Ra 4 Food - Health and Nutritional Tips

The National Institute for clinical excellence – NICE – has recommended major changes round convenience & processed food.

NICE – The UK’s leading health watchdog - has challenged both the government & the food industry to take action to improve the nation’s health through diet, saying that this should no longer just be a matter for the individual consumer. In producing its report, the focus for the NICE committee – which spent two years considering the content of the report - was viewed as safeguarding the population, rather than advising the individual who may have limited options.

Klim McPherson - professor of health epidemiology at Oxford University and chairman of the NICE committee – said, “It is about busy people having a lot to do, having to make choices on the fly, making pragmatic choices on how they feed themselves and their children. Commercial organisations are very good at exploiting people who make choices on price and convenience.”

Some of the changes recommended by the report were:

• A total ban on trans fats.

• Halving the individual daily salt intake.

• Legislating if necessary to encourage manufacturers to slash the content of hidden saturated fats in all food products.

• Ensuring low fat and low salt foods are cheaper than unhealthier versions.

• Banning television adverts for high-salt and high-fat foods before the 9pm watershed, to protect children.

• Urging local councils to forbid take-aways and junk food outlets near schools.

• Bringing in the “traffic light” colour coding system to show whether a product has high, low or medium levels of salt, fat and sugar. The committee noted the regrettable decision by the EU not to support the system & urged the government to implement it via legislation.

The report met with a less than enthusiastic response from the government who claimed it was up to the individual to make healthy choices. The Food & Drink Federation claimed that the voluntary measures already taken by the industry had had a significant impact on the consumption of saturated fat, trans fat, salt & sugar.

The report was, however, supported, by the European Society of Cardiology and the British Heart Foundation. There are at least 150,000 deaths a year from cardiovascular disease, the majority through heart attack & stroke. According to Klim McPherson, “These are eminently preventable deaths.”

Simon Capewell, - professor of clinical epidemiology at Liverpool University and a public health physician - said that the changes would make economic sense too, including for example, fewer people having to give up work to be a carer. “We’re looking at well over £1bn a year in savings, not just to the NHS.”

Eating disorder charities are concerned that a marked rise in people obsessed with healthy eating may be indicative of a serious psychological condition.

Sufferers typically have strict rules around eating. Certain foods - such as sugar, salt, caffeine, gluten & dairy - are out, as are foods that contain artificial additives or may have come into contact with pesticides. But hey – that all sounds reasonable enough! Isn’t that along the lines of how many of us health conscious folk eat?

In 1996 a Californian doctor – Stephen Bratman – coined the phrase ‘Orthorexia Nervosa’ which he defined as ‘an unhealthy obsession with eating healthy food.’ Initially intended as what he termed ‘tease therapy’ for some of his patients whom he considered to be overly obsessed with diet, it has since gained significance in an arena where such an obsession has sometimes become physically & psychologically unhealthy.

The concept has encountered much challenge because of the apparent contradiction that an emphasis on healthy food can be unhealthy. However it is the obsession with healthy food that is viewed as the unhealthy aspect. Bratman points to exercise addiction as a comparison & says, ‘I never intended the expression to apply to anything other than extreme cases of over-focus, particularly where the person themselves would rather lighten up and stop thinking about it so much.’

Until relatively recently there were so few cases that the medical profession placed them under the ‘Ednos’ label – eating disorders not otherwise recognized. Now – according to experts – they constitute such a high proportion of this group that it is felt they should receive separate treatment.

Ursula Philpot, chair of the British Dietetic Association’s mental health group said, “I am definitely seeing significantly more orthorexics than just a few years ago. Other eating disorders focus on quantity of food but orthorexics can be overweight or look normal. They are solely concerned with the quality of the food they put in their bodies, refining and restricting their diets according to their personal understanding of which foods are truly ‘pure’.”

This obsession orthorexics have about what constitutes ‘good’ food & ‘bad’ food can lead to malnutrition. Eating can become so stressful that it impacts on relationships. But a characteristic of the condition is that despite these difficulties, people who suffer from it feel an exaggerated sense of ‘righteousness’

Bratman says that since writing a book on the condition he has become ‘aware of a rare, darker form of orthorexia, in which the fixation can lead to death.’ He continues, ‘There are some, now, who use “orthorexia” alone to indicate the milder obsession and “orthorexia nervosa” to refer to the dangerous type.’

So, to go back to where we started, if you want to remain in a healthy state of body & mind, yes, be conscious of what you’re eating, just try not to obsess about it!

