This river is the Eor Ewuaso community's main source of water. Photo credit: Maddy Appelbaum

The women filled their buckets with water and we took turns carrying them on our backs during the mile walk back to the women’s home. A few days later, my group went on a hike through the forest beside the town. After a beautiful two hour hike through trees and fields, as we were heading back toward town, we saw a same river at a different point. A boy was herding his cattle through the open space and had brought the cows to the river to drink. The cows washed off and urinated in the river. Just one half mile away, women and girls were fetching water from the same river -- water they would later drink.

An Acacia tree sits beside a small body of water. Photo credit: Maddy Appelbaum

Illnesses that come from drinking poor water are most commonly due to bacteria, protozoa, or viruses present in the water. “There are three groups of microorganisms, so if you design a treatment system for one of these groups of microorganisms and not take into account the other groups, you will not have a successful and complete treatment of the water,” explained Professor Kellogg Schwab director of the Johns Hopkins University Global Water Program.

Scanning electron micrograph of Escherichia coli, Photo Credit: Rocky Mountain Laboratories, NIAID, NIH

The drinking water crisis not just about lack of access to clean water sources, it is much more complex. A contributing factor is lack of access to adequate sanitation. More than 2.6 billion people do not have access to simple sanitation technologies such as pit latrines and hand washing stations. “They have to, unfortunately, defecate in the open, which contaminates the water supply and leads to the unsafe drinking water issue as well,” said  Ana Kolodzinski, Director of Communications for the WASH Advocacy Initiative.

The water and sanitation crisis has the greatest effect on young children. “Adults also get illnesses from drinking dirty water, but children are more susceptible to dehydration, which actually leads to death in some children,” said April Davies, International Programs Manager of Water.org. This leads many children to miss school due to sickness, which only sustains the cycle of poverty.

Woman collecting water from unsafe source in Kenya. Photo credit: Sarah Bramley, courtesy of Water.org

Girls can even suffer serious bodily harm from constantly carrying such heavy loads. “They can actually have muscular skeletal problems," said Schwab. "So if they're hauling 44 pounds around, and they weigh 60 pounds, and they’re carrying it on their heads for three kilometers, [it can lead to] a permanently deformed neck.”

It is also possible for a certain parasite to infect the body of a person who is just standing in the contaminated water while fetching it for her family or herding animals. “There are other microorganisms, such as schistosomiasis, that are present in the water, so you walk in the water, you can get them causing an infection in your legs,” said Schwab.

While there is a growing awareness among North Americans and Europeans of the water crisis in the developing world, “it is oftentimes kind of the unspoken reality for many people in developing worlds that a lot people here in the United States don't completely understand or grasp,” said Kolodzinski. Because of this lack of understanding, (alongside other issues) fifty percent of the time a foreign organization steps in to help, despite the best of intentions, the project fails.

According to Schwab, this occurs “usually because the engineering tool they have chosen, the technique, might show great success in a high income country, in a laboratory, but if its not applied appropriately...or if you don’t train the individual, or if you forget that there are cultural differences...it will not be sustainable.”

Although Professor Schwab says there will be no "silver bullet,” there are several sustainable solutions that are showing promise in developing countries. One of these solutions is chlorinating the water in such a way that many of the microorganisms are destroyed but the chemical is still safe to drink. However, this is not a perfect solution. “Chlorination has a place,” said Schwab, “but it has to be integrated in with behavior and an understanding of the population before just giving someone a chlorine tablet.”

New school handpump in Kisumu, Kenya. Photo courtesy of Water.org

Water.org is implementing a new method called Water Credit, with the hope of making water a truly sustainable, accessible resource across the world. “Essentially it is applying microfinance to water and sanitation so people can take out small loans to obtain water and sanitation connections in their community or right outside their home or in their home,” said Wickenhauser. “What's really important is it is bringing a capitol market on the ground that is self sustaining so eventually we want to work ourselves out of business.”

“The grassroots approach, where you work with the individuals who you are trying to help, moving forward is one that is going to show more success,” said Kellogg Schwab.

Even here at home there are many things we can do to aid in ending the water crisis -- from donating money to donating Facebook statuses.

“We are...asking individuals who are interested in getting involved to become advocates, which means they could actually ask their senator to cosponsor the Water for the World Act which is currently in the senate, or they could ask their member of congress to ask for local funding for [water and sanitation] support in next year’s federal budget,” said Kolodzinski.

It is also important to spread the word about the water related issues affecting people worldwide. “[The issue] really is, I think, under the radar to a certain extent, so we ask people to donate their voice. We actually have a Web site calledpower.water.org where you can donate your Twitter or Facebook status and then occasionally we’ll tweet or automatically post different things about the crisis or the solutions,” said Wikenhauser.

Additionally, hosting or participating in a fundraiser is a good way to raise awareness and money. “Individuals can either join or lead a walk for water event in their community,” said Kolondzinski.

On an even smaller scale, according to Schwab, there are little things we can do each day to help solve the global water and sanitation challenge. “We all need to lead by example," he said. "The most basic thing we can do for global health is wash our hands.”

Water is one of the most basic human needs, which is why it is unacceptable that almost one billion people world wide do not have access to a safe, clean supply of it. Although there is not one simple solution, Koldodzinski is hopeful and explained:

“We have the knowledge and the technology to do it, at this point its just a matter of finding the funds and the awareness.”

Schwab agrees that the problem is solvable, but believes it will require a global, interdisciplinary effort. “We have to develop a dialogue with individuals outside our own discipline," he said. :Engineers will not solve this problem, public health practitioners alone will not solve this problem. We need to bring in the entrepreneurs, we need to bring in the social aspects of this the economic aspects, the behavior, the policy, the government, together as a unified approach.”

Want to help? Visit these sites to learn how you can get involved:

Water.org
Waterforpeople.org
WASH Advocacy Initiative
charity: water
Global Water Program
________________
Maddy Appelbaum is a TalkingScience intern and a senior at Scarsdale High School. She loves learning new things about science -- and any other topic. She also enjoys art and travel.

We've all heard the stories and seen the articles about the dangers of using tanning beds -- using tanning beds greatly increases the risk of getting melanoma. But we've also seen shows like Jersey Shore, where the cast hits the tanning salon almost daily. The show's stars make tanning seem like the greatest hobby in the world. But there are some hidden facts about tanning that even Snooki doesn't know.

The University of Texas just completed a study where they found that the many tanning bed users released chemicals in their brains found in the brains of addicts after using the tanning bed. This means that tanning is no longer "something to do" for many people, it's now an addiction. This study also provides a reason for why, despite the inherent health risks, tanning salons are still booming. Researchers have linked tanning to behaviors like smoking cigarettes, people know that there are devastating health effects, but continue with the behavior anyway.

Many view tanning as relaxing and calming, a nice way to spend the day while improving one's appearance. But it is much more than that. When tanning goes beyond just a way to improve one's looks, and starts to impact other areas like social activities, it can be classified as an addiction.

So what can be done about this? Your best bet is to not start indoor tanning in the first place. People who have tanned indoors are 75% more likely to develop melanoma. But don't panic. If you have been to a tanning salon, and are worried, just don't go again. The best way to get a tan is to use the self-tanning creams you can find in the drug store. With all of the health risks in mind, indoor tanning is not worth it.
_______________________
Ally Ruchman is a senior at Rumson-Fair Haven Regional High School in Rumson, NJ. She loves animals, reading, science, and traveling.

Okay, now for the truth. Being a doctor is hard. Expectations, details, and enormous pressure. It seems to get worse all the time. New things to learn: medical technology, medical knowledge, business know how, rules/regulations multiplying like bunny rabbits. For example, the soon to be released new 3 volume set of disease classification (ICD-10) has almost twice as many diagnoses as the two-volume old ICD-9. Getting the information into electronic health records which we all must master is no easy feat!

So while you are writing your kick butt essay, think about where you are going to find the right amounts of these 6 ingredients that one needs to become a really good doctor:

1. Commitment — one large cup of putting aside your own needs to tend to others who are not your family.
2. Confidence — a heaping tablespoon. It takes a lot of guts to embark on a journey where your own skills in so many areas have such huge consequences for others.
3. Curiosity — two dashes. What we think we know today will be replaced by a different understanding tomorrow. Be curious, always challenge and ask questions of what you know and believe. Your patients will help a lot!
4. Conscientiousness — mix with precise measuring tools. The details of the patient’s life can crack the code. The details of the physical examination, the x-ray that was taken, and the details of how you communicate will get you into and keep you out of trouble.
5. Communication — 2 large cloves. One for listening and one for explaining.
6. Compassion and caring — as much as needed.

