Summary by M Counsman:
I am unable to post a blog. For whatever reason it is not letting me on.
I found an article on NEWSWISE.
It is titled Unexpected Impact When Family Caregivers Learn Touch and Massage Cancer Ptatients Benefit, Released 4/15/10 at 0900.
The author is also the lead researcher, William Collinge, PhD, from the Touch Cancer Program. This is sponsored by the American Cancer Society.
The studies are very interesting, and although I cannot duplicate in its entirety, the essence is that human touch provides significant reductions to pts undergoing chemo and treatment for Stage IV Ca.
Stress is a constant with negative impacts and pts that received 4 hrs of massage per wk over a 4 wk period showed a 78% reduction in pain, stress and other emotional hardships. The avg massage was 13.75 mins.
I feel this is one positive tool that should be shared with all of those undergoing such a difficult life experience.
An instructional DVD is also available called Touch, Caring and Cancer: Simple Instruction for Family and Friends. It is available in English, Spanish and Chinese at http://www.partnersinhealing.net/dvd.
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Why Be Smoke- Free? A Qualitative Study of Smoke-free Restaurant Owner and Manager Opinions
Health Promotion Practice
January 2010 Vol. 11 No. 1, 89-94
This qualitative study captured the opinions of the owners and managers of smoke-free restaurants. The study was initiated by local citizens in North Carolina who were members of a group called Healthy Alamance. Healthy Alamance is a Healthy Carolina partnership. Healthy Carolinas is a community-based partnership designed to improve the health of North Carolinians. This is guided by a Governor's Task Force whose vision is that the health promotion agenda for North Carolina should be developed and owned by a broad coalition of concerned citizens. Healthy Carolinas is based on the concept that community members are most qualified to effectively prioritize the health and safety problems in their community and to plan and execute creative solutions to these problems. Healthy Alamance is devoted to a variety of locally selected health issues, including heart disease and stroke, diabetes, cancer, obesity, and tobacco use and prevention and smoke-free environments.
Using findings from research about smoke-free environments, several approaches were suggested to increase the number of these restaurants. These include sharing data about smoke-free restaurants and the lack of economic harm, working with affected populations, for example, asthmatic children, to advocate for smoke-free environments, and community-wide events to generate media attention about secondhand smoke.
While focusing on these approaches the Healthy Alamance Substance Abuse Task Force implemented a campaign to establish smoke-free environments as a community norm in Alamance County. They educated restaurant owners about actual rates of smokers and the number of patrons who wanted smoke-free environments. They facilitated a process that incorporated community input and media recognition as an incentive for change. Early on the Task Force conducted a telephone poll to determine the number of smoke-free restaurants. At that time 33% of Alamance County restaurants were smoke-free. Many restaurant owners feared that if they became smoke-free they would lose a large number of customers.
By 2004, 45% or 80 of the restaurants were smoke-free. All 80 restaurants fit the criteria for the study and all of the owner/managers of these restaurants were contacted. Respondents were interviewed with the understanding that the description of findings would not reveal their identity or the identity of the restaurant. A total of 70 or 87.5% of the restaurant owners/ managers completed the interview. The interview consisted of pre-selected questions derived from an pilot tested with a small sample of restaurant owners/managers. The questions were based on the study's objectives. These included: (1)What motivated you to become smoke-free? (2)What are the benefits of being smoke-free? and (3)What are the disadvantages of being smoke-free? The investigators concluded that the data isolated economic factors, customer demands and considerations, and environmental issues as the three principal measures describing smoke-free restaurant owners' and managers' motivations for operating smoke-free restaurants.
The majority of respondents indicated no economic loss by being smoke-free. In fact, a number of respondents indicated that business had increased. Respondents also spoke of their customers' appreciation of a smoke-free environment and receiving fewer complaints about smoking from the customers. They also spoke of their employees and of their own values. Many indicated that corporate policy directed or encouraged smoke-free environments. A number of respondents discussed the issues of cleanliness, odor, and damage to the restaurant. Many stated that it was much easier and much less expensive to keep a smoke-free restaurant clean. This was not only true for the interior of the restaurant but also for the exterior in the form of few cigarette butts to clean up outside of the restaurant.
In conclusion, this study found that while several respondents expressed concern of the potential loss of customers, most felt that over time, they gained customers and were prospering. Very few received complaints from customers about being smoke-free. Most felt that they benefited in terms of environmental issues, such as increased cleanliness, and decreased maintenance to buildings and furniture. An underlying theme was that smoke -free policies were good for business. It improved customer turnaround time and appreciation and lowered costs by creating an cleaner, healthier smoke-free environment. This study supports research that contrasts big tobacco's claim that going smoke free would hurt business profits (Alamar & Glantz, 2004).
