Air quaity becoming a growing risk for premature CVD death and disability worldwide

by The American Heart Association

DALLAS — The impact of particulate matter air pollution on death and disability is on the rise worldwide, according to new research published today in the Journal of the American Heart Association, an open access, peer-reviewed journal of the American Heart Association.

Previous research established the association of particulate matter (PM) pollution to CVD death and disability. However, questions remain about the worldwide impact from this type of pollution and how it has been changing over time, the study authors noted.

“We focused on examining the burden globally because particulate matter pollution is a widespread environmental risk factor that affects all populations worldwide, and understanding its impact on cardiovascular health can help guide public health interventions and policy decisions,” said Farshad Farzadfar, M.D., M.P.H., D.Sc., senior author of the study and a professor of medicine in the non-communicable diseases research center of the Endocrinology and Metabolism Research Institute at Tehran University of Medical Sciences in Iran.

The researchers analyzed PM pollution as a risk factor for death and disability using freely available data from 204 countries collected between 1990 and 2019 and detailed in the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study. Exposure to PM pollution was estimated using a tool from the 2019 update to the GBD study that incorporated information from satellite and ground-level monitoring, computer models of chemicals in the atmosphere and land-use data.

Among the many types of heart disease, the current analysis of cardiovascular disease is restricted to stroke and ischemic heart disease (a lack of blood and oxygen supply to portions of the heart, usually due to plaque build-up in the arteries) because the 2019 GBD study on the global burden of disease attributed to PM pollution only examined these two diagnoses. The Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), which provides the GBD estimates, only reports data for a certain risk factor if there is a large body of evidence about its association with a disease, Farzadfar noted.

“Until now, only the association of PM pollution with ischemic heart disease and stroke has been demonstrated in a large number of studies,” Farzadfar said. “The IHME may include other CVDs in the future. Moreover, ischemic heart disease and stroke contribute to a significant majority of CVDs, and our estimates, despite having limitations, may be used as a good estimate of PM pollution burden on CVDs.”

The investigators analyzed changes over time in years of life lost due to premature death (YLLs), years lived with disability (YLDs) and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs). DALYs is a measure that considers both the loss of life and the impact on quality of life to assess the full impact of a health condition on a population. The cardiovascular disease burden was assessed both overall and with age standardization, which compares health outcomes across a population with a wide range of ages.

The analysis found:

  • The total number of premature deaths and years of cardiovascular disability from cardiovascular diseases attributable to PM air pollution rose from 6.8 million in 1990 to 8.9 million in 2019, a 31% worldwide increase.
  • The increase in overall deaths was unevenly distributed, with a 43% increase among men compared to a 28.2% increase among women.
  • Between 1990 and 2019, there was a 36.7% decrease in age-standardized premature deaths attributed to PM pollution, meaning that while fewer people had died from cardiovascular disease, people are living longer with disability.
  • Regions with higher socioeconomic conditions had the lowest number of lost years of life due to cardiovascular disease attributed to PM pollution, yet also the highest number of years lived with disability. The opposite was true in regions with lower socioeconomic conditions, with more lives lost and fewer years lived with disability.
  • Between 1990 and 2019, changes in the cardiovascular impact of PM pollution differed between men and women. In all measures, increases in disability and death from ambient PM air pollution were higher in men than women, while declines in disability and death from household PM air pollution were lower in women than men.

“The declines in deaths may be considered positive news, as they indicate improvements in health care, air pollution control measures and access to treatment. However, the increase in disability-adjusted life years suggests that although fewer people were dying from cardiovascular disease, more people were living with disability,” Farzadfar said.

The researchers also found that between 1990 and 2019, age-standardized CVD death and disability attributed to outdoor PM pollution rose by 8.1%, while age-standardized cardiovascular death and disability attributed to household PM pollution, which is produced by solid cooking fuels such as coal, charcoal, crop residue, dung and wood, fell by 65.4%.

“The reason for the decrease in the burden of household air pollution from solid fuels might be better access and use of cleaner fuels, such as refined biomass, ethanol, liquefied petroleum gas, solar and electricity. Moreover, structural changes, such as improved cookstoves and built-in stoves, chimney hoods and better ventilation, might be effective in reducing pollution exposure to solid fuels. Finally, the effects of educational and behavioral interventions should be considered,” Farzadfar said. “The shifting pattern from household air pollution due to solid fuels to outdoor, ambient PM pollution has important public policy implications.”

In a 2020 scientific statement and a 2020 policy statement, the American Heart Association details the latest science about air pollution exposure and the individual, industrial and policy measures to reduce the negative impact of poor air quality on cardiovascular health. Reducing exposure to air pollution and reversing the negative impact of poor air quality on cardiovascular health, including heart disease and stroke, is essential to reducing health inequities in Black and Hispanic communities, those that have been historically marginalized and under-resourced, and communities that have the highest levels of exposure to air pollution.

The study has several limitations. Because the assessment of exposure to particulate matter pollution in the study is based on regional estimates, it may not accurately reflect individual exposure. In addition, results from this analysis of the association between particulate matter pollution and cardiovascular outcomes may not be generalizable to other health conditions or other pollutants.


Fatal heart attack risks may be higher during days with extreme heat & air pollution

by The American Heart Association


Our findings provide evidence that reducing exposure to both extreme temperatures and fine particulate pollution may be useful to prevent premature deaths from heart attack, especially for women and older adults

DALLAS — The combination of soaring heat and smothering fine particulate pollution may double the risk of heart attack death, according to a new study of more than 202,000 heart attack deaths in China. The study published today in the American Heart Association’s flagship journal Circulation.

"Extreme temperature events are becoming more frequent, longer and more intense, and their adverse health effects have drawn growing concern. Another environmental issue worldwide is the presence of fine particulate matter in the air, which may interact synergistically with extreme temperatures to adversely affect cardiovascular health," said senior author Yuewei Liu, M.D., Ph.D., an associate professor of epidemiology in the School of Public Health at Sun Yat-sen University in Guangzhou, China. "However, it remains unknown if and how co-exposure to extreme temperatures and fine particulate pollution might interact to trigger a greater risk of death from heart attack, which is an acute response potentially brought on by an acute scenario and a great public health challenge due to its substantial disease burden worldwide."

AHA Logo To examine the impact of extreme temperatures with and without high levels of fine particulate pollution, the researchers analyzed 202,678 heart attack deaths between 2015-2020 that occurred in Jiangsu province, a region with four distinct seasons and a wide range of temperatures and fine particulate pollution levels. The deaths were among older adults with an average age of 77.6 years; 52% were older than age 80; and 52% were male. Particulate exposure on the day of each death and one day before death were included in the analysis.

Extreme temperatures were gauged according to the daily heat index (also referred to as apparent temperature) for an area, which captures the combined effect of both heat and humidity. Both the length and extremeness of heat waves and cold snaps were evaluated. Heart attack deaths, or case days, during these periods were compared with control days on the same day of the week in the same month — meaning that if a death occurred on a Wednesday, all other Wednesdays in the same month would be considered control days. Particulate levels were considered high on any day with an average level of fine particulate matter above 37.5 micrograms per cubic meter.

"Our findings provide evidence that reducing exposure to both extreme temperatures and fine particulate pollution may be useful to prevent premature deaths from heart attack, especially for women and older adults," Liu said.

Compared with control days, the risk of a fatal heart attack was observed at the following levels:

  • 18% higher during 2-day heat waves with heat indexes at or above the 90th percentile (ranging from 82.6 to 97.9 degrees Fahrenheit), increasing with temperature and duration, and was 74% higher during 4-day heat waves with heat indexes at or above the 97.5th percentile (ranging from 94.8 to 109.4 degrees Fahrenheit). For context, 6,417 (3.2%) of the 202,678 observed deaths from heart attack happened during heat waves with heat indexes at or above the 95th percentile (ranging from 91.2 to 104.7 degrees Fahrenheit) for three or more days.
  • 4% higher during 2-day cold snaps with temperatures at or below the 10th percentile (ranging from 33.3 to 40.5 degrees Fahrenheit), increasing with lower temperatures and duration, and was 12% higher during 3-day cold snaps with temperatures at or below the 2.5th percentile (ranging from 27.0 to 37.2 degrees Fahrenheit). For context, 6,331 (3.1%) of the 202,678 observed deaths from heart attack happened during cold spells with temperatures at or below the 5th percentile (ranging from 30.0 to 38.5 degrees Fahrenheit) for 3 or more days.
  • Twice as high during 4-day heat waves that had fine particulate pollution above 37.5 micrograms per cubic meter. Days with high levels of fine particulate pollution during cold snaps did not have an equivalent increase in the risk of heart attack death.
  • Generally higher among women than men during heat waves.
  • Higher among people ages 80 and older than in younger adults during heat waves, cold snaps or days with high levels of fine particulate pollution.
  • The mean age of all individuals who died from a heart attack in Jiangsu from 2015-2020, including during non-extreme temperature events, was 77.6 years old; 52.1% of these individuals were over 80 years old.

