NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Kids hospitalized with the flu are more likely to need intensive care and a longer stay if they've been exposed to second-hand smoke at home, a small new study finds.
Analyzing the records of more than 100 kids hospitalized with flu in New York state, researchers found those exposed to second-hand smoke were five times more likely to be admitted to the intensive care unit and required a 70 percent longer stay in the hospital, compared to the kids not exposed to smoke.
'People are being a bit complacent and thinking that because they don't see smoking as often.that it's not a problem anymore,' said Dr. Karen Wilson, of Children's Hospital Colorado, in Aurora, who led the study. 'But we still need to be vigilant about protecting kids from second-hand smoke.'
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, passive smoking causes ear infection, breathing problems and lung infections in children, and leads to the hospitalization of up to 15,000 children under the age of 18 months every year.
The new work is the first study to look at the effect of second-hand smoke on kids with influenza, however.
Wilson and her team looked at hospital records for 117 kids admitted for influenza to a New York hospital between 2002 and 2009.
Second-hand smoke exposure was reported on the charts of 40 percent of the kids - slightly lower than the 53 percent national exposure rate for kids under 11 estimated by the CDC in 2008.
During the seven-year study, researchers found that overall, 18 percent of the flu-affected kids were admitted to intensive care, and six percent needed to be intubated with a breathing tube. On average, kids stayed in the hospital for two days.
When Wilson and her team compared the kids who had been exposed to second-hand smoke to those who weren't, they found that 30 percent of smoke-exposed kids needed intensive care versus 10 percent of unexposed kids. Intubation was required for 13 percent of smoke-exposed kids, compared to one percent of those from a smoke-free home.
Hospital stays were up to 70 percent longer for smoke-exposed kids, with kids staying in for four days on average, compared with 2.4 days in non-exposed kids. If kids had a chronic illness as well as the flu, their length of stay increased to about 10 days, on average, if they had been breathing second-hand smoke, versus about three days in non-exposed sick kids.
'We've known that (second-hand smoke) is bad for children in a whole variety of ways,' said Dr. Susan Coffin, who has studied flu complications in children at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. 'With this (study) we see that smoke exposure not only increases risk of hospitalization but it specifically makes the course of illness worse.'
The small study, published in The Journal of Pediatrics, does have limitations. The authors note in their report, for instance, that children with severe illnesses may have been screened more frequently for smoke exposure, leading to an underestimate of how many kids were exposed to smoke.
Still, the findings do point to a need for better screening when kids with the flu are seen in the ER, researchers said.
'If you have a child who comes into the hospital and they are exposed to tobacco smoke, they have more risk of going on to develop more severe illness,' Wilson told Reuters Health. Knowing that kids are at increased risk could help physicians make better treatment decisions, she added.
For Wilson, it's critical that children don't end up in the ER in the first place.
'This is a preventable cause of severe flu, and it's sad that children are in a position to be exposed even though these serious complications can occur,' said Wilson.
'Obviously not smoking and protecting children from smoke won't stop them from getting influenza, but it may help it from becoming a severe illness or (preventing) complications that we sometimes see,' she added.
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/OFA4oS The Journal of Pediatrics, online August 6, 2012.
This article is brought to you by DATING ADVICE.
Friday, August 31, 2012
Wednesday, August 29, 2012
Cataract risk for kids on Vertex's cystic fibrosis pill: FDA
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Children taking Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc's cystic fibrosis pill may be at risk of getting cataracts, based on a study in juvenile rats, according to a statement Wednesday on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's website.
The FDA added information about the risk on Wednesday to the label for Kalydeco, the first drug designed to treat the underlying cause of cystic fibrosis, a life-shortening genetic disease that impairs the lungs and digestive system and affects about 30,000 people in the United States.
Shares of the company slipped 1.0 percent to $53.55 in morning trading on Nasdaq.
Rats that were seven to 35 days old developed cataracts after being given a dose of Kalydeco that was about a tenth of the maximum recommended dose for people, the study showed. Cataracts are a clouding of the lens in the eye that can impair vision.
It was uncertain whether the finding in juvenile rats would apply to children, since people and rats have different eye development, the FDA said.
To ascertain the risks to children, the regulator has asked Vertex to conduct a clinical study of the risk of cataracts in kids who are already taking Kalydeco up to 11 years of age, when eye development is generally complete. The children must be followed for at least two years and get eye appointments every six months.
The FDA approved Kalydeco in January for patients from six years of age and older, who have a specific defective protein which causes cystic fibrosis in about 4 percent of patients.
Vertex still plans to expand use of the drug to patients as young as two, and is set to launch a study in that group later this year.
Company spokeswoman Dawn Kalmar said the company had received no complaints about cataracts from about 350 people who took the drug during clinical trials, or from more than 600 people who have been treated with it since January.
Kalydeco is Vertex's second product approved in the United States, after a hepatitis C treatment called Incivek.
(Reporting by Anna Yukhananov in Washington, additional reporting by Esha Dey in Bangalore; Editing by Bernadette Baum)
This news article is brought to you by FREE ROMANTIC DATING SITE BLOG - where latest news are our top priority.
The FDA added information about the risk on Wednesday to the label for Kalydeco, the first drug designed to treat the underlying cause of cystic fibrosis, a life-shortening genetic disease that impairs the lungs and digestive system and affects about 30,000 people in the United States.
Shares of the company slipped 1.0 percent to $53.55 in morning trading on Nasdaq.
Rats that were seven to 35 days old developed cataracts after being given a dose of Kalydeco that was about a tenth of the maximum recommended dose for people, the study showed. Cataracts are a clouding of the lens in the eye that can impair vision.
It was uncertain whether the finding in juvenile rats would apply to children, since people and rats have different eye development, the FDA said.
To ascertain the risks to children, the regulator has asked Vertex to conduct a clinical study of the risk of cataracts in kids who are already taking Kalydeco up to 11 years of age, when eye development is generally complete. The children must be followed for at least two years and get eye appointments every six months.
The FDA approved Kalydeco in January for patients from six years of age and older, who have a specific defective protein which causes cystic fibrosis in about 4 percent of patients.
Vertex still plans to expand use of the drug to patients as young as two, and is set to launch a study in that group later this year.
Company spokeswoman Dawn Kalmar said the company had received no complaints about cataracts from about 350 people who took the drug during clinical trials, or from more than 600 people who have been treated with it since January.
Kalydeco is Vertex's second product approved in the United States, after a hepatitis C treatment called Incivek.
(Reporting by Anna Yukhananov in Washington, additional reporting by Esha Dey in Bangalore; Editing by Bernadette Baum)
This news article is brought to you by FREE ROMANTIC DATING SITE BLOG - where latest news are our top priority.
Tuesday, August 28, 2012
No risks seen with flu shot in early pregnancy
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Adding to evidence that the flu shot is safe for pregnant women, a new study finds no link between the vaccine and the risk of serious birth defects.
The study, of nearly 9,000 pregnant women who got the flu shot, found that about 2 percent had a baby with a major birth defect, such as a malformation in the heart or a cleft lip.
That was identical to the rate among almost 77,000 pregnant women who did not get the vaccine.
What's more, researchers found, women who got vaccinated were less likely to suffer a stillbirth (a pregnancy loss after the 20th week): 0.3 percent did, versus 0.6 percent of unvaccinated women.
Their newborns also had a lower death rate: 0.2 percent died soon after birth, compared with 0.4 percent of babies born to unvaccinated moms.
It's not clear if the flu vaccine deserves the credit. But Dr. Jeanne S. Sheffield, the lead researcher on the work, said it's possible the vaccine helped by preventing severe cases of the flu.
'Can we say for sure that it's the vaccine? No,' said Sheffield, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas.
But, she added, these findings suggest that the flu shot is at least safe, and possibly has a benefit against stillbirth.
Sheffield and her colleagues report the findings in the journal Obstetrics & Gynecology.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and other groups recommend that all pregnant women get a seasonal flu shot.
That's because pregnant women are more likely than other women their age to get a severe case of the flu or have complications, such as pneumonia. The flu is also thought to raise the risk of preterm delivery and fetal distress.
Still, Sheffield said, many women and doctors alike still have concerns about flu vaccine safety during pregnancy - especially the first trimester, which is when birth defects form and when most miscarriages happen.
But in this study, the researchers found that vaccination during the first trimester came with no increased risk of birth defects.
Despite recommendations to get the flu shot, most pregnant women do not. In the U.S., only between 10 percent and one-quarter of women have been vaccinated each flu season over the last couple decades, Sheffield's team notes.
Based on studies, that seems largely due to safety worries.
On the other hand, Sheffield said 'it's amazing' how many women are unaware that the flu itself is considered a risk during pregnancy.
'The flu is a problem in pregnancy,' she said. 'But we have a vaccine to prevent it. And it's considered safe and effective in any trimester.'
A CDC study published last year found 'no unusual patterns' of pregnancy complications or newborn health problems among U.S. women who received the flu shot between 1990 and 2009.
Based on cases reported to the CDC's Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, the rate of miscarriage was 1.9 per one million vaccinated pregnant women.
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/NZKSve Obstetrics & Gynecology, September 2012.
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIPS ADVICE.
The study, of nearly 9,000 pregnant women who got the flu shot, found that about 2 percent had a baby with a major birth defect, such as a malformation in the heart or a cleft lip.
That was identical to the rate among almost 77,000 pregnant women who did not get the vaccine.
What's more, researchers found, women who got vaccinated were less likely to suffer a stillbirth (a pregnancy loss after the 20th week): 0.3 percent did, versus 0.6 percent of unvaccinated women.
Their newborns also had a lower death rate: 0.2 percent died soon after birth, compared with 0.4 percent of babies born to unvaccinated moms.
It's not clear if the flu vaccine deserves the credit. But Dr. Jeanne S. Sheffield, the lead researcher on the work, said it's possible the vaccine helped by preventing severe cases of the flu.
'Can we say for sure that it's the vaccine? No,' said Sheffield, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas.
But, she added, these findings suggest that the flu shot is at least safe, and possibly has a benefit against stillbirth.
Sheffield and her colleagues report the findings in the journal Obstetrics & Gynecology.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and other groups recommend that all pregnant women get a seasonal flu shot.
That's because pregnant women are more likely than other women their age to get a severe case of the flu or have complications, such as pneumonia. The flu is also thought to raise the risk of preterm delivery and fetal distress.
Still, Sheffield said, many women and doctors alike still have concerns about flu vaccine safety during pregnancy - especially the first trimester, which is when birth defects form and when most miscarriages happen.
But in this study, the researchers found that vaccination during the first trimester came with no increased risk of birth defects.
Despite recommendations to get the flu shot, most pregnant women do not. In the U.S., only between 10 percent and one-quarter of women have been vaccinated each flu season over the last couple decades, Sheffield's team notes.
Based on studies, that seems largely due to safety worries.
On the other hand, Sheffield said 'it's amazing' how many women are unaware that the flu itself is considered a risk during pregnancy.
'The flu is a problem in pregnancy,' she said. 'But we have a vaccine to prevent it. And it's considered safe and effective in any trimester.'
A CDC study published last year found 'no unusual patterns' of pregnancy complications or newborn health problems among U.S. women who received the flu shot between 1990 and 2009.
Based on cases reported to the CDC's Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, the rate of miscarriage was 1.9 per one million vaccinated pregnant women.
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/NZKSve Obstetrics & Gynecology, September 2012.
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIPS ADVICE.
Monday, August 27, 2012
Pediatricians Group Praises Benefits of Circumcision for Male Infants
Evidence for the long-term health benefits of circumcision for newborn boys has been mounting for years. Today the influential group the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) declared that the procedure is, indeed, beneficial and that it should be covered by public and private health insurance plans. The recommendation was published online August 27 in Pediatrics.
Previously the group was less committal on the subject of circumcision, their last guidelines noting that it was not "a medical necessity for the well-being of the child." But "since that time, substantial contributions have been made to the peer-reviewed literature," The AAP noted.
The new statement comes after five years of work by the group's Task Force on Circumcision and an analysis of 15 years of the medical literature on circumcision. The new recommendations are also backed by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
With the removal of part or all of the penis's foreskin, a male child's risk of urinary tract infections, sexually transmitted infections including the human papillomavirus (HPV) and penile cancer are reduced, the organization noted. Removing the skin reduces the areas that infectious bugs can linger. A study published earlier this year in Cancer linked circumcision to a 15 percent lower risk of getting prostate cancer. Circumcision has also been shown to drastically reduce the spread of HIV, and the World Health Organization now recommends it as a preventive strategy. A 2011 study found that circumcision, including that of adults and adolescents, in many African countries could prevent millions of new HIV infections in both men and women on that continent over the next decade, saving lives and billions of dollars in future health care costs.
With all of this evidence, "the procedure's benefits justify access to this procedure for families who choose it," the task force concluded. The group recommends that circumcision should be performed by trained medical workers, using sterilized equipment and adequate pain management. It acknowledges that the procedure does carry risks, but most of them are minor such as local infection and more major complications are rare. And circumcising a newborn appears to carry the lowest risk of complications compared to other age groups.
The rate of male newborn circumcisions has been declining in the U.S. since the late 1990s, from roughly 62 percent in 1999 to 57 percent in 2008, according to the National Hospital Discharge Survey. Without insurance coverage, newborn male circumcision can cost upward of $600, and public and private health plans do not always cover the procedure.
The group does not go so far as to insist every male baby be circumcised, despite the medical evidence for its benefits. "Parents should weigh the health benefits and risks in light of their own religious, cultural and personal preferences," the task force noted in their more detailed technical report, also published online August 27 in Pediatrics. It also might not be appropriate for infants who have other medical complications, or it might be delayed for health or cultural traditions.
"Ultimately, this is a decision that parents will have to make," Susan Blank a pediatrician affiliated with the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene and who chaired the task force, said in a prepared statement. But "parents are entitled to medically accurate and non-biased information about circumcision," and should talk with their doctors early in pregnancy to ensure adequate decision making time and to establish whether they can get insurance coverage for the procedure, she noted.
Follow Scientific American on Twitter @SciAm and @SciamBlogs. Visit ScientificAmerican.com for the latest in science, health and technology news.
© 2012 ScientificAmerican.com. All rights reserved.
This news article is brought to you by ECONOMY BLOG - where latest news are our top priority.
Previously the group was less committal on the subject of circumcision, their last guidelines noting that it was not "a medical necessity for the well-being of the child." But "since that time, substantial contributions have been made to the peer-reviewed literature," The AAP noted.
