Wairakiteblackhole

Lifestyle changes like regular exercise, a healthy diet, and sufficient sleep are cornerstones of self-care for people with type 2 diabetes.

But what about mind-body practices? Can they also help people manage or even treat type 2 diabetes? An analysis of multiple studies, published in the Journal of Integrative and Complementary Medicine, suggests they might.

Which mindfulness practices did the study look at?

Researchers analyzed 28 studies that explored the effect of mind-body practices on people with type 2 diabetes. Those participating in the studies did not need insulin to control their diabetes, or have certain health conditions such as heart or kidney disease. The mind-body activities used in the research were:

• yoga
• qigong, a slow-moving martial art similar to tai chi
• mindfulness-based stress reduction, a training program designed to help people manage stress and anxiety
• meditation
• guided imagery, visualizing positive images to relax the mind.

How often and over what time period people engaged in the activities varied, ranging from daily to several times a week, and from four weeks to six months.

What did the study find about people with diabetes who practiced mindfulness?

Those who participated in any of the mind-body activities for any length of time lowered their levels of hemoglobin A1C, a key marker for diabetes. On average, A1C levels dropped by 0.84%. This is similar to the effect of taking metformin (Glucophage), a first-line medication for treating type 2 diabetes, according to the researchers.

A1C levels are determined by a blood test that shows a person’s average blood sugar levels over the past two to three months. Levels below 5.7% are deemed normal, levels from 5.7% to less than 6.5% are considered prediabetes, and levels 6.5% and higher are in the diabetes range.

How can mind-body practices help control blood sugar?

Their ability to reduce stress may play a big part. “Yoga and other mindfulness practices elicit a relaxation response — the opposite of the stress response,” says Dr. Shalu Ramchandani, a health coach and internist at the Harvard-affiliated Benson-Henry Institute for Mind Body Medicine at Massachusetts General Hospital. “A relaxation response can lower levels of the stress hormone cortisol. This improves insulin resistance and keeps blood sugar levels in check, thus lowering A1C levels.”

A relaxation response can help people with diabetes in other ways, such as by improving blood flow and lowering blood pressure, which protects against heart attacks and strokes.

What else should you know about this study?

The results of studies like this suggest a link between various mind-body practices and lower A1C levels, but do not offer firm proof of it. Levels of participation varied widely. But because all mindfulness practices studied had a modest positive effect, the researchers suggested that these types of activities could become part of diabetes therapy along with standard lifestyle treatments.

Could mind-body practices protect people against developing type 2 diabetes, especially for those at high risk? While this study wasn’t designed to look at this, Dr. Ramchandani again points to the long-range benefits of the relaxation response.

“Reducing and managing stress leads to improved moods, and greater self-awareness and self-regulation,” she says. “This can lead to more mindful eating, such as fighting cravings for unhealthy foods, adhering to a good diet, and committing to regular exercise, all of which can help reduce one’s risk for type 2 diabetes.”

Trying mind-body practices

There are many ways to adopt mind-body practices that can create relaxation responses. Here are some suggestions from Dr. Ramchandani:

• Do a daily 10-minute or longer meditation using an app like Insight Timer, Calm, or Headspace.
• Attend a gentle yoga, qigong, or tai chi class at a local yoga studio or community center.
• Try videos and exercises to help reduce stress and initiate relaxation responses.
• Practice slow controlled breathing. Lie on your back with one or both of your hands on your abdomen. Inhale slowly and deeply, drawing air into the lowest part of your lungs so your hand rises. Your belly should expand and rise as you inhale, then contract and lower as you exhale. Repeat for several minutes.

About the Author

Matthew Solan, Executive Editor, Harvard Men's Health Watch

Matthew Solan is the executive editor of Harvard Men’s Health Watch. He previously served as executive editor for UCLA Health’s Healthy Years and as a contributor to Duke Medicine’s Health News and Weill Cornell Medical College’s … See Full Bio View all posts by Matthew Solan

About the Reviewer

Howard E. LeWine, MD, Chief Medical Editor, Harvard Health Publishing

Howard LeWine, M.D., is a practicing internist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, Chief Medical Editor at Harvard Health Publishing, and editor in chief of Harvard Men’s Health Watch. See Full Bio View all posts by Howard E. LeWine, MD

Infertility is a remarkably common problem. It affects up to one in five people in the US who are trying to become pregnant, and 186 million people worldwide. A thorough medical evaluation can spot key contributing issues in many cases — whether in a woman, a man, or both partners — that might respond to treatment, or call for assisted reproductive tools like in vitro fertilization (IVF).

But in a substantial number of cases, no cause is found for infertility. Could inflammation be to blame for some of those cases, as recent research suggests? And if so, will an anti-inflammatory diet or lifestyle boost fertility?

Exploring the connection between inflammation and infertility

Chronic inflammation has been linked to many health conditions, such as cardiovascular disease, stroke, and cancer.

