JADA Study Proves Fluoridation is Money down the Drain

RJ Note: This study raised my eyebrows. Fluoridated water doesn't reduce cavities? I wonder if the children studied in this research brushed and/or flossed their teeth. Was fluoridation the only variable? Hmmm. At any rate, it seems like fluoridated water has been the norm for something like 40 years or so.

/PRNewswire/ -- Children's cavity rates are similar whether water is fluoridated or not, according to data published in the July 2009 Journal of the American Dental Association by dentist J.V. Kumar of the NY State Health Department(1), reports NYSCOF.

In 2008, New York City spent approximately $24 million on water fluoridation ($5 million on fluoride chemicals)(1a). In 2010, NYC's fluoride chemicals will cost $9 million(1b).

Fluoride in water at "optimal" levels (0.7 - 1.2 mg/L) is supposed to reduce tooth decay without creating excessive fluorosis (fluoride-discolored and/or damaged teeth). Yet cavities are rampant in NY's fluoridated populations(1c).

Attempting to prove that fluorosed teeth have fewer cavities, Kumar uses 1986-1987 National Institute of Dental Research (NIDR) data which, upon analysis, shows that 7- to 17-year-olds have similar cavity rates in their permanent teeth whether their water supply is fluoridated or not (Table 1).

In 1990, using the same NIDR data, Dr. John Yiamouyiannis published equally surprising results in a peer-reviewed journal. He concluded, "No statistically significant differences were found in the decay rates of permanent teeth or the percentages of decay-free children in the F [fluoridated], NF [non-fluoridated], and PF [partially fluoridated] areas."(2).

Kumar divided children into four groups based on their community's water fluoride levels:

Less than 0.3 mg/L where 55.5% had cavities
From 0.3 to 0.7 mg/L where 54.6% had cavities
Optimal 0.7 to 1.2 mg/L where 54.4% had cavities
Over 1.2 mg/L where 56.4% had cavities


"Dr. Kumar's published data exposes more evidence that fluoridation doesn't reduce tooth decay," says attorney Paul Beeber, President, New York State Coalition Opposed to Fluoridation.

"It's criminal to waste taxpayers' money on fluoridation, while exposing entire populations unnecessarily to fluoride's health risks, especially when local and state governments are attempting to balance budgets by cutting essential services," says Beeber.

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.artsacrossgeorgia.com
Arts Across Georgia

Why we long to look and look too long

A 19th-century etiquette guide had this to say to readers about staring: “It is a mark of ill-breeding, and rightly gives offense.” The history of staring is, in fact, filled with such admonitions and cautionary tales, from the myth of Medusa, who turned men to stone with her stare, to the yanking away of bug-eyed children by their mortified mothers.

“We stare at what interests us. We stare to make the unknown known, to make sense of the unexpected,” says Professor of Women’s Studies Rosemarie Garland-Thomson, a cultural critic and pioneering researcher in disability studies whose recently released book “Staring: How We Look” explores the myriad causes of gaping, gawking and prolonged gazing.

She analyzes the interaction of the starer and the “staree” – a term Garland-Thomson coined.

Beginning with why we stare (it’s a response to novelty, which captures our attention and arouses our interest, as well as prompting a dopamine rush) and the fact that staring is universal, crossing cultures, countries and centuries, Garland-Thomson moves into the experience of staring, the various types of staring and the ethics of staring.

“Because we both crave and dread unpredictable sights, staring encounters are fraught with anxious contradiction,” she writes.

Each of us has had the experience of being both a starer and a staree. Staring can be a show of dominance, a sign of flirtation, or an instinctual reaction to a sight that is shocking, frightening, confusing or unexpected.

For people who are visually different — such as Garland-Thomson herself, who was born with a congenitally amputated arm — the fact that they frequently will experience being a staree is a given: especially if their disability affects a body site that “inherently draws more attention” because it carries significant cultural meaning, such as faces, hands, breasts or being of greater or lesser size than average.

“Staring is a natural impulse but often a social blunder,” she says.

The staree, however, is not powerless in the staring interaction, posits Garland-Thomson. Many of the “starable” people she interviewed and included in the book have devised ways to command control of the staring encounter. For example, Kevin Connolly, who was born legless, became a traveling documentary photographer, taking photos of people’s reactions when they saw him.

The staring may even culminate in a conversation in which the staree tells the starer how they came to be different, turning the stare into an opportunity for education or for turning sympathy to empathy, especially activism.

Children whose arms had been amputated by machete in the Sierra Leone civil war, for instance, became potent living symbols of the war’s brutality, inspiring the various factions to work together and raising charitable funds around the world. Models who have undergone mastectomies due to breast cancer have posed topless on magazine covers, daring viewers not to look away from their scar.

