ReportWire

Tag: healthscienceclimate

  • Wegovy Is Good for More Than Just Weight Loss

    Wegovy Is Good for More Than Just Weight Loss

    [ad_1]

    The obesity drug Wegovy can now claim to lower the risk of heart attack, stroke, and other cardiovascular issues in people who are overweight or who have obesity, and also have cardiovascular disease. It’s the first weight-loss drug to carry an indication for heart benefits.

    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the addition to the label on March 8 based on a study from Wegovy’s manufacturer, Novo Nordisk, showing that the drug lowered the risk of heart attack, stroke, or dying of heart-related issues in this population by 20% compared to people receiving placebo.

    When the results of the study were first released at the American Heart Association meeting last November, the findings were greeted with a round of applause from the heart experts in attendance. Obesity is a major risk factor for heart disease, and while doctors have an arsenal of medications to treat many other risk factors—such as high blood pressure, high cholesterol, and diabetes—they haven’t had a powerful enough drug to help people lose weight until now.

    Wegovy, which was approved in 2021, is the brand name for semaglutide. Ozempic, which was approved in 2017 to treat diabetes, is a lower dosage of semaglutide; in 2020, it too received FDA approval for reducing the risk of major cardiovascular events in people with Type 2 diabetes and heart disease.

    Patients taking Wegovy inject themselves once a week in increasing doses until they reach the target dose of 2.4 mg. People with a history of thyroid cancer should not use Wegovy, since semglutide has been linked to a higher risk of that cancer in animals (though not in people). Side effects of the injections include inflammation of the pancreas, kidney problems, and depression.

    “This is an entirely new pathway to harness, of addressing obesity and its metabolic complications,” said Dr. Amit Khera, director of the Preventive Cardiology Program at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, after the results on which the approval was based were released in November. “The fact that we have a new treatment avenue for patients with cardiovascular disease is incredibly exciting, and welcome.”

    [ad_2]

    Alice Park

    Source link

  • Today Is Your Last Chance to Order Free COVID-19 Tests

    Today Is Your Last Chance to Order Free COVID-19 Tests

    [ad_1]

    March 8 is your last day to order free rapid COVID-19 tests, as the U.S. government prepares to suspend its at-home test program. Households in the U.S. can receive at least four rapid antigen tests, free of charge, simply by entering a name and address.

    The federal government has been shipping free tests since early 2022. The program was suspended for a few months in 2023, after the U.S. government stopped considering COVID-19 a public-health emergency, but was reinstated this past fall, as new variants began to spread and cause upticks in infections and hospitalizations. Now, the free testing initiative is again coming to an end.

    Today is the last day the U.S. Postal Service will accept orders, here. Households that have not ordered any tests since the program was reinstated in September 2023 can place two orders of four tests each, while those that have ordered more recently can get one set of four tests.

    Rapid tests will also remain for sale in retail stores, and may be available for free through certain community organizations, after March 8.

    The end of the government’s free testing program is the latest in a string of public-health decisions that signal officials are moving on from COVID-19. On March 1, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ended its long-standing recommendation that people isolate themselves from others for at least five days when they have COVID-19. Instead, the agency now recommends that people stay home until they’ve been fever-free for at least 24 hours and their other symptoms are improving—an approach that brings COVID-19 guidance in line with that of the flu and other common respiratory diseases.

    [ad_2]

    Jamie Ducharme

    Source link

  • Daylight Saving Time Is the Worst

    Daylight Saving Time Is the Worst

    [ad_1]

    On Sunday, March 10 at 2 a.m., the U.S. and about a third of the world’s other countries will set their clocks forward by one hour, which will make the sun seem to rise later in the morning and hang in the sky longer in the evening. I am not alone in dreading it. Plenty of people want nothing to do with the whole hoary practice.

    It’s bad for health, bad for safety, bad for your mood, and just plain unpopular. But that doesn’t stop us from changing the clocks, pointlessly, twice a year.

    The ridiculous history of Daylight Saving Time

    The first push for changing the clocks took place in 1907, when British builder William Willett penned a pamphlet titled “A Waste of Daylight,” in which he proposed setting clocks forward one hour. “The sun shines upon the land for several hours each day while we are asleep,” he wrote, and yet there “remains only a brief spell of declining daylight in which to spend the short period of leisure at our disposal.”

    For years, Willett lobbied Parliament for legislation mandating the change—then died just a year before it was adopted, when the U.K. followed Germany in making the move to conserve daylight, and thus fuel, during World War I. In 1918, the U.S., which was by then one of the combatants too, got on board with the time change. The clocks returned to their pre-war settings after the fighting ended, only to resume the Daylight Saving Time tradition in the U.S. for the duration of World War II. Finally, in 1966, Congress passed the Uniform Time Act, dividing the year into two: six months of Daylight Saving Time and six months of Standard Time. In 2005, lawmakers mandated eight months of Daylight Saving Time.

    Daylight Saving Time is not even effective

    But does changing the clocks really conserve fuel? According to Stanford University, one meta-analysis of 44 studies found that it essentially does not, leading to just a 0.34% reduction in electricity consumption. Some research shows it even backfires. A 2008 study from the National Bureau of Economic Research found that nationwide, added daylight can actually increase energy consumption by about 1%, due partly to greater use of air conditioning when the sun is out later in the evening.

    It’s lousy for your health

    The downsides are even clearer in terms of health. Sleep expert Adam Spira, professor of mental health at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, cites a range of problems that can occur when we trade an hour of sleep for an extra hour of sun—as we do with Daylight Saving Time—including daylight-induced sleeplessness when bedtime arrives and morning drowsiness when we wake up in the dark. Studies have linked such circadian disruption to an increased risk of heart attack, stroke, inflammatory markers, and even suicide. Spira also cites a 2020 study which found that moving clocks forward one hour carries an alarming 6% increased risk of fatal traffic accidents, due to similar circadian scrambling and sleep deprivation.

    Young children and teens suffer too. Establishing a fixed and predictable sleep cycle for infants and babies can be a challenge, and once things are set, even small disruptions can cause headaches for parents and fitful slumber for babies. A 2019 study in the journal Sleep found that springing ahead one hour into Daylight Saving Time leads to broken sleep during the night and earlier awakenings in the morning for babies in the newborn-to-24-month age group. In 2022, research conducted by the American Academy of Sleep Medicine revealed that teens lose an average of 32 minutes of sleep a night after the switch to Daylight Saving Time—a seemingly small difference that can lead to not-so-small consequences, with increased sleepiness, slower reaction times, lack of attentiveness, and sluggish psychomotor reactions resulting.  

    “We’re affected by this not just one day of the year, but really eight months of the year,” says Dr. Beth Malow, professor of neurology and pediatrics and director of the Vanderbilt Sleep Division at Vanderbilt University in Nashville. “We need morning light to reset our clocks. Teenagers are going through puberty and their melatonin levels are delayed, and it just cuts into their sleep when they get too much light too late in the day and not enough light in the morning.”

    No one can agree how to lock the clock

    All of this is exasperating to Americans who are broadly in favor of eliminating the practice of changing the clocks twice a year. In a YouGov poll of 1,000 U.S. adults conducted last year, 62% said that toggling between Daylight Saving Time and Standard Time should be eliminated, with just one fixed time established year-round. Daylight Saving Time actually proved more popular than Standard Time: 56% of respondents said they preferred the extra hour of sunshine at the end of the day and 26% preferred the darker, winter way of doing things. 

    State legislatures are trying to respond to this sentiment, with 29 considering laws last year that would establish permanent Daylight Saving Time, but those efforts are going nowhere. One problem, as The Hill reports, is that federal law allows states to establish permanent Standard Time, but not permanent Daylight Saving Time. The rule goes back to 1966, when the Uniform Time Act sought to forestall some states from rushing pell-mell to grab that extra hour of evening sunlight while others resisted. 

    To change those rules requires Congressional action. The Sunshine Protection Act of 2023 is trying to establish permanent Daylight Saving Time and eliminate further time changes after this one. So far, it hasn’t been successful. Some groups, including the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, oppose it—instead favoring permanent standard time. In a January position statement, the American Academy of Sleep Medicine wrote that permanent standard time “aligns best with human circadian biology.” Daylight Saving Time was made permanent in the U.S. once before, in 1974, then repealed eight months later after concerns for children’s safety going to school in the dark.

    The one thing everyone seems to agree on, though, is that the clock should not switch twice a year. Not that it’s likely to stop anytime soon.“I think a lot of this is inertia,” says Malow. “People don’t want to change.”

    For now, the best Americans can do is resign themselves to the fact that this spring, as in so many springs past, we will be selling an hour in the morning to buy an hour at night—and in the fall we’ll do things the other way all over again.

    [ad_2]

    Jeffrey Kluger

    Source link

  • Researchers Are Using AI to Find New Alzheimer’s Risk Factors

    Researchers Are Using AI to Find New Alzheimer’s Risk Factors

    [ad_1]

    Brain experts have a pretty good handle on some of the major risk factors that contribute to Alzheimer’s—from a person’s genes to their physical activity levels, how much formal education they’ve received, and how socially engaged they are.

    But one promise of AI in medicine is that it can spot less obvious links that humans can’t always see. Could AI help uncover conditions linked to Alzheimer’s that have so far been overlooked?

