Every day, we read or hear about something we eat or do that can cause or prevent cancer. Often, what we hear one day will be the exact opposite of what we hear the next day. Dr. Joseph Imperato, medical director of radiation oncology at Lake Forest Hospital, sets the record straight on some of what has been said to cause cancer or help prevent it.
Antiperspirants
"One of the most common myths is that antiperspirants cause breast cancer," Imperato said. Proponents of this myth say when we use aluminum-based antiperspirants under our arms, our bodies absorb this aluminum, which goes into the lymph nodes and blocks them. These blocked lymph nodes, they believe, cannot effectively remove toxins, and breast cancer subsequently develops.
"In reality, when pathologists examine lymph nodes of patients with breast cancer, they never actually find a build-up of aluminum in the lymph nodes of the breast," said Imperato. "There is no truth to this myth."
Artificial sweeteners
Aspartame (aka Nutrasweet and Equal), approved in 1981 by the FDA, has also been a frequent target of cancer myths. Vocal groups have claimed aspartame is linked to increased incidence of brain and central nervous system cancers. Studies conducted to evaluate the truth of this claim found that the increased incidence of brain and nervous system cancers actually began to rise in 1973, eight years before aspartame went on the market.
EMFs
Electro-magnetic fields are emitted by devices that produce, use or transmit electric power, such as power lines and household electronics like microwaves, televisions and electric blankets. Over the past 15 years, several studies have evaluated the effect of residential exposure to EMFs and its relationship to an increased risk of cancer.
Most findings have been inconclusive, but the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences recommends increasing the space between people and devices that emit EMFs, as well as discouraging children from playing near power lines.
With the widespread use of cellular phones, people have also become concerned about the effect of EMFs so close to the brain. Studies have been conducted, but it's difficult to draw conclusions because cell phones have only been around for a short time, and because technology changes so quickly.
While no study has conclusively proven that cell phones cause brain tumors, the FDA has suggested that those concerned should reserve cell phones for shorter conversations and switch to hand-free devices that place more distance between the antenna and the phone user.
Stress
Myths about stress causing cancer are particularly disturbing in that they blame the victim. The myth insinuates that our responses to day-to-day life stressors cause cancer. While major stressors may have an impact on the immune system, Imperato said responses to day-to-day stressors do not cause cancer. "In fact, since primitive times, man has always dealt with day-to-day stressors," he said.
Yoga or meditative activities have been touted to prevent or cure cancer. Imperato noted that while yoga and meditative activities do not prevent or cure cancer, activities that strengthen the mind-body connection do help people come to terms with their situation and may help them to maintain a positive outlook.
While it is not possible to achieve zero risk of cancer, actions that consistently prove to have some protection against cancer include eating a healthy diet with a variety of fruits and vegetables and exercising. And don't smoke, because even small amounts of cigarette smoke have been linked to cancer.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Monday, June 23, 2008
Protect yourself from the sun
Summer sun brings more to worry about than a burn. Melanoma, a very common and deadly form of skin cancer, is most often caused by spending too much time in the sun without protection from ultraviolet (UV) radiation. People with fair skin and lighter hair are at greatest risk but anyone, regardless of skin color, is at risk from excessive sun exposure.
Cases of melanoma have been rising at an alarming rate, faster than any other form of cancer, and will affect one person in 50 by 2010 -- that compares to one in 1,500 people just 70 years ago.
Helping kids protect themselves and learn good skin care habits is especially important. Sunburn at any age can cause melanoma, but 80 percent of sun damage occurs before the age of 18.
"Parents play a key role in stemming the tide of melanoma," said Dr. Moira Ariano, M.D., a Wheaton dermatologist and supporter of the Glen Ellyn-based Jack H. Marston II Melanoma Fund, which raises funds and awareness to fight melanoma. "Kids need to learn good habits early and parents can set a good example."
Jack's Fund offers these sun protection tips to help reduce the risks of skin cancer:
* Don't burn. Always use sunscreen, even on cloudy days. This applies to all outdoor activities: sports, shopping, picnicking, walking or jogging, gardening, even waiting for a bus.
