Smoke Gets In Your Eyes -- Your Lungs and Your Brain

"It's not just a few days in these extreme events that you need to protect  yourself."

"It is also the days when the sky looks OK [while air quality indexes or weather reports warn of the presence of smoke]."

Dr. Kai Chen, associate professor, Yale School of Public Health 

 

The health effects of short-term PM_2.5 exposure, and subsequently smoke, can range from relatively minor (e.g., eye and respiratory tract irritation) to more serious health effects (e.g., exacerbation of asthma and heart failure and premature death). In addition, there is initial evidence that short-term smoke exposure may lead to preterm birth (Picciotto et al. 2024) and impact brain function (i.e., cognitive performance as measured through a brain-training game) (Cleland et al. 2022). Fine particles are respiratory irritants, and exposures to high concentrations can lead to persistent coughing, phlegm, wheezing and difficulty breathing. Exposure to PM_2.5 may affect the body’s ability to remove inhaled foreign materials, such as viruses and bacteria, from the lungs. For example, some studies have reported an increase in the risk of COVID-19 cases and deaths in response to wildfire smoke exposure (Zhou et al. 2021; Meo et al. 2021; Schwarz et al. 2022). Although most healthy people will recover quickly from smoke exposure, some may experience health effects such as pulmonary inflammation and transient reductions in lung function (U.S. EPA 2019).

United States Environment Protection Agency  

Vancouver skyline   Wildfires and smoke have always occurred in British Columbia, but they are becoming more frequent and severe as the climate changes. Wildfire smoke is a form of air pollution that can affect your health.  BC Centre for Disease Control 

 

Evaluation of air pollution from wildfires presents unique challenges, compared to air pollution from other sources, such as traffic or industrial point sources, as smoke exposure is seasonal and episodic in nature (Gould et al., 2023). Also, as the number and size of wildfires impacting an area are variable and as smoke production from wildfires is not constant or steady, the concentration of smoke experienced by populations can vary considerably, and can include high levels of exposure for short time periods or moderate exposure levels lasting for several days or longer. Additionally, to evaluate the health effects of wildfire smoke, it is necessary to distinguish the contribution of wildfire smoke from that of other sources of air pollution within the mixture that people are exposed to. To address this, researchers have employed a variety of methods to assess exposure to wildfire smoke for use in health studies including use of land-based PM monitors, satellite imagery, air quality modelling, comparison of fire versus non-fire periods, proximity to wildfire burn area, and self-reports. In these studies, the most commonly used surrogates for wildfire smoke exposure are PM_2.5 (particles with a diameter of 2.5 micrometres or less) and PM₁₀ (particles with a diameter of 10 micrometres or less). For the primary investigations included in the systematic reviews considered here, the health outcome data were based on administrative sources (for example, mortality registries, health care utilization data), surveys, or self-reports. In addition, most of the primary studies focused on short-term or episodic exposure to wildfire smoke (that is, daily exposure), while some of the studies assessing mental health impacts considered health effects in years following the wildfires, and studies of reproductive or developmental impacts considered wildfire smoke exposure during the gestational period. It is noted that the health effects of PM_2.5, a key pollutant in wildfire smoke, have been extensively studied and Health Canada has evaluated the health risks of ambient PM_2.5 (that is, PM_2.5 from all sources combined) (Health Canada 2022). 

Government of Canada 

People who are exposed to smoke from wildfires, according to more recent scientific investigations, are increasingly assailed by lung-damaging toxins, but new discoveries identify that hearts, brains and other body organs are also being damaged by wildfire smoke. Smoke exposure could sound the death knell of up to 1.9 million people in the United States alone, over three decades, according to one 2025 study. Lungs can be penetrated deeply by the concentration of airborne particles known as PM2.5, from wildfires.

 

PM2.5 is a primary pollutant that air quality indexes measure, but fails to reflect other substances that can be contained in wildfire smoke that include lead, mercury and formaldehyde, cautions Karl Nadeau, dean of the University of California, Los Angeles Fielding School of Public Health. Preliminary research suggests that wildfire smoke may be of greater harm than air pollution from more common sources such as car exhaust. Fire in proximity to urban areas, moreover, may be of particular toxicity, through consuming buildings vehicles and electronics.

 

Smoke and flames from the Palisades Fire fill the sky as seen from the Pacific Palisades neighborhood of Los Angeles. | Getty Images

 

Associations between wildfire smoke and cardiovascular hospitalization, diabetes complications, preterm birth, cancer, impaired cognition and other problems, as well as respiratory effects including  attacks of asthma have been associated through scientific analytical studies. Wildfire smoke was linked in a 2024 study to deaths from cardiovascular, digestive, endocrine and kidney diseases. Asthma attacks and heart attacks can increase within an hour, in the presence of the severity of ambient smoke, pointed out professor Michael Brauer with the University of British Columbia.

 

Cognitive effect research has seen a significant expansion, explains Stephanie Cleland, associate professor at Simon Fraser University in British Columbia. Dr. Cleland was lead author of a 2022 study finding smoke exposure to be associated with lower scores on a 'brain training' game. A link between cumulative exposure throughout a school year and lower standardized test scores was also found through research, while other studies indicate a possible association with dementia. 

 

Less dramatic, lower-level exposures over time have an add-on impact, according to Professor Chen, who suggests the wearing of masks to be avoidance-helpful to exposure to ambient smoke during such events, not necessarily only when the surrounding air is redolent of burning, charred wood, and the atmosphere turns grey in reduced visibility with wildfire smoke. One study published in 2025 linked the risk of death from all causes with three-year exposure to wildfire smoke. Yet another 2025 study concluded that as average wildfire exposure increased, North Americans over age 65 suffered a higher risk of dying from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.  

