Showing posts with label health. Show all posts
Showing posts with label health. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 04, 2007

Rock 'N' Roll: Sex, Drugs and an Early Exit

Article from HealthDay News
From Elvis Presley to Jimi Hendrix, from Janis Joplin to Kurt Cobain, rock and pop stars are more than twice as likely to die early compared with the general population, British researchers report. What's more, pop stars often die within a few years of achieving fame, often due to drug and alcohol abuse. But it's their role as icons that worries the researchers behind the report that appears in the September issue of the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.

"People should understand the type of lifestyle that many of these performers live," said study author Mark Bellis, director of the Centre for Public Health at Liverpool John Moores University. "In addition, the music industry should consider not just the short-term health of popular rock stars, but also the longer term health even as they disappear later into obscurity." Part of the problem is living with the stress of fame, Bellis said. "Also, living in an environment of money and fame, which protects people from some of the consequences, which would make members of the general public give up drugs," he said. "Generally," he added, "affluence enhances people's lifestyles and prolongs life, whereas in this particular case the exposure to fame and what comes with it is associated with a mortality which is higher than that in the general population."

Read more...

Friday, April 20, 2007

Ethanol Vehicles Pose Significant Risk To Health, New Study Finds

Article from Science Daily
Ethanol is widely touted as an eco-friendly, clean-burning fuel. But if every vehicle in the United States ran on fuel made primarily from ethanol instead of pure gasoline, the number of respiratory-related deaths and hospitalizations likely would increase, according to a new study by Stanford University atmospheric scientist Mark Z. Jacobson. His findings are published in the April 18 online edition of the journal Environmental Science & Technology (ES&T).


Using ethanol-based fuel instead of gasoline would likely
increase the ozone-related death rate in Los Angeles by
9 percent in 2020, according to a new study by atmospheric
scientist Mark Jacobson. (Credit: Mark Z. Jacobson)

"Ethanol is being promoted as a clean and renewable fuel that will reduce global warming and air pollution," said Jacobson, associate professor of civil and environmental engineering. "But our results show that a high blend of ethanol poses an equal or greater risk to public health than gasoline, which already causes significant health damage."

Gasoline vs. ethanol
For the study, Jacobson used a sophisticated computer model to simulate air quality in the year 2020, when ethanol-fueled vehicles are expected to be widely available in the United States. "The chemicals that come out of a tailpipe are affected by a variety of factors, including chemical reactions, temperatures, sunlight, clouds, wind and precipitation," he explained. "In addition, overall health effects depend on exposure to these airborne chemicals, which varies from region to region. Ours is the first ethanol study that takes into account population distribution and the complex environmental interactions."
In the experiment, Jacobson ran a series of computer tests simulating atmospheric conditions throughout the United States in 2020, with a special focus on Los Angeles. "Since Los Angeles has historically been the most polluted airshed in the U.S., the testbed for nearly all U.S. air pollution regulation and home to about 6 percent of the U.S. population, it is also ideal for a more detailed study," he wrote. Jacobson programmed the computer to run air quality simulations comparing two future scenarios:

  • A vehicle fleet (that is, all cars, trucks, motorcycles, etc., in the United States) fueled by gasoline, versus
  • A fleet powered by E85, a popular blend of 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline.

Deaths and hospitalizations
The results of the computer simulations were striking. "We found that E85 vehicles reduce atmospheric levels of two carcinogens, benzene and butadiene, but increase two others—formaldehyde and acetaldehyde," Jacobson said. "As a result, cancer rates for E85 are likely to be similar to those for gasoline. However, in some parts of the country, E85 significantly increased ozone, a prime ingredient of smog."
Inhaling ozone—even at low levels—can decrease lung capacity, inflame lung tissue, worsen asthma and impair the body's immune system, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. The World Health Organization estimates that 800,000 people die each year from ozone and other chemicals in smog.
"In our study, E85 increased ozone-related mortalities in the United States by about 200 deaths per year compared to gasoline, with about 120 of those deaths occurring in Los Angeles," Jacobson said. "These mortality rates represent an increase of about 4 percent in the U.S. and 9 percent in Los Angeles above the projected ozone-related death rates for gasoline-fueled vehicles in 2020."

The study showed that ozone increases in Los Angeles and the northeastern United States will be partially offset by decreases in the southeast. "However, we found that nationwide, E85 is likely to increase the annual number of asthma-related emergency room visits by 770 and the number of respiratory-related hospitalizations by 990," Jacobson said. "Los Angeles can expect 650 more hospitalizations in 2020, along with 1,200 additional asthma-related emergency visits."

The deleterious health effects of E85 will be the same, whether the ethanol is made from corn, switchgrass or other plant products, Jacobson noted. "Today, there is a lot of investment in ethanol," he said. "But we found that using E85 will cause at least as much health damage as gasoline, which already causes about 10,000 U.S. premature deaths annually from ozone and particulate matter. The question is, if we're not getting any health benefits, then why continue to promote ethanol and other biofuels? There are alternatives, such as battery-electric, plug-in-hybrid and hydrogen-fuel cell vehicles, whose energy can be derived from wind or solar power," he added. "These vehicles produce virtually no toxic emissions or greenhouse gases and cause very little disruption to the land—unlike ethanol made from corn or switchgrass, which will require millions of acres of farmland to mass-produce. It would seem prudent, therefore, to address climate, health and energy with technologies that have known benefits."

This ES&T study was partially supported by NASA.

Tuesday, April 10, 2007

Majority of Doctors Believe Religion Is Good for Your Health

Source: FOXNews.com
Most U.S. doctors agree that religion and spirituality have a significant effect on a person's health, according to a new survey on doctor's spiritual beliefs. But doctors who themselves are religious or spiritual are more likely to see the impact of religion or spirituality on personal health as positive and believe it strongly influences health.

Researchers say the findings support recommendations that doctors recognize how their own beliefs influence how they provide care. "Physicians' notions about the relationship between religion and spirituality and patients' health are strongly associated with physicians' own religious characteristics," write researcher Farr Curlin, MD, of the University of Chicago, and colleagues in the Archives of Internal Medicine.

"Consensus seems to begin and end with the idea that many [if not most] patients draw on prayer and other religious resources to navigate and overcome the spiritual challenges that arise in their experiences of illness," write the researchers. "Controversy remains regarding whether, to what extent and in what ways religion and spirituality helps or harms patients' health."

Doctors' Spiritual Beliefs Affect Care
In the study, researchers mailed surveys to a random sample of 2,000 U.S. doctors from all specialties. Participants were asked to estimate how often patients raised religious or spiritual issues, how much religion and spirituality affect health, and how the influence of religion and spirituality is manifested.

Among the more than 1,100 doctors who returned the survey, the results showed that 56 percent believed religion and spirituality had much or very much influence on health. But only 6 percent believed religion or spirituality had changed “hard” medical outcomes. Instead, most doctors believed that religion and spirituality:

  • Often helps patients cope with illness (76 percent)
  • Gives patients a positive state of mind (74 percent)
  • Provides emotional and practical support through the religious community (55 percent)

Compared with those who rated themselves as not very religious, those who were more religious were more likely to:

  • Report that patients often mention religious or spiritual issues
  • Believe religion and spirituality strongly influences health
  • Interpret the influence of religion and spirituality in positive rather than negative ways.