event printing ticket world

Feb. 6, 2007 -- Teen sex -- oral or vaginal -- may have negative emotional consequences, especially for girls, according to a new study in Pediatrics.

Parents and health professionals should help teens prepare for and cope with the emotions attached to sex, say Sonya Brady, PhD, and Bonnie Halpern-Felsher, PhD.

The two researchers work at the University of California, San Francisco.

They studied a diverse group of 273 sexually active students at two California public schools between 2002 and 2004.

The students, 56% of whom were girls, all reported having had vaginal and/or oral sex by spring of 10th grade.

Of the students, 116 said they had had only oral sex, 43 said they had had only vaginal sex, and 114 said they had had both.

Consequences From Teen Sex

For the study, the students completed surveys every six months between 9th and 10th grade about the consequences they experienced from sex.

Overall, the teens reported positive consequences -- such as pleasure, popularity, and stronger relationships.

But a sizeable percentage noted negative consequences such as feeling used, getting pregnant, contracting a sexually transmitted infection, or feeling bad about themselves.

Those reporting at least one negative effect included 31% of those who had had only oral sex, 58% of those who had had only vaginal sex, and nearly 62% of those who had had both.

Gender Gap

Girls were more than twice as likely as boys to say they felt bad about themselves. Girls were also more than three times as likely to say they felt used as a result of having sex.

Those findings may partly stem from society's double standard about sex.

"These findings are consistent with research showing that boys are encouraged to be sexually experienced, whereas girls are encouraged to restrict sexual behavior," the researchers write.

Boys were more likely to say their popularity rose when they became sexually active.

But they were also more likely to report a pregnancy or sexually transmitted infection as a result of their sexual activity.

The reasons for those findings aren't clear. The boys may have been more sexually active, had more partners or risky sex, or been more willing to admit those consequences, say the researchers.

Researchers' Advice

Teens may need help in coping with the emotions that surround sex, the researchers say.

They encourage health professionals and other adults to talk with adolescents "about how decisions to engage in any type of sexual activity may have important consequences."

The study has limits. For instance, it's not clear if the results apply to all sexually active 9th and 10th grade students.

Also, the surveys didn't label the listed consequences as good or bad; the researchers classified consequences as positive or negative without teen input.

"We do not know whether consequences were viewed as positive or negative by adolescents," write Brady and Halpern-Felsher.

July 28, 2006 -- Kids mix up their nuts -- even kids with potentially life-threatening nut allergies.

Kids age 4-19 are, on average, able to identify only three out of 11 different nuts, find Los Angeles Children's Hospital researcher Ronald M. Ferdman, MD, and USC researcher Joseph A. Church.

Ferdman and Church invented the nut box. It's a clear plastic box with 12 nut samples -- peanuts in the shell, peanuts out of the shell, cashews, pecans, mixed shelled and unshelled pistachios, hazelnuts, slivered almonds, Brazil nuts, almonds, macadamia nuts, pine nuts, and walnuts.

The researchers tested 100 children, 37 of whom had nut allergies. In general, the youngest kids knew the fewest nuts. But older kids didn't do a whole lot better.

Overall, nine out of 10 kids could identify peanuts in the shell. After that, their nut IQ went downhill.

Only half the kids could identify peanuts out of the shell. Almost a third of them could pick out pistachios. Brazil nuts stumped them all -- and only two of the 100 kids knew a hazelnut (or filbert) when they saw it. Twenty-one of the kids thought all the nuts were peanuts.

Kids with nut allergies did much worse. Only one in three kids with nut allergies could identify out-of-the-shell peanuts.

"Many nut-allergic children lack the nut recognition skills that could protect them from future reactions," Ferdman and Church conclude. "The best strategy would incorporate actively teaching the affected child to recognize nuts so that he or she will be protected in every environment regardless of the skill of adult caretakers."

Even so, a lot of the allergic kids had a great strategy of their own. Nearly three-fourths of the kids with nut allergies said they would not eat the nut to which they were allergic -- and half of these kids said they avoided all nuts.

The study appears in the July issue of Annals of Allergy Asthma & Immunology.

Jan. 18, 2006 -- Don't cover babies with extra blankets or clothes during winter because of the risk of SIDS (sudden infant death syndrome).

That advice comes from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), a branch of the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

The number of infants who die of SIDS rises during the winter, notes an NICHD news release.

"During these colder months, parents often place extra blankets or clothes on infants, hoping to provide them with more warmth. In fact, the extra material may actually increase infants' risk for SIDS," states the release.

"Unless there's a medical reason not to, infants should be placed on their backs to sleep, on a firm mattress with no blankets or fluffy bedding under or over them," the release continues.

"If a blanket is used, it should be placed no higher than the baby's chest and be tucked in under the crib mattress. The baby's crib and sleep area should be free of pillows and stuffed toys, and the temperature should be kept at a level that feels comfortable for an adult," states the release.

About SIDS

SIDS is the sudden, unexpected death of an infant who is less than 1 year old with no explanation for the baby's death after a thorough investigation.

Although rare, SIDS is the leading cause of death in infants between 1 month and 1 year of age. Every year, about 2,500 U.S. babies die of SIDS, according to the NICHD.

Most SIDS cases happen when babies are 2 to 4 months old, states the NICHD.

SIDS cases have dropped by more than half since SIDS education campaigns began more than a decade ago. However, SIDS is still more common among minorities than among whites, notes the NICHD.

Tips to Help Prevent SIDS

The American Academy of Pediatrics recently updated its recommendations on SIDS prevention. The updated guidelines, which appeared in the November 2005 issue of Pediatrics, are:

• Always place your baby on his or her back to sleep -- for naps and at night.
• Place your baby on a firm sleep surface, such as on a safety-approved crib mattress, covered by a fitted sheet.
• Keep soft objects, toys, and loose bedding out of your baby's sleep area.
• Do not smoke or allow smoking around your baby.
• Don't share your bed with your baby during sleep. Keep your baby's sleep area close to, but separate from, where you and others sleep.
• Consider offering a clean pacifier when placing your baby on his or her back to sleep.
• Don't let your baby overheat during sleep.
• Avoid products that claim to reduce SIDS risk. Effectiveness and safety of these products have not been thoroughly tested.
• Don't use home monitors as a way to reduce SIDS risk. There is no proof that these monitors decrease the occurrence of SIDS.
• Reduce the chance that flat spots will develop on your baby's head by providing "tummy time" when your baby is awake and someone is watching, changing the direction that your baby lies in the crib, and avoiding too much time in car seats, carriers, and bouncers.

Recently, British researchers warned that parents shouldn't share a couch with a baby during sleep, either.

June 16, 2004 -- Seattle is the best major city for kids and Cleveland is the worst, according to a new ranking.

Among the 20 major cities on the list, only Seattle and Boston get an "A." Cleveland is joined by Detroit and Phoenix in getting a "C."

Des Moines, Iowa, tops the list of the next 80 largest cities. It gets an even better grade than Seattle: an "A+." So does Spokane, Wash. At the bottom of this list -- with a "C-," the worst grade given -- are Birmingham, Ala., Shreveport, La.; and New Orleans.

The ratings come from a group called Population Connection (formerly, Zero Population Growth), a group that sees overpopulation as the greatest threat to the world's quality of life. It supports family planning - including sex education -- and strongly opposes abstinence-only programs.

The ratings are based on a complex formula. The rankings consider several "indicators" of child welfare, including population indicators, health indicators, education indicators, and community indicators. These are:

• Percent change in population, an indicator of whether a city is growing or shrinking too quickly (5% of grade)
• Percent of population under 18, an indicator of whether a city's population is stable (2% of grade)
• Percent of births to teens (13% of grade)
• Infant mortality rates (9% of grade)
• Percent of eligible women getting public reproductive health services (1% of grade)
• Whether state laws require insurers to cover contraceptive drugs (7% of grade)
• Percent of children without health insurance (3% of grade)
• Percent of residents with a high-school diploma (11% of grade)
• Ratio of teachers that received training from Population Connection (6% of grade)
• Whether sex education is required, whether it is medically accurate, whether it discusses abstinence and contraception, and whether it is age appropriate (8% of grade)
• Student proficiency in reading (2% of grade)
• Student proficiency in math (5% of grade)
• Percentage of kids living in poverty (5% of grade)
• Percent growth in urbanized land (3% of grade)
• Violent crime rate (8% of grade)
• Recycling (12% of grade)

The report, Kid-Friendly Cities Report Card 2004, is available on the Population Connection web site. It offers detailed information on each city. It also features one thing each city is doing especially right.

Here are the ratings, and the grade assigned to each city. But Population Connection says the ratings and grades don't matter as much as what you do with them.

