barre

The Best Way to Deal With Airplane Ear

Photo: Getty Images

Photo: Getty Images

I had to fly home from vacation with a cold, and now my ears are painfully clogged and I can’t hear a thing. Help!

Ouch. Airplane ear happens when there’s an imbalance between the air pressure in the middle ear and the air pressure around you, which changes rapidly with the altitude during the start and end of a flight. Yawning, swallowing or chewing gum can usually fix it by letting air flow through the eustachian  tubes—the narrow passages between the middle ear and the back of the nose—equalizing the pressure. But a cold or sinus infection complicates things because congestion can block the tubes. Result: painful pressure and hearing problems.

To clear the clog, you need an over-the-counter decongestant to encourage drainage; a nasal spray may also help calm any swelling that’s adding to the problem. Also try taking ibuprofen or acetaminophen to treat related pain. (Congested due to allergies? Go with an antihistamine.) Once you’ve given the medicine some time to work, close your mouth, pinch your nose shut and very gently push air into the back of your nose as if you were blowing it, which may help nudge the tubes open. These tactics, combined with a little patience, should do the trick, but if the issue persists or the pain gets worse, see your doc. A clog can turn into a bacterial ear infection, for which you’ll need antibiotics.

Health‘s medical editor, Roshini Rajapaksa, MD, is assistant professor of medicine at the NYU School of Medicine and co-founder of Tula Skincare.

 RELATED: 

How to Get Rid of Pesky Health Problems

10 Products to Help You Find Sinus Relief




from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1M2h924

Will the New ‘Women’s Viagra’ Finally Get FDA Approval?

FDA Puts Antibiotics for Food Animals Under Vet’s Supervision

TUESDAY, June 2, 2015 (HealthDay News) — A new regulation aimed at stopping routine use of antibiotics in food-producing animals was issued Tuesday by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Giving antibiotics to cattle, hogs, poultry and other farm animals to fatten them up contributes to the growing problem of antibiotic resistance in people, the agency said.

The Veterinary Feed Directive final rule — the new regulation in a plan rolled out over several years — will place the use of antibiotics in feed under veterinary supervision so the drugs are given only when necessary for the health of food-producing animals.

“The actions the FDA has taken to date represent important steps toward a fundamental change in how antimicrobials can be legally used in food-producing animals,” Michael Taylor, FDA deputy commissioner for foods, said in an agency news release.

“The [Veterinary Feed Directive] takes another important step by facilitating veterinary oversight in a way that allows for the flexibility needed to accommodate the diversity of circumstances that veterinarians encounter, while ensuring such oversight is conducted in accordance with nationally consistent principles,” he said.

The directive provides veterinarians with guidelines for authorizing the use of medically necessary antibiotics. They should have sufficient knowledge of the animal by making examinations and/or visits to the facility where the animal is located, and provide any necessary follow-up evaluation or care, according to the agency.

Bacteria-fighting antibiotics have been added to the feed of farm animals to help them gain weight faster, not for medical reasons.

“The problem is that all use of antimicrobials, in humans and animals alike, generally contributes to the development of antimicrobial-resistant bacteria, considered a global threat to public health,” Taylor and his colleagues said.

“Drug-resistant strains of bacteria could be fatal if they enter the human body through uncooked or improperly cooked food and the medicines created to combat them are rendered ineffective,” they explained.

In the United States each year, more than 2 million people become infected with bacteria resistant to antibiotics, and at least 23,000 people die as a result, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The veterinary directive, which applies to all antibiotics used to treat human disease, takes effect at the end of 2016.

In late 2013, the FDA asked manufacturers of antibiotics used in the feed and water of food-producing animals to make voluntary labeling changes. The drug makers were urged to stop saying the drugs can improve animal growth and to highlight the need for veterinary oversight when the drugs are used to treat health problems in the animals.

All of the companies gave written commitments to follow those recommendations, the FDA said.

More information

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has more about antibiotic use and resistance.





from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1I9Ujoy

New Drug Shows Potential for Blood Cancer

By Dennis Thompson
HealthDay Reporter

TUESDAY, June 2, 2015 (HealthDay News) — A two-pronged immune-boosting drug could provide new hope for people stricken with multiple myeloma, a cancer of the blood and bone marrow, according to clinical trial findings.

