The Wall Street Journal recently wrote an article concerning the drug industries barrage of drug ads on T.V., radio and the internet.The frequency of these ads can eventually make even the most healthy human think a shaking foot or a night of twisting and turning in bed warrant a pill here or there.That is exactly what the billion dollar drug industry has in mind. The politicians who are considering action against the pharmaceutical industry are the same ones who in 1997 relaxed the rules governing drug ads.Investor’s Business Daily recently published two brief news articles in Trends and Innovations that stated over half of Americans are on meds. Another article’s title, “US Kids Prescribed More Drugs.” What is going on?
Clearly, the pharmaceutical industry has succeeded beyond their imagination in making the US a legal drug addicted society. However, our politicians are a direct recipient of this huge financial success. The pharmaceutical industry commits over $500,000,000 annually to the FDA and lobby efforts.
Read the briefs by Investor’s Business Daily:
Over Half of Americans on Meds
For the first time, more than half of insured Americans are taking prescription medications regularly for chronic health problems, a study by Medco health Solutions found. Blood pressure and cholesterol drugs are the most widely used medications. One in 4 children and teenagers, 52% of adult men, and two-thirds of women age 20 and older are taking prescription drugs regularly, according to the study, which examined 2.5 million customers from 2001 to 2007.
U.S. Kids Prescribed More Drugs
American children are 6 times more likely to take anti-psychotic drugs than U.K. children, a study by the University of London said. The number of U.S. kids who used the drugs rose by 96%, to 45 out of 10,000, from 1996 to 2001. In the UK the rate nearly doubled, to 7 out of 10,000, from 1992 to 2005. Experts say the drugs to treat autism and hyperactivity are being over-prescribed in both countries. In the U.S., direct ads for drugs are more common.
Read Alicia Mundy of the Wall Street Journal, drug ad article.
New Rules on Drug Ads Sought
WASHINGTON—Congressional Democrats are renewing pressure on the drug industry’s direct-to-consumer advertising amid growing tension over the marketing of several best-selling drugs. Last year, Democrats lost a fight over proposals to strengthen government regulation of TV commercials for prescription drugs. But recent controversies over the marketing of anticholesterol drugs Vytorin and Lipitor and of Procrit, which helps treat anemia, have given Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee ammunition for a new battle. A subcommittee led by Michigan Democrat Bart Stupak has scheduled a hearing for Thursday with an agenda titled “Direct to Consumer Advertising: Marketing, Education or Deception?” Mr. Stupak says he wants to lay the groundwork for future legislation to tighten controls on drug marketing, including giving the Food and Drug Administration the right to force changes in TV drug ads before they are broadcast. Direct-to-consumer drug marketing brings in billions of dollars in sales for drug makers and for the television industry. In 1997, the government relaxed rules on TV and radio ads, allowing drug makers to shorten the warnings on side effects in their commercials; since then, pharmaceutical makers have spent about $14 billion on broadcast and cable TV ads for prescription drugs. Such advertising has become a major revenue stream for the TV industry. In 2007, drug makers spent more than $5 billion on direct-to-consumer ads, according to Nielsen Monitor-Plus; more than half of that was spent on television. The National Association of Broadcasters, a TV-industry lobbying group, and Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, a drug-industry trade group, have beaten back several congressional efforts to toughen regulations on TV commercials for drugs. “The drug and TV and cable industries have formed a cabal here to protect their revenues,” said Gene Kimmelman of Consumers Union, an advocacy group that wants stricter limits on direct-to-consumer drug marketing. Ken Johnson, a PhRMA vice president, says consumer advertising for prescription drugs “brings patients into their doctors’ offices and helps start important doctor-patient conversations about conditions that might otherwise go undiagnosed or untreated.” The renewed debate about drug marketing was spurred in part by several recent high-profile campaigns. Merck & Co. and Schering-Plough Inc. have been criticized for heavily promoting the cholesterol drug Vytorin while failing to disclose a study that raised questions about the drug’s effectiveness. Committee members plan to question officials of