Polyphenol-rich diets linked to better long-term heart health

 People who regularly consume polyphenol-rich foods and drinks, such as tea, coffee, berries, cocoa, nuts, whole grains and olive oil, may have better long-term heart health.

The research, led by King’s College London, found that those with higher adherence to polyphenol-rich dietary patterns had lower predicted cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk.

Polyphenols are natural compounds found in plants that are linked to various health benefits, including improved heart, brain, and gut health.

The study, published today in BMC Medicine, followed more than 3,100 adults from the TwinsUK cohort for over a decade, found that diets rich in specific groups of polyphenols were linked to healthier blood pressure and cholesterol profiles, contributing to lower CVD risk scores.

For the first time, the researchers also analysed a large number of metabolites in the urine that are produced when the body breaks down polyphenols.

These biomarkers confirmed that individuals with higher levels of polyphenol metabolites—especially those derived from specific groups of polyphenols, flavonoids and phenolic acids—had lower cardiovascular risk scores. They also had increased HDL cholesterol, also know as ‘good’ cholesterol.

The study used a newly developed polyphenol dietary score (PPS) to capture intake of 20 key polyphenol-rich foods commonly consumed in the UK, ranging from tea and coffee to berries, olive oil, nuts, and whole grains.

This score showed stronger associations with cardiovascular health than estimates of total polyphenol intake, likely because it captures overall dietary patterns rather than individual compounds.This finding suggests that considering the whole diet provides a more accurate picture of how polyphenol-rich foods work together to support long-term heart health.

Professor Ana Rodriguez-Mateos, senior author and Professor of Human Nutrition at King’s College London, said: “Our findings show that long-term adherence to polyphenol-rich diets can substantially slow the rise in cardiovascular risk as people age. Even small, sustained shifts towards foods like berries, tea, coffee, nuts, and whole grains may help protect the heart over time.”

Dr Yong Li, first author of the study, added: “This research provides strong evidence that regularly including polyphenol-rich foods in your diet is a simple and effective way to support heart health. These plant compounds are widely available in everyday foods, making this a practical strategy for most people.”

The researchers note that while cardiovascular risk naturally increases with age, higher polyphenol intake was associated with a slower progression of risk over the 11-year follow-up period. They also emphasise the need for future dietary intervention studies to further validate these associations.

Vegan diet even with ‘unhealthy’ plant-based foods better for weight loss than Mediterranean diet

 Eating a vegan diet increases consumption of plant-based foods—including those defined as “unhealthy” by the plant-based diet index—leading to greater weight loss than the Mediterranean diet, finds a new analysis by the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine published in Frontiers in Nutrition. 

Avoiding animal products; eating foods like potatoes and refined grains, which are defined as “unhealthy” by the plant-based diet index; and avoiding added oils and nuts, which are defined as “healthy” by the plant-based diet index, all contributed to weight loss.

“Our research shows that even when a low-fat vegan diet includes so-called unhealthy plant-based foods—as defined by the plant-based diet index—like refined grains and potatoes, it’s better than the Mediterranean diet for weight loss, because it avoids animal products and added oils,” says Hana Kahleova, MD, PhD, director of clinical research at the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine and lead author of the study.

The new research is a secondary analysis of a previous Physicians Committee study comparing a low-fat vegan diet to a Mediterranean diet. The study randomly assigned 62 overweight adults to either a low-fat vegan diet, which consisted of fruits, vegetables, grains, and beans, or a Mediterranean diet, which focused on fruits, vegetables, legumes, fish, low-fat dairy, and extra-virgin olive oil, for 16 weeks. Neither group had a calorie limit. Participants then went back to their baseline diets for a four-week washout period before switching to the opposite group for an additional 16 weeks. The study found that a vegan diet is more effective for weight loss than a Mediterranean diet, and has better outcomes for weight, body composition, insulin sensitivity, and cholesterol levels.

