Exercise and other lifestyle habits that may add over 10 years to your life

China, where the novel coronavirus originated, has reported 111 cases since beginning of May, which shows the infection rate has dipped, and 3 deaths since April 27, according to the WHO. A Shanghai-based Noida doctor says China is close to winning the battle against COVID-19, and the combination of zinc, hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and antibiotic azithromycin has been able to save the lives of coronavirus patients.

Speaking to media persons, Dr Sanjeev Choubey, Medical Director Internal Medicine at St. Michael Hospital said this combination has been adopted as a line of treatment for patients infected with coronavirus, and as a result patients are recovering, decreasing their need for intensive care.

What is the line of treatment for COVID-19 patients, which also include asymptomatic patients?

The combination of zinc, hydroxychloroquine and antibiotic azithromycin has produced positive results, and it helped in the recovery of many COVID-19 patients. The combination -- Ascorbic Acid, B-complex, Zinc, Selenium, L-carnitine, Vitamin B-12 and Glutathione normal saline should be administered on patients twice a week for at least 6 weeks. This is COVID-19 treatment protocol for prophylaxis, and it implies both asymptomatic and symptomatic along with other medicine support.

Based on your experience on COVID-19 in China, after how many tests, is it safe to call a person coronavirus free?

The coronavirus should be performed at least 9 times, before terming a patient COVID-19 free. It is a standard in China. This procedure has worked in China and it will also work in India. Minimum five tests should be mandatory through RT-PCR.

Does coronavirus majorly attack the respiratory system or it could lead to organ failure too?

Line of treatment should not be just looking at the respiratory system, as the problem lies somewhere else. COVID-19 attacks many vital organs in the body. In China, a coronavirus patient died from a stroke. In the autopsy it was found that the innermost layer in the arteries was swollen. It was concluded that coronavirus had inflamed the layer of the arteries leading to clotting, which was a factor in generating a heart attack. Therefore, COVID-19 is not just a respiratory problem.

Amid the coronavirus pandemic, should autopsy be made mandatory in the case of unpredictable death or where reasons for death are not unknown?

Patients below 50 years, who die suddenly and the reasons are not known, then it should be mandatory to conduct the autopsy. After death, coronavirus is active in the body for five days, and it fades away on day 6. Therefore, if an autopsy is done then it will help in understanding this disease. In China, we have seen young COVID-19 patients, aged 22 and 28, succumbed to strokes.

Since the beginning of May, India has recorded more than 2,000 cases everyday in the first week, then it jumped past 3,000 mark in the second week. Finally, the tally is 4,987 on May 17. At 90,927 cases, has India progressed into community transmission or Stage3?

Yes, India has moved into Stage 3. The data suggests that 3,000 to 4,000 active COVID-19 cases, who are asymptomatic, are moving around and spreading the infection. The research has indicated that COVID-19 from an infected person spreads in 30 minutes to non-infected persons. The relaxation on the lockdown will certainly contribute to a high infection rate.

Do you think India has reached its peak in COVID-19 cases, or the sharp rise will continue till July end?

It seems India has already reached its peak and cases will begin to come down from June end or beginning of July first week. If social distancing norms are followed then certainly things can improve, but if not followed then it may get worse. High population density is a major contributor for the increase in cases. The government should continue to focus on finding hotspots, and urge people to follow the rules, eventually it is for people’s own benefit.

Has China won the battle against COVID-19?

It seems China has won the battle by not opening up Wuhan. The Chinese are following a COVID-19 patient’s engagement program, where the authorities continuously interact with people infected with the disease. The Government of India should reward people who follow the guidelines; it will help in setting up a positive trend in the society.

Washington D.C., May 20: While a dairy-rich diet is helpful in meeting the body's calcium requirement, outcomes of a large international study links eating at least two daily servings of dairy with lower risks of diabetes and high blood pressure.

The dairy-rich diet also proved to lower the cluster of factors that heighten cardiovascular disease risk (metabolic syndrome). The study was published online in journal BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care.

The observed associations were strongest for full-fat dairy products, the findings indicated.

Previously published research has suggested that higher dairy intake is associated with a lower risk of diabetes, high blood pressure, and metabolic syndrome. But these studies have tended to focus on North America and Europe to the exclusion of other regions of the world.

To see whether these associations might also be found in a broader range of countries, the researchers drew on people taking part in the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study.

Participants were all aged between 35 and 70 and came from 21 countries: Argentina; Bangladesh; Brazil; Canada; Chile; China; Colombia; India; Iran; Malaysia; Palestine; Pakistan; Philippines, Poland; South Africa; Saudi Arabia; Sweden; Tanzania; Turkey; United Arab Emirates; and Zimbabwe.