"Forget about the rankings. Ignore the grades," the report states. "We hope that [the report] will inspire families, individuals, activists, and officials to work together to create better communities -- instead of just moving to 'better' places."

Major Cities:
1 Seattle: A
2 Boston: A
3 San Diego: A-
4 San Francisco: A-
5 Minneapolis: A-
6 New York: B+
7 Denver: B+
8 Philadelphia: B+
9 Chicago: B+
10 Los Angeles: B
11 St. Louis: B
12 Washington, DC: B
13 Atlanta: B
14 Baltimore: B-
15 Houston: B-
16 Dallas: B-
17 Miami: C+
18 Phoenix: C
19 Detroit: C
20 Cleveland: C

Large Cities:

1 Des Moines, Iowa: A+
2 Spokane, Wash: A+
3 Madison, Wis.: A
4 Fremont, Calif.: A
5 Yonkers, N.Y.: A
6 Glendale, Calif.: A
7 Kansas City, Mo.: A
8 Indianapolis: A
9 Fort Wayne, Ind.: A-
10 St. Paul, Minn.: A-
11 Raleigh, N.C.: A-
12 Tacoma, Wash.: A-
13 Anchorage, Alaska: A-
14 San Jose, Calif.: A-
15 Greensboro, N.C.: A-
16 Portland, Ore.: A-
17 Lincoln, Neb.: A-
18 Lexington, Ky.: A-
19 Virginia Beach, Va.: A-
20 Grand Rapids, Mich.: B+
21 Rochester, N.Y.: B+
22 Pittsburgh: B+
23 Omaha, Neb.: B+
24 Louisville, Ky.: B+
25 Oakland, Calif.: B+
26 Honolulu: B+
27 Jersey City, N.J.: B+
28 Austin, Texas: B+
29 Wichita, Kan.: B+
30 Buffalo, N.Y.: B+
31 Irving, Texas: B+
32 Plano, Texas: B+
33 Colorado Springs, Colo.: B+
34 Scottsdale, Ariz.: B+
35 Augusta, Ga.: B
36 Aurora, Colo.: B
37 Sacramento, Calif.: B
38 Newark, N.J.: B
39 Charlotte, N.C.: B
40 Anaheim, Calif.: B
41 Riverside, Calif.: B
42 Arlington, Texas: B
43 Long Beach, Calif.: B
44 Garland, Texas: B
45 Milwaukee, Wis.: B
46 Akron, Ohio: B
47 Columbus, Ohio: B
48 Mesa, Ariz.: B
49 Tucson, Ariz.: B
50 Norfolk, Va.: B-
51 Jacksonville, Fla.: B-
52 Fort Worth, Texas: B-
53 Albuquerque, N.M.: B-
54 San Antonio: B-
55 Chesapeake, Va.: B-
56 Glendale, Ariz.: B-
57 Hialeah, Fla.: B-
58 Toledo, Ohio: B-
59 Santa Ana, Calif.: B-
60 Cincinnati: B-
61 Tampa, Fla.: B-
62 Corpus Christi, Texas: B-
63 Stockton, Calif.: C+
64 Lubbock, Tex.: C+
65 Richmond, Va.: C+
66 Tulsa, Okla.: C+
67 Nashville, Tenn.: C+
68 Las Vegas: C+
69 Montgomery, Ala.: C+
70 St. Petersburg, Fla.: C+
71 Fresno, Calif.: C+
72 Oklahoma City: C+
73 Mobile, Ala.: C
74 El Paso, Texas: C
75 Baton Rouge, La.: C
76 Bakersfield, Calif.: C
77 Memphis, Tenn.: C-
78 New Orleans: C-
79 Shreveport, La: C-
80 Birmingham, Ala.: C-

The report card comes out once every two years.

March 22, 2004 -- New research challenges the widely held belief that delaying the introduction of solid foods helps reduce an infant's risk of developing asthma and allergies later in life. German investigators found no evidence that this is the case, calling into question expert guidelines recommending such delays in high-risk infants.

But a separate investigation from the U.K. appeared to contradict the German conclusion, finding that preterm infants did seem to benefit from later introduction of solid foods. Both studies are published in the latest issue of the journal Archives of Disease in Childhood.

"The advice of expert committees in the U.S. and Europe to delay the introduction of solid foods to reduce allergy risk is based on very little evidence," childhood allergy specialist Abbas Khakoo, FRCPCH, tells WebMD. "In my mind, the (German) study finding no benefit to such a practice is among the best research that has been done in this area. Given what we know right now, the expert recommendations cannot be justified."

Four percent to 6% of children have food allergies, and according to the American Academy of Pediatrics, the rate of food allergies in children has increased in the past decade. Chicken eggs, cow's milk, peanuts, fish, nuts, wheat, and soy are the most common.

The Studies

In the German study, 642 children were followed from birth to age 5 1/2. Researcher Anne Zutavern and colleagues found no evidence that delaying the introduction of solid foods helped protect the children against asthma, allergies, wheezing, or eczema.

On the contrary, the researchers found that introducing eggs later in life increased the risk of eczema and preschool wheezing, which is a common predictor of asthma.

The U.K. study included 257 infants born prematurely and studied for a year following their birth. Researchers showed that the introduction of four or more different solid foods prior to age 4 months was associated with a threefold increased risk of eczema.

Morgan tells WebMD that it is probably safe to introduce one or two solid foods that are not linked to allergies prior to age 4 months.

AAP Recommendations

In an editorial accompanying the two studies, Khakoo called for further research, noting that these and other conflicting studies do not allow a definitive statement on the impact of solid food introduction on allergies.

"It is surprising that expert committees like the ones in the United States and Europe have taken stands on this issue when there is so little evidence to support the link," Khakoo tells WebMD.

The American Academy of Pediatrics' recommends that infants at high risk for allergies, asthma, and eczema be exclusively breastfed for at least six months. Further delays are recommended for the introduction of foods typically associated with allergies. The guidelines call for delaying the introduction of cow's milk for one year; eggs until age 2; and tree nuts, peanuts, and fish until age 3.

AAP nutrition committee member Frank Greer, MD, agrees that there is little scientific evidence to support the recommendations. He tells WebMD that he is currently revising an AAP policy statement of infant formulas and allergies.

"The data just aren't there to make a strong statement on this issue," he says.

Khakoo says he supports a recent World Health Organization statement calling for the exclusive breastfeeding of babies until they are at least 6 months old, but he adds that, "from an allergy point of view, we can't really say right now if it is beneficial."

Last year's hottest supermarket craze -- low-carb products -- can be found in this year's clearance aisle. In a country obsessed with dieting, we've seen low-fat, fat-free, sugar-free, low-carb, and no-carb foods come and go with little impact on our girth. In fact, as a nation, we're heavier than ever.

So what new foods can you expect to see next on your supermarket shelves? WebMD asked the experts for their predictions on the latest trends.

As with most everything else, baby boomers are affecting how the nation eats, according to the NPD Marketing group. Boomers made their mark with fast food in the '60s, fern bars in the '70s, microwaves in the '80s, take-out in the '90s, and a trend toward healthier foods today, according to Harry Balzar, NPD's vice president. As the boomers age, they are coping with health and weight concerns that drive their eating patterns.

But boomers aren't the only ones behind changes in food buying habits.

"Increasing Latin populations have had an enormous impact on our food trends," says supermarket guru Phil Lempert, editor of the Facts, Figures and the Future newsletter. "They don't drink sodas with high-fructose corn syrup, and their diets are more abundant in fruits, vegetables, and fresh foods."

Among the once-exotic fruits and vegetables Hispanic cuisine is bringing to supermarket shelves are mangoes, cherimoyas, and a host of others, says trend tracker Linda Gilbert, president of the HealthFocus market analysis firm.

Another issue that continues to exert a huge influence on food manufacturers: our ever-increasing desire for convenience.

What's In, What's Out

To address the nation's health concerns, manufacturers are scrambling to reformulate foods that taste good but are lower in fat, salt, cholesterol, and sugar. Many are designed to help reduce cholesterol, prevent type 2 diabetes, and protect the heart.

Cholesterol-lowering, plant-derived chemicals called sterols are being added to orange juice, dark chocolate, yogurt, and margarine. The FDA has determined that some products containing sterols may carry a heart-healthy claim.

Another heart-protective ingredient comes from fatty fish and vegetable oils -- omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids. Higher intakes of food that contain these fats are an option for the heart-healthy conscious. Flaxseeds, walnuts, and their oils are among the richest sources of these fatty acids.

Another trend is foods that are enriched, fortified, or otherwise pumped up nutritionally. Manufacturers are adding nutrients such as calcium and folate to foods to help fill the nutritional gaps in our diets.

"This is great for minerals such as calcium for people who have trouble tolerating dairy," says Linda McDonald, RD, editor of the Supermarket Savvy newsletter. But she notes, "some food manufacturers have taken it too far." Eating some foods or beverages is similar to taking a vitamin pill -- and they don't always taste so great, she says.

