An HIV-infected person whose partner is not infected should be offered immediate treatment to cut the risk of transmission, the World Health Organisation has recommended.

The WHO`s recommendations as part of a global crackdown on the spread of HIV come in the wake of a a clinical trial last year which found that giving antiretroviral drugs to an infected partner earlier reduces the risk of transmission by 96 per cent, the `New Scientist` reported.

The new WHO strategy is part of a drive to stop HIV spreading, even if it means treating people whose immune systems are not yet depleted to the levels that usually require therapy.

"This is the first time people would get treatment not necessarily for their own benefit, but to protect their partners," said Bernhard Schwartlander, Director of evidence, innovation and policy at UNAIDS in Geneva, Switzerland.

"The big question is to what extent reducing the viral load in a community impacts the HIV epidemic overall," added Andrew Ball of the WHO`s HIV/AIDS department.

Eating pistachio nuts may help the growth of potentially beneficial gut bugs and promote digestive health, says a new study.

Pistachios are also an excellent source of vitamin B6, copper and manganese and a good source of phosphorus and thiamin. Gut bugs help in digestion of food in the stomach.

They may play a role in "modifying microbiota (microbial environment in the gastrointestinal tract) ... for supporting intestinal health," said Volker Mai, assistant professor at the University of Florida`s Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences.

To examine this link between prebiotics in pistachios and the gut, researchers conducted a study at the Beltsville Human Nutrition Research Center in Maryland. Prebiotics are a functional food that stimulates the growth of healthy bugs, helping produce digestive enzymes.

A group of healthy individuals were randomly assigned to eat an American-style, pre-planned diet that included either 0 ounces, 1.5 ounces or 3 ounces of pistachios or almonds per day, according to a Florida statement.

Each participant`s diet was calorie-controlled to ensure they neither gained nor lost weight during the intervention. Multiple stool samples were collected throughout the study and analyzed for bacterial community composition.

After controlling for age, dietary factors and other relevant variables, the researchers observed that after 19 days, people who ate up to three ounces of pistachios (about 147 nuts or 2 servings) per day had increased changes in levels of various gut bacteria.

The difference in gut microbes was stronger in people who ate pistachios rather than almonds. The researchers used "modern high throughput sequencing" to quantify specific gut bacterial DNA signatures before and after nut consumption.

According to the researchers, this is the first study using this method to observe that pistachios and almonds may have the ability to help change the amounts of bacteria thriving in the gut.

Weaning before a baby is 6 months old is a bad idea for HIV-positive mothers in circumstances where breastfeeding has no safe alternative, researchers reported.

And treatment with anti-retroviral drugs should continue as long as breastfeeding is required, according to Charles van der Horst, MD, of the University of North Carolina, in Chapel Hill, N.C., and colleagues.

The finding comes from 48-week follow-up of a large randomized trial that compared different treatment strategies for six months, and then encouraged weaning without further therapy, van der Horst and colleagues reported online in The Lancet.

The researchers reported in 2010 that treatment of either the mother or infant during the first six months of breastfeeding reduced the risk of HIV transmission, compared with no therapy.

In the current analysis, they looked at what happened when the babies were weaned at 6 months and treatment was stopped.

The bottom line, van der Horst told MedPage Today, is that "weaning puts the baby at risk for ... other infections," such as pneumonia and tuberculosis.

At the same time, he added, it's important to continue therapy as long as the baby is being breastfed in order to continue to prevent HIV transmission.

In the so-called BAN study -- for Breastfeeding, Antiretrovirals, and Nutrition -- 2,369 mother-and-infant pairs in which the mother was HIV-positive got the now-standard perinatal prophylaxis of a single dose of nevirapine (Viramune) and a week of nevirapine and lamivudine (3TC).

All of the mothers had a CD4-positive lymphocyte count of at least 250 cells per cubic millimeter and thus, by then-current standards, did not require anti-retroviral therapy for their own health.

After the first week, they were randomly assigned to no further treatment (the control group), to maternal therapy with a triple-drug regimen, or to infant treatment with nevirapine.

Between 24 and 28 weeks, van der Horst said, the mothers were asked to stop breastfeeding, but were supported with additional care to ensure the infants had adequate nutrition.

Despite that, the researchers found, the rate of serious adverse events in infants was markedly higher during weeks 29 through 48 than during the intervention phase.

Specifically, during the intervention phase, the overall rate of adverse events among the babies was 0.7 per 100 person weeks, which jumped significantly (at P<0.0001) to 1.1 per 100 person weeks after therapy was stopped.

Stopping therapy also increased the risk of HIV transmission, they reported.

The cumulative risk of transmission by 48 weeks was 7% in the control group, which was significantly higher (at P=0.027 and P=0.002, respectively) than the 4% seen in each of the treatment groups.

In contrast, the rates at the end of the intervention period had been 5.7% in the control group, 2.9% in the maternal-treatment group, and 1.7% in the infant-treatment group.

Van der Horst said the data suggest that many mothers did not immediately cease breastfeeding even though they said they had.

He added that the study also found a worrisome trend among the mothers -- nine women died during the study, but only one of them was in the maternal-treatment arm. The differences did not reach statistical significance, he told MedPage Today, but they hint that, even for women with relatively robust immune systems, continued therapy may have a health benefit.

Indeed, largely as a result of the study, Malawi has changed its criteria for HIV treatment eligibility. Now, regardless of CD4 count, HIV-positive mothers are placed on triple-drug therapy for life.

The study is one of several investigating similar questions and arriving at similar answers. Combined with other studies suggesting transmission can be prevented by treatment, the findings have important implications for health policy in the developing world, van der Horst said.

