Today’s guest post for Halloween is from Rachel Drake, a community manager at Obrello, an insurance company. The inclusion of this guest post does not mean that I endorse the services of Obrello. I think the information is important, and it is evidence-based, so I am hosting the guest post.
Sure, Halloween is frightfully full of ghosts and goblins, or maybe Iron Men and Elsas, but most children and parents recognize that it’s an evening of fun. That does not, however, mean that there are no safety concerns to look out for.
With little people dressed up in costumes that may partially obscure their vision, running around in the dusk and dark along the street, getting hit by a car is a real concern. According to research compiled by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) from 1990-2010, more children die from being hit by a car on Halloween than on any other night of the year.
And during what time frame do the most pedestrian accidents occur that night? Unsurprisingly, peak trick-or-treating times are the most dangerous for children, particularly from 5pm-8pm.
Image from Obrella.com.
Some parents may worry about urban legends focusing on razor blades in candy or about their children running and tripping as they traipse from one house to the next. But car collisions are the perhaps the biggest risk.
Even though child pedestrian fatalities are trending down every year, the data is still harrowing. Parents can take two approaches to reduce the risk of children’s deaths on Halloween. During trick or treating, be smart about where you go and don’t let children under the age of 12 trick-or-treat alone. Then, when you are driving, take extra precautions and keep an extra careful eye out for trick-or-treaters who may not be watching for you.
I mentioned in my post yesterday that I would share the other exhibit at the National Museum of Art in Maputo that I most compelling. I originally included it with that post, but these images deserved their own. The second floor art installation, by artist Naguib Abdula, starkly reveals children’s limited access to quality health care in this country.
Eleven doctor coats, one for each province of Mozambique plus the capital city, had been stiffened and painted. On the base of each one is the population of that province. Inside the coat is the number of pediatricians in that province. For example, the province Niassa has one pediatrician. For 1.2 million inhabitants. There are five pediatricians in the province Nampula. Where 4.1 million Mozambicans live. See all of them below. Unsettling and effective.
Edited to add: My colleague here in Mozambique, Chrysula Winegar, has also written about the pediatrician coats exhibit with additional context, much of which we learned this morning at a UNICEF meeting. Please check out her short, informative piece!
Remember the International Reporting Project (IRP) fellowship I said I had received to travel to Mozambique and report on child health and immunizations? Well, I’ve been here just under two days and have had the pleasure of meeting all the other awesome colleagues I’ll be working alongside. Tomorrow will be our first official set of program events, and I’m already excited to learn more about the country and the stories I can tell. Expect to see a number of updates about the trip from me here over the next two weeks, starting with today!
The trip over here was relatively uneventful, but catching four flights over two days was grueling: Peoria to Chicago to DC to Addis Ababa to Maputo. The trickiest part for me, though, was pumping. My husband, mother-in-law and mother are taking care of my 4-year-old and 7-month-old while I’m here, but I want to be able to continue nursing when I return, so I’m traveling with — ready for this? — four breast pumps. Yes, four. I have one fantastic hospital-grade Medela Lactina Electric Plus, for which I had to buy a converter since it’s 120V input only. But boy can that sucker pump well! I’m incredibly grateful to my lactation consultant, Kathy Ireland at OSF Breastfeeding Resource Center, for setting me up with it.
Then I brought two Ameda Purely Yours pumps because one is several years old and was much used, but the brand new one was acting up. I brought both because there may be times I’m without access to electricity (or when we’re out in the field for many hours), and both can operate on AA batteries. Of course, neither pumps very well, and I didn’t trust either one — hence bringing both. And then I brought a Medela hand pump. Just in case. Yea, I suppose I’m taking this preserve-my-milk-supply thing pretty seriously, but it’s important to me to be able to continue nursing my youngest through 1 year, and this trip is personally and professionally important to me, so this is as close as it gets to working moms’ “having it all,” I suppose.
However, I’m going to be tweaking my pumping schedule on an ongoing, as-needed basis, which started right away. I flew to DC via Chicago on Thursday afternoon and pumped that evening, but I didn’t get up early enough to pump before leaving for the airport the following morning. I left at 7am for an 11:15am flight, and Dulles was an hour from where I was staying. Seems reasonable, right? Well, the drive took over an hour, then check-in took WELL over an hour (long enough for me to write a whole story on my iPhone), then there was security, then there was catching the train to my gate, and then I finally arrived at the gate… a few minutes before boarding began. No time to pump.
