Can coffee help reduce the risk of dementia or Alzheimer’s disease?

Dementia /Alzheimer’s disease is a condition that attacks the brain function, affects memory and alters logical capacity to the point that simple daily tasks become almost impossible. A combination of factors including age, genetic inheritance, diet, and environment is likely to be responsible for this heartbreaking disease, since there has been no specific proven cause.

According to the April publication of Tufts Newsletter, a new study by Finnish and Swedish researchers reported that people who drink between three to five cups of coffee a day in midlife could be cutting their risk of dementia/Alzheimer’s disease by 65 percent. Researchers followed over 1,000 people.  During that time, 61 participants developed dementia, 48 with Alzheimer’s disease. After controlling for recurrent socioeconomic and health factors, including high cholesterol and high blood pressure, the scientists found that the subjects who had reported drinking three to five cups of coffee daily were 65 percent less likely to have developed dementia, compared with those who drank two cups or less. There were not enough people who drank more than five cups to depict statistically significant conclusions, but researchers said they too, were at reduced risk of dementia.

Although it is unclear exactly how moderate coffee drinking helps delay or avoid these diseases, studies have shown that coffee contains strong antioxidants, which are known to counter them.  Some studies have also shown that coffee helps protect the nervous system, which can also protect against dementia.  Due to the fact that the average American drinks more than three and half cups of coffee daily, these results can have imperative implications for the prevention or delaying the onset of dementia/Alzheimer’s disease.

Tanya Zuckerbrot, MS, RD is a nutritionist and founder of www.Skinnyandthecity.com.    She is also the creator of The F-Factor Diet™, an innovative nutritional program she has used for more than ten years to provide hundreds of her clients with all the tools they need to achieve easy weight loss and maintenance, improved health and well-being.  For more information log onto www.FFactorDiet.com.

Researchers from Addenbrooke Hospital in Cambridge, England reported in this month’s edition of the journal, Allergy, that by studying a small group of peanut-allergic children, they have found a possible way of reducing the risks associated with accidental peanut ingestion.

The study authors pointed out that an allergy to peanuts may affect the entire family, particularly when a child has a food allergy.  Families affected by food allergies have a great deal of pressure put upon them, as well as anxieties associated with this condition.

How to cope with food allergies:

Eating out of the home requires planning and education to avoid an allergic reaction.  I often tell my patients to be a “label detective” and understand food labels ― or when dining out, present a “food ingredient card” to the server or kitchen staff to alert them, in order to reduce unwanted exposure to peanuts and other food allergens.  Don’t forget to always ask questions about ingredients and food preparation if you have a history of food allergies.

Bottom line: the only 100 percent successful treatment for food allergies in 2010, is education, prevention and avoidance, as well as preparedness for possible allergic reactions. There is a great need for more research as it is too soon to know whether this approach will ultimately work for the many millions with allergies to peanuts and nuts! 

Check out some additional strategies as well as one of the upcoming food allergy conferences taking place this year hosted by the Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network at:  http://www.foodallergy.org/conferences.html. 

Dr. Clifford W. Bassett is an assistant clinical professor of medicine at the Long Island College Hospital and on the faculty of NYU School of Medicine. He is the current vice chair for public education committee of the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology. No information in this blog is intended as medical advice to any reader or intended to diagnose or treat any medical condition.

The National Institutes of Health recently published an interesting study in the “BMJ,” where they approached 1,200 internists and rheumatologists about what they called “placebo treatments,” where patient expectations rather than an expected physiological response was the rationale for the treatment. Only 679 physicians responded, which limited the conclusions, along with the design of the study itself, as this type of survey is a weak form of science. Nevertheless, the results were disturbing – about half of the responding doctors indicated they prescribed these kind of treatments on a regular basis, and more than 60 perecent believed there was no ethical problem in doing so. It has long been known that cures and responses to treatment can be affected by a patient’s mental attitude and expectation, and that healing itself involves suggestion as well as chemical intervention.

But I find these results deeply disturbing for the following reasons:

1) Most of those surveyed were not using sugar pills or harmless salt water, they were using medicines with potential side effects. These included over-the-counter analgesics (41percent), vitamins (38 percent), sedatives (13 percent), and antibiotics (13 percent).

2) More than 90 percent of upper respiratory infections are viral, yet physicians are knowingly prescribing antibiotics to meet patient expectation.

3) Patients are fueled to ask for pills because of advertising, the Internet and a culture of instant gratification.

4) Physicians are motivated to provide a quick fix rather than a more elaborate explanation which could eliminate the need or urge for the treatment. A study published in the “Annals of Family Medicine” published in 2005 concluded that physicians only spend 55 percent of their time in face-to-face patient care. In this environment of 5 to 10 minute office visits, it is often easier for doctors to provide a quick placebo treatment rather than a more elaborate diagnosis and explanation.

5) This is a survey of doctors, but it is highly doubtful to me that patients would be satisfied with this approach. I suspect that a similar survey of patients would reveal that less than 10 percent of patients believe that it is okay for placebo treatments to be given for deceptive reasons, with false expectations. I suspect that most patients would like an interaction with their doctor to be completely honest and based on full disclosure.

Do my readers agree?

VIDEO: Watch Dr. Siegel Talk About The Placebo Problem

Dr. Marc Siegel is an internist and associate professor of medicine at the NYU School of Medicine. He is a FOX News Medical Contributor and writes a health column for LA Times, where he examines TV and movies for medical accuracy. Dr. Siegel is the author of “False Alarm: the Truth About the Epidemic of Fear” and “Bird Flu: Everything You Need to Know About the Next Pandemic”. Read more at www.doctorsiegel.com

A hearty breakfast laced with sugar appears to boost a woman’s chances of giving birth to a son, a new study finds.

The odds of having a male baby also went up sharply for women who had at least one bowl of breakfast cereal each day compared to women who ate less than or equal to one bowl of week, according to the study.

Please leave your comments below.