The Glycemic Index

This is a term used fairly frequently but is not often understood.  Simply put, it is a measure of how much sugar gets into the blood stream for a given food.  The scale is set by pure sugar, or glucose itself which is given the value of 100.  Other foods are rated in comparison to it.  Table sugar, which is sucrose, is composed of two glucose molecules bonded together.  Therefore, on a per molecule basis it would have a glycemic index of 200.  The glycemic index should also be viewed in the context of the glycemic load.  This is the actual amount of sugar that one ingests.

Let me illustrate an example.  A typical soda contains about 39 gm of sugar and has a glycemic index approaching that of pure glucose.  Fruit also has a high glycemic index but the sugar found in fruits and vegetables is from a molecule that has one glucose molecule bonded to a galactose molecule.  Only half of the amount of glucose is delivered to the blood stream as regular sugar.  In addition, fruit has vitamins, fiber and water to go along with the ingested carbohydrate, all of which is healthy.  A typical orange has 12 gm of sugar.  It is unlikely that someone will eat three oranges at a sitting, but that is what it would take to equal the glycemic load of one soda.  It is, therefore, important to interpret the glycemic index appropriately.  I give my patients free range on the amount of fruits and vegetables they eat.  Even my diabetics.  It is hard to ingest enough fruit to cause any significant damage.

Apart from fruits and vegetables, the glycemic index can be very helpful.  Most foods are fairly obvious.  Starches can be a big source of dietary glucose.  Potatoes, bread, rice and pasta need to be watched closely.  Many breakfast cereals are quite high on the glycemic index.  As a rule, the heartier grain, the coarser the starch, the better.  Brown rice is healthier than quick, white rice.  Seven grain breads are much better than processed white bread such as Wonder Bread.  It makes sense.  The harder it is for the body to digest the food, the less sugar gets delivered to the blood stream.

Now that you know the basics, head off to a web site and start looking up foods.  There may be a few surprises for you there.  Remember to keep it simple.

Harnessing Hay Fever

The itchy eyes, sneezing, nasal drip and tickle in the back of the throat are all well known to sufferers of hay fever or "Allergic Rhinitis."  What is not commonly understood is how fatiguing this condition can be as well.  People suffer from allergies because their immune system recognizes a foreign substance (antigen) that usually enters the body through the nose and mouth.  A primed immune system will bind that antigen by a histamine receptor to what is called a Mast Cell.  The interaction causes the Mast Cell to release histamine into the blood stream, resulting in an immediate release of inflammatory products which trigger swelling of the lining of the nose, throat and eyes.  This is what causes that runny nose and watery eyes.  The work required to create this inflammation is very fatiguing.  In fact, any medical condition that causes inflammation will cause fatigue.  Sufferers of Multiple Sclerosis, Rheumatoid Arthritis or Chron's Disease know this well. In fact, it is very common for a patient with pneumonia to still feel fatigued weeks after the cough has gotten better.

Most sufferers of allergies do just that; they suffer through it.  I'll admit that I am usually one of them.  Keeping them under control, though, can help you feel more energetic and less miserable.  Let me explain the different treatment options and the rationale for each so you can decide what is best for you.  The most commonly used medicines are the antihistamines.  This includes Claritin (loratadine), Allegra (fexofenadine), Zyrtec (cetirizine), and Benadryl (diphenhydramine) to name the most common ones.  They block that initial triggering event discussed above.  Logically, the sooner they are used, the better they will work.  If you wait till you are full of fluid, they will keep your allergies from getting worse but they will not help for what you have already been exposed to.  The horse is out of the barn in this case and it is too late to close the door.  During a bad season it may be best to take the medicine on a daily basis.  They can work quite well intermittently if given prior to an exposure.  I have used them effectively prior to wood working, mowing the lawn or going to a friend's house who has a cat.  The medicines are all available over the counter now and most have a generic form which makes them less expensive.  The main draw back is that they themselves can be fatiguing.  The least sedating is Claritin and Allegra, followed by Zyrtec.  Benadryl is the most sedating.  There are also antihistamine nasal sprays and eye drops.  Those are not sedating at all but have to be used more frequently.

Nasal steroids reduce the inflammatory response from the histamine release.  They can be used with or without the antihistamine.  Since they are absorbed right in the nasal passage, almost none of the medicine enters the bloodstream, making them quite safe.  The draw back to these medications is that many people do not like squirting medication in their nose and they are quite expensive.  Thankfully, one of the best ones, Flonase (fluticasone) is now available in generic form.  They do all require a prescription.  If used daily over many weeks or months, the lining in the nose can become too thin and result in nose bleeds.  Stopping the medication for 1-2 weeks will solve that problem.  They do not work quite as well as antihistamine medications on an as needed basis.  Many use them for a few weeks out of the year during a bad season.

Allergy shots are the most effective way of reducing long term symptoms.  They induce tolerance in the immune system by introducing a small dose of antigen on a regular basis.  Over time, the immune system becomes desensitized, similar to what happens with teenage boys when their mother speaks to them.  The trigger is still there but nothing registers.  There are some obvious drawbacks to injection immunotherapy (allergy shots).  First, they are given by injection.  Second, if the dose of antigen is too high, it can induce a more serious reaction in the whole body so they must be given at the doctor's office.  Third, they have to be administered weekly for the first few months and then monthly for many years.  The hassle factor can be a big impediment.  Lastly, if you move to a new area, you have to start all over.  The injections only work for the antigens in your current environment.