While its importance in infertility is far from clear, some evidence supports a connection:

• The risk of infertility is higher in conditions marked by inflammation, including infection, endometriosis, and polycystic ovary syndrome.
• Bodywide (systemic) inflammation may affect the uterus, cervix, and placenta, thus impairing fertility.
• Women with infertility who had IVF and followed an anti-inflammatory diet tended to have higher rates of successful pregnancy than women who did not follow the diet.

Could an anti-inflammatory diet improve fertility?

It’s a real possibility. Decades ago, researchers observed that women following a prescribed fertility diet ovulated more regularly and were more likely to get pregnant. Now a 2022 review of multiple studies in Nutrients suggests that following an anti-inflammatory diet holds promise for people experiencing infertility. The research was done years apart, but the diets in these two studies share many elements.

The 2022 review found that an anti-inflammatory diet may help

• improve pregnancy rates (though exactly how is uncertain)
• increase success rates of assisted reproductive measures, such as IVF
• improve sperm quality in men.

The authors add that improving diet might even reduce the need for invasive, prolonged, and costly fertility treatments. However, the quality of studies and consistency of findings varied, so more high-quality research is needed to support this.

Will adopting an anti-inflammatory lifestyle improve fertility?

While recent research is intriguing, there’s not enough evidence to show that an anti-inflammation action plan will improve fertility. A plant-based diet such as the Mediterranean diet, and other measures considered part of an anti-inflammatory lifestyle, improve heart health and have many other benefits.

It’s not clear if this is directly due to reducing inflammation. But this approach comes with little to no risk. And abundant convincing evidence suggests it can improve health and even fight disease.

What is an anti-inflammatory lifestyle?

Health experts have not agreed on a single definition. Here are some common recommendations:

• Adopt a diet that encourages plant-based foods, whole grains, and healthy fats like olive oil while discouraging red meat, highly processed food, and saturated fats.
• Stop smoking or vaping.
• Lose excess weight.
• Be physically active.
• Get enough sleep.
• Treat inflammatory conditions, such as rheumatoid arthritis or allergies.
• Avoid excessive alcohol consumption.
• Control stress.

Anti-inflammatory medicines may help in certain situations — for example, treatments for autoimmune disease. However, they are not warranted for everyone. And for people trying to conceive, it’s far from clear that any potential benefit would exceed the risk of side effects for parent and child.

The bottom line

It’s possible that inflammation plays an important and underappreciated role in infertility and that an anti-inflammatory diet or lifestyle could help. But we need more evidence to confirm this. Until we know more, taking measures to improve your overall health and possibly reduce chronic inflammation makes sense.

About the Author

Robert H. Shmerling, MD,

Senior Faculty Editor, Harvard Health Publishing; Editorial Advisory Board Member, Harvard Health Publishing

Dr. Robert H. Shmerling is the former clinical chief of the division of rheumatology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC), and is a current member of the corresponding faculty in medicine at Harvard Medical School. … See Full Bio View all posts by Robert H. Shmerling, MD

Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) are a common type of anti-acid medication, and are available both by prescription and over the counter. Omeprazole and pantoprazole are examples of PPIs. They are the treatment of choice for several gastrointestinal disorders, such as peptic ulcer disease, esophagitis, gastroesophageal reflux disease, and H. pylori infection.

New guidelines by the American Gastroenterological Association have highlighted the need to address appropriate PPI usage, and they recommend that PPIs should be taken at the lowest dose and shortest duration for the condition being treated. However, PPIs are frequently overused, and may be taken for longer than necessary. This can happen unintentionally; for example, if the medication was started while the patient was hospitalized, or it was started as a trial to see if a patient’s symptoms would improve and then is continued beyond the needed timeframe.

Who should use PPIs in the short term?

There are a variety of reasons for short-term PPI usage. For instance, PPIs are prescribed typically for one to two weeks to treat H. pylori infection, in addition to antibiotics. A PPI course of four to 12 weeks may be prescribed for people with ulcers in their stomach or small intestine, or for inflammation in the esophagus.

People may also be prescribed a short course of PPIs for acid reflux or abdominal pain symptoms (dyspepsia), and for symptom relief while physicians perform tests to determine the cause of abdominal pain. People may be able to move to a lower dose of PPIs, or discontinue their medication altogether, if their symptoms get better or they have completed their treatment course.

Who should be on PPIs long-term?

Some patients with specific conditions may need to be on PPIs for the long term, and they should discuss their condition and unique treatment plan with their doctor. Some conditions that may require longer-term use of PPIs include:

• severe esophagitis, eosinophilic esophagitis, Barrett’s esophagus, esophageal strictures, or idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis
• acid reflux
• dyspepsia or upper airway symptoms that improve with PPI usage but worsen when stopping PPIs
• people with a history of upper gastrointestinal bleeding from gastric and duodenal peptic ulcers may need to be on PPIs long-term to prevent recurrence.

What are some side effects of PPIs?