And the last step, she says, depends on the starers’ receptiveness. “If their visual politics of deliberately structured self-disclosure succeeds, it can create a sense of obligation that primes people to act in new ways: to vote differently, to spend money differently, to build the world differently, to treat people differently and to look at people differently.”

From Emory Report

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.artsacrossgeorgia.com
Arts Across Georgia

Drinking Diet Soda May Reduce the Risk of Forming Kidney Stones

RJ Note: Guess this study indicates I can now drink some diet sodas without flinching. Of course, this doesn't mean I'll give up that wonderful refreshing taste of water. As my mam used to say- everything in moderation.

/PRNewswire / -- Patients with stone disease could benefit from drinking diet soda. New research from the University of California, San Francisco suggests that the citrate and malate content in commonly consumed sodas may be sufficient to inhibit the development of calcium stones. The study was presented at the 104th Annual Scientific Meeting of the American Urological Association (AUA).

Increased alkalinity is proven to augment citraturia, a known factor for calcium stones. Malate increases the amount of alkali delivered. Researchers measured the citrate and malate content of 15 popular diet sodas. The researchers found that Diet Sunkist Orange contained the greatest amount of total alkali and Diet 7-Up had the greatest amount of citrate as alkali.

"This study by no means suggests that patients with recurrent kidney stones should trade in their water bottles for soda cans," said Anthony Y. Smith, MD, an AUA spokesman. "However, this study suggests instead that patients with stone disease who do not drink soda may benefit from moderate consumption."

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook

Published Study Shows Brain Exercises Improve Memory and Attention - And People Notice

/PRNewswire/ -- Study results to be published in the April 4, 2009 edition of the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society are the first to show definitively that computerized brain exercises can improve memory and attention in older adults. An advance copy of the breakthrough study led by researchers from the University of Southern California and the Mayo Clinic has been released online.

A total of 487 healthy adults over the age of 65 participated in the randomized controlled trial, called the IMPACT Study. Half were assigned to a group that trained on a brain fitness software program for a total of 40 hours over the course of 8 weeks. The other half spent an equal amount of time learning from educational lectures on the computer followed by quizzes.

The study found that participants who trained on the software, The Brain Fitness Program(TM) from Posit Science(R), more than doubled their processing speed, with an average increase of 131%. They also saw gains on standard measures of memory and attention of 10 years, on average. These changes were big enough that participants reported significant improvements in every day activities (such as remembering names or understanding conversations in noisy restaurants). The gains of the brain exercise group were clinically significant; the gains of the lecture group were significantly smaller and not clinically significant.

The Brain Fitness Program was developed by a global team of neuroscientists for Posit Science. It consists of six exercises done on a computer. The product is based on the science of brain plasticity - the ability of the brain to change and form new pathways in response to the right stimulation delivered in the right way.

Marlene Allen, aged 75, of Mill Valley, California participated in the brain exercise half of the study. "Now I don't have to write down shopping lists. I remember what I need at the store," Ms. Allen said. "And I almost never walk into a room and forget why anymore."

While some earlier studies have shown older adults get better at exercises that they practice, this study goes two steps further. The improvements at the exercises resulted in gains in standard measures of memory and attention and people noticed improvements in their every day activities.

"The changes we saw in the experimental group were remarkable - and significantly larger than the gains in the control group," said Liz Zelinski, PhD, a principal investigator for the study from the University of Southern California. "From a researcher's point of view, this was very impressive because people got better at the tasks trained, those improvements generalized to standardized measures of memory and people noticed improvements in their lives. What this means is that cognitive decline is no longer an inevitable part of aging. Doing properly designed cognitive activities can enhance our abilities as we age."

"We saw gains of 4% in memory scores in the brain exercise group," said Glenn Smith, PhD, the study's principal investigator from the Mayo Clinic. "That may not sound like much, but it is about what an older person normally loses in a 10 year period. The lectures group saw about a 2% gain, which may sound like they did half as well; however, we look at memory on a curve, not a straight line, and a 2% gain is not something you are apt to notice in your life."

"This study has profound personal and public implications for aging baby boomers and their parents," said Joe Coughlin, PhD, Director of the AgeLab at the Massachusetts Institute Technology. "This means boomers may now have tools for a future that is not their grandfather's old age. It also impacts most aspects of independent living - from aging-in-place to transportation to all the great and little things that we call life. This is big news for aging and for all of us."

The IMPACT study is the largest study ever of a brain fitness program that is available to the public and the first published in a medical journal to show improvements in memory and attention.

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page

Quick! Give me Viagra for my Heart!

A new study on Viagra and a potential future indication of helping to protect the heart has just been released. The Johns Hopkins study has promising benefits in mice hearts. Wonder what it will do for humans? Or will it just be for men's hearts? Time will tell.

The full research details can be found in the January 5th edition of Journal of Clinical Investigation.

