Smoking changes our genes

Smoking changes our genes.

From the 17 December 2013 ScienceDaily article

The fact that smoking means a considerable health risk is nowadays commonly accepted. New research findings from Uppsala University and Uppsala Clinical Research Center show that smoking alters several genes that can be associated with health problems for smokers, such as increased risk for cancer and diabetes.

We inherit our genes from our parents at birth. Later in life the genetic material can be changed by epigenetic modifications, i.e. chemical alterations of the DNA the affect the activity of the genes. Such alterations are normally caused by aging but can also result from environmental factors and lifestyle.

In a study recently published in the journal Human Molecular Genetics the researchers have examined how the genes are changed in smokers and users of non-smoke tobacco. They could identify a large number of genes that were altered in smokers but found no such effect of non-smoke tobacco.

…

t has been previously known that smokers have an increased risk of developing diabetes and many types of cancer, and have a reduced immune defence and lower sperm quality. The results from the study also showed that genes that increase the risk for cancer and diabetes, or are important for the immune response or sperm quality, are affected by smoking.

…..

Read the entire article here

Related articles

• Smoking changes our genes
• How Smoking Changes Your Genes: Cigarettes Linked To Epigenetic Alterations
• Smoking can affect DNA: Swedish study
• Top 10 Studies on Nicotine You Need to Know About
• Teen Smokers at Greater Risk for Early Death

 

High school years hard on adolescent health, with spikes in drinking, smoking and drug use: Canada study

Dualist Beliefs Linked With Less Concern For Healthy Behaviors

 

From the 27 July 2012 article at Medical News Today

Many people, whether they know it or not, are philosophical dualists. That is, they believe that the brain and the mind are two separate entities. Despite the fact dualist beliefs are found in virtually all human cultures, surprisingly little is known about the impact of these beliefs on how we think and behave in everyday life. ..

…Across five related studies, researchers Matthias Forstmann, Pascal Burgmer, and Thomas Mussweiler of the University of Cologne, Germany, found that people primed with dualist beliefs had more reckless attitudes toward health and exercise, and also preferred (and ate) a less healthy diet than those who were primed with physicalist beliefs.

Furthermore, they found that the relationship also worked in the other direction. People who were primed with unhealthy behaviors – such as pictures of unhealthy food – reported a stronger dualistic belief than participants who were primed with healthy behaviors.

Overall, the findings from the five studies provide converging evidence demonstrating that mind-body dualism has a noticeable impact on people’s health-related attitudes and behaviors. Specifically, these findings suggest that dualistic beliefs decrease the likelihood of engaging in healthy behavior.

These findings support the researchers’ original hypothesis that the more people perceive their minds and bodies to be distinct entities, the less likely they will be to engage in behaviors that protect their bodies. Bodies are ultimately viewed as a disposable vessel that helps the mind interact with the physical world.

Evidence of a bidirectional relationship further suggests that metaphysical beliefs, such as beliefs in mind-body dualism, may serve as cognitive tools for coping with threatening or harmful situations.

The fact that the simple priming procedures used in the studies had an immediate impact on health-related attitudes and behavior suggests that these procedures may eventually have profound implications for real-life problems. Interventions that reduce dualistic beliefs through priming could be one way to help promote healthier – or less self-damaging – behaviors in at-risk populations.

 

Related articles

• Mind vs. Body? Dualist Beliefs Linked with Less Concern for Healthy Behaviors (prn.fm)
• Mind vs. body? Dualist beliefs linked with less concern for healthy behaviors (sciencedaily.com)
• Mind vs. Body? Dualist Beliefs Linked with Less Concern for Healthy Behaviors (psychologicalscience.org)
• Mind vs. Body? Dualist Beliefs Linked with Less Concern for Healthy Behaviors (sott.net)
• Mind vs. body? Dualist beliefs linked with less concern for healthy behaviors (medicalxpress.com)
• Mind vs. body? Dualist beliefs linked with less concern for healthy behaviors (eurekalert.org)

 

Male acts of bravery, risk display honor, increase accidental death

From the 16 August Eureka news alert

Effects of male aggression in response to insult most felt in South, West US states

Los Angeles, CA (August 15, 2011) Men sometimes prove themselves by taking risks that demonstrate their toughness and bravery. Putting yourself in peril might establish manliness, but it can also lead to high rates of accidental death, particularly among men who live in states with a “culture of honor,” according to a study in the current Social Psychological and Personality Science (published by SAGE).

