Wednesday, February 22, 2012

News and Events - 21 Feb 2012




NHS Choices
17.02.2012 20:35:00

“Dogs are a woman’s best friend too!” according to the Daily Mail, which said that research has ‘proved’ that expectant mothers with a pet pooch are more physically active than those without one.

The research examined data on over 11,000 pregnant women to look at links between pet ownership and the type of physical activity they undertook. One-quarter of the women owned a dog, and those who owned a dog were more likely to be physically active at least once a week, and to achieve three or more hours of physical activity each week. When broken down by type of activity, the one that dog owners did more of than women without a dog was brisk walking.

It is not surprising that women who own a dog would walk more regularly, However, before women go out and get themselves a canine companion, it should not be assumed that having a dog causes people who would otherwise be sedentary to be more active. It could be that people who have more active lifestyles are also more likely to have a dog.

While regular brisk walking is free and a good form of cardiovascular exercise for pregnant women, you do not need a canine companion to do it – you can just take yourself and avoid cleaning up dog droppings.

In pregnancy, both NICE and the Department of Health advise that beginning or continuing a moderate course of regular exercise is beneficial but advise that pregnant women avoid potentially dangerous, high-impact or contact sports.

Where did the story come from?

The study was carried out by researchers from University of Liverpool and other institutions in the UK and US.

Participants were drawn from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC , a long-running research project supported by the Medical Research Council, Wellcome Trust, UK Department of Health, Department of the Environment, Department of Education and the Environment, National Institutes of Health, and a variety of medical research charities and commercial companies.

This specific study on the role of dogs in pregnancy was funded by a grant from the WALTHAM Centre for Pet Nutrition - a subsidiary of Mars Petcare, which manufactures a range of pet foods including Pedigree Chum. The study was published in the peer-reviewed journal Plos One.

What kind of research was this?

This was an analysis of dog ownership and health in pregnant women who were taking part in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC cohort. Specifically, the research looked at the pregnant woman’s self-reported physical activity, pre-pregnancy BMI and looked at whether there was any relationship between these factors and whether the women owned a dog.

The study was cross-sectional, meaning it measured these factors at a single point in time rather than following participants to see how they progressed over a period. Although the study technically did assess the participants at two points during their pregnancy, these were only a few months apart and do not provide any meaningful data on women’s health and fitness levels before and after getting a dog. On this basis, it should be seen as providing cross-sectional data.

Regular physical activity is known to contribute to maintaining a healthy weight and wellbeing and it is not surprising that women who own a dog would take more regular activity.

However, given that the study only assessed the participants at a single point in time, it can provide only limited conclusions; that is, it can show us whether owning a dog is associated with good health, but not that the dog is the cause of someone’s health status. We cannot tell whether having a dog causes people who would otherwise be sedentary to be more active or whether people who have more active lifestyles are more likely to get a dog.

What did the research involve?

This study was an analysis of the long-running ALSPAC study started in the early 1990s to look a range of health and development factors among babies born in the Avon area of south-west England. The ALSPAC study recruited 14,541 pregnant women from Avon who were due to give birth between April 1991 and December 1992. This sub-study on pet ownership excluded any multiple births such as twins and looked at only the 14,273 women who went on to give birth to single babies.

During pregnancy, the women were assessed using questionnaires and clinical assessments. At 18 and 32 weeks of pregnancy, women were questioned on any regular physical activity that they took such as housework, gardening, brisk walking, jogging, cycling, aerobics, antenatal classes, ‘keep fit’, yoga, squash, tennis/badminton, swimming or weight training.

Options for response were seven or more hours a week, two to six hours, less than one hour, or never. The mother’s pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI was calculated from her self-reported height and weight. At enrolment the women had also been asked if they had any pets, and if so, what type of pet.

The researchers analysed how ownership of different pets related to:

  • whether women did physical activity at least once a week or none
  • whether they did three or more hours of exercise a week, or less than three hours
  • the number of hours of different types of activity women did each week
  • whether women were normal weight (BMI
    <25 , or overweight or obese

The researchers then adjusted for potential confounders that could influence the relationship between physical activity and of pet ownership, including:

  • maternal education
  • maternal social class
  • working during pregnancy
  • maternal age at delivery
  • number of people in household
  • previous children
  • house type
  • whether the pregnant woman had pets as a child

What were the basic results?

The study analysis only looked at the 11,466 women who provided details on both physical activity and pet ownership during pregnancy. During pregnancy, 58% of these pregnant women owned one or more pets and 25% had one or more dogs. At 18 weeks of pregnancy, almost 70% of all pregnant women assessed engaged in any form or physical activity at least once a week, and 50% of all women took part in three or more hours of activity a week.

Women who owned a dog were 27% more likely to participate in physical activity at least once a week than those who did not have a dog (odds ratio [OR] 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11 to 1.41 . Dog owners were also 53% more likely to achieve three or more hours of activity a week (equivalent to 30 minutes a day on most days of the week: OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.35 to 1.72 .

When broken down by type of activity, dog owners were more likely to participate in brisk walking two to six hours a week (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.67 or seven or more hours a week (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.43 to 2.27 , but they found no association between dog ownership and any other type of activity.

Similar associations were seen at 32 weeks of pregnancy.

There was no link between dog ownership and ‘weight status’(being of ideal weight, overweight or obese .

How did the researchers interpret the results?

The researchers conclude that in their study pregnant women who had dogs were more active than those who did not own dogs, principally through walking. They consider that, as walking is a low-risk exercise, it should be investigated whether encouraging pregnant women to participate in dog walking is useful as part of a broader strategy to improve activity levels in pregnant women.

Conclusion

This cross-sectional study looked at over 11,000 women who were pregnant in 1991 and 1992 and questioned them on their levels of physical activity and pet ownership. Women who owned a dog were found to do more brisk walking than those without.

It is not surprising that women who own a dog would walk more regularly. However, the study only looked at health and dog ownership within a narrow period, so limited conclusions can be drawn from this observational research. It is not possible to say whether having a dog causes people who would otherwise be sedentary to be more active, or whether people who have more active lifestyles are more likely to choose having a dog.

