Author name: Admin

• Prostate cancer rates rose over the past decade, following years of decline.
• The increase is driven by advanced prostate cancer diagnoses, even in males as young as 55.
• Experts say it’s time to reevaluate recommendations for PSA screening to ensure prostate cancer is caught early.

Prostate cancer rates have risen steadily over the past decade, reversing course after years of decline.

Diagnoses of prostate cancer rose by 3% annually between 2014 and 2021, following year-over-year declines of 6.4% in the late 2000s and early 2010s, according to the latest statistics from the American Cancer Society (ACS).

Even more worrisome, the growth is driven by late-stage cancer diagnoses, the most dangerous form, in which the cancer has spread to other parts of the body. Advanced prostate cancer increased by up to 6.2% annually, with the most precipitous increase observed in males over the age of 70.

Prostate cancer is the second-leading cause of cancer-related death for men in the United States, second only to lung cancer. One in eight men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer during their lifetime. In 2025, the ACS estimates 313,780 new cases of prostate cancer and 35,770 deaths from the disease.

Declines in mortality have also slowed. Between 1993 and 2012, deaths from prostate cancer fell about 3.5% per year, before slowing to a trickle — just 0.6% per year during the following decade.

While the exact reasons behind these trends are unclear, experts point to changes made to recommendations for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screenings in the early 2010s. At that time, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) downgraded PSA screening to a “D” score, recommending against it for males ages 70 and older.

For males ages 55–59, USPTF guidelines remain a “C” score, stating that periodic screening can be considered.

“It appears that we are still experiencing some of the detrimental effects of the USPSTF recommendations against PSA screening, as we continue to see an increase in distant-stage disease across age groups,” said Jeffrey Tosoian, MD, MPH, an assistant professor of urology and director of Translational Cancer Research at Vanderbilt University Medical Center. Tosoian was not involved in the research.

“The hope is that as updated recommendations based on best-available evidence take hold, this trend will reverse, and the harm caused by prostate cancer can be significantly reduced,” he told Healthline.

Disparities in prostate cancer

The report highlights in stark detail consistent disparities in prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment due to race and ethnicity.

Black men have the highest incidence rate of prostate cancer of all racial or ethnic groups — 67% higher than white men. They experience higher rates of the disease at every age compared to white men, and have the lowest age of diagnosis (65 years old) out of all racial groups.

Black men also fare significantly worse disease outcomes than their peers: they are twice as likely to die from prostate cancer as any other racial or ethnic group.

“Though this disparity has improved from a 2.5-fold increase in 2001, it underscores the importance of ensuring equal access to quality healthcare, among other potential factors,” said Tosoian.

Disparities in mortality are present in other groups as well. For example, despite overall lower incidence of prostate cancer among American Indian and Alaska Natives (AIAN), they have a 12% higher mortality rate than White men.

The reason for these disparities is multifactorial and includes factors like:

• later stage diagnosis
• higher prevalence of comorbidities 
• barriers to receiving high-quality treatment

“Improving access to care, particularly early detection and high quality treatment, is important for reducing the disparity for Black men,” said Tyler Kratzer, MPH, first author of the report, and associate research scientist, surveillance research, at the American Cancer Society.

“Prior research has shown that when Black men and white men with similar prostate cancer are treated equally, they have equivalent outcomes,” Kratzer told Healthline.

Kratzer and his team also identified significant geographic prostate cancer trends in the United States, which may also be driven by racial disparities. They note that Washington, DC, and Mississippi, the two jurisdictions with the highest death rates from prostate cancer, also have higher proportions of Black residents.

When should prostate cancer screening start?

The ACS report suggests that climbing prostate cancer incidence rates, particularly at later stages, may be the result of declining PSA screening. 

PSA screening is a simple blood test that measures prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels. PSA is naturally produced by the prostate gland, but elevated levels may indicate the presence of cancer. PSA testing can detect prostate cancer up to 7 years before it becomes symptomatic.

Despite these benefits, screening is also associated with overdiagnosis — when a tumor that is unlikely to cause symptoms is treated, leading to unnecessary harm to the patient.

How to strike a balance between the harms and benefits of PSA testing is the “central question in the field” according to Tosoian. 

In 2018, the USPSTF again updated its recommendations for PSA screening for males ages 55–69, urging them to “make individual decisions” about the test and discuss potential harms and benefits with their doctor.

For patients, navigating these vague recommendations may be difficult.

“The recommendations certainly can be inconsistent from one guideline to the next, yet the majority of them are aligned on major points,” said Tosoian.