In this secondary analysis, the participants’ dietary records were used to assess the relationship of a plant-based diet index (PDI), healthful PDI (hPDI), and unhealthful PDI (uPDI) with weight loss on both the vegan diet and Mediterranean diet. “Healthful” plant-based foods, as defined by the PDI system, include fruits, vegetables, whole grains, nuts, legumes, oils, coffee, and tea. “Unhealthful” plant-based foods include fruit juice, sugar-sweetened beverages, refined grains, potatoes, and sweets. The PDI system assigns scores as follows:

• PDI: Score increases with more plant-based foods overall.
• hPDI: Score increases with more “healthful” plant-based foods and fewer “unhealthful” plant-based foods.
• uPDI: Score increases with more “unhealthful” plant-based foods and fewer “healthful” plant-based foods.

In the analysis, the PDI score increased significantly on the vegan diet and did not change on the Mediterranean diet; the hPDI score increased on both diets; and uPDI increased on the vegan diet and decreased on the Mediterranean diet.

The increases in the PDI and uPDI scores, which were seen only the low-fat vegan diet, were associated with weight loss. The changes in hPDI, which were seen on both diets, were not associated with changes in body weight.

The majority of the increases in the PDI, hPDI, and uPDI scores came from avoiding animal foods on a vegan diet. Reducing the consumption of oils and nuts further increased the uPDI score by points on a vegan diet. These findings suggest that replacing animal products with plant-based foods, and reducing the consumption of oil and nuts, may be successful strategies for weight loss.

Metabolism, not just weight, improved when older adults reduced ultra-processed food intake

 A controlled feeding study out of South Dakota State University shows that older adults who ate fewer ultra-processed foods naturally consumed fewer calories, lost weight and abdominal fat, and showed improvements in insulin, nutrient-sensing hormones, and inflammation.

“Counting nutrients is not enough,” Moul Dey, professor of health and nutritional sciences, said. “The degree of processing changes how the body handles those same nutrients. Diet quality depends not only on nutrients but also on the ingredients and the level of processing, considered together.”

For decades, the Dietary Guidelines for Americans have urged balance and moderation, yet rates of obesity and other chronic diseases have continued to rise. The Dietary Guidelines currently include no clear directive on ultra-processed foods, but this study shows that when diets meet DGA nutrient goals while minimizing ultra-processed food and ingredients, calorie intake drops and metabolic health improves. The findings are the first to demonstrate that the DGA framework can deliver stronger health benefits when the level of food processing is also considered.

Ultra-processed foods are industrial products made by reconstructing parts of whole foods with synthetic additives such as flavors, colors, preservatives, and emulsifiers. They dominate modern diets, providing more than half of U.S. adults’ daily calories and about 70 percent of the national food supply. In simpler terms, if it comes wrapped in plastic and lists ingredients you wouldn’t keep in your kitchen, it’s probably ultra-processed.

Meals in the study were designed and administered by the university’s human nutrition research team, prepared by a professional local chef, and eaten at home by clinical trial participants to reflect everyday eating patterns. Very few feeding trials have examined how ultra-processed foods affect Americans’ health. The first major study, conducted entirely inside a research center, compared diets made up of almost entirely ultra-processed foods to diets with none. This second trial tested a more realistic shift, reducing ultra-processed foods from about half of daily calories to about 15 percent within nutritionally balanced menus for free-living older adults in the United States.

“Older adults often face metabolic challenges as appetite and energy needs shift,” said Dey, the senior author and principal investigator of the study. “We saw that when ultra-processed food intake went down, total calories and metabolic risk markers did too.”

Saba Vaezi, a doctoral student researcher in Dey’s laboratory and first author of the collaborative study, said the findings show that simple substitutions, rather than restrictive dieting, can make measurable differences. “Participants did not count calories or follow complicated weight-loss instructions,” she said.

Robust study design
The study is among a handful of rigorously controlled feeding trials in free-living older adults that:

• Tested two low–ultra-processed diets aligned with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans; one featuring a meat-based (lean pork) diet and the other a plant-based (lentil) diet.
• Matched the diets for calories, protein, fat, carbohydrate, fiber and other key nutrients; a few familiar ultra-processed items were included in moderation to support adherence.
• Prepared and served more than twelve thousand pre-portioned meals from scratch to study participants. The team measured daily food intake, metabolic, hormonal and body-composition outcomes, with a subset followed for about one year after the intervention.

Older adults completed an 18-week feeding study with two diet periods of eight weeks each, separated by a short break of at least two weeks. Every meal and snack was fully prepared and provided to eat at home. One diet was meat-based, featuring pork as the main protein source, and the other was plant-based, centered on lentils, beans and peas. Both followed the nutrient goals of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans.

