Geneology International

Category: Health News

  • Possible link between PFAS and diabetes in women

    Possible link between PFAS and diabetes in women

    By Will Atwater

    Eastern North Carolina has some of the highest rates of diabetes in the state. 

    There are two forms of diabetes – type 1 and type 2. Type 1 diabetes is a genetic disorder in which the immune system destroys insulin producing cells needed to regulate blood sugar levels. Type 2 diabetes occurs when the body is unable to produce enough insulin to regulate blood sugar levels. Factors associated with type 2 diabetes include diet, exercise and environment. 

    In 2020, the U.S. diabetes average was 10.6 percent, while the North Carolina average was 12.4 percent, according to American Health Rankings 2021 Annual Report. During this same period, the annual County Health Rankings report noted that Columbus County recorded a 19 percent diabetes rate, Pender County was at 15 percent and Brunswick showed a rate of 14 percent. These counties are a part of the lower Cape Fear River Basin.

    That’s why it’s worrisome that a recent study suggests that middle-aged women exposed to “forever chemicals” may be at a higher risk of contracting the disease. 

    Those forever chemicals are per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). They’re a family of synthetic chemicals that includes more than 4,700 substances, none of which are federally regulated. They’ve been a subject of scrutiny in eastern North Carolina since 2017, when researchers found that the Chemours chemical facility near Fayetteville had been dumping one of the PFAS chemicals known as GenX into the Cape Fear River for decades. 

    A key point in the findings, published in the journal Diabetologia, is that women who were exposed to a mixture of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are at a higher risk of developing diabetes than the women who were exposed to only one of the chemicals.

    The study’s authors wrote that this finding suggested, “a synergistic effect of multiple PFAS on diabetes risk.” 

    Based at the University of Michigan, the researchers tracked a mixed race group of 1,237 women with a median age of 49.4. They followed them for 17 years, from the turn of the century until 2017. Four out of five of the women had at least some college education.

    The researchers found that of the overall group studied, Black women who were less educated, less physically active, had a larger energy intake and higher BMI at baseline, were more likely to develop diabetes than the other participants. 

    Non-stick chemicals stick around

    PFAS have been manufactured and used by industries worldwide since the 1940s, used in everything from Teflon pans to raincoats to dental floss. They are also used in firefighting foams.

    The two most extensively produced and studied, PFOA and PFOS, have been phased out in the U.S., but they don’t break down easily and can accumulate in the environment and in human bodies, hence the moniker “forever chemicals.” There is a growing body of evidence that exposure to PFAS can lead to adverse human health effects.

    Although all the health effects of PFAS are still not completely clear, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says they are believed to impact the immune system and may reduce antibody responses to vaccines, including those for COVID-19.

    Additionally, studies on laboratory animals have found a link between PFAS and liver, kidney, testicular, pancreas and thyroid cancer. Studies also suggest that PFAS can cause high cholesterol, pregnancy problems and immune suppression. 

    The study’s researchers suspect that the molecular structures of different PFAS mimic naturally occurring fatty acids. Those fatty acids trigger receptors in the body’s cells that are sensitive to fat and insulin and control the formation and development of fat cells. Those receptors also exercise control of the body’s fat and blood sugar levels. 

    If PFAS chemicals are fooling the fat and insulin receptors in cells, that could disrupt their behavior and suggest a possible way that these substances affect diabetes risk.

    In other words, there may be environmental factors beyond one’s ability to control diet and exercise, for instance, that contribute to diabetes risk factors, the research suggests. 

    A call to action

    The Lower Cape Fear River Basin, which provides drinking water to Columbus, Pender and Brunswick counties, among others, is contaminated with a class of PFAS known as GenX. 

    There are more than 257,000 people living in these three counties, which have diabetes rates of 19 percent, 15 percent and 14 percent respectively. In contrast, the state’s two largest counties, Mecklenburg and Wake, have diabetes rates of 8 percent and 9 percent respectively. 

    The study may offer insights into certain public health issues in this region.

    Credit: CDC

    North Carolina State University epidemiologist Jane Hoppin believes the study – though started several years before North Carolina began tracking PFAS – has overlap with respect to certain legacy chemicals and is worth attention. 

