Targeted alteration of dietary n-3 and n-6 fatty acids for the treatment of chronic headaches: A randomized trial

Omega-3 and n-6 fatty acids are biosynthetic precursors to lipid mediators with antinociceptive and pronociceptive properties. We conducted a randomized, single-blinded, parallel-group clinical trial to assess clinical and biochemical effects of targeted alteration in dietary n-3 and n-6 fatty acids for treatment of chronic headaches. After a 4-week preintervention phase, ambulatory patients with chronic daily headache undergoing usual care were randomized to 1 of 2 intensive, food-based 12-week dietary interventions: a high n-3 plus low n-6 (H3-L6) intervention, or a low n-6 (L6) intervention. Clinical outcomes included the Headache Impact Test (HIT-6, primary clinical outcome), Headache Days per month, and Headache Hours per day. Biochemical outcomes included the erythrocyte n-6 in highly unsaturated fatty acids (HUFA) score (primary biochemical outcome) and bioactive n-3 and n-6 derivatives. Fifty-six of 67 patients completed the intervention. Both groups achieved targeted intakes of n-3 and n-6 fatty acids. In intention-to-treat analysis, the H3-L6 intervention produced significantly greater improvement in the HIT-6 score (−7.5 vs −2.1; P < 0.001) and the number of Headache Days per month (−8.8 vs −4.0; P = 0.02), compared to the L6 group. The H3-L6 intervention also produced significantly greater reductions in Headache Hours per day (−4.6 vs −1.2; P = 0.01) and the n-6 in HUFA score (−21.0 vs −4.0%; P < 0.001), and greater increases in antinociceptive n-3 pathway markers 18-hydroxy-eicosapentaenoic acid (+118.4 vs +61.1%; P < 0.001) and 17-hydroxy-docosahexaenoic acid (+170.2 vs +27.2; P < 0.001). A dietary intervention increasing n-3 and reducing n-6 fatty acids reduced headache pain, altered antinociceptive lipid mediators, and improved quality-of-life in this population

Equilibrium Explanation of Bargaining and Arbitration in Major League Baseball

Arbitration in Major League Baseball can be explained by baseball clubs "lack of information regarding their players" risk attitudes. Different player risk attitudes yield different contract zones of potential settlements. Profit-maximizing baseball clubs must sacrifice some potential settlements to minimize their expected payments to players. Mixed strategies in arbitration offers by players and settlement offers by clubs yield an equilibrium in a game with asymmetric information. The history of arbitration outcomes is explained by the predicted selection of cases for arbitration.Arbitration; Bargaining