Google News Health Test post Content
Monday, June 24, 2013
Thursday, May 16, 2013
Cancer funding will save lives: Stricker
About 3200 men die annually from prostate cancer but with the injection of the federal money, which will be split between three research institutes in NSW, Victoria and Queensland, more effective and less invasive treatments will be developed, Professor Phillip Stricker from Sydney's Kinghorn Cancer Centre said.
"It's a matter of how many lives you save but also how many people you don't hurt (with invasive treatment)," Prof Stricker told reporters on Friday.
"It's a matter of tailoring the treatment."
The Kinghorn Cancer Centre will receive $5.5 million of the money, which Prof Stricker said will fund research in genomics.
Researchers will study the genes of various groups as they seek to uncover potential predispositions to prostate cancer, which affects one-in-five men by the age of 85.
This information can then be used to target people with higher risks and start them on less-invasive preventative treatment, Prof Stricker said.
The remainder of the federal research money will be split between the Epworth Hospital in Melbourne and the Princess Alexandra Hospital in Brisbane with each due to receive $6.2 million.
Federal Health Minister Tanya Plibersek said the money was provided to "make sure that Australian patients get the best possible treatment".
The government also committed $656 million to building 25 regional cancer centres across the country.
Ms Plibersek said this will "ensure that people can access early detection, treatment and quality care, where and when they need it".
"It's a matter of how many lives you save but also how many people you don't hurt (with invasive treatment)," Prof Stricker told reporters on Friday.
"It's a matter of tailoring the treatment."
The Kinghorn Cancer Centre will receive $5.5 million of the money, which Prof Stricker said will fund research in genomics.
Researchers will study the genes of various groups as they seek to uncover potential predispositions to prostate cancer, which affects one-in-five men by the age of 85.
This information can then be used to target people with higher risks and start them on less-invasive preventative treatment, Prof Stricker said.
The remainder of the federal research money will be split between the Epworth Hospital in Melbourne and the Princess Alexandra Hospital in Brisbane with each due to receive $6.2 million.
Federal Health Minister Tanya Plibersek said the money was provided to "make sure that Australian patients get the best possible treatment".
The government also committed $656 million to building 25 regional cancer centres across the country.
Ms Plibersek said this will "ensure that people can access early detection, treatment and quality care, where and when they need it".
Friday, April 12, 2013
Study Reveals Why You Can't Stop At Just One Potato Chip
Everyone will agree that eating potato chips is addictive. It is impossible to eat just one when it comes to this deep-fried delight. Have you ever given it a thought as to what is the secret underpinning the reality about one's non-resistance to potato chips?
The scientific secret behind this is being provided by a team of researchers at FAU Erlangen Nuremberg, in Erlangen, Germany. According to Tobais Hoch, Ph.D, the study lead, 'hedonic hyperphagia' is a condition that plagues several people around the world.
Hedonic hyperphagia is the scientific term for recreational over-eating. It is used to describe eating in excess for pleasure rather than hunger.
To prove this, researchers conducted a study in which they allowed a group of laboratory rats to feast on potato chips and another group of rats got to eat bland rat chow. With the help of high-tech magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), they checked the difference in the brain activity of both groups. The rats were given one out of the three test foods along with their chow pellets. They were given animal chow, a mix of fat and carbs or potato chips. It was seen that the rats ate similar amounts of chow as well as chips and the fat carb mixture. But the rats actively hunted for potato chips and ate them. This showed that the ingredient in the chips was more interesting for rats than the carbs and fat mix.
The researchers suspect the high ratio of fat and carbohydrates to be the reason behind why people are attracted to these food items.
"The effect of potato chips on brain activity, as well as feeding behavior, can only partially be explained by its fat and carbohydrate content," explained Hoch in a press statement. "There must be something else in the chips that make them so desirable," he said.
During the MRI they observed that the reward and addiction centers in the brain had most of the activity. Eating potato chips significantly stimulated the food intake, sleep, activity and motion areas of the brain.
The study was presented at a meeting of the American Chemical Society.
The scientific secret behind this is being provided by a team of researchers at FAU Erlangen Nuremberg, in Erlangen, Germany. According to Tobais Hoch, Ph.D, the study lead, 'hedonic hyperphagia' is a condition that plagues several people around the world.
Hedonic hyperphagia is the scientific term for recreational over-eating. It is used to describe eating in excess for pleasure rather than hunger.
To prove this, researchers conducted a study in which they allowed a group of laboratory rats to feast on potato chips and another group of rats got to eat bland rat chow. With the help of high-tech magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), they checked the difference in the brain activity of both groups. The rats were given one out of the three test foods along with their chow pellets. They were given animal chow, a mix of fat and carbs or potato chips. It was seen that the rats ate similar amounts of chow as well as chips and the fat carb mixture. But the rats actively hunted for potato chips and ate them. This showed that the ingredient in the chips was more interesting for rats than the carbs and fat mix.
The researchers suspect the high ratio of fat and carbohydrates to be the reason behind why people are attracted to these food items.
"The effect of potato chips on brain activity, as well as feeding behavior, can only partially be explained by its fat and carbohydrate content," explained Hoch in a press statement. "There must be something else in the chips that make them so desirable," he said.
During the MRI they observed that the reward and addiction centers in the brain had most of the activity. Eating potato chips significantly stimulated the food intake, sleep, activity and motion areas of the brain.
The study was presented at a meeting of the American Chemical Society.
Friday, March 22, 2013
CVS requirement for employees to turn over health info part of greater trend in health insurance
A plan by a major drug store chain to penalize employees who don't turn over health information may be new, but the trend to get unhealthy people to pay - and pay more - for their health insurance is not.
CVS Caremark Inc., which operates dozens of drug stores in the region and a pharmacy fulfillment center in Hanover Township, will require employees under its health insurance plan get an annual checkup and disclose to the company health statistics such as weight, body mass index and blood sugar or face a $50 per month surcharge for health care.
A statement issued by the Woonsocket, R.I.-based company said the program "is evolving to help our colleagues take more responsibility for improving their health and managing health-associated costs."
This is not the eve of a new era of premium differentials and risk ratings, said Nate Kaufman, managing director of Kaufman Strategic Advisors. That era is already here.
Hospitals are refusing to hire smokers, group insurance plans have long offered financial incentives to those who get regular health assessments or even those who go the gym. The federal Affordable Care Act will cost smokers more, he noted. Whether a company is charging the healthy less or the unhealthy more, it's the other side of the same coin.
"Those are precursors to what we are seeing now - follow health advice or there will be a differential," said Kaufman, who spoke at Misericordia University last year about health care costs.
Those buying individual insurance have long been subjected to more probing scrutiny, he noted, with an insurer assessing not just an individual's use of tobacco, weight, blood pressure, but also every visit to a health care provider going back years, which sometimes veers into more sensitive areas.
"If you've ever visited a psychologist, for example, you may end up with a higher risk ranking and a higher premium," he said.
Those same risk rankings and differentials are coming to group plans, where the unhealthy or those who used lots of services were blended with a larger group. An employer offering group insurance to employees negotiates premiums with insurance companies. Adopting wellness incentives usually results in a lower-cost insurance plan for all.
Health insurers say the terms of the wellness incentives come from the employer, in consultation with the insurance companies. Both Geisinger and Blue Cross of Northeastern Pennsylvania offer wellness plans that includes health planning and coaching connected to incentives from discounts and refunds to gift cards.
