Nature Therapy (Ecotherapy) Medical Benefits

Nature therapy may mean that better health is right outside your door.

A stroll outside on a sunny day is a great pick-me-up. Now it may also be just what the doctor ordered.

The benefits of nature for both body and soul are finding their way to the prescription pad as more health care providers are telling their patients to take a hike -- literally.

Many health care researchers and practitioners say that ecotherapy (also known as green therapy, nature therapy, and earth-centered therapy) -- a term coined by pastoral counselor Howard Clinebell in his 1996 book of the same name -- can have regenerative powers, improving mood and easing anxiety, stress, and depression.

But that’s not all. Health care providers are also giving their patients “nature prescriptions” to help treat a variety of medical conditions, from post-cancer fatigue to obesity, high blood pressure, and diabetes.  

Scientists have long known that sunlight can ease depression, especially seasonal affective disorder (SAD). New research is expanding those findings. A 2007 study from the University of Essex in the U.K., for example, found that a walk in the country reduces depression in 71% of participants. The researchers found that as little as five minutes in a natural setting, whether walking in a park or gardening in the backyard, improves mood, self-esteem, and motivation.

The growing interest in ecotherapy has even given rise to academic programs, such as one begun at John F. Kennedy University, which offers a graduate-level certificate in ecotherapy, an umbrella term that includes horticultural therapy, animal-assisted therapy, time stress management, and managing “eco-anxiety.”

John F. Kennedy University ecotherapy professor Craig Chalquist, PhD, co-author of Ecotherapy: Healing with Nature in Mind, has acknowledged that research has not proven that spending time in nature can prevent, treat, or cure any particular condition.

But a growing body of research offers a “hopeful picture” of the effectiveness of ecotherapy, Chalquist says.

Kathy Helzlsouer, MD, director of the Prevention and Research Center at Mercy Medical Center in Baltimore, has long been recommending to breast cancer survivors that they get outdoors more.

For 30% to 40% of breast cancer survivors, persistent fatigue follows their treatment, says Helzlsouer. To help her patients learn how to manage this fatigue, Helzlsouer created “Be Well, Be Healthy,” a holistic program that includes tips not only on managing stress and improving diet and exercise patterns, but also on incorporating nature as part of the healing process.

“Among the frustrations we saw in our patients,” Helzlsouer says, “was that they didn’t have the energy to garden, a favorite activity for many of them.”

For people who enjoy gardening, Helzlsouer prescribes getting back outside, even if it’s starting out with five minutes of weeding. People who aren’t gardening enthusiasts are advised to find a nearby park where they can take a walk, "commune with nature," and reap the mind-body results of a relaxing setting and physical exercise.

View the original article here

What is chelation therapy, and can it reduce my risk of heart attack?

Posted June 18, 2013, 2:00 am

I have heart disease. Will chelation therapy help reduce my risk of a heart attack?

That’s a timely question, because a recent study of chelation therapy has generated a lot of interest and debate.

Chelation therapy is used to eliminate metals or other toxins from your body. During the procedure, chemicals are infused into your bloodstream. When these chemicals find unwanted substances as they travel through your blood, they attach themselves to them and carry them out of the body in your urine. For people with toxic levels of lead or mercury, chelation therapy is an FDA-approved method to help with their removal from the body.

Its use for heart disease is more controversial. Here’s the idea: Heart disease results when your blood vessels are narrowed by atherosclerotic plaques that limit blood flow. These plaques are largely made up of fat, cholesterol and calcium. Chelation with a chemical called EDTA pulls calcium out of atherosclerotic plaques — or so the thinking goes. This is supposed to shrink plaques and make artery walls healthier. Thus, the risk of heart attack, stroke and other problems related to blood vessel diseases should decrease.

For decades, chelation practitioners have claimed that the procedure works. But results of a recently published study didn’t support the positive claims.

The study included 1,708 adults age 50 and older who had a previous heart attack. Half of the patients got 40 infusions of EDTA solution along with high doses of vitamin and mineral supplements. Half got a placebo (saltwater) solution. People were chosen for the chelation therapy group and the placebo group by a random process.

The researchers followed the patients for about 4.5 years. Twenty-six percent of people in the chelation group had heart attack, stroke or hospitalization for chest pain or heart bypass surgery. That was compared with 30 percent of patients in the placebo group. Statistical testing showed that the slightly lower rate of heart problems in the chelation group could have occurred by chance.

