Many Risks Related to Early Onset Scoliosis Treatments

Surgically treating early onset scoliosis with growing rods or vertical expandable prosthetic titanium rib procedures may not fully control the deformity over a patient's entire growth period, and both procedures are beset with complications, according to a literature review published in the Dec. 1 issue of Spine.


FRIDAY, Dec. 3 (HealthDay News) -- Surgically treating early onset scoliosis (EOS) with growing rods (GR) or vertical expandable prosthetic titanium rib (VEPTR) procedures may not fully control the deformity over a patient's entire growth period, and both procedures are beset with complications, according to a literature review published in the Dec. 1 issue of Spine.

Behrooz A. Akbarnia, M.D., of the University of California San Diego in La Jolla, and John B. Emans, M.D., of Harvard Medical School in Boston, reviewed studies on EOS and the indications, complications, and outcomes of GR and VEPTR.

The researchers found that risks associated with GR included spontaneous spinal fusion and rod breakage. Risks associated with VEPTR included drifting rib attachments and chest wall scars. Potential adverse outcomes associated with the treatments included failure to prevent progressive deformity or thoracic insufficiency syndrome, a spine that is too short or stiff or an unacceptably deformed thorax, increased burden of care for families, and negative psychological consequences from repeated surgery. The authors note that neither technique reliably controls deformity over the full growth period.

"Consideration of the options must include a discussion of complications as they relate to GR or VEPTR. Families need to understand that there will be unexpected events such as rod breakage or loss of anchor points or need for revision or exchange, and these complications might cause the premature cessation of treatment of EOS," the authors write.

Surgically treating early onset scoliosis with growing rods or vertical expandable prosthetic titanium rib procedures may not fully control the deformity over a patient's entire growth period, and both procedures are beset with complications, according to a literature review published in the Dec. 1 issue of Spine.


FRIDAY, Dec. 3 (HealthDay News) -- Surgically treating early onset scoliosis (EOS) with growing rods (GR) or vertical expandable prosthetic titanium rib (VEPTR) procedures may not fully control the deformity over a patient's entire growth period, and both procedures are beset with complications, according to a literature review published in the Dec. 1 issue of Spine.

Behrooz A. Akbarnia, M.D., of the University of California San Diego in La Jolla, and John B. Emans, M.D., of Harvard Medical School in Boston, reviewed studies on EOS and the indications, complications, and outcomes of GR and VEPTR.

The researchers found that risks associated with GR included spontaneous spinal fusion and rod breakage. Risks associated with VEPTR included drifting rib attachments and chest wall scars. Potential adverse outcomes associated with the treatments included failure to prevent progressive deformity or thoracic insufficiency syndrome, a spine that is too short or stiff or an unacceptably deformed thorax, increased burden of care for families, and negative psychological consequences from repeated surgery. The authors note that neither technique reliably controls deformity over the full growth period.

"Consideration of the options must include a discussion of complications as they relate to GR or VEPTR. Families need to understand that there will be unexpected events such as rod breakage or loss of anchor points or need for revision or exchange, and these complications might cause the premature cessation of treatment of EOS," the authors write.

Read More

Your Child and Self Diagnosis for Scoliosis

It is understandable that a parent may feel a little distressed if they believe that their child has scoliosis, however it is vitally important that you know the difference between a self diagnosis and that carried out by a physician. 

Scoliosis is a condition of the spine that can cause great discomfort and stress to the sufferer. The curving of the spine is something that can affect young people from a relatively early age, and cause great self conscious embarrassment and anxiety. This is the reason why so many people opt to have a screening for it as early as possible. This article looks at ways in which scoliosis is screened for, and how you can even make some attempt to carry out a self screening process, one that may even do as good a job as that which the medical professional will do. It must be stated that if you do opt for any kind of self screening process, it is important that you also gain the advice of a medical professional. This kind of advice can never be substituted for your own assessment, so it is vital that you follow up any self screening with a visit to your local physician if you are concerned about scoliosis.

Scoliosis can greatly affect the flexibility of the sufferer, and even, when cases are more severe, affect the free movement of the sufferer. This can be extremely distressing and cause all sorts of problems for the mental wellbeing of the patient. Since scoliosis is basically an abnormal curve to the back, it is relatively easy to know when it is occurring. If one looks at a person’s back from slightly above or, better still, directly above, you will be able to notice the curvature.

The first thing you should do for your child is go for a physical examination. Doctors are of course the first recommended port of call for this aspect of the treatment plan, and it is advisable that you take yourself to the physician for this initial consultation. However, once you realise that all this entails is being shirtless and bending forward prior to the medical examination, one can see how it can be done by someone at home.