Although the researchers adjusted for some potential factors that can influence both levels of activity and dog ownership (for example, socioeconomic status or past dog ownership , it is still difficult to pick apart this relationship.

At all stages in life, regular physical activity and a healthy balanced diet are known to contribute to maintaining a healthy weight, increasing wellbeing and reducing the risk of many chronic diseases.

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE advises that beginning or continuing a moderate course of exercise during pregnancy is not harmful, but advises avoiding potentially dangerous, high-impact or contact sports. The Department of Health also advises women to keep up normal daily physical activity or exercise for as long as is comfortable, as the more active and fit they are during pregnancy, the easier it will be to adapt to pregnancy weight gain, cope with labour and get back into shape after the birth.

Similarly, the Department of Health advises against potentially dangerous activities such as contact sports, horse riding and gymnastics.

Regular brisk walking is free and a good form of cardiovascular exercise and a good activity choice during pregnancy. However, while you can get benefits from regular walking, you do not need a dog to do it.

Analysis by Bazian

Links To The Headlines

Dogs are a woman's best friend too! Female pet owners more likely to meet recommended activity levels during pregnancy. Daily Mail, February 17 2012

Links To Science

Westgarth C, Liu J, Heron J, et al. Dog Ownership during Pregnancy, Maternal Activity, and Obesity: A Cross-Sectional Study. Plos One. Published online February 15 2012

Press release

Owning a dog encourages pregnant women to exercise. Bristol University, February 15 2012

20.02.2012 22:45:58

IN THE video clip my colleague posted of Paul Ryan arguing with Tim Geithner, Mr Ryan points to the inexorable rise in US government debt starting in 2023 projected by the administration's proposed budget and warns incredulously, "That's Europe." I'm having trouble thinking of another statement that is so wrong in so many different ways.

The European Union has lower government debt levels than America. Gross government debt in the 27 nations of the EU was 80% of the region's GDP at the end of 2010; in America gross federal debt at the end of 2010 was 94% of GDP. Furthermore, government debt is growing more slowly as a percentage of GDP in the EU than in America, because pretty much every nation in the EU is implementing austerity measures. The general government deficit in the EU-27 in 2010 was 6.6% of GDP. In America the federal deficit in 2010 was 9% of GDP.

Mr Ryan clearly thinks Europe is an economic basket case. Obviously, there is a grave economic crisis underway in the euro zone, and many European countries' economies contracted in the fourth quarter of 2011 while America's grew solidly. But it makes no sense to attribute the EU's poor relative economic performance to higher debt levels or higher deficits, because the EU has lower debt levels and lower deficits. The euro-zone crisis is in fact largely due to persistent current-account imbalances between member economies caused by differences in competitiveness, and the unwillingness of the more competitive countries to subsidise the less competitive countries, as would happen between states in America. But regardless of what you think the cause of the euro-zone crisis is, it doesn't make sense to attribute it to phenomena that don't exist, or to warn that America is in danger of becoming Europe if it keeps running such high deficits when in fact the way for America to become Europe would be to immediately and drastically cut its deficits.

Moreover, as my colleague explains, the reason the Obama administration's budget shows projected debt levels curving inexorably upwards after 2023 is pretty much entirely because of health-care expenses on Medicare and Medicaid. Medicare and Medicaid expenses will start to blow out the US government's budget from 2023 due to the impact of baby-boom retirees and the explosive growth in medical costs in America. Will this make America more like Europe? No. European countries do not spend more on government-provided health care than America does. They spend less. In 2009, according to OECD data, the US government spent $3,800 per citizen on health care. The German government spent $3,242. The French government spent $3,100. The British government spent $2,935. America is richer and should be able to afford more, but even as a percentage of GDP, US government spending on health care is comparable: 8.3% in America to 8.9% in Germany, 9.2% in France and 8.2% in Britain. And what of those wastrel Italians? They spent...7.2% of GDP. (In America, unlike Europe, government spending amounts to less than half of total spending on health care; when you add in private spending, America spent 17.2% of GDP on health care in 2009, while rich European countries were in the 11-12% range. And unlike rich European countries, we don't cover anywhere near all of our citizens. But that's a different subject.



Government health-care spending

Not only that, US government health-care spending is rising faster than European government health-care spending. It's rising faster even measured as a percentage of GDP. From 2001-2009, US government health-care spending went from 6.3% to 8.3%. In Germany it went from 8.3% to 8.9%, in France 8.1% to 9.2%, in Italy 6.1% to 7.2%. Only in Britain, where New Labour launched a deliberate campaign to grow the National Health Service to levels more comparable to other wealthy economies, did spending rise faster than in America, from 5.8% to 8.2%. Again, because America's long-term debt problems are driven by government health-care spending, we would be in better shape if we looked more like Europe, not less.

I don't expect Paul Ryan to conclude from all this that the reason why Europe is in a recession is that they're not doing enough deficit spending and loose monetary policy to stimulate their economy, and that it's a good thing America has run massive deficits for the past three years or we might not be seeing the cautious recovery we're seeing. It would be nice if he did conclude this, because it's true, but I don't expect him to. But I do think he ought to stop waving at a fantastic vision of a Europe that doesn't exist when he needs a bogeyman for whatever point he's trying to score in an argument.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2012/02/message-paul-ryan#comments
20.02.2012 15:15:47
When a boy struts in a tutu or a girl dons boxer shorts, grown-ups get nervous. It's one of the first lessons gender nonconforming kids learn.
17.02.2012 16:03:35
Jillian Michaels catapulted to fame as a punishing trainer on "The Biggest Loser," but she has always been just as interested in building confidence as she has in sculpting rockhard abs.
19.02.2012 17:18:26
Allan Jones says the brain is one of the last great frontiers of science. For all it does for us, we understand very little about how it works
rss@dailykos.com (Chris Bowers
17.02.2012 3:50:23

Do you want to prove it's possible for an enormous grassroots movement, backed up by fearless Democrats, to part a sea of unlimited corporate dollars and win elections with the message that we should stop taking stuff from working people and giving it to the rich?

