Am heart assoc

=<div>this includes heart attack cardio, top cause of death usa world?</div><div>
</div><div></div><div><div>=</div><div><a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/air-pollution-cardiac-arrests-2644941669.html?">https://www.ecowatch.com/air-pollution-cardiac-arrests-2644941669.html</a></div><div>
</div><div>Researchers now say there is "no safe level" of air pollution exposure after a large-scale study found a correlation between exposure to fine particle matter, known as PM2.5, and cardiac arrests, according to the <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/no-safe-level-study-links-pm2-5-pollution-to-increased-risk-of-cardiac-arrest-20200128-p53v98.html?ref=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_source=rss_national" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">The Sydney Morning Herald</a>.<div class="rebellt-item col1" data-basename="particle-1" data-href="https://www.ecowatch.com/air-pollution-cardiac-arrests-2644941669.html?rebelltitem=1#rebelltitem1" data-id="1" data-is-image="False" data-reload-ads="false" id="rebelltitem1">The researchers found that exposure to PM2.5 that even fell below global standards was hazardous, suggesting that tighter regulations and cleaner energy is required, according to the <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(19)30262-1/fulltext" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">study</a>, which was published in the journal <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(19)30262-1/fulltext" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">Lancet Planetary Health</a>.Scientists from the University of Sydney led the study, which analyzed air quality in Japan against 249,372 cases of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests. They concluded that even low-level exposure was associated with an increased risk of cardiac arrest for people over 65, as <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/no-safe-level-study-links-pm2-5-pollution-to-increased-risk-of-cardiac-arrest-20200128-p53v98.html?ref=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_source=rss_national" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">The Sydney Morning Herald</a> reported.The researchers noticed that the risk of cardiac arrest grew by up to 4 percent for every increase of 10 units in the PM2.5 levels.</div><div class="rebellt-item col1" data-basename="particle-2" data-href="https://www.ecowatch.com/air-pollution-cardiac-arrests-2644941669.html?rebelltitem=2#rebelltitem2" data-id="2" data-is-image="False" data-reload-ads="false" id="rebelltitem2" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">"Our study supports recent evidence that there is no safe level of air pollution — finding an increased risk of cardiac arrest despite air quality generally meeting the standards," said report author professor Kazuaki Negishi from the <a href="https://sydney.edu.au/medicine-health/schools/sydney-medical-school.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">University of Sydney School of Medicine</a>, as <a href="https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6602410/new-study-outlines-health-risks-of-even-short-exposure-to-pm25-air-pollution/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">The Canberra Times</a> reported.Negishi pointed out that previous research into air pollution and acute cardiac events had been inconsistent, particularly at PM2.5 levels that met the World Health Organization guidelines. However, the large scale of this study meant that past inconsistencies could be addressed."Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is a major medical emergency – with less than one in 10 people worldwide surviving these events – and there has been increasing evidence of an association with the more acute air pollution, or fine particulate matter such as PM2.5," said Negishi in a University of Sydney <a href="https://sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2020/01/28/air-pollution-impacts-can-be-heart-stopping-lancet-paper-finds.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">statement</a>. "We analyzed almost a quarter of a million cases of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests and found a clear link with acute air pollution levels."