Don’t Let Burns Spoil Your Summer Fun

FRIDAY, July 8, 2016 (HealthDay News) — As summer kicks into high gear, be sure your fun isn’t marred by fires or burns, an expert says.

“Before using your grill, make sure all of the parts — including the gas tank — are in good condition. If you notice any leaks, cracks or breaks, replace the parts before using,” said Dr. James Gallagher. He’s director of the William Randolph Hearst Burn Center at New York-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medical Center in New York City.

Barbecue grills should only be used outdoors and should be at least 10 feet away from buildings, deck railings and overhanging branches, Gallagher said in a hospital news release. Use utensils with long handles, wear short or tight-fitting sleeves and have a garden hose or bucket of sand available to put out small flare-ups.

Keep a fire extinguisher close by, and never leave the grill unattended, Gallagher advised.

To prevent sunburn, apply sunscreen at least 30 minutes before going outdoors. Reapply every one to two hours and after swimming, sweating or exercising, even on cloudy days, Gallagher said.

More information

The American Academy of Family Physicians has more on burn prevention.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/29DBhNB

Beware Whole Body Cryotherapy Claims, FDA Warns

FRIDAY, July 8, 2016 (HealthDay News) — Whole body cryotherapy — a trendy treatment that has been used for everything from arthritis pain to Alzheimer’s — may pose serious health risks, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration warns.

“Based on purported health benefits seen in many promotions for cryotherapy spas, consumers may incorrectly believe that the FDA has cleared or approved [these] devices as safe and effective to treat medical conditions,” Dr. Aron Yustein, a medical officer in the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health, said in an agency news release. “That is not the case.”

Cryotherapy involves freezing abnormal tissue; it is often used to kill early skin cancers, according to the U.S. National Cancer Institute.

During whole body cryotherapy, the entire body is enclosed in a chamber and exposed to cold vapors for several minutes. The vapors are generated by liquid nitrogen and can reach ultra-low temperatures, the FDA said.

The benefits of whole body cryotherapy are still under investigation, although proponents claim it can ease symptoms of fibromyalgia, migraines, rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis, stress, anxiety or chronic pain.

But the FDA says there are many risks associated with the treatment.

“Potential hazards include asphyxiation, especially when liquid nitrogen is used for cooling,” said FDA scientific reviewer Dr. Anna Ghambaryan.

Being exposed to nitrogen vapors in an enclosed space can deprive people of oxygen and cause them to lose consciousness. Other risks associated with these extreme temperatures include frostbite, burns and eye injuries, the FDA said.

The treatment could also worsen existing medical conditions, the agency added.

The FDA advises people considering whole body cryotherapy to check with their doctor first.

Some whole body cryotherapy operators also claim the treatment improves circulation, boosts metabolism, speeds recovery and soreness following workouts and eases joint pain, the agency said.

It remains unclear how whole body cryotherapy affects people’s blood pressure, heart rate or metabolism, the FDA said.

More information

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration provides consumer updates on cryotherapy and other products and treatments.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/29DBlwM

Beware Whole Body Cryotherapy Claims, FDA Warns

FRIDAY, July 8, 2016 (HealthDay News) — Whole body cryotherapy — a trendy treatment that has been used for everything from arthritis pain to Alzheimer’s — may pose serious health risks, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration warns.

“Based on purported health benefits seen in many promotions for cryotherapy spas, consumers may incorrectly believe that the FDA has cleared or approved [these] devices as safe and effective to treat medical conditions,” Dr. Aron Yustein, a medical officer in the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health, said in an agency news release. “That is not the case.”

Cryotherapy involves freezing abnormal tissue; it is often used to kill early skin cancers, according to the U.S. National Cancer Institute.

During whole body cryotherapy, the entire body is enclosed in a chamber and exposed to cold vapors for several minutes. The vapors are generated by liquid nitrogen and can reach ultra-low temperatures, the FDA said.

The benefits of whole body cryotherapy are still under investigation, although proponents claim it can ease symptoms of fibromyalgia, migraines, rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis, stress, anxiety or chronic pain.

But the FDA says there are many risks associated with the treatment.

“Potential hazards include asphyxiation, especially when liquid nitrogen is used for cooling,” said FDA scientific reviewer Dr. Anna Ghambaryan.

Being exposed to nitrogen vapors in an enclosed space can deprive people of oxygen and cause them to lose consciousness. Other risks associated with these extreme temperatures include frostbite, burns and eye injuries, the FDA said.

The treatment could also worsen existing medical conditions, the agency added.

The FDA advises people considering whole body cryotherapy to check with their doctor first.

