I’ve been running regularly for a good many years now. While I like to run outside, I traditionally run on a treadmill, hoping that the soft landing will supplant any potential damage done to my knees if I were to run everyday on the hard pavement.  While I always see myself exercising regularly, I must
admit that I’ve been somewhat concerned about what effect running for so long will have on my knees, perhaps rendering me disabled by the time I reach my senior years.

But according to new research on the topic, I need not fret.

The benefits of exercise are well documented.  That’s not in dispute.  But when researchers began investigating what effect regular running would do on the joints of those 50 and older, many who were aware of the study had a sneaking suspicion that there’d be a rise in the number of orthopedic injuries and a general increase in limited physical ability.  Their suspicions proved to be largely off-based.

The researchers that actually conducted the study began investigating the impact of running on people over the age of 50 back in 1984 – a time when seeing runners on the street wasn’t exactly commonplace.  The study’s lead researcher, Dr. James Fries from the Stanford University School of Medicine, went against what was then the convention wisdom, more exercise among older adults would increase disability.  His against-the-tide mentality proved prophetic.

Several years after the study was initiated, Fries had all 538 participants fill out questionnaires, detailing what their exercise habits were at the time and if they had any trouble performing daily tasks, like walking, grabbing, lifting and getting in and out of a chair.  When Fries compared the results of the running crop to those among the sample that did not run regularly at the start of the study, the non-runners encountered disability much earlier in life when compared to the runners and when they encountered disability.  And it wasn’t just a year or two.  On average, initial sign of disability among non-runners was 16 years prior to the runners’ initial sign of disability.

But the benefits of running were not relegated to increased physicality as one ages.  When researchers looked at the death records of those that participated in the study, then looked at whether or not those that died were runners or non-runners, 34 percent of the non-runners had died.  Among the runners?  Only 15 percent!

These findings did substantiate Fries’ initial hypothesis – that physical activity such as running would consolidate the amount of time disability occupies one’s life.  But even he was surprised by just how big of a role running played in sustaining physicality and life in general.

As the researchers note, this study should not suggest that running is the fundamental aspect to extending life.  It does in part, but it’s just as likely that the people that ran regularly also had eating habits that were beneficial to extending life and physicality.  Further, at some point in life, the body breaks down and can’t do what it once did.  Researchers found this to be the case among the runners, as the average amount of time spent running diminished significantly after 21 years – an average of almost 70 percent less.  But the point is living as healthy a life for as long as possible.  And as the researcher’s study suggests – a study published in the August 2008 issue of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine – running can keep one’s life running on full.

When people from other countries decide to immigrate to America – the most prosperous and opportunity-filled country in the world – they take a portion of their country life along with them. Whether it’s their language, their societal norms or their average diet, America has a splash of every culture mixed in to its proverbial melting pot.  But according to a new study, some immigrants – as well as those native to America but with lineage ties to foreign countries – aren’t adopting their native country’s dietary norms into their lives while in America. Allow me to elaborate…

According to a study published in the American Journal of Cardiology, the prevalence of atherosclerosis among middle-aged men from Japan, middle-aged men from America and Japanese-American middle aged men is decidedly different.  The researchers found that Americans and Japanese Americans are suffering from atherosclerosis in far greater numbers than men in Japan.  Why?  They think it has everything to do with the amount of fish that’s eaten in Japan compared to here in the States.

When the researchers began their study, they enlisted the help of random participants, but all were from certain areas of the world and with certain ethnicities.  For example, while 868 participants took part in the study, about 280 of them were from a town in Japan called Kusatsu, another 281 participants recruited were all fourth generation Japanese Americans from Honolulu, Hawaii, and 306 participants were from towns in and around Pittsburgh Steeler country, Allegheny County.

The researchers found that when they analyzed the participants’ blood samples, the Japanese men from Japan had much higher omega-3 fatty acid levels than the other men – two times the amount, in fact.  Omega-3s are believed to be the antidote in preventing atherosclerosis – artery clogging material that blocks the blood vessels, often leading to stroke or heart attack.  Previous studies have elicited similar conclusions, but they were all unclear as to what attributed to the discrepancy.  After controlling for variations, the researchers believe the omega-3s found in fish is the beneficial ingredient that’s led to markedly low rates of coronary heart disease in Japan compared to America.

