Posts Tagged ‘cancer’

Increasing Rates of Some Cancers Associated with Obesity

January 28th, 2012

Increasing rates of some cancers may be associated with obesity. Cancers with increasing incidence trends in… [CA Cancer J Clin. 2012] – PubMed – NCBI

Staggering New Cost Projections for Obesity

November 22nd, 2011

Simulation model predicts increased health care costs and utilization in rising obese populations in the United States and the United Kingdom, predicting 65 million more obese in the US and 11 million more in the UK, meaning 6 to 8.5 million cases of diabetes, 5.7 to 7.3 million cases of heart disease, 492,000 to 669,000 additional cases of cancer in the US and UK combined. The combined health care costs increases are $48-66 billion per year in the US and by £1·9-2  billion  per year in the United Kingdom. Health and economic burden of the projected obesity t… [Lancet. 2011] – PubMed – NCBI

Cancer and Obesity Explored

November 3rd, 2011

The Institute of Medicine’s National Cancer Policy Forum this week convened a two-day workshop, “The Role of Obesity in Cancer Survival and Recurrance.” So this is a good opportunity to re-visit the relationship between these two deadly diseases. Susan Gapstur of the American Cancer Society noted the growing list of cancers associated with obesity. For men, these include cancers of the colon, esophagus, kidney, colorectum, pancreas, gallbladder and liver. Women are affected by the same cancers as well as of the endometrium and postmenopausal breast cancer. Evidence is accumulating for an association with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, ovarian cancer in women and aggressive prostate in men. Obesity, she pointed out, is not the second (to tobacco) leading risk factor of cancer. Ominously, she pointed out we do not know what the health effects will be for the children now obesity who will obese for a lifetime.

Pamela J. Goodwin of the University of Toronto explored potential mechanisms in the progression to cancer including inflammation, adipokines, hyperinsulinemia, diabetes/diabetes drugs and sex steroids. She pointed to studies showing reductions in cancer risk with intentional weight loss of 20 pounds or more. Intentional weight loss and in… [Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2003] – PubMed – NCBI and reduction in the relative risks of death and of cancer following bariatric surgery. Metabolic surgery and cancer: protective effects of b… [Cancer. 2011] – PubMed – NCBI.  Specifically, she showed the positive effect of intentional weight loss on breast cancer risk   Does intentional weight loss reduce canc… [Diabetes Obes Metab. 2011] – PubMed – NCBI and the impact of physical activity on improvements in insulin in breast cancer survivors Impact of a mixed strength and endurance exerci… [J Clin Oncol. 2008] – PubMed – NCBI.

Bruce Wolfe of the Oregon and Science University and a bariatric surgeon reminded the participants that the Swedish Obesity Study found the reduction in mortality after bariatric surgery was greater for cancer than for cardiovascular events Effects of bariatric surgery on mortality in Sw… [N Engl J Med. 2007] – PubMed – NCBI. In a Utah study, bariatric surgery reduced deaths from cancer by 60% compared to a 48% reduction in cardiovascular events. Long-term mortality after gastric bypass surgery. [N Engl J Med. 2007] – PubMed – NCBI

Rachel Ballard-Barbash of the National Cancer Institute, who has been a leader in exploring the obesity-cancer connection for many years, moved the discussion to look at the co-morbid conditions of obesity and their relationship to cancer mortality, including renal disease, congestive heart failure, cerebrovascular disease, citing A refined comorbidity measurement algorithm fo… [Ann Epidemiol. 2007] – PubMed – NCBI

Patricia Ganz of the UCLA Schools of Medicine picked up the point and explained that about half of all deaths of breast cancer survivors are due to causes other than breast cancer. She recommended prevention of weight gain and/or weight loss in those breast cancer survivors who are obese. 

Thomas Wadden described the non-surgical approaches to weight loss used in the Diabetes Prevention Program and the LOOK Ahead study and the contribution of intensive behavioral counseling to reduction in comorbid conditions associated with obesity

Some of the workshop’s presentations are on-line at Workshop on the Role of Obesity in Cancer Survival and Recurrence – Institute of Medicine. Watch that site for future information on a publication from the workshop.

