Regular fat and reduced fat dairy products show similar associations with markers of adolescent cardiometabolic health

Reduced fat dairy products are generally recommended for adults and children over the age of two years. However, emerging evidence suggests that dairy fat may not have detrimental health effects. We aimed to investigate prospective associations between consumption of regular versus reduced fat dairy products and cardiometabolic risk factors from early to late adolescence. In the West Australian Raine Study, dairy intake was assessed using semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaires in 860 adolescents at 14 and 17-year follow-ups; 582 of these also had blood biochemistry at both points. Using generalized estimating equations, we examined associations with cardiometabolic risk factors. Models incorporated reduced fat and regular fat dairy together (in serves/day) and were adjusted for a range of factors including overall dietary pattern. In boys, there was a mean reduction in diastolic blood pressure of 0.66 mmHg (95% CI 0.23–1.09) per serve of reduced fat dairy and an independent, additional reduction of 0.47 mmHg (95% CI 0.04–0.90) per serve of regular fat dairy. Each additional serve of reduced fat dairy was associated with a 2% reduction in HDL-cholesterol (95% CI 0.97–0.995) and a 2% increase in total: HDL-cholesterol ratio (95% CI 1.002–1.03); these associations were not observed with regular fat products. In girls, there were no significant independent associations observed in fully adjusted models. Although regular fat dairy was associated with a slightly better cholesterol profile in boys, overall, intakes of both regular fat and reduced fat dairy products were associated with similar cardiometabolic associations in adolescents

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Association between depression and chronic diseases: results from a population-based study

OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between depression and chronic diseases in adults. METHODS: Population-based cross-sectional study with a sample of 1,720 adults aged 20 to 59 years conducted in the city of Florianópolis, southern Brazil, in 2009. Multistage sampling was used and census tracts were the primary sample unit. Subjects were interviewed at home, and reported being diagnosed with depression (outcome) and 11 other chronic diseases (exploratory variable) by a health provider. They were grouped into those with no chronic disease, one, and two or more diseases. Gender, age, marital status, income, physical activity, hospitalization and medical visits were confounders. Poisson regression analysis was used to estimate prevalence ratios and related 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: The prevalence os depression was 16.2% (95%CI 14.3;18.2). It was higher in women, older individuals, widowed or divorced, and poor ones. Those who reported no leisure-time physical activity and medical visits in the last two weeks, and who were hospitalized in the last year also showed higher prevalence of depression and chronic diseases. Even after adjustment for confounders the prevalence of depression was 1.44 (95%CI 1.09;1.92) times higher among those reporting one chronic disease and 2.25 times higher among those reporting two or more diseases than among those with no diseases. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of depression is much higher among people with higher burden of chronic diseases. Health professionals, health services, and policy makers must target specific strategies to this group.Antonio Fernando Boing, Guilherme Rocha Melo, Alexandra Crispim Boing, Rodrigo Otávio Moretti-Pires, Karen Glazer Peres, Marco Aurélio Pere

Dutch influences on English literary culture in the early renaissance, 1470–1650

During the fifteenth, sixteenth and seventeenth centuries the Low Countries made a series of important contributions to English literature. Through such agents as the printers of Antwerp and Amsterdam, and the movements of Dutch scholars and Calvinist refugees, the Low Countries exerted a continuous impact on the literary culture of England. This article examines the scope of Dutch influence during the English Renaissance, indicates some of its key effects, and provides an overview of existing scholarship on the subject