"There is nothing unusual about what CVS is doing," said Mark Ungvarsky, vice president of informatics for Blue Cross of Northeastern Pennsylvania. "The reality is that we see more and more groups telling us 'we want our insured employees to have some accountability.'"
Blue Cross wellness programs are based on incentives rather than penalties, because that's how employer groups request it. Ungvarsky said the perception of those plans has much to do with how the program packaged, but in the end, some pay less or get a benefit and others don't.
Among the 400,000 people covered by Geisinger Health Plan, 50,000 in 40 employer group are in some form of Geisinger's wellness plan often called Smart Steps, said Amy Bowen, public relations specialist for Geisinger Health Plan. Thirteen other groups are considering it.
CVS Caremark Inc., which operates dozens of drug stores in the region and a pharmacy fulfillment center in Hanover Township, will require employees under its health insurance plan get an annual checkup and disclose to the company health statistics such as weight, body mass index and blood sugar or face a $50 per month surcharge for health care.
A statement issued by the Woonsocket, R.I.-based company said the program "is evolving to help our colleagues take more responsibility for improving their health and managing health-associated costs."
This is not the eve of a new era of premium differentials and risk ratings, said Nate Kaufman, managing director of Kaufman Strategic Advisors. That era is already here.
Hospitals are refusing to hire smokers, group insurance plans have long offered financial incentives to those who get regular health assessments or even those who go the gym. The federal Affordable Care Act will cost smokers more, he noted. Whether a company is charging the healthy less or the unhealthy more, it's the other side of the same coin.
"Those are precursors to what we are seeing now - follow health advice or there will be a differential," said Kaufman, who spoke at Misericordia University last year about health care costs.
Those buying individual insurance have long been subjected to more probing scrutiny, he noted, with an insurer assessing not just an individual's use of tobacco, weight, blood pressure, but also every visit to a health care provider going back years, which sometimes veers into more sensitive areas.
"If you've ever visited a psychologist, for example, you may end up with a higher risk ranking and a higher premium," he said.
Those same risk rankings and differentials are coming to group plans, where the unhealthy or those who used lots of services were blended with a larger group. An employer offering group insurance to employees negotiates premiums with insurance companies. Adopting wellness incentives usually results in a lower-cost insurance plan for all.
Health insurers say the terms of the wellness incentives come from the employer, in consultation with the insurance companies. Both Geisinger and Blue Cross of Northeastern Pennsylvania offer wellness plans that includes health planning and coaching connected to incentives from discounts and refunds to gift cards.
"There is nothing unusual about what CVS is doing," said Mark Ungvarsky, vice president of informatics for Blue Cross of Northeastern Pennsylvania. "The reality is that we see more and more groups telling us 'we want our insured employees to have some accountability.'"
Blue Cross wellness programs are based on incentives rather than penalties, because that's how employer groups request it. Ungvarsky said the perception of those plans has much to do with how the program packaged, but in the end, some pay less or get a benefit and others don't.
Among the 400,000 people covered by Geisinger Health Plan, 50,000 in 40 employer group are in some form of Geisinger's wellness plan often called Smart Steps, said Amy Bowen, public relations specialist for Geisinger Health Plan. Thirteen other groups are considering it.
Tuesday, February 19, 2013
New dietary guidelines all about balance
Australia's new dietary guidelines hold no unexpected plot twists. You still need to eat more vegetables, fruit and whole grains, and fewer unhealthy junk foods, those which are high salt, sugar and saturated fat.
But putting physical activity at the top of dietary guidelines is a bit of surprise. In the past, the guidelines have focused on what food and drink you need to include in a healthy diet, but now the focus is about 'energy balance'.
It might sound like gobbledegook, but the idea of 'energy balance' simply means making sure the energy you get from food and drink is no more than the energy your body needs to maintain a healthy weight. Obviously, your age, gender, height and level of physical activity all play a role in the amount of energy you need.
With more than 60 per cent of adults and 25 per cent of children overweight and obese this is something many of us need to consider more. (For more information see Being overweight or obese: what does it mean for you?).
And when it comes to food, it's not just about what you eat, but how much, says Professor Warwick Anderson, the chief executive officer at the National Health and Medical Research Council, which published the guidelines.
"We can eat as many leafy vegetables as we like without risk of eating too many kilojoules," Anderson says. "But some other foods, which are healthy in themselves, such as full fat milk and cheese, may also be high in kilojoules and therefore they can tip us over in the daily kilojoule requirement if we eat too much of those.
"If people have a better understanding of this need for energy balance, they can apply that concept to their daily lives as they make choices regarding activity levels as well as healthy food options."
Physical activity
Not only has physical activity been given greater prominence in the current guidelines, but the advice is we need to do more of it if we want to avoid weight gain.
Nutritionist Dr Rosemary Stanton, who sat on the dietary guidelines working committee, says when previous dietary guidelines were written it was recommended we do between 20 to 30 minutes of physical activity every day. That's now been increased to between 45 and 60 minutes, Stanton says, (although that's yet to be reflected in revised national exercise guidelines).
"In the previous guidelines it was about reducing cardiovascular risk. When we're looking at obesity, the amount of exercise you require is greater," Stanton says.
Physical activity is mentioned high up in the new dietary advice, as part of guideline one.
"Some people want to put them against each other and... say 'physical activity is more important' or 'all you need to is diet'," Stanton says. "But both are going to be important."
But putting physical activity at the top of dietary guidelines is a bit of surprise. In the past, the guidelines have focused on what food and drink you need to include in a healthy diet, but now the focus is about 'energy balance'.
It might sound like gobbledegook, but the idea of 'energy balance' simply means making sure the energy you get from food and drink is no more than the energy your body needs to maintain a healthy weight. Obviously, your age, gender, height and level of physical activity all play a role in the amount of energy you need.
With more than 60 per cent of adults and 25 per cent of children overweight and obese this is something many of us need to consider more. (For more information see Being overweight or obese: what does it mean for you?).
And when it comes to food, it's not just about what you eat, but how much, says Professor Warwick Anderson, the chief executive officer at the National Health and Medical Research Council, which published the guidelines.
"We can eat as many leafy vegetables as we like without risk of eating too many kilojoules," Anderson says. "But some other foods, which are healthy in themselves, such as full fat milk and cheese, may also be high in kilojoules and therefore they can tip us over in the daily kilojoule requirement if we eat too much of those.
"If people have a better understanding of this need for energy balance, they can apply that concept to their daily lives as they make choices regarding activity levels as well as healthy food options."
Physical activity
Not only has physical activity been given greater prominence in the current guidelines, but the advice is we need to do more of it if we want to avoid weight gain.
Nutritionist Dr Rosemary Stanton, who sat on the dietary guidelines working committee, says when previous dietary guidelines were written it was recommended we do between 20 to 30 minutes of physical activity every day. That's now been increased to between 45 and 60 minutes, Stanton says, (although that's yet to be reflected in revised national exercise guidelines).
"In the previous guidelines it was about reducing cardiovascular risk. When we're looking at obesity, the amount of exercise you require is greater," Stanton says.
Physical activity is mentioned high up in the new dietary advice, as part of guideline one.