Any medication can cause side effects. Fortunately, adverse effects from PPIs are generally rare. However, these medications have been associated with increased risk of certain infections (such as pneumonia and C. difficile). Previously, there had been concerns that PPI usage was linked to dementia, but newer studies have contradicted this association.

Additionally, while rare, PPIs may also cause drug interactions with other medications. For example, PPIs may affect the levels and potency of certain medications, such as clopidogrel (Plavix), warfarin (Coumadin), and some seizure and HIV medications, sometimes necessitating dosage adjustments of these drugs. Therefore, it is important to let the team of healthcare providers who manage your medications know when a new medication has been added to your list or if a medication has been discontinued.

How do I work with my doctor to step down from taking PPIs?

Some patients are prescribed PPIs twice a day in an acute situation, such as to prevent rebleeding from stomach ulcers or if a patient has severe acid reflux symptoms. If there no longer remains a reason to take PPIs twice a day, you may be stepped down to once a day. To discontinue a PPI, your doctor may decide to taper the medication — for example, by decreasing the dose by 50% each week until discontinued.

What might I experience if my doctor suggests I stop taking a PPI?

Studies have shown that for patients with long-term PPI use, there can be rebound secretion of stomach acid and an increase in upper gastrointestinal symptoms when discontinuing PPIs. However, a different type of anti-acid medication (such as an H2 antagonist like famotidine or a contact antacid medication containing calcium carbonate like TUMS) can be used for relief temporarily. If a patient experiences more than two months of severe persistent symptoms after discontinuing a PPI, this may be a reason to resume PPI therapy.

What steps should I take next?

It is important to routinely discuss your medication list and concerns with your primary care doctor. The decision to step down or discontinue a PPI is complex, and for your safety you should verify with your doctor before adjusting your PPI dosing. Ultimately, the goal is to make sure you are only taking medications that are necessary in order to maximize the benefit and minimize side effects.

About the Authors

Nisa Desai, MD, Contributor

Dr. Nisa Desai is a practicing hospitalist physician at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, and an instructor in medicine at Harvard Medical School. She completed undergraduate education at Northwestern University, followed by medical school at the … See Full Bio View all posts by Nisa Desai, MD

Loren Rabinowitz, MD, Contributor

Dr. Loren Rabinowitz is an instructor in medicine Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, and an attending physician in the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Center at BIDMC. Her clinical research is focused on the … See Full Bio View all posts by Loren Rabinowitz, MD

Everyone has moments when their brain suddenly goes haywire. They repeatedly fixate on the same thought, like being stuck on a hamster wheel. Or their thoughts aimlessly bounce from one random topic to the next like a pinball.

People often refer to these thought patterns as racing thoughts, and the most common cause is anxiety, says Fairlee Fabrett, PhD, a psychologist at Harvard-affiliated McLean Hospital.

“People who struggle with racing thoughts are constantly worried about what needs to be done, what hasn’t been done, and what is next,” says Fabrett. “Or they obsess about past, present, or future situations.” For example, you replay a conversation with different versions of dialogue, ruminate about an upcoming meeting with your boss or medical appointment, or worry about an unlikely doomsday scenario.

“When racing thoughts take over your mind you can’t stay focused, and you feel trapped, which makes you even more anxious and stressed, and the cycle continues,” says Fabrett.

Breaking the cycle of anxiety and racing thoughts

How can you break this cycle and keep racing thoughts from controlling you? Here are five strategies to try.

Give yourself permission. Racing thoughts are often made worse by the anxiety over having racing thoughts. To escape this, give yourself permission to experience them. “Acknowledge that racing thoughts are just noise, it is what our minds sometimes do, and that’s okay,” says Fabrett. “This gives you a sense of control so you don’t feel helpless. When you put racing thoughts in their proper context, they feel less threatening and easier to manage.”

Get mindful. Practicing mindfulness can help change your thought patterns. For instance, try counting your breaths. Close your eyes and count to yourself as you take slow, steady breaths: count one on the inhale, two on the exhale, etc. When you reach 10, start over and repeat the process until you calm down. “This is also a great remedy before sleep when most people’s minds begin to ruminate,” says Fabrett. Also, practice this breath work at times when your thoughts are not racing, so you will have the skill when you need it.

Distract yourself. You can sometimes break the cycle by distracting your mind. “As soon as you notice yourself worrying again or thinking about things over and over, make an internal comment to yourself, like ‘here I go again, with my list of thoughts that never ends,” says Fabrett. Then make a conscious decision to do something else, like reading, listening to music, or calling a friend.

Get moving. It sounds like token health advice — exercise more — but movement is helpful for defusing anxiety. For instance, when an episode of racing thoughts strikes, do a set of push-ups, 10 jumping jacks, take a five-minute walk, or do household chores. “These not only help break the cycle of racing thoughts but give your mind something else to focus on,” says Fabrett. Also, try to build regular exercise into your life as well as these short bursts of activity. That can help relieve anxiety and stress.