Essentially, any physician is looking for any abnormal variations when it comes to the length and curvature of the spine. Children are especially open to screening, because the effect of scoliosis is pronounced in younger bodies, and this is why children are often screened in this way at school.  With the permission of the parents, the child undergoes the examination. Since discomfort and strain is often a common sign of scoliosis when a sufferer bends forward, it can be quite easy to note what is potentially a sign of the condition. Parents do obviously have to be involved and often request an examination themselves for their child. It can be a little upsetting for a child, but it is often best to check at an early age.

Once a suspected case of scoliosis has been made clear from the physician (or if you think that you have the condition), then it is important that the next stage is proceeded towards as quickly as possible, this is where the x-ray comes into play.

Having an x-ray is vital when it comes to ascertaining if there is indeed a scoliosis case to deal with. As you can understand, if such a condition is suspected, then the x-ray is there to back up the examination with the picture of the condition. This is the best way to get a clear an accurate picture of the extent of the curvature of the spine. This is something that you cannot adequately do in the home environment, so it is most definitely the next stage after the initial examination. So if you are at the stage where you have checked the spine of your child, for example, and you suspect a clear case of scoliosis, then you should now move towards the point where you use x-ray technology to gain a full and clear picture of the problem.

A full diagnosis can only really be made once the physician has carried out the physical examination, and backed this up with the x-ray pictures. Add to this the taking of a full medical history, and you have a complete diagnosis of scoliosis of the spine.

The medical history is an important part of the picture. Once the physician has this to hand and the other factors, then they can make a full diagnosis. Then treatment can proceed.

Treatment of any kind will only really be offered if the curvature of the spine is deemed to be significant. This means that it is pronounced and causing enough discomfort to the sufferer that it will debilitate them in the future f not at the pint of diagnosis. The general benchmark as regards ‘significant’ is if the curvature is 25 degrees.

So there you have it. By all means take the opportunity to diagnoses scoliosis at home. There is nothing wrong with this. In fact, many medical conditions are diagnosed or at least suspected by people before they approach medical professionals. However, as this article explains, having a full diagnosis done by physicians helps to assess the depth of the problem, and therefore the move towards treatment.

If your child is suffering from what you believe to be scoliosis, it shouldn’t be too hard to notice as you go about your caring for them. But general medical treatment, whichever country you are in, is not always guaranteed. Remember that the 25 degrees benchmark is a general one for most practitioners and healthcare providers, and if your child falls below this, other treatments may be an option.

It is understandable that a parent may feel a little distressed if they believe that their child has scoliosis, however it is vitally important that you know the difference between a self diagnosis and that carried out by a physician. 

Scoliosis is a condition of the spine that can cause great discomfort and stress to the sufferer. The curving of the spine is something that can affect young people from a relatively early age, and cause great self conscious embarrassment and anxiety. This is the reason why so many people opt to have a screening for it as early as possible. This article looks at ways in which scoliosis is screened for, and how you can even make some attempt to carry out a self screening process, one that may even do as good a job as that which the medical professional will do. It must be stated that if you do opt for any kind of self screening process, it is important that you also gain the advice of a medical professional. This kind of advice can never be substituted for your own assessment, so it is vital that you follow up any self screening with a visit to your local physician if you are concerned about scoliosis.

Scoliosis can greatly affect the flexibility of the sufferer, and even, when cases are more severe, affect the free movement of the sufferer. This can be extremely distressing and cause all sorts of problems for the mental wellbeing of the patient. Since scoliosis is basically an abnormal curve to the back, it is relatively easy to know when it is occurring. If one looks at a person’s back from slightly above or, better still, directly above, you will be able to notice the curvature.

The first thing you should do for your child is go for a physical examination. Doctors are of course the first recommended port of call for this aspect of the treatment plan, and it is advisable that you take yourself to the physician for this initial consultation. However, once you realise that all this entails is being shirtless and bending forward prior to the medical examination, one can see how it can be done by someone at home.

Essentially, any physician is looking for any abnormal variations when it comes to the length and curvature of the spine. Children are especially open to screening, because the effect of scoliosis is pronounced in younger bodies, and this is why children are often screened in this way at school.  With the permission of the parents, the child undergoes the examination. Since discomfort and strain is often a common sign of scoliosis when a sufferer bends forward, it can be quite easy to note what is potentially a sign of the condition. Parents do obviously have to be involved and often request an examination themselves for their child. It can be a little upsetting for a child, but it is often best to check at an early age.

Once a suspected case of scoliosis has been made clear from the physician (or if you think that you have the condition), then it is important that the next stage is proceeded towards as quickly as possible, this is where the x-ray comes into play.

