antidepressants Archives - Amazing Health Advances

Antidepressants Linked to Faster Cognitive Decline in Dementia

The AHA! Team — Fri, 23 May 2025 05:21:22 +0000

Karolinska Institutet via EurekAlert! – New research suggests that antidepressants can accelerate cognitive decline in people with dementia. At the same time, some drugs appear to be less harmful than others, which can help doctors make better treatment decisions, according to the study published in BMC Medicine. Antidepressants are often used to relieve symptoms such as anxiety, depression, aggressiveness, and sleep disturbances in dementia sufferers. However, a new observational study based on data from the Swedish Dementia Registry (SveDem) shows that patients with dementia who are treated with antidepressants experience an increased cognitive decline compared to patients who do not receive this medication. The study is based on a comprehensive analysis of registry data from 18,740 patients, of whom approximately 23 percent were treated with antidepressants. During the course of the study, a total of 11,912 prescriptions of antidepressants were registered, with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) accounting for 65 percent. Depressive symptoms “Depressive symptoms can both worsen cognitive decline and impair quality of life, so it is important to treat them. Our results can help doctors and other healthcare professionals choose antidepressants that are better adapted for patients with dementia,” says Sara Garcia Ptacek, researcher at the Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institutet, and the study’s last author. The researchers from Karolinska Institutet and Sahlgrenska University Hospital in Gothenburg have followed the patients’ cognitive development over time and compared both medicated and non-medicated groups as well as different types of antidepressants. Although it is not currently possible to determine whether the cognitive impairment is due to the drugs or to the depressive symptoms themselves, the researchers were able to see that antidepressants were associated with increased cognitive decline. Differences between drugs The study also points to differences between different drugs. The SSRI escitalopram was associated with the fastest cognitive decline, followed by the SSRIs citalopram and sertraline. Mirtazapine, which has a different mechanism of action, had less negative cognitive impact than escitalopram. The researchers now want to investigate whether certain patient groups, such as people with specific dementia types or biomarkers, respond better or worse to different antidepressants. “The goal is to find these subgroups to create more individualised care,” says Sara Garcia Ptacek. The study has been funded by the Swedish Research Council, Region Stockholm, the Swedish Dementia Research Foundation, the Alzheimer’s Foundation and New Innovative Roads Call – a private initiative from the Leif Lundblad family and others. The researchers report no conflicts of interest. Publication: “Antidepressant use and cognitive decline in patients with dementia: a national cohort study”, Minjia Mo, Tamar Abzhandadze, Minh Tuan Hoang, Simona Sacuiu, Pol Grau Jurado, Joana B. Pereira, Luana Naia, Julianna Kele, Silvia Maioli, Hong Xu, Maria Eriksdotter, Sara Garcia Ptacek. BMC Medicine, online February 25, 2025, doi: 10.1186/s12916-025-03851-3. Journal BMC Medicine DOI 10.1186/s12916-025-03851-3. To read the original article click here.

The post Antidepressants Linked to Faster Cognitive Decline in Dementia appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Study Links Common Antidepressants to Weight Gain