At the same time, manufacturers are rushing to remove another ingredient, artery-clogging trans fats, from their products. Trans fats, also known as hydrogenated fats, are found in many processed foods and are made by turning liquid vegetable oils into solid products like margarine and shortening.

On the heels of the 2005 Dietary Guidelines' recommendation to limit trans fats, many manufacturers are reformulating products to reduce or eliminate them. In January 2006, all food labels will be required to list the amount of trans fats the foods contain. (In the meantime, be sure to read labels and compare brands.)

Of course, new food technology is about taste as well as health.

Consider slow-churned ice cream technology, which makes lower-calorie ice cream taste like the real thing without artificial sweeteners or fat substitutes. This means manufacturers can deliver the creamy taste of full-butterfat ice cream at a fraction of the calories -- now that's progress!

What's a holiday feast without a turkey or a roast with all the trimmings?

Indeed, that's what we love about the holidays -- all that rich satisfying food we don't often get. We load up the dinner plate with our favorites, then go back for more. Trouble is, those foods are full of fat. For people prone to heartburn, too much fat - and too much food - that is just asking for problems.

"Holiday foods are rich, festive foods, which is why we gravitate toward them," Elaine Magee, MPH, RD, tells WebMD. "These are foods we don't normally eat, and we tend to indulge in them. That's what gets us into trouble."

In the kitchen, there are tricks that cooks can use to lighten the fare. "No one's here to take away the traditional flavors," says Magee, who is WebMD Weight Loss Clinic's 'Recipe Doctor.' "We have a way of making mashed potatoes, gravy, stuffing, sweet potatoes, and pie a few pounds lighter (in fat) without compromising taste and integrity."

To make a lighter version of turkey gravy, use the brown bits at the bottom of the pan to flavor your gravy, she suggests. "Don't add too much of the actual fat, because the flavor is in the brown bits... not so much the 'drippings.' For creamy gravy, I use fat-free half-and-half or low-fat or whole milk instead of real half-and-half."

Magee's book Tell Me What to Eat if I Have Acid Reflux offers these suggestions:

• Most pumpkin pie recipes call for at least 1 cup of cream or evaporated whole milk and 2 eggs. Use evaporated skim and 3 egg whites to cut about 300 calories and 30-38 grams of fat.
• Buy brown-and-serve bread rolls instead of higher-fat crescent rolls to cut about 1,100 extra calories and about 100 grams of fat per dozen.
• Use light cream cheese instead of regular cream cheese in your holiday dips, spreads, and cheesecakes to cut about 16 grams of fat per cup of cream cheese.
• Use a great tasting fat-free sour cream (like "Naturally Yours" in the black-and-white cow hide container) for dips, spreads, and potato dishes to cut about 320 calories and about 35 grams of fat per cup of sour cream.
• Use reduced-fat cheese in cheese logs, appetizers, and side dishes to cut 36 grams of fat and 320 calories for every 8 ounces.
• Make dips, appetizers, and side dishes using a blend of real mayonnaise and fat-free sour cream. This cuts over 1,000 calories and 132 grams of fat per cup of mayo.

When we cut fat, we cut calories and heartburn, Magee tells WebMD. "The dish still tastes great, so there's still a feeling of satisfaction."

Her stuffing recipe, for instance, uses much less butter than traditional recipes -- with chicken broth serving as the substitute. Also, her recipe doesn't use spicy sausage. "Both the spices and the fatty sausage can be problematic for people," Magee tells WebMD. "A traditional recipe for dressing would have twice the fat that's in my recipe."

Here's another tip: When going to a potluck, take a "safe" dish - one you know you can eat without heartburn trouble. "You'll know there's at least one thing there you can eat," Magee says.

Here are three recipes from recipe doctor Elaine Magee, MPH, RD.

Creamy Green Bean Bake

Journal as: 1 cup vegetables without fat + 1/2 cup broth-based soup
OR 1/2 cup vegetable without fat + 1/2 cup vegetable with 1 tsp fat
OR 1/2 cup hearty stew, chili, or bean soup

4 cups lightly cooked French-style frozen green beans
10-3/4 oz.-can condensed Healthy Request cream of mushroom soup (or similar)
1/2 cup fat-free or light sour cream
1 tbsp diced pimento (optional)
1/4 cup canned chow mein fried noodles

• Lightly cook frozen beans.
• Preheat oven to 350 degrees.
• In a 1-quart casserole dish or 9x9 inch dish, combine condensed soup, sour cream, and pimento. Measure 4 cups of cooked green beans, add to dish, and stir.
• Bake for 20 minutes or until bubbly. Sprinkle chow mein noodles over the top and bake 5 minutes more.

Makes 6 servings.

Per serving: 102 calories, 4 g protein, 16 g carbohydrates, 2 gram fat, 2 mg cholesterol, 3 g fiber, 337 mg sodium. Calories from fat: 20%.

March 12, 2007 -- After weight loss surgery, some patients risk brain damage from vitamin B-1 deficiency, researchers report.

Too little vitamin B-1 -- thiamine -- causes a syndrome called Wernicke's encephalopathy. It's most often seen in malnourished alcoholics.

If treated right away with vitamin B-1 shots, patients quickly recover. But if the syndrome isn't recognized quickly, it can result in permanent brain damage.

And that can be a problem, says Wake Forest University researcher Sonal Singh, MD. Singh and Abhay Kumar, MD, of the University of Iowa, found 32 reports of Wernicke's encephalopathy in weight loss surgery patients.

"Early diagnosis is essential," Singh tells WebMD. "Yes, thiamine shots are helpful. But you get full recovery only when it is given early. Once [advanced symptoms] develop, there is going to be neurological damage."

Singh and Kumar report their findings in the March 13 issue of the journal Neurology.

Tricky Symptoms

Wernicke's encephalopathy has three classic symptoms: jerky, uncoordinated movement; uncontrollable eye movements; and mental confusion.

That sounds easy to recognize. But not all weight loss surgery patients who develop the syndrome get all three symptoms. And some patients have unusual symptoms, such as hearing loss, weakness, convulsions, and tingling or numbness in the arms and legs.

Symptoms of Wernicke's encephalopathy most often occurred four to 12 weeks after weight loss surgery. However, one case began a year after surgery, and another started only two weeks after surgery.

There's one major warning sign for weight loss surgery patients: frequent vomiting. Twenty-five of the 32 reported patients were vomiting after their surgery.

However, not all the patients had this symptom. And many developed vitamin B-1 deficiency even though they were taking oral thiamine supplements, suggesting that deficiencies in other nutrients may also play a role.

How often do weight loss surgery patients get Wernicke's encephalopathy? That isn't yet known. Singh says it's an issue that clearly needs study.

"Maybe giving shots of thiamine after surgery would prevent this," Singh says. "We might do it preventively rather than waiting for symptoms to appear. That, too, needs to be studied."

Bariatric surgeon Ioannis Raftopoulos, MD, assistant professor of surgery at the University of Pittsburgh, says he regularly monitors thiamine levels in his patients and routinely gives his patients thiamine supplements, either orally or by monthly injections.

The result: Raftopoulos says he has never had a patient develop Wernicke's encephalopathy.

"This kind of thing only happens when a patient has been vomiting for weeks," Raftopoulos tells WebMD. "That kind of neurological impairment means a patient has had a lot of problems for a long time. That is why the key here is patient follow-up. All my patients have my personal beeper number so they can contact me immediately, before there is a serious problem."

Singh says patients should immediately call a doctor if, after weight loss surgery, they have coordination problems -- especially changes in their gait -- or any changes in their hearing or vision.

July 27, 2006 -- Women may pay a higher health price for obesityobesity than men.

Compared to men, "women suffer a disproportionate burden of disease attributable to overweight and obesity," write Peter Muennig, MD, MPH, and colleagues in a new study.

Muennig works in New York at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health. His study appears in September's American Journal of Public Health.

The study used information from two sources:

• U.S. death data from 1990-1995.
• A 2000 survey on health and quality of life for more than 13,600 U.S. adults.

The health survey included participants' height and weight. Muennig's team used those numbers to calculate BMI (body mass index), which relates height to weight.

A BMI of 25 to 29.9 is overweight; a BMI of 30 or more is obese.

Gender Gap

Being overweight or obese has been tied to a greater risk of health problems, including heart diseaseheart disease, high blood pressurehigh blood pressure, type 2 diabetesdiabetes, and some cancers.

Muennig's team crunched the death, health, and quality-of-life numbers. Their key finding: Extra weight seemed to be a bigger burden in terms of health and quality of life for women than for men.

