or margarita—hits your belly, any food there at that moment delays the absorption of alcohol into the bloodstream, which is why you feel woozier faster if you’re drinking on an empty stomach. The higher the percentage of alcohol your cocktail contains, the longer it stays in your system and the drunker you feel. And if you’re a woman (or you are on the slim side , the longer it takes for your body to process the alcohol.
The Healthier Approach: Moderation—and slow consumption—is key. While on the whole it’s better to drink with food in your system, it won’t make you less drunk, Dr. Breite says. “Drink less or spread drinking out so your body has time to metabolize it. If you down five shots and a loaf of bread with it, you’ll just be really drunk and full of carbohydrates,” he says.
exception of artificial sweeteners, has a direct effect on your metabolism and energy. All sugar is converted into glucose and fructose, which is absorbed through the small intestines into the blood. Your body uses it as an easy and quick source of fuel, but it runs out quickly (hence the famed “sugar crash” .
The Healthier Approach: Sugar is, well, sweet, and that makes it a key part of some of the tastiest things on the planet: homemade chocolate chips cookies, creme brulee, chocolate everything. But it’s also all empty calories, and unless you’re an elite athlete, you’re probably not going to burn all those empty calories off, so you don’t need more from excess sugar consumption. Watch out for the hidden sources that don’t serve any pleasurable purpose: sports drinks, soda, that cache of gummy bears on your co-workers desk you eat because you’re bored.
energy boost. You get hungry again faster after a refined-carb heavy meal (the reason you’re ready to eat again an hour after a huge plate of pancakes , plus your body isn’t using fat stores for energy, which is what you want.
The Healthier Approach: Yes, a crusty baguette is a wonderful thing, as are pancakes, and sometimes only white rice with beef and broccoli will do. Still, try to get as many of your everyday carbs from slow burning, complex sources like beans, whole fruits and veggies, and whole grains. That way you have room for the occasional splurge.
The Healthier Approach: Luckily, trans fats are under fire, and many manufacturers have removed them from their products. So when you buy packaged foods, read labels and make sure there are as few ingredients as possible. Opt for
leaner meats and make cheese a splurge rather than part of your everyday diet. Go for the good stuff on the weekends; a small slice of something French and decadent, or really good Parmesan rather than ordering American cheese on your lunchtime sandwich out of habit.
Cocktails,
cupcakes, salty potato chips, a big juicy cheeseburger. These things all taste pretty darn good as they pass through your lips, but what happens after they move on down the road? “No matter what you swallow, the mechanisms are the same: past the food pipe, through the esophagus, and into your stomach,” says Ira Breite, M.D., a clinical assistant professor in the division of gastroenterology at NYU Langone Medical Center.
This social activism movement sees more of a social problem, and less of a medical one
Features
Ljudmila Petrovic — The Peak (Simon Fraser University
VANCOUVER (CUP — As a child, Kalamity Hildebrandt was put on diet pills by her doctor in order to lose weight. By age nine she was bulimic, which progressed to the point where she was throwing up blood in her teenage years. By 19, she could barely function emotionally in the world because of her overwhelming fear of harassment.
Hildebrandt's view on being fat was changed by fat activism, the social justice movement that believes that, just like any other discrimination, oppression of people because of their weight is unacceptable and should be fought against.
“I know for me, when I discovered fat politics, I actually think it saved my life. It was such a surprise because it was the first time I encountered the idea that maybe I was fine and society was messed up,” Hildebrandt, a founder of the political group Fat Panic!, explained.
“I spent my whole life, every minute of my life, hating myself, contemplating how I could surgically alter my body at all times, throwing up, cutting ... to punish myself for being fat.”
Hildebrandt is currently working with the Simon Fraser Public Interest Research Group (SFPIRG , a student group at Simon Fraser University, to organize a series of Fat Happiness Days workshops that invite conversation about issues surrounding fat and society.
A social movement
Fat activism is a lesser known political movement that started around the 1970s, but has recently received more notoriety with the rise of blogging. A common reaction to the idea of fat activism is disbelief and uncertainty. Many people hold to the idea that being fat is a matter of choice or lifestyle, and that fat activism should not be put in the same category as other political movements.
Hildebrandt, however, argues that in many cases, it is not due to individual choice, but to the socio-economic environment that an individual is put in. Furthermore, those subscribing to this movement believe that oppression in any form and towards anybody is unacceptable, and that includes oppression based on body size.
Lesley Kinzel, a body politics activist, explains on her blog Two Whole Cakes: “For ... those who would identify as fat activists, [fat activism is] about changing culture, and confronting the social pressures that seek to either depress us into fruitless dieting, or shame us into living as invisibly as possible.” She continues, “Fat acceptance isn’t just for me, or just for fat people; everyone needs fat acceptance, because this is a lesson that benefits us all.”
The movement also rejects the medicalization of terminology used to describe weight. Hildebrandt explains that by using terms such as "obese" or "overweight" (rather than "fat" , it turns the body and its weight into a medical symptom; it defines the body in a medical way. Fat activism takes the word ‘fat’ and turns it into a political term.
Michelle Allison, a nutritionist invested in body politics who advocates for “eating normally”, explains how she understands the word "fat" on her blog The Fat Nutritionist. “I call myself fat because not only am I fat ... I’m also not especially bothered by it,” Allison wrote. “Because the size of my body, and your body, is morally neutral. Fat doesn’t equal lazy or ugly or even, necessarily, unhealthy. It’s just a word.”
Loving your body at any weight and size is an admirable attitude, and one that our thin-obsessed society is in dire need of. However, what about the "obesity epidemic" we’ve heard so much about? Have we not seen a huge increase in obesity rates and overall less healthy lifestyles in North American society?
According to Hildebrandt, however, the term "epidemic" is misleading in describing the trend occurring in our society. “One thing to realize is that the term ‘epidemic’ is misused in this context because what we see in an epidemic is a sudden increase,” Hildebrandt said. “What is actually seen is that there has been a gradual increase in the average weight of people in Western society. That’s not an epidemic. The term alone is being used to stir up fear ... but actually, everybody is living longer.”
The health issues
Dr. Scott Lear, an associate professor of kinesiology at SFU whose research has focused on obesity and cardiology, agrees that the term "epidemic" is an overused one in terms of obesity rates. However, he said, “it is a public health concern, just like any other risk factor, just like cholesterol, just like blood pressure and diabetes, and that it needs to be treated in a professional way, from all aspects, from health professionals to society at large.”
Furthermore, fat activism strives to dispel the idea that fat is necessarily associated with being unhealthy. “Another thing to realize about the whole fat–health debate is that all studies that have looked at large populations over time ... find that there’s a ‘U’-shaped curve. So, it’s not like you’re thin, and then you get fatter, and then you die faster. There’s a curve and what they find is that, actually, the people who live the longest are in the overweight category ... It doesn’t make sense [to define] fatness as a health problem, [or to try and] make people thinner in order to improve public health.”