 

A woman wears an N95 mask to protect herself from high levels of smoke pollution. Daniiielc, Getty Images

 

"The data pretty clearly say that there is no safe level of exposure to wildfire smoke: the more exposure we get, the worse a range of health outcomes. The data also pretty clearly show that our notion of sensitive groups should probably be greatly expanded. In addition to kids, elderly populations, or anyone else with preexisting conditions, like asthma, we need to think about populations like pregnant people whose birth outcomes can be substantially affected by exposure. Portable indoor filtration is often the best option for many households, and well-fitting N95 masks can help when outside. "

"Climate change, and in particular increasing fuel aridity brought about by hotter temperatures and variable rainfall, is playing a central role in the recent rapid increase in wildfire activity and smoke exposure throughout the US. It is certainly not the only factor, but is substantially amplifying the risk brought about by other factors, which include a century of fire suppression that has left abundant fuels in our wildlands, as well as increased human construction and activity in the wildland-urban interface. We can say with strong confidence that climate change has made these events much more likely and much more severe."

Marshall Burke,  associate professor, Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability 

In For The Long Haul With COVID

"This is remarkably important work. For a long time now, we have been scratching our heads and asking why long COVID seems to affect so many organ systems."

"This paper sheds some light, and may help explain why long COVID can occur even in people who had mild or asymptomatic acute disease."

Zyad Al-Aly, director, clinical epidemiology centre, Veterans Affairs St.Louis Health Care System, Missouri

 

"We don't fully understand long COVID, but these changes could explain ongoing symptoms."

"[The research] provides a warning about being blase about mass infection in children and adults."

"We don't yet know what burden of chronic illness will remain in years to come. Will we see young-onset cardiac failure in survivors, or early onset dementia?"

"These are unanswered questions which call for a precautionary public health approach to mitigation of the spread of the virus."

Raina MacIntyre, professor of global biosecurity, University of New South Wales, Sydney

"Our results collectively show that while the highest burden of SARS-CoV-2 is in the airways and lung, the virus can disseminate early during infection and infect cells throughout the entire body, including widely throughout the brain."

NIH Study authors

 

A new study concludes that the coronavirus causing COVID-19 has the ability to spread within days from the airways to the heart, brain and just about every bodily organ system, in addition to which it may persist for months. The study authors describe their work as the most comprehensive analysis to the present of the SARS-CoV-2 virus's widespread distribution and duration in both body and brain. 

 

Scientists at the U.S. National Institutes of Health discovered that the pathogen has the capacity to replicate in human cells beyond the respiratory tract.

The manuscript, pre-released on line, is currently under review preparatory to publication in the journal Nature; its results spell out delayed viral clearance as a possible contributor to the pernicious symptoms stubbornly wracking the minds and bodies of long-COVID sufferers. Knowing how the virus is able to persist, as well as the body's response to a viral reservoir has the potential to aid in improving care for those sufferers.

The investigative discoveries and the techniques used are yet to be reviewed by independent scientists, and relate to data gathered from fatal COVID cases, and not from people suffering with long COVID or "post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2", the authors point out. Numerous earlier studies provide evidence both for and against the possibility that the coronavirus has the propensity to infect cells outside the airways and lungs.

 

Undertaken at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland, the research is based on sampling extensively, and analysis of tissues reserved during autopsies on 44 American patients who failed to survive their encounter with the coronavirus. Daniel Chertow, who heads the NIH emerging pathogen section, wrote that the burden of infection outside the respiratory tract and the time it takes to clear the virus from infected tissues, particularly in the brain, fail to be characterized.

Persistent SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected by the study group in multiple parts of the body, as well as throughout the brain, for up to 230 days after symptom onset, which may represent infection with defective virus particles, seen as well in persistent infection with the measles virus. The NIH team's post-mortem tissue collection was comprehensive, occurring within about a day of the patients' demise.

A variety of tissue preservation techniques to detect and quantify viral levels was also used, along with growing the virus collected from multiple tissues, including lung, heart, small intestine and adrenal gland. Pathological data can be drawn from the study supporting findings of previous research indicating, as an example, that SARS-CoV-2 directly destroys heart muscle cells, and those who survive an infection suffer cognitive deficits.

Infection of the pulmonary system may result in an early "viremic" phase where the virus is seeded throughout the body, including in patients experiencing mild or no symptoms, posit the NIH researchers. An example given was that of a juvenile included in the autopsy study who was presumed to have died from unrelated seizure complications, suggesting infected children with mild COVID-19 onset are also able to experience systemic infection.

Getty -- The Atlantic

Home Cooking Vs Processed Food Products

Lina Bruins | EyeEm | Getty Images

"While the telomeres do not contain genetic information themselves, they are vital for preserving the stability and integrity of chromosomes, and by extension, the DNA that every cell in our body relies on to function. As we get older, our telomeres get shorter since each time a cell divides, part of the telomere is lost, thus telomere length is considered to be a marker of biological age. In this cross-sectional study of elderly Spanish subjects, we showed a robust association between ultra-processed food consumption and telomere length."                                                                 "Further research in larger longitudinal studies with baseline and repeated measures of telomere length is needed to confirm these observations."                   Research, University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain

Canadians get nearly half of their total calories from ultra-processed foods, according to previous research from Heart & Stroke. Photo by David Ryder /Getty Images

A year ago, Spanish researchers published findings -- after following 19,899 people over a two-decade period -- that appeared in the British Medical Journal. Researchers from Navarra University sorted processed foods into categories ranging from unprocessed to ultra-processed, four groups in all, to discover that the latter group linked people to early deaths. Five or more servings of ultra-processed foods consumed daily had the result of increasing mortality risk by 62 percent, each additional serving increasing mortality risk by 18 percent. Cancer was seen as the major cause of death, at an average age 58.

