Frances Correa

A majority of Texas physicians see the current health care payment system as not economically viable, according to a survey conducted by the Texas Medical Association.

Sixty-nine percent of physicians who responded to the survey reported slow payment, nonpayment, or underpayment of Medicare and Medicaid claims. An additional 61% reported a significant decrease in their incomes over the past 2 years.

Dr. Steven Petak, a Houston-based endocrinologist, said that his practice nearly went bankrupt last year because of increased Medicare costs. Those low reimbursements, he said, are the reason his practice started phasing out Medicare patients over the past 2 years. Today, less than 10% of Dr. Petak’s patients are covered by Medicare.

According to the Texas Medical Association, less than 42% of surveyed physicians currently accept Medicare patients; half of physician respondents said they are considering opting out of Medicare entirely.

As immediate past president of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, Dr. Petak was in Washington in early March representing the organization. He and his colleagues met with 80 House and Senate members to discuss a fix for the Sustainable Growth Rate formula.

"Economically, it’s suicidal," Dr. Petak said. In his meetings, he recommended alternative measures of estimating funding such as the Medicare Economic Index, a tool by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to annually calculate changes in practice cost.

In response to ongoing concerns, President Obama’s 2012 budget proposal includes a 10-year, $370 billion plan to fix the SGR using funds from fraud reduction and adjustments to payments for pharmaceuticals and Medicaid.

In addition to Medicare and SGR woes, more than half (59%) of respondents to the TMA survey said that they are concerned about what the Affordable Care Act means for them and their patients. More than two-thirds (67%) said that they were concerned that the quality of health care would diminish and costs would increase under the law.

Further, 74% of respondents said they are disappointed with the proposed health reforms, 74% said they’re anxious, and 62% said they’re angry and confused.

The physician survey was conducted through monthly e-mails. Among the respondents, 95% were physicians; the rest were medical students, residents, and interns. Of the 29,764 members who received the survey, 3,587 responded.

A majority of Texas physicians see the current health care payment system as not economically viable, according to a survey conducted by the Texas Medical Association.

Sixty-nine percent of physicians who responded to the survey reported slow payment, nonpayment, or underpayment of Medicare and Medicaid claims. An additional 61% reported a significant decrease in their incomes over the past 2 years.

Dr. Steven Petak, a Houston-based endocrinologist, said that his practice nearly went bankrupt last year because of increased Medicare costs. Those low reimbursements, he said, are the reason his practice started phasing out Medicare patients over the past 2 years. Today, less than 10% of Dr. Petak’s patients are covered by Medicare.

According to the Texas Medical Association, less than 42% of surveyed physicians currently accept Medicare patients; half of physician respondents said they are considering opting out of Medicare entirely.

As immediate past president of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, Dr. Petak was in Washington in early March representing the organization. He and his colleagues met with 80 House and Senate members to discuss a fix for the Sustainable Growth Rate formula.

"Economically, it’s suicidal," Dr. Petak said. In his meetings, he recommended alternative measures of estimating funding such as the Medicare Economic Index, a tool by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to annually calculate changes in practice cost.

In response to ongoing concerns, President Obama’s 2012 budget proposal includes a 10-year, $370 billion plan to fix the SGR using funds from fraud reduction and adjustments to payments for pharmaceuticals and Medicaid.

In addition to Medicare and SGR woes, more than half (59%) of respondents to the TMA survey said that they are concerned about what the Affordable Care Act means for them and their patients. More than two-thirds (67%) said that they were concerned that the quality of health care would diminish and costs would increase under the law.

Further, 74% of respondents said they are disappointed with the proposed health reforms, 74% said they’re anxious, and 62% said they’re angry and confused.

The physician survey was conducted through monthly e-mails. Among the respondents, 95% were physicians; the rest were medical students, residents, and interns. Of the 29,764 members who received the survey, 3,587 responded.

A majority of Texas physicians see the current health care payment system as not economically viable, according to a survey conducted by the Texas Medical Association.

Sixty-nine percent of physicians who responded to the survey reported slow payment, nonpayment, or underpayment of Medicare and Medicaid claims. An additional 61% reported a significant decrease in their incomes over the past 2 years.

Dr. Steven Petak, a Houston-based endocrinologist, said that his practice nearly went bankrupt last year because of increased Medicare costs. Those low reimbursements, he said, are the reason his practice started phasing out Medicare patients over the past 2 years. Today, less than 10% of Dr. Petak’s patients are covered by Medicare.

According to the Texas Medical Association, less than 42% of surveyed physicians currently accept Medicare patients; half of physician respondents said they are considering opting out of Medicare entirely.

As immediate past president of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, Dr. Petak was in Washington in early March representing the organization. He and his colleagues met with 80 House and Senate members to discuss a fix for the Sustainable Growth Rate formula.

"Economically, it’s suicidal," Dr. Petak said. In his meetings, he recommended alternative measures of estimating funding such as the Medicare Economic Index, a tool by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to annually calculate changes in practice cost.

In response to ongoing concerns, President Obama’s 2012 budget proposal includes a 10-year, $370 billion plan to fix the SGR using funds from fraud reduction and adjustments to payments for pharmaceuticals and Medicaid.

In addition to Medicare and SGR woes, more than half (59%) of respondents to the TMA survey said that they are concerned about what the Affordable Care Act means for them and their patients. More than two-thirds (67%) said that they were concerned that the quality of health care would diminish and costs would increase under the law.

Further, 74% of respondents said they are disappointed with the proposed health reforms, 74% said they’re anxious, and 62% said they’re angry and confused.

The physician survey was conducted through monthly e-mails. Among the respondents, 95% were physicians; the rest were medical students, residents, and interns. Of the 29,764 members who received the survey, 3,587 responded.

A majority of Texas physicians see the current health care payment system as not economically viable, according to a survey conducted by the Texas Medical Association.

Sixty-nine percent of physicians who responded to the survey reported slow payment, nonpayment, or underpayment of Medicare and Medicaid claims. An additional 61% reported a significant decrease in their incomes over the past 2 years.

Dr. Steven Petak, a Houston-based endocrinologist, said that his practice nearly went bankrupt last year because of increased Medicare costs. Those low reimbursements, he said, are the reason his practice started phasing out Medicare patients over the past 2 years. Today, less than 10% of Dr. Petak’s patients are covered by Medicare.

According to the Texas Medical Association, less than 42% of surveyed physicians currently accept Medicare patients; half of physician respondents said they are considering opting out of Medicare entirely.

As immediate past president of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, Dr. Petak was in Washington in early March representing the organization. He and his colleagues met with 80 House and Senate members to discuss a fix for the Sustainable Growth Rate formula.

"Economically, it’s suicidal," Dr. Petak said. In his meetings, he recommended alternative measures of estimating funding such as the Medicare Economic Index, a tool by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to annually calculate changes in practice cost.

In response to ongoing concerns, President Obama’s 2012 budget proposal includes a 10-year, $370 billion plan to fix the SGR using funds from fraud reduction and adjustments to payments for pharmaceuticals and Medicaid.

In addition to Medicare and SGR woes, more than half (59%) of respondents to the TMA survey said that they are concerned about what the Affordable Care Act means for them and their patients. More than two-thirds (67%) said that they were concerned that the quality of health care would diminish and costs would increase under the law.

Further, 74% of respondents said they are disappointed with the proposed health reforms, 74% said they’re anxious, and 62% said they’re angry and confused.

The physician survey was conducted through monthly e-mails. Among the respondents, 95% were physicians; the rest were medical students, residents, and interns. Of the 29,764 members who received the survey, 3,587 responded.

A majority of Texas physicians see the current health care payment system as not economically viable, according to a survey conducted by the Texas Medical Association.

Sixty-nine percent of physicians who responded to the survey reported slow payment, nonpayment, or underpayment of Medicare and Medicaid claims. An additional 61% reported a significant decrease in their incomes over the past 2 years.

Dr. Steven Petak, a Houston-based endocrinologist, said that his practice nearly went bankrupt last year because of increased Medicare costs. Those low reimbursements, he said, are the reason his practice started phasing out Medicare patients over the past 2 years. Today, less than 10% of Dr. Petak’s patients are covered by Medicare.

