsidies if necessary;
• Advertising of unhealthy foods should be banned until after 9pm and planning laws should be used to restrict the number of fast food outlets, especially near schools;
• The Common Agricultural Policy should focus more on public health, ensuring farmers are paid to produce healthier foods;
• Action should also be taken to introduce a “traffic light” food labelling system, even though the European Parliament recently voted against this;
• Local authorities must act to encourage walking and cycling and public sector caterers must provide healthier meals;
• All lobbying of the Government and its agencies by the food and drink industry should be fully disclosed.
Prof Klim McPherson, the Chairman of the Nice Guidance Development Group and professor of epidemiology at Oxford University, said: “Where food is concerned, we want the healthy choice to be the easy choice. Going even further, we want the healthy choice to be the less expensive, more attractive choice.
“Put simply, this guidance can help the Government and the food industry to take action to prevent huge numbers of unnecessary deaths and illnesses caused by heart disease and stroke.” The average person in Britain consumes more than eight grams of salt a day. The body only requires one gram to function. Targets are already in place to reduce salt consumption to six grams by 2015 and this should be extended to three grams by 2050, the guidance says.
Nice says children should consume considerably less salt than adults and that, because the bulk of salt in their diets comes from prepared food such as bread, cereal, soups, meat and cheese products, manufacturers have a significant role to play in reducing it.
The organisation says that most consumers did not even notice a difference in taste if salt levels were reduced by
5-10 per cent a year because their taste buds adjusted.
Prof Mike Kelly, the public health director at Nice, added: “This isn’t about telling individuals to choose salad instead of chips — it’s about making sure that the chips we all enjoy occasionally are as healthy as possible.
“That means making further reductions in the salt, trans fats and saturated fats in the food we eat every day.”
Betty McBride, the director of policy and communications at the British Heart Foundation, said: “Creating an environment that makes healthy choices easy is vital. Government, the health service, industry and individuals must all play their part. We must see industry making major efforts now to reformulate products with less saturated fat.
“Cutting our 'sat fat’ intake would have a major impact on heart disease.”
Prof Sir Ian Gilmore, president of the Royal College of Physicians, added: “The Nice guidance demonstrates conclusively why we need to change radically our approach to this vast and silent killer.
“Many of the diet-related recommendations made by Nice have the added benefit of costing the public purse little to nothing, while creating an opportunity to reduce the tens of billions of pounds of associated costs the UK loses every year to heart disease.”
While the guidance was welcomed by health experts, representatives of the food and drink industry said significant progress on salt and fat had already been taken.
The Food and Drink Federation accused Nice of being “out of touch with the reality”. Julian Hunt, its director of communications, said: “We are surprised that Nice has found the time and the money to develop guidance that seems to be out of touch with the reality of what has been happening for many years.
“The food industry is leading the world when it comes to voluntarily changing the recipes of popular food brands so that they are lower in salt, fat or sugar; introducing better-for-you choices at the same price as standard lines; and improving the quality of nutrition information available on packs.”
Nice says it has brought together all the available evidence to illustrate the link between unhealthy food and public health, partly in response to increasing concern about obesity in Britain, particularly among children.
It says there are about five million people in the country suffering the effects of cardiovascular disease — a “largely avoidable” condition that includes heart attacks, heart disease and stroke — and that it causes 150,000 deaths annually. Nice says 40,000 of these deaths could be prevented, and hundreds of millions of pounds saved, if its measures were introduced.
The guidance, which was commissioned by the Department of Health, also recommends that:
• Low-salt and low-fat foods should be sold more cheaply than their unhealthy counterparts, through the use of subsidies if necessary;
• Advertising of unhealthy foods should be banned until after 9pm and planning laws should be used to restrict the number of fast food outlets, especially near schools;
• The Common Agricultural Policy should focus more on public health, ensuring farmers are paid to produce healthier foods;
• Action should also be taken to introduce a “traffic light” food labelling system, even though the European Parliament recently voted against this;
• Local authorities must act to encourage walking and cycling and public sector caterers must provide healthier meals;
• All lobbying of the Government and its agencies by the food and drink industry should be fully disclosed.
Prof Klim McPherson, the Chairman of the Nice Guidance Development Group and professor of epidemiology at Oxford University, said: “Where food is concerned, we want the healthy choice to be the easy choice. Going even further, we want the healthy choice to be the less expensive, more attractive choice.
