(Reuters) - Children whose mothers took antibiotics while they were pregnant were slightly more likely than other children to develop asthma, according to a Danish study.
The results don't prove that antibiotics caused the higher asthma risk, but they support a current theory that the body's own 'friendly' bacteria have a role in whether a child develops asthma, and antibiotics can disrupt those beneficial bugs.
'We speculate that mothers' use of antibiotics changes the balance of natural bacteria, which is transmitted to the newborn, and that such unbalance bacteria in early life impact on the immune maturation in the newborn,' said Hans Bisgaard, one of the study's authors and a professor at the University of Copenhagen.
Previous research has linked antibiotics taken during infancy to a higher risk of asthma, although some researchers have disputed those findings.
To look for effects starting at an even earlier point, Bisgaard and his colleagues gathered information from a Danish national birth database of more than 30,000 children born between 1997 and 2003, and followed for five years.
They found that about 7,300 of the children, or nearly one quarter, were exposed to antibiotics while their mothers were pregnant. Among them, just over three percent, 238 children, were hospitalized for asthma by age five.
The study, which appeared in The Journal of Pediatrics, found that by contrast, about 2.5 percent, or 581 of some 23,000 children whose mothers didn't take antibiotics, were hospitalized with asthma.
After taking into account other asthma risk factors, Bisgaard's team calculated that the children who had been exposed to antibiotics were 17 percent more likely to be hospitalized for asthma.
Similarly, these children were also 18 percent more likely to have been given a prescription for an asthma medication than children whose mothers did not take antibiotics when they were pregnant.
His team also looked at a smaller group of 411 children who were at higher risk for asthma because their mothers had the condition. They found that these children were twice as likely as their peers to develop asthma too if their mothers took antibiotics during the third trimester of pregnancy.
Others said that it was possible that something besides the antibiotics was responsible, such as the illness the drugs were prescribed for.
'This study, it doesn't tell us whether it's the antibiotic use or whether it's the infection. That's one thing we can't decipher,' said Anita Kozryskyj, a professor at the University of Alberta who also studies the antibiotics-asthma link but wasn't involved in the new study.
The results don't suggest that women should avoid antibiotics since some infections can be quite dangerous to a fetus, she said, adding that Bisgaard's study suggests that the development of asthma might start before birth, something researchers hadn't studied very closely.
'We're beginning to appreciate that some of the origins of asthma and changes to the immune system, maybe they start earlier than right after birth,' she added. SOURCE: http://bit.ly/W9SnlJ (Reporting from New York by Kerry Grens at Reuters Health; editing by Elaine Lies)
This news article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIPS ADVICE - where latest news are our top priority.
Tuesday, November 20, 2012
Monday, November 19, 2012
Antibiotics in pregnancy tied to asthma in kids
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Children whose mothers took antibiotics while they were pregnant were slightly more likely than other kids to develop asthma in a new Danish study.
The results don't prove that antibiotics caused the higher asthma risk, but they support a current theory that the body's own 'friendly' bacteria have a role in whether a child develops asthma, and antibiotics can disrupt those beneficial bugs.
'We speculate that mothers' use of antibiotics changes the balance of natural bacteria, which is transmitted to the newborn, and that such unbalanced bacteria in early life impact on the immune maturation in the newborn,' said Dr. Hans Bisgaard, one of the authors of the study and a professor at the University of Copenhagen.
Those effects on the immune system could lead to asthma later on, although it's still not clear how, said Anita Kozyrskyj, a professor at the University of Alberta who also studies the antibiotics-asthma link but wasn't involved in the new study.
Previous research has linked antibiotics taken during infancy to a higher risk of asthma, although some researchers have disputed those findings (see Reuters Health stories of May 17, 2011 and February 3, 2011).
To look for effects starting at an even earlier point in a baby's development, Bisgaard and his colleagues gathered information from a Danish national birth database of more than 30,000 children born between 1997 and 2003 and followed for five years.
They found that about 7,300 of the children, or nearly one quarter, were exposed to antibiotics while their mothers were pregnant. Among them, just over three percent (238 kids) were hospitalized for asthma by age five.
In comparison, about 2.5 percent, or 581 of some 23,000 kids whose mothers didn't take antibiotics were hospitalized for asthma.
After taking into account other asthma risk factors, Bisgaard's team calculated that the children who had been exposed to antibiotics were 17 percent more likely to be hospitalized for asthma.
Similarly, these children were also 18 percent more likely to have been given a prescription for an asthma medication than kids whose mothers did not take antibiotics when they were pregnant, according to findings published in The Journal of Pediatrics.
