Month: October 2011

Health

Will Moving Out of a Poor Neighborhood Bring Down the Levels of Obesity and Diabetes?

Posted on
Share


Evidently so, according to a new study.

Helping people move out of poor neighborhoods into those that are better off may help reduce levels of obesity and diabetes, researchers found.

In a large social experiment, people who used vouchers to move to an area with better socioeconomic conditions were significantly less likely to have a high body mass index (BMI) and elevated glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels than those who remained in poor neighborhoods, Jens Ludwig, PhD, of the University of Chicago, and colleagues reported in the Oct. 20 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine.

Moving from high-poverty to low-poverty areas is associated “with modest but potentially important reductions in the prevalence of extreme obesity and diabetes,” Ludwig and colleagues wrote.

Researchers have long questioned whether a person’s neighborhood directly contributes to the development of obesity and diabetes. Observational studies have shown that neighborhood factors such as poverty or racial separation are associated with greater risks of these conditions.

To look more closely at the association, Ludwig and colleagues looked at data from a Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) program conducted between 1994 and 1998.

The department randomly assigned 4,498 women with children who were living in public housing in high-poverty urban areas to one of three groups:

    1,788 received rent-subsidy housing vouchers earmarked for a move to a low-poverty area, as well as counseling ‘to help with their housing search’
    1,312 got rent-subsidy vouchers with no requirement as to where they could live and no special counseling
    1,398 were assigned to a control group that wasn’t offered either opportunity

The researchers then looked at participants’ health outcomes — including height, weight, and HbA1c levels — between 2008 and 2010.

Overall, 48% of the families given the vouchers to move to a low-poverty area used them; 63% used the no-restriction vouchers.

Ludwig and colleagues found that using a voucher to move to a low-poverty area was associated with a decreased risk of extreme obesity and diabetes among the female heads-of-households.

Well, we are the product of our genes and our environment.

Will public health physicians be able to identify the specific factors which affect obesity and diabetes and devise interventions for those who cannot or will not move?

Share
Facebook

MORE Facebook Friends Linked to BIGGER Brain Areas?

Posted on
Share

No, seriously, I am not making this up.

The answer is YES.

Scientists have found a direct link between the number of “friends” a person has on Facebook and the size of certain brain regions, raising the possibility that using online social networks might change our brains.

The four brain areas involved are known to play a role in memory, emotional responses and social interactions.

So far, however, it is not possible to say whether having more Facebook connections makes particular parts of the brain larger or whether some people are simply pre-disposed, or “hard-wired,” to have more friends.

“The exciting question now is whether these structures change over time — this will help us answer the question of whether the Internet is changing our brains,” said Ryota Kanai of University College London (UCL), one of the researchers involved in the study.

The internet and social media are changing human’s brains.

What a happy thought of the day??

So, go and get some more Facebook friends, folks…..

Share
Cell Phones

Watch Your Cell Phone – Nasty Bacteria Lurking There

Posted on
Share

According to a new study in the UK.

The next time you reach for your cell phone, consider this: A new study found that 92% of cell phones in the U.K. have bacteria on them – including E. coli — because people aren’t washing their hands after going to the bathroom.

The E. coli came from fecal bacteria, which can survive on hands and surfaces for hours.

Researchers from the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and Queen Mary, University of London looked at cell phones in 12 cities in the U.K.

They took 390 samples from cell phones and hands, which were then analyzed for germs. People were also asked about their hand hygiene.

The study found:

  •     92% of phones had bacteria on them.
  •     82% of hands had bacteria on them.
  •     16% of hands and 16% of phones had E. coli bacteria, which is found in feces.

However, 95% of people said they washed their hands with soap where possible, which suggests we have a tendency to lie about our hygiene habits.

“We’re pretty shocked to find the vast majority of mobile phones — 92% — had bacteria all over them. Often large numbers of bacteria,” said hygiene expert Val Curtis, PhD, of the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine.

“That isn’t necessarily something that we should worry about, but what is worrying is that 16% of mobile phones had E. coli on them. E. coli comes from human [and animal] feces,” she says. “That means that people with dirty hands are not washing their hands after using the toilet, for example. Then they’re handling their mobile phones.”

It’s not just cell phones that the dirty hands are touching, Curtis says.

“They’re also touching other surfaces as well,” she says. “They’re spreading fecal bugs on everything they touch really.”

The solution: wash your hands after you go to the bathroom!

Ewwwwww!

By the way, I won’t be asking to borrow YOUR cell phone!

Share
Health

Poll Watch: Unhealthy American Workers Cost $135 Billion a Year in Lost Productivity

Posted on
Share


According to the latest Gallup Poll.

Full-time workers in the U.S. who are overweight or obese and have other chronic health conditions miss an estimated 450 million additional days of work each year compared with healthy workers — resulting in an estimated cost of more than $153 billion in lost productivity annually.

Now, you understand why American companies have wellness programs in the workplace.

The $153 billion in annual lost productivity costs linked to unhealthy workers in the United States is more than four times the cost found in the United Kingdom. The striking difference is the result of fewer unhealthy workers in the U.K. About 14% of full-time U.S. workers are of a normal weight and have no chronic illness, compared with 20% in the U.K.

The high percentages of full-time U.S. workers who have less than ideal health are a significant drain on productivity for U.S. businesses. However, employees and employers have the opportunity to potentially increase productivity if they address the health issues that are currently plaguing the workplace.

The $153 billion in lost productivity estimated in this analysis would increase if it included presenteeism, which is when employees go to work but are less productive in their jobs because of poor health or wellbeing. Including part-time employees would also add to the estimate of costs in lost productivity. Other research that has examined a broader array of factors using a somewhat different list of chronic conditions places the economic effect of lost productivity at $1.1 trillion per year.

It is of benefit to the American economy as well as the populace to address health issues = a better diet and regular exercise.

Share
Coronary Disease

Coronary Heart Disease Rates Have Decreased Says the CDC

Posted on
Share

Well, this is good news.

Fewer people in the U.S. report having angina or a heart attack, though the South continues to be a hot spot for heart troubles.

So says the CDC in its latest Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. The percentage of adults surveyed who report being told by a health professional that they have coronary heart disease — which happens when the blood vessels to the heart narrow, causing chest pain or heart attack — fell to 6% last year from 6.7% in 2006.

There’s been a concerted public-health effort over the past two decades to better prevent and treat heart disease. Fewer people are smoking, and hypertension and high cholesterol are better controlled. As the WSJ’s Ron Winslow has reported, the payoff has included a sharp drop in the heart-attack rate among older Americans.

But cardiovascular disease is still the leading cause of death in the U.S. — according to the CDC, it kills more people than cancer, lower respiratory diseases and accidents combined. And according to the new stats, prevalence of CHD varies by age, gender and ethnicity. Just 3.9% of Asians and Pacific Islanders report having CHD, compared to 11.6% of American Indians and Alaska natives. (Prevalence rates were 5.8% for whites, 6.5% for blacks and 6.1% for Hispanics.)

Geography matters, too, with 3.7% of Hawaiians reporting CHD vs. 8% of West Virginians. In general, the South has a greater prevalence of heart disease.

Good news….now to work on better diets and more exercise.

Share