    The researchers estimated that up to 2.8% of heart attack deaths may be attributed to the combination of extreme temperatures and high levels of fine particulate pollution (> 37.5 micrograms per cubic meter), according to WHO targets.


    Reducing exposure to air pollution and reversing the negative impact of poor air quality on cardiovascular health, including heart disease and stroke, is essential to reducing health inequities in Black and Hispanic communities.

    "Strategies for individuals to avoid negative health effects from extreme temperatures include following weather forecasts, staying inside when temperatures are extreme, using fans and air conditioners during hot weather, dressing appropriately for the weather, proper hydration and installing window blinds to reduce indoor temperatures," said Liu. "Using an air purifier in the house, wearing a mask outdoors, staying clear of busy highways when walking and choosing less-strenuous outdoor activities may also help to reduce exposure to air pollution on days with high levels of fine particulate pollution. To improve public health, it is important to take fine particulate pollution into consideration when providing extreme temperature warnings to the public."

    In a 2020 scientific statement and a 2020 policy statement, the American Heart Association details the latest science about air pollution exposure and the individual, industrial and policy measures to reduce the negative impact of poor air quality on cardiovascular health. Reducing exposure to air pollution and reversing the negative impact of poor air quality on cardiovascular health, including heart disease and stroke, is essential to reducing health inequities in Black and Hispanic communities, those that have been historically marginalized and under-resourced, and communities that have the highest levels of exposure to air pollution.

    The investigators recommended additional research about the possible interactive effects of extreme weather events and fine particulate pollution on heart attack deaths in areas with different temperature and pollution ranges to confirm their findings. The study did not include adjustments for any adaptive behaviors taken by individuals, such as using air conditioning and staying indoors, when temperatures are extreme or pollution levels are high, which could cause misclassification of individuals’ exposure to weather and alter their risk patterns. These results also may not be generalizable to other regions in China or other countries due to potential variations of adaption capacity and temperature distribution.




  • Shoveling heavy snow may increase risk of a heart attack or sudden cardiac episode

    Photo: Todd Trapani/Unsplash

    DALLAS — Clearing sidewalks and driveways of snow may be essential to keep from being shut in, however, the American Heart Association urges caution when picking up that shovel or even starting the snowblower. Research shows that many people may face an increased risk of a heart attack or sudden cardiac arrest after shoveling heavy snow.

    The American Heart Association’s 2020 scientific statement, Exercise-Related Acute Cardiovascular Events and Potential Deleterious Adaptations Following Long-Term Exercise Training: Placing the Risks Into Perspective–An Update, notes snow shoveling among the physical activities that may place extra stress on the heart, especially among people who aren’t used to regular exercise. Numerous scientific research studies over the years have identified the dangers of shoveling snow for people with and without previously known heart disease.

    The lead author of that scientific statement and long-time American Heart Association volunteer Barry Franklin, Ph.D., FAHA, is one of the leading experts on the science behind the cardiovascular risks of snow shoveling. He has authored a number of studies on the topic, estimating that hundreds of people die during or just after snow removal in the U.S. each year.

    "Shoveling a little snow off your sidewalk may not seem like hard work. However, the strain of heavy snow shoveling may be as or even more demanding on the heart than taking a treadmill stress test, according to research we’ve conducted." said Franklin, a professor of internal medicine at Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine in Royal Oak, Michigan. "For example, after only two minutes of snow shoveling, study participants’ heart rates exceeded 85% of maximal heart rate, which is a level more commonly expected during intense aerobic exercise testing. The impact is hardest on those people who are least fit."

    A study conducted in Canada a few years ago found that the chance of heart attack after a snowfall increased among men but not among women. The study found that, compared to no snowfall, a heavy snow – about 7-8 inches – was associated with 16% higher odds of men being admitted to the hospital with a heart attack, and a 34% increase in the chance of men dying from a heart attack.

    Photo provided by AHA

    Franklin said winter weather in general can contribute to the increased risk. Cold temperatures may increase blood pressure while simultaneously constricting the coronary arteries. Those factors, combined with the higher heart rate from the extra physical effort, may increase the risk for acute cardiac events. There are even studies that show an increased risk for heart attacks among people using automatic snow blowers. Similar to the extra exertion of pushing shovel, pushing a snow blower can raise heart rate and blood pressure quickly.

    "The impact of snow removal is especially concerning for people who already have cardiovascular risks like a sedentary lifestyle or obesity, being a current or former smoker, having diabetes, high cholesterol or high blood pressure, as well as people who have had a heart attack or stroke," he said. "People with these characteristics and those who have had bypass surgery or coronary angioplasty simply should not be shoveling snow."

    Franklin said the most important thing is to be aware of the dangers, be prepared and take it easy, including taking short breaks. Even people who are relatively healthy should note that pushing the snow with a shovel is better physically than lifting and throwing it.

    The American Heart Association urges everyone to learn the common signs of heart trouble and if you experience chest pain or pressure, lightheadedness or heart palpitations or irregular heart rhythms, stop the activity immediately. Call 9-1-1 if symptoms don’t subside shortly after you stop shoveling or snow blowing. If you see someone collapse while shoveling snow, call for help and start Hands-Only CPR if they are unresponsive with no pulse.

    Learn more about cold weather and cardiovascular disease here.


    Hypertension is a key risk factor for cardiovascular disease

    DALLAS - High levels of lipoprotein(a), a type of “bad” cholesterol, may be associated with a 24% higher risk of cardiovascular disease among people who have hypertension, however, CVD risk was not higher among those without hypertension, according to new research published today in Hypertension, an American Heart Association journal.

    “High blood pressure is a known cardiovascular disease risk factor, and lipoprotein(a) is a type of inherited ‘bad’ cholesterol that may also lead to cardiovascular disease,” said lead study author Rishi Rikhi, M.D., M.S., a cardiovascular medicine fellow at Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. “We found that among people with hypertension who have never experienced a stroke or heart attack before, lipoprotein(a) seems to increase the risk of cardiovascular disease and risk of a major cardiovascular event like heart attack or stroke.”

    Hypertension is a key risk factor for cardiovascular disease. In this study, hypertension was defined as a top number of 140 mmHg or higher, a bottom number of 90 or mmHg or the use of blood pressure medication. In 2017, the Association updated its definition of hypertension to be a top number of 130 mmHg or higher or a bottom number of 80 mmHg or higher.  Previous studies have indicated that when a person has hypertension and lipid imbalance, or dyslipidemia, their cardiovascular disease risk substantially increases. According to the study’s authors, there is less information on how much of an affect lipoprotein(a) may have on cardiovascular disease risk among people with hypertension.

    Lipoproteins, which are made up of protein and fat, carry cholesterol through the blood. The subtypes of lipoproteins include low-density lipoprotein (LDL), high-density lipoprotein (HDL) and lipoprotein(a), or Lp(a). Much like LDL cholesterol, lipoprotein(a) cholesterol may deposit and build up in the walls of blood vessels, thus increasing a person’s risk of a heart attack or stroke.

    The research used health data from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) study, an ongoing community-based study in the U.S. of subclinical cardiovascular disease—meaning the disease is discovered before there are clinical signs and symptoms. MESA is a research study including nearly 7,000 adults that began in 2000 and is still following participants in six locations across the U.S.: Baltimore; Chicago; New York; Los Angeles County, California; Forsyth County, North Carolina; and St. Paul, Minnesota. At the time of enrollment in the study, all participants were free from cardiovascular disease.

