Children born to women who drank artificially sweetened beverage were more likely to be obese

Children born to women who had gestational diabetes and drank at least one artificially sweetened beverage per day during pregnancy were more likely to be overweight or obese at age 7, compared to children born to women who had gestational diabetes and drank water instead of artificially sweetened beverages, according to a study led by researchers at the National Institutes of Health. Childhood obesity is known to increase the risk for certain health problems later in life, such as diabetes, heart disease, stroke and some cancers. The study appears online in the International Journal of Epidemiology.

According to the study authors, as the volume of amniotic fluid increases, pregnant women tend to increase their consumption of fluids. To avoid extra calories, many pregnant women replace sugar-sweetened soft drinks and juices with beverages containing artificial sweeteners. Citing prior research implicating artificially sweetened beverages in weight gain, the study authors sought to determine if diet beverage consumption during pregnancy could influence the weight of children.

“Our findings suggest that artificially sweetened beverages during pregnancy are not likely to be any better at reducing the risk for later childhood obesity than sugar-sweetened beverages,” said the study’s senior author, Cuilin Zhang, Ph.D., in the Epidemiology Branch at NIH’s Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD). “Not surprisingly, we also observed that children born to women who drank water instead of sweetened beverages were less likely to be obese by age 7.”

The researchers analyzed data collected from 1996 to 2002 by the Danish National Birth Cohort, a long-term study of pregnancies among more than 91,000 women in Denmark. At the 25th week of pregnancy, the women completed a detailed questionnaire on the foods they ate. The study also collected data on the children’s weight at birth and at 7 years old.

In the current study, the NICHD team limited their analysis to data from more than 900 pregnancies that were complicated by gestational diabetes, a type of diabetes that occurs only during pregnancy.

Approximately 9 percent of these women reported consuming at least one artificially sweetened beverage each day. Their children were 60 percent more likely to have a high birth weight, compared to children born to women who never drank sweetened beverages. At age 7, children born to mothers who drank an artificially sweetened beverage daily were nearly twice as likely to be overweight or obese.

Consuming a daily artificially sweetened beverage appeared to offer no advantages over consuming a daily sugar-sweetened beverage. At age 7, children born to both groups were equally likely to be overweight or obese. However, women who substituted water for sweetened beverages reduced their children’s obesity risk at age 7 by 17 percent.

It is not well understood why drinking artificially sweetened beverages compared to drinking water may increase obesity risk. The authors cited an animal study that associated weight gain with changes in the types of bacteria and other microbes in the digestive tract. Another animal study suggested that artificial sweeteners may increase the ability of the intestines to absorb the blood sugar glucose. Other researchers found evidence in rodents that, by stimulating taste receptors, artificial sweeteners desensitized the animals’ digestive tracts, so that they felt less full after they ate and were more likely to overeat.

The authors caution that more research is necessary to confirm and expand on their current findings. Although they could account for many other factors that might influence children’s weight gain, such as breastfeeding, diet and physical activity levels, their study couldn’t definitively prove that maternal artificially sweetened beverage consumption caused the children to gain weight. The authors mention specifically the need for studies that use more contemporary data, given recent upward trends in the consumption of artificially sweetened beverages. They also call for additional investigation on the effects of drinking artificially sweetened beverages among high-risk racial/ethnic groups.

About the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD): NICHD conducts and supports research in the United States and throughout the world on fetal, infant and child development; maternal, child and family health; reproductive biology and population issues; and medical rehabilitation. For more information, visit NICHD’s website.

Diet Soda Associated With Stroke, Dementia

But can’t determine causality; some associations diminished with adjustments

Higher consumption of artificially sweetened soft drinks was associated with an increased risk of both stroke and dementia in an analysis of more than 4,000 participants in the Framingham Heart Study Offspring cohort, researchers found.

In the observational study, those who drank at least one artificially-sweetened beverage a day were nearly three times more likely to develop ischemic stroke (HR 2.96, 95% CI 1.26–6.97) and 2.9 times more likely to develop Alzheimer’s disease (95% CI 1.18–7.07) over 10 years than those who abstained, Matthew Pase, PhD, of Boston University School of Medicine, and colleagues reported in the American Heart Association’s journal Stroke.

