Researchers at the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) have found that a genetic splicing mechanism is a trigger for both premature aging syndrome and normal cellular aging. This new study provides insights into how progerin may participate in the normal aging process. They published the results of their study on June 13, 2011 in the early online edition of the Journal of Clinical Investigation. The study investigates the interaction between a toxic protein called progerin and telomeres.

Read the rest of this entry »

By now most people know that IBM Watson is the computer that Jeopardy contestants went up against on the popular television show. The idea was to feed enough information into the computer’s data bank so that Watson could answer any of the trivia questions asked. Now, the creators behind IBM Watson are taking this concept a step further and intend to use the computer in the medical field.

In preparation for Jeopardy, Watson’s data banks were filled with books, encyclopedias, dictionaries and movie scripts. So is it too far-fetched to think that if this computer could be filled with enough information to answer trivia questions on Jeopardy, that you couldn’t fill it with enough medical data so that it could diagnose an actual medical condition? IBM has now filled Watson’s data banks with medical books and journals. Recently they provided a sneak peek into Watson’s transition from trivia genius to medical guru.

Unlike, Jeopardy, where Watson only came back with a single answer, it will now provide a list of possible diagnoses based on the symptoms input into the computer and ranked in order of probability. Watson will also provide a confidence rating for each diagnosis. The computer is designed to provide a diagnosis which only has a small likelihood of being right. This is very important because while nine out of ten times most people will have a common medical ailment, this is not always the case. Sometimes you medical problem is more rare and may fall in that 4% range. Watson is designed to list all possible diagnoses no matter what its probability.

Watson will not be the first computer designed to diagnose medical conditions. Both Artemis and Isabel are automated programs that have already been around for a few years and are designed to accomplish this same task. In fact, last fall the Orlando Health hospital network in Florida began using Isabel. Additionally, a demonstration of Isabel showed it was very similar to IBM’s Watson. So, why do we need a computer from IBM that will do the same thing?

Well, Watson does provide medical personnel with some real world advantages over the automated systems currently in place. First, Watson’s data banks are huge and can hold a tremendous amount of information. Second, IBM’s computer is faster at returning a possible diagnosis. The most important advantage, however, is that Watson does a better job at interpreting non medical terms. A patient that comes into the doctor’s office might say they are having difficulty swallowing. Watson can take that information and match it with its actual medical term which is dysphagia. Its speed, vast repository of information, and ability to understand plain language catapults Watson to the top of its field.

The ability to recognize plain language provides IBM with the possibility of loading internet blogs into the computer’s data banks. People all over the world post descriptions of their medical symptoms and side effects in an effort to get answers from other people who are experiencing similar complaints. If Watson could be a repository for this information, the benefits could be invaluable to doctors.

Watson is meant to assist doctors with diagnosing and treating patients, not replace them. Medical advances are occurring at warp speed and even the most diligent doctor cannot keep up with all the changes. Watson could provide them with the largest medical reference book ever imagined. Just keeping up with the latest drugs, studies and journals is an enormous feat. If doctors could work with Watson to help them stay on top of the most current medical information, we would all benefit.

Many have called California the land of the fruits and the nuts. I don’t think it gets any nuttier than trying to pass a law that will make circumcision illegal. Or maybe I am the one that is nuts because the city of San Francisco intends to put a measure on their November 2011 ballot which states it would be illegal to “circumcise, excise, cut or mutilate the whole or any part of the foreskin, testicles, or penis of another person” under the age of 18. Is it just me or does that sound crazy to you?

What sounds even crazier is that this measure does not provide any religious exemptions. If your child attends public school you must provide proof of immunization which can be waived if you claim a religious exemption. So let me get this straight. I can refuse to immunize my child against measles and spread a potentially serious disease because of religious practices, but I won’t be able to decide if my own child can be circumcised for religious reasons if the ban is passed.

Both the Jewish and Muslim faiths consider circumcision an important ritual. It is customary for 8 day old Jewish males to be circumcised by a mohel during a religious ceremony. If San Francisco passes the ban, anyone who performs circumcision would be charged with a misdemeanor crime which carries penalties of up to $1,000 or a maximum sentence of one year in jail. This includes doctors who perform the procedure.

Apparently thousands of people are on board with thinking that the decision of whether to circumcise a child should be decided by the government instead of the parents who brought him into this world. More than 12,000 signatures were collected in support of the ban, making it a legitimate ballot measure. Supporters of the ban liken circumcision to genital mutilation in girls. However, critics say the ban is an infringement of their rights. The Jewish community intends to fight the ballot measure, stating the ban violates their First Amendment rights to religious freedom.

Even medical authorities do not agree on whether circumcision provides health benefits. The World Health Organization recommends circumcision stating it helps reduce the risk of HIV. Additionally, in 2005, The American Academy of Pediatrics stated their official position is that the procedure reduces the risk of bladder infections and helps prevent sexually transmitted diseases like HIV/AIDS. However, they went on to say that their data was insufficient to support a recommendation for routine circumcision in newborns.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the rate of baby boys in the United States they were circumcised has dropped from 56% in 2006 to about 32% in 2009. This number may be low, however, because it does not take into account circumcisions performed outside of a hospital in a religious ceremony.

