Healthy Life Newsletter, July 2020
D Stands for Diabetes Defense
If you’re looking for a single vitamin to help you “take on the world,” it just might be vitamin D. That’s because vitamin D has been associated in numerous research trials with a long list of potential health benefits.
We’re talking immune-system support, bone health, blood pressure regulation, and wide-scale disease prevention, including everything from rheumatoid arthritis to multiple sclerosis, to various cancers (prostate, colon, etc.).
And then there’s diabetes, specifically type 2 diabetes, which affects nearly 10 percent of U.S. adults – and those are just the diagnosed cases. Yes, vitamin D can also protect against diabetes, and a new study adds to the favorable evidence.
Because type 2 diabetes manifests in the body’s inability to effectively use insulin (which is produced in the pancreas), the pancreas is continually producing it to meet the body’s demand to reduce blood glucose levels. Eventually, it is unable to do so and blood sugar levels stay perpetually high: diabetes. Researchers in the new study suggest maintaining vitamin D receptor levels in pancreatic cells could help counteract pancreatic cell damage caused by type 2 diabetes.
They came to this conclusion after finding that mice with both type 1 and type 2 diabetes had lower expression of vitamin D receptors in the pancreas; while at the same time, overexpression of vitamin D receptors appeared to counteract the disease. In other words, more vitamin D receptors = lower risk of diabetes; fewer vitamin D receptors = higher risk of diabetes. Talk to your doctor about the multiple health benefits of vitamin D and discuss whether supplementation (and in what amounts) would be wise for you. (If you’re not getting consistent exposure to sunlight or eating a ton of food high in vitamin D, it’s worth testing to find out if you’re deficient or near-deficient, as millions of Americans are.)
campaign.r20.constantcontact.com
Dr. Manson of Harvard Medical School and Lead Researcher: “Vitamin D May Be More Important Now than Ever”
“Vitamin D may be even more important now than ever,” says Dr. JoAnn Manson, MD, DrPH, of Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women’s Hospital. Dr. Manson was the lead researcher and author of the VITAL trial and its resulting publications, which focused on the effects of supplemental vitamin D and omega-3s on specific health outcomes, mainly cancer and cardiovascular health. Now, with the current coronavirus epidemic, she is urging everyone to do what they can to avoid vitamin D deficiency, through sun exposure and supplements, due to emerging and growing evidence that vitamin D status may be related to the risk of developing COVID-19 disease and to its severity.
It is known that vitamin D is important to the immune system, for several different reasons, and that it plays a major role in reducing inflammation and regulating cytokine storm events such as those resulting from COVID-19. Additional studies involving cell cultures have documented vitamin D’s effect on respiratory cell function, and there is much existing evidence that patients with respiratory infections tend to have lower vitamin D levels.
Due to the evidence of the association between vitamin D deficiency and COVID-19 disease and severity, all are encouraged to help reduce their risk of vitamin D deficiency by getting regular outdoor sunshine exposure in order to make vitamin D in the skin - as always, be sure not to burn. Also, being physically active while outdoors may boost overall health, and can be done while maintaining social distancing.
Dr. Manson is planning a randomized clinical trial of vitamin D supplementation on reducing the risk and severity of COVID-19. In the meantime, she encourages the use of measures to reduce your risk of vitamin D deficiency, including considering a vitamin D supplement.
Your Brain Needs Positivity
We all have negative thoughts from time to time, particularly with the current chaos surrounding us. Between the coronavirus pandemic and social unrest, who wouldn’t let a little negativity – or a lot – creep into their brain? It’s a completely natural reaction to what’s been going on lately.
Here’s why too many negative thoughts can be bad for your brain, whether it’s during a pandemic or your “normal,” day-to-day existence.
Research suggests repetitive negative thinking, particularly as we age, can increase the risk for cognitive decline, including Alzheimer’s disease.
In the study, published in Alzheimer’s & Dementia, the official journal of the Alzheimer’s Association, researchers evaluated nearly 300 older adults. Subjects, each of whom had previously undergone a cognitive assessment brain scan, completed questionnaires that asked about repetitive negative thoughts, anxiety and depression. Repetitive negative thoughts were associated with declines in global cognition, delayed memory, and increased deposition of specific proteins in the brain that have been linked to the development of Alzheimer’s disease.
We can’t always control a negative thought from entering our brain, but we can certainly take steps to reduce the likelihood that one will “pop up” – and reduce the chances that we’ll obsess on it, creating a string of negative thoughts. Surrounding ourselves with positive, nurturing relationships; expressing our gratefulness on a daily basis; continually striving to enrich our lives by learning new skills, pursuing new hobbies, etc.; and developing a clear-cut plan of how to process a negative thought when you have one is a great start. Your brain needs positivity, so give it what it needs and reap the mental health benefits today!
A Conspiracy to Get Us to Take More Prescription Drugs?
Ready for your wake-up call to why prescription medications – and their accompanying health dangers – are an increasing part of your daily life? From the Annals of Family Medicine comes one of the most important studies to date in the effort to define and understand how drug companies are influencing both the practice of medicine and the health of patients who seek care from medical providers.
