CLOSE
Medical Compass

by -
0 1165
METRO photo
Is there a magic bullet to speed the healing process?

By David Dunaief, M.D.

Dr. David Dunaief

Now that many of us are interacting more fully in society, the common cold is becoming common again this fall.

All of us have suffered from the common cold at some point. Most frequently caused by the notorious human rhinovirus, its effects can range from an annoyance to more serious symptoms that put us out of commission for a week or more.

Amid folklore about remedies, there is evidence that it may be possible to reduce the symptoms — or even reduce the duration — of the common cold with supplements and lifestyle management.

I am frequently asked, “How do I treat this cold?” Below, I will review and discuss the medical literature, separating myth from fact about which supplements may be beneficial and which may not.

Zinc

You may have heard that zinc is an effective way to treat a cold. But what does the medical literature say? The answer is a resounding, YES! According to a meta-analysis that included 13 trials, zinc in any form taken within 24 hours of first symptoms may reduce the duration of a cold by at least one day (1) Even more importantly, zinc may significantly reduce the severity of symptoms throughout the infection, improving quality of life. The results may be due to an anti-inflammatory effect of zinc.

One of the studies, which was published in the Journal of Infectious Disease, found that zinc reduced the duration of the common cold by almost 50 percent from seven days to four days, cough symptoms were reduced by greater than 60 percent and nasal discharge by 33 percent (2). All of these results were statistically significant. Researchers used 13 grams of zinc acetate per lozenge taken three-to-four times daily for four days. This translates into 50-65 mg per day.

There are a few serious concerns with zinc. Note that the dose researchers used was well above the maximum intake recommended by the National Institutes of Health, 40 mg per day for adults. This maximum intake number goes down for those 18 and younger (3). Also, note that the FDA has warned against nasal administration through sprays, which has led to permanent loss of smell in some people.

As for the studies, note that not all studies showed a benefit. Also, all of the studies where there was a proven benefit may have used different formulations, delivery systems and dosages, and there is no current recommendation or consensus on what is optimal.

Vitamin C

According to a review of 29 trials with a combined population of over 11,000, vitamin C did not show any significant benefit in prevention, reduction of symptoms or duration in the general population (4). Thus, there may be no reason to take mega-doses of vitamin C for cold prevention and treatment. However, in a sub-group of serious marathon runners and other athletes, there was substantial risk reduction when taking vitamin C prophylactically; they caught 50 percent fewer colds.

Echinacea

After review of 24 controlled clinical trials, according to the Cochrane Database, the jury is still out on the effectiveness of echinacea for treatment of duration and symptoms, but the results are disappointing presently and, at best, are inconsistent (5). There are no valid randomized clinical trials for cold prevention using echinacea. In a randomized controlled trial with 719 patients, echinacea was no better than placebo for the treatment of the common cold (6).

Exercise

People with colds need rest – at least that was the theory. However, a study published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine may have changed this perception. Participants who did aerobic exercise at least five days per week, versus one or fewer days per week, had a 43 percent reduction in the number of days with colds over two 12-week periods during the fall and winter months (7). Even more interesting is that those who perceived themselves to be highly fit had a 46 percent reduction in number of days with colds compared to those who perceived themselves to have low fitness. The symptoms of colds were reduced significantly as well.

Symptom relief

What do I confidently recommend to my patients? If you have congestion or coughing symptoms with your cold, time-tested symptom relief may help. Sitting in a steamy bathroom, which simulates a medical mist tent, can help. Also, dry heat is your enemy. If your home is dry, use a cool mist humidifier to put some humidity back in the air.

Consuming salt-free soups loaded with vegetables can help increase your nutrient intake and loosen congestion. I start with a sodium-free base and add in spices, onions, spinach, broccoli and other greens until it’s more stew-like than soup-like.

Caffeine-free hot teas will also help loosen congestion and keep you hydrated.

Where does all of this information leave us?

Zinc is potentially of great usefulness the treatment and prevention of the common cold. Use caution with dosing, however, to reduce side effects. Echinacea and vitamin C may or may not provide benefits, but don’t stop taking them if you feel they work for you. And, if you need another reason to exercise, reducing your cold’s duration may a good one. Lastly, for symptom relief, simple home remedies may work better than any supplements.

References:

(1) Open Respir Med J. 2011; 5: 51–58. (2) J Infect Dis. 2008 Mar 15;197(6):795-802. (3) ods.od.nih.gov. (4) Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 1. Art. No.: CD000980. (5) Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2014, Issue 2. Art. No.: CD000530. (6) Ann Intern Med. 2010;153(12):769-777. (7) British Journal of Sports Medicine 2011;45:987-992.

Dr. David Dunaief is a speaker, author and local lifestyle medicine physician focusing on the integration of medicine, nutrition, fitness and stress management. For further information, visit www.medicalcompassmd.com.

by -
0 1317
Photo by Pixabay
Build a risk-reduction arsenal with healthy food options

By David Dunaief, M.D.

Dr. David Dunaief

Happy “Movember!” In 2003, The Movember Foundation was founded in Australia to raise awareness and research money for men’s health issues (1). Its mission is to reduce the number of men dying prematurely 25 percent by 2030. From its modest beginnings with 30 participants, The Movember Foundation has expanded to 20 countries, more than six million participants, and funded over 1250 men’s health projects focused on mental health and suicide prevention, prostate cancer, and testicular canc

Movember Foundation’s prostate cancer initiatives focus on early detection, treatment options, and quality of life considerations for different treatments. Here, I’d like to add prevention options to the conversation.

The best way to avoid prostate cancer is with some simple lifestyle modifications. There are a host of things that may increase your risk and others that may decrease your likelihood of prostate cancer, regardless of family history.

What may increase the risk of prostate cancer? Contributing factors include obesity, animal fat and supplements, such as vitamin E and selenium. Equally as important, factors that may reduce risk include vegetables, especially cruciferous vegetables, and tomato sauce or cooked tomatoes.

Vitamin E and selenium – not the right choice

In the SELECT trial, a randomized clinical trial (RCT), a dose of 400 mg of vitamin E actually increased the risk of prostate cancer by 17 percent (2). Though significant, this is not a tremendous clinical effect. It does show that vitamin E should not be used for prevention of prostate cancer. Interestingly, in this study, selenium may have helped to reduce the mortality risk in the selenium plus vitamin E arm, but selenium trended toward a slight increased risk when taken alone. I would not recommend that men take selenium or vitamin E for prevention.

