It’s been a long time since we’ve heard any news about the swine flu or the swine flu vaccine. No news is usually good news, and that’s the way we like it.

Unfortunately, there may be cause for concern among some individuals who thought they had done the “right” thing by getting their swine flu jabs. That cause for concern is narcolepsy, a sleeping disorder that causes those affected by it to suddenly and unexpectedly fall asleep.

Pandemrix under scrutiny

Recently, the European Medicines Agency reported news of a possible link between ten reported cases of narcolepsy and Pandemrix, a swine flu vaccine manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline and widely used in the UK during the swine flu pandemic. In an effort to learn more about the suspected Pandemrix/narcolepsy connection, the EMA is involved in an investigation designed to get answers.

The EMA launched its investigation after receiving several similar-sounding reports of vaccinated children and teens who had displayed symptoms of the sleep disorder. These reports came from countries including Finland, Sweden, Iceland and the UK.

Studies conducted by the EMA showed an increased risk of developing narcolepsy after receiving this particular swine flu jab. The increased risk ranged from six- to 13-fold when compared to children and adolescents who had not received the Pandemrix jab.

A written statement by the EMA suggests that a possible interaction between Pandemrix and environmental or genetic factors may be responsible for the increased risk. Other factors may also have played a role, according to the statement.

Pandemrix was a popular vaccination option during the swine flu craze. During the pandemic, approximately 31 million people around the world received a Pandemrix vaccination. Of those, nearly six million doses were given in the UK. The EMA had recommended that Pandemrix only be given to at-risk children and adolescents when no other suitable vaccination was available.

Officials from GlaxoSmithKline reported that as of July, the company had received 335 reports of narcolepsy among individuals who had gotten a Pandemrix jab. As expected, the company has pledged to work closely with regulatory officials in Europe and elsewhere and stressed its continued commitment to patient safety. Pandemrix is no longer in use and a planned destruction of all remaining doses is scheduled this fall.

What will be the impact on the upcoming flu season?

There should not be any adverse impact, according to a spokesperson with the UK’s Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, or MHRA. In a recently released statement, a spokesperson stressed that the annual seasonal flu vaccine is in no way associated with the narcolepsy issue. She stressed that there have not been any reports of safety issues associated with the seasonal flu vaccine and that the vaccine is highly recommended as a way of protecting against the seasonal flu.

That’s reassuring. But if you were vaccinated with Pandemrix and find yourself falling asleep during any type of activity during any time of the day, it’s time to visit your GP!

For years we’ve heard that Afro-Americans are at higher risk of diabetes and that the risk of having the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic mutations is greater for Ashkenazi Jewish women. We’re so accustomed to race being associated with certain health risks we believe that if we aren’t of a race with an associated risk, we need not worry about that risk.

However, recent advances in medical technology and knowledge suggest this way of thinking is not entirely correct. More accurate say some in the profession, is the theory of personalized medicine. This theory suggests that it’s not race that matters most when determining individual health risk, but genetic sequencing.

Once you learn more about personalized medicine, the theory starts to make sense. After all, each one of us has a unique genetic makeup. And although there is still much to be learned about genetics, many in the field anticipate that one’s genetic makeup may soon be a more likely predictor of health risk than race.

What is race?

There was a time when physical features like skin color, hair type or eye shape defined a person’s race. But that is beginning to change as more people question what the term race really means. Plenty of people now believe that race is nothing more than an outdated category used by the Census Bureau, public schools and other government organizations.

Ask people you know what race category they belong to and you may find some who are hesitant to tick a single box that says “White” or “Asian” or African American”. Interestingly, “multi-racial” was the box chosen by approximately nine million people during the most recent U.S. census.

Furthermore, archeologists would argue that every one of us is a descendant of the same race, citing archaeological evidence dating back two million years that suggests all of our earliest ancestors originated from Africa.

But even if race is nothing more than a category that labels people, some doctors aren’t ready to do away with it completely. They point out that race-based trends do exist. For example, it’s now known that genetic traits for sickle cell disease, historically thought to strike only Africans, also appear in people originating from Mediterranean and Indian regions. These are regions that have or used to have problems with malaria and genetic researchers now know that the sickle cell trait protects against malaria.

Is there room for both?

As the cost of genetic sequencing continues to decline and research into identifying specific markers and their association with certain diseases intensifies, chances are good that doctors will soon be able to make more meaningful medical decisions. That however, won’t stop those who stand firm in their belief that race still has a place, especially in reaching people in certain high-risk populations.