Schedule worry time. Sometimes it’s best to let racing thoughts run their course; otherwise, they may linger indefinitely. To do this, schedule worry time. When anxious racing thoughts occur, recognize them, but tell yourself that now is not worry time and you will deal with them later. Then at a fixed time of your choosing, do nothing but explore those thoughts and work through them. For example, write down the thoughts that come to mind without editing, including all the worst-case scenarios you can think of.

“You can also talk about them aloud and ask what makes you nervous and why,” says Fabrett. “This allows you to confront your anxiety head-on, but on your schedule without taking away from other activities,” says Fabrett. Set a limit to worry time, like 10 to 20 minutes. When the time is up, you move on.

If racing thoughts regularly affect your life or interfere with sleep, talk to your doctor or a mental health professional. “Frequent racing thoughts may be related to anxiety disorders, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), trauma, or other mental health issues that need exploring,” says Fabrett.

About the Author

Matthew Solan, Executive Editor, Harvard Men's Health Watch

Matthew Solan is the executive editor of Harvard Men’s Health Watch. He previously served as executive editor for UCLA Health’s Healthy Years and as a contributor to Duke Medicine’s Health News and Weill Cornell Medical College’s … See Full Bio View all posts by Matthew Solan

About the Reviewer

Howard E. LeWine, MD, Chief Medical Editor, Harvard Health Publishing

Howard LeWine, M.D., is a practicing internist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, Chief Medical Editor at Harvard Health Publishing, and editor in chief of Harvard Men’s Health Watch. See Full Bio View all posts by Howard E. LeWine, MD

Are you having a little trouble hearing conversations? If so, you’re not alone. An estimated 23% of Americans ages 12 and older have hearing loss. Although most of those people have mild hearing loss, for people ages 80 years and older, it’s more common for hearing loss to be moderate to severe than mild.

But not only is moderate to severe hearing loss disruptive to one’s life, it also makes you more likely to develop dementia. A new study helps explain why — and what you can do about it.

What did the new study look at and find?

A study published in JAMA focused on a sample of adults in the United States from the National Health and Aging Trends Study, which follows Medicare beneficiaries. The participants sampled were 70 or older.

The researchers found that about 33% of participants had normal hearing, 37% had mild hearing loss, and 30% had moderate to severe hearing loss. Dementia occurred least often among those with normal hearing (6%), more often among those with mild hearing loss (9%), and most often among those with moderate to severe hearing loss (17%). That’s a large increase in risk, particularly for those whose hearing loss is moderate to severe.

What else to know about this study

The study sample was selected to make it possible to analyze subgroups by age and apply findings to a diverse population. The sample included additional participants ages 90 years and older, and additional participants who identified as Black. Of the 2,413 total participants, 53% were ages 80 years and older, 56% were female, 19% were non-Hispanic Black, 4.5% were Hispanic, and 74% were non-Hispanic white.

Also, unlike previous research, this study looked objectively at hearing loss and dementia. Prior research had shown that hearing loss is thought to account for about 8% of all dementia cases worldwide. Exactly why the connection exists is not known.

It’s important to note that most large studies that found this link were based on questionnaires that people fill out. In other words, no one actually measured the hearing of those participating in the study to make sure that they had hearing loss — or that their hearing was really normal.

In this new study, however, the investigative team used an electronic tablet-based audiometer to evaluate participants’ hearing for four pure tone frequencies that are most important for understanding speech. So, for the first time in a large study, there was objective measurement of hearing loss.

How do hearing aids reduce the risk of dementia?

If you have hearing loss, does that mean you’re doomed to develop dementia? Not at all. This study found that those with moderate to severe hearing loss could significantly reduce their risk of dementia simply by using hearing aids.

This research helps us understand why hearing loss causes dementia. Here’s the connection:

There is increasing evidence that the more the brain is stimulated, the less likely it is that dementia will develop. When there is hearing loss, auditory stimulation is reduced. This, by itself, likely increases dementia risk. But even more important is that when an individual suffers from moderate to severe hearing loss, they are less likely to participate in social activities. Perhaps they are embarrassed about their hearing loss. Or they may simply find it unrewarding to attend a social event when they cannot hear what is going on.

It turns out that social activities are one of the best ways to stimulate the brain, as there is evidence that our brains evolved to facilitate social behavior. Given all this information, you won’t be surprised to learn that reduced social activity has been linked to cognitive decline. Thus, this new study provides additional evidence that the reason hearing loss increases the risk of dementia is because hearing loss reduces brain stimulation — both directly and through reduced social interaction.

What to do if you have hearing loss

Don’t let hearing loss raise your risk of dementia.

• Keep your ears clean. (But remember, never put anything in your ears smaller than your elbow. Ask your doctor if you’re not sure how to clean your ears.)
• If you can’t hear and you don’t have hearing aids, get them. Hearing aids now available over the counter can help many people with mild to moderate hearing loss.
• If you have hearing aids, wear them.
• If your hearing aids aren’t working, get them fixed.
• Don’t be passive — ramp up your social life and other activities.

