This salt alternative could help reduce blood pressure. So why are so few people using it?
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
One in three Australian adults has high blood pressure (hypertension). Excess salt (sodium) increases the risk of high blood pressure so everyone with hypertension is advised to reduce salt in their diet.
But despite decades of strong recommendations we have failed to get Australians to cut their intake. It’s hard for people to change the way they cook, season their food differently, pick low-salt foods off the supermarket shelves and accept a less salty taste.
Now there is a simple and effective solution: potassium-enriched salt. It can be used just like regular salt and most people don’t notice any important difference in taste.
Switching to potassium-enriched salt is feasible in a way that cutting salt intake is not. Our new research concludes clinical guidelines for hypertension should give patients clear recommendations to switch.
What is potassium-enriched salt?
Potassium-enriched salts replace some of the sodium chloride that makes up regular salt with potassium chloride. They’re also called low-sodium salt, potassium salt, heart salt, mineral salt, or sodium-reduced salt.
Potassium chloride looks the same as sodium chloride and tastes very similar.
Potassium-enriched salt works to lower blood pressure not only because it reduces sodium intake but also because it increases potassium intake. Insufficient potassium, which mostly comes from fruit and vegetables, is another big cause of high blood pressure.
What is the evidence?
We have strong evidence from a randomised trial of 20,995 people that switching to potassium-enriched salt lowers blood pressure and reduces the risks of stroke, heart attacks and early death. The participants had a history of stroke or were 60 years of age or older and had high blood pressure.
An overview of 21 other studies suggests much of the world’s population could benefit from potassium-enriched salt.
The World Health Organisation’s 2023 global report on hypertension highlighted potassium-enriched salt as an “affordable strategy” to reduce blood pressure and prevent cardiovascular events such as strokes.
What should clinical guidelines say?
We teamed up with researchers from the United States, Australia, Japan, South Africa and India to review 32 clinical guidelines for managing high blood pressure across the world. Our findings are published today in the American Heart Association’s journal, Hypertension.
We found current guidelines don’t give clear and consistent advice on using potassium-enriched salt.
While many guidelines recommend increasing dietary potassium intake, and all refer to reducing sodium intake, only two guidelines – the Chinese and European – recommend using potassium-enriched salt.
To help guidelines reflect the latest evidence, we suggested specific wording which could be adopted in Australia and around the world:
Why do so few people use it?
Most people are unaware of how much salt they eat or the health issues it can cause. Few people know a simple switch to potassium-enriched salt can help lower blood pressure and reduce the risk of a stroke and heart disease.
Limited availability is another challenge. Several Australian retailers stock potassium-enriched salt but there is usually only one brand available, and it is often on the bottom shelf or in a special food aisle.
Potassium-enriched salts also cost more than regular salt, though it’s still low cost compared to most other foods, and not as expensive as many fancy salts now available.
Jimmy Dean/Unsplash
A 2021 review found potassium-enriched salts were marketed in only 47 countries and those were mostly high-income countries. Prices ranged from the same as regular salt to almost 15 times greater.
Even though generally more expensive, potassium-enriched salt has the potential to be highly cost effective for disease prevention.
Preventing harm
A frequently raised concern about using potassium-enriched salt is the risk of high blood potassium levels (hyperkalemia) in the approximately 2% of the population with serious kidney disease.
People with serious kidney disease are already advised to avoid regular salt and to avoid foods high in potassium.
No harm from potassium-enriched salt has been recorded in any trial done to date, but all studies were done in a clinical setting with specific guidance for people with kidney disease.
Our current priority is to get people being managed for hypertension to use potassium-enriched salt because health-care providers can advise against its use in people at risk of hyperkalemia.
In some countries, potassium-enriched salt is recommended to the entire community because the potential benefits are so large. A modelling study showed almost half a million strokes and heart attacks would be averted every year in China if the population switched to potassium-enriched salt.
What will happen next?
In 2022, the health minister launched the National Hypertension Taskforce, which aims to improve blood pressure control rates from 32% to 70% by 2030 in Australia.
Potassium-enriched salt can play a key role in achieving this. We are working with the taskforce to update Australian hypertension management guidelines, and to promote the new guidelines to health professionals.
In parallel, we need potassium-enriched salt to be more accessible. We are engaging stakeholders to increase the availability of these products nationwide.
