Children drinking non-cow milk little shorter than peers

Agencies
June 25, 2017

Jun 25: A new study suggests drinking non-cow milk- soy, almond or rice milks - is linked to shorter kids.cowmilk

The study, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, found that each daily cup of non-cow's milk consumed was associated with 0.4 centimeters (0.15 inches) lower height than average for a child's age.

"We found that children who are consuming non-cow's milk like rice, almond and soy milk tended to be a little bit shorter than children who consumed cow's milk," said Dr. Jonathon Maguire, the study's lead author and a pediatrician and researchers at St. Michael's Hospital in Toronto.

"For example, a 3-year-old child consuming three cups of non-cow's milk relative to cow's milk was on average 1.5 centimeters shorter."

That's over half an inch difference, which Maguire said is "not a tiny difference when you're 3 years old."

The study was a cross-section involving 5,034 healthy Canadian children ranging in age from two to six years old. The subjects were on average 38 months of age, with 51% being male, and were recruited from nine family and pediatric health-care practices from December 2008 to September 2015.

Of those participating, about five percent drank exclusively non-cow's milks, and about 84% drank only cow's milk; about eight percent drank both and about three precent drank neither.

Maguire said the most surprising finding was "that the amount children were shorter depended on how much they were consuming."

"It's not like if you're not consuming cow's milk, you're a little shorter," he said. "It's more like if you are consuming non-cow's milk, with each cup that a child consumes, that child on average appears to be a little bit smaller, a little shorter. That's a bit surprising."

Does it matter if a kid is half an inch shorter at the age of three? Does it correlate to height in adulthood?

"That's one remaining question. We don't know if the kids consuming non-cow's milk, maybe they catch up over time, or maybe they don't. Time's going to have to tell," he said.

"We do know in general as pediatricians that children who are on a certain percentile line in terms of height tend to stay on that line for the rest of their childhood and into adulthood."

The findings are sure to add fire to the ongoing debate about the benefits of cow's milk versus dairy alternatives.

Amy Joy Lanou, a professor of health and wellness at the University of North Carolina-Asheville who was not involved in the research, said she had several issues with the study, most notably why only milk consumption was considered.

"It's just odd to me why we wouldn't be looking at the overall diets of the children," Lanou said. "If they're making the claim that it's because it's the difference in the types of milk the kids are drinking, well, what else are they eating?"

Lanou, whose research has led her to believe that cow's milk is "not a necessary food," said she believes the study makes an improper leap by implying that taller means healthier.

"Taller children and heavier children are not necessarily healthier adults, or even healthier children," she said. "I think they're using height as a marker for health, and I'm not sure that's appropriate."

Connie Weaver, a professor of nutrition science at Purdue University who was also not involved in the study, said she found it interesting.

"This is the first study that I recall directly comparing cow milk with plant-based beverages for a physiological benefit," she wrote in an email. "We know that some of the plant beverages, almond especially, have lower protein contents so I have speculated that calcium absorption may be lower. This would suggest that cow's milk is superior."

However, she says, "A wrong message would be if people who do not consume cow's milk would decide to avoid the plant-based milks also."

The study suggests that one reason for the difference in height might be that plant-based milks do not stimulate insulin-like growth factor, or IGF, production as well as cow's milk does. Studies have found that adults with higher levels of certain IGFs have increased risks of reproductive cancers.

"Having less IGF may compromise height but that may lower risk of fracture -- and some cancers, too," Weaver said.

Overall, she would advise parents that "cow's milk may be the best option, but plant-based beverages provide many needed nutrients like protein, calcium, magnesium, potassium," which is far better than what most kids might prefer to drink.

Lanou would tell parents who are already giving plant-based milks to their children not to worry -- but to make sure their kids are getting enough protein from other sources throughout the day.

Maguire said he'd like to see soy, almond and rice milks more tightly regulated to bring the industry, in line with cow's milk.

"As a consumer and as a parent, you have to be pretty savvy when going to the grocery store to choose a non-cow's milk beverage that has similar nutritional value as cow's milk," he said. "Many of those beverages are marketed as being equivalent to cow's milk when they're not."

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
June 20,2020

Washington, Jun 20: Pregnant and postpartum women are usually at a high risk of depression and anxiety - one in seven women struggle with symptoms in the perinatal period and the coronavirus pandemic is exacerbating those struggles according to a recent study.

The study was published in Frontiers in Global Women's Health, which found that the likelihood of maternal depression and anxiety has substantially increased during the health crisis.

"The social and physical isolation measures that are critically needed to reduce the spread of the virus are taking a toll on the physical and mental health of many of us," said Dr. Margie Davenport of the University of Alberta, Canada, who co-authored the study.

For new moms, those stresses come with side effects.

"We know that experiencing depression and anxiety during pregnancy and the postpartum period can have detrimental effects on the mental and physical health of both mother and baby that can persist for years," said Davenport.

Such effects can include premature delivery, reduced mother-infant bonding, and developmental delays in infants.

The study surveyed 900 women - 520 of whom were pregnant and 380 of whom had given birth in the past year - and asked about their depression and anxiety symptoms before and during the pandemic.

