Swimming Pool Safety Alert

CDC urges public to be "vigilant" about pool safety.
The AP (5/21, Stobbe) reports, "A new government report shows one in eight public swimming pools were shut down two years ago because of dirty water or other problems, like missing safety equipment." The data are "based on more than 120,000 inspections of public swimming pools in 2008, including those in parks and hotels." In fact, this is "the largest study of the topic ever done by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which released the report Thursday." The agency said that "each year, there are about 15 or 20 outbreaks from stomach bugs blamed on pools. ... Studies suggest a quarter of them are caused by bacteria, viruses or parasites that should have been killed by proper pool treatment and chlorination."

Yoga and Improved Sleep

Yoga classes may help cancer survivors sleep better.
USA Today (5/21, Szabo) reports that "yoga classes can help cancer survivors sleep better, according to a study" scheduled to be presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology's annual meeting and funded by the National Institutes of Health. Investigators "randomly assigned 410 people who had finished treatment to receive either their usual follow-up care or attend a 75-minute yoga class, twice a week, for four weeks."
Bloomberg News (5/21, Randall) reports that "by the end of the trial, 31 percent of yoga patients no longer had the sleep disruptions, twice the recovery rate of patients who didn't take classes." The researchers found that "yoga practitioners also reported a 42 percent reduction in fatigue, compared with a 12 percent reduction for the control group." While "yoga users decreased the use of sleep medication by 21 percent...the control group actually increased reliance on sleeping drugs by five percent."

Ovarian Cancer Detection Update

New method may help detect ovarian cancer earlier.
NBC Nightly News (5/20, story 2, 2:35, Williams) reported, "We have a big health news story for women tonight." It is "about ovarian cancer," which is "often called the silent killer because it's so often diagnosed late and that it's so often fatal."
The AP (5/21, Marchione) reports that "a simple blood test followed by ultrasound exams as needed found deadly tumors before they caused symptoms, and without giving too many false alarms," according to research scheduled to be presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology's annual meeting.
Bloomberg News (5/21, Randall) reports that "researchers were able to detect early development of three aggressive cancer cases and two borderline tumors when doctors monitored fluctuations of a protein known as CA-125, according to the study of 3,252 women released...by the MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston." According to Bloomberg News, "The CA-125 protein was identified as a tumor marker in the 1980s and has long been used by doctors to watch for relapse in patients who have been treated for ovarian cancer." But, "until now, the test was considered a failure at detecting new cases, because it missed some tumors and falsely identified too many healthy women as having cancer."
The Houston Chronicle (5/21, Ackerman) quotes Karen Lu, MD, the study's principal investigator, as saying, "If the study's findings are confirmed in larger studies, I think this new strategy will be practice-changing."

Statin Safety

Statins may increase risk of cataracts, kidney failure, muscle pain, and liver dysfunction.
Bloomberg News (5/21, Cortez) reports that, according to a study published online May 20 in the British Medical Journal, statin "drugs to lower cholesterol and prevent heart disease...increase the risk of cataracts, kidney failure, muscle pain and liver dysfunction." In "a study of more than two million Britons," researchers found that "for every 10,000 people taking a statin, there were about 271 fewer cases of heart disease, eight fewer cases of esophageal cancer, 307 extra patients with cataracts, 23 additional patients with acute kidney failure, and 74 extra patients with liver dysfunction."
HealthDay (5/21, Reinberg) reported, "On the more positive side, the study found no link between statin use and risks for a wide range of cancers (including stomach, colon, lung, renal, breast, or prostate malignancies), as well as no connection to Parkinson's disease, rheumatoid arthritis, blood clots, dementia, or fractures." Important to note is that "the risk for adverse effects lasted as long as the drugs were being taken, but were highest during the year when treatment was initiated, the researchers found."
While statins all shared similar adverse effects, fluvastatin (Lescol) produced the highest risk for liver dysfunction, Reuters (5/21, Helland) reported. An accompanying commentary nevertheless emphasized how the benefits of statins (reducing the risk for heart disease) outweigh the risks of adverse effects when used properly

Student Athlete Evaluation

House committee hearing focuses on head injuries in student athletes.
The New York Times (5/21, B17, Schwarz) reports that the House Committee on Education and Labor heard testimony Thursday "on how head injuries affect the student in student-athletes." The hearing "centered on girls -- who, studies indicate, may be more susceptible to concussions than boys." Committee chairman George Miller (D-CA) "arranged for the hearing as well as a Government Accountability Office report on youth sports concussions."
The Washington Post (5/21, Carrera) notes that the GAO's report "highlighted an underestimation of" the number of concussions "by three national databases and inconsistencies among state laws" that deal with "return-to-play guidelines in high school sports." Currently, states are considering "legislation that would require high school athletes who have suffered head injuries to be medically cleared before returning to play."

A New Synthetic Cell

Scientists may have created the first "synthetic cell."
ABC World News (5/20, story 4, 2:30, Sawyer) reported, "World renowned geneticist Craig Venter" and a team of researchers at the J. Craig Venter Institute have "created life from nonliving parts." That is, they developed "the first synthetic cell." Dr. Venter explained, "Instead of having a genetic relative that it evolved from, the parent of this cell is a computer."
It is possible that one day, such cells "will make up designer organisms that can be programmed to do specific tasks like creating new biofuels or breaking down oil," CBS Evening News (5/20, story 3, 0:30, Couric) reported.
The breakthrough stems from a step that was taken approximately three years ago, when Dr. Venter was able to show that "the natural DNA from one bacterium could be inserted into another and that it would take over the host cell's operation," the New York Times (5/21, A17, Wade) reports. In 2009, "his team synthesized a piece of DNA with 1,080,000 bases." Now, according to the paper in Science, the team has found that the "synthetic DNA takes over a bacterial cell just as the natural DNA did, making the cell generate the proteins specified by the new DNA's genetic information in preference to those of its own genome."
In other words, the "donor genome reprogrammed the recipient cell, which went on to replicate and divide," the Washington Post (5/21, Brown) reports. "The result was new colonies of Mycoplasma mycoides." Notably, the "man-made copy of the genome that Mycoplasma mycoides produces naturally" was "not an exact duplicate," as 14 "of the bacterium's 850 genes were altered or deleted during the experiment -- 12 intentionally, two accidentally." The Los Angeles Times (5/21, Maugh, Roan), Time (5/20, Park), the Wall Street Journal (5/21, A1, Hotz), and NPR (5/20, Palca) also covered the story.