The world has already changed its salt supply once: from regular salt to iodised salt. Iodisation efforts began in the 1920s and took the best part of 100 years to achieve traction. Salt iodisation is a key public health achievement of the last century preventing goitre (a condition where your thyroid gland grows larger) and enhancing educational outcomes for millions of the poorest children in the world, as iodine is essential for normal growth and brain development.
The next switch to iodised and potassium-enriched salt offers at least the same potential for global health gains. But we need to make it happen in a fraction of the time.
Xiaoyue Xu (Luna), Scientia Lecturer, UNSW Sydney; Alta Schutte, SHARP Professor of Cardiovascular Medicine, UNSW Sydney, and Bruce Neal, Executive Director, George Institute Australia, George Institute for Global Health
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Recommended
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
Random Acts of Medicine – by Dr. Anupam Jena & Dr. Christopher Worsham
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
We talked recently of small things that can change how productive your doctor’s appointment is, and this book is a more scientific version of that, and on a grander scale.
The author use what they call “natural experiments”, essentially observational studies, to determine what factors beyond the obvious affect health outcomes. With this approach, they address such questions as why kids with summer birthdays are more likely to get the flu, and why heart attack outcomes improve when there’s a cardiologists’ convention elsewhere. And many more such things that can seem like non-causal correlation, until one examines the causative factors, and controls (in the statistical analysis; remember this is still entirely observational, so no interventions are made) for other potential confounding factors.
They also look at what factors influence doctors’ decisions in ways they certainly shouldn’t, but they do, because doctors are as prone to biases as everyone else. And, for that matter, what factors influence patients’ decisions in ways they certainly shouldn’t—for the same reason. The authors acknowledge that they themselves are not immune, and you, dear reader, are not immune either.
Nevertheless, the practical value in this book comes from trying to at least be more aware of such things, the better to either leverage them, or at least ensure you don’t fall foul of them.
The style is conversational pop-science, making for quite light reading, albeit with many footnotes and a respectable bibliography.
Bottom line: if you’d like to understand more about the machinations that decide who lives and who dies (especially when sometimes it will be you or a loved one who lives or dies), then this is a fascinating book that that delves deeply into that.
Click here to check out Random Acts Of Medicine, and be aware!
Share This Post
-
Keep Your Wits About You – by Dr. Vonetta Dotson
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
Dr. Dotson sets out to provide the reader with the tools to maintain good brain health at any age, though she does assume the reader to be in midlife or older.
She talks us through the most important kinds of physical activity, mental activity, and social activity, as well as a good grounding in brain-healthy nutrition, and how to beat the often catch-22 situation of poor sleep.
If you are the sort of person who likes refreshers on what you have just read, you’ll enjoy that the final two chapters repeat the information from chapters 2–6. If not, then well, if you skip the final 2 chapters the book will be 25% shorter without loss of content.
The style is enthusiastic; when it comes to her passion for the brain, Dr. Dotson both tells and shows, in abundance. While some authors may take care to break down the information in a way that can be understood from skimming alone, Dr. Dotson assumes that the reader’s interest will match hers, and thus will not mind a lot of lengthy prose with in-line citations. So, provided that’s the way you like to read, it’ll suit you too.
Bottom line: if you are looking for a book on maintaining optimal brain health that covers the basics without adding advice that is out of the norm, then this is a fine option for that!
Click here to check out Keep Your Wits About You, and keep your wits about you!
Share This Post
-
Half of Australians in aged care have depression. Psychological therapy could help
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
While many people maintain positive emotional wellbeing as they age, around half of older Australians living in residential aged care have significant levels of depression. Symptoms such as low mood, lack of interest or pleasure in life and difficulty sleeping are common.
Rates of depression in aged care appear to be increasing, and without adequate treatment, symptoms can be enduring and significantly impair older adults’ quality of life.
But only a minority of aged care residents with depression receive services specific to the condition. Less than 3% of Australian aged care residents access Medicare-subsidised mental health services, such as consultations with a psychologist or psychiatrist, each year.
Cochrane AustraliaInstead, residents are typically prescribed a medication by their GP to manage their mental health, which they often take for several months or years. A recent study found six in ten Australian aged care residents take antidepressants.
