subsectsquickened

Infections after a prostate biopsy are rare, but they do occur. Now research shows that fewer than 2% of men develop confirmed infections after prostate biopsy, regardless of the technique used.

In the United States, doctors usually thread a biopsy needle through the rectum and then into the prostate gland while watching their progress on an ultrasound machine. This is called a transrectal ultrasound-guided biopsy (TRUS). Since the biopsy needle passes through the rectum, there's a chance that fecal bacteria will be introduced into the prostate or escape into the bloodstream. For that reason, doctors typically treat a patient with antibiotics before initiating the procedure.

Alternatively, the biopsy needle can be passed through the peritoneum, which is a patch of skin between the anus and the base of the scrotum. These transperitoneal prostate (TP) biopsies, as they are called, are also performed with ultrasound guidance, and since they bypass the rectum, antibiotics typically aren't required. In that way, TP biopsies help to keep antibiotic resistance at bay, and European medical guidelines strongly favor this approach, citing a lower risk of infection.

Study goals and methodology

TP biopsies aren't widely adopted in the United States, in part because doctors lack familiarity with the method and need further training to perform it. The technology is steadily improving, and TP biopsies are increasingly being conducted in office settings around the country. But questions remain about how TRUS and TP biopsies compare in terms of their infectious complications.

To investigate, researchers at Albany Medical Center in New York conducted the first-ever randomized clinical trial comparing infection risks associated with either method. The results were published in February in the Journal of Urology.

The Albany team randomized 718 men to either a TRUS or TP biopsy. Nearly all the men who got a TRUS biopsy (and with few exceptions, none of the TP-treated men) first received a single-day course of antibiotics. All the biopsies were administered between 2019 and 2022 by three urologists working at the Medical Center's affiliated and nonaffiliated hospitals.

The men were then monitored for fever, genitourinary infections, antibiotic prescriptions for suspected or confirmed infections, sepsis, and infection-related contacts with caregivers. Researchers collected data during a visit conducted two weeks after a biopsy procedure, and then by phone over an additional 30-day period following this initial meeting.

What the researchers found

According to the results, 1.1% of men in the TRUS group and 1.4% of men in the transperineal group wound up with confirmed infections. The difference was not statistically significant. If "possible" infections were counted (for example, antibiotic prescriptions for fever), then the rates increased to 2.6% and 2.7% of men in the TRUS and TP groups, respectively.

Fever was the most frequent complication, reported by six participants in each group. One participant from each group also developed noninfectious urinary retention, requiring the temporary use of a catheter. None of the men developed sepsis or required post-biopsy treatments for bleeding.

The study had some limitations: Nearly all the participants were white, and so the results may not be applicable to men from other racial and ethnic groups. Furthermore, since all the men were biopsied by a single institution, it's unclear if the findings are generalizable in other settings. Still, the study provides reassuring evidence that both types of biopsies "appear safe and viable options for clinical practice," the authors concluded.

Commentary from experts

"The paper provides needed evidence that TP biopsies without antibiotics are about as safe and efficacious as TRUS biopsies with antibiotics," said Dr. Marc Garnick, the Gorman Brothers Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. The findings also help to dispel a growing view that transperineal biopsies are superior, Dr. Garnick pointed out.

"Recent years have witnessed a marked interest and surge in the transperineal approach, primarily driven by early studies suggesting a lower risk of infectious complications compared with transrectal biopsy," said Dr. Boris Gershman, a urologist at Harvard-affiliated Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, and a member of Harvard Health Publishing's Annual Report on Prostate Diseases advisory board.

"Interestingly, the investigators find no difference in infectious complications, and it will be important to see if other ongoing studies report similar results," Dr. Gershman continued. "In addition to safety, we also need to confirm whether there are any meaningful differences between the two approaches with respect to cancer detection rates."

About the Author

Charlie Schmidt, Editor, Harvard Medical School Annual Report on Prostate Diseases

Charlie Schmidt is an award-winning freelance science writer based in Portland, Maine. In addition to writing for Harvard Health Publishing, Charlie has written for Science magazine, the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Environmental Health Perspectives, … See Full Bio View all posts by Charlie Schmidt

About the Reviewer

Marc B. Garnick, MD, Editor in Chief, Harvard Medical School Annual Report on Prostate Diseases; Editorial Advisory Board Member, Harvard Health Publishing

Dr. Marc B. Garnick is an internationally renowned expert in medical oncology and urologic cancer. A clinical professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, he also maintains an active clinical practice at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical … See Full Bio View all posts by Marc B. Garnick, MD

Headaches are very common in children and teens. In fact, more than half will suffer from headaches at some point, and by 18 years the majority of adolescents have had them. And while most headaches are part of a viral illness, some are migraines. In fact, recurring migraines affect as many as one in 10 children and teens overall.  

What should you know — and do — if you think your child or teen may be having migraines?

How early do migraines start to occur?

We don’t tend to think about migraines in children, but by age 10, one in 20 children has had a migraine. And migraines sometimes occur even earlier.

Before puberty, boys and girls are equally likely to have them. After puberty, migraines are more common in girls.

Which migraine symptoms are most common in children?

Migraines are often one-sided in adults. In children they are more likely to be felt on both sides of the head, either in both temples or both sides of the forehead.

While it’s not always easy to tell a migraine from another kind of headache, children

• often report throbbing pain
• may experience nausea and sensitivity to light and noise.