According to the Texas Medical Association, less than 42% of surveyed physicians currently accept Medicare patients; half of physician respondents said they are considering opting out of Medicare entirely.

As immediate past president of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, Dr. Petak was in Washington in early March representing the organization. He and his colleagues met with 80 House and Senate members to discuss a fix for the Sustainable Growth Rate formula.

"Economically, it’s suicidal," Dr. Petak said. In his meetings, he recommended alternative measures of estimating funding such as the Medicare Economic Index, a tool by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to annually calculate changes in practice cost.

In response to ongoing concerns, President Obama’s 2012 budget proposal includes a 10-year, $370 billion plan to fix the SGR using funds from fraud reduction and adjustments to payments for pharmaceuticals and Medicaid.

In addition to Medicare and SGR woes, more than half (59%) of respondents to the TMA survey said that they are concerned about what the Affordable Care Act means for them and their patients. More than two-thirds (67%) said that they were concerned that the quality of health care would diminish and costs would increase under the law.

Further, 74% of respondents said they are disappointed with the proposed health reforms, 74% said they’re anxious, and 62% said they’re angry and confused.

The physician survey was conducted through monthly e-mails. Among the respondents, 95% were physicians; the rest were medical students, residents, and interns. Of the 29,764 members who received the survey, 3,587 responded.

A majority of Texas physicians see the current health care payment system as not economically viable, according to a survey conducted by the Texas Medical Association.

Sixty-nine percent of physicians who responded to the survey reported slow payment, nonpayment, or underpayment of Medicare and Medicaid claims. An additional 61% reported a significant decrease in their incomes over the past 2 years.

Dr. Steven Petak, a Houston-based endocrinologist, said that his practice nearly went bankrupt last year because of increased Medicare costs. Those low reimbursements, he said, are the reason his practice started phasing out Medicare patients over the past 2 years. Today, less than 10% of Dr. Petak’s patients are covered by Medicare.

According to the Texas Medical Association, less than 42% of surveyed physicians currently accept Medicare patients; half of physician respondents said they are considering opting out of Medicare entirely.

As immediate past president of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, Dr. Petak was in Washington in early March representing the organization. He and his colleagues met with 80 House and Senate members to discuss a fix for the Sustainable Growth Rate formula.

"Economically, it’s suicidal," Dr. Petak said. In his meetings, he recommended alternative measures of estimating funding such as the Medicare Economic Index, a tool by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to annually calculate changes in practice cost.

In response to ongoing concerns, President Obama’s 2012 budget proposal includes a 10-year, $370 billion plan to fix the SGR using funds from fraud reduction and adjustments to payments for pharmaceuticals and Medicaid.

In addition to Medicare and SGR woes, more than half (59%) of respondents to the TMA survey said that they are concerned about what the Affordable Care Act means for them and their patients. More than two-thirds (67%) said that they were concerned that the quality of health care would diminish and costs would increase under the law.

Further, 74% of respondents said they are disappointed with the proposed health reforms, 74% said they’re anxious, and 62% said they’re angry and confused.

The physician survey was conducted through monthly e-mails. Among the respondents, 95% were physicians; the rest were medical students, residents, and interns. Of the 29,764 members who received the survey, 3,587 responded.

A majority of Texas physicians see the current health care payment system as not economically viable, according to a survey conducted by the Texas Medical Association.

Sixty-nine percent of physicians who responded to the survey reported slow payment, nonpayment, or underpayment of Medicare and Medicaid claims. An additional 61% reported a significant decrease in their incomes over the past 2 years.

Dr. Steven Petak, a Houston-based endocrinologist, said that his practice nearly went bankrupt last year because of increased Medicare costs. Those low reimbursements, he said, are the reason his practice started phasing out Medicare patients over the past 2 years. Today, less than 10% of Dr. Petak’s patients are covered by Medicare.

According to the Texas Medical Association, less than 42% of surveyed physicians currently accept Medicare patients; half of physician respondents said they are considering opting out of Medicare entirely.

As immediate past president of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, Dr. Petak was in Washington in early March representing the organization. He and his colleagues met with 80 House and Senate members to discuss a fix for the Sustainable Growth Rate formula.

"Economically, it’s suicidal," Dr. Petak said. In his meetings, he recommended alternative measures of estimating funding such as the Medicare Economic Index, a tool by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to annually calculate changes in practice cost.

In response to ongoing concerns, President Obama’s 2012 budget proposal includes a 10-year, $370 billion plan to fix the SGR using funds from fraud reduction and adjustments to payments for pharmaceuticals and Medicaid.

In addition to Medicare and SGR woes, more than half (59%) of respondents to the TMA survey said that they are concerned about what the Affordable Care Act means for them and their patients. More than two-thirds (67%) said that they were concerned that the quality of health care would diminish and costs would increase under the law.

Further, 74% of respondents said they are disappointed with the proposed health reforms, 74% said they’re anxious, and 62% said they’re angry and confused.

The physician survey was conducted through monthly e-mails. Among the respondents, 95% were physicians; the rest were medical students, residents, and interns. Of the 29,764 members who received the survey, 3,587 responded.

A majority of Texas physicians see the current health care payment system as not economically viable, according to a survey conducted by the Texas Medical Association.

Sixty-nine percent of physicians who responded to the survey reported slow payment, nonpayment, or underpayment of Medicare and Medicaid claims. An additional 61% reported a significant decrease in their incomes over the past 2 years.

Dr. Steven Petak, a Houston-based endocrinologist, said that his practice nearly went bankrupt last year because of increased Medicare costs. Those low reimbursements, he said, are the reason his practice started phasing out Medicare patients over the past 2 years. Today, less than 10% of Dr. Petak’s patients are covered by Medicare.

According to the Texas Medical Association, less than 42% of surveyed physicians currently accept Medicare patients; half of physician respondents said they are considering opting out of Medicare entirely.

As immediate past president of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, Dr. Petak was in Washington in early March representing the organization. He and his colleagues met with 80 House and Senate members to discuss a fix for the Sustainable Growth Rate formula.

"Economically, it’s suicidal," Dr. Petak said. In his meetings, he recommended alternative measures of estimating funding such as the Medicare Economic Index, a tool by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to annually calculate changes in practice cost.

In response to ongoing concerns, President Obama’s 2012 budget proposal includes a 10-year, $370 billion plan to fix the SGR using funds from fraud reduction and adjustments to payments for pharmaceuticals and Medicaid.

In addition to Medicare and SGR woes, more than half (59%) of respondents to the TMA survey said that they are concerned about what the Affordable Care Act means for them and their patients. More than two-thirds (67%) said that they were concerned that the quality of health care would diminish and costs would increase under the law.

Further, 74% of respondents said they are disappointed with the proposed health reforms, 74% said they’re anxious, and 62% said they’re angry and confused.

The physician survey was conducted through monthly e-mails. Among the respondents, 95% were physicians; the rest were medical students, residents, and interns. Of the 29,764 members who received the survey, 3,587 responded.

A majority of Texas physicians see the current health care payment system as not economically viable, according to a survey conducted by the Texas Medical Association.

Sixty-nine percent of physicians who responded to the survey reported slow payment, nonpayment, or underpayment of Medicare and Medicaid claims. An additional 61% reported a significant decrease in their incomes over the past 2 years.

Dr. Steven Petak, a Houston-based endocrinologist, said that his practice nearly went bankrupt last year because of increased Medicare costs. Those low reimbursements, he said, are the reason his practice started phasing out Medicare patients over the past 2 years. Today, less than 10% of Dr. Petak’s patients are covered by Medicare.

According to the Texas Medical Association, less than 42% of surveyed physicians currently accept Medicare patients; half of physician respondents said they are considering opting out of Medicare entirely.

As immediate past president of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, Dr. Petak was in Washington in early March representing the organization. He and his colleagues met with 80 House and Senate members to discuss a fix for the Sustainable Growth Rate formula.

"Economically, it’s suicidal," Dr. Petak said. In his meetings, he recommended alternative measures of estimating funding such as the Medicare Economic Index, a tool by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to annually calculate changes in practice cost.

In response to ongoing concerns, President Obama’s 2012 budget proposal includes a 10-year, $370 billion plan to fix the SGR using funds from fraud reduction and adjustments to payments for pharmaceuticals and Medicaid.

