Amino acid supplement may boost exercise benefits for older adults

 

Feeling tired can make exercise a challenge, especially with age. A new pilot clinical trial at UT Health San Antonio suggests that supplementing with branched-chain amino acids (BCAAs) alongside an exercise program may help reduce fatigue, improve strength, and ease symptoms of depression for older adults.

“We’ve been studying for years how inflammation contributes to functional decline with normal aging or during disease,” said Jason O’Connor, PhD, associate professor in the Department of Pharmacology at The University of Texas at San Antonio and the study’s co-author. “Among the many factors implicated in this process, the metabolism of amino acids appears to play an important role.”

For many people in later life, maintaining an active lifestyle is easier said than done. Physical and mental fatigue can make regular exercise feel out of reach. This new study indicates that adding BCAAs to an exercise routine may help counter both forms of fatigue, enhancing endurance, energy and mood.

Published in the August 2025 issue of Dietetics, the research found that participants who combined a BCAA supplement with an eight-week exercise program experienced notable improvements compared with those who exercised alone. Participants who received BCAAs reported a 45% reduction in fatigue and a 29% decrease in depressive symptoms, along with modest gains in strength and endurance.

BCAAs, which include leucine, isoleucine, and valine, are essential amino acids that support both muscle and brain health. They may reduce mental fatigue, aid in muscle recovery, and activate pathways that prevent muscle breakdown.

The double-blind, placebo-controlled study involved 20 adults with obesity, averaging 70 years of age, who participated in an eight-week regimen of moderate aerobic exercise and strength training. While exercise alone produced modest benefits, combining it with BCAA supplementation led to greater physical performance and improved mood outcomes.

O’Connor and his team plan to expand their research through larger clinical trials, including studies focused on aging veterans. They are also examining the biological connections between BCAA supplementation, inflammation, physical performance and mental health.

While early results are promising, researchers caution additional information is needed before recommending BCAA supplementation more broadly. Individuals should speak with their healthcare provider before starting any new exercise or supplement regimen.

To read the full story, click here.

Ultra-processed food consumption linked to declines in physical function in older adults

A new study published in Nutrients found that a higher intake of ultra-processed foods was not associated with the development of frailty among middle-aged and older adults. However, UPF consumption was associated with small but significant declines in physical function, including slower gait speed in both men and women, as well as weaker grip strength in men.

The study, “Ultra-Processed Food and Frailty: Evidence from a Prospective Cohort Study and Implications for Future Research,” analyzed data from 2,547 adults in the Framingham Offspring Cohort over an average follow-up of 10.8 years. During that time, 9.2% of participants, or 233 people, developed frailty. While no direct relationship between UPF intake and frailty onset was found, each additional daily serving of UPFs was associated with a measurable decline in gait speed (–0.001 meters/second per year, p = 0.03). Among men, each extra serving was also linked to a yearly reduction in grip strength (–0.02 kg, p = 0.04).

“These findings suggest that while ultra-processed food consumption may not directly raise the risk of frailty, it could still contribute to subtle declines in mobility and strength over time,” said Shivani Sahni, PhD, director of the Nutrition Program at the Hinda and Arthur Marcus Institute for Aging Research at Hebrew SeniorLife and associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School.

“Limiting ultra-processed food intake and emphasizing whole, nutrient-dense foods may be a crucial step in preserving physical function and supporting healthy aging,” said lead author Elsa M. Konieczynski, MS, Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, Tufts University.

The study emphasizes the significance of diet in later life and underscores the need for further research into the biological mechanisms underlying the association between ultra-processed foods and functional decline. Still, the findings add to growing evidence that diets emphasizing whole and minimally processed foods may support better mobility and strength in later life.

About safety of MMR vaccine and risks of getting measles

 

Also does RFK Jr. support MMR vaccination?

Nearly 1,650 cases of measles in 42 states have been confirmed this year in the United States by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the largest annual number in 34 years. This includes a fresh outbreak of over a hundred people that began in late summer in Arizona and Utah. Public health experts such as Dr. Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, suspect the actual total could be higher.

The outbreaks come over two decades after measles was declared “eliminated” from the United States in 2000, a status that signifies the absence of “the continuous spread of the disease” for more than 12 months, the CDC says, thanks largely to a “highly effective vaccination program.”

After decades without many cases, however, and several years in which the safety of new Covid-19 vaccines and others have been called into question, an Annenberg health survey finds that the public is less informed than it should be of the dangers of measles – a highly contagious disease that can lead to death or disability – and less certain than it used to be of the value of vaccination.

The survey by the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania shows that while most U.S. adults (82%) would recommend that eligible children in their household get the MMR vaccine, which protects against measles, mumps, and rubella, the percentage has declined significantly since November 2024 (90%). The survey also finds that:

• The public is confused about whether the top U.S. health official, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., recommends that children be vaccinated against measles;
• Most Americans believe that vaccines like the MMR vaccine do not cause autism – but significantly fewer know this than in recent years;
• Over half of those surveyed are not sure whether a mercury-based preservative in some vaccines affects a person’s chances of developing autism, when evidence has shown no link between the preservative and autism;
• A quarter of the public thinks getting the measles is likely to be less deadly than it is.