According to the May 2019 report: “Processed meats, sugar sweetened beverages, dairy products, and French fries were the main foods contributing to the ultra-processed food consumed". The study pinpointed a wide range of processed foods covering all categories, including chocolate, cookies, potato chips, pizza, meatballs, doughnuts, mayonnaise, margarine, breakfast cereals, milkshakes, soda and sweetened drinks, chicken nuggets, croissants and pastries, processed meats, instant soups, ice cream, and distillation-produced alcohol. 

Researchers at the University of Paris and the University of Montpellier also published the results of a study monitoring dietary habits of 105,159 people over age 18 between the years 2009 and 2018. The conclusion of this study resulted in the finding of a clear link between ultra-processed food consumption and cardiovascular disease. Cardiovascular disease is known to be the main cause of worldwide deaths. "This report is based on an associative study which would normally lead to or be the start of more detailed research. Health professionals continue to promote a combination of a healthy lifestyle and meat has its place in a balanced diet", commented a spokesperson for the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board, a UK farming body.

More latterly, researchers from the University of Navarra presented a more recent study at the online European and International Conference on Obesity, the study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, where researchers concluded that those who consume over three servings of ultra-processed foods each day are twice as likely to have shortened telomeres, the protein structure at each end of a chromosome, acting as protection for the chromosome, which researchers recognize as an indicator of aging.

Ultra-processed foods could be linked to ageing cells. (iStock). 

The research analyzed 645 men and 241 women with an average age of 67.7 years, to discover that as consumption of ultra-processed foods increased. the likelihood of having shortened telomeres did as well. "Medium-low" consumption with 2-2.5 servings daily held an increased risk of 29 percent, while "medium-high", with 2-5.3 daily servings saw that risk rise to 40 percent. "High", with over 3 servings daily, saw the consequential risk rise to 82 percent.

As well, an association between consumption of ultra-processed foods and depression, hypertension, overweight/obesity and premature mortality were all identified by the researchers. The Heart & Stroke Association has advice for those concerned enough to avoid frequent ultra-processed foods consumption; to cook at home more frequently, to eat with others and become more wary of food marketing ploys. Items marketed as "wholesome", "nourishing", and "organic", may be anything but.

Use It or Lose It : Walking Through the Pain

"The condition is underdiagnosed and undertreated despite it being common and associated with mobility limitation and an increased risk of heart attack, stroke, amputation and death."
"The public is not well informed about peripheral artery disease or its main symptom of intermittent claudication. Clinical guidelines recommend exercise as a first-line approach."
"There is good quality research evidence showing that it [exercise] can improve walking ability and quality of life. Some types of exercise are more effective than others, so it is useful to highlight the type that will benefit people the most."
Garry Tew, Northumbria University, Newcastle, U.K.

"It may take a while to achieve significant improvements after you have started exercising or walking, so be patient."
"Be intentional about exercising and aim to do it for 30 to 60 minutes per day several times a week."
"But do not be afraid to start, even if you cannot achieve this at the beginning."
Ukachukwu Abaraogu, Glasgow Caledonian University, U.K.

Roughly four percent of people over age 60 are affected by intermittent claudication, the most common symptom of peripheral artery disease. The condition, according to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in the United Kingdom, leads to impaired quality of life and with it there follows an increased risk of death from heart attack or stroke.

Intermittent claudication is characterized by discomfort in the calf and upper legs while walking. The condition is a mark of narrowed blood vessels as a result of heart disease. And like any part of the human body, when discomfort and pain leads people to stop physical activity that causes that pain, in this instance, the legs, people hesitate to continue walking and eventually end up wheelchair-bound.

The pain results when too little blood reaches the muscles, generally a sign that blood vessels in the legs have become clogged by atherosclerosis; peripheral artery disease, causing intermittent claudication. Yet supervised exercise programs have been shown to help, and according to a group of exercise and rehabilitation experts, exercise should be the first line of treatment for people suffering from the condition.

Those experts have put together a new infographic, illustrated in the British Journal of Sports Medicine. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines in the U.K. recommends a three-month supervised exercise program to reduce pain, improve heart health, help mood, improve sleep, maintain a healthy weight and ultimately decrease the need for vascular leg procedures, like clearing blood vessels and inserting a stent.

The authors write in praise of supervised exercise classes as having the greatest merit in benefiting people, yet if such programs are not locally available people can still opt to exercise on their own, using a method that alternates between walking for three to ten minutes until moderate-to-strong pain arises, resting to allow the pain to subside; then resuming walking for three to ten minutes.

Peripheral artery diseas

Ideally, 30 to 60 minutes of walking per session is recommended, three to five sessions weekly. On two other days weekly, people can include strength and balance activities like yoga, dance, tai chi, bowling or lifting weights. Comfortable clothing is suggested and remaining hydrated during these exercise regimens. Walking routes should be selected that have occasional places to rest.

Should chest pain, dizziness or illness occur during a session, medical advice should be sought. The researchers urge that people not succumb to fear of walking with leg pain, that walking speed be gradually increased with time since typically it takes several weeks of exercise for symptoms to begin to improve.

