The topic has been hotly debated in recent years; how often should women get a mammogram? And with all the conflicting information that is being published these days some women are more confused than ever about how to properly screen themselves for breast cancer.

The latest study to hit the web, saw researchers claiming that following the 2009 U.S. guidelines for mammography, which recommend being screened every two years instead of annually, can cause breast cancer to be missed by physicians.

This study was published right on the heels of a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine which claimed that mammograms were leading to the overdiagnosis of breast cancer, pointing out that nearly one-third of all patients, over 1 million women, received unnecessary treatment for tumors that would most likely not become life threatening.

The debate pits the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force against the American Cancer Society in their recommendations for women. Up until 2009 both teams agreed that screening should be conducted annuall,y but in their new guidelines published that year, the task force decided to change their recommendation to once every two years for women between the ages of 50 and 74. The Cancer Society stands by their recommendation of annual cancer screenings.

The latest study conducted by Dr. Elizabeth Arleo and a team of researchers found evidence that annual screening is still vitally important for women and that regular mammograms are responsible for detecting 20% of cancer cases. Arleo issued a statement to accompany her findings saying: “Our findings favor the American Cancer Society recommendations. Women over 40 should have annual mammograms. In my book there’s no confusion. I tell my patients, I tell my friends, and I tell my mother to get annual mammograms.” She went on to say that she hopes these finding will “quell some of the confusion” that has erupted of late.

The post New Study leaves women confused over mammograms appeared first on Happy Healthy Hub.

In recent years many parents and health officials alike have been drawing attention to the overdiagnosis of ADHD and the subsequent prescribing of medication, but a new study has taken a look at which children are most likely to be overdiagnosed.

The study, published this week in the journal “Pediatrics,” found that the children in the youngest third of their class are up to 50% more likely to be prescribed ADHD medication than their older peers. They attribute this in part to the fact that this demographic also tends to perform worse on standardized math and English tests, one of the things professionals look at when making a diagnosis.

This isn’t the first study to make a correlation between age and ADHD. A group of researchers from Canada reviewed medical records of about 1 million children aged 6-12 years old and found that the youngest males in their grade level were 30% more likely to be treated for ADHD and females were 70% more likely.

For the latest study, researchers in Iceland studied examined both test scores and medical records of 12,000 9-12 year olds. They discovered that 8% of the youngest third of the class were prescribed ADHD medication compared to only 5% or 6% of their older classmates. The discrepancy was most evident in the younger age category but was still prevalent as late as the 7^th grade. “Researchers always assumed that academic differences due to age would completely disappear once children reached high school, but we don’t really know,” said study co-author Sonia Hernandez-Diaz. She went on to say that: “Age should be considered when evaluating children for an ADHD diagnosis and a prescription of a stimulant such as Ritalin. Parents and teachers need to be aware that kids may just be action their age if they’re a year younger than some of their peers and are struggling a bit emotionally and academically.”

The post New Study: Younger kids more likely to be prescribed ADHD medication appeared first on Happy Healthy Hub.

According to a new study, almost one third of all tumors discovered in mammograms would not have led to illness and are leading to an overdiagnosis of breast cancer in over one million women in America alone.

The report goes on to say that it is the improvement in cancer treatment not increased screenings that has led to an increase in breast cancer survival rates. The study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine concluded that the screenings, which discover tumors when they are still extremely small, have led to and overdiagnosis on nearly 70,000 women each year and caused unnecessary financial and emotional hardship for the women by subjecting them to unneeded treatment. Study author Dr. H. Gilbert Welch, who is an epidemiology and biostatistics professor from Dartmouth College wrote: “Our study raises serious questions about the value of screening mammography. It clarifies that the benefit of mortality reduction is probably smaller, and the harm of overdiagnosis probably larger, than has been previously recognized.”

The study raises a larger issue regarding the increased technology available for cancer screening. The new equipment is able to detect very small groups of cancer cells that would probably never become dangerous, leaving doctors in unknown territory regarding when to treat and when to leave the cells alone.