The new statement comes after five years of work by the group's Task Force on Circumcision and an analysis of 15 years of the medical literature on circumcision. The new recommendations are also backed by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
With the removal of part or all of the penis's foreskin, a male child's risk of urinary tract infections, sexually transmitted infections including the human papillomavirus (HPV) and penile cancer are reduced, the organization noted. Removing the skin reduces the areas that infectious bugs can linger. A study published earlier this year in Cancer linked circumcision to a 15 percent lower risk of getting prostate cancer. Circumcision has also been shown to drastically reduce the spread of HIV, and the World Health Organization now recommends it as a preventive strategy. A 2011 study found that circumcision, including that of adults and adolescents, in many African countries could prevent millions of new HIV infections in both men and women on that continent over the next decade, saving lives and billions of dollars in future health care costs.
With all of this evidence, "the procedure's benefits justify access to this procedure for families who choose it," the task force concluded. The group recommends that circumcision should be performed by trained medical workers, using sterilized equipment and adequate pain management. It acknowledges that the procedure does carry risks, but most of them are minor such as local infection and more major complications are rare. And circumcising a newborn appears to carry the lowest risk of complications compared to other age groups.
The rate of male newborn circumcisions has been declining in the U.S. since the late 1990s, from roughly 62 percent in 1999 to 57 percent in 2008, according to the National Hospital Discharge Survey. Without insurance coverage, newborn male circumcision can cost upward of $600, and public and private health plans do not always cover the procedure.
The group does not go so far as to insist every male baby be circumcised, despite the medical evidence for its benefits. "Parents should weigh the health benefits and risks in light of their own religious, cultural and personal preferences," the task force noted in their more detailed technical report, also published online August 27 in Pediatrics. It also might not be appropriate for infants who have other medical complications, or it might be delayed for health or cultural traditions.
"Ultimately, this is a decision that parents will have to make," Susan Blank a pediatrician affiliated with the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene and who chaired the task force, said in a prepared statement. But "parents are entitled to medically accurate and non-biased information about circumcision," and should talk with their doctors early in pregnancy to ensure adequate decision making time and to establish whether they can get insurance coverage for the procedure, she noted.
Follow Scientific American on Twitter @SciAm and @SciamBlogs. Visit ScientificAmerican.com for the latest in science, health and technology news.
© 2012 ScientificAmerican.com. All rights reserved.
This news article is brought to you by ECONOMY BLOG - where latest news are our top priority.
Saturday, August 25, 2012
Baltimore's 'Batman' just wants to help sick kids
Batman, the comic book superhero, stalks the night saving Gotham from villains, but Baltimore's Caped Crusader just wants sick kids to feel better -- a mission undeterred by last month's deadly shooting at a screening of the fictional hero's latest movie.
Clad in a heavy leather and neoprene Batsuit, the Baltimore man drove up on a recent day to the orthopedic wing of the east coast city's Sinai hospital in a slick Batmobile -- a perfect replica of the Hollywood one.
Excitement bubbled over just inside the entrance, where kids in wheelchairs, parents and medical personnel were eagerly watching the Dark Knight arrive.
In a game room set up for the special visit, a cardboard replica of Batman stood amid piles of Batman-themed crayon boxes, t-shirts, glasses, and necklaces made of bats.
The man behind the costume is Lenny Robinson, 48, a tall, muscular father of three adult children.
For the last 11 years, the wealthy former businessman has dedicated himself to these visits, bringing gifts and a bit of fun to the young hospital patients.
This day, Batman approached 6-year-old Farrah, whose legs were supported by metal braces.
'Farrah, do me a favor,' Batman said, leaning towards the shy little girl, before whispering in her ear.
'I never ask kids how they are,' Robinson later explained to AFP.
'I say hi, it's nice to meet you, and I give them a present,' he said.
Then he tells them to 'do Batman a favor: get better. That will make me very happy.'
Robinson took up the Batman mantle at the inspiration of his son, who, he said, was 'obsessed by Batman.'
Robinson inherited the obsession, and then transformed it, ultimately organizing his efforts into a charity: superheroesforkids.org.
He doesn't get paid for his appearances, which average twice a month. Instead he spends some $60,000 (48,159 euros) a year from his own pocket on gifts for the kids. And he spent another $215,000 this year on a new Batmobile, which he donated to the foundation.
Robinson, who sold his commercial cleaning business to great profit in 2007, said he has plenty of time and money for the job.
'I swim, go on vacation, and go be Batman,' he smiled. 'It's a full time job.'
'When the kids know he's coming, there is excitement,' said John Herzenberg, head doctor at Sinai hospital's orthopedic wing.
'Anything to divert their attention from their troubles and the pain they are having is a good thing.'
-- The caring, polite side of Batman --
Robinson has earned local stardom in his hometown, and his fame only grew last spring when, dressed as the masked vigilante, his Batmobile was pulled over by police.
Officers stopped him because the car -- an earlier version of the Batmobile that was really a decked out Lamborghini -- wasn't displaying its license plates. In their place was the bat symbol.
The police thought they were pulling over 'some rich dude in a freaking Batman outfit' who thought he didn't have to follow the rules, Robinson laughed.
Then they realized that Robinson had the real plates in the car -- and that he was on a superhero mission to visit a local hospital.
A video of the incident went viral on the web.
But his mission suffered more of a setback last month, when a gunman massacred 12 people and wounded dozens more in a Colorado movie theater, on opening night of the latest installment of the 'Dark Knight' trilogy.
Two hospitals immediately cancelled their long-planned dates with the Winged Avenger.
'The timing was unfortunate for Mr. Robinson's visit, as it was scheduled just three days after the shooting,' a spokeswoman for the St. Louis Children's hospital in Missouri, told AFP.
'We felt our patients -- and their families -- needed some time and distance from those images,' she explained, adding the hospital planned to reschedule the visit.
'I understand and respect the hospital's decision,' said Robinson. 'The last thing I want to do is to upset (the children). That would be the opposite of what I want to do.'
Despite the shooting, Baltimore's Batman remains in high demand across the US -- with upcoming stops scheduled for Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and New York. Even European hospitals have requested a visit.
Robinson, who at times adopts the voice of the children's cartoon character SpongeBob SquarePants to avoid scaring the littlest patients, says, unlike the comic book hero, his Batman has no connection to violence.
'I'm the comical, funny, caring, polite, respectful side of Batman,' he insisted.
This news article is brought to you by CELEBRITY MUSIC NEWS - where latest news are our top priority.
Clad in a heavy leather and neoprene Batsuit, the Baltimore man drove up on a recent day to the orthopedic wing of the east coast city's Sinai hospital in a slick Batmobile -- a perfect replica of the Hollywood one.
Excitement bubbled over just inside the entrance, where kids in wheelchairs, parents and medical personnel were eagerly watching the Dark Knight arrive.
In a game room set up for the special visit, a cardboard replica of Batman stood amid piles of Batman-themed crayon boxes, t-shirts, glasses, and necklaces made of bats.
The man behind the costume is Lenny Robinson, 48, a tall, muscular father of three adult children.
For the last 11 years, the wealthy former businessman has dedicated himself to these visits, bringing gifts and a bit of fun to the young hospital patients.
This day, Batman approached 6-year-old Farrah, whose legs were supported by metal braces.
'Farrah, do me a favor,' Batman said, leaning towards the shy little girl, before whispering in her ear.
'I never ask kids how they are,' Robinson later explained to AFP.
'I say hi, it's nice to meet you, and I give them a present,' he said.
Then he tells them to 'do Batman a favor: get better. That will make me very happy.'
Robinson took up the Batman mantle at the inspiration of his son, who, he said, was 'obsessed by Batman.'
Robinson inherited the obsession, and then transformed it, ultimately organizing his efforts into a charity: superheroesforkids.org.
He doesn't get paid for his appearances, which average twice a month. Instead he spends some $60,000 (48,159 euros) a year from his own pocket on gifts for the kids. And he spent another $215,000 this year on a new Batmobile, which he donated to the foundation.
Robinson, who sold his commercial cleaning business to great profit in 2007, said he has plenty of time and money for the job.
'I swim, go on vacation, and go be Batman,' he smiled. 'It's a full time job.'
'When the kids know he's coming, there is excitement,' said John Herzenberg, head doctor at Sinai hospital's orthopedic wing.
'Anything to divert their attention from their troubles and the pain they are having is a good thing.'
-- The caring, polite side of Batman --
Robinson has earned local stardom in his hometown, and his fame only grew last spring when, dressed as the masked vigilante, his Batmobile was pulled over by police.
Officers stopped him because the car -- an earlier version of the Batmobile that was really a decked out Lamborghini -- wasn't displaying its license plates. In their place was the bat symbol.
The police thought they were pulling over 'some rich dude in a freaking Batman outfit' who thought he didn't have to follow the rules, Robinson laughed.
Then they realized that Robinson had the real plates in the car -- and that he was on a superhero mission to visit a local hospital.
A video of the incident went viral on the web.
But his mission suffered more of a setback last month, when a gunman massacred 12 people and wounded dozens more in a Colorado movie theater, on opening night of the latest installment of the 'Dark Knight' trilogy.
Two hospitals immediately cancelled their long-planned dates with the Winged Avenger.
'The timing was unfortunate for Mr. Robinson's visit, as it was scheduled just three days after the shooting,' a spokeswoman for the St. Louis Children's hospital in Missouri, told AFP.
'We felt our patients -- and their families -- needed some time and distance from those images,' she explained, adding the hospital planned to reschedule the visit.
'I understand and respect the hospital's decision,' said Robinson. 'The last thing I want to do is to upset (the children). That would be the opposite of what I want to do.'
Despite the shooting, Baltimore's Batman remains in high demand across the US -- with upcoming stops scheduled for Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and New York. Even European hospitals have requested a visit.
Robinson, who at times adopts the voice of the children's cartoon character SpongeBob SquarePants to avoid scaring the littlest patients, says, unlike the comic book hero, his Batman has no connection to violence.
'I'm the comical, funny, caring, polite, respectful side of Batman,' he insisted.
This news article is brought to you by CELEBRITY MUSIC NEWS - where latest news are our top priority.
Wednesday, August 22, 2012
Cartoon stickers may sway kids' food choices: study
(Reuters) - Can Elmo make children like apples?
For children who turn up their noses at fruits and vegetables, slapping a cartoon face on a healthy snack may make those choices more appealing, according to a U.S. study.
Researchers, whose findings appeared in the Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, discovered that when elementary school students were offered apples and cookies with lunch, children were more likely to opt for an apple when it was branded with a cartoon sticker - such as one of the 'Sesame Street' character Elmo.
'If we're trying to promote healthier foods, we need to be as smart as the companies that are selling the less-healthy foods,' said David Just, co-director of the Cornell Center for Behavioral Economics in Child Nutrition Program, who worked on the study.
Noting that cartoon characters and flashy advertising often don cookie and candy packaging, he added, 'The message should be: fight fire with fire.'
Just and his colleagues offered cookies and apples to 208 eight- to 11-year-olds at suburban and rural schools every day at lunch for a week. Children were allowed to choose an apple, a cookie or both, along with their normal meal.
Some days, the snacks were offered without cartoon stickers or other branding. On other days, either the cookie or the apple was branded with a familiar cartoon character.
When the snacks weren't specially marked, 91 percent of children took a cookie and just under one-quarter took an apple.
But when an Elmo sticker was slapped on the apples, 37 percent of children took fruit, the researchers reported.
Stickers on cookies didn't affect children's choice of the sweet snack.
'There are so many foods that are of poor nutritional quality and they are being marketed to children,' said Christina Roberto, who studies food choices at the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston and did not take part in the study.
Kid-friendly characters used for this marketing 'aren't popping up on the carrots and apples as much as they are on a wide range of foods that aren't good for kids,' she added.
Using stickers on fruits and vegetables could be one cheap option to help improve students' diets, she said, as well as something parents can try at home.
'It's not a bad idea to create these positive associations, especially if you're struggling to get kids to eat healthy foods,' she added. SOURCE: http://bit.ly/Rzn7zT
(Reporting from New York by Genevra Pittman at Reuters Health; editing by Elaine Lies)
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIP ADVICE.
For children who turn up their noses at fruits and vegetables, slapping a cartoon face on a healthy snack may make those choices more appealing, according to a U.S. study.
Researchers, whose findings appeared in the Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, discovered that when elementary school students were offered apples and cookies with lunch, children were more likely to opt for an apple when it was branded with a cartoon sticker - such as one of the 'Sesame Street' character Elmo.
'If we're trying to promote healthier foods, we need to be as smart as the companies that are selling the less-healthy foods,' said David Just, co-director of the Cornell Center for Behavioral Economics in Child Nutrition Program, who worked on the study.
Noting that cartoon characters and flashy advertising often don cookie and candy packaging, he added, 'The message should be: fight fire with fire.'
Just and his colleagues offered cookies and apples to 208 eight- to 11-year-olds at suburban and rural schools every day at lunch for a week. Children were allowed to choose an apple, a cookie or both, along with their normal meal.
Some days, the snacks were offered without cartoon stickers or other branding. On other days, either the cookie or the apple was branded with a familiar cartoon character.
When the snacks weren't specially marked, 91 percent of children took a cookie and just under one-quarter took an apple.
But when an Elmo sticker was slapped on the apples, 37 percent of children took fruit, the researchers reported.
Stickers on cookies didn't affect children's choice of the sweet snack.
'There are so many foods that are of poor nutritional quality and they are being marketed to children,' said Christina Roberto, who studies food choices at the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston and did not take part in the study.
Kid-friendly characters used for this marketing 'aren't popping up on the carrots and apples as much as they are on a wide range of foods that aren't good for kids,' she added.
Using stickers on fruits and vegetables could be one cheap option to help improve students' diets, she said, as well as something parents can try at home.
'It's not a bad idea to create these positive associations, especially if you're struggling to get kids to eat healthy foods,' she added. SOURCE: http://bit.ly/Rzn7zT
(Reporting from New York by Genevra Pittman at Reuters Health; editing by Elaine Lies)
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIP ADVICE.
Tuesday, August 21, 2012
Cartoon stickers may sway kids' food choices
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - For youngsters who turn up their noses at fruits and vegetables, slapping a cartoon face on a healthy snack could make those choices more appealing, a new study suggests.
Researchers found that when elementary school students were offered apples and cookies with lunch, kids were more likely to opt for an apple when it was branded with an Elmo sticker.
One researcher not involved in the new study said parents and school administrators can take a lesson from food companies: Elmo, Dora the Explorer and SpongeBob help sell snacks, healthy or unhealthy.
'There are so many foods that are of poor nutritional quality and they are being marketed to children,' said Christina Roberto, who studies food choices at the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston.
Kid-friendly characters used for marketing 'aren't popping up on the carrots and apples as much as they are on a wide range of foods that aren't so good for kids,' Roberto told Reuters Health.