In addition to Medicare and SGR woes, more than half (59%) of respondents to the TMA survey said that they are concerned about what the Affordable Care Act means for them and their patients. More than two-thirds (67%) said that they were concerned that the quality of health care would diminish and costs would increase under the law.

Further, 74% of respondents said they are disappointed with the proposed health reforms, 74% said they’re anxious, and 62% said they’re angry and confused.

The physician survey was conducted through monthly e-mails. Among the respondents, 95% were physicians; the rest were medical students, residents, and interns. Of the 29,764 members who received the survey, 3,587 responded.

A majority of Texas physicians see the current health care payment system as not economically viable, according to a survey conducted by the Texas Medical Association.

Sixty-nine percent of physicians who responded to the survey reported slow payment, nonpayment, or underpayment of Medicare and Medicaid claims. An additional 61% reported a significant decrease in their incomes over the past 2 years.

Dr. Steven Petak, a Houston-based endocrinologist, said that his practice nearly went bankrupt last year because of increased Medicare costs. Those low reimbursements, he said, are the reason his practice started phasing out Medicare patients over the past 2 years. Today, less than 10% of Dr. Petak’s patients are covered by Medicare.

According to the Texas Medical Association, less than 42% of surveyed physicians currently accept Medicare patients; half of physician respondents said they are considering opting out of Medicare entirely.

As immediate past president of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, Dr. Petak was in Washington in early March representing the organization. He and his colleagues met with 80 House and Senate members to discuss a fix for the Sustainable Growth Rate formula.

"Economically, it’s suicidal," Dr. Petak said. In his meetings, he recommended alternative measures of estimating funding such as the Medicare Economic Index, a tool by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to annually calculate changes in practice cost.

In response to ongoing concerns, President Obama’s 2012 budget proposal includes a 10-year, $370 billion plan to fix the SGR using funds from fraud reduction and adjustments to payments for pharmaceuticals and Medicaid.

In addition to Medicare and SGR woes, more than half (59%) of respondents to the TMA survey said that they are concerned about what the Affordable Care Act means for them and their patients. More than two-thirds (67%) said that they were concerned that the quality of health care would diminish and costs would increase under the law.

Further, 74% of respondents said they are disappointed with the proposed health reforms, 74% said they’re anxious, and 62% said they’re angry and confused.

The physician survey was conducted through monthly e-mails. Among the respondents, 95% were physicians; the rest were medical students, residents, and interns. Of the 29,764 members who received the survey, 3,587 responded.

A majority of Texas physicians see the current health care payment system as not economically viable, according to a survey conducted by the Texas Medical Association.

Sixty-nine percent of physicians who responded to the survey reported slow payment, nonpayment, or underpayment of Medicare and Medicaid claims. An additional 61% reported a significant decrease in their incomes over the past 2 years.

Dr. Steven Petak, a Houston-based endocrinologist, said that his practice nearly went bankrupt last year because of increased Medicare costs. Those low reimbursements, he said, are the reason his practice started phasing out Medicare patients over the past 2 years. Today, less than 10% of Dr. Petak’s patients are covered by Medicare.

According to the Texas Medical Association, less than 42% of surveyed physicians currently accept Medicare patients; half of physician respondents said they are considering opting out of Medicare entirely.

As immediate past president of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, Dr. Petak was in Washington in early March representing the organization. He and his colleagues met with 80 House and Senate members to discuss a fix for the Sustainable Growth Rate formula.

"Economically, it’s suicidal," Dr. Petak said. In his meetings, he recommended alternative measures of estimating funding such as the Medicare Economic Index, a tool by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to annually calculate changes in practice cost.

In response to ongoing concerns, President Obama’s 2012 budget proposal includes a 10-year, $370 billion plan to fix the SGR using funds from fraud reduction and adjustments to payments for pharmaceuticals and Medicaid.

In addition to Medicare and SGR woes, more than half (59%) of respondents to the TMA survey said that they are concerned about what the Affordable Care Act means for them and their patients. More than two-thirds (67%) said that they were concerned that the quality of health care would diminish and costs would increase under the law.

Further, 74% of respondents said they are disappointed with the proposed health reforms, 74% said they’re anxious, and 62% said they’re angry and confused.

The physician survey was conducted through monthly e-mails. Among the respondents, 95% were physicians; the rest were medical students, residents, and interns. Of the 29,764 members who received the survey, 3,587 responded.

A majority of Texas physicians see the current health care payment system as not economically viable, according to a survey conducted by the Texas Medical Association.

Sixty-nine percent of physicians who responded to the survey reported slow payment, nonpayment, or underpayment of Medicare and Medicaid claims. An additional 61% reported a significant decrease in their incomes over the past 2 years.

Dr. Steven Petak, a Houston-based endocrinologist, said that his practice nearly went bankrupt last year because of increased Medicare costs. Those low reimbursements, he said, are the reason his practice started phasing out Medicare patients over the past 2 years. Today, less than 10% of Dr. Petak’s patients are covered by Medicare.

According to the Texas Medical Association, less than 42% of surveyed physicians currently accept Medicare patients; half of physician respondents said they are considering opting out of Medicare entirely.

As immediate past president of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, Dr. Petak was in Washington in early March representing the organization. He and his colleagues met with 80 House and Senate members to discuss a fix for the Sustainable Growth Rate formula.

"Economically, it’s suicidal," Dr. Petak said. In his meetings, he recommended alternative measures of estimating funding such as the Medicare Economic Index, a tool by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to annually calculate changes in practice cost.

In response to ongoing concerns, President Obama’s 2012 budget proposal includes a 10-year, $370 billion plan to fix the SGR using funds from fraud reduction and adjustments to payments for pharmaceuticals and Medicaid.

In addition to Medicare and SGR woes, more than half (59%) of respondents to the TMA survey said that they are concerned about what the Affordable Care Act means for them and their patients. More than two-thirds (67%) said that they were concerned that the quality of health care would diminish and costs would increase under the law.

Further, 74% of respondents said they are disappointed with the proposed health reforms, 74% said they’re anxious, and 62% said they’re angry and confused.

The physician survey was conducted through monthly e-mails. Among the respondents, 95% were physicians; the rest were medical students, residents, and interns. Of the 29,764 members who received the survey, 3,587 responded.

A majority of Texas physicians see the current health care payment system as not economically viable, according to a survey conducted by the Texas Medical Association.

Sixty-nine percent of physicians who responded to the survey reported slow payment, nonpayment, or underpayment of Medicare and Medicaid claims. An additional 61% reported a significant decrease in their incomes over the past 2 years.

Dr. Steven Petak, a Houston-based endocrinologist, said that his practice nearly went bankrupt last year because of increased Medicare costs. Those low reimbursements, he said, are the reason his practice started phasing out Medicare patients over the past 2 years. Today, less than 10% of Dr. Petak’s patients are covered by Medicare.

According to the Texas Medical Association, less than 42% of surveyed physicians currently accept Medicare patients; half of physician respondents said they are considering opting out of Medicare entirely.

As immediate past president of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, Dr. Petak was in Washington in early March representing the organization. He and his colleagues met with 80 House and Senate members to discuss a fix for the Sustainable Growth Rate formula.

"Economically, it's suicidal," Dr. Petak said. In his meetings, he recommended alternative measures of estimating funding such as the Medicare Economic Index, a tool by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to annually calculate changes in practice cost.

In response to ongoing concerns, President Obama's 2012 budget proposal includes a 10-year, $370 billion plan to fix the SGR using funds from fraud reduction and adjustments to payments for pharmaceuticals and Medicaid.

In addition to Medicare and SGR woes, more than half (59%) of respondents to the TMA survey said that they are concerned about what the Affordable Care Act means for them and their patients. More than two-thirds (67%) said that they were concerned that the quality of health care would diminish and costs would increase under the law.

Further, 74% of respondents said they are disappointed with the proposed health reforms, 74% said they're anxious, and 62% said they're angry and confused.

The physician survey was conducted through monthly e-mails. Among the respondents, 95% were physicians; the rest were medical students, residents, and interns. Of the 29,764 members who received the survey, 3,587 responded.