While the controversy whether race or genetic sequencing is a better indicator of health risk continues, it’s comforting to know that many doctors still believe that asking questions about a patient’s lifestyle, habits and family history is a reliable way to calculate a predictive value for at-risk disease.

…wait until you learn about these five health issues that make some people’s lives more than miserable. Although it may sound like these diseases are made up, they are not.

Here they are, in no particular order.

Trimethylaminuria

Trimethylaminuria is a metabolic disorder that causes those with it to give off an extremely foul fish odor. The odor is so strong that no amount of deodorant or perfume or showering gets rid of it. The odor results from the body’s inability to break down TMA or trimethylamine. So it builds up inside and is emitted from the affected individual’s breath, urine, sweat, and bodily secretions. Stinking like a fish sounds funny, but it’s serious and can cause affected individuals to suffer work-related, social and psychological trouble. No cure yet exists. The best way to deal with the disorder is by consuming foods that do not convert into TMA, which is difficult since so many common foods do.

Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy

Imagine experiencing hot, searing pain continuously and you will have a better idea what it’s like to live with the nerve disorder called Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy. Along with the pain, sufferers describe swollenness, excessive sweat and skin that feels like it is on fire. These extreme sensations usually follow an injury, surgery, stroke or other type of harmful event. An improperly functioning sympathetic nervous system is believed the reason for the trouble. In some cases, the disease disappears unexplainably. Other times, sufferers need years of intensive treatment. Sometimes they even need to be put into a Ketamine coma so that their pain connections can reset. This treatment is expensive and extreme, but works.

Harlequin Ichtyosis

As far as newborn baby problems go, Harlequin Ichtyosis is a biggie. This genetic skin disease is congenital, meaning it is present at birth, and causes the development of thick scales on the skin that harden into the shapes of diamonds. Deep cracks separate the scales that can appear anywhere on the body. These scales rob the skin of its protective ability, and newborns can suffer uncontrollable water loss, trouble with body temperature regulation, and difficulty fighting infections. Survival rates for babies with Harlequin Ichtyosis are dismal. Few reach their teenage years, and even fewer reach adulthood.

Polyglandular Addison’s Disease

When stressed, your body produces adrenaline, a hormone that prepares the body’s organs to effectively deal with whatever actions are necessary to end that stress. The few people diagnosed with this hormonal disorder are not able to produce this important “fight or flight” hormone, so any type of stress, no matter how minor, can cause organ shock and failure, and critical illness.

Morgellons Disease

This controversial disease is best characterized as a skin disorder with symptoms including intensely itchy skin sores, a feeling of insects crawling on or under skin, fibers/threads on or in the skin, pain in the joints, vision problems, extreme fatigue and memory/concentration problems. Further investigation will hopefully determine the cause of this mysterious skin disorder, and whether the symptoms are part of a different health problem like mental illness or Lyme disease, or whether Morgellons Disease is instead its own specific condition.

Hopefully after reading this, your life doesn’t seem so bad after all!

For the first time ever, doctors have been able to manufacture a synthetic human organ in a laboratory without using any tissue provided by a human donor. Instead, they used a patient’s own stem cells to create a replica trachea that they then successfully implanted into that patient.

This was fantastic news for the 36-year-old patient whose original trachea was badly damaged by late-stage tracheal cancer, an extremely rare form of cancer. The resulting tumor had grown so large that it nearly completely blocked the cancer victim’s windpipe. Prior to the transplant surgery, the patient had undergone chemotherapy, radiation and traditional surgery, all to no avail. His only other treatment option was the most uncertain; awaiting a suitable organ donor.

Rather than wait an indefinite period of time, the patient’s doctors suggested another possible treatment option; one that had never been tried before. The option to grow a replica trachea using a patient’s own stem cells in a laboratory seemed outrageous at first. But the patient probably felt he had nothing to lose, so off to the lab the doctors went.

They knew what a trachea looked like. They knew its purpose. And they knew that if successful, they would be pioneers in the field of regenerative medicine.

Understanding the manufacturing process

The trachea, also known as the windpipe, is a Y-shaped tubular airway. The single end connects to the voice box. The other end divides into separate air tubes that connect to each of the lungs. The trachea lays part way in the throat and part way in the chest and facilitates the passage of air into and out of the lungs.

The first step in manufacturing the synthetic trachea involved creating a framework that resembled an actual human trachea. Spongy, flexible polymers were used in this step. The doctors even added stiff rings in an effort to make the synthetic trachea look as natural as possible.

