User login
IV nutrition becoming the norm for athletes despite no evidence it works
In their editorial, published online in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, experts urged the “food first” and “no needle” messages – that are taught in sports nutrition courses around the world – need to be amplified among all athletes and their support teams to “stop this trend in its tracks”.
The international group of authors, including experts from St Mary’s University, London; University College London; and University of Bath (England), who regularly interact with professional team players in European and American leagues and their support teams, said they have become increasingly aware of the practice.
Although it’s not known exactly how common the practice is, they pointed out that, anecdotally, some players are hooked up to intravenous nutrition drips as often as every week as part of a pre- or postgame routine.
‘Drip-bars’ easily accessible but devoid of regulation
Intravenous nutrition has traditionally been reserved for serious clinical conditions – such as anaemia – symptoms caused by nutrient deficiencies, or to correct severe dehydration caused by marathon running in, for example, a desert.
A ban on needle use by athletes at the Olympic Games has been in place for all recent Games except for appropriate medical use, and where a therapeutic use exemption is obtained, explained the authors.
However, “so-called ‘drip bars’ and concierge IV nutrition services are now easily accessible,” they said. These claim to boost health and performance, restore hydration, and speed up recovery, by offering a menu of B vitamins, amino acids, glutathione, vitamin C, and electrolytes, and potentially boosting levels beyond any therapeutic range.
However, they are “devoid of regulation” and for players or practitioners there is no official guidance on their use.
Physical and reputational risks
Bypassing the gut-liver axis risks nutrient toxicity warned the authors, and “appears foolhardy” unless there is a “significant clinical rationale.” They highlighted that they had noted vitamin B6 and vitamin B12 levels often “beyond the measurement range of the laboratory” in a subgroup of professional players. They pointed out how long-term effects of too much vitamin B6 include peripheral neuropathy, and that athletes regularly receiving parenteral iron “risk liver disease.”
“Given that the long-term effects of supratherapeutic doses of B vitamins and other nutrients are unknown in athletes, it does not appear to be worth the risk, especially given the lack of evidence-based benefits,” they said. They added that there is also the risk related to venous access, including “infection and thromboembolic complications.”
Additionally, a shift away from “what works” according to scientific standards to that which is “unproven” puts the reputation of sport at risk, and also puts athletes at risk of antidoping violation, they cautioned.
Figures on the prevalence of intravenous nutrition need to be gathered in tandem with governing bodies and players’ associations in the professional leagues providing guidance on the potential risks of intravenous nutrition use, recommended the authors.
The ‘food first’ and ‘no needle’ messages need to be amplified among all athletes and multidisciplinary support teams, they emphasised, to avoid what was previously a ‘last resort’ treatment becoming “normal without scientific evidence of benefit”.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape UK.
In their editorial, published online in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, experts urged the “food first” and “no needle” messages – that are taught in sports nutrition courses around the world – need to be amplified among all athletes and their support teams to “stop this trend in its tracks”.
The international group of authors, including experts from St Mary’s University, London; University College London; and University of Bath (England), who regularly interact with professional team players in European and American leagues and their support teams, said they have become increasingly aware of the practice.
Although it’s not known exactly how common the practice is, they pointed out that, anecdotally, some players are hooked up to intravenous nutrition drips as often as every week as part of a pre- or postgame routine.
‘Drip-bars’ easily accessible but devoid of regulation
Intravenous nutrition has traditionally been reserved for serious clinical conditions – such as anaemia – symptoms caused by nutrient deficiencies, or to correct severe dehydration caused by marathon running in, for example, a desert.
A ban on needle use by athletes at the Olympic Games has been in place for all recent Games except for appropriate medical use, and where a therapeutic use exemption is obtained, explained the authors.
However, “so-called ‘drip bars’ and concierge IV nutrition services are now easily accessible,” they said. These claim to boost health and performance, restore hydration, and speed up recovery, by offering a menu of B vitamins, amino acids, glutathione, vitamin C, and electrolytes, and potentially boosting levels beyond any therapeutic range.
However, they are “devoid of regulation” and for players or practitioners there is no official guidance on their use.
Physical and reputational risks
Bypassing the gut-liver axis risks nutrient toxicity warned the authors, and “appears foolhardy” unless there is a “significant clinical rationale.” They highlighted that they had noted vitamin B6 and vitamin B12 levels often “beyond the measurement range of the laboratory” in a subgroup of professional players. They pointed out how long-term effects of too much vitamin B6 include peripheral neuropathy, and that athletes regularly receiving parenteral iron “risk liver disease.”
“Given that the long-term effects of supratherapeutic doses of B vitamins and other nutrients are unknown in athletes, it does not appear to be worth the risk, especially given the lack of evidence-based benefits,” they said. They added that there is also the risk related to venous access, including “infection and thromboembolic complications.”