IOM Announces Workshop on Obesity and Cancer Survival

September 5th, 2011

The Institute of Medicine will be holding a workshop on the effect of obesity on cancer survival in Washington, DC on October 31- November 1, 2011. Information is available at Workshop on the Role of Obesity in Cancer Survival and Recurrence – Institute of Medicine

The Obesity Society Meeting-Day Two

October 26th, 2009

Today’s sessions of the Obesity Society’s annual scientific meeting covered a lot of ground.  I think the most interesting  was the session on the relationship of cancer and obesity organized by Ruth Ballard-Barash of the National Cancer Institute and Ted Adams of the University of Utah School of Medicine. Christine Friedenreich, Ph.D. of the Alberta Health Services presented a comprehensive overview of the association between specific cancers and obesity, reviewing the published literature for each cancer. At the end, she proposed that obesity was responsible for about 20% of all cancers. If (in an ideal world) obesity levels could be resolved to normal BMIs, she speculated 1.6 million deaths due to cancer could be saved, 2.2 million new cancer cases could be avoided and we could avoid having 5 million persons living with cancer.

Other key presentations addressed the powerful influence of sleep and circadian rhythms, or the lack thereof, on rising rates of obesity. This led one presenter to suggest that we should have our biggest meals at breakfast and gradually reduce caloric input throughout the day to a light salad at dinner. Rena Wing reported on the 4 year results of the Look Ahead Trial which provided persuasive information for intensive lifestyle counseling over less intensive interventions in reductions in body fat and related metabolic indicators.

Sometimes these meetings morph into abstract, perhaps irrelevant, discussions of minutia   among researchers.  At other times, you feel you are witnessing an emerging new insight into obesity and its effects. So it was today in a session, Is There Good and Bad Body Fat? chaired by Richard Bergman, editor of Obesity, and including prominent researchers, Tamara Harris, Michael Jensen (who readers may remember from our conference at the 2008 Republican National Convention) and Sam Klein. Their task was to unravel which fat was bad and which was good. Their presentations covered detailed, precise research into these tangled issues.  Why are there some obese individuals who were, nevertheless, metabolically normal? Why did bariatric surgery resolve diabetes in some cases but not others?  Why does weight loss resolve some metabolic disorders but not others? For many in the audience, these are the cutting edge questions – today – to understand the metabolic sequela of weight gain, insulin resistance, diabetes and cardiovascular disease. The presenters provided exciting new data interspersed with a camaraderie and jocularity which is the realm of highly accomplished and competitive scientists who admire each other’s works but are not going to give them an inch. Bottom line: adipose cell build up in the liver may explain many of the inconsistencies in present views of the obesity-insulin resistance-metabolic disorders axis. But, build up of adipose cell in the liver is hard to measure given today’s technology and bio-statistical resources. On the other hand, there may well be another factor, not yet identified (kind of like dark matter in astrophysics), which modulates the effects of obesity, insulin resistance and metabolic disorders. The large, enthusiastic audience no doubt left with many possible research proposals in mind to unravel this conundrum. Stay tuned, as they say, “we wait with bated breath,” for the next insight.

A Diet for the New Administration

September 27th, 2009

December 30, 2008

By Morgan Downey

At this time of year, millions of Americans are hoping the new Administration will solve our seemingly intractable problems at home and abroad. Millions are also hoping to lose weight in the New Year. The two are not unrelated.

Over the past three decades, obesity has increased among all segments of the population, in the United States and abroad. Obesity is now recognized as the fuel behind many major health problems from cancer to diabetes to heart disease, and a significant cause of increasing health care utilization and health care costs.

While this recognition has increased among both Republicans and Democrats (for the first time, both parties recognized obesity in their 2008 party platforms), changing public policy has not caught up with the problem. Under President George W. Bush, Medicare did undo its policy that obesity was not a disease and did expand coverage of surgery for the treatment of obesity. There have been modest increases in the research and prevention budgets at the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But by and large, the efforts of the last eight years have been largely educational: tell people they should lose weight, eat more nutritiously, and exercise more.

Duh! We get it. And it doesn’t work. Frankly, other than bariatric surgery, nothing works very well to lose significant amounts for a long period of time. There simply is not one ‘fix’ that will reverse this disturbing trend.

So here is some advice to the incoming Administration. It should be noted that many appointees named so far have a solid exposure to obesity from a public policy perspective, including former Senator Tom Daschle, nominee for Secretary of Health and Human Services, Peter Orszag, named to head the Office of Management and Budget, Governor Bill Richardson, nominated for Secretary of Commerce, and Melody Barnes, incoming chief of domestic policy at the White House.

Universal health insurance is often put forward as the panacea for all ills. However, Democrats may have to learn that expanding health insurance coverage alone does not translate to a healthier population, especially if obesity continues to increase among children and adolescents. Truth be told, we do not have adequate medical interventions to affect the rates of obesity and its effects. So, if we do not know how to truly prevent obesity or create a long term treatment, what should a new Administration do? Basically, it should focus on how to create the conditions where it is more likely than not that we will find effective strategies for prevention and treatment in the future.