Lear agrees that there are many misguided perceptions against people carrying extra weight, and dismisses the common belief in our society that fat people should just "eat less and exercise more."
“With that kind of thinking,” Lear said, “we’re not going to get anywhere.”
However, contrary to the fat activist belief that weight and health are not directly correlated, Lear acknowledges that there are health consequences to being overweight. “There’s undeniable evidence that it is unhealthy to be carrying excess body fat,” he said.
Possible consequences of carrying excess weight range from high cholesterol, high blood pressure and diabetes to psychosocial stress and other societal consequences. Just as Hildebrandt is attempting to bring the political and social issues surrounding fat oppression to light, so too does Lear believe that “by ignoring [these issues], it’s not going to help anybody ... the solution is as complex as the cause. It needs to be taken on from a societal point of view, as well as an individual one.”
When it comes to being overweight, there is a habit of placing blame on individuals and their habits. Lear, however, does not see this as the solution at all. “What we need to do is not so much focus on whether people are obese or not, but focus on healthy behaviors,” he said. “We all make choices, but we make choices presented with the opportunities we have ... [We need to] give people the education and the tools with which they can make healthy life choices.”
Lear explains that obesity is only one of many public health issues — the only difference between obesity and most other health problems is that obesity is always visible to others.
This is exactly what Hildebrandt and other fat activists are fighting against: the oppression of those that are noticeably different from what is considered the norm, be that according to race, gender or body weight. Lear, too, acknowledges the social stigmas involved with obesity, but also notes that it is a public health issue that must be addressed on several levels.
Obesity has been addressed as an epidemic, as a public health issue, and as a personal failing. What fat activism is trying to accomplish is to address fat as a political issue — an issue of oppression like any other. What health professionals like Lear are making clear, however, is that while obesity is subject to unnecessary social negativity, it is nonetheless a public health issue that must be dealt with in a holistic manner — addressing both the individual and our society.
-30-
Fruit and vegetables are not only nutritious but could also make you “cuter”, according to the Daily Mail. Apparently, eating more foods such as carrots, broccoli, squash and spinach enhances attractiveness and gives the skin a healthy glow within six weeks.
These rather fruity claims are based on a small experimental study that investigated whether people could improve their complexion by eating the yellow-red carotenoid pigments found in many fruits and vegetables. In the first phase of the study, 35 people completed dietary questionnaires and had their skin colour recorded over a six-week period. The researchers found that a modest increase in self-reported fruit and vegetable consumption over the period was related to an increase in skin colouration (yellowness and redness . In the second part of the study, the researchers enrolled 24 young students and asked for their subjective opinions of the attractiveness of computer-created, colour-manipulated images, which the researchers said reflected different degrees of fruit and vegetable consumption.
No conclusions can be drawn from this small, short study, which has numerous limitations. To assess more reliably whether fruit and vegetable consumption caused skin colour change, the researchers could have performed a trial asking people to eat different diets and looked at the results it had. Also, the researchers did not account for other factors that might affect complexion, such as exposure to daylight and exercise, and can provide no evidence that the diet caused the observed skin colour over the short six-week period. In the second part of the study, the subjective opinions of 24 people cannot be interpreted as a universal measure of attractiveness.
Regardless of whether or not fruit and vegetables enhance our complexion, including them in a healthy, balanced diet has many other known health benefits.
Where did the story come from?
The study was carried out by researchers from the University of St Andrews and was funded by the Economic and Social Research Council and by Unilever Research and Development USA. Unilever is a large food manufacturer. The research was published in the peer-reviewed scientific journal PLoS One.
This apparent “good news” study was widely reported in the papers, for the most part uncritically. The BBC included comments from independent experts, one of whom pointed out that the study did not take account of food preparation technique and another who said the effects of daylight could not be ruled out. The Mail’s report, which said that people who increased their fruit and vegetable intake became more attractive, and even “cuter” in an online version of the story, was misleading because it attempted to combine the results of two separate experiments.
What kind of research was this?
This experimental study set out to examine the effects of fruit and vegetable intake on skin colour, and specifically to find out how much dietary intake needs to change and for how long to have a perceptible change on skin colour. A second part of the study looked at the minimum colour change required to make skin look healthier and more attractive.
The authors say that a recent cross-sectional study has associated higher fruit and vegetable consumption with human skin colour (yellowness , mainly because of the presence of carotenoids, the yellow-red organic pigments abundant in many fruit and vegetables. Carotenoids are described as high in antioxidants, which the authors say may be beneficial for skin health. They say that the accumulation of carotenoids imparts colour to the skin, but that it is not known how much is needed to give the skin a healthy colour. In evolutionary terms, a healthy skin colour, they argue, indicates suitability as a mate and is therefore beneficial in sexual selection.
What did the research involve?
In the first experiment, the researchers monitored the fruit and vegetable intake of 35 individuals (21 women and 14 men over a period of six weeks. Participants were undergraduate students, mostly of Caucasian origin. None of them wore facial makeup or reported recent sunbathing or use of self-tanning products. Researchers recorded their diet and skin colour at an initial session and in two follow-up sessions at three and six weeks, between March and June 2010.
Students completed a validated food-frequency questionnaire to establish their daily fruit and vegetable intake, from which researchers worked out a daily average. The participants reported consuming an average of 3.41 fruit and vegetable portions daily over the three sessions. Skin colour and “reflectance” (the amount of light reflected off the skin were recorded using a specialist device called a spectrophotometer. The measurement of skin colour included three separate components: skin lightness and degrees of yellowness and redness.
Skin colour on seven body locations was recorded:
- the left cheek
- right cheek
- forehead
- part of forearm
- outer bicep
- shoulder
- palm
The researchers analysed whether there were any associations between changes in diet and changes in skin colour over this period. They also conducted a further analysis to investigate whether changes in skin colour associated with dietary changes were caused by the absorption of carotenoids or melanin, a skin pigment that gives the skin its colour and which also protects against UV rays.
In a second experiment involving 24 students (19 women and 5 men , the researchers investigated the effects of skin colour changes on perception of health and attractiveness, using what they call “psychophysics”. For this, they took close-up photos of two women and two men (all of whom were white , taking various precautions to reduce the possibility of reflection from external light and ensuring each image was colour calibrated.
They then digitally created two on-screen face-shaped colour masks, which they say represented the average skin colour of 15 high and 15 low fruit and vegetable consumers, as derived from a previous study. The skin areas of the photos were manipulated to create a row of 22 images for each face, with the middle one showing the original face and those either side varying in their colour tone. The full set of 22 images represented a total range of colour equivalent to a change of plus or minus 5.55 fruit and vegetable portions a day.
The 24 students were asked to view the images and, in three separate tasks, to choose the face that appeared healthier, more yellow or more attractive.
What were the basic results?
