Fitness, Health and Nutrition

daveroberts

  • Online Tai Chi Linked to Greater Knee Osteoarthritis Pain Relief in Trial

    CATEGORY: MOBILITY, BONES & JOINTS

    If you have knee osteoarthritis — the common “wear-and-tear” joint condition in which the smooth cartilage cushioning your knee gradually breaks down, causing pain and stiffness — a gentle form of exercise you can follow at home may ease it. In a 2026 randomized trial, people who did unsupervised tai chi guided only by online videos saw their knee pain while walking fall about twice as much over 12 weeks as those in a comparison group.1

    What Osteoarthritis Does to the Knee

    In a healthy knee, cartilage lets the bones glide smoothly. In osteoarthritis, that cushion thins and roughens over time, so the joint aches, stiffens, and can swell — often making walking and stairs harder. It’s one of the leading causes of pain and reduced mobility in older adults, and while there’s no cure, movement-based approaches are a mainstay of easing symptoms.

    How the Trial Worked

    The study, called the RETREAT trial, enrolled 178 adults who met the clinical criteria for knee osteoarthritis. Half were randomly assigned to a 12-week program of tai chi — a slow, flowing “moving meditation” of gentle postures and controlled breathing — which they followed entirely on their own using online videos, with no in-person instructor. The other half formed a comparison group. Because participants were assigned by chance, this design can point more directly to cause and effect than an observational study. Nearly all — 96% — completed the trial.1

    What Improved

    Knee pain while walking was measured on a 0-to-10 scale. The tai chi group’s pain fell by 2.7 points on average, compared with 1.3 points in the comparison group — roughly double the improvement. A measure of physical function, covering everyday tasks like climbing stairs and rising from a chair, also improved more in the tai chi group. Both differences were statistically significant, meaning they were unlikely to be due to chance.

    Why Tai Chi May Help

    Tai chi is low-impact, so it’s gentle on sore joints while still strengthening the muscles that support the knee and improving balance and flexibility. Its slow, mindful pace may also change how the brain registers pain. Because this version needed no class, equipment, or instructor, it offers a low-cost, accessible option — though a video program isn’t right for everyone, especially with balance problems or other health conditions.

    Key Takeaways

    • In a randomized trial, unsupervised online tai chi was linked to about double the reduction in knee-osteoarthritis walking pain over 12 weeks versus a comparison group.
    • Physical function — everyday movements like stairs and standing up — also improved more with tai chi.
    • The program used only online videos at home, suggesting a low-cost, accessible approach for some people.
    • Before starting a new exercise routine, especially if you have joint pain or balance concerns, check with your healthcare provider about what’s safe for you.

    References

    1. Zhu SJ, Hinman RS, Nelligan RK, et al. Online Unsupervised Tai Chi Intervention for Knee Pain and Function in People With Knee Osteoarthritis: The RETREAT Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Internal Medicine. 2026;186(1):15–25. link
    For educational purposes only — not medical advice. Consult your clinician before acting on this content.

    Found this useful? Share it!

    Link copied!

    Stay up to date! Subscribe to our FREE weekly newsletter.

  • Healthier Eating Patterns Linked to Lower Diverticulitis Risk in Women

    CATEGORY: GUT & DIGESTIVE HEALTH

    If you’ve had diverticulitis — a painful inflammation or infection of small pouches that can form in the wall of your colon, the main part of your large intestine — your overall eating pattern may matter more than any single food you’re told to avoid. In a 2025 study that followed nearly 30,000 U.S. women, those whose diets most closely matched healthy patterns such as the DASH diet had roughly a 23% lower risk of developing diverticulitis than those whose diets matched them least.1

    What Diverticulitis Is

    As people age, small bulging pouches called diverticula commonly form in the colon wall. Simply having them, known as diverticulosis, usually causes no trouble. But sometimes a pouch becomes inflamed or infected — that’s diverticulitis, which can bring abdominal pain, fever, and nausea, and in serious cases needs hospital care. Because flare-ups can be so uncomfortable, many people look for ways to lower their chances of a first or repeat episode.