Alcohol -- a Controlled Risk

"We recommend that healthy men and women reduce the risk of harm by drinking no more than ten standard drinks per week and no more than four standard drinks on any one day."
"[Additionally there is now] greater certainty about links between alcohol and a number of different cancers."
"Drinking above this level increases this risk [of dying from alcohol-related disease or injury], while drinking less frequently and drinking less on each occasion reduces this lifetime risk of alcohol-related harm."
National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia

"We are not saying this is a level that completely eliminates risk."
"The less you choose to drink, the lower your risk of alcohol related harm."
"[The guidelines are] not telling Australians how much to drink. We’re providing advice about the health risks from drinking alcohol so that we can all make informed decisions in our daily lives – for ourselves and for our children." 
"It’s ten years since our last review of the guidelines and we now know more about the effects of alcohol. We know that alcohol continues to have significant direct health consequences for many Australians."
Anne Kelso, report author, Medical Research Council chief executive

A new study suggests you may want to stop after this drink

Yutacar / Unsplash

For the first time in ten years Australia has altered its guidelines for alcohol consumption, releasing a study containing consumer guidelines, updating them from previous such advice of two drinks each day being safe, for a total of 14 weekly. That total is now reduced to no more than ten drinks weekly. A standard drink is epitomized by approximately ten grams of alcohol, the equivalent of one glass of wine. Typically a pint of beer has an alcohol volume of around 5.5 percent, or 15 grams of alcohol.

Under these new guideli8nes, 1-1/2 pint-sized beers is seen as the outer limit for an adult. The type of beer is also to be taken into account such that drinking a stronger beer or increasing the amount poured into a mug should also be taken into account accordingly, since without taking these points into consideration, a drinker could wind up consuming more than a standard serving, requiring some self discipline in limiting themselves.

Further evidence has accumulated in the past decade since the last guidelines. (Syda Productions/Shtterstock)

Australia's move is not that far off guidelines issued by the Center for Disease Control in the United States which defines moderate drinking as one drink daily for women and "up to two" drinks for men. Statistics from the CDC note furthermore that "excessive" alcohol consumption was known to have led to 88,000 alcohol-associated deaths yearly, taking an average 30 years off life expectancy for those affected, according to its latest findings dating back to 2010.

"Young people in the emergency department with alcohol poisoning, having drunk so much they can’t keep themselves safe. Some at risk of their breathing stopping. I also see the smashed up faces, young and old."
"On the other hand, I also see people who used to drink too much but who have now cut back or stopped. Their sleep has improved, their mood has improved, their blood pressure has returned to normal. So working out what amount of drinking is OK for health is so important."
Kate Conigrave, chair, NHMRC alcohol working committee -- professor of addiction medicine, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney

The National Health and Medical Research Council’s new guidelines on drinking alcohol say adults should have no more than 10 standard drinks a week – or roughly 1.4 a day – to reduce health risks. Photograph: Caiaimage/Paul Bradbury/Getty Images

The Medical Research Council spent three years in studied research in updating the risks or benefits in relation to consuming alcohol. Pointing out in their report that the risk of alcohol-related diseases like heart and liver disease, high blood pressure and digestive problems drops significantly when alcohol consumption is reduced. The report stops just short of claiming two drinks daily represents a safe level =- rather, that it represents an acceptable risk.

In addition to which the report took pains to recommend that adolescents under 18 years of age should ideally consume no alcohol whatever, since it is well known to harm brain development and increase the risk of injury.

Heart and Muscle Health?  Get Moving!

"There are clearly benefits at all levels [of activity]."
"The most encouraging is you don't have to be a super athlete, and it's never too late."
Soren Brage, principal investigator MRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge

"Older individuals get heart failure not because their hearts stop pumping well, but because the hearts become hard and stiff."
"There's no medication that treats that problem [prevention is key]."
Benjamin Levine, director, Institute for Exercise and Environmental Medicine, Dallas

 Aging.com

Researchers who looked at the activity levels of 315,059 study participants from age 50 to 71 at four stations in their lives; from age 15 to 18; 19 to 29; 35 to 39, and 40 to 61, found that those who had been inactive but went on to increase physical activity in later adulthood -- 40 to 61 -- to four to seven hours weekly, ended up with a 35 percent lower mortality risk as compared to those who were inactively sedentary all their lives and remained that way.

The study results, published in JAMA Network Open, found those individuals already active and continuing with their exercise levels into later adulthood came out with a 29 to 36 percent lower risk of early mortality. What was instructive and useful was the understanding that older adults who maintained exercise levels along with older adults who had newly taken up exercise both experienced comparable conclusions.

Adults -- researchers discovered -- with cardiovascular disease and cancer, gained substantial longevity benefits when they became more active, irrespective of their past physical activity levels, and those who had been inactive at the beginning, yet increased to an average of thirty minutes of moderate exercise daily, gained an approximate 24 percent lower mortality risk.

Aging.com

What the research indicated was that irregardless of a participant's body mass index, blood pressure or cholesterol, benefits were attained. Specifically, health benefits of beginning to exercise later in life, affected the heart and muscles beneficially. A study of 61 healthy, but sedentary adults of age 45 to 64 by the American Heart Association, found in 2018 that participants who began exercising reversed cardiovascular effects of sedentary aging.

In that age category, those people who took up exercising indicated a 25 percent improvement in elasticity of the left ventricular muscle of the heart, the heart chamber responsible for pumping blood to the rest of the body. The cardiac stiffness linked to sedentary aging was prevented through exercise restoring heart elasticity.

Exercise training has a best-before date for effectiveness which represents that period before the onset of late-middle age -- since heart stiffening begins at that point. Before attaining age 65, while the heart retains plasticity, exercise training as a maintenance preventive therapy must be well in place.

"Master athletes", representing men between age 60 and 80 whose  high-level endurance training at least twice weekly for a minimum of 20 years were compared by researchers from the University of Birmingham to men of the same age who had no regular workout routine. Published in Frontiers in Physiology this year, the study concluded both groups held an equal capacity to build muscle, related to their exercise.

Aging.com

Life Savers!

