Posts Tagged ‘live longer lucy’


Thursday, July 4th, 2013



(Reuters Health) – Postmenopausal women who work tend be in better health than their unemployed counterparts, according to a new study from South Korea.

Researchers found that employed postmenopausal women were about 34 percent less likely to have so-called metabolic syndrome – a collection of obesity-related conditions that raise heart disease risk – compared to unemployed women of the same age.

But one expert pointed out that it’s hard to know whether jobs make women healthy or if healthy women are just more likely to have jobs.


“You wonder if healthy women get hired and less healthy women get fired. You just don’t know,” Dr. Melissa Wellons, who was not involved with the new research, told Reuters Health.

Previous studies have found that people who work tend to do financially better and are more physically active, and that may influence their risk of metabolic syndrome – which includes high blood pressure and high cholesterol, a large waistline and insulin resistance.

Together, the risk factors that make up metabolic syndrome are linked to a heightened risk of heart attack and stroke.

Menopause may also influence a woman’s risk for metabolic syndrome, because hormone changes make women susceptible to excessive weight gain, Yonsei University’s Dr. Hee-Taik Kang and colleagues write in the journal Menopause.

For the new study, the researchers used data from 2007 through 2009 on 3,141 premenopausal Korean women and 2,115 postmenopausal women to investigate the potential link between employment status and metabolic syndrome.

pilgrim womens fashion banner image www.acbocallcentre (51)

Among postmenopausal women, whose average age was between 59 and 65 years old, about 55 percent of unemployed women met the criteria for having metabolic syndrome. That compared to about 42 percent of employed women.

There was a similar trend among premenopausal women, whose average age was about 35 years old.

About 15 percent of unemployed premenopausal women met the criteria for metabolic syndrome, compared to about 13 percent of employed women. That small difference, however, could have been due to chance.

“Several mechanisms could explain the significant relationships between employment status and (metabolic syndrome),” write the researchers.

One possible explanation, according to Kang and colleagues, is that employed postmenopausal women in their study were more active than the unemployed women.

But Wellons, an assistant professor of endocrinology at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, said it’s hard to know exactly why employed postmenopausal women are healthier and if the results would apply to women in the U.S.

“I’ve seen studies that show working women in America weigh less, but again, you just don’t know. Does work keep you busy, keep you from gaining weight, and do healthy women get hired more?” Wellons said.

“It’s an interesting observation and I hope it’s true because I’m working,” she said.

SOURCE: Menopause, online June 10, 2013


Henry Sapiecha

rainbow line


Monday, November 22nd, 2010

For preventing cancer,

medical experts have recommended that people eat five portions of vegetables and fruit each day since this is one form of prevention.  Recently, the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study revealed that, in some forms of cancer, specifically lung cancer, eating lots of fruits may not be enough – the type of fruit should also be considered.

Eating the right types of fruits, and in their right amount, can reduce the risk of lung cancer by up to 23 percent.  The study was done by researchers coming from 10 countries all over Europe and the results were published in the Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention journal.

María José Sánchez Pérez, the director of the Andalusian School of Public Health’s Granada Cancer Registry and also the study’s co-author, said that the research delves deeply into the link between lung cancer and a person’s diet.  Furthermore, she said that apart from considering the amount of fruits consumed, it is equally important to consider the variety.  Variations in the diet lower the risk of developing lung cancer, most especially among people who smoke.

Results have shown that eating eight sub-groups, or more, of vegetables slashes cancer risk by 23 percent as compared to eating lesser than four sub-groups.  Additionally, cancer risk decreases by another 4 percent for each unit that is added to the person’s diet coming from another sub-group. The researchers emphasized that an important connection was only found in people who smoke.  For every two units of varied vegetables and fruits that are added into the diet, lung cancer risk significantly plummets by up to 3 percent.  This shows that if smokers add more fruit variety into the foods that they eat, they could actually lower their risk of developing lung cancer.

The European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) is composed of 23 centres from 10 countries in Europe namely Sweden, the United Kingdom, Norway, Italy, Holland, Greece, France, Spain, Denmark and Germany, working with 500,000 Europeans as sample subjects.  41,000 of the 500,000 subjects live in Navarre, Murcia, Guipúzcoa, Granada and Asturias, which are Spanish regions.

