iPads Could Affect Implanted Heart Devices, Early Study Finds

Young researcher suggests that users avoid placing tablets too close to the chest

By Barbara Bronson Gray

HealthDay Reporter

THURSDAY, May 9 (HealthDay News) -- Sprawled out on the couch, reading the news on your iPad, you'd never think you could be putting yourself at risk. But you might be, if you happen to have an implanted heart device.

Magnetic interference could alter the settings and even deactivate the technology of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs), according to a small new study -- conducted by a 14-year-old investigator and her colleagues.

The researchers found that magnets imbedded in the iPad 2 and its Smart Cover may cause electromagnetic interference that can disrupt a cardiac rhythm device.

Specialized magnets are imbedded in the heart devices to allow physicians to routinely adjust their settings. The magnets can suspend the ability of the devices to prevent sudden rapid heart rates, such as tachycardia and fibrillation.

That risk occurs when a person falls asleep with the tablet on the chest. Thirty percent of study participants had interference with their devices when the iPad 2 was placed there, the researchers found. Yet electromagnetic interference was not found when the iPad was at a normal reading distance from the chest.

The magnetic field drops off quickly with distance, explained Gianna Chien, the lead study author. And heavier people who happen to have more fat on their chest -- not just in their abdomen -- also seem to be less sensitive to the interference, she added.

The research is scheduled to be presented Thursday at the Heart Rhythm Society's annual meeting in Denver. Chien, a high school freshman, worked with her father, Dr. Walter Chien, a cardiologist with Central Valley Arrhythmia in Stockton, Calif., to coordinate patient testing.

Other devices with imbedded magnets -- such as cellphones and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) machines -- may also affect cardiac rhythm devices, but were not tested in this study.

Last year, research published in the Journal of Neurosurgery: Pediatrics suggested that the iPad 2 can interfere with the settings of magnetically programmable shunt devices in the brain when held within two inches of the technology.

That study reported on a 4-month-old girl with hydrocephalus -- abnormal accumulation of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in the brain -- who developed a shunt malfunction. This was due to a changed setting of the magnetically programmable valve that regulates the flow of CSF out of the brain cavity, or ventricle. The mother had been using an iPad 2 while holding the infant.

An expert noted how difficult it could be to detect such a malfunction.

"The real problem is that you don't even know; there is no trigger, no light goes off [to alert you]," said Dr. Salvatore Insinga, a neurosurgeon at the Cushing Neuroscience Institute at North Shore-LIJ Health System, in New York. "With all the tech devices people are using now and all the implanted things in patients, this is more of an issue now." Insinga was not associated with either study.

View the original article here

Flame-Retardant Chemicals Could Be Toxic to Kids

Study tied exposure in womb to hyperactivity, lower IQ

By Robert Preidt

HealthDay Reporter

MONDAY, May 6 (HealthDay News) -- Exposure to flame-retardant chemicals in the womb is associated with hyperactivity and lower intelligence in children, a new study indicates.

Researchers examined the effects of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), which were used for decades as fire retardants in common products such as carpeting, baby strollers and electronics.

"In animal studies, PBDEs can disrupt thyroid hormone and cause hyperactivity and learning problems. Our study adds to several other human studies to highlight the need to reduce exposure to PBDEs in pregnant women," study author Dr. Aimin Chen, an assistant professor in the department of environmental health at the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, said in an American Academy of Pediatrics news release.

The researchers looked at PBDE levels in blood samples from 309 pregnant women and then performed intelligence and behavior tests on the women's children each year until they were 5.

They found that PBDE exposure in the womb was associated with hyperactivity at ages 2 to 5, and with lower intelligence at age 5. A tenfold increase in PBDE exposure during pregnancy was related to about a four-point IQ deficit in 5-year-old children.

While the study tied PBDE exposure during pregnancy to later hyperactivity and lower intelligence, it did not prove a cause-and-effect relationship.

The study was to be presented Monday at the Pediatric Academic Societies annual meeting in Washington, D.C.

PBDEs were mostly withdrawn from the U.S. market in 2004, but they are present in many consumer products bought several years ago and still widely used by Americans, according to the news release. In addition, PBDEs remain in human tissue for a long time and a pregnant woman can transfer them to her fetus.

"Because PBDEs exist in the home and office environment as they are contained in old furniture, carpet pads, foams and electronics, the study raises further concern about their toxicity in developing children," Chen concluded.

Research presented at medical meetings should be viewed as preliminary until published in a peer-reviewed journal.

View the original article here

Better use of medicines could save billions

Posted June 21, 2013, 3:59 pm

Wiser use of prescription medications by everyone—doctors and their patients—could save the U.S. health care system more than $200 billion a year. That’s the conclusion of a new report, Avoidable Costs in U.S. Healthcare, from the IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics.

Inefficient or ineffective use of medications lead to six million hospitalizations, four million trips to the emergency room and 78 million visits to doctors and other care providers each year, according to the report. Those are huge numbers.

Although $213 billion represents less than 8% of what Americans spend on health care each year, it’s still a staggering sum. It also exacts human costs that aren’t reflected in the estimates.