“Put simply, this guidance can help the Government and the food industry to take action to prevent huge numbers of unnecessary deaths and illnesses caused by heart disease and stroke.” The average person in Britain consumes more than eight grams of salt a day. The body only requires one gram to function. Targets are already in place to reduce salt consumption to six grams by 2015 and this should be extended to three grams by 2050, the guidance says.
Nice says children should consume considerably less salt than adults and that, because the bulk of salt in their diets comes from prepared food such as bread, cereal, soups, meat and cheese products, manufacturers have a significant role to play in reducing it.
The organisation says that most consumers did not even notice a difference in taste if salt levels were reduced by
5-10 per cent a year because their taste buds adjusted.
Prof Mike Kelly, the public health director at Nice, added: “This isn’t about telling individuals to choose salad instead of chips — it’s about making sure that the chips we all enjoy occasionally are as healthy as possible.
“That means making further reductions in the salt, trans fats and saturated fats in the food we eat every day.”
Betty McBride, the director of policy and communications at the British Heart Foundation, said: “Creating an environment that makes healthy choices easy is vital. Government, the health service, industry and individuals must all play their part. We must see industry making major efforts now to reformulate products with less saturated fat.
“Cutting our 'sat fat’ intake would have a major impact on heart disease.”
Prof Sir Ian Gilmore, president of the Royal College of Physicians, added: “The Nice guidance demonstrates conclusively why we need to change radically our approach to this vast and silent killer.
“Many of the diet-related recommendations made by Nice have the added benefit of costing the public purse little to nothing, while creating an opportunity to reduce the tens of billions of pounds of associated costs the UK loses every year to heart disease.”
While the guidance was welcomed by health experts, representatives of the food and drink industry said significant progress on salt and fat had already been taken.
The Food and Drink Federation accused Nice of being “out of touch with the reality”. Julian Hunt, its director of communications, said: “We are surprised that Nice has found the time and the money to develop guidance that seems to be out of touch with the reality of what has been happening for many years.
“The food industry is leading the world when it comes to voluntarily changing the recipes of popular food brands so that they are lower in salt, fat or sugar; introducing better-for-you choices at the same price as standard lines; and improving the quality of nutrition information available on packs.”
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Medicines show up in water | delawareonline.com | The News Journal
Tiny traces of medical hormones, antidepressants, antibiotics and other drugs are trickling into the drinking water of homes and businesses across Delaware, a new Division of Public Health study has found.
The drug residues turned up in more than half the Delaware water samples taken from 20 public water sources and 95 farm irrigation wells last year.
Among the most common contaminants in Delaware's public taps: caffeine, the antibiotic sulfamethoxazole, the painkilleribuprofen
, a medical-imaging aid called iopromide and estrogens.
Also found: antidepressants, cholesterol drugs, nicotine and triclosan, an ingredient widely used in soaps and antibacterial hand cleaners, but now under investigation as a potential disruptor of human endocrine systems.
The release of the information was prompted by a formal request by The News Journal.
"At these extremely low levels, it's not expected that there would be a health impact, but then, nobody's sure of that," said Edward G. Hallock, program administrator for Delaware's Office of Drinking Water. "When you add three or four compounds, even at extremely low levels, we're not sure whether there's an effect."
Those questions already are circulating in Congress, where some lawmakers recently pressed the Environmental ProtectionAgency to look closer at the cumulative effect of low-level but long-term exposure to toxic compounds, and frequent exposure to cocktails of pharmaceuticals at trace levels.
Recent studies have tied antidepressant levels in fish brains to water pollutants, Kolpin said. Others have found that chemicals from human activities may be disrupting fish responses to predators, making them more vulnerable.
Last year, the U.S. Fish and WildlifeService reported that up to 82 percent of male bass in the Potomac River had "intersex" symptoms, or female cells in their male reproductive organs. Scientists said the symptoms were "an indicator of exposure to estrogens or chemicals that mimic the activity of natural hormones."
In the Delaware study, the Wilmington, United Water Delaware and Newark systems, supplied from local creeks, had the highest concentrations, but pharmaceuticals and personal care product residues were detected in all three counties. Pharmaceuticals and hormones are believed to pass into the environment because sewage treatment plants were never designed to capture or break down the chemicals.
"It does slightly concern me -- that's why we have filtered water, and that's why we drink a lot of bottled water," Cody said. "I'm more concerned about industrial contaminants and things like that. The list is getting too long. Antibiotics in our meat, all kinds of things."
Delaware officials are worried enough that plans call for a stepped-up campaign to discourage flushing of medications and other medicinal chemicals in toilets. Development of disposal alternatives or drop-off programs also are under consideration.
