[Reblog] Most Distinctive Cause of Death in Each State

From the 27 May 2015 post at You Think You Know

The CDC recently released an interesting map depicting the most “distinctive” cause of death in each state from 2001 through 2010.  These causes of death are not the most common – that would be cancer or heart disease in every state – but rather unusual causes of death that are disproportionately common in each state.

Because these aren’t the most common cause of death, in some states just a few dozen people are dying of each condition.  For example, the number of deaths range “from 15,000 deaths from HIV in Florida to 679 deaths from tuberculosis in Texas to 22 deaths from syphilis in Louisiana.”

Maps like this one can be helpful in elucidating unique health conditions or social issues in each state.  We all know that as a country we are overweight; pointing out the number one killer (heart disease) on a map on seeks to reinforce what is already known.  The “distinctive cause” of death points to other issues – like people in coal-mining states being disproportionately likely to die from pneumoconiosis (black lung).

For the physicians out there – the authors of the study noted the importance of categorizing causes of death accurately on death certificates. “It would not take many systematic miscodes involving an unusual cause of death for it to appear on this type of map,” they write.

You can also visit this article on Slate about fun with maps that go viral, which clearly shows how manipulating data can give you some interesting results.

[Press release] Equation helps identify global disparities in cancer screening and treatment | EurekAlert! Science News

Equation helps identify global disparities in cancer screening and treatment | EurekAlert! Science News.

From the 20 January 2015 press release

Disparities in cancer screening, incidence, treatment, and survival are worsening globally. In a new study on colorectal cancer, researchers found that the

Age-standardised death rates from Colon and rectum cancers by country (per 100,000 inhabitants). (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

mortality-to-incidence ratio (MIR) can help identify whether a country has a higher mortality than might be expected based on cancer incidence. Countries with lower-than-expected MIRs have strong national health systems characterized by formal colorectal cancer screening programs. Conversely, countries with higher-than-expected MIRs are more likely to lack such screening programs.

The findings suggest that the MIR has potential as an indicator of the long-term success of global cancer surveillance programs. “The MIR appears to be a promising method to help identify global populations at risk for screenable cancers. In this capacity, it is potentially a useful tool for monitoring an important cancer outcome that informs and improves health policy at a national and international level,” said Dr. Vasu Sunkara, lead author of the Cancerstudy. Senior author Dr. James Hébert, who had used the MIR previously at the state and national level within the US, added that the use of the MIR internationally opens new possibilities for testing the relationship between this important indicator of cancer outcome and characteristics of countries’ health care delivery systems.

 

Related articles

• Can China tackle soaring cancer rates?
• Thyroid cancer on the rise
• Cancer deaths in under-80s ‘to be eliminated within 35 years’
• Research and Markets: Global Prostate Cancer Vaccine Clinical Pipeline Insight 2015
• ‘Significant decline’ in UK life expectancy, health officials warned

[News article] High milk intake linked with higher fractures and mortality, research suggests — ScienceDaily

High milk intake linked with higher fractures and mortality, research suggests — ScienceDaily.

Excerpts from the 28 October 2014 article

Source:

BMJ-British Medical Journal

Summary:

A high milk intake in women and men is not accompanied by a lower risk of fracture and instead may be associated with a higher rate of death, suggests observational research. Women who drank more than three glasses of milk a day had a higher risk of death than women who drank less than one glass of milk a day.

“there may be a link between the lactose and galactose content of milk and risk, although causality needs be tested.

“Our results may question the validity of recommendations to consume high amounts of milk to prevent fragility fractures,” they write. “The results should, however, be interpreted cautiously given the observational design of our study. The findings merit independent replication before they can be used for dietary recommendations.”

Michaëlsson and colleagues raise a fascinating possibility about the potential harms of milk, says Professor Mary Schooling at City University of New York in an accompanying editorial. However, she stresses that diet is difficult to assess precisely and she reinforces the message that these findings should be interpreted cautiously.

“As milk consumption may rise globally with economic development and increasing consumption of animal source foods, the role of milk and mortality needs to be established definitively now,” she concludes.”

A glass of milk Français : Un verre de lait (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

Prolonged TV Watching’s Health Outcomes

From the  18 July 2011 US National Library of Medicine (NLM) Director’s Comments article

Watching television for more than two hours a day is associated with significantly higher risks of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease and death from all causes, finds a comprehensive analysis of prior research recently published in Journal of the American Medical Association.

Eight international studies suggest two hours of daily television viewing is associated with a 20 percent higher risk of type 2 diabetes, a 15 percent higher chance of cardiovascular disease, and a 13 percent increased risk of all-cause mortality for men and women.

The findings suggest each two hour increment of daily TV watching results in an absolute risk of 176 new cases of type 2 diabetes, 38 new cases of fatal cardiovascular disease, and 104 new cases of all-cause mortality among 100,000 persons each year.

The researchers’ findings are based on a meta-analysis of eight studies about the broader health impacts of television watching.

Meta-analyses assess a cluster of previous research studies within a highly similar area. The findings sometimes suggest commonalities or aggregate patterns, which are more evidence-based than the findings from individual studies. Meta-analyses also suggest areas where more comprehensive research is desirable – and sometimes identify new research agendas.

