Human Teeth Healthier in the Stone Age Than Today: Study

TUESDAY, Feb. 19 (HealthDay News) -- Something to think about next time you're in the dentist's chair: Ancient humans had healthier teeth than people do today, researchers say.

This decline in oral health over the past 7,500 years is the result of changes in oral bacteria due to human evolution and industrialization, the study authors said. These changes have led to chronic oral and other health problems, according to the report published Feb. 18 in Nature Genetics.

"The composition of oral bacteria changed markedly with the introduction of farming, and again around 150 years ago," explained study leader Alan Cooper, a professor and director of the University of Adelaide's Australian Centre for Ancient DNA, in a center news release. "With the introduction of processed sugar and flour in the Industrial Revolution, we can see a dramatically decreased diversity in our oral bacteria, allowing domination by caries [cavities]-causing strains. The modern mouth basically exists in a permanent disease state."

The international team of researchers examined DNA that had been preserved in tartar -- calcified dental plaque -- found on 34 prehistoric northern European human skeletons. They used these samples to analyze how oral bacteria changed from the Stone Age to the last hunter-gatherers, medieval times and later with the introduction of food manufacturing in the Industrial Revolution.

The evolution of human behavior and diet have had a negative impact on oral health, the investigators said.

"This is the first record of how our evolution over the last 7,500 years has impacted the bacteria we carry with us, and the important health consequences," Cooper said. "Oral bacteria in modern man are markedly less diverse than historic populations and this is thought to contribute to chronic oral and other disease in post-industrial lifestyles," he pointed out.

Study lead author Christina Adler, now at the University of Sydney, added that "dental plaque represents the only easily accessible source of preserved human bacteria." And, she said in the news release, "Genetic analysis of plaque can create a powerful new record of dietary impacts, health changes and oral pathogen genomic evolution, deep into the past."

The researchers said their research is being expanded to include other periods in time, other areas of the world and other species, such as Neanderthals.

-- Mary Elizabeth Dallas
Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCE: Australian Centre for Ancient DNA, news release, Feb. 18, 2013

View the original article here

Alcohol Blamed for 1 in Every 30 Cancer Deaths: Study

By Steven Reinberg
HealthDay Reporter

THURSDAY, Feb. 14 (HealthDay News) -- For anyone who still thinks that drinking does not contribute to cancer, a new report finds that alcohol is to blame for one in every 30 cancer deaths each year in the United States.

The connection is even more pronounced with breast cancer, with 15 percent of those deaths related to alcohol consumption, the researchers added.

And don't think that drinking in moderation will help, because 30 percent of all alcohol-related cancer deaths are linked to drinking 1.5 drinks or less a day, the report found.

Alcohol is a cancer-causing agent that's in "plain sight," but people just don't see it, said study author Dr. David Nelson, director of the Cancer Prevention Fellowship Program at the U.S. National Cancer Institute.

"As expected, people who are higher alcohol users were at higher risk, but there was really no safe level of alcohol use," he stressed.

Moderate drinking has been associated with heart benefits, Nelson noted. "But, in the broader context of all the issues and all the problems that alcohol is related to, alcohol causes 10 times as many deaths as it prevents," he said.

The best thing people who believe they are at risk for cancer can do is reduce their alcohol consumption, Nelson said. "From a cancer prevention perspective, the less you drink, the lower your risk of an alcohol-related cancer and, obviously, if one doesn't drink at all then that's the lowest risk," he said.

The report was published online Feb. 14 in the American Journal of Public Health.

To determine the risks related to drinking and cancer, Nelson's team compiled data from a variety of sources, including the 2009 Alcohol Epidemiologic Data System, the 2009 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System and the 2009-2010 National Alcohol Survey.

Along with breast cancer in women, cancers of the mouth, throat and esophagus were also common causes of alcohol-related cancer deaths in men, accounting for about 6,000 deaths each year.

Each alcohol-related cancer death accounted for an average of 18 years of potential life lost, the researchers added.

Previous studies have shown drinking is a risk factor for cancers of the mouth, throat, esophagus, liver, colon, rectum and, in women, breast cancer, the researchers noted.

According to the American Cancer Society, it's not entirely clear how alcohol might raise cancer risk. Alcohol might act as a chemical irritant to sensitive cells, impeding their DNA repair, or damage cells in other ways. It might also act as a "solvent" for other carcinogens, such as those found in tobacco smoke, helping those chemicals enter into cells more easily. Or alcohol might affect levels of key hormones such as estrogen, upping odds for breast cancer.