Before the pandemic began, 29 percent of those women experienced moderate to high anxiety symptoms, and 15 percent experienced depressive symptoms. During the pandemic, those numbers increased - 72 percent experienced anxiety and 41percent experienced depression.

Because lockdown measures have affected daily routines and access to gyms, researchers also asked women whether their exercise habits had changed. Of the women surveyed, 64 percent reduced their physical activity since the pandemic began, while 15 percent increased and 21 percent experienced no change.

Exercise is a known way to ease depression symptoms, so limited physical activity may result in an uptick in depressive symptoms. Indeed, the study found that women who engaged in at least 150 minutes of moderate physical activity a week had significantly lower symptoms of depression and anxiety.

The findings are somewhat limited given the fact that researchers could not survey women before the pandemic began (since they could not know a pandemic would occur). The women surveyed could only offer their pre-pandemic symptoms in hindsight.

Also, while the researchers asked women about their symptoms using validated measures, only mental health care professionals can validly diagnose an individual with depression or anxiety.

The study was specifically interested in the impact of COVID-19 on new moms, but Davenport says maternal mental health is a critical issue no matter the time.

"Even when we are not in a global pandemic, many pregnant and postpartum women frequently feel isolated whether due to being hospitalized, not having family or friends around or other reasons," she said.

"It is critical to increase awareness of the impact of social (and physical) isolation on the mental health of pregnant and postpartum women," Davenport added.

Increased awareness makes diagnosis and treatment - the ultimate goal - more likely.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
May 17,2020

Geneva, May 17: Spraying disinfectant on the streets, as practised in some countries, does not eliminate the new coronavirus and even poses a health risk, the World Health Organization (WHO) warned on Saturday.

In a document on cleaning and disinfecting surfaces as part of the response to the virus, the WHO says spraying can be ineffective. "Spraying or fumigation of outdoor spaces, such as streets or marketplaces, is... not recommended to kill the Covid-19 virus or other pathogens because disinfectant is inactivated by dirt and debris," explains the WHO.

"Even in the absence of organic matter, chemical spraying is unlikely to adequately cover all surfaces for the duration of the required contact time needed to inactivate pathogens." The WHO said that streets and pavements are not considered as "reservoirs of infection" of Covid-19, adding that spraying disinfectants, even outside, can be "dangerous for human health".

The document also stresses that spraying individuals with disinfectants is "not recommended under any circumstances".

"This could be physically and psychologically harmful and would not reduce an infected person's ability to spread the virus through droplets or contact," said the document.

Spraying chlorine or other toxic chemicals on people can cause eye and skin irritation, bronchospasm and gastrointestinal effects, it adds.

The organisation is also warning against the systematic spraying and fumigating of disinfectants on to surfaces in indoor spaces, citing a study that has shown it to be ineffective outside direct spraying areas.

"If disinfectants are to be applied, this should be done with a cloth or wipe that has been soaked in disinfectant," it says.

The SARS-CoV-2 virus, the cause of the pandemic that has killed more than 300,000 people worldwide since its appearance in late December in China, can attach itself to surfaces and objects.

However, no precise information is currently available for the period during which the viruses remain infectious on the various surfaces.

Studies have shown that the virus can stay on several types of surfaces for several days. However, these maximum durations are only theoretical because they are recorded under laboratory conditions and should be "interpreted with caution" in the real-world environment.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
May 26,2020

Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the World Health Organisation's (WHO) Director-General, said that a clinical trial of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) on COVID-19 patients has come to "a temporary pause", while the safety data of the the anti-malaria drug was being reviewed.

According to the WHO chief, The Lancet medical journal on May 22 had published an observational study on HCQ and chloroquine and its effects on COVID-19 patients that have been hospitalized, reports Xinhua news agency.

The authors of the study reported that among patients receiving the drug, when used alone or with a macrolide, they estimated a higher mortality rate.

"The Executive Group of the Solidarity Trial, representing 10 of the participating countries, met on Saturday (May 23) and has agreed to review a comprehensive analysis and critical appraisal of all evidence available globally," Tedros said in a virtual press conference on Monday.

The review will consider data collected so far in the Solidarity Trial and in particular robust randomized available data, to adequately evaluate the potential benefits and harms from this drug, he said.

"The Executive Group has implemented a temporary pause of the HCQ arm within the Solidarity Trial while the safety data is reviewed by the Data Safety Monitoring Board. The other arms of the trial are continuing," Tedros added.

WHO initiated the Solidarity Trial, a plan to evaluate the safety and efficacy of four drugs and drug combinations against COVID-19 more than two months ago, which include HCQ.

According to the WHO, over 400 hospitals in 35 countries are actively recruiting patients and nearly 3,500 patients have been enrolled from 17 countries under the Solidarity Trial.

Tedros added that the safety concern over the drug related only to the use of HCQ and chloroquine in COVID-19, and "these drugs are accepted as generally safe for use in patients with autoimmune diseases or malaria".

"WHO will provide further updates as we know more," he added.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.