These 6 ingredients are not found in the books you buy or the courses you take. They are found inside yourself. They are learned from your family, your friends, your teachers. They are more important than the Krebs citric acid cycle or even knowing the four basic nucleotides that make up our DNA.

Find ways to acquire these critical ingredients. Make them part of your daily habits in everything you do. When you finally get that green hood (the cowl that you get when you graduate medical school), you will truly be ready to be the doctor the MD degree says you are.

Next month: Roadmaps on the way — Dana’s turn.

Diet soda seems like the perfect marriage of delicious soda and no-calorie guilt.  Yet new studies have emerged that point to diet soda, and other diet drinks, as the culprit behind weight gain.  How can this be if there are no calories?  And what are we going to do about the new findings?

Epidemiologists in San Antonio researched the effects of drinking diet soda on the body by using a test group of over 400 SALSA, or San Antonio Longitudinal Study of Aging participants.  They found that over the 9.5 years of the study, the waistlines of diet soda drinkers increased 70% more than the waistlines of the non-diet soda drinkers.  The drinkers who consumed two or more diet drinks a day had waistline increases 500% greater than the non-drinkers. 

So what was the reason for the weight gain?  Part of the answer is psychological.  When people drink products like Coke Zero and Diet Pepsi, they tend to eat more since they feel entitle to extra calories they are not consuming in their sodas.  This phenomenon is called a health halo.  It has been demonstrated at fast food restaurants as well.  Patrons who eat at "healthy" places will generally consume more calories than someone eating at a burger joint.  The answer is not just psychological though.  Scientists have found that in rodents, the artificial sweeteners  "unbundle the sweetness" from the calories.  What this means is that the brain knows calories are coming in, but the body doesn't receive the energy.  This can lead to weight gain as the body isn't receiving the energy it needs and to compensate, craves more food.

Another effect of diet drinks was studied on mice.  Mice were given meals that had either added corn oil and aspartame, or just corn oil.  The mice that received aspartame, which is the no-calorie sweetener used in most diet products, not just diet soda, showed higher fasting glucose levels, but the same or lower insulin levels.  Doctors say this imbalance is what may lead to diabetes.  There are also numerous other side effects associated with aspartame, including headaches, nausea, and depression.

So what does this mean for a nation hooked on aspartame and other artificial sweeteners?  It means that we should reduce the number of diet sodas we drink, but there is no need to cut them out completely.  Doctors say that diet drinks are a great bridge between transitioning off regular sodas and sweets.  It's fine to reach for a diet soda once in a while, but don't incorporate it into your everyday diet.

_______________________
Ally Ruchman is a junior at Rumson-Fair Haven Regional High School in Rumson, NJ. She loves animals, reading, science, and traveling.

Dr. Charles Augenbraun is a cardiologist and the Chief of Cardiology at Norwalk Hospital in Norwalk, CT. He graduated from the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine and did his residency at Temple University. Dr. Augenbraun specializes in cardiovascular disease.

Do you want to heal broken hearts?  Dr. Charles Augenbraun shared with me what it's like being a cardiologist.  His favorite part of the job?  The ability treat and modify diseases that would otherwise shorten people's lives or limit their ability to remain fully active and live a full life.

What advice would you give to a student interested in becoming a cardiologist?

Be prepared for a long course of study - high school, college, medical school, medical residency (3 years), and finally cardiology fellowship (3-4 years).  Look for every opportunity early on to get some exposure to medicine and cardiology just to be sure you find it really interesting and fulfilling.  Keep in mind that the first decision is whether to pursue medicine and go to medical school.  It is not necessary to decide on a specific field of medicine until after medical school is completed.

In your opinion, what procedure and/or treatment has saved the most lives?

In the treatment of acute heart attack the use of emergency angioplasty has resulted in a clear cut improvement in survival.  On the other hand,  medications such as the "statins" which lower cholesterol,  aspirin which prevents blood clots, and  antihypertensives which lower blood pressure have a huge impact.  These preventative treatments save many more lives by preventing the heart attacks and strokes in the first place.

What cutting-edge technology has proved most vital to the cardiology field?

Angioplasty and stenting of coronary arteries.  This technique has evolved over the last 25 years.  It allows cardiologists to open blocked arteries using small tubes that are in inserted in a blood vessel in the arm or thigh. The procedure can be done with local anesthetic as it only requires a small needle puncture similar to starting an IV.    In many cases it replaces the need for open heart surgery.

Can you explain the difference between invasive cardiology and non-invasive cardiology?

An invasive cardiologist is one who does procedures like angioplasty and cardiac catherization.  A non-invasive cardiologist does everything except those procedures.

What is cardiac catheterization?  When is the procedure necessary?

Cardiac catheterization is a diagnostic procedure (not treatment).  It involves putting a small tube into an artery in the thigh or arm.  The tube is guided through the blood vessels to the heart. It is used to inject xray dye into the coronary arteries and heart chambers while xray pictures are taken.  It allows exact diagnosis of blocked arteries (coronary artery disease) and abnormal heart chambers and valves. It is done with local anesthesia and is generally painless.

What is the most common heart problem you treat?

Coronary Artery Disease.  Controlling cholesterol,  treating high blood pressure, treating diabetes, exercising, and eating a good diet all play a role in reducing the risk.

________________________________

April Garbuz is a TalkingScience summer intern and a junior at Wilton High School. She loves science, debating, acting, and swimming. Ultimately, she'd like to be a research scientist.

Alexander Sheh

New findings link estrogen to the prevention of gastric cancer. Though it is unlikely that men will be treated with estrogen in order to prevent gastric cancer, this discovery will help us learn more about how to manage immune responses and prevent some cancers. I spoke with the study's lead author, Alexander Sheh, a Postdoctoral Associate at MIT, about his estrogen research and what it might mean for cancer prevention.

How was the study conducted?

We used mice that have been genetically engineered to produce gastrin in their stomachs and infected them with bacteria that cause gastric cancer.  Gastrin is a hormone used by the stomach to increase acid production, but has also been associated with increased proliferation of cells. We used Helicobacter pylori, a bacterium which is a carcinogen, to infect these mice.  Previous work in our labs had shown that H. pylori infection accelerates the development of cancer.

We were interested in using this model of gastric cancer and seeing if we could prevent the development of cancer in the male mice infected with H. pylori by giving them estrogen, as we knew that estrogen played a role in protecting females from previous work.  We used an anti-estrogen Tamoxifen, which blocks estrogen, to see if it would block the protective effect of estrogen.

We infected the mice with H. pylori so that they would start their progression towards gastric cancer.  We treated the male mice with estrogen, Tamoxifen, a combination of both, or neither. Female mice were treated with Tamoxifen or nothing.  After a total of 28 weeks of infection we assessed whether the mice had developed gastric cancer.  We found that estrogen, Tamoxifen and a combination of both treatments prevented cancer in males but Tamoxifen had no effect on females.  This was contrary to what we expected for Tamoxifen as we expected it to reverse the protective effects in both genders.

So we used microarrays to look at gene expression profiles in the stomach of male mice treated with placebo, estrogen or Tamoxifen.  The gene expression results pointed to CXCL1, a cytokine involved in recruiting immune cells to sites of infection.  CXCL1 levels have been found to be elevated in patients with cancers, but we found that estrogen treatment was able to reduce CXCL1 activity and the recruitment of immune cells.

What do the results suggest about the relationship between Helicobacter pylori and estrogen?

We are interested in how estrogen modulates immune responses and how that affects the progression to gastric cancer that H. pylori sets in motion.

Normally, H. pylori promoted disease has a snowball-like effect.  The bacteria induce a response from the stomach, which recruits innate immune cells, like neutrophils and macrophages.  Innate immune cells form the first line of defense to insults to the body and help organize other aspects of the body's defenses.  We believe that estrogen can affect how the body reacts to H. pylori, downplaying the ineffective immune response and preventing the body from damaging itself.

What property of estrogen protects against gastric cancer?