Manage your weight

Obesity showed conflicting results, prompting the study authors to analyze the results further. Ac-cording to a review of the literature, obesity may slightly decrease the risk of nonaggressive prostate cancer, however increase risk of aggressive disease (3). The authors attribute the lower incidence of nonaggressive prostate cancer to the possibility that it is more difficult to detect the disease in obese men, since larger prostates make biopsies less effective. What the results tell us is that those who are obese have a greater risk of dying from prostate cancer when it is diagnosed.

Lose or lower your animal fat and meat intake

There appears to be a direct effect between the amount of animal fat we consume and incidence of prostate cancer. In the Health Professionals Follow-up Study, a large observational study, those who consumed the highest amount of animal fat had a 63 percent increased risk, compared to those who consumed the least (4).

Here is the kicker: It was not just the percent increase that was important, but the fact that it was an increase in advanced or metastatic prostate cancer. Also, in this study, red meat had an even greater, approximately 2.5-fold, increased risk of advanced disease. If you continue to eat red meat, reduce your frequency as much as possible, targeting once a month or quarter.

In another large, prospective observational study, the authors concluded that red and processed meats increase the risk of advanced prostate cancer through heme iron, barbecuing/grilling and nitrate/nitrite content (5).

I hope you love cooked tomatoes!

Tomato sauce has been shown to potentially reduce the risk of prostate cancer. However, uncooked tomatoes have not shown the same beneficial effects. It is believed that lycopene, which is a type of carotenoid found in tomatoes, is central to this benefit. Tomatoes need to be cooked to release lycopene (6). 

In a prospective study involving 47,365 men who were followed for 12 years, the risk of prostate cancer was reduced by 16 percent with higher lycopene intake from a variety of sources (7). When the authors looked at tomato sauce alone, they saw a reduction in risk of 23 percent when comparing those who consumed at least two servings a week to those who consumed less than one serving a month. The reduction in severe, or metastatic, prostate cancer risk was even greater, at 35 per-cent. There was a statistically significant reduction in risk with a very modest amount of tomato sauce.

In the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study, the results were similar, with a 21 percent reduction in the risk of prostate cancer (8). Again, tomato sauce was the predominant food responsible for this effect. 

Although tomato sauce may be beneficial, many brands are loaded with salt, which creates its own bevy of health risks. I recommend to patients that they either make their own sauce or purchase prepared sauce made without salt.

Eat your (cruciferous) veggies

While results among studies vary, they all agree: consumption of vegetables, especially cruciferous vegetables, are beneficial to prostate cancer outcomes.

In a case-control study, participants who consumed at least three servings of cruciferous vegetables per week, versus those who consumed less than one per week, saw a 41 percent reduction in prostate cancer risk (9). What’s even more impressive is the effect was twice that of tomato sauce, yet the intake was similarly modest. Cruciferous vegetables include broccoli, cauliflower, bok choy, kale and arugula, to name a few.

A separate study of 1338 patients with prostate cancer in a larger cancer screening trial concluded that, while vegetable and fruit consumption did not appear to lower outright prostate cancer risk, increased consumption of cruciferous vegetables – specifically broccoli and cauliflower – did reduce the risk of aggressive prostate cancer, particularly of more serious stage 3 and 4 tumors (10). These results were seen with consumption of just one or more servings of each per week, when com-pared to less than one per month.

When it comes to preventing prostate cancer, lifestyle modification, including making dietary changes, can reduce your risk significantly.

References:

(1) www.movember.com. (2) JAMA. 2011; 306: 1549-1556. (3) Epidemiol Rev. 2007;29:88. (4) J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993;85(19):1571. (5) Am J Epidemiol. 2009;170(9):1165. (6) Exp Biol Med (Maywood). 2002; 227:914-919. (7) J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94(5):391. (8) Exp Biol Med (Maywood). 2002; 227:852-859; Int. J. Cancer. 2007;121: 1571–1578. (9) J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92(1):61. (10) J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99(15):1200-1209.

Dr. David Dunaief is a speaker, author and local lifestyle medicine physician focusing on the integration of medicine, nutrition, fitness and stress management. For further information, visit www.medicalcompassmd.com. 

by -
0 421
Start with small, but key dietary changes

By David Dunaief

Dr. David Dunaief

Heart disease is an umbrella term that includes a number of disorders. Most common is coronary artery disease, which can cause heart attacks. Others include valve issues and heart failure, which is a problem with the pumping mechanism. We will focus on coronary artery disease and the resulting heart attacks.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, about 6.7 percent of U.S. adults over the age of 19 have coronary artery disease (CAD) (1). There are 805,000 heart attacks in the U.S. annually, and 200,000 of these occur in those who’ve already had a first heart attack.

Among the biggest contributors to heart disease risk are high blood pressure, high cholesterol, and smoking. In addition, if you have diabetes or are overweight or obese, your risk increases significantly. Lifestyle choices also contribute to your risk: poor diet, lack of physical activity and high alcohol consumption are among the most significant contributors.

We can significantly reduce the occurrence of CAD. The evidence continues to highlight lifestyle changes, including diet, as the most important factors in preventing heart disease. Changes that garner a big bang for your buck include the consumption of chocolate, legumes, nuts, fiber and omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs).

Can chocolate help?

Preliminary evidence shows that two pieces of chocolate a week may decrease the risk of a heart attack by 37 percent, compared to those who consume less (2). However, the authors warned against the idea that more is better. In fact, high fat and sugar content and calorically dense aspects may have detrimental effects when consumed at much higher levels. There is a fine line between potential benefit and harm. The benefits may be attributed to micronutrients referred to as flavonols.

I usually recommend that patients have one to two squares – about one-fifth to two-fifths of an ounce – of high-cocoa-content dark chocolate daily. Aim for chocolate labeled with 80 percent cocoa content. Alternatively, you can get the benefits without the fat and sugar by adding unsweetened, non-Dutched cocoa powder to a fruit and vegetable smoothie.

Who says prevention has to be painful?

Increase your dietary fiber

Fiber has a dose-response relationship to reducing risk. In other words, the more fiber you eat, the greater your risk reduction. In a meta-analysis of 10 studies, results showed for every 10-gram increase in fiber, there was a corresponding 14 percent reduction in the risk of a cardiovascular event and a 27 percent reduction in the risk of heart disease mortality (3). The authors analyzed data that included over 90,000 men and 200,000 women.