Those cartoon characters and other flashy advertising often don cookie and candy packaging, said David Just, co-director of the Cornell Center for Behavioral Economics in Child Nutrition Programs in Ithaca, New York.
For the new study, Just and his colleagues did the apple and cookie experiment with 208 eight- to 11-year-olds at suburban and rural schools every day at lunch for a week. Kids were allowed to choose an apple, a cookie or both snacks along with their normal meal.
Some of those days, the snacks were offered without cartoon stickers or other branding. On other days, either the cookie or the apple was branded with a familiar kids' character.
When the snacks weren't specially marked, 91 percent of kids took a cookie and just under one-quarter took an apple.
Putting an Elmo sticker on the apples led 37 percent of kids to take fruit, the researchers reported this week in a letter to the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine.
Stickers on cookies didn't affect kids' choice of the sweet snack - probably because the youngsters already knew they tasted good, according to Just.
Roberto said some experts want branding off of kids' foods altogether, but others are willing to experiment with marketing strategies to encourage kids to make healthier choices.
Just advocated for the latter strategy.
'If we're trying to promote healthier foods, we need to be as smart as the companies that are selling the less-healthy foods,' he told Reuters Health. 'The message should be: fight fire with fire.'
Fire, in this case, being Elmo and other friendly faces, of course.
Using stickers on fruits and vegetables could be one cheap option to help improve students' diets, Roberto said, as well as something parents can try at home.
'It's not a bad idea to create those positive associations,' Roberto said, 'especially if you're struggling to get kids to eat healthy foods.'
Just added that parents can use fun names to encourage little kids especially to see fruits and vegetables as cool, such as 'X-ray vision carrots' and 'power peas.'
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/Rzn7zT Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, online August 20, 2012.
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIPS ADVICE.
Researchers found that when elementary school students were offered apples and cookies with lunch, kids were more likely to opt for an apple when it was branded with an Elmo sticker.
One researcher not involved in the new study said parents and school administrators can take a lesson from food companies: Elmo, Dora the Explorer and SpongeBob help sell snacks, healthy or unhealthy.
'There are so many foods that are of poor nutritional quality and they are being marketed to children,' said Christina Roberto, who studies food choices at the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston.
Kid-friendly characters used for marketing 'aren't popping up on the carrots and apples as much as they are on a wide range of foods that aren't so good for kids,' Roberto told Reuters Health.
Those cartoon characters and other flashy advertising often don cookie and candy packaging, said David Just, co-director of the Cornell Center for Behavioral Economics in Child Nutrition Programs in Ithaca, New York.
For the new study, Just and his colleagues did the apple and cookie experiment with 208 eight- to 11-year-olds at suburban and rural schools every day at lunch for a week. Kids were allowed to choose an apple, a cookie or both snacks along with their normal meal.
Some of those days, the snacks were offered without cartoon stickers or other branding. On other days, either the cookie or the apple was branded with a familiar kids' character.
When the snacks weren't specially marked, 91 percent of kids took a cookie and just under one-quarter took an apple.
Putting an Elmo sticker on the apples led 37 percent of kids to take fruit, the researchers reported this week in a letter to the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine.
Stickers on cookies didn't affect kids' choice of the sweet snack - probably because the youngsters already knew they tasted good, according to Just.
Roberto said some experts want branding off of kids' foods altogether, but others are willing to experiment with marketing strategies to encourage kids to make healthier choices.
Just advocated for the latter strategy.
'If we're trying to promote healthier foods, we need to be as smart as the companies that are selling the less-healthy foods,' he told Reuters Health. 'The message should be: fight fire with fire.'
Fire, in this case, being Elmo and other friendly faces, of course.
Using stickers on fruits and vegetables could be one cheap option to help improve students' diets, Roberto said, as well as something parents can try at home.
'It's not a bad idea to create those positive associations,' Roberto said, 'especially if you're struggling to get kids to eat healthy foods.'
Just added that parents can use fun names to encourage little kids especially to see fruits and vegetables as cool, such as 'X-ray vision carrots' and 'power peas.'
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/Rzn7zT Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, online August 20, 2012.
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIPS ADVICE.
Smoking during pregnancy tied to kids' asthma
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Children whose mothers smoked during pregnancy may have an increased risk of asthma - even if they were not exposed to secondhand smoke after birth, a large study of European children suggests.
Many studies have found that secondhand smoke may worsen kids' asthma symptoms, or possibly raise their risk of developing the lung disease in the first place.
But it's been less clear if smoking during pregnancy is linked to asthma. Most studies have not been able to tease out the possible effects from those of secondhand smoke after birth.
The new study, however, had a large enough group of kids who were exposed to smoking in the womb, but not after birth, according to the researchers.
And it found that those children were two-thirds more likely to have asthma by age six, versus kids whose moms did not smoke during pregnancy. Even smoking during the first trimester alone was linked to higher asthma risk.
The findings cannot prove that prenatal smoking was the cause.
But there are already plenty of reasons for women who are planning to have a baby to quit smoking, said Anna Bergstrom, a researcher at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm who worked on the study.
Smoking during pregnancy is linked to increased risks of miscarriage, low birth weight, certain birth defects and other pregnancy complications.
'I think that our study provides yet another good reason to quit smoking,' Bergstrom said in an email.
The findings, published online in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, come from data on 21,600 European children.
There were 735 children whose mothers said they'd smoked during pregnancy but not after giving birth.
Just under seven percent of all children in the study had been diagnosed with asthma by the time they were four to six years old. And the risk, Bergstrom's team found, was higher when mothers had smoked during pregnancy.
Those children were 65 percent more likely to develop asthma, when factors like birthweight and both parents' own history of asthma were taken into account.
These types of studies point to correlations, and cannot prove cause-and-effect.
But Bergstrom said it is 'biologically plausible' that prenatal smoking raises a child's future asthma risk. Exactly how is not clear, but chemicals in tobacco smoke may affect early lung development.
And if there are direct effects, they may happen early in pregnancy, the current findings suggest.
Of the mothers who smoked only during pregnancy, most quit during the second or third trimester. But first-trimester smoking alone was linked to a doubling in a child's risk of asthma.
'For many reasons - not only thinking about asthma in the offspring - it is a good idea to quit smoking when planning a pregnancy, or as early as possible in a pregnancy,' Bergstrom said.
Some pregnant women may be able to quit smoking with behavioral counseling. In some cases, a doctor may prescribe nicotine replacement therapy or other medication.
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/O2vqAY American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, online August 17, 2012.
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIPS ADVICE.
Many studies have found that secondhand smoke may worsen kids' asthma symptoms, or possibly raise their risk of developing the lung disease in the first place.
But it's been less clear if smoking during pregnancy is linked to asthma. Most studies have not been able to tease out the possible effects from those of secondhand smoke after birth.
The new study, however, had a large enough group of kids who were exposed to smoking in the womb, but not after birth, according to the researchers.
And it found that those children were two-thirds more likely to have asthma by age six, versus kids whose moms did not smoke during pregnancy. Even smoking during the first trimester alone was linked to higher asthma risk.
The findings cannot prove that prenatal smoking was the cause.
But there are already plenty of reasons for women who are planning to have a baby to quit smoking, said Anna Bergstrom, a researcher at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm who worked on the study.
Smoking during pregnancy is linked to increased risks of miscarriage, low birth weight, certain birth defects and other pregnancy complications.
'I think that our study provides yet another good reason to quit smoking,' Bergstrom said in an email.
The findings, published online in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, come from data on 21,600 European children.
There were 735 children whose mothers said they'd smoked during pregnancy but not after giving birth.
Just under seven percent of all children in the study had been diagnosed with asthma by the time they were four to six years old. And the risk, Bergstrom's team found, was higher when mothers had smoked during pregnancy.
Those children were 65 percent more likely to develop asthma, when factors like birthweight and both parents' own history of asthma were taken into account.
These types of studies point to correlations, and cannot prove cause-and-effect.
But Bergstrom said it is 'biologically plausible' that prenatal smoking raises a child's future asthma risk. Exactly how is not clear, but chemicals in tobacco smoke may affect early lung development.
And if there are direct effects, they may happen early in pregnancy, the current findings suggest.
Of the mothers who smoked only during pregnancy, most quit during the second or third trimester. But first-trimester smoking alone was linked to a doubling in a child's risk of asthma.
'For many reasons - not only thinking about asthma in the offspring - it is a good idea to quit smoking when planning a pregnancy, or as early as possible in a pregnancy,' Bergstrom said.
Some pregnant women may be able to quit smoking with behavioral counseling. In some cases, a doctor may prescribe nicotine replacement therapy or other medication.
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/O2vqAY American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, online August 17, 2012.
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIPS ADVICE.
Ads may spur unhappy kids to embrace materialism
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Unhappy kids who watch a lot of TV ads may come to believe that material possessions are the key to feeling better, new research hints.
A number of studies in adults have suggested that unhappiness and materialism can create a vicious circle: People who are dissatisfied with their lives may think material possessions will make them happy; and when that fails, they become even more discontent.
Since we're living in a material world, there is concern about what that mindset could mean for kids' life satisfaction.
In the new study, researchers found that, unlike adults, materialistic 8- to 11-year-olds did not become less happy over time.
On the other hand, unhappy kids did become more consumed by material possessions - but only if they watched a lot of TV.
The findings, which appear in the journal Pediatrics, point to links among unhappiness, TV and materialism, though they cannot prove that TV is the villain.
The results do suggest, however, that the ads might 'teach children that possessions are a way to increase happiness,' study leader Suzanna J. Opree, a research associate at the University of Amsterdam in the Netherlands, said in an email.
To help guard against that possibility, she suggested that parents help kids adopt a healthy skepticism toward consumer ads.
The findings are based on 466 Dutch children between the ages of eight and 11, who took an online survey two times, one year apart. On both occasions the kids answered questions about life satisfaction - how happy they were at home, at school, in their relationships and with themselves.
They also rated the importance of material possessions in their life, and the degree to which they thought those things could bring happiness or win them friends.
Overall, Opree's team found no evidence that materialistic kids became less happy by the second survey.
However, kids who were relatively unhappy in the first survey tended to become more materialistic over the next year - but only if they regularly watched TV shows popular with the preteen crowd.
The study points only to general patterns. And there are limitations; the researchers used kids' TV show viewing as a proxy for their exposure to ads, for example.
And in the big picture, according to Opree, TV ads would be just one factor that could affect a child's level of materialism. The same is true of life dissatisfaction, she said.
'Children's social environment - that is, family and peers - plays an important role,' Opree said. 'Values held by family members and peers are more likely to be adopted by the child.'
No studies have been done to show whether parents' values win out over TV ads when it comes to kids' materialism.
But, Opree said, 'what we do know is that parents can counteract advertising's influence.'
Parents can help, she noted, by teaching kids to view ads with a critical eye, and to be skeptical of images that imply a product can make life better. Encouraging kids to see other sources of happiness - like 'love, friendship and play' - might also help, according to Opree's team.
And why should parents worry about keeping kids off the path toward materialism?
It's true that in this study, kids' materialism did not seem to lead to unhappiness, Opree noted. But that was only the short-term outlook, she said.
'Previous studies conducted among adults suggest that it is very likely that children's materialism will lead to decreased life satisfaction later in life,' Opree said.
Whether or not TV ads do affect some kids' materialism, experts already recommend that parents limit children's TV viewing and help them become savvy about advertising in general.
The American Academy of Pediatrics suggests that kids get no more than two hours of non-educational 'screen time' - TV and computers - each day. The group also advises parents to keep TVs and computers out of their kids' bedrooms.
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/PsIjET Pediatrics, online August 20, 2012.
This news article is brought to you by ADVANCED DATING ADVICE - where latest news are our top priority.
A number of studies in adults have suggested that unhappiness and materialism can create a vicious circle: People who are dissatisfied with their lives may think material possessions will make them happy; and when that fails, they become even more discontent.
Since we're living in a material world, there is concern about what that mindset could mean for kids' life satisfaction.
In the new study, researchers found that, unlike adults, materialistic 8- to 11-year-olds did not become less happy over time.
On the other hand, unhappy kids did become more consumed by material possessions - but only if they watched a lot of TV.
The findings, which appear in the journal Pediatrics, point to links among unhappiness, TV and materialism, though they cannot prove that TV is the villain.
The results do suggest, however, that the ads might 'teach children that possessions are a way to increase happiness,' study leader Suzanna J. Opree, a research associate at the University of Amsterdam in the Netherlands, said in an email.
To help guard against that possibility, she suggested that parents help kids adopt a healthy skepticism toward consumer ads.
The findings are based on 466 Dutch children between the ages of eight and 11, who took an online survey two times, one year apart. On both occasions the kids answered questions about life satisfaction - how happy they were at home, at school, in their relationships and with themselves.
They also rated the importance of material possessions in their life, and the degree to which they thought those things could bring happiness or win them friends.
Overall, Opree's team found no evidence that materialistic kids became less happy by the second survey.
However, kids who were relatively unhappy in the first survey tended to become more materialistic over the next year - but only if they regularly watched TV shows popular with the preteen crowd.
The study points only to general patterns. And there are limitations; the researchers used kids' TV show viewing as a proxy for their exposure to ads, for example.
And in the big picture, according to Opree, TV ads would be just one factor that could affect a child's level of materialism. The same is true of life dissatisfaction, she said.
'Children's social environment - that is, family and peers - plays an important role,' Opree said. 'Values held by family members and peers are more likely to be adopted by the child.'
No studies have been done to show whether parents' values win out over TV ads when it comes to kids' materialism.
But, Opree said, 'what we do know is that parents can counteract advertising's influence.'
Parents can help, she noted, by teaching kids to view ads with a critical eye, and to be skeptical of images that imply a product can make life better. Encouraging kids to see other sources of happiness - like 'love, friendship and play' - might also help, according to Opree's team.
And why should parents worry about keeping kids off the path toward materialism?
It's true that in this study, kids' materialism did not seem to lead to unhappiness, Opree noted. But that was only the short-term outlook, she said.
'Previous studies conducted among adults suggest that it is very likely that children's materialism will lead to decreased life satisfaction later in life,' Opree said.
Whether or not TV ads do affect some kids' materialism, experts already recommend that parents limit children's TV viewing and help them become savvy about advertising in general.
The American Academy of Pediatrics suggests that kids get no more than two hours of non-educational 'screen time' - TV and computers - each day. The group also advises parents to keep TVs and computers out of their kids' bedrooms.
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/PsIjET Pediatrics, online August 20, 2012.
This news article is brought to you by ADVANCED DATING ADVICE - where latest news are our top priority.