</div><div class="rebellt-item col1" data-basename="particle-3" data-href="https://www.ecowatch.com/air-pollution-cardiac-arrests-2644941669.html?rebelltitem=3#rebelltitem3" data-id="3" data-is-image="False" data-reload-ads="false" id="rebelltitem3" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The findings are troubling for Australia, which has seen its usually pristine air plummet in quality due to the recent <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wildfires" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">bushfires</a>. In the study, more than 90 per cent of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests occurred at levels below the Australian standard of 25 micrograms per cubic meter. Put another way, the air quality levels ranked as "fair," "good" or "very good" under Australian standards, as the <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/no-safe-level-study-links-pm2-5-pollution-to-increased-risk-of-cardiac-arrest-20200128-p53v98.html?ref=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_source=rss_national" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">The Sydney Morning Herald</a> reported. The U.S. and Japanese standard is less strict at 35 micrograms per cubic meter.Australia had a particularly awful year, with air quality in Canberra ranking as the worst in the world on Dec. 31. Sydney had 81 days of hazardous, very poor or poor air quality in 2019, which was more days of bad air than the last decade combined, according to <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/no-safe-level-study-links-pm2-5-pollution-to-increased-risk-of-cardiac-arrest-20200128-p53v98.html?ref=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_source=rss_national" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">The Sydney Morning Herald</a>.The researchers expect the worsening air quality will lead to more heart attack fatalities in Australia, especially among older people."Given the fact that there is a tendency towards worsening air pollution – from increasing numbers of cars as well as disasters such as bushfires – the impacts on cardiovascular events, in addition to respiratory diseases and lung cancer – must be taken into account in health care responses," said Negishi in a university <a href="https://sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/news/2020/01/28/air-pollution-impacts-can-be-heart-stopping-lancet-paper-finds.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">statement</a>.Unfortunately, the researchers did not identify a threshold that is safe for exposure to PM2.5. Instead, Negishi said that existing standards should be reevaluated."It might not be a good idea to continue to seek [a new] threshold, but try to continuously improve our air quality. If a threshold exists, it should be very, very close to zero," Negishi said, as <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/no-safe-level-study-links-pm2-5-pollution-to-increased-risk-of-cardiac-arrest-20200128-p53v98.html?ref=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_source=rss_national" target="blank" style="text-decoration-color: rgb(82, 149, 70); line-height: 1.5;">The Sydney Morning Herald</a> reported.</div></div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div>=</div><div>=<a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/sugar-industry-2004899240.html">http://www.ecowatch.com/sugar-industry-2004899240.html</a>...Next year will mark 50 years since the sugar industry initiated and funded a literature review absolving sugar of its association with chronic heart disease, without disclosing the industry's role in the study.What we now know as the Sugar Association began as the Sugar Research Foundation (SRF) in 1943. Researchers Cristin Kearns, Laura Schmidt and Stanton Glantz of the University of California at San Francisco (UCSF) combed through hundreds of SRF documents and found <a href="http://archinte.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2548255" target="blank" style="color: rgb(78, 147, 66); text-decoration: none;">evidence</a> that the sugar industry had manipulated the science to exonerate sugar as a dominant cause of heart disease—an action that shifted the direction of scientific research for decades.<div class="share-tab-img share-buttons share-trigger" style="max-width: 100%; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; position: relative; overflow: hidden;">img<div class="share-media-panel">One particularly jarring quote they found was from the president Henry Hass's 1954 speech to the American Society of Sugar Beet Technologists in which he said, "if the carbohydrate industries were to recapture this 20 percent of the calories in the US diet (the difference between the 40 percent which fat has and the 20 percent which it ought to have) and if sugar maintained its present share of the carbohydrate market, this change would mean an increase in the per capita consumption of sugar more than a third with a tremendous improvement in general health."The sugar industry was interested in increasing sugar consumption by funding science that would urge Americans to decrease calories from saturated fats and hopefully replace them with sugar.The UCSF analysis reveals that SRF employed the following tactics the Union of Concerned Scientists previously identified in <a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/center-for-science-and-democracy/sugar-industry-undermines-public-health-policy.html#.V9gQVPkrKHs" target="blank" style="color: rgb(78, 147, 66); text-decoration: none;">Added Sugar, Subtracted Science</a> in order to undermine public health policy on sugar. Our work shows that SRF's successor the Sugar Association and its counterpart