While antidepressant medications may help many people, we lack robust evidence on whether they work for aged care residents with depression. Researchers have described “serious limitations of the current standard of care” in reference to the widespread use of antidepressants to treat frail older people with depression.
Given this, we wanted to find out whether psychological therapies can help manage depression in this group. These treatments address factors contributing to people’s distress and provide them with skills to manage their symptoms and improve their day-to-day lives. But to date researchers, care providers and policy makers haven’t had clear information about their effectiveness for treating depression among older people in residential aged care.
The good news is the evidence we published today suggests psychological therapies may be an effective approach for people living in aged care.
We reviewed the evidence
Our research team searched for randomised controlled trials published over the past 40 years that were designed to test the effectiveness of psychological therapies for depression among aged care residents 65 and over. We identified 19 trials from seven countries, including Australia, involving a total of 873 aged care residents with significant symptoms of depression.
The studies tested several different kinds of psychological therapies, which we classified as cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), behaviour therapy or reminiscence therapy.
CBT involves teaching practical skills to help people re-frame negative thoughts and beliefs, while behaviour therapy aims to modify behaviour patterns by encouraging people with depression to engage in pleasurable and rewarding activities. Reminiscence therapy supports older people to reflect on positive or shared memories, and helps them find meaning in their life history.
The therapies were delivered by a range of professionals, including psychologists, social workers, occupational therapists and trainee therapists.
Cochrane AustraliaIn these studies, psychological therapies were compared to a control group where the older people did not receive psychological therapy. In most studies, this was “usual care” – the care typically provided to aged care residents, which may include access to antidepressants, scheduled activities and help with day-to-day tasks.
In some studies psychological therapy was compared to a situation where the older people received extra social contact, such as visits from a volunteer or joining in a discussion group.
What we found
Our results showed psychological therapies may be effective in reducing symptoms of depression for older people in residential aged care, compared with usual care, with effects lasting up to six months. While we didn’t see the same effect beyond six months, only two of the studies in our review followed people for this length of time, so the data was limited.
Our findings suggest these therapies may also improve quality of life and psychological wellbeing.
Psychological therapies mostly included between two and ten sessions, so the interventions were relatively brief. This is positive in terms of the potential feasibility of delivering psychological therapies at scale. The three different therapy types all appeared to be effective, compared to usual care.
However, we found psychological therapy may not be more effective than extra social contact in reducing symptoms of depression. Older people commonly feel bored, lonely and socially isolated in aged care. The activities on offer are often inadequate to meet their needs for stimulation and interest. So identifying ways to increase meaningful engagement day-to-day could improve the mental health and wellbeing of older people in aged care.
Some limitations
Many of the studies we found were of relatively poor quality, because of small sample sizes and potential risk of bias, for example. So we need more high-quality research to increase our confidence in the findings.
Many of the studies we reviewed were also old, and important gaps remain. For example, we are yet to understand the effectiveness of psychological therapies for people from diverse cultural or linguistic backgrounds.
Separately, we need better research to evaluate the effectiveness of antidepressants among aged care residents.
What needs to happen now?
Depression should not be considered a “normal” experience at this (or any other) stage of life, and those experiencing symptoms should have equal access to a range of effective treatments. The royal commission into aged care highlighted that Australians living in aged care don’t receive enough mental health support and called for this issue to be addressed.
While there have been some efforts to provide psychological services in residential aged care, the unmet need remains very high, and much more must be done.
The focus now needs to shift to how to implement psychological therapies in aged care, by increasing the competencies of the aged care workforce, training the next generation of psychologists to work in this setting, and funding these programs in a cost-effective way.
Tanya Davison, Adjunct professor, Health & Ageing Research Group, Swinburne University of Technology and Sunil Bhar, Professor of Clinical Psychology, Swinburne University of Technology
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Share This Post
Related Posts
-
Even small diet tweaks can lead to sustainable weight loss
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
It’s a well-known fact that to lose weight, you either need to eat less or move more. But how many calories do you really need to cut out of your diet each day to lose weight? It may be less than you think.
To determine how much energy (calories) your body requires, you need to calculate your total daily energy expenditure (TDEE). This is comprised of your basal metabolic rate (BMR) – the energy needed to sustain your body’s metabolic processes at rest – and your physical activity level. Many online calculators can help determine your daily calorie needs.