"Some people want to put them against each other and... say 'physical activity is more important' or 'all you need to is diet'," Stanton says. "But both are going to be important."
Monday, January 28, 2013
Think preventive medicine will save money? Think again
It seems like a no-brainer. Since about 75 percent of healthcare spending in the United States is for largely preventable chronic illnesses such as Type 2 diabetes and heart disease, providing more preventive care should cut costs.
If only. In a report released on Tuesday, the non-profit Trust for America's Health outlined a plan "to move from sick care to health care" by putting more resources into preventing chronic disease rather than treating it, as the current system does.
There is a strong humanitarian justification for prevention, argued Trust Executive Director Jeffrey Levi in an interview, since it reduces human suffering. But the report also makes an economic argument for preventive care, highlighting the possibility of reducing healthcare spending -- which in 2011 reached $2.7 trillion, just shy of 18 percent of gross domestic product -- by billions of dollars. And that has health economists shaking their heads.
"Preventive care is more about the right thing to do" because it spares people the misery of illness, said economist Austin Frakt of Boston University. "But it's not plausible to think you can cut healthcare spending through preventive care. This is widely misunderstood." A 2010 study in the journal Health Affairs, for instance, calculated that if 90 percent of the U.S. population used proven preventive services, more than do now, it would save only 0.2 percent of healthcare spending.
Some disease-prevention programs do produce net savings. Childhood immunizations, and probably some adult immunizations (such as for pneumonia and the flu), are cost-saving, found a 2009 analysis for the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
The vaccines are cheap, and large swaths of the population are vulnerable to the diseases they prevent. The cost of providing them to everyone is less than that of treating the illnesses they prevent. Counseling adults about using baby aspirin to prevent cardiovascular disease also produces net savings. The counseling is inexpensive, the aspirin even cheaper and the costs of heart disease, which strikes one in three U.S. adults, are enormous. Screening pregnant women for HIV produces net savings, too. Those, however, are exceptions.
One big reason why preventive care does not save money, say health economists, is that some of the best-known forms don't actually improve someone's health. These low- or no-benefit measures include annual physicals for healthy adults. A 2012 analysis of 14 large studies found they do not lower the risk of serious illness or premature death. But about one-third of U.S. adults get them, said Dr. Ateev Mehrota, a primary-care physician and healthcare analyst at RAND, for a cost of about $8 billion a year. Similarly, some cancer screenings -- including for ovarian cancer and testicular cancer, and for prostate cancer via PSA tests -- produce essentially no health benefits, causing the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force to recommend against their routine use. The task force bases its recommendations on medical benefits alone, not costs.
The second reason preventive care brings so few cost savings is the large number of people who need to receive a particular preventive service in order to avert a single expensive illness. "It seems counterintuitive: If you provide care to prevent all these expensive diseases, it should save money," said Peter Neumann, an expert on health policy and professor of medicine at Tufts University School of Medicine.
"But prevention itself costs money, and some preventive measures can be very expensive, especially if you give them to a lot of people who won't benefit." If preventive care could be provided only to those who are going to get the illness, it would be more cost-effective. "But in the real world, the number needed to screen or to treat in order to prevent one case of illness can be huge," said BU's Frakt, who blogs at theincidentaleconomist.com. Currently, many people who do not benefit from a preventive service receive it, paying something for nothing. Studies have calculated those numbers, which can be surprisingly high.
For instance, 217 high-risk smokers would have to undergo a CT lung scan for one to be spared death from lung cancer, according to a database of studies maintained by Dr. David Newman, an emergency physician at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York City. One hundred post-menopausal women who have had a bone fracture would have to take drugs called bisphosphonates in order for one to avoid a hip fracture. By comparison, only 50 people with heart disease must be treated with aspirin for one to avoid a heart attack or stroke, making this a good buy.
The numbers of people who need to be treated for one to benefit are so high because so few will get the disease the preventive is meant to avert. It's like treating every house for termites, said Neumann, co-author of the Robert Wood Johnson report: The vast majority would never have gotten infested in the first place, so the thousands spent to avoid the infestation is money for nothing. The failure of many preventive services to improve health, plus the large number of people who have to receive preventive care for one to be spared an illness he or she would otherwise get, limit the economic savings.
A better gauge of the value of preventive medicine is bang for the buck; that is, not whether it reduces healthcare spending but whether it buys more health than treating the disease does. "We don't ask whether cancer treatment or heart disease treatment saves money," said Dr. Steven Woolf, professor of family medicine at Virginia Commonwealth University Medical Center in Richmond. "But it is reasonable to ask how to make our healthcare dollar go further." On that score, screening for hypertension and for some cancers (such as colorectal and breast) are good investments, he said, at less than $25,000 per year of healthy life. In contrast, such common treatments as angioplasty cost $100,000 or more per healthy year of life.
There are two glimmers of hope in this bleak picture. For preventive medicine to help rein in the nation's soaring healthcare spending, it should be provided someplace other than doctors' offices. "Some of the most common chronic, preventable diseases might be best addressed outside the clinical setting," said the Trust's Levi, such as through wellness programs at YMCAs and health education and screening programs at houses of worship. "But that requires Medicaid to be more flexible in who they'll reimburse." It also requires a more expansive definition of preventive medicine.
The Trust suggests such steps as extending bus lines to parks so people without cars can go someplace pleasant for physical activity and other "community-based" efforts. These strategies save more money in healthcare spending than they cost. For instance, at a program in Akron, Ohio, profiled in the new report, physicians and others coordinate care for patients with Type 2 diabetes. It reduced the average cost of care by more than 10 percent, or $3,185 per year, largely by reducing pricey emergency-room visits.
And at Boston Children's Hospital, an asthma program that sends community health workers into patients' homes to reduce the environmental triggers of asthma has saved $1.46 in healthcare costs for every $1 invested. It has reduced asthma-related hospital admissions by 80 percent and asthma-related emergency department visits by 60 percent, reports the Trust.
The other promising approach is to target preventive care at those most likely to develop a chronic disease, not at low-risk people. Such "smart" prevention increases the chances of preventing expensive diseases and saving money. In contrast, unthinking expansion of preventive medicine is the wrong prescription, say experts. "If you start giving preventive care to more people, many of whom won't benefit from it, it's going to be very, very expensive," said Tufts' Neumann.
If only. In a report released on Tuesday, the non-profit Trust for America's Health outlined a plan "to move from sick care to health care" by putting more resources into preventing chronic disease rather than treating it, as the current system does.
There is a strong humanitarian justification for prevention, argued Trust Executive Director Jeffrey Levi in an interview, since it reduces human suffering. But the report also makes an economic argument for preventive care, highlighting the possibility of reducing healthcare spending -- which in 2011 reached $2.7 trillion, just shy of 18 percent of gross domestic product -- by billions of dollars. And that has health economists shaking their heads.
"Preventive care is more about the right thing to do" because it spares people the misery of illness, said economist Austin Frakt of Boston University. "But it's not plausible to think you can cut healthcare spending through preventive care. This is widely misunderstood." A 2010 study in the journal Health Affairs, for instance, calculated that if 90 percent of the U.S. population used proven preventive services, more than do now, it would save only 0.2 percent of healthcare spending.