Additionally, a shift away from “what works” according to scientific standards to that which is “unproven” puts the reputation of sport at risk, and also puts athletes at risk of antidoping violation, they cautioned.
Figures on the prevalence of intravenous nutrition need to be gathered in tandem with governing bodies and players’ associations in the professional leagues providing guidance on the potential risks of intravenous nutrition use, recommended the authors.
The ‘food first’ and ‘no needle’ messages need to be amplified among all athletes and multidisciplinary support teams, they emphasised, to avoid what was previously a ‘last resort’ treatment becoming “normal without scientific evidence of benefit”.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape UK.
In their editorial, published online in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, experts urged the “food first” and “no needle” messages – that are taught in sports nutrition courses around the world – need to be amplified among all athletes and their support teams to “stop this trend in its tracks”.
The international group of authors, including experts from St Mary’s University, London; University College London; and University of Bath (England), who regularly interact with professional team players in European and American leagues and their support teams, said they have become increasingly aware of the practice.
Although it’s not known exactly how common the practice is, they pointed out that, anecdotally, some players are hooked up to intravenous nutrition drips as often as every week as part of a pre- or postgame routine.
‘Drip-bars’ easily accessible but devoid of regulation
Intravenous nutrition has traditionally been reserved for serious clinical conditions – such as anaemia – symptoms caused by nutrient deficiencies, or to correct severe dehydration caused by marathon running in, for example, a desert.
A ban on needle use by athletes at the Olympic Games has been in place for all recent Games except for appropriate medical use, and where a therapeutic use exemption is obtained, explained the authors.
However, “so-called ‘drip bars’ and concierge IV nutrition services are now easily accessible,” they said. These claim to boost health and performance, restore hydration, and speed up recovery, by offering a menu of B vitamins, amino acids, glutathione, vitamin C, and electrolytes, and potentially boosting levels beyond any therapeutic range.
However, they are “devoid of regulation” and for players or practitioners there is no official guidance on their use.
Physical and reputational risks
Bypassing the gut-liver axis risks nutrient toxicity warned the authors, and “appears foolhardy” unless there is a “significant clinical rationale.” They highlighted that they had noted vitamin B6 and vitamin B12 levels often “beyond the measurement range of the laboratory” in a subgroup of professional players. They pointed out how long-term effects of too much vitamin B6 include peripheral neuropathy, and that athletes regularly receiving parenteral iron “risk liver disease.”
“Given that the long-term effects of supratherapeutic doses of B vitamins and other nutrients are unknown in athletes, it does not appear to be worth the risk, especially given the lack of evidence-based benefits,” they said. They added that there is also the risk related to venous access, including “infection and thromboembolic complications.”
Additionally, a shift away from “what works” according to scientific standards to that which is “unproven” puts the reputation of sport at risk, and also puts athletes at risk of antidoping violation, they cautioned.
Figures on the prevalence of intravenous nutrition need to be gathered in tandem with governing bodies and players’ associations in the professional leagues providing guidance on the potential risks of intravenous nutrition use, recommended the authors.
The ‘food first’ and ‘no needle’ messages need to be amplified among all athletes and multidisciplinary support teams, they emphasised, to avoid what was previously a ‘last resort’ treatment becoming “normal without scientific evidence of benefit”.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape UK.
FROM THE BRITISH JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE
Hope for quicker and more accurate endometriosis diagnosis
A new imaging study hopes to make diagnosing endometriosis quicker, more accurate and reduce the need for invasive surgery.
In October 2020 the All Party Parliamentary Group on Endometriosis published a report that included within its recommendations “a commitment to drive down diagnosis times” for women with the condition. On average, it takes around 8 years for a woman to get a diagnosis of endometriosis, a figure, said the authors of the report, that had “not improved in the last decade.”
Indeed, in its report the APPG said that it was seeking a commitment from Governments in all four nations to reduce average diagnosis times with “targets of 4 years or less by 2025, and a year or less by 2030.”
Surgery often needed for endometriosis diagnosis
Endometriosis affects 1 in 10 women between puberty and menopause – 1.5 million in the United Kingdom – often results in multiple general practitioner and accident and emergency department visits, multiple scans, and often laparoscopic surgery to confirm the diagnosis, as there is currently no simple diagnostic test for the condition. One of the main reasons for the delay in diagnosis is the lack of noninvasive tests capable of detecting all endometriosis subtypes – ovarian, superficial, and deep disease.
Now, experts at the Endometriosis CaRe Centre and Nuffield Department of Women’s and Reproductive Health, University of Oxford (England), in collaboration with British life sciences company Serac Healthcare, hope to establish a faster process for diagnosing endometriosis.