“Men with a life expectancy of 10 years or more should consider PSA screening to avoid long-term risk of harm from prostate cancer. The exact age at which guidelines recommend beginning to screen does vary among guidelines, but most agree on beginning in the range of 45 to 55,” he said.

However, those with specific risk factors, such as a family history or Black race, may want to consider screening as early as age 40.

Kratzer suggested that having informed discussions with family members and healthcare practitioners is essential for anyone considering prostate cancer screening.

“Patients should talk with their family members to learn about any history of prostate cancer and then have a conversation with their healthcare provider about if and when screening is in their best interest, beginning at age 50 for most men or earlier for those with higher risk,” he said.

Michael Irvin has cared for his wife Sandy for a decade since…

Content source – www.soundhealthandlastingwealth.com

Randy Moss shared critical family advice that helped Deion Sanders manage his…

Content source – www.soundhealthandlastingwealth.com

Tom Holland finds developing characters “intimidating” due to his ADHD and dyslexia…

Content source – www.soundhealthandlastingwealth.com

• Researchers report that the weight loss drugs semaglutide and tirzepatide can reduce the risk of hospitalization and death by 40% in people with a common type of heart failure.
• Experts say this large cohort study strengthens the case for using these GLP-1 medications in people with this heart condition.
• Regular exercise, a balanced diet, and quality sleep are important in maintaining good heart health.

Two widely used weight loss drugs could significantly reduce the risk of complications in people with the most common type of heart failure

A new study reported that semaglutide and tirzepatide effectively lowered the risk of being hospitalized for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and death from any cause.

The findings show that semaglutide, commonly sold under the brand names Ozempic, Wegovy, and Rybelsus, produced similar benefits to those produced by tirzepatide, commonly sold under the brand names Zepbound and Mounjaro.

Semaglutide and tirzepatide reduced the risk of hospitalization for HFpEF and all-cause mortality by 40% compared to subjects who took the blood sugar medication sitagliptin, commonly sold under the brand name Januvia.

The researchers looked at five cohort studies that used data from healthcare claims in the United States between 2018 and 2024. Eligibility criteria were then expanded to evaluate treatment effects in patients typically treated in clinical practice. Finally, a head-to-head comparison of tirzepatide and semaglutide was implemented with a follow-up of 52 weeks.

In all, the researchers examined 58,000 people in a semaglutide versus sitagliptin comparison. Another 11,000 people were in a group that compared tirzepatide and sitagliptin, while 28,000 patients were studied in a semaglutide versus tirzepatide comparison.

Researchers noted that their study supports the results of smaller, earlier studies on GLP-1 drugs and heart failure. The results were published on August 31 in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).

“These findings complement early results from small clinical trials and support the use of semaglutide and tirzepatide in patients with cardiometabolic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction,” the authors wrote.

“This study further strengthens the case for using GLP-1 agonists in obese patients with HFpEF, a type of heart failure that is associated with significant morbidity and mortality,” said Pooja Prasad, MD, an assistant clinical professor in the Department of Advanced Heart Failure & Transplant Cardiology at the University of California San Francisco.

“While recent randomized clinical trials have rightly generated a lot of interest in GLP-1 agonists, having these results, specifically reduction in the composite outcome of heart failure hospitalizations and all-cause mortality, replicated in a large cohort study will likely increase their utilization even before we see a change in guidelines,” she told Healthline.

Weight loss drugs improve heart failure outcomes

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) affects about 3 million people in the United States and more than 30 million people worldwide.

People with HFpEF are hospitalized an estimated 1.4 times per year and have an annual mortality rate of approximately 15%.

Risk factors for HFpEF include obesity and type 2 diabetes.

Experts said the new research opens up the possibility of new treatments for people with this form of heart failure.

“As this condition is the most common form of heart failure and is a disease with limited treatment options, these study results offer a tremendous opportunity for us to better manage patients with this diagnosis,” said Cheng-Han Chen, MD, an interventional cardiologist and medical director of the Structural Heart Program at MemorialCare Saddleback Medical Center in Laguna Hills, CA.

“These findings are important as they may broaden the indications for these medications and benefit a larger patient population,” added Mir Ali, MD, a general surgeon and bariatric surgeon as well as the medical director of MemorialCare Surgical Weight Loss Center at Orange Coast Medical Center in Fountain Valley, CA.

Ali noted, however, that the study focused on people with high body mass index (BMI) readings. He said he’d like to see research done on the benefits of the weight loss medications on people with this heart condition who don’t have obesity or type 2 diabetes.

