Pumpkins, Costumes and Candy, Oh My!

Halloween is a great time for kids of all ages. For parents of young children, it’s a time to really think about guarding your child’s safety in numerous ways.

The University of Alabama at Birmingham’s Youth Safety Lab has researched and suggested the following four safety tips while participating in the fun activities of the holiday.

1. Pumpkin Carving – It is important that if you plan to carve a pumpkin and insert candles inside that young children do not use sharp instruments or matches. While that seems like common sense, hundreds of injuries occur annually while pumpkin carving with stab wounds to the fingers and palms being the most common. According to the Somers Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports Medicine Group in Carmel, NY, every year puncture wounds have caused significant damage to tendons, nerves or arteries simply from trying to carve a pumpkin.

For children, it is important to get them involved but keeping them away from the dangers. It might be best to have an older teen or adult carve the pumpkin and allow the younger ones to scoop out the seeds and pulp. Another suggestion is to paint or color the pumpkin rather than carving it. Many retail stores carry kits for painting or drawing on pumpkins as decorations rather than the traditional carving.

2. Halloween Costumes – Children should not wear any costume that restricts their vision or their breathing. This means full-face covering masks can be a safety hazard. Not only does this limit the child’s ability to see while walking in the dark but some of those significantly restrict breathing. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also recommends that any accessories such as swords or wands should be short, soft and flexible. Children could easily swing these accessories and injure themselves or another child.

Also, make-up should be tested first on a small area on the skin to test for irritation. If the surface turns red or causes a rash, you do not want to use it on your child.

Furthermore, many costumes are not flame resistant – in fact many are highly flammable.  Recent research discovered that various dangerous chemicals have been discovered in both costumes and trick-or-treat bags. The study tested 106 Halloween related products from costumes to decorations and found lead, flame retardants, tin compounds and phthalates in these products. These chemicals are linked to asthma, reproductive problems, developmental and learning disabilities and cancer. The website www.healthystuff.org posted a list last week of the specific products that contain these dangerous chemicals.

3. Trick-or-Treating – It is highly recommended that children wear something reflective or even a light on their costume somewhere so that they are visible to drivers. Teach your children to look both ways before crossing the street; do not allow your child to just run from house to house without concern over traffic.

Avoid trick-or-treating alone as it is never safe. This particular holiday is a prevalent time for lurkers, stalkers and kidnappers. Make sure you stay with your child. Large groups are also a good idea for neighborhood trick-or-treating.

4. Candy – Always examine all treats for choking hazards and tampering before allowing your child to consume their treats. Furthermore, eat only factory-wrapped treats and avoid homemade treats that were made by strangers. While healthy, fruit obtained from trick-or-treating should be thrown away. It is hard to tell if there were objects or something injected into the fruit; therefore, the safest thing to do is toss it.

Following these four safety tips should ensure and safe and fun holiday for you and your family. Enjoy and Happy Halloween!

Works used to compile this article:

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2014). Halloween Health and Safety Tips. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/family/halloween/

Chambers, J. (2014). Tips to keep children safe as they enjoy Halloween candy, costumes and trick or treating. Retrieved from http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2014/10/post_128.html

Consumer Reports. (2011). Safe Halloween pumpkin carving. Retrieved from http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2011/10/safe-halloween-pumpkin-carving/index.htm

HealthyStuff.org. (2014). Hidden dangerous chemicals in popular Halloween costumes and “Trick or Treat” bags. Retrieved from http://www.healthystuff.org/get-stuff.php?report=Hidden+Dangerous+Chemicals+in+Popular+Halloween+Costumes+and+%22Trick+or+Treat%22+Bags

U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2014). Halloween food safety tips for parents. Retrieved from http://www.fda.gov/Food/ResourcesForYou/Consumers/ucm187021.htm

Why Get a Flu Shot?

Despite the fact that the influenza virus can kill, many people still opt out of the vaccination. The critical point here is that they would rather succumb to severe illness and possibly death than simply get their arm pricked with a needle.

Of course, there are some who are allergic to eggs, which the vaccine comprises, so for those people, it makes sense to opt out. For the rest, there is no good reason to refuse the immunization. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, annual deaths from influenza have reached close to 49,000 people in recent years – most of which were 65 and older.