A companion method paper published by Dey and her team in Current Developments in Nutrition confirmed strong participant adherence and described the complex operations that made this real-world feeding study possible.

Findings and implications
On average, participants spontaneously reduced calorie intake and experienced about 10% total body fat loss and 13% belly fat loss during both diet phases, along with a 23% improvement in insulin sensitivity and favorable changes in inflammatory markers and nutrient-sensing hormone levels. Daily calorie intake decreased by roughly 400 calories per day, even without instructions to restrict calories. These results suggest that replacing ultra processed food with minimally processed ones can enhance metabolic efficiency and body composition in older adults, within balanced, American Guidelines–aligned diets. The study also demonstrates that high dietary quality and lower processing can be achieved in practical, take-home meal programs.

Researchers note that the 18-week trial included a small sample of 36 participants who completed the study, and that larger studies are needed to confirm long-term outcomes. At the one-year follow-up, when participants’ ultra-processed food intake gradually increased again, many of the metabolic improvements observed during the trial diminished, suggesting that benefits depend on sustained reductions in ultra-processed foods. Still, the consistency of effects across both diet patterns underscores the central role of food processing in metabolic health.

“This study moves past the usual debate over whether plant-based or animal-based diets are better,” Dey said. “Both can be health-promoting when foods are simply prepared and nutritionally balanced.”

Higher glycemic index linked to higher lung cancer risk

 Background: In this study, researchers examined whether people who follow higher-GI or higher-GL diets have different risks of developing lung cancer. They used data from 101,732 adults in the U.S. National Cancer Institute's Prostate, Lung, Colorectal and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial cohort who filled out a detailed diet questionnaire when they joined the study (1993–2001). These adults were followed for about 12 years to see who developed lung cancer. The researchers then compared people with the highest GI and GL to those with the lowest, accounting for smoking and other factors.

What This Study Found:

• Glycemic index: People who ate diets with the highest glycemic index had a higher chance of lung cancer than those with the lowest glycemic index — about 13% higher overall — including higher risks for both non–small cell and small cell lung cancer.

• Glycemic load: People who ate diets with the highest glycemic load had a lower chance of lung cancer than those with the lowest glycemic load — about 28% lower overall — and the pattern was similar for non–small cell lung cancer. There was no clear link for small cell lung cancer.

Implications: Diets that contain fewer amounts of high glycemic index foods and higher amounts of high-quality carbohydrates, such as vegetables, fruits, and whole grains, may be linked to lower lung cancer risk.

Dietary Glycemic Index, Glycemic Load, and Risk of Lung Cancer: a Population-Based Cohort Study  

The dietary glycemic index (GI) is a rating system for carbohydrate-containing foods based on how quickly they raise blood sugar (glucose) levels after eating, compared to a reference food (usually pure glucose). 

Understanding the Glycemic Index

The GI ranks foods on a scale of 0 to 100, categorized into three ranges: 

• Low GI: 55 or less
• Medium GI: 56 to 69
• High GI: 70 or higher 

Foods with a high GI are quickly digested and cause a rapid spike in blood sugar, while low GI foods are digested more slowly, resulting in a gradual and lower rise in blood glucose and insulin levels. 

Foods that are primarily fat or protein (e.g., meat, fish, oils) do not contain carbohydrates and are not assigned a GI value. 

Factors Affecting a Food's GI

A food's GI value is not static and can be influenced by several factors: 

• Processing: Minimally processed, whole foods generally have a lower GI than refined or instant versions (e.g., steel-cut oats vs. instant oatmeal).
• Fiber, Fat, and Protein Content: The presence of these nutrients slows down digestion and absorption, which lowers the overall GI of a food or a meal.
• Cooking Method and Time: Longer cooking times can break down starches, increasing the GI (e.g., al dente pasta has a lower GI than soft-cooked pasta).
• Ripeness: As fruits ripen, their sugar content increases, raising their GI (e.g., an unripe banana has a lower GI than an overripe one). 

Glycemic Load (GL)

A related and often more accurate measure is the Glycemic Load (GL). While the GI indicates how quickly a carbohydrate is converted to glucose, the GL accounts for both the speed of digestion (GI) and the actual amount of carbohydrate in a standard serving size. 