So, I boarded and asked the flight attendants for help in finding an outlet. None in the bathroom. None in the seat (even though this was a Dreamliner). The only place there were outlets was beside an emergency exit door in the aisle. So with the help of the flight attendant, I sat in the jump seat, plugged in the pump and got set up. And then I proceeded to pump in the aisle of the plane while boarding continued. Good times. The woman in the row across from the jump seat was a nurse and was very sweet and helpful. When she pointed out that my container was overflowing, I realized I only had one choice if I wanted to continue pumping (and I had to given how long the flight would be and how long I’d already gone), so I disposed of the milk in the only reasonable way I could right there, and then I continued.
So, that was a couple of firsts wrapped into one. However, I have to say I was incredibly impressed with how understanding, helpful and accommodating the Ethiopian flight attendant women were. Three of them helped at various times, and several checked on me throughout the flight. I wonder if American airline flight attendants would have been as accommodating. For the rest of the 12-hour flight, I pumped just two more times because the battery operated Amedas (the outlets didn’t work in flight) were lousy, and it was super cramped to be standing in the plane bathroom for 20-25 minutes. Then I briefly pumped with the Ameda in the Addis Ababa airport “bathroom,” which I put in quotes because it was a plywood makeshift area encircling one stall and two portable sinks. I stood there as a long line of women used the restroom, some asking me about my baby and where he was, some looking surprised, some confused, some shaking their head (I’m not sure why, but I think it was in sympathy). Needless to say, I was grateful for that 5-hour flight to end and finally arrive at the hotel.
Since arriving, things have gone a bit more smoothly. We had a luncheon today with all the fellows, and it’s quite an incredible bunch we have here, each with diverse backgrounds, experiences and reporting interests. (Seriously, check out everyone’s bio! And follow us on Twitter with the hashtag #IRPfellows!) I’m already getting excited about reporting by talking to them, and I was relieved to hear some of them express some of the same anxiety I had about really making this trip count by finding and reporting on some good stories. (However, I already have some ideas I’m looking forward to pursuing.) I’ve also been especially thrilled to meet fellow Chrysula Winegar, also a mom and a blogger, who works with the UN on issues related to health and motherhood. She and I hit it off right away, and it’s nice to have another mom on the trip who “gets” what it’s like to be pumping and leaving the kids behind.
And, speaking of mothers, that’s a perfect transition to the piece of art that captured my heart today, the one in the photo above of a big, strong mother wearing her baby and carrying a book. This sculpture sits outside an art museum in Maputo, the country’s capital, through which we took a walking tour today. Seriously, what could be more perfect than that? Strength, pride, defiance, love, motherhood, education, learning… It’s such a lovely sculpture, and the kind I’d love to see outside an art museum in the U.S. The other piece of art I appreciated so much will be in my next post.
Brace yourselves: Flu season is coming! And with the coughing, fevers and aches come all the alarmist articles and blog posts on unreliable, misinformative websites questioning the flu vaccine’s safety and effectiveness. There are already some good posts out there that address some of these misconceptions about the vaccine so many love to hate (including the CDC’s own one), but none quite get around to addressing every last claim I’ve heard, and most don’t provide the citations right then and there to back up the accurate information provided.
And so I began this list last year, attempting to address every last myth about the flu vaccine I had come across and provide all the links needed to see where my information had come from. Admittedly, some of the “myths” aren’t exactly myths – they contain a morsel of truth in them – but they are misconceptions in that the morsel of truth has become twisted, misrepresented or misunderstood, and therefore important to address.
The post last year went unexpectedly, uh, viral, revealing just how much people are craving accurate information about the flu vaccine. Hopefully it convinced at least some people to get the vaccine since last season’s H1N1 strain hit young adults particularly hard. Either way, I’ve decided to update the posts for the 2014-2015 flu season. So far this year, of course, Ebola has upstaged the flu and stolen most of the headlines about a killer virus. But flu season has not really quite begun just yet, so it remains to be seen which one will dominate the media throughout the winter. What’s ironic is that the flu kills more people in one year – in the U.S. alone – than Ebola has killed ever in history worldwide.