All these things will help to reduce your risk of dementia. And you might just find that, despite some hearing loss, you’re enjoying life more.

About the Author

Andrew E. Budson, MD,

Contributor; Editorial Advisory Board Member, Harvard Health Publishing

Dr. Andrew E. Budson is chief of cognitive & behavioral neurology at the Veterans Affairs Boston Healthcare System, lecturer in neurology at Harvard Medical School, and chair of the Science of Learning Innovation Group at the … See Full Bio View all posts by Andrew E. Budson, MD

We all want our child to have friends. We want them to be happy, and to build the social skills and connections that will help them now and in the future.

Sometimes, and for some children, making friends isn’t easy. This is particularly true after the COVID-19 pandemic. Because of isolation and remote school, many children either didn’t learn the skills they need to make friends — or those skills got rusty.

Here are some ways parents can help.

Start at home: Learning relationship skills

Making and keeping friends involves skills that are best learned at home with your family. Some of them include:

• Empathy. Make sure that everyone in the family treats each other fairly and with kindness. Sometimes we turn a blind eye to sibling fights, or feel justified in snapping at our partner when we have had a long day. No matter what we say, our children pay attention to what we do.
• Curiosity about others. Make a family habit of asking each other about their day, their interests, their thoughts.
• Communication skills. These days, devices endanger the development of those skills. Shut off the devices. Have family dinners. Talk with each other.
• Cooperation. Do projects, play games, and do chores as a family. Work together. Help your child learn about taking turns and valuing the input of others.
• Regulating emotions. It’s normal to have strong feelings. When your child does, help them find ways to understand big emotions and manage them.
• Knowing when and how to apologize — and forgive. This really comes under empathy, but teach your child how to apologize for their mistakes, make amends, and forgive the mistakes of others.

All of these apply also to how you and your partner talk about — or with — other people in front of your children, too!

Be a good role model outside the home, too

When you are outside your home, be friendly! Strike up conversations, ask questions of people around you. Help your child learn confidence and strategies for talking to people they don’t know.

Make interactions easier

Conversations and interactions can be easier if they are organized around a common interest or activity. Here are some ways parents can help:

• Sign your child up for sports or other activities that involve their peers. Make sure it’s something they have at least some interest in doing.
• Get to know the parents of some of your child’s peers — and invite them all to an outing or meal. It could allow the children to get to know each other while taking some of the pressure off.
• When planning playdates, think about fun, cooperative activities — like baking cookies, or going to a park or museum.

Keep an eye on your child — but don’t hover

Ultimately, your child needs to learn to do this — and you don’t want to embarrass them, either. The two exceptions might be:

• If the children aren’t interacting at all, you might want to suggest some options for activities. Facilitate as necessary, and step back out again.
• If there is fighting or meanness on either side, you should step in and make it clear that such behavior isn’t okay.

Keep an open line of communication, and be supportive

Talk with your child regularly about their day, about their interactions, and how things made them feel. Listen more than you talk. Be positive and supportive. Remember that part of being supportive is understanding your child’s personality and seeing the world from their eyes. You can’t make your child someone they are not.

If your child keeps struggling with making friends, talk to your doctor

All parents need help sometimes — and sometimes there is more to the problem than meets the eye. This is particularly true if your child has ADHD or another diagnosis that could make interactions more challenging.

For information on supporting friendships at different ages, check out the advice from the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Follow me on Twitter @drClaire

About the Author

Claire McCarthy, MD, Senior Faculty Editor, Harvard Health Publishing

Claire McCarthy, MD, is a primary care pediatrician at Boston Children’s Hospital, and an assistant professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School. In addition to being a senior faculty editor for Harvard Health Publishing, Dr. McCarthy … See Full Bio View all posts by Claire McCarthy, MD

A positive outlook has been linked to better heart health and a longer life. But is that true for Black Americans, whose average lifespan is about 72 years, compared with an average lifespan of 77 years for all Americans?

Recent findings from the nation’s largest and longest-running study of cardiovascular risk factors in Black Americans, the Jackson Heart Study, suggest that the answer is a qualified yes. Cardiovascular diseases, which give rise to heart attack and stroke, are the leading cause of death and disability worldwide. Perhaps not surprisingly, the association between optimism and longevity in Black Americans appears to be strongest among people with higher education or income levels, and those ages 55 and younger. It also proved stronger among men than among women.

Is optimism the only key to longevity in this study?

Probably not. There’s another possible explanation for the findings, says Dr. Rishi Wadhera, a cardiologist at Harvard-affiliated Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC).

“Instead of optimism leading to better health, it’s possible that healthier individuals are simply more optimistic, or less healthy individuals are less optimistic,” he says. This so-called reverse causality — when cause and effect are the opposite of what one assumes — is always a possibility in observational studies, even when scientists take pains to control for possible confounding factors such as health conditions and behaviors, as they did in this study.