More troubling was the fact that many people who were assigned to have chelation therapy never actually received the therapy. Nearly 20 percent dropped out of the study before completing the therapy. So drawing conclusions about the value of chelation therapy from this study is difficult.

There are more established ways to prevent heart attacks, stroke and premature death. For example:

Get activeEat betterDon’t smokeControl cholesterolManage blood pressureLose weightReduce blood sugar

If you already have atherosclerosis, you should be taking a statin drug and a daily aspirin.

If you take these steps, I think the current evidence says that you’re unlikely to get any extra benefit from chelation therapy. In contrast to that inconclusive evidence, the evidence on each of these lifestyle changes and medications is conclusive: They all definitely protect you from heart disease, strokes and premature death.

window.fbAsyncInit = function() { FB.init({appId: "199616670120169", status: true, cookie: true, xfbml: true});}; (function() { var e = document.createElement("script"); e.async = true; e.src = document.location.protocol + "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js"; document.getElementById("fb-root").appendChild(e);}());

View the original article here

Therapy for an abusive spouse to stop being abusive...?

Wasn't sure where to post this. Long story short I am a wife of a verbally/psychologically/emotionally abusive husband. Its been an 11 year long marriage. I have developed my eating disorder issues in the second half of our marriage and am in tons of therapy to work on it. I'm finally strong enough to put my foot down and separate from him. I do want our marriage to work one day but as is, there is no way right now. In the last few days he has made tons of promises he has never made before and I can't help but question if it is sincere or long term. I'm very stressed out but am determined to continue w moving apart from him until I have long term solid proof that he has changed. One of his promises is that he is willing to do therapy. He said he already has an apt for his first group therapy session this week but is also willing to see a therapist together. From all I've read, it isn't wise for couples to do any counseling together until the abuser addresses his abuse problems. It seems that couples counseling assumes both need to change but in an abusive relationship, the abuse must stop first before anything can be addressed. Anyway my question is if any of you out there have experiences of abusive people you know who have successfully received medical help and were able to change? Is that even possible? Small detail also is that I have kaiser medical coverage and so am looking to see if they have any services to help. I've already contacted my providers and am waiting for their responses.

View the original article here

Standard Rheumatoid Arthritis Therapy as Good as Costlier Newcomer: Study

Biologic drug Enbrel wasn't better for patients who didn't respond to methotrexate alone

By Steven Reinberg

HealthDay Reporter

TUESDAY, June 11 (HealthDay News) -- Newer, costlier treatment for rheumatoid arthritis appears no better than an older, less-expensive regimen for people who don't respond to the first-line drug methotrexate, a new study suggests.

"Newer isn't always better," said researcher Dr. Ted Mikuls, an associate professor in the rheumatology division at the University of Nebraska Medical Center, in Omaha. "Some of the older medications can be effective."

Rheumatoid arthritis causes inflammation in the joints, resulting in swelling, stiffness, pain and reduced joint function. It can also affect other parts of the body.

"We compared two different ways of treating rheumatoid arthritis -- one that included a new biologic [medication] with an older, more conventional oral medication," Mikuls explained. "We basically showed that at the end of the day patients, regardless of what they got, looked very similar in terms of pretty much every outcome we looked at in the study."

Patients whose arthritis didn't respond to methotrexate alone who were then given a combination of methotrexate, sulfasalazine (Azulfidine) and hydroxychloroquine (Plaquenil) did as well as patients given methotrexate and the new biologic drug etanercept (Enbrel) -- which is given by injection -- the researchers said.

"The treatments are very different in terms of costs," Mikuls said. If a patient had to pay out of pocket for etanercept it could cost around $20,000 a year, while the out-of-pocket costs for the other drugs is a few hundred to a few thousand dollars, he said.

The out-of-pocket cost of etanercept varies by insurance provider, including those covering the Medicare drug benefit program, Mikuls added.

The report was published online June 11 in the New England Journal of Medicine to coincide with presentation of the study at the Annual European Congress of Rheumatology meeting in Madrid, Spain.

"This study addresses a real-life scenario for rheumatologists where patients are often on methotrexate and are not doing well and the question is what to do next," said Dr. Soumya Reddy, an assistant professor in the rheumatology division of the dermatology department at NYU Langone Medical Center, in New York City.

About 20 percent to 40 percent of patients don't respond methotrexate or can't take the drug either because of side effects or it is not indicated for them, said Reddy, who was not involved in the study.

The findings are "reassuring," in that when a biologic is not an option, due to cost or other reasons, the older regimen is effective, she said.

Which regimen is best really needs to be tailored to each patient, Reddy said.