The report identifies 6 things that can be improved to address the problem:

Not taking medications as directed. Most drugs are prescribed for a good reason. Take antihypertensive medications. They are used to lower blood pressure. Not taking the drug allows blood pressure to remain high, which can lead to a very expensive stroke. There are several reasons why people don’t take medications as prescribed. They include fear of drug side effects, not understanding complications that can occur without treatment, and not being able to afford their medicines. The report estimated that taking medications as directed accounted for almost half of the $213 billion in savings.

Taking too many medications. This has become a huge problem, especially in older people with multiple medical issues. Doctors often add medications based on new symptoms, but seldom tell their patients to stop taking drugs prescribed earlier or lower doses. The more medications a person takes, the greater the chances he or she will experience a harmful interaction between medications.

Delayed treatment. Doctors can’t prescribe potentially health-saving medications if they don’t know that patients need it. Better screening for a hidden condition like hepatitis C, for example, could identify those with it, and get them started on medication that could prevent costly cirrhosis of the liver, liver cancer, or the need for a liver transplant.

Overuse of antibiotics. Far too many doctors still prescribe antibiotics for upper respiratory infections, simple bronchitis, and ear infections, even though many of these are caused by viruses (which aren’t affected by antibiotics) and many get better just as fast without an antibiotic. This adds unnecessary costs for the unneeded antibiotics. Use of antibiotics can cause side effects such as severe allergic reactions and diarrhea, which can lead to hospitalization. It can also help create bacteria that are resistant to antibiotics, a growing problem in the United States.

Medication errors. Errors occur in different stages of medication use. Doctors sometimes prescribe the wrong drug or dosage. Pharmacists sometimes prepare or dispense the wrong drug or dosage. And sometimes patient take, or are given, the wrong drug or dosage. These all add up to unnecessary side effects that can harm health or cause death.

Underuse of generic medications. Many people are reluctant to take generic medications instead of their brand-name versions, even though generics contain and deliver the same active ingredients as brand names. And many doctors don’t tell their patients about generic alternatives unless the patient asks.

The United States spends more money on health care per person than any other country in the world (17.6% of our gross domestic product versus 11.6% in France and Germany). But we are far from number one in quality of health care. In fact, among 17 of the leading industrialized nations, the United States ranked dead last in life expectancy.

Better use of medications won’t solve our health-care spending crisis, but it can help. What would really save us money, and improve our health, is preventing disease with a healthy lifestyle. The biggest bang would come from beginning that in childhood and maintaining it throughout life, but starting at any time will help.

View the original article here

Gene Studies Could Point to New Alzheimer's Treatments

THURSDAY, April 25 (HealthDay News) -- Insight into genes that play a key role in disrupting immune system pathways in the brains of people with Alzheimer's disease could offer a potential target for new drugs against the disease, two new studies show.

"Defining the precise steps of the inflammatory response crucial to causing Alzheimer's disease has been elusive. We are pleased to discover these novel insights into that process," Bin Zhang, lead author of one of the studies and an associate professor of genetics and genomic sciences at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City, said in a school news release.

In the study, Zhang's team analyzed brain tissue samples from deceased Alzheimer's patients, as well as healthy people who had died. By measuring the activity level of thousands of genes in these tissue samples, the team identified which gene networks are disrupted in diseased brains.

Specifically, their analysis pinpointed the important role of a gene expressed in immune cells called microglia, which clean up debris and destroy pathogens in the brain.

This gene, called TYROBP, is overactive in the brains of Alzheimer's patients and plays a major role in disrupting the activity of many other genes that control microglia activation, according to the study, which was published April 25 in the journal Cell.

"As a next step, we will evaluate drugs that impact [this] pathway as potential therapies for the disease," Zhang said. "This discovery enables us to design more specific compounds that target these key steps precisely, in contrast to existing anti-inflammatory drugs that may be less ideal for hitting this target."

Another study, published online April 25 in the journal Neuron, may have uncovered another genetic clue to Alzheimer's disease.

Researchers looked at brain samples from deceased Alzheimer's patients and found that higher activity of a gene called CD33 in microglia was linked to higher levels of the beta-amyloid protein plaques that have long been associated with Alzheimer's disease.

In their experiments with mice, switching off CD33 activity seemed to help microglia sweep away the plaques.

"Our findings suggest that pharmaceutical inactivation of CD33 represents a potentially powerful new therapy for the treatment and prevention of Alzheimer's disease, and perhaps other neurodegenerative disorders," senior study author Rudolph Tanzi, of Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston, said in a journal news release.

Another expert said the findings from both studies may help advance research.

"We have known for a long time that Alzheimer's disease is characterized by the presence of excessive inflammation in the brain," said Philippe Marambaud, an investigator at the Litwin-Zucker Research Center for the Study of Alzheimer's Disease at the Feinstein Institute for Medical Research in Manhasset, N.Y.

"The role of this inflammatory response in the pathogenic mechanisms of the disease, however, remains unclear," he said. "These two studies ... provide concordant evidence that the immune cells microglia actively participate in this disease process."

