Doctor HealthHealth Tips

The zero size is in and has become a rage in the younger generation. Most celebrities and models look so thin as if they have been starving themselves for months. Despite their anorexic looks, youngsters look up to them as their role models. They believe that they are too fat and go for fad diets to get rid of body flab. Many youngsters these days even go for surgical procedures to become thin. Diet pills have also become very common lately as people continue to consume them to reduce weight without exercising. However all these methods are wrong and can harm your body in some way or the other. The only safe way of becoming thin is to eat the right foods in the right proportions. You can follow a healthy 1600-calorie diet plan to lose weight slowly but permanently.

Any weight loss program that guarantees you five to ten pounds weight loss in a couple of weeks could be just a scam. Even if you do lose weight with such a program, you are bound to regain it in no time. So, why go for shortcuts when you can permanently get rid of excess weight with a 1600 calorie diet plan?

The 1600 calorie diet plan comprises of foods that provide adequate diet nutrition required for your daily needs. Your diet plan should typically include whole grains instead of processed grains. On the other hand, refined white flour foods should be avoided at all costs, as they affect the glucose metabolism in the body putting you at a higher risk of developing insulin disorders. Similarly, trans fatty acids in cakes, candy, and margarine should be avoided along with cheese and red meat that are high in saturated fats. This group of fats is responsible for health problems like heart attacks, atherosclerosis, and stroke.

The 1600 calorie diet plan is apt for a medium-sized woman who wishes to maintain weight and does not do much of exercise. On the other hand, a medium-sized woman who exercises three to five times in a week can use this diet plan to lose weight fast. The 1600 calorie diet plan can be broken down into various food groups. No matter what food groups you choose, ensure that you do not exceed the recommended number of servings for that particular food group. Your diet should include 4 servings of vegetables, 3 servings of fruits, 5oz grains, 3 cups dairy foods, 5oz meats/meat substitute, 22g fats/oils, and a discretionary calorie allowance of 132 calories. This allowance can be used to balance any extra calories you ate by choosing foods with higher fat or sugar content than the recommended amount. You can consume vegetables in the form of juices, soups and salads or cook them using your favorite seasoning.

Weight loss does not happen overnight and you must therefore choose a realistic diet plan that you can follow consistently for a long time. After a while, you will get used to this style of eating and may never crave for chocolates, ice creams and other foods that are loaded with calories. Always make it a point to drink plenty of water during the day when you are on the 1600 calorie diet plan.
by MIKE LOMBARDY

MUNICH, Germany — Women typically get heart disease much later than men, but not if they smoke, researchers said Tuesday.

In fact, women who smoke have heart attacks nearly 14 years earlier than women who don’t smoke, Norwegian doctors reported in a study presented to the European Society of Cardiology. For men, the gap is not so dramatic; male smokers have heart attacks about six years earlier than men who don’t smoke.

“This is not a minor difference,” said Dr. Silvia Priori, a cardiologist at the Scientific Institute in Pavia, Italy. “Women need to realize they are losing much more than men when they smoke,” she said. Priori was not connected to the research.

Dr. Morten Grundtvig and colleagues from the Innlandet Hospital Trust in Lillehammer, Norway, based their study on data from 1,784 patients admitted for a first heart attack at a hospital in Lillehammer.

Their study found that the men on average had their first heart attack at age 72 if they didn’t smoke, and at 64 if they did.

Women in the study had their first heart attack at age 81 if they didn’t smoke, and at age 66 if they did.
Read the rest of this entry »

Every year, an estimated 700,000 Americans have a first heart attack, with another 500,000 suffering a recurrent attack. About 40 percent of these people die as a result. However, many of these individuals might live if heart attack victims and bystanders recognize symptoms and call 911, said lead author Henraya McGruder, Ph.D., an epidemiologist at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

In a survey of 33,059 adults, most ages 25 to 64, McGruder and co-authors found that while knowledge of heart attack symptoms is poor within the general population, it is especially poor among African-Americans and Hispanics yet heart attacks are more prevalent among these populations than among whites.

“Our research highlights the importance of targeting these groups with education, so they understand the signs of heart attack and know what to do,” she said. “The key to survival is knowledge and awareness of symptoms, because lifesaving treatments must be given within a certain time window.”