The flashing lights and other vision changes people often see as a migraine begins are less common in children. However, parents may notice that their child is more tired, irritable, or pale before a migraine begins — and takes a while to get back to normal after it ends.

What causes migraines in children?

We don’t know exactly what causes migraines. We used to think it had to do with blood flow to the brain, but that does not seem to be the case. It appears that migraines are caused by the nerves being more sensitive, and more reactive to stimulation. That stimulation could be stress, fatigue, hunger, almost anything.

Migraines run in families. In fact, most migraine sufferers have someone in the family who gets migraines too.

Can migraines be prevented?

The best way to prevent migraines is to identify and avoid triggers. The triggers are different in each person, which is why it’s a good idea to keep a headache diary.

When your child gets a headache, write down what was happening before the headache, how badly it hurt and where, what helped, and anything else about it you can think of. This helps you and your doctor see patterns that can help you understand your child’s particular triggers.

It’s a good idea to make sure your child gets enough sleep, eats regularly and healthfully, drinks water regularly, gets exercise, and manages stress. Doing this not only helps prevent migraines, but is also good for overall health!

How can you help your child ease a migraine?

When a migraine strikes, sometimes just lying down in a dark, quiet room with a cool cloth on the forehead is enough. If it’s not, ibuprofen or acetaminophen can be helpful; your doctor can tell you the best dose for your child.

It’s important not to give your child these medications more than about 14 days a month, as giving them more often can lead to rebound headaches and make everything worse!

Are there prescription medicines that can help children with migraines?

If those approaches aren’t enough, a class of medications called triptans can be helpful in stopping migraines in children ages 6 and up.

If a child experiences frequent or severe migraines, leading to missed days of school or otherwise interfering with life, doctors often use medications to prevent migraines. There are a number of different kinds, and your doctor can advise you on what would be best for your child.

Some girls get migraines around the time of their period. If that happens frequently, sometimes taking a prevention medicine around the time of menses each month can be helpful.

When to contact your doctor

If you think your child might be having migraines, you should call and make an appointment. Bring the headache diary with you. Your doctor will ask a bunch of questions, do a physical examination, and make a diagnosis. Together you can come up with the best plan for your child.

You should always call your doctor, or go to an emergency room, if your child has a severe headache, a stiff neck, trouble with coordination or movement, is abnormally sleepy, or isn’t talking or behaving normally.

The American Academy of Pediatrics has additional useful information about migraines, and how to treat and prevent them, on their website.

About the Author

Claire McCarthy, MD, Senior Faculty Editor, Harvard Health Publishing

Claire McCarthy, MD, is a primary care pediatrician at Boston Children’s Hospital, and an assistant professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School. In addition to being a senior faculty editor for Harvard Health Publishing, Dr. McCarthy … See Full Bio View all posts by Claire McCarthy, MD

All of us have an internal clock that regulates our circadian rhythms, including when we sleep and when we are awake. And light is the single most important factor that helps establish when we should feel wakeful (generally during the day) and when we should feel sleepy (typically at night).

So, let me ask you a personal question: just how dark is your bedroom? To find out why that matters — and whether sleeping in an eye mask is worthwhile — read on.

How is light related to sleep?

Our circadian system evolved well before the advent of artificial light. As anyone who has been to Times Square can confirm, just a few watts of power can trick the brain into believing that it is daytime at any time of night. So, what’s keeping your bedroom alight?

• A tablet used in bed at night to watch a movie is more than 100 times brighter than being outside when there is a full moon.
• Working on or watching a computer screen at night is about 10 times brighter than standing in a well-lit parking lot.

Light exposure at night affects the natural processes that help prepare the body for sleep. Specifically, your pineal gland produces melatonin in response to darkness. This hormone is integral for the circadian regulation of sleep.

What happens when we are exposed to light at night?

Being exposed to light at night suppresses melatonin production, changing our sleep patterns. Compared to sleeping without a night light, adults who slept next to a night light had shallower sleep and more frequent arousals. Even outdoor artificial light at night, such as street lamps, has been linked with getting less sleep.

But the impact of light at night is not limited to just sleep. It’s also associated with increased risk of developing depressive symptoms, obesity, diabetes, and high blood pressure. Light exposure misaligned with our circadian rhythms — that is, dark during the day and light at night — is one reason scientists believe that shift work puts people at higher risk for serious health problems.

Could sleeping with an eye mask help?

Researchers from Cardiff University in the United Kingdom conducted a series of experiments to see if wearing an eye mask while sleeping at night could improve certain measures of learning and alertness.

Roughly 90 healthy young adults, 18 to 35 years of age, alternated between sleeping while wearing an eye mask or being exposed to light at night. They recorded their sleep patterns in a sleep diary.

In the first part of the study, participants wore an intact eye mask for a week. Then during the next week, they wore an eye mask with a hole exposing each eye so that the mask didn't block the light.

After sleeping with no light exposure (wearing the intact eye mask) and with minimal light exposure (the eye mask with the holes), participants completed three cognitive tasks on days six and seven of each week:

• First was a paired-associate learning task. This helps show how effectively a person can learn new associations. Here the task was learning related word pairs. Participants performed better after wearing an intact eye mask during sleep in the days leading up to the test than after being exposed to light at night.
• Second, the researchers administered a psychomotor vigilance test, which assesses alertness. Blocking light at night also improved reaction times on this task.
• Finally, a motor skill learning test was given, which involved tapping a five-digit sequence in the correct order. For this task, there was no difference in performance whether participants had worn an intact eye mask or been exposed to light at night.

