recentpopularlog in

Quercki : hypertension   36

Is Sunscreen the New Margarine? | Outside Online
Sunny Australia changed its tune back in 2005. Cancer Council Australia’s official-position paper (endorsed by the Australasian College of Dermatologists) states, “Ultraviolet radiation from the sun has both beneficial and harmful effects on human health.... A balance is required between excessive sun exposure which increases the risk of skin cancer and enough sun exposure to maintain adequate vitamin D levels.... It should be noted that the benefits of sun exposure may extend beyond the production of vitamin D. Other possible beneficial effects of sun exposure… include reduction in blood pressure, suppression of autoimmune disease, and improvements in mood.”
sun  VitaminD  hypertension  depression  cancer 
10 weeks ago by Quercki
Anti-Hypertensives to Prevent Death, Heart Attacks, and Strokes – TheNNTTheNNT
In Summary, for those who took anti-hypertensives:

Benefits in NNT

1 in 125 were helped (prevented death)
1 in 67 were helped (prevented stroke)
1 in 100 were helped (prevented heart attack*)
Harms in NNT

1 in 10 were harmed (medication side effects, stopping the drug)
hypertension  drugs  treatment  safety 
april 2018 by Quercki
Guideline Hub | High Blood Pressure - American College of Cardiology
High Blood Pressure in Adults: Guideline For the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation and Management

publish date:Nov 13, 2017
Go to JACC article Download PDF
Quick Reference
These items break the guidelines down into easy-to-use summaries.

2017 Executive Summary
2017 Systematic Review
2017 Data Supplement
2017 Key Points to Remember
2017 Guideline Analysis
JACC High Blood Pressure Guideline Hub
hypertension  guidelines 
november 2017 by Quercki
2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults: Executive Summary | Hypertension
ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APHA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINE
2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults: Executive Summary
A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines

Paul K. Whelton, Robert M. Carey, Wilbert S. Aronow, Donald E. Casey, Karen J. Collins, Cheryl Dennison Himmelfarb, Sondra M. DePalma,
hypertension  guidelines 
november 2017 by Quercki
2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults | JACC: Journal of the American College of Cardiology
Journal of the American College of Cardiology
November 2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.11.006
PDF Article
Just Accepted
2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults
A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines
Paul K. Whelton, Robert M. Carey, Wilbert S. Aronow, Donald E. Casey Jr., Karen J. Collins, Cheryl Dennison Himmelfarb, Sondra M. DePalma,
hypertension  guidelines 
november 2017 by Quercki
Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults, Journal of the American College of Cardiology (2017
Please cite this article as: Whelton PK, Carey RM, Aronow WS, Casey Jr DE, Collins KJ, Dennison Himmelfarb C, DePalma SM, Gidding S, Jamerson KA, Jones DW, MacLaughlin EJ, Muntner P, Ovbiagele B, Smith Jr SC, Spencer CC, Stafford RS, Taler SJ, Thomas RJ, Williams Sr KA, Williamson JD, Wright Jr JT, 2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults, Journal of the American College of Cardiology (2017), doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.11.006.
pdf  hypertension  guidelines  *** 
november 2017 by Quercki
Potential U.S. Population Impact of the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association High Blood Pressure Guideline | JACC: Journal of the American College of Cardiology
Condensed abstract

The 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults provides recommendations for the definition of hypertension, antihypertensive medication treatment and blood pressure target goals. According to this guideline, 45.6% of US adults have hypertension and 36.2% are recommended antihypertensive treatment. Non-pharmacological intervention is advised for US adults (9.4%) with hypertension according to this guideline who are not recommended antihypertensive medication. Among US adults taking antihypertensive medication, 53.4% had BP above the treatment goal according to the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline and are recommended more intensive antihypertensive treatment.
hypertension  guidelines  prevalence  treatment  paywall 
november 2017 by Quercki
Size is everything when it comes to high blood pressure -- ScienceDaily
A team of clinical scientists at the University of Bristol have found a new way to treat high blood pressure (hypertension). The research study, entitled "Unilateral carotid body resection in resistant hypertension: a safety and feasibility trial," was led by Professor Julian Paton at the University of Bristol, and Dr Angus Nightingale (Cardiology Consultant) at the Bristol Heart Institute, Bristol, and was published recently in the Journal of American College of Cardiology: Basic to Translational Science.

