February 17th, 2011 by Steve Novella, M.D. in Health Tips, Research
Tags: Alternative Medicine, Antihistamines, Cold and Flu Season, cold medicines, Cold Remedies, Cold Virus, Common Cold, Decongestants, Dr. Steve Novella, Echinacea, Folk Remedies, Herbal Remedies, Homeopathic Treatments, Homeopathy, Infectious Disease, Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs, NSAIDs, OTC, Over-The-Counter Medications, Pseudoscience, Respiratory Tract Infections, SBM, Science Based Medicine, Supplements, Treating Colds, Vitamin C, Zinc
No Comments »
For the last week I have had a cold. I usually get one each winter. I have two kids in school and they bring home a lot of viruses. I also work in a hospital, which tends (for some reason) to have lots of sick people. Although this year I think I caught my cold while traveling. I’m almost over it now, but it’s certainly a miserable interlude to my normal routine.
One thing we can say for certain about the common cold — it’s common. It is therefore no surprise that there are lots of cold remedies, folk remedies, pharmaceuticals, and “alternative” treatments. Finding a “cure for the common cold” has also become a journalistic cliche — reporters will jump on any chance to claim that some new research may one day lead to a cure for the common cold. Just about any research into viruses, no matter how basic or preliminary, seems to get tagged with this headline. (It’s right up there with every fossil being a “missing link.”)
But despite the commonality of the cold, the overall success of modern medicine, and the many attempts to treat or prevent the cold — there are very few treatments that are actually of any benefit. The only certain treatment is tincture of time. Most colds will get better on their own in about a week. This also creates the impression that any treatment works — no matter what you do, your symptoms are likely to improve. It is also very common to get a mild cold that lasts just a day or so. Many people my feel a cold “coming on” but then it never manifests. This is likely because there was already some partial immunity, so the infection was wiped out quickly by the immune system. But this can also create the impression that whatever treatment was taken at the onset of symptoms worked really well, and even prevented the cold altogether.
What Works
There is a short list of treatments that do seem to have some benefit. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), like aspirin, ibuprofen, and naproxen, can reduce many of the symptoms of a cold — sore throat, inflamed mucosa, aches, and fever. Acetaminophen may help with the pain and fever, but it is not anti-inflammatory and so will not work as well. NSAIDs basically take the edge off, and may make it easier to sleep. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Science-Based Medicine*
February 17th, 2011 by IsisTheScientist in Health Policy, Research
Tags: Biomedical Research, Budget Cuts, Dr. Isis, Dr. William Talman, FASEB, Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, Government-Funded Medical Research, Grant Funding, HR1, Isis the Scientist, National Institutes of Health, NIH, NIH Funding, Research Funding, Science and Medicine, Scientific Research
1 Comment »
Many of my regular readers may know that biomedical research in the United States is largely funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Please see this message from Dr. William Talman, president of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB), about proposed spending cuts to the NIH budget. Grant funding from the NIH is already hard to come by, and the proposed budget cuts will make it even harder.
Whether you are a scientist, a student, or a member of the public interested in the future of science and medicine, I join with Dr. Talman in asking you to call your congressional representatives and ask them to oppose HR1. Also, if you have a blog I’d ask you to repost Dr. Talman’s call to action so that your readers can join in.
Dear Colleague,
For months the new House leadership has been promising to cut billions in federal funding in fiscal year (FY) 2011. Later this week the House will try to make the rhetoric a reality by voting on HR 1, a “continuing resolution” (CR) that would cut NIH funding by $1.6 billion (5.2%) BELOW the current level – reducing the budget for medical research to $29.4 billion!
We must rally everyone – researchers, trainees, lab personnel – in the scientific community to protest these draconian cuts. Please go to this FASEB link for instructions on how to call your Representative’s Washington, DC office today! Urge him/her to oppose the cuts to NIH and vote against HR 1. Once you’ve made the call, let us know how it went by sending a short email to the address provided in the call instructions and forward the alert link to your colleagues. We must explain to our Representatives how cuts to NIH will have a devastating impact on their constituents!
Sincerely,
William T. Talman, MD
FASEB President
*This blog post was originally published at The Brain Confounds Everything*
February 16th, 2011 by Glenn Laffel, M.D., Ph.D. in Better Health Network, Research
Tags: Behavioral Change, Biological Substances, Body Language, Chemical Composition Of Tears, Chemical Signaling, Dr. Glenn Laffel, Drop In Testosterone Levels, Emotional Response, Emotional Tears, Gender Studies, Heart Rate, Male Libido, Men's Response To Women's Tears, Noam Sobel, Pheromones, Physiological Response, Physiology, Pizaazz, Psychological Response, Psychology, Respiratory Rate, Salivary Testosterone, Science Journal, Sexual Arousal, Sexual Health, Skin Temperature, Tears From Eye Irritation, Washington Post, Weizmann Institute, When Women Cry
1 Comment »
Humans are the only living things that cry when they are overcome with emotion. Why do we do this?
