commentopia

JANUARY 25, 2010 -- JANUARY 31, 2010

FISH OIL MAY SLOW GENETIC AGING IN HEART PATIENTS

I am so glad this story has finally come to light. I have a 95 year old great aunt that has been taking fish oil since she was a child. She is so agile, the woman could run a marathon. She has no arthritis, no joint problems, no memory problems, nothing is basically wrong with her. She eats what she wants, does what she wants, though she doesn’t drive anymore, she climbs flights of stairs in her house like she has wings. I have a hard time getting up her steep stairs.

She used hate when people told her age, now when she walks through Costco and she makes it known that she’s 95 years old. I remember a story she told me of how a doctor told her about 30 years ago that she needed to change her diet, for her not to eat eggs or sausage. Sorry to say the doctor is dead and she is still living. Her secret, FISH OIL and a few other necessities during the day. You go girl!

Read the article ABC NEWS/Fish oil, Omega 3, may slow genetic aging in heart patients

<>

I had a triple bypass and found that I had a very high level of cholesterol in 1991. Medications and diet did not seem to help. I could drink water and the levels would go up. A couple of years ago, I heard about the benefits of fish oil and started taking it on a regular/daily basis.

Since then, my cholesterol levels are very low, I have tons of energy and have started a gym workout program where I exercise 2 hrs, 3 times per week. One hour of 3mph 3% incline on the treadmill and one hour with strength training. Not bad for a 73 year old man. The only thing to which can attribute my good health, is the fish oil! I really don't think my metabolism changed that much and that quickly.

Read the article ABC NEWS/Fish oil, Omega 3, may slow genetic aging in heart patients

MANY APPENDECTOMIES MAY NOT BE NEEDED

For the readers who are commenting that this timing seems to coincide with this administration's health care reform... from my experience in medical research, you couldn't be more wrong. As a nurse who's held several positions in medical research, published studies usually start collecting data and forming hypotheses at least a few years in advance of publishing any findings.

This particular article states that the empirical data in this study was taken from 1970 to 2006; the physicians most likely began compiling data for this study even before the end of 2006 due to a trend they saw occurring. The work had to be completed and data compiled before the current administration took office and the current healthcare debates were a gleam in anyone's eye. Having typed these papers myself, I can tell you that drafts of the paper take months to write - they go back and forth between authors, data is corrected, wording is adjusted, and drafts and drafts are written as the physicians try to clarify their findings and put forth the best journal article they feel they can. The work is most likely submitted several months prior to actual publication, and is often web-published a month before print publication. I would guess that this article was actually written a year ago at least.

I personally don't care what your political viewpoint is, but I do feel the duty to clear up miscommunication and misunderstandings when there is a topic I do know a bit about. :) I hope that everyone reading can take the information simply as info offered - not as a political statement.

Read the article USA TODAY/Many appendectomies may not be needed, study finds

<>

Trying anti-biotic first would be my choice. Especially since they have recently discovered the Appendix is part of our immune system and not an unused ancient organ as thought. If a anti-biotic works, a considerable amount of money would be saved and pain associated with the surgery, even though it is done by arthroscopy these days, would be eliminated.

Read the article USA TODAY/Many appendectomies may not be needed, study finds

 

JANUARY 18, 2010 -- JANUARY 24, 2010

IT'S A HARD DAY'S NIGHT FOR THE SLEEP DEPRIVED

Sleep deprivation is not "all hot air". It is a serious problem in many professions, as well as in the lives of many individuals.

Sleep deprivation (due to undiagnosed sleep apnea), has personally led me to suffer from chronic low-grade depression, gaining weight (always munching to keep my energy level up), and eventually led to me being fired from my job a couple months ago.

And that was just the impact on me personally, not the impact that my sleep deprivation had on people who came into contact with me personally and professionally. Now that I have finally been diagnosed and am being treated, I can truly appreciate just how impaired I was from the lack of quality sleep.

It's been 2 months, and I still feel like I'm running at 40% of my usual energy level. I'm just so grateful that I didn't cause any significant harm to anyone while driving, cooking, etc. I can really feel for the people who are expected to work unusual shifts or long hours while having the lives of other people in their hands.

Read the article USA TODAY/Catching up on lost sleep a dangerous illusion

 

TAKING LESS THAN A PINCH OF SALT

 

I am really thankful that someone is finally leading the fight in reforming the American food supply. I feel we as Americans are being "poisoned" by the additives and non-natural substances we allow to be added to our foods. Our food has too much salt and too much sugar added to it. I am fine with processed/convenience foods as long as they are made in the most healthy, natural manner possible.