From there doctors covered the inside and outside of the form in a solution made up of the patient’s own stem cells. The goal with this step was to encourage growth of more stem cells. This step was key since stem cells have an amazing ability to grow and replicate into different types of cells. During this step they received physical as well as chemical messages that instructed them to grow into the type of cells needed in the trachea.

Before long stem cells began growing all over and the framework had come alive. Once doctors were certain the stem cells were thriving, they implanted the laboratory-grown synthetic trachea into the patient. As is not always the case with donor organs, the body accepted the synthetic organ grown with the patient’s own stem cells.

How long did it take?

Creating the synthetic trachea took less than two weeks, which is considerably shorter than the time it takes to find a suitable organ donor.

Does success mean that obtaining a replacement organ could soon be as simple as ordering a replacement part for your car?

It’s possible, and that is pretty amazing!

When I was younger, my girlfriends and I used to stare at guys’ feet and giggle. Back then, foot size was supposedly indicative of how well-endowed a guy was. Our game was fun and innocent and purely unscientific.

Fast-forward to 2011 and new research that suggests there may be a reliable way to gauge a man’s penis size that does actually involve part of a man’s anatomy. Instead of foot size, the new study suggests that women – or anyone who’s interested – may not need to look any farther than a man’s hands to guess-timate what’s hiding behind his zipper!

It’s true, according to Tae Beom Kim who works in the Urology Department at Gachon University Gil Hospital in Incheon, South Korea. But figuring out a man’s penis size may be a bit more difficult than simply looking at his hands. Kim says that to determine the length of a man’s penis, you need to measure the length his ring finger and his index finger. Then you have to divide one by the other to arrive at a ratio. It seems the higher the ratio, the shorter the penis length and vice versa.

Why these two fingers?

Chances are none of us are going to start measuring men’s fingers in an effort to confirm or deny the credibility of this formula. But researchers believe the possible connection involves prenatal testosterone. Previously conducted studies have presented compelling evidence of prenatal testosterone’s role in the development of both the length of a man’s finger and the length of his penis.

Wanting to learn more about this possible connection, Kim and his colleagues launched their own study during which they measured men’s penises. The 144 men who participated in their study all had urological problems, yet those problems had no adverse affect on penis length. Researchers measured the length of participants’ penises while they were under anesthesia.

Researchers also measured the lengths of both fingers on each participant’s right hand so that they could calculate the ratio. They only measured the fingers on the right hand because previous research suggests that there is more sensitivity to testosterone in the right hand.

The researchers found that the men whose index fingers were shorter than their ring fingers just might come out the winner in the penis length game. Crazy as the possible involvement of prenatal testosterone sounds, it is an idea that is gaining respect. Just last year another study involving finger length was carried out by other researchers. In this study researchers found that the risk for prostate cancer was lower in men with long index fingers.

While the finger length/penis length relationship hasn’t yet been confirmed, a researcher not involved in the study believes that the recent results offer “circumstantial evidence” of prenatal testosterone’s involvement.

Until then, it sure will be fun to gaze at men’s fingers and wonder. But seriously, studies that unlock more of the mysteries of what takes place before birth are imperative for their ability to advance medical knowledge.

Before drugs show up on store shelves in the U.S., they go through a lengthy approval process. This process ensures that proposed drugs produce the results they claim and all potential side effects are known and well documented. But most importantly, the process attempts to assure that every new drug is safe for human consumption.

The process, which many in the pharmaceutical industry claim has become cumbersome and expensive, was created and is enforced by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Once approved, every new drug gets to wear that all-important “FDA-approved” stamp on its packaging.

The number of new drug applications submitted each year keeps FDA staff and drug manufacturers extremely busy. For all their hard work though, not all of the new drug applications submitted each year make it all the way through the approval process.

To date, the FDA has approved 20 new drugs this year. This figure is very close to surpassing the total number of drugs approved by the FDA in all of 2010 which was only 21. To clarify, this figure includes approval of new drugs and biologics but does not include applications for reformulations or expanded uses of already approved drugs and vaccines.

The higher drug approval rate is a welcome increase over previous years that should appease those who claim that rigorous safety requirements have led to higher manufacturing costs, longer approval processes and less investment in U.S. companies that make up the life sciences industry.