High Fat Meals Linked to Asthma

High-fat meals may increase inflammation, reduce lung function in patients with asthma.
The Los Angeles Times (5/16, Stein) "Booster Shots" blog reported, "People with asthma are familiar with typical triggers, such as exercise, allergies, and smoking, that can bring on inflammation." Now, new research from Australia suggests that "high-fat meals...may also increase inflammation in airways." Before reaching that conclusion, asthmatic study participants were asked to eat either "a high-fat meal of fast food hamburgers and hash browns that came in at 1,000 calories, with 52% of calories from fat," or "a 200-calorie low-fat meal of reduced fat yogurt with 13% of calories from fat."
Investigators "found that markers of airway inflammation increased significantly among those who ate the high-fat meal," HealthDay (5/16, Gordon) reported. "They also found that lung function was affected as well." In fact, participants "who were given the high-fat meal who then used their asthma inhaler medication saw just a one percent improvement in their lung function," while their low-fat meal counterparts "saw a 4.5 percent increase in their lung function after using their medication." The results of the study were expected to be presented "Sunday at the American Thoracic Society's International Conference in New Orleans."

ADHD and Malathion Link

Malathion associated with AD/HD in children.
The Los Angeles Times (5/17, Maugh) reports that, according to a study published in the journal Pediatrics, "children with higher levels of the pesticide malathion in their urine seem to be at an increased risk of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (AD/HD)." Researchers from the Harvard University School of Public Health "studied data on 1,139 children from the government's National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey for the period 2000 to 2004. Among the information collected in the survey was the level of metabolites of malathion in urine and, through a structured interview with the parents, whether a child had been formally diagnosed with AD/HD."
The children "with higher levels had increased chances of having ADHD," the AP (5/17, Johnson) reports. The youngsters "may have eaten food treated with pesticides, breathed it in the air, or swallowed it in their drinking water. The study didn't determine how they were exposed," but the study authors theorized that most children who are not on farms may be exposed to pesticides through their diet.
Time (5/17, Park) reports that the study's "author stresses that her study uncovers only an association, not a direct causal link between pesticide exposure and the...condition."

Daycare Quality

NIH study evaluates impact of high-, low-quality daycare on children.
USA Today (5/14, Szabo) reports, "Children who attended high-quality childcare as babies and toddlers do slightly better on academic tests at age 15 than kids who were in lower-quality care, according to the largest and longest-running study of its kind, released" by NIH. But, "kids who spent the most total time in day care also grew up to act more impulsively and take more risks than their peers, according to the study of 1,364 youngsters, who have been evaluated regularly since they were 1 month old." Nevertheless, "youth who had spent more time in high-quality childcare were slightly less likely than others to act out as teenagers." James Griffin, of NIH, said that "earlier results from the study indicate that parents have 'far more influence' on children's development than childcare."
The Los Angeles Times (5/14, Healy) explains, "When answering questions that measured their impulsiveness, teens rated themselves about 16% more rash in their behavior for every additional 10 hours they spent per week in day care as a preschooler." Meanwhile, "in terms of risk-taking, the link to time spent in day care was more marginal: Ten more hours a week in day care prompted the average teen to answer one out of 30 questions with an admission of more risky behavior."
The Washington Post (5/14, Stein) reports that although the "differences between teens who received low- and high-quality care when they were very young were relatively small...the endurance of these disparities startled researchers." The Post quotes Griffin as saying, "The fact that you have this persistent association is pretty remarkable." Notably, "several experts praised the findings, saying they underscore the urgent need for local, state and federal governments, employers and others to improve access to high-quality child care." The Wall Street Journal (5/14, Wang) and Reuters (5/14, Fox) also cover the story.

Calling Your Mom May Relieve Stress

Study explains why calling mom may relieve daughter's stress.
USA Today (5/12, Szabo) reported, "When mothers soothe their children, levels of hormones involved with love and trust surge, and stress hormones plummet. Now, for the first time, a study" published May 12 in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences "shows that just a mother's voice can set off the same chemical cascade."
"For the study, researchers asked 61 girls, ages 7 to 12, to give a speech or do math problems in front of an audience, a surefire way to make a kid stressed," CNN /Health.com (5/12, Harding) reported. "Afterward, roughly one-third of the girls were reunited with their mothers, who hugged and soothed them for 15 minutes. Another third spoke to their mothers on the phone for 15 minutes," while the remaining group watched a film judged to be neutral in emotional tone. Both before and after the stressful event, all groups had had saliva tests taken measuring cortisol levels.
HealthDay (5/12, Mozes) reported, "According to scientists from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, stressed-out daughters experienced an equally significant drop in levels of the stress hormone cortisol after exposure to either their mother's touch or her voice." Meanwhile, "either form of maternal intervention appeared to prompt a simultaneous jump in levels of the so-called 'love hormone' oxytocin, the researchers found." In other words, "both phone and in-person maternal contact produced an equally substantial and enduring reprieve from stress and anxiety among the girls."
BBC News (5/12), the UK's Telegraph (5/12, Gammell), and the UK's Guardian (5/12, Meikle) also covered the story.

Submarines and Women Sailors

Physician questions how radiation from submarines may affect women sailors.
In the Los Angeles Times (5/13), Roger C. Dunham, a doctor of internal medicine, writes that "the United States is poised to repeal" a ban on women sailors serving on submarines, with "the first women...scheduled to serve aboard subs by 2012." However, according to Dunham, "on submarines, the nuclear reactor is near the center of the vessel, and sailors need to pass by that radiation-emitting system to get to the engine room watch stations, often several times a day." Dunham wonders what effect this radiation could have on the "genetically sensitive" ovarian "tissue in women that is intimately involved in the process of childbearing." He argues that "female sailors volunteering for service aboard a nuclear submarine must be better informed about their risk before it is too late for them, or for the children they hope to bear."

Heart Risk and Overtime Work

Working overtime may be linked to heart risks.
The Los Angeles Times (5/11, Mestel) "Booster Shots" blog reported that working overtime may be bad for one's heart, according to a study published in the European Heart Journal. The "study looked at 6,014...men and women, tracking their health for an average of 11 years."
Bloomberg News (5/11, Hallam) reported that researchers found that "people who added three or more hours to a seven-hour day had a 60 percent greater risk of heart attack, angina, and death from cardiovascular disease than those with no overtime work."

