Published by
Stanford Medicine

Category

Ask Stanford Med

Ask Stanford Med, Health and Fitness, Nutrition, Obesity, Precision health, Stanford News

A Stanford physician takes a precision health approach to living a healthier lifestyle

A Stanford physician takes a precision health approach to living a healthier lifestyle

timthumbNearly 70 percent of Americans ages 20 or older are overweight or obese, including Larry Chu, MD, a Stanford anesthesiologist and executive director of Medicine X.

Chu, who has struggled with his weight for over a decade, knew he was overweight but didn’t think it was a serious threat to his health. This changed during a routine doctor’s visit. As he explains in a podcast, Chu was shocked to learn that lab results showed he was at high risk for stroke and heart attack. He decided to take action and launch precision:me, a personal blog project chronicling the first 90 days of his journey to live a healthier lifestyle.

Why most of us try to slim down by shunning carbs, stepping up our exercise routines and secretly weighing ourselves each morning, Chu is tracking his health data using a range of gadgets and other tools and sharing the every detail of his progress publicly on his blog. He is also posting photos and podcasts.

Below Chu discusses why he choose to take this unique approach to achieve his weight-loss goals, how he hopes it will inform the broader conversation about obesity and its potential to demonstrate the value of digital tools in enhancing personal health.

What was the catalyst for precision:me?

One of the misconceptions about obesity is that it is a lifestyle disease and if people would only eat less and move more they would be fit. In my case, this is a health journey I have been struggling with since my residency training at Stanford. Using precision health tools to address obesity is a new approach that we are focusing on in precision:me. Stanford has recently announced exciting plans for precision health. I thought it was a good time to share how we at Medicine X see precision health as a novel approach that individuals and their providers can use today to tailor precise and individualized care. It is a very practical and personal dive into developing and implementing a precise plan to modify my diet and metabolic profile to forestall the development of more significant chronic diseases, such as diabetes and heart disease, using data and analytics provided through digital health tools and expert medical, nutritional and fitness collaborators.

Why did you decide to make all of your health data available online for public consumption?

It was an easy and difficult decision at the same time. There is incredible stigma associated with obesity, which we discuss on the precision:me website. Being overweight or obese is a subject that many of us find difficult to talk about. Sharing information can make it easier to start a dialogue. Advances in precision health at Stanford and around the world will depend upon patients sharing their personal health data in a secure and protected fashion with researchers. By sharing my data with the public, I hope to help everyone see what it is like to live with obesity as a condition, break down misconceptions and misperceptions about the disease, and help shine a light on the value of sharing data to help others.

Continue Reading »

Aging, Ask Stanford Med, Chronic Disease, Neuroscience, Women's Health

Exploring Alzheimer’s toll on women

Exploring Alzheimer’s toll on women

Julianne Moore AlzheimersIn last year’s “Still Alice,” Julianne Moore’s portrays a woman beset by early-onset Alzheimer’s Disease. It’s fitting that the academy-award winning film (Moore garnered a Best Actress award for her role) about Alzheimer’s features a woman as the central character because the illness disproportionately affects women.

The BeWell@Stanford blog recently featured a Q&A with Stanford neurologist and Alzheimer’s researcher Michael Greicius, MD, MPH about Alzheimer’s and women. The piece covers the effects of the disease, but I was intrigued to read about the challenges for caregivers of people with the disease (who are also disproportionately women):

Most of the caregivers of people with Alzheimer’s Disease are women. Do you have any advice for them in terms of how they can take care of themselves while taking care of a loved one with the disease?

This gets to the damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don’t aspect of AD and women. On the one hand, women are more likely to develop AD; on the other hand, they are also more likely to find themselves as the primary caregiver for someone with AD. It is now well known that caring for someone with AD has a powerful, negative impact on physical and emotional well-being. Particularly as the disease progresses and patients require more care, there is a large physical toll taken when, for example, having to lift patients out of a chair or off the toilet or out of bed. Sleep becomes fractured for the patient. which means it becomes fractured for the caregiver.

Some of the questions also dealt with the fact that despite the recent advances in Alzheimer’s research, we still don’t completely understand how the disease works or how it can be prevented:

What can we do to reduce our risk for developing the disease?