The experimental drug, elotuzumab, reduced the risk of cancer progression and death by 30 percent when doctors combined it with the standard two-drug therapy for multiple myeloma, researchers found.

Elotuzumab works against this relatively rare cancer through a dual mechanism, said senior study author Dr. Sagar Lonial. It makes cancer cells vulnerable to immune attack, and also enhances the immune system’s ability to kill cancer.

“It’s a bit of a double-whammy,” said Lonial, executive vice chair of hematology and oncology at Emory University School of Medicine in Atlanta.

Patients receiving the three-drug elotuzumab cocktail did not seem to suffer an increase in side effects, compared with those who took the two-drug standard regimen.

Elotuzumab is being developed by Bristol-Meyers Squibb and AbbVie Pharmaceuticals, which helped fund the study. The findings were presented Tuesday at the American Society of Clinical Oncology annual meeting in Chicago and published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

Multiple myeloma is caused by malignant plasma cells in the bloodstream and bone marrow, according to the U.S. National Institutes of Health. Myeloma patients tend to suffer bone pain and easily broken bones, weakness or fatigue, weight loss, and frequent infections.

About 26,850 new cases of myeloma are expected to occur this year, according to the American Cancer Society. More than 11,000 are expected to die from myeloma in 2015.

The standard therapy for myeloma involves the chemotherapy drug lenalidomide and the steroid medication dexamethasone, Lonial said.

But researchers wondered if they’d get better results by adding the experimental drug elotuzumab. In 2014, the drug was granted a breakthrough therapy designation by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for treatment of relapsed multiple myeloma alongside lenalidomide and dexamethasone. This designation is intended to speed up the development and review of drugs for serious or life-threatening conditions.

Elotuzumab, administered by intravenous infusion, targets a protein called SLAMF7, which is found on the surface of myeloma cells and also on a type of immune cell called natural killer cells.

In the study, 646 patients with recurring, already treated myeloma received the standard two-drug treatment. About half also received elotuzumab.

At an average follow-up period of 24 months, elotuzumab reduced risk of cancer progression and death by 30 percent, researchers found.

Patients in the elotuzumab group experienced a longer period of remission, about 19.4 months on average compared with 14.9 months for those who had standard treatment.

The three-drug cocktail also produced a response rate of 79 percent, compared with 66 percent for the standard treatment, the study found.

“Patients who received elotuzumab had a longer duration of remission, had a higher overall response rate, and this improvement in clinical parameters occurred without a significant increase in adverse events or toxicity,” Lonial said.

The most common side effects experienced by both groups of patients were anemia, low levels of white blood cells and platelets, fatigue and diarrhea. Mild infusion reactions occurred after the first few doses in 10 percent of patients in the elotuzumab group.

Elotuzumab represents the first potentially effective immunotherapy drug for myeloma, said Dr. Julie Vose, president-elect of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. Benefits without additional side effects are being seen even in patients who have received multiple prior treatments for their cancer, said Vose, professor of hematology and oncology at the University of Nebraska Medical Center.

“The results are very encouraging, giving renewed hope to patients who have relapsed,” Vose said.

More information

For more on multiple myeloma, visit the U.S. National Institutes of Health.





from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1I9Uhx7

Why Lauren Conrad’s New Body-Shaming Policy Is Awesome

Photo: Getty Images

Photo: Getty Images

Yet another celebrity is taking a stand on body-shaming, and this time it isn’t a reaction to some nasty comment from a fan. Yesterday, Lauren Conrad put up a now-viral post on her website proclaiming that going forward, she’ll be banning the words “skinny,” “slim,” “thin,” and other body-shaming words from the site in favor of “fit,” “toned,” and “healthy.”

As Conrad noted, “We want to make sure the focus is on being fit, as opposed to a number on the scale. Every body is created differently—and healthy bodies come in all shapes and sizes.”

Conrad joins the ranks of celebs who’ve recently spoken out about body acceptance, including Pink, who got fan flack about her weight in April after attending a charity event. As she said in her tweeted response, “I am perfectly fine, perfectly happy, and my healthy, voluptuous and crazy strong body is having some much deserved time off. Thanks for your concern. Love, cheesecake.”