Some disease-prevention programs do produce net savings. Childhood immunizations, and probably some adult immunizations (such as for pneumonia and the flu), are cost-saving, found a 2009 analysis for the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
The vaccines are cheap, and large swaths of the population are vulnerable to the diseases they prevent. The cost of providing them to everyone is less than that of treating the illnesses they prevent. Counseling adults about using baby aspirin to prevent cardiovascular disease also produces net savings. The counseling is inexpensive, the aspirin even cheaper and the costs of heart disease, which strikes one in three U.S. adults, are enormous. Screening pregnant women for HIV produces net savings, too. Those, however, are exceptions.
One big reason why preventive care does not save money, say health economists, is that some of the best-known forms don't actually improve someone's health. These low- or no-benefit measures include annual physicals for healthy adults. A 2012 analysis of 14 large studies found they do not lower the risk of serious illness or premature death. But about one-third of U.S. adults get them, said Dr. Ateev Mehrota, a primary-care physician and healthcare analyst at RAND, for a cost of about $8 billion a year. Similarly, some cancer screenings -- including for ovarian cancer and testicular cancer, and for prostate cancer via PSA tests -- produce essentially no health benefits, causing the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force to recommend against their routine use. The task force bases its recommendations on medical benefits alone, not costs.
The second reason preventive care brings so few cost savings is the large number of people who need to receive a particular preventive service in order to avert a single expensive illness. "It seems counterintuitive: If you provide care to prevent all these expensive diseases, it should save money," said Peter Neumann, an expert on health policy and professor of medicine at Tufts University School of Medicine.
"But prevention itself costs money, and some preventive measures can be very expensive, especially if you give them to a lot of people who won't benefit." If preventive care could be provided only to those who are going to get the illness, it would be more cost-effective. "But in the real world, the number needed to screen or to treat in order to prevent one case of illness can be huge," said BU's Frakt, who blogs at theincidentaleconomist.com. Currently, many people who do not benefit from a preventive service receive it, paying something for nothing. Studies have calculated those numbers, which can be surprisingly high.
For instance, 217 high-risk smokers would have to undergo a CT lung scan for one to be spared death from lung cancer, according to a database of studies maintained by Dr. David Newman, an emergency physician at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York City. One hundred post-menopausal women who have had a bone fracture would have to take drugs called bisphosphonates in order for one to avoid a hip fracture. By comparison, only 50 people with heart disease must be treated with aspirin for one to avoid a heart attack or stroke, making this a good buy.
The numbers of people who need to be treated for one to benefit are so high because so few will get the disease the preventive is meant to avert. It's like treating every house for termites, said Neumann, co-author of the Robert Wood Johnson report: The vast majority would never have gotten infested in the first place, so the thousands spent to avoid the infestation is money for nothing. The failure of many preventive services to improve health, plus the large number of people who have to receive preventive care for one to be spared an illness he or she would otherwise get, limit the economic savings.
A better gauge of the value of preventive medicine is bang for the buck; that is, not whether it reduces healthcare spending but whether it buys more health than treating the disease does. "We don't ask whether cancer treatment or heart disease treatment saves money," said Dr. Steven Woolf, professor of family medicine at Virginia Commonwealth University Medical Center in Richmond. "But it is reasonable to ask how to make our healthcare dollar go further." On that score, screening for hypertension and for some cancers (such as colorectal and breast) are good investments, he said, at less than $25,000 per year of healthy life. In contrast, such common treatments as angioplasty cost $100,000 or more per healthy year of life.
There are two glimmers of hope in this bleak picture. For preventive medicine to help rein in the nation's soaring healthcare spending, it should be provided someplace other than doctors' offices. "Some of the most common chronic, preventable diseases might be best addressed outside the clinical setting," said the Trust's Levi, such as through wellness programs at YMCAs and health education and screening programs at houses of worship. "But that requires Medicaid to be more flexible in who they'll reimburse." It also requires a more expansive definition of preventive medicine.
The Trust suggests such steps as extending bus lines to parks so people without cars can go someplace pleasant for physical activity and other "community-based" efforts. These strategies save more money in healthcare spending than they cost. For instance, at a program in Akron, Ohio, profiled in the new report, physicians and others coordinate care for patients with Type 2 diabetes. It reduced the average cost of care by more than 10 percent, or $3,185 per year, largely by reducing pricey emergency-room visits.
And at Boston Children's Hospital, an asthma program that sends community health workers into patients' homes to reduce the environmental triggers of asthma has saved $1.46 in healthcare costs for every $1 invested. It has reduced asthma-related hospital admissions by 80 percent and asthma-related emergency department visits by 60 percent, reports the Trust.
The other promising approach is to target preventive care at those most likely to develop a chronic disease, not at low-risk people. Such "smart" prevention increases the chances of preventing expensive diseases and saving money. In contrast, unthinking expansion of preventive medicine is the wrong prescription, say experts. "If you start giving preventive care to more people, many of whom won't benefit from it, it's going to be very, very expensive," said Tufts' Neumann.
Thursday, December 6, 2012
Men more prone to cancer: Vic study
VICTORIAN men are more likely to
suffer cancers linked to smoking and drinking such as lung and liver
cancer than women, according a new study.
Not only were more men diagnosed with any cancer in 2011, but they
were also more likely to lose their battle with cancer than women, the
Cancer Council Victoria study shows.
The study, released on
Friday, is a reminder for men to cut their cancer risk, with the
difference put down to the historical prevalence of cancer risk factors
such as smoking and alcohol consumption among men, said Cancer Council
chief Todd Harper.
"Some research also suggests that men tend to
present when their cancer is at a later stage, which may be a factor in
differing survival rates," Mr Harper said in a statement.
The study revealed just over half of the 28,405 Victorians diagnosed with cancer last year were men.
Men were also over-represented in the number of cancer deaths, with
5921 Victorian men losing their battle with cancer compared with 4,710
women.
The study found more men were likely to be diagnosed with
cancers associated with smoking and alcohol such as lung, bladder and
stomach cancer, oral cavity cancers, and cancers of the oesophagus,
larynx and liver.
Mr Harper urged Victorian men to be aware of any bodily changes and get regular checks and screenings.
Monday, November 26, 2012
The Science of Immunisation
Twelve of Australia's top immunisation specialists have released a booklet to help parents navigate the issue of vaccination.
It is designed to help parents understand the deadly consequences that can arise if they choose not to vaccinate their children.
A copy of the booklet can be found at http://www.science.org.au/.
It was put together by the Australian Academy of Science. Its President, Professor Suzanne Cory explains to Linda why it's important.
Source http://blogs.abc.net.au/nsw/2012/11/the-science-of-immunisation-.html
It is designed to help parents understand the deadly consequences that can arise if they choose not to vaccinate their children.
A copy of the booklet can be found at http://www.science.org.au/.
It was put together by the Australian Academy of Science. Its President, Professor Suzanne Cory explains to Linda why it's important.
Source http://blogs.abc.net.au/nsw/2012/11/the-science-of-immunisation-.html
Monday, November 12, 2012
Nothing to hide about my health: Bal Thackeray tells partymen
Stating that he had not "completely collapsed", ailing Shiv Sena chief
Bal Thackeray on Monday admitted his health was "not that good" but
denied that he was on a ventilator.
"My health is not that good, but I have not completely collapsed. I am
not on a ventilator," Thackeray declared in a personalised edit in the party mouthpiece Saamna on Monday
after reports in a section of the media that his health had
deteriorated sharply and he had been put on a ventilator.
