newspower.eu

Sat May 19, 2012 4:16pm EDT

(Reuters) – A Georgia woman fighting a flesh-eating bacterial infection was in critical condition at Augusta Hospital on Saturday, a hospital spokeswoman said.

The spokeswoman said she could not comment on whether Aimee Copeland had undergone surgery to remove her hands and right foot, amputations that Copeland’s father had said were pending on Friday. Surgeons had amputated the 24-year-old’s left leg at the hip.

“All I can say is Aimee is still in critical condition,” hospital spokeswoman Barclay Bishop said.

Prayers and messages of support have poured in for Copeland on a Facebook page where her father, Andy Copeland, has chronicled her struggle.

There were no updates on the site on Saturday. The Atlanta Journal Constitution newspaper said the family had been overwhelmed by public interest and had asked for privacy.

Copeland suffered a huge gash in her leg in a zip-line accident and fell into the Little Tallapoosa River near Carrollton, Georgia, on May 1. She developed necrotizing fasciitis, a bacterial infection that destroys soft tissue.

Necrotizing or “flesh-eating” soft-tissue infections are a broad category of infections with many causes, although Group A Streptococcus is the most common culprit. Doctors blamed Copeland’s infection on the Aeromonos hydrophila bacteria, which are found in fresh or brackish water and may have entered the wound when she fell into the river.

With media attention focused on Copeland’s struggle, additional cases of necrotizing fasciitis have been reported in Georgia and South Carolina. Health experts say the disease is not communicable.

A 1996 report from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated there were 500 to 1,500 cases of necrotizing fasciitis annually in the United States, with about 20 percent of them fatal. The National Necrotizing Fasciitis Foundation says on its website that the case number estimate is probably low.

(Reporting By Jane Sutton; Editing by Greg McCune and Jackie Frank)

Share with others:

<!—->

The name alone sounds so encouraging: HDL, the “good cholesterol.” The more of it in your blood, the lower your risk of heart disease. So bringing up HDL levels has got to be good for health.

Or so the theory went.

Now, a new study that makes use of powerful databases of genetic information has found that raising HDL levels may not make any difference to heart disease risk. People who inherit genes that give them naturally higher HDL levels throughout life have no less heart disease than those who inherit genes that give them slightly lower levels. If HDL were protective, those with genes causing higher levels should have had less heart disease.

Researchers not associated with the study, published online Wednesday in The Lancet, found the results compelling and disturbing. Companies are actively developing and testing drugs that raise HDL, although three recent studies of such treatments have failed. And patients with low HDL levels are often told to try to raise them by exercising or dieting or even by taking niacin, a drug that raised HDL but failed to lower heart disease risk in a recent clinical trial.

“I’d say the HDL hypothesis is on the ropes right now,” said James A. de Lemos, a University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center professor of medicine who was not involved in the study.

Michael Lauer, director of the division of cardiovascular sciences at the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, agreed. “The current study tells us that, when it comes to HDL, we should seriously consider going back to the drawing board — in this case meaning back to the laboratory,” said Dr. Lauer, who also was not connected to the research. “We need to encourage basic laboratory scientists to figure out where HDL fits in the puzzle — just what exactly is it a marker for?”

But Steven Nissen, the Cleveland Clinic’s chairman of cardiovascular medicine, who is helping conduct studies of HDL-raising drugs, said he remained hopeful. HDL is complex, he said, and it is possible that some types of HDL molecules might in fact protect against heart disease. “I am an optimist,” Dr. Nissen said.

The study’s authors emphasize that they are not questioning the well-documented finding that higher HDL levels are associated with lower heart disease risk. But the relationship may not be causative. High HDL levels may be a sign that something else is going on that makes heart disease less likely. But HDL itself may not be directly reducing risk.

<!–

–>

Sat May 19, 2012 4:16pm EDT

(Reuters) – A Georgia woman fighting a flesh-eating bacterial infection was in critical condition at Augusta Hospital on Saturday, a hospital spokeswoman said.

The spokeswoman said she could not comment on whether Aimee Copeland had undergone surgery to remove her hands and right foot, amputations that Copeland’s father had said were pending on Friday. Surgeons had amputated the 24-year-old’s left leg at the hip.