There are other possible ways to help your allergies as well.  The simplest, of course, is avoidance.  That may not always be the best course of action, however. There is some evidence that children born and raised in the city have more allergies than children born in the country.  There is likely a critical age in the developing immune system where exposure induces tolerance rather than activation.  The science behind this has not been completely worked out yet.  Some have suggested that ingesting unfiltered bee honey can help.  When bees return to the hive, they not only bring the nectar to form honey but also lots of pollen.  The rationale is similar to that of injections but instead of sensitizing to very specific antigens, this would in theory sensitize to a more broad range of them.  For this to work, it should be unfiltered honey from local bee keepers to make sure that the antigens are ones that exist in your own environment.  There are likely many antigens that would not be covered by the honey, such as animal dander or dust.

I hope you find this informative.  Thanks to Debbie for the requested topic.  If you have specific questions that I did not touch, on please let me know.

The Right of Vice?

The Bill of Rights

A patient comment recently had me thinking of the Bill of Rights.  It has been a little while since I took a government class so I decided to brush up on my history a bit.  As you may remember better than I, the Bill of Rights references the first ten amendments to the Constitution, specifically outlining the personal rights and freedoms that our government guarantees. It ranges from the right of free speech, to the right to bear arms, including  the right of a fair trial, to name a few.  

The comment that sent me on my historical inquiry was, "Everyone needs a vice, right Doc?"  It was in response to one of my encouragements to eat healthier.  It was said so authoritatively, I thought that it must be included in the bill of rights.  Now as I read through the list, the only one that might qualify is the eight amendment which reads, "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment." I suppose many may feel that taking away their chocolate, soda, ice cream, beer or cigarettes may constitute "cruel and unusual punishment," but I don't think that was what the Founding Father's had in mind.  

What is Your Vice?

According to one of my favorite sources of information (Wikipedia), vice is defined as follows:

"Vice is a practice or a behavior or habit considered immoral, depraved, or degrading in the associated society. In more minor usage, vice can refer to a fault, a negative character trait, a defect, an infirmity, or merely a bad habit."  

In this context, do we have the right to a vice?  My answer to the patient and to you is "No!"  What we do need are good habits.  We need to set up routines that edify our body and soul, not tear it down.  It has been shown that it takes on average twelve weeks to create a habit.  When embarking on a new diet or exercise regimen, the first three months are the most critical.  It is much easier to exercise when it is a foregone conclusion that has already been ingrained as opposed to a vigorous internal debate that has to be endured each and every morning.  

We all have habits. Look at the ones in your life. Fortify the ones that make you stronger and eliminate the ones that hold you down, the vices.  Rather than being constitutional guarantees; your vices guarantee declining health.  Get rid of them!

The Science and Art of Medicine

Terrified, on my mother's lap, gasping for each breath.  The doctor's office seemed a rather scary place to a seven or eight year old.  I can remember hearing frightening words such as "admit to the hospital" or "let's try this shot."  As poorly as I felt, I didn't even worry about getting the injection.  I just wanted to feel better.  I can't remember the pain of the shot but I can certainly remember my heart pounding nearly out of my chest.  I had been given an injection of epinephrine (adrenaline).  Even more terrified, I clung to my mother.  My breathing slowly improved and thankfully I was able to go home.  Though I am sure I had been in many before, this is the first time that I can remember being in a doctor's office.

A few years later I was in a different office.  It seemed similar, though less terrifying than the first.  I lay on the examining table on my back.  The doctor placed vials of serum on my chest and then held my ankles.  Somehow he could feel differences in my legs and would make notations in his chart.  From this he concocted serum that my father than injected into me once a week to treat my seasonal allergies (no, he is not a physician and yes, it was terrifying).  I was not a happy patient.  I had no trust in this homeopathic doctor's evaluation and resented each shot.  To this day, my mother is convinced that it helped us even in the face of the rude quacking noises coming from her sons' mouths.

These two experiences of mine illustrate a common occurrence in the practice of medicine.  As much as we have learned about the human body and how it functions, there is much we do not know.  Even in the face of accurate knowledge we often lack adequate treatments for some conditions.  That adrenaline injection I received is no longer considered to be an acceptable treatment for asthma.  Thankfully, the science has progressed, and the treatments have gotten better, less toxic and more efficacious.  The second treatment I received may still be offered in some corner of our society but has fallen out of favor.  Such treatments are not studied nor evaluated.  Therefore, there is no improvement.  They are discarded only to be replaced by some other theory.  I have little patience for proposed treatments that claim they offer something "your doctor doesn't want you to know about," claiming a conspiracy theory between scientific medicine and the pharmaceutical companies.  If someone comes up with a valid proposal, it will stand up to the rigors of scientific investigation.  Refusing to study such treatments is tantamount to snake oil in my eyes.

I am not suggesting that only FDA approved medications should be used in the treatment of health conditions.  If you have read my previous posts, you know that I am all for avoiding medications through healthy habits.  Regular cardiovascular exercise has been studied extensively and has found to be beneficial over and over again.  It is getting people to actually make such a habit that is difficult.  Being able to show patients the studies that support my claims helps me to make my point.  One of the favorite parts of my job is eliminating a medication due to a patient having changed his or her behavior.  Seeing people lose weight, stop smoking and drop their cholesterol or blood sugar values is very fulfilling.  Writing prescriptions to treat chronic conditions that could be otherwise controlled, if a patient would just change their life style, is frustrating.

I am grateful to be in a profession that forces me to keep learning.  We still have many inadequacies as a profession, offering "adrenaline" type treatments with the hope that better alternatives are on the way.  As much as we learn and as advanced as our treatments become, though, it is important not to lose sight of the basic tenets of good health.  Nothing will ever substitute for eating a healthy diet, getting plenty of regular exercise and keeping our stresses in check with balanced living.  Remember, keep it simple.