How does the vaccine work? The CDC explains the process on its website, but in brief, the vaccine causes the body to create antibodies for about two weeks after the inoculation. These antibodies then provide protection against the influenza virus that is included in the vaccine. There are two types of shots: trivalent and quadrivalent. The traditional shot is trivalent and protects against three strains: two influenza A viruses: H1N1 and H3N2, and one influenza B virus. The quadrivalent protects you from those three plus a second influenza B strain.

It is recommended that most people 18 and older receive the standard dose of the trivalent flu shot with people age 65 and older receiving a higher dose of the same vaccine. The quadrivalent flu shot is recommended for children and youth up through age 17. In particular, the quadrivalent nasal spray version is highly recommended for healthy children ages 2 through 8.

The point of the different vaccine for children is to provide far more assistance in their bodies, whose immune systems are still developing. Likewise, senior citizens need the extra protection because their immune systems are comprised simply through the aging process.

The best time to get vaccinated is now. The flu season typically begins in October and can run through May. The peak time for the virus is January and February. You want to make sure you are protected before the virus peaks in activity. The benefits of the vaccination are great:

1. It protects you from the flu but also protects those around you who may be more vulnerable to the influenza virus

2. Older adults who chronic health conditions and young children have far better protection from becoming seriously ill from the flu

3. The vaccine may make your illness milder if you do get sick

4. It will reduce your risk of the more serious outcomes from influenza such as hospitalization or death

Recent studies found that the vaccine reduced the risk of flu-related hospitalizations by 74% in children and 71% in adults. Also, the vaccine has been shown to reduce hospitalizations among those with diabetes and chronic lung disease by 79% and 52%, respectively.

You are encouraged to talk with your doctor about the influenza shot and which version is best for you. You could also reach out to the local health department, and some pharmacies offer the influenza vaccine as well. Regardless, get the vaccination. You won’t regret it.

People who should not be vaccinated

The biggest reason for not getting a flu shot is because of an egg allergy. However, there are other people who should not get the vaccine:

1. Children under 6 months old are far too young to handle the flu shot

2. People with life-threatening allergies to other ingredients in the vaccine such as gelatin or antibiotics

People who should not get the nasal spray vaccine:

1. Children under 2 years old

2. Adults 50 and older

3. People with severe allergies to the ingredients

4. Children or adolescents (2-17) who are on a long-term aspirin regimen

5. Pregnant women

6. People with suppressed immune systems

7. Children ages 2-4 who suffer from asthma

8. People who have taken influenza antiviral drugs within the previous 48 hours

9. People with severely compromised immune systems that require protective environments

E-cigarettes pique interest in Youth

The growing interest in e-cigarettes has had a profound impact on the youth population. A study in the Journal Nicotine and Tobacco Research found that more than 25% of youth who had never smoked in the past used e-cigarettes in 2013. According to the statistics on smoking rates among youth, this represents an increase from 79,000 youth smokers in 2011 to more than 263,000 in 2013.

What’s more staggering is that surveys of these youth indicate higher interests in trying conventional cigarettes after smoking the e-cigarettes. Because of the alarming rise in young e-cigarette users, concerns have cropped up about overall regulation of the e-cigarette market. Right now, only e-cigarettes that are marketed for therapeutic purposes are regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.

On April 25, the FDA proposed the regulation of all e-cigarettes, lumping them into the same category as other tobacco products. If the ruling goes through, the products would be subject to federal prohibition on sales to minors. Right now, sales can be made to minors unless the product is marketed as a therapeutic treatment. However, certain state and local laws do restrict sales to minors. It is not a federal mandate to do so.

While e-cigarettes have been touted as a “safe” way to smoke, their general make up, as noted in toxicology reports, show otherwise. E-cigarettes contain various cancer-causing agents such as diethylene glycol, a compound found in antifreeze and brake fluid. Diethylene glycol is also a poison as classified by the World Health Organization that can cause kidney damage, nerve dysfunction and respiratory failure. Also contained within the electronic sticks are particles of silver, iron, aluminum and silicate along with traces of tin, chromium and nickel. All of these elements have been known to cause respiratory distress and disease, according to the FDA.

