Archive for the ‘medically-oriented background info’ Category

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Should you take multivitamins?

Friday, July 29th, 2011

The best choice is on the right

Eight days ago The Wall Street Journal had an article with an intriguing title, "Multivitamins: Lots of Types, Lots of Label Confusion. The question was "do you really need a multivitamin?" and the answer was, "probably not, although much depends on your age, gender, diet and health.

I take a senior vitamin (I'm 70), 5,000 IU of vitamin D every other day, 500 milligrams of vitamin C and 2,500 micrograms of B12 a day. I also take another vitamin-containing capsule suggested by an ophthalmologist (as my Dad had macular degeneration and there's some data suggesting taking these vitamins plus zinc, selenium, copper, lutein and zeaxanthin can help prevent this disease).

The last two chemicals I mentioned are probably unfamiliar to most of you; but they're found naturally in your eyes, especially in the retina/macula. Zeaxanthin is the pigment that gives paprika  (made from bell peppers), corn, saffron, and many other plants their characteristic color.

The questions I asked myself for these vitamins today were firstly: what are the recommended daily allowances RDAs), the amount from food (and maybe added pills) that are sufficient to meet the nutrient requirements of nearly all (97-98%) healthy individuals in a group. And secondly: what are the tolerable upper intake (TUL) levels for these same vitamins.

Both these querys can be answered by looking at tables supplied by the Institute of Medicine (look at www.iom.edu). The IOM is an independent, nonprofit organization that works outside of government to provide unbiased and authoritative advice to decision makers and the public. It's been the health arm since 1970 of the National Academy of Science which itself was established by President Lincoln in 1863.

I'll just mention a few of the RDAs and TULs and stick to my age and gender. Remember B vitamins are water soluble, so for most of these there is no upper determined limit. Excess amounts should be excreted in the urine. That doesn't mean you can or should gulp an endless amount of these; to me it just means there is no data on adverse effects.

Vitamins that are fat soluble (A, D, E, and K for most of of us, CoQ10 for those who take this supplement {disclaimer: I know little about CoQ10 and have never taken it myself}), are different. Excess amounts may remain in the body and cause toxicity.

Vitmain C megadoses were advocated years ago by Linus Pauling (who won two Nobel prizes), but large, randomized clinical trials on the effects of high doses on the general population have never taken place and toxicity in some individuals taking high doses has been shown. The RDA for me is 75 mg/d and the TUL is 2,000.

I wondered if I were possibly pushing the upper limits of vitamin A intake, with 2,500 IU (international units) in my senior vitamin and 2,500 IU in the other multi I take, so I looked for the TUL and found it in IU format in the NIH's MedlinePlus website as 25,000 IUs.

Multivitamins are a $4.9 biilion/year industry, so I'd consult your own physician if you want to take them or any supplements.

 

Posted in medically-oriented background info, scientific controversies, supplements | 1 Comment »

An Entire Pillar of Salt?

Saturday, July 23rd, 2011

Not a pillar, but too much anyway

I remember a Biblical reference (Genesis 9:26 in my copy) to Lot's wife looking back at Sodom and Gomorrah and turning into a pillar of salt. Today I'd like to talk about much smaller amounts than a whole pillar and salts in the pleural, not just sodium chloride, ordinary table salt, but potassium as well.

I am aware there's been considerable discussion of our dietary salt/sodium intake in the past few years. A July 12, 2011 article in The Wall Street Journal titled "Neutralizing Sodium's Heart Impact" led me back into this literature.

We've been urged time and again to lessen our sodium intake. The 2011 Dietary Guidelines, as I've mentioned before, suggested the average American cut their sodium intake from our average of  3,400 milligrams down to 2,300, roughly a teaspoon a day.

But a large group of us, all at risk for hypertension: everyone over 51, African-Americans, anyone with pre-existing high blood pressure and those with diabetes or chronic kidney disease (i.e., over half our population) were told we should go further, cut to roughly a half teaspoon of salt a day, with various sources suggesting 1,200 to 1,500 milligrams per day total sodium intake.

The most recent study appeared in the Archives of Internal Medicine on July 11th and had a slightly different take on the subject. A prospective cohort study of 12,00+ US adults, followed nearly 15 years, showed that both lower sodium intake and higher potassium intake were associated with a lower risk of death.

The numbers appear significant with the quartile i.e., quarter of the group, ingesting the highest sodium to potassium ratio having almost one and a half times the death risk of those who ate the lowest ratio. That held true for all-cause mortality and the death risk for ischemic heart disease was over two-fold in the group who ate more sodium and less potassium-containing foods.