Some whole body cryotherapy operators also claim the treatment improves circulation, boosts metabolism, speeds recovery and soreness following workouts and eases joint pain, the agency said.

It remains unclear how whole body cryotherapy affects people’s blood pressure, heart rate or metabolism, the FDA said.

More information

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration provides consumer updates on cryotherapy and other products and treatments.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/29DBosH

Obese Preschoolers More Likely to Be Hospitalized

FRIDAY, July 8, 2016 (HealthDay News) — Obese preschoolers are two to three times more likely to end up in the hospital than their healthy weight peers are, new research suggests.

The Australian study also found that health care costs are about 60 percent higher for obese kids.

“Childhood obesity is a serious public health issue, and is becoming an increasing problem in children under 5 years old,” said study lead author Alison Hayes. She is an associate professor of health economics at the University of Sydney.

“In addition to the health impacts of childhood obesity, there are major economic impacts, which may occur earlier than previously thought,” she said in a university news release.

Obesity and overweight rates for kids under age 5 are about 7 percent worldwide, the researchers said. But in Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States, the rate rises as high as 23 percent.

The new study looked at health care usage patterns among 350 children aged 2 to 5 years. This included visits to specialists, hospital admissions, visits to the ER, and the use of diagnostic services, medical testing and drugs.

The researchers found that obese children were more likely to be admitted to a hospital for respiratory difficulties, as well as for diseases of the ear, nose, mouth and/or throat.

“Early prevention of obesity is important to improve children’s health, but there are also likely to be immediate savings in health care costs,” said Hayes.

Preventing childhood obesity also could have a long-term impact on health systems. That’s because children who are obese tend to stay obese into adulthood. And, lasting obesity can lead to serious chronic diseases, she pointed out.

“Our results are important for health care funders and policy makers because preventing obesity in the early childhood years may be a cost-effective way to tackle the obesity crisis, improve the nation’s health and reduce the economic burden of obesity,” Hayes said.

The study was published in the July 6 issue of the journal Obesity.

More information

There’s more on pediatric obesity at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/29DB6C8

Are High School Athletes at Risk From Artificial Turf?

By Randy Dotinga
HealthDay Reporter

FRIDAY, July 8, 2016 (HealthDay News) — Lower levels of fake soil in artificial turf — a cost-saving move — may be linked to sharply higher numbers of injuries among high school football players, new research suggests.

The findings of the industry-funded research suggest a connection but don’t definitively prove that less fake soil causes more injuries.

Still, “we’re seeing a phenomenal effect. You’re exchanging low cost for higher injuries,” said study author Michael Meyers, an associate professor with the department of sport science and physical activity at Idaho State University. “It’s an eye opener, definitely a game changer.”

Meyers recommends that schools move to prevent injuries by installing artificial turf with more fake soil, known as “infill.”

According to Meyers, modern school fields often feature artificial turf instead of grass for several reasons. For one, artificial turf doesn’t require the same level of maintenance and watering as grass. And as schools use their fields for purposes beyond athletics, artificial turf can tolerate the wear and tear better than grass, he said.

Artificial turf can be expensive, potentially costing $1 million for a field, Meyers said, but its durability can make it cost-effective.

The question: Does the thickness of the turf’s infill affect injuries? Meyers decided to explore the issue and sought funding assistance from turf makers. Only one company, FieldTurf, agreed to help support his research, he said.

Meyers focused on a measurement of infill, a combination of rubber and sand that underlies artificial turf. Infill is measured by the number of pounds of infill per square foot; more infill translates to more pounds per square foot — and a higher cost.

For the study, Meyers analyzed injuries at 52 high schools in four states over five football seasons. All the high schools had artificial turf.

The average number of injuries per season on the fields with the most infill (9 or more pounds per square foot) was 18. But that number grew to 34 on fields with infill measured at 3 to 5 pounds per square foot, the findings showed.

The study also reported higher rates of injuries from contact with the ground on fields with less infill. In general, Meyers said, these injuries occurred to players’ arms and legs.

Why might more infill translate to fewer injuries?

“It’s kind of common sense,” Meyers said. “Would you rather hit your head on a pillow or hit your head on concrete? You want a little bit of padding, some thickness.”

When there’s less infill, he said, “you have less firmness, less foundation, less room for error.”

Meyers recommends that campuses install artificial turf with at least 6 pounds per square foot of infill. If an existing field has less than that, he said, school officials should add more infill.

Sports medicine specialist Dr. Samuel Taylor is an orthopedic surgeon at the Hospital for Special Surgery in New York City. He said the new study is important, but he cautioned that decisions about infill aren’t simple.

