The strain of bacterium found recently at a Nestle's plant in Virginia is not actually the same as the strain blamed for an outbreak of illnesses in 30 states.
The FDA made the announcement today, and production at the plant is reportedly ramping back up. Here's a new AP story and a slightly fuller one from ABC News, the second of which brings a third strain of E. coli into the picture.
And perhaps more relevant considering the scarcity of facts, the list of recalled products, the Food and Drug Administration's basic page on the topic, plus one from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
But if you're wondering how the investigators ended up pointing the finger at cookie dough in the first place, here's an informative blog post from a CDC officer investigating this outbreak. She writes: "There are no short cuts. We talk to the patients, we look at the combined information, and we generate hypotheses about the cause. Then we can refine our questions and go back to the patients again to see which hypothesis holds true."
And, as a bonus, here's Michael Jacobson, executive director of the nutrition watchdog Center for Science in the Public Interest, expressing outrage over Nestle's alleged recalcitrance in cooperating with the FDA during inspections at the plant in question.
And in other food safety news this week: "Administration moves to bolster food safety net."
None of which explains the source of the E. coli blamed in the outbreak.
-- Tami Dennis
Photo: Some people actually eat cookie dough without cooking it first.
Ah, the happy days of summer: Frolicking in the waves. Basking on the beach (responsibly sun-screened, of course) while Janie and Johnnie dig in the sand with their buckets and spades. Maybe you'll even build a sandcastle yourself, throw off the cares of the world for a while.
Wait -- should you be doing that? Such reckless sand play, scientists have found, puts people at risk for subsequent stomach cramping and diarrhea courtesy of fecal bacteria on the shore. Safer to walk along the beach or (gulp) go in the water.
In a survey of 27,000 visitors to ocean and freshwater beaches, 13% of those who said they'd dug in sand during a visit to a beach reported gastrointestinal problems when interviewed 10 to 12 days later.
As for those who allowed themselves to be buried in sand, their rate was even higher: 23%. So think about that the next time you decide to go have some fun like that.
The study, by scientists at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the Environmental Protection Agency, was published in the American Journal of Epidemiology.
The recalls are dwarfed by those recent, and now almost infamous, ones prompted by the Peanut Corp. of America. But they're starting to add up. Plainview Milk Products Cooperative of Plainview, Minn., has started another recall with ripple effects, this one of nonfat dried milk, whey protein and thickening agents sold over the last two years.
The reason? Possible salmonella contamination.
No illnesses have been linked to any of the products, which aren't sold directly to consumers but to companies with which the cooperative does business.
But because dry milk lasts a while, one of its main selling points after all, some could conceivably be in your cabinet.
Smokers who wear a nicotine patch for two weeks before they quit smoking are twice as likely to kick the habit as those who puton the patch on the day they quit, finds a new study, published online in the journal Nicotine & Tobacco Research.
Smokers, and the physicians who advise them, have always been wary of suggesting the use of patch and cigarettes together for fear that the two-fisted approach would cause nicotine overdoses. And the labels of nicotine patches reflect that concern, warning would-be quitters not to use both at once.
But researchers at Duke University's Center for Nicotine and Smoking Cessation Research found that smokers who wore the smoking-cessation aid before they smoked were more likely to decrease the number of cigarettes they smoked in the two-week period before their official quit date. That's probably because the patch was satisfying some of their desire for nicotine, they surmised. When the time came to quit, it would seem that some had already dialed down their need to light up and puff.
In all, 22% of those who wore the patch for two weeks before quitting abstained continuously from cigarettes for 10 weeks. Only 11% of those who wore a fake patch -- the placebo -- abstained for that long.
One interesting parallel: The smoking-cessation drug Chantix is also to be started two weeks before a person's quit date. But Chantix is thought to suppress the urge to smoke not by replacing cigarettes' nicotine, but by blocking the brain's reward-seeking pathways, thus blunting the craving to smoke and the pleasure in doing so.