Monday, August 20, 2012
Rape trauma as barrier to pregnancy has no scientific basis
(Reuters) - The long-discredited notion that rape victims cannot become pregnant - a claim that pushed Republicans to repudiate one of their own U.S. Senate candidates on Monday - dates back centuries to when human reproduction was hardly understood.
But the medieval theory has surfaced in 21st century political discourse as a result of the U.S. abortion wars.
Writers from the Middle Ages and modern politicians alike have based their arguments on the idea that a trauma of the magnitude of rape can shut down the body's reproductive system.
The combination of misunderstanding and cherry-picked science even led some to conclude that a woman who says she was raped yet becomes pregnant must have been lying about the attack. Modern proponents of the claim repeat it despite empirical research showing that rape victims are at least as likely to become pregnant as women who have consensual sex, and possibly more likely.
Representative Todd Akin, the Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate in Missouri, spurred new outrage on the subject when he told a St. Louis television station he does not support abortion for rape victims because "if it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down."
Akin, a member of the House science committee, apologized on Monday for his statement, calling it "ill conceived" and "wrong." Senior Republicans scrambled to distance themselves from the comments a week before the party holds its presidential nominating convention in Florida.
The claim that rape is unlikely to lead to a pregnancy has "no biological plausibility," said Dr. Barbara Levy, vice president for health policy at the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. The claim is "not grounded in any physiology or scientifically valid data."
Akin is not alone in his view about rape and pregnancy, however. It dates at least to medieval times, when a 13th century English legal tome called Fleta asserted that pregnancy was prima facie evidence against a charge of rape, "for without a woman's consent she could not conceive."
A 19th century book, "Elements of Medical Jurisprudence" by Samuel Farr, said that conception is unlikely "without an excitation of lust, or the enjoyment of pleasure in the venereal act." That reflected the common notion that pregnancy requires a woman, like a man, to reach orgasm during intercourse.
Both early references were noted by The Guardian newspaper in a blog post on Monday.
In fact, "human ... female orgasm is not necessary for conception," explained a 1995 paper in the journal Animal Behaviour, one of many studies reaching the same conclusion.
THE STRESS FACTOR
In more modern times, the rape-pregnancy claim seems to have been linked to the fact that stress can decrease fertility.
"Mental stress can temporarily alter the functioning of your hypothalamus - an area of your brain that controls the hormones that regulate your menstrual cycle," explains the Mayo Clinic in a publication about infertility. "Ovulation and menstruation may stop as a result."
But the stress that reduces fertility is the chronic kind that occurs over months or years, not the acute trauma of a rape.
"A woman who is raped at a vulnerable time in her menstrual cycle is as likely to conceive and retain a pregnancy as a woman who was voluntarily attempting pregnancy," said ACOG's Levy. "There's absolutely no validity to any sort of theory that the trauma related to rape - or to any thing else for that matter - would shut down ovulation that has already begun."
Physicians and researchers had long thought that conception occurs when sperm encounter an already-waiting egg. Recent research has shown that in fact sperm do the waiting, remaining in the woman's uterus or fallopian tubes until an egg is released from the ovaries.
Although the trauma of rape might impair a woman's fertility months or years later, said Levy, "you're not going to interrupt something (like the release of an egg) that's already started."
Numerous studies support that. In a 1996 study in the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, researchers surveyed 4,008 American women for three years. Among women in their prime reproductive years, 12 to 45, 5 percent of rapes resulted in pregnancy, mostly among adolescents. One-third "did not discover they were pregnant until they had already entered the second trimester," the researchers found, concluding that "rape-related pregnancy occurs with significant frequency."
It may occur with greater frequency than after consensual sex. Indeed, evolutionary psychologists - who seek to explain human behavior by imagining what actions might have helped our ancient ancestors survive and reproduce - say the reason rape has been so endemic throughout history is precisely because it often leads to pregnancy: men who commit that crime, goes the argument, were more likely to have progeny, passing along their "rape genes" to the next generation.
While the explanation for rape has been discredited, the fact that rape often leads to pregnancy has not been. In a 2003 study in the journal Human Nature, researchers found that 6.4 percent of rapes in the hundreds of women they surveyed caused pregnancy; that compares to a rate roughly half that with consensual intercourse. In Mexico, rape crisis centers have reported that some 15 percent of rapes cause pregnancy.
The rate may be high because rape victims are less likely to be using contraception at the time of the crime than are women in a relationship, who can also choose to forego sex during fertile periods in their reproductive cycle if they do not want to conceive.
(Sharon Begley reported from New York and Susan Heavey from Washington; Editing by Doina Chiacu and Michele Gershberg)
This news article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIPS ADVICE - where latest news are our top priority.
But the medieval theory has surfaced in 21st century political discourse as a result of the U.S. abortion wars.
Writers from the Middle Ages and modern politicians alike have based their arguments on the idea that a trauma of the magnitude of rape can shut down the body's reproductive system.
The combination of misunderstanding and cherry-picked science even led some to conclude that a woman who says she was raped yet becomes pregnant must have been lying about the attack. Modern proponents of the claim repeat it despite empirical research showing that rape victims are at least as likely to become pregnant as women who have consensual sex, and possibly more likely.
Representative Todd Akin, the Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate in Missouri, spurred new outrage on the subject when he told a St. Louis television station he does not support abortion for rape victims because "if it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down."
Akin, a member of the House science committee, apologized on Monday for his statement, calling it "ill conceived" and "wrong." Senior Republicans scrambled to distance themselves from the comments a week before the party holds its presidential nominating convention in Florida.
The claim that rape is unlikely to lead to a pregnancy has "no biological plausibility," said Dr. Barbara Levy, vice president for health policy at the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. The claim is "not grounded in any physiology or scientifically valid data."
Akin is not alone in his view about rape and pregnancy, however. It dates at least to medieval times, when a 13th century English legal tome called Fleta asserted that pregnancy was prima facie evidence against a charge of rape, "for without a woman's consent she could not conceive."
A 19th century book, "Elements of Medical Jurisprudence" by Samuel Farr, said that conception is unlikely "without an excitation of lust, or the enjoyment of pleasure in the venereal act." That reflected the common notion that pregnancy requires a woman, like a man, to reach orgasm during intercourse.
Both early references were noted by The Guardian newspaper in a blog post on Monday.
In fact, "human ... female orgasm is not necessary for conception," explained a 1995 paper in the journal Animal Behaviour, one of many studies reaching the same conclusion.
THE STRESS FACTOR
In more modern times, the rape-pregnancy claim seems to have been linked to the fact that stress can decrease fertility.
"Mental stress can temporarily alter the functioning of your hypothalamus - an area of your brain that controls the hormones that regulate your menstrual cycle," explains the Mayo Clinic in a publication about infertility. "Ovulation and menstruation may stop as a result."
But the stress that reduces fertility is the chronic kind that occurs over months or years, not the acute trauma of a rape.
"A woman who is raped at a vulnerable time in her menstrual cycle is as likely to conceive and retain a pregnancy as a woman who was voluntarily attempting pregnancy," said ACOG's Levy. "There's absolutely no validity to any sort of theory that the trauma related to rape - or to any thing else for that matter - would shut down ovulation that has already begun."
Physicians and researchers had long thought that conception occurs when sperm encounter an already-waiting egg. Recent research has shown that in fact sperm do the waiting, remaining in the woman's uterus or fallopian tubes until an egg is released from the ovaries.
Although the trauma of rape might impair a woman's fertility months or years later, said Levy, "you're not going to interrupt something (like the release of an egg) that's already started."
Numerous studies support that. In a 1996 study in the American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, researchers surveyed 4,008 American women for three years. Among women in their prime reproductive years, 12 to 45, 5 percent of rapes resulted in pregnancy, mostly among adolescents. One-third "did not discover they were pregnant until they had already entered the second trimester," the researchers found, concluding that "rape-related pregnancy occurs with significant frequency."
It may occur with greater frequency than after consensual sex. Indeed, evolutionary psychologists - who seek to explain human behavior by imagining what actions might have helped our ancient ancestors survive and reproduce - say the reason rape has been so endemic throughout history is precisely because it often leads to pregnancy: men who commit that crime, goes the argument, were more likely to have progeny, passing along their "rape genes" to the next generation.
While the explanation for rape has been discredited, the fact that rape often leads to pregnancy has not been. In a 2003 study in the journal Human Nature, researchers found that 6.4 percent of rapes in the hundreds of women they surveyed caused pregnancy; that compares to a rate roughly half that with consensual intercourse. In Mexico, rape crisis centers have reported that some 15 percent of rapes cause pregnancy.
The rate may be high because rape victims are less likely to be using contraception at the time of the crime than are women in a relationship, who can also choose to forego sex during fertile periods in their reproductive cycle if they do not want to conceive.
(Sharon Begley reported from New York and Susan Heavey from Washington; Editing by Doina Chiacu and Michele Gershberg)
This news article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIPS ADVICE - where latest news are our top priority.
Lunch workers study how to get kids to eat healthy
DENVER (AP) - There will be more whole grains on school lunch menus this year, along with a wider selection of fruits and vegetables and other healthy options. The challenge is getting children to eat them.
'We don't want healthy trash cans. We want kids who are eating this stuff,' said Kern Halls, a former Disney World restaurant manager who now works in school nutrition at Orange County Public Schools in Florida.
At a School Nutrition Association conference in Denver this summer, food workers heard tips about how to get children to make healthy food choices in the cafeteria.
The problem is a serious one for the nation's lunch-line managers, who are implementing the biggest update to federal school-food guidelines in 15 years.
New Department of Agriculture guidelines taking effect this fall set calorie and sodium limits for school meals. Schools must offer dark green, orange or red vegetables and legumes at least once a week, and students are required to select at least one vegetable or fruit per meal. Flavored milk must be nonfat, and there's a ban on artificial, artery-clogging trans fats.
At the conference, Halls demonstrated some healthy recipes for curious cafeteria managers, joining White House chef Sam Kass to prepare a veggie wrap using a whole-wheat tortilla.
Halls' main mission, though, was not pushing new recipes but teaching cafeteria managers marketing strategies used to great success by private-sector restaurants and food producers.
The first step, cafeteria workers were told, is to stop thinking of lunchtime as a break from academics, but a crucial part of a child's school day.
'Your job is not to serve kids food. Your job is motivate kids to be adventurous and healthy eaters,' said Barb Mechura, head of nutrition services at schools in Hopkins, Minn.
Her school district recruited parent volunteers to be elementary-school 'food coaches,' touring cafeterias and handing out samples of fruits and vegetables. The food coaches would also demonstrate eating them. Food coaching may seem silly, but kids who have had chicken only as nuggets or patties may not know how to eat bone-in chicken and need to see how a grown-up eats it before trying it themselves.
As the kids graduate to middle and high schools, and grown-ups in the cafeteria aren't as welcome, schools can tap student ambassadors to be food coaches, perhaps asking the baseball team or a popular student athlete dish out veggies. Or, high school seniors might give underclassmen samples of a new vegetable coming to the cafeteria.
School cafeterias also are using cutting-edge market research. They're filming what kids eat, test-marketing new products before they go on the line and doing menu surveys to find out exactly what students think about a dish's taste, appearance and temperature.
A Colorado State University professor studied the dining habits of kids in Loveland, Colo., with an eye toward measuring ways to get them to choose healthier foods. Leslie Cunningham-Sabo, who photographed 'before' and 'after' pictures of kids' lunch trays, found that kids eat more fruits and vegetables if they have lunch after recess, instead of before recess. She found that corn consumption went up when generic 'corn' labels were replaced with colorful cards describing the vegetable as 'mellow yellow corn.'
'Don't put veggies in opaque containers or give them boring labels like 'corn,'' Cunningham-Sabo told the lunch workers, showing diagrams of how to lay out a service line to encourage trips to the salad bar.
Another trick - just like supermarkets place impulse buys like candy and chewing gum by the checkout, lunch lines should place easy-to-grab fruits and veggies by their own cash registers. Her study saw cafeterias double their sales of fresh fruit when they placed it colorful bowls in a convenient place.
'You really have to be in their face with what's available,' Cunningham-Sabo said.
The marketing doesn't stop at the cafeteria doors. Lassen View Elementary School in Redding, Calif., got children to eat more fruits and vegetables when cafeteria manager Kathie Sardeson started a recess snack cart bringing the foods straight to the playground for kids to munch on.
Her school also bought an iPad 2 to raffle away to students who entered by choosing a healthy breakfast yogurt parfait and turning in tickets attached to the bottom. She tempted kids to try unusual flavors by giving out 'Fear Factor Smoothies' including unexpected ingredients such as spinach. Sardeson said schools can be persuaded to invest more in nutrition promotions because the payoff is better students.
'We get a lot of feedback from teachers that behavior problems are way down because the kids are eating right,' Sardeson said.
Educators are coming around to recognizing value in having better school food, Mechura told the cafeteria workers.
'Food is one of the most important influences on your everyday brain cells,' Mechura said. Healthy eating habits, she argued, is as important as everything else schools are trying to teach.
'We have to change,' Mechura said. 'We have to build an environment that creates excitement about what we are doing rather than fear of new foods.'
___
Follow Kristen Wyatt at http://www.twitter.com/APkristenwyatt
___
Online:
School Nutrition Association: http://www.schoolnutrition.org
USDA sample school lunch menu: http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/Governance/Legislation/cnr_chart.pdf
This news article is brought to you by WOMEN'S BLOG - where latest news are our top priority.
'We don't want healthy trash cans. We want kids who are eating this stuff,' said Kern Halls, a former Disney World restaurant manager who now works in school nutrition at Orange County Public Schools in Florida.
At a School Nutrition Association conference in Denver this summer, food workers heard tips about how to get children to make healthy food choices in the cafeteria.
The problem is a serious one for the nation's lunch-line managers, who are implementing the biggest update to federal school-food guidelines in 15 years.
New Department of Agriculture guidelines taking effect this fall set calorie and sodium limits for school meals. Schools must offer dark green, orange or red vegetables and legumes at least once a week, and students are required to select at least one vegetable or fruit per meal. Flavored milk must be nonfat, and there's a ban on artificial, artery-clogging trans fats.
At the conference, Halls demonstrated some healthy recipes for curious cafeteria managers, joining White House chef Sam Kass to prepare a veggie wrap using a whole-wheat tortilla.
Halls' main mission, though, was not pushing new recipes but teaching cafeteria managers marketing strategies used to great success by private-sector restaurants and food producers.
The first step, cafeteria workers were told, is to stop thinking of lunchtime as a break from academics, but a crucial part of a child's school day.
'Your job is not to serve kids food. Your job is motivate kids to be adventurous and healthy eaters,' said Barb Mechura, head of nutrition services at schools in Hopkins, Minn.