“A study separating the weight loss effects (and improvement in diabetes) from other benefits, and elucidating the mechanism, would be helpful to further ascertain how these drugs are working to reduce heart failure,” he told Healthline.

How obesity impacts health

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that the prevalence of obesity among adults in the United States is about 40%.

The agency notes that obesity increases a person’s risk of type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, heart disease, stroke, and certain cancers.

“Obesity affects every organ system in the body — from diabetes, heart disease, arthritis and even cancer. So, it is clear that reducing weight can improve or reverse the deleterious effects of obesity,” said Ali.

“Abdominal obesity, in addition to high blood sugars, high cholesterol, and high blood pressure, is a key component of metabolic syndrome,” said Prasad.

“Through a variety of mechanisms, metabolic syndrome increases our risk for cardiovascular disease, which can manifest as both acute and chronic blockages in the arteries supplying blood to our heart, strokes, heart rhythm abnormalities, and heart failure (weakness and stiffness of the heart muscle).”

“The GLP1 [weight loss] drugs are the best available medications for treatment of obesity. If the patient meets the criteria for surgery, that is even more effective,” Ali said.

“We need to stop thinking of HFpEF as purely a cardiac disease,” added Prasad. “It is a consequence of metabolic syndrome, and treating it requires addressing metabolic syndrome, of which obesity is one key component.”

The semaglutide and tirzepatide medications are injectable drugs. Some are approved to manage weight, while others are approved to treat type 2 diabetes.

Past research has reported that these weight loss drugs can help lower the risk of a heart attack as well as reduce the risk of cancer in people with obesity.

Tips to improve and maintain heart health

Chen told Healthline there are a number of lifestyle factors people can adopt to improve their cardiovascular health. They include:

• regular physical activity
• eating a healthy balanced diet
• getting an adequate amount of quality sleep
• maintaining a healthy weight
• avoiding tobacco and alcohol
• controlling blood pressure and cholesterol numbers

Experts say a heart-healthy diet should avoid ultra-processed foods, sugars, and unhealthy fats.

Some heart healthy foods that are recommended are:

• leafy green vegetables
• whole grains
• berries
• beans
• tomatoes
• almonds

Ali added that it’s essential that people adopt healthy habits, even if they are taking weight loss medications.

“Patients need to realize that counseling, medications, and even surgery are tools to help the patient adopt a healthier diet and lifestyle, and like any other tool, if used properly, it works well,” he said. “However, it still requires the proper effort on the part of the patient.”

Montell Jordan’s prostate cancer returned nearly a year after his prostate removal…

Content source – www.soundhealthandlastingwealth.com

• A new study has found no increased death risk from eating plant or animal protein.
• The findings also suggest that animal protein may slightly lower cancer-related death risk.
• Nutrition experts say there’s no need to alter general protein recommendations, but individual needs may vary based on age, activity level, health status, or dietary pattern.

For decades, the question of whether animal protein is harmful has sparked debate.

Some studies have suggested that eating a lot of meat, eggs, or dairy might increase the risk of death from cancer or heart disease.

On the other hand, plant protein has been praised as a safer and healthier option.

A new analysis of a large U.S. study, however, offers a new twist: Consuming typical amounts of both animal and plant proteins does not appear to be linked with a higher risk of death from any cause, including cancer or cardiovascular disease. The results were published on July 16 in Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism.

Death risk and protein intake

The findings of this study come from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III), which gathered information from more than 15,000 American adults between 1988 and 1994.

Participants were 19 years or older at the time of enrollment and were followed for 12 years to track mortality outcomes.

During this follow-up period, researchers recorded deaths from all causes, including cancer or cardiovascular disease.

The authors noted that measuring protein intake accurately is a challenge, since diets change from day to day, and surveys that rely on food recall are prone to error.

To address this, the research team used an advanced statistical approach known as the multivariate Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) model.

This method helps estimate a person’s “usual” nutrient intake by adjusting for normal daily variation and common reporting mistakes.

Using this method allowed the investigators to distinguish between protein coming from animal sources — such as meat, dairy, and eggs — and protein coming from plant sources, including beans, nuts, and grains.

The study went a step further by incorporating blood measurements of insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1).

This hormone has attracted attention in earlier studies, where higher levels were sometimes associated with cancer development and greater mortality risk.

By looking at IGF-1 alongside dietary data, the researchers were able to explore whether the hormone helped explain any potential connection between protein intake and death rates.