-- Robert Preidt
Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCES: Philippe Marambaud, Ph.D., investigator, Litwin-Zucker Research Center for the Study of Alzheimer's Disease, Feinstein Institute for Medical Research, Manhasset, N.Y.; Cell, news release, April 25, 2013; Neuron,news release, April 25, 2013; Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York City, news release, April 25, 2013

View the original article here

Could 'Moderate' Drinking Be Safe During Pregnancy?

British study finds no problems with balance in kids, but some experts have concerns about the findings

By Alan Mozes

HealthDay Reporter

TUESDAY, June 18 (HealthDay News) -- Children of women who drink moderate amounts of alcohol while pregnant don't appear to have any neurodevelopmental problems when it comes to balance, a new British study suggests.

Researchers assessed the long-term health impact of drinking while pregnant by testing roughly 7,000 10-year-olds on their balancing abilities, a method that offers a reliable reflection of fetal neurodevelopment. For the study, "moderate" alcohol consumption was defined as between three to seven glasses of alcohol a week.

The research team cautioned, however, that other variables, such as maternal wealth and education, might have influenced the findings.

The bottom line, according to study co-author John Mcleod, is that "[there's] certainly no evidence that moderate alcohol use by pregnant mums is good for their kids, and [there are] reasons to be cautious about other messages around 'benefits' of moderate alcohol use by pregnant mums. But equally, [there's] no strong evidence for important harmful effects."

Macleod, chair of clinical epidemiology and primary care with the School of Social and Community Medicine at the University of Bristol, and his colleagues discuss their findings in the June 17 online edition of BMJ Open.

The research comes on the heels of another British study, released in April, which reported no connection between "light" drinking (one to two drinks per week) during pregnancy and increased risk for mental defects among children at the age of 7.

For the new study, the researchers focused on 6,915 children from southwest England who had participated in the larger Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children.

The team first analyzed maternal drinking habits self-reported at both the 18-week mark of pregnancy and then again when the children were 4 years old.

The vast majority of mothers -- 70 percent -- said they drank no alcohol during pregnancy, while 25 percent said they had consumed drinks in the range of "low" (one to two per week) to "moderate" amounts on a weekly basis. Among such drinkers, one in seven had actually engaged in "binge drinking," meaning at least four glasses of alcohol at a sitting.

By the time their children were 4 years of age, 50 percent of the mothers said they consumed three to seven glasses of alcohol weekly. The research team noted that those who drank moderately were older, more affluent and better educated.

At the age of 10, the children underwent two balance tests, which included walking across a balance beam (to assess so-called "dynamic balance"); standing heel-to-toe on a beam with eyes open and closed (to assess "static balance"); and standing on just one leg, eyes open and closed.

The result: moderate maternal (and paternal) drinking while pregnant, and maternal drinking after delivery appeared to be associated with better overall balance, particularly in terms of static balance.

View the original article here

Study: THIS Common Pre-Marathon Habit Could Cause Serious Side Effects

It's been a scary week for marathon runners; it feels weird to write anything marathon-related right now without addressing that first. But once we take a step back, we know that, ultimately, running is still good for us -- more likely to do our bodies good than to do them harm. Now, however, a new study shows a potential danger that many marathoners face every time they toe the line. And it's due to a common pre-race ritual -- one that I've definitely done, and you probably have, too!

So what should we NOT be doing before a race? Popping painkillers. Everyday OTCs like aspirin, ibuprofen and acetaminophen can cause serious side effects when paired with endurance sports, says the study, published today in the online journal BMJ Open -- serious enough to affect your performance, or even land you in the hospital.

When German researchers surveyed nearly 4,000 runners after a local marathon and half marathon, 49 percent of respondents said they'd popped pain meds beforehand in hopes of a pain-free race. But overall, the medicated runners were five times more likely to suffer complications during or after the event, including stomach cramps, cardiovascular problems, gastrointestinal bleeds, blood in their urine, and joint and muscle pain.

Those who took medication were slightly less likely to drop out of the race due to muscle cramps -- but more likely to drop out because of GI distress (which, if you ask me, is worse than a little knee pain). Nine of them also ended up in the hospital for kidney failure, bleeding ulcers, or heart attacks, compared to none of the non-medicated runners. Taking more than the recommended dosage -- as 43 percent of ibuprofen users in the study did -- raised the risk of side effects significantly.

Painkillers prevent the formation of prostaglandins, hormone-like substances involved in the body's inflammatory process. But, the authors say, prostaglandins also protect the body under extreme stress (e.g. marathon running), and without them, we're at risk for more serious injury.

Bottom line? Use pain meds sparingly, and only when you really need them. And if you're relying on them to get through your workouts, talk to your doctor about a safer, longer-term solution. Stay safe out there, runners!

Do you ever pop pain meds before a run? Will this change your mind about it? Tweet us at @amandaemac and @SELFmagazine.

RELATED LINKS:

Image Credit: Arthur Belebeau

View the original article here

Could Turtle Gene Findings Aid Human Health?

WEDNESDAY, April 17 (HealthDay News) -- Researchers have decoded the DNA of the western painted turtle in the hopes that a greater understanding of these reptiles could one day improve treatment for people who suffer a heart attack or stroke.