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
Community News You Can Use
Fayetteville, Peachtree City, Tyrone
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page

Survey: College Students Say Illicit Use of ADHD Drugs Helps Their Ability To Study

Undergraduates who illegally use ADHD medication without a prescription say it’s worth the risk for one key benefit: enhancing their ability to study.

In a new study led by researchers from Duke University’s Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, more than 5 percent of students surveyed reported using ADHD medication without a prescription during the past six months. Nine percent reported doing this since beginning college.

The Web-based survey of 3,407 students was taken in spring 2007 at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro and at Duke. Ninety percent of respondents who reported using the medication without a prescription during the past six months said enhancing the ability to study was the reason they most often took stimulant drugs such as Ritalin, Adderall and Concerta for nonmedical purposes. And nearly 90 percent of these students felt it was effective in helping them study.

Nonacademic motives, such as “to get high,” were far less common.

Using ADHD medication without a prescription was more common among students
who reported more frequent use of alcohol and other substances during the past six months. However, it was also more likely to occur among students who felt that concentration and attention was a problem for them. In fact, many of the students reporting illicit use had attention difficulties similar to students who reported a current diagnosis of ADHD.

“Students without prescriptions use ADHD medication primarily to enhance academic performance and may do so to ameliorate attention problems that they experience as undermining their academic success,” according to the study, which appears in the online edition of the Journal of Attention Disorders. “Students perceived non-medical use to be beneficial despite frequent reports of adverse reactions.”

Side effects reported by students included 23.9 percent of respondents saying illicit ADHD medication “always” reduced their appetite, while 15.6 percent said the drugs “always” made it difficult to sleep. More than 7 percent reported that the drugs “always” made them irritable.

Despite the side effects, more than 70 percent of students believed that using ADHD medication without a prescription had been positive for them. More than 70 percent said they “never” worried about becoming addicted to the medication.

The research was led by David Rabiner, associate research professor and director of undergraduate studies in the Department of Psychology and Neuroscience at Duke. Other researchers on the project were from Duke, the University of North Carolina at Greensboro and the University of Michigan.

The researchers noted that several past studies have shown more than 30 percent of students who illegally used ADHD medication did so to “get high,” but only 2.2 percent of respondents in this survey said they frequently used illicit ADHD medication for that purpose.

“Learning about the benefits that students perceive from nonmedical ADHD medication use may inform efforts to prevent this behavior,” Rabiner said.

This study and others like it have shown that the practice was more common at colleges and universities with tougher admission standards. These studies also revealed that most students using illicit ADHD medication tended to be white, belong to a fraternity or sorority, have lower GPAs and engage in substance use and other risky behaviors.

The authors of this study -- “Motives and Perceived Consequences of Nonmedical ADHD Medication Use by College Students: Are Students Treating Themselves for Attention Problems?” -- said the findings point to a need for further study of the academic, social and biomedical consequences of illicit ADHD medication use among college students.

“A limitation of this study is that we only learned how students believe using ADHD medication affects them,” said Rick Hoyle, a psychology professor at Duke. “How students are actually affected -- whether it truly helps them do better academically or whether it contributes to the use of other substances -- cannot be determined from our results. This would require following students across college and learning whether nonmedical ADHD medication predicts any of these other outcomes.”

The other authors of the study were E. Jane Costello, professor of medical psychology in the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Duke University Medical Center; H. Scott Swartzwelder, clinical professor of psychiatry and psychology/neuroscience at Duke; Arthur Anastopoulos, a psychology professor and director of the ADHD clinic at UNC-Greensboro; and Sean Esteban McCabe, research associate professor at the Substance Abuse Research Center and Institute for Research on Women and Gender at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

The study was funded by a grant from the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

-----

www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page

Largest Study of Granite Countertops Finds No Stones That Pose Health Threat

RJ Note: It seems like this subject keeps coming up.

/PRNewswire/ -- The most comprehensive scientific study of health threats from granite countertops did not find a single stone slab that poses a health risk. Quantities of radon and radiation emitted by stones included in the analysis all fell well below average background levels commonly found in the United States.

The scientists conducted more than 400 tests of 115 different varieties of granite countertops, including stones cited in media reports as being potentially problematic. The stones tested include types of granite that comprise approximately 80 percent of the annual U.S. market share for granite countertops, based on the most recent market data available. The study specifically included types of granite most commonly used in countertops in the United States and more exotic stones that represent a tiny share of the market. The study found:

-- Not one stone slab contributed to radon levels that even reached the average U.S. outdoor radon concentration of 0.4 picocuries per liter -- one-tenth the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency level for remedial action within a home. The stone slabs found to emit at higher levels -- though still well below average outdoor background levels -- represent a tiny share of the U.S. market for granite countertops, less than 1 percent of sales.