    To find out, Marina Sirota and her team at University of California San Francisco (UCSF) ran a machine-learning program on a database of anonymous electronic health records from patients. The AI algorithm was trained to pull out any common features shared by people who were ultimately diagnosed with Alzheimer’s over a period of seven years. The database includes clinical data, such as lab and imaging test results and diagnoses of medical conditions.

    “There were some things we saw that were expected, given the knowledge that we have about Alzheimer’s, but some of things we found were novel and interesting,” says Sirota. The results were published in Nature Aging.

    Heart disease, high cholesterol, and inflammatory conditions all emerged as Alzheimer’s risk factors—not surprising, since they’re known to contribute to the buildup of protein plaques in the brain. But the less expected conditions included osteoporosis in women and depression in both men and women. The researchers also saw unexpected patterns emerge closer to when people are diagnosed, such as having lower levels of vitamin D.

    Sirota and Alice Tang, a medical student in bioengineering who is the lead author of the paper, stress that these factors do not always mean that a person will develop Alzheimer’s. But they could be red flags that a patient can address to potentially lower their risk. “Picking up these factors gives us clues that a diagnosis of Alzheimer’s might be coming, and things like [high cholesterol] and osteoporosis are modifiable [with treatments],” says Tang.

    Whether or not treating these issues can actually lower a person’s risk of developing Alzheimer’s isn’t clear yet; the study wasn’t designed to answer that question. Sirota and her team plan to continue mining the database of health records to determine if people receiving treatments for conditions like osteoporosis or high cholesterol, for example, eventually had a lower risk of Alzheimer’s than patients who had those conditions but didn’t treat them. “We can retrospectively look at treatment data in the electronic medical records, so that’s definitely a direction forward to determine if we can leverage any existing therapies to lower risk,” says Sirota.

    Tang also hunted for genetic factors associated with things like high cholesterol or osteoporosis and Alzheimer’s that could further explain the connection between these risk factors. The link between cholesterol and Alzheimer’s turns out to be related to the ApoE gene; scientists have known that a specific form of the gene, ApoE4, is associated with a higher risk of developing Alzheimer’s. Tang also identified a gene associated with both osteoporosis and Alzheimer’s that could become a new research target for a possible treatment.

    The study shows the power of machine learning in helping scientists to better understand the factors driving diseases as complex as Alzheimer’s, as well as its ability to suggest potential new ways of treating them.

    More From TIME

    [ad_2]

    Alice Park

    Source link

  • The First Over-the-Counter Birth Control Pill Is Here

    The First Over-the-Counter Birth Control Pill Is Here

    [ad_1]

    The first birth control pill that people can buy without a prescription, called Opill, is shipping to stores this week.

    Perrigo, the Ireland-based company that makes Opill, said the pills should be available to purchase at retail pharmacies and online by the end of March. The pills are designed to be taken daily at about the same time each day, and they will be sold in one-month packs for $19.99 and three-month packs for $49.99.

    A spokesperson for CVS, one pharmacy that will be stocking the pill, said the pills will be in more than 7,500 of its stores nationwide and will be available to order on the store’s app. People can opt for same-day delivery or pick-up in store to preserve their privacy.

    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the over-the-counter use of the oral contraceptive last summer in a landmark decision. Women can now walk into any pharmacy or go online to purchase the pills without medical supervision; previously, birth control pills required a prescription and had to be dispensed by a pharmacist.

    Opill contains only the hormone progestin and prevents pregnancy in several different ways, including preventing the ovaries from releasing eggs and making the uterus less hospitable for fertilized eggs to implant and grow. Because progestin is active for about 24 hours, it’s important for women to take the pill every day at about the same time for it to be most effective. Under those conditions, Opill is up to 98% effective in preventing pregnancy.

    There are side effects linked to the pill, including bleeding, bloating, and abdominal pain. If these are severe and persist, women should report them to their doctor. Opill is not recommended for women with a history of breast cancer or those who are also using other forms of hormonal birth control, such as an IUD, patch, or implant.

    [ad_2]

    Alice Park

    Source link

  • Yogurt Can Now Claim It May Reduce the Risk of Diabetes

    Yogurt Can Now Claim It May Reduce the Risk of Diabetes

    [ad_1]

    Yogurt sold in the U.S. can make claims that the food may reduce the risk of type 2 diabetes, based on limited evidence, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration said Friday.

    The agency agreed that there is some evidence, but not significant scientific agreement, that eating at least 2 cups of yogurt per week may reduce the chance of developing the disease that affects about 36 million Americans.

    FDA has allowed qualified health claims—a claim that lacks full scientific support but is allowed as long as there are disclaimers to keep from misleading consumers—for dietary supplements since 2000 and foods since 2002. The agency had faced lawsuits that challenged the standard of requiring scientific agreement based on claims that it violated free speech guarantees.

    Among the allowed qualified health claims: consuming some types of cocoa may reduce heart disease and cranberry juice might reduce the risk of recurrent urinary tract infections in women.

    For yogurt, Danone North America, the U.S. branch of the French firm whose brands include Dannon, Activia, and Horizon Organics yogurts, requested a qualified health claim in 2018. It submitted information from studies that observed participants over time and found a link between eating yogurt and lower markers of diabetes. The FDA agreed that there “is some credible evidence” of benefit from eating yogurt as a whole food, but not because of any particular nutrient in it.

    Critics said the label change is not based on gold-standard randomized controlled trials that could have proven whether yogurt reduces diabetes risk.

    No single food can reduce the risk of a disease that is tied to overall diet, the advocacy group Center for Science in the Public Interest said. It also said the label change might raise the risk of diabetes by encouraging consumption of yogurt, including types that include added sugars, and mix-ins such as cookies and pretzels.

    Marion Nestle, a food policy expert, said qualified health claims based on limited evidence are “ridiculous on their face.”

    “Translation: If you want to believe this, go ahead, but it’s not on the basis of evidence,” she said.

    [ad_2]

    JONEL ALECCIA/AP

    Source link

  • RSV Vaccine May Be Linked to a Slightly Higher Risk of Guillain-Barre Syndrome

    RSV Vaccine May Be Linked to a Slightly Higher Risk of Guillain-Barre Syndrome

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — Health officials are investigating whether there’s a link between two new RSV vaccines and cases of a rare nervous system disorder in older U.S. adults.

    The inquiry is based on fewer than two dozen cases seen among more than 9.5 million vaccine recipients, health officials said Thursday. And the available information is too limited to establish whether the shots caused the illnesses, they added.

    But the numbers are higher than expected and officials are gathering more information to determine if the vaccines are causing the problem. The data was presented at a meeting of an expert panel that provides vaccine policy advice to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    Officials said they were investigating more than 20 cases of Guillain-Barre syndrome, a rare illness in which a person’s immune system damages nerve cells, causing muscle weakness and paralysis. An estimated 3,000 to 6,000 people develop GBS in the U.S. each year, and it’s more commonly seen in older people, according to the CDC.

    Most people fully recover from the syndrome, but some have permanent nerve damage. Guillain-Barre can occur in people after they are infected with a virus, but in some instances cases have been linked to vaccinations.

    RSV, or respiratory syncytial virus, is a common cause of cold-like symptoms but it can be dangerous for infants and the elderly.

    Last year, the CDC signed off on a recommendation made by the advisory panel, aimed at Americans age 60 and older. It was for a single dose of RSV vaccine. There were two options, one made by Pfizer and the other by GSK.

    The CDC said that patients should talk to their doctors about the vaccines and then decide whether to get it.

    Officials were aware that instances of Guillain-Barre had been identified in clinical trials done before the shots were approved for sale, and that different systems were watching for signs of problems.

    At a meeting of the expert panel on Thursday, CDC officials presented an analysis of the reports taken in by those systems.

    About two-thirds of the cases occurred in people who got a version of the vaccine made by Pfizer, called Abrysvo. But officials are also doing follow-up tracking in people who got Arexvy, made by GSK.

    About two cases of Guillain-Barre might be seen in every 1 million people who receive a vaccine, health officials estimate. A CDC analysis found the the GSK rate was lower than that, but 4.6 cases per million were reported in recipients of the Pfizer shot.

    Data from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration also showed an above-expected number of Guillain-Barre cases being reported in RSV vaccine recipients, with more among Pfizer shot recipients.

    “Taken together, these data suggest a potential increased risk” in RSV vaccine recipients 60 and older that must be explored, said Dr. Tom Shimabukuro, a CDC vaccine safety monitoring official.

    Officials from GSK and Pfizer made brief statements during the meeting, noting that sorting out a safety signal is complicated.

    “Pfizer is committed to the continuous monitoring and evaluation of the safety of Abrysvo” and is conducting four safety studies to look into the possibility of vaccine-related GBS, said Reema Mehta, a Pfizer vice president.

    CDC officials also presented estimates that the vaccines have prevented thousands of hospitalizations and hundreds of deaths from RSV, and that current data indicates the benefits of vaccination outweigh the possible risks.

    [ad_2]

    Mike Stobbe/AP

    Source link

  • The Hidden Health Costs of Climate Change

    The Hidden Health Costs of Climate Change

    [ad_1]

    Climate change kills. Since 2000, nearly four million people worldwide have lost their lives due to floods, wildfires, heat waves, droughts, and other extreme weather events that have been linked to a steadily warming planet, according to a recent estimate in the journal Nature. That sweeping number can make it hard for any of us to grasp how the problem is touching health in our own small part of the world. Now, a new study in Nature Medicine provides some of that granular insight for people living in the U.S., exploring how climate-linked disasters affect visits to hospital emergency departments in counties nationwide, as well as related deaths in the aftermath of the disasters. The numbers, the researchers found, are troubling, with the hardest-hit communities showing mortality rates as much as 3.8 times higher than those in surrounding areas.

