|
DECEMBER 2008
SCIENTISTS ADMIT SELF-CENSORING
CONTROVERSIAL RESEARCH
WHERE HAVE ALL THE BOYS GONE?
MOBILE PHONE USE 'RAISES CHILDREN'S
RISK OF BRAIN CANCER FIVEFOLD'
VETERANS ADMINISTRATION: ONE IN
SEVEN WOMEN PATIENTS REPORT SEXUAL TRAUMA
NOVEMBER 2008
IT'S OKAY TO HAVE ONLY TWO AND
A HALF STAGES OF GRIEF
NON PROFIT HOSPITALS BEING SHUT
DOWN
OCTOBER 2008
THE IMMEDIATE CAUSE OF DEATH
Jane Gross, NY Times -
According to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
the leading causes of death among those ages 65 and over are,
in descending order, heart disease, cancer, stroke, respiratory
disease, Alzheimer's disease, diabetes, influenza, kidney disease,
accidents and infection. Maybe so. But that's because people
are not allowed to die of old age - at least, old age cannot
be listed as the cause of death on the official documents, according
to both the C.D.C. and the World Health Organization, repositories
of the world's mortality statistics.
Neither should "infirmity"
or "senescence" appear as a cause of death, according
to the C.D.C. handbook on how properly to fill out a death certificate.
Why? These words "have little value for public health or
medical research," the agency says. Plus, "Age is recorded
elsewhere on the [death] certificate." . . . Instead, every
death must be attributed to a single disease, which is the immediate
cause of death. A second disease may be cited as the intermediate
cause, and a third as the underlying condition. Even in situations
"when a number of conditions or multiple organ/system failure
resulted in death," the C.D.C. instructs that "the
physician, medical examiner or coroner should choose…a clear
and distinct etiological sequence," a "chain of morbid
events."
It sounds orderly, doesn't
it? But 80- and 90-year-olds don't usually die of one thing.
Little by little, the wheels fall off the bicycle. The first
few times, you patch everything up. But it's never quite the
same. Each setback is a little worse than the last. Bad stuff
happens more often. Eventually, as with all machines, the human
body simply wears out. . .
But being old isn't the
same as having a heart attack. Frail, weak, bedridden old people
don't get cured, ever. . .
What would it mean to
medical science, I wonder, if death certificates did not describe
us all as dying of something that could have been treated, and
perhaps was, but instead of something inevitable and universally
shared?
NON PROFIT HOSPITALS BEING SHUT
DOWN
Wall Steet Journal - Ascension
Health, the country's largest nonprofit hospital system, says
its mission is to serve all, "with special attention to
those who are poor and vulnerable." But in this city, where
one in four people don't have health insurance, it's become harder
for the poor and vulnerable to find Ascension. Last year, Ascension's
local subsidiary closed [Detroit's] Riverview Hospital, the third
hospital it has shut down in Detroit in the past 10 years and
the only hospital that remained on the city's blighted east side.
Meanwhile, 30 miles away, in a suburb of multimillion-dollar
homes, Ascension is opening a new $224 million hospital. Of the
42 hospitals in the city in 1960, fewer than 10 are left. .
Net income at Ascension,
which owns 67 hospitals located mostly in the Midwest, South
and Northeast, nearly tripled to $1.2 billion between 2004 and
2007 thanks largely to investment gains.
. . Nonprofit hospital systems have shuttered facilities from
Los Angeles to Chicago to Newark, N.J., while spending billions
on suburban expansions. This all comes as large nonprofit chains
have been enjoying some of their most prosperous times ever.
PUBLIC HEALTH BECOMES A RESPECTABLE
MAJOR
VEGETARIANS FACE BRAIN SHRINKAGE
WHAT THE MUSIC YOU LIKE SAYS ABOUT
YOU
STUDIES LEND SUPPORT TO DANGERS
OF CELLPHONES
CHEWING GUM LINKED TO LOWERED
STRESS LEVELS
MORE THAN HALF OF COLLEGE STUDENTS
REPORT SUICIDAL THOUGHTS
PHARMAS & BIOTECH FIRMS THREATEN
TO LEAVE MASSACHUSETTS IF DOCTOR BRIBES ARE BANNED
STUDY FINDS NOSELESS BIKE SADDLES
IMPROVE MALE RIDERS' SEX LIVES
COLD FUSION UPDATE
TRANS-FATS BANNED IN CALIFORNIA
SEPTEMBER 2008
GERMS & PUBLIC TOILETS
CNN - Public bathrooms
may be teeming with bacteria, but the toilet seat is probably
safe for sitting. But the toilet seat is actually the cleanest
part of the bathroom, one expert says.
Charles Gerba, a microbiologist
at the University of Arizona who has studied restrooms and other
germ-infested environments for more than 20 years, says that
because of the care people take when they're about to sit, other
parts of the bathroom are much more prone to delivering bacterial
infections.
"One of the cleanest
things in the bathrooms we find are the toilet seats," Gerba
said. "I'd put my fanny on it any time -- unless it's wet;
then you'd want to wipe it first."
Public bathrooms may contain
several kinds of harmful bacteria, including E. coli, salmonella,
coliform, rotavirus, cold virus and the potentially deadly form
of staph known as MRSA, experts say. But people are more likely
to pick up these nasty bugs through touching things in the bathroom
with their hands, not their behinds. . .
More concerning, however,
is a child who steadies himself or herself on a toilet seat by
holding onto it and then leaving without washing hands, she said.
Those germs could lead to an infection once the child's hands
touch the nose, mouth or eyes.
And don't forget that
unwashed hands have handled everything from the door knob to
the lock to the flusher. Again, if you touch one of these objects
and then rub your eye, nose or mouth, you're apt to transmit
that bacteria.
But there is hope. Here
are hygiene helpers:
Yes, it's basic. But,
in general, washing your hands is the most effective action you
can take to prevent bacterial infections from a public bathroom,
experts say.
"You can remove all
gastrointestinal and respiratory infection bacteria by washing
hands," said Judy Daly, clinical microbiologist at the University
of Utah and spokesperson for the Clean Hands Campaign. "Seventeen
seconds of a little bit of friction, water and soap will really
mediate bacteria."
The American Society for
Microbiology, which sponsors the Clean Hands Campaign, found
in a study last year that about 77 percent of men and women washed
their hands in public restrooms, down 6 percent from 2005. The
observational study also found that women washed their hands
more than men.
"It's such an easy
intervention," Daly said. "If you get it to be a habit
for a 30-day period, it's something you do automatically."
Recent bathroom additions
like automatic hands-free faucets and paper towel dispensers
diminish contact between your hands and bathroom items that may
bear bacteria.
Gerba's research found
that the highest concentration of germs in a public bathroom
are on the floor, the outside of the sanitary napkin disposal
and the sink and water taps.
When Gerba looked at women's
purses, he found that one-third of them had fecal bacteria on
the bottom. Make sure you hang your shoulder bag on a hook. If
none is available, some people swear by hanging the strap around
their necks.
The middle stall of a
public restroom usually has the most bacteria because people
use it the most. "I guess people like company," Gerba
said. The first stall will probably be cleaner.
As a rule, the cleanest
toilets are usually in hospitals, because they use disinfectants
heavily, but the worst are in airports and airplanes, Gerba said.
The small size of airplane bathrooms, including the sinks themselves,
make it hard for people to wash their hands -- in fact, Gerba's
study found a thin layer of E. coli in an airplane bathroom.
As for the airports themselves,
"In the men's room at Chicago O'Hare, I don't think the
toilet seat ever gets cold," Gerba said.
Since the Review
is better known for its political scoops rather than its scientific
ones, excuse us for bragging that the latest issue of the highly
regarded Nature Magazine has a cover article about the important
but hidden Altenberg meeting on post-Darwinian research and new
thoughts about evolution. We ran a piece of Suzan Mazur's ground
breaking work on this topic back in March
and followed up with another in July.
Nature even borrows from Mazur's term "evolutionary Woodstock"
to describe the critical meeting. Mazur's work is also found
regularly in the great New Zealand journal, Scoop.
The scientific establishment has been somewhat scared of
dealing rationally and openly with new evolutionary ideas because
of its fear of the powerful creationist movement. So for the
topic to make the cover of Nature is a notable development.
SCIENCE ON THE STREET
A Nobel Prize
winner takes to the street to answer questions about scienc
WHERE HAVE ALL THE BOYS GONE?
Tree Hugger - Martin Mittelstaedt
of the Globe and Mail writes about how "Researchers tracking
childhood behavioural disorders, sperm counts, testicular cancer
and even the shrinking size of male gonads are convinced that
something is amiss. The University of Pittsburgh's Devra Davis,
in a study issued last year, found that the U.S. and Japan combined
had a staggering tally of 262,000 "missing boys" from
1970 to about 2000 because of a decline in the sex ratio at birth.
Although it could be a statistical anomaly, she says the figure
is "very worrisome." Some think it might be due to
endocrine disruptors in the environment. He lists "science's
top five worries over the fate of the human male."
1. Lost boys: Studies
on births from the U.S., Japan, and Canada have found a drop
in the percentage of boys born compared with girls. The reason
isn't known.
2. Declining harvest:
Men in farm country can be half as prolific when it comes to
making sperm as their city counterparts, raising the possibility
that pesticides undermine male fertility.
3. Downsizing: It's disputed
by chemical companies, but some researchers say they have found
an everyday plastic compound - phthalates - that feminizes baby
boys, causing penises and other reproductive organs to be smaller.
4. Hormones not so raging:
If you're a middle-aged man, you're likely to be less virile
than your father because you make less testosterone. In recent
decades, the decline has averaged about 1 per cent a year. If
it continues over another generation or two, the consequences
could be dire.
5. Equipment failure:
Rates of testicular cancer, hypospadias and other genital abnormalities
have soared over recent decades, rising by more than 50 per cent
each.
Mittelstaedt then lists
the four chemicals that are causing the biggest concern: Bisphenol
A, Phthalates, Polybrominated diphenylethers (PBDE). Polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCB)
HEAD OF LEADING CANCER INSTITUTE
WARNS STAFF ON CELL PHONES
ROCK DRUMMING AS GOOD FOR HEART
AS SOCCER
HAS AMERICA GONE MAD?
Bruce E, Levine, Alternet
- In The Sane Society, [Erich] Fromm wrote, "Many psychiatrists
and psychologists refuse to entertain the idea that society as
a whole may be lacking in sanity. They hold that the problem
of mental health in a society is only that of the number of 'unadjusted'
individuals, and not of a possible unadjustment of the culture
itself."
Is American society a
healthy one, and are those having difficulties adjusting to it
mentally ill? Or is American society an unhealthy one, and are
many Americans with emotional difficulties simply alienated rather
than ill? For Fromm, "An unhealthy society is one which
creates mutual hostility (and) distrust, which transforms man
into an instrument of use and exploitation for others, which
deprives him of a sense of self, except inasmuch as he submits
to others or becomes an automaton." Fromm viewed American
society as an increasingly unhealthy one, in which people routinely
experience painful alienation that fuels emotional and behavioral
difficulties. . .
The essential confrontation
for Fromm is not about psychiatric drugs per se (though he would
be sad that so many Americans nowadays, especially children,
are prescribed psychotropic drugs in order to fit into inhospitable
environments). His essential confrontation was directed at all
mental health professionals -- including non-prescribers such
as psychologists, social workers and counselors -- who merely
assist their patients to adjust but neglect to validate their
patients' alienation from society.
Those comfortably atop
societal hierarchies have difficulty recognizing that many American
institutions promote helplessness, passivity, boredom, fear,
isolation, alienation and dehumanization for those not at the
top. One-size-fits-all schools, the corporate workplace, government
bureaucracies and other giant, impersonal institutions routinely
promote manipulative relationships rather than respectful ones,
machine efficiency rather than human pride, authoritarian hierarchies
rather than participatory democracy, disconnectedness rather
than community, and helplessness rather than empowerment.
In The Sane Society, Fromm
warned, "Today the function of psychiatry, psychology and
psychoanalysis threatens to become the tool in the manipulation
of man. The specialists in this field tell you what the 'normal'
person is, and, correspondingly, what is wrong with you; they
devise the methods to help you adjust, be happy, be normal.".
. .
It is my experience that
psychiatry, Scientology and fundamentalist religions are turnoffs
for genuinely critical thinkers. Critical thinkers are not so
desperate to adjust and be happy that they ignore adverse affects
-- be they physical, psychological, spiritual or societal. Critical
thinkers listen to what others have to say while considering
their motives, especially financial ones; and they discern how
one's motivation may distort one's assumptions.
A critical thinker would
certainly not merely accept without analysis Fromm's and my conclusion
that American society is insane in terms of healthy human development.
. .
A critical thinker would
most certainly point out that there have been societies far less
sane than the United States -- and Erich Fromm made himself absolutely
clear on this point. In the barbaric German society that Fromm
fled, disruptive children who couldn't fit into one-size-fits-all
schools were not forced to take Adderall and other amphetamines,
but instead their parents handed them over to psychiatrists to
be euthanized. Fromm, however, knew that just because one could
point to societies less sane than the United States, this did
not make the United States a sane, humanistic society.
Bruce E. Levine, Ph.D.,
is a clinical psychologist and author of Surviving America's
Depression Epidemic: How to Find Morale, Energy, and Community
in a World Gone Crazy (Chelsea Green, 2007
VEGETARIANS FACE BRAIN SHRINKAGE
Times of India - Scientists
have discovered that going veggie could be bad for your brain-with
those on a meat-free diet six times more likely to suffer brain
shrinkage.
Vegans and vegetarians
are the most likely to be deficient because the best sources
of the vitamin are meat, particularly liver, milk and fish. Vitamin
B12 deficiency can also cause anaemia and inflammation of the
nervous system. Yeast extracts are one of the few vegetarian
foods which provide good levels of the vitamin.
The link was discovered
by Oxford University scientists who used memory tests, physical
checks and brain scans to examine 107 people between the ages
of 61 and 87.
When the volunteers were
retested five years later the medics found those with the lowest
levels of vitamin B12 were also the most likely to have brain
shrinkage. It confirms earlier research showing a link between
brain atrophy and low levels of B12.
Brain scans of more than
1,800 people found that people who downed 14 drinks or more a
week had 1.6% more brain shrinkage than teetotallers. Women in
their seventies were the most at risk.
Beer does less damage
than wine according to a study in Alcohol and Alcoholism.
And being overweight or
obese is linked to brain loss, Swedish researchers discovered.
Scans of around 300 women found that those with brain shrink
had an average body mass index of 27 And for every one point
increase in their BMI the loss rose by 13 to 16%.
EUROPEAN DOCTORS TO INCLUDE WARNINGS
WITH STATINS; STUDIES KEPT SECRET
WHEN SCIENCE, POLITICS, RELIGION
& JOURNALISM MEET
AUGUST 2008
CHEWING GUM LINKED TO LOWERED
STRESS LEVELS
Scientific Blogging -
Andrew Scholey, Ph.D., professor of Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
Swinburne University in Melbourne, Australia has led a research
study on the effects of chewing gum on stress relief and focus
and concentration. The study found that chewing gum helped relieve
anxiety, improve alertness and reduce stress among individuals
in a laboratory setting. . .
The study noted:
- When chewing gum, participants
reported lower levels of anxiety.
- Gum chewers showed a
reduction in anxiety as compared to non-gum chewers by nearly
17 percent during mild stress and nearly 10 percent in moderate
stress.
- Increased Alertness:
Participants experienced greater levels of alertness when they
chewed gum.
- Gum chewers showed improvement
in alertness over non-gum chewers by nearly 19 percent during
mild stress and 8 percent in moderate stress.
- Reduced Stress: Stress
levels were lower in participants who chewed gum.
- Levels of salivary cortisol
(a physiological stress marker) in gum chewers were lower than
those of non-gum chewers by 16 percent during mild stress and
nearly 12 percent in moderate stress.
- Improved Performance:
Chewing gum resulted in a significant improvement in overall
performance on multi-tasking activities.
Both gum-chewers and non-chewers
showed improvement from their baseline scores; however, chewing
gum improved mean performance scores over non-gum chewers by
67 percent during moderate stress and 109 percent in mild stress.
JULY 2008
TOO MUCH TOFU OR SOY MAY CAUSE
MEMORY LOSS
HUNGER IN CITIES GROWING
HOW DO YOU GO TO THE BATHROOM
IN SPACE?
JUNE 2008
HOSPITAL PROFITS SOARED LAST YEAR
WASHINGTON BUSINESS JOURNAL The country's
hospital systems reported robust revenue and profit growth in
the survey, a news release said. Hospital system revenue from
patient care grew 8.4 percent in 2007 compared to 2006 and revenue
from all sources, including patient care, climbed 8.9 percent.
Hospital system profits jumped 23.8 percent, according to the
survey results.
CELLPHONE
USE SUBJECT OF HEALTH DEBATE
MAY 2008
WHY MOZART RELIEVES THE PAIN OF
INTENSIVE CARE PATIENTS
WEIGHT DISCRIMINATION FOUND AS
PREVALENT AS ETHNIC & GENDER BIAS
CELL PHONES A RISK DURING PREGNANCY
LOW SALT DIETS ASSOCIATED WITH
HEART DISEASE
INCENSE SEEMS TO HAVE ANTI-DEPRESSANT
EFFECT
SCIENCE DAILY Religious leaders
have contended for millennia that burning incense is good for
the soul. Now, biologists have learned that it is good for our
brains too. An international team of scientists, including researchers
from Johns Hopkins University and the Hebrew University in Jerusalem,
describe how burning frankincense (resin from the Boswellia plant)
activates poorly understood ion channels in the brain to alleviate
anxiety or depression. This suggests that an entirely new class
of depression and anxiety drugs might be right under our noses.
"In spite of information stemming
from ancient texts, constituents of Bosweilla had not been investigated
for psychoactivity," said Raphael Mechoulam, one of the
research study's co-authors. "We found that incensole acetate,
a Boswellia resin constituent, when tested in mice lowers anxiety
and causes antidepressive-like behavior. Apparently, most present
day worshipers assume that incense burning has only a symbolic
meaning.". . .
"Perhaps Marx wasn't too wrong
when he called religion the opium of the people: morphine comes
from poppies, cannabinoids from marijuana, and LSD from mushrooms;
each of these has been used in one or another religious ceremony."
said Gerald Weissmann, M.D., Editor-in-Chief of The FASEB Journal.
"Studies of how those psychoactive drugs work have helped
us understand modern neurobiology. The discovery of how incensole
acetate, purified from frankincense, works on specific targets
in the brain should also help us understand diseases of the nervous
system. This study also provides a biological explanation for
millennia-old spiritual practices that have persisted across
time, distance, culture, language, and religion--burning incense
really does make you feel warm and tingly all over!"
TEENAGER'S SCIENCE FAIR PROJECT
MAY DELIVER US FROM PLASTIC
MOTHER JONES Daniel Burd - [a] 16-year-old
from Waterloo, Ontario, as part of a science fair project, figured
out a way to break down the polymers in plastic bags-compounds
that can last for over 1,000 years-in about three months. Essentially,
Burd hypothesized that since the bags eventually do degrade,
it must be possible to isolate and augment the degrading agents.
. .
Burd combined ground polyethylene
plastic bags, sodium chloride, dirt from a landfill (which theoretically
contains the microorganisms that ultimately degrade the plastic)
and a yeast mixture in shakers for four weeks at a consistent
temperature of about 86 degrees. At the end of the month, he
took a sample of that mixture and combined it with a new one,
with the goal of increasing the overall concentration of microbes.
After one more repetition, he put fresh plastic bags in his solution
for six weeks. In the end, the plastic degraded nearly 20%. A
little more filtering to figure out exactly which microbes were
the most effective, and he upped the degradation rate to 32%.
He concludes, "The process of polyethylene degradation developed
in this project can be used on an industrial scale for biodegradation
of plastic bags. As a result, this would save the lives of millions
of wildlife species and save space in landfills.". . . Judges
at the Canada-Wide Science Fair apparently agree that it's worth
pursuing. They sent Burd home with $30,000 in awards and scholarships.
You can read his final report here
STUDIES FIND DOCTORS REALLY DON'T
KNOW HOW TO WRITE
BRAIN EXPERT SAYS MOBILE PHONES
MORE DANGEROUS THAN SMOKING
WE ONLY HAVE A BILLION YEARS TO
GET IT RIGHT
WHY SCRATCHING FEELS GOOD
USING CELLPHONE BEFORE BEDTIME
DELAYS AND REDUCES SLEEP
U.S. RANKS LAST AMONG INDUSTRIALIZED
NATIONS IN DEALING WITH PREVENTABLE DEATHS
AMERICAN STYLE HEALTHCARE: HOSPICES
FORCED TO REPAY MEDICARE FOR PATIENTS WHO LIVE TOO LONG
REVISED U.N. FIGURES FIND AIDS
DECLINING OVER PAST TEN YEARS
THREE BOOKS ON HOW THE PHARMA
INDUSTRY PUSHES PILLS FOR SHYNESS AND SORROW
BRAZIL 'REMARKABLE' SUCCESS WITH
AIDS REFLECTS TOUGH STAND WITH PHARMA CORPS
CALORIE CREEP FOUND IN POPULAR
FOODS
A DOCTOR TALKS ABOUT THE GOOGLER
AS PATIENT
AVERAGE CHILD EXPOSED DAILY TO
27 CHEMICALS NOT FOUND SAFE FOR THEM
CDC STUDY BLOWS HOLES IN WEIGHT
MYTH
STUDY: INTERNET PORN MAY HAVE
AIDED BIG DROP IN RAPES
WATCHING TV MAY RAISE KIDS' BLOOD
PRESSURE, WEIGHT
OREGON'S DEATH WITH DIGNITY POLICY
PASSES TEN YEAR MARK
THE HIGH COST OF NOT ENOUGH YOUNG
SLEEP
AUSTRALIAN COAL MINERS GIVEN INSTRUCTION
IN FOREPLAY AND MENOPAUSE
SCIENCE OF DESIGNATED HITTERS
STUDY: BREAST FEEDING DOESN'T
CAUSE SAGGING
CANCER GROWTH UNAFFECTED BY MENTAL
ATTITUDE
MINNESOTA SLASHES PHARMA PAYOLA
INSURANCE COMPANIES FOUND TO BE
ALREADY RIPPING OFF MEDICARE DRUG PATIENTS
PRIVATIZED MEDICAL INSURANCE SYSTEM
RESULTS IN UP TO 18,000 DEATHS A YEAR
STUDY FINDS HEAVIER OLDER PEOPLE
ARE HEALTHIER
MATHEMATICAL PROOF OF WHY HANGING
OUT IS A GOOD IDEA
WHY PRIVATE INSURANCE BASED HEALTH
CARE WON'T WORK
HALF OF AMERICANS, TWO-THIRDS
OF DEMOCRATS
TO THE LEFT OF DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATES ON HEALTH CARE
WHY BOOMERS AREN'T THE MAJOR PROBLEM
OF MEDICARE
COST OF HEALTH CARE RISING FASTER
THAN WAGES
SAVING ON MALPRACTICE INSURANCE
MEANS SOMETIMES SAYING YOU'RE SORRY
MYTHS ABOUT GIRLS AND SCIENCE
FEBRUARY 2008
NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE IGNORES
NATURAL OPTIONS
NATURAL NEWS In an article
included in the latest edition of Cancer Monthly's free newsletter
CancerWire, researchers analyzed statistics obtained through
the National Cancer Institute in order to gain a clearer perspective
on what type of cancer research is being undertaken in the country.
. .
The authors found that
of the 7,080 clinical trials for cancer currently ongoing, over
3,000 are focused on chemotherapy -- a treatment that already
has over 50 years of research to its credit with relatively little
practical return on investment. Of the remaining trials, over
2,000 were focused on more advanced biological treatments such
as anti-angiogenesis drugs, which work to cut off the blood supply
to tumors.
In all, only 123 of the
trials deal with any type of alternative or complementary treatment.
"These 123 represent only 1.7% of the total and included
trials of various foods, herbs and modalities such as: soy, ginger,
Valerian, Curcumin, acupuncture, Reiki, meditation, garlic, Green
tea, and Tai Chi," the authors state.. . .
"The overwhelming
majority of these trials examined questions that did not focus
on whether these approaches alone improved survivability from
cancer," the authors report. What this means is that the
treatments were actually being evaluated not as treatments, but
as adjunctive therapies to improve the rate and intensity of
symptoms among those patients already undergoing conventional
therapy.
Of the 7,080 clinical
trials for cancer currently underway in the U.S., only three
focus on natural alternative methods of treating the disease.
PSYCHIATRIST SAYS WE'RE TOO DOWN ON DEPRESSION
BBC - A leading psychiatrist says that
depression is not a human defect at all, but a defense mechanism
that in its mild and moderate forms can force a healthy reassessment
of personal circumstances.
Dr Paul Keedwell, an expert on mood disorders
at the Institute of Psychiatry, argues all people are vulnerable
to depression in the face of stress to varying degrees, and always
have been.
The fact it has survived so long - and
not been eradicated by evolution - indicates it has helped the
human race become stronger. . .
Aristotle believed depression to be of
great value because of the insights it could bring. There is
also an increased empathy in people who have or have had depression,
he says, because they become more attuned to other people's suffering.
. .
The Banda tribe in Uganda calls it "illness
of thought" and those affected are allowed time out from
the group, a concession not extended to many with the condition
in the UK.
The high and rising incidence in the UK
and US - compared to countries like Brazil and Mexico - could
be due to the breakdown of family bonds and the fragmentation
of society. And compared to past decades, there are increased
expectations of success.
Dr Keedwell says his theory does not cover
severe depression, which is an illness accompanied by a catatonic
lack of energy, cannot be worked through
WE ONLY HAVE A BILLION YEARS TO GET IT RIGHT
SCIENTIFIC BLOGGING - University of Sussex
astronomers predict that the Earth will be swallowed up by the
Sun unless the Earth's orbit can be altered - but we have about
7.6 billion years to do it. Dr Robert Smith, Emeritus Reader
in Astronomy, said his team previously calculated that the Earth
would escape ultimate destruction, although be battered and burnt
to a cinder, but they did not take into account the effect of
the drag caused by the outer atmosphere of the dying Sun. . .
Life on Earth will have disappeared long
before 7.6 billion years, however. Scientists have shown that
the Sun's slow expansion will cause the temperature at the surface
of the Earth to rise. Oceans will evaporate, and the atmosphere
will become laden with water vapor, which (like carbon dioxide)
is a very effective greenhouse gas. Eventually, the oceans will
boil dry and the water vapor will escape into space. In a billion
years from now the Earth will be a very hot, dry and uninhabitable
ball.
Can anything be done to prevent this fate?
Professor Smith points to a remarkable scheme proposed by a team
at Santa Cruz University, who suggest harnessing the gravitational
effects of a close passage by a large asteroid to "nudge"
the Earth's orbit gradually outwards away from the encroaching
Sun. A suitable passage every 6000 years or so would be enough
to keep the Earth out of trouble and allow life to survive for
at least 5 billion years, and possibly even to survive the Sun's
red giant phase.
OF MEDICATIONS AND MASSACRES
SAM SMITH - Once again, in the case of
the North Illinois University killings, there is a possible link
to medications - reportedly anti-depressants. And, once again,
media and officials are downplaying it. In this case, the reported
situation is that the killer stopped using his meds a few weeks
before the massacre, but this statement by a police official
does not qualify as serious inquiry. For example, if there was
actually some connection, it could have been because:
- Some people have extremely violent reactions
when they stop using the drugs. If so, what steps need to be
taken to avoid this?
- The drugs had altered the killer's brain
in some way that not only contributed to the violence but got
him to give up taking the drugs.
Of course, there may be no connection at
all, but - as pointed out here in the past - the use of anti-depressants
and similar drugs is so prevalent that one need not have more
than a miniscule chance of violent reactions to have major consequences.
While there are no answers at present,
we do know this: neither medicine nor the media seems to care
much.
Medicine is part science and part gambling.
That's what all the small print on your prescriptions is about.
We need to look at the odds more closely.
ABOUT A QUARTER OF WOMEN, 11% OF MEN
REPORT SUFFERING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
MSNBC - About a quarter of U.S. women suffer
domestic violence, U.S. health officials reported, with ongoing
health problems that one activist likened to the effects of living
in a war zone. Some men also experience domestic violence, a
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention survey found.
The CDC said 23.6 percent of women and
11.5 percent of men reported being a victim of what it called
"intimate partner violence" at some time in their lives.
The CDC defined this as threatened, attempted
or completed physical or sexual violence or emotional abuse by
a spouse, former spouse, current or former boyfriend or girlfriend
or a dating partner. The CDC estimates that 1,200 women are killed
and 2 million injured in domestic violence annually. . .
Black women were more likely to report
domestic violence than whites or Hispanics, but it was most frequent
among multiracial, American Indian and Alaska native women. Women
of all income and education levels suffer such abuse, although
it was more frequent among the poorest and those who attended
but did not graduate from college.
"Perhaps one of the factors at play
here is the high prevalence of sexual violence on college campuses,
and dating violence," Michele Black, a CDC epidemiologist
who helped write the agency's report, said in a telephone interview.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23056009
JANUARY 2008
STUDY: NEARLY A QUARTER OF GENES CONTRIBUTE TO
BODY WEIGHT
SCIENTIFIC BLOGGING - Genetics Researchers
from the Monell Chemical Senses Center have attempted to count
the number of genes that contribute to obesity and body weight
- and it isn't a pretty number.
The findings suggest that over 6,000 genes,
almost 25 percent of the genome, could help determine an individual's
body weight.
"Reports describing the discovery
of a new 'obesity gene' have become common in the scientific
literature and also the popular press," notes Monell behavioral
geneticist Michael G. Tordoff, PhD, an author on the study. "Our
results suggest that each newly discovered gene is just one of
the many thousands that influence body weight, so a quick fix
to the obesity problem is unlikely.". . .
Tordoff comments, "It is interesting
that there are 10 times more genes that increase body weight
than decrease it, which might help explain why it is easier to
gain weight than lose it."
DECEMBER 2007
REPORT DOCUMENTS LINK BETWEEN BOOZING AND UNSAFE
SEX, SUGGESTS FREE CONDOMS AT CLUBS AND IN TAXIS
BBC - Free condoms should be given away
in pubs, clubs and taxis to reduce the levels of unwanted pregnancies
and sex infections, experts say. Research by the University of
Southampton found strong links between binge drinking and unsafe
sex. The poll of 520 people attending sexual health clinics found
76% said they had unprotected sex due to drinking.
And those with sex infections drank 40%
more on average, the International Journal of STD and Aids reported.
In total, only a sixth of those quizzed said they always had
safe sex with a new partner. . .
Journal editor Professor Wallace Dinsmore
said: "The young people interviewed in this study frequently
said that better access to condoms at the time and place they
were needed would have enabled them to practise safer sex. Young
people can get free condoms from their GPs, family planning and
GU [sexual health] clinics but it might make more sense to give
condoms away in pubs, clubs and taxis."
DRUG DENIAL IN MASS KILLINGS (CONT'D)
OUR PIECE on the possible connection between
prescription behavioral drugs and mass slayings stirred up a
lot of correspondence pro and con, with the latter missing a
key point: we didn't blame the drugs, we blamed officials for
not investigating their possible role and the media for ignoring
it. As we pointed out, a drug that works for a million people
but causes violence or suicide in just one percent means 10,000
people who could kill themselves or others.
Speaking of which. . .
ABC NEWS - It was the first, anguished
thought that sprung to the mind of the mother of the Omaha mall
sniper Robert Hawkins when she realized her son was the killer.
. . Rodriguez said her son's life had been a challenge from the
start. She divorced Hawkins' father when the boy was 3-years-old,
she said, and by 5 he was taking prescription Ritalin and Zoloft.
. .
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=3994022&page=1
MASS KILLINGS AND DRUG DENIAL
ANOTHER TEENAGER, another mass killing,
another round of totally predictable reactions: flags at half-mast,
outrage, tightened security, a statement from the White House.
And one other thing: virtually no mention
by police, media or politicians of the possible role of behavioral
drugs in the killing.
This despite the fact that such drugs appear
in the background - albeit well hidden by the media - in just
about every one of these mass killing stories including the latest.
Why is there this drug denial? A number
of reasons, including the fact that blaming it on the guns is
a lot easier, a mass brain drain achieved by Big Pharma in public
discussions of such matters and the uncomfortable possibility
that drugs that have helped millions might also cause a much
smaller but significant number of people to do bizarrely violent
things.
The pharmaceutical, medical and media industries
have trained us to acquiesce to something called "acceptable
risk." Yet we should be leery of letting others determine
what the acceptable risk of our own death or illness is as they
may not have the same vested interest in it as we do.
Let's consider the example of anti-depressants.
Let's assume there is only a one percent chance of a violent
or otherwise serious adverse reaction. Sounds small, but it means
that if one million people are successfully taking the drug,
about 10,000 may be potential Omaha shooters or have some other
adverse reaction. Ten million prescriptions and you have a population
the size of South Bend, Indiana or Cambridge, Massachusetts at
risk to themselves or to others.
At present, we are unable to even discuss
this anomaly. Admittedly it is confusing, frustrating and contradictory
to have a drug that is both a salivation and a major danger,
but we do no one a favor by pretending the problem doesn't exist.
NATION, MAY 2001 - While many explanations
have been proposed for the epidemic of rampage killings, one
that has not been given much attention in the media is the possible
involvement of psychotropic medications, particularly selective
serotonin-reuptake inhibitors such as fluoxetine (Prozac). Dr.
Julian Whitaker, writing in the March 2001 issue of Health and
Healing, calls attention to the fact that an uncomfortably large
proportion of the people who have gone on shooting sprees were
all taking Prozac or related drugs. A 42-year-old software tester
from Massachusetts was, according to Whitaker, taking Prozac
when he killed seven of his coworkers. One of the teenage murderers
from Columbine High School, and the man who killed seven people
at a Kentucky printing plant, were taking Prozac or similar drugs.
And Prozac was found in the car of the Atlanta day-trader who
murdered his wife and children and then killed or wounded 22
people at two brokerage firms.
While it could be argued that the deranged
psyches that led these people to violent acts preceded their
use of SSRIs, it is possible that the side effects of the drugs
played a role in their murderous rages. Whitaker cites a study
by Dr. David Healy, showing that when people without mental illness
were given the SSRI drug sertraline (Zoloft), 20% became suicidal.
There has also been a long-held suspicion that Prozac causes
some people to become obsessed with killing themselves. The hall-of-fame
singer Del Shannon, whose 1961 smash hit Runaway was number one
on the charts for eight weeks, shot himself in the head in 1990,
15 days after starting Prozac. According to his wife, Shannon
was, at the time, an emotionally healthy individual who had been
prescribed the drug to help him through a period of relatively
minor stress. Abby Hoffman, the political radical and founder
of the Youth International Party, also committed suicide shortly
after starting Prozac.
A drug-induced obsession with violence
could lead not only to suicide, but, for some personality types,
to violence against others. It is noteworthy that certain drugs
used to treat obsessive-compulsive disorder also affect serotonin
reuptake. It should not, therefore, be surprising if some people
develop obsessive thoughts when their serotonin metabolism is
"messed with." . . .
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH, 2007
- Specific variations in two genes are linked to suicidal thinking
that sometimes occurs in people taking the most commonly prescribed
class of antidepressants, according to a large study led by scientists
at the Institute of Mental Health. Depending on the particular
mix inherited, these versions increased the likelihood of such
thoughts from 2- to15-fold, the study found. About 1 percent
of adult patients were deemed to be at high genetic risk, 41
percent at elevated risk and 58 percent at lower risk.
If confirmed, the findings may hold promise
for genetic testing, as more such markers are identified. . .
. Overall, about 6 percent of 1,915 patients with depression
reported that they started to have suicidal thoughts while taking
an antidepressant. This rate soared to 36 percent among the few
patients with both of the suspect gene versions; 59 percent of
the patients who had suicidal thoughts had at least one of the
versions. . .
Earlier studies had shown that about 4
percent of youth treated with antidepressants experience suicidal
thinking compared with about 2 percent of those taking placebos.
WIKIPEDIA - Over the years there have been
many accusations by patients and their families of SSRIs causing
suicidal ideation and aggressive (or homicidal) behavior. The
scientific evidence supporting this claim has been criticized
by drug advocates, but alternative medicine sites often claim
that patients committed suicide or engaged in aggressive and/or
criminal acts using SSRIs. Manufacturers of SSRIs historically
have vehemently denied any such link and have always blamed the
disease rather than the treatment. However, evidence from case
studies, epidemiological studies, experimental research, and
theory supports the view that SSRIs increase suicide risk for
some patients.
In the United States there is a required
box warning for suicide risk in children. In the UK, all "antidepressant"
medications except Prozac have been banned for people under 18.
In late 2004 the first U.S. black box warning was added which
applied only to children 12 and under. Recently experts recommended
expanding the warning to adults. In general the risk of suicide
is twice as great when taking an SSRI regardless of the type
of diagnosis or whether the patient was considered a healthy
volunteer for trial purposes.
On Dec 13, 2006, a U.S. Food and Drug Administration
advisory panel recommended that "black-box" warnings
on SSRIs be raised from 18 to 25 years old. The FDA is not obliged
to follow the recommendations of its advisory committees but
usually does.
THE RISK OF RISK ASSESSMENT
CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR
- At least since 2003, and especially after hurricane Katrina
hit, the White House has broadly attempted to control which climate
scientists could speak with reporters, as well as editing scientists'
congressional testimony on climate science and key legal opinions,
according to a new report by a House committee. "The Bush
Administration has engaged in a systematic effort to manipulate
climate change science and mislead policy makers and the public
about the dangers of global warming," said the report, which
is the result of a 16-month probe by the Committee on Oversight
and Government Reform. "The White House exerted unusual
control over the public statements of federal scientists on climate
change issues."
ISRAELI STUDY SAYS REGULAR MOBILE USE INCREASES
TUMOR RISK
AFP - Regular use of mobile telephones
increases the risk of developing tumours, a new scientific study
by Israeli researchers and published in the American Journal
of Epidemiology revealed. An extract of the report seen by Israel's
Yedoit Aharonot newspaper put the risk of developing a parotid
gland tumor nearly 50 percent higher for frequent mobile phone
users - more than 22 hours a month. The risk was still higher
if users clamped the phone to the same ear, did not use hands
- free devices or were in rural areas.
NOVEMBER 2007
BRAZIL 'REMARKABLE' SUCCESS WITH AIDS
REFLECTS TOUGH STAND WITH PHARMA CORPS
GARY DUFFY, BBC - Bargaining with pharmaceutical
firms to bring down the price of Aids drugs and producing cheap
generic versions has saved Brazil $1bn, a study has shown. Infection
rates in the Latin American country have been kept at a similar
level to the US, the report finds. And more than 180,000 Brazilians
have access to Aids treatment.
Brazil's achievement is described as "remarkable",
in the study published by researchers at the Harvard School of
Public Health in the United States. . . In 1996 it became the
first developing country to commit to providing free and universal
access to Aids drugs. . .
By threatening to produce cheaper generic
versions of existing drugs, the government has repeatedly persuaded
companies to reduce their prices. Earlier this year Brazil broke
the patent on the Aids drug Efavirenz and decided to import a
cheaper version from India.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/2/hi/americas/7093809.stm
CALORIE CREEP FOUND IN POPULAR FOODS
FRAN ABRAMS, GUARDIAN, UK - Fast food,
fizzy drinks and larger portion sizes have all been blamed for
rising levels of obesity. But figures obtained by the Guardian
suggest changes to the recipes of many of our favorite foods
could be to blame. Of a dozen leading brands for which we were
able to compare nutritional information from a decade or more
ago with today, nine showed an increase in calories, sugar or
saturated fat. Kellogg's Rice Krispies contain 36 more calories
per 100g than in 1983 - an increase of about 10% - while Kraft
Dairylea Triangles contain 15 more calories per 100g than in
2001, a 7% rise. While cheese used to be their main ingredient,
followed by skimmed milk, whey and butter, it now comes third
and accounts for just 16%.
Häagen-Dazs Belgian Chocolate ice-cream
- always marketed as a dangerous pleasure - contains 16% more
calories than in 1994, and 26% more fat. Even products marketed
as healthy options are not immune to this "calorie creep".
Jordans Original Crunchy bars have 16% more calories than in
1986, and more fat. Experts said the findings, derived from a
comparison of current labels with old ones stored in museum archives,
fitted a pattern whereby manufacturers remove salt and some types
of fat from food for health reasons, only to replace them with
sugar and more fat.
CDC STUDY BLOWS HOLES IN WEIGHT MYTH
[This is not new data. Some of it has
been noted by the Review. The CDC still, however, continues to
use the mathematical illogical BMI as a standard, which assumes
that we are two dimensional rather than 3 dimensional creatures.
This creates a substantial bias against taller people. The formula
also doesn't consider genetic differences, body type, or percentage
of fat]
INDEPENDENT, UK - After years of anti-obesity
public health advice, a major new study causes an outcry by concluding
that the overweight live longer. A startling new study by medical
researchers in the United States has caused consternation among
public health professionals by suggesting that, contrary to conventional
wisdom, being overweight might actually be beneficial for health.
The study, published in the respected Journal
of the American Medical Association, runs counter to almost all
other advice to consumers by saying that carrying a little extra
flab – though not too much – might help people to live
longer.
Struggling dieters, used to being told
that staying thin is the best prescription for longevity, are
likely to be confused this morning if not heartily relieved.
While being a bit overweight may indeed increase your chances
of dying from diabetes and kidney disease – conditions that
are often linked with one another – the same is not true
for a host of other ailments including cancer and heart disease,
the report suggests.
In fact, scanning the whole gamut of diseases
that could curtail your life, being over weight is, on balance,
a good thing. The bottom line, the scientists say, is that modestly
overweight people demonstrate a lower death rate than their peers
who are underweight, obese or – most surprisingly –
normal weight.
The findings will be hard to dismiss. They
are the result of analysis of decades of data by federal researchers
at the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta,
Georgia. This is not a study from a fringe group of scientists
or sponsored by a fast-food chain.
Being overweight, the report asserts in
its conclusions, "was associated with significantly decreased
all-cause mortality overall". . .
That the CDC has even published the report
and thus threatened to muffle years of propaganda as to the health
benefits of staying slender has enraged some medical experts.
. .
The scientists are careful to stress that
the benefits they are describing are limited to those people
who are merely overweight – which generally means being
no more than 30 pounds heavier than is recommended for your height
– and certainly do not carry over to those who fall into
the category of obese.
OCTOBER 2007
WATCHING TV MAY RAISE KIDS' BLOOD PRESSURE,
WEIGHT
DAILY MAIL, UK - Children
who watch more than two hours of TV a day are twice as likely
to be obese and suffer high blood pressure, say researchers.
A U.S. study found those glued to the screen for between two
and four hours a day were 2.5 times more likely to have hypertension,
which can lead to heart disease and stroke in later life. That
increased to 3.3 times the risk for children watching TV for
four hours or more each day, says a report today in the American
Journal of Preventive Medicine. The study also found that children
tended to be more seriously overweight the more time they spent
watching TV.
SEPTEMBER 2007
THE MATING HABITS OF LADY BUGS
 VIDEO
AUGUST 2007
TOO MANY BEING DIAGNOSED AS DEPRESSED?
SCOTSAMN - Doctors are over-diagnosing
depression, resulting in thousands of people wrongly being prescribed
drugs to treat it, an expert warns. Professor Gordon Parker says
the current threshold for what is considered to be "clinical
depression" is too low and he fears that it might lead to
the condition becoming less credible. He argues that the problem
has been reduced to the "absurd" and we risk medicalizing
normal human distress and viewing any expression of depression
as necessary of treatment.
Prof Parker, a psychiatrist based at Australia's
University of New South Wales, says it is "normal to be
depressed" and points to his own cohort study, which followed
242 teachers. After 15 years of research, 79 per cent of respondents
had already met the symptom and duration criteria for major,
minor or very mild "subsyndromal" depression.
Anti-depressants have a range of side-effects.
About 25 per cent of patients have problems when stopping them
and studies have found that they can cause a rise in suicidal
thoughts and actions. Patients also report a loss of libido.
Prof Parker blames the over-diagnosis of
clinical depression on a change in its categorization, in 1980,
which saw the condition split into "major" and "minor"
disorders. He says that the simplicity and gravitas of "major
depression" gave it credit with clinicians, while its descriptive
profile set a low threshold.
Criterion A required a person to be in
a "dysphoric mood" for two weeks, which included feeling
"down in the dumps". Criterion B involved appetite
change, sleep disturbance, drop in libido and fatigue.
This model was then extended to include
what Prof Parker describes as a seeming subliminal condition,
"subsyndromal depression".
Writing in the British Medical Journal,
Prof Parker said: "It is normal to feel depressed. A low
threshold for diagnosing clinical depression risks treating normal
emotional states as illness. . .
A recent study in the United States found
that as many as one-quarter of people currently labelled as depressed
were reacting normally to stressful events. It suggested that
even psychiatrists regularly miss the broad picture. Some experts
say that once patients tick enough boxes for symptoms, then they
get diagnosed as depressed even though they may just be sad.
http://news.scotsman.com/uk.cfm?id=1300982007
FIRST IN WAR, LAST IN PEACE AND 42ND
IN LIFE EXPECTANCY
AP - Americans are living longer than ever,
but not as long as people in 41 other countries. For decades,
the United States has been slipping in international rankings
of life expectancy, as other countries improve health care, nutrition
and lifestyles. Countries that surpass the U.S. include Japan
and most of Europe, as well as Jordan, Guam and the Cayman Islands.
. .
A baby born in the United States in 2004
will live an average of 77.9 years. That life expectancy ranks
42nd, down from 11th two decades earlier, according to international
numbers provided by the Census Bureau and domestic numbers from
the National Center for Health Statistics.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,,-6843591,00.html
WIDELY USED PLASTIC CHEMICAL MAY BE
CAUSING REPRODUCTIVE DISORDERS
MARLA CONE LOS ANGELES TIMES - In an unusual
effort targeting a single chemical, several dozen scientists
on Thursday issued a strongly worded statement warning that an
estrogen-like compound in plastic is likely to be causing an
array of serious reproductive disorders in people.
The compound, bisphenol A, is one of the
highest-volume chemicals in the world and has found its way into
the bodies of most human beings.
Used to make hard plastic, BPA can seep
from beverage containers and other materials. It is used in all
polycarbonate plastic baby bottles, as well as other rigid plastic
items, including large water- cooler containers, sports bottles
and microwave-oven dishes, along with canned-food liners and
some dental sealants for children.
The scientists, including four from federal
health agencies, reviewed about 700 studies before concluding
that people are exposed to levels of the chemical exceeding those
that harm lab animals. Infants and fetuses are most vulnerable,
they said. . . No studies so far have looked for effects in people.
http://tinyurl.com/2e4ygy
OVERWEIGHT CHILDREN STIGMATIZED BY PEERS,
TEACHERS, PARENTS
MSNBC - Overweight children are stigmatized
by their peers as early as age 3 and even face bias from their
parents and teachers, giving them a quality of life comparable
to people with cancer, a new analysis concludes.
Youngsters who report teasing, rejection,
bullying and other types of abuse because of their weight are
two to three times more likely to report suicidal thoughts as
well as to suffer from other health issues such as high blood
pressure and eating disorders, researchers said.
"The stigmatization directed at obese
children by their peers, parents, educators and others is pervasive
and often unrelenting," researchers with Yale University
and the University of Hawaii at Manatoa wrote in the July issue
of Psychological Bulletin. . . .
Children as young as 3 are more likely
to consider overweight peers to be mean, stupid, ugly and sloppy.
A growing body of research shows that parents
and educators are also biased against heavy children. In a 1999
study of 115 middle and high school teachers, 20 percent said
they believed obese people are untidy, less likely to succeed
and more emotional.
"Perhaps the most surprising source
of weight stigma toward youths is parents," the report says.
Even parents tease Several studies showed
that overweight girls got less college financial support from
their parents than average weight girls. Other studies showed
teasing by parents was common.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19725025/from/ET/
THE ECONOMICS OF GOOD HEALTH
BRYDIE RAGAN, YES! MAGAZINE - In 1967,
British epidemiologist Michael Marmot began to study the relationship
between poverty and health. He showed that each step up or down
the socio-economic ladder correlates with increasing or decreasing
health.
Over time, research linking health and
wealth became more nuanced. It turns out that "what matters
in determining mortality and health in a society is less the
overall wealth of that society and more how evenly wealth is
distributed. The more equally wealth is distributed, the better
the health of that society," according to the editors of
the April 20, 1996 issue of the British Medical Journal. In that
issue, American epidemiologist George Kaplan and his colleagues
showed that the disparity of income in each of the individual
U.S. states, rather than the average income per state, predicted
the death rate.
"The People's Epidemiologists,"
an article in the March/April 2006 issue of Harvard Magazine,
takes the analysis a step further. Fundamental social forces
such as "poverty, discrimination, stressful jobs, marketing-driven
global food companies, substandard housing, dangerous neighborhoods
and so on" actually cause individuals to become ill, according
to the studies cited in the article. Nancy Krieger, the epidemiologist
featured in the article, has shown that poverty and other social
determinants are as formidable as hostile microbes or personal
habits when it comes to making us sick. This may seem obvious,
but it is a revolutionary idea: the public generally believes
that poor lifestyle choices, faulty genes, infectious agents,
and poisons are the major factors that give rise to illness.
Krieger is one of many prominent researchers
making connections between health and inequality. Michael Marmot
recently explained in his book, The Status Syndrome, that the
experience of inequality impacts health, making the perception
of our place in the social hierarchy an important factor. According
to Harvard's Ichiro Kawachi, the distribution of wealth in the
United States has become an "important public health problem."
The claims of Kawachi and his colleagues move public health firmly
into the political arena, where some people don't think it belongs.
But the links between socio-economic status and health are so
compelling that public health researchers are beginning to suggest
economic and political remedies.
Richard Wilkinson, an epidemiologist at
the University of Nottingham, points out that we are not fated
to live in stressful dominance hierarchies that make us sick
-- we can choose to create more egalitarian societies. In his
book, The Impact of Inequality, Wilkinson suggests that employee
ownership may provide a path toward greater equality and consequently
better health.
http://www.alternet.org/healthwellness/57529/
AMERICAN SCIENCE IS IN TROUBLE
BENNETT GORDON, UTNE - Science in the United
States is in trouble. "The numbers indicate that the American
scientist population is not healthy," writes Marc Zimmer
for Inside Higher Ed, "especially not in comparison to scientists
in other countries." Only 13 percent of US graduate degrees
are in the sciences, as opposed to 40 percent of degrees in Japan,
South Korea, Sweden, and Switzerland. Numbers like these make
Zimmer wonder if the American scientist is quickly becoming "an
endangered species."
The blame for science's drop in popularity,
according to Zimmer, can be squarely placed on a culture that
does not respect the "authority and autonomy of science."
Creationism and other "pseudosciences" are undermining
the institution as a whole, and Americans just don't seem to
care. "There are no modern Einsteins," Zimmer points
out, "gracing the cover of Rolling Stone.". . .
http://www.utne.com/webwatch/2007_307/news/12653-1.html
JUNE 2007
GREAT MOMENTS IN SCIENCE
BODY
MASS OF PLAYBOY CENTERFOLDS
THROUGHOUT HISTORY
MAY 2007
MEDICAL EXPERIMENTS TO BE DONE WITHOUT
PATIENT'S CONSENT
ROB STEIN, WASHINGTON POST - The federal
government is undertaking the most ambitious set of studies ever
mounted under a controversial arrangement that allows researchers
to conduct some kinds of medical experiments without first getting
the patients' permission. The $50 million, five-year project,
which will involve more than 20,000 patients in 11 sites in the
United States and Canada, is designed to improve treatment after
car accidents, shootings, cardiac arrest and other emergencies.
The three studies, organizers say, offer
an unprecedented opportunity to find better ways to resuscitate
people whose hearts suddenly stop, to stabilize patients who
go into shock and to minimize damage from head injuries. Because
such patients are usually unconscious at a time when every minute
counts, it is often impossible to get consent from them or their
families, the organizers say. . .
Some bioethicists say the new research
is more ethical than some of the earlier studies in several ways,
including that patients are not being denied highly effective
therapies. Most patients who receive the current treatments do
not survive. . . But others say that the studies could be done
by finding patients or family members who are in a position to
provide consent, even though that might make such studies more
difficult.
"This just seems like lazy investigators
not wanting to try to get informed consent in situations where
it is difficult to get it, so they say it is impossible,"
said George Annas, a Boston University bioethicist. . .
Annas was particularly disturbed that children
as young as 15 might be included in the research. "Suppose
a 15-year-old child is in the back of a car that is in a terrible
accident," Annas said. "The EMTs arrive and say: 'We
are doing an experiment with two techniques. We think they are
about equal. Is it okay if we flip a coin to see how we treat
your son? Or would you rather we just give him the treatment
we think is best?' Unless you think all parents would have the
EMTs flip a coin, consent here is necessary."
Others are concerned patients may be getting
experimental therapies that could turn out to be inferior to
standard treatments.
http://chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headline/nation/4839234.html
ECHOES FROM THE PAST
GINA KOLATA, NY TIMES, 1996
- For the first time in a half century, new Federal regulations
allow investigators to enroll patients in some medical research
studies without their consent. The Food and Drug Administration
regulations, . . . apply only in carefully circumscribed situations.
The patients must have a life-threatening condition, like a severe
head injury, and must be unable to say whether they want to be
part of a study. They would be selected only if it was not feasible
to obtain consent from a relative. Furthermore, the community
in which the research is done must be notified about the study,
and the research design must have been reviewed and approved
by the Food and Drug Administration.
Even the most ardent supporters of the
new regulations say they understand the seriousness of what they
have done. They have repealed a principle that dates back to
the Nuremberg trials of Nazi doctors after World War II, when
American judges were agonizing over rules that might prevent
doctors from ever again using human subjects in horrendous experiments.
The judges wrote a code of ethics, the Nuremberg Code, whose
first principle was that no one should ever be forced to take
part in a medical experiment. "The voluntary consent of
the human subject is essential," they wrote. . .
"It's a fateful step," Jay Katz,
an ethicist and lawyer at Yale University, said in a telephone
interview from Germany, where he was at a conference marking
the 50th anniversary of the Nuremberg doctors' trials. "The
first sentence of the first principle of the Nuremberg Code,"
he said, stated that nothing should be done to human beings without
their consent. And now, he said, "here we are making exceptions."
US HOLOCAUST MUSEUM - During World War
II, a number of German physicians conducted painful and often
deadly experiments on thousands of concentration camp prisoners
without their consent. Unethical medical experimentation carried
out during the Third Reich may be divided into three categories.
The first category consists of experiments aimed at facilitating
the survival of Axis military personnel. In Dachau, physicians
from the German air force and from the German Experimental Institution
for Aviation conducted high-altitude experiments, using a low-pressure
chamber, to determine the maximum altitude from which crews of
damaged aircraft could parachute to safety. Scientists there
carried out so-called freezing experiments using prisoners to
find an effective treatment for hypothermia. They also used prisoners
to test various methods of making seawater potable.
The second category of experimentation
aimed at developing and testing pharmaceuticals and treatment
methods for injuries and illnesses which German military and
occupation personnel encountered in the field. . . The third
category of medical experimentation sought to advance the racial
and ideological tenets of the Nazi worldview. The most infamous
were the experiments of Josef Mengele at Auschwitz. Mengele conducted
medical experiments on twins. He also directed serological experiments
on Roma (Gypsies), as did Werner Fischer at Sachsenhausen, in
order to determine how different "races" withstood
various contagious diseases. The research of August Hirt at Strasbourg
University also intended to establish "Jewish racial inferiority."
http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/article.php?lang=en&ModuleId=10005168
LANCET, 2005 - Patients the world over
need adequate protection from overreaching physicians who use
patients to test experimental drugs and procedures without their
informed consent. Jacques Michel, a retired director of Hadassah
Hospital in Jerusalem who also heads the hospital ethics committee,
triggered an investigation of 39 hospitals by Israel's State
comptroller, the government watchdog.
The findings of non-consensual experiments
conducted primarily on children, the elderly and psychiatric
patients, shocked Israelis. . . The violations were found to
be worst in geriatric, rehabilitation, and psychiatric hospitals,
where some children had their eardrums deliberately pierced so
that a drug could be applied. In another painful procedure, a
needle was used to draw urine from the bladder for testing without
health ministry approval.". . . "Anyone who performs
a medical experiment on someone who doesn't or is unable to give
his informed consent should be tried for physical assault."
A striking difference between this and
similar research scandals at major US
http://www.ahrp.org/infomail/05/07/26.php
WIKIPEDIA - The Tuskegee Study of Untreated
Syphilis in the Negro Male. . . became notorious because it was
conducted without due care to its subjects, and led to major
changes in how patients are protected in clinical studies. Individuals
enrolled in the Tuskegee Syphilis Study did not give informed
consent and were not informed of their diagnosis; instead they
were told they had "bad blood" and could receive free
medical treatment, rides to the clinic, meals and burial insurance
in case of death in return for participating.
In 1932, when the study started, standard
treatments for syphilis were toxic, dangerous, and of questionable
effectiveness. Part of the original goal of the study was to
determine if patients were better off not being treated with
these toxic remedies.
By 1947, penicillin had become the standard
treatment for syphilis. Prior to this discovery, syphilis frequently
led to a chronic, painful and fatal multisystem disease. Rather
than treat all syphilitic subjects with penicillin and close
the study, or split off a control group for testing penicillin;
the Tuskegee scientists withheld penicillin and information about
penicillin, purely to continue to study how the disease spreads
and kills. Participants were also prevented from accessing syphilis
treatment programs that were available to other people in the
area. The study continued until 1972, when a leak to the press
resulted in its termination.
SCORES OF COMMON CHEMICALS CAUSE BREAST
CANCER IN ANIMALS
MARLA CONE, LA TIMES -
More than 200 chemicals - many found in urban air and everyday
consumer products - cause breast cancer in animal tests, according
to a compilation of scientific reports published today. Writing
in a publication of the American Cancer Society, researchers
concluded that reducing exposure to the compounds could prevent
many women from developing the disease. . . Experts say that
family history and genes are responsible for a small percentage
of breast cancer cases but that environmental or lifestyle factors
such as diet are probably involved in the vast majority.
"Overall, exposure to mammary gland
carcinogens is widespread," the researchers wrote in a special
supplement to the journal Cancer. "These compounds are widely
detected in human tissues and in environments, such as homes,
where women spend time.". . .
The researchers named 216 chemicals that
induce breast tumors in animals. Of those, people are highly
exposed to 97, including industrial solvents, pesticides, dyes,
gasoline and diesel exhaust compounds, cosmetics ingredients,
hormones, pharmaceuticals, radiation and a chemical in chlorinated
drinking water. . .Toxicologists say that other mammals, such
as rats and mice, often develop the same tumors as humans do,
and that animal tests are efficient means of testing the effects
of chemicals. Environmental regulators, however, often want conclusive
human data before taking action.. . .
Twenty-nine of the chemicals are produced
in volumes exceeding 1 million pounds annually in the United
States. Seventy-three are present in consumer products or are
food contaminants - 1,4-dioxane in shampoos, for example, or
acrylamide in French fries. Thirty-five are common air pollutants,
25 are in workplaces where at least 5,000 women are employed,
and 10 are food additives, according to the reports.
NEW DRUG BILL STRENGTHENS BIG PHARMA'S
CONTROL OVER FDA
JAMES RIDGEWAY, MOTHER JONES -
Last week was a good week for Big Pharma. Wednesday's passage
in the Senate, 93 votes to 1, of a bill sponsored by Ted Kennedy
has been heralded by some for strengthening the Food and Drug
Administration. In fact, it only serves to tighten the drug companies'
grip on the FDA by allowing the industry to pay for the testing
of its own products, setting up potentially huge conflicts of
interest. At the same time, the Senate helped tighten the drug
companies' grip on the market, blocking the importation of low-cost
drugs from Canada.
It is true that the legislation steps up
regulations on advertising and gives the FDA more authority to
scrutinize drug safety. It also sets up a surveillance scheme
to follow adverse effects of drugs; in theory, this might signal
some change in philosophy in the sense that the FDA will now
look at a drug over its lifetime, not just in the years before
it gets approval. But in practice, the FDA doesn't have the money
or the staff to be an effectively regulator. Instead of giving
the agency the money to do its job, Kennedy's legislation allows
companies to underwrite the paychecks of the regulators after
a drug goes to market - just as pharma "user fees"
now pay for much of the regulation that goes on before a new
drug is approved.
This legislation doesn't even begin to
get at what's really going on in the drug business, where the
big companies are well along with their program to turn doctors
into veritable drug salespeople through an elaborate system of
thinly disguised kickbacks. A brand new example comes courtesy
of the New York Times, which reports on psychiatrists who have
been prescribing an antipsychotic drug called Risperdal in teenagers
- including many who were not suffering from psychosis, but entirely
unrelated disorders such as eating disorders - while also receiving
payments from the drug's maker for speaking engagements.
WHY WE GET SO UPSET ABOUT 9/11 AND VIRGINIA
TECH
BRUCE SCHNEIER - The Virginia Tech massacre
is precisely the sort of event we humans tend to overreact to.
Our brains aren't very good at probability and risk analysis,
especially when it comes to rare occurrences. We tend to exaggerate
spectacular, strange and rare events, and downplay ordinary,
familiar and common ones. There's a lot of research in the psychological
community about how the brain responds to risk but the gist is
this: Our brains are much better at processing the simple risks
we've had to deal with throughout most of our species' existence,
and much poorer at evaluating the complex risks society forces
us face today.
We can see the effects of this all the
time. We fear being murdered, kidnapped, raped and assaulted
by strangers, when it's far more likely that the perpetrator
of such offenses is a relative or a friend. We worry about airplane
crashes and rampaging shooters instead of automobile crashes
and domestic violence - - both far more common.
In the United States, dogs, snakes, bees
and pigs each kill more people per year than sharks. In fact,
dogs kill more humans than any animal except for other humans.
Sharks are more dangerous than dogs, yes, but we're far more
likely to encounter dogs than sharks.
Our greatest recent overreaction to a rare
event was our response to the terrorist attacks of 9/11. I remember
then - Attorney General John Ashcroft giving a speech in Minnesota
in 2003, and claiming that the fact there were no new terrorist
attacks since 9/11 was proof that his policies were working.
I thought: "There were no terrorist attacks in the two years
preceding 9/11, and you didn't have any policies. What does that
prove?"
What it proves is that terrorist attacks
are very rare, and maybe our reaction wasn't worth the enormous
expense, loss of liberty, attacks on our Constitution and damage
to our credibility on the world stage. Still, overreacting was
the natural thing for us to do. . .
Consider the reaction to another event
from last month: professional baseball player Josh Hancock got
drunk and died in a car crash. As a result, several baseball
teams are banning alcohol in their clubhouses after games. Aside
from this being a ridiculous reaction to an incredibly rare event
(2,430 baseball games per season, 35 people per clubhouse, two
clubhouses per game. And how often has this happened?), it makes
no sense as a solution. Hancock didn't get drunk in the clubhouse;
he got drunk at a bar. But Major League Baseball needs to be
seen as doing something, even if that something doesn't make
sense - - even if that something actually increases risk by forcing
players to drink at bars instead of at the clubhouse, where there's
more control over the practice.
I tell people that if it's in the news,
don't worry about it. The very definition of "news"
is "something that hardly ever happens." It's when
something isn't in the news, when it's so common that it's no
longer news - - car crashes, domestic violence - - that you should
start worrying.
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/05/rare_risk_and_o.html
APRIL 2007
STUDY: BOOMERS SEEM LESS HEALTHY THAN
PRECEDING GENERATIONS
ROB STEIN, WASHINGTON POST -
As the first wave of baby boomers edges toward retirement, a
growing body of evidence suggests that they may be the first
generation to enter their golden years in worse health than their
parents. While not definitive, the data sketch a startlingly
different picture than the popular image of health-obsessed workout
fanatics who know their antioxidants from their trans fats and
look 10 years younger than their age.
Boomers are healthier in some important
ways -- they are much less likely to smoke, for example -- but
large surveys are consistently finding that they tend to describe
themselves as less hale and hearty than their forebears did at
the same age. They are more likely to report difficulty climbing
stairs, getting up from a chair and doing other routine activities,
as well as more chronic problems such as high cholesterol, blood
pressure and diabetes. . .
Boomers tend to report more stress than
earlier generations -- from their jobs, their commutes, taking
care of their parents and their kids -- all of which can take
a physical toll, which is compounded by having less support from
extended families and communities, experts say. "People
are working two jobs. They are not sleeping as much. They're
experiencing more job insecurity. They have less time to take
care of themselves. They are more socially isolated," said
Lisa Berkman of the Harvard School of Public Health. . .
When researchers examined the first wave
of baby boomers to enter the study -- 5,030 adults born between
1948 and 1953 -- they were shocked to discover that they appeared
to report poorer health than groups born between 1936 and 1941,
and between 1942 and 1947. . .
It is unclear whether boomers are really
sicker or are simply more health-conscious by dint of being better
educated and having better access to information. They may also
have higher expectations, making them more likely to notice and
complain about aches and pains that earlier generations would
have accepted as just part of getting older. "As they age,
they may be less tolerant of the changes they see -- minor pains,
less stamina, muscle loss and strength," Soldo said. "I
don't just think they are crybabies or whiners. I think there
is a changing definition of what good health means."
But self-reports of health tend to be powerful
predictors of risk of death at any given age, Soldo and others
say.
THOSE HELPING OTHERS HAPPIEST IN THEIR
JOBS
JEANNA BRYNER, LIVE SCIENCE
- Firefighters, the clergy and others with professional jobs
that involve helping or serving people are more satisfied with
their work and overall are happier than those in other professions,
according to results from a national survey.
"The most satisfying jobs are mostly
professions, especially those involving caring for, teaching
and protecting others and creative pursuits," said Tom Smith,
director of the General Social Survey at the National Opinion
Research Center at the University of Chicago.
Across all occupations, on average 47 percent
of those surveyed said they were satisfied with their jobs and
33 percent reported being very happy.
Here are the Top 10 most gratifying jobs
and the percentage of subjects who said they were very satisfied
with the job:
Clergy 87 percent
Firefighters 80 percent
Physical therapists 78 percent
Authors 74 percent
Special education teachers 70 percent
Teachers 69 percent
Education administrators 68 percent
Painters and sculptors 67 percent
Psychologists 67 percent
Security and financial services salespersons
65 percent
Operating engineers 64 percent
Office supervisors 61 percent
A few common jobs in which about 50 percent
of participants reported high satisfaction included: police and
detectives, registered nurses, accountants, and editors and reporters.
. .
"The least satisfying dozen jobs are
mostly low-skill, manual and service occupations, especially
involving customer service and food/beverage preparation and
serving," Smith said.
AUSTRALIAN STUDY FINDS LAWYERS MOST
DEPRESSED
NEWS, AUSTRALIA - Lawyers, insurance brokers
and accountants are among the most depressed workers in Australia,
according to a wide-ranging study. Nearly 16 per cent of lawyers
who responded to the survey displayed "moderate or severe
symptoms of depression" with nearly a third of those using
alcohol and drugs to deal with the problem.
Patent attorneys and insurance underwriters
were the next most likely to suffer from depression, with professional
workers overall having higher levels of symptoms than the general
population.
The survey also found age to be a factor
influencing depression. "The younger professionals have
higher rates of depressive symptoms than older professionals,"
the report by Beyond Blue and Beaton Consulting said.
Nearly 5 per cent of people working at
actuarial firms, which have the seventh highest proportion of
workers suffering from depression, also used drugs and alcohol
to try to combat symptoms.
And about 9 per cent of architects also
reported symptoms of depression.
President of the Law Society of NSW Geoff
Dunlevy said he wasn't surprised by the results of the study.
"For a long time, the Society has receieved anecdotal evidence
from solicitors regarding the prevalence of depression,"
Mr Dunlevy said. "Law, unfortunately, is a high-pressure
profession.". . .
More than 17,000 people responded to the
survey with more than 7500 of respondents working in the ten
professions identified as being worst for depression.
1. Law 2. Patent Attorney 3. Insurance
underwriting 4. Accounting 5. IT services 6. Architectural 7.
Actuarial Firm 8. Engineering 9. Consulting 10. Insuranc |