Added Sugars. Sugars in your diet can be naturally occurring or added. Naturally occurring sugars are found naturally in foods such as fruit (fructose) and milk (lactose). Added sugars are sugars and syrups put in foods during preparation or processing, or added at the table. Foods Containing Added Sugars. The major sources of added sugars are regular soft drinks, sugars, candy, cakes, cookies, pies and fruit drinks (fruitades and fruit punch); dairy desserts and milk products (ice cream, sweetened yogurt and sweetened milk); and other grains (cinnamon toast and honey- nut waffles). Too Much Sugar Isn't So Sweet for Your Health. Many people consume more sugar than they realize. It’s important to be aware of how much sugar you consume because our bodies don’t need sugar to function properly. Added sugars contribute zero nutrients but many added calories that can lead to extra pounds or even obesity, thereby reducing heart health. If you think of your daily calorie needs as a budget, you want to “spend” most of your calories on “essentials” to meet your nutrient needs. Use only left over, discretionary calories for “extras” that provide little or no nutritional benefit, such as sugar. This chart graphically details the %DV that a serving of Walnuts provides for each of the nutrients of which it is a good, very good, or excellent source according to. The Hidden Ingredient with Many Different Names. To figure out if a packaged food contains added sugars, and how much, you have to be a bit of a detective. On the Nutrition Facts panel, the line for sugars contains both the natural and added types as total grams of sugar. There are four calories in one gram, so if a product has 1. To tell if a processed food contains added sugars, you need to look at the list of ingredients. Sugar has many other names. Besides those ending in “ose,” such as maltose or sucrose, other names for sugar include high fructose corn syrup, molasses, cane sugar, corn sweetener, raw sugar, syrup, honey or fruit juice concentrates. The DASH diet (Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension) is a dietary pattern promoted by the U.S.-based National Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteThe Ultimate Arthritis Diet Stock your fridge and pantry with Mediterranean staples to fight pain and inflammation. Learn more about reading food labels. Limit your consumption of foods with high amounts of added sugars, such as sugar- sweetened beverages. Just one 1. 2- ounce can of regular soda contains eight teaspoons of sugar, or 1. How much is just right? The American Heart Association (AHA) recommends limiting the amount of added sugars you consume to no more than half of your daily discretionary calories allowance. For most American women, that’s no more than 1. For men, it’s 1. 50 calories per day, or about 9 teaspoons. The AHA recommendations focus on all added sugars, without singling out any particular types such as high- fructose corn syrup.
Inuit Eskimos, who get high amounts of omega- 3 fatty acids from eating fatty fish, also tend to have increased HDL cholesterol and decreased triglycerides (fats in the blood). Several studies show that fish oil supplements reduce triglyceride levels. Walnuts, which are rich in alpha linolenic acid or ALA, which can convert to omega- 3s in the body, have been reported to lower total cholesterol and triglycerides in people with high cholesterol levels. High blood pressure Several clinical studies suggest that diets rich in omega- 3 fatty acids lower blood pressure in people with hypertension. An analysis of 1. Doses this high, however, should only be taken under the direction of a physician. Heart disease The role of omega- 3 fatty acids in cardiovascular disease is well established. One of the best ways to help prevent heart disease is to eat a diet low in saturated fat, and to eat foods that are rich in monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats (including omega- 3 fatty acids). Clinical evidence suggests that EPA and DHA (eicosapentaenoic acid and docosahexaenoic acid), the two omega- 3 fatty acids found in fish oil help reduce risk factors for heart disease, including high cholesterol and high blood pressure. Fish oil has been shown to lower levels of triglycerides (fats in the blood), and to lower the risk of death, heart attack, stroke, and abnormal heart rhythms in people who have already had a heart attack. Fish oil also appears to help prevent and treat atherosclerosis (hardening of the arteries) by slowing the development of plaque and blood clots, which can clog arteries. Large population studies suggest that getting omega- 3 fatty acids in the diet, primarily from fish, helps protect against stroke caused by plaque build up and blood clots in the arteries that lead to the brain. Eating at least 2 servings of fish per week can reduce the risk of stroke by as much as 5. However, high doses of fish oil and omega- 3 fatty acids may increase the risk of bleeding. People who eat more than 3 grams of omega- 3 fatty acids per day (equivalent to 3 servings of fish per day) may have higher risk for hemorrhagic stroke, a potentially fatal type of stroke in which an artery in the brain leaks or ruptures. Studies also suggest that omega- 3 fatty acids may have antioxidant properties that improve endothelial function and may contribute