For the study, researchers randomly assigned 353 patients to methotrexate, sulfasalazine and hydroxychloroquine or to methotrexate and etanercept for 48 weeks. Some patients switched from one regimen to another midway through the study.

View the original article here

Radiation Therapy May Raise Future Death Risk From Heart Surgery

THURSDAY, April 11 (HealthDay News) -- Cancer survivors who had chest radiation therapy have a nearly twofold increased risk of dying in the years after having major heart surgery, a new study finds.

Researchers looked at 173 people who had chest radiation treatment for cancer an average of 18 years before they required heart surgery. These patients were compared to 305 people who underwent similar heart surgeries but had no history of radiation therapy.

The death risk in the first 30 days after heart surgery was about the same for both groups. But during an average follow-up of nearly eight years, 55 percent of the patients in the radiation group died, compared with 28 percent of those in the nonradiation group, the investigators found.

The study was published April 8 in the journal Circulation.

"These findings tell us that if you had radiation, your likelihood of dying after major cardiac surgery is high," study author Dr. Milind Desai, an associate professor of medicine at the Cleveland Clinic, said in a journal news release.

"That's despite going into the surgery with a relatively low risk score. In patients who have had prior [chest] radiation, we need to develop better strategies of identifying appropriate patients that would benefit from surgical intervention. Alternatively, some patients might be better suited for [nonsurgical] procedures," Desai said.

"While radiation treatments done on children and adults in the late 1960s, '70s and '80s played an important role in cancer survival, the treatment often takes a toll on the heart," Desai explained.

"Survivors are at greater risk than people who do not have radiation to develop progressive coronary artery disease, aggressive valvular disease, as well as pericardial diseases, which affect the heart's surrounding structures," he said. "These conditions often require major cardiac surgery."

While the study found an association between chest radiation therapy for cancer and future risk of death after heart surgery, it did not establish a cause-and-effect relationship.

-- Robert Preidt
Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCE: Circulation, news release, April 8, 2013

View the original article here

Combo Therapy Helps Knock Out Fungal Meningitis

Study found 2-drug treatment reduced death risk from cryptococcal meningitis by 40 percent

By Serena Gordon

HealthDay Reporter

WEDNESDAY, April 3 (HealthDay News) -- A drug regimen containing two powerful antifungal medicines -- amphotericin B and flucytosine -- reduced the risk of dying from cryptococcal meningitis by 40 percent compared to treatment with amphotericin B alone, according to new research.

The study also found that those who survived the illness were less likely to be disabled if they received treatment that included flucytosine.

"Combination antifungal therapy with amphotericin and flucytosine for HIV-associated cryptococcal meningitis significantly reduces the risk of dying from this disease," said the study's lead author, Dr. Jeremy Day, head of the CNS-HIV Infections Group for the Wellcome Trust Major Overseas Program in Vietnam.

"This combination could save 250,000 deaths across Africa and Asia each year. The key to achieving this will be improving access to the antifungal agent flucytosine," said Day, also a research lecturer at the University of Oxford.

Flucytosine is more than 50 years old and off patent, according to Day. The drug has few manufacturers, and it isn't licensed for use in many of the countries where the burden from this disease is highest, he said. Where it is available, the limited supply often drives the cost higher, Day noted.

"We hope the results of this study will help drive increased and affordable access to both amphotericin and flucytosine," he said.

Infectious disease specialist Dr. Bruce Hirsch, an attending physician at North Shore University Hospital in Manhasset, N.Y., said that in the United States, "the use of these medicines, amphotericin and flucytosine, is the usual standard of care for this dangerous infection, and is followed by long-term treatment with fluconazole [another antifungal]."

But, Hirsch noted that this infection is unusual to see in the United States.

That's definitely not the case in the rest of the world. There are about 1 million cases of cryptococcal meningitis worldwide each year, and 625,000 deaths associated with those infections, according to study background information.

Meningitis is an infection of the meninges, the protective membranes that cover the brain and the spinal cord. Meningitis can be caused by bacteria, viruses and fungi, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Cryptococcal meningitis is caused by the fungus Cryptococcus. There are 30 strains of Cryptococcus, and one that often causes disease is Cryptococcus neoformans.

"Most of us have been exposed to Cryptococcus neoformans. It is ubiquitous in the environment, associated with trees, bird guano and soil. Infection is thought to occur from the inhalation of spores," Day said.