This study leaves an interesting question that social scientists might want to ruminate over:  What is it about America that influences Japanese Americans to abandon their home country’s love of fish (studies suggest that the Japanese eat an average of 3 oz. of fish per day, compared to the average American eating just 2 oz. of fish a week)?  Of course, many factors must be considered before this question can be answered.  But this is a question better left to the social scientists, anyway, so I’ll leave it be for now.
 
In the meantime, if you’re not a fan of fish, you can still get the benefits of its nutritional value through supplementation.  And when it comes to fish, the best aspect of it is, of course, its high omega-3 content.   You therefore want to find a good fish oil supplement to fully reap the benefits of omega-3.  There are several good options to choose from, but my favorite is Carlson’s Liquid Fish Oil.  They’re very well known and you should be able to find them in any nutritional store or vitamin shop near you or online.  Whether it’s in liquid form or soft gel form, make supplementing with Carlson’s a part of your daily routine – your heart will thank you.

Friends of mine recently traveled to the Far East and came home with a special surprise: a young toddler. As handsome and as happy as this young boy is sure to make his adoptive parents, he has an oral cleft – something that makes him highly susceptible to colds, ear infections and a host of dental problems.  If you’ve ever seen someone with an oral cleft, you know that it’s very noticeable and is something that often causes people to stare. Approximately 1 in every 700 to 1,000 birth defects in the

United States are oral clefts; that prevalence is even higher in Asian countries; for whatever reason, oral clefts frequent people with Asian heritage.

If treated early through surgery (within a year to a year and a half after birth), children can live long and healthy lives without any health complications.  But people don’t always have the means to put their child through surgery, leaving their child victim to ridicule through their childhood years and subject to way too many visits to the dentist office.
While no one thing can eliminate the risk of a birth defect like oral clefts, avoiding drinking while pregnant can reduce that risk significantly.  Particularly binge drinking.

With all that we now know about a mother’s health, it’s hard to believe that there are women out there that not just drink but binge drink while pregnant.  Yikes!  Sadly, if women binge drink in their first trimester of pregnancy, they’re twice as likely to have a baby with a cleft palette, cleft lip or both.  Researchers came to this conclusion after analyzing approximately 1,330 Norwegian women that gave birth between 1996 and 2002.  They found that the more the women binged during their pregnancy, the higher the risk of birth defect.  For example, the women that binge drank more than three times during their first trimester of pregnancy tripled the risk of their child having an oral cleft.  This of course makes sense, not only because the dangers of drinking alcohol while pregnant are well-documented, but also because a baby’s facial features are formed during the first three months of the gestation period.

Fortunately, as the researchers note, most of the world knows about the dangers of drinking while pregnant, so this data is sort of like trying to teach a major league short stop how to turn a double play – he already knows how!  But because Norway has one of the highest rates of children with oral clefts in all of Europe, clearly the message isn’t getting through.
Again, I’m not about to say why you shouldn’t drink while pregnant – I think we all know why we shouldn’t (if we don’t, we’re in serious trouble).   But this study is a testament to why binge drinking is such a dangerous activity.  If you drink at all, it should be sparingly.  Moderate levels of alcohol can bring some nutritional benefit, but this study should be clarion call to everyone that high amounts of alcohol consumption are darn near toxic.

For parents wanting to avoid spending hundreds of dollars on their kids eyes, lend me your eyes for a moment. According to new research, one of the easiest ways to keep them from having four eyes (i.e. glasses) is to keep them outside!  We know that keeping kids’ active and healthy means they need to spend more time outdoors playing and running around like we used to do at their age. But eye health is another important reason for keeping them out of the house (to say nothing of your own sanity).