Because many lifestyle factors also influence health outcomes, the analysis adjusted for age, sex, smoking, physical activity, and total calorie intake.

These adjustments are important for teasing apart the role of protein itself rather than mistaking other behaviors for dietary effects.

No link between protein intake and early death

After examining years of follow-up data, the researchers found no evidence that eating more animal or plant protein increased the risk of dying early.

This was true when considering overall mortality as well as deaths caused specifically by cancer or cardiovascular disease.

The results even suggested a small protective effect: participants with higher animal protein intake showed a slightly lower risk of dying from cancer.

When IGF-1 levels were factored in, the story did not change. No significant relationship emerged between this hormone and the risk of death, contradicting some earlier concerns.

The consistency of the results across age groups also stood out. Whether participants were younger adults under 65, older adults over 65, or in the 50-to-65 range, protein intake was not associated with an elevated risk of mortality.

This detail is notable because prior studies had suggested that middle-aged adults might face more danger from higher protein diets.

The research team additionally compared their findings with earlier work that reported strong links between protein and mortality.

They speculated that differences in methodology may explain the contrasting results. Whereas older studies often relied on less precise ways of estimating intake, this analysis used more advanced modeling techniques to better capture long-term dietary patterns.

In addition, the study’s balanced group sizes helped reduce bias that can occur when too few participants fall into certain categories.

Taken together, the evidence suggests that usual protein consumption, regardless of source, does not shorten life expectancy.

By accounting for both dietary variation and biological markers like IGF-1, the researchers provided one of the more thorough examinations to date of the relationship between protein and mortality in a large, nationally representative population.

Recommended protein intake

Avery Zenker, a medical and health writer with MyHealthTeam, said that, based on these findings, people don’t need to make any adjustments in planning their daily protein intake. Zenker wasn’t involved in the new study.

“This study found that going beyond the minimum daily recommended intake of 0.8 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight per day didn’t appear to shorten life span,” she told Healthline, noting that higher protein intakes were still within the recommended ranges of between 10–35% of total calories.

“Plan protein intake based on individual goals, including muscle maintenance [and] growth, health needs, and satiety,” she added.

Zenker said the main takeaway from this study is not to fear higher total protein intakes when it comes to cancer or cardiovascular disease risk.

“It doesn’t mean that all protein sources are made equal, though,” she said. “Previous research has linked high intakes of processed meat with negative health outcomes like cardiovascular disease and certain cancers.”

She further noted the importance of not taking these findings as “rules.”

“As with most nutrition research, correlation does not always indicate causation,” cautioned Zenker, explaining that the way the study was structured can make it difficult to exclude other factors that might be influencing the results.

However, this study does contribute to our overall understanding of optimal eating patterns, she said.

Finally, Zenker pointed out that protein sources are not just composed of protein.

There are “many other compounds in protein foods that impact health, like vitamins, minerals, fiber, fats, carbohydrates, and phytonutrients,” she said.

No ‘one-size-fits-all’ for protein consumption

Of course, there is no one-size-fits-all recommendation for protein consumption.

“In addition to the information provided in this study, we also know that certain groups may need to adjust their protein intake based on their circumstances and lifestyle,” explained Maura Donovan, a board certified sports dietitian and Medical Education Specialist for Sports Nutrition at Thorne. Maura wasn’t involved in the study.

Donovan said older adults can benefit from a higher protein intake. This can help them maintain muscle mass and daily function as they age.

“[Athletes] have increased protein needs due to the need for quick muscle repair and recovery after physical activity,” she added.

“Additionally, individuals recovering from illness or injury can benefit from additional protein for immune support, and vegetarians and vegans should combine different plant sources to ensure they’re receiving a complete amino acid profile,” Donovan advised.

Working with a registered dietitian is a good way to figure out your own personal needs. The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics maintains a database of certified nutrition experts in your area.

Gabrielle Anwar’s bipolar disorder first manifested with her first manic episode at…

Content source – www.soundhealthandlastingwealth.com

• Cannabis products consumed on a daily basis resulted in better sleep for people with insomnia in a new study.
• Participants also reported improvements in anxiety and depression as well as pain levels.
• Cannabis continued to reduce insomnia throughout the 18-month trial, although the effects waned over time.
• Experts caution that tolerance for cannabis may reduce its value as a long-term sleep aid, and note other health risks associated with chronic cannabis use.

People with insomnia experienced improved sleep with regular cannabis use in a new study.

The authors report that participants experienced less insomnia using cannabis products daily throughout the 18-month study period. The findings were published on August 27 in PLOS Mental Health.