In an email to Reuters Health, Bisgaard said he expected to see a higher risk of asthma 'because the mother is a prime source of early bacterial colonization of the child, and antibiotics may (have) disturbed her normal bacterial flora.'
Bisgaard's team also looked at a smaller group of 411 kids who were at higher risk for asthma because their mothers had the condition and found these children were twice as likely as their peers to develop asthma too if their mothers took antibiotics during the third trimester of pregnancy.
Kozyrskyj, who is research chair of the Women and Children's Health Research Institute, said it's also possible that something other than the antibiotics are to blame for the findings in both groups of children - such as the illness that caused the mothers to take antibiotics.
'This study, it doesn't tell us whether it's the antibiotic use or whether it's the infection. That's one thing we can't decipher,' she told Reuters Health.
The results don't suggest that women should avoid taking antibiotics to try to reduce their kids' risk of asthma, Kozyrskyj emphasized.
Some infections can be quite dangerous to a fetus, and 'there are very good indications for these antibiotics,' she added.
Bisgaard agreed that women should be treated, 'but we see 1/3 of pregnant women in our region receiving treatments (often for urinary tract infections), which may reflect an uncritical use,' he wrote in an email.
Bisgaard said his group is also studying the types of bacteria in pregnant mothers and newborn children to get a better understanding of their role in asthma.
Kozyrskyj said Bisgaard's study suggests that the development of asthma might start before birth, something researchers hadn't studied very closely.
'We're beginning to appreciate that some of the origins of asthma and changes to the immune system, maybe they start earlier than right after birth. It might be happening in utero,' she said.
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/W9SnlJ The Journal of Pediatrics, online November 8, 2012.
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIP ADVICE.
The results don't prove that antibiotics caused the higher asthma risk, but they support a current theory that the body's own 'friendly' bacteria have a role in whether a child develops asthma, and antibiotics can disrupt those beneficial bugs.
'We speculate that mothers' use of antibiotics changes the balance of natural bacteria, which is transmitted to the newborn, and that such unbalanced bacteria in early life impact on the immune maturation in the newborn,' said Dr. Hans Bisgaard, one of the authors of the study and a professor at the University of Copenhagen.
Those effects on the immune system could lead to asthma later on, although it's still not clear how, said Anita Kozyrskyj, a professor at the University of Alberta who also studies the antibiotics-asthma link but wasn't involved in the new study.
Previous research has linked antibiotics taken during infancy to a higher risk of asthma, although some researchers have disputed those findings (see Reuters Health stories of May 17, 2011 and February 3, 2011).
To look for effects starting at an even earlier point in a baby's development, Bisgaard and his colleagues gathered information from a Danish national birth database of more than 30,000 children born between 1997 and 2003 and followed for five years.
They found that about 7,300 of the children, or nearly one quarter, were exposed to antibiotics while their mothers were pregnant. Among them, just over three percent (238 kids) were hospitalized for asthma by age five.
In comparison, about 2.5 percent, or 581 of some 23,000 kids whose mothers didn't take antibiotics were hospitalized for asthma.
After taking into account other asthma risk factors, Bisgaard's team calculated that the children who had been exposed to antibiotics were 17 percent more likely to be hospitalized for asthma.
Similarly, these children were also 18 percent more likely to have been given a prescription for an asthma medication than kids whose mothers did not take antibiotics when they were pregnant, according to findings published in The Journal of Pediatrics.
In an email to Reuters Health, Bisgaard said he expected to see a higher risk of asthma 'because the mother is a prime source of early bacterial colonization of the child, and antibiotics may (have) disturbed her normal bacterial flora.'
Bisgaard's team also looked at a smaller group of 411 kids who were at higher risk for asthma because their mothers had the condition and found these children were twice as likely as their peers to develop asthma too if their mothers took antibiotics during the third trimester of pregnancy.
Kozyrskyj, who is research chair of the Women and Children's Health Research Institute, said it's also possible that something other than the antibiotics are to blame for the findings in both groups of children - such as the illness that caused the mothers to take antibiotics.
'This study, it doesn't tell us whether it's the antibiotic use or whether it's the infection. That's one thing we can't decipher,' she told Reuters Health.
The results don't suggest that women should avoid taking antibiotics to try to reduce their kids' risk of asthma, Kozyrskyj emphasized.
Some infections can be quite dangerous to a fetus, and 'there are very good indications for these antibiotics,' she added.
Bisgaard agreed that women should be treated, 'but we see 1/3 of pregnant women in our region receiving treatments (often for urinary tract infections), which may reflect an uncritical use,' he wrote in an email.