January 2010 Vol. 11 No. 1, 89-94
This qualitative study captured the opinions of the owners and managers of smoke-free restaurants. The study was initiated by local citizens in North Carolina who were members of a group called Healthy Alamance. Healthy Alamance is a Healthy Carolina partnership. Healthy Carolinas is a community-based partnership designed to improve the health of North Carolinians. This is guided by a Governor's Task Force whose vision is that the health promotion agenda for North Carolina should be developed and owned by a broad coalition of concerned citizens. Healthy Carolinas is based on the concept that community members are most qualified to effectively prioritize the health and safety problems in their community and to plan and execute creative solutions to these problems. Healthy Alamance is devoted to a variety of locally selected health issues, including heart disease and stroke, diabetes, cancer, obesity, and tobacco use and prevention and smoke-free environments.
Using findings from research about smoke-free environments, several approaches were suggested to increase the number of these restaurants. These include sharing data about smoke-free restaurants and the lack of economic harm, working with affected populations, for example, asthmatic children, to advocate for smoke-free environments, and community-wide events to generate media attention about secondhand smoke.
While focusing on these approaches the Healthy Alamance Substance Abuse Task Force implemented a campaign to establish smoke-free environments as a community norm in Alamance County. They educated restaurant owners about actual rates of smokers and the number of patrons who wanted smoke-free environments. They facilitated a process that incorporated community input and media recognition as an incentive for change. Early on the Task Force conducted a telephone poll to determine the number of smoke-free restaurants. At that time 33% of Alamance County restaurants were smoke-free. Many restaurant owners feared that if they became smoke-free they would lose a large number of customers.
By 2004, 45% or 80 of the restaurants were smoke-free. All 80 restaurants fit the criteria for the study and all of the owner/managers of these restaurants were contacted. Respondents were interviewed with the understanding that the description of findings would not reveal their identity or the identity of the restaurant. A total of 70 or 87.5% of the restaurant owners/ managers completed the interview. The interview consisted of pre-selected questions derived from an pilot tested with a small sample of restaurant owners/managers. The questions were based on the study's objectives. These included: (1)What motivated you to become smoke-free? (2)What are the benefits of being smoke-free? and (3)What are the disadvantages of being smoke-free? The investigators concluded that the data isolated economic factors, customer demands and considerations, and environmental issues as the three principal measures describing smoke-free restaurant owners' and managers' motivations for operating smoke-free restaurants.
The majority of respondents indicated no economic loss by being smoke-free. In fact, a number of respondents indicated that business had increased. Respondents also spoke of their customers' appreciation of a smoke-free environment and receiving fewer complaints about smoking from the customers. They also spoke of their employees and of their own values. Many indicated that corporate policy directed or encouraged smoke-free environments. A number of respondents discussed the issues of cleanliness, odor, and damage to the restaurant. Many stated that it was much easier and much less expensive to keep a smoke-free restaurant clean. This was not only true for the interior of the restaurant but also for the exterior in the form of few cigarette butts to clean up outside of the restaurant.
In conclusion, this study found that while several respondents expressed concern of the potential loss of customers, most felt that over time, they gained customers and were prospering. Very few received complaints from customers about being smoke-free. Most felt that they benefited in terms of environmental issues, such as increased cleanliness, and decreased maintenance to buildings and furniture. An underlying theme was that smoke -free policies were good for business. It improved customer turnaround time and appreciation and lowered costs by creating an cleaner, healthier smoke-free environment. This study supports research that contrasts big tobacco's claim that going smoke free would hurt business profits (Alamar & Glantz, 2004).
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Cancer vaccines may be on the verge of wider use
By Mark Roth
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
In order for cancer to occur there must be some failure of the immune system. As tumors grow and multiply they evade our immune system. Many scientists in universities and companies around the world believe we may be on the verge of developing a vaccine to vaccinate people against cancer. Some of the cancer vaccines being developed include sipuleucel-T, a vaccine against advanced prostate cancer, and stimuvax, a cancer marker known as MUC1 that is present in many different tumors.
Dr. Olivera Finn, UPMC researcher, has developed her own vaccine against MUC1 that has shown some success in advanced cancer patients. She tried her vaccine in mice bread to have IBS that leads to colon cancer 80% of the time. The mice that receive the MUC1 targeted vaccine were far less likely to get IBD and almost none got cancer. Dr. Finn has also tested her vaccine in people with precancerous polyps to see if the vaccine is able to prevent colorectal cancer and is likely a few years away from reporting her results.. She states the hope is that “… the cells that become abnormal might actually be eliminated by a strong immune response.””
Neurosurgeon Hideho Okada is trialing an immune system booster called Hitonol, which would be the first vaccine developed for low-grade gliomas. He hopes this vaccine can reverse the death sentence” that comes with a diagnosis of glioma. Hitonol, named for co-inventor Hilton Levy, mimics the DNA of a virus and primes the immune system. It is currently being used in twelve different vaccine trials.
According to Robert Kirkmann, president of Oncothyreon, (company that manufactured stimuvax), the best way to test the cancer vaccines may be on large groups of patients who aren’t sick and can be followed for a long period of time. This would undoubtedly be very expensive. This type of work is typically easier done if the product is commercially produced. Dr. Gulley of the National Cancer Institute believes cancer vaccines take longer than other kinds of therapies to show beneficial results because of the amount of time it takes the immune system to evolve.
This is exciting news in the road to a “cure for cancer”. If nothing else, these vaccines may make it possible for people to live longer with cancer or make certain types of cancer less aggressive and less life-threatening.