So how do we get more potassium in our diets and just how much should we be ingesting? I found a lovely illustrated guide on the umassmed.edu website and another good discussion on MedlinePlus, the NIH website. The former guideline has both potassium and calorie data.

Adults with normal kidney function should be getting 4.7 grams a day from the foods they eat (if you have reduced kidney function, ask your own physician how much you should ingest). Some medicines affect your ability to excrete potassium; for the rest of us 19 and older the Food and Nutrition Center of the Institute of Medicine says the 4.7 gram amount is reasonable. Nursing moms need 5.1 grams a day.

Here' a good potassium source

A large baked potato with skin has 845 milligrams of potassium and 160 calories while 1/2 of a medium sized cantaloupe has 680 milligrams and only 60 calories. A medium banana has 451 milligrams with 105 calories.

Red meats, chicken, salmon, cod, flounder and sardines are all good sources of potassium and a cup of low-fat plain yogurt has 530 milligrams with 150 calories.

Many of us have eaten far too much sodium (in processed foods) and too little potassium.

It's time for a change.

 

 

Posted in additives, Food Additives, Food producers and less-healthy foods, medically-oriented background info, Unhealthy eating | 1 Comment »

Food Allergies: part two

Wednesday, July 20th, 2011

These may cause hives or much more serious reactions

I was intrigued by the MedicineNet.com comments on Food Allergy that I mentioned in my last post.I printed off a nine-page discussion, but then went back to check on the background of the article's editor and author. The chief editor, who helped found this website fifteen years ago, is a rheumatologist with what appear to be impeccable credentials. The author is a pathologist, not an allergist, but also seems to have a very solid background.

She mentions that roughly 6-8% of kids have food allergies and 3% of adults. Her discussion is detailed, but crucial in it is the fact that true food allergies involve the immune system and may be life-threatening. Many who develop food allergies have relatives who are allergic to pollens or other non-food items (feathers or medicines, for instance). If both your parents have those kinds of allergic problems, you're more likely to develop food allergies than someone from an allergy-free family.

True food allergic reactions happen soon after ingestion of the nuts or shellfish or whatever causes the problem in a particular person. They may cause mild symptoms (such as oral itching), skin reactions such as hives, gastrointestinal reactions (pain, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea) or led to an asthmatic attack).

I'll copy in the Mayo Clinic website's take on the most severe reaction, anaphylaxis.

"Anaphylaxis is a severe, potentially life-threatening allergic reaction. It can occur within seconds or minutes of exposure to something you're allergic to, such as the venom from a bee sting or a peanut.

The flood of chemicals released by your immune system during anaphylaxis can cause you to go into shock; your blood pressure drops suddenly and your airways narrow, blocking normal breathing. Signs and symptoms of anaphylaxis include a rapid, weak pulse, a skin rash, and nausea and vomiting. Common triggers of anaphylaxis include certain foods, some medications, insect venom and latex.

Anaphylaxis requires an immediate trip to the emergency department and an injection of epinephrine. If anaphylaxis isn't treated right away, it can lead to unconsciousness or even death."

Here's another Epi-pen; it can keep you alive

I mentioned an Epi-pen in my previous post on this subject. We keep one in the house since I give my wife her allergy shots; If you've had food reactions that appear to be true food allergy your doctor may want you to have one available.

Adults and kids are more likely to react to those foods commonly served in their particular culture, e.g., rice in Japan, fish in Scandinavia.

And to add to the mix, there are several types of cross-reactivity, e.g., allergic reactions from a food similar to one a person has had a severe reaction to or allergies to fruits (especially melons and apples) during the "hay-fever season"  The latter is caused by uncooked foods and may occur in half of those affected by pollens. Typically they are mild, but a tenth of those affected may have more severe problems and 1 or 2% can even have anaphylaxis.

Similarly, some people, usually teens or young adults, can eat a particular food, then exercise and then develop an allergic reaction. Eating two or more hours before exercising seems to prevent this form of food allergy.

There's lots more information, but suffice it to say food allergy should be taken seriously.

Tags: ,
Posted in Food-related disease, medically-oriented background info, Publications | No Comments »

A sneeze, a wheeze or worse: part one

Friday, July 15th, 2011

a common food allergen

I've been reading about food allergies recently beginning with a Wall Street Journal article entitled "An 'Allergy Girl' Comes Out of Her Bubble." Sandra Beasley, author of that short piece, is in her early thirties, has major food allergies and has written a memoir, Don't Kill the Birthday Girl: Tales fom an Allergic Life.

