Medical Hints

Archive for the ‘Medical Research’ Category

Homeopathy, a form of alternative medicine (or if you are a skeptic, a “pseudo-science”), is the subject of much controversy. While millions of people around the globe invest in homeopathic remedies, many in the health and science communities are in an uproar due to the lack of scientific evidence for homeopathic medicine. Many consumers are also confused as to what homeopathy is, and how it differs from taking health supplements.

What is homeopathy?

Homeopathic medicine is founded on the principle that, by providing a compound that has similar effect on the body to the disease, you can fight that disease. However, it goes further than merely adding a compound with a similar impact. It dilutes the substance until the compound created has incredibly small, or no detectable, levels of the original substance. The scientific community does not argue that some benefit can be given to the health of a person if they eat an onion when they have a cold, for example, but they do argue that these immensely diluted substances have impact.

There have been numerous studies on homeopathy. While some studies have been relatively conclusive in favor of homeopathy, these studies could not be effectively replicated under controlled circumstances. Skeptics of homeopathy argue that the placebo effect, as well as the environment in which homeopathic remedies are offered, are the likely cause of increasing healthy in patients; they decrease stress in the patient, thus improving the body’s natural ability to heal itself.

What about nutritional supplements?

Nutritional supplements are different than homeopathic remedies. Many times, the vitamins, minerals, and herbal solutions that are provided come in forms that are far from diluted and have some degree of scientific evidence supporting their use. Various studies have shown the benefits of taking vitamin and mineral supplements in order to provide your body with all the correct building blocks and resources.

There are some supplements which fall into a middle ground, however. For example, echinacea, which claims to bolster the immune system, has yet to provide a conclusive study which shows this effect. The best advice is to research each supplement you’re considering prior to use.

It is a well known fact that men over fifty should get a colonoscopy for early colon cancer detection. Doing so immediately upon reaching that age can do more than provide some astute medical examination, it can save your life. However, the discomfort, both physical and mental, involved in the procedure has led many men to avoid undergoing it. A new study conducted online survey software may give some good news for those who aren’t quite to that age yet.

The study is taking place in UNCG (or the University of North Carolina). Scientists there are trying to decide for certain whether or not an alternative test could be used for early colon cancer detection. This non-invasive test, a simple urine analysis, would negate the need for the current colorectal screenings. The benefits don’t stop there, however. This examination would also be far more cost effective, less complicated, and have a lower possibility of error, if the study manages to prove that this alternative works appropriately.

The research is based on a concept known as metabolomics, or the study of metabolites on their smallest level (the molecular). Researchers examined the urine of sixty-three patients who had colon cancer and sixty who did not, looking for metabolite differences and patterns. Among the sixty-three cancer patients, sixteen metabolite substances were consistently abnormal. This included tryptophan levels, an easy to detect amino acid located inside protein strands. Researchers are hopeful that further study may be able to identify cancer through this simpler and less invasive method. There are also some hopes that the metabolite study will lead to a greater understanding of colon cancer in general, and may open doors to new treatments.

If the tests are successful, then a precise urine test would begin development. The date that this process begins to the date when it is available in standard clinics would likely span several years, and possible just over a decade. Even if successful, colorectal screening may remain the preferred method due to its proven accuracy. Regardless of the discomfort, men over fifty should get appropriate screening to catch and treat this curable cancer in the early stages.

Have you ever seen a person at a computer monitor, or television screen, staring so intently at a video game that it seems like they’re trying to cure cancer by doing it? Well, while it’s unlikely that you actually met someone who was attempting to advance medical research by gaming, it is possible that you encountered exactly that. Beginning in 2008, the University of Washington started using gamers to solve problems normally set aside for supercomputers.

The idea was relatively simple. Protein folding, a complex mathematical process that is normally reserved for high powered computer terminals, and which still has the possibility of inaccuracy, was turned into a game. The game involved stacking and folding the different parts of the protein strains, which are divided out into different folds and colored blocks. From 2008 to 2010, fifty-thousand individuals got involved in the “Foldit” game. The results were spectacular.

The results from the many thousands of games played was compiled and compared with the standard protein folding results provided by supercomputers. An analysis of this data showed that human players outperformed these computers in a number of difficult tasks requiring fundamental shifts in theory, the evaluation of risk and reward, and other areas that bring the scientific community closer to innovative cures.