Thursday, April 8, 2010
Experts: One-third of Breast Cancer Cases Avoidable
Experts: One-third of Breast Cancer Cases Avoidable
The Associated Press 2010
March 25 2010
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2010-03-25-breast-cancer_N.htm
Breast Cancer is the most common cancer in women with 190,000 new cases and 40,000 deaths in the United States in 2009. A woman has a 1/8 chance of developing breast cancer in her lifetime. A 2006 study by British researchers found that women who are obese have and increased risk of developing the cancer compared to normal weight women by 60%. Estrogen is produced by fat tissue and it is thought that the more fat tissue a woman has the greater chance the estrogen produced from that tissue will make a person more prone to develop breast cancer. Similarly, during 1980-1990 a parallel increase was recognized in obesity, breast cancer and hormone replacement therapy which all are associated with estrogen. Better Mammogram screenings, early diagnosis and treatments have shown improvements. The head of epidemiology at the University of Milan, Carlo La Vecchia, spoke his thoughts to the Associated Press, “What can be achieved with screening has been achieved. We can’t do much more, It’s time to move onto other things.” A European breast cancer conference in Barcelona, suggests breast cancer can be prevented in Western countries with a focus on changing lifestyle behaviors with diet and exercise. However this recommendation only applies to postmenopausal women because of limited evidence on reduced body fat in younger women.
The International Agency for Research on Cancer estimated a 25-30% decrease in cases following this recommendation to stay thin. An IARC cancer expert, Robert Baan from Lyon, France posed the question of whether it is the weight reduction activities or being slim and not gaining weight from the beginning had a lower cancer risk.
A cancer expert at Harvard University, Michelle Holmes said that diet and exercise is an easier risk factor to modify in comparison to genes. “The genes have been there for thousands of years but if cancer rates are changing in a lifetime, that doesn’t have much to do with genes.”
It was noted that 1.25-2.5 hours of brisk walking a week reduced the risk 18% in a Women’s Health Initiative study. It is recommended by the American Cancer Society to exercise five or more days a week between 45-60 minutes to reduce the risk.
The Associated Press 2010
March 25 2010
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2010-03-25-breast-cancer_N.htm
Breast Cancer is the most common cancer in women with 190,000 new cases and 40,000 deaths in the United States in 2009. A woman has a 1/8 chance of developing breast cancer in her lifetime. A 2006 study by British researchers found that women who are obese have and increased risk of developing the cancer compared to normal weight women by 60%. Estrogen is produced by fat tissue and it is thought that the more fat tissue a woman has the greater chance the estrogen produced from that tissue will make a person more prone to develop breast cancer. Similarly, during 1980-1990 a parallel increase was recognized in obesity, breast cancer and hormone replacement therapy which all are associated with estrogen. Better Mammogram screenings, early diagnosis and treatments have shown improvements. The head of epidemiology at the University of Milan, Carlo La Vecchia, spoke his thoughts to the Associated Press, “What can be achieved with screening has been achieved. We can’t do much more, It’s time to move onto other things.” A European breast cancer conference in Barcelona, suggests breast cancer can be prevented in Western countries with a focus on changing lifestyle behaviors with diet and exercise. However this recommendation only applies to postmenopausal women because of limited evidence on reduced body fat in younger women.
The International Agency for Research on Cancer estimated a 25-30% decrease in cases following this recommendation to stay thin. An IARC cancer expert, Robert Baan from Lyon, France posed the question of whether it is the weight reduction activities or being slim and not gaining weight from the beginning had a lower cancer risk.
A cancer expert at Harvard University, Michelle Holmes said that diet and exercise is an easier risk factor to modify in comparison to genes. “The genes have been there for thousands of years but if cancer rates are changing in a lifetime, that doesn’t have much to do with genes.”
It was noted that 1.25-2.5 hours of brisk walking a week reduced the risk 18% in a Women’s Health Initiative study. It is recommended by the American Cancer Society to exercise five or more days a week between 45-60 minutes to reduce the risk.
Jamie Oliver's Food Revolution
Reality series ‘Jamie Oliver’s Food Revolution’ aims to anger views over the food system
The Associated Press
Friday March 26th
http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/food/2010/03/26/2010-03-26_reality_series_jamie_olivers_food_revolution_aims_to_anger_viewers_over_the_food.html
Celebrity Chef Jamie Oliver has taken on the challenge of reforming America’s school lunch menus. By hosting an ABC reality series he hopes to open the country’s eyes to the state of the American food system and channel that anger towards change. The series is based off of a similar show he had done in England that did end in restructuring the British school lunch system. The setting of the show is Huntington, West Virginia. Based on an Associated Press Story in 2008, Huntington, was labeled as the “nation’s unhealthiest city” using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data. It recognized that close to half of the adults were obese and the area led in many other illnesses. Mr. Oliver also plans on taking this change further to the White House with an online petition for healthier food choices in the nation’s schools.