Right now Big Food in the US tries to do everything at the lowest cost possible at the cost of our health. Thankfully the Bloomberg administration is stepping up to tackle this, which apparently cannot be done in Washington due to Big Food's powerful lobbying efforts. I am happy the Bloomberg administration is trying to do something to benefit citizens and their right to healthy food.

Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/ Citing hazard, New York says hold the salt

<>

OK, this is going too far. The Bloomberg administration should go away and mind its own business taking care of New York City, not go on a nationwide prohibitionist campaign against salt.

Personally, I like salt. I cook with basic ingredients -- fresh vegetables and meats -- and control the amount of salt I use to my taste and to what I consider healthy. I am aware of the health issues. If you don't like salt or think it's unhealthly, don't use it! And packaged foods already are labeled with their sodium content. Read the labels before you buy them.

There is a hazy continuum between well-meaning encouragement to coercion to oppression. We've gone down that road as a nation before with other things. Treat us like adults. Let us decide for ourselves with the informed choices we already have available rather than telling the rest of us how to eat and live.

Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/ Citing hazard, New York says hold the salt

<>

How is this a "Bloomberg initiative" when it's supported by 26 other cities,and the AMA. The Campbell soup company calls it "laudable" and even the snack food lobby's only objection is that the time-line is too short.

It seems only the "Salt Institute" and Bloomberg haters are against this.

I agree with Rocknrope, no one is prohibited from adding more salt. I also agree with Zampano, that cars are a far greater threat to our health, but you remember what happened when congestion pricing was proposed!

Read the article GOTHAMIST/Now Bloomberg's coming for your salt

 

JANUARY 11, 2010 -- JANUARY 17, 2010

TAKING A CLOSER LOOK AT LASIK EYE SURGERY

I think the main point that people who are considering LASIK need to remember is that that LASIK is SURGERY. Like any operative procedure, there are good candidates, poor candidates, possible risks, and potential complications. Before deciding to go under the laser, get recommendations for doctors, get more than one opinion, and understand that LASIK is not for everyone.

Although there is no excuse for sloppy medical work, being well-informed before committing is the best way for someone to achieve the best outcome, whether the decision is to get the surgery or walk away.

Read the article NPR/For some, Lasik brings more problems than solutions

<>

As an MD, I thought I had done my homework before I had my -12 and -10 eyes done about 10 years ago in Canada. I kept hearing about how few people need a "re-do" statistically as a measure of success. I also couldn't read a clock at night so getting even close to normal vision without glasses was my goal.

Interestingly, the tech mentioned something about my pupil size being "rather large". I asked the MD about that specifically and my concern about loss of night vision, he told me definitely my pupils were fine. "Don't worry...no problem."

Well I have had nightbursts ever since and only drive at night on familiar roads, and if wet (increases the glare) and lots of oncoming traffic, I don't drive at all since I'm such a hazard.

My eyes are a little dry and I now need reading glasses; neither of those are as problematic as the night time effects. I'm guessing my unhappiness isn't in the statistics since I don't want a "re-do".....it won't fix my problems.

I welcome a good study so others have accurate data to make judgements on....including my adult children who I have discouraged from having the surgery until such a study is done. Glad to hear it's coming.....long overdue.

Read the article NPR/For some, Lasik brings more problems than solutions

WHY AN EARFUL OF BACKGROUND NOISE CAN BE STRESSFUL

 

First of all, there is a big difference between "white noise" and background noise. White noise is what you hear on the 'snow' channel on your TV and is a very annoying sound. A well designed masking noise system in an office should be unnoticeable (even if it actually raises the background noise level).

Second, we hear background noise always and everywhere. Whether or not it is a distraction depends on a)how loud it is, and b)its characteristic such as tonal hum, modulating volume, impacts or beating etc.

I am an acoustical engineer and deal a lot with noise complaints in offices and residences, so I am very interested in this study, but there are a lot of unanswered questions. A) what are the differences in stress levels between exposure to an uncharacteristic broadband background noise and a characteristic background noise such as white noise. B) what was the type and level of the background noise used for the control group compared to the group that showed the increase in stress C) In what setting did these studies take place (and did the studies take place in various settings to compare this).

This is important because we perceive the relative loudness of background noise differently depending on where we are. For example, many people have no problem falling asleep in a car where the background noise level is 60-70dBA. Place a speaker in someone's bedroom and play the same noise at the same level and not many people would fall asleep as easily or at all (assuming of course the same level of tiredness) where the expected background noise is more like 30-35dBA.

Read the article SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN/How does background noise affect out concentration?

 

JANUARY 4, 2010 -- JANUARY 10, 2010

NEW YORK CITY HEROIN PAMPHLET SPARKS CONTROVERSY

 

Ignorance is bliss, I guess. Is anyone aware that there are many needle exchanges set up around many large urban areas to help prevent the spread of disease among IV drug users?

