1. Home
  2. Cranberries Squashed as Folk Remedy for Urinary Infections

Cranberries Squashed as Folk Remedy for Urinary Infections

[email protected] (Agencies)
October 28, 2016

Oct 28: Cranberry capsules didn't prevent or cure urinary infections in nursing home residents in a study challenging persistent unproven claims to the contrary.

Cranberries

The research adds to decades of conflicting evidence on whether cranberries in any form can prevent extremely common bacterial infections, especially in women.

Many studies suggesting a benefit were based on weak science, but that hasn't stopped marketers and even some health care providers from recommending cranberry juice or capsules as an inexpensive way to avoid these uncomfortable and potentially risky infections.

The new study , published online Thursday in the Journal of the American Medical Association, used rigorous methods and the results are convincing, according to a journal editorial. Health care providers who encourage using cranberry products as a prevention method "are doing their patients a disservice," the editorial says.

THE INFECTIONS

Urinary infections lead to nearly 9 million doctor visits and more than 1 million hospitalizations each year. Men, because of their urinary anatomy, are less vulnerable, while almost half of all U.S. women will develop at least one of these infections in their lifetime. Symptoms can include painful, frequent urination and fatigue.

Antibiotics are often used to treat the infections, which usually are not serious but can lead to kidney infections and sometimes dangerous bloodstream infections. Urinary infections are the most commonly diagnosed infection in nursing home residents, but they often have no obvious symptoms and evidence suggests antibiotics have little effect in these older patients without symptoms, the study authors say.

THE STUDY

The research included 147 older women in nursing homes who were randomly assigned to take two cranberry capsules or dummy pills for a year. The number of women with laboratory evidence of infection — bacteria and white blood cells in their urine — varied during the study but averaged about 29 percent overall in both groups.

Ten infections in the cranberry group caused overt symptoms, compared with 12 in the placebo group but that difference wasn't statistically significant. There also were no differences in hospitalizations and deaths between the two groups. The National Institutes of Health helped pay for the research, led by Dr. Manisha Juthani-Mehta, a Yale University infectious disease specialist.

Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc., one of the best-known makers of cranberry-based products, promotes the purported health benefits on its website. Responding to the new study, company spokeswoman Kellyanne Dignan cited previous studies that suggested a benefit and said, "We take great pride in our cranberry products and the health benefits associated with them."

THE ADVICE

People who think they have a urinary infection should see a doctor for diagnosis and treatment, but avoid cranberry products "in place of proven treatments for infections," according to the National Institutes of Health alternative medicine branch.

The journal editorial says additional research is needed to find effective treatments for nursing home residents and others.

"It is time to move on from cranberries," the editorial says.

Comments

Add new comment

About text formats
  • 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
July 7,2020

The World Health Organization (WHO) is reviewing a report that suggested its advice on the novel coronavirus needs updating after some scientists told the New York Times there was evidence the virus could be spread by tiny particles in the air.

The WHO says the Covid-19 disease spreads primarily through small droplets, which are expelled from the nose and mouth when an infected person breaths them out in coughs, sneezes, speech or laughter and quickly sink to the ground.

In an open letter to the Geneva-based agency, 239 scientists in 32 countries outlined the evidence they say shows that smaller exhaled particles can infect people who inhale them, the newspaper said on Saturday.

Because those smaller particles can linger in the air longer, the scientists - who plan to publish their findings in a scientific journal this week - are urging WHO to update its guidance, the Times said.

"We are aware of the article and are reviewing its contents with our technical experts," WHO spokesman Tarik Jasarevic said in an email reply on Monday to a Reuters request for comment.

The extent to which the coronavirus can be spread by the so-called airborne or aerosol route - as opposed to by larger droplets in coughs and sneezes - remains disputed.

Any change in the WHO's assessment of the risk of transmission could affect its current advice on keeping one-metre physical distancing. Governments, which also rely on the agency for guidance policy, may also have to adjust public health measures aimed at curbing the spread of the virus.

"Especially in the last couple of months, we have been stating several times that we consider airborne transmission as possible but certainly not supported by solid or even clear evidence," Benedetta Allegranzi, the WHO's technical lead for infection prevention and control, was quoted as saying in the New York Times.

