Messages

16

EEE / Health Benefits of Facebook

« on: April 22, 2017, 03:24:55 PM »

Research shows that Facebook can:

Fuel self-esteem. In a Cornell University study, students felt better about themselves after they updated their Facebook profiles; a control group of students who didn’t log onto the site didn’t experience such a mood lift. The very act of posting something about yourself — regardless of what you write — can boost your self-confidence because you control the image you present to your network of friends, according to researchers.
Similarly, according to a Michigan State University study, students with low self-esteem and happiness levels who used Facebook more frequently felt more connected to friends and campus life than those who logged on less often.

Strengthen friendship bonds. In a small study of heavy Facebook-using young British adults between ages 21 and 29, Lancaster University researchers found that the site helped cement positive interactions among friends. Both private messages and wall posts allowed Facebook users to confide in their friends, surf down memory lane, and laugh out loud, promoting happy feelings.
Stamp out shyness and loneliness. In a soon-to-be-published Carnegie Mellon study, researchers who surveyed more than 1,100 avid Facebook-using adults found that receiving messages from friends and consuming info from friends’ news feeds boosted feelings of connectedness, especially in people with self-described “low social skills.” Authors say that for shy people, gleaning information from news feeds and profiles can help start conversations they otherwise might not be comfortable enough to strike up. “People who are uncomfortable chatting face to face gain more through their use of the site,” says study co-author Moira Burke, a PhD candidate in the university’s Human-Computer Interaction Institute.
Similar benefits hold true for tweens and teens: Australian researchers who studied more than 600 students between age 10 and 16 found that communicating online helped improve communication skills for lonely adolescents, giving them an outlet to talk more comfortably about personal topics.

17

EEE / The Facebook Effect: Good or Bad for Your Health?

« on: April 22, 2017, 03:24:28 PM »

Is it us, or are news headlines about Facebook’s impact on our health popping up more and more these days? Considering that 51 percent of Americans over age 12 now have profiles on the social networking site compared to 8 percent just three years ago, according to new data from Edison Research, it’s no wonder there are entire scientific journals devoted to the psychology of social networking, and piles of studies analyzing such sites’ effects on our moods, body image, friendships, and marriages.

Negative conditions such as “Facebook depression” or Facebook-fueled divorces bear the brunt of the media blitz, but much of the body of research actually points to positive perks from Facebook use. Here, a deeper look at how all those “likes,” “pokes,” and status updates are really affecting you and your family’s well-being, and how you can outsmart some of the potentially negative side effects.

18

EEE / 10 Foolish Health Rumors You Should Ignore

« on: April 22, 2017, 03:23:35 PM »

Urban legends and health myths are certainly nothing new — we’re pretty sure even our Neanderthal ancestors passed some version of them around their cave fires. But the Internet has certainly helped outdated advice die hard, so it’s no wonder these fake facts keep popping up in our inboxes. We picked our favorites from such myth-busting sites as Snopes, the authors of Don't Swallow Your Gum!: Myths, Half-Truths, and Outright Lies About Your Body and Health, and more. Here’s why you should stop falling for these, once and for all:

Chewing gum takes seven years to pass through your digestive tract.

The truth: Gum addicts can relax. Although your body can’t digest chewing gum, it doesn’t just sit in your stomach, according to Snopes.com. You eliminate it when you go to the bathroom just like other food you haven’t digested.

Plucking a gray hair causes two to grow back.

The truth: It’s fine to tweeze that errant hair. Genetics plays a key role in when you go gray, regardless of how often you pluck. It can take six months from the time a hair falls out until it grows back long enough for you to notice it; during that time, you’ll automatically see more gray hair as part of the aging process, explains Snopes.com.

Antiperspirant deodorants cause breast cancer.

The truth: Going au naturel won’t protect your breasts from cancer. This myth probably came about because some antiperspirants contain aluminum, which can show up as a false-positive finding on a mammogram. All this means is you should skip the white stuff before a breast cancer screening. Though concerns have been raised about parabens in deodorant raising estrogen levels — and thus possibly increasing cancer risk — there’s never been any conclusive evidence to prove a link, according to the National Cancer Institute and FDA.

Cats can steal the air from a baby’s mouth.

The truth: There’s no need to send Fluffy away when baby moves in. This myth dates back hundreds of years to an era when cats were associated with evil spirits and witchcraft, but KidsHealth.org notes that it’s anatomically impossible for a cat or other animal to suffocate a baby by sealing the infant’s mouth with its own. Still, it’s a good idea to supervise pets around babies and small children — for the kitty’s safety just as much as the child’s.