Misleading Pharmaceutical Claims

FDA rolls out "bad ad program" to identify misleading pharmaceutical marketing claims.
The AP (5/12, Perrone) reports that on May 11, the Food and Drug Administration announced "it will begin asking doctors to keep an eye out for misleading drug advertisements as part of the agency's latest effort to police the pharmaceutical industry's multibillion-dollar marketing machine." Specifically, the FDA's "'bad ad program ' urges doctors to report ads and sales pitches that violate FDA rules." And, "as part of its new program, FDA will offer doctors training at medical conferences to help spot misleading ads. They can report advertising violations anonymously by emailing badad(at)fda.gov or calling 877-RX-DDMAC."
According to an agency news release, the program is also aimed at "consumer ads that downplay drug risks and effectiveness," Modern Healthcare (5/12, Rhea) reports.
CQ HealthBeat (5/12) reports, "The program will be run by the Division of Drug Marketing, Advertising, and Communications in the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, and it will be implemented in three phases. In the first phase, FDA staff members will talk with healthcare providers at conventions and will partner with medical societies to hand out material about the program." The second and third phases "will expand those efforts and add updated educational material, officials said."
Reuters (5/12, Richwine) quotes Rebecca Patchin, MD, board chair of the American Medical Association, who called the agency's new program to rein in deceptive or misleading marketing of medications "a helpful avenue for physicians to bring these activities to the agency's attention." Speaking on behalf of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, Ken Johnson called the FDA's new program "another step to help educate -- and receive feedback from -- healthcare providers about prescription drug advertising and promotion." Medscape (5/11, Lowes) also covered the story.

Food Allergy Articles

Food allergies may be less common than believed.
On its front page, the New York Times (5/12, A1, Kolata) reports that approximately "30 percent of the population believe they have food allergies," but a new report, "commissioned by the federal government," indicates that many of those people are wrong. "While there is no doubt that people can be allergic to certain foods, with reproducible responses ranging from a rash to a severe life-threatening reaction, the true incidence of food allergies is only about eight percent for children and less than five percent for adults."
Before reaching those conclusions, "researchers at Stanford University, Rand Corp., and the Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Healthcare System searched databases, analyzed reviews, assessed controlled trials, and compared sample sizes," the Los Angeles Times (5/11, Dennis) "Booster Shots" blog reported. "Their conclusion largely seems to be: What a mess." In other words, there is "voluminous literature related to food allergy, but high-quality studies are few." Yet, the confusion begins with terminology, according to the Wall Street Journal (5/11, Hobson) "Health Blog."
It "turns out that the term 'food allergy' has no universally accepted definition, nor are there well-accepted criteria for diagnosis," CNN (5/11, Landau) pointed out. Indeed, a "common method of diagnosing food allergies is the skin prick test," and a number of physicians "also recommend blood tests called 'serum-food specific IgE,'" while others turn to the "atopy patch test." But, "none of these methods...says anything about the severity of symptoms that a person will experience if he or she ingests the substance -- for some, there may be no reaction at all." In short, "there is no one test that's better than the other, either, researchers said."
Investigators also "looked at 25 studies of seven food allergy management strategies: elimination, immunotherapy, food substitutions, diets in breastfeeding women, medical or pharmacologic therapies, probiotics, and education," MedPage Today (5/11, Fiore) reported. Regarding elimination diets, the "lone study that assessed their effects reported improvement in atopic dermatitis," and "immunotherapy is promising...but data are insufficient to recommend use." In terms of prevention, "the researchers found that delayed introduction of solids was tied to decreased food intolerance, but the quality of these studies was limited," as well.
According to Medscape (5/11, Larson), this led the investigators to conclude that the "sweeping lack of key information has led to an overdiagnosis of food allergies -- a dangerous situation." But, on the other hand, the team wrote in their Journal of the American Medical Association paper, the "overdiagnosis or misdiagnosis of food allergy by medical practitioners obscures the substantial morbidity caused in patients truly affected by immune-mediated food allergy and serves to perpetuate some public misperceptions that food allergy is a trivial medical condition." HealthDay (5/11, Preidt) also covered the study.

Vitamin D Update for Older Adults

Older adults may need up to twice the amount of vitamin D than is typically recommended.
The Los Angeles Times (5/10, Roan) "Booster Shots" blog reported, "Older adults need up to twice the amount of vitamin D than is typically recommended, according to guidelines released Monday by the International Osteoporosis Foundation." The guidelines "urged adults, defined by this group as 65 and older, to aim for a 25-OHD blood level -- the primary marker for vitamin D in the blood -- of 75 nanomoles per liter. To reach that level, one would need an intake of 20 to 25 micrograms per day (or 800 to 1,000 international units) of vitamin D," as opposed to the amounts suggested by the current US Recommended Daily Allowance of "10 micrograms (400 IU) for people ages 51 to 70, and 15 micrograms (600 IU) for people 71 and older."

New Pain Management Strategy

Physicians using novel procedures for pain management.
Laura Landro writes in the Wall Street Journal (5/11) The Informed Patient column that peripheral-nerve stimulation, a procedure which allows a physician to implant a tiny, battery-operated generator, is one of a growing number of treatments for people who endure chronic pain, and who have been unable to find relief from drugs, physical therapy, or even acupuncture. The procedures typically cost between $15,000 and $50,000. Data show that about 76 million Americans suffer from chronic pain. Notably, the CDC has said that over eight million Americans use pain management drugs.

Nuts and Cholesterol

Nuts may help lower cholesterol levels.
According to the Wall Street Journal (5/11, Dooren), research published in the Archives of Internal Medicine suggests that nuts may help lower cholesterol levels.
HealthDay (5/10, Edelson) reported that investigators "pooled data on 583 men and women who had participated in 25 nut consumption trials."
"Patients in the trials ate an average of 67 grams, or about 2.4 ounces, of nuts daily," WebMD (5/10, Hendrick) reported.
MedPage Today (5/10, Neale) reported that the researchers found that "eating an average of 67 grams of nuts a day (2.4 ounces) reduced total cholesterol by 5.9% and LDL cholesterol by 7.4%."

Huntington's Disease Update

Scientists claim to have made Huntington's disease breakthrough.
NBC Nightly News (5/10, story 8, 2:30, Williams) reported that since the death of her mother, "Dr. Nancy Wexler has" been obsessed with "Huntington's disease, a horrible, inherited brain disorder that destroys the mind and the body." After her mother was diagnosed in 1968, she came to understand that "she and her sister Alice" had "a 50% chance of inheriting the disease." So, "her father Milton, a psychoanalyst, started a foundation," which "Dr. Wexler now heads to try to find a cure." Now, through his work with mice, "foundation-supported researcher Dr. William Yang," of UCLA, has "discovered how to shut down" a specific "gene so the Huntington's is cured." Dr. Wexler added, "It really dramatically cures the mice and gives us a lead about new therapy."