Her school district recruited parent volunteers to be elementary-school 'food coaches,' touring cafeterias and handing out samples of fruits and vegetables. The food coaches would also demonstrate eating them. Food coaching may seem silly, but kids who have had chicken only as nuggets or patties may not know how to eat bone-in chicken and need to see how a grown-up eats it before trying it themselves.
As the kids graduate to middle and high schools, and grown-ups in the cafeteria aren't as welcome, schools can tap student ambassadors to be food coaches, perhaps asking the baseball team or a popular student athlete dish out veggies. Or, high school seniors might give underclassmen samples of a new vegetable coming to the cafeteria.
School cafeterias also are using cutting-edge market research. They're filming what kids eat, test-marketing new products before they go on the line and doing menu surveys to find out exactly what students think about a dish's taste, appearance and temperature.
A Colorado State University professor studied the dining habits of kids in Loveland, Colo., with an eye toward measuring ways to get them to choose healthier foods. Leslie Cunningham-Sabo, who photographed 'before' and 'after' pictures of kids' lunch trays, found that kids eat more fruits and vegetables if they have lunch after recess, instead of before recess. She found that corn consumption went up when generic 'corn' labels were replaced with colorful cards describing the vegetable as 'mellow yellow corn.'
'Don't put veggies in opaque containers or give them boring labels like 'corn,'' Cunningham-Sabo told the lunch workers, showing diagrams of how to lay out a service line to encourage trips to the salad bar.
Another trick - just like supermarkets place impulse buys like candy and chewing gum by the checkout, lunch lines should place easy-to-grab fruits and veggies by their own cash registers. Her study saw cafeterias double their sales of fresh fruit when they placed it colorful bowls in a convenient place.
'You really have to be in their face with what's available,' Cunningham-Sabo said.
The marketing doesn't stop at the cafeteria doors. Lassen View Elementary School in Redding, Calif., got children to eat more fruits and vegetables when cafeteria manager Kathie Sardeson started a recess snack cart bringing the foods straight to the playground for kids to munch on.
Her school also bought an iPad 2 to raffle away to students who entered by choosing a healthy breakfast yogurt parfait and turning in tickets attached to the bottom. She tempted kids to try unusual flavors by giving out 'Fear Factor Smoothies' including unexpected ingredients such as spinach. Sardeson said schools can be persuaded to invest more in nutrition promotions because the payoff is better students.
'We get a lot of feedback from teachers that behavior problems are way down because the kids are eating right,' Sardeson said.
Educators are coming around to recognizing value in having better school food, Mechura told the cafeteria workers.
'Food is one of the most important influences on your everyday brain cells,' Mechura said. Healthy eating habits, she argued, is as important as everything else schools are trying to teach.
'We have to change,' Mechura said. 'We have to build an environment that creates excitement about what we are doing rather than fear of new foods.'
___
Follow Kristen Wyatt at http://www.twitter.com/APkristenwyatt
___
Online:
School Nutrition Association: http://www.schoolnutrition.org
USDA sample school lunch menu: http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/Governance/Legislation/cnr_chart.pdf
This news article is brought to you by WOMEN'S BLOG - where latest news are our top priority.
Early anesthesia tied to language problems in kids
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Babies and toddlers who went under anesthesia during surgery ended up having slightly worse scores on language and reasoning tests as 10-year-olds, in a new study.
That doesn't prove the anesthesia is to blame, researchers pointed out.
'At this point, we're still unsure if these differences are due to anesthesia, surgery or some other factor, like the underlying diagnosis that caused kids to need surgery in the first place,' said lead researcher Dr. Caleb Ing, an anesthesiologist from the Columbia University Medical Center in New York.
And even if anesthesia proves to be behind the extra risk of learning problems, it's still important for many surgeries in kids, researchers said.
Doctors already know putting kids to sleep carries a small risk of breathing complications - and they're accustomed to weighing possible risks with the benefits of a procedure that requires anesthesia.
'The vast majority of procedures we do on kids of this age, we don't do lightly,' said Dr. David Warner, an anesthesiologist from the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota.
Surgeries to relieve inner ear pressure, hernia procedures, circumcisions and tonsillectomies were the most common reasons kids in the new study received anesthesia.
The data was collected from records of about 2,600 kids born in Australia between 1989 and 1992. Of those, 321 went under anesthesia at least once before age three.
At age 10, all kids in the study were given a battery of tests measuring their thinking, language and motor skills as well as behavior issues.
There were no differences in behavioral problems or motor function based on whether or not kids had needed anesthesia as babies and toddlers, according to findings published Monday in the journal Pediatrics.
But kids who'd had anesthesia were about twice as likely to show signs of language disabilities and 70 percent more likely to have reasoning problems than the non-anesthesia group.
The researchers counted a 'disability' as a score in the seventh percentile or lower on the standardized tests.
Studies in baby animals have shown that anesthesia can cause some brain cells to die and may affect the formation of circuits that other neurons use to communicate. But it's still not clear whether that also happens in kids' brains, researchers noted.
Based on the new study, it's difficult to say if the average difference in learning and reasoning between the two groups is one that a parent or teacher would notice in the average child, Warner said.
Still, he added that combined with other research linking multiple rounds of anesthesia with learning disabilities and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, the effect 'may in fact be clinically significant.'
What this study adds, Warner pointed out, is that even kids who underwent anesthesia only once when they were very young still had more trouble later on.
Nonetheless, 'Our results do not mean that children should not have surgery if it's needed,' Ing told Reuters Health.
Warner, who wasn't involved in the new study, agreed.
'Even though there is an increase in risk, the vast majority of kids don't have problems (after anesthesia),' he told Reuters Health.
For example, 30 out of 214 kids who'd gone under anesthesia had very low scores on the language test.
'We don't want parents to be unduly alarmed, to prevent their children from having necessary surgery. But we can't be entirely reassuring that there aren't any long-term effects, especially from having multiple anesthetics,' Warner said.
Ing said studies currently underway are testing whether there's a difference in the long-term effects of local and general anesthesia.
But for now, he added, 'We don't have enough evidence to change our current medical practice.'
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/jsoh2P Pediatrics, online August 20, 2012.
This article is brought to you by DATING ADVICE.
That doesn't prove the anesthesia is to blame, researchers pointed out.
'At this point, we're still unsure if these differences are due to anesthesia, surgery or some other factor, like the underlying diagnosis that caused kids to need surgery in the first place,' said lead researcher Dr. Caleb Ing, an anesthesiologist from the Columbia University Medical Center in New York.
And even if anesthesia proves to be behind the extra risk of learning problems, it's still important for many surgeries in kids, researchers said.
Doctors already know putting kids to sleep carries a small risk of breathing complications - and they're accustomed to weighing possible risks with the benefits of a procedure that requires anesthesia.
'The vast majority of procedures we do on kids of this age, we don't do lightly,' said Dr. David Warner, an anesthesiologist from the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota.
Surgeries to relieve inner ear pressure, hernia procedures, circumcisions and tonsillectomies were the most common reasons kids in the new study received anesthesia.
The data was collected from records of about 2,600 kids born in Australia between 1989 and 1992. Of those, 321 went under anesthesia at least once before age three.
At age 10, all kids in the study were given a battery of tests measuring their thinking, language and motor skills as well as behavior issues.
There were no differences in behavioral problems or motor function based on whether or not kids had needed anesthesia as babies and toddlers, according to findings published Monday in the journal Pediatrics.
But kids who'd had anesthesia were about twice as likely to show signs of language disabilities and 70 percent more likely to have reasoning problems than the non-anesthesia group.
The researchers counted a 'disability' as a score in the seventh percentile or lower on the standardized tests.
Studies in baby animals have shown that anesthesia can cause some brain cells to die and may affect the formation of circuits that other neurons use to communicate. But it's still not clear whether that also happens in kids' brains, researchers noted.
Based on the new study, it's difficult to say if the average difference in learning and reasoning between the two groups is one that a parent or teacher would notice in the average child, Warner said.
Still, he added that combined with other research linking multiple rounds of anesthesia with learning disabilities and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, the effect 'may in fact be clinically significant.'
What this study adds, Warner pointed out, is that even kids who underwent anesthesia only once when they were very young still had more trouble later on.
Nonetheless, 'Our results do not mean that children should not have surgery if it's needed,' Ing told Reuters Health.
Warner, who wasn't involved in the new study, agreed.
'Even though there is an increase in risk, the vast majority of kids don't have problems (after anesthesia),' he told Reuters Health.
For example, 30 out of 214 kids who'd gone under anesthesia had very low scores on the language test.
'We don't want parents to be unduly alarmed, to prevent their children from having necessary surgery. But we can't be entirely reassuring that there aren't any long-term effects, especially from having multiple anesthetics,' Warner said.
Ing said studies currently underway are testing whether there's a difference in the long-term effects of local and general anesthesia.
But for now, he added, 'We don't have enough evidence to change our current medical practice.'
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/jsoh2P Pediatrics, online August 20, 2012.
This article is brought to you by DATING ADVICE.
Kids' lack of self-control tied to extra pounds
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Preschoolers who had less patience and worse self-control while waiting for treats in a classic behavior study ended up weighing slightly more as adults, a new analysis shows.
Although the link between childhood patience and extra pounds in adulthood was 'not particularly large,' researchers said it might still help hint at which little kids are at risk of growing into overweight adults - and give their parents and teachers a chance to intervene.
'This is a skill or set of skills that really emerges through the preschool years,' said Alison Miller, a developmental psychologist from the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor.
Self-control 'is really developing for kids, and there are a lot of things that you can get in there and teach,' she told Reuters Health.
Researchers said teaching patience and self-control to little kids may also have other long-term benefits, such as better grades and overall health.
'This is a struggle that all parents face,' said Lori Francis, who has studied kids' self-regulation at Penn State University in University Park.
But, she told Reuters Health, 'The idea that children have something to look forward to and there is this awesome reward if you learn how to be patient and wait... that has so much relevance for other things that kids will encounter in life.'
Previous research has suggested self-control in preschoolers is tied to their weight as preteens. But for the new study, Tanya Schlam from the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health in Madison and her colleagues wanted to look farther into the future.
They mailed health questionnaires to adults who had taken part in a delayed-gratification experiment in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when they were four years old.
For the test - which has now become standard in developmental psychology - kids are offered a treat like a marshmallow or cookie immediately or told they will get two marshmallows, for example, if they can wait 15 minutes.
The longer children are able to hold out for a bigger reward, the greater their self-control.
In the original marshmallow study, the average kid was able to wait about six and a half minutes for a treat. About a quarter had enough self-control to make it the full 15 minutes and get the extra snack.
By linking those test results to adults' reports of their own height and weight 30 years after the experiment, the researchers calculated that each extra minute four-year-olds were able to wait for marshmallows was tied to a 0.2-point decrease in their adult body mass index.
Body mass index, or BMI, is a measure of weight in relation to height. A difference of 0.2 points is equivalent to about one pound in most adults.
The majority of the 164 adults included in the final study were considered in the normal range for weight, according to findings published Thursday in The Journal of Pediatrics.
The study can't prove lack of self-control causes kids to become heavier adults, the researchers noted. They also didn't have information on other factors that could predispose people to gain more weight - such as whether or not their moms were also heavy.
Still, they think childhood self-control and patience play a role.
'Self-control is associated with so many outcomes important to society: weight... but also health, financial stability (and) likelihood of being convicted of a crime,' Schlam told Reuters Health.
Francis, who wasn't part of the research team, said there could be basic differences between kids who are or aren't good at self-regulating - such as their environment growing up or their families' beliefs - that go on to influence eating and weight.
'The big question mark is explaining why this relationship exists,' she said.
Of course, the typical four-year-old isn't exactly known as the model of patience and self-control. But Schlam said meditation, yoga, martial arts and mindfulness can all promote greater self-control, even in young people.
Miller, who also wasn't involved in the new study, said simply talking through self-regulation with kids - like validating their feelings that yes, it's really hard to wait - can help build basic patience skills. So can encouraging kids to distract themselves by thinking about something else in situations that require waiting.
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/NsrjeR The Journal of Pediatrics, online August 16, 2012.
This news article is brought to you by GAMING NEWS - where latest news are our top priority.
Although the link between childhood patience and extra pounds in adulthood was 'not particularly large,' researchers said it might still help hint at which little kids are at risk of growing into overweight adults - and give their parents and teachers a chance to intervene.
'This is a skill or set of skills that really emerges through the preschool years,' said Alison Miller, a developmental psychologist from the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor.
Self-control 'is really developing for kids, and there are a lot of things that you can get in there and teach,' she told Reuters Health.
Researchers said teaching patience and self-control to little kids may also have other long-term benefits, such as better grades and overall health.
'This is a struggle that all parents face,' said Lori Francis, who has studied kids' self-regulation at Penn State University in University Park.
But, she told Reuters Health, 'The idea that children have something to look forward to and there is this awesome reward if you learn how to be patient and wait... that has so much relevance for other things that kids will encounter in life.'
Previous research has suggested self-control in preschoolers is tied to their weight as preteens. But for the new study, Tanya Schlam from the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health in Madison and her colleagues wanted to look farther into the future.
They mailed health questionnaires to adults who had taken part in a delayed-gratification experiment in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when they were four years old.
For the test - which has now become standard in developmental psychology - kids are offered a treat like a marshmallow or cookie immediately or told they will get two marshmallows, for example, if they can wait 15 minutes.
The longer children are able to hold out for a bigger reward, the greater their self-control.
In the original marshmallow study, the average kid was able to wait about six and a half minutes for a treat. About a quarter had enough self-control to make it the full 15 minutes and get the extra snack.
By linking those test results to adults' reports of their own height and weight 30 years after the experiment, the researchers calculated that each extra minute four-year-olds were able to wait for marshmallows was tied to a 0.2-point decrease in their adult body mass index.
Body mass index, or BMI, is a measure of weight in relation to height. A difference of 0.2 points is equivalent to about one pound in most adults.
The majority of the 164 adults included in the final study were considered in the normal range for weight, according to findings published Thursday in The Journal of Pediatrics.
The study can't prove lack of self-control causes kids to become heavier adults, the researchers noted. They also didn't have information on other factors that could predispose people to gain more weight - such as whether or not their moms were also heavy.
Still, they think childhood self-control and patience play a role.
'Self-control is associated with so many outcomes important to society: weight... but also health, financial stability (and) likelihood of being convicted of a crime,' Schlam told Reuters Health.
Francis, who wasn't part of the research team, said there could be basic differences between kids who are or aren't good at self-regulating - such as their environment growing up or their families' beliefs - that go on to influence eating and weight.
