Search This Blog

Saturday, November 3, 2018

For heart patients who want to live longer: Move every 20 minutes


Heart patients should move around every 20 minutes during an eight-hour period of sitting, according to a paper presented on Saturday at the Canadian Cardiovascular Congress in Toronto, an event where visiting experts from the European Society of Cardiology participate in joint scientific sessions with the Canadian Cardiovascular Society.
Heart patients spend most of their waking hours sitting, lying down, but remaining sedentary for long periods could shorten their life, research suggests. Taking breaks and burning more than 770 calories per day should help prolong their life, said Ailar Ramadi, postdoctoral fellow in the Faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine at University of Alberta, Edmonton, and author of the latest paper.
He suggests simple activities such as standing up and walking at a casual pace. “There is a lot of evidence now that sitting for long periods is bad for health,” Ramadi said. His study enrolled 132 patients with coronary artery disease and an average age of 63 years; 77% were men. Participants wore an arm band activity monitor for an average of 22 hours a day for five days.

This is not the first doctor to effectively recommend walking your way to a longer life. Walking at an average pace was linked to a 20% reduction in the risk of mortality compared with walking at a slow pace, according to a study published earlier this year in the British Journal of Sports Medicine. A similar result was found for risk of dying from cardiovascular disease.
That study was a collaboration between the Universities of Sydney, Cambridge, Edinburgh, Limerick and Ulster. It linked mortality records with the results of 11 population-based surveys in the U.K. between 1994 and 2008 in which participants reported their walking pace. Average pace walkers aged 60 years or over experienced a 46% reduction in risk of death from cardiovascular causes.
separate Harvard University study concluded that you could add 10 years to your life by eating a healthy diet, exercising 30 minutes or more a day, maintaining a healthy weight — a body mass index between 18.5 and 24.9 — never smoking and drinking only a moderate amount of alcohol. It analyzed 34 years of data from 78,000 women and 27 years of data from 44,000 men.

Embryo swapping is the Wild West


Lisa, a mom desperate to give her son a little brother, is looking to trade embryos with another mom. Doing so, she’s wading into legal territory colored in shades of gray, experts say.
Only a handful of states — including Florida, Louisiana, Oklahoma and Georgia — have passed legislation regarding embryo donation. (New York is not among them.)
Georgia was the first to allow embryo-adopting parents to file for a final order of adoption once a child is born. In states without laws, couples who adopt embryos rely solely on private legal contracts.
According to Kimberly Tyson, program manager of the Embryo Adoption Awareness Center in Colorado, the general “law of the land is that the woman who gives birth to the baby is legally the baby’s mother on the birth certificate.” (This is complicated by surrogates, although typically a pre-birth order is drafted to assign parentage.)
Compared to the United Kingdom, which has a 10-year limit on embryo storage and prohibits people from discriminating against embryos based on race or religion, the United States is one of the most lax countries in the world when it comes to the creation, storage and donation of embryos.
According to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology donated embryos were used in 1,092 transfers in 2014, up from 596 in 2009. Rebecca Mendel, a New York attorney, said she has seen people interested in embryo donation even turn to Craigslist.
Despite the rise, Dr. Brian Levine, practice director for the fertilitiy clinic CCRM New York, said embryo donation isn’t very common in US due to the complicated legalities and contracts and because “egg and sperm donation is so easy to come by.”
Plus, he warns, it’s unlikely that the embryos put up for donation are the most viable. “You may not be getting the highest quality, which means the pregnancy rate might be sacrificed.”
Both Levine and Mendel both say they’ve never heard of embryo swaps, but, Mendel admitted, “It wouldn’t surprise me.”