  1. Being a role model is not enough. It’s been noted that George Bush and Barack Obama share a passion for physical activity. Unfortunately, the habits of the chief executive do not translate to population changes. And then there is the smoking thing. Being a role model is not an excuse for inadequate policies.
  2. Make someone responsible for obesity policy development. Right now there is no one tasked at the upper levels of the U.S. Government with dealing with obesity. True, periodically the heads of different agencies give a speech, start a new website or create a new task force but little happens because so many do so little with scant coordination.
  3. Prepare to spend some money. For one of the most significant health problems in the country, the federal government spends vastly less than on obesity than other conditions. Research, prevention and treatment costs for diabetes and heart disease, to name but two, swamp comparable figures for obesity. The federal government is spending more on getting TV converters boxes in US homes than the entire NIH research budget on obesity.
  4. Do not just focus on childhood obesity. While childhood obesity is critical, remember that the population between 7 and 16 spans only 9 years out of a lifetime. Look at obesity over the lifetime and look for relevant interventions. Support childhood prevention programs but require that they have a competent evaluation method so we will know what is working and what is not.
  5. Do focus on research. Perhaps 90% of what we know about obesity has been learned since the discovery of leptin in 1994. Too many people believe that we know everything we need to know about obesity and do not need any more research. That’s not true. A great deal is known but there are many more questions than answers. Scientific credibility on issues around body weight is sorely needed. Every hour on television another weight loss program or product is hyped as being based on doctor’s advice or scientific study. What can help on both fronts is for the Administration to create a National Institute of Obesity Research at the National Institutes of Health. A new entity like this can reenergize researchers on obesity, can more closely coordinate the many disparate programs across NIH, provide leadership to other federal agencies, states and local governments and provide much needed focus on the social and economic impacts of obesity. Furthermore, a director who is articulate can help lead policymakers and the public away from harmful and dangerous products and keep a focus on developing effective interventions. The NIH bureaucracy will oppose “disease specific” research but their interests should not trump the public health needs and the best use of taxpayer dollars.
  6. As part of your health care reform package, remove the bias against drugs for weight loss in the Medicaid statute and change the exclusion of these drugs under Medicare Part D. Then have the Food and Drug Administration revisit its risk/benefit views of drugs to treat obesity. There are few fans of pharmaceutical companies in a Democratic Congress and Administration and there are even fewer who favor drugs to treat obesity. Nonetheless, there is a huge treatment gap. We have more and more effective surgical options, one over-the-counter FDA approved pill, a couple of tried medicines, commercial plans and self-help. What we do not have are the drug treatment options we have for high cholesterol, hypertension or diabetes. Recently, major pharmaceutical companies such as Merck, Pfizer, Solvay and Sanofi-Aventis have dropped or cut back on their programs to develop drugs for obesity. There are two reasons. First, insurance companies will not reimburse for most obesity treatments, including counseling, drugs and surgery. For the pharmaceutical industry, it just did not make economic sense to invest in drugs which were not going to be reimbursed. This is where leadership by Medicaid and Medicare is critical. If these programs support obesity products, private insurance may follow. This is in the government’s long term interest because insurers can avoid treating or preventing obesity knowing that the big effects, like diabetes and heart disease will not be seen until later in life, when Medicare will become the payor. Second, many involved in obesity drug development feel, rightly or wrongly, that the Food and Drug Administration is so risk-averse that they simply cannot afford the long and expensive trials necessary to meet the rising bar of safety. A National Institute of Obesity Research can help shape clinical trials needed by the FDA and speed the process along.
  7. Look to multiply your opportunities. For example, you can use the public works part of the economic stimulus package to construct new gyms in schools, sidewalks, playgrounds, green spaces and biking/walking trails to encourage more physical activity.
  8. Let the states experiment with taxes and proposals like displaying caloric content in restaurants. Vending machines, non-diet soft drinks, high-fat foods have all come under fire in recent years for contributing to the obesity epidemic. The problem is that these products still only contribute a fraction to an individual’s total caloric intake. But no one is sure that they won’t be replaced by other calories. Likewise, there will be voices to restrict food advertising to children through the federal government’s regulatory powers. Use your National Institute of Obesity Research to design evaluation studies so that there is an objective review to see if these policies will work.
  9. Take some leadership internationally. The United States has a long history of involvement in global health issues, such as HIV/AIDs. However, very little is done on the federal level to learn from other countries’ experiences and to help shape global patterns of eating and physical activity.
  10. Avoid the single fix ideas. The obesity field is full of good advice and scant evidence. Focusing on a single fix, such a TV advertising, agricultural subsidies or sweetened beverage may consume a great amount of political resources without producing the outcome you seek.

