Study:  Pine Bark Extract Improves Eyesight in 75 Percent of Diabetics

Italian researchers believe pine bark extract can improve the visual acuity of diabetics with poor eyesight.

Say you fall victim to some mysterious illness.  The illness is such that it renders four of your senses useless.  What’s the one sense that you’d want to keep more than any other?

For me, hands down, it’s eyesight.  I can’t imagine not being able to see remarkable sunsets, gorgeous landscapes, the bustling streets of New York City, or the clear blue waters of the Caribbean.

Yet for millions of diabetics, sight is something they’re robbed of.  It doesn’t happen for each and every one of the estimated 24 million Americans that have diabetes, but the chance of their becoming blind is steep indeed.  Simply because they’re diabetic, they are 60 percent more likely to develop cataracts and 40 percent more likely to develop glaucoma.

But a new study published in the Journal of Ocular Pharmacology and Therapeutics indicates that eyesight can be improved in diabetics by supplementing with pine bark extract.

Pine bark being used as a healing aid goes all the way back to the days when French explorers roamed the Americas.  Legend has it that when Jacques Cartier arrived on the new world, fellow shipmen of his were terribly ill with scurvy.  But thanks to the medicinal knowledge and know-how of the Native Americans, their symptoms disappeared after drinking tea made with pine bark from an East White Cedar tree.

Pine tree bark remains in use today.  Its high antioxidant content makes it something of an all-purpose supplement, helping people recover from arthritis, cancer and diabetes complications.

Speaking of diabetes complications, the participants in the aforementioned study had all been diabetic for four years.  For two months, the Italian researchers had 24 of the participants supplement with 150 milligrams of pine bark extract.  The remaining participants served as the control group and supplemented with a placebo.

At the end of the study, three out of every four participants that supplemented with the pine bark extract improved their eyesight.  They reported being able to see more clearly, and tests measuring their eye strength increased from 14/20 to 17/20.

Researchers believe the pine bark extract proved beneficial because of its ability to stimulate greater blood flow to the eyes.

It’s hard to believe that sugar regulation can have such a huge impact on the eyes, but that’s the very thing that puts diabetics at such risk for blindness.  When the body’s sugar levels can’t be maintained properly (i.e. due to an inability to produce enough insulin), the blood vessels in the eye become severely weakened.  This weakening increases the chances of capillaries bursting.  Capillaries in the eye burst all the time, but when they’re weakened because of insufficient sugar regulation, they often become closed off.  This means that they can’t grow back, robbing the retina of the blood it needs to survive and function.  Approximately 40 percent of diabetics with eye problems have diabetic retinopathy.

Diabetes is the leading cause of blindness in adults.

Sources:
nutraingredients.com
cancer.org
aoa.org

For Obese, Moderate Weight Loss Brings Significant Healing

If you're obese, even a little weight loss pays big heart health dividends.

It’s one thing to hear about something, but it’s quite another to know it.

For instance, I’m sure all of you have heard that obesity is a significant risk factor for developing heart disease – the world’s leading killer.  But how many of you have actually seen this on display?  Where someone who had all the symptoms of heart disease freed themselves of those symptoms after losing just a moderate amount of weight?

Well, a study out of the Washington University School of Medicine demonstrates that very thing.

The researchers recruited approximately 60 individuals to participate in a weight loss experiment.  The program would take two years to complete, and they could choose from one of two diets to follow over that two-year period.  Their weapons of choice?  Either a low-carb diet or a low-fat diet.  Impressively, 78 percent of the participants stuck with their pre-selected diet throughout the two-year trial.

The researchers from St. Louis, MO instructed each participant to consume a low-calorie diet (between 1,200 and 1,500 calories per day, depending upon how obese they were) and to get at least three and a half hours per week of aerobic activity.  Their oldest participant was 64, youngest 22, and the participants’ BMI Index ranged between 30 and 44.  Anything over 30 is considered obese.

Fast-forward two years and both groups lost an average of 22 pounds.  Now, for people moderately overweight, this is a significant drop.  But for the obese and morbidly obese—which adequately describes most of the participants in the study—22 pounds is like scooping a bucket of water out of the ocean.