* Use sunscreen with sun protection factor (SPF) 15 or higher, and with ingredients that block both UVB and UVA rays. Apply sunscreen liberally and reapply every two hours.
* Cover up with clothing, including a broad-brimmed hat and UV-blocking sunglasses.
* Be sure to apply sunscreen all over, including your ears, lips, neck, hands and feet.
* Stay out of the sun when it's strongest, between 10 a.m. and 2 p.m.
* Avoid tanning and UV tanning booths. The UV radiation emitted by indoor tanning lamps is many times more intense than natural sunlight. Dangers include burns, premature aging of the skin, and the increased risk of skin cancer.
* Keep newborns out of the sun. Sunscreens should be used on babies over the age of six months. Zinc sunscreen is especially good for small children.
* Examine your skin head-to-toe every month and see a dermatologist for a skin and mole check. Early detection is the key to beating melanoma.
Cases of melanoma have been rising at an alarming rate, faster than any other form of cancer, and will affect one person in 50 by 2010 -- that compares to one in 1,500 people just 70 years ago.
Helping kids protect themselves and learn good skin care habits is especially important. Sunburn at any age can cause melanoma, but 80 percent of sun damage occurs before the age of 18.
"Parents play a key role in stemming the tide of melanoma," said Dr. Moira Ariano, M.D., a Wheaton dermatologist and supporter of the Glen Ellyn-based Jack H. Marston II Melanoma Fund, which raises funds and awareness to fight melanoma. "Kids need to learn good habits early and parents can set a good example."
Jack's Fund offers these sun protection tips to help reduce the risks of skin cancer:
* Don't burn. Always use sunscreen, even on cloudy days. This applies to all outdoor activities: sports, shopping, picnicking, walking or jogging, gardening, even waiting for a bus.
* Use sunscreen with sun protection factor (SPF) 15 or higher, and with ingredients that block both UVB and UVA rays. Apply sunscreen liberally and reapply every two hours.
* Cover up with clothing, including a broad-brimmed hat and UV-blocking sunglasses.
* Be sure to apply sunscreen all over, including your ears, lips, neck, hands and feet.
* Stay out of the sun when it's strongest, between 10 a.m. and 2 p.m.
* Avoid tanning and UV tanning booths. The UV radiation emitted by indoor tanning lamps is many times more intense than natural sunlight. Dangers include burns, premature aging of the skin, and the increased risk of skin cancer.
* Keep newborns out of the sun. Sunscreens should be used on babies over the age of six months. Zinc sunscreen is especially good for small children.
* Examine your skin head-to-toe every month and see a dermatologist for a skin and mole check. Early detection is the key to beating melanoma.
Saturday, June 21, 2008
Exercise and Health
A recent study in the Journal of the American Medical Association shows that even exercising less than standard recommendations offers some health benefits. But it was published just one month after another study found that getting beyond the standard 30 minutes of daily moderate activity brings dramatically better weight control.
The emerging message of these and previous studies seems to be: The benefits of physical activity vary with how much you do.
The good news that every little bit helps comes from a study of 464 sedentary, post-menopausal women who were all either overweight or obese.
The women were randomly assigned to one of four activity-level groups:
Three of the groups provided supervised exercise at either 50, 100 or 150 percent of the National Institutes of Health recommended physical activity, which aims for about 30 minutes five days a week.
The fourth group was a non-exercising group. The group at 50 percent exercised for an average of 72 minutes weekly. The group at 150 percent got in an average 192 minutes of weekly exercise.
Participants were not instructed to cut calories. After six months, three different measurements showed all three activity groups were more fit, even in the 50 percent group that exercised the equivalent of 15 minutes five days a week. Each increase in exercise brought a greater improvement in fitness.
The JAMA study adds further support to the 2001 findings from the Women's Health Study that those who walked even 60 to 90 minutes weekly developed about half the heart disease as sedentary women. However, in this new study, only the group exercising the longest showed a drop in blood pressure.
The other recently published study found that it may take a lot of exercise to affect weight loss.