A culture of honor puts a high value on the defense of reputation—sometimes with violence. It can develop in environments with historically few natural resources, danger of rustling, and low police presence. States with strong cultures of honor in the U.S. are in the South and West, such as South Carolina, Texas and Wyoming. People from honor states tend to respond to reputation threats with higher levels of hostility and violence compared to people from non-honor states, mostly in the Northeast and upper Midwest, such as New York, Wisconsin and Ohio.

People who most believe in a culture of honor—who agree that “A real man doesn’t let other people push him around” or that aggression is a reasonable response to being insulted—told the researchers they were quite willing to engage in risky behaviors, such as bungee jumping or gambling away a week’s wages.

This willingness to take risks might well translate into an early death, according to Collin Barnes, Ryan Brown and Michael Tamborski of the University of Oklahoma. They compared the rates of accidental death—by drowning, car wrecks, over-exertion and so on—and found that people in honor states had significantly higher accidental death rates than did people in non-honor states, especially among White men.

Honor cultures are more powerful in rural areas, where the influence of personal reputation is higher than it is in cities. Although honor states had a 14% higher accidental death rate in the cities, they had a 19% higher rate of accidental death in more rural areas, compared to non-honor states. More than 7,000 deaths a year can be attributed to risk-taking associated with the culture of honor in the USA.

“Exposing yourself to potentially deadly situations is proof of strength and courage, and because this proof is such a concern for people living in cultures of honor, they suffer from a higher rate of accidental fatalities,” said the authors.

###

The article “Living Dangerously: Culture of Honor, Risk-Taking, and the Non-Randomness of ‘Accidental’ Deaths” in Social Psychological and Personality Science is available free for a limited time at: http://spp.sagepub.com/content/early/2011/06/03/1948550611410440.full.pdf+html .

Social Media Has Benefits And Risks For Kids

Social Media Has Benefits And Risks For Kids

From the March 28 2011 Health News Today item

While social media sites like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube bring benefits to children and teenagers, such as helping them develop communication and technical skills, they can also expose them to danger and risk, such as cyberbullying and depression, according to a new report written by American pediatricians.

The report, which appears in the April issue of Pediatrics, [free full text] the peer-reviewed, scientific journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), says doctors are in an ideal position to encourage children to use social media in a healthy way, and to help parents and families understand and engage with their use of social media while also monitoring for potential problems….

…The report does much to stress the benefits of social media, such as developing communication skills, facilitating social interaction and improving technical competence. Other benefits include helping young people find opportunities to link up with community activity like volunteering, and helping them attain a sense of identity…
…A Common Sense Media Poll in 2009 found that more than half of American teenagers log onto their favorite social media site at least once a day, while 22% do so at least ten times a day.

75% of teenagers now own cellphones, with 54% of them using them for texting, 24% for instant messaging, and 25% for social media access.

The growth of social media has been so rapid and their presence in children’s everyday life is now so pervasive, that:

“For some teens and tweens, social media is the primary way they interact socially, rather than at the mall or a friend’s house,” report co-author Dr Gwenn O’Keeffe told the press.

“Parents need to understand these technologies so they can relate to their children’s online world – and comfortably parent in that world,” urged O’Keeffe.

O’Keeffe and colleagues point out that a significant part of young people’s social and emotional development now occurs while they are using the Internet or on their cellphones.

Related Articles

• Today’s Kids Face ‘Facebook Depression’ (livescience.com)
• How Marketers Are Using Social Media to Grow (othersidegroup.com)
• NLM Director’s Comments Transcript: Kids & Social Media 05/02/2011 (US National Library of Medicine)

As Peer Pressure Increases, So Does Brain’s Ability to Resist It

From a March 9 2011 Health Day news item:

As Peer Pressure Increases, So Does Brain’s Ability to Resist It
Adolescents’ brain wiring gears up just as risky behavior approaches, researchers report

 

Poorly presented risk statistics could misinform health decisions

Poorly presented risk statistics could misinform health decisions

From the March 15 Eureka news alert item

Choosing the appropriate way to present risk statistics is key to helping people make well-informed decisions. A new Cochrane Systematic Review[abstract]*** found that health professionals and consumers may change their perceptions when the same risks and risk reductions are presented using alternative statistical formats.

Risk statistics can be used persuasively to present health interventions in different lights. The different ways of expressing risk can prove confusing and there has been much debate about how to improve the communication of health statistics.

