New Yorkers can’t smoke outside at parks anymore

Smokers in New York are no longer allowed to light up in parks.

The Big Apple’s outdoor smoking ban began Monday.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced last year plans to expand smoking bans at parks, beaches, marinas, boardwalks and pedestrian plazas, to prevent the effects of secondhand smoke.

Secondhand smoke exposure ’striking’ in the U.S.

The city has more than 1,700 parks and other open spaces, totaling more than 43.75 square miles. And now it’s illegal to smoke in any of them, reports CNN affiliate WPIX.

The punishment: a $50 fine.

WPIX reported that a 2009 study carried out by the New York City Department of Health found that 57% of non-smokers had elevated levels of nicotine, an indicator or exposure to secondhand smoke, higher than the national average of 45%.

Source: http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2011/05/23/new-yorkers-cant-smoke-outside-at-parks-anymore/

Prevent STDs like a porn star

(CNN) — Dylan Ryan and Danny Wylde knew each other online — she’s read his blog, he’s seen her tweets — before they met in person in Los Angeles a few weeks ago. A bit awkward, they made small talk, spending an hour or so getting to know each other.

“When I’m with someone new, my primary bit of nervousness is I have no idea if they’ll like me, or be attracted to me, or be interested in me,” Ryan says. “It’s sort of akin to a first date situation.”

But this wasn’t a first date — it was strictly business. After chatting, Ryan and Wylde got to work, which in their case meant having sex. Ryan and Wylde (their stage names) are adult performers.

While hooking up with a new co-star can provoke some anxiety, there’s one thing they’re usually not anxious about: getting a sexually transmitted disease from their co-star, since both get tested for STDs at least once a month.

“Before you start shooting, you go online to see the other person’s test results,” Wylde explains. “Or sometimes on set, before you start, they show you the results on paper.”

Such diligence about STDs is a good idea for anyone having sex with a new partner, even if you’re not a porn star, says Dr. Craig Strafford, director of clinical research at the Holzer Clinic in Gallipolis, Ohio.

“It really shows they’re thinking conscientiously,” Strafford says. “I think it really works.”

Talent Testing Service, which does STD screenings for adult performers, routinely tests for HIV, chlamydia, and gonorrhea, according to Sixto Pacheco, president and CEO of the service. In addition, some performers opt for an additional panel of tests for hepatitis B, hepatitis C and syphilis.

So far, Ryan and Wylde say it’s worked for them. Ryan says in her eight years as an adult performer — she has about five sexual partners a month professionally — she hasn’t contracted a single STD. She says when she has sex with men outside work she always uses a condom. Wylde says about once a year he comes down with a case of chlamydia or gonorrhea.

“I take some pills and it goes away in a week,” he says, adding that outside of work he has sex only with other performers, since he’s knows they’re regularly tested.

While the testing isn’t foolproof, it lowers the risk of getting infected. Combine that with condom use and the risk goes down even more.

HIV is a particularly tricky test, since it may provide a false negative if taken too soon after a person is exposed to HIV. This is because most people don’t produce enough antibodies for the test to detect until around a month after being exposed. Some people take three months or longer to produce detectable antibodies.

“I think about this all the time,” says Ryan, who’s been an adult performer for eight years. “It’s by far the biggest risk in the industry. I think the one thing that gives me comfort — small comfort — is that the people I’m working with by and large have very strong safer sex practices because of what they do for a living.”

Wylde says he’s not too concerned about contracting HIV since he has sex only with women, but he adds that he knows he’s taking at least a small risk.

“There’s risk in a lot of jobs,” he says. “Professional athletes take risks.”

When beginning a new relationship, many wonder what diseases they should get tested for.

“It’s a very common question, for both males and females,” Strafford says.

Neither the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, nor the American Social Health Association has a list of STDs you should get tested for when you’re about to have sex for the first time with someone. However, after discussion with various STD experts, here’s a list of tests many doctors recommend.

They can be a starting point for a discussion with your doctor. The CDC has a list of clinics that offer testing for STDs by ZIP code.

Chlamydia

Often a simple urine test is all that is necessary; sometimes a swab must be taken from the infected area, according to ASHA.