People can be infected for years without knowing it, according to Day. But, if someone who's infected has weakened immunity, the infection can then start to wreak havoc. Common ways people become immune-suppressed are through an HIV infection, taking immune-suppressing medications for organ transplantation, or taking immune-system altering medications for chronic inflammatory diseases, Day explained.

View the original article here

Artificial Ovaries Could Potentially Deliver Hormone Therapy

Title: Artificial Ovaries Could Potentially Deliver Hormone Therapy
Category: Health News
Created: 3/29/2013 4:35:00 PM
Last Editorial Review: 4/1/2013 12:00:00 AM

View the original article here

Stem Cell Therapy Cures Type 1 Diabetes in Mice

Whether the new approach would work in humans is unknown, experts say

By Serena Gordon

HealthDay Reporter

WEDNESDAY, June 5 (HealthDay News) -- Using an immune-suppressing medication and adult stem cells from healthy donors, researchers say they were able to cure type 1 diabetes in mice.

"This is a whole new concept," said the study's senior author, Habib Zaghouani, a professor of microbiology and immunology, child health and neurology at the University of Missouri School of Medicine in Columbia, Mo.

In the midst of their laboratory research, something unanticipated occurred. The researchers expected that the adult stem cells would turn into functioning beta cells (cells that produce insulin). Instead, the stem cells turned into endothelial cells that generated the development of new blood vessels to supply existing beta cells with the nourishment they needed to regenerate and thrive.

"I believe that beta cells are important, but for curing this disease, we have to restore the [blood vessels]," Zaghouani said.

It's much too early to know if this novel combination would work in humans. But the findings could stimulate new avenues of research, another expert says.

"This is a theme we've seen a few times recently. Beta cells are plastic and can respond and expand when the environment is right," said Andrew Rakeman, a senior scientist in beta cell regeneration at the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation (JDRF). "But, there's some work still to be done. How do we get from this biological mechanism to a more conventional therapy?"

Results of the study were published online May 28 in Diabetes.

The exact cause of type 1 diabetes, a chronic disease sometimes called juvenile diabetes, remains unclear. It's thought to be an autoimmune disease in which the body's immune system mistakenly attacks and damages insulin-producing beta cells (found in islet cells in the pancreas) to the point where they no longer produce insulin, or they produce very little insulin. Insulin is a hormone necessary to convert the carbohydrates from food into fuel for the body and brain.

Zaghouani said he thinks the beta cell's blood vessels may just be collateral damage during the initial autoimmune attack.

To avoid dire health consequences, people with type 1 diabetes must take insulin injections multiple times a day or obtain continuous infusions through an insulin pump. It's estimated that 3 million U.S. children and adults have the disease, which increased by almost one-quarter in Americans under age 20 between 2001 and 2009.

Zaghouani and his colleagues previously tested a drug called Ig-GAD2 that would destroy the immune system cells responsible for destroying the beta cells. The drug worked well to prevent type 1 diabetes, but it didn't work as a therapy when type 1 diabetes was more advanced.

"This made us question whether there were enough beta cells left when the disease is advanced," said Zaghouani. After conducting bone marrow transplants, the researchers came to a surprising conclusion. "The bone marrow cells did go to the pancreas, but they didn't become beta cells; they became endothelial cells," he said. "So, the problem wasn't a lack of beta cells or their precursor, the problem was that the blood vessels that irrigate the islet cells are damaged. That was a very novel and intriguing finding."

View the original article here

New Kind of Therapy Shows Early Promise in MS Patients

Approach may shield patients' immune systems to allow safer treatment, study suggests

By Brenda Goodman

HealthDay Reporter

WEDNESDAY, June 5 (HealthDay News) -- A new therapy for multiple sclerosis that teaches the body to recognize and then ignore its own nerve tissue appears to be safe and well-tolerated in humans, a small new study shows.

If larger studies prove the technique can slow or stop the disease, the therapy would be a completely new way to treat autoimmune diseases such as multiple sclerosis (MS) and type 1 diabetes.

Most treatments for MS and other autoimmune diseases work by broadly suppressing immune function, leaving patients vulnerable to infections and cancers.

The new treatment targets only the proteins that come under attack when the immune system fails to recognize them as a normal part of the body. By creating tolerance to only a select few proteins, researchers hope they will be able to cure the disease but leave the rest of the body's defenses on guard.

"This is important work," said Dr. Lawrence Steinman, a professor of neurology at Stanford University who was not involved with the study.

"Very few investigators are trying therapies in humans aimed at simply turning off unwanted immune responses and leaving the rest of the immune system intact to fight infections -- to do surveillance against cancer," Steinman said. "The early results show encouragement."