'The big question mark is explaining why this relationship exists,' she said.
Of course, the typical four-year-old isn't exactly known as the model of patience and self-control. But Schlam said meditation, yoga, martial arts and mindfulness can all promote greater self-control, even in young people.
Miller, who also wasn't involved in the new study, said simply talking through self-regulation with kids - like validating their feelings that yes, it's really hard to wait - can help build basic patience skills. So can encouraging kids to distract themselves by thinking about something else in situations that require waiting.
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/NsrjeR The Journal of Pediatrics, online August 16, 2012.
This news article is brought to you by GAMING NEWS - where latest news are our top priority.
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
Pregnancy Changes Mom's Gut Bacteria
Click here to listen to this podcast
Having a kid changes everything, from your sleep schedule to the status of that formerly spare room. The stable of bacteria that live in a woman's gut is also transformed when their host becomes pregnant. So finds research in the journal Cell. [Omry Koren et al, Host Remodeling of the Gut Microbiome and Metabolic Changes during Pregnancy]
The study looked at women in Finland. The women's microbial makeup changed dramatically between the first and third trimesters. The array of microbes in the gut went from looking normal in the first three months of a pregnancy to resembling what's found in patients suffering from metabolic disease in the last three.
But some of the symptoms of that condition - like weight-gain and slower sugar metabolism - can be beneficial to pregnant women, supporting energy storage that helps a fetus develop. Other symptoms, like inflammation, demonstrate that the immune system is functioning properly as a pregnancy comes to term.
Scientists don't yet fully understand what brings about the changes in gut bacteria - immune function is a suspect, but factors like hormonal signals aren't ruled out. The research suggests that other changes to the body, like puberty or old age, could also bring about microbial makeovers.
-Ian Chant
[The above text is a transcript of this podcast]
Follow Scientific American on Twitter @SciAm and @SciamBlogs. Visit ScientificAmerican.com for the latest in science, health and technology news.
© 2012 ScientificAmerican.com. All rights reserved.
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIP ADVICE.
Having a kid changes everything, from your sleep schedule to the status of that formerly spare room. The stable of bacteria that live in a woman's gut is also transformed when their host becomes pregnant. So finds research in the journal Cell. [Omry Koren et al, Host Remodeling of the Gut Microbiome and Metabolic Changes during Pregnancy]
The study looked at women in Finland. The women's microbial makeup changed dramatically between the first and third trimesters. The array of microbes in the gut went from looking normal in the first three months of a pregnancy to resembling what's found in patients suffering from metabolic disease in the last three.
But some of the symptoms of that condition - like weight-gain and slower sugar metabolism - can be beneficial to pregnant women, supporting energy storage that helps a fetus develop. Other symptoms, like inflammation, demonstrate that the immune system is functioning properly as a pregnancy comes to term.
Scientists don't yet fully understand what brings about the changes in gut bacteria - immune function is a suspect, but factors like hormonal signals aren't ruled out. The research suggests that other changes to the body, like puberty or old age, could also bring about microbial makeovers.
-Ian Chant
[The above text is a transcript of this podcast]
Follow Scientific American on Twitter @SciAm and @SciamBlogs. Visit ScientificAmerican.com for the latest in science, health and technology news.
© 2012 ScientificAmerican.com. All rights reserved.
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIP ADVICE.
U.S. kids downing more diet drinks
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - The number of U.S. children who drink sugar-free beverages has doubled in the past decade, a new study finds - though the health implications of the trend, if any, are unclear.
Using data from a federal health survey, researchers found that by 2008, 12.5 percent of children were drinking artificially-sweetened beverages. That was up from six percent a decade earlier.
U.S. adults are downing more diet drinks too. One-quarter of Americans surveyed in 2007-2008 said they'd had a diet drink in the past day, versus 19 percent in 1999-2000, the researchers report in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
It's not surprising to see such trends, but the size of the increase among kids was a bit unexpected, according to senior researcher Dr. Miriam B. Vos, of Emory University in Atlanta.
And whether the pattern is good or bad is unknown.
'We do want children to drink less sugar,' Vos said in an interview.
'But the challenge,' she added, 'is that there are no studies that have looked at the long-term health effects of artificial sweeteners in growing children.'
That's not to say they are unsafe, Vos said. But she added that animal research has raised some potential concerns. For instance, animals fed artificial sweeteners have shown weight gain - suggesting there could be some effect on metabolism.
'We don't know if anything like that happens in children,' Vos stressed.
But before anyone can make widespread recommendations that kids should have diet drinks instead of sugary versions, she said there should be studies into the possible effects on weight and health.
Sugar substitutes include artificial sweeteners like aspartame, saccharin and sucralose; the herbal sweetener stevia is available as a dietary supplement in the U.S.
With the rapid expansion of Americans' collective waistline in the past couple of decades, diet versions of sweet drinks and foods are increasingly popping up on supermarket shelves.
No one knows if that's helping. Vos noted that large population studies have not shown diet-beverage drinkers to be doing better weight-wise - and they tend to weigh more than people who favor water.
But it's hard to know what to make of that, Vos said. People who drink diet beverages may already be overweight and trying to shed some pounds, for instance.
The current findings are based on more than 42,000 Americans who took part in a periodic federal health survey. It included questions on what respondents had to eat and drink in the past 24 hours.
The fact that the questions covered only one day is a limitation of the study, according to Vos. There's no way of knowing how often kids may be having diet drinks, for instance.
Vos said she thinks studies that follow kids over time, to see whether there's a link between diet drinks and weight gain or health, are needed.
Besides the animal research, some studies have found that diet-beverage lovers have increased risks of diabetes, heart problems and stroke. But those reports point only to correlations, and do not prove that artificially-sweetened drinks are to blame.
Vos said that when she counsels families, she suggests that kids stick with water and milk, which has protein, calcium and other nutrients.
SOURCE: American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, online August 1, 2012.
This news article is brought to you by GAMING NEWS - where latest news are our top priority.
Using data from a federal health survey, researchers found that by 2008, 12.5 percent of children were drinking artificially-sweetened beverages. That was up from six percent a decade earlier.
U.S. adults are downing more diet drinks too. One-quarter of Americans surveyed in 2007-2008 said they'd had a diet drink in the past day, versus 19 percent in 1999-2000, the researchers report in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
It's not surprising to see such trends, but the size of the increase among kids was a bit unexpected, according to senior researcher Dr. Miriam B. Vos, of Emory University in Atlanta.
And whether the pattern is good or bad is unknown.
'We do want children to drink less sugar,' Vos said in an interview.
'But the challenge,' she added, 'is that there are no studies that have looked at the long-term health effects of artificial sweeteners in growing children.'
That's not to say they are unsafe, Vos said. But she added that animal research has raised some potential concerns. For instance, animals fed artificial sweeteners have shown weight gain - suggesting there could be some effect on metabolism.
'We don't know if anything like that happens in children,' Vos stressed.
But before anyone can make widespread recommendations that kids should have diet drinks instead of sugary versions, she said there should be studies into the possible effects on weight and health.
Sugar substitutes include artificial sweeteners like aspartame, saccharin and sucralose; the herbal sweetener stevia is available as a dietary supplement in the U.S.
With the rapid expansion of Americans' collective waistline in the past couple of decades, diet versions of sweet drinks and foods are increasingly popping up on supermarket shelves.
No one knows if that's helping. Vos noted that large population studies have not shown diet-beverage drinkers to be doing better weight-wise - and they tend to weigh more than people who favor water.
But it's hard to know what to make of that, Vos said. People who drink diet beverages may already be overweight and trying to shed some pounds, for instance.
The current findings are based on more than 42,000 Americans who took part in a periodic federal health survey. It included questions on what respondents had to eat and drink in the past 24 hours.
The fact that the questions covered only one day is a limitation of the study, according to Vos. There's no way of knowing how often kids may be having diet drinks, for instance.
Vos said she thinks studies that follow kids over time, to see whether there's a link between diet drinks and weight gain or health, are needed.
Besides the animal research, some studies have found that diet-beverage lovers have increased risks of diabetes, heart problems and stroke. But those reports point only to correlations, and do not prove that artificially-sweetened drinks are to blame.
Vos said that when she counsels families, she suggests that kids stick with water and milk, which has protein, calcium and other nutrients.
SOURCE: American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, online August 1, 2012.
This news article is brought to you by GAMING NEWS - where latest news are our top priority.
Tuesday, August 14, 2012
Deeply Religious Parents Often Reluctant to Cease Medical Care
Arthur Caplan, the head of the division of medical ethics at NYU Langone Medical Center, recalls a case of a man who had beaten his six-month-old child to death. It was a horror the mother simply could not accept.
A deeply religious woman, she pushed the doctors to do more, telling them that God would intervene and allow her daughter to make a miraculous recovery. For several hours there was a tense standoff between caregivers and parent.
She finally allowed the child to come off life support when Caplan told her, 'God may bring you a miracle but your baby does not have to be attached to a machine for this happen.'
When a child is seriously ill or injured, parents understandably move heaven and earth to save them. However, a new study has found that sometimes deeply religious families test the limits of medical science by asking doctors to go to extremes to prolong life.
Writing in the Journal of Medical Ethics, the investigators reviewed 203 cases over a three-year period that involved end of life decisions. In the majority of instances, parents ultimately agreed to end treatment after meeting with caregivers and discussing the options. But in a small number of cases -- just 11 -- the parents insisted on continuing intensive care while they prayed for divine intervention and a complete cure, even after being told there was no hope for recovery.
Overriding Religious Beliefs Such scenarios bring up all sorts of ethical and legal dilemmas for medical caregivers who must try to balance a parent's wishes with what they think is best for their patient. Caplan says in most cases, they ultimately advocate for the patient.
'Some parents will never make a decision to discontinue life support. They will never say don't do everything even when they understand that 'everything' may mean torture for their child,' he says. 'But often they are OK when the physician says enough is enough.'
According to Holzman, Jehovah's Witnesses and Christian Scientists are the most likely to refuse medical treatment on religious grounds whereas Orthodox Jews, Muslims and some fundamental Christians are the faiths most likely to ask for life sustaining treatment.
The authors of the study include children's intensive care doctors and a hospital chaplain. Various different faiths were represented among the parents, including Christian fundamentalism, Islam, Judaism, and Roman Catholicism.
In their commentary they stress that religious beliefs provide vital support to many parents in a time of dire need but still express concerns that those same beliefs are increasingly leading parents to insist on the continuation of aggressive treatment long after it make sense.
Also Read
This article is brought to you by DATING ADVICE.
A deeply religious woman, she pushed the doctors to do more, telling them that God would intervene and allow her daughter to make a miraculous recovery. For several hours there was a tense standoff between caregivers and parent.
She finally allowed the child to come off life support when Caplan told her, 'God may bring you a miracle but your baby does not have to be attached to a machine for this happen.'
When a child is seriously ill or injured, parents understandably move heaven and earth to save them. However, a new study has found that sometimes deeply religious families test the limits of medical science by asking doctors to go to extremes to prolong life.
Writing in the Journal of Medical Ethics, the investigators reviewed 203 cases over a three-year period that involved end of life decisions. In the majority of instances, parents ultimately agreed to end treatment after meeting with caregivers and discussing the options. But in a small number of cases -- just 11 -- the parents insisted on continuing intensive care while they prayed for divine intervention and a complete cure, even after being told there was no hope for recovery.
Overriding Religious Beliefs Such scenarios bring up all sorts of ethical and legal dilemmas for medical caregivers who must try to balance a parent's wishes with what they think is best for their patient. Caplan says in most cases, they ultimately advocate for the patient.
'You have to take beliefs into account but you can't let any parent for any reason hijack what you as a doctor believe is in the child's best interest,' he says. 'If you think what they want will cause pain and suffering and further treatment is pointless, a doctor should not do it even if the parents say Jesus spoke to them.'
In situations where parents refuse lifesaving medical care on religious grounds the law is clear: Doctors can go to court and legally compel them to accept treatment if it is deemed life saving. But when the tables are turned and parents insist on sustaining life by any means, few doctors are willing to make it a legal matter. The authors of the study say it's time for this to change.
'Spending a lifetime attached to a mechanical ventilator, having every bodily function supervised and sanitized by a carer or relative, leaving no dignity or privacy to the child and then adult, has been argued as inhumane,' they say in an accompanying editorial. 'We suggest it is time to reconsider current ethical and legal structures and facilitate rapid default access to courts in such situations when the best interests of the child are compromised in expectation of the miraculous.'
Not all religious leaders agree. J.R. Brown, a spokesman for the New York chapter of Jehovah's Witnesses says that parents should be allowed to do everything they can so long as it doesn't violate scripture.
'How many times have we heard stories where physicians say the situation is hopeless and the patient goes onto make a miraculous recovery?' he asks.
Working Together
The majority of physicians are not unsympathetic to parents of faith. Dr. Ian Holzman, chairman of the medical ethics committee at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York City, stresses that the main thing caregivers must do is respect parental faith and try to honor their beliefs as long as there is no undue harm to the patient. And he points out, sometimes it's just a matter of demonstrating a little empathy.'Some parents will never make a decision to discontinue life support. They will never say don't do everything even when they understand that 'everything' may mean torture for their child,' he says. 'But often they are OK when the physician says enough is enough.'
According to Holzman, Jehovah's Witnesses and Christian Scientists are the most likely to refuse medical treatment on religious grounds whereas Orthodox Jews, Muslims and some fundamental Christians are the faiths most likely to ask for life sustaining treatment.
The authors of the study include children's intensive care doctors and a hospital chaplain. Various different faiths were represented among the parents, including Christian fundamentalism, Islam, Judaism, and Roman Catholicism.
In their commentary they stress that religious beliefs provide vital support to many parents in a time of dire need but still express concerns that those same beliefs are increasingly leading parents to insist on the continuation of aggressive treatment long after it make sense.
Also Read
This article is brought to you by DATING ADVICE.
Monday, August 13, 2012
Sunday, August 12, 2012
Study: Junk food laws may help curb kids' obesity
CHICAGO (AP) - Laws strictly curbing school sales of junk food and sweetened drinks may play a role in slowing childhood obesity, according to a study that seems to offer the first evidence such efforts could pay off.
The results come from the first large national look at the effectiveness of the state laws over time. They are not a slam-dunk, and even obesity experts who praised the study acknowledge the measures are a political hot potato, smacking of a 'nanny state' and opposed by industry and cash-strapped schools relying on food processors' money.
But if the laws have even a tiny effect, 'what are the downsides of improving the food environment for children today?' asked Dr. David Ludwig, an obesity specialist at Harvard Medical School and Boston Children's Hospital. 'You can't get much worse than it already is.'