"Dog ownership was associated with a 24 percent risk reduction for all-cause mortality as compared to non-ownership."
"Dog ownership is associated with lower risk of death over the long term, which is possibly driven by a reduction in cardiovascular mortality."
Study authors published in Circulation, journal of the American Heart Association

"Dogs offer companionship, reduce anxiety and loneliness, increase self-esteem, and improve overall mood."
"Several studies have shown that acquiring a dog perforce increases physical exercise [as anyone who has unsuccessfully tried to sleep past the time of a dog's routine morning walk can attest]."
"Pet owners tend to be younger, wealthier, better educated, and more likely to be married, all of which improve cardiovascular outcomes."
"The association  between dog ownership and improved survival is real, and is likely at least partially causal."
The most salient benefits of dog ownership on cardiovascular outcomes are likely mediated through large and sustained improvements in mental health, including lower rates of depression, decreased loneliness, and increased self-esteem."
Dr.Dhruv Kazi, cardiologist, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston

A new study undertook to review several decades of evidence on the interdependent relations between dog ownership and mortality. The study focused on dogs as personal companion pets and made no effort to examine any potential longevity and health benefits accruing to cat ownership \. However, that connection was explored in at least one previously-published study, finding that like dog ownership, cat companions too are linked to a decrease in fatal cardiovascular events in their owners.

The study's authors were interested in reconciling differences in previously published literature based on the benefits of dog ownership. Of previous studies not all validated the understanding of companion dogs' beneficial effects on their human companions. Some of those studies indicated a benefit while there were others that came up empty. However, this new study linked to data that indicated among people who had already had cardiovascular issues such as a heart attack and stroke, even greater benefits resulted with dog ownership.

The study came with an accompanying editorial written by cardiologist Dhruv Kazi, who outlined a number of findings; for example well-documented mental health benefits accruing to dog companions adding quality to the lives of their owners. Those who own dogs tend to spend more time outdoors than people without dog companions. The very act of being outdoors, much less being physically active, as when taking a dog for a walk, or playing with it outdoors has beneficial health outcomes.

Even stroking a dog can have the effect of lowering an individual's blood pressure; communion of any kind between person and dog benefits both to the extent that physical and mental health are both impacted positively, the recognized pathway through which dog ownership creates a healthier dynamic allowing the person to live more healthily and with an increased life span. A failing in the research does exist in that randomized controlled trials of dog ownership benefiting mortality are few.

Direct studies have simply been overlooked, of the quality that would instruct a group of individuals to acquire a dog, while another group would be without the benefit of a dog present in their lives. Following which the individuals' health would be tracked over time. As the gold standard of evidence with such controlled randomized trials, should they present the solid evidence that is lacking, it would result in definitive assurances that owning a dog causes people to live longer lives.

Despite which, according to Dr. Kazi, the current balance of evidence is convincing enough. The study review controlled for a variety of socio-economic and demographic factors, finding the longevity effect of dog ownership to be assured. Several randomized, controlled studies on pet ownership generally indicated direct benefits of having a companion animal. One study saw a group of cardiac patients randomly instructed to acquire a dog or a cat; the end result being a reduced blood pressure response to stress.

Yet another saw researchers in Korea randomly assigning nursing home residents pet crickets with the direction that they care for the insects for an eight-week period. It was found that the cricket-caring group showed significant improvements on depression measurements and cognitive ability, relative to the control group

Inflammation Guidance

"That's when it [chronic inflammation] becomes detrimental."
"Chronic inflammation is like a grumbling, low level of inflammation, which can go on for years."
"Hippocrates [the Greek 'father of medicine'] BC, in 400 BC said that exercise is man's best medicine, but his message has been lost over time, and we live in an increasingly sedentary society."
"As we get older, levels of inflammation in the body tend to creep up, but if you keep your weight down and keep physically active then you can prevent inflammaging; it is not inevitable."
Dr.Janet Lord, director, Institute of Inflammation and Ageing, University of Birmingham

"In the late '90s, people started saying that heart disease is an inflammatory disease, and you can lower people's risk by treating them with anti-inflammatory drugs like aspirin."
"If I was to write a book on the Mediterranean diet, I would have that exact same picture [colourful fruits and vegetables, olive oil, whole grains and nuts, salmon, red wine]."
"There isn't a magic anti-inflammatory diet; an anti-inflammatory diet is a generally healthy diet."
"That's [weight gain] a danger signal to cells, and the way we respond to danger is through inflammation. Being obese is a risk factor for heart disease and maybe one of the reasons is that adipose tissue drives low-grade inflammation." 
Dr.Philip Calder, nutritional immunologist, University of Southampton

"Diet, exercise, healthy lifestyle, minimizing stress, getting enough sleep; all of these things are beneficial at the molecular level and the cellular level, as well as just making you feel a lot better."
"One of the things they [senescent cells refusing to die] do is to switch on a pile of inflammatory genes. This aging-related inflammation even has a name: 'inflammaging'."
Dr.Lynne Cox, biochemist, University of Oxford

As people age, low-grade inflammation can increase as age progresses where sex hormones estrogen and testosterone -- both anti-inflammatory hormones -- decline, and inflammation creeps up. Senescent cells grow larger and more stressed, refusing to die, as we age. The best proven strategy against what seems inevitable is to continue to use our bodies. When muscles move, the production of anti-inflammatory cytokines, which counteract inflammation in the muscles and elsewhere in the body, is stimulated. Exercise is key.

Inflammation has been linked to every major age-related disease; heart disease to dementia, Type 2 diabetes and cancer. The process causing pain, heat, redness and swelling with a fall or a sore threat is recognized increasingly as the start of the journey, through inflammation toward ill-health and frailty. "Inflammation is the way your body tries to defend itself against danger", immunologist at University of Manchester, Dan Davis advises. Inflammation helps to see that wounds don't fester and mild infections don't get worse.

Human tissues respond to injury and bacterium or virus infection through the release of chemicals called cytokines which bring forward immune cells whose function is to kill infectious agents and cells; to aid in repairing any damage through creating new tissue. The resulting inflammation is severe and painful, but generally vanishes once the wound or infection has been healed. Chronic inflammation is another thing; associated with age-related diseases and frailty where inflammatory chemicals are lower, but continue to fester.