We do not know of anything that definitely reduces a person’s risk of developing Alzheimer’s, although there is strong data to suggest that regular aerobic exercise and a heart-smart diet will reduce risk. Head trauma is an important risk factor for AD and another type of dementia, so minimizing exposure to head trauma can also reduce risk of AD. Numerous companies make explicit or implicit claims about their “nutraceutical” or vitamin or “brain-training” software being able to stave off AD. None of these claims are true and most, if not all, of these purveyors are modern-day snake-oil salesmen and saleswomen.

But Greicius is optimistic and pointed out that Stanford recently became an NIH-sponsored Alzheimer’s Disease Research Center, which means we can build upon Stanford’s past “ground-breaking Alzheimer’s research.”

Previously: Are iron, and the scavenger cells that eat it, critical links to Alzheimer’s?Alzheimer’s forum with Rep. Jackie Speier spurs conversation, activismScience Friday explores women’s heightened risk for Alzheimer’s and The toll of Alzheimer’s on caretakers
Photo by Maria Morri

Ask Stanford Med, Cancer, Genetics, Women's Health

Genetic testing and its role in women’s health and cancer screening

Genetic testing and its role in women's health and cancer screening

14342954637_3f8c3fde77_zYears ago, when I first learned that genetic testing could help screen for some cancers, such as breast, ovarian and bone, it seemed like a no-brainer to get this testing done. Now I know better; genetic testing is a helpful tool that can help you assess your risk for certain kinds of cancer, but it’s not recommended for everyone. Senior genetic counselor Kerry Kingham, a clinical assistant professor affiliated with the Cancer Genetics Clinic at Stanford, explains why this is the case in a recent Q&A with BeWell@Stanford.

Cancer can be “hereditary” or “sporadic” in nature, Kingham says. Hereditary cancers, such as the forms of breast cancer related to a mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes, are associated with an inherited genetic mutation. In contrast, sporadic cancers arise independent of family history or other risk factors. Since genetics testing detects gene mutations, it can only be used to help screen for the mutations that may lead to forms of hereditary cancer.

Kingham elaborates on this point, when it makes sense to get genetic testing, and what the results may mean in the Q&A:

Twelve percent of women in the U.S. develop breast cancer; it is a common disease. Yet, only five to ten percent of these women will develop breast cancer because of a hereditary gene mutation.

The best step to take prior to deciding whether or not to proceed with genetic testing is to meet with a genetic counselor. Your doctor can provide a referral. The genetic counselor will take a three generation family history, discuss the testing that might be indicated for you or a family member, and explain the risks and benefits of the testing. They also discuss the potential outcomes of the testing: whether a mutation is found, a mutation is not found, or there are uncertain results. Even when a genetic test is negative, this may not mean that the individual or their family is not at risk for cancer.

At this point you may be wondering: Why bother with genetic testing if it’s only useful for hereditary cancers and a negative test result is no guarantee you’re risk-free? Kingham’s closing comment addresses this question nicely: “I would say that your genes don’t change – they are what they are, and knowing what is in our genes can often help us learn how to take better care of our health.”

Previously: Stanford researchers suss out cancer mutations in genome’s dark spotsAngelina Jolie Pitt’s New York Times essay praised by Stanford cancer expertNIH Director highlights Stanford research on breast cancer surgery choices and Researchers take a step towards understanding the genetics behind breast cancer
Photo by Paolo

Ask Stanford Med, Bioengineering, Cardiovascular Medicine, Stanford News, Technology

The next challenge for biodesign: constraining health-care costs

The next challenge for biodesign: constraining health-care costs

This post is part of the Biodesign’s Jugaad series following a group of Stanford Biodesign fellows from India. (Jugaad is a Hindi word that means an inexpensive, innovative solution.) The fellows will spend months immersed in the interdisciplinary environment of Stanford Bio-X, learning the Biodesign process of researching clinical needs and prototyping a medical device. The Biodesign program is now in its 14th year, and past fellows have successfully launched 36 companies focused on developing devices for unmet medical needs.

5445002411_0f22229afd_z 300Founder and director of the Stanford Biodesign Program Paul Yock, MD, describes himself as a “gismologist.” His inventions include a balloon angioplasty system that is in widespread use and many other devices primarily related to ultrasound imaging of the vascular system. I recently spoke with him about the program he helped found, the iterative biodesign process, and the ongoing relationship with the Stanford-India Biodesign Program.

What’s next for the Stanford Biodesign Program?