“Nonetheless, these findings contribute to a body of evidence that suggests that psychosocial resources, mood, and mental health are all associated with health,” says Dr. Wadhera, who is section head of health policy and equity research at the Richard A. and Susan F. Smith Center for Outcomes Research in Cardiology at BIDMC.

Measuring optimism in the study

Led by researchers at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, the study included 2,652 women and 1,444 men who were part of the Jackson Heart Study. Researchers measured optimism using the Life Orientation Test-Revised, which includes questions such as “In uncertain times, I usually expect the best.” Responses are scored on a scale of 0 (strongly disagree) to 4 (strongly agree). The researchers administered this test and others between 2000 and 2004, and tracked mortality among the study participants until 2018.

Optimism — the general belief that good things will happen — may be partly inherited, although genetic factors are thought to explain only about 20% to 30% of this trait. Some research suggests that people can enhance their feelings of optimism either through cognitive behavioral therapy or writing exercises that focus on imagining their “best possible future self.”

Looking forward

Still, optimism is but one of many intertwined social factors that influence how long people live. A better understanding of biological pathways that could potentially explain the outcomes observed in this study may help, says Dr. Wadhera.

“But to meaningfully address the alarming and ubiquitous health inequities that exist in our country, we need to tackle the unacceptable gaps in care and resources that exist between different racial and ethnic groups,” he adds. This includes disparities in health insurance coverage, access to health care, neighborhood factors such as access to green space and healthy foods, and environmental stressors such as pollution exposure. “Doing so may help people and communities from all backgrounds live happier and longer lives,” Dr. Wadhera says.

 

About the Author

Julie Corliss, Executive Editor, Harvard Heart Letter

Julie Corliss is the executive editor of the Harvard Heart Letter. Before working at Harvard, she was a medical writer and editor at HealthNews, a consumer newsletter affiliated with The New England Journal of Medicine. She … See Full Bio View all posts by Julie Corliss

It used to be that doctors would automatically recommend treating all men with prostate cancer, even if their initial biopsies suggested the disease would grow slowly (or at all). But during the last several decades, the pendulum on treatment has swung the other way.

Doctors are now likely to advise active surveillance for low- to intermediate-risk cancers that may never turn deadly over the course of a man’s life. Active surveillance involves routine PSA checks, follow-up biopsies, and more recently, magnetic resonance imaging of a patient’s tumor. Treatment is initiated only when — or if — the disease shows signs of progression.

Recent evidence from Johns Hopkins University shows that the long-term risks of metastasis and death from low-grade prostate cancer among men on active surveillance averages just 0.1%. But doctors who care for such men also face a nagging question: which of their patients might have more aggressive cancer that should require closer monitoring? New findings published by the Johns Hopkins team in January provide useful insights.

The researchers’ approach

The researchers in this case zeroed in on the prognostic value of so-called perineural invasion, or PNI, on tumor biopsy samples. PNI simply means that cancer cells are moving into the perineural space between nerves in the prostate and their surrounding tissues. A finding of PNI raises red flags because the perineural space “provides a conduit by which tumor cells can potentially escape the prostate and grow elsewhere in the body,” says Dr. Christian Pavlovich, a urologic oncologist at Johns Hopkins who led the research.

Dr. Pavlovich’s team wanted to know if PNI detected on initial or follow-up biopsies would be associated with higher risks for cancer progression. So they analyzed long-term follow-up data from 1,969 men who had enrolled in an active surveillance research protocol at Johns Hopkins between 1995 and 2021. All the men were diagnosed initially with Grade Group 1 prostate cancer (the least risky form of the disease) and had undergone at least one follow-up biopsy since then.

What did the results show?

Among the 198 men with PNI, 44% of them (87 men in all) eventually progressed to Grade Group 2 prostate cancer, which is a more advanced form of the disease with an intermediate risk of further spread. Conversely, just 26% of the remaining 1,771 men without PNI (461 men) had progressed to Grade Group 2.

Pavlovich emphasizes that despite the new findings, PNI “does not make patients ineligible for active surveillance.” Importantly, the research showed that PNI was not associated with high-risk features, such as cancer in the lymph nodes of patients who wound up having surgery, or post-surgical elevations in PSA that show cancer still lurks in the body.

“What we’ve really shown here is that PNI puts men at a slightly higher risk of extraprostatic extension (cancer cells located just beyond the confines of the prostate),” Pavlovich says. “This is not necessarily a new finding. But PNI only occurs in about 10% of Grade Group 1 patients, and this is the boldest statement yet from the largest study conducted so far.” Pavlovich and his colleagues concluded that PNI provides an inexpensive and readily available indicator for identifying which men on active surveillance will benefit from more intensive monitoring protocols, including MRI and genetic tests.

