|
LE Magazine October 2002
SAMe aids
arthritis without side effects
A group of researchers at the University of Maryland has
confirmed that the dietary supplement S-adenosylmethionine
(SAMe) is just as effective in easing the pain of one form of
arthritis as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs),
but without the unwanted side effects of NSAIDs [J Fam Pract 2002
May;51(5):425-30].
The researchers conducted a large-scale investigation of
published controlled studies that tested the efficacy of SAMe
versus NSAIDs and placebo given at random to patients with
osteoarthritis.
Previously, they found that there had been insufficient
medical evidence documenting SAMe’s benefits against
osteoarthritis, despite talk of its increasing popularity.
When analyzing the level of pain, functional limitation and
any adverse effects generated by the treatments given, the
researchers found that SAMe provided a similar effect as
anti-inflammatory drugs, but without the common
gastrointestinal side effects [National Library of Medicine,
National Institutes of Health].*
“We would agree that based on the findings, patients
with osteoarthritis — especially those particularly
susceptible to side effects of NSAIDs—might consider
using SAMe on a regular basis,” the researchers said.
Studies published as early as 1987 echoed the same results
[Am J Med 1987 Nov
20;83(5A):60-5]. Italian researchers reviewed the outcomes of
clinical trials conducted in the 1980’s that also found
that SAMe was just as effective as NSAIDs, but more tolerable,
as an arthritis treatment.
In a German study published that same year, researchers
made randomized, double blind comparisons between SAMe and
ibuprofen in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee, hip and
spine. They concluded that SAMe was just as effective as
ibuprofen in treating the disease [Am J Med 1987 Nov
20;83(5A):81-3].
—John
Martin
*http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginfo/uspdi/202743.html
Vitamin
intake may be answer to
esophageal cancers
A recent string of epidemiological studies has shown that
certain vitamins and minerals can reduce the risk of
developing stomach and esophageal cancers.
Researchers at Yale University found that people who
consumed nutrients such as beta-carotene, folate, vitamins C
and B6, and fiber had a lower risk of cancers of the esophagus
and stomach [Cancer Epidemiol
Biomarkers Prev 2001 Oct;10(10):1055-62]. They based
their findings on nutrient intake among cancer patients in
three states.
The scientists also pointed to the familiar benefits of
plant-derived nutrients. “Higher intake of nutrients
found primarily in plant-based foods was associated with a
reduced risk of [esophageal cancers], whereas higher intake of
nutrients found primarily in foods of animal origin was
associated with an increased risk.”
In a similar case-control study, Swedish scientists
analyzed the effects of various antioxidants on patients with
cancers of the esophagus and stomach, and compared the results
with those of a control group [Int
J Cancer 2000 Sep1;87(5):750-4].
The researchers found that levels of vitamin C,
beta-carotene and vitamin E cut the risk of developing two
forms of esophageal cancer nearly in half, with vitamin C and
beta-carotene providing the most dramatic effect.
The conclusions of other studies have been similar.
Scientists with the National Cancer Institute analyzed cancer
death rates over a five-year period in a region of China known
for epidemic rates of certain esophageal and stomach cancers
[J Natl Cancer Inst 2000 Nov
1;92(21):1753-63]. They found that higher intakes of the
nutrient selenium resulted in a lower cancer incidence.
Likewise, researchers examining esophageal cancer rates in
a region of Iran discovered that consumption of specific
nutrients had an effect on the risk of esophageal cancer
development [Cancer Detect
Prev 2000;24(3):295-303]. In fact, the scientists wrote
that those with niacin and phosphorus deficiencies faced more
than twice the risk. The researchers concluded: “... the
status of these nutrients may be used eventually as an
epidemiologic predictive marker” in determining whether a
patient may or may not be at risk.
In yet another related study, Italian scientists found that
a diet containing a specific set of vitamins and minerals
resulted in a reduced risk of developing esophageal
squamous-cell carcinoma [Int J
Cancer 2000 Jun 1;86(5):626-31]. The effect was the
same, the researchers noted, even for those who smoked or
consumed heavy amounts of alcohol.
—JM
Mayo Clinic:
Vitamin E, supplements
keep eyesight in focus
Vitamin E—tocopherol—and a host of other
supplements have just won prestigious backing as powerful
prevention against macular degeneration.
In a recently released book entitled Mayo Clinic on Vision
and Eye Health, the respected medical organization touts
vitamin E, in combination with other specific vitamins and
minerals, as therapies that can lower the risk of this common
eye disease [Mayo Clinic on Vision and Eye Health. Mayo
Foundation for Medical Education and Research. May 2002].
Age-related macular degeneration, also known as AMD, is a
disease that affects central vision. It typically occurs in
people over age 60, and because only the center of vision is
affected, its victims rarely go blind. Yet AMD can commonly
make it difficult to perform routine tasks like driving or
reading [National Eye Institute, National Institutes of
Health].*
Mayo Clinic points to recent research—the Age-Related
Eye Disease Study—that found people were able to lower
their risk of developing macular degeneration by 25%, and
decrease their risk of vision loss due to the disease by about
one-fifth by using a combination of vitamin E, and other
vitamins and minerals.
The book points out that the study showed the impact of
dietary supplements on people at high risk of developing the
advanced stages of macular degeneration. “Here was
positive proof of the role dietary supplements can play in
preserving your eyesight,” the authors pointed out.