The study randomly assigned 202 men and women ages 25 to 50 to either be on a standard behavior change weight reduction program or one that required more exercise. Participants were about 30 to 70 pounds overweight. Both programs included a low-calorie diet. The standard program instructed members to burn about 1,000 calories per week (about 30 minutes a day of moderate activity, such as walking); the high-exercise group was asked to burn about 2,500 calories per week (about 75 minutes of exercise a day).
After one year without group support, average exercise levels were roughly the same for both groups and the high-exercise group had lost only slightly more weight than the standard group.
However, there remained a link between participants who exercised the most and weight loss.
Those who were exercising the equivalent of at least 75 minutes five days a week lost more than 10 times as much weight as those exercising less than 30 minutes five times a week. Participants exercising the most also showed much less weight regain.
A variety of studies over the years have shown an association between 30 minutes of daily moderate exercise and reduced heart disease and diabetes. Some studies have shown 30 minutes of daily exercise can lead to weight loss and/or a fitter body. However, as these studies show, if you've been exercising and not losing weight, you may need to add another 15 to 30 minutes of activity, change what you eat, or both.
The emerging message of these and previous studies seems to be: The benefits of physical activity vary with how much you do.
The good news that every little bit helps comes from a study of 464 sedentary, post-menopausal women who were all either overweight or obese.
The women were randomly assigned to one of four activity-level groups:
Three of the groups provided supervised exercise at either 50, 100 or 150 percent of the National Institutes of Health recommended physical activity, which aims for about 30 minutes five days a week.
The fourth group was a non-exercising group. The group at 50 percent exercised for an average of 72 minutes weekly. The group at 150 percent got in an average 192 minutes of weekly exercise.
Participants were not instructed to cut calories. After six months, three different measurements showed all three activity groups were more fit, even in the 50 percent group that exercised the equivalent of 15 minutes five days a week. Each increase in exercise brought a greater improvement in fitness.
The JAMA study adds further support to the 2001 findings from the Women's Health Study that those who walked even 60 to 90 minutes weekly developed about half the heart disease as sedentary women. However, in this new study, only the group exercising the longest showed a drop in blood pressure.
The other recently published study found that it may take a lot of exercise to affect weight loss.
The study randomly assigned 202 men and women ages 25 to 50 to either be on a standard behavior change weight reduction program or one that required more exercise. Participants were about 30 to 70 pounds overweight. Both programs included a low-calorie diet. The standard program instructed members to burn about 1,000 calories per week (about 30 minutes a day of moderate activity, such as walking); the high-exercise group was asked to burn about 2,500 calories per week (about 75 minutes of exercise a day).
After one year without group support, average exercise levels were roughly the same for both groups and the high-exercise group had lost only slightly more weight than the standard group.
However, there remained a link between participants who exercised the most and weight loss.
Those who were exercising the equivalent of at least 75 minutes five days a week lost more than 10 times as much weight as those exercising less than 30 minutes five times a week. Participants exercising the most also showed much less weight regain.
A variety of studies over the years have shown an association between 30 minutes of daily moderate exercise and reduced heart disease and diabetes. Some studies have shown 30 minutes of daily exercise can lead to weight loss and/or a fitter body. However, as these studies show, if you've been exercising and not losing weight, you may need to add another 15 to 30 minutes of activity, change what you eat, or both.
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Medicare to cover sleep apnea testing
Loud snoring doesn't just annoy your spouse. It could signal dangerous sleep apnea, yet millions go undiagnosed.
A government move may help change that: Medicare is poised to allow at-home testing for sleep apnea -- letting people snooze in their own beds instead of spending the night in a sleep laboratory.
It's a controversial proposal, but potentially a far-reaching one. Some 18 million Americans are estimated to suffer from sleep apnea, yet specialists think fewer than half know it.
"It's been awkward and inconvenient and expensive to get a sleep test, and now that should be improved," said Dr. Terence Davidson of the University of California, San Diego, a longtime proponent of home-testing.
Today, Medicare pays for sleep apnea treatment -- called CPAP, a mask that blows air through the nose while sleeping -- only for seniors diagnosed in a sleep lab. Last month, Medicare proposed covering those diagnosed with cheaper home tests, too. Final approval is expected in March.