The researchers identified 19 genes in the turtles' brain and 23 in the heart that are activated in situations with low oxygen. These genes also occur in humans. The study authors said their findings might lead to treatments to repair tissue damage due to oxygen deprivation associated with cardiovascular emergencies.

"Turtles are nothing short of an enigma," senior study author Richard Wilson, director of Washington University's Genome Institute, said in a university news release. "They may be slowly evolving, but turtles have developed an array of enviable features. They resist growing old, can reproduce even at advanced ages and their bodies can freeze solid, thaw and survive without damaging delicate organs and tissues. We could learn a lot from them."

Turtles evolve very slowly -- at about one-third of the rate of human evolution -- found the team of researchers from several institutions, including Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis University and the University of California, Los Angeles. The body design of turtles has not changed much in 210 million years.

By examining the turtle's DNA, the researchers found that turtles are more closely related to birds than other reptiles, such as lizards and snakes. They are also able to withstand oxygen deprivation not by relying on new genes, but by activating gene networks found in humans and most other vertebrates and using those genes in new ways.

"This is a backdoor route for turtles to evolve," study co-author Patrick Minx, of the Genome Institute, said in the news release. "Rather than evolve new genes, they adapted existing genes for new uses."

Up to 50 percent of the 330 turtle species worldwide are considered threatened, however, primarily due to human consumption, the researchers said. Although claims have been made that eating turtles can help people live longer or cure cancer, these are unsubstantiated, the researchers added.

Changes in turtles' habitats have also played a role in their global decline.

"The challenge is to preserve the rich diversity of turtles that still exist on Earth as we continue to unravel their secrets for success," study first author H. Bradley Shaffer, of UCLA, said in the news release. "Turtles have a tremendous amount to tell us about evolution and human health, but time is running out."

The study was published online recently in the journal Genome Biology.

-- Mary Elizabeth Dallas
Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCE: Washington University in St. Louis, news release, April 3, 2013

View the original article here

Social Toll of Hearing Loss Could Be Cause for Alarm

Higher rates of hospitalization, illness and depression for seniors reported in study

By Robert Preidt

HealthDay Reporter

TUESDAY, June 11 (HealthDay News) -- Straining to catch the gist of conversations is frustrating enough, but a new study shows that seniors with hearing loss are also at increased risk for hospitalization, illness, injury and depression.

Researchers analyzed data from more than 1,100 American men and women aged 70 and older with hearing loss, and found that over a four-year period they were 32 percent more likely to have been admitted to the hospital than more than 500 adults with normal hearing.

Hearing-impaired seniors were also 36 percent more likely to have prolonged stretches (more than 10 days) of illness or injury and 57 percent more likely to have extended episodes (more than 10 days) of stress, depression or bad mood, according to the study, published online June 11 in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

"Hearing loss may have a profoundly detrimental effect on older people's physical and mental well-being, and even health care resources," said study senior investigator Dr. Frank Lin, an otologist and assistant professor at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and Hopkins' Bloomberg School of Public Health.

"Our results underscore why hearing loss should not be considered an inconsequential part of aging, but an important issue for public health," Lin said in a Hopkins news release.

Hearing deficits can lead to social isolation, which in turn contribute to physical and mental declines, Lin said.

Hearing loss affects as many as 27 million Americans over age 50, including two-thirds of men and women aged 70 years and older, according to Lin.

The study doesn't prove that being hard of hearing directly leads to other health problems, but it does show an association between the two. And health policymakers need to consider the broader health impact of hearing loss when making decisions for older people, study lead investigator Dr. Dane Genther, a resident in otolaryngology/head and neck surgery, said in the news release.

Genther's recommendations: expanded Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement for hearing-related health care services, wider installation of hearing loops in various facilities, and more accessible and affordable approaches for treating hearing loss.

View the original article here

What is “mindful eating” and could it help me lose weight?

Posted June 11, 2013, 2:00 am

I recently heard someone discuss “mindful eating” as a weight-loss strategy. Could that help me lose weight?

Does this sound familiar? You’re at your computer, facing a wall of emails. After composing a reply, you hit “send” and reach for the bulging turkey wrap on your desk, and then the bag of chips, washed down by a soda (sugar-free, or not). You continue to eat, chewing while glancing at the screen. Before you know it, you’ve finished lunch without even noticing it. That’s not mindful eating.

Mindful eating is a slower, more thoughtful way of eating. It’s based on the Buddhist concept of mindfulness, which involves being fully aware of what is happening within and around you at the moment. A small yet growing body of research suggests that mindful eating could help with weight problems and aid people in making more healthful food choices.

Applied to eating, mindfulness includes noticing the colors, smells, flavors and textures of food. It involves chewing slowly and getting rid of distractions such as TV or reading — or email.

Mindfulness helps you recognize the difference between eating because you’re hungry and eating because you’re sad or bored. It introduces a “moment of choice” between the urge to eat and actually eating. It gives you the chance to ask yourself, “Am I really hungry?” and to make the decision to do something else, like reading or taking a walk, if you’re not. By slowing down your meals, mindful eating also gives you the opportunity to recognize that you’re full before you’ve overeaten.