What else did the researchers learn?

No research study is ever perfect, so it is important to take the conclusions above with a grain of salt.

According to sleep diary data, there was no difference in the amount of sleep, nor in their perceptions of sleep quality, regardless of whether people wore an eye mask or not.

Further, in a second experiment with about 30 participants, the researchers tracked sleep objectively using a monitoring device called the Dreem headband. They found no changes to the structure of sleep — for example, how much time participants spent in REM sleep — when wearing an eye mask.

Should I rush out to buy an eye mask before an important meeting or exam?

If you decide to try using an eye mask, you probably don’t need to pay extra for overnight shipping. Instead, follow a chronobiologist’s rule of thumb: “bright days, dark nights.”

• During the daytime, get as much natural daylight as you possibly can: go out to pick up your morning bagel from a local bakery, take a short walk during your afternoon lull at work.
• In the evening, reduce your exposure to electronic devices such as your cell phone, and use the night-dimming modes on these devices. Make sure that you turn off all unnecessary lights. Finally, try to make your bedroom as dark as possible when you go to bed. This could mean turning the alarm clock next to your bed away from you or covering up the light on a humidifier.

Of course, you might decide a well-fitted, comfortable eye mask is a useful addition to your light hygiene toolkit. Most cost $10 to $20, so you may find yourself snoozing better and improving cognitive performance for the price of a few cups of coffee.

About the Author

Eric Zhou, PhD, Contributor

Eric Zhou, PhD, is an assistant professor at Harvard Medical School. His research focuses on how we can better understand and treat sleep disorders in both pediatric and adult populations, including those with chronic illnesses. Dr. … See Full Bio View all posts by Eric Zhou, PhD

Maybe we should add toothbrushes to the bouquet of flowers we bring to friends and family members in the hospital — and make sure to pack one if we wind up there ourselves.

New Harvard-led research published online in JAMA Internal Medicine suggests seriously ill hospitalized patients are far less likely to develop hospital-acquired pneumonia if their teeth are brushed twice daily. They also need ventilators for less time, are able to leave the intensive care unit (ICU) more quickly, and are less likely to die in the ICU than patients without a similar toothbrushing regimen.

Why would toothbrushing make any difference?

“It makes sense that toothbrushing removes the bacteria that can lead to so many bad outcomes,” says Dr. Tien Jiang, an instructor in oral health policy and epidemiology at Harvard School of Dental Medicine, who wasn’t involved in the new research. “Plaque on teeth is so sticky that rinsing alone can’t effectively dislodge the bacteria. Only toothbrushing can.”

Pneumonia consistently falls among the leading infections patients develop while hospitalized. According to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, each year more than 633,000 Americans who go to the hospital for other health issues wind up getting pneumonia. Air sacs (alveoli) in one or both lungs fill with fluid or pus, causing coughing, fever, chills, and trouble breathing. Nearly 8% of those who develop hospital-acquired pneumonia die from it.

How was the study done?

The researchers reviewed 15 randomized trials encompassing nearly 2,800 patients. All of the studies compared outcomes among seriously ill hospitalized patients who had daily toothbrushing to those who did not.

• 14 of the studies were conducted in ICUs
• 13 involved patients who needed to be on a ventilator
• 11 used an antiseptic rinse called chlorhexidine gluconate for all patients: those who underwent toothbrushing and those who didn’t.

What were the findings?

The findings were compelling and should spur efforts to standardize twice-daily toothbrushing for all hospitalized patients, Dr. Jiang says.

Study participants who were randomly assigned to receive twice-daily toothbrushing were 33% less likely to develop hospital-acquired pneumonia. Those effects were magnified for people on ventilators, who needed this invasive breathing assistance for less time if their teeth were brushed.

Overall, study participants were 19% less likely to die in the ICU — and able to graduate from intensive care faster — with the twice-daily oral regimen.

How long patients stayed in the hospital or whether they were treated with antibiotics while there didn’t seem to influence pneumonia rates. Also, toothbrushing three or more times daily didn’t translate into additional benefits over brushing twice a day.

What were the study’s strengths and limitations?

One major strength was compiling years of smaller studies into one larger analysis — something particularly unusual in dentistry, Dr. Jiang says. “From a dental point of view, having 15 randomized controlled trials is huge. It’s very hard to amass that big of a population in dentistry at this high a level of evidence,” she says.

But toothbrushing techniques may have varied among hospitals participating in the research. And while the study was randomized, it couldn’t be blinded — a tactic that would reduce the chance of skewed results. Because there was no way to conceal toothbrushing regimens, clinicians involved in the study likely knew their efforts were being tracked, which may have changed their behavior.

“Perhaps they were more vigilant because of it,” Dr. Jiang says.

How exactly can toothbrushing prevent hospital-acquired pneumonia?

It’s not complicated. Pneumonia in hospitalized patients often stems from breathing germs into the mouth — germs which number more than 700 different species, including bacteria, fungi, viruses and other microbes.

This prospect looms larger for ventilated patients, since the breathing tube inserted into the throat can carry bacteria farther down the airway. “Ventilated patients lose the normal way of removing some of this bacteria,” Dr. Jiang says. “Without that ventilator, we can sweep it out of our upper airways.”

How much does toothbrushing matter if you’re not hospitalized?

In case you think the study findings only pertain to people in the hospital, think again. Rather, this drives home how vital it is for everyone to take care of their teeth and gums.

