Minority Women Get Worse Breast Cancer Care, Regardless of Tumor Type: Study

TUESDAY, Oct. 13, 2015 (HealthDay News) — No matter the type or stage of breast cancer, minority women are more likely to be diagnosed later in the disease than white women, and they are also less likely to receive recommended treatments, a new study shows.

While prior studies have found such disparities before, the new research finds that it exists “across all breast cancer subtypes,” study lead author Lu Chen, a researcher in the public health sciences division at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, said in a news release from the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR).

The study received funding from the U.S. National Cancer Institute and was published Oct. 13 in the journal Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.

Chen’s team looked at data from 18 U.S. population-based cancer registries. Specifically, the researchers analyzed the demographics, stage of disease, tumor grade and size, treatment, and health insurance status for more than 100,000 American women.

The researchers also recorded the women’s tumor subtypes, which can factor into prognosis and care.

For example, the investigators looked at the tumor’s hormone receptor (HR) status, which means the tumor is more or less sensitive to hormonal therapies. They also looked at whether or not the tumor tested positive for human epidermal growth factor 2-neu (HER2), which can point to more aggressive tumors.

According to the researchers, compared to black women, white women were more likely to have smaller tumors, and they were also more likely have less-aggressive forms of breast cancer.

In addition, women of other racial and ethnic groups were more likely than white women to be diagnosed with more advanced stages of breast cancer.

Black women were more likely to have large tumors and an aggressive form of the disease known as “triple-negative” breast cancer. They were also 40 to 70 percent more likely to be diagnosed with advanced disease, in all subtypes of breast cancer.

Across all types of breast cancer, Hispanic women were also 30 to 40 percent more likely to be diagnosed with stage 2 or 3 disease, the study found.

Racial and ethnic disparities also appeared to affect women’s treatment. For nearly all types of breast cancer, black women were 30 to 60 percent more likely to receive inappropriate treatment, the study showed.

Meanwhile, Hispanic women were 20 to 40 percent more likely to receive substandard care.

The researchers said there was no difference in treatments between white women and Asian-American women.

All of these health disparities remained even after Chen’s team took the women’s health care insurance status into account.

Two experts in breast cancer care weren’t surprised by the findings.

“It is well known that disparities in breast cancer affect women from minority groups, and in particular African Americans,” said Dr. Paolo Boffetta, a professor of medical oncology at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, in New York City. However, the new study looks deeper, quantifying “the disparities at each stage of the natural and clinical history of the disease,” he said.

“Addressing such disparities, and the resulting higher death rate in minority women, should be given the highest priority in the global effort to combat breast cancer,” Boffeta said.

Dr. Stephanie Bernik is chief of surgical oncology at Lenox Hill Hospital, also in New York City. She said that the reasons behind the racial and ethnic gap in breast cancer diagnosis and care remain unclear.

“Socioeconomic factors probably play a role, as women with less resources are less likely to seek care and follow through with recommended treatments,” Bernik said. “There needs to be more study as to how to optimize treatment for these women, as current strategies are not effective enough.”

More information

The U.S. National Cancer Institute has more on cancer health disparities.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1NE38N8

This Healthy Beef Recipe Lets You Forget You’re on a Diet

Photo: Jennifer Causey

Have your steak and eat it, too, with a rich yet healthy entrée— then check out more recipes in the Cooking Light Diet to take off pounds, deliciously.

Mojo Flat Iron Steak With Red Pepper Salsa

Recipes developed by David Bonom

Prep: 25 minutes
Stand: 35 minutes
Cook: 10 minutes

Serves: 4

2 tsp. grated orange zest
1/4 cup fresh orange juice
2 tsp. grated lime zest
3 Tbsp. fresh lime juice
2 Tbsp. extra-virgin olive oil
2 cloves garlic, minced
2 tsp. brown sugar
1 tsp. chili powder
1/4 tsp. ground chipotle chili powder
1 1-lb. flat iron steak, trimmed
1 tsp. kosher salt
1 cup finely chopped red bell pepper
1 cup peeled, seeded and finely chopped red onion
3 Tbsp. finely chopped red onion
2 Tbsp. chopped cilantro
1 jalapeño, seeded and finely chopped

1. In a large bowl, whisk together orange zest and juice, lime zest, 2 Tbsp. lime juice, 1 Tbsp. oil, garlic, sugar, chili powder and chipotle powder. Add steak; turn to coat. Let stand for 30 minutes at room temperature, turning occasionally.