Remember how after spending an hour or two outside on a sunny day you would go inside where it was darker and everything was sort of blurry?  This was due to the eyes’ rods and cones adjusting to the sudden differences in light.  Researchers believe it is the eyes exposure to the light from the sun that releases retinal dopamine, which blocks the eyes from growing.  The growth of the eyes causes them to experience short-sightedness, or myopia, which leads to a lifetime of one of two things:  (1) glasses or (2) squinting (pick your poison).  Not that there’s anything wrong with glasses, but I think most people would rather be glasses-free than having to wear them 24/7 to be able to see clearly.

Here’s how the researchers came to their conclusions regarding sunlight and kids’ eye health.  First off, they targeted their research to certain segments of children, namely 12-year-olds and 6-year-olds (approximately 13 percent and 1 percent of whom were myopic, respectively).  While they didn’t find sunlight played much of an impact on eye health in 6-year-olds – likely because their eyes are still in the growth stage – they found that sunlight impacted 12-year-olds’ eyesight in preventing myopia.

When researchers figured out how much time each respective 12-year-old spent outside, they found some interesting correlations, revolving around how much time they spent outside on average.  For instance, among those children that spent approximately three hours of their day outside, they were much less likely to have problems with myopia.  Among those with myopia, however, they were typically those who spent an average of 1 ½ hours outside each day.  What’s more, when close-up tasks were taken into account – i.e. those activities that require the eyes to be close to that which is being done, like reading, using the computer, watching the television at close range or playing video games – they were three times more likely than those children who spent more time outdoors and did comparatively little close-up activity.  The association between myopia and close-up activity was among those who spent an average of three hours per day doing shortsighted activities. 

The research has since been published in the journal Ophthalmology and was conducted by researchers from the University of Sydney in Australia (an institution that ranks in as among the top 25 biomedical universities in the world, according to Britain’s Higher Education Supplement).

Now, will outdoor activity save your young ones’ eyes for the rest of their lives?  Probably not.  After all, nearly half of all Americans today have some kind of eye problem, the most prevalent ones being myopia or astigmatism.  But preserving their eyesight for as long as possible should be a priority for all parents.  It starts by making sure their eating healthy (see past article on eye health, titled “Bright ‘Eye-dea”) and enjoying the outdoors.

Well, you probably didn’t need another reason to eat fish, but I’ll give you another one anyway. A new study says that eating fatty fish like salmon, mackerel and tuna as little as two times a week significantly decreases the chances of suffering from a silent stroke, while significantly increasing one’s brain capacity.   The only caveat? Make sure it isn’t fried. I’ll get into why later. First off, the study was conducted by researchers from

Finland at the University of Kuopio in Eastern Finland (for those of you who may not be familiar with where, exactly, the university is situated in the northern European country). It looked at approximately 3600 men and women, all of whom were over 65 years of age. At the study’s outset, researchers asked the participants to fill out questionnaires that asked them what their average diet was like and how much seafood they tended to eat in a given week. They then scanned the brains of the participants to see what effect their diets had in their brain formation and anything else they might be able to glean from the brain scans. The participants had another brain scan done five years after the first.

Based on the participants’ responses to the questionnaires and the results from the brain scans, researchers found that those who ate salmon and the like on a regular basis revealed brain scans to be far healthier than those who ate fatty fish in limited quantities or not at all.  And the fattier the fish, the better (how often can you say that?).

For example, the participants that ate fatty fish once a week had a 13 percent reduced risk of developing brain lesions.  But that reduced risk doubled if fatty fish was eaten three or more times per week – to 26 percent. 

These brain lesions often lead to silent brain infarction, or what is more commonly referred to as “silent” stroke.  Adding “silent” to silent stroke is appropriate because when someone suffers a silent stroke, the effects are not seen.  Those that suffer from a stroke typically display symptoms like slurred speech, paralysis, vision problems, weakness or an inability to move freely on one side of the body.  Such symptoms aren’t apparent in silent stroke sufferers, but the damage done to the brain is the same.  This is why silent stroke sufferers often don’t realize it unless they’ve undergone a brain scan.