Mountain Dew can shrink a man’s testicles.

The truth: Mountain Dew-drinking guys everywhere can breathe a sigh of relief. The gist of this ridiculous rumor, according to Snopes.com, is that drinking Mountain Dew can lower a man’s sperm count or cause his penis to shrink. The alleged culprit is food coloring Yellow No. 5, and the myth that it has a harmful effect on the male reproductive system is unfounded, the site says.

Related: 10 Soda Alternatives

You can catch a cold from being outside too long.

The truth: It’s actually a good idea to let your kids spend plenty of time outdoors. “Going outside — with or without a wet head — is one of the best things you can do to prevent catching a cold,” D.J. Verret, MD, a Dallas otolaryngologist, told WomansDay.com. “Colds are caused by viruses or bacteria, which are more often spread in the winter because of close contact from everyone being indoors.” So spending time al fresco can actually make you less likely to catch a cold.

Related: Easy Strategies for Boosting Immunity

Cracking your knuckles causes arthritis.

Truth: The sound can be extremely grating, but this uncouth habit won’t harm your joints. Researchers found no difference in instances of arthritis when they compared a group of longtime knuckle crackers with those who left their hands alone, according to Prevention.com. However, the study did find that people who cracked their knuckles had weaker grips and more hand swelling — good reasons to kick the habit.

Drinking cold water after meals can lead to cancer.

Truth: Water is one of the healthiest things you can drink with any meal — hot, cold, or tepid. This rumor first surfaced in early 2006, according to Snopes.com, and still makes its way into various email chains. It posits that cold water helps solidify oily fats from your meal into a “sludge” that lines the intestines and can lead to cancer. But there’s zero evidence from medical literature to support this theory.

It's okay to follow the five-second rule for dropped food.

Truth: The five-second rule should actually be the “zero-second rule,” Roy M. Gulick, MD, chief of the division of infectious diseases at Weill Cornell Medical College, recently told The New York Times. “Eating dropped food poses a risk for ingestion of bacteria and subsequent gastrointestinal disease, and the time the food sits on the floor does not change the risk.” If bacteria are present, they will cling to the food immediately on contact. So while it may be tempting to dust off food you’ve dropped, it’s safer to just toss it in the trash.

You only use 10 percent of your brain.

Truth: Motivational speakers may love this idea, but the evidence against it is just common sense, say Aaron Carroll, MD, and Rachel Vreeman, MD, in their book Don’t Swallow Your Gum: Myths, Half-Truths, and Outright Lies About Your Body and Health. “Studies of patients with brain damage suggest that harm to almost any area of the brain has specific and lasting effects on a human being’s capabilities,” they wrote. “If this myth were true, it would not be a big deal to hurt various parts of your brain.” You’re using 100 percent of your brain — or at least we hope so.

19

EEE / What Level of Radiation Exposure Is Safe?

« on: April 22, 2017, 03:21:19 PM »

It's well-established that exposure to large amounts of radiation at once can cause acute sickness and even cancer. (A 1,000 mSv-dose can trigger acute radiation sickness, causing symptoms such as nausea and vomiting; 3,000 mSV can be lethal, according to Thrall.)

But there's no good data on the long-term risks of the low levels of radiation to which we're continually exposed.

According to the World Nuclear Association, annual exposure to 100 mSv or greater carries a measurable, though small, increase in cancer risk. Below that level, it's believed that your body's cells are able to heal themselves from radiation. "There are enzyme systems in the body that repair damage from these low levels of background radiation," says Thrall.

But even small levels of radiation exposure may impact cancer risks later in life.

This has been of particular concern in the medical community, where some experts worry that increasing use of diagnostic CT scans (which has skyrocketed from 3 million annual scans nationwide in 1980 to 70 million in 2007, according to MedPage Today) will impact future cancer rates. For example, in one 2009 study, National Cancer Institute researchers estimated that one in 270 women and one in 595 men who had a heart CT at age 40 would eventually develop cancer related to the test.

While the health benefits of necessary diagnostic imaging usually outweigh the small risks of secondary cancers, it's always a good idea to talk to your doctor before any procedure involving radiation to understand exactly what you're getting, why you need it, and what the potential health risks may be.

Bottom line: Americans are exposed to far more radiation in their daily lives — and especially from certain medical tests — than from dispersed particles traveling across the Pacific. "With what we know now about the situation in Japan, there are no personal or public health risks apparent for people in the United States," Thrall says.