This is nothing new, people. It just happened to make the news today. And I'd be willing to bank on the fact that those needle exchanges cost a lot more to the taxpayer than that little $70,000 pamphlet. But in the long run, quelling the spread of disease saves MUCH more. An ounce of prevention and all that.

And just so you know, drug users are not all stereotypical "losers"--they come from all walks of life and have all sorts of reasons for falling into the trap of addiction. And they can and DO recover and go on to live successful lives as contributing members of society. They may be even more of an asset to their community than...gasp...YOU!

Read the article CBS/New York city publishes heroin guide book

 

<>

There is always a fine line between harm reduction and legitimizing a bad lifestyle choice. If this guide includes help on where to go to try to get clean, it is the former; if it does not it is the latter.

Read the article BOING BOING/Guide to shooting smack published by New York City

<>

Anyone who disagree's with NYC putting out this pamphlet is 100% completely ignorant to the facts. PERIOD. As a White collar, College educated, upstanding member of society, and former heroin addict, I can tell you that awareness saves lives. Don't let your disapproval of drug use cloud the issue.

Over-dosing on opiates is not instantaneous; it takes anywhere from minutes to hours for the respiratory system to shut down to the point of causing death/irreversible damage. What happens during that time? Well quite often, the person O.D.ing is around other people/opiate users who are afraid to seek medical attention out of fear of getting in trouble.

In reality, if these other people/users were informed & educated, they would know that they can call an ambulance for someone who has O.D.'d with little to no involvement with the police and save someone's life.

How do I know this? I just happened to wake up in an ambulance to voice of an EMT saying "welcome back. You overdosed on opiates and stopped breathing for almost 10 minutes during which your friends called an ambulance and saved your life." That was about 3 years ago and I have been clean ever since.

Don't be so quick to judge opiate addicts; Everyone has the potential to be an opiate addict. It's not just that homeless guy on the corner... it can happen to your kids, your parents, your neighbors, and you..

Read the article CNN/NYC heroin pamphlet -- Is it a Help of How-to guide?

THE HIGHS AND LOWS OF ACADEMIC TEXT BOOK PRICING

 

Students are a captive audience in the sense that they are 'required' to buy the books as the post suggests in the same way that patients are 'required' to buy prescribed drugs. More of a strong suggestion that a requirement but still captive audience is a reasonable claim to make.

Further more faculty are strongly encouraged to keep text books 'up-to-date' meaning that students may not be able to purchase used copies.

When an undergraduate I had a one year turn around on textbooks meaning that the second hand market was non existent. Now as a staff member setting texts I create my own reader sets from journal articles and book chapters - much more reading and prep time on my behalf but it cuts out the textbook market and means students can look up readings in the library if they don't want to purchase the reader.

The other problem with text books is the ideology factor - really I think it is better for students to go and read for themselves. In most cases there are important texts that they should read and they don't really need a textbook to explain it for them.

Read the article BOINGBOING/Prescription for consumers challenging academic textbook cartels

<>

I did my entire degree buying two textbooks. I just used that other great source of books: the library. Sit in there, write your own notes on the material and photocopy any particularly useful pages. I figured I can't fit thousands of pages of information in my head, so summa rising 90% of it in notes is effective for comprehension and remembering it.

The only books I bought were those I was genuinely interested in and wanted to keep. My degree was architecture,

Read the article BOINGBOING/Prescription for consumers challenging academic textbook cartels

<>

I used to work as a sales rep for one of the biggest textbook publishers, and in my opinion the blame for the high cost of textbooks should be shared. Professors can always find a cheaper option (all publishers offer custom editing, which means you can eliminate parts of the text you don't use, or even get the text printed in loose-leaf format, allowing students to arrange it in their Trapper-Keeper however they wish) but professors often put off these sorts of decisions.

90% of the time when I called on a professor, they first said they hadn't seen the text I was talking about, and then when I pointed it out on their shelf, they said "Oh yeah I haven't looked at this yet."

Students also have multiple options for purchasing but don't take as much advantage as they should, but in large part this is because all their options aren't always made clear.

Lastly, publishers certainly engage in dirty tricks to keep prices high and to keep students buying new texts, not old. Those same custom editions that could keep costs low are usually used to make insignificant changes that force students to buy a new edition. Bundling isn't as big a deal as Ms. James says it is -- most bookstores know bundles don't sell well and so either break them up or order the component parts from the publishers.

Read the article BOINGBOING/Prescription for consumers challenging academic textbook cartels

 

DECEMBER 28, 2009 -- JANUARY 3, 2010