Nevertheless, researchers found significant improvements to their heart health. For instance, the physical structure of the heart takes on a different form in obese people.  The heart hardens and the arteries thicken because it has to work so much harder.  But according to the study’s lead researcher, Lisa de las Fuentes, this 22 pound weight drop “turned back the clock,” allowing them to “regain more youthful heart function” as the heart smoothened, and the arteries became more elastic.

The study is published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

Granted, this isn’t exactly an earth shattering discovery, but sometimes we need to be reminded of things to re-commit ourselves to why we do the things we do.  After all, as a wise man likes to say, “Repetition is the mother of learning.”

And with the rate of childhood obesity three times higher today than what it was 20 years ago, this is a lesson that we need to have down-cold if we want to be examples to our children on how to live healthfully.  If we don’t, then they’re certain to have a similar fate.

Sources:
sciencedaily.com
americansportsdata.com

Alzheimer’s Results More from Aging, Not Age

Through genetic-modification of mice, Salk Institute researchers show that Alzheimer's forms more as a result of aging, not getting older.

Alzheimer’s disease, to paraphrase Winston Churchill, is a riddle, wrapped in an enigma, wrapped in a mystery.  Sure, doctors have come a long way in unraveling why it affects as many people as it does, but its prevalence remains somewhat of a mystery.

One thing we do know is that Alzheimer’s overwhelmingly affects older people.  In fact, as the nation progressively grows older, the incidence rate is set to jump from its current rate of 35.6 million affected to 115.4 million affected in 2050.

So the question a lot of us have on our minds is whether Alzheimer’s is a risk because we’re growing older, or is it a risk because we’re aging?

Well, according to researchers from the Salk Institute, it’s more a result of the latter.

This is good news, because aging is something we can work at delaying.  But before I get into how that can be worked at, the study broke down thusly:

Researchers from the Salk Institute used a mouse model to slow down the function of what’s called the IGF-1 pathway.  According to the study’s lead author Dr. Ehud Cohen, this pathway in the brain plays a crucial role in how quickly someone ages.

A series of tests were then employed to see how plaque buildup formed in their brains.  This plaque, known as amyloid plaque, is believed to be the growth that sets off the progressive chain of events that leads to full-fledged Alzheimer’s disease.

But interestingly—and happily—the mice whose IGF-1 pathway had been tinkered with formed less plaque buildup compared to the mice whose brains were left unaltered.

This is a very exciting find because it indicates that it’s not the getting older per se that influences the risk of Alzheimer’s disease, it’s the aging process.  So if you’ve been living an all-natural lifestyle for several years, you’re already ahead of the curb.

But in case you haven’t been or are a new convert to the holistic way of life, there are several things you can do to help slow the aging process.

One of them is through supplementation with nutrients that are essential to maintaining the fountain of youth.  Coenzyme A is chief among those vital nutrients.  Aging is highly influenced by what toxins and chemicals we’ve been exposed to, and Coenzyme A helps detoxify the body of many of these substances when taken regularly.

Another crucial nutrient is glutathione, particularly for brain health.  Glutathione is a natural mood enhancer (studies show that the perpetually happy live longer and don’t age as quickly as the perpetually perturbed) and destroys ammonia, which interferes with brain function.  You probably don’t think you’re at risk for ammonia exposure, but you’re around it every day, as ammonia is used to produce every day plastics, pharmaceuticals and fibers.

And while we’re on the topic of keeping your brain young, ginkgo biloba helps with that as well.  It enhances brain function by supplying the brain with a greater dose of oxygen.

Another thing you should do that goes without saying but I’ll say it anyway:  Lifestyle changes that are anti-aging.  These include avoiding stimulants and chemical food additives; eating a balanced diet that’s rich in raw vegetables, fruits, nuts and seeds; getting at least 7 to 8 hours of sleep a night; and remaining as stress-free as possible.

No one is perfect, which is why we all age to varying degrees.  Where you fall short, though, is where the aforementioned supplements and nutrients pick up the slack.

