Common preservatives used in many store-bought foods to kill bacteria and mold were linked to a 29% greater risk of elevated blood pressure and a 16% higher risk of heart attacks and stroke, according to a new study from France.

Even so-called “natural” antioxidant preservatives used to stop discoloration, such as citric acid and ascorbic acid (widely known as vitamin C), led to a 22% greater risk of high blood pressure in people who ate more foods with those ingredients, the research found.

While antioxidants such as citric and ascorbic acid are found naturally in foods such as fruits, they are “not exactly natural” when used as preservatives, senior author Mathilde Touvier said in an email. Touvier is the principal investigator of the NutriNet-Santé study used to conduct the research.

“Naturally occurring ascorbic acid and added ascorbic acid — which may be chemically manufactured — may have different impacts on health,” said Touvier, who is also director of research at France’s National Institute of Health and Medical Research in Paris.

“Thus, the results observed here for these food additives are not true for natural substances found in fruits and vegetables,” she added.

Not only ultraprocessed foods

The study sheds light on how different additives in ultraprocessed foods, or UPFs, could play a role in cardiovascular risk, and “echo the recent European Society of Cardiology consensus, which highlights UPFs as a global public health concern,” Tracy Parker, nutrition lead at the British Heart Foundation in London said in a statement. Parker was not involved in the study.

Ultraprocessed foods have been linked to an approximately 50% higher risk of cardiovascular disease-related death, and they may boost the risk of obesity by 55%, sleep disorders by 41% and the development of type 2 diabetes by 40%. Obesity, diabetes and poor sleep are closely connected to poor heart health.

“This is one of the first large studies to look at individual preservatives rather than treating ultra-processed foods as a single category,” Parker said. “UPFs have long raised concerns due to their high levels of sugar, salt and fat, but these factors alone have never fully explained why they appear more harmful than their nutrient profile suggests. These findings help fill part of that gap.”

However, prior research by Touvier and her team found ultraprocessed foods make up only 35% of foods with preservatives people consumed. That means “preservatives are ubiquitous,” said lead author Anaïs Hasenböhler, a doctoral student at the Nutritional Epidemiology Research Team at the Université Sorbonne Paris Nord.

“There is no food group/item to remove from the diet in order to fix things,” Hasenböhler said in an email. “These results also support the recommendations for consumers to favour non-to-minimally-processed foods.”

Choose fresh, uncooked, unprocessed items, or if looking for the fastest to prepare and eat, choose “frozen options which are preserved through a low temperature, not necessarily through the addition of food additive preservatives,” she added.

More ‘natural’ preservatives associated with risk

The study, published Wednesday in the European Heart Journal, investigated the impact of 58 preservatives on the cardiovascular health of more than 112,000 people above the age of 15. All are participating in NutriNet-Santé, which has analyzed the diets of volunteers from across France since 2009.

To be in the study, each participant tracks every bite of their food and drink by brand name for three days every six months. Researchers then use a database of product ingredients to identify common preservatives and compare levels of consumption over years with medical data stored in the French national health care system.

Researchers did a deep dive on 17 preservatives consumed by at least 10% of the participants and found eight were associated with higher blood pressure over the next decade. Three of those — potassium sorbate, potassium metabisulphite and sodium nitrite — are “non-antioxidant” preservatives, which means they kill bacteria, molds and yeast that spoil foods.

Potassium sorbate is often used in wine, baked goods, cheeses and sauces. Potassium metabisulphite, which releases sulfur dioxide when dissolved, is found in wine, juice, cider, beer and other fermented beverages. Sodium nitrite is a chemical salt commonly used in processed meats such as bacon, ham and deli meats.

Nitrates and sulfur-based compounds are found in foods like red and processed meats, already known to increase the risk of heart disease. Therefore, that finding is should not be surprising, some experts say.

In addition, preservatives are needed if consumers want to continue to purchase foods they can store and eat later, according to Gunter Kuhnle, a professor of food and nutritional science at the University of Reading in England. He was not involved in any of the studies.

“Preservatives have an important role in the food system, not only by preventing food-borne diseases, but also by preventing spoilage, reducing food waste and extending shelf life,” Kuhnle said in a statement.

The remaining preservatives linked to high blood pressure in the study — ascorbic acid, sodium ascorbate, sodium erythorbate, citric acid and extracts of rosemary — are so-called natural “antioxidant” preservatives, used to reduce oxidation that turns foods brown and rancid.

Ascorbic acid, or vitamin C, was also specifically linked to cardiovascular disease, the study found.