In atherosclerosis -- a fatty plaque buildup in the blood vessel walls triggers inflammation. Should part of the plaque break away to trigger a clot, the result can be a heart attack or stroke. The buildup of fatty materials creating plaque may be attributable to the presence of inflammation to begin with. Recent research has revealed that statins, prescribed primarily to help lower cholesterol, have an anti-inflammatory effect as well, helping to reduce the risk of heart disease.

Insulin, the hormone enabling glucose to be released from food becomes impaired in the presence of inflammation; the initial movement toward the development of Type 2 diabetes. The body's tissues irritated as glucose levels in the blood increase, triggers additional inflammation. Chronic inflammation activates enzymes in muscles, producing the hormone cortisol which in turn can trigger the breakdown of muscle and bone. "This is one of the reasons why you become frailer as you grow older", Dr. Lord explains.

In a subset of instances there are some scientists who believe that inflammation may be the cause of clinical depression. In middle age, chronic inflammation is being linked increasingly to memory loss and dementia as people grow older. Obesity researchers too are turning their attention to weight gain and the role inflammation plays there. A major source of inflammation is body fat (adipose tissue); as weight is gained, fat cells find it more and more difficult to receive sufficient oxygen.

Smoking or vaping can exacerbate the situation, since some of the inhaled chemicals trigger an immune response. Lack of sleep, emotional stress and a diet high in sugar and certain types of fat are viewed as other sources of low-level inflammation.

Here’s what you can do to reduce inflammation:

• Quit smoking: Smoking damages your blood vessels and promotes atherosclerosis. By quitting, you can cut your heart disease risk in half.
• Maintain a healthy weight: Being overweight increases your risk for multiple diseases. But carrying excess fat around your belly is a red flag for heart disease risk. A type of fat that accumulates in the belly (called visceral fat) secretes a molecule that causes inflammation.
• Increase activity: Exercising for as little as 20 minutes a day can decrease inflammation. You don’t have to do an intense sweat session: Moderate workouts, such as fast walking, are effective.
• Eat a heart-healthy diet: Processed and fast foods produce inflammation. Whole foods, on the other hand, are anti-inflammatory. Eat more fruits, vegetables, whole grains, beans, nuts and fatty fish.

John Hopkins Medicine

Pot Concerns from the Scientific-Medical Community

"I'm not here to demonize cannabis. We don't need to go back to reefer madness. But we can't say it does not harm."
"If we have several million people smoking marijuana every day, we want to know what the effects are."
"When we study a new drug, like a statin, for example, it is a single drug -- a single molecule. We know what receptors it works on, why it works, how it works, and have tested it extensively under rigorous conditions to ensure it is both safe and effective."
"To expect 70 chemicals of unknown dose to exert a specific effect, or even a net positive effect, is magical thinking."
"From a public health perspective, the balance of evidence so far is that using marijuana is not good for your heart, blood vessels and brain."
Dr.Chris Simpson, cardiologist, 2014/15 president, Canadian Medical Association

Marijuana in edible form may have cardiovascular risks for people at risk.

There are 70 cannabinoids of unknown dose in each joint of marijuana. What is a great unknown is the manner in which these chemicals interact with the endocannabinoid system, and thus the effects are unpredictable. Since the growing incidence in North America -- federally in Canada, and state-by-state in the United States -- of cannabis legalization, the belief has grown of the safety and usefulness of marijuana for medical purposes. And nor do recreational users of cannabis think otherwise than that their use of the now-regulated drug is perfectly fine.

That, aside from the growing numbers of high-school students using pot, or e-cigarettes in vaping, grown immensely popular. And with its popularity another concern from the medical-science community over the effect of an unknown substance which is known to have a deleterious effect on the still-maturing brain of people under 21. Much less that vaping has now been associated with lung disease, to the effect that it has now been attributed as the cause of death of 18 people in the United States, and the hospitalization of one thousand. In Canada this same phenomenon is beginning to emerge.

According to Dr. Simpson, preparing to address researchers, health professionals and policy-makers at the Canadian Stroke Congress, someone who has smoked a joint becomes as vulnerable within the passing of an hour to a heart attack as someone who has just finished shovelling a heavy load of snow. The greater the THC content -- the psychoactive compound in marijuana, the higher the risk, stresses Dr. Simpson, explaining that THC serves to activate certain blood vessel receptors. So that, when THC binds to the receptors the buildup of plaque results, making blood "stickier", a condition then leading to blood clot creation.

A man lights a marijuana cigarette  THE CANADIAN PRESS/Joe Mahoney

"In the case of a stroke, a blood clot lets go and travels to the brain", this expert on cannabis interaction with the heart muscle and health conditions leading to stroke explained. He acknowledges the potential that some of the 70 chemicals known to make up marijuana may be useful. On the other hand, marijuana remains a largely unknown quality with respect to human health. It becomes even more complicated to judge the effect on health in marijuana use since people who smoke pot also frequently are cigarette smokers.

"There is this huge popular misconception about cannabis, driven by social media and the cannabis industry, that it is a medicine or it is harmless. "I worry when people say that cannabis is a natural product that has been used for a thousand years and so it must be safe. Countering that belief is tough. There are huge gaps between what people believe and what is reality."
"It hits you like a ton of bricks at the one-hour mark or so and you can overdose very quickly because of the delayed reaction."