Bisgaard said his group is also studying the types of bacteria in pregnant mothers and newborn children to get a better understanding of their role in asthma.
Kozyrskyj said Bisgaard's study suggests that the development of asthma might start before birth, something researchers hadn't studied very closely.
'We're beginning to appreciate that some of the origins of asthma and changes to the immune system, maybe they start earlier than right after birth. It might be happening in utero,' she said.
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/W9SnlJ The Journal of Pediatrics, online November 8, 2012.
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIP ADVICE.
Friday, November 16, 2012
Smoking in pregnancy tied to lower reading scores
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Babies exposed to their mother's cigarette smoke in the womb later perform more poorly on reading comprehension tests, according to a new study.
'It's not a little difference - it's a big difference in accuracy and comprehension at a critical time when children are being assessed, and are getting a sense of what it means to be successful,' lead author Dr. Jeffrey Gruen of Yale University told Reuters Health.
In the study, researchers found that children born to mothers who smoked more than one pack per day struggled on tests specifically designed to measure how accurately a child reads aloud and if she understands what she read.
On average, children exposed to high levels of nicotine in utero -- defined as the minimum amount in one pack of cigarettes per day -- scored 21 percent lower in these areas than classmates born to non-smoking mothers. The difference remained even when researchers took other factors -- such as if parents read books to their children, worked in lower-paying jobs or were married -- into account.
Put another way, among students who share similar backgrounds and education, a child of a smoking mother will on average be ranked seven places lower in a class of 31 in reading accuracy and comprehension ability, said co-author Jan Frijters of Brock University in Ontario, Canada.
Previous studies have found smoking during pregnancy is linked to lower IQ scores and academic achievement, and more behavioral disorders. The authors found no reports so far that zeroed in on specific reading tasks like accuracy and comprehension in a large population.
The team, which published their results in The Journal of Pediatrics, pulled data from more than 5,000 children involved in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPC) study that began in the early 1990s in the UK. Only data from children with IQ scores of 76 and higher were used. An IQ score of 70 and below can be the sign of a mental disability.
UK researchers collected questionnaires from mothers before and after giving birth. This helps make the self-reported data more trustworthy, explained Sam Oh of the University of California, San Francisco, who wasn't involved with the work. If mothers knew their child's reading scores beforehand, they might subconsciously report more or less smoking.
'To me, this study suggests that the effects attributed to in utero smoking can in fact be attributed to the intrauterine environment, and not due to environmental differences that the children grow up in,' Oh told Reuters Health by email.
Large observational studies like this one call attention to patterns, but do not prove a direct cause-effect relationship between cigarette smoking and low reading scores.
Despite public health initiatives to discourage smoking, as many as one in six pregnant American women still light up, according to national surveys by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
'That is a lot of children,' Dr. Tomás Paus of the University of Toronto told Reuters Health.
Paus added that the study tied the effects of low test scores to nicotine in cigarettes, which also produce other harmful chemicals and carbon dioxide. Either way, smoking while pregnant seems to put a baby at risk for negative health outcomes.
'We should not be happy with those rates. Smoking during pregnancy is preventable,' Paus said.
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/W7v2kM The Journal of Pediatrics, online November 5, 2012.
This news article is brought to you by MOVIE CRITIC NEWS - where latest news are our top priority.
'It's not a little difference - it's a big difference in accuracy and comprehension at a critical time when children are being assessed, and are getting a sense of what it means to be successful,' lead author Dr. Jeffrey Gruen of Yale University told Reuters Health.
In the study, researchers found that children born to mothers who smoked more than one pack per day struggled on tests specifically designed to measure how accurately a child reads aloud and if she understands what she read.
On average, children exposed to high levels of nicotine in utero -- defined as the minimum amount in one pack of cigarettes per day -- scored 21 percent lower in these areas than classmates born to non-smoking mothers. The difference remained even when researchers took other factors -- such as if parents read books to their children, worked in lower-paying jobs or were married -- into account.
Put another way, among students who share similar backgrounds and education, a child of a smoking mother will on average be ranked seven places lower in a class of 31 in reading accuracy and comprehension ability, said co-author Jan Frijters of Brock University in Ontario, Canada.
Previous studies have found smoking during pregnancy is linked to lower IQ scores and academic achievement, and more behavioral disorders. The authors found no reports so far that zeroed in on specific reading tasks like accuracy and comprehension in a large population.
