Endurance training could cause heart problems

Endurance training could exacerbate heart problems, particularly among middle-aged individuals according to scientists this month. They are adding to the ongoing debate on whether endurance training can cause heart attacks, by claiming cycling and marathon running can increase the frequency of cardiac arrhythmias in certain participants.

The researchers from Spain however, stress any risk is very low and may only occur in people with pre-existing heart problems. Sports scientist Dr Luis Mont, who led the research team said pre-training screening is crucial, but more research needs to be done. He said, “It is certainly of great interest to define which recommendations for sport should be implemented in an individual patient, and how best to manage arrhythmias in participants.” at the European Society of Cardiologists conference last month.

The paper he presented is the latest in a long line of papers which have debated the problems endurance training can cause.

Ellen Mason, a senior cardiac nurse at the British Heart Foundation says any risk to triathletes is very low explaining, “There is a term called athlete’s heart syndrome that is sometimes used for this condition.

“The general feeling is that having an athletic heart is a good thing overall, and does not pose significant risk. Although the ventricles can become thickened and the heart larger, the risk of dangerous heart rhythm disturbances is low.This is compared to people who have heart muscle dysfunction caused hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), where the heart is enlarged and the muscle thicker. The risk of dangerous ventricular rhythms in people with HCM is often quite high, requiring treatment including anti-arrhythmic drugs and/or an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD). Basically one condition is considered generally benign and HCM is pathologically abnormal. 

“The reason for testing young athletes at the start of their careers, with an ECG and echocardiogram is to identify any with underlying cardiomyopathies”

Not all is lost though, the study suggests that the drug losartan could be used to counteract the most common causes of heart arrhythmias in endurance

Controversy over effectiveness of HPV screening with cervical smears

Controversy over the effectiveness of HPV screening in addition to basic cervical smear testing has been reported by Pulse magazine today.

Currently, cervical screening involves liquid-based cytography to detect abnormalities on the cervix. This, according to Professor Henry Kitchener’s lab at The University of Manchester is adequate for effective screening which currently prevents 70 percent of cervical cancer cases in this country alone.

He claims HPV screening alongside cervical smears is no more effective than liquid-based cytography tests alone. HPV is a virus which can cause cervical cancer.

However, Professor Jack Cuzick claims in Pulse magazine that, “‘I think this study has some major issues. About another dozen studies show HPV results are better, and all other literature contradicts the results of this study.’

The University of Manchester study will continue for another three years in order to investigate if HPV testing could results in a need for fewer cervical smear tests for women in this country.

Who’s job is it anyway?

“What is crystal clear is that he didn’t spot how the growing size and increasing connectedness of financial institutions was making the Bank of England’s sterling work in controlling inflation the equivalent of re-arranging deckchairs on the Titanic.” said Robert Peston on Mervyn King’s attempts to stabilise inflation last year.

The BBC Business Editor may have had a point about King’s feeble attempts to nudge and poke the economy into shape, but following last week’s explosive Mansion House events, we have to ask if the Governor of the Bank of England had enough power to do any thing else? Last week King said it was not clear how the Bank could complete its legal duties “if we can do no more than issue sermons or organise burials.” hammering a final nail in the coffin for the tripartite system of bank regulation.

The legal duty to the Bank of England to analyse financial threats was only handed over last year, some could argue it was a token gesture when the depths the recession could take the economy became clear. Then, this month, while reform plans were being unveiled in both the UK and the USA, King made it clear he desired more authority to be able to tell the banks what to do. This is a significant departure from the current regulatory system, introduced by Gordon Brown in 1997, which has up until now been defended by the Labour party. The Liberal Democrats are behind King, but the Conservatives have failed to deliver any detailed proposals…yet.

This is an interesting and brave response by King, as he has said exactly what the Labour Party and the banks did not want to hear. If the Bank of England can not tell the banks what to do, then who can?

Darling has responded to the financial crisis by tinkering with Brown’s holy trinity of the Financial Services Authority (FSA), the Bank of England and the Treasury: the tripartite system which King claims does not stand up to the power of the banks. Darling has also refused to blame the current regulatory system for being responsible for the financial crisis, instead insisting the bank boardroom is the first line of defence against risky decision making.

The speech by Darling at Mansion House resonated strongly in the wake of sweeping reforms by the US Treasury which many claim are being made far too late. However, perhaps now is the time Darling should heed the admission by the US Treasury that: “the government could have done more to prevent many of the problems from growing out of control and threatening the stability of the financial system”, as we await the effects of the UK reforms over the next couple of months.

Women should have babies before 35

The Daily Mail has been the first to report the recent findings of a report by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists which has highlighted the difficulty many women face reproducing after the age of 35.

The study claims the optimum age to have children is between the ages of 20 and 35. One of the most likely reasons for this is the risk of preeclampsia which increases in frequency in pregnancy women under the age of 20 and over the age of 40.