Regardless of the study’s finding many doctors and health care professionals are accusing the authors of taking part in a campaign to reduce healthcare expenses by cutting back services to women. Dr. Daniel B. Kopans, who is a senior breast imager at Massachusetts General Hospital called the study “malicious nonsense,” and went on to say that: “It is time to stop blaming mammography and screening for ‘overdiagnosis’ and ‘overtreatment’ in an effort to deny women access to screening.”

The authors maintain however that they are not arguing against the importance of screening but say that “the question is whether we should invite women, coerce them, threaten them, scare them to come get checked when nothing’s wrong.”

The post New Study: do regular mammograms lead to overdiagnosis of breast cancer? appeared first on Happy Healthy Hub.

According to the latest research, teens may be relying more heavily on muscle-building supplements and protein shakes than previously believed. According to a survey taken by study authors, 35% of all males and females polled reported using protein powders or shakes and almost 6% admitted to taking steroids. This marks a dramatic increase from other studies that put the numbers of protein shake users at about 10.2% of males and 8% of females.

The report, which was published today in ‘Pediatrics,’ also found that the numbers greatly varied by; gender, race, body mass index (BMI), and sports participation. While much research has been conducted on women and body image this was one of the few studies to address the pressures young men are under to appear lean and muscular.

“Boy’s body dissatisfaction has simultaneously increased, and research has demonstrated that exposure to images of extremely muscular models contributes to body dissatisfaction and muscle dysmorphia in young men,” the authors said.

Participants in the study were asked to complete a 235 question survey which asked questions regarding muscle-enhancing behaviors such as altered eating behaviors or exercise and were asked to report their height, weight and physical measurements. They also listed gender, race, school grade, socioeconomic status and sports participation.

The study found that of the nearly 1,500 men survey about 65% reported changing their eating habits to bulk up and 90% reported exercising more to build muscle both of which were considered healthy habits. The study also reported on ‘unhealthy’ habits and found that 35% of participants used protein shakes and powders, 6% used steroids and 10% used muscle-enhancing substances.

The rates among females were considerably lower. Only 21% of women reported using powders, 4.5% reported using steroids and 5.5% reported using muscle-enhancing substances. The study also found that Asian students, both male and female, were more likely to use steroids than white students that were surveyed.

The post Teens using protein shakes and supplements to bulk up appeared first on Happy Healthy Hub.

According to a new study, a woman’s menstrual cycle has a direct impact on respiratory problems and can increase asthma symptoms.

A Norwegian study has found that women suffer from more severe respiratory symptoms during ovulation than at other times during the month. “The effects of the menstrual cycle on respiratory symptoms in the general population have not been studied. In a cohort of nearly 4,000 women, we found large and consistent changes in respiratory symptoms according to menstrual cycle phase, and, in addition there patterns varied according to menstrual cycle phase, and, in addition, these patterns varied according to body mass index (BMI), asthma, and smoking status,” explained the study’s lead author Ferenc Macsali from the Haukeland University Hospital in Norway.

The study found that wheezing symptoms were most sever between days 10-22 of the ovulation cycle and women reported more shortness of breath between days 7 and 21.

“Our finding that respiratory symptoms vary according to the stage of the menstrual cycle is novel, as is our finding that these patterns vary according to BMI and smoking status,” Mascali explained. “These relationships indicate a link between respiratory symptoms and hormonal changes through the menstrual cycle.”

The study suggests that female patients could benefit from a treatment program that takes into account their menstrual cycle, adjusting medication for the times of the month when symptoms are at their worst.

A study published back in 1996 had similar findings. The study, which was published in the Archives of Internal Medicine, tracked the menstrual cycle of 182 women who were treated in the emergency room for asthma symptoms and found that “20 percent of the patients were preovulatory and 24 percent were in the ovulatory phase when the attacks occurred.”

According to the latest statistics approximately 25 million Americans suffer from and it causes 3,300 fatalities each year. Considering that more women suffer from asthma than men, this study could greatly affect the way doctors treat this very serious ailment.

The post Researchers find link between asthma and menstrual cycle appeared first on Happy Healthy Hub.

According to the latest research, getting as little as 10 minutes of exercise a day can increase life expectancy by as much as 2 years past the age of 40. Steven Moore from the U.S. National Cancer Institute and his co-authors collected data on 650,000 men and women, both here and in Sweden over the age of 40, who had self-reported their regular activity levels. The found that an average of 75 minutes of exercise a week, or about 10 minutes a day, could add 1.8 years to life expectancy compared to no exercise at all. They also discovered that walking briskly for 450 minutes a week, or a little over an hour a day, could increase life expectancy by 4.5 years.