“All I can say is Aimee is still in critical condition,” hospital spokeswoman Barclay Bishop said.

Prayers and messages of support have poured in for Copeland on a Facebook page where her father, Andy Copeland, has chronicled her struggle.

There were no updates on the site on Saturday. The Atlanta Journal Constitution newspaper said the family had been overwhelmed by public interest and had asked for privacy.

Copeland suffered a huge gash in her leg in a zip-line accident and fell into the Little Tallapoosa River near Carrollton, Georgia, on May 1. She developed necrotizing fasciitis, a bacterial infection that destroys soft tissue.

Necrotizing or “flesh-eating” soft-tissue infections are a broad category of infections with many causes, although Group A Streptococcus is the most common culprit. Doctors blamed Copeland’s infection on the Aeromonos hydrophila bacteria, which are found in fresh or brackish water and may have entered the wound when she fell into the river.

With media attention focused on Copeland’s struggle, additional cases of necrotizing fasciitis have been reported in Georgia and South Carolina. Health experts say the disease is not communicable.

A 1996 report from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated there were 500 to 1,500 cases of necrotizing fasciitis annually in the United States, with about 20 percent of them fatal. The National Necrotizing Fasciitis Foundation says on its website that the case number estimate is probably low.

(Reporting By Jane Sutton; Editing by Greg McCune and Jackie Frank)

The Center for Disease Control (CDC) is now recommending all baby boomers receive a Hepatitis C test to determine if they have the deadly liver destroying disease. Anyone born between 1945 and 1965 falls into the “boomer” category. A simple one time blood test would put to rest the concern and perhaps save your life.

About 70% of those infected with this illness are baby boomers (2 million of the 3.2 million infected). Early detection could not only save sufferers years of misery, but perhaps 120,000 lives. For whatever reason, Hepatitis is considered an “unrecognized” health crisis even though it’s infecting millions of people. Even illnesses related to Hepatitis C (cirrhosis of the liver, liver cancer) take 15,000 lives a year.

From 1999 to 2007 the spread of the disease doubled in size. In recent years, new discoveries have been made to help heal and defend the body, but early detection is a key response in stopping Hepatitis C.

Blood transfusions, prior to 1992

Until changes were made in 1992, to screen blood for various reasons, blood transfusions were mostly thought to be responsible for the spread of the Hepatitis C illness. So, if you received a blood transfusion prior to 1992 you might want to be checked just to make certain you don’t have this condition, waiting to raise its head in your health. 

The obvious ways in which you can contract it (via shared needles) isn’t the only possible culprit.  Baby boomers represent a large number of people in our society today, hence the reason why they are probably the most like to have this illness.  To put it into perspective about 17,000 infections occur annually and, of those infected, about 3% are baby boomers. While everyone with the infection will not seek treatment, they may see their condition subside while still experiencing a positive test result later. However, only about 25% of those infected are able to be treated without medicine. As you can see, the numbers quickly decline between those who don’t need treatment and can still survive the illness.

A “shared” illness

So where in the world is the spread of Hepatitis C coming from and what is the possible root-cause? Think about anything that touches the body and can spread or share our blood/body fluids: 

Tattoos 

Manicures/Pedicures 

Piercing

Razor blades 

Toothbrushes

Open wounds/sores 

Poor hygiene practices

It’s usually never the obvious things we think about (like sharing a needle with a drug addict) that becomes the culprit behind the spread of an illness but the everyday things we take for granted. Ignorance is bliss when it comes to understanding the when, where and why of Hepatitis C. While most think it could be a death sentence (which it could be if left untreated), the majority of us don’t realize that early detection can be a “life” sentence. So why not get tested now?

Testing

Unless you’re donating blood or having an annual physical, detecting Hepatitis C may be a challenge except through symptoms leading to its discovery. Whether you go to a Doc-in-the-Box or a local health care clinic, get tested!

Symptoms

Most of us would have no idea we’re infected with the illness, at all. Some of the symptoms could include:

*Fatigue

*Jaundice (yellowish) eyes and skin color/tone

*Belly pain

*Poor or loss of appetite

*Low or mild fever

While each of the above could also be related to something else, combined, they paint a picture we can’t ignore.

