http://www.tobacco.org/newsfeed/category/food.rss Latest top tobacco news headlines en-us http://www.medpagetoday.com/AllergyImmunology/COPD/31060?utm_content=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=DailyHeadlines&utm_source=WC&eun=g220600d0r&userid=220600&email=gborio@gmail.com&mu_id= http://tobacco.org/news/333516.html Action Points People who consumed at least a half a liter of soft drinks a day were more than twice as likely to develop either asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), compared with those who didn't partake at all. Point out that the study design was cross-sectional study and therefore could not prove causality. More bad news for soda lovers: in addition to obesity and heart disease, the sugary drinks may be tied to asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), Australian researchers found. People who consumed at least a half a liter of soft drinks a day were more than twice as likely to develop either lung condition compared with those who didn't partake at all (OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.51 to 3.60), Zumin Shi, MD, of the University of Adelaide in Australia, and colleagues reported in Respirology. The cross-sectional study, however, couldn't prove causality, and researchers not involved in the study suspect an overall unhealthy diet effect might be at play. MedPage Today Australia Tue, 07 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://consumer.healthday.com/Article.asp?AID=661550 http://tobacco.org/news/333449.html Drinking a lot of soft drinks may increase the risk for asthma and/or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), a new study suggests. Nearly 17,000 people aged 16 and older in South Australia were asked about their consumption of soft drinks such as Coke, flavored mineral water, lemonade, Powerade and Gatorade. . . . Smoking increased the risk even further, especially for COPD. People who smoked and consumed more than half a liter of soft drinks a day had a 6.6 times greater risk of COPD than those who didn't smoke and didn't consume soft drinks. HealthDay [HealthScout] Australia Tue, 07 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/dirty-minds/201202/if-you-needed-another-reason-quit http://tobacco.org/news/333300.html A few months ago, I attended Neuroscience 2011, the largest neuroscience conference in the world. Imagine 30,000+ scientists exiting the lab, squinting at the daylight and coming together to share the latest and greatest findings in the neuroscience world. . . . One of the studies I wrote up after the conference was a landmark study demonstrating the molecular mechanisms of nicotine as a gateway drug. The long and the short was that researchers at Columbia University found that nicotine, when taken along with cocaine, increases the risk of addiction. And it showed how it did so very elegantly at both the cellular and epigenetic levels. Translation: nicotine changed the way animals learned, priming them for addiction. And it did so by changing the way an animal's genes were expressed. . . . Nora Volkow, the Director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, hailed the study as "transformative." And when we spoke about it during Neuroscience 2011, she mentioned that it may reach much further than just cocaine addiction—if nicotine can make these kinds of epigenetic changes, literally changing the way genes are expressed, it could mean that it also has influence over many other diseases and disorders. "This a previously unknown pharmacological effect of nicotine," she said. "And the implications...there are many potential implications. We give nicotine patches to help pregnant women stop smoking. But if it works this way on the genes, then maybe we should not be giving them those patches." Then the conjecture started. . . . If nicotine can act on all these genes, I can see it potentially playing a role in anorexia and depression—perhaps even exacerbating diseases like schizophrenia or Parkinson's disease. I told Volkow that all these questions were going to keep me up at night for a while. "This is the difference between good science and not-so-good science. Good science makes you think," she said. "This paper raises a lot of questions that are extremely interesting. And we need to see them through." Psychology Today Fri, 03 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://consumer.healthday.com/Article.asp?AID=661228 http://tobacco.org/news/333130.html Women who are both overweight and smoke during pregnancy could damage their baby's developing heart, a new study warns. Researchers in the Netherlands looked at nearly 800 fetuses and babies with congenital heart defects, but no other birth defects, between 1997 and 2008. Congenital means present at birth. This group was compared with more than 300 fetuses and babies born with chromosomal abnormalities, but without any heart defects. The results showed that women who were both overweight (body mass index of 25 or more) and smoked during pregnancy were 2.5 times more likely to have a baby with a congenital heart defect than women who either smoked or were overweight during pregnancy. . . . The study was published online Jan. 31 in the journal Heart. HealthDay [HealthScout] Tue, 31 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://mdn.mainichi.jp/mdnnews/news/20120201p2a00m0na005000c.html http://tobacco.org/news/333004.html Rates of both smoking and obesity in women are higher in low-income households, analysis of a Japanese government health survey has shown. The analysis, released on Jan. 31 by the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, was based on the ministry's 2010 nationwide health and nutrition survey, and marks the first time the government has examined the relationship between average income and lifestyle. "It's possible the (health and income) relationship is influenced by factors such as access to medical care and information on healthy living," a ministry statement said. The health ministry queried some 3,200 