December 29th, 2011 by PreparedPatient in Health Tips, Research
No Comments »
Vitamins, herbs and other dietary supplements are sold as natural alternatives to pharmaceuticals and many people turn to them in an attempt to improve their health. Others seek supplements to lose weight or after hearing that they can help with serious medical conditions. These products are now used at least monthly by more than half of all Americans—and their production, marketing and sales have become a $23.7 billion industry, according to the Nutrition Business Journal.
What Are Dietary Supplements and How Are They Regulated?
98-year-old Bob Stewart, a retired podiatrist and senior Olympian, credits his use of supplements for his healthy aging. Writer Betsy McMillan, a mother of two now adult children, however, nearly suffered permanent liver damage due to a supplement that contained potentially fatal levels of niacin.
Unlike pharmaceuticals—which must be FDA-approved as safe and effective before they can be marketed—supplements are considered as foods by regulators and assumed to be safe until proven otherwise. Although pharmaceutical manufacturers face inspections to ensure that the right dose is in the right pill without dangerous contaminants, supplements do not undergo such intense government scrutiny.
Despite many reports of health problems, Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Prepared Patient Forum: What It Takes Blog*
November 19th, 2011 by KennyLinMD in Opinion
3 Comments »
In the face of accumulating evidence and a U.S. Preventive Services Task Force finding that PSA screening for prostate cancer does more harm than good, the most frequent response I hear from physicians who continue to defend the test is that PSA is all we have, and that until a better test is developed, it would be “unethical” to not offer men some way to detect prostate cancer at an asymptomatic stage. (However, these physicians for the most part don’t question the ethics of not offering women screening for ovarian cancer, which a recent randomized trial concluded provides no mortality benefit but causes considerable harms from diagnosis and treatment.)
I’m currently reading historian Stephen Ambrose’s dual biography of Oglala Sioux leader Crazy Horse and Civil War cavalry general George Armstrong Custer, whose troops were routed by the Sioux at the famous Battle of Little Bighorn in 1876. One premise of the book is that the same aggressive instincts that served Custer so well during the Civil War Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Common Sense Family Doctor*
September 27th, 2011 by RyanDuBosar in Research
No Comments »
Intranasal insulin stabilized or improved cognition and function and preserved cerebral metabolic rate of glucose in brain regions affected by Alzheimer’s disease, concluded researchers from a phase II trial. But more and larger trials are needed before any conclusions can be drawn, they also cautioned.
Insulin is important to normal brain function, and reduced insulin levels may contribute to Alzheimer’s disease, researchers noted. To examine the effects of intranasal insulin in adults with amnestic mild cognitive impairment or Alzheimer’s disease, researchers conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in a VA medical center.
The intent-to-treat sample consisted of 104 adults with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (n=64) or mild to moderate Alzheimer’s disease (n=40) defined as Clinical Dementia Rating scores of 0.5-1 and Mini-Mental State Examination scores greater than 15.
Participants received Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at ACP Internist*
September 19th, 2011 by KennyLinMD in Health Policy, True Stories
No Comments »
Flashback to summer of 2008. I’m looking forward to August 5–the day that I’ll no longer be a faceless bureaucrat. The day that the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) will issue its new recommendations on screening for prostate cancer–recommendations I’ve labored on as a federal employee for the past year and a half.
For much of 2007 I combed the medical literature for every study I could find on the benefits and harms of prostate cancer screening. In November of that year I presented my findings to the USPSTF, a widely respected, independent panel of primary care experts. They discussed and debated what the evidence showed and then voted unanimously to draft new recommendations. I didn’t get to vote, but it has been my job in 2008 to shepherd the draft statement and literature review through an intensive vetting process and to finalize both.
As August 5 approaches, my colleagues in public relations warn me that the last time the USPSTF said anything about prostate cancer screening, the phones started ringing off the hook. I’m not so secretly hoping that the same will happen this time.
And I’m not disappointed! After we release the statement, Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Common Sense Family Doctor*
