1. Take responsibility for your health.
Cardiovascular disease is the major cause of death in America, accounting for 34 percent of deaths, many suddenly and almost all of them premature. This is down from 40 percent just four decades ago, mainly due to treatment of common risk factors. If you have diabetes, your risk increases dramatically. The best prevention against heart disease and stroke is to understand the risks and treatment options. The greatest risk is ignorance or misinformation. The first step is to take responsibility for your health.
2. Know your risks.
The most influential risk factor for cardiovascular disease is age – the older you are, the greater your risk. The second is your genetic make-up. Although everyone is excited by the scientific progress in genomics research, conclusive gene tests are still in their infancy. But, as I tell our medical students, “A good family history is a poor man’s gene test.” We have long known that if your parents, grandparents, or other relatives were afflicted with or died of heart disease, diabetes or stroke, your risk is much greater.
3. Don’t smoke or expose yourself to second-hand smoke.
The evidence is overwhelming that cigarette smoking and second-hand exposure to smoke increases the risks of heart disease, lung disease, peripheral vascular disease and stroke.
4. Maintain a healthy blood pressure.
High blood pressure, called hypertension, is known as “the silent killer” as it goes without symptoms in most individuals. High blood pressure causes wear and tear of the delicate inner lining of your blood vessels. The higher your blood pressure (BP) the greater your risk. The risk begins to increase from a pressure of 115/70 mmHg and doubles for each 10 mmHg increase in systolic (the larger number) and 5 mmHg increase in the diastolic (the smaller number). Heredity and increasing age raise the risks. Measuring blood pressures at home reflects more accurately your risk than having the blood pressure taken at a physician’s office. It is worth the investment to get a cuffmeter.
It is best not to rely only on the readings at your doctor’s office as some individuals suffer from “white coat” hypertension – their BP is up only when they are at the doctor’s office. Others have “masked” hypertension – higher when not in the doctor’s office. Prognosis is best related to home BP. But for home blood pressure readings, you should not use finger or wrist units – only regular upper arm units.
Read more at: depkhoenews.com
Tuesday, 17 March 2015
Tuesday, 10 March 2015
Tips For Lowering Salt Intake
The more salt you eat, the greater the potential rise in your blood pressure — so people with hypertension should consume no more than 1,500 mg of sodium a day. One surefire way to reduce your intake: Take the saltshaker off the table, and try not to add salt to foods you prepare at home. If you miss the flavor, experiment with some of the salt substitutes on the market. When you do use salt, use a coarser salt with less sodium per teaspoon, like kosher salt and certain coarse-grain sea salts.
When you’re comparing nutrition labels on products at the grocery store, make sure you check the sodium content too. All nutrition stats are listed per serving, so if you eat more than one serving, you’ll need to make sure you calculate total sodium accordingly. As a general rule, look for entrées with no more than 600 mg sodium and snack foods with no more than 300 mg — and of course, the lower the better. Go out of your way to buy brands that offer low-sodium varieties, especially when it comes to canned goods.
This list includes deli and processed meats (like bacon, sausage, and hot dogs), canned soup and broth, canned vegetables and beans, pickles, frozen entrées, and salty condiments like soy sauce, ketchup, and bottled salad dressing. When you do use these foods, eat them sparingly or look for “reduced sodium” varieties. If you’re lucky enough to find “no salt added” versions of canned beans, tomatoes, and other products on this list at your supermarket, you’re totally in the clear.
Fresh fruits and vegetables, whole grains, and most other unprocessed foods are naturally low in sodium. Plus, many of these foods are rich in potassium, a mineral that helps counterbalance sodium’s elevating effect on blood pressure. (These foods are also chock-full of nutrients and low in calories — so eating more of them is an all around win). When whole foods are the foundation of your diet, you’re in charge of the specific seasonings that are added during the cooking process. Be stingy with the salt.
Read more at: depkhoenews.com
When you’re comparing nutrition labels on products at the grocery store, make sure you check the sodium content too. All nutrition stats are listed per serving, so if you eat more than one serving, you’ll need to make sure you calculate total sodium accordingly. As a general rule, look for entrées with no more than 600 mg sodium and snack foods with no more than 300 mg — and of course, the lower the better. Go out of your way to buy brands that offer low-sodium varieties, especially when it comes to canned goods.
