In the first systematic review, UC San Francisco researchers found that it helps with a variety of conditions, from obesity to migraine.
Public health recommendations generally suggest drinking eight cups of water a day. And many people assume it’s healthy to drink plenty of water.
Now, researchers at UC San Francisco have systematically reviewed the available evidence. They concluded that drinking enough water can help with weight loss and prevent kidney stones, as well as migraines, urinary tract infections, and low blood pressure.
“For such a ubiquitous and simple intervention, the evidence hasn’t been clear, and the benefits were not well-established, so we wanted to take a closer look,” said senior and corresponding author Benjamin Breyer, MD, MAS, the Taube Family Distinguished Professor and chair of the UCSF Department of Urology.
“The amount of rigorous research was limited, but in some specific areas, there was a statistically significant benefit,” Breyer said. “To our knowledge, this is the first study assessing the benefits of water consumption on clinical outcomes broadly.”
The researchers found the most evidence favouring drinking water to prevent kidney stones and help people lose weight.
Drinking eight cups of water daily significantly decreased the likelihood of getting another kidney stone.
Several studies found that drinking about six cups of water daily helped adults lose weight. However, a survey that included adolescents found that drinking more than eight cups of water daily had no effect.
Still, the authors said encouraging people to drink water before meals would be a simple and cheap intervention that could have huge benefits, given the increased prevalence of obesity.
Other studies indicated that water can help prevent migraines, control diabetes and low blood pressure, and prevent urinary tract infections.
Adults with recurrent headaches felt better after three months of drinking more water.
Drinking about four more cups of water a day helped diabetic patients whose blood glucose levels were elevated.
Drinking an additional six cups of water a day also helped women with recurrent urinary tract infections. It reduced the number of infections and increased the time between them.
Drinking more water helped young adults with low blood pressure.
“We know that dehydration is detrimental, particularly in someone with a history of kidney stones or urinary infections,” said Breyer, a UCSF Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics member. “On the other hand, someone who suffers from frequent urination at times may benefit from drinking less. There isn’t a one size fits all approach for water consumption.”
According to new research, a low-fat vegan diet cuts food costs by 19%, or $1.80 per day, compared with a standard American diet that includes meat, dairy, and other animal products. The study also found that a Mediterranean diet costs 60 cents more per day. Total food costs on a vegan diet were 25% lower, $2.40 per day, compared with the Mediterranean diet.
“As grocery prices remain quite high, consumers might consider replacing meat and dairy products with a low-fat vegan diet of fruits, vegetables, grains, and beans. This change could potentially save more than $650 a year on grocery expenses compared to a standard American diet and over $870 compared to the Mediterranean diet,” says Hana Kahleova, MD, PhD, the lead author of the study and director of clinical research at the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. “Adopting a vegan diet can not only lead to financial savings but also improve health by reducing the risk or severity of conditions such as obesity, type 2 diabetes, and heart disease.”
The decrease in costs on the vegan diet was mainly attributable to savings of $2.90 per day on meat, 50 cents per day on dairy products, and 50 cents per day on added fats. These savings outweighed the increased spending of 50 cents per day on vegetables, 30 cents per day on grains, and 50 cents on meat alternatives on the vegan diet.
The new research is a secondary analysis of a previous study by the Physicians Committee, which compared a low-fat vegan diet to a Mediterranean diet. In this study, participants were randomly assigned to follow either a low-fat vegan diet—which included fruits, vegetables, grains, and beans—or a Mediterranean diet, which emphasized fruits, vegetables, legumes, fish, low-fat dairy, and extra-virgin olive oil, for 16 weeks. There were no calorie restrictions for either group. After this phase, participants returned to their baseline diets for a four-week washout before switching to another diet for 16 weeks. The findings showed that the low-fat vegan diet resulted in better outcomes for weight, body composition, insulin sensitivity, and cholesterol levels compared to the Mediterranean diet.
For the food cost assessment, intakes from the study participants’ dietary records were linked to the U.S. Department of Agriculture Thrifty Food Plan, 2021, a database of national food prices, which are calculated from data collected for the consumer price index. The reduction in costs associated with a vegan diet primarily resulted from savings of $2.90 per day on meat, $0.50 per day on dairy products, and $0.50 per day on added fats. These savings exceeded the additional expenses of $0.50 per day on vegetables, $0.30 per day on grains, and $0.50 per day on meat alternatives. Overall, the vegan diet proved to be more economical.
Recent research published in the journal *Glia* has uncovered important connections between dietary choices and the progression of multiple sclerosis (MS). The study, led by Patrizia Casaccia, the founding director of the Advanced Science Research Center at the CUNY Graduate Center’s Neuroscience Initiative and an Einstein Professor of Biology and Biochemistry at the same institution, investigated the role of enzymes known as ceramide synthase 5 and 6. These enzymes are linked to the harmful effects of a diet high in palm oil on neurons in the central nervous system, which may lead to an increase in the severity of MS symptoms.
Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an inflammatory autoimmune disease characterized by significant damage to the myelin sheath, which protects nerves throughout the body. Current treatments aim to control the immune system’s response, but the exact mechanisms leading to neurodegeneration in MS are still not well understood. Previous research from the Casaccia lab and others has indicated that a high-fat diet can exacerbate the severity of MS symptoms. In their study, researchers investigated potential mechanisms by which a diet high in palm oil may negatively affect neuronal health.
Neuroprotection From Palm Oil-Induced Toxicity
In the experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE) model of inflammatory demyelination, researchers discovered that mice with diets high in palm oil had a more severe disease course.
“We hypothesized that within neuronal cells, palm oil is transformed into a toxic substance known as C16 ceramide by specific enzymes called CerS5 and CerS6,” explained principal investigator Casaccia. “This ceramide causes damage to mitochondria, depriving neurons of the energy they require to combat inflammation in the brain. Consequently, we investigated whether inactivating these enzymes could provide neuroprotection.”
The researchers found that genetically deleting the enzymes CerS6 and CerS5 in neurons could prevent neurodegeneration in an experimental model of MS.
“This was true even when mice were given a diet high in palmitic acid,” said Damien Marechal, a research associate with the Casaccia Lab and co-first author of the paper. “This new information highlights a specific metabolic pathway that shows how dietary fats can exacerbate MS symptoms.”
Significance for MS Patients and Clinicians
The paper’s findings have significant implications for individuals diagnosed with MS, clinicians treating patients, and neuroscientists researching the disease. The work reinforces that lifestyle choices, such as diet, can profoundly impact the course of the disease. The study’s results build on previous concepts about careful dietary decisions in managing the symptoms of MS. The findings also identify potential molecules that could help slow diet-induced symptom severity.
“Our research provides a molecular explanation for how to protect neurons from the palm-oil-dependent creation of molecules that harm them,” said Casaccia. “We hope this information can empower patients to make informed dietary decisions that could positively impact the course of the disease while identifying strategies to counteract the effect of cerS5 and cerS6 in a neuron-specific fashion.”
A new study has found that a low-sugar diet in utero and in the first two years of life can meaningfully reduce the risk of chronic diseases in adulthood. This provides compelling new evidence of the lifelong health effects of early-life sugar consumption.
A study published in the journal Science reveals that children who had sugar restrictions during their first 1,000 days after conception faced up to a 35% lower risk of developing Type 2 diabetes and a 20% reduced risk of hypertension in adulthood. The research indicates that low sugar intake by mothers during pregnancy was sufficient to lower these health risks, and maintaining sugar restrictions after birth further enhanced the benefits.
Using an unintended “natural experiment” from World War II, researchers at the USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences, McGill University in Montreal, and the University of California, Berkeley, examined how sugar rationing during the war influenced long-term health outcomes.
The United Kingdom introduced limits on sugar distribution in 1942 as part of its wartime food rationing program. Rationing ended in September 1953.
The researchers used contemporary data from the U.K. Biobank, a database of medical histories and genetic, lifestyle and other disease risk factors, to study the effect of those early-life sugar restrictions on health outcomes of adults conceived in the U.K. just before and after the end of wartime sugar rationing.
“Studying the long-term effects of added sugar on health presents challenges,” explains Tadeja Gracner, a senior economist at the USC Dornsife Center for Economic and Social Research and the study’s corresponding author. “It is difficult to identify situations where individuals are randomly exposed to different nutritional environments early in life and tracked over a span of 50 to 60 years. The end of rationing provided us with a unique natural experiment that helped us overcome these obstacles.”
On average, during rationing, sugar intake was about 8 teaspoons (40 grams) per day. When rationing ended, sugar and sweets consumption skyrocketed to about 16 teaspoons (80 grams) per day.
Notably, rationing did not involve extreme food deprivation overall. Diets generally appeared to have been within today’s guidelines set by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the World Health Organization, which recommend no added sugars for children under two and no more than 12 teaspoons (50g) of added sugar daily for adults.
The immediate and large increase in sugar consumption but no other foods after rationing ended created an interesting natural experiment: Individuals were exposed to varying levels of sugar intake early in life, depending on whether they were conceived or born before or after September 1953. Those conceived or born just before the end of rationing experienced sugar-scarce conditions compared to those born just after who were born into a more sugar-rich environment.
The researchers then identified those born in the U.K. Biobank data collected over 50 years later. Using a very tight birth window around the end of sugar rationing allowed the authors to compare midlife health outcomes of otherwise similar birth cohorts.