The AHA! Team — Mon, 16 Dec 2024 06:09:50 +0000

News Staff via NaturalHealth365 – Depression and anxiety affect more Americans than ever before, with millions of people taking antidepressants, anti-anxiety medication, and various hybrid courses of therapy every day. While these medications may work for some people (temporarily), they are not without unwanted side effects, including weight gain, reduced positive feelings and suicidal thoughts! While gaining weight over the course of antidepressant treatment is relatively common, the amount of weight gain varies between the first-line medications used in most doctors’ offices. Researchers set out to quantify the expected weight gain associated with antidepressant use and compare the differences among major prescriptions. Although depression and anxiety are widespread in today’s society, numerous treatment options exist, many of which are holistic and do not involve medication. This article will examine a recent study on antidepressant-related weight gain and its findings and explore alternative approaches to managing depression and anxiety beyond prescription medications. What’s fueling the rise in depression? There is no shortage of stressors in the world today to be depressed about; a combination of unstable geopolitics, inflation, and any number of personal issues can weigh heavily on a person’s mental health. Our society is so breakneck that we are expected to work ourselves to the bone while not displaying weakness, and this can easily lead to burnout and depression. There are other factors at play, however – the unnatural and highly processed diets that we almost all partake in are key factors in depression development. There is a profound link between bodily inflammatory states and the development of depression in all age groups. It is reasonable to look at the world around us and assume that mental health crises abound because of the state of everything, but one of the biggest contributors could be living right within your body. Researchers explore the impact of antidepressants on weight gain Antidepressants like SSRIs (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors) work by preventing the reabsorption (or reuptake) of serotonin, a neurotransmitter, back into neurons. This allows serotonin to remain available longer in the brain, improving mood regulation. While the exact mechanism of how this alleviates anxiety and depression isn’t fully understood, the ability of SSRIs to enhance serotonin signaling has shown enough efficacy in treating these conditions to warrant their widespread medical use. In addition to a variety of other side effects, some mild, some less so, weight gain is a well-known side effect of most antidepressants. The researchers of the study above assessed the health records of over 180,000 mental health patients over 24 months in the United States. They examined the baseline weight and BMI of each individual at the time their course of antidepressants began, at the midpoint of 12 months, and the end. The main antidepressants, often referred to as ‘first-line’ medications, include bupropion (Wellbutrin), escitalopram (Lexapro), paroxetine (Paxil), duloxetine (Cymbalta), sertraline (Zoloft), citalopram (Celexa), and venlafaxine (Effexor). Each of these medications has its own profile of potential side effects, but some may also provide additional benefits for comorbid mental health conditions alongside depression. As a result, the choice of medication is tailored to the individual’s specific needs and circumstances. The analysis of over 180,000 patients showed a clear line of weight gain in an overwhelming majority. Of those examined, Zoloft and Lexapro showed the most significant weight gain. The difference between each medication was not extremely high, and bupropion showed the least weight gain. The researchers, however, did admit that they could not control for medication adherence – their data indicated only that the patients were prescribed these medications for the 24 months of the observation, but there was no way to know if they were taking them regularly or not. Tips to combat depression naturally Research increasingly supports the idea that what we eat can significantly impact our mood and mental well-being. A groundbreaking study published in the journal Nutritional Neuroscience found that adherence to a Mediterranean-style diet supplemented with fish oil was associated with lower rates of depression and improved overall mental health. We, at NaturalHealth365, consistently advocate for a natural diet rich in organic, whole foods as a powerful tool to combat many chronic health issues. While depression is a complex condition that may not always respond solely to dietary changes, adopting a whole-food diet can play a crucial role in supporting mental health. In addition, we know that the pharmaceutical industry would like all of us believe that depression or anxiety is best treated by taking their drugs. Conversely, we would like to see more doctors giving out lifestyle advice to their patients to improve the quality of their physical, mental and emotional wellbeing. For example, consistent daily exercise offers multiple benefits for mental health. It helps regulate blood sugar levels, which in turn reduces systemic inflammation. Additionally, exercise has been shown to boost mood and alleviate symptoms of depression and anxiety. Quality sleep is crucial for overall health, with mental well-being particularly vulnerable to sleep disturbances. Many modern health issues can be significantly improved through a combination of regular exercise, proper nutrition, and adequate sleep. Bottom line: do everything you can to improve the quality of your sleep, starting tonight. Remember, addressing sleep, exercise, and diet is fundamental to managing any health condition, including mental health disorders. By focusing on these areas, you’re taking proactive steps toward better mental and physical well-being. Sources for this article include: Acpjournals.org Medicalnewstoday.com NIH.gov To read the original article click here.

The post Study Links Common Antidepressants to Weight Gain appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

How Hard Is It to Stop Antidepressants?

