Healthy Me - At Home and Away: University College London

Showing posts with label University College London. Show all posts

Sunday, January 15, 2012

Brain power can decline from age 45

So, should age of retirement be adjusted?
-----

Posted: 06 January 2012

PARIS: Cognitive skills can start to fall from the age of 45, not from around the age of 60 as is commonly thought, according to research published on Friday by the British Medical Journal (BMJ).

Researchers led by Archana Singh-Manoux from the Centre for Research in Epidemiology and Population Health in France and University College London observed 5,198 men and 2,192 women over a 10-year period from 1997.

The volunteers were London civil servants aged between 45 and 70 who had been enrolled in a long-term health study.

Over the 10 years, the participants were tested three times - for memory, vocabulary, and skills in aural and visual comprehension.

During this time, there was a 3.6-percent decline in mental reasoning in men aged 45-49 and a 9.6-percent fall in those aged 65-70. The corresponding figures for women were 3.6 and 7.4 percent.

"Cognitive decline is already evident in middle age," says the paper, which defines this as the years from 45 to 49.

The findings should spur further research into spotting and braking cognitive deterioration, the authors hope.

Many societies face an "exponential increase" in the number of elderly people as a result of increases in life expectancy, they note.

"These changes are likely to have a profound influence on individuals' lives and society at large. Poor cognitive status is perhaps the single most disabling condition in old age."

- AFP/de

Taken from ChannelNewsAsia.com; source article is below:
Brain power can decline from age 45

Thursday, November 3, 2011

'Longevity gene' may be dead end

Posted: 22 September 2011

Undated illustration shows DNA double helix

PARIS: Research over the last decade showing that proteins called sirtuins can increase lifespan is deeply flawed, according to a new study in Nature that debunks prior claims of a direct causal link.

Pioneering experiments on earthworms and fruitflies - commonly used as models to examine the biology of human ageing - suggested that an extra dose of the naturally-occurring enzymes could prolong life by up to 50 percent.

These early results unleashed a flood of new research, much of which backed up the original findings.

They also spawned a flourishing market in dubious health products claiming to boost sirtuins, and thus slow down one's biological clock.

Many contained resveratrol, a molecule - also found in red wine - thought to activate the enzyme.

But the new research, led by David Gems at the Institute of Healthy Ageing at the University College London, provides solid evidence that the supposed cause-and-effect relationship between the proteins and longer life is a mirage.

Gems and colleagues reproduced benchmark studies to test whether the links might be attributable to other factors besides the allegedly miracle gene, known as Sir2 in worms and flies, and SIRT1 in mammals.

"We have re-examined the key experiments linking sirtuin with longevity in animals and none seem to stand up to close scrutiny," Gem said in statement.

"Sirtuins, far from being a key to longevity, appear to have nothing to do with extending life."

The main problem with most of these earlier experiments was the failure to account for all the possible differences between genetically manipulated organisms and the "wild" ones against which they compared.

For nematode worms, for example, once precautions were taken to ensure that the only difference between normal and test animals was the higher sirtuin levels, the added lifespan disappeared.

It turned out that other mutations had occurred but escaped notice.

Leonard Guarante of MIT, who conducted some of these pathbreaking studies, acknowledged in a "brief communication," also published in Nature, that his earlier work had been flawed.

Gem and colleagues then reproduced similar experiments done with fruit flies, again showing that the results attributed to sirtuins were in fact due to other genetic drivers.

The researchers also created synthetic fruitfly sirtuin to see if it could be activated by resveratrol, as previously claimed. But neither of two separate laboratories, using multiple techniques, could make it work.

Finally, the study refutes the claim that enhanced lifespan due to dietary restriction - itself not in doubt - also depended on sirtuins.

"Studies on yeast lifespan were the first to cast doubt on the role of sirtuins in longevity," note Carles Canto and Johan Auwerx from the Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne.

The new study "puts a final nail in the coffin," they wrote in a commentary, also in Nature.

But even if sirtuins are not the long hoped-for life-prolonging elixir, they may still confer important health benefits, they added.