“Mixed messages about the safety and efficacy of measles vaccination from those leading health agencies fuel confusion and cultivate a climate that is hospitable to an otherwise preventable and sometimes deadly disease,” said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center (APPC).

The survey was conducted August 5-18, 2025, among nearly 1,700 U.S. adults on a nationally representative panel. See the end of this news release or the topline for additional details.

Views on the MMR vaccine

The survey finds that most American adults know…

… What MMR prevents: Given the choice of a number of different diseases and conditions that begin with the letters “M” and “R,” around two-thirds of those surveyed know that the MMR vaccine is designed to prevent measles (68%), mumps (65%), and rubella (64%). As many or more people correctly did not select alternatives such as meningitis (66% did not select), mpox (68% did not select), rhinitis (69% did not select), menopause (70% did not select), and rigor mortis (70% did not select). However, more than 1 in 4 people (27%) overall say they are not sure what the MMR vaccine is designed to prevent.

… Vaccination is the best way to avoid getting measles: Given the options of vaccination, a healthy diet, or neither, a strong majority knows the best way to prevent getting measles is to be vaccinated (81%), while 1% say “eating a healthy diet,” 6% say neither, and 11% are not sure.

… The MMR provides lifetime protection against measles: Most people (67%) know it is true that the MMR vaccine usually protects people who receive it from getting measles for their entire lifetime, though 21% are not sure and 13% think this is false. The CDC says the MMR vaccine usually protects people for life against measles and rubella, though immunity against mumps may diminish over time.

Giving children the MMR vaccine

The CDC recommends that children get a first dose of the MMR vaccine at 12 to 15 months old and a second dose between ages 4 and 6 years old. The CDC says one dose is 93% effective at preventing measles and two doses are 97% effective.

Recommending MMR for a child: Although a large majority of people support giving children the vaccine, the number declined significantly in just over nine months. The August 2025 survey finds that 82% would recommend that an eligible child in their household get an MMR vaccine, compared with 90% in November 2024.

Why childhood measles is less common than a century ago: A majority (77%) knows that “the main reason” children in the United States are much less likely to get measles today than a century ago is effective vaccination, rather than better sewage treatment and water purification (4%) or better nutrition (2%), though 13% say they are not sure and 3% say “none of the above.”

Two doses: Less than half of those surveyed (42%) know children need two doses of the MMR vaccine for full protection from measles, mumps, and rubella, while 48% are not sure.

RFK Jr. and the measles vaccine

The American public is unclear about where Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a longtime critic of vaccines, stands on the MMR vaccine. Less than a quarter of the public (23%) says that he recommends that children be vaccinated against measles, while 29% say he does not recommend it, and almost half of the public (48%) is not sure.

In January confirmation hearings for HHS secretary, Kennedy “refused to say that vaccines do not cause autism – despite a large body of evidence showing there is no link,” according to FactCheck.org, a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center. In fact, Kennedy “also pointed to a flawed paper to suggest that there is credible evidence to claim vaccines cause the disorder.”

According to the CDC: “There is no link between the MMR vaccine and autism.”

As secretary, Kennedy has made misleading and unsupported claims about the MMR vaccine, the measles, and vaccination in general. He has downplayed the risks of measles and this year’s large measles outbreak in Texas. FactCheck.org has reviewed a number of his claims on various issues – see its articles.

Last spring, during the Texas outbreak, Kennedy did make positive statements about vaccination. On April 6, he wrote on X (formerly Twitter), “The most effective way to prevent the spread of measles is the MMR vaccine.” In an April 8 CBS interview, he said, “We encourage people to get the measles vaccine.” Yet Kennedy also said, “We don’t know the risks of many of these products because they’re not safety tested.”

As FactCheck.org writes, hours after his post on X, Kennedy praised two Texas physicians as “extraordinary healers” for using two unsupported treatments for measles. On March 2, Kennedy wrote on Fox News that vaccines “not only protect individual children from measles, but also contribute to community immunity…” But as FactCheck.org also notes, he did not explicitly say the vaccine is safe, nor did he specifically advocate vaccination.

During the Texas outbreak, Kennedy suggested that poor nutrition and a lack of exercise play a role in measles and misleadingly focused on vitamin A, including from cod liver oil, as a treatment. Even so, nearly 4 in 5 Americans (79%) know it is true that “healthy, well-nourished children can get measles.” Just 7% think that is false and 14% are not sure.

A CDC page dated January 17, 2025, (accessed Oct. 27) states: “The best way to protect against measles is to get the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine. Children may get the measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella (MMRV) vaccine instead, which protects against chickenpox too.”

Most see no link between vaccines and autism

No evidence vaccines cause autism: About two-thirds of the public (65%) say it is false to claim that vaccines given to children for diseases like measles, mumps, and rubella cause autism, though that represents a significant decrease from prior years (June 2021-July 2024), when 70-74% of the public agreed it was false to link autism with vaccines. In 2004, the National Academy of Medicine (then named the Institute of Medicine) determined that “the body of epidemiological evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship between the MMR vaccine and autism evidence.” The CDC, on a web page dated Dec. 20, 2024 (accessed Oct. 29), wrote that “studies have shown that there is no link between receiving vaccines and developing ASD” (autism spectrum disorder).