If you reduce your energy intake (or increase the amount you burn through exercise) by 500-1,000 calories per day, you’ll see a weekly weight loss of around one pound (0.45kg).
But studies show that even small calorie deficits (of 100-200 calories daily) can lead to long-term, sustainable weight-loss success. And although you might not lose as much weight in the short-term by only decreasing calories slightly each day, these gradual reductions are more effective than drastic cuts as they tend to be easier to stick with.
Small diet changes can still lead to weight loss in the long run. Monkey Business Images/ Shutterstock Hormonal changes
When you decrease your calorie intake, the body’s BMR often decreases. This phenomenon is known as adaptive thermogenesis. This adaptation slows down weight loss so the body can conserve energy in response to what it perceives as starvation. This can lead to a weight-loss plateau – even when calorie intake remains reduced.
Caloric restriction can also lead to hormonal changes that influence metabolism and appetite. For instance, thyroid hormones, which regulate metabolism, can decrease – leading to a slower metabolic rate. Additionally, leptin levels drop, reducing satiety, increasing hunger and decreasing metabolic rate.
Ghrelin, known as the “hunger hormone”, also increases when caloric intake is reduced, signalling the brain to stimulate appetite and increase food intake. Higher ghrelin levels make it challenging to maintain a reduced calorie diet, as the body constantly feels hungrier.
Insulin, which helps regulate blood sugar levels and fat storage, can improve in sensitivity when we reduce calorie intake. But sometimes, insulin levels decrease instead, affecting metabolism and leading to a reduction in daily energy expenditure. Cortisol, the stress hormone, can also spike – especially when we’re in a significant caloric deficit. This may break down muscles and lead to fat retention, particularly in the stomach.
Lastly, hormones such as peptide YY and cholecystokinin, which make us feel full when we’ve eaten, can decrease when we lower calorie intake. This may make us feel hungrier.
Fortunately, there are many things we can do to address these metabolic adaptations so we can continue losing weight.
Weight loss strategies
Maintaining muscle mass (either through resistance training or eating plenty of protein) is essential to counteract the physiological adaptations that slow weight loss down. This is because muscle burns more calories at rest compared to fat tissue – which may help mitigate decreased metabolic rate.
Portion control is one way of decreasing your daily calorie intake. Fevziie/ Shutterstock Gradual caloric restriction (reducing daily calories by only around 200-300 a day), focusing on nutrient-dense foods (particularly those high in protein and fibre), and eating regular meals can all also help to mitigate these hormonal challenges.
But if you aren’t someone who wants to track calories each day, here are some easy strategies that can help you decrease daily calorie intake without thinking too much about it:
1. Portion control: reducing portion sizes is a straightforward way of reducing calorie intake. Use smaller plates or measure serving sizes to help reduce daily calorie intake.
2. Healthy swaps: substituting high-calorie foods with lower-calorie alternatives can help reduce overall caloric intake without feeling deprived. For example, replacing sugary snacks with fruits or swapping soda with water can make a substantial difference to your calorie intake. Fibre-rich foods can also reduce the calorie density of your meal.
3. Mindful eating: practising mindful eating involves paying attention to hunger and fullness cues, eating slowly, and avoiding distractions during meals. This approach helps prevent overeating and promotes better control over food intake.
4. Have some water: having a drink with your meal can increase satiety and reduce total food intake at a given meal. In addition, replacing sugary beverages with water has been shown to reduce calorie intake from sugars.
4. Intermittent fasting: restricting eating to specific windows can reduce your caloric intake and have positive effects on your metabolism. There are different types of intermittent fasting you can do, but one of the easiest types is restricting your mealtimes to a specific window of time (such as only eating between 12 noon and 8pm). This reduces night-time snacking, so is particularly helpful if you tend to get the snacks out late in the evening.
Long-term behavioural changes are crucial for maintaining weight loss. Successful strategies include regular physical activity, continued mindful eating, and periodically being diligent about your weight and food intake. Having a support system to help you stay on track can also play a big role in helping you maintain weight loss.
Modest weight loss of 5-10% body weight in people who are overweight or obese offers significant health benefits, including improved metabolic health and reduced risk of chronic diseases. But it can be hard to lose weight – especially given all the adaptations our body has to prevent it from happening.