The GL calculation is: (Glycemic Index × grams of available carbohydrate per serving) / 100. 

GL values are also categorized: 

• Low GL: 10 or less
• Medium GL: 11 to 19
• High GL: 20 or more 

For example, watermelon has a high GI (72), but a standard serving size contains little carbohydrate, giving it a low GL (around 4), which is a more realistic picture of its effect on blood sugar. 

Health Implications

Following a low-GI or low-GL diet may offer health benefits: 

• Diabetes Management: Helps people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes manage blood sugar levels and improve glycemic control.
• Weight Management: May help with short-term weight loss and appetite control by promoting a feeling of fullness.
• Reduced Disease Risk: Diets with a high GI and GL are positively associated with a higher risk of developing type 2 diabetes, coronary heart disease, and certain cancers. 

While the GI is a useful tool, it is best used as part of an overall healthy eating pattern that focuses on a variety of nutrient-dense foods, portion control, and general dietary guidelines. You can use resources like the University of Sydney's GI database or the American Diabetes Association guidelines to learn more. 

US regions with high epilepsy rates among older adults

  

Caption

 Epilepsy Incidence Among Medicare Beneficiaries 65 Years and Older Across US MaxCounties

Credit

American Medical Association.

Insufficient sleep, extreme heat, physical inactivity, healthcare access and low vehicle access linked to higher disease risk

A first-of-its-kind nationwide study has mapped epilepsy incidence rates among older adults in the United States and identified key social and environmental factors associated with the neurological condition. Published recently in JAMA Neurology, the study is a collaborative effort between researchers at Houston Methodist Research Institute and Case Western Reserve University. The analysis revealed that epilepsy cases among adults aged 65 and older were significantly higher in parts of the South—including Louisiana, Mississippi, East Texas and central Oklahoma—compared to other regions.

Epilepsy affects an estimated 3.3 million people in the United States, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In 2019, health care spending on epilepsy and seizures reached $24.5 billion.

Against this backdrop, the study’s lead investigator, Weichuan Dong, Ph.D., assistant professor at the Houston Methodist DeBakey Heart & Vascular Center and adjunct assistant professor at Case Western Reserve University, said the research offers critical insight into how epilepsy impacts older adults nationwide—revealing geographic patterns that could reshape how communities approach prevention and care for this neurological condition.

“Until now, we didn’t have a national picture of where epilepsy affects older adults the most,” Dong said. “By applying advanced geospatial mapping to Medicare data, we revealed striking clusters of high epilepsy rates across parts of the South — what we call the ‘epilepsy belt.’ Understanding where the burden lies is the first step toward uncovering why and helping communities reduce risk.”

The study also found that the most influential factors linked to higher epilepsy incidence included insufficient sleep (fewer than seven hours per night), extreme heat (more days with heat index above 95 degrees), lack of physical activity, lack of health insurance among younger adults (suggesting delayed diagnosis until Medicare eligibility) and limited access to a household vehicle. These conditions, often shaped by local environments and socioeconomic status, were more prevalent in regions with the highest epilepsy rates.

“This is the first study documenting such a strong association between extreme heat and incident epilepsy in older adults across the U.S., highlighting the importance of climate change in emergency preparedness, especially given the graying of the population,” said Siran Koroukian, Ph.D., professor in the Department of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences at Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine.

Using advanced geospatial machine learning algorithms, researchers analyzed data from 4.8 million Medicare beneficiaries between 2016 and 2019. Data sources included the U.S. Medicare Master Beneficiary Summary File and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Alaska and Hawaii were excluded due to incomplete data from the Social and Environmental Determinants of Health report.

The study uncovered patterns previously invisible in national data, showing how factors like neighborhood sleep habits, heat exposure, health care access and household vehicle access can shape health outcomes. Other strong predictors included obesity prevalence and availability of primary care physicians.

Smoking cannabis and eating highly processed foods raises cardiac health risks

Key takeaways:

• Cannabis smoke and processed-food diets weaken the immune system, making it harder for the body to repair heart damage caused by inhaled cannabis.
• Cannabis compounds rapidly accumulate in major organs, including the heart, lungs and brain, where they can intensify inflammation.
• The risks are greatest for individuals already eating seed-oil–rich processed foods, a pattern common among populations with high rates of obesity and chronic illness.