    “While this is a [study] with older samples, it could be particularly relevant to people in North Carolina because our levels [of exposure] 22 years later, are like this general population sample [from] 20 years ago,” she said.

    Donald A. McClain, an endocrinologist at Wake Forest University School of Medicine, says that while the Michigan study is compelling, there are likely several other factors that contribute to a diabetes diagnosis, including diet, genetic disposition and environmental factors. 

    On the other hand, McClain acknowledged this study contributes to a growing body of research that points to the negative effects of human exposure to forever chemicals. He believes it is not too soon to act.

    “I would not be sad if the political and social response to this [study] was maybe even a little bit ahead of science,” he said. “If I’m suddenly 75 percent sure, do I want to wait 10 years and be 99 percent sure?” 

    “And after 10 years, how many people have [been harmed]?”

    Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.

    X

    Republish this article

    As of late 2019, we’re changing our policy about reprinting our content.

    You are free to use NC Health News content under the following conditions:

    • You can copy and paste this html tracking code into articles of ours that you use, this little snippet of code allows us to track how many people read our story.





    • Please do not reprint our stories without our bylines, and please include a live link to NC Health News under the byline, like this:

      By Jane Doe

      North Carolina Health News



    • Finally, at the bottom of the story (whether web or print), please include the text:

      North Carolina Health News is an independent, non-partisan, not-for-profit, statewide news organization dedicated to covering all things health care in North Carolina. Visit NCHN at northcarolinahealthnews.org. (on the web, this can be hyperlinked)

    by Will Atwater, North Carolina Health News
    April 26, 2022

    1

  • Pandemic uncertainty complicates Medicaid budget

    Pandemic uncertainty complicates Medicaid budget

    By Rose Hoban

    What a difference a decade can make.

    Republican lawmakers raised a ruckus 10 years ago when officials from the state Department of Health and Human Services informed them that North Carolina had spent millions of dollars more than projected on the Medicaid budget.

    But this month, when Dave Richard, the DHHS head of Medicaid, informed state lawmakers at a Joint Legislative Oversight Committee on Medicaid and NC Health Choice that Medicaid expenses were running higher than expected for the fiscal year ending in June, no similar outcry occurred.

    That shortfall in a $4 billion budget could top $100 million, Richard projected. Though it’s a small percentage of the overall budget, the dollar figure can be eye-popping, nonetheless.

    There are many reasons for the extra expense, including the pandemic and all the unexpected and related health care costs.

    In the spring of 2020, as historic questions about the pandemic loomed, Congress took huge steps to do away with barriers to treatment for the novel coronavirus.

    Republicans and Democrats pushed aside the hyper-partisanship that often plunges big bills and critical issues into a quagmire. Unaware of what lay ahead for the next two years, Congress came together to adopt the $2 trillion  CARES Act.

    Pandemic beneficiaries

    Tucked into the massive relief bill was a measure forbidding states from removing people from Medicaid rolls if they had suddenly qualified for the benefit because of job loss or other reasons during the pandemic.

    That applies throughout the duration of the public health emergency. No beneficiaries can be removed from Medicaid rolls until the end of the month in which the emergency expires.

    Usually, low-income workers in North Carolina don’t qualify for Medicaid. Most enrollees are children whose families barely make a living wage, people with disabilities and elderly people with little to no built-up wealth.

    In North Carolina, however, some low-income parents with children younger than 18 can be enrolled in the program for as long as their child qualifies. 

    The number of Medicaid beneficiaries in North Carolina more than doubled from March 2020 to this month, according to Richard. There were about 205,000 adult beneficiaries in March 2020. Now there are nearly 418,000 adults on the Medicaid rolls.

    More children qualified too, but since most children in the state already had some form of health insurance — whether Medicaid or otherwise — that part of the program hasn’t had the same rapid growth. 

    Monthly Medicaid enrollment growth since start of public health emergency. Image, data: NC DHHS

    All those extra people added to the program’s cost, Richard told lawmakers, leading to the news that Medicaid would be over budget for the first time in years.

    “The forecast was much more difficult because we were doing this in the middle of a pandemic,” Richard said. “And we were moving into managed care.”