“More leisure-time physical activity was associated with longer life expectancy across a range of activity levels and body mass index groups,” the author’s wrote in this month’s issue of PLOS Medicine, which is published by the Public Library of Science.

Researchers also examined the effects of weight on life expectancy and found that the best case scenario was for a person who was active and at a normal BMI, which could add 7.2 years compared to those in the obese or inactive category.  The same person who was inactive could lose up to 4.7 years.

Smoking was also a considerable factor in determining life expectancy. The study, which was funded by the U.S. National Cancer Institute and the U.S. National Institutes of Health, found that long-term smoking could reduce life span by as much as 10 years.

According to a survey conducted by Statistics Canada’s Health Measures only about 15% of adults get the recommended amount of exercise, 150 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity.

“This finding may help convince currently inactive persons that a modest physical activity program is ‘worth it’ for health benefits, even if it may not result in weight control.”

The post 10 minutes of daily exercise linked to increased life expectancy appeared first on Happy Healthy Hub.

According to a new study how old you look could be directly connected to your risk for heart disease. People with receding hairlines or balding, creases near the earlobes and eyelid bumps may be at a higher risk for heart trouble than people the same age that appear younger.

Researches in Denmark studied 11,000 people to determine the difference between chronological age and biological age. Beginning in 1976 researchers documented each subject’s appearance including counting wrinkles and crow’s feet. Over the next three decades 3,400 of the 11,000 participants developed some form of heart disease and 1,700 had heart attacks. The researchers found that each sign of aging caused a rise in the risk of heart problems, regardless of gender or family history of heart disease.

If a participant had three to four signs of aging, hair receding from the temple, balding at the crown, earlobe creases or lumps on the eyelids, their risk of heart attack went up 57% and they had a 39% greater chance of developing heart disease.

Eyelid bumps were found to be the biggest factor; these fatty deposits are often connected to cholesterol buildup. Baldness has been tied to heart disease in the past and is believed to have something to do with testosterone levels but the researches could not explain how earlobe creases were connected to an increased risk.

Regular signs of aging such as facial wrinkles and greying hair were not found to be an indication of heart disease.

This study helps illustrate that some obvious risk factors could be being overlooked by physicians. Dr. Kathy Magliato, a surgeon at Santa Monica’s St. John’s Health Center said that doctors need to pay more attention to visible signs of trouble, “We’re so rushed to put on a blood pressure cuff or put a stethoscope on the chest” that obvious signs may be missed.

The post How old you look may indicate heart disease appeared first on Happy Healthy Hub.

According to the latest study cancer survivors are more likely to report poorer physical and mental well-being, even if they have beaten their disease, compared to those who have never suffered from cancer. The study’s authors found that 24.5% of  survivors surveyed reported a low physical quality of life and 10.2% claimed a poor mental quality of life. Of those that had never suffered from cancer only 10.2% reported low physical quality and 5.9% reported low mental quality of life. The author’s noted that  survivors “report more functional impairment, poorer health, greater psychological distress, and more mental health needs.”

The survey, conducted by the 2010 National Health Interview Survey, which “tracks trends in illness and disability in the U.S.” spoke with 1,822  survivors and 24,804 adults with no cancer history.

To determine quality of life a 10-item Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Global Health Scale was employed which addresses fatigue, social, physical and mental health and pain. Mean scores for survivors were compared against mean scores for those with no history of cancer.

The study also found that “adult cancer survivors were older, less likely to be racial and ethnic minorities, more likely to be female, reported higher incomes, and had more noncancer comorbidities than adults without a history of cancer,” and that “12% of the survivors reported that they had a recurrence of their cancer.”

This research helps illustrate that even after cancer goes into remission, the survivor has a long road to recovery ahead. The pain and suffering that comes with a cancer diagnosis can leave deep and long lasting scars that need to be addressed by health care professionals if a patient is to regain a high quality of life in recovery.

The post Study finds lower quality of life for cancer survivors appeared first on Happy Healthy Hub.