We have a chance to prove that right now. Please, click here to contribute $5 to the Democratic Party of Wisconsin for the recall of Governor Scott Walker.

One year ago this week, tens of thousands of people were physically occupying the Wisconsin state capitol building and the grounds surrounding it. They were protesting an immoral Republican budget bill that stripped collective bargaining rights for public employees and slashed funding for health care and education in order to hand out huge tax breaks to corporations and the ultra-rich.

With this budget just hours from passage, all 14 Democratic senators left the state, thus denying Republicans the quorum they needed to pass the bill. If even one Democrat had either stayed behind or been captured by the state police which Republicans sent to arrest them, then the bill would have passed that day. Instead, the Democrats held out and the ranks of the protesters swelled. Fed by pizza orders called in from around the world, they kept the capitol building occupied for weeks.

Republicans eventually passed their budget bill by illegally circumventing Wisconsin's open meetings law, but the protesters and the Democrats were undeterred.

Backed by the Democratic Party of Wisconsin, the protesters began organizing recalls of Republican state senators. With an all-volunteer effort, they collected hundreds of thousands of signatures in less than two months. Over the summer, they successfully removed two Republicans from office by scoring electoral victories in districts Democrats could not even win in the landslide of 2008.

Even after that, the protesters and the Democrats kept going. They continued holding daily protests at the capitol building and dogging Scott Walker at all of his public appearances. Then, on Nov. 15, they filed the papers to recall Scott Walker. Through snow and winter weather, more than 30,000 volunteers collected over one million recall signatures. In so doing, they forced recall elections against not only Scott Walker, but also against the Republican Lt. Governor and at least three more Republican state senators.

The whole time they did it with a simple message: Scott Walker and Wisconsin Republicans are cutting education, health care and salaries for working people in order to make big corporations and the ultra-rich even richer. Despite the unlimited donations which have given Republicans a massive financial advantage in this fight, the Democrats and the protesters have used this populism to continually gain ground.

Wisconsin is not the only state where these battles are being fought, but it is a special case because it shows us a path to victory. How do we put an end to the gut-wrenching trend of conservative politicians taking from working people and giving to the rich? We do it by having heroes on the ground who keep protesting, gathering signatures, and knocking on doors no matter what, and by having Democrats who are willing to back those heroes up by going to the mat to defend the middle-class.


The decisive recall election against Scott Walker is coming soon. If Walker is recalled, then the whole country will know Democrats and the middle class can defeat the forces of greed with fearless populism. Republicans and the ultra-rich know such an outcome could change the political dynamic in our nation, which is why they have given more than $12 million dollars to Scott Walker to defeat the recall. Goal Thermometer Much of that money came from only a few dozen members of the one percent of the one percent, all of whom gave $10,000 or more.

What happens in Wisconsin will impact the entire country. We must prove it's possible for a tenacious grassroots movement, backed up by a fearless Democratic Party, to breach a red sea of corporate cash and win elections with a populist economic message. If we lose, the masters of the universe will continue looting what remains of the middle class with no apparent electoral consequences for politicians who facilitate their destructive actions.

On the one year anniversary of the beginning of the Wisconsin protests, please give $5 to the Democratic Party of Wisconsin to recall Scott Walker. This is an election none of us can afford to lose.

2012-02-19 05:18:06
A World Health Organization (WHO panel has ruled that a pair of studies detailing how scientists were able to mutate the H5N1 bird flu virus into a strain that could lead to a global pandemic will not be published in the near future, various media outlets reported on Friday. According to Eryn Brown of the Los Angeles Times, a 22-person panel of experts drafted by the WHO decided to extend a moratorium on the research indefinitely, announcing that scientific journals Nature and Science would not publish redacted versions of the research in the near future as had been planned. Rather, unedited versions of the research could be printed in the journals sometime "at a later date," Brown said. The meeting of influenza experts and American security officials had been called by the WHO in order to act as an arbitrator between the scientists involved with the study and officials from the U.S. National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity (NSABB , who had called on the work to be censored before it could appear in scientific journals, Reuters reporters Stephanie Nebehay and Kate Kelland said. "Biosecurity experts fear mutated forms of the virus that research teams in The Netherlands and the United States independently created could escape or fall into the wrong hands and be used to spark a pandemic worse than the 1918-19 outbreak of Spanish flu that killed up to 40 million people," Nebehay and Kelland said. WHO Assistant Director-General for Health Security and Environment Keiji Fukuda told Reuters that a deal had been reached to keep the studies secret pending additional analysis of the risks involved with making it public, adding that there while there was "a preference from a public health perspective for full disclosure of the information in these two studies," there were also "significant public concerns surrounding this research that should first be addressed." The two studies in question were conducted by Ron Fouchier of the Erasmus Medical Center in the Netherlands and Yoshihiro Kawaoka of the University of Wisconsin in Madison. Both scientists headed up research which led to the genetic engineering of new H5N1 strains that could easily be transmitted through the air amongst humans and other mammals, according to Brown. In its natural state, the illness is not likely to spread from one human to another, but has a reported 60% fatality rate, which the Times says has some health experts concerned "that if one of the newly engineered, highly contagious bird-flu strains somehow escaped the laboratory -- or if people with intent to do harm learned how to engineer and release their own lethal bird-flu strains using methods published in the papers -- it could unleash a deadly global pandemic… Many scientists, in turn, argued that moving forward with the H5N1 research was essential for developing prevention and treatments if a pandemic were to arise naturally." On Thursday, before the WHO ruling was handed down, Science editor Dr. Bruce Alberts addressed the issue at the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS meeting in Vancouver, British Columbia. Alberts told reporters in attendance, including BBC News Science Correspondent Pallab Ghosh, that his "default position" was to publish full versions of both studies. "Our position is that, in the absence of any mechanism to get the information to those scientists and health officials who need to know and need to protect their populations and to design new treatments and vaccines, our default position is that we have to publish in compete form," he said during the conference, adding that the same mutations described in the studies were "likely to happen at some point in the wild" and that Fouchier's and Kawaoka's research should serve as a "real wake-up call to the world." However, following the WHO announcement, Alberts told Denise Grady of the New York Times that his journal would wait until it is deemed appropriate to publish full versions of the studies. He also expressed his surprise that the expert panel reached their verdict in such a short amount of time, according to Grady. As previously reported here on RedOrbit, in January, Fouchier and Kawaoka agreed to halt their controversial research for 60 days in order to allow experts to determine whether or not the research could lead to a global pandemic or a possible bioterrorism threat. A letter announcing the decision -- written by Fouchier, Kawaoka, and more than three dozen other top influenza researchers -- appeared late last month in both Science and Nature, according to previous reports by Grady. “The continuous threat of an influenza pandemic represents one of the biggest challenges in public health,” the authors wrote. “Recent research breakthroughs identified specific determinants of transmission of H5N1 influenza viruses in ferrets. Responsible research on influenza virus transmission using different animal models is conducted by multiple laboratories in the world using the highest international standards of biosafety and biosecurity practices that effectively prevent the release of transmissible viruses from the laboratory.” “Despite the positive public-health benefits these studies sought to provide, a perceived fear that the ferret-transmissible H5 HA viruses may escape from the laboratories has generated intense public debate in the media on the benefits and potential harm of this type of research. We would like to assure the public that these experiments have been conducted with appropriate regulatory oversight in secure containment facilities by highly trained and responsible personnel to minimize any risk of accidental release,” they added. --- On the Net:
20.02.2012 14:00:00
Foods That Can Make You Look Younger/Older