Vaccines are safe: A substantial majority of the public (70%) similarly says that vaccines approved for use in the United States are safe, though that also represents a decline from past years (April 2021-January 2022), when 76-79% said vaccines are safe.

No evidence of an autism-thimerosal link: Thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative used in some vaccines since the 1930s, has been the target of unfounded and misleading claims by anti-vaccine advocates, including claims that it is ineffective, a neurotoxin, and may be tied to autism. In its 2004 report, the National Academy of Medicine determined that evidence “favors rejection of a causal relationship between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism.” Numerous studies since have also supported thimerosal’s safety, according to FactCheck.org. Thimerosal has not been in childhood vaccines other than flu vaccines since 2001. In July 2025, Kennedy signed off on recommendations by the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices to remove thimerosal from U.S. flu vaccines.

Asked about any connection between thimerosal and autism, half of those surveyed (51%) are not sure whether thimerosal increases, decreases, or has no effect on the chances that a person getting a vaccine will develop autism. Over a third (37%) correctly say it has no effect on the chances of developing autism, and 10% say it increases the chances.

• To learn more about autism and the challenges it may pose for young people, see “If Your Adolescent Has Autism: An Essential Resource for Parents” (Oxford University Press, 2025), a new book in a series developed by the Adolescent Mental Health Initiative. The initiative is a joint project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center and The Annenberg Foundation Trust at Sunnylands under the guidance of Patrick E. Jamieson, director of APPC’s Annenberg Health and Risk Communication Institute. 

Knowing about the consequences of getting measles

Most Americans have little firsthand experience with measles, which, as noted above, was declared “eliminated” from the United States in 2000, according to the CDC. If current trends hold, however, “there would appear to be grounds for the U.S. to lose measles elimination status,” according to KFF researcher Josh Michaud. The survey finds that many Americans are unsure about the possible consequences of getting measles:

• Only 22% correctly know that some people experience a swelling of the brain, known as encephalitis, as a result of having measles. A small number (3%) say you can get encephalitis from the measles vaccine, which is extraordinarily rare. Ten percent say you cannot get encephalitis from measles or the measles vaccine, 6% say you can get it from both, but most people (60%) are not sure.
• Less than a third (30%) know that getting measles increases the chances of getting some serious illnesses later in life, while 24% say it has no effect on getting serious illnesses later, 8% say it decreases the chances, and 38% are not sure.
• Most people are not sure how many children die as a result of getting measles (58%) – only 9% correctly know it is about 1 in 1,000, while a quarter of those surveyed (26%) chose lower rates, and 8% chose higher rates. This year’s U.S. outbreaks have so far resulted in three deaths, two of them children.
• About 1 in 5 people (19%) believe that among children who get the MMR vaccine none are likely to die as a result. Half of those surveyed (50%) are not sure, and about a third (32%) chose higher rates. According to the Infectious Disease Society of America, “There have been no deaths shown to be related to the MMR vaccine in healthy people.” 

Annenberg Science and Public Health survey

The survey data come from the 25th wave of a nationally representative panel of 1,699 U.S. adults conducted for the Annenberg Public Policy Center by SSRS, an independent market research company. Most have been empaneled since April 2021. To account for attrition, replenishment samples have been added over time using a random probability sampling design. The most recent replenishment, in September 2024, added 360 respondents to the sample. Wave 25 of the Annenberg Science and Public Health (ASAPH) survey, fielded August 5-18, 2025, has a margin of sampling error (MOE) of ± 3.5 percentage points at the 95% confidence level.

Download the topline and the methods report.

The policy center has been tracking the American public’s knowledge, beliefs, and behaviors regarding vaccination, Covid-19, flu, RSV, and other consequential health issues through this survey panel for more than four years. In addition to APPC Director Kathleen Hall Jamieson, APPC’s ASAPH survey team includes research analyst Laura A. Gibson, Patrick E. Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Health and Risk Communication Institute, and Ken Winneg, managing director of survey research.

See other recent Annenberg health survey news releases:

• Vaccinations and pregnancy: Under half in the U.S. would recommend some routine vaccinations during pregnancy (Sept. 30, 2025)
• Mosquito-borne illness: Despite increase in U.S. cases, worry about West Nile virus remains low (Sept. 26, 2025)
• Trust in health agencies and RFK Jr.: Public confidence in U.S. health agencies slides, fueled by declines among Democrats (Sept. 18, 2025)
• Vaccine mandates for school: Most Americans favor MMR vaccine requirements for public school (September 12, 2025)
• Health risks during pregnancy: Public knowledge high on smoking and alcohol risks during pregnancy (July 29, 2025)

Study finds improvement in knee pain with exercise and physical therapy

Mass General Brigham researchers showed that all trial participants with knee osteoarthritis, meniscal tear, and knee pain improved 
•    Participants who received a home exercise program as well as standard or sham physical therapy (PT) had a small additional improvement compared with those who received the home exercise program without PT 
•    Outcomes in those receiving standard and sham PT were similar