I found two medical websites dealing with the issue, one from the Mayo Clinic. and the other on  MedicineNet.com. We have to sort out food allergy from food intolerance, which is considerably more prevalent. I have mild food intolerance to milk and dairy products, presumably from a low level of the enzyme, lactase, which helps break down the lactose in those foods, but can drink a small glass of milk without any problems resulting. I have a relative who has fairly severe lactose intolerance and strictly avoids milk; if he drinks even a small glass, he's going to, at the very least, have lots of gas.

We have a local friend who is allergic to a protein in milk; she'll have bloody diarrhea if she drinks any quantity of it. She can drink coconut milk and, when she joins us at our favorite Thai restaurant, will order Thai ice tea with that substitution.

Mayo's website says the FDA requires food producers to provide a list of the big eight, the most common ingredients that cause around 80% of food allergies. The list includes milk, eggs, peanuts, so-called "tree nuts," including almonds, walnuts and cashews, fish including bass, cod and flounder, shellfish (e.g., crab, shrimp and lobster), soy and wheat.

Fresh meat, fresh produce and some oils don't require labeling, but packaged foods do. That holds true even when the allegen is in a flavoring, coloring or other ingredient. The manufacturers are required to list even small amounts of the allergens if and only if, they're actually contained in an ingredient.

But there's another issue or two or three. Some food allergens can be introduced via cross contamination, so many food producers will add statements like, "Manufactured in a factory that also processes peanuts." This is voluntary on the part of the food company and the FDA is working to make the format of these warning labels more consistent.

But the article from "allergy girl" describes an episode where she asked for a dairy-free menu in a restaurant, then ordered a drink. The cocktail came with a milky liquid bottom layer. Upon inquiry she found the garnish contained pine nuts.

The waiter said, "You didn't ask for the nut-free menu."

If you have severe food allergies and eat these, you may need the Epi-pen

In her case, as in the situation for many adults with major food allergies, multiple foods can cause life-threatening reactions.

We ask friends who are coming to our house for a meal what food intolerances and food allergies they have and plan accordingly. But two years ago, one man was about to reach for a dish that had a pine nut topping when his wife grabbed his hand.

"Did you forget to mention the last time you ate pine nuts, we had to visit the emergency room? she asked.

I was happy I had an Epi-pen in the nearby bathroom.

 

 

Tags: ,
Posted in Corporations and healthy foods, Food Additives, Food labeling, Food safety, Food-related disease, medically-oriented background info | No Comments »

Will this work and is it safe?

Tuesday, July 5th, 2011

The ultrasound said 9 pounds

I'm still digesting Taubes's work with mixed feelings, but his concept that insulin is central in the obesity epidemic took on a new meaning today. I was reading the "Health & Wellness" section of The Wall Street Journal and came across an article titled "Programming a Fetus for a Healthier Life." I was intrigued and read further, finding the U.K. government is backing a research effort in the realm of "fetal programming," changing the uterine environment during pregnancy in an attempt to better a child's health for the better in later years.

This is new turf for me and normally not an area I would have written about; in this case, however, the experiment, thus far only in its early stages, hopes to prevent obesity.

The underlying concept is the work of Dr. David J. P. Barker, who published a theory in 1997 termed the "thrifty phenotype," saying that in poor nutritional conditions, a pregnant woman can modify the development of her unborn child such that it will be prepared to survive in a resource-limited environment. The extension of this says reduced fetal growth is associated with a number of later-life chronic conditions.

Barker is now both Professor of Epidemiology at an English university and Professor in the Department of Cardiovascular Medicine at the Oregon Health and Science University. In 1995 his theory was renamed as the Barker hypothesis by the British Medical Journal. Now it's being applied in a very different setting.

a model of human insulin

The study is attempting to enroll obese pregnant women, 400 of them, in a trial of an oral agent called Metformin, normally utilized to treat type-2 diabetes, to lower their blood sugars, which tend to run higher than normal. The thought is that glucose is passed on to babies in utero and they then end up larger than normal birth weights and elevated insulin levels, setting the stage for lifelong obesity.

Dr. Jane Norman, a maternal-fetal health specialist at the University of Edinburgh is a lead investigator. A prominent US specialist, on the board of the 2,000-member Maternal-Fetal Medicine Society and not involved in the study, says he'd have no qualms about his patients joining the Metformin-taking moms-to-be.