Many people don’t know they have chlamydia, the most frequently reported bacterial sexually transmitted disease in the United States. Complications among men are rare, but in women chlamydia can lead to chronic pelvic pain, infertility, and ectopic pregnancies. The disease can be easily treated and cured with antibiotics, according to the CDC.

Gonorrhea

This is also often a urine test, although sometimes a swab is taken from the infected area, ASHA says. Some men have no symptoms of gonorrhea, while others have painful urination or discharge from the penis, according to the CDC. Antibiotics can treat the disease, but if left untreated, gonorrhea can lead to infertility in men and women, and can be life-threatening if it spreads to the blood or joints.

Syphilis

A blood test is used to diagnose syphilis, a disease that’s easy to treat in its early stages, but if left untreated can cause blindness or even death, according to the CDC.

Hepatitis A and B

Men who have sex with men should talk to their doctor about getting tested for Hepatitis A and B, and they should also be vaccinated against the diseases, says Dr. Hunter Handsfield, a clinical professor of medicine at the University of Washington Center for AIDS and STD.

HIV

As noted above, you can be positive for HIV for several weeks or months before it will show up on most HIV blood tests.

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/05/19/std.protection.ep/index.html

Special Report: An end to AIDS?

(Reuters) - For his doctors, Timothy Ray Brown was a shot in the dark. An HIV-positive American who was cured by a unique type of bone marrow transplant, the man known as “the Berlin patient” has become an icon of what scientists hope could be the next phase of the AIDS pandemic: its end.

Dramatic scientific advances since HIV was first discovered 30 years ago this week mean the virus is no longer a death sentence. Thanks to tests that detect HIV early, new antiretroviral AIDS drugs that can control the virus for decades, and a range of ways to stop it being spread, 33.3 million people around the world are learning to live with HIV.

People like Vuyiseka Dubula, an HIV-positive AIDS activist and mother in Cape Town, South Africa, can expect relatively normal, full lives. “I’m not thinking about death at all,” she says. “I’m taking my treatment and I’m living my life.”

Nonetheless, on the 30th birthday of HIV, the global scientific community is setting out with renewed vigor to try to kill it. The drive is partly about science, and partly about money. Treating HIV patients with lifelong courses of sophisticated drugs is becoming unaffordable.

Caring for HIV patients in developing countries alone already costs around $13 billion a year and that could treble over the next 20 years.

In tough economic times, the need to find a cure has become even more urgent, says Francoise Barre Sinoussi, who won a Nobel prize for her work in identifying Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV). “We have to think about the long term, including a strategy to find a cure,” she says. “We have to keep on searching until we find one.”

The Berlin patient is proof they could. His case has injected new energy into a field where people for years believed talk of a cure was irresponsible.

THE CURE THAT WORKED

Timothy Ray Brown was living in Berlin when besides being HIV-positive, he had a relapse of leukemia. He was dying. In 2007, his doctor, Gero Huetter, made a radical suggestion: a bone marrow transplant using cells from a donor with a rare genetic mutation, known as CCR5 delta 32. Scientists had known for a few years that people with this gene mutation had proved resistant to HIV.

“We really didn’t know when we started this project what would happen,” Huetter, an oncologist and haematologist who now works at the University of Heidelberg in southern Germany, told Reuters. The treatment could well have finished Brown off. Instead he remains the only human ever to be cured of AIDS. “He has no replicating virus and he isn’t taking any medication. And he will now probably never have any problems with HIV,” says Huetter. Brown has since moved to San Francisco.

Most experts say it is inconceivable Brown’s treatment could be a way of curing all patients. The procedure was expensive, complex and risky. To do this in others, exact match donors would have to be found in the tiny proportion of people — most of them of northern European descent — who have the mutation that makes them resistant to the virus.

Dr Robert Gallo, of the Institute of Virology at the University of Maryland, puts it bluntly. “It’s not practical and it can kill people,” he said last year.

Sinoussi is more expansive. “It’s clearly unrealistic to think that this medically heavy, extremely costly, barely reproducible approach could be replicated and scaled-up … but from a scientist’s point of view, it has shown at least that a cure is possible,” she says.

The International AIDS Society will this month formally add the aim of finding a cure to its HIV strategy of prevention, treatment and care.