The research indicates that the carotid bodies appear to be a cause of high blood pressure, and as such now offer a new target for treatment.

The clinical team have shown that removing one carotid body from some patients with high blood pressure caused an immediate and sustained fall in blood pressure.
hypertension  cause  treatment 
may 2017 by Quercki
Resisting expanding disease empires: why we shouldn't label healthy people as sick
A few years ago, colleagues and I analysed changes made by expert panels of doctors to the definitions of 14 common conditions, including high-blood pressure, depression, arthritis and Alzheimer’s disease. Our study was published in the international journal PLOS Medicine and was covered on The Conversation.

In summary, most conditions were expanded – including high blood pressure, Alzheimer’s disease, high cholesterol, depression, rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis and myocardial infarction or heart attack. Pre-diseases were created, thresholds for diagnosis were lowered, or the processes used to diagnose were changed so that people would be diagnosed and labelled earlier.


There’s no evidence to suggest patients benefit from expanded definitions. Burlingham/Shutterstock
No panel rigorously investigated and reported on the potential downside of their decision to expand – the danger that some people might be caught unnecessarily by the newly widened definitions.

No panels reported on the possibility that the new patients created by the new definitions might be “overdiagnosed” – they might be labelled with a disease that would never harm them, or be given a diagnosis and treatment that would do them more harm than good.

An epidemic of conflicts of interest

Perhaps most disturbingly, among the panels of experts who included disclosure sections in their publications, 75% revealed multiple financial ties to around seven drug companies each.
healthcare  overdiagnosis  cholesterol  hypertension  mammogram 
november 2016 by Quercki
How diseases get defined, and what that means for you
While it is well known that these financial ties are widespread, it was not known – until our study – whether the ties extended to the experts who define disease, and decide who among us should be labelled as sick.

What we found

The results of our study on expert panels that make changes to common disease definitions are published today in the open access journal PLOS Medicine.

You can read the full text of the publication yourself, but here are a few key findings in a nutshell. We only looked at 14 conditions, but the list features some very common ones including high blood pressure, high cholesterol, asthma, rheumatoid arthritis and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

We found that out of 16 different publications from these panels since the year 2000, ten proposed changes to the disease definition in a way that tended to widen the disease boundaries.

One panel created “pre-high blood pressure”, for instance, while another announced “pre-dementia” and several lowered the thresholds that define illness, including the ADHD panel. One panel narrowed the definition of its disease, and in five cases, we were unclear about the impacts of the changes.

About half of the panels made some brief mention of the potential downsides of their proposed changes, but in no case did any panel publication rigorously investigate the potential harms of their decisions to expand a disease and classify more people as sick.

Among all the panels that disclosed members’ financial ties, an average of 75% of panel members disclosed financial relationships with drug companies.
healthcare  medicine  cholesterol  mammogram  hypertension 
november 2016 by Quercki
Junkfood Science: “Obesity Paradox” #2— How can it be a disease if it has health benefits?
published in this month’s journal Hemodialysis International, led by Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh, MD, PhD, MPH, of UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine. It reported that among dialysis patients, “obese” patients are far more likely to survive than smaller patients. Since dialysis patients have protein-energy malnutrition and inflammation, termed Kidney Disease Wasting, obesity probably represents better overall nutrition and protective reserves that lower their risk of death, said Dr. Kalantar-Zadeh.

According to these doctors, the popular belief that fatness is associated with heart disease among these patients has not been shown in any study, nor is the survival advantage of higher BMIs (body mass index) related to having greater muscle mass over fat. Fatness isn’t the only “paradoxical” association among favorable clinical outcomes of dialysis patients, they said in a 2005 issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition:

High concentrations of total cholesterol have been associated with both a survival advantage in these patients, as has an inverse relation between blood pressure and outcome. These consistent findings across an array of cardiovascular risk factors in dialysis patients support the more inclusive term “reverse epidemiology.”

