New Study on Cell Phone Use and Brain Cancer Inconclusive

A large, international study to determine whether cell phones cause cancer – in particular – brain cancers, is coming back inconclusive once again.

The report, which is due to be published in a medical journal, looked at 13,000 cell phone users over a 10-year period. The report looked specifically at number of calls and length of calls and whether users had an increase in cancerous brain tumors.

According to the authors, there were some suggestions that frequent, lengthy phone calls over 30 minutes did show a higher risk for glioma – a deadly type of brain cancer, according to the study by the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer.

However, even with this, there still seems to be no conclusive evidence that increased cellular use is harmful. The study did not look at the effects of hands-free devices, location to the brain (such as in a pocket, on a nightstand, etc.) or other contributing factors.

So, once again, we don’t know what to expect from the increased use of cell phones. It seems with so many studies that are definitive in showing “positive” effects of medicinal therapies, we can never get conclusive evidence on how other facets of our lifestyle affect our health.

I guess we will have to wait for another study to tell us what to expect. What is probably definite, is that we will never truly know what effect cell phone use has on our brains.

Smoking in Michigan Gets Snuffed Out

Michigan joined 37 other states this week when it banned smoking in restaurants, bars and other public places – excluding casinos. It is a victory for its advocates who have pushed the state Congress to pass this law over the past several years.

I am amazed, however, by the outrage of people who do not think that government should make smoking illegal in public places. There is a concern that government is regulating private businesses and personal choice. Here is a newsflash – the government regulates businesses and your personal health and safety already, but people seem to choose which regulations they like and which ones they don’t. In this case – it is mostly those who smoke who are choosing to dislike these regulations.

Let’s take a look at why the smoking ban is a good idea. First, smoking and secondhand smoke has proven to increase one’s risk of a multitude of chronic health conditions including heart disease and cancer. This is a scientifically proven fact. I don’t think that anyone argues against that fact. If you didn’t know this, you must be living under one huge rock.

Secondly, the cost of healthcare services to smokers and those exposed to smoke, is significantly higher. So, for those crying out that healthcare costs are too expensive and out-of-control, think about how less burdened our healthcare system would be if people quit smoking.

Those who are against smoking legislation argue that smoking is a personal choice and if someone chooses to smoke and understands the health risks, then so be it. Government should not legislate personal health choices.

Some restaurant and bar owners claim a smoking ban will put them out of business. Tell that to New York, Florida, Chicago and the numerous other cities and states with similar bans. The ratio of businesses that have opened and thrived during these bans are far more than those who have failed due to the loss of the smokers’ patronage.

In fact, more restaurants will agree that they have more requests for non-smoking seating than smoking. Have you ever been on a waiting list at a restaurant for the smoking section? Rarely. Few businesses will go under because of the smoking ban and some will probably increase.

Finally, for those people who think that one’s personal choices should not be legislated by the government as long as “they are not hurting anyone else” I say this:  Since secondhand smoke is proven to have a negative health impact on everyone exposed to it, you ARE hurting someone else.

No one is telling you that you can’t smoke in your own home. And, that you have to stop smoking in your home if a guest arrives. What the legislation is telling you is that you cannot go out into a place that is open to the public and expose people to secondhand smoke who are not choosing to be around it.

Look at it this way. Your car is your personal property. Drinking is a personal choice. However, when you take your car out onto a public roadway after you’ve consumed too many drinks, the government says this is illegal. Why is this law in place? Because driving while intoxicated can be harmful to you as well as the unsuspecting public. I don’t hear many people arguing that they should be allowed to drink and drive because it’s a “personal choice.”

Congratulations to the Michigan legislature for finally stepping up and passing this law. It was long overdue.

April is Autism Awareness Month

This month you will see a lot of media attention given to Autism Awareness Month. It is a campaign to bring more awareness to this disorder that affects many children and their families. And, with this awareness often comes more questions such as: What causes Autism? Who is most susceptible? Is there a cure? Are we closer to a cure? Can we prevent autism?

Unfortunately, like many other medical conditions, there are not many answers. Even more so, there are disagreements within the medical community and the autism community as to outside factors that may cause autism – most notably vaccinations.

According to www.autismspeaks.org it is estimated that one out of every 110 children are diagnosed with some form of autism. When it comes to boys, 1-in70 are estimated to have autism. This is amazinglycommon within society – more proliferative than many other diseases such as diabetes or cancer.

So, why does autism diagnoses seem to be on the rise? Where was it 10, 15 and 20 years ago? The most logical response is that it has always been here. However, not until the last decade or so have we been able to diagnose it accurately. Generally, when a dramatic increase in diagnosed cases arise in a disorder, it is not due to a sudden epidemic, but more so because the criteria for diagnosing the condition has improved. Such is the case with autism.

The other question is what, if any, role does envinronment factors play in autism? Today, we are always looking for the impact of environmental factors on disorders and disases that we do not understand. In cancer, we know smoking is an environmental factor. We undertand the role of lead, asbestos and other pollutants on certain diseases. However, there does not seem to be a consensus on what factors cause autism.

With continued funding for research, hopefully some of these questions can be answered. In the meantime, the children and families affected by autism continue to find ways to improve their lives. For the rest of us who are not affected by autism, it is important to understand how our friends, family members and loved ones are affected by this disorder.

For more information, check out www.autismspeaks.org or www.autism-society.org.