The 86-year-old has been suffering from breathing problems and other age-related complaints.
"I have nothing to hide on this issue. During the Dussehra rally last
month, I took my party activists into confidence and made it clear
publicly that my health was not too good," Thackeray said about his
persisting health concerns.
He also admitted that a team of doctors was making efforts to improve
his condition. However, he said he had not yet reached a stage
requiring "artificial respiration" as the love and affection of his
supporters was acting like "a breath of fresh air".
Thackeray said his son Uddhav (who is recuperating from an
angioplasty performed a few days ago) was looking after him
round-the-clock as other family members.
"Even (nephew) Raj Thackeray keeps coming regularly. Yesterday
(Sunday), former president Pratibha Patil had come. I also read the
newspapers as usual, but I don't speak on the phone, that's all,"
Thackeray said, assuring his health was stable.
Thackeray conveyed his Diwali greetings to the people of Maharashtra
and his party activists, Raj had told mediapersons after visiting his
uncle Sunday evening.
Friday, August 3, 2012
Aussies back junk food crackdown
MOST Australians support "traffic light" labelling on foods and banning junk food ads during children's TV.
The study found 87 per cent of 1500 Australians surveyed would
support colour-coding on packaged food to indicate healthier options.
Of
those surveyed, 83 per cent agreed with a ban on advertising junk foods
on TV during popular children viewing times, but only 56 per cent
supported a total ban on advertising unhealthy foods.
The study by
the Cancer Council Victoria and Obesity Policy Coalition, published in
the Health Promotion Journal of Australia, questioned the main grocery
shopper in 1511 households nationwide.
People aged 18 to 64 took
part but those who nominated themselves as the household's grocery
shopper were usually women aged between 35 to 54 years.
Most
participants (84 per cent) were also in favour of kilojoule information
displays at fast-food outlets and 87 per cent supported regulations for
food companies to reduce the fat, sugar and salt content of processed
foods.
Almost all of those surveyed - 97 per cent - supported restricting
junk food marketing to children via email and mobile phone text
messages, while 93 per cent thought it should be restricted in magazines
and 89 per cent supported restrictions on websites.
Taxing
unhealthy food was not as popular, unless the money was used to make
healthy food more affordable, with 71 per cent supporting this option.
The
study's authors said the research showed there was strong public
support for tougher food labelling and advertising regulations.
"There's
high support for government to intervene, but particularly high support
among those new (technology) platforms," said co-author Jane Martin
from the Obesity Policy Coalition.
"Children are not being
adequately protected, and parents are limited in their ability to
intervene, particularly with new technologies such as mobile phones and
computers," she said.
Front-of-pack colour-coded food labelling
systems have been recommended by a recent Australian government review,
with a decision expected by the end of 2012.
New rules about
marketing fast food to children on television were introduced in August
2009, but a review last year found the voluntary code had failed to
reduce the number of junk food ads.
Meanwhile, the federal
government's Food and Health Dialogue group encourages companies to
reduce the amount of salt in foods such as bread, soups, sauces and
pies.
Kellogg's recently announced it would reduce the amount of salt in its cornflakes and rice bubbles by 20 per cent.
Tuesday, July 3, 2012
Health tips for the heatwave
Sweating cleans the pores
To keep safe the Health Department recommends that people:
• Slow down and reduce outdoor activities, especially during the hottest part of the day, from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m.
• Dress for summer. Wear lightweight, light-colored clothes.
• Drink plenty of water or other non-alcoholic, caffeine-free fluids.
Check with your doctor if you are on diuretic medications or have a
problem with fluid retention.
• Spend more time in air-conditioned places. In order for air
conditioners and central air units to be effective, it’s best to have
them serviced annually.
• Never leave a child, disabled adult, elderly person or a pet in a
car for even a few minutes. Temperatures can rise to life-threatening
levels within minutes.
Stay cool
• Avoid using your stove or oven.
• Use your dishwasher and dryer at night.
• Keep window shades or drapes closed.
• Set ceiling fans in a counterclockwise position to pull cool air up.
More tips
• Spend some time in an air conditioned facility during the worst of
the heat. This can be a public building such as a library, senior
center, shopping mall or grocery store.
• Sit in a bathtub containing cool water.
• Don’t get too much sun. Use at least a SPF 30 sunscreen. Note that sunburn makes it more difficult to cool off.
• Bringing air in from the outside with fans is not effective when
the heat index is above 90; use them to blow hot air outside instead.
• Keep in mind that infants, the elderly, people with heart or lung
problems, overweight people and those who work outside are at a higher
risk for heat-related illnesses.
• Certain medications disrupt a body’s thermostat and make it more
difficult to cool down, especially those taken for mental or movement
disorders, allergies, depression and heart or circulatory problems.
• Frequently contact neighbors and others you know who are at a
greater risk and help them obtain relief from the heat and humidity.
Wednesday, June 13, 2012
Diesel fumes cause cancer - WHO
Diesel exhaust causes cancer, the World Health Organization's cancer agency has declared, a ruling it says could make exhaust as important a public health threat as second-hand smoke.
The risk of getting cancer from diesel fumes is small, but since so many people breathe in the fumes in some way, the science panel says raising the status of diesel exhaust to carcinogen from 'probable carcinogen' is an important shift.
'It's on the same order of magnitude as passive smoking,' said Kurt Straif, director of the IARC department that evaluates cancer risks.
'This could be another big push for countries to clean up exhaust from diesel engines.'
Since so many people are exposed to exhaust, Straif said there could be many cases of lung cancer connected to the contaminant. He said the fumes affected groups including pedestrians on the street, ship passengers and crew, railroad workers, truck drivers, mechanics, miners and people operating heavy machinery.
The new classification followed a weeklong discussion in Lyon, France by an expert panel organised by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. The panel's decision stands as the ruling for the IARC, the cancer arm of the World Health Organization.
The last time the agency considered the status of diesel exhaust was in 1989, when it was labelled a 'probable' carcinogen.
Reclassifying diesel exhaust as carcinogenic puts it into the same category as other known hazards such as asbestos, alcohol and ultraviolet radiation.
Experts said new diesel engines spew out fewer fumes but further studies are needed to assess any potential dangers.
Experts in Lyon had analysed published studies, evidence from animals and limited research in humans. One of the biggest studies was published in March by the US National Cancer Institute.
That paper analysed 12,300 miners for several decades starting in 1947. Researchers found that miners heavily exposed to diesel exhaust had a higher risk of dying from lung cancer.
Lobbyists for the diesel industry argued the study wasn't credible because researchers didn't have exact data on how much exposure miners got in the early years of the study; they simply asked them to remember what their exposure was like.
A person's risk for cancer depends on many variables, from genetic makeup to the amount and length of time of exposure to dangerous substances.
Tuesday, December 6, 2011
Depressed mums at risk of abuse: study
More than one third of all mums who suffer depression in the first year after giving birth are being abused by their partners, a study shows.
A survey of 1300 first-time mums in Melbourne found 16 per cent reported symptoms of depression before their baby turned one.
Of those, about 40 per cent were also physically or emotionally abused by their husband or boyfriend.
Associate professor Stephanie Brown, a co-author of the study by the Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, said while mums had been successfully encouraged over the years to report postnatal depression, partner violence remained a taboo topic.