    How the Study Worked

    Researchers drew on a large U.S. study of 29,916 women aged 35 to 74, none of whom had diverticulitis, inflammatory bowel disease, or cancer at the start. Each woman filled out a detailed questionnaire about how often she ate various foods, and researchers scored her diet against several well-established healthy-eating patterns. The women were then tracked over more than 415,000 combined person-years, during which 1,531 developed diverticulitis for the first time.1

    Healthier Patterns, Lower Risk

    Women whose diets best fit the DASH pattern — one rich in vegetables, fruits, whole grains, beans, and nuts, and lighter on red meat and sugary foods — had about a 23% lower risk of diverticulitis. Two other healthy-eating scores pointed the same way, with roughly 19% to 22% lower risk. Because this is an observational study, it shows an association rather than proof of cause and effect, but seeing the same pattern across several separate scoring systems strengthens the signal.

    The Nuts-and-Seeds Myth

    For decades, people with diverticulosis were warned to avoid nuts, seeds, and popcorn, on the theory that fragments could lodge in the pouches. This study adds to evidence overturning that idea: eating peanuts, nuts, and seeds was not linked to any higher risk, and neither were fruits with edible seeds. Rather than fixating on foods to fear, the findings point toward the broader quality of the diet.

    Key Takeaways

    • In nearly 30,000 women, a healthier overall diet such as the DASH pattern was linked to about 23% lower risk of diverticulitis.
    • Nuts, seeds, and fruits with seeds were not associated with higher risk — reassuring news if you’ve been avoiding them.
    • This is an observational study, so it shows a link, not proof that diet directly prevents diverticulitis.
    • If you have a history of diverticulitis or a digestive condition, talk with your healthcare provider before making major changes to how you eat.

    References

    1. Barlowe T, Anderson C, Nichols HB, Salvador AC, Sandler RS, Sandler DP, Peery AF. Diet and Risk for Incident Diverticulitis in Women: A Prospective Cohort Study. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2025;178(6):788–795. link
    For educational purposes only — not medical advice. Consult your clinician before acting on this content.

    Found this useful? Share it!

    Link copied!

    Stay up to date! Subscribe to our FREE weekly newsletter.

  • Healthier Sleep Patterns Linked to Lower Risk of Being Hospitalized for Infection

    CATEGORY: IMMUNE HEALTH

    Healthier sleep is linked to a lower chance of ending up in the hospital with an infection. In a study of nearly 400,000 adults followed for more than 13 years, each step toward a healthier sleep pattern was associated with about 9% lower risk of being hospitalized for an infection.1

    How the Study Worked

    Researchers drew on the UK Biobank, a large long-term health study, and gave each participant a healthy-sleep score from 0 to 4. A point was awarded for each of four habits: sleeping about seven to eight hours, being a natural early riser (your “chronotype,” or whether your body leans toward mornings or evenings), rarely having insomnia, and not feeling very sleepy during the day. The researchers then followed hospital records for about 13.5 years to see who was admitted for an infection. Because this was an observational study — it tracked people’s usual sleep rather than changing it — it can show a link but cannot prove that better sleep is the cause.1

    How Much the Risk Shifted

    Every one-point gain on the sleep score was tied to roughly 9% lower risk of infection overall. The size of the link varied by infection type, from about 9% lower risk for sepsis (a dangerous, body-wide reaction to infection) up to about 20% lower for certain liver infections. The researchers estimated that if everyone met all four healthy-sleep markers, more than 1 in 10 of these infection hospitalizations might never have happened.

    Why Sleep and Immunity Are Connected

    Sleep is when your body does much of its immune housekeeping. During deep sleep, your immune system produces and organizes the cells and signaling proteins that find and fight germs, and it helps keep inflammation — the body’s defensive response — properly regulated. When sleep is short or broken over long periods, that maintenance work is disrupted, which may leave the body less prepared to hold off a serious infection.

    Who Saw the Strongest Link

    The connection between healthy sleep and lower infection risk was present across the group but stood out more in some people than others. It was more pronounced in adults under 65 and in women, though the study cannot explain why those differences appeared.

    Key Takeaways

    • In a large study, each step toward a healthier sleep pattern was linked to about 9% lower risk of being hospitalized for an infection.
    • The strength of the link varied by infection type and was more pronounced in adults under 65 and in women.
    • As an observational study, it shows an association, not proof that sleep causes lower infection risk.
    • If you regularly struggle with sleep or with frequent infections, your healthcare provider can help you look into possible causes and options.