Whether directly or indirectly, the protein has been shown to protect mammals - notably mice - from the metabolic damage caused by high-fat diets and age-related diseases.

"SIRT1 activation remains a promising approach to delaying general age-related physiological decline and to treating numerous inherited and acquired diseases," they argue.

The protein may not cause an otherwise healthy animal live longer, in other words, but it could help one who over-eats to reduce related stress on its system.

-AFP/pn

Taken from ChannelNewsAsia.com; source article is below:
'Longevity gene' may be dead end

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

American Teens and their Eating Disorder

Celebrity Eating Disorders: "Nicole Richi...

Image by tollieschmidt via FlickrThis is exactly a month old today, but it is still relevant - even in the future.

Read on...
-----

Related social impairment, suicidal thoughts make this a major public health concern, researchers say
Posted: March 7, 2011

MONDAY, March 7 (HealthDay News) -- Many American adolescents suffer from an eating disorder and struggle with related psychiatric disorders, including suicidal tendencies, new research reveals.

"The prevalence of these disorders is higher than previously expected in this age range, and the patterns of [co-existing illnesses], role impairment and suicidality indicate that eating disorders represent a major public health concern," the researchers wrote.

"This article aptly points out that we should not dismiss eating disorders as a public health problem simply because their prevalence is lower than some other major mental illnesses," said Mary Tantillo, director of the Western New York Comprehensive Care Center for Eating Disorders and an associate professor of clinical nursing at the University of Rochester School of Nursing. "The magnitude of what happens because of eating disorders -- severe mental and physical health complications, psychiatric illness and addictions, high mortality rates and the high cost of acute treatment -- far outweighs their lower prevalence."

"As the article states, eating disorders, as diseases of disconnection, can become chronic and can eventually kill due to the social impairment and isolation they create," Tantillo said in a statement. "Despite loving families, friends and school personnel, afflicted teens can go months or years undetected due to the secrecy and shame surrounding the illness, and the ways in which the disease affects the brain and distorts how they perceive it. Timely diagnosis is often hindered by the inability of afflicted teens to recognize the need for help and/or ask for it. Clearly, when eating disorders in adolescents are not quickly identified and treated, there are great costs to the teen, his or her family and society."

Led by Sonja A. Swanson, of the National Institute of Mental Health, the research team reported the findings online March 7 in the Archives of General Psychiatry.

To research the issue, the authors analyzed data collected by the National Comorbidity Survey Replication Adolescent Supplement, which included the results of in-person interviews conducted with more than 10,000 adolescents between the ages of 13 and 18.

The result: lifetime prevalence rates of anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, binge-eating disorder and several other eating disorders ranged from less than half a percent of those interviewed to as much as 2.5 percent.

While boys and girls appeared to be equally susceptible to anorexia, girls were found to be more likely to develop bulimia and/or binge-eating disorders.

What's more, the majority of those with any eating disorder were also burdened with at least one other mental health issue. This was the case, for example, with nearly nine in 10 bulimic adolescents, and more than eight in 10 of those with a binge-eating problem.

Eating disorders, the team found, were most commonly linked to social impairment, a problem that affects nearly nine in 10 anorexic adolescents. And all eating disorders were associated with a higher lifetime risk for suicidal tendencies.

Despite the findings, the authors noted that just a minority of adolescent patients with an eating disorder appeared to be receiving treatment designed to deal with their food issues.

Prior research has suggested that adults plagued with the problem are also susceptible to higher rates of associated medical complications and suicide.

Swanson and her team conducted their work with support from the National Institute of Mental Health.

More information

For more on eating disorders, visit the U.S. National Institute of Mental Health.

Taken from Health.USNews.com; source article is below:
Eating Disorders More Prevalent Than Thought Among American Teens

Monday, January 31, 2011

Breastfeeding: its strengths and limitations

For my family, my wife quit her work to take care of our kids. We introduce solids from four months, soups, broths, and anything that we eat during meals, which means cooking with the baby in mind. And no, we don't follow the 6-months rule: my wife breastfeeds until the baby stops on its own, way over 2 years old.