“Many other factors likely come into play, such as the influence of weather conditions in a given location on infill performance,” said Taylor, who’s also an associate team physician with the National Football League’s New York Giants.

Also, Taylor said, “we don’t know the impact of how often a field is used on infill performance. For example, an NFL stadium used 10 times over a season and a high school field used year-round may perform differently over time.”

The study was to be presented Friday at the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine annual meeting in Colorado Springs, Colo. The findings of studies released at medical conferences are considered preliminary until they are published in a peer-reviewed journal.

More information

For more about athletic safety for kids, visit the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/29DBTCK

Stigma Prolongs Global HIV Epidemic Among Gays

THURSDAY, July 7, 2016 (HealthDay News) — High rates of HIV among gay and bisexual men continue in many regions of the world because of discriminatory laws and lack of access to preventive services, a new study finds.

“While HIV rates have flattened overall in recent years, we’re really concerned that the HIV epidemic is continuing among gay men and we’re going in the wrong direction,” said study leader Dr. Chris Beyrer, a professor of public health and human rights at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore.

“It’s painful that the history of AIDS is looking like its future, but that’s actually where we are,” said Beyrer, who is also president of the International AIDS Society. “But the first step in taking on a problem is recognizing and articulating it, and we’ve really done that here.”

Four years ago, the same researchers laid out a plan to curb HIV epidemics in gays. Among other priorities, the plan called for policy reforms and improved HIV prevention, such as expanded access to pre-exposure medication.

For the latest study, the scientists examined medical research published between January 2007 and October 2015 to identify any improvements. But little progress has been made, they report in the July 9 issue of The Lancet.

HIV infection rates are falling among heterosexual men and women in many countries. Many people with the virus are also living long lives with the help of antiretroviral treatment. But this isn’t the case among gay men, even in middle- and high-income countries, the researchers said.

A new $100 million investment fund from the U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief was set up for at-risk groups, including gay and bisexual men. Several countries also approved or initiated projects to improve access to preventive treatment among gay men, the researchers noted.

Overall, however, preventive services aren’t reaching gays who are HIV-negative and at high risk for infection, the authors found. Loss of civil liberties among the gay community in some countries, including Russia, Nigeria and Uganda, have also played a role in continued high HIV rates among gay men, they said.

In the United States, a 20-year-old gay black man has a 50 percent chance of becoming infected with HIV during his lifetime, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Insured Americans have access to effective preventive treatment, but HIV epidemics continue among gay men in low-income, southern minority communities where Medicaid coverage has not been expanded, the researchers said.

Sodomy is still a crime in many countries. And even websites providing information on HIV have been shut down in certain parts of the world.

“Stigma and discrimination continue to play a very big role in these epidemics,” Beyrer said in a Hopkins news release. “In many countries, these men are just not welcome in health clinics and the fear of discrimination stands in the way of not only treatment, but even just the testing that can go a long way toward stemming the spread of disease.”

Looking ahead, the researchers expect Mexico, Argentina and the Netherlands to expand the use of preventive HIV treatments. They also hope some countries will repeal anti-gay laws.

“The global epidemic of HIV in gay men is ongoing and efforts to address it remain insufficient,” said Beyrer. “This must change if we are ever to ever truly achieve an AIDS-free generation.”

He will oversee the International AIDS Conference, which begins July 18 in Durban, South Africa.

More information

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention provides more on HIV/AIDS.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/29m0BEW

All About the Scary Throat Emergency That Nearly Killed Sarah Silverman

Second, Unrelated Cancers Strike 1 in 12 Cancer Patients

THURSDAY, July 7, 2016 (HealthDay News) — A new study found that 8 percent of patients — or one in 12 — already diagnosed with one form of cancer end up developing a second type of unrelated cancer.

The second cancer was fatal in 55 percent of the cases, the study found.

“As clinicians, we can become so focused on surveilling our patients to see if a primary cancer recurs that we sometimes may not be aware that patients can be at risk of developing a second, unrelated cancer,” said study author Dr. Karim Chamie, an assistant professor of urology at the David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, Los Angeles.

Chamie added that the findings should encourage physicians to adjust the way they tackle follow-up care and monitoring among cancer patients.

The current study included more than 2 million people diagnosed with cancer. Patients in the study were initially diagnosed with cancers of the prostate, breast, lung, colon, rectum, bladder, uterus or kidney, or melanoma or non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Of those who developed a second cancer, only 13 percent died from their initial cancer, researchers said.

Chamie’s team found that patients diagnosed with bladder cancer were the most at risk for developing a second cancer.

Thirty-four percent of bladder cancer patients were diagnosed with a second cancer during the 20-year study. Of those second cancers, 25 percent were lung cancer cases, the study found.