Quitting is hard; and it's probably particularly hardfor the same reason that these two pre-quitting treatments probably help: because in addition to a smoker's physical need for nicotine, there is also the relaxing, pleasurable, familiar routine of breaking for a cigarette, staring into the cloud of blue smoke you've created and, for a brief spell, just floating in the sensation of relief. If that hypnotic spell can be eased -- or even broken -- before their quit date, maybe quitters will have one big battle, not two, to fight.
By the way, the FDA recently ordered warnings on Chantix cautioning those who take it to look out for signs of odd behavior or thinking: unusual aggression, irritability, sadness or suicidal behavior. Nicotine patches, so far, have been free of such concerns.
Finally, a disclosure by the Duke study's lead author, Jed Rose: Rose is one of the inventors of the nicotine patch, and has received royalties in the past on their sales. Also, the research was conducted under a grant from the tobacco giant Phillip Morris USA. Don't say we didn't tell you.
Losing weight and keeping it off is challenging, but not impossible. Just ask the men and women on the National Weight Control Registry, an ongoing research study of adults who have lost at least 30 pounds and maintained it for a year or more.
But with obesity starting younger and younger, health experts realize that weight loss efforts and lifestyle changes for children and teens must start sooner, and need to be tailored to that age group to be effective. That's why researchers from the Miriam Hospital and the Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University are starting the Adolescent Weight Control Registry, led by Rena Wing, director of the Weight Control and Diabetes Research Center at the Miriam Hospital, and Elissa Jelalian, associate professor of psychiatry and human behavior at Brown Medical School.
"We're doing it with the idea that we could develop better interventions for teens," says Jelalian. "We would also like to track kids over time to see how they do through transitions, such as from school to independence."
Through questionnaires and surveys, adult registry founders Wing and James O. Hill, director of the Center for Human Nutrition, have discovered similarities among successful losers, such as being faithful to regular exercise and diligent about portion control.
But teens lose weight differently from adults, Jelalian says, for many reasons: Teens and parents can initiate efforts; teens are learning to navigate through peer pressure and social situations; they don't always have access to gyms or fitness classes; and they're not always in control of what's served at meals.
The study is currently seeking participants ages 14 to 20 from around the country. Requirements are less stringent than for adults -- teens must have kept off at least 10 pounds for a year or more, and fulfill other conditions.
"I think when you get down to diet and activity," says Jelalian, "inevitably these kids will have somehow cut back on eating and upped their activity. But I think there are lots of ways of getting to that point."
People who appreciate small moments of happiness, laughter and joy through the course of each day tend to be happy people who are more likely to be resilient against adversity and more successful in jobs, relationships and health outcomes.
Researchers at the University of North Carolina reached this conclusion after a series of studies that required 86 participants to submit daily "emotion reports" that gauged their emotional status in detail over the course of the day. The study showed that happy people do not need to be Pollyannas or deny the upsetting parts of life. But these people have the ability to put greater stock in small, happy moments. Savoring these blips of pleasure in everyday life, the study found, elevates one's mood overall and leads to more resilience against negative events.
"This study shows that if happiness is something you want out of life, then focusing daily on the small moments and cultivating positive emotions is the way to go," said Barbara Fredrickson, the lead author of the study, in a news release. "Those small moments let positive emotions blossom, and that helps us become more open. That openness then helps us build resources that can help us rebound better from adversity and stress, ward off depression and continue to grow."
The key to focusing on micro-moments, Fredrickson said, is to set aside worries about the big picture.
"A lot of times we get so wrapped up in thinking about the future and the past that we are blind to the goodness we are steeped in already, whether it's the beauty outside the window or the kind things that people are doing for you. The better approach is to be open and flexible, to be appreciative of whatever good you do find in your daily circumstances, rather than focusing on the bigger questions, such as 'Will I be happy if I move to California?' or 'Will I be happy if I get married?' "
The study, published in the current issue of the journal Emotion, was co-authored by researchers at UC San Francisco, the University of Michigan,University of Pittsburgh and Cornell University. Fredrickson has written a book on her research titled, "Positivity: Groundbreaking Research Reveals How to Embrace the Hidden Strength of Positive Emotions, Overcome Negativity and Thrive," (Crown Publishing, 2009).