However, sugary beverages weren’t tied to an increased risk of stroke or dementia — a finding the authors called “intriguing,” and one that could have been due to survival bias.

“It is possible that individuals with high intakes of sugary beverages may have died earlier from other illnesses such as heart disease,” Pase told MedPage Today. “It is also worth noting that our sample consumed diet soda more frequently than sugar-sweetened soda and this may contribute to differences in findings between regular and diet soda.”

He cautioned that the association between artificially sweetened drinks and stroke and dementia seen in their study does not imply causation — a point emphasized by Marion Nestle, PhD, professor of nutrition, food studies, and public health at New York University, who wasn’t involved in the study.

“Association is not the same as causation, although the survival curves are impressive,” Nestle said. “I wish the authors had offered a plausible hypothesis for how artificial sweeteners could be causally related to stroke and dementia.”

Several other experts commented on the “controversial but inconclusive” nature of the association.

“The relationship with artificially sweetened beverages was not simple or straightforward,” said Keith Fargo, PhD, of the Alzheimer’s Association. “When the researchers controlled for other risk factors, particularly cardiovascular risk factors, it explained most of the association between artificially sweetened beverage intake and the development of dementia. This kind of data does not allow us to say that drinking [these] beverages causes dementia, or that cutting down on artificially sweetened beverages will reduce a person’s risk for dementia.”

Pase and colleagues analyzed data from the Framingham Heart Study Offspring cohort on people over age 45 years for the stroke arm (N=2,888) and people over age 60 years for the dementia arm (N=1,484). Both groups were primarily Caucasian and were just under 50% male.

Beverage intake was quantified using the Harvard semiquantitative food-frequency questionnaire at three points: cohort examinations five (1991–1995), six (1995–1998), and seven (1998–2001). Participants were then followed for more than 10 years to determine development of stroke or dementia.

Notably, data collection did not distinguish between the types of artificial sweeteners used in the beverages.

Pase and colleagues found that higher recent and cumulative intake of artificially sweetened soft drinks was linked to an increased risk of ischemic stroke, all-cause dementia, and Alzheimer’s dementia — even after adjustment for total caloric intake, diet quality, physical activity, and smoking status.

However, the associations between recent and higher cumulative intake of artificially sweetened soft drinks and dementia were no longer significant after additional adjustment for vascular risk factors and diabetes mellitus.

“Because our study was observational, we are unable to determine whether artificially sweetened soft drink intake increased the risk of incident dementia through diabetes mellitus or whether people with diabetes mellitus were simply more likely to consume diet beverages,” Pase said.

Pase noted the findings complement their sister study, published in Alzheimer’s & Dementia, that found higher consumption of both sugary and diet beverages was associated with smaller brain volumes, a marker of accelerated brain aging.

Also using data from the Framingham Heart Study Offspring cohort, this study found that people who more frequently consumed sugary beverages, including sodas and fruit juices, were more likely to have poorer memory, smaller overall brain volumes, and smaller hippocampal volumes.

The researchers concluded that their studies highlight a need for more research into this area, especially given how often people drink artificially-sweetened beverages.

In an accompanying editorial in Stroke, Ralph Sacco, MD, of the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, agreed, writing that the findings “encourage further discussion and more research into this question, for even small causal effects would have tremendous effects on public health due to the popularity of both artificially sweetened soft drinks and sugar sweetened soft drinks consumption. Both sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened soft drinks may be hard on the brain.”

“This kind of research is critical for examining and uncovering public health relationships that may eventually lead to actionable recommendations,” added Fargo.

Rachel Johnson, PhD, MPH, RD, past chair of the American Heart Association’s Nutrition Committee and professor at the University of Vermont, suggested that people stick to water, low-fat milk, or other beverages without added sweeteners until more data are available: “We know that limiting added sugars is an important strategy to support good nutrition and healthy body weights, and until we know more, people should use artificially sweetened drinks cautiously,” she said in a statement.

The researchers acknowledged several study limitations, including the observational nature of the data, the absence of ethnic minorities, and the use of a self-reported questionnaire to obtain dietary intake data, which may be subject to recall bias.

“Even if someone is three times as likely to develop stroke or dementia,” Pase said, “it is by no means a certain fate.”