A majority of Texas physicians see the current health care payment system as not economically viable, according to a survey conducted by the Texas Medical Association.

Sixty-nine percent of physicians who responded to the survey reported slow payment, nonpayment, or underpayment of Medicare and Medicaid claims. An additional 61% reported a significant decrease in their incomes over the past 2 years.

Dr. Steven Petak, a Houston-based endocrinologist, said that his practice nearly went bankrupt last year because of increased Medicare costs. Those low reimbursements, he said, are the reason his practice started phasing out Medicare patients over the past 2 years. Today, less than 10% of Dr. Petak’s patients are covered by Medicare.

According to the Texas Medical Association, less than 42% of surveyed physicians currently accept Medicare patients; half of physician respondents said they are considering opting out of Medicare entirely.

As immediate past president of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, Dr. Petak was in Washington in early March representing the organization. He and his colleagues met with 80 House and Senate members to discuss a fix for the Sustainable Growth Rate formula.

"Economically, it's suicidal," Dr. Petak said. In his meetings, he recommended alternative measures of estimating funding such as the Medicare Economic Index, a tool by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to annually calculate changes in practice cost.

In response to ongoing concerns, President Obama's 2012 budget proposal includes a 10-year, $370 billion plan to fix the SGR using funds from fraud reduction and adjustments to payments for pharmaceuticals and Medicaid.

In addition to Medicare and SGR woes, more than half (59%) of respondents to the TMA survey said that they are concerned about what the Affordable Care Act means for them and their patients. More than two-thirds (67%) said that they were concerned that the quality of health care would diminish and costs would increase under the law.

Further, 74% of respondents said they are disappointed with the proposed health reforms, 74% said they're anxious, and 62% said they're angry and confused.

The physician survey was conducted through monthly e-mails. Among the respondents, 95% were physicians; the rest were medical students, residents, and interns. Of the 29,764 members who received the survey, 3,587 responded.

A majority of Texas physicians see the current health care payment system as not economically viable, according to a survey conducted by the Texas Medical Association.

Sixty-nine percent of physicians who responded to the survey reported slow payment, nonpayment, or underpayment of Medicare and Medicaid claims. An additional 61% reported a significant decrease in their incomes over the past 2 years.

Dr. Steven Petak, a Houston-based endocrinologist, said that his practice nearly went bankrupt last year because of increased Medicare costs. Those low reimbursements, he said, are the reason his practice started phasing out Medicare patients over the past 2 years. Today, less than 10% of Dr. Petak’s patients are covered by Medicare.

According to the Texas Medical Association, less than 42% of surveyed physicians currently accept Medicare patients; half of physician respondents said they are considering opting out of Medicare entirely.

As immediate past president of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, Dr. Petak was in Washington in early March representing the organization. He and his colleagues met with 80 House and Senate members to discuss a fix for the Sustainable Growth Rate formula.

"Economically, it's suicidal," Dr. Petak said. In his meetings, he recommended alternative measures of estimating funding such as the Medicare Economic Index, a tool by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to annually calculate changes in practice cost.

In response to ongoing concerns, President Obama's 2012 budget proposal includes a 10-year, $370 billion plan to fix the SGR using funds from fraud reduction and adjustments to payments for pharmaceuticals and Medicaid.

In addition to Medicare and SGR woes, more than half (59%) of respondents to the TMA survey said that they are concerned about what the Affordable Care Act means for them and their patients. More than two-thirds (67%) said that they were concerned that the quality of health care would diminish and costs would increase under the law.

Further, 74% of respondents said they are disappointed with the proposed health reforms, 74% said they're anxious, and 62% said they're angry and confused.

The physician survey was conducted through monthly e-mails. Among the respondents, 95% were physicians; the rest were medical students, residents, and interns. Of the 29,764 members who received the survey, 3,587 responded.

Major Finding: For each serving of a sugar-sweetened beverage consumed per day, systolic blood pressure increased by 1.6 mm Hg. Diastolic blood pressure rose by 0.8 mm Hg.

Data Source: The International Study of Macro/Micronutrients and Blood Pressure (INTERMAP) involving 2,696 participants, aged 40–59, who were surveyed about their consumption of sugar-sweetened and diet beverages and who provided urine samples for analysis.

Disclosures: The investigators reported having no conflicts of interest. Dr. Brown's analysis was supported by a U.K. Medical Research Council studentship. The INTERMAP Study as a whole was supported by a grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the Chicago Health Resource Foundation, and national agencies in China, Japan and the United Kingdom.

High consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages appeared to adversely affect blood pressure levels in a population-based study involving more than 2,600 people living in the United Kingdom and the United States.

The findings should help shore up the message to patients that consumption of soda and fruit juice needs to be limited for a healthy diet.

“If individuals want to drink sugar sweetened beverages, we suggest they do so only in moderation [fewer than three 12-ounce cans per week],” the study's lead investigator, Ian Brown, Ph.D., said in an interview.

The International Study of Macro/Micronutrients and Blood Pressure (INTERMAP) involved 2,696 people aged 40–59 years recruited from 10 population samples in the United Kingdom and United States.

In addition to providing answers to questions about the intake of beverages sweetened by fructose, glucose, and sucrose, participants were asked about their consumption of diet beverages and alcohol.

Each participant also provided two 24-hour urine collection samples, according to Dr. Brown of the department of epidemiology and biostatistics at Imperial College of London, and his colleagues.

Multiple regression analyses showed that for each serving of a sugar-sweetened beverage consumed per day, systolic blood pressure increased by 1.6 mm Hg. Diastolic blood pressure rose by 0.8 mm Hg, according to the investigators.

A direct association also was observed between the intake of fructose-sweetened beverages and blood pressure, they noted.

Fructose intake that was higher by 2 standard derivations was associated with a 3.4–mm Hg increase in systolic blood pressure and a 2.5–mm Hg increase in diastolic blood pressure, according to the findings (J. Hypertens. 2011 Feb. 28[doi: 10.1161/hypertension aha.110. 165456]).

These associations between sugared beverage intake and blood pressure were strongest among individuals with higher urinary sodium excretion, the researchers added. The results remained statistically significant after the investigators accounted for differences in body mass.

Dr. Brown and his coinvestigators concluded that higher blood pressure is associated with high consumption of glucose and fructose, as well as with higher levels of dietary sugar and sodium.

There was no significant correlation between diet soda intake and blood pressure levels.

The study was the first in people to suggest that there is an association between high sodium intake and high sugar-sweetened beverage intake and the overall effect on blood pressure, Dr. Brown said in an interview.

“It has been suggested by other scientists that consumption of high levels of sugars and salt may lead to sodium retention in the kidneys and/or volume expansion (i.e., an increased level of fluid in the body), which could lead to higher blood pressure,” Dr. Brown said.

The findings also suggest that people who consume more than one sugar-sweetened beverage daily tend to consume less of other types of nutrients including starch, fiber, protein (animal and vegetable), and polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fatty acids, the researchers noted.

But critics of the study emphasized that the “level of blood pressure changes noted by the authors are inconsequential and well within standard measurement error,” according to a statement by the American Beverage Association.

In addition, “The results of [the analysis] obfuscate other important variables that are linked to high blood pressure.”

Major Finding: For each serving of a sugar-sweetened beverage consumed per day, systolic blood pressure increased by 1.6 mm Hg. Diastolic blood pressure rose by 0.8 mm Hg.

Data Source: The International Study of Macro/Micronutrients and Blood Pressure (INTERMAP) involving 2,696 participants, aged 40–59, who were surveyed about their consumption of sugar-sweetened and diet beverages and who provided urine samples for analysis.

Disclosures: The investigators reported having no conflicts of interest. Dr. Brown's analysis was supported by a U.K. Medical Research Council studentship. The INTERMAP Study as a whole was supported by a grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the Chicago Health Resource Foundation, and national agencies in China, Japan and the United Kingdom.

High consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages appeared to adversely affect blood pressure levels in a population-based study involving more than 2,600 people living in the United Kingdom and the United States.

The findings should help shore up the message to patients that consumption of soda and fruit juice needs to be limited for a healthy diet.

“If individuals want to drink sugar sweetened beverages, we suggest they do so only in moderation [fewer than three 12-ounce cans per week],” the study's lead investigator, Ian Brown, Ph.D., said in an interview.