Sources:
alz.org
sciencedaily.com
Balch, Phyllis.  “Prescription for Nutritional Healing.”  4^th Ed.  2006.  New York:  Avery
en.wikipedia.org

Study Shows Why Breast-Feeding Is in the Woman’s Best Interest

There's lots of talk about how breast-feeding benefits babies' health. Here's a study that discusses how breast-feeding benefits womens' health.

To breast-feed or to bottle-feed?  That is the question.

Depending on who you ask, there are positives and negatives to either approach.  The breast-feeding fans (which include the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Medical Association and the American Dietetic Association) say the boons to it are endless.  Besides the bonding it brings, breast-feeding provides babies with the natural vitamins of breast milk, it’s more digestible and it helps protect them from a veritable smorgasbord of infections that tend to crop up in their early years (e.g. ear infections, diarrhea, respiratory infections).

But talk to the bottle-feeding followers, and they’ll tell you that the nutritional benefits of breast milk are slight and that the convenience of bottle-feeding far outweighs the perceived benefits of breastfeeding, slight as they are.

Like Democrats and Republicans, the two sides will likely never reach an accord.  And as polls of politicians wax and wane based on “what have you done for me lately,” the popularity of breast milk or bottle milk will rise or fall depending on the latest scientifically-backed study.

And considering the latest study that breast-feeding supports the health of women, a polling of women suggests the polls will tip in the favor of breast-feeding.

According to a 20-year study conducted by Kaiser Permanente, a health care organization based in Oakland, Calif., women who breastfed after pregnancy were up to 56 percent less likely to develop metabolic syndrome over the course of their lives (the likelihood of developing metabolic syndrome was influenced by how long they breastfed after pregnancy).

It’s not yet clear why breast-feeding women were less likely to have developed metabolic syndrome, but researchers think it may have something to do with their ability to lose more weight post-pregnancy.

Metabolic syndrome is an umbrella term for a group of conditions that contribute to the risk of heart disease and the leading type of heart disease, coronary artery disease.  Metabolic syndrome is diagnosed when someone has a combination of obesity (particularly around the waist), high blood pressure, high triglyceride levels and diabetes.  A May 2009 report from a National Health Statistics Survey found that 34 percent of 3,500 men and women met all the criteria for developing metabolic syndrome.  The survey found that men and women were more likely to have it if they were both advanced in years and advanced in weight.

Women should inform themselves of all the positives and negatives of breast-feeding and bottle-feeding and make their decision accordingly.  But if you’re asking my opinion, it’s preferable that women breast-feed—both for the health of the child.  And as this study indicates, for the long-term health of women.

Sources:
kidshealth.org
msnbc.msn.com
health.google.com
cdc.gov

German Study Ties Tobacco Use to Impaired Social Function in Kids

2009 was a banner year for the tobacco industry. Perhaps this latest study regarding tobacco's negative health effects will make 2010 their worst year yet.

If you hate smoking as much as I do, the year 2009 couldn’t come to an end soon enough.  That’s because 2009 was a banner year for the cigarette industry.

As I recently reported on Natural News, smoking in the year 2009 made a bit of a comeback.  Unlike 2008, when the rate of smoking in the country hit an historic low, the smoking rate increased.

Now, granted, the increase wasn’t significant (from 20 percent to 21 percent) but with all we know about the negative health effects of tobacco, why would people even consider starting?

Here’s the latest example of why it’s such a mystery.

According to a recently published report in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, children who are exposed to tobacco smoke either in the womb or during the first stages of life are more likely to develop an array of behavioral problems by the time they reach fourth grade.

The study involved the questioning of the mothers of 6,000 children.  It was a carefully questioned questionnaire that tried to eliminate as many potential biases and circumstances that can influence a child’s social development.  Simon Ruckinger, the study’s lead author from the University of Munich, made it a point of emphasizing this fact.

