Search

This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the association between spicy food (chilli pepper, chilli sauce, or chilli oil) consumption with cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. Medline and EMBASE were searched from their inception until February 2020 to identify relevant prospective cohort studies. Hazard ratios (HRs)/relative risk (RRs) were pooled via random-effect meta-analysis. Of the 4387 citations identified, 4 studies (from the United States, China, Italy, and Iran) were included in the meta-analysis. The included studies involved a total of 564 748 adults (aged ≥18 years; 51.2% female) followed over a median duration of 9.7 years. The pooled data suggested that compared with people who did not regularly consume spicy food (none/pooled 0.88, 95% CI, 0.86-0.90; I 2 = 0%) lower risk of all-cause mortality. Moreover, spicy food consumption was associated with significant reduction in the risk of death from cardiac diseases (HR/RRpooled 0.82, 0.73-0.91; I 2 = 0%), but not from cerebrovascular disorders (HR/RRpooled 0.79, 0.53-1.17; I 2 = 72.2%). In conclusion, available epidemiological studies suggest that the consumption of spicy chilli food is associated with reduced risk of all-cause as well as heart disease–related mortality. Further studies in different populations are needed to confirm this association.

Healthcare rationing during pandemics has been widely discussed in global bioethics literature. However, existing scenarios and analyses have focused on high income countries, except for very few disease areas such as HIV treatment where some analyses related to African countries exist. We argue that the lack of scholastic discourse, and by extension, professional and democratic engagement on the subject constitute an unacceptable ethical omission. Not only have African governments failed to develop robust ethical plans for pandemics, ethicists in this region have been unable to ignite public discourse on rationing. Therefore, we aim to initiate a debate on how rationing health and social goods could be done ethically in Ghana during the current and future pandemics. The paper discusses and critiques some moral considerations (utilitarian, equity, equal worth, urgent need, and the prioritarian principles) for rationing and their relevance in the Ghanaian context. This contribution may facilitate ethical decision-making during the current (COVID-19) pandemic - in Ghana and other African settings where hardly any rationing guidelines exist

Healthcare rationing during pandemics has been widely discussed in global bioethics literature. However, existing scenarios and analyses have focused on high income countries, except for very few disease areas such as HIV treatment where some analyses related to African countries exist. We argue that the lack of scholastic discourse, and by extension, professional and democratic engagement on the subject constitute an unacceptable ethical omission. Not only have African governments failed to develop robust ethical plans for pandemics, ethicists in this region have been unable to ignite public discourse on rationing. Therefore, we aim to initiate a debate on how rationing health and social goods could be done ethically in Ghana during the current and future pandemics. The paper discusses and critiques some moral considerations (utilitarian, equity, equal worth, urgent need, and the prioritarian principles) for rationing and their relevance in the Ghanaian context. This contribution may facilitate ethical decision-making during COVID-19 in Ghana and other African settings where hardly any rationing guidelines exist

Objective: To examine the patterns of statin use and determine the 3-year adherence and discontinuation rates among a cohort of Australians aged ≥65 years with dementia. Methods: The yearly prevalence and incidence of statin use were compared via Poisson regression modeling using 2007 as the reference year. People with dementia were identified according to dispensing of antidementia medications. A cohort of 589 new statin users was followed longitudinally. Adherence was estimated via the proportion of days covered (PDC). Discontinuation was defined as ≥90 days without statin coverage. Results: The annual prevalence of statin use among older Australians with dementia increased from 20.6% in 2007 to 31.7% in 2016 (aged-sex adjusted rate ratio: 1.51, 95% confidence interval: 1.35-1.69). Among the new users, the proportion adherent (PDC ≥ 0.80) decreased from 60.3% at 6 months to 31.0% at 3 years. During the 3-year follow-up, 58.7% discontinued their statin. Conclusions: Despite increased use of statins among older Australians with dementia, adherence is low and discontinuation is high, which may point to intentional cessation.