households Mainichi Daily News Japan Wed, 01 Feb 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/290084/20120131/pregnant-women-obese-smoke-congenital-heart-defect.htm http://tobacco.org/news/332921.html Pregnant women who are both overweight and smoke are putting their babies' hearts at risk, according to a study published online in the journal Heart. Researchers from the University Medical Center Groningen, The Netherlands, studied the impact smoking by obese pregnant mothers has on the heart of the unborn baby. They found that the risk for congenital heart defects in babies increased with around eight in every 1,000 babies affected when their obese moms smoked during pregnancy. IBTimes Netherlands Tue, 31 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.couriermail.com.au/entertainment/confidential/excess-of-smoke-on-the-set-of-excess-baggage/story-e6freq7o-1226255747412 http://tobacco.org/news/332737.html THEY might be cutting back on the junk food but it seems the cast of Excess Baggage - Channel 9's submission into the celebrity weight loss reality genre - are having a little more trouble ditching the smokes. In between snaps of the D-listers sweating off the kilos are just as many pictures of them sucking down their nicotine fixes, with paparazzi mogul Darren Lyons, Kate DeAraugo and Kevin Federline all among the proud puffers reluctant to butt out. But as any fitness trainer worth their salt will tell you, smoking and fitness aren't exactly well-known bedfellows. Brisbane Courier-Mail pictorial@qnp.newsltd.com.au ( Staff Writer * From: The Daily Telegraph) Australia Fri, 27 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9027761/NHS-lottery-if-youre-fat-or-smoke.html http://tobacco.org/news/332595.html God help you if you're fat and you smoke. It is therefore perhaps unsurprising that the NHS has started to reflect society's attitude to these groups. Patients in Hertfordshire have been told that they cannot have routine operations until they lose weight and stop smoking. Rules laid down by the new Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG), set up under the Coalition reforms, mean that those needing surgery will first have to satisfy their GP that they have lost weight and attended smoking-cessation courses before they will refer them on to be seen by a surgeon. . . . Could there come a time when surgery is only offered to slim, teetotal non-smokers? The incidence of smoking in general surgical populations undergoing elective procedures is about 30 per cent. The incidence of what doctors would define as "hazardous drinking" - above the maximum units consumed per week - is estimated to be anywhere between 10 and 49 per cent of those undergoing surgery. Viewed this way, restricting access to operations from these groups of people could nearly halve waiting lists and save a fortune. This ignores the fact that the NHS is not there to enforce lifestyle choices or to judge the choices people make about their lives. It is also not there to pick and choose whom it treats. If we're going to penalise smokers and the obese, what about people who engage in dangerous activities - such as horse riding, for example? Shall we restrict the treatments they can receive as well? Electronic Telegraph mdc876@gmail.com (Max Pemberton) UK Mon, 23 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/12/60 http://tobacco.org/news/332352.html Background The association between socioeconomic status and health-related behaviours has been clarified in several epidemiological studies. The aim of this study was to reveal the socioeconomic differences in health-related behaviours and in nutritional status of Hungarian and Romanian citizens living on both sides of the border. . . . Results The prevalence of smoking was similar in Hungarians and Romanians (33.2% and 36.4%). The frequency of "unhealthy diet" was 70.6% in Hungarians and 75.2% in Romanians. Physical inactivity was more prevalent in Romanians (73.2%) than in Hungarians (32.0%), while the prevalence of obesity was higher in Hungarians (22.0%) than in Romanians (16.5%). Based on the univariate logistic regression models the risk of smoking was higher among those with medium educational level (ORHu=1.66) and poor financial conditions (ORHu=3.13) in Hungarians. The risk of unhealthy diet was higher among the low educated (ORHu=1.77; ORRo=7.91) and among those with poor financial conditions (ORHu=2.05; ORRo=4.25). None of the socioeconomic factors was associated with leisure time physical inactivity. In the multivariate models obesity was associated with medium level of education in Hungarians, and with unhealthy diet in Romanians (ORRo=2.10). Physically inactive Hungarians were more (ORHu=1.74), whereas inactive Romanians were less (ORRo=0.64) likely to be obese than physically active people from the same country. Conclusions The present study shows that socioeconomic status is associated with health-related behaviours in a small area of Hungary and Romania. The results highlight the need for developing interventional strategies, focusing more on people in lower socioeconomic status, in order to reduce the existing inequalities in health and health-related behaviours. BioMed Central Hungary Romania Fri, 20 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/11984/ http://tobacco.org/news/332151.html The remorseless illiberal logic of the 'we don't like it, so ban it' lobby is now leeching its way into the lives of meat-eaters. Meat causes cancer. It's been said so many times that you'd have to be an idiot not to believe it, right? The latest confirmation of this apparent common sense was a report published last week in the British Journal of Cancer Research. The authors, from the Karolinska Institute in Sweden, brought together 11 studies - published between 1993 and 2011 - that assessed the risk of pancreatic cancer from eating red meat and 'processed' meat. From this meta-analysis, the authors found that red meat increased the risk of pancreatic cancer for men, but not for women, and that