The team, which published their results in The Journal of Pediatrics, pulled data from more than 5,000 children involved in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPC) study that began in the early 1990s in the UK. Only data from children with IQ scores of 76 and higher were used. An IQ score of 70 and below can be the sign of a mental disability.
UK researchers collected questionnaires from mothers before and after giving birth. This helps make the self-reported data more trustworthy, explained Sam Oh of the University of California, San Francisco, who wasn't involved with the work. If mothers knew their child's reading scores beforehand, they might subconsciously report more or less smoking.
'To me, this study suggests that the effects attributed to in utero smoking can in fact be attributed to the intrauterine environment, and not due to environmental differences that the children grow up in,' Oh told Reuters Health by email.
Large observational studies like this one call attention to patterns, but do not prove a direct cause-effect relationship between cigarette smoking and low reading scores.
Despite public health initiatives to discourage smoking, as many as one in six pregnant American women still light up, according to national surveys by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
'That is a lot of children,' Dr. Tomás Paus of the University of Toronto told Reuters Health.
Paus added that the study tied the effects of low test scores to nicotine in cigarettes, which also produce other harmful chemicals and carbon dioxide. Either way, smoking while pregnant seems to put a baby at risk for negative health outcomes.
'We should not be happy with those rates. Smoking during pregnancy is preventable,' Paus said.
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/W7v2kM The Journal of Pediatrics, online November 5, 2012.
This news article is brought to you by MOVIE CRITIC NEWS - where latest news are our top priority.
Wednesday, November 14, 2012
Even moderate drinking in pregnancy may affect child's IQ
LONDON (Reuters) - Women who drink even moderate amounts of alcohol while pregnant may risk lowering child's intelligence levels, according to a study by British scientists.
Advice to pregnant women about drinking is contradictory, with some guidelines recommending no alcohol at all and others suggesting the odd drink now and then is safe.
But in a study described as 'hugely important' by one expert, researchers using genetic analysis of more than 4,000 mothers and children found that drinking between one and six units of alcohol a week during pregnancy can lead to lower Intelligence Quotient (IQ) scores by the time a child is eight.
'Even at levels of alcohol consumption which are normally considered to be harmless, we can detect differences in childhood IQ which are dependent on the ability of the fetus to clear this alcohol,' said Sarah Lewis of Bristol University, who led the study. 'This is evidence that even at these moderate levels, alcohol is influencing fetal brain development.'
This study used genetic data from women and children who were part of another study called the Children of the 90s study.
Since the individual genetic variations that people have in their DNA are not connected to lifestyle and social factors, this kind of study avoids potential complications.
Most previous studies have used observational evidence, but experts say this can be misleading because, for example, mothers who drink in moderation while pregnant are typically also well educated, have good diets and are unlikely to smoke - all factors linked to higher IQ in children and which could mask any negative effects of alcohol.
A U.S. study published in July found that older, educated women are more likely to drink while pregnant.
GENES AFFECT ALCOHOL METABOLISM
This study, published in the journal PLOS ONE on Wednesday, used a new technique analyzing the genetic variants which modify the effects of alcohol exposure levels.
When a person drinks alcohol, ethanol is converted to acetaldehyde by a group of enzymes, the researchers explained.
Variations in genes that 'encode' these enzymes lead to differences in a person's ability to metabolize ethanol, so in 'slow metabolizes', alcohol levels may be higher for longer than in 'fast metabolizes'. Scientists think fast ethanol metabolism protects against abnormal brain development because less alcohol goes to the fetus.
The mothers were asked to record their alcohol consumption at various stages during pregnancy, and one drink was specified as one unit of alcohol.
The results showed that four genetic variants in alcohol-metabolizing genes among the 4,167 children were strongly related to lower IQ at age eight. The child's IQ was on average almost two points lower per genetic variation they had.
The effect was only seen among children of women who were moderate drinkers and there was no effect evident in children of mothers who abstained during pregnancy. This strongly suggests it was exposure to alcohol in the womb that led to the difference in child IQ, the researchers said.
'This is a complex study but the message is simple: even moderate amounts of alcohol during pregnancy can have an effect on future child intelligence.' said Ron Gray of Oxford University, who was part of Lewis's team.
David Nutt, a professor of neuropsychopharmacology at Imperial College London who was not involved in the research, said it was 'a hugely important study from the best UK cohort that can study this question'.
'Even though the IQ effects are small, if at all possible women should avoid ethanol in pregnancy as it's a known toxin,' he said in an emailed comment.
(Editing by Paul Casciato)
This news article is brought to you by DATING AND RELATIONSHIP ADVICE - where latest news are our top priority.