According to a 2021 analysis of National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) data from 2013 to 2018, only 5 percent of men and 9 percent of women get the recommended daily amount of fiber (4).

The average American consumes about 16 grams per day of fiber (5).

So, how much is “enough”? The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics recommends 14 grams of fiber for each 1,000 calories consumed, or roughly 25 grams for women and 38 grams for men (6).

We can significantly reduce our risk of heart disease if we increase our consumption of fiber to reach the recommended levels. Good sources of fiber are fruits and vegetables with the edible skin or peel, beans and lentils, and whole grains.

Focus on legumes

 

Pixabay photo

In a prospective (forward-looking) cohort study, the First National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey Epidemiologic Follow-up Study, legumes reduced the risk of coronary heart disease by a significant 22 percent (7). Those who consumed four or more servings per week, compared to those who consumed less than one serving, saw this effect. The legumes used in this study included beans, peas and peanuts. There were over 9,500 men and women involved, spanning 19 years of follow-up.

I recommend that patients consume at least one to two servings of legumes a day, or 7 to 14 a week. Imagine the impact that could have, compared to the modest four servings per week used to reach statistical significance in this study.

Add healthy nuts

In a study with over 45,000 men, there were significant reductions in CAD with omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs). Both plant-based and seafood-based omega-3s showed these effects (8). Good sources of omega-3s from plant-based sources include nuts, such as walnuts, and ground flaxseed.

Your ultimate goal should be to become “heart attack proof,” a term used by Dr. Sanjay Gupta and reinforced by Dr. Dean Ornish. Ideally, this requires a plant-based diet. But even modest changes in diet will result in significant risk reductions. The more significant the lifestyle changes you make, the closer you will come to achieving this goal.

References:

(1) cdc.gov. (2) BMJ 2011; 343:d4488. (3) Arch Intern Med. 2004 Feb 23;164(4):370-376. (4) nutrition.org (5) NHANES 2009-2010 Data Brief No. 12. Sep 2014. (6) eatright.org. (7) Arch Intern Med. 2001 Nov 26;161(21):2573-2578. (8) Circulation. 2005 Jan 18;111(2):157-164.

Dr. David Dunaief is a speaker, author and local lifestyle medicine physician focusing on the integration of medicine, nutrition, fitness and stress management. For further information, visit www.medicalcompassmd.com. 

by -
0 319
METRO photo
Annual eye exams are crucial

By David Dunaief, M.D.

Dr. David Dunaief

Diabetic retinopathy is a frequent consequence of diabetes and is the number one cause of blindness in the U.S. among those 20 to 74 years old (1). Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is an umbrella term for microvascular complications of diabetes that can lead to blurred vision and blindness.

Among the risk factors for DR are diabetes duration, glucose (sugar) that is not well-controlled, smoking, high blood pressure, kidney disease, pregnancy and high cholesterol (2). As of 2019, only about 60 percent of people with diabetes had a recommended annual screening for DR (3). Herein lies the challenge, because the earlier you catch it, the more likely you will be able to prevent or limit permanent vision loss.

Over time, DR can lead to diabetic macular edema (DME). Its signature is swelling caused by extracellular fluid accumulating in the macula (4). The macula is the region of the eye with greatest visual acuity. An oval spot in the central portion of the retina, it is sensitive to light. When fluid builds up from leaking blood vessels, there is potential for vision loss.

Those with the longest duration of diabetes have the greatest risk of DME. Unfortunately, many patients are diagnosed with DME after it has already caused vision loss. If not treated early, patients can experience permanent damage (3).

In a cross-sectional study using NHANES data, among patients with DME, only 45 percent were told by a physician that diabetes had affected their eyes (5). Approximately 46 percent of patients reported that they had not been to a diabetic nurse educator, nutritionist or dietician in more than a year — or never.

The problem is that the symptoms of vision loss don’t necessarily occur until the latter stages of the disorder, often after it’s too late to reverse damage. According to the authors, there needs to be an awareness campaign about the importance of getting your eyes examined on an annual basis if you have diabetes.

Treatment options

While DME has traditionally been treated with lasers, intravitreal (intraocular — within the eye) injections of anti-VEGF medications may be more effective. These work by inhibiting overproduction of a protein called vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), which contributes to DR and DME (6).

The results from a randomized controlled trial, the gold standard of studies, showed that intravitreal (delivery directly into the eye) injections with ranibizumab (Lucentis), whether given prompt laser treatments or treatments delayed for at least 24 weeks, were equally effective in treating DME (7). Other anti-VEGF drugs include aflibercept (Eylea) and bevacizumab (Avastin).

Some diabetes drugs increase risk

You would think that using medications to treat type 2 diabetes would prevent DME from occurring as well. However, in the THIN trial, a retrospective study, a class of diabetes drugs, thiazolidinediones, which includes Avandia and Actos, actually increased the occurrence of DME compared to those who did not use these oral medications (8). Those receiving these drugs had a 1.3 percent incidence of DME at year one, whereas those who did not had a 0.2 percent incidence. This incidence was persistent through the 10 years of follow-up. Note that DME is not the only side effect of these drugs. There are important FDA warnings of other significant issues.

To make matters worse, those who received both thiazolidinediones and insulin had an even greater incidence of DME. There were 103,000 diabetes patients reviewed in this trial. It was unclear whether the drugs, because they were second-line treatments, or the severity of the diabetes itself may have caused these findings.

This is in contrast to a previous ACCORD eye sub-study, a cross-sectional analysis, which did not show an association between thiazolidinediones and DME (9). This study involved review of 3,473 participants who had photographs taken of the fundus (the back of the eye).

What does this ultimately mean? Both of these studies were not without weaknesses. It was not clear how long the patients had been using the thiazolidinediones in either study or whether their sugars were controlled and to what degree. The researchers were also unable to control for all other possible confounding factors (10). Thus, there needs to be more study done to sort out these results.

Glucose control and diet

The risk of progression of diabetic retinopathy was significantly lower with intensive blood sugar controls using medications, one of the few positive highlights of the ACCORD trial (11). Medication-induced intensive blood sugar control also resulted in increased mortality and no significant change in cardiovascular events. But an inference can be made: A nutrient-dense, plant-based diet that intensively controls blood sugar is likely to decrease the risk of diabetic retinopathy and further vision complications (12, 13).