There are many skin treatments advertised today, especially during winter, when skin tends to be especially high-maintenance. Some products claim to soften skin and give you a youthful glow, some claim to erase wrinkles. But what if you could help improve the way you look simply by watching what you eat and drink? According to health and nutrition experts, it is possible to look younger by eating specific foods and avoiding others.
 

Peggy Kotsopoulos, nutritionist and author of Must Have Been Something I Ate , recommends eating certain foods on a regular basis to attain a more youthful complexion:

  • Red grapes, Black currants, and Goji berries (or wolfberries  

“These fruits contain Polyphenols, antioxidants with amazing health benefits,” advises Kotsopoulos “Goji berries are one of the most beautifying fruits around. Start adding this superfood to your diet and watch the transformation begin! Goji berries are among the highest antioxidant-containing foods and are thought to improve skin complexion and contain anti-aging properties. Their claim to fame is their high concentration of carotenoids, in particular beta carotene, which converts into antioxidant vitamin A and helps treat acne .”

  • Kakadu plum, Camu camu, Guava, Black Currants, Red pepper, Parsley, Kiwi, and Broccoli

These foods are among the richest in Vitamin C. “Vitamin C is a powerful antioxidant. Not only does it help to protect against oxidative stress and free-radical damage as a result of physical stress, but vitamin C can also helps curb the large spikes in cortisol as a response to mental stress,” says Kotsopoulos.

Related: Eat Your Way To Sexy in 6 Steps

  • Turnip greens, Swiss chard, Spinach, Mustard greens and Asparagus

“These foods are rich in copper,” explains Kotsopoulos. “Copper is one of the most abundant minerals in our body and is essential in the production of the enzyme found in the skin that repairs all damage caused by free-radicals and produces skin-building cells. It also aids in the production of collagen and is what gives color to hair, skin and eyes.”

  • Leeks, Cucumber skin, Green beans and Strawberries

“These foods are rich in Silica,” advises Kotsopoulos. “Silica is a trace mineral essential for healthy skin. It strengthens connective tissues, tendons, cartilage, muscles, hair and nails. Silica improves your skin’s elasticity and helps repair wounds.”

There are also certain foods that experts say actually age your skin when part of your regular diet. These include:

  • Sugars and trans fats

“These are found in processed refined foods, white flour and fast foods. Excess sugar attaches itself to collagen in a process called "glycation," making the skin stiff and inflexible. Losing this elastic resilience of young skin will give the skin deep wrinkles and make it look old. Trans fats clog and stiffen the arteries and smaller blood vessels producing the same results,” says Ann A. Rosenstein, author of Diet Myths Busted; Food Facts Not Nutrition Fiction.

Related: Is "Aging" The New Medical Condition to Fear?

  • Fried foods and  BBQ charred foods

“Modern diets are largely heat-processed (deep fried, roasting, BBQ charred and as a result contain high levels of advanced glycation end products. (These products contribute to collagen breakdown in skin, leading to more wrinkles and a ‘crusted looking skin,’” advises registered dietitian Dina Khader.

  • Foods and beverages that dehydrate you

    • Coffee (caffeinated products
    • Alcohol
    • Soda
    • Salt

“When you are tired, you often look it – and the most common cause of fatigue is dehydration,” explains Kotsopoulos. “A good rule of thumb is to drink half your body weight in ounces. So if you weight 130 lbs, you need 65 ounces of water a day – just over eight cups.”
 

More from GalTime:

Danielle Miller is a freelance writer and editor from the Boston area. She is a publishing project manager and has written articles on health and relationship-related topics for various outlets for several years. She is also a book editor, working mainly on books relating to science, technology, and user experience. Read more: http://galtime.com/profile/39603/5407/danielle-miller#ixzz1lKXvGf63

 

20.02.2012 3:00:00

Wasted medication is costing the NHS millions every year – including £20million for the NHS across South Central England – local health chiefs have revealed.

This potential money wasted on unused or partially used medicines could pay for:

  • 785 more nurses, OR
  • 20,000 more treatment courses for Alzheimer’s, OR
  • 1,319 more treatment courses for breast cancer, OR
  • 5,393 more hip replacements, OR
  • 20,811 more cataract operations

A campaign aimed at reducing unnecessary waste launches today across the eight PCT areas which comprise the NHS South Central Strategic Health Authority. The campaign asks patients to;

  • Only order what they need;
  • Return their unwanted medicines to their pharmacy for safe disposal and;
  • Take their medicines with them when they go into hospital.

GPs and pharmacists across Berkshire have joined together in a bid to inform patients about their treatment and to help patients understand more about their medicines and the options they have.

