Almost one percent of American children had an autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in a large CDC surveillance study whose lead author called the condition a "significant public health issue."
Across 11 sites in the U.S., ASD prevalence in 2006 ranged from about one out of 80 children to one out of every 240 children, with an overall prevalence of one in 111 youngsters, according to a report by investigators from the CDC's Autism and Developmental Disorders Monitoring (ADDM) Network.
Among 10 ADDM sites that reported data in both 2002 and 2006, there was an average 57% increase in ASD prevalence. No single factor could explain the rise, researchers said. Overall ASD prevalence was 4.5 times higher in boys than in girls: about one in every 70 boys and one in every 315 girls.
From 2002 to 2006, prevalence increased 60% in boys and 48% in girls (P<0.001 for both).
The American Academy of Pediatrics has recommended that all children be screened for autism when they are 18 and 24 months old which is especially important, as early recognition and treatment improves outcomes.
ASD diagnosis was made at a slightly younger age in 2006 than in 2002, but it was still delayed to an average age of 53 months. That was so despite the fact that anywhere from 70% to 95% of children had developmental concerns noted in their records before age 3.
Please remember, as with all our articles we provide information, not medical advice. For any treatment of your own medical condition you must visit your local doctor, with or without our article[s]. These articles are not to be taken as individual medical advice.
Deepen your understanding of "medical malpractice"... www.MedMalBook.com
For more health info and links visit the author's web site www.hookman.com
Sunday, August 21, 2011
Monday, August 8, 2011
Cluster Headaches
Concerned about recent overdoses of radiation in CT perfusion scans, an FDA official urged imaging practitioners to go "back to basics" when they're performing the scans.
The advice comes after more than 250 patients in two states were exposed to excess radiation during CT perfusion brain scans.
"Until we get through whether we're dealing with errors that people are making (or) whether these are problems with the CT scanners themselves, we're saying go back to basics," said Jeffrey Shuren, MD, acting director of the FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health.
Shuren and colleagues released a set of interim recommendations while the agency continues to investigate cases of overexposure reported in California and Alabama.
They include:
• Imaging facilities should review their radiation dosing protocols for all CT perfusion studies to ensure that dosing is correct for each study.
• They should implement quality control procedures to ensure that protocols are followed and correct radiation is used.
• For each patient, technologists should check the CT scanner displays to make sure the radiation to be delivered is appropriate.
• If more than one study is performed during one session, practitioners should adjust the radiation dose so it is appropriate for each study.
The agency also urged imaging facilities to check whether any patients who underwent CT perfusion scans have received excess radiation.
"We're reminding (practitioners) of good practices that they should be employing routinely," said Charles Finder, MD, also of the agency's Center for Devices and Radiological Health.
The issue arose when the FDA was told of more than 200 cases of excess radiation delivered during CT perfusion brain scans at Cedars-Sinai Medical center in Los Angeles. (See CT Safety Warnings Follow Radiation Overdose Accident)
Since then, the agency has received reports of 14 cases at Glendale Adventist Medical Center, also in Los Angeles, as well as an undetermined number of cases at St. Joseph's Medical Center in Burbank, Calif., according to Simon Choi, PhD, also of the Center for Devices and Radiological Health.
Choi said the the agency is investigating reports in Alabama, too, but he did not give numbers or the name of the facility involved.
The agency said scanners made by two manufacturers, GE and Toshiba, are involved in the incidents.
Affected patients had redness of the skin and some hair loss, but potential long-term consequences include an increased risk of cancer and cataracts, Finder said.
The standard radiation dose for a CT perfusion scan is between 0.5 and 1.0 Gray, but it was reported that some patients at Cedars-Sinai got as much as 3.0 or 4.0 Gray.
According to a statement from the hospital, "there was a misunderstanding about an embedded default setting applied by the machine."
The recommendations apply to all CT perfusion imaging, since the methods involved are the same as for brain perfusion scans, the FDA said.
While the agency is probing cases in the two states, Shuren said, "we would not be surprised to find there are similar occurrences in other states."
