In last week’s article on fall risk, I briefly mentioned cataracts as a contributor. Cataracts, the nuclear type, reduce visual acuity in an insidious process. What is important about cataracts is that they affect so many Americans, and their incidence is rising. Well, as it turns out, cataract surgery may not only reduce the risk of falls and hip fracture but, at the same time, pressure in the eye.
A diet rich in carotenoids may also prevent the occurrence of cataracts, whereas statins may have the reverse effect by increasing risk.

Cataract surgery and hip fracture

In a recent study, elderly cataract patients who underwent surgery were significantly less likely to experience a hip fracture during a year of follow-up than those who did not have surgery (JAMA. 2012;308:493-501). This was a retrospective (backward-looking) observational study, and its size was considerable, with over one million patients 65 and older. The results showed a 16 percent reduction in the risk of hip fractures overall. Those who were older — between 80 and 84 — had the most to gain, with a 28 percent reduction in hip fracture risk.

The reason for the increased fall risk and subsequent hip fracture risk in those with cataracts is the decrease in visual acuity and depth perception and the reduction in visual field that accompanies cataracts (J Am Geriatr Soc. 2009 Oct;57(10):1825-1832). As we know, hip fractures have tremendous impact on the ability of elderly patients to remain independent. Thus, avoiding them is the best strategy, since many of these patients do not regain their prior mobility.

Cataract surgery and intraocular pressure

Yet another benefit of cataract surgery is the potential reduction in intraocular pressure (IOP). Why is intraocular pressure (pressure within the eye) important? High IOP has been associated with an increased risk of glaucoma. A comparative case series (looking at those with and without cataract surgery) utilizing data from the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study showed that those cataract patients with ocular hypertension (higher than normal pressure in the eye) who underwent cataract surgery saw an immediate reduction in IOP (Ophthalmology. 2012;119:1826-1831). This effect lasted at least three years. The removal of the cataract lowered the IOP by 16.5 percent from 23.9 mm Hg to 19.8 mm Hg. This would be close to the lower end of pressure reduction goals in glaucoma treatments, 20 to 40 percent. Therefore, cataract surgery may be synergistic with traditional glaucoma treatment.

Cataract surgery and macular degeneration risk

In a May 15, 2011 article, I wrote about a study that suggested cataract surgery increased the risk of progression of age-related macular degeneration (AMD). However, this may not be the case after all. There is conflicting evidence from a second study. Rather than increasing AMD risk, cataract surgery may uncover underlying AMD pathology that is hidden because the cataract obfuscates the view of the retina (back of the eye) (Arch Ophthalmol. 2009;127:1412-1419). The study’s strengths were the use color retinal photographs and fluorescein angiography (dye in blood vessels of eye), both very thorough approaches.

Cataract prevention with dietary carotenoids

Diet may play a significant role in prevention of cataracts. In the Women’s Health Initiative Observational Study, carotenoids, specifically lutein and zeaxanthin, seem to decrease cataract risk by 23 percent in women with high blood levels, compared to those with low blood levels (Arch Ophthalmol. 2008;126(3):354-364). In fact, those in the highest quintile (the top 20 percent) had an even more dramatic 32 percent risk reduction when compared to those in the bottom quintile (the lowest 20 percent). As the authors commented, it may not have been just lutein and zeaxanthin. There are more than 600 carotenoids, but these were the ones measured in the study. Some of the foods that are high in carotenoids include carrots, spinach, kale, apricots and mango, according to the USDA. Interestingly, half a cup of one of the first three on a daily basis will far exceed the recommended daily allowance. Thus, it takes a modest consistency in dietary carotenoids to see a reduction in risk.

Vitamin C effect

The impact of vitamin C on cataract risk may depend on the duration of daily consumption. In other words, 10 years seems to be the critical duration needed to see an effect. According to one study, those participants who took 500mg of vitamin C supplements for 10 or more years saw a 77 percent reduction in risk (Am J Clin Nutr. 1997 Oct;66(4):911-916). However, only very few women achieved this goal in the study, demonstrating how difficult it is to maintain supplementation for a 10-year period.

Those who took vitamin C for fewer than 10 years saw no effect in prevention of cataracts. In the well-designed AREDS study, a randomized controlled trial, the gold standard of studies, those who received 500 vitamin C supplements along with other supplements did not show any cataract risk reduction, compared to those who did not receive these supplements. There were 4,757 patients involved in the study with duration of 6.3 years of daily supplement consumption. Therefore, I would not rush to take vitamin C as a cataract preventative.

Statin use

Statins have both positive and negative effects, and the effect on the eyes is negative. In the Waterloo Eye Study with over 6,000 participants, those patients taking statins were at a 57 percent increased the risk of cataracts (Optom Vis Sci 2012;89:1165-1171). Diabetes patients saw an increased risk of cataracts as well. And in diabetes patients, statins seem to increase the rate at which cataracts occurred. The authors surmise that this is because higher levels of cholesterol may be needed for the development of epithelial (outer layer) cells and transparency of the lens. This process may be blocked with the use of statins. Before considering discontinuing statins, it is important to weigh the risks with the benefits.

Thus, if you have diminished vision, it may be due to cataracts. It is important to consult an ophthalmologist for cataract surgery, which can reduce your risks of falls, hip fractures and intraocular pressure. For those who do not have cataracts, a diet rich in carotenoids may significantly reduce the risk of occurrence.

Dr. Dunaief is a speaker, author and local lifestyle medicine physician focusing on the integration of medicine, nutrition, fitness and stress management.  For further information, go to the website www.medicalcompassmd.com and/or consult your personal physician.

Falling is not a big deal when you are young, but that changes with age. Most of us have seen the commercial where the woman has fallen and can’t get up. Although this commercial has been mocked, for older adults, falling can be seriously debilitating or cause life-threatening complications. In a study, 24 percent of people over the age of 71 who had at least one fall experienced reduced quality of life (J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 1998;53A(2):M112-M119).

In a survey, 80 percent of women said they preferred death over the risk of a “bad” hip fracture from a fall that would cause loss of independence and nursing home admission (BMJ. 2000;320(7231):341-345). Unfortunately, falls in those over age 65 are quite common, with 30 to 40 percent falling annually (Clin Geriatr Med. 2002;18(2):141-158).