OTC Genetic Testing Kit

Startup to sell over-the-counter genetic testing kit at drugstores.
The New York Times (5/11, B2, Pollack) reports that genetic tests, which "look at specific variations in a person's DNA to derive information about their risk of getting diseases like diabetes, heart disease, and various forms of cancer," are "heading to the corner drug store." Typically, the tests have "been sold directly to consumers through the Internet or through doctors' offices." Now, startup Pathway Genomics "will sell such a test through most of the nation's 7,500 Walgreens stores."
In fact, "starting May 14, Walgreen Co. will become the first US retailer to sell test kits, for $30, that promise customers" genetic-risk information, as well as clues about their chances of "passing conditions to their unborn children," Bloomberg News (5/11, Waters) reports. "Buyers get vials in which they can send their saliva to Pathway Genomics...then pay another $79 to $249 to get a detailed report assessing their genes." Notably, the "the Pathway product will be stocked on store shelves near drug-testing kits and other diagnostic tools, said Jim Cohn, a Walgreen spokesman." Although the move may "give gene tests a higher public profile that will entice more customers to try them" out, "retail marketing may also draw scrutiny."
Specifically, the marketing strategy concerns those "who worry it will open a Pandora's box of confusion, privacy violations, genetic discrimination and other issues," the Washington Post (5/11, A1, Stein) reports on its front page. What's more, the "new test comes as federal regulators, bioethicists, geneticists, doctors and patients have been increasingly struggling with how to use, interpret, regulate, and guard against abuse from the flood of genetic information, tests and technologies being developed because of the massive, government-sponsored Human Genome Project." Already, the "Food and Drug Administration questioned Monday whether the test will be sold legally because it does not have the agency's approval."

Proton Pump Inhibitor Complications

Studies link PPIs to increased risk of bacterial infection, bone fracture.
The CBS Evening News (5/10, story 6, Couric) reported on proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), which are "some very popular drugs used to treat acid reflux and ulcers." They are "sold under brand names like Nexium, Prilosec and Prevacid," and generate "$13.5 billion in sales."
In fact, in 2009, approximately 119 million PPI prescriptions were written in the US, making the medicines part of the third-largest selling class of drugs, the Wall Street Journal (5/11, Dooren) reports. Some physicians have raised concerns about overprescribing, however. CNN (5/10, Gardner) reported on its website that "the risks" of taking PPIs "may outweigh the benefits for people with less serious conditions, experts say." What's more, they "can have rare but serious side effects, including an increased risk of bacterial infection and bone fracture, according to several new studies in the Archives of Internal Medicine."
During one trial, researchers at the University of Washington "looked at 161,806 postmenopausal women who didn't have any history of hip fracture and were enrolled in the Women's Health Initiative, a 15-year research program," Bloomberg News (5/10, Ostrow) reported. "Over eight years of the study, there were 21,247 bone fractures." Even though "women who took the drugs were no more likely to break their hips than women who didn't take the drugs," the Boston Globe (5/10, Cooney) "White Coat Notes" blog reported that "they did have a 47 percent increased risk of spine fractures, a 26 percent increased risk of forearm or wrist fractures, and a 25 percent increased risk of other fractures."
Meanwhile, Dr. Michael Howell, of the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, and colleagues "analyzed data on more than 100,000 patients discharged from the hospital over a five-year period," HealthDay (5/10, Goodwin) reported. They "found that taking a proton pump inhibitor each day increased the chances of a C. difficile infection by 74 percent," and "patients who took proton pump inhibitors longer than that had more than double the chance. That translates to about one additional case of C. difficile for every 533 people taking proton pump inhibitors."
Along similar lines, MedPage Today (5/10, Bankhead) reported that a study conducted by Amy Linsky, MD, of Boston Medical Center, revealed that "PPI use was associated with a 42% increase in the risk of recurrent C. difficile infection, with the greatest risk among patients older than 80 and in patients treated with antibiotics that were not targeted to the bacterium." Meanwhile, a paper written by Taiwanese scientists indicated that "high-dose PPI therapy proved to be no more effective than lower doses for controlling bleeding ulcers," while Harvard data revealed that "introduction of a standardized guideline for prescribing practices reduced inpatient use of PPIs, but only among patients who were not on PPIs at admission."
Indeed, Los Angeles Times (5/11, Maugh) reports, the "risks are relatively small, but the drugs are so widely used that large numbers of people are affected, wrote Dr. Mitchell H. Katz of the San Francisco Department of Public Health in an editorial accompanying the reports."

Birth Control Pill Context

FDA approval of the pill ushered in era of information about contraception.
Op-ed columnist Gail Collins wrote in the New York Times (5/8, A21), "A thousand years ago, popular birth control methods in the Western world included spitting into the mouth of a frog, eating bees and wearing the testicles of a weasel. In Córdoba, Spain, which was supposed to be on the scientific cutting edge, women were told to leap up and down vigorously after sex, and then jump backward nine times." Collins added that we should "give thanks that we avoided the era of the weasel testicles." She noted that the FDA approved the pill 50 years ago on Mother's Day. Collins also discussed the obstacles advocates faced in providing women with information about contraception, and noted that Margaret Sanger "was the first person to publish an evaluation of all the available forms of birth control."
The pill's "bad image" endures partly because it must still be prescribed, obstetrician says. British obstetrician Malcolm Potts writes in a Los Angeles Times (5/10) op-ed, "I knew the biologists who developed 'the pill' and the doctors who tested it. In the 1960s, as a young obstetrician in Britain, I began prescribing oral contraceptives. I saw how they gave women a freedom they'd never known." But, "from the get-go the pill was intensely controversial. Would women become sexual hedonists? Would the pope approve its use? Was the pill so dangerous it should be taken off the market?" Potts says that in-depth studies on the pill have revealed that it is safe, "suppresses ovulation," and "is the only drug a doctor can prescribe that is known to prevent cancer." Yet, it continues "to have a bad image," in part "because it has remained a prescription drug."

Sleep Disturbance in Assisted Living Residents

Assisted-living residents may suffer from sleep problems.
The Los Angeles Times (5/8, Roan) "Booster Shoots" blog reported, "A study of adults who live in assisted-living facilities found that 65% had significant sleep problems, according to a study released Friday in the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. The study also found that people with sleep problems had an increased incidence of depression and a lower quality of life." The study found that "the most common sleep problems included waking in the middle of the night or early morning or the inability to fall asleep within 30 minutes." The study noted that "much is known about how to resolve such sleep problems," and that "these strategies should be applied in assisted living facilities to see if better-quality sleep improves daily functioning and quality of life."

Acupuncture and Back Pain

Data show Americans increasingly using acupuncture for some conditions.
Lesley Alderman wrote in the New York Times (5/8, B5) Patient Money column that "a growing number of people are turning to acupuncture for help with conditions including infertility, chronic pain, depression, and menopause symptoms. And they are turning to it even though financially it remains a largely out-of-pocket form of health care." In fact, "in a 2007 survey, 3.1 million adults reported using acupuncture in the previous 12 months, up from 2.1 million in a 2002 survey, according to the government's National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, a unit of the National Institutes of Health." Although the center "is mainly neutral on the question of acupuncture's effectiveness," some studies have shown that "acupuncture can be an effective treatment for a range of conditions, like chronic headaches, osteoarthritis, depression in pregnancy, and low back pain."