I searched the literature and found the following

"Does metformin cause birth defects? Is it safe to take it during the first trimester?

Most studies suggest that metformin is not associated with an increased risk of birth defects. Some early trials suggested that the use of metformin during the first trimester was associated with an increased risk of birth defects. However, it is not clear whether these were caused by metformin or poor control of the mothers’ diabetes. More recent trials studying the safety of metformin during pregnancy, mostly when used to treat insulin resistance in women with PCOS (polycystic ovary syndrome), did not show an increased rate of birth defects or complications at birth."

So the concept appears to be a reasonable test of whether the uterine environment can be safely altered with a drug to prevent obesity.

Wow!

Tags: , ,
Posted in diabetes type 2, medically-oriented background info, Obesity, our kids and their weight issues, scientific controversies | No Comments »

Reading Taubes: part one

Saturday, July 2nd, 2011

Avoid white bread

A while back one of my blog readers asked if I had ever read Taubes. I wasn't sure if that was a book title, a diet plan or an author, so I Googled the word and eventually purchased two books written by a veteran science writer, Gary Taubes.

Taubes studied applied physics at Harvard and areospace engineering at Stanford, then wrote articles for Discover and Science plus four books. He looks for scientific controversises and wades into them. In July 2002 he published an article in the New York Times Magazine titled "What if it's All Been a Big Fat Lie,"

The article takes us back to the Adkins diet craze. Dr. Atkins, trained in cardiology, was significantly overweight and used a JAMA study as a basis for his own personal diet plan. He then published two books urging dieters to severely limit carbohydrate consumption. At one point it was estimated that one out of eleven North American adults were on his diet. His company made over $100 million, but filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2005, two years after he died.

Taubes explores some of the same turf, saying it's refined carbohydrates that make us fat. His initial plunge into the field was the NYT piece, followed by a 2007 book, Good Calories, Bad Calories and now a 2011 book, Why We get Fat: and What to do About It.

Taubes has hefty credentials as a science writer; he is the only print journalist to have received the Science in Society Journalism Award three times. Currently he's a Robert Woods Johnson Foundation investigator in Health Policy Research at UC Berkeley's School of Public Health. But his initial article ignited a firestorm. In the piece Taubes mentions that the common veiwpoint links the kickoff of the obesity epidemic  (in the early 1980s), to cheap fatty foods, large portion servings (at commercial establishments presumably), an increase in food advertisements and a sedentary lifestyle.

He would beg to differ, invoking what he terms "Endocrinology 101," an explanation that says human evolution was not designed for a high-sugar, high-starch diet. Until a comparatively recent era (roughly 10,000 years ago) we were not agriculturists, but hunter-gatherers. So Taubes thinks the problem is our increased consumption of sugar, high fructose corn syrup, white bread, pasta &  white rice.

Others think he picks and chooses his facts. I don't think he's wrong in his basic premise, but he also disagrees with the ideas of "calories in; calories out," avoiding saturated fats and exercising being important in weight control (He seems to think people who exercise then hurry off to eat more).

more than one way to "thin a cat"

I'm down thirty pounds since early in 2009, have easily kept the weight off by exercising six days a week, avoiding sugar & HFCS foods and eating lots  more veggies and fruits while cutting back on portion size of meat dishes.

I'll read more on Taubes and his detractors and let you know what I agree with and what I don't.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Healthy eating, medically-oriented background info, Metabolic Syndrome, Publications, scientific controversies, Weight Loss | No Comments »

So what should I eat?

Friday, June 24th, 2011

Medical research comes through for us

I was reading my morning papers yesterday, The Wall Street Journal (hard-copy edition) and the New York Times breaking news (on my Kindle). I came across a June 23, 2011, WSJ article titled "You Say Potato, Scale Says Uh-Oh." It detailed a recent research study online in a prominent medical journal. The premise was what you choose to eat will determine what happens to your weight over a four-year period.

The overall conclusion, once again, is picking healthier items for your diet leads to less weight gain. Most American adults gain a pound a year, but if they add a serving of French Fries on a daily basis, they'll gain more (3.35 pounds). The NEJM said the participants in three huge studies (a total of 120,877 U.S. men and women who were free of chronic diseases and non-obese at the start of the studies), gained most if the extra item was potato chips, and lost weight if it was yogurt. The list, after chips, in deceasing correlation to weight gain included potatoes, sugar-sweetened beverages and unprocessed red meat or processed meat.