"It tends to be a hidden thing because the year after birth is when there's lots of pressure on families and it's difficult for women to discuss abuse with their friends, families and health professionals because it's meant to be a time of joy," she said.
"But the results from the study are sending a message that it's important for GPs and other health service workers to encourage women to seek help when they are feeling depressed or when they are being physically or emotionally abused because all these issues are common in the year after childbirth."
Emotional abuse was more common than physical abuse among the mums with postnatal depression.
Mums were also more likely to report symptoms of depression after their baby reached six months of age.
Assoc Prof Brown said that finding suggested most depressed mums could miss out on treatment because current guidelines suggest women be screened for postnatal depression in the first three months after giving birth.
"We would recommend that GPs regularly inquire about women's emotional wellbeing and issues in their relationships with their partner rather than just limiting that discussion to the first consultation or those soon after the birth," she said.
"The emotional wellbeing of the mum and her physical wellbeing does have an impact on the health of the child and that's one reason why we need to be concerned to enable women to get appropriate support."
The study, published in BJOG - An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, found women most at risk of partner violence were likely to have a history of depression, relationship problems, be aged 18-24 or over 35, and single.
Separate US studies have found that physical and emotional violence in a relationship tends to escalate in the year after a child is born.
Source http://news.ninemsn.com.au/health/8385907/depressed-mums-at-risk-of-abuse-study
A survey of 1300 first-time mums in Melbourne found 16 per cent reported symptoms of depression before their baby turned one.
Of those, about 40 per cent were also physically or emotionally abused by their husband or boyfriend.
Associate professor Stephanie Brown, a co-author of the study by the Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, said while mums had been successfully encouraged over the years to report postnatal depression, partner violence remained a taboo topic.
"It tends to be a hidden thing because the year after birth is when there's lots of pressure on families and it's difficult for women to discuss abuse with their friends, families and health professionals because it's meant to be a time of joy," she said.
"But the results from the study are sending a message that it's important for GPs and other health service workers to encourage women to seek help when they are feeling depressed or when they are being physically or emotionally abused because all these issues are common in the year after childbirth."
Emotional abuse was more common than physical abuse among the mums with postnatal depression.
Mums were also more likely to report symptoms of depression after their baby reached six months of age.
Assoc Prof Brown said that finding suggested most depressed mums could miss out on treatment because current guidelines suggest women be screened for postnatal depression in the first three months after giving birth.
"We would recommend that GPs regularly inquire about women's emotional wellbeing and issues in their relationships with their partner rather than just limiting that discussion to the first consultation or those soon after the birth," she said.
"The emotional wellbeing of the mum and her physical wellbeing does have an impact on the health of the child and that's one reason why we need to be concerned to enable women to get appropriate support."
The study, published in BJOG - An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, found women most at risk of partner violence were likely to have a history of depression, relationship problems, be aged 18-24 or over 35, and single.
Separate US studies have found that physical and emotional violence in a relationship tends to escalate in the year after a child is born.
Source http://news.ninemsn.com.au/health/8385907/depressed-mums-at-risk-of-abuse-study
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
To Lower Australia’s Rising Obesity Rates, Tax Soft Drinks
To battle Australia's rising obesity rates, American psychologist Kelly Brownell suggested a tax on soft drinks at the 46th Australian Psychological Association's yearly conference on Wednesday.
He favors a one penny tax per ounce on beverages that have added sugar. Twenty U.S. cities and states are considering her proposal, but have not passed laws.
Mr Brownell estimated that by taxing soft drinks, consumption would go down by 10 to 23 per cent and health care cost arising from ailments linked with excessive intake of sugar such as obesity and diabetes would go down by $50 billion.
He compared taxing sugary beverages to taxes on cigarettes and other tobacco products.
"We have seen how effective tobacco taxes have been in reducing rates of smoking, so there is no reason to believe such taxes wouldn't be as effective in reducing the consumption of high sugar and fat foods," Xinhua quoted Mr Brownell, who is the director for Food Policy and Obesity of Yale University's Rudd Center.
"A soft drink tax is a good place to start," Mr Brownell said.
He attributed popularity of soft drinks to human nature to eat what is readily available, cost the least and heavily marketed.
"Food companies know that people have trouble eating reasonable amounts of foods engineered to taste so good, so they load food with things that boost profits but contribute to ill health, such as sugar, fat and salt," The Canberra Times quoted Mr Brownell.
Obesity rates in Australia have doubled in the past two decades, while over 17 million Australians considered obese or overweight.
Mr Brownell's proposal could be considered timely as Australia ends a two-day tax forum on Wednesday.
While fruit juices are considered healthier alternatives to soft drinks, a recent study raised the alarm that frequent fruit juice drinkers ran the risk of colon cancer because of the high sugar content of the popular beverage.
Source http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/225168/20111005/american-psychologist-suggest-lowering-australia-s-rising-obesity-rates-by-taxing-soft-drinks.htm
He favors a one penny tax per ounce on beverages that have added sugar. Twenty U.S. cities and states are considering her proposal, but have not passed laws.
Mr Brownell estimated that by taxing soft drinks, consumption would go down by 10 to 23 per cent and health care cost arising from ailments linked with excessive intake of sugar such as obesity and diabetes would go down by $50 billion.
He compared taxing sugary beverages to taxes on cigarettes and other tobacco products.
"We have seen how effective tobacco taxes have been in reducing rates of smoking, so there is no reason to believe such taxes wouldn't be as effective in reducing the consumption of high sugar and fat foods," Xinhua quoted Mr Brownell, who is the director for Food Policy and Obesity of Yale University's Rudd Center.
"A soft drink tax is a good place to start," Mr Brownell said.
He attributed popularity of soft drinks to human nature to eat what is readily available, cost the least and heavily marketed.
"Food companies know that people have trouble eating reasonable amounts of foods engineered to taste so good, so they load food with things that boost profits but contribute to ill health, such as sugar, fat and salt," The Canberra Times quoted Mr Brownell.
Obesity rates in Australia have doubled in the past two decades, while over 17 million Australians considered obese or overweight.
Mr Brownell's proposal could be considered timely as Australia ends a two-day tax forum on Wednesday.
While fruit juices are considered healthier alternatives to soft drinks, a recent study raised the alarm that frequent fruit juice drinkers ran the risk of colon cancer because of the high sugar content of the popular beverage.
Source http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/225168/20111005/american-psychologist-suggest-lowering-australia-s-rising-obesity-rates-by-taxing-soft-drinks.htm
Friday, July 22, 2011
Tasmanian devils undergo plastic surgery
Scientists have used plastic surgery to shed new light on the deadly cancer wiping out tasmanian devils.
The devils are being killed by a contagious facial tumour disease transferred from animal-to-animal through biting.
Until now, scientists assumed the animals inbreeding was to blame.
They believed the low genetic diversity in the population meant devils could not reject the invading tumour cells.
But a plastic surgery experiment is making scientists reconsider the reason why the devils are being affected by the deadly tumours.
Associate Professor Greg Woods from the Menzies Research Institute says a plastic surgeon from a local hospital came to a bush site near Hobart to do skin grafts on devils.
"He really revolutionised the whole technique and brought out all his equipment," he said.
"What was really amazing was this was done out in the field, in the back of a truck ... the surgery went beautifully so it was really quite a nice way in which to do this research."