Similar preservatives also linked to cancer, type 2 diabetes

The results support the findings of two other studies by Touvier and her team which found similar links between preservatives and a much higher risk of cancer and type 2 diabetes.

Six preservatives — sodium nitrite, potassium nitrate, sorbates, potassium metabisulfite, acetates and acetic acid — were linked to up to a 32% higher risk of prostate cancer, breast cancer and cancer of all kinds. All but one of those same preservatives also boosted the risk of developing type 2 diabetes by 49%.

While the findings of the new research are observational and cannot prove cause and effect, the study did a good job of controlling for other factors that may influence health, such as age, body mass index or BMI, smoking, physical activity and diet in general, said Rachel Richardson, a methods support unit manager for The Cochrane Collaboration, an international nonprofit highly respected for its scientific approach to research. She was not involved in the study.

“Other strengths of this study include the way in which they assessed people’s diets and their comprehensive approach to identifying hypertension and cardiovascular disease,” said Richardson in a statement. “Although they cannot prove causation, there are signals in the results that warrant further investigation.” (CNN)

The post High blood pressure, heart attacks linked to common preservatives in food appeared first on Newswire.

Cardiologist Dr. Gothabhaya Ranasinghe says international studies have confirmed that after an emergency disaster situation, such as Cyclone Ditwah, the incidence of heart attacks and cardiovascular emergencies among individuals can increase by about 40%. 

In a statement on social media, he noted that during such sudden disasters, the loss of homes and loved ones can cause psychological stress, which in turn may lead certain people to develop heart disease.

The specialist further pointed out that factors such as psychological stress, increased blood pressure, and elevated heart rate contribute to this condition.

He also said that being unable to take medicines such as blood pressure tablets, diabetes drugs, cholesterol tablets, aspirin, clopidogrel, and warfarin can also be a cause.

Dr. Gothabhaya Ranasinghe emphasized that at such times one should build mental strength and ensure adequate sleep. 

He advised that if any discomfort or heart‑related condition arises, immediate medical treatment should be sought, and most importantly, people should maintain mental resilience and continue taking their prescribed medications without forgetting them.

What triggers heart attacks after a disaster?

1.High Stress = High Heart Strain

• Adrenaline surges
• Blood pressure increases
• Heart rate accelerates
• Plaque may rupture → Heart attack

2. Poor Sleep & Exhaustion

Crowded shelters and anxiety make quality sleep rare.

Sleep deprivation increases inflammation and disrupts heart function.

3. Interrupted Medication

Access to regular medicines is often lost.

Stopping your:

• Blood pressure pills
• Diabetes medication
• Cholesterol tablets
• Aspirin or Clopidogrel
• Blood thinners (like Warfarin)

Even for a few days, it can be life-threatening.

4. Irregular or Unbalanced Meals

Emergency food may be high in salt, sugar, or lacking key nutrients worsening sugar control, blood pressure, and fluid retention.

5. Coping with Smoking & Alcohol

Many turn to smoking or drinking to deal with stress but both significantly increase the risk of heart attacks and arrhythmias.

Who’s Most at Risk?

Pay special attention if you are:

• A heart attack survivor
• Living with high blood pressure or diabetes
• Elderly
• A regular smoker
• Under emotional or physical stress
• Living with kidney disease

Know These Heart Attack Warning Signs

If you experience any of the following, seek help immediately:

• Chest pain, pressure, or tightness
• Shortness of breath
• Pain in the jaw, neck, arm, or back
• Sudden nausea, sweating, or dizziness
• Palpitations or irregular heartbeat
• Swollen legs or trouble breathing when lying down

How to Protect Your Heart During the Crisis

1️. Continue All Medications

Keep them dry and safe. Replace immediately if lost.

Never stop BP meds, diabetes pills, aspirin, or blood thinners without medical advice.

2️. Prioritise Sleep and Rest

Even short naps help reduce cardiac strain.

3️. Avoid Smoking and Alcohol

They increase blood pressure and cardiac risk under stress.

4️. Stay Hydrated

Drink safe water regularly to avoid dehydration.

5️. Seek Medical Help Early

Visit your nearest:

• Hospital
• Medical camp
• MOH clinic

Ask for an ECG if you feel chest discomfort, dizziness, or palpitations.

Emergency Support:

• Suwa Seriya Ambulance Service (24/7): 1990
• Sri Lanka STEMI Forum Hotline: +94 76 317 7312 (Newswire)

The post Heart attack risk rises after disasters, Cardiologist warns appeared first on Newswire.

