Building brawn may also boost brain power

It has long been a cliche that muscle bulk doesn't equate with intelligence. Most of the science about activity and brain health has focused on the role of endurance exercise in improving brain functioning.
Aerobic exercise causes a steep spike in blood movement to the brain, an action some researchers speculated might be necessary to create new brain cells, or neurogenesis.
Running and other forms of aerobic exercise have been shown, in mice and men, to lead to neurogenesis in the parts of the brain associated with memory and thinking, providing another compelling reason to run.
Few researchers thought muscle bulk would have a similar effect. But recent studies intimate otherwise. It's not easy to induce a lab rat to lift weights, so researchers developed clever approximations of resistance training to see what impact adding muscle and strength has on an animal's brain.

Guidelines to offer kids a healthy smile

February is National Children’s Dental Health Month, and the New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services is urging parents to ensure their children are polishing up on their tooth brushing skills, and maintaining good oral hygiene in order to have a lifelong healthy smile.
“Over 50 percent of children ages 5-9 have at least one cavity or filling,” said Dr. Poonam Alaigh, Commissioner of the New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services. “We hope that by raising parental awareness of the importance of brushing we will reduce the incidences of cavities and improve oral health in children.”
Tooth decay is one of the most common diseases in children. It is five times more common than asthma and seven times as common as hay fever.
Here are some preventive measures:
• Infants and young children can be especially vulnerable to tooth decay because tooth decay is an infectious disease. Avoid testing the temperature of your child’s bottle with the mouth, sharing utensils or cleaning a pacifier or bottle nipple with saliva.
• Do not put your baby to bed with a bottle or prop the bottle up in the baby’s mouth. Hold your infant during feeding.
• Clean your infant’s gums with a clean, damp cloth or piece of gauze wrapped around a finger and plain water after each feeding.
• Parents are urged to take an active role in brushing their children’s teeth once the first tooth comes in usually when the child is between 6 and 10 months of age. Lift the lip to brush at the gum line and behind the teeth.
• For children ages 2-6, parents should use no more than a pea-sized amount of fluoride toothpaste.

Walking, Nutrition for a Healthy Mind

Women can take simple steps to bolster their brain power now and keep mentally agile as they age, according to an article in The Sun by fitness expert Nicki Waterman and nutritionist Amanda Ursell.
First up is the importance of nutrition, which starts during pregnancy, as the fetus is hungry for solid nutrients to improve brain development. Ursell encouraged pregnant women to consume good sources of magnesium, including whole grains, nuts and lentils; zinc, found in wheat germ, pumpkin seeds and red meat; folic acid, ideally via a 400 mcg/d supplement, to help the development of the spinal cord and central nervous system; choline, found in eggs, which helps in production of acetylcholine, an important neurotransmitter; and omega-3 fatty acids, which support brain development.
Children and adults also need various nutrients to support their developing brains. One important step, Ursell said, is ensuring children eat breakfast to provide nutrients that fuel the brain. Other key compounds, she noted, include iron for brain development, memory and concentration; vitamin D, which supports learning and memory; B vitamins, which studies suggest can fight memory impairment in aging; and vitamin E, found in nuts and seeds, which can stave off mental decline.
In the exercise arena, it’s as simple as walking, according to Waterman, who noted studies have found walking just a mile a day can slow memory loss and maintain brain volume, while also reducing the risk for developing Alzheimer’s disease. Exercise also improves blood flow to the brain, delivering oxygen for optimal performance; Waterman added studies have found aerobic exercise may even promote the growth of new brain cells.

More Kids Have Health Coverage

If you are a parent, you know that your children’s health and wellbeing is your number one concern. According to a new report, an increasing number of parents in America are resting easy, knowing that their kids have health coverage.

The report shows that last year, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) provided health coverage to two million additional children. All together, 42 million kids now rely on Medicaid and CHIP for their coverage.

If you aren’t familiar with them, Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program are programs run by the states (with financial help from federal government) that offer no-cost or low-cost health insurance to kids. Every state program varies a little, and most have their own names - HUSKY, Healthy Families, Apple Health for Kids. Generally, children up to age 19 in families of four with income up to $45,000 a year can qualify, but the rules are set by each state. You can find more about your State’s programs at Healthcare.gov. In many states the income limit is higher, so more children and families are eligible.

The increase in kids getting covered by Medicaid and CHIP is a big deal. Tough economic times are making it hard for businesses to continue providing coverage to their employees, and harder for families to afford coverage. Tough times also have kept many states from devoting their funds to do outreach to uninsured families and to help eligible children sign up.

Moderate physical exercises cut cancer risk

The World Health Organization (WHO) has said that moderate physical exercises can help reduce the risk of cancers such as breast cancer and colon cancer.