A five-year study of hospital statistics from the U.S., looking at a period from 2010 to 2014, shows the incidence of stroke has risen steadily among marijuana users even though the overall rate of stroke remained constant over the same period. The study was presented on Friday during the third day of the World Stroke Congress in Montreal. (Sean Gallup/Getty Images)

Food for Thought

"I think people shouldn't just embark on a vegan diet because it's on trend, and they're following some Instagram guru."
"They should delve deeper and understand that there are nutrient shortfalls."
"Full-blown B12 deficiency is not very common in today's society. [Deriving enough vitamin D the 'sunshine vitamin' from diet is of greater concern , vital for the health of bones, teeth and immune system]."
"Vitamin D-rich foods are mainly oily fish, eggs and things like that [difficult to attain on a vegetarian and vegan diet]."
Helen Bond, dietitian, consultant, spokesperson, British Dietetic Association

Vegan and vegetarian diets could affect your chances of a heart attack (Photo: Getty)

"We observed lower rates of ischaemic heart disease in fish eaters and vegetarians than in meat eaters, which appears to be at least partly due to lower body mass index and lower rates of high blood pressure, high blood cholesterol, diabetes associated with these diets."
Oxford University researchers

“It is based on results from just one study and the increase is modest relative to meat eaters,”'
“Relevance to vegetarians worldwide must also be considered. Participants were all from the UK where dietary patterns and other lifestyle behaviours are likely very different from those prevalent in low and middle-income countries where most of the world’s vegetarians live.”
Professor Mark Lawrence, Public Health Nutrition, Deakin University, Australia

"It does seem that the lower risk of coronary heart diseases does exceed the higher risk of stroke, if we look at the absolute numbers."
"There is some evidence which suggests that very low cholesterol levels might be associated with a slightly higher risk of hemorrhagic stroke."
"[Similarly, other research points to deficiencies of some nutrients, like vitamin B12, may be linked to a higher risk of stroke]."
Tammy Tong, Study lead researcher, nutritional epidemiologist, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford

A major study published last week in the British Medical Journal by researchers from Oxford University concludes there is a 20 percent higher risk of stroke among vegetarians and vegans as compared with people those diets include red meat; for that matter any kind of meat. It is the authors' educated guess that this might occur as a result of vegetarians lacking sufficient blood cholesterol. Close to 50,000 Britons were tracked for this study for a period of 18 years.

Conventional wisdom claims vegetarianism represents a healthier alternative to a carnivorous diet, quite the opposite of what this research concludes, in part. Yet, according to nutritionists, an increased risk of stroke represents merely one of the many health risks to complicate the health of vegetarians and people should be aware before they decide to opt for the kind of diet that depends solely on vegetables to the exclusion of meat entirely.

Dietitian Helen Bond feels the results of the Oxford study should be viewed with serious concern. Although the 20 percent accelerated risk in practical terms is "quite small", sample size taken into account (equating to three additional cases of stroke per 1,000 people over ten years), those whose diets avoid meat entirely fail to understand the entire implications of their choice on their health outcomes.

Nutritionist Emma Derbyshire wrote recently in the British Medical Journal that vegans face the potential of deficiency in choline, a nutrient critical for brain health, and one found commonly in eggs, milk and beef. Choline influences memory, mood and muscle control. Although vegans could conceivably reach requisite levels of choline from alternate sources, it is not fully understood by most vegans to impel them to take the necessaryremedial action.

As for B12, also critical to brain health, it is sourced only through the inclusion of animal products in the balanced diet. Lacking this critical vitamin, a greater risk of being fatigued is foreseen, along with a weakening of the immune system.

Food for thought, at the very least.

The research found a 20 per cent increase [Photo: Getty]

“It’s important to emphasize that we’ve looked at two outcomes here. The lower risk of heart disease does seem to outweigh the higher risk of stroke", cautions study co-author Tammy Tong, nutritional epidemiologist. For while the study did focus on a slightly elevated risk of stroke for vegans, it also confirmed that according to other studies, vegetarians and vegans may have a lower risk of heart disease than meat-eaters.

Ten fewer cases of heart disease per 1,000 people over 10 years, versus three more instances of strokes in the same population. 

Threats of Daylight Savings

"[Dangers exist of possible heart risks linked to the twice-yearly clock changes, spring and fall] especially in the first week after the spring shift."
"For most people, changing the time -- even if only by one hour -- may produce tiredness as a small inconvenience. Other people, however, can have more serious consequences."
"One day [Sunday] is clearly insufficient to become accustomed to waking an hour earlier in the morning."
"Take care in exposing oneself to abrupt changes of temperature in the immediate post-shift days."
Study, researchers, University of Ferrara

"Our body prefers a longer than a shorter day."
"A similar pattern has been suggested for DST transitions [as that of the effect on our biological rhythm when travelling several times zones to the east]."
Dr. Roberto Manfredini, study co-author

Daylight-saving time in 2019 starts on Sunday, March 10 at 2 a.m.

Yutong Yuan/Insider

According to a 2017 study out of University of Washington and University of Virginia, sentences handed down by U.S. federal courts between 1992 and 2003 tended to be longer immediately after the time change. On the Monday after the switch to daylight savings time, judges tended give 5 percent longer sentences than those on the previous and following Monday. According to the researchers, "judges doled out longer sentences when they were sleep-deprived". The authors whose study was published in Psychological Science, pointed out in effect, how grumpy people can be post-change, effecting our attitudes and our work.

Another study on the effects of the time change, presented at the American Academy of Neurology's annual meeting in 2016, found the rate of hospital admissions for ischemic stroke -- when a clot in the arteries blocks blood flow to the brain -- was eight percent higher in the first two days following a time transition in comparison to either two weeks prior or two weeks following the switch to daylight savings.

Now, a new Italian study published in the journal Internal and Emergency Medicine once again points out the deleterious health effects for health-vulnerable people, those with underlying heart conditions, that occur in the wake of those detested time switches. The association between sleep and heart attacks has been demonstrated by studies where less than six hours of sleep is associated with high blood pressure, diabetes, obesity and premature death.