For the study, published in the June 5 issue of the journal Science Translational Medicine, researchers in the United States and Germany recruited nine patients with MS. Seven had the relapsing-remitting form of the disease, while two others had secondary progressive MS (a more advanced phase). All were between the ages of 18 and 55, and were in good health except for their MS.

Blood tests conducted before the treatments showed that each patient had an immune reaction against at least one of seven myelin proteins.

Myelin is a white tissue made of fats and proteins that wraps nerve fibers, allowing them to conduct electrical signals through the body. In MS, the body attacks and gradually destroys these myelin sheaths. The damage disrupts nerve signals and leads to myriad symptoms, including numbness, tingling, weakness, loss of balance and disrupted muscle coordination.

Six patients in the study had low disease activity, while three others had a history of more active disease. Most were not experiencing symptoms at the time of their treatment.

On the day of the treatments, patients spent about two hours hooked up to a machine that filtered their blood, harvesting white cells while returning red cells and plasma to the body.

After the white cells were collected, they were washed and then combined with seven proteins that make up myelin tissue. A chemical was used to link the proteins to the white blood cells, which were dying.

View the original article here

'Sensory-Focused' Autism Therapy Shows Early Promise

In small study, parents used variety of methods to stimulate boys' senses

By Mary Brophy Marcus

HealthDay Reporter

WEDNESDAY, June 5 (HealthDay News) -- Smelling essential oils, walking across textured surfaces, immersing hands in warm water -- these are just some of the therapeutic experiences that boys with autism had while participating in a small new study.

The scientists wanted to learn how "sensory-motor" therapy compared to traditional behavioral therapy methods in boys with autism.

Twenty-eight boys aged 3 to 12 and their parents participated in the six-month-long study, published online May 20 in Behavioral Neuroscience. The boys were split into two groups. Both groups of children participated in daily behavioral therapy, but 13 of the boys also received environmental enrichment, another term for sensory-motor therapy.

The environmental enrichment therapy had a significant positive effect on these children with autism, the study authors said.

"What we've done here for the first time is give humans a sensory-enriched environment and found out that a neurological disorder -- autism -- responds favorably. We saw a 600 percent greater likelihood of having a positive clinical outcome in individuals that had enriched environments compared to those receiving the standard care that children have been receiving for autism up to this point," said study author Michael Leon, a professor of neurobiology and behavior at Center for Autism Research and Treatment at the University of California, Irvine.

However, an autism expert who wasn't part of the study cautioned that other sensory-based therapies showing early promise haven't proven effective so far.

For the new study, parents of the children in the sensory enrichment group were given a kit that contained a broad range of materials aimed at stimulating their child's senses of smell, temperature, texture, sight and movement. Vials of essential oils scented of apple, lavender, sweet orange and vanilla, were among the items. Squares of different textured materials included smooth foam, hardwood flooring, sponges, felt and sandpaper.

The children were also given the opportunity to play with objects: beads, a small piggy bank with plastic coins, pictures of famous art, a can of Play-Doh, a bowl to hold warm or cool water and more.

The researchers asked parents to conduct two therapy sessions a day with their child, and to run four to seven different exercises during each session that involved different combinations of the items in the kit. Sessions ranged from 15 to 30 minutes. The children also listened to classical music once a day.

As the six-month period progressed, parents were encouraged to offer more complex enrichment exercises. For example, a child would be given the chance to select a textured square and in addition to feeling it would be encouraged to match it to another square of the same material.

By the end of the six months, Leon said the enrichment group children had significantly improved compared to the children who received standard therapy alone. He said 42 percent of the boys in the enrichment group improved in their ability to relate to other people and in their ability to respond to sights and sounds, compared with 7 percent of the standard care group.

View the original article here

More Evidence Shows Hormone Therapy May Increase Breast Cancer Risk

In new analysis, researchers found risk highest when used just before menopause

By Kathleen Doheny

HealthDay Reporter

FRIDAY, March 29 (HealthDay News) -- Women who take hormone therapy that includes estrogen and progestin are at increased risk of developing breast cancer and dying from it, especially if they start taking the therapy just as menopause begins, a new analysis confirms.

Researchers followed nearly 42,000 women, all of whom were past menopause, for an average of more than 11 years. Of those, more than 25,000 did not use hormone therapy and more than 16,000 took estrogen and progestin, also called combined hormone therapy. For this analysis, the researchers did not include estrogen-only therapy, used by women who have had a hysterectomy.