In the first experiment, the researchers found that changes in fruit and vegetable consumption over a period of six weeks significantly correlated with changes in skin “redness and yellowness” over the same period, across all seven measured regions of the body.
However, when they considered only the three facial areas (left cheek, right cheek, forehead , researchers found no significant association between changes in fruit and vegetable intake and changes of redness or lightness in complexion. There was only a marginal association between dietary changes and an increase in facial yellowness. They also found that the changes in skin “reflectance” were significantly associated with the absorption of carotenoids and not melanin (which means they could be attributed to compounds found in fruit and vegetables rather than to the skin’s natural pigment .
In the second experiment, they found that modest dietary changes are required to enhance apparent health (2.91 more portions of fruit and veg a day and attractiveness (3.3 more portions a day .
How did the researchers interpret the results?
The researchers concluded that increased fruit and vegetable consumption confers “measurable and perceptibly beneficial effects” on Caucasian skin appearance within six weeks. This effect, they say, could potentially be used as a “motivational tool” in dietary intervention.
Conclusion
This small study attempted to look at how fruit and veg intake affected attractiveness and skin tone in two experiments. The first found that self-reported increases in fruit and vegetables over a period of six weeks were associated with changes in complexion. The second asked people to rate the attractiveness of digital facial images manipulated to reflect different levels of fruit and vegetable consumption.
Despite all the prominent, positive news coverage this research received, no conclusions should be drawn from this experimental study, which has numerous limitations. There is no reason why the first part of this study could not have been conducted using a randomised controlled design that assigned people different diets and then followed them over time to assess skin colour change. This would have been relatively simple and would probably have given much more reliable results. Instead, the study asked just 35 students to report their dietary intake over the course of the six weeks while having their skin colour assessed. The study had a small number of participants, and the results cannot prove that the diet caused the change over this short period. For example, changes in complexion could be related to other factors including exercise, exposure to daylight and even sleep.
In the second experiment, researchers tried to link this association between complexion and diet by asking 24 people to give their subjective perceptions of the health and attractiveness of computerised facial images that had been manipulated to show varying complexions, apparently related to fruit and vegetable intake. Again, no significance should be attached to these results. Judging how attractive someone is involves many other factors, not just their skin tone.
Overall, this widely reported research can't tell us very much about whether fruit and vegetables have a beneficial effect on complexion, although there are plenty of other good reasons to eat fruit and vegetables.
Links To The Headlines
Fruit and veg 'give healthy glow'. BBC News, March 8 2012
Eating fruit and veg 'boosts attractiveness'. The Daily Telegraph, March 8 2012
Best incentive yet for improving your diet: how fruit and veg could make you cuter. Daily Mail, March 8 2012
Eat your five-a-day if you want a glowing complexion, say scientists. Metro, March 8 2012
Links To Science
Whitehead RD, Re D, Xiao D et al. You Are What You Eat: Within-Subject Increases in Fruit and Vegetable Consumption Confer Beneficial Skin-Color Changes. PLoS ONE 7(3 : e32988
One of the most important companies in the wireless space you may never have heard of is Aricent Group, the product engineering, carrier services and design company which renamed itself last year by combining Aricent and frog (formerly Frog Design . The name change was not done for cosmetic reasons, Aricent Group’s customers are carriers, and equipment providers who live in a brave new world requiring ever-faster time to market. In addition, in an increasingly standardized world of LTE, companies have to be able to provide bullet-proof interoperability and product and service stability while simultaneously adding value in order to reduce the brutal effects of commoditization which plagues virtually all markets where standards take hold. So faster product integration is necessary to keep up with evolving and hypercompetitive markets.
With financial backing from KKR and Sequoia Capital and 10,000 employees in 36 countries, Aricent Group is a major player in helping design and implement leading-edge wireless systems. And at MWC the company touted its 35th LTE win. Yes the word holistic is thrown around a lot but there seems to be no better term to describe how this corporate behemoth is helping customers from the consumer touch point to the core of the network. In fact many customers rely on Aricent Group’s 5,000 wireless engineers to provide them with protocol stacks and software frameworks to speed their time to market.
As an example, the company supports 3GPP Release 9 and Release 10 compliant protocol stacks and software frameworks for LTE span eNodeB platforms and components, IP Backhaul, and the Evolved Packet Core. Moreover they support reference frameworks support both the Frequency Division Duplex (FDD and Time Division Duplex (TDD modes of operation on LTE across different bands.
At MWC 2012 in Barcelona I spent time with Tim Leberecht the company’s CMO and Shrikant Latkar VP of Product and Solutions Marketing to learn about how the company is helping MVNOs with sophisticated OSS/BSS systems helping provide revenue assurance for MVNOs to how the drive towards the consumerization of IT has helped their company grow more quickly.
Some of the areas where they provide assistance have to do with designing products consumers don’t even know they want and helping their customers speed up their internal organizational structures to keep up with the rapidly accelerating market.
In the future, the company hopes to expand beyond the core telecom market into healthcare, financial and automotive spaces. In addition they have noticed a trend in the market where their customers now have in-house design departments meaning Aricent Group is becoming more of an advisor and partner.
Other areas where they see opportunity are M2M where they mentioned that if a machine-to-machine system is monitoring a heart patient they have to make sure it works and meets an SLA requirement. Other spaces of growth include big data, apps and the smart grid where they say they are helping consumers become aware of their energy usage.
Finally, we can expect the company to focus more on helping customers develop ecosystems as well as providing network-based apps.
At MWC much of the focus on the consumer press centered around the latest gadget and gizmos but the reality is while design is important, without the wireless infrastructure, support,
billing and OSS systems – all our fancy smartphones and tablets would become paperweights. So while Aricent group does focus on the glitz and glamour side of the wireless space, they also help make sure our devices keep working as efficiently as possible while helping carriers make the money they need to keep reinvesting in their networks.
Tags:
3g,
4g,
aricent group,
carrier,
consumer electronics,
consumerization,
consumerization of it,
frog,
frog designaricent,
lte,
mobile world congress,
mvno,
mwc,
wirelessRelated tags:
aricent group,
helping customers,
stacks software,
division duplex,
protocol stacks,
aricent
- Follow me:
Facebook Profile
Google Reader Profile
Twitter Profile
AirWatch Highlights MDM in a Post-PC Era - Mar 08, 2012
VMware Mobile Virtualization Helps Secure Consumerized IT - Mar 07, 2012
xG Technology xMax Works as Advertised - Sep 29, 2009
Nexus One: A $350 Penalty so you can Access AT&T? - Jan 07, 2010
AT&T Moves to 4G in Miami and Elsewhere - Sep 09, 2009
Off to MWC 2012 Next Week - Feb 23, 2012
xG Technology Making Progress - Dec 29, 2011
20 Millions Reasons WiMAX is Here to Stay - Aug 22, 2011
The Apple iOS vs. Android Fight in 2011 - Dec 28, 2010
Harald Braun Former Aviat Networks CEO Interview - Sep 17, 2010
TrackBacks |
Comments |
Tag with del.icio.us |
Communications and Technology Blog - Tehrani.com Home | Permalink:
How Aricent Group Enables Rapid LTE Adoption
Copyright
Communications and Technology Blog - Tehrani.com
Sponsored by the
Call Center Outsourcing Community & the
Virtual Contact Center Outsourcing Community
A year after the power plant's triple meltdown, conflicting official information leaves families confused and fearful for their future
The noise levels soar inside Fukushima city's youth centre gymnasium as dozens of nursery school children are let loose on bouncy castles and pits filled with plastic balls.