    The current study included 6,674 MESA participants who had lipoprotein(a) levels and blood pressure assessed and for whom there was documented cardiovascular disease event data throughout MESA’s follow-up exams in approximately 2001, 2003, 2004, 2006, 2010, 2017 and in telephone interviews every 9 to 12 months to gather interim data on new diagnoses, procedures, hospitalization and deaths. The study’s participants were from diverse racial and ethnic groups: 38.6% self-identified as white adults; 27.5% self-identified as African American adults; 22.1% self-identified as Hispanic adults; and 11.9% self-identified as Chinese American (n=791) adults.  Additionally, more than half of the group was female (52.8%).

    To evaluate the potential correlation between hypertension and lipoprotein(a) on the development of cardiovascular disease, the researchers first categorized the participants into groups based on their lipoprotein(a) levels and blood pressure measures obtained once at baseline:

    • Group 1 (2,837 people): lipoprotein(a) levels less than 50 mg/dL and no hypertension.
    • Group 2 (615 people): lipoprotein(a) levels greater than or equal to 50mg/dL and no hypertension
    • Group 3 (2,502 people): lipoprotein(a) levels less than 50mg/dL and hypertension
    • Group 4 (720 people): lipoprotein(a) levels ≥ 50mg/dL and hypertension

    Participants were followed for an average of approximately 14 years and cardiovascular events, including heart attack, cardiac arrest, stroke or death from coronary artery disease, were tracked.

    The study’s results include:

    • A total of 809 of the participants experienced a cardiovascular disease event.
    • Lipoprotein(a) levels had an effect on hypertension status that was statistically significant (meaning it was not due to chance).
    • When compared to Group 1 (low lipoprotein(a) levels and no hypertension), Group 2 (higher lipoprotein(a) levels and no hypertension) did not have an increased risk for cardiovascular disease events.
    • Less than 10% of Group 1 (7.7%) and Group 2 (participants 8%) had cardiovascular disease events.
    • Participants in Groups 3 and 4, all of whom had hypertension, demonstrated a statistically significant increase in risk for cardiovascular disease events when compared to those in Group 1.
    • Approximately 16.2% of the people in Group 3 (lower lipoprotein(a) levels and hypertension) had cardiovascular disease events, and 18.8% of the participants in Group 4 (higher lipoprotein(a) levels and hypertension) experienced cardiovascular disease events.

    “We found that the overwhelming amount of cardiovascular risk in this diverse population appears to be due to hypertension,” Rikhi said. “Additionally, individuals with hypertension had even higher cardiovascular risk when lipoprotein(a) was elevated. The fact that lipoprotein(a) appears to modify the relationship between hypertension and cardiovascular disease is interesting, and suggests important interactions or relationships for hypertension, lipoprotein(a) and cardiovascular disease, and more research is needed.”

    Everyone can improve their cardiovascular health by following the American Heart Association’s Life’s Essential 8: eating healthy food, being physically active, not smoking, getting enough sleep, maintaining a healthy weight, and controlling cholesterol, blood sugar and blood pressure levels. Cardiovascular disease claims more lives each year in the U.S. than all forms of cancer and chronic lower respiratory disease combined, according to the American Heart Association.


    Your health: Excessive alcohol consumption can be deadly for young adults

    URBANA -- For many adults, alcohol is part of unwinding after a stressful work week. There are the usual reminders about having a sober driver, knowing your limits and mixing in water between your beers. But experts are also warning about the dangers of excessive drinking or binge drinking, which is having several drinks on one occasion.


    Photo provided
    Dr. Andrew Zasada

    Two recent studies shed light on the dangers. One reported that around one in five deaths among people aged 20 to 49 was attributed to excessive alcohol use. The other study published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine linked binge drinking to problems like alcohol addiction, emotional symptoms and not getting along with friends, family and coworkers. This was true in study participants who didn’t even consider themselves heavy drinkers.

    The dangers

    How quickly can binge drinking turn problematic?

    "Very easily," says Andrew Zasada, MD, an internal medicine physician at OSF HealthCare in Champaign County, Illinois.

    Dr. Zasada says for women, binge drinking is defined as five or more drinks on one occasion, like a night out on the town that lasts three to four hours. For men, it’s 15 drinks. That takes into account the differences in how men’s and women’s bodies metabolize alcohol.

    Dr. Zasada says the internal issues linked with excessive alcohol use can be devastating.

    "It can cause brain dysfunction. It can cause liver disease and stomach ulcers," Dr. Zasada says. "It’s just not a good thing. It can cause a wide variety of problems."

    Not to mention the outward symptoms like: acne, redness on your nose and palms and dry, wrinkled skin that makes you look older. And drinking during pregnancy can lead to a host of problems for the child, like facial abnormalities and developmental deficits.

    "A lifetime of misery" for the little one, as Dr. Zasada puts it.

    Safety, recovery

    Just like there’s no magic way to prevent or cure a hangover, there’s no magic number of drinks to have on a night out that will make you immune to alcohol problems. But for Fourth of July revelers, Dr. Zasada has this advice: take it slow.

    "If you’re an average size gentleman, probably a beer an hour is just about the max you can drink," he says.

    Dr. Zasada says are there many ways to help people who are drinking in excess. In the short term, such as during a party, call 911 if the person needs immediate medical attention. If they just need a break, take the person away from the clatter to rest. Take their car keys, and give them some water. A painkiller like Tylenol in appropriate doses can help with that hangover headache the next day.

    Long term, a patient’s primary care provider can link them with resources to curb drinking, such as Alcoholics Anonymous or treatment centers. The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism also has resources. And within OSF HealthCare’s footprint, Illinois and Michigan have phone numbers to call for behavioral health issues.

    "If the person is trying to deny that they drink at all; if they are drinking alone when there is nobody else around; if they're trying to hide or cover up their drinking, those are all fairly serious warning signs that this person needs help," Dr. Zasada says.

    Dr. Zasada says it’s never too late to kick the habit of excessive drinking, but sooner is better.

    "It's easier to mitigate any problems that have already occurred earlier, rather than wait for the problem to get very, very serious, very bad, and then quit," he says. "Yeah, you'll get better. But you won't go back to what you were."

    That "getting better" looks like a lot of things.

    "You might lose weight. You might lower your blood pressure. It may increase heart health," Dr. Zasada says. "You'll think clearer. You'll sleep better."


    Tabacco industry made an intense effort to market methol cigarettes in Black communitites

    Photo: Frank K/PEXELS
    A study by Stanford Research into the Impact of Tobacco Advertising (SRITA)and the American Heart Association, found overwhelming evidence showing that tobacco companies directly target populations including Black communities, women and youth with menthol cigarettes, which make it easier to get hooked and are much tougher to quit.

    DALLAS -- The massive growth in popularity of menthol cigarettes over several decades is the result of the tobacco industry’s intense and persistent targeting of Black communities, women and youth – a campaign the industry continues today with new products and marketing campaigns. These are the findings of a new research study by Stanford Research into the Impact of Tobacco Advertising (SRITA), a research unit of Stanford Medicine, and the American Heart Association, the world’s leading voluntary organization focused on heart and brain health.

    The report comes as the Food & Drug Administration weighs public comments on draft rules to remove menthol cigarettes and flavored cigars from the market, and as a growing number of states and localities act to stop the sale of menthol cigarettes and other flavored tobacco products. Massachusetts and 160 localities nationwide currently restrict the sale of menthol cigarettes, in addition to other flavored tobacco products. In November, California voters will consider a ballot measure to prohibit flavored tobacco products including menthol.

    “This study is a compelling addition to the overwhelming evidence showing that tobacco companies directly target populations including Black communities, women and youth with menthol cigarettes, which make it easier to get hooked and are much tougher to quit than other tobacco products,” said Rose Marie Robertson, M.D., FAHA, deputy chief science and medical officer of the American Heart Association and co-director of the Association’s National Institutes of Health/Food and Drug Administration-funded Tobacco Center of Regulatory Science. “Nearly a century of disgraceful behavior by the tobacco companies has made clear that menthol and other flavored tobacco products threaten public health and perpetuate inequities – they should no longer be sold.”

    Menthol cigarettes are used by 85% of Black people who smoke and 44% of women who smoke, compared to 30% of non-Hispanic white people who smoke. More than half of teens who begin smoking start with a menthol brand. Numerous studies have shown that the cooling sensation of menthol cigarettes makes them easier to inhale deeply, which leads to a higher dose of nicotine and a stronger addiction as compared to other cigarettes.