While sleep apnea is a problem for seniors, it is most common in middle-aged men. But private insurers now reluctant to cover home apnea testing are expected to follow the government's lead, thus easing access for all ages.
Sleep apnea doesn't just deprive family members of their own zzzzs. Sufferers actually quit breathing for 30 seconds or so at a time, as their throat muscles temporarily collapse. They jerk awake to gasp in air, sometimes more than 15 times an hour. They're fatigued the next day because their brains never got enough deep sleep.
Severe apnea increases the chance of a car crash sevenfold. Research from UCSD suggests 1,400 deaths each year are caused by drivers with sleep apnea.
Worse, sleep apnea stresses the body in ways that also increase risk of high blood pressure, heart attack, stroke and diabetes.
Not every apnea patient is a bad snorer, and a low rumble may not be cause for concern. But sleep apnea's trademark is bad snoring, the snorting, choking kind. Other risk factors: Being overweight, having small airways and apnea in the family.
Yet patients don't remember the nightly breathing struggle, and often don't see a doctor unless a family member complains about snoring -- or until daytime sleepiness gets so bad they can't function.
Only then comes the test debate.
There are dozens of sleep disorders. A night slumbering in a sleep lab, hooked to monitors that measure both breathing and brain waves while health workers watch, has long been the standard for telling who has sleep apnea or another disorder.
But this lab-based polysomnography, or PSG, can cost $1,500. And while access has improved, there are swaths of the country where reaching a sleep lab can mean a few hundred miles drive.
For about $500, home tests use primarily breathing monitors to detect only sleep apnea, not other disorders. Hook it up at bedtime, and a doctor checks the recordings later.
A home test can miss apnea, because it won't signal if someone never fell into that deep REM sleep where breathing is most likely to falter, said Dr. Thomas Gravelyn of the Saint Joseph Mercy Hospital sleep center in Ann Arbor, Mich., who opposes the Medicare change.
"You have this good feeling that everything was taken care of, when in fact it wasn't," he said.
"It certainly is possible to diagnose severe apnea at home," added Dr. Joyce Walsleben, chief of New York University's sleep center. "What if it isn't severe? Are you willing to say it doesn't exist at all if you get a negative study?"
Still, a Canadian study published last year randomly assigned suspected apnea sufferers to either a sleep lab or home testing, and found they worked equally well.
Last month, the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, which represents sleep centers, changed its position to say home tests can help certain high-risk patients -- but should be administered by sleep specialists.
Medicare's proposal wouldn't limit which doctors offer home tests. The American Academy of Otolaryngology, head-and-neck surgeons, requested the change.
In fact, Medicare concluded a sleep-lab test isn't perfect, either -- and thus proposed that all patients get a 12-week trial of CPAP treatment. Only if their doctors certify they're being helped would treatment continue.
That's important, because about half of apnea patients prescribed CPAP struggle to use it, said Dr. Charles Atwood of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, a home-test proponent.
What he calls tricks of the trade -- trying differently shaped masks, adjusting the air pressure, adding a humidifier to moisten nostrils -- early could keep more of them in care.
Consider Raymond Miles, 57, diagnosed with a sleep-lab study a few years ago. While he felt better with CPAP treatment, Miles quit it in frustration when he couldn't get help maintaining it.
Two weeks ago, nudged by his wife, Miles underwent a home test with a different doctor to see if it's time to try care again.
"There's a different level of comfort being at home," Miles said.
Healthy Trust Immediate Medical Care serves the Chicago North Shore Communities of Lake County, Wheeling, Prospect Heights, Lincolnshire, Deerfield, Buffalo Grove, Northbrook, Highland Park, Long Grove, Riverwoods, Des Plaines, Palatine, Glenview, Highwood, Northfield, Libertyville, Winnetka, Arlington Heights, Mount Prospect, Lake Bluff, Lake Forest, Mundelein, and Bannockburn.
A government move may help change that: Medicare is poised to allow at-home testing for sleep apnea -- letting people snooze in their own beds instead of spending the night in a sleep laboratory.