AHA Publisher — Fri, 02 Dec 2022 08:00:18 +0000

Dr. Caroline Leaf – In this podcast (episode #435) and blog, I talk to clinical researcher and fellow at University College London Dr. Mark Horowitz on his own experience on psychiatric medication, the many myths surrounding antidepressants, safely withdrawing from psychiatric drugs, and so much more! Mark works in London as a Clinical Research Fellow in the NHS and an Honorary Clinical Research Fellow at UCL while training as a psychiatry. As well as his work in this field, he has also completed a PhD in the neurobiology of depression and the pharmacology of antidepressants at the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience at King’s College London. But Mark does more than study psychiatric medications. As he notes, “At the same time as researching the way in which antidepressants worked I have also been taking this medication since I was a medical student. It was not until 15 years later that I tried to come off this medication as I wondered whether it was responsible for the fatigue which had led to me being diagnosed with the sleep disorder, narcolepsy. When I tried to come off this antidepressant over 4 months I received a very abrupt education into antidepressant withdrawal symptoms. I experienced insomnia, panic attacks, dizziness, anxiety and low mood. This was nothing like the Woody Allen-level neurosis that had led me to start them in the first place – and I had experienced nothing like it before. It was also something that I had not been taught about at medical school or in psychiatry training. I soon learnt by reading the academic literature available that the psychiatrists and academics at the institution I had studied at and others like them around the world had little helpful to say about withdrawal effects from antidepressants – they recommended stopping the drugs over 2 to 4 weeks, and reported that the symptoms were mild and brief. Many prominent academics with close ties to pharmaceutical companies attacked academics and patients who complained of trouble coming off their antidepressants, accusing them of malingering, or seeking legal payments. Instead, the place where I found the most useful advice was online peer-support websites (especially Surviving Antidepressants) filled with people trying to come off their antidepressants. There I found people describing the exact same symptoms I had experienced: like me, their symptoms were neither mild, nor brief. And this was not a handful of people – instead I found tens of thousands of people with near identical complaints. None seemed to be malingerers, in it for a buck or ignorant – they all had been told by doctors that there would be no major issue in coming off their medication and all had been given unhelpful advice by their doctors to come off in just a few weeks. Even more helpfully for me, these online groups described a better way to come off antidepressants: going down by small amounts, that become smaller and smaller as the total dose got lower, and going down to very tiny amounts before completely stopping. I am using this method to come off the antidepressant I have been on for so many years, as well as the other psychiatric drugs I ended up being prescribed, in what I now see as a prescribing cascade, where adverse effects led to more medications. Reducing my medication has greatly improved the tiredness, problems with memory and concentration that have plagued me for years (and for which I was given psychiatric and neurological explanations).” Indeed, based on his research and experience, Mark has written an excellent paper about how to come off antidepressants that was published in The Lancet Psychiatry and widely reported. He also works with other doctors and the public how to teach people how to safely taper off antidepressants and other psychiatric medications based on his own personal and professional experiences, and the realization that he has been “misled on how difficult it is to stop psychiatric medications”. Mark has dedicated his career to “re-evaluating the other information he has taken for granted about psychiatric medications, how they work, what they are treating and what their long-term effects might be” and helping people who are suffering find ways to heal and be at peace within their own minds. Mark is also one of the authors of the groundbreaking study on the serotonin depression myth that recently made headlines around the world. As mentioned in my interview with journalist and mental health advocate Robert Whitakerand my interview with psychiatrist, researcher and professor Dr. Joanna Moncrieff, the chemical imbalance theory has been around for a long time. From the 1970s, drug companies and many mental health professionals have largely marketed psychiatric drugs as