Having Both Migraines, Depression May Mean Smaller Brain

But it's unclear what the finding might mean for patients

By Maureen Salamon

HealthDay Reporter

WEDNESDAY, May 22 (HealthDay News) -- Migraines and depression can each cause a great deal of suffering, but new research indicates the combination of the two may be linked to something else entirely -- a smaller brain.

Already aware that people with migraines face double the risk of depression, scientists wanted to determine if having both conditions together affected total brain volume. The difference in size -- about 2 percent -- isn't alarming, study authors said, but needs further research to determine if the disparity causes any meaningful health effects.

"There are several potential explanations why those with both conditions have smaller brain volume," said study author Larus Gudmundsson, a research associate at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda, Md. "There could be some genetic factor driving the whole thing. It could be related to pain mechanisms [in the brain]. It's also possible there are social and economic reasons."

The study is published in the May 22 online issue of the journal Neurology.

More than 36 million Americans -- about 12 percent of the population -- are estimated to suffer from migraine headaches, which can be debilitating, according to the U.S. National Library of Medicine. Meanwhile, major depression affects 15 million people, and Gudmundsson estimated that perhaps 3 percent to 4 percent of Americans suffer from both conditions.

Gudmundsson and his colleagues analyzed data from Iceland on about 4,300 older adults at two time points. At an average age of 51, participants were assessed for migraine headache incidence and about 25 years later were asked about their lifetime history of major depressive disorder. A full-brain MRI scan was taken at that later point to measure brain volume, when participants were between 66 and 96 years old.

Compared to those with no history of migraines or depression, those with both conditions had brain volumes about 2 percent smaller. There was no difference in the total brain volume when comparing people with only one of the conditions to those with neither condition.

Although the study found a connection between brain size and the combination of migraines and depression, it did not show a cause-and-effect relationship, as one expert noted.

"We certainly know that migraine sufferers tend to have smaller brains than non-migraine sufferers. But I'm not sure this study confirms that, apart from a neurodegenerative process, the two diseases act to do anything to increase the rate of [brain shrinkage] with aging," said Dr. Dara Jamieson, an associate professor of clinical neurology and director of the headache center at New York-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medical Center, in New York City.

"The people they were imaging [with MRI] were quite old -- 66 to 96 -- and you can expect brain atrophy in that group," added Jamieson, who was not involved with the study. "Maybe there's something to be said for these disorders accelerating brain atrophy ... but to take away that because of migraine and depression that your brain is smaller is unnecessarily glum."

Study author Gudmundsson, who's also a guest researcher at the U.S. National Institute on Aging, pointed out that those with migraines and depression may not suffer brain shrinkage since it's possible that their brains are smaller from birth.

"The clinical impact needs to be determined," he added. "We have to keep in mind that several studies have looked at migraine and cognition [thinking ability] and have not found a difference in cognition. That is reassuring."

View the original article here

Smaller Snack Portions Just as Satisfying

By Robert Preidt

HealthDay Reporter

THURSDAY, Jan. 31 (HealthDay News) -- Eating a smaller portion of chocolate and other snack foods will satisfy you just as much as a larger portion, according to a new study.

The study included more than 100 adults who were given small and large portions of the same snack. Those who ate large portions consumed 77 percent more calories than those who ate small portions.

Both groups, however, reported significantly lower snack cravings 15 minutes after eating, according to the study, which was published in the January issue of the journal Food, Quality and Preference.

"This research supports the notion that eating for pleasure -- hedonic hunger -- is driven more by the availability of foods instead of the food already eaten," study co-author Brian Wansink, a professor of economics at Cornell University in Ithaca, N.Y., said in a university news release.

"Just a bit satisfies, not magnifies, hunger and craving tendencies for snacks," he added.

The findings could help people trying to shed pounds or prevent weight gain.

"If you want to control your weight, here's the secret: Take a bite and wait. After 15 minutes all you'll remember in your head and in your stomach is that you had a tasty snack," Wansink said.

More information

The U.S. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases has more about portion sizes.

View the original article here

Eat Too Much While Watching TV? Try Taking Smaller Bites

WEDNESDAY, Jan. 23 (HealthDay News) -- Ever find yourself wolfing down snacks as you're watching your favorite sitcom? Studies have shown that people eat more when distracted by TV or other pastimes.

A new study finds, however, that there may be a simple way to slow down food intake in these situations: take smaller bites.

In the Dutch study, participants were given a meal of soup to consume as they watched a 15-minute animated film. Two groups ate pre-measured volumes of either small or large sips, while another group was free to take whatever size of sips they wanted.

All the participants could eat as much as they wanted and were later asked to estimate how much they had eaten.

In all three groups, the distraction of watching the film led to a general increase in the amount of soup consumed. The people who ate the pre-specified small sips of soup, however, consumed about 30 percent less than those in the other groups.

The other two groups -- who took bigger sips -- also tended to think they ate much less of the soup than they actually had consumed, said researchers led by Dieuwerke Bolhuis and colleagues from Wageningen University.

"The idea that taking smaller bites would potentially counteract the effects of eating while distracted makes sense from a physiologic standpoint," said registered dietitian Rebecca Solomon, who was not connected to the study.

"We know that it takes approximately 20 minutes for the sensation of 'satiety' or fullness to kick in," explained Solomon, who is nutrition coordinator at the Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York City. "When we eat too quickly, we tend to overeat -- whether distracted or not -- because we unknowingly may eat past the point of what I call 'gentle satiety,' an appropriate level of after-meal fullness."

"Taking smaller bites necessarily makes the meal or snack take longer to eat, therefore reducing the amount one would eat within that initial 20 minutes when the feeling of satiation is not yet registered by the brain and stomach," Solomon said.

Another expert agreed.

"The old advice of taking small bites in order to lose weight may have more evidence," said Nancy Copperman, director of public health initiatives in the Office of Community Health at North Shore-LIJ Health System in Great Neck, N.Y.

Her advice? "Avoid inhaling large bites or gulps," she said. "Focus on what you are eating and drinking, enjoy the taste of the meal or snack, and try to avoid distractions when eating."

The study was published Jan. 23 in the journal PLoS One.

More information

The U.S. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases offers advice about food portions.

View the original article here