It's a controversial proposal, but potentially a far-reaching one. Some 18 million Americans are estimated to suffer from sleep apnea, yet specialists think fewer than half know it.
"It's been awkward and inconvenient and expensive to get a sleep test, and now that should be improved," said Dr. Terence Davidson of the University of California, San Diego, a longtime proponent of home-testing.
Today, Medicare pays for sleep apnea treatment -- called CPAP, a mask that blows air through the nose while sleeping -- only for seniors diagnosed in a sleep lab. Last month, Medicare proposed covering those diagnosed with cheaper home tests, too. Final approval is expected in March.
While sleep apnea is a problem for seniors, it is most common in middle-aged men. But private insurers now reluctant to cover home apnea testing are expected to follow the government's lead, thus easing access for all ages.
Sleep apnea doesn't just deprive family members of their own zzzzs. Sufferers actually quit breathing for 30 seconds or so at a time, as their throat muscles temporarily collapse. They jerk awake to gasp in air, sometimes more than 15 times an hour. They're fatigued the next day because their brains never got enough deep sleep.
Severe apnea increases the chance of a car crash sevenfold. Research from UCSD suggests 1,400 deaths each year are caused by drivers with sleep apnea.
Worse, sleep apnea stresses the body in ways that also increase risk of high blood pressure, heart attack, stroke and diabetes.
Not every apnea patient is a bad snorer, and a low rumble may not be cause for concern. But sleep apnea's trademark is bad snoring, the snorting, choking kind. Other risk factors: Being overweight, having small airways and apnea in the family.
Yet patients don't remember the nightly breathing struggle, and often don't see a doctor unless a family member complains about snoring -- or until daytime sleepiness gets so bad they can't function.
Only then comes the test debate.
There are dozens of sleep disorders. A night slumbering in a sleep lab, hooked to monitors that measure both breathing and brain waves while health workers watch, has long been the standard for telling who has sleep apnea or another disorder.
But this lab-based polysomnography, or PSG, can cost $1,500. And while access has improved, there are swaths of the country where reaching a sleep lab can mean a few hundred miles drive.
For about $500, home tests use primarily breathing monitors to detect only sleep apnea, not other disorders. Hook it up at bedtime, and a doctor checks the recordings later.
A home test can miss apnea, because it won't signal if someone never fell into that deep REM sleep where breathing is most likely to falter, said Dr. Thomas Gravelyn of the Saint Joseph Mercy Hospital sleep center in Ann Arbor, Mich., who opposes the Medicare change.
"You have this good feeling that everything was taken care of, when in fact it wasn't," he said.
"It certainly is possible to diagnose severe apnea at home," added Dr. Joyce Walsleben, chief of New York University's sleep center. "What if it isn't severe? Are you willing to say it doesn't exist at all if you get a negative study?"
Still, a Canadian study published last year randomly assigned suspected apnea sufferers to either a sleep lab or home testing, and found they worked equally well.
Last month, the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, which represents sleep centers, changed its position to say home tests can help certain high-risk patients -- but should be administered by sleep specialists.
Medicare's proposal wouldn't limit which doctors offer home tests. The American Academy of Otolaryngology, head-and-neck surgeons, requested the change.
In fact, Medicare concluded a sleep-lab test isn't perfect, either -- and thus proposed that all patients get a 12-week trial of CPAP treatment. Only if their doctors certify they're being helped would treatment continue.
That's important, because about half of apnea patients prescribed CPAP struggle to use it, said Dr. Charles Atwood of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, a home-test proponent.
What he calls tricks of the trade -- trying differently shaped masks, adjusting the air pressure, adding a humidifier to moisten nostrils -- early could keep more of them in care.
Consider Raymond Miles, 57, diagnosed with a sleep-lab study a few years ago. While he felt better with CPAP treatment, Miles quit it in frustration when he couldn't get help maintaining it.
Two weeks ago, nudged by his wife, Miles underwent a home test with a different doctor to see if it's time to try care again.
"There's a different level of comfort being at home," Miles said.