Please remember, as with all our articles we provide information, not medical advice. For any treatment of your own medical condition you must visit your local doctor, with or without our article[s]. These articles are not to be taken as individual medical advice.
Deepen your understanding of "medical malpractice"... www.MedMalBook.com
For more health info and links visit the author's web site www.hookman.com
The advice comes after more than 250 patients in two states were exposed to excess radiation during CT perfusion brain scans.
"Until we get through whether we're dealing with errors that people are making (or) whether these are problems with the CT scanners themselves, we're saying go back to basics," said Jeffrey Shuren, MD, acting director of the FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health.
Shuren and colleagues released a set of interim recommendations while the agency continues to investigate cases of overexposure reported in California and Alabama.
They include:
• Imaging facilities should review their radiation dosing protocols for all CT perfusion studies to ensure that dosing is correct for each study.
• They should implement quality control procedures to ensure that protocols are followed and correct radiation is used.
• For each patient, technologists should check the CT scanner displays to make sure the radiation to be delivered is appropriate.
• If more than one study is performed during one session, practitioners should adjust the radiation dose so it is appropriate for each study.
The agency also urged imaging facilities to check whether any patients who underwent CT perfusion scans have received excess radiation.
"We're reminding (practitioners) of good practices that they should be employing routinely," said Charles Finder, MD, also of the agency's Center for Devices and Radiological Health.
The issue arose when the FDA was told of more than 200 cases of excess radiation delivered during CT perfusion brain scans at Cedars-Sinai Medical center in Los Angeles. (See CT Safety Warnings Follow Radiation Overdose Accident)
Since then, the agency has received reports of 14 cases at Glendale Adventist Medical Center, also in Los Angeles, as well as an undetermined number of cases at St. Joseph's Medical Center in Burbank, Calif., according to Simon Choi, PhD, also of the Center for Devices and Radiological Health.
Choi said the the agency is investigating reports in Alabama, too, but he did not give numbers or the name of the facility involved.
The agency said scanners made by two manufacturers, GE and Toshiba, are involved in the incidents.
Affected patients had redness of the skin and some hair loss, but potential long-term consequences include an increased risk of cancer and cataracts, Finder said.
The standard radiation dose for a CT perfusion scan is between 0.5 and 1.0 Gray, but it was reported that some patients at Cedars-Sinai got as much as 3.0 or 4.0 Gray.
According to a statement from the hospital, "there was a misunderstanding about an embedded default setting applied by the machine."
The recommendations apply to all CT perfusion imaging, since the methods involved are the same as for brain perfusion scans, the FDA said.
While the agency is probing cases in the two states, Shuren said, "we would not be surprised to find there are similar occurrences in other states."
Please remember, as with all our articles we provide information, not medical advice. For any treatment of your own medical condition you must visit your local doctor, with or without our article[s]. These articles are not to be taken as individual medical advice.
Deepen your understanding of "medical malpractice"... www.MedMalBook.com
For more health info and links visit the author's web site www.hookman.com
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Good News & Bad News
NIH Report Finds Cancer Incidence Has Declined.
A report by the NIH found that "the incidence in men of cancers of the prostate, lung, oral cavity, stomach, brain, colon and rectum has declined." However, "rates in men continue to rise for kidney/renal, liver, and esophageal cancer, as well as for leukemia, myeloma and melanoma," the agency said.
Heavy Margarines May Be Increasing Their Risk Of A Painful Inflammatory Bowel Disease,
People who eat lots of red meat, cook with certain types of oil, and use some kinds of polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA)-heavy margarines may be increasing their risk of a painful inflammatory bowel disease, a study in more than 200,000 Europeans shows.
These foods are high in linoleic acid and the study have found that people who were the heaviest consumers of this omega-6 PUFA were more than twice as likely to develop ulcerative colitis as those who consumed the least.
But eating more eicosapentaenoic acid, an omega-3 fatty acid found in fish and fish oils, was associated with a lower risk of the disease.
To investigate the role of fatty acids and ulcerative colitis, a life-long disease characterized by inflammation of the lining of the large intestine, investigators analyzed the problem. Their analysis included 203,193 men and women 30 to 74 years old. During follow-up, which ranged from about 2 to 11 years, 126 people developed ulcerative colitis.