Thankfully, small, sustainable changes that lead to gradual weight loss appear to be more effective in the long run, compared with more drastic lifestyle changes.
Alexandra Cremona, Lecturer, Human Nutrition and Dietetics, University of Limerick
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
Nutritional Profiles to Recipes
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
It’s Q&A Day at 10almonds!
Have a question or a request? We love to hear from you!
In cases where we’ve already covered something, we might link to what we wrote before, but will always be happy to revisit any of our topics again in the future too—there’s always more to say!
As ever: if the question/request can be answered briefly, we’ll do it here in our Q&A Thursday edition. If not, we’ll make a main feature of it shortly afterwards!
So, no question/request too big or small
❝I like the recipes. Most don’t seem to include nutritional profile. would lilke to see that. Macro/micro world…. Thank you❞
We’re glad you’re enjoying them! There are a couple of reasons why we don’t, but the reasons can be aggregated into one (admittedly rare) concept: honesty
To even try to give you these figures, we’d first need to use the metric system (or at least, a strictly mass-based system) which would likely not go well with our largely American readership, because “half a bulb of garlic, or more if you like”, and “1 cucumber” or “1 cup chopped carrot” could easily way half or twice as much, depending on the sizes of the vegetables or the chopping involved, and in the case of chopped vegetables measured by the cup, even the shape of the cup (because of geometry and the spaces left; it’s like Tetris in there). We can say “4 cups low-sodium broth” but we can’t say how much sodium is in your broth. And so on.
And that’s without getting into the flexibility we offer with substitutions, often at a rate of several per recipe.
We’d also need to strictly regulate your portion sizes for you, because we (with few exceptions, such as when they are a given number of burger patties, or a dessert-in-a-glass, etc) give you a recipe for a meal and leave it to you how you divide it and whether there’s leftovers.
Same goes for things like “Extra virgin olive oil for frying”; a recipe could say to use “2 tbsp” but let’s face it, you’re going to use what you need to use, and that’s going to change based on the size of your pan, how quickly it’s absorbed into the specific ingredients that you got, which will change depending on how fresh they are, and things like that.
By the time we’ve factored in your different kitchen equipment, how big your vegetables are, the many factors effecting how much oil you need, substitutions per recipe per making something dairy-free, or gluten-free, or nut-free, etc, how big your portion size is (we all know that “serves 4” is meaningless in reality)… Even an estimated average would be wildly misleading.
So, in a sea of recipes saying “500 kcal per serving” from the same authors who say you can caramelize onions in 4–5 minutes “or until caramelized” and then use the 4–5 minutes figure for calculating the overall recipe time… We prefer to stay honest.
PS: for any wondering, caramelizing onions takes closer to 45 minutes than 4–5 minutes, and again will depend on many factors, including the onions, how finely you chopped them, the size and surface of your pan, the fat you’re using, whether you add sugar, what kind, how much you stir them, the mood of your hob,
and the phase of the moon. Under very favorable circumstances, it could conceivably be rushed in 20 minutes or so, but it could also take 60. Slow-cooking them (i.e. in a crock pot) over 3–4 hours is a surprisingly viable “cheat” option, by the way. It’ll take longer, obviously, but provided you plan in advance, they’ll be ready when you need them, and perfectly done (the same claim cannot be made if you budgeted 4–5 minutes because you trusted a wicked and deceitful author who wants to poop your party).Take care!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
Long-acting contraceptives seem to be as safe as the pill when it comes to cancer risk
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
Many women worry hormonal contraceptives have dangerous side-effects including increased cancer risk. But this perception is often out of proportion with the actual risks.
So, what does the research actually say about cancer risk for contraceptive users?
And is your cancer risk different if, instead of the pill, you use long-acting reversible contraceptives? These include intrauterine devices or IUDs (such as Mirena), implants under the skin (such as Implanon), and injections (such as Depo Provera).
Our new study, conducted by the University of Queensland and QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute and published by the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, looked at this question.
We found long-acting contraceptives seem to be as safe as the pill when it comes to cancer risk (which is good news) but not necessarily any safer than the pill.
Peakstock/Shutterstock Some hormonal contraceptives take the form of implants under the skin. WiP-Studio/Shutterstock How does the contraceptive pill affect cancer risk?
