Editor Emeritus on November 5th, 2005

Researchers in the US found that the antioxidants lutein and zeaxanthin were almost 10 times more powerful than vitamin E in protecting cells from UV-induced damage. These anti-oxidants are found in dark green leafy vegetables such as spinach and kale.

Cataracts are wrongly believed by many to involve a growth across the eye, blocking the pupil. In fact, cataracts result from increasing opacity, or cloudiness, of the lens of the eye. Eventually the opacity is too great for light to pass through the lens and register on the retina and visual impairment results.

Vitamin E is an antioxidant also thought to reduce the onset of eye diseases. The value of wearing UV protecting eyewear should also be remembered. Just remember to always wear them and to use the wrap-around style for maximum protection.

Until recently there has been no biochemical evidence to support the claim that the less well-known antioxidants help protect the eyes, according to researcher Joshua Bomser, from Ohio State University. "Along with the many environmental, lifestyle and genetic risk factors associated with cataracts, exposure to ultraviolet radiation from sunlight and oxidative stress appear to be the most relevant in this disease," Prof Bomser said. "Our results are the first to provide physical evidence suggesting that lutein and zeaxanthin decrease damage caused by ultraviolet radiation."

It is estimated that around 71% of over-85s have a cataract bad enough to affect their sight, with women more commonly affected than men.

The researchers found that it took far less lutein and zeaxanthin than vitamin E – about 10 times less – to get a protective effect. Prof Bomser said: "The lens is equipped with antioxidant defence mechanisms designed to guard against the harmful effects of ultraviolet radiation and oxidative stress. "In addition to protective enzymes and compounds like vitamins C and E, we think that low concentrations of lutein and zeaxanthin in the eye lens help shield the eye from the harmful effects of UVB radiation."

Just how the antioxidants enter the lens remains unknown. "Lutein and zeaxanthin accumulate in the retina and in the lens of the eye, but we’re not sure how they reach the eye in the first place. They travel through the bloodstream but the lens doesn’t have a blood supply," Prof Bomser said.

Anita Lightstone, the RNIB’s head of eye health, said: "The Royal National Institute of the Blind welcome this latest research because we have recommended for some time that eating more leafy green vegetables is important for maintaining good eye health."

Eating a diet rich in antioxidant vitamins can help prevent age-related macular degeneration, the biggest cause of blindness. So check your own diet, and the diets of those you care about. Good eyesight is precious.

Editor Emeritus on November 5th, 2005

People receiving Avinza for pain relief must be reminded to strictly avoid all alcohol while using the drug. This is a vital message as consumption of alcohol while taking Avinza may result in the rapid release and absorption of a potentially fatal dose of morphine.

The FDA alert is provided below.

Avinza (morphine sulfate extended-release capsules)
Audience: Pain specialists, other healthcare professionals and consumers
[Posted 11/03/2005] Ligand Pharmaceuticals Inc. and FDA notified healthcare professionals of revisions to BOXED WARNING, WARNINGS, PRECAUTIONS, CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, and DOSAGE AND ADMINISTRATION sections of the prescribing information to highlight and strengthen the warning that patients should not consume alcohol while taking Avinza. Additionally, patients must not use prescription or non-prescription medications containing alcohol while on Avinza therapy.

If you know someone using this medication please make them aware of this alert from the FDA and the drug manufacturer. Advise them to consult their prescriber or another health professional for assistance if necessary, to identify any other of their medications that may contain alcohol.

Editor Emeritus on November 4th, 2005

There was a time when the good name of Johns Hopkins could proudly be associated with high standards of excellence in health care. Well, perhaps that is really just rhetoric, but it was certainly true for hospital services, even if actual health care is a bit of a stretch.

Today, I have quite a different view of Johns Hopkins University and Health Services. Although it is not new, I think it is topical. This once great institution has sold its soul for a mess of pottage. These days, high cost pharmaceutical medicine is the best they have to offer and the unholy alliance between the clinical services at Johns Hopkins and the drug giant Pfizer is sad to see, if not ethically questionable.

Why is this topical? Just take a look at their extensive advertising for the cox-2 inhibitor from Pfizer known as Celebrex. This drug certainly represents big money, especially with Vioxx, a main competitor, now taken off the market.

The interesting thing to note is that there isn’t really that much difference between Vioxx and Celebrex. Both are cox-2 inhibitors, both have similar actions and both were designed for and used in the same markets as treatment for arthritis.

Now Vioxx is gone, and good riddance. Pfizer didn’t come away unscathed however, since it withdrew Bextra (valdecoxib) from the market. Celebrex remains but the cloud over it is darkening. Consider the following for example.