-- Not a single stone emitted radiation levels that even approached a radiation dose of 0.3 milliSievert per year (mSv/year), the level determined by the European Commission to be negligible for human health risk; the U.S. has no such standard. However, this European standard is just 30 percent of the 1 milliSievert per year annual dose limit recommended for the general public by the National Council for Radiation Protection & Measurements.

Unlike some media reports of questionable scientific accuracy, this study evaluated a large variety of stones and used a number of complementary, well established scientific techniques to assess the exposures that people could have to radon and radiation in real-world environments and to determine whether the presence of these specific stones could compromise consumer health.

"The study showed that you are more likely to have a fatal fall from bed than to develop a health problem related to the most common granite countertops," said Dr. John F. McCarthy, president of Environmental Health & Engineering, the independent environmental testing firm that conducted the study. "Stones were selected for the study based on their prevalence of use as countertops and media reports suggesting specific types of granite pose health risk.

"Our research program was designed to assess exposure and risk to individuals in real world conditions. The scenarios that we evaluated were selected to ensure that they represent what people will really encounter in U.S. homes," McCarthy said. "Our research shows that some of the reports published by the media significantly exaggerate risk because they report raw data without considering real-world conditions as commonly defined by the scientific community. It is very important to put the results of these product evaluations into a context that is meaningful for the consumer."

Study findings are consistent with an earlier review of the scientific literature, which assessed results from every identified study of radon emissions from granite published in the scientific literature to evaluate potential exposures in homes.

The new study is being submitted for peer review and publication in a scientific journal, a process that can take several months.

"Our study included detailed mapping of radiation emitted from various stones that had areas that we identified as being elevated above levels for typical granite countertop material. We found that it's easy to get what appear to be high readings of radon or radiation from a small fraction of granite countertops, but those readings do not reflect the actual risk to consumers because they do not assess the real exposure, only isolated, extreme measurements," McCarthy said. "As with any other type of environmental measurement, assessing the real risk to consumers must take into account more than isolated readings from small spots on a countertop. It must reflect real- world exposure scenarios and be interpreted using well established principles of environmental health."

The study also concluded:

-- Radon levels associated with emissions from granite countertops in homes are low in comparison to typical background levels of radon exposure. In other words, natural stone is a minor contributor to concentrations of radon gas within homes. These findings are consistent with an earlier review of the scientific literature that EH&E performed.

-- Absorbed dose associated with radiation emissions for all of the slabs tested are well below health-protective guidelines, including the exemption limit of 0.3 mSv per year recommended by the European Commission. The United States has yet to establish an exemption level for building products based on radioactivity to our knowledge.

-- A portion of stones used as countertops may contain limited areas that are enriched in radioactive materials relative to the remainder of the slab. The areas of enrichment in the stones evaluated for this study make up a small proportion of the stone, on the order of less than 10 percent of the surface area. Detailed measurements of these enriched areas showed that they make a negligible contribution to potential doses of ionizing radiation.

-- Assessing exposure to radon and radiation requires accounting for duration and frequency of exposure, not just absolute magnitude. Additionally, careful consideration of several key parameters is warranted. For radon, measurements of radon flux from a countertop must account for variability across the countertop surface, the effect of any backing material on the stone, and diffusion through the slab. It is critical that ventilation is accounted for when estimating radon concentrations in indoor air from measurements of radon emissions from stones. For radiation, distance and geometry must be incorporated into dose assessments.

-- While significant variability was observed across stone types, the stones at the lower end of radon emissions were found to account for the vast majority of sales and also exhibited little variability among slabs. The varieties of granite countertop that exhibited the greatest variability of radon flux among slabs represent a small fraction of the U.S. market.

"You can never rule out anything, but [the likelihood of a granite countertop posing any health risk] is as close to zero as you could hope to get about a risk in your life based on what I know," said David Ropeik, risk consultant and author of the book "Risk." "Cumulatively, we have a huge body of evidence that suggests that this particular risk from granite is negligible."

Marble Institute of America President Guido Gliori said, "This study once again proves that granite countertops do not pose the risk that some exaggerated media reports would suggest. While some organizations that benefit financially from consumer concerns about granite attempt to spread panic, this study was designed to withstand the closest scientific scrutiny and should reassure the public about granite countertops."

In the absence of comprehensive, independent scientific analysis of granite countertops, the Marble Institute financed the study as part of its continuing effort to define a standard test protocol to assess radiation and radon emissions from different stones. The goal is to develop protocols for testing granite in the home, in showrooms or fabrication shops and at the quarry. The fact that no single protocol exists has allowed individuals to make claims about granite countertops based on inconsistent and often incorrect tests, methodologies or analyses.

The MIA is working with the scientific community to develop a single, acceptable standard for the proper testing of granite countertops and other granite building material. Work on the standard will involve scientists and several independent and governmental agencies.

-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page