A group of scientist-activists is also launching a global working group to draw up a scientific plan of attack and persuade governments and research institutions to commit more funds. Money is starting to flow. The U.S. National Institutes of Health is asking for proposals for an $8.5 million collaborative research grant to search for a cure, and the Foundation for AIDS Research, or amfAR, has just announced its first round of four grants to research groups “to develop strategies for eradicating HIV infection.”

THE COST OF TREATMENT

Until recently, people in HIV and AIDS circles feared that to direct funds toward the search for a cure risked detracting from the fight to get HIV-positive people treated. Even today, only just over five million of the 12 million or so people who need the drugs actually get them.

HIV first surfaced in 1981, when scientists at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention discovered it was the cause of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). An article in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report of that June referred to “five young men, all active homosexuals” from Los Angeles as the first documented cases. “That was the summer of ‘81. For the world it was the beginning of the era of HIV/AIDS, even though we didn’t know it was HIV then,” says Anthony Fauci, director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, who has made AIDS research his life’s work.

In the subsequent three decades, the disease ignorantly branded “the gay plague” has become one of the most vicious pandemics in human history. Transmitted in semen, blood and breast milk, HIV has devastated poorer regions, particularly sub-Saharan Africa, where the vast majority of HIV-positive people live. As more tests and treatment have become available, the number of new infections has been falling. But for every two with HIV who get a chance to start on AIDS drugs, five more join the “newly infected” list. United Nations data show that despite an array of potential prevention measures — from male circumcision to sophisticated vaginal or anal microbicide gels — more than 7,100 new people catch the virus every day.

Treatment costs per patient can range from around $150 a year in poor countries, where drugs are available as cheap generics, to more than $20,000 a year in the United States.

The overall sums are huge. A recent study as part of a non-governmental campaign called AIDS2031 suggests that low and middle-income countries will need $35 billion a year to properly address the pandemic by 2031. That’s almost three times the current level of around $13 billion a year. Add in the costs of treatment in rich countries and experts estimate the costs of HIV 20 years from now will reach $50 to $60 billion a year.

“It’s clear that we have to look at another possible way of managing of the epidemic beyond just treating everyone forever,” says Sharon Lewin, a leading HIV doctor and researcher from Monash University in Melbourne, Australia.

In some ways, we have been here before. Early AIDS drugs such as AZT came to market in the late 1980s, but within a decade they were overtaken by powerful cocktail treatments known as HAART, or highly active antiretroviral treatment. HAART had a dramatic effect — rapidly driving the virus out of patients’ blood and prompting some to say a cure was just around the corner.

But then scientists discovered HIV could lie low in pools or reservoirs of latent infection that even powerful drugs could not reach. Talk of a cure all but died out.

“Scientifically we had no means to say we were on the way to finding a cure,” says Bertrand Audoin, executive director of the Geneva-based International AIDS Society. “Scientists … don’t want to make any more false promises. They didn’t want to talk about a cure again because it really wasn’t anywhere on the horizon.”

GENE THERAPY

The ultimate goal would allow patients to stop taking AIDS drugs, knocking a hole in a $12 billion-a-year market dominated by Californian drugmaker Gilead and the likes of Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline and Merck.

It’s unlikely to happen anytime soon, but Brown’s case has opened the door to new ideas. “What it proved was that if you make someone’s cells resistant to HIV…then all the last bits of HIV, that hang around for a long time in patients on treatment, did in fact decay and disappear,” says Lewin.

Now scientists working on mimicking the effect of the Berlin patient’s transplant have had some success. One experimental technique uses gene therapy to take out certain cells, make them resistant to HIV and then put them back into patients in the hope they will survive and spread.

At an HIV conference in Boston earlier this year, American researchers presented data on six patients who had large numbers of white blood cells known as CD4 cells removed, manipulated to knock out the existing CCR5 gene, and then replaced.

“It works like scissors and cuts a piece of genetic information out of the DNA, and then closes the gap,” says Huetter. “Then every cell arising from this mother cell has this same mutation.”

Early results showed the mutated cells managed to survive inside the bodies of the patients at low levels, remaining present for more than three months in five. “This was a proof of concept,” says Lewin. Another potential avenue is a small group of patients known as “elite controllers”, who despite being infected with HIV are able to keep it under control simply with their own immune systems. Researchers hope these patients could one day be the clue to developing a successful HIV/AIDS vaccine or functional cure.