The studies were done in four nations and published between 1970-2010. The authors note the current study is the first quantitative and systematic assessment of television viewing and health research.

In the meta-analysis of television viewing’s health impacts, its two authors only assessed research undergirded by large sample sizes. All eight studies featured long durations of participant follow-up, and well-established prospective study methods. Prospective studies follow the health of a cohort, or group of similar persons, over time and often assess the consequences of a common exposure (such as television viewing) on health outcomes.

The authors, from the University of Southern Denmark and the Harvard School of Public Health, explain the first generation of research tied prolonged television viewing with unhealthy eating habits and less exercise. The authors add a second generation of research suggested an association between TV viewing and biological risk factors, such as obesity and adverse lipid levels.

The current findings represent a third generation of research that suggests an association between prolonged television viewing and disease risks, including type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Moreover, the current findings suggest prolonged television viewing is linked to an elevated risk of death from all causes.

Within the article, the authors discuss how TV viewing displaces time on other activities, such as sleeping, exercise, and reading. The authors explain future researchers need to better contextualize the impact of TV viewing and health outcomes. For example, they suggest future research might assess the health impacts of TV watching in comparison with a range of the activities it displaces.

The authors also suggest reversing current emphases to note the impact of reducing TV watching on health outcomes. They write (and we quote): ‘Further study is needed to determine whether reducing prolonged TV viewing can prevent chronic disease morbidity and mortality’ (end of quote).

While MedlinePlus.gov does not have a health topic page devoted to the health impacts of TV viewing, a medical encyclopedia article about television watching is available. The article explains the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends no television viewing for children under age two, and fewer than two hours per day for older children.

Of course, the current research suggests the impact of prolonged television viewing may be deleterious to adult health. It will be interesting to see the extent that future research is consistent with the eight studies identified in the current meta-analysis and how these yield suggestions for a more therapeutic use of our time.

To find the encyclopedia article, type ‘television watching’ in the search box on MedlinePlus.gov’s home page. Then, click on ‘television watching.’

Before I go, this reminder……. MedlinePlus.gov is authoritative,….. free…. does not accept advertising …and is written to help you.

To find MedlinePlus.gov, just type in ‘MedlinePlus.gov’ in any web browser, such as Firefox, Safari, Netscape, or Explorer.

We encourage you to use MedlinePlus and please recommend it to your friends. MedlinePlus is available in English and Spanish.

Your comments about this or any of our podcasts are always welcome. We welcome suggestions about future topics too!

Please email Dr. Lindberg anytime at: NLMDirector@nlm.nih.gov

That’s NLMDirector (one word) @nlm.nih.gov

Patients worse off with more-experienced docs?

From a 15 July 2011 Reuters health article

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) – In a study that flies in the face of common sense, sicker patients turned out to fare worse under the care of seasoned doctors than when newcomers to medicine looked after them.

According to findings in the American Journal of Medicine, patients whose doctors had practiced for at least 20 years stayed longer in the hospital and were more likely to die compared to those whose doctors got their medical license in the past five years.

The results highlight “issues that we have as a medical profession in keeping up to date” with the latest medical knowledge, said Dr. Niteesh Choudhry of Harvard Medical School, who was not involved in the new study. It is “a quality of care problem that has been recognized for five to 10 years,” he told Reuters Health….

Click here to read the rest of the article

Black men survive longer in prison than out: study

From a 14 July 2011 Health News Today item

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) – Black men are half as likely to die at any given time if they’re in prison than if they aren’t, suggests a new study of North Carolina inmates.

The black prisoners seemed to be especially protected against alcohol- and drug-related deaths, as well as lethal accidents and certain chronic diseases.

But that pattern didn’t hold for white men, who on the whole were slightly more likely to die in prison than outside, according to findings published in Annals of Epidemiology.

Researchers say it’s not the first time a study has found lower death rates among certain groups of inmates — particularly disadvantaged people, who might get protection against violent injuries and murder.

“Ironically, prisons are often the only provider of medical care accessible by these underserved and vulnerable Americans,” said Hung-En Sung of the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York.

“Typically, prison-based care is more comprehensive than what inmates have received prior to their admission,” Sung, who wasn’t involved in the new study, told Reuters Health by email….

Your Culture May Influence Your Perception Of Death

From the 24 May 2011 Medical News Today article

Contemplating mortality can be terrifying. But not everyone responds to that terror in the same way. Now, a new study which will be published in an upcoming issue of Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, finds cultural differences in how people respond to mortality. European-Americans get worried and try to protect their sense of self, while Asian-Americans are more likely to reach out to others.

Much of the research on what psychologists call “mortality salience” – thinking about death – has been done on people of European descent, and has found that it makes people act in dramatic ways. “Men become more wary of sexy women and they like wholesome women more. People like to stereotype more. You see all these strange and bizarre occurrences when people think about the fact that they aren’t going to live forever,” says Christine Ma-Kellams of the University of California Santa Barbara, who carried out the research with Jim Blascovich. Particularly, people try to protect their sense of self, by putting down people who aren’t like them or distancing themselves from innocent victims. …..

Related articles

• Perception of death influences one’s action (news.bioscholar.com)
• How You Think About Death May Affect How You Act (Medical News Today)
• The More You Talk About Death, The Less You Fear It, Australia (Medical News Today)