Based on the mothers’ responses of their children’s social health and whether or not they smoked during pregnancy and/or after giving birth (or whether they smoked at all), children were almost two times more likely to have a social interaction disorder.  This was true for the women who smoked during pregnancy; the rate was only slightly lower for women who smoked during the child’s first years of life.  For them, the rate of behavioral problems in kids was approximately 1.3 times higher compared to non-smokers.

The physical development risks tobacco exposes babies to are well-documented, but this is one of the first studies to firmly establish the link between antisocial behavior and tobacco exposure.

Hopefully this finding will lead the estimated 15 percent of women—15 percent!—to think twice before lighting up.

But as with any addiction, smoking is very difficult to stop, even when the health consequences are so apparent.  The brain knows that it’s bad for you, but the tobacco-addicted mind can’t quite make the connection.

There’s no shortage of ways to kick the habit, but as you work at, it’s advisable to take some herbs and supplements that help cleanse the body of the toll tobacco puts on the body.  This is especially important if you’re pregnant!

Cayenne, the spicy ingredient found in chili and jalapeno peppers, often induces perspiration.  Perspiration naturally cleanses the body of toxins.  Another natural “perspirant-inducer” is ginger.

And as far as cleansing your blood of toxins, burdock root and red clover help with this.  The principle use of burdock root is for blood detoxification, in fact.

Sources:
sciencedaily.com
weblogs.baltimoresun.com
naturalherbsguide.com
Balch, Phyllis.  “Prescription for Nutritional Healing.”  4^th Ed.  2006.  New York:  Avery

Study Shows Antioxidants Inhibit Polyp Growth in Colon

Italian researchers believe antioxidant supplementation can reduce the development of cancerous polyps.

The array of benefits antioxidants provide continue to grow, much to the chagrin of skeptical “scientists” who believe antioxidants are bunkum and don’t provide any material health benefit.  Well I wonder what they’ll think of the latest study that finds antioxidants improve colon health.

Not much, I’m sure.

Before I get into the study, colon health is a lot like the electricity when it goes out; we don’t appreciate it until we lose it or have a problem with it.  That’s certainly how people with ulcerative colitis feel.  Ulcerative colitis, a specific type of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), occurs when the lining of the colon becomes inflamed, leading to all sorts of excretory and digestive system problems like bloody diarrhea, painful gas and bloating.  Many medicinal treatments exist for ulcerative colitis, but they’re very expensive and often loaded with side-effects (e.g. common long-term side effects from ulcerative colitis medications include acne, insomnia, weight gain, and changes in mood).

And as much of a pain ulcerative colitis is to live with (literally and figuratively), at least it’s not a deadly condition, unlike colon cancer.  While colon cancer mortality rates have dropped, it still has a fairly high five-year mortality rate (about 40 percent).

But with the help of antioxidants, the colon cancer mortality rate can come down even further.

The researchers of the antioxidant study supplied approximately 400 participants with either a placebo or a super-duper antioxidant supplement.  It was “super-duper” because it contained a veritable treasure trove of antioxidants, including vitamin E, vitamin A, vitamin C, and zinc.  All the participants had a history of cancerous polyp development (all of whom had them removed via surgery).

After supplementing with these antioxidants for a short time, the researchers found that it paid dividends almost immediately; the development of cancerous colon polyps reduced by 40 percent compared to the placebo group.  What’s more, this diminishment in polyp development continued for 13 years, the extent of time the researchers devoted to follow-up.

The study was conducted by researchers from Genoa, Italy’s National Institute for Cancer Research.

Now, I’m sure you’re wondering why the heck I brought up ulcerative colitis when the study’s findings found it to be effective in cancerous polyp development in the colon.  Well, besides the fact that ulcerative colitis is a condition that concerns the colon, it’s a condition that also increases the risk for colon cancer development.

People with and without ulcerative colitis should be getting plenty of antioxidants through their diet, but there are other supplements you can take both to prevent and treat ulcerative colitis.  Vitamin K—one of two fat-soluble vitamins not supplied to the participants—has been shown to helps heal the lining of the colon.  You can dose with vitamin K directly or get it from rich vitamin K herbal sources like alfalfa.  Being deficient in vitamin K is a natural side-effect of ulcerative colitis.