    “This could be a significant strain for hospitals and emergency departments, especially if they are damaged, lack power, or are short-staffed,” says Dr. Renee Salas, an emergency medicine physician at Massachusetts General Hospital and lead author of the study.

    To conduct their work, Salas and her co-authors surveyed health records in emergency departments of major hospitals in more than 4,800 counties nationwide that had suffered billion-dollar storms—measured by property loss, insurance claims, the cost of government recovery efforts, and more—from 2011 to 2016. They focused their research on Medicare patients only, for a number of reasons. People with private insurance may pick up or lose coverage as they change jobs, making for an incomplete dataset, while Medicare coverage, once begun, is typically continued for life. What’s more, senior citizens make up the population most vulnerable to death, injury, or illness related to climate change. Finally, Medicare is taxpayer funded, and studying the health effects of climate change—and the hit on the public pocketbook that results—is important in establishing policy going forward.

    “Health costs are not currently incorporated into the total economic costs of these disasters,” says Salas.

    In counties that sustained the most damage from any climate-related event, emergency department use and mortality remained elevated by 1.22% and 1.4% respectively for at least one week after the event, compared to surrounding counties that suffered less damage. Those numbers may seem relatively small. But in counties for which followup data were available, the study found that those hospital visits and deaths remained elevated for up to six weeks, leading to a mortality rate 2.5 times higher than in counties that suffered less damage from the event.

    Read More: Climate Change Isn’t Just a Global Threat—It’s a Public Health Emergency

    Acute health problems—like smoke inhalation from wildfires, dehydration, or heat stroke from soaring temperatures—led to the greatest number of immediate visits to emergency departments or deaths. But other kinds of harm played out more slowly. Contaminated water or mold-related infections can damage health, as can loss of power that cuts off air conditioning and such essential health devices as CPAP machines. Closures of hospitals and the inability to access needed medicines may play a role too.

    “People are likely to be harmed over the longer term by the things the extreme weather event caused,” says Salas. Most of the time, she adds, reports of deaths and injuries do not consider “the long tails these events appear to be having on some of the most vulnerable.”

    The climate events themselves can have their own kind of long tails. Wildfires and droughts that were documented in the study tended to last about 200 to 300 days, causing elevated sickness and injury the entire time. As time goes on, those kinds of mega-crises are becoming more common. Data cited in the study and drawn from the National Centers for Environmental Information and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration found that billion-dollar events account for up to 80% of all climate-related damage in the U.S. Still, the remaining 20% is not without risks. The new study, says Salas, did not provide “a complete picture of all extreme weather events.”

    The world is bracing for a miserable few months when it comes to climate change. According to another study just published in Scientific Reports, a combination of greenhouse gasses and an especially intense El Niño event in the tropical Pacific Ocean will result in a 90% likelihood of record-breaking global mean surface temperatures through the end of June. The areas that are predicted to see the greatest impact are the Philippines, the Caribbean, and the Bay of Bengal region; should the heating be even worse than what the model predicts, the Amazon and Alaska will suffer acutely too. The authors of the paper warn of wildfires, cyclones, and heatwaves that will challenge the ability of local populations to adapt to or mitigate the crises—especially populations in lower income parts of the world that lack the medical infrastructure of the U.S. and other highly industrialized nations.

    “Our longer-term findings are happening in a high-income country with a relatively robust health system,” says Salas. ”Death rates in low- and middle-income countries following tropical cyclones have been shown to be even greater, revealing that they may not be able to cope as well with these major climate-related disasters.”

    Climate change is a planet-wide problem. It also touches the health of every one of us—nation by nation, county by county, and person by person.

    [ad_2]

    Jeffrey Kluger

    Source link

  • Why Older Adults Need Another COVID-19 Shot

    Why Older Adults Need Another COVID-19 Shot

    [ad_1]

    Older adults should get the COVID-19 vaccine more frequently than previously recommended, according to new guidance from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Health officials are urging people ages 65 and older to receive another vaccine dose in the spring, or at least four months after their most recent dose.

    CDC director Dr. Mandy Cohen announced the decision after a CDC advisory committee, which is made up of independent vaccine and infectious disease experts, voted 11-1 to make the change. “An additional vaccine dose can provide added protection that may have decreased over time for those at highest risk,” she said in a statement.

    The decision is based on data presented by CDC scientists that showed current hospitalization rates for COVID-19 are highest among seniors, with the biggest spikes occurring among those 75 years and older. People 65 and older account for 67% of hospitalizations due to COVID-19. (The CDC previously recommended that most people get a COVID-19 vaccine once a year. )

    The committee reviewed new data showing that the current COVID-19 shot is effective against currently circulating variants including JN.1 , even though it targets XBB. People who were vaccinated with the latest shot made fewer trips to urgent care and emergency rooms for COVID-19-related symptoms, and were less likely to be hospitalized than those who did not receive the shot. But vaccine protection wanes over time, so getting another dose will help prevent serious outcomes in the most vulnerable.

    Read More: Why It’s So Hard to Get Kids Vaccinated Against COVID-19

    “I was convinced by the data that there is significant protection with an additional dose at this time,” says Dr. Wilbur Chen, professor of medicine at the University of Maryland School of Medicine and a member of the committee. “This recommendation isn’t for the entire population, but for high-risk segments of the population. We are trying to improve their protection as much as possible and wanted to afford those over 65 years the opportunity to get a second dose.”

    One challenge to achieving that, however, is that uptake of the newest COVID-19 vaccine has been low. Though about 40% of seniors have gotten it so far—the highest rate out of any age group—it still means more than half of a very vulnerable group are not up to date. The low demand is fueling decreased access, says Chen, since more doctors’ offices are deciding not to provide the shot because their patients aren’t asking for it. Now that the government is no longer providing the vaccines for free, many people who are under- or uninsured are not getting immunized.

    Chen says the committee members hope that older adults and health care providers alike receive the strong message behind the recommendation and take it seriously. “As we enter the warmer months, while we usually see flu and RSV disappear, in previous summers we still saw 500 deaths a month,” he says. “That’s a lot of deaths, and we need to act on that.”

    [ad_2]

    Alice Park

    Source link

  • 9 Things Therapists Do When They Feel Lonely

    9 Things Therapists Do When They Feel Lonely

    [ad_1]

    True friendships can take years to develop—which isn’t exactly comforting to the 1 in 3 U.S. adults who say they are lonely right now. But you don’t need to wait for a new BFF to feel better. Small acts can help give you immediate relief from loneliness, experts say. We asked therapists what low-effort steps they take in their own lives when isolation starts to creep in.

    Join an easy group class

    When Courtney Morgan, a therapist in Louisville, Ky., wants to be around like-minded people without having to try too hard, she goes to a yoga class. “Sometimes I want to feel connected without actively engaging in a conversation,” she says. She tells her clients to seek out structured programming that they’re interested in, too.

    If want to try a group class—whether it’s fitness-related, educational, something artsy, or in a different realm entirely—Morgan recommends searching for options through social media, email newsletters, or your local library. During your first class, aim to appear approachable, she suggests. Resist the urge to look at your phone, make eye contact with people, smile, ask a stranger if you can sit next to them, and thank the instructor. All are small ways to feel better connected.

    Do a 5-minute loving-kindness meditation

    We’re not always kind to ourselves when we’re lonely. That’s part of the reason why Suzette Bray, a therapist in Burbank, Calif., does a quick loving-kindness meditation, a type of practice that originates from the Buddhist tradition, first thing in the morning. “The idea is that you’re going to set your intention to cultivate compassion and send loving wishes toward yourself and others,” she says.

    Close your eyes and repeat a few positive phrases—first toward yourself, and then toward others. For example: “May I be happy, may I be healthy, may I live with ease. May you be happy, may you be healthy, and may you live with ease.”

    “You’re sending those wishes to neutral individuals like the barista, or your neighbor, or the person you drove past sitting at a bus stop,” Bray says. “Then, the really cool part is you identify people you struggle with, and you send love to them, too. It really is a reminder of our connection to the world, and that we’re all part of the shared human condition.”

    Do what you used to love as a kid

    A friend once asked Allison Guilbault, a therapist in Morristown, N.J., where she found community as a child, before life got in the way of making time for personal pursuits. The answer: swimming and dancing. So Guilbault revisited those long-neglected interests. Swimming more has opened up new social circles of like-minded people, and so has taking a dance class at a local studio. “It’s been absolutely incredible,” she says. “I enter the doors and find immediate connection. I legitimately have friends there.”

    Flip through old photos 

    It’s so easy to forget fun, fulfilling times when you’re all alone. But looking at photos of favorite memories can help. “It immediately sparks joy,” says San Francisco therapist Erika Bent, who does this whenever she feels isolated. “Thinking of beautiful moments helps me remember that I’m worthy of connection.” It also helps “reignite the possibility” of feeling less alone, she says—which is sometimes the most powerful antidote to loneliness.