For example, you could read that a drug cuts the risk of hip fracture over a three year period by 50%. At first sight, this would seem like an incredible breakthrough. In fact, what it might equally mean is that without taking the drug 1% of people have fractures, and with the drug only 0.5% do. Now the benefit seems to be much less. Another way of phrasing it would be that 200 people need to take the drug for three years to prevent one incidence of hip fracture. In this case, the drug could start to look a rather expensive option.

Statisticians have terms to describe each type of presentation. The statement of a 50% reduction is typically expressed as a Relative Risk Reduction (RRR). Saying that 0.5% fewer people will have broken hips is an Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR). Saying that 200 people need to be treated to prevent one occurrence is referred to as the Number Needed to Treat (NNT). Furthermore, these effects can be shown as a frequency, where the effect is expressed as 1 out of 200 people avoiding a hip fracture.

In the new study, Cochrane researchers reviewed data from 35 studies assessing understanding of risk statistics by health professionals and consumers. They found that participants in the studies understood frequencies better than probabilities. Relative risk reductions, as in “the drug cuts the risk by 50%”, were less well understood. Participants perceived risk reductions to be inappropriately greater compared to the same benefits presented using absolute risk or NNT.

“People perceive risk reductions to be larger and are more persuaded to adopt a health intervention when its effect is presented in relative terms,” said Elie Akl of the Department of Medicine, University at Buffalo, USA and first author on the review. “What we don’t know yet is whether doctors or policymakers might actually make different decisions based on the way health benefits are presented.”

Although the researchers say further studies are required to explore how different risk formats affect behaviour, they believe there are strong logical arguments for not reporting relative values alone. “Relative risk statistics do not allow a fair comparison of benefits and harms in the same way as absolute values do,” said lead researcher Holger Schünemann of the Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada. “If relative risk is to be used, then the absolute change in risk should also be given, as relative risk alone is likely to misinform decisions.”

 

***  For suggestions on how to get this review for free or at low cost click here

Cochrane Reviews are ” systematic reviews of primary research in human health care and health policy. They investigate the effects of interventions (literally meaning to intervene to modify an outcome) for prevention, treatment and rehabilitation. They also assess the accuracy of a diagnostic test for a given condition in a specific patient group and setting.”

Please go here for a previous posting on Cochrane Reviews.

 

Global Strategy to Reduce the Harmful Use of Alcohol- WHO report

Global Strategy to Reduce the Harmful Use of Alcohol

February 17, 2011 20:30

From the  WHO (World Health Organization) press release:

Wider implementation of policies is needed to save lives and reduce the health impact of harmful alcohol drinking, says a new report by WHO. Harmful use of alcohol results in the death of 2.5 million people annually, causes illness and injury to many more, and increasingly affects younger generations and drinkers in developing countries.

Alcohol use is the third leading risk factor for poor health globally. A wide variety of alcohol-related problems can have devastating impacts on individuals and their families and can seriously affect community life. The harmful use of alcohol is one of the four most common modifi able and preventable risk factors for major noncommunicable diseases (NCDs). There is also emerging evidence that the harmful use of alcohol contributes to the health burden caused by communicable diseases such as, for example, tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS.

Read the report

Related Articles

• U.S. must reorient global health strategy (cnn.com)

Related WHO Web pages

• Management of Substance Abuse (currently featuring  Global status report on alcohol and health 2o11 (3 March 2011)

• Atlas 2010: First global report on treatment resources launched

Related Resources

• Rethinking Drinking provides research-based information about how your drinking habits can affect your health. Learn to recognize the signs of alcohol problems and ways to cut back or quit drinking. Interactive tools can also help you calculate the calories and alcohol content of drinks. (US National Institutes of Health)

CDC Health Disparities and Inequalities Report – United States – 2011 (And Link About Recent WHO Report on Inequities and Avoidable Deaths)

In my humble opinion, a strong argument for affordable, accessible health care for all regardless of one’s income or where one lives. Health disparities   are not found only within groups of people who have the ability to pay for treatments or who are able to get needed treatment quickly.

While this train of thought may be labeled as creeping socialism, health care cost/access challenges are  a matter of justice and fairness for all.  Is there agreement on what is just or what is fair? Well, no. However, I believe we all can put differences aside in working for what is best for all.

 

From the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) January 13th news release

Americans’ differences in income, race/ethnicity, gender and other social attributes make a difference in how likely they are to be healthy, sick, or die prematurely, according to a report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

For instance, state-level estimates in 2007 indicate that low income residents report five to 11 fewer healthy days per month than do high income residents, the report says. It also says men are nearly four times more likely than women to commit suicide, that adolescent birth rates for Hispanics and non-Hispanic blacks are three and 2.5 times respectively those of whites, and that the prevalence of binge drinking is higher in people with higher incomes.