But I’m already getting ahead of myself – I’ve bumped Ebola to #1 on this year’s list – so let’s get to it with two quick, important notes: First, for those who prefer to do their own research, I’ve provided all my sources in hyperlinks. More than half of these go directly to peer-reviewed medical research, and a fair number go to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or the World Health Organization.
Second, but very important: I am a science journalist but not a medical doctor or other health care professional. I’ve compiled research here to debunk common myths about the flu vaccine. You should always consult a reliable, trusted medical professional with questions that pertain specifically to you. For the CDC recommendations on the 2014-2015 flu vaccines (including information on which vaccines pregnant women, the elderly and children under 2 should *not* get), please consult the CDC flu vaccine recommendations directly. There are indeed people who should *not* get the flu vaccine.
To make it easier to navigate, I’ve listed all 31 myths at the top followed by the factual information in parentheses, which is also a link to jump to that explanation. I use “flu shot” and “flu vaccine” interchangeably to refer to any type of flu vaccine, including the nasal vaccine.
Myth #1: You should fear Ebola more than the flu.
Fact: The flu poses greater risk to you than Ebola.
Myth #2: You don’t need the flu vaccine this year if you got it last year.
Fact: You need a new flu shot each year.
Myth #3: The flu shot is a “one size fits all” approach that doesn’t make sense for everyone.
Fact: You have many flu vaccine options.
Myth #4: People die from the flu shot.
Fact: There have been no confirmed deaths from the flu shot.
Myth #5: Deaths from the flu are exaggerated.
Fact: Thousands of people die from flu in a typical year.
Myth #6: The flu vaccine gives you the flu or makes you sick.
Fact: The flu shot can’t give you the flu.
Myth #7: Flu vaccines contains dangerous ingredients, such as mercury, formaldehyde and antifreeze.
Fact: Flu shot ingredients are safe.
Myth #8: Pregnant women should not get the flu shot. The flu shot can cause miscarriages. Pregnant should only get the preservative-free flu shot.
Fact: Pregnant women should get the flu shot. Fact: The flu shot reduces miscarriage risk. Fact: Pregnant women can get any inactivated flu vaccine.
Myth #9: Flu vaccines can cause Alzheimer’s disease.
Fact: There is no link between Alzheimer’s disease and the flu vaccine; flu vaccines protect older adults.
Myth #10: Pharmaceutical companies make a massive profit off flu vaccines.
Fact: They’re a tiny source of pharma profit.
Myth #11: Flu vaccines don’t work.
Fact: Flu vaccines reduce the risk of flu.
Myth #12: Flu vaccines don’t work for children.
Fact: Flu vaccines reduce children’s risk of flu.
Myth #13: Flu vaccines make it easier for people to catch pneumonia or other infectious diseases.
Fact: Flu vaccines reduce the risk of pneumonia and other illnesses.
Myth #14: Flu vaccines cause vascular or cardiovascular disorders.
Fact: Flu shots reduce the risk of heart attacks and stroke.
Myth #15: Flu vaccines can break the “blood brain barrier” of young children, hindering their development.
Fact: Flu vaccines have been found safe for children 6 months and older.
Myth #16: Flu vaccines cause narcolepsy.
Fact: The U.S. seasonal flu vaccine does not cause narcolepsy.
Myth #17: The flu vaccine weakens your body’s immune response.
Fact: The flu vaccine prepares your immune system to fight influenza.
Myth #18: The flu vaccine causes nerve disorders such as Guillain Barre syndrome.
Fact: Influenza is more likely than the flu shot to cause Guillain-Barré syndrome.
Myth #19: The flu vaccine can make you walk backwards or cause other neurological disorders.
Fact: Neurological side effects linked to flu vaccination are extremely rare (see Myth #18), but influenza can cause neurological complications.
Myth #20: Influenza isn’t that bad. Or, people recover quickly from it.
Fact: Influenza knocks most people down *hard*.
Myth #21: People don’t die from the flu unless they have another underlying condition already.
Fact: Otherwise healthy people DO die from the flu.
Myth #22: People with egg allergies cannot get the flu shot.
Fact: People with egg allergies can get a flu shot.
Myth #23: If I get the flu, antibiotics will take care of me.
Fact: Antibiotics can’t treat a viral infection.
Myth #24: The flu shot doesn’t work for me, personally, because last time I got it, I got the flu anyway.