The best way to avoid diabetic retinopathy and DME is obviously to prevent diabetes. Barring that, it’s to have sugars well-controlled. If you or someone you know has diabetes, it is imperative that they get a yearly eye exam from an ophthalmologist so that diabetic retinopathy is detected as early as possible, before permanent vision loss occurs. It is especially important for those diabetes patients who are taking the oral diabetes class thiazolidinediones.

References:

(1) cdc.gov. (2) JAMA. 2010;304:649-656. (3) www.aao.org/ppp. (4) www.uptodate.com. (5) JAMA Ophthalmol. 2014;132:168-173. (6) Community Eye Health. 2014; 27(87): 44–46. (7) ASRS. Presented 2014 Aug. 11. (8) Arch Intern Med. 2012;172:1005-1011. (9) Arch Ophthalmol. 2010 March;128:312-318. (10) Arch Intern Med. 2012;172:1011-1013. (11) www.nei.nih.gov. (12) OJPM. 2012;2:364-371. (13) Am J Clin Nutr. 2009;89:1588S-1596S.

Dr. David Dunaief is a speaker, author and local lifestyle medicine physician focusing on the integration of medicine, nutrition, fitness and stress management. For further information, visit www.medicalcompassmd.com. 

by -
0 312
METRO photo

Understand your risk profile and design a screening plan with your physician

By David Dunaief, M.D.

Dr. David Dunaief

Get out your pink attire, because October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month.

The most common cancer diagnosed in U.S. women, an estimated 30 percent of 2021 cancer diagnoses in women will be breast cancer (1). Of these, 85 percent of cases occur in those with no family history of the disease, and 85 percent of new cases will be invasive breast cancer.

A primary objective of raising awareness is to promote screening for early detection. While screening is crucial, prevention should be just as important, including primary prevention, preventing the disease from occurring, and secondary prevention, preventing recurrence.

Here, we will discuss current screening recommendations, along with tools to lower your risk.

At what age and how often should we be screened?

Here is where divergence occurs; experts don’t agree on age and frequency. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force currently recommends mammograms every other year, from age 50 through age 74, with the option of beginning as early as age 40 for those with significant risk (2). It’s important to note that these guidelines, published in 2016, are currently being refined and are pending publication.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends consideration of beginning annual or biennial mammograms at 40, but starting no later than 50, and continuing until age 75. They encourage a process of shared decision-making between patient and physician to determine age and frequency of exams, including whether to continue after age 75 (3).

The American Cancer Society’s physician guidelines are to offer a mammogram beginning at age 40 and recommend annual or biennial exams from 45 to 54, with biennial exams after 55 until life expectancy is less than 10 years (4).

While the recommendations may seem nuanced, it’s important to consult with your physician to determine your risk profile and plan or revise your regular screening schedule accordingly.

Do bisphosphonates help?

Bisphosphonates include Fosamax (alendronate), Zometa (zoledronic acid) and Boniva (ibandronate) and are used to treat osteoporosis. Do they have a role in breast cancer prevention? It depends on the population, and it depends on study quality.

In a meta-analysis involving two randomized controlled trials (RCTs), FIT and HORIZON-PFT, results showed no benefit from the use of bisphosphonates in reducing breast cancer risk (5). The study population involved 14,000 postmenopausal women from ages 55 to 89 women who had osteoporosis, but who did not have a personal history of breast cancer. In other words, the bisphosphonates were being used for primary prevention.

In a more recent meta-analysis of 10 studies with over 950,000 total participants, results showed that bisphosphonates did indeed reduce the risk of primary breast cancer in patients by as much as 12 percent (6). However, when the researchers dug more deeply into the studies, they found inconsistencies in the results between observational and case-control trials versus RCTs, along with an indication that longer-term use of bisphosphonates is more likely to be protective than use of less than one year.

Randomized controlled trials are better designed than observational trials. Therefore, it is more likely that bisphosphonates do not work in reducing breast cancer risk in patients without a history of breast cancer or, in other words, in primary prevention.

A Lancet metanalysis focused on breast cancer recurrence in distant locations, including bone, and survival outcomes did find benefits for postmenopausal women (7). A good synopsis of the research can be found at cancer.org.

How much exercise?

We know exercise is important in diseases and breast cancer is no exception. In an observational trial, exercise reduced breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women significantly (8). These women exercised moderately; they walked four hours a week over a four-year period. If they exercised previously, five to nine years ago, but not recently, no benefit was seen. The researchers stressed that it is never too late to begin exercise.

Only about one-third of women get the recommended level of exercise every week: 30 minutes for five days a week. Once diagnosed with breast cancer, women tend to exercise less, not more. We need to expend as much energy and resources emphasizing exercise for prevention as we do screenings.

What about soy?

Contrary to popular belief, soy may be beneficial in reducing breast cancer risk. In a meta-analysis, those who consumed more soy saw a significant reduction in breast cancer compared to those who consumed less (9). There was a dose-response curve among three groups: high intake of >20 mg per day, moderate intake of 10 mg and low intake of <5 mg.

Those in the highest group had a 29 percent reduced risk, and those in the moderate group had a 12 percent reduced risk when compared to those who consumed the least. In addition, higher soy intake has been associated with reduced recurrence and increased survival for those previously diagnosed with breast cancer (10). The benefit from soy is thought to come from isoflavones, plant-rich nutrients.

Hooray for Breast Cancer Awareness Month stressing the importance of mammography and breast self-exams. However, we need to give significantly more attention to prevention of breast cancer and its recurrence. Through potentially more soy intake, as well as a Mediterranean diet and modest exercise, we may be able to accelerate the trend toward a lower breast cancer incidence.

References:

(1) breastcancer.org. (2) uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org. (3) acog.org. (4) cancer.org. (5) JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174(10):1550-1557. (6) Clin Epidemiol. 2019; 11: 593–603. (7) Lancet. 2015 Jul 23. (8) Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2014 Sep;23(9):1893-902. (9) Br J Cancer. 2008; 98:9-14. (10) JAMA. 2009 Dec 9; 302(22): 2437–2443.

Dr. David Dunaief is a speaker, author and local lifestyle medicine physician focusing on the integration of medicine, nutrition, fitness and stress management. For further information, visit www.medicalcompassmd.com. 

by -
0 336
Pixabay photo
Fracture risk is not linked to steroid use

By David Dunaief, M.D.