The handful of teachers and volunteers on duty are in forgiving mood: for the past year, the Fukushima nuclear accident has robbed these children of the simple freedom to run around.
Instead, anxious parents and teachers have confined them to their homes and classrooms, while scientists debate the possible effects of prolonged exposure to low-level radiation on their health.
"Many parents won't let their children play outside, even in places where the radiation isn't that high," said Koji Nomi of the Fukushima chapter of the Japanese Red Cross, which organised the event. "Unless they have the opportunity to run around, their physical strength is at risk of deteriorating.
"That in turn puts them at risk of succumbing to stress. Some are allowed to play outside for short periods every day, but that's not enough."
Hundreds of thousands of children in the area have been living with similar restrictions since the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant's triple meltdown last March, sending radioactive particles over a wide area.
The immediate threat of a catastrophic release has passed, but residents of several towns, including those outside the 12-mile (20km exclusion zone, say they live in fear of the invisible threat in their midst. Kumiko Abe and her family evacuated from Iitate, 39km from the power plant, weeks after the accident after a study by Tetsuji Imanaka, an associate professor of nuclear engineering at the Kyoto University Research Reactor Institute, found unusually high pockets of radiation in the village.
They now live in private accommodation in Fukushima city, but Abe says she continues to take precautions to protect her nine-year-old daughter, Momoe.
"We have stopped eating rice grown by my husband's parents, and I never buy locally grown vegetables," Abe, 46, said. "I started buying imported meat, and we drink only bottled water. I try not to hang out laundry on windy days ... I'd like to be able to air our futons, but I can't."
Her concerns centre on her daughter, who has a tiny lump on her thyroid gland. Doctors have assured her it is benign. "Even though they say there's nothing to worry about I'd like her to have more frequent tests," Abe said.
Her anxiety is compounded by conflicting messages from experts about the risk of exposure to low-level radiation.
Shunichi Yamashita, a professor at Fukushima Medical University who acts as an adviser on radiation risk management to the local government, angered parents when he said exposure to 100 millisieverts a year – the level recommended for nuclear plant workers in an emergency – was safe, even for children.
He has since claimed that his comments were taken out of context.
A cumulative dosage of 100 millisieverts a year over a person's lifetime increases the risk of dying from cancer by 0.5%, according to the International Commission of Radiological Protection.
No study has linked cancer development to exposure at below that level, but there is agreement that the Fukushima case is unprecedented.
Much of the unease stems from the wildly varying levels of radiation recorded in the same areas: in parts of Fukushima outside the evacuation zone, readings vary from negligible to as high as 50 millisieverts a year. Normally, the Japanese are exposed to about 1 millisievert of background radiation a year.
The emergence of thyroid cancers in children living near Chernobyl is on many parents' minds, despite UN data showing that exposure to radioactive iodine, an established cause of the condition, was much lower in Fukushima.
Campaigners said this week that Japan's government had been too slow to providing health checks and information to residents.
"A year on, we are really not seeing basic health services being offered in an accessible way and we are not seeing accurate, consistent, non-contradictory information being disclosed to people on a regular basis," Jane Cohen, a researcher for Human Rights Watch, told Reuters.
"People have to at least be equipped with accurate information so that they are evaluating their situation based on real facts."
The government has tried to ease health concerns with the launch of a testing programme in Fukushima prefecture that will include 360,000 children aged up to 18. They will undergo thyroid checks every two years until they are 20, and every five years thereafter. In all, 2 million residents will be screened over the next 30 years, but so far only a fraction of those eligible have been tested.
Serious threats
"Our children have all been wearing glass badges [to measure radiation absorption], but only a few of them have been screened," said Mitsue Shiga, a teacher at a kindergarten in Fukushima city's Watari suburb. "We don't allow the children to play outside at all."
Medical professionals in the area say they lack the specialist equipment to quickly test and reassure residents. "We have just one whole body radiation counter, but we need three," said Tomoyoshi Oikawa, assistant director of Minamisoma municipal general hospital.
Anti-nuclear campaigners accused the authorities of putting children's health at risk by ignoring calls to help women and young people leave at-risk areas outside the evacuation zone. "We are finding that radioactive contamination is concentrating in many places, creating hot spots that pose serious threats to health and safety," said Jan van de Putte, Greenpeace's radiation expert.
"These spots are worryingly located in densely populated areas, but people do not have support or even the right to relocate, and decontamination work is patchy and inadequate at best."
According to preliminary estimates, the doses of radiation received by people living near the nuclear facility were probably too small to have much of an effect on health, even among those who were in the vicinity during the meltdowns.
But the relatively small doses measured so far could pose problems for long-term attempts to properly gauge the Fukushima effect.
"There is no opportunity for conducting epidemiological studies that have any chance of success," John Boice, the incoming president of the US national council on radiation protection and measurements, said recently. "The doses are just too low. If you were to do a proposal, it would not pass scientific review."
For a more comprehensive assessment of the accident's impact on health, Fukushima residents will have to wait for the UN scientific committee on the effects of atomic radiation to publish its findings in May 2013.
Iitate residents say the conflicting information has left them confused and fearful about the future. "Young children were living in the village for months after the meltdown," said Toru Anzai, a rice farmer who now lives in temporary housing on the outskirts of Fukushima city said: "We're being treated like lab rats. The authorities should have told us as soon as they knew the reactors had melted down and helped us leave immediately. That's why people here are so angry."
Anecdotal evidence suggests that fear of radiation, rather than contamination, is triggering stress-related problems among evacuees.
A handful of children from Iitate suffered nosebleeds, despite having no history of the condition, and blotches on their skin, according to Anzai, who says he has had stomach pains, pins and needles and hair loss since last spring.
Tadateru Konoe, president of the Japanese Red Cross, said parents from Fukushima were living in an "information vacuum".
Abe was dismissive of promises by Iitate's mayor that the village would be decontaminated and that some residents would be able to move back in the next few years: "I have a young child so I don't think I'll ever go back. There will always be some contamination left, especially in the mountains. It's no place to bring up a child."
Terms & Conditions |
More Feeds
Health savings estimated at ?1bn a year would offset shipping job losses from tighter emissions limits, report shows
The financial cost of tighter controls on pollution from shipping would be outweighed by health benefits estimated at ?1.1bn a year by 2020,
MPs said on Friday.
