Does Curcumin Use Help with Cognitive Dysfunction?

Recently, more and more patients have been adding curcumin or turmeric to their cooking to help with their memory. Curcumin is a metabolite of Turmeric and has been available in health food stores for years.

A study a few years back on Alzheimer’s patients published by J. Ringman and Associates showed no benefit in slowing the development of symptoms and no improvement in symptoms when supplied with curcumin. When they looked closely at their study, and analyzed the participant’s blood, they found that curcumin was not absorbed and never really entered the bloodstream.

Last month a study was published in the American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry by Dr. Gary Small and colleagues. They looked at 40 patients with mild memory complaints aged 50 – 90.  Some were administered a placebo and others were administered nanoparticles of curcumin in a product called “Theracumin”. The participants were randomized and blinded to the product they were testing. The study designers felt the nanoparticles would be absorbed better than other products and would actually test whether this substance was helpful or not. At 18 months, memory improved in patients taking the nanoparticles of curcumin and they had less amyloid deposition in areas it usually found relating to Alzheimers Disease.

Robert Isaacson MD, the director of the Alzheimer’s Prevention Clinic at Weil Cornell Medicine and New York- Presbyterian, has been suggesting his patients cook with curcumin for years. Until the development of the Theracumin nanoparticles, cooking with curcumin was the best way to have it absorbed after ingestion. There is now some evidence to suggest that curcumin, in this specific nanoparticle form, may play a role in both the risk reduction and potential therapeutic management of Alzheimers Disease.

Advertisements

Fitness Lowers Your Risk of Dementia

Over the years I have read and passed on to my patients the benefits of exercise on quality of life and healthy aging. This hypothesis was supported by a recent publication in the journal “Primary Care” by Peter Lin, MD, CCFP. Dr Lin and colleagues followed a group of woman aged 38 to 60 years for 44 years to determine the relationship between fitness and development of dementia. They chose to follow 191 women from a group of 1462 patients and selected a balanced number of patients in each age group up to age 60. They performed a physical fitness test on the women in 1968 and then grouped them into high fitness category, intermediate fitness category and low fitness category based on their performance in the physical fitness test. The women then received neuropsychiatric evaluations in 1974, 1980, 1992, 2000, 2005 and 2009.

The patients within the high fitness group showed an 88% reduction in dementia rate compared to those with medium fitness. Those in the lowest fitness group had a 41% increase d risk of dementia compared to the medium fitness group. Those patients in the high fitness group who developed dementia showed symptoms 9.5 years later on average than the patients in the medium fitness group.

The message for young adults is simple. Stay fit at a high level doing something you enjoy and you may reduce your risk of developing dementia by up to 90%.

Fish, Fish Oils and Cardiovascular Disease

Years ago the scientific researcher responsible for the promotion of fish oils as an antioxidant and protector against vascular disease recommended we all eat two fleshy fish meals of cold water fish a week. He continued to endorse this dietary addition and included canned tuna fish and canned salmon in the types of fish that produced this positive effect.

Over the years I heard him lecture at a large annual medical conference held in Broward County and he fretted about the growth of the supplement industry encouraging taking fish oils rather than eating fish. He worried about the warnings against eating all fish to women of child bearing age because of the fear of heavy metal contamination and knew that the fish oils and omega 3 Fatty Acids played a developmental role in a growing fetus and child.

I then attended lectures, in particular one sponsored by the Cleveland Clinic, during which they promoted Krill oil as the chosen form of fish oil supplements because it remained liquid and viscous at body temperature of 98.6 while others solidified. I listened to this debate only to hear the father of the science speak again and this time advocate that one or two fleshy fish meals a month was adequate to obtain the protective effect of Omega 3 Fatty acids. He felt that the supplements did not actually provide a protective effect as eating real fish did. Since I love to eat fresh fish I had no problem with this message but others are not comfortable buying and preparing fish at home or eating it at a restaurant. Supplements to them were the answer.