A 39-year-old cardiac surgeon, Dr Gradlin Roy, collapsed during rounds at Saveetha Medical College Hospital in Chennai on Wednesday. Despite immediate efforts by colleagues, he could not be revived.

Neurologist Dr Sudhir Kumar, who shared details on X, said colleagues administered CPR, performed urgent angioplasty with stenting, inserted an intra-aortic balloon pump, and even placed Dr Roy on an ECMO machine. However, the 100% blockage in his left main artery caused irreversible damage.

Alarming trend among young doctors

Dr Kumar noted that Dr Roy’s case is not isolated. Increasing numbers of doctors in their 30s and 40s are suffering sudden cardiac events. He attributed this to long and erratic working hours, unhealthy eating patterns, sedentary lifestyles, high stress, substance use, and neglect of preventive care.

Strain of the profession

Experts say doctors often work 12–18 hours a day, with some shifts extending beyond 24 hours. The constant pressure of life-or-death decisions, coupled with patient expectations and medico-legal risks, adds to the stress. Many also skip regular check-ups and exercise, while struggling with burnout, depression, and anxiety.

Calls for lifestyle changes

Dr Kumar urged medical professionals to prioritise preventive care, adopt healthier lifestyles, and learn to say “no” to overwork. He warned that sleep-deprived doctors risk harming both themselves and their patients.

Tributes and concerns on social media

Tributes poured in for Dr Roy, who is survived by his wife and young son. Social media users expressed grief and raised concerns about doctors’ gruelling schedules. Many compared them to pilots, who are given mandatory rest breaks, questioning why doctors are not granted the same protection.

Why young doctors are at risk

High stress, burnout, long duty hours, and irregular diet and sleep patterns put a huge strain on the heart. Many doctors also ignore early warning signs such as fatigue, mild pain, nausea, and light-headedness.

What makes a left artery blockage deadly?

A 100% blockage of the left main artery cuts blood supply to about 50% of the heart muscle. This can trigger dangerous arrhythmias, particularly ventricular fibrillation, leading to sudden cardiac arrest. Without immediate oxygen reaching vital organs, this can be fatal within minutes.

Rising cardiac complications among doctors

Chronic stress and burnout cause inflammation, weakening blood vessels. Low-density lipoprotein (LDL or “bad cholesterol”) builds up, forming plaques and blockages.

Triggers for young doctors and busy professionals

• Long work weeks: 80-hour schedules are common
• Unhealthy habits: irregular meals, little sleep, poor diet, lack of exercise
• Mental strain: high stress increases risk of hypertension, anxiety, depression, and even suicide
• Physical effects: elevated blood pressure combined with stress hormones damages artery walls further

Genetic risks to watch

Some people inherit familial hypercholesterolemia, which raises LDL cholesterol regardless of lifestyle. Small, dense LDL particles are especially damaging to artery walls.

Doctors and professionals can monitor risk through a full lipid panel measuring ApoA1 (good cholesterol) and ApoB (bad cholesterol), which provides a clearer picture than total cholesterol alone. Experts recommend keeping LDL below 70 mg/dL, ideally around 50 mg/dL. (Gulf News)

The post Young Indian Cardiac surgeon dies of heart attack during hospital rounds appeared first on Newswire.

An analysis of over 20,000 U.S. adults found that people who limited their eating across less than 8 hours per day, a time-restricted eating plan, were more likely to die from cardiovascular disease compared to people who ate across 12-16 hours per day, according to preliminary research presented at the American Heart Association’s Epidemiology and Prevention│Lifestyle and Cardiometabolic Scientific Sessions 2024, March 18- 21, in Chicago. The meeting offers the latest science on population-based health and wellness and implications for lifestyle.

Time-restricted eating, a type of intermittent fasting, involves limiting the hours for eating to a specific number of hours each day, which may range from a 4- to 12-hour time window in 24 hours. Many people who follow a time-restricted eating diet follow a 16:8 eating schedule, where they eat all their foods in an 8-hour window and fast for the remaining 16 hours each day, the researchers noted. Previous research has found that time-restricted eating improves several cardiometabolic health measures, such as blood pressure, blood glucose and cholesterol levels.

“Restricting daily eating time to a short period, such as 8 hours per day, has gained popularity in recent years as a way to lose weight and improve heart health,” said senior study author Victor Wenze Zhong, Ph.D., a professor and chair of the department of epidemiology and biostatistics at the Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine in Shanghai, China. “However, the long-term health effects of time-restricted eating, including risk of death from any cause or cardiovascular disease, are unknown.”