Now that I have your attention, what increases the risk of falls and what can we do to prevent them? When we think of the risk, we think of making the home safer by, for example, making sure that there are no loose rugs or by providing adequate lighting. But the potential causes and prevention go far beyond these steps. The factors that increase risk include chronic diseases, such as osteoarthritis, Parkinson’s, dementia, atrial fibrillation, AMD and cataracts, as well as obesity and medications.

Medication’s impact

Many patients over the age of 65 are on blood pressure medications. It turns out that diuretics (water pills) may increase the risk of falls. In a case-control study (those with high blood pressure compared to those without), nursing home patients who newly started diuretics or had their dose increased had a significant twofold increased risk of fall, especially the first day (Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2012 May;21(5):560-563). Loop diuretics, such as Lasix (furosemide), had the most damaging effects on risk.

The authors recommend close surveillance of elderly patients for at least two days when initiating diuretic medications to treat high blood pressure. High blood pressure can be effectively treated with lifestyle modifications, such as an antioxidant-rich diet like the DASH diet that focuses on fruit, vegetables and low saturated fat (Circulation. 2010;122:A18589).

Chronic diseases

Those with osteoarthritis (OA), especially of the knee, are more likely to fall. This makes sense, since it is more difficult to walk with OA. In the GLOW study, a prospective (forward-looking) study involving postmenopausal women, those with OA had a 27 percent greater risk of falling, compared with those who didn’t have the disease (Ann Rheum Dis. online June 23, 2012). There was also a 21 percent increased risk of fracture that occurred, as well. Over 50,000 women with a mean age of 68 participated in the study. I recommend reading my article on the treatment and prevention of OA from July 10 for more details.

Obesity effect

We tend to associate falls and fractures with elderly patients who are gaunt and frail. However, it turns out that obesity increases the risk of falls. In an observational study, there was a linear relationship between obesity and fall risk (J Am Geriatr Soc. 2012 Jan;60(1):124-129). In other words, as patients increased their BMI, their fall risk went up proportionally.

Even more interesting, the risk of fracture increased with increasing BMI associated with obesity. Just a reminder that obesity is a BMI of 30 kg/m2 or over. According to the authors, the reason for obesity’s effect is that people who are obese have difficulty with balance. In this study, underweight patients did not have an increase in falls. To treat obesity, lifestyle modifications have shown significant results. And as you decrease weight and inflammation, it also helps to treat osteoarthritis.

Vitamin D

Although it is not surprising that vitamin D helps to prevent falls, since this supplement strengthens bones and muscle in the elderly, dose and frequency are determining factors of whether it is beneficial or detrimental. In a randomized controlled trial (RCT), the gold standard of studies, annual oral doses of 500,000 IUs of vitamin D3 actually increased the risk of falls and fracture in elderly patients, 15 percent and 26 percent respectively (JAMA. 2010;303:1815-1822).

However, when given on a daily basis, vitamin D does what we have come to expect, decreases the risk of falls and fractures with the appropriate dose. In a secondary analysis of a RCT, it was the lower doses of 200 IUs, 400 IUs and 600 IUs that were ineffective, while the higher dose of 800 IUs taken daily showed a large, statistically significant 72 percent reduction in the risk of falls (J Am Geriatr Soc. 2007;55(2):234-239).

The difference between this and the previous study on vitamin D was the frequency and dosing regimen. Hence, taking vitamin D is an easy and very efficient way to reduce falls and fractures in the elderly. Many elderly are deficient in vitamin D and should have their blood levels checked. Regardless of the results, they should receive at least 800 IUs of vitamin D — if not more — on a daily basis. This will either maintain or improve blood levels of vitamin D.

Exercise

In a RCT, exercise in women with a mean age of 65 increased the bone mineral density (BMD) of the spine by 77 percent compared to a control group, which had a 66 percent reduction in BMD. In other words, the women developed stronger bones with increased exercise. The trial design looked at the exercise group, which focused on increased exercise intensity, and compared it to a control group with low-intensity and low-frequency exercise. This translated into a significant reduction in fall risk for the exercise group.

We should be aware of the risk factors for falls. Complications from falls are the leading cause of mortality in older adults. This is not something to be taken lightly. Fortunately, many of the risk factors are modifiable with lifestyle changes, including a nutrient-dense diet, vitamin D supplementation and increased exercise.

Dr. Dunaief is a speaker, author and local lifestyle medicine physician focusing on the integration of medicine, nutrition, fitness and stress management.  For further information, go to the website www.medicalcompassmd.com and/or consult your personal physician.

In last week’s article, (dated Sept. 27), I wrote about general dementia prevention. I thought it would be appropriate to follow up with an article on Alzheimer’s disease, one of the most debilitating neurodegenerative diseases. Its incidence continues to rise in lockstep with the fact that we are living longer, for as we age, our risk for the disease increases exponentially (Neurology 1998;51(3):728).

There is more and more evidence that points to an association between diet and Alzheimer’s disease.  Also, there may be a more definitive way to estimate disease risk and progression. This involves white matter hyperintensities (WMH) found in an MRI scan of the brain. These WMH may be tied, at least partially, to diet. Vitamin D levels are also potentially important in Alzheimer’s risk. This article will discuss and explore the potential associations in more detail by looking at the evidence.

The potential significance of white matter hyperintensities

What are WMH and why are they important? White matter hyperintensities represent small vessel cerebrovascular disease. Cerebrovascular disease involves a group of disorders that affect blood vessels, causing a significantly diminished or lack of blood flow to the brain (www.medicalnewstoday.com). For example, atherosclerosis or plaques in the arteries can be a cause, potentially leading to a cerebrovascular accident — or what we typically call a stroke.

One study utilized the Washington Heights/Inwood Columbia Aging Project (WHICAP), an observational study in Manhattan. It found significantly increased risk of Alzheimer’s with WMH, while the atrophy of the hippocampus did not correlate with disease diagnosis (Arch. Neurol. online Sept. 2012). The hippocampus is the part of the brain involved in formation, organization and storage of memory.
The study suggests that these WMH may be important for predicting disease risk and progression, even potentially more so than hippocampal atrophy or shrinkage. Further study is needed for these preliminary findings, though they are very intriguing.

If we are looking at the WMH, then the risk factors for cerebrovascular disease, including high blood pressure, diabetes and obesity, become important. This is where dietary aspects may play a role. The authors suggest that lifestyle modifications would impact cerebrovascular disease risk, which ultimately could reduce Alzheimer’s risk.