Advice to pregnant women about drinking is contradictory, with some guidelines recommending no alcohol at all and others suggesting the odd drink now and then is safe.
But in a study described as 'hugely important' by one expert, researchers using genetic analysis of more than 4,000 mothers and children found that drinking between one and six units of alcohol a week during pregnancy can lead to lower Intelligence Quotient (IQ) scores by the time a child is eight.
'Even at levels of alcohol consumption which are normally considered to be harmless, we can detect differences in childhood IQ which are dependent on the ability of the fetus to clear this alcohol,' said Sarah Lewis of Bristol University, who led the study. 'This is evidence that even at these moderate levels, alcohol is influencing fetal brain development.'
This study used genetic data from women and children who were part of another study called the Children of the 90s study.
Since the individual genetic variations that people have in their DNA are not connected to lifestyle and social factors, this kind of study avoids potential complications.
Most previous studies have used observational evidence, but experts say this can be misleading because, for example, mothers who drink in moderation while pregnant are typically also well educated, have good diets and are unlikely to smoke - all factors linked to higher IQ in children and which could mask any negative effects of alcohol.
A U.S. study published in July found that older, educated women are more likely to drink while pregnant.
GENES AFFECT ALCOHOL METABOLISM
This study, published in the journal PLOS ONE on Wednesday, used a new technique analyzing the genetic variants which modify the effects of alcohol exposure levels.
When a person drinks alcohol, ethanol is converted to acetaldehyde by a group of enzymes, the researchers explained.
Variations in genes that 'encode' these enzymes lead to differences in a person's ability to metabolize ethanol, so in 'slow metabolizes', alcohol levels may be higher for longer than in 'fast metabolizes'. Scientists think fast ethanol metabolism protects against abnormal brain development because less alcohol goes to the fetus.
The mothers were asked to record their alcohol consumption at various stages during pregnancy, and one drink was specified as one unit of alcohol.
The results showed that four genetic variants in alcohol-metabolizing genes among the 4,167 children were strongly related to lower IQ at age eight. The child's IQ was on average almost two points lower per genetic variation they had.
The effect was only seen among children of women who were moderate drinkers and there was no effect evident in children of mothers who abstained during pregnancy. This strongly suggests it was exposure to alcohol in the womb that led to the difference in child IQ, the researchers said.
'This is a complex study but the message is simple: even moderate amounts of alcohol during pregnancy can have an effect on future child intelligence.' said Ron Gray of Oxford University, who was part of Lewis's team.
David Nutt, a professor of neuropsychopharmacology at Imperial College London who was not involved in the research, said it was 'a hugely important study from the best UK cohort that can study this question'.
'Even though the IQ effects are small, if at all possible women should avoid ethanol in pregnancy as it's a known toxin,' he said in an emailed comment.
(Editing by Paul Casciato)
This news article is brought to you by DATING AND RELATIONSHIP ADVICE - where latest news are our top priority.
Kids with Down syndrome twice as likely to be heavy
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - More than one in four children with Down syndrome in The Netherlands is overweight, a rate double that of Dutch youth without the developmental disability, according to a new study.
'We were alarmed by the high prevalence of overweight in children with Down syndrome,' said Dr. Helma van Gameren-Oosterom, the lead author of the study from the Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research in Leiden.
'Of course we knew that the prevalence of overweight is rising; for Dutch standards a twofold level, however, was not expected.'
Previous studies have suggested children with Down syndrome are especially prone to being heavy. But researchers still aren't sure why that is, according to Dr. Sheela Magge, an endocrinologist at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, who was not part of the new study.
Theories have ranged from physiological differences in metabolism or the way the body suppresses appetite to behavioral differences, such as in how much exercise children get, she said, but no studies have been able to pin down the definitive cause.
About 6,000 babies - or one in every 691 - are born with Down syndrome each year in the U.S., according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
For the latest study, the researchers compared growth patterns among 659 children with Down syndrome and no other health problems to general data on youth in The Netherlands.
By calculating kids' weight relative to their height - a unit called body mass index (BMI) - the research team determined which children were overweight and which were obese. The BMI cutoffs for obesity and overweight are different for each age in children.
Magge said they're not a perfect measure for children with Down syndrome because their body proportions are different than those of other children, but it's the best available yardstick for now.
Gameren-Oosterom and her colleagues found 25.5 percent of boys with Down syndrome were overweight and 4.2 percent were obese.
Among girls with the condition, 32 percent were overweight and 5.1 percent obese, they report in the medical journal Pediatrics.