Despite the seriousness of the obesity epidemic, the people of Huntington, West Virginia, were not very receptive to the proposed changes in the early episodes. Mr. Oliver described the reception to change during the early months was tough. Even while on a radio airing DJ Rod Willis commented, “We don’t want to sit around and eat lettuce all day. You come to town and say you’re going to change our menus and all that. I just don’t think you should come in here and tell us what to do.”
A major struggle in the series is replacing processed foods in the school lunch menus with fresh produce. This would also include new standards for vending machine items. State officials worry about the additional food and labor costs of providing fresh foods for lunches. Mr. Oliver debates that eating healthy is worth it and the time is now for a food revolution in the United States.
The show airs on ABC on Friday at 9pm until April 23rd.
The Associated Press
Friday March 26th
http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/food/2010/03/26/2010-03-26_reality_series_jamie_olivers_food_revolution_aims_to_anger_viewers_over_the_food.html
Celebrity Chef Jamie Oliver has taken on the challenge of reforming America’s school lunch menus. By hosting an ABC reality series he hopes to open the country’s eyes to the state of the American food system and channel that anger towards change. The series is based off of a similar show he had done in England that did end in restructuring the British school lunch system. The setting of the show is Huntington, West Virginia. Based on an Associated Press Story in 2008, Huntington, was labeled as the “nation’s unhealthiest city” using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data. It recognized that close to half of the adults were obese and the area led in many other illnesses. Mr. Oliver also plans on taking this change further to the White House with an online petition for healthier food choices in the nation’s schools.
Despite the seriousness of the obesity epidemic, the people of Huntington, West Virginia, were not very receptive to the proposed changes in the early episodes. Mr. Oliver described the reception to change during the early months was tough. Even while on a radio airing DJ Rod Willis commented, “We don’t want to sit around and eat lettuce all day. You come to town and say you’re going to change our menus and all that. I just don’t think you should come in here and tell us what to do.”
A major struggle in the series is replacing processed foods in the school lunch menus with fresh produce. This would also include new standards for vending machine items. State officials worry about the additional food and labor costs of providing fresh foods for lunches. Mr. Oliver debates that eating healthy is worth it and the time is now for a food revolution in the United States.
The show airs on ABC on Friday at 9pm until April 23rd.
Monday, March 29, 2010
Health Law Will Make Calorie Counts Hard to Ignore
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review
By The Associated PressTuesday, March 23, 2010
The nations new health care bill requires the inclusion of calorie counts on many American menus. Restaurants will not longer be able to hide the calorie content of items on their menus; and it will soon be difficult for consumers to ignore the overtly displayed calorie counts. The law will require more than 200,000 restaurants and fast food chains to include calorie counts on their menus, menu boards, and even at the drive-through menus. It will also apply to vending machines, especially the ones that do not have visible calories listed on the front of the packages. The new law applies to any restaurant with 20 or more locations.
Many restaurants currently post nutritional information in a location other than the point of sale where it is not readily available to consumers. The information is currently located on their website or a hamburger wrapper that is visible to the consumer only after the purchase has taken place. The hope for the new law, requiring visible information at the time of purchase, is that the consumers will process the calorie information as they are ordering and make healthier choices.
“The nutrition information is right on the menu or menu board next to the name of the menu item, rather than in a pamphlet or in a tiny print on a poster, so that consumers can see it when they are making ordering decisions,” says Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin, Chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, who wrote the provision.
Restaurants are struggling with facing many different regulations and legislation from cities and states. The author states that this requirement was added with the support of the restaurant industry and, according to Sue Hensley of the National Restaurant Association, “… will allow operators to better be able to provide the information [to customers].”
Some places including New York City, California, and Seattle have already established calorie counts. The law directs the Food and Drug Administration to create a new national standard for menu labeling that will replace the existing laws in a number of cities and states. The FDA will have a year to write the new rules.
Margo Wooten, Director of Nutrition Policy at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, spoke of the wide range of calorie counts possible for the same types of food and said this is “…one step in the fight against obesity.”
There are some concerns being raised surrounding the accuracy of the counts, whether consumers will notice the calorie counts, and whether they will make a considerable difference in the health of Americans.
Monday, March 22, 2010
Are Teen Vegetarians Really Hiding an Eating Disorder?
Julie M
March 22, 2010
Source: http://health.msn.com/health-topics/articlepage.aspx?cp-documentid=100256060
A recent University of Minnesota study found that former vegetarian teenagers were more prone to participate in weight loss measures, from purging to calorie restriction. Many teenagers with eating disorders are using the excuse that they are “vegetarians” to mask their developing problem. Some teenagers feel that fat is in meat, and in order to maintain a perfect (or too thin) of a figure, they have resorted to eating vegetables only. Little do they know that this type of daily menu lacks many essential vitamins and minerals found in meats and need to be taking in some type of replacement for their losses.
“Posing as a vegetarian is nothing new for those with eating disorders, but it is becoming more popular,” says Sari Shepphird, Ph.D., an adolescent psychologist. It is difficult to correct a teen who says they are becoming a vegetarian on moral grounds; however, this eating disorder mask needs to be uncovered. By choosing to mask the disorder by stating that he/she is choosing to be a vegetarian can cause major problems, as the eating disorder may be found once it is too late.