Quick Tips for Wellness: Ignorance isn’t something you can claim once you know better. Get tested now for Hepatitis C, especially if you’re a baby boomer.

Resources: http://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/HepTestingRecsPressRelease2012.html

Click on this link to see a slide show and learn more about Hepatitis C http://www.emedicinehealth.com/slideshow_hepatitis_pictures/article_em.htm

Quick Tips for Wellness ™ Copyright © 2012, All Rights Reserved

Follow me on Facebook Quick Tips for Wellness and Twitter @wellnesstips4u

COMMENTS ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here; comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its websites. Users must follow agreed-upon rules: Be civil, be clean, be on topic; don’t attack private individuals, other users or classes of people. Read the full rules here.
- Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the report violation link below it.

Editor’s Choice
Main Category: Pregnancy / Obstetrics
Also Included In: Obesity / Weight Loss / Fitness
Article Date: 19 May 2012 – 0:00 PDT

email to a friend   printer friendly   opinions  

<!– rate article

Patient / Public:

Healthcare Prof:



A study in BMJ reports that the risk for serious complications, such as pre-eclampsia, diabetes and premature birth can be safely reduced even in overweight and obese pregnant women by following a healthy calorie controlled diet during pregnancy.

Over half of the UK’s female population of reproductive ages is overweight or obese, and up to 40% of European and American women gain more than the recommended weight in pregnancy, which has been associated with numerous serious health problems. Health professionals believe that a woman’s pregnancy is the perfect time to discuss weight management, given that pregnant women are generally more motivated to make changes that benefit both themselves and their baby.

Research leader, Dr Shakila Thangaratinam from Queen Mary’s University of London assessed the impact of diet, exercise, or both on weight gain during pregnancy and any adverse effects on the expectant mother and their unborn baby by analyzing data from over 7,000 women obtained from 44 randomized controlled trials. The team accounted for the study’s designs and quality for minimum bias. 


They found that weight management interventions during pregnancy proved effective in reducing the mother’s weight gain, and that diets achieved the largest average weight loss of almost 4 kg in comparison with only 0.7 kg for exercise and 1 kg for a combination of both, diet and exercise. They also discovered that diet was the most effective option in preventing pregnancy complications, including pre-eclampsia, diabetes, high blood pressure and premature birth, although the researchers highlight the fact that the overall evidence rating for these significant results was classed as ‘low to very low’.

However, the findings did prove that interventions are indeed safe and have no adverse impact on the baby’s weight. The researchers conclude that dietary and lifestyle interventions in pregnancy improve outcomes for both mother and infant, but acknowledge that their study was subject to limitations in terms of the lack of data on risk factors, including age, ethnicity and socioeconomic status.

According to experts at London’s St Thomas Hospital in London, opinion in an associated editorial, the evidence to support any specific intervention is still insufficient. Although Lucilla Poston and Lucy Chappell agree that this study is “timely and welcome”, it fails to provide the necessary evidence required for the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) to re-evaluate the guidelines for weight management during pregnancy. Poston and Chappell refer to various ongoing trials that will provide a greater understanding of effective interventions in pregnant overweight and obese women

.

Written By Petra Rattue

Copyright: Medical News Today

Not to be reproduced without permission of Medical News Today

“Effects of interventions in pregnancy on maternal weight and obstetric outcomes: meta-analysis of randomised evidence”
S Thangaratinam, E Rogozińska,, K Jolly, S Glinkowski, T Roseboom, J W Tomlinson, MRC, R Kunz, B W Mol, A Coomarasamy, K S Khan
BMJ, May 2012, doi: 10.1136/bmj.e2088

Please use one of the following formats to cite this article in your essay, paper or report:

MLA

Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.

Privacy Policy |
Terms and Conditions

MediLexicon International Ltd
Bexhill-on-Sea, United Kingdom
MediLexicon International Ltd © 2004-2012 All rights reserved.
MNT (logo) is the registered EU trade mark of MediLexicon Int. Limited.

back to top | home |
privacy policy

MediLexicon International Ltd
Bexhill-on-Sea, United Kingdom
MediLexicon International Ltd © 2004-2012 All rights reserved.
MNT (logo) is the registered EU trade mark of MediLexicon Int. Limited.