The International Study of Macro/Micronutrients and Blood Pressure (INTERMAP) involved 2,696 people aged 40–59 years recruited from 10 population samples in the United Kingdom and United States.

In addition to providing answers to questions about the intake of beverages sweetened by fructose, glucose, and sucrose, participants were asked about their consumption of diet beverages and alcohol.

Each participant also provided two 24-hour urine collection samples, according to Dr. Brown of the department of epidemiology and biostatistics at Imperial College of London, and his colleagues.

Multiple regression analyses showed that for each serving of a sugar-sweetened beverage consumed per day, systolic blood pressure increased by 1.6 mm Hg. Diastolic blood pressure rose by 0.8 mm Hg, according to the investigators.

A direct association also was observed between the intake of fructose-sweetened beverages and blood pressure, they noted.

Fructose intake that was higher by 2 standard derivations was associated with a 3.4–mm Hg increase in systolic blood pressure and a 2.5–mm Hg increase in diastolic blood pressure, according to the findings (J. Hypertens. 2011 Feb. 28[doi: 10.1161/hypertension aha.110. 165456]).

These associations between sugared beverage intake and blood pressure were strongest among individuals with higher urinary sodium excretion, the researchers added. The results remained statistically significant after the investigators accounted for differences in body mass.

Dr. Brown and his coinvestigators concluded that higher blood pressure is associated with high consumption of glucose and fructose, as well as with higher levels of dietary sugar and sodium.

There was no significant correlation between diet soda intake and blood pressure levels.

The study was the first in people to suggest that there is an association between high sodium intake and high sugar-sweetened beverage intake and the overall effect on blood pressure, Dr. Brown said in an interview.

“It has been suggested by other scientists that consumption of high levels of sugars and salt may lead to sodium retention in the kidneys and/or volume expansion (i.e., an increased level of fluid in the body), which could lead to higher blood pressure,” Dr. Brown said.

The findings also suggest that people who consume more than one sugar-sweetened beverage daily tend to consume less of other types of nutrients including starch, fiber, protein (animal and vegetable), and polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fatty acids, the researchers noted.

But critics of the study emphasized that the “level of blood pressure changes noted by the authors are inconsequential and well within standard measurement error,” according to a statement by the American Beverage Association.

In addition, “The results of [the analysis] obfuscate other important variables that are linked to high blood pressure.”

Major Finding: For each serving of a sugar-sweetened beverage consumed per day, systolic blood pressure increased by 1.6 mm Hg. Diastolic blood pressure rose by 0.8 mm Hg.

Data Source: The International Study of Macro/Micronutrients and Blood Pressure (INTERMAP) involving 2,696 participants, aged 40–59, who were surveyed about their consumption of sugar-sweetened and diet beverages and who provided urine samples for analysis.

Disclosures: The investigators reported having no conflicts of interest. Dr. Brown's analysis was supported by a U.K. Medical Research Council studentship. The INTERMAP Study as a whole was supported by a grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the Chicago Health Resource Foundation, and national agencies in China, Japan and the United Kingdom.

High consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages appeared to adversely affect blood pressure levels in a population-based study involving more than 2,600 people living in the United Kingdom and the United States.

The findings should help shore up the message to patients that consumption of soda and fruit juice needs to be limited for a healthy diet.

“If individuals want to drink sugar sweetened beverages, we suggest they do so only in moderation [fewer than three 12-ounce cans per week],” the study's lead investigator, Ian Brown, Ph.D., said in an interview.

The International Study of Macro/Micronutrients and Blood Pressure (INTERMAP) involved 2,696 people aged 40–59 years recruited from 10 population samples in the United Kingdom and United States.

In addition to providing answers to questions about the intake of beverages sweetened by fructose, glucose, and sucrose, participants were asked about their consumption of diet beverages and alcohol.

Each participant also provided two 24-hour urine collection samples, according to Dr. Brown of the department of epidemiology and biostatistics at Imperial College of London, and his colleagues.

Multiple regression analyses showed that for each serving of a sugar-sweetened beverage consumed per day, systolic blood pressure increased by 1.6 mm Hg. Diastolic blood pressure rose by 0.8 mm Hg, according to the investigators.

A direct association also was observed between the intake of fructose-sweetened beverages and blood pressure, they noted.

Fructose intake that was higher by 2 standard derivations was associated with a 3.4–mm Hg increase in systolic blood pressure and a 2.5–mm Hg increase in diastolic blood pressure, according to the findings (J. Hypertens. 2011 Feb. 28[doi: 10.1161/hypertension aha.110. 165456]).

These associations between sugared beverage intake and blood pressure were strongest among individuals with higher urinary sodium excretion, the researchers added. The results remained statistically significant after the investigators accounted for differences in body mass.

Dr. Brown and his coinvestigators concluded that higher blood pressure is associated with high consumption of glucose and fructose, as well as with higher levels of dietary sugar and sodium.

There was no significant correlation between diet soda intake and blood pressure levels.

The study was the first in people to suggest that there is an association between high sodium intake and high sugar-sweetened beverage intake and the overall effect on blood pressure, Dr. Brown said in an interview.

“It has been suggested by other scientists that consumption of high levels of sugars and salt may lead to sodium retention in the kidneys and/or volume expansion (i.e., an increased level of fluid in the body), which could lead to higher blood pressure,” Dr. Brown said.

The findings also suggest that people who consume more than one sugar-sweetened beverage daily tend to consume less of other types of nutrients including starch, fiber, protein (animal and vegetable), and polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fatty acids, the researchers noted.

But critics of the study emphasized that the “level of blood pressure changes noted by the authors are inconsequential and well within standard measurement error,” according to a statement by the American Beverage Association.

In addition, “The results of [the analysis] obfuscate other important variables that are linked to high blood pressure.”

High consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages appeared to adversely affect blood pressure levels in a population-based study involving more than 2,600 people living in the United Kingdom and the United States.

Photo credit: © Irochka/Fotolia.com

The findings, published online Feb. 28 in the journal Hypertension, should help shore up the message to patients that consumption of soda and fruit juice needs to be limited for a healthy diet. "If individuals want to drink sugar sweetened beverages, we suggest they do so only in moderation [fewer than three 12-ounce cans per week]," the study’s lead investigator, Ian Brown, Ph.D., said in an interview.

The International Study of Macro/Micronutrients and Blood Pressure (INTERMAP) involved 2,696 people aged 40-59 years recruited from 10 population samples in the United Kingdom and United States. In addition to answering questions about the intake of beverages sweetened by fructose, glucose, and sucrose, participants were asked about their consumption of diet beverages and alcohol. Each subject also provided two 24-hour urine collection samples, according to Dr. Brown of the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the Imperial College of London, and colleagues.

Multiple regression analyses showed that for each serving of a sugar-sweetened beverage consumed per day, systolic blood pressure increased by 1.6 mm Hg. Diastolic blood pressure rose by 0.8 mm Hg, the investigators wrote.

A direct association also was observed between the intake of fructose-sweetened beverages and blood pressure. Fructose intake that was higher by 2 standard derivations was associated with a 3.4–mm Hg increase in systolic blood pressure and a 2.5–mm Hg increase in diastolic blood pressure, according to the findings (J. Hypertens. 2011 Feb. 28 [doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.110.165456]).

These associations between sugared beverage intake and blood pressure were strongest among individuals with higher urinary sodium excretion, the researchers added.

The results remained statistically significant after the investigators accounted for differences in body mass. The researchers concluded that higher blood pressure is associated with high consumption of glucose and fructose, as well as with higher levels of dietary sugar and sodium.

There was no significant correlation between diet soda intake and blood pressure levels.

The study was the first in people to suggest that there is an association between high sodium intake and high sugar-sweetened beverage intake and the overall effect on blood pressure, Dr. Brown said in an interview.

"It has been suggested by other scientists that consumption of high levels of sugars and salt may lead to sodium retention in the kidneys and/or volume expansion (i.e., an increased level of fluid in the body), which could lead to higher blood pressure," Dr. Brown said.