This list includes deli and processed meats (like bacon, sausage, and hot dogs), canned soup and broth, canned vegetables and beans, pickles, frozen entrées, and salty condiments like soy sauce, ketchup, and bottled salad dressing. When you do use these foods, eat them sparingly or look for “reduced sodium” varieties. If you’re lucky enough to find “no salt added” versions of canned beans, tomatoes, and other products on this list at your supermarket, you’re totally in the clear.
Fresh fruits and vegetables, whole grains, and most other unprocessed foods are naturally low in sodium. Plus, many of these foods are rich in potassium, a mineral that helps counterbalance sodium’s elevating effect on blood pressure. (These foods are also chock-full of nutrients and low in calories — so eating more of them is an all around win). When whole foods are the foundation of your diet, you’re in charge of the specific seasonings that are added during the cooking process. Be stingy with the salt.
Read more at: depkhoenews.com
Monday, 2 March 2015
Omega-3 fatty acids may improve children's sleep patterns: study
A new pilot study indicates increasing children's intake of omega-3 fatty acids may improve their sleep.
The study from the University of Oxford is said to be the first to analyze the potential link between sleep and fatty acid status in healthy children. Findings will be published in the Journal of Sleep Research.
Researchers provided 362 children from 74 Oxford primary schools with either daily 600-milligram supplements of algal sources or a placebo over a 16-week period to determine if sleep would improve.
Participants were between 7 and 9 years old. The children weren't selected based on sleep issues, although all had problems with reading.
Previous research has shown an increase in omega-3 consumption can improve children's ability to concentrate, read and spell in addition to lowering disruptive behaviour.
At the beginning of the study, parents filled out a questionnaire, with results revealing that four in ten of the children dealt with regular sleep disturbances. The researchers fitted the 43 children rated as poor sleepers with wrist sensors that monitored movements in bed over five nights.
The study found children who took the daily omega-3 supplements enjoyed 58 minutes more sleep and seven fewer awakenings per night than those who took the placebo. Higher blood levels of the long-chain omega-3 DHA were linked to improved sleep, including "less bedtime resistance, parasomnias and total sleep disturbance."
"Various substances made within the body from omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids have long been known to play key roles in the regulation of sleep," said lead study author Professor Paul Montgomery of Oxford University. "For example, lower ratios of DHA have been linked with lower levels of melatonin, and that would fit with our finding that sleep problems are greater in children with lower levels of DHA in their blood."
While further research is needed given the relatively small number of participants, researchers say that if the study results are confirmed implications will be "profound" for children struggling with behavioral and learning issues.
Omega-3s are associated with a number of other health benefits, including their ability to lower blood pressure.
A study announced this week and published in the American Journal of Hypertension found omega-3 fatty acids EPA and DHA are as effective, if not more so, in lowering blood pressure than commonly recommended lifestyle changes, such as exercising more, consuming less sodium and drinking less alcohol.
Read more at: depkhoenews.com
The study from the University of Oxford is said to be the first to analyze the potential link between sleep and fatty acid status in healthy children. Findings will be published in the Journal of Sleep Research.
Researchers provided 362 children from 74 Oxford primary schools with either daily 600-milligram supplements of algal sources or a placebo over a 16-week period to determine if sleep would improve.
Participants were between 7 and 9 years old. The children weren't selected based on sleep issues, although all had problems with reading.
Previous research has shown an increase in omega-3 consumption can improve children's ability to concentrate, read and spell in addition to lowering disruptive behaviour.
At the beginning of the study, parents filled out a questionnaire, with results revealing that four in ten of the children dealt with regular sleep disturbances. The researchers fitted the 43 children rated as poor sleepers with wrist sensors that monitored movements in bed over five nights.
The study found children who took the daily omega-3 supplements enjoyed 58 minutes more sleep and seven fewer awakenings per night than those who took the placebo. Higher blood levels of the long-chain omega-3 DHA were linked to improved sleep, including "less bedtime resistance, parasomnias and total sleep disturbance."