    Go people-watching

    When Samantha Bender, a social worker in El Paso, Texas, feels lonely, she heads to a local coffee shop where she can people-watch while sipping a saffron latte and reading the latest Stephen King novel. “Sometimes loneliness isn’t about our direct relationships,” she says, “but how we feel in relation to the world around us.” There’s so much going on in public spaces—new sounds, scents, and sights—that it grounds her in the present moment and distracts her from tinges of loneliness. “You can soak it all in and feel like you’re part of something without having to extend a lot of effort,” she says. “We don’t always have the mental energy and capacity to connect with others one-on-one.”

    Try something new

    Sometimes Bent gets stuck in the routine of heading straight home after work—but after many evenings doing the same thing, she starts to feel isolated. “Monotony makes me feel worse,” she says. In those moments, she takes out the to-do list where she logs new things she’d like to try: a bar to check out, a new salsa dancing spot, a hiking meet-up. Trying something new sparks a shift in her mood while fostering much-needed connection.

    The thought of going hiking with strangers, for example, had always made her anxious—but it stepping out of her comfort zone was “a beautiful way to meet people I otherwise wouldn’t have.” Even admiring new scenery helps her break out of a rut. And then there’s salsa dancing. The first time she went, it felt hard, and it was certainly a social risk: Dancers were paired with strangers. “But it was so much fun,” she says, and the experience made it almost impossible to feel lonely.

    Send a voice text

    Audrey Schoen, a marriage and family therapist in Granite Bay, Calif., loves communicating via voice message. When she meets someone new and exchanges contact info, she sends them an audio message instead of firing off a text. And when she feels lonely, she reaches out to friends in the same way—or replays old voice messages that she saved. “I love receiving voice messages, and I love sending them,” she says. “They feel so much more personal,” and are an especially fun way to keep in touch with friends who live far away.

    Connect with yourself

    If Bender is lonely but feels like staying home, she turns to creative hobbies like coloring, journaling, or reading. “They help me connect to myself,” she says. She particularly likes to do these activities while sitting next to her husband: no interaction necessary. Simply being in each other’s presence, she says, is healing, and helps squash any inkling of loneliness.

    Cuddle a pet

    Spending just 10 minutes interacting with cats and dogs reduces levels of the stress hormone cortisol—so it’s no wonder Guilbault seeks out her pups when she craves company. “I find it hard to feel lonely in the presence of animals,” she says. “There’s love there, and there’s loyalty there.”

    Plus, pets open the door to social opportunities. After Guilbault enrolled one of her dogs in agility classes, she met a number of acquaintances and made one good friend. She takes her pups on frequent hikes and inevitably sees other people on the trail—helpful on days when she feels lonely but not up to engaging in drawn-out conversations.

    Guilbault once advised a client who was having trouble finding connection to take her two poodles to a local park and position herself in a way that was “really open.” That meant not scrolling through her phone and instead looking around and smiling. “Dogs are an invitation,” Guilbault says. “She didn’t walk away from this with her new best friend, but she had a really pleasurable afternoon where she made small talk with people who came over and asked to pet her dog.” Sometimes, experts agree, those small moments can make the biggest difference in overcoming loneliness.

    [ad_2]

    Angela Haupt

    Source link

  • Why Measles Cases Are Rising Right Now

    Why Measles Cases Are Rising Right Now

    [ad_1]

    Last year, cases of measles—a serious, vaccine-preventable disease that’s highly contagious—jumped by 79% around the world. Most of them were in children. That trend is continuing this year, threatening to reverse an impressive 73% drop in measles deaths worldwide from 2000 to 2018.

    Cases in the U.S. are climbing, too. In just the first two months of 2024, 35 cases have already been reported in 15 states including California, Minnesota, Florida, New York, and Louisiana; in 2023, 58 cases were reported over the entire year.

    Why are measles cases taking off, and how can people protect themselves?

    Why measles cases are climbing

    Not enough kids are getting vaccinated. For herd immunity, about 95% or more of a population needs to be vaccinated, but most countries around the world have been below that threshold for years. By 2019, 86% of kids worldwide had been vaccinated with a dose by their second birthday, but that number dropped even further to 81% in 2021. (The measles vaccine is given in two doses: one at a year, the next at age 4-6.)

    Vaccination rates in the U.S. are declining, too, and vaccination exemption rates are creeping up. CDC data show that 93% of kindergarteners were vaccinated against measles during the 2021-22 school year

    Vaccinating more children is the best way to prevent new outbreaks. The vaccine, which has been around since the 1960s, is given as a combination shot that also includes protection against mumps and rubella. One dose is 93% effective against measles, and two doses are 97% effective. “The science really supports the safety and effectiveness of vaccinations,” says Dr. Katherine Baumgarten, medical director for infection control and prevention at Ochsner Health in New Orleans. However, “we know there is a lot of distrust in vaccines, and that’s a shame. If vaccination rates continue to decline, then we will see more of the diseases that we had hoped to completely eliminate.”

    How measles spreads

    Measles is one of the most contagious diseases on the planet. It spreads through the air, by infectious droplets, and on surfaces. “If a person has not been exposed or vaccinated, then they generally get infected if they are exposed 90% of the time,” Baumgarten says. Measles can cause a rash, high fevers, and even brain swelling and death.

    Cases pose a particular threat to people who can’t get vaccinated, such as babies less than a year old, people who have weakened immune systems due to medical conditions or transplant surgeries, and pregnant women—even if they’ve been vaccinated—since their immune systems are more susceptible while they are expecting. “If [people with measles] come to a doctor of hospital for care and are in a waiting room with other patients, they may expose other people,” Baumgarten says.

    Why fewer kids are getting vaccinated

    Growing vaccine-refusal is one reason. Another is COVID-19.

    Measles cases had started climbing in 2019, but they dropped significantly in 2020, when much of the world went into lockdown and adopted stricter public health prevention measures, such as wearing masks and practicing social distancing. Those behaviors make it harder for any virus, including measles, to spread. It’s also possible that following the surge in cases in 2019, more of the world’s children became immune because they had contracted the infection, and therefore fewer were susceptible to the disease.

    But lockdowns also interrupted kids’ vaccinations. As health resources shifted to controlling the pandemic, vaccination programs around the world were put on hold. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that 22 million children missed the first dose of their measles vaccine in 2022, most likely due to disruption caused by COVID-19.

    Many of those kids still aren’t immunized. Some countries have strict programs for vaccinating kids at specific ages, so if child misses their window, they may find it hard to get immunized later on. “We do have more susceptible children globally, so outbreaks could get bigger and more frequent,” says Dr. William Moss, executive director of the International Vaccine Access Center at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. “For an outbreak, you need two things: a susceptible pool of people, mostly children, and introduction of the virus.”

    Outbreaks tend to originate elsewhere—but experts are still worried

    There doesn’t seem to be a reservoir of virus endemic to the U.S. that’s seeding new cases. Most outbreaks in various states start when a person contracts measles during travel, then returns home.

    But that scenario is still concerning, especially for communities where measles vaccination coverage is lower due to growing anti-vaccine sentiment or religious reasons for avoiding immunizations. In those areas, a susceptible population plus introduction of the measles virus could spawn a cluster of cases, Moss says.

    [ad_2]

    Alice Park

    Source link

  • Here’s What Americans Think of Weight Loss Drugs

    Here’s What Americans Think of Weight Loss Drugs

    [ad_1]

    Not every major medical innovation breaks through to the general public. But the buzzy weight loss drugs for people with obesity or Type 2 diabetes certainly have.

    About 75% of Americans have heard of Ozempic, Wegovy and other brands of anti-obesity drugs, according to the results of a new Pew Research Center survey. (Wegovy and Zepbound are specifically approved to treat obesity, while Ozempic and Mounjaro are approved to treat people with Type 2 diabetes and can help them lose weight.)

    The survey included more than 10,000 people of different ages, genders, races, ethnicities, education levels and political affiliations who were randomly recruited to answer online questions about obesity and the new class of anti-obesity medications.

    Among those familiar with the drugs, 53% said they were good weight-loss options for people with obesity, while 28% were unsure—and 62% said they were not good options for people without a weight-related health condition. That last stat reflects the controversial, widely publicized trend of people without these conditions taking the drugs as a quick way to lose weight.

    Read More: More Weight Loss Drugs Are Coming, and They Could Be Even More Effective

    When asked what impact the drugs would have on reducing obesity in America, 35% thought they would do “not much” or “nothing at all,” and only 16% thought the medications would do “a great deal” or “quite a bit.” “Those expectations are fairly modest and could change, since these medications are still fairly new,” says Alec Tyson, associate director of science and society research at the Pew Research Center.

    But the survey shows that “the public has a nuanced take on the factors that influence weight,” Tyson says. Most survey respondents (57%) said diet affects a person’s weight “a great deal,” with exercise following as the next most important factor at 43%. Many (36%) said that stress and anxiety affected weight “a great deal,” and 22% said genetics did. Past research has found that all of these factors matter. An even larger percentage, 65%, acknowledged that willpower is not enough to lose weight and maintain a healthy weight.

    That’s where anti-obesity medications could play a role, says Tyson. “The survey suggests there is a fair amount of openness among Americans for this new group of drugs designed to address food cravings to address obesity and overweight in this country.”