2. Heat a grill pan over high heat. Coat pan with cooking spray. Remove steak from marinade (discard marinade). Sprinkle steak with 1/2 tsp. salt and add to pan; grill to desired doneness, about 5 minutes per side for medium-rare. Place steak on a cutting board. Let stand for 5 minutes before cutting across the grain into thin slices.

3. Place remaining 1 Tbsp. lime juice, remaining 1 Tbsp. oil, remaining 1/2 tsp. salt, bell pepper, cucumber, onion, cilantro and jalapeño in a bowl, stirring to combine. Serve with steak.

PER SERVING: 216 Calories, 11g Fat (3g Sat.), 81mg Chol., 1g Fiber, 24g Pro., 6g Carb., 587mg Sod., 3mg Iron, 26mg Calcium

RELATED:

8 Sizzling Steak Recipes

10 Marinated Meals

11 Lightened-Up Recipes With Ground Beef

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

Exercise Pills May Be in Your Future

Photo: Getty Images

It sounds too good to be true and for now, it is. But what if some of the benefits of exercise could be packed into a pill? Scientists are beginning to develop “exercise pills” that show some potential, according to two new papers—a review published in the journal Trends in Pharmacological Sciences and another small study published in the journal Cell Metabolism.

“Everyone’s looking for a pill to replace exercise, but we’re just not there yet,” says the first study’s co-author Ismail Laher, professor in the department of anesthesiology, pharmacology and therapeutics at the University of British Columbia in Canada. “It’s not going to make a couch potato into Arnold Schwarzenegger.”

So-called “exercise pills” are made from compounds that have been shown—mostly in studies done in animals—to mimic one or more of the effects of exercise, like developing new blood vessels, forming new mitochondria in cells or increasing the body’s capacity for exercise. “They’ll let you get muscles that are stronger and faster and reach your exercise goals much quicker,” Laher says.

But no single pill can reproduce every benefit exercise has on the body. Popping an exercise pill won’t flood you with endorphins, for instance, while also making your bones stronger. speeding up the blood flow through your arteries and making your heart beat faster, Laher says. “It’s a very small slice of the pie.”

What exercise pills can do is largely localized to muscles, the new review finds. “You’re increasing efficiency of ATP, the currency by which every cell goes about its daily life,” Laher says.

This article originally appeared on Time.com.

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1Lr9lcW

HIV Therapy May Also Lower Risk for Hepatitis B, Study Says

MONDAY, Oct. 12, 2015 (HealthDay News) — Not only does effective HIV therapy thwart the AIDS-causing virus, it may also reduce the risk for hepatitis B infection, a new study says.

“What this means to us is that effective HIV therapy appears to restore an impairment in the immune response that protects someone with HIV from acquiring hepatitis B infection,” study senior author Dr. Chloe Thio, a professor of medicine at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, said in a university news release.

The study, published in the October issue of Annals of Internal Medicine, involved 2,400 gay and bisexual men who were enrolled in the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study. Researchers found that the men successfully treated with HIV therapy had the same risk for hepatitis B infection as the men who did not have HIV. Hepatitis B is a virus that can damage the liver.

The study showed HIV-positive men on HIV therapy who had no detectable virus in their blood were 80 percent less likely to be infected with hepatitis B over about 9.5 years, compared to men with HIV who weren’t on HIV therapy or had detectable levels of the virus in their blood.