Dr. David Dunaief

Eczema is a common skin condition in both children and adults. It’s estimated that over seven percent of the U.S. adult population is afflicted (1), with twice as many females as males affected (2). Ranging in severity from mild to moderate to severe, adults tend to have moderate to severe eczema.

The causes of eczema are unknown, but it is thought that nature and nurture are both at play (3). Essentially, it is a chronic inflammatory process that involves symptoms of itching, pain, rashes and redness (4).

While there is no cure, treatments for eczema run the gamut from over-the-counter creams and lotions to prescription steroid creams to oral steroids and injectable biologics. Some use phototherapy for severe cases, but the research on its effectiveness is scant. Antihistamines are sometimes used to treat the itchiness. Interestingly, lifestyle modifications, specifically diet, may play an important role.

Two separate studies have shown an association between eczema and fracture risk, which we will investigate further. Let’s look at the evidence.

Not just skin deep

Eczema may be related to broken bones, according to several studies. For example, one observational study of 34,500 patients showed that those with eczema had a 44 percent increased risk of injury causing limitation and an even more disturbing 67 percent risk of bone fracture and bone or joint injury for those 30 years and older (5).

And if you have both fatigue or insomnia and eczema, you are at higher risk for bone or joint injury than having one or the other alone. The researchers postulated that the use of corticosteroids in treatment could be one reason for increased fracture risk, in addition to chronic inflammation, which may also contribute to the risk of bone loss.

Steroids may weaken bone, ligaments and tendons and may cause osteoporosis by decreasing bone mineral density.

A recently published study of over 500,000 patients tested this theory and found that the association between major osteoporotic fractures and atopic eczema remained, even after adjusting for a range of histories with oral corticosteroids (6). Also, fracture rates were higher in those with severe atopic eczema.

For those who have eczema, it may be wise to have a DEXA (bone) scan.

Do supplements help?

There are two well-known supplements for helping to reduce inflammation, evening primrose oil and borage oil. Are these supplements a good replacement for – or addition to – medications? The research is really mixed, leaning toward ineffective – and with some concerns.

In a meta-analysis of seven randomized controlled trials, evening primrose oil was no better than placebo in treating eczema (7).

The researchers also looked at eight studies of borage oil and found there was no difference from placebo in terms of symptom relief. While these supplements only had minor side effects in the study, they can interact with other medications. For example, evening primrose oil in combination with aspirin can cause clotting problems (8).

But don’t look to supplements for significant help.

Injectable solutions

Dupilumab is a biologic monoclonal antibody (9). In trials, this injectable drug showed good results, improving outcomes for moderate to severe eczema sufferers when topical steroids alone were not effective. Like any drug therapy, it does have side effects.

Topical probiotics

There are also potentially topical probiotics that could help with atopic dermatitis. In preliminary in-vitro (in a test tube) studies, the results look intriguing and show that topical probiotics from the human microbiome (gut) could potentially work as well as steroids (10). Currently, additional trials are underway in children with the atopic dermatitis form of eczema (11). This may be part of the road to treatments of the future. However, this is in very early stage of development.

Dietary possibilities

In a Japanese study involving over 700 pregnant women and their offspring, results showed that when the women ate either a diet high in green and yellow vegetables, beta carotene or citrus fruit there was a significant reduction in the risk of the child having eczema of 59 percent, 48 percent and 47 percent, respectively, when comparing highest to lowest consumption quartiles (12).

Elimination diets may also play a role. One study’s results showed when eggs were removed from the diet in those who were allergic, according to IgE testing, eczema improved significantly (13).

From an anecdotal perspective, I have seen very good results when treating patients who have eczema with dietary changes. My patient population includes about 15 to 20 percent of patients who suffer some level of eczema. For example, a young adult had eczema mostly on the extremities. When I first met the patient, these were angry, excoriated, erythematous and scratched lesions. However, after several months of a vegetable-rich diet, the patient’s skin had all but cleared.

Eczema exists on a spectrum from annoying to significantly affecting a patient’s quality of life (14). Supplements may not be the solution, at least not borage oil or evening primrose oil. However, there may be promising topical probiotics ahead and medications for the hard to treat. It might be best to avoid long-term systemic steroid use, because of the long-term side effects. Lifestyle modifications appear to be very effective, at least at the anecdotal level.

References:

(1) J Inv Dermatol. 2017;137(1):26-30. (2) BMC Dermatol. 2013;13(14). (3) Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 1985;117 (Suppl.):1-59. (4) uptodate.com. (5) JAMA Dermatol. 2015;151(1):33-41. (6) J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2021 Sep 24;S2213-2198(21)01018-7. (7) Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;4:CD004416. (8) mayoclinic.org (9) Medscape.com. (10) ACAAI 2014: Abstracts P328 and P329. (11) nih.gov. (12) Allergy. 2010 Jun 1;65(6):758-765. (13) J Am Acad Dermatol. 2004;50(3):391-404. (14) Contact Dermatitis 2008; 59:43-47.

Dr. David Dunaief is a speaker, author and local lifestyle medicine physician focusing on the integration of medicine, nutrition, fitness and stress management. For further information, visit www.medicalcompassmd.com. 

by -
0 363
Studies show that running just 5 to 10 minutes each day may help reduce your risk of death from heart attacks, strokes, and other common diseases. Pixabay photo
Add quality years with modest lifestyle changes

By David Dunaief, M.D.

Dr. David Dunaief

The number of 90-year-olds is growing in the U.S. According to the National Institutes of Health, those who were more than 90 years old increased by 2.5 times over a 30-year period from 1980 to 2010 (1). This group is among what researchers refer to as the “oldest-old,” which includes those aged 85 and older.

What do these people have in common? According to one study, they tend to have fewer chronic morbidities or diseases. Thus, they tend to have a better quality of life with greater physical functioning and mental acuity (2).

In a study of centenarians, genetics played a significant role. Characteristics of this group were that they tended to be healthy and then die rapidly, without prolonged suffering (3). In other words, they grew old “gracefully,” staying mobile and mentally alert.

Factors that predict one’s ability to reach this exclusive club may involve both genetics and life-style choices. Let’s look at the research.

