1.
Dietary Patterns and Interventions to Alleviate Chronic Pain.
Dragan, S, Șerban, MC, Damian, G, Buleu, F, Valcovici, M, Christodorescu, R
Nutrients. 2020;12(9)
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
A common symptom of many conditions is pain, with chronic pain being a significant cause of emotional distress and disability. Chronic pain is associated with a pro-inflammatory state. Diet interventions can be a helpful tool for the management of chronic pain and its associated inflammation. The increase of nutrient-dense, antioxidant-rich foods and the reduction of pro-inflammatory foods, as well as correcting nutrient deficiencies, all appear to have a positive effect on pain. Whilst previous research on the impact of diet therapy in chronic pain yielded varied results, the authors of this article sought to analyse the most important literature to gain more clarity and direction for future research. After a detailed introduction on the different types of pain, the article summarises the outcome of a range of dietary interventions for chronic pain management. These include calorie restriction and fasting, polyunsaturated fatty acids, low-fat plant-based diets, high protein diet, elimination diet, antioxidants and vitamins including vitamin D, fruits and fibres, prebiotics and probiotics. In the discussion, a helpful table presents the key results organised by type of pain (chronic musculoskeletal pain, chronic headache, neuropathic pain, chronic abdominal pain) and the clinical interventions that showed positive outcomes. In conclusion, diet interventions could be part of a multidisciplinary approach in the management of chronic pain. This article yields an oversight of the possible interventions to consider when supporting people with different types of chronic pain.
Abstract
Pain is one of the main problems for modern society and medicine, being the most common symptom described by almost all patients. When pain becomes chronic, the life of the patients is dramatically affected, being associated with significant emotional distress and/or functional disability. A complex biopsychosocial evaluation is necessary to better understand chronic pain, where good results can be obtained through interconnected biological, psychological, and social factors. The aim of this study was to find the most relevant articles existent in the PubMed database, one of the most comprehensive databases for medical literature, comprising dietary patterns to alleviate chronic pain. Through a combined search using the keywords "chronic pain" and "diet" limited to the last 10 years we obtained 272 results containing the types of diets used for chronic pain published in the PubMed database. Besides classical and alternative methods of treatment described in literature, it was observed that different diets are also a valid solution, due to many components with antioxidant and anti-inflammatory qualities capable to influence chronic pain and to improve the quality of life. Thirty-eight clinical studies and randomized controlled trials are analyzed, in an attempt to characterize present-day dietary patterns and interventions to alleviate chronic pain.
2.
Green tea (Camellia sinensis) for the prevention of cancer.
Filippini, T, Malavolti, M, Borrelli, F, Izzo, AA, Fairweather-Tait, SJ, Horneber, M, Vinceti, M
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews. 2020;3(3):CD005004
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Brewed tea is obtained from the infusion of leaves and buds of Camellia sinensis. The most consumed types of tea are green and black tea. Due to the high content of antioxidant compounds, a great deal of attention has been given to green tea regarding the possible prevention of chronic diseases and cancer, as well as possible beneficial effects on cardiovascular disease, insulin sensitivity and lipid profiles. The main aim of this review was to assess the association between green tea consumption and the risk of developing cancer in epidemiologic studies. This study is an update of a previously published Cochrane review based on studies in which participants consumed green tea orally, either as drinkable tea or as extracts. One hundred and forty-two epidemiological studies of experimental and nonexperimental design were included with a total of 1,100,000 participants. Findings yielded inconsistent results for the effect of green tea consumption on cancer risk, despite some indications of a beneficial effect of green tea on a few site-specific cancers. Authors conclude that the epidemiological evidence appears to be still inadequate to support a beneficial effect of green tea on cancer risk.