As for the nicotine content, e-cigarettes do contain nicotine, but the delivery mechanism is different than traditional cigarettes because of the filtering mechanism. Regardless, the amount entering the body can be similar to regular filtered cigarettes. Furthermore, the toxicity of the smoke emitted from e-cigarettes (i.e. second-hand smoke) is still being tested.

The numerous unknowns of e-cigarettes have caused many countries in Europe to ban them. In the United States, it appears the objective is more regulation.

Research has indicated that the use of e-cigarettes will likely increase and potentially replace traditional cigarettes. The cost is 5-7 times cheaper than smoking a pack a day. Furthermore, the marketing has touted them to be safer and they are easier to use than regular cigarettes, which require a lighter or matches to get started. Time will tell if they are safer or simply another unhealthy practice.

For overall health, it is wise to not smoke at all – e-cigarettes or traditional ones. For information on smoking cessation, consult your primary care physician. You will be glad you did.

 

Works Used for this Post:

ChangeLab Solutions. (2014). Are e-cigarettes regulated by the FDA? Retrieved from http://changelabsolutions.org/tobacco-control/question/are-e-cigarettes-regulate

Cope, G. (2013). Are e-cigarettes an aid to smoking cessation? Practice Nursing, 24(9), 426-428.

Niaura, R. S., Glynn, T. J., and Abrams, D. B. (2014). Youth experimentation with e-cigarettes. Journal of the American Medical Association, 312(6), 641-642.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2014). Electronic Cigarettes. Retrieved from http://www.fda.gov/newsevents/publichealthfocus/ucm172906.htm

 

 

An Office Window can improve your Health

Having a window office really does make a difference in your health.

A study that came out of Germany showed how exposure to light can influence both mood and sleep in office workers. The fascinating part of this study was that they recorded evidence of two visible light factors: illuminance and irradiance of blue spectral component. In general terms, blue light come from the sun’s ultra-violet rays. While most people understand that UV rays can be harmful and cause skin disorders such as cancer, they are also valuable to human health in other ways.

Daily light exposure during office hours does truly influence the amount of sleep a person obtains every night. Blue light reaching the eye during the day positively affected the quality of sleep as well as the amount of sleep. So, if you have an office window, you are likely getting at least 45 more minutes of sleep – and quality sleep – than your counterparts with interior offices.

Sleep health is far more important than people realize. In fact, it has become so important that public health professionals added it to their priority list in 2010 when studies consistently showed sleep disorders were on the rise. At that time, poor sleep was reported in more than 25 percent of the adult population. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that only 70 percent of adults got sufficient sleep (8 or more hours per night) during a 24-hour period.

However, what’s more important is that these sleepy people are more prone to infections, diabetes, low productivity and high risk of accidents of various types. Also, sleep disorders have been associated with heart disease, high blood pressure, and obesity.

Light is an important element to the human body because it acts as a master clock. It tells your brain cells when it is daylight and when it is night simply by the amount of light that enters the eye. Natural light contains a higher intensity that than indoor lighting, allowing your body to be more alert and focused. That, in turns, allows your body to rest more soundly when it is darker.

Since natural sunlight and sleep are correlated, it stands to reason that we should be spending more time outdoors – especially when the sun is out. For those with an exterior window, you are lucky. The rest of us have to figure out how to get in regular daily doses of sunshine if we work inside.

The best way to maintain a healthy master clock is to get into bright sunlight during the day – around noon is best. The bright light apparently “anchors” your body’s rhythms so that you are more alert through the day and able to sleep more soundly at night. It only takes between 30 and 60 minutes to achieve the anchoring effect. The easiest way to soak in the sunlight is to get outside during your breaks – even short bouts of 15 minutes of natural light can help improve your health. Take your mid-day breaks outside and eat lunch outdoors.

Researcher Dan Pardi who works with the Behavioral Sciences Department at Stanford University discovered that if you get enough light every day, you will not only improve your mood and sleep, but your overall well-being.

There may be a quicker fix: If you’re in need of more sleep, ask your boss for a window office!