    [ad_2]

    Alice Park

    Source link

  • An Asthma Drug Can Drastically Reduce Food Allergies

    An Asthma Drug Can Drastically Reduce Food Allergies

    [ad_1]

    About 20 million people in the U.S.—including four million children—have food allergies. Now, there’s a new way to reduce their risk of severe allergic reactions. A study published in the New England Journal of Medicine reports that the drug omalizumab, or Xolair, allows people with food allergies to tolerate higher doses of allergenic foods before developing a reaction after an accidental exposure. It also leads to milder reactions if they are exposed.

    The drug was originally approved more than two decades ago to treat allergic asthma. But because of this new study and other data, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration expanded the approval of Xolair on Feb. 16 to include treatment of food allergies in anyone one year or older. It’s now the first drug approved to treat allergies to multiple foods.

    Anabelle Terry, a 12-year old with severe peanut and tree nut allergies, experienced that benefit firsthand as a participant in the trial. While participating in the study, she ate half a cupcake while with friends that she thought was nut-free but had made been made with cashew flour. Within about an hour, her stomach and throat started to hurt and her lips tingled, so she thought she was having an allergic reaction and went home. Her mom gave her an antihistamine, which was enough to quell her symptoms. Before Xolair, if she ate even a tiny amount of peanuts or tree nuts, she would generally need a shot of epinephrine, which is an emergency treatment for an allergic reaction, and a visit to the doctor. “I did notice a difference—I didn’t react as badly as I thought I would have,” Terry says. “I only had half, but it was a big cupcake, and it was amazing to see that even though I accidentally ate some, I was okay.”

    Anabelle Terry, age 12Courtesy Photo

    Xolair does not cure food allergies, so people must continue to avoid allergy-causing foods by reading labels and asking how food is prepared. But people now “have another layer of protection in case of accidental exposure,” says Dr. Sharon Chinthraja, associate professor of medicine at Stanford University School of Medicine and co-lead of the study.

    How Xolair works to fight allergic reactions

    The drug works by mopping up something called immunoglobulin E (IgE) cells, which activate the immune cells responsible for inflammation and allergic reactions. “I think of the drug as a sponge that takes allergic antibodies out of circulation,” says Chinthraja. It was this mechanism that led to Xoalir’s original approval in 2003 for allergic asthma, since IgE cells play a role in that condition as well. “There were suggestions that the drug should work in food allergy too, but no study until this one demonstrated that to the level required by the FDA to add it to the label, says Dr. Robert Wood, director of pediatric allergy, immunology, and rheumatology at Johns Hopkins Children’s Center and the principal investigator of the study.” In fact, because of the way the drug blocks IgE, it “may be more applicable to food allergies because asthma has a lot of different triggers, but food allergies are pretty much an IgE-driven reaction.”

    What the new study shows

    The study included 177 children from ages 1 to 17 at 10 different sites in the U.S. The participants were randomly assigned to receive Xolair as an injection either every two weeks or every four weeks, depending on their body weight and levels of IgE (a proxy for how severe their food allergies are), or a placebo. All of the participants were allergic to peanuts and at least two other foods such as tree nuts (cashews, walnuts, and hazelnuts), milk, eggs, or wheat. After about four months of receiving the injections, the kids were given high levels of peanut or other food allergens—much higher than doses they might encounter by accidentally taking a bite of food containing them. Of those who took Xolair, 67% were able to tolerate the higher dose of peanut without a severe allergic reaction, compared to 7% of those getting placebo. The breakdown was similar for the other allergens.

    “Over half [of the participants] could eat a lot of the foods they were allergic to,” says Dr. Robert Wood, director of pediatric allergy, immunology, and rheumatology at Johns Hopkins Children’s Center and the principal investigator of the study. “More than 50% could eat the equivalent of 16 peanuts with no reaction.” Among the remaining half, about 15% experienced allergic reactions even at small doses of exposure, but all of the reactions were milder among the Xolair group than the placebo group. It’s not clear how long the drug blocks IgE activity, but doctors anticipate that people will have to continue getting the shots to lower their risk of severe reactions.

    How to use Xolair for food allergies

    For Anabelle, the drug provides a sense of security. “I’ll be able to try new things and do some things that I wasn’t able to before,” she says. “I love traveling even more now because I don’t always have to worried about whether a new food is safe. I’m still cautious, but more free to experience things.”

    Xolair isn’t an emergency treatment. It’s designed to be a maintenance therapy that keeps the immune system in check for as long as people take the medication, so that if someone is accidentally exposed to an allergy-causing food, their reaction will be dampened and not life-threatening. The first few doses might be given at the doctor’s office to make sure people don’t have adverse reactions to the shot, but parents give subsequent doses to children at home. Adults can also give the shots to themselves.

    To work, a person has to keep taking the shots. That can get expensive: A spokesperson for Genentech, which makes the drug, says the injections for food allergies will cost the same as those for asthma, which amounts to $2,900 for children and $5,000 for adults each month. It’s not clear yet whether insurers will cover Xolair for treating food allergies, but many do cover the drug for asthma. For the uninsured, Genentech offers a patient assistance program.

    Anabelle’s parents are still discussing with their allergist how Xolair might fit into her life. Anabelle completed the trial in 2022 and has not taken the drug for two years. “I would be willing to go back on it,” she says. “Maybe with more treatment, it could become even less severe and make me less stressed about food.”

    [ad_2]

    Alice Park

    Source link

  • Can AI Stop Suicide?

    Can AI Stop Suicide?

    [ad_1]

    “We stumbled upon your post…and it looks like you are going through some challenging times,” the message begins. “We are here to share with you materials and resources that might bring you some comfort.” Links to suicide help lines, a 24/7 chat service, and stories of people who overcame mental-health crises follow. “Sending you a virtual hug,” the message concludes.

    This note, sent as a private message on Reddit by the artificial-intelligence (AI) company Samurai Labs, represents what some researchers say is a promising tool to fight the suicide epidemic in the U.S., which claims almost 50,000 lives a year. Companies like Samurai are using AI to analyze social media posts for signs of suicidal intent, then intervene through strategies like the direct message.

    There is a certain irony to harnessing social media for suicide prevention, since it’s often blamed for the mental-health and suicide crisis in the U.S., particularly among children and teenagers. But some researchers believe there is real promise in going straight to the source to “detect those in distress in real-time and break through millions of pieces of content,” says Samurai co-founder Patrycja Tempska.

    Samurai is not the only company using AI to find and reach at-risk people. The company Sentinet says its AI model each day flags more than 400 social media posts that imply suicidal intent. And Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, uses its technology to flag posts or browsing behaviors that suggest someone is thinking about suicide. If someone shares or searches for suicide-related content, the platform pushes through a message with information about how to reach support services like the Suicide and Crisis Lifeline—or, if Meta’s team deems it necessary, emergency responders are called in.

    Underpinning these efforts is the idea that algorithms may be able to do something that has traditionally stumped humans: determine who is at risk of self-harm so they can get help before it’s too late. But some experts say this approach—while promising—isn’t ready for primetime.

    “We’re very grateful that suicide prevention has come into the consciousness of society in general. That’s really important,” says Dr. Christine Moutier, chief medical officer at the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (AFSP). “But a lot of tools have been put out there without studying the actual results.”


    Predicting who is likely to attempt suicide is difficult even for the most highly trained human experts, says Dr. Jordan Smoller, co-director of Mass General Brigham and Harvard University’s Center for Suicide Research and Prevention. There are risk factors that clinicians know to look for in their patients—certain psychiatric diagnoses, going through a traumatic event, losing a loved one to suicide—but suicide is “very complex and heterogeneous,” Smoller says. “There’s a lot of variability in what leads up to self-harm,” and there’s almost never a single trigger.

    The hope is that AI, with its ability to sift through massive amounts of data, could pick up on trends in speech and writing that humans would never notice, Smoller says. And there is science to back up that hope.

    More than a decade ago, John Pestian, director of the Computational Medicine Center at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital, demonstrated that machine-learning algorithms can distinguish between real and fake suicide notes with better accuracy than human clinicians—a finding that highlighted AI’s potential to pick up on suicidal intent in text. Since then, studies have also shown that AI can pick up on suicidal intent in social-media posts across various platforms.

    Companies like Samurai Labs are putting those findings to the test. From January to November 2023, Samurai’s model detected more than 25,000 potentially suicidal posts on Reddit, according to company data shared with TIME. Then a human supervising the process decides whether the user should be messaged with instructions about how to get help. About 10% of people who received these messages contacted a suicide helpline, and the company’s representatives worked with first responders to complete four in-person rescues. (Samurai does not have an official partnership with Reddit, but rather uses its technology to independently analyze posts on the platform. Reddit employs other suicide-prevention features, such as one that lets users manually report worrisome posts.)

    Co-founder Michal Wroczynski adds that Samurai’s intervention may have had additional benefits that are harder to track. Some people may have called a helpline later, for example, or simply benefitted from feeling like someone cares about them. “This brought tears to my eyes,” wrote one person in a message shared with TIME. “Someone cares enough to worry about me?”

    When someone is in an acute mental-health crisis, a distraction—like reading a message popping up on their screen—can be lifesaving, because it snaps them out of a harmful thought loop, Moutier says. But, Pestian says, it’s crucial for companies to know what AI can and can’t do in a moment of distress.

    Services that connect social media users with human support can be effective, Pestian says. “If you had a friend, they might say, ‘Let me drive you to the hospital,’” he says. “The AI could be the car that drives the person to care.” What’s riskier, in his opinion, is “let[ting] the AI do the care” by training it to duplicate aspects of therapy, as some AI chatbots do. A man in Belgium reportedly died by suicide after talking to a chatbot that encouraged him—one tragic example of technology’s limitations.