People with a meniscal tear and osteoarthritis prescribed home exercises with or without physical therapy reported substantial improvements in knee pain, according to a new study led by Mass General Brigham researchers. Participants who had regular visits with a physical therapist over three months, in addition to the home exercise program, reported slightly greater pain relief at the six- and 12-month follow up timepoints than those who had home exercise alone. This additional improvement may have stemmed from the interpersonal aspects of working with the therapist rather than the therapist’s exercise instruction. Results are published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

The Treatment of Meniscal Problems in Osteoarthritis (TeMPO) study was conducted at Brigham and Women’s Hospital (BWH), University at Buffalo, Cleveland Clinic and the University of Pittsburgh. The trial enrolled 879 participants with an average age of 59 years. Participants were randomized to receive home exercise; home exercise and standard in-clinic physical therapy (PT); or home exercise and in-clinic sham PT.

The home exercise program consisted of 25 minutes of lower extremity stretching and strengthening exercises four times per week. Participants received a video and pamphlets to guide them through the home exercises. In the standard and sham PT arms, participants also saw a physical therapist two times a week in the first month, weekly in the second month, and every other week in the third month. Standard PT consisted of muscle stretching and strengthening, manual therapy, and neuromuscular training, while sham PT consisted of sham manual therapy and sham ultrasound. 

The investigators did not observe clinically important or statistically significant differences in pain reduction between the groups at three months. However, participants in the standard PT and sham PT groups experienced slightly greater pain improvement at six and twelve months, compared to those who did not see a therapist.

“On average, participants in all groups reported moderately severe pain at the start of the study and much milder pain three, six, and 12 months later,” said lead author Jeffrey Katz, MD, MSc, clinical director of the Orthopaedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, a founding member of the Mass General Brigham healthcare system. “We observed similar improvement in the standard PT and sham PT groups, suggesting that personal interactions with a physical therapist may have been more influential than the physical therapy itself.”

Katz explained that the study was designed to mimic typical one-on-one, half-hour PT sessions offered in the U.S. The findings should be generalized cautiously to settings that employ longer sessions, group sessions, or different visit frequency.  

 

Reducing use of sleep drugs could improve quality of life and longevity in older adults

 

Millions of older Americans suffering from insomnia regularly use prescription sleep medications, despite the risk of serious side effects—such as falls, broken bones, cognitive impairment and dependence—and warnings from leading medical societies against their use.

A new study from the USC Schaeffer Center for Health Policy & Economics finds that reducing prescriptions of sleep medication in older adults could provide substantial health and economic benefits.

Avoiding use of these medications among older adults would reduce lifetime incidence of falls by 8.5% and cognitive impairment by 2.1%, researchers found. It would also increase life expectancy by 1.3 months, which translates to 1.7 million life-years gained across the population—most of which would be spent in good health.

“Our results show reducing use of sleep medications could help older adults live healthier lives with fewer limitations,” said lead author Hanke Heun-Johnson, a research scientist at the Schaeffer Center.

The study appears in The Lancet Regional Health - Americas.

Improved Quality of Life

An estimated 15.3 million American adults ages 50 and older take prescribed sleep medications, including benzodiazepines and “Z-drugs” such as Ambien. Use of these medications tends to increase with age and is more common among women and white adults.

While medical guidelines discourage long-term use, doctors often prescribe these drugs long-term. For some patients, the primary benefit becomes the avoidance of withdrawal, which in a clinical setting is easily misconstrued as ongoing effectiveness.

Insomnia itself carries serious risks for older adults, including depression, heart disease and cognitive decline. But while many people take sleep medications hoping to improve their quality of life, long-term use appears to do more harm than good.

For the new study, researchers leveraged a dynamic microsimulation model developed at the Schaeffer Center, the Future Elderly Model, to project the impacts of sleep medication use in older adults. They compared current use of the drugs with a scenario in which no one uses them, examining various outcomes such as cognitive decline, fall risk, nursing home use, medical costs and lifetime earnings.

People ages 65 to 74 saw the largest potential benefit in cognitive function and physical health from avoiding these drugs, suggesting that efforts to reduce prescribing should focus on this age group.

In addition to the health benefits of avoiding these drugs, researchers found it would mean lifetime savings of $6,600 per person, or about $101 billion across the United States. Most of the savings come from improvements in quality of life. 

Encouraging Safer Prescribing Practices

Professional organizations such as the American Academy of Sleep Medicine recommend cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I), rather than sleep medication, as a first-line treatment. The treatment is structured to help people adopt better sleeping habits and can be delivered in-person, virtually or through an app (for example, the Department of Veterans Affairs’ CBT-I Coach). CBT-I is just as effective as sleep medication in the short term and is more effective in the long run, without the side effects.

Previous Schaeffer Center research identified practical interventions to reduce inappropriate prescribing of antibiotics, opioids and other medications. Researchers said some of these methods could likely be used to reduce prescriptions of sleep medications and steer physicians toward recommending safer options.

For example, it’s possible that electronic health record systems could prompt physicians to justify prescriptions for older patients and provide information about cognitive behavioral therapy. Physicians could also receive periodic reports comparing their prescribing patterns with those of their peers.