Estrogen helps regulate immune responses in women.  Increased levels of estrogen seem to reduce pro-inflammatory signals in the body by eliciting the production of distinct types of T regulatory cells and T helper 2 (Th2) cells.  In this study we tried to exploit this fact as we know that H. pylori induces a strong T helper 1 response from mice, which is a pro-inflammatory response.

Our study showed that estrogen had effects even further upstream as it affected the development of the tumor microenvironment, that is the combination of chemical mediators at the site of tumor origin that aid the progression of cancer.

Do the findings suggest that estrogen could protect against other infections?

Others have no doubt looked at the role of estrogen in other infections.  Our particular findings do suggest a possible mechanism by which estrogen can protect the body from damage due to chronic infections that the body is not well-equipped to eradicate on its own.  Other chronic inflammatory agents such as hepatitis B and C viruses and liver flukes can also promote these states where the body damages itself while not actually resolving the infection.  However, in infections that can be resolved by the immune system, treatment with estrogen might actually allow the infection to persist.

Is it likely that will men be treated with estrogen to prevent gastric cancer?

It’s unlikely that doctors would prescribe estrogen to men as a preventative treatment for gastric cancer.  However if we can learn more about the mechanisms involved, we hope to discover ways to better manage the immune response in order to prevent cancers mediated by inflammation and other inflammatory mediated diseases involving the brain and heart.

How will these results be applied to other research?  What is the next step?

What we showed is that estrogen was able to skew the tumor microenvironment by decreasing CXCL1 levels which were associated with protection. We hypothesize that the decrease in CXCL1 levels and neutrophils affected the tumor microenvironment which influences the development of the response to H. pylori.  So we'll focus on trying to determine what CXCL1 is doing in our model system and whether we can modulate its effects.

________________________________

April Garbuz is a TalkingScience summer intern and a junior at Wilton High School. She loves science, debating, acting, and swimming. Ultimately, she'd like to be a science journalist.

If you had a choice between getting a colonoscopy or interacting in a certain way with a dog, which would you chose?  I know that after witnessing both my parents have uncomfortable colonoscopies, I would definitely chose the dog option.  But how can a dog sniff out colon cancer?  And what does this mean for the future of pre-cancer screening?

First, dogs are specifically trained to sniff out cancer. What does this entail?  The dogs are taught to sniff cancer laced breath samples, and sit down in front of the samples that smell of cancer.  They are then rewarded with a tennis ball or treat.  Some dogs can smell cancer without ever having training.  Researchers believe that cancerous cells emit specific odors that circulate through the body and are given off in the stool and breath.

How effective is a dog at sniffing out cancer? A study conducted last year in Japan used a labroador retriever, Marine, who had a 91% sucess rate with the breath test and about a 97% success rate with the stool test.  One of the most effective current methods for finding early stage colon cancer is the fecal occult blood test, which only acknowledges early-stage cancer in every 1 out of 10 samples.

What does this mean for the future of colonoscopies and pre-cancer screening?  Scientists who worked on the study hope to develop a sensor that will detect the same cancer smells that dogs do.  As for now we will have to make do with the technologies that we already have, as scientists say it is too time consuming, impractical, and expensive to use dogs.

_______________________
Ally Ruchman is a junior at Rumson-Fair Haven Regional High School in Rumson, NJ. She loves animals, reading, science, and traveling.

The protein distribution (in red and green) that indicates a new heart cell, or cardiomyocite, has been created. Photo credit: Tae Kyung Kim/University of Pennyslvania

Approximately every 25 seconds, an American will have a “coronary event,” more commonly known as a heart attack. Heart disease is the leading killer of both adult men and women in the United States, as well as the leading cause of other debilitating health problems. As a result, the majority of Americans either know someone who has been affected by heart disease, or suffer from it themselves.

Even when heart attacks are not fatal, they can leave the affected individual with debilitating tissue damage in their hearts. Now, however, after over a decade of research, a team of scientists at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania have managed to “reprogram” other types of cells into heart cells, so that they may be used to repair damaged coronary tissues. This breakthrough, published in the July 8 issue of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, is an extremely significant step for the treatment of heart attacks and coronary disease, and may eventually help save lives.

The team* of investigators from the University of Pennsylvania's Perelman School of Medicine was led by Dr. James Eberwine, Elmer Holmes Bobst Professor of Pharmacology, and Dr. Tae Kyung Kim, post-doctoral fellow. By experimenting with different methods of RNA transfer between cells, the research team managed to transform one type of cell directly into another. The key lies directly in natural cellular processes. A particular individual's cells all contain the same set of genes encoded in DNA; however, within each cell, different genes are "expressed," resulting in many cells with different appearances and functions. All human cells also contain molecules called messenger RNA (mRNA), which act as chemical blueprints for making proteins in a process called translation. RNA translation produces proteins depending on which genes are to be expressed in the cell. Thus, the genes determine the properties of the mRNA, and the mRNA, in turn, determines the appearance and behavior of the cell.

To make this particular transformation, the team of researchers extracted large amounts of mRNA from heart cells, and then injected it into two different kinds of “host cells:” astrocytes (star-shaped brain cells) and fibroblasts (skin cells). This change was done through a process called lipid-mediated transfection, which involves creating pores in the cell membrane, so that new material can be brought into the cell. Because each new host cell in this study contained an overabundance of heart cell mRNA, the cells began translating the heart cell mRNA, rather than their own original mRNA. As a result, heart cell proteins were produced, and eventually, the entire cell was transformed from a skin or brain cell into a functioning heart cell.

The research team called this process Transcriptome-Induced Phenotype Remodeling (TIPeR). Previous research in the field had focused on another process, the Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell Procedure, in which cells are transformed back into their original embryonic form, and "reprogrammed" to develop as a new type of cell. TIPer, however, is a new procedure that skips this middle step, changing the cell directly from one form to the next without returning to its developmental state. TIPeR is therefore an important breakthrough in stem cell research, because it makes the process of transforming one cell into another much more efficient and quick.

The process is still too time-consuming to be an instant "miracle cure," but it is an important step in the treatment of heart disease. In addition, creating new heart cells from individual patients could allow for personal screenings for the efficiency of specific treatments. Hopefully, treatments such as this one will soon be important additions to medical treatments for America’s leading killer.

*For a full list of names of research investigators, please scroll down to the bottom of this article.

_______________________

Kaitlyn Gerber is an incoming sophomore at Carleton College, where she plans to major in biology. Originally from Ridgefield, CT, she likes soccer, reading, and science, especially ecology and astronomy.

Cooling off in a pool during the summer is a favorite past-time of adults and kids alike.  What better way is there to beat the heat and spend time with family and friends than going down to the local public pool for a swim?  But what lurks beneath the water and how can we make our pools safe again?

Posted at every public pool is a list of rules...no running, no horseplay, dive only in designated areas, and shower before entering.  Why shower before entering if you're just going to get wet in the pool and take one afterwards?  Studies show that nitrogen-rich products, such as sunscreen and cosmetics, can mix with the pool water and create toxic chemicals that can mutate genes.  By not showering, you're bringing in agents that can become detrimental to your health.  And since 35% of Americans admit to skipping the shower before swimming, the toxicity levels can really add up.

Another thing that makes our pools unsafe is urine.  It might seem a bit crazy, but in a recent survey by the Water Quality and Health Council, 1 in 5 people admitted to peeing in pools.  That slogan from when you were a kid, "Welcome to our OOL, notice there is no P in it" might have been on to something.  Urine is filled with toxins that are leaving your body for a reason.  By using the pool as a toilet, you are not only subjecting yourself, but others, to health risks.

The most common disease found in public swimming pools is RWI or recreational water illness.  They affect about 10,000 Americans every year, and are contracted through breathing, swallowing, or other contact with contaminated water.  The effects can range from mild discomfort to diarrhea and nausea.

So what are some safety precautions you can take to prepare yourself against public pool germs this summer?

• Shower, shower, shower.  It's the best way to prevent new germs from entering and products like sunscreen and make-up from mixing and turning toxic.
• Don't pee in the pool and don't allow little kids to pee either.
• Tell whoever is in charge to up the amount of chlorine that is put in -- but not to an unsafe level. Chlorine kills the majority of germs, but too much exposure can be hazardous to swimmers.
• Make sure your local government cleans your public pool regularly.
• Observe all rules and regulations posted poolside.
• Check for anything the looks suspicious as you never know what might be lurking under the water.