anti-psychotic, anti-depressive, or anxiolytic (anti-anxiety)—cures combating a particular disease, notwithstanding the lack of evidence for chemical imbalances or other pathologies related to mental illness. This was recently highlighted in the groundbreaking systematic review study led by Dr. Mike Horowitz, Dr. Joanna Moncrieff and their team. As they note in their study on the serotonin theory of depression (alongside many other mental health professionals and advocates), the chemical imbalance approach is shaped by the assumption that symptoms of depression and other mental health issues are caused by a brain chemical abnormality, and that psychotropics like anti-depressants help rectify this abnormality and improve mental health. Even though this hypothesis dominates the way we think about mental health, we have no evidence that it is the best way to understand mental issues, as Mark and his team point out. First, there is no strong evidence that mental struggles like depression, for example, is associated with any particular biochemical abnormality. Moreover, we do not know if the drugs we use work in this way, i.e. correcting biochemical imbalances. This is due to the fact that the mental health drugs we use are psychoactive. They cross the blood-brain barrier and change the normal state of the brain, which means they can change our feelings, thoughts, perceptions and even behaviors, just in the same way a substance like alcohol can (as Dr. Moncrieff discussed in our interview). As Mark, Joanna and the other authors of the study note in their article in the journal Molecular Psychiatry, “the main areas of serotonin research provide no consistent evidence of there being an association between serotonin and depression, and no support for the hypothesis that depression is caused by lowered serotonin activity or concentrations”. If we do not have good evidence that psychiatric medications like antidepressants do not work by correcting or reversing a chemical imbalance in the brain that causes depression, it is important that we review the way we use their drugs, many of which may even cause chemical imbalances in the brain, and can have many negative side effects (like the ones Mark himself experienced) that, unfortunately, are often just assumed to be the result of the mental condition returning. This is why he is passionate about helping people safely withdraw from these medications. As Mark notes, there is actually very little official guidance on how to stop psychiatric medication safely. There has been very little research on this subject, although, thankfully, this is changing, not least through the work done by Mark and other professionals like him. The key thing to understand about withdrawal is that“no one should stop their antidepressant medication abruptly—this can be dangerous and is known to cause withdrawal effects, which can be severe and long-lasting in some people, especially those using the medications long-term. If anyone is considering this choice…discuss it with your doctor and, if you go ahead, to undertake a gradual and supported reduction as advised by recent Royal College of Psychiatry guidance.” There are ways to withdraw from psychiatric drugs safely, which Mark has written extensively about including in a recent paper about how to come off antidepressants, although this should always be done under the guidance of an appropriate medical professional. When withdrawing, there are several key points to consider: Come off psychiatric medication SLOWLY. Go down in SMALL AMOUNTS. It is very important to understand that very small amounts of any kind of psychiatric medication can have large effects on the brain. It is important to note that with psychiatric drugs you can reduce higher doses a lot quicker than lower doses. For lower levels, people often use tapering strips or liquids to reduce the drug by very small amounts over time. This is why it is important to make smaller and smaller reductions over time as you get down to lower doses (by proportion), based on the effect these doses have on the brain. It is necessary to take a flexible approach as everyone’s situation and past history is different, and avoid switching between certain drugs as much as possible. There are different ways to decrease doses, which should be done under the guidance of a medical professional. These include dividing tablets, using a liquid version of the drug and a syringe, and using compounding pharmacies to order smaller doses or tapering strips. There are also great sources of information like Mad in America, Rxisk, ISEPP and other patient-run websites (like the kind Mark mentions) that seek to provide people with helpful information and address all parts of the human experience, not just our biology. To read the original article click here.