The study appears in the spring issue of the journal Ethnicity and Disease, the journal of the International Society on Hypertension in Blacks.

McGruder and CDC colleagues looked at data from the 2001 National Health Interview Survey, in which participants indicated their awareness of heart attack symptoms and the need to call 911 to get help fast.

Respondents indicated their ability to recognize the following five signs of cardiac distress: (1) chest pain or discomfort; (2) pain or discomfort in the jaw, neck or back; (3) pain or discomfort in arms and shoulders; (4) feeling weak, lightheaded, or faint; and (5) shortness of breath.

“Knowing the signs and symptoms — and knowing to call 911 — will decrease death and disability associated with heart attack,” McGruder said, noting also the importance of traveling to the hospital by ambulance.

“Research suggests that patients arriving by ambulance received quicker care and a shorter time to treatment, compared to those who arrived via personal transportation,” she said.

“This paper certainly adds ammunition to the argument that we need to build more culturally appropriate public information health campaigns,” said Brian Smedley, Ph.D., research director and co-founder of The Opportunity Agenda.

“This paper does an important service in pointing to the need for patient education,” Smedley said. “If we want to reduce the disproportionate burden of heart attack in communities of people of color, however, there are fundamental, structural issues we need to address. We also need sound public policies that can help to ensure that everyone has appropriate access to health care resources.”

One problem, Smedley said, is that many hospitals have closed in minority neighborhoods. Even with increased awareness of the symptoms of heart attack and knowing to call 911, minorities could still face longer travel times to get to an emergency room.

In a recent study, mice implanted with living embryonic cardiac cells became resistant to cardiac arrhythmias, which are one of the most dangerous and fatal consequences of heart attacks. The discovery, reported in this week’s issue of Nature, has profound implications for using cell-transplant therapies to restore damaged heart tissue.

The researchers discovered that a protein called connexin43, expressed by the transplanted embryonic heart cells, improved electrical connections to other heart cells. The researchers showed that the improved connections helped activate the transplanted cells deep within the damaged section of the heart tissue. The technique reversed the risk of developing ventricular arrhythmias after a heart attack, the number one cause of sudden death in the Western world.

In the past, scientists have transplanted a variety of cell types into failing hearts with modest improvement of function, although transplanting skeletal muscle cells made things worse and led to more arrhythmias. Surprisingly, when co-author Bernd Fleischmann at the University of Bonn and colleagues transplanted embryonic cardiac cells, the hearts’ electrical stability and function returned to normal.

Scientists recognize the untapped potential of using cell-based therapies to counter many debilitating diseases, but they have not had tools to assess the function of the cells once transferred. In Kotlikoff’s laboratory, the researchers determined that the transplanted embryonic cells were making electrical connections with normal heart cells. Using genetically modified heart cells that express a fluorescent sensor, they established that transplanted heart cells were activated during normal heart contractions.

“For the first time we were able to see how cells used in therapy are working with other cells in a complex organ within a living animal, establishing the mechanism of the therapeutic effect,” Kotlikoff said.

Professor Guy Salama at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine was also able to map voltage signals across the surface of the hearts, establishing that the implanted cells improve conduction of electrical signals within the damaged heart tissue.

While doctors could never use cells from a human embryonic heart for transplantation, researchers at the University of Bonn engineered skeletal muscle to express connexin43 and achieved the same restorative results as they did with the embryonic heart cells.

“These results have important implications for therapy, although they must be verified in the context of naturally occurring heart damage,” Kotlikoff said. “One can envision using a patient’s own cells by deriving heart cells from stem cells to improve heart function and decrease arrhythmia risk.”

The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health, the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, the Federal Ministry of Education and Research, Germany, and the European Commission, Bonn Forschung.

Source: Cornell University

The skin disorder psoriasis is not only painful and hard to treat, but a new study suggests that psoriasis may be an independent risk factor for heart attack, particularly in young individuals with severe psoriasis.

But not just young individuals with psoriasis are at risk. Researchers studied medical records for more than 680,000 British patients, and found that people in their 40s with severe psoriasis were more than twice as likely to have a heart attack than people without the skin disease.