Be safe, but don't forget to enjoy yourself and have a nice swim!

_______________________
Ally Ruchman is a junior at Rumson-Fair Haven Regional High School in Rumson, NJ. She loves animals, reading, science, and traveling.

With the warmer weather comes a variety of so-called "health tips" for surviving the summer months. But which of these are really true, and which are simply urban myths?

Myth#1: Swimming less than an hour after eating is dangerous.

This common claim has kept many swimmers out of the water throughout the decades. Theoretically, it’s possible: digestion requires large amounts of blood to provide oxygen, so swimming directly after a large meal could lead to muscle cramps if there is not enough blood left over to supply muscles with oxygen. However, experts have since concluded that this legend is simply that – a myth. Recreational swimmers may get the occasional calf cramp, but there has never been a documented case of drowning due to food-related cramps. In fact, at least one study that examined all drownings in the United States found that fewer than one percent of all drownings occur within an hour after the person ate a meal.

Much more dangerous, however, is swimming after consuming an alcoholic beverage. According to the CDC, alcohol use and intoxication is associated with up to half of all adolescent and adult deaths that occur while swimming recreationally. “No swimming after eating” would be more appropriately phrased as “no swimming after drinking.”

Myth #2: Sunburns will “fade to a tan.”

Many people (including, until recently, this author) believe that they it is natural to burn before getting a suntan, since burns eventually fade into tan. However, in actuality, sunburns and suntans are completely different.  A sunburn means that the tissue in the skin has been overexposed to UV light, causing burning and inflammation. A suntan, on the other hand, is a result of moderate UV exposure, which causes skin cells called melanocytes to release a pigment called melanin. Melanin is a darker pigment that absorbs UV light, protecting the skin from UV damage. This melanin, in turn, causes the skin to look darker, or more tan. A sunburn will not fade into a suntan because it indicates damage, and does not stimulate melanin release.

Myth #3: People with darker skin do not need to use sunscreen.

People with naturally darker skin have more melanin in their skin, so their skin is more prone to absorb damaging UV rays, protecting them from sunburns. However, it is still possible for darker-skinned people to get sunburned when overexposed to the sun. In fact, while cancer rates for those with darker skin are much lower than for people with fair skin, the death rate from skin cancer is actually higher for people with dark skin, because they are less likely to notice or be aware of skin cancer signs. Overall, it is unsafe for anyone to be in the sun for too long without any sort of protection against UV rays.

Myth #4: Salty sea water is good for cleaning cuts and other wounds.

We’ve always been told that the salt in sea water will help clean cuts.  However, many experts tend to disagree. Although home-made salt water is good for disinfecting cuts, sea water contains many germs and impurities that can actually cause harm if they enter the body through an open wound or sore. People who have “compromised” immune systems, due to medications, health conditions such as diabetes, or even a common cold need to be careful when swimming with exposed wounds.   Harmful bacteria are especially common in ocean areas near fisheries, farms, golf courses, or stormwater drains, because runoff often contains nutrients that promote bacterial growth. Tropical waters can also host some harsh bacteria, because warmer water encourages bacteria to grow.

This doesn’t mean, of course, that you shouldn’t go swimming if you have a skinned knee or scraped elbow. But it’s important to clean cuts properly with antiseptic or a homemade salt solution once you get out of the water.

Curious about any other common summer health "facts" that you want to see investigated? Let us know!

_____________________________\

Kaitlyn Gerber will be a sophomore at Carleton College, where she plans to major in biology. Originally from Ridgefield, CT, she likes soccer, reading, and science, especially ecology and astronomy.

Oil swirls down the Yellowstone River in Lockwood, Montana following a spill from a nearby pipeline. Photo courtesy of ABC News.

One year after the infamous BP Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico, new oil spills are still causing environmental problems.

Last Saturday, an Exxon-Mobil pipeline ruptured, spilling up to 42,000 gallons (approximately 1,000 barrels) of crude oil into the Yellowstone River and forcing the evacuations of many nearby residents. Although over 300 people are working on cleaning up the spill, Exxon-Mobil revealed that the impact of the leak could extend far beyond the ten-mile river, with potentially devastating ecological consequences.

The break was near Billings, in southern Montana. Although the exact cause of the spill is unknown, experts have estimated that the increased pressure of the river, which was swollen from flooding, could have caused the pipe to break.

Yellowstone River watershed. The spill occurred near Billings, Montana, and is currently flowing eastward towards North Dakota. Photo courtesy of the Montana Division of Water Resources.

Unfortunately, there are no dams in the river. As a result, although cleanup efforts are underway, the oil plume could spread all the way to the Missouri River if it isn’t somehow stopped. This problem is only increased by the fact that the river is running at flood stage, meaning that the spill will spread faster than usual. Steve Knecht, chief of operations for Montana's Disaster and Emergency Services, said in a public statement "the timing couldn't be worse." In an attempt to trap the oil, volunteers are releasing absorbant pads and booms, which act as barriers to stop the flow of oil. However, it is possible that, because of the elevated floodwaters, the oil is simply passing under the booms.

Oil spills are some of the deadliest forms of pollution. Oil is particularly harmful to birds because it coats their feathers, making it harder for them to fly. In addition, when birds preen, they ingest the oil, which can damage their livers and livers. Oil spills in the still water, such as last year’s oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, are also harmful to marine mammals because oil coats the fur of seals and sea otters, reducing their ability to retain heat as well as making them more vulnerable to predators. As a result, many of these animals actually die from hypothermia.

The ecological damage of this particular spill remains to be seen. The spill is downstream from the famous Yellowstone National Park, but it still may harm fish, waterbirds, and other inhabitants of the river’s environment. However, if the oil manages to reach the Missouri River, the damage could be much greater. In the meantime, volunteers will attempt to clean up the spill and prevent further damage.

Fortunately, little ecological damage has been reported so far. Duane Titus, of the International Bird Rescue in California, said that the only injured waterfowl he has found so far are a few pelicans with oil on their wings. Because the water is so high, many of the river’s geese and birds are currently migrating, and not living on the river. In addition, because the river moves so quickly, the oil will most likely be less toxic than it would be in still water, such as oceans and seas.

However, possible effects on human health are a concern as well. On Monday, Montana landowner and National Wildlife Federation coordinator Alexis Bonogofsky was taken to the hospital after exposure to oil fumes caused her dizziness, nausea, and trouble breathing. Although air and water tests have not yielded harmful results, adverse effects on human health cannot be ruled out, particularly because oil contains benzene, which can cause cancer.

“We’re not saying it’s good, we’re not saying it’s bad,” said Bob Gibson of the Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks in a public statement. “We haven’t found anything substantive yet, but that doesn’t mean it’s not there.”

In the case of the Yellowstone River spill, the fishing industry could be seriously damaged because oil kills many of the insects and plankton that live on the river. Because these organisms form the base of the food chains in the river, their deaths could lead the fish to starve. In ecology, this type of effect is called a “bottom-up” effect, because the number of fish is controlled by the amount of plankton that is available for them to eat.

Exxon-Mobil was apparently in compliance with all federal regulations regarding oil pipelines. Yet the spill still happened. Hopefully it can be cleaned up before it causes too much damage; however, we still need to ask: are oil regulations as strict as they need to be, if they allow for these kinds of disasters to happen? What is the true cost of our need for oil?

To learn how you can possibly help with the cleanup, check out volunteer organizations such as the International Bird Rescue or contact the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Our whole lives we've heard that the higher the number on the sunscreen bottle, the better.  But what does the number really mean?  And is it necessary to use SPF 75 when 30 works just fine? 

When going outside, doctors recommend using a broad spectrum sunscreen, which blocks out both UVA and UVB light.  The lowest recommended SPF number by doctors is 15, which blocks out 93% of UV rays.  Most sunscreens only block UVB rays, even though UVA are more harmful.  Products containing UVA blockers list ingredients like zinc oxide or titanium dioxide.   The best sunscreens have UVA and UVB blockers to prevent the damaging rays that potentially cause cancer from reaching and harming skin cells.