Fact: The flu shot cannot guarantee you won’t get the flu, but it reduces your risk.
Myth #25: I never get the flu, so I don’t need the shot.
Fact: You can’t predict whether you’ll get the flu.
Myth #26: I can protect myself from the flu by eating right and washing my hands regularly.
Fact: A good diet and good hygiene alone cannot prevent the flu.
Myth #27: It’s okay if I get the flu because it will make my immune system stronger.
Fact: The flu weakens your immune system while your body is fighting it and puts others at risk.
Myth #28: If I do get the flu, I’ll just stay home so I’m not infecting others.
Fact: You can transmit the flu without showing symptoms.
Myth #29: Making a new vaccine each year only makes influenza strains stronger.
Fact: There’s no evidence flu vaccines have a major effect on virus mutations.
Myth #30: The side effects of the flu shot are worse than the flu.
Fact: The flu is worse than flu shot side effects.
Myth #31: The “stomach flu” is the flu.
Fact: The “stomach flu” is a generic term for gastrointestinal illnesses unrelated to influenza.
Myth #32: If you haven’t gotten a flu shot by November, there’s no point in getting one.
Fact: Getting the flu shot at any time during flu season will reduce your risk of getting the flu.
Myth #33: The flu vaccine causes Bell’s palsy.
Fact: The flu shot does not cause Bell’s palsy. Read the rest of this entry »
Yes, we are all going to die.
The media and social networks are understandably abuzz with the news that an individual in Dallas has become the first U.S.-diagnosed case of the Ebola virus. Ebola has no vaccine or cure and is an exotic, foreign disease. Pop culture descriptions of its symptoms have been, at times, over the top (to put it mildly, ahem Richard Preston). And then there are the frightening double digits of mortality rates, the “50% to 90%” I keep seeing cited on Twitter and Facebook.
(ETA) First, however, Ebola is not nearly as contagious as some people may fear it is. Measles and flu are much more contagious, and more dangerous. Read this *excellent* explainer at NPR’s Shots to understand how contagious Ebola is.
Yes, those who become ill with Ebola have a high mortality rate… IN AFRICA. Many diseases have far higher mortality rates in different African countries than in developed countries because the medical care, facilities, resources and availability of trained healthcare workers tends to be far greater in places such as North American and Europe when compared to most countries in Africa.
Here, in the U.S., safety protocols, equipment, resources and overall medical care are far superior. As Tara C. Smith writes in her fantastic piece at The Guardian, we got this. In fact, everything you need to know to maintain a measure of calm about Ebola in the U.S. is perfectly encapsulated in Dr. Smith’s article, so please, stop reading this, click this link, and read her article. She’s an infectious disease specialist. She knows her stuff. (She wrote a great piece debunking myths about Ebola in August.) She’s not worried. Neither should you be.
When you’ve finished that piece and taken a deep breath, read the excellent Q&A about what we do and don’t know concerning the Ebola patient in Dallas and this other Q&A about the outbreak in general. To further ease your mind, read about the disease on the CDC website, including transmission, risk of exposure and a general Q&A. I also published a previous Ebola reading list here. If you’re still worried, go back to Dr. Smith’s article and pay special attention to that part where she says your risk of dying in a roller coaster is greater than your risk of Ebola. (Risks of fatal bee stings, food poisoning and horse kickings are all greater than the risk of Ebola. And so is the flu, even though many people skip their opportunity to protect themselves against that pathogen.)
I understand the first instinct to panic. Again, Ebola is exotic and frightening. It is reasonable to be concerned about other people becoming infected with any disease. However, the level of fear and attention we devote to that concern should be in proportion to the risk. Right now, that risk with Ebola is minuscule, and therefore our concern should be minuscule. It’s not irrational to feel the fear when it’s a new, exotic disease. It is irrational to give into that fear and call for drastic measures that the facts and the risk do not justify.
My parents and my sister’s family live in the Dallas area. I mostly grew up in the Dallas metropolitan area and taught there. The vast majority of my friends live there. If there were a real threat, I would have good reasons to be concerned. But there is not a real threat, and I am not concerned. Again, neither should you be.