The study involved over 127,000 patients with mild psoriasis, 3,837 with severe psoriasis, and 556,995 controls. The patients all had a follow-up period of just under 5.5 years. Over that time, the heart attack rate in the control group was 2.0 percent, while the rates in the mild and severe psoriasis groups were 1.8 percent and 2.9 percent, respectively.

Researchers said, “Our findings are novel and therefore it is important that additional studies be performed to confirm these results and determine their therapeutic implications.” They added, “In the meantime, as part of good medical care, patients with psoriasis should be encouraged to aggressively address their modifiable cardiovascular risk factors.”

Although current research supports a link between psoriasis and cardiovascular disease, all the research thus far has come from hospital-based studies that did not control for known cardiovascular risk factors. The researchers of the current study addressed these non-controlled issues by conducting a population-based cohort study to examine the risk of heart attack in patients with and without psoriasis. They also adjusted the study to exclude high blood pressure, diabetes, lipid abnormalities, and other heart risk factors.

“The unstated implication in all of this is that if psoriasis is linked to heart attacks, consumers can reduce their heart attack risk by treating their psoriasis with drugs. But this logic is absurd,” explained Mike Adams, a holistic nutritionist. “Both conditions may, indeed, have a common cause, but that cause is certainly not a lack of medication. The real cause common to both conditions is a variety of nutritional imbalances and deficiencies, including a lack of omega-3 oils, zinc and other nutrients.”

by: Jerome Douglas

As we all know, vitamins are very important when it comes to keeping your heart healthy.You need to eat the right foods of course, although you also need to supplement the food you eat with the necessary vitamins your body needs to stay in shape and keep your heart working healthy for a long time to come. If you don’t consume the right nutrients, you won’t be doing your heart any favors - and may end up having problems later on in life.

The first vitamin that comes to mind for most people is vitamin E, a vitamin that is essential to improving the overall health of your heart. When taken correctly, vitamin E will stop the cholesterol in the body from harming the arteries that surround the heart. Anytime cholesterol oxidizes, it sticks to the sides of the arteries and can lead to blockages which can cause heart attacks or other serious problems with the heart.

To help you keep your heart healthy, most doctors recommend that you take additional supplements that contain vitamin E. They may also suggest that you eat foods that are naturally rich in vitamin E, such as nuts. Nuts have high amounts of vitamin E, and most of them taste great. You can find other foods that contain vitamin E as well, although nuts have the highest amounts.

In the past, research has shown Vitamin E to help those who have already suffered the wrath of a heart attack. This vitamin helps to prevent heart attacks in the future by opening up the arteries and eliminate blockage. Those who have had a heart attack in the past are always encouraged to add more vitamin E to their diet.

What many aren’t aware of, is the fact that you can use vitamin C to boost the effects of vitamin E. Vitamin C is known as an antioxidant, which prevents the damaging effects that cholesterol has on the body. Along with preventing cholesterol from damaging the body, vitamin C also helps vitamin E with it’s functions - such as protecting your arteries and your heart.

By taking both vitamin C and E as a combination, you’ll be well on your way to a healthier heart. Overall, this is the easiest way that you can be sure you aren’t damaging your heart, especially if you have had a heart attack in the past. If you have a history of heart disease or heart problems in your family, these vitamins are essential to your diet. Even if you are just concerned about the health of your heart, these vitamins will give you the peace of mind in knowing that you are eating for a healthy heart.

As far as your dosage goes, it will vary from person to person, although 400 international units of vitamin E and C are the recommended amounts for most people. On it’s own, vitamin C can be tolerated in large doses, without imposing any harmful effects. You can take around 500 mg of it twice a day, and ensure that your heart remains healthy.

To be on the safe side, you should always make sure that you get the proper amount of vitamins in your daily diet. Taking additional vitamins and supplements isn’t a bad idea either, especially if you are trying to boost the health of your heart. Your heart is one of the most important organs in your body, which is why you should always take care of it. If you eat the proper diet and take the necessary vitamins - you’ll be well on your way to keeping your heart healthy.