    References

    1. Li HM, Zhang XR, Liao DQ, et al. Healthy sleep patterns and risk of hospitalization for infection: a large community-based cohort study. Transl Psychiatry. 2025;15:100. link
    For educational purposes only — not medical advice. Consult your clinician before acting on this content.

    Found this useful? Share it!

    Link copied!

    Stay up to date! Subscribe to our FREE weekly newsletter.

  • Prolonged Sitting Linked to Higher Risk of Heart and Circulation Problems

    CATEGORY: HEART & CIRCULATION

    Spending long stretches of the day sitting is linked to a higher risk of heart and circulation problems, and that risk begins to climb once sitting passes roughly 10 hours a day. In a study of more than 83,000 adults whose movement was tracked by a wrist device, prolonged sitting was tied to more cardiovascular disease and more “orthostatic” circulatory problems — conditions such as varicose veins and dizziness on standing that involve how well blood moves through your body.1

    How the Study Worked

    Participants wore an accelerometer — a wrist device that records movement, much like a fitness tracker — for seven days, and computer software then sorted each person’s time into sitting, standing, and other still periods. Those one-week snapshots became the starting point, and the researchers followed the group for about seven years, recording who developed heart or circulation problems. Because this was an observational study — it watched people’s existing habits rather than assigning them to sit more or less — it can show a strong link but cannot prove that sitting itself is the cause.1

    Where the Risk Climbed

    Sitting appeared to be of little concern up to a point. But once daily sitting passed about 10 hours, each additional hour was linked to roughly 15% higher risk of a major cardiovascular event, such as a heart attack or heart failure, and about 26% higher risk of an orthostatic circulatory problem. The pattern suggests it is long, unbroken stretches of sitting — not simply being seated at all — that track with higher risk.

    Standing More Was Not the Fix

    You might expect that swapping sitting for standing would solve the problem, but the study did not find that. Standing time showed no link to lower cardiovascular risk, and standing for long periods was actually associated with more orthostatic circulatory trouble — the blood-pooling and pressure issues that come from staying upright and still. The conclusion the researchers drew was that movement, rather than simply standing up, is what sets the two apart.

    Key Takeaways

    • In this large study, sitting beyond about 10 hours a day was linked to higher risk of heart and circulation problems, with the risk rising for each extra hour.
    • Simply standing more was not linked to lower heart risk, and prolonged standing was tied to more circulatory problems — breaking up stillness with movement is what distinguished the two.
    • Because the study is observational, it shows an association, not proof of cause.
    • If you sit for most of your day or have heart or circulation concerns, your healthcare provider can help you find realistic ways to move more.

    References

    1. Ahmadi MN, Coenen P, Straker L, Stamatakis E. Device-measured stationary behaviour and cardiovascular and orthostatic circulatory disease incidence. Int J Epidemiol. 2024;53(6):dyae136. link
    For educational purposes only — not medical advice. Consult your clinician before acting on this content.

    Found this useful? Share it!

    Link copied!

    Stay up to date! Subscribe to our FREE weekly newsletter.

  • Calcium and Vitamin D Supplements Linked to Little Fracture Protection

    CATEGORY: MOBILITY, BONES & JOINTS

    For decades, calcium and vitamin D supplements have been recommended as a simple way for older adults to strengthen their bones and avoid fractures. A major new review of nearly 154,000 people now challenges that advice, finding that these supplements — taken alone or together — provide little to no meaningful protection against fractures or falls for most older adults.1

    What the Review Actually Found

    Researchers pooled the results of 69 randomized controlled trials — the most rigorous kind of study, in which people are randomly assigned to take a supplement or a placebo (a dummy pill). Across 153,902 participants, none of the three approaches meaningfully reduced fractures: vitamin D alone had essentially no effect on fracture risk (just 0 percent change), calcium alone lowered it by only about 9 percent (a result that could easily be chance), and even the combination cut fractures by only about 9 percent — roughly 1 fewer fracture for every 100 people treated, a benefit the researchers judged too small to matter clinically. The certainty of this evidence was rated as moderate to high, meaning the conclusion is unlikely to shift much with further research.1

    Why This Challenges Long-Standing Advice

    The original enthusiasm for these supplements traces back to early studies in very frail, vitamin-D-deficient nursing home residents — a group quite different from the average healthy older adult. Most people taking these pills today are community-dwelling and not at especially high risk, and in that larger group the benefit largely disappears. The study authors concluded that clinicians and health agencies should re-evaluate routine recommendations.