to heart benefits. Diabetes People with diabetes often have high triglyceride and low HDL levels. Omega- 3 fatty acids from fish oil can help lower triglycerides and apoproteins (markers of diabetes), and raise HDL. So eating foods or taking fish oil supplements may help people with diabetes. Another type of omega- 3 fatty acid, ALA (from flaxseed, for example) may not have the same benefit as fish oil. Some people with diabetes can't efficiently convert ALA to a form of omega- 3 fatty acids that the body can use. Also, some people with type 2 diabetes may have slight increases in fasting blood sugar when taking fish oil. So talk to your doctor to see if fish oil is right for you. Rheumatoid arthritis Most clinical studies examining omega- 3 fatty acid supplements for arthritis have focused on rheumatoid arthritis (RA), an autoimmune disease that causes inflammation in the joints. Several small studies have found that fish oil helps reduce symptoms of RA, including joint pain and morning stiffness. One study suggests that people with RA who take fish oil may be able to lower their dose of non- steroidal anti- inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). However, unlike prescription medications, fish oil does not appear to slow progression of RA, only to treat the symptoms. Joint damage still occurs. Laboratory studies suggest that diets rich in omega- 3 fatty acids (and low in the inflammatory omega- 6 fatty acids) may help people with osteoarthritis. New Zealand green lipped mussel (Perna canaliculus), another potential source of omega- 3 fatty acids, has been reported to reduce joint stiffness and pain, increase grip strength, and improve walking pace in a small group of people with osteoarthritis. For some people, symptoms worsened before they improved. An analysis of 1. RA or joint pain caused by inflammatory bowel disease (IBS) and painful menstruation (dysmenorrhea). The results suggest that omega- 3 fatty acids, along with conventional therapies, such as NSAIDs, may help relieve joint pain associated with these conditions. Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) Several small studies suggest that EPA and fish oil may help reduce symptoms of lupus, an autoimmune condition characterized by fatigue and joint pain. However, two small studies found that fish oil had no effect on lupus nephritis (kidney disease caused by lupus, a frequent complication of the disease). Osteoporosis Some studies suggest that omega- 3 fatty acids may help increase levels of calcium in the body and improve bone strength, although not all results were positive. Some studies also suggest that people who do not get enough of some essential fatty acids (particularly EPA and gamma- linolenic acid (GLA), an omega- 6 fatty acid) are more likely to have bone loss than those with normal levels of these fatty acids. In a study of women over 6. EPA and GLA supplements had less bone loss over 3 years than those who took placebo. Many of these women also experienced an increase in bone density. Depression Research is not clear on whether taking omega- 3 fatty acids can help relieve depression symptoms. Several studies show that people who took omega- 3 fatty acids in addition to prescription antidepressants had a greater improvement in symptoms than those who took antidepressants alone. Other studies suggest that omega- 3 fatty acid intake helps protect against postpartum depression, among other benefits. However, some studies found no benefit. Studies are also mixed on whether omega- 3 fatty acids alone have any effect on depression. Depression is a serious illness and you should not try to treat it on your own. See a doctor for help. Bipolar disorder In a clinical study of 3. But another 4- month long clinical study treating people with bipolar depression and rapid cycling bipolar disorder did not show that EPA helped reduce symptoms. Schizophrenia Preliminary clinical evidence suggests that people with schizophrenia take omega- 3 fatty acids, they experience an improvement in symptoms. However, more recent research found that EPA supplements were no better than placebo in improving symptoms of this condition. Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) Children with ADHD may have low levels of certain essential fatty acids (including EPA and DHA). In a clinical study of nearly 1. However, studies examining whether omega- 3 fatty acids help improve symptoms of ADHD have produced mixed results. A few studies show that omega- 3 fatty acids help improve behavioral symptoms. But most of these studies were not well designed. One study that looked at DHA in addition to stimulant therapy (standard therapy for ADHD) found no effect. More research is needed. In the meantime, eating foods that are high in omega- 3 fatty acids is a reasonable approach for someone with ADHD. Cognitive decline Several studies show that reduced intake of omega- 3 fatty acids is associated with increased risk of age- related cognitive decline or dementia, including Alzheimer disease. Scientists believe the omega- 3 fatty acid DHA is protective against Alzheimer disease and dementia. Skin disorders In one clinical study, 1. UV rays after taking fish oil supplements. However, topical sunscreens are much better at protecting the skin from damaging effects of the sun than omega- 3 fatty acids. In another study of 4. EPA with their prescription medications did better than those treated with the medications alone. However, a larger study of people with psoriasis found no benefit from fish oil. Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) Results are mixed as to whether omega- 3 fatty acids can help reduce symptoms of Crohn disease and ulcerative colitis, two types of IBD. Some studies suggest that omega- 3 fatty acids may help when added to medication, such as sulfasalazine (a standard medication for IBD). Others show no effect. More studies are needed. Fish oil supplements can cause side effects that are similar to symptoms of IBD (such as flatulence, belching, bloating, and diarrhea). Asthma Studies examining omega- 3 fatty acids for asthma are mixed. In one small, well- designed clinical study of 2. EPA and DHA for 1. However, most studies have shown no effect. Macular degeneration A questionnaire given to more than 3,0. Similarly, a clinical study comparing 3. Menstrual pain In one study of 4. Colon cancer Eating foods rich in omega- 3 fatty acids seems to reduce the risk of colorectal cancer. For example, Eskimos, who tend to have a high fat diet, but eat significant amounts of fish rich in omega- 3 fatty acids, have a low rate of colorectal cancer. Animal studies and laboratory studies have found that omega- 3 fatty acids prevent worsening of colon cancer. Preliminary studies suggest that taking fish oil daily may help slow the progression of colon cancer in people with early stages of the disease. If you have colorectal cancer, ask your doctor before taking any supplements. Breast cancer Although not all experts agree, women who eat foods rich in omega- 3 fatty acids over many years may be less likely to develop breast cancer. More research is needed to understand the effect that omega- 3 fatty acids may have on the prevention of breast cancer. Prostate cancer Population- based studies of groups of men suggest that a low- fat diet including omega- 3 fatty acids (from fish or fish oil) may help prevent the development of prostate cancer. Supporting Research. Aben A, Danckaerts M. Omega- 3 and omega- 6 fatty acids in the treatment of children and adolescents with ADHD. Angerer P, von Schacky C. Aronson WJ, Glaspy JA, Reddy ST, Reese D, Heber D, Bagga D. Modulation of omega- 3/omega- 6 polyunsaturated ratios with dietary fish oils in men with prostate cancer. ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: Executive Summary. Table of Contents. Preamble 1. 81. 11. Methodology and Evidence Review 1. Organization of the Writing Committee 1. Document Review and Approval 1. Scope of This Guideline With Reference to Other Relevant Guidelines or Statements 1. Definition of HF 1. HF Classifications 1. Initial and Serial Evaluation of the HF Patient: Recommendations 1. Clinical Evaluation 1. History and Physical Examination 1. Diagnostic Tests 1. Noninvasive Cardiac Imaging 1. Invasive Evaluation 1. Treatment of Stages A to D: Recommendations 1. Nonpharmacological Interventions 1. Pharmacological Treatment for Stage C HFr. EF 1. 82. 16. 3. 3. Pharmacological Treatment for Stage C HFp. EF 1. 82. 46. 3. 4. Device Therapy for Stage C HFr. EF 1. 82. 66. 4. Water Restriction 1. Inotropic Support 1. Mechanical Circulatory Support 1. Cardiac Transplantation 1. The Hospitalized Patient: Recommendations 1. Precipitating Causes of Decompensated HF 1. Maintenance of GDMT During Hospitalization 1. Diuretics in Hospitalized Patients 1. Renal Replacement Therapy—Ultrafiltration 1. Parenteral Therapy in Hospitalized HF 1. Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis in Hospitalized Patients 1. Arginine Vasopressin Antagonists 1. Inpatient and Transitions of Care 1. Important Comorbidities in HF 1. Surgical/Percutaneous/Transcatheter Interventional Treatments of HF: Recommendations 1. Coordinating Care for Patients With Chronic HF: Recommendations 1. Quality Metrics/Performance Measures: Recommendations 1. Evidence Gaps and Future Research Directions. References 1. 83. Appendix 1. Author Relationships With Industry and Other Entities (Relevant) 1. Appendix 2. Reviewer Relationships With Industry and Other Entities (Relevant) 1. Preamble. The medical profession should play a central role in evaluating the evidence related to drugs, devices, and procedures for the detection, management, and prevention of disease. When properly applied, expert analysis of available data on the benefits and risks of these therapies and procedures can improve the quality of care, optimize patient outcomes, and favorably affect costs by focusing resources on the most effective strategies. An organized and directed approach to a thorough review of evidence has resulted in the production of clinical practice guidelines that assist clinicians in selecting the best management strategy for an individual patient. Moreover, clinical practice guidelines can provide a foundation for other applications, such as performance measures, appropriate use criteria, and both quality improvement and clinical decision support tools. The American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF) and the American Heart Association (AHA) have jointly produced guidelines in the area of cardiovascular disease since 1. The ACCF/AHA Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Task Force), charged