The measurement of blood pressure has been a cornerstone of medical practice for decades. However, despite its widespread use, research suggests that common cuff-based blood pressure readings may be inaccurate and potentially miss up to 30% of hypertension cases.

A team of researchers from the University of Cambridge has shed new light on this issue by building an experimental model that explains the physics behind these inaccuracies. Their findings, reported in the journal PNAS Nexus, have significant implications for patient health outcomes and highlight the need for more accurate measurement methods.

The auscultatory method, which relies on inflating a cuff around the upper arm to measure blood pressure, has long been considered the gold standard. However, this study reveals that it overestimates diastolic pressure while underestimating systolic pressure. The researchers attribute this discrepancy to a previously unidentified factor: the delayed reopening of arteries due to low downstream pressure.

To replicate this condition in their experimental rig, the Cambridge team used tubes that lay flat when deflated and fully closed when inflated with cuff pressure. This setup allowed them to study the effects of downstream blood pressure on artery closure and reopening, leading to a better understanding of the mechanics behind inaccurate readings.

The researchers propose several potential solutions to address this underestimation, including raising the arm before measurement to produce a predictable downstream pressure. This simple change does not require new devices but can make blood pressure measurements more accurate.

If new devices for monitoring blood pressure are developed, they may incorporate additional inputs that correlate with downstream pressure, such as age, BMI, or tissue characteristics, to adjust ‘ideal’ readings for each individual.

The study’s authors emphasize the need for clinical trials to test their findings in patients and collaborate with clinicians to implement changes to clinical practice. Funding from organizations like the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) will be essential to support further research and development.

By uncovering the inaccuracies in common blood pressure readings, this study has significant implications for patient health outcomes and highlights the need for more accurate measurement methods. The proposed solutions have the potential to improve diagnosis and treatment of hypertension, ultimately saving lives and reducing healthcare costs.

A new study published in The Journal of Immunology has made an intriguing discovery about how a parasitic worm evades detection and what it can teach us about pain relief. Researchers from Tulane School of Medicine found that the Schistosoma mansoni worm, which causes schistosomiasis, suppresses neurons in the skin to avoid triggering an immune response.

When this worm penetrates human skin, typically through contact with infested water, it produces molecules that block a protein called TRPV1+, which is responsible for sending pain signals to the brain. This clever mechanism allows the worm to infect the skin largely undetected.

The researchers believe that the S. mansoni worm evolved this strategy to enhance its own survival and found that blocking TRPV1+ also reduced disease severity in mice infected with the parasite. The study suggests that identifying the molecules responsible for suppressing TRPV1+ could lead to new painkillers that do not rely on opioids.

Moreover, the researchers discovered that TRPV1+ is essential for initiating host protection against S. mansoni infection. When this protein is activated, it triggers a rapid mobilization of immune cells, which induces inflammation and helps fight off the parasite. This finding highlights the critical role of neurons in pain-sensing and immune responses.

The study’s lead author, Dr. De’Broski R. Herbert, emphasizes that identifying these molecules could inform preventive treatments for schistosomiasis. He envisions a topical agent that activates TRPV1+ to prevent infection from contaminated water for individuals at risk of acquiring S. mansoni.

This groundbreaking research has the potential to revolutionize our understanding of pain relief and immune responses, offering new avenues for developing innovative therapies that could benefit millions worldwide.

The relationship between potatoes and type 2 diabetes has long been debated. While it’s known that potatoes contain several essential nutrients like fiber, vitamin C, and magnesium, their high starch content also contributes to a higher glycemic index, potentially increasing the risk of developing type 2 diabetes. A recent study published in The BMJ sheds new light on this topic by investigating the association between different potato preparation methods and the risk of type 2 diabetes.

Researchers analyzed data from over 205,000 health professionals across three large US studies conducted between 1984 and 2021. Participants were free of diabetes, heart disease, or cancer and completed detailed food questionnaires every four years. The study found that for every three weekly servings of total potato, the rate of type 2 diabetes increased by 5%. However, a similar intake of baked, boiled, or mashed potatoes was not associated with a significantly increased risk.

In contrast, eating French fries three times a week was linked to a 20% higher risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Replacing total potatoes or baked, boiled, or mashed potatoes with whole grains lowered the type 2 diabetes rate by 8%. Substituting French fries with whole grains reduced the risk by 19%. On the other hand, replacing total potatoes or baked, boiled, or mashed potatoes with white rice increased the risk of type 2 diabetes.

This observational study highlights that the association between potato intake and type 2 diabetes risk depends on the specific foods used as replacement. The findings align with current dietary recommendations promoting whole grains as part of a healthy diet for preventing type 2 diabetes.

While baked, boiled, or mashed potatoes can be part of a healthy and sustainable diet, especially when prepared in moderation, it’s essential to consider preparation methods and replacement foods when guiding the public or informing policy. Future studies from diverse populations that account for both preparation methods and substitution analysis are needed to further understand this relationship and provide more tailored recommendations.

In conclusion, the French fry effect is a significant concern, but not all potatoes are created equal. By being mindful of our potato choices and making informed decisions about food substitutions, we can reduce the risk of type 2 diabetes and promote overall well-being.