That’s particularly important. About 15 to 20 minutes after you start to eat, your body starts to send signals to your brain that you’re full — but only after 15 to 20 minutes, no matter how large the meal. And a person can easily eat a 3,000-calorie meal in 15 to 20 minutes. So deliberately making a meal go slowly, and being willing to quit when you feel full and save the leftovers, is a potent aid to weight loss.

If you want to give mindful eating a try, start gradually. Eat one meal a day or week in a slower, more attentive manner. Here are some tips that may help you get started:

Set your kitchen timer for 20 minutes. Take that time to eat a normal-sized meal.Try eating with your non-dominant hand. If you’re a righty, hold your fork in your left hand.Use chopsticks if you don’t normally use them.Eat silently for five minutes. Think about what it took to produce that meal, from the sun’s rays to the farmer to the grocer to the cook.Take small bites and chew well.

Eating healthy is not just about maintaining a healthy weight. The kind of calories, as well as the number of calories, matter. I hope some of these tips will help you limit the number of calories. In other columns, I’ll describe the healthiest calories.

window.fbAsyncInit = function() { FB.init({appId: "199616670120169", status: true, cookie: true, xfbml: true});}; (function() { var e = document.createElement("script"); e.async = true; e.src = document.location.protocol + "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js"; document.getElementById("fb-root").appendChild(e);}());

View the original article here

Gulp! Study Suggests Super-Size Soda Ban Could Fizzle

But the research didn't involve actual consumers or beverages

By Randy Dotinga

HealthDay Reporter

WEDNESDAY, April 10 (HealthDay News) -- A new study may take the fizz out of New York City's bid to improve health by banning super-sized sugary drinks: It suggests restaurants could bypass the rules, and make more money to boot, by offering pairs of drinks that add up to forbidden sizes.

For now, the Big Apple's ban on drink sizes bigger than 16 ounces is moot -- a judge's ruling put it on hold last month. But if it's upheld, the study findings point to a major loophole, said lead author Brent Wilson, a psychology graduate student at the University of California, San Diego. "The risk is that regulations intended to reduce consumption could unintentionally increase consumption," he said.

However, the research has limitations. The study didn't involve actual drinks or an actual restaurant, and it didn't tackle the logistical issue of whether customers are willing to carry two smaller cups or bottles to get the punch of one big drink. Also, it didn't consider whether restaurants would think of the "drink-bundling" idea, although they may do so now that the study has brought it up.

At issue are giant cups and bottles of sugary soft drinks, which pack a punch of calories. While some restaurant owners and residents cried foul, New York City officials outlawed super-size drinks to combat the obesity epidemic.

"I'm trying to do what's right. I've got to defend my children . . . and everybody else and do what's right to save lives," said Mayor Michael Bloomberg, according to CBS News.

Inspired by the ban, Wilson and his colleagues created an experiment to gauge whether it might be possible for restaurants to get around the purpose of the law, which is to get people to drink less sugary soda.

The researchers asked 100 college students, aged 18 to 39, to consider choices on menus. One "unregulated" menu had these prices for sodas: $1.59 (16 ounces), $1.79 (24 ounces) and $1.99 (32 ounces). Those prices were all taken from a McDonald's menu at the time of the study.

Another menu, with "bundled" options, offered a 16-ounce soda for $1.59, a pair of 12-ounce drinks for $1.79, and a pair of 16-ounce drinks for $1.99. And a third "no bundle" menu only offered a 16-ounce drink for $1.59.

The researchers found that the participants wanted to buy more drinks when they had the choice of "bundling" them. When the participants only had a choice of just one size, only 62 percent chose to buy a soda, compared to 84 percent of those who had a choice of "bundled" options and 79 percent of those who faced the "unregulated" options.

Wilson said the study suggests that restaurants could make 70 percent more money from drinks if they offered the bundled options instead of just 16-ounce drinks. "The bundled options just felt like a better deal" to study participants, Wilson suggested.

View the original article here

Changes to Psychiatry's 'Bible' Could Widen Definition of ADHD

By Serena Gordon
HealthDay Reporter

FRIDAY, April 12 (HealthDay News) -- When the latest version of what is considered the "bible" of psychiatry is unveiled in May, experts believe several changes in it will broaden both the definition and diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder -- or ADHD.

But experts also differ on whether the shifts in thinking about this neurodevelopmental disorder will be a good thing.

Dr. James Norcross, a child and adolescent psychiatrist at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, outlined the major changes that should be coming in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), which is published by the American Psychiatric Association.

"One is the latest age that someone can have the onset of symptoms," Norcross explained. "In the current version, it's seven years. That will be changed to 12 years in the DSM-5, which may make things easier for adults and adolescents, because they'll be able to better recall some of the challenges that may have occurred."

Another big change that Norcross expects is that those over 17 will only have to meet five criteria, instead of six, to be diagnosed with ADHD. "This could increase the number of adults [who] are diagnosed because the criteria were largely developed for children, and they're not necessarily things we see in adults," he explained. For example, one of the criteria for hyperactivity has been squirming in your seat.