Dietary aspects

In an observational study called the Kame Project cohort, a modest dietary change had dramatically beneficial results. Those who drank fruit juice and vegetable juice three times or more a week, compared to those who drank less than once a week, saw a 76 percent reduction in the risk of Alzheimer’s disease (Am. J. Med. 2006 Sep;119(9):751-759). The authors concluded that fruit/vegetable juice may play a vital role in delaying the onset of dementia.

Ironically, at the same time that the WMH results of the previously mentioned study were published, Mark Bittman wrote in a recent article that Alzheimer’s disease has been referred to as “type 3 diabetes” (www.nytimes.com). This phrase has been around since the publication of a 2005 journal article (J. Alzheimers Dis. 2005 Feb;7(1):63-80). The reason for this phrase is that there is potentially an impaired insulin response in the brain of Alzheimer’s disease patients. It is not the phrase itself, but rather the implication of the phrase, that is important. Insulin helps the body regulate and utilize blood sugar. If the brain is not able to metabolize sugar in early Alzheimer’s, this mechanism may contribute to the disease.

To compound this potential lack of insulin response, a recent study focused on macronutrients, or more specifically carbohydrates, and their impact on Alzheimer’s. But what does Alzheimer’s disease have to do with carbohydrates?

The results of the study showed that those who ate a high-carbohydrate diet were at an 89 percent increased risk of developing dementia, such as Alzheimer’s disease (J. Alzheimers Dis. Online July 17, 2012). This should not be shocking, since carbohydrates become sugar when broken down in the body. It seems to fit what the authors are saying in the previously mentioned 2005 study conclusions.

Diabetes

It turns out that type 2 diabetes patients have twice the risk of developing Alzheimer’s (Medscape.org). If we control the glucose (sugar) levels intensely in diabetics, will this reduce their risk of Alzheimer’s? Unfortunately, the ACCORD-MIND trial, a randomized clinical trial, considered the gold standard of studies, did not show a difference after 40 months between the group that had intensive control of sugars compared to standard control (Lancet Neurol. 2011;10:969-977).

The impact of vitamin D

We can’t seem to get away from vitamin D. It appears to be involved in so many different chronic diseases. In the most recent meta-analysis (a group of 37 studies), it was found that those with Alzheimer’s have a lower vitamin D blood level than those without the disease (Neurology. 2012;79:1397-1405). I have a patient with moderately severe Alzheimer’s who is not only insufficient (<30 ng/ml) but deficient (<20 ng/ml) in vitamin D. When I first tested the blood levels, the patient had a vitamin D level of 13 ng/ml.

What is also interesting is that this same patient, after being on a high nutrient, plant-rich diet for a month, had an approximately 45-minute lucid moment, something that had not been seen for years according to the caregiver. This is only anecdotal, and it has only been a month, so that the lucid moment may have been a coincidence. We will have to stay tuned to see what happens.

Ultimately, what is critically important is to realize that Alzheimer’s disease, just like many other chronic diseases, has modifiable risk factors that involve lifestyle choices. Pardon the pun, but I hope this gives you food for thought.

Dr. Dunaief is a speaker, author and local lifestyle medicine physician focusing on the integration of medicine, nutrition, fitness and stress management.  For further information, go to the website www.medicalcompassmd.com and/or consult your personal physician.

Dementia may be diagnosed when someone experiences loss of memory plus loss of another faculty, such as executive functioning (decision-making) or language abilities (speaking, writing or reading). The latter is known as aphasia. Alzheimer’s disease is responsible for approximately 60 to 80 percent of dementia cases (www.uptodate.com).

This past weekend, there was a torrent of support for Alzheimer’s research through fundraising walks. More research is certainly needed, since there are no definitive studies that show reversal or cure for Alzheimer’s disease. This is why prevention is central to Alzheimer’s — and dementia in general — as I discussed in my May 19, 2011, article.

In terms of dementia, there is good news and some disappointing news.
We will start with the good news. Though chronological age is a risk factor that cannot be changed, biological age may be adjustable. There are studies that suggest we may be able to prevent dementia through the use of both lifestyle modifications and medications.

Telomeres’ length and biological age

Biological age may be different from chronologic age depending on a host of environmental factors that include diet, exercise and smoking. There are substances called telomeres that are found at the ends of our chromosomes. They provide stability to this genetic material. As our telomeres get shorter and shorter, our cellular aging and, ultimately, biological aging, increases.
In a recent preliminary case control study, dementia patients were shown to have significantly shorter telomere length than healthy patients (Arch Neurol. 2012 Jul 23:1-8). Interestingly, according to the authors, men have shorter telomere length and may be biologically older by four years than women of the same chronological age. The researchers caution that this is a preliminary finding and may not have clinical implications.

What I find most intriguing is that intensive lifestyle modifications increased telomere length in a small three-month study with patients who had low-risk prostate cancer (Lancet Oncol. 2008;9(11):1048-57). By adjusting their lifestyles, study participants were potentially able to decrease their biological ages.

Beta-carotene and vitamin C effect

Lifestyle modifications play a role in many chronic diseases and disorders. Dementia is no exception. In a small, preliminary case-control study (disease vs. healthy patients), higher blood levels of vitamin C and beta-carotene significantly reduced the risk of dementia, by 71 percent and 87 percent respectively (J Alzheimers Dis. 2012;31:717-724). The blood levels were dramatically different in those with the highest and lowest blood levels of vitamin C (74.4 vs. 28.9 µmol/L) and beta-carotene (0.8 vs 0.2 µmol/L).

The reason for this effect may be that these nutrients help reduce oxidative stress and thus have neuroprotective effects, preventing the breakdown of neurons. This study was done in the elderly, average 78.9 years old, which is a plus, since as we age we’re more likely to be afflicted by dementia.
It is critically important to delineate the sources of vitamin C and beta-carotene in this study. These numbers came from food, not supplements. Why is this important? First, beta-carotene is part of a family of nutrients called carotenoids. There are at least 600 carotenoids in food, all of which may have benefits that are not achieved when taking beta-carotene supplements. Second of all, beta-carotene in supplement form may increase the risk of small cell lung cancer in smokers (Am. J. Epidemiol. 2009; 169(7):815-828).

Foods that contain beta-carotene include fruits and vegetables such as berries; green leafy vegetables; and orange, red or yellow vegetables like peppers, carrots and sweet potato. It may surprise you, but fish also contains carotenoids. In my practice, I test for beta-carotene and vitamin C as a way to measure nutrient levels and track patients’ progress when they are eating a nutrient-dense diet. Interestingly, many patients achieve more than three times higher than the highest beta-carotene blood levels seen in this small study.