We’ve been really pleased with the results of the Biodesign Program so far in terms of being able to take newcomers into the process, then repeatedly and reliably seeing good ideas coming out and seeing patients getting treated from those good ideas.

The challenge is that the world has changed profoundly since we founded this program. There’s no question that new technologies – despite being good for patients – contribute to escalation of health-care costs. We are in a phase of reinventing our process to take into account the fact that the sickest patient in the system is the system itself. We have to invent technologies that help constrain costs. We will need to modify the process of needs-finding not only to look for important clinical needs but important value needs as well. Inventors in general don’t like thinking about economics and so we have to not only figure out how to update the process but also figure out how to make it attractive for our fellows to learn and practice.

Could the India fellows help you incorporate affordability into the process?

One of the big reasons we decided to do the India program in the first place was to shock our system into thinking about really affordable technology innovation. It is remarkable how good our fellows from India are at thinking this way and how immersed they have been from an early age with value-based design and invention.

Affordability is very much a part of the Indian culture and technology innovation is clearly something that we are very good at here. I think we have only started to capitalize on the fusion of their culture and ours. I think there is a hybridization here that really is going to be cool. Our grand strategy is to have a number of different platforms – it could be companies, incubators, or other experiences – where our fellows can get a deep exposure in India. We aren’t fans of parachuting people in for two weeks to invent something good to give to India. What we really want to do is have trainees get a deep experience in what it’s like to invent and develop technologies in that setting to influence the way we invent here.

How did you arrive at the drawn out, iterative process the fellows use to identify medical needs they want to address?

There’s a long tradition of what is called user centered design that says if you want to design a product you need to talk to the user and understand what their needs are. That’s essentially where our process starts. What’s fundamentally different with health care is that there isn’t just one user. There’s this really complex network of stakeholders who influence whether a technology will actually make it into patient care. You can’t just design for the patient because there are also the doctors, nurses, hospitals, insurance companies, regulatory agencies and financers to name a few. To make it all still more complex, this whole system is in tremendous flux because of health-care reform.

So what we’ve done is blow out the needs characterization stage to take all these stakeholders into account in a rigorous way, up front, before any inventing happens.  There’s also a bit of psychology at play here. In health care it is really easy to fall in love with the first need that comes your way. Looked at in isolation, pretty much any clinical need looks compelling. You need to put in a disciplined process, a semi-quantitative way of weighing one need against the other in order to make a good decision about which need to pursue. It is easier to get rid of the one you thought you loved if it really doesn’t meet the criteria you set out.

Continue Reading »

Ask Stanford Med, Global Health, Stanford News, Technology

Stanford-India Biodesign co-founder: Our hope is to “inspire others and create a ripple effect” in India

Stanford-India Biodesign co-founder: Our hope is to "inspire others and create a ripple effect" in India

This post is part of the Biodesign’s Jugaad series following a group of Stanford Biodesign fellows from India. (Jugaad is a Hindi word that means an inexpensive, innovative solution.) The fellows will spend months immersed in the interdisciplinary environment of Stanford Bio-X, learning the Biodesign process of researching clinical needs and prototyping a medical device. The Biodesign program is now in its 14th year, and past fellows have successfully launched 36 companies focused on developing devices for unmet medical needs.

shutterstock_258773231Rajiv Doshi, MD, is the executive director (U.S.) of the Stanford-India Biodesign Program and was part of the Stanford team that initially flew to India in 2007 to propose the program to the Government of India. He has commercialized devices to treat sleep apnea and snoring and later served on boards of multiple medical device companies. In 2012 he was named by Forbes India as one of the top 18 Indian scientists who are changing the world.

Doshi answered questions about the early days of the Stanford-India Biodesign program and the hurdles entrepreneurs face in India.

Why did you want to start the Stanford-India Biodesign program?

Starting the program was both an opportunity and an obligation. My belief was that this was going to be a difficult challenge spanning perhaps a decade. We were working with a partner [the Indian government] where we didn’t know the people very well and we didn’t know many of their systems. We had never assembled such an international collaboration of this scale. If we failed then at least we tried and did our best. If we were successful then we would have helped a lot of people. I felt that this was a once in a lifetime opportunity to have an impact of this scale.

What were some of the hurdles the early fellows faced when they tried to develop technologies in India?