Even the hint -- from an animal study, no less -- that a specific drug may eventually help humans extend lifespan is enough to generate considerable popular excitement, presumably among those who have an interest in living longer. But if it's longevity you want, suppressing the immune system may not be the best way to go. That's what the drug in question, rapamycin, does.
For one thing, this suppression does tend to increase the risk of disease. An undesirable side effect by anyone's standards.
Rapamycin, an antibiotic commonly given to prevent rejection of organ transplants, was given to old mice in a recent study and, yes, the animals lived longer. Lifespan was increased up to 14% for female rodents (not to belabor the point, but it's worth repeating that the study was on, yes, rodents) and up to 9% for male rodents. *
Now, more on rapamycin.
The National Cancer Institute defines it as: "An antibiotic that blocks a protein involved in cell division and inhibits the growth and function of certain T cells of the immune system involved in the body's rejection of foreign tissues and organs. It is a type of immunosuppressant and a type of serine/threonine kinase inhibitor. Rapamycin is now called sirolimus."
More on sirolimus from rxlist.com, which points out that the drug can increase the risk of certain types of cancer -- lymphoma and skin cancer, for example.
Here's a summary of the new research, published Wednesday in the journal Nature. It states: "Rapamycin may extend lifespan by postponing death from cancer, by retarding mechanisms of ageing, or both."
That's heady stuff. Here's a bit more context, in a more accessible version, from nature.com. And a blog post from the site pointing out just where the word "mice" first appeared in various media reports.
As a Forbes story clarifies, the significance here is actually what the research tells us about the biology of aging. There's a long way to go between one finding about a signaling pathway in the body and practical effects in people. A very long way.
But, of course, that doesn't mean you shouldn't try to get this antibiotic and take it as an insurance policy. Mega doses, naturally, just to be on the safe side.
-- Tami Dennis
* An earlier version of this story said the mice were all of the same type. Not so, as Mr. Miller (see comment below) was kind enough to point out.
Would you be willing to go on a diet … for the rest of your life?
What if I told you it would dramatically reduce your odds of getting cancer, heart disease and diabetes?
Perhaps more folks will start considering the trade-off between a long life and an enjoyable life after reading a study released today by the journal Science.
Researchers in Wisconsin have been feeding 38 rhesus monkeys a restricted diet that contains 30% fewer calories than standard monkey chow for as long as 20 years. Those calorically restricted monkeys had half the risk of developing cardiovascular disease or cancer compared with the 38 control monkeys on the normal diet.
What’s more, none of the low-cal animals developed Type 2 diabetes. That compares to five diabetic monkeysand another 11 that were pre-diabetic in the control group.
Overall, the researchers found that monkeys on the regular diet were three times as likely to die of age-related causes during the study than the ones on caloric restriction. An article about the study appears in Science News.
Researchers said that, because monkeys are close relatives of humans, it’s quite likely that humans could live longer and healthier lives by paring back their calories too. But with two-thirds of the country classified as overweight or obese, it hardly seems like a trend that will take off.
-- Karen Kaplan
Photo: Canto, 27 (right), is on a restricted diet, and Owen, 29, is not. Canto looks younger, but is he happier? Credit: University of Wisconsin
An experimental drug called raxibacumab protected monkeys and rabbits against inhaled anthrax and could presumably be used to protect humans in the event of a terrorist attack, researchers reported today in the New England Journal of Medicine. Anthrax can be killed with antibiotics, but the death of the anthrax organisms releases a deadly flood of toxin. Raxibacumab is a monoclonal antibody, produced in animals, that binds to the toxin and removes it from the blood stream, preventing its lethal effects.