Cancer Cost Trends in the US

Data show cancer costs doubled over last two decades.
USA Today (5/10, Weise) reports, "The cost of treating cancer has doubled over the past 20 years, but those costs are in line with overall trends in health spending. And while more people are getting cancer as the US population ages, treatment has shifted away from hospitals to outpatient settings, finds a study in Monday's edition of the journal Cancer." In addition, "how the new health care bill will affect the numbers isn't clear, says Florence Tangka, a health economist with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and senior author on the paper."
The AP (5/10, Stobbe) reports, "The study confounds conventional wisdom in several respects. The soaring price of new cancer treatments has received widespread attention, but the researchers conclude that rising costs were mainly driven by the growing number of cancer patients." Study data also revealed that "private insurers now cover a greater share of cancer treatment costs -- about 50 percent -- while patients' out-of-pocket costs have fallen over the past two decades." Despite the findings, "cancer accounts for only 5 percent of total US medical costs, and that has not changed in the last few decades." Meanwhile, "Dr. Len Lichtenfeld, of the American Cancer Society...said he would have expected the proportion of cancer costs to rise."
Researchers able to categorize low, medium, or high risk for future DCIS. The Los Angeles Times (5/10, Dance) reports, "After analyzing the outcomes for nearly 1,200 women who had a" ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) "surgically removed...researchers were able to categorize low, medium or high risk for future DCIS or invasive, spreading cancer." In the "study, published online April 28 in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, the researchers found that the worst offenders were DCIS detected by palpation -- that is, obvious to the touch -- or those that carried three particular chemical marks on their surface." The study indicated that "DCIS found by mammogram, or missing those marks, was far less likely to cause trouble."
High amounts of coffee, sugary soft drinks may not boost colon cancer risk. The Los Angeles Times (5/7, Healy) "Booster Shots" blog reported that "a study in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute concludes that people who coffee daily -- even four or more cups -- are no more likely to develop colon cancer than those who do not drink coffee." Investigators "at the Harvard School of Public Health also concluded there's no higher risk of colon cancer among those who drink sweetened beverages daily." The researchers "did, however, find a small increase in risk of colon cancer among those who drank a lot of tea -- 32 oz or more a day."

Chocolate Flavored Toddler Formula

Chocolate-flavored toddler formula criticized by nutritionists.
The Los Angeles Times (5/6, Wernau) reported that "nutritionists are criticizing a new formula for toddlers that comes in chocolate and vanilla flavors as an early start to obesity." Nutrition professor Marion Nestle, of New York University, even "complained to the US Food and Drug Administration, arguing that the product is claiming health benefits for children younger than two," but "FDA spokesman Michael Herndon said the product is considered a food and not an infant formula under FDA guidelines and does not appear to be in violation of the law as it doesn't claim to 'cure' anything, only to 'support' normal body functions." What's more, the Mead Johnson Nutrition Co. maintains its products are "no sweeter than chocolate milk or orange juice that toddlers drink and contain added nutrients that milk lacks."

Liver Cancer Update

CDC data show increasing rate of hepatocellular carcinoma in the US.
The CNN (5/7, Bixler) "Paging Dr. Gupta" blog reports that a new CDC study "finds the most common form of liver cancer is on the rise. According to the May 5th Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, rates of hepatocellular carcinoma...in the United States increased from 2.7 cases per 100,000 people in 2001 to 3.2 cases per 100,000 people in 2006." The data also indicate that "untreated hepatitis B and hepatitis C infections are responsible for about 78 percent of global HCC cases." CNN adds, "One reason may be the legacy of the Vietnam War. 'Many veterans contracted it through exposure to blood and body fluids,' says Dr Otis Brawley, Chief Medical Officer of the American Cancer Society and CNN.com Health contributor."

Childhood Cancer Linked to Alcohol in Pregnant Mothers

Drinking while pregnant may increase unborn babies' risk of acute myeloid leukemia.
CNN (5/6, Hughes) "Paging Dr. Gupta" blog reported that "drinking mothers increase their unborn babies' risk of developing acute myeloid leukemia (AML) says a study published in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers, & Prevention." The higher "risk of AML in children between the ages of 0 and 4 was shown to increase in mothers that self-reported consuming one drink per week." Researchers found that "the risk remained the same regardless of the kind of alcohol."
HealthDay (5/6, Holohan) reported that "no greater impact was found during any stage of pregnancy, but the risk increased with the amount of alcohol consumed." Reuters (5/6, Brooks) also covered the story.

Gardasil Debate

Gardasil use in boys debated among parents already uneasy over vaccines.
The Chicago Tribune (5/7, Black) reports that, "for parents already uneasy about vaccinating their children, the news that the maker of Gardasil recently began promoting its HPV shots to boys as young as nine is prompting yet another round of internal debate." Last year, the CDC "granted Merck permission to promote the vaccine for males as young as nine, but stopped short of recommending it as part of a boy's routine immunization." Physicians "who have begun recommending the vaccine for both sexes expect questions from parents, given the controversy it initially generated when introduced."

Adult Survivors of Childhood Cancer

Adult survivors of childhood cancer four times more likely to suffer PTSD.
The Los Angeles Times (5/6, Maugh) "Booster Shots" blog reported that, according to a study published online April 30 in the journal Pediatrics, "adult survivors of childhood cancer are four times as likely as their siblings to suffer post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)." In a study of "6,542 adults over 18 who were diagnosed with cancer between 1970 and 1986, as well as 368 of their siblings," researchers found that "about 9% of the adults suffer PTSD," compared to "only 2% of their siblings."

Cancer Risk from Chemical Exposure

Panel says cancer risk from chemical exposure underestimated.
The CBS Evening News (5/6, story 5, 2:00, Couric) reported, "The risk of getting cancer is often linked to our genetics and choices like smoking, but...a presidential panel" in a new report says "it's time to take a hard look at the environment for potentially cancer-causing chemicals in our daily lives, like the water we drink and the household products we use."
The Washington Post (5/7, Layton) reports that "epidemiologists have long maintained that tobacco use, diet and other factors are responsible for most cancers, and that chemicals and pollutants cause only a small portion -- perhaps five percent." However, "the presidential panel said that figure has been 'grossly underestimated,' but it did not provide a new estimate."
On its website, CBS News (5/6, LaPook) reported that "the presidential panel notes more than 80,000 chemicals are used in the United States and only a few hundred have been tested for safety."
American Cancer Society critical of new report. The New York Times (5/7, A16, Grady) reports that "Dr. Michael Thun, an epidemiologist from the [American Cancer Society], said in an online statement that the report was 'unbalanced by its implication that pollution is the major cause of cancer,' and had presented an unproven theory -- that environmentally caused cases are grossly underestimated -- as if it were a fact." The ACS "estimates that about six percent of all cancers in the United States -- 34,000 cases a year -- are related to environmental causes (four percent from occupational exposures, two percent from the community or other settings)." Arguing "that the risk is much higher, when there is no proof, may divert attention from things that are much bigger causes of cancer, like smoking, Dr. Thun said in an interview."