“Insomnia is a serious issue for many older adults, but regular use of sleep medication can pose real risks. Supporting physicians in reducing prescriptions and promoting safer, proven alternatives will ultimately benefit patients and society,” said co-author Jason Doctor, a senior scholar at the Schaeffer Center and the Norman Topping Medical Enterprise Chair in Medicine at the USC Price School of Public Policy.

Mediterranean diet could be an effective first-line intervention for irritable bowel syndrome

 

A randomized clinical trial evaluated if the Mediterranean diet is noninferior to traditional dietary advice in managing irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) symptoms. The trial found that the Mediterranean diet is noninferior and superior to traditional diet advice in managing IBS symptoms, suggesting that it could be considered a viable first-line dietary intervention for IBS. The study is published in Annals of Internal Medicine.  

 

Researchers from the University of Sheffield studied data from 110 adults aged 18 to 65 years who had IBS across the United Kingdom. Trial participation was selective, with exclusion criteria including history of eating disorders, inflammatory bowel disease, and celiac disease. Participants were randomly assigned to follow either a Mediterranean diet or traditional diet for 6 weeks, with traditional diet advice following guidance from the British Dietetic Association. The primary end point was the proportion of participants achieving clinical response, defined as a 50-point or greater reduction in IBS Symptom Severity Scale (IBS-SSS). Secondary endpoints included changes in IBS-SSS scores, quality of life, and Mediterranean Diet Adherence Screener (MEDAS). At week 6, a 50-point or greater reduction in IB-SSS score was achieved by 62% (95% CI, 50% to 73%) assigned a Mediterranean diet versus 42% (CI, 31% to 55%) of participants assigned traditional diet. At week 6, there was also a greater reduction in the mean IBS-SSS after a Mediterranean diet than traditional diet. Frequency of abdominal pain was statistically significantly improved among participants with a Mediterranean diet versus traditional diet.

10–15 minute bouts of walking better for your cardiovascular health than shorter strolls

• People who walk at least 10-15 minutes in a single stretch reduce their risk of developing cardiovascular disease by two thirds compared to those who walk less than five minutes in one go 

• When walking the same number of steps, longer accumulations of steps in one go have a greater health benefit than short bouts spread out across the day 

 

An international study led by experts at the University of Sydney and the Universidad Europea in Spain has found that longer periods of continuous walking are more beneficial to cardiovascular health than walking the same number of steps in shorter, more sporadic bouts. 

 

The study published in the Annals of International Medicine analysed the impact of walking on the health of physically inactive people.  

 

The results showed that among those who took fewer than 8000 steps per day, those who accumulate most of their steps across one or two walks lasting at least 10-15 minutes or longer have a lower risk of mortality and cardiovascular events (such as a heart attack or stroke) compared to those who take their steps in very short bouts of less than five minutes. 

 

Co-lead author Dr Matthew Ahmadi, Deputy Director of the Mackenzie Wearables Research Hub and member of the Charles Perkins Centre at the University of Sydney said: “For the most inactive people, switching from brief walks here and there to longer continuous walks may come with some health benefits.  

 

“There is a perception that health professionals have recommended walking 10,000 steps a day is the goal, but this isn't necessary. Simply adding one or two longer walks per day, each lasting at least 10-15 minutes at a comfortable but steady pace, may have significant benefits – especially for people who don’t walk much.” 

 

The study analysed 33,560 adults aged between 40-79 years who walked less than 8000 steps a day and had no cardiovascular disease or cancer at baseline.  

 

Participants wore a research wristband for a week which measured not only how many steps they took but also how their step count was accumulated. Following the participants’ health outcomes over the course of an average of eight years, the researchers found:  

 

• People who walked continuously for 10-15 minutes per day had a 4 percent chance of having a cardiovascular related event such as heart attack or stroke. Meanwhile those who walked continuously for only 5 minutes a day had a 13 percent risk of having a cardiovascular incident.  

• The health benefits of continuous bouts of walking were most pronounced among the least active, for example those who walked 5000 steps a day or less. Among this group, the risk of developing cardiovascular disease halved from 15 percent for those who walked up to 5 minutes a day, to 7 percent for those who walked up to 15 minutes a day. 

• Among the most sedentary group (5000 steps a day or less) the risk of death dropped from 5 percent for those who walked in 5 minutes stretches during the day, to less than 1 percent for those who walked up to 15 minutes a day.  

 

Senior author Professor Emmanuel Stamatakis, Director of the Mackenzie Wearables Research Hub and physical activity theme leader at the Charles Perkins Centre said: “We tend to place all the emphasis on the number of steps or the total amount of walking but neglect the crucial role of patterns, for example ‘how’ walking is done.  

 

“This study shows that even people who are very physically inactive can maximise their heart health benefit by tweaking their walking patterns to walk for longer at a time, ideally for at least 10-15 minutes, when possible.” 

 

Co-lead author Dr Borja del Pozo from the Universidad Europea said: “Our research shows that simple changes can make all the difference to your health. If you walk a little, set aside some time to walk more often and in longer sessions. Such small changes can have a big impact." 

Just a little movement can lift your mood

Swapping just 30 minutes of sitting for light activity boosts energy and mood the next day

Feeling sluggish?