    It’s also not clear whether algorithms are sophisticated enough to pick out people at risk of suicide with precision, when even the humans who created the models don’t have that ability, Smoller says. “The models are only as good as the data on which they are trained,” he says. “That creates a lot of technical issues.”

    As it stands, algorithms may cast too wide a net, which introduces the possibility of people becoming immune to their warning messages, says Jill Harkavy-Friedman, senior vice president of research at AFSP. “If it’s too frequent, you could be turning people off to listening,” she says.

    That’s a real possibility, Pestian agrees. But as long as there’s not a huge number of false positives, he says he’s generally more concerned about false negatives. “It’s better to say, ‘I’m sorry, I [flagged you as at-risk when you weren’t] than to say to a parent, ‘I’m sorry, your child has died by suicide, and we missed it,’” Pestian says.

    In addition to potential inaccuracy, there are also ethical and privacy issues at play. Social-media users may not know that their posts are being analyzed or want them to be, Smoller says. That may be particularly relevant for members of communities known to be at increased risk of suicide, including LGBTQ+ youth, who are disproportionately flagged by these AI surveillance systems, as a team of researchers recently wrote for TIME.

    And, the possibility that suicide concerns could be escalated to police or other emergency personnel means users “may be detained, searched, hospitalized, and treated against their will,” health-law expert Mason Marks wrote in 2019.

    Moutier, from the AFSP, says there’s enough promise in AI for suicide prevention to keep studying it. But in the meantime, she says she’d like to see social media platforms get serious about protecting users’ mental health before it gets to a crisis point. Platforms could do more to prevent people from being exposed to disturbing images, developing poor body image, and comparing themselves to others, she says. They could also promote hopeful stories from people who have recovered from mental-health crises and support resources for people who are (or have a loved one who is) struggling, she adds.

    Some of that work is underway. Meta removed or added warnings to more than 12 million self-harm-related posts from July to September of last year and hides harmful search results. TikTok has also taken steps to ban posts that depict or glorify suicide and to block users who search for self-harm-related posts from seeing them. But, as a recent Senate hearing with the CEOs of Meta, TikTok, X, Snap, and Discord revealed, there is still plenty of disturbing content on the internet.

    Algorithms that intervene when they detect someone in distress focus “on the most downstream moment of acute risk,” Moutier says. “In suicide prevention, that’s a part of it, but that’s not the whole of it.” In an ideal world, no one would get to that moment at all.

    If you or someone you know may be experiencing a mental-health crisis or contemplating suicide, call or text 988. In emergencies, call 911, or seek care from a local hospital or mental health provider.

    [ad_2]

    Jamie Ducharme

    Source link

  • This Is the Best Time to Get a Flu Shot

    This Is the Best Time to Get a Flu Shot

    [ad_1]

    Getting the flu shot any time during respiratory virus season is better than not getting it at all. But vaccine protection wanes, so timing the shot properly can help antibodies peak when cases are highest.

    Researchers wanted to figure out the optimal time for getting a flu shot, and took advantage of the fact that children tend to get vaccinated in the month they were born. In a study published in BMJ, they analyzed health insurance data from more than 800,000 children, ages 2-5, who got a flu shot from 2011 to 2018. The data showed that kids vaccinated in October had the strongest protection—they were about 12% less likely to get the flu compared to kids vaccinated in August.

    “It makes sense that October is the ideal time to get vaccinated,” says the study’s senior author Dr. Anupam Jena, professor of health care policy at Harvard Medical School and professor of medicine at Massachusetts General Hospital. Get vaccinated in August or September, and immunity might wane too soon; get the shot in December or January, and immunity might not have time to build up before the December or January peak, he says. October seems to be the sweet spot. “These findings provide a data-driven way to show that’s true.”

    Read More: Why It’s So Hard to Get Kids Vaccinated Against COVID-19

    Pediatricians could put this finding into practice by discussing optimal timing of the shot and “doubling down on October appointments,” says Jena. “To the extent that they can more forcibly advocate that October is the optimal time for kids to get vaccinated, we might see parents moving to get shots in that month.”

    Other strategies may include focusing on school-based vaccination programs. “For things like flu vaccines, convenience is a really big deal, and making them more available in school would solve the problem of many kids not getting vaccinated in the first place, as well as facilitating optimal timing,” says Jena.

    Getting the flu shot in October could also be important in helping children with weakened immune systems get the best protection possible against severe illness and hospitalization. “If you are at risk of having flu-related complications, optimal timing of the shot may matter even more,” says Jena. “For those kids, they get a larger bang for their buck if they are vaccinated in October.”

    Since the study only involved children, it’s not clear if the same effect will hold for adults. But since children are among the most efficient spreaders of the flu, making sure kids are protected could also lead to fewer cases among adults, Jena says. “If kids are going to get vaccinated, you might as well optimize the time at which they get the shot.”

    [ad_2]

    Alice Park

    Source link

  • How to Get 4.5 Million Americans to Quit Smoking

    How to Get 4.5 Million Americans to Quit Smoking

    [ad_1]

    You wouldn’t think it would be easy to get nearly 4.5 million Americans—the equivalent of the entire state of Louisiana or Kentucky—to give up smoking. But it can be done in a single, straightforward step: prohibiting the sale of menthol cigarettes. That’s the conclusion of a new study in the journal Nicotine & Tobacco Research.

    The study is one more piece of evidence in favor of a nationwide menthol ban, the authors say. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) proposed just such a ban in 2022, but in Dec. 2023, the Biden Administration postponed implementation following intense lobbying by tobacco company lobbyists and convenience store owners, who complained that the action could cost untold jobs and billions of dollars in sales.

    “The FDA has done its work,” says Sarah Mills, the paper’s lead author and an assistant professor in the department of health behavior at the University of North Carolina’s Gillings School of Public Health. “The White House has decided to put off their decision, which simply delayed what could be an important step in promoting public health.” 

    Medical experts have long argued that menthol cigarettes are a particularly pernicious form of tobacco. The flavoring cools the smoke, encouraging users to consume more, and nonsmokers—typically young people—to pick up the habit.

    “When added to cigarettes, menthol sweetens the poison of nicotine, making it easier to start smoking and harder to quit,” says Mills. What’s more, the chemical stimulates the activity of so-called nicotinic receptors in the brain, increasing the addictive power of nicotine. 

    Read More: What the Science Says About Menthol Cigarette Bans

    Black Americans are especially likely to smoke menthols. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 42 million U.S. adults reported using any tobacco product last year. Of those, 18.5 million consume menthol. That represents just 34% of white smokers—but 81% of Black smokers. “A menthol cigarette ban would provide the greatest benefits to Black people who smoke,” said Mills in a statement that accompanied the release of the paper.

    The investigators conducted a meta-analysis of 78 previously published studies, principally of populations in the U.S., as well as in Canada and the European Union, both of which have imposed nationwide or continent-wide bans. In the U.S., only two states—Massachusetts and California—prohibit the sale of menthol cigarettes, imposing bans in 2020 and 2022 respectively. An additional 170 cities—including Chicago; Aspen, Colorado; Bangor, Maine; and Duluth, Minnesota—have banned menthols as well.

    The most important part of what the authors of the new paper learned concerns the share of menthol smokers who would quit entirely if their preferred product was no longer available. Based on the collective findings of the 78 papers—and what happened in places where menthols were banned—the researchers estimated that 50% of menthol smokers would switch to a non-menthol brand and 24% would continue smoking menthol cigarettes—either buying them online or crossing state or national boundaries to purchase the products where they are still legal. A remaining 24% of menthol smokers would simply give up cigarettes.

    If the FDA’s proposed ban were rolled out nationwide, the 24% quit rate would mean 4.44 million American ex-smokers.

    The data also provide a granular look at the effects of menthol bans.  Up to 65% of menthol smokers, when asked, said that a ban would get them off cigarettes for good—or 2.7 times the share who actually did quit, a possible sign of how addictive mentholated tobacco is. Switching to a non-menthol brand actually had some salutary effects, with users reporting, on average, that they smoked 2.2 fewer cigarettes a day and experienced fewer nicotine cravings.

    Menthol bans are not always comprehensive, and in some cities and countries, menthol e-cigarettes are still available. A study in Massachusetts found that 7% of menthol smokers had switched to menthol e-cigarettes six months after the statewide ban was imposed. In Canada, the number was much higher—29% within just one month of the ban. This could be due to the greater difficulty of traveling out of the country to buy menthol cigarettes as opposed to the ease of crossing a state line. “Compared to a national ban,” says Mills, “individuals under a state or city ban can readily visit places nearby that sell the product.”

    Retailers and cigarette manufacturers are not going down without a fight, and their resistance to bans goes beyond lobbying. In the U.S., manufacturers have mounted a public relations campaign, sending mailers to homes, holding community meetings, and arguing that a ban would discriminate against Black Americans. In the European Union, tobacco makers have introduced menthol capsules that can be inserted into cigarettes and cigarillos. Brazilian cigarette makers have gone to court to litigate against bans. Canadian companies have relied more on marketing, conspicuously labeling cigarette packs with the words “smooth taste without menthol.”