F.D.A. Says Bayer Failed to Reveal Drug Risk Study
WASHINGTON, Bayer A.G., the German pharmaceutical giant, failed to reveal to federal drug officials the results of a large study suggesting that a widely used heart-surgery medicine might increase the risks of death and stroke, the Food and Drug Administration announced Friday.Bayer scientists even appeared at a public meeting called by the F.D.A. on Sept. 21 to discuss the possibility that the drug, Trasylol, might have serious risks. But they did not mention the study or its worrisome results.In a highly unusual move, the food and drug agency released a public health advisory saying it had learned of the study’s existence only on Wednesday. Preliminary results of the study demonstrate “that use of Trasylol may increase the chance for death, serious kidney damage, congestive heart failure and strokes,” the advisory said.Nevertheless, the agency did not change its advice about whether patients should be given the drug. Instead, it restated previous warnings that Trasylol’s use should be limited to patients in whom the risks of blood loss outweighed the drug’s risks.The disclosure comes exactly two years after Merck announced it was withdrawing its arthritis drug, Vioxx, after a study showed that it doubled the risks of heart attacks. Since then, members of Congress and even top scientific advisers have concluded that the F.D.A. lacks the regulatory authority and the money needed to detect and protect against drug dangers.Drug companies have also been sharply criticized for failing to make public the results of some human trials of their drugs that suggest that the drugs are either ineffective or dangerous. Some lawmakers have proposed legislation that would require that nearly all human drug trials must be announced and their results disclosed publicly.A top F.D.A. official said the agency learned of the Trasylol study on Wednesday only after a getting a tip from a researcher involved in it. The official insisted on anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the information.In a written statement, Bayer said “that it mistakenly did not inform” the F.D.A. of the study and added, “This data was not shared immediately with the agency because it was preliminary in nature.”Staci Gouveia, a Bayer spokeswoman, said the company nonetheless stood behind the safety of Trasylol, which has become one of Bayer’s fastest sellers. Sales last year were $200 million and were expected to nearly triple this year.Several members of the advisory committee that met last week said they were shocked that Bayer failed to inform them of the study.“For them not to mention that it was under way, that it was being analyzed or that results were available is appalling and will do significant harm to their reputation for transparency,” said Dr. John Teerlink, an associate professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, and a member of the advisory committee.Steven Findlay, a health care analyst at Consumers Union and another committee member, said the agency needed to investigate whether Bayer knowingly withheld the information from the advisory committee.“The safety of this drug is called into further question now,” Mr. Findlay said.Doctors give Trasylol to patients before surgery to reduce the risks of blood loss. It can also reduce the need for transfusions in patients undergoing heart bypass surgery. Trasylol, also known as aprotinin, has been on the market for 13 years.But two recent studies suggested that the drug might have serious risks. One of the articles, published in January in The New England Journal of Medicine, found that the drug increases the risks of kidney failure, heart attack and stroke. The study concluded that halting the drug’s use would prevent 10,000 to 11,000 cases of kidney failure a year and save more than $1 billion a year in dialysis costs, as well as nearly $250 million spent on the drug itself.There are other, cheaper drugs that can be used in Trasylol’s place.Still, the advisory panel concluded that Trasylol’s risks were worth taking in some patients. Dr. Teerlink said that despite the results of the new study, that might still be true.Bayer’s study was performed by a contract research organization. But Bayer did not inform the F.D.A. that the study was being done, even though that is routine practice.It examined hospital records of 67,000 patients, 30,000 of whom received Trasylol. The rest got other drugs. It concluded that the patients given Trasylol were at greater risk.Such studies, however, are fraught with statistical and other problems. Patients given Trasylol may have been sicker than those given other drugs. Their worse outcomes would be explained not by problems with Trasylol but by their own illness.Susan Bro, an F.D.A. spokeswoman, said it was evaluating the new study and would decide soon whether the results merit changing the agency’s advice about use of the drug.“It is regrettable that the F.D.A. advisory board did not have the benefit of a frank scientific dialogue based on the totality of available data,” she said.Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa and chairman of the Senate Finance Committee and a longtime critic of the F.D.A., said Bayer’s behavior proved that the agency was largely toothless.“The remedy is mandatory reporting of all clinical trials and real teeth for the F.D.A. to do its job in holding drug companies accountable,” Mr. Grassley said.