    Who This Does Not Apply To

    This is an important distinction. The review specifically excluded people being treated with osteoporosis medications, for whom calcium and vitamin D are standard companion therapy, and it noted the findings may not apply to those with diagnosed bone disorders or who take long-term steroids. If your doctor has prescribed these supplements as part of treatment for a specific condition, that recommendation still stands. The takeaway is about routine, “just-in-case” supplementation in otherwise healthy people — not about overriding targeted medical care.

    What Actually Protects Your Bones

    The evidence points toward strategies that strengthen bone and prevent falls directly. Weight-bearing and resistance exercise, balance training, and personalized fall-prevention measures (such as removing tripping hazards at home) have far better support for keeping older adults on their feet and out of the fracture ward.

    Key Takeaways

    • If you take calcium or vitamin D purely as routine insurance for your bones, the latest evidence suggests it likely offers little fracture or fall protection — bring it up at your next checkup rather than stopping on your own.
    • Do not stop a supplement your doctor prescribed for osteoporosis, a diagnosed bone disorder, or alongside steroid treatment; in those cases it serves a specific purpose.
    • Strategies with stronger support include regular weight-bearing and strength exercise, balance training, and reducing tripping hazards at home.
    • If you are concerned about your bone health or fracture risk, ask your provider whether a bone density test or a targeted treatment plan makes sense for you.

    References

    1. Massé O, Mercurio CM, Dupuis S, et al. Calcium, vitamin D, or combined supplementation to prevent fractures and falls: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2026 May 20;393:e088050-e088050. link
    For educational purposes only — not medical advice. Consult your clinician before acting on this content.

    Found this useful? Share it!

    Link copied!

    Stay up to date! Subscribe to our FREE weekly newsletter.

  • A Simple Smell Test May Spot Cognitive Decline as Well as a Brain Scan

    CATEGORY: BRAIN & MENTAL HEALTH

    Your sense of smell is wired directly into brain regions that Alzheimer’s disease attacks early — which is why losing it can be an early warning sign. A 2024 study found that a quick, inexpensive scratch-and-sniff test, combined with a brief memory check, predicted future cognitive decline and dementia about as well as costly brain scans.1

    Why Smell and Memory Are Connected

    The nerves that carry smell information feed into the same parts of the brain — including the areas handling memory — where the earliest changes of Alzheimer’s tend to appear. Because of this, a fading ability to identify everyday odors can show up years before obvious memory problems, making smell a useful window into brain health.

    What the Study Did

    Researchers in the Mayo Clinic Study of Aging followed 647 older adults for an average of about 8 years. At the start, each person took a 12-item Brief Smell Identification Test — a roughly 5-minute scratch-and-sniff card — along with a short cognitive test, and also underwent expensive MRI and PET brain scans that detect Alzheimer’s-related changes. The researchers then tracked who went on to develop cognitive decline or dementia.1

    What They Found

    The combination of the brief smell test and the brief cognitive test predicted who would decline about as accurately as the high-tech brain imaging. In other words, two simple, low-cost tools performed comparably to scans that can cost thousands of dollars and require specialized equipment. The authors concluded that pairing a short odor-identification test with a quick cognitive screen deserves consideration as a practical, affordable way to flag people at higher risk.1

    What This Does — and Doesn’t — Mean

    A poor smell-test score does not mean you have or will get dementia. Smell fades for many ordinary reasons — colds, allergies, sinus problems, past COVID-19 infection, certain medications, and normal aging. This research points to smell testing as a low-cost screening signal that can help identify who might benefit from closer follow-up, not as a stand-alone diagnosis. The promise is earlier, cheaper risk detection — which matters most now that treatments work best when started early.

    Key Takeaways

    • A noticeable, lasting decline in your ability to identify familiar smells — not tied to a cold, allergies, or a stuffy nose — is worth mentioning to your doctor, especially alongside memory concerns.
    • Simple, inexpensive smell and memory tests may flag cognitive risk nearly as well as costly brain scans, making early screening more accessible.
    • Smell loss has many harmless causes, so a low score is a prompt for follow-up, not a diagnosis.
    • If you or family notice persistent changes in smell along with memory or thinking difficulties, ask your healthcare provider about a cognitive evaluation.