Disrupted sleep leads us to consume increased calories while burning fewer of those calories, and one small study has shown that a single night of disrupted sleep alone can be sufficient to increase insulin resistance. Environmental impacts such as natural disasters can trigger heart attacks. Among the working demographic, Monday mornings are particularly stressful, with higher blood pressure and higher catecholamine levels (hormones involved in the 'fight-or-flight' response) occurring.

Monday, according to the Italian researchers, is as well a critical day for Takotsubo cardiomyopathy, the "broken heart syndrome", characterized by a sudden, temporary weakening of the heart muscle whose causation is thought to be through the onset of sudden emotional stress. Available literature on daylight saving time and heart attack was reviewed by the team from the University of Ferrara who discovered five conducted in Europe and two in the U.S., reflecting a total of 87,994 cases.

All these studies identified an association with an increased frequency of heart attack, with increases ranging from four to 29 percent, while three studies identified a higher incidence of heart attacks on the Monday following the time change. All studies were observational only, with no proof existing respelling cause and effect. Tellingly, it was the spring shift forward when an hour is 'lost' to the day where the deleterious effect was identified.

The circadian rhythm controlling the body's sense of day and night, when to rise and when to sleep, also regulates metabolism in the heart and other vital organs. In sensitive people, the hour of sleep lost may increase heart rate, blood pressure, stress levels and chemicals promoting inflammation. The researchers caution that people should heed the weather, not the fact that days stay brighter and are longer.

Cold weather, they point out, can constrict blood vessels and hence blood flow to the heart, potentially triggering heart attacks in susceptible people. Cardiologist Dennis Ko of Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre in Toronto explained the association between daylight saving time and heart attacks is doubtless real, but meaningful specifically for those with underlying heart conditions.

Daylight-saving time begins at 2 a.m. on Sunday, March 10.

Brian Snyder/Reuters

Wishing It Were So, Doesn't Make The Grade

"As much as they try and account for different variables, we can’t say definitively that having more than seven drinks a week is going to lead to a lower life expectancy for an individual."
"That’s based on so many factors — their genetic ability to metabolize alcohol, their other overall health and wellness, whether they eat well, exercise, whether they manage their stress."
"From a health perspective, what you’re not supposed to do is save up all your drinks for the weekend. For better health, keep your daily drinking moderate."

"One study comes out saying one thing and other researchers try to replicate those results, and they may or may not. It takes time for a body of evidence to accumulate."
"It’s really important for us not to kind of flip-flop or worry about changing our entire lives based on one study."
Desiree Nielsen, registered dietitian, Vancouver 

Health benefits from drinking alcohol? Sorry, but it’s just another case of something that is too good to be true, say experts. Photograph: Inti St Clair/Getty Images/Blend Images

“Above two units a day, the death rates steadily climb."
"The paper estimates a 40-year-old drinking four units a day above the guidelines [the equivalent of drinking three glasses of wine in a night] has roughly two years’ lower life expectancy, which is around a 20th of their remaining life. This works out at about an hour per day. So it’s as if each unit above guidelines is taking, on average, about 15 minutes of life, about the same as a cigarette."
"Of course, it’s up to individuals whether they think this is worthwhile."
"[It represents] a massive and very impressive study. It estimates that, compared to those who only drink a little, people who drink at the current UK guidelines suffer no overall harm in terms of death rates, and have 20% fewer heart attacks."
David Spiegelhalter, Winton professor, public understanding of risk, University of Cambridge



There was a time -- and it seems not all that long ago -- that pregnant women were urged to drink beer, informed it was a good source of protein and would aid their pregnancy nutritionally. And even now people continue to think that a little alcohol consumed during a pregnancy cannot be harmful to the fetus, even while scientific research is desperately slamming that fiction, pointing out that even small amounts of alcohol taken while pregnant can result in various levels of fetal alcohol syndrome in children whose mothers drank while pregnant.

Now, a new and very large international study finds that those men and women who regularly imbibe over seven drinks on a weekly basis can look forward to their devotion to alcohol coming with a dear price; early death. At the very least, dying at a sooner date than their peers who are careful to studiously restrict alcohol intake to an occasional drink on special occasions. 

"What this is saying is, if you're really concerned about your longevity, don't have more than a drink a day", David Jernigan, alcohol researcher at  Johns Hopkins University, observed. He was not involved in the research that combined 83 studies' results conducted in 19 countries which tracked alcohol consumption for close to 600,000 people. The focus of the researchers was who developed and died from stroke and various types of heart disease.

Roughly half the study participants divulged having had over 100 grams of alcohol weekly. In American terms 100 grams is the equivalent of seven 12-ounce cans of beer, five-ounce glasses of wine, or 1.5 ounce shots of run, gin or other distilled spirits. Among whom researchers discerned a higher risk of stroke, heart failure and associated problems within that group.

The study estimated that 40-year-old men who consume up to the current American guidelines that permit for good health, can expect to sacrifice one to two years of life in contrast to men who take no more than seven drinks each week. Isn't moderation the key in everything in life, to guarantee longer life? The risk inherent in too liberal alcohol consumption may reflect that elevated blood pressure and cholesterol levels result from alcohol consumption. 

Currently, no more than seven drinks weekly for women and 14 for men reflect the recommendations by the U.S. government. Studies found that women react quicker to alcohol effects at amounts lower than do men, attributed in part to women weighing less than men on average, and that blood alcohol concentrations rise quicker in women.

Canada and Sweden reflect similar guidelines to those the Department of Agriculture in the U.S. has set, while countries like Spain and Romania set their upper limit for men at 20 drinks weekly. Until several years back, British guidelines reflected American standards, when the U.K. brought recommendations for men down to match those for women.