in the corn syrup industry, the Corn Refiners Association, took pointers from SRF:Attacking the ScienceJust as the Corn Refiners Association planned to "<a href="http://blog.ucsusa.org/gretchen-goldman/added-sugar-subtracted-science-a-new-report-and-a-labeling-debate-at-the-fda-564" target="blank" style="color: rgb(78, 147, 66); text-decoration: none;">bury the data</a>" when it was inconvenient, when the sugar industry got word that researchers like John Yudkin at Queen Elizabeth College were challenging the maxim that sugar calories were more desirable than fat calories, the SRF's vice president and director of research called on the organization in 1964 to "embark on a major program" to counter the science coming from Yudkin and others representing "negative attitudes toward sugar."This program would include issuing a public opinion poll to find out what messages would resonate with consumers and decision makers, opening up a venue to publicly call out scientists for their undesirable results regarding sugar, and finally, pushing out studies funded by the sugar industry that look at the causes of chronic heart disease....Spreading MisinformationSimilar to the sugar industry's <a href="http://blog.ucsusa.org/gretchen-goldman/five-things-sugar-interests-get-wrong-about-fda-added-sugars-labeling-576" target="blank" style="color: rgb(78, 147, 66); text-decoration: none;">recent misinforming</a> in order to fight labeling policies, as a part of its campaign to increase sugar consumption in the 1960s, it began to fund its own literature review on sugars, fats, and chronic heart disease in an obvious attempt to dispel the rumors that calories from sugar were at least part of the problem. The SRF paid Dr. Mark Hegsted and Dr. Robert McGandy, under the supervision of Harvard University's Fredrick Stare, a total of nearly $50,000 (in 2015 dollars) for their work. And the SRF was heavily involved throughout the review process, urging the scientists to focus on the perils of fat consumption.The SRF vice president and director of research, John Hickson, emphasized in 1965, "Our particular interest had to do with that part of nutrition in which there are claims that carbohydrates in the form of sucrose make an inordinate contribution to the metabolic condition, hitherto ascribed to aberrations called fat metabolism. I will be disappointed if this aspect is drowned out in a cascade of review and general interpretation."The study authors discounted research showing sugar's impact on chronic heart disease in a number of ways, focusing especially on possible bias within individual studies instead of looking at the consensus across studies. The conclusion of the literature review was that there was "no doubt" that the one way to prevent chronic heart disease was through a reduction of dietary cholesterol and replacing saturated fats with unsaturated fats. And the SRF was content with these findings, telling the lead authors, "this is quite what we had in mind."Deploying Industry Scientists/Influencing AcademiaJust as the Sugar Association and Corn Refiners Association today <a href="http://www.ucsusa.org/addedsugar" target="blank" style="color: rgb(78, 147, 66); text-decoration: none;">work with academic scientists</a>to advance their talking points, when the literature review was published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1967, the authors did not disclose the funding or close involvement of the SRF in the review. Dr. Fredrick Stare, the founder and chairman of the nutrition department at the Harvard School of Public Health, had an <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2012/10/sugar-industry-lies-campaign?page=3" target="blank" style="color: rgb(78, 147, 66); text-decoration: none;">extended history</a> of funding from the sugar and food industry: over 30 papers authored by members of his department were funded by the SRF just between 1952 and 1956. Stare's department at Harvard is a key example of how industry funding can influence academic science, with dangerous consequences for public discourse and public policy.Undermining PolicyThe manipulation of science doesn't happen in a vacuum. Often, it serves to change the conversation and impact policy, as well. Similar to <a href="http://blog.ucsusa.org/genna-reed/why-the-food-industry-cant-stomach-transparency-on-food-labels" target="blank" style="color: rgb(78, 147, 66); text-decoration: none;">today's efforts</a> by the sugar industry to undermine public health policies, in 1986, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Sugars Task Force <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3543257" target="blank" style="color: rgb(78, 147, 66); text-decoration: none;">assessed</a> the scientific evidence around sugar, leaning heavily upon the industry's 1976 review, titled <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/documents/472416-scientists-dispel-sugar-fears" target="blank" style="color: rgb(78, 147, 66); text-decoration: none;">"Sugar in the Diet of Man."