About 300 diseases and conditions are linked in some way to oral health. Poor oral health triggers some health problems and worsens others. People with gum disease and tooth loss, for example, have higher rates of heart attacks. And those with uncontrolled gum disease typically have more difficulty controlling blood sugar levels.

About the Author

Maureen Salamon, Executive Editor, Harvard Women's Health Watch

Maureen Salamon is executive editor of Harvard Women’s Health Watch. She began her career as a newspaper reporter and later covered health and medicine for a wide variety of websites, magazines, and hospitals. Her work has … See Full Bio View all posts by Maureen Salamon

About the Reviewer

Howard E. LeWine, MD, Chief Medical Editor, Harvard Health Publishing

Dr. Howard LeWine is a practicing internist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, Chief Medical Editor at Harvard Health Publishing, and editor in chief of Harvard Men’s Health Watch. See Full Bio View all posts by Howard E. LeWine, MD

What happens when a widely used medicine is no longer available at pharmacies across the US? Until recently, Flovent (fluticasone) inhalers were frequently prescribed to help control asthma. If you or your child relied on these products, you may be scrambling to find medicines that will help you stay healthy without breaking the bank.

What’s essential to know, and what questions should you ask your health care provider? We checked in with Dr. William B. Feldman, a physician in the Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine at Harvard-affiliated Brigham and Women’s Hospital to get answers.

Which medicines are discontinued?

In January, GlaxoSmithKline stopped producing Flovent, which was available as a prescription metered-dose inhaler (Flovent HFA) and a dry powder inhaler (Flovent Diskus).

Both contain fluticasone, a steroid. Fluticasone reduces inflammation and swelling in the airways. Both types of inhalers are FDA-approved to help prevent asthma attacks.

However, children under age 5 and adults with particularly poor lung function may not be able to use a dry powder inhaler. They may lack the lung power necessary to breathe in deeply enough to pull the medicine into their airways, Dr. Feldman explains. A metered-dose inhaler could be the best choice for them.

Now that Flovent is discontinued, is a generic product available?

Yes, the drug manufacturer has licensed an authorized generic of both Flovent products: the metered-dose inhaler and the dry powder inhaler.

However, insurance coverage may not pay for the authorized generic because it may cost an insurer more than some other branded medicines. So, you may need to switch to another brand to stay healthy. Call your insurance company to check.

What are your alternatives?

This is a good chance for you and your doctor to review your asthma treatment plan. It may be a good time to make changes.

If you had been using Flovent daily for symptom control, your doctor may recommend:

• Trying an inhaled steroid similar to Flovent. Many types of steroids will work, including beclomethasone (Qvar RediHaler), budesonide (Pulmicort Flexhaler), ciclesonide (Alvesco), and mometasone (Asmanex Twisthaler, Asmanex HFA). “These products use different molecules to do the same job as fluticasone,” says Dr. Feldman.
• Switching to a combination inhaler. New studies suggest this approach may help many people who use Flovent daily for symptom control and only use a short-acting medicine to open airways when an asthma flare occurs (see here and here). If you have intermittent asthma symptoms, talk with your provider about whether you could use a combination inhaler when you start to wheeze or have shortness of breath. This combines a medicine called formoterol with a steroid. Symbicort provides this combination in one inhaler. Although not yet approved by the FDA for this specific use, it is approved in many other countries.

What else do asthma specialists advise people to do?

If your insurance covers the authorized generic, this may be a good choice because you already know how to use the product. But what if insurance won’t cover this?

“Any other inhaled steroid should work for most — but not all — people,” says Dr. Feldman. “There are brand-name metered-dose and dry powder inhalers available, such as those mentioned above.”

Here’s what else to know and do

• Discuss whether it’s safe to switch medicines or type of device. For many people, the answer will be yes. But if your health care provider believes that a metered-dose inhaler is the best choice due to age or poor lung function, ask your insurance company for a formulary exception to cover the authorized generic fluticasone or another metered-dose inhaler. Ask your provider to make the same request.
• If you have a child under 5, you and your doctor should also ask your insurance company for a formulary exception to cover a metered-dose inhaler with a steroid.
• For anyone who needs to switch brands, your new inhaler may look and feel different and may require a new technique when you use it to get the full benefit of the medicine. “When folks switch from one type of inhaler to another, it’s very important to get proper education, ideally from their prescriber. But you can also do this online to understand how to properly use this new product,” says Dr. Feldman.

If you do switch, ask your health care provider to show you how to use the new inhaler in an in-person or virtual visit. If that’s not possible, check your technique by watching these videos created by National Jewish Health, a leading US hospital for respiratory care.

What if you’re not feeling as good on a new asthma medicine?

If you’ve switched and notice worsening symptoms or more asthma attacks, contact your health care provider, Dr. Feldman advises. “They should make sure this isn’t due to improper technique with the new device. It may not be, but it’s important to check and to keep your doctor aware of changes like these.”

Is there a difference between an authorized generic and independent generic medicines?

“With an authorized generic, the brand-name company produces the generic or licenses another company to do that. It’s the exact same medicine as the original brand-name drug. It just doesn’t have the label,” says Dr. Feldman.

Independent generics encourage price competition if several companies make them. “With authorized generics, you don’t see those price decreases to the same extent, because you typically just have one product and it’s totally controlled by the branded company,” he adds.

What if you don’t have insurance, or insurance won’t cover a medicine you need?