    The study finds that disproportionately high use of menthol cigarettes by Black people, women and youth, as well as others including Hispanic people (48% of Hispanic people who smoke use menthol brands), is not the result of organically evolving consumer preferences over time. Rather, it is the result of decades of high-dollar marketing campaigns explicitly targeting these populations.

    The industry’s efforts continue today in a market dominated by categorical menthol brands such as Newport, Kool and Salem, which are joined by menthol extensions of major cigarette brands including Marlboro, Camel and Pall Mall. One measure of the tobacco industry’s strong emphasis on menthol is the number of menthol variants sold in the marketplace. For example, Marlboro cigarettes are sold in 11 menthol variants, including Black Menthol, Smooth Ice and Bold Ice; Camel sells 12 types of menthol cigarettes, including Crush Smooth and Crush Rich; and market leader Newport offers seven menthol variants, including Smooth, Boost and Boost Gold.

     

    Tobacco companies’ recent tactics: flavor bursts, additives and greenwashing

    The study finds that tobacco companies have evolved their products with capsule cigarettes, which contain a sphere of flavored liquid in the filter that when squeezed produces a burst of intense flavor. Known as “crushers,” “clickers,” “kickers,” “infusers” and “squeezers,” capsules serve as a flavor booster in menthol cigarettes and are sold on the U.S. market by Camel, Marlboro, Lucky Strike, Newport and Pall Mall.

    Capsules and other innovations including infusion cards, infused paper, flavor caps and flavor stones also serve as on-demand menthol additives in unflavored cigarettes. These post-market additives enable sellers to circumvent restrictions on menthol tobacco sales. Tobacco companies also attempt to sidestep sales restrictions by offering numerous menthol and mint varieties in categories including e-cigarettes, cigarillos, chewing tobacco, snus and hookah that are currently regulated differently than traditional cigarettes.

    Another new industry marketing tactic is the depiction of menthol products as “organic,” “additive free” or “plant based”. This trend, which the study calls the “greenwashing” of menthol cigarettes, continues years of tobacco industry efforts to hide the health hazards of tobacco use to the public. A federal court in 2006 found that several major tobacco companies had violated civil racketeering laws following decades of lying to the public about the health threats of smoking.

    “Our report shows that since at least the 1930s, tobacco companies have systematically preyed on targeted populations with menthol cigarette promotions intended to get more people to start smoking a product that the companies know is both harmful to health and exceedingly difficult to quit,” said Robert K. Jackler, MD, principal investigator, Stanford Research into the Impact of Tobacco Advertising and Edward & Amy Sewall Professor, Stanford University School of Medicine. “By continuously rolling out new marketing campaigns and innovating their products to avoid oversight, the tobacco industry is intent on recruiting new tobacco users and continuing to threaten public health.”

     

    A long history of industry targeting

    The study is the result of exhaustive research of tobacco industry marketing and internal corporate correspondence since the 1930s, including company advertisements targeting specific consumer segments by skin color, gender and age over the course of decades. The study also includes excerpts from numerous internal company documents reflecting the industry’s sophisticated marketing approaches in areas including:

    • Building a menthol market in Black communities – The report examines tobacco industry efforts to sell more menthol products within Black communities by deluging urban centers with menthol cigarette advertisements on billboards, buses and subways, distributing free “starter packs” and discount coupons, and featuring prominent Black athletes and entertainers in menthol advertisements in leading Black newspapers and magazines.

    For example, industry documents show that Newport employees handing out samples in predominantly Black communities from a Newport van were instructed to “assertively ask people to accept samples of Newports” as part of an overall effort to “provide aggressive promotional and advertising support for the brand.” A 1981 RJ Reynolds corporate document stated that “the Black segment has been identified as the Brand’s Special Market priority” for its Salem brand.

    • Seizing on menthol’s popularity among women – The report states that when tobacco companies discovered that women were early adopters of menthol brands, they responded in kind with marketing campaigns such as Kool’s “Lady, Be Cool” and Salem’s “For More of a Woman,” and with brands targeting women such as Virginia Slims (“You’ve come a long way baby”), Eve and Capri.

    The Eve brand, launched in 1971 by Liggett & Myers, intentionally chose both a “feminine package design” and a “truly female name,” according to industry documents. Philip Morris Executive Larry Williams indicated that the name Virginia Slims, launched in 1968, was chosen because “most women like to think of themselves as slim.”

    • Targeting youth – Internal company documents reveal a consistent focus on attracting youth smokers since the 1920s. An internal RJ Reynolds document from September 1927 states “School days are here. And that means BIG TOBACCO BUSINESS for somebody. Let’s get it. And start after it RIGHT NOW.” In other internal correspondence, companies adopted acronyms such as “YAS” (Young Adult Smokers) and “FUBYAS” (First Usual Brand Younger Adult Smokers), referring to the targets of their youth-oriented advertising campaigns.

    Lorillard’s 1984 promotion plan for Newport noted that: “Newport's franchise represents the youngest demographic profile in the industry. This profile is enviable in terms of it being an ‘in’ brand, as well as insuring future viability as long as these smokers stay within the Newport franchise.” The patently youth-targeted “Alive with Pleasure” campaign established Newport as a dominant youth starter brand, the best-selling menthol brand, and the second best-selling cigarette in the U.S. after Marlboro. Internal Newport documents reflect that a primary market for Newport cigarettes was young African Americans. Newport’s 1992 brand plan revealed that the products was targeted “primarily to young ethnic adult smokers ages 18-24,” and that “the ethnic market could be a major source of new business for the brand that we plan to exploit it.”

    • Financing music festivals – From the Newport Jazz Festival that began in the 1950s, to the Salem Spirit Concert Series in the 1980s, to tobacco-sponsored concert series today including Kool MIXX, Marlboro’s Vinyl Vibes and Salem’s Stir the Senses, tobacco companies continue to recruit new users across populations through music events. The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act prohibited music and art event sponsorships by cigarette and oral tobacco brands, but not by cigars or emerging nicotine products such as e-cigarettes and heated tobacco.
    • Obfuscating the harms of smoking – For much of the last century, tobacco companies attempted to reassure a public increasingly worried about the health consequences of smoking through marketing campaigns with claims such as “More Doctors Smoke Camels,” and “Got a cold? Smoke a Kool.” Today, menthol tobacco advertising continues to include health reassurance messaging with the use of proxy terms such as “natural” and “organic” tobacco.

    “Exposing the ways tobacco companies target people in disadvantaged communities with products that threaten their health is core to the American Heart Association’s commitment to battling systemic racism,” said Michelle A. Albert, M.D., M.P.H., FAHA, volunteer president of the American Heart Association, immediate past president of the Association of Black Cardiologists and Walter A. Haas-Lucie Stern endowed chair in Cardiology, professor of medicine at the University of California at San Francisco. “To promote public health and achieve health equity, we must enact proven public policies that prevent the industry from engaging in practices that have contributed to the loss of millions of lives from tobacco use.” 


    Reporter panics at diagnosis, then discovers simple, no-cost solution

    Photo: Shane/Unsplash
    Sleeping on your back contributes to snoring and blockages, especially as you age and the muscles in the throat become looser. Sleeping on your side could help improve your sleep quality.

    by Jay Hancock
    Kaiser Health News

    I woke up in a strange bedroom with 24 electrodes glued all over my body and a plastic mask attached to a hose covering my face.

    The lab technician who watched me all night via video feed told me that I had “wicked sleep apnea” and that it was “central sleep apnea” — a type that originates in the brain and fails to tell the muscles to inhale.

    As a journalist — and one terrified by the diagnosis — I set out to do my own research. After a few weeks of sleuthing and interviewing experts, I reached two important conclusions.

    First, I had moderate apnea, if that, and it could be treated without the elaborate machines, mouthpieces, or other devices that specialists who had consulted on my care were talking about.

    Second, the American health care system has joined with commercial partners to define a medical condition — in this case, sleep apnea — in a way that allows both parties to generate revenue from a multitude of pricey diagnostic studies, equipment sales, and questionable treatments. I was on a conveyor belt.


    As a journalist who spent years covering the business of health care, I found there was more motivating my expensive testing cascade than concerns about my health.