Conducted by a pair of anthropologists from Michigan State University, the study examines the impact of lower diagnostic thresholds, clinician rewards systems and the prescribing cascade on the health of patients diagnosed with diabetes and hypertension.
The authors lay the foundation for their study by noting, “Spending on prescription drugs in the Unites States has risen nearly 6-fold since 1990, reflecting substantial increases in treatment of chronic conditions and subsequent polypharmacy. As many as 45% of Americans have at least 1 diagnosed chronic condition, and 60% of the most prescribed medications were for hypertension, high cholesterol levels and diabetes. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that 11% of the US population and 40% of people older than age 60 take 5 medications or more.”
In conducting the study, the authors studied primary care clinicians and their patients over a two-year period (2009-2010), with specific emphasis on management of type 2 diabetes and hypertension, two of the most common chronic health conditions. As the study progressed, the authors realized the overwhelming prevalence of prescription drug use in managing these two conditions and thus focused on their influence more closely.
Lower Diagnostic Thresholds
Simply put, lower diagnostic thresholds mean that more people are diagnosed with a disease they didn’t previously have. The authors point to changes in the diagnosis of diabetes, hypertension and their “pre-” conditions as increasing the number of people subjected to intense prescription management, suggesting that an estimated 10 million additional people are being treated for diabetes, and an additional 22 million for hypertension, due to these lower thresholds.
In 1998, the fasting plasma glucose level that defined a person as diabetic was lowered from 140 to 126. This resulted in an additional 10.3 million people being medically defined as diabetics. The prediabetes fasting glucose level was established at 110 in 1998 and changed to 100 in 2003, resulting in many more pre-diabetics.
In 1993, the blood pressure definition for hypertension was lowered from 160/95 to 140/90 in non-diabetic patients. In 1998, the hypertension blood pressure definition for diabetics was established at 130/80, lower than that of non-diabetics. These changes resulted in an estimated 22 million additional hypertension diagnoses. The prehypertension definition was also established in 1998 at 120/80.
Rewarded to Prescribe?
Medical doctors are monitored and rewarded for keeping their patients below certain standards that stem from established guidelines. But “the committees and organizations setting the standards often have substantial pharmaceutical industry support and include many individuals with industry ties.” According to the authors, “many insurance companies assess individual clinicians on the basis of whether their patients meet these standards, often paying substantial bonuses that encourage clinicians to respond to marginal test results with aggressive use of pharmaceuticals.”
The Prescribing Cascade
Prescription drugs can have adverse health impacts on patients, producing symptoms that prompt the prescribing of additional drugs. This is particularly true for patients of clinicians who fail to recognize these adverse reactions. Two-thirds of patients “reported experiencing symptoms they attributed to their diabetes medications, hypertension medications, or both,” with several patients hospitalized because of symptoms, prompting a medication change.
In this study, 89% of the patients “reported taking multiple medications, averaging 4.8 prescriptions with more than half (51%) taking 5 or more.” In many cases, the patients were expected to continue taking these medications “permanently.”
Real People, Real Problems
One of the things that makes this paper so interesting is the approach taken by the authors. They interviewed 58 clinicians and 74 patients for about an hour each, providing insightful clinician comments and patient vignettes that are included in the study:
A 61-year-old man is taking “3 medications for hypertension, 2 for diabetes, 2 for high cholesterol levels, 1 for acid reflux, and daily doses of aspirin and ibuprofen, and uses an inhaler for chronic bronchitis, for a grand total of 11 medications. … Since starting the hypertension and diabetes medications, he has developed severe indigestion and breathing problems.”
A family practice physician stated, “I tell most new diabetics the sad news is that they’re going to be on 5 meds.”
A 54-year-old woman is “currently taking 8 prescription medications: 3 for hypertension, 2 for diabetes, 1 for high cholesterol levels, and 2 for depression. She also had 5 visits to the emergency department in 1 month for excruciating headaches before they were determined to be an adverse effect of the additional hypertension medication she had been prescribed.”
Another clinician noted, “I’ve got patients on 4 different medications and their blood pressure is still uncontrolled. We try sending them to the cardiologists, and they say, ‘Just keep adding stuff because there’s really nothing we can do about this.’ Some people whose blood pressure that we get normal again, they don’t function very well at all. I’m not sure why.”
A Chance to Change
In their concluding remarks, the authors call for a reform on how much influence the pharmaceutical industry has on the practice of medicine: “At a minimum, we urge policies excluding individuals or organizations with financial conflicts of interest from involvement with guideline-writing panels. The presumption that mere disclosure resolves such conflicts must be rejected.” They also suggest that physicians “be discouraged from seeing drug representatives.”
So, armed with this information, what’s your next step? The next time you see a drug ad on TV, think about this study. The next time your medical doctor recommends a prescription drug for your health problem, think about this study and ask if there’s a better, safer, natural way that doesn’t require medication.
One more important piece to read online at nytimes.com
How Poor Diet Contributes to Coronavirus Risk
Improving our metabolic health could help ward off future medical, economic and social calamities from whatever pathogen next comes down the pike.