September 20th, 2011 by John Mandrola, M.D. in Opinion
No Comments »
Did you know September is AFib awareness month?
As a believer in education as the first, and best treatment of AF, I think it’s great to enhance the public knowledge of this highly-misunderstood disease.
By all means…
Tell people about AF’s risks: stroke and heart failure.
Tell them that their fatigue, poor exercise tolerance and breathlessness might not be old age; it might be AF.
Tell them about the importance of early intervention.
Tell them that obesity, inactivity, sleep disturbances, alcohol, and incessantly worrying about everything makes AF more likely to occur, and to stay.
Tell them that Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Dr John M*
September 2nd, 2011 by MuinKhouryMDPhD in Health Tips, Research
No Comments »
Campaigns against public spitting in the 19th century were largely driven by concerns about the spread of tuberculosis. However, at the beginning of the 21st century, spitting seems to be making a comeback. Over the past few years, several companies have begun offering personal genomic tests online to the public. There have been famous images of “spit parties”, where celebrities are seen filling tubes with saliva to ship for DNA testing. Getting information on one’s genes has been promoted as fun, as part of social networking, and as a basis for improving health and preventing disease.
When it comes to spitting to improve one’s health, we say: think before you spit. Our knowledge of the potential benefits and harms of these tests is incomplete at best. Despite exciting research advances in genomics of common diseases, there is still much to learn about what this information means and how to use it to prevent disease. A little bit of incomplete or inaccurate information may even be harmful.
There are at least 2 key questions to consider when deciding whether personal genomic tests are worth your spit. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Genomics and Health Impact Blog*
August 28th, 2011 by John Di Saia, M.D. in Opinion, Research
No Comments »
The FDA has granted a license to the maker of laViv which is said to improve the appearance of smile lines without freezing the muscles of your face. Have you heard of this new drug? Does it work like it claims? Are there any side effects that are worrisome?
Source: dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2028456/New-biological-wrinkle-cure-touted-alternative-Botox-frozen-face.html
Maybe.
As we have discussed before, FDA approval is not a stamp of approval that a drug is effective. It just means that as far as current studies show, it is not harmful. Some drugs are FDA approved for years until later the FDA reconsiders and removes them from the market. Look at the relatively recent removal of Darvocet from the market after many years of FDA approval.
LaViv is an interesting concept. Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at Truth in Cosmetic Surgery*
August 3rd, 2011 by Jeffrey Benabio, M.D. in Health Tips
No Comments »
Yes, laser hair removal is a common and effective way to permanently remove hair. It is safe, but remember these tips:
- Hair removal lasers target the pigment in hair (that’s how they work). Hair lasers can damage darker or pigmented skin as the laser will target both the hair and the skin, burning it. This can lead to permanent skin discoloration.
- Tanned skin is dark skin, and laser hair removal should never be done on people with a tan.
- Laser hair treatments hurt. Some people Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at The Dermatology Blog*
July 19th, 2011 by RyanDuBosar in Health Policy, Research
No Comments »
Generic medications appear to be far more cost-effective than previously reported, concluded a team of Harvard professors. But, physicians and patients aren’t adopting them wholeheartedly.
Patents of 20 drugs with annual sales of more than $1 billion expired or will do so between 2010 and 2013, including Lipitor and Plavix, the highest- and second-highest revenue producing drugs in the U.S. While highly effective generics provide low-cost options for chronic disease management, they are not always factored into cost analyses, and are sometimes viewed with concerns about their safety and efficacy.
The Harvard team revisited a 2008 study that used brand-name medication costs in an analysis of the cost-effectiveness of strategies to prevent adverse outcomes associated with cardiovascular disease and diabetes. The study found that up to 244 million quality-adjusted life-years could be gained over 30 years with appropriate preventive care. But, the study authors wrote, that “most prevention activities are expensive when considering direct medical costs.”
The Harvard team recalculated figures from the 2008 research, Read more »
*This blog post was originally published at ACP Internist*