It’s that time of the year again! I will be working on updating my massive post on myths about the flu vaccine over the next week, but in the meantime, I’ve gone and gotten my own flu vaccine. This year, I got the FluMist, the nasal vaccine, at Walgreens, which is running a pretty awesome promotion through October 13 called “Get a Shot. Give a Shot.” Partnering with the United Nations Foundation’s Shot@Life program, Walgreens will donate one vaccine to children in developing countries for every vaccine administered at one of their U.S. pharmacies. You can watch a video about the program below.
I expected the process to quite smooth, and it mostly was, except the delay when I realized my insurance plan frustratingly doesn’t consider Walgreens in-network. I can get a 50% reimbursement for the vaccine that I submit info for, but the only way for me to get a flu shot fully covered by my insurance was to go to my doctor’s office or find an in-network pharmacy (of which there is one, which I’ve never heard of, in Peoria). I could have headed to my doctor’s office, but I went ahead and paid out of pocket at Walgreen’s for a couple reasons. First, my boys were with me, and I wanted my older son to see me getting the vaccine that he’ll be getting on Thursday. The FluMist is quadrivalent, which means it contains all four strains recommended by the World Health Organization, and it’s more effective for children aged 2 to 8 than the injection is. (Note that children under 2, adults over 49, pregnant women and individuals with certain conditions should not get the FluMist because it’s a live vaccine.)
I also went with Walgreens because I really support their Get a Shot Give a Shot program. As I head off to Mozambique in a few weeks, I’ll be reminded of how many children in the developing world still desperately need vaccines and all the different agencies working together to make that happen. I am willing to pay a little out of pocket to support a business who is working with those agencies. Finally, the pharmacy staff at my local Walgreens is simply outstanding. They have always been very friendly and helpful, and they go out of their way to be accommodating whenever they can. It may not be a “local” business as part of large national corporation, but I am still happy to patronize any place where I am treated well.
As I mentioned, I got the FluMist because I wanted the protection of four strains. There is never a guarantee of which strains will be circulating, so every extra bit of protection is helpful, especially when the flu vaccine’s effectiveness varies considerably from year to year. The only injection the pharmacy had available was trivalent Fluvirin (covering three strains), and since I’m not pregnant this year, I’m able to get the live vaccine, thereby stimulating my immune system to develop antibodies against the following four influenza strains:
- an A/California/7/2009 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus
- an A/Texas/50/2012 (H3N2)-like virus
- a B/Massachusetts/2/2012-like virus
- B/Brisbane/60/2008-like virus
Unusually, these are the same strains as in last year’s flu shot, but I got the shot again because flu vaccines are not designed to provide immunity beyond a single season. Typically, this is because it’s expected that different recommended strains each year will require new formulations. In fact, the WHO has already announced new strains – different from this year’s – to be included in next year’s vaccine, including those to be used for the Southern Hemisphere (currently heading into summer) during the next flu season. However, even when the strains are identical from last year’s shot to this year’s, there is some evidence that immunity from the seasonal flu shot wanes over the year. While it’s certainly possible I still have antibodies for the three strains from last year’s shot, I would rather ensure that my immunity is as strong as it can be each season.
So, what flu vaccine should you get this year? The flu vaccine is still unfortunately not among our most effective vaccines, due largely to how many strains of flu exist and how the strains change over the year. However, it still reduces the risk of the flu anywhere from approximately 40% to 70% (ish) each year. Whether you are immunocompromised, allergic to eggs, afraid of needles or have some other limitation, there is likely a flu vaccine option for you. I recommend checking out this *excellent* Washington Post piece that runs through all the options: the basic (trivalent) flu shot, the quadrivalent shot, the nasal spray (quadrivalent), the high-dose vaccine (for older adults), the recombinant vaccine (egg-free!), the PharmaJet-delivered vaccine (trivalent, no needle!), and the intradermal shot.
As always, neither this blog nor the Washington Post article nor any other news article is doling out medical advice. Always consult your doctor regarding which flu vaccine is right for you and your family members.
If you can think of a disease or medical condition, somebody somewhere out there will declare it can be treated or cured with an essential oil. Athlete’s foot, candida, gastrointestinal problems, Alzheimer’s, depression, cystic fibrosis, cancer, MRSA, ringwork, staph, anxiety, tuberculosis, sinusitis, shingles, pertussis, flu, lupus, ADHD, pneumonia, herpes, high cholesterol, measles, arthritis, bronchitis, inflammation, diabetes, insomnia, Hashimoto’s disease, gum disease, thyroid problems, ulcers, autism, Crohn’s disease, asthma irritable bowel syndrome, kidney stones, joint pain, Bell’s palsy…the list never ends. Even Ebola can supposedly be cured by cinnamon bark and some other combination of oregano, lavender, tea tree, clove, eucalyptus, frankincense, lemongrass, peppermint, rosemary… Again, the list goes on.