    Nine months ago, the state changed how its Medicaid system was administered, moving from an in-house, fee-for-service program to a system run by large commercial managed care companies.

    Republican lawmakers pushed for the change not long after making political noise about the budget overrun in 2012, claiming mismanagement of the system after the Medicaid expenses outpaced what had been budgeted.

    When Richard updated lawmakers this month on the Medicaid budget, he said North Carolina had spent about 67 percent of its Medicaid budget. At this point in last year’s spending cycle, the program had spent 64 percent of its budget.

    “There are certain things … we didn’t recognize,” Richard said. “The enrollment projections are higher than we thought we would be.”

    “We thought at some point, this would even off quicker than it did,” Richard added. 

    Still in emergency mode

    Not only did North Carolina see its Medicaid beneficiary numbers explode, the federal and state government allowed rate hikes for health care providers during the pandemic.

    While the federal government pays an enhanced rate of more than 72 percent of the state’s Medicaid costs currently, there are still expenses that the state has had to bear. 

    Skilled nursing facilities got a bump up in rates to help them hire more personnel. Hospitals got a rate hike to help them cover the costs of personal protective equipment, staffing and long hospital stays by uninsured COVID patients. There also were extra costs for just about everything related to the pandemic.

    “We did do a lot of those COVID temporary rate increases that we’ve talked about,” Richard said. “And they stayed on longer than we planned.”

    Nonetheless, Richard assured lawmakers that he was confident that the spending trends were “going the right direction.”

    One reason for his confidence is that there are also one-time federal pandemic funds still sloshing around in the state budget to cover gaps that might arise because of the pandemic. 

    Another reason for his confidence was that NC public health officials thought at the time that the end of the federal public health emergency was to occur in the middle of April.

    During a pandemic with so many curves, many know to expect the unexpected.

    On the same day that Richard met with state lawmakers, federal Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra pushed the end out to mid-July, meaning that the bumped-up rates and the extra people would remain on North Carolina’s Medicaid balance sheets for an additional 90 days. 

    ‘Forecasts are always wrong’

    A decade ago, Medicaid was over budget for several years in a row and Republican lawmakers roundly criticized the program as wasteful. 

    This year, criticism of cost overruns has been muted, if there at all. 

  • COVID Shots Still Work but Researchers Hunt New Improvements | Health News

    COVID Shots Still Work but Researchers Hunt New Improvements | Health News

    By LAURAN NEERGAARD, AP Health-related Writer

    COVID-19 vaccinations are at a significant juncture as corporations exam no matter if new methods like mixture photographs or nasal drops can hold up with a mutating coronavirus — even however it is not obvious if variations are required.

    Now there is community confusion about who need to get a next booster now and who can wait around. You can find also debate about whether really considerably anyone may possibly will need an further dose in the fall.

    “I’m very concerned about booster fatigue” leading to a reduction of self-confidence in vaccines that still present really strong protection versus COVID-19’s worst outcomes, reported Dr. Beth Bell of the University of Washington, an adviser to the U.S. Centers for Condition Control and Avoidance.

    In spite of success in stopping major health issues and loss of life, there is escalating stress to acquire vaccines superior at fending off milder infections, far too — as perfectly as alternatives to counter terrifying variants.

    Political Cartoons

    “We go as a result of a hearth drill it seems like every quarter, each individual a few months or so” when another mutant leads to frantic exams to identify if the pictures are keeping, Pfizer vaccine chief Kathrin Jansen advised a current meeting of the New York Academy of Sciences.

    Nonetheless looking for improvements for the following round of vaccinations could appear to be like a luxurious for U.S. families nervous to guard their littlest young children — youngsters under 5 who are not yet eligible for a shot. Moderna’s Dr. Jacqueline Miller informed The Affiliated Press that its application to give two reduced-dose shots to the youngest kids would be submitted to the Food stuff and Drug Administration “fairly shortly.” Pfizer hasn’t but documented details on a 3rd dose of its extra-compact shot for tots, right after two didn’t confirm strong more than enough.

    Mix Pictures May possibly BE Next

    The first COVID-19 vaccines continue being strongly protective from major health issues, hospitalization and demise, particularly immediately after a booster dose, even towards the most contagious variants.