"From what I've seen from other states, I don't think that we're any different than what's being found across the country, as far as surface water and shallow groundwater," Hallock said.
Although results from individual wells and water intakes have not been released, a summary of findings noted that 17 different drugs were found in 101 samples of treated and untreated water from public systems. Tests of 95 shallow farm irrigation wells detected 14 compounds. Some samples had as many as nine different substances.
Researchers have pointed to discharges from sewage-treatment plants and septic systems, sewage sludges, wastewater-fed irrigation systems and landfills as likely sources. Concentrations were in the parts-per-billion and parts-per-trillion range, however, far below levels in prescription doses.
Delaware's study, which cost $200,000, tested for 23 compounds, but many others not on the list are viewed as potentially harmful to humans, including flame retardants, plasticizers used in bottles, insect repellents and other medications and hormones.
Officials are preparing a report on the sampling and analysis commissioned by Delaware's Cancer Consortium.
Dana W. Kolpin, a researcher with the U.S. GeologicalSurvey's Iowa Water Science Center, said scientists are concerned about the human and environmental consequences. In addition to flushed-away medications, human wastes carry away medicines not used by the body, Kolpin said. Although some may be trapped in sewage sludge, they can be released to groundwater as sludges are reused as farm fertilizers. Even landfilled drugs can eventually find their way into drinking water, since liquids emerging from modern dumps are often captured and sent through sewage plants.
"It's not because of any negligence by treatment plants," Kolpin said. "These compounds haven't been a part of the [treatment] equation, and they're still not regulated."
The USGS and the EPA are preparing new studies of contamination levels before and after treatment, Kolpin said, with a goal of helping to develop new ways to reduce releases of the chemicals.
"They may or may not do something out of the box, depending on how well they've been maintained," Kolpin said. "But we've never done studies. There's a lot we don't know, just because we're trying to catch up on the products that are getting through."
The Brandywine is likely the largest carrier of pharmaceutical contaminants, because it receives treated wastewater from multiple sources as it courses through Pennsylvania, past Downingtown, Coatesville and West Chester.
University ofDelaware professor and state Water Supply Coordinator Gerald Kauffman said that about 60 wastewater-treatment plants of varying sizes discharge into tributaries of the Brandywine, Wilmington's sole regular source of water. During past droughts, treated sewage and the trace contaminants it carries accounted for as much as 15 percent of all water reaching the city's treatment plant.
"Until we know more about it, in terms of developing methods of treatment, it's best to limit the amount of pharmaceuticals that get into the water supply by the very simple method of not flushing it, and making sure it's packaged for disposal."
"The other thing that's being talked about is getting pharmaceutical companies involved in disposal of their products, just as other industries are," Kauffman said. By Jeff Montgomery for The News Journal 27 April 2010 Contact Jeff Montgomery at 678-4277 or jmontgomery@delawareonline.com.
The drug residues turned up in more than half the Delaware water samples taken from 20 public water sources and 95 farm irrigation wells last year.
Among the most common contaminants in Delaware's public taps: caffeine, the antibiotic sulfamethoxazole, the painkiller
Also found: antidepressants, cholesterol drugs, nicotine and triclosan, an ingredient widely used in soaps and antibacterial hand cleaners, but now under investigation as a potential disruptor of human endocrine systems.
The release of the information was prompted by a formal request by The News Journal.
"At these extremely low levels, it's not expected that there would be a health impact, but then, nobody's sure of that," said Edward G. Hallock, program administrator for Delaware's Office of Drinking Water. "When you add three or four compounds, even at extremely low levels, we're not sure whether there's an effect."
Those questions already are circulating in Congress, where some lawmakers recently pressed the Environmental Protection
Recent studies have tied antidepressant levels in fish brains to water pollutants, Kolpin said. Others have found that chemicals from human activities may be disrupting fish responses to predators, making them more vulnerable.
Last year, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
In the Delaware study, the Wilmington, United Water Delaware and Newark systems, supplied from local creeks, had the highest concentrations, but pharmaceuticals and personal care product residues were detected in all three counties. Pharmaceuticals and hormones are believed to pass into the environment because sewage treatment plants were never designed to capture or break down the chemicals.
List getting long
Windybush resident Theresa Cody said Monday the news adds another reason for her uneasiness about our drinking water."It does slightly concern me -- that's why we have filtered water, and that's why we drink a lot of bottled water," Cody said. "I'm more concerned about industrial contaminants and things like that. The list is getting too long. Antibiotics in our meat, all kinds of things."