The post How Hard Is It to Stop Antidepressants? appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Debunking the Serotonin-Depression Theory (with Psychiatrist & Professor Dr. Joanna Moncrieff)

AHA Publisher — Fri, 16 Sep 2022 07:00:38 +0000

Dr. Caroline Leaf – In this podcast (episode #415) and blog, I talk to psychiatrist, researcher, professor and best-selling author Dr. Joanna Moncrieff about her new study on the chemical imbalance myth, antidepressants as placebo, the causes of depression, how to withdraw from psychiatric drugs, and so much more. As mentioned in my interview with journalist and mental health advocate Robert Whitaker and my previous interview with Dr. Joanna Moncrieff, the chemical imbalance theory has been around for a long time. From the 1970s, drug companies and many mental health professionals have largely marketed psychiatric drugs as anti-psychotic, anti-depressive, or anxiolytic (anti-anxiety)—cures combating a particular disease, notwithstanding the lack of evidence for chemical imbalances or other pathologies related to mental illness. This was recently highlighted in the groundbreaking systematic review study led by the psychiatrist and researcher Joanna Moncrieff, Mike Horowitz and their team. As Moncrieff and Whitaker point out (alongside many other mental health professionals and advocates), the chemical imbalance approach is shaped by the assumption that symptoms of depression and other mental health issues are caused by a brain chemical abnormality, and that psychotropics like anti-depressants help rectify this abnormality and improve mental health. Even though this hypothesis currently dominates the way we think about mental health, we have no evidence that it is the best way to understand mental issues, as Moncrieff points out in her study on the serotonin theory of depression. First, there is no strong evidence that depression, for example, is associated with any particular biochemical abnormality. Moreover, we do not know if the drugs we use work in this way, i.e. correcting biochemical imbalances. This is due to the fact that the mental health drugs we use are psychoactive. They cross the blood-brain barrier and change the normal state of the brain, which means they can change our feelings, thoughts, perceptions and even behaviors, just in the same way a substance like alcohol can. For instance, alcohol may decrease someone’s social anxiety, but this does not mean it is a “cure” for social anxiety. Many psychotropics work the same way, including antidepressants—we have been lied to for decades. As Moncrieff and the other authors of the study note in their article in Molecular Psychiatry, “the main areas of serotonin research provide no consistent evidence of there being an association between serotonin and depression, and no support for the hypothesis that depression is caused by lowered serotonin activity or concentrations.” If we do not have good evidence that psychiatric medications like antidepressants do not work by correcting or reversing a chemical imbalance in the brain that causes depression, it is important that we review the way we use their drugs, many of which may even cause chemical imbalances in the brain. Joanna takes a different approach—what she calls the “drug-centered” model. This centers around understanding what prescribed psychiatric medication is doing in the brain and body, and how it is changing the state of the brain like a substance such as alcohol does. We need to understand the kind of alterations these drugs make and factor them out of the equation—we cannot simply say that they are targeting and “correcting” a hypothetical biochemical imbalance. For example, benzodiazepines are currently used to treat anxiety. These drugs, when given to someone in a high state of arousal, can help calm down the brain and body. Yet they also do the same for someone who is not anxious—they alter the brain by reducing brain activity. There is no strong evidence that these psychoactive drugs are “curing” anxiety. To understand psychoactive drugs and their use in mental healthcare, we first need to understand their general effects in people, including individuals who do not have depression or symptoms of another mental issue. Yes, some people may see these mind-altering effects as an improvement, but not everyone. This may account for the very, very small difference we see between drugs like antidepressants and placebo in randomized control trials (the gold standard of evidence-based medicine). Yet it is also important to consider the negative outcomes that often occur when a person comes off these drugs—withdrawal symptoms can be incredibly traumatic mentally and physically, and last for a long period of time. The chemical imbalance theory about depression is about more than just someone’s brain chemistry. It impacts their sense of self; how they see themselves. It tells someone that the problem mainly resides in their brain, and that there is something intrinsically wrong with their biology, which is a great burden to put on someone who is suffering, especially since there is no scientific evidence to support this hypothesis. This kind of mindset is also less likely to make someone think that their own efforts or anything besides medication can affect their recovery, which can impact their healing in the short and long-term. Depression