</a> The FDA report said that "no conclusive evidence on sugars demonstrates a hazard to the general public when sugars are consumed at the levels that are now current." The agency's study was influenced by <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/magazine/mag-17Sugar-t.html?r=0" target="blank" style="color: rgb(78, 147, 66); text-decoration: none;">industry sponsorship</a>, as the chair of the study later went on to work at the Corn Refiners Association, a trade group that represents the interests of high-fructose corn syrup manufacturers.This agency study, which had clear influence form the sugar and food industry, has been responsible for the determination of <a href="http://blog.ucsusa.org/genna-reed/new-fda-ruling-doesnt-close-industrys-favorite-food-safety-loophole?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheEquationGennaReed+%28The+Equation+%E2%80%93+Genna+Reed%29" target="blank" style="color: rgb(78, 147, 66); text-decoration: none;">GRAS status</a> for several added sugars, and has largely set the precedent for the resulting years of <a href="http://blog.ucsusa.org/gretchen-goldman/added-sugar-subtracted-science-a-new-report-and-a-labeling-debate-at-the-fda-564" target="blank" style="color: rgb(78, 147, 66); text-decoration: none;">denial</a> about the health impacts of sugar-laden diets.The Sugar Industry's Role in Today's Chronic Disease EpidemicIt is no wonder that even today, our food policies are only just beginning to adequately address the association between added sugars and chronic disease. The sugar industry has magnificently managed to delay the inevitable knowledge about the dangers of excessive sugar consumption for a half century. And they are still employing this same behavior. Just last month, the American Heart Association released added sugar consumption <a href="http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/early/2016/08/22/CIR.0000000000000439" target="blank" style="color: rgb(78, 147, 66); text-decoration: none;">guidelines</a> for children, recommending that children under two consume no added sugars and that all other children consume less than 10 percent of calories from sugars, because "there is minimal room for nutrient-free calories in the habitual diets of very young children." The Sugar Association <a href="https://www.sugar.org/the-sugar-association-response-to-aha-scientific-statement-on-added-sugars-recommendation-for-kids/" target="blank" style="color: rgb(78, 147, 66); text-decoration: none;">responded</a> by accusing the American Heart Association of a lack of scientific integrity.Luckily the tide is beginning to turn in spite of the industry's best efforts. <a href="http://blog.ucsusa.org/pallavi-phartiyal/hard-fought-battle-over-added-sugar-labeling-at-the-fda-public-health-1-food-industry-0" target="blank" style="color: rgb(78, 147, 66); text-decoration: none;">FDA's label</a> will soon include added sugars information on food packages. More and more local <a href="http://news.berkeley.edu/2016/08/23/sodadrinking/" target="blank" style="color: rgb(78, 147, 66); text-decoration: none;">resolutions</a> are popping up to place <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/berkeley-soda-tax-1992066540.html" style="color: rgb(78, 147, 66); text-decoration: none;">taxes on sugary beverages</a>. School meal <a href="http://blog.ucsusa.org/lindsey-haynes-maslow/lessons-from-the-lunchroom-what-do-we-know-about-school-lunch-and-kids-diet-644" target="blank" style="color: rgb(78, 147, 66); text-decoration: none;">policies</a> are adding variety and improving the nutritional quality of kids' diets. And exposés like this one are revealing the truth about how the food industry has manipulated science to influence our diets for the worse.Still, the aforementioned research points to some interesting scientific integrity issues that remain today, including the rigor of conflict-of-interest policies at scientific journals and the ethical questions involved with the ability of decision makers to use industry-funded research to shape policies. My colleague, <a href="http://blog.ucsusa.org/author/gretchen-goldman#.V9g7qfkrKHs" target="blank" style="color: rgb(78, 147, 66); text-decoration: none;">Gretchen Goldman</a>, explains more about how we should be dealing with conflicts of interest in science funding <a href="http://blog.ucsusa.org/gretchen-goldman/the-trouble-with-science-funding" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(78, 147, 66); text-decoration: none;">here</a>. We need greater transparency around the sugar industry's role in scientific studies, including funding but also identification of the nature of the relationship between the industry and the science. Independent science should inform policies that protect public health from the adverse impacts of added sugar.Genna Reed is a science and policy analyst in the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scientists.</div></div>
===
http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/