"Various substances made within the body from omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids have long been known to play key roles in the regulation of sleep," said lead study author Professor Paul Montgomery of Oxford University. "For example, lower ratios of DHA have been linked with lower levels of melatonin, and that would fit with our finding that sleep problems are greater in children with lower levels of DHA in their blood."
While further research is needed given the relatively small number of participants, researchers say that if the study results are confirmed implications will be "profound" for children struggling with behavioral and learning issues.
Omega-3s are associated with a number of other health benefits, including their ability to lower blood pressure.
A study announced this week and published in the American Journal of Hypertension found omega-3 fatty acids EPA and DHA are as effective, if not more so, in lowering blood pressure than commonly recommended lifestyle changes, such as exercising more, consuming less sodium and drinking less alcohol.
Read more at: depkhoenews.com
Monday, 23 February 2015
7 Foods to Keep Kids’ Eyes Healthy
Eyes foremost need vitamin A. But other important eye-protecting nutrients are vitamin C, vitamin E, beta carotene (vitamin A precursor) and an antioxidant called lutein, which helps protect the eyes from free radical damage caused by the sun. What’s more, research shows Omega-3 fatty acids may help protect eyes from retinal degeneration and ease the discomfort of dry eyes.
These seven foods are packed with nutrients that help keep kids’ eyes healthy:
CARROTS provide vitamin A and the potent antioxidant beta carotene. And as a great source of potassium and fiber, carrots are good for the rest of the body as well.
SWEET POTATOS are also rich in vitamin A, beta carotene, potassium and fiber, just like carrots. Must be because they’re orange too!
STRAWBERRIES are packed with vitamin C, plus folate (a B vitamin), fiber and an array of cancer-preventing phytonutrients.
ORANGES are vitamin C bombs and contain potassium, fiber, calcium and folate.
ALMONDS Almonds contain vitamin E, along with monounsaturated fatty acids.
SPINACH is laden with lutein. Eating lots of green leafy vegetables lowers the risk of macular degeneration. The other good stuff in spinach is iron, vitamin K and folate.
SALMON contains more omega-3 fatty acid than any other fish or seafood.
Read more at: depkhoenews.com
These seven foods are packed with nutrients that help keep kids’ eyes healthy:
CARROTS provide vitamin A and the potent antioxidant beta carotene. And as a great source of potassium and fiber, carrots are good for the rest of the body as well.
SWEET POTATOS are also rich in vitamin A, beta carotene, potassium and fiber, just like carrots. Must be because they’re orange too!
STRAWBERRIES are packed with vitamin C, plus folate (a B vitamin), fiber and an array of cancer-preventing phytonutrients.
ORANGES are vitamin C bombs and contain potassium, fiber, calcium and folate.
ALMONDS Almonds contain vitamin E, along with monounsaturated fatty acids.
SPINACH is laden with lutein. Eating lots of green leafy vegetables lowers the risk of macular degeneration. The other good stuff in spinach is iron, vitamin K and folate.
SALMON contains more omega-3 fatty acid than any other fish or seafood.
Read more at: depkhoenews.com
Monday, 9 February 2015
7 Simple Ways to Eat More Omega 3
Despite the various controversies surrounding nutrition – Omega 3 fatty acids are one of the few nutrients where everyone seems to be in agreement.
Omega 3 EFA’s (Essential Fatty Acids) are essential because our body is unable to manufacture them.
Food manufacturers are now ‘fortifying’ a number of different processed food products with Omega 3. However it’s possible to easily meet your Omega 3 needs from basic whole foods.
A huge shout out to fat loss expert Tom Venuto for creating this list:
1. Eat fatty fish at least twice per week and even daily if practical and economical for you. If not, you could supplement with fish oil (1.5-3 grams of combined DHA/EPA daily)
2. Omega 6 fatty acids are also essential, but most people have an unbalanced omega 3 to omega 6 ratio. This can be remedied by increasing the omega 3 consumption and or reducing the omega 6 consumption (by decreasing intake of processed foods, refined grains, and supermarket cooking oils, with the exception of extra virgin olive oil)
3. Grind up flaxseeds and sprinkle them on salads or add them to oatmeal, protein shakes or morning cereals. Alternately, supplement with flaxseed oil; 1 tbsp is equivalent to 3 tbsp flaxseeds (use as a supplement; Not for cooking)
4. Snack on walnuts, which contain modest amounts of omega 3 fats (other types of nuts and seeds can also contain significant amounts of omega 3 fats)
5. Increase your consumption of leafy greens which contain small amounts of omega 3 fats.
6. If you eat red meat, try game meats or grass fed beef or bison. they don’t have nearly the quantity of omega-3 as marine sources, but they are higher in omega-3 and have a better omega-3 to omega-6 ratio than conventionally raised and fed beef.