is not as simple as a “brain disease”. Human brains and bodies are way more complicated than that. Of course, things are going on in the brain when people are feeling depressed. Everything we do is mediated by our brains, whether we are walking, working, feeling, eating, exercising and so on. This does not mean that we can fully understand depression at the level of the brain. Depression is an emotional reaction that is affected by our history, personal inclinations, and so on. It is, at its heart, a reaction to life circumstances mediated by our uniqueness. This means that, to understand depression, we need to understand both the circumstances it is a reaction to and the individual’s personality, history and development (everything that has happened to them). One of the most important things we can do to help people who are depressed is to find ways to help them address their unique life circumstances, not just give them a drug and send them on their way. That is not to say that there is no such thing as severe depression or that people with depression do not suffer greatly, or even that psychiatric drugs do not work for some people over a set period of time. But, unfortunately, we do not have any good evidence that even severe depression responds well to psychiatric drugs or other interventions just at the level of the brain. It is so important that we understand the nature of the psychiatric drugs we are using. They are not harmless, as Moncrieff talks about in detail her book A Straight Talking Introduction to Psychiatric Drugs: The truth about how they work and how to come off them. Drugs like antidepressants have a blunting effect that may help some people for a certain period of time, as mentioned above, but other people may find this effect incredibly unhelpful, especially if they are experiencing many unwanted side effects. Additionally, although blunting someone emotions may be helpful in the short term, it is not a long term solution that will help someone find true and lasting healing. Moreover, the longer someone is on these drugs, the greater chance that their withdrawal effects will be more significant and last longer. In Joanna’s blogs, she points out that this is why it is so important to understand how these drugs affect the mind and brain, so that you are more empowered to know what choice will be best for you and your unique circumstances. Some people may find these drugs very beneficial in the short term; however, it is important to understand how these drugs can be dependence-forming in the long term. This is why you cannot just stop using these medications overnight. It is important to remember that withdrawal should always be done under the supervision of a qualified professional. Take your time, process the information in this podcast and blog, speak to those you trust and the appropriate medical professional. These drugs can alter brain chemistry, and withdrawal can be an incredibly difficult process. The brain adapts to the presence of these drugs. Even if you do not feel a “high” from a drug, this does not mean you cannot become dependent on it. People usually don’t take these psychoactive drugs for a few days or weeks. They generally take them for months or years, often based on research done on the long-term effects of psychiatric drugs like anti-depressants, called “relapse prevention trials”. These trials look as if they are examining the benefits of long-term treatment, but what they are actually doing is enrolling people that have already been using these drugs for years, then randomizing them to either continue the treatment or be weaned off (usually very quickly) onto the placebo. The latter group often experience intense withdrawal effects, since these drugs alter brain function and chemistry. However, in the trials, these withdrawal effects are often assumed to be because of the “brain disease”. This can make someone feel terrible or believe that there is something intrinsically wrong with them, even though what these research studies are actually studying is not the benefit of long term treatment but the adverse effects of withdrawing from these psychoactive medications quickly. Very few studies try to wean people off these drugs gradually, and even these still have a risk of significant withdrawal effects that bias the clinical data. If you do decide you want to go off these drugs, it is important to take a flexible approach, and avoid switching between certain drugs, especially anti-depressants, as much as possible (anti-depressants are often quite different from each other). It is important to note that it is easier to reduce higher doses than lower doses; for lower levels, people often use tapering strips or liquids with the help of a professional to reduce the drug by very small amounts over a specific period of time. Moncrieff uses these methods in her London clinic, which she is hoping to expand into other areas of the UK and perhaps the world. Moncrieff and her team also want to try to set up a peer-support group to help other people trying to withdraw and find hope. Thankfully, there are also great sites like Mad in America, Rxisk, ISEPP and other patient-run websites that seek to provide people with helpful information and address all parts of the human experience, not just our biology. To read the original article click here.