The study team suggested that this finding points to the need for annual screening with a CT scan of the lungs for bladder cancer patients.

“Lung cancer is a very common and extremely lethal disease, and the national screening trial found [in 2011] CT scans actually saved lives,” Chamie explained in a school news release.

“We could make a significant improvement in cancer survivorship, for instance, if we monitored bladder cancer patients annually for second, unrelated lung cancers,” he added.

People initially diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma also faced a particularly high risk for a second cancer, the research team noted. The most common second cancers for these patients were lung, prostate or breast cancers.

The findings are in the July 5 issue of Cancer.

More information

There’s more on second cancers at the American Cancer Society.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/29qy0li

Dinosaurs Got Tumors, Too

THURSDAY, July 7, 2016 (HealthDay News) — Even dinosaurs developed tumors, with some more prone to growths than others, a new study suggests.

An international group of researchers detected a facial tumor in the fossilized jawbone of a dwarf dinosaur (Telmatosaurus transsylvanicus), also known as a hadrosaur.

Subsequent imaging indicated the duck-billed dinosaur had a noncancerous tumor called an ameloblastoma.

This type of growth has been found in people, other mammals and some modern reptiles, according to the study.

“This discovery is the first ever described in the fossil record and the first to be thoroughly documented in a dwarf dinosaur,” said study researcher Kate Acheson, a doctoral student at the University of Southampton in England.

“Telmatosaurus is known to be close to the root of the duck-billed dinosaur family tree, and the presence of such a deformity early in their evolution provides us with further evidence that the duck-billed dinosaurs were more prone to tumors than other dinosaurs,” she said in a university news release.

The jawbone is said to be 67 million to 69 million years old. It was discovered in the “Valley of the Dinosaurs,” an area in Hateg Country Dinosaurs Geopark, in Transylvania, a region in western Romania.

“The discovery of an ameloblastoma in a duck-billed dinosaur documents that we have more in common with dinosaurs than previously realized. We get the same [abnormal growths],” said Dr. Bruce Rothschild, from Northeast Ohio Medical University, in Rootstown. He specializes in the study of ancient diseases and injuries.

The dinosaur’s jawbone reveals it died early but exactly why isn’t clear. The researchers speculate the tumor probably wasn’t painful or the direct cause of the dinosaur’s death.

It may have led indirectly to its death, however. One theory is that predators might have considered the tumor a sign of weakness or vulnerability, leading to an attack.

The study was published July 5 in Scientific Reports.

More information

The National Organization for Rare Disorders provides more on ameloblastoma.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/29qxSCc

Smoking in Pregnancy May Be Under-Reported

THURSDAY, July 7, 2016 (HealthDay News) — A significantly higher percentage of American women may be smoking while pregnant than researchers have previously believed, a new study suggests.

The finding is based on urine tests that can measure nicotine exposure compared to what pregnant women report about their smoking habits.

“We have long suspected that smoking status during pregnancy is under-reported,” study senior author Dr. Jim Greenberg, director of the Perinatal Institute at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital, said in a hospital news release.

“But now we know just how many women struggle to quit smoking when they are pregnant,” he added.

Smoking while pregnant boosts the risk for premature birth by as much as 25 percent, the study authors noted. Smoking is also associated with the three most common causes of infant death. It’s also considered to be a risk factor for both sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) and birth defects, the researchers said.

For the study, the investigators reviewed the birth records of more than 700 women who gave birth at a single hospital in Ohio between 2014 and 2015. In Ohio, such records include pregnant women’s self-reported smoking habits during their last trimester.

These self-reports were cross-referenced with urine samples taken from the same women. Those samples are now routinely obtained in maternity centers in southwest Ohio to test for drug use, so that babies exposed to opioids in the womb can be treated quickly after birth, the study authors explained.

Just under 9 percent of women admitted to smoking while pregnant, but markers for tobacco found in the urine suggested that 16.5 percent had high levels of nicotine exposure during pregnancy. An additional 7.5 percent had low-level nicotine exposure, the study found.

Another 7.5 percent of the women tested positive for exposure to secondhand smoke while pregnant, the findings showed.

About 8 percent of black women in the study group admitted to smoking cigarettes. But urine tests suggested that 21 percent were smokers, according to the report.

“This is extremely important new information for us as we work to better understand risk factors for preterm birth,” Greenberg noted.

The investigators said that the findings point to a need for increased public health efforts to help women — especially minority women — quit smoking during pregnancy.

The study was published online July 7 in the Journal of Perinatology.

More information

There’s more on smoking and pregnancy at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

---

from Health News / Tips & Trends / Celebrity Health http://ift.tt/29D21Aj