with developing, updating, and revising practice guidelines for cardiovascular diseases and procedures, directs and oversees this effort. Writing committees are charged with regularly reviewing and evaluating all available evidence to develop balanced, patient- centric recommendations for clinical practice. Experts in the subject under consideration are selected by the ACCF and AHA to examine subject- specific data and write guidelines in partnership with representatives from other medical organizations and specialty groups. Writing committees are asked to perform a literature review; weigh the strength of evidence for or against particular tests, treatments, or procedures; and include estimates of expected outcomes where such data exist. Patient- specific modifiers, comorbidities, and issues of patient preference that may influence the choice of tests or therapies are considered. When available, information from studies on cost is considered, but data on efficacy and outcomes constitute the primary basis for the recommendations contained herein. In analyzing the data and developing recommendations and supporting text, the writing committee uses evidence- based methodologies developed by the Task Force. The Class of Recommendation (COR) is an estimate of the size of the treatment effect considering risks versus benefits in addition to evidence and/or agreement that a given treatment or procedure is or is not useful/effective or in some situations may cause harm. The Level of Evidence (LOE) is an estimate of the certainty or precision of the treatment effect. The writing committee reviews and ranks evidence supporting each recommendation with the weight of evidence ranked as LOE A, B, or C according to specific definitions that are included in Table 1. Studies are identified as observational, retrospective, prospective, or randomized where appropriate. For certain conditions for which inadequate data are available, recommendations are based on expert consensus and clinical experience and are ranked as LOE C. When recommendations at LOE C are supported by historical clinical data, appropriate references (including clinical reviews) are cited if available. For issues for which sparse data are available, a survey of current practice among the clinicians on the writing committee is the basis for LOE C recommendations and no references are cited. The schema for COR and LOE are summarized in Table 1, which also provides suggested phrases for writing recommendations within each COR. A new addition to this methodology is separation of the Class III recommendations to delineate whether the recommendation is determined to be of “no benefit” or is associated with “harm” to the patient. In addition, in view of the increasing number of comparative effectiveness studies, comparator verbs and suggested phrases for writing recommendations for the comparative effectiveness of one treatment or strategy versus another have been added for COR I and IIa, LOE A or B only. Table 1. Applying Classification of Recommendation and Level of Evidence. In view of the advances in medical therapy across the spectrum of cardiovascular diseases, the Task Force has designated the term guideline- directed medical therapy (GDMT) to represent optimal medical therapy as defined by ACCF/AHA guideline. This new term, GDMT, will be used herein and throughout all future guidelines. Because the ACCF/AHA practice guidelines address patient populations (and clinicians) residing in North America, drugs that are not currently available in North America are discussed in the text without a specific COR. For studies performed in large numbers of subjects outside North America, each writing committee reviews the potential influence of different practice patterns and patient populations on the treatment effect and relevance to the ACCF/AHA target population to determine whether the findings should inform a specific recommendation. The ACCF/AHA practice guidelines are intended to assist clinicians in clinical decision making by describing a range of generally acceptable approaches to the diagnosis, management, and prevention of specific diseases or conditions. The guidelines attempt to define practices that meet the needs of most patients in most circumstances. The ultimate judgment regarding care of a particular patient must be made by the clinician and patient in light of all the circumstances presented by that patient. As a result, situations may arise for which deviations from these guidelines may be appropriate. Clinical decision making should involve consideration of the quality and availability of expertise in the area where care is provided. When these guidelines are used as the basis for regulatory or payer decisions, the goal should be improvement in quality of care. The Task Force recognizes that situations arise in which additional data are needed to inform patient care more effectively; these areas will be identified within each respective guideline when appropriate. Prescribed courses of treatment in accordance with these recommendations are effective only if followed. Because lack of patient understanding and adherence may adversely affect outcomes, clinicians should make every effort to engage the patient’s active participation in prescribed medical regimens and lifestyles. In addition, patients should be informed of the risks, benefits, and alternatives to a particular treatment and be involved in shared decision making whenever feasible, particularly for COR IIa and IIb, for which the benefit- to- risk ratio may be lower. The Task Force makes every effort to avoid actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest that may arise as a result of industry relationships or personal interests among the members of the writing committee. All writing committee members and peer reviewers of the guideline are required to disclose all current healthcare- related relationships, including those existing 1. In December 2. 