    It all began with a desire for answers: I had been feeling drowsy during the day, and my wife told me I snored. Both can mean obstructive sleep apnea. With obstructive sleep apnea, the mouth and throat relax when a person is unconscious, sometimes blocking or narrowing the airway. That interrupts breathing, as well as sleep. Without treatment, the resulting disruption in oxygen flow might increase the risk of developing certain cardiovascular diseases.

    So I contacted a sleep-treatment center, and doctors gave me an at-home test ($365). Two weeks later, they told me I had “high-moderate” sleep apnea and needed to acquire a continuous positive airway pressure, or CPAP, machine, at a cost of about $600.

    Though I had hoped to get the equipment and adjust the settings to see what worked best, my doctors said I had to come to the sleep lab for an overnight test ($1,900) to have them “titrate” the optimal CPAP air pressure.

    “How do you treat central sleep apnea?” I worriedly asked the technician after that first overnight stay. She said something about an ASV (adaptive servo-ventilation) machine ($4,000). And one pricey lab sleepover wasn’t enough, she said. I needed to come back for another.

    (Most procedures and devices mentioned in this article were covered or would have been covered by insurance — in my case, Medicare, plus a supplemental plan. Unnecessary care is a big reason Americans’ insurance costs — premiums, copays, and deductibles — tend to rise year after year.)

    As a journalist who spent years covering the business of health care, I found there was more motivating my expensive testing cascade than concerns about my health.

    The American Academy of Sleep Medicine, or AASM, a nonprofit based near Chicago, decides what is sleep apnea and how to treat it. Working with sleep societies around the world, it publishes the International Classification of Sleep Disorders, relied on by doctors everywhere to diagnose and categorize disease.

    But behind that effort lie considerable conflicts of interest. Like so much of U.S. health care, sleep medicine turns out to be a thriving industry. AASM finances its operations in part with payments from CPAP machine manufacturers and other companies that stand to profit from expensive treatments and expansive definitions of apnea and other sleep disorders.

    Zoll Itamar, which makes the at-home testing device I used, as well as implantable nerve-stimulation hardware for central sleep apnea, is a $60,000, “platinum” partner in AASM’s Industry Engagement Program. So is Avadel Pharmaceuticals, which is testing a drug to treat narcolepsy, characterized by intense daytime sleepiness.


    Almost everybody breathes irregularly sometime at night, especially during REM sleep, characterized by rapid eye movement and dreams.

    Other sponsors include the maker of an anti-insomnia drug; another company with a narcolepsy drug; Fisher & Paykel Healthcare, which makes CPAP machines and masks; and Inspire Medical Systems, maker of a heavily advertised surgical implant, costing tens of thousands of dollars, to treat apnea.

    Corporate sponsors for Sleep 2022, a convention AASM put on in Charlotte, North Carolina, with other professional societies, included many of those companies, plus Philips Respironics and ResMed, two of the biggest CPAP machine makers.

    In a statement, AASM spokesperson Jennifer Gibson said a conflict-of-interest policy and a non-interference pledge from industry funders protect the integrity of the academy’s work. Industry donations account for about $170,000 of AASM’s annual revenue of about $15 million, she said. Other revenue comes from educational materials and membership and accreditation fees.

    Here’s what else I found. Almost everybody breathes irregularly sometime at night, especially during REM sleep, characterized by rapid eye movement and dreams. Blood oxygen levels also fluctuate slightly.

    But recent European studies have shown that standards under the International Classification of Sleep Disorders would doom huge portions of the general population to a sleep apnea diagnosis — whether or not people had complaints of daytime tiredness or other sleep problems.

    A study in the Swiss city of Lausanne showed that 50% of local men and 23% of the women 40 or older were positive for sleep apnea under such criteria.

    Such rates of disease are “extraordinarily high,” “astronomical,” and “implausible,” Dr. Dirk Pevernagie, a scientist at Belgium’s Ghent University Hospital, wrote with colleagues two years ago in a comprehensive study in the Journal of Sleep Research.

    “Right now, there is no real evidence for the criteria that have been put forward to diagnose obstructive sleep apnea and rate its severity,” he said in an interview.

    Likewise, 19% of middle-aged subjects in a 2016 Icelandic study appeared to have moderate to severe “apnea” under one definition in the International Classification of Sleep Disorders even though many reported no drowsiness.

    “Most of them were really surprised,” said Erna Sif Arnardóttir, who led the study and is running a large European program to refine detection and treatment of apnea.

    Nevertheless, the official AASM journal recommends extremely broad screening for sleep apnea, looking for patients who have what it defines as illness. Everybody 18 and older should be screened every year for apnea if they have diabetes, obesity, untreated high blood pressure, or heart disease — even if they have never complained about sleep problems, the group says.

    AASM “continually evaluates the definitions, criteria and recommendations used in the identification of sleep apnea and other sleep disorders,” Gibson said in the statement. Meanwhile, routine screening by primary care doctors “is a simple way” of gauging whether a high-risk patient may have obstructive sleep apnea, the statement said.

    The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, an authoritative body that reviews the effectiveness of preventive care, takes a conservative view, more like that of the European researchers, concluding there is “insufficient” evidence to support widespread screening among patients with no symptoms.

    Many insurers refuse to pay for CPAP machines and other treatments prescribed for people at the outer edges of the AASM’s apnea definition. But AASM is pressuring them to come around.

    After all my reporting, I concluded that my apnea is real, though moderate. My alarming reading in the overnight lab — diagnosed quickly as central sleep apnea — was a byproduct of the testing machinery itself. That’s a well-described phenomenon that occurs in 5% to 15% of patients.

    And when I looked closely at the results of my at-home diagnostic test, I had an epiphany: My overall score was 26 breathing interruptions and blood-oxygen level declines, on average, per hour — enough to put me in the “high-moderate” category for apnea. But when I looked at the data sorted according to sleeping positions, I saw that I scored much better when I slept on my side: only 10 interruptions in an hour.

    So I did a little experiment: I bought a $25 pulse oximeter with a smartphone app that records oxygen dips and breathing interruptions. When I slept on my side, there were hardly any.

    Now I sleep on my side. I snore less. I wake up refreshed. I’m not daytime drowsy.

    None of my specialists mentioned turning on to my side — known in medical parlance as “positional therapy” — though the intervention is recognized as effective by many researchers.

    “Positional patients … can sleep in the lateral position and sleep quite well,” said Arie Oksenberg, a sleep researcher formerly at Loewenstein Hospital in Israel.

    But it’s not easy to find this in the official AASM treatment guidelines, which instead go right to the money-making options like CPAP machines, surgery, central apnea, and mouth appliances.

    Dealing with apnea by shifting slightly in bed gets little more than a couple of paragraphs in AASM’s guideline on “other” treatments and a little box on a long and complex decision chart.

    A third or more of patients wear CPAPs only a few hours a night or stop using them. It turns out people don’t like machines in their beds.

    “Positional therapy is an effective treatment option for some patients,” said the AASM’s Gibson. But she said there are concerns about whether patients will sleep on their sides long term and whether trying to stay in one position might cause sleep interruptions itself.

    It’s true that And it often takes practice. (Some people tape a tennis ball to their pajamas to keep them off their backs.) Even conservative sleep doctors say CPAP machines are the best solution for many patients.

    But there is a largely overlooked alternative.

    “Are we missing a simple treatment for most adult sleep apnea patients?” was the name of a 2013 paper that Oksenberg and a colleague wrote about positional therapy.

    In my case, the answer was “yes.”


    Jay Hancock is a former KHN senior correspondent.

    KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

    Subscribe to KHN's free Morning Briefing.


    Heart attack risks increase as people with HIV and hepatitis C age, according to recent study

    by American Heart Association
    DALLAS -- As people with HIV age, their risk of heart attack increases far more if they also have untreated hepatitis C virus, even if their HIV is treated, according to new research published today in the Journal of the American Heart Association, an open access, peer-reviewed journal of the American Heart Association.

    Since the introduction of antiretroviral therapies to treat HIV in the late 1990s, the lifespan of people with HIV has increased dramatically. However, even with treatment, studies have found the heart disease risk among people with HIV is at least 50% higher than people without HIV. This new study evaluated if people with HIV who also have hepatitis C – a viral liver infection – have a higher risk of heart attack.