Impact of high blood pressure medications

For those patients who have high blood pressure, it is important to know that not all blood pressure medications are created equal. When comparing blood pressure medications in an observational study, two classes of these medications stood out. Angiotensin II receptor blockers (known as ARBs) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (known as ACE inhibitors) reduce the risk of dementia by 53 percent and 24 percent respectively, when used in combination with other blood pressure medications.
Interestingly, when ARBs were used alone, there was still a 47 percent reduction in risk, however ACE inhibitors lost their prevention advantage. High blood pressure is a likely risk factor for dementia and can also be treated with lifestyle modifications (Neurology. 2005;64(2):277). Otherwise, ARBs or ACE inhibitors may be the best choices for reducing dementia risk.

Ginkgo biloba disappoints

Ginkgo biloba, a common herbal supplement taken to help prevent dementia, may have no benefit. In the recent GuidAge study, ginkgo biloba was shown to be no more effective than placebo in preventing patients from progressing to Alzheimer’s disease (Lancet Neurol. 2012;11(10):851-859). This randomized controlled trial, considered the gold standard of study designs, was done in elderly patients over a five-year period with almost 3,000 participants. There was no difference seen between the treatment and placebo groups. This reinforces the results of an earlier study, Ginkgo Evaluation of Memory trial (JAMA. 2008;300(19):2253-2262). Longer studies may be warranted. The authors stressed the importance of preventive measures with dementia.

Fish oil: not the last word

Many of us take fish oil supplements in the hope of preventing dementia. However, in a meta-analysis (a group of three randomized controlled trials), the results did not show a difference between treatment groups and placebo in older patients taking fish oil with omega-3 fatty acids (Cochrane Summaries online June 13, 2012). The authors stress that this is not the final word, since studies have been mixed. The longest of the three studies was 40 months yet may not have been long enough to see a beneficial effect. Also participants in the meta-analysis did not necessarily have low omega-3 levels at the beginnings of the studies. This doesn’t necessarily mean fish oil doesn’t work for dementia prevention, it is just discouraging, as the authors emphasize. Fish consumption, however, has shown an inverse association with Alzheimer’s and dementia overall (Neurology. 2007;69(20):1921).

There may be ways to prevent dementia from occurring, whether through lifestyle modifications or through the selection of medications, if they are necessary. It is great that there is such enthusiasm to raise money for dementia research and, in particular, for Alzheimer’s disease. However, it’s just as important to take action now in the form of preventing this disabling disorder.

Dr. Dunaief is a speaker, author and local lifestyle medicine physician focusing on the integration of medicine, nutrition, fitness and stress management. For further information, go to the website www.medicalcompassmd.com and/or consult your personal physician.

Eye tremor may be an early indication Parkinson’s disease is a neurodegenerative disease, which means there is progressive breakdown of neurons. Traditional medications that focus on dopamine levels and receptors help improve symptoms, sometimes dramatically, yet they have limitations. Medications can’t prevent the breakdown of the neurons themselves. Also, drug benefits may eventually “wear off.”
Parkinson’s typically affects people who are older than 60. There are over one million people in North America directly affected by this disease, but countless family member caregivers are indirectly affected as well (N Engl J Med 1998;339(15):1044).

This article’s focus is to provide an overview of Parkinson’s, including risk factors, diagnosis and alternative treatments that may enhance traditional treatments.

Significance of eye tremors

The common triad of symptoms for diagnosing Parkinson’s are rigidity, tremor and bradykinesia (slow gait). Parkinson’s tremors typically occur in the limbs, but this may not be the whole story. We may also want to look at the eyes. It appears that Parkinson’s disease patients have ocular fixation instability, meaning that when they focus on a point on a computer screen, their eyes oscillate and may have trouble focusing. This happens to a greater degree in the vertical direction than the horizontal (Arch Neurol. 2012;69(8):1011-1017).

In this case-control trial, which compared Parkinson’s patients with healthy participants, 63 percent of the Parkinson’s patients, in addition to eye tremors, experienced difficulty with vision at some point during the testing. The eye area affected was the fovea — part of the retina (back of the eye) responsible for sharp central vision. The authors believe that eye testing may provide an accurate way to diagnose the disease.

Role of pesticides

It appears in meta-analysis (a group of 46 trials) that pesticides increase the risk of Parkinson’s disease (Environ Health Perspect. 2012;120(3):340-347). Insecticides and herbicides appeared to have more impact, whereas fungicides were not associated with increased risk.

The studies were not completely consistent, even though there was a 62 percent overall increased risk. However, it would be premature to declare that pesticides are definitely associated with Parkinson’s disease. There were no randomized clinical trials, and there were several different types of trials analyzed. Many past studies have had mixed results. Also, it was unclear what type of pesticide exposure occurred and at what level. The authors did not definitively say that it was from consumption of foods, but the results are interesting and may give a boost to the validity of organic foods.

Dairy’s potential negative impact

The National Dairy Council wants you to believe that dairy makes you big and strong. However, in the prospective (forward-looking) Cancer Prevention Study II, men who consumed the most dairy were found to have as much as an 80 percent increased Parkinson’s disease risk compared to those who consumed the least (Am J Epidemiol. 2007 May 1;165(9):998-1006).The risk is higher than the pesticide study mentioned above. There was also an increased risk with women, but not as dramatic. When results combined both sexes, there was an overall 60 percent increased risk. Therefore, if there is a family history of Parkinson’s, it might be wise to consider keeping dairy to a minimum.

Dietary effect

In a meta-analysis that looked at the Nurses’ Health Study and the Health Professionals Follow-up Study, results showed diets that focused on fruit, vegetables, whole grain, nuts and seeds, fish and poultry demonstrated a 30 percent reduction in Parkinson’s disease risk (Am J Clin Nutr. 2007 Nov;86(5):1486-94). This effect may be due to flavonoids, bioactive compounds in plant-rich diets. It is surmised that these compounds may have neuroprotective effects, because of their antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties (Eur J Pharmacol. 2006;545(1):51-64).

Exercise and Parkinson’s treatment

Exercise may be used in concert with therapeutics in treating Parkinson’s disease, and goes beyond medications in helping with motor function and stability. Two that have shown good results are resistance training and tai chi.