On the World Cancer Day Friday, WHO recommended moderate intensity aerobic physical activities of at least 150 minutes a week, for all people aged 18 and over, which has proven effective in bring down risks to noncommunicable diseases (NCDs).

For the 5 to 17-age group, the WHO said at least 60 minutes of moderate to vigorous intensity physical activities could serve to prevent such diseases from building-up, reports English .

"Physical inactivity is the fourth leading risk factor for all global deaths, with 31 per cent of the world's population not physically active," said Ala Alwan, WHO assistant director-general for Noncommunicable Diseases and Mental Health.

It said physical inactivity is in close relation with cancers and other NCDs, such as cardiovascular diseases and diabetes, and worldwide, it is associated with 3.2 million deaths per year.

The situation is particularly alarming in low and middle income countries, which suffered 2.6 million cases of death, a majority of the world's total, said the report.

Heart disease costs are expected to triple by 2030

There's a new forecast of the cost to treat heart disease in the U.S. over the next 20 years — and it isn't pretty.
According to a study published in Circulation: Journal of the American Heart Association, the annual cost to treat heart disease — including high blood pressure, coronary heart disease, heart failure, stroke and other conditions — will triple by 2030, from $273 billion to $818 billion (in 2008 dollars).
U.S. medical expenditures are already the highest in the world, hitting 15 percent of gross domestic product in 2008, the authors reported.
To generate the forecast, researchers took current disease rates and applied them to population estimates suggested by census data. They assumed no major changes in treatment.
Today, 36.9 percent of Americans have some form of heart disease. By 2030, 40.5 percent — about 116 million people — will, according to the Circulation study. Cases of both stroke and heart failure were projected to rise about 25 percent.
The most expensive condition to treat will remain hypertension, because of its prevalence. Hypertension is a risk factor for stroke, coronary heart disease and heart failure.
Shortages of doctors or nurses could push costs even higher, the study authors wrote.
Continued rises in rates of diabetes and obesity could too, they said.

Health care debate remains confusing for most Americans

Most people have an opinion about 2009's health care act, if even a confused one. I knew a columnist who was pushing for this reform years before it happened. I also knew a woman who thought that the act authorized killing newborn babies. You could say I hang out with a mixed crowd, but we definitely have confusion over the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in common.
Congress is back in session and the Republicans in the House have made health care its first order of business. They want it repealed immediately but the Democrats in the Senate want to keep it, and neither seems to be getting very far.
The strange thing about the act is that everyone had something to say about it, even when no one was sure what it said. If you already liked it, you probably thought it was a human rights victory in the making. If you didn't like it, perhaps you worried it would give the government dangerous powers.
The old bill lingered seven months in the Senate. Political ads so flooded the airwaves that you might have thought it was an election year. After all that, how can millions of us still be unclear on the act?
The pundits' rhetoric was tainted by political agenda and impossible to trust. The congressmen debating the bill weren't much better. Speaker of the House John Boehner, R-Ohio, gave his "Hell No" speech against the bill, saying that it would defy the will of the people. "But we have to pass the bill," said Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., "so that you can find out what is in it." Some parts won't take effect for 10 more years.
It's a shame when something that stirs so much sentiment remains so hazy. Only one source remained for information about the act: non-partisan news. Some people call this "doing your homework." You hunt down a description of the bill untouched by tones of heated opposition or unthinking agreement. The details of the act shouldn't be so inaccessible, so check the sidebar for a sampling of excerpts from the bill.
The text of the act isn't something to jump for joy over, but it doesn't feel like the descent of the Iron Curtain either.

How much sodium? Decoding nutrition labels

Guidelines for Americans, designed to give Americans a sense of what their diets need based on the newest food research.
But interpreting this information as a consumer can be tricky. After all, the numbers companies must print on packaged foods are only useful if you have a point of reference.
When you're deciding what to make for dinner, experts say that having a bit of background information allows you to make more informed decisions about the information you see on food labels.
Counting calories
"The most important thing there — and that's why it's in bold — is calories," said Keith-Thomas Ayoob, an associate clinical professor of pediatrics and registered dietitian at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York. "That will determine whether someone gains or loses weight. Your body doesn't really care whether the calories come from sugar or fat when it comes to controlling weight."
As it says in the fine print, food labels are based on a 2,000 calorie diet — but the number of calories you actually need can vary. The American Heart Association recommends consuming anywhere from 1,600 to 3,000 calories per day depending on your age, gender and lifestyle.
There is also some variation in how much you need of the different vitamins and minerals, based on your age. The daily values listed on food packages after each vitamin or mineral are based on the highest amount needed by any age group, Ayoob said, which ensures that anyone following the labels will be getting enough of the vitamin, if not a little extra.