Health Insurance Innovations: Cut Ties with Health Benefits One


Health Insurance Innovations, Inc. (NASDAQ: HIIQ), a leading cloud-based technology platform and distributor of affordable individual and family health insurance and supplemental plans, today announced the termination of its relationship with Health Benefits One, LLC (“Simple Health”).
On November 1, 2018, Health Insurance Innovations, Inc. (“HIIQ”) was made aware of an action brought by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) against Simple Health. Simple Health is an independent, third-party licensed insurance distributor that marketed and sold products offered by various insurance carriers, including insurance carriers who sell products through HIIQ’s platform. Upon receiving notice of the FTC’s action, HIIQ immediately suspended its relationship with Simple Health and contacted the FTC to offer its support and assistance in the FTC’s investigation.
HIIQ maintains an active internal compliance team and works closely with state insurance agencies. The company has relationships with over 100 independent insurance sales agencies, many of whom sell products for many different carriers, and HIIQ closely monitors all sales of HIIQ products by each agency. For 2018 to date, Simple Health was the agency of record for less than 10% of HIIQ’s submitted policies.

‘Kill code’ in all cells can be triggered to destroy cancer


A “kill code” present within every cell of the body can cause cancerous cells to self-destruct, according to a study recently published in the journal Nature Communications.

Once certain cellular machinery detects that a cell is changing into cancer, it triggers the kill code to destroy the mutating cell.
The code is found in large protein-coding ribonucleic acids (RNAs) and in small microRNAs, which are thought to have evolved more than 800 million years ago, partly to protect against cancer.
The Northwestern University researchers say the toxic microRNAs are also induced by chemotherapy.
Cancer does not have the ability to adapt to or become resistant to the toxic RNAs, making it potentially fail safe if the code can be duplicated artificially.
Now that we know the kill code, we can trigger the mechanism without having to use chemotherapy and without messing with the genome. We can use these small RNAs directly, introduce them into cells and trigger the kill switch.”
Marcus Peter, Lead Author
Since chemotherapy targets and alters the genome, it is associated with various side effects including some that can cause secondary cancers.
The current findings will enable the design of artificial microRNAs that are even more powerful than the ones developed by nature, says Peter, who is now investigating how to trigger the embedded kill code to destroy cancer cells.
“We absolutely need to turn this into a novel form of therapy,” he concludes.

New antibiotic compounds discovered


Researchers at the University of Eastern Finland have identified new compounds that can target bacterial infection, potentially providing an answer to antibiotic resistance.
As reported in the journal ChemMedChem, Prasanthi Medarametla and colleagues have targeted a protein called LsrK that is involved in a bacterial communication process called quorum sensing.
Quorum sensing enables bacteria to colonize, produce virulence factors, form a biofilm and to establish infection.
Disrupting the process of quorum sensing has therefore become a new focus in the investigation of agents that may quench and inhibit bacteria.
In the era of increased antibiotic resistance, targeting enzymes involved in bacterial communication (quorum sensing) represents a new strategy to fight bacterial infections.”
Prasanthi Medarametla, Lead Researcher
Quorum sensing is mediated by molecules called autoinducers (AIs) and a signaling molecule called AI-2 is essential for both intraspecies and interspecies bacterial communication.
The phosphorylation of AI-2 is mediated by the enzyme LsrK, which means inhibiting this protein can inactivate quorum sensing. However, to date, no such inhibitor of LsrK has been reported.
Now, Medarametla and colleagues have used computational methods to model the structure of LsrK and screened a library of compounds to find potential inhibitors of the protein.
Eventually, the team identified four hits of micromolar activity against LsrK.
The LsrK inhibitors the team identified will be developed further to ensure high affinity and function so that they can be used as tools to help researchers understand how to inhibit LsrK in the AI-2 pathway.
Considering how little is known bout the structure of LsrK, the current study provides exciting new insights about how the protein behaves and how to potentially interfere with the protein-substrate dynamics that ensure virulence.
These results prove the utility of the model and provide the first class of LsrK inhibitors to be further optimized as antivirulence agents.”
Prasanthi Medarametla, Lead Researcher

Forget gridlock: Republican win may be better for stocks


U.S. President Donald Trump has warned that his favorite measure of success, the stock market, is imperiled if voters favor Democrats in next week’s congressional elections.