7. Try omega-3 fortified eggs instead of regular eggs.
About that last one; back in the day I used to keep chickens. Some breeds (such as Araucana) laid eggs that were supposedly higher in Omega-3 – although some people see this as a myth.
Nowadays poultry farmers feed chickens more kelp meal and polyunsaturated fats in order to increase Omega 3 EFA’s in the egg.
Read more at: depkhoenews.com
Omega 3 EFA’s (Essential Fatty Acids) are essential because our body is unable to manufacture them.
Food manufacturers are now ‘fortifying’ a number of different processed food products with Omega 3. However it’s possible to easily meet your Omega 3 needs from basic whole foods.
A huge shout out to fat loss expert Tom Venuto for creating this list:
1. Eat fatty fish at least twice per week and even daily if practical and economical for you. If not, you could supplement with fish oil (1.5-3 grams of combined DHA/EPA daily)
2. Omega 6 fatty acids are also essential, but most people have an unbalanced omega 3 to omega 6 ratio. This can be remedied by increasing the omega 3 consumption and or reducing the omega 6 consumption (by decreasing intake of processed foods, refined grains, and supermarket cooking oils, with the exception of extra virgin olive oil)
3. Grind up flaxseeds and sprinkle them on salads or add them to oatmeal, protein shakes or morning cereals. Alternately, supplement with flaxseed oil; 1 tbsp is equivalent to 3 tbsp flaxseeds (use as a supplement; Not for cooking)
4. Snack on walnuts, which contain modest amounts of omega 3 fats (other types of nuts and seeds can also contain significant amounts of omega 3 fats)
5. Increase your consumption of leafy greens which contain small amounts of omega 3 fats.
6. If you eat red meat, try game meats or grass fed beef or bison. they don’t have nearly the quantity of omega-3 as marine sources, but they are higher in omega-3 and have a better omega-3 to omega-6 ratio than conventionally raised and fed beef.
7. Try omega-3 fortified eggs instead of regular eggs.
About that last one; back in the day I used to keep chickens. Some breeds (such as Araucana) laid eggs that were supposedly higher in Omega-3 – although some people see this as a myth.
Nowadays poultry farmers feed chickens more kelp meal and polyunsaturated fats in order to increase Omega 3 EFA’s in the egg.
Read more at: depkhoenews.com
Monday, 2 February 2015
Vitamin D, the gut and food allergies
What's behind the current allergy epidemic? New research linking a lack of vitamin D with food allergies in children is an important new piece in the jigsaw.
Vitamin D deficiency has been linked to a range of health issues from poor bone health to heart disease, diabetes and some cancers.
Now Australian researchers have found a new connection: children with vitamin D deficiency are at an increased risk of food allergies.
Allergy rates have massively increased over the past 20 years. In Australia, food allergies are of particular concern with studies finding one in 10 children under 12 months of age is affected.
In new research, a team led by Professor Katie Allen, paediatric gastroenterologist, allergist and researcher with Murdoch Children's Research Institute (MCRI), found children deficient in vitamin D are three times more likely to have a food allergy. They are also more likely to have multiple food allergies.
"This study provides the first direct evidence that vitamin D sufficiency may be an important protective factor for food allergy in the first year of life; this adds supporting evidence for medical correction of low vitamin D levels," Allen says.
The rise in food allergy runs parallel with increased prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in pregnancy (and in the community generally), but it's not clear if this is a cause or if other factors occurring during the child's first year of life are to blame.
Inadequate exposure to sunlight, rather than diet, is the most common cause of low vitamin D levels as vitamin D is present in only very low amounts in most foods.