Four Phase Contraceptive Dosing

FDA approves first contraceptive pill to use four-phase dosing.
The AP (5/7) reports, The Food and Drug Administration has given its approval to Natazia, "a novel birth control pill from Bayer Healthcare that combines" the "hormones estrogen and progestin in doses that adjust four times throughout a woman's period cycle. The pill is the first birth control product to use four-phase dosing, according to the FDA."
Bloomberg News (5/7, Peterson) reports, "Natazia is the first oral contraceptive to use a synthetic estrogen called estradiol valerate in combination with a progestin called dienogest, Bayer said...in an emailed statement. Other birth control pills sold in the US contain ethinyl estradiol, the company said." The drug also may "offer a new treatment option for women who suffer from heavy or prolonged menstrual periods, Bayer said in October after presenting clinical trial data" in which the drug, compared to placebo, "reduced menstrual bleeding in a study of 231 women" over the course of 90 days.
"The drug was evaluated by more than 1,800 women during clinical testing in North America and Europe," HealthDay (5/6) reported. "The most common adverse effects were irregular bleeding, breast tenderness, headache, nausea and vomiting, weight gain, and acne." The FDA warned that women "older than 35 who smoke should not use the product," because it could put them at risk for potentially serious cardiovascular problems. MedPage Today (5/6, Gever) and Reuters (5/7) also covered the story.
Birth control pill should be available OTC, advocates say. NBC Nightly News (5/6, story 7, 2:40, Williams) reported, "Hard for a lot of people to believe the birth control pill has been around now for half a century. It became a game changer for millions of American women and for American society." NBC (Snyderman) added, "Today, an estimated 12 million American women use the pill and about 80% will use it at some point in their reproductive lives." Yet, Snyderman noted, "Just because it's readily available doesn't mean it's always easy to get."
USA Today (5/7, Rubin) adds, "On the eve of the birth-control pill's 50th anniversary...it's time to clear up some misconceptions, if you'll pardon the expression." The FDA "approved the first pill in the first year of the Swinging Sixties, but the pill did not spark the sexual revolution. Nor did it cause a sudden drop in the US fertility rate, which didn't bottom out until the early 1970s." Nevertheless, "the pill's influence has been lasting and pervasive. It became a symbol of women's rights and generational change -- and, for a time, the focus of a debate over whether it led to declining morals." Yet, "women became dependent on doctors for contraception, because the pill was, and still is, available only with a prescription." Some women's advocates argue that pills today are much safer; therefore, they should be available without a prescription.

Caring for Dementia Patients

Spouses caring for partners with dementia more likely to develop disorder themselves.
The Salt Lake Tribune (5/6, May) reports that, according to a study published May 5 in the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, "spouses who care for partners with dementia are six times more likely to develop the disorder too, compared to healthy elderly couples." Perhaps "the incredible stress of watching their partner deteriorate, as well as taking care of their physical and emotional needs, impairs the brain of the caring spouse," or "something in the couple's shared environment -- their diet and exercise patterns, or chemical exposures" may explain the connection.
Researchers from "Utah State University, followed 1,221 heterosexual married couples (2,442 individuals) ages 65 and older," none of whom had dementia at the start of the study, "for up to 12 years," the Time (5/5, O'Callaghan) "Wellness" blog reported. Over the course of the study, the investigators found that, "in addition to advanced age, having a spouse with dementia was significantly correlated with individuals' increased risk for developing the disease themselves."

Hospital Medication Error Initiative

Bar-code technology may help reduce medication errors in hospitals.
The Boston Globe (5/5, Cooney) "White Coat Notes" blog reported that "a new study conducted at Brigham and Women's Hospital found that after bar-code technology was added to electronic medication records, errors in transcribing medication orders were eliminated and errors in administering drugs with potentially serious consequences were cut in half." Investigators "tracked medication administration, timing, and transcription errors in medical, surgical, and intensive care units before and after the new system was adopted in 2005." The researchers found that "the rate of potential adverse drug events fell from 3.1 percent to 1.6 percent with the use of bar codes."
The researchers also "observed significant relative reductions in many subtypes of medication administration errors," MedPage Today (5/5, Frieden) reported. "For example, wrong-medication errors were reduced by 57.4%, wrong-dose errors by 41.9%, and administration documentation errors by 80.3%."
HealthDay (5/5, Reinberg) reported that these "findings are important, because the technology is being considered as a 2013 criterion for meaningful use of health information technology under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, the researchers noted."
According to Reuters (5/6, Emery), the researchers wrote, "Given the high number of doses administered and orders transcribed in any acute care hospital, implementation of" this type of system "could substantially improve medication safety."

Environmental Toxin Update

Report from President's Cancer Panel warns of dangers of environmental toxins.
USA Today (5/6, Szabo) reports that "widespread exposure to environmental toxins poses a serious threat to Americans, causing 'grievous harm' that government agencies have not adequately addressed, according to a strongly worded report released today by the President's Cancer Panel, a body of experts that reports directly to President Obama." A great deal "of the suffering faced by people diagnosed with toxin-related cancer 'could have been prevented through appropriate national action,' according to the 240-page report." USA Today adds, "The report was produced by cancer specialists LaSalle Lefall and Margaret Kripke, both of whom were appointed by President Bush and who heard from dozens of experts over the past two years."
The report, according to the Los Angeles Times (5/6, Maugh), "highlights some potential risks that almost everyone agrees on. Those include: the increasing exposure to radiation as the result of greater use of medical testing and treatment; radon in homes, particularly in the East; and exposure to toxic chemicals during military service and for people living close to military bases." The Times added, "Government and industry should invest much more money in researching the potential risks of such chemicals -- and that research should be done before the chemicals come into wide use, not after large numbers of people have been exposed to them, the report said." However, "reaction to the report was mixed."
Reuters (5/6, Fox) quotes the American Cancer Society's Dr. Michael Thun as saying, "The report is most provocative when it restates hypotheses as if they were established facts." He added, "For example, its conclusion that 'the true burden of environmentally (pollution) induced cancer has been grossly underestimated' does not represent scientific consensus. Rather, it reflects one side of a scientific debate that has continued for almost 30 years."
In the New York Times (5/6, A33), op-ed columnist Nicholas Kristof writes, "I've read an advance copy of the report, and it's an extraordinary document." He points out that "the report warns about exposures to chemicals during pregnancy, when risk of damage seems to be greatest." According to Kristof, "It's striking that this report emerges not from the fringe, but from the mission control of mainstream scientific and medical thinking, the President's Cancer Panel."
MedPage Today (5/6, Walker) reported that "radiation exposure has long been recognized as a cancer risk, but this latest report...claims that patients and healthcare professionals are not completely aware of radiation exposure from imaging techniques such as computed tomography (CT) scans -- a radiation exposure that might be increasing with the use of whole body scans and virtual colonoscopy." And although "the report issued a call for increased emphasis on dialing down the radiation exposure with CT, the government may actually be out in front on this issue -- the FDA recently proposed new safety requirements for manufacturers of CT scanners and fluoroscopic devices." These "requirements are designed to reduce unnecessary radiation from medical imaging."