    "HIV and hepatitis C coinfection occurs because they share a transmission route - both viruses may be transmitted through blood-to-blood contact," said Keri N. Althoff, Ph.D., M.P.H., senior author of the study and an associate professor in the department of epidemiology at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore. "Due in part to the inflammation from the chronic immune activation of two viral infections, we hypothesized that people with HIV and hepatitis C would have a higher risk of heart attack as they aged compared to those with HIV alone."

    Researchers analyzed health information for 23,361 people with HIV (17% female, 49% non-Hispanic white) in the North American AIDS Cohort Collaboration on Research and Design (NA-ACCORD) between 2000 and 2017 and who had initiated antiretroviral treatment for HIV. All were between 40 to 79 years of age when they enrolled in the NA-ACCORD study (median age of 45 years). One in 5 study participants (4,677) were also positive for hepatitis C. During a median follow-up of about 4 years, the researchers compared the occurrence of a heart attack between the HIV-only and the HIV-hepatitis C co-infected groups as a whole, and by each decade of age.

    The analysis found:

  • With each decade of increasing age, heart attacks increased 30% in people with HIV alone and 85% in those who were also positive for hepatitis C.
  • The risk of heart attack increased in participants who also had traditional heart disease risk factors such as high blood pressure (more than 3 times), smoking (90%) and Type 2 diabetes (46%).
  • The risk of heart attack was also higher (40%) in participants with certain HIV-related factors such as low levels of CD4 immune cells (200cells/mm3, signaling greater immune dysfunction) and 45% in those who took protease inhibitors (one type of antiretroviral therapy linked to metabolic conditions).
  • "People who are living with HIV or hepatitis C should ask their doctor about treatment options for the viruses and other ways to reduce their cardiovascular disease risk," said lead study author Raynell Lang, M.D., M.Sc., an assistant professor in the department of medicine and community health sciences at the University of Calgary in Alberta, Canada.

    "Several mechanisms may be involved in the increased heart attack risk among co-infected patients. One contributing factor may be the inflammation associated with having two chronic viral infections," Lang said. "There also may be differences in risk factors for cardiovascular disease and non-medical factors that influence health among people with HIV and hepatitis C that plays a role in the increased risk."

    According to a June 2019 American Heart Association scientific statement, Characteristics, Prevention, and Management of Cardiovascular Disease in People Living With HIV, approximately 75% of people living with HIV are over the age of 45. "Even with effective HIV viral suppression, inflammation and immune dysregulation appear to increase the risk for heart attack, stroke and heart failure." The statement called for more research on cardiovascular disease prevention, causes and treatment in people with HIV.

    "Our findings suggest that HIV and hepatitis C co-infections need more research, which may inform future treatment guidelines and standards of care," Althoff said.

    The study is limited by not having information on additional factors associated with heart attack risk such as diet, exercise or family history of chronic health conditions. Results from this study of people with HIV receiving care in North America may not be generalizable to people with HIV elsewhere. In addition, the study period included time prior to the availability of more advanced hepatitis C treatments.

    "Because effective and well-tolerated hepatitis C therapy was not available during several years of our study period, we were unable to evaluate the association of treated hepatitis C infection on cardiovascular risk among people with HIV. This will be an important question to answer in future studies," Lang said.


    Many of the heart-related emergencies seen in ERs are due to uncontrolled high blood pressure

    DALLAS -- The top cardiovascular (CVD) diagnoses from U.S. emergency departments suggest that many cardiovascular emergencies are due to poorly controlled high blood pressure, according to a study of more than 20 million emergency department visits published Sept. 8 in the Journal of the American Heart Association, an open access, peer-reviewed journal of the American Heart Association.

    The researchers found that 13% of all heart-related emergency department diagnoses, representing more than 2.7 million people, were for "essential" hypertension, which is high blood pressure not caused by other diseases. Most cases of high blood pressure are essential hypertension.

    "These visits resulted in hospital admission less than 3% of the time and with very few deaths - less than 0.1%. This suggests that these visits were mostly related to the management of hypertension," said lead author Mamas A. Mamas, M.D., a professor of cardiology at Keele University in Stoke-on-Trent, and a consultant cardiologist at University Hospitals of North Midlands NHS Trust, both in the UK.

    For the 15 CVD conditions detailed in the study, about 30% were hypertension-related diagnoses.

    The study analyzed cardiovascular diagnoses made during emergency department visits that were part of the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample from 2016-2018. The sample was 48.7% women, and the average age was 67 years. The majority were Medicare or Medicaid participants. Men in the sample were more likely to have other diseases in addition to cardiovascular disease, such as diabetes, while women had higher rates of obesity, high blood pressure and medical conditions that affect blood vessels in the brain.

    The most common heart- or stroke-related diagnoses for women seen in the emergency department were high blood pressure (16% of visits), high blood pressure-related heart or kidney disease (14.1%) and atrial fibrillation (10.2%). The most common diagnoses for men were high blood pressure-related heart or kidney disease (14.7%), high blood pressure (10.8%) and heart attack (10.7%).

    "Previous studies have shown sex differences in patterns of CVD among hospitalized patients," Mamas said. "However, examining CVD encounters in the emergency department provides a more complete picture of the cardiovascular health care needs of men and women, as it captures encounters prior to hospitalization." He also points out that previous studies of CVD emergency visits are limited to suspected heart attack visits. "Therefore, this analysis of 15 CVD conditions helps to better understand the full spectrum of acute CVD needs, including sex disparities in hospitalization and risk of death."

    The study found that outcomes from the emergency CVD visits were slightly different for men and women. Overall, women were less likely to die (3.3% of women vs 4.3% of men) or be hospitalized (49.1% of women vs 52.3% of men) after an emergency department visit for CVD. The difference may be due to women’s generally lower risk diagnoses, said Mamas, but there could be an underestimation of deaths in women.

    "We did not track deaths outside of the hospital setting," said Mamas. "Given past evidence that women are more likely to be inappropriately discharged from the emergency department, and strong evidence for the systemic undertreatment of women, further study is warranted to track outcomes beyond the emergency department visit."

    An additional limitation of the data includes potential misdiagnosis errors in cases where the final diagnosis did not match the emergency diagnosis, particularly after a hospitalization and additional bloodwork and other health information could be obtained. Furthermore, the data is limited in that it does not capture information related to severity of disease, which may make comparisons around mortality differences between different patient groups challenging.

    "Our work with this large, nationally representative sample of cardiovascular emergency visits highlights differences in health care needs of men and women, which may be useful to inform planning and provision of health care services," said Mamas. "We also encourage further research into understanding the underlying factors driving the differences in CVD patterns and outcomes between men and women."


    Mediterranean-style diet shown to reduce risk of preeclampsia during pregnancy

    Photo: Edgar Castrejon/Unsplash

    DALLAS -- Following a Mediterranean-style diet during pregnancy was associated with a reduced risk of developing preeclampsia, and Black women appeared to have the greatest reduction of risk, according to new research published today in the Journal of the American Heart Association, an open access, peer-reviewed journal of the American Heart Association.

    Previous studies have found that following a Mediterranean diet, which consists primarily of vegetables, fruits, legumes, nuts, olive oil, whole grains, and fish, reduces heart disease risk in adults.

    Preeclampsia, a condition during pregnancy characterized by severe high blood pressure and liver or kidney damage, is a major cause of complications and death for the mother and her unborn child. Preeclampsia also increases a woman’s risk of heart diseases, such as high blood pressure, heart attack, stroke or heart failure, by more than two times later in life. Women with preeclampsia have a higher risk of preterm delivery (giving birth before 37 weeks gestation) or low birth weight babies, and children born to mothers with preeclampsia are also at higher risk of developing high blood pressure and heart disease.

    Black women are at higher risk of developing preeclampsia, yet research on potential treatments for high-risk women are limited, according to the study researchers. The researchers investigated the potential association of a Mediterranean-style diet among a large group of racially and ethnically diverse women who have a high risk of preeclampsia.

    “The U.S. has the highest maternal mortality rate among developed countries, and preeclampsia contributes to it,” said Anum S. Minhas, M.D., M.H.S., chief cardiology fellow and a cardio-obstetrics and advanced imaging fellow at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. “Given these health hazards to both mothers and their children, it is important to identify modifiable factors to prevent the development of preeclampsia, especially among Black women who are at the highest risk of this serious pregnancy complication.”