The new findings are based on a study of more than 5000 children and confirm earlier research showing the further you live from the equator the more likely you are to have food allergy.
Interestingly, it appears the link between vitamin D and food allergy was found only in children whose parents were born in Australia, leading researchers to speculate that genetic factors, such as parents' ethnicity, may also play a role.
Reducing your child's allergy risk
Unfortunately there aren't specific guidelines on how to reduce a child's allergy risk, but Allen and her colleagues believe the current evidence suggests a few simple steps could help.
These include:
breastfeed your baby for at least six months
introduce a wide variety of solid foods around six months
learn to be more relaxed if your baby is exposed to environments that aren't perfectly clean (that doesn't mean you should ignore everyday hygiene measures, such as handwashing etc)
ensure your children get enough safe sunlight exposure to meet their vitamin D needs (this is also likely to important for mothers during pregnancy). For more information on how to do this see Vitamin D: how do you know you are getting enough?
Allen recommends pregnant women have their vitamin D levels checked and parents talk to their GP about testing their baby if they have any concerns.
Read more at: depkhoenews.com
Vitamin D deficiency has been linked to a range of health issues from poor bone health to heart disease, diabetes and some cancers.
Now Australian researchers have found a new connection: children with vitamin D deficiency are at an increased risk of food allergies.
Allergy rates have massively increased over the past 20 years. In Australia, food allergies are of particular concern with studies finding one in 10 children under 12 months of age is affected.
In new research, a team led by Professor Katie Allen, paediatric gastroenterologist, allergist and researcher with Murdoch Children's Research Institute (MCRI), found children deficient in vitamin D are three times more likely to have a food allergy. They are also more likely to have multiple food allergies.
"This study provides the first direct evidence that vitamin D sufficiency may be an important protective factor for food allergy in the first year of life; this adds supporting evidence for medical correction of low vitamin D levels," Allen says.
The rise in food allergy runs parallel with increased prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in pregnancy (and in the community generally), but it's not clear if this is a cause or if other factors occurring during the child's first year of life are to blame.
Inadequate exposure to sunlight, rather than diet, is the most common cause of low vitamin D levels as vitamin D is present in only very low amounts in most foods.
The new findings are based on a study of more than 5000 children and confirm earlier research showing the further you live from the equator the more likely you are to have food allergy.
Interestingly, it appears the link between vitamin D and food allergy was found only in children whose parents were born in Australia, leading researchers to speculate that genetic factors, such as parents' ethnicity, may also play a role.
Reducing your child's allergy risk
Unfortunately there aren't specific guidelines on how to reduce a child's allergy risk, but Allen and her colleagues believe the current evidence suggests a few simple steps could help.
These include:
breastfeed your baby for at least six months
introduce a wide variety of solid foods around six months
learn to be more relaxed if your baby is exposed to environments that aren't perfectly clean (that doesn't mean you should ignore everyday hygiene measures, such as handwashing etc)
ensure your children get enough safe sunlight exposure to meet their vitamin D needs (this is also likely to important for mothers during pregnancy). For more information on how to do this see Vitamin D: how do you know you are getting enough?
Allen recommends pregnant women have their vitamin D levels checked and parents talk to their GP about testing their baby if they have any concerns.
Read more at: depkhoenews.com
Monday, 26 January 2015
New Evidence for Protective Effects of Vitamin D on Your Heart
By Paolo Boffetta, MD, MPH, Special to Everyday Health
Although vitamin D is obtained from diet and dietary supplements, the main source of vitamin D is production in our skin under the influence of solar radiation.
As sun exposure varies with the latitude of regions and during the year, so vitamin D concentrations of populations vary accordingly. Furthermore, women are generally more prone to low vitamin D concentrations than men. Vitamin D deficiency is especially common among the elderly who often have less sun exposure because of reduced outdoor activity and reduced capacity of the skin to produce vitamin D.