Works Used for this Article:

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2014). Sleep health. Retrieved from http://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topicsobjectives2020/objectiveslist.aspx?topicId=38

Hubalek, S., Brink, M., and Schierz, C. (2010). Office workers’ daily exposure to light and its influence on sleep quality and mood. Lighting Research & Technology, 42(1), 33-50.

Kitchel, E. (2000). The effects of blue light on ocular health. Retrieved from http://www.cclvi.org/contributions/effects1.htm

Pardi, D. (2014). How the cycles of light and darkness affect your health and wellbeing. Retrieved from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2014/01/19/sleep-light-exposure.aspx

Are You Safe from Ebola?

With the Ebola scare littering the national news, it is important to understand the disease itself as well as the outbreak risks – especially here in the United States.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Tom Frieden, the virus can be stopped but not cured. The current crisis in Africa partially stems from a poor public health structure. That means there is not a solid method for containment of any such infectious disease. Because of this, the World Health Organization has declared this recent Ebola outbreak the worst in at least four decades since they have been tracking the disease.

Ebola virus disease (EVD) is a severe illness which is often fatal for humans. It is a viral infection that causes a sudden onset of fever, intense weakness, muscle pain, headache, and sore throat. Further symptoms include vomiting, diarrhea, kidney and liver impairment, and often internal and external bleeding.

It is transmitted through close contact with bodily fluids such as blood, sweat, saliva, and urine. Of interest, cultures where there are “laying of hands” on the deceased person can also promote the transmission of Ebola.

As most people know, two Americans who were on a mission trip to Africa at the time of the outbreak did contract the disease. It was decided that the best way to help them was to bring them back to the states in a highly quarantined manner in order to give them a fighting chance at survival. Ebola is not curable, but the CDC is using experimental serum treatments in an effort to repress the Ebola virus. If you’ve been watching the news, then you are well aware that the treatment seems to be effective – for now.

The real questions from the general public are: 1) How safe was it to bring Ebola into our country, and 2) Could it potentially spread?

The Safety Precautions:

The U.S. Department of State noted that this is the first time Ebola – a highly contagious disease – has been brought into the United States, so concerns are warranted. The transport of the two Americans from Liberia to the United States was a fast one. They were attended to by highly trained doctors and nurses during the flight, in which the couple was placed in separate Aeromedical Biological Containment Systems. This system prevents air flow outside of the system – keeping all bodily fluids from escaping and potentially infecting others.

The couple is being treated at Emory University Hospital in Atlanta, also the location of the CDC. Again, the room in which they are quarantined is a much like a larger version of the Aeromedical Biological Containment System. Airflow does not extend outside the walls, and strict precautions and protection protocols prohibit any fluids from exiting the room on any of the medical personnel treating them. Highly trained doctors, nurses and staff will wear Haz-Mat –style protective gear, including oxygen tanks, to attend to the two people. To ensure the disease will not spread, the hospital issued this public statement:

"Emory University Hospital physicians, nurses and staff are highly trained in the specific and unique protocols and procedures necessary to treat and care for this type of patient. For this specially trained staff, these procedures are practiced on a regular basis throughout the year so we are fully prepared for this type of situation."

Potential Outbreak in the US:

It is highly unlikely that we will see an Ebola outbreak in the United States as a result of these two people being treated in Atlanta. So far, all measures have been successful in containing the disease within the containment room at Emory. Strict protocols and adherence to the CDC’s procedures will keep it this way. The fact that Emory University is closely connected to the CDC helps escalate the level of protections and overall security of our nation’s health.

Outside of this particular incidence, federal law prohibits infectious diseases to cross the border via human carriers. If someone might carry such a disease, CDC agents will examine the person(s) and detain them if there is a potential threat. The same is true of crossing state lines. The Public Health title of the Code of Federal Regulations allows for “inspection, fumigation, disinfection, sanitation, pest extermination and destruction of animals or articles believed to be sources of infection.”

CDC agents are routinely stationed at airports and transportation centers to thwart such threats. Right now, flights in and out of the affected areas are suspended in an effort to contain the virus and keep it from spreading further.