Dr. Marc B. Garnick, the Gorman Brothers Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, agrees, while pointing out that PNI evaluations aren’t performed often enough. A PNI analysis of pathology specimens, he says, “along with emerging and sophisticated genetic testing of the tissue samples, may lead to more certainty in our recommendations to patients.”

About the Author

Charlie Schmidt, Editor, Harvard Medical School Annual Report on Prostate Diseases

Charlie Schmidt is an award-winning freelance science writer based in Portland, Maine. In addition to writing for Harvard Health Publishing, Charlie has written for Science magazine, the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Environmental Health Perspectives, … See Full Bio View all posts by Charlie Schmidt

About the Reviewer

Marc B. Garnick, MD, Editor in Chief, Harvard Medical School Annual Report on Prostate Diseases; Editorial Advisory Board Member, Harvard Health Publishing

Dr. Marc B. Garnick is an internationally renowned expert in medical oncology and urologic cancer. A clinical professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, he also maintains an active clinical practice at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical … See Full Bio View all posts by Marc B. Garnick, MD

The current shortage of semaglutide (Ozempic), an important diabetes drug, has an unusual origin: too many people without diabetes are taking it. Here’s how that happened, and how we might course-correct to help ensure that those with the greatest need for this medicine can get it.

A diabetes drug with an important side effect: Weight loss

Semaglutide (Ozempic) was first approved by the FDA in 2017 to help people with type 2 diabetes keep blood sugar under control. But during pre-approval studies, researchers noticed a remarkable side effect: people lost weight. For example, in one pivotal study, average losses for those receiving one milligram a week of semaglutide were:

• nearly 10 pounds lost over 30 weeks
• nearly 5% overall body weight lost
• waist size shrank 1.6 inches.

This side effect helped people with type 2 diabetes because excess weight is a major risk factor for the condition. Among other health benefits, weight loss can lower blood sugar and blood pressure, and reduce the need for other diabetes medications.

Turning a side effect into a selling point

Unintended weight loss would usually be listed as a side effect for a study medication. But ads for Ozempic didn’t list it with the other possible side effects; instead, it was featured as a benefit. The Ozempic “Tri-Zone” (a phrase concocted by marketers, not medical experts) promised improved blood sugar control, lower cardiovascular risk, and weight loss.

At the bottom of the ad, fine print that’s easy to miss states: “Ozempic is not a weight loss drug.” Talk about mixed messages!

The makers of Ozempic saw the potential of semaglutide as a weight loss drug for people without diabetes. Sure enough, clinical trials confirmed that overweight and obese people taking semaglutide also lost substantial weight. Semaglutide received FDA approval in 2021 for people with obesity (BMI of 30 or greater), or who were overweight (with a BMI of 27 to 29.9) and had a medical problem related to excess weight, such as high blood pressure or high cholesterol. As a weight loss drug, it was rebranded as Wegovy.

The only difference between the two drugs? The maximum approved dose of semaglutide is a bit higher with Wegovy than Ozempic.

How social media fueled the Ozempic shortage

Soon after the approval of Wegovy, celebrities and social media influencers began taking it and sharing glowing weight loss experiences. What’s more, medicines approved for specific uses in the US can be prescribed off-label for any use: up to 38% of all prescriptions written in the US are off-label (note: automatic PDF download). So, it’s likely some of the viral run on Wegovy was fueled by people who wanted to lose weight but had no medical reason to take it.

After high demand put Wegovy in short supply, many turned to Ozempic to lose weight. And that contributed to a shortage of Ozempic, threatening the health of people with type 2 diabetes who rely on the drug.

Readjust priorities and limit irresponsible prescribing

This situation couldn’t have happened without physicians or other health care professionals willing to write Ozempic prescriptions for people who did not have diabetes or another medical reason to use semaglutide. And that suggests an obvious solution: limit prescriptions for Ozempic to people with diabetes. For many drugs, a prior authorization process requires certain conditions be met before a prescription can be filled. This could be done for Ozempic.

And of course, we should encourage people who don’t have diabetes not to request a prescription for Ozempic. While that message is unlikely to show up in a drug ad, public service announcements could do the trick.

The bottom line

Drug ads often urge you to ask your doctor if a treatment is right for you. But we already know a key piece of the answer for Ozempic: if you don’t have diabetes, don’t ask for a diabetes medicine to help with weight loss. There are better ways to get the help you need to reach a healthy weight if you are overweight or obese. Talk to your doctor about a full range of treatment options. And if your weight is already in a healthy range, it’s not a good idea to take a medication to become thinner.

Finally, to keep vitally important medicines available for those who need them most, health care professionals must prescribe them responsibly. Responsible requests by their patients could help.