The last significant expected change is that ADHD will no longer be grouped with conduct disorder and oppositional defiant disorder. Instead, it will be grouped with neurodevelopmental disorders.

"They're trying to group disorders by similar pathology, and this is a better description of ADHD. More and more, it's being shown to be a biological process," Norcross explained.

Overall, Norcross said he thought the changes were positive and that they might remove some of the stigma that's been attached to an ADHD diagnosis.

However, another expert said the changes could lead to overdiagnosis of the disorder, and a subsequent jump in the prescribing of stimulants to treat the disorder.

"In trying never to miss a case, they may mislabel millions of people with a disorder they don't have. Everyone has problems with distractibility, but when ADHD is real, it starts early, it's intense and it's unmistakable," said Dr. Allen Frances, chair of the task force for the DSM-4 and former chair of psychiatry at Duke University School of Medicine in Durham, N.C. The fourth edition of the DSM has been in force since 1994.

"We're already overdiagnosing ADHD. Almost 20 percent of teen boys get the diagnosis of ADHD, and about 10 percent of boys are on stimulant drugs. We don't need to make it easier to diagnose ADHD," Frances said.

His biggest concern is that by expanding the diagnosis of ADHD, more children and adults will be put on stimulant medications, such as Adderall, Ritalin, Concerta and Vyvanse.

"In the short-term, performance is improved, which makes it highly desirable. In the long-run, there's a risk of addiction. Would you think it's OK for people to take steroids to improve their tennis game? It's pill-pushing," Frances said.

"If we decide as a society that the use of stimulants is good, it shouldn't be done through a fake medical diagnosis. Making it a medical diagnosis is what's wrong here," Frances explained. "I'm not against these drugs being legal, but I'm against the backdoor medical diagnosis."

Another concern is that people who have other psychiatric disorders may be wrongly classified as having ADHD.

"Every single psychiatric disorder has distractibility as part of it. If you misdiagnose someone with bipolar disorder as having ADHD and put them on stimulants, you'll throw them into mania," he cautioned.

Norcross agreed that ADHD diagnosis in adults needs to be done very carefully. But, he said the traits of inattention and disorganization often do continue into adulthood. And, for teens and young adults, ADHD can have an impact on education and employment opportunities.

Copyright © 2013 HealthDay. All rights reserved. SOURCES: James Norcross, M.D., child and adolescent psychiatrist, the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas; Allen Frances, M.D., professor emeritus, and former chair, psychiatry, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, N.C.

View the original article here

Changes to Psychiatry's 'Bible' Could Widen Definition of ADHD

Experts disagree over whether this will help or harm in the long run

By Serena Gordon

HealthDay Reporter

FRIDAY, April 12 (HealthDay News) -- When the latest version of what is considered the "bible" of psychiatry is unveiled in May, experts believe several changes in it will broaden both the definition and diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder -- or ADHD.

But experts also differ on whether the shifts in thinking about this neurodevelopmental disorder will be a good thing.

Dr. James Norcross, a child and adolescent psychiatrist at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, outlined the major changes that should be coming in the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), which is published by the American Psychiatric Association.

"One is the latest age that someone can have the onset of symptoms," Norcross explained. "In the current version, it's seven years. That will be changed to 12 years in the DSM-5, which may make things easier for adults and adolescents, because they'll be able to better recall some of the challenges that may have occurred."

Another big change that Norcross expects is that those over 17 will only have to meet five criteria, instead of six, to be diagnosed with ADHD. "This could increase the number of adults [who] are diagnosed because the criteria were largely developed for children, and they're not necessarily things we see in adults," he explained. For example, one of the criteria for hyperactivity has been squirming in your seat.

The last significant expected change is that ADHD will no longer be grouped with conduct disorder and oppositional defiant disorder. Instead, it will be grouped with neurodevelopmental disorders.

"They're trying to group disorders by similar pathology, and this is a better description of ADHD. More and more, it's being shown to be a biological process," Norcross explained.

Overall, Norcross said he thought the changes were positive and that they might remove some of the stigma that's been attached to an ADHD diagnosis.

However, another expert said the changes could lead to overdiagnosis of the disorder, and a subsequent jump in the prescribing of stimulants to treat the disorder.

"In trying never to miss a case, they may mislabel millions of people with a disorder they don't have. Everyone has problems with distractibility, but when ADHD is real, it starts early, it's intense and it's unmistakable," said Dr. Allen Frances, chair of the task force for the DSM-4 and former chair of psychiatry at Duke University School of Medicine in Durham, N.C. The fourth edition of the DSM has been in force since 1994.

"We're already overdiagnosing ADHD. Almost 20 percent of teen boys get the diagnosis of ADHD, and about 10 percent of boys are on stimulant drugs. We don't need to make it easier to diagnose ADHD," Frances said.

View the original article here

Balding Men Could Face Higher Heart Risks, Study Finds

But not those with a receding hairline, say Japanese investigators who analyzed previous research

By Alan Mozes

HealthDay Reporter

WEDNESDAY, April 3 (HealthDay News) -- New research out of Japan shows a potential link between male baldness and an increased risk for coronary heart disease.