But
the report by the Commons Transport Select Committee urged the government to work with fellow EU members to block the EC's "gold-plating" of the regulations with the additional restrictions on passenger ferries.
"Tighter emissions limits have been under discussion for many years, during which time shipping has enjoyed favourable treatment when compared with the emissions limits and fuel costs faced by the road haulage industry," the committee said in a report.
"However, we acknowledge that these regulations will impose significant costs on operators, and we therefore agree that the commission should impose no additional burdens on operators at this time over and above the requirements of Annex VI."
Maritime UK, which represents shipping and ports, said the regulations would cost jobs.
The vice chairman, Lars Olsson, told the committee the regulations would place an additional financial burden of up to ?3.6bn on shipping.
"The problem we have as an industry is that we cannot absorb this additional cost and we have to offset it by adding it to transport prices, for both passengers and freight," he said.
"This, we believe, will lead to modal shift. It will affect our businesses in a radical way and it may lead to route closures and loss of jobs, investment and so forth."
Overall, the strict new pollution controls will cost thousands of British shipping jobs, force ferry fares to rise by a fifth and may even drive operators out of business, said
the UK maritime industry. It warned that ports including Newcastle, Hull, Harwich, Teesport and Rosyth would be particularly badly hit by tougher limits on sulphur emissions in the North Sea.
Ferry companies said their fuel bills would rise by tens of millions of pounds a year, resulting in passenger fare increases of 20%, fewer services and job losses.
They also claimed that more traffic would be transferred to the roads and that higher freight costs would mean imported goods would cost more.
The so-called
Annex VI controls, to come into force from 2015, are backed by the British government as part of an international convention revised in 2008.
The European commission wants to bring the regulations into European Union law, but with additional requirements - resisted by the UK - for passenger ferries to observe the limits even when they are outside special emission control areas.Steve Todd, national secretary of the Rail, Maritime and Transport Union, said: "You are talking about thousands of seafarers' jobs being at risk if companies are forced into having to withdraw vessels because they cannot comply by a certain date."
P&O Ferries said its fuel costs would rise by about ?60m a year, adding: "This will change routes which today are marginal, to be heavily loss making routes. This is completely unsustainable, with job losses inevitable."
It said ferry services within the North Sea emissions control area would face "severe economic cost pressures" from 2015 and non-economic routes would have to be closed.
"Within the UK, short sea and ferry services on the longer North Sea Routes from Rosyth, Newcastle, Teesport, Hull and Harwich are particularly exposed to these job losses," it said.
"Many of these areas are already suffering from high unemployment due to the ongoing recession over the last three years, and further job losses will hit these communities hard."
Brittany Ferries told the committee its costs would rise by at least ?40m.
"To absorb additional costs of this magnitude passenger fares and freight rates would have to increase by 20% which will inevitably result in a fall in business," it said in written evidence to the committee.
"Because of our longer routes, which unavoidably use more fuel, our passenger fares and freight rates are already significantly higher than those on the Dover Straits.
"We are, consequently, relatively more sensitive to fuel prices so these increases would make us uncompetitive, particularly as the Tunnel will not be affected by these regulations.
"This will result, at the very least, in a reduction in frequency of services and the closure of routes and, at the worst, a cessation of business."
The transport Committee chairwoman Louise Ellman said: "Clearly the government must work with industry to identify available abatement technologies and help overcome barriers to the development of this equipment.
"But when tough emission standards were first imposed on cars, suitable technology emerged far more rapidly than much of the motor industry forecast and cost far less than was predicted at the outset."
A Department for Transport spokesman said: "We welcome the Transport Select Committee's report which broadly supports our position in relation to the commission's proposal for a revised directive on sulphur in marine fuels.
"Along with representatives from the international shipping industry, the UK supported the reduction in sulphur limits when they were agreed in 2008.
"This agreement represents a global compromise following lengthy and difficult negotiations.
"We are confident that the new limits will significantly reduce emissions from ships, improving air quality and delivering benefits to both the environment and human health."
Terms & Conditions |
More Feeds
up in arms.
The problem with repeal,
they are now saying, is that it would put too many existing health programs in jeopardy. But that's all President Obama's fault, of course.
"The administration has used the Affordable Care Act's mandatory spending, which is not subject to a vote by Congress every year, to backfill key discretionary programs," [Sen. Richard] Shelby [R-AL] said in his opening remarks.It's not justification that is likely to sway anybody in the base, who don't think federal health programs should exist at all, but it's a game attempt by Shelby to help out leadership in finding a reason to break their repeal promise.
"The administration then diverts discretionary dollars to fund new programs. When the Affordable Care Act is repealed, many important programs like Community Health Centers and the [federal] Immunization program at the Centers for Disease Control will be in jeopardy because their base funding … has been so significantly reduced."
But that's going to be a big problem for congressional Republicans, since they're also
abandoning their fight for "religious freedom." The tea partiers and evangelicals (read, base Republicans aren't going to like that one bit. GOP leadership has blinked, twice. That's going to create problems with the crazy wing of the congressional caucus and with their voting base come November. Too bad.
The rebranding of Britain's Assura Medical as 'Virgin Care', "health management company", is a grim indicator of the future for the NHS. Wendy Savage reflects on the cheerful Richard Branson's attempt to cash in on the 'marketisation' of England's National Health Service.
As if the National Health Service did not have enough to celebrate at present, now there is news of the arrival of a big new player in what we all may soon have to call the UK “healthcare market”. That player is “Virgin Care”. Not content with providing such a popular rail service, and not too busy buying Northern Rock from the taxpayer at a knock down price, Sir Richard Branson has now turned his attention to what may soon be the rich pickings of the NHS.Assura Group got rid of its then loss-making medical services business by selling 75% of the stock to “Virgin Healthcare Holdings” in March 2010, in return for a
?4 million loan note. That business has now changed its name from Assura Medical to Virgin Care.
In June 2011, the Independent reported that that Assura Medical, had links with more than
half of the board members at three out of 52 of the first wave of GP consortia (now known as Clinical Commissioning Groups . Most of these board members were GP members of Assura; their practice had formed a joint company with it. These companies provide community-based services in areas including sexual health and out-of-hours care, with profits split evenly between Assura Medical and member practices.
In September 2011, Assura Medical was named as the preferred bidder in one of the NHS’s biggest ever procurements: a ?450 million contract to provide community services in Surrey over five years. The contract was due to begin on 31st December 2011, but the website
‘Health Investor’ has reported it is yet to be finalised. A spokesman for Virgin Care was quoted as saying that
“discussions are ongoing”
about the handover of services.