RELATED: The 5 Best Things Kelly Clarkson Has Said About Body Positivity

Most of the reactions to Conrad’s effort have been positive, with tweets proclaiming “Bravo!” and “Amen sister!” As one reader on her site commented, “When young ladies and women begin a fitness regime, their goal is to look like someone else (Megan Fox, or Adriana Lima) instead of the best version of themselves…. American popular culture is confusing women about this.”

Yet not everyone was on board. Some people have rightfully noted that there is nothing wrong with the description “thin” or “skinny” if that is, in fact, your body type—which would have been good for Conrad to specify. Others have pointed out that to equalize the body field, terms such as “plus size” should also be banned. And then, of course, there’s that whole put-your-models-where-your-mouth-is thing. As in, laurenconrad.com ought to feature ladies of all shapes and sizes.

Still, you’ve got to give Conrad props for taking steps in the right direction to promote fitness and health over an idealized shape. Whenever a star sounds off on body image, it gets a conversation going on an issue that so many women still struggle with and raises yet more awareness. Now, wouldn’t it be great if more male celebs praised the diversity of beautiful bodies that make up womankind? Chris Hemsworth, Chris Pratt, Bradley Cooper, [insert other hottie here]: invitation, issued.

RELATED: Zooey Deschanel on Body Image: ‘I Don’t Buy Into That Skinny-Is-Better Mentality’




from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1Qn1YBU

4 Easy Tricks to Getting Show-Off Legs Fast

Photo: Getty Images

Photo: Getty Images

Last-minute beach invite this weekend? Sounds like fun! Then you realize your legs haven’t seen the light of day (or the glint of a razor) in months. No worries: You can get your gams in show-off shape almost as fast as you can grab your towel and sunnies. Here’s how to:

Sleek-ify your skin

The quickest way to make your legs look good in a hurry? Exfoliate ’em. Gently scrubbing the outermost layer of skin uncovers the fresh, radiant layer beneath it. Translation: brighter, softer skin. But grainy scrubs can often be irritating. Instead, look for a chemical peel for the body that combines glycolic, salicylic, or lactic acid and fruit enzymes, like Kerstin Florian Correcting Brightening Body Peel ($40, nordstrom.com). Simply sweep a pad over your legs, wait a few minutes, then rinse off in the shower and pat dry. (And then, of course, cover that freshly-revealed skin with SPF so it’s protected from the sun’s damaging rays.)

RELATED: 8 Ways to Look Beautiful Bare

Shed the stubble

If you’ve got time to do a proper shave in the shower, wait until the end before whipping out your blade. That way, the water’s heat and steam has time to open up your pores, making the shave that much closer. It’s also a good idea to let shaving cream sit on your skin for at least 30 seconds pre-shave; it softens tiny hairs and makes them stand up so your razor can get nice and close. Spot a missed zone as you’re walking out the door? Instead of dry-shaving a hairy patch, check out the Sphynx shaving razor ($15, sphynxrazor.com), which houses water and soap inside, so you can get a great shave wherever you are (at your desk, at a red light—no judgment!).

RELATED: 5 Ways to Show Skin With Confidence

Check Cellulite

Okay, so there’s no insta-cellulite eraser (yet!), but you can make those lumps and bumps appear a whole lot less visible by using a body product with caffeine (which may temporarily shrink fat cells) or peptides (which stimulate collagen and elastin). One to try: Vichy CelluDestock ($40, dermstore.com). Another idea? Try a quickie deep tissue massage—it improves circulation, which helps break up puckering and dimples. At home, reach for a rolling pin (yep, the kind you bake with) or a body brush with rounded nubs, then firmly run it up and down trouble spots 20 times a day. Can’t hurt to try, right?

RELATED: 30 Fast, New Fat-Burners

Get Glowing

When there’s no time to let self-tanner work its magic overnight, there’s a new option: express tanners. Instead of the usual 6 to 8 hours required for DHA (the ingredient that tints skin) to settle in, express formulas like St. Tropez Self Tan Express Bronzing Mousse ($44, sephora.com) get you golden in as little as one hour (though you can leave them on for up to three hours for darker results). For an even faster (albeit temporary) fix, reach for a body bronzer, like Becca Luminous Body Perfecting Mousse ($34, sephora.com). It disguises imperfections and evens out your skin tone, leaving behind a subtle sheen. Think of it as a real-life Instagram filter for your legs.

RELATED: Find the Right Sunless Tan for You




from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1dcnFrG

Melanoma Rates Way Up Among Young People in U.S.



TUESDAY, June 2, 2015 (HealthDay News) — Melanoma, the potentially deadly skin cancer, has increased by 250 percent among U.S. children and young adults since the 1970s, researchers report.

Young women appear to be especially vulnerable, accounting for two-thirds of cases diagnosed in 2011, scientists at Roswell Park Cancer Institute in Buffalo, N.Y., reported.
“The reality is that melanoma is the third most common cancer in those 15 to 39 years old, and these numbers have been steadily increasing,” said the study’s senior author, Dr. Nikhil Khushalani, section chief for soft tissue and melanoma at the cancer institute.
The findings were scheduled for presentation this week at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, in Chicago. Research presented at meetings is usually considered preliminary until published in a peer-reviewed medical journal.
“This is a national problem that needs to be addressed, and it begins with awareness and effective prevention strategies,” Khushalani said in a society news release.
The researchers uncovered some good news, however. Melanoma survival rates are also on the rise, increasing from 80 percent in the mid-to-late 1970s to 95 percent in 2011.
For the study, investigators analyzed more than 35,000 cases of melanoma among patients younger than age 40 and diagnosed between 1973 and 2011. Ninety-eight percent of the cases involved teens and young adults between 15 and 39.
While women accounted for 57 percent of melanomas reported between 1973 and 1980, they comprised about 65 percent of all diagnoses by 2011. The researchers said this is likely because of unsafe tanning practices. Sunbathing and indoor tanning are known risk factors for skin cancer.
While 4 percent of melanoma cases diagnosed before 1980 were classified as noninvasive and early stage, these cancers accounted for more than 20 percent of all cases by 2011, the study also found.
“Given the epidemic rise of melanoma cases diagnosed among children, adolescents and young adults, it is imperative that new research initiatives are implemented, genetic and environmental risk factors identified, and effective prevention and screening strategies employed,” the study’s lead author, oncology fellow Dr. Demytra Mitsis, said in the news release.
More information
The American Academy of Dermatology provides more information on melanoma.

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1cvJpy4

Office Workers, On Your Feet!

TUESDAY, June 2, 2015 (HealthDay News) — Desk jockeys should make a point to stand up for at least two hours during the workday in order to avoid the negative health consequences linked to too much sitting, new research suggests.
Gradually break up periods of prolonged sitting until you’re on your feet four hours a day, advises a panel of international experts. Aside from taking regular walks throughout the workday, desk-bound employees can opt for sit-stand desks or workstations that require them to stand.
The recommendations are based on an analysis of research that links prolonged periods spent seated with a heightened risk of serious illness and premature death.
“The evidence is clearly emerging that a first ‘behavioral’ step could be simply to get people standing and moving more frequently as part of their working day,” the study authors reported online June 1 in the British Journal of Sports Medicine.
Increasing the amount of time that people stand could be a more achievable goal than encouraging more daily exercise, the researchers said in a journal news release.
The report was commissioned by Public Health England, which is an agency of the U.K. Department of Health, and another British organization, Active Working Community Interest Company.
Among the panel’s other recommendations for office workers:
  • Move around. Standing in one place for too long can also have harmful health effects. Changing your posture or position, or going on a brief walk can reduce the risk for musculoskeletal pain and fatigue.
  • Employers can warn their staff about the health risks associated with prolonged sitting or being sedentary both in the office and at home.
  • Employers can invest in the health of their staff by designing working environments that encourage more activity.
The researchers acknowledged that the materials they reviewed don’t prove a direct cause-and-effect relationship between prolonged sitting and chronic illness.
Still, they believe on-the-job adjustments are in order. “While longer-term intervention studies are required, the level of consistent evidence accumulated to date, and the public health context of rising chronic diseases, suggest initial guidelines are justified,” the panel wrote.
More information
The American Academy of Family Physicians has more on the adverse health effects of prolonged sitting.

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1cvJpy2

Exercise May Blunt a Woman’s Risk of Lung and Breast Cancer: Studies

By Dennis Thompson
HealthDay Reporter

TUESDAY, June 2, 2015 (HealthDay News) — Physical activity may reduce a woman’s risk of lung or breast cancer, a pair of new studies suggest.

Women seem less likely to either develop or die from lung cancer if they engage in physical activity, and the benefits increase the more a woman stays on the move, Stanford University researchers found.

“We saw that as levels of physical activity increase, risk of lung cancer decreased,” said lead author Ange Wang, a medical student at Stanford.

Even active smokers enjoyed some protective benefit from lung cancer, when compared with couch potatoes who smoked, the researchers said.

Meanwhile, a French study found that women may reduce by as much as one-third their risk of developing breast cancer by engaging in vigorous physical exercise. But that benefit did not extend to those who had ever taken hormone replacement therapy.

Both studies were presented Monday at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, in Chicago. Research presented at medical meetings is typically considered to be preliminary until published in a peer-reviewed journal.

The Stanford study relied on data from the Women’s Health Initiative, a long-term federally funded project that tracked the health of nearly 162,000 women 50 to 79 years of age at 40 U.S. hospitals.

Of those women, the researchers focused on about 132,000 postmenopausal women to see if their exercise levels had any effect on lung cancer risk or death. During nearly 12 years of follow-up, just over 2,200 women developed lung cancer and 1,400 women died from the disease.

But women who spent more minutes per week on the move were less likely to either develop lung cancer or die from it, according to the findings.

The study looked only at minutes spent moving around, not at intensity of movement, Wang said. A minute of walking or mowing the lawn weighed the same as a minute jogging or lifting weights.

“It seems to indicate that you don’t have to kill yourself,” she said. “It doesn’t need to be strenuous. You just have to put the time in.”

What’s more, Wang and her colleagues found that physical activity seemed to help even smokers. Former heavy smokers and current smokers developed lung cancer and died from the disease less often if they were active, compared with sedentary women who smoked.

The benefits of physical activity were most prominent among women who were not obese, with a BMI — body mass index, a ratio of weight to height — under 30, according to findings. A BMI of 30 or greater is considered obese.

However, “it would be the wrong conclusion that women with higher BMI won’t benefit from physical activity,” Wang added.

It should be noted that the study only revealed an association between exercise and lung cancer risk. It did not prove cause-and-effect.

The French study found that physical activity appeared to reduce breast cancer risk.

In that study, researchers reviewed 38 previous studies published between 1987 and 2014 that involved 4.18 million women and more than 116,000 cases of breast cancer.

Women with the highest levels of physical activity experienced an 11 percent to 20 percent reduction in breast cancers, compared to women with the lowest levels of activity, researchers reported.

Overall, a sedentary woman who began engaging in four to seven hours a week of mainly vigorous physical activity seemed to reduce her risk of breast cancer by 31 percent, according to lead author Cecile Pizot, a biostatistician with the International Prevention Research Institute in Lyon, France.

“This reduction occurred irrespective of the type of physical activity, the place of residence, obesity and menopausal status,” Pizot said. “Also, breast cancer risk seems to decline with increasing physical activity, and we observed no threshold.”

However, that benefit only applied to women who had never used hormone replacement therapy. Taking replacement hormones appeared to wipe out whatever protective benefit that exercise conferred.

But again, like the lung cancer study, this study only uncovered a link between exercise and breast cancer risk — not cause-and-effect.

ASCO spokeswoman Dr. Jyoti Patel said it makes sense that exercise could blunt breast cancer risk, since exercise can reduce the number of fat cells that produce the hormone estrogen, which can fuel breast cancer.

Following that line of reasoning, it also makes sense that hormone replacement therapy would negate the benefits of exercise, since women are replacing the estrogen that’s being reduced through physical activity, said Patel, an associate professor of hematology/oncology at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago.

“Of course it’s not in these women because they’re taking pro-growth hormones,” she said.

Dr. Gregory Masters, an oncologist at the Helen F. Graham Cancer Center in Newark, Del., said it’s a bit tricky to say why exercise might help prevent lung cancer.

“I’m sure it involves multiple factors,” Masters said. For example, exercise reduces inflammation in the body, boosts the immune system and lowers body weight, all of which have been previously shown to limit overall cancer risk, he said.

Wang said physical activity might specifically help the lungs by improving lung function and limiting the deposition deep in the lungs of inhaled cancer-causing agents.

“All these things can play a role,” she said.

More information

For more on physical activity and cancer risk, visit the American Society of Clinical Oncology.





from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1cvJpxV

Risk to Baby From Antidepressant Use in Pregnancy Is Small, Study Says

By Tara Haelle
HealthDay Reporter

TUESDAY, June 2, 2015 (HealthDay News) — Babies born to mothers taking antidepressants in late pregnancy may be slightly more likely to develop a rare circulation disorder, a new study suggests.

However, the increased risk of the disorder — known as persistent pulmonary hypertension of the newborn (PPHN) — is small, and similar to the risk in women with untreated depression.

“Although we cannot exclude the possibility that there might be an increased risk of PPHN associated with SSRI [antidepressant] use late in pregnancy, our study has shown that the absolute risk is small,” said lead author Krista Huybrechts. She is an assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and an epidemiologist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston.

The absolute risk refers to the actual number of infants born with the condition.

“The risk increase, if present, appears much more modest than previous studies have suggested,” Huybrechts added.

It’s also important to note that this study can only show an association between taking antidepressants in pregnancy and the risk of PPHN; it cannot prove a cause-and-effect relationship.

The findings were published online June 2 in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

A newborn’s blood circulation is supposed to change after birth from what it was in the womb, but the circulation in a baby with PPHN does not fully make this transition, according to background information in the study. The condition is life-threatening.

Previous research had suggested that taking antidepressants after the 20th week of pregnancy could significantly increase the risk of PPHN, according to the study authors.

Women with depression commonly take antidepressants, including drugs in a class called selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or SSRIs. Common SSRIs include fluoxetine (Prozac), escitalopram (Lexapro), sertraline (Zoloft), paroxetine (Paxil) and citalopram (Celexa).

The researchers followed more than 3.7 million women enrolled in Medicaid from just before their pregnancy through one month postpartum. Among these women, just over 3 percent filled at least one prescription for antidepressants during their third trimester.

Overall, the rate of babies born with PPHN was approximately 21 infants per 10,000 births among women who did not take antidepressants.

Among those who took SSRIs, the rate of the condition was 32 infants per 10,000 births. The rate was slightly lower, 29 children per 10,000 births, for women taking antidepressants other than SSRIs, the study found.

When the researchers compared women with untreated depression to those taking antidepressants, the risk of PPHN didn’t differ much between women taking antidepressants and those not taking them.

“A patient should discuss this potential small increased risk as well as all risks and benefits of SSRIs on an individual basis with her doctor,” said Dr. David Ghausi, an obstetrician and gynecologist at Los Robles Hospital in Thousand Oaks, Calif. “The physician and patient should determine if the benefits of this medication for the mother outweigh the risks to the fetus.”

The fetus of a woman who has untreated depression during pregnancy may also be at higher risk for various conditions, Huybrechts said.

“Untreated depression or anxiety during pregnancies has been linked to different adverse health outcomes, such as miscarriage, preterm birth, pre-eclampsia and smaller newborns,” Huybrechts said.

Prenatal depression can also affect a woman’s lifestyle and behavior, she added. Depressed women are more likely to smoke more, drink more alcohol and exercise less. And, she said, they’re more likely to miss prenatal appointments or skip their prenatal vitamins.

The risks of untreated depression during pregnancy can extend past the baby’s birth as well, suggested Dr. Sheryl Ross, an obstetrician and gynecologist at Providence Saint John’s Health Center in Santa Monica, Calif.

“Women who go off their normal medications or are untreated during pregnancy are at an increased risk of having a relapse of symptoms, which could potentially be harmful to baby and mother,” Ross said. “Untreated mental illness in pregnancy puts women at a much greater risk of postpartum depression,” she explained.

“We know there are risks associated with the use of SSRIs, but ultimately it’s a conversation about the risks versus the benefits. The studies available show the risk is low compared to the benefits,” Ross said.

More information

For more about depression during or after pregnancy, visit the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.





from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1cvJpxT