Being plump is good for health

The researchers said the idea that weight is harmful has been "exaggerated" and people who are little heavier may actually live longer.

The California University (CU) study that looked at about 350,000 people in the US also suggested that the obese put their health in greater danger when they obsessively try to slim down.

It recommended that people should eat a varied and balanced diet, and take "enjoyable" amounts of exercise — even if they still end up carrying a few extra pounds. The researchers also noted that society's obsession with dieting is "ineffective" and often leads to people becoming fatter as they crave food and binge, the Daily Mail reported.

Linda Bacon, a CU professor who led the study, claimed there is evidence to show that overweight people live longer than normal. Those who are obese in old age also tend to live longer than elderly people who are thin, they said. They are also more likely to survive certain health conditions, such as type 2 diabetes, heart disease and kidney failure, added the researchers.

Although it's known that obesity puts people at higher risk of heart disease and other illnesses, the scientists said that "being fat" is not the cause. Instead, they blame poor diet and lack of exercise — which almost always come with obesity.

Plan would charge state retirees more for health care

State lawmakers, fresh off of passing a major income tax increase, are turning toward a trio of other ideas as they try to capitalize on a newfound mood at the Capitol of dealing with long-festering budget problems.
The new push is a crackdown on the rising cost of health care for retired state workers. The program costs the state nearly $500 million a year, and more than 90 percent of the retirees and survivors pay no premiums.
The leftover plans are to raise the cigarette tax and borrow money to more quickly pay down a big backlog of bills, both of which could get new life now that the high-pressure political atmosphere surrounding the tax increase is done.
Of the three, the retiree health insurance issue is most likely to become the next rallying cry among a public weary of the cost of state government and the recent Democrat-led incursion into their wallets to pay for years of mismanagement.
The idea is to start charging the retirees who can afford to pay for their health care. And new state research shows some of the 84,100 retirees and survivors appear to possess the ability to pay — the average annual household income for a retired state worker younger than 65 was nearly $78,000.

Kidney transplants could save health-care system millions

The number of Canadians living with kidney failure has tripled in 20 years and thousands of patients are waiting for kidney transplants, researchers say in a report that suggests if transplants were available, $150 million spent on expensive treatments would be saved.
There were nearly 38,000 Canadians living with kidney failure in 2009 -more than triple the number recorded in 1990 -with 3,000 people on a transplant waiting list, according to a study examining organ failure released yesterday by the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI).
If everyone on the wait list was transplanted, about $150 million would be saved each year because of less dialysis treatment expenses, said Claire Marie Fortin, CIHI's manager of clinical registries.
"Dialysis is expensive, there's no denying it," Fortin said.
"It's also onerous on the patient. We always think of dollars and cents when it comes to health care, but there are patients involved and these are people who have to travel far to get their dialysis. A greater supply of organs would be beneficial to the system."
Hemodialysis treatments cost $60,000 a year per patient while a one-time expense for a kidney transplant is only about $23,000, plus an additional $6,000 for medication to maintain the transplant, Fortin said.

Health Bill: facts and fiction, by Carol Propper

I have to admit to being stunned by the level of misinformation that is currently accompanying the Health and Social Care Bill as it is introduced into Parliament.
Yesterday, the shadow health secretary John Healey stated that ‘the changes would make the health service profit centred rather than patient centred, health secretary Andrew Lansley said ‘competition would be on quality and not cost’ and that as the health service is free at the point of delivery patients obtain the best medical outcome rather than the cheapest option. Meanwhile, Karen Jennings, head of health at Unison, stated that the only survivors will be the private health companies which are ‘circling like sharks’ and MPs say ‘the reforms have taken the NHS by surprise’.
None of these statements has much basis in either fact or evidence. The reforms being introduced in the bill are essentially a continuation of the reforms started under the previous administration, albeit at an increase in pace and scale. The Labour reforms introduced competition between hospitals for patients and patient choice of hospital and a system of regulated prices. Lansley has changed the buyers of health care from local PCTs to general practitioners, but under Labour the PCTs were supposed to act on behalf of their local GPs anyhow. Why Healey believes that increasing the pace of reform and replacing the PCTs with GP consortia should mean the NHS switches from being patient to profit centred is completely unclear.
GPs have not been seen by politicians as profit centred previously. In fact, perhaps because GPs see so many voters each week, most politicians studiously ignore the fact that GPs are private contractors and not NHS employees. In addition, the new GP consortia will probably employ a fair number of ex-PCT staff. So it seems unlikely there will be a radical shift in values on the purchaser side.