Having an x-ray is vital when it comes to ascertaining if there is indeed a scoliosis case to deal with. As you can understand, if such a condition is suspected, then the x-ray is there to back up the examination with the picture of the condition. This is the best way to get a clear an accurate picture of the extent of the curvature of the spine. This is something that you cannot adequately do in the home environment, so it is most definitely the next stage after the initial examination. So if you are at the stage where you have checked the spine of your child, for example, and you suspect a clear case of scoliosis, then you should now move towards the point where you use x-ray technology to gain a full and clear picture of the problem.

A full diagnosis can only really be made once the physician has carried out the physical examination, and backed this up with the x-ray pictures. Add to this the taking of a full medical history, and you have a complete diagnosis of scoliosis of the spine.

The medical history is an important part of the picture. Once the physician has this to hand and the other factors, then they can make a full diagnosis. Then treatment can proceed.

Treatment of any kind will only really be offered if the curvature of the spine is deemed to be significant. This means that it is pronounced and causing enough discomfort to the sufferer that it will debilitate them in the future f not at the pint of diagnosis. The general benchmark as regards ‘significant’ is if the curvature is 25 degrees.

So there you have it. By all means take the opportunity to diagnoses scoliosis at home. There is nothing wrong with this. In fact, many medical conditions are diagnosed or at least suspected by people before they approach medical professionals. However, as this article explains, having a full diagnosis done by physicians helps to assess the depth of the problem, and therefore the move towards treatment.

If your child is suffering from what you believe to be scoliosis, it shouldn’t be too hard to notice as you go about your caring for them. But general medical treatment, whichever country you are in, is not always guaranteed. Remember that the 25 degrees benchmark is a general one for most practitioners and healthcare providers, and if your child falls below this, other treatments may be an option.

Read More

How Cats Lap Water

Reis PM, Jung S, Aristoff JM et al: How cats lap: water uptake by Felis catus, Science 330: 1231, 2011.

Dr. Roman Stocker, an associate professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, wondered about the mechanism cats use to lap fluid while watching his own cat one day. Out of that curiosity, a project to answer the question using high-speed video, simulations, and investigations of other feline species was born. Cats use an interesting biomechanical method to drink by bending the tip of the tongue downward toward the chin and pulling liquid into the mouth. The high-speed videos showed that cats don't dip their tongue into the liquid to scoop it up as dogs do. Rather, cats touch the tip of the tongue, with the tip bent downward, against the surface of the liquid before drawing the tongue rapidly back into the mouth. The cat swallows only after several laps have accumulated enough liquid in the mouth.

Related articles:
Matson, J. Cat Lap: Engineers unravel the mystery of how felines drink. Scientific American, Nov 11, 2010.

More on cat health: Winn Feline Foundation Library
Join us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter

Reis PM, Jung S, Aristoff JM et al: How cats lap: water uptake by Felis catus, Science 330: 1231, 2011.

Dr. Roman Stocker, an associate professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, wondered about the mechanism cats use to lap fluid while watching his own cat one day. Out of that curiosity, a project to answer the question using high-speed video, simulations, and investigations of other feline species was born. Cats use an interesting biomechanical method to drink by bending the tip of the tongue downward toward the chin and pulling liquid into the mouth. The high-speed videos showed that cats don't dip their tongue into the liquid to scoop it up as dogs do. Rather, cats touch the tip of the tongue, with the tip bent downward, against the surface of the liquid before drawing the tongue rapidly back into the mouth. The cat swallows only after several laps have accumulated enough liquid in the mouth.

Related articles:
Matson, J. Cat Lap: Engineers unravel the mystery of how felines drink. Scientific American, Nov 11, 2010.

More on cat health: Winn Feline Foundation Library
Join us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter

Read More

Cinnamon’s anti-diabetes benefits get clinical trial boost

A daily dose of two grams of cinnamon for 12 weeks may improve blood pressure measures and blood sugar levels in people with type-2 diabetes, says new research from Imperial College London.

According to findings of the randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial, the spice may be considered as interesting supplement to the conventional diabetes medications.

“The two gram dose of cinnamon administered in our study was safe and well tolerated over the 12 weeks of treatment,” wrote Dr Rajadurai Akilen and his co-workers in Diabetic Medicine.

“The sustainability and durability of the effect of cinnamon has not been tested, nor has its long-term tolerability and safety, both of which will need to be determined. However, the short-term effects of the use of cinnamon for patients with Type 2 diabetes look promising.”

Exploding statistics

The study adds to a growing body of research reporting that active compounds in cinnamon may improve parameters associated with diabetes.

With the number of people are affected by diabetes in the EU 25 projected to increase to 26 million by 2030, up from about 19 million currently – or 4 per cent of the total population –approaches to reduce the risk of diabetes are becoming increasing attractive.