    This study included data for more than 8,500 women enrolled between 1998 and 2016 in the Boston Birth Cohort. Participants’ median age was 25 years old, and they were recruited from Boston Medical Center, which serves a predominantly urban, low-income, under-represented racial and ethnic population. Nearly half of the participants were Black women (47%), about a quarter were Hispanic women(28%) and the remaining were white women or “other” race, according to self-reported information on a postpartum questionnaire. Researchers created a Mediterranean-style diet score based on participants’ responses to food frequency interviews and questionnaires, which were conducted within three days of giving birth.

    The analysis found:

  • 10% of the study participants developed preeclampsia.

  • Women who had any form of diabetes before pregnancy and pre-pregnancy obesity were twice as likely to develop preeclampsia compared to women without those conditions.

  • The risk of preeclampsia was more than 20% lower among the women who followed a Mediterranean-style diet during pregnancy.

  • Black women who had the lowest Mediterranean-style diet scores had the highest risk (72% higher) for preeclampsia compared to all other non-Black women who more closely adhered to the Mediterranean-style diet.
  • “We were surprised that women who more frequently ate foods in the Mediterranean-style diet were significantly less likely to develop preeclampsia, with Black women experiencing the greatest reduction in risk,” Minhas said. “This is remarkable because there are very few interventions during pregnancy that are found to produce any meaningful benefit, and medical treatments during pregnancy must be approached cautiously to ensure the benefits outweigh the potential risks to the mother and the unborn child.”

    Minhas added, “Women should be encouraged to follow a healthy lifestyle, including a nutritious diet and regular exercise, at all stages in life. Eating healthy foods regularly, including vegetables, fruits and legumes, is especially important for women during pregnancy. Their health during pregnancy affects their future cardiovascular health and also impacts their baby’s health.”

    The study’s limitations are related to the food frequency interviews: they were conducted once after the pregnancy, and they relied on self-reported information about which foods were eaten and how frequently they were eaten.


    For night owls the pandemic may have improved sleep habits

    by Krishna Sharma, Kaiser Health News

    Photo: Victoria Heath/Unsplash

    Many so-called night people feel that, when it comes to society’s expectations about when the workday should start, they drew the short straw.

    Research shows that “night owls” are hard-wired to sleep later, yet 9-to-5 work schedules force them to battle their physiology and wake up early. Research also has shown that conventional timetables leave them vulnerable to physical and mental health issues.

    “It is harder for night owls to function in the world because they’re out of sync with the conventional schedule,” said Kelly Baron, an associate professor at the University of Utah who studies sleep health and clinically treats patients who have insomnia. She noted that poor sleep is also a driver of worker absenteeism and use of sick days. “We would get better performance out of employees if they were allowed to work at their best working time.”

    Her research has found that keeping late evening hours can cause even healthy night owls to be prone to bad habits like eating fast food, not exercising, and socializing less.

    But the covid-19 pandemic, which forced many people to telework, allowed more flexibility in work schedules, prompting sleep scientists to rethink assumptions about sleep and how to assess patients.

    The pandemic “was an international experiment to understand how sleep changes when work hours and work environments change,” said Baron.

    Researchers in Italy are among those tapping into this question. In a recent study, they found that many Italians who don’t typically fit into a traditional daylight timetable thrived and their health improved when the pandemic’s remote working conditions allowed them to work later hours.

    Federico Salfi, a doctoral student at the University of L’Aquila and self-professed night owl, joined with colleagues late in 2020 to examine how the work-from-home trend influenced Italian sleep habits. Through social media, they identified 875 people who represented in-office and remote workers. They then used web-based questionnaires to discover the impacts of remote working on sleep health. The findings: The pandemic’s work-from-home flexibility helped the participants better align their work and sleep schedules — many of them for the first time.

    More specifically, the researchers found evidence that evening-type people slept longer and better while working from home, with a corresponding decrease in symptoms of depression and insomnia.

    They also pointed out an important theme that echoes other studies — that people who fall into the night-owl category regularly sleep less than early risers. On his podcast, Matthew Walker, a professor of neuroscience and psychology at the University of California-Berkeley and author of “Why We Sleep,” said it was the difference of 6.6 hours a night versus more than 7 hours a night, leading night owls to accumulate a chronic sleep debt. (The study is available as a preprint and has not yet been peer-reviewed.)

    So why don’t such people just go to bed earlier? The answer is complicated.

    To feel sleepy requires a biochemical cascade of events to kick into action, and that timing is determined by a person’s chronotype. A chronotype is an internal “body clock” that determines when people feel awake or tired during a 24-hour period. The cycles are genetically set, with about half of people falling into the midrange — meaning they neither wake at dawn nor fall asleep past midnight — and the others evenly split as morning larks or night owls.

    In prehistoric times, a mix of mismatched bedtimes served an evolutionary purpose. Evening types would watch over morning types while they slept, and vice versa. Modern society, however, rewards early risers while stigmatizing those burning the midnight oil, said Brant Hasler, associate professor at the University of Pittsburgh and part of the university’s Center for Sleep and Circadian Science. “We are catering to one portion of our population at the expense of another.”

    Walker has outlined specific health consequences on his podcast. Late-night types are 30% more likely than early birds to develop hypertension, which can lead to strokes or heart attacks, and 1.6 times as likely to have Type 2 diabetes since sleep affects blood sugar regulation. They are also two to three times as likely to be diagnosed with depression and twice as likely to use antidepressants.

    A study published in February also found that evening people who slept more during the pandemic still had remarkably poorer mental health compared with morning larks.

    Neither Walker nor Hasler was involved in the Italian study.

    Still, some experts noted that the Italian study had limitations.

    “I couldn’t find clearly included in the study: Were people always on those schedules? [Or did they change after the pandemic?] Because that is something that really matters,” said Stijn Massar, a senior research fellow at the National University of Singapore. Plus, since covid has drastically affected almost all aspects of life, pandemic-era sleep data can get muddied by the many lifestyle changes people have had to endure.

    Moreover, sleep scientists are still wondering if it is always healthier for someone to sleep in sync with their chronotype.

    It’s a question of prioritizing individual schedules versus community schedules. But “sleep is one of the great mysteries of life,” said Massar. “This is all somewhat speculative,” with each new study providing glimpses of the bigger picture.


    KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

    Subscribe to KHN's free Morning Briefing.


    Good for the heart, golfers have a significantly lower death rate

    by American Heart Association


    DALLAS -— While golfing was once known as the game of kings, the American Heart Association, the world’s leading nonprofit organization focused on heart and brain health for all, says you don’t have to be royalty or a professional player to reap health benefits from hitting the links at your local golf course. Research presented at the Association’s International Stroke Conference in 2020 found that regularly golfing – at least once per month – lowered the risk of death, especially among older adults.

    Golfing can provide benefits such as stress reduction and regular exercise. Due to its social nature and typically slower, controlled pace, people of most all ages and physical fitness levels can play the sport.

    Paul Dalbey lines up his put on the 6th green at the 2005 University of Illinois Open golf tournament. Time spent outside enjoying nature, social interaction and even the friendly competition of a round of golf is beneficial to one's health.
    Photo: PhotoNews Media/Clark Brooks
    "The regular exercise, time spent outside enjoying nature, social interaction and even the friendly competition of a round of golf are all elements that can foster mental and physical wellbeing," said Donald M. Lloyd-Jones, M.D., Sc.M., FAHA, president of the American Heart Association and chair of the department of preventive medicine, the Eileen M. Foell Professor of Heart Research and professor of preventive medicine, medicine and pediatrics at Northwestern University’s Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago. "The past couple of years have been hard and many of us have picked up some unhealthy lifestyle behaviors such as more eating and less physical activity, and we’ve missed the company of friends and family. I think golfing can offer a great opportunity to start venturing back out into an enjoyable activity that can feed our hearts and our souls."