Health-related drops in quality of life were:

• Nearly four times steeper for overweight women than for overweight men.
• A bit more than twice as great for obese women as for obese men.

But neither sex escaped the effects of excess weight.

The study also came up with estimates for the number of additional deaths per year among those carrying extra weight:

• 57,000 more deaths among overweight and obese men than among normal-weight men
• 107,000 more deaths among overweight and obese women than normal-weight women.

Study's Limits

The study has several limits, the researchers note.

First, they don't know if obesity was solely responsible for the results.

It's hard to prove cause-and-effect in big statistical studies like this one. Sometimes it's difficult to know which came first -- the health problems or the excess weight.

Also, participants reported their own height and weight. Self-reports aren't always accurate.

Lastly, the researchers excluded people without complete height and weight data. Those people may or may not have been exceptions to the findings -- there's no way to know for sure.

The study doesn't suggest all overweight women are headed for health problems. Not everyone who's overweight is unhealthy. And being lean doesn't guarantee good health.

June 15, 2004 -- Looking for serious weight loss? Surgery may be the answer. By restricting the size of the stomach, surgery offers three times the weight loss compared with a medically supervised diet, new research shows.

LAP-BAND bariatric surgery involves placing an adjustable gastric band around the upper part of the stomach. It creates a small stomach pouch that holds about 1 tablespoon of food and a small narrowing to the rest of the stomach. The small pouch helps control a person's sense of fullness and how much he or she is able to eat -- thereby controlling appetite, which results in weight loss.

Few studies have compared the safety and effectiveness of bariatric surgery with a very low caloric diet, medication, and exercise regimen for weight loss in obese people.

But a group of Australian researchers presented their findings at the annual meeting of the American Society for Bariatric Surgery being held in San Diego this week.

The study "confirms that in appropriate patients, weight loss surgery has clear benefits over traditional medical therapy," says researcher Paul O'Brien, MD, of the Centre of Obesity Research and Education in Melbourne, Australia, in a news release.

His study involved 79 mild to moderately obese patients (BMI 30-35) who had either the LAP-BAND surgery or a medically prescribed diet of fewer than 800 calories, medication, and exercise plan.

During the two-year follow-up:

• The surgery group lost 67% of their excess weight.
• The surgery patients showed greater improvement in type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, cholesterol levels, and quality of life.
• The diet/exercise group lost 17% excess weight initially -- but then regained it.

This study shows that bariatric surgery for mild to moderate obesity is safe and significantly more effective than optimal medical therapy for weight loss and improving health and quality of life, says O'Brien.

SOURCE: News release, American Society for Bariatric Surgery.

Jan. 27, 2004 -- In the wake of the first reported case of mad cow disease in the U.S., the FDA says it will ban the use of certain cattle and animal parts in dietary supplements, cosmetics, and animal feed.

The move strengthens current safeguards to prevent the spread and protect the public from exposure to the agent thought to cause bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), also known as mad cow disease. A cow in Washington State tested positive for the disease on Dec. 23.

"Today we are bolstering our BSE firewalls to protect the public," says FDA Commissioner Mark McClellan, MD, PhD, in a news release. "We are further strengthening our animal feed rule, and we are taking additional steps to further protect the public from being exposed to any potentially risky materials from cattle."

The new regulations ban a wide range of bovine-derived material from dietary supplements and cosmetics regulated by the FDA. They also prohibit some currently allowed feeding and manufacturing practices involving feed for cattle and other hooved animals.

Materials derived from cows, such as gelatin, are currently used in a variety of cosmetic lotions and creams as well as dietary supplements.

Earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced similar safeguards banning the use of risky animal parts, such as brain and spinal cord-related materials, in the human food supply.

New Mad Cow Safeguards

The new FDA regulations are effective immediately and include two main components.

The first bans the following materials from FDA-regulated human food (including dietary supplements) and cosmetics:

• Any material from "downer" cattle. (Downer cattle are animals that cannot walk.)
• Any material from dead cattle.
• Specified risk materials (SRMs) that are known to contain the highest concentrations of the infectious agent for BSE, including the brain, skull, eyes, and spinal cord of cattle 30 months or older, and a portion of the small intestine and tonsils from all cattle, regardless of their age or health.
• Mechanically separated beef, which may contain SRMs.

The second rule contains the following changes to the FDA's current animal feed rule:

• Eliminates the exemption that allows mammalian blood and blood products to be used in feed for other hooved animals.
• Bans use of bedding, spilled feed, feathers, and fecal matter collected from the living quarters of poultry as feed ingredient.
• Bans use of plate waste consisting of uneaten meat and other scraps collected from large restaurant operations and rendered into meat and bone meal for animal feed.
• To further minimize cross contamination, a new rule requires equipment, facilities, and production lines to be dedicated to non-hooved animal feed if they use any of the prohibited ingredients in manufacturing feed products.

Officials say that in addition to these measures, the FDA will step up its inspection of feed mills and rendering industries.

"The science and our own experience and knowledge in this area are constantly evolving. Small as the risk may already be, this is the time to make sure the public is protected to the greatest extent possible," says Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy G. Thompson in a news release.

"Lose 30 pounds in 30 days!"
"Block the absorption of fat, carbs, and calories with this pill!"
"Wear this and watch the pounds melt away."

Whether you're flipping through a magazine, scanning the aisles of a health store, or watching late-night television, you're bound to see slogans like these touting the latest and greatest product designed to help YOU lose weight.

But chances are the only thing you'll lose by purchasing the latest "miracle diet product" is money. Diet scams are big business with sellers vying for their share of the nearly $35 billion that Americans spend each year on weight loss products and programs.

Is calcium part of your weight management plan? What about 35 grams of fiber per day, or more, and lots of foods with high water content? Soy?

?

If you're not taking advantage of these "thin foods," you may be making the job of weight loss and long-term weight maintenance harder than they need to be.

?

"What we see in research studies is that food is more than the sum of its parts," says Cindy Moore, RD, director of nutrition therapy at The Cleveland Clinic in Ohio and a spokeswoman for the American Dietetic Association. "Foods that haven't been highly processed can have more than one effect in the body. Low-fat dairy foods are high in calcium and protein, but they also contain a range of other benefits that we are just beginning to understand in many cases."

?

And why not make that easier, she and other weight management experts say, by using what's easily available to help achieve your goals?

Calcium

A small, but growing body of research has found an association between calcium intake and long-term weight management.

?

"It's really remarkable what we're seeing in research on calcium," says Moore.

?

Women with the highest intake of calcium from dairy foods, in relation to their total daily calorie intake, lost the most weight and body fat over two years, regardless of exercise, according to a study in the December 2000 Journal of the American College of Nutrition. Although the recommended calcium level for young women is 1,200-1,500 milligrams (mg) daily, the study found that the average woman's daily intake of calcium was under 800 mg per day.

?

"Calcium appears to suppress a highly specific chemical in the vitamin D group," says Moore. "This chemical promotes the laying down of fat. It also slows the metabolism of fat. Calcium blocks this chemical, resulting in less stored fat and greater fat metabolism."

?

In fact, Moore says, animal studies have shown that sufficient calcium can even raise your body's core temperature. More fat is burned to keep your body warmer. But this finding has yet to be confirmed in humans.

?

"Ideally, three servings of low-fat dairy products would give you the recommended amount of calcium, which is enough to suppress the fat-producing chemical," says Moore. "It's always better to get your nutrition from foods, but calcium supplements have nearly as great an effect."

?

In addition, the weight lost comes largely from the midsection. Fat deposits in this are a risk factor for heart disease.

?

"We don't know for sure exactly how the calcium causes these changes, but it's consistent across the studies," says Greg Miller, PhD, director of nutrition and science affairs for the National Dairy Council. "People who ate more dairy seem to partition energy into lean body mass rather than into fat storage."

?

Here are the calcium levels recommended for adults by the USDA:

?

Age 9 to 18: 1,300 mg

Age 19 to 50: 1,000 mg

Age 51 and over: 1,200 mg

?

That all sounds good, but what if you're picking out a calcium supplement? There's calcium carbonate, calcium citrate, coral calcium. There are dozens to choose from.

?

"Calcium carbonate or citrate doesn't matter," says Moore. "What's more important is that the supplement also contains vitamin D. That combination is what you need to maximize calcium's effects."

?

Want to stay on top of the latest weight loss news and get motivational tips in your inbox? Sign up for WebMD's free weight loss newsletter.

Soy

An interesting side note to the larger calcium story is emerging in research on soy protein and soy isoflavones. An article in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition in December 2002 found in soy many of the same properties that have been seen in calcium. More research in soy's potential weight-loss properties is ongoing, but it is too early to say whether early findings will hold up in larger trials.

Oct. 5, 2004 (Atlanta) -- A close relative of the performance-boosting supplement DHEA may be able to combat radiation from a "dirty bomb," Researchers say.