Earlier in the month research suggested that coffee may give some protection against developing Parkinson’s disease. Now scientists have found evidence that drinking coffee may also result in a reduced risk of getting head & neck cancers.

The study, led by Mia Hashibe from the University of Utah in Salt Lake City, used studies from the International Head and Neck Cancer Epidemiology (INHANCE) consortium. The results were published online in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, a journal of the American Association for Cancer Research.

The new study looked at & analyzed data from nine previous case controlled studies of head & neck cancers. Altogether this new research considered five thousand one hundred & thirty nine cases & compared these with nine thousand & twenty eight controls.

The results indicated that people who drank more than four cups of caffeinated coffee a day had a thirty nine per cent less risk of developing cancers of the oral cavity & pharynx. However, there was no similar association when it came to developing cancer of the larynx.

The data available regarding decaffeinated coffee & tea also indicated a lack of association, though in the case of decaffeinated coffee the amount of data was limited due to both the low number of participants drinking this, & the low amounts consumed.

The researchers concluded their report by saying, “Since coffee is so widely used and there is a relatively high incidence and low survival rate of these forms of cancers, our results have important public health implications that need to be further addressed. What makes our results so unique is that we had a very large sample size, and since we combined data across many studies, we had more statistical power to detect associations between cancer and coffee.”

However the report also pointed out that no definite biological mechanism has yet been established for the potentially positive role of coffee on head & neck cancers. It refers to the fact that coffee contains phenols, some of which are known to have antioxidant properties, & others to activate enzymes that help detoxify some carcinogens.

Ed Yong, speaking on behalf of Cancer Research UK, said: “Coffee is a cocktail of hundreds of different chemicals and we don’t know which of these, if any, could affect the risk of cancer. You often only see benefits in people who drink a great deal of coffee. And studies like these rely on people with cancer remembering how much coffee they drank years ago. We now need studies that look at larger groups of initially healthy people to see if the amount of coffee they drink affects their cancer risk over time.”

There was disappointment & outrage on Wednesday as the European Parliament appeared to reject recommendations designed to promote better health among consumers, in favour of the interests of the food industry.

Consumer & health groups were dismayed at the rejection of the proposals which were the result of much research in an attempt to devise a universal & easily understood system.

BEUC – the European consumer organization – pointed out that the traffic lights system has been endorsed by consumer groups, public health organisations and doctors, and is already in use in some of Europe’s major supermarkets.

Its director general - Monique Goyens - said: “Despite being presented with a wealth of independent research confirming that the vast majority of consumers wanted the colour coding system, MEPs have mystifyingly voted against it.

“One wonders how we are to convince lawmakers that the fight against obesity and the battle to improve public health needs to start with action today, not tomorrow.

“There is no doubt that this vote is a very, very serious setback.”

Members of the food industry have lobbied intensively against colour coded labelling, claiming that such a system would ‘demonize’ many of their products.

Conservative MEP, Struan Stevenson - speaking on Wednesday about the lobbying - said that hundreds of people from the food industry had been attempting to meet with him. He said that he had had five meetings with the Italian chocolate company Ferrero Rocher alone.

He told the BBC: “The lobbyists have now penetrated the inner sanctum of the MEPs and they’re walking into our offices very often without any appointments at all. People are objecting to that and saying we should have more control about where lobbyists are allowed to go. But on this issue there are armies of them. I’ve never seen anything like it.”

Peter Hollins - chief executive of The British Heart Foundation – said that the vote went “against all the evidence”.

He said: “The European Parliament should be ashamed of putting the interests of the food lobby ahead of the health of the people they represent. Thousands of people across the UK have taken action to ask their MEPs to back traffic lights because they want help to make healthy choices.

“But the food industry has spent millions of pounds lobbying to block this improvement in food labelling. David has been no match for the industry’s Goliath.”

Before the new regulations become law, it is essential for all three parts of the European government – council, commission & parliament - to reach agreement.

Hollins said:  ”The European council and commission still have the opportunity to give this critical scheme the green light, and we will continue to fight for the health of ordinary people above the profits of the food industry.”

A new study has revealed that motorists who do not use screen wash for their windscreen wipers are at risk of contracting the potentially fatal Legionnaires ‘disease.

According to the NHS website, ‘Legionnaires’ disease is a potentially fatal lung infection (pneumonia) that is caused by the bacteria legionella.

The condition is called Legionnaires’ disease because it was first identified after a mass outbreak at a hotel hosting a convention of a veteran organisation known as the American Legion.’

The bacteria occur naturally in rivers & ponds, but it is in artificial water supply systems that it can really thrive, temperature being crucial to its growth. The bacteria can be inhaled via small droplets of the contaminated water. The disease is not contagious.