Probably the number one problem they face in India is that there is really little mentorship as we know it here. Few people in India have successfully developed a medical device from scratch so it is really hard to find mentors who are already domain experts in medical technology. The next issue is raising capital. There is very little early stage venture capital focused on medical technology in India.

Then there are challenges with research and development. Imagine you’re creating a difficult-to-make medical device that has small, complicated parts. Odds are the suppliers aren’t available for all these parts in India. Then there’s manufacturing and supply chain issues. Let’s say the entrepreneurs are able to develop a product, then they may struggle to find an in-country manufacturer to make this product. In many cases, in-country manufacturing capabilities just aren’t at the same level as you would see here or in Singapore, Germany or other locations. So you start stacking these challenges together and you realize that they are pretty serious.

Does it get easier once they’ve developed the device?

No, I think the greatest challenges are related to commercialization – after development has been completed. Let’s imagine you created a great product, you’ve figured out all these issues. Your next challenge is then to market your product and convince healthcare providers in India to start using your product. This takes time and money to support your marketing and sales efforts. Additionally, many of the providers may not be as trained as their US or UK counterparts and may be less likely to adopt your product if it requires a certain level of training. Finally, there is the issue of who is going to pay for the product. In India, only about 25 percent of people have basic health insurance so any device in India needs to be quite low cost to be broadly used.

Continue Reading »

Ask Stanford Med, Cardiovascular Medicine, Events, Genetics

A conversation about using genetics to advance cardiovascular medicine

A conversation about using genetics to advance cardiovascular medicine

2260347375_3eb4af95c9_z

In recognition of American Heart Month, Stanford Health Care is hosting a heart fair on Saturday. The free community event includes a number of talks ranging in topic from the latest developments in treating atrial fibrillation to specific issues related to women’s heart health.

During the session on heart-disease prevention, Joshua Knowles, MD, PhD, will deliver a talk titled “How We Can (and Will) Use Genetics to Improve Cardiac Health.” Knowles’ research focuses on familial hypercholesterolemia, a genetic disease that causes a deadly buildup of cholesterol in the arteries. He and colleagues recently launched a project that uses a big-data approach to search electronic medical records and identify patients who may have the potentially fatal heart condition.

To kick off the conversation about preventing heart disease, I contacted Knowles to learn more about how the genomics revolution is changing the cardiovascular medicine landscape and what you can do to determine if you have a genetic heart disorder. Below he explains why heart disease is a “complex interplay between genetics and environment” and what the future may hold with respect to personalized treatments and pharmacogenetics.

Let’s start by talking about your work on familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). How has the understanding of the genetic basis of FH evolved over the last few years, and what key questions remain unanswered?

For FH, there has been a revolution in our understanding. FH causes very elevated cholesterol levels and risk of early onset heart disease. We used to think that it affected 1 in 500 individuals, but recent studies have pointed out that this is probably an underestimate and it may affect as many as 1 in 200 people. This means that there may be as many as 1 million people in the United States who are affected. We have also identified new genes that cause FH, and the identification of some of these genes has directly translated into the development of a new class of drugs (so called PCSK9 inhibitors) to treat this condition.

What steps can patients take to determine if they are at risk of, or may have, a genetic cardiovascular disorder like FH?

The easiest way is to know about your family history of medical conditions- to know what illnesses affected parents, grandparents, uncles, aunts and other relatives. Of course, genes aren’t the only things that are passed in families. Good and bad habits, such as exercise patterns, smoking and diet, are also passed down through the generations. But a family history of heart disease or certain forms of cancer is certainly a risk factor.

Past research suggests that patients with a genetic predisposition to heart disease can significantly reduce their chances of having a heart attack or stroke by making changes to their lifestyle, such as eating a diet rich in fruits and vegetables. Can lifestyle changes overcome genetics?

Heart disease is a result of the complex interplay between genetics and environment – lifestyle, for instance. For some people with specific genetic conditions, such as familial hypercholesterolemia or hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, the effect of genetics tends to dominate the effect of environment because the genetic effect is so large.

For the vast majority of people without these “Mendelian” forms of heart disease, which follow the laws of inheritance were derived by nineteenth-century Austrian monk Gregor Mendel, it’s difficult to determine at an individual level how much of the risk is due to genes and how much is due to environment (this is for things like high blood pressure, high cholesterol, coronary disease). One clue is certainly family history. However, for most of these diseases the genes are not “deterministic” – that is, people are not destined to have these diseases. Some are more at risk than others, but there are certainly ways to mitigate genetic risk through lifestyle choices. Choosing not to smoke and exercising regularly are two examples of ways you can help to greatly minimize genetic risk.