Get modest exercise

We are told repeatedly to exercise. Here’s one reason. Results of one study showed that 5 to 10 minutes of daily running, regardless of the pace, can have a significant impact on life span by decreasing cardiovascular and all-cause mortality (4).

Amazingly, even if participants ran fewer than six miles per week at a pace slower than 10-minute miles, and even if they ran only one to two days a week, there was still a decrease in mortality compared to nonrunners. Those who ran for this very short amount of time potentially added three years to their life span. There were 55,137 participants ranging in age from 18 to 100 years old.

An accompanying editorial to this study noted that more than 50 percent of people in the United States do not meet the current recommendation of at least 30 minutes of moderate exercise per day (5).

Reduce animal protein

A long-standing paradigm has been that we need to eat sufficient animal protein. However, cracks have developed in this theory, especially as it relates to longevity.

In an observational study using NHANES III data, results show that those who ate a high-protein diet (greater than 20 percent of calories from protein) had a twofold increased risk of all-cause mortality, a four-times increased risk of cancer mortality, and a four-times increased risk of dying from diabetes (6). This was over a considerable duration of 18 years and involved almost 7,000 participants ranging in age at the start of the study from 50 to 65.

However, this did not hold true if the protein source was plants. In fact, a high-protein plant diet may reduce the risks, not increase them. The reason, according to the authors, is that animal protein may increase insulin growth factor-1 and growth hormones that have detrimental effects on the body.

The Adventists Health Study 2 trial reinforced this data. It looked at Seventh-day Adventists, a group that emphasizes a plant-based diet, and found that those who ate animal protein once a week or less had a significantly reduced risk of dying over the next six years compared to those who were more frequent meat eaters (7). This was an observational trial with over 73,000 participants and a median age of 57 years old.

Reduce systemic inflammation

In the Whitehall II study, a specific marker for inflammation was measured, interleukin-6. The study showed that higher levels did not bode well for participants’ longevity (8). In fact, if participants had elevated IL-6 (>2.0 ng/L) at both baseline and at the end of the 10-year follow-up period, their probability of healthy aging decreased by almost half.

The good news is that inflammation can be improved significantly with lifestyle changes.

The takeaway from this study is that IL-6 is a relatively common biomarker for inflammation that can be measured with a simple blood test offered by most major laboratories. This study involved 3,044 participants over the age of 35 who did not have a stroke, heart attack or cancer at the beginning of the study.

The bottom line is that, although genetics are important for longevity, so too are lifestyle choices. A small amount of exercise and replacing animal protein with plant protein can contribute to a substantial increase in healthy life span. IL-6 may be a useful marker for inflammation, which could help predict healthy or unhealthy outcomes. Therefore, why not have a discussion with your doc-tor about testing to see if you have an elevated IL-6? Lifestyle modifications may be able to reduce these levels.

References:

(1) nia.nih.gov. (2) J Am Geriatr Soc. 2009;57:432-440. (3) Future of Genomic Medicine (FoGM) VII. Presented March 7, 2014. (4) J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:472-481. (5) J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:482-484. (6) Cell Metab. 2014;19:407-417. (7) JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173:1230-1238. (8) CMAJ. 2013;185:E763-E770.

Dr. David Dunaief is a speaker, author and local lifestyle medicine physician focusing on the integration of medicine, nutrition, fitness and stress management. For further information, visit www.medicalcompassmd.com. 

by -
0 390
Stock photo

By David Dunaief, M.D.

Dr. David Dunaief

Heart failure (HF) occurs when the heart’s pumping is not able to keep up with the body’s demands for blood and oxygen and may decompensate. Unlike a heart attack, which is acute, heart failure is a slowly developing disease that may take years to become symptomatic.

As of 2018, there were about 6.2 million Americans living with heart failure, and heart failure was a potential contributing factor in 13.4 percent of deaths (1).

There are two types of heart failure, systolic and diastolic. The basic difference is that the ejection fraction, the output of blood with each contraction of the left ventricle of the heart, is more or less preserved in diastolic HF, while it can be significantly reduced in systolic HF.

We have more evidence-based medicine, or medical research, on systolic heart failure. Fortunately, both types can be diagnosed with the help of an echocardiogram, an ultrasound of the heart. The signs and symptoms may be similar, as well, and include shortness of breath on exertion or when lying down, edema or swelling, reduced exercise tolerance, weakness and fatigue.

Major lifestyle risk factors for heart failure include obesity; smoking; poor diet, including consuming too much sodium; being sedentary; and drinking alcohol excessively. Pre-existing conditions that are significant risk factors include diabetes, coronary artery disease and high blood pressure.

Typically, heart failure is treated with blood pressure medications, such as beta blockers, ACE inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers. We are going to look at how diet, iron and the supplement CoQ10 impact heart failure.

Antioxidant diet’s impact

If we look beyond the usual risk factors mentioned above, oxidative stress may play an important role as a contributor to HF. Oxidative stress is thought to result in damage to the inner lining of the blood vessels, or endothelium, oxidation of cholesterol molecules and a decrease in nitric oxide, which helps vasodilate blood vessels.

In a population-based, prospective (forward-looking) study, called the Swedish Mammography Cohort, results show that a diet rich in antioxidants reduces the risk of developing HF (2). In the group that consumed the most nutrient-dense foods, there was a significant 42 percent reduction in the development of HF, compared to the group that consumed the least. According to the authors, the antioxidants were derived mainly from fruits, vegetables, whole grains, coffee and chocolate. Fruits and vegetables were responsible for the majority of the effect.

This nutrient-dense approach to diet increased oxygen radical absorption capacity. Oxygen radicals have been implicated in cellular and DNA damage, potentially as a result of increasing chronic inflammation. What makes this study so impressive is that it is the first of its kind to investigate antioxidants from the diet and their impacts on heart failure prevention.

This was a large study, involving 33,713 women, with good duration — follow-up was 11.3 years. There are limitations to this study, because it is observational and the population involved only women. Still, the results are very exciting, and it is unlikely there is a downside to applying this approach to the population at large.

CoQ10 benefits

Coenzyme Q10 is a substance produced by the body that helps the mitochondria (the powerhouse of the cell) produce energy. It is thought of as an antioxidant. 

Results of the Q-SYMBIO study, a randomized double-blind control trial, showed an almost 50 percent reduction in the risk of all-cause mortality and 50 percent fewer cardiac events with CoQ10 supplementation (3). This one randomized controlled trial followed 420 patients for two years who had severe heart failure. This involved using 100 mg of CoQ10 three times a day compared to placebo.