00. ACCF and AHA implemented a new policy for relationship with industry and other entities (RWI) that requires the writing committee chair plus a minimum of 5. RWI (Appendix 1 includes the ACCF/AHA definition of relevance). These statements are reviewed by the Task Force and all members during each conference call and/or meeting of the writing committee and are updated as changes occur. All guideline recommendations require a confidential vote by the writing committee and must be approved by a consensus of the voting members. Members are not permitted to draft or vote on any text or recommendations pertaining to their RWI. Members who recused themselves from voting are indicated in the list of writing committee members, and specific section recusals are noted in Appendix 1. Authors’ and peer reviewers’ RWI pertinent to this guideline are disclosed in Appendixes 1 and 2, respectively. Additionally, to ensure complete transparency, writing committee members’ comprehensive disclosure information—including RWI not pertinent to this document—is available as an online supplement. Comprehensive disclosure information for the Task Force is also available online at http: //www. DASH diet - Wikipedia. The DASH diet (Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension) is a dietary pattern promoted by the U. S.- based National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (part of the National Institutes of Health . The DASH diet is rich in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and low- fat dairy foods; includes meat, fish, poultry, nuts, and beans; and is limited in sugar- sweetened foods and beverages, red meat, and added fats. In addition to its effect on blood pressure, it is designed to be a well- balanced approach to eating for the general public. DASH is recommended by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) as one of its ideal eating plans for all Americans. None of the plans were vegetarian, but the DASH plan incorporated more fruits and vegetables, low fat or nonfat dairy, beans, and nuts than the others studied. The DASH diet reduced systolic blood pressure by 6 mm Hg and diastolic blood pressure by 3 mm Hg in patients with high normal blood pressure (formerly called . Those with hypertension dropped by 1. Hg, respectively. These changes in blood pressure occurred with no changes in body weight. The DASH dietary pattern is adjusted based on daily caloric intake ranging from 1,6. Omni. Heart demonstrated that partial replacement of carbohydrate with either protein (about half from plant sources) or with unsaturated fat (mostly monounsaturated fat) can further reduce blood pressure, low- density lipoprotein cholesterol, and coronary heart disease risk. News & World Report's annual . The higher the BP, the greater is the chance of heart attack, heart failure, stroke, and kidney disease. National Institutes of Health (NIH) to propose funding to further research the role of dietary patterns on blood pressure. In 1. 99. 2 the NHLBI worked with five of the most well- respected medical research centers in different cities across the U. S. The DASH study used a rigorous design called a randomized controlled trial (RCT), and it involved teams of physicians, nurses, nutritionists, statisticians, and research coordinators working in a cooperative venture in which participants were selected and studied in each of these five research facilities. The chosen facilities and locales for this multi- center study were: (1) Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, (2) Duke University Medical Center in Durham, North Carolina, (3) Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research in Portland, Oregon, (4) Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, Massachusetts, and (5) Pennington Biomedical Research Center in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. The standardized multi- center protocol is an approach used in many large- scale multi- center studies funded by the NHLBI. A unique feature of the DASH diet was that the foods and menu were chosen based on conventionally consumed food items so it could be more easily adopted by the general public if results were positive. The nutritional conceptualization of the DASH meal plans was based in part on this research. The control diet was low in potassium, calcium, magnesium and fiber and featured a fat and protein profile so that the pattern was consistent with a . Magnesium and Potassium levels were close to the 7. U. S. The second experimental diet was high in fruits- and- vegetables and in low- fat dairy products, as well as lower in overall fat and saturated fat, with higher fiber and higher protein compared with the control diet. One of the unique