The International Agency for Research on Cancer, which compiles evidence on cancer causes, has concluded that oral contraceptives have mixed effects on cancer risk.
Using the oral contraceptive pill:
- slightly increases your risk of breast and cervical cancer in the short term, but
- substantially reduces your risk of cancers of the uterus and ovaries in the longer term.
Our earlier work showed the pill was responsible for preventing far more cancers overall than it contributed to.
In previous research we estimated that in 2010, oral contraceptive pill use prevented over 1,300 cases of endometrial and ovarian cancers in Australian women.
It also prevented almost 500 deaths from these cancers in 2013. This is a reduction of around 25% in the deaths that could have occurred that year if women hadn’t taken the pill.
In contrast, we calculated the pill may have contributed to around 15 deaths from breast cancer in 2013, which is less than 0.5% of all breast cancer deaths in that year.
Previous work showed the pill was responsible for preventing far more cancers overall than it contributed to. Image Point Fr What about long-acting reversible contraceptives and cancer risk?
Long-acting reversible contraceptives – which include intrauterine devices or IUDs, implants under the skin, and injections – release progesterone-like hormones.
These are very effective contraceptives that can last from a few months (injections) up to seven years (intrauterine devices).
Notably, they don’t contain the hormone oestrogen, which may be responsible for some of the side-effects of the pill (including perhaps contributing to a higher risk of breast cancer).
Use of these long-acting contraceptives has doubled over the past decade, while the use of the pill has declined. So it’s important to know whether this change could affect cancer risk for Australian women.
Our new study of more than 1 million Australian women investigated whether long-acting, reversible contraceptives affect risk of invasive cancers. We compared the results to the oral contraceptive pill.
We used de-identified health records for Australian women aged 55 and under in 2002.
Among this group, about 176,000 were diagnosed with cancer between 2004 and 2013 when the oldest women were aged 67. We compared hormonal contraceptive use among these women who got cancer to women without cancer.
We found that long-term users of all types of hormonal contraception had around a 70% lower risk of developing endometrial cancer in the years after use. In other words, the risk of developing endometrial cancer is substantially lower among women who took hormonal contraception compared to those who didn’t.
For ovarian cancer, we saw a 50% reduced risk (compared to those who took no hormonal contraception) for women who were long-term users of the hormone-containing IUD.
The risk reduction was not as marked for the implants or injections, however few long-term users of these products developed these cancers in our study.
As the risk of endometrial and ovarian cancers increases with age, it will be important to look at cancer risk in these women as they get older.
What about breast cancer risk?
Our findings suggest that the risk of breast cancer for current users of long-acting contraceptives is similar to users of the pill.
However, the contraceptive injection was only associated with an increase in breast cancer risk after five years of use and there was no longer a higher risk once women stopped using them.
Our results suggested that the risk of breast cancer also reduces after stopping use of the contraceptive implants.
We will need to follow-up the women for longer to determine whether this is also the case for the IUD.
It is worth emphasising that the breast cancer risk associated with all hormonal contraceptives is very small.
About 30 in every 100,000 women aged 20 to 39 years develop breast cancer each year, and any hormonal contraceptive use would only increase this to around 36 cases per 100,000.
What about other cancers?
Our study did not show any consistent relationships between contraceptive use and other cancers types. However, we only at looked at invasive cancers (meaning those that start at a primary site but have the potential to spread to other parts of the body).
A recent French study found that prolonged use of the contraceptive injection increased the risk of meningioma (a type of benign brain tumour).
However, meningiomas are rare, especially in young women. There are around two cases in every 100,000 in women aged 20–39, so the extra number of cases linked to contraceptive injection use was small.
The French study found the hormonal IUD did not increase meningioma risk (and they did not investigate contraceptive implants).
Benefits and side-effects
There are benefits and side-effects for all medicines, including contraceptives, but it is important to know most very serious side-effects are rare.
A conversation with your doctor about the balance of benefits and side-effects for you is always a good place to start.
Susan Jordan, Professor of Epidemiology, The University of Queensland; Karen Tuesley, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, School of Public Health, The University of Queensland, and Penny Webb, Distinguished Scientist, Gynaecological Cancers Group, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