    References

    1. Devanand DP, Lee S, Luchsinger JA, Knopman D, Vassilaki M, Motter JN. Comparison of brief olfactory and cognitive assessments to neuroimaging biomarkers in the prediction of cognitive decline and dementia in the MCSA cohort. Alzheimers Dement. 2024 Dec;20(12):8346-8358. link
    For educational purposes only — not medical advice. Consult your clinician before acting on this content.

    Found this useful? Share it!

    Link copied!

    Stay up to date! Subscribe to our FREE weekly newsletter.

  • A Common “Brain Booster” Amino Acid Is Linked to Shorter Lifespan in Men

    CATEGORY: HEALTHY AGING & LONGEVITY

    Tyrosine is an amino acid — one of the building blocks of protein — that your body uses to make dopamine and other brain chemicals tied to focus and motivation. Because of that, it is widely sold in supplements marketed for mental performance. But a large new study found that men with higher blood levels of tyrosine tended to have a shorter life expectancy — by close to a year — raising fresh questions about a compound many people assume is simply good for the brain.1

    What the Researchers Examined

    The team analyzed health and genetic data from more than 270,000 people in the UK Biobank, a large long-term health database. They looked at blood levels of two related amino acids, phenylalanine and tyrosine, and how they related to lifespan. Importantly, they used a genetic method called Mendelian randomization, which uses inherited gene variants people are born with to test whether a factor likely influences an outcome rather than just traveling alongside it. That makes the link stronger than a simple observation — though, as with all such studies, it stops short of final proof.1

    What They Found

    At first, both amino acids appeared tied to a higher risk of earlier death. After closer analysis, only tyrosine held up, and only in men: genetic estimates suggested that higher tyrosine levels were associated with roughly a year less of life expectancy. There was no significant effect in women, even though the same analysis drew on all 270,000-plus participants. The researchers noted that men naturally tend to carry higher tyrosine levels than women, which may even be one thread in the long-standing gap between male and female lifespans.

    Why Tyrosine Might Matter

    The mechanism is not settled, but scientists have a couple of leads. Tyrosine is involved in insulin resistance — a condition in which the body’s cells stop responding well to the hormone insulin, which is linked to many diseases of aging. It also feeds the production of stress-response chemicals like adrenaline, and chronic activation of those pathways may affect men and women differently because of how they interact with sex hormones.

    An Important Caveat About Supplements

    This study did not test tyrosine supplements directly — it measured naturally occurring blood levels and genetics. So it does not prove that taking a tyrosine supplement shortens your life. What it does suggest is that more is not automatically better with this amino acid, and that the “brain booster” marketing may be getting ahead of the evidence. If you take tyrosine for focus or energy, this is a good reason to be thoughtful rather than alarmed.

    Key Takeaways

    • For men taking tyrosine supplements for focus or energy, the study is a reason for caution — its long-term effect on lifespan is unproven.
    • You do not need tyrosine supplements to get this amino acid; your body makes it and obtains plenty from ordinary protein in food.
    • The finding applied to men, not women, and reflects blood levels and genetics rather than tested supplement doses — so interpret it as a caution, not a cause for fear.
    • Before starting or stopping any supplement, talk with your healthcare provider, especially if you have a metabolic condition such as insulin resistance or diabetes.

    References

    1. Zhao JV, Sun Y, Zhang J, Ye K. The role of phenylalanine and tyrosine in longevity: a cohort and Mendelian randomization study. Aging (Albany NY). 2025 Oct 3;17(10):2500-2533. link
    For educational purposes only — not medical advice. Consult your clinician before acting on this content.

    Found this useful? Share it!

    Link copied!

    Stay up to date! Subscribe to our FREE weekly newsletter.