However, another “gamer” based solution is providing the supercomputer end of the solution as well. Owners of the Sony Playstation 3 can download software which will direct their system’s resources to protein folding calculations whenever the system is on but not actively in use. The powerful computers of the PS3 enable it to dissect this information as if they gaming console were a single part of a much larger computing platform. Thousands of Sony console owners have enabled this feature, contributing to the scientific community by lending their processing power to a good cause.

The idea of gaming as a way to progress in the medicinal research field is a new and intriguing one, but one that is gaining much support. The success of these protein folding projects may well open the floodgates to a myriad of other possibilities.

Lower back pain is a problem faced by almost one in seven Americans today. The prevalence of this issue is connected to a number of factors, including growing problems with obesity and a sedentary lifestyle, but there are many other causes as well. The treatments are no less diverse than the causes, and it seems that doctors around the globe all favor different approaches, types of treatment, short term solutions, long term plans of action, and more. A recent collaborative approach to back pain may change that, however.

The approach is known as “systems science,” and first became a method of use in the scientific community in the early 1900s. This method is advantageous because it allows scientists to share their thoughts, opinions, and research more readily and more accurately. “Systems science” is a term used to describe the approach whereby scientists study individual parts of a structure within the context of the system, paying special attention to how the part interrelates to the whole. In the past, much of spinal research has been following the “reductionist” method, wherein scientists look at small parts in an isolated fashion in order to find a problem. While this has had benefits and aided in advancing the industry, it has also provided a barrier in sharing research and doing collaborative study.

This collaborative method was much of the center of the International Back Pain Symposium that took place in Brisbane, Australia earlier in 2010. With more than a dozen of the world’s most highly respected spine researchers present, the idea of collaborative study was more than a little appealing. Each of the researchers made a presentation that included their model of the spine system and their conclusions through research. The remainder of the conference was used attempting to find agreements between the scientists on the fundamental causes of back pain. This “root of the problem” understanding can then be used to develop more effective treatments as well as preventative care. Immediately after the conference, many of the scientific groups present began plans for additional research studies to validate their agreements and conclusions.

Acupressure and acupuncture, like much of the supplementary medicine field, are under constant fire from the core portions of the scientific and medical research community. Skeptics and health information zealots often criticize methods such as these for having unscientific evidence supporting it, a large number of faulty arguments, and far more. This may be changing for acupressure and acupuncture, however, thanks to a neuroimaging study which examined the impact of acupressure on the brain.

The idea of the study was relatively simple. Scientists would use neuroimaging devices in order to look at the electrical reactions in the brain in response to the pain or application of pressure at various acupuncture points. These “meridians,” according to the ancient Chinese philosophies that serve as the foundation for the practice, are points through which the Ki (or life force) of the body flows. By “opening” these meridians, acupuncturists are allowing the energy to flow more smoothly.

Scientists examining the process knew there would be some predictable effects on the brain. Pain in various areas of the nervous system will create a specific electrical signal within the brain that is relevant to the part of the body being stimulated. These “specific results” were seen as the only likely scientific outcome of the study, but were insufficient for the claimed results of acupressure.

The study found, after advanced neuroimaging on a large number of patients, that the results were not limited to the “specific results.” A variety of non-specific results from the acupressure process were also visible on the brain that could not be immediately explained. While some of the scientists theorize that this may simply be the result of the patient’s expectation for healing through the process, others state that it may be something more than that. With pain being such an advanced set of sensations, and so directly associated with expectation and circumstance, there is much that is still not understood about it. The non-specific neurological information may be highly relevant to health and medicine as it validates acupressure theories, largely because this highly scientific study provided only support for acupuncture’s original claims.

The phrase “laughter is the best medicine” is frequently thrown around. Still, when a person discovers that they have cancer or a heart disease, their first response isn’t usually to chuckle. The idea of using laughter to self-treat is disregarded by most people with a serious condition, and the “laughter medication” is usually seen as a nice thought with little scientific relevance. Laughter may actually be more serious a form of medicine than you may believe, however, and can aid health in a number of immensely positive ways.