In this study, researchers investigated the potential long-term health impact of following an 8-hour time-restricted eating plan. They reviewed information about dietary patterns for participants in the annual 2003-2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES) in comparison to data about people who died in the U.S., from 2003 through December 2019, from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Death Index database.

The analysis found:

• People who followed a pattern of eating all of their food across less than 8 hours per day had a 91% higher risk of death due to cardiovascular disease.
• The increased risk of cardiovascular death was also seen in people living with heart disease or cancer.
• Among people with existing cardiovascular disease, an eating duration of no less than 8 but less than 10 hours per day was also associated with a 66% higher risk of death from heart disease or stroke.
• Time-restricted eating did not reduce the overall risk of death from any cause.
• An eating duration of more than 16 hours per day was associated with a lower risk of cancer mortality among people with cancer.

“We were surprised to find that people who followed an 8-hour, time-restricted eating schedule were more likely to die from cardiovascular disease. Even though this type of diet has been popular due to its potential short-term benefits, our research clearly shows that, compared with a typical eating time range of 12-16 hours per day, a shorter eating duration was not associated with living longer,” Zhong said.

“It’s crucial for patients, particularly those with existing heart conditions or cancer, to be aware of the association between an 8-hour eating window and increased risk of cardiovascular death. Our study’s findings encourage a more cautious, personalized approach to dietary recommendations, ensuring that they are aligned with an individual’s health status and the latest scientific evidence,” he continued. “Although the study identified an association between an 8-hour eating window and cardiovascular death, this does not mean that time-restricted eating caused cardiovascular death.”
Study details and background:

• The study included approximately 20,000 adults in the U.S. with an average age of 49 years.
• Study participants were followed for a median length of 8 years and maximum length of 17 years.
• The study included data for NHANES participants who were at least 20 years old at enrollment, between 2003-2018, and had completed two 24-hour dietary recall questionnaires within the first year of enrollment.
• Approximately half of the participants self-identified as men, and half self-identified as women. 73.3% of the participants self-identified as non-Hispanic white adults, 11% self-identified as Hispanic adults, 8% self-identified as non-Hispanic Black adults and 6.9% of adults self-identified as another racial category, including mixed-race adults and adults of other non-Hispanic races.

The study’s limitations included its reliance on self-reported dietary information, which may be affected by participant’s memory or recall and may not accurately assess typical eating patterns. Factors that may also play a role in health, outside of daily duration of eating and cause of death, were not included in the analysis.

Future research may examine the biological mechanisms that underly the associations between a time-restricted eating schedule and adverse cardiovascular outcomes, and whether these findings are similar for people who live in other parts of the world, the authors noted.

“Overall, this study suggests that time-restricted eating may have short-term benefits but long-term adverse effects. When the study is presented in its entirety, it will be interesting and helpful to learn more of the details of the analysis,” said Christopher D. Gardner, Ph.D., FAHA, the Rehnborg Farquhar Professor of Medicine at Stanford University in Stanford, California, and chair of the writing committee for the Association’s 2023 scientific statement, Popular Dietary Patterns: Alignment with American Heart Association 2021 Dietary Guidance. 

“One of those details involves the nutrient quality of the diets typical of the different subsets of participants. Without this information, it cannot be determined if nutrient density might be an alternate explanation to the findings that currently focus on the window of time for eating. Second, it needs to be emphasized that categorization into the different windows of time-restricted eating was determined on the basis of just two days of dietary intake,” he said.

“It will also be critical to see a comparison of demographics and baseline characteristics across the groups that were classified into the different time-restricted eating windows – for example, was the group with the shortest time-restricted eating window unique compared to people who followed other eating schedules,  in terms of weight, stress, traditional cardiometabolic risk factors or other factors associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes? This additional information will help to better understand the potential independent contribution of the short time-restricted eating pattern reported in this interesting and provocative abstract.”

Co-authors, their disclosures and funding sources are listed in the abstract.

Statements and conclusions of studies that are presented at the American Heart Association’s scientific meetings are solely those of the study authors and do not necessarily reflect the Association’s policy or position. The Association makes no representation or guarantee as to their accuracy or reliability. Abstracts presented at the Association’s scientific meetings are not peer-reviewed, rather, they are curated by independent review panels and are considered based on the potential to add to the diversity of scientific issues and views discussed at the meeting. The findings are considered preliminary until published as a full manuscript in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.