Delaware officials are worried enough that plans call for a stepped-up campaign to discourage flushing of medications and other medicinal chemicals in toilets. Development of disposal alternatives or drop-off programs also are under consideration.
"From what I've seen from other states, I don't think that we're any different than what's being found across the country, as far as surface water and shallow groundwater," Hallock said.
Although results from individual wells and water intakes have not been released, a summary of findings noted that 17 different drugs were found in 101 samples of treated and untreated water from public systems. Tests of 95 shallow farm irrigation wells detected 14 compounds. Some samples had as many as nine different substances.
Researchers have pointed to discharges from sewage-treatment plants and septic systems, sewage sludges, wastewater-fed irrigation systems and landfills as likely sources. Concentrations were in the parts-per-billion and parts-per-trillion range, however, far below levels in prescription doses.
Delaware's study, which cost $200,000, tested for 23 compounds, but many others not on the list are viewed as potentially harmful to humans, including flame retardants, plasticizers used in bottles, insect repellents and other medications and hormones.
Officials are preparing a report on the sampling and analysis commissioned by Delaware's Cancer Consortium.
Dana W. Kolpin, a researcher with the U.S. Geological
"It's not because of any negligence by treatment plants," Kolpin said. "These compounds haven't been a part of the [treatment] equation, and they're still not regulated."
The USGS and the EPA are preparing new studies of contamination levels before and after treatment, Kolpin said, with a goal of helping to develop new ways to reduce releases of the chemicals.
Filter claims unverified
While some home tap-filter producers claim their systems can capture antibiotics and other contaminants, Kolpin said he was unaware of any that have undergone comprehensive, independent testing."They may or may not do something out of the box, depending on how well they've been maintained," Kolpin said. "But we've never done studies. There's a lot we don't know, just because we're trying to catch up on the products that are getting through."
The Brandywine is likely the largest carrier of pharmaceutical contaminants, because it receives treated wastewater from multiple sources as it courses through Pennsylvania, past Downingtown, Coatesville and West Chester.
University of
"Until we know more about it, in terms of developing methods of treatment, it's best to limit the amount of pharmaceuticals that get into the water supply by the very simple method of not flushing it, and making sure it's packaged for disposal."
"The other thing that's being talked about is getting pharmaceutical companies involved in disposal of their products, just as other industries are," Kauffman said. By Jeff Montgomery for The News Journal 27 April 2010 Contact Jeff Montgomery at 678-4277 or jmontgomery@delawareonline.com.
Friday, April 23, 2010
Caring for Hips and Knees to Avoid Artificial Joints
If you are one of the more than 400,000 people a year who have already had one or more hips or knees replaced — or someone who already has no choice but to consider joining their ranks — we offer our sympathies or encouragement or even congratulations, depending on how you are faring. But this column is for people who are not yet destined to necessarily become part of those statistics.
Although the human body has an amazing capacity to repair itself, our joints are surprisingly fragile.
When the cartilage that cushions bones wears away, it does not grow back. Thinning cartilage contributes to osteoarthritis, also known as degenerative arthritis, a painful and often debilitating condition.
Over time, arthritic joints can become so sore and inflamed that they need to be replaced with mechanical substitutes. A result: more pain, at least in the short term, and big medical bills.
Fortunately, you can act to protect your joints now, to reduce your chances of needing to replace them later.
And protect you should. The cost for a new hip or knee — the joints most commonly replaced — is $30,000 to $40,000. If you have insurance, your total out of pocket costs will be much less, but may still be $3,000 to $4,000. And don’t forget to factor in all those days of work you will miss before you get your new prosthetic.
Creaky joints are a growing national problem. The population is getting older, more people are overweight, and an increasing number of children and young adults are playing serious sports and getting seriously injured — all factors that contribute to osteoarthritis.
“Arthritis used to show up in people during their late 40s and 50s, now we’re seeing it earlier, like in the 30s and 40s,” said Dr. Patience White, a rheumatologist and the chief public health officer at the Arthritis Foundation.
The total national tab for hip replacements in 2007 was $19 billion, and $26 billion for knees, according to the federal Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Those figures are expected to rise significantly in the coming decade, Dr. White said. So protecting your joints will not only save wear and tear on you and your budget. You could also be doing your part to curtail the national health care bill.
If your joints are still intact, or just beginning to creak, here are some ways to keep osteoarthritis at bay.