Reverse epidemiology has also been observed in heart failure patients, elderly persons, and patients with advanced malignancies, AIDS, and other chronic diseases. This means that 20 million persons—including almost half a million dialysis patients—in the United States alone may be subject to this reverse epidemiology. We believe this vulnerability to reverse epidemiology could have very important implications for public advice on health matters, because conventional recommendations for the management of CVD risk factors, such as weight reduction or aggressive treatment of hypercholesterolemia, may not be appropriate.
It’s probably shocking for some to hear that there even ARE health benefits to being fat. But as these doctors noted, kidney disease isn’t the only health problem where studies have shown that being fat appears protective and beneficial, especially as we age. It also includes infections, cancer, lung disease, heart disease, osteoporosis, anemia, high blood pressure, rheumatoid arthritis and type 2 diabetes.
fat  longevity  weight  hypertension  heart  diabetes  benefits 
august 2016 by Quercki
Another one bites the dust - The Blog of Michael R. Eades, M.D.
The US Department of Health and Human Services and the US Department of Agriculture 2005 nutritional guidelines (click here to read in full in a large pdf download) recommend that Americans consume less than 2300 mg of sodium per day (which is less than the 2400 mg recommended in the 2000 guidelines) in order to “prevent or delay the onset of high blood pressure..” and “to lower elevated blood pressure” Seems rationale enough until one considers that there is really no good evidence that sodium intake causes blood pressure to increase other than that shown in short-term clinical trials, a number of which are inconclusive or contradictory. It’s just like with the idea of low-fat: somewhere, sometime, someone got it into his or her head that dietary sodium is bad, the word spread, and researchers start doing studies to prove it. As long as a study here or there confirms this bias, then the idea is held in the minds of many people not simply as an hypothesis, but as a truth. In the case of the nutritional guidelines, the scientific committee making recommendations did so

largely based on the blood pressure reduction associated with lower sodium in short-term clinical trials. However, these trials could not assess the long-term cardiovascular morbidity and mortality consequences of lower sodium. Of concern is that lower sodium intake can generate increased activity of the renin-angiotensin and sympathetic nervous systems, and possibly increased insulin resistance, and each of these could have adverse cardiovascular effects. Morbidity and mortality outcomes will be influenced by unfavorable and favorable effects, as well as the unknown consequences of a diet altered to achieve lower sodium intake. In the absence of clinical trial data, several observational studies, with contradictory results, are available.

So, it’s not even really a case of unintended consequences. The scientific committee chose to overlook evidence clearly showing that there could easily be a downside to sodium restriction in favor of their built-in bias against salt. In fact, based on no good evidence they lowered the recommendation from that of the time before. Gives one a lot of faith in the nutritional guidelines, doesn’t it?
sodium  health  salt  hypertension  heart 
march 2015 by Quercki
The Seattle Times: Suddenly sick
Change a number, create a patient
The number of people with at least one of four major medical conditions has increased dramatically in the past decade because of changes in the definitions of disease. "The new definitions ultimately label 75 percent of the adult U.S. population as diseased," according to calculations by two Dartmouth Medical School researchers.
hypertension  cholesterol  weight  diabetes  statistics 
june 2013 by Quercki
U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF): Introduction
U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
 

Created in 1984, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF or Task Force) is an independent group of national experts in prevention and evidence-based medicine that works to improve the health of all Americans by making evidence-based recommendations about clinical preventive services such as screenings, counseling services, or preventive medications. The USPSTF is made up of 16 volunteer members who come from the fields of preventive medicine and primary care, including internal medicine, family medicine, pediatrics, behavioral health, obstetrics/gynecology, and nursing. All members volunteer their time to serve on the USPSTF, and most are practicing clinicians.

When Congress authorized the USPSTF, it required the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to support the Task Force's work. The 1998 Public Health Service Act and the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act instruct AHRQ to provide administrative, research, technical, and communication support to the Task Force. As part of this support, AHRQ helps with day-to-day operations, coordinates the production of evidence reports, ensures consistent use of Task Force methods, and helps disseminate Task Force materials and recommendations. The Director of AHRQ also appoints new USPSTF members, with guidance from the Chair of the Task Force. While AHRQ staff supports the Task Force, it is important to note that the Task Force is an independent body, and its work does not require AHRQ or HHS approval.