Virgin Care is already involved in a major dispute with North Yorkshire and York Primary Care Trust and York Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, which it has reported to the Co-operation and Competition Panel for NHS Services (CCP . The dispute is over procurement of a community based musculoskeletal and orthopaedic clinical assessment, triage and treatment service in the York and Selby areas. Ironically, given claims that compeition will cut NHS costs, Assura have claimed that the winning bidder, York Hospitals, had bid
too low
for the tender and would not be able to deliver the service for the price stated. The CCP has now launched
phase two (the more detailed part of its investigation and is due to report on Monday 12th March.
Since the last Conservative Government’s hopelessly bungled privatisation of British Rail, Virgin Rail has been bringing its unique brand of service to passengers on the West Coast Main Line. Now, if the current Government forces through its even more shambolic break-up of the NHS, patients can look forward to the same happy experience with Virgin Care.
David Cameron and Andrew Lansley deny furiously that the purpose of the Health Bill is market “competition” and private sector provision of healthcare. But if you ignore them and listen carefully to what is really happening, you will hear the cries of wolves and vultures waiting to feast on the body of one of Britain’s most important and most loved institutions.
The Health and Social Care Bill creates a legal basis for withholding or charging for health services, according to medico-legal experts.
In an article in the British Medical Journal, it is argued that the Bill will drive a transition to a US-style model where private health insurance is the norm for medical reimbursement.
The authors argue that by removing the legal obligation to provide free healthcare and creating a legal right to charge for it, the Bill amounts to “the legal destruction of the founding principles of the NHS”.
Allyson M. Pollock, David Price and Peter Roderick list the following legal consequences of the new legislation:
• The duty of the Health Secretary to secure free healthcare for the population of England and the duty of PCTs to secure health services for everyone living in a defined geographical area are both abolished.
• The new CCGs will determine the scope of services independently of the Health Secretary, and may delegate these decisions to commercial companies.
• Some health services will be arranged by local authorities, who will have new charging powers.
• The Health Secretary will have an extraordinary power to exclude people from the NHS.
Taken in combination, the authors argue, this is a sufficient legal framework for a transition from a free NHS to one that charges many people for many of the services they receive.
Now that it's March, it's time to break out the green stuff for St. Patrick's Day! But if you're planning to do so by indulging in a cool, minty McDonald's McCafe Shamrock Shake to celebrate the Irish holiday, there's a few things you should know before hitting the drive-thru.
For weeks, bewildered Americans have witnessed politicians debate whether or not contraception should be covered by President’s Obama’s new health care plan. On March 1, after some of the most bizarre theatrical antics remembered in this nation’s political history, the U.S. Senate finally interrupted this surreal soap opera with a cliff hanger. By only two votes, they defeated an amendment that would have allowed religious employers to refuse to pay for the contraception of their employees.
The pilot episode of the drama began on February 16, when President Obama announced that all the employers of all institutions, regardless of their religious affiliation, would have to pay for contraception. When the Catholic Church and right-wing fringe went ballistic, he compromised and said that if an institution felt it was violating its religious beliefs, then the insurance company would have to pay.
But even that compromise was insufficient. In the weeks that followed, the Republicans launched a war on contraception. They told women that the appropriate birth control pill was an aspirin held by tightly-grasped knees; they created a religious “hearing” on contraception made up of all men; and right-wing radio pundit Rush Limbaugh called a Georgetown University law student, who had defended contraception,
a “slut” and a “prostitute.”. “No drama Obama” only intensified the plot when he personally called the student and thanked her for supporting his health plan.
Every day brought new and unbelievable episodes in this weird melodrama. In Virginia, the legislature passed a bill that would require a pregnant woman seeking an abortion to have an ultrasound probe inserted into her vagina so she would
really
know she was carrying a human being. The Governor at first agreed, but then, attacked for humiliating pregnant women, dithered about what kind of
bill he would sign. Some opponents, of course,
genuinely believe that contraception is the same thing as abortion—the murder of a human being. Some may even realize that less contraception results in more abortions and more government expenditures for unwanted children. The Republicans certainly know that the vast majority of Americans, including Catholics, support birth control, but they just couldn’t stop themselves. They thought they had found a way to defeat the President.
But they were wrong.
Women and independents tend to support birth control. In fact, by March 1, 63% of those polled
supported the President’s compromise. Liberal groups mobilised all across the country, noting that the right-wing wants an unobtrusive government unless it involves inserting a probe into a woman’s body for an ultrasound. Senator Barbara Boxer launched “one million Strong for Women,” to make women’s voice heard. Democrats, realising that the Republicans had truly overreached, became
positively giddy at how much they had to gain if they could keep the debate simmering.
So, part of this soap opera was simply politics as the loopy, right-wing fringe Republicans became intoxicated with the possibility of electing one of two candidates, both of whom oppose contraception and abortion. (Although former Governor Mitt Romney
flip-flopped when he backed away from his support of contraception and joined the Republican opposition a few hours later .
So what’s really going on?
The Republican party, for its part, framed the fight as one of religious freedom and freedom of speech, protected by the first amendment to the constitution. Democrats and women’s rights advocates responded that it was
exclusively
about women’s health care.
The media, with all its stenographic sophistry, uncritically quoted the language of both sides. The New York Times, for example,
said that “ the furor over President Obama’s birth control mandate has swiftly entered a new plane, with supporters and opponents alike calling the subject a potent weapon for the November elections and taking it to the public in campaigns to shape the issue---is it about religious liberty or women’s health?”
Actually everyone has missed the real story.
What neither side wants to say is that this is a counter-reformation, an attempt to return women to the early 1960s, before birth control pill existed and the Supreme Court, in
Griswold v.Connecticut
(1965 , established the right of contraception in the United States. In short, it was a nostalgic effort to return to a time when a middle class man could support a family, women knew their place, Georgetown University law students were mostly men, and African Americans could not vote, let alone become President. It was a time of male and racial supremacy, before the civil rights and women’s movements changed the political culture of this country and economic changes made a two-income family necessary.
At stake in 2012 is the right of a woman to control her own fertility, her own reproductive choices and therefore, to lead an independent life. This is a battle that has raged since the late 19th century. After abortion became legal in 1973, the Republican party inserted an anti-abortion plank into its 1980 platform and ever since, every Republican candidate has had to pass a litmus test of opposing abortion in order to run for president.
For most of human history, sexuality and reproduction have been intricately yoked together. Birth control, particularly the Pill, ruptured that link and gave women the right to enjoy sex without the goal of reproduction. When the Supreme Court formally ratified that rupture by making abortion legal in
Roe v. Wade , (1973 , many people in this country trembled at the possible changes women’s sexual independence might bring. By then, the women’s movement had challenged and changed laws and customs that governed the daily lives of women in both the work place and at home. The idea of women’s sexual freedom polarised the nation, with both men and women advocating for different choices.
In short, the war over contraception during the last bizarre month was never about religious freedom or women’s health care. It was about controlling women’s right to control their own bodies and to make their own sexual and reproductive choices.