A study by Noam Sobel and colleagues at the Weizmann Institute provide part of the answer, at least as it relates to women. The scientists showed that when men get a whiff of women’s tears, they experience a temporary, generalized loss of libido and a dip in testosterone. Really. (And you thought that red, runny nose was the turn off, didn’t you?)
Scientists have known for decades that the chemical composition of “emotional tears” differs from tears shed due to simple irritation. But now, it appears that some of the chemicals contained in the former are actually pheromones; biological substances that create behavioral changes in others who are exposed to them. Such chemicals were known to exist in urine in anogenital gland secretions (dont ask), but not in tears.
Sobel’s team began its study by posting ads on Israeli college campus bulletin boards in which they sought volunteers who cried easily. Seventy-one people responded. All but one were women. From that group, the scientists identified six who were profuse criers and who could return to their labs every other day.
The scientists then asked each one to select a movie that was guaranteed to make them break down, to watch it in private, and to collect their tears in a vial. For the controls, Sobel’s group trickled a saline solution down the same women’s cheeks and collected that. Sobel’s group subsequently asked male volunteers to sniff the contents of the two vials and ran a battery of psychological and physiological tests to measure their responses. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Pizaazz*
February 15th, 2011 by Medgadget in Better Health Network, Research
Tags: Artificial Gut, Biotechnology, Combating Obesity, Creating New Foods, Dietetics, Digestion, Digestion Lab, Feel Full With Less Food, Feelings of Satiation, Food and Nutrition, Food Research and Development, Foods That Satisfy, Foods That Trick The Body, Gastrointestinal Phenomenon, Gastrointestional Medicine, Gastrointestional Tract, GI Tract, Human Food Consumption, Hunger Control, Ileal Break, Lausanne, Medgadget, Nestle, Peptidal Feedback System, Reduces Food Intake, Satiety-Inducing Foods, Science and Medicine, Slows Food Transit, Stomach Studies, Switzerland
No Comments »
What do you do when you’re one of the world’s biggest food companies and you’re looking to explore what happens after your products get chewed and swallowed? Apparently you build a large refrigerator-sized, million dollar model of a human gut, complete with valves, injection ports for enzymes, and a transparent window for visibility, of course.
Nestle, in their quest to create foods that trick your body into feeling even more satisfied after eating than you otherwise would be, has a research and development center that holds this artificial gut, tucked next to the mountains in Lausanne, Switzerland. Here they’re busy studying and trying to commercialize gastrointestinal phenomenon such as the “ileal break,” a peptidal feedback mechanism that both slows transit through the GI system and reduces food intake by triggering feelings of satiation. They hope to release products based on this science within five years.
From the Wall Street Journal:
Tracking the movement of food in a person’s gastrointestinal tract isn’t easy. So at a “digestion lab”—part of Nestle’s sprawling research and development center here—scientists use a million-dollar model of the human gut.
The machine is about the size of a large refrigerator. It has several compartments linked by valves, and it is carefully calibrated to the body’s temperature. The entire setup is controlled by a computer. The front is glass, allowing observers to watch as food travels through the system.
On a recent day, the “stomach” section at the top slowly squeezed and churned a salt solution, just like the real thing. The liquefied result then wended its way down the other tubes, representing other sections of the digestive tract. At each stage, tiny valves released the appropriate salt, bile and enzymes, which helped to digest the food.
The question still stands: What comes out the other end?
The Wall Street Journal article: Hungry? Your Stomach Really Does Have a Mind of Its Own…
*This blog post was originally published at Medgadget*
February 15th, 2011 by RyanDuBosar in Better Health Network, Research
Tags: ACP, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Ambulatory Care, Ambulatory Visits, American College Of Physicians, Cost of Medical Care, Government Statistics, Inpatient Visits, Kidney Disease, Medicare Payments, National Healthcare Costs, Renal Disease, Ryan DuBosar
No Comments »
Medical spending to treat kidney disease totaled on average $25.3 billion annually from 2003 to 2007 (in 2007 dollars). Almost half of the expenditures ($12.7 billion) were spent on ambulatory visits.
On average, 3.7 million adults (1.7 percent of the population) annually reported getting treatment for kidney disease, reports a statistical brief from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. During 2003-2007, for those ages 18 to 64, more than half of the total kidney disease expenditures were from ambulatory visits (53.1 percent) compared with about one third (30.3 percent) from inpatient visits. Among those age 65 and older, ambulatory visits accounted for 46 percent of the total kidney disease expenditures and hospital stays were 43 percent.
Similar amounts were spent on prescription medicines ($1.4 billion) and emergency room visits ($1.5 billion). Hospital stays amounted to $9.1 billion. Medicare paid 40 percent of the total expenditures to treat kidney disease.
*This blog post was originally published at ACP Internist*