Usual dietary intake over the previous 12 months was assessed by means of Food Frequency Questionnaires. Dairy products included milk, yogurt, yogurt drinks, cheese and dishes prepared with dairy products, and were classified as full or low fat (1-2 percent).

Butter and cream were assessed separately as these are not commonly eaten in some of the countries studied.

Information on personal medical history, use of prescription medicines, educational attainment, smoking and measurements of weight, height, waist circumference, blood pressure and fasting blood glucose were also collected.

Data on all five components of the metabolic syndrome were available for nearly 113,000 people: blood pressure above 130/85 mm Hg; waist circumference above 80 cm; low levels of (beneficial) high-density cholesterol (less than 1-1.3 mmol/l); blood fats (triglycerides) of more than 1.7 mmol/dl; and fasting blood glucose of 5.5 mmol/l or more.

Average daily total dairy consumption was 179 g, with full-fat accounting for around double the amount of low fat: 124.5+ vs 65 g.

Some 46, 667 people had metabolic syndrome--defined as having at least 3 of the 5 components.

Total dairy and full-fat dairy, but not low-fat dairy, was associated with a lower prevalence of most components of metabolic syndrome, with the size of the association greatest in those countries with normally low dairy intakes.

At least 2 servings a day of total dairy were associated with a 24 percent lower risk of metabolic syndrome, rising to 28 percent for full-fat dairy alone, compared with no daily dairy intake.

The health of nearly 190,000 participants was tracked for an average of nine years, during which time 13,640 people developed high blood pressure and 5351 developed diabetes.

At least 2 servings a day of total dairy was associated with a 11-12 percent lower risk of both conditions, rising to a 13-14 percent lower risk for 3 daily servings. The associations were stronger for full fat than they were for low-fat dairy.

This is an observational study, and as such can't establish the cause. Food frequency questionnaires are also subject to recall, and changes in metabolic syndrome weren't measured over time, all of which may have influenced the findings.

Nevertheless, the researchers suggest: "If our findings are confirmed in sufficiently large and long term trials, then increasing dairy consumption may represent a feasible and low-cost approach to reducing [metabolic syndrome], hypertension, diabetes, and ultimately cardiovascular disease events worldwide."

Washington D.C., May 9: Do the middle age feel much stressful now, and seems to have changed over time, if compared to the life in the 90s? Well, this recent study indicates that it might be true.

The study has signalled to the fact that life may become more stressful majorly for middle-aged people than it was in the 1990s. The researchers reached this analysis even before the novel coronavirus started sweeping the globe.

A team of researchers led by Penn State found that across all ages, there was a slight increase in daily stress in the 2010s compared to the 1990s. But when researchers restricted the sample to people between the ages of 45 and 64, there was a sharp increase in daily stress.

"On average, people reported about 2 percent more stressors in the 2010s compared to people in the past," said David M. Almeida, professor of human development and family studies at Penn State.

"That's around an additional week of stress a year. But what really surprised us is that people at mid-life reported a lot more stressors, about 19 percent more stress in 2010 than in 1990. And that translates to 64 more days of stress a year."

Almeida said the findings were part of a larger project aiming to discover whether health during the middle of Americans' lives has been changing over time.

"Certainly, when you talk to people, they seem to think that daily life is more hectic and less certain these days," Almeida said.

For the study, the researchers collected data from 1,499 adults in 1995 and 782 different adults in 2012.

Almeida said the goal was to study two cohorts of people who were the same age at the time the data was collected but born in different decades. All study participants were interviewed daily for eight consecutive days.

During each daily interview, the researchers asked the participants about their stressful experiences throughout the previous 24 hours.

They asked questions related to arguments with family or friends or feeling overwhelmed at home or work, so and so. The participants were also asked how severe their stress was and whether those stressors were likely to impact other areas of their lives.

"We were able to estimate not only how frequently people experienced stress, but also what those stressors mean to them," Almeida said.

"For example, did this stress affect their finances or their plans for the future. And by having these two cohorts of people, we were able to compare daily stress processes in 1990 with daily stress processes in 2010," Almeida added.

After analyzing the data, the researchers found that participants reported significantly more daily stress and lower well-being in the 2010s compared to the 1990s.

Additionally, participants reported a 27 percent increase in the belief that stress would affect their finances and a 17 percent increase in the belief that stress would affect their future plans.

Almeida said he was surprised not that people were more stressed now than in the 90s, but at the age group that was mainly affected.

"We thought that with economic uncertainty, life might be more stressful for younger adults. But we didn't see that. We saw more stress for people at mid-life," Almeida said.

"And maybe that's because they have children who are facing an uncertain job market while also responsible for their own parents. So it's this generational squeeze that's making stress more prevalent for people at mid-life," he concluded.