  • Low Testosterone Levels Linked to Higher Death Risk in Men

    CATEGORY: MEN’S HEALTH

    Testosterone is usually talked about in terms of energy, muscle, and sex drive — but your level may also be a window into your overall health. A large 2024 analysis pooling data from 24,109 men found that those with low testosterone had a measurably higher risk of dying over the following years, suggesting that a simple blood test can flag risk well before serious disease shows up.1

    What the Researchers Did

    This was an individual-participant-data meta-analysis — a rigorous approach that combines the raw data from many studies rather than just their summaries. Researchers pulled together 11 prospective cohort studies of community-dwelling men from Australia, Europe, and North America, following them for at least 5 years each (more than 255,000 person-years of data in total). Crucially, hormone levels were measured with mass spectrometry, the most accurate laboratory method, which makes the findings more reliable than older studies using less precise tests.1

    The Thresholds That Mattered

    Two specific cutoffs stood out. Men whose baseline testosterone was below 213 nanograms per deciliter (a standard blood-test unit) had a higher risk of death from any cause, regardless of other hormone levels. And men below 153 nanograms per deciliter had a higher risk of dying specifically from cardiovascular (heart and blood vessel) disease. These associations held even after accounting for age, weight, smoking, blood pressure, diabetes, and cholesterol — meaning low testosterone added information beyond the usual risk factors.1

    What This Does — and Doesn’t — Mean

    This is an association, not proof that low testosterone directly causes earlier death, and it does not show that taking testosterone reverses the risk. Low levels may instead be a signal of underlying problems — obesity, poor metabolic health, or chronic illness — that themselves drive risk. Think of it like a smoke detector: a low reading is a reason to look closely at your health, not automatically a reason to start a hormone. The value lies in early information.

    Why It Often Goes Unchecked

    Despite this, testosterone is not part of routine checkups for most men, so the signal frequently goes unnoticed until symptoms or disease appear. Common signs that may justify testing include persistent fatigue, low libido, loss of muscle or bone strength, depressed mood, and difficulty concentrating — especially alongside conditions like obesity or type 2 diabetes.

    Key Takeaways

    • A low testosterone reading is a meaningful health signal, not just a sex-drive issue — in this analysis, it predicted higher all-cause mortality below about 213 ng/dL and higher cardiovascular death below about 153 ng/dL.
    • In this analysis, a low result was best read as a prompt to evaluate overall health (weight, blood sugar, blood pressure, cholesterol) rather than an automatic reason to start testosterone.
    • If you have symptoms like ongoing fatigue, low libido, or loss of strength — particularly with obesity or diabetes — ask your healthcare provider whether a testosterone test makes sense.
    • Any decision about treatment should be made with your provider, weighing your symptoms, levels, and overall risk together.

    References

    1. Yeap BB, Marriott RJ, Dwivedi G, et al. Associations of testosterone and related hormones with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality and incident cardiovascular disease in men: individual participant data meta-analyses. Ann Intern Med. 2024 Jun;177(6):768-781. link
    For educational purposes only — not medical advice. Consult your clinician before acting on this content.

    Found this useful? Share it!

    Link copied!

    Stay up to date! Subscribe to our FREE weekly newsletter.

  • For Women With a BRCA Gene and Breast Cancer, Ovary Removal Linked to Longer Survival

    CATEGORY: WOMEN’S HEALTH

    Women who carry a faulty BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene face high lifetime risks of both breast and ovarian cancer. A large 2025 study of about 3,400 such women who had already had breast cancer found that those who had their ovaries and fallopian tubes surgically removed were roughly half as likely to die over the follow-up period — and, reassuringly, gained that benefit without the rise in heart disease that many women fear from early surgical menopause.1

    What BRCA Genes Mean

    BRCA1 and BRCA2 are genes that normally help repair damaged DNA. When someone inherits a faulty (“pathogenic”) version, that protection is weakened, sharply raising the odds of breast and ovarian cancers. Because ovarian cancer is hard to detect early, women with these variants are often advised to consider having the ovaries and fallopian tubes removed once childbearing is complete — a procedure called bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy.

    What the Study Found

    Researchers at the University of Cambridge linked NHS health records for 1,674 BRCA1 and 1,740 BRCA2 carriers who had been diagnosed with breast cancer. Women who underwent the surgery had a 48% lower risk of death from any cause (hazard ratio 0.52). The benefit extended to dying specifically from breast cancer, with risk cut by 38% in BRCA1 carriers and 52% in BRCA2 carriers. In plain terms, removing the ovaries was associated with meaningfully better survival in women already dealing with breast cancer.1

    The Reassuring Part About Heart Health

    Removing the ovaries before natural menopause causes an abrupt drop in estrogen, and a long-standing worry is that this might raise the risk of heart disease later. In this study, it did not: the surgery was not linked to any increase in cardiovascular disease (hazard ratio 0.73, a result statistically consistent with no added risk), ischemic heart disease, non-cancer death, or depression. That absence of harm is part of what makes the survival finding so meaningful for decision-making.