The new study – funded by the Health Protection Agency & published in the European Journal of Epidemiology – set out to investigate why professional drivers in England & Wales were five times more likely to suffer from the disease. The people found to be most at risk were those driving through an industrial area, & those driving with the car window open. But the researchers say that, ‘Of the identified risk exposures, the risk found to be associated with not using screen wash in the windscreen wiper fluid was the most intriguing’. They said, “Not adding screen wash to windscreen wiper fluid is a previously unidentified risk factor and appears to be strongly associated with community- acquired sporadic cases of Legionnaires ‘disease.

“We estimated that around 20% of community acquired sporadic cases could be attributed to this exposure.”

They emphasize that further research is required to more fully understand the process, but conclude “This simple public health advice may be of worldwide relevance in reducing morbidity and mortality from Legionnaires ‘disease.”

As a result of the findings, drivers are now being encouraged to add screen wash to their wiper water.

Three hundred & forty five cases of Legionnaires’ disease were reported in England and Wales last year, although some of these cases were contracted abroad. It is estimated that ten per cent of people who get Legionnaires’ disease will die from complications arising from infection. Males, smokers, vulnerable people such as the elderly & those with a suppressed auto immune system, as well as people with other pre existing health conditions are at a particularly high risk from the disease.

Prompt treatment using specific antibiotics is essential in treating Legionnaires’ disease and reducing the risk of death.

New research indicates a twenty five per cent reduction in the risk of developing Parkinsosn’s disease among coffee drinkers.

Parkinson’s disease is a progressive neurological condition – the second most common worldwide - for which the causes are uncertain, & there is currently no cure. Around one hundred & twenty thousand people suffer from the condition in the UK, meaning that one person in every five hundred has Parkinson’s disease.

Several previous studies carried out worldwide have indicated coffee consumption as a protective factor against the risk of developing Parkinson’s disease. However, the conflicting results between studies meant that it wasn’t possible to clarify the accuracy & extent of the association.

The new study, undertaken by researchers in Portugal, & published in the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease, looked at & analysed the findings of twenty six published studies that had previously investigated the link. The researchers concluded that, “This study confirm an inverse association between caffeine intake and the risk of Parkinson’s Disease, which can hardly by explained by bias or uncontrolled confounding.”

They found that in people who drank two to three cups of coffee a day, there was a twenty five per cent less risk of developing Parkinson’s disease. Interestingly, when the research team looked only at female coffee drinkers, the figure dropped to fourteen per cent. According to the research team, this may be due to the fact that they ‘found an interaction between post menopausal hormones & caffeine intake in the risk of Parkinson’s disease.’ They say that though the reasons are unclear, HRT seems to modify the effects of caffeine on the risk.

Kieran Breen,  Director of Research and Development at Parkinson’s UK said of  the study: “These results represent the strongest evidence so far that caffeine may have some protective effects against developing Parkinson’s. But what this study doesn’t tell us is if drinking coffee can slow the progression of the condition once it has begun.

“We need to tease apart exactly what is happening inside the brain before we know whether coffee or caffeine will be useful in developing new treatments for Parkinson’s.

“Although these results are interesting it’s too soon for us to recommend people with Parkinson’s up their caffeine intake, especially as drinking too much coffee may cause other health problems.

While further research is required to clarify the nature of the link between coffee consumption & incidence of the disease, the researchers state that ‘there is a plausible rational biological mechanism’ for the association.

.

Just what is the real cost of some of the food we’re buying at our supermarkets?

Transporting food over long distances is not environmentally friendly. People are widely aware of this nowadays & many strive to buy locally, or at least from within the UK. Food miles could be significantly cut if we returned to eating seasonal locally grown food, but even at the height of the growing season it is not as widely available as it could be.

A recent survey carried out for the Independent looked at ten foods grown in the UK – all of which can be grown here at this time of year - & found that fresh produce was being imported from as far away as South America by seven of the leading supermarkets. Marks & Spencer had the fewest foreign products with broccoli from Spain & broad beans from Guatemala. Asda was selling the most imported items – five – which included asparagus from Peru, cauliflower from France, & strawberries from Spain. Other imported produce included radishes from Holland – at Morrisons who came second best -  strawberries from Holland at Tesco, & spring onions from Mexico & Kenya at Sainsbury’s!

Retailers claim that it is only by buying foreign produce that they are able to offer a supply of fruit & vegetables throughout the whole year. Many have argued that the reality is that buying from overseas is often cheaper than seasonal produce from within the UK because of cheap labour rates in developing countries.