Pfizer Inc. about ads for its cholesterol drug, Lipitor, which featured Robert Jarvik, the inventor of the artificial heart. Mr. Jarvik isn’t a practicing doctor, but he “appears to be giving medical advice,” according to the committee, which suggested that the ads are misleading. Pfizer and the joint venture between Merck and Schering-Plough have defended their ads as accurate. In an interview, Mr. Stupak said Procrit presents a particular problem. Procrit marketers Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiary Ortho Biotech continued to broadcast ads promoting Procrit as an antifatigue drug—a use for which the drug wasn’t approved—despite repeated requests from the FDA to the companies to revise their commercials. “They advertised this for seven years,” said Mr. Stupak, calling this a violation of off-label-use prohibitions. Mr. Stupak said political appointees leading the FDA’s legal advisory team effectively shut down the FDA’s marketing regulators during the current administration. The FDA’s letters to J&J and Ortho Biotech complaining about the Procrit TV commercials and print ads touting fatigue relief stopped in December 2001, shortly before the agency instituted a policy of routing warnings to companies through the FDA chief counsel’s office for review, Mr. Stupak said. The FDA didn’t respond to a request for comment. The company stopped running the Procrit TV ads in 2005, and the print ads stopped in 2006. Procrit was later linked to increased risk of tumor growth in certain patients, and a panel of experts advising the FDA questioned whether the drug was being overused in cancer patients. In a statement, a representative for Johnson & Johnson said the broadcast advertisements for Procrit, which ran from 1998 to 2005, “were accurate, substantiated by clinical research, and consistent with the FDA-approved label at the time they aired.”
Learn More on Healthy Living: Visit http://www.infinitehealthresources.com/
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Fast Food and Global Warming
Fast Food and Global Warming
There is always news about America’s beloved McDonald’s. I have written much and today will write a little more.My favorite daily financial paper, Investor’s Business Daily, always defends this global disease causing behemoth. Here is some news concerning America’s favorite past time, eating at McDonald’s. This company is indeed an incredible corporate titan. It’s earnings grow annually and the public is slowly dying from malnutrition and disease. Every low cost fast food chain is slowly disabling a significant portion of our society.McDonald’s is also contributing to global warming. There are over 5 billion cows in the world. That is up to 10,000 fold over the past 40 years. These 5 billion cows are increasing CO2 and methane gasses. The land required to feed these cows is enormous; millions of acres of forest must be cut down to allow grazing. Furthermore, the corn grown to feed these cows destroys millions more acres. Lastly, the gas emitted from these 5 billion cows is pure methane, trapping CO2 gasses in our atmosphere.My suggestion is McDonald’s, Burger King and the burger happy food chains, put aside 10% of their gross profits and dividends to treat the sick and fund green projects.Now, if we can just get Al Gore to spread this inconvenient truth, he would really be on to something.
Eat Healthy and Love Well. Find out more at www.infinitehealthresources.com
There is always news about America’s beloved McDonald’s. I have written much and today will write a little more.My favorite daily financial paper, Investor’s Business Daily, always defends this global disease causing behemoth. Here is some news concerning America’s favorite past time, eating at McDonald’s. This company is indeed an incredible corporate titan. It’s earnings grow annually and the public is slowly dying from malnutrition and disease. Every low cost fast food chain is slowly disabling a significant portion of our society.McDonald’s is also contributing to global warming. There are over 5 billion cows in the world. That is up to 10,000 fold over the past 40 years. These 5 billion cows are increasing CO2 and methane gasses. The land required to feed these cows is enormous; millions of acres of forest must be cut down to allow grazing. Furthermore, the corn grown to feed these cows destroys millions more acres. Lastly, the gas emitted from these 5 billion cows is pure methane, trapping CO2 gasses in our atmosphere.My suggestion is McDonald’s, Burger King and the burger happy food chains, put aside 10% of their gross profits and dividends to treat the sick and fund green projects.Now, if we can just get Al Gore to spread this inconvenient truth, he would really be on to something.
Eat Healthy and Love Well. Find out more at www.infinitehealthresources.com
More Problems With Plastics
U.S. News and World Report, May 19, 2008
”More Problems With Plastics”
By: Adam Voiland
Phthalates, a softening agent used in plastics may be responsible for countless diseases. This article in US News and World Report touches on the subject briefly. We at InfiniteHealthResources.com have been discussing the dangers of phthalates for several years. The astronomical rise in autism has the science community baffled. Surely our environment, diet and pharmaceutical industry may all contribute to this terrible epidemic.Please read this brief, but informative article. Much more detailed health info can be found at www.infinitehealthresources.com , click Health Center.More Problems With PlasticsLike BPA, chemicals called phthalates raise some concernsThe urethra is supposed to emerge at the tip of the penis, but in 1 out of every 300 baby boys, its opening is elsewhere—sometimes just underneath the head, or midway down the shaft, or even at the base of the scrotum. No one knows what causes the defect, called hypospadias, but studies have shown that widespread chemicals called phthalates can reproduce it in rodents. Phthalates are used widely as softening agents in certain plastics, notably PVC, and are also found in some cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, and a wide range of other products. Scientists classify these chemicals among the "endocrine disruptors," so known for their ability to alter the proper balance of hormones, which play a central role during development. "It's not just bisphenol A that we're concerned about," says Ted Schettler, the lead scientist at the Iowa-based advocacy group called the Science and Environmental Health Network, referring to another endocrine disruptor that has made headlines this spring.Widespread problem. Human exposure to hormone-disrupting synthetic chemicals, which can leach from a slew of consumer products, is continuous and widespread. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found in 2005 that most Americans have traces of hormone-disrupting chemicals in their body. An analysis of the data by the Environmental Working Group, an advocacy organization based in Washington, D.C., concluded that 84 percent of Americans have at least six different phthalates in their urine.Toxicologists have been studying the effects of various phthalates in animals for decades. Three in particular—diethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP), butyl benzyl phthalate (BBP), and dibutyl phthalate (DBP)—cause a constellation of reproductive defects that includes hypospadias, testicular cancer, reduced sperm quality, diminished penis size, and undescended testicles. The effects, in some cases, seem to extend beyond the male reproductive system. Studies in animals have linked allergic skin lesions and lung malformations to DEHP, which is the most widely produced of the phthalates. And pregnant rodents given high daily doses of DBP tend to lose their fetuses. Not everyone, however, thinks such adverse effects in animals justify concern among people. "Most of the exposures are at doses far higher than what we see in humans," says Marian Stanley, a spokesperson for the Phthalate Esters Panel, an industry group that represents phthalate manufacturers. Major scientific reviews from the National Toxicology Program have concluded the risk the chemicals pose to humans is minimal. Yet, the most concerned scientists counter that emerging evidence does suggest phthalates harm humans. Shanna Swan, an epidemiologist at the University of Rochester, has shown that baby boys born to women with elevated DBP and BBP levels tend to have somewhat demasculinized and slightly smaller genitals. Recent studies in adults have linked high exposure to certain phthalates to low sperm quality and abdominal obesity.Though these studies don't prove cause and effect, some people find the existing evidence alarming enough to act. Many European countries have banned phthalates in certain toys, and a number of American states are considering similar restrictions. Meanwhile, "phthalate-free" products are popping up in stores and on the Internet—just as bisphenol A (BPA)-free baby bottles and water bottles have. Industry groups say that many of the products people worry most about—including plastic wrap, water bottles, and food containers—do not contain any phthalates.Still, avoiding phthalates altogether is more difficult than avoiding BPA, since it's not clear which of the panoply of products containing them contribute most to exposure. The chemicals easily move from sources such as vinyl tiles or shower curtains, so phthalates routinely end up in the air, water, and dust.Pregnant women, children, and couples trying to conceive may have the most to gain from trying to avoid phthalates, scientists say. "The primary risk appears to be to the developing fetus," says Swan.
Learn more about Healthy Living. Visit InfiniteHealthResources.com.
”More Problems With Plastics”
By: Adam Voiland
Phthalates, a softening agent used in plastics may be responsible for countless diseases. This article in US News and World Report touches on the subject briefly. We at InfiniteHealthResources.com have been discussing the dangers of phthalates for several years. The astronomical rise in autism has the science community baffled. Surely our environment, diet and pharmaceutical industry may all contribute to this terrible epidemic.Please read this brief, but informative article. Much more detailed health info can be found at www.infinitehealthresources.com , click Health Center.More Problems With PlasticsLike BPA, chemicals called phthalates raise some concernsThe urethra is supposed to emerge at the tip of the penis, but in 1 out of every 300 baby boys, its opening is elsewhere—sometimes just underneath the head, or midway down the shaft, or even at the base of the scrotum. No one knows what causes the defect, called hypospadias, but studies have shown that widespread chemicals called phthalates can reproduce it in rodents. Phthalates are used widely as softening agents in certain plastics, notably PVC, and are also found in some cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, and a wide range of other products. Scientists classify these chemicals among the "endocrine disruptors," so known for their ability to alter the proper balance of hormones, which play a central role during development. "It's not just bisphenol A that we're concerned about," says Ted Schettler, the lead scientist at the Iowa-based advocacy group called the Science and Environmental Health Network, referring to another endocrine disruptor that has made headlines this spring.Widespread problem. Human exposure to hormone-disrupting synthetic chemicals, which can leach from a slew of consumer products, is continuous and widespread. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found in 2005 that most Americans have traces of hormone-disrupting chemicals in their body. An analysis of the data by the Environmental Working Group, an advocacy organization based in Washington, D.C., concluded that 84 percent of Americans have at least six different phthalates in their urine.Toxicologists have been studying the effects of various phthalates in animals for decades. Three in particular—diethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP), butyl benzyl phthalate (BBP), and dibutyl phthalate (DBP)—cause a constellation of reproductive defects that includes hypospadias, testicular cancer, reduced sperm quality, diminished penis size, and undescended testicles. The effects, in some cases, seem to extend beyond the male reproductive system. Studies in animals have linked allergic skin lesions and lung malformations to DEHP, which is the most widely produced of the phthalates. And pregnant rodents given high daily doses of DBP tend to lose their fetuses. Not everyone, however, thinks such adverse effects in animals justify concern among people. "Most of the exposures are at doses far higher than what we see in humans," says Marian Stanley, a spokesperson for the Phthalate Esters Panel, an industry group that represents phthalate manufacturers. Major scientific reviews from the National Toxicology Program have concluded the risk the chemicals pose to humans is minimal. Yet, the most concerned scientists counter that emerging evidence does suggest phthalates harm humans. Shanna Swan, an epidemiologist at the University of Rochester, has shown that baby boys born to women with elevated DBP and BBP levels tend to have somewhat demasculinized and slightly smaller genitals. Recent studies in adults have linked high exposure to certain phthalates to low sperm quality and abdominal obesity.Though these studies don't prove cause and effect, some people find the existing evidence alarming enough to act. Many European countries have banned phthalates in certain toys, and a number of American states are considering similar restrictions. Meanwhile, "phthalate-free" products are popping up in stores and on the Internet—just as bisphenol A (BPA)-free baby bottles and water bottles have. Industry groups say that many of the products people worry most about—including plastic wrap, water bottles, and food containers—do not contain any phthalates.Still, avoiding phthalates altogether is more difficult than avoiding BPA, since it's not clear which of the panoply of products containing them contribute most to exposure. The chemicals easily move from sources such as vinyl tiles or shower curtains, so phthalates routinely end up in the air, water, and dust.Pregnant women, children, and couples trying to conceive may have the most to gain from trying to avoid phthalates, scientists say. "The primary risk appears to be to the developing fetus," says Swan.
Learn more about Healthy Living. Visit InfiniteHealthResources.com.
Get Healthier and Happier
InfiniteHealthResources.com has produced many articles blasting the pharmaceutical industry and our medical community for its rampant abuse prescribing drugs.Well some good news finally. Much is written lately about the medical community realizing that medication is not the cure all that the drug industry would have you believe.
Get Healthier and Happier
You may need a lifestyle fix as well as antidepressants
By: Deborah Kotz, U.S. News and World Report
What has become abundantly clear in the antidepressant age—the drugs are now the most commonly prescribed medications in the country—is that depression is terribly difficult, if not impossible, to cure. Many primary-care doctors, who treat 80 percent of depressed people, labor under the assumption that a prescription is a panacea. But antidepressants completely alleviate symptoms in only about 35 to 40 percent of people compared with 15 to 20 percent of those who take a placebo—a fact not publicized in pharmaceutical ads. And about 70 percent of people who successfully beat one bout can expect to face another. "We just don't have one magical pill that will do the whole trick," says Madhukar Trivedi, a professor of psychiatry at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas. He recently participated in the government-funded "Star*D" trial of more than 4,000 patients with difficult-to-treat depression, which showed success rates of antidepressants could be increased but that it sometimes took four tries of various drugs plus therapy. Even then, in 30 percent of those who completed the yearlong study, symptoms still lingered.Lifestyle culprits. Gradually, many mental-health practitioners are coming to believe that adjusting brain chemistry with medication isn't enough—that depression is a complex chronic disease, akin to diabetes, requiring lifestyle changes and ongoing monitoring to address underlying causes. As with diabetes, experts have begun to look for culprits in the 21st-century lifestyle. Might the isolating, sedentary, indoor computer culture explain, for example, why the disorder appears to be surging in young adults? Today's 20-somethings have a 1-in-4 lifetime risk of experiencing depression's hallmark black mood, joylessness, fatigue, and suicidal thoughts compared with the 1-in-10 risk of their grandparents' generation. Americans are 10 times as likely to have depression today as they were 60 years ago, a development that is not merely a result of increased awareness and diagnosis.There's certainly evidence that vigorous exercise has an effect on mood. Trivedi and others have shown that burning off 350 calories three times a week in sustained, sweat-inducing activity can reduce symptoms of depression about as effectively as antidepressants. Brain-imaging studies indicate that exercise stimulates the growth of neurons in certain brain regions damaged during depression. And animal studies have found that physical exertion increases the production of brain molecules that improve connections between nerve cells and act as a natural antidepressant. Sunlight or light-box exposure often helps people prone to seasonal affective disorder. And there's no doubt that getting a decent night's sleep can lift the spirits. Nutrition may play a role, too: It's fairly well established that those who eat the most fish have the lowest rates of depression.Realizing that primitive societies like the Kaluli of Papua New Guinea experience virtually no depression, Stephen Ilardi, an associate professor of psychology at the University of Kansas, is now testing a cave-man-esque approach to treatment with promising results. His 14-week Therapeutic Lifestyle Change program entails large doses of simulated hunter-gatherer living in people suffering from prolonged, unremitting depression. Participants sign up for 35 minutes of aerobic exercise (running, walking briskly, biking) three days a week, at least 30 minutes of daily sunlight or exposure from a light box that emits 10,000 lux, eight hours of sleep per night, and a daily fish oil supplement containing 1,000 mg of the fatty acid EPA and 500 mg of the fatty acid DHA.Brooders. They also get plenty of time surrounded by the "clan," in the form of frequent social gatherings with family members, Starbucks dates with friends, and volunteer work. "Hunter-gatherers almost never had time alone," says Ilardi; even a generation or two ago, people grew up supported by extended family and much more engaged with their community. Too much time in isolation, he says, means "opportunities to ruminate," the modern scourge. Studies indicate that brooders are far more likely than nonbrooders to develop depression. "I feel terrific now, but I'm really well plugged in with my old friends," says Russo, who regularly calls and E-mails former colleagues, occasionally traveling 70 miles to Philadelphia to meet them for lunch.Obsessive thinkers can learn to redirect themselves. Cognitive behavioral therapy, for example, teaches people to recognize when irrational negative thoughts are triggering a mood plunge and to reframe those thoughts in a rational way. Was that coworker really laughing at my outfit? Or just trying to be witty in front of the boss? A 2006 study published in the American Journal of Psychiatry found that people whose symptoms disappeared after cognitive behavioral therapy showed significant changes on MRI scans in two brain regions associated with depression. What's more, the therapy appears to be as effective as medication when used for resistant depression, according to findings from the Star*D trial."Drugs are quicker acting and take less work in the short run, but they only suppress the problem," says Michael Thase, a professor of psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine who led the comparative study for Star*D. The therapy, he says, allows people to take action when their mood is dipping to prevent a full-blown relapse.
Happier—and Healthier
The mind-body link appears to work both ways
Far from being just a psychiatric disorder, depression wreaks havoc on the entire body by throwing the stress response out of whack. The amount of damage it causes takes a greater toll on health than chronic angina, arthritis, asthma, or diabetes, according to a September report from the World Health Organization. And a growing body of research indicates that it triggers certain diseases:
Heart disease. Under stress, blood produces more clotting factors to prepare for a wound, which can cause clots to form in the arteries—setting the stage for a heart attack or stroke. Increased stress hormones can also lead to inflammation in the heart.
Osteoporosis. Depression's link to high levels of the stress hormone cortisol may speed bone loss, raising the risk of fractures even in premenopausal women, according to one new study.
Diabetes. Increased cortisol also raises blood sugar levels, which new research suggests may cause diabetes in those over age 65. Inflammation may also play a role.
Cancer. Studies show that depressed folks have high levels of immune system chemicals called cytokines, which may hamper the body's ability to destroy malignant cells.
Get Healthier and Happier
You may need a lifestyle fix as well as antidepressants
By: Deborah Kotz, U.S. News and World Report
What has become abundantly clear in the antidepressant age—the drugs are now the most commonly prescribed medications in the country—is that depression is terribly difficult, if not impossible, to cure. Many primary-care doctors, who treat 80 percent of depressed people, labor under the assumption that a prescription is a panacea. But antidepressants completely alleviate symptoms in only about 35 to 40 percent of people compared with 15 to 20 percent of those who take a placebo—a fact not publicized in pharmaceutical ads. And about 70 percent of people who successfully beat one bout can expect to face another. "We just don't have one magical pill that will do the whole trick," says Madhukar Trivedi, a professor of psychiatry at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas. He recently participated in the government-funded "Star*D" trial of more than 4,000 patients with difficult-to-treat depression, which showed success rates of antidepressants could be increased but that it sometimes took four tries of various drugs plus therapy. Even then, in 30 percent of those who completed the yearlong study, symptoms still lingered.Lifestyle culprits. Gradually, many mental-health practitioners are coming to believe that adjusting brain chemistry with medication isn't enough—that depression is a complex chronic disease, akin to diabetes, requiring lifestyle changes and ongoing monitoring to address underlying causes. As with diabetes, experts have begun to look for culprits in the 21st-century lifestyle. Might the isolating, sedentary, indoor computer culture explain, for example, why the disorder appears to be surging in young adults? Today's 20-somethings have a 1-in-4 lifetime risk of experiencing depression's hallmark black mood, joylessness, fatigue, and suicidal thoughts compared with the 1-in-10 risk of their grandparents' generation. Americans are 10 times as likely to have depression today as they were 60 years ago, a development that is not merely a result of increased awareness and diagnosis.There's certainly evidence that vigorous exercise has an effect on mood. Trivedi and others have shown that burning off 350 calories three times a week in sustained, sweat-inducing activity can reduce symptoms of depression about as effectively as antidepressants. Brain-imaging studies indicate that exercise stimulates the growth of neurons in certain brain regions damaged during depression. And animal studies have found that physical exertion increases the production of brain molecules that improve connections between nerve cells and act as a natural antidepressant. Sunlight or light-box exposure often helps people prone to seasonal affective disorder. And there's no doubt that getting a decent night's sleep can lift the spirits. Nutrition may play a role, too: It's fairly well established that those who eat the most fish have the lowest rates of depression.Realizing that primitive societies like the Kaluli of Papua New Guinea experience virtually no depression, Stephen Ilardi, an associate professor of psychology at the University of Kansas, is now testing a cave-man-esque approach to treatment with promising results. His 14-week Therapeutic Lifestyle Change program entails large doses of simulated hunter-gatherer living in people suffering from prolonged, unremitting depression. Participants sign up for 35 minutes of aerobic exercise (running, walking briskly, biking) three days a week, at least 30 minutes of daily sunlight or exposure from a light box that emits 10,000 lux, eight hours of sleep per night, and a daily fish oil supplement containing 1,000 mg of the fatty acid EPA and 500 mg of the fatty acid DHA.Brooders. They also get plenty of time surrounded by the "clan," in the form of frequent social gatherings with family members, Starbucks dates with friends, and volunteer work. "Hunter-gatherers almost never had time alone," says Ilardi; even a generation or two ago, people grew up supported by extended family and much more engaged with their community. Too much time in isolation, he says, means "opportunities to ruminate," the modern scourge. Studies indicate that brooders are far more likely than nonbrooders to develop depression. "I feel terrific now, but I'm really well plugged in with my old friends," says Russo, who regularly calls and E-mails former colleagues, occasionally traveling 70 miles to Philadelphia to meet them for lunch.Obsessive thinkers can learn to redirect themselves. Cognitive behavioral therapy, for example, teaches people to recognize when irrational negative thoughts are triggering a mood plunge and to reframe those thoughts in a rational way. Was that coworker really laughing at my outfit? Or just trying to be witty in front of the boss? A 2006 study published in the American Journal of Psychiatry found that people whose symptoms disappeared after cognitive behavioral therapy showed significant changes on MRI scans in two brain regions associated with depression. What's more, the therapy appears to be as effective as medication when used for resistant depression, according to findings from the Star*D trial."Drugs are quicker acting and take less work in the short run, but they only suppress the problem," says Michael Thase, a professor of psychiatry at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine who led the comparative study for Star*D. The therapy, he says, allows people to take action when their mood is dipping to prevent a full-blown relapse.
Happier—and Healthier
The mind-body link appears to work both ways
Far from being just a psychiatric disorder, depression wreaks havoc on the entire body by throwing the stress response out of whack. The amount of damage it causes takes a greater toll on health than chronic angina, arthritis, asthma, or diabetes, according to a September report from the World Health Organization. And a growing body of research indicates that it triggers certain diseases:
Heart disease. Under stress, blood produces more clotting factors to prepare for a wound, which can cause clots to form in the arteries—setting the stage for a heart attack or stroke. Increased stress hormones can also lead to inflammation in the heart.
Osteoporosis. Depression's link to high levels of the stress hormone cortisol may speed bone loss, raising the risk of fractures even in premenopausal women, according to one new study.
Diabetes. Increased cortisol also raises blood sugar levels, which new research suggests may cause diabetes in those over age 65. Inflammation may also play a role.
Cancer. Studies show that depressed folks have high levels of immune system chemicals called cytokines, which may hamper the body's ability to destroy malignant cells.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)