One of the main concerns is repeat prescriptions, which are ordered and collected by patients but then not used. It is estimated that £90 million worth of unused prescription medicines are retained in individuals’ homes, across the UK, at any one time1.  Around half of all do not take or use their medicines as prescribed [i].  This can occur for a number of reasons, including:

 

  • patients not believing the medicine is necessary;
  • possible side effects;
  • fitting taking or using medicines into daily routines;
  • choosing between medicines if patients’ feel they are taking too many, and;
  • cutting down or stopping medicines they have been taking for a long time. 

 

Posters and leaflets will be displayed in pharmacies and GP practices to raise awareness of medicine waste among both patients and carers. In addition to this a high profile bus campaign which will run across the South Central region.  Further information may also be found on the national website www.medicinewaste.com

Notes to Editors

The latest report by the Department of Health estimates that £300 million is wasted on unused medicines across England.1

NHS South Central comprises NHS East Berkshire, West Berkshire, Buckinghamshire, Hampshire, Isle of Wight, Oxfordshire, Portsmouth and Southampton.

[1]Department of Health, Evaluation of the Scale, Causes and Costs of Waste Medicines, November 2010

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dr David Buckle, Medical Director at NHS Berkshiresaid: “Everyone involved in prescribing, dispensing or reviewing medicines needs to make sure that patients are involved in making decisions about their treatment and that more medicines are taken as recommended.

 

“Unwanted drugs in the home may mean that patients are not getting the benefit they could be from their medicines.  It also represents a large amount of waste. We want patients on repeat prescriptions to think about what they are ordering and only ask for what they need and are running out of. Any other medicines can be dispensed when needed at a later date, as once medicines have been dispensed, they cannot be recycled”

 

The latest report from the Department of Health (Nov 23rd 2010 cited Medicine Usage Reviews as a potential way to reduce waste.  In 2011, NICE (National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence issued new guidelines to healthcare professionals on how to involve patients in making decisions about prescribed medicines and reduce the number of people not taking or using their medicines correctly.

 

Carol Trower, Chief Executive Office, Berkshire Local Pharmaceutical Committee, said: “There are a number of reasons why medicines are going to waste; including people no longer taking or using the drugs. Others may be put at risk if unwanted medicines are left in the home.

 

"If anyone has any unused medicines at home we're encouraging them to take them back to the pharmacy for safe disposal and have a chat with the pharmacist  about their medicines on how to use them more effectively."

 

 

The campaign will encourage patients to have regular reviews of their medicines and to discuss any issues they may have with taking their medication with their GP or pharmacist.

 

Anyone with unwanted medicines can return them to their local pharmacy where they will be disposed of safely.



[i] Department of Health, Evaluation of the Scale, Causes and Costs of Waste Medicines, November 2010

20.02.2012 9:20:12
Basic steps and expert advice on toddlers eating healthy with recipe and eating plan for healthy eating aimed at children and kids eating healthy with a healthy eating recipe and family meals.
20.02.2012 20:52:30

Congratulations! You've made it to week 8 of BlogHer's Inspiration to Fitness! Julie and I hope that this challenge has helped you make positive changes to your diet. If you missed the previous weeks, you can still catch up and follow along at your own pace. Review our earlier posts and you can incorporate week one's goal into your diet starting today.

 

No More Portion Distortion!

This week's focus is on portion size. In the last several decades, portions in the US have become larger and larger. It's no coincidence that as portions have grown, so have waistlines. In the 1960s, 45% of Americans were overweight or obese. Today that number is nearing 70%!

week8-1

Studies show that the more food put in front of people, the more they eat. Twenty years ago, a typical cheeseburger had 330 calories; today, it's 590. The French fries you ordered on the side 20 years ago were a 2.4-ounce handful totaling 210 calories; today the standard order is a heaping 6.9 ounces, packing 610 calories.

So when it comes to losing weight and keeping it off, what you eat matters, but so does the quantity of what you eat. A study in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition found that women who shrank their portions by 25% slashed 250 calories a day enough to help them lose a half-pound a week and still felt full.

Make 2012 the year you get a handle on portion size with the following strategies:

Get to Know A Portion

week8-3

One of the best ways to begin to control portions is to get familiar with what a portion should be. Here's list of common foods and 1 serving equivalents.

What Does 1 Serving Look Like?

Grain Products:
1 cup of cereal flakes = fist
1 pancake = compact disc
1/2 cup of cooked rice, pasta or potato = 1/2 baseball
1 slice of bread = cassette tape
1 piece of cornbread = bar of soap

Vegetables and Fruit:
1 cup of salad greens = baseball
1 baked potato = fist
1 medium fruit = baseball
1/2 cup of fresh fruit = 1/2 baseball
1/4 cup of raisins = large egg

Dairy and Cheese:
1 1/2 oz. cheese = 4 stacked dice or 2 cheese slices
1/2 cup of ice cream = 1/2 baseball
Fats?1 tsp. margarine or spreads = 1 dice

Meat and Alternatives:
3 oz. meat, fish or poultry = deck of cards
3 oz. grilled/baked fish = checkbook
2 Tbsp. peanut butter = ping pong ball

Source: National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute

Set Your Table for Weight Loss

Did you know the way you set your table can influence how many calories you eat?

That's right, there are some simple ways you can change your home environment to reduce the calories you eat. In fact research shows that going from a 12-inch plate to a 10-inch plate can reduce how much you eat by about 22%. Just using a smaller plate can fool your brain into thinking you are satisfied on fewer calories! The same is true for smaller bowls and spoons. Smaller servings spoons were found to result in a 14% decrease in food intake, while smaller bowls led to a whopping 50% decrease in eating.

Forget Family-Style

week8-2

Studies also found that people eat food that's on a table much more frequently than food that's off the table. That may seem obvious, but so many of us leave food out on the table making second and third helping much more likely. In one study men ate 29% more food when a serving dish was on the table vs. the counter. Women ate about 10% more when the serving dish was on the table. So fill your plate at the counter, then bring it to the dining table. Leave the serving dish off the table.

Dining Out? Doggie-Bag It!

Some of the biggest portion pitfalls happen when dining out ? when restaurants supersize everything from salads to sundaes. If you eat out often, you need to always keep portion sizes in mind. Try these tips:

* Ask about half portions or order from the child's menu.