Therefore, safety for United States citizens is solid. At this time, Ebola is an unlikely threat on this side of the world.

Works used for this post:

Karimi, F. (2014). WHO: Ebola outbreak in West Africa an international health emergency. Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/08/health/ebola-outbreak/.

World Health Organization. (2014). Ebola virus disease. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs103/en/.

Lane, S. (2014). Here’s why it’s safe to bring Ebola patients to the U.S. Retrieved from http://mashable.com/2014/08/01/ebola-united-states-law/

How Safe Is “Natural” Hormone Replacement Therapy?

The quick and dirty answer to this question is: it’s not safe at all. In fact, no hormone replacement therapy is safe, yet, numerous pre-menopausal, menopausal, and post-menopausal women participate in such therapies regularly. Actually, so do many men; although, it’s far more common for women.
 
In the Women’s Health Initiative Study, a 15-year project performed in the 1990s studying nearly 70,000 post-menopausal women ages 50-79, discovered numerous health effects of hormone replacement therapy (HRT). The therapy used the FDA approved traditional hormone replacement drugs, not “natural” therapies. The study showed significant increases in the risk of breast cancer, coronary heart disease, stroke and venous thromboembolism (i.e. blood clotting).

Research from this study showed that older women who have long been through menopause – regardless of their initial health – were at risk for these serious health issues.

Hormone replacement therapy was originally touted to help women with menopausal symptoms such as weight gain, bloating, hot flashes, night sweats, and similar issues. While that is true and HRT did relieve those symptoms, the Women’s Health Initiative discovered the health risks far outweighed the benefits these benefits.

That brings us to what has been marketed as a safer alternative to synthetic hormone replacement therapies. Known by several different names – bioidentical hormones or natural hormones – this therapy is not necessarily safer.

Bioidentical Hormone Replacement Therapy (BHRT) is controversial because of the mistaken belief that the hormones are personalized to the individual’s body make-up. That’s not necessarily true; and considering how recent these products were introduced, there are few studies on them. Individualization of hormone therapy has made “natural” therapies popular, but not necessarily safer.

A clinical review of BHRT published in 2011 in the Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine provided several specific discussion points for health practitioners in regard to these bioidentical hormones. Here are four critical points to consider:

1. Bioidentical hormones are not necessarily “natural.” Natural refers to the source of the hormones. Natural and bioidentical hormones both come from the same source of soy and plants but bioidentical hormones must be commercially processed.

2. The Food and Drug Administration has approved some bioidentical hormones, but custom compounded hormones are not subject to federal law. These custom hormones contain so many combinations that it would be difficult to monitor and test. Plus, custom compounded hormones will vary from batch to batch causing variations in the doses received and benefits earned.

3. There is no safe hormone therapy. All active ingredients are the same regardless of whether they are synthetic, bioidentical or custom compounded; therefore, the risks are the same. There is no such thing as a safe hormone therapy.

4. It is nearly impossible to accurately monitor hormone levels in those receiving individualized hormone therapy. Every woman is unique in how she processes hormones within her body, therefore, routine blood tests or salivary tests do not necessarily show adequate or accurate results. As an example, even the smallest of elements such as brushing your teeth can affect salivary test results. The journal noted that positive tracking is typically based upon symptom relief not laboratory results.

 

Some positive news can be said about hormone replacement therapies. Evidence from a 2008 study of conventional hormone replacement therapies in younger, menopausal women showed that the benefits did outweigh the risks when the therapy was used short-term. The study was performed in people younger than age 60 who had either been in pre-menopause or menopause.

The point here is that hormone replacement therapies – natural or conventional – can be effective if the individual is young, healthy, active and going through the menopausal process. After a certain point (i.e. post menopause), hormone replacement should be eliminated. If you are interested in hormone replacement therapies, you are encouraged to talk with your physician.

 

Works Used for this Post: 

Bosarge, P. M. and Freeman, S. (2009). Bioidentical hormones, compounding and evidence-based medicine: What women’s health practitioners need to know. The Journal for Nurse Practitioners, 5(6), 421-427.