    Updating the vaccine recipe to match the hottest variants is dangerous, simply because the upcoming mutant could be entirely unrelated. So businesses are getting a cue from the flu vaccine, which presents protection towards a few or four distinctive strains in a single shot each and every 12 months.

    Moderna and Pfizer are tests 2-in-1 COVID-19 security that they hope to provide this drop. Every “bivalent” shot would combine the first, confirmed vaccine with an omicron-targeted edition.

    Moderna has a hint the technique could work. It examined a combo shot that targeted the unique variation of the virus and an before variant named beta — and found vaccine recipients made modest concentrations of antibodies able of fighting not just beta but also more recent mutants like omicron. Moderna now is screening its omicron-qualified bivalent applicant.

    But you will find a looming deadline. FDA’s Dr. Doran Fink mentioned if any up-to-date pictures are to be specified in the fall, the company would have to make a decision on a recipe adjust by early summertime.

    Really don’t Hope BOOSTERS Just about every Several MONTHS

    For the average individual, two doses of the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine as well as one particular booster — a whole of 3 pictures — “gets you set up” and all set for what may possibly grow to be an once-a-year booster, explained Dr. David Kimberlin, a CDC adviser from the University of Alabama at Birmingham.

    Immediately after that to start with booster, CDC information indicates an additional dose offers most persons an incremental, temporary reward.

    Why the emphasis on three photographs? Vaccination triggers enhancement of antibodies that can fend off coronavirus infection but naturally wane in excess of time. The up coming line of protection: Memory cells that jump into action to make new virus-fighters if an an infection sneaks in. Rockefeller University scientists discovered people memory cells turn into more powerful and in a position to target a lot more varied variations of the virus soon after the 3rd shot.

    Even if a person who’s vaccinated gets a gentle an infection, thanks to individuals memory cells “there’s nonetheless loads of time to shield you against critical illness,” said Dr. Paul Offit of the Children’s Healthcare facility of Philadelphia.

    But some persons — individuals with seriously weakened immune units — require extra doses up-entrance for a better possibility at security.

    And People in america 50 and more mature are staying available a 2nd booster, pursuing equivalent choices by Israel and other countries that give the more shot to give more mature people a very little much more security.

    The CDC is developing tips to support these eligible make a decision regardless of whether to get an further shot now or hold out. Amid these who could want a second booster faster are the aged, people with well being troubles that make them particularly susceptible, or who are at significant hazard of publicity from operate or journey.

    COULD NASAL VACCINES BLOCK An infection?

    It is hard for a shot in the arm to kind heaps of virus-preventing antibodies inside of the nose exactly where the coronavirus latches on. But a nasal vaccine may possibly supply a new approach to avert infections that disrupt people’s day to day lives even if they are moderate.

    “When I consider about what would make me get a second booster, I in fact would want to reduce an infection,” said Dr. Grace Lee of Stanford University, who chairs CDC’s immunization advisory committee. “I imagine we require to do superior.”

    Nasal vaccines are difficult to acquire and it truly is not crystal clear how immediately any could turn out to be available. But a number of are in medical trials globally. One in late-phase testing, manufactured by India’s Bharat Biotech, makes use of a chimpanzee cold virus to provide a harmless copy of the coronavirus spike protein to the lining of the nose.

    “I definitely do not want to abandon the achievement we have had” with COVID-19 photographs, explained Dr. Michael Diamond of Washington University in St. Louis, who served build the prospect that’s now certified to Bharat.

    But “we’re going to have a complicated time stopping transmission with the latest systemic vaccines,” Diamond added. “We have all figured out that.”

    The Involved Press Health and fitness and Science Department gets support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Division of Science Schooling. The AP is exclusively responsible for all articles.

    Copyright 2022 The Related Push. All legal rights reserved. This content may perhaps not be revealed, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

  • OSHA, USDA should have protected meatpackers

    OSHA, USDA should have protected meatpackers

    By Sky Chadde / Investigate Midwest

    This story was originally published by The Midwest Center for Investigative Reporting.