At the end of the follow-up period, more than 2,200 of the women were found to have breast cancer. Compared to non-users, those who took combined therapy were more likely to have breast cancer, said Dr. Rowan Chlebowski, a medical oncologist at the Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center. Chlebowski led the study, which was published in the March 29 issue of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

The link has been found in other studies, but Chlebowski also found the risk was greatest among those who took the hormones closest to menopause. "Women starting within months of menopause had about a threefold greater risk than women starting 10 years after menopause," Chlebowski said.

For the new analysis, Chlebowksi looked at results from the Women's Health Initiative observational study. He compared the findings with those from the Women's Health Initiative randomized clinical trial, in which women were assigned to different treatments.

The Women's Health Initiative included four clinical trials and an observational study. Women were all past menopause and were aged 50 to 79.

Chlebowski said he did the new analysis to resolve what he saw as unanswered questions. In the trial, only about one-third, or 5,000, of the women were in their 50s when they started the study. As that is the typical age for menopause to start, about two-thirds of the women in the trial were in their 60s or beyond, so began to take hormones several years after menopause.

Chlebowski set out to see if the link between breast cancer risk and combined hormone therapy use was influenced by earlier use of hormones.

"We had a substantial number closer to menopause than the clinical trial of [the Women's Health Initiative]," he said.

He found, however, that not only was the risk of breast cancer still increased, but it also increased even more if the women were closer to menopause when they began to take the hormones.

He speculated that women who start the hormone therapy close to menopause still have circulating levels of estrogen high enough to make them exceed some threshold, beyond which it may become hazardous.

View the original article here

Modest Cardiac Benefit From Chelation Therapy Not Enough to OK Use: Experts

New study shows slight effect, but arduous 'leaching' treatment has side effects, doctors say

By E.J. Mundell

HealthDay Reporter

TUESDAY, March 26 (HealthDay News) -- Results from a major trial on controversial chelation therapy for patients with a history of heart attack find a modest benefit from the expensive treatment, but experts conclude there's no clear evidence supporting its use.

Still, "groups that advocate for chelation and groups that oppose chelation will both find comfort in the results," said one expert not connected to the study, Dr. Stephen Green, associate chairman in the department of cardiology at North Shore University Hospital in Manhasset, N.Y.

Chelation therapy involves dozens of arduous infusions conducted over a period of years, aimed at leaching excess metals from the body. Patients typically also receive high doses of vitamins and minerals. The therapy has been offered to heart patients by some clinics across the United States for decades, although its use for this purpose has been considered controversial and it has never received approval as a heart disease treatment from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

The results of this latest study are published in the March 27 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association. Findings from the same study were also presented earlier this month at the annual meeting of the American College of Cardiology (ACC) in San Francisco, and at last fall's annual meeting of the American Heart Association.

Speaking at the ACC meeting on March 10, the study's lead researcher said that the modest benefit noted in the study had not made him any more ready to recommend chelation therapy.

"These findings should stimulate further research, but are not by themselves sufficient to recommend the routine use of chelation therapy and high-dose vitamins in most patients," said Dr. Gervasio Lamas, chief of the Columbia University division of cardiology at Mount Sinai Medical Center, in Miami Beach, Fla.

The trial, which was funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health, involved more than 1,700 patients from the United States and Canada who had suffered a previous heart attack. Most were already taking standard therapies such as daily aspirin, cholesterol-lowering statins or blood pressure medications.

In the new analysis of the data, the patients were divided into two groups: high-dose vitamin/mineral supplements plus chelation or "dummy" placebo infusions/supplements. Chelation therapy consisted of 40 three-hour sessions with the IV infusions spread over anywhere between 50 and 110 weeks. Doses of vitamins and minerals given were much higher than recommended daily intakes.

After an average follow-up of more than four and a half years, the team did see a slight benefit among the group who took the vitamins/minerals in combination with chelation therapy. Twenty-six percent of people in this group experienced some kind of cardiovascular event such as heart attack, stroke or hospitalization for angina (chest pain) -- less than the 30 percent seen among those who got placebo/placebo therapy only.

View the original article here

Gene Therapy May Protect Against Flu Pandemics

Study found coaxing cells in the nose to make super antibodies protected mice and ferrets from pandemic strains

By Brenda Goodman

HealthDay Reporter

WEDNESDAY, May 29 (HealthDay News) -- Gene therapy that turns cells in the nose into factories that crank out super antibodies against the flu protected mice and ferrets against lethal doses of several pandemic strains of the virus.