Scientists are also exploring ways to “wake up” HIV cells and kill them. As discovered in the late 1990s, HIV has a way of getting deep into the immune system itself — into what are known as resting memory T-cells — and going to sleep there. Hidden away, it effectively avoids drugs and the body’s own immune response.

“Once it goes to sleep in a cell it can stay there forever, which is really the main reason why we can’t cure HIV with current drugs,” says Lewin. Her team in Melbourne and another group in the United States are about to start the first human trials using a drug called SAHA or vorinostat, made by Merck and currently used in cancer treatment, which has shown promise in being able to wake up dormant HIV.

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/01/us-aids-idUSTRE75030I20110601

WHO says cell phone use “possibly carcinogenic”

(Reuters) - Using a mobile phone might increase the risk of developing certain types of brain tumors and consumers should consider ways of reducing their exposure, World Health Organization (WHO) cancer experts said on Tuesday.

A working group of 31 scientists from 14 countries meeting at the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) said a review of all the available scientific evidence suggested cell phone use should be classified as “possibly carcinogenic.”

The classification, which puts mobile phone use in the same broad IARC cancer risk category as lead, chloroform and coffee, could spur the United Nations health body to look again at its guidelines on mobile phones, the scientists said.

But more lengthy and detailed research is needed before a more definitive answer on any link can be given.

The WHO had previously said there was no established evidence for a link between cell phone use and cancer.

“After reviewing essentially all the evidence that is relevant … the working group classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans,” Jonathan Samet, chair of the IARC group, said in a telebriefing.

He said some evidence suggested a link between an increased risk for glioma, a type of brain cancer, and mobile phone use.

Cellphone use has risen hugely since they were introduced in the early 1980s, with 5 billion in use today. And since phones have become such an key part of daily life — used by many for Web surfing as well as talking — industry experts say a health threat will not stop people using them.

Instead, concerned consumers might opt to buy more accessories such as headsets to reduce the risks, Avian Securities analyst Matthew Thornton said.

“It’s going to take some compelling argument to change behavior,” he said.

The WHO’s position has been keenly awaited by mobile phone companies and by campaign groups who have raised concerns about whether cell phones might be harmful to health.

Industry groups immediately sought to play down the decision, stressing the “possibly carcinogenic” category also includes substances such as pickled vegetables and coffee.

“This IARC classification does not mean that cell phones cause cancer,” said John Walls, vice president of public affairs for the United States-based wireless association CTIA.

He noted the IARC working group did not conduct any new research, but reviewed published studies, and said other regulatory bodies such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration have stated that “the weight of scientific evidence has not linked cell phones with any health problems.”

John Cooke, executive director of the British-based Mobile Operators Association, said IARC had only found the possibility of a hazard.

“Whether or not this represents a risk requires further scientific investigation,” he said in a statement.

PREVIOUS STUDIES INCONCLUSIVE

The IARC remarks follow a study published last year that looked at almost 13,000 cell phone users over 10 years and found no clear answer on whether the mobile devices cause brain tumors.

Many previous studies have also failed to establish any clear cancer link, but a U.S. study in February found that using a mobile phone can change brain cell activity.

IARC director Christopher Wild said it was important that more research be conducted, particularly into long-term and heavy use of mobile phones.

“Pending the availability of such information, it is important to take pragmatic measures to reduce exposure such as hands-free devices or texting,” he said.

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/02/us-cancer-cellphones-idUSTRE74U4R920110602

7 Ways to Reduce Stress

Oprah’s resident MD shares his most effective tips for reducing stress.

There’s a reason it’s called the restroom: It’s the one place—at work or at home—where no one will bother you. If you’re overwhelmed, steal away for a five-minute meditation break. Inhale deeply into your belly and try to focus on your breathing. You’ll emerge calmer, and maybe even more productive. Research shows that meditation can improve your ability to concentrate.