Continue Reading »

Ask Stanford Med, Events, Nutrition, Obesity, Stanford News

Sticky situation: How sugar affects our health

Sticky situation: How sugar affects our health

132244825_dbf0e21d9f_zHere’s a shocking statistic: On average, Americans consume three pounds of sugar each week, or 3,550 pounds in an entire lifetime. This leads some to blame the sweet stuff for the increase of chronic disease in modern society. But simply reducing our sugar intake is easier said than done, in part because identifying foods with added sugars can be tricky.

This Thursday, Alison Ryan, a clinical dietician with Stanford Health Care, will deliver an in-depth talk on sugar and our health as part of a Stanford Health Library lecture series. Those unable to attend can watch the presentation online here.

In the following Q&A, Ryan discusses the controversies surrounding sugar and the role of sugar in our diet, and she offers tips for making sure your consumption doesn’t exceed daily guidelines.

Why does our body need sugar?

Sugar, in the form of dextrose or glucose, is the main fuel or energy source for the cells of the human body. Without glucose, our body has to get creative and rely on other metabolic pathways, like ketosis, to keep our brain and other organs running. There is an optimal range for our blood sugar levels, and our bodies are making constant efforts to keep blood sugar within this range.

Our body can make glucose from any carbohydrate that is consumed, so consuming monosaccharide (glucose and the like) is not biologically required. This is one of the reasons it’s difficult to determine the right amount of sugar that is required for the human body. Do we think of the optimal amount as the amount needed to function at peak level? Or an amount not to go over in order to avoid detrimental effects on our health?

Sugar intake has been on the rise in human diets. Why do you think that is?

At one time, sugar used to be a seldom available food item. It is now ubiquitous and more of a hallmark for highly processed, low nutritional value foods. Now, consider the food industry and the politics of sugar. Soda companies, makers of desserts, cakes, sugary snack foods, the sugar and corn syrup refiners all lobby to keep their products “part of a balanced diet.” The food industry is deeply involved (or at least vocal about) the food and nutrition guidelines in the U.S. Then there’s the reality that sugar tastes good! Most people enjoy the taste of sweet foods and are drawn to consuming them.

What are some of the health risks of consuming too much sugar?

Sugar has been implicated as playing a role in some obvious ways, like obesity, diabetes, and tooth decay; but also in less direct appearing ways such as heart disease, chronic inflammatory conditions, cancer, etc. Often, when we’re consuming foods high in sugar, we’re not consuming foods that are rich in nutrients. These calorie-dense foods displace the nutrient-dense foods. The net effect is higher intake of calories, with concurrent lower intake of vitamins, minerals, phytonutrients, protein, etc.

Continue Reading »

Ask Stanford Med, Health and Fitness, Nutrition, Obesity

How to keep New Year’s resolutions to eat healthy

How to keep New Year's resolutions to eat healthy

2409582661_22387a9d53_z

New Year’s Day always offers the opportunity to hit pause, reflect on our lives and set goals to improve our health and well-being. For many of us, this year also involved making promises to eat healthier and lose weight. To help you achieve your nutrition goals, I reached out to Stanford health educator Jae Berman. Below she shares how to select New Year’s resolutions that you’ll actually keep (perhaps you’ll have to tweak the ones you made last week!), offers strategies for eating healthy even when you’re pressed for time, and explains why cooking for yourself is a key factor in changing nutritional habits.

What are some examples of smaller, more manageable, goals that could help someone make better food choices?

People often jump in too hard, too fast when creating New Year’s resolutions. This perfectionist and “all or nothing” attitude tends to result in grand, lofty goals that we quit if we have a setback or don’t see immediate results. When considering health and weight loss-related goals make sure they are realistic and sustainable.

Instead, closely examine your routine and note one thing you can improve. This behavior may be something obvious, such as you drinking soda every day and wanting to stop. Or, it could be an aspiration to make healthy habits more sustainable, for example, bringing your lunch to work so you can lose weight and save money. Those who already eat well and exercise regularly may want to adopt a goal on a larger scope and learn to cook or try a new form of exercise.