FDA Alert: 3/2005.  Based on emerging information, including preliminary reports from one of several long term National Institutes of Health (NIH) prevention studies, the risk of cardiovascular events (composite endpoint including MI, CVA and death) may be increased in patients receiving Celebrex. FDA will be analyzing all available information from these studies to determine whether additional regulatory action is needed.

Where does this leave the strong supporters of this dangerous drug? Just go to http://www.celebrex.com and you’ll see the sickening link between Pfizer and Johns Hopkins. It appears to leave them up the supporter’s creek without a paddle.

According to the promotional material accessible on the celebrex site, "In 2005, for the 15th straight year, U.S. News and World Report ranked Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore the No. 1 hospital in the United States." Well, that doesn’t say much for hospitals in the United States.

Still on the celebrex site, what follows from the doctors at Johns Hopkins is a sales pitch. There are reassuring references to the FDA and the awareness of the problems associated with Celebrex, but the idea is projected that somehow Celebrex has been caught up in some other drugs’ problems.

The bottom line is that Celebrex is dangerous and those who actively promote and peddle it should be held accountable when the law suits are filed. In the meantime, the stature of Johns Hopkins continues to fall, permanently tarnished as a mere shopfront for the pharmaceutical industry.

Editor Emeritus on November 4th, 2005

Major victory? That’s how Merck would like everyone to view the verdict yesterday in a New Jersey court. Merck is doing the victory dance, but I’m not buying it.

A jury found that Merck adequately warned consumers and doctors about the risk of Vioxx, a painkiller that was once widely prescribed for arthritis patients. Merck pulled Vioxx off the market last year when cumulative research linked the drug to a high risk of heart attacks and strokes.

So far, in legal terms for Merck, this is just 1-all. There are more than 6,500 similar suits awaiting trial. In the only other Vioxx trial so far, a Texas jury awarded a plaintiff $250 million in damages. Merck would love this success to be the case that influences future juries rather than the case in Texas, so you can expect plenty of news coverage.

I cannot help wondering why the time between becoming quite well aware of the risks posed by Vioxx and the eventual withdrawal of the drug isn’t being probed. I think that would prove very enlightening if probed sufficiently. What’s that sound I hear, is that a giant shredder?

There is no doubt about the fact that Vioxx was a dangerous, even lethal drug. Other synthetic cox-2 inhibitors are also risky in my opinion.

Editor Emeritus on November 4th, 2005

I came across an interesting book recently and was immediately taken by how much it agreed with what I’ve said for years. That must sound aweful, but it’s true. What is it they say; there’s nothing new under the heavens? Maybe they’re right.

Anyway, this book is about making a good brain great and it employs the deceptively obvious observation that your brain is involved in everything you do. That is almost so obvious as to be trite, but the author, Dr Daniel Amen, draws some very practical user guidelines based on the perfectly obvious.

A portion of a description of the book says:

You probably run, lift weights, or do yoga to keep your body in great shape; you put on sunscreen and lotions to protect your skin; but chances are you simply ignore your brain and trust it to do its job. People unknowingly endanger or injure their brains, stress them by working at a frenzied pace and not getting enough sleep, pollute them with caffeine, alcohol, and drugs, and deprive them of proper nutrients. Brain dysfunction is the number one reason people fail at school, work, and relationships. The brain is the organ of learning, working, and loving – the supercomputer that runs our lives. It’s very simple: when our brains work right, we work right – and when our brains have trouble, we have trouble in our lives.

Luckily, it’s never too late: the brain is capable of change, and when you care for it, the results are amazing. Making a Good Brain Great gives you the tools you need to optimize your brain power and enrich your health and your life in the process. The principles and exercises in this book, based on years of cutting-edge neuroscience research and the experiences of thousands of people, provide a wealth of practical information to teach you how to achieve the best brain possible.

Fortunately, the book does just what the description says. If I had a negative criticism it would be the medical bias of the author, but that’s to be expected from an MD. As far as MDs go however, Amen is definitely one of the more enlightened.

I particularly like the basic soundness to Amen’s approach to brain health. It is about overall health. Let’s face it, if your brain is involved in everything you do (doh…), then we should expect a broad number of activities to be related to brain health. The book spells out things like eating a brain friendly diet, taking brain supporting supplements, practicing safety to protect your brain from injury, the value to your brain from getting plenty of physical exercise and enough sleep and, very importantly, the benefits to be obtained from exercising good thinking and eliminating negative thoughts. All great stuff!

If you get the chance, grab a copy and have a good read. As a reader of The Health Gazette I already know your’re very clever. Think of this as a tune-up.