Steve Kopecky, M.D. examined the question in an article published in JAMA Cardiology this week. He looked at 77,917 high risk individuals already diagnosed with coronary artery disease and vascular disease who were taking supplements to prevent a second event. His study concluded that taking these omega 3 supplements had no effect on the prevention of recurrent cardiovascular events. The study did not discuss primary prevention for those who have not yet had a vascular illness or event.

Once again it seems that eating fish in moderation, like most anything, is the best choice. I will continue to eat my fresh fish meals one or two times per week, not necessarily for the health benefit but because I enjoy eating fresh fish.

I advise those worried about preventing primary or secondary heart and vascular disease to find a form of fish they can enjoy if they want this benefit. If you really wish to reduce your risk of a cardiovascular event; I suggest you stop smoking, control your blood pressure and lipid profile, stay active and eat those fresh fish meals.

Cleaning Is Hazardous to Your Lungs and Overall Health

In an article published in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine it was shown that women who regularly clean homes show a marked decline in pulmonary function. The study looked at 6,230 persons participating in the European Community Respiratory Health Survey over a period of 20 years.

Normally lung function declines as we age but women who were professional home cleaners, and who used cleaning sprays, declined at a far faster rate than women who did not clean at home or professionally. For unclear reasons in this study cleaning did not appear to effect the measurements on men. The study authors were quick to point out that there were very few men in the study making their conclusions on men less meaningful.

The authors looked at two main parameters, Forced Vital Capacity (the maximum amount of air exhaled after a maximum inspiration) and Forced Expiratory Volume in one second. They noted that decrease in Forced Vital Capacity is associated with decreased long term survival in patients without known pulmonary disease. They additionally noted a slight increase in the development of asthma in the home cleaners.

The authors postulated that cleaning products were “low grade irritants” and chronic exposure could lead to remodeling of the airways and resultant decline in pulmonary function. While reading this article I thought about how infrequently we read labels on the products we use to clean our homes, cars and elsewhere before using them. How often do we actually follow the health advice listed on the bottle? Should we be wearing N95 respirator type masks when using cleaning sprays and working in sparsely ventilated areas? What about children and their exposure? Should we be using these products around them and or our pets? Is it the actual spraying that exposes cleaners or does the products effects linger well after use?

These are all questions that few, if anyone, looks into or answers but certainly need to be addressed now that these findings have been published.

Cigar and Pipe Smoking Significantly Increases Mortality Risk

My male patients express to me on a regular basis their desire to continue to smoke a few cigars per day. They are quick to point out that they do not inhale the smoke like cigarette smokers do. They also point out that their use of cigars is far fewer in number than cigarettes. They all discount the risks of the smoke, its byproducts, carbon monoxide, etc.

The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) has just published a research project which looked at that subject. They followed cigar and pipe smokers from 1985 until 2011 looking at the mortality rate and the cancers they sustained. Of the 357,420 participants in the study, 51,150 died. The death rate of cigar and pipe smokers was much higher than nonsmokers and those who never smoked. There was also a much higher likelihood they would sustain a tobacco related cancer such as lung, throat, esophagus, oral cavity and bladder cancer which would eventually kill them.

It was clear the risks were higher for cigarette smokers than pipe and cigar smokers. As a physician, I will continue to encourage smoking cessation of all tobacco products.

Tobacco smoking ruins your health and kills people. Let there be no confusion about that fact.

Emergencies and the Rational For Our Treatment Algorithm

We are a primary care medical office that tries to deliver personalized attentive care. We define emergencies as chest pain, significant breathing difficulty and loss of consciousness, uncontrolled bleeding or pain, sudden change in mental status and behavior or major trauma. In these situations, my office staff receiving a phone call interrupts me so I can speak with you and determine whether or not to advise you to call 911. We do this because we know with life threatening situations time is of the essence.