Something else that’s deficient in people with ulcerative colitis is iron.  Iron is traditionally found in meat sources, but vegetables and legume sources like spinach and chickpeas are good ways to increase levels of iron in the blood.

Sources:
Balch, Phyllis A. “Prescription for Nutritional Healing.” 4th Ed. 2006. New York: Avery
nutraingredients.com
ezinearticles.com
ehealthmd.com
coloncancer

Quitting Smoking Bears Fruit for Asthmatics, Especially

If you have asthma and smoke, you can reverse the damage it's causing to your lungs by quitting now.

Generally speaking, when people make bad choices they tend to adversely affect the person making those choices more than anyone else.  But that’s not the case with smoking.  Smoking is a bad choice that adversely affects the health of the people around them almost as much as it does the smoker.  Some would say even more so.

There is no better example of this than with people who have asthma.  Cigar and cigarette smoke is the leading cause of asthma attacks, thanks to the very thing that makes cigarettes so deadly to our health: tobacco.

When people smoke and blow out those noxious fumes into the air, they don’t just disappear.  They all go somewhere, most of them winding up in the lungs of passers-by.  And if one of those passers-by happens to have asthma—and there’s a one in 15 chance that they do—it’s an asthma attack waiting to happen.  Because when tobacco smoke enters the lungs, it severely hampers its every day functioning capability.  How?  By damaging hair-like structures on the walls of the lungs (called cilia) that keep dirt and dust from going any farther.  So instead of sweeping dust molecules away as they normally would, the particles gather and gather until the asthmatic has a difficult time breathing, thus triggering an asthma attack.

So as bad as secondhand smoke is for non-smoking asthmatics, how devastating must it be for smoking asthmatics?  Pretty dang devastating, because each and every puff they take exacerbates the damage that’s already there as a result of their asthma.

But there may be hope for them.  As research from the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine indicates, the damage smoking does to the lungs of asthmatics can be reversed if they snuff the puff.

Researchers from the University of Groningen in the Netherlands recruited about 150 patients and assessed the “structural integrity,” for lack of a better word, of their lungs.  Most of them had never smoked before (66 of them), a little less than 50 of them were ex-smokers and about 35 of them still smoked.

Through bronchial biopsies and the administering of questionnaires that gauged their asthmatic symptoms, they found that the smokers’ lungs were far different from everyone else’s, both in phlegm production and the lining of their lungs.  For the smokers, the epithelial lining of their lungs was much thicker and they produced a whole heck of a lot more phlegm. This explains why smoking tends to exacerbate asthmatic symptoms, because there’s far less room for air to roam freely, combined with the blockage from the excessive amounts of phlegm.

As for the non-smokers and ex-smokers, logic would suggest that the non-smokers had the healthiest of lungs.  But surprisingly, there was no statistically significant difference in their epithelial lining and phlegm production compared to the non-smokers.

Reporting on the findings, the study’s lead author Dr. Martine Broekema said, “This study shows again how important smoking cessation is for pulmonary health, and this appears to be especially true for asthmatic patients.”

Broekema went on to say how the findings suggest that smoking can reverse the damage cigarettes cause to the lungs of asthmatic patients.

If nothing else, this study shows that it’s never too late to quit.  And if you have asthma, this truth especially applies to you.

Sources:
sciencedaily.com
webmd.com

Utah Study Says Magnesium Does Little for Women’s Heart Health

Does new heart health research suggest magnesium isn't as important for women's health overall?

With the year of 2009 coming to a close and 2010 on the horizon, you may be wondering what the latest and greatest supplement will be come January 1.  Answer?  Magnesium.

Now, if you’re even the least bit familiar with nutrition, you know that magnesium is nothing new.  It’s been existing from time immemorial.  And besides having the atomic number 12 on the periodic table and being the eighth most abundant element in the earth’s crust, it’s an abundant element in the human body.  But unlike the earth’s crust, where it’s naturally found, magnesium is not found naturally in the body.  In other words, the only way the body gets its “magnificent magnesium” is through the food we eat and the supplements we take.