* If you get a full portion size, doggie bag half your entre before you start eating.

* Share your food with your companion.

* Eat a healthy appetizer and soup or salad instead of an entre.

Editors
20.02.2012 19:08:21
Axway, the Business Interaction Networks company, and GE Healthcare, a leading health information exchange software provider and a division of General Electric Company announced today that the Health Information Technology Exchange of Connecticut (HITE-CT , the state designated Health Information Exchange (HIE , has selected its combined solution for HIE.
http://www.news-medical.net/news/20120220/Axway-GE-Healthcare-combined-HIE-solution-selected-by-HITE-CT.aspx#comment
18.02.2012 2:23:59

Portland Trail Blazers center Greg Oden has been one of the most disappointing draft picks in league history, to the point where it's difficult even to call him a bust. He's been injured so many times, and missed so many games, that it's been hard to get a sense of his ceiling, or what could reasonably be expected of him if he were to stay healthy enough to play. He's a suggestion of an NBA player more than a real one, these days.

In fact, his health is now such a problem that he's not even able to undergo knee surgery on the timetable he'd hoped for. From Ben Golliver of Blazersedge.com (via PBT :

Portland Trail Blazers Acting GM Chad Buchanan said Friday that center Greg Oden is still not clear for surgery on his left knee because of the ankle blood clots. "Nothing new," he said. "The doctors in Colorado are addressing his blot clot and once that is complete Greg will have the surgery on his left knee."

Friday marks two weeks since Oden's right knee surgery. The Blazers had said repeatedly the plan was for Oden to undergo left knee surgery within 10 days to two weeks.

That's three injuries mentioned in five sentences, if you need the math written out for you. That's a lot of problems, obviously, and fairly bad news considering Oden will be a free agent this summer. If he wants an NBA job, he's probably going to have a hard time coasting on his old reputation as a defensive game-changer. Instead, he'll have to take a job with few expectations — maybe even a D-League spot — and work his way up from there.

It's an unfortunate turn of events for a guy who once held so much promise. But it's also way past time to get realistic about his career prospects. Sadly, if the injuries keep piling up, retirement might be the next decision.

Other popular content on the Yahoo! network:
Pat Forde: Butler is in transition, but not dead
Jimmie Johnson sets sights on Richard Petty, Dale Earnhardt Sr.
Y! Travel: Strangest roadside attractions in the U.S.

20.02.2012 18:45:22

Icons of Healthy Food and Hearts


Icons of Healthy Food and Hearts
2 EPS | 14.3 Mb

dflynn@foodsafetynews.com (Dan Flynn
20.02.2012 12:59:01
Jimmy John's Gourmet Sandwich franchise owners and customers are being told the chain is permanently dropping sprouts from the menu.
Jimmy John's restaurants are currently associated with a five-state outbreak of the rare O26 strain of E. coli.   It is the fifth outbreak involving sprouts traced back to Jimmy John's franchises since 2008.
While there has been no public comment by Jimmy John's since the outbreak was announced Feb. 15,  a Kirkville, MO franchise owner says "Jimmy himself" has ordered all sprouts permanently removed from the menu.
"Jimmy decided he was tired of the negative press from it and he thinks sprouts aren't necessary for Jimmy John's to rock," franchise owner Will Aubuchon told the Daily Express in Kirksville, MO.
And Linda DeGraaf, a Jimmy John's customer from Omaha who was sickened in the 2009 outbreak, was told by a corporate email that sprouts have been dropped.  "We no longer serve sprouts because supplies are too inconsistent," wrote a Jimmy John's spokeswoman.  http://www.marlerblog.com/legal-cases/the-free-market-actually-works-if-consumers-are-informed---jimmy-johns-to-stop-serving-sprouts/