20

EEE / How Are We Exposed to Radiation?

« on: April 22, 2017, 03:20:55 PM »

We encounter radiation each day from a variety of sources. The average American is exposed to about 6 millisieverts (mSv) of radiation annually, according to the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC). Half of this typically comes from background radiation that occurs naturally in the environment, and half comes from medical tests, such as X-rays, mammograms, and CT scans.

According to Kelly Classic, MS, spokesperson for the Health Physics Society, sources of environmental radiation include:

Radioactive compounds in soil and building materials like concrete, brick, and stone
Radiation from outer space that your encounter when you fly on airplanes or visit high-altitude places
The mineral potassium in your own body (a small fraction of potassium, which our bodies need to function, is radioactive)
Radon gas in the home, which accounts for about 2 mSv of exposure each year, and is the largest contributor of background radiation
Finally, there's the kind of radiation released during nuclear reactions, such as what's disseminating from Japan's Fukushima Daiichi plant.

Here's a look at various sources of radiation exposure (dose of radiation in millisieverts (mSv)), according to data from the Health Physics Society and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). By way of comparison, a single dose of radiation below 0.01 mSv is considered negligible by the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements.

Banana: 0.0001
Dental X-ray: 0.005
Living within 50 miles of a nuclear power plant: 0.01 (per year)
A flight from New York to Los Angeles: 0.04
Smoking 1 ½ packs of cigarettes: 0.08
Chest X-ray: 0.1
Living at sea level: 0.25 (per year)
Mammogram: 0.3
Living in Denver: 0.5 (per year)
Abdominal CT scan: 14
Measures between reactors No. 3 and No. 4 during the March 15 explosion at the Fukushima plant: As high as 400 per hour

21

EEE / What Is Radiation?

« on: April 22, 2017, 03:20:27 PM »

Radiation is a form of energy in waves. It exists on a spectrum, with low-frequency radiation (from radio waves and microwaves) on the low end and high-frequency radiation (from gamma rays and x-rays) on the high end. All radiation affects the cells in our bodies to some extent, but the lower the frequency of the waves and the lower the exposure, the less dangerous it is.

To understand the risks of high-frequency radiation — the kind we're talking about in this article — think back to high school physics: These waves have enough energy to knock electrons off molecules, which can cause damage to cell DNA that can ultimately lead to cancer.

22

EEE / The Truth About Everyday Radiation Exposure

« on: April 22, 2017, 03:19:58 PM »

Japan's ongoing nuclear crisis understandably has people around the world worried about radiation exposure and the potential health risks it may pose. According to the latest reports, radiation from Japan was detected in Southern California late this week, but experts are quick to point out that the levels are far from dangerous. The readings were "about a billion times beneath levels that would be health threatening," a diplomat with access to United Nations' radiation tracking told the Associated Press.

Nor is it unexpected. "Whenever radioactive particles get in the atmosphere, they have the potential to spread around the world," says James Thrall, MD, president of the American College of Radiology. "But they get diluted as they travel, so they're unlikely to pose any real health problem."

In fact, we're probably exposed to significantly more radiation every day than the miniscule fallout arriving from Japan. Here's a quick tutorial on radiation to put our collective anxiety in perspective:

23

EEE / How Optimism Helps in the Long Run

« on: April 22, 2017, 03:18:59 PM »

Limitations of the study, according to the investigators, included the possibility of confounders and selection bias.

"These findings argue for expanded efforts to understand the influence of recovery expectations and the potential benefits of attempts to modify them," Barefoot's group concluded.

However, the potential efficacy of such efforts is uncertain, according to Dr. James Kirkpatrick, of the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia.

"Whether a patient's outlook can be changed (or patients can change their outlook) and improve results, and whether there are other factors which might make these patients do better, is unknown. One of those factors might be that cardiovascular providers give better care to patients with a positive outlook — perhaps spending more time with them or being more conscientious," wrote Kirkpatrick in an email to MedPage Today and ABC News.

"Future studies will need to take this possible mechanism into account," wrote Kirkpatrick.

The study was supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the National Institute on Aging.

One author has a patent pending on an allele as a marker of cardiovascular disease and stress, and is a founder and major stockholder in Williams LifeSkills Inc.

Editorialist Gramling is funded by the National Palliative Care Research Center and the Greenwall Foundation.

24

EEE / Live Long and Be Positive

« on: April 22, 2017, 03:18:07 PM »

Patients with coronary heart disease who have positive expectations about recovery, expressing beliefs such as "I can still live a long and healthy life," had greater long-term survival, researchers reported.