People in the top quartile of linoleic acid intake (they were consuming around 13 to 38 grams a day) were 2.5 times more likely to have developed the disease than people who consumed the least, about 2 to 8 grams daily.
While a Western-style, red-meat-heavy diet is high in this fatty acid and low in omega-3s, a more Mediterranean style eating pattern -- with plenty of fruits and vegetables, fish, and nut oils -- would be low in linoleic acid and high in omega-3.
It is estimated that if omega-3s do help prevent ulcerative colitis, eating a couple of servings of fish a week would probably be protective.
Please remember, as with all our articles we provide information, not medical advice. For any treatment of your own medical condition you must visit your local doctor, with or without our article[s]. These articles are not to be taken as individual medical advice.
Deepen your understanding of "medical malpractice"... www.MedMalBook.com
For more health info and links visit the author's web site www.hookman.com
A report by the NIH found that "the incidence in men of cancers of the prostate, lung, oral cavity, stomach, brain, colon and rectum has declined." However, "rates in men continue to rise for kidney/renal, liver, and esophageal cancer, as well as for leukemia, myeloma and melanoma," the agency said.
Heavy Margarines May Be Increasing Their Risk Of A Painful Inflammatory Bowel Disease,
People who eat lots of red meat, cook with certain types of oil, and use some kinds of polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA)-heavy margarines may be increasing their risk of a painful inflammatory bowel disease, a study in more than 200,000 Europeans shows.
These foods are high in linoleic acid and the study have found that people who were the heaviest consumers of this omega-6 PUFA were more than twice as likely to develop ulcerative colitis as those who consumed the least.
But eating more eicosapentaenoic acid, an omega-3 fatty acid found in fish and fish oils, was associated with a lower risk of the disease.
To investigate the role of fatty acids and ulcerative colitis, a life-long disease characterized by inflammation of the lining of the large intestine, investigators analyzed the problem. Their analysis included 203,193 men and women 30 to 74 years old. During follow-up, which ranged from about 2 to 11 years, 126 people developed ulcerative colitis.
People in the top quartile of linoleic acid intake (they were consuming around 13 to 38 grams a day) were 2.5 times more likely to have developed the disease than people who consumed the least, about 2 to 8 grams daily.
While a Western-style, red-meat-heavy diet is high in this fatty acid and low in omega-3s, a more Mediterranean style eating pattern -- with plenty of fruits and vegetables, fish, and nut oils -- would be low in linoleic acid and high in omega-3.
It is estimated that if omega-3s do help prevent ulcerative colitis, eating a couple of servings of fish a week would probably be protective.
Please remember, as with all our articles we provide information, not medical advice. For any treatment of your own medical condition you must visit your local doctor, with or without our article[s]. These articles are not to be taken as individual medical advice.
Deepen your understanding of "medical malpractice"... www.MedMalBook.com
For more health info and links visit the author's web site www.hookman.com
Friday, July 15, 2011
High coffee, tea intake may reduce chances of developing type 2 diabetes.
According to a study spublished in the Archives of Internal Medicine, "drinking four cups of coffee, decaf, or tea daily can reduce the chances of getting type 2 diabetes by about 25 percent to 35 percent." Harvard University "researchers reviewed 18 studies of almost 500,000 people" and discovered that "for each cup of coffee people drank, their likelihood of getting diabetes dropped by seven percent."
"Even better results were found for bigger coffee and tea consumers -- drinking three to four cups a day was associated with about a 25% reduced diabetes risk, compared with those who drank between none and two cups day.. In addition, investigators found "positive results with decaf coffee and tea." Specifically, those "who drank more than three to four cups of decaf a day had about a one-third lower risk than those who didn't drink any," while "tea drinkers who consumed more than three to four cups a day had about a one-fifth lower diabetes risk than non-tea drinkers."
Please remember, as with all our articles we provide information, not medical advice. For any treatment of your own medical condition you must visit your local doctor, with or without our article[s]. These articles are not to be taken as individual medical advice.