A vaccine against anthrax is available and is given to laboratory workers and some soldiers, but its use has been controversial because of the high incidence of side effects. The new research provides "an important addition to the existing arsenal" against anthrax, Dr. Gary G. Nable, director of vaccine research at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases wrote in an editorial in the same issue of the journal.
The antibody, called ABthrax, was developed by Human Genome Sciences of Rockville, Md., under a contract from the government's Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority following the 2001 attacks in which anthrax-containing letters were sent to journalists and politicians, killing five people. The company has already delivered 20,000 doses of the drug to the U.S. Strategic National Stockpile for emergency use.
In one experiment, monkeys got a single dose of ABthrax or a placebo two days before receiving a lethal dose of anthrax. Those receiving a placebo all died within six days, while nine of the 10 receiving the highest dose survived. In a similar experiment, monkeys were given the drug after inhaling a powder of anthrax 200 times the lethal dose. Nine of 14 monkeys receiving the highest dose survived. Similar results were obtained with rabbits.
The drug cannot ethically be tested against anthrax in humans, but studies in 333 healthy people showed that it produced no adverse side effects. The company has applied to the Food and Drug Administration for approval under a rule that lets animal studies substitute for human ones in cases where human testing is not feasible.
Muscle pain often sends people scrambling for muscle rubs -- but do they actually work?
Not in all cases, according to a recent Cochrane Library study, which reviewed previous studies comparing muscle pain relief via rubefacients -- topical rubs that cause skin redness by dilating the capillaries and increasing blood flow -- to topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Here, in part, is what the BBC had to say about it:
"They looked at 16 studies involving nearly 1,300 patients using creams containing salicylate -- a close drug relative of aspirin.
"Results from four of the studies showed topical salicylates performed better than dummy (placebo) creams against acute pain, but when lower quality studies were excluded, the results were not statistically significant.
"Again, when used for chronic conditions, salicylates performed better than placebos.
"But only one in six patients with chronic pain from conditions like osteoarthritis benefited substantially from using the muscle rubs compared with one in three using non-steroidal anti-inflammatory painkiller gels like ibuprofen or diclofenac."
The review concluded that more research -- specifically large, good-quality clinical trials -- is needed to determine the effectiveness of muscle rubs.
Considering how many athletes and exercisers (including weekend warriors) use these rubs, the study's conclusion is worth considering. But keep in mind that topical NSAIDs are not without their side effects, such as gastrointestinal problems, although some studies show they have fewer complications than oral NSAIDs.
Spending on healthcare for obese American adults increased 82% between 2001 and 2006, according to a new government report.
In 2001, expenditures for obese Americans totaled $167 billion compared with $303 billion in 2006. Costs for adults who were overweight rose 36% during that time period while costs for normal-weight adults increased 25%.
Healthcare expenditures for obese Americans accounted for 35% of all costs in 2006, the report noted. During the years of 2001 to 2006, the number of obese Americans increased from 48 million to 59 million people. Obese people are much more likely to suffer from several chronic health conditions.
One hopes the figures, which were compiled by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, will come to the attention of lawmakers and other authorities discussing healthcare reform. Perhaps the top goal of healthcare reform should be preventing obesity, and the myriad of health problems it causes, in our children.
-- Shari Roan
Illustration credit: Michelle Chang / For The Times
If you're waiting with bated breath for all those new healthful-food-scoring schemes to hit the grocery stores, you may be interested in a chart of existing and upcoming rating systems compiled by the Fooducate blog. It's a pretty useful resource.
(By the way, if all the fields of the chart don't show up when you click on the link, copying and pasting the content into a blank document seems to do the trick, for reasons that I do not understand.)
For men with prostate cancer, even those with the early-stage type, the urge to treat is undeniable and understandable. The same apparently holds true for their doctors. But sometimes no treatment, at least for a while, is better -- both for men with cancer and for the healthcare system as a whole.
More men -- and, again, their doctors (who are paid by procedure, not by performance) -- need to ask themselves whether less might ultimately provide more. That's the suggestion posed by a smart, making-the-big-picture-personal piece in today's New York Times.