The statistics are even more startling in the US, where almost 24 million people live with diabetes, equal to 8 per cent of the population. The total costs are thought to be as much as $174 billion, with $116 billion being direct costs from medication, according to 2005-2007 American Diabetes Association figures.

At the end of the study the results indicated that the cinnamon supplement was associated with a mean decrease in systolic and diastolic blood pressure of 3.4 and 5.0 mmHg, respectively. No significant reductions were recorded in the placebo group.

In terms of blood sugar, the researchers noted a reduction in levels of glycated hemoglobin (used to measure blood sugar levels) over 12 weeks from 8.22 to 7.86 percent in the cinnamon group, compared with an increase in the placebo group from 8.55 to 8.68 percent over 12 weeks.

“This is the first clinical trial in the United Kingdom in a multiethnic population that has confirmed beneficial effects of 2 g cinnamon on [glycated hemoglobin] and blood pressure in Type-2 diabetes patients,” wrote the researchers.

Cinnamon and diabetes

Despite numerous studies championing the role of cinnamon for diabetes management, a recent meta-analysis questioned the potential benefits of cinnamon for type-2 diabetes. The analysis considered only five randomized placebo-controlled trials involving 282 subjects, and found no significant benefits of cinnamon supplement on glycated hemoglobin (A1C), fasting blood glucose (FBG), or other lipid parameters (Diabetes Care, 2008, Vol. 31, pp. 41-43).

A daily dose of two grams of cinnamon for 12 weeks may improve blood pressure measures and blood sugar levels in people with type-2 diabetes, says new research from Imperial College London.

According to findings of the randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial, the spice may be considered as interesting supplement to the conventional diabetes medications.

“The two gram dose of cinnamon administered in our study was safe and well tolerated over the 12 weeks of treatment,” wrote Dr Rajadurai Akilen and his co-workers in Diabetic Medicine.

“The sustainability and durability of the effect of cinnamon has not been tested, nor has its long-term tolerability and safety, both of which will need to be determined. However, the short-term effects of the use of cinnamon for patients with Type 2 diabetes look promising.”

Exploding statistics

The study adds to a growing body of research reporting that active compounds in cinnamon may improve parameters associated with diabetes.

With the number of people are affected by diabetes in the EU 25 projected to increase to 26 million by 2030, up from about 19 million currently – or 4 per cent of the total population –approaches to reduce the risk of diabetes are becoming increasing attractive.

The statistics are even more startling in the US, where almost 24 million people live with diabetes, equal to 8 per cent of the population. The total costs are thought to be as much as $174 billion, with $116 billion being direct costs from medication, according to 2005-2007 American Diabetes Association figures.

At the end of the study the results indicated that the cinnamon supplement was associated with a mean decrease in systolic and diastolic blood pressure of 3.4 and 5.0 mmHg, respectively. No significant reductions were recorded in the placebo group.

In terms of blood sugar, the researchers noted a reduction in levels of glycated hemoglobin (used to measure blood sugar levels) over 12 weeks from 8.22 to 7.86 percent in the cinnamon group, compared with an increase in the placebo group from 8.55 to 8.68 percent over 12 weeks.

“This is the first clinical trial in the United Kingdom in a multiethnic population that has confirmed beneficial effects of 2 g cinnamon on [glycated hemoglobin] and blood pressure in Type-2 diabetes patients,” wrote the researchers.

Cinnamon and diabetes

Despite numerous studies championing the role of cinnamon for diabetes management, a recent meta-analysis questioned the potential benefits of cinnamon for type-2 diabetes. The analysis considered only five randomized placebo-controlled trials involving 282 subjects, and found no significant benefits of cinnamon supplement on glycated hemoglobin (A1C), fasting blood glucose (FBG), or other lipid parameters (Diabetes Care, 2008, Vol. 31, pp. 41-43).

Read More

Belly fat may weaken bones

One of the few possible advantages of carrying extra weight is being shot down

In the past, doctors had suggested that excess body fat, which is associated with heart disease, diabetes, and many other bodily harms, may protect against the bone disease osteoporosis.

But now, a study finds that even this may be misleading. In fact, deep belly fat may contribute to osteoporosis, say scientists whose research will be presented at the Radiological Society of North America.

That's because the fat cells most likely produce substances, not yet understood, that lead to bone disease in addition to heart disease and diabetes, said Dr. Miriam Bredella of Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital, where the study was conducted.

Bredella and colleagues looked at 50 premenopausal women and examined their fat using computerized tomography (CT), which can distinguish between compartments of fat. Bredella said the human body has two categories of fat: superficial fat, which lies under the skin, and visceral fat, which surrounds organs. The first type of fat has been shown to have benefits against diabetes and heart disease when distributed around the hips.