Research on Vitamin D’s Protective Role
We conducted an international study of eight populations from Europe and the United States to investigate the association of level of vitamin D in blood and deaths from all-causes, cardiovascular diseases, and cancer mortality, published in the British Medical Journal in June 2014. We paid attention to differences between countries, sexes, age groups and seasons of blood sampling. The study was conducted with the CHANCES Project, a research initiative funded by the European Commission and coordinated by scientists at the Hellenic Health Foundation in Athens, Greece, and Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York, and primary authors were from the German Cancer Research Center, in Heidelberg.
A total of 26,018 people had their vitamin D level measured in blood samples collected at enrolment in the study, when they were ages 50 to 79, and were followed for an average of 4 to 16 years, depending on the population. During this period 6,695 of them died, including 2,624 from cardiovascular disease and 2,227 from cancer. We compared the risk of dying between the group with highest vitamin D level and those with lower levels by dividing each study population in five groups of equal size based on their baseline vitamin D level.
Increased Deaths in People With Low Vitamin D Levels
Compared with the group with the highest vitamin D, people in the group with lowest vitamin D had a 57 percent increased mortality for all causes. They also had a 41 percent increased mortality from heart disease for those who were free from heart disease at the study’s start. In addition, individuals with history of cardiovascular disease had a 65 percent increased risk. People with a history of cancer had a 70 percent increased risk. However, for cancer mortality, we saw no benefit in those who were free from cancer at the start.
For all these associations, the three groups with intermediate vitamin D level were at intermediate risk, with a dose-response relation. These associations did not vary by sex, age group, or season of blood collection.
For the US population in the study, the comparison was between people with level of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (the main metabolite of vitamin D, and the active compound measured in blood) just above 85 nmol/L on the high end, and people with a level below about 42 nmol/L on the lowest. In that population, the difference in mortality was 42 percent for all causes and 26 percent for cardiovascular diseases.
Since ours an observational study, it cannot directly address the issue of causality. In other words, it is possible that blood vitamin D is a marker of some other characteristics causally linked to disease and mortality, like general good or poor health status. Controlled vitamin D trials, in which individuals are randomly allocated to vitamin D supplement or placebo, are needed to disentangle the effect of vitamin D from that of other factors. However, such studies can only address the effect of dietary supplementation, not of normal dietary intake and sun-related endogenous production. Prior trials showed a protective effect of vitamin D on mortality, albeit of smaller magnitude than observational studies, including ours.
Why Vitamin D Is Good for the Heart
If indeed the protective effect of vitamin D on mortality is real, our study provides important evidence that the effect is present for cardiovascular disease — but not for cancer. The protective effect is present at all ages and in both sexes. Unfortunately, our study did not include a sufficient number of people of different racial and ethnic groups to provide information on this important issue.
An important question is the identification of who should increase their vitamin D status using supplements. There is no consensus on ideal cut-off values for vitamin D deficiency. Our observation that the use of cut-off levels which were specific for country, age, sex, or season produced comparable results, raises the question whether such factors should be considered for defining vitamin D deficiency.
Future population-based studies with standardized vitamin D measurements are needed to fully resolve this issue; in the meantime, caution should be used in extrapolating results across regions with different latitudes.
Despite these uncertainties, I recommend moderate sun exposure, in particular in the elderly. The amount of sun exposure depends on the type of skin (15-30 minutes are sufficient for a fair skinned person, while one or two hours are needed for dark skinned person) and on the latitude the person lives (more time is needed in Northern regions, in particular in winter). If sun exposure is not sufficient, people can consider taking supplements, after talking with their doctor.
Paolo Boffetta, MD, MPH is a chronic disease epidemiologist who is Director of the Institute for Translational Epidemiology and Associate Director for Population Sciences of the Tisch Cancer Institute at the Icahn School of Medicine, which is part of Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York City. He is also Adjunct Professor in the Department of Medicine at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn., and in the Department of Epidemiology at the Harvard School of Public Health. He has edited 12 books and published more than 1,000 peer-reviewed scientific articles.
Read more at: depkhoenews.com
Although vitamin D is obtained from diet and dietary supplements, the main source of vitamin D is production in our skin under the influence of solar radiation.
As sun exposure varies with the latitude of regions and during the year, so vitamin D concentrations of populations vary accordingly. Furthermore, women are generally more prone to low vitamin D concentrations than men. Vitamin D deficiency is especially common among the elderly who often have less sun exposure because of reduced outdoor activity and reduced capacity of the skin to produce vitamin D.