Resistance training — specifically weight training — may have significant benefits, according to preliminary data (AAN 2012 abstract #S02.003). The patients involved in the study had Parkinson’s for a mean of seven years and were not on medication. They exercised twice a week for one hour, and they saw a significant improvement in motor function as they gradually increased the level of resistance. This was sustained for the 24-month study. Though this study was small, these results are encouraging.
Postural stability is important to the functionality of a Parkinson’s disease patient. In an NIH-funded randomized clinical trial, the gold standard of trials, tai chi significantly improved postural stability when comparing it to both resistance training and stretching (N Engl J Med 2012;366:511-519). Tai chi was instrumental also in reducing falls — even three months after patients stopped tai chi. The mild to moderate Parkinson’s patients in the study performed tai chi for one hour twice a week.

It is exciting that there may be a more definitive way to diagnose Parkinson’s disease by testing the eyes for tremors, rather than the traditional compilation of symptoms. Even though it is not clear where pesticide exposure occurred, it may be prudent for people with a high risk of Parkinson’s to lean toward an organic, plant-rich diet for prevention.

In addition, if a Parkinson’s disease patient exercised four times a week, alternating between tai chi and resistance training, they would get the best of both worlds: potential improvement in postural stability and in motor skills.

Dr. Dunaief is a speaker, author and local lifestyle medicine physician focusing on the integration of medicine, nutrition, fitness and stress management. For further information, go to the website www.medicalcompassmd.com and/or consult your personal physician.

You would think that all of us, if given a choice, would want to live longer. However, in a recent informal survey involving 30,000 participants over the last three years, more than half did not want to live past the 80-year current life expectancy for developed countries (NYTimes.com Aug. 25). This would be surprising, except that the most frequent reason offered had to do with not wanting to be old and debilitated. What if we could propose improving longevity — and health — so that people would feel vivacious throughout their lives, regardless of age?

Calorie restriction impact
Recent thinking has been that if we restrict our calorie intake significantly, by 30 percent, then we are more apt to live longer and healthier lives. That is what we were led to believe by earlier studies in monkeys, like the 2009 University of Wisconsin study (Science. 2009 Jul 10;325(5937):201-4). The problem with the study was that the researchers discounted a number of monkeys who died, claiming this did not have to due with aging.

However, a newly published study with rhesus monkeys reported different results (Nature online Aug. 29). Severely restricting these monkeys’ calories did not increase their longevity, nor did they live healthier lives. These results were disappointing in that calorie restriction is not necessarily the panacea that we thought. This was a 25-year study and the results had been eagerly anticipated.

There were some benefits to calorie restriction, though. For older males and females, heart disease risk was reduced due to lowered triglyceride levels. This was true, ironically, only when calorie restriction was begun when the monkeys were already old.

However, the monkeys — calorie restricted or not — did still experience chronic diseases such as heart disease and cancer.

What about chronic disease?

It appears that chronic disease is the greatest hindrance to achieving or maintaining a better quality of life. Coincidently, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has released data that show chronic disease is on the rise, with increasing numbers of patients having two or more diseases. Also, it appears that the United States lags behind European nations in reducing the number of preventable deaths, called “amenable mortality.” Most of these deaths are caused by chronic disorders, such as high blood pressure, stroke and cancers. The U.S. is seeing a decline in its rates of preventable deaths but at half the pace of France and the United Kingdom. So what can we do to slow the rise in chronic disease and accelerate the decrease in our rate of preventable deaths?

Diet composition effect

Dietary choices can have a tremendous effect on health. Not surprisingly, poor diet composition is one of the leading contributors to many chronic diseases such as high cholesterol, diabetes and heart disease, and thus amenable mortality rates (Ann Intern Med 2010;153:736-750). The CDC showed that only about one-quarter of Americans consumed the most basic levels of fruits and vegetables recommended.

However, there are several diets that have been promoted because they are known to have powerful effects on reversing this dismal trend of increasing chronic disease such as the DASH diet and the Mediterranean-type diet. In 2010, the DASH diet was highlighted because of its beneficial effects on prevention and treatment of disease (www.cnpp.usda.gov). At the basis of this diet is the emphasis on nutrient-rich foods, including fruits, vegetables, nuts and seeds, beans and legumes, and whole grains, as well as a modest amount of lean animal protein.

The DASH diet was originally designed to lower blood pressure. In a randomized controlled trial, the gold standard of studies, DASH showed significantly lower systolic blood pressure results compared to those on a standard diet, even though both groups were intentionally given the same level of sodium intake, which is very interesting (N Engl J Med 1997;336:1117-1124). The difference was that DASH increased the amounts of fruits, vegetables and low-fat dairy, while lowering saturated fat.

Subsequent prospective studies, such as the Nurses’ Health Study, have borne out the benefits of the DASH diet in lowering heart disease risk in patients followed for a 25-year duration (Arch Intern Med 2008;168:713-720).

Fitness at any age — a greater impact than expected

We used to think that fitness helped delay disease, but a new study suggests that fitness in middle age, defined as people in their 50s, actually decreased the risk of chronic disease significantly. It didn’t just delay it (Arch Int. Med online Aug. 27). Ultimately, fitness at any age seems to provide us with a higher quality of life. This study involved 18,600 participants. There was an approximately 45 percent reduction across the board for both men and women in incidence of the top eight chronic diseases.
The good news is that you may not have to make yourself miserable by eating a very low calorie diet in the hopes of achieving a longer life.

Rather than suffering — or imagining suffering — through severe calorie restriction, why not focus on consistent, modest fitness routines and diets that are rich in nutrients and high in volume? The potential disease-modifying effects could play a crucial role in preventing what we perceive as age-related decline. Then, you can have a positive attitude toward living longer, since you will be able to maintain, if not improve, your health as you age.

Dr. Dunaief is a speaker, author and local lifestyle medicine physician focusing on the integration of medicine, nutrition, fitness and stress management. For further information, go to the website www.medicalcompassmd.com and/or consult your personal physician.

When studies have unexpected results, I feel the need to investigate further.
In life we run into paradoxes all the time. A paradox is defined as a statement or opinion that seems to contradict itself. For instance, “You should not go near the water until you learn to swim” is a paradox. You can’t learn to swim until you get in the water.

There are two recent apparent medical contradictions, both obesity paradoxes. One refers to heart attacks and the other to type 2 diabetes.