It is always your choice as to how and when, no matter what any study may find out or suggest, right?
-----

Posted: 14 January 2011

LONDON: Breastfeeding exclusively for the first six months is not necessarily best for a baby's health, British researchers said Friday, calling into question advice given to new mothers.

The team led by a paediatrician from University College London said babies fed only breast milk could suffer iron deficiency and may be more prone to allergies.

The study says babies could start to be weaned on to solids as early as four months, although other experts advised sticking to the existing guidelines.

Ten years ago, the World Health Organisation (WHO) recommended that infants should be exclusively breastfed for six months.

"Many Western countries, including 65 percent of European member states and the United States, elected not to follow this recommendation fully, or at all," the authors said, although Britain did.

The WHO recommendation "rested largely" on a review of 16 studies, including seven from developing countries.

It concluded that babies given only breast milk for six months had fewer infections and experienced no growth problems.

But another review of 33 studies found "no compelling evidence" not to introduce solids at four to six months, the experts said.

Some studies have also shown that breastfeeding for six months fails to give babies all the nutrition they need.

One US study from 2007 found that babies exclusively breastfed for six months were more likely to develop anaemia than those introduced to solids at four to six months.

On the issue of allergies, the British study said researchers in Sweden found that the incidence of early onset coeliac disease increased after a recommendation to delay introduction of gluten until age six months, "and it fell to previous levels after the recommendation reverted to four months".

The authors said however that exclusively breastfeeding for six months remains the best recommendation for developing countries, which have higher death rates from infection.

But in developed countries, it could lead to adverse health outcomes and may "reduce the window for introducing new tastes".

"Bitter tastes, in particular, may be important in the later acceptance of green leafy vegetables, which may potentially affect later food preferences with influence on health outcomes such as obesity."

The researchers said the European Food Safety Authority's panel on dietetic products, nutrition and allergies has concluded that for infants across the EU, complementary foods may be introduced safely between four to six months.

Experts in Britain challenged the findings of the new study.

Janet Fyle, professional policy adviser at the Royal College of Midwives, said: "I really must challenge the suggestion from the review that the UK should reconsider its current advice on exclusive breastfeeding for six months.

"I believe that this is a retrograde step and plays into the hands of the baby food industry which has failed to support the six-month exclusive breastfeeding policy in the UK."

-AFP/jl

Taken from ChannelNewsAsia.com; source article is below: Breastfeeding may not be best after four months: study

Monday, January 24, 2011

Two hours of TV-watching boosts heart risk

And I thought that TV is bad only for kids?
-----

Posted: 11 January 2011

WASHINGTON: People who spend more than two hours per day of leisure time watching television or sitting in front of a screen face double the risk of heart disease and higher risk of dying, said a study on Monday.

Researchers said the effect was seen regardless of how much people exercised, indicating that how we choose to spend our free time away from work has a huge impact on our overall health.

"It is all a matter of habit. Many of us have learned to go back home, turn the TV set on and sit down for several hours - it's convenient and easy to do," said Emmanuel Stamatakis, expert in epidemiology and public health at University College London.

"But doing so is bad for the heart and our health in general," said Stamatakis, who along with the other study authors is advocating public health guidelines to warn of the risks of being inactive during non-work hours.

Such warnings are urgent, "especially as a majority of working age adults spend long periods being inactive while commuting or being slouched over a desk or computer," said the study in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

Researchers studied data from 4,512 adults who took part in the Scottish Health Survey of households.

The information on screen time came from self-reported data about TV or DVD watching, leisure time computer use and playing video games.

When scientists compared people who reported spending less than two hours a day in front of screen-based entertainment to those who spent four or more hours per day, they found a 48 percent higher risk of death from any cause.

In those spending just two or more hours per day in front of screen after work, they also found a 125 percent higher risk of cardiovascular events such as heart attack.

"These associations were independent of traditional risk factors such as smoking, hypertension, BMI (body mass index), social class, as well as exercise," the study noted.

However researchers were able to make associations between the levels of inflammation and cholesterol in sedentary people.