In comparison, children in the rest of the Dutch population had much lower rates: for boys, 12.3 percent were overweight and 1.7 percent obese; for girls, 14.7 percent were overweight and 2.2 percent were obese.
Magge said researchers have also observed higher rates of overweight among children with Down syndrome in the U.S.
Gameren-Oosterom wrote in an email to Reuters Health that she and her colleagues suspect lifestyle has something to do with that pattern. Because it's harder for young people with Down syndrome to develop their motor skills, they may be less active.
Low muscle tone and poor coordination often accompany the disability as well, Magge told Reuters Health.
Her concern with so many kids being overweight is that as people with Down syndrome are living longer, 'we may start seeing more complications and comorbidities such as diabetes, cardiovascular disease (and) hypertension, all those things that we worry about in all of our obese adolescents.'
Gameren-Oosterom said it's difficult to develop a prevention or treatment strategy to target overweight and obesity in children with Down syndrome, given that the causes are unknown.
But like all youth, she added, those children will benefit from a healthy diet and sufficient exercise.
Magge said people with Down syndrome tend to prefer keeping strict routines, which could be something parents can take advantage of to help instill healthy habits.
'In adults it might be that if they get into a routine of eating healthy it's more likely to stick,' she said.
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/SnWv05 Pediatrics, online November 12, 2012.
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIP ADVICE.
'We were alarmed by the high prevalence of overweight in children with Down syndrome,' said Dr. Helma van Gameren-Oosterom, the lead author of the study from the Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research in Leiden.
'Of course we knew that the prevalence of overweight is rising; for Dutch standards a twofold level, however, was not expected.'
Previous studies have suggested children with Down syndrome are especially prone to being heavy. But researchers still aren't sure why that is, according to Dr. Sheela Magge, an endocrinologist at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, who was not part of the new study.
Theories have ranged from physiological differences in metabolism or the way the body suppresses appetite to behavioral differences, such as in how much exercise children get, she said, but no studies have been able to pin down the definitive cause.
About 6,000 babies - or one in every 691 - are born with Down syndrome each year in the U.S., according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
For the latest study, the researchers compared growth patterns among 659 children with Down syndrome and no other health problems to general data on youth in The Netherlands.
By calculating kids' weight relative to their height - a unit called body mass index (BMI) - the research team determined which children were overweight and which were obese. The BMI cutoffs for obesity and overweight are different for each age in children.
Magge said they're not a perfect measure for children with Down syndrome because their body proportions are different than those of other children, but it's the best available yardstick for now.
Gameren-Oosterom and her colleagues found 25.5 percent of boys with Down syndrome were overweight and 4.2 percent were obese.
Among girls with the condition, 32 percent were overweight and 5.1 percent obese, they report in the medical journal Pediatrics.
In comparison, children in the rest of the Dutch population had much lower rates: for boys, 12.3 percent were overweight and 1.7 percent obese; for girls, 14.7 percent were overweight and 2.2 percent were obese.
Magge said researchers have also observed higher rates of overweight among children with Down syndrome in the U.S.
Gameren-Oosterom wrote in an email to Reuters Health that she and her colleagues suspect lifestyle has something to do with that pattern. Because it's harder for young people with Down syndrome to develop their motor skills, they may be less active.
Low muscle tone and poor coordination often accompany the disability as well, Magge told Reuters Health.
Her concern with so many kids being overweight is that as people with Down syndrome are living longer, 'we may start seeing more complications and comorbidities such as diabetes, cardiovascular disease (and) hypertension, all those things that we worry about in all of our obese adolescents.'
Gameren-Oosterom said it's difficult to develop a prevention or treatment strategy to target overweight and obesity in children with Down syndrome, given that the causes are unknown.
But like all youth, she added, those children will benefit from a healthy diet and sufficient exercise.
Magge said people with Down syndrome tend to prefer keeping strict routines, which could be something parents can take advantage of to help instill healthy habits.
'In adults it might be that if they get into a routine of eating healthy it's more likely to stick,' she said.
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/SnWv05 Pediatrics, online November 12, 2012.
This article is brought to you by RELATIONSHIP ADVICE.
Monday, November 12, 2012
Nesquik Recall Q and A: Are Your Kids Safe?
Nestlé announced late last week a recall of Nesquik for possible Salmonella contamination. Promoted by the Nesquik Bunny, the chocolate milk flavoring is consumed primarily by children. Here's what you need to know to make sure your kids are safe from this Salmonella risk.
How Do I Know If My Nesquik Is Part of the Recall?