Among a cohort of almost 3,000 patients undergoing coronary angiography, those with the highest expectations for outcomes actually had the best outcomes, Dr. John C. Barefoot, and colleagues from Duke University Medical Center in Durham, N.C.

"Patients differ widely in terms of their psychological reactions to major illnesses such as coronary heart disease," Barefoot's group explained online in the Archives of Internal Medicine.

25

EEE / 10 Easy Ways to Make Your Home Eco-Friendly

« on: April 22, 2017, 03:17:29 PM »

While the EPA has the authority to regulate levels of CO2, a budget bill passed by the House of Representatives last the weekend prohibited the EPA from exercising that authority. Meanwhile, other bills are pending in Congress that would significantly delay the agency's ability to regulate air pollutants.

AMA has a number of policies on the books regarding climate change, including a resolution supporting the EPA's authority to regulate the control of greenhouse gases, and a statement endorsing findings from the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report that concludes the Earth is undergoing adverse climate changes, and that humans are a significant contributor to the changing weather.

In that statement, the AMA said it supports educating the medical community about climate change and its health implications through medical education on topics such as "population displacement, heat waves and drought, flooding, infectious and vector-borne diseases, and potable water supplies."

The statement also said the AMA supports physician involvement in policymaking to "search for novel, comprehensive, and economically sensitive approaches to mitigating climate change to protect the health of the public."

26

EEE / The Link Between Air Pollution and Asthma

« on: April 22, 2017, 03:17:04 PM »

The "evidence has only grown stronger" that climate change is responsible for an increasing number of health ills, including asthma, diarrheal disease, and even deaths from extreme weather such as heat waves, said Dr. Georges Benjamin, executive director of the APHA.

For one, rising temperatures can mean more smog, which makes children with asthma sicker, explained pediatrician Dr. Perry Sheffield, assistant professor in the Department of Pediatrics and the Department of Preventive Medicine at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine, in New York.

There is also evidence that pollen season is also getting longer, she said, which could lead to an increase in the number of people with asthma.

Climate change also is thought to lead to increased concentrations of ozone, a pollutant formed on clear, cloudless days. Ozone is a lung irritant which can affect asthmatics, those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and those with heart disease, said Dr. Kristie Ebi, who is a member of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

More ozone can mean more health problems and more hospital visits, she said.

Aside from air-related ailments and illnesses, extreme weather can have a devastating effect on health, Sheffield said.

"As a result of global warming, extreme storms including hurricanes, heavy rainfall, and even snowstorms are expected to increase," Sheffield said. "And these events pose risk of injury and disruption of special medical services, which are particularly important to children with special medical needs."

Extreme heat waves and droughts are responsible for more deaths than any other weather-related event, Sheffield said.

The 2006 heat wave that spread through most of the U.S. and Canada saw temperatures that topped 100 degrees. In all, 450 people died, 16,000 visited the emergency room, and 1,000 were hospitalized, said Dr. Cecil Wilson, president of the AMA.

Climate change has already caused temperatures to rise and precipitation to increase, which, in turn, can cause diseases carried by tics, mosquitoes, and other animals to spread past their normal geographical range, explained Ebi.

For instance, Lyme disease is increasing in some areas, she said, including in Canada, where scientists are tracking the spread of Lyme disease north.

Ebi also recounted the 2004 outbreak of the leading seafood-related cause of gastroenteritis, Vibrio parahaemolyticus, from Alaskan seafood, which was attributed to increased ocean temperatures causing infected sea creatures to travel 600 miles north.

Salmonella outbreaks also increase when temperatures are very warm, Sheffield said.

A 2008 study also projected that global warming will lead to a possible increase in the prevalence of kidney stones due to increased dehydration, although the link hasn't been proven.

Wilson said the AMA wants to make doctors aware of the projected rise in climate-related illnesses. To combat climate change, Wilson says physicians and public health groups can advocate for policies that improve public health, and should also serve as role models by adopting environmentally-friendly policies such as eliminating paper waste and using energy-efficient lighting in their practices.

"Climate instability threatens our health and life-supporting system, and the risk to our health and well-being will continue to mount unless we all do our part to stabilize the climate and protect the nation's health," said Wilson.

Benjamin added that doctors should pay attention to the Air Quality Index. For instance, if there's a "Code Red" day, which indicates the air is unhealthy, physicians should advise patients (particularly those with cardiac or respiratory conditions) that it's not the day to try and mow the grass.