    For the study on golfing, researchers from the University of Missouri in Columbia, analyzed data from the Cardiovascular Health Study, a population-based observational study of risk factors for heart disease and stroke in adults 65 and older. Out of nearly, 5,900 participants, average age 72, researchers identified nearly 400 regular golfers. During the 10-year follow-up period, death rates for golfers were significantly lower than for non-golfers.[1]

    A comprehensive review of research published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine analyzed more than 300 scientific studies, leading a panel of 25 public health experts to issue an international consensus statement, from several sporting and golf organizations, noting the health and social benefits of golf.

    "The American Heart Association recommends most people get at least 150 minutes of moderate-intensity exercise a week. Golfing qualifies as a moderate-intensity exercise, specifically if you are walking an 18-hole course, carrying your golf clubs," said Lloyd-Jones. "While golfing, you’re increasing your heart rate and blood flow, enhancing brain stimulation, improving your balance and socializing. Even if you are riding in a cart and playing a short course of only 9 holes, you’re still being physically active, and we know any movement is better than none."

    There are a few safety measures to take into consideration before hitting the greens. Before you start, warm up with a few stretching exercises and be sure to wear sunscreen even on cloudy days. Also, stay hydrated by drinking plenty of water and don’t get overheated. Be aware of the signs of a heat stroke and if you or your fellow golfers show any of these symptoms, call 9-1-1 and seek emergency medical help right away:

    • Fever (temperature above 104 °F)
    • Irrational behavior
    • Extreme confusion
    • Dry, hot, and red skin
    • Rapid, shallow breathing
    • Rapid, weak pulse
    • Seizures
    • Unconsciousness

    CDC’s latest guidelines on Covid risk and masking sends confusing message to Americans

    by Colleen DeGuzman, Kaiser Health News
    A shopper checks the quality of a pineapple at the supermarket. Most people have become increasingly more comfortable shopping and attending live events around the country thanks largely to the CDC's guidelines. Yet, a poll in February suggests that 49% of the population still has concerns about the relaxed public health guidance.
    Photo: Anna Shvets/Pexels

    When the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention last month unveiled updated covid-19 guidelines that relaxed masking recommendations, some people no doubt sighed in relief and thought it was about time.

    People have become increasingly comfortable being out shopping, attending live events, or meeting up with friends at restaurants. And many are ready to cast aside their masks.

    Still, a recent KFF poll pointed to an underlying tension. Just as a large swath of the American public, 62%, said that the worst of the pandemic was behind us, nearly half were worried about easing covid-related restrictions — like indoor masking — too soon. The poll, conducted in February, found that 49% of adults were either "very worried" or "somewhat worried" that lifting pandemic restrictions would cause more virus-related deaths in their communities. About 50% were "not too worried" or "not at all worried" that death tolls would rise in their communities.

    The CDC’s move triggered some of the same mixed feelings from the public that the poll uncovered and laid bare a split within the health care community.

    On the one hand, there’s applause.

    The CDC’s protocol change is an indicator that the nation is approaching a "transition from the pandemic phase to an endemic phase," said Dr. Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association. Rather than pushing messages of prevention, Benjamin said, the agency is changing its focus to monitoring for spikes of infection.

    On the other hand, there is criticism — and worry, too.

    "When I hear about relaxing regulations," said Dr. Benjamin Neuman, a Texas A&M University professor and chief virologist at its Global Health Research Complex, "it sounds a lot like people giving up. And we’re not there yet, and it’s a little bit heartbreaking and a little bit hair-pulling."

    What Are the New Guidelines, and How Are They Different?

    Before the update, the CDC considered a community at substantial or high risk if it had had an infection rate of 50 or more new cases for every 100,000 residents in the previous week.

    According to the agency’s new community-based guidance, risk levels can be low, medium, or high and are determined by looking — over a seven-day period — at three factors: the number of new covid cases in an area, the share of hospital beds being used, and hospital admissions.

    This change had a profound impact on how covid risk was measured across the country. For example, the day before the CDC announced the new guidelines, 95% of the nation’s counties were considered areas of substantial or high risk. Now, just 14% of counties fall into the high-risk category, according to the agency.

    The CDC doesn’t make specific mask recommendations for areas at low risk. For areas classified as medium risk, people who have other health problems or are immunocompromised are urged to speak to their health care provider about whether they should mask up and take other precautions. In areas deemed to be high risk, residents are urged to wear masks in indoor public spaces.

    "This more stratified approach with this combination of those factors gives us a better level of understanding of covid-19’s impact on our communities," said Keri Althoff, an epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. "Specifically, the impact of severe disease and death."

    But people shouldn’t get rid of their masks yet, she said. Even as the nation’s infection rates fall, the virus continues to spread on a global scale. "We have to fully recognize that there are so many people on this Earth who are unvaccinated internationally, and this is where the variants come from," Althoff said.

    Roses and Thorns From Experts

    The same week the CDC rolled out its new guidelines, it reported a national seven-day average of about 71,000 new covid cases, along with 5,400 hospital admissions. Around 2,000 people were dying because of the disease every day.

    It’s numbers like these that led some public health experts to question the CDC’s timing.

    "I think we have prematurely opened and prematurely unmasked so many times at this point, followed by remasking and reclosing and just seeing our hospitals absolutely swamped, that I don’t really trust this," said Texas A&M’s Neuman.

    Health News on The Sentinel

    There have been "too many times," he said, when the CDC has put down its guard and the virus came back stronger. "We’re basically taking our foot off the accelerator in terms of what we’re doing to slow down the virus, and that just means that there will be more virus going around and it’s going to keep swirling around," he said.

    The CDC’s goal for easing mask mandates, Neuman speculated, was to create regulations that are more appealing and easier for people to abide by, because "it’s hard to sell prudence as something really attractive." Plus, public health officials need to have a program that the entire country can follow, he said. The battle against the virus can’t be won with policies "that people follow in blue states but not in red states," he added, "because the virus is very much a collective risk."

    There also are questions about how effective the new approach is at signaling when risk is increasing.

    Joshua Salomon, a professor of health policy at Stanford University’s medical school, said that although the CDC designed its new guidance to incorporate a stronger indicator of surges, it has "a very late trigger."

    Salomon, along with Alyssa Bilinski, an assistant professor of health policy at Brown University, looked into the delta and omicron surges and found that a rough rule of thumb during that period was that 21 days after most states rose to the high-risk level, the death rate hit three people for every million. That equals about 1,000 deaths a day at a national level.

    The updated CDC guidance "is intended to provide a sort of warning that states are entering a period in which severe outcomes are expected," he said. But the new approach would not sound that alarm until death rates were already reaching that "quite high" mark.

    Others, though, point to another set of numbers. They say that with 65% of Americans fully vaccinated and 44% boosted as of March 8, relaxing covid protocols is the right decision.

    The new strategy is forward-looking and continues to measure and track the virus’s spread, said the APHA’s Benjamin. "It allows a way to scale up and scale back the response."

    Since the guidelines are based on seven-day averages, he added, they are a good way to monitor communities’ risk levels and gauge which set of mandates is appropriate. "So if a community goes from green to yellow to red," he said, referring to the CDC’s color-coded map that tracks counties’ covid levels, "that community will then need to modify its practices based on the prevalence of disease there."

    The guidelines, Benjamin said, are "scientifically sound, they’re practical." Over time, he added, more communities will move into the low and moderate categories. "The truth of the matter is that you just cannot keep people in the emergency state forever," he continued. "And this is never going to get to zero risk. … [Covid’s] going to be around, and so we’re going to have to learn to live with it."

    What About Those Who Are Not Eligible for a Vaccine or Are Immunocompromised?

    The CDC’s relaxed recommendations do not prevent anyone from wearing a mask. But for millions of Americans who are immunocompromised or too young to receive a vaccine, less masking means a loss of a line of defense for their health in public spaces.

    Children younger than 5 are not eligible to receive a vaccine yet, and people who are immunocompromised and are susceptible to more severe cases of the disease include cancer patients undergoing active treatment and organ transplant recipients. People living with chronic illnesses or disabilities are also vulnerable.

    "You only have control of so much," Neuman said. "And if you’re exposed to enough of the virus and you’re doing all the right things, you can still sometimes end up with a bad result."

    Masks are most effective when everyone in a room is wearing one, Neuman added, but the new mandate is similar "to victim-blaming — basically saying, ‘You have a problem and so here’s the extra burden to go with your problem.’"


    KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

    Subscribe to KHN's free Morning Briefing.



    More Sentinel Stories