Pase reported funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council.

The Framingham Heart Study is supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and by grants from the National Institute on Aging and the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke.

Sacco received a National Institutes of Health grant for the Northern Manhattan Study. Gardener is also funded by the National Institutes of Health for her work on the Northern Manhattan Study.

Reviewed by F. Perry Wilson, MD, MSCE Assistant Professor, Section of Nephrology, Yale School of Medicine and Dorothy Caputo, MA, BSN, RN, Nurse Planner

Primary Source: Pase M, et al “Sugar and artificially sweetened beverages and the risks of incident stroke and dementia a prospective cohort study” Stroke 2017; DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.116.016027.

Secondary Source: Wersching H, et al “Sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened beverages in relation to stroke and dementia are soft drinks hard on the brain?” Stroke 2017; DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.017198.

Gender bias in treating or preventing blood clots in women

Animation of the formation of an occlusive thrombus in a vein. A few platelets attach themselves to the valve lips, constricting the opening and causing more platelets and red blood cells to aggregate and coagulate. Coagulation of unmoving blood on both sides of the blockage may propagate a clot in both directions.

A thrombus occurs when the hemostatic process, which normally occurs in response to injury, becomes activated in an uninjured or slightly injured vessel. A thrombus in a large blood vessel will decrease blood flow through that vessel (termed a mural thrombus). In a small blood vessel, blood flow may be completely cut off (termed an occlusive thrombus), resulting in death of tissue supplied by that vessel. If a thrombus dislodges and becomes free-floating, it is considered an embolus.

Some of the conditions which elevate risk of blood clots developing include atrial fibrillation (a form of cardiac arrhythmia), heart valve replacement, a recent heart attack (also known as a myocardial infarction), extended periods of inactivity (see deep venous thrombosis), and genetic or disease-related deficiencies in the blood’s clotting abilities.

Formation

Platelet activation can occur through different mechanisms such as a vessel wall breach that exposes collagen, or tissue factor encryption.[clarification needed] The platelet activation causes a cascade of further platelet activation, eventually causing the formation of the thrombus.[2]This process is regulated through thromboregulation.

Prevention and treatment

Blood clot prevention and treatment reduces the risk of stroke, heart attack and pulmonary embolism. Heparin and warfarin are often used to inhibit the formation and growth of existing thrombi; the former binds to and activates the enzyme inhibitor antithrombin III, while the latter inhibits vitamin K epoxide reductase, an enzyme needed to synthesize mature clotting factors.

Some treatments have been derived from bacteria. One drug is streptokinase, which is an enzyme secreted by several streptococcal bacteria. This drug is administered intravenously and can be used to dissolve blood clots in coronary vessels. However, streptokinase is nonspecific and can digest almost any protein, which can lead to many secondary problems. Another clot-dissolving enzyme that works faster and is more specific is called tissue plasminogen activator (tPA). This drug is made by transgenic bacteria and it converts plasminogen into the clot-dissolving enzyme plasmin.[3] There are also some anticoagulants that come from animals that work by dissolving fibrin. For example, Haementeria ghilianii, an Amazon leech, produces an enzyme called hementin from its salivary glands.[4] As of 2012, this enzyme has now been successfully produced by genetically engineered bacteria and administered to cardiac patients.

Prognosis

Thrombus formation can have one of four outcomes: propagation, embolization, dissolution, and organization and recanalization.[5]

  1. Propagation of a thrombus occurs towards the direction of the heart. This means that it is anterograde in veins or retrograde in arteries.
  2. Embolization occurs when the thrombus breaks free from the vascular wall and becomes mobile. A venous embolus (mostly from deep vein thrombosis in the lower limbs) will travel through the systemic circulation, reach the right side of the heart, and travel through the pulmonary artery resulting in a pulmonary embolism. Arterial thrombosis resulting from hypertension or atherosclerosis can become mobile and the resulting emboli can occlude any artery or arteriole downstream of the thrombus formation. This means that cerebral stroke, myocardial infarction, or any other organ can be affected.
  3. Dissolution occurs when the fibrinolytic mechanisms break up the thrombus and blood flow is restored to the vessel. This may be aided by drugs (for example after occlusion of a coronary artery). The best response to fibrinolytic drugs is within a couple of hours, before the fibrin meshwork of the thrombus has been fully developed.
  4. Organization and recanalization involves the ingrowth of smooth muscle cells, fibroblasts and endothelium into the fibrin-rich thrombus. If recanalization proceeds it provides capillary-sized channels through the thrombus for continuity of blood flow through the entire thrombus but may not restore sufficient blood flow for the metabolic needs of the downstream tissue.[citation needed]