Hardly anyone feels free to say this. Opponents of women’s sexual freedom talk about free speech or religious freedom when what they really want to do is to repeal everything the women’s movement’s changed. Supporters of women’s right to make their own sexual and reproductive choices know they must emphasise women’s health care. Even though contraception and abortion are a central part of that health care, they know they must remain mum about women’s sexual freedom.
This soap opera is hardly over. In fact, we are now seeing re-reruns of this never-ending drama. Some of us remember that in 1969, a feminist group called Redstockings
disrupted a New York State hearing on whether abortion should be legal. The panel included a dozen men and one nun. The women’s effort to be heard was thwarted when the hearing was moved.
Today, contraception and abortion are legal, but state by state, laws are chipping away at women’s access to both contraception and abortion. The truth is, this is the last gasp of a patriarchal counter-reformation that is still alive, mobilized and, most importantly, well-funded. Stay tuned, as they say. The soap opera is far from over.
Oh, Michele Bachmann. Why is this woman not en route to the presidency as we speak? Appearing on
Glenn Beck's online TV show Tuesday night, Bachmann started a chain of thought about the Obama administration's mandate that employer-provided health care plans make birth control available with the premise that, in her words, "what the government can give, the government can take away," and then "going with that logic" arrived at the following thought:
[I]t isn’t far-fetched to think that the President of the United States could say, we need to save health care expenses — the federal government will only pay for one baby to be born in the hospital per family, or two babies to be born per family. That could happen. We think it couldn’t?And as we all know, if the federal government doesn't pay for your babies to be born, you can't have any babies. Asked for clarification by one of the program's hosts, Bachmann said:
"What I’m saying is that now that we know the President of the United States unilaterally can tell insurance companies, you must offer the morning-after abortion pill, you must offer sterilizations, you must offer contraceptives free to the recipients of those products, because we tell you to — which means they’re effectively setting the price, as well — that says that whoever the health care dictator, could conceivably make that order, as well."So to Bachmann, if the government makes birth control available, we are on the road to a "health care dictator" telling us how we will use that birth control. It's a perfect example of the
very narrow conservative definition of freedom.
And I don't know about you, but when it comes to birth control, the wannabe health care dictator I worry about is the pope.
NPR. "We're not talking about abandoning standards for safety and efficacy, we're talking about leveraging opportunities in science so we can do a more effective job as regulators and also improve the drug development process." The agency said eliminating or reducing the number of routine visits to the doctor could free up prescribers "to spend time with more seriously ill patients, reduce the burdens on the already over burned health care system and reduce health care costs." Drugmakers would have to request a switch for each drug individually, and the FDA would judge the safety of each proposal on a case-by-case basis. "We're not talking about very specific drugs right now, we're talking about the concept," Dr. Janet Woodcock, director of FDA's drug center, told NPR. --- On the Net:
You know you should be eating healthfully and exercising, but when you’re young you may feel disconnected from the long-term rewards. Now, a new study from the Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine finds that living a healthy lifestyle in your 20s leads to a HUGE health payoff in your 40s and demonstrates that your lifestyle is far more powerful than your genetics.
reported earlier this week that it found the unsafe levels of the chemical 4-methylimidazole (4-MI -- used to make caramel color -- in cans of Coke, Pepsi, Dr. Pepper, and Whole Foods’ 365 Cola. Coca-Cola confirmed that changes were being made at its facilities to keep within the law but argued that the CSPI’s allegations on the dangers the ingredient posed on humans were false. “The company has made the decision to ask its caramel suppliers to make the necessary manufacturing process modification, to meet the specific Californian legislation,” A spokesperson for Coca-Cola told
Daily Mail Online. “Those modifications will not change our product.” California added 4-MI to its list of carcinogens, after studies showed high levels of the chemical led to tumors in lab animals. However, the studies were inconclusive on whether the chemical was dangerous to humans or not. “Caramel is a perfectly safe ingredient and this has been recognized by all European food safety authorities,” the spokesperson added. “The 4-MEI levels in our products pose no health or safety risks. Outside of California, no regulatory agency concerned with protecting the public’s health has stated that 4-MEI is a human carcinogen.” “The caramel color in all of our ingredients has been, is and always will be safe. That is a fact,” the spokesperson said. This had been the CSPI’s second go-around with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA over the dangers of 4-MI in soft drinks. It first petitioned the regulator last year, but the FDA has continually maintained that the claims were exaggerated. “It is important to understand that a consumer would have to consume well over a thousand cans of soda a day to reach the doses administered in the studies that have shown links to cancer in rodents,” said FDA spokesman, Doug Karas to the Daily Mail's Laura Pullman. CSPI maintains that the regulator is allowing soft drink companies to needlessly expose millions of Americans to a chemical that is known to cause cancer. “If companies can make brown food coloring that is carcinogen-free, the industry should use it,” CSPI’s executive director Michael Jacobson told
Reuters. The FDA said it will review the watchdog’s petition, but that the soft drinks in question were still safe. CSPI took cans from stores in the Washington DC area, where they found some had levels of 4-MI near 140 micrograms per 12-ounce can. California has a legal limit of 29 micrograms of 4-MI per 12 ounces, it noted. The FDA’s limit for 4-MI in caramel coloring is 250 parts per million (ppm . Once the caramel is mixed in with the soda it becomes diluted. According to calculations by Reuters, the highest levels of 4-MI found in the soft drinks were about 0.4 ppm, significantly within the safe zone. “This is nothing more than CSPI scare tactics,” the American Beverage Association (ABA told Reuters in a statement. “In fact, findings of regulatory agencies worldwide ... consider caramel coloring safe for use in foods and beverages.” ABA said its member companies will continue to caramel coloring in certain products but that adjustments were being made to meet California requirements. “Consumers will notice no difference in our products and have no reason at all for any health concerns,” the ABA said. Diana Garza-Ciarlante, a representative for Coca-Cola, said its suppliers would modify the manufacturing process used to reduce the levels of 4-MI, which is formed during the cooking process and as a result may be found in trace amounts in many foods. “While we believe that there is no public health risk that justifies any such change, we did ask our caramel suppliers to take this step so that our products would not be subject to the requirement of a scientifically unfounded warning,” she said in an email to
The Telegraph. --- On the Net:
Vital Signs. About 14,000 deaths in the United States every year are linked to a C. difficile infection. Those most at risk for contracting the infection are those who receive health care in any medical setting or those who take antibiotics. Of those infected, almost half are under the age of 65. However, the infection becomes more deadly to older patients, with more than 90 percent deaths occur in patients over 65. According to previously released billing data, the number of hospital stays related to C. difficile remains at a historically high 337,000 cases in the United States alone. It is estimated that these cases add an additional $1 billion in costs to America’s health care system. The Vital Signs report suggests these hospital estimates represent only one part of the overall impact of C. difficile. According to the report, 94 percent of C. difficile infections are directly related to medical care. 25 percent of these infections first show symptoms in hospital patients. What’s troubling to the CDC, however, is the amount of cases found in nursing home patients or patients who were recently cared for in another clinic or facility. Half of C. difficile infections diagnosed in hospitals were already present at the time of patient admittance. The other half of these infections were related to the care given in the hospital where the infection was diagnosed. Hospitals and clinics are doing their part to reduce the number of C. difficile infections they see and treat. Hospitals in England have decreased the number of C. Difficile infections more than 50 percent during a three year span. Following their lead, 71 hospitals in Illinois, Massachusetts, and New York were able to see these results in less than 2 years. These hospitals were highlighted in Vital Signs. “C. difficile infections are usually a regional problem since patients transfer back and forth between facilities, allowing the disease to spread,” said L. Clifford McDonald, M.D., CDC medical epidemiologist and lead author of the study. “Health departments have the ability to work with many types of health care facilities, and have a unique opportunity to coordinate local, comprehensive prevention programs to reduce the occurrence of these infections.” The CDC lists 4 steps for patients to follow in order to prevent and stop the spread of C. difficile. Following these steps is easy and can save lives. According to Vital Signs, the four steps are: - Take antibiotics only as prescribed by your doctor. Antibiotics can be lifesaving medicines. - Tell your doctor if you have been on antibiotics and get diarrhea within a few months. - Wash your hands after using the bathroom. - Try to use a separate bathroom if you have diarrhea, or be sure the bathroom is cleaned well if someone with diarrhea has used it.