For more information about the USPSTF and its recommendations, go to http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/.
prevention  health  medicine  hypertension  cholesterol 
november 2012 by Quercki
Evidence-Based Guidelines for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Women
Included articles were abstracted for more detailed information on a standardized form that included study type, number of participants (% female) at baseline, population characteristics (primary prevention, secondary prevention, or mixed), mean age (age range), percentage diabetic, percentage white, intervention(s) (for drug trials, information was listed about dose, schedule, and duration), primary outcomes including numbers of events, subgroup analysis of clinical end points in women (if analysis available), and comments about important methodological or quality issues.

Lifestyle interventions received Class I recommendations from the panel not only because of their potential to reduce clinical CVD, but also because heart-healthy lifestyles may prevent the development of major risk factors for CVD.13 Prevention of the development of risk factors through a positive lifestyle approach may minimize the need for more intensive intervention in the future.
heart  cholesterol  hypertension  health  prevention  research  data  **** 
november 2012 by Quercki
Abstract 14642: Do Diuretics, Beta-Blockers, and Statins Increase the Risk of Diabetes in Patients with Impaired Glucose Tolerance? Insights from the NAVIGATOR Study -- Shen et al. 126 (10021): A14642 -- Circulation
Result: During a median 5 years of follow-up, diuretics, beta-blockers, statins, and CCBs were started in 1425 (22.5%), 993 (17.6 %), 1474 (24.0%), and 1274 (20.3%) of patients, respectively. After adjustment for time-varying confounders, reported prescription of diuretics and statins was associated with increased risk of NOD (HR [95% CI] 1.36 [1.16-1.59] and 1.30 [1.11-1.53], respectively). Beta-blocker treatment showed a trend towards increased risk of NOD (HR [95% CI] 1.2 [1.00-1.46]). No association was found between the use of CCB and NOD (HR [95% CI] 1.14 [0.94-1.38]).

Conclusion: Among persons with IGT and other CV risk factors, diuretic and statin use was associated with an increased risk of NOD, while the use of beta-blockers was indeterminate. Our finding suggests that the risk of NOD with statins and diuretics needs to be carefully weighed against the benefits of these 2 drug classes.
statins  diabetes  risk  cholesterol  hypertension 
november 2012 by Quercki
Obesity phenotypes in midlife and cognition in ear... [Neurology. 2012] - PubMed - NCBI
RESULTS:
Of the participants, 31.0% had metabolic abnormalities, 52.7% were normal weight, 38.2% were overweight, and 9.1% were obese. Among the obese, the global cognitive score at baseline (p = 0.82) and decline (p = 0.19) over 10 years was similar in the metabolically normal and abnormal groups. In the metabolically normal group, the 10-year decline in the global cognitive score was similar (p for trend = 0.36) in the normal weight (-0.40; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.42 to -0.38), overweight (-0.42; 95% CI -0.45 to -0.39), and obese (-0.42; 95% CI -0.50 to -0.34) groups. However, in the metabolically abnormal group, the decline on the global score was faster among obese (-0.49; 95% CI -0.55 to -0.42) than among normal weight individuals (-0.42; 95% CI -0.50 to -0.34), (p = 0.03).
CONCLUSIONS:
In these analyses the fastest cognitive decline was observed in those with both obesity and metabolic abnormality.
cholesterol  mental  diabetes  hypertension  brain 
september 2012 by Quercki
PLoS ONE: Survival with Treated and Well-Controlled Blood Pressure: Findings from a Prospective Cohort Study
Of the 3182 women with information on blood pressure and treatment, 1641 (52%) had untreated hypertension, 696 (22%) had poorly-controlled hypertension, 101 (3%) well-controlled hypertension and 744 (23%) had normal blood pressure (as noted above 243 (7%) women had missing blood pressure or treatment data). The distribution of blood pressure categories for all 3425 eligible women, including those for whom blood pressure was imputed when it was missing was similar: 54% with untreated hypertension, 20% with poorly-controlled hypertension, 3% with well-controlled hypertension and 23% normotensive. Of the 3042 men 1497 (49%) had untreated hypertension, 545 (18%) had poorly-controlled hypertension, 113 (4%) well-controlled hypertension and 887 (29%) had normal blood pressure (9 (0.3%) had missing blood pressure or treatment data). Thus, for both genders in over 80% of those on treatment, blood pressure was poorly-controlled.