The data are in the new “CDC Health Disparities and Inequalities Report — United States, 2011”. The report also underscores the need for more consistent, nationally representative data on disability status and sexual orientation.

“Better information about the health status of different groups is essential to improve health. This first of its kind analysis and reporting of recent trends is designed to spur action and accountability at the federal, tribal, state and local levels to achieve health equity in this country,” said CDC Director Thomas R. Frieden, M.D., M.P.H.

The report, the first of a series of consolidated assessments, highlights health disparities by sex, race and ethnicity, income, education, disability status and other social characteristics. Substantial progress in improving health for most U.S. residents has been made in recent years, yet persistent disparities continue.

Released as a supplement to CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, the report addresses disparities at the national level in health care access, exposure to environmental hazards, mortality, morbidity, behavioral risk factors, disability status and social determinants of health – the conditions in which people are born, grow, live and work.

Findings from the report’s 22 essays include:

In 2007, non-Hispanic white men (21.5 per 100,000 population) were two to three times more likely to die in motor vehicle crashes than were non-Hispanic white women (8.8 per 100,000). The gender difference was similar in other race/ethnic groups.

In 2007, men (18.4 per 100,000) of all ages and races/ethnicities were approximately four times more likely to die by suicide than females (4.8 per 100,000).

In 2007, rates of drug-induced deaths were highest among non-Hispanic whites (15.1 per 100,000) and lowest among Asian/Pacific Islanders (2.0 per 100,000).

Hypertension is by far most prevalent among non-Hispanic blacks (42 percent vs. 29 percent among whites), while levels of control are lowest for Mexican-Americans (31.8 percent versus 46.5 percent among non-Hispanic whites).

Rates of preventable hospitalizations increase as incomes decrease. Data from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality indicate that eliminating these disparities would prevent approximately 1 million hospitalizations and save $6.7 billion in health care costs each year.

Rates of adolescent pregnancy and childbirth have been falling or holding steady for all racial/ethnic minorities in all age groups. However, in 2008, disparities persist as birth rates for Hispanic adolescents (77.4 per 1,000 females) and non-Hispanic black adolescents (62.9 per 1,000 females) were three and 2.5 times those of whites (26.7 per 1,000 females), respectively.

In 2009, the prevalence of binge drinking was higher in groups with incomes of $50,000 or above (18.5 percent) compared to those with incomes of $15,000 or less (12.1 percent); and in college graduates (17.4 percent), compared to those with less than high school education (12.5 percent). However, people who binge drink and have less than $15,000 income binge drink more frequently (4.9 versus 3.6 episodes) and, when they do binge drink, drink more heavily (7.1 versus 6.5 drinks).

The report supports the Healthy People 2020 goals and the forthcoming National Partnership for Action (NPA) to End Health Disparities. The report also complements the upcoming AHRQ National Healthcare Disparities Report *** and underscores the need to connect those working in clinical care and public health, especially at the local level.

“CDC publishes this report today not only to address gaps in health between populations in our country but also to begin to measure progress in years to come in reducing these gaps and inequities going forward,” said Leandris Liburd, Ph.D., M.P.H., M.A., recently appointed director of CDC’s Office of Minority Health and Health Equity. Dr. Liburd will provide leadership for the office and CDC’s public health programs, policies, surveillance and research efforts in achieving health equity.

The full “CDC Health Disparities and Inequalities Report — United States, 2011”, is available at http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr.

*** AHRQ National Healthcare Disparities Report Fact Sheet
AHRQ- Measure Healthcare Quality, including section on National Healthcare Disparities Reports (2003-09) with related documents

Related articles

• Inequities and Avoidable Deaths (thirdworlddd.wordpress.com)
  Excerpts
  • When there are disparities, especially in health, there result avoidable deaths. The WHO estimates that better use of existing preventive measures could reduce the global burden of disease by as much as 70% (WHO, 3). That means that we already have much of the needed solutions, but why are we not implementing them? For example, Diarrheal Disease is a preventable, avoidable disease; with basic sanitation and access to clean water, a huge difference could be made in eradicating the affliction. Why are these things not being put into place?
  • What we can take from this is that we need to change the way we look at the disparities, by getting our hands dirty. We need to get into these places and ask questions, not answer them ourselves. The extent of human suffering is vast, but it needs to be witnessed in order to gain solutions. If these people can bare to live their lives full of inequities, inequalities, and misfortune, we can bare to listen to what they have to say.
• Disability as a Disparity (couragecenter.wordpress.com)

Psychopaths May Lack Understanding of Social Contracts

From a November 5, 2010 Health Day news item by Robert Preidt

FRIDAY, Nov. 5 (HealthDay News) — Impaired understanding of how social contracts work and why people need to take precautions may explain why psychopaths cheat and take risks even though they know right from wrong, a new study suggests.

