July 31st, 2007 by Dr. Val Jones in News
Tags: News, Research, Urology, Women's Health
No Comments »
Thanks to ED nurse Ian Miller who brought this research study to my attention: lidocaine jelly can substantially reduce the pain of having a Foley catheter inserted into the urethra – for both men and women. And yet the jelly is not always used for women. Many nurses, PAs and physicians erroneously believe that only men benefit from the numbing gel because they have longer urethras. But new research suggests that women benefit substantially from this pain reducing gel. What amazes me is that it took this long to research the issue – imagine all the women who could have had a more comfortable experience with this process. So ladies, if you (or your mom) need a bladder catheterization for any reason, be sure to ask for lidocaine jelly.This post originally appeared on Dr. Val’s blog at RevolutionHealth.com.
July 24th, 2007 by Dr. Val Jones in News
Tags: Cancer, Cardiology, Research, Weight Loss
1 Comment »
A provocative press release crossed my desk today, “Study Finds Association Between Low Cholesterol Levels and Cancer” with subtitle: “Benefits of Statin Therapy Outweigh Small Risk.” Well that’s fairly terrifying, isn’t it? It sounds as if they’re saying that taking a statin (like lipitor or zocor) is good for your heart but might carry with it the “small” risk of developing cancer.
First of all, let me assure you that this is a gross misinterpretation of the metanalysis. The authors themselves never postulated a cause and effect between statins and cancer, and in fact did all they could to avoid drawing this conclusion. They merely observed that there was a slight trend towards higher cancer rates among people with low LDL cholesterol.
There are two very good explanations for the higher cancer rates in people with low cholesterol:
1. Everyone knows that “unexplained weight loss” is an ominous sign. Often times a patient’s first clue that they have cancer is sudden weight loss – since cancer has a voracious appetite and steals nutrients from the rest of the body. When people lose weight, their cholesterols decrease. So it’s possible that low LDL cholesterol is really just a surrogate marker for those who already have very early stages of cancer that have not yet been detected otherwise.
2. Statins are well known to reduce cholesterol and the atherosclerotic plaques that put people at risk for heart attacks and strokes. Lower cholesterol levels can reduce overall mortality risk/year by 30%, and so people live longer when they have lower cholesterol levels. People who live longer extend their opportunity to develop cancer. And so lower cholesterol levels inadvertently raise your cancer risk simply because they may extend your life.
Why else do I think the link between cancer and statins is faulty? Because the observed increase in cancer rates was in ALL cancer types – the genetics of cancer is so complex, and the reasons why certain cell types begin to divide in an uncontrolled manner is so diverse, that it’s hard to imagine any possible trigger could stimulate all cells to become cancerous. Also, most cancers develop very slowly, and the 5 year window in which the authors observed people taking statins and developing cancers is too short to be a cause and effect. And finally, previous statin safety studies showed no link between them and the development of any form of cancer.
The Journal of the American College of Cardiology admits in an
accompanying editorial, “In the 5 years that we have been stewards of
the Journal, no other manuscript has stimulated such intense scrutiny
or discussion.” Do I think they should have published this study? Yes – but to me the most interesting question out of all of this is: could cholesterol screening be used for early cancer detection? If an extra low LDL is observed, maybe that should prompt some additional investigations to rule out occult malignancies?
Obviously, more studies are needed to determine the potential validity of such an approach… but for now, there is absolutely no reason (based on this study) to cease statin therapy for fear of developing cancer. Hope that allays some fears!This post originally appeared on Dr. Val’s blog at RevolutionHealth.com.
July 19th, 2007 by Dr. Val Jones in News
Tags: News, Ophthalmology, Surgery
No Comments »
There was a very interesting case report in the New England Journal of Medicine this week. A 25 year old woman went bungee jumping and wound up with sudden decreased vision in one eye. As it turned out, the sudden yank of the bungee cord (while being upside down) caused an increase in pressure in her eye ball (kind of the way the Heimlich maneuver can), and broke one of the blood vessels in the back of her eye. Luckily she had surgery to remove the blood and recovered nearly normal vision in that eye a week later.
If I ever felt tempted to go bungee jumping, this case cured my curiosity. How about you?This post originally appeared on Dr. Val’s blog at RevolutionHealth.com.
July 18th, 2007 by Dr. Val Jones in News
Tags: Beauty, Dermatology, News, Plastic Surgery
4 Comments »
ABC news created an online photo album of the actors from the movie The Princess Bride. They display headshots of the actors from 20 years ago (when the film was created) beside a current image. It was a real eye-opener for me, seeing how these people have changed in appearance over the years – though in all fairness, ABC didn’t choose the most flattering follow up pictures. Nicer ones are displayed in the link to the movie above.
Nonetheless, this raises the issue of aging – and what each of us will look like in 20 years. I think a lot of it depends on the little choices we make each day – what we eat, if we exercise, if we’re stressed, if we have loving relationships in our lives… these little things add up and imprint themselves on our faces and bodies for all to see. What will your body say about you in 20 years? Mine’s going to have a lot of laugh lines, and probably a good deal of cellulite… ahem. But I’m going to keep aiming towards the leafy green veggies and regular exercise. If you’d like to join me, you’ll find some helpful programs right here at Revolution Health.
Bonus Link: My friend Tony Via suggested this link to fake celebrity makeovers (someone took the time to create how they might look as “normal” overweight Americans – thank you, Photoshop). Quite entertaining – and more fuel for the “eat right and exercise” plan.This post originally appeared on Dr. Val’s blog at RevolutionHealth.com.
July 15th, 2007 by Dr. Val Jones in News
Tags: Food and Nutrition, News, Research, Weight Loss
1 Comment »
I read an interesting series of articles about improving nutritional status in the US and Britain. First, the New York Times reports that trendy Manhattan bars are offering vitamin-fortified cocktails – fresh, organic fruits and/or veggies are muddled with vodka martinis to create a “healthy” alternative to your typical beverages. I’m skeptical – given the volume of fruits and veggies recommended for a healthy diet, you’d have to drink a whole lot of vodka martinis to get the vitamins you need in a day. Probably better to go for a fruit salad.
The British are still debating the utility of a “fat tax” as a way to discourage people from eating food high in refined sugar, flour or unhealthy oils. So far the government’s position is that taxing non-nutritive food is too controlling (creates a “nanny state”), and that people will just find an unhealthy alternative to the taxed foods. Interestingly, some research suggests that if all unhealthy foods were taxed, and healthy foods were made less expensive, thousands of heart attacks and obesity-related conditions might be avoided each year. However, this study has been received with much skepticism.
And a new British study also showed a surprising similarity between middle class and lower income eating habits. Both groups ate equally poorly, though the lower income group was more likely to smoke and engage in less physical activity. The similar eating habits came as a surprise, as it had been incorrectly assumed that the lower income group had a substantially poorer diet.This post originally appeared on Dr. Val’s blog at RevolutionHealth.com.