    The U.S. Department of Agriculture has food safety inspectors in every large meatpacking plant in the country. Just like the industry’s workers, the government’s inspectors entered the high-risk work spaces almost every day during the Covid-19 pandemic.

    Sonny Perdue, USDA’s leader during the pandemic’s critical first year, made clear he saw no role for the agency in protecting workers. That mostly fell to the U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

    Despite Perdue’s proclamations, however, the two agencies should have collaborated to ensure workers were safe from Covid-19 by leveraging USDA’s employees in plants to provide better oversight of the industry, the DOL’s Office of Inspector General concluded in a new report released recently.

    OSHA has been roundly criticized for failing to protect meatpacking workers from the coronavirus. In the pandemic’s first year, the agency doled out small fines to only a handful of plants, and it failed to inspect every plant where cases were publicly reported.

    OSHA defended its approach in responses to the inspector general’s office. The head of OSHA under former President Donald Trump, Loren Sweatt, has told Investigate Midwest the agency was dedicated to protecting workers.

    The agency entered the pandemic with its fewest number of inspectors in its history. At the same time, the number of workplaces it has to oversee has increased.

    This graphic, included in the OIG’s report, shows the number of establishments OSHA is responsible for overseeing and the number of OSHA inspectors.

    Still, according to the inspector general’s report, OSHA should have identified what federal agencies oversaw high-risk industries — including meatpacking — and provided training to on-the-ground employees in how to assist with worker safety.

    Like this story? Sign up for our newsletter.

    Get the latest stories from the Yonder directly in your email inbox.

    “Without delivering the necessary outreach and training, OSHA could not leverage the observations of external federal agencies’ enforcement or oversight personnel active on job sites regarding potential safety and health hazards,” the report reads.

    Fostering collaboration with the USDA’s Food Safety Inspection Service was “particularly important” given the risk at meatpacking plants, the report said. More than 400 meatpacking workers have died from Covid-19, according to Investigate Midwest tracking.

    OSHA and FSIS had some history that made collaborating challenging, according to the report.

    Before the pandemic, when FSIS inspectors would make a referral about potential worker safety violations to OSHA, OSHA would investigate FSIS, not the plant, according to the report. Because of this, FSIS inspectors were hesitant to refer possible violations.

    OSHA said it “informally collaborated” with FSIS during the pandemic. Starting “early in 2020,” OSHA held weekly meetings with FSIS and other agencies where it “often” discussed the safety of meatpacking workers, the agency said in its response to the report.

    OSHA “judged this effort to be far more fruitful than attempting to reach individual FSIS inspectors,” it said.

    Sweatt didn’t reach out to FSIS’s head, Mindy Brashears, until mid-April 2020, weeks after the first reported Covid-19 case in a U.S. meatpacking plant and months after news of the contagious disease broke, according to emails obtained by Public Citizen.

    “Is FSIS doing guidance for meat packers in the world of Covid-19?” Sweatt asked Brashears on April 11, 2020. “If so, is there anything OSHA can do to be of assistance?”

    Brashears then emailed back, saying she’d like to see any guidance documents OSHA had.

    “It’s shocking how much OSHA deferred to USDA” on worker safety during the pandemic, Adam Pulver, the attorney at Public Citizen who obtained the records, has said about the emails.

    During the pandemic’s first year, Covid-19 deaths had been reported at 65 plants. OSHA didn’t inspect 26 of them, according to an investigation by USA TODAY and Investigate Midwest.

    The trend has continued, according to OSHA’s responses to the report. Investigate Midwest has tracked nearly 500 plants with reported Covid-19 cases. Between March 2020 and March 2022, OSHA conducted 157 inspections related to Covid-19 in the meatpacking industry.

    This article first appeared on The Daily Yonder and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

    Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.

    X

    Republish this article

    As of late 2019, we’re changing our policy about reprinting our content.

    You are free to use NC Health News content under the following conditions:

    • You can copy and paste this html tracking code into articles of ours that you use, this little snippet of code allows us to track how many people read our story.