While not fully accurate – stocks tend to rise regardless of who controls the government – it does bear out that the market has delivered a slightly stronger performance on average when Republicans dominate in Washington.
A Reuters analysis of the past half century shows stocks fared better in the two calendar years after congressional elections when Republicans control Congress and the presidency than when Democrats controlled the two branches, and at least as well as during times of gridlock. Many investors are now hoping for a continuation of the Republican agenda.
“There is Trump ‘the person’, who is very controversial,” said Stephen Massocca, Senior Vice President at Wedbush Securities in San Francisco. “And there’s also Trump ‘the agenda’. The Trump agenda, the stock market loves. To the extent it continues, the market will like that.”
Republicans traditionally push pro-business policies such as tax cuts and deregulation, which boost stock prices. The market has, on the whole, given Trump a thumbs-up, with the market rising almost 20 percent during his presidency so far.
Polls show strong chances that the Democratic Party may win control of the House of Representatives in the Nov. 6 midterm elections after two years of wielding no practical political power in Washington, with Republicans likely to keep the Senate.
Trump warned in a tweet on Tuesday that a change in Congress would be bad for the market, saying: “If you want your Stocks to go down, I strongly suggest voting Democrat.”
Investors often favor Washington gridlock because it preserves the status quo and reduces uncertainty.
“Traditionally, gridlock is good for the markets. But I think this election is very tricky; I’m not sure that’s the preferred market outcome because a lot of the benefits of the past two years have come from not being in a gridlock environment,” said Mike O’Rourke, Chief Market Strategist at JonesTrading.
Should his fellow Republicans maintain or extend their grip on Congress, Trump may be emboldened to pursue more of his political agenda, including further tax overhauls.
By contrast, Democratic gains that allow the party to control the House of Representatives, and possibly the Senate, could stifle Trump’s policy aims and perhaps lead to attempts to impeach him. It could also lead to resistance to increasing the government’s debt limit next year.
“Our economists believe that two likely consequences of a divided Congress would be an increase in investigations and uncertainty surrounding fiscal deadlines, which could raise equity volatility,” Goldman Sachs said in a report this week.
Over the past 50 years, gridlock has been the norm rather than the exception in Washington, with the presidency and Congress won by one party in just seven out of 25 congressional election years.
GRAPHIC: Wall Street and Washington – https://tmsnrt.rs/2P57hRuLooking at the two calendar years following each congressional election, the S&P 500 had a mean annual increase of 12 percent under Republican-controlled governments, compared to an increase of 9 percent for Democrat-controlled governments and a 7 percent rise for gridlocked governments.
However, using median averages, which exclude outliers, differences are less clear, with the S&P 500 seeing annual increases of 11 percent under Republican-controlled governments and under gridlock, and 10 percent gains under Democrat-controlled governments.
An analysis by BTIG brokerage of data going back to 1928 also indicates gridlock is not necessarily ideal. It showed U.S. stocks performing better under united governments.
“While government control is by no means the sole determinant of market performance, investors clearly favor a unified regime,” BTIG strategist Julian Emanuel wrote in his report.
Interest rates, economic growth, company earnings and inflation are widely viewed as strong influences on stock prices, making the balance of power in Washington just one of many factors affecting investor sentiment.
Two Democratic presidents – Bill Clinton and Barack Obama – have presided over the strongest S&P 500 performances http://tmsnrt.rs/2jtEpzi since 1952, with gains of 208 percent and 166 percent, respectively.
Wall Street has applauded Trump since he took power in January 2017 and quickly pushed through measures to deregulate banks and other companies. Last December, his Republican party passed sweeping corporate tax cuts that have S&P 500 companies on track this year to grow their earnings per share by over 20 percent, the biggest jump since 2010, according to Refinitiv IBES data.
“Volatility may rise regardless of the outcome, but, based on historical relationships, equities may be more likely to rise if Republicans manage to maintain control of Congress,” Deutsche Bank said in a recent report.