For this and other reasons, The Freedonia Group estimates that magnesium will be the top-seller in supplement sales next year (a 6.4 percent increase over last year, bringing the global supplement sales tally to $12.6 billion).

As documented here, magnesium is great for the heart.  A phalanx of studies has found magnesium helps diminish the risk of various forms of heart disease, high blood pressure, and heart attack.

But a recent study from Brigham Young University suggests magnesium may be more heart effective for men than it is for women.

The Provo, Utah based researchers reviewed six studies that analyzed magnesium’s effect on heart health for both sexes.  And while they did indeed find evidence suggesting magnesium’s magnificence for men when it comes to preventing coronary heart disease, the evidence wasn’t as convincing for women.

Writing matter-of-factly in the Journal of the American Academy of Researchers, the researchers report “there was no noted decrease in the development of CHD in women who had high magnesium intake.”

Now, this may suggest that women simply don’t need magnesium as much as men do.  But as the researchers themselves note, magnesium plays multiple roles in the human body, not the least of which is the role it plays in buoying the strength of bone structure, relaxing nerves and muscles, and decreasing the risk and/or development of over two dozen conditions.  One of the conditions magnesium helps prevent that is exclusive to women is called pre-eclampsia.

Pre-eclampsia is diagnosed in pregnant women when their blood pressure is elevated for at least 20 weeks.  Of course, high blood pressure is serious for any person young or old, male or female, but it’s particularly dangerous for pregnant women, as it can affect the development (and life) of her baby.

Translation:  While magnesium is more important for men, it remains a super supplement for women.  Men are recommended to get at least 420 milligrams of magnesium every day, while recommendations for women are 320 milligrams.

So with the coming of the New Year, ladies, jump aboard the magnesium bandwagon and make 2010 the Year of the Smoothie (i.e., the nickname for magnesium as it naturally “soothes” the muscles).

Sources:
webelements.com
mayoclinic.com
whfoods.com
nutraingredients.com

Study:  Sleep Apnea Episodes Halved through Weight Loss

British Medical Journal reports on the significant tie between diminishing sleep apnea episodes and losing weight.

All of us have trouble sleeping now and then.  Whether it’s due to stress, an uncomfortable bed, thoughts you can’t get out of your head, or a disturbing conversation where things were better left unsaid, common but frustrating experiences cause us to wake up several times a night.

But imagine waking up not several times a night, but hundreds of times a night.  Because if you’re one of the approximately 20 million people in America with sleep apnea, this is your life in a nutshell.

Sleep apnea is different from other sleep conditions in that it seems like the person who has it is sleeping fine.  In fact, at various point in the night, their sleep can be reminiscent of the dead – literally.  They’ll stop breathing for minutes at a time, waking up gasping for breath.

If this sounds serious, it is.  And if it sounds scary, it is.  People have been known to die from sleep apnea.

Besides the obvious side effects associated with sleep apnea—like difficulty staying asleep, excessive sleepiness during the day because of the lack of sleep during the night—sleep apnea has long term health consequences as well.  Because of the intermittent cessations in breathing, high blood pressure is a common trait.  And with high blood pressure carries the added risks of stroke and heart disease.

Treatments for sleep apnea are both invasive and non-invasive, ranging from surgery on the nose or throat, oral appliances that allow for a greater airway passage or masks that open the nasal passages.  And while these treatments have worked to varying degrees and extents, the most cost-effective way of treating sleep apnea may be to lose weight.

According to a study published in the British Medical Journal and conducted by researchers from the Karolinska Institute, people who lost weight cut their sleep apnea episodes almost in half compared to the control group.

Here’s how the study went down:  All of the participants used a therapy that’s very commonly used in people with sleep apnea called Continuous Positive Airway Pressure, or CPAP.  This is where a mask is placed over the nose during sleep which allows for a greater airflow (gentle, but greater), hopefully diminishing the snoring and breathing cessation episodes.

Both of the groups in the study used CPAP (pronounced see-pap), but only one of the groups went through an intense program that had them lose weight.