Christian Becker, codirector of the Endometriosis CaRe Centre in Oxford, and a study lead, said: “There is an urgent unmet clinical need for a noninvasive marker to identify or rule out endometriosis as it is such a very common disease affecting more than 190 million women worldwide.”
In the study, researchers will investigate whether a 20-minute imaging scan can detect the most common types of endometriosis, which currently require surgery to diagnose. In turn, they hope that earlier diagnosis of the condition will allow women to seek appropriate treatment sooner. They will use an experimental imaging marker – 99mTc-maraciclatide – that binds to areas of inflammation and that can be used in endometriosis to visualize the disease on a scan. The imaging marker has already been used for detecting inflammation in conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis.
Between 2 and 7 days before planned surgery for suspected endometriosis, participants will be invited for an imaging scan, and the team will compare the suspected locations of disease detected on the scan with those seen during surgery to confirm whether this imaging test could be an effective noninvasive method of detecting all endometriosis subtypes.
Doctor visits and repeated investigations reduced
The researchers commented that the potential strengths of the scan lie in the way the imaging marker binds to areas of inflammation, which may allow doctors to distinguish between new and old lesions and detect endometriosis in areas not easily seen during surgery, such as the lung.
They added that the development of a 20-minute imaging test would reduce the need for repeated visits to doctors, for repeated investigations, and for invasive surgery to obtain a diagnosis. This would ultimately “reduce the time taken to confirm or exclude endometriosis,” they pointed out.
Following the publication of the APPG report in October 2020 the group’s then chair, the late Sir David Amess, said: “Without investment in research, a reduction in diagnosis time, and appropriate NHS pathways, those with endometriosis will continue to face huge barriers in accessing the appropriate support at the right time.”
Krina Zondervan, head of department at the Nuffield Department of Women’s and Reproductive Health, University of Oxford, and a study lead, said: “This study highlights that close collaborations between academics, clinicians and industry are important to combine and accelerate discovery and innovation in addressing high-priority areas in women’s health such as endometriosis.”
David Hail, CEO of Serac Healthcare, said: “We are excited about the potential of 99mTc-maraciclatide to diagnose endometriosis noninvasively and delighted to be working with the internationally renowned team at Oxford on this important first study.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape UK.
A new imaging study hopes to make diagnosing endometriosis quicker, more accurate and reduce the need for invasive surgery.
In October 2020 the All Party Parliamentary Group on Endometriosis published a report that included within its recommendations “a commitment to drive down diagnosis times” for women with the condition. On average, it takes around 8 years for a woman to get a diagnosis of endometriosis, a figure, said the authors of the report, that had “not improved in the last decade.”
Indeed, in its report the APPG said that it was seeking a commitment from Governments in all four nations to reduce average diagnosis times with “targets of 4 years or less by 2025, and a year or less by 2030.”
Surgery often needed for endometriosis diagnosis
Endometriosis affects 1 in 10 women between puberty and menopause – 1.5 million in the United Kingdom – often results in multiple general practitioner and accident and emergency department visits, multiple scans, and often laparoscopic surgery to confirm the diagnosis, as there is currently no simple diagnostic test for the condition. One of the main reasons for the delay in diagnosis is the lack of noninvasive tests capable of detecting all endometriosis subtypes – ovarian, superficial, and deep disease.
Now, experts at the Endometriosis CaRe Centre and Nuffield Department of Women’s and Reproductive Health, University of Oxford (England), in collaboration with British life sciences company Serac Healthcare, hope to establish a faster process for diagnosing endometriosis.
Christian Becker, codirector of the Endometriosis CaRe Centre in Oxford, and a study lead, said: “There is an urgent unmet clinical need for a noninvasive marker to identify or rule out endometriosis as it is such a very common disease affecting more than 190 million women worldwide.”
In the study, researchers will investigate whether a 20-minute imaging scan can detect the most common types of endometriosis, which currently require surgery to diagnose. In turn, they hope that earlier diagnosis of the condition will allow women to seek appropriate treatment sooner. They will use an experimental imaging marker – 99mTc-maraciclatide – that binds to areas of inflammation and that can be used in endometriosis to visualize the disease on a scan. The imaging marker has already been used for detecting inflammation in conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis.
Between 2 and 7 days before planned surgery for suspected endometriosis, participants will be invited for an imaging scan, and the team will compare the suspected locations of disease detected on the scan with those seen during surgery to confirm whether this imaging test could be an effective noninvasive method of detecting all endometriosis subtypes.