“These inhalers have extraordinarily high list prices — $200, $300, $400 per month for the product,” notes Dr. Feldman. Manufacturers negotiate rebates with insurers that may substantially lower the price for an insurance plan.

If you don’t have insurance, you won’t get that lower price. So, it’s worth checking prices for all options: you may find the authorized generic will cost you less than other brand-name inhalers.

About the Author

Francesca Coltrera, Editor, Harvard Health Blog

Francesca Coltrera is editor of the Harvard Health Blog, and a senior content writer and editor for Harvard Health Publishing. She is an award-winning medical writer and co-author of Living Through Breast Cancer and The Breast … See Full Bio View all posts by Francesca Coltrera

About the Reviewer

Howard E. LeWine, MD, Chief Medical Editor, Harvard Health Publishing

Dr. Howard LeWine is a practicing internist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, Chief Medical Editor at Harvard Health Publishing, and editor in chief of Harvard Men’s Health Watch. See Full Bio View all posts by Howard E. LeWine, MD

Experiencing discrimination in the workplace — where many adults spend one-third of their time, on average — may be harmful to your heart health.

A 2023 study in the Journal of the American Heart Association found that people who reported high levels of discrimination on the job were more likely to develop high blood pressure than those who reported low levels of workplace discrimination.

Workplace discrimination refers to unfair conditions or unpleasant treatment because of personal characteristics — particularly race, sex, or age.

How can discrimination affect our health?

“The daily hassles and indignities people experience from discrimination are a specific type of stress that is not always included in traditional measures of stress and adversity,” says sociologist David R. Williams, professor of public health at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

Yet multiple studies have documented that experiencing discrimination increases risk for developing a broad range of factors linked to heart disease. Along with high blood pressure, this can also include chronic low-grade inflammation, obesity, and type 2 diabetes.

More than 25 years ago, Williams created the Everyday Discrimination Scale. This is the most widely used measure of discrimination’s effects on health.

Who participated in the study of workplace discrimination?

The study followed a nationwide sample of 1,246 adults across a broad range of occupations and education levels, with roughly equal numbers of men and women.

Most were middle-aged, white, and married. They were mostly nonsmokers, drank low to moderate amounts of alcohol, and did moderate to high levels of exercise. None had high blood pressure at the baseline measurements.

How was discrimination measured and what did the study find?

The study is the first to show that discrimination in the workplace can raise blood pressure.

To measure discrimination levels, researchers used a test that included these six questions:

• How often do you think you are unfairly given tasks that no one else wanted to do?
• How often are you watched more closely than other workers?
• How often does your supervisor or boss use ethnic, racial, or sexual slurs or jokes?
• How often do your coworkers use ethnic, racial, or sexual slurs or jokes?
• How often do you feel that you are ignored or not taken seriously by your boss?
• How often has a coworker with less experience and qualifications gotten promoted before you?

Based on the responses, researchers calculated discrimination scores and divided participants into groups with low, intermediate, and high scores.

• After a follow-up of roughly eight years, about 26% of all participants reported developing high blood pressure.
• Compared to people who scored low on workplace discrimination at the start of the study, those with intermediate or high scores were 22% and 54% more likely, respectively, to report high blood pressure during the follow-up.

How could discrimination affect blood pressure?

Discrimination can cause emotional stress, which activates the body’s fight-or-flight response. The resulting surge of hormones makes the heart beat faster and blood vessels narrow, which causes blood pressure to rise temporarily. But if the stress response is triggered repeatedly, blood pressure may remain consistently high.

Discrimination may arise from unfair treatment based on a range of factors, including race, gender, religious affiliation, or sexual orientation. The specific attribution doesn’t seem to matter, says Williams. “Broadly speaking, the effects of discrimination on health are similar, regardless of the attribution,” he says, noting that the Everyday Discrimination Scale was specifically designed to capture a range of different forms of discrimination.

What are the limitations of this study?

One limitation of this recent study is that only 6% of the participants were nonwhite, and these individuals were less likely to take part in the follow-up session of the study. As a result, the study may not have fully or accurately captured workplace discrimination among people from different racial groups. In addition, blood pressure was self-reported, which may be less reliable than measurements directly documented by medical professionals.

What may limit the health impact of workplace discrimination?

At the organizational level, no studies have directly addressed this issue. Preliminary evidence suggests that improving working conditions, such as decreasing job demands and increasing job control, may help lower blood pressure, according to the study authors. In addition, the American Heart Association recently released a report, Driving Health Equity in the Workplace, that aims to address drivers of health inequities in the workplace.

Encouraging greater awareness of implicit bias may be one way to help reduce discrimination in the workplace. Implicit bias refers to the unconscious assumptions and prejudgments people have about groups of people that may underlie some discriminatory behaviors. You can explore implicit biases with these tests, which were developed at Harvard and other universities.

On an individual level, stress management training can reduce blood pressure. A range of stress-relieving strategies may offer similar benefits. Regularly practicing relaxation techniques or brief mindfulness reflections, learning ways to cope with negative thoughts, and getting sufficient exercise can help.