The term ‘food miles’ was first used five years ago by Tim Lang -  professor of food policy at City University in London and a Government adviser on food sustainability - who wanted to get people to think about the “hidden ecological, social and economic consequences”  of where their food might be coming from.

According to the Independent, ‘One in four lorries on the road now carries food, and food miles account for 1.8 per cent of the UK’s carbon dioxide emissions…. Annually, food transportation is estimated to cost the country £9bn in congestion, greenhouse gas emissions, accidents, air pollution, noise and other problems.’

However, food miles are only one aspect of sustainability. The growing & storage of crops which are out of season in the UK can cause more pollution than transporting produce thousands of miles, the heated glass for growing & the refrigeration for storage, both consuming vast amounts of energy.

A further factor to be taken into consideration is the livelihood of farmers & their dependents in developing countries, who are reliant on income generated by western food demands.

However, the issue of food miles continues to cause consternation. A prime example was highlighted recently when in Evesham – one of  Britain’s largest regions for market gardening – asparagus was found to be on sale in Tesco, having travelled all the way from Peru. One local resident commented: “It’s such a shame it had to come all the way from Peru. I could understand if asparagus was out of season.” & another stated: “It’s an insult to our heritage. My grandfather grew asparagus and he would be up in arms about this.”

Professor Lang had this to say about it: “In the middle of the British asparagus season to have aspargus coming from the other side of the world because land and labour are cheap is folly. Peruvian land ought to be feeding South Americans who are under-consuming. This is a new form of colonialism.”

The importance of calcium for our bones has long been publicized, but it seems that taking too much in the form of supplements can seriously damage our health.

Advertising calcium supplements for the prevention & treatment of osteoporosis - a condition where bones become so brittle that they break easily - has encouraged their widespread use. According to a new report - published in the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology. - (inadvertent) calcium overdose has become common, with pregnant & post menopausal women being at greatest risk. Taking excessive amounts of calcium in the form of supplements can lead to high blood pressure, kidney damage, & potentially even kidney failure.

Calcium is found readily in lots of foods, such as milk & other dairy produce, green leafy vegetables, & fish with edible bones. However, as people become older it becomes more difficult to get enough of these nutrients, in part because as we get older our bodies don’t absorb the calcium so easily. Because of this many people routinely take supplements to reduce the risk of broken bones. Without realising it some people take far more than the recommended dose potentially resulting in a serious condition currently known as milk-alkali syndrome.

The new report – written by American researchers from the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine in Philadelphia - looked into the history of the syndrome & its recent resurgence. It seems that the syndrome first came to light in the early 1900s. An American doctor – Bertram Welton Sippy – came up with a new diet for treating people suffering from peptic ulcers (consequently known as the Sippy diet).

As well as taking antacid medication, the Sippy diet involved eating large quantities of milk, cream, eggs, & cereals every half an hour. While the diet helped counteract the effects of the peptic ulcers, it resulted in patients consuming excessively high levels of calcium, & becoming known - because of the high milk content involved – as milk alkali syndrome.

The advent of effective medication for the ulcers meant that the necessity for the diet declined, & along with it the incidence of milk-alkali syndrome. During the 1990s the syndrome once again became more common due to the increase in use of over the counter supplements. The scientists carrying out the study feel that due to its current cause, it would be more appropriate for it to be known as calcium-alkali syndrome.

High blood calcium levels – hypercalcaemia – which result from calcium supplement overdose account can result in some of the following symptoms: nausea & vomiting, abdominal pain, excessive thirst, frequent urination, constipation, weight loss, fatigue, muscle weakness, & confusion.

The researchers emphasise that the supplements are safe when only the recommended daily dosage of around 800 milligrams is taken.

The prospect of a vaccine that can give protection from breast cancer is an exciting one, but news of the new trials need to be tempered with a realistic outlook – there’s still a long way to go.

Each year more than a million women are diagnosed with breast cancer throughout the world. It is currently the most common cancer in the U.K. & for women the incidence rates have increased by fifty per cent over the last twenty five years. In the U.K. approximately twelve thousand women & seventy men die each year as a result of the disease.

Many people reading the headlines this week will have felt a surge of hope at the prospect of finally combating one of the world’s biggest killers. Research carried out in America & published in the journal Nature Medicine, has shown that a vaccine containing a protein  present in most human breast cancers - alpha-lactalbumin (a-lactalbumin) - injected into mice which have been bred to develop breast cancer was effective in preventing the disease.