The findings also suggest that people who consume more than one sugar-sweetened beverage daily tend to consume less of other types of nutrients including starch, fiber, protein (animal and vegetable), and polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fatty acids.

Critics of the study emphasized that the “level of blood pressure changes noted by the authors are inconsequential and well within standard measurement error,” according to a statement by the American Beverage Association. In addition, “The results of [the analysis] obfuscate other important variables that are linked to high blood pressure.”*

The investigators reported having no conflicts of interest. Dr. Brown’s analysis was supported by a U.K. Medical Research Council studentship. The INTERMAP Study as a whole was supported by a grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the Chicago Health Resource Foundation, and by national agencies in China, Japan and the United Kingdom.

High consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages appeared to adversely affect blood pressure levels in a population-based study involving more than 2,600 people living in the United Kingdom and the United States.

Photo credit: © Irochka/Fotolia.com

The findings, published online Feb. 28 in the journal Hypertension, should help shore up the message to patients that consumption of soda and fruit juice needs to be limited for a healthy diet. "If individuals want to drink sugar sweetened beverages, we suggest they do so only in moderation [fewer than three 12-ounce cans per week]," the study’s lead investigator, Ian Brown, Ph.D., said in an interview.

The International Study of Macro/Micronutrients and Blood Pressure (INTERMAP) involved 2,696 people aged 40-59 years recruited from 10 population samples in the United Kingdom and United States. In addition to answering questions about the intake of beverages sweetened by fructose, glucose, and sucrose, participants were asked about their consumption of diet beverages and alcohol. Each subject also provided two 24-hour urine collection samples, according to Dr. Brown of the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the Imperial College of London, and colleagues.

Multiple regression analyses showed that for each serving of a sugar-sweetened beverage consumed per day, systolic blood pressure increased by 1.6 mm Hg. Diastolic blood pressure rose by 0.8 mm Hg, the investigators wrote.

A direct association also was observed between the intake of fructose-sweetened beverages and blood pressure. Fructose intake that was higher by 2 standard derivations was associated with a 3.4–mm Hg increase in systolic blood pressure and a 2.5–mm Hg increase in diastolic blood pressure, according to the findings (J. Hypertens. 2011 Feb. 28 [doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.110.165456]).

These associations between sugared beverage intake and blood pressure were strongest among individuals with higher urinary sodium excretion, the researchers added.

The results remained statistically significant after the investigators accounted for differences in body mass. The researchers concluded that higher blood pressure is associated with high consumption of glucose and fructose, as well as with higher levels of dietary sugar and sodium.

There was no significant correlation between diet soda intake and blood pressure levels.

The study was the first in people to suggest that there is an association between high sodium intake and high sugar-sweetened beverage intake and the overall effect on blood pressure, Dr. Brown said in an interview.

"It has been suggested by other scientists that consumption of high levels of sugars and salt may lead to sodium retention in the kidneys and/or volume expansion (i.e., an increased level of fluid in the body), which could lead to higher blood pressure," Dr. Brown said.

The findings also suggest that people who consume more than one sugar-sweetened beverage daily tend to consume less of other types of nutrients including starch, fiber, protein (animal and vegetable), and polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fatty acids.

Critics of the study emphasized that the “level of blood pressure changes noted by the authors are inconsequential and well within standard measurement error,” according to a statement by the American Beverage Association. In addition, “The results of [the analysis] obfuscate other important variables that are linked to high blood pressure.”*

The investigators reported having no conflicts of interest. Dr. Brown’s analysis was supported by a U.K. Medical Research Council studentship. The INTERMAP Study as a whole was supported by a grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the Chicago Health Resource Foundation, and by national agencies in China, Japan and the United Kingdom.

High consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages appeared to adversely affect blood pressure levels in a population-based study involving more than 2,600 people living in the United Kingdom and the United States.

Photo credit: © Irochka/Fotolia.com

The findings, published online Feb. 28 in the journal Hypertension, should help shore up the message to patients that consumption of soda and fruit juice needs to be limited for a healthy diet. "If individuals want to drink sugar sweetened beverages, we suggest they do so only in moderation [fewer than three 12-ounce cans per week]," the study’s lead investigator, Ian Brown, Ph.D., said in an interview.

The International Study of Macro/Micronutrients and Blood Pressure (INTERMAP) involved 2,696 people aged 40-59 years recruited from 10 population samples in the United Kingdom and United States. In addition to answering questions about the intake of beverages sweetened by fructose, glucose, and sucrose, participants were asked about their consumption of diet beverages and alcohol. Each subject also provided two 24-hour urine collection samples, according to Dr. Brown of the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the Imperial College of London, and colleagues.

Multiple regression analyses showed that for each serving of a sugar-sweetened beverage consumed per day, systolic blood pressure increased by 1.6 mm Hg. Diastolic blood pressure rose by 0.8 mm Hg, the investigators wrote.

A direct association also was observed between the intake of fructose-sweetened beverages and blood pressure. Fructose intake that was higher by 2 standard derivations was associated with a 3.4–mm Hg increase in systolic blood pressure and a 2.5–mm Hg increase in diastolic blood pressure, according to the findings (J. Hypertens. 2011 Feb. 28 [doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.110.165456]).

These associations between sugared beverage intake and blood pressure were strongest among individuals with higher urinary sodium excretion, the researchers added.

The results remained statistically significant after the investigators accounted for differences in body mass. The researchers concluded that higher blood pressure is associated with high consumption of glucose and fructose, as well as with higher levels of dietary sugar and sodium.

There was no significant correlation between diet soda intake and blood pressure levels.

The study was the first in people to suggest that there is an association between high sodium intake and high sugar-sweetened beverage intake and the overall effect on blood pressure, Dr. Brown said in an interview.

"It has been suggested by other scientists that consumption of high levels of sugars and salt may lead to sodium retention in the kidneys and/or volume expansion (i.e., an increased level of fluid in the body), which could lead to higher blood pressure," Dr. Brown said.

The findings also suggest that people who consume more than one sugar-sweetened beverage daily tend to consume less of other types of nutrients including starch, fiber, protein (animal and vegetable), and polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fatty acids.

Critics of the study emphasized that the “level of blood pressure changes noted by the authors are inconsequential and well within standard measurement error,” according to a statement by the American Beverage Association. In addition, “The results of [the analysis] obfuscate other important variables that are linked to high blood pressure.”*

The investigators reported having no conflicts of interest. Dr. Brown’s analysis was supported by a U.K. Medical Research Council studentship. The INTERMAP Study as a whole was supported by a grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the Chicago Health Resource Foundation, and by national agencies in China, Japan and the United Kingdom.

High consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages appeared to adversely affect blood pressure levels in a population-based study involving more than 2,600 people living in the United Kingdom and the United States.

Photo credit: © Irochka/Fotolia.com

The findings, published online Feb. 28 in the journal Hypertension, should help shore up the message to patients that consumption of soda and fruit juice needs to be limited for a healthy diet. "If individuals want to drink sugar sweetened beverages, we suggest they do so only in moderation [fewer than three 12-ounce cans per week]," the study’s lead investigator, Ian Brown, Ph.D., said in an interview.

The International Study of Macro/Micronutrients and Blood Pressure (INTERMAP) involved 2,696 people aged 40-59 years recruited from 10 population samples in the United Kingdom and United States. In addition to answering questions about the intake of beverages sweetened by fructose, glucose, and sucrose, participants were asked about their consumption of diet beverages and alcohol. Each subject also provided two 24-hour urine collection samples, according to Dr. Brown of the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the Imperial College of London, and colleagues.

Multiple regression analyses showed that for each serving of a sugar-sweetened beverage consumed per day, systolic blood pressure increased by 1.6 mm Hg. Diastolic blood pressure rose by 0.8 mm Hg, the investigators wrote.

A direct association also was observed between the intake of fructose-sweetened beverages and blood pressure. Fructose intake that was higher by 2 standard derivations was associated with a 3.4–mm Hg increase in systolic blood pressure and a 2.5–mm Hg increase in diastolic blood pressure, according to the findings (J. Hypertens. 2011 Feb. 28 [doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.110.165456]).

These associations between sugared beverage intake and blood pressure were strongest among individuals with higher urinary sodium excretion, the researchers added.

