Something to keep an eye on if you are struggling with depression. Neuroscience News:
A new study by researchers at University of Maryland School of Medicine has identified promising compounds that could successfully treat depression in less than 24 hours while minimizing side effects. Although they have not yet been tested in people, the compounds could offer significant advantages over current antidepressant medications.
Science has been teasing stuff like this for ages (Electric ion repair of teeth, stem cells, etc), my goal is to keep my teeth in good enough shape that I'll still have enough left to repair so I can make a full recovery.
Well, I legitimately wondered when this was going to happen after hearing about the successes of the research they mention a couple years ago. I thought, "Well, someone could set themselves up as a supplier, assuming they could get enough supply and had sufficiently few qualms." And now someone has.
Who knew this would be foreshadowed all the way back in 2000? At the time, I remember thinking, "Hmm, I suppose it could theoretically work, but nobody is ever going to find out because that would never make it past any ethics committee."
An official with the Department of Defense, which maintains about $13.6 billion worth of drugs in its stockpile, says that in 2016 it cost $3.1 million to run the extension program, but it saved the department from replacing $2.1 billion in expired drugs. To put the magnitude of that return on investment into everyday terms: It’s like spending a dollar to save $677.
“We didn’t have any idea that some of the products would be so damn stable — so robustly stable beyond the shelf life,” says Ajaz Hussain, one of the scientists who formerly helped oversee the extension program.
This isn't super-surprising to me that things are stable far longer than their "shelf life" says, but I found it interesting that the government and military already had a program to cut costs like this.
High carbohydrate intake was associated with higher risk of total mortality, whereas total fat and individual types of fat were related to lower total mortality. Total fat and types of fat were not associated with cardiovascular disease, myocardial infarction, or cardiovascular disease mortality, whereas saturated fat had an inverse association with stroke. Global dietary guidelines should be reconsidered in light of these findings.
Here's the sci-hub, in case you want to read the full thing: Full article
Figure 1 (see below) is the best TL;DR;. p values look good, but I'm hardly well-versed at spotting bad science that's not in my area. I see mixed public/private funding (including "Big Pharma" names), FWIW.
This is association data which is a labeled as Epidemiology. It is work by statisticians. Simple Meaning: people fill out questionaires (self-reporting) information (socioeconomic stuff and food they eat) and then the researchers waited to see which ones had heart attacks, then some computer jocks crunch numbers to find a correlation/association b/t the questionaire and the heart attack.
The biggest problem with this kind of work is the 'ol correlation =/= causation. It fairly well-established that too much sugar is bad for you. Also, there is a link b/t heart failure and type 2 diabetes already. However, it's sort of a chicken and the egg thing. This study stated that the participants self-reported their diabetes status. It's sort of like saying more people with gray hair have dementia. So there is an association with gray hair and dementia. Does that mean gray hair causes dementia? That's the same here. I'm not saying they are wrong. It's a massive study, it's published in The Lancet (which is highly respected), and there is data showing that controlling your carbs can reduces risk for T2D which in turn MIGHT reduce your risk for heart disease. I am saying it's more complicated than high carbs = heart failure. And, that's what will get spewed across news sites.
Here is their conclusion: In conclusion, we found that a high carbohydrate intake was associated with an adverse impact on total mortality, whereas fats including saturated and unsaturated fatty acids were associated with lower risk of total mortality and stroke. We did not observe any detrimental effect of fat intakes on cardiovascular disease events.
Here are some interesting notes in there conclusion as well: Measurement error in reporting might lead to random errors that could dilute real associations between nutrients and clinical events.
...we were unable to measure trans-fat intake which might affect our results...
We were unable to quantify separately the types of carbohydrate (refined vs whole grains) consumed. However, carbohydrate consumption in low-income and middle-income countries is mainly from refined sources.
There is definitely a link b/t diet and health status. However, diet alone is not the only risk factor. Genetic risk for disease and environmental factors also play a large role.
I think @Denbrought brought up a salient point. Big pharma funded this study (in part anyway). Are they developing some carbohydrate metabolism blocking drug? And, will they claim that it will prevent heart disease? Time will tell.
... Epidemiology.....socioeconomic ... correlation/association b/t the questionaire and the heart attack.
... a chicken and the egg thing. This study stated that the participants self-reported... dementia... carbohydrate intake was associated with an adverse impact on total mortality, whereas fats including saturated and unsaturated fatty acids were associated with lower risk of total mortality and stroke. We did not observe any detrimental effect of fat intakes on cardiovascular disease events.
... quantify separately the types of carbohydrate... carbohydrate consumption in low-income and middle-income countries is mainly from refined sources.
Certainly interesting, but it does make the argument that we should be living as our ancestors did. Similar to some fad diets, I'm not sure that's a perfectly solid foundation, but it's a good place to start and consider things.
I went to her Nutritious Movement website, and there’s just something about it that sets off the bullshit detector. There aren’t any exercises on the site (that I could find), but she has a lot of books/DVDs/seminars to sell you to tell you about them! And her About page is like a textbook definition of “privilege”. Not only being able to afford to refurnish her house, being able to “break up her work day” with chores around the house and walking around outside, and sending her children to a “nature school”, but also some ageism and ableism thrown in to boot (Like her suggestion is to keep some folding chairs around for elderly and disabled guests. Yeah, my grandmas would have loooooooved sitting on a folding chair for a week. )
Also, while watching that video, all I could think of was all the sedentary people who sat at desks and worked on assembly lines to invent/create the audio equipment, computers, programming languages, software, communications infrastructure, and internet that allowed her to create her YouTube video criticizing desk sitting and assembly line work.
To me, it looks like the big secret (without all the privileged “hunter-gatherer lifestyle” bullshit) is “do some stretching/yoga every day”. Which any physical therapist would tell you. And can be done in modified forms at your desk/workstation. And there’s tons of free resources to get you started. (There, I saved you $19.95.)