How big is the difference between SPF 15 and SPF 30? And what about SPF 30 and SPF 50?  The truth is, once you go past 30, there really isn't much difference.  SPF 30 blocks about 97% of UV rays, versus 93% in SPF 15.  And SPF 50? Only 98% of UV rays.  Higher numbers are just ploys made by manufacturers to get consumers to buy their products.  The higher the number, the more likely a consumer will purchase their product because of the false belief that it will offer more protection.  The truth is, when purchasing a sunscreen, don't rely on the number alone.  The difference between 30 and anything above it is negligible.  Instead, focus on the ingredients, and whether or not it blocks UVA rays.  Also, ignore anything on the bottle about waterproof or long-lasting.  They are more marketing techniques that are being shut down by the FDA.

So some handy tips for this summer? Make sure you read the entire bottle of sunscreen before purchasing, to make sure it offers proper protection. Don't fall prey to marketing tricks that will only end up costing you more money.  Reapply, reapply, reapply.  No sunscreen can last all day, especially if you've been in water.  Stay out of the sun during the hottest part of the day, usually 10-4.  And remember, have fun!

_______________________
Ally Ruchman is a junior at Rumson-Fair Haven Regional High School in Rumson, NJ. She loves animals, reading, science, and traveling.

This photo shows an angiogram of a human heart. Angiograms are performed on patients that are at risk for heart disease. First, the heart is injected with an opaque fluid, which shows up on x-rays. When an x-ray (angiogram) is taken, each individual artery becomes visible. Narrowed arteries can indicate coronary artery disease. Blockage, even incomplete blockage, of the two coronary arteries could cause a heart attack. Angiograms help doctors detect heart disease and recommend treatment.

To learn more, click here.

What many people don't understand about the very important concept that controlling body weight is not a matter of will power is that people can still be healthy, or improve their health dramatically, no matter what they weigh. Everyone can make changes in their lives that will improve their health. It is absolutely true that a sedentary lifestyle combined with poor eating habits is clearly linked with disease, such as diabetes and heart disease. The important thing is the process of learning to incorporate healthier habits, while doing away with prejudice or discrimination against fat people. Shaming fat people will not lead to improvement in anyone's health. Instead, it will continue to engender low self-esteem, unhealthy dieting practices that will slow down metabolic rates, and eating disorders. In short, the focus should be on learning to live a healthier lifestyle that doesn't involve beating oneself up on a regular basis, based on one's appearance or a number on a scale. Check out Linda Bacon's website and the website for the Association for Size Diversity and Health.

In the first part of the book, in order to draw parallels with current scientific evidence for the “epidemics of obesity and diabetes,” he puts forth a detailed historical analysis of the decades-long debate on the correlation, or causation, of heart disease with dietary fat intake. The upshot of this work is to point out what happens when a researcher, who becomes prominent for various reasons, can influence health care policy even when the researcher’s scientific data are far from conclusive. In this particular case, Taubes discusses the work of the prominent physiologist Ancel Keys, who was convinced, based on his research that the rise in incidence of heart disease in the developed world from the 1920s through the 1950s was due to increased blood cholesterol levels, which was in turn due to increased total dietary fat intake. Keys was apparently a formidable character who felt very strongly that his data conclusively proved this hypothesis, and was very quick to strongly criticize those who opposed his theories. Throughout this time period, and even into the 1960s, there were many prominent researchers who had serious reservations, based on scientific analysis of his data as well as their own, that Keys’ results were inconclusive. Nevertheless, because Keys was so forceful, Taubes brings various elements to show that the media picked up Keys’ theories, and physicians began to recommend low fat diets to their patients, despite lack of strong scientific evidence for increased dietary cholesterol intake (mainly from animal fats) causing a rise in heart disease.

In such a scenario, the question becomes one of correlation versus causation, i.e., depending on how solid the scientific evidence is for any given observed public health phenomenon, one might be able to say there is a CORRELATION of a dietary trend with observed disease incidence, rather than being able to state, through a solid base of scientific evidence, that a given dietary trend CAUSES disease. This concept is one that the Health at Every Size paradigm considers regarding current dietary habits with the incidence of “obesity” and diabetes. The bottom line is that there is still much scientific work that needs to be done to determine whether lifestyle in the developed world causes, versus merely correlates with, “obesity” and diabetes.

One reason for this phenomenon of correlation overpowering the media is that it provides a solid message to address what appears to be an alarming trend. Understandably, people don’t have the patience to wait for conclusive scientific evidence to be produced when faced with a potentially scary scenario. When scientific evidence that contradicts the popular theory is published, it tends to be ignored, because it doesn’t fit what has become DOGMA, based on the popular correlation. Taubes skillfully points out that when correlations are not thoroughly researched scientifically, and they become socially accepted dogma, real scientific progress just breaks down. Ultimately, I believe, the truth always emerges in the end, and the road of public health history is littered with the corpses of what used to be very popular theories. But while the dogma exists, well meaning but misguided health professionals may in fact do more harm than good, by encouraging unrealistic weight loss goals rather than focus on lifestyle changes.

On March 15, MSNBC had some surprising news about peanut allergies. Thanks to a new treatment by Duke University Medical Center and the Arkansas Children's Hospital, 29 children were able to eat peanuts without any allergic reactions. The treatment is called oral desensitization, a method of gradually introducing a food allergen orally in order to build up immune system tolerance.

Though further study is still necessary, 5 of those 29 children appear to have had their peanut allergies completely cured. This isn’t just good news for the 1.8 million peanut allergy sufferers in the U.S.-- it could change their lives. Every year, 200 people die in the U.S. because of peanut allergies, and another 30,000 make emergency visits to the hospital.

According to the MedlinePlus Encyclopedia, many people have food intolerances (lactose intolerance, for example, is a condition in which a person cannot drink milk or consume dairy products, but does not have an actual allergy). Food allergies, however, are much less common, and cause the production of antihistamines and antibodies in response to the allergen, much like seasonal allergies or hay fever. Because many people have severe peanut allergies which can result in anaphylaxis, the peanut is high on the list of the most dangerous allergens.

There are many statistics on food allergies, but, according to the FDA, 1.5%, or 4 million Americans have them, with 1 to 2 percent, or 1.5 million food allergy-sufferers in Japan, according to figures from the Japanese National Diet Library.

For many years, people with run-of-the-mill, non-food allergies could take antihistamines or allergy shots for relief, but people with the often terrible peanut allergy had no recourse. With this new treatment, peanut allergy patients are given small amounts of the allergen, much like with allergy shots, gradually increasing the dose as his or her tolerance builds. The result is that children who could not eat peanuts before are now able to do so to some degree, without any adverse reactions.

Peanut oral desensitization is different from allergy shots, however. Allergy shots are injected into the arm, while oral desensitization patients eat small doses—starting with amounts smaller than a person could cut by hand, or powders—of peanut every day. Furthermore, unlike allergy shots, which carry only a possibility of increased allergen tolerance, oral desensitization carries a hope of actually curing the peanut allergy.

There are still a few caveats: this method can only be administered by a doctor, and is still dangerous for those with peanut allergies. Doctors should continue to search for a safer method that can be used by everyone, but that will take time.

However, as the head of the allergy department at the Duke University Medical Center said, “We’re optimistic that [the children who have undergone oral desensitization] have lost their peanut allergy.” So, for the time being, if you think of peanut allergies, think like the doctors at Duke: optimistically.

Read more: The Food Allergy & Anaphylaxis Network: Tips for Managing a Peanut Allergy and FAQs

Jennifer Brout

The recent Sensation to Emotion Conference was packed with scholars and clinicians with an interest in advancing the understanding of how sensory processing and emotion regulation interact, and how these processes affect human behavior. In interviewed Dr. Jennifer Brout, the mother of fourteen-year-old triplets, a clinical/child psychologist, and the founder of the EMB Brout Sensory Processing and Emotion Regulation Program at Duke University. Dr. Brout is also involved with projects at the SPD Foundation (the leading authority on Sensory Processing Disorders), Cal State University Fullerton, and The Institute for Music and Neurologic Function at Beth Abraham.

Talia: Before hearing about your conference, Sensation to Emotion, I did not
know a thing about Sensory Processing Disorder (SPD). I've since
learned that the disorder was first discovered in the early 1900's,
and current statistics estimate that up to one in five children suffer
from some form of SPD. So why have there been so few studies that examine how sensory
information processing affects emotion regulation?