The results remained statistically significant after the investigators accounted for differences in body mass. The researchers concluded that higher blood pressure is associated with high consumption of glucose and fructose, as well as with higher levels of dietary sugar and sodium.

There was no significant correlation between diet soda intake and blood pressure levels.

The study was the first in people to suggest that there is an association between high sodium intake and high sugar-sweetened beverage intake and the overall effect on blood pressure, Dr. Brown said in an interview.

"It has been suggested by other scientists that consumption of high levels of sugars and salt may lead to sodium retention in the kidneys and/or volume expansion (i.e., an increased level of fluid in the body), which could lead to higher blood pressure," Dr. Brown said.

The findings also suggest that people who consume more than one sugar-sweetened beverage daily tend to consume less of other types of nutrients including starch, fiber, protein (animal and vegetable), and polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fatty acids.

Critics of the study emphasized that the “level of blood pressure changes noted by the authors are inconsequential and well within standard measurement error,” according to a statement by the American Beverage Association. In addition, “The results of [the analysis] obfuscate other important variables that are linked to high blood pressure.”*

The investigators reported having no conflicts of interest. Dr. Brown’s analysis was supported by a U.K. Medical Research Council studentship. The INTERMAP Study as a whole was supported by a grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the Chicago Health Resource Foundation, and by national agencies in China, Japan and the United Kingdom.

High consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages appeared to adversely affect blood pressure levels in a population-based study involving more than 2,600 people living in the United Kingdom and the United States.

Photo credit: © Irochka/Fotolia.com

The findings, published online Feb. 28 in the journal Hypertension, should help shore up the message to patients that consumption of soda and fruit juice needs to be limited for a healthy diet. "If individuals want to drink sugar sweetened beverages, we suggest they do so only in moderation [fewer than three 12-ounce cans per week]," the study’s lead investigator, Ian Brown, Ph.D., said in an interview.

The International Study of Macro/Micronutrients and Blood Pressure (INTERMAP) involved 2,696 people aged 40-59 years recruited from 10 population samples in the United Kingdom and United States. In addition to answering questions about the intake of beverages sweetened by fructose, glucose, and sucrose, participants were asked about their consumption of diet beverages and alcohol. Each subject also provided two 24-hour urine collection samples, according to Dr. Brown of the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the Imperial College of London, and colleagues.

Multiple regression analyses showed that for each serving of a sugar-sweetened beverage consumed per day, systolic blood pressure increased by 1.6 mm Hg. Diastolic blood pressure rose by 0.8 mm Hg, the investigators wrote.

A direct association also was observed between the intake of fructose-sweetened beverages and blood pressure. Fructose intake that was higher by 2 standard derivations was associated with a 3.4–mm Hg increase in systolic blood pressure and a 2.5–mm Hg increase in diastolic blood pressure, according to the findings (J. Hypertens. 2011 Feb. 28 [doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.110.165456]).

These associations between sugared beverage intake and blood pressure were strongest among individuals with higher urinary sodium excretion, the researchers added.

The results remained statistically significant after the investigators accounted for differences in body mass. The researchers concluded that higher blood pressure is associated with high consumption of glucose and fructose, as well as with higher levels of dietary sugar and sodium.

There was no significant correlation between diet soda intake and blood pressure levels.

The study was the first in people to suggest that there is an association between high sodium intake and high sugar-sweetened beverage intake and the overall effect on blood pressure, Dr. Brown said in an interview.

"It has been suggested by other scientists that consumption of high levels of sugars and salt may lead to sodium retention in the kidneys and/or volume expansion (i.e., an increased level of fluid in the body), which could lead to higher blood pressure," Dr. Brown said.

The findings also suggest that people who consume more than one sugar-sweetened beverage daily tend to consume less of other types of nutrients including starch, fiber, protein (animal and vegetable), and polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fatty acids.

Critics of the study emphasized that the “level of blood pressure changes noted by the authors are inconsequential and well within standard measurement error,” according to a statement by the American Beverage Association. In addition, “The results of [the analysis] obfuscate other important variables that are linked to high blood pressure.”*

The investigators reported having no conflicts of interest. Dr. Brown’s analysis was supported by a U.K. Medical Research Council studentship. The INTERMAP Study as a whole was supported by a grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the Chicago Health Resource Foundation, and by national agencies in China, Japan and the United Kingdom.

High consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages appeared to adversely affect blood pressure levels in a population-based study involving more than 2,600 people living in the United Kingdom and the United States.

Photo credit: © Irochka/Fotolia.com

The findings, published online Feb. 28 in the journal Hypertension, should help shore up the message to patients that consumption of soda and fruit juice needs to be limited for a healthy diet. "If individuals want to drink sugar sweetened beverages, we suggest they do so only in moderation [fewer than three 12-ounce cans per week]," the study’s lead investigator, Ian Brown, Ph.D., said in an interview.

The International Study of Macro/Micronutrients and Blood Pressure (INTERMAP) involved 2,696 people aged 40-59 years recruited from 10 population samples in the United Kingdom and United States. In addition to answering questions about the intake of beverages sweetened by fructose, glucose, and sucrose, participants were asked about their consumption of diet beverages and alcohol. Each subject also provided two 24-hour urine collection samples, according to Dr. Brown of the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the Imperial College of London, and colleagues.

Multiple regression analyses showed that for each serving of a sugar-sweetened beverage consumed per day, systolic blood pressure increased by 1.6 mm Hg. Diastolic blood pressure rose by 0.8 mm Hg, the investigators wrote.

A direct association also was observed between the intake of fructose-sweetened beverages and blood pressure. Fructose intake that was higher by 2 standard derivations was associated with a 3.4–mm Hg increase in systolic blood pressure and a 2.5–mm Hg increase in diastolic blood pressure, according to the findings (J. Hypertens. 2011 Feb. 28 [doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.110.165456]).

These associations between sugared beverage intake and blood pressure were strongest among individuals with higher urinary sodium excretion, the researchers added.

The results remained statistically significant after the investigators accounted for differences in body mass. The researchers concluded that higher blood pressure is associated with high consumption of glucose and fructose, as well as with higher levels of dietary sugar and sodium.

There was no significant correlation between diet soda intake and blood pressure levels.

The study was the first in people to suggest that there is an association between high sodium intake and high sugar-sweetened beverage intake and the overall effect on blood pressure, Dr. Brown said in an interview.

"It has been suggested by other scientists that consumption of high levels of sugars and salt may lead to sodium retention in the kidneys and/or volume expansion (i.e., an increased level of fluid in the body), which could lead to higher blood pressure," Dr. Brown said.

The findings also suggest that people who consume more than one sugar-sweetened beverage daily tend to consume less of other types of nutrients including starch, fiber, protein (animal and vegetable), and polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fatty acids.

Critics of the study emphasized that the “level of blood pressure changes noted by the authors are inconsequential and well within standard measurement error,” according to a statement by the American Beverage Association. In addition, “The results of [the analysis] obfuscate other important variables that are linked to high blood pressure.”*

The investigators reported having no conflicts of interest. Dr. Brown’s analysis was supported by a U.K. Medical Research Council studentship. The INTERMAP Study as a whole was supported by a grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the Chicago Health Resource Foundation, and by national agencies in China, Japan and the United Kingdom.

High consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages appeared to adversely affect blood pressure levels in a population-based study involving more than 2,600 people living in the United Kingdom and the United States.

Photo credit: © Irochka/Fotolia.com

The findings, published online Feb. 28 in the journal Hypertension, should help shore up the message to patients that consumption of soda and fruit juice needs to be limited for a healthy diet. "If individuals want to drink sugar sweetened beverages, we suggest they do so only in moderation [fewer than three 12-ounce cans per week]," the study’s lead investigator, Ian Brown, Ph.D., said in an interview.

The International Study of Macro/Micronutrients and Blood Pressure (INTERMAP) involved 2,696 people aged 40-59 years recruited from 10 population samples in the United Kingdom and United States. In addition to answering questions about the intake of beverages sweetened by fructose, glucose, and sucrose, participants were asked about their consumption of diet beverages and alcohol. Each subject also provided two 24-hour urine collection samples, according to Dr. Brown of the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the Imperial College of London, and colleagues.