The obesity epidemic is more likely than not to continue to grow over the next four to eight years. However, the new Administration can position the United States for meaningful change if it takes its time and devotes attention to organizing the effort. With any luck, we can make future New Year’s resolutions more likely to be successful.

Downey Fact Sheet 2 – Quick Facts

September 27th, 2009
The Downey Obesity Report

The Downey Obesity Report

Printable PDF

ADULT OBESITY

The adult obesity rates have risen dramatically from 1960 to today; rates of overweight (BMI >30) have doubled, rates of obesity (BMI 30-39.9) have nearly tripled and rates of extreme or morbid obesity (BMI >40) have nearly increased seven fold.

ADULT (age 20-74) Prevalence 1

Overweight (BMI 25-30) Percentage

1960-1962 31.5%

2005-2006 33%

Obese (BMI>30)

1960-1962 13.4%

2005-2006 35.1%

Extreme or Morbid Obese( BMI>40)

1960-1962 0.9%

2005-2006 6.2%

The rates of obesity only tell half the story. During this period, the total US population has also increased. Therefore, the raw numbers of Americans affected have also increased. Looking at the numbers of people affected, the overweight population has doubled, the obese population has increased 5 fold and the population with extreme or morbid obesity as increased by a factor of nearly 12!

Number of Americans Overweight in 1960: 56.5 million

Number of Americans Overweight in 2006: 94.5 million

Number of Americans Obese in 1960: 24 million

Number of Americans Obese in 2006:
40 million

Number of American with extreme or morbid obesity in 1960:
1.6 million

Number of Americans with extreme or morbid obesity in 2006: 18.6 million

Since 1960-61 to 2006, the number of American adults who became obese or extremely obese*: 61.1 million

Average number per year: 1.3 million

Average number per month: 110,779

Average number per day: 3,693

Average number per hour: 153

Average increase per minute: 2.5

Since 1960-61 to 2006, the number of American adults who became  extremely obese*: 11 million

Average number per year: 240,217 

Average number per month: 20,018

Average number per day: 667

Average number per hour: 27

Adolescents Obesity age 12-19 3

Percent overweight/obese 2005-2006 18%

Young adult Obesity
Ages 18-29

Percent obese 1971-1974 8%

Percent obese 2005 24%

Childhood 2

Ages 6-11 15%

Ages 2-5 11%

Year at which each group will reach 80% obesity 4

All 2072

Men 2077

Women
2058

African American Women 2035

African American Men 2079

Mexican American Women 2073

Mexican American Men 20 91

White Women 2082

White Men
2073

Adipose Tissue (Fat Cells) 5

Age at which typical body has acquired its full number of fat cells: 13

Number of fat cells in average American Adult: 23-65 billion

Number of fat cells in persons with morbid obesity: 37-237 billion

Number of fat cells lost in weight-loss efforts: 0

By Julie Snider for the Downey Obesity Report

By Julie Snider for the Downey Obesity Report

 

Daily Calories Needed and Available 6

Recommended calories per day by typical American adult:

Men 2,400 to 2,800

Women 2,000 to 2,200

Mean (meaning half were above and half below) adult daily calorie intake per day 7 :

Men

1971 2,450

2001-2004 2,593

Women

1971 1,542

2001-2004 1,886

Percent increase in food available for consumption per person from
1970 to 2003: 16%

Amount of food available for each person increase from
1.67 pounds in 1970 to 1.95 pounds in 2003

Daily caloric intake has grown by 523 calories from 1970 to 2003. Leading the way were fats, oils, grains, vegetables and sugars and sweeteners.

U.S. Government Biomedical Research 8

2008 Budget of National Institutes of Health $29.6 billion

NIH Spending 2008 on selected diseases:

Cancer
$5.6 billion

HIV/AIDS funding $2.9 billion

Cardiovascular Disease
$2.0 billion

Heart Disease $1.2 billion

Obesity
$664 million

U. S. Government Infrastructure on Combating Obesity

Name of coordinator of U.S. global anti-obesity efforts:

(Trick question: no such position exists)

Name of White House coordinator of federal anti-obesity efforts:

(Another trick question: no such position exists)

Name of coordinator of Department of Health and Human Services***anti-obesity efforts:

(No such position exists)

*Calculations were made by taking the CDC prevalence figures for 1960-1962 and 2005-2006and multiplying them against US census data for 1960 and census data for 2006,respectively. See Census Bureau Home Page

**Available in this context means the total US calories available for consumption, less spoilage and waste. See ERS/USDA Data – Food Availability (Per Capita) Data System)

*** Department of Health and Human Services includes the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the Food and Drug Administration, Office of the Surgeon General, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality among others.)