The lead author goes as far as to suggest that CoQ10 should be part of the paradigm of treatment. CoQ10 is the first supplement to show survival benefits in heart failure.

This study’s rigor is impressive; it assesses the supplement as if it were a drug. A subsequent 2019 sub-group analysis of Q-SYMBIO confirmed the short- and long-term effects and also found a significant improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction among CoQ10 therapy adherents (4).

A meta-analysis involving 13 studies of CoQ10 supplementation with HF confirmed that CoQ10 resulted in ejection fraction improvements among patients with less severe stages of HF, although the authors suggest that studies with more diverse demographics and that refine and compare dose responses are warranted (5). If you have heart failure, you may want to discuss CoQ10 supplementation with your physician.

Iron deficiency challenges

An observational study that followed 753 heart failure patients for almost two years showed that iron deficiency without anemia increased the risk of mortality in heart failure patients by 42 percent (6).

In this study, iron deficiency was defined as a ferritin level less than 100 μg/L (the storage of iron) or, alternately, transferrin saturation less than 20 percent (the transport of iron) with a ferritin level in the range 100–299 μg/L.

The authors conclude that iron deficiency is potentially more predictive of clinical outcomes than anemia, contributes to the severity of HF and is common in these patients. Thus, it behooves us to try to prevent heart failure through dietary changes, including high levels of antioxidants, because it is not easy to reverse the disease. Those with HF should have their ferritin and iron levels checked, for these are correctable.

Based on study results, CoQ10 appears to be a compelling therapy to reduce risk of further complications and potentially death. Consult with your doctor before taking CoQ10 or any other supplements.

References:

(1) cdc.gov. (2) Am J Med. 2013 Jun:126(6):494-500. (3) JACC Heart Fail. 2014 Dec;2(6):641-649. (4) Cardiol J. 2019;26(2):147-156. (5) Am J Clin Nutr. 2013 Feb; 97(2): 268–275. (6) Am Heart J. 2013;165(4):575-582.

Dr. David Dunaief is a speaker, author and local lifestyle medicine physician focusing on the integration of medicine, nutrition, fitness and stress management. For further information, visit www.medicalcompassmd.com. 

by -
0 330
In recent studies, apples, bananas and pears were shown to reduce COPD. Pixabay photo
Lung health is affected by simple diet and exercise changes

By David Dunaief, M.D.

Dr. David Dunaief

The COVID-19 pandemic has raised many people’s awareness of the importance of lung function. Its consequences are especially severe for those with chronic obstructive lung diseases such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma, as well as those who smoke and vape.

What can we do to strengthen our lungs? We can improve lung function with simple lifestyle modifications including exercising, eating a plant-based diet with a focus on fruits and vegetables, expanding lung capacity with an incentive spirometer, and quitting smoking and vaping, which damage the lungs (1). Not only people with compromised lungs will benefit; studies suggest everyone will benefit.

COPD and diet

Several studies demonstrate that higher consumption of fiber from plants decreases the risk of COPD in smokers and ex-smokers. Bear with me, because the studies were done with men or women, not both at the same time. In one study of men, for example, results showed that higher fiber intake was associated with significant 48 percent reductions in COPD incidence in smokers and 38 percent incidence reductions in ex-smokers (3). The high-fiber group ate at least 36.8 grams per day, compared to the low-fiber group, which ate less than 23.7 grams per day. Fiber sources were fruits, vegetables and whole grain, essentially a whole foods plant-based diet. The high-fiber group was still below the American Dietetic Association-recommended 38 grams per day. This is within our grasp. 

In another study, women had a highly significant 37 percent decreased risk of COPD among those who consumed at least 2.5 serving of fruit per day compared to those who consumed less than 0.8 servings per day (4). The highlighted fruits shown to reduce COPD in both men and women included apples, bananas, and pears.

Asthma and diet

In a randomized controlled trial of asthma patients, results show that after 14 days those who ate a low-antioxidant diet had less lung function compared to those who ate a high-antioxidant diet (2). Researchers measured lung function with one-second forced expiratory volume (FEV1) and predicted forced vital capacity (FVC). 

Additionally, those who were in the low-antioxidant diet group also had higher inflammation at 14 weeks, as measured using a c-reactive protein (CRP) biomarker. Those who were in the low-antioxidant group also were over two-times more likely to have an asthma exacerbation.

The good news is that the difference in behavior between the high- and low-antioxidant groups was small. The high-antioxidant group had a modest five servings of vegetables and two servings of fruit daily, while the low-antioxidant group ate no more than two servings of vegetables and one serving of fruit daily. 

Carotenoid supplementation, instead of antioxidant foods, made no difference in inflammation. The authors concluded that an increase in carotenoids from diet has a clinically significant impact on asthma and can be seen in a very short period. 

Incentive spirometry

What is an incentive spirometer? It’s a device that helps expand the lungs by inhaling through a tube and causing a ball or multiple balls to rise. This opens the alveoli and may help you breathe better. 

Incentive spirometry has been used for patients with pneumonia, those who have chest or abdominal surgery and those with asthma or COPD, but it has also been useful for healthy participants (5). A small study showed that those who trained with an incentive spirometer for two weeks increased their vital capacity, right and left chest wall motion, and right diaphragm motion. This means it improved lung function and respiratory motion. Participants were 10 non-smoking healthy adults who were instructed to take five sets of five deep breaths twice a day, totaling 50 deep breaths per day. The brands used in the study are inexpensive and easily accessible, such as Teleflex’s Triflo II.

In another small, two-month study of 27 patients with COPD, the incentive spirometer improved blood gasses, such as partial pressure carbon dioxide and oxygen, in COPD patients with exacerbation (6). The authors concluded that it may improve quality of life for COPD patients.  

Exercise

Exercise can have a direct impact on lung function. In a study involving healthy women ages 65 years and older, results showed that 20 minutes of high-intensity exercise three times a day improved FEV1 and FVC, both indicators of lung function, in as little as 12 weeks (7). Participants began with a 15-minute warm-up, then 20 minutes of high-intensity exercise on a treadmill, followed by 15 minutes of cool-down with stretching.

What is impressive is that it was done in older adults, not those in their twenties and not in elite athletes.