Vincent Tuohy, from the Cleveland Clinic Lerner Research Institute – the immunologist who led the study - said: “We believe that this vaccine will someday be used to prevent breast cancer in adult women in the same way that vaccines have prevented many childhood diseases.

“If it works in humans the way it works in mice, this will be monumental. We could eliminate breast cancer.”

In the study half of the mice were injected with a vaccine containing a-lactalbumin & half were injected with a control solution. None of the mice injected with the vaccine containing a-lactalbumin went on to develop breast cancer, whilst all the mice given the control solution did. The vaccine was also shown in a separate experiment to slow the growth of existing tumours.

The vaccine is unique in targeting the cancer formation itself  rather than a virus, which is how the existing vaccines for cervical & liver cancer work, respectively immunising against the human papilloma virus & the Hepatitis B virus. Joseph Crowe, MD, director of Cleveland Clinic’s Breast Centre. Said “Dr. Tuohy is not a breast cancer researcher, he’s an immunologist, so his approach is completely different - attacking the tumour before it can develop. It’s a simple concept, yet one that has not been explored until now.”

As the a-lactalbumin protein is present in the breast tissue of women who are producing milk, a vaccine containing it would be unsuitable for women who are either pregnant or likely to be. The researchers conclude that, “a-lactalbumin vaccination may provide safe and effective protection against the development of breast cancer for women in their post child bearing, pre menopausal years, when lactation is readily avoidable and risk for developing breast cancer is high”

The new research is exciting, but further research is required before it can be considered safe enough for human trials to begin. It has been reported that human trials might begin as early as next year, but the need for long trials on large numbers of women, mean that it could be ten years or more before the vaccine might become available if indeed it proves to be as promising as the initial hype suggests. Dr Caitlin Palframan - policy manager at Breakthrough Breast Cancer – said, This research could have important implications for how we might prevent breast cancer in the future.

“However, this is an early stage study, and we look forward to seeing the results of large-scale clinical trials to find out if this vaccine would be safe and effective in humans.

“Crucially, there are already things that women can do to reduce their breast cancer risk including reducing alcohol consumption, maintaining a healthy weight and taking regular exercise.”

Acupuncture has been regarded by many with scepticism. Now some new research evidences a scientific basis for its perceived beneficial effects.

Practiced throughout the world for around four thousand years since it was developed in China, the procedure of acupuncture involves the insertion of fine needles into the body at specific points. During a session that typically lasts for about half an hour, the needles are rotated, electrically stimulated, or sometimes even heated, at regular intervals. Recipients of the treatment have reported relief from pain which lasts beyond the actual treatment itself.

Traditional practitioners of the therapy believe that the treatment works by facilitating the flow of energy through meridians (channels) in the body. Sceptics have long held the view that any benefits are the result of a placebo effect. Now – according to a study carried out in America - it seems that there is a scientific mechanism which accounts for the pain relief people experience.

The new research – published in the journal Nature Neuroscience - involved scientists carrying out acupuncture treatments on mice that had pain in one paw. Needles were inserted near the knee & rotated every five minutes for a period of half an hour. After this period the mice were found to have less pain in their paws. This was monitored by the researchers recording how quickly each mouse pulled its sore paw away from a small bristly brush. The treatment was found to have stimulated the production of a natural anti inflammatory painkiller – adenosine - the effects of which lasted for up to an hour after the treatment had ended. The chemical – which also helps to keep the heart healthy & regulate sleep – becomes active following an injury in order to inhibit nerve signals, thereby aiding pain relief.

The scientists also found that by administering a drug to slow down the removal of the adenosine, they could almost triple the length of time that pain relief lasted.

Dr Maiken Nedergaard, a neuroscientist at the University of Rochester, New York, who was involved in the research said: “Acupuncture has been a mainstay of medical treatment in certain parts of the world for 4,000 years, but because it has not been understood completely, many people have remained sceptical.”

He said: “The view that acupuncture does not have much benefit beyond the placebo effect has really hampered research into the technique,” & added, “Some people think any work in this area is junk research, but I think that’s wrong. I was really surprised at the arrogance of some of my colleagues.”

“In this work, we provide information about one physical mechanism through which acupuncture reduces pain in the body.

“What we found is that adenosine, a natural pain killer, is released during acupuncture and that adenosine may be the primary way acupuncture reduces pain.

“The most important observation is that acupuncture worked almost three times as long if we gave a drug that slows down the removal of adenosine.”

While the research throws some light on pain relief as a result of the treatment, it does not explain other perceived benefits, for example as an aid to fertility.