Children in the study gained less weight from fifth through eighth grades if they lived in states with strong, consistent laws versus no laws governing snacks available in schools. For example, kids who were 5 feet tall and 100 pounds gained on average 2.2 fewer pounds if they lived in states with strong laws in the three years studied.
Also, children who were overweight or obese in fifth grade were more likely to reach a healthy weight by eighth grade if they lived in states with the strongest laws.
The effects weren't huge, and the study isn't proof that the laws influenced kids' weight. But the results raised optimism among obesity researchers and public health experts who generally applaud strong laws to get junk food out of schools.
'This is the first real evidence that the laws are likely to have an impact,' said Dr. Virginia Stallings, director of the nutrition center at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. Stallings chaired an Institute of Medicine panel that urged standards for making snack foods and drinks sold in schools more healthful but was not involved in the new research.
The authors of the study, released online Monday in the journal Pediatrics, analyzed data on 6,300 students in 40 states. Their heights and weights were measured in spring 2004, when they were finishing fifth grade and soon to enter middle school, and in 2007, during the spring of eighth grade.
The researchers also examined several databases of state laws on school nutrition during the same time. The states were not identified in the study because of database license restrictions that protect the students' confidentiality, the authors said.
The laws governed food and drinks sold in public school vending machines and school stores, outside of mealtime. Laws were considered strong if they included specific nutrition requirements, such as limits on sugar and fats. Laws were rated weak if the requirements were vague and merely urged sales of 'healthy' food without specifics.
The results show that for these laws to be effective, they need to be consistently strong in all grades, said lead author Daniel Taber, a health policy researcher at the University of Illinois at Chicago.
In late 2003, 27 of the states studied had no relevant laws affecting middle-schoolers, seven had weak laws and six had strong laws. Several states and school districts enacted tougher laws affecting middle-schoolers and younger kids during the next few years as national concern rose over obesity rates.
Recent data suggest that almost 20 percent of elementary school children nationwide are obese, and the rate among teens is only slightly lower.
In states with consistently strong laws in elementary and middle school, almost 39 percent of fifth-graders were overweight when the study began. That fell to 34 percent in eighth grade. Also, almost 21 percent of fifth-graders were obese, declining to about 18 percent in the eighth grade.
In states with no relevant laws, almost 37 percent of fifth-graders were overweight and 21 percent were obese, and those numbers barely budged by eighth grade.
Boston University statistician Mark Glickman said the study design makes it difficult to reach any convincing conclusions. It's possible, for example, that stronger laws might be more prevalent in Democratic-leaning states with better-educated residents, and less obesity. But the study authors said they found stronger laws in states that had high levels of obesity.
The authors accounted for gender, race, income and school location.
Taber noted that several Southern states have been the most aggressive at targeting school junk food, 'probably because they have the highest rates of obesity.'
Ludwig, the Boston obesity specialist, praised the researchers for trying to 'tackle a complicated question.'
'The challenge is that there are a great many factors that coalesce to influence body weight,' Ludwig said. 'Disentangling these influences and looking at the independent effects of just one is a methodological nightmare.'
___
Online:
Pediatrics: http://www.pediatrics.org
USDA: http://1.usa.gov/z7t5md
___
AP Medical Writer Lindsey Tanner can be reached at http://www.twitter.com/LindseyTanner
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIPS ADVICE.
The results come from the first large national look at the effectiveness of the state laws over time. They are not a slam-dunk, and even obesity experts who praised the study acknowledge the measures are a political hot potato, smacking of a 'nanny state' and opposed by industry and cash-strapped schools relying on food processors' money.
But if the laws have even a tiny effect, 'what are the downsides of improving the food environment for children today?' asked Dr. David Ludwig, an obesity specialist at Harvard Medical School and Boston Children's Hospital. 'You can't get much worse than it already is.'
Children in the study gained less weight from fifth through eighth grades if they lived in states with strong, consistent laws versus no laws governing snacks available in schools. For example, kids who were 5 feet tall and 100 pounds gained on average 2.2 fewer pounds if they lived in states with strong laws in the three years studied.
Also, children who were overweight or obese in fifth grade were more likely to reach a healthy weight by eighth grade if they lived in states with the strongest laws.
The effects weren't huge, and the study isn't proof that the laws influenced kids' weight. But the results raised optimism among obesity researchers and public health experts who generally applaud strong laws to get junk food out of schools.
'This is the first real evidence that the laws are likely to have an impact,' said Dr. Virginia Stallings, director of the nutrition center at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. Stallings chaired an Institute of Medicine panel that urged standards for making snack foods and drinks sold in schools more healthful but was not involved in the new research.
The authors of the study, released online Monday in the journal Pediatrics, analyzed data on 6,300 students in 40 states. Their heights and weights were measured in spring 2004, when they were finishing fifth grade and soon to enter middle school, and in 2007, during the spring of eighth grade.
The researchers also examined several databases of state laws on school nutrition during the same time. The states were not identified in the study because of database license restrictions that protect the students' confidentiality, the authors said.
The laws governed food and drinks sold in public school vending machines and school stores, outside of mealtime. Laws were considered strong if they included specific nutrition requirements, such as limits on sugar and fats. Laws were rated weak if the requirements were vague and merely urged sales of 'healthy' food without specifics.
The results show that for these laws to be effective, they need to be consistently strong in all grades, said lead author Daniel Taber, a health policy researcher at the University of Illinois at Chicago.
In late 2003, 27 of the states studied had no relevant laws affecting middle-schoolers, seven had weak laws and six had strong laws. Several states and school districts enacted tougher laws affecting middle-schoolers and younger kids during the next few years as national concern rose over obesity rates.
Recent data suggest that almost 20 percent of elementary school children nationwide are obese, and the rate among teens is only slightly lower.
In states with consistently strong laws in elementary and middle school, almost 39 percent of fifth-graders were overweight when the study began. That fell to 34 percent in eighth grade. Also, almost 21 percent of fifth-graders were obese, declining to about 18 percent in the eighth grade.
In states with no relevant laws, almost 37 percent of fifth-graders were overweight and 21 percent were obese, and those numbers barely budged by eighth grade.
Boston University statistician Mark Glickman said the study design makes it difficult to reach any convincing conclusions. It's possible, for example, that stronger laws might be more prevalent in Democratic-leaning states with better-educated residents, and less obesity. But the study authors said they found stronger laws in states that had high levels of obesity.
The authors accounted for gender, race, income and school location.
Taber noted that several Southern states have been the most aggressive at targeting school junk food, 'probably because they have the highest rates of obesity.'
Ludwig, the Boston obesity specialist, praised the researchers for trying to 'tackle a complicated question.'
'The challenge is that there are a great many factors that coalesce to influence body weight,' Ludwig said. 'Disentangling these influences and looking at the independent effects of just one is a methodological nightmare.'
___
Online:
Pediatrics: http://www.pediatrics.org
USDA: http://1.usa.gov/z7t5md
___
AP Medical Writer Lindsey Tanner can be reached at http://www.twitter.com/LindseyTanner
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIPS ADVICE.
Friday, August 10, 2012
Heart defects on the decline in European babies
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - The number of newborns in Europe affected by heart defects appears to have fallen in recent years, but it's not clear why, says a new study.
A team of European Union researchers analyzing millions of birth records found that the number of European babies born with heart defects fell from around seven in every thousand births in 2004 to around six per thousand by 2007- a drop of around four percent each year.
While any drop in the numbers of babies born with birth defects is good news, experts noted that the decline is a modest one and the researchers can only speculate about the reasons for it.
There is cause 'for a high level of skepticism,' said Dr. Joe Simpson at the New York-based March of Dimes foundation, a non-profit organization that works to improve babies' health.
'It would be lovely if... true,' Simpson told Reuters Health, but given the lack of explanation for the change, 'whether it persists over time remains unclear.'
For the new study, a team led by Dr. Babak Khoshnood at the National Institute for Health and Medical Research (INSERM), in Paris, France, looked at data on congenital heart defects collected in 16 mostly western-European countries between 1990 and 2007.
They found 47,000 cases of congenital heart disease among more than seven million births.
According to the report, published in the Journal of Pediatrics, cases of the most severe forms of CHD - including conditions like hypoplastic left heart syndrome, when the left side of the heart doesn't develop properly - has held steady at around five per 10,000 births since 1990.
But less severe conditions, like 'hole in the heart' syndrome, decreased from around 50 to 40 cases per 10 000 births, between 2004 and 2007. For a country like France, with around 780,000 births a year, that means about 780 fewer babies born with heart problems every year.
Khoshnood speculates that increased folic acid intake by European women is a possible cause of the decline in defects. But, 'we don't have the data to know for sure,' he added.
A recent study in Quebec, Canada, found that the number of babies born with heart defects dropped after 1998, shortly after the government began adding folic acid to staple foods like cereal and bread.
Folic acid fortification programs were introduced in both Canada and the U.S. in 1998 to reduce the number of serious birth defects in the spine and brain, known as neural tube defects. But there are no such programs in Europe.
It's possible that European women have increased their consumption of folic acid and are starting to follow recommendations to take it before and during pregnancy, Khoshnood said.
'People are realizing that there is a lot of voluntary fortification. In some breakfast cereals and so on, there is folic acid added, although it's not mandatory. Women are getting folic acid even if they don't take any.'
Dr. Sunil Malhotra, a surgeon specializing in congenital defects at New York University, points out, however, 'Folic acid has been a part of prenatal care in the U.S. for the better part of a decade, but there hasn't been a similar decrease (in heart defects) here.'
According to the American Heart Association, the causes of congenital heart defects are still unknown. So researchers can only speculate about what could be causing the European decline.
Simpson and Malhotra noted further limits to the new study
Methods to diagnose birth defects have changed during the last 20 years, said Simpson. And with babies leaving the hospital within a day of being born, there is less time to spot heart defects.
Some conditions, including hole in the heart syndrome, don't show up until a couple of days after birth, he said.
'I was not overwhelmed by the strength of the data,' Malhotra added. The study draws on data from a lot of different country registries that each collect and store data in a different way, and that data can often be incomplete, he explained.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 40,000 babies are born with heart defects in the U.S. every year. Close to one million adults in the U.S. live with congenital heart disorders, which can cause tiredness, shortness of breath and abnormal heart rhythms.
Advances in surgical techniques mean it's now possible to treat many heart defects, although life-long follow-up care is still essential. Mild cases can often be treated with medication.
'One thing we do know,' Malhotra said, is that detection of CHD in the womb has 'improved markedly, as has care for mothers with babies with CHD.' As a result, those mothers can get more prenatal attention and 'have better outcomes when those babies deliver.'
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/N0bJuX Journal of Pediatrics, online 26 July, 2012.
This news article is brought to you by MOVIE GOSSIP NEWS - where latest news are our top priority.
A team of European Union researchers analyzing millions of birth records found that the number of European babies born with heart defects fell from around seven in every thousand births in 2004 to around six per thousand by 2007- a drop of around four percent each year.
While any drop in the numbers of babies born with birth defects is good news, experts noted that the decline is a modest one and the researchers can only speculate about the reasons for it.
There is cause 'for a high level of skepticism,' said Dr. Joe Simpson at the New York-based March of Dimes foundation, a non-profit organization that works to improve babies' health.
'It would be lovely if... true,' Simpson told Reuters Health, but given the lack of explanation for the change, 'whether it persists over time remains unclear.'
For the new study, a team led by Dr. Babak Khoshnood at the National Institute for Health and Medical Research (INSERM), in Paris, France, looked at data on congenital heart defects collected in 16 mostly western-European countries between 1990 and 2007.
They found 47,000 cases of congenital heart disease among more than seven million births.
According to the report, published in the Journal of Pediatrics, cases of the most severe forms of CHD - including conditions like hypoplastic left heart syndrome, when the left side of the heart doesn't develop properly - has held steady at around five per 10,000 births since 1990.
But less severe conditions, like 'hole in the heart' syndrome, decreased from around 50 to 40 cases per 10 000 births, between 2004 and 2007. For a country like France, with around 780,000 births a year, that means about 780 fewer babies born with heart problems every year.
Khoshnood speculates that increased folic acid intake by European women is a possible cause of the decline in defects. But, 'we don't have the data to know for sure,' he added.
A recent study in Quebec, Canada, found that the number of babies born with heart defects dropped after 1998, shortly after the government began adding folic acid to staple foods like cereal and bread.
Folic acid fortification programs were introduced in both Canada and the U.S. in 1998 to reduce the number of serious birth defects in the spine and brain, known as neural tube defects. But there are no such programs in Europe.
It's possible that European women have increased their consumption of folic acid and are starting to follow recommendations to take it before and during pregnancy, Khoshnood said.
'People are realizing that there is a lot of voluntary fortification. In some breakfast cereals and so on, there is folic acid added, although it's not mandatory. Women are getting folic acid even if they don't take any.'
Dr. Sunil Malhotra, a surgeon specializing in congenital defects at New York University, points out, however, 'Folic acid has been a part of prenatal care in the U.S. for the better part of a decade, but there hasn't been a similar decrease (in heart defects) here.'
According to the American Heart Association, the causes of congenital heart defects are still unknown. So researchers can only speculate about what could be causing the European decline.
Simpson and Malhotra noted further limits to the new study
Methods to diagnose birth defects have changed during the last 20 years, said Simpson. And with babies leaving the hospital within a day of being born, there is less time to spot heart defects.
Some conditions, including hole in the heart syndrome, don't show up until a couple of days after birth, he said.
'I was not overwhelmed by the strength of the data,' Malhotra added. The study draws on data from a lot of different country registries that each collect and store data in a different way, and that data can often be incomplete, he explained.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 40,000 babies are born with heart defects in the U.S. every year. Close to one million adults in the U.S. live with congenital heart disorders, which can cause tiredness, shortness of breath and abnormal heart rhythms.
Advances in surgical techniques mean it's now possible to treat many heart defects, although life-long follow-up care is still essential. Mild cases can often be treated with medication.
'One thing we do know,' Malhotra said, is that detection of CHD in the womb has 'improved markedly, as has care for mothers with babies with CHD.' As a result, those mothers can get more prenatal attention and 'have better outcomes when those babies deliver.'
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/N0bJuX Journal of Pediatrics, online 26 July, 2012.
This news article is brought to you by MOVIE GOSSIP NEWS - where latest news are our top priority.
Food stamps don't alter kids' sugary drink choices
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Despite hopes that the U.S. Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) can steer people toward healthier eating choices, there's no evidence the program currently influences - for better or worse - how many sugary drinks kids consume, according to a new study.
When children from families participating in the federal assistance program for poor families, commonly known as food stamps, were compared to peers not in SNAP, there was no significant difference in how much milk, soda and fruit juice the kids drank.