the risk of pancreatic cancer rose by 19 per cent for every 50 grams of processed meat consumed. . . . Here's the argument: * people (like smokers and drinkers) who deliberately do things that are bad for them, despite being told time and again that they should not, are now lectured, restricted and even have their basic rights taken away; * eating meat - and particularly 'processed' meat - increases your risk of getting cancer and is bad for you; * therefore, people who eat meat should now be lectured, restricted and even have their basic rights taken away. This is a shocking but perfectly logical argument, if you accept the petty-authoritarian mindset that flourished under New Labour and is still going strong under the Lib-Con coalition . . . The only proper response to this junkscience-based illiberalism is to be extremely sceptical of any such claims and to defend everyone's right to indulge in these petty vices. spiked general-enquiries@spiked-online.com (Rob Lyons | spiked) UK Wed, 18 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://paper.standartnews.com/en/article.php?d=2012-01-05&article=38087 http://tobacco.org/news/331837.html the Bulgarians are changing their habits to healthier life, statistics shows. During the period 1999-2010 people in Bulgaria have cut down the number of cigarettes they had smoked almost by half. However, the daily package of cigarettes still empties the Bulgarian’s pocket. Standart News Bulgaria Thu, 05 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/health/05iht-obese.1.9748884.html http://tobacco.org/news/331743.html It costs more to care for healthy people who live years longer, according to a Dutch study that counters the common perception that preventing obesity would save governments millions of dollars. "It was a small surprise," said Pieter van Baal, an economist at the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment in the Netherlands, who led the study. "But it also makes sense. If you live longer, then you cost the health system more." In a paper published online Monday in the Public Library of Science Medicine journal, Dutch researchers found that the health costs of thin and healthy people in adulthood are more expensive than those of either fat people or smokers. . . . "This throws a bucket of cold water onto the idea that obesity is going to cost trillions of dollars," said Patrick Basham, a professor of health politics at Johns Hopkins University who was unconnected to the study. New York Times Netherlands Tue, 05 Feb 2008 05:00:00 GMT http://www.herald.ie/entertainment/around-town/dr-eva-promises-war-on-show-smokers-2983025.html http://tobacco.org/news/331730.html Giving up smoking is no excuse for failing to lose weight, Operation Transformation nutritionist Dr Eva Orsmond has insisted. The diet specialist acknowledges it will be tough for contestants Natalie Cox and Grace Batterberry to lose weight while giving up cigarettes. "Of course it's going to be tough for them -- they have a lot of bad habits to give up -- but I don't think it will be any more difficult for them than for the other leaders," Dr Orsmond told the Herald. "It's the perfect time for them to stop. "If they start losing weight but don't address this issue, then they could start smoking more as they replace food with cigarettes. "And if they try to lose weight first, then the pounds could start piling up again when they eventually stop smoking." Dr Orsmond remarked that Natalie (24) and Grace (32) faced increased health risks because of their habits, like the other one million estimated smokers in Ireland. Evening Herald hnews@herald.ie (Adelina Campos) Ireland Mon, 09 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.foxnews.com/health/2012/01/05/how-to-quit-smoking-with-food/ http://tobacco.org/news/331704.html "There's a Duke University study (that) shows certain foods like dairy products, fruits and vegetables, and water can worsen the taste of cigarettes," said registered dietitian and nutritionist Patricia Bannan, based in Los Angeles. Including foods like cheese, milk and yogurt into your diet may make it easier to stop smoking. Mangoes also help, because smoking depletes your body of vitamin C, and this fruit will help replenish it. The study tested 209 smokers and found that some foods actually make cigarettes taste better, too. "Foods you want to avoid when you are trying to quit smoking are things like meat, alcohol and caffeinated beverages, like coffee, because the Fox News newsmanager@foxnews.com Sat, 07 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/90/1/11-098863/en/ http://tobacco.org/news/331435.html The most obvious area of concern relates to mental health, resulting from exposure to violent and traumatic events, forced displacement, impoverishment, uncertainty and isolation. Not surprisingly, surveys reveal very high levels of mental ill-health in countries emerging from conflicts.3 Rather less attention has been paid to the ways the post-conflict environment increases risks of other noncommunicable diseases. First, high levels of psychological distress contribute to harmful health behaviours, such as hazardous drinking and increased smoking, which in turn increase the future burden of noncommunicable diseases. Second, post-conflict countries commonly experience rapid urbanization, also associated with increased alcohol and tobacco use, as well as higher levels of obesity and reduced physical activity. Third, tobacco, alcohol and food companies often take advantage of weakened post-conflict trading systems. This toxic combination of stress, harmful health behaviours and aggressive marketing by multinational companies in transitional settings4,5 requires an effective policy response,6 but often the state has limited capacity to do this. For example, Afghanistan has no national policy, strategy, targets or coordinating body for noncommunicable diseases. World Health Organization bayard.roberts@lshtm.ac.uk ( Bayard Roberts a, Preeti Patel b & Martin McKee a) Sun, 01 Jan 2012 05:00:00 GMT