Here's a roundup of five medical studies
published this week that might give you new insights into your health, mind and
body. Remember, correlation is not causation – so if a study finds a connection
between two things, it doesn't mean that one causes the other.
This week kicked off the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, at
which researchers presented information about the treatment, diagnosis,
prevention and biology of this condition. There were several important studies
presented there.
Journal: The LancetExercise reduces drug-linked joint pain
Presented at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium
Exercise reduces drug-linked joint pain
Presented at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium
Presented at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium
Journal: Human Communication Research
Journal: American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
The conference brought good news for preventing
breast cancer in some women. Researchers found that an antihormone therapy
called anastrozole cuts the likelihood of breast cancer by about half among
postmenopausal women at high risk of breast cancer.
About 80% of U.S. women with breast cancer each
year suffer tumors with high levels of hormone receptors, fueled by estrogen.
Anastrozole stops the body from making estrogen. It has been used in the past
as a treatment for breast cancer of the hormone receptor positive kind.
The study involved 3,864 postmenopausal women at
increased risk for developing breast cancer. This was a double-blind,
randomized controlled trial, which is the gold standard for drug research.
Women who took anastrozole were 53% less likely to develop breast
cancer compared with those who took the placebo. This was after a follow-up
time period of more than five years. Few side effects were reported.
About half of patients on breast cancer drugs
called aromatase inhibitors say that they feel joint pain and stiffness. That’s
the most common reason that patients stop taking the drug.
But a new study shows that exercise during
treatment can reduce the unpleasant side effect.
Participants included 121 postmenopausal women
with hormone receptor-positive breast cancers in stages 1, 2 or 3. All of them
were taking an aromatase inhibitor, had at least mild joint pain, and did not
exercise before beginning the study.
Researchers are interested in investigating how
exercise helps with the pain and at what point during the intervention such
improvements occurred.
Retrospective analyses of metastatic breast
cancer patient outcomes have given conflicting views over the value of surgery
or radiation after chemotherapy.
A new study found no difference in overall
survival between patients with metastatic breast cancer who had surgery or
radiation after chemotherapy, and those who did not. This was a prospective,
randomized, controlled trial.
"Loco-regional treatment" is the name
for radiation and removal of the breast tumor and nearby lymph nodes.
“I’m sure a lot of oncologists who believe in
conventional wisdom and don’t provide loco-regional treatment will feel a lot
more comfortable looking at these results,” study author Dr. Rajendra Badwe,
director of the Tata Memorial Hospital in Mumbai, India, said in a statement.
And here are two
other recent studies, which are on the lighter side:
Knowing whom to trust is tricky business.
Interestingly, a new study suggests that liars are more honest about their
dishonesty than you might think.
Researchers from the University of Amsterdam and
Ben-Gurion University gave participants a variety of psychological tests and
asked them how often they'd said something untrue in the past 24 hours. They
also did some follow-up experiments where participants rolled a die and
reported their scores, and another activity involving word puzzles - some of
which are not solvable.
Statistically, some people had to have lied, the
researchers determined, because there's no way that all of the high scores
reported were real.
“The interesting thing was,” study co-author
Shaul Shalvi, a psychology professor at the University of the Negev told
TIME.com, “that the more people reported they lied in the last 24 hours, the
higher their reported die roll outcomes were."
This sounds like a fun study to participate in:
More than 100 high school students drank chocolate-flavored milkshakes, all
with the same calorie count. Some were high in sugar and low in fat, and some
were low in sugar and high in fat.
Researchers wanted to know whether we're more
drawn to the sugar or to the fat during cravings. So they did functional
magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) on the students while they drank the
milkshakes.
It appears that the pleasure center of the brain
responded to both milkshakes tested in the study, but it was the high-sugar,
low-fat version that tended to be a more powerful stimulus.
“We do a lot of work on the prevention of
obesity, and what is really clear not only from this study but from the broader
literature over all is that the more sugar you eat, the more you want to
consume it,” Eric Stice, a senior research scientist at the Oregon Research
Institute, told the New York Times. “As far as the ability to engage brain
reward regions and drive compulsive intake, sugar seems to be doing a much
better job than fat.”

No comments:
Post a Comment