Among other things, the findings suggest the "Malawians were correct" in deciding to opt for lifelong therapy for pregnant women, rather than cutting treatment off until medically required.

Nevertheless, the data are "sobering," commented Louise Kuhn, PhD, of Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health in New York City, and Hoosen Coovadia, MD, of the University of KwaZulu-Natal in Durban, South Africa.

In an accompanying commentary, they noted that early weaning is accompanied by increases in infant death and illness, as well as by faltering growth.

"Early weaning is neither effective nor safe as an HIV prevention strategy," they concluded.

On the other hand, they added, continued anti-retroviral therapy does prevent transmission, and there are hints that even in women who don't need treatment for their own health the drugs reduce the risk of maternal death.

TAKING aspirin after being diagnosed with bowel cancer can reduce the chance of dying from the disease by 30%, research shows today.

Bowel cancer patients who took a daily dose of aspirin for at least nine months after their diagnosis cut their chance of dying from the disease by 30%, a study shows.

It adds to the growing evidence of aspirin as a potential cancer treatment although more research is needed.

Researchers added that bowel cancer patients who took aspirin for any length of time post-diagnosis had a 23% less chance of dying from bowel cancer compared with patients who took no aspirin at all.

Bowel cancer is the third most common cancer in the UK - with around 41,000 new cases of the disease a year.

But bowel cancer is the second most common cause of cancer death in the UK after lung cancer - around 16,000 people died of the disease in 2010 in the UK.

The study, published in the British Journal of Cancer, looked at 4,500 bowel cancer patients from the Eindhoven Cancer Registry in the Netherlands diagnosed between 1998 and 2007.

A quarter of patients were not aspirin users, a further quarter only took aspirin after being diagnosed with bowel cancer and the remaining group took aspirin both before and after diagnosis.

Dr Gerrit-Jan Liefers, study author based at the Leiden University Medical Centre, The Netherlands, said: "Our findings could have profound clinical implications.

"In this study, we showed the therapeutic effect of a widely-available, familiar drug that costs mere pennies per day.

"It's possible that some older people may have other health problems which mean that they are not well enough to have chemotherapy.

"Bowel cancer is more common in older people so these results could be a big advance in treatment of the disease, particularly in this group. But we need further research to confirm this."

The research team are planning to start a randomised controlled trial across the Netherlands later this year, specifically targeting the over-70s population.

The study also found that taking aspirin only after bowel cancer had been detected had a bigger impact on reducing death compared with when aspirin was taken before and after diagnosis.

Researchers said it may be that those who took aspirin and still got bowel cancer could have had a particularly aggressive form of tumour that did not respond as well to aspirin.

This research just looked at bowel cancer patients - focusing on the impact of aspirin in treatment of cancer rather than the drug's preventative benefits.

Previous studies have shown that taking a daily dose of aspirin for several years can help to lower the risk of a number of cancers including bowel and oesophageal cancers.

Cancer Research UK is already investigating the anti-cancer properties of aspirin.

Sarah Lyness, executive director policy and information at Cancer Research UK, said: "This latest study adds to the growing evidence about the benefits of aspirin.

"The latest evidence suggests that the drug not only reduces the risk of dying from cancer, but can also help prevent the disease from developing in the first place.

"But we are not yet at the point where we would recommend people start taking aspirin to reduce their chances of developing cancer.

"There are still questions we need to answer about the side effects, such as internal bleeding, who might benefit most from taking aspirin, who might be harmed, what dose and how long people some people might want to take it for."

Being stuck in a job you dislike can manifest itself in physical pain, say scientists.

They believe that many sufferers of back pain may simply be unhappy at work.

Researchers claim the phenomenon is unique because in no other circumstances do a person's feelings lead to physical pain.

Sufferers may be able to 'think themselves better', as those with a positive attitude to work are less likely to have lower back problems, they say.

In a study, only 33 per cent of people with niggling non-specific backache developed persistent pain that severely affected their career and social lives.

Although some workers required extended sick leave, only a few had suffered a physical change such as a slipped disc.

Anatomical tests of the other patients involved in the study showed no physical reasons for ongoing daily problems with pain.

Study leader Professor Markus Melloh, said: 'Attitude and positivity in the workplace has a huge impact on lower back pain.

'Positive thinking would make people better. If they get occasional back pain and say, "that's life" there is more chance it will go away by itself.

'If an employee has the option to alter their workplace or job design, the condition may correct itself due to the person regaining positivity.

'Having somebody to listen and show emotional support at work is a strong protective factor.'

There are no similar processes that occur in the human body where feelings result in physical pain.

Furthermore, the reason people have varying attitudes towards work and life in general could be connected to the way they were brought up.

A total of 315 patients who went to their GP with their first episode of non-specific back pain were interviewed and followed up at three, six and 12 weeks. The assessment included questions about their attitude.

By the end of the study, 169 people were still participating in the research and about a third of them - 64 patients - were classed as having a persistent condition.

Some reported worse pain after six months, which could be due to getting into a negativity spiral.

'Once people stay at home on sick leave, it gets harder to go back to work and the pain gets worse,' Dr Melloh said.

'It's a vicious circle that needs to be broken. The research shows that if patients feel helpless and are convinced that any movement will land them in a wheelchair, they are making their condition worse.'

The research also suggested there were very few ways to provide medical proof that back pain exists.

Dr Melloh added: 'Back pain is just people telling you they have pain in the back.

'I do not want to encourage people to quit their jobs, but to see if they can make any alterations to their current role.

'If people learn to cope with things and not to ruminate over things, they may be more positive towards life and their work.'