Known as Neumune, "this and similar drugs could protect us from the potentially fatal radiation sickness associated with a nuclear attack as well as from some elements of a dirty bomb," says Dwight Stickney, MD, vice president of medical affairs at Hollis-Eden Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the San Diego-based company developing the novel agent. "Casualties would be greatly reduced."

Dirty bombs are explosive devices that don't pack the punch of nuclear bombs, but can spread lethal doses of radiation to surrounding areas.

Specifically, Neumune protects our infection-fighting bone marrow, known to be particularly hard hit in a dirty bomb or nuclear attack, he tells WebMD.

Speaking here at the annual meeting of the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, Stickney notes that researchers in a recent scientific article in the BMJ predict that if a small and crude nuclear device were detonated in New York City, approximately 50,000 people would die from the initial blast. But another 200,000 would die shortly thereafter from severe bone marrow damage, and an additional 700,000 would be at risk because of radiation sickness resulting from bone marrow damage.

"The primary cause of death from radiation is a severe depletion of bone marrow cells," Stickney says.

Enter Neumune -- a close relative of performance-enhancing DHEA, or dehyroepiandrosterone. It is a hormone naturally made by the adrenal glands.

90% Survival Rate With Neumune

In studies in monkeys, Neumune protected all three elements of the bone marrow: the white blood cells that fight infection, the platelets that help blood to clot, and the red blood cells that transport oxygen throughout the body, Stickney reports. "No other single compound has ever done that before."

In the studies, 30 primates were exposed to potentially fatal doses of radiation. "The doses we gave were such that you would expect 50% of the animals to die," Stickney says, "a good simulation of what would happen [to humans] in a terrorist nuclear explosion."

Ten of the animals received no treatment, while 10 received placebo and 10 received injections of Neumune beginning several hours after radiation exposure. The study showed that 90% of the Neumune-treated macaques survived, compared with only 55% of those that received either placebo or no treatment.

The drug had few side effects, with only minor swelling that resolved over time, Stickney says.

"We're very excited," he adds. "This is the first time a drug has safely stimulated all three aspects of the bone marrow while also showing an improvement in survival."

Since it would be unethical to subject humans to the high doses of radiation necessary to test Neumune, the company will be trying to gain FDA approval under its so-called "animal rule" for countermeasures to weapons of mass destruction. In such cases, study results in animals are used as a surrogate for what could happen in humans following a dirty bomb attack.

"The FDA has indicated our model is acceptable," Stickney says. So the next step is to determine the minimum dose needed to improve survival, followed by further studies in nonhuman primates. He predicts everything could be done by next year.

Thomas MacVittie, PhD, professor in the departments of radiation oncology and pathology at the University of Maryland Cancer Center in Baltimore, and one of the nation's top experts on radiation sickness, is equally excited.

"I give [Stickney's team] a lot of credit," he tells WebMD. "They're asking the hard questions and have shown that the drug will modify lethality."

MacVittie agrees that nonhuman primates offer an "excellent model" for studying human radiation exposure and its treatment following a possible dirty bomb attack. "I think we'll need to see tests in larger numbers of animals before the drug is approved, but everything is moving in the right direction."

Nov. 8, 2004 (New Orleans) -- Wedded bliss has its rewards: Being married and having a strong social network may help protect against heart disease, a new study suggests.

The study of nearly 15,000 men and women shows that those who have a spouse, go to church, join social clubs, and have a lot of friends and relatives have significantly lower blood pressure and other heart disease risk factors than unmarried loners.

People who are married and have a strong social network are also less likely to smoke than their unmarried, less social counterparts, says Chris J. Armstrong, PhD, research associate in the division of epidemiology and community health at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis.

Men seem to get an added bonus from taking a trip to the altar: "Married men with strong social support are also more likely to engage in physical activity, though this doesn't hold true for women," Armstrong tells WebMD.

High blood pressure and smoking are classic risk factors for heart disease, while physical activity can help ward off the nation's No. 1 killer.

For the study, presented at the annual meeting of the American Heart Association (AHA), the researchers interviewed nearly 15,000 Minnesotans between 1990 and 2002. Participants were asked about their marital status, church attendance, membership in social clubs such as the PTA, bridge club, or runner's club, and how many friends and relatives they had to help them through the good and bad times. All the men and women also underwent a physical exam looking at risk factors for heart disease.

Though the study was not designed to look at how family and social ties protect against heart disease, Armstrong says he suspects that "at least as far as smoking [goes], spousal and peer pressure are involved."

Coronary heart disease is the single largest killer of American men and women, responsible for more than one in five deaths in the U.S. in 2001, according to the AHA. About every 26 seconds an American will suffer a coronary event such as a heart attack, and about every minute, someone will die from one.

Importance of Social Ties

Raymond J. Gibbons, MD, the Arthur and Gladys D. Gray professor of medicine at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., tells WebMD that the new research is one of a series of recent studies showing that social support in general and marriage in particular may be important for our heart health.

Another study presented at the meeting, for example, shows that married people who receive implantable defibrillators to correct heart disease due to abnormal heart rhythms have significantly less anxiety and depression than those who live alone.

Although the subject of a flurry of recent reports, the connection between social support and heart health has probably always been there: It was just a matter of looking for it, says Tim Gardner, MD, professor of surgery at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia.

"We haven't looked at the impact of behavior on health as much as we should," he says. "Especially within the scientific community, the emphasis has been on new drugs."

But health conditions such as obesity are actually both a medical problem and a behavioral problem, Gardner says.

"We need to pay more attention to the behavioral aspects of our health," he tells WebMD.

Oct. 16, 2002 -- Cancer patients are avid users of herbal remedies and dietary supplements. They're also much more willing than others to talk to their doctor about it. And researchers say that's good news for their health.

Two new surveys show cancer patients are about 30% more likely than others to tell their healthcare provider about herbal or dietary supplement use.

"Cancer patients are very forthcoming with their doctors about everything they're taking," says researcher Jessie A. Leak, MD, of M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, in a news release. "We don't know why, but perhaps they feel the need to disclose everything about themselves to better their chances of getting well."

Leak presented the results of the surveys today at the annual meeting of the American Society of Anesthesiologists in Orlando, Fla.

Researchers say doctors are concerned about their patients' use of herbs and dietary supplements because some of the preparations have been linked to potentially hazardous drug interactions, or shown to reduce the effectiveness of cancer surgery and chemotherapy drugs.

Products linked to negative side effects include ephedra, licorice, St. John's wort, ginkgo biloba, valerian, feverfew, ginger, and echinacea. The effects of these supplements can linger long after the body has processed them.

In the first survey, researchers asked 300 cancer patients scheduled to undergo surgery about their use of alternative treatments. About 18% reported using at least one herbal or other supplement. That rate of use is roughly comparable to that seen in the general population.

But 70% of the patients said they told at least one physician about their herbal use, and that's about one-third higher than the rate at which other types of patients report herbal use to their doctors. Researchers say previous studies have shown about 40% of preoperative patients tell physicians about using herbal products.

In a second survey, researchers looked at 154 cancer patients being treated in the center's pain management clinic. They found that 43% of these patients were using herbals, and like the other group, about two-thirds said they'd informed their doctor.

Leak says the fact that the patients in the pain clinic were more than twice as likely to be using herbals may be due to the fact that they were farther along in their cancer treatment and probably had spent more time educating themselves about alternative options. -->

Thanks to the Internet, becoming a hypochondriac is much easier than it used to be.

The easy availability of health information on the web has certainly helped countless people make educated decisions about their health and medical treatment, but it can be disastrous for people who are likely to worry. Hypochondriacs researching an illness used to have to scour books and ask doctors for information. Now a universe of information is available with a few mouse clicks.

"For hypochondriacs, the Internet has absolutely changed things for the worse," says Brian Fallon, MD, professor of psychiatry at Columbia University and the co-author of Phantom Illness: Recognizing, Understanding and Overcoming Hypochondria (1996).

So far, no studies have been conducted on just how hypochondriacs use the Internet, Fallon says. But the phenomenon is common enough to have a snappy name -- "cyberchondria."

Understanding Hypochondria

The medical condition called hypochondriasis is defined as worry over an imagined illness with exaggeration of symptoms, no matter how insignificant, that lasts for at least six months and causes significant distress. It tends to develop in the 20s or 30s, and it affects men and women equally. It sometimes comes on following the illness of a friend or family member, and it can also occur as a secondary illness to depression or generalized anxiety disorder.

Although it's often seen as harmless, sufferers know that it can shift from a quirky, neurotic character trait into a devastating obsession.