NHS Berkshire and Reading Borough Council are delighted that the number of teenage pregnancies in Reading has dropped for the sixth consecutive year.
Figures from the Office for National Statistics show the rate of pregnancies in women under 18 has fallen to 40.9 per thousand in 2010 from a high of 61.4 per thousand in 2000. In 2009 the rate was 43.8.
Since the start of the teenage pregnancy strategy in 1998, there has been an overall reduction in the rate of teenage pregnancies in Reading of 35.2 per cent.
John Ennis, Lead Councillor for Education and Children’s Services at Reading Borough Council, said: “A tremendous amount of effort has gone into helping reduce these figures and it is heartening to see that having a significant effect.”
This success is due to the following factors:
-
Reading ’s Walk-in Health Centre is a valuable resource in reducing conception rates among teenagers;
- The Teenage Pregnancy Strategic Partnership Board is jointly chaired by the Deputy Chief Executive of NHS Berkshire, Helen MacKenzie and Reading’s Director of Education and Children’s Services, Anna Wright;
- A pharmacy scheme ensures that young people in Reading can access Emergency Hormonal Contraception (EHC for free at 16 pharmacies across Reading;
- A young people’s health drop-in service providing information, advice and referral on all health issues, specifically sexual health and contraception advice;
- A Sexual Health Outreach Nurse continues to provide sexual and reproductive health services to the most vulnerable and at risk young people in Berkshire West;
- The C Card scheme was launched in March 2009 and provides young people under-19 better access to sexual health information and free condoms, leading to a greater awareness about safer sex, unplanned pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections.
The rate of under 18 teenage pregnancies in the Wokingham and West Berkshire localities in 2010 also fell to 13.1 and 19.4 per thousand respectively.
As we reflect on another International Women's Day and the progress made by women globally, it is painful to know that 1,000 women still die every day in childbirth or from pregnancy-related complications.
This statistic remains overwhelmingly confronting, especially when the vast majority of these deaths are preventable with skilled clinicians, drugs and equipment. Maternal death is an ongoing crisis, and an avoidable crisis that deserves our attention.
In December last year I was with Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF in Buin, a village in southern Bougainville in Papua New Guinea which remains isolated and poorly serviced due to civil conflict that ended 11 years ago. We had heard about a woman who'd recently died giving birth to twins so we went to check up on the twins and found another woman, carrying twins. We transferred her to our hospital in Buin learning that she'd already had one previous stillbirth.
She then endured a difficult and protracted delivery but two healthy baby boys arrived into the world safely. What should have been a remarkable moment however turned into a medical emergency. There is a higher risk of bleeding after the delivery of twins, and the young mother started to haemorrhage, and probably lost over a litre of blood. We managed to control her bleeding with intravenous fluids and drugs, therefore preventing her from having further complications. She would have lost a lot more blood without this medical care and might not have survived.
The reality in most developing countries is that access to health care is limited and most women cannot get the emergency assistance they need during pregnancy and at the time of birth. In Bougainville that day, one woman's life was saved while another's was lost - the difference being that the second woman had practical medical solutions available to her that made death avoidable.
Access for all pregnant women to this type of quality healthcare may seem an impossible dream. As MSF, it is not our role to provide a global solution to the crisis of maternal mortality. It is the role of governments and development-focussed agencies to weigh in upon the issues of women's rights, education for girls and the improvement of health systems that are paramount in reducing maternal mortality in the long term.
While these kind of developmental strategies are critical, there are women dying today. We see it as our goal as an emergency medical humanitarian organisation to respond to this immediate need. I have witnessed firsthand the immense challenges women face and have had the privilege to provide care in places such as Darfur, Madagascar, Sri Lanka and Papua New Guinea. After seeing the direct impact that this care has, it unfortunately leaves me to wonder just how many women around the world are left without it.
In the countries where MSF works, our expectation therefore has to be relatively simple: to be able to concretely reduce the number of deaths we see in our clinics and hospitals by addressing the immediate needs of pregnant women in crisis situations. The medical approaches we use have been available for a long time, and it is abundantly clear from our experience in the field that maternal deaths can be averted.
It's a fact that 15 per cent of all pregnant women encounter life-threatening complications during delivery, whether they are in Sydney, Port-au-Prince or Mogadishu. Women who are subject to conflict, health crises and displacement are rendered even more vulnerable - and complications for those living in a war zone are likely to be even higher when health facilities collapse.
To make an immediate difference, the focus has to be on the main causes - haemorrhage, infection, unsafe abortion, hypertensive disorders and obstructed labour - accounting for over 80 per cent of all maternal deaths globally. In our emergency obstetric units, we can provide care for these complications in a range of high-risk settings.
Medical care and available resources are the key factors during these times of crisis. Time and again, we see that having access to emergency obstetric care will make the difference no matter where pregnant women are. Whether she is fleeing conflict, surviving in a refugee camp or living under plastic sheeting after her home was destroyed by an earthquake, all a pregnant woman who experiences complications in childbirth needs is skilled staff, drugs and equipment. This will save her life and that of her baby as it did for the woman we assisted in Bougainville.
A woman should not face an uncertain future just because she is pregnant. Today on International Women's Day, as on every other day, we must continually remind ourselves that every maternal death is an unacceptable and avoidable death.
Kara Blackburn is a midwife and Women's Health Advisor for MSF. View her full profile
here.
No comments:
Post a Comment