Research on Vitamin D’s Protective Role
We conducted an international study of eight populations from Europe and the United States to investigate the association of level of vitamin D in blood and deaths from all-causes, cardiovascular diseases, and cancer mortality, published in the British Medical Journal in June 2014. We paid attention to differences between countries, sexes, age groups and seasons of blood sampling. The study was conducted with the CHANCES Project, a research initiative funded by the European Commission and coordinated by scientists at the Hellenic Health Foundation in Athens, Greece, and Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York, and primary authors were from the German Cancer Research Center, in Heidelberg.
A total of 26,018 people had their vitamin D level measured in blood samples collected at enrolment in the study, when they were ages 50 to 79, and were followed for an average of 4 to 16 years, depending on the population. During this period 6,695 of them died, including 2,624 from cardiovascular disease and 2,227 from cancer. We compared the risk of dying between the group with highest vitamin D level and those with lower levels by dividing each study population in five groups of equal size based on their baseline vitamin D level.
Increased Deaths in People With Low Vitamin D Levels
Compared with the group with the highest vitamin D, people in the group with lowest vitamin D had a 57 percent increased mortality for all causes. They also had a 41 percent increased mortality from heart disease for those who were free from heart disease at the study’s start. In addition, individuals with history of cardiovascular disease had a 65 percent increased risk. People with a history of cancer had a 70 percent increased risk. However, for cancer mortality, we saw no benefit in those who were free from cancer at the start.
For all these associations, the three groups with intermediate vitamin D level were at intermediate risk, with a dose-response relation. These associations did not vary by sex, age group, or season of blood collection.
For the US population in the study, the comparison was between people with level of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (the main metabolite of vitamin D, and the active compound measured in blood) just above 85 nmol/L on the high end, and people with a level below about 42 nmol/L on the lowest. In that population, the difference in mortality was 42 percent for all causes and 26 percent for cardiovascular diseases.
Since ours an observational study, it cannot directly address the issue of causality. In other words, it is possible that blood vitamin D is a marker of some other characteristics causally linked to disease and mortality, like general good or poor health status. Controlled vitamin D trials, in which individuals are randomly allocated to vitamin D supplement or placebo, are needed to disentangle the effect of vitamin D from that of other factors. However, such studies can only address the effect of dietary supplementation, not of normal dietary intake and sun-related endogenous production. Prior trials showed a protective effect of vitamin D on mortality, albeit of smaller magnitude than observational studies, including ours.
Why Vitamin D Is Good for the Heart
If indeed the protective effect of vitamin D on mortality is real, our study provides important evidence that the effect is present for cardiovascular disease — but not for cancer. The protective effect is present at all ages and in both sexes. Unfortunately, our study did not include a sufficient number of people of different racial and ethnic groups to provide information on this important issue.
An important question is the identification of who should increase their vitamin D status using supplements. There is no consensus on ideal cut-off values for vitamin D deficiency. Our observation that the use of cut-off levels which were specific for country, age, sex, or season produced comparable results, raises the question whether such factors should be considered for defining vitamin D deficiency.
Future population-based studies with standardized vitamin D measurements are needed to fully resolve this issue; in the meantime, caution should be used in extrapolating results across regions with different latitudes.
Despite these uncertainties, I recommend moderate sun exposure, in particular in the elderly. The amount of sun exposure depends on the type of skin (15-30 minutes are sufficient for a fair skinned person, while one or two hours are needed for dark skinned person) and on the latitude the person lives (more time is needed in Northern regions, in particular in winter). If sun exposure is not sufficient, people can consider taking supplements, after talking with their doctor.
Paolo Boffetta, MD, MPH is a chronic disease epidemiologist who is Director of the Institute for Translational Epidemiology and Associate Director for Population Sciences of the Tisch Cancer Institute at the Icahn School of Medicine, which is part of Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York City. He is also Adjunct Professor in the Department of Medicine at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn., and in the Department of Epidemiology at the Harvard School of Public Health. He has edited 12 books and published more than 1,000 peer-reviewed scientific articles.
Read more at: depkhoenews.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)