Researchers said their findings also confirm the longstanding belief that vaccination against the hepatitis B virus protects people regardless of their HIV status.

Study lead author Dr. Oluwaseun Falade-Nwulia, an assistant professor of medicine at Hopkins, said, “We found a 70 percent reduction in new [hepatitis B] infections in the men who reported receiving at least one dose of [hepatitis B] vaccine.”

However, “vaccination rates, even in high-risk individuals, such as men who have sex with men, remain low, and we need to do a better job of encouraging vaccination,” she said in the news release.

Adults getting the hepatitis B vaccine should receive three doses within six months, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends.

In 1984, when the study began, 41 percent of men with HIV had been vaccinated against hepatitis B, compared with 28 percent of men without HIV, researchers said.

By 2013, the proportion of men who received more than one dose of hepatitis B vaccine increased 67 percent among men with HIV, compared to 58 percent among men who did not have the virus.

Despite the protective effects of HIV therapy, better hepatitis B prevention in gay and bisexual men is needed to control the epidemic of the virus among this population, the study’s authors cautioned.

In the United States, gay and bisexual men account for roughly 15 to 25 percent of new hepatitis B infections, the researchers said.

Drug users who share needles are also at risk for the liver disease, according to the CDC.

More information

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention provides more information on hepatitis B.

---

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

Daily Glass of Wine May Boost Type 2 Diabetics’ Heart Health

By Kathleen Doheny
HealthDay Reporter

MONDAY, Oct. 12, 2015 (HealthDay News) — Relaxing with a glass of wine at the end of the day may help improve heart health and blood sugar levels for people with type 2 diabetes, new research suggests.

Red wine was better at improving cholesterol, the study found. And, both red and white wine helped blood sugar control in those who metabolize alcohol slowly, the researchers said.

While other studies have suggested that wine drinking helps the heart, expert recommendations about the benefits of moderate drinking are still controversial, especially for those with diabetes, said study lead author Iris Shai, a researcher at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in Israel.

“This is the first long-term, large-scale, alcohol intervention clinical trial ever conducted, and in diabetics in particular,” that looked at the benefits of wine, and if the type of wine matters, she said.

Shai and colleagues randomly assigned 224 patients with type 2 diabetes, aged 40 to 75, to drink a five-ounce glass of red wine, white wine or mineral water with dinner nightly for two years. The researchers measured cholesterol levels, blood sugar, and other indicators of heart health and diabetes control. These measurements were taken at the start of the study, at six months and again at the end of the study.

The study volunteers were all asked to follow a heart-healthy Mediterranean diet. They were not asked to restrict calories. Their diabetes was well-managed when the study began. Before the start of the study, the volunteers only drank a little — about one alcoholic drink a week, the researchers said.

Wine helped to decrease heart risk, Shai said, and red wine did it better than white wine did. The red wine increased HDL cholesterol (the “good” cholesterol) by about 10 percent, compared to the water group, the findings showed.

“Both red and white can improve glucose [blood sugar] control, but not for everyone,” she said. Blood sugar levels only improved in those who metabolized alcohol slowly. The benefit wasn’t found in those who cleared alcohol quickly, as evaluated by genetic tests. About one in five cleared alcohol too quickly to have the blood sugar improvement, the research revealed.

Wine’s effect on blood sugar levels was probably due to the alcohol itself, Shai suggested. Alcohol can hamper the generation of glucose in the body, she said.

The effect of wine on cholesterol levels was greater for the red wine, and she credits substances known as phenols. Compared to white wines, the red wines in the study had about seven times higher levels of total phenols, such as resveratrol, the study said.

For those who don’t drink alcohol, the American Heart Association (AHA) notes that these substances can also be found in grapes and grape juice, as well as other fruits and vegetables. The AHA says that exercise is also an effective way to boost HDL cholesterol levels.

Shai’s study was published online Oct. 12 in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

Dr. Minisha Sood, director of inpatient diabetes at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City, reviewed the findings but was not involved in the study. She said one of the strengths of the new research was the length of the two-year study.