Obesity paradox in heart attacks

A newly published meta-analysis involving two studies finds that obese patient are more likely to survive a heart attack at year one than are patients who have a normal body mass index, known as BMI (Am J Med. 2012 Aug;125(8):796-803).

In other words, the results show that a patient’s risk of mortality from a heart attack is inversely related to weight. Those who were obese had the lowest mortality rate from a heart attack: 4.7 percent. Those who were overweight had a 6.1 percent mortality rate, and those with normal weight had a 9.2 percent mortality rate. This is a paradox. It’s logical to assume the higher the weight the higher the risk of mortality, but that isn’t the case.

Although the reasons were unknown, the authors surmise that this effect may occur because obese and overweight patients seek medical attention with their symptoms earlier than normal weight patients. Overweight and obese patients may have a heighten awareness of their heart attack risk.

So what do we do about the paradox? At face value the study would seem to imply that it is better to be obese, because your prognosis may be better after suffering a heart attack. However, if you look below the surface, it is a more complex issue. Obese patients may be at higher risk for all-cause mortality and
cardiovascular disease.

Obesity’s impact on all-cause mortality

Obesity was found to increase the risk of all-cause mortality. This was demonstrated in a very large observational study, The Nurses’ Health Study, which showed a linear relationship with risk. Patients who were overweight had a 30 to 60 percent increased chance of all-cause mortality, while obese patients had over a 200 percent increased risk of death (N Engl J Med. 1995;333(11):677). Also, gaining 22 pounds or more after age 18 resulted in increased risk of all-cause mortality in middle age.

Obesity and cardiovascular risk

Obesity seems to be an independent risk for heart disease beyond high blood pressure, high cholesterol and type 2 diabetes, according to the American Heart Association (Circulation. 2006;113(6):898).

The Framingham Heart Study, a large observational study, showed a statistically significant increased risk for cardiovascular disease in both overweight and obese patients, with some patients followed for as long as 44 years (Arch Intern Med. 2002;162(16):1867). Those who were obese had the highest risk, with a 46 percent increase in men and 64 percent increase risk in women.

Obesity and fatal heart attacks

In an observational study following men over approximately 15 years, obesity in middle-aged men significantly increased their risk of death from heart attacks (Heart 2011;97:564-568). Interestingly, this study, just like the obesity paradox study, controlled for other risk factors, and even with these taken into account, the men had a 60 percent greater risk of dying from a heart attack. The authors suggest the reason is that inflammation underlies obesity’s effects.

The obesity paradox in type 2 diabetes

There were counterintuitive results in a recent meta-analysis, involving a group of five studies, with participants who became type 2 diabetes patients during the study (JAMA. 2012;308:581-590). The patients who were normal weight were two times more likely to see an increase in total mortality compared to patients who were obese. There was no significance difference in cardiovascular mortality.

The authors could not explain why there was a higher mortality in normal weight patients except to hypothesize that it may have to do with inflammation, pancreatic beta cell functioning and/or the extent of plaque development in the arteries. However, only 11 percent of patients who had type 2 diabetes were of normal weight, whereas 89 percent were overweight or obese.

It is interesting because more than 80 percent of cases of type 2 diabetes are associated with obesity (www.uptodate.com). Some in the medical field have taken to calling the phenomenon “diabesity.” This study reinforces that notion. Even though the normal weight patients had a higher mortality rate, the overall risk of developing type 2 diabetes was much higher in obese patients.

In the accompanying editorial to the diabetes study, the author refers to diabetes patients of normal weight as MONW (that is, metabolically obese normal weight) individuals (JAMA. 2012;308(6):619-620).These are obviously not healthy patients, despite their BMIs being in the normal range. The author recommends healthy weight loss — an alteration in body composition so that there is a loss of fat mass and an increase in lean body mass. This, she suggests, can occur with a Mediterranean-type diet and exercise.

The caveat with normal weight

Normal weight does not necessarily equal health. It is a paradigm that is long overdue for a shift. I hear people say all the time that this person is thin, so he or she must be healthy, and we know that is not necessarily true.

Chronic diseases occur in patients of all different BMIs — cancers, heart disease, autoimmune diseases and even diabetes — although weight may exacerbate or increase risk. The scary part is that almost one quarter of patients in the U.S. are metabolically abnormal, according to the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(15):1617-1624).

The moral of the story is that it’s important to read between the lines in some studies. Whatever you do, know that there are many complications that are associated with obesity.

Just because there may be an apparent benefit to obesity, there are more downsides. Thin or normal weight does not imply fit or lean body mass. Monitoring body composition changes in combination with a healthy lifestyle is the best defense against getting caught up in the aforementioned paradoxes.

Dr. Dunaief is a speaker, author and local lifestyle medicine physician focusing on the integration of medicine, nutrition, fitness and stress management. For further information, go to the website www.medicalcompassmd.com and/or consult your personal physician.

Dry eye disease (keratoconjunctivitis sicca) is not always dry. Paradoxically, one of its symptoms may be excessive tearing. Other symptoms may include burning, stinging, itching, light sensitivity, dryness, blurred vision and foreign body sensation (Arch Ophthalmol. 2009;127:763-768).Dry eye is a result of either increased tear evaporation or decreased tear production.

Inflammation may play a role in causing or exacerbating dry eye, although the causes are not completely clear. It is associated with chronic diseases, such as diabetes and Sjögren’s syndrome. Some medications such as some antihistamines, some antidepressants, some sleeping pills and some blood pressure medications may also be contributing factors.

Dry eye is very common, affecting approximately 3.9 percent of men between the ages of 50 and 54. Its prevalence doubles to 7.7 percent as men reach 80 years old, according to the Physicians’ Health Study (Arch Ophthalmol. 2009;127(6):763-768). Sixty-six percent of dry eye disease occurs in women and also increases with age (Am J Ophthalmol. 2003;136(2):318-326). While we can’t reduce the risk from aging, this is only one of many factors.

There are a number of risk factors that are modifiable. Diet is one of them, since patients with dry eye may have low vitamin A and low omega-3 fatty acid levels. Vitamin A comes from foods like carrots and broccoli, and omega-3 fatty acids are in fish, nuts, seeds and fish oil. These deficiencies are easily rectifiable and should not go unnoticed.

Treatments of dry eye

There are a variety of treatments for dry eye, ranging from using artificial tears, consuming omega-3 fatty acids and potentially caffeine to the use of topical medications that reduce inflammation, such as cyclosporine and tofacitinib (in the early phases of development) to the placement of punctal plugs in the tear ducts — a minor procedure to block tear drainage.