Emergency Medical Services at 911 can arrive within 5 minutes. They are all Advanced Cardiac Life Support (ACLS) trained and carry the equipment and medications to provide life sustaining care while you are transported to a hospital Emergency Department that has the staff, medications and equipment to keep you alive while we diagnose the problem and create a plan to rectify it.

The office staff is trained in Basic Cardiac Life Support. We do not have a defibrillator. We do not maintain and store medications to correct low blood pressure – cardiac arrhythmias. We do not have endotracheal tubes to intubate you and breathe for you. In the past, when we tried to maintain these supplies, they became outdated due to infrequent use and were expensive to replace. Since we do very few resuscitations day to day we are not as experienced or efficient as EMS and emergency department personnel are.

I realize the wait for care and institutional care settings are not pleasant. We sacrifice that for the best chance to keep you healthy. Trust me, it is no fun cancelling a scheduled patients to run to the ER and then return already behind. We do it for your comfort and security and safety.

In the recent past patients with chest pain resembling heart disease, trouble breathing and excessive bleeding have refused to call 911 and were upset when we did not bring them into the office. We do this for your health and safety not our convenience. If you would like to discuss this feel free to contact the office.

Inflammation as a Cause of Heart Attacks and Strokes

Years ago I attended a series of lectures sponsored by the Cleveland Clinic to promote its proprietary lab tests that were geared to detect previously undetectable causes of heart attacks and strokes. A cardiologist at Cleveland Clinic, along with a research nurse out of Emory University Hospital and Medical Center, noted that 50% of the men having heart attacks and strokes were within the recommended life and health guidelines. They didn’t smoke, their blood pressures were controlled, they had lipids within the recommended guidelines and their weight was appropriate – as was their activity level.

They unofficially dubbed it the Supermen study and showed that by reducing “inflammation” they could reduce the number of heart attacks and strokes. They concentrated on periodontal disease and rheumatologic diseases as sources of inflammation. They believed that angina and heart attacks and strokes did not occur because a blood vessel gradually narrowed much like a plumbing pipe clogged with hair and debris. They felt that soft lipid plaque under the surface in vehicles dubbed “foam cells” ruptured through the blood vessel wall into the lumen through the endothelial lining under the direction of inflammation in the body.

This breakthrough into the blood carrying portion of the blood vessel was perceived as a fresh cut or wound which was bleeding. The body’s natural response was to try and stop the bleeding by creating a clot. This clot occurred quickly in a small vessel and every living item downstream, not supplied by a collateral blood vessel, died from lack of oxygen and fuel to function. They treated the identifiable inflammation and felt that statin medications (Lipitor, Zocor, Pravachol, Crestor , Livalo and the generics) had an of- label quality that reduced inflammation as well as lowered the cholesterol.

I bought into that theory and incorporated these blood tests into the patient population most at risk and the appropriate age where prevention would make a major difference. Tests like hsCRP, Myeloperoxidase, Apo-B and others were used for screening. Finding the inflammation and treating it for men who met the definition for entry into the Supermen study was far more difficult. The whole theory of inflammation causing acute cardiac and cerebrovascular events was treated much like climate change, genetically modified foods and even vaccinations with a large degree of community doubt.

Last week at a major European Cardiology meeting the CANTOS (Canakinumab Anti-inflammatory Thrombosis Outcomes Study) showed that by administering an anti- inflammatory medicine for three plus years at an appropriate dosage, we could reduce the number of heart attacks and strokes significantly. Using a monoclonal antibody, “Canakinumab” at 150 mg every third month they treated inflammation and reduced the number of events. The downside was the annual cost of this medicine currently stands at about $200,000 per year making it unavailable for most of us.

The surprising and startling finding was that it reduced lung cancers by 70% and other malignancies as well. The true finding in this study may be its use as a cancer weapon in the future. The study truly opened the door for research into new and less expensive approaches to treating inflammation. It validated inflammation as a pathway to vascular disease. Now we need to find a way to make that treatment affordable to all.