Deepen your understanding of "medical malpractice"... www.MedMalBook.com
For more health info and links visit the author's web site www.hookman.com
"Even better results were found for bigger coffee and tea consumers -- drinking three to four cups a day was associated with about a 25% reduced diabetes risk, compared with those who drank between none and two cups day.. In addition, investigators found "positive results with decaf coffee and tea." Specifically, those "who drank more than three to four cups of decaf a day had about a one-third lower risk than those who didn't drink any," while "tea drinkers who consumed more than three to four cups a day had about a one-fifth lower diabetes risk than non-tea drinkers."
Please remember, as with all our articles we provide information, not medical advice. For any treatment of your own medical condition you must visit your local doctor, with or without our article[s]. These articles are not to be taken as individual medical advice.
Deepen your understanding of "medical malpractice"... www.MedMalBook.com
For more health info and links visit the author's web site www.hookman.com
Monday, June 27, 2011
Osteoporosis prevention and nutrition
Although calcium and vitamin D have been the primary focus of nutritional prevention of osteoporosis, recent research has clarified the importance of several additional nutrients and food constituents. Further, results of calcium and vitamin D supplementation trials have been inconsistent, suggesting that reliance on this intervention may be inadequate. In addition to dairy, fruit and vegetable intake has emerged as an important modifiable protective factor for bone health. Several nutrients, including magnesium, potassium, vitamin C, vitamin K, several B vitamins, and carotenoids, have been shown to be more important than previously realized.
Rather than having a negative effect on bone, protein intake appears to benefit bone status, particularly in older adults. Regular intake of cola beverages shows negative effects and moderate alcohol intake shows positive effects on bone, particularly in older women. Current research on diet and bone status supports encouragement of balanced diets with plenty of fruit and vegetables, adequate dairy and other protein foods, and limitation of foods with low nutrient density.
Please remember, as with all our articles we provide information, not medical advice. For any treatment of your own medical condition you must visit your local doctor, with or without our article[s]. These articles are not to be taken as individual medical advice.
Deepen your understanding of "medical malpractice"... www.MedMalBook.com
For more health info and links visit the author's web site www.hookman.com
Rather than having a negative effect on bone, protein intake appears to benefit bone status, particularly in older adults. Regular intake of cola beverages shows negative effects and moderate alcohol intake shows positive effects on bone, particularly in older women. Current research on diet and bone status supports encouragement of balanced diets with plenty of fruit and vegetables, adequate dairy and other protein foods, and limitation of foods with low nutrient density.
Please remember, as with all our articles we provide information, not medical advice. For any treatment of your own medical condition you must visit your local doctor, with or without our article[s]. These articles are not to be taken as individual medical advice.
Deepen your understanding of "medical malpractice"... www.MedMalBook.com
For more health info and links visit the author's web site www.hookman.com
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Radiation overexposure from CT scans may be more widespread than previously estimated.
The problem of too much radiation during CT scans may be more widespread than anyone thought." In fact, "new research...found a wide variation in radiation dose for the most common CT scan like abdomen, pelvis, and chest. A survey of four hospitals found some patients received 13 times more radiation than others for the same type of scan." "Depending on the part of the body being scanned, each CT exposes a patient to an amount of radiation equal to between 30 and 440 chest X-rays." But, in a separate study, "researchers calculated that 72 million CT scans are performed in this country a year and concluded that could lead to 29,000 excess cancers and 15,000 excess deaths a year in the future." In that study, published in the Archives of Internal Medicine, researchers at the National Cancer Institute "found that people may be exposed to up to four times as much radiation as estimated by earlier studies.
Meanwhile, the second study, appearing in the same journal, of over 1,000 patients at four hospitals, showed that one woman out of 270 and one man out of 600 would suffer from cancer after undergoing a single heart scan at age 40. Researchers noted that the differences in radiation doses may be due to a lack of standardized settings and disparities in technology use.
Ian accompanying editorial, it was noted that "the articles...make clear that there is far more radiation from medical CT scans than has been recognized previously because even many otherwise healthy patients are being subjected to the radiation...because emergency [departments] are often sending patients to the CT scanner before they see a doctor."