Stroke in women

A number of factors are likely behind the surprising rise in strokes in women, including:

  • Increasing rates of obesity (women’s waists have grown by nearly two inches in the last 10 years)
  • Vitamin D3 deficiency due to lack of sun exposure. Sun avoidance also increases your risk of vitamin D sulfate deficiency, which may be an underlying cause of arterial plaque buildup (a risk factor for stroke)
  • Rising prevalence of high blood sugar levels
  • eating unprocessed, preferably organic, foods, exercising and maintaining a healthy weight will help to reduce your risk of stroke. Two additional risk factors that can have a direct impact on your stroke risk are:
    • Psychological distress. According to a 2008 study published in the journal Neurology, the more stressed you are, the greater your risk. The researchers actually found that for every notch lower a person scored on their well-being scale, their risk of stroke increased by 11 percent. Not surprisingly, the relationship between psychological distress and stroke was most pronounced when the stroke was fatal.
    • Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and birth control pills. If you’re on one of the hormonal birth control methods (whether it’s the pill, patch, vaginal ring or implant), it is important to understand that you are taking synthetic progesterone and synthetic estrogen — something that is clearly not advantageous if you want to maintain optimal health. These contraceptives contain the same synthetic hormones as those used in hormone replacement therapy (HRT), which has well-documented risks, including an increased risk of blood clots, stroke, heart attack, and breast cancer.

Diet Soda May Dramatically Increase Your Stroke Risk

Earlier this year, research presented at the American Stroke Association’s International Stroke Conference showed that people who drink just one diet soda a day may increase their risk of stroke by 48 percent!

According to the authors:

“This study suggests that diet soda is not an optimal substitute for sugar-sweetened beverages, and may be associated with a greater risk of stroke, myocardial infarction, or vascular death than regular soda.”

While more research will likely be needed to confirm this potential link, there’s plenty of evidence showing that artificial sweeteners such as aspartame and sucralose (Splenda) can be dangerous to your health. I believe aspartame is, by far, the most dangerous artificial sweetener on the market. Reports of adverse reactions to the US FDA also support this, as aspartame accounts for over 75 percent of the adverse reactions to food additives reported to the FDA.

Embolism

An embolism is the lodging of an embolus, a blockage-causing piece of material, inside a blood vessel.[1] The embolus may be a blood clot (thrombus), a fat globule, a bubble of air or other gas (gas embolism), or foreign material. An embolism can cause partial or total blockage of blood flow in the affected vessel.[2] Such a blockage (a vascular occlusion) may affect a part of the body distant from where the embolus originated. An embolism in which the embolus is a piece of thrombus is called a thromboembolism. Thrombosis, the process of thrombus formation, often leads to thromboembolism.

An embolism is usually a pathologic event (that is, part of illness or injury). Sometimes it is created intentionally for a therapeutic reason, such as to stop bleeding or to kill a cancerous tumor by stopping its blood supply. Such therapy is called embolization.


Gender bias in treating or preventing blood clots in women

In health care, gender disparities are especially pernicious. If you are a woman, studies have shown, you are not only less likely to receive blood clot prophylaxis, but you may also receive less intensive treatment for a heart attack. If you are a woman older than 50 who is critically ill, you are at particular risk of failing to receive lifesaving interventions. If you have knee pain, you are less likely to be referred for a knee replacement than a man, and if you have heart failure, it may take longer to get EKGs.

When Dr. Elliott Haut and his team at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore designed their blood clot prevention protocol back in 2006, they didn’t expect to discover systemic gender bias. But the data were clear and the implications were alarming: Women who were trauma patients at Johns Hopkins Hospital were in considerably greater danger of dying of preventable blood clots than men.