But hopefully, this nonsense all over the web will soon stop, or at least slow down considerably. The FDA issued Warning Letters last week to three individuals regarding their health claims for essential oils and related “natural healing” products. The letters – sent to Young Living, who manufacture and distribute Young Living Essential Oil products; dōTERRA International, another essential oils distributor; and the Natural Solutions Foundation, who sell “nano silver,” hemp oil and other products – were all pretty similar to one another.
The letters warn that the way the products are being marketed on websites and on social media means those products are “drugs” under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. Therefore, “The therapeutic claims on your websites establish that the products are drugs because they are intended for use in the cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease. As explained further below, introducing or delivering these products for introduction into interstate commerce for such uses violates the Act,” as the one to Rima Laibow and Ralph Fucetola at Natural Solutions Foundation states. Each letter is worth reading in full simply to see how extensively the FDA documents the ridiculous claims made by these businesses.
It’s about time. It’s not as though essential oils or the bogus health claims associated with them are new. Indeed, the claims are not much different than the snake oil claims of bygone eras. But the Internet has made distribution even easier, the claims more widespread, and regulation much tougher. Both Young Living and doTerra are multi-level marketing companies, AKA pyramid schemes, and those tend to grow quickly before (eventually, usually) crashing and burning. The FDA already has a massive job, so it can’t be easy or even possible to go after every person making such claims, but the essential oils industry has exploded in recent years, exceeding $1 billion in annual revenue. And alongside that growth, claims of what these oils can cure has gotten out of control.
Certainly essential oils can be used for a variety of things, ranging from aromatherapy for headaches to skin allergic reactions from bug bites. But they can’t cure cancer. Or Ebola. Nor can nano silver cure “every pathogen against which it has been tested, worldwide, without exception,” as the Natural Solutions Foundation claims. Or perhaps that much is true if we consider that nano silver has not been tested for too many things in randomized, controlled trials, though apparently it may be helpful in fluoride for fighting tooth caries. Such a thought must make pseudoscience believers’ heads explode considering those who promote essential oils’ use for treating conditions such as cancer are in the same communities who believe fluoride is a dangerous neurotoxin. And while nano silver does have antibacterial properties, it cannot cure Ebola. (If only it were so easy.)
I suspect it’s the Ebola claims that eventually pushed the FDA over the edge in issuing these letters. (I don’t know that for a fact; it’s just a hunch since claims about Ebola proliferated on these websites as the public health crisis in west Africa grew.) Whatever it was, I’m glad to see the agency finally addressing these claims. Essential oils in and of themselves are not harmful, but the way they can be used – especially when administered to children undiluted or if ingested – can certainly cause harms, including death, as pediatrician Roy Benaroch describes here. There are many responsible manufacturers or distributors of essential oils that issue appropriate guidelines and warnings, such as not ingesting them and using them on babies, children or pets. Let’s hope that the FDA is successful in shutting down these harmful claims and that they can keep up with the others that will inevitably pop up.
Today’s post is from guest contributor Amy Williams, a writer and former social worker in Southern California. She previously specialized in teen behavioral issues and has created an infographic (sourced with secondary sources) below with statistics on cyberbullying. She has two children of her own and can be found at her website here or on Twitter.
Our son was cyberbullied in middle school. The worse the problem got, the more he became more reclusive and anxiety ridden. We had no idea what was happening and had come up with a few different theories as to what could have caused his change in behavior. Never did we imagine that distant acquaintances he met at a school football game had been berating him daily.
Once we realized what was happening, we began our research. The numbers surprised us (sources in infographic):
- 25% of pre-teens and teenagers are cyberbullied daily. This number is growing every year.
- 62% have observed a friend being cyberbullied or cyberbullying others.
- 90% will not confide in their parents or another adult when victimized.
This last number really hit us hard. It was a real eye opener and a teachable moment. Rather than look outside ourselves for answers we first looked within to see what we could change in our household to make sure this never happened again.