It's the second kind of fat, the deep belly fat, that is bad for bones, she said. The study found that this fat was associated with lower bone mineral density, a measure of bone strength.

Most other studies on fat and osteoporosis have looked at weight or body mass index (BMI), which do not reflect this distribution of fat, she said.

And there's no way to know where the fat goes when you gain weight, as it's largely determined by genetics, she said.

The researchers also used a new technique to look at bone marrow fat, or fat within bones, which also appears to make the bones weaker. Women with deep tummy fat also had more fat within their bones, Bredella said.

On the other hand, women with anorexia have also been known to be at increased risk of osteoporosis. The bottom line is that you should strive for a normal weight, because the extremes of too much or too little fat are both bad for bones, Bredella said.

The research is being presented for the first time at the conference, and has not yet appeared in a peer-reviewed journal. Further work should be done to confirm the results.

A future study will look at the relationship between deep belly fat and osteoporosis among men, Bredella said.

One of the few possible advantages of carrying extra weight is being shot down

In the past, doctors had suggested that excess body fat, which is associated with heart disease, diabetes, and many other bodily harms, may protect against the bone disease osteoporosis.

But now, a study finds that even this may be misleading. In fact, deep belly fat may contribute to osteoporosis, say scientists whose research will be presented at the Radiological Society of North America.

That's because the fat cells most likely produce substances, not yet understood, that lead to bone disease in addition to heart disease and diabetes, said Dr. Miriam Bredella of Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital, where the study was conducted.

Bredella and colleagues looked at 50 premenopausal women and examined their fat using computerized tomography (CT), which can distinguish between compartments of fat. Bredella said the human body has two categories of fat: superficial fat, which lies under the skin, and visceral fat, which surrounds organs. The first type of fat has been shown to have benefits against diabetes and heart disease when distributed around the hips.

It's the second kind of fat, the deep belly fat, that is bad for bones, she said. The study found that this fat was associated with lower bone mineral density, a measure of bone strength.

Most other studies on fat and osteoporosis have looked at weight or body mass index (BMI), which do not reflect this distribution of fat, she said.

And there's no way to know where the fat goes when you gain weight, as it's largely determined by genetics, she said.

The researchers also used a new technique to look at bone marrow fat, or fat within bones, which also appears to make the bones weaker. Women with deep tummy fat also had more fat within their bones, Bredella said.

On the other hand, women with anorexia have also been known to be at increased risk of osteoporosis. The bottom line is that you should strive for a normal weight, because the extremes of too much or too little fat are both bad for bones, Bredella said.

The research is being presented for the first time at the conference, and has not yet appeared in a peer-reviewed journal. Further work should be done to confirm the results.

A future study will look at the relationship between deep belly fat and osteoporosis among men, Bredella said.

Read More

For Health Benefits, Try Tai Chi

The gentle, 2,000-year-old Chinese practice of tai chi is often described as "meditation in motion." But the Harvard Women's Health Watch newsletter suggests a more apt description is "medication in motion."


Tai chi, the most famous branch of Qigong, or exercises that harness the qi (life energy, pronounced "chee"), has been linked to health benefits for virtually everyone from children to seniors. Researchers aren't sure exactly how, but studies show that tai chi improves the quality of life for breast cancer patients and Parkinson's sufferers. Its combination of martial arts movements and deep breathing can be adapted even for people in wheelchairs. And it has shown promise in treating sleep problems and high blood pressure.

Flexibility and strength. Tai chi is credited with so many pluses, physiological and psychological, that Chenchen Wang, an associate professor of medicine at Tufts University, set out earlier this year to analyze 40 studies on it in English and Chinese journals. Wang found that tai chi did indeed promote balance, flexibility, cardiovascular fitness, and strength. In a study comparing it with brisk walking and resistance training, a tai chi group improved more than 30 percent in lower-body strength and 25 percent in arm strength, nearly as much as a weight-training group and more than the walkers.

[For Better Balance, Pilates and Tai Chi Beat Yoga]

"Benefit was also found for pain, stress, and anxiety in healthy subjects," adds Wang, who was influenced by her mother, a Chinese doctor, to study an integration of complementary and alternative medicine with Western medicine.

In a 2008 analysis, Harvard Medical School's Gloria Yeh, an internist and assistant professor, reviewed 26 studies in English and Chinese and reported that in 85 percent of trials, tai chi lowered blood pressure. Other studies have shown it to reduce blood levels of B-type natriuretic peptide, a precursor of heart failure, and to maintain bone density in postmenopausal women. The nonprofit Arthritis Foundation offers its own 12-movement tai chi sequence.

Wang says more study is needed. Still, says New York Times personal health writer Jane Brody: "After reviewing existing scientific evidence for its potential health benefits, I've concluded that the proper question to ask yourself may not be why you should practice tai chi, but why not."

Lesson One: Find a teacher. "Learning from a book or video just does not work," says Greg Woodson, vice president of the international T'ai Chi Foundation and a teacher for 35 years. Students need real feedback from a teacher who can make sure exercises are done correctly "so the practice does not cause the type of injury it's designed to alleviate," he says. One example: Weight-bearing feet need to be flat on the floor to avoid knee stress, "an extremely subtle point that an experienced teacher will see." Woodson suggests that if a teacher has less than 10 years of experience, you should make sure he or she has the backing of a school or a more experienced teacher.

[Tai Chi May Help Ward Off Knee Pain in Seniors]

How much tai chi is enough? "Data suggest the minimum amount for effective results" is once- or twice-weekly sessions for eight to 12 weeks, says Wang. No pain, big gains.

The gentle, 2,000-year-old Chinese practice of tai chi is often described as "meditation in motion." But the Harvard Women's Health Watch newsletter suggests a more apt description is "medication in motion."


Tai chi, the most famous branch of Qigong, or exercises that harness the qi (life energy, pronounced "chee"), has been linked to health benefits for virtually everyone from children to seniors. Researchers aren't sure exactly how, but studies show that tai chi improves the quality of life for breast cancer patients and Parkinson's sufferers. Its combination of martial arts movements and deep breathing can be adapted even for people in wheelchairs. And it has shown promise in treating sleep problems and high blood pressure.

Flexibility and strength. Tai chi is credited with so many pluses, physiological and psychological, that Chenchen Wang, an associate professor of medicine at Tufts University, set out earlier this year to analyze 40 studies on it in English and Chinese journals. Wang found that tai chi did indeed promote balance, flexibility, cardiovascular fitness, and strength. In a study comparing it with brisk walking and resistance training, a tai chi group improved more than 30 percent in lower-body strength and 25 percent in arm strength, nearly as much as a weight-training group and more than the walkers.

[For Better Balance, Pilates and Tai Chi Beat Yoga]

"Benefit was also found for pain, stress, and anxiety in healthy subjects," adds Wang, who was influenced by her mother, a Chinese doctor, to study an integration of complementary and alternative medicine with Western medicine.

In a 2008 analysis, Harvard Medical School's Gloria Yeh, an internist and assistant professor, reviewed 26 studies in English and Chinese and reported that in 85 percent of trials, tai chi lowered blood pressure. Other studies have shown it to reduce blood levels of B-type natriuretic peptide, a precursor of heart failure, and to maintain bone density in postmenopausal women. The nonprofit Arthritis Foundation offers its own 12-movement tai chi sequence.

Wang says more study is needed. Still, says New York Times personal health writer Jane Brody: "After reviewing existing scientific evidence for its potential health benefits, I've concluded that the proper question to ask yourself may not be why you should practice tai chi, but why not."

Lesson One: Find a teacher. "Learning from a book or video just does not work," says Greg Woodson, vice president of the international T'ai Chi Foundation and a teacher for 35 years. Students need real feedback from a teacher who can make sure exercises are done correctly "so the practice does not cause the type of injury it's designed to alleviate," he says. One example: Weight-bearing feet need to be flat on the floor to avoid knee stress, "an extremely subtle point that an experienced teacher will see." Woodson suggests that if a teacher has less than 10 years of experience, you should make sure he or she has the backing of a school or a more experienced teacher.

[Tai Chi May Help Ward Off Knee Pain in Seniors]

How much tai chi is enough? "Data suggest the minimum amount for effective results" is once- or twice-weekly sessions for eight to 12 weeks, says Wang. No pain, big gains.

Read More

Today, the Food and Nutrition Board has Failed Millions

After 13 years of silence, the quasi governmental agency, the Institute of Medicine's (IOM) Food and Nutrition Board (FNB), yesterday recommended that a three - pound premature infant can take virtually the same amount of vitamin D as a 300 pound pregnant woman. While that 400 IU/day dose is close to adequate for infants, 600 IU/day in pregnant women will do nothing to help the three childhood epidemics most closely associated with gestational and early childhood vitamin D deficiencies: asthma, auto-immune disorders, and, as recently reported in the largest pediatric journal in the world, autism (1). Professor Bruce Hollis of the Medical University of South Carolina has shown pregnant and lactating women need at least 5,000 IU/day, not 600.
The FNB also reported that vitamin D toxicity might occur at an intake of 10,000 IU/day (250 micrograms), although they could produce no reproducible evidence that 10,000 IU/day has ever caused toxicity in humans and only one poorly conducted study indicating 20,000 IU/day may cause mild elevations in serum calcium but not clinical toxicity.
Viewed with different measure, this FNB report recommends that an infant should take 10 micrograms/day (400 IU) and the pregnant women 15 micrograms/day (600 IU). As a single 30 minutes dose of summer sunshine gives adults more than 10,000 IU (250 micrograms), the FNB is apparently also warning that natural vitamin D input – as occurred from the sun before the widespread use of sunscreen – is dangerous. That is, the FNB is implying that God does not know what she is doing.

Disturbingly, this FNB committee focused on bone health, just like they did 14 years ago. They ignored the thousands of studies from the last ten years that showed higher doses of vitamin D helps: heart health, brain health, breast health, prostate health, pancreatic health, muscle health, nerve health, eye health, immune health, colon health, liver health, mood health, skin health, and especially fetal health. Tens of millions of pregnant women and their breast-feeding infants are severely vitamin D deficient, resulting in a great increase in the medieval disease, rickets. The FNB report seems to reason that if so many pregnant women have low vitamin D blood levels then it must be OK because such low levels are so common. However, such circular logic simply represents the cave man existence of most modern day pregnant women.
Hence, if you want to optimize your vitamin D levels – not just optimize the bone effect – supplementing is crucial. But it is almost impossible to significantly raise your vitamin D levels when supplementing at only 600 IU/day (15 micrograms). Pregnant women taking 400 IU/day have the same blood levels as pregnant women not taking vitamin D; that is, 400 IU is a meaninglessly small dose for pregnant women. Even taking 2,000 IU/day of vitamin D will only increase the vitamin D levels of most pregnant women by about 10 points, depending mainly on their weight. Professor Bruce Hollis has shown that 2,000 IU/day does not raise vitamin D to healthy or natural levels in either pregnant or lactating women. Therefore supplementing with higher amounts -- like 5000 IU/day -- is crucial for those women who want their fetus to enjoy optimal vitamin D levels, and the future health benefits that go along with it.
For example, taking only two of the hundreds of recently published studies, Professor Urashima and colleagues in Japan gave 1,200 IU/day of vitamin D3 for six months to Japanese 10 year-olds in a randomized controlled trial. They found vitamin D dramatically reduced the incidence of influenza A as well as the episodes of asthma attacks in the treated kids while the placebo group was not so fortunate. If Dr. Urashima had followed the newest FNB recommendations, it is unlikely that 400 IU/day treatment arm would have done much of anything and some of the treated young teenagers may have come to serious harm without the vitamin D. Likewise, a randomized controlled prevention trial of adults by Professor Joan Lappe and colleagues at Creighton University, which showed dramatic improvements in the health of internal organs, used more than twice the FNB's new adult recommendations.
Finally, the FNB committee consulted with 14 vitamin D experts and – after reading these 14 different reports – the FNB decided to suppress their reports. Many of these 14 consultants are either famous vitamin D researchers, like Professor Robert Heaney at Creighton, or in the case of Professor Walter Willett at Harvard, the single best-known nutritionist in the world. So, the FNB will not tell us what Professors Heaney and Willett thought of their new report? Why not? Yesterday, the Vitamin D Council directed our attorney to file a federal Freedom of Information (FOI) request to the IOM's FNB for the release of these 14 reports.
I, my family, most of my friends, hundreds of patients, and thousands of readers of the Vitamin D Council newsletter, have been taking 5,000 IU/day for up to eight years. Not only have they reported no significant side-effects, indeed, they have reported greatly improved health in multiple organ systems. My advice: especially for pregnant women, continue taking 5,000 IU/day until your (OH)D] is between 50 ng/ml and 80 ng/ml (the vitamin D blood levels obtained by humans who live and work in the sun and the mid-point of the current reference ranges at all American laboratories). Gestational vitamin D deficiency is not only associated with rickets, but a significantly increased risk of neonatal pneumonia (2), a doubled risk for preeclampsia (3), a tripled risk for gestational diabetes (4), and a quadrupled risk for primary cesarean section (5).
Yesterday, the FNB failed millions of pregnant women whose as yet unborn babies will pay the price. Let us hope the FNB will comply with the spirit of "transparency" by quickly responding to our freedom of Information requests.