Why? Because doctors were less likely to provide them with the appropriate blood clot prevention treatment. At Hopkins, as at many hospitals, both men and women were receiving treatment at less than perfect rates, but while 31 percent of male trauma patients were failing to get proper clot prevention, for women, the rate was 45 percent. That means women were nearly 50 percent more likely to miss out on blood clot prevention.

Blood clots, gelatinous tangles that can travel through the body and block blood flow, kill more people every year than breast cancer, AIDS and car crashes combined. But many of these clots can be avoided — if doctors prescribe the right preventive measures.

Such implicit bias, as researchers now understand, happens when we unintentionally use stereotypes or associations to make judgments. “Perhaps we take women’s symptoms less seriously, or we interpret them as having an emotional cause as opposed to a physical cause,” said Dr. Christine Kolehmainen, the associate director for women’s health at the Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital in Madison, Wis. Studies bear this out: in one study of patients with irritable bowel syndrome, doctors were more likely to suggest that male patients receive X-rays and more likely to offer female patients tranquilizers and lifestyle advice.

In the case of blood clot prevention, doctors’ assumptions about women’s risk factors could lead to disparities in treatment. “There might be stereotypes about women’s biology or environment or occupation that could all play into medical decision-making,” Kolehmainen said.

Whether unintentional, unconscious or simply based on erroneous assumptions, treatment differentials clearly exist. Interventions like the Hopkins checklist can help correct them.


Google Women , blood clots, birth control,  pills trauma, PTSD , pregnancy

Sucralose, GMOs, PCB,sugar,aspartame are health hazards for your liver by Dr Mercola

Sucralose, GMOs, PCB,sugar,aspartame are health hazards.

We can see more of these in the food we eat and so we supplement.

Have your own health nutrition site. We will train you for free as health ambassadors:

  • Prevent Diabetes and chronic disease by stopping sugar addiction with a support group

Email Connie ->  motherhealth@gmail.com or text 408-854-1883 for an online health coach.

——————-

From Dr Mercola:

Indeed, while less widely publicized, sucralose is associated with many of the same adverse effects as aspartame, including blood sugar increases and weight gain.

Researchers have also found that sucralose can kill as much as 50 percent of your microbiome.22,23 This is very important, because when you destroy healthy intestinal bacteria you open yourself up to unfriendly micro-organisms that can cause health problems. Worse yet, sucralose appears to target beneficial microorganisms to a greater extent than pathogenic and other more detrimental bacteria. And remarkably, according to one study,24 these adverse effects on gut microbiota remained even after a three-month long recovery period.

The Role of Environmental Pollutants in Diabetes Risk

Sugary and/or artificially sweetened beverages are not the sole cause for obesity and diabetes, of course. There are many other dietary factors that contribute to the problem. I’ve become convinced that eating REAL FOOD is imperative for good health, but even in the category of whole food there are risk factors to take into consideration, courtesy of the polluted state of our world. One such example is fish. A number of analyses have been published over the years looking at the links between fish consumption and type 2 diabetes.25

While the reasons are still unclear, fish eaters appear to have an increased risk for the disease. One potential culprit appears to be environmental pollutants such as dioxins, PCBs, and chlorinated pesticides. Vietnam War veterans exposed to Agent Orange were found to have higher rates of diabetes than those who were no exposed, and researchers have proposed that persistent organic pollutants (POPs) may be a stronger risk factor for diabetes than obesity.

POPs are very persistent in the environment, including waterways and oceans, and most fish are contaminated to some degree these days. Unfortunately, POPs accumulate in fatty tissues, and fish have historically been one of the best sources of healthy fats. (As a general rule, seafood caught in Alaska and the South Pacific tend to be the safest in terms of POP contaminants.)26 According to one 2008 study:27

“The strong associations seen in quite different studies suggest the possibility that exposure to POPs could cause diabetes. One striking observation is that obese persons that do not have elevated POPs are not at elevated risk of diabetes, suggesting that the POPs rather than the obesity per se is responsible for the association. Although a specific mechanism is not known, most POPs induce a great number and variety of genes, including several that alter insulin action.”

Order your sports nutrition GOGYV health caps (contains selenium, other phyto-nutrients, CQ10),

http://gogyv.com/clubalthea/

powered by Biogenesis.

motherhealth@gmail.com or text 408-854-1883