The impact of omega-3 fatty acids

Why are omega-3 fatty acids important? Omega-3 fatty acids may work, at least partially, by blocking factors that increase inflammation, such as interleukin-1 and tumor necrosis factor-alpha. In the Women’s Health Study, involving 32,470 participants, those who were in the highest intake group for omega-3 fatty acids had a significantly decreased risk of developing dry eye disease, compared to those with the lowest intake of fatty acids (Am J Clin Nutr 2005;82:887-893).

But even more impactful was that those women with the highest ratio of omega-6 (pro-inflammatory) to omega-3 (anti-inflammatory) fatty acids had an increased risk of dry eye that was more than 2.5-fold greater than those with a much lower ratio of less than 4:1.

Interestingly, in the standard American diet that most of us eat, the ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 is about 20:1, whereas with a high nutrient, plant-rich diet, the ratio hovers around the optimal greater than 4:1 ratio.

Fish oil supplementation types: triglyceride vs. ethyl ester

The type of fish oil may also make a difference when supplementing with omega-3 fatty acids. A triglyceride formulation is the natural form of fish oil. In a study, it seems that the triglyceride formulation is absorbed to a greater extent than the ethyl ester formulation, which may translate into better results with treating dry eye (Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 1988 Oct 31; 156(2):960-3). Patients may be able to decrease the dose, and thus potential side effects, with the triglyceride formulation. To boost omega-3 levels, take fish oil with a meal containing some good fats. Eating fish may be the best way to get the natural triglyceride formulation (Lipids. 2003;38:415-418).

Caffeine effects

In a small double-blind crossover trial (meaning both groups in the study will eventually consume caffeine), caffeine appears to increase the capability of the dry eye patient to increase tear production (Ophthalmology. 2012 May;119(5):972-8). This may help overcome the symptoms of dry eye for patients. Caffeine seemed to increase the amount of tears in the eye — by 30 percent. There were 78 participants in the study, and it was only two sessions long, spanning a six day interval. Though the results are impressive, more study is obviously needed. Daily caffeine intake also seemed to have an impact on increasing tear production.

Disease association and inflammation

It makes sense that dry eye is associated with diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis and Sjögren’s syndrome — the latter two being autoimmune diseases — because these diseases have inflammatory components. In a study, there was a linear association between the risk of dry eye and diabetes (BMC Ophthalmology, June 2008). In other words, the longer patients had diabetes, the higher the probability of having dry eye disease. Also, patients who had diabetic retinopathy, a complication of diabetes affecting the back of the eye, were at greater risk of developing dry eye. This is just another reason that it is so important for diabetes patients to keep their blood glucose levels under control with lifestyle modifications and/or medications. Diabetic retinopathy occurs when blood sugar levels are too high on a chronic basis.

Thus, though dry eye is a common malady, there are a variety of ways to treat the disorder. It is important to not only get enough omega-3s, but also to optimize the ratio of omega-6 to omega-3s. This will only happen if patients embrace a nutrient-rich diet. Consult your ophthalmologist for the most effective treatment for you. However, increasing omega-3s with diet is only beneficial so it won’t hurt to embrace dietary changes.

Dr. Dunaief is a speaker, author and local lifestyle medicine physician focusing on the integration of medicine, nutrition, fitness and stress management. For further information, go to the website www.medicalcompassmd.com and/or consult your personal physician.

Medicine has made great strides in the treatment of multiple sclerosis over the last few decades.
M.S. is an autoimmune disease, where there is underlying inflammation and the immune system attacks its own tissue. This causes demyelination, or breakdown of the myelin sheath, a protective covering on the nerves in the central nervous system. The result is a number of debilitating effects, such as cognitive impairment, numbness and weakness in the limbs, fatigue, memory problems and inflammation of the optic nerve causing vision loss and eye pain (optic neuritis), and mobility difficulties.

There are several forms of M.S.. The two most common are relapsing-remitting and primary-progressive. Relapsing-remitting has intermittent flare-ups and occurs about 85 percent to 90 percent of the time. Primary-progressive (steady) occurs about 10 percent of the time. Relapsing-remitting may eventually become secondary-progressive M.S., which is much harder to control, although dietary factors may play a role.

Diagnosis and progression

M.S. is diagnosed in several ways. The ophthalmologist may be the first to diagnose the disease with a retinal exam (looking at the back of the eye). If you have eye pain or sudden vision loss in one eye, it is important to see your ophthalmologist.

Another tool in diagnosis is an MRI of the central nervous system. This looks for lesions caused by the breakdown of the myelin sheath.

The MRI can also be used to determine the risk of progression from a solitary CNS lesion to a full-blown M.S. diagnosis. This is accomplished by examining the corpus callosum, a structure deep within the brain, according to a recent presentation at the European Neurologic Society (Abstract O-293; June 2012).

Approximately half of patients with one isolated lesion will progress to clinically definite M.S. within six years. An MRI may be able to predict changes in this portion of the brain within two years. Patients with a family history of M.S. should discuss this diagnostic with a neurologist.

Medication

Interferon beta is the mainstay of treatment for M.S. for good reason. Data shows that it reduces recurrence in relapsing-remitting M.S. and also the number of brain lesions.

However, in a recent study, interferon beta failed to stop the progression to disability in the long term (JAMA. 2012;308:247-256). Many M.S. patients will experience disability over 20 years. Ultimately, what does this mean? Patients should continue therapy, however they should have realistic expectations. This study was retrospective, looking back at previously collected data — not the strongest of studies.

Vitamin D impact

Vitamin D may play a key role in reducing flare-ups in relapsing-remitting M.S.. There were several studies that showed this benefit with vitamin D supplements and/or with interferon beta.
In one study, interferon beta had very interesting results showing that it may help increase the absorption of vitamin D from the sun (Neurology. 2012;79:208-210). This was a randomized controlled trial, the gold standard of studies, involving 178 patients. The study’s authors suggest that interferon beta’s effectiveness at reducing the frequency of relapsing-remitting M.S. flare-ups may have to do with its effect on the metabolizing of vitamin D.

In those who did not have higher blood levels of vitamin D, interferon beta actually increased the risk of flare-ups. Physicians should monitor blood levels of vitamin D to make sure they are adequate. It may be beneficial for M.S. patients to get 15 to 20 minutes of sun exposure without sunscreen per day. However, patients with a history of high risk of skin cancer should not be in the sun without protective clothing and sunscreen.