Negative numbers were noted for the addition of vegetables, whole grains, fruits, nuts and then yogurt. Other lifestyle influences were examined. If one of the subjects exercised regularly, they lost weight; if they watched much TV, they gained pounds.

So what's new here? Huge studies over lengthy time periods + a few different conclusions.

The study's co-author, Dr. Walter Willet, the chairman of Epidemiology and Nutrition at Harvard's School of Public Health was interviewed on NPR New's program "All Things Considered." He commented that highly refined foods-sugar-added beverages and potatoes, white rice and white bread-were related to greater weight gain. The presumption is these foods are rapidly broken down into sugar, absorbed and then quickly removed by the action of insulin. So if you eat these things, in a short while you're hungry again.

high-protein Greek-style yogurt

Nuts have fat, but keep us satiated for a prolonged time. Yogurt was a surprise to the research group (we're talking about natural yogurt without added sugar) and the mechanism for its influence on weight is unclear, but may relate to the healthy bacteria included.

The bottom line may be just because some foods contain fat, doesn't necessarily mean they'll be fattening. On the other hand, foods that keep us satisfied for a longer time may help us control our overall calorie intake over the long haul.

 

 

 

Posted in Food Choices, Healthy eating, medically-oriented background info, Obesity, Publications, Uncategorized, Unhealthy eating | No Comments »

Vitamins & supplements: part 1

Tuesday, June 21st, 2011

The amazing mangosteen

I started reading the New York Times breaking news on my Kindle this morning and ran across a story titled "Support is Mutual for Senator and Utah Industry." The photo below the byline showed US Senator Orin Hatch at the HQ of one of his state's firms; this one puts out a $40 bottle of fruit juice. Well, that's a lot more than I usually pay (and I almost always buy fruit, not juice, anyway). But my interest was piqued, so I read the story and then did background research.

The fruit involved in the mangosteen, a name I vaguely remembered from my Air Force tour in the Philippines. It's been used in medicinal products in India and China for many years, but much more recently sold in mixed juice form in the United States with fairly incredible health claims (improves immunity, fights cancer, has anti-aging properties).

The Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center website says, "Despite claims by several marketers, the efficacy and safety of mangosteen products for cancer treatment in humans has not been established." They do mention that several small studies suggest it may be beneficial for halitosis, but also note at least one person who suffered a major side effect after prolonged use of mangosteen juice.

I was able to find a single randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that demonstrated some laboratory evidence of changes in immune function in a small group of 40 to 60-year-old  who took a mangosteen product that also contained multivitamins and "essential minerals" over a 30-day period. The study participants who got the combination product also felt their health improved.

So is this another expensive scam or will further study find we should all consider drinking mangosteen juice? Frankly I don't know, but I'd bet it's going to be hard to find out.

In March of this year, a Board Certified Family Practice physician who is now on the "mangosteen circuit" apparently spoke at the central Utah headquarters of the firm producing the miracle juice and claimed it had "anti-tumor," "anti-obesity," "anti-aging," "anti-fatigue," "antiviral," "antibiotic," and "anti-depressant" properties.

When asked how he knew the juice wasn't snake oil, he replied, "A company that is selling snake oil is not going to stay in business for 11 years and grow as fast as this company is growing."

That's strange. If I were asked a similar question I'd want to be able to show solid, evidence-based data generated by researchers who have no financial interest in the company.

sell very expensive juice with extensive but unproven health benefit claims

But the senator has apparently been the focal point for legislation that says nutritional supplement companies can bring out new products without FDA approval and make lots of general health claims without studies of safety or effectiveness.

Oh, and by the way, the New York Times mentioned that the doctor making all those sweeping statements has had his license to practice revoked on two occasions, for charges including prescribing excessive amounts of narcotics and for giving a weight-loss clinic signed, blank prescription forms.

He's not my idea of an ideal spokesperson.

Posted in medically-oriented background info, Publications, supplements, tricks and gimmicks | No Comments »

Post-exercise protein choices, part 1

Friday, June 17th, 2011

Maybe a few more pounds than this

I received a comment recently on one of my April 2011 posts asking if I still had the April edition of the Nutrition Action Health Letter (NAHL) published by the Center for Science in the Public Interest. My reader had lost her copy and wanted to know what protein supplement CSPI thought was reasonable. I found the info (it was creatine monohydrate with background research done by an associate professor at the University of Regina in Saskatchewan), emailed it to her and decided to review the whole topic in more depth.

I'm in the gym six or seven days a week for ~two hours or a tad more. I'm not trying to bulk up and never attempt the weights I see some of the really husky guys lifting.