We were not too happy about the fact that our son had not spoken to us about this, so we eventually sought outside help. It took some work, but has ultimately created what I feel is a stronger relationship between us and our son. Here are a few tips that may help you re-connect with your child so they come to you first when threatened: Read the rest of this entry »
I mentioned my blog posts would be more sporadic as I finish up the book, and some, like this one, will be just brief updates to let folks know what I’m up to as it relates to the topics on this blog.
The first part of my update is the most exciting: I applied for an International Reporting Project fellowship and was selected as one of ten journalists to travel to Mozambique for two weeks to report on immunizations and child health. One of the expectations of my going is that I will be regularly posting updates about what I learn, so expect to read about that experience between October 24 and November 6, while I’m in Africa. I will be in the company of a diverse, accomplished group of other journalists you can read about here.
The other update is for those who are interested in how I work as a journalist and writer. I was featured as a “Rebel Woman” on the Creative Revolution website, where I wrote about why I write and my process as a writer. So, if you’re interested in what makes me tick as a wrangler of words, check it out!
I ran across one of those health stories recently that made me want to cheer, laugh and cry all at the same time. Really, the headline says it all: “Is Drinking Wine Better Than Going to the Gym? According to Scientists, Yes!” And of course, because of both the subject matter (red wine!) and the way it was handled in the story, I felt I absolutely had to look at the study and write about it. (I did wait a few hours before looking up the study so that I could briefly revel in the idea that red wine cures all ills and is superior to exercise.)
First, of course, the headline is so absurd that I still smile when I read it. IS drinking wine better than going to the gym? Well, heck, it sure is to me on many days. Would I rather sit and have a glass of Shiraz while winding down at the end of the day or head out to the gym for the workout I skipped earlier that day? Drinking certainly sounds better on most nights! (Better for *what*, however, is a different question, of course.)
The caption on the enticing photo offers a little more specificity: “A glass of red wine per day is as beneficial as going to the gym.” Again, beneficial in what sense? Mental health? That’s a claim actually worth exploring, but alas, that’s not what they meant. (It’s also different from the headline: is it BETTER than going to the gym, or just AS beneficial? It can’t be equal and better at the same time.)
What they mean, however, is that it’s better for heart health (I think — they also mention diabetes). And once you start reading the first paragraph, the caveats to the headline start popping up: First, it’s not red wine, per se, that has been tested in this study, but resveratrol, an antioxidant that has been studied for years as a compound that may “prevent damage to blood vessels, reduces low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol (the “bad” cholesterol) and prevents blood clots,” the Mayo Clinic puts it. So right off, this study isn’t “news.” And it’s not just wine either since the article notes that resveratrol is in nuts and grapes (from which wine is made, obviously).
Second, as with nearly all resveratrol studies, the researchers tested the compound on rats. Last time I checked, humans are no furry creatures with tails scavenging trash for food, and our physiology does, in fact, differ. What happens to a rat does not necessarily happen to a human, and until effects are seen in humans, any research, while valuable, cannot conclude anything about humans.
The opening to their second paragraph made me laugh again: “While scientists and wine lovers are rejoicing over this news…” I have this image of scientists in white coats in the lab dancing with pompous wine tasters from Napa Valley, clinking their glasses of red wine and laughing as it splashes out on them. At least I’ll give them credit for saying that doctors aren’t going to start recommend their patients start drinking and that alcohol can negatively affects the body.
There isn’t much of substance beyond this… except a throw-away mention that red wine (in moderation) promotes longevity, cuts risk of cataracts and colon cancer, reduces the risk of Type 2 diabetes and slows down brain decline. WooBoy! That’s quite a list! I would ask for evidence, but their link does indeed take us to a list of evidence. The problem is that we know virtually nothing about these studies, how they were conducted, whether they controlled for confounders, whether they were replicated, etc. So it’s probably best that we just ignore this last paragraph altogether (lest we end up down a rabbit hole) and focus on the study they are writing about.
I looked up studies on resveratrol by Jason Dyck on PubMed and found the one I think they’re referring to since it was published in August: “Systemic and renal oxidative stress in the pathogenesis of hypertension: modulation of long-term control of arterial blood pressure by resveratrol.” And so I read the abstract. I would read the whole paper, but really, the abstract alone provides plenty of information to show how bunk the news article is. Read the rest of this entry »