The research “lends support to the idea that red wine, not white, benefits cholesterol levels,” Sood said. The implications? “Among type 2 diabetics with a low risk for alcohol abuse, starting moderate wine consumption with a healthy diet is safe and may benefit cardiovascular risk,” she said.

Shai cautioned that this is not a case of “if a little is good, more is better.” Women should stop at one glass a day, while men can have two, at most, she said.

More information

To learn more about alcohol and heart health, visit the American Heart Association.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1N9rk6N

Confirm High Blood Pressure Outside Doctor’s Office, U.S. Task Force Says

By Steven Reinberg
HealthDay Reporter

MONDAY, Oct. 12, 2015 (HealthDay News) — High blood pressure levels should generally be confirmed with home or ambulatory blood pressure monitoring before starting treatment for hypertension, a new U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation says.

Many factors can affect blood pressure readings, such as stress, physical activity and caffeine or nicotine, the USPSTF said. And, some people experience “white-coat hypertension” — an increase in blood pressure at the doctor’s office from stress — when having their blood pressure taken.

All of these factors can make it hard to tell if someone really has high blood pressure, the researchers said.

That’s why the Task Force recommends confirming a diagnosis of high blood pressure, or hypertension, before starting treatment, unless someone has very high blood pressure that needs to be treated right away.

“For most patients, elevated blood pressure readings in the doctor’s office should be confirmed outside the doctor’s office before starting treatment,” said Task Force vice-chair Dr. Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo.

“For individuals who have very high blood pressure or other health problems, such as heart or kidney damage, that might make it critical to lower blood pressure, this recommendation doesn’t really apply to them. This recommendation is really for individuals where one wants to confirm high blood pressure,” Bibbins-Domingo said.

Blood pressure levels can be confirmed with ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Your doctor will provide a small, portable device that automatically measures your blood pressure every 20 to 30 minutes over 12 to 48 hours. If this method isn’t available, people can take their blood pressure at different times throughout the day using home blood pressure monitoring, the USPSTF said.

The Task Force recommendations were published online Oct. 12 in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring is the first choice for confirming a diagnosis of high blood pressure, the Task Force said. But, when not available, home monitors are an acceptable alternative.

Home blood pressure monitoring devices can cost from less than $20 to $100 or more, according to Consumers Union. Devices that use upper arm readings — rather than finger or wrist — are considered more accurate, the American Heart Association (AHA) says. But, it’s important that the cuff that wraps around your arm fits properly, the AHA advises.

The dangers of sustained high blood pressure include an increased risk for heart attack, stroke, kidney disease and heart failure, the USPSTF said. High blood pressure is a leading cause of death in the United States, particularly among older Americans, Bibbins-Domingo said.

Dr. Gregg Fonarow is a spokesman for the AHA and a professor of cardiology at the University of California, Los Angeles. He said, “Nearly one in three adult men and women in the United States have high blood pressure. However, way too many adults do not have their elevated blood pressure adequately detected and treated, and as a result are at risk for heart attacks and strokes that could have been prevented.”

The Task Force’s recommendations reinforce that it’s essential for all adults to have their blood pressure checked at least once a year, he said. The latest guidelines also emphasize the need to take action to achieve and maintain a healthy blood pressure level in consultation with their doctor, Fonarow said.

“It is well established that systolic blood pressure above 120 mm Hg results in a greater risk of heart disease and stroke,” he said. Systolic blood pressure is the top number in a reading.

“New trial results demonstrate that treating systolic blood pressure to achieve a goal of 120 mm Hg lowers the risk of death from any cause, compared with treating to a conventional goal of 140 mm Hg,” Fonarow said, adding that the USPSTF’s treatment section needs to be updated to reflect this new information.

More information

For advice on selecting a home blood pressure monitor, go to the American Heart Association.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1N9rjQd

Response in Sierra Leone to Ebola Outbreak Saved 40,000 Lives: Study

By Dennis Thompson
HealthDay Reporter

MONDAY, Oct. 12, 2015 (HealthDay News) — The world response to the Ebola epidemic in West Africa saved tens of thousands of lives in Sierra Leone, though a quicker response likely would’ve been even more effective, a new study reports.

The opening of new Ebola centers helped isolate sick people and prevented an estimated 57,000 new Ebola cases and 40,000 deaths in Sierra Leone, the new research says. But, the researchers also estimated that if the centers had been introduced just one month earlier, an additional 12,500 reported and unreported cases could have been prevented.

“Our results show that when responding to a rapidly growing outbreak, every day counts,” said lead author Adam Kucharski, a lecturer in infectious disease epidemiology at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine in England.

By isolating patients and providing them with life-saving medical care, the thousands of new hospital beds created a “cascade effect” that kept Ebola from spreading further, said Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior associate at the Center for Health Security at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center.

These findings provide “clear on-the-ground evidence that providing a safe environment for Ebola patients to be cared for is enormously beneficial because, in these treatment units, infection control protocols are adhered to and personal protective equipment is provided to health care workers,” Adalja said.

Findings from the new study were published online Oct. 12 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The Ebola crisis may now be over. Last week, the World Health Organization (WHO) reported no known cases in West Africa. That’s the region’s first Ebola-free week since the epidemic began in March 2014, the WHO said.

The WHO says there have been 13,945 reported cases of Ebola in Sierra Leone to date. And, in 2014, the estimated death rate from infection was 70 percent, the WHO reported.

But many cases in Sierra Leone have potentially gone unreported. The actual figure is likely to be much higher, researchers said in background information.

To see what difference the global response made on the Ebola epidemic, Kucharski and his team decided to see how the introduction of thousands of new hospital beds might have helped prevent the spread of the deadly virus.

“We looked at the impact of beds as this was a measure that could be easily quantified,” Kucharski said. “If a case was in a treatment center, it meant they were not in the community potentially spreading infection.”

The researchers focused on Sierra Leone because that country maintained relatively good data on disease incidence and bed capacity in different districts over time, Kucharski said.

Between September 2014 and February 2015, more than 1,500 treatment beds were introduced in Ebola holding centers and community care centers in Sierra Leone, the researchers found. Another 1,200 beds were opened in Ebola treatment units.

Using mathematical models, researchers estimated the impact these additional beds had on the decline of the Ebola outbreak.

Based on both reported and presumed unreported cases, the researchers said nearly 57,000 Ebola cases were prevented up to February 2015 as a direct result of the introduction of treatment beds.

Thousands more cases of Ebola might have been prevented if the global community had responded more quickly and introduced the same number of beds one month earlier, the study concluded.

“The effect would have been greater had the beds been introduced even a few weeks earlier,” Kucharski said.

He added that the beds are only one factor in a more complex response that brought Ebola to heel.

“Our results suggest it was a combination of factors that sent the outbreak into decline,” he said. “The impact of additional beds coincided with a decline in community transmission, most likely resulting from factors such as safe burials and changes in behavior.”

Kucharski said he could not apply these findings to the situation in the other two West African nations involved in the epidemic, Guinea or Liberia.

“Unlike in Sierra Leone and Liberia, the outbreak in Guinea did not rise and fall sharply,” he said. “Instead it simmered along for several months, which suggests that control measures had a more gradual effect on the reduction in transmission.”

Results like these show that if we heed the lessons of this epidemic, we will be better prepared for the next one, Adalja concluded.

“The cascading effects of rapidly establishing Ebola treatment units in outbreak settings will likely become formally incorporated into response plans for future Ebola and Marburg outbreaks, and have the potential to change the face of future outbreaks,” Adalja said. “The new mathematical modeling study illustrates just how big the impact may have been in Sierra Leone.”

More information

For more on Ebola, visit the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1RD7imU

Doctors, Nurse Practitioners Offer Comparable Outpatient Heart Care: Study

By Alan Mozes
HealthDay Reporter

MONDAY, Oct. 12, 2015 (HealthDay News) — Heart disease patients appear to get comparable care whether they see a doctor, nurse practitioner or physician assistant, a new study finds.

But most outpatient cardiac care fails to meet established standards for good heart health management, regardless of the provider, the researchers determined. Just over 10 percent of providers complied with all of the current recommendations, the study revealed.

Many patients aren’t getting the care they need, said Dr. Gregg Fonarow, a professor of cardiology at the University of California, Los Angeles.

“As a result [they] may be at risk for cardiovascular events and deaths that could have been prevented,” added Fonarow, who wasn’t involved in the study.

The researchers, led by Dr. Salim Virani, a cardiologist at the DeBakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Houston, based their results on more than 600,000 heart patients cared for in 2012.

The findings appear in the Oct. 12 issue of the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

Because of its aging population and current retirement trends, the United States will experience a substantial doctor shortage in coming years, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges.

It anticipates a shortfall of 45,000 primary care doctors and 45,000 specialists by 2020.

That concern has placed a spotlight on the potential of nurse practitioners and physician assistants to help fill the gap.

According to the American Association of Nurse Practitioners, certified nurse practitioners complete training that goes significantly beyond that of a registered nurse. Although state regulations vary, in general nurse practitioners are qualified (either on their own or in consultation with a physician) to provide diagnostic services, manage patient care and prescribe treatments and medications.

Similarly, under doctors’ supervision (and with similar state restrictions), certified physician assistants can conduct physical exams and provide diagnostic services, counseling and treatment plans.

For the new study, the researchers reviewed patient data gathered by an American College of Cardiology electronic health registry.

Patients had received care from one of more than 1,200 providers at one of 90 practices across the country. About 70 percent were treated at facilities that had both physicians and so-called “advanced practice providers” on staff. The rest had only physicians.

The study authors first compared the quality of heart care provided by doctors versus their non-doctor counterparts in facilities staffed with both. A second analysis compared heart care provided by doctor-only facilities versus care from nurse practitioners/physician assistants in facilities with both.

Only about 12 percent of either doctors or nurse practitioners/physician assistants were found to meet all heart care standards with regard to basic screening and treatment protocols.

These guidelines include ensuring use of beta-blocker drugs by anyone with a prior heart attack; prescribing anti-platelet medications and effective cholesterol control; and use of anti-clotting drugs in patients with a history of irregular heartbeat (atrial fibrillation). Health care providers should also make referrals to cardiac rehabilitation and encourage smokers to quit, according to the guidelines.

The study authors found very little difference between doctors and nurse practitioners/physician assistants in terms of care quality, even after accounting for patients’ age, gender, insurance status, and frequency of visits.

Dr. Paul Heidenreich, a professor of medicine at Stanford University, co-authored an accompanying journal editorial. He said, “The findings confirm prior studies that show that advanced practice providers such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners can do as well or better than physicians at delivering simple but important care such as education, smoking cessation counseling, ordering cancer screening tests and vaccinations.”

His co-author, Dr. Robert Harrington, chair of the department of medicine at Stanford, added that the study finding is important “as the population ages and there are insufficient numbers of M.D.’s available for all patients for every encounter.”

But Harrington and Heidenreich also expressed disappointment at the poor standard of overall care.

Fonarow added that more studies are needed to assess patient outcomes, satisfaction and value.

More information

See what heart outpatients need to know at the American College of Cardiology.

---

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

7 Everyday Habits That Improve Mood, According to Science

Photo: Getty Images

Some of these happiness habits may surprise you—but scientific research shows they really work.

1. Smell the roses

Harvard research found that folks who kept freshly cut flowers in their home for a week reported feeling more energized and less anxious.

2. Spend wisely

In a 2014 study, San Francisco State University researchers discovered that splurging on life experiences (like a weekend trip) made people happier than purchasing material items.

RELATED: Eat Your Way to Health and Happiness

3. Switch to iced coffee

Downing four or more cans of sweetened soda a day raised a person’s risk of depression by 30 percent, while drinking four cups of coffee a day lowered the risk by 10 percent, according to a 2014 study in Plos One.

4. Consider a D supplement

A 2012 study of more than 12,000 people found that those with the lowest levels of vitamin D were the most likely to be depressed. Talk to your doc about getting a blood test to see if you’re deficient.

RELATED: Happiness Really Is Contagious, Study Finds

5. Work out regularly

Starting a fitness routine between the ages of 20 and 40 that includes three sweat sessions a week could reduce one’s risk of depression by about 16 percent, suggested British research published in JAMA Psychiatry in 2014.

6. Cut back on Facebook…

The site was associated with a decline in overall happiness and life satisfaction in a 2013 University of Michigan study.

7. …And meditate instead

A daily practice might help some people relieve anxiety and depression, found Johns Hopkins research published last year in JAMA Internal Medicine. It’s easy to get started with the video below.

RELATED: What I Learned About Happiness After I Got Rid of Half My Wardrobe

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1WXQ2vD

Americans Concerned About Prescription Painkiller Addiction

MONDAY, Oct. 12, 2015 (HealthDay News) — Most Americans are concerned about the abuse of narcotic painkillers, despite widespread use of these legal medications, new research suggests.

About one in four Americans reported taking a prescription painkiller — such as hydrocodone (Vicodin) or oxycodone (Percocet, Oxycontin) — within the past year, the study said.

Around 70 percent of Americans said they’ve been prescribed narcotic painkillers at some point in their life. And almost 20 percent admit they’ve taken painkillers prescribed for someone else, the study revealed.

“This study shows that many Americans have had direct experience using prescription pain relievers and a sizable share have misused or abused these medications themselves, or have close friends or family members who have done so,” study leader Colleen Barry, an associate professor at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, said in a university news release.

At the same time, however, the researchers found that almost 60 percent of Americans believe abuse of these medications is a significant public health concern. That’s similar to Americans’ views on other public health concerns such as gun violence and tobacco use, the researchers said.

In 2012, drug overdoses, primarily involving prescription painkillers, surpassed car crashes to become the leading cause of injury death, the researchers said. In addition, costs related to abuse of these drugs is estimated to be around $50 billion a year.

The study, published in the Oct. 7 online edition of the journal Addiction, included a web-based public opinion survey. The researchers heard from more than 1,100 U.S. adults in February 2014.

Most people thought doctors prescribing these drugs were responsible for the current health crisis. Survey participants believed that patients are kept on these drugs for too long, and it was too easy to get more than one prescription for these drugs. Many respondents said that people don’t realize how easy it is to become addicted to these medications.

The survey revealed wide support among Americans for policy changes proposed by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, the American Medical Association and the Trust for America’s Health.

“We think this is the perfect time to work on passing policies that can truly impact the crisis of prescription pain reliever abuse,” study co-author Emma “Beth” McGinty, an assistant professor at the Bloomberg School, said in the news release. “The issue has not yet been highly politicized like some public health issues such as the Affordable Care Act, gun violence or needle exchanges, so we may have an opportunity to stem this epidemic.”

People who answered the survey supported additional training for doctors in how to control patients’ pain and treat addiction. They also supported measures that keep patients from getting multiple painkiller prescriptions from different doctors, as well as rules that require pharmacists to check patients’ identification before distributing narcotic painkillers.

Two proposed changes lacked broad support, the findings showed. Slightly less than half of people surveyed wanted greater distribution of medications that can reverse an overdose of these painkilling medications. And only 39 percent supported more government spending on addiction treatment.

More information

The U.S. National Institute on Drug Abuse has more about prescription drug abuse.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/1Ou6gLq