"Illness often becomes a central part of a hypochondriac's identity," says Arthur Barsky, MD, of Harvard Medical School and the author of Worried Sick: Our Troubled Quest for Wellness (1988). As a result, a hypochondriac's work and relationships suffer. And those with the condition aren't the only ones who pay the price: According to Fallon, hypochondria costs billions of dollars a year in unnecessary medical tests and treatments.

Contrary to what some skeptics think, hypochondriacs are not pretending or just trying to get attention. "They're absolutely not fakers or malingerers," says Barsky. "They really feel the distress they're talking about. It's just that their feelings don't have an obvious medical basis."

"What hypochondriacs have trouble accepting is that normal, healthy people have symptoms," says Barsky. Hypochondriacs tend to be very aware of bodily sensations that most people live with and ignore. To a hypochondriac, an upset stomach becomes a sign of cancer and a headache can only mean a brain tumor. The stress that goes along with this worry can make the symptoms even worse.

Web Can Be Misleading

Hypochondriacs are often not particularly careful about where they get their health information. To many sufferers, Gray's Anatomy, a half-remembered TV movie, and a harrowing health story about your hairdresser's friend's grandmother are all equally legitimate sources.

This can lead to serious trouble for hypochondriacs using the vast and unregulated web.

"A lot of the stuff on the Internet, especially on health-related bulletin boards, is pure impression and anecdote," says Barsky, "and they just don't have a lot of scientific validity."

Even the most reputable health web sites with the most accurate information can cause trouble for the hypochondriac. "Hypochondriacs tend to latch onto diseases with common or ambiguous symptoms or that are hard to diagnose," says Fallon. For example, illnesses such as HIV or lupus, and neurological disorders including multiple sclerosis can cause vague symptoms like fatigue, swollen glands, and strange physical sensations.

With symptoms as common as these, it's easy for hypochondriacs to become convinced they're sick.

With St. Paddy's Day upon us, it's time to think green. Researchers credit green veggies with promoting colon and heart health, as well as providing folic acid to pregnant women to prevent birth defects. And guess what? Greens in the kale family also contain as much calcium as milk. And they help balance all the sodium in our diets with healthy potassium.

Leafy green vegetables and fruits are loaded with antioxidants, minerals, folate, and flavonoids. These all work to prevent unstable molecules called free radicals from damaging cells.

Melissa Diane Smith, nutritionist and author of Going Against the Grain: How Reducing and Avoiding Grains Can Revitalize Your Health, tells WebMD that most Americans don't even come close to the recent revised dietary recommendations of eating five to nine servings of fruits and vegetables a day. "Eat vegetables in place of grains," she urges.

Even salad-phobes can easily get more green in their diets.

Tips for Greening Up Your Plate

Unfortunately, eating vegetables is not an automatic choice for humans. Therefore, it's a challenge to present green foods in enough different ways to titillate the jaded palate. Some ideas:

• Wrap small portions of cheese, meats, rice, or condiments in greens. Even restaurants are now offering "lettuce wraps." "Blanched cabbage (boiled a few minutes in water or tomato juice to soften it) is also a good wrap," Audrey T. Cross, PhD, a nutritionist at Columbia University in New York City, tells WebMD.
  
  
• Speaking of cabbage, a cooked hunk sauced with a little mayonnaise is delicious, according to Cross. Cabbage is rich in anticancer antioxidants and bioflavinoids.
  
  
• Dress up frozen pizza with frozen or fresh spinach or green pepper. When you order out, ask for double green pepper. Green pepper is packed with vitamin C, Smith notes. Spinach (and Swiss chard and kale) is especially good because it contains lutein, a complex substance that can help prevent the blinding eye disorder called macular degeneration. Lutein also lowers cholesterol.
  
  
• Steam veggies to keep them green. If you don't have a fancy steamer, a few minutes suspended in a colander over a pot of water works.
  
  
• For leafy greens, steaming can result in a gray mess. Acids in these greens destroy the chlorophyll, leaving an unappetizing wad. Instead, treat spicy greens like mustard greens or chard by precooking in 2 cups of water per pound for three to 10 minutes.
  
  
• Drink the water afterwards. It's surprisingly tasty.
  
  
• Some greens are bitter -- try adding raisins.
  
  
• Sneak cut-up zucchini into meatloaf. The same goes for pasta sauce; load it up with greenery.
  
  
• If you make canned soup, toss in frozen peas or string beans. The FDA has declared that frozen is as nutritious as fresh. A box of veggies in macaroni and cheese is also delicious.
  
  
• At the salad bar, make a veggie sandwich. Add balsamic vinegar and munch away!
  
  
• Check out the prewashed department. In addition to prewashed lettuce, mesclun, field greens, and other variations (the darker the green, the better), grocery stores now carry prewashed broccoli florets and cut-up celery. Who says crudites are just for parties? Toss some ranch dressing in your lunch box, along with prewashed veggie chunks, and it's a perfect desk nibble!
  
  
• Don't forget the fresh herbs next door to the prewashed greens. Make pesto (mashed olive oil, garlic, and basil leaves) and spread on crusty bread and pop under the broiler.
  
  
• Or toss some fresh tarragon on asparagus, drizzle with extra virgin olive oil, and roast at 400 degrees for 15 minutes. Now this does beat canned!
  
  
• When you finish eating, banish that garlic mouth by eating your parsley garnish. According to Smith, parsley is surprisingly full of nutrients.

Oct. 5, 2004 (Atlanta) -- A close relative of the performance-boosting supplement DHEA may be able to combat radiation from a "dirty bomb," Researchers say.

Known as Neumune, "this and similar drugs could protect us from the potentially fatal radiation sickness associated with a nuclear attack as well as from some elements of a dirty bomb," says Dwight Stickney, MD, vice president of medical affairs at Hollis-Eden Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the San Diego-based company developing the novel agent. "Casualties would be greatly reduced."

Dirty bombs are explosive devices that don't pack the punch of nuclear bombs, but can spread lethal doses of radiation to surrounding areas.

Specifically, Neumune protects our infection-fighting bone marrow, known to be particularly hard hit in a dirty bomb or nuclear attack, he tells WebMD.

Speaking here at the annual meeting of the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, Stickney notes that researchers in a recent scientific article in the BMJ predict that if a small and crude nuclear device were detonated in New York City, approximately 50,000 people would die from the initial blast. But another 200,000 would die shortly thereafter from severe bone marrow damage, and an additional 700,000 would be at risk because of radiation sickness resulting from bone marrow damage.

"The primary cause of death from radiation is a severe depletion of bone marrow cells," Stickney says.

Enter Neumune -- a close relative of performance-enhancing DHEA, or dehyroepiandrosterone. It is a hormone naturally made by the adrenal glands.

90% Survival Rate With Neumune

In studies in monkeys, Neumune protected all three elements of the bone marrow: the white blood cells that fight infection, the platelets that help blood to clot, and the red blood cells that transport oxygen throughout the body, Stickney reports. "No other single compound has ever done that before."

In the studies, 30 primates were exposed to potentially fatal doses of radiation. "The doses we gave were such that you would expect 50% of the animals to die," Stickney says, "a good simulation of what would happen [to humans] in a terrorist nuclear explosion."

Ten of the animals received no treatment, while 10 received placebo and 10 received injections of Neumune beginning several hours after radiation exposure. The study showed that 90% of the Neumune-treated macaques survived, compared with only 55% of those that received either placebo or no treatment.

The drug had few side effects, with only minor swelling that resolved over time, Stickney says.

"We're very excited," he adds. "This is the first time a drug has safely stimulated all three aspects of the bone marrow while also showing an improvement in survival."

Since it would be unethical to subject humans to the high doses of radiation necessary to test Neumune, the company will be trying to gain FDA approval under its so-called "animal rule" for countermeasures to weapons of mass destruction. In such cases, study results in animals are used as a surrogate for what could happen in humans following a dirty bomb attack.

"The FDA has indicated our model is acceptable," Stickney says. So the next step is to determine the minimum dose needed to improve survival, followed by further studies in nonhuman primates. He predicts everything could be done by next year.

Thomas MacVittie, PhD, professor in the departments of radiation oncology and pathology at the University of Maryland Cancer Center in Baltimore, and one of the nation's top experts on radiation sickness, is equally excited.

"I give [Stickney's team] a lot of credit," he tells WebMD. "They're asking the hard questions and have shown that the drug will modify lethality."

MacVittie agrees that nonhuman primates offer an "excellent model" for studying human radiation exposure and its treatment following a possible dirty bomb attack. "I think we'll need to see tests in larger numbers of animals before the drug is approved, but everything is moving in the right direction."

What's a holiday feast without a turkey or a roast with all the trimmings?

Indeed, that's what we love about the holidays -- all that rich satisfying food we don't often get. We load up the dinner plate with our favorites, then go back for more. Trouble is, those foods are full of fat. For people prone to heartburn, too much fat - and too much food - that is just asking for problems.