The post Debunking the Serotonin-Depression Theory (with Psychiatrist & Professor Dr. Joanna Moncrieff) appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Saffron Improves Brain Function in MULTIPLE Ways, Studies Suggest

AHA Publisher — Thu, 13 Jan 2022 08:00:28 +0000

Stephanie Vick via NaturalHealth365 – Saffron is one of the world’s most exotic and expensive spices. Besides its culinary prowess, it is a powerful healer with a long history of use as a medicinal herb dating back to ancient times. Thankfully, modern science is finally catching up and realizing the therapeutic effects of saffron on memory and mood. Real Proof That Saffron Improves Memory One of the most exciting findings on saffron’s medicinal use comes from a couple of studies published in the Journal of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics and Psychopharmacology. These studies show that saffron can protect against Alzheimer’s disease. In these two studies, patients were given 30 milligrams of saffron each day. One study monitored patients for 16 weeks, while the other study monitored patients for 22 weeks. At the end of the two studies, study authors discovered that the patients who took the daily saffron (in both monitored groups) did better on cognitive memory tests than those who did not take it. How Does Saffron Work to Help the Brain Retain Information? Saffron is full of natural antioxidants. These antioxidants are known to offer some protective benefits against the amyloid plaques that form in the brain of Alzheimer’s patients. In addition, this spice also has gallic acid – which supports healthy immune function – which helps to keep those plaques from forming in the first place. And, finally, saffron contains pyrogallol, a natural compound that scientists have long known to have memory protective benefits. The evidence seems to point strongly to the fact that saffron, taken daily in moderate amounts, can protect against Alzheimer’s disease. It may even help improve memory, during the early stages of the disease, by keeping the formation of amyloid plaques to a minimum. A Safe Alternative to Toxic Antidepressant Medications Saffron has been used as a mood elevator since ancient Persian times. This is significant since conventional antidepressants are often given to Alzheimer’s patients, increasing the risk of unwanted side effects such as nausea, weight gain, insomnia, and anxiety. With Alzheimer’s disease already causing so many health problems, why would any rational healthcare professional want to give out dangerous drugs like Paxil, Zoloft, and Prozac – three of the most popular drugs on the market? Because of the danger posed by these selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), many scientists are reasoning that the mood-boosting benefits of saffron would be helpful in treating Alzheimer’s disease. In fact, in July 2013, a study was done to test the mood-boosting properties of saffron. The same 30 milligrams a day was given to a group of clinical depressives for six weeks. At the end of the study, it was found that the mood of the test subjects improved as much or better than with traditional antidepressant drugs, and there were no side effects. Although the pharmaceutical industry may not be so happy about these results, it seems saffron has many benefits for the brain, and those benefits could lead to better memory function for those with Alzheimer’s disease. And, while it may not represent a ‘cure,’ it is definitely something that can offer hope for a better future and a healthier memory for those who take it. Sources for this article include: NIH.gov NIH.gov NIH.gov To read the original article click here.

The post Saffron Improves Brain Function in MULTIPLE Ways, Studies Suggest appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Researchers Identify Biomarker for Depression, Antidepressant Response

AHA Publisher — Wed, 05 Jan 2022 08:00:45 +0000

University of Illinois Chicago via Newswise – Researchers are one step closer to developing a blood test that provides a simple biochemical hallmark for depression and reveals the efficacy of drug therapy in individual patients. Published in a new proof of concept study, researchers led by Mark Rasenick, University of Illinois Chicago distinguished professor of physiology and biophysics and psychiatry, have identified a biomarker in human platelets that tracks the extent of depression. The research builds off of previous studies by several investigators that have shown in humans and animal models that depression is consistent with decreased adenylyl cyclase — a small molecule inside the cell that is made in response to neurotransmitters such as serotonin and epinephrine. “When you are depressed, adenylyl cyclase is low. The reason adenylyl cyclase is attenuated is that the intermediary protein that allows the neurotransmitter to make the adenylyl cyclase, Gs alpha, is stuck in a cholesterol-rich matrix of the membrane — a lipid raft – where they don’t work very well,” Rasenick said. The new study, “A Novel Peripheral Biomarker for Depression and Antidepressant Response,” published in Molecular Psychiatry, has identified the cellular biomarker for translocation of Gs alpha from lipid rafts. The biomarker can be identified through a blood test. “What we have developed is a test that can not only indicate the presence of depression but it can also indicate therapeutic response with a single biomarker, and that is something that has not existed to date,” said Rasenick, who is also a research career scientist at Jesse Brown VA Medical Center. The researchers hypothesize they will be able to use this blood test to determine if antidepressant therapies are working, perhaps as soon as one week after beginning treatment. Previous research has shown that when patients showed improvement in their depression symptoms, the Gs alpha was out of the lipid raft. However, in patients who took antidepressants but showed no improvement in their symptoms, the Gs alpha was still stuck in the raft — meaning simply having antidepressants in the bloodstream was not good enough to improve symptoms. A blood test may be able to show whether or not the Gs alpha was out of the lipid raft after one week. “Because platelets turn over in one week, you would see a change in people who were going to get better. You’d be able to see the biomarker that should presage successful treatment,” Rasenick said. Currently, patients and their physicians have to wait several weeks, sometimes months, to determine if antidepressants are working, and when it is determined they aren’t working, different therapies are tried. “About 30% of people don’t get better — their depression doesn’t resolve. Perhaps, failure begets failure and both doctors and patients make the assumption that nothing is going to work,” Rasenick said. “Most depression is diagnosed in primary care doctor’s offices where they don’t have sophisticated screening. With this test, a doctor could say, ‘Gee, they look like they are depressed, but their blood doesn’t tell us they are. So, maybe we need to re-examine this.’” To read the original article click here.