Is Sexual Addiction a Reality or an Excuse?

Big news in the sporting world today…Tiger Woods held a press conference! He had to discuss his infidelity, his temporary fall from grace and what he is doing moving forward to make life better for himself and his family.

Tiger has acknowledged that he is receiving treatment for Sexual Addiction. This “addiction” has received a lot more attention lately as celebrities – most notably – who have been caught cheating state that they have a sexual addiction and enter rehabilitation.

Some, including Tiger, may truly have a sexual addiction. We are not privvy to his private health information. What we do know is that he is receiving treatment for this condition.

So, what exactly is sex addiction? According to www.psychology/wikia.com, sexual addiction is a controversial diagnosis. Some experts feel that it is a disease similar to alcoholism or drug addiction. Others believe it is more of a facet of obsessive compulsive disorder, even others believe it is not a true diagnosis.

Utilizing established addiction models, sexual addition is a condition in which some form of sexual behaviour is employed in a pattern that is characterized at least by two key features: recurrent failure to control the behaviour and continuation of the behaviour despite harmful consequences.

Most addiction and mental health conditions are diagnosed using DSM-IV criteria. This is a series of questions and observations that help mental health experts determine a person’s addiction or mental health status. Currently, there is no DSM-IV criteria specifically for sexual addiction, although some modifications can be made to the test to identify sexual compulsions.

Patrick Carnes, Ph.D., co-editor of Sexual Addiction and Compulsivity: The Journal of Treatment and Prevention, the official journal of the National Council of Sexual Addiction/Compulsivity, has written about sexual addiction and has designed an assessment tool called the Sexual Addiction Screening Test (SAST).

Here are some of the criteria identified:

Recurrent failure (pattern) to resist impulses to engage in extreme acts of lewd sex.

Frequent engaging in those behaviors to a greater extent or over a longer period of time than intended.

Persistent desire or unsuccessful efforts to stop, reduce, or control those behaviors.

Inordinate amount of time spent in obtaining sex, being sexual, or recovering from sexual experience.

Preoccupation with the behavior or preparatory activities.

Frequent engaging in violent sexual behavior when expected to fulfill occupational, academic, domestic, or social obligations.

Continuation of the behavior despite knowledge of having a persistent or recurrent social, financial, psychological, or physical problem that is caused or exacerbated by the behavior.

Need to increase the intensity, frequency, number, or risk of behaviors to achieve the desired effect, or diminished effect with continued behaviors at the same level of intensity, frequency, number, or risk.

Giving up or limiting social, occupational, or recreational activities because of the behavior.

Distress, anxiety, restlessness, or violence if unable to engage in the behavior.

Questions arise as to when is someone truly addicted to sexual behaviors and when is it an excuse to gain sympathy when caught in an adulterous affair. Many believe that like most addictions, sexual addiction must cause a disruption in one’s daily life: family, work, friends, etc. However, having an affair(s) may not quite constitute addiction as we know it.

The bottom line is this:  I hope that the media, celebrities and other public officials who continue to be caught in adulterous situations do not rely on “sexual addiction” as their excuse to gain sympathy from the public, as well as a way to shirk their responsibility in the situation.

My concern is that the seedy attractiveness to utilizing “sexual addiction” as an excuse will only demean the condition for those people who truly do suffer from this addiction. Let’s hope that true addicts receive the necessary treatment that they need and the others will simply correct their behavior and not hijack the term “sexual addiction.”

Editor’s Corner: A Reflection on the 30 Second Health Soundbites

Welcome to a new feature on our site: Editor’s Corner. This is our opportunity to summarize the latest news in healthcare.

Health information is spouted daily to us on the television, radio, magazines, newspapers and web. Most often, we receive our “latest” health information on the nightly news or the radio as we travel in our car.

The problem with these formats is that you receive a quick summary about an important topic in 15-30 seconds! Now, I ask you, what can you truly learn in that brief synopsis given to you by Brian Williams or Diane Sawyer? Not much.

Here is an example: Last week a report came out stating that a recent study revealed that people who drank as few as two coca cola-type beverages in a week were twice as likely to develop pancreatic cancer as those who do not. I heard it on the radio as I was driving in Detroit. The headline was reported and that was it! Luckily, I’m not a heavy soda drinker. However, think about all of the people driving at the same time I was, hearing this headline and knowing they drink more than two sodas a week. They just heard that they are doubling their risk of pancreatic cancer!

But, is that all there is to it? No. In fact, there is much more to it. The study was done in China. It looked at thousands of people over several years. The study only looked at those who drank soda and those that developed pancreatic cancer over that time period. What the study did not look at was other factors such as smoking, family history and other lifestyle and co-morbidities that could also contribute to an increased risk of pancreatic cancer.

In other words, was the soda a “true” predictor of pancreatic risk? Or, is it one of many factors? Either way, many soda drinkers probably had a little panic attack when they heard the 30 second soundbite!

With this column, we hope to summarize, clarify, rectify and review the latest headlines and soundbites you hear in regard to health news. It is not our job to tell you how to administer your health. That is a personal choice. But, we do want our readers to be informed. The world of healthcare is always changing: New studies. New medications. New technologies. You are your best advocate in managing your healthcare and your best weapon for fighting any illness is to be informed.

Thanks for reading and visit back here often!

In good health,

Clark