The authors predicted that lung cancer will be the most common radiation-related cancer followed by colon cancer and leukemia." For its part, the FDA "issued interim regulations requiring closer monitoring of CT scans after more than 250 cases of exposure to excess radiation were reported since October."
Please remember, as with all our articles we provide information, not medical advice. For any treatment of your own medical condition you must visit your local doctor, with or without our article[s]. These articles are not to be taken as individual medical advice.
Deepen your understanding of "medical malpractice"... www.MedMalBook.com
For more health info and links visit the author's web site www.hookman.com
Meanwhile, the second study, appearing in the same journal, of over 1,000 patients at four hospitals, showed that one woman out of 270 and one man out of 600 would suffer from cancer after undergoing a single heart scan at age 40. Researchers noted that the differences in radiation doses may be due to a lack of standardized settings and disparities in technology use.
Ian accompanying editorial, it was noted that "the articles...make clear that there is far more radiation from medical CT scans than has been recognized previously because even many otherwise healthy patients are being subjected to the radiation...because emergency [departments] are often sending patients to the CT scanner before they see a doctor."
The authors predicted that lung cancer will be the most common radiation-related cancer followed by colon cancer and leukemia." For its part, the FDA "issued interim regulations requiring closer monitoring of CT scans after more than 250 cases of exposure to excess radiation were reported since October."
Please remember, as with all our articles we provide information, not medical advice. For any treatment of your own medical condition you must visit your local doctor, with or without our article[s]. These articles are not to be taken as individual medical advice.
Deepen your understanding of "medical malpractice"... www.MedMalBook.com
For more health info and links visit the author's web site www.hookman.com
Saturday, May 14, 2011
Americans living longer than ever
Americans are living a record 77 years and 11 months on average...according to two studies that led researchers to suggest raising the retirement age." The first study, from the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics, found that in the "US in 2007, the latest year for which figures are available," the "0.76 percent death rate is the lowest ever," driven by "a decline in deaths from heart disease and other ailments." Meanwhile, a second study published Dec. 14 in the health journal Milbank Quarterly, found that "every year that gets tacked on to the average life expectancy costs an extra trillion dollars in expenditures by Social Security and Medicare."
Overall, the 2007 data "show continued improvements in life expectancy for all Americans, although women are faring better than men, and whites fare better than other racial groups" by a "race differential" of about "4.6 years." But, even amid this progress, vast geographical discrepancies remain -- with people in southern states still facing higher death rates than those living in other parts of the country."
And, "even though Americans can expect to live longer than their parents, life expectancy in the" US "is still lower than in many other industrialized countries, including Canada and Japan. Even so, the "dramatic improvements in the health of Americans over the last 20 years" will "have unforeseen effects on the country. The Social Security and Medicare "programs weren't designed to support people for that long."
Please remember, as with all our articles we provide information, not medical advice. For any treatment of your own medical condition you must visit your local doctor, with or without our article[s]. These articles are not to be taken as individual medical advice.
Deepen your understanding of "medical malpractice"... www.MedMalBook.com
For more health info and links visit the author's web site www.hookman.com
Overall, the 2007 data "show continued improvements in life expectancy for all Americans, although women are faring better than men, and whites fare better than other racial groups" by a "race differential" of about "4.6 years." But, even amid this progress, vast geographical discrepancies remain -- with people in southern states still facing higher death rates than those living in other parts of the country."
And, "even though Americans can expect to live longer than their parents, life expectancy in the" US "is still lower than in many other industrialized countries, including Canada and Japan. Even so, the "dramatic improvements in the health of Americans over the last 20 years" will "have unforeseen effects on the country. The Social Security and Medicare "programs weren't designed to support people for that long."
Please remember, as with all our articles we provide information, not medical advice. For any treatment of your own medical condition you must visit your local doctor, with or without our article[s]. These articles are not to be taken as individual medical advice.
Deepen your understanding of "medical malpractice"... www.MedMalBook.com
For more health info and links visit the author's web site www.hookman.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