"ER docs are quite aware of Code Red days because we know that when those occur, we're going to see lots of patients in the emergency room," Benjamin said.

The conference call came as Congress is considering what role the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) should have in updating its safeguards against carbon dioxide and other pollutants.

27

EEE / Global Warming May Pose Health Risks

« on: April 22, 2017, 03:16:32 PM »

Medical and public health groups are banding together to explain how global warming has taken a toll on human health and will continue to cause food-borne illnesses, respiratory problems, and deaths unless policy changes are enacted.

In a conference call with reporters, the heads of the American Medical Association (AMA) and the American Public Health Association (APHA) joined with a pediatrician and a scientist to lay out what they say is a major public health issue: climate change caused by global warming.

28

EEE / Need an Ambulance? Not Sure

« on: April 22, 2017, 03:15:41 PM »

 When a baby has a stiff neck and a high fever, or an elderly person starts slurring their words without being under the influence of alcohol, it's time to call an ambulance — but not many people know this, a new study says.

These signs of meningitis and of stroke are worthy of a lights-flashing, sirens-blaring trip to the hospital, but 53 percent of Britons responding to a survey said there was no need to call emergency transport for the meningitis scenario and only 25 percent would call an ambulance for the stroke.

On the other hand, almost 50 percent thought a woman in labor deserved such a ride to the hospital — just one of many scenarios found to be illustrative of inappropriate use of ambulances, Helen Kirkby, BS, and Dr. Lesley Roberts, of the University of Birmingham in England, reported online in the Emergency Medicine Journal.

"Most people would call for an ambulance appropriately when a real emergency occurred, but there are high levels of inappropriate calls when emergencies are not present," they wrote.

Those also include a toddler bumping its head, a child with Lego blocks stuffed up the nose, or a drunk friend who is conscious but ill.

29

EEE / Are Cell Phones Dangerous for Kids?

« on: April 22, 2017, 03:14:43 PM »

But glucose metabolism in the regions closest to the antenna — the orbitofrontal cortex and the temporal pole — was significantly higher when the phone was turned on.

Further analyses confirmed that the regions expected to have the greatest absorption of radiofrequency and electromagnetic fields from cell phone use were indeed the ones that showed the larger increases in glucose metabolism.

“Even though the radio frequencies that are emitted from current cell phone technologies are very weak, they are able to activate the human brain to have an effect,” Dr. Volkow said in a JAMA video report.

The effects on neuronal activity could be due to changes in neurotransmitter release, cell membrane permeability, cell excitability, or calcium efflux.

It’s also been theorized that heat from cell phones can contribute to functional brain changes, but that is probably less likely to be the case, the researchers said.

Dr. Wang noted that the implications remain unclear — “further studies are needed to assess if the effects we observed could have potential long-term consequences,” he said — but the researchers have not yet devised a follow-up study.

“The take-home message,” Dr. Kesair said, “is that we still don’t know, more studies are needed, and in the meantime users should try to use headsets and reduce cell phone use if at all possible. Restricting cell phone use in young children certainly is not unreasonable.”

30

EEE / What We Know About Cell Phones and Cancer

« on: April 22, 2017, 03:13:46 PM »

Although the study can’t draw conclusions about long-term implications, other researchers are calling the findings significant.

“Clearly there is an acute effect, and the important question is whether this acute effect is associated with events that may be damaging to the brain or predispose to the development of future problems such as cancer as suggested by recent epidemiological studies,” Dr. Santosh Kesari, director of neuro-oncology at the University of California San Diego, said in an e-mail to MedPage Today and ABC News.

There have been many population-based studies evaluating the potential links between brain cancer and cellphone use, and the results have often been inconsistent or inconclusive.

Most recently, the anticipated Interphone study was interpreted as “implausible” because some of its statistics revealed a significant protective effect for cell phone use. On the other hand, the most intense users had an increased risk of glioma — but the researchers called their level of use “unrealistic.”

But few researchers have looked at the actual physiological effects that radiofrequency and electromagnetic fields from the devices can have on brain tissue. Some have shown that blood flow can be increased in specific brain regions during cell phone use, but there’s been little work on effects at the level of the brain’s neurons.

So Dr. Volkow and colleagues conducted a crossover study at Brookhaven National Laboratory, enrolling 47 patients who had one cell phone placed on each ear while they lay in a PET scanner for 50 minutes.

The researchers scanned patients’ brain glucose metabolism twice — once with the right cell phone turned on but muted, and once with both phones turned off.

There was no difference in whole-brain metabolism whether the phone was on or off.