Connect with us

Business

Dr. Oz says probiotic supplements have wide-ranging health benefits. Here’s what science says

Published

on



Our bodies—and guts, specifically—depend on a balance of bacteria to “maintain healthy blood sugar and cholesterol levels,” but “you gotta feed the bacteria.” So said Dr. Mehmet Oz—heart surgeon turned daytime TV host, ardent RFK Jr. supporter, believer in disproven COVID treatment hydroxychloroquine, and now possible head of Medicaid and Medicare for the Trump administration—who began his Senate confirmation process on Friday

To aid in that gut-balancing process, Oz has pushed the benefits of both prebiotics and probiotics, including in his role as global advisor for the iHerb brand of supplements. 

Both have come under scrutiny recently, including through this week’s Washington Post opinion piece by Harvard medical school instructor and physician Trisha Pasricha, who called probiotics “a waste of money,” instead recommending a high-fiber diet

So which doctor is right? Here’s what science tells us. 

What are probiotics?

The human gastrointestinal tract is colonized by a range of microorganisms, including bacteria, archaea, viruses, fungi, and protozoa, explains the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Office of Dietary Supplements. And the activity and composition of those microorganisms (often known as the gut microbiome) can affect human health and disease.

Probiotics, according to the International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics, are “live microorganisms that, when administered in adequate amounts,” may benefit that gut microbiome composition. 

While they are naturally present in fermented foods—including the homemade turmeric sauerkraut Dr. Oz mentions in his Instagram post (above) about probiotics—they can also be added to food products, and are available as dietary supplements. 

“However,” notes the NIH, “not all foods and dietary supplements labeled as probiotics on the market have proven health benefits.”

That’s where a range of varied opinions come into play.

Who says what about probiotic supplements?

As Pasricha points out, of the over 1,000 clinical trials of probiotic supplements, there have been too many different strains tested and results found to reliably say they can be universally helpful. 

A 2024 review of existing evidence, published in the Advances in Nutrition journal, concluded that, on one hand, “there is sufficient evidence of efficacy and safety for clinicians and consumers to consider using specific probiotics for some indications—such as the use of probiotics to support gut function during antibiotic use or to reduce the risk of respiratory tract infections—for certain people.”

However, those researchers concluded, “we did not find a sufficiently high level of evidence to support unconditional, population-wide recommendations for other preventive endpoints we reviewed for healthy people. Although evidence for some indications is suggestive of the preventive benefits of probiotics, additional research is needed.”

When looking at the body of scientific evidence regarding effect of probiotics on seven different health issues, the NIH reports the following:

Atopic dermatitis

Numerous studies have looked at the effect of probiotics on this most common form of eczema. Overall, the evidence suggests that the use of probiotics might reduce the risk of developing atopic dermatitis, but also might provide only limited relief. The effects also depend on the strain used, the timing of administration, and the patient’s age.

Pediatric acute diarrhea

While one large review found that single- and multi-strain probiotics significantly shortened the duration of symptoms, another found it was no better than a placebo. 

Antibiotic-associated diarrhea

Overall, the available evidence suggests that starting probiotic treatment with strains LGG (Lactobacillus) or Saccharomyces boulardii within 2 days of the first antibiotic dose helps reduce the risk of diarrhea in patients between 18 and 64, but not in elderly adults.

Inflammatory bowel disease

IBD is a chronic inflammatory disease that includes ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease, for which no cure exists. In the many reviews that have looked at the effects of probiotics, researchers reached similar conclusions—that certain probiotics might have modestly beneficial effects on ulcerative colitis but not on Crohn’s disease.

Irritable bowel syndrome

IBS is a common functional disorder of the gastrointestinal tract that’s been linked to both stress and gut microbiomes. Overall, the available evidence shows that probiotics might reduce some symptoms, but stresses that additional clinical trials are needed to confirm the specifics of strain, dose, and duration of treatment.

High cholesterol

Researchers have studied the use of probiotics to improve lipid profiles. And while, overall, research suggests that using multiple probiotic strains might reduce total and LDL (bad) cholesterol levels, more research is needed.

Obesity

Again: More research is needed. The results, the NIH concludes, “indicate that the effects of probiotics on body weight and obesity might depend on several factors, including the probiotic strain, dose, and duration as well as certain characteristics of the user, including age, sex, and baseline body weight.” 

Bottom line: The jury is still out. Whether you opt to try the supplements or not (as they are generally believed to be harmless, though long-term safety studies are still needed), make sure to eat plenty of fiber as well as fermented foods. That includes yogurt, kefir, fermented cottage cheese, kimchi and other fermented vegetables (as endorsed by Oz), and kombucha tea, which were shown by Stanford University researchers to increase microbial diversity and lower inflammation.