Cancer of the lungs remains to be one of the most common types of cancer especially in developed countries.  Because of this, regardless of the study results which are deemed encouraging, Sánchez Pérez said that the most significant and effective way of ensuring the success of lung cancer prevention is to reduce the frequency of tobacco consumption among the population.

The Link between Fruits and Vegetables Consumption and Lung Cancer Affectation

Giving more variety in the consumption of fruits and vegetables is being linked to a reduced risk of developing lung cancer – specifically epidermoid carcinoma – which includes consuming two more units of vegetables and fruits, leading to a 9 percent risk reduction.  This particular effect is clearly seen among smokers, whose risk falls by 12 percent.

No significant connection was seen between the consumption of vegetables and fruits and the risk of developing cancer found in other tissues such as small cell and large cell carcinoma as well as adenocarcinoma.

Why Fruits are Good for You

Nowadays, we need as much vitamins and minerals as we can get.  The  various types of pollution that surround us each day, the longer hours we put in at work and the higher levels of stress that we experience day in and day out are enough to put a dent on our health.  Eating fruits and vegetables is the simplest way of providing the body with its much needed nutrients in order to help combat possible illnesses.

Free radicals are produced inside our bodies once it reacts with oxygen.  These molecules can cause damage inside the cells by destroying the cells’ membranes and proteins.  A damaged cell may trigger a cascade of events that would eventually lead to diseases such as cancer, cardiovascular diseases and neurological disorders such as Alzheimer’s disease. Factors such as too much alcohol consumption, smoking, overexposure to sunlight and pollution may set off the production of free radicals.

The body needs all the help that it can get – and eating fruits is the simplest thing that you can do. Here are more reasons why you should have your daily dose of fruits:

  • Fruits contain antioxidants which help neutralize free radicals inside the body.  Thus, diseases and premature aging are prevented.
  • Fruits are rich in dietary fiber – some have more amounts than others, so remember to choose wisely. Fiber helps in keeping the digestive system function efficiently. This will help the body get rid of waste and flush out toxins.  It also helps prevent bowel and colon cancer.

Additionally, eating five portions of vegetables and fruits each day has the following health benefits:

  • Reduced risk of having kidney stones
  • Reduced risk of osteoporosis
  • Reduced risk of colon, stomach and mouth cancer
  • Reduced risk of having type 2 diabetes
  • Reduced risk of having a stroke and other heart diseases

How to Increase Fruit Intake

Increasing your intake of vegetables and fruits should not be very difficult.  You just have to incorporate these in your typical eating habits:

  • Juice your fruits and vegetables. Juicing is my top recommendation for increasing your intake of fruits and vegetables.
  • Add fruits to whatever it is that you are eating.  If you are having oatmeal for breakfast, you can add blueberries, strawberries or peaches.  For yogurts or cereals, add slices of fresh fruits to make it more delicious and healthy. You may also go for banana slices.
  • During lunch, add tomatoes and lettuce to your sandwich and include grapes or a slice of melon at the side.
  • For dinner, have a salad ready and a fruit cup as well. You may also add in a vegetable-based soup.
  • You don’t have to skip dessert.  Go for healthy options such as baked apples, or a slice of ripe pear with a little bit of raw agave nectar, or a frozen sorbet topped with your favorite fruit.
  • Wash meals up with your favorite smoothie – banana, strawberry, blueberry, and more.  You see, the only limiting factor here is your imagination.
  • Sourced & published by Henry Sapiecha


Friday, August 13th, 2010

Cell reprogramming breakthrough could mend broken hearts

Heart disease remains one the biggest killers in the Western world. When a heart attack or heart failure occurs, permanent damage often results, destroying live cells and leaving the patient with irreversible scarring. Now scientists at the Gladstone Institute of Cardiovascular Disease (GICD) have discovered a new technique to create healthy beating heart cells from structural cells, opening up the possibility of regenerating damaged hearts. Read More

Received & published by Henry Sapiecha


Sunday, August 8th, 2010

Low vitamin D linked to Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease

So you’ve listened to mainstream and now you don’t even know what the sun looks like anymore.