Alzheimer Search and Rescue Operations

Search-and-rescue operations increasingly focusing on wandering Alzheimer's victims.
On its front page, the New York Times (5/5, A1, Johnson) reports, "About six in 10 dementia victims will wander at least once, healthcare statistics show, and the numbers are growing worldwide, fueled primarily by Alzheimer's disease." The "rising numbers of searches are driving a need to retrain emergency workers, police officers, and volunteers around the country who say they throw out just about every generally accepted idea when hunting" for Alzheimer's sufferers. Retired FBI agent Robert B. Schaefer, who now conducts training sessions for the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services, recently told a class that "a dementia wanderer will sometimes take evasive action to avoid detection, especially if the disease has made them paranoid about authority figures."
Technology helps caregivers look after sufferers of Alzheimer's, dementia. The New York Times (5/5, A3, Johnson) reports, "Companies that make GPS devices are also starting to enter the growing Alzheimer's market with products that look like wristwatches, and even shoes with GPS monitors embedded in the heels. ... Lower on the technology scale, but widespread in its use around the nation, is radio frequency tracking." A nonprofit organization, Project Lifesaver, "equips Alzheimer's sufferers with wristbands," and "contracts with local government agencies to set up the service."

Stomach Cancer Trends

Stomach cancer incidence increasing among 25-to-39-year-old whites.
The AP (5/5, Tanner) reports that while the "chances for developing stomach cancer are still very low in young adults...the incidence among 25 to 39 year old whites nonetheless climbed by almost 70 percent in the past three decades," National Cancer Institute researchers and colleagues found in a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association. The "stomach cancer rates have been declining in many countries because of improved food preservation and better hygiene, which decreases risks for H. pylori infection, so the overall US decline was expected, said Dr. Charles Rabkin of the National Cancer Institute, the study's lead author." But, "the researchers noted that salt intake has increased among Americans of all ages, and said they will be investigating whether changes in eating habits explain the rise in young adults." HealthDay (5/4, Reinberg) and MedPage Today (5/4, Fiore) also covered the story.

Children's Tylenol Recall

FDA uncovers quality control problems at plant responsible for manufacturing recalled children's medicines.
The CBS Evening News (5/4, story 7, 0:30, Couric) reported, "We're learning more tonight about last weekend's recall of children's medicine" manufactured by a unit of Johnson & Johnson, McNeil Consumer Healthcare. The company voluntarily "recalled 43 over the counter medications, including Tylenol [acetaminophen] and Motrin [ibuprofen] for children and infants." Now, according to a recently released federal report, "inspectors found more than 20 manufacturing problems at a Pennsylvania plant, which has been shut down," ABC World News (5/4, story 9, 0:30, Sawyer) reported.
The report, which the FDA "sent to McNeil last Friday, before the recall, said the company had used raw materials with known bacterial contamination to make certain lots of infants' and children's liquid Tylenol," the New York Times (5/5, B2, Singer) reports. "Samples of finished products tested negative for bacteria, however, and the risk to consumers was remote, agency officials said."
Stephen Byrn, "founder of Purdue University's pharmacy quality compliance program, said that...he doesn't doubt that the risk of health problems from the recalled lots is remote," USA Today (5/5, Rubin) reports. Still, the "type and scope of manufacturing problems cited by FDA inspectors make it difficult to have confidence in the plant's products."
Those other "numerous" documented deficiencies, the Los Angeles Times (5/5, Zajac) reports, included "'a failure to sufficiently investigate problems in its manufacturing and in its drugs,' failure to maintain proper testing facilities, and making changes in manufacturing processes without assuring that they would not harm consumers, said Deborah M. Autor, director of compliance in FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research." For instance, McNeil "failed to investigate '46 consumer complaints regarding foreign materials, dark or black specks,' some dating to June 2009."
Last week, the unit also revealed that some of the liquid products may contain improper amounts of inactive ingredients or unusually high concentrations of active ones, according to the Wall Street Journal (5/5, Rockoff, Dooren). "The findings are serious, but we cannot say yet whether further action by the FDA is warranted," Autor stated during a conference call with the media.
The agency commenced the "10-day inspection" partly because "of problems discovered late last year at a McNeil plant in Puerto Rico," the Washington Post (5/5, Layton) reports. "In January, the FDA sent a warning letter to McNeil; in February, federal officials met with company" heads. "'We had concerns about the company's failure to investigate and correct quality problems,' Autor said."
In a "statement Tuesday, J&J called the problems discovered by the FDA 'unacceptable to us, and not indicative of how McNeil Consumer Healthcare intends to operate,'" the AP (5/5, Perrone) reports. The "company said production at the Fort Washington plant won't resume until corrective measures have been put in place."
Nevertheless, the "recall isn't likely to hurt New Brunswick, New Jersey- based J&J financially, said Linda Bannister, an analyst with Edward Jones & Co," Bloomberg News (5/5, Peterson, Tirrell) reports. But, "J&J may lose any good favor it had with the FDA as a result of the most recent action," another analyst contended.
Reuters (5/5, Richwine), the Dallas Morning News (5/4, Garcia), the Philadelphia Inquirer (5/4, Gelles), and HealthDay (5/4, Reinberg) also covered the story, as did ABC News (5/4, Childs) on its website.

Medical School Residency Cost

Medical schools, residency programs now teaching about price of care.
The New York Times (5/4, D5, Okie) reports that physicians "in training have traditionally been insulated from information about the cost of the tests and treatments they order for patients -- in fact, for decades, the subject was virtually taboo when professors and trainees discussed treatment decisions during hospital rounds." However, "escalating costs and the national debate over the healthcare overhaul are forcing medical schools and residency programs to grapple with teaching about the financial side of their profession." Additionally, "accrediting organizations now require such teaching, and students and residents recognize that they need to understand finances as well as blood tests."
Health policy experts hope technology will help educate physicians about care costs. The New York Times (5/4, D6, Okie) reports that "health policy experts hope that technology will become a tool for educating doctors about the cost of care. More widespread use of electronic medical records, they say, will help keep costs in check by providing doctors with precise information on the price of tests and drugs even as they are deciding what to order." One physician "said that students should begin learning early in medical school about the financial consequences of their decisions and that such teaching should continue throughout their training."