These teens choosing this type of ‘dieting’ have found themselves to be low on energy, and nutrients, but they feel that they need to continue this diet in order to have the perfect image.
Eating disorders among teenagers is a huge problem being faced not only in the United States, bur around the world. When these teenagers admit that they have a problem and go to seek help, it is a long road back to eating normally again. This is a mental illness that comes with many other problems; however, if the teenager is determined to get better and have a strong support system, they will be able to get back their ‘normal’ life and live a healthier, more fulfilling life as a regular sized teenager!
March 22, 2010
Source: http://health.msn.com/health-topics/articlepage.aspx?cp-documentid=100256060
A recent University of Minnesota study found that former vegetarian teenagers were more prone to participate in weight loss measures, from purging to calorie restriction. Many teenagers with eating disorders are using the excuse that they are “vegetarians” to mask their developing problem. Some teenagers feel that fat is in meat, and in order to maintain a perfect (or too thin) of a figure, they have resorted to eating vegetables only. Little do they know that this type of daily menu lacks many essential vitamins and minerals found in meats and need to be taking in some type of replacement for their losses.
“Posing as a vegetarian is nothing new for those with eating disorders, but it is becoming more popular,” says Sari Shepphird, Ph.D., an adolescent psychologist. It is difficult to correct a teen who says they are becoming a vegetarian on moral grounds; however, this eating disorder mask needs to be uncovered. By choosing to mask the disorder by stating that he/she is choosing to be a vegetarian can cause major problems, as the eating disorder may be found once it is too late.
These teens choosing this type of ‘dieting’ have found themselves to be low on energy, and nutrients, but they feel that they need to continue this diet in order to have the perfect image.
Eating disorders among teenagers is a huge problem being faced not only in the United States, bur around the world. When these teenagers admit that they have a problem and go to seek help, it is a long road back to eating normally again. This is a mental illness that comes with many other problems; however, if the teenager is determined to get better and have a strong support system, they will be able to get back their ‘normal’ life and live a healthier, more fulfilling life as a regular sized teenager!
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Cambria near bottom in health report
Tribune Democrat - 2/25/2010
According to a report compiled by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the University of Wisconson, Cambria County residents don't feel very well.
Cambria County ranked 64th out of 67 counties in health outcome measures that included premature death rates and health related quality of life. Cambria County did a little better, (not really) ranking 52nd, in health factors that are related to enviornmental and economic factors.
This article outlined not only Cambria County's risk but also neighboring Somerset County which landed at number 32nd in health outcomes and 47th in health factors relating to enviornmental and economic risk factors. The county that ranked first in both categories in PA was Chester County. The county that ranked last in both categories was Philadelphia County.
Dr. Patrick Remington of the University of Wisconsin was interviewed by the Associated Press regarding this project and offered: "This just paints a picture of areas for improvement." Based upon these results the Cambria County Commisionners were asked for their insight. P.J. Stevens responded: "The easy thing to do would be to ignore it." Which is a suprising statement. However, he goes on to state: "...there are opportunities to make improvments, so that's what we are going to do. There are underlying factors to take a holistic approach to quality of life here. They have to be addressed."
Dr. Matthew Masiello, of the Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention at the Windber Research Institute states "It is time to honest, reflective and involved in discussing the health of our communities. This conversation must include our health care providers and how they are obligated to re-evaluate their role and responsibilities in the very large picture of health." Dr. Masiello was to meet with the county commissioners. The purpose: to identify and bring together a group made up of health care representatives and government officials to organize a 'Call to Action Legislative Health Forum.' Officials from Windber Research Institute commented on their committment to development of a plan of action.
This article summarized the meaning of the rankings. It explains that counties included are in a database that ties measures like general health and rate of premature death with factors known to affect health, such as smoking, obesity and binge drinking and with other variables like unemployment, poverty, air pollution and access to grocery stores. A link is provided:
www.countyhealthrankings.org
Those who live in the least healthy counties were more likely to smoke and have fewer places to find healthy foods. It states that this was determned by measuring the number of grocery stores for each zip code. The final statement of this article is that the healthiest counties are urban or suburban, while the least healthy are mostly rural. Cambria County fits the bill for rural; however, Somerset County (which ranked 32nd) fits the rural moniker too and their ranking was much better than say, Alleghany, which is was ranked at 49th. I absolutely believe there is a true statement to be made for those that live in rural areas. Access to care, access to simple things like food and clothing can be very difficult when the closest place is 30 - 40 miles away and you have no transportation (there are no cabs, no buses that run in many areas throughout rural counties) and you have no car or family that can drive you. However, to state that rural automatically means less healthy can be a false assumption.
This same story is also listed on the local news website:
www.wjactv.com
A follow up to this story:
March 2, 2010
This article discusses the meeting between Dr. Masiello, members of Windber Research Intitute (WRI) and the Cambria County Comissioners. This was a summary of the original findings of the report. The Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention volunteered to review and analyse the data that was reported. Once the analysis is complete the commissioners will organize a public forum that will also bring in other agencies and organizations.
These articles essentially summarized Cambria County's response to the low ranking related to health in the reports listed in the County Health Rankings - Mobilizing Action Towards Community Health (MATCH). I did not get the feel for any real plan to try and improve the health of the local community at this time.