About the Author

Julie Corliss, Executive Editor, Harvard Heart Letter

Julie Corliss is the executive editor of the Harvard Heart Letter. Before working at Harvard, she was a medical writer and editor at HealthNews, a consumer newsletter affiliated with The New England Journal of Medicine. She … See Full Bio View all posts by Julie Corliss

About the Reviewer

Howard E. LeWine, MD, Chief Medical Editor, Harvard Health Publishing

Dr. Howard LeWine is a practicing internist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, Chief Medical Editor at Harvard Health Publishing, and editor in chief of Harvard Men’s Health Watch. See Full Bio View all posts by Howard E. LeWine, MD

Social media and stores are full of products that promise perfect skin. Increasingly, these products are being marketed not just to adults but to teens and tweens. Many are benign, but some can cause skin irritation — and can be costly. And even if these products are benign, does buying them support unhealthy notions about appearance and beauty?

It’s worth looking at this from a medical perspective. Spoiler alert: for the most part teens and tweens do not need specialized skin products, especially expensive ones. But let’s talk about when they may make sense.

When can a specialized skin product help tweens and teens?

So, when should your child buy specialized skin products?

• When their doctor recommends it. If your child has a skin condition that is being treated by a doctor, such as eczema or psoriasis, over-the-counter skin products may help. For example, with eczema we generally recommend fragrance-free cleansers and moisturizers. Always ask your doctor which brands to choose, and get their advice on how best to use them.
• If they have dry and/or sensitive skin. Again, fragrance-free cleansers are a good idea (look for ones recommended for people with eczema). So are fragrance-free, non-irritating moisturizers (look for creams and ointments rather than lotions, as they will be more effective for dry skin). If you have questions, or if the products you are buying aren’t helping, check in with your doctor.

What about skin products for acne?

It’s pretty rare to go through adolescence without a pimple. Many teens aren’t bothered by them, but if your child is bothered by their pimples or has a lot of them, it may be helpful to buy some acne products at your local pharmacy.

• Mild cleansers tend to be better than cleansers containing alcohol. You may want to check out cleansers intended for dry skin or eczema.
• Over-the-counter acne treatments usually contain benzoyl peroxide, salicylic acid, azelaic acid, or alpha-hydroxy acids. Adapalene can be helpful for more stubborn pimples.
• Steer away from astringents or exfoliants, which tend to irritate the skin.
• Talk to your doctor about what makes the most sense for your child — and definitely talk to them if over-the-counter products aren’t helpful. There are many acne treatments available by prescription.

Ask questions and help dispel myths

If your teen or tween doesn’t fall into one of these groups, chances are they don’t need anything but plain old soap and water and the occasional moisturizer if their skin gets dry.

If your child has normal, healthy skin yet is asking for or buying specialized skin products, ask them why. Do your best to dispel the inevitable marketing myths — like that the products will prevent problems they do not have. Let them know that should a problem arise, you will work with them — with the advice of their doctor — to find and buy the best products.

Use it as an opportunity, too, to talk about self-image and how it can be influenced by outside factors. This is an important conversation to have whether or not your child is pining for the latest cleanser they see on Instagram. Helping your child see their own beauty and strengths is a key part of parenting, especially for a generation raised on social media.

About the Author

Claire McCarthy, MD, Senior Faculty Editor, Harvard Health Publishing

Claire McCarthy, MD, is a primary care pediatrician at Boston Children’s Hospital, and an assistant professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School. In addition to being a senior faculty editor for Harvard Health Publishing, Dr. McCarthy … See Full Bio View all posts by Claire McCarthy, MD

If you’ve ever tried to lose excess weight, you’ve probably gotten this advice: drink more water. Or perhaps it was more specific: drink a full glass of water before each meal.

The second suggestion seems like a reasonable idea, right? If you fill your stomach with water before eating, you’ll feel fuller and stop eating sooner. But did that work for you? Would drinking more water throughout the day work? Why do people say drinking water can help with weight loss — and what does the evidence show?

Stretching nerves, burning calories, and thirst versus hunger

Three top theories are:

Feel full, eat less. As noted, filling up on water before meals has intuitive appeal. Your stomach has nerves that sense stretch and send signals to the brain that it’s time to stop eating. Presumably, drinking before a meal could send similar signals.

• The evidence: Some small, short-term studies support this idea. For example, older study subjects who drank a full glass of water before meals tended to eat less than those who didn’t. Another study found that people following a low-calorie diet who drank extra water before meals had less appetite and more weight loss over 12 weeks than those on a similar diet without the extra water. But neither study assessed the impact of drinking extra water on long-term weight loss.

Burning off calories. The water we drink must be heated up to body temperature, a process requiring the body to expend energy. The energy spent on this — called thermogenesis — could offset calories from meals.

• The evidence: Though older studies provided some support for this explanation, more recent studies found no evidence that drinking water burned off many calories. That calls the thermogenesis explanation for water-induced weight loss into question.

You’re not hungry, you’re thirsty. This explanation suggests that sometimes we head to the kitchen for something to eat when we’re actually thirsty rather than hungry. If that’s the case, drinking calorie-free water can save us from consuming unnecessary calories — and that could promote weight loss.

• The evidence: The regulation of thirst and hunger is complex and varies over a person’s lifespan. For example, thirst may be dulled in older adults. But I could find no convincing studies in humans supporting the notion that people who are thirsty misinterpret the sensation for hunger, or that this is why drinking water might help with weight loss.

Exercise booster, no-cal substitution, and burning fat demands water

Being well-hydrated improves exercise capacity and thus weight loss. Muscle fatigue, cramping, and heat exhaustion can all be brought on by dehydration. That’s why extra hydration before exercise may be recommended, especially for elite athletes exercising in warm environments.

• The evidence: For most people, hydrating before exercises seems unnecessary, and I could find no studies specifically examining the role of hydration to exercise-related weight loss.