After a 2010 outbreak,  founder Jimmy John Liautaud switched the sandwich chain to clover sprouts after Salmonella illnesses were associated with alfalfa sprouts.    He thought clover sprout seeds were smoother and would be easier to clean.
Jimmy John's is not alone among sandwich chains who have decided sprouts are too risky.   The 230-unit Jason's Deli dropped sprouts for at least the balance of 2012 as a food safety concern.   And the current O26 outbreak prompted the seven state Erbert and Gerbert's Sandwich Shops to drop sprouts.
Jimmy John's recent history includes five major outbreaks involving spouts.  Only the latest involves E coli O26.   Briefly here's the history of each of those incidents, including the latest ongoing event:
2012- E. coli O26
On Feb. 15, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC announced an ongoing investigation into illnesses linked to consumption of raw clover sprouts at Jimmy John's restaurants.
Twelve are sickened in five states.  Among the 11 ill persons with information available, 10 (91% reported eating at a Jimmy John's sandwich restaurant in the 7 days preceding illness. Ill persons reported eating at 9 different locations of Jimmy John's restaurants in 4 states in the week before becoming ill. 
One Jimmy John's restaurant location was identified where more than one ill person reported eating in the week before becoming ill. Among the 10 ill persons who reported eating at a Jimmy John's restaurant location, 8 (80% reported eating a sandwich containing sprouts, and 9 (90% reported eating a sandwich containing lettuce. 
Currently, no other common grocery stores or restaurants are associated with illnesses. Preliminary traceback information has identified a common lot of clover seeds used to grow clover sprouts served at Jimmy John's restaurant locations where ill persons ate. 
FDA and states conducted a traceback that identified two separate sprouting facilities; both used the same lot of seed to grow clover sprouts served at these Jimmy John's restaurant locations. On February 10, 2012, the seed supplier initiated notification of sprouting facilities that received this lot of clover seed to stop using it. Investigations are ongoing to identify other locations that may have sold clover sprouts grown from this seed lot.  http://www.cdc.gov/ecoli/2012/O26-02-12/index.html
2010 (Dec - Salmonella
Sprouters Northwest of Kent, WA, issued a product recall after the company's clover sprouts had been implicated in an outbreak in Oregon and Washington. At least some of the cases had consumed clover sprouts while at a Jimmy John's restaurants.  Seven were sickened. 
At about the same time, a separate Salmonella outbreak was linked to Tiny Greens Organic Farm, and Jimmy John's, involving alfalfa sprouts served at Jimmy John's restaurants.  http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2011/01/jimmy-johns-will-switch-to-clover-sprouts/, http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2011/01/jimmy_johns_switches_to_clover.html, http://www.thepacker.com/opinion/fresh-produce-opinion/jimmy_johns_sprout_switch_remains_puzzling_122028204.html
2010 (Dec - Salmonella
A second outbreak involving Jimmy John's was reported Dec. 17, 2010 by the Illinois Department of Health.   Many of the Illinois cases reported eating alfalfa sprouts at various Jimmy John's franchises in an outbreak that sickened 140.
Four days later, on Dec. 21, Jimmy John Liautaud asked all of his franchises to remove sprouts from the menu as a "precautionary" measure.On Dec. 23, the Centers for Disease Control revealed that outbreak cases had been detected in other states and that the outbreak was linked with eating alfalfa sprouts while at a "nationwide sandwich chain."
 On Dec. 26, preliminary results of the investigation indicated a link to eating Tiny Greens' Alfalfa Sprouts at Jimmy John's restaurant outlets. The FDA subsequently advised consumers and restaurants to avoid Tiny Greens Brand Alfalfa Sprouts and Spicy Sprouts produced by Tiny Greens Organic Farm of Urbana, Illinois. Spicy sprouts contained alfalfa, radish and clover sprouts. 
On January 14, 2011, it was revealed that the FDA had isolated Salmonella serotype I4, [5], 12:i: - from a water runoff sample collected from Tiny Greens Organic Farm; the Salmonella isolated was indistinguishable from the outbreak strain. The several FDA inspections of the sprout growing facility revealed factors that likely led to contamination of the sprouts.  http://www.cdc.gov/salmonella/i4512i-/122810/index.html
2009- Salmonella Saintpaul
Jimmy John's, which the CDC at the time identified at "Restaurant Chain A" was caught up in one of the largest recent sprout-related outbreaks.
A total of 256 were sickened in an outbreak first reported in February by the, Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services.  Officials there identified six isolates of Salmonella Saintpaul. Although this is a common strain of Salmonella, in the previous year only three cases had been detected in Nebraska and only four subtypes of this outbreak strain had been identified in the entire USA. 
Alfalfa sprout consumption was found in a case study to be significantly related to illness. The initial tracebacks of the sprouts indicated that although various companies had distributed the sprouts, the sprouts from the first cases originated from the same sprouting facility in Omaha. 
Forty-two of the illnesses beginning on March 15 were attributed to sprout growing facilities in other states; these facilities had obtained seed from the same seed producer, Caudill Seed Company of Kentucky. The implicated seeds had been sold in many states. 
On April 26, the FDA and CDC recommended that consumers not eat raw alfalfa sprouts, including sprout blends containing alfalfa sprouts. In May, FDA alerted sprout growers and retailers that a seed supplier, Caudill Seed Company of Kentucky, was withdrawing all alfalfa seeds with a specific three-digit prefix.  
CDC also reported many illnesses occurred at "Restaurant Chain A," which was later identified as Jimmy John's.  http://www.cdc.gov/salmonella/saintpaul/alfalfa/, http://www.whas11.com/news/iteam/Salmonella-Outbreak-Linked-to-Louisville-Seed-Company-83577137.html, http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5818a4.htm, See PDF linking outbreak to Jimmy John's a.k.a. "restaurant chain (Chain A "
2008- E coli O157:NM
An outbreak of E. coli O157:NM in Colorado's Boulder and Adams counties, including the University of Colorado, was linked to the consumption of alfalfa sprouts from Jimmy John's franchises in the area.
The sickened, including several UC students, experienced symptoms of bloody diarrhea and cramping with O157 determined to be the cause.  A total of 28 illnesses were associated with the outbreak.
In addition, the environmental investigation identified  Jimmy John's food handlers in Boulder, CO who worked while infected with E. coli. The health department investigation found a number of critical food handling violations, including inadequate hand washing. The fourteen isolates from confirmed cases were a genetic match to one another.  http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/17669936/detail.html
20.02.2012 22:01:43
HealthDay - (HealthDay News -- Kids left in the car, either accidentally or not, can be at risk for hyperthermia, a potentially dangerous elevation of body temperature. This can happen even in mild weather and in a short period of time.
NHS Choices
20.02.2012 20:30:00

Medical experts say “210,000 people could die from alcohol abuse in next 20 years”, according to the Daily Mirror.

Several other newspapers have highlighted the estimate, based on the latest alcohol-related harm statistics released from the UK’s Office of National Statistics. These figures show that there were 6,317 alcohol-related liver deaths in 2010, slightly up from 2009. Based on this data, researchers calculated the future toll of drinking, and estimated that there could be up to 210,000 preventable alcohol-related deaths over the next 20 years.

However, the researchers’ projections varied quite widely. Their report stated that the death rate seen in coming years will depend on the effectiveness of government policies designed to tackle problem-drinking. They added that it is “within the power of the UK government to prevent the worst-case scenario of avoidable deaths”, and discussed implementing a minimum price per unit of alcohol.

The BBC and other media covered this story accurately.

Where have the current reports come from?

Last year, The Lancet published an article containing projections of alcohol-related liver deaths in England and Wales, and today doctors have published updated projections of the number of drink-related liver deaths expected to occur over the next 20 years. These latest projections were made using alcohol-related harm statistics released by the UK’s Office of National Statistics (ONS in January 2012. Today’s article, published online, was written by experts from University Hospital Southampton, the University of Liverpool and Nottingham University Hospital.

Although alcohol-related liver deaths fell from 6,470 in 2008 to 6,230 in 2009, they began increasing again in 2010, up to 6,317 in total. Based on available data, the expert team produced a range of estimates looking at the potential death toll in years to come, factoring in how interventions such as government policy changes could prevent deaths.