Most medical experts do not make a recommendation. Instead, they outline the possible benefits and potential risks, leaving the final decision up to the parents. I think that is the way it should be. And, frankly, I am surprised that San Francisco which is usually considered very forward thinking when it comes to the rights of its citizens, is proposing such a ban.

The war against childhood obesity continues to rage on. First the culprit was too much fast food. Then we blamed video games for making our children more sedentary. Researchers have even linked a lack of sleep to higher risks of becoming overweight. And now, chocolate milk is on the chopping block. Even British chef, Jamie Oliver, has jumped on the bandwagon to blame flavored milk as a contributing factor to childhood obesity.

Many school districts are considering banning flavored milk in an effort to reduce the amount of sugar kids are consuming. Even though most schools serve fat-free chocolate milk, an eight ounce carton contains six more grams of sugar than an equal serving of low fat white milk. Even worse, some schools serve fat-free strawberry milk which has 13 more grams of sugar than the white milk.

The Boulder Valley School District in Colorado has already banned flavored milk and the second largest school district in the nation, Los Angeles Unified School District in California, is proposing to have flavored milk removed from its schools. Florida, which was also considering a statewide ban, backed off when they were asked to look at all food and beverages served at school with a high sugar content.

However, not everyone agrees that banning flavored milk in school will be a good nutritional move. Both parents and nutritionists line up on both sides of the argument. Critics of the plan point to that fact that 70% of milk consumed at school is flavored. Some districts which have already banned flavored milk experienced a 35% decrease in milk consumption. The theory was that if you removed flavored milk from the menu, kids would drink the white milk instead. However, that was not the reality. One district in West Virginia even reversed its decision and brought chocolate milk back at the urging of state officials.

The American Academy of Pediatrics, American Dietetic Association, American Heart Association, National Medical Association and School Nutrition Association have banded together to point out that the nutritional value of flavored milk offsets the harm of added sugar. They backed up their joint statement by citing studies that prove kids who drink fat-free, flavored milk are not heavier than non milk drinkers and they meet more of their nutritional needs. The fact is that milk, even flavored milk, contains nine essential nutrients such as calcium, protein and vitamin D.

I think most parents agree that schools could serve more nutritional lunches. Perhaps we should find a substitute for corn dogs or chicken tenders, instead of focusing on flavored milk. I especially take issue when I hear chocolate milk being compared to soda or candy. There is actually nutritional value in milk, but soda and candy do not offer the same benefits to make up for the extra sugar.

According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), the number of obese kids ages 2 to 19 has almost tripled since 1980. Currently, about 17% or 12.5 million kids in the United States are obese.

Did you know the month of May is Hepatitis Awareness month? Did you also know that over 4.5 million people in the United States are living with chronic viral hepatitis and that an alarming 80,000 new infections occur each year? How easily is the disease transmitted? Are you at risk? These are the same questions I started asking myself when my daughter came home from school and told me one of her classmates had been diagnosed with the disease.

Hepatitis is an inflammation of the liver usually caused by a virus that infects the liver. There are several types of hepatitis, but Hepatitis A, B, and C are the most prevalent in the United States. About 3 million Americans are infected with Hepatitis C alone, making it the most common chronic infection spread through the blood. You can also contract hepatitis through drug or alcohol use and by having certain medical conditions.

Since hepatitis is only spread through contact with an infected person’s blood, it is not easily transmitted through routine daily contact. You cannot catch viral hepatitis from someone coughing, sneezing, hugging, kissing, or sharing food, utensils or glasses with you. However, you can expose yourself to hepatitis if you share common household items such as nail clippers, razors, or toothbrushes with an infected person. Additionally, simple tasks such as disposing of sanitary napkins, tampons, bloody tissues or used bandages can put you at risk for exposing yourself to the infected person’s blood.

Another source of common infection is through drug use. It is not atypical for the youth of today to share everything, including needles. Even if you don’t inject drugs, you can also be exposed if you get a tattoo which is applied using a needle. In rare instances, viral hepatitis can be transmitted through sexual intercourse and there is also a 5% chance of pregnant women passing the disease to their child during birth.

The most dangerous thing about having viral hepatitis is that many people do not know they even have the disease. It is not uncommon for a person to show no symptoms of the disease, providing a false sense that they are healthy. The bad news is that while they are unaware a problem exists; the disease may still be damaging their liver. It can take as long as 30 years for symptoms to develop and by this time the damage has been done. Viral hepatitis is the primary cause of liver cancer the most frequent reason a liver transplant is needed.

If you don’t remember anything else from this article, remember three important facts about viral hepatitis. First, both Hepatitis B and Hepatitis C are viral types of the disease and can lead to chronic, life-long infections. Second, many people that have the disease do not even know they are infected. Third, chronic viral hepatitis can lead to liver cancer. It is important that you know everything you need to about hepatitis.