Buyback Boom Picks Up Where It Left Off


U.S. companies are ramping up share buybacks again, offering potential support to volatile markets.
Share buybacks fell ahead of earnings season, when regulations bar such repurchases. As that so-called blackout period ends, there has been a resurgence, with companies making the most of last month’s selloff. That has eased analysts’ concerns that the year’s buyback boom is over.
Net buybacks in the month totaled just $12 billion by Oct. 19, but jumped to $39 billion by Oct. 29, according to estimates from JPMorgan Chase & Co. That is more than the $30 billion recorded in September and just under the $48 billion recorded in August.
The bank’s estimates are based on the average drop in share count across the S&P 500, FTSE Russell1000, Datastream U.S. and MSCI U.S. indexes.
Some analysts hope a resurgence in buybacks could help support share prices during a period of geopolitical and economic uncertainty. Others are skeptical that companies can continue purchasing their own shares at the current pace, particularly as the stream of repatriated cash that helped drive the year’s buybacks slows down.
“It is possible that some companies saw the equity correction as an opportunity to buy back their stock” in October, said Nikolaos Panigirtzoglou, global-markets strategist at JPMorgan. “But this raises the hurdle for November.”
The pickup came at the close of a month that wiped more than $4 trillion in value from stocks in the U.S., Europe and Asia. Markets have tumbled on concerns over the U.S. trade dispute with China, the prospect of slowing global growth and higher interest rates and declines in the technology sector. The S&P has lost 6.9% in the past month, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average is down 5.6% and the tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite has dropped 8%.
That swoon has accentuated interest in buybacks.
Cosmetics firm Estée Lauder Cos., whose shares dropped by as much as 14% during October, on Wednesday announced plans to buy back 40 million shares, or 11% of the total outstanding. The New York-based company had spent more than $240 million buying back its own stock over October, it said.
Semiconductor-equipment maker Rudolph Technologies Inc., based in Massachusetts, pointed to “undervalued market conditions” on Monday as it announced it had spent $14.3 million completing a buyback plan. The firm’s shares dropped as much as 20% in October.
This past week, International Business Machines Corp. authorized $4 billion worth of buybacks, and financial-exchanges operator Intercontinental Exchange Inc. announced a plan for repurchases worth $2 billion.
Elsewhere, Netherlands-based Royal Dutch Shell PLC spent $2 billion on buybacks between July 26 and Oct. 19. On Thursday, it launched a second round, planning to spend up to $2.5 billion by late January.
Buybacks aren’t loved by everyone. Critics say they are motivated by executives’ desire to boost the value of the stock options and allocations in their remuneration packages. Buybacks also channel profits away from the research and capital expenditure that could improve productivity in the longer term, they say.
“There is an inherent conflict of interest because the management is incentivized through the share price,” said Neil Dwane, global strategist at Allianz Global Investors.
For their fans, buybacks are an efficient way to return capital to shareholders by boosting the share price.
Mr. Panigirtzoglou warned that stock repurchases could now decline because companies may have already taken advantage of the correction and that the repatriation of U.S. profits stockpiled overseas could tail off. Companies’ purchases of their own shares hit new highs in the first half of the year, after December’s tax overhaul motivated firms to repatriate funds. Some of the returning cash has been put toward dividend payments, capital expenditures and bonuses, but a large share has been used to buy existing shares.
Inflows of repatriated cash dwindled to $105 billion in the second quarter from $225 billion in the previous three-month period, according to JPMorgan.
Still, some analysts say there could be more cash to come.
Some companies repatriated offshore capital immediately in response to the tax reform, but others may act more slowly, depending on how their overseas profits are invested, according to Todd Castagno, an equity strategist at Morgan Stanley.
Mr. Castagno pointed out that some corporations hold a lot of their offshore capital as corporate bonds, which are difficult to liquidate.
Cash held overseas by U.S. nonfinancial companies rated by S&P hit $1.3 trillion last year, according to S&P’s own estimates, though that estimate varies wildly between sources.
Data shows U.S. companies have also hit pause on announcing plans to buy back shares in the second half of this year. There is usually a lag between these announcements and the actual share repurchases.
TrimTabs, an investment research company, said that companies announced $156 billion in buybacks in the third quarter, after posting record levels in the first and second quarter of $242 billion and $437 billion, respectively.
Marvell Technology Group, a semiconductor company with a total market capitalization of about $11 billion, for example, announced this past month it would increase its buyback program to $1 billion from $300 million, but set no timetable for the purchases. Chief Financial Officer Jean Hu said management is holding out for prices to sink further.
“We’ll do the buyback opportunistically as we think about the valuation and about the future of the company,” she said.