features of the DASH study was that dietary patterns rather than single nutrients were being tested. The sample population consisted of healthy men and women with an average age of 4. Hg and diastolic blood pressures within 8. Hg. African- American and other minority groups were planned to comprise 6. In the screening phase, participants were screened for eligibility based on the combined results of blood pressure readings. In the 3 week run- in phase, each subject was given the control diet for 3 weeks, had their blood pressure measurements taken on each of five separate days, gave one 2. At this point, subjects who were compliant with the feeding program during the screening phase were each randomly assigned to one of the three diets outlined above, to begin at the start of the 4th week. The intervention phase followed next; this was an 8- week period in which the subjects were provided the diet to which they had been randomly assigned. Blood pressures and urine samples were collected again during this time together with symptom & physical activity recall questionnaires. The first group of study subjects began the run- in phase of the trial in September 1. January 1. 99. 6. Participants were also given two packets of salt, each containing 2. Alcohol was limited to no more than two beverages per day, and caffeine intake was limited to no more than three caffeinated beverages. The minority portion of the study sample and the hypertensive portion both showed the largest reductions in blood pressure from the combination diet against the control diet. The hypertensive subjects experienced a drop of 1. Hg in their systolic and 5. Hg in their diastolic phases. The data indicated that reductions in blood pressure occurred within two weeks of subjects. At the end of the intervention phase, 1. Apart from only one subject (on the control diet) who was suffering from cholecystitis, other gastrointestinal symptoms had a low rate of incidence. DASH- Sodium study. The DASH- Sodium trial was conducted from September 1. November 1. 99. 9. Like the previous study, it was based on a large sample (4. The DASH diet was the same as in the previous DASH study. After being assigned to one of these two diets, the participants were given diets that differed by 3 distinct levels of sodium content, corresponding to 3,0. The 3. 0- day intervention phase followed, in which subjects ate their assigned diets at each of the aforementioned sodium levels (high, intermediate and low) in random order, in a crossover design. The secondary outcome was diastolic blood pressure. The DASH- Sodium study found that reductions in sodium intake produced significantly lower systolic and diastolic blood pressures in both the control and DASH diets. Study results indicate that the quantity of dietary sodium in the control diet was twice as powerful in its effect on blood pressure as it was in the DASH diet. Importantly, the control diet sodium reductions from intermediate to low correlated with greater changes in systolic blood pressure than those same changes from high to intermediate (change equal to roughly 4. These results led researchers to postulate that the adoption of a national lower daily allowance for sodium than the currently held 2,4. Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommend eating a diet of 2. DASH- Sodium study. The DASH diet and the control diet at the lower salt levels were both successful in lowering blood pressure, but the largest reductions in blood pressure were obtained by eating a combination of these two (i. DASH diet). The effect of this combination at a sodium level of 1,5. Hg (systolic/diastolic). The hypertensive subjects experienced an average reduction of 1. Hg. Department of Agriculture and U. S. Department of Health and Human Services (2. Government Printing Office. Retrieved December 1. Department of Health and Human Services. Retrieved 2. 2 Oct 2. News Best Diet Rankings. News & World Report Wellness. News & World Report LP. Retrieved 1. 4 May 2. Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Department of Health and Human Services. Annals of Epidemiology. The New England Journal of Medicine. Massachusetts Medical Society. The DASH Diet for Hypertension. New York: Simon & Schuster. ISBN 9. 78- 0- 7. Southern California Urology Institute. Retrieved 2. 1 April 2. Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine. Lyndhurst, Ohio: The Cleveland Clinic Foundation. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. M.; Miller, Edgar R.; Copeland, Trisha; Charleston, Jeanne; Harshfield, Benjamin J.; Laranjo, Nancy; Mc. Carron, Phyllis (2. The DASH Diet Solution and 6. Day Weight Loss and Fitness Journal. Los Angeles, California: Learning Visions. ISBN 9. 78- 1- 9. Liebman, Bonnie (October 1. Nowlan, Sandra (2. Delicious DASH Flavours: The proven, drug- free, doctor- recommended approach to reducing high blood pressure. ISBN 9. 78- 0- 8. Sacks, Frank M; Svetkey, Laura; Vollmer, William; Appel, Lawrence; Bray, George; Harsha, David; Obarzanek, Eva; Conlin, Paul; et al. New England Journal of Medicine. Massachusetts Medical Society sunshinehs. VIDEO - Which Diet Works: A Nutritional Review. University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health. Women's Heart Foundation.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
November 2017
Categories |