However old you are, my hope is that you already like the taste of fish like salmon, mackerel and trout; this study only gives more reason to keep eating it and on a regular basis.  But for those of you who don’t like its taste and cover it up by eating it fried, I’m afraid you don’t get the same benefits of it as those who eat it baked or broiled.  According to the researchers, the effects of preventing the aforementioned brain lesions – lesions that not only lead to silent brain strokes but an early onset of dementia-related diseases like Alzheimer’s – were restricted to those that ate baked or broiled fish regularly, not regular fried fish eaters.

Exactly why this is the case is grounds further research, but you can probably guess for yourself why this is the case.  Other than the fact that fried foods are astronomically higher in calories and saturated fat, they’re also cooked at an extremely high temperature, sapping them of their nutrient value. 

You might also be aware of the study that reveals how even the exposure to fried cooking oil increases your chances of developing cancer.  According to the 2006 study done by the Royal Society of Chemistry, people regularly exposed to the chemicals and particles released into the air when using vegetable oils to fry food have a 1 in 100 chance of developing cancer! 

Fried food certainly tastes good, but you could fry woodchips and they would taste good.  In other words, frying grants no nutritional value, it only makes something – anything – taste better.  That may be fine in the micro, as your meal will taste good, but in the macro, it’s doing more harm than good.

In the meantime, do your brain a favor and eat more fish – so long as it’s baked or broiled.

The Archives of Internal Medicine recently published a study in which Vitamin C was used as a preventative measure against Type 2 diabetes. The study was performed by the Institute of Metabolic Science at Addenbrooke’s Hospital in England. Its focus was of middle-aged and older participants and how Vitamin C would affect their risk through the consumption of a diet high in fruits and vegetables, which are full of the important nutrient.

The researchers gathered 21,831 participants between the ages of forty and seventy-five.  The men and women were all given a clean bill of health after being asked to divulge detailed information regarding both their medical history and their personal lifestyle choices.  Blood samples were also taken in order to determine their Vitamin C levels at the beginning of the study. Then they were all asked to simply live their lives with the addition of a Vitamin C filled diet in order to possibly prevent the development of Type 2 diabetes.

The findings showed that out of the massive number of participants only 423 men and 312 women were diagnoses with Type 2 diabetes, which is 3.2 percent.  The researchers concluded that one would be 62 percent less likely to risk getting the disease if they maintained high levels of Vitamin C than someone only getting very small amounts in their diet.

The team believes this study to be solid enough for “persuasive evidence of a beneficial effect of Vitamin C and fruit and vegetable intake on diabetes risk.”  In a society where unhealthy and processed foods are a staple to the overall diet, it is important to truly look at this study and others like it.  Maintaining a healthy diet has been proven to provide many benefits regarding health and yet the population chooses to casually ignore it so they can feel better about “super sizing” their already massive fast food orders.  

If we could just learn to pick up an apple instead of a cookie, we would all reap the benefits.  Vitamin C filled foods do not only help with Type 2 diabetes, but also protects the body from heart disease and cancer, holds bone cells together, and maintains both healthy gums and the immune system.  All these life extending benefits are so easily gained through a better diet and lifestyle choices.

Among the unfortunate slew of diseases that tend to be prominent in the elderly populace is the heart rhythm abnormality, atrial fibrillation. It is the most common irregularity regarding heart rhythm in which the heart’s two upper chambers twitch rather than the expected steady beat. The pooling of blood that can occur causes harmful clots that can make their way to the heart or brain, which could result in a stroke. It can also cause heart palpitations, shortness of breath,

and the general feeling of weakness. Boston researchers at Brigham and Women’s Hospital set out to find a way in which those in the sixty-five–years and older category could minimize their risk and published their findings in the journal Circulation.

The fact that the team decided to focus on seniors was significant in itself.  As the study’s lead author and cardiologist, Dr. Dariush Mozaffarian pointed out, “Prior studies have looked at atrial fibrillation in young and middle-aged and generally healthy people.”  That is to say that atrial fibrillation was discovered to take place within younger patients who maintained a vigorous exercise regime.  However, Mozaffarian believes that regardless of this fact it is necessary to observe this abnormality in the elderly.  “The vast majority of atrial fibrillation occurs later in life. After 65, about one in five people develops atrial fibrillation over 10 years,” he said.