If the approach works in humans, it could offer several important advantages over flu vaccines, said study author Dr. James Wilson, a professor of pathology and laboratory medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, in Philadelphia.

Because the therapy can be made ahead of time and fights many different strains, it might give doctors a faster way to thwart flu pandemics.

Currently, doctors race to identify dangerous new types of flu. They then have to develop a vaccine that targets the new strain. The vaccine is then grown in chicken eggs and tested for safety. It takes between three and six months to manufacture large quantities of vaccines against the flu.

"By the time we realize it's a potential pandemic, it's too late," Wilson said. "The timeliness of deploying the seasonal flu vaccine approach for pandemics is not the best way to go."

Vaccines, which prime the body to remember to attack incoming pathogens, also don't do the best job of protecting people who have diminished immune function, such as seniors and those with chronic health problems.

The new treatment, which is delivered through a nasal spray, gets around that problem because it doesn't require the body to mount an immune attack.

Instead, the nasal spray contains many copies of small, harmless viruses called adeno-associated viruses. The simple genome of these viruses can be altered in the lab to carry instructions for making special proteins called broadly neutralizing antibodies.

Broadly neutralizing antibodies are rare super antibodies that are capable of disarming many kinds of flu strains.

When researchers insert the instructions for making those antibodies into the genome of adeno-associated viruses, the viruses act like Trojan horses. They infect cells in the nose, inject the altered genetic material and turn the cells into factories that crank out many copies of the broadly neutralizing proteins.

"The way I envisioned it was sort of a bioshield," Wilson said. "I wanted to focus the production of the antibody to the site where flu enters our body."

In animal tests, researchers showed that mice, ferrets and monkeys made many copies of the super antibody after they inhaled the gene therapy treatment. And the protection seemed to last for a while. Experts note, however, that promising research in animals often does not pan out in humans.

"In mice, it persists up to a year," Wilson said. "In monkeys, we think we're going to see expression up to six months."

The treatment also appears to work pretty quickly. Wilson said the animals were fully protected about three days after their nasal passages were swabbed.

View the original article here

periods, post-recovery stuff, therapy.. ?

Hey :) so yesterday I STARTED my period after 500 days of being underweight (according to my body's standards).. well, it's the lightest period in the history of everything (is this normal?) and I was wondering, what should I do about gaining or maintaining and food. I really don't want to gain more weight now - such thoughts are daunting, but also I have this APPETITE, aaand... that's pretty overwhelming too. It can't go on forever. Any thoughts? My BMI is about 19, and I eat 2000-2500 calories a day, with exercise.

Other that the HUGE relief of knowing what kind of weight-range is good for me... everything's the same. Somehow I expected being in a state of 'complete weight restoration' would be accompanied by 'complete un-obsessiveness, calm thoughts and happiness' but it's not, it's just ME, and for all I know I could relapse tomorrow, and just escape the overwhelming world... (I'm also cross, you know, because I feel like I could be trying HARDER at this peace-and-contentment thing) Anyway, has anyone had good experiences with psychologists even after weight-restoration? I've never been to one for long. I somehow don't feel 'bad enough' to think about it now.

Thanks everyone - I still question the morals of telling all this to random online strangers, but often you do turn out quite helpful and friendly. :)

xx Sophie

View the original article here

Immune Therapy Shows Early Promise for Advanced Leukemia

Title: Immune Therapy Shows Early Promise for Advanced Leukemia
Category: Health News
Created: 3/20/2013 4:35:00 PM
Last Editorial Review: 3/21/2013 12:00:00 AM

View the original article here

Talk Therapy Can Ease Depression, But No Single Type Deemed 'Best'

Experts say choice depends on individual patient, treatment availability

By Amy Norton

HealthDay Reporter

TUESDAY, May 28 (HealthDay News) -- Various forms of "talk therapy" can help people with depression, but no single type stands out as better than the rest, according to a new analysis.

Experts said the results confirm what is generally thought: Psychotherapy can help lift depression, and there is no one form that is best for everyone.

Instead, a person's therapy choice may come down to the nature of the depression, and practical matters -- like finding a therapist you're comfortable with, and being able to pay.

In the study, published online May 28 in PLoS Medicine, Swiss researchers from the University of Bern analyzed nearly 200 clinical trials testing seven different types of psychotherapy for major depression. Overall, they found that all of the therapies were better than no treatment. The typical effect was "moderate to large," they say -- which means that the average patient who received the therapy was doing better than half of the patients in the untreated, comparison group.