Well, I’ve got some bad news for you — because if, like most people, you’re deficient in the sunshine vitamin, you’re also at risk for life-robbing diseases like Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s.

One new study out of England’s University of Exeter found that seniors with the lowest levels of D had a dramatically higher risk of dementia warning signs.

Researchers followed 858 seniors for six years, and found that those with less than 25 nanomoles of D per liter of blood were 60 percent more likely to experience general cognitive decline, and 31 percent more likely to start losing their abilities to plan, organize and prioritize.

That’s a road you don’t want to go down — because it ends in a nursing home, where you think every orderly is a long-dead relative and you can’t tell noon from midnight anymore.

But what’s truly bizarre about this new study in the Archives of Internal Medicine is the accompanying editorial, which is straight out of the Dark Ages. In it, Dr. Andrew Grey of the University of Auckland in New Zealand urges people NOT to take a D supplement. He also writes that most people shouldn’t even bother to have their D levels measured.

Paging Dr. Grey, there’s a reality check for you on line one: Ignorance isn’t bliss!

I wonder if this guy even bothers reading these journals. Let me help him out here, because a second new study finds that high levels of D can help save you from Parkinson’s disease.

The study in the Archives of Neurology looked at the D levels of 3,173 Finns between the ages of 50 and 79, and found that those with the most had a 65 percent lower risk of Parkinson’s than those with the least.

Meanwhile, a new report in Endocrine Today says it’s now clear beyond all doubt that vitamin D is needed by the immune, pancreas, cardiovascular, muscle and brain systems.

That’s in addition to all the other well-established benefits of vitamin D, which can help everything from your bones to your longevity. Low levels of vitamin D have also been linked to diabetes, multiple sclerosis, autism and schizophrenia

Sortced & published by Henry Sapiecha


Thursday, June 17th, 2010

Coffee Drinkers Have Slightly Lower

Death Rates, Study Finds

Science (June 17, 2008) — A new study has good news for coffee drinkers: Regular coffee drinking (up to 6 cups per day) is not associated with increased deaths in either men or women. In fact, both caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee consumption is associated with a somewhat smaller rate of death from heart disease.

“Coffee consumption has been linked to various beneficial and detrimental health effects, but data on its relation with death were lacking,” says Esther Lopez-Garcia, PhD, the study’s lead author. “Coffee consumption was not associated with a higher risk of mortality in middle-aged men and women. The possibility of a modest benefit of coffee consumption on heart disease, cancer, and other causes of death needs to be further investigated.”

Women consuming two to three cups of caffeinated coffee per day had a 25 percent lower risk of death from heart disease during the follow-up period (which lasted from 1980 to 2004 and involved 84,214 women) as compared with non-consumers, and an 18 percent lower risk of death caused by something other than cancer or heart disease as compared with non-consumers during follow-up. For men, this level of consumption was associated with neither a higher nor a lower risk of death during the follow-up period (which lasted from 1986 to 2004 and involved 41,736 men).

The researchers analyzed data of 84,214 women who had participated in the Nurses’ Health Study and 41,736 men who had participated in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study. To be in the current study, participants had to have been free of cancer and heart disease at the start of those larger studies.

The study participants completed questionnaires every two to four years that included questions about how frequently they drank coffee, other diet habits, smoking, and health conditions. The researchers then compared the frequency of death from any cause, death due to heart disease, and death due to cancer among people with different coffee-drinking habits.

Among women, 2,368 deaths were due to heart disease, 5,011 were due to cancer, and 3,716 were due to another cause. Among men, 2,049 deaths were due to heart disease, 2,491 were due to cancer, and 2,348 were due to another cause.

While accounting for other risk factors, such as body size, smoking, diet, and specific diseases, the researchers found that people who drank more coffee were less likely to die during the follow-up period. This was mainly because of lower risk for heart disease deaths among coffee drinkers.

The researchers found no association between coffee drinking and cancer deaths. These relationships did not seem to be related to caffeine because people who drank decaffeinated coffee also had lower death rates than people who did not drink coffee.