To back up his statement, Mozaffarian and his colleagues gathered 5, 446 participants, who averaged around the age of seventy-three.  Studying their daily routines and habits lead the team to an important link in the development of atrial fibrillation: exercise.

Of course there is no suggestion that those in their seventies and eighties should start going out to pump insane amounts of iron or run marathons.  However, light exercise could be a key way to lower their risk.  The study showed that those walking five to eleven blocks per week had a twenty-two percent decrease in incidence than those walking less.  Furthermore, there was a twenty-four percent decrease in those walking twelve to twenty-three blocks per week, a thirty-three percent decrease with those walking twenty-four to fifty-nine blocks, and finally an impressive forty-four percent decrease with those walking over sixty blocks. 

“No one has looked at exercise and atrial fibrillation in these older people,” Mozaffarian said, regarding his study. “We found that light to moderate exercise, such as walking 10 blocks a week, was associated with a lower incidence of atrial fibrillation.”  

To take the work done at Brigham and Women’s Hospital one step further, Dr. Jose A. Joglar of the University of Texas started his own study in order to determine the effects of exercise in those already suffering from atrial fibrillation.  Joglar has ten participants in their seventies doing forty-five minutes of aerobic exercise per day a few days per week in order to gauge how it helps or hinders atrial fibrillation.  Although the trial is still ongoing, Joglar reports that “preliminary data appears to be that they feel better and function better.”

Regardless of its benefits to atrial fibrillation, the older population should still be participating in light exercise.  It is known to help in controlling blood pressure and weight and keeps one feeling young and energetic.

	Paul Thornalley, professor at the University of Warwick and several of his colleagues were determined to find a way to mend the damage done to heart blood vessels in diabetes cases. These defective blood vessels are swarming with three times the normal amount of oxidative molecules called Reactive Oxygen Species, which makes the risk of a diabetes patient
developing heart disease or a stroke five times more likely than someone in good health. As was posted on the online journal Diabetes, broccoli was the researchers’ big answer.

Former studies had proven that consuming a large amount of vegetables, like broccoli was a good option for bypassing heart disease or stroke, but Thornalley and his fellow researchers wanted to know the reasoning behind this.  Their theory was linked to the sulforaphane found within vegetables, which is a know activator of nrf2, a protein that helps increase antioxidants as well as protective and metabolic enzymes.

To test this, they cultured human microvascular HMEC-1 endothelial cells.  Some were low in glucose concentrations and others were high (3 and 30 mMole, respectively).  They analyzed the effects of adding sulforaphane to the mix in order to determine if the activation of nrf2 could prevent any damage to the heart blood vessels or have any result on the Reactive Oxygen Species molecules.

Based on the results, the researchers wrote, “Activation of nrf2 may prevent biochemical dysfunction and related functional responses of endothelial cells induced by hyperglycemia in which increased expression of transketolase has a pivotal role.”  The transketolase in their statement refers to an enzyme that converts harmful glucose byproducts so that they can be safely removed from the body.

In the study, the sulforaphane was able to double the amount of nfr2 typically activated, which in turn doubled the amount of antioxidants and enzymes.  The nfr2 itself reduced Reactive Oxygen Species molecules and prevented the increase of them by an impressive seventy-three percent. 

Regarding their findings, Thornalley said, “[The study] Suggests that compounds such as sulforaphane from broccoli may help counter processes linked to the development of vascular disease in diabetes.”

Although further studies will have to be done with human volunteers suffering from diabetes, even healthy skeptics see the importance of the work done at the University of Warwick.  Diabetes UK charity director of research, Dr Iain Frame said, “Professor Thornalley and his team have identified a potentially important substance that may protect and repair blood vessels from the damaging effects of diabetes.” 

Even the American Diabetes Association cites vegetables like broccoli as a good option for those with the disease.  They suggest eating three servings a day and even compiled a list of helpful tips in order to implore patients to heed their advice. 

Should further studies be conducted and people start taking their mothers’ old warnings to finish the vegetables from their plate, then perhaps the devastating effects of diabetes to the heart can be prevented.