Smoking cannabis can increase the risk of heart problems — but doing so and eating highly processed foods increases cardiac health risks even more, a new University of South Florida study says.

The combination may weaken the immune system, leading to a higher risk of cardiac problems.

Consuming a diet heavy in processed foods, especially those laden with seed oils, and smoking cannabis may compromise the immune system, according to the paper newly published online in the journal Life Sciences. That, in turn, impedes the immune system’s response from being activated to repair any damage to the heart caused by inhaling cannabis.

“If you are smoking cannabis, and you are already on a processed food diet — or what we call an omega-6 enriched diet — then you are shutting off the immune system, which is your defense system,” said Ganesh Halade, a cardiovascular researcher and professor of Internal Medicine in the USF Health Morsani College of Medicine, and senior author of the new study. “In other words, if you eat a lot of this type of food and add in smoking cannabis, then your defense system will be impaired.”

In the study, researchers examined the effects of smoking hemp, a form of cannabis that contains CBD, or cannabidiol. It contains extremely low amounts of THC, the compound in marijuana that causes people to experience psychoactive effects. Marijuana is derived from the cannabis plant.

Researchers wanted to study the impact of smoking cannabis and its overlap with the consumption of omega-6–enriched processed foods amid concerns that marijuana use is becoming more frequent among populations that are already unhealthy.

The genesis for the study was the increasing number of U.S. states where marijuana use is legalized. Halade has been participating in tobacco-related research grant review in California and, while visiting there, noticed the prevalence of cannabis in the downtown area.

“I was reading the previous scientific literature and realized we have limited understanding of what cannabis is doing to the body at a molecular level,” he said. “So I thought, ‘What is the impact of cannabis, where the American diet is already heavy on processed/packaged food? It is a real situation. And that is what we’re trying to address in this whole paper.”

According to the study, while cannabis is legal in 35 states, “its cardiac effects, particularly alongside omega-6-rich seed oil diets in processed foods, are not well understood.” However, through laboratory experiments, Halade and his team found that cannabis smoke weakened the heart function and that significant quantities of multiple cannabis compounds accumulated in several organs, including the heart, lungs and brain.

Furthermore, they found that the seed-oil diet suppresses the immune system’s ability to fight inflammation in the body when compared with a diet that did not include processed and packaged foods. For context, Halade pointed out that only a small percentage of the body’s blood cells, about one percent of the blood content, are part of the immune system.

“Think of it as the Army, the police or firefighters,” he said. “When there’s a problem, they come to fight it right away. That’s what that one percent is doing within the body — and it doesn’t discriminate among organs. Wherever there’s a problem, it goes there. Whether it’s an insect bite, a cut or an acute injury, that same one percent goes to any part of the body to take care of it. In essence, our whole defense system depends on that tiny percentage.”

Unless, as the paper explains, the immune system is undermined by the combination of cannabis and processed/packaged food enriched with seed oils.

“Our first innovative finding is that we have very state-of-the-art technology to quantify the components that are present in the cannabis material,” Halade explained. “We can detect it in the heart, in the spleen, the plasma, the lungs and the brain. This means that when anyone smokes cannabis, it can go rapidly to the multiple organs. And we can detect it within two hours.”

But a second, more critical discovery, points to the negative effect of inhaled cannabis smoke on the immune system for people whose menu choices are filled with soybean oil, corn oil, safflower oil and many other oils that are key ingredients in processed/packaged foods. Halade weighs that fact against the knowledge that some 40 percent of the population is obese, and some 70-75 percent are overweight.

“So that whole population is already on packaged or processed food of some sort, and if these people are among those smoking cannabis, they will definitely have a more harmful effect than a beneficial one,” Halade said. “If they get sick, it can be worse for them.”

Halade and his team conducted a five-day lab study that examined the impact of smoking twice daily over that period. It demonstrated a pronounced impact from a microscopic perspective. “We could detect molecules in the organs from the cannabis, and we also learned that it weakens the heart and inflames the lungs and other organs,” he said.

That can lead to another kind of danger: developing chronic inflammation. While acute inflammation is the body’s response to an infection or injury, and is part of the healing process, chronic inflammation has more negative effects.