Abstract
BACKGROUND This review is an update of a previously published review in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2009, Issue 3).Tea is one of the most commonly consumed beverages worldwide. Teas from the plant Camellia sinensis can be grouped into green, black and oolong tea, and drinking habits vary cross-culturally. C sinensis contains polyphenols, one subgroup being catechins. Catechins are powerful antioxidants, and laboratory studies have suggested that these compounds may inhibit cancer cell proliferation. Some experimental and nonexperimental epidemiological studies have suggested that green tea may have cancer-preventative effects. OBJECTIVES To assess possible associations between green tea consumption and the risk of cancer incidence and mortality as primary outcomes, and safety data and quality of life as secondary outcomes. SEARCH METHODS We searched eligible studies up to January 2019 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of previous reviews and included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA We included all epidemiological studies, experimental (i.e. randomised controlled trials (RCTs)) and nonexperimental (non-randomised studies, i.e. observational studies with both cohort and case-control design) that investigated the association of green tea consumption with cancer risk or quality of life, or both. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two or more review authors independently applied the study criteria, extracted data and assessed methodological quality of studies. We summarised the results according to diagnosis of cancer type. MAIN RESULTS In this review update, we included in total 142 completed studies (11 experimental and 131 nonexperimental) and two ongoing studies. This is an additional 10 experimental and 85 nonexperimental studies from those included in the previous version of the review. Eleven experimental studies allocated a total of 1795 participants to either green tea extract or placebo, all demonstrating an overall high methodological quality based on 'Risk of bias' assessment. For incident prostate cancer, the summary risk ratio (RR) in the green tea-supplemented participants was 0.50 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18 to 1.36), based on three studies and involving 201 participants (low-certainty evidence). The summary RR for gynaecological cancer was 1.50 (95% CI 0.41 to 5.48; 2 studies, 1157 participants; low-certainty evidence). No evidence of effect of non-melanoma skin cancer emerged (summary RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.92; 1 study, 1075 participants; low-certainty evidence). In addition, adverse effects of green tea extract intake were reported, including gastrointestinal disorders, elevation of liver enzymes, and, more rarely, insomnia, raised blood pressure and skin/subcutaneous reactions. Consumption of green tea extracts induced a slight improvement in quality of life, compared with placebo, based on three experimental studies. In nonexperimental studies, we included over 1,100,000 participants from 46 cohort studies and 85 case-control studies, which were on average of intermediate to high methodological quality based on Newcastle-Ottawa Scale 'Risk of bias' assessment. When comparing the highest intake of green tea with the lowest, we found a lower overall cancer incidence (summary RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.07), based on three studies, involving 52,479 participants (low-certainty evidence). Conversely, we found no association between green tea consumption and cancer-related mortality (summary RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.07), based on eight studies and 504,366 participants (low-certainty evidence). For most of the site-specific cancers we observed a decreased RR in the highest category of green tea consumption compared with the lowest one. After stratifying the analysis according to study design, we found strongly conflicting results for some cancer sites: oesophageal, prostate and urinary tract cancer, and leukaemia showed an increased RR in cohort studies and a decreased RR or no difference in case-control studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Overall, findings from experimental and nonexperimental epidemiological studies yielded inconsistent results, thus providing limited evidence for the beneficial effect of green tea consumption on the overall risk of cancer or on specific cancer sites. Some evidence of a beneficial effect of green tea at some cancer sites emerged from the RCTs and from case-control studies, but their methodological limitations, such as the low number and size of the studies, and the inconsistencies with the results of cohort studies, limit the interpretability of the RR estimates. The studies also indicated the occurrence of several side effects associated with high intakes of green tea. In addition, the majority of included studies were carried out in Asian populations characterised by a high intake of green tea, thus limiting the generalisability of the findings to other populations. Well conducted and adequately powered RCTs would be needed to draw conclusions on the possible beneficial effects of green tea consumption on cancer risk.
3.
A Systematic Review of Organic Versus Conventional Food Consumption: Is There a Measurable Benefit on Human Health?
Vigar, V, Myers, S, Oliver, C, Arellano, J, Robinson, S, Leifert, C
Nutrients. 2019;12(1)
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
The demand for organic products has risen rapidly over the last decades. The reasons why consumers may favour organic over conventional products are varied. They may be for personal health and wellbeing, environmental considerations, animal welfare or perceived higher nutritional profile - which is true for some, but not all components. While the long-term safety of pesticide consumption through conventional food production has been questioned, organic foods clearly show lower levels of toxic metabolites, like heavy metals and synthetic fertilizer and pesticide residues. This systematic review aimed to assess the current evidence of organic diet consumption and human health compared to conventionally produced foods. Included were 35 papers on clinical trials and observational studies. The clinical trials studied pesticide and phytochemical excretion, antioxidant capacity, body composition, lipids and inflammatory markers. The observational studies were focused on fertility, foetal and childhood development, pregnancy, lactation and levels of pesticides in children and adults, as well as nutritional biomarkers and cancer risk in adults. An increased intake of organic produce in long-term studies appeared to reduce the incidence of infertility, birth defects, allergies, middle ear infection, pre-eclampsia, metabolic syndrome, high BMI, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Organic intake was also linked to reduced urinary levels of organophosphorus pesticides and herbicides. Yet, the author highlighted that organic consumers are more likely to be health conscious, physically active, eat a more plant-based diet, have higher education levels and income, and therefore are not representative of the general population. They also argue that the possible benefits from an organic diet may be partially due to the quality and composition of the diet rather than a direct effect of organic food consumption. Whereby a growing number of findings demonstrate the health benefits of organic food consumption, according to the authors, the current evidence does not yield a solid and definitive answer.
Abstract
The current review aims to systematically assess the evidence related to human health outcomes when an organic diet is consumed in comparison to its conventional counterpart. Relevant databases were searched for articles published to January 2019. Clinical trials and observational research studies were included where they provided comparative results on direct or indirect health outcomes. Thirty-five papers met the criteria for inclusion in the review. Few clinical trials assessed direct improvements in health outcomes associated with organic food consumption; most assessed either differences in pesticide exposure or other indirect measures. Significant positive outcomes were seen in longitudinal studies where increased organic intake was associated with reduced incidence of infertility, birth defects, allergic sensitisation, otitis media, pre-eclampsia, metabolic syndrome, high BMI, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The current evidence base does not allow a definitive statement on the health benefits of organic dietary intake. However, a growing number of important findings are being reported from observational research linking demonstrable health benefits with organic food consumption. Future clinical research should focus on using long-term whole-diet substitution with certified organic interventions as this approach is more likely to determine whether or not true measurable health benefits exist.