It’s a common notion that people with heart disease should avoid sex because they’ll be at risk of having a heart attack.

Not true, concludes a new study published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology. In fact, the researchers at Ulm University in Germany said sexual activity may serve as a mild aerobic activity and could actually help reduce heart attack risk.

They said the common misconception is that sex is more rigrous than it really is. It’s more like a brisk walk or climbing two staircases.

For the study, 536 heart disease patients from 30 to 70 years old filled out a self-reported questionnaire on the frequency of sexual activity during the 12 months prior to their heart attack.

The responses were:

• None - 14.9 percent
• Less often than once per month - 4.7 percent
• Less often once per week - 25.4 percent
• One or more times per week – 55 percent

During the 10-year follow-up period, there were 100 heart disease-related incidents amongst the participants. Based on the timing of the answers, 78 percent reported sexual activity more than 24 hours before their heart attack and only 0.7 percent reported sexual activity an hour before their heart attack.

The researchers concluded that based on these findings, it is very unlikely sexual activity was a trigger for heart attacks.

This Week’s Slice of History: Penicillin Discovered: Sept. 28, 1928

Sourced from: medicalnewstoday.com, Sex ‘unlikely to raise heart attack risk’ for heart disease patients

Indoor pesticides have been tied to a higher risk of cancer in children, according to a new study in the journal Pediatrics.

Harvard University researchers analyzed 16 studies of children exposed to indoor pesticides. The pesticides include pest control services, flea and tick pet collars, and ant and roach sprays. The analysis compared 7,400 cancer cases with 9,437 healthy children.

Indoor pesticides were linked to a 47 percent increased risk for childhood leukemia and a 43 percent increased risk for childhood lymphomas. Outdoor pesticides, such as weed killers, were linked to 26 percent increased risk of developing brain tumors.

The study authors acknowledge that their research involved analysis of a relatively small number of studies. They also stressed that the pesticides were linked to an increased risk of cancer and were not found to be the cause of cancer.

This Week’s Slice of History: Penicillin Discovered: Sept. 28, 1928

Sourced from: well.blogs.nytimes.com, Pesticides Tied to Childhood Cancers

When referring to new drugs on the market, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) commonly uses the word “breakthrough” to describe them in its review process. But a group of researchers have now asked the agency to stop using the the word because it could be misleading to the general public.

In a study published in the journal _JAMA Internal Medicine, r_esearchers from Dartmouth College and Carnegie Mellon University found that patients may be misinterpreting the FDA’s usage of the word because they often don’t understand the FDA’s review process.

“Breakthrough therapies” are classified by the FDA if they meet certain criteria, such as its use to treat life-threatening conditions or that it may work better than other drugs. These drugs are the moved through the review process quicker, and the actual effectiveness of the drugs is studied later.

The study found that when 600 Americans read actual FDA press releases on a hypothetical new lung cancer drug, 10 percent of people thought the drug sounded promising based only on the facts. When the word “breakthrough” was added into the press release, however, 22 to 25 percent of people thought it sounded promising.

Also, belief in the supporting evidence for the drug increased from 43 percent to nearly 60 percent once “breakthrough” was added.

The researchers have asked the FDA to use more neutral terms.

This Week’s Slice of History: Penicillin Discovered: Sept. 28, 1928

Sourced from: livescience.com, Doctors to FDA: Don’t Call Them ‘Breakthrough’ Drugs