Healthy Trust Immediate Medical Care serves the Chicago North Shore Communities of Lake County, Wheeling, Prospect Heights, Lincolnshire, Deerfield, Buffalo Grove, Northbrook, Highland Park, Long Grove, Riverwoods, Des Plaines, Palatine, Glenview, Highwood, Northfield, Libertyville, Winnetka, Arlington Heights, Mount Prospect, Lake Bluff, Lake Forest, Mundelein, and Bannockburn.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
UV Rays can harm eyes
Most people know the harmful effects that ultraviolet rays can have on the skin. But many are not aware of the damage that they can cause to the eyes. Possibly the most frightening aspect of UV damage is that it is cumulative, meaning the negative effects may not present themselves until years later.
A recent survey, sponsored by Transitions Optical, Inc., revealed that although 82 percent of respondents knew that extended exposure to the sun could cause skin cancer, only 9 percent knew it could damage vision. Additionally, only one in six respondents said they wear sunglasses when they prepare for extended exposure to the sun and only approximately one third said they wear a hat.
"Most of us wouldn't dream of staying outside in the sun without putting on sunscreen lotion," said Daniel D. Garrett, senior vice president of Prevent Blindness America. "But we also have to remember to wear both UV-blocking lenses and a brimmed hat to protect our eyes as well."
Prevent Blindness America offers an online resource for patients and their loved ones to learn more about what they can do to protect their eyes.
Extended UV exposure has been linked to eye damage including:
* Cataracts -- a major cause of visual impairment and blindness worldwide. Cataracts are a cloudiness of the lens inside the eye that develops over a period of many years. Laboratory studies have implicated UV radiation as a cause of cataract. Furthermore, studies have shown that certain types of cataract are associated with a history of higher ocular exposure to UV and especially UV-B radiation.
* Age-related macular degeneration -- a leading cause of vision loss in the United States for people age 55 and older. Exposure to UV and intense violet/blue visible radiation is damaging to retinal tissue and scientists have speculated that chronic UV or intense violet/blue light exposure may contribute to degenerative processes in the retina.
* Pterygium -- a growth of tissue on the white of the eye that may extend onto the clear cornea where it can block vision. It can be removed surgically, but often recurs, and can cause cosmetic concerns and vision loss if untreated.
* Photokeratitis -- essentially, a reversible sunburn of the cornea resulting from excessive UV-B exposure. It can be extremely painful and can result in temporary loss of vision. There is some indication that long-term exposure to UV-B can result in corneal and conjunctival degenerative changes.
Fortunately, eye protection doesn't have to be expensive to be effective. Quality sunglasses should block out 99 to 100 percent of both UV-A and UV-B radiation and prices vary. For UV protection in everyday eyewear, there are several options like UV-blocking lens materials, coatings and photochromic lenses.
A recent survey, sponsored by Transitions Optical, Inc., revealed that although 82 percent of respondents knew that extended exposure to the sun could cause skin cancer, only 9 percent knew it could damage vision. Additionally, only one in six respondents said they wear sunglasses when they prepare for extended exposure to the sun and only approximately one third said they wear a hat.
"Most of us wouldn't dream of staying outside in the sun without putting on sunscreen lotion," said Daniel D. Garrett, senior vice president of Prevent Blindness America. "But we also have to remember to wear both UV-blocking lenses and a brimmed hat to protect our eyes as well."
Prevent Blindness America offers an online resource for patients and their loved ones to learn more about what they can do to protect their eyes.
Extended UV exposure has been linked to eye damage including:
* Cataracts -- a major cause of visual impairment and blindness worldwide. Cataracts are a cloudiness of the lens inside the eye that develops over a period of many years. Laboratory studies have implicated UV radiation as a cause of cataract. Furthermore, studies have shown that certain types of cataract are associated with a history of higher ocular exposure to UV and especially UV-B radiation.
* Age-related macular degeneration -- a leading cause of vision loss in the United States for people age 55 and older. Exposure to UV and intense violet/blue visible radiation is damaging to retinal tissue and scientists have speculated that chronic UV or intense violet/blue light exposure may contribute to degenerative processes in the retina.