WHO guidance to health workers, dated June 29, says that SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes Covid-19, is primarily transmitted between people through respiratory droplets and on surfaces.

But airborne transmission via smaller particles is possible in some circumstances, such as when performing intubation and aerosol-generating procedures, it says.

Medical workers performing such procedures should wear heavy-duty N95 respiratory masks and other protective equipment in an adequately ventilated room, the WHO says.

Officials at South Korea's Centers for Disease Control said on Monday they were continuing to discuss various issues about Covid-19, including the possible airborne transmission. They said more investigations and evidence were needed.

Comments

Add new comment

About text formats
  • 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
March 6,2020

Mar 6: The spread of the new coronavirus is shining the spotlight on a little-discussed gender split: men wash their hands after using the bathroom less than women, years of research and on-the-ground observations show.

Health officials around the world advise that deliberate, regular handwashing is one of the best weapons against the virus which causes a flu-like respiratory illness that can kill and has spread to around 80 countries.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's online fact sheet "Handwashing: A corporate activity," cites a 2009 study that finds "only 31% of men and 65% of women washed their hands" after using a public restroom.

Social media comments about men's handwashing lapses forced an august British institution to caution visitors about bathroom behaviour this week.

After author Sathnam Sanghera complained on Twitter about "grown," "educated" men in the British Library toilets not washing their hands, the library responded, putting up additional signs reminding patrons to wash their hands in men's and women's bathrooms.

Thanks to "visitor feedback," a spokesman told Reuters, "we have increased further the number of posters in public toilets so that visitors are reminded of the importance of good hygiene at exactly the point where they can wash their hands."

Men and women approach handwashing after using the restroom differently, according to multiple surveys and field studies.

"Women wash their hands significantly more often, use soap more often, and wash their hands somewhat longer than men," according to a 2013 Michigan State University field study conducted by research assistants who observed nearly 4,000 people in restrooms around East Lansing, Michigan.

The study found 14.6% of men did not wash their hands at all after using the bathroom and 35.1% wet their hands but did not use soap, compared to 7.1% and 15.1% of women, respectively.

"If you stand in the men's bathroom at work, and watch men leave, they mostly don't wash their hands if they used the urinal," said one New York City public relations executive, who did not want to be identified for fear of alienating his colleagues.

Since the virus's spread, he's seen an uptick in men's handwashing at work, he noted. "I, for the record, do wash my hands all the time," he added.

Female medical staff in critical care units "washed their hands significantly more often than did their male counterparts after patient contact," a 2001 study published in the American Journal of Infection Control found.

Middle-aged women with some college education had the highest level of knowledge about hand hygiene, a survey published in 2019 by BMC Public Health, an open access public health journal, found.

Early information about coronavirus infection in China shows that men may be more susceptible to the disease. Just over 58% of the more than 1,000 COVID-19 patients reported in China through Jan. 29, 2020, were male, research published in the New England Journal of Medicine shows.

Researchers have not linked the difference to hand hygiene.

Comments

Add new comment

About text formats
  • 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 25,2020

Singapore, May 25: COVID-19 patients are no longer infectious after 11 days of getting sick even though some may still test positive, according to a new study by infectious disease experts in Singapore.

A positive test "does not equate to infectiousness or viable virus," a joint research paper by Singapore's National Centre for Infectious Diseases and the Academy of Medicine, Singapore said. The virus "could not be isolated or cultured after day 11 of illness."

The paper was based on a study of 73 patents in the city-state.

The latest findings may have implications on the country's patient discharge policy. The discharge criteria is currently based on negative test results rather than infectiousness.

Singapore's strategy on managing COVID-19 patients is guided by the latest local and international clinical scientific evidence, and the Ministry of Health will evaluate if the latest evidence can be incorporated into its patient clinical management plan, according to a report by the Straits Times.

So far, 13,882, or about 45% of the total 31,068 Covid-19 patients in Singapore have been discharged from hospitals and community facilities. Singapore reported 642 new Covid-19 cases as of noon on Saturday.

The government has been actively screening pre-school staff as it prepares to reopen pre-schools from June 2. On Friday, two pre-school employees tested positive for the novel coronavirus, bringing the total number of confirmed cases among pre-school staff to seven, according to the Ministry of Health.

Comments

Add new comment

About text formats
  • 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.