The Nesquik recall covers only chocolate powder in 10.9, 21.8 and 40.7 ounce canisters manufactured during October 2012. Any other Nesquik products are not subject to recall. According to CNN, 200,000 canisters of Nesquik are included in the recall.
Nesquik subject to the recall bears a Best Before date of October 2014. The applicable UPC codes and production codes include: for 40.7 ounce containers UPC 0 28000 68230 9 with production codes 2282574810 or 2282574820; for 21.8 ounce size, UPC 0 28000 68090 9 and production codes 2278574810, 2278574820, 2279574810, 2279574820, 2284574820, 2284574830, 2285574810, 2285574820, 2287574820, 2289574810, or 2289574820; and, for 10.9 ounce canisters, UPC 0 28000 67990 3 and product code 2278574810.
What About Ready-to-Drink Nesquik Served at My Kid's School?
In June, Nestlé went after the school lunch market by offering eight-ounce ready-to-drink Nesquik. If your child's school is serving ready-to-drink Nesquik, there's no cause for concern. The recall covers only the powder variety of Nesquik, not the ready-to-drink type.
What Led to the Nesquik Recall?
Nestlé identifies a supplier of calcium carbonate used in the drink powder as the culprit. The recall notice says Omya, Inc., notified Nestlé of its own product recall due to Salmonella concerns. There have been no reports of illness associated with the Nesquik recall, Nestlé says.
What Is Calcium Carbonate?
Calcium carbonate is an additive included in powdered products to prevent caking and/or to increase calcium content, according to Self.
If My Child Gets Sick, How Will I Know Whether or Not It's from Salmonella?
Salmonella infection symptoms include diarrhea, abdominal cramps, and fever. These normally develop within 72 hours of consuming contaminated food or drink. Most people who do contract salmonellosis get better in about a week without treatment. For infants, the elderly, pregnant women, and people with compromised immune systems, salmonellosis can be life threatening and medical treatment is advised.
Can I Get a Refund?
Yes. Return recalled Nesquik to the store where you bought it for a refund, or call Nestlé Consumer Services at (800) 628-7679.
Carol Bengle Gilbert writes about consumer issues for the Yahoo! Contributor Network.
This news article is brought to you by GADGETS NEWS - where latest news are our top priority.
Sunday, November 11, 2012
Study tentatively links flu in pregnancy and autism
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Kids whose mothers had the flu while pregnant were slightly more likely to be diagnosed with 'infantile autism' before age three in a new Danish study. But the children's overall risk for the developmental disorder was not higher than that of other kids.
Researchers said it's possible that activation of a mother's immune system - such as by infection with the influenza virus - could affect a fetus's developing brain. But they urged caution with the new findings, especially because of statistical limitations in their number-crunching.
'I really want to emphasize that this is not something you should worry about,' said lead author Dr. Hjordis Osk Atladottir, from the University of Aarhus.
'Ninety-nine percent of women with influenza do not have a child with autism,' she told Reuters Health. 'If it were me that was pregnant, I wouldn't do anything different from before, because our research is so early and exploratory.'
Her team's data came from a study that originally recruited more than 100,000 pregnant women in Denmark between 1996 and 2002. The women were called multiple times during their pregnancies, and once afterward, to ask about any new infections they had or medications they had taken.
The new report includes 96,736 kids born from that initial cohort who were between 8 and 14 years old at the time of the analysis.
Using a country-wide register of psychiatric diagnoses, Atladottir and her colleagues found that 1 percent of all kids were diagnosed with autism, including 0.4 percent with infantile autism - in which the main symptoms all show up before age three.
There was no link between a range of infections in pregnancy - including herpes, coughs and colds and cystitis - and the chance a baby would develop autism or infantile autism, according to the report published Monday in Pediatrics.
And among 808 women who reported having the flu while pregnant, there was no increased risk of autism in their children. However, seven of those babies, or 0.87 percent, were diagnosed with infantile autism, compared to the rate of 0.4 percent among kids in general.
There was also an increased - albeit sometimes borderline - risk of both autism and infantile autism in babies of women who had fevers for a week or more during pregnancy, as well as mothers who took some types of antibiotics.
Atladottir said there is some research in rodents suggesting women's activated immune cells can cross the placenta and affect chemicals in a fetus's brain. But how those findings apply to humans is still a question mark.
'It's all very unsure now - we don't really know anything,' she said.
In the United States, about one in 88 children is now diagnosed with autism or a related disorder.
One limitation of the new study, the researchers noted, is that they did 106 statistical tests comparing the risk of autism or infantile autism with various infections and drugs.