    • Please do not reprint our stories without our bylines, and please include a live link to NC Health News under the byline, like this:

      By Jane Doe

      North Carolina Health News



    • Finally, at the bottom of the story (whether web or print), please include the text:

      North Carolina Health News is an independent, non-partisan, not-for-profit, statewide news organization dedicated to covering all things health care in North Carolina. Visit NCHN at northcarolinahealthnews.org. (on the web, this can be hyperlinked)

    by Shelbi Polk, North Carolina Health News
    April 23, 2022

    1

  • Nearly half of rural hospitals lose money on births

    Nearly half of rural hospitals lose money on births

    By Liz Carey

    Daily Yonder

    About 40 percent of rural hospitals are losing money on their obstetrics programs, but many continue to provide the service because of its importance for community health, a new study shows.

    Losing childbirth services can also be a harbinger of hard times for a rural hospital, oftentimes serving as a precursor to closure.

    A study conducted by the University of Minnesota Rural Health Research Center found that some rural hospitals keep their obstetrics programs open even after they have stopped being financially viable.

    In large part, researcher Julia Interrante said, rural hospitals that close their obstetrics units are more likely to close their doors for good.

    “Usually the obstetrics unit will close, and then other services will start to close before the entire hospital closes,” she said. “It’s not always the case – sometimes we see things where hospitals will enter into mergers or move those services to another hospital location… But often when they end up closing OB services, then it usually kind of leads toward the hospital closing.”

    A survey of obstetric unit managers or administrators at nearly 300 rural hospitals found that whether the program was in the black wasn’t as important to these leaders as how much the community needed it.

    Hospitals reported they needed 200 births per year to maintain safety standards and to remain financially viable. More than 40 percent said they had fewer births than needed to sustain operations financially.

    “I think that’s really striking,” Interrante said. “But so many of them also reported understanding the need and importance of having those services in rural communities, because people are still giving birth, and they have to have somewhere to go.”

    The survey respondents said it was important to keep the obstetrics units open because of the complications patients could encounter if they had to drive long distances to give birth.

    About two-thirds of survey respondents said meeting their community’s needs was the most important factor in keeping their obstetrics units open, even if there weren’t enough births in the area to warrant it financially. Only 16.5 percent said their top priority in making that decision was the financial aspect. Nearly 13 percent said their top priority was staffing. 

    Nationally, birth rates have been falling since 2008, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.  Birth rates tend to be higher in rural areas, around 1,900 births per every 1,000 women, compared to 1,600 births for 1,000 women in urban areas. However, because there are fewer women of child-bearing age in rural areas, hospitals tend to see fewer births per year. 

    “Many hospital administrators in rural communities care deeply about the health of pregnant rural residents,” Katy Backes Kozhimannil, director of the Rural Health Research Center and lead author of the study, said. “Rural hospital administrators prioritized local community needs over finances and staffing, keeping obstetric units open because local pregnant patients need care. Policy investments are needed to help rural hospitals and communities support safe, healthy pregnancies and births.”

    Interrante said insurance reimbursement is one issue rural hospitals face in keeping the obstetrics units open. Rural areas tend to have more patients on Medicaid, she said, which only reimburses a percentage of what it costs hospitals to provide those services. According to the CDC, half of the women who give birth in rural areas are on Medicaid, compared to 41.9 percent in urban areas. 

    Medicaid’s role in financing maternity care: Number and share of births, by payer source, rural vs. urban 2018. Table source: MACPAC; Data source: CDC

    More than a quarter of those responding to the survey said they were not sure if they would continue providing obstetrics. Or they said they expected to stop offering the service, indicating a continued downward trend in health care access, researchers said.

    “The responses from the rural hospital administrators strongly highlight the fact that they provide obstetric services because they are so necessary and important for the health of rural communities they serve,” Bridget Basile Ibrahim, a co-author of the study, said. “For many of the patients who give birth at these hospitals, it would be a huge burden for them to travel to the next nearest hospital to give birth.”

    Researchers concluded that any policies to improve rural obstetrics care should take into account community needs, clinical safety, and rural hospital finances. How low-volume, rural hospitals are reimbursed should be investigated to ensure those hospitals’ financial viability, they said.

    Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.

    X

    Republish this article

    As of late 2019, we’re changing our policy about reprinting our content.