In the best possible scenario, alcohol-related liver deaths, which account for approximately one quarter of alcohol-related deaths, would gradually fall to 2,500 a year over the next 20 years. This is the same number of alcohol-related liver deaths a year currently seen in the Netherlands, Sweden, Australia, New Zealand and Norway. In this “best-scenario” case, there would be an estimated 73,000 alcohol-related liver deaths over the coming 20 years. However, if alcohol policy in England and Wales were to remain the same, the experts predict that alcohol-related liver deaths would be nearly twice as high over the same period, with 143,000 deaths in total.

The experts say that the difference between the two scenarios is due to 70,000 “avoidable deaths”. This is a moderate improvement from the projection of 77,000 avoidable alcohol-related liver deaths presented in last year’s study.

When the researchers considered alcohol-related deaths from all causes, they estimated that the number of avoidable deaths expected over the next 20 years has actually fallen from last year’s projections, from 250,000 down to 210,000. The experts suggested that this fall in the number of alcohol-related deaths may be due to alcohol sales having been curbed during the recession, but that alcohol policy in England and Wales still needs to be amended to prevent these avoidable alcohol-related deaths. They discussed the possibility of bringing in a minimum price per unit of alcohol, a policy that Scotland is debating in parliament and Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland are both considering. England is due to publish a new alcohol strategy in 2012.

How will alcohol cause these deaths?

Alcohol consumption can contribute to acute (sudden deaths, such as from accidents, violence and suicide. It can also contribute to the development of potentially fatal chronic diseases, including liver disease, hypertension, stroke, cardiovascular disease and cancers of the breast and gastrointestinal tract. Deaths due to alcohol-related liver disease are reported to account for approximately one quarter of all alcohol-related deaths.

Who is at risk?

In the UK, the peak age for alcohol-related deaths is 45 to 65, and alcohol is a contributing factor in over a quarter of all deaths in men aged 16 to 24 years.

There is no “safe” limit for drinking, but risk can be reduced by drinking no more than 2 to 3 units a day for women, or 3 to 4 units for men. Regularly exceeding these limits increases the risk of certain chronic diseases and alcohol-related problems, including fatigue, depression, weight gain and poor sleep. The more the recommended limits are exceeded, the greater the risk to your health.

How much do we drink in the UK?

The NHS Information Centre (NHSIC Statistics for England found that in 2009 the average weekly consumption of alcohol was 16.4 units for men and 8 units for women, with 26% of men reporting drinking more than 21 units in an average week, and 18% of women reporting drinking more than 14 units.

To put this into context, there are:

  • 3 units in a pint of high-strength lager (strength 5.2%
  • 2 units in a standard can of lager, beer or cider (strength 5%
  • 2.1 units in a standard glass of wine (175ml, strength 12%
  • 1 unit in a small measure of spirits (25ml, strength 40%

See our page on alcohol units for more information.

How much should I be drinking?

The NHS and Department of Health (DH advise that:

  • Adult women should not regularly drink more than 2 to 3 units of alcohol a day.
  • Adult men should not regularly drink more than 3 to 4 units of alcohol a day.

“Regularly” means drinking on most days of the week or on every day of the week. The DH also advises taking a break for 48 hours after a heavy drinking session to allow your body to recover.

NICE recommends that pregnant women should avoid drinking alcohol during the first three months of pregnancy as drinking may increase the risk of miscarriage. If a woman does choose to drink during pregnancy, she should not drink more than 1-2 units once or twice a week (although there is no certainty of a “safe” level of alcohol consumption, at this low level there is currently no evidence of harm to the unborn baby . Binge-drinking in pregnancy (7.5 units or more on a single occasion may be harmful to the unborn baby and should be avoided.

Analysis by Bazian

Links To The Headlines

Alcohol abuse 'to kill 200000 people in 20 years' - but deaths are preventable. Metro, February 20 2012

Health experts predict high rate of alcohol-related deaths. BBC news, February 20 2012

210000 people face alcohol death risk, warn doctors. BBC news, February 20 2012

Drinking will kill 210,000 in next 20 years unless we outlaw cheap booze, senior doctors warn. Daily Mail, February 20 2012

210000 people could die from alcohol abuse in next 20 years. Daily Mirror, February 20 2012

Links To Science

Sheron N, Gilmore I, Parsons C et al. Projections of alcohol-related deaths in England and Wales—tragic toll or potential prize?. The Lancet, Early Online Publication, February 20 2012

21.02.2011 3:05:16

Premier healthcare alliance launches next wave of comparative effectiveness research program to determine safest, most efficient care

Inaugural Premier healthcare alliance Excellence Award recognizes a health system using collaboration to lead 2,400 hospitals toward transforming healthcare

CHARLOTTE, N.C. (February 15, 2011 – The Premier healthcare alliance has launched the second wave of a voluntary program evaluating products and clinical interventions in real-world settings at Premier member hospitals.

Editors
20.02.2012 19:19:34
ZirMed, a preeminent provider of revenue cycle and information solutions for healthcare, today announced the launch of VeraFund Manager for healthcare providers. Available exclusively from ZirMed and utilizing advanced payment and remittance processing support from BNY Mellon, the service delivers an end-to-end automated patient/payer solution for healthcare providers.
http://www.news-medical.net/news/20120220/ZirMed-launches-VeraFund-Manager-for-healthcare-providers.aspx#comment
20.02.2012 15:00:45
-- When it comes to stroke prevention, a healthy lifestyle is your best bet. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention lists these suggestions to help reduce your risk of stroke: Follow a healthy diet that's low in saturated fats and...
Editors
20.02.2012 19:01:28
HealthSpot, Inc. today announced that 3M Littmann Stethoscopes, the trusted leader for stethoscopes worldwide, will be the provider of electronic stethoscopes for all HealthSpot Care4 Stations.
http://www.news-medical.net/news/20120220/3M-Littmann-to-provide-electronic-stethoscopes-for-all-HealthSpot-Care4-Stations.aspx#comment
20.02.2012 17:47:41
The FDA is going to investigate whether the "Aeroshot" canisters of inhalable caffeine are actually safe. When you hear about widely available and totally unregulated drugs like this that are available with absolutely no medical supervision whatsoever to any kid who wanders into a convenience store, it makes you ask: is that stuff any good? More »

No comments:

Post a Comment