But there was a surprising result. Associate Professor Woods had assumed that the devils would accept skin grafts from each other.
That would have confirmed the researchers theory that the animals were catching the facial cancer from each other because the devils are so inbred.
But the devil's did not accept each other's skin.
"The graft got rejected quite nicely, which shows that the devils do have enough diversity to recognise foreign tissue," he said.
"This is really good news for the devil because it means that the devils' immune system can recognise foreign tissue.
"The challenge now is to work out what is special about those tumour cells to allow them to hide from the devils' immune system.
"I think it may be that the tumour is camouflaged; it's got a camouflage."
University of Sydney Associate Professor Kathy Belov, who has been studying the devil's genetics, says the researchers will now start studying the tumour cells.
"This has probably confused us more than anything else," she said.
"But we are going to come back and start thinking about what it means and how we can use this information to help us beat the disease."
The devil is considered an endangered species and faces extinction in about three decades if a cure for the disease is not found.
Source http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-07-22/20110722-plastic-surgery-sheds-light-on-devil-tumour/2806502
The devils are being killed by a contagious facial tumour disease transferred from animal-to-animal through biting.
Until now, scientists assumed the animals inbreeding was to blame.
They believed the low genetic diversity in the population meant devils could not reject the invading tumour cells.
But a plastic surgery experiment is making scientists reconsider the reason why the devils are being affected by the deadly tumours.
Associate Professor Greg Woods from the Menzies Research Institute says a plastic surgeon from a local hospital came to a bush site near Hobart to do skin grafts on devils.
"He really revolutionised the whole technique and brought out all his equipment," he said.
"What was really amazing was this was done out in the field, in the back of a truck ... the surgery went beautifully so it was really quite a nice way in which to do this research."
But there was a surprising result. Associate Professor Woods had assumed that the devils would accept skin grafts from each other.
That would have confirmed the researchers theory that the animals were catching the facial cancer from each other because the devils are so inbred.
But the devil's did not accept each other's skin.
"The graft got rejected quite nicely, which shows that the devils do have enough diversity to recognise foreign tissue," he said.
"This is really good news for the devil because it means that the devils' immune system can recognise foreign tissue.
"The challenge now is to work out what is special about those tumour cells to allow them to hide from the devils' immune system.
"I think it may be that the tumour is camouflaged; it's got a camouflage."
University of Sydney Associate Professor Kathy Belov, who has been studying the devil's genetics, says the researchers will now start studying the tumour cells.
"This has probably confused us more than anything else," she said.
"But we are going to come back and start thinking about what it means and how we can use this information to help us beat the disease."
The devil is considered an endangered species and faces extinction in about three decades if a cure for the disease is not found.
Source http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-07-22/20110722-plastic-surgery-sheds-light-on-devil-tumour/2806502
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
More properties under Hendra quarantine
FOUR properties have now been quarantined at Logan City, south of Brisbane, after a horse died from the Hendra virus at a Park Ridge property on Monday night.
Biosecurity Queensland says there was just one horse on the property but any of the seven horses on surrounding properties may have come into contact with it.
Samples will be taken from those horses for testing.
Staff from Queensland Health and Biosecurity Queensland have been doorknocking neighbours of the property where the horse died to provide information about the virus and confirm the location of other horses in the area.
Veterinarian Kylie Schaaf treated the horse at Park Ridge and is one of two people being tested for the virus in the area. The other is the horse's owner.
It is the second time Ms Schaaf has been tested for the Hendra virus after colleague Ben Cunneen died in 2008 while looking after an infected horse at Redlands Veterinary Clinic.
She told ABC Radio today she was not worried about her personal safety because she took all the necessary precautions, but she feels for those who have been affected.
But she said what she does want to see is the vaccine for horses made available quickly.
"Humans can't get infected by bats, however if we can vaccinate the horses which amplify the disease this will prevent them infecting people potentially or at least minimise the risk."
She said her understanding was that the vaccine could be available by March next year if the permit process was sped up.
Ms Schaaf said it was also now getting to the point where it was better to play it safe and take precautions any time a horse was treated.
"It's ridiculous when it could be prevented by simple vaccinations. People wouldn't be at a greater risk of dying," she said.
Eight properties in total are now under quarantine, with 42 horses being monitored.
Three of the properties are in the Beaudesert area and contain 28 horses, while the other property is at Mount Alford, near Boonah, and has seven horses.
Since June 20, six horses have died or have been put down after contracting Hendra - five in southern Queensland and one in northern New South Wales.
In Queensland, 17 people who were exposed to the sick horses are waiting to learn if they have contracted the potentially deadly virus.
Nine others linked to a Hendra case in northern NSW are also waiting for test results.
Premier Anna Bligh said today the new cases were worrying.
"The recent spate of diagnosis of Hendra virus are deeply concerning," Ms Bligh told reporters in Brisbane.
"My heart goes out to the people who are waiting for these results."
Source http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/more-properties-under-hendra-quarantine/story-e6frf7jx-1226089099057
Biosecurity Queensland says there was just one horse on the property but any of the seven horses on surrounding properties may have come into contact with it.
Samples will be taken from those horses for testing.
Staff from Queensland Health and Biosecurity Queensland have been doorknocking neighbours of the property where the horse died to provide information about the virus and confirm the location of other horses in the area.
Veterinarian Kylie Schaaf treated the horse at Park Ridge and is one of two people being tested for the virus in the area. The other is the horse's owner.
It is the second time Ms Schaaf has been tested for the Hendra virus after colleague Ben Cunneen died in 2008 while looking after an infected horse at Redlands Veterinary Clinic.
She told ABC Radio today she was not worried about her personal safety because she took all the necessary precautions, but she feels for those who have been affected.
But she said what she does want to see is the vaccine for horses made available quickly.
"Humans can't get infected by bats, however if we can vaccinate the horses which amplify the disease this will prevent them infecting people potentially or at least minimise the risk."
She said her understanding was that the vaccine could be available by March next year if the permit process was sped up.
Ms Schaaf said it was also now getting to the point where it was better to play it safe and take precautions any time a horse was treated.
"It's ridiculous when it could be prevented by simple vaccinations. People wouldn't be at a greater risk of dying," she said.
Eight properties in total are now under quarantine, with 42 horses being monitored.
Three of the properties are in the Beaudesert area and contain 28 horses, while the other property is at Mount Alford, near Boonah, and has seven horses.
Since June 20, six horses have died or have been put down after contracting Hendra - five in southern Queensland and one in northern New South Wales.
In Queensland, 17 people who were exposed to the sick horses are waiting to learn if they have contracted the potentially deadly virus.
Nine others linked to a Hendra case in northern NSW are also waiting for test results.
Premier Anna Bligh said today the new cases were worrying.
"The recent spate of diagnosis of Hendra virus are deeply concerning," Ms Bligh told reporters in Brisbane.
"My heart goes out to the people who are waiting for these results."
Source http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/more-properties-under-hendra-quarantine/story-e6frf7jx-1226089099057
Friday, May 6, 2011
Synthetic blood saves a life
The Victorian doctor who saved a woman's life using a transfusion of synthetic blood, says the product can help address the shortage of stock in regional Victoria and also address the imbalance in life expectancy between the city and the country.Professor Mark Fitzgerald, who was raised in Teddywaddy West, south of Wycheproof in the state's north-west, faced with losing a patient who was unable to accept human blood transfusions due to religious beliefs had to get a blood substitute from the United States.