Heart disease is the No. 1 killer in the world. Stroke ranks second

globally and is a leading cause of severe disability. Too many families

are losing loved ones of all ages. Each year, these diseases kill more

than 786,000 Americans, which is larger than the population of several

states (Alaska, North Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming). Some form of

cardiovascular disease affects more than one in every three adult

Americans. Many suffer terribly from disabilities caused by these

diseases. The American Heart Association wants everyone to understand

the threat – and to know that cardiovascular diseases and stroke are

largely preventable. Risks can be lowered by adhering to what we call

Life’s Simple 7: not smoking, being physically active, maintaining a

healthy body weight, eating a healthy diet, controlling blood pressure,

controlling cholesterol and controlling blood sugar.<h3>Our 2020 Goal</h3>We

are working toward improving the cardiovascular health of all Americans

by 20 percent, and reducing deaths from cardiovascular diseases and

stroke by 20 percent, all by the year 2020....

The American Heart Association is the

nation’s oldest and largest voluntary organization dedicated to fighting

heart disease and stroke. Founded by six cardiologists in 1924, our

organization now includes more than 22.5 million volunteers and

supporters. We fund innovative research, fight for stronger public

health policies, and provide critical tools and information to save and

improve lives. Our nationwide organization includes 156 local offices

and more than 3,000 employees. We moved our national headquarters from

New York to Dallas in 1975 to be more centrally located. The American

Stroke Association was created as a division in 1997 to bring together

the organization’s stroke-related activities.
What We Do:

To improve the lives of all Americans, we provide public health

education in a variety of ways. We’re the nation’s leader in CPR

education training. We help people understand the importance of healthy

lifestyle choices. We provide science-based treatment guidelines to

healthcare professionals to help them provide quality care to their

patients. We educate lawmakers, policymakers and the public as we

advocate for changes to protect and improve the health of our

communities.
<a href="http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/General/About-American-Heart_UCM_452487_Article.jsp#About">Continue to read more about the American Heart Association ></a><div class="historybox"><h2 class="title">Our Lifesaving History</h2>Before

the American Heart Association existed, people with heart disease were

considered to be doomed to complete bed rest – or worse.
But a

handful of pioneering physicians and social workers believed it didn’t

have to be that way. They conducted studies to learn more about heart

disease, eventually leading to the founding of the American Heart

Association in 1924.
“We were living in a time of almost

unbelievable ignorance about heart disease,” said Paul Dudley White, one

of six cardiologists who founded the organization.
The early

American Heart Association enlisted help from hundreds, then thousands,

of physicians and scientists. The association reorganized in 1948,

transforming from a scientific society to a voluntary health

organization composed of both science and lay volunteers and supported

by professional staff. Since then, the American Heart Association has

grown rapidly in size and influence – nationally and internationally.
In

1975, the headquarters moved from New York City to Dallas to be more

centrally located. Volunteer-led affiliates formed a national network of

local organizations providing research funding, education, community

programs and fundraising.
In the 1980s, the association became

a much more visible champion of public health, starting advocacy

efforts that remain active today locally across America in all 50 states

and in Washington. Large gifts allowed the association to support new

research projects and education programs, including more efforts to

address heart disease and stroke in women and minorities.
<a href="http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/General/About-American-Heart_UCM_452487_Article.jsp#History">Continue to read more about our lifesaving history ></a></div>
==
</div></div>