While living through the period of sugar restriction during the first 1,000 days of life substantially lowered the risk of developing diabetes and hypertension, for those later diagnosed with either of those conditions, the onset of disease was delayed by four years and two years, respectively.
Notably, exposure to sugar restrictions in utero alone was enough to lower risks, but disease protection increased postnatally once solids were likely introduced.
The researchers say the magnitude of this effect is meaningful as it can save costs, extend life expectancy, and, perhaps more importantly, improve quality of life.
In the United States, individuals with diabetes face average annual medical expenses of approximately $12,000. Additionally, an earlier diagnosis of diabetes is associated with a significantly reduced life expectancy; specifically, for each decade that diagnosis occurs earlier, life expectancy decreases by three to four years.
The researchers note that these numbers underscore the value of early interventions that could delay or prevent this disease.
Experts continue to raise concerns about children’s long-term health as they consume excessive amounts of added sugars during their early life, a critical period of development. Adjusting child sugar consumption, however, is not easy—added sugar is everywhere, even in baby and toddler foods, and children are bombarded with TV ads for sugary snacks, say the researchers.
“Parents need information about what works, and this study provides some of the first causal evidence that reducing added sugar early in life is a powerful step towards improving children’s health over their lifetimes,” says study co-author Claire Boone of McGill University and University of Chicago.
Co-author Paul Gertler of UC Berkeley and the National Bureau of Economics Research adds: “Sugar early in life is the new tobacco, and we should treat it as such by holding food companies accountable to reformulate baby foods with healthier options and regulate the marketing and tax sugary foods targeted at kids.”
This study is the first of a larger research effort exploring how early-life sugar restrictions affected a broader set of economic and health outcomes in later adulthood, including education, wealth, and chronic inflammation, cognitive function and dementia.
A study of more than 13 million hours of data collected from light sensors worn by 89,000 people has found exposure to bright nights and dark days is associated with an increased risk of death.
Researchers investigated whether personal day and night light and lighting patterns that disrupt our circadian rhythms predicted mortality risk.
Published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the findings indicate that individuals exposed to high levels of light at night faced a 21% to 34% increased risk of death. In contrast, those exposed to high levels of daylight experienced a 17% to 34% decrease in their risk of death.
“Exposure to brighter nights and darker days can disrupt our circadian rhythms. This disruption can lead to various health issues, including diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular disease, mental health problems, and an increased risk of death,” explains Professor Sean Cain, a senior author and sleep expert from Flinders University.
“These new insights into the potential adverse impact of light have shown us just how important personal light exposure patterns are for your health.”
Associate Professor Andrew Phillips, co-senior author, states that nighttime light exposure disrupts circadian rhythms by shifting their timing (phase-shift) and weakening the signal (amplitude suppression) of the central circadian ‘pacemaker,’ which regulates circadian rhythms throughout the body.
“Disruption to the body’s circadian rhythms is linked to the development of metabolic syndrome, diabetes, and obesity and is also strongly implicated in the development of cardiometabolic diseases, including myocardial infarction, stroke and hypertension,” says Associate Professor Phillips.
“The observed relationships of night light exposure with mortality risk may be explained by night light disrupting circadian rhythms, leading to adverse cardiometabolic outcomes.
“Our findings clearly show that avoiding night light and seeking daylight may promote optimal health and longevity, and this recommendation is easy, accessible and cost-effective,” adds Associate Professor Phillips.
The study authors from FHMRI Sleep Health investigated the relationship between personal light exposure and the risk of all-cause and cardiometabolic mortality in 89,000 participants from the UK Biobank, aged between 40 and 69. Metrics were recorded using wrist-worn sensors, and the National Health Service collected the participants’ mortality data over an approximate follow-up period of eight years.
Sleep duration, sleep efficiency, and midsleep were estimated from motion data. At the same time, cardiometabolic mortality was defined as any cause of death corresponding to diseases of the circulatory system or endocrine and metabolic diseases.
The research also showed a disrupted circadian rhythm predicted higher mortality risk, which the authors were able to determine using computer modelling. Findings accounted for age, sex, ethnicity, photoperiod, and sociodemographic and lifestyle factors.
Lead author Dr Daniel Windred says that the findings demonstrate the importance of maintaining a dark environment during the late night and early morning hours, when the central circadian ‘pacemaker’ is most sensitive to light, and seeking bright light during the day to enhance circadian rhythms.
“Protection of lighting environments may be significant in those at risk for circadian disruption and mortality, such as in intensive care or aged-care settings,” says Dr Windred.
“Across the general population, avoiding night light and seeking daylight may lead to a reduction in disease burden, especially cardiometabolic diseases, and may increase longevity.”
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