The Association receives funding primarily from individuals; foundations and corporations (including pharmaceutical, device manufacturers and other companies) also make donations and fund specific Association programs and events. The Association has strict policies to prevent these relationships from influencing the science content. Revenues from pharmaceutical and biotech companies, device manufacturers and health insurance providers and the Association’s overall financial information are here. (American Heart Association)

The post Intermittent fasting tied to 91% higher risk of cardiovascular death: Study appeared first on Newswire.

Covid vaccines from companies like Pfizer, Moderna and AstraZeneca were linked to rare occurrences of heart, brain and blood disorders, a recent peer-reviewed study found, though experts say the risks of developing Covid-19 greatly outweigh the risks of getting vaccinated.

KEY FACTS

• Researchers from the Global Vaccine Data Network—a research arm of the World Health Organization—looked at expected versus observed rates of 13 medical conditions that were considered “adverse events of special interest” in a study population of 99 million vaccinated people eight countries, making it the largest Covid vaccine study to date.
• Rare cases of myocarditis—inflammation of the heart—were identified in the first, second and third doses of Pfizer-BioNTech’s and Moderna’s mRNA vaccines: The highest rate was seen after the second Moderna dose (6.1 times the expected rate of cases), according to the study published in the journal Vaccine.
• Another heart condition called pericarditis had a 6.9-fold increased risk in those who took a third dose of AstraZeneca’s viral-vector vaccine, while a first and fourth dose of Moderna’s vaccine had a 1.7-fold and 2.6-fold increased risk, respectively.
• There was a 2.5-times greater risk of developing the rare autoimmune disorder Guillain-Barre syndrome among those who took AstraZeneca’s vaccine compared to the rate researchers expected, and a 3.2-times greater risk of getting blood clots among the same population.
• There was a 3.8-times greater risk of developing the neurological disorder acute disseminated encephalomyelitis after the Moderna vaccine was administered, and a 2.2-fold increased risk after AstraZeneca’s vaccine, according to the study.

BIG NUMBER

13.5 billion. That’s how many Covid vaccines have been administered worldwide since the start of the Covid pandemic, according to science research organization Our World in Data. Around 71% of the world’s population has received at least one dose of a Covid vaccine.

CRUCIAL QUOTE

“The odds of all of these adverse events is still much, much higher when infected with SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19), so getting vaccinated is still by far the safer choice,” CEO of biotechnology company Centivax Jacob Glanville, who is not involved in the study, told Forbes.

KEY BACKGROUND

Covid vaccines are meant to prevent severe infection, and studies have indicated Moderna, Pfizer-BioNTech and AstraZeneca’s vaccines are effective at preventing severe illnesses, hospitalizations and death. Meanwhile, the chances of having a neurological event after a Covid infection were up to 617-fold higher than following COVID vaccination, which suggests “the benefits of vaccination substantially outweigh the risks,” according to the Vaccine study researchers. The risk of developing myocarditis is higher post-Covid infection than after getting a Covid vaccine, according to Akiko Iwasaki, PhD, professor of Immunobiology at Yale University. Myocarditis risk after the second dose of a Covid vaccine is 35.9 per 100,000 people, compared to a 64.9 per 100,000 risk after Covid infection. The risk of developing Guillain-Barre syndrome after Covid infection was six times greater, and the risk of developing it after vaccination was 0.41 times greater than the control group, according to a 2023 study published in Neurology. While most Americans have received at least one Covid-19 vaccine shot, uptake for booster shots that are updated to combat new coronavirus strains has remained slow.

TANGENT

The rapidly spreading Covid variant JN.1 caused an uptick in cases during the fall and winter months, causing a resurgence of the tripledemic—when cases of Covid, flu and respiratory syncytial virus simultaneously increase. JN.1 made up 96.4% of all cases in the two week period ending in Feb. 17. However, Covid cases (down 0.6%) and deaths (down 6.9%) are declining—though hospitalizations are up 0.8%—signaling an end to the tripledemic. The variant was classified as a “variant of interest”—meaning it’s spreading in a way that may pose “an emerging risk to global public health”—by the World Health Organization in December. JN.1 is an offshoot of the highly mutated Pirola (BA.2.86) virus that some experts worried wouldn’t be protected against the updated monovalent Covid boosters, which specifically target XBB variants. However, vaccine makers ensured their shots provided some protection. (Forbes)

The post Covid vaccines linked to small increase in Heart & Brain disorders – New Study appeared first on Newswire.