Swapping out high calorie drinks with water. Yes, if you usually drink high-calorie beverages (such as sweetened sodas, fruit juice, or alcohol), consistently replacing them with water can aid weight loss over time.

• The evidence: A dramatic reduction in calorie intake by substituting water for higher-calorie beverages could certainly lead to long-term weight loss. While it’s hard to design a study to prove this, indirect evidence suggests a link between substituting water for high-cal beverages and weight loss. Even so, just as calorie-restricting diets are hard to stick with over the long term, following a water-only plan may be easier said than done.

Burning fat requires water. Dehydration impairs the body’s ability to break down fat for fuel. So, perhaps drinking more water will encourage fat breakdown and, eventually, weight loss.

• The evidence: Though some animal studies support the idea, I could find no compelling evidence from human studies that drinking extra water helps burn fat as a means to lose excess weight.

The bottom line

So, should you bump up hydration by drinking water before or during meals, or even at other times during the day?

Some evidence does suggest this might aid weight loss, at least for some people. But those studies are mostly small or short-term, or based on animal data. Even positive studies only found modest benefits.

That said, if you think it’s working for you, there’s little downside to drinking a bit more water, other than the challenge of trying to drink if you aren’t particularly thirsty. My take? Though plenty of people recommend this approach, it seems based on a theory that doesn’t hold water.

About the Author

Robert H. Shmerling, MD, Senior Faculty Editor, Harvard Health Publishing; Editorial Advisory Board Member, Harvard Health Publishing

Dr. Robert H. Shmerling is the former clinical chief of the division of rheumatology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC), and is a current member of the corresponding faculty in medicine at Harvard Medical School. … See Full Bio View all posts by Robert H. Shmerling, MD

Snuff is a smokeless tobacco similar to chewing tobacco. It rarely makes headlines. But it certainly did when the FDA authorized a brand of snuff to market its products as having a major health advantage over cigarettes. Could this be true? Is it safe to use snuff?

What did the FDA authorize as a health claim?

Here’s the approved language for Copenhagen Classic Snuff:

If you smoke, consider this: switching completely to this product from cigarettes reduces risk of lung cancer.

While the statement is true, this FDA action — and the marketing that’s likely to follow — might suggest snuff is a safe product. It’s not. Let’s talk about the rest of the story.

What is snuff, anyway?

Snuff is a form of tobacco that’s finely ground. There are two types:

• Moist snuff. Users place a pinch or a pouch of tobacco behind their upper or lower lips or between their cheek and gum. They must repeatedly spit out or swallow the tobacco juice that accumulates. After a few minutes, they remove or spit out the tobacco as well. This recent FDA action applies to a brand of moist snuff.
• Dry snuff. This type is snorted (inhaled through the nose) and is less common in the US.

Both types are available in an array of scents and flavors. Users absorb nicotine and other chemicals into the bloodstream through the lining of the mouth. Blood levels of nicotine are similar between smokers and snuff users. But nicotine stays in the blood for a longer time with snuff users.

Why is snuff popular?

According to CDC statistics, 5.7 million adults in the US regularly use smokeless tobacco products — that’s about 2% of the adult population. A similar percentage (1.6%) of high school students use it as well. That’s despite restrictions on youth marketing and sales.

What accounts for its popularity?

• Snuff may be allowed in places that prohibit smoking.
• It tends to cost less than cigarettes: $300 to $1,000 a year versus several thousand dollars a year paid by some smokers.
• It doesn’t require inhaling smoke into the lungs, or exposing others to secondhand smoke.
• Snuff is safer than cigarettes in at least one way — it is less likely to cause lung cancer.
• It may help some cigarette smokers quit.

The serious health risks of snuff

While the risk of lung cancer is lower compared with cigarettes, snuff has plenty of other health risks, including

• higher risk of cancers of the mouth (such as the tongue, gums, and cheek), esophagus, and pancreas
• higher risk of heart disease and stroke
• harm to the developing teenage brain
• dental problems, such as discoloration of teeth, gum disease, tooth damage, bone loss around the teeth, tooth loosening or loss
• higher risk of premature birth and stillbirth among pregnant users.

And because nicotine is addictive, using any tobacco product can quickly become a habit that’s hard to break.

There are also the “ick” factors: bad breath and having to repeatedly spit out tobacco juice.

Could this new marketing message about snuff save lives?

Perhaps, if many smokers switch to snuff and give up smoking. That could reduce the number of people who develop smoking-related lung cancer. It might even reduce harms related to secondhand smoke.

But it’s also possible the new marketing message will attract nonsmokers, including teens, who weren’t previously using snuff. A bigger market for snuff products might boost health risks for many people, rather than lowering them.

The new FDA action is approved for a five-year period, and the company must monitor its impact. Is snuff an effective way to help smokers quit? Is a lower rate of lung cancer canceled out by a rise in other health risks? We don’t know yet. If the new evidence shows more overall health risks than benefits for snuff users compared with smokers, this new marketing authorization may be reversed.

The bottom line

If you smoke, concerns you have about lung cancer or other smoking-related health problems are justified. But snuff should not be the first choice to help break the smoking habit. Commit to quit using safer options that don’t involve tobacco, such as nicotine gum or patches, counseling, and medications.

While the FDA’s decision generated news headlines that framed snuff as safer than smoking, it’s important to note that the FDA did not endorse the use of snuff — or even suggest that snuff is a safe product. Whether smoked or smokeless, tobacco creates enormous health burdens and suffering. Clearly, it’s best not to use any tobacco product.