Among the new drugs approved so far in 2011 are:

• A drug for hepatitis C developed by Merck & Co.
• Another drug for hepatitis C developed by Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
• Yervoy, a drug to treat melanoma developed by Bristol-Meyers Squibb Co.
• Benlysta for lupus from GlaxoSmithKline PLC and Human Genome Sciences Inc.
• A drug designed to prevent blood clots called Xarelto by co-developers Bayer AG and Johnson & Johnson.

There are others, and likely will be more approved by year’s end. But there will probably be a number of drugs that do not make it through the process, as well. For one reason or another, a lot experimental drugs never make it past the various trial phases. Although discouraging for people who invest a lot of capital and time into their development, such failures really should not be blamed on the FDA. The agency is simply doing its job and trying hard to avoid a repeat of what happened with popular painkiller Vioxx, which ultimately was withdrawn from the market after receiving approval.

Janet Woodcock who leads the drug division at the FDA makes no apologies for the current process. She points to the agency’s high drug approval rate during the six to ten month period after application submission and notable track record for meeting deadlines. It’s true that requests for additional information can delay the process or lead to a drug’s failure. But in my opinion, this is one situation in which it is better to be safe than sorry!

What do you think?

It’s difficult to gauge how concerned we should be about information recently uncovered by a team of scientists from the University of Dundee and reported in the British Medical Journal. At first glance, the news is alarming. But in fact, the situation is more common than people realize.

The “situation” being addressed in this report is the number of patients who are prescribed high-risk drugs and then end up hospitalized because of side effects that should be preventable. Of the records reviewed by these scientists, nearly 140,000 individuals were found to be “high-risk” patients either because of their age, or because of a pre-existing condition or other reason. Further research of these records revealed that in the last year, doctors had prescribed a high-risk drug to nearly 20,000 of those high-risk patients.

The information used to compile these statistics was uncovered after reviewing data and prescription records from 315 general practices located in Scotland. Nearly one-third of all of the people living in Scotland are registered at these 315 practices.

Sounds like cause for concern

But it may not be. To make it easier to understand why these statistics may not be as alarming as they sound, it is important to understand why doctors prescribe high-risk drugs to some high-risk patients. Oftentimes, they do it because the benefits of doing so outweigh the potential risks. This is common in situations where the GP has determined that there is no other “correct” course of treatment for a patient. When a patient’s treatment options are limited, even patients agree that taking a potentially risky medication is an acceptable option.

Sometimes though, this situation happens by mistake. A good example of this is prescribing anti-inflammatory drugs to patients with known health issues like ulcers or problems with their kidneys. Another example involves prescribing antipsychotic drugs to dementia patients. Situations like these and plenty of others really should not happen. But unfortunately they do because doctors are human and even they make mistakes.

Interestingly, the scientists involved in this latest study were not so concerned with the actual practice of prescribing high-risk drugs to some high-risk patients. As observed in their research, this type of high-risk prescribing was fairly common.  What scientists expressed more concern over were the discrepancies they noted among the different medical practices that allow this to happen.

Without more consistency in deciding the health situations in which prescribing high-risk drugs to some high-risk patients is acceptable and when it is unacceptable, they fear even more patients will be put at unnecessary risk of hospitalization, or worse – death.

In their opinion, their research clearly shows that there are considerable opportunities to improve drug prescribing safety. One such opportunity is the development of uniform prescribing guidelines; something they believe will greatly reduce these risks. The scientists hope that the research they compiled will open a lot of people’s eyes to the need for more consistency in prescribing practices among GPs so that appropriate steps to address this problem get underway sooner rather than later.

What do you think?

We’ve all heard that the “squeaky wheel gets the grease.” The saying basically means that the loudest or most noticeable problems usually garner the most attention. If you’ve ever complained loudly about poor service, a poor experience, or a poor quality product, you know the saying is true.

And that’s the way it’s been lately with animal rights activists. In their quest to protect the rights of innocent mice, rabbits, and other critters with no human voice of their own, their voices have grown louder than ever before.

As their voices grow louder, the attention those voices attract grows larger. One group whose collective voice has become extremely loud belongs to Animal Aid, a group that up until recently was a fairly insignificant player in the battle over animal rights.

With animal testing supporters more tight-lipped than ever, this one group alone has been able to cast a huge shadow of doubt over the continued need to subject helpless animals to the inhumane tests that help determine a product’s safety and/or effectiveness.

This group believes – as many other animal rights groups do – that the rights of animals should be made a higher priority than finding cures for life-stealing illnesses including Alzheimer’s disease and cancer. The group also believes that this type of research fails to achieve beneficial results in humans.