In a prospective (forward-looking) observational study, patients with higher levels of vitamin D, even in those without interferon beta treatment, had reduced risk of relapsing-remitting M.S. flare-ups (Neurology. 2012;79:254-260).The patients with higher levels had 40 ng/ml, and those with lower levels had 20 ng/ml. Patients’ blood samples were assessed every eight weeks for a mean duration of 1.7 years. The relationship with vitamin D was linear — as the blood level increased two-fold, the risk of flare-ups decreased by 27 percent.

In an RCT, higher levels of vitamin D in the blood showed a trend toward reduced disability in timed tandem walking and in disability accumulation (J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2012;83(5):565-571). The results did not reach statistical significance, but approached it. A much larger RCT needs to be be performed to test for significance.

Diet and lifestyle

Interestingly, a recent study found that caffeine, alcohol and fish — fatty or lean — intake may result in delay of secondary progression of relapsing-remitting M.S. (Eur J Neurol. 2012 Apr;19(4):616-24). This observational study involved 1,372 patients. The reduction in risk of disability was as follows: moderate daily alcohol intake resulted in a 39 percent reduction; daily coffee consumption showed a 40 percent reduction; and fish two or more times a week showed a 40 percent reduction. All of these results were compared to patients who did not consume these items. However, the same effect was not shown in primary-progressive M.S. patients: fatty fish actually increased risk of progression, compared to lean fish.

With M.S., vitamin D blood levels may be critically important. They are one of the easier fixes, although it may take higher doses of vitamin D supplementation to reach sufficient levels, once low. While food (fish with bones, for example) provides vitamin D, it falls short of the amount needed by an M.S. patient. Interferon beta and vitamin D supplementation may have added effects. Lifestyle changes or additions also have tantalizingly appealing possibilities.

Dr. Dunaief is a speaker, author and local lifestyle medicine physician focusing on the integration of medicine, nutrition, fitness and stress management. For further information, go to the website www.medicalcompassmd.com and/or consult your personal physician.

I am inspired by the 30th Olympiad to discuss the implications of exercise. It would be nice if we could all be in the shape of Olympians, but most of us simply hope that, if we exercise more, we will burn more calories and lose more weight. However, there is a new study addressing this assumption, and the results are disappointing.

Does this mean we should give up exercise, or that exercise has little impact on our lives? The answer is a resounding “no.” We have to look beyond weight loss, just as we do when considering the differences in diets — as I did in last week’s article — to disease prevention and modification.

We know that exercise can alter the course of many chronic diseases, including the top 10 diseases responsible for killing many Americans, including diabetes, heart disease, stroke and cancer. I am going to focus on diabetes treatment and prevention, highlighting several recent studies.

Weight loss and exercise

The presumption has always been that if we exercise, we will lose weight equivalent to the amount of effort that we put into the activity. But, as many of us have experienced, we lose weight at a slower rate than predicted, maintain our weight or even continue to gain weight. Why is this?

In a study, anthropologists looked at a tribe in Tanzania to try to explain why exercise does not seem to reduce weight to the degree that we would expect (PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e40503). They followed the Hadza tribe — hunter and gatherers — for 11 days with GPS, tracking how active they were and their metabolic rates. While they were more active than most Americans — seven miles a day for men and three miles a day for women — they did not have a higher resting metabolic rate. In other words, they were not burning more calories. Their bodies seemed to adapt.

The authors, therefore, surmise that exercise cannot overcome the typical western high-calorie diet. This seems to be reinforced by another study that concluded the same thing about calorie-dense diets being hard to overcome (Obes Rev. 2012 Jun 11). For those of you who think that exercise is a pass to eat what you want, think again.

Also, lower body mass burns fewer calories for the same level of effort. For example, if my wife and I get on two treadmills with the same settings and for the same period of time, since I weigh more, I burn more calories than she does.

The researchers who investigated the Hadza tribe, did not look at weight-lifting or resistance training and their impacts on body composition. As we build muscle, it may be hard to lose weight. A pound of muscle, while weighing the same as a pound of fat, has a higher density. So you can be fit without losing as much weight as you replace fat with muscle. Just look at those Olympians.

Weight-lifting impact

Resistance training seems to have more of an impact on body composition. In a randomized controlled trial of women, ages 25 to 44, participants who were in the treatment group saw a significantly greater reduction in body fat percentage than the control group, at 3.8 percent and 0.14 percent respectively (Am J Clin Nutr. 2007 Sep;86(3):566-72). The treatment group followed a regimen of strength training twice a week, compared to the control group, who were given brochures for aerobic exercise.

Aerobic and anaerobic impact on diabetes

In a meta-analysis (a group of studies, including a very large prospective observational study called EPIC), patients who had diabetes at baseline and were physically active had a much lower risk of dying from cardiovascular disease and a significant reduction in total mortality, compared to those who were least active (Arch Intern Med. online August 6, 2012). Interestingly, the group that did moderate amounts of activity daily saw the largest reductions in overall mortality and death due to cardiovascular disease, at 38 percent and 49 percent respectively. Therefore, you don’t have to be an Olympian to get gold medal results in preventing complications from diabetes.

There were also surprisingly inspiring results with short durations of exercise in diabetes. Three short anaerobic exercise bouts of 10 minutes each daily were potentially more efficacious in helping to control glucose levels in diabetes patients, compared to 30 minutes once a day, as the results showed in a small randomized controlled trial (Diabetologia. 2007 Nov;50(11):2245-53).

Intensity did not seem to be as important as duration in preventing diabetes. In the Health Professionals Follow-up Study, 150 minutes a week of strength training or aerobic exercise are critical to reducing diabetes risk (Arch Intern Med. online August 6, 2012), at 34 percent and 52 percent respectively. The greatest reduction in risk was when participants did a combination of strength and aerobic activities within the 150 minutes.

So the message ultimately is that putting on lean body mass by weight lifting may be a more effective way to change body composition than aerobic exercise alone. And aerobic exercise has tremendous benefits in treating and preventing chronic disease, even in moderate amounts done in short bursts. Ideally, lifestyle modifications should include both exercise and diet in order to reach weight-loss goals.

Dr. Dunaief is a speaker, author and local lifestyle medicine physician focusing on the integration of medicine, nutrition, fitness and stress management. For further information, go to the website www.medicalcompassmd.com and/or consult your personal physician.