    American retailers have been uneven in obeying bans, with compliance ranging from as low as 17% in shops in San Francisco to 100% in some in Minnesota, according to studies the authors cite that took place in those and other cities from 2019 to 2022. Retailers acquire their forbidden menthol products the same way individual consumers do: shopping online or importing from across state or city lines. In a few localities that have partial bans—prohibiting menthol sales only to young people—some retailers have managed a workaround, establishing an enclosed, adults-only space within their stores where menthol products are sold.

    The prospects for the FDA’s proposed U.S. ban remain uncertain, with some commentators speculating that President Biden will wait until after the November election before allowing the prohibition to go through, fearing a backlash from Black voters. “This is ultimately coming down to a political decision by the president and his senior advisers,” Erika Sward, assistant vice president at the American Lung Association, told The Hill.

    Whatever the reason for the ban’s delay, Mills and her colleagues maintain that the time to act is now. Every year, more than 480,000 Americans die of smoking-related causes, according to the CDC. “Menthol bans,” the authors write in their paper, “promote smoking cessation.”

    [ad_2]

    Jeffrey Kluger

    Source link

  • 7 Low-Stress Ways to Start Decluttering

    7 Low-Stress Ways to Start Decluttering

    [ad_1]

    None of the tidying clichés ever really clicked with KC Davis, a therapist in Houston and mom to two young kids. “I’ve always been a messy person,” she says. “I’ve never been able to ‘clean as I go.’” Davis knew there were plenty of people just like her: those who wanted a serene space but lacked the time and energy to get started. After finding bite-size strategies that worked for her, Davis wrote How to Keep House While Drowning: A Gentle Approach to Cleaning and Organizing.

    A messy house can feel overwhelming to tackle, and progress may seem incremental at first. But there’s good reason to work on building a healthier relationship with your home. Research suggests that clutter increases levels of the stress hormone cortisol, and that cleanliness is associated with better self-rated health. Other studies have found that being surrounded by lots of excess stuff contributes to procrastination, diminishes focus, and leads to decreased life satisfaction.

    We asked Davis and other experts to share their favorite strategies to kickstart a realistic decluttering routine.

    Tackle one category at a time.

    One day, Davis looked at her messy room and realized that every item could be sorted into one of five categories: trash, dishes, laundry, items that have a place (like books that belong on the shelf), and odds and ends that don’t. She started cleaning up by category (and then found a home for her random objects). “I would get a trash bag and pick up all my trash, and then I’d get my laundry basket and pick up all my laundry,” she says. “It provided a really simple roadmap for my brain.”

    Edit your wardrobe automatically.

    Every New Year’s Eve, Matt Paxton turns all the hangers in his closet around so they’re hanging backward on the rod. “When you wear the item, you turn the hanger the other way,” says the host of the PBS show Legacy List with Matt Paxton—which helps people unearth hidden treasures in their homes—and author of Keep the Memories, Lose the Stuff. The hanger trick gives Paxton visual proof of what he actually wore that year and which clothes languished in the closet. “You can’t argue with it,” he says, even if he did love that pink shirt he never got around to wearing. Anything he didn’t wear, he donates. If a year feels too long, test out the exercise for three or six months, and then make a trip to the donation center or consignment shop.

    Another way to thin out your wardrobe, Paxton suggests, is to host a fashion show—wearing whatever your kids or grandkids select from your closet. “If you can’t put it on or if it doesn’t fit, there’s your answer,” he says. “Everyone will laugh.”

    Change your environment.

    Instead of dwelling on how to fix your own messy habits, consider adjusting your environment. Davis isn’t good about taking the trash out every day, so she got a bigger trash can that takes longer to fill up. She even wheels it from room to room when she cleans up. To address another pain point—piles of dirty clothes—she put a laundry basket in every room. “I want to be able to put away trash and laundry with four steps no matter where I am in my house,” she says. “That cut down a lot on how messy I was.”

    Scan your stuff.

    One of the most frequent questions people ask Paxton is what to do with all their old photos. First, he advises, get rid of the negatives, any duplicates, generic landscape shots, and pictures of people you don’t know or don’t like. Then, digitize the remaining, more manageable pile by scanning copies with your computer or phone. The free app Google PhotoScan, for example, allows users to scan photos with their smartphone, saving them in their cloud-based photo library.

    Another app, Artifcts, help preserve memories through a combination of images, audio, video, and text. If your grandmother has a lot of vintage jewelry, you could take a picture of each ring or necklace and record her telling a story about its significance. “Now you’ve got her words, her voice, her story, and it’s forever,” he says—yet the objects cluttering up the closet can go.

    Paxton also uses Artifcts to digitize his seven kids’ artwork. Every Friday before dinner, he spends five minutes taking a photo of their latest creation and then records them talking about their work. Each kid chooses one piece of art to keep per year, and the rest live on in digital form.

    Make donating part of your routine.

    When Paxton starts helping a new family clean their house, he asks where they want to donate belongings they no longer need that might be valuable to someone else. There are lots of options, depending where you live and what causes you support: Dress for Success provides used professional attire to low-income women; One Warm Coat provides free coats to people in need; and Soles4Souls distributes footwear to people with limited resources, for example.

    If you’re donating to a local thrift store, like Goodwill or the Salvation Army, get in the habit of keeping a donation box in the trunk of your car. Otherwise, the pile might sit in your house for weeks. Then, once a week, swing by the donation center. Doing so “has become a normal Saturday for me,” Paxton says.

    Gamify the purge.

    It can be hard to get the kids to pitch in as good citizens of the house. That’s why Deborah Gilman, a psychologist based in Pittsburgh, coaches her clients on ways to make cleaning up fun. You could play what she calls the “20-things game”—setting a timer for 20 minutes and challenging each member of the family to find 20 items to donate, sell, or throw away. “I tell people to do this a couple times a year, like when the seasons are changing,” she says. Make it a race to see who collects their items first; the prize could be choosing what movie to watch together that night.

    Another idea, she says, is to launch a room redesign challenge. Each family member gets to choose one room or area they want to revamp—but first, everyone spends time decluttering the space together. “It gets everybody involved and excited to clear out unnecessary items to make way for the new,” she says.

    Look for the stories.

    Many people struggle to declutter because they don’t want to part with items that remind them of someone or something they love, Paxton says. A simple mindset shift can make a big difference: Think of getting rid of stuff as a way of unearthing your family’s history. Ask each person to choose five items from your house that mean a lot to them—maybe a set of dishes from their wedding, a 50-year-old ball gown, or an antique typewriter. Then, have them tell a story explaining why they treasure each one so much. Record it, if you can, as a way of preserving their past for the future. The exercise usually proves liberating, Paxton says. “If you tell the stories, then you can let go of the items.”

    [ad_2]

    Angela Haupt

    Source link

  • AI Writes Scientific Papers That Sound Great—But Aren’t Accurate

    AI Writes Scientific Papers That Sound Great—But Aren’t Accurate

    [ad_1]

    First came the students, who wanted help with their homework and essays. Now, ChatGPT is luring scientists, who are under pressure to publish papers in reputable scientific journals.

    AI is already disrupting the archaic world of scientific publishing. When Melissa Kacena, vice chair of orthopaedic surgery at Indiana University School of Medicine, reviews articles submitted for publication in journals, she now knows to look out for ones that might have been written by the AI program. “I have a rule of thumb now that if I pull up 10 random references cited in the paper, and if more than one isn’t accurate, then I reject the paper,” she says.

    But despite the pitfalls, there is also promise. Writing review articles, for example, is a task well suited to AI: it involves sifting through the existing research on a subject, analyzing the results, reaching a conclusion about the state of the science on the topic, and providing some new insight. ChatGPT can do all of those things well.

    Kacena decided to see who is better at writing review articles: people or ChatGPT. For her study published in Current Osteoporosis Reports, she sorted nine students and the AI program into three groups and asked each group to write a review article on a different topic. For one group, she asked the students to write review articles on the topics; for another, she instructed ChatGPT to write articles on the same topics; and for the last group, she gave each of the students their own ChatGPT account and told them to work together with the AI program to write articles. That allowed her to compare articles written by people, by AI, and a combination of people and AI. She asked faculty member colleagues and the students to fact check each of the articles, and compared the three types of articles on measures like accuracy, ease of reading, and use of appropriate language.

    Read More: To Make a Real Difference in Health Care, AI Will Need to Learn Like We Do

    The results were eye-opening. The articles written by ChatGPT were easy to read and were even better written than the students’. But up to 70% of the cited references were inaccurate: they were either incoherently merged from several different studies or completely fictitious. The AI versions were also more likely to be plagiarized.

    “ChatGPT was pretty convincing with some of the phony statements it made, to be honest,” says Kacena. “It used the proper syntax and integrated them with proper statements in a paragraph, so sometimes there were no warning bells. It was only because the faculty members had a good understanding of the data, or because the students fact checked everything, that they were detected.”

    There were some advantages to the AI-generated articles. The algorithm was faster and more efficient in processing all the required data, and in general, ChatGPT used better grammar than the students. But it couldn’t always read the room: AI tended to use more flowery language that wasn’t always appropriate for scientific journals (unless the students had told ChatGPT to write it from the perspective of a graduate-level science student.)