The post Researchers Identify Biomarker for Depression, Antidepressant Response appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Study Shows How Sewage Plants Can Remove Pharmaceuticals from Wastewater

AHA Publisher — Tue, 14 Jan 2020 08:00:22 +0000

University at Buffalo via News-Medical Net – A study of seven wastewater treatment plants in the Eastern United States reveals a mixed record when it comes to removing medicines such as antibiotics and antidepressants. The research points to two treatment methods — granular activated carbon and ozonation — as being particularly promising. Each technique reduced the concentration of a number of pharmaceuticals, including certain antidepressants and antibiotics, in water by more than 95%, the scientists’ analysis found. Activated sludge, a common treatment process that uses microorganisms to break down organic contaminants, serves an important purpose in wastewater treatment but was much less effective at destroying persistent drugs such as antidepressants and antibiotics. “The take-home message here is that we could actually remove most of the pharmaceuticals we studied. That’s the good news. If you really want clean water, there are multiple ways to do it.” Diana Aga, PhD, Henry M. Woodburn Professor of Chemistry, University at Buffalo College of Arts and Sciences “However, for plants that rely on activated sludge only, more advanced treatment like granular activated carbon and/or ozonation may be needed,” Aga adds. “Some cities are already doing this, but it can be expensive.” The findings are important because any drugs discharged from treatment plants can enter the environment, where they may contribute to phenomena such as antibiotic resistance, or be consumed by wildlife. “Our research adds to a growing body of work showing that advanced treatment methods, including ozonation and activated carbon, can be very effective at removing persistent pharmaceuticals from wastewater,” says Anne McElroy, PhD, Professor and Associate Dean for Research in the Stony Brook University School of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences. The study — funded by New York Sea Grant — was published in November in the journal Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology. Aga and McElroy led the project, with UB chemistry PhD student Luisa Angeles as first author. The paper was a partnership between researchers at UB, Stony Brook University, the Hampton Roads Sanitation District and Hazen and Sawyer, a national water engineering firm that designs advanced wastewater treatment systems, including some of the systems studied. The research analyzed a variety of technologies in use at seven wastewater treatment plants in the Eastern U.S., including six full-scale plants and one large pilot-scale plant. According to the paper, “more precise locations are not provided in order to protect the identity” of the facilities. Angeles says the study’s findings could guide future decision-making, especially in areas where water is scarce and in cities that may want to recycle wastewater, converting it into drinking water. The research is also important for environmental conservation. It demonstrated that larval zebrafish did not change their behavior when they were exposed to wastewater discharged from treatment plants. However, much more work is needed to understand how longer-term exposures may impact wildlife, Aga says. In a separate study in 2017, Aga’s team found high concentrations of antidepressants or the metabolized remnants of those drugs in the brains of numerous fish in the Niagara River, part of the Great Lakes region. Scientists still don’t fully understand the behavioral and ecological impacts that may occur when chemicals from human medicines build up in wild animals over time, Aga says. Though wastewater treatment plants were historically designed and operated for purposes such as removing organic matter and nitrogen from used water, the new research and other prior studies demonstrate that these facilities could also be harnessed to remove different classes of medicines. To read the original article click here.

The post Study Shows How Sewage Plants Can Remove Pharmaceuticals from Wastewater appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.