"One fourth of the association between screen time and cardiovascular events was explained collectively by C-reactive protein (CRP), body mass index, and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol," said the study.

CRP, an indicator of low-grade inflammation, was about twice as high in people who spent more than four hours of free time daily in front of a screen compared to people who spent less than two hours a day.

Stamatakis said he intends to continue to study how prolonged sitting impacts human health and how lifestyle changes could be advocated to reduce the amount of time people spend inactive.

- AFP/de

Taken from ChannelNewsAsia.com; source article is below: Two hours of TV-watching boosts heart risk

Thursday, June 24, 2010

Secondhand Smoke and Mental Health

I came across two articles in the web that tells about the effect of secondhand smoke to one's mental health. I am reposting one, and keeping the other as an alternate article. To find out what could be in store, read on...
-----

Secondhand Smoke a Mental Health Hazard?

By Steven Reinberg
HealthDay Reporter

MONDAY, June 7 (HealthDay News) — Long linked to physical ailments such as asthma, heart disease and lung cancer, secondhand smoke may now be tied to an increase in mental woes, new research suggests.

Prolonged exposure to another’s noxious tobacco fumes could up the odds for psychological distress, depression, schizophrenia and delirium, British researchers say.

“In the U.S., an estimated 60 percent of non-smokers have biological evidence of exposure to passive smoke. Thus, in order to improve mental and physical health, people should be made aware of these harmful effects,” said lead researcher, Mark Hamer, from the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health at University College London.

“Exposure to passive smoke was associated with higher levels of psychological distress and greater risk of future psychiatric illness,” he said.

The report is published in the June 7 online edition of the Archives of General Psychiatry.

For the study, Hamer’s team collected data on over 5,500 non-smokers and nearly 2,600 smokers. None of these people had any history of mental illness at the start of the study, the researchers noted. In addition, the researchers measured levels of cotinine in saliva, which indicates an individual’s level of exposure to tobacco smoke.

Over six years of follow-up, 14.5 percent of the individuals were found to be suffering from psychological distress. People who did not smoke, but who were exposed to high levels of secondhand smoke, were almost 50 percent more likely to suffer from psychological distress than those not exposed, the researchers found.

In addition, during the six-year follow-up period, 41 of the participants were admitted to psychiatric hospitals for problems such as depression, schizophrenia, delirium or other psychiatric problems. Those with high exposure to secondhand smoke were nearly three times as likely to be admitted versus people unexposed to the fumes, the study authors found.

Stanton A. Glantz, a professor of medicine and director of the Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education at the University of California, San Francisco, commented that “this is an important and well-done study that shows that secondhand smoke is even more dangerous than we previous thought.”

Dr. Norman H. Edelman, a scientific consultant for the American Lung Association, agreed that “this is a very well done, potentially important study.”

Edelman said, “It’s not just that people with psychiatric symptoms tend to smoke more or be around those who smoke more, it may be that the exposure to smoke adds to their symptoms.”

However, another expert questions the validity of the findings. While smoke may make one more susceptible to mental problems, people predisposed to mental health woes may find themselves in smoky environments more often.

Dr. Ted Schettler, the science director of the Science and Environmental Health Network, reasoned that, perhaps “nicotine is associated with an increased likelihood of psychological problems.”

But, he added, “On the other hand, you can easily imagine that people who are in stressful life circumstances are also finding themselves in more smoke-filled environments. I don’t know that you can separate it out.”

More information

For more information on secondhand smoke, visit the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
SOURCES: Mark Hamer, Ph.D., department of epidemiology and public health, University College London; Stanton A. Glantz, Ph.D., professor, medicine, and director, Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education, University of California, San Francisco; Norman H. Edelman, M.D., scientific consultant, American Lung Association; Ted Schettler, M.D., science director, Science and Environmental Health Network; June 7, 2010, Archives of General Psychiatry, online

Last Updated: June 07, 2010

From Health.com; source article is below:
Secondhand Smoke a Mental Health Hazard?

The other article is here:
Secondhand Smoke and Mental Health
-----