"Holiday foods are rich, festive foods, which is why we gravitate toward them," Elaine Magee, MPH, RD, tells WebMD. "These are foods we don't normally eat, and we tend to indulge in them. That's what gets us into trouble."

In the kitchen, there are tricks that cooks can use to lighten the fare. "No one's here to take away the traditional flavors," says Magee, who is WebMD Weight Loss Clinic's 'Recipe Doctor.' "We have a way of making mashed potatoes, gravy, stuffing, sweet potatoes, and pie a few pounds lighter (in fat) without compromising taste and integrity."

To make a lighter version of turkey gravy, use the brown bits at the bottom of the pan to flavor your gravy, she suggests. "Don't add too much of the actual fat, because the flavor is in the brown bits... not so much the 'drippings.' For creamy gravy, I use fat-free half-and-half or low-fat or whole milk instead of real half-and-half."

Magee's book Tell Me What to Eat if I Have Acid Reflux offers these suggestions:

• Most pumpkin pie recipes call for at least 1 cup of cream or evaporated whole milk and 2 eggs. Use evaporated skim and 3 egg whites to cut about 300 calories and 30-38 grams of fat.
• Buy brown-and-serve bread rolls instead of higher-fat crescent rolls to cut about 1,100 extra calories and about 100 grams of fat per dozen.
• Use light cream cheese instead of regular cream cheese in your holiday dips, spreads, and cheesecakes to cut about 16 grams of fat per cup of cream cheese.
• Use a great tasting fat-free sour cream (like "Naturally Yours" in the black-and-white cow hide container) for dips, spreads, and potato dishes to cut about 320 calories and about 35 grams of fat per cup of sour cream.
• Use reduced-fat cheese in cheese logs, appetizers, and side dishes to cut 36 grams of fat and 320 calories for every 8 ounces.
• Make dips, appetizers, and side dishes using a blend of real mayonnaise and fat-free sour cream. This cuts over 1,000 calories and 132 grams of fat per cup of mayo.

When we cut fat, we cut calories and heartburn, Magee tells WebMD. "The dish still tastes great, so there's still a feeling of satisfaction."

Her stuffing recipe, for instance, uses much less butter than traditional recipes -- with chicken broth serving as the substitute. Also, her recipe doesn't use spicy sausage. "Both the spices and the fatty sausage can be problematic for people," Magee tells WebMD. "A traditional recipe for dressing would have twice the fat that's in my recipe."

Here's another tip: When going to a potluck, take a "safe" dish - one you know you can eat without heartburn trouble. "You'll know there's at least one thing there you can eat," Magee says.

Here are three recipes from recipe doctor Elaine Magee, MPH, RD.

Creamy Green Bean Bake

Journal as: 1 cup vegetables without fat + 1/2 cup broth-based soup
OR 1/2 cup vegetable without fat + 1/2 cup vegetable with 1 tsp fat
OR 1/2 cup hearty stew, chili, or bean soup

4 cups lightly cooked French-style frozen green beans
10-3/4 oz.-can condensed Healthy Request cream of mushroom soup (or similar)
1/2 cup fat-free or light sour cream
1 tbsp diced pimento (optional)
1/4 cup canned chow mein fried noodles

• Lightly cook frozen beans.
• Preheat oven to 350 degrees.
• In a 1-quart casserole dish or 9x9 inch dish, combine condensed soup, sour cream, and pimento. Measure 4 cups of cooked green beans, add to dish, and stir.
• Bake for 20 minutes or until bubbly. Sprinkle chow mein noodles over the top and bake 5 minutes more.

Makes 6 servings.

Per serving: 102 calories, 4 g protein, 16 g carbohydrates, 2 gram fat, 2 mg cholesterol, 3 g fiber, 337 mg sodium. Calories from fat: 20%.

July 27, 2006 -- Women may pay a higher health price for obesityobesity than men.

Compared to men, "women suffer a disproportionate burden of disease attributable to overweight and obesity," write Peter Muennig, MD, MPH, and colleagues in a new study.

Muennig works in New York at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health. His study appears in September's American Journal of Public Health.

The study used information from two sources:

• U.S. death data from 1990-1995.
• A 2000 survey on health and quality of life for more than 13,600 U.S. adults.

The health survey included participants' height and weight. Muennig's team used those numbers to calculate BMI (body mass index), which relates height to weight.

A BMI of 25 to 29.9 is overweight; a BMI of 30 or more is obese.

Gender Gap

Being overweight or obese has been tied to a greater risk of health problems, including heart diseaseheart disease, high blood pressurehigh blood pressure, type 2 diabetesdiabetes, and some cancers.

Muennig's team crunched the death, health, and quality-of-life numbers. Their key finding: Extra weight seemed to be a bigger burden in terms of health and quality of life for women than for men.

Health-related drops in quality of life were:

• Nearly four times steeper for overweight women than for overweight men.
• A bit more than twice as great for obese women as for obese men.

But neither sex escaped the effects of excess weight.

The study also came up with estimates for the number of additional deaths per year among those carrying extra weight:

• 57,000 more deaths among overweight and obese men than among normal-weight men
• 107,000 more deaths among overweight and obese women than normal-weight women.

Study's Limits

The study has several limits, the researchers note.

First, they don't know if obesity was solely responsible for the results.

It's hard to prove cause-and-effect in big statistical studies like this one. Sometimes it's difficult to know which came first -- the health problems or the excess weight.

Also, participants reported their own height and weight. Self-reports aren't always accurate.

Lastly, the researchers excluded people without complete height and weight data. Those people may or may not have been exceptions to the findings -- there's no way to know for sure.

The study doesn't suggest all overweight women are headed for health problems. Not everyone who's overweight is unhealthy. And being lean doesn't guarantee good health.

July 15, 2004 -- Kids watching lots of TV this summer? It's programming them for a lifetime of health problems, a new study shows.

A study in this week's issue of The Lancet shows that when children and teens watch more than two hours of TV daily, by age 21 they will likely be obese smokers with heart problems.

The TV-and-junk food pattern has "long-lasting detrimental effects," writes lead researcher Robert J. Hancox, MD, with the Dunedin School of Medicine at the University of Otago in New Zealand.

These kids get less physical activity and eat too much junk food -- accounting for so many obese children today, writes Hancox. Their cholesterol levels get too high, and too many take up smoking, even if their parents don't smoke.

His is the first study to examine the long-term effects of this lifestyle.

In his study, Hancox and his colleagues focused on nearly 1,000 randomly selected children born from 1972 to 1973 and tracked their TV viewing at regular intervals until they reached age 26. They asked parents and the children (at ages 13 and 15) to report their viewing habits.

Researchers found:

• Those who watched the most TV between ages 5 and 15 were more likely to be overweight, have heart and respiratory problems, have higher cholesterol, and smoke at age 21.
• 61% of those in the study watched TV more than two hours every weekday between ages 5 and 15.
• By the time they were 26, 17% of cases of overweight, 15% of cases of elevated cholesterol and 17% of cases of smoking was attributable to watching more than two hours of TV during childhood and adolescence.
• Even those kids whose parents didn't smoke ended up smoking.

His data indicate that TV viewing habits established in childhood will continue into adult years, writes Hancox. "This is itself is cause for concern."

"Parents must reclaim from television the responsibility for educating and entertaining their young children," even though the parents work long hours, don't have access to good day care, and often live in unsafe neighborhoods, writes David Ludwig, MD, with Harvard Medical School, in an accompanying commentary.

Food advertising aimed at children should be banned to help cut the numbers of obese children, Ludwig adds. "The commercial food industry has no business telling toddlers to consume fast food, soft drinks, and high-calorie low-quality snacks," he writes.

From the time Debra Sherman and her husband, Mark Wilcox, learned through prenatal genetic tests that they were having a boy, they agonized over whether to circumcise their baby. "I didn't want the first decision we make for him to be a bad one," Sherman says.

In the end, the Chicago couple decided against taking that extra surgical snip of foreskin from their son's penis. Without overwhelming medical evidence favoring circumcision, Sherman says, it would have seemed to her like deciding to cut off his ear lobes.

"From everything we read and everyone we talked to, it seemed like there was no medical reason to do it," says Sherman, whose son, Alex, is 7 months old. "Plus, I'm not religious, Mark's not religious, and I just thought it was an awful thing to do to a baby."

The fact is, the circumcision decision is a very personal one. Experts say parents need to understand the advantages and disadvantages, then decide what's right for them. Here are the latest facts and a look at how some parents are choosing.

Vive la Difference

Locker rooms have a way of reducing each sex to its least common denominator. Peel away the Levi's and Jockeys, put aside sizes and shapes, and the equipment is all basically the same -- at least that was the case when today's generation of new dads were kids.

