Association of Coffee Consumption with Total and Cause-Specific Mortality in Three Large Prospective Cohorts

But did they consider those studies that have identified a single nugget of our DNA that seems to determine whether we process caffeine quickly or slowly? That, in turn, appears to have a large effect on whether coffee is good for your health. Studies starting from 2002, 2005, 2006, 2009 so failure to mention them is piss poor research, reflecting badly on the senior staff.

Association of Coffee Consumption with Total and Cause-Specific Mortality in Three Large Prospective Cohorts

1. Ming Ding1;
2. Ambika Satija1;
3. Shilpa N. Bhupathiraju1;
4. Yang Hu1;
5. Qi Sun2;
6. Jiali Han3;
7. Esther Lopez-Garcia4;
8. Walter Willett2;
9. Rob M. van Dam5;
10. Frank B. Hu2*

+ Author Affiliations

1. ¹Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA
2. ²Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA & Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
3. ³Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN
4. ⁴Universidad Autónoma de Madrid/IdiPAZ, CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain
5. ⁵Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA & National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore

1. ↵* Department of Nutrition, Harvard School of Public Health, 655 Huntington Ave, Boston, MA 02115 frank.hu@channing.harvard.edu

Abstract

Background—The association between consumption of caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee and risk of mortality remains inconclusive.

Methods and Results—We examined the associations of consumption of total, caffeinated, and decaffeinated coffee with risk of subsequent total and cause-specific mortality among 74,890 women in the Nurses' Health Study (NHS), 93,054 women in the NHS 2, and 40,557 men in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study. Coffee consumption was assessed at baseline using a semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire. During 4,690,072 person-years of follow-up, 19,524 women and 12,432 men died. Consumption of total, caffeinated, and decaffeinated coffee were non-linearly associated with mortality. Compared to non-drinkers, coffee consumption one to five cups/d was associated with lower risk of mortality, while coffee consumption more than five cups/d was not associated with risk of mortality. However, when restricting to never smokers, compared to non-drinkers, the HRs of mortality were 0.94 (0.89 to 0.99) for ≤ 1 cup/d, 0.92 (0.87 to 0.97) for 1.1-3 cups/d, 0.85 (0.79 to 0.92) for 3.1-5 cups/d, and 0.88 (0.78 to 0.99) for > 5 cups/d (p for non-linearity = 0.32; p for trend < 0.001). Significant inverse associations were observed for caffeinated (p for trend < 0.001) and decaffeinated coffee (p for trend = 0.022). Significant inverse associations were observed between coffee consumption and deaths due to cardiovascular disease, neurological diseases, and suicide. No significant association between coffee consumption and total cancer mortality was found.

Treating the Uninjured Side of the Brain Appears to Aid Stroke Recovery

My earliest post on this was back in May 2012
And we still seem to have no stroke protocols on how to use this. Damned lazy everybody in the stroke world. You had better hope you never get a stroke and find out how piss poor the rehab and recovery protocols are.
http://dgnews.docguide.com/treating-uninjured-side-brain-appears-aid-stroke-recovery?
To maximise stroke recovery, researchers may want to focus more on ways to support the side of the brain where the injury didn't occur, according to a study that will be presented at the 2015 International Stroke Conference (ISC).
“Most studies focus on the stroke area and ways to limit damage in that area,” said Adviye Ergul, MD, Medical College of Georgia at Georgia Regents University, Augusta, Georgia.
However, the researchers are among a growing number of scientists finding that while the opposite side of the brain may not have directly experienced a stroke, its ability to aid the injured side is affected.
That aid includes endothelial cells that line blood vessels on both sides of the brain releasing growth factors, which protect neurons, help ailing ones recover, and prompt the growth of new blood vessels to the stroke site, which is screaming for blood and oxygen. All this activity also attracts endogenous stem cells so, even if the new blood vessels never actually carry blood, they help create what scientists are calling a “regenerative niche” that can minimise stroke damage.
The uninjured side benefits as well with a boost of growth factors and maybe even more blood vessels, possibly readying itself to take on more responsibility.
“We know that blood vessels react a lot to the injury in distant parts of the brain,” said Dr. Ergul. “Within a few days of a stroke, the non-damaged side becomes more active and starts taking up, we think, some of the functions of the damaged side. If you do functional MRIs in humans, you can see other hemispheres starting to light up more in the recovery phase within a few days of stroke.”
Patients with diseases such as hypertension and diabetes are at particular risk for stroke and poor stroke recovery because their vascular system already has lost some of its innate ability to protect itself. In the unique domain of the brain, that includes maintaining super-tight control over blood flow.
“Blood vessels contract to regulate the flow,” said Dr. Ergul. “What we are seeing in diabetes and hypertension is, for a while, they try to compensate, but they lose the ability to sense the pressure and regulate blood flow.”
Without that ability, blood vessels will continue to dilate, increasing leakiness and bleeding into the brain. In addition, tiny vessels upstream sense what's happening and contract, further reducing blood and oxygen supplies to the already fragile stroke area.
“That is why it is so important to regulate the function and also the new blood vessel formation to generate this nutritive environment,” said Dr. Ergul.
SOURCE: Medical College of Georgia at Georgia Regents University

Virtual reality for the rehabilitation of the upper limb motor function after stroke: a prospective controlled trial

When are we going to get these research trials translated into stroke protocols? This is something any good stroke association would be doing. But we don't even have a piss poor stroke association for survivors. We don't have any association that is dedicated to survivors unless we can convince the existing ones(that's you, board of directors) to do the right thing.
http://www.jneuroengrehab.com/content/10/1/85

Abstract

Background

Recent evidence has demonstrated the efficacy of Virtual Reality (VR) for stroke rehabilitation nonetheless its benefits and limitations in large population of patients have not yet been studied.

Objectives

To evaluate the effectiveness of non-immersive VR treatment for the restoration of the upper limb motor function and its impact on the activities of daily living capacities in post-stroke patients.

Methods

A pragmatic clinical trial was conducted among post-stroke patients admitted to our rehabilitation hospital. We enrolled 376 subjects who had a motor arm subscore on the Italian version of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (It-NIHSS) between 1 and 3 and without severe neuropsychological impairments interfering with recovery. Patients were allocated to two treatments groups, receiving combined VR and upper limb conventional (ULC) therapy or ULC therapy alone. The treatment programs consisted of 2 hours of daily therapy, delivered 5 days per week, for 4 weeks. The outcome measures were the Fugl-Meyer Upper Extremity (F-M UE) and Functional Independence Measure (FIM) scales.

Results

Both treatments significantly improved F-M UE and FIM scores, but the improvement obtained with VR rehabilitation was significantly greater than that achieved with ULC therapy alone. The estimated effect size of the minimal difference between groups in F-M UE and FIM scores was 2.5 ± 0.5 (P < 0.001) pts and 3.2 ± 1.2 (P = 0.007) pts, respectively.

Conclusions

VR rehabilitation in post-stroke patients seems more effective than conventional interventions in restoring upper limb motor impairments and motor related functional abilities.