The editors of Annals of Internal Medicine caution that the design of the study does not make it certain that coffee decreases the chances of dying sooner than expected. Something else about coffee drinkers might be protecting them. And some measurement error in the assessment of coffee consumption is inevitable because estimated consumption came from self-reports.

This study was supported by National Institutes of Health research grants.

Sourced & published by Henry Sapiecha


Friday, June 11th, 2010

Genetic Secrets That Allow Tibetans

to Thrive in Thin Air Discovered

ScienceDaily (June 9, 2010) — A new study pinpoints the genetic changes that enable Tibetans to thrive at altitudes where others get sick.

In the online edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, an international team has identified a gene that allows Tibetans to live and work more than two miles above sea level without getting altitude sickness.

A previous study published May 13 in Science reported that Tibetans are genetically adapted to high altitude. Now, less than a month later, a second study by scientists from China, England, Ireland, and the United States pinpoints a particular site within the human genome — a genetic variant linked to low hemoglobin in the blood — that helps explain how Tibetans cope with low-oxygen conditions.

The study sheds light on how Tibetans, who have lived at extreme elevation for more than 10,000 years, have evolved to differ from their low-altitude ancestors.

Lower air pressure at altitude means fewer oxygen molecules for every lungful of air. “Altitude affects your thinking, your breathing, and your ability to sleep. But high-altitude natives don’t have these problems,” said co-author Cynthia Beall of Case Western Reserve University. “They’re able to live a healthy life, and they do it completely comfortably,” she said.

People who live or travel at high altitude respond to the lack of oxygen by making more hemoglobin, the oxygen-carrying component of human blood. “That’s why athletes like to train at altitude. They increase their oxygen-carrying capacity,” said Beall.

But too much hemoglobin can be a bad thing. Excessive hemoglobin is the hallmark of chronic mountain sickness, an overreaction to altitude characterized by thick and viscous blood. Tibetans maintain relatively low hemoglobin at high altitude, a trait that makes them less susceptible to the disease than other populations.

“Tibetans can live as high as 13,000 feet without the elevated hemoglobin concentrations we see in other people,” said Beall.

To pinpoint the genetic variants underlying Tibetans’ relatively low hemoglobin levels, the researchers collected blood samples from nearly 200 Tibetan villagers living in three regions high in the Himalayas. When they compared the Tibetans’ DNA with their lowland counterparts in China, their results pointed to the same culprit — a gene on chromosome 2, called EPAS1, involved in red blood cell production and hemoglobin concentration in the blood.

Originally working separately, the authors of the study first put their findings together at a March 2009 meeting at the National Evolutionary Synthesis Center in Durham, NC. “Some of us had been working on the whole of Tibetan DNA. Others were looking at small groups of genes. When we shared our findings we suddenly realized that both sets of studies pointed to the same gene — EPAS1,” said Robbins, who co-organized the meeting with Beall.

While all humans have the EPAS1 gene, Tibetans carry a special version of the gene. Over evolutionary time individuals who inherited this variant were better able to survive and passed it on to their children, until eventually it became more common in the population as a whole.

“This is the first human gene locus for which there is hard evidence for genetic selection in Tibetans,” said co-author Peter Robbins of Oxford University.

Researchers are still trying to understand how Tibetans get enough oxygen to their tissues despite low levels of oxygen in the air and bloodstream. Until then, the genetic clues uncovered so far are unlikely to be the end of the story. “There are probably many more signals to be characterized and described,” said co-author Gianpiero Cavalleri of the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland.

For those who live closer to sea level, the findings may one day help predict who is at greatest risk for altitude sickness. “Once we find these versions, tests can be developed to tell if an individual is sensitive to low-oxygen,” said co-author Changqing Zeng of the Beijing Institute of Genomics.

“Many patients, young and old, are affected by low oxygen levels in their blood — perhaps from lung disease, or heart problems. Some cope much better than others,” said co-author Hugh Montgomery, of University College London. “Studies like this are the start in helping us to understand why, and to develop new treatments.”

Sourced and published by Henry Sapiecha 11th June 2010