A new study from The University of Texas at Arlington finds the fix may be as simple as swapping 30 minutes of sitting for light activity.

UT Arlington kinesiology Professor Yue Liao joined a research team from Monash University in Australia to track more than 350 young adults using wearable activity monitors. The study found that on days when participants engaged in light activity—such as walking or doing chores—instead of sitting, they felt better and more energetic the next day.

“This study indicated that light activity—where you don’t have to go to the gym or do intense exercise—can lead to better feelings the next day when it replaces sedentary behavior,” Dr. Liao said. “One doesn’t have to think, ‘I have to run,’ or ‘I have to do these big things.’ Just sitting less and moving more can have an immediate impact on your mood the next day.”

This finding is particularly relevant given current habits. A January 2024 study by smart seating company Kalogon found that 38% of U.S. adults sit nine or more hours a day. Replacing even a portion of that time with light activity can pay off in meaningful ways.

The research, recently published in Psychology of Sport and Exercise, found that light activity had the strongest link to boosting mood and energy the next day. Moderate to vigorous exercise, such as running or gym workouts, was associated with modest mood benefits, while sedentary time—sitting or lying awake—was linked to worse mood the next day. The study also examined sleep duration but found no clear effect on next-day mood among the young adults studied.

“We looked at the 24-hour movement behavior—sleep, exercise, sedentary time and light activity,” Liao said. “The 24-hour part is a unique piece because we’re not simply saying, ‘Do more of this.’ They all add up to 24 hours. From that perspective, if a person does more light activity in place of sedentary behavior, that predicts better mood the next day. That’s the key point.”

Liao also emphasized that the mood benefits weren’t about comparing one’s activity level to others. Instead, the improvements came from a “within-person” effect—making subtle, self-directed changes in daily activity.

In the end, Liao hopes the study demonstrates that making small changes relative to one’s usual routine is key to better overall health.

“Based on prior literature, we assumed exercise would be the clear factor, but our analysis mostly highlighted light activity,” she said. “You don’t have to work up a sweat to get benefits. Just moving a little more than your usual helps.”

Being exposed to bright light at night increases the chances of developing serious heart problems

 Being exposed to bright light at night can significantly increase the chances of developing serious heart problems, including heart attacks, strokes and heart failure.

Published in JAMA Network Open, the research is the largest study of its kind to explore how personal light exposure affects heart health using data from nearly 89,000 people in the UK.

Using wrist-worn sensors, researchers from FHMRI Sleep Health tracked over 13 million hours of light exposure and followed participants for up to 9.5 years.

The study found that people who were exposed to the brightest light at night were much more likely to develop heart problems, with a 56% higher chance of heart failure and 47% more likely to have a heart attack.

These risks remained high even after accounting for other factors like exercise, diet, sleep habits and genetics.

Dr Daniel Windred, lead author and Research Associate at Flinders University’s FHMRI Sleep Health, says the study highlights a risk factor that many people aren’t aware of, but one that’s easy to address.

“This is the first large-scale study to show that simply being exposed to light at night is a strong and independent risk factor for heart disease,” says Dr Windred.

“Disrupting your body’s internal circadian clock by repeatedly exposing yourself to bright light at night, when it would typically be dark otherwise, will put you at a higher risk of developing dangerous heart issues.

“Thankfully, we do have some control over our exposure to light at night.

“By using blackout curtains, dimming lights, and avoiding screens before bed, we can help to reduce the health risks associated with light at night.”

The study also found that women and younger people were especially vulnerable to the impact of light exposure at night.

“Women may be more sensitive to the effects of light disrupting their body clock, which supports earlier research findings,” says senior co-author, Professor Sean Cain.

“In fact, women exposed to high levels of night light had similar heart failure risks to men, which is unusual because women typically have some natural protection against heart disease.”

Senior co-author, Associate Professor Andrew Phillips, says that this isn’t just a problem for shift workers or people living in brightly lit cities.

“Everyday habits, like scrolling on your phone in bed or falling asleep with the TV on or bedroom lights on, can expose you to potentially harmful levels of light,” says Associate Professor Philips from FHMRI Sleep Health.

“We’re not talking about extreme cases, even low levels of indoor light can interfere with your body’s natural rhythm.”

Unlike previous studies that relied on satellite images or surveys of outdoor light at night, this research used real-time data from wearable devices, giving a much clearer picture of how light in our indoor environments affects health.

With heart disease still the leading cause of death worldwide, the researchers say it’s time to treat light at night like other health risks—such as poor diet, lack of exercise, or smoking.

The team is now calling for more research into lighting guidelines for homes, hospitals, and cities to help reduce night-time light exposure.

“We need to take our body clocks seriously,” concludes Professor Cain.

“Protecting our natural sleep rhythms could be a powerful way to fight heart disease.”

The article, ‘Light Exposure at Night and Cardiovascular Disease Incidence’, by Daniel P. Windred, Angus C. Burns, Martin K. Rutter, Jacqueline M. Lane, Richa Saxena, Frank A. J. L. Scheer, Sean W. Cain and Andrew J. K. Phillips, PhD.  DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.39031 

Fatty Winter Snacks May Trick the Body into Packing on the Pounds

A new study from UC San Francisco shows that our natural eating patterns are more closely tied to seasonal rhythms than previously thought.