CONTROL YOUR WEIGHT The more you weigh, the more pressure on your joints, which can lead to joint damage. When you walk, each knee bears a force equivalent to three to six times the body’s weight. If you weigh a mere 120 pounds, your knees are taking a 360-pound, or more, beating with every step.
Studies have found a connection between being overweight and developing osteroarthritis of the knees, and to a lesser extent the hips. One recent review found that 27 percent of hip replacements and 69 percent of knee replacements might be attributed to obesity.
For reasons not well understood, weight is more of risk factor for women than men.
“A woman’s risk for developing OA is linearly related to her weight,” Dr. David Felson, a rheumatologist and arthritis-prevention specialist at Boston University School of Medicine, said, referring to osteoarthritis.
“Men who are moderately overweight are not as at high a risk as a woman of the same weight,” Dr. Felson said.
But a woman can substantially lower her risk by shedding pounds. One study in which Dr. Felson was a co-author found that when a woman lost 10 pounds, her risk of osteoarthritis of the knee dropped by half. [LINK: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1543306]
GO LOW-IMPACT Although no definitive link has been found between osteoarthritis of the knee and running (or any other sport), sports medicine doctors discourage their patients from running on hard pavement, playing tennis on concrete or activities like skiing over lots of moguls.
“Impact sports put too much stress on the joints, particularly the knees,” said Dr. Donald M. Kastenbaum vice chairman of orthopedic surgery at Beth Israel Medical Center in Manhattan. “These activities may lead to OA and they definitely can escalate the progression of the condition.”
If you run regularly, try to do so on a track or treadmill and consider swapping one run a week for something low impact like swimming, biking, lifting weights or tai chi.
AVOID INJURY Easier said than done, of course. But major injuries, typically the type that require surgery, greatly increase your risk for osteoarthritis.
According to one big study, 10 to 20 years after a person injures the anterior cruciate ligament or menisci of the knee, that person has a 50 percent chance of having arthritis of the knee. [LINK: ajs.sagepub.com/content/35/10/1756.abstract].
Those rates are even higher when the injury happens in your 30s or 40s, Dr. Felson said. “As you move into middle age, it’s crucial to avoid sports that predispose you to injury,” he said.
Weekend warriors, who sit at a desk Monday through Friday, and then run or play basketball for five hours straight on the weekend, are at a high risk for injury, and thus for osteoarthritis.
GET FIT It makes sense. The better toned your muscles are, the less likely you are to injure yourself (unless you are also playing football every Saturday morning).
And “building muscles up around joints acts like a shock absorber, spreading stress across the joint,” said Dr. Laith M. Jazrawi, chief of the sports medicine division at N.Y.U. Hospital for Joint Diseases. Pilates, moderate weight lifting, vinyasa yoga, and swimming are all non-impact forms of exercise that firm up your muscles without jeopardizing your cartilage.
No definitive link exists between increased flexibility and lower, or higher, rates of osteoarthritis. But some doctors interviewed said they believed that by regularly stretching your muscles you are less likely to injure your joints. It can’t hurt to judiciously stretch your muscles after a work out. And even if it won’t protect your joints from deterioration, it will certainly make your muscles feel better.
BE SKEPTICAL Don’t waste your money on specialized nutrients. Shark cartilage, glucosamine and chondroitin — popular supplements marketed for healthy joints — can be expensive and probably are of limited benefit, many specialists say.
“There’s some evidence to suggest glucosamine and chondrotin sulfate may be helpful in O.A. once it has started, but overall the results are inconclusive,” Dr. Jazrawi said. As for shark cartilage, there is also no evidence to suggest that it has any benefit for treating the symptoms or the disease, he said. Joints are like car parts. With proper care and maintenance, they last longer.
By LESLEY ALDERMAN
Published: April 23, 2010
New York Times
Although the human body has an amazing capacity to repair itself, our joints are surprisingly fragile.
When the cartilage that cushions bones wears away, it does not grow back. Thinning cartilage contributes to osteoarthritis, also known as degenerative arthritis, a painful and often debilitating condition.
Over time, arthritic joints can become so sore and inflamed that they need to be replaced with mechanical substitutes. A result: more pain, at least in the short term, and big medical bills.
Fortunately, you can act to protect your joints now, to reduce your chances of needing to replace them later.
And protect you should. The cost for a new hip or knee — the joints most commonly replaced — is $30,000 to $40,000. If you have insurance, your total out of pocket costs will be much less, but may still be $3,000 to $4,000. And don’t forget to factor in all those days of work you will miss before you get your new prosthetic.