“Chronic inflammation is the one we need to take care of, and that is the one coming from our lifestyle choices,” Halade said. “It really has tremendous consequences on your whole body, and that’s what cannabis is doing. It amplifies your chronic inflammation, rather than activating your beneficial acute inflammation.”

Given the complexity involved, scientists still do not fully understand the immune system, Halade adds, but in addition to inhaling cannabis and eating a poor diet, two other key factors have a direct effect on the immune system: sleep and exercise.

“We previously published a paper on that, and our motto was, if the three components are there — good diet, proper sleep and regular exercise — then the immune system responds effectively to eliminate the danger from the body,” he said. “But adding cannabis, on top of a poor diet, makes a mess.”

What comprises a good diet? Halade points to a non-processed, homemade, wholesome diet-based approach, especially later in a person’s life. “From middle age on, the diet, along with physical activity and sleep, needs to be coordinated for better health,” he said. 

All adults should receive the 2025-2026 influenza vaccine

 The American College of Physicians (ACP) issued new influenza vaccine practice points that say everyone ages 18 to 64 years who are not pregnant or immunocompromised should receive either a standard-dose trivalent or a standard-dose quadrivalent (cell-based, egg-based, MF59-adjuvanted, or recombinant) influenza vaccine for the 2025-2026 influenza season. Those aged 65 years or older who are not immunocompromised should receive either a high-dose trivalent or a high-dose quadrivalent egg-based influenza vaccine. ACP did not examine evidence or make recommendations for pregnant women or immunocompromised adults. The practice points are published in Annals of Internal Medicine.  

Influenza A and B drive seasonal epidemics because they are highly infectious, rapidly mutate, and cause a respiratory infection known as the flu. Incidence and severity of influenza vary by year and season but is greatest in the fall and winter. Adults aged ≥ 65 years and adults with comorbidities, such as diabetes, asthma, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), are at greater risk for morbidity and mortality.   

More ultra-processed foods = higher rates of precursors of early-onset colorectal cancer

 Colorectal cancer used to be associated with old age, but diagnoses have become increasingly common in adults aged 50 or younger particularly in high-income countries like the United States. The reason for this trend is unclear, but a new study led by Mass General Brigham researchers, as part of the Cancer Grand Challenges PROSPECT team, suggests an important link to ultra-processed foods that merits closer investigation. By analyzing the diets and endoscopy results from almost 30,000 women, the team found that study participants who reported consuming the highest levels of ultra-processed foods had a 45% higher risk of developing adenomas, which can be precursors of early-onset colorectal cancer, compared to participants who reported consuming the lowest levels. Their results are published in JAMA Oncology. 

“Our findings support the importance of reducing the intake of ultra-processed foods as a strategy to mitigate the rising burden of early-onset colorectal cancer,” said senior author Andrew Chan, MD, MPH, chief of the Clinical and Translational Epidemiology Unit and a gastroenterologist in the Mass General Brigham Cancer Institute. “The increased risk seems to be fairly linear, meaning that the more ultra-processed foods you eat, the more potential that it could lead to colon polyps.” 

The consumption of ultra-processed foods — ready-to-eat foods that often contain high levels of sugar, salt, saturated fat and food additives — has risen in parallel to the rise of early-onset colorectal cancer (EOCRC). Chan’s research group previously found an association between ultra-processed foods and colorectal cancer more broadly, but this is the first study to link ultra-processed foods with EOCRC.  

The researchers analyzed data from the Nurses’ Health Study II, a long-term prospective study of female nurses who were born between 1947 and 1964 — a generation that is known to be at elevated risk for EOCRC. They analyzed 24 years’ worth of data from 29,105 female nurses who received at least two lower endoscopies before they turned 50 to screen for colorectal cancer precursors. The participants also completed dietary surveys every four years, from which the researchers estimated their average daily intake of ultra-processed food. Though diet was self-reported, this type of survey has been validated for its ability to accurately reflect a person’s dietary patterns. 

On average, participants consumed 5.7 servings of ultra-processed foods per day, which amounted to 35% of their total daily calories — slightly lower than the national average in the U.S.  