"This study is reassuring, because it shows all of these therapies can work," said Dr. Bryan Bruno, acting chair of psychiatry at Lenox Hill Hospital, in New York City, who was not involved with the analysis. "I'd encourage people to get educated about the different types of therapy that are out there."

Most of the studies in the review (70 percent) tested cognitive-behavioral therapy -- which aims to change the dysfunctional thinking and behavior that feed a person's depression. In the United States, it's the most widely available talk therapy for depression.

Another approach is known as interpersonal therapy, which focuses on improving a patient's relationships and social skills.

Interpersonal therapy is well-studied, but it's harder to find than cognitive behavioral therapy, said Steven Hollon, a professor of psychology at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn., who was not involved in the review.

Both cognitive behavioral and interpersonal therapies are attractive, in part, because they are fairly short-term -- typically lasting for 10 to 20 sessions over a few months.

Some other therapies, like an approach known as supportive counseling, are longer term, Bruno noted. So your ability to pay may be an obstacle, even if the therapy is available to you.

"Most insurers do not dictate the type of psychotherapy they'll pay for," Bruno said. "But they may dictate the number of sessions."

The nature of depression varies widely from person to person, so ideally psychotherapy would be individualized. Bruno said that a person who has suffered a trauma, for example, might benefit from short-term "psychodynamic therapy" -- where the therapist tries to help you figure out how past experiences, from childhood onward, may be affecting your mental health now.

"Or sometimes a therapist will use a combination of therapies, depending on what seems best for the patient," Bruno said.

View the original article here

Therapy as Good as Surgery for Some With Torn Knee Cartilage

Study looked at osteoarthritis patients in severe pain

By Robert Preidt

HealthDay Reporter

TUESDAY, March 19 (HealthDay News) -- Physical therapy is comparable to surgery in improving movement and reducing pain for some patients with knee arthritis and torn knee cartilage, new research finds.

Many middle-aged and older adults have severe knee pain due to a tear in the meniscus, a crucial support structure in the knee that is often damaged in people with knee osteoarthritis.

Each year in the United States, more than 450,000 arthroscopic surgeries are performed to treat meniscal tears, but scant data exist to help doctors determine if physical therapy or surgery is the best treatment for a patient, according to the researchers at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston.

Their study of 351 patients -- all over age 45 with knee pain, meniscal tear and knee osteoarthritis -- suggests that physical therapy may be equal to surgery for some patients.

Participants were randomly assigned to be treated with either arthroscopic surgery or physical therapy. When they were assessed six and 12 months later, both groups had substantial and similar improvements in movement.

The study was scheduled for presentation this week at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, in Chicago, and published online March 19 in the New England Journal of Medicine.

"Since both the patients who received physical therapy and those who received surgery had similar and considerable improvements in function and pain, our research shows that there is no single 'best' treatment," principal investigator Dr. Jeffrey Katz said in a hospital news release.

However, the release noted that some of the original physical therapy patients did eventually opt for surgery.

"Patients who wish to avoid surgery can be reassured that physical therapy is a reasonable option, although they should recognize that not everyone will improve with physical therapy alone. In this study, one-third of patients who received physical therapy ultimately chose to have surgery, often because they did not improve with [physical therapy]," added Katz, who is director of the Orthopedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research at Brigham and Women's Hospital, and a professor of medicine and orthopedic surgery at Harvard Medical School.

One expert agreed with those conclusions.

"The article reinforces the standard that if a patient suffers a degenerative meniscal tear related to mild to moderate osteoarthritis then the first line of treatment is typically physical therapy," said Dr. Leon Popovitz, an orthopedic surgeon at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City.

"If patients do not improve, then arthroscopy is a viable option to improve their symptoms," he added.

View the original article here

Hands-On Therapy May Spell Relief for Low Back Pain

Title: Hands-On Therapy May Spell Relief for Low Back Pain
Category: Health News
Created: 3/18/2013 6:35:00 PM
Last Editorial Review: 3/19/2013 12:00:00 AM

View the original article here

Therapy as Good as Surgery for Some With Torn Knee Cartilage

Title: Therapy as Good as Surgery for Some With Torn Knee Cartilage
Category: Health News
Created: 3/19/2013 10:35:00 AM
Last Editorial Review: 3/19/2013 12:00:00 AM

View the original article here

Can Therapy Dogs Help Kids With Autism?

Title: Can Therapy Dogs Help Kids With Autism?
Category: Health News
Created: 2/26/2013 10:35:00 AM
Last Editorial Review: 2/26/2013 12:00:00 AM

View the original article here