Pick one thing (just one!) and make sure it is SMART – specific, measurable, achievable, results-focused and time-bound. Pick a resolution that is within reach, yet a bit of a stretch so that it’s a challenge. Additionally, goals should lead towards creating a sustainable habit. Some ideas include: Bring your lunch to work Monday-Thursday for the entire month of January; eat five fist-sized servings of vegetables every day; drink coffee only at breakfast; go to sleep at at the same time every night and wake up at the same time every morning for the month of January; or do 30 minutes of weight training three times a week.

In an effort to slim down in the New Year, some individuals may go on the Atkins diet and other popular weight-loss plans, or decide to do a juice fast, like the Master Cleanse. What’s your advice for those considering these approaches?

It’s very difficult to change someone’s mind when they decide to try these types of weight loss plans. So I usually say, “Go for it!” After a few days, the person often feels miserable and wants to create a long-term plan for managing their weight. I will say the one benefit of these quick fixes and fad diets, which I do not endorse, is that they teach a person what it feels like to be hungry. This may sound strange, but this awareness is an important lesson.

Many people overeat and are used to eating to avoid being hungry. We also tend to mindlessly eat out of boredom, or simply because food is in front of us. Going on a restrictive diet results in some feeling hungry for the first time in long time and, as a result they learn their hunger cues. When you experience a hunger cue, which is right when you think “I could eat,” then you should eat just enough food to get through the next three to four hours. You don’t need a huge meal to feel stuffed and small; unsatisfying snacks aren’t helpful either. Understanding what it feels like to be satiated is very important for long-term success.

Ongoing research at the Stanford Prevention Research Center shows that “one diet really does not fit all.”  So I can’t tell you exactly what to eat, but I can tell you that creating a long-term sustainable plan is key.

Continue Reading »

Ask Stanford Med, Chronic Disease, Nutrition

Diabetes and nutrition: Healthy holiday eating tips, red meat and disease risk, and going vegetarian

Diabetes and nutrition: Healthy holiday eating tips, red meat and disease risk, and going vegetarian

famers_market

Despite greater awareness about diabetes in recent years, a recent study found that nearly three in 10 Americans have the disease but don’t know it. The findings also showed that among those who were diagnosed with diabetes, a significant percentage weren’t meeting goals to control their blood sugar and blood pressure or lower their LDL cholesterol.

This Thursday, Kathleen Kenny, MD, a clinical associate professor at Stanford, and Jessica Shipley, a clinical dietitian at Stanford Hospital & Clinics, will discuss why eating healthy is a key component of diabetes management and prevention. The Stanford Health Library event will be held at the Arrillaga Alumni Center on campus; those unable to attend the event can watch a live webcast of the discussion.

In the final installment of our two-part Q&A with Kenny, she offers tips to avoid overindulging on sugary treats during the holidays, explains why you should consider limiting your consumption of red meat, and outlines the benefits of a vegetarian diet.

Many of us have a hard time refraining from indulging in high-calorie foods during the holidays. What’s your advice to those trying to make healthy choices during holiday season?

The holidays don’t have to be a stressful or trying time for patients with diabetes. Patients can adhere to a few simple strategies to help prevent weight gain and hyperglycemia. Some people will find it beneficial to eat a nutritious snack, particularly one that is high in fiber, and to drink lots of water in advance of a holiday party, rather than arriving hungry.

Buffet tables and appetizer trays can be problematic. Count toothpicks and stop snacking when you reach a certain number of toothpicks in your pocket. It is always a good idea to find the smallest plate available, when there are options, so as to reduce portions. Another tip is to limit alcohol intake; not only will this itself reduce liquid calories, but it will help individuals to make smarter choices. Substitute sparkling mineral water with lemon or lime. Eat lots of veggies at snack tables. Avoid calorie and sugar-dense sweets, or limit to one.

The most important aspect is to devise a plan in advance of a holiday gathering, and stick to it. Set your predetermined limits. Spontaneous choices will tend to be less healthy ones. Finally, if you are going to indulge a bit more, try to take a brisk walk afterwards to help reduce the glycemic impact of your meal.

Previous research has shown that decreasing your red meat consumption can lower your type 2 diabetes risk. Why does eating red meat influence a person’s diabetes risk? 