    Read More: The 100 Most Influential People in AI

    That reflects a truth about the use of AI: it’s only as good as the information it receives. While ChatGPT isn’t quite ready to author scientific journal articles, with the proper programming and training, it could improve and become a useful tool for researchers. “Right now it’s not great by itself, but it can be made to work,” says Kacena. For example, if queried, the algorithm was good at recommending ways to summarize data in figures and graphical depictions. “The advice it gave on those were spot on, and exactly what I would have done,” she says.

    The more feedback the students provided on ChatGPT’s work, the better it learned—and that represents its greatest promise. In the study, some students found that when they worked together with ChatGPT to write the article, the program continued to improve and provide better results if they told it what things it was doing right, and what was less helpful. That means that addressing problems like questionable references and plagiarism could potentially be fixed. ChatGPT could be programmed, for example, to not merge references and to treat each scientific journal article as its own separate reference, and to limit copying consecutive words to avoid plagiarism.

    With more input and some fixes, Kacena believes that AI could help researchers smooth out the writing process and even gain scientific insights. “I think ChatGPT is here to stay, and figuring out how to make it better, and how to use it in an ethical and conscientious and scientifically sound manner, is going to be really important,” she says.

    [ad_2]

    Alice Park

    Source link

  • To Live Longer, Women Need Half as Much Exercise as Men

    To Live Longer, Women Need Half as Much Exercise as Men

    [ad_1]

    Women need to exercise only half as much as men to reap the same longevity benefits, according to a new study published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

    That’s good news for women who struggle to motivate themselves to hit the gym, says study co-author Dr. Martha Gulati, director of preventive cardiology at Cedars-Sinai in Los Angeles. “For me, the news to women is: a little goes a long way,” Gulati says.

    In the study, men who got about 300 minutes of aerobic exercise every week had an 18% lower risk of dying compared to inactive men, the researchers found. But among women, it took only 140 minutes of weekly exercise to see an equivalent benefit—and the risk of death was 24% lower among those who got about 300 minutes of movement per week. (For both sexes, longevity benefits seemed to plateau beyond 300 minutes of weekly exercise.)

    The researchers ran a similar analysis on muscle-strengthening exercise, such as weight training. They found the same pattern: for women, a single weekly strength-training session was associated with just as much longevity benefit as three weekly workouts for men.

    Women tend to have less muscle mass than men, Gulati explains, so “if they do the same amount of strengthening exercises, they may have greater benefits with smaller doses just based on the fact that they don’t have as much to begin with.” Other sex-based physiological differences, like differences in the lungs and cardiopulmonary system, may also come into play.

    Read More: Your Brain Doesn’t Want You to Exercise

    To reach their findings, Gulati and her colleagues analyzed self-reported exercise habits from more than 400,000 U.S. adults who took the National Health Interview Survey from 1997 to 2017, then compared those data with death records. About 40,000 of the participants died during the study period.

    That observational approach—meaning the researchers looked for patterns in preexisting data—can’t prove cause and effect. It’s possible that exercise didn’t cause people to live longer, but rather that active people in the study were healthier overall or had other lifestyle habits that boosted longevity. The researchers tried to control for those possibilities by excluding people who had serious preexisting conditions or mobility constraints, or who died in the first two years of study follow-up, and thus may have been unhealthy from the beginning.

    The study was also limited by its reliance on self-reported exercise data, which isn’t always accurate. The survey also asked about exercise people did in their free time, and thus may not have accounted for physical activity that occurred at work or during household chores—a type of movement that research increasingly suggests can meaningfully improve health.

    In part because of those limitations, Gulati says more research is required to confirm the findings. But, she says, the study—and others that have reached similar conclusions—offers a clear signal that “women are not just small men” and that sex-based differences must be incorporated into research and public-health policy. “For years, we’ve used men as the standard,” Gulati says, even when it may not have been accurate to do so.

    Take the federal guidelines for physical activity, which issue the same blanket recommendation for U.S. adults: at least 150 minutes of moderate aerobic exercise (or 75 minutes of vigorous cardio) and two muscle-strengthening sessions each week. In 2020, about 28% of U.S. men hit both benchmarks, compared to 20% of U.S. women, data show.

    Gulati’s research, at least, suggests women may see significant longevity benefits even if they don’t quite meet those targets. But she says the study shouldn’t be discouraging for men, either.
    The latest research suggests people of both sexes benefit from even very short chunks of activity, as just a few minutes of movement per day can boost longevity.

    “Our pitch should be the same to men and women: something is better than nothing,” Gulati says. “Sit less and move more.”

    [ad_2]

    Jamie Ducharme

    Source link

  • Why Bathroom Access Is a Public Health Issue

    Why Bathroom Access Is a Public Health Issue

    [ad_1]

    It’s not unusual to fast before a medical test to avoid skewing the results. But Dr. Zoë Gottlieb’s patients often skip meals for a different reason.

    Gottlieb, a gastroenterologist and assistant professor of medicine at Mount Sinai’s Icahn School of Medicine in New York City, specializes in treating inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), an umbrella term for conditions involving chronic inflammation of the gastrointestinal tract, specifically Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis. People with IBD have “unreliable bowel habits,” meaning they may need to use the bathroom frequently or urgently, Gottlieb says. So when a patient doesn’t eat before their appointment, it can be a sign that they’re afraid they’ll be caught without a restroom when they need one, she says.

    That fear is warranted in the U.S., where there are just eight public toilets per 100,000 residents, according to a 2021 report from bathroom-supply company QS Supplies. That’s a public-health issue that acutely affects IBD patients but spares no one, says Michael Osso, CEO of the Crohn’s & Colitis Foundation.

    “Everyone needs bathrooms,” Osso says. “And, frankly, it feels fundamentally wrong that we can’t support people in our community when they leave their homes by meeting this obviously critical need.” 

    The issue is serious enough that some people with IBD choose to stay home rather than risk ending up in a place with unreliable bathroom access, studies show. One 2012 review of previous research on IBD found that patients frequently reported a fear of incontinence that often led them to pull back from their work, social lives, or hobbies. “Actual episodes [of incontinence] were rare,” the authors wrote, “but the fear remained constant.”

    That fear, and the lifestyle changes it prompts, can lead to or exacerbate feelings of isolation, loneliness, and depression, Osso says, which kicks off a vicious cycle. Mental-health issues can worsen IBD symptoms, since the gut and brain are closely connected, studies suggest. Some research even suggests IBD patients who are socially isolated are at an increased risk of premature death.

    “A huge part of being able to heal,” Gottlieb says, “is having both their physical and mental health appropriately addressed.” 

    But it’s not only people with IBD who suffer when there’s not a restroom in sight. People with a range of chronic conditions, as well as pregnant people, parents of young children, and elderly adults, may need bathrooms frequently or with little warning. (People with mobility issues or disabilities are at a particular disadvantage in their hunt for a usable toilet, as many public bathrooms aren’t designed with their needs in mind.) Unhoused people and those whose jobs require them to be out and about all day—like delivery and taxi drivers—often rely on public facilities. And no one, regardless of job or health status, is immune from the occasional urgent situation, as Theodora “Teddy” Siegel learned when a 2021 shopping trip turned into a frantic search for a bathroom.

    Siegel averted disaster only after buying a bottle of water so she could use the bathroom at a McDonald’s in New York City’s Times Square. Shaken by the experience, Siegel began posting on social media about where to find restrooms around New York City. Her audience grew almost immediately, and followers began to submit their own bathroom hacks. Those crowdsourced submissions now live on a giant map, which Siegel says Google representatives told her is its most frequently used map in the world—an impressive feat, but one that also speaks to how difficult it is to locate a bathroom without insider knowledge or the disposable income to buy something from a shop with a customers-only restroom.

    The U.S’ poor public-restroom infrastructure is a multi-pronged issue. As Bloomberg has reported, the reasons for it range from chronic under-funding (public facilities are costly to build and maintain) to discrimination (during the Jim Crow era, some cities refused to build “separate but equal” facilities). In the present day, some city officials are also hesitant to build bathroom complexes because they tend to become hubs for drug use and sex work, the New York Times adds.

    But there is also research to show that public health and well-being improves when high-quality restrooms are available—not only by improving access for people who need to go, but also by cutting down on health hazards like public defecation and urination.

    Some states have passed legislation meant to ensure that people with certain chronic conditions, including IBD, can use businesses’ employee-only bathrooms when necessary. But these laws often don’t work as well as intended because of lacking compliance and awareness, prompting the Crohns & Colitis Foundation to start its Open Restrooms Movement. The initiative calls on businesses to let the public use their facilities, and to publicize that stance by joining the listings on the Foundation’s We Can’t Wait app. “There is an opportunity for [businesses] to promote inclusivity within their community and be a good partner to the citizens around them,” Osso says.

    Siegel became an accidental bathroom influencer by sharing tips about businesses with clean, accessible bathrooms. (Department stores, bookstores, and grocery stores are usually safe bets, as are churches, she says.) But she also feels it’s “unfair” for the entire burden to fall on private establishments, rather than local governments. It’s a “failure,” she says, that New York City has only about 1,000 public toilets to serve a population of more than 8 million, and she has advocated for local legislation that would identify New York City neighborhoods in need of more public facilities and boost the overall number of bathrooms available. Advocates in cities including Portland, Ore., Washington, D.C., and Cincinnati, Ohio, are pushing for similar outcomes.

    “Bathroom access is a basic human right. It shouldn’t be a privilege,” Siegel says. “I hope that this is something we all look back on one day and are horrified by.”

    [ad_2]

    Jamie Ducharme

    Source link