I was very impressed with the weblink listed above. It is very user friendly and gives you a one stop shop of information that a person may be interested in knowing about an area they live. The website is very well done with easy links to the PADoH and other national databases. It even comes with a toolkit for communities to respond to the "Call to Action." The exact method on the website is what is outlined in these articles. Which leads me to conclude that the Cambria County commissioners and WRI are following this template to try to identify needs and provide resources for targeted community assessment. Having this kind of information at your fingertips can be powerful. Powerful in the knowledge of improving health for our neighbors. It is also powerful in attracting others to your area (businesses, people), because who wants to live in an area that is ranked so low in health? This becomes critical for an area like Cambria County that has shrunk steadily in population over the years and continues to do so.
According to a report compiled by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the University of Wisconson, Cambria County residents don't feel very well.
Cambria County ranked 64th out of 67 counties in health outcome measures that included premature death rates and health related quality of life. Cambria County did a little better, (not really) ranking 52nd, in health factors that are related to enviornmental and economic factors.
This article outlined not only Cambria County's risk but also neighboring Somerset County which landed at number 32nd in health outcomes and 47th in health factors relating to enviornmental and economic risk factors. The county that ranked first in both categories in PA was Chester County. The county that ranked last in both categories was Philadelphia County.
Dr. Patrick Remington of the University of Wisconsin was interviewed by the Associated Press regarding this project and offered: "This just paints a picture of areas for improvement." Based upon these results the Cambria County Commisionners were asked for their insight. P.J. Stevens responded: "The easy thing to do would be to ignore it." Which is a suprising statement. However, he goes on to state: "...there are opportunities to make improvments, so that's what we are going to do. There are underlying factors to take a holistic approach to quality of life here. They have to be addressed."
Dr. Matthew Masiello, of the Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention at the Windber Research Institute states "It is time to honest, reflective and involved in discussing the health of our communities. This conversation must include our health care providers and how they are obligated to re-evaluate their role and responsibilities in the very large picture of health." Dr. Masiello was to meet with the county commissioners. The purpose: to identify and bring together a group made up of health care representatives and government officials to organize a 'Call to Action Legislative Health Forum.' Officials from Windber Research Institute commented on their committment to development of a plan of action.
This article summarized the meaning of the rankings. It explains that counties included are in a database that ties measures like general health and rate of premature death with factors known to affect health, such as smoking, obesity and binge drinking and with other variables like unemployment, poverty, air pollution and access to grocery stores. A link is provided:
www.countyhealthrankings.org
Those who live in the least healthy counties were more likely to smoke and have fewer places to find healthy foods. It states that this was determned by measuring the number of grocery stores for each zip code. The final statement of this article is that the healthiest counties are urban or suburban, while the least healthy are mostly rural. Cambria County fits the bill for rural; however, Somerset County (which ranked 32nd) fits the rural moniker too and their ranking was much better than say, Alleghany, which is was ranked at 49th. I absolutely believe there is a true statement to be made for those that live in rural areas. Access to care, access to simple things like food and clothing can be very difficult when the closest place is 30 - 40 miles away and you have no transportation (there are no cabs, no buses that run in many areas throughout rural counties) and you have no car or family that can drive you. However, to state that rural automatically means less healthy can be a false assumption.
This same story is also listed on the local news website:
www.wjactv.com
A follow up to this story:
March 2, 2010
This article discusses the meeting between Dr. Masiello, members of Windber Research Intitute (WRI) and the Cambria County Comissioners. This was a summary of the original findings of the report. The Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention volunteered to review and analyse the data that was reported. Once the analysis is complete the commissioners will organize a public forum that will also bring in other agencies and organizations.
These articles essentially summarized Cambria County's response to the low ranking related to health in the reports listed in the County Health Rankings - Mobilizing Action Towards Community Health (MATCH). I did not get the feel for any real plan to try and improve the health of the local community at this time.
I was very impressed with the weblink listed above. It is very user friendly and gives you a one stop shop of information that a person may be interested in knowing about an area they live. The website is very well done with easy links to the PADoH and other national databases. It even comes with a toolkit for communities to respond to the "Call to Action." The exact method on the website is what is outlined in these articles. Which leads me to conclude that the Cambria County commissioners and WRI are following this template to try to identify needs and provide resources for targeted community assessment. Having this kind of information at your fingertips can be powerful. Powerful in the knowledge of improving health for our neighbors. It is also powerful in attracting others to your area (businesses, people), because who wants to live in an area that is ranked so low in health? This becomes critical for an area like Cambria County that has shrunk steadily in population over the years and continues to do so.