From the endoscopy results, the researchers identified 2,787 participants who developed precursor polyps for colorectal cancer. Women who consumed the highest amounts of ultra-processed foods (10 servings per day on average), had a 45% higher risk of developing conventional adenomas, the colorectal cancer precursor most associated with EOCRC, compared to individuals who consumed the lowest amounts (3 servings per day on average). However, there was no association between ultra-processed food intake and serrated lesions, another type of colorectal cancer precursor, but one that develops more slowly and is less commonly associated with EOCRC. 

“One of the strengths of our study was that we had detailed information about other colorectal cancer risk factors in the participants, such as such as body mass index, type 2 diabetes, and low fiber intake,” said Chan. “Even after accounting for all these other risk factors, the association with ultra-processed foods still held up.” 

The authors note that ultra-processed foods do not fully explain the rise in EOCRC, and the researchers are working to identify other risk factors. They’re also working on ways to better categorize ultra-processed foods, since some foods in this category might be more harmful than others.  

“Diet isn't a complete explanation for why we're seeing this trend — we see many individuals in our clinic with early onset colon cancer who eat very healthy diets,” said Chan, who conducted this work as part of the Cancer Grand Challenges PROSPECT team. “Identifying other risk factors for early onset colorectal cancer is one of the focuses of the work that we're leading here at the Mass General Brigham Cancer Institute.” 

 

Want fewer running injuries? Start with better sleep

 

If you are among the 620 million people who lace up their running shoes on a regular basis, chances are that you’re an early riser.

Hopefully, you will have got at least eight hours of good sleep the night before, otherwise your risk of injury skyrockets.

That’s the finding from a new study led by Professor Jan de Jonge, a work and sports psychologist at Eindhoven University of Technology in the Netherlands, and an Adjunct Professor at the University of South Australia.

In a survey of 425 recreational runners, Prof de Jonge and his team found that those reporting shorter sleep duration, lower sleep quality, and more sleep problems were nearly twice as likely to sustain an injury.

The findings, published in Applied Sciences, provide “compelling evidence that sleep is a critical yet often overlooked component of injury prevention,” according to Prof de Jonge.

“While runners specifically focus on mileage, nutrition and recovery strategies, sleep tends to fall to the bottom of the list,” he says.

“Our research shows that poor sleepers were 1.78 times more likely to report injuries than those with stable, good quality sleep, with a 68% likelihood of sustaining an injury over a 12-month period.

“That’s a strong reminder that how well you rest is just as important as how hard you train.”

Recreational running is one of the world’s most popular sports, but it also carries a high injury risk, with up to 90% of runners experiencing an injury at some stage, costing the world economy millions of dollars each year in work absences and medical expenses.

The study is among the first to investigate sleep as a multidimensional factor in relation to sports injuries, considering not just duration, but also quality and sleep disorders.

“Sleep is a vital biological process that allows the body and mind to recover and adapt to the physical and mental demands of training,” Prof de Jonge says.

“When sleep is disrupted or insufficient, the body’s ability to repair tissues, regulate hormones and maintain focus diminishes, all of which can increase injury risk.”

The research found that runners who regularly experienced sleep problems such as trouble falling asleep, waking frequently during the night, or not feeling rested upon waking, were particularly vulnerable to injury.

In contrast, those with consistent sleep duration and good sleep quality reported fewer injuries.

Prof de Jonge says the findings have important implications for both recreational and competitive athletes, coaches, and health professionals.

“We often assume that more training equals better performance, but that’s not necessarily the case.”

“Runners – especially those balancing training with work, family and social commitments – may actually need more sleep than average adults to recover properly. Sleep should be treated as a performance priority, not an afterthought.”

Experts recommend that people should aim for between seven and nine hours of sleep per night, with athletes often needing more rest, including daytime naps, to aid mental and physical recovery.

Consistent bedtimes, minimising screen use before bed, reducing caffeine and alcohol content, and creating a quiet, cool sleep environment should be all be prioritised.

“Sleep quality and sleep duration are both important, but quantity often provides the bed-rock. Sleep should be recognized not only as a recovery tool, but also as a potential predictor of injury vulnerability in recreational sports.”

‘Sleep Matters: Profiling Sleep Patterns to Predict Sports Injuries in Recreational Runners’ is published in Applied Sciences. DOI: 10.3390/app151910814