Multiple regression analyses showed that for each serving of a sugar-sweetened beverage consumed per day, systolic blood pressure increased by 1.6 mm Hg. Diastolic blood pressure rose by 0.8 mm Hg, the investigators wrote.

A direct association also was observed between the intake of fructose-sweetened beverages and blood pressure. Fructose intake that was higher by 2 standard derivations was associated with a 3.4–mm Hg increase in systolic blood pressure and a 2.5–mm Hg increase in diastolic blood pressure, according to the findings (J. Hypertens. 2011 Feb. 28 [doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.110.165456]).

These associations between sugared beverage intake and blood pressure were strongest among individuals with higher urinary sodium excretion, the researchers added.

The results remained statistically significant after the investigators accounted for differences in body mass. The researchers concluded that higher blood pressure is associated with high consumption of glucose and fructose, as well as with higher levels of dietary sugar and sodium.

There was no significant correlation between diet soda intake and blood pressure levels.

The study was the first in people to suggest that there is an association between high sodium intake and high sugar-sweetened beverage intake and the overall effect on blood pressure, Dr. Brown said in an interview.

"It has been suggested by other scientists that consumption of high levels of sugars and salt may lead to sodium retention in the kidneys and/or volume expansion (i.e., an increased level of fluid in the body), which could lead to higher blood pressure," Dr. Brown said.

The findings also suggest that people who consume more than one sugar-sweetened beverage daily tend to consume less of other types of nutrients including starch, fiber, protein (animal and vegetable), and polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fatty acids.

Critics of the study emphasized that the “level of blood pressure changes noted by the authors are inconsequential and well within standard measurement error,” according to a statement by the American Beverage Association. In addition, “The results of [the analysis] obfuscate other important variables that are linked to high blood pressure.”*

The investigators reported having no conflicts of interest. Dr. Brown’s analysis was supported by a U.K. Medical Research Council studentship. The INTERMAP Study as a whole was supported by a grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the Chicago Health Resource Foundation, and by national agencies in China, Japan and the United Kingdom.

*NOTE: The original edition of this story did not contain this statement from the  American Beverage Association.

High consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages appeared to adversely affect blood pressure levels in a population-based study involving more than 2,600 people living in the United Kingdom and the United States.

Photo credit: © Irochka/Fotolia.com

The findings, published online Feb. 28 in the journal Hypertension, should help shore up the message to patients that consumption of soda and fruit juice needs to be limited for a healthy diet. "If individuals want to drink sugar sweetened beverages, we suggest they do so only in moderation [fewer than three 12-ounce cans per week]," the study’s lead investigator, Ian Brown, Ph.D., said in an interview.

The International Study of Macro/Micronutrients and Blood Pressure (INTERMAP) involved 2,696 people aged 40-59 years recruited from 10 population samples in the United Kingdom and United States. In addition to answering questions about the intake of beverages sweetened by fructose, glucose, and sucrose, participants were asked about their consumption of diet beverages and alcohol. Each subject also provided two 24-hour urine collection samples, according to Dr. Brown of the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the Imperial College of London, and colleagues.

Multiple regression analyses showed that for each serving of a sugar-sweetened beverage consumed per day, systolic blood pressure increased by 1.6 mm Hg. Diastolic blood pressure rose by 0.8 mm Hg, the investigators wrote.

A direct association also was observed between the intake of fructose-sweetened beverages and blood pressure. Fructose intake that was higher by 2 standard derivations was associated with a 3.4–mm Hg increase in systolic blood pressure and a 2.5–mm Hg increase in diastolic blood pressure, according to the findings (J. Hypertens. 2011 Feb. 28 [doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.110.165456]).

These associations between sugared beverage intake and blood pressure were strongest among individuals with higher urinary sodium excretion, the researchers added.

The results remained statistically significant after the investigators accounted for differences in body mass. The researchers concluded that higher blood pressure is associated with high consumption of glucose and fructose, as well as with higher levels of dietary sugar and sodium.

There was no significant correlation between diet soda intake and blood pressure levels.

The study was the first in people to suggest that there is an association between high sodium intake and high sugar-sweetened beverage intake and the overall effect on blood pressure, Dr. Brown said in an interview.

"It has been suggested by other scientists that consumption of high levels of sugars and salt may lead to sodium retention in the kidneys and/or volume expansion (i.e., an increased level of fluid in the body), which could lead to higher blood pressure," Dr. Brown said.

The findings also suggest that people who consume more than one sugar-sweetened beverage daily tend to consume less of other types of nutrients including starch, fiber, protein (animal and vegetable), and polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fatty acids.

Critics of the study emphasized that the “level of blood pressure changes noted by the authors are inconsequential and well within standard measurement error,” according to a statement by the American Beverage Association. In addition, “The results of [the analysis] obfuscate other important variables that are linked to high blood pressure.”*

The investigators reported having no conflicts of interest. Dr. Brown’s analysis was supported by a U.K. Medical Research Council studentship. The INTERMAP Study as a whole was supported by a grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the Chicago Health Resource Foundation, and by national agencies in China, Japan and the United Kingdom.

*NOTE: The original edition of this story did not contain this statement from the  American Beverage Association.

High consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages appeared to adversely affect blood pressure levels in a population-based study involving more than 2,600 people living in the United Kingdom and the United States.

Photo credit: © Irochka/Fotolia.com

The findings, published online Feb. 28 in the journal Hypertension, should help shore up the message to patients that consumption of soda and fruit juice needs to be limited for a healthy diet. "If individuals want to drink sugar sweetened beverages, we suggest they do so only in moderation [fewer than three 12-ounce cans per week]," the study’s lead investigator, Ian Brown, Ph.D., said in an interview.

The International Study of Macro/Micronutrients and Blood Pressure (INTERMAP) involved 2,696 people aged 40-59 years recruited from 10 population samples in the United Kingdom and United States. In addition to answering questions about the intake of beverages sweetened by fructose, glucose, and sucrose, participants were asked about their consumption of diet beverages and alcohol. Each subject also provided two 24-hour urine collection samples, according to Dr. Brown of the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at the Imperial College of London, and colleagues.

Multiple regression analyses showed that for each serving of a sugar-sweetened beverage consumed per day, systolic blood pressure increased by 1.6 mm Hg. Diastolic blood pressure rose by 0.8 mm Hg, the investigators wrote.

A direct association also was observed between the intake of fructose-sweetened beverages and blood pressure. Fructose intake that was higher by 2 standard derivations was associated with a 3.4–mm Hg increase in systolic blood pressure and a 2.5–mm Hg increase in diastolic blood pressure, according to the findings (J. Hypertens. 2011 Feb. 28 [doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.110.165456]).

These associations between sugared beverage intake and blood pressure were strongest among individuals with higher urinary sodium excretion, the researchers added.

The results remained statistically significant after the investigators accounted for differences in body mass. The researchers concluded that higher blood pressure is associated with high consumption of glucose and fructose, as well as with higher levels of dietary sugar and sodium.

There was no significant correlation between diet soda intake and blood pressure levels.

The study was the first in people to suggest that there is an association between high sodium intake and high sugar-sweetened beverage intake and the overall effect on blood pressure, Dr. Brown said in an interview.

"It has been suggested by other scientists that consumption of high levels of sugars and salt may lead to sodium retention in the kidneys and/or volume expansion (i.e., an increased level of fluid in the body), which could lead to higher blood pressure," Dr. Brown said.

The findings also suggest that people who consume more than one sugar-sweetened beverage daily tend to consume less of other types of nutrients including starch, fiber, protein (animal and vegetable), and polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fatty acids.

Critics of the study emphasized that the “level of blood pressure changes noted by the authors are inconsequential and well within standard measurement error,” according to a statement by the American Beverage Association. In addition, “The results of [the analysis] obfuscate other important variables that are linked to high blood pressure.”*

The investigators reported having no conflicts of interest. Dr. Brown’s analysis was supported by a U.K. Medical Research Council studentship. The INTERMAP Study as a whole was supported by a grant from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the Chicago Health Resource Foundation, and by national agencies in China, Japan and the United Kingdom.

*NOTE: The original edition of this story did not contain this statement from the  American Beverage Association.