Sunday, March 14, 2010
School lunches linked to obesity
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Tribune Review
School lunches linked to obesity
Childhood obesity is on the rise in America. Research is now indicating that students who buy their lunch in schools compared to students who bring their food from home have higher rates of obesity and higher levels of bad cholesterol. The research shows that 39% of middle school students who buy their lunch at school are overweight compared with 24% who bring their food from home. The article mentions that only 6 percent of school meals meet nutritional requirements that are set by the Agricultural Department. Of these 6 percent of school meals that meet requirements it is mentioned that free meals are offered to students below the poverty line. This brings up the important link between heart health and poverty. Students who receive their lunches free because of their financial status have no choice but to eat the food that is given to them, shouldn’t the food they are being offered at least meet the nutritional requirements set by the Agricultural Department. This article mentions the need to help schools come up with a better variety of healthy foods for students to choose from so that we can help prevent heart disease, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, etc. later in life. The research also shows that students who buy their lunch have an average low-density lipoprotein level of 94 compared to 87.5 in the group of children who bring their food from home. Information that was obtained from questionnaires also shows that the students who buy their lunch eat less fruits and vegetables along with higher fat foods and more sweets compared to the group that brings their food from home. The questionnaires also show that the students who bring their lunch are more likely to watch television, sit at the computer, or play video games and less likely to get intense exercise. Another study b the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention showed the rate of childhood obesity has more than doubled since the 90’s to 17 percent in 2008. Research has also shown that vending machines at schools, which make snacks more readily available to children, have contributed to the childhood obesity epidemic. Lastly, it has been shown that children snack up to three times a day and get about 27percent of their daily calories from salty, fatty, and sugary foods.
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Medical center helping diabetes patients
February 28, 2010
Courier Express Tri-County Sunday
Pennsylvania has started a Chronic Care Initiative that will enable patients to be more actively involved in managing their ailments and health care providers to more efficiently counsel and refer patients. This article describes the initiative and specifically how a Western Pennsylvania medical center is implementing it.
The Reynoldsville Medical Center was chosen to be one of 36 medical practices throughout the state to participate in the Pennsylvania Chronic Care Initiative. The program uses a computer registry to identify patients at risk for complications from diabetes; it then reminds patients and staff of needed care and provides feedback to the offices about patient care. Numerous studies show a gap between evidence based recommendations for care and the outcomes for patients, according to the Penn State Diabetes Center. Doctors concur that gathering all the patient data can be difficult, so using information technology could alleviate at risk patients slipping between the cracks.
To initiate this program, the staff members at Reynoldsville Medical Center reviewed 1,500 charts, identifying 300 patients with diabetes. From there, each patient’s lab results and other care information were uploaded into the registry. At each visit, the staff is prompted by a computer generated check list to look into important data related to diabetes assuring the most updated standard of care. From this information, a monthly report is generated back to the state office to assess progress and areas that could use improvement.
The staff helps patients to set personal goals to work on between appointments; every three to six months there are 22 measures for the patient to achieve. Also, a group visitation for patients to support each other is a program in the works. Research has shown outcomes are better when patients take responsibility for their own health rather than relying on their doctor to do the work for them.
The team approach has yielded improvement in results and is changing healthcare delivery systems for the better. Pennsylvania is part of a pilot program for the United States. If this program continues to succeed, it will be generalized to management of other diseases such as asthma, coronary artery disease and congestive heart failure.
Courier Express Tri-County Sunday
Pennsylvania has started a Chronic Care Initiative that will enable patients to be more actively involved in managing their ailments and health care providers to more efficiently counsel and refer patients. This article describes the initiative and specifically how a Western Pennsylvania medical center is implementing it.
The Reynoldsville Medical Center was chosen to be one of 36 medical practices throughout the state to participate in the Pennsylvania Chronic Care Initiative. The program uses a computer registry to identify patients at risk for complications from diabetes; it then reminds patients and staff of needed care and provides feedback to the offices about patient care. Numerous studies show a gap between evidence based recommendations for care and the outcomes for patients, according to the Penn State Diabetes Center. Doctors concur that gathering all the patient data can be difficult, so using information technology could alleviate at risk patients slipping between the cracks.
To initiate this program, the staff members at Reynoldsville Medical Center reviewed 1,500 charts, identifying 300 patients with diabetes. From there, each patient’s lab results and other care information were uploaded into the registry. At each visit, the staff is prompted by a computer generated check list to look into important data related to diabetes assuring the most updated standard of care. From this information, a monthly report is generated back to the state office to assess progress and areas that could use improvement.
The staff helps patients to set personal goals to work on between appointments; every three to six months there are 22 measures for the patient to achieve. Also, a group visitation for patients to support each other is a program in the works. Research has shown outcomes are better when patients take responsibility for their own health rather than relying on their doctor to do the work for them.
The team approach has yielded improvement in results and is changing healthcare delivery systems for the better. Pennsylvania is part of a pilot program for the United States. If this program continues to succeed, it will be generalized to management of other diseases such as asthma, coronary artery disease and congestive heart failure.
Pediatricians urge choking warning labels
February 21, 2010
Courier Express Tri-County Sunday
The American Academy of Pediatrics is calling for changes to be made in the way food is designed and labeled to minimize children’s risk of choking. Choking kills more than 100 U.S. children 14 years or younger each year and thousands more (15,000 in 2001) are treated in emergency rooms.
Candy and gum are the leading causes of choking, as well as items like coins and balloons. In 2006, 141 choking deaths in children were reports of which 61 were food related. However, pediatricians still feel this is a low estimate and that there are many choking incidents that go unreported. Pediatricians are urging the FDA to establish a nationwide choking reporting system to identify high risk foods.
Federal law mandates choking warning labels on small toys, so the pediatrics academy is urging the same be done for high-risk foods. High risk food include: hot dogs, raw carrots, grapes and apples. These high risk foods should be cut in to small pea-sized pieces for children to reduce the hazard of choking. Foods such as hard candy, popcorn, peanuts, and marshmallows shouldn’t be given to younger children at all.
Another recommendation by the academy to the food industry is to avoid shapes and sizes that pose a choking risk. For example, making lollipops flat like a silver dollar instead of round like a ping pong ball.
Courier Express Tri-County Sunday
The American Academy of Pediatrics is calling for changes to be made in the way food is designed and labeled to minimize children’s risk of choking. Choking kills more than 100 U.S. children 14 years or younger each year and thousands more (15,000 in 2001) are treated in emergency rooms.
Candy and gum are the leading causes of choking, as well as items like coins and balloons. In 2006, 141 choking deaths in children were reports of which 61 were food related. However, pediatricians still feel this is a low estimate and that there are many choking incidents that go unreported. Pediatricians are urging the FDA to establish a nationwide choking reporting system to identify high risk foods.
Federal law mandates choking warning labels on small toys, so the pediatrics academy is urging the same be done for high-risk foods. High risk food include: hot dogs, raw carrots, grapes and apples. These high risk foods should be cut in to small pea-sized pieces for children to reduce the hazard of choking. Foods such as hard candy, popcorn, peanuts, and marshmallows shouldn’t be given to younger children at all.
Another recommendation by the academy to the food industry is to avoid shapes and sizes that pose a choking risk. For example, making lollipops flat like a silver dollar instead of round like a ping pong ball.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Low Vaccination Rates among Adults
Shared by Megan
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review February 5, 2010
Title: Adults failing to get Vaccines Rate blamed for loss of billions
of dollars, thousands of lives by McClatchy Newspapers
States require children to have all their immunizations prior to
starting school. Some veterinary offices send reminders to clients
when their pets need vaccines. Seniors do not have these safety nets.
It was found that 1/3 of seniors had not received any immunizations
against pneumonia in 36 states in 2008. As well, nearly 1/3 of
seniors also went without the annual flu vaccine that year. The
articles says millions of adults forego immunizations for preventable
diseases each year, and between 40,000-50,000 people die each year
because of it. Because vaccines are not given, it adds an additional
10 billion dollars annually to the cost of health care according to
the CDC. Oregon had the best rate of the pneumonia vaccine with
about 75% of seniors obtaining it; whereas Washington D.C. had the
lowest with about 50% not receiving the vaccine.
Adults slip through the cracks when it comes to vaccinations. They
are usually seeing their healthcare providers for specific reasons
and not for an overall picture of health. Another reason is that
seniors are not linked to organizations that require vaccinations
like children are with schools. Other hinders to vaccines are the
cost, misinformation regarding effectiveness and safety, and
insurance coverage that does not cover vaccinations, and having the
vaccines not readily accessible.
Jeff Levi, the executive director of the Trust for America's Health
states, "We need a national strategy to make vaccines a regular part
of medical care and educate Americans about the effectiveness and
safety of vaccines." The CDC has recommended that everyone older than
65 get the pneumonia vaccine. They are hoping for 90% compliance rate
this year. They also included a vaccination schedule in the article
for adults with varying age ranges and the recommended vaccines.
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review February 5, 2010
Title: Adults failing to get Vaccines Rate blamed for loss of billions
of dollars, thousands of lives by McClatchy Newspapers
States require children to have all their immunizations prior to
starting school. Some veterinary offices send reminders to clients
when their pets need vaccines. Seniors do not have these safety nets.
It was found that 1/3 of seniors had not received any immunizations
against pneumonia in 36 states in 2008. As well, nearly 1/3 of
seniors also went without the annual flu vaccine that year. The
articles says millions of adults forego immunizations for preventable
diseases each year, and between 40,000-50,000 people die each year
because of it. Because vaccines are not given, it adds an additional
10 billion dollars annually to the cost of health care according to
the CDC. Oregon had the best rate of the pneumonia vaccine with
about 75% of seniors obtaining it; whereas Washington D.C. had the
lowest with about 50% not receiving the vaccine.
Adults slip through the cracks when it comes to vaccinations. They
are usually seeing their healthcare providers for specific reasons
and not for an overall picture of health. Another reason is that
seniors are not linked to organizations that require vaccinations
like children are with schools. Other hinders to vaccines are the
cost, misinformation regarding effectiveness and safety, and
insurance coverage that does not cover vaccinations, and having the
vaccines not readily accessible.
Jeff Levi, the executive director of the Trust for America's Health
states, "We need a national strategy to make vaccines a regular part
of medical care and educate Americans about the effectiveness and
safety of vaccines." The CDC has recommended that everyone older than
65 get the pneumonia vaccine. They are hoping for 90% compliance rate
this year. They also included a vaccination schedule in the article
for adults with varying age ranges and the recommended vaccines.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)