Among the 3425 women, there were 409 deaths over a median follow-up time of 7.6 years, giving a mortality rate of 16.3/1000 person-years. This includes 70 deaths due to cardiovascular disease, giving a cardiovascular mortality rate of 2.8/1000 person-years. A further 325 women experienced a non-fatal cardiovascular disease event, giving a total rate of fatal or non-fatal cardiovascular disease of 16.8/1000 person-years. Among the 3051 men, there were 585 deaths over a median follow-up time of 8.1 years, giving a mortality rate of 25.3/1000 person-years. This includes 95 deaths due to cardiovascular disease, giving a cardiovascular mortality rate of 4.1/1000 person-years. A further 484 men experienced a non-fatal cardiovascular disease event, giving a total rate of fatal or non-fatal cardiovascular disease of 27.2/1000 person-years.
...
the elevated risk in the well-controlled group compared to the normotensive group was not explained by baseline differences in blood pressure. Our finding of increased risk of all-cause and cardiovascular disease mortality in those who were on treatment and well controlled is consistent with one previous study of men only
hypertension  heart 
august 2012 by Quercki
PLoS ONE: Sex Differences in Step Count-Blood Pressure Association: A Preliminary Study in Type 2 Diabetes
Conclusions/Significance
A 1,000 steps/day increment is associated with important blood pressure decrements among women with type 2 diabetes but the data were inconclusive among men. Targeted “dose increments” of 1,000 steps/day in women may lead to measurable blood pressure reductions. This information may be of potential use in the titration or “dosing” of daily steps. No associations were found between step count increments and A1C.
hypertension  exercise  research  diabetes 
august 2012 by Quercki
Weight Science: Evaluating the Evidence for a Paradigm Shift
Abstract
Current guidelines recommend that "overweight" and "obese" individuals lose weight through engaging in lifestyle modification involving diet, exercise and other behavior change. This approach reliably induces short term weight loss, but the majority of individuals are unable to maintain weight loss over the long term and do not achieve the putative benefits of improved morbidity and mortality. Concern has arisen that this weight focus is not only ineffective at producing thinner, healthier bodies, but may also have unintended consequences, contributing to food and body preoccupation, repeated cycles of weight loss and regain, distraction from other personal health goals and wider health determinants, reduced self-esteem, eating disorders, other health decrement, and weight stigmatization and discrimination. This concern has drawn increased attention to the ethical implications of recommending treatment that may be ineffective or damaging. A growing trans-disciplinary movement called Health at Every Size (HAES) challenges the value of promoting weight loss and dieting behavior and argues for a shift in focus to weight-neutral outcomes. Randomized controlled clinical trials indicate that a HAES approach is associated with statistically and clinically relevant improvements in physiological measures (e.g., blood pressure, blood lipids), health behaviors (e.g., eating and activity habits, dietary quality), and psychosocial outcomes (such as self-esteem and body image), and that HAES achieves these health outcomes more successfully than weight loss treatment and without the contraindications associated with a weight focus. This paper evaluates the evidence and rationale that justifies shifting the health care paradigm from a conventional weight focus to HAES.
diet  HAES  fat  research  PubMed  obesity  hypertension  diabetes 
july 2012 by Quercki
“Weathering” and Age Patterns of Allostatic Load Scores Among Blacks and Whites in the United States
Conclusions. We found evidence that racial inequalities in health exist across a range of biological systems among adults and are not explained by racial differences in poverty. The weathering effects of living in a race-conscious society may be greatest among those Blacks most likely to engage in high-effort coping.
race  poverty  hypertension  health  stress 
november 2010 by Quercki
If There's No Benefit, Why Tolerate Any Risk? - ABC News
It works. It lowers the blood sugar. Furthermore, the earlier generations of drugs designed to do this also lower the blood sugar. They work too.

However, no one feels better for a lower blood sugar. Some feel worse or get fatter depending on the drug. And no one feels worse for a high blood sugar, except for the rare patient with adult onset type 2 diabetes who can mobilize an extremely high blood sugar.