For writer David Leonhardt, the true test of health reform can be summed up with our medical and insurance systems' approach to prostate cancer, specifically the common, slow-growing kind. It's the kind that can often be monitored with what is known as watchful waiting without the risk of side effects that comes with radiation and surgery.
But if the treatments have roughly similar benefits, they have very different prices. Watchful waiting costs just a few thousand dollars, in follow-up doctor visits and tests. Surgery to remove the prostate gland costs about $23,000. A targeted form of radiation, known as I.M.R.T., runs $50,000. Proton radiation therapy often exceeds $100,000.
And in our current fee-for-service medical system — in which doctors and hospitals are paid for how much care they provide, rather than how well they care for their patients — you can probably guess which treatments are becoming more popular: the ones that cost a lot of money.
If you doubt that similar-benefits contention and want an in-depth look at how the treatments compare, there's this report: "Comparative Effectiveness of Therapies for Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer" from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
The report, released last year, concludes:
Published evidence indicates that no one therapy can be considered preferred for localized prostate cancer due to limitations in quality of the body of comparative effectiveness evidence. All treatment options result in adverse effects (primarily urinary, bowel, and sexual) though the severity and frequency may vary between treatments and according to the provider/hospital. Even if differences in therapeutic efficacy exist, differences in AEs [adverse effects], convenience, and costs are likely to be important factors in individual patient decision making. Despite this uncertainty, patient-reported satisfaction with any individual therapy received is high.
Leonhardt is right. This one example highlights the seemingly large and intractable problems of rising healthcare costs (proton radiation therapy isn't cheap) and getting the most effective healthcare for our national dollars.
And, come decision-making time, if less-expensive treatments are as effective as more high-tech ones, perhaps it's time to question some of the recommendations for expensive treatment and screenings.
A simple nutritional supplement could provide the first medical assistance for compulsive hair-pullers, who often pluck hair from the scalp, eyebrows and lashes to the point of baldness. The supplement, N-acetylcysteine, has previously been found to aid people with other compulsive disorders, and a new clinical trial showed that it benefited more than half of those who took it.
Compulsive hair-pulling, also known as trichotillomania, is marked by a high level of tension that is relieved by the hair-pulling; sufferers receive pleasure, relief or gratification from the act. It is believed to affect up to 4% of the U.S. population, most commonly women, but accurate figures are hard to come by because many sufferers hide their conditions because of shame. Victims often suffer a reduced quality of life and difficulties in working because they refuse to be seen in public. There are no approved medical treatments for the condition, but cognitive behavioral therapy can help some patients.
The condition, like many other compulsive behaviors, is thought to arise from an imbalance of chemicals in the brain, especially levels of serotonin and glutamate, a chemical that triggers excitement. N-acetylcysteine blocks production of glutamate in specific areas of the brain.
Dr. Jon E. Grant of the University of Minnesota School of Medicine and his colleagues studied 50 people with the disorder, 45 women and five men with an average age of about 34. Half received 1,200 to 2,400 milligrams of N-acetylcysteine daily while the other half received a placebo.
The team reported this week in the Archives of General Psychiatry that, after 12 weeks, 56% of those receiving the amino acid supplement reported being "much or very much improved," compared with 16% of those taking the placebo. The improvement was noticeable after nine weeks of treatment.
The supplement "is available in health-food stores, is cheaper than most insurance co-payments and seems to be well-tolerated," they wrote. Future studies, they said, should examine long-term effects.
We recently wrote about new labels you'll be seeing in grocery stores soon that are designed to help consumers make more healthful choices. But how helpful will they be? Consider the fact that Frosted Flakes would qualify for the new industry-designed "Smart Choices" logo.
Check out the Chicago Tribune's story about these new labeling schemes and what various nutrition experts think of them.
The involvement of industry in developing Smart Choices "is a classic case of the fox guarding the hen house," comments Dr. David Katz, director of the Yale Prevention Research Center, in the article. Katz helped put together a different system, NuVal, which rates foods on a scale of 1 to 100 based on nutritional content and was developed without industry involvement. (Frosted Flakes scored only 22 on that scale.)