But it only affects men who are balding on top. Those with a receding hairline are not at risk, the researchers reported.

The findings stem from an analysis of six published studies on hair loss and heart health that involved approximately 37,000 men.

And although the researchers admitted the small study size was a limitation, they reported that men whose baldness affected the crown on their head faced a 32 percent to 84 percent increase in the risk of developing heart disease compared to men with a full head of hair or a receding hairline.

Study lead author Dr. Tomohide Yamada, of the department of diabetes and metabolic diseases at the University of Tokyo's Graduate School of Medicine, in Japan, reported his findings in the current issue of the journal BMJ Open and called for more research on the topic. Although the research review found an association between baldness and heart disease risk, it did not prove a cause-and-effect link.

Male pattern baldness (technically referred to as "androgenetic alopecia") affects up to 40 percent of adult men and is the most common type of hair loss, the researchers reported. By age 80, about four in five men will experience this form of baldness.

To explore the link to heart disease, the researchers analyzed databases covering the period 1950 through 2012. Out of 850 related investigations, they selected six studies, all published between 1993 and 2008 in the United States, Denmark or Croatia.

In the three studies that tracked patients for a minimum of 11 years, the research showed that, overall, balding men face a 33 percent greater risk for heart disease than other men, and those between 55 and 60 years old faced an even higher risk (44 percent).

The other three studies, comparing the cardiac health of balding men to non-balding men, showed a 70 percent bump in heart disease risk among the balding group, and an 84 percent risk for younger balding men.

What's more, a balding man's heart disease risk appeared to be dependent on the severity of his hair loss, with more severe loss translating into greater risk, the studies showed.

Yamada's team said the driving mechanism behind the connection is unknown, but they theorized that baldness could be a marker for insulin resistance, chronic inflammation or an increased sensitivity to testosterone, all of which are factors in the onset of heart disease.

Regardless, Yamada said, balding men should do what all men should do when it comes to controlling heart disease risk. "I recommend adapting a heart-healthy lifestyle that includes a low-fat diet, exercise and less stress [in order to mitigate against] classical coronary risk factors," such as age, high blood pressure, blood lipid disruption and a history of smoking, he said.

View the original article here

College Sports Could Raise Players' Risk for Depression, Study Finds

Compared with former college athletes, those still in school had doubled odds, possibly due to stress, researchers say

By Robert Preidt

HealthDay Reporter

FRIDAY, April 5 (HealthDay News) -- Current college athletes are twice as likely to be depressed as former athletes, researchers have found.

The findings suggest the need for further research to learn more about depression among college athletes, the Georgetown University investigators said.

For the study, they examined questionnaires completed by 117 current and 163 former college athletes who had participated in Division I NCAA-sponsored sports. The current athletes played in 10 different sports and the former athletes had played in 15 different sports.

Nearly 17 percent of current athletes had questionnaire scores consistent with depression, compared with 8 percent of former athletes, according to the study published online recently in the journal Sports Health.

"We expected to see a significant increase in depression once athletes graduated, but by comparison it appears the stress of intercollegiate athletics may be more significant than we and others anticipated," senior investigator Dr. Daniel Merenstein, an associate professor of family medicine and human science at Georgetown University Medical Center, said in a university news release.

These stressors include things such as overtraining, injury, pressure to perform, lack of free time, or trying to juggle athletics and schoolwork.

"College in general is a potentially stressful time for many students. The additional stress of playing high-level sports appears to add to that stress," Merenstein said.

He advised parents, friends and coaches to pay attention to changes in behavior, weight and sleep of college athletes, and of all students.

View the original article here

College Sports Could Raise Players' Risk for Depression, Study Finds

Compared with former college athletes, those still in school had doubled odds, possibly due to stress, researchers say

By Robert Preidt

HealthDay Reporter

FRIDAY, April 5 (HealthDay News) -- Current college athletes are twice as likely to be depressed as former athletes, researchers have found.

The findings suggest the need for further research to learn more about depression among college athletes, the Georgetown University investigators said.

For the study, they examined questionnaires completed by 117 current and 163 former college athletes who had participated in Division I NCAA-sponsored sports. The current athletes played in 10 different sports and the former athletes had played in 15 different sports.

Nearly 17 percent of current athletes had questionnaire scores consistent with depression, compared with 8 percent of former athletes, according to the study published online recently in the journal Sports Health.

"We expected to see a significant increase in depression once athletes graduated, but by comparison it appears the stress of intercollegiate athletics may be more significant than we and others anticipated," senior investigator Dr. Daniel Merenstein, an associate professor of family medicine and human science at Georgetown University Medical Center, said in a university news release.

These stressors include things such as overtraining, injury, pressure to perform, lack of free time, or trying to juggle athletics and schoolwork.

"College in general is a potentially stressful time for many students. The additional stress of playing high-level sports appears to add to that stress," Merenstein said.

He advised parents, friends and coaches to pay attention to changes in behavior, weight and sleep of college athletes, and of all students.