IBS and Antibiotics

Two-week course of antibiotic benefits IBS patients.
The Los Angeles Times (5/3, Maugh) "Booster Shots" blog reported that some ten years ago, researchers at the Cedars-Sinai Medical Center began studying the "breath of IBS patients who had diarrhea and concluded that the symptoms were being produced when the intestines were overgrown by bacteria." Lead investigator Dr. Mark Pimentel explained that the "excess bacteria produce large amounts of hydrogen and methane through fermentation." Scientists begin to speculate about "killing off the excess bacteria with antibiotics."
With that in mind, Pimentel turned to rifaximin, according to Reuters (5/4, Beasley). The drug, developed by Salix Pharmaceuticals, was tested among 1,260 patients. By day 14, investigators observed some significant results.

Children and Dietary Supplements

Parents cautioned about giving children dietary supplements.
On the front of its Personal Journal section, the Wall Street Journal (5/4, D1, Mathews) reports that increasingly, Americans are giving their children dietary supplements, but groups, such as the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Dietetic Association, caution that food is the best source of nutrition. Besides, some supplements, if taken in excess, can prove dangerous. Nevertheless, physicians concede that children who are picky eaters may need certain supplements, although experts urge parents to be wary of nutrition claims, particularly since the FDA does not regulate supplements to the same extent that it does drugs.

Delayed Vaccine Trends

More parents delaying or refusing to have their children vaccinated.
USA Today (5/4, Szabo) reports, "Nearly 40% of parents of toddlers have delayed or refused a child's vaccination -- a practice that endangers not only their children but others around them." In fact, the "percentage of parents who delay or refuse a shot rose from 22% in 2003 to 39% in 2008, according to" a newly released "study, based on records and interviews of parents of 8,904 children ages 1½ to 3 and conducted through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Immunization Survey." Lead investigator Lance Rodewald explained that "interviews with parents suggest that many are influenced by medical myths, such as the notions that kids can't be vaccinated when they have a cold or that shots cause autism."

Southern Children and Obesity

Children residing in Southeastern states most likely to be overweight, obese.
The Los Angeles Times (5/3, Stein) "Booster Shots" blog reported, "Kids in the US have been getting fatter in recent decades, but a new study showing the geographical differences in childhood obesity trends paints a more comprehensive picture of where things are getting worse -- and better." Researchers at the US Health Resources and Services Administration started with data from the National Survey of Children's Health, zeroing in on "weight statistics among 46,707 US children ages 10 to 17 in 2003, and among 44,101 children in 2007."
They found that overall, the "childhood obesity rose by 10 percent across the country between 2003 and 2007," the Boston Globe (5/3, Cooney) "White Coat Notes" blog reported. "But there are wide variations among the states and between girls and boys," according to the paper in the Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine. In fact, "obesity and overweight rates fell for boys but not for girls, although boys had higher rates to begin with, both in the state and across the country."
And, "youngsters living in the Southeastern US are the most likely to be overweight or obese, while those from the West are most likely to be thin," MedPage Today (5/3, Emery) reported. For example, "in 2007, Mississippi had the highest prevalence of childhood obesity (21.9%), while Oregon had the lowest (9.6%)." The former "also had the highest proportion of children who were overweight (44.5%), while Utah had the lowest proportion (23.1%)."
CDC, other groups outline plan to encourage physical activity among Americans. USA Today (5/4, Hellmich) reports that daily physical activity for children and adults is "among the goals that could be achieved with comprehensive, wide-ranging strategies outlined in the new US National Physical Activity Plan, which is being released today by an expert panel representing influential health organizations. Among groups involved are the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American College of Sports Medicine, the American Heart Association, and the American Cancer Society." The objective is "to create an environment in which Americans can be physically active where they live, work and play." Notably, "experts have been encouraging people to be physically active for years because it lowers the risk of heart disease, stroke, cancer, diabetes, osteoporosis, and a long list of other health problems."

Childrens Medication Recall Update

J&J recalls children's OTC medicines.
The CBS Evening News (5/1, story 8, Glor) reported, "The FDA...is advising consumers to avoid more than 40 liquid medications for children that are being recalled by the manufacturer because of quality problems. The products include children's and infants' Tylenol, children's and infants' Motrin, as well as children's Zyrtec [cetirizine] and Benadryl [diphenhydramine]."
The Washington Post (5/2, Layton) reported, "A division of Johnson & Johnson is recalling 43 over-the-counter medicines made for infants and children...after federal regulators identified what they called deficiencies at the company's manufacturing facility." McNeil Consumer Healthcare announced "the voluntary recall," which "affects hundreds of thousands of bottles of medicine" that make up "a vast portion of the children's medicine market."
The New York Times (5/2, A21, Singer) reported, "The deficiencies may affect the potency, purity or quality of the products, the agency said." The FDA also "said it was investigating the plant where the products were made to make sure there were no other problems."
The recall includes pediatric formulations of Tylenol, Motrin and Zyrtec, the Wall Street Journal (4/3, Rockoff) reports. A spokeswoman for McNeil indicated that the active ingredient in some products may be at a higher concentration than it should, while inactive ingredients in other products may be at levels the company says are inappropriate.
Bloomberg News (5/1, Hart) reported that McNeil "said the likelihood of any serious reactions is 'remote,' although it urged consumers who have the products not to use them."
The FDA "advised consumers to stop using the medicine as a precaution," the AP (5/2) reported. Consumers should contact "a healthcare professional...a child has recently taken any of the recalled products and is exhibiting unexpected symptoms," and "parents in the interim should consider substitute child medications."
The Chicago Tribune (5/2, Graham, Eldeib), HealthDay (5/1), MedPage Today (5/1, Peck), and WebMD (5/2, DeNoon) also cover the story.
Analysts assess impact of J&J's response on consumer confidence. On the front page of its Business Day section, the New York Times (5/3, B1, Singer) reports that although "Johnson & Johnson is considered a model in the consumer products industry," the company "and its McNeil unit "may have more difficulty wooing customers back because the latest recalls stem from problems at company plants, industry analysts said." In fact, "some consumers said they found the company's initial response flat-footed," as they were "unable to obtain clear information about how to receive a refund on...a company website about the recalled products," and some consumers "complained that they could not get through to customer service representatives at the company's recall hot line."
The Wall Street Journal (5/3, Winslow, Johnson) reports that J&J has been criticized by regulators for how the company handles issues with product quality. Last year, the company received a warning letter from the FDA after widening its recall of Tylenol arthritis-pain caplets to include all lots of the product, as well as other brands.