The food industry isn't the only organization to get dinged in the article. As the article makes clear, the American Heart Assn. has long been criticized for its endorsement of products through the heart-check mark program. The association gets paid for those heart-check marks, and not all of the foods that can qualify are ones you'd necessarily consider healthful, even if they are low in saturated fat and cholesterol. One example from the Tribune article is Kellogg's Smart Start Strong Heart Antioxidants cereal, which has the association's heart-check mark but contains 14 grams of sugar per serving.
Read more about the American Heart Assn. heart-check mark controversy in an online exerpt from NYU nutrition professor Marion Nestle's 2003 book, "Food Politics."
Propoxyphene, better known by long-used brand names Darvon and Darvocet, may stay on the market, but must carry a new, stronger version of the Food and Drug Administration's most serious warnings to consumers and physicians. Products containing propoxyphene, an opiate used to treat mild to moderate pain, will now carry more stringent warnings about the dangers of taking more than the recommended dose, the FDA announced today.
The agency also announced that it has ordered studies on the risk of dangerous cardiac side effects associated with Darvon and related pain medications, as well as on the extent of their use in the elderly -- a population for which propoxyphene is considered to be problematic and less effective than newer, safer drugs.
Propoxyphene's dangers most recently came to light in February 2006, when the group Public Citizen petitioned the FDA to remove the drug from the market. The FDA said today that while it may take further action against the pain drug after studies have been completed, it would allow its continued sale, with the strengthened "black-box" warnings.
The decision came as the agency also considers the advice of one of its own advisory panels, which recently recommended banning further sale of several other widely prescribed opiate pain medications -- those that include acetaminophen, among them Vicodin and Percocet.
Propoxyphene was found to have been associated with roughly 2,110 deaths in the United States between 1981 and 1999, and during the same period was found in autopsies to have been implicated in 5.6% of drug-related deaths in the U.S. Public Citizen had sued the FDA in June of last year for failing to rule on its 2006 petition, prompting the FDA to act this week.
Few people go to fast-food places for low-fat, healthful foods, so it's no surprise that a new study finds that customers accumulate copious calories when they eat a fast-food lunch.
Researchers from the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Bureau of Chronic Disease Prevention and Control, surveyed 7,750 customers at 167 fast-food restaurants in New York City (before fast-food calorie-labeling regulations began) to see on average how many calories they consumed at lunch. Results were broken down into several categories, including restaurants, foods and what meals consisted of.
Those who ate at fast-food chicken chains averaged the highest number of calories per meal -- 931. Customers of sandwich joints averaged the lowest calories, at 734. Overall, average lunchtime calories came in at 827, but when researchers excluded single-item purchases, that average rose to 961 calories.
Although lunch is only one meal, 34% of all people surveyed ordered meals that averaged 1,000 calories or more. For the three hamburger chains surveyed -- McDonald's, Burger King and Wendy's -- more than 70% of all orders were combination meals or dollar meals. Those dollar or value meals averaged more than 800 calories at the three hamburger chains. Not surprisingly, the combination meals (usually consisting of a sandwich, side order and drink) averaged more than 1,100 calories at the hamburger chains.
The study, in the July issue of the journal Obesity, is timely for Californians, since a law went into effect last week requiring chain restaurants with 20 or more locations to give nutrition information (including calorie counts) via brochures, menu inserts or table tents. But next year, calorie information has to be on menus and indoor menu boards.
In the study, the authors wrote, "Posting calorie information on menus and menu boards, a requirement for New York City fast-food chains since April 2008, may help guide consumers to healthier choices and increase demand for lower calorie items. It may also encourage companies to reduce portion sizes and increase the availability of lower calorie options, especially in the popular combination meal and value categories."
When federal health officials declared a flu-related public health emergency in April, state health departments in 46 states, plus the District of Columbia, got cracking to let the public know. Within about 24 hours, they had posted information about the new strain of H1N1 on their websites, most of it easily accessible. (No site map required.)