View the original article here

College Sports Could Raise Players' Risk for Depression, Study Finds

Title: College Sports Could Raise Players' Risk for Depression, Study Finds
Category: Health News
Created: 4/5/2013 10:35:00 AM
Last Editorial Review: 4/5/2013 12:00:00 AM

View the original article here

Could Scientists Peek Into Your Dreams?

In small study, computer programs and brain MRIs identified visual images during sleep

By Barbara Bronson Gray

HealthDay Reporter

THURSDAY, April 4 (HealthDay News) -- Talk about mind reading. Researchers have discovered a potential way to decode your dreams, predicting the content of the visual imagery you've experienced on the basis of neural activity recorded during sleep.

Visual experiences you have when dreaming are detectable by the same type of brain activity that occurs when looking at actual images when you're awake, the small new study suggests.

The scientists created decoding computer programs based on brain activity measured while wide-awake study participants looked at certain images. Then, right after being awakened from the early stages of sleep, the researchers asked the subjects to describe the dream they were having before being disturbed.

The researchers used functional MRI to monitor brain activity of the participants and polysomnography to record the physical changes that occur during sleep. They compared evidence of brain activity when participants were awake and looking at real images to the brain activity they saw when participants were dreaming, when they were in light -- or early -- sleep. Functional MRIs directly measure blood flow in the brain, providing information on brain activity.

Published April 4 in the journal Science, the study shows it may be possible to use brain activity patterns to understand something about what a person is dreaming about, according to Yukiyasu Kamitani, lead author and head of neuroinformatics at ATR Computational Neuroscience Laboratories, in Kyoto, Japan.

"Our current approach requires the data of image viewing and sleep within the same [person]," Kamitani said. "But there are methods being developed for aligning brain patterns across people. It may become possible to build a decoder that works for different people with a small amount of data for calibration."

While the research may conjure up images of science fiction movies -- such as aliens from another planet finding a way to reveal our most private mental activities -- there are practical applications to the research, Kamitani said.

"There is evidence suggesting that the pattern of spontaneous brain activity is relevant to health issues, including psychiatric disorders," Kamitani explained. "Our method could relate spontaneous brain activity to waking experience, potentially providing clues for better interpretations of [brain activity]."

The research involved only three participants, who, over seven or 10 sleep "experiences," were awakened and asked for a visual report a minimum of 200 times each.

The authors gave an example of what a study participant said when awakened: "Yes, well, I saw a person. It was something like a scene. I hid a key in a place between a chair and a bed, and someone took it." Researchers then compared the participant's description to the functional MRI activity pattern before awakening. This pattern was put through a machine learning decoder assisted by vocabulary and image databases. The system's prediction identified a man, a key, a bed and a chair, which compared closely to the participant's immediate report.

View the original article here

Could Scientists Peek Into Your Dreams?

Title: Could Scientists Peek Into Your Dreams?
Category: Health News
Created: 4/4/2013 2:35:00 PM
Last Editorial Review: 4/5/2013 12:00:00 AM

View the original article here

Artificial Ovaries Could Potentially Deliver Hormone Therapy

Title: Artificial Ovaries Could Potentially Deliver Hormone Therapy
Category: Health News
Created: 3/29/2013 4:35:00 PM
Last Editorial Review: 4/1/2013 12:00:00 AM

View the original article here

Pent-Up Stress Could Harm Health of Middle-Aged Women

Swedish study followed women since late 1960s

By Robert Preidt

HealthDay Reporter

FRIDAY, June 7 (HealthDay News) -- Many middle-aged women develop aches and pains and other physical symptoms as a result of chronic stress, according to a decades-long study.

Researchers in Sweden examined long-term data collected from about 1,500 women and found that about 20 percent of middle-aged women experienced constant or frequent stress during the previous five years. The highest rates of stress occurred among women aged 40 to 60 and those who were single or smokers (or both).

Among those who reported long-term stress, 40 percent said they suffered aches and pains in their muscles and joints, 28 percent experienced headaches or migraines and 28 percent reported gastrointestinal problems, according to the researchers at the Sahlgrenska Academy of the University of Gothenburg.

The study appeared recently in the International Journal of Internal Medicine.

Even after adjusting for smoking, body weight and physical activity levels, there was a clear link between stress and an increased risk of physical symptoms, the researchers said.

The women in the study were followed since the late 1960s. Among those who experienced long-term stress but did not report any stress-related physical symptoms at the start of the study, 27 percent had new muscular and joint pain symptoms 12 years later, and about 15 percent reported new complaints in the form of headaches or gastrointestinal problems.

"Since 1968, women's lifestyles have changed in many ways," researcher Dominique Hange said in a university news release. "For example, many more women now work outside the home. Naturally, these changes can affect the experience of stress."

"Although we've used exactly the same question since 1968, we can't take it for granted that the term 'stress' has exactly the same meaning today," Hange added. "It might also be more socially accepted today to acknowledge one's experience of stress."

Hange said the "most important conclusion [from this study] is that single women, women who do not work outside the home and women who smoke are particularly vulnerable to stress. Here, we see a greater need for preventive measures from society."

The next step is to identify methods that doctors can use to help patients deal with stress-related physical complaints and illnesses, and to pinpoint ways to reduce stress at work, the researchers said.

View the original article here