In medical research, a significant finding is typically considered one where there is less than a five percent likelihood the result would have occurred by chance.
But when so many calculations are done, scientists would expect that at least some would pass this test of significance, even if there is no real link between the pregnancy variables and autism.
In addition, women's flu reports weren't confirmed by doctors - and the frequency of mistaking the flu for another infection, or vice versa, is 'likely to be considerable,' the researchers noted.
Because of those limitations, Atladottir said the findings could encourage future research, but shouldn't be at the front of pregnant women's minds.
'We don't want to create panic,' she said.
Still, one expert who wasn't involved in the new study thought the researchers were 'soft peddling' their conclusions.
'It is highly recommended that women avoid infection during pregnancy, and there are a variety of very practical ways to decrease the likelihood of this,' Paul Patterson, who studies the immune system and brain development at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, told Reuters Health by email.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend all women get a flu vaccine during pregnancy - in part because serious flu complications are more common in pregnant women.
But, said Patterson, 'It is also worth emphasizing that even though the risk (of infantile autism) is significantly increased, the risk is still quite low.'
SOURCE: http://bitly.com/kSEGVh Pediatrics, online November 12, 2012.
This news article is brought to you by FREE ROMANTIC DATING SITE BLOG - where latest news are our top priority.
Researchers said it's possible that activation of a mother's immune system - such as by infection with the influenza virus - could affect a fetus's developing brain. But they urged caution with the new findings, especially because of statistical limitations in their number-crunching.
'I really want to emphasize that this is not something you should worry about,' said lead author Dr. Hjordis Osk Atladottir, from the University of Aarhus.
'Ninety-nine percent of women with influenza do not have a child with autism,' she told Reuters Health. 'If it were me that was pregnant, I wouldn't do anything different from before, because our research is so early and exploratory.'
Her team's data came from a study that originally recruited more than 100,000 pregnant women in Denmark between 1996 and 2002. The women were called multiple times during their pregnancies, and once afterward, to ask about any new infections they had or medications they had taken.
The new report includes 96,736 kids born from that initial cohort who were between 8 and 14 years old at the time of the analysis.
Using a country-wide register of psychiatric diagnoses, Atladottir and her colleagues found that 1 percent of all kids were diagnosed with autism, including 0.4 percent with infantile autism - in which the main symptoms all show up before age three.
There was no link between a range of infections in pregnancy - including herpes, coughs and colds and cystitis - and the chance a baby would develop autism or infantile autism, according to the report published Monday in Pediatrics.
And among 808 women who reported having the flu while pregnant, there was no increased risk of autism in their children. However, seven of those babies, or 0.87 percent, were diagnosed with infantile autism, compared to the rate of 0.4 percent among kids in general.
There was also an increased - albeit sometimes borderline - risk of both autism and infantile autism in babies of women who had fevers for a week or more during pregnancy, as well as mothers who took some types of antibiotics.
Atladottir said there is some research in rodents suggesting women's activated immune cells can cross the placenta and affect chemicals in a fetus's brain. But how those findings apply to humans is still a question mark.
'It's all very unsure now - we don't really know anything,' she said.
In the United States, about one in 88 children is now diagnosed with autism or a related disorder.
One limitation of the new study, the researchers noted, is that they did 106 statistical tests comparing the risk of autism or infantile autism with various infections and drugs.
In medical research, a significant finding is typically considered one where there is less than a five percent likelihood the result would have occurred by chance.
But when so many calculations are done, scientists would expect that at least some would pass this test of significance, even if there is no real link between the pregnancy variables and autism.
In addition, women's flu reports weren't confirmed by doctors - and the frequency of mistaking the flu for another infection, or vice versa, is 'likely to be considerable,' the researchers noted.
Because of those limitations, Atladottir said the findings could encourage future research, but shouldn't be at the front of pregnant women's minds.
'We don't want to create panic,' she said.
Still, one expert who wasn't involved in the new study thought the researchers were 'soft peddling' their conclusions.
'It is highly recommended that women avoid infection during pregnancy, and there are a variety of very practical ways to decrease the likelihood of this,' Paul Patterson, who studies the immune system and brain development at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, told Reuters Health by email.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend all women get a flu vaccine during pregnancy - in part because serious flu complications are more common in pregnant women.
But, said Patterson, 'It is also worth emphasizing that even though the risk (of infantile autism) is significantly increased, the risk is still quite low.'
SOURCE: http://bitly.com/kSEGVh Pediatrics, online November 12, 2012.
This news article is brought to you by FREE ROMANTIC DATING SITE BLOG - where latest news are our top priority.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)