Next time you’re tempted to raid the pantry for snacks loaded with saturated fat — especially in winter — you might want to consider that the result could be a mounting urge for high-calorie nibbles. 

That’s because, from our body’s perspective, saturated fat — which includes the hydrogenated fats found in many snacks — signals the approach of summertime, when food is naturally plentiful and animals are bulking up for the lean winter months. 

Scientists have thought that mammals get their cues on how much to eat just from the length of the day. Black bears, for example, gorge on berries and nuts during the lengthening days of spring and summer but fast during their long winter hibernation. 

Now, a new study from UC San Francisco shows that it may have as much or more to do with the balance of saturated and unsaturated fats they have in their diet.  

The researchers discovered that saturated fat affects the behavior of a protein called PER2, which orchestrates fat metabolism and circadian rhythms. Depending on how much saturated fat is being consumed, this protein may either tell the body to burn fat or store it.

As summer approaches, plants begin producing more saturated fat. In mammals who eat those plants, the saturated fat signals the season of abundance and PER2 encourages the body to store energy that it will use in winter, when food is scarce. 

As autumn approaches, plants produce more unsaturated fat, which helps them function better in chilly conditions. Mammals eating more of this type of fat — instead of the saturated variety — get signals that summer is coming to an end. As food supplies dwindle, PER2 prepares the body to tap into its fat stores. 

“It makes a lot of sense that both nutrition and the length of the day would guide seasonal behavior,” said Louis Ptacek, MD, professor of Neurology and a senior author of the study, noting the example of hibernating bears. “If it’s fall and there are still plenty of nuts and berries to eat, the bear might as well keep eating rather than settle in for winter sleep, even while it senses that the days are getting shorter.”

The study, which was done in mice, is the first to investigate the role of nutrition in how mammals adapt with the seasons. The findings appear Oct. 23 in Science and could inspire new approaches to treating obesity and type 2 diabetes. The research was supported in part by the National Institutes of Health.

Fat matters

Ptacek and co-senior author Ying-Hui Fu, PhD, have been studying PER2 since their 2001 discovery that the gene and its protein control our 24-hour sleep-wake cycles. About a decade later, PER2 was found to play a role in fat metabolism as well, leading researchers to suspect that our biological clocks do more than keep time. 

The team decided to investigate the combined impact of fat and light on mice. The researchers simulated the cycle of the seasons by exposing the mice to 12 hours of light and dark each day to approximate the fall and summer equinox; then, they shifted to 20 hours of light to simulate summer, and 20 hours of dark for winter. 

Mice that ate a diet that was not too high in fat or calories adapted easily to the seasonal changes. As the nights got longer, they began to run on their wheels as soon as it got dark, which is normal behavior for a nocturnal mouse. 

In contrast, mice that ate a high-fat diet were unable to wake up and start running until a few hours after darkness set in.

Next, the team compared the effect of food rich in unsaturated fats, like those found in seeds and nuts, to food containing hydrogenated fat like that found in processed foods. 

The mice that ate more hydrogenated fat did not adjust well to the extended dark of winter and did not wake up and start running on their wheels until many hours after the start of night.

“These types of fats seem to prevent mice from being able to sense the early nights of winter,” said postdoctoral scholar Dan Levine, PhD, who brought his interest in seasonal cycling to Ptacek’s lab. 

“It begs the question of whether the same thing is happening for people snacking on processed food.” 

Electric light and constant calories

Hydrogenated fats aren’t the only aspects of modern life that can disrupt seasonal rhythms. Electric lighting provides light all day long, and grocery stores make food abundant year-round. 

Because we’ve evolved to eat a lot in the summer and store it to live on in the winter, “Eating a lot of food becomes maladaptive when there’s no escape from temptation,” Levine said.

Disruptions in biological rhythms have been linked to sleep disorders, obesity, diabetes, and mental health problems, and the researchers said the same is likely true for out-of-whack seasonal rhythms. Correcting these imbalances could improve sleep and energy levels, prevent chronic disease, and help shift workers and people with jet lag.

Levine advised resisting the urge to graze on fatty treats, especially in winter.

“That one holiday cookie could turn into two cookies the next day, because you've now tricked your circadian clock into thinking it's summer,” he said. 

Updated CPR guidelines tackle choking response, opioid-related emergencies

 

• New guidance on choking in conscious children and adults recommends alternating five back blows followed by five abdominal thrusts, until the object is expelled or the person becomes unresponsive.
• Guidance for choking in infants has been updated to alternate between five back blows and five chest thrusts using the heel of one hand, until the foreign object is expelled or the infant becomes unresponsive.
• The guidelines provide a new algorithm for treating individuals with suspected opioid overdose, including public access guidance on naloxone use.
• The systems of care volunteer writing group elected to revert to a single chain of survival for all forms of cardiac arrest, whether adult or pediatric, in- or out-of-hospital.
• Evidence shows that children 12 years old or older can be taught effective CPR and defibrillation.
• To improve lay-rescuer response to out-of-hospital cardiac arrests, the guidelines recommend support for media campaigns, instructor-led training and community training.