Although less than 1 percent of people in the United States are psychopaths, they account for 20 percent of the prison population because of their tendency for impulsive, destructive and harmful behavior, noted the University of New Mexico researchers.

Previous studies have shown that psychopaths know the difference between right and wrong and give typical responses when presented with an example of a moral dilemma. This study  [in the October 2010 issue of  Psychological Science] ***examined another type of reasoning — thinking about precautions and social contracts……

….”This work suggests that psychopaths don’t understand cheating in the normal way, so they might not realize when they’re cheating other people or when other people would react badly to cheating,” study co-author Elsa Ermer said in an Association for Psychological Science news release.

She added that psychopaths’ inability to reason about precautions may explain why they take risks and commit impulsive acts that land them in trouble. It appears they have difficulty “understanding when they can avoid negative consequences of a risk by taking a precaution,” Ermer said.

SOURCE: Association for Psychological Science, news release, Nov. 3, 2010

A related news item.. Logic of a psychopath..

***Click here for suggestions on how to get this article for free or at low cost

Do Your Genes Tilt You Toward Thrill-Seeking?

Scientists have found a dozen mutations associated with the urge to do exciting things

THURSDAY, Oct. 7 (HealthDay News) — Do your genes predispose you to thrill-seeking?

Scientists looking into this question have found a dozen gene mutations associated with the urge to do exciting things.

This urge, called “sensation seeking” by researchers, has been linked to the neurotransmitter dopamine, a chemical that carries messages in the brain. In research that involved 635 people enrolled in a study on addiction, the scientists looked at 273 genetic mutations — involving a change in just one letter of the DNA — known to occur in eight genes with roles related to dopamine.

That number was eventually narrowed down to a dozen potentially important mutations. When those 12 gene variants were combined, they explained just under 4 percent of the difference between people who are sensation seekers and those who are not. This may not seem like much but it is “quite large for a genetic study,” according to study first author Jaime Derringer, a doctoral student at the University of Minnesota.

However, she added, it’s too early to start screening people for these mutations because not enough is known about how genes affect behavior.

While sensation seeking has been linked to a range of behavior disorders, such as drug addiction, it can be a positive trait.

“Not everyone who’s high on sensation-seeking becomes a drug addict. They may become an Army Ranger or an artist. It’s all in how you channel it,” Derringer said.

The study appears in the current issue of the journal Psychological Science.

 

Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance – United States, 2009

Some sobering statistics from a recent Morbidity and Mortality report,  Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance  (US, 2009)

“Results from the 2009 national YRBS indicated that many high school students are engaged in behaviors that increase their likelihood for the leading causes of death among persons aged 10–24 years in the United States. Among high school students nationwide, 9.7% rarely or never wore a seat belt when riding in a car driven by someone else. During the 30 days before the survey, 28.3% of high school students rode in a car or other vehicle driven by someone who had been drinking alcohol, 17.5% had carried a weapon, 41.8% had drunk alcohol, and 20.8% had used marijuana. During the 12 months before the survey, 31.5% of high school students had been in a physical fight and 6.3% had attempted suicide. Substantial morbidity and social problems among youth also result from unintended pregnancies and STDs, including HIV infection. Among high school students nationwide, 34.2% were currently sexually active, 38.9% of currently sexually active students had not used a condom during their last sexual intercourse, and 2.1% of students had ever injected an illegal drug. Results from the 2009 YRBS also indicated that many high school students are engaged in behaviors associated with the leading causes of death among adults aged ≥25 years in the United States. During 2009, 19.5% of high school students smoked cigarettes during the 30 days before the survey. During the 7 days before the survey, 77.7% of high school students had not eaten fruits and vegetables five or more times per day, 29.2% had drunk soda or pop at least one time per day, and 81.6% were not physically active for at least 60 minutes per day on all 7 days. One-third of high school students attended physical education classes daily, and 12.0% were obese.”