Think You're Stressed? Maybe You Should Have Your Heart Checked

Those who thought pressure was affecting their health twice as likely to suffer heart attack, study says

By Steven Reinberg

HealthDay Reporter

THURSDAY, June 27 (HealthDay News) -- People who think stress is affecting their health may be setting themselves up for a heart attack, a new study contends.

The researchers found that these people had double the risk of a heart attack compared with people who didn't think stress was harming their health.

"People's perceptions about the impact of stress on their health are likely to be correct," said study author Hermann Nabi, a senior research associate at the Centre for Research in Epidemiology and Population Health at INSERM in Villejuif, France.

"They may need to take actions when they feel that it is the case," he added.

These findings have both clinical and theoretical implications, Nabi said.

"From a clinical perspective, they suggest that complaints of adverse impact of stress on health should not be ignored in clinical settings as they may indicate increased risk of developing coronary heart disease," he said.

From a theoretical perspective, the findings imply that the perceived impact of stress on health is a valid concept that should be considered in future studies aimed at examining the association between stress and health outcomes, Nabi added.

The report was published June 27 in the online edition of the European Heart Journal.

Dr. Gregg Fonarow, a professor of cardiology at the University of California, Los Angeles, said that "stress and reactions to stressful situations have been associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease in many studies."

However, few studies have looked at whether an individual's perception of stress is associated with cardiovascular outcomes, he said.

And it's not clear if reducing stress would affect the risk for heart attack, Fonarow said.

"Further studies are needed to determine whether stress reduction or other risk reduction strategies can reduce cardiovascular events in men and women who perceive they are under stress that is adversely impacting their health," he said.

For the study, Nabi's team collected data on more than 7,000 men and women who took part in the Whitehall II study, which has followed London-based civil servants since 1985.

Participants were asked how much they felt that stress or pressure in their lives had affected their health. Based on their answers, they were placed into one of three groups: "not at all," "slightly or moderately," or "a lot or extremely."

Participants were also asked about their levels of stress and other lifestyle factors such as smoking, drinking, diet and physical activity.

The researchers also collected medical information, such as blood pressure, diabetes status and weight, and other data, including marital status, age, sex, ethnicity and socioeconomic status.

Over 18 years of follow-up, there were 352 heart attacks or deaths from heart attack.

After taking all of these factors into account, the investigators found those who said their health was a "lot or extremely" affected by stress had more than double the risk of a heart attack compared with those who said stress had no effect on their health.

View the original article here

What to Expect When You're Thinking About Adoption

"Adoption is created through loss," says Linda Hageman, executive director of adoption services at The Cradle, an Illinois adoption agency.

That's a statement you don't often see among the pretty pictures of giggling babies and happy families in adoption brochures. But it's true. The child loses his or her first parents. The birth parents face the loss of their child. And the adoptive parents often lose long-cherished dreams and expectations about having biological children.

Some parents consider adoption after they've already built a biological family, but many others come to adoption after struggling with infertility. As a prospective adoptive parent you may wonder: Am I going to love this child as much as I would have loved a biological child? Will I have the same parenting instincts? Will our household feel like a real family?

The answer to all of those questions is a heartfelt yes, says Hageman -- but it will take some work first.

Most important, talk about those losses rather than sweep them under the rug. "List all the losses you've gone through in getting to adoption and the feelings you have about them. Do you feel anger? Resentment? Guilt or shame?"

Next, connect with the experts who can give you a real picture of what adoption may be like for you: other adoptive families. "The time to join in the adoption community is before you adopt, not after," says Hageman.

Finally, come up with rituals and traditions that reinforce this child's place in your family. "It's all about establishing markers that help you envelop this child and make them a part of your whole family system."

Thinking about moving forward with your adoption plans?  Hageman and Adoptive Families magazine offer these tips.

Choose your path. Adoptive Families magazine's online "decision matrix" can help you pick which type of adoption may be right for you based on your age, finances, and the characteristics of the child you would like.

Learn more. Attend adoptive family meetings to find out more about the type of adoption you're interested in pursuing. Check local "parent papers" for listings, or call adoption or foster care agencies in your area.

Find a professional. Adoptive Families has a searchable list of agencies. Do very thorough research on any adoption professional you're thinking of working with. Calling the Better Business Bureau and state licensing agencies is just a start.

Take off the rose-colored glasses. Beware of promises to have a baby in your arms in X amount of time. It's hard to wait, but you're better off with an ethical agency that doesn't make too-good-to-be-true claims.

Take time for yourself. Focus on you and your partner. Embark on that last solo vacation. Read a book not about adoption. Before you know it, a little person will be taking up all that spare time.

"Always remember: Family is not necessarily who you were born with but who you choose." -- fiannakyn, WebMD community member

Find more articles, browse back issues, and read the current issue of "WebMD Magazine." 

View the original article here

Hate Other People's Cellphone Calls? You're Not Alone

Study found working people were more distracted by one-sided versus two-sided conversations

By Alan Mozes

HealthDay Reporter

WEDNESDAY, March 13 (HealthDay News) -- Adding to the list of "really annoying things," new research is pointing the finger at a technology that can turn public spaces into private misery for many: cellphones.

The study suggests that cellphone calls, and the half-conversations listeners are forced to overhear, are a much more distracting form of background noise than an in-person exchange between two people.

"I find cell phones annoying, frankly, and there's lots of research suggesting that many people agree -- so I wanted to study this," said study lead author Veronica Galvan, an assistant professor in the department of psychological sciences with the College of Arts and Sciences at the University of San Diego.

"What we found," Galvan said, "was that there does seem to be something unique about a one-sided cell conversation that makes it more distracting for people to overhear than a two-way conversation."

Galvan and her colleagues published their findings in the March 13 issue of the journal PLoS ONE.

According to the authors, in 2012 wireless device users worldwide devoted more than 2.3 trillion minutes to cellphone calls, texting, listening to music and Web surfing. Many of the calls are being placed in public spaces such as restaurants, elevators or on public transport.

Last year, a study conducted by researchers at Cornell University asked college students to try to ignore sound recordings while trying to complete a task. Their conclusion: Recordings of one-sided cell phone conversations were actually more distracting, irritating and taxing to the brain than two-sided in-person conversations.

The newer study builds on that work, using a real-world study design. This time, Galvan's team had nearly 150 undergraduate students complete a word-play reading exercise.

There was a hitch, though: Participants were exposed to one of two types of live conversations, either an in-person exchange between two people or a one-sided cellphone call.

In both cases, the exchange was scripted to focus on the same range of topics, including shopping for furniture, details concerning a birthday party for Dad, or meeting up with a date in a shopping mall.

Conversations were similar in length and were overheard by the participants just once, as they struggled to compete the word task. When the conversations ceased, the students were asked to complete memory recall tests, as well as distraction questionnaires.

While all the participants fared comparably well on the tasks, one-sided cellphone conversations were deemed to be "significantly" more distracting than two-sided conversations. Attention seemed to stray more to the one-sided calls, since people who had overheard a one-sided cellphone conversation were more able to recall what had been said versus those who had overheard a two-party exchange.

According to the researchers, people appear to be less able to tune out cellphone conversations compared to two-person exchanges. This supports notions that overheard cellphone jabber might negatively affect a person's ability to concentrate and focus, they said.

View the original article here