* Pterygium -- a growth of tissue on the white of the eye that may extend onto the clear cornea where it can block vision. It can be removed surgically, but often recurs, and can cause cosmetic concerns and vision loss if untreated.
* Photokeratitis -- essentially, a reversible sunburn of the cornea resulting from excessive UV-B exposure. It can be extremely painful and can result in temporary loss of vision. There is some indication that long-term exposure to UV-B can result in corneal and conjunctival degenerative changes.
Fortunately, eye protection doesn't have to be expensive to be effective. Quality sunglasses should block out 99 to 100 percent of both UV-A and UV-B radiation and prices vary. For UV protection in everyday eyewear, there are several options like UV-blocking lens materials, coatings and photochromic lenses.
Sunday, June 15, 2008
Recognizing Anaphylaxis
An anaphylactic reaction may start off innocently enough, with a tingling or itching sensation or a strange metallic taste. Other common symptoms include hives, a sensation of warmth, trouble breathing or swelling of the mouth and throat. Symptoms may develop within minutes or as long as two hours after exposure, but life-threatening reactions may take up to several hours to appear.
Because exposure to any offending substance can quickly progress to severe anaphylaxis and even death, persons experiencing a combination of the following symptoms are advised to seek emergency care right away:
* Difficulty breathing due to narrowing of airways and swelling of the throat
* Wheezing, coughing or unusual (high-pitched) breathing sounds
* Confusion, slurred speech or anxiety
* Difficulty swallowing
* Swelling of the tongue, throat and nasal passages
* Localized edema or swelling, especially involving the face
* Itchiness and redness on the skin, lips, eyelids or other areas of the body
* Skin eruptions and large welts or hives
* Skin redness, at the site of a bee sting, for example
* Bluish skin color, especially the lips or nail beds, or grayish in darker complexions
* Nausea, stomach cramping, vomiting/diarrhea
* Heart palpitations (feeling the heart beating)
* Weak and rapid pulse
* Dizziness, a drop in blood pressure, fainting or unconsciousness, which can lead to shock and heart failure
Because exposure to any offending substance can quickly progress to severe anaphylaxis and even death, persons experiencing a combination of the following symptoms are advised to seek emergency care right away:
* Difficulty breathing due to narrowing of airways and swelling of the throat
* Wheezing, coughing or unusual (high-pitched) breathing sounds
* Confusion, slurred speech or anxiety
* Difficulty swallowing
* Swelling of the tongue, throat and nasal passages
* Localized edema or swelling, especially involving the face
* Itchiness and redness on the skin, lips, eyelids or other areas of the body
* Skin eruptions and large welts or hives
* Skin redness, at the site of a bee sting, for example
* Bluish skin color, especially the lips or nail beds, or grayish in darker complexions
* Nausea, stomach cramping, vomiting/diarrhea
* Heart palpitations (feeling the heart beating)
* Weak and rapid pulse
* Dizziness, a drop in blood pressure, fainting or unconsciousness, which can lead to shock and heart failure
Friday, June 13, 2008
115-year-old's brain worked perfectly
A Dutch woman who was the oldest person in the world when she died at age 115 in 2005 appeared sharp right up to the end, joking that pickled herring was the secret to her longevity.
Scientists say that Henrikje van Andel-Schipper's mind was probably as good as it seemed: a post-mortem analysis of her brain revealed few signs of Alzheimer's or other diseases commonly associated with a decline in mental ability in old age.
That came as something of a surprise, said Gert Holstege, a professor at Groningen University, whose findings will be published in the August edition of Neurobiology of Aging.
"Everybody was thinking that when you have a brain over 100 years, you have a lot of problems," he said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press on Friday.
He cited a common hardening of arteries and the build up of proteins associated with Alzheimer's disease as examples.
"This is the first (extremely old) brain that did not have these problems."
Van Andel was the oldest living person in the world at the time of her death in 2005 in the Dutch city of Hoogeveen, according to the Guinness Book of World Records.
In 1972, the then 82-year-old Van Andel called the University of Groningen in order to donate her body to science. She called again at age 111 because she worried she might no longer be of interest. At that time Holstege began to interview her, testing her cognitive abilities at ages 112 and 113. Though she had problems with her eyesight, she was alert and performing better than the average 60- to 75-year-old.