Out of 153 local health departments studied, only 52 did so within that time frame. Of those that did, most linked directly to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which makes more than a little sense.
Such are the findings in a new analysis performed by researchers at Rand Corp. and published online today in the journal Health Affairs. The report offers a look at state and local health officials' readiness for a public health emergency. As the researchers point out, chances to assess such preparedness are rare. The outbreak of so-called swine flu provided one such opportunity.
Potentially reassuring for Californians is that local folks fared fairly well in the survey, especially compared with Kansas. Here, 73% of the sampled counties offered up information online within that time frame; in Kansas, only 8% did so.
Of course, the quality of that information varied, as you may know if you tried to find something other than advice to wash your hands and stay home when you felt ill. That's why the link to the CDC comes in particularly handy. The site had a wealth of information during the outbreak. Still does.
The researchers acknowledge that residents of some communities simply may not turn to their local or state departments for information, that they may get such news elsewhere. They suggest health officials need to improve how well they work with others in the community.
And of note, they point out that most health departments didn't provide information in multiple languages. Whether or not you think such information should be available, it's hard to deny the implications during an infectious disease outbreak.
The report concludes:
"In the past several years, federal funding for public health emergency preparedness activities has declined. This reduction in funding, coupled with the current economic crisis, has led many health departments to lay off staff and reduce their activities across the board (for both routine public health functions and emergency preparedness). Unfortunately, these cuts threaten to erase much of the progress that has been made over the past eight years and will likely lead to major degradations in U.S. preparedness and response capabilities."
-- Tami Dennis
Photo: Victor Cristoba wears a mask during a San Jose immigration rally in early May, soon after a public health emergency was declared.
The Myers cocktail, an intravenous blend of vitamins and minerals, has become increasingly popular in the less-traditional medical world in recent years. It went public a few days ago when nurse Cherilyn Lee, who specializes in nutritional counseling, said she had given Michael Jackson an intravenous blend of vitamins and minerals called a Myers cocktail.
In the Associated Press story, she's quoted as saying: "It wasn't that he felt sick. ... He just wanted more energy." Jackson had been asking for Diprivan, Lee said.
The concoction, based on one created by physician John Myers of Baltimore, includes magnesium, calcium, several B vitamins and vitamin C.
Here's an overview, "Intravenous Nutrient Therapy: The 'Myers’ Cocktail,'" published in Alternative Medicine Review in 2002.
It's written by Dr. Alan Gaby, who popularized the mixture and who contends that the cocktail "has been found to be effective against acute asthma attacks, migraines, fatigue (including chronic fatigue syndrome), fibromyalgia, acute muscle spasm, upper respiratory tract infections, chronic sinusitis, seasonal allergic rhinitis, cardiovascular disease, and other disorders."
These are bold claims.
Even the paper acknowledges that the evidence of its effectiveness is largely anecdotal and that there's little in the way of published research.
And yet in his conclusion, Gaby says: "In many instances this treatment is more effective and better tolerated than conventional medical therapies. ... Widespread appropriate use of this treatment would likely reduce the overall cost of healthcare, while greatly improving the health of many individuals."
Perhaps explaining the appeal, and lack of obvious effectiveness, of such intravenous nutrients, there's this discussion-starting post on a Lyme disease support group forum from a patient who had a Myers cocktail via IV drip:
"I didn't feel much yesterday after having it administered but today I feel pretty darn good. Hard to know, though if it's the treatment or not since good and bad days alternating is my norm."
More recently, the blog Terra Sigillata, by a researcher trained in pharmacology and toxicology, explains the "Myers' cocktail" in relation to the Jackson case.
He offers some background material on the concoction and adds: "I am particularly concerned with the calcium composition of this intravenous brew; while not likely to be toxic on its own, if dosed as listed, I do have some concern if Mr. Jackson already had pre-existing cardiac problems and/or was receiving drugs such as Demerol (meperidine) or Diprivan (propofol) which each pose a risk of cardiac toxicity."