It's like "high" blood pressure.

So Avandia does nothing for the quality of your life. Does it do something else -- save your life, or postpone the horrid complications some patients can get with adult onset type 2 diabetes and its fellow travelers?

...

There is no precedent for any of these drugs saving a life, a limb, an eye, kidney or anything else important. There is no demonstrable benefit except the lowering of blood sugar. Who cares?
health  risk  hypertension  diabetes  medicine 
august 2010 by Quercki
The Quantified Self
part of the problem is that home blood pressure measurements vary a lot. I've had single sessions in which my systolic ranged 11 points and my diastolic 16 points. This measurement range is larger than the likely effect of any intervention I'm going to be making. Therefore, a single measurement session doesn't give me the feeling that I'm adding any information. It's frustrating and stupid. Damn measurements.

Of course a good way to track measurements with a lot of random error is to use a moving average. So here's the question: how many blood pressure measurements does it take to get results that accurate enough to discern the effects of treatment?
hypertension 
october 2009 by Quercki
New Evidence Shakes Up Perceptions of Salt | Reuters
Study Analysis Finds Sodium Consumption Is Not at Extreme Levels The researchers evaluated 24-hour urinary sodium excretion, the standard measure of daily sodium intake, from 19,151 individuals collected in 62 previously published surveys from 33 countries worldwide. In contrast to the widely held notion that salt intake has reached extreme levels in Western societies, the analysis indicates that daily sodium intake across a wide range of "food environments" tracks within a relatively narrow range: 117 mmol-212 mmol (2,700-4,900 mg). In addition, previous studies provide supportive evidence that adult humans naturally seek this range of sodium intake.
sodium  hypertension  diet 
october 2009 by Quercki
Seasonal Variation In Blood Pressure
Average systolic blood pressure was 5 mmHg higher in winter than in summer. High blood pressure, defined as a systolic blood pressure of 160 mmHg or higher, or a diastolic blood pressure of 95 mmHg or higher, was detected in 33.4 per cent of participants during winter and 23.8 percent during summer. These changes in blood pressure were greater in subjects 80 years or older than in younger participants.

One possible explanation for the study findings, adds Professor Ruschitzka, lies in the emerging link between vitamin D and blood pressure. The elderly, especially those in care homes, are subject to vitamin D deficiency, and vitamin D deficiency can predispose to hyptertension via activation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system. "The benefit of sunlight on vitamin D levels in the elderly is under appreciated," says Professor Ruschitzka. "Fifteen minutes exposure to sunlight can produce the equivalent of 2000 international units vitamin D."
hypertension  chronobiology  seasonality 
may 2009 by Quercki
[Serotonin and blood pressure regulation--antihype...[Nippon Yakurigaku Zasshi. 1989] - PubMed Result
[Serotonin and blood pressure regulation--antihypertensive mechanism of ketanserin]

Drug study for ketanserin? Lots of very technical language
hypertension  serotonin  5-htp 
february 2009 by Quercki
Carol Hart—Secrets of Serotonin, Chap. 2
Serotonin in Sickness and in Health

The list of disorders in which serotonin abnormalities are believed to be a major factor includes mania, depression, anxiety, personality disorders, suicide, impulsive acts of violence and aggression, obsessive-compulsive behavior, some types of sexual problems, alcoholism, eating disorders, sleep disturbances, and perhaps schizophrenia and Alzheimer's disease. In addition, serotonin abnormalities underlie migraine, cluster headache and other forms of chronic headache. It is also thought to contribute to some cardiovascular conditions, including Raynaud's disease and hypertension.

Depending on genetics and environment, that imbalance might make itself known as migraines, bingeing, anxiety, obsessive-compulsive behavior, depression or out-of-control impulsiveness.
serotonin  depression  hypertension 
february 2009 by Quercki
Take One Step for a Healthy Heart - Watching: The Hidden Epidemic | PBS
good video with transcripts about heart disease, cholesterol, high blood pressure
health  hypertension 
february 2007 by Quercki
Vegetables and Fruits and disease: Entrez PubMed
The effect of fruit and vegetable intake on risk for coronary heart disease.
health  hypertension  heart 
january 2007 by Quercki

Copy this bookmark:





to read