Author: Théophile Niyitegeka

{Instant noodles are perhaps one of the most sought after foods by people around the world. They have really unique tastes and smells, they are easy to make, and above all, like the name implies, they are a fast food. But despite all these added values that come with noodles, they also have their negative sides. Let me show you some things about instant noodles that make them unsafe for you.}

* Noodles inhibit the absorption of nutrients for children under 5.

* There is an ingredient in instant noodles called ‘Styrofoam’. This substance has been said to cause cancer.

* Instant noodles are mostly enriched with carbohydrates, but no vitamins, fiber and minerals. This makes them junk foods. Junk foods are unhealthy.

* Instant noodles are power packed with high amounts of sodium. Excess consumption of sodium can lead to heart disease, stroke, hypertension and kidney damage.

* A substance known as Monosodium Glutamate (MSG) is used to enhance the flavour of instant noodles. Some people react badly to MSG, and for people like this, when consumed, they end up suffering from headaches, facial flushing, pain, burning sensations.

* Perhaps you didn’t know this — eating noodles is the leading cause of obesity. Noodles contain fat and large amounts of sodium, which causes water retention in the body and surely it leads to overweight, and of course, you know how dangerous obesity can be. It can lead to heart complications.

* Instant noodles are bad for the digestive system. A regular consumption of instant noodles can cause one irregular bowl movements and bloating.

* A regular consumption of instant noodles can tend to affect the body’s metabolism, because of the chemical substances they’re made with, like additives, coloring and preservatives inside the noodles.

Alright, so now you know what dangers you may be exposing yourself to when you consume instant noodles excessively. Remember it’s not really eating it that’s the problem. It’s your addiction and excessive consumption of it.

Source:Elcrema

{Doctors for the first time can determine which medication is more likely to help a patient overcome depression, according to research that pushes the medical field beyond what has essentially been a guessing game of prescribing antidepressants.}

A blood test that measures a certain type of protein level provides an immediate tool for physicians who until now have relied heavily on patient questionnaires to choose a treatment, said Dr. Madhukar Trivedi, who led the research at UT Southwestern Medical Center’s Center for Depression Research and Clinical Care.

“Currently, our selection of depression medications is not any more superior than flipping a coin, and yet that is what we do. Now we have a biological explanation to guide treatment of depression,” said Dr. Trivedi, Director of the depression center, a cornerstone of UT Southwestern’s Peter O’Donnell Jr. Brain Institute.

The study demonstrated that measuring a patient’s C-reactive protein (CRP) levels through a simple finger-prick blood test can help doctors prescribe a medication that is more likely to work. Utilizing this test in clinical visits could lead to a significant boost in the success rate of depressed patients who commonly struggle to find effective treatments.

A major national study Dr. Trivedi led more than a decade ago (STAR*D) gives insight into the prevalence of the problem: Up to a third of depressed patients don’t improve during their first medication, and about 40 percent of people who start taking antidepressants stop taking them within three months.

“This outcome happens because they give up,” said Dr. Trivedi, whose previous national study established widely accepted treatment guidelines for depressed patients. “Giving up hope is really a central symptom of the disease. However, if treatment selection is tied to a blood test and improves outcomes, patients are more likely to continue the treatment and achieve the benefit.”

The new research published in Psychoneuroendocrinology measured remission rates of more than 100 depressed patients prescribed either escitalopram alone or escitalopram plus bupropion. Researchers found a strong correlation between CRP levels and which drug regimen improved their symptoms:

For patients whose CRP levels were less than 1 milligram per liter, escitalopram alone was more effective: 57 percent remission rate compared to less than 30 percent on the other drug.
For patients with higher CRP levels, escitalopram plus bupropion was more likely to work: 51 percent remission rate compared to 33 percent on escitalopram alone.
Dr. Trivedi noted that these results could readily apply to other commonly used antidepressants.

“These findings provide evidence that a biological test can immediately be used in clinical practice,” he said.

Dr. Trivedi identified CRP as a potential marker for depression treatments because it has been an effective measure of inflammation for other disorders such as cardiovascular disease and diabetes.

While previous research to establish CRP as an antidepressant marker used levels three to five times higher than the latest study, “my theory was that you don’t need that high of an inflammation to experience the sickness of depression,” Dr. Trivedi said. “Even a little inflammation may be sufficient for the patients to experience some of these symptoms of depression.”

The next step is to conduct larger studies to verify CRP’s role with other antidepressants and find alternative markers where CRP does not prove effective. Dr. Trivedi said these studies could lead to additional useful biological tests that can be used in practice.

“Both patients and primary-care providers are very desperately looking for markers that would indicate there is some biology involved in this disease. Otherwise, we are talking about deciding treatments from question-and-answer from the patients, and that is not sufficient,” said Dr. Trivedi, a Professor of Psychiatry who holds the Betty Jo Hay Distinguished Chair in Mental Health and is the inaugural holder of the Julie K. Hersh Chair for Depression Research and Clinical Care.

The data reviewed for the study came from the CO-MED trial, which was funded by the National Institute of Mental Health. The work was also supported through UT Southwestern’s Center for Depression Research and Clinical Care and The Hersh Foundation.

Other UT Southwestern researchers include Dr. Manish Jha, Dr. Abu Taher Minhajuddin, Dr. Bharathi Gadad, Dr. Tracy Greer, Bruce Grannemann, Dr. Abigail Soyombo and Taryn Mayes. Dr. A. John Rush, Professor Emeritus, Duke-National University of Singapore also collaborated on the publication.

“With advances in technology and our understanding of the biology of depression, our ongoing work with additional biomarkers is likely to yield tests for other subtypes of depression,” said Dr. Jha, Assistant Professor of Psychiatry.

Source:Science Daily

{Clinical trials found that it is safe to regularly infuse brain and lung cancer patients with 800 — 1000 times the daily recommended amount of vitamin C as a potential strategy to improve outcomes of standard cancer treatments. In a work presented March 30, 2017 in Cancer Cell, University of Iowa researchers also show pathways by which altered iron metabolism in cancer cells, and not normal cells, lead to increased sensitivity to cancer cell death caused by high dose vitamin C.}

“This paper reveals a metabolic frailty in cancer cells that is based on their own production of oxidizing agents that allows us to utilize existing redox active compounds, like vitamin C, to sensitize cancer cells to radiation and chemotherapy,” says co-author Garry Buettner, who was one of the first to propose that cancer cells might have a vulnerability to redox active compounds over 40 years ago. Buettner, along with study senior authors Bryan Allen and Douglas Spitz, are faculty members at the University of Iowa’s Department of Radiation Oncology, Free Radical and Radiation Biology Program, in the Holden Comprehensive Cancer Center.

The 11 evaluable patients enrolled in the brain cancer safety trial received three infusions of vitamin C a week for 2 months followed by two infusions per week for 7 months while receiving standard care radiation and chemotherapy. The goal of each infusion was to raise the concentration of vitamin C in a patient’s blood to 20,000 μM, as compared to a blood level of about 70 μM found in most adults. The high dose is necessary because vitamin C has a half-life of about two hours in the circulation of humans. The treatment was generally well tolerated; with modest side effects including frequent trips to the bathroom and dry mouth. Rarely, some patients developed high blood pressure that subsided quickly following infusion.

Why is this approach safe? Vitamin C, even at high levels, isn’t toxic to normal cells. The research group at Iowa found, however, that tumor tissue’s abnormally high levels of redox active iron molecules (a by-product of abnormal mitochondrial metabolism) react with vitamin C to form hydrogen peroxide and free radicals derived from hydrogen peroxide. These free radicals are believed to cause DNA damage selectively in cancer cells (versus normal cells) leading to enhanced cancer cell death as well as sensitization to radiation and chemotherapy in cancer cells.

“This is a significant example of how knowing details of potential mechanisms and the basic science of redox active compounds in cancer versus normal cells can be leveraged clinically in cancer therapy,” says co-senior author Douglas Spitz, who focused on the biochemical studies. “Here, we verified convincingly that increased redox active metal ions in cancer cells were responsible for this differential sensitivity of cancer versus normal cells to very high doses of vitamin C.”

The safety study sets the stage for phase II clinical trials looking at whether high dose vitamin C is effective at extending overall lifespan and quality of life for patients undergoing radiation and chemotherapy. The researchers are currently enrolling patients with stage 4 lung cancer and will soon begin enrolling people with glioblastoma multiforme (brain cancer) in these phase II trials. They are hopeful that brain cancer responses to radiation and chemotherapy can be enhanced in these phase II trials. This guarded optimism is based on the phase I trial data showing an increase in overall survival of 4-6 months in 11 glioblastoma multiforme patients (18-22 months) versus the 14-16 months survival typically seen with the standard treatment.

“The majority of cancer patients we work with are excited to participate in clinical trials that could benefit future patient outcomes down the line,” says co-senior author Bryan Allen, who led the clinical side of the study. “Results look promising but we’re not going to know if this approach really improves therapy response until we complete these phase II trials.”

The cost per patient above standard insurance billing for the phase II vitamin C glioblastoma multiforme protocol is approximately $8000 spread over 9 months of test infusions. This cost can be less than a single dose of some immunotherapy and/or chemotherapy drugs.

Source:Science Daily