Dr. Brout: Since A. Jean Ayres (1972, 1979) published her work on sensory
integration controversy regarding the disorder has continued for
over 30 years. Dr. Ayres, an Occupational Therapist with advanced
training in neuroscience and educational psychology (Ayres, 1972;
Bundy & Murray, 2002) described the process of sensory integration as
"the many parts of the nervous system [working] together so that a
person can interact with the environment effectevly".(p.184
Ayres,1989). She viewed Sensory Integration Dsyfunction as a
condition that affected learning, motor skills and socio-emotional
functioning. While sensory integration is still the term with which
the disorder’s theory is described Sensory Processing Disorder (SPD)
is used currently to describe the disorder itself, as it more
consistnely reflects up-to-date knowledge of information and
neurological processing. There are two issues that have been at the
forefront of the controversy. The first relates to the treatment
efficacy of sensory integration occupational therapy. The second
addresses the the validity of SPD as a disorder separate from other
developmental conditions (such as autism, aspergers syndrome,
schizophrenia, and fragile-x syndrome, etc.). It has been so difficult
to get past the gate with these issues that the ways in which sensory
processing affects emotions has been overlooked in research, although
we certainly see it clinically.

Talia: I've had difficulty finding out exactly how SPD is diagnosed, and it
seems that misdiagnoses are common. How do parents tend to find out
that their child has SPD?

Dr. Brout: The connection between sensory processing and early regulation is
well-acknowledged (Gross, 1998). Recently, two prominent diagnostic
manuals for infants and young children recently included disordered
sensory processing. The Zero to Three Diagnostic Classification of
Mental Health and Developmental Disorders of Infancy and Early
Childhood (Zero to Three, 2005) adopted the term “Sensory Processing
Disorders of Regulation” in the revised edition to replace “Regulatory
Disorder.” Similarly, the Interdisciplinary Council on Development and
Learning Disorders (ICDL) selected “Regulatory-Sensory Processing
Disorders” for use in its diagnostic manual (ICDL, 2005). However, for
elementary age children through adults the DSM (Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual) is used and this book has not yet recognized SPD.
Therefore, SPD is misdiagnosed with other disorders that it either
masks, mimics or may be comorbid (overlap or coexist) with.

Talia: Is this a disorder that some children may "grow out of"?

Dr. Brout: No It is not. Treatment can help and in certain cases therapy can
alleviate most symptoms but there are many adults with SPD, who have
not reported full alleviation of symptoms.

Talia: I read that SPD is not considered a disease. So... if an adult is not
able to work as a result of a serious case of SPD, are they not
eligible to receive disability aide from the government?

Dr. Brout: No they are not eligiable for disability.

Talia: Is there a connection between SPD and synesthesia?

Dr. Brout: This is an excellent question, one many of us have asked. We don’t
know the answer. Dr. Simon Baron Cohen who studies both sensory
processing and synthesia might be a good person to ask about this.

Talia: Is SPD the same as Sensory Integration Disorder (SID)? In 2005 Dr
Peter Heilbroner wrote a short article on QuackWatch stating that "Few
pediatric neurologists believe that SID is a real diagnostic entity."
Is this accurate, or has this sentiment changed in the past few years?

Dr. Brout: SPD overlaps with sensory integration disorder to a large degree.
However, the term has been expanded to reflect three different types
of disorders with specific subtypes related to motor issues, postural
problems and the modulation of sensory information. The original
theory of sensory integration remains the same. Dr. Peter Hellbroner
is ill-informed. Even by 2005 a body of research on SPD
(physiologically based and some from the field of neurocience) would
have caused most MD’s to at least take pause prior to making such a
broad sweeping statement. Perhaps Dr. Heilbroner would like to make a
retraction now.

Talia: Are you satisfied with the progress being made with regards to SPD studies?

Dr. Brout: No. We need more funds and we need to be going four times as fast!
Other than that, sure!

Talia: Will you have another conference next year?

Dr. Brout: Yes, I hope we will.

Talia: If someone wit the SPD is ultra sensitive to sound, how could music
therapy help? Wouldn't the noise drive them crazy? Do you know if
anyone with the disorder rocked out to Dee Snider at the
post-conference Rock-it Festival?

Dr. Brout: The relationship between auditory over-responsivity and the kinds of
sounds that bother an indivisual is very complicated. It is not
obvious and we don’t understand it yet. For example, some individuals
can tolerate loud music but cannot stand the repetitive quiet hum of
the refrideradtor. This may be a reflection of the difference in
amplitude or the many other factors that make sound unique. Many
people speak of difficulty separating background noise from foreground
noise and this can play into the issue. Also, one of the important
topics covered at the conference was that of auditory gating. Gating
refers to the way in which the auditory system responds less and less
over time to a non-dangerous. This is somewhat like putting an
unimportant sound in the background. SPD kids have demonstrated gating
difficulties. Where gating fits in terms of amplitude (or the loudness
of music) is not yet understood. We have ideas that we can work with
in order to create therapies both through music and other sound
therapies but we need more studies. To answer your question, my
daughter and I who are both over-sensitive to many sounds enjoyed Dee
very much.

This is the first of a three-part series about Breakfast, Obesity & Juvenile Diabetes. Please take the time to write a comment or relate some personal experience -- help us make a connection through your stories.

So, Why is Breakfast So Important?

Confused? Well you're not alone. Over 50% of people regularly skip eating breakfast. At one time or another everyone reading this has done it, and left home for school or work without taking just a few minutes to start the day properly, with a nutritious breakfast.

We're not talking 3 course meal – how long does a bowl of granola take to eat? Even a piece of fresh fruit on the go would be a good start – yet alarming numbers of people skip breakfast every day. One can make the case that breakfast not only shouldn't be missed, to take things even further breakfast is believed by some nutritionist and dietitians to be the most important meal of the day.

To properly understand the total dynamics let's first establish what are the immediate and positive effects of eating an easy and nutritious breakfast:

• Improves Concentration and Focus
  
• Weight Control (more on this later)
  
• Better absorption of vital nutrients
  
• Helps boost energy levels
  
• Sustainable Strength and Endurance
  
• May help lower cholesterol levels
  
• Promotes a Positive Mental Attitude
• Blood Glucose Management for everyone not just Diabetic
• 
  

For children, eating breakfast dramatically affects their abilities with regards to concentration, problem solving skills, better focus, creativity, and their immune system. Imagine being a teacher and dealing with the possibility that 1 in 2 children sitting in a classroom come to school without having eaten breakfast, and are therefore being ill-prepared to learn.

He asked that I post his response verbatim:

Dear Ms. Gordon:

What I learned from my correspondence with Dr. Christakis and a review of some of his vast trove of publications was that what had originally motivated him to study how feelings/perceptions spread through social networks was his work with terminally ill patients, which served as his initiation into clinical medicine. Through his interactions with these patients and their families, he understandably became concerned with the feelings of the family members and how it affected them and their social networks in turn.

I was surprised that as a Sociologist, Dr. Christakis would have been taken aback at the overwhelming attention received by his obesity study. Surely he must have been aware of the hair trigger emotions surrounding obesity in our society. It then occurred to me that perhaps, due to his initiation by fire into what must be one of the most difficult fields a physician can choose (end-of-life care), his attempt to approach the spreading of emotions through social networks through mathematics and statistics took him a step back from what must have been a very potent emotional experience. I felt that there was a certain detachment in thequantitative work involved in these analyses.
When I posited this to him, he explained:

Dr. Christakis is not primarily studying the "obesity epidemic" but rather how social networks work.

After watching this interview and looking over Dr. Christakis' website, I composed this email to him:

Dear Dr. Christakis,

When your paper came out in NEJM in 2007, I was participating in a weight loss program at St. Luke's (NYORC). I remember our group leader, Rich Weil, presenting your findings to us. From what I recall, he seemed to have no opinion on it one way or another, but I don't really remember.

I participated in the group for 2.5 years, and left it this past summer in disgust. I had lost about 12 lbs during the first year, and gained it back over the course of that time. I started and ended at around 225 lbs. I'm a 5'5" 45 year old female. I have repeatedly, over the course of my life, even as a little girl, tried to lose weight. I was maybe 10-20% overweight as a child and young adult, but once I hit my early 30s, I hit 200 lbs. for the first time. After reaching 225 for the first time, I joined Overeaters Anonymous and became "abstinent" (from all refined sugar, flour and wheat), and lost 60 lbs. I maintained my abstinence but still gained back about 10 lbs before falling off the wagon 5 years later and returning to 225. I repeated this same cycle, fell off the wagon again after 5 years, and again went up to 225. It was at this point that I said - ENOUGH.