Dr. Murali Doraiswamy of the Center for Aging at Duke University, not associated with the study, said it is unusual and valuable.
In the first place there are few "super-centenarians" - people 110 and older - alive at any one time, a slim proportion of the world's population and a scant number even compared to those who reach 100 years.
As a result, he said, there are few chances to study brains as old as hers.
"It's very rare to be able to do not only a post-mortem, but also be able to have tested her two, three years before she died," said Doraiswamy.
"For a scientist, getting the opportunity to study someone like that is like winning the lottery."
Doraiswamy, an Alzheimer's expert, said that the proportion of brains with some buildup of proteins associated with the disease increases with age. As a result, experts theorize anybody who lives long enough will get them eventually.
When Van Andel died, the director of the elderly home where she was living declined to give a cause of death, pointing to her extremely advanced years.
Holstege said she died of cancer.
"She died from stomach cancer, and you and I can also die from stomach cancer," he said, adding that her case demonstrates that very old people die of diseases, not simply old age.
"It is very important to treat the elderly as normal people, as if they are 50 or 60."
He noted that Van Andel was operated on at age 100 for breast cancer and survived 15 more years.
When she was born in 1890, she weighed only 3.5 pounds, and her mother expected her to die in infancy. Van Andel's husband died in 1959. She had no children.
Longevity was in her genes, as all her siblings lived past 70, and her mother died at the age of 100.
Asked what advice she would give to people who want to live a long time, she once quipped: "Keep breathing."
Scientists say that Henrikje van Andel-Schipper's mind was probably as good as it seemed: a post-mortem analysis of her brain revealed few signs of Alzheimer's or other diseases commonly associated with a decline in mental ability in old age.
That came as something of a surprise, said Gert Holstege, a professor at Groningen University, whose findings will be published in the August edition of Neurobiology of Aging.
"Everybody was thinking that when you have a brain over 100 years, you have a lot of problems," he said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press on Friday.
He cited a common hardening of arteries and the build up of proteins associated with Alzheimer's disease as examples.
"This is the first (extremely old) brain that did not have these problems."
Van Andel was the oldest living person in the world at the time of her death in 2005 in the Dutch city of Hoogeveen, according to the Guinness Book of World Records.
In 1972, the then 82-year-old Van Andel called the University of Groningen in order to donate her body to science. She called again at age 111 because she worried she might no longer be of interest. At that time Holstege began to interview her, testing her cognitive abilities at ages 112 and 113. Though she had problems with her eyesight, she was alert and performing better than the average 60- to 75-year-old.
Dr. Murali Doraiswamy of the Center for Aging at Duke University, not associated with the study, said it is unusual and valuable.
In the first place there are few "super-centenarians" - people 110 and older - alive at any one time, a slim proportion of the world's population and a scant number even compared to those who reach 100 years.
As a result, he said, there are few chances to study brains as old as hers.
"It's very rare to be able to do not only a post-mortem, but also be able to have tested her two, three years before she died," said Doraiswamy.
"For a scientist, getting the opportunity to study someone like that is like winning the lottery."
Doraiswamy, an Alzheimer's expert, said that the proportion of brains with some buildup of proteins associated with the disease increases with age. As a result, experts theorize anybody who lives long enough will get them eventually.
When Van Andel died, the director of the elderly home where she was living declined to give a cause of death, pointing to her extremely advanced years.
Holstege said she died of cancer.
"She died from stomach cancer, and you and I can also die from stomach cancer," he said, adding that her case demonstrates that very old people die of diseases, not simply old age.
"It is very important to treat the elderly as normal people, as if they are 50 or 60."
He noted that Van Andel was operated on at age 100 for breast cancer and survived 15 more years.
When she was born in 1890, she weighed only 3.5 pounds, and her mother expected her to die in infancy. Van Andel's husband died in 1959. She had no children.
Longevity was in her genes, as all her siblings lived past 70, and her mother died at the age of 100.
Asked what advice she would give to people who want to live a long time, she once quipped: "Keep breathing."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)