As I walk in, I pass a lineup off supplements and see men especially, mixing up powders from large containers. I've never even considered the idea. I told my reader that the professor's credentials seemed reasonable, but she should ask her own physician before starting any supplements from a bottle. I also mentioned that I hard boil eggs, compost the yolks and eat the whites at meals that are otherwise low in protein.

But I reread the article in the April NAHL "Staying Strong: How exercise & diet can help preserve your muscles." The opening quote caught my eye. Miriam Nelson, the director of Tuft's Center on Physical Activity, Nutrition and Obesity Prevention said, "Muscle is the absolute centerpiece for being healthy, vital and independent as we grow older."

I turned seventy in April, so it made sense to pay attention to her. I'm already active and doing some "resistance training" as was recommended later in the article. I saw also quotes from Ben Hurley, a professor of kinesiology at the University of Maryland (and husband to Jane Hurley, an RD on the NAHL staff).

Hurley has been a longtime student of strength training AKA resitance or weight training and feels it is the mode of choice for preventing muscle loss.

Notice I said preventing loss of muscles, not muscle building. I see men in our gym who are only a few years younger than me and are still bulking up deliberately. The sixteen to twenty-year-old youngsters are presumably doing so to impress the young women or because their friends do so, but why do that at age sixty plus?

I actually bought Stonyfield Organic Oikos yogurt

But back to protein intake; experts like the woman who holds the Distinguished Chair in Geriatric Medicine at the University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, say we should consume 30 grams of protein soon after exercising and that smaller amounts won't work in older adults.

So that's four ounces of skinned chicken breast (170 calories) or my egg white plus some Greek yogurt (with twice the protein of regular yogurt). I'll try that a while and then comment on the idea.

Posted in Exercise possibilities, Life extension, medically-oriented background info, Publications, strategies for healthy aging, supplements | No Comments »

E. coli here as well as there

Friday, June 10th, 2011

You may not need to be quite this careful

On June 7th CDC officials were quoted as saying an unusual strain of E. coli, similar to that that has caused the on-going epidemic in Germany, had also, in the US in 2010, caused even more illness than the more common form of the bacteria. In this country, however, the national tracking and monitoring system for food-bourne diseases, revealed considerably less serious problems, with fewer of those affected requiring hospitalization.

So what actually happened here vs. in Europe? Let's start with what E. coli is and how we determine its variants (or strains as they are usually termed). In 1885 a German physician/bacteriologist discovered the most common bowel bacterium. His name was Theodor Escherich and the organism was found in the colon, so its name became Escherichia coli, E. coli for short. Several types of E. coli are part of the normal flora of the human gut, are not a threat to our health, help keep more dangerous bacteria from colonizing the bowel and can actually produce, in some instances, forms of vitamin K.

Laboratories test for E. coli strains by determining which form of the bacterium's antigens are found in its various structural components layer. The ones that form the major surface antigens are the O antigens, and the H and K antigens. The O157:H7 variety is more virulent than most others and causes diarrheal disease by producing a toxin harmful to the lining of the intestine.

Even that nasty "bug," which can be found in undercooked beef, but also other foods, is not lethal to most affected by it. Most healthy adults recover from a O157:H7 infection  in 5 to 7 days. Roughly 6% of those affected, usually young children, elderly adults and people of all ages with weakened immune systems, can develop much more serious complications such as hemolytic uremic syndrome  (HUS) in which red blood cells break down (hemolysis), blood platelets (responsible for clotting) clump up in small blood vessels in the kidneys and acute kidney failure occurs.

The most common problem bacterium, E. coli O157:H7, has for some time been a focal point for eradication from food products. The others, commonly called the "non-O157s" haven't routinely been tested for. Now the debate is whether US meat packers will be forced to check for rarer forms of E. coli making the selling of ground beef that contains it illegal.

Why is ground beef the focus?

It often contains meat from a number of cows (sometimes a large number) and has to be thoroughly cooked to break down the toxin. The day of the safe rare hamburger (I used to love them) may well be over. Other cuts of beef would come from just one animal and cooking the surface is usually felt to be relatively safe.

Meanwhile in Europe the number affected by the epidemic is up to almost 3,000 in 12 countries with over 700 developing HUS and 30 deaths. The lab tests on sprout samples were negative, but people who ate bean sprouts were nine times more likely to become infected than those who hadn't.

 

 

Posted in Food producers and less-healthy foods, Food-related disease, Governmental Efforts, medically-oriented background info, Publications | No Comments »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »