Why Do Cell Phones Damage Brain?
Research found that microwaves from cellphones damaged the blood-brain barrier, which prevents materials from the blood entering the brain. It could lead to disturbances, such as headaches, feeling tired or problems with sleeping.

www.skfriends.com
Copyright © 2002 Singles Konnexion. All rights reserved.
SkFriends Worlds Largest FREE Non-Profit Singles Group
Friends are what SkFriends are all about.
We are not a dating service. We are much more.
We're changing singles ideas and making friends for life.

For more articles, see also: Website articles and pages

Why Drinking Too Much Water Can Kill You?
Tue Jul 2, 2002 5:34 PM ET

Drinking too much water is dangerous because the body cannot excrete that much fluid. Excess water then goes to the bowel, which pulls salt into it from the body, diluting the concentration of salt in the tissues. Changing the concentration of salt, in turn, causes a shifting of fluids within the body, which can then induce a swelling in the brain. The swollen organ will then press against the bones of the skull, and become damaged.

By Alison McCook

NEW YORK (Reuter Health) - A new review of three deaths of US military recruits highlights the dangers of drinking too much water.

The military has traditionally focused on the dangers associated with heat illness, which has killed a number of healthy, young enrollees, Colonel John W. Gardner of the Office of the Armed Forces Medical Examiner in Rockville, Maryland told Reuter Health. However, pushing the need to drink water too far can also have deadly consequences, he said.

"The risk has always been not drinking enough," Gardner said. "And then people who aren't medically attuned get overzealous," inducing recruits to drink amounts of water that endanger their health, he added.

"That's why we published this paper: to make it clear to people that overzealousness can be dangerous," Gardner explained.

In September 1999, a 19-year-old Air Force recruit collapsed during a 5.8-mile walk, with a body temperature of 108 degrees Fahrenheit. Doctors concluded he had died of both heat stroke and low blood sodium levels as a result of overhydration.

During January 2000, a 20-year-old trainee in the Army drank around 12 quarts of water during a 2- to 4-hour period while trying to produce a urine specimen for a drug test. She then experienced fecal incontinence, lost consciousness and became confused, then died from swelling in the brain and lungs as a result of low blood sodium.

In March 2001, a 19-year-old Marine died from drinking too much water after a 26-mile march, during which he carried a pack and gear weighing more than 90 pounds. Although he appeared fine during the beginning stages of the 8-hour walk, towards the end he began vomiting and appeared overly tired. He was then sent to the hospital, where he fell into a coma, developed brain swelling and died the next day. It is unclear how much water he drank during the march, but Marines were given a "constant emphasis" on drinking water before and during the activity, Gardner writes in the latest issue of Military Medicine.

In an interview with Reuter Health, Gardner explained that drinking too much water is dangerous because the body cannot excrete that much fluid. Excess water then goes to the bowel, which pulls salt into it from the body, diluting the concentration of salt in the tissues.

Changing the concentration of salt, in turn, causes a shifting of fluids within the body, which can then induce a swelling in the brain. The swollen organ will then press against the bones of the skull, and become damaged.

The researcher added that previous cases of water toxicity have been noted in athletes who consume excessive amounts in order to avoid heat stroke. In addition, certain psychiatric patients may drink too much water in an attempt to wash away their sins, or flush out poisons they believe have entered their bodies.

In 1998, the Army released fluid replacement guidelines, which recommend a certain intake of water but limit it to 1 to 1-1/2 quarts per hour and 12 quarts per day.

It takes a while for these guidelines to get "permeated out" to everybody, Gardner admitted. In the meantime, he suggested that bases take notice of the mistakes of others, and "not wait for somebody to die from (water toxicity) again," he said.

"You can't prevent everything bad from happening," Gardner noted. "But when it does, you have to learn from it."

SOURCE: Military Medicine 2002;167:432-434

http://story.news.yahoo.com/

By Maggie Fox, Health and Science Correspondent

Trying to do the "right" thing by drinking eight full glasses of water a day may do little more than make a person run to the bathroom, a researcher said on Friday.

WASHINGTON (Reuter) - Trying to do the "right" thing by drinking eight full glasses of water a day may do little more than make a person run to the bathroom, a researcher said on Friday.

Newspaper articles, health and beauty magazines all advise drinking at least 8 full glasses of water a day totaling 64 ounces for optimal health -- an approach called "8x8" by proponents.

But Dr. Heinz Valtin of Dartmouth Medical School in New Hampshire said there is no scientific evidence to back up this advice, which has helped create a huge market for bottled water.

"After 10 months of careful searching I have found no scientific evidence that supports '8x8'," Valtin, who has written textbooks on the subject of human water balance, said in a telephone interview.

Writing in the American Journal of Physiology, Valtin, a kidney specialist, said people forget that the food they eat also contains some water.

The Food and Nutrition Board of the National Research Council ( news - web sites) has recommended that people take in about one milliliter of water for each calorie of food eaten.

This adds up to two liters, or 74 fluid ounces on an average 2,000-calorie diet. But the National Research Council also noted that much of this is already contained in food.

"I did 43 years of research on that system -- the osmoregulatory system. That system is so precise and so fast that I find it impossible to believe that evolution left us with a chronic water deficit," Valtin said.

LOW ON FLUID

If a person gets low on fluid, the body compensates by bringing fluid back out of the kidneys and by slowing the loss of water through the skin, Valtin said. Thirst kicks in long before dehydration starts, he added.

"It does it very quickly and very accurately and it does so in minutes," Valtin said.

He said he and colleagues became concerned after seeing dozens of newspaper and magazine articles urging people to sip water all day. "I started talking to my colleagues and asking them 'Do you know of any evidence for this?'. Invariably, they said, 'No I think it's a myth'," Valtin said.

The journal asked him to review all the scientific studies he could find and he concluded that someone misinformed has been telling people to drink large amounts of water when most do not need to.

"I am referring to healthy adults in a temperate climate leading a largely sedentary existence," Valtin said. "Persons with certain diseases must have large volumes of water -- kidney stones are probably the most common example."

The rest can just drink enough to slake thirst -- and this includes coffee, tea, and even beer -- despite their diuretic effects, Valtin said.

He hopes people will be relieved of the guilt of not getting enough water, and of the expense of buying bottled water to drink throughout the day.

"There is also the possibility that if you drink a lot of water that happens to be polluted then of course you get more pollutants," Valtin said.

"Then there is the inconvenience of constant urination, the embarrassment of having to go to the bathroom all the time," he added.

And overdoses of water can cause water intoxication that can lead to confusion and even death. Water intoxication is one deadly effect of taking the drug Ecstasy, for instance, because it makes people thirsty beyond their physical needs

Source: http://story.news.yahoo.com/

For more articles, see also: Website articles and pages

June 23, 2002

By BRYAN MILLER, NY Times

FOR more than a hundred years, the slender triangle formed by Raleigh, Durham and Chapel Hill, N.C., has been the country's capital of tobacco. Today, as the cigarette industry wanes, the region is enjoying a bumper crop of a different sort, this one a hybrid of high technology, higher education and quality dining.

The Triangle, as it is called, is home to 8,000 companies, numerous colleges and universities — including two of the country's most handsome campuses, Duke and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill — and ample sightseeing and regional festivals.

While I made the tourism rounds by day, my main pursuit was authentic Southern cooking. And as it turned out, after eight staggering meals in three days, I had only nibbled around the edge of the plate.

Allen & Son Barbeque

As soon as my plane landed, I made tracks for this regionally renowned Chapel Hill restaurant. Upon opening the door I was nearly thrust backward by a warm gust of hickory smoke billowing from the kitchen. Allen's — along with Bullock's Bar-B-Cue in Durham — is considered by residents as among the best reasons for gnawing ribs and soiling your shirt.

At 1:30 p.m. on a Wednesday, Allen's was crowded with well-nourished businessmen and families at tables covered with green-and-white-checked oilcloth. Plastic flowers on the tables and pig art galore add to the festive ambience.

The Piedmont, as the greater region is called, is known for its pulled pork — slow-cooked, hickory-smoked shoulder of pork that is torn off the bone by hand. In this part of North Carolina, pulled pork is usually served with a vinegar and hot pepper sauce. A house favorite is the massive pulled pork sandwich garnished with lots of hot sauce and a mound of coleslaw ($4).

Main courses, like the fat, faintly smoky pork ribs, come with addictive little hush puppies and two vegetables (overcooked, but vegetables are not why you're there anyway). Entrees — pork or chicken — average $6 to about $8. I ordered a small plate of pulled pork, which is richly flavored but very lean, so it needs plenty of sauce.

Like many down-home restaurants in North Carolina, Allen's does not serve alcohol; if you ask for iced tea they bring out a carafe that holds enough for a school picnic. As for dessert, my delightful waitress ran off at least a dozen pies, cobblers and cakes. I can highly recommend the peach cobbler.

Mama Dip's Kitchen

Mildred Council picked cotton as a little girl, helping her family scratch out a living on their small farm. In summer, if the well went dry, she was recruited, being the tallest child, to climb onto the rim of the tall rain barrel to "dip" for water.

Today, 73-year-old Mama Dip, a tall, soft-speaking celebrity in these parts, owns an eponymous restaurant in Chapel Hill where students and residents flock for her fried chicken, barbecue and soul food. Alcohol is not available, but there's plenty of iced tea. You have to love a woman who, in her cookbook, gives a recipe for pork tenderloin and tells readers in the liner notes: "This is good for breakfast." ("Mama Dip's Kitchen," University of North Carolina Press, 1999).

It's a nondescript place on the outside; and the large dining room is plain and functional as well, with wooden booths and decorative hurricane lamps. The matronly servers could not be more pleasant.

The fried chicken alone is worth a visit: lightly battered, perfectly blistered and uncommonly moist. The ribs were first-rate, too, fatty and succulent. For dessert, go with the house specialties — warm pecan pie (covered with toasty pecans, and not too sweet) and the eggy bread pudding.

Magnolia Grill

This inconspicuous restaurant in a modest building near downtown Durham enjoys a national reputation for its innovative "new Southern" fare, a fairly recent genre. Many creations of the chef and owner, Ben Barker, are at first daunting, some with six or more ingredients. For such a sophisticated place, the setting is reminiscent of an upscale roadhouse — a big yet cramped, cacophonous space festooned with changing exhibits of local art. That said, it's well worth visiting for exceptional dishes like grilled yellowfin tuna in a sauce made with smoked ham hocks, red wine and homemade barbecue sauce — amazingly, it did not overwhelm the fish. Along with it came hush puppies, lemon remoulade, barbecued red beans and a spicy green tomato slaw.

Perfectly grilled pork tenderloin was sublime in a spicy sweet molasses and black pepper jus. The meat arrived atop a delicious crayfish-and-grits cake, along with smoked ham, beans, green tomatoes and mustard greens.

The pastry chef, Karen Barker, Mr. Barker's wife and partner in the business, changes her superb dessert repertory periodically. Two to seek out are the lovely buttermilk pudding cake with seasonal berries, and the tart, creamy goat-cheese blintzes with sun-dried blueberry compote.

Because of the relentless crowds and apparent understaffing, service can be hurry up and wait.

Magnolia Grill's wine selection, mostly French and Californian, has plenty of choices between $25 and $35, like our bright and pleasantly acidic pinot gris reserve from King Estate, in Oregon ($30).

Fishmonger's

This is a gritty old bar and restaurant in downtown Durham with a worn checkered tile floor, long picnic tables, lazy ceiling fans and a dining counter with stools made from tractor seats and old car-tire rims. Fishmonger's is fine for a quick, if caloric, lunch.

I got off to a shaky start with a watery and bland oyster stew, but things picked up with the panned oysters — essentially oysters sautéed in garlic, butter and paprika, then slathered over half a loaf of sourdough. Fried crab cakes are crunchy and fresh, and you can't go wrong with the cleanly fried fish and chips.

Don't expect brisk service — my laconic young server seemed to prefer the warm, secure kitchen to the vagaries of the dining room. If you are pressed for time, sit at the bar.

Pop's

A short walk from Fishmonger's is a pleasing Italian restaurant. In a renovated warehouse, it's spacious and artfully lighted, with a giant painting of a chef in the main dining area. I was alone, so I sat at one of the two large bars, close to the flaring open kitchen.

The cooking is light, fresh and satisfying, with selections like mussels cooked with garlic and chili flakes, fried calamari with a fiery harissa aioli, and al dente penne tossed in a sauce of wood-smoked salmon with fennel, olives, and a citrus fumet.

From my vantage point, servers seemed to be doing a good job. Pop's has a modest international wine list with very fair prices.

One of the best Dixie desserts I sampled on the trip was Pop's warm chocolate pudding cake, intense and spongy, ringed with crème anglaise and chocolate sauce.

Fearrington House

For truly first-class Southern dining in the Triangle, travel some eight miles south of Chapel Hill to rural Pittsboro. Set in a meticulously restored 1920's farmhouse, the restaurant is surrounded by magnificent gardens and acres of lawns. Lamentably, the dignified old house has been enveloped by a sprawling planned community, but you can't see it from the dining rooms.

I was greeted by a genial fellow in black tie who informed me that I could take cocktails in a rocking chair on the porch (highly recommended) or at the cheerful little bar inside.

Dinner is served on the ground floor of the old house, in cozy, irregularly shaped rooms that are formally appointed in neutral colors with plush high-backed chairs, well-spaced tables and soft lighting.

The inspired food at Fearrington House — with a nod to James Thurber — could be called hush puppies with a college education. Southern ingredients anchor many creations: collard greens, smoked bacon, mustard greens, black-eyed peas and local oysters. The chef, R. Warren Stephens, who came to Fearrington from the Peninsula Grill in Charleston, is deft at balancing North and South.

While rocking on the porch with a glass of Champagne, I met a couple who were revisiting Fearrington House for the first time since they were married there five years before. I don't know if it was the bubbly or the seductive setting, but before we finished our second glass they were insisting that I join them for dinner.

One memorable creation ordered by one of my companions was a perfectly seared fillet of wild striped bass on a pedestal of a crispy black-eyed pea cake with surprisingly subtle tomato-andouille gravy. Also superb were rosy slices of grilled duck breast in a lovely thyme-scented red wine sauce, accompanied by shoepeg (white corn) pudding and braised collard greens; another dish was was a meltingly tender braised lamb shank in a caramel-type sauce that was hard to identify. I called over our waitress.

"Pepsi-Cola!" she said, referring to a not uncommon braising sauce made with reduced cola and lamb or beef stock.

A consumer-friendly wine selection offers plenty of choices under $25. I wanted something bright and fresh with this food and chose 1999 Aligoté from Ghislaine & Jean-Hugues Goisot ($20).

Desserts are copious and, judging from the excessive number I sampled, exceptional. Warm plum tart with a caramelized red wine sauce is a big-time winner, and in the munificent Southern style, a wedge of mascarpone cheesecake is added to the plate. Sorbets are outstanding, as is the hot chocolate soufflé. Service is attentive and professional.

Crook's Corner

On my last day in the Piedmont Triangle a local writer declared, "You mean you haven't had the shrimp and grits at Crook's Corner?" No, I hadn't, and although I had a dinner reservation elsewhere, I decided to go for it.

Crook's Corner, on the western end of Franklin Street in Chapel Hill, is identified by a giant pig on the roof and a gallery of silver hubcaps outside. What I didn't know was that I was stepping onto somewhat sacred ground for Southern foodies. An old fish market with a shady past, it was renovated in 1978 and taken over in 1982 by the chef and author Bill Neal and Gene Hamer, who still runs it.

The moment you enter you know you're at the right place. Part neighborhood diner, part upscale restaurant, Crook's is a nightly celebration. I took a seat at the small tile bar and ordered a glass of Honig sauvignon blanc from the Napa Valley ($6.50). The wine list has only 24 selections, but most are from quality producers and run under $30 a bottle.

Red fabric banquettes, cafe tables and local art that changes every month set the tone in the main room; outside is an enchanting garden bordered by illuminated bamboo.

Before taking on the fabled shrimp and grits, I warmed up with two appetizers: a heap of crackly fried oysters with hot sauce, and another house favorite, springy little jalapeño-cheddar hush puppies.

The main event consisted of sautéed large shrimp afloat on creamy cheese grits, enhanced with an earthy mushroom and scallion sauce flecked with crusty bits of bacon. Definitely worth the indulgence. The menu also features local conflations like scalawag (grilled filet mignon with bourbon brown sauce and oysters), green Tabasco chicken, and barbecue sandwiches perfect to feed a couple, or more, on the plane home.   
 

Restaurant Information

Prices are estimates for a three-course dinner for two and a glass of wine for each, except for those restaurants that do not serve alcohol, indicated below.

Allen & Son Barbeque, 6203 Millhouse Road, Chapel Hill, N.C.; (919) 942-7576; $35. Lunch and dinner; closed Sunday and Monday. Open for breakfast on Saturday. No alcohol. Smoking allowed. (A branch in Pittsboro has a more limited menu.)

Mama Dip's Kitchen, 408 West Rosemary Street, Chapel Hill, N.C.; (919) 942-5837, www.mamadips.com; $30. Lunch and dinner daily; no alcohol and no smoking.

Magnolia Grill, 1002 Ninth Street, Durham, N.C.; (919) 286-3609; $100. Dinner nightly except Sunday and Monday. Smoking in bar only.

Fishmonger's Restaurant and Oyster Bar, 806 West Main Street, Durham, N.C.; (919) 682-0128, www.fishmongers.net; $100. Lunch and dinner daily; smoking section.

Pop's, 810 West Peabody Street, Durham, N.C.; (919) 956-7677; $70. Lunch and dinner daily; smoking at the bar.

Fearrington House Restaurant and Country Inn, 2000 Fearrington Village Center, Pittsboro, N.C.; (919) 542-2121, www.fearrington.com. Dinner nightly except Monday; six-course prix-fixe menu $72 a person weekdays, $79 weekends, and does not include wine, about $7 a glass. No smoking.

Crook's Corner, 610 West Franklin Street, Chapel Hill, N.C.; (919) 929-7643, www.crookscorner.com; $70. Open nightly for dinner. Smoking on the patio.

BRYAN MILLER, a former restaurant critic for The Times, is restaurant editor for Citysearch.com

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/23/travel/23TAB.html?pagewanted=print&position=bottom

For more articles, see also: Website articles and pages

Why Do Cell Phones Damage Brain?

Research found that microwaves from cell phones damaged the blood-brain barrier, which prevents materials from the blood entering the brain. It could lead to disturbances, such as headaches, feeling tired or problems with sleeping.

By Robert Uhlig, Technology Correspondent
(Filed: June 06, 2002)

Normal levels of mobile phone radiation have for the first time been found to have a biological effect on human brain cells, according to a two-year study by government scientists.

Research by the Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority in Finland found that microwaves from cellphone handsets damaged the blood-brain barrier, which prevents materials from the blood entering the brain. It warned that this might have implications for human health.

However, Prof Darius Leszczynski, who led the team, said that the research had so far been conducted only in laboratory conditions.

He said: "We need further study looking at real people to see if the blood-brain barrier is affected. What is happening in the human brain is an enigma. If it did happen it could lead to disturbances, such as headaches, feeling tired or problems with sleeping."

Prof William Stewart, who chairs the British Government's expert group on mobile phone radiation, said the Finnish research should be taken seriously because it came from "a well-respected team at a well-respected institution".

He said: "Because it found changes to the blood-brain barrier it is an important finding, particularly bearing in mind that it involved a short period of exposure.

"But a biological effect does not necessarily imply a health risk and we need more work on human subjects."

The study, the first to look at the effects of mobile phone radiation on human cells rather than those of laboratory animals, is due to be presented at a conference in Canada this month.

Cells from blood vessel walls in the brain were placed in culture dishes and subjected in the laboratory to mobile phone radiation of two watts per kilogram, the maximum allowed internationally for mobile phones. After an hour's exposure biochemical changes were seen in the cells that could alter the activity of about 400 proteins.

In particular, one enzyme, called HSP 27, which helps to regulate blood-brain barrier permeability, was affected. Prof Leszczynski said HSP 27 affected structures in the cells called stress fibres. The distribution of stress fibres in turn affected leakage of the blood-brain barrier.

Prof Leszczynski said: "If the same thing happened in real life, in people, then it could affect blood-brain barrier permeability by increasing it." As a result, molecules that caused damage to neurons might be allowed to invade brain tissue.

"What I believe is that we will find these leaks occur in humans, too. What we do not know is the extent of these leaks and whether they have any effect on our health," said Prof Leszczynski.

He added that a French team also presenting findings at the conference had shown that blood-brain barrier leakage increased in rats exposed to mobile phone radiation.

But he added that it would be wrong to assume at this stage that mobile phones were hazardous to human health. It was possible that the human body might be able to cope with the effects.

Dr Michael Clarke, scientific spokesman at the National Radiological Protection Board, said: "It is important work and part of the jigsaw to see whether mobile phone radiation really has any health effect.

"But we need to remember that all sorts of things - tea, caffeine, red wine, sugar - have biological effects without necessarily damaging health."

More than 40 million people in Britain, many of them children, use mobile phones. The Government inquiry, led by Sir William, concluded two years ago that mobile phones posed no provable health risk but Sir William urged caution over the use of mobile phones by children until more was known about their impact on health.

In January, a new £7.4 million research programme was announced, backed by the Government and the mobile phone industry, to be managed by an international committee of experts led by Sir William.

The programme includes 15 studies that will seek clear conclusions about the health hazards of mobile phones, in particular fears of an association between cellphone radiation and brain cancer.

The Federation of Electronic Industries, which represents mobile phone makers and normally responds to health concerns regarding cellphone radiation, declined to comment.

Source: http://www.dailytelegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml

FINNISH STUDY

Cell-phone radiation 'might affect brain'

By The Straits Times

HELSINKI - A study by scientists in Finland has found that mobile-phone radiation can cause changes in human cells that might affect the brain, the leader of the research team said.

But Mr Darius Leszczynski, who headed the two-year study and will present findings next week at a conference in Quebec, said more research was needed to determine the seriousness of the changes and their impact on the brain or the body.

The study at Finland's Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (Stuk) found that exposure to radiation from mobile phones can increase activity in hundreds of proteins in human cells grown in a laboratory, he said.

'We know that there is some biological response. We can detect it with our very sensitive approaches, but we do not know whether it can have any physiological effects on the human brain or human body,' he said.

Nonetheless, the study, the initial findings of which were published last month in the scientific journal Differentiation, raises new questions about whether mobile-phone radiation can weaken the brain's protective shield against harmful substances.

The study focused on changes in cells that line blood vessels and on whether such changes could weaken the functioning of the blood-brain barrier which prevents potentially harmful substances from entering the brain from the blood stream, Mr Leszczynski said.

The study found that the functioning of the blood-brain barrier showed increased activity due to irradiation and pointed to a possibility that such activity could make the shield more permeable, he added.

Increased protein activity might cause cells to shrink and then tiny gaps could appear between those cells. Some molecules could pass through these gaps.

He declined to speculate on what kind of health risks that could pose, but said a French study indicated that headache, fatigue and sleep disorders could result.

'These are not life-threatening problems but can cause a lot of discomfort,' he said, adding that a Swedish group had also suggested a possible link with Alzheimer's disease.

Mr Leszczynski said that he, his wife and children use mobile phones, and he did not think his study suggested any need for new restrictions on mobile-phone use. --Reuter

Brain shield breached?

THE study found that radiation increases the activity level of a protein called hsp27, which is linked to the functioning of the blood-brain barrier, a shield which prevents potentially harmful substances from entering the brain from the blood stream.

There is a possibility that such activity could make the shield more permeable, and could result in headache, fatigue and sleep disorders.

Source: http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/cybernews/story/0,1870,127350,00.html?

For more articles, see also: Website articles and pages

Why Have Fat-Free Foods Caused American Obesity Epidemic?
Mon Jun 10, 2002 5:28 PM ET

The introduction of more than 5,000 low-fat and non-fat foods over the past decade has contributed to an epidemic of obesity in America, the American Heart Association (AHA) said on Monday.

By Suzanne Rostler

NEW YORK (Reuter Health) - The introduction of more than 5,000 low-fat and non-fat foods over the past decade has contributed to an epidemic of obesity in America, the American Heart Association (AHA) said on Monday.

The trouble comes when people think they can eat unlimited amounts of reduced-fat cookies, frozen yogurt and cakes. While these foods contain less fat than their full-fat versions, they tend to have more sugar and can be even higher in calories.

"Too often we forget about limiting the quantity when a product is promoted as low-fat," Dr. Judith Wylie-Rosett, the author of the paper, told Reuter Health.

She recommends that consumers read nutrition facts labels to compare the number of calories in each serving with the number of servings in the entire container of food. Choosing fresh produce and other fiber-rich foods allows a person to eat a large volume for relatively few calories because it promotes a feeling of fullness.

"Low-fat foods that provide more bulk and fiber may reduce the sensation of hunger for a longer period of time," said Wylie-Rosett, from Albert Einstein College of Medicine in the Bronx, New York.

Dr. Henry Anhalt, director of a children's weight-loss program at Maimonides Medical Center in Brooklyn, New York, advises patients to view fat-free and low-fat desserts the same way they view full-fat desserts--as an occasional treat.

The advice from health experts comes at a time when rates of obesity are unprecedented in the US and other countries. While Americans have followed the government's advice and reduced fat intake in the past half-century, they continue to pack on the pounds.

Studies have shown that the rate of obesity has doubled in the US in the last 20 years while the number of people with type 2 diabetes, a disease that can result from excess weight, increased by one-third during the 1990s. Children as young as 10 are now being diagnosed with type 2 diabetes, formerly known as adult-onset diabetes because it affected people in their 40s and older.

"It is a paradox that requires explanation," said Anhalt in an interview with Reuter Health. "One can only guess that the total number of calories in food has increased as food has become lower in fat."

The AHA's statement recommends that individuals who want to lose weight and maintain a healthy body weight follow the US government's food guide pyramid and pay particular attention to portion sizes. A serving of meat, for instance, is just 3 ounces or roughly the size of a deck of cards. A half-cup of pasta is equivalent to a serving of carbohydrate.

According to the pyramid, about 60% of a person's daily calorie count should come from carbohydrates such as whole grains, fruits and vegetables. No more than 30% of a person's daily calorie allotment should come from fat, of which no more than 10% should come from saturated fat found in animal products such as meat and whole-fat dairy foods. Protein-rich foods should account for about 15% of calories.

The AHA's statement also recommends that individuals avoid excessive amounts of fat substitutes such as olestra, which is found primarily in snack foods. Olestra passes through the body unabsorbed and can cause digestive problems, the authors note in the report published in the June 11th issue of Circulation: Journal of the American Heart Association.

It can also impair the absorption of certain nutrients such as vitamins D and E, and at present, it is not clear how olestra interacts with drugs and with other ingredients in food products.

Source: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20020610/hl_nm/food_fatfree_1

For more articles, see also: Website articles and pages

Why USDA Says High Carbohydrate Diet Best?
Mon Jun 3, 200211:57 PM ET

The key is eating a tried-but-true diet loaded with fruits, vegetables and whole grains such as wheat bread and brown rice, with smaller portions of lean meats, poultry and fish, according to a new study by the U.S. Department of Agriculture  (USDA).

By Jennifer Thomas
HealthScoutNews Reporter

MONDAY, June 3 (HealthScoutNews) -- The Atkins Diet. The Carbohydrate Addicts Diet. The Sugarbusters Diet.

Low-carbohydrate diets are all the rage among people trying to shed pounds.

However, new research says such diets aren't the solution to maintaining a healthy body weight and practicing good nutrition.

The key is eating a tried-but-true diet loaded with fruits, vegetables and whole grains such as wheat bread and brown rice, with smaller portions of lean meats, poultry and fish, according to a new study by the U.S. Department of Agriculture  (USDA).

In other words, a diet in which you get most of your calories from carbohydrates.

The reasoning is rather simple, says Shanthy Bowman, study author and a USDA nutritionist.

If you eat more calories than you burn, you gain weight. If you eat fewer calories than you burn, you lose weight. To maintain your weight, keep things in equilibrium.

In comparison to proteins or fats, carbohydrates tend to contain fewer calories for the same volume of food. That means a person who has a diet high in carbohydrates can eat more food than someone who eats mostly protein and fats -- all the while taking in less calories, Bowman says.

The study appears in the June issue of the Journal of the American College of Nutrition.

Researchers used data from the USDA's Continuing Survey of Food Intakes By Individuals 1994-1996, which includes self-reported food consumption information from 10,014 adults nationwide who weren't on diets. The people were divided into four groups based on carbohydrate intake: those whose diets contained less than 30 percent; 30 percent to 45 percent; 45 percent to 55 percent; and more than 55 percent.

The researchers found the people in the highest group consumed, on average, about 200 calories less per day while eating the same amount of food. The high-carb group ate an average of 1,840 calories daily. The low-carb group ate, on average, 2,031 calories daily, Bowman says.

The high-carb group also had the lowest body mass index (BMI), a ratio of their weight to height.

Fifty-nine percent of women and 45 percent of men in the high-carb group had a BMI of less than 25, considered a healthy weight. In the low-carb group, 45 percent of women and 35 percent of men had a BMI of less than 25.

Not only did they weigh less, their diets were more nutritious, Bowman says.

"The high carb group ate more fruit than the other groups," Bowman adds. "Their strategy was to choose foods high in water content and dietary fiber, and also choose foods that are low in fat. That way they were able to eat more food without sacrificing variety."

Sheah Rarback, a spokeswoman for the American Dietetic Association, says she's not surprised by the findings.

"If you're eating a diet that's high in carbs, there's the possibility for eating a lot of fruits, vegetables and grains," Rarback says.

So, how can you eat a diet that's high in carbs?

Rarback says a good rule of thumb is to eat at least five servings of fruits and vegetables a day. When choosing grains, opt for whole grains such as brown rice or wheat bread.

One thing to note: In all the groups in the study, the third biggest source of daily caloric intake was beverages -- alcohol, soft drinks and sweetened fruit drinks. In all the groups, about 10 percent to 14 percent of calories came from beverages.

For people trying to slim down, Bowman recommends cutting back on these high-calorie drinks.

Source: http://story.news.yahoo.com/

For more articles, see also: Website articles and pages

May 28, 2002

Why Did "Cooking" Make Us Human and Keep Us Married?

In the view of Dr. Richard W. Wrangham, a professor of anthropology at Harvard, the preparing, cooking and sociable eating of food are so central to the human experience that the culinary arts may well be what made us human in the first place.

By NATALIE ANGIER, NY TImes

Among virtually every culture on earth, anything worth doing is best done over dinner. Bring out a nicely braised roast, a hot loaf of bread and a slice of, oh, lemon chess pie, and rifts can be healed, pacts sealed, loves revealed. Even the condemned do not want to leave this world without one really divine last supper.

In the view of Dr. Richard W. Wrangham, a professor of anthropology at Harvard, the preparing, cooking and sociable eating of food are so central to the human experience that the culinary arts may well be what made us human in the first place.

Dr. Wrangham, who is renowned for his studies of chimpanzees, and of male aggression generally, proposes that the use of fire to cook food could date back almost 2 million years, a good 1.5 million years before the timing traditionally accorded it. He also suggests that the capacity to cook food could explain a wide array of hominid features, including a large brain, small teeth, a relative modesty of size difference, or sexual dimorphism, between men and women, and a tendency to pair up and put up with each other far longer than most primates do.

The theory has sparked a kind of pun-happy food fight among anthropologists, with some deriding it as "half-cooked" and causing "a good case of indigestion." But others toast its boldness.

"I feel a real harmony with a lot of his argument," said Dr. Kristin Hawkes, an anthropologist at the University of Utah. "It's so nice to have a set of alternative ideas to the conventional wisdom."

Dr. James F. O'Connell, another anthropologist at the University of Utah said, "The ability to cook food opened a very large niche for people, allowing them to eat foods they couldn't eat before, and to be in places they couldn't exploit before."

But Dr. C. Loring Brace, an anthropologist at the University of Michigan, argued that there was no good evidence that cooking was older than a quarter of a million years, and that many of the changes in the hominid line that Dr. Wrangham attributes to the discovery of cooking are much better explained by improvements in hunting technology. Dr. Wrangham "didn't check with enough of the right people before putting this idea into print," Dr. Brace said.

Dr. Wrangham initially presented the theory in the December 1999 issue of Current Anthropology, in a paper written with Dr. James Holland Jones, Dr. David Pilbeam and Dr. NancyLou Conklin-Brittain of Harvard and Dr. Greg Laden of the University of Minnesota. Dr. Wrangham has continued to elaborate on the thesis, most recently as a chapter in a newly published book, "Tree of Origin: What Primate Behavior Can Tell Us About Human Social Evolution," and online, in an extended interview on The Edge, an intellectual "salon" for scientists and their devotees.

While Dr. Wrangham admits that there is no "smoking gun" among the scant remains of humanity's ancient forebears — nothing akin to the evidence found in comparatively recent archaeological sites of repeatedly used hearthplaces, with their charred blocks and roasted animal bones. He points out, however, that most campfires set by traditional hunter-gatherers are small and fleeting affairs, which would not be expected to leave a strong signature over a million years and counting.

More to the point, he argues that many experts have failed to appreciate that the most salient dietary difference between humans and other species: they go for raw; we like it hot. "There's no record anywhere of any people who have lived without cooking," he said. Indeed, it was while he was staring at a campfire and imagining how hard life would be without fire that Dr. Wrangham came up with the first glimmers of the cooking hypothesis.

"I am an ecologist, and I think about how animals get their food, and what impact that has on their lives," he said. "I also know that primates are hungry all the time, and always desperate for a better meal."

What a revolution it must have been, he realized, that primal wielding of the saucepan. Not only does cooking make food delicious, it also makes it safer and more digestible, the better to extract the maximum number of calories from any given meal. Cooking bursts open the cells of foods and releases their nutritious innards; it breaks down long, tough chains of proteins and carbohydrates into simpler and more digestible sugars and peptides; and it detoxifies many of the defensive and potentially sickening compounds in plants, as well as killing many dangerous meat-borne microbes.

Surveying the literature, Dr. Wrangham and his colleagues determined that of the 48 types of roots, tubers and other potatolike plant foods eaten by humanity's foraging African forebears, 21 require cooking to be comestible. Other experts have calculated that when starchy foods like soybeans, potatoes and cassavas are cooked, they offer 75 to 100 percent more digestible calories than they do when eaten raw.

The nutritional benefits of cooking, they hypothesized, must have left extraordinary marks on hominid anatomy. Teeth would no longer have needed to chew their food so vigorously, and so would have gotten smaller, and the jaw itself probably followed. The gut and rib cage would also have downsized. "We don't need large fermentation chambers to break down long-chain carbohydrates," Dr. Wrangham said. "Cooking helps predigest our food."

By contrast, with all the extra calories that could be wrested from a meal, brain and overall body size would be expected to increase.

Yet when the researchers looked at what was happening to human anatomy at the time commonly proposed as the dawn of fine dining, 300,000 or so years ago, there was no evidence for changes like these.

To find the drastic bodily transformations that they thought must have resulted from a steep improvement in nutrition, the researchers had to go back 1.9 million years, when humanity's ancestors shifted from being small-brained, jut-jawed australopithecines to being cortically enhanced, small-faced and modestly dentitioned Homo erectus, the immediate predecessors to modern humans.

That evolutionary leap, from australopithecine to Homo, was so extraordinary that it demands explanation, Dr. Wrangham said, and the party line, that it resulted from hominids' learning to hunt big game, doesn't work.

For one thing, there is evidence that australopithecines had been hunting large mammals for at least 600,000 years before the evolution of Homo erectus — why such a long delay? For another, if meat spelled the difference, why did the teeth of Homo erectus get so small and round? Carnivores generally have large, pointy teeth. Homo teeth are rather like big baby teeth, he said, designed to eat softened food.

The researchers observed yet another significant change that occurred with the onset of H. erectus: the male is a tiny bit bigger than the australopithecine male, but the Homo erectus woman is full 60 percent taller and heavier than her female predecessor, an impressive discrepancy equivalent to the difference between a modern 10-year-old girl and a woman. So whatever happened at the evolutionary dividing line, females apparently reaped the greatest benefits: they were eating enough to get bigger, and among females, bigger generally means more fecund.

As a result of the asymmetrical expansion of females, the sexual dimorphism in the Homo line is much smaller than it was among our australopithecine ancestors. And that, Dr. Wrangham said, suggests the males were no longer under selective pressure to get bigger themselves. Because it is generally competition with other males that drives the need for male bulk, the transition to the Homo era must have brought with it the origins of the distinctly human pair bond. Males were no longer required to spend so much time fighting for females because something roughly and imperfectly approaching monogamy had entered into the mathematics of human mating.

If cooking seriously changed hominid proportions, might it have had a similarly radical impact on human behavior? Dr. Wrangham proposes that the need for people to gather food and bring it en masse to a kitchen-equivalent meant that thieves and cheats would have a comparatively richer opportunity to steal food. Males and females would have benefited from pairing up and defending their stocks together. Thus was born the hearth, the home, the nuclear family and the romantic, overpriced candlelit dinner.

As much as Dr. Wrangham admits that the evidence for ancient cooking is weak, it is not, he said, nonexistent. In some African sites, he said, anthropologists have found reddened patches of dirt dating back 1.6 million years that could be evidence of cooking fires.

Dr. Brace and other critics have dismissed these discoveries as red herrings. Some are probably not fire ash at all, Dr. Brace said, but traces of the metal manganese that have been misinterpreted for years. Other patches may indeed be the signature of antediluvian fires — set by lightning, not enterprising chefs. "Where the evidence of fire does occur, it indicates fires of huge temperatures, hundreds of degrees," he said. "These are not anthropogenic barbecues."

Dr. O'Connell of the University of Utah suggested that new studies now under way might resolve the question of how these fires began. The reddened patches are being scrutinized for their composition of so-called phytoliths, hard little silica particles found in plants, including wood products. If the phytolith signature in a given area proves to be the remnants of one type of plant, that would suggest the natural burning of a large tree, or a stand of bushes. If the signature is more diverse, it may be the result of various types of firewood being brought to the spot for a campfire.

Other researchers who doubt that early Homo erectus knew how to cook food nonetheless agree with Dr. Wrangham that the role of cooking in human affairs has been woefully neglected — perhaps because the men who historically have been anthropology's grand hypothesizers are unaccustomed to wearing an apron.

Dr. Sonia Ragir, an anthropologist at the College of Staten Island of the City University of New York, has argued that cooking did benefit women preferentially, though at a much later time in evolution than Dr. Wrangham believes. As she sees it, the increase in stature seen among archaic females occurred slowly, and picked up steam only toward the end of Homo erectus's reign, just about when cooking is thought to have taken hold.

Women, Dr. Ragir said, being burdened with children and thus less mobile than men, were the likely keepers of the tribal flame. As they tended the fire and cooked the meat and tubers, they could sample the food with impunity. "Women would have had access to food before it was distributed to everybody in the group," she said. "I call it the nibbling theory of human evolution."

And once snacking had been invented, all the glories of human civilization were bound to follow.

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/28/science/social/28COOK.html

For more articles, see also: Website articles and pages

May 28, 2002

By JANE E. BRODY,  NY Times

I slowed down as I approached a fork in the highway, unsure of which arm to take. The driver behind me was on my tail, so impatient that he tried to pass me on the right just as I headed for the right fork, forcing him to slam on his brakes.

He became so infuriated that he pulled right in front of my car and each time I moved he repeatedly slammed on his brakes, forcing me to brake suddenly again and again, endangering not only me but himself and the driver behind me.

While his road rage was short of a shooting, it was rage nonetheless and extremely unnerving.

I consoled myself by thinking that he most likely had frequent temper tantrums and probably would die of a heart attack or stroke at an early age — if someone didn't kill him first.

Dr. Norman Rosenthal, a psychiatrist in the Washington area and an expert on depression and anger, says drivers who repeatedly tailgate, trying to pressure the cars in front to move faster or get out of the way, "are always sitting on their arteries," which constrict in response to stress hormones that spew forth from their adrenal glands.

"These people live on a razor's edge," he continued, "always vigilant and tense, angry because they want to get someplace quicker and think that they can somehow clear the highway."

It is hard to say whether rage is now more common than it used to be or we are simply now more aware of it, given high-profile cases like mass shootings by children and evidence that chronically angry people endanger their health, their jobs and their personal relationships.

For example, in a 25-year follow-up study of University of North Carolina medical students, Dr. John Barefoot, now at Duke, found that those who scored highest in hostility on a standard personality test were nearly five times as likely to die of heart disease as their less hostile classmates.

In a similar study Dr. Barefoot did among law students, those who scored highest in hostility had more than a fourfold risk of dying within the next 25 years.

"People with short fuses are often very self-righteous and unsympathetic about the effect of their anger on other people," said Dr. Rosenthal, author of a new book on the science of feelings, "The Emotional Revolution" (Citadel Press, $25). "Angry people don't come into psychiatrists' offices. They think it's everyone else's problem — obnoxious boss, difficult wife, incompetent employees."

Certainly the time pressures built into many modern lives — urban, suburban and rural — give many opportunities for latent anger to erupt. But that does not mean frequent hostile outbursts are either inevitable or productive. As Dr. Rosenthal wrote, "In most everyday situations we are more likely to pay a greater price for losing our temper than for not getting our licks in quickly enough."

The advice to count to 10, and if you're still angry, count to 100 before you take any action is far from an old wive's tale.

Waiting until you cool down to respond is only one of many effective strategies. Most valuable is to curb the tendency to get angry in the first place.

What Makes You Angry?

The first step in reducing hostile tendencies is to recognize how hostile you may be and the distorted thoughts and beliefs that give rise to angry outbursts.

Are you cynical? Do you think that most people cannot be trusted, are mostly out for their own personal gain, would lie to get ahead, know less than they pretend to know, use people chiefly for what they can get from them, exaggerate their misfortunes, don't really care what happens to you and do the right thing only when it suits them?

Do you think most people have hostile motivations? Do you think they are likely to misunderstand the way you do things, are nice to you only when they have an ulterior motive, have something against you, treat you unfairly, are critical of you, talk about you in a negative way, are jealous of your good ideas and fail to give you proper credit for your contributions?

Do you often experience feelings of hostility, getting irritated or angry easily, often getting into arguments?

Dr. Rosenthal said the driver who kept threatening me appeared to attribute hostile motives to other people. In his mind I deliberately made his life difficult and he was determined to teach me a lesson.

"Different triggers provoke different people," he wrote. "Bad traffic, slow waiters, an insensitive boss, an incompetent employee or an inattentive spouse are all common provocations for angry people."

Furthermore, he said, common misperceptions often fuel anger. Some people, especially those who are depressed, see hostility where it does not exist. They believe — incorrectly — that others feel hostile or critical toward them and tend to defend themselves, in the process actually provoking hostility and a vicious cycle of anger.

Others operate from a misperception that the world should be other than it is and become enraged when beset by the ordinary hassles and inconveniences of everyday life — an airport delay, a traffic jam, a person who breaks into a line.

Dr. Rosenthal told of a friend who was often angered by long red lights and whose wife "reminds him gently that the red light doesn't care, so he might as well save his fury." The psychiatrist noted that "it is easier to change your expectations and recognize that life is often neither fair nor easy than it is to change the world."

Sometimes chemical influences — like excessive caffeine, steroids, diet drugs and antidepressants — foster irritability. If medications may be contributing to your anger, discuss this possibility with your physician.

Curbing Hostility

When small children act up, parents these days are likely to give them a "timeout." Likewise, people prone to anger need time to calm down and collect their thoughts.

Sometimes, Dr. Rosenthal said, this literally means turning the other cheek — "physically moving away from the person who is provoking the anger."

Only with time and distance may it be possible to respond appropriately, with wit, diplomacy, or proper assertiveness.

"Sometimes the cause of the anger may need to be addressed; at other times it might be better left alone," Dr. Rosenthal said.

Just because you fail to respond immediately to a provocation does not mean you are "giving in" and allowing the person to offend you again and again.

You will be much more effective at changing offensive behavior if you wait until you can discuss things calmly and rationally. Keep in mind that even if your anger is fully justified, blowing your top can still cost you; you may lose your job, your spouse or your health.

Once you recognize what makes you mad, change the messages you give yourself, Dr. Rosenthal suggests.

For example, you might rehearse the idea that just because some people are rude doesn't mean you must let them get to you. Instead, respect yourself for being a competent and polite person.

Finding something funny in the situation and distractions like listening to the radio or to a tape of a book while stuck in traffic can often be effective antidotes to anger.

Finally, learn how to let go of anger by soothing your body through deep breathing and muscle relaxation. Listening to music and even aromatherapy can be helpful to calm an overactive nervous system.

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/28/health/psychology/28BROD.html

For more articles, see also: Website articles and pages

Why are physical attractiveness, social level and kindness most important in mate selection?
Wed May 29, 2002 5:35 PM ET

Overall, for both men and women, a person's physical attractiveness, social level and kindness were key to their being accepted or rejected as a potential mate. Men also considered a woman's liveliness as a crucial factor, the report indicates.

By Charnicia E. Huggins

NEW YORK (Reuter Health) - The idea that men are interested in a woman's beauty while women are interested in the size of a man's wallet is overly simplistic, according to new study findings.

The truth is, though attractiveness and income may indeed be factors of interest, qualities such as kindness and creativity are also very important, researchers report.

Norman P. Li, a PhD candidate at Arizona State University, and his colleagues studied two groups of undergraduate men and women who were given a budget of "mate" dollars and told to spend the appropriate amount on the qualities most important to them.

When under budget constraints, women placed the most importance--meaning they spent the highest proportion of their mate dollars--on intelligence or kindness and yearly income/social level, whereas men placed the most importance on physical attractiveness and intelligence, the investigators report in the June issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

"Everyone really wants a well-rounded mate, but physical attractiveness matters first and social status matters first to men and women, respectively," Li explained.

Yet, when given additional income to spend on luxuries, men and women did not allocate more dollars towards physical attractiveness and social status, respectively, but rather added qualities such as creativity and special non-work talents.

"At a low budget you really can't have it all," Li said, so "you tend to spend money on necessities; when you start getting more money, you spend towards luxuries."

Lastly, the investigators conducted a third study in which they asked 58 undergraduates to participate in a computer activity to choose the qualities most essential to them in a mate.

Similar to the previous two study findings, women chose social level first, with kindness as a close second. For men, physical attractiveness and kindness topped the list.

Overall, for both men and women, a person's physical attractiveness, social level and kindness were key to their being accepted or rejected as a potential mate. Men also considered a woman's liveliness as a crucial factor, the report indicates.

"If you want to find a mate, you don't have to be the most physically attractive or the richest," Li said.

SOURCE: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2002;82:947-955.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20020529/hl_nm/kindness_intelligence_1

For more articles, see also: Website articles and pages

New Viagra for 24-36 Hours Erection
Mon May 27, 2002 4:26 AM ET

Patients in the study reported success in achieving erections lasting from 24 hours to as long as 36 hours after taking a 20-milligram pill of Cialis.

By MARK JEWELL, Associated Press Writer

INDIANAPOLIS (AP) - A yet-to-be-approved impotence drug developed by Eli Lilly and Co. and Icos Corp. appears to be longer-lasting than Viagra, the companies said, citing a study being released at a medical conference.

Patients in the study reported success in achieving erections lasting from 24 hours to as long as 36 hours after taking a 20-milligram pill of Cialis, said Indianapolis-based Lilly and Bothell, Wash.-based Icos on Saturday.

The study did not compare Cialis' effects directly with those of Viagra, the $1.2 billion-a-year drug for erectile dysfunction that Pfizer Inc. introduced in 1998.

"There are other studies that have looked at the length of the duration of Viagra's effects, and usually it's in the eight-to-12 hour range maximum," Dr. Raymond Rosen, the author of the Cialis study, said in a phone interview.

Results of the peer-reviewed, final-phase study were to be released on Monday at the American Urological Association conference in Orlando, Fla.

The study, funded by Lilly and Icos, involved 348 men with mild to severe erectile dysfunction who were given either a placebo or Cialis over eight weeks.

Patients were asked to attempt intercourse with their partners on two occasions 24 hours after taking a dose, and on two occasions after 36 hours.

About 59 percent of the patients reported positive effects in their ability to have sex after 36 hours.

Cialis (pronounced see-ALL-iss) "showed a consistent effect at both time points," said Rosen, a human sexuality researcher at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey and a psychologist. "Also, in this study, the duration of effectiveness did not appear to influence the incidence or severity or side effects."

The most commonly reported side effects include headaches and upset stomachs, with less than 2 percent of patients dropping out of the study because of side effects.

Dr. Gerald Brock, an associate professor of urology at the University of West Ontario, said the findings that Cialis' effects are longer-lasting than Viagra's are significant because many patients report that the window during which Viagra is effective hinders their sex life.

"With Cialis, the vast majority of the men, even at 36 hours, are still going to have sexual function," said Brock, who was not involved in the Cialis study. "I think that dramatically results in an improvement in spontaneity for couples to have sex on their own time schedule."

Rosen attributes Cialis' longer-term effects to a difference in the rate at which it is chemically active in the bloodstream and eliminated from the body compared with Viagra.

The drugs work in a similar fashion by targeting the same enzyme that can increase blood flow to the penis. But they have different molecular structures, Rosen said.

Lilly and Icos developed Cialis in a joint venture. The companies had hoped to win marketing approval this year. But that has been pushed back to next year after the Food and Drug Administration (news - web sites) last month said it would require additional studies before deciding on approval.

The companies have said they expect Cialis' label will warn against use by some patients with heart problems.

Pfizer officials could not be reached for comment Saturday on the Cialis findings.

However, Pfizer spokesman Geoff Cook said in March that the company expects the emergence of competing erectile dysfunction drugs will only boost its fortunes.

"We strongly believe the competition is going to grow the market," Cook said. "This condition still has a stigma attached to it.

Bayer Corp. also is awaiting FDA approval for another impotence treatment, vardenafil.

Source: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020527/ap_on_he_me/anti_impotence_drug_3

Impotence Drug Works For 36 Hours
Tue May 28, 200210:35 AM ET

By Emma Hitt, PhD

ORLANDO (Reuter Health) - Men with erectile dysfunction can have sexual intercourse for up to 36 hours after taking a single dose of an experimental drug called tadalafil (Cialis), according to new study findings released here Sunday.

Tadalafil provides an advantage to couples by making sex more spontaneous, "because a person doesn't have to take the pill just before having sex," commented Dr. Hartmut Porst of the University of Hamburg, Germany, who presented the findings at the American Urological Association's annual meeting.

Porst and colleagues enrolled 348 men with mild to severe erectile dysfunction in 36 centers in Europe and the United States. Patients received either 20 milligrams of tadalafil or an inactive placebo over about 8 weeks.

During the study, patients were asked to attempt intercourse with their partners on four occasions: twice 24 hours after taking the pill and twice 36 hours after taking it.

About 60% of patients taking tadalafil were able to maintain an erection sufficient for sexual intercourse at 24 hours and 36 hours after taking the pill, compared with about 30% of patients taking the placebo.

The researchers also evaluated penetration ability, hardness of erection and overall satisfaction, and found that tadalafil was more effective than placebo at 24 and 36 hours after dosing.

"Some of my patients tell me that they are still able to perform sexual intercourse 3 days after taking one pill," Porst noted during a press conference.

According to Porst, patients can take tadalafil every day because the drug does not reach toxic levels in the body.

Indigestion, flushing, and headache were the most common side effects, but these were generally mild and decreased as the patients continued to use the drug, Porst said.

The study was funded by the manufacturers of the drug, Lilly ICOS. In April, the US Food and Drug Administration issued an approvable letter to Lilly ICOS for tadalafil, which means the regulator may approve the drug pending the results of additional studies. Lilly ICOS said it expects to launch the drug in the US in 2003.

Source: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20020528/hl_nm/sex_impotence_1

For more articles, see also: Website articles and pages

TRIAD STAGE THEATRE

For more articles, see also: Website articles and pages

How can a woman tell if her man is unfaithful?
Wed May 22, 2002  2:09 PM ET

Women interested in knowing whether their men are likely to stray should find out their testosterone levels.

LONDON (Reuter) - Women interested in knowing whether their men are likely to stray should find out their testosterone levels.

In birds, low levels of the male hormone encourage fidelity while higher levels mean they are more likely to play the field, and the same could hold true for humans.

Scientists at Harvard University have discovered that married men who spend time with their family have lower testosterone levels than bachelors.

When anthropologist Peter Gray and his colleagues measured testosterone levels of 58 men they found that levels dropped after a natural peak in the morning but the decrease was more prominent in the married men than in bachelors.

"And fathers seem to show an even more dramatic difference from unmarried men," Gray told New Scientist magazine on Wednesday.

So devoted dads, who are less likely to stray, probably have lower testosterone levels.

Gray believes it could work both ways. Lower levels encourage men to spend time with their family and being in a family may lower the hormone levels.

In his next project, he plans to study levels of the hormone in men separated from their wives but who have joint custody of their children to separate the impact of marriage from parenting.

Source: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20020522/sc_nm/health_testosterone_dc_1
 

For more articles, see also: Website articles and pages

May 14, 2002

By JANE E. BRODY, NY Times

Colorize your diet. That is the latest advice from nutrition experts who have studied the health-promoting properties of the vast spectrum of colorful fruits and vegetables now available throughout the country.

Two recently published books — "What Color Is Your Diet?" (Regan Books, $25), by Dr. David Heber, director of the Center for Human Nutrition at the University of California at Los Angeles, with Susan Bowerman, a dietitian, and "The Color Code" (Hyperion, $22.95) by Dr. James A. Joseph, Dr. Daniel A. Nadeau and Anne Underwood — emphasize the importance of increasing consumption of fruits and vegetables, and the need to choose broadly among the richly colored options.

This is not hard to do, and the payoff in terms of health — and weight — can be considerable. Nearly all fruits and vegetables are naturally very low in fat, replete with filling fiber and loaded with natural chemicals that can help protect against heart disease, cancer and age-related cognitive decline, cataracts and macular degeneration.

To me there is nothing more beautiful and tempting in a modern market than the expansive array of colorful produce, their vivid skins all the more enticing because of their health-promoting benefits. And even the paler members of this community — garlic, onions, leeks, cabbage, celery and the like — have notable health-promoting virtues.

Fruits and vegetables come closer than any other category of food to behaving like a fountain of youth. Each one is power-packed with plant-based chemicals, or phytonutrients, that can help to prevent or even reverse one or more chronic, debilitating and often deadly diseases.

For a detailed account of the protective chemicals nature has bestowed upon various fruits and vegetables and how these chemicals can help you as well as the plants they come in, consult "The Color Code." This book and "What Color Is Your Diet?" also provide tempting recipes to encourage an increased intake of produce, which should add up to 9 or 10 servings a day. No doubt you have encountered government health experts' "five-a-day" campaign, currently achieved by at most a third of the population, and now I am saying double that, based on the findings that are coming in. If you check the Food Pyramid, you will see that five servings a day of fruits and vegetables is the bare minimum recommended to achieve a wholesome diet; nine servings or more are optimal for health maintenance.

But merely counting servings may not even be adequate if, these experts now say, you are missing out on one or more major color categories.

"Not all members of the fruit and vegetable group are alike," Dr. Heber says. "They have unique properties that provide combinations of substances with unique effects on human biology. Therefore, simply eating five servings a day of fruits and vegetables will not guarantee that you are eating enough of the different substances needed to stimulate the metabolic pathways of genes in the different organs where fruits and vegetables have their beneficial effects."

The Virtues of Color

"Pigment power" is what it is all about, say the authors of "The Color Code," who divide fruits and vegetables into four broad color groups: red, orange-yellow, green and blue-purple, each with a different set of beneficial phytonutrients. Dr. Heber, who is more of a "splitter," groups them into seven color categories, as follows:

Red, including tomatoes (especially cooked tomato products), pink grapefruit and watermelon, which are rich in the carotenoid lycopene, a potent scavenger of gene-damaging free radicals that seems to protect against prostate cancer as well as heart and lung disease.

Red/purple, including red and blue grapes, blueberries, strawberries, beets, eggplant, red cabbage, red peppers, plums and red apples, which are loaded with powerful antioxidants called anthocyanins believed to delay cellular aging and help the heart by blocking the formation of blood clots. Dr. Heber includes red wine in this category.

Orange, including carrots, mangoes, cantaloupe, winter squash and sweet potatoes, rich in the cancer-fighter alpha carotene, along with beta carotene that protects the skin against free-radical damage and promotes repair of damaged DNA.

Orange/yellow, including oranges, peaches, papaya and nectarines, which provide beta cryptothanxin, which supports intracellular communication and may help prevent heart disease.

Yellow/green, including spinach, collards, corn, green peas, avocado and honeydew, which are sources of the carotenoids lutein and zeaxanthin. These are strongly linked to a reduced risk of cataracts and age-related macular degeneration, the leading cause of preventable blindness in developed countries.

Green, including broccoli, brussels sprouts, cabbage, kale and bok choy. These are rich in cancer-blocking chemicals like sulforaphane, isocyanate and indoles, which inhibit the action of carcinogens.

White/green, including garlic, onions, leeks, celery, asparagus, pears and green grapes. The onion family contains allicin, which has antitumor properties. Other foods in this group contain antioxidant flavonoids like quercetin and kaempferol. Dr. Heber includes white wine in this category.

Eating by Color

The trick, these experts say, is to include as many plant-based colors in your daily diet as possible. In many cases, that means eating the colorful skins, the richest sources of protective phytonutrients, along with the paler flesh. So try to avoid peeling foods like apples, peaches and eggplant lest you lose their most concentrated source of beneficial chemicals.

Getting in 10 servings a day of produce is not that difficult, once you realize what a serving is. It is one medium apple, banana or orange, half a grapefruit, a quarter of a cantaloupe, a cup of raw leafy vegetables, half a cup of cooked or chopped raw vegetable or fruit and six ounces of fruit or vegetable juice.

If you start your day with juice, add fruit to your breakfast cereal, yogurt, pancakes or French toast; snack on whole fruit, fruit salad or vegetables like baby carrots; have a big salad with lunch or dinner; drink a vegetable or fruit juice before or with your meals; dine on main courses that include stir-fried, stewed, grilled or steamed vegetables and include fruit in your dessert, you will readily achieve and even surpass the 10-a-day goal without overdosing on calories. Dr. Heber has produced a revised version of the Food Pyramid, placing fruits and vegetables at the base, with grain-based foods above them.

My favorite home supper is a huge salad that typically includes spinach, richly colored lettuce, arugula, red pepper, avocado, asparagus and tomatoes, topped by a lean source of protein: slivered grilled chicken or turkey breast, pork, beef, salmon or tuna, cooked beans or a sliced hard-boiled egg. With a slice of whole-grain bread, a glass of vegetable juice or red wine and melon for dessert, I have got a full dinner and at least six of my day's produce servings.

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/14/health/14BROD.html?pagewanted=print&position=bottom

For more articles, see also: Website articles and pages

Why Breast-Fed Babies Have Higher IQ's?
Tue May 7, 2002 4:01 PM ET

Breast-fed babies may grow up to be smarter adults, according to research that bolsters the evidence linking nursing and intelligence. The link can probably be explained by the effect of nutrients in mothers' milk on the developing brain and benefits from the close physical and psychological relationship breast-feeding involves, researchers said. Mothers who take time to breast-feed may spend more time interacting with their youngsters throughout childhood, which also could affect intelligence, the researchers said.

By LINDSEY TANNER, AP Medical Writer

CHICAGO (AP) - Breast-fed babies may grow up to be smarter adults, according to research that bolsters the evidence linking nursing and intelligence.

Most previous studies did not measure breast-feeding's effects on IQ into adulthood, and the few that did so ignored factors such as parents' education and social status, said the researchers, who took such variables into account.

In their study of 3,253 Danish men and women, the more babies were breast-fed through 9 months of age, the higher they scored on intelligence tests in their late teens and 20s. Breast-feeding past 9 months had no additional effect on scores.

The link can probably be explained by the effect of nutrients in mothers' milk on the developing brain and benefits from the close physical and psychological relationship breast-feeding involves, researchers said. Mothers who take time to breast-feed may spend more time interacting with their youngsters throughout childhood, which also could affect intelligence, the researchers said.

In the study, mothers had been questioned about their breast-feeding practices when their youngsters were a year old.

Those who had been breast-fed for seven to nine months scored an average of about six points higher on IQ tests than those whose mothers said they nursed for less than one month.

That gap "is not the difference between an Einstein and a mentally retarded child," said study director June Machover Reinisch. But she said it could be the difference "between normal and bright-normal, or bright-normal and superior."

Reinisch is director emeritus of the Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender and Reproduction.

The study appears in Wednesday's Journal of the American Medical Association (news - web sites).

The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that babies be breast-fed exclusively for their first six months, citing evidence that breast milk is nutritionally superior, reduces the incidence of infection and may enhance mental development.

Few participants in the latest study had been bottle-fed exclusively, though about 1,000 had nursed for less than a month.

The study was funded in part with grants from the National Institutes of Health (news - web sites).

Malla Rao, a scientist at the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, said that the study overlooked factors that could help explain the results — such as whether participants had dropped out of school — but that the findings agree with those of most previous studies.

Source: www.yahoo.com

For more articles, see also: Website articles and pages

May 8, 2002

A Duke University study showed that women with mild depression were 40 percent less likely to die prematurely than women who were not depressed, or than those with severe depression. Single women can now call off the exhausting and maddening hunt for Mr. Right. Mr. Right would bring bliss — and an early grave. But women will also have to try harder to avoid Mr. Wrong. Mr. Wrong, or a series of Mr. Wrongs, would lead to a slough of despond — and an early grave.

By MAUREEN DOWD, NY Times

WASHINGTON — I was feeling pretty happy, in a guilty-pleasure sort of way. It was a banner week for schadenfreude.

First the tumble of the arrogant colossus, AOL Time Warner; then the unraveling of the imperious Hollywood Svengali Michael Ovitz; finally the news that the batrachian Enron executives may do time for manipulating energy markets in California.

As in Greek myths: Hubris gets its just deserts.

AOL Time Warner was the humongous beast that got a stomachache trying to gobble up everything in sight. The Internet crowd was in the throes of a narcissistic and economic explosion two years ago. It treated its partners — such as Time, People, InStyle, Fortune, HBO and CNN — contemptuously, even though they provide most of the conglomerate's products. The dot-com cabal dismissed content as the vestige of an obsolete universe.

But now that the company has lost $54 billion in the first quarter, we must ask: What is AOL, anyhow? Isn't it just cyberspace tin cans strung together?

AOL placed a losing bet that the bottle was more important than the wine. The universe is not so easy to master, after all.

Maybe Mike Ovitz and the hotshots of AOL and Enron, all those emperors of etherea, those peddlers of pseudo-services, will have to get real jobs now.

I was reading the paper, gloating that the puffed-up were not prospering, when I learned that my glee could kill me. Happiness could be unhealthy.

Articles detailed new research indicating that a pale shade of the blues may actually be good for women's longevity. A Duke University study showed that women with mild depression were 40 percent less likely to die prematurely than women who were not depressed, or than those with severe depression.

This was going to require some tricky calibrations in our personal lives.

Single women can now call off the exhausting and maddening hunt for Mr. Right. Mr. Right would bring bliss — and an early grave.

But women will also have to try harder to avoid Mr. Wrong. Mr. Wrong, or a series of Mr. Wrongs, would lead to a slough of despond — and an early grave.

For the sake of our health, women will now have to look for Mr. Slightly Wrong, someone a little annoying, a man who can modify, qualify, deflect and overturn our happiness just enough so that we wake up not happy and not sad. We must find men who leave us with a sense of malaise, but who don't leave us.

O.K., I thought, I'll find Mr. Slightly Wrong and live very long.

But then I read about the Attack of the Killer Potatoes. Swedish researchers found out that frying spuds spurs the formation of a carcinogenic molecule.

French fries and potato chips are my major food group. I've downed enough Pringles to shingle Versailles.

Now I was really depressed. My life was rapidly growing shorter.

I pondered psychopharmacology: I could lift my unhealthy deep depression to a restorative mild one by taking an itty bit of Prozac.

But then I spied the front page of The Washington Post, which reported that sugar pills may work just as well as Prozac, Paxil and Zoloft.

So maybe I'll just put sugar in my tea, a beverage that dramatically reduces the chance of death following a heart attack, according to another new study this week.

Besides, the Duke research implied that anti-depressants would lull me into not fixing the problems in my life, and thereby shorten my life by making me too happy.

My imperative was clear: I had to dwell on the sad things with silver linings, at least if I wanted to stick around to keep being moderately saddened by them.

The new research sounds like the old Catskills joke: Restaurant-goers complain that the food is awful — and the portions are too small.

As much as boomers cherish age-attenuating measures, maybe it's better just to be happy, quickly. In the opera "The Makropoulos Case" a 16-year-old is given a magic elixir by her father that allows her to live for three centuries. When we meet her she is a ravishing 337-year-old opera singer, bored with fawning men and perpetual reruns.

That is when she realizes: Brevity is the soul of life.

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/08/opinion/08DOWD.html?todaysheadlines

For more articles, see also: Website articles and pages

How To Straighten Curved Penis Without Painful Surgery
Mon May 6,2002 5:37 PM ET

After 6 months, 93% of patients reported straight erections and 7% reported almost straight but acceptable erections.

By Keith Mulvihill

NEW YORK (Reuter Health) - Preliminary study findings suggest that a less invasive surgical technique is a promising way to correct curvature of the penis, according to a report.

Aside from the negative emotional consequences of having a curved penis, the condition can often cause painful erections and severely inhibit a man's ability to engage in sexual intercourse.

There are basically two conditions that may cause severe curvature of the penis, explained lead investigator Dr. Tom F. Lue of the University of California in San Francisco. One is congenital curvature of the penis, which means that a man is born with the condition, and the other is due to scarring or fibrous thickening of the wall of the penis and is called Peyronie's disease.

Achieving an erection requires increased blood flow into two spongy chambers in the penis--scar tissue on one side can alter the natural architecture of the penis, cause it to curve either up, down or sideways when erect.

In the current investigation, Leu and his co-author Dr. Shahram S. Gholami reviewed the cases of 132 men who underwent surgery called "the 16-dot plication technique." The men were aged 16 to 74, six of whom were diagnosed with congenital curvature of the penis. The rest were diagnosed with Peyronie's disease.

"The procedure is performed to straighten the curved penis by 'tucking' the longer side with sutures just under the skin," Leu told Reuter Health. In other words, tissue on the longer side is folded over on itself, like an accordion, and held together with permanent sutures, Leu explained.

The key to the surgery's success, according to Leu, is that "it incorporates multiple pairs of sutures, which act together to lessen the tension on the other sutures during an erection and lessen the likelihood of any one suture from breaking."

Best of all, Leu point out that "it is not necessary to separate the nerve, blood vessel or urethra from the wall the penis, as is often done in other types of surgeries done to straighten a curved penis." These types of surgeries are quite invasive and run a higher risk of more severe side effects such as numbness, incomplete straightness and impotence, Leu added.

After the surgery, 63% of the patients in the current study had acceptable erections, 25% moderate erections requiring sildenafil (Viagra), and 12% poor erections.

"At 6 months, 93% of patients reported straight erections and 7% reported almost straight but acceptable erections," the authors write in the May issue of The Journal of Urology.

In addition 15% reported recurrence of curvature and 4 reported worsening erectile dysfunction, the report indicates.

The surgery is best for "young men with congenital curvature of the penis and potent men with stable Peyronie's disease," concluded Leu, who also noted that all men considering the surgery need to be counseled on the potential shortening of the penis and "palpable small bumps" that result from the nonabsorbable sutures.

While there are no estimates as to how many men have congenital curvature of the penis, Leu told Reuter Health that Peyronie's disease afflicts about 3% of men, most of whom are between the ages of 40 and 70 years.

SOURCE: The Journal of Urology 2002;167:2066-2069.