After 13 years of silence, the quasi governmental agency, the Institute of Medicine's (IOM) Food and Nutrition Board (FNB), yesterday recommended that a three - pound premature infant can take virtually the same amount of vitamin D as a 300 pound pregnant woman. While that 400 IU/day dose is close to adequate for infants, 600 IU/day in pregnant women will do nothing to help the three childhood epidemics most closely associated with gestational and early childhood vitamin D deficiencies: asthma, auto-immune disorders, and, as recently reported in the largest pediatric journal in the world, autism (1). Professor Bruce Hollis of the Medical University of South Carolina has shown pregnant and lactating women need at least 5,000 IU/day, not 600.
The FNB also reported that vitamin D toxicity might occur at an intake of 10,000 IU/day (250 micrograms), although they could produce no reproducible evidence that 10,000 IU/day has ever caused toxicity in humans and only one poorly conducted study indicating 20,000 IU/day may cause mild elevations in serum calcium but not clinical toxicity.
Viewed with different measure, this FNB report recommends that an infant should take 10 micrograms/day (400 IU) and the pregnant women 15 micrograms/day (600 IU). As a single 30 minutes dose of summer sunshine gives adults more than 10,000 IU (250 micrograms), the FNB is apparently also warning that natural vitamin D input – as occurred from the sun before the widespread use of sunscreen – is dangerous. That is, the FNB is implying that God does not know what she is doing.

Disturbingly, this FNB committee focused on bone health, just like they did 14 years ago. They ignored the thousands of studies from the last ten years that showed higher doses of vitamin D helps: heart health, brain health, breast health, prostate health, pancreatic health, muscle health, nerve health, eye health, immune health, colon health, liver health, mood health, skin health, and especially fetal health. Tens of millions of pregnant women and their breast-feeding infants are severely vitamin D deficient, resulting in a great increase in the medieval disease, rickets. The FNB report seems to reason that if so many pregnant women have low vitamin D blood levels then it must be OK because such low levels are so common. However, such circular logic simply represents the cave man existence of most modern day pregnant women.
Hence, if you want to optimize your vitamin D levels – not just optimize the bone effect – supplementing is crucial. But it is almost impossible to significantly raise your vitamin D levels when supplementing at only 600 IU/day (15 micrograms). Pregnant women taking 400 IU/day have the same blood levels as pregnant women not taking vitamin D; that is, 400 IU is a meaninglessly small dose for pregnant women. Even taking 2,000 IU/day of vitamin D will only increase the vitamin D levels of most pregnant women by about 10 points, depending mainly on their weight. Professor Bruce Hollis has shown that 2,000 IU/day does not raise vitamin D to healthy or natural levels in either pregnant or lactating women. Therefore supplementing with higher amounts -- like 5000 IU/day -- is crucial for those women who want their fetus to enjoy optimal vitamin D levels, and the future health benefits that go along with it.
For example, taking only two of the hundreds of recently published studies, Professor Urashima and colleagues in Japan gave 1,200 IU/day of vitamin D3 for six months to Japanese 10 year-olds in a randomized controlled trial. They found vitamin D dramatically reduced the incidence of influenza A as well as the episodes of asthma attacks in the treated kids while the placebo group was not so fortunate. If Dr. Urashima had followed the newest FNB recommendations, it is unlikely that 400 IU/day treatment arm would have done much of anything and some of the treated young teenagers may have come to serious harm without the vitamin D. Likewise, a randomized controlled prevention trial of adults by Professor Joan Lappe and colleagues at Creighton University, which showed dramatic improvements in the health of internal organs, used more than twice the FNB's new adult recommendations.
Finally, the FNB committee consulted with 14 vitamin D experts and – after reading these 14 different reports – the FNB decided to suppress their reports. Many of these 14 consultants are either famous vitamin D researchers, like Professor Robert Heaney at Creighton, or in the case of Professor Walter Willett at Harvard, the single best-known nutritionist in the world. So, the FNB will not tell us what Professors Heaney and Willett thought of their new report? Why not? Yesterday, the Vitamin D Council directed our attorney to file a federal Freedom of Information (FOI) request to the IOM's FNB for the release of these 14 reports.
I, my family, most of my friends, hundreds of patients, and thousands of readers of the Vitamin D Council newsletter, have been taking 5,000 IU/day for up to eight years. Not only have they reported no significant side-effects, indeed, they have reported greatly improved health in multiple organ systems. My advice: especially for pregnant women, continue taking 5,000 IU/day until your (OH)D] is between 50 ng/ml and 80 ng/ml (the vitamin D blood levels obtained by humans who live and work in the sun and the mid-point of the current reference ranges at all American laboratories). Gestational vitamin D deficiency is not only associated with rickets, but a significantly increased risk of neonatal pneumonia (2), a doubled risk for preeclampsia (3), a tripled risk for gestational diabetes (4), and a quadrupled risk for primary cesarean section (5).
Yesterday, the FNB failed millions of pregnant women whose as yet unborn babies will pay the price. Let us hope the FNB will comply with the spirit of "transparency" by quickly responding to our freedom of Information requests.

Read More