Creaky joints are a growing national problem. The population is getting older, more people are overweight, and an increasing number of children and young adults are playing serious sports and getting seriously injured — all factors that contribute to osteoarthritis.
“Arthritis used to show up in people during their late 40s and 50s, now we’re seeing it earlier, like in the 30s and 40s,” said Dr. Patience White, a rheumatologist and the chief public health officer at the Arthritis Foundation.
The total national tab for hip replacements in 2007 was $19 billion, and $26 billion for knees, according to the federal Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Those figures are expected to rise significantly in the coming decade, Dr. White said. So protecting your joints will not only save wear and tear on you and your budget. You could also be doing your part to curtail the national health care bill.
If your joints are still intact, or just beginning to creak, here are some ways to keep osteoarthritis at bay.
CONTROL YOUR WEIGHT The more you weigh, the more pressure on your joints, which can lead to joint damage. When you walk, each knee bears a force equivalent to three to six times the body’s weight. If you weigh a mere 120 pounds, your knees are taking a 360-pound, or more, beating with every step.
Studies have found a connection between being overweight and developing osteroarthritis of the knees, and to a lesser extent the hips. One recent review found that 27 percent of hip replacements and 69 percent of knee replacements might be attributed to obesity.
For reasons not well understood, weight is more of risk factor for women than men.
“A woman’s risk for developing OA is linearly related to her weight,” Dr. David Felson, a rheumatologist and arthritis-prevention specialist at Boston University School of Medicine, said, referring to osteoarthritis.
“Men who are moderately overweight are not as at high a risk as a woman of the same weight,” Dr. Felson said.
But a woman can substantially lower her risk by shedding pounds. One study in which Dr. Felson was a co-author found that when a woman lost 10 pounds, her risk of osteoarthritis of the knee dropped by half. [LINK: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1543306]
GO LOW-IMPACT Although no definitive link has been found between osteoarthritis of the knee and running (or any other sport), sports medicine doctors discourage their patients from running on hard pavement, playing tennis on concrete or activities like skiing over lots of moguls.
“Impact sports put too much stress on the joints, particularly the knees,” said Dr. Donald M. Kastenbaum vice chairman of orthopedic surgery at Beth Israel Medical Center in Manhattan. “These activities may lead to OA and they definitely can escalate the progression of the condition.”
If you run regularly, try to do so on a track or treadmill and consider swapping one run a week for something low impact like swimming, biking, lifting weights or tai chi.
AVOID INJURY Easier said than done, of course. But major injuries, typically the type that require surgery, greatly increase your risk for osteoarthritis.
According to one big study, 10 to 20 years after a person injures the anterior cruciate ligament or menisci of the knee, that person has a 50 percent chance of having arthritis of the knee. [LINK: ajs.sagepub.com/content/35/10/1756.abstract].
Those rates are even higher when the injury happens in your 30s or 40s, Dr. Felson said. “As you move into middle age, it’s crucial to avoid sports that predispose you to injury,” he said.
Weekend warriors, who sit at a desk Monday through Friday, and then run or play basketball for five hours straight on the weekend, are at a high risk for injury, and thus for osteoarthritis.
GET FIT It makes sense. The better toned your muscles are, the less likely you are to injure yourself (unless you are also playing football every Saturday morning).
And “building muscles up around joints acts like a shock absorber, spreading stress across the joint,” said Dr. Laith M. Jazrawi, chief of the sports medicine division at N.Y.U. Hospital for Joint Diseases. Pilates, moderate weight lifting, vinyasa yoga, and swimming are all non-impact forms of exercise that firm up your muscles without jeopardizing your cartilage.
No definitive link exists between increased flexibility and lower, or higher, rates of osteoarthritis. But some doctors interviewed said they believed that by regularly stretching your muscles you are less likely to injure your joints. It can’t hurt to judiciously stretch your muscles after a work out. And even if it won’t protect your joints from deterioration, it will certainly make your muscles feel better.
BE SKEPTICAL Don’t waste your money on specialized nutrients. Shark cartilage, glucosamine and chondroitin — popular supplements marketed for healthy joints — can be expensive and probably are of limited benefit, many specialists say.
“There’s some evidence to suggest glucosamine and chondrotin sulfate may be helpful in O.A. once it has started, but overall the results are inconclusive,” Dr. Jazrawi said. As for shark cartilage, there is also no evidence to suggest that it has any benefit for treating the symptoms or the disease, he said. Joints are like car parts. With proper care and maintenance, they last longer.
By LESLEY ALDERMAN
Published: April 23, 2010
New York Times
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)