One expert says the findings in this study are consistent with what has been shown before.

"Nobody is recommending that if you do not drink to start drinking for any reason," said Susan Gapstur, vice president of epidemiology at the cancer society. "If you do drink, limit your consumption."

Gapstur did point out that smoking is a much more powerful factor in cancer deaths than alcohol. Although some 20,000 cancer deaths can be attributed to alcohol each year, more than 100,000 cancer deaths are caused by smoking, she said.

To strike a balance between the cancer risk of drinking and its possible benefit in preventing heart disease, Gapstur suggested talking with your doctor about the risks and benefits of drinking.

Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCES: David Nelson, M.D., M.P.H., director, Cancer Prevention Fellowship Program, U.S. National Cancer Institute; Susan Gapstur, Ph.D., M.P.H., vice president of epidemiology, American Cancer Society; Feb. 14, 2013, American Journal of Public Health, online

View the original article here

Open Windows, Lower Risk for Preterm Birth: Study

THURSDAY, Feb. 14 (HealthDay News) --Opening the windows at home may help pregnant women reduce their risk for preterm birth or low birth weight, a new study indicates.

Researchers suggested the increase in fresh air could help protect expectant mothers from exposure to secondhand smoke and other volatile organic compounds that can be found indoors.

For the study, published online and in the April issue of the American Journal of Public Health, researchers questioned more than 1,760 mothers in Los Angeles about the quality of air in their home while they were pregnant. They were asked about their exposure to secondhand smoke, how often they opened the windows and how often they used hairspray, insect spray and nail polish at home.

Although the researchers did not link the use of hairspray or other household products with preterm birth or low birth weight, they did find that opening the windows at home reduced the women's risk for these complications of pregnancy.

The study showed that women exposed to secondhand smoke at home who opened their windows for less than half the day were three times more likely to experience low birth weight and were 92 percent more likely to have a preterm birth.

Even if they were not exposed to secondhand smoke, women who didn't open their windows very often were 49 percent more likely to have a baby with low birth weight and 25 percent more likely to have a preterm delivery than women in homes with better ventilation.

"As there is no risk-free level of secondhand smoke, pregnant women should be advised to avoid secondhand smoke exposure whenever possible, or mitigate secondhand smoke exposure by limiting smoking by household members to outdoor spaces or ventilating their home," the authors wrote.

While the study found an association between opening windows and preterm birth, it did not establish a cause-and-effect link.

-- Mary Elizabeth Dallas
Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCE: American Public Health Association, news release, Feb. 14, 2013

View the original article here

Open Windows, Lower Risk for Preterm Birth: Study

THURSDAY, Feb. 14 (HealthDay News) --Opening the windows at home may help pregnant women reduce their risk for preterm birth or low birth weight, a new study indicates.

Researchers suggested the increase in fresh air could help protect expectant mothers from exposure to secondhand smoke and other volatile organic compounds that can be found indoors.

For the study, published online and in the April issue of the American Journal of Public Health, researchers questioned more than 1,760 mothers in Los Angeles about the quality of air in their home while they were pregnant. They were asked about their exposure to secondhand smoke, how often they opened the windows and how often they used hairspray, insect spray and nail polish at home.

Although the researchers did not link the use of hairspray or other household products with preterm birth or low birth weight, they did find that opening the windows at home reduced the women's risk for these complications of pregnancy.

The study showed that women exposed to secondhand smoke at home who opened their windows for less than half the day were three times more likely to experience low birth weight and were 92 percent more likely to have a preterm birth.

Even if they were not exposed to secondhand smoke, women who didn't open their windows very often were 49 percent more likely to have a baby with low birth weight and 25 percent more likely to have a preterm delivery than women in homes with better ventilation.

"As there is no risk-free level of secondhand smoke, pregnant women should be advised to avoid secondhand smoke exposure whenever possible, or mitigate secondhand smoke exposure by limiting smoking by household members to outdoor spaces or ventilating their home," the authors wrote.

While the study found an association between opening windows and preterm birth, it did not establish a cause-and-effect link.

-- Mary Elizabeth Dallas
Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCE: American Public Health Association, news release, Feb. 14, 2013

View the original article here