More on supplements:

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Trump administration deports hundreds as judge orders their removals be stopped with planes already in the air

Published

on

The Trump administration has transferred hundreds of immigrants to El Salvador even as a federal judge issued an order temporarily barring the deportations under an 18th century wartime declaration targeting Venezuelan gang members, officials said Sunday. Flights were in the air at the time of the ruling.

U.S. District Judge James E. Boasberg issued an order Saturday blocking the deportations, but lawyers told him there were already two planes with immigrants in the air — one headed for El Salvador, the other for Honduras. Boasberg verbally ordered the planes be turned around, but they apparently were not and he did not include the directive in his written order.

In a court filing Sunday, the Department of Justice, which has appealed Boasberg’s decision, said the immigrants “had already been removed from U.S. territory” when the written order was issued at 7:26 pm.

Trump’s allies were gleeful over the results.

“Oopsie…Too late,” Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele, who agreed to house about 300 immigrants for a year at a cost of $6 million in his country’s prisons, wrote on the social media site X above an article about Boasberg’s ruling. That post was recirculated by White House communications director Steven Cheung.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who negotiated an earlier deal with Bukele to house immigrants, posted on the site: “We sent over 250 alien enemy members of Tren de Aragua which El Salvador has agreed to hold in their very good jails at a fair price that will also save our taxpayer dollars.”

Steve Vladeck, a professor at the Georgetown University Law Center, said that Boasberg’s verbal directive to turn around the planes was not technically part of his final order but that the Trump administration clearly violated the “spirit” of it.

“This just incentivizes future courts to be hyper specific in their orders and not give the government any wiggle room,” Vladeck said.

The immigrants were deported after Trump’s declaration of the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which has been used only three times in U.S. history.

The law, invoked during the War of 1812 and World Wars I and II, requires a president to declare the United States is at war, giving him extraordinary powers to detain or remove foreigners who otherwise would have protections under immigration or criminal laws. It was last used to justify the detention of Japanese-American civilians during World War II.

A Justice Department spokesperson on Sunday referred to an earlier statement from Attorney General Pam Bondi blasting Boasberg’s ruling and didn’t immediately answer questions about whether the administration ignored the court’s order.

Venezuela’s government in a statement Sunday rejected the use of Trump’s declaration of the law, characterizing it as evocative of “the darkest episodes in human history, from slavery to the horror of the Nazi concentration camps.”

Tren de Aragua originated in an infamously lawless prison in the central state of Aragua and accompanied an exodus of millions of Venezuelans, the overwhelming majority of whom were seeking better living conditions after their nation’s economy came undone during the past decade. Trump seized on the gang during his campaign to paint misleading pictures of communities that he contended were “taken over” by what were actually a handful of lawbreakers.

The Trump administration has not identified the immigrants deported, provided any evidence they are in fact members of Tren de Aragua or that they committed any crimes in the United States. It also sent two top members of the Salvadoran MS-13 gang to El Salvador who had been arrested in the United States.

Video released by El Salvador’s government Sunday showed men exiting airplanes onto an airport tarmac lined by officers in riot gear. The men, who had their hands and ankles shackled, struggled to walk as officers pushed their heads down to have them bend down at the waist.

The video also showed the men being transported to prison in a large convoy of buses guarded by police and military vehicles and at least one helicopter. The men were shown kneeling on the ground as their heads were shaved before they changed into the prison’s all-white uniform — knee-length shorts, T-shirt, socks and rubber clogs — and placed in cells.

The immigrants were taken to the notorious CECOT facility, the centerpiece of Bukele’s push to pacify his once violence-wracked country through tough police measures and limits on basic rights

The Trump administration said the president actually signed the proclamation contending Tren de Aragua was invading the United States on Friday night but didn’t announce it until Saturday afternoon. Immigration lawyers said that, late Friday, they noticed Venezuelans who otherwise couldn’t be deported under immigration law being moved to Texas for deportation flights. They began to file lawsuits to halt the transfers.

“Basically any Venezuelan citizen in the US may be removed on pretext of belonging to Tren de Aragua, with no chance at defense,” Adam Isacson of the Washington Office for Latin America, a human rights group, warned on X.

The litigation that led to the hold on deportations was filed on behalf of five Venezuelans held in Texas who lawyers said were concerned they’d be falsely accused of being members of the gang. Once the act is invoked, they warned, Trump could simply declare anyone a Tren de Aragua member and remove them from the country.

Boasberg barred those Venezuelans’ deportations Saturday morning when the suit was filed, but only broadened it to all people in federal custody who could be targeted by the act after his afternoon hearing. He noted that the law has never before been used outside of a congressionally declared war and that plaintiffs may successfully argue Trump exceeded his legal authority in invoking it.