—JM
*http://www.nei.nih.gov/health/maculardegen/armd_facts.htm
Breast
implants not linked
to cancer risk, study finds
Fears that many women may have about the increased risk of
cancer from breast implants are unfounded, according to
researchers who conducted a study last year for the Dow
Corning Corporation, a one-time maker of silicone gel implants
[Plast Reconstr Surg 2001
May;107(6):1393-407].
The researchers conducted a meta-analysis of the
literature, and concluded that there is “no persuasive
evidence” of a relationship between breast implants and
cancer risk. In fact, they suggested that such implants may
provide a protective effect against breast cancer.
Not only do breast implants have no link to cancer. Women
who use them are typically not diagnosed with late-stage
breast cancer, do not have recurrences, and do not have a
lower risk of survival, the researchers wrote.
In 1992, the FDA restricted the use of silicone gel breast
implants after reports of their possible link to risk of
cancer and connective tissue disease.
Congress subsequently ordered the National Institutes of
Health to conduct safety studies, and the National Cancer
Institute (NCI) later drew similar conclusions [Plast Reconstr Surg 2000
Nov;105(3):919-27]. “For women followed for more than 10
years, there was no change in breast cancer risk,” said
Louise Brinton, Ph.D., of the NCI’s Division of Cancer
Epidemiology and Genetics, and the study’s lead
author.
Brinton added, however, that the study did not show a
reduced risk of breast cancer from implants, compared with
other studies. “This may relate to the longer follow-up
in this study as compared with most others,” she
said.
Further research is planned to determine whether implants
are linked to connective tissue disease and the risk of other
cancers.
—JM
Study finds
seniors skip drugs, risk health
because they can't afford drugs
The increasing cost of prescription drugs is more than just
a financial burden for senior citizens—it’s a health
risk with nearly one in four skipping medication because they
can’t afford it, a [recent] report said.
The survey of 10,927 seniors in eight states, including
California, focused on the struggle to afford medicine by
those 65 and older. Results showed that seniors are having an
increasingly difficult time paying for lifesaving
medicines.
Even seniors with severe and chronic conditions, such as
heart disease and diabetes, often reported going without
medication because of the costs.
“I think the evidence suggests it’s pretty bad
right now, and it’s likely to get worse,” said
report co-author Tricia Neuman, vice president and director
for the Medicare Policy Project with the Kaiser Family
Foundation.
The survey of 10,927 diverse seniors in California,
Colorado, Illinois, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and
Texas was sponsored by the Kaiser Family Foundation and the
Com-monwealth Fund and published online in the journal Health Affairs.
The report paints a dismal picture for the nation’s
elderly. Many seniors reported having no prescription coverage
as part of their health plan and having difficulty paying for
a health plan that covers prescriptions. Nearly 25% of seniors
reported they spent $100 or more per month out-of-pocket for
medicines in 2001.
“The finding of nearly one in four skipping medicines
is both with coverage and without and cuts across all income
groups,” Neuman said.
While the report did not provide specific numbers for the
Valley, it suggests the problem is worse in rural areas and
places with a higher poverty rate.
Some 31% of all low-income seniors and 42% of low-income
seniors who lacked drug coverage either skipped doses or did
not fill a prescription because of costs.
While some of these seniors were helped by state pharmacy
assistance programs and discount drug cards, such programs
didn’t provide enough assistance in most cases.
Shirley Grand Main, program manager for the Health
Insurance Counseling and Advocacy Program for the Kings-Tulane
Area Agency on Aging, said she isn’t surprised by the
survey results.
Main said desperate seniors come to her office all the time
seeking assistance. “It’s ‘Do I eat or take my
meds?’ ” Main said.
It is not uncommon to see local el-derly couples spending
$300 to $400 a month on medications, and that’s if they
can afford it, she said.
“What we tell our folks is to ask for [medicine]
samples from their doctors. The way I look at it is they are
free from the pharmaceutical companies,” Main said.
Seniors helped pay for government research on these drugs, she
noted.
Medicare—which covers 40 million older
Americans—doesn’t cover prescriptions, and Congress
continues to debate the issue of adding a drug benefit to the
government program.
While seniors have the option to purchase additional
coverage through private HMOs and Medigap policies sold by
private insurers, such plans usually are expensive, not widely
available and impose annual caps on drug costs.
The report found that some poor se-niors could qualify for
additional help from programs such as Medicaid or Medi-Cal,
but many seniors don’t enroll because they don’t
believe they’ll qualify or fear losing other government
benefits if they participate.
Ross Dille, a 68-year-old Visalia resident, said he and his
wife spend about $525 a month on health-care
coverage—about $300 of it on a prescription drug plan
they recently added. More than 25% of the retired
couple’s fixed monthly income is spent on health
care.
“There’s little choice,” Dille said. She has
high blood pressure, and he had prostate cancer.
Seniors are living on a median income on $13,000 a year,
“and they have expenses just like the rest of us,”
Neuman said.
The report concludes the problem will get worse with
projected double-digit increases in drug spending.
“While there is a difference of opinion on a solution,
there is no arguing there needs to be solution,” she
said.
Kaiser is an independent, national health philanthropy and
not associated with Kaiser Permanente or Kaiser industries.
Commonwealth Fund in New York is a national foundation that
supports research on health and social issues.
The survey also included researchers from Tufts-New England
Medical Center in Boston.
Reprinted with permission, in its
entirety. The Fresno Bee by Tracy Correa.
Back to
the Magazine Forum
|