Living together or being married might have some health benefits, but losing weight may not be one of them.
Couples who marry or cohabit are more likely than their single-and-dating counterparts to be obese, according to a new study in the July issue of the journal Obesity. Those living together for two years or more are also less apt to be physically active, part of the recipe for obesity.
Researchers from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill looked at data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, a large study tracking students from Grade 7 through adulthood to age 27. The data also included a couples sample, which included the study participants' heterosexual romantic partners.
Here's the breakdown of their romantic life: about 41% transitioned from single-and-dating to dating, 29% transitioned to single, 17% transitioned to living with someone, and 13% transitioned to marriage. Men and women who shifted from single-and-dating to married were more likely to become obese than those who made the transition from single-and-dating to dating. And women who went from single-and-dating to single, or single-and-dating to cohabiting, were more likely to become obese.
Living with a romantic partner for one year or more increased women's chances of becoming obese. Men who lived with a romantic partner for one to two years were twice as likely to become obese compared to men not living with a significant other.
Marriage didn't seem to have much of a slimming effect. Overall, couples who lived together or were married had less healthy habits for obesity, exercise and screen time than dating couples. Married couples also tended to have one or two fewer active partners in them than those who were dating, and cohabiting couples were more likely to have two sedentary partners in them. Couples who lived together for two years or more were considerably more likely to have one or two partners in them who were obese, less physically active, and more sedentary.
As for the whys of all this, researchers speculate that a couple's living conditions may contribute to the added poundage. The actions of one partner -- eating fattier foods, for example -- could influence the other, perhaps with bad results. But knowing that, they add, may also lead to more effective interventions.
So maybe registering for a Wii Fit for your wedding isn't such a bad idea after all.
Tami Dennis, who takes the word "skeptic" to previously uncharted territory, is the Times' Health and Science editor. She's adamant that pitches promoting awareness days, weeks or months are, by their nature, non-stories. And, because she's an adult, she refuses to use words like "veggies," "tummy" and "yummy."
Rosie Mestel, deputy Health and Science editor, studied genetics before abandoning flies, fungi and DNA for health/medical writing. Her hero is the biologist Ernst Haeckel, whose jellyfish paintings inspired snazzy chandeliers. Her favorite toast-spread is Marmite, a British delicacy made of yeast extract. Her least-favorite word is "millenniums."
Melissa Healy is a staff writer for the Health section reporting from Washington D.C. Healy's a veteran of The Times' National staff, having covered the Pentagon, Congress, poverty and social welfare, the environment, and the White House before shifting to Health in 2003. She writes frequently about mental health and human behavior, about federal health policy, prescription medication and ethics in medicine. More wonk than wellness freak, Healy chooses to believe in the health benefits of coffee and wine, and considers water a better work-out medium than beverage.
Karen Kaplan covers genetics, stem cells and cloning. She and colleague Thomas H. Maugh II comprise about 25% of the unofficial MIT-Alumni-in-Journalism Club, and she is proud to have taken more math (5) than English (0) courses in college. Her contributions to Booster Shots will, she hopes, appear more frequently than postings to her mommy blog.
Thomas H. Maugh II has been a science and medical writer at the Times for 23 years. Before that, he was on the staff of the journal Science for 13 years.
He has bachelor's degrees in English and chemistry from MIT and a doctorate in chemistry from UC Santa Barbara.
After a brief stint as a sports writer, Shari Roan turned to health journalism and has covered the topic for The Times for 18 years. She is the author of three books and the mother of two daughters, both teenagers who refer to her as a "health freak." She likes to jog, watch baseball and is very happy that dark chocolate contains some health benefit.
Jeannine Stein writes about fitness, sports medicine and obesity for the Health section. She’s a gym rat from way back and never met an elliptical trainer she didn’t like. Well, maybe one or two. She tempers exercise with a steady diet of reality television because she believes it’s all about balance.