    You are free to use NC Health News content under the following conditions:

    • You can copy and paste this html tracking code into articles of ours that you use, this little snippet of code allows us to track how many people read our story.





    • Please do not reprint our stories without our bylines, and please include a live link to NC Health News under the byline, like this:

      By Jane Doe

      North Carolina Health News



    • Finally, at the bottom of the story (whether web or print), please include the text:

      North Carolina Health News is an independent, non-partisan, not-for-profit, statewide news organization dedicated to covering all things health care in North Carolina. Visit NCHN at northcarolinahealthnews.org. (on the web, this can be hyperlinked)

    by Daily Yonder, North Carolina Health News
    April 22, 2022

    1

  • How regular intercourse can keep you away from ED?

    How regular intercourse can keep you away from ED?

    How regular intercourse can keep you away from ED?

    Men who seem to be having more intercourse with partners seem to be having fewer chances of having ED. yes, this has been a curious type of observation that has been found as per data of experiments and research.

    Some doctors say that the more sex you have the more you are going to stay healthy and the more you can stay away from ED.

    In this article, we will dive deep into male fantasies and sexual rhythms and their relationships in between and find out how having more sex can keep away ED.

    There is a lot to discuss, so let’s begin…

    Having more sex can keep you mentally healthy

    When you have more sex doctors say that this can help you to keep mentally healthy and joyous. Doctors say that on reaching climax and finally when you ejaculate it releases adrenaline for the excitement is at its peak at this stage and even dopamine which is a hormone that ensures that you have feelings of satisfaction and joy.

    This is vital for preventing feelings of depression, anxiety, or even stress. When you don’t have sex you don’t employ this remedy that nature has inbuilt into your body systems to try and get rid of psychological problems. some doctors say that having sex can also ensure better sleep and prevents chances of sleep problems such as insomnia or sleep apnea. Even if you are suffering from ED have your daily pill of Cenforce 100 but ensure to have sex more.

    Having more sex can keep your heart and blood flow to normal healthy levels

    When you have regular sex doctors say that it can help you to keep your heart and blood flow levels to healthier margins. You see when you are having sex, ad excitement levels are at their peak the blood flow would automatically rise as your heartbeat increases. Initially, the brain gives signals to the heart to pump blood more effectively to the penis region in particular.

    Doctors say that this is good for your body. It can help prevent chances of a heart attack or heart failure in elder men above the age of 40s according to some research.

    Even the blood flow levels are in the normal range and according to some health researchers, this can prevent high blood pressure too. It seems that having more sex can be a counter remedy for those men who are having pills such as Cenforce 200.

    Having more sex keeps away chances of prostate diseases

    Some doctors have found through extensive research that having sex can prevent diseases relating to the prostate gland in males. Doctors have done a lot of human trials and generically found out that men who are having more sex per week that is three or more times are generally indicated to have fewer chances of having prostate disorders such as the formation of tumors or prostate cancer.

    Although scientists don’t have much explanation for this and it is due to a lack of foundation evidence that more research needs to be done in this field. But certainly based on the research that has been done till now there is indeed some positive indication.

    Having more sex keeps your penis tissues healthier

    When you have sex your penis tissues will increase in girth and this is due to higher blood flows through them. Having more sex allows your penis tissues to maintain this level of elasticity where they can grow hard into an erected state more easily.

    Sometimes doctors say that men who do not have more than two sexual meetings per week may have higher refractory periods.

    Data based on such research is very limited. But some indications show it to be an inherent possibility. In case you do not know what the refractory period is well, it is the time taken by your penis to grow hard and erect after having ejaculated.

    Over a long period, this may lead to impotency problems. this may be one of the prime reasons why you are having to take pills such as Fildena 100.

    Bring up these changes to have the same intensity and desire for having sex

    Do you want to have more sex? Do you want to keep up to the levels of intensity as in your prime? Well, it seems that some simple homely changes can help you to reduce your buying dependence on ED pills from online websites such as powpills.com and even allow you to increase your sexual vigor and hunger.

    Here are some of the usual recommendations that doctors and sex experts provide-

    Doing exercises such as running, jogging, swimming, and cycling

    Having a healthy diet and preventing intake of more fats and carbs

    Doing yoga and meditation for stress management