About the Author

Robert H. Shmerling, MD,

Senior Faculty Editor, Harvard Health Publishing; Editorial Advisory Board Member, Harvard Health Publishing

Dr. Robert H. Shmerling is the former clinical chief of the division of rheumatology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC), and is a current member of the corresponding faculty in medicine at Harvard Medical School. … See Full Bio View all posts by Robert H. Shmerling, MD

Imagine this as a morning routine that replaces your first cup of coffee:

You wake up feeling a bit foggy, so you slip on a wearable device that looks like an extra-thick headband. You turn on the power source and settle in while electrical current flows into your brain. Twenty minutes later, feeling more focused and energized, you start your busy day feeling grateful for this new technology.

If this scenario sounds strange to you, I’m with you. And yet, hype around transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is growing for an expanding list of conditions such as depression, ADHD, and even Alzheimer’s disease. A recent ad for one tDCS device urges you to “elevate your performance.” But before you give this a try, read on.

What is transcranial direct current stimulation?

Brain stimulation therapies aim to activate or inhibit parts of the brain. tDCS has been around for years, but its popularity has spiked over the last decade.

tDCS devices use headgear that may look like a swim cap or headband to position electrodes against the scalp. When a power source is switched on, the electrodes deliver low levels of electrical current to the brain. A typical session lasts 20 to 30 minutes and may be repeated over days or weeks.

Three better-known brain stimulation therapies are:

• Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS): A device worn over the forehead stimulates specific areas of the brain by changing nearby magnetic fields. TMS is cleared by the FDA to treat depression that hasn’t responded to standard medicines, and for obsessive-compulsive disorder.
• Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT): An electric current flowing through electrodes placed at specific locations on the scalp causes a brief seizure while a patient is under anesthesia. In use since the late 1930s, ECT can be highly effective for severe depression that hasn’t responded to standard therapies. It uses higher levels of electrical current than tDCS. That’s why it requires close medical supervision and is generally administered in a hospital or specialized clinic.
• Deep brain stimulation (DBS): Electrodes surgically implanted in specific areas of the brain generate electrical pulses. DBS is used to treat conditions such as Parkinson’s disease, epilepsy, or tremors that don’t improve with medicines.

What claims are made for tDCS?

The brain normally functions by sending and receiving tiny electrical signals between nerve cells. Stimulating specific regions of the brain with low levels of electricity might improve focus or memory, mood, or even dementia, according to tDCS advocates.

Some claims say tDCS can

• improve mental clarity, focus, and memory
• increase energy and motivation
• relieve so-called brain fog following COVID-19, Lyme disease, or other conditions
• reduce depression or anxiety
• reduce cravings among smokers or people with drug addiction
• improve symptoms of ADHD or Alzheimer’s disease.

Does tDCS work?

The jury is still out. Research suggests that tDCS holds promise for certain conditions, but techniques tested through research may differ from devices sold commercially for at-home use. For example, electrodes may be positioned more precisely over an area of the brain, and how current is delivered, session length, or number of sessions may differ.

Currently, small, short-term studies show that tDCS may benefit people with:

• Depression: An analysis of 10 randomized trials found some participants were more likely to report fewer symptoms of depression, or remission of depression, after a course of tDCS treatment compared with sham treatment.
• Alzheimer’s disease: A review of seven studies found that tDCS lasting 20 to 40 minutes improved memory and other cognitive measures in people with mild to moderate Alzheimer’s disease.
• ADHD: One randomized trial of 64 adults with ADHD found improved attention after 30 minutes of tDCS daily for a month.

The FDA has not cleared tDCS for any health condition, and it is considered investigational. More research with positive results and reassuring safety data are needed before tDCS gets a thumbs-up from regulators.

That’s probably why some ads for tDCS note in fine print that it is not a medical device and is only for recreational use.

Does tDCS have downsides?

While the FDA assesses tDCS as safe for adults, there are downsides to consider. For example, treatment may cause itching, irritation, or small burns at the sites of the electrodes. Some users complain of fatigue or headache.

There are no large, long-term studies of tDCS, so overall safety is uncertain. Some experts believe at-home use raises many questions, such as how much of the brain beyond targeted areas is affected, what inconsistent approaches to tDCS use might do, and how long changes in the brain — intended or not — could last.

Very limited research has been done in children. So, the consequences for a child’s developing brain aren’t clear.

Finally, tDCS devices can be expensive (several hundred dollars or more), and generally are not covered by health insurance.

The bottom line

It’s not yet clear how tDCS should be used, or who is most likely to benefit from it. If you’re interested in pursuing tDCS, understand that there’s still a lot we don’t know.

If you’re more skeptical and risk-averse (like me), you may want to wait for more definitive research regarding its benefits and risks — and for now, stick with your morning coffee to clear your mind.

Follow me on Twitter @RobShmerling

About the Author

Robert H. Shmerling, MD,

Senior Faculty Editor, Harvard Health Publishing; Editorial Advisory Board Member, Harvard Health Publishing

Dr. Robert H. Shmerling is the former clinical chief of the division of rheumatology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC), and is a current member of the corresponding faculty in medicine at Harvard Medical School. … See Full Bio View all posts by Robert H. Shmerling, MD