Source: http://www.oprah.com/health/Dr-Oz-on-Stress-Reduction

A Top Doc Reveals 8 Fertility Misconceptions

As an infertility specialist, the first, and sometimes hardest, thing I have to accomplish is to assess a couple’s understanding of how the whole getting pregnant thing—naturally or otherwise—works. Despite widespread sex education and increased public awareness of the issue of infertility, many people still don’t really get it; a study from New Zealand, for instance, showed that 74% of women presenting to a fertility clinic had inadequate fertility awareness.

An extreme example: I once had a couple come in for an infertility consultation, and only after probing some of the most esoteric—and as it turns out, irrelevant—minutiae of the biology of reproduction did I find out that the husband wasn’t able to ejaculate during vaginal intercourse. (Yes, this is generally considered a prerequisite to conception.)

Source: http://www.health.com/health/article/0,,20486519,00.html

New Yorkers can’t smoke outside at parks anymore

Smokers in New York are no longer allowed to light up in parks.

The Big Apple’s outdoor smoking ban began Monday.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced last year plans to expand smoking bans at parks, beaches, marinas, boardwalks and pedestrian plazas, to prevent the effects of secondhand smoke.

Source: http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2011/05/23/new-yorkers-cant-smoke-outside-at-parks-anymore/

Quiz: What’s Your Emotional Age?

Scientists know that when it comes to your health, how old you feel may be just as important as how old you are. Harvard psychologist Ellen Langer, PhD, author of the groundbreaking book on aging Counterclockwise, has been studying this intriguing mind-body phenomenon for more than 30 years. We asked her to create a quiz to help you determine your subjective age.

Source: http://www.oprah.com/health/Subjective-Age-Quiz-Psychological-Age-Quiz

Scientists find genetic link to depression

(Reuters) - Scientists say they have discovered the first solid evidence that variations in some peoples’ genes may cause depression — one of the world’s most common and costly mental illnesses.

And in a rare occurrence in genetic research, a British-led international team’s finding of a DNA region linked to depression has been replicated by another team from the United States who were studying an entirely separate group of people.

“What’s remarkable is that both groups found exactly the same region in two separate studies,” Pamela Madden, who led the U.S. team at Washington University, said in a statement.

The researchers said they hoped the findings would bring scientists closer to developing more effective treatments for patients with depression, since currently available medicines for depression only work in around half of patients.

“These findings … will help us track down specific genes that are altered in people with this disease,” said Gerome Breen of King’s College London’s Institute of Psychiatry, who led the other research group.

The researchers said they believed many genes were involved in depression.

These findings are unlikely to benefit patients immediately, with any new drugs developed from them likely to take another 10 to 15 years. However, they will help scientists understand what may be happening at the genetic and molecular levels in people with depression.

The first study analyzed more 800 families with recurrent depression, while the second examined depression and heavy smoking in a series of families from Australia and Finland.

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/16/us-depression-genes-idUSTRE74E3V920110516

Waist fat ‘increases heart risk’

People with coronary artery disease have an increased risk of death if they have fat around the waist, according to researchers in the US.

The Mayo Clinic team, which analysed data from five studies involving 15,923 patients, found this even affected people with a normal Body Mass Index.

In the Journal of the American College of Cardiology, they said people with waist fat should try to lose weight.

The British Heart Foundation said those with heart disease should be vigilant.

The researchers at the Mayo Clinic looked at the distance around the hips and waist to measure the fat around the belly, and BMI which is a measure comparing height and weight.

There was a 75% increased risk of death for patients with high levels of fat around the waist compared with those with thin waists.

Even patients with a normal weight, a BMI between 20 and 25, had this increased risk of death if they were carrying fat around the waist.

‘Major risk’Dr Thais Coutinho, from the Mayo Clinic, said: “BMI is just a measure of weight in proportion to height. What seems to be more important is how the fat is distributed on the body.”

The researchers argue that doctors should take waist and hip measurements for all patients with coronary artery disease in order to give patients advice on how to reduce their risk.

Dr Mike Knapton, associate medical director at the British Heart Foundation, said: “This study shows that abdominal obesity is the major risk factor for patients with coronary heart disease even if they have a normal BMI and are a healthy weight.

“The study only looked at patients with coronary heart disease, but it confirms the idea that abdominal fat is ‘toxic’ and is associated with a number of other risk factors for the disease such as high blood pressure, high cholesterol and diabetes.

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-13222192