The findings don't mean that banning the use of food stamps to buy sweetened beverages, as some have proposed, wouldn't cut down on their consumption.
But the results do suggest at least that having food stamps doesn't encourage families with kids to buy more unhealthy drinks, according to the report in the August issue of the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.
In short, 'SNAP does not affect beverage consumption among low-income children,' said Meenakshi Fernandes, the study's author and a senior analyst at the health and policy research organization Abt Associates in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
SNAP provides - on average - about $284 per month for people with low incomes to use at grocery stores on food. Purchases of alcohol, tobacco and other non-food items are not permitted.
In 2010, New York City attempted to add sugary drinks to the banned-items list, arguing that sweetened drinks are helping to spur the obesity epidemic, which disproportionately affects poorer households (see Reuters story of October 8, 2010 at).
The U.S. Department of Agriculture, which administers SNAP, denied the city permission to implement its proposed pilot project in 2011.
That, however, has not stopped other proposals for limiting soda consumption on public health grounds.
One approach is to impose an additional tax on sugary drinks, such as that passed by the city of El Monte, California late last month. (see Reuters story of July 27, 2012.).
In New York City, the Mayor recently proposed limiting the size of drink containers that can be sold, to cut down on 'super-sized' beverage purchases.
According to Fernandes, approximately one fifth of American homes participate in SNAP and children live in more than half of those homes, so the question of whether the program influences food and drink choices interested her.
To find out, she used information from a national survey that asked fifth and eighth grade students how many times a week they drank certain beverages.
Ultimately, a sample group of 3,126 kids, all of whom lived in homes with incomes less than $75,000 were surveyed in 2004 and 2007. About one in five of those children were SNAP participants.
Overall, Fernandes found that kids from SNAP households drank sugary drinks slightly less than those who were not in the program, and drank fruit juice and milk slightly more. The differences were so small, though, they could have been due to chance.
Among eight-graders, for instance, kids overall reported drinking milk eight times a week, soft drinks six times a week and fruit juice 5.6 times a week. Those in the SNAP program, on average, reported 0.6 fewer episodes of soft drink consumption and 0.51 more episodes of milk consumption.
Anne Barnhill, a lecturer in the Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, told Reuters Health that although she thinks the study is great, it still does not answer the question of whether telling people they cannot buy soda through SNAP would reduce sugary drink consumption.
Barnhill, who supported New York City's 2010 proposal, said more research is needed into that topic along with how incentive programs work, such as the ability to buy fruits and vegetables at a discounted price.
'What we really want to do is increase the consumption of healthy food and decrease the consumption of unhealthy food,' she said.
SOURCE: Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, online June 6, 2012.
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIP ADVICE.
When children from families participating in the federal assistance program for poor families, commonly known as food stamps, were compared to peers not in SNAP, there was no significant difference in how much milk, soda and fruit juice the kids drank.
The findings don't mean that banning the use of food stamps to buy sweetened beverages, as some have proposed, wouldn't cut down on their consumption.
But the results do suggest at least that having food stamps doesn't encourage families with kids to buy more unhealthy drinks, according to the report in the August issue of the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.
In short, 'SNAP does not affect beverage consumption among low-income children,' said Meenakshi Fernandes, the study's author and a senior analyst at the health and policy research organization Abt Associates in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
SNAP provides - on average - about $284 per month for people with low incomes to use at grocery stores on food. Purchases of alcohol, tobacco and other non-food items are not permitted.
In 2010, New York City attempted to add sugary drinks to the banned-items list, arguing that sweetened drinks are helping to spur the obesity epidemic, which disproportionately affects poorer households (see Reuters story of October 8, 2010 at).
The U.S. Department of Agriculture, which administers SNAP, denied the city permission to implement its proposed pilot project in 2011.
That, however, has not stopped other proposals for limiting soda consumption on public health grounds.
One approach is to impose an additional tax on sugary drinks, such as that passed by the city of El Monte, California late last month. (see Reuters story of July 27, 2012.).
In New York City, the Mayor recently proposed limiting the size of drink containers that can be sold, to cut down on 'super-sized' beverage purchases.
According to Fernandes, approximately one fifth of American homes participate in SNAP and children live in more than half of those homes, so the question of whether the program influences food and drink choices interested her.
To find out, she used information from a national survey that asked fifth and eighth grade students how many times a week they drank certain beverages.
Ultimately, a sample group of 3,126 kids, all of whom lived in homes with incomes less than $75,000 were surveyed in 2004 and 2007. About one in five of those children were SNAP participants.
Overall, Fernandes found that kids from SNAP households drank sugary drinks slightly less than those who were not in the program, and drank fruit juice and milk slightly more. The differences were so small, though, they could have been due to chance.
Among eight-graders, for instance, kids overall reported drinking milk eight times a week, soft drinks six times a week and fruit juice 5.6 times a week. Those in the SNAP program, on average, reported 0.6 fewer episodes of soft drink consumption and 0.51 more episodes of milk consumption.
Anne Barnhill, a lecturer in the Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, told Reuters Health that although she thinks the study is great, it still does not answer the question of whether telling people they cannot buy soda through SNAP would reduce sugary drink consumption.
Barnhill, who supported New York City's 2010 proposal, said more research is needed into that topic along with how incentive programs work, such as the ability to buy fruits and vegetables at a discounted price.
'What we really want to do is increase the consumption of healthy food and decrease the consumption of unhealthy food,' she said.
SOURCE: Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, online June 6, 2012.
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIP ADVICE.
Thursday, August 9, 2012
Kegel exercises curb incontinence in late pregnancy
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Pregnant women who exercise and strengthen their pelvic muscles are less likely to have problems with urine leakage in their third trimester, a new clinical trials finds.
Experts have long recommended that pregnant women do so-called Kegel exercises to strengthen the muscles of the pelvic floor, including the muscles that help control urine flow.
The exercises may help manage urinary incontinence - a common problem in pregnancy - or help prevent it from arising after childbirth.
Still, there have been questions about just how effective Kegel exercises are in preventing incontinence - particularly the fecal variety, according to the researchers on the new study, led by Signe Stafne of the Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
So Stafne's team randomly assigned 855 women in their second trimester to either join a supervised exercise program or stick with routine prenatal care - which included standard advice to do Kegels and written information about them, but not active instruction.
The exercise group had one weekly hour-long session of low-impact aerobic exercise and strength training, including Kegel exercises.
They were also given a home exercise routine to do at least twice a week.
After 12 weeks, when the women were in late pregnancy, 11 percent of the exercisers said they had problems with urine leakage at least once a week. That compared with 19 percent of women in the control group.
The exercise plan seemed to both treat and prevent problems, the researchers report in the British obstetrics journal BJOG.
Of women who already had urinary incontinence at the study's start, 24 percent were having weekly problems by late pregnancy. That was true of 35 percent of women in the comparison group.
And when women started the study incontinence-free, the exercise regimen seemed to help ward off stress incontinence - urine leakage when there's pressure on the bladder - in particular.
Five percent of women in the comparison group developed stress incontinence, versus just one percent of exercisers.
'The results from the present trial indicate that pregnant women should do pelvic floor muscle training to prevent and treat urinary incontinence in late pregnancy,' Stafne's team writes.
As for fecal incontinence, the jury is still out, they say.
Overall, three percent of exercisers had that type of incontinence by late pregnancy. That was lower than the rate in the comparison group - at five percent - but the difference was not significant in statistical terms.
Many women in the comparison group were already exercising when they entered the study, and since all were given information on Kegels, the findings suggest that pelvic exercises are more effective if women get 'thorough instructions' in how to do them, the researchers say.
Women can often get instruction on the exercises during prenatal classes, if they take them, or they can ask their obstetrician for help.
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/O4LXQa BJOG, online July 17, 2012.
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIPS ADVICE.
Experts have long recommended that pregnant women do so-called Kegel exercises to strengthen the muscles of the pelvic floor, including the muscles that help control urine flow.
The exercises may help manage urinary incontinence - a common problem in pregnancy - or help prevent it from arising after childbirth.
Still, there have been questions about just how effective Kegel exercises are in preventing incontinence - particularly the fecal variety, according to the researchers on the new study, led by Signe Stafne of the Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
So Stafne's team randomly assigned 855 women in their second trimester to either join a supervised exercise program or stick with routine prenatal care - which included standard advice to do Kegels and written information about them, but not active instruction.
The exercise group had one weekly hour-long session of low-impact aerobic exercise and strength training, including Kegel exercises.
They were also given a home exercise routine to do at least twice a week.
After 12 weeks, when the women were in late pregnancy, 11 percent of the exercisers said they had problems with urine leakage at least once a week. That compared with 19 percent of women in the control group.
The exercise plan seemed to both treat and prevent problems, the researchers report in the British obstetrics journal BJOG.
Of women who already had urinary incontinence at the study's start, 24 percent were having weekly problems by late pregnancy. That was true of 35 percent of women in the comparison group.
And when women started the study incontinence-free, the exercise regimen seemed to help ward off stress incontinence - urine leakage when there's pressure on the bladder - in particular.
Five percent of women in the comparison group developed stress incontinence, versus just one percent of exercisers.
'The results from the present trial indicate that pregnant women should do pelvic floor muscle training to prevent and treat urinary incontinence in late pregnancy,' Stafne's team writes.
As for fecal incontinence, the jury is still out, they say.
Overall, three percent of exercisers had that type of incontinence by late pregnancy. That was lower than the rate in the comparison group - at five percent - but the difference was not significant in statistical terms.
Many women in the comparison group were already exercising when they entered the study, and since all were given information on Kegels, the findings suggest that pelvic exercises are more effective if women get 'thorough instructions' in how to do them, the researchers say.
Women can often get instruction on the exercises during prenatal classes, if they take them, or they can ask their obstetrician for help.
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/O4LXQa BJOG, online July 17, 2012.
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIPS ADVICE.
Hong Kong tests babies over Japanese milk formula
Hong Kong said Thursday it will test babies who have consumed Japanese-made infant formulas found to have insufficient levels of iodine, after the products were ordered off the city's shelves.
Officials found the Wakodo and Morinaga brands lacked enough iodine, and warned they could have 'adverse health effects' on babies' thyroid glands and brains.
'We urge parents to take their babies to the 10 government-designated health centres for blood tests,' a spokesman at the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department told AFP, adding that around 2,000 babies could be affected.
The government ordered the two products to be removed from shop shelves, following the findings of a random test on 14 milk brands.
The banned products, which are for babies aged up to nine months, were found to contain less than one-third of the World Health Organization's recommended levels of iodine, an essential nutrient for infant development.
'This may affect the functioning of the thyroid gland,' the Centre for Food Safety said in a statement.
'If the thyroid gland's normal functions are significantly affected, there may be potential impact on the brain development of infants.'
The government said it would continue to test other brands.
Japanese-made baby formula accounts for about three percent of the total milk brands distributed in Hong Kong.
Their popularity slumped after the nuclear disaster in Japan last year sparked fears of radiation poisoning.
The producers of Wakodo and Morinaga formula said the products were not intended for sale in Hong Kong, which had different requirements for iodine content than Japan.
'We presume that local importers... are marketing it there,' Morinaga spokeswoman Natsumi Takahashi told AFP in Japan.
'When we export our products, we make them compatible with the standards of countries in which they are sold.'
The Japanese government does not allow manufacturers to add iodine to powdered milk products, which may however contain some iodine from other ingredients, she said.
Kenta Mitsuhashi, a spokesman for Asahi Group Holdings which includes Wakodo, said the company had 'no idea' how its milk formula ended up in Hong Kong.
'Wakodo does not export this product to Hong Kong at present,' he said, adding that the 'domestically marketed product is safe and can be used without any worry'.
'The government does not allow iodine to be added to powdered milk,' Mitsuhashi said.
Kyodo news agency reported that Morinaga believed formula producers were not permitted to supplement their products with iodine because of the relatively large amount of iodine-rich seaweeds consumed in Japan.
Hong Kong is a favourite place for mainland Chinese shoppers to stock up on baby formula, thanks to its relatively high health standards and strong enforcement.
Mainland China's dairy industry was rocked in 2008 when at least six babies died and another 300,000 became ill from milk tainted with the industrial chemical melamine.
Melamine had been added to give the appearance of higher protein levels.
This news article is brought to you by TECHNOLOGY NEWS - where latest news are our top priority.
Officials found the Wakodo and Morinaga brands lacked enough iodine, and warned they could have 'adverse health effects' on babies' thyroid glands and brains.
'We urge parents to take their babies to the 10 government-designated health centres for blood tests,' a spokesman at the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department told AFP, adding that around 2,000 babies could be affected.
The government ordered the two products to be removed from shop shelves, following the findings of a random test on 14 milk brands.
The banned products, which are for babies aged up to nine months, were found to contain less than one-third of the World Health Organization's recommended levels of iodine, an essential nutrient for infant development.
'This may affect the functioning of the thyroid gland,' the Centre for Food Safety said in a statement.
'If the thyroid gland's normal functions are significantly affected, there may be potential impact on the brain development of infants.'
The government said it would continue to test other brands.
Japanese-made baby formula accounts for about three percent of the total milk brands distributed in Hong Kong.
Their popularity slumped after the nuclear disaster in Japan last year sparked fears of radiation poisoning.
The producers of Wakodo and Morinaga formula said the products were not intended for sale in Hong Kong, which had different requirements for iodine content than Japan.
'We presume that local importers... are marketing it there,' Morinaga spokeswoman Natsumi Takahashi told AFP in Japan.
'When we export our products, we make them compatible with the standards of countries in which they are sold.'
The Japanese government does not allow manufacturers to add iodine to powdered milk products, which may however contain some iodine from other ingredients, she said.
Kenta Mitsuhashi, a spokesman for Asahi Group Holdings which includes Wakodo, said the company had 'no idea' how its milk formula ended up in Hong Kong.
'Wakodo does not export this product to Hong Kong at present,' he said, adding that the 'domestically marketed product is safe and can be used without any worry'.
'The government does not allow iodine to be added to powdered milk,' Mitsuhashi said.
Kyodo news agency reported that Morinaga believed formula producers were not permitted to supplement their products with iodine because of the relatively large amount of iodine-rich seaweeds consumed in Japan.
Hong Kong is a favourite place for mainland Chinese shoppers to stock up on baby formula, thanks to its relatively high health standards and strong enforcement.
Mainland China's dairy industry was rocked in 2008 when at least six babies died and another 300,000 became ill from milk tainted with the industrial chemical melamine.
Melamine had been added to give the appearance of higher protein levels.
This news article is brought to you by TECHNOLOGY NEWS - where latest news are our top priority.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)