Kuehn, B. M. (2008). FDA warns claims for pharmacy-made “bio-identical” hormones are misleading. Journal of the American Medical Association, 299(5), 512.

Sood, R., Shuster, L., Smith, R., Vincent, A., and Jatoi, A. (2011). Counseling postmenopausal women about bioidentical hormones: 10 discussion points for practicing physicians. Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, 24(2), 202-210.

Women’s Health Initiative. (2014). WHI Overview. Retrieved from https://www.whi.org/about/SitePages/About%20WHI.aspx

 

 

Occupational Hazard: Sitting increases your risk of cancer

If you’re female, you might want to consider a more physically active career to avoid a variety of cancers.
 
A meta-analysis of thousands of Europeans across seven different groups (five in England and two in Scotland) found that sitting occupations were linked to a greater risk of cancer mortality – but for women only, not for men. Another study in the Netherlands included nearly 130,000 people drew the same conclusion.

It is unclear how sitting can be linked to a greater risk for cancer, especially colon cancer. Yet, studies have suggested that sitting occupations may reduce lipoprotein lipase activity by up to 90% and significantly slow insulin action. Lipoprotein lipase (LPL) is a gene that is responsible for producing an enzyme that plays a critical role in transporting and breaking down fats which then is used for energy or stored. Retarded insulin secretion can lessen the effects of metabolism. Both actions have been linked to obesity and related diseases.

Furthermore, sedentary behaviors and cancer may also involve adiposity (the state of being fat), inflammation (swelling), and sex-hormone related pathways (efficient use of estrogen, testosterone, and progesterone). All of these elements can cause obesity and related health issues – including cancer.

It comes down to the same theme we’re all heard over and over: get moving to prevent illness and disease.

 If you work in a sitting occupation, consider adding the following to your daily routine as suggested by the Workplace Health and Safety sector of the Attorney General’s office in Queensland (Australia):

1. Use a height adjustable desk so that you can work standing or sitting

2. Move your printer, scanner and other office equipment so that you have to walk to them to use them

3. Standing during phone calls

4. Walk to your colleagues’ desks; don’t phone or email them

5. Hold standing or walking meetings

6. Eat lunch or snacks away from your desk

7. Take breaks regularly to stand, stretch or walk for a few minutes

8. Use the stairs, not the elevator

9. Walk during your lunchtime or breaks

10. Walk or bicycle to work, or park further away from the office and walk the rest of the way

 

Regardless of what you do, the point is to move more. It can reduce your risk of cancer.

 

Of interest, it is unclear why women who sit for their jobs are at a higher risk for cancers than men. It has been suggested that men who work in sedentary occupations are more likely to participate in physical activity outside the office than are women. There have been studies that suggest women who begin exercising before puberty can reduce their risk of cancers even if they end up with a sedentary occupation.

Research is very clear about one thing: physical activity in your daily routine can prevent diseases and keep you healthy.

 

Research used for this article:

Schonfeld, S. J., Neta, G., Sturgis, E. M., Pfeiffer, R. M., Hutchinson, A. A., Xu, L., Wheeler, W., Guenel, P., Rajaraman, P., de Bathaire, F., Ron, E., Tucker, M. A., Chanock, S. J., Siqurdson, A. J., and Brenner, A. V. (2012). Common genetic variants in sex hormone pathway genes and papillary thyroid cancer risk. Thyroid, 22(2), 151-156.

Simons, C., Hughes, L., van Engeland, M., Goldbohm, A., van den Brandt, P., and Weijenberg, M. (2013). Physical activity, occupational sitting time, and colorectal cancer risk in the Netherlands cohort study. American Journal of Epidemiology, 177(6), 514-530.

Stamatakis, E., Chau, J., Pedisic, Z., Bauman, A., Macniven, R., Coombs, N., and Hamer, M. (2013). Are sitting occupations associated with increased all-cause, cancer, and cardiovascular disease mortality risk? A pooled analysis of seven British population cohorts. PLoS One, 8(9), 1-10.

Workplace Health and Safety Queensland. (n.d.). Sedentary work – sit less and move more in your work day. Retrieved from http://www.justice.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/160089/sedentary-work-factsheet-ekka.pdf.