Embargoed until 5 a.m. CT / 6 a.m. ET Wednesday, October 22, 2025

DALLAS, Oct. 22, 2025 —The “2025 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) and Emergency Cardiovascular Care (ECC),” published today in the Association’s flagship journal, Circulation, marks the first full revision of lifesaving resuscitation guidance since 2020. Among the updates are expanded recommendations for managing choking and suspected opioid overdose, in addition to other lifesaving interventions.

Each year, approximately 350,000 people in the U.S. experience an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest – when the heart suddenly stops beating – which results in death 90% of the time, according to the Association’s statistics.[1] The 2025 CPR guidelines provide an extensive review of the latest science, translating it into clear, lifesaving recommendations that empower people to act when every second counts.

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrests caused by respiratory emergencies or asphyxia occur in more than 9% of adults and 39% of children in the U.S.[2] New guidance on choking recommends alternating five back blows followed by five abdominal thrusts for conscious children and adults, until the foreign object is expelled or the person becomes unresponsive. Choking guidance for adults was not included in the previous guidelines, and earlier guidance for children called for performing abdominal thrusts only. For infants, rescuers should alternate between five back blows and five chest thrusts using the heel of one hand, until the foreign object is expelled or the infant becomes unresponsive. Abdominal thrusts are not recommended for infants, due to the risk of injury.

The guidelines also provide updated recommendations for treating people experiencing a suspected opioid overdose, which is the cause of 80% of all drug overdose deaths worldwide.[3] According to the World Health Organization (WHO), opioid use can lead to death because opioids affect the part of the brain that regulates breathing. Signs of an opioid overdose include:

• Slow, shallow or no breathing
• Choking or gurgling sounds
• Drowsiness or loss of consciousness
• Small, constricted pupils
• Blue or grey coloring of the skin, lips or nail beds

For the first time, the guidelines provide public access instruction on when to use naloxone, a medication used to reverse or reduce the effects of opioids.

“The American Heart Association’s 2025 CPR guidelines represent gold standard science. It reflects a rigorous examination of the most up-to-date evidence that guides how resuscitation is provided for critically ill patients,” said Ashish Panchal, M.D., Ph.D., volunteer chair of the American Heart Association Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science Committee, physician and professor of emergency medicine at The Ohio State University. “As the science continues to evolve, it’s important that we continue to review new research specific to the scientific questions considered of greatest clinical significance that affect how we deliver life-saving care.”

Together with the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Association co-developed the pediatric and neonatal guidelines that help protect the youngest and most vulnerable lives. These chapters were co-led by volunteer experts from both organizations, with writing groups evenly balanced between their members, resulting in a unified set of recommendations that reflect the shared expertise, dedication and vision of both organizations.

Alongside major changes to choking recommendations for infants, the neonatal guidelines provide further direction for treating newborns. For most term and preterm infants not needing immediate resuscitation, delaying umbilical cord clamping for at least 60 seconds – up from the previously recommended 30 seconds – has been shown to improve a newborn’s blood health and iron levels.

“We’re proud that these guidelines will be jointly published in the American Heart Association journal Circulation and the American Academy of Pediatrics journal Pediatrics. This action underscores our joint commitment to advancing pediatric and neonatal resuscitation — together,” said Javier Lasa, MD, FAHA, FAAP, American Heart Association and American Academy of Pediatrics volunteer and co-chair of the 2025 Pediatric Advanced Life Support Writing Group and associate professor in critical care and cardiology at Children’s Health in Dallas.

Further updates offer suggestions for increasing lay rescuer intervention in a cardiac emergency, noting that only approximately 41% of adults experiencing cardiac arrest outside of the hospital receive CPR before emergency medical services arrive.[4] Early CPR could double or triple a person’s chance of survival. New recommendations include:

• Consolidating the chain of survival into one chain, which highlights the importance of doing compressions and breaths, especially in children and infants. Previously, there were separate chains of survival for adults, infants and children experiencing a cardiac emergency, and for cases of in-hospital and out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.
• Aligning with new scientific evidence that suggests children 12 years old or older can be taught effective CPR and defibrillation.
• Further improving lay rescuer response to out-of-hospital cardiac arrests, by recommending the use of media awareness and education campaigns, increased instructor-led training and expanded community training.

The American Heart Association updates and publishes CPR guidelines periodically, as it has since issuing the first CPR guideline in 1966. The Association also plays a unique dual role in resuscitation—leading global efforts in public awareness, education and policy change, while also serving as the scientific authority that develops the official CPR and emergency cardiovascular care guidelines used by other CPR and first aid training providers in the U.S. and in over 90 countries worldwide. For more than five decades, the Association has trained millions of people each year in CPR, first aid and advanced cardiovascular care through its programs and awareness campaigns. As a founding member of the international committee that shapes lifesaving resuscitation guidelines, the Association ensures the CPR recommendations reflect the most advanced research from global experts around the world.

“We know high-quality CPR saves lives, and we need dedicated support to ensure that everyone who needs high-quality CPR receives it,” said Panchal. “That starts with learning it yourself. We encourage everyone to take a CPR class to learn the skills and techniques to provide life-saving care in an emergency. Everyone has a role to play in the chain of survival.”