Estimates of the number of people who have difficulty sleeping range from 10%, as cited by the study authors, to as high as 30%.

Poor sleep quality over an extended period of time can lead to cardiovascular risks, as well as psychiatric and cognitive problems.

Effective medical treatments for insomnia are available, but they often come with side effects and a risk of developing a dependence.

As an alternative, the effects of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the main psychoactive ingredient in cannabis, have become of increasing interest to researchers.

Cannabis as a sleep aid

In the new study, researchers recruited people who had been diagnosed with primary insomnia and who were registered with the UK Medical Cannabis Registry. The final study cohort was 124 participants, 18 years old or older.

Individuals were each prescribed the same controlled daily dosage of cannabis supplied by the authors of the study.

Cannabis was consumed in oil or dried flower form, or a combination of both. No external cannabis was allowed during the trial period.

A total of 11 participants experienced 112 adverse events, including fatigue, dry mouth, and insomnia, though none of these were considered disabling or life threatening.

At the end of the 18-month trial, participants said that cannabis was still helping them sleep. However, the strongest benefit was observed during the first month of the trial and slowly decreased through the study period.

In addition to reporting insomnia relief, individuals said they also experienced less pain and that their levels of anxiety and depression improved throughout the trial.

“Cannabis can quiet racing thoughts and help some people fall asleep faster,” Eliana Bonaguro, LMHC, a therapist in New York City and Florida specializing in anxiety disorders, told Healthline.

“Many people with anxiety and depression have trouble falling asleep because of racing thoughts, so that’s where cannabis helps in the short term.”

Previous research studying the effects of cannabis on sleep quality has not consistently confirmed its value.

“The American Academy of Sleep Medicine indicated in 2024 that evidence remains insufficient to recommend cannabinoids for routine treatment of insomnia or other sleep disorders,” noted Ruchir Patel, MD, medical director of the Insomnia and Sleep Institute of Arizona.

He told Healthline that cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) remains the first-line therapy for insomnia.

Positive effects of cannabis may wane over time

The study followed participants for a year and a half, however, it’s unclear whether cannabis is a viable long-term sleep aid.

The authors note that one potential issue is how the body develops a tolerance for cannabis, meaning that consuming more and more of it may be necessary to achieve the same result.

They suggest that the decrease in the effectiveness of cannabis over time is likely related to participants’ growing tolerance.

“There is evidence indicating the consistent medical use of cannabis is associated with higher usage over time, resulting in increased risk of tolerance and dependence,” Patel said.

Bonaguro noted that cannabis use often becomes a cycle. “It gives short-term relief of anxiety or depression, but with prolonged use, tolerance builds, dependency develops, and both mood and sleep get worse,” she said.

Is long-term cannabis use safe?

The study investigated daily consumption of cannabis products for insomnia, and Patel noted there are side effects associated with frequent use.

Heavy cannabis use has been linked to a number of adverse health outcomes, such as a higher risk of cardiovascular disease.

Frequent cannabis use also raises the risk of developing a dependence or cannabis use disorder.

However, as a 2021 review notes, cannabis may compare favorably “in regards to safety and tolerability with other drugs, such as opioids, and it is important to weigh up the benefits of use vs the risk of dependence.”

The review further notes that the risk of adverse side effects, such as tolerance or dependence, may not outweigh the medicinal benefits of using cannabis for the management of chronic health conditions, “highlighting the need for a medicine with a good safety profile.”

As for sleep, however, cannabis use may be disruptive for some. Some research suggests that cannabis may affect slow-wave (N3) sleep. There is also suspicion that it fractures REM and deep sleep.

“One more thing I frequently heard from clients who use it regularly or sporadically is that they can’t remember their dreams,” said Bonaguro. “This makes sense since THC is well-documented to suppress REM sleep, which is when most dreaming occurs.”

Patel added that chronic cannabis use has also been linked to psychiatric problems in susceptible individuals.

Finally, cannabis taken daily can adversely interact with medications commonly prescribed for people with anxiety, such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), as well as antiepileptic medications.

The authors of the study conclude their report with an expression of their own concern.

They note the likelihood that insomnia patients will develop a tolerance for cannabis may ultimately limit the substance’s usefulness as a long-term therapy, however successful it proved throughout the relatively short-term of the study period.

Those successes alone, they argue, merit further randomized controlled trials of cannabis use in treating insomnia.

Pras Michel’s sentencing is postponed to October 3 due to emergency colon…

Content source – www.soundhealthandlastingwealth.com