A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association last year found an association of higher-diabetes risk with increased intake of red meat (about 30 percent higher with average increased red meat intake of ½ serving daily, adjusted for weight and BMI), and the converse, a lower risk in those who decreased their red meat consumption over a four-year period in the subsequent four years (14 percent reduction in diabetes risk by reducing consumption by more than ½ red meat serving daily over the baseline measure, some of which was mediated by reduced BMI with lower red meat intake).

This data was based on food questionnaires, and was a compilation from three prospective cohort studies involving almost 150,000 men and women. One of these cohorts, the Women’s Health Study, showed a 28 percent increased risk of developing diabetes in women in the highest quintile of red meat intake.  On further analysis, this seemed to be largely mediated by higher intake of processed meats such as hot dogs and bacon. Note that these studies do show an association, but not clear causation in terms of red meat and diabetes risk.

One theory of causality proposed is that compounds such as nitrates and nitrites added in meat processing  (sandwich meats, hot dogs, bacon), can be converted to “N-Nitrosamines”, which are thought to be toxic to the pancreas insulin-secreting beta cells. Thus, eating a bologna sandwich may be different in risk than eating grass-fed organic beef. But we don’t have enough data at this time to be clear on this.  Regardless of the nitrate content, red meat is still high in saturated fats, and this in and of itself is associated with higher cardiovascular disease risk. Additionally, higher red meat intake was associated with more weight gain and higher BMI in this analysis.

Continue Reading »

Ask Stanford Med, Chronic Disease, Events, Nutrition

Diabetes and nutrition: Why healthy eating is a key component of prevention and management

Diabetes and nutrition: Why healthy eating is a key component of prevention and management

grocery_produce

The prevalence of type 2 diabetes is expected to rise sharply over the next three decades. Recent data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows that if current trends continue, an estimated 1 in 3 adults will be diagnosed with the disorder by 2050. Eating healthy is a key component of managing diabetes and reducing one’s risk for developing the disease. But what does eating right for diabetes actually mean?

Kathleen Kenny, MD, a clinical associate professor at Stanford, and Jessica Shipley, a clinical dietitian at Stanford Hospital & Clinics, will answer this question during a talk focused on diabetes and nutrition on Dec. 4. The Stanford Health Library event will be held at the Arrillaga Alumni Center on campus, where attendees can also have their blood glucose checked. The conversation will also be webcasted for those unable to attend in person.

To promote discussion on the topic in advance of the lecture, I reached out to Kenny and asked about nutrition principles and guidelines for patients with diabetes and others interested in how healthy eating can prevent or delay onset of the disease. In the first installment of a two-part Q&A, she explains the advantages of eating a Mediterranean diet and the importance of eating fiber-rich foods.

Are there any ways to reverse or slow the progression of pre-diabetes? Are there specific diets that may be useful to help prevent or control diabetes?

One of the most common questions my diabetic patients ask is how they can reduce or eliminate diabetes medications. Others are found to be pre-diabetic on the basis of an “A1c” or an impaired fasting glucose, and want to know how to prevent diabetes. Several randomized trials have shown that healthy diet and exercise can reverse and also delay the onset of diabetes.

One of the largest trials is the often-cited Diabetes Prevention Program, which randomized more than 3,000 patients to diet/lifestyle versus metformin versus placebo. The most effective strategy was diet and lifestyle, showing a dramatic 58 precent reduction in the rate of developing diabetes. This surpassed the drug therapy with metformin. Approximately 5 percent of patients in the lifestyle group developed diabetes annually, as compared to 11 percent in the placebo arm. Notably, there was a 16 percent reduction in diabetes risk with every 1 kg reduction in weight. This seems attainable for many patients.

There was also meta-analysis last year looking at different diets for patients with known diabetes, in terms of weight loss and improving their diabetes control. In this data compilation, the Mediterranean diet had the greatest weight loss, followed by the low carbohydrate diet. In terms of A1c reduction, the Mediterranean diet had a reduction of -0.47 percent, and the low carbohydrate -0.12 percent. But all the diets studied resulted in better glycemic control. Many studies have shown that diets high in glycemic load are linked to higher diabetes risk (particularly in overweight women), and contribute to central body fat , so it is recommended that diabetics or those at risk limit their intake of high glycemic index foods both to delay and to help control their diabetes. Additionally, there are some data suggesting that adherence and success rate may be higher for low-carbohydrate diets in patients with diabetes and insulin resistance.

Continue Reading »

Stanford Medicine Resources: