The proliferation of cell phones is leading to a new range of pain, according to Dr. Mark Sobor of ChicagoHealers.com .

All that texting is causing neck, shoulder, hand and arm pain, including the same kinds of repetitive motion injuries as those who type on computer keyboards a lot. Further, cell phones are really designed for all that writing. 

Dr. Sobor says people tend to hunch over, putting strain on their neck and upper backs. They tend to use only one thumb to type, focusing strain on one side. And repeated motions of some muscles deprives them of oxygen, causing them to spasm.

Here are his tips, in his words:

*Prepare for texting like for a physical workout. Warm up and stretch your muscles.

*Improve your posture. Don't hunch over while texting. Place your phone or PDA on a surface where you don't strain your neck and upper back bending over to see the screen.

*Take frequent breaks. Put the phone down between texts, get up and move around.  Regularly open and close your fingers and stretch them.

*Stretch your forearm muscles by extending your arm with palm facing up and using the other hand to pull your palm toward the floor.  Hold for 15 seconds, repeat 2 or 3 times for each arm.

*Use both thumbs to text and keep messages short.

So, someone want to give these tips a try and let us know how they work?

Baltimore Sun file photo/Amy Davis

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 12:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: Healthy Living
        

The Food and Drug Administration is warning the public of the hazards of drinking raw milk after at least 12 people in the Midwest have gotten sick from an outbreak of campylobacteriosis.

The infection, which can cause symptoms such as diarrhea, abdominal pain and fever, appears to be linked to raw milk from a dairy in Indiana, the FDA said in a statement.

Raw, or unpasteurized, milk carries risks of a wide variety of nasty bacteria, including E.coli, listeria and salmonella and about half of all states ban the sale of raw milk. (Maryland's among them. Although here, it's legal to drink it if you own the cow).

While most healthy people can recover quickly from the illnesses these bacteria can cause, pregnant women, the elderly, infants and people with weakened immune systems are at higher risk for complications, the FDA warns.

And yet, raw milk has faithful devotees.

Meredith Cohn wrote about the debate over raw milk in this story last year, which highlighted how those who prefer raw milk insist it's more nutritious and how a movement to make it more accessible triggered proposed legislation from Maryland lawmakers.

Elsewhere, others who object to statewide bans on raw milk sales insist that not only is it safe to drink, it might just have healing properties. Public health officials who maintain its unsafe continue to clash with advocates. The debate is heating up in statehouses and grocery stores alike. Whole Foods is pulling raw milk from its shelves in certain states, according to this WSJ piece.

Any raw milk drinkers here? Those on the other side? What do you think?

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (4)
Categories: Diet and exercise
        

If you live in Baltimore, you also happen to live with plenty of pests. I don't know many people who have managed to avoid a roach or mice infestation from time to time. And in getting rid of them, many rely on toxic pest control sprays.

The Baltimore City Health Department aims to offer residents some relief -- in a less hazardous way. The department received a $250,000 grant from the Environmental Protection Agency to fund less-toxic pest control strategies for city homes, schools and businesses.

Called the Safe Pest Management for Health Initiative, the program aims to reduce the use of toxic pesticides in favor of a concept called integrated pest management, which is less harmful and more environmentally sensitive, according to health officials.

The strategy relies on preventive measures first – such as sealing cracks and properly storing food – continuing with less hazardous pest control options, if needed. A pilot program started last year in a city public housing development decreased cockroach infestation by 97 percent, health department officials said.

About 5,450 residents and government workers will be trained in the program, which over the next two years, will be rolled out to 100,000 residents with a goal of decreasing toxic aerosol pesticides by 75 percent.

Edited to add: The sites targeted for the new pest control program have largely been chosen and include day care centers and schools that have specified a problem with pests in the past. But if you're interested in finding out more about the program, contact the health department: 410-396-3558

Baltimore Sun photo

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 4:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
Categories: General Health
        

A third of patients 65 and older endure long waits for kidney transplants because they are not being considered for riskier organs that could save their lives, new research from Johns Hopkins concludes. 

I wrote about the use of such kidneys, known as expanded criteria donors, or ECD, in a story in The Sun today.

ECD kidneys are typically from deceased older donors. They have riskier outcomes and last just half as long as younger kidneys. While such organs aren't suitable for younger patients, for older patients, for whom time is critical, they can be a good alternative, researchers say.

Patients waiting for kidneys often endure a punishing schedule of dialysis. The likelihood that people 65 and older will survive five years on the blood-filtering treatment is just 27 percent, said Dr. Dorry Segev, associate professor of surgery and epidemiology at the Hopkins School of Medicine and the lead author of the study.

But some transplant centers are skeptical of using such kidneys. Centers are rated by the federal government on their transplant outcomes. Using riskier kidneys can mean poor outcomes and poor ratings.

Still, with kidney transplant lists growing long and donor figures staying flat, using riskier kidneys can be a life saver, according to researchers. 

Baltimore Sun photo

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 12:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: General Health
        

TV medical shows are full of salacious story lines and over-the-top drama. So perhaps it's no surprise that a new study by Johns Hopkins researchers finds them full of bioethical breaches and questionable professional conduct.

Researchers admit that their findings shed light on the expected. But they also point out that some 80 percent of medical and nursing students watch TV medical dramas.

Sure, people watch these programs for entertainment, but researchers point out they may also be influenced by the unsavory on-screen depictions. Such programs, while clearly not educational in themselves, could be used to provide a starting point for discussion about thorny ethical topics, the researchers suggest.

The research, appearing in the April issue of the Journal of Medical Ethics, didn't intend to find out whether the portrayals were accurate or not. (Other folks have been quick to blast TV portrayals of medical professionals) Rather, the Hopkins researchers wanted to offer a thorough review to find out the nature and extent of the depictions.

In a study of full seasons of Grey's Anatomy and House, researchers found lack of informed consent as the most frequent bioethical issue. Researchers examined 49 incidents and found 47 percent of them to be "inadequate" conversations of consent with "hurried and one-sided discussions, refusal by physicians to answer questions and even an entire lack of informed consent for risky procedures," the authors write. 

Another big problem was physicians endangering patients unnecessarily, and in many cases not being penalized for it. And, not surprising, sexual misconduct was another big issue found in the review, researchers said.

I'm not a big TV person, so I've never seen either show. But fans, particularly if you're in the medical field, what do you make of the findings? 

AP photo of the drama unfolding on Grey's Anatomy

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
Categories: Medical studies
        

Spring may be in the air, but flu season is still with us and could stick around as late as May. With a recent flurry of H1N1 activity in the Southeast, public health officials are still urging people to get vaccinated against the H1N1 virus.

The virus is still circulating significantly in Georgia, where H1N1 hospitalizations have been higher in recent weeks than they were during last October, when infections were high nationwide, said Dr. Anne Schuchat, director of the CDC's National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, in a telephone briefing to reporters.

Georgia health officials asked a group of CDC infectious disease specialists to visit the state and investigate the new cases. For now, no one knows why Georgia is being hit harder than other states. But CDC officials continued their mantra that the vaccination is the best protection against getting sick. 

While infections are down overall compared to last fall's surge in H1N1, people are still vulnerable, particularly adults with chronic diseases, said Surgeon General Dr. Regina Benjamin. She cautioned that minorities are at even higher risk because they tend to have higher rates of chronic diseases.

The government has some 124 million doses of vaccine left on hand and wants to use them up. And to think just months ago, there was a mad scramble to get vaccine to enough people in advance of the winter flu season. 

So far, the virus has infected some 60 million people nationwide, responsible for 205,000 hospitalizations and some 12,000 deaths. 

About 36,000 people die nationwide during a typical flu season. While the new strain has killed fewer people, it has disproportionately struck the young and largely spared the elderly. 

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 4:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
Categories: Swine flu/H1N1
        

A new study in rats concludes what we've all suspected: binging on fatty foods can be addicting.

The study, appearing in the latest edition of the journal Nature Neuroscience, finds that overeating can trigger the same response in the brain that fuels drug addiction. Researchers from the National Institute on Drug Abuse discuss how obesity and drug addiction are linked to the same dysfunction in a reward system in the brain.

Eating too much or getting a fix can trigger an increase in this reward threshold, making you eat more or do more drugs to satisfy the craving. (Makes sense to anyone who has devoured an entire box of chocolates. Please tell me I'm not alone in this.)

Researchers studied rats for 40 days, giving three groups of them unlimited access to food. In addition, two groups had access to high-fat food for either an hour or 18-23 hours. After the 40 day period, the rats were cut off from their fatty food binge. Researchers found the brain receptors that play a role in addiction also played a role in the rats that became obese.

The authors think the study can help techniques to treat obesity, perhaps even using the same drugs used to treat addiction.

Baltimore Sun photo

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 12:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)
Categories: Diet and exercise
        

This from the B'More Green blog:

A coalition of 200 public health and environmental groups plan to rally outside of a conference of chemical execs Tuesday to draw attention to the issue of harmful chemicals in everyday products. 
 
The rally is slated for noon at the Pier Six Pavilion in the Inner Harbor, outside the hotel where the GlobalChem conference is happening.

The groups want the companies to adhere to some tougher rules and agree to more reporting about chemicals. Congress is about to consider  updating the Toxic Substances Control Act, which governs the chemicals and hasn't been updated since 1976.

The groups formed an organization called Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families to call for:

1) Safety information on all chemicals in use. The group says the chemical industry wants to prioritize just a few;

2) Reduction of the most dangerous chemicals now. The group says the industry wants more testing; and

3) Real-world analysis of chemical exposures to inform safety decisions. The group says now the law works as if people are exposed to one chemical and one source at a time.  
 
The group says the law now requires the Environmental Protection Agency to only test a few hundred of the 80,000 chemicals now in use. But they say health problems such as autism, cancer and reproductive disorders are linked to these chemicals and are on the rise.

Maryland PIRG, one of the lead organizations in the group, has been working to get harmful chemicals out of products, such as BPA in baby bottles and the flame retardant DecaBDE.  

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: General Health
        

Researchers at Johns Hopkins Children's Center have found that more kids are coming in with community-aquired MRSA, the super bug that is often resistent to antibiotics.

The kids aren't always sick from MRSA, but are carriers who pose a threat to other patients.

The researchers have found that screening all patients as they come into the ICU and then every week is helpful in controlling the spread.

The researchers said it was once very uncommon for kids to come in with community-acquired infections with the drug-resistent strains of the bacterium Staphylococcus aureaus. But the findings, to be published in the April edition of the journal Emerging Infectous Diseases, show that the Hopkins policy of screening everyone is beneficial.

This infection causes skin and soft-tissue infections, but in sick people or those with compromised immune systems, it can be deadly.

The Johns Hopkins Hospital began screening all patients in 2007 regardless of symptoms.

“MRSA has become so widespread in the community, that it’s become nearly impossible to predict which patients harbor MRSA on their body,” said lead investigator Dr. Aaron Milstone, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at Hopkins Children’s, in a statement.

“Point-of-admission screening in combination with other preventive steps, like isolating the patient and using contact precaution, can help curb the spread of dangerous bacterial infections to other vulnerable patients.”

The hopkins study found 6 percent of the 1,674 children admitted to the pediatric ICU at Hopkins Children’s between 2007 and 2008 carried MRSA but had no active infection. Of the 72 who tested positive, 60 percent had the community-acquired strain and 75 percent of the carriers had no history of MRSA. It was more common in kids 3 years old on average, and among African-American children, though researchers don't know why. Eight patients acquired MRSA while in the ICU, with 4 developing signs of infection.

The research was funded in part by the National Institutes of Health, the Thomas Wilson Sanitarium for Children in Baltimore and by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Other investigators in the study included Dr. Karen Carroll, Tracy Ross, Alexander Shangraw and Dr. Trish Perl, all of Hopkins.

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 1:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: News roundup
        

When it comes to being healthy in Baltimore, income and education can make all the difference, according to a new survey from the city health department.

The survey of 1,100 Baltimoreans shows stark differences by income and education in rates of chronic disease, health insurance and mental health problems.

Among the key findings:

• 34 percent of respondents said they were obese, 14 percent had diabetes  and 36 percent had high blood pressure. Those in the lowest income group were 2.4 times more likely to be obese than those in the highest income group, 3.7 times more likely to have diabetes and twice as likely to have hypertension.
  

• Mental health issues showed a wide racial disparity. Black respondents were 4 times more likely than whites to say they had an unmet mental health need in the last year. 
  

• People in the lowest income group were 12 times more likely to say they had trouble affording to eat healthily. The lowest income group was also 6 times more likely to report concerns about having enough food.

Health officials said they have known for years that such socioeconomic dynamics are important determinants of people's health. They hope the data helps them create programs to combat the disparities.

The survey, a first to combine questions about eating habits, the impact of violence on health and mental health problems, builds on previous studies about the city's huge health disparities. In 2008, a city report found a two-decade difference in life expectancy between residents of Hollins Market and the city's Roland Park neighborhood.

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 12:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: General Health
        

Let's take a time out and talk about some of the numbers in the health care bill, mainly how many people will be covered and how many won't be. While the effort to overhaul the nation's health care system was pitched as a movement to cover the uninsured, millions of them will remain without coverage after the plan is enacted.

Well how many will remain uninsured and who are they, you ask? This piece from Kaiser Health News explains.

The bill covers 32 million people. That leaves some 23 million uninsured, the story explains. Some -- about 7 million are illegal immigrants.

The other 16 million are a mix of people. Some will be exempt from the mandate because they can't afford to buy their own insurance. (People are exempt if the most affordable plan is more than 8 percent of their income) Others would opt out for religious objection. And still others would prefer to pay a penalty than get insurance coverage.

Congress recognized months ago that any bill likely to pass would leave out some people from being covered.

For more details on who the uninsured are, check out this interactive map from NPR from last fall that gives a breakdown by geographic region.

Still confused about when the key elements of reform kick in? Here's a cool chart with timetables from the Kaiser Family Foundation. 

And if you have more questions about how reform will affect you, take a look at our Q&A from earlier this week with Bradley Herring, an assistant professor in health policy and management at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: Health care reform
        

There's no doubt high-fructose corn syrup is everywhere -- added to processed foods, sodas and fruity drinks. It's even an ingredient in foods you wouldn't expect like a loaf of bread.

The cheap sweetener has gotten a lot of blame of late for the nation's obesity epidemic. But does it really make us fat? Is it worse than sugar?

A new study from Princeton researchers suggests yes on both accounts. The paper in the latest issue of the journal Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior found that male rats who consumed high fructose corn syrup were more likely to gain weight than those who ate sugar -- even when the calories were the same.

The study explains while the compounds of HFCS and sugar are similar, they are not the same and the body metabolizes them differently. It's a subject of intense debate.

A 2004 study in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition speculated that HFCS is worse than sugar, but even the researchers behind it now say the sweetener and sugar are equally bad, according to this piece by The Sun's Laura Vozzella.

The new research has received some praise, but plenty of criticism from skeptics, who say the study demonizes the corn-based sweetener and the study is flawed. For instance, the study compares its findings to previous research in female rats that showed no increased weight gain when they were given the sweetener vs. sugar.

It's a debate likely to rage on. Again, check out Vozzella's story on the issue, in which HFCS haters called the substance "the devil" and defenders insist the sweetener is just like sugar. It's a great piece that lays out the history of how the corn-based sweetener got big with corn subsidies and how the backlash against it has evolved.

Baltimore Sun graphic

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 12:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (7)
Categories: Diet and exercise
        

Along with individual mandates and health insurance exchanges, health reform includes a provision to get chain restaurants to list their calorie counts by next year.

Tucked within the sweeping legislation to overhaul the nation's health care system, labeling calorie information will become a requirement of chain restaurants and vending machines with more than 20 locations.

New York City already has such a provision and states such as California and Oregon have measures set to take effect next year. Some studies show labeling leads to people to pick healthier options, while others have found that alone, they do little to curb people's eating habits, the WSJ reports.

Folks at Yale's Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity called the provision "an historic development" according to the NY Times, noting that too often people chow down on fast food without realizing how unhealthy it is for them.

Other supporters say such information can be empowering and help all of us make better eating choices. I'll be honest: it's not that I don't realize that Big Macs contain mega calories. It's just, well, perhaps I don't want to know exactly how much. 

How about you?

AP photo

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)
Categories: Diet and exercise, Health care reform
        

Children with sickle cell disease are more likely to have hearing problems, intellectual disabilities and migraines, according to a new study from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The disease, in which red blood cells take on a crescent or sickle shape, blocking blood flow, is one of the most common genetic disorders and is more likely to affect people of African or Middle Eastern descent.

The study found that black children with sickle cell disease are four times more likely to have poor health and twice as likely to have recently visited a mental health professional and received special education services than black children without the illness. 

Not only are they more likely to visit doctors' offices and emergency rooms, children with the disease are more likely to have problems accessing health care, according to the study, which analyzed data from a 1997-2005 National Health Interview Survey that examined the health of black children with the disease.

Sickle cell doesn't only affect children; it can be a debilitating disease for adults. A study in the New England Journal of Medicine last year found that bone marrow treatments often used to treat children can be effective for adults too.

For more resources on the disease and how to cope with its complications, check out these sites: Sickle Cell Disease Association of America and Sickle Cell Kids, which offers cute interactive educational tools for parents and children.

AP photo

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 12:04 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
Categories: Pediatrics
        

Oh, the pollen, the grass, the trees! 

A new poll from Consumer Reports say that 60 percent of allergy sufferers have not been able to stop seasonal misery. A fifth say they missed work because of allergies.

The primary season starts in March and gets really bad in April and May, according to the survey.

Survey respondents said the main strategies were not helping enough. Almost 60 percent had to see a doctor for relief.

If you'd like to see the full survey or get advice on coping, go to www.ConsumerReportsHealth.org.    
 
“Seasonal allergies affect all parts of the upper respiratory system plus the eyes,” said Dr. Marvin Lipman, chief medical adviser for Consumer Reports, in a statement.  “There’s usually no single magic bullet.” 

In search of relief, consumers spent some $325 million last year on prescription allergy drugs. The poll found the average sufferer took three kinds of medications; 26 percent took five or more. Some were switching around to find more effective ones or avoid side effects. The most common side effects were drowsiness and dry mouth. 

The three main strategies for dealing with allergies were avoidance, over-the-counter drugs and prescriptions. Most successful was avoidance. 
                         
Of the drugs, Consumer Reports Health gives steroidal nasal sprays the high marks for treating spring allergies. Very likely to work, the group says, also are OTC antihistamines such as Benadryl, Claritin, Zyrtec and their generic versions. But they often make people sleepy or cause other problems.

Are you suffering? What do you do to cope?

Istock photo

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
Categories: Allergies
        

See the widget below for our chat with Bradley Herring of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

Posted by Carla Correa at 1:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)
        

We're less than two hours away from our live chat to answer all your burning health care reform questions. Wondering what the individual mandate means? Do you get to keep your insurance? When do the key provisions of the bill kick in?

Join us at noon to get answers from Bradley Herring, an assistant professor in health policy and management at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. 

And feel free to start submitting your questions now in the comments space below. See you then!

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 10:04 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: Health care reform
        

"What does the health care bill mean to me," you ask? Well, here on the blog tomorrow at noon, we'll have a live chat where you can ask an expert who's been studying this historic legislation.

Bradley Herring, an assistant professor in health policy and management at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, will be here to answer questions about how health care reform might affect you. You can submit questions beforehand in the comments below.

Posted by Kate Shatzkin at 1:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (25)
Categories: Health care reform
        

Congress took the historic step to pass a sweeping overhaul of the nation's health care system. Now what does that mean for you, particularly if you're uninsured?

The legislation will extend insurance coverage to 600,000 more Marylanders -- some 63,000 in Baltimore alone, according to an analysis by Baltimore HealthCare Access, a quasi-public agency that helps link low-income people with Medicaid.

Breaking that down further, according to the group's analysis:

--About 309,000 non-elderly low-income people will be eligible for coverage through an expansion of Medicaid--about 32,000 of them in Baltimore.

--The health care plan comes with an individual mandate that requires nearly everyone have coverage, or face a tax penalty. Low and moderate income people can get help through government subsidies to purchase insurance through new health insurance exchanges. In Maryland some 315,000 will be eligible for subsidies, which kick in for people earning up to 400 percent of the federal poverty level. In Baltimore, about 32,000 people would be eligible for such help. For example: a family of three making $54,930 (which is 300 percent of poverty) would qualify for a subsidy to buy a health plan in a new health exchange. The premium to cover that family wouldn't exceed $5,218 or 9.5 percent of their income.

Important note: the expansion of Medicaid, the creation of the health insurance exchanges and the tax penalty don't kick in until 2014.

We'll bring you more analysis on what the bill means for other groups... For now, here's a good Q&A consumer guide from the folks at Kaiser Health News.  

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (7)
Categories: Health care reform
        

The FDA announced yesterday it would crack down on the sale and marketing of tobacco products to children.

While such bans already exist in most states, enforcement varies. Every day, some 4,000 children try a cigarette for the first time, and about 1,000 of them become daily smokers, according to the Food and Drug Administration. 

But we've known this for years. In fact, the federal rule, which goes into effect June 22, was initially proposed some 15 years ago, this NY Times article explains. 

Still, the rule is a significant step toward regulating the ingredients in tobacco and restricting the way it is sold. It's part of new broad powers Congress gave the FDA last year, when it passed legislation to regulate the $89 billion industry, this Washington Post story explains.

The new rule:

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 11:52 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Pediatrics
        

The Consumer Product Safety Commission recently issued a warning about infant slings, saying they can be treacherous for babies under 4 months old. The agency is investigating the deaths of 14 babies connected to the trendy sling-style carriers -- three from last year alone.

The soft slings pose a suffocation risk to small babies who can't control their neck muscles and whose mouth and nose can wind up too close to the fabric, the agency warns.

The warning has generated all sorts of chatter on parenting blogs and chatrooms, where some mothers swear by the slings saying when used properly they are convenient and comfortable for both mom and baby. Attachment parenting advocates, who recommend "baby wearing" as a parent-baby bonding tool, insist the slings are safe, saying they've been used for centuries with few injuries.

Others say that the sling warnings give them much pause and that many parents don't use them the right way.

And yet, the slings seem to be as popular as ever with celebs sporting their newborns in them all the time. 

The CPSC offers a few visuals on the safe way to wear slings as well as video. 

Do you wear your baby in a sling? Has the warning changed your mind about it?

AP photo

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (9)
Categories: Pediatrics
        

In a little over an hour, medical students at med schools nationwide will find out where they'll begin their careers as doctors.

Here in Baltimore, we'll bring you the suspense, drama and intrigue from Johns Hopkins and the University of Maryland School of Medicine as students tear open envelopes precisely at noon. It'll be like March Madness, only of the medical variety.

Are you a med student learning your fate today? We want to hear about you on Twitter. If so, please use the hashtag #mdmatchday. Good Luck!

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 10:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Health care professionals
        

The recession coupled with rising health care costs has taken a stiff financial toll on most Americans -- but no one more than the middle class, according to a new report from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

The number of middle-income Americans who get health insurance from their employers fell by 3 million people from 2000 to 2008, according to the report called Barely Hanging On: Middle-Class and Uninsured, which offers state data on the issue. Today about 66 percent of people who earn between $45,000 and $85,000 get insurance through their jobs.

In Maryland: 

• The number of middle-income people who were uninsured increased from 160,000 in 2000 to 240,000 in 2008.
  
• About 12 percent of private-sector employees worked for companies that didn't offer health insurance.
  
• Even for those with insurance through their employer, costs are rising. A family insurance policy increased 46 percent from 2000 to $12,651 in 2008.
  

While lower income earners can qualify for Medicaid and people with higher incomes can afford to purchase coverage on their own, those in the middle are getting squeezed, the report explains. If you're middle class you typically don't qualify for government insurance programs, so getting coverage through your employer is often the only feasible option.

The report is part of the organization's effort urging for coverage of the uninsured. It so happens to correspond with this week's big showdown in the House on the health care bill.

Does your employer still offer coverage? How much has your plan increased in recent years? How are you holding up?

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: Health care reform
        

Skin cancer diagnoses are on the rise and the disease affects more people than all other cancers combined, according to two new studies that aim to sound the alarm on what experts are calling an epidemic.

Researchers estimate that in 2006 there were more than 3.5 million non-melanoma skin cancers in the U.S., with about 2.1 million patients treated for the disease, according to the articles, appearing in the latest Archives of Dermatology.

Most skin cancers are of the non-melanoma variety, meaning they start in the basal or squamous cells on the outer layer of the skin. The culprit: too much sun. (Here are some skin cancer basics from the American Cancer Society)

This form of cancer is far less deadly than the melanoma variety, not to mention other cancers. But the disease is serious and treating it comes at a high cost. In 2004, nearly $1.5 billion was spent on treating non-melanoma skin cancer.

Researchers said that many non-melanomas aren't reported to cancer registries, so they came up with their own estimates which they say are more accurate. In one article, Dr. Robert S. Stern, of Harvard Medical School developed a mathematical model to estimate the prevalence of non-melanoma skin cancer in 2007. Another researcher, Dr. Howard W. Rogers, of Advanced Dermatology, Norwich, Conn. reviewed Medicare databases and national surveys.

Tanning beds could have something to do with the rise, say advocates. Howard County, Maryland, has already outlawed tanning beds for people under 18 and similar actions have been considered in states nationwide. 

Do you tan? Be honest, now... 

Baltimore Sun photo

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 12:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: Cancer
        

Those grocery store cards and key chain hangers that save you money might be the next big tool in helping keep customers informed of food safety risks.

As reported in The Sun on Sunday by our colleague Liz Kay, food safety advocates say those customer loyalty cards are the best way to notify customers of recalled products and prevent illness.

In fact, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention used the cards to track down the latest salmonella outbreak that sickened 245 people in 44 states.

Of course, not everyone's on board with the idea. Some opponents say privacy is a real concern. After all, barcodes on the back of those cards are linked to a mountain of personal data about shoppers.

With the recent recall of hydrolyzed vegetable protein possibly contaminated with a strain of salmonella, the debate over the best way to keep consumers informed of recalls rages on. 

For now, the story offers some tips consumers can use to take matters into their own hands:

•Recalled products should be discarded or returned to retailers for refunds.

•All food should be cooked according to the package instructions, including directions to let food stand after heating in the microwave.

•Conscientious eaters with computer access also could sign up for e-mail alerts about recalls at foodsafety.gov, but prepare to be inundated with messages.

AP photo

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: General Health
        

A new national health initiative aims to keep expectant moms on track for a healthy pregnancy through nuggets of advice via text message.

As Meredith Cohn reported in The Sun yesterday, text4baby aims to cut down on the high number of premature births both across the country and in Maryland, with free messages about all things pregnancy, from tips on good nutrition to how to find a health care provider. The program, sponsored by the National Healthy Mothers, Healthy Babies Coalition, has already rolled out in Maryland with more than 18,000 women signed up so far.

Lack of prenatal care is one of the leading causes for bad birth outcomes. Both Baltimore and Maryland have rates of premature births above the national average. Much of this can be prevented, advocates say, by better informing moms-to-be.

Texting is getting huge in medical circles, with doctors offices using messages as reminders for appointments and taking medication. Not adhering to medical advice is one of the biggest causes of poor outcomes in many chronic health problems, this NY Times article explains.

Up until recently, I thought texting was just for "the kids" -- teenagers with lightening-fast thumb reflexes who seem far better at electronic multitasking than I. But these days, my coordination is improving and I text a lot more than I used to. With some 90 percent of people in the U.S. with cell phones, sending 1.5 trillion texts a year, it makes sense that the medical community would tap into this quick, easy tool to keep patients informed.

Does your doctor text? Would you use text messaging for health purposes?

Baltimore Sun photo

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Women's health
        

The Baltimore health department is sponsoring free vision screenings tomorrow in honor of World Glaucoma Day.

You can get your screening from 9 a.m to noon at Good Samaritan Hospital's main lobby at 5601 Loch Raven Blvd, Baltimore. You don't need an appointment. If you're uninsured and the vision test discovers a problem, the health department will help you find resources to pay for treatment.

Glaucoma is serious -- about 3 million people nationwide are affected, and typically the disease has few warning signs. The condition leads to damage of the optic nerve and is the second most common cause of blindness in the United States. There's no cure, but if detected early, treatment can be effective.

For more information, check out the health department website at: www.baltimorehealth.org. 

Baltimore Sun photo

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 11:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: General Health
        

The folks at the Truth About Nursing, a Baltimore-based group concerned about demeaning portrayals of nurses have a new target: Mariah Carey.

Yep, you heard that right. The pop star's video for her song "Up Out My Face" takes the naughty nurse stereotype to a new level of low, according to Sandy Summers, the group's director. Complete with a booty-grazing nurse outfit, white cap and stockings, Mariah's version of naughty nurse has real nurses in an uproar, apparently.

They dissect the video and the lyrics here. The group has even launched a letter writing campaign urging Ms. Carey herself to "make amends by withdrawing the video from all distribution, avoiding the stereotype in the future and publicly apologizing to the nursing profession (in a music video perhaps!)."

Hmmmm, OK. I wonder, have any other Mariah Carey videos resulted in any formal apologies?

Take a look and let us know what you think.

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (10)
Categories: Health care professionals
        

It's just about allergy season and guest blogger Jill Rosen shares with us her take on the neti pot. Oprah loves them, some studies say they work, and there are even You Tube videos on how to use em, parodies included.

Here's Jill's take: 

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 1:23 PM | Permalink | Comments (15)
Categories: Allergies
        

Once a C-section, always a C-section. That was the standard medical routine for years. But vaginal birth after Cesarean is not only safe, it should be encouraged for more women, an NIH-convened panel of experts said yesterday.

We reported on the issue today in The Sun, including the voice of a Towson mother who just gave birth to her eight child, the seventh vaginal birth after a C-section with her firstborn 13 years ago.

The decision to try a vaginal birth after Cesarean, or VBAC, is individual and should be made only after discussion between doctor and patient, the panel said. Among the most dangerous risk is uterine rupture, which can be deadly.

That risk, however, is small -- less than 1 percent -- and 74 percent of VBACs are successful, according to the panel's report, the culmination of a three-day conference on the contentious issue. 

Nevertheless, VBAC has dwindled in recent years, the C-section rate has surged to an all-time high, and an emotional, medical and legal debate over VBAC has raged on.

About one in three babies in the U.S. are born by C-section while VBACs dropped from a high of 28 percent in 1996 to just 10 percent today. 

The panel expressed concern about women being denied an opportunity at a vaginal birth because doctors won't allow it and hospitals outright ban the practice. 

I caught up with Barbara Stratton, head of the Baltimore chapter of International Cesarean Awareness Network, and chairwoman of the group's nationwide effort to reverse hospital bans. She also attended the NIH conference. In Maryland, most hospitals allow VBAC. But women on the Eastern Shore and western part of the state encounter a handful of hospital bans and providers who will not allow the practice, she said. The group worked to reverse a ban in Frederick a few years ago, Stratton said.

While Stratton was encouraged at the panel's recommendations, she was concerned that it didn't go far enough in "respecting a patient's right for informed consent or refusal."

"They talked a lot about this shared decision making process. But on the ground level those conversations are not happening," she said. "The ultimate decision lies with the patient."

What do you think?

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 11:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Women's health
        

Three quarters of the 128 companies get a failing grade for their policies on marketing food to kids, according to a new report card from the Center for Science in the Public Interest.

Those companies had weak policies or no policies, the nonprofit group said.

The highest grade -- a B+ -- went to Mars Inc., but the group was sure the highlight that it was not for the food the company sells, such as candy. It was because the company policy says there is no marketing to kids under 12. 

Procter & Gamble, maker of Pringles, got a B. Six others got a B-, 17 got a C, 7 a D.  Ninety-five companies got an F.

“Despite the industry’s self-regulatory system, the vast majority of food and entertainment companies have no protections in place for children,” said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan, in a statement.  “If companies were marketing bananas and broccoli, we wouldn’t be concerned.  But instead, most of the marketing is for sugary cereals, fast food, snack foods, and candy.  And this junk food marketing is a major contributor to childhood obesity.”

Companies spend about $2 billion a year marketing to kids. And the group points to an Institute of Medicine study that showed TV commercials affect children’s food choices, food purchase requests, diets and health. 

Some of the worst in the CSPI study were Denny’s; Lucasfilms, which partners with McDonald's;  Topps, which markets a miniature candy baby bottle, eaten by dipping a candy nipple in a sugary powder and licking it off.

A self-regulatory program by the Council of Better Business Bureaus, called the Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative, was introduced in 2006. It got 16 food and restaurant companies that represent about 80 percent of television food advertising expenditures to commit to no marketing to children under 12 if the companies' individual nutritional standards weren't met, but the standards are carefully tailored, the group said, and allow junk-food advertising to kdis.

The group found 80 percent of food ads on the kids channel Nickelodeon were for junk food.

The Federal Trade Commission plans in the next few weeks to propose nutrition criteria and other standards for foods aimed at kids. They would be voluntary.

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: Diet and exercise, News roundup
        

With cities such as New York and Philadelphia considering taxing sugary sodas to fill budget gaps, new research makes the case that the idea could actually improve health.

As the cost of soda and pizza increases, adults eat less of the bad stuff, bringing down their weight, according to the study appearing in the latest Archives of Internal Medicine. 

It's not the first medical study to conclude a soda tax could cut obesity. This one studied the eating habits of some 5,115 adults over more than 20 years to find out the impact of increasing prices of junk food on their health.

The conclusions: an 18 percent tax on pizza and soda could result in a decrease of nearly 56 calories per person per day. That could mean the loss of 5 lbs per person per year and a reduction of obesity-related diseases, the authors write. 

It's a persuasive argument, especially considering that the price of soda has decreased over two decades while the price of milk has increased, the authors note. Meanwhile, the obesity epidemic has soared.

An accompanying editorial draws parallels with the tobacco industry, suggesting that the money gained from taxing soda and junk food could help fund healthy eating campaigns and even promote the benefits of regular ol (not to mention, free) tap water.

Still, the study has some limitations and there are many foes of taxing sodas and junk food. 

The authors suggest the study would be stronger if it focused on more kinds of food. And of course, there could be other reasons for the modest lost in weight, notably the people chosen to participate in the study could be more motivated than the rest of us grease-and-sugar-loving Americans. 

That said, the editorial by Dr. Mitchell H. Katz and Dr. Rajiv Bahatia of the San Francisco Department of Public Health makes the case that a sin tax on bad food isn't out of the realm of possibility in a country that offers food subsidies for things like corn. 

Besides adding surcharges to unhealthful foods, we should also consider the more positive side of the coin, food subsidies. Sadly, we are currently subsidizing the wrong things including the production of corn, which makes the corn syrup in sweetened beverages so inexpensive.  Evidence suggests that lowering the price of fruits and vegetables would increase their consumption among youth. Therefore, our agricultural subsidies should be used to make healthful foods such as locally grown vegetables, fruits, and whole grains less expensive.

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 12:26 PM | Permalink | Comments (7)
Categories: Diet and exercise
        

This morning, 300 Baltimore residents will head to Washington to join other health care reform supporters in a protest against insurance companies.

The group, supported by the public employee and health care worker union AFSCME and the pro-health reform group Health Care for America Now, says they will make a "mass citizens' arrest of the health insurance executives who are denying care, hiking up premiums and contributing to the deaths of 45,000 people each year." 

The group aims to get Congress' attention during the same time  America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), the health insurance lobbying group, is meeting in DC.  That group, for the record, also says it supports health care reform.

According to a press release on the protest, Baltimore residents Dorothy Bryant and others will head to the hotel where the AHIP meeting is planned with arrest warrants, badges, crime tape and “wanted” posters.

“It’s time to put the enemies on notice. We will not allow the big corporations and their lobbyists to bully Congress to a standstill. This means confronting the health insurance industry that has secretly spent tens of millions to protect its profits by trying to kill reform,” said Dorothy Bryant, a member of AFSCME Council 67, in a statement. “I’ve decided that if Congress can’t hear me from Baltimore, then I’m going to DC and making my voice heard.”
 
So, are you getting on the bus? What do you think of this action? Would you go to Washington to support or oppose health care reform?

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (9)
Categories: Health care reform
        

The H1N1 flu pandemic that swept through the region and the nation and made millions of people sick, appears to have abated before the end of the traditional flu season, according experts I talked to for my story on the flu in yesterday's Sun.

There also appears to be little traditional flu going around.

And while, public health officials aren't ready to declare the flu totally gone -- a DC-area man died in late February -- they are saying that they don't see a big new wave, at least in areas that were hard hit already.

So many people have had the flu or gotten the vaccine that we may have something of a herd immunity going. About a third of people normally get the flu vaccine and more than that are estimated to have gotten the traditional flu shots this year. A little less than a third have gotten the H1N1 vaccine, but it's still be handed out.

Officials still suggest getting immunized. It's free at all the local health departments. All the vaccine you get in your life adds up, and this new and unique virus could still return.

As for deaths, this season appears to have been less deadly overall that past years, though the finally tally isn't in and may never be known. Many people are never tested and their cause of death is often listed as a complication or underlying health condition. So far, the state has counted 44 deaths from lab-confirmed H1N1 influenza, a disproportionate number of which were kids. 

Seasonal flu and complications including pneumonia typically kills 1,000. They are usually elderly people with underlying health conditions, which is why the number is so high.

Baltimore Sun photo of H1N1 vaccine at the Howard County health department/Lloyd Fox

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 11:09 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)
Categories: News roundup, Swine flu/H1N1
        

Since HBO's "The Wire" went off the air more than two years ago, it's been a favorite topic of academia, spurring college courses on urban poverty, lectures on substance abuse and the like.

The latest takes place in The Wire's home here in Bmore. Wednesday, the folks at Johns Hopkins School of Public Health will kick off a lecture series that uses the gritty series to explore real public health challenges in the city in which it is based. 

Wednesday's talk will feature Sonja Sohn, who played Detective Kima Greggs on the drama. She'll discuss her program ReWired for Change, which uses the show's vivid portrayals of drugs, crime and poverty to help young people confront those very real challenges in their communities.

Over the course of the series, public health professors will examine the struggles of urban women and families as portrayed in the series, the problem of injection drug use and even thornier topics, including one session in April provocatively titled: "Is there a choice? Violence and Guns on The Street of Baltimore."

Susan Sherman, an epidemiologist with the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, and self-professed "huge fan of the show" said the seminar is something she and professors David Holtgrave and Danielle German have wanted to do for years.

Wednesday's seminar will take place from 12:15 p.m to  1:15 pm in the Hampton House Auditorium at the school of public health in Baltimore. Click here for more info and details on the rest of the series.

Baltimore Sun photo of Sohn speaking to youth in the ReWired for Change program

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: General Health
        

Doctors should educate their patients better about the risks and benefits of prostate cancer screening, according to new guidelines from the American Cancer Society.

Physicians should discuss the downsides to the blood test, known as prostate-specific antigen screening, or PSA, including potential diagnosis of cancers that may never harm them or kill them and along the way, exposing them to unnecessary treatment, the recommendations say.

The guidelines also question the use of digital rectal exams saying they should be considered optional, not a standard part of screening.

The guidelines come on the heels of several studies that raise doubts about PSA testing. The recommendations reference early findings of two long-range studies underway about screening.

In one, researchers randomly assigned 76,600 men to two groups. One received annual PSA tests for 6 years and digital rectal examinations every year for 4 years and the other was the control. Researchers found little difference in prostate cancer death rates between the two groups after 7 years and again after a decade.

We reported here about a study last year raising concerns that men are being overtreated for the disease and as a result, subjected to unnecessary biopsies and treatment. And another study published last year in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that men are not getting adequate counseling from their doctors on the risks of screening. 

Of course, not everyone is on board with this reasoning. The American Urological Association agrees with better education but stands by its recommendations that men start PSA testing at age 40.

Meanwhile, the American Cancer Society says at 50, men should simply begin weighing the options of this test. (With the exceptions of people at higher risk: African Americans or someone with a relative with prostate cancer before age 65. They should start evaluating the test at age 45, ACS says)

Confused yet?

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 1:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)
Categories: Cancer, Men's health
        

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is jumping on the social media bandwagon and enlisting some help from celebrities Jamie Foxx and Ludacris to promote an HIV/AIDS awareness campaign targeting African Americans.

Called, "i know," the campaign uses a website, Twitter, Facebook, texting and a PSA from celebs (check out Jamie Foxx below) in an effort to increase dialogue and reduce the stigma of the disease among young African Americans -- a very vulnerable population. While blacks make up 14 percent of the population of 13- to 29-year-olds, they account for half of all new HIV infections of this group, according to the CDC. 

But concern about the epidemic appears to be fading. A Kaiser Family Foundation asked black 18- to 29-year-olds to rate their concern about HIV. In 1997, 54 percent said they were "very concerned." That figure sank to 40 percent last year.

The effort is part of the CDC's five-year $45 million Act Against AIDS campaign, to raise awareness, battle indifference about the disease and reach those most at risk.

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: HIV/AIDS
        

Dreyers Grand Ice Cream Inc., Gorton's Inc., POM Wonderful and Beechnut were some of the companies that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration says use misleading labels.

The government's main food cop has sent letters to 17 companies telling them to correct the label violations on 22 products.

The companies have run afoul of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act with claims like the products prevent disease or are healthy when they don't meet the official definition or contain no trans fats when they are high in saturated fats.

In October 2009 the FDA encouraged the companies to review their labels to make sure they were truthful and not misleading. A letter that went to the companies yesterday basically said the FDA means it this time.

"Today, ready access to reliable information about the calorie and nutrient content of food is even more important, given the prevalence of obesity and diet-related diseases in the United States,"  Commissioner of Food and Drugs Margaret Hamburg said in the letter.

The companies have 15 business days to tell the FDA how they will correct their labels.

The FDA also plans to propose new rules about calorie and nutrient labeling on the front of food packages to make it easier for consumer to know which items are healthy. 

On the deceptive labels, the Center for Science in the Public Interest called the FDA's move the "largest crackdown on deceptive labeling in over a decade." But the group called for binding regulation for all companies. It released a report recently that found other misleading labels that so far have not been addressed.

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (4)
Categories: Diet and exercise, News roundup
        

Foodborne illness in the United States is a costly matter, in terms of health, money for treatment and quality of life losses.

Official government estimates of costs range from $6,9 billion to $35 billion, but a new report says those estimates don't take all costs into account and puts the tab much higher.

The report is authored by a former U.S. Food and Drug Administration economist and is being released by the Produce Safety Project, which is supported by The Pew Charitable Trusts and Georgetown University. The new report says costs are more like $152 billion.

Many illnesses' causes are unknown, but there are some usual and coslty suspects: Campylobacter-related costs are more than $18.8 billion, Salmonella's costs approach $14.6 billion and Listeria-associated costs were an estimated at $8.8 billion. 

States with the highest foodborne illness costs are California with $18.6 billion, Texas with $11.3 billion and New York with $10.4 billion. Maryland ranked 20, with costs at $2.9 billion.

Per case foodborne illness, the costliest states are Hawaii at $2,008, Florida at $1,984 and Connecticut at $1,949. Maryland ranked 17th at $1,871.

Here is an interactive map of state findings. 

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 12:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
Categories: Medical studies
        

Today's kids are a generation of snackers. Munching on junk food accounts for more than 27 percent of the daily calories children take in -- an increase of 168 calories per day between 1977 and 2006, according to a new study appearing in the journal Health Affairs.

Snacking is just the latest example of the problem. In a review of food surveys of 31,000 children, researchers at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill found that in 1977 to 1978, 74 percent of children ages 2 to 18 snacked outside of regular meals. In 2003 to 2006, that number surged to 98 percent. It shakes out to about three snacks per day, which the authors warn, is way too much.

“Kids still eat three meals a day, but they’re also loading up on high-calorie junk food that contains little or no nutritional value during these snacks,” said lead author Barry M. Popkin in a statement.

This journal's entire March issue is devoted to childhood obesity, a problem everyone from school districts to First Lady Michelle Obama is trying to tackle.

There's a wealth of information in the journal, including a paper on what the state of Delaware has done to combat childhood obesity, another that tackles the thorny question of personal responsibility in controlling the nation's obesity epidemic and another about a local Baltimore weight loss program that we wrote about recently in The Sun.

Baltimore Sun photo

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: Pediatrics
        

Join us today for a chat with Dr. Jean Warner, director of the Tyanna O'Brien Center for Women's Imaging at Mercy Medical Center, about mammograms. You can submit your questions now using the widget below; Dr. Warner will start answering questions live at noon.

Please note when posting your questions that our guest expert's responses represent general information ONLY and do NOT represent a diagnosis; those seeking personal/individual medical advice are recommended to consult with their physician or medical specialist.

Posted by Carla Correa at 9:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
Categories: Women's health
        

Some parents swear by them, but the latest data on educational DVDs for toddlers show they do little to help babies learn.

A study of 96 1 to 2 years old found no evidence after six weeks that the children had learned the words highlighted in Baby Einstein videos, according to a new study appearing in the Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine.

Researchers at the University of California, Riverside studied vocabulary and general development of the children while their parents answered questions about their development and exposure to videos. 

Such videos have long been controversial. Baby Einstein has come under fire and Disney, who makes it, even started offering refunds of the videos in an acknowledgment that they didn't fulfill their claims. 

In general, TV for tots has long been the subject of debate. A study in the journal Pediatrics found last year that time in front of the TV doesn't help babies learn, but it probably isn't harmful.

Meanwhile, other studies have found that that early tube time is associated with lower language ability, language delays, and kids who watched Baby Einstein videos actually learned fewer words than toddlers who didn't. 

In general, medical experts have warned against TV time for toddlers. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends against screen time for babies before they turn 2 years old. And yet, the average age kids start watching is 5 months, according to the study. And children 2 and younger spend an estimated two hours a day in front of the TV.

The study questions if children are even capable at this age to learn from videos. Is it wise to expect children so young to learn from the TV when they're still developing understanding of symbols and how to process sensory information? Nope, say the authors:

Given that children younger than 2 years are developing all of these capabilities, we may not expect them to learn some kinds of content from a television screen.

photo: stock.xchng

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)
Categories: Pediatrics
        

We're less than 24 hours away from our live chat on everything you wanted to know about mammograms. 

Confused about controversial new government recommendations concerning who should get the breast x-rays? Have a question about how mammograms are done? Confused about the newest mammogram technology?

Dr. Jean Warner, director of the Tyanna O'Brien Center for Women's Imaging at Mercy Medical Center, will be here at noon Tuesday to answer your questions. Feel free to start asking in advance, either here in the comments section or by sending me an email: kelly.brewington@baltsun.com

See you then.

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 1:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Cancer
        

It's been so snowy in the past few weeks that many people probably decided to give up on their diet and exercise plans in favor of sitting in front of the fire and snacking. 

Shoveling probably provided a little bit of heart-pounding movement, and maybe walking to work did too? But did anyone get to the gym? Did anyone get in extra running or yoga or aerobics?

If you want to talk about your extra efforts or your lack of all motivation, we're working on a story so please contact us. Email Jill Rosen at jill.rosen@baltsun.com.

Baltimore Sun file photo of the Baltimore marathon

Posted by Meredith Cohn at 11:46 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
Categories: Diet and exercise
        

While the vast majority of parents believe vaccines protect their children from life-threatening illnesses, many continue to have concerns about the safety of childhood vaccines, according to a new national survey.

More than half -- 54 percent -- of the 1,552 parents surveyed said they have serious worries about adverse affects and overall vaccine safety, according to the findings, appearing today in the journal Pediatrics. And nearly 1 in 8 parents said they refused to have their child vaccinated against at least one recommended vaccine.

News of the 2009 survey comes just a month after the Lancet retracted a controversial article from a dozen years ago that first linked the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine to autism, sparking a global panic over the safety of routine childhood inoculations.  

Nevertheless, more than 1 in 5 parents believe that some vaccines cause autism, the survey found. The study calls that figure "disturbingly high."

Well before the Lancet retraction, the evidence had been stacking up for years: study after study showed child vaccines are safe and effective ways at preventing a host of horrible diseases. So why so much fear among parents?

Many simply aren't getting the correct information, the paper states. Public health education campaigns are clearly falling short and more aggressive outreach is needed, said the study's authors, a team of University of Michigan researchers.

Of course, the survey is limited by it's small sample size. Still, it drives home a fascinating debate.

In addition, it had a few interesting demographic tidbits: Latino parents were more likely than whites or blacks to believe that vaccines cause autism. And black parents were more likely than whites or Latinos to have refused a pediatrician-recommended vaccine. Overall, women were more likely to have concerns about childhood vaccines than men.

Those findings should be taken into account when building effective public education programs, the author said.

Baltimore Sun photo

Posted by Kelly Brewington at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (4)
Categories: Pediatrics