Note that you don’t need a treadmill to do aerobic exercise. You can walk up steps or steep hills in your neighborhood, do jumping jacks, or even dance in your living room. Whatever you choose, you want to increase your heart rate and expand your lungs. If this is new for you, consult a physician and start slowly. You’ll find that your stamina improves rather quickly over time.

We all should be working to strengthen our lungs, regardless of COVID-19. This three-pronged approach of lifestyle modifications – diet, exercise and incentive spirometer – can help without expending significant time or expense.

References:

(1) Public Health Rep. 2011 Mar-Apr; 126(2): 158-159. (2) Am J Clin Nutr. 2012 Sep;96(3):534-43.(3)Epidemiology Mar 2018;29(2):254-260. (4)Int J Epidemiol Dec 1 2018;47(6);1897-1909. (5)Ann Rehabil Med. Jun 2015;39(3):360-365. (6)Respirology. Jun 2005;10(3):349-53.(7)J Phys Ther Sci. Aug 2017;29(8):1454-1457. 

Dr. David Dunaief is a speaker, author and local lifestyle medicine physician focusing on the integration of medicine, nutrition, fitness and stress management. For further information, visit www.medicalcompassmd.com. 

by -
0 270
Stock photo
Excess fat contributes to increased inflammation

By David Dunaief, M.D.

Dr. David Dunaief

Obesity is an ongoing struggle for many in the United States. If you, like many, put on some extra pounds during the past 18 months, it’s even more concerning.

Obesity is a disease unto itself and is defined by a BMI (body mass index) of >30 kg/m2, but obesity can also be defined by excess body fat, which is more important than BMI.

Poor COVID-19 outcomes have been associated with obesity, especially in the U.S. In a study involving 5700 hospitalized COVID-19 patients in the NYC area, the most common comorbidities were obesity, high blood pressure and diabetes (1). Of those who were hospitalized, 41.7% were obese.

In a study in China, results showed that those who were overweight were 86 percent more likely to have severe COVID-19 pneumonia, and that percentage increases to 142 percent when obesity is reached (2).

In fact, one study’s authors suggested quarantining should be longer in obese patients because of the potential for prolonged viral shedding compared to those in the normal range for weight (3).

And though age is a risk factor for COVID-19, among those younger than 60 and obese, there is a two-times increased risk of being admitted to the hospital, according to a 3,615-patient study at NYU Langone Health (4).

While these studies do not test specifically for the more recent variants, I would expect the results are similar.

Why is risk for severe COVID-19 higher with obesity? 

According to the prevailing theory, obesity may interfere with mechanical aspects of breathing, thus increasing airway resistance and make gas in exchange more difficult in the lung. It may also impede on lung volume by exerting pressure on the lungs and may involve weaker muscles necessary for respiration (5).

Why is excess fat more important than BMI? 

First, some who have elevated BMI may not have a significant amount of fat; they may actually have more innate muscle. More than 25 percent of my patient population is “solidly built,” which means they have greater muscle mass as well as too much excess fat. Visceral fat is the most important, since it’s the fat that lines the organs, including the lungs.

For another, fat cells have adipokines, specific cell communicators found in fat cells that communicate with other fat cells but also other systems such as the brain, immune system, muscles, and liver. Adipokines can be mediators of both inflammation and insulin resistance, according to an endocrinology study (6). In a study of over 4,000 patients with COVID-19, the author suggests that inflammation among obese patients may be an exacerbating factor for hospitalizations and severe illness (7). 

If we defined obesity as being outside the normal fat range – normal ranges are roughly 11-22 percent for men and 22-34 percent for women – then close to 70 percent of Americans are obese.

Inflammation reduction and weight-loss combined

In a randomized controlled trial with 75 participants comparing a plant-based diet to a control diet, there was a greater than 14 lbs. weight reduction and roughly 10 lbs. fat reduction over a 14-week period (8). Of the weight lost, about 70 percent was excess fat. Remember, excess body fat, through adipokines, may be inflammatory and increase the risk of severe COVID-19. 

The weight reduction with a plant-based approach may involve the increase in fiber, reduction in dietary fat and increased burning of calories after the meal, according to Physician’s Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) (9).

You also want a diet that has been shown to reduce inflammation.

We recently published a study involving 16 patients from my clinical practice. It shows that those who ate a whole food plant-based LIFE (low inflammatory foods everyday) diet over a seven-day period had a significant decrease in inflammation measured by hsCRP (high sensitivity c-reactive protein). This occurred in those who completely changed their diets to the LIFE diet, but also occurred in those who simply added a greens and fruit-based smoothie daily to their existing diet (10).

In my practice, I have seen a number of patients lose a substantial amount of weight, but also body fat, over a short period. For instance, a 70-year-old male lost 19 lbs. of weight and 12 lbs. of body fat over a six-week period. His inflammation, which was very high to start, dropped substantially to the border of optimal levels, using hsCRP as the inflammation measurement. This patient and many others have seen tandem reductions in both weight and inflammation. To boot, this was a cardiac patient whose cardiologist had considered a stent, but later said he did not need it after reducing his inflammation.

If the continuing COVID-19 concerns do not convince you that losing excess fat is important, then consider that obesity contributes to, or is associated with, many other chronic diseases like cardiovascular disease, high blood pressure, and high cholesterol, which also contribute to severe COVID-19. Thus, there is an imperative to lose excess body fat.

References:

(1) JAMA. online April 22, 2020. (2) Clin Med (Lond). 2020 Jul; 20(4): e109–e113. (3) Acta Diabetol. 2020 Apr 5: 1–6. (4) Clin Infect Dis. 2020 Jul 28;71(15):896-897. (5) Chron. Respir. Dis. 5, 233–242 (2008). (6) Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2013; 4:71. (7) MedRxiv.com. (8) Nutr Diabetes. 2018; 8: 58. (9) Inter Journal of Disease Reversal and Prevention 2019;1:1. (10) Am J of Lifestyle Med. online Oct. 5, 2020.

Dr. David Dunaief is a speaker, author and local lifestyle medicine physician focusing on the integration of medicine, nutrition, fitness and stress management. For further information, visit www.medicalcompassmd.com. 

Prev1...181920...64Next Page 19 of 64
TBR News Media is your local news and entertainment website.
We provide you with the latest breaking news and information for your community.
Contact us: [email protected]

Most Viewed

©