    How to Read This Finding

    This was an observational study — it tracked women’s real-world choices rather than randomly assigning surgery — so it shows a strong association rather than absolute proof. It also applies specifically to women who carry a BRCA1 or BRCA2 variant and have had breast cancer, not to women at average risk, for whom removing healthy ovaries is not recommended. The value here is in giving carriers and their doctors solid numbers to weigh.

    Key Takeaways

    • If you carry a BRCA1 or BRCA2 variant and have had breast cancer, this study links removing the ovaries and fallopian tubes to about half the risk of death — strong information to discuss with your care team.
    • The survival benefit came without an increase in heart disease, addressing a common concern about early surgical menopause.
    • This applies to BRCA carriers specifically; removing healthy ovaries is not advised for women at average risk.
    • Decisions about genetic testing and risk-reducing surgery are highly personal — discuss timing, benefits, and menopause management with a specialist or genetic counselor.

    References

    1. Hassan H, Allen I, Rahman T, et al. Long-term health outcomes of bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy in BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers with personal history of breast cancer: a retrospective cohort study using linked electronic health records. Lancet Oncol. 2025 Jun;26(6):771-780. link
    For educational purposes only — not medical advice. Consult your clinician before acting on this content.

    Found this useful? Share it!

    Link copied!

    Stay up to date! Subscribe to our FREE weekly newsletter.

  • Strength-Training “Sweet Spot” for a Longer Life Is About 90 Minutes a Week

    CATEGORY: EXERCISE & MOVEMENT

    When it comes to lifting weights for a longer life, more is not always better. A large study that followed nearly 150,000 adults for up to 30 years found that roughly 90 to 120 minutes of strength training per week was the sweet spot for lowering the risk of death — and that pushing beyond about two hours a week added no further benefit.1

    What the Researchers Did

    Investigators at Harvard pooled data from three long-running studies of doctors and nurses, tracking how much resistance training (using weights or your own bodyweight) people did and recording deaths over the decades. Because this is an observational study — meaning it followed people’s habits rather than assigning them to exercise — it can show a strong link but cannot prove that strength training alone causes longer life. Still, the size and length of the study make the pattern compelling.1

    Where the Benefit Peaks

    Compared with doing no strength training, about 90 to 119 minutes per week was tied to a 13 percent lower risk of dying from any cause, a 19 percent lower risk of dying from cardiovascular (heart and blood vessel) disease, and a 27 percent lower risk of dying from neurological disease, such as dementia. Above 120 minutes a week, the risk did not drop any further — the benefit simply leveled off. That is genuinely good news: you do not need to live in the gym to capture the payoff.

    An Interesting Wrinkle on Cancer

    For cancer deaths specifically, the lower risk showed up only at smaller amounts of strength training — roughly 1 to 60 minutes a week — and not at higher volumes. The researchers aren’t certain why, but it is a reminder that the ideal “dose” can differ depending on which health outcome you are looking at.

    Strength Plus Cardio Is the Real Winner

    The lowest death risk of all belonged to people who combined strength training with plenty of aerobic exercise like brisk walking, cycling, or swimming. Each type of exercise contributes something different — aerobic activity supports the heart and circulation, while strength training builds muscle, supports metabolism, and may protect the brain — so doing both gives you the most complete protection.

    Key Takeaways

    • About 90 to 120 minutes of strength training per week — for example, three 30-to-40-minute sessions using weights, machines, or bodyweight — was the range linked to the lowest death risk.
    • Beyond roughly two hours a week, the longevity benefit flattened out — more was not linked to further gains.
    • Combining strength work with regular aerobic exercise was linked to the largest reduction in death risk.
    • If you are new to resistance training or have a health condition, start gradually and check with your healthcare provider about a safe plan.

    References

    1. Zhang Y, Lee DH, Rezende LFM, Ma Y, Giovannucci E. Long-term resistance training with all-cause and cause-specific mortality: assessing dose-response and joint associations with aerobic physical activity. Br J Sports Med. 2026 Jun;60(12):874-883. link
    For educational purposes only — not medical advice. Consult your clinician before acting on this content.

    Found this useful? Share it!

    Link copied!

    Stay up to date! Subscribe to our FREE weekly newsletter.