Sleep duration is correlated with risk of developing coronary artery disease, according to a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

To reach this conclusion, Diane Lauderdale and colleagues at the University of Chicago implemented a prospective, observational study of 495 participants between the ages of 35 and 47 that had no coronary artery calcifications as determined by computed tomography.

The scientists assessed sleep duration and quality using motion sensing devices and questionnaires.

Overall 12.1% of study participants developed coronary artery calcifications during the 5-year study.

That number was 27% for those getting less than 5 hours of sleep per night and only 6% in those who slept 7 hours or more per night.

Thus each extra hour of rack time was associated with a 33% decline in the risk of developing coronary artery calcifications.

The findings were present in both sexes and not impacted by race or the presence of other cardiovascular risk factors.

Lauderdale told MedpageToday that “the magnitude of the observed effect was similar to sizable differences in established coronary risk factors.”

“It’s important to say that…this does not yet prove the association is causal,” Lauderdale told the New York Times. “Until we know what the mechanism is — that it’s really a direct or a causal relationship — there is no point in making recommendations based on this.”

Sanjay Patel, a sleep expert at Case Western Reserve University echoed this conclusion. “It’s possible,” he told the Times, “that people who are under more stress may be both sleeping less and at higher risk of heart disease.”
 
“If we got those people to sleep more but they still were under a lot of stress, it wouldn’t change their risk of heart disease,” he added.

Federal regulators have chastised Coca-Cola for inappropriate nutritional claims on the label of its popular soft drink, Diet Coke Plus.

In a letter, the FDA objected to the beverage’s tag line claiming the stuff is “Diet Coke with Vitamins and Minerals.”

Apparently, Diet Coke Plus doesn’t have enough vitamins and minerals to justify the “plus” descriptor. To qualify as “plus,” foods must contain 10% or more nutrients than comparable products, according to the Associated Press.

The FDA wants Coca-Cola to change the labeling for Diet Coke Plus and revert to the agency in 2 weeks with a plan to do so.

Coca-Cola said it will address the matter this month, but for now it seems likely to spurn the agency’s request. “This does not involve any health or safety issues, and we believe the label on Diet Coke Plus complies with FDA’s policies and regulations,” Coke spokesman Scott Williamson told the AP.

Diet Coke Plus hit supermarkets in March, 2007, trumpeted as a calorie-free cola packed with B vitamins, magnesium and zinc.

Beverages enriched with homeopathic doses of vitamins and minerals generate billions of dollars annually for soft-drink purveyors. Products range from energy drinks with ginkgo and ginseng to calcium-fortified OJ.

The FDA will endorse health claims on food labels once scientists verify they help prevent illness. For example the FDA says it’s OK for oatmeal products to state “may reduce risk of heart disease” on their labels.

When the FDA dispatches warning letters to companies for failing to adhere to manufacturing and marketing regulations, the letters are not legally binding, so for Coke officials there’s no sense getting bent out of shape so soon after the holidays.

People who want to go to medical school take note.

A quarter of 2008 US medical school graduates have accumulated debt of $200,000 or more. And although only a third entered medical school with some degree of debt, 87% were in debt when they graduated, according a report by the Association of American Medical Colleges.

Annual medical school costs including tuition and living expenses exceed $62,000 per year. The number is $44,000 for those attending public medical schools.

Med students received $2.5 billion in financial assistance between 2006 and 2007, but only 20% was in the form of grants and scholarships, including assistance based on need and that which requires service payback, such as the National Health Service Corps and the military. 

The rest of it was in the form of loans.

Some medical schools recently bucked the trend by announcing scholarships. Yale Medical School for example no longer requires payment from students whose annual family income is less than $100,000.

But few schools have resources to support programs like this, and it hasn’t helped that the Great Economic Crisis of ’08-’09 has pummeled university endowments. 

Can the situation continue like this forever? In 2008, US medical schools enrolled over 18,000 students, which is more than ever. And twice that many applied.

But the prospect of enormous debt dissuades some from applying and more often than not it’s people from low-income families that back off.

As Robert Steinbrook noted in the New England Journal of Medicine, economic diversity in medical school is morally just and believed to improve patient care and access down the road.

But even now more than 50% of US med students come from families with incomes in the top 20%.