The research into laughter began long ago, when the actually impact of laughter on the human body was first studied. The alleviation of stress and anxiety, which in turn helped boost the immune system, was one of the first acknowledged effects. Since that time, the use of laughter as part of the treatment for children with terminal illnesses has found that laughing children, even those with diseases that leave little to no chance of reprieve, live a healthier life and have a notably higher chance of recovery.

It is not limited to bolstering the immune system of the less stressed patient, however. Additional studies have found that laughter helps with gene regulation. The gene regulation that laughter contributes to includes genetic prevention of type two diabetes. According to the study which discovered this, conducted by the Foundation for the Advancement of International Science in Japan, showed the laughter can actually alter the structure of a person’s DNA in order to prevent diseases.

Other studies on laughter have shown that it reduces the pain and progression of rheumatoid arthritis, lowers the chance of mental illness, and can help prevent heart disease and heart attacks. These varying studies have all shown that laughter really can help the body’s self-healing in a fundamental way.

The idea of “humor therapy” that is used in these studies is based on a thirty-minute per day session where the patient engages in humorous activities that evoke laughter. The scientific study of this method have led to a growing use of the method as supplementary care for patients in various conditions.

The possibilities of advancement within the health industry through stem cells are vast, but often times run into hurdles and barriers due to the fiery ethics debate surrounding them. Luckily, there is a form of stem cell known as a “reprogrammed cell,” which functions on the same principles as embryonic cells but is not extracted from a fertilized embryo. This effectively dodges to the side of the moral crossfire, and allows scientists to proceed with various experiments. There have been mixed opinions within the scientific community as to whether reprogrammed, or iPS cells, can effectively replace embryonic, or ES, cells. However, a recent study has demonstrated at least one area wherein reprogrammed cells may make a bounding leap forward.

The study took place at the Gladstone Institute of Cardiovascular Disease in San Fransisco, California. The study used iPS cells in an attempt to replicate functional beating heart muscles. The iPS cells were reverted back to their embryonic state by adding or removing three to four genes. In this state, they are referred to as fibroblasts. The fibroblasts, which in and of themselves can serve as muscle tissue but which cannot function as part of a beating heart, were put into the beating cells of a the hearts of mice. Within a day, the iPS cells were functionally beating.

This is big news for a number of reasons. One of the major problems of heart attacks is that they attack will kill a large number of the vital cells in the heart, weakening overall heart function and increasing the chance of another attack. While stints or treatments may be used in an attempt to assist the heart in working correctly, these options increase the chance of infection, require consistent use, and do not provide a permanent solution. If iPS cells really can replicate and regenerate the tissue of beating hearts, it may provide a fully permanent solution to heart disease, heart attack recovery, and the healing of other damaged organs. The studies are not yet at the human testing phase, but will be within the next several years.

While stem cell research may be opening new doors in the medical field, it is also consistently under fire for the ethical grey zone that many feel it resides in. While some these arguments against stem cell are founded in legitimate arguments, others are based on misconceptions about stem cells, how they are obtained, and how they are used. Among other areas where opponents are often ignorant is the difference between embryonic and reprogrammed cells, and what each has been and can be used for.

First, we have embryonic cells. Embryonic stem cells, also known as chromatin cells, are taken directly from fertilized fetuses. This is where much of the ethical controversy comes into play. It is something that involves such strong emotions that political campaigns have all included a strong stance on stem cell research. These chromatin cells, however, are not generally taken from aborted fetuses, as the some opponents sometimes think they are. Rather, they are generally taken from fertilized embryos that are “left over” after a successful in vitro fertilization. These embryos, if not used for some purpose, would be destroyed.

Second, we have reprogrammed cells. Reprogrammed cells are also known as induced pluripotent stem cells, and are cells that are taken directly from the potential patient and reprogrammed to a “stem state.” This provides an advantage in that these cells are less likely to be rejected by the patient’s immune system, an unfortunate event which will sometimes occur with embryonic stem cells. These reprogrammed cells are genetically very similar to embryonic cells, and may be functional as a way to get approximately the same results while evading much of the heated ethical debate.

While it is not conclusive how different these cells are in their practical function, they both provide potential routes to the desired goal of medical advancement. For opponents, the idea of embryonic stem cells should be researched to see if the specific ethical stance in question really does oppose the precise method through which the ES cells are obtained, and the possibility of reprogrammed cells may still remain morally sound.