	The suffering and horrors associated with cancer is not due to just merely the disease itself. Chemotherapy pumps drugs into the body and leaves behind the side effects of general pain, nausea and vomiting, memory and hair loss and the depression of the immune system. Researchers at the National Institutes of Health published an alternative treatment
suggestion in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Through experimentation they came to find that the injecting of Vitamin C should be looked at as a possibility for cancer patients.

Although the idea of orally taking Vitamin C, or ascorbate to treat cancer was thrown out of the window about thirty years ago, Mark Levine, the chief of the Molecular and Clinical Nutrition Section of the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and his team put a new spin on the old argument.  Since the body is able to regulate the amount of Vitamin C it gets when ingested, the researchers turned to injections.

Mice were injected with forty-three cancer lines and five normal cell lines.  Additionally they were given doses of Vitamin C injections.  While studying the cancer lines, it was discovered that there was an anti-cancer effect in seventy-five percent of them.  The normal cells were not affected negatively by the injections.  Those involved in the study found that “in immune-deficient mice with rapidly spreading ovarian, pancreatic, and glioblastoma (brain) tumors … the ascorbate injections reduced tumor growth and weight by 41 to 53 percent.”  Based on this study they say that there is solid evidence to believe that “these high ascorbate concentrations could be achieved in people.”

This idea was tested a few years back in a study published in the Canadian Association’s Medical Journal.  In it three cancer patients were given large doses of Vitamin C and all three benefited.  A man of forty-nine refused the traditional treatments of chemotherapy and radiology after being diagnosed with terminal bladder cancer in 1996.  Instead he opted for infusions of Vitamin C and was still alive and even cancer-free when the study was published in 2006.

Similarly, the other two participants were also successful in their alternative treatments.  A sixty-six-year-old woman was diagnosed with aggressive lymphoma in 1995.  Another woman of fifty-one was given the tragic news of kidney cancer that spread up to her lungs in 1995.  Both women are still alive, the latter having a clean X-ray only two years after her diagnosis.

These studies provide a strong plausibility for Vitamin C as a weapon against cancerous growths without any of the painful side effects found with chemotherapy.  With the desire of more studies to come out of this research there is hope it can be proven without a shadow of a doubt.

	A report in the Clinical Journal of Sports Medicine is suggesting an alternative method of treatment for those suffering from chronic migraines. Researchers claim a routine of exercise and relaxation will significantly improve the intensity of migraine pain.   Martin Kopp, MD and his team at Innsbrook Medical University chose thirty women who were also
migraine patients to participate in their study. They were split into two groups; half were asked to continue on with their normal treatments while the rest were given a new exercise routine to follow. Twice a week for forty-five minutes each they were to do aerobic exercise and then afterwards were told to do fifteen minutes worth of muscle relaxation.

The study lasted six weeks.  The women who were involved in the exercise/relaxation method yielded positive results.  Not only did they report to have had less migraine pain than the other women, but also claimed to have less depressed symptoms.  Kopp and his team claim the logic behind these results lies with the self-efficacy one feels during physical activity and other means of coping that are not medicine based. 

Another study was done in Austria.  Researchers there used fifteen migraine suffers and added a similar regime of exercise and relaxation to care for their pain.  The results there were the same, with an overall report of the improvement of intensity.  Although neither study proves that this method can prevent getting migraines once and for all, it does suggest a very valid treatment of the pain that does not involve the intake of drugs.

In addition to Koop’s research, Coenzyme Q₁₀ may also be a helpful option, but this time in the prevention of migraines.  It is an enzyme that is naturally found within mitochondria and plays an essential part in producing energy.  It is known to reduce inflammation, lower high blood pressure and cholesterol and reduce the impairment caused by Parkinson’s disease. 

Research done in 2002 also cites CoQ₁₀ as a way to help prevent migraines.  A reported sixty-one percent of participants treated with the enzyme had fifty percent fewer migraine headaches at the end of one month’s time.  It is an effective alternative to drugs due to the belief that migraines are caused by cells’ inability to produce energy.  As previously mentioned CoQ₁₀ is an energy producer in cells.