The director of trauma services at the Alfred hospital said he only knew about the existence of the synthetic blood, which is derived from cow blood, because he'd been involved in trials of the product in the US.
He said it was not a substitute for the real thing, but could go a long way towards addressing blood bank shortages.
"Half the people who die from injury die from blood lost," Professor Fitzgerald said.
"Our blood supplies aren't infinite and sometimes difficult to access and they need to be stored, the need to be refrigerated, they've only got a certain shelf life - essentially whole blood is only good for about a month.
"This product just carries haemoglobin, it doesn't need to be cross-matched, it can be left on the shelf for three years so it can have its advantages - particularly in the areas where you don't have very good or rapid access to blood."
Source http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2011/05/05/3209041.htm?site=ballarat
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Backyard chillies spark chemical emergency
hillies drying in a Melbourne resident's backyard led to a chemical emergency last night.
An ambulance was called to a home in Cranbourne, in Melbourne's south-east, after two men were reported to be coughing and having difficulty breathing.
At one stage, up to 10 people in the area were complaining of feeling dizzy and nauseated.
The area was doorknocked and it emerged someone was drying out strong chillies in their backyard and that was the source of the fumes.
It was a still evening and homes up to 150 metres away were affected by the strong chilli smell.
Source http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/04/20/3196697.htm?site=melbourne
An ambulance was called to a home in Cranbourne, in Melbourne's south-east, after two men were reported to be coughing and having difficulty breathing.
At one stage, up to 10 people in the area were complaining of feeling dizzy and nauseated.
The area was doorknocked and it emerged someone was drying out strong chillies in their backyard and that was the source of the fumes.
It was a still evening and homes up to 150 metres away were affected by the strong chilli smell.
Source http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/04/20/3196697.htm?site=melbourne
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Australians unaware of bowel cancer toll
Just one in four Australians is aware that bowel cancer is the nation's second deadliest cancer, according to a new survey.
The lack of awareness reflects alarmingly slow progress in population screening for the disease, Cancer Council Australia said on Wednesday.
A Galaxy survey found only one in four Australians were aware that bowel cancer is the nation's biggest cancer killer after lung cancer.
Advertisement: Story continues below
Cancer Council Australia is calling on the federal government to fully fund a bowel screening program.
"If the national bowel cancer screening program were fully funded and promoted, we would expect public awareness about the impact of bowel cancer to be much higher," chair of Cancer Council Australia's bowel cancer screening committee, Anita Tang, said.
"Yet 14 years after the benefits of screening were confirmed, all we have is a partial program that no longer targets new participants and faces an uncertain future."
The survey found the majority of people thought breast cancer was the biggest killer when, in fact, it is the fourth most deadly, after lung, bowel and prostate cancers.
"Breast cancer advocates have done an excellent job raising breast cancer awareness," Ms Tang said.
"If the Australian government does not announce a plan for the program's implementation in the 2011/12 budget, people affected by bowel cancer will be entitled to ask why they were denied the benefits of population screening."
Source http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/australians-unaware-of-bowel-cancer-toll-20110406-1d33a.html
The lack of awareness reflects alarmingly slow progress in population screening for the disease, Cancer Council Australia said on Wednesday.
A Galaxy survey found only one in four Australians were aware that bowel cancer is the nation's biggest cancer killer after lung cancer.
Advertisement: Story continues below
Cancer Council Australia is calling on the federal government to fully fund a bowel screening program.
"If the national bowel cancer screening program were fully funded and promoted, we would expect public awareness about the impact of bowel cancer to be much higher," chair of Cancer Council Australia's bowel cancer screening committee, Anita Tang, said.
"Yet 14 years after the benefits of screening were confirmed, all we have is a partial program that no longer targets new participants and faces an uncertain future."
The survey found the majority of people thought breast cancer was the biggest killer when, in fact, it is the fourth most deadly, after lung, bowel and prostate cancers.
"Breast cancer advocates have done an excellent job raising breast cancer awareness," Ms Tang said.
"If the Australian government does not announce a plan for the program's implementation in the 2011/12 budget, people affected by bowel cancer will be entitled to ask why they were denied the benefits of population screening."
Source http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/australians-unaware-of-bowel-cancer-toll-20110406-1d33a.html
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Australia’s first transplanted hand starts moving
Peter Walsh, 65, a grandfather, with no hands or feet has been wriggling his new fingers after becoming the first Australian recipient of a hand transplant. He underwent a landmark nine-hour operation at St Vincent's Hospital this week after years of painstaking planning by Melbourne specialists.
Mr Walsh, who was a plumber lost both his hands, most of his left leg and part of his right foot four years ago to a bacterial infection which almost killed him. This week the grandfather of 16 from Cobben, in Victoria's west received a donor’s right hand. Surgeons have been cautious in declaring its short-term success - it is very early days - but Mr Walsh was yesterday displaying promising signs with his donated right hand. Prof Wayne Morrison, who led the surgical team said, “Peter was wriggling his fingers today…We actually don't want him to be moving his hand yet, but it's demonstrating everything is connected…Everything is on track.”
The next question is whether Mr Walsh's body accepts the donor hand. Sensation in his fingertips will not be felt for a year, if at all say surgeons. After four to five weeks, he should be able to perform basic movements, working towards making a fist. He will be undergoing physiotherapy now and given a lifetime of anti-rejection medication to prevent his body from rejecting the new hand.
About 60 hand and arm transplants have been performed around the world, with a very high success rate.
The medical director of hand transplant program at UCLA, Dr Sue McDiarmid said, “It is truly amazing to see the function that returns in these transplanted hands over the course of the months and even the years…Our patients do need to put some time in with the rehab, but I have seen patients restored to full use of their hands doing the things that you and I take for granted.”
Source http://www.news-medical.net/news/20110323/Australiae28099s-first-transplanted-hand-starts-moving.aspx
Mr Walsh, who was a plumber lost both his hands, most of his left leg and part of his right foot four years ago to a bacterial infection which almost killed him. This week the grandfather of 16 from Cobben, in Victoria's west received a donor’s right hand. Surgeons have been cautious in declaring its short-term success - it is very early days - but Mr Walsh was yesterday displaying promising signs with his donated right hand. Prof Wayne Morrison, who led the surgical team said, “Peter was wriggling his fingers today…We actually don't want him to be moving his hand yet, but it's demonstrating everything is connected…Everything is on track.”
The next question is whether Mr Walsh's body accepts the donor hand. Sensation in his fingertips will not be felt for a year, if at all say surgeons. After four to five weeks, he should be able to perform basic movements, working towards making a fist. He will be undergoing physiotherapy now and given a lifetime of anti-rejection medication to prevent his body from rejecting the new hand.
About 60 hand and arm transplants have been performed around the world, with a very high success rate.
The medical director of hand transplant program at UCLA, Dr Sue McDiarmid said, “It is truly amazing to see the function that returns in these transplanted hands over the course of the months and even the years…Our patients do need to put some time in with the rehab, but I have seen patients restored to full use of their hands doing the things that you and I take for granted.”
Source http://www.news-medical.net/news/20110323/Australiae28099s-first-transplanted-hand-starts-moving.aspx
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)