The bar on deportations stands for up to 14 days and the immigrants will remain in federal custody during that time. Boasberg has scheduled a hearing Friday to hear additional arguments in the case.

He said he had to act because the immigrants whose deportations may actually violate the U.S. Constitution deserved a chance to have their pleas heard in court.

“Once they’re out of the country,” Boasberg said, “there’s little I could do.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Bessent not worried about market, calls corrections healthy

Published

on

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, a former hedge fund manager, said he’s not worried about the recent downturn that’s wiped trillions of dollars from the equities market as the US seeks to reshape its economic policies.

“I’ve been in the investment business for 35 years, and I can tell you that corrections are healthy, they are normal,” Bessent said Sunday on NBC’s Meet The Press. “I‘m not worried about the markets. Over the long term, if we put good tax policy in place, deregulation and energy security, the markets will do great.”

The selloff that took the S&P 500 Index into a correction last week came amid investor concerns about the economic effects of the Trump administration’s moves around tariffs, immigration and cuts to the federal government. Losses in equity markets have deepened with mounting growth concerns and souring consumer sentiment

“We are putting the policies in place that will make the affordability crisis go down, inflation moderate and as we set the sails I am confident that the American people will come our way,” said Bessent, who ran Key Square Group before joining the administration.

As the scope of President Donald Trump’s tariff policy broadens, consumers across the political spectrum have become increasingly concerned that the extra duties will lead to higher costs. Global tariffs are now in place on steel and aluminum and there’s an April 2 deadline pending for even broader levies. 

Read More: Here’s a Running Tally of Trump’s Tariff Threats and Actions

While inflation cooled last month, any sustained pickup in price pressures risks causing households to limit discretionary purchases.

In the interview, Bessent said the American Dream isn’t contingent on being able to buy cheap goods from China. Families instead want to afford a home and see their children do better than they are. 

“It’s mortgages, it’s cars, it’s real wage gains,” he said.

As questions about the US economy build, Federal Reserve officials are due to meet this week. Fed Chair Jerome Powell emphasized earlier this month that the central bank doesn’t need to be in a hurry to cut rates but he will likely be pressed about the uncertainty and risks emerging.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

This US-based company warns revenue could suffer from ‘anti-American sentiment’ amid trade war backlash

Published

on



  • Beyond Meat recently flagged the risk that “anti-American sentiment” could hurt sales if it loses customers in other countries or faces other forms of retaliation that affect its sourcing and manufacturing. That’s as US tariffs trigger a global backlash against American products.

Beyond Meat, a producer of plant-based meat substitutes, recently warned that its status as a US company could hurt sales amid an international backlash against President Donald Trump’s tariffs.

The El Segundo, Calif.-based company filed a 10-K annual report with the SEC earlier this month that included a section on risk factors.

In regulatory filings, such sections are often a laundry list of a wide universe of potential headwinds, with some more likely than others. Beyond Meat’s flagged the possible risks associated with epidemics, natural disasters, severe weather, civil strife, war, terrorist activity and other geopolitical tensions.

It also mentioned Trump’s tariffs and plans for retaliation by US trade partners like Canada, saying the company may have to raise prices, increase inventory levels, or find new sourcing for products that it imports.

“There is no assurance that we would be able to pass on any cost increases, in full or at all, to our customers, and/or we could lose customers in countries such as Canada due to anti-American sentiment, any of which could materially affect our revenue, gross margin and results of operations,” Beyond Meat warned.

Any trade wars that feature “buy national” policies or other forms of retaliation against US tariffs could hurt the company’s supply chains, prices, demand, and macroeconomic markets, the filing added.

For example, Beyond Meat sources almost all of its pea protein from Canada and manufactures some of its products there.

“We cannot predict future trade policy and regulations in the United States and other countries, the terms of any renegotiated trade agreements or treaties, or tariffs and their impact on our business. A trade war could have a significant adverse effect on world trade and the world economy,” it said, noting that uncertainty on trade policy can also impact consumer confidence and spending.

The company didn’t immediately respond to a request for further comment.

To be sure, Beyond Meat’s sales had previously been in a slump before Trump returned to the White House as demand for meat substitutes waned more broadly.

But sales had recently started to turn around. Fourth-quarter revenue rose 4% to $76.7 million, marking the second consecutive quarter of annual growth, the company said last month.

Still, the backlash against US products is real, from alcohol to cutting-edge weapons. Canadians are pulling bottles of American liquor off shelves, and sales of Tesla cars are collapsing in Europe as CEO Elon Musk interjects himself in national elections and becomes more closely associated with Trump’s policies.

Even the F-35 stealth fighter is not immune. NATO allies Canada and Portugal are now having second thoughts about buying the fighter from the US and are taking a look at European alternatives.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.