Parents in the United States have routinely circumcised their sons since the 1940s, in large part because doctors believed it promoted good hygiene and prevented disease. To Jews and Muslims, circumcision is a sacred ritual symbolizing their covenant with God. By the mid-1960s and early 1970s, about 90% of all boys were circumcised.

But that trend is shifting. In 1996, circumcision rates declined to about 65%, although rates differ depending on demographics: 80% in the Midwest, 68% in the Northeast, 64% in the South and 34% in the West. Among whites, the rate is 81%, compared with 65% among blacks and 54% among Hispanics.

In fact, many observers predict that by the time the first generation of boys born in the new millennium is old enough to hit the locker-room showers, the haves and have-nots may be about equally divided.

The biggest reason for the change is mounting evidence that the medical benefits aren't as compelling as once believed. In addition, anti-circumcision groups have turned up the heat on the debate. They claim the practice is cruel and unnecessary and are spreading the word via Web sites, mailings, bumper stickers, T-shirts and international conferences.

Circumcision rates are much lower in other parts of the world, including most of Europe, Asia and Latin America. Only 48% of boys in Canada, 24% in the United Kingdom and 15% of boys worldwide are circumcised.

Probably the strongest cause for pause among parents, however, came this year when the American Academy of Pediatrics issued a policy statement saying it does not endorse routine circumcision.

"There are potential benefits as well as risks, but the data wasn't sufficient for us to say every newborn male needs to be circumcised," says Dr. Carole Lannon, clinical associate professor of pediatrics and internal medicine at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, and chairwoman of the task force on circumcision. "Each parent needs to make that decision."

Feb. 5, 2005 -- A healthy diet with lots of milk, fruits, and vegetables in your diet can help you keep up your strength as well as manage your money.

Previous research has shown that nutrition is a key factor in maintaining a good quality of life and preventing disability. And calcium, vitamin D, and antioxidants have been shown to play a significant role in this regard.

So Denise K. Houston, PhD, an epidemiologist at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, took a look at how much dairy, fruits, and vegetables people ate. Dairy is rich in calcium and vitamin D and fruits and vegetables are packed with antioxidants.

Her study appears in this month's American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

In this study, Houston set out to examine how three key elements of a healthy diet -- milk, fruits, and vegetables -- affected middle-aged men and women over a nine-year period.

At the study's beginning, 940 people she studied -- aged 44 to 64 -- were all healthy and strong. Each volunteer gave detailed information about foods they regularly ate.

Dairy foods included milk, yogurt, and cottage cheese. Fruits included fresh apples or pears, oranges andorange juice, bananas, and other fruits. Vegetables included everything from green beans and broccoli to lima beans and sweet potatoes.

Men reported eating fewer daily servings of fruits and vegetables than the women did. Blacks had fewer daily servings of dairy, including milk, than whites did.

Put a Little Pep in Your Step

Nine years later each volunteer completed a survey about their ability to perform various physical activities, such as climbing stairs and lifting a 10-pound object. Normal everyday activities were also evaluated, including chores around the house and managing money.

The people were divided into low, medium, and high groups based on the amount of fruits, veggies, and dairy they ate.

Researchers found that people who ate a healthy diet with the most dairy, fruits, and vegetables were physically the strongest. In addition, they were better able to handle what the researchers called "instrumental" activities, such as managing money and preparing meals.

Black women especially benefited from getting enough milk and dairy. Those getting the most were better able to perform daily-living activities.

Other studies have shown similar results of a healthy diet: In one study, middle-aged women -- but not men -- who ate an "unhealthy" diet with no whole-grain bread, no low-fat milk, and less than one fresh fruit or vegetable a day increased the risk of poor physical function five years later.

According to just released dietary guidelinesjust released dietary guidelines, two to five servings of fruit, two to eight servings of vegetables, and two to three servings of dairy should be eaten every day.

March 10, 2003 -- Picking up a burger and fries to eat while watching the big game or a favorite TV show may be a hazardous habit for many Americans. A new study shows eating fast food along with a steady diet of watching television can prove to be a lethal combination, increasing the risks for both obesity and diabetes.

Researchers say fast food consumption has grown dramatically in recent years, but the link between eating fast food and the prevalence of obesity and other factors related to diabetes risk has not been thoroughly examined.

The study found that eating fast food more than twice a week doubled the risk for glucose intolerance and produced a 50% increase in obesity.

Glucose intolerance occurs when the body can no longer efficiently convert sugar into energy. Both obesity and glucose intolerance are major risk factors for heart disease and type 2 diabetes.

In the study, researchers followed 2,027 white and 1,726 black adults for 15 years and interviewed them about their dining and lifestyle habits as well as evaluated their physical health. The participants were considered obese if their body mass index (BMI, a measurement of weight relative to height) was 30 or higher or if their waistline was more than 39 inches for men or 35 inches for women.

They found that the eating fast food and watching TV acted independently to increase the risk of obesity and glucose intolerance, but two factors proved to be an especially dangerous combination among whites specifically.

Whites who visited fast food restaurants more than twice a week and watched more than three hours of television per week were three times as likely to have abnormal glucose control compared to those who ate fast food less than once a week or watched less than an hour of television per week.

After adjusting for other factors associated with health risk, such as social and economic status, smoking, alcohol use, and physical activity, researchers found this link between fast food consumption and obesity and glucose intolerance was still significant in whites but not in blacks.

Although the study found blacks ate fast food blacks more often than whites (an average of twice a week vs. 1.6 times per week for whites), researchers say the lack of an association may be due to other dietary habits found among blacks that were not assessed in the study, and these factors need to be examined in future studies.

Researchers say that frequent dining on fast food may have an overall negative effect on the quality of a person's diet, therefore increasing the risk of obesity and other health problems.

"When you eat fast foods, you eat fewer fresh fruits and vegetables, fewer whole grains, and fewer reduced-fat dairy products and fiber," says researcher Mark Pereira, PhD, assistant professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School, in a news release. "The actual meal didn't seem to matter -- hamburgers, fries, breakfast sandwiches, chicken sandwiches and nuggets -- they were all associated with an increased risk."

Periera presented the results of the study recently at the American Heart Association's 43^rd Annual Conference on Cardiovascular Disease Epidemiology and Prevention, in Miami, Fla.

Aug. 23, 2006 -- Scientists may have figured out how high-fiber diets help digestion.

Basically, fiber (sometimes called "roughage") roughs up the outer membrane of gut cells a bit. As those cells heal, they release mucus, which helps move food along the digestive tract.

The process is detailed by Paul McNeil, PhD, and Katsuya Miyake, PhD, in the early online issue of Public Library of Science Biology.

McNeil and Miyake work at the Medical College of Georgia, located in Augusta, Ga.

"When you eat high-fiber foods, they bang up against the cells lining the gastrointestinal tract, rupturing their outer covering," McNeil explains, in a Medical College of Georgia news release.

"What we are saying is this banging and tearing increases the level of lubricating mucus. It's a good thing," he adds.

How Much Fiber?

McNeil and Miyake studied roughage in a lab. But what about the real world, where fiber goes on your plate, not into test tubes?

Fiber is a cornerstone of the latest dietary guidelines issued by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).

In those guidelines, issued in 2005, the USDA recommends getting 14 grams of dietary fiber for every 1,000 calories you consume.

So if you consume 2,000 calories per day, you should get 28 grams of dietary fiber that day.

Fiber is found naturally in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and legumes. How much fiber will you get from different foods? Here's a list from the USDA:

• Navy beans, 1/2 cup, cooked: 9.5 grams
• 100% bran cereal, 1/2 cup, ready to eat: 8.8 grams
• Sweet potato, medium-sized and baked, including peel: 4.8 grams
• Whole-wheat English muffin: 4.4 grams
• Mixed vegetables, 1/2 cup: 4.0 grams
• Raspberries, 1/2 cup, raw: 4.0 grams
• Apple, medium-sized, including skin: 3.3 grams
• Whole-wheat spaghetti, 1/2 cup, cooked: 3.1 grams
• Banana, medium-sized: 3.1 grams
• Broccoli, 1/2 cup, cooked: 2.8 grams
• Collard greens, 1/2 cup, cooked: 2.7 grams

For instance, a breakfast of a medium-sized banana and half a cup of 100% bran cereal yield 11.9 grams of dietary fiber.

Add an apple as a morning snack, a half cup of Navy beans with an equal amount of mixed vegetables at lunch, and whole-wheat spaghetti at dinner, and you've reached 31 grams of dietary fiber -- more than the 28 grams recommended for a 2,000-calorie diet.

Of course, that's just an example, not a menu recommendation. Each person is different, and not every food that you eat has to be loaded with fiber.

The take-home message: Mix and match fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and legumes to help you get recommended amounts of dietary fiber as part of a healthy diet.