Since the story was published earlier today on the Mail’s website, comments have been predictably split. Though, it is Jillie in London who almost hits the nail on the head:

“Outrageous advise ( if you can call it that) responsible people might want to be financially secure, or have a partner/husband on the scene when they start a family, to scare and badger women into having children before 35 is unforgivable, or is this a ploy by the government to ensure that there are enough young bloods to provide pensions in the years to come?”

The issue of social responsibility to reproduce or not reproduce has become increasingly antagonistic, particularly since the Optimum Population Trust launched their Stop at Two Pledge. However, this has never been an issue in Scandinavia.

Norway in particular, is responsible for launching social policy which enables women to reproduce during the optimum time period without loss of finances and therefor loss of taxes paid. Many of the Nordic countries, unlike many other developed Western countries have an increasing birth rate. It is believed that this is due to the implementation of policy including extended parental leave, subsidises child care and economic support packages for families.

Interestingly a study published in Demographic Research in 2004, showed longer maternity leave with better pay had a positive impact on the number of women reproducing in their twenties and thirties, suggesting policy can have a significant effect on when women chose to have children.

Mooncup sales on the rise

Many advocates cite the environmental benefits. (Distributed under the Creative Common's license)

Sales of menstrual cups have increased dramatically over the last year in the UK, mainly due to their increasing presence on the high street.

High street chemist Boots stocked the menstrual product in only 300 of its stores last year, but you can now buy them in 1,300. Sales have grown by 37 per cent since April 2008.

Kath Clements, a spokesperson for Mooncup UK  said, “It is now a normal thing to do rather than a fringe product. I think it has become popular during this financial crisis because it saves a lot of money and some women like the fact that it is an environmentally friendly product.”

Their product has received a lot of attention recently with a recent positive Which? review. Expert Alison Eastwood said, “four out of seven testers [became] enthusiastic converts, won over by the cost, how well it works and the convenience of not having to carry tampons about and dispose of them” 
 

In the same year, Mooncup has been awarded ‘Best Buy’ status by the Ethical Consumer Magazine.   The Mooncup is also the top rated sanitary product in The Good Shopping Guide (New Edition).

So what is the Mooncup?

Basically, it is a small silicon cup which you use in place of a tampon. It is reusable so you only need to buy one. They currently retail for around £19, but the company and coverts claim the savings quickly add up. It is registered with the Vegan Society.

Many women use it for the environmental benefits, but more use it because of heavy periods or conversely light periods. The Mooncup holds on average three times as much as a tampon or pad, but because it isn’t absorbent it can be used by people with light flows without being uncomfortable.

Mooncup UK are based near Bristol and are an ethical company which employs only eight people. (Distributed under the Creative Commons license.)

So, what’s wrong with it. Firstly it could cause problems if you are prone to urinary tract infections as it can press on the urethra in a similar way to the diaphragm. Originally, supporters of The Mooncup cited it did not carry the risk  of toxic shock syndrome which tampons did, but current medical advice suggests you do not leave anything in your vagina for longer than eight hours. The manufacturers of The Mooncup also admit their product requires a “hands on approach” which women who are used to modern products may find hard to become accustomed too.

Now the big one. Carrying it around in public is a bit of a bore. The only thing which is provided to hold it is a pretty cotton drawstring bag. It is attractive but: white, absorbent and porous. Plus, there is the issue of rinsing it out in public. The company suggest carrying a bottle of water with you to use in the cubicle, but that could end up seeming more cumbersome than what you are currently using.

Have you used the Mooncup or are you thinking about doing so? If so drop me a line on what you think of this innovative product.

Changes to cervical cancer surgery

Changes to the surgical methods used to treat early stage cervical cancer could increase survival rates by up to 20 percent, according to new research published in The Lancet.

German researchers have found a more targeted approach which involves only removing tissue in the areas where tumor is most likely to spread, is more effective at treating cervical cancer than radical hysterectomy, which is the traditional tttreatment.

By removing a more defined, section which includes the fallopian tubes, uterus, and certain parts of the vagina, radiotherapy can also be avoided.

The technique is called mesometrial resection (TMMR), and the study practised the method on 212 patients. In high risk patients the recurrence rate was only 5 percent compared to 28 percent for patients who had received traditional surgery.

The surgery also avoids a lot of potential nerve damage which is a problem experienced by a large number of women who undergo hysterectomy.

Cancer UK agree the technique shows potential and are hoping larger trials will start so the treatment can be offered to more patients.

The news comes not long after results showing the removal of ovaries during hysterectomy had no positive effect on survival rates in women(1).

1.Parker WH, Broder MS, Chang E et al. Ovarian conservation at the time of hysterectomy and long-term health outcomes in the Nurses’ Health Study. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2009;113:1027-37.