Notes

1. N C H S – Health E Stats – Prevalence of overweight, obesity and exreme obesity among adults: United States, trends 1960-62 through 2005-2006

2. FASTSTATS – Overweight Prevalence

3. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus08.pdf

4. Studies of human adipose tissue. Adipose cell size…[J Clin Invest. 1973] – PubMed Result

5. Will all Americans become overweight or obese? est…[Obesity (Silver Spring). 2008] – PubMed Result. In this estimate, by 2030, 86.3% of adults will be overweight or obese and 51% obese; black women at a level of 96.9% will be the most effected, followed by Mexican-American men (91.1%). By 2048, all American adults would be overweight or obese but black women would reach that milestone by 2034. In children, the authors estimate, rates will nearly double by 2030.

6. http://www.mypyramid.gov/downloads/MyPyramid_Food_Intake_Patterns.pdf

7. http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/November05/pdf/FindingsDHNovember2005.pdf

8. NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tool (RePORT) – Estimates of Funding for Various Research, Condition, and Disease Categories (RCDC)

By Julie Snider for the Downey Obesity Report

By Julie Snider for the Downey Obesity Report

Downey Fact Sheet 7 – Bariatric Surgery

September 27th, 2009

pdficon_smallPrintable PDF

Most chronic diseases, if they have a treatment, can be better addressed at early stages before the disease process has established itself. The longer and more severe the disease, the less effective treatments there are. Obesity does not follow this model. For the most severe cases there is actually a very good and effective intervention ― bariatric surgery. Many studies support surgery as effective in resolving comorbid chronic diseases.

By Julie Snider for the Downey Obesity Report

By Julie Snider for the Downey Obesity Report

In a recent study, bariatric surgery had a significant decrease in the prevalence of 26 of 106 specific diseases and conditions ― about one-fourth. The prevalence of type 2 diabetes, high cholesterol, osteoarthritis and intervertebral disc disorders dropped by about half, hypertension by about one-third and asthma by almost three-quarters within two to four months after surgery. Patients were able to maintain or further decrease the prevalence of these diseases and conditions for up to two years. The impact of morbid obesity and bariatric surgery…[J Occup Environ Med. 2009] – PubMed Result. Recent studies show support for surgery’s role in treating type 2 diabetes. Weight and type 2 diabetes after bariatric surgery…[Am J Med. 2009] – PubMed Result

Increasing technological improvements both in the surgical process and in the devices, such as the adjustable band, can improve outcomes and reduce adverse events (see Meta-analysis: surgical treatment of obesity. [Ann Intern Med. 2005] – PubMed Result)..

A recent study demonstrated bariatric surgery’s effectiveness in reducing the risk of cancer (see http://www.asbs.org/html/pdf/soard_featured_article.pdf). More importantly, the rapid resolution of diabetes following bariatric surgery and before significant weight loss is providing researchers with new avenues to investigate the basic science of obesity and diabetes.

The ability of bariatric surgery to effect a remission of type 2 diabetes was first reported in the 1970s. Subsequent research has increased the evidence for this effect.

One commentator has concluded, “The most effective way to induce a remission of type 2 diabetes at present is not pharmacologic, but surgical. Bariatric surgery, particularly when gastric banding is effectively applied, results in rapid and massive weight loss that reduces insulin resistance. Roux-en-Y procedures, however, may act via the entero-pancreatic (incretin) hormone axis, causing diabetes to remit even before weight loss. However bariatric surgery has adverse effects and complications, as it enforces a major alteration of lifestyle. Surgically reduced stomach volume restricts how much food the individual can ingest without significant discomfort. Long-established eating habits are necessarily changed.” (Saudek, CD, Can Diabetes Be Cured? Potential Biological and Mechanical Approaches, JAMA, April 15, 2009, 301:15:1588-1589)

Another paper estimated that as many as 14,310 diabetes-related deaths might be prevented by bariatric surgery over five years. (Purnell JA, Flum DR, Bariatric Surgery and Diabetes, Who Should be Offered the Option of Remission, JAMA, April 15, 2009, 301;15:1593-1595.)

Recent data shows a mortality rate as safe or safer than gallbladder surgery when performed in a Center of Excellence. (see Pratt, G.M., McLees, B., W.J. Pories. The ASMBS Bariatric Surgery Centers of Excellence Program: A Blueprint for Quality Improvement. Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases, 2, 2006. pp. 497-503).

Bariatric Surgery Centers of Excellence have been established identify and track long term outcomes. See Surgical Review Corporation