Until we have a better understanding of its impact, I think any new marketing of this sort should also make clear that using snuff comes with other important health risks — even if lung cancer isn’t the biggest one.

Follow me on Twitter @RobShmerling

About the Author

Robert H. Shmerling, MD, Senior Faculty Editor, Harvard Health Publishing; Editorial Advisory Board Member, Harvard Health Publishing

Dr. Robert H. Shmerling is the former clinical chief of the division of rheumatology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC), and is a current member of the corresponding faculty in medicine at Harvard Medical School. … See Full Bio View all posts by Robert H. Shmerling, MD

Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) –– or myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), to be specific ––  is an illness defined by a group of symptoms. Yet medical science always seeks objective measures that go beyond the symptoms people report.

A new study from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has performed more diverse and extensive biological measurements of people experiencing CFS than any previous research. Using immune testing, brain scans, and other tools, the researchers looked for abnormalities that might drive health complaints like crushing fatigue and brain fog. Let’s dig into what they found and what it means.

What was already known about chronic fatigue syndrome?

In people with chronic fatigue syndrome, there are underlying abnormalities in many parts of the body: The brain. The immune system. The way the body generates energy. Blood vessels. Even in the microbiome, the bacteria that live in the gut. These abnormalities have been reported in thousands of published studies over the past 40 years.

Who participated in the NIH study?

Published in February in Nature Communications, this small NIH study compared people who developed chronic fatigue syndrome after having some kind of infection with a healthy control group.

Those with CFS had been perfectly healthy before coming down with what seemed like just a simple “flu”: sore throat, coughing, aching muscles, and poor energy. However, unlike their experiences with past flulike illnesses, they did not recover. For years, they were left with debilitating fatigue, difficulty thinking, a flare-up of symptoms after exerting themselves physically or mentally, and other symptoms. Some were so debilitated that they were bedridden or homebound.

All the participants spent a week at the NIH, located outside of Washington, DC. Each day they received different tests. The extensive testing is the great strength of this latest study.

What are three important findings from the study?

The study had three key findings, including one important new discovery.

First, as was true in many previous studies, the NIH team found evidence of chronic activation of the immune system. It seemed as if the immune system was engaged in a long war against a foreign microbe — a war it could not completely win and therefore had to keep fighting.

Second, the study found that a part of the brain known to be important in perceiving fatigue and encouraging effort — the right temporal-parietal area — was not functioning normally. Normally, when healthy people are asked to exert themselves physically or mentally, that area of the brain lights up during an MRI. However, in the people with CFS it lit up only dimly when they were asked to exert themselves.

While earlier research had identified many other brain abnormalities, this one was new. And this particular change makes it more difficult for people with CFS to exert themselves physically or mentally, the team concluded. It makes any effort like trying to swim against a current.

Third, in the spinal fluid, levels of various brain chemicals called neurotransmitters and markers of inflammation differed in people with CFS compared with the healthy comparison group. The spinal fluid surrounds the brain and reflects the chemistry of the brain.

What else did study show?

There are some other interesting findings in this study. The team found significant differences in many biological measurements between men and women with chronic fatigue syndrome. This surely will lead to larger studies to verify these gender-based differences, and to determine what causes them.

There was no difference between people with CFS and the healthy comparison group in the frequency of psychiatric disorders — currently, or in the past. That is, the symptoms of the illness could not be attributed to psychological causes.

Is chronic fatigue syndrome all in the brain?

The NIH team concluded that chronic fatigue syndrome is primarily a disorder of the brain, perhaps brought on by chronic immune activation and changes in the gut microbiome. This is consistent with the results of many previous studies.

The growing recognition of abnormalities involving the brain, chronic activation (and exhaustion) of the immune system, and of alterations in the gut microbiome are transforming our conception of CFS –– at least when caused by a virus. And this could help inform potential treatments.

For example, the NIH team found that some immune system cells are exhausted by their chronic state of activation. Exhausted cells don’t do as good a job at eliminating infections. The NIH team suggests that a class of drugs called immune checkpoint inhibitors may help strengthen the exhausted cells.

What are the limitations of the study?

The number of people who were studied was small: 17 people with ME/CFS and 21 healthy people of the same age and sex, who served as a comparison group. Unfortunately, the study had to be stopped before it had enrolled more people, due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

That means that the study did not have a great deal of statistical power and could have failed to detect some abnormalities. That is the weakness of the study.

The bottom line

This latest study from the NIH joins thousands of previously published scientific studies over the past 40 years. Like previous research, it also finds that people with ME/CFS have measurable abnormalities of the brain, the immune system, energy metabolism, the blood vessels, and bacteria that live in the gut.

What causes all of these different abnormalities? Do they reinforce each other, producing spiraling cycles that lead to chronic illness? How do they lead to the debilitating symptoms of the illness? We don’t yet know. What we do know is that people are suffering and that this illness is afflicting millions of Americans. The only sure way to a cure is studies like this one that identify what is going wrong in the body. Targeting those changes can point the way to effective treatments.

About the Author

Anthony L. Komaroff, MD, Editor in Chief, Harvard Health Letter

Dr. Anthony L. Komaroff is the Steven P. Simcox/Patrick A. Clifford/James H. Higby Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School, senior physician at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, and editor in chief of the Harvard … See Full Bio View all posts by Anthony L. Komaroff, MD