Doctor visits and repeated investigations reduced
The researchers commented that the potential strengths of the scan lie in the way the imaging marker binds to areas of inflammation, which may allow doctors to distinguish between new and old lesions and detect endometriosis in areas not easily seen during surgery, such as the lung.
They added that the development of a 20-minute imaging test would reduce the need for repeated visits to doctors, for repeated investigations, and for invasive surgery to obtain a diagnosis. This would ultimately “reduce the time taken to confirm or exclude endometriosis,” they pointed out.
Following the publication of the APPG report in October 2020 the group’s then chair, the late Sir David Amess, said: “Without investment in research, a reduction in diagnosis time, and appropriate NHS pathways, those with endometriosis will continue to face huge barriers in accessing the appropriate support at the right time.”
Krina Zondervan, head of department at the Nuffield Department of Women’s and Reproductive Health, University of Oxford, and a study lead, said: “This study highlights that close collaborations between academics, clinicians and industry are important to combine and accelerate discovery and innovation in addressing high-priority areas in women’s health such as endometriosis.”
David Hail, CEO of Serac Healthcare, said: “We are excited about the potential of 99mTc-maraciclatide to diagnose endometriosis noninvasively and delighted to be working with the internationally renowned team at Oxford on this important first study.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape UK.
A new imaging study hopes to make diagnosing endometriosis quicker, more accurate and reduce the need for invasive surgery.
In October 2020 the All Party Parliamentary Group on Endometriosis published a report that included within its recommendations “a commitment to drive down diagnosis times” for women with the condition. On average, it takes around 8 years for a woman to get a diagnosis of endometriosis, a figure, said the authors of the report, that had “not improved in the last decade.”
Indeed, in its report the APPG said that it was seeking a commitment from Governments in all four nations to reduce average diagnosis times with “targets of 4 years or less by 2025, and a year or less by 2030.”
Surgery often needed for endometriosis diagnosis
Endometriosis affects 1 in 10 women between puberty and menopause – 1.5 million in the United Kingdom – often results in multiple general practitioner and accident and emergency department visits, multiple scans, and often laparoscopic surgery to confirm the diagnosis, as there is currently no simple diagnostic test for the condition. One of the main reasons for the delay in diagnosis is the lack of noninvasive tests capable of detecting all endometriosis subtypes – ovarian, superficial, and deep disease.
Now, experts at the Endometriosis CaRe Centre and Nuffield Department of Women’s and Reproductive Health, University of Oxford (England), in collaboration with British life sciences company Serac Healthcare, hope to establish a faster process for diagnosing endometriosis.
Christian Becker, codirector of the Endometriosis CaRe Centre in Oxford, and a study lead, said: “There is an urgent unmet clinical need for a noninvasive marker to identify or rule out endometriosis as it is such a very common disease affecting more than 190 million women worldwide.”
In the study, researchers will investigate whether a 20-minute imaging scan can detect the most common types of endometriosis, which currently require surgery to diagnose. In turn, they hope that earlier diagnosis of the condition will allow women to seek appropriate treatment sooner. They will use an experimental imaging marker – 99mTc-maraciclatide – that binds to areas of inflammation and that can be used in endometriosis to visualize the disease on a scan. The imaging marker has already been used for detecting inflammation in conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis.
Between 2 and 7 days before planned surgery for suspected endometriosis, participants will be invited for an imaging scan, and the team will compare the suspected locations of disease detected on the scan with those seen during surgery to confirm whether this imaging test could be an effective noninvasive method of detecting all endometriosis subtypes.
Doctor visits and repeated investigations reduced
The researchers commented that the potential strengths of the scan lie in the way the imaging marker binds to areas of inflammation, which may allow doctors to distinguish between new and old lesions and detect endometriosis in areas not easily seen during surgery, such as the lung.
They added that the development of a 20-minute imaging test would reduce the need for repeated visits to doctors, for repeated investigations, and for invasive surgery to obtain a diagnosis. This would ultimately “reduce the time taken to confirm or exclude endometriosis,” they pointed out.
Following the publication of the APPG report in October 2020 the group’s then chair, the late Sir David Amess, said: “Without investment in research, a reduction in diagnosis time, and appropriate NHS pathways, those with endometriosis will continue to face huge barriers in accessing the appropriate support at the right time.”
Krina Zondervan, head of department at the Nuffield Department of Women’s and Reproductive Health, University of Oxford, and a study lead, said: “This study highlights that close collaborations between academics, clinicians and industry are important to combine and accelerate discovery and innovation in addressing high-priority areas in women’s health such as endometriosis.”
David Hail, CEO of Serac Healthcare, said: “We are excited about the potential of 99mTc-maraciclatide to diagnose endometriosis noninvasively and delighted to be working with the internationally renowned team at Oxford on this important first study.”
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape UK.