The researchers believe that the combination of CPAP and the participants’ rigorous weight loss program (an average of 41 pounds was lost) decreased the number of sleep apnea incidents.  They really emphasized the importance of the weight loss because the drop in the number of incidents was so significant for the weight loss group compared to the CPAP-only group.

As propitious as these findings are, there are some limitations to how far they can be generalized to the population at large.  For example, this is only the second study that’s addressed the link between weight and sleep apnea.  And while both studies have found losing weight affects the incidence level of sleep apnea, this most recent study only looked at men (65 in total).  Further, it was only done on people who were obese (i.e., a BMI index level over 30).

If you think you may have sleep apnea, there are some things you can do to self-diagnose.  For example, people with sleep apnea almost always awake with a dry mouth, are excessively sleepy throughout the day (to the point of falling asleep at the dinner table) and have headaches upon awakening in the morning.  If these symptoms sound familiar, have someone else observe you while you sleep to determine definitively if it is indeed sleep apnea.  For example, have them see if you wake up excessively (at least 12 times); if you stop breathing for at least 10 seconds during each apnea episode; and count the number of episodes there are per hour (five or more is indicative of sleep apnea).

Sources:
Balch, Phyllis A.  “Prescription for Nutritional Healing.”  Fourth Ed.  New York:  Avery, 2006.
sciencedaily.com
mayoclinic.com

People with Runner’s Knee Report Greater Improvements with Light Exercise over Rest

Could the advice to "stay off that knee" for knee pain be hurting more than helping? Researchers think so.

Exercise carries a risk of injury.  No two ways about it.  And if you injure yourself in, say, the knee area—one of the more common injuries for runners and joggers alike—the typical advice is to stay off the knee and stay out of the gym.  After all, if you want something to heal, you have to give it the time to rest, right?

But a new study in the British Medical Journal is turning this conventional wisdom on its head, with a finding that certainly seems counterintuitive.  According to their results, a better way to solve knee pain is not by resting but by exercising.

The researchers discovered this somewhat surprising finding after recruiting 131 people with a condition called Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome, or PFPS.  PFPS is actually a fairly common knee problem that is characterized by constant pain around the knee cap and is something runners often complain of (that’s probably the reason why PFPS is also known as Runner’s Knee).

Sixty-five of the participants were given detailed information on how to exercise properly and in ways that would cause as little pain as possible in the course of their exercise regimen.  The remaining 66 did some exercises, but for the most part, they rested their knee and performed very few exercises.

To gauge whether or not their knee pain improved, the participants were supplied with a series of questions that enabled them to accurately determine how much (or how little) the exercise or rest was affecting their knee health.  They took these assessments at the start of the study, at the three-month mark and at the study’s conclusion, or after one year.

While there wasn’t universal improvement with one treatment over the other, exercising was deemed a better treatment because, well, more people reported improvements compared to prolonged periods of rest.  For instance, at the three-month mark, 42 percent of the exercisers reported reduced pain compared to the 35 percent that felt better after resting.  And at the 12-month mark, an overwhelming majority of the exercisers reported reduced pain (62 percent) versus the bear majority that felt better after resting (51 percent).

Now it goes without saying—but I’ll say it anyway—that if your knee pain is such that you can’t bear standing without writhing in agony, then by all means DON’T EXERCISE.  But if your pain is similar to the pain felt by people with Runner’s Knee (e.g., pain in the knee cap after sitting for prolonged periods of time, pain when running downhill or walking down stairways), then light amounts of exercise may be just what the doctor ordered.

As always, you should consult a physical therapist about what exercises would be best for you, but I’m willing to bet that he or she will advise you do some stretching and strengthening exercises.  Because Runner’s Knee is often a function of weak quadriceps muscles, some of the exercise he or she will likely recommend include isometrics, straight leg lifts, as well has hip adductor and abductor exercises.

He or she may also suggest you purchase a different kind of shoe; people with Runner’s Knee often overpronate when they run and certain shoes can help to minimize that tendency.

Sources:
drpribut.com
familydoctor.org
sciencedaily.com
medicalnewstoday.com