I have a Ph.D. in Developmental and Molecular Biology from Einstein (2001), so I try to follow the basic science literature on obesity. I'm also very interested in sociology and the impact of scientific communications on society - something which attracted me to your research.

I just viewed, online, the 3 minute interview with you about your paper, and I must admit that your reported findings don't sit well with me at all. I have always battled my weight but felt that I have always been surrounded by (and shamed by) thinner people. I would classify myself as middle class, from a middle class background. My mother was never obese - in fact, there was not one obese person on her side of the family, going back 3 generations. My Dad was overweight and his brother was obese for most of his adult life. I have one sister, 3 years younger than I (we share both parents and are not stepsisters), who has never had a weight problem. Most of my classmates, fellow students and colleagues throughout my life were thin.

I think the social pressure is very much the opposite of obese people influencing those closest to them to be obese - I think its very much the other way around. And this pressure does nothing except force obese people to try everything and anything to maintain completely unsustainable weight loss. Your reported findings vilify obese people, by implying that it is desirable to shun them to maintain ones health. Obese individuals in western society already carry a huge social burden of great shame. I don't appreciate the implications of your findings one bit.

From a brief review of your website, I understand that you make heavy use of mathematical models to support your conclusions. The current state of the economy should be much more than enough to demonstrate to you that the maxim "lies, damn lies, and statistics" has never been so relevant. You're a sociologist - get out of your lab, your ivory tower, and talk to people on the ground, for G-d's sake.

It will be interesting to see if Dr. Christakis responds to my email and what he has to say. If I do get a response, I will report the gist of it.

Today, I got a lecture from Judith about my poor pancreas, which really cares that my blood glucose levels are too high, and therefore futilely keeps pumping out insulin to try and reduce it (high blood glucose levels are toxic to the body's cells). Alas, due to insulin resistance, the cells in my body (primarily in my liver, skeletal and cardiac muscle and adipose tissue) that routinely take up glucose in response to insulin are not responding to the insulin because THEY JUST CAN'T TAKE IT ANYMORE. They are saying to the increased levels of insulin that keep trying to bind to the receptors on my body's cells, "get lost, we're sick of you already!" (by decreasing or "downregulating" the number of insulin receptors on their surfaces). They've shut the door in the insulin's face. But my poor pancreas just can't hear what the liver and muscle cells are saying, and can't tell that they've rejected the insulin that it works so hard to make. So it keeps churning out insulin. Eventually, if I continue to ingest too much sugar, the cells in my pancreas that manufacture the insulin (called beta cells) will just get tired and wear out, like a treadmill that has been left on constantly for months. Then my pancreas will never make its own insulin again (I think - I have to look into this), and my blood glucose will shoot up to levels that will eventually kill my organs and me, unless I inject synthetic insulin (as do most people being treated for type 2 diabetes). According to my blood work, my insulin levels have always been in the normal range. However, this is not conclusive evidence that I am not insulin resistant.

My question is, is Judith an alarmist? If one is clinically defined as obese, does it necessarily mean that one is insulin resistant? If I maintain my weight (my BMI is roughly 36, I am not morbidly obese), do regular moderate exercise, watch what I eat and monitor my glucose levels by getting my blood tested every 6 months or so, will I necessarily become diabetic? I eat a lot of healthy foods - lean protein, fruits and vegetables, whole grains, but I also need my chocolate. Is this an attempt to scare me straight? How much is Judith's concern motivated by actual scientific evidence and how much is it motivated by cultural bias against obesity, which all of us carry around with us, just like unwanted extra pounds? Time will tell. I guess the clock is ticking for me.

Scientists like Harvard Medical School's Bruce Spiegelman would like to figure out a way to help us do just that! Spiegelman, who studies mammalian embryonic fat cell development, is conducting research to understand the adipogenic (i.e. how adipose, or fat cells arise) lineage. One key question that Dr. Spiegelman and his group seek to address is how white and brown fat cell fates are determined.

To answer this question, Dr. Spiegelman's group performed a screen for molecular regulators including transcription factors that may be unique to either brown or white fat cells. The researchers identified a transcriptional co-regulator called PRDM16, which is expressed exclusively in brown fat cells. When the investigators studied the effect of increasing PRDM16 expression in white fat cell precursors in culture, they observed that the overall gene expression profile was distinctly that of brown fat cells. Then, they made transgenic mice that selectively overexpressed PRDM16 in white fat cells, and found that pockets of brown fat cells grew in the white fat cell depots. Similar results are obtained when mice are exposed to low temperatures for extended periods of time, or by prolonged exposure to b-adrenergic stimulation. Together, these results suggest that PRDM16 is an excellent candidate for a master molecular switch that can convert white fat cells into brown fat cells. However, since "suggestion" is not proof, the researchers performed additional experiments to investigate this.

To their surprise, the scientists found that when PRDM16 expression is inhibited in primary brown fat cells in culture, they differentiated not into white fat cells, but into myotubes, or skeletal muscle cells! This result suggested that brown and white fat cells did not come from one common progenitor cell type. Instead, they may in fact be two entirely separate lineages. Additional experiments provided strong evidence for this.

So where do these results leave Bruce Spiegelman and his group? The data showing that white fat cells can become brown fat cells by overexpression of PRDM16 still hold promise for therapy. Spiegelman aspires to make this type of therapy a reality, by employing a transplant model. White fat cells, which are easily obtained by liposuction, can be engineered to express PRDM16, and transplanted back into the original fat cell donor. These experiments are currently being performed in mice.

Important questions remain. For example, how many cells would be needed for the procedure to succeed, and how the body would respond to the engineered cells? Could these engineered "brown" fat cells lead to positive results by reducing obesity and restoring energy balance, or could there be negative effects? Bruce Spiegelman as well as many people suffering from obesity are sincerely hoping for the former.

This entry is based on a talk given by Dr. Spiegelman on Thursday, May 15, 2008 at the New York Academy of Sciences. Dr. Spiegelman was a featured speaker at the NYAS Conference on Integrative Physiology.

The thing is - they're not really taking a drug.

Placebos are actually fake drugs that are used to make people believe that the drug will cure them. In many cases, by simply thinking they will be cured of a certain aliment - the patients cure themselves. The placebos themselves are usually either sugar pills or salt pills, but they really could be made of anything under the sun.

Today, placebos are used in almost every clinical study, and they are marred with controversy. While some people believe the placebo effect to be a true concept, there are many others that have conducted research that proves otherwise. In May of 2001, a group of researchers from the University of Copenhagen conducted an experiment in which they attempted to measure the effectiveness of the placebo effect. The researchers noticed that the participants in the group who were not given any treatment healed at relatively the same rates as the patients who were given the placebo treatment. They did, however, find that the placebos worked well when it came to pain relief.

With all of these arguments against it, could the placebo effect truly be real? Up until now, there has not been a decent explanation for how positive expectations translate to pain relief or an alleviation of symptoms. A man named Tor Wager and his research team has recently made a breakthrough at Columbia University. To test out the placebo effect, he and his group of researches gathered participants and then separated them accordingly for the experiment.

On all groups, he applied a hot stimulus (sometimes painfully hot) to the forearms of the participants. He informed some of the participants that the placebo cream to be applied was a pain reliever, while he told others that the cream did nothing to relieve pain.

Then, using a positron emission tomography, or a PET scan, Wager and his team measured the brain activity of all of the participants. It was then that Wager noticed that the brains of all of the people in the placebo group released high levels of opioids, a natural painkiller, proving the placebo effect to be true. What does this mean for the medical world? Details are still sketchy, but as more and more research is conducted on the placebo effect, psychology just may be the science used to cure a person's aliments. Who knows, before you know it, we may just be curing ourselves with our minds!

- Katrina Boston, intern at Science Friday/TalkingScience

He came up with Mendelian genetics, which basically states that organisms inherit traits that are either dominant or recessive. The dominant traits are always expressed, while the recessive traits are only expressed when paired with another recessive allele. Each parent donates either a dominant or recessive allele to the offspring. There can be multiple alleles for one specific trait. Now, as I stated earlier, genetics are not quite as simple as this. There are other ways of inheriting certain traits. What Mendel didn't know was that certain traits could actually blend together, for example, when it comes to the color of a flower, sometimes the dominant and recessive allele will blend together when they are paired with each other. This is called Incomplete Dominance.

There are also several other types of inheritance that Mendel was not able to account for simply because he only dealt with pea plants and because the technology at the time did not allow for much in-depth analysis of genetics. So, what can we conclude from this? Our 9th grade living environment teachers have lied to us! In reality, Mendelian genetics only work for a select group of traits! Traits such as being able to roll one's tongue, having mid-digit hair, and having a cow lick, are all examples of Mendelian genetics. But this is only a minuscule part of actual genetics. The occurrence of linked genes also shows that Mendel was not 100% correct in his theory. To Mendel, traits were expressed based on the probability of certain alleles occurring with each other. This probability is usually random, but we can predict which alleles will be expressed with other alleles by using a punnett square. However, in reality you cannot actually predict the exact number of which alleles are expressed because of linked genes. Linked genes are genes that are inherited together because they are located on the same chromosome.

Because of linked genes, red heads are usually born with freckles, and blonds are usually born with blue eyes since the genes are located on the same chromosome. So, what can we learn from all of this? Don't believe your 9th grade biology teachers, kids! You'll only find out that you're being lied to as you continue your education!

The United Nations and Council of Europe recently held a panel to discuss issues surrounding organ trafficking and policies to shut down heartless brokers of the underground market. The business of organ tourism and trafficking is a booming, billion-dollar cash business that exploits the world’s poor. The market’s inventory comes from a variety of sources: some organs are extracted from murdered prisoners in China, others come from people who are desperate enough to sell their organs to support their families or pay a dowry, and still more come thieving doctors. Individual accounts are horrifying—-respected journalists have reported stories about mothers who sell their children’s organs, doctors in New Delhi who deceive their patients by falsely claiming that the patient has an illness which calls for the removal of a kidney, and beggars who sell body parts in order to become more effective.

The panel at the UN discussed free markets and whether one should have the right to make the decision to sell what is rightly theirs. Each panelist opposed this idea, agreeing with Dr. Caplan, who noted early in the discussion that those who sell their organs do not do so out of choice so much as out of desperation and exploitation. Dr. Diflo added that the economic consequences of selling an organ actually tends to worsen both the economic and health conditions of the seller in the long run. He cited a study in India where the average yearly salary of donors was reduced by an average of 30% and the health of most donors declined quickly after their operation.

People who are reduced to selling an organ are not the only ones who are desperate, of course. Two thirds of those on the waiting list to receive an organ have a slim chance of getting one in time. The line is deathly long and the options are limited:

Option 1. Take part in the underground market that exploits the world’s poor by buying or stealing their organs. The black market is now accessible via Google, which makes it fairly easy to take part in this option. It is risky, however, as black market organs are often not tested for diseases, and the “donated” organ, perhaps from a murdered Chinese prisoner, could be rotting from a nasty disease. Additionally, Maude de Boer-Buquichhio, Secretary General of the Council of Europe, stated that international organizations are considering new policies that will criminalize clients of trafficked organs.

Option 2. Continue to wait, and hope that it doesn’t take too long to get your organ in a legitimate manner. Sites such as MatchingDonors.com can help, and some have even had success by posting requests on Craigslist.

For more information about organ harvesting, or to get involved, see Doctors Against Forced Organ Harvesting at DAFOH.

A vast majority of Indians living in rural areas do not have reliable access to electricity or petroleum-based fuel, but this doesn't stop them from cooking up feasts of delicious dishes.

60-80% of rural residents use cow dung as their principle source of cooking fuel. It's a cheap and fairly simple process that consists of collecting the dung (called "gobar" in Hindi), squishing it into patties, and leaving it to bake under the scorching Indian sun. Once the patty is dry, it can be used under the stove to make possible those scrumptious curries, samosas, and chai.

For those unaccustomed to this creative alternative source of energy, the mere idea of dung near food may cause queasiness and stomach upset. Luckily, many people on the subcontinent have discovered that cow urine can be used to relieve the symptoms of an upset gut. For example, to cure serious constipation, a dose of 10-40ml of filtered cow urine should do the trick. This may also help to kill worms and other parasites that your dinner may have left in your belly. Some even claim that cow urine is the answer to AIDS, cancer, and kidney problems. Holy cow indeed!

* A disclaimer: I am simply reporting the news and have never used cow urine. Pursue medical alternatives at your own risk.

With about 550 million people in poverty, it's safe to say that a lot of Indians don't have much in the bank-- but that's about to change. Soon, Indians will have the opportunity to bank their babies' umbilical cords for free, which is priceless when it comes to health.

While the Bush administration is limiting stem cell research at home, India is opening their arms to welcome partnerships with some of the best brains in America. Being from the United States, I would lower my voice a bit when telling you: these brilliant, young, liberal scientists who are pioneering new stem cell research in India are...Canadians. Eh? Yes, Canadians. They’ve come out on top again.

Following in the footsteps of Canada ’s James Till and Ernest McCulloch who proved the existence of stem cells in the 1960s, Dr. Jeffrey Turner and Dr. J. E. Davies are setting high standards in the latest mesenchymal stem cell technologies. Ontarian Premier Dalton McGuinty is also doing his part as head of the Ministry of Research and Innovation (MRI). Together, these three visionaries hope to start a global trend when it comes to big philanthropy on a cellular level.

"What we see as a tremendous resource of life-giving cells is being discarded as medical waste everyday," remarks Dr. Turner, CEO of Tissue Regeneration Therapeutics (TRT). Dr. Turner is joined by Dr. Davies (TRT President) and McGuinty in Mumbai to partner with Indian officials in developing a national policy on the deployment of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) in India. They plan to facilitate the creation of a national MSC bank that will be accessible to all Indians, free of charge, by summer 2009.

Instead of throwing the umbilical cord in the wastebasket, parents will have the opportunity to donate their newborn's cord to a national MSC bank where the cord perivascular cells (HUCPVCs) will be extracted and cryogenically preserved in nitrogen at -200 degrees for 15 to 20 years. In return for the donation, the parents will have free access to stem cell treatment on a later basis, should their child become sick.

"It is a cost-effective treatment on a massive scale," Dr. Turner emphasizes. Hundreds of thousands suffer from auto-immune disorders that can be treated with the use of MSCs. In India, this is especially relevant as there has been a sharp rise in health-related issues along with the rapid growth in the subcontinent's development. Over the past 10 years, for example, India has significantly improved the quality of public sanitation. While this is clearly a positive development, scientists have noticed that the quick change has taken its toll on the immune systems of Indians. "An Indian’s immune system is insulted with an incredible number of bacteria every day, beginning with the day they are born. Thus, they develop an iron-strong immune system. As India adopts higher standards of cleanliness and public sanitation, the immune system becomes weaker, leaving individuals at risk of developing auto-immune disorders, such as Crohn's disease," states Dr. Turner.

Luckily, MSCs can regenerate into 200 types of tissues, thus creating a solution for many of these disorders. While the stem cell therapy may not be a cure-all, it will almost certainly reduce the symptoms and flare-ups that can be debilitating to patients.

Not only are human umbilical cords an ethical source of MSCs, they are also a much denser source than bone marrow, the current gold standard. "Bone marrow is a very rich cellular smorgasbord that gives rise to a wide variety of different cells, including MSCs," explains Dr. Turner," Yet in adults, the number of MSCs is small: about 1 in 100,000. So if you needed a billion MSCs, it would be possible to use bone marrow but it is a completely impractical source." With the emerging MSC bank, the standard for stem cell extractions could very well shift from bone marrow to umbilical cords. It's no wonder that Indian officials have declared MSC research and technology a "national priority." Will the USA follow suit or will India become another place that Americans visit as medical tourists? We’ll keep you posted on policy changes and flight deals to Mumbai.

For more information, visit http://www.tissue-regeneration.com

With about 550 million people in poverty, it's safe to say that a lot of Indians don't have much in the bank-- but that's about to change. Soon, Indians will have the opportunity to bank their babies' umbilical cords, which is priceless when it comes to health.

While the Bush administration is limiting stem cell research at home, India is opening their arms to welcome partnerships with some of the best brains in America. Being from the United States, I would lower my voice a bit when telling you: these hot scientists who are pioneering new stem cell research in India are...Canadians. Eh? Yes, Canadians.

Keep an eye out for the next post to find out how umbilical cords are likely to solve enormous health problems that affect millions of people world-wide.