Animal Aid is targeting those messages at anyone who will listen, but has its sights set on those with deep pockets; in other words, the people and organizations most likely to put their financial support behind medical research. It’s a smart move at a time when those same people and organizations are trying hard not to upset one side or the other.

A tough balancing act

No doubt some of the things researchers do to animals in the name of advancing medical science are unpleasant. Torture and mutilation are not uncommon. But these actions are not wasteful or futile or performed by sadists as some animal rights groups contend. They’re performed by individuals who truly want to make a difference in people’s health and their lives.

Animal testing has as many opponents as proponents. Unfortunately, many proponents are afraid to speak up. When they do speak up in support of animal testing or they agree to debate the topic, all too often their words sound apologetic, full of regret or worse, defensive. Knowingly or unknowingly, many proponents overcompensate to avoid appearing inconsiderate or heartless.

And that’s a shame

Some contend that too many concessions have been made to animal rights supporters. They say that concessions like limiting the number and type of animals used in testing could endanger us all. Rather than be on the defensive, they believe medical researchers should be on the offensive, reminding all of us as loudly as they can of the significant role animals play in advancing medical research – and saving human lives.

Unfortunately in this situation, we can’t have it both ways. Each of us needs to take a stand – either for or against animal testing – and not be swayed by the squeaky wheel.

It’s hard to believe that in today’s day and age, some people still consider homosexuality a disease. Usually, people with beliefs like these keep those beliefs to themselves. It’s easier that way and much less controversial, especially for public officials and anyone who spends a lot of time in the public eye.

But the role of public official did not keep India’s Health Minister from expressing his feelings on the subject of homosexuality. He made his disturbing statements at a recent conference that was held in India’s capital of New Delhi. The topic of that conference was HIV/AIDS; a growing health issue in this country.

The things that Ghulam Nabi Azad said about homosexuality came as a surprise to some people and angered many more. Ghulam Nabi Azad reportedly told the audience that he believes homosexuality is a disease; a problem that was imported into the country by Westerners. He referred to the act of a man having sex with another man as unnatural. He is also reported as having said that this type of sexual behavior should not happen, yet it does.

Change brings the good and the not-so-good

Azad claims his comments were taken out of context. Whether they were or were not, no one can deny that India is a conservative country with long-standing conservative beliefs. But India is also a country undergoing change. And part of that change is the arrival of health issues that have never plagued the country before.

One health issue that is beginning to cause quite a bit of alarm is the growing number of citizens who have contracted the HIV virus. Estimates put that number at approximately 2.5 million, more than any other country in Asia, placing India first in a category few leaders would be proud of.

Is the rising HIV infection rate the result of the recent overturn of a long-standing Colonial law? Prior to 2009, a same sex relationship was considered an unnatural offense punishable by imprisonment. Overturn of the 148-year old law decriminalized gay sex. However, as happens in other countries where there is more tolerance of same sex relationships decriminalization did not end the discrimination or the harassment.

Indians may no longer have to worry about committing an offense when expressing their preference for companions of the same sex. But regardless of efforts by gay rights support groups and growing acceptance of homosexuality in other developed countries, openly gay individuals everywhere in the world continually encounter others who do not agree with their choices.

Education and self-protection are key

Whether same-sex relationships are offensive or unnatural isn’t really the issue. These relationships exist and some contend they have since the beginning of time. What seems more important in India and elsewhere is that people, whether gay or straight, take steps to educate and better protect themselves. This includes always using condoms and knowing a partner’s sexual history.

This is excellent advice for everyone and it’s a more effective way to control the spread of potentially deadly HIV infections.

Obesity doesn’t discriminate. If given the opportunity, obesity will strike anybody regardless of gender, race or age. As people pile on the excess weight, they can develop a range of secondary health issues including Type 2 diabetes, joint trouble, sleep disorders, heart disease, issues with self-esteem, and more.

The obesity rate among adults is at an all-time high and is cause for concern. But even more alarming is the rapid increase in obesity among teenagers. Today it is not uncommon to see teens weighing in at 2-, 3-, 400-pounds and sometimes even more. Too many have developed secondary health issues like those mentioned above. Too many have trouble performing even the simplest activities, like walking. And too many are turning to weight loss surgery as a way to solve their excess weight woes.

Surgery is not a quick fix

Doctors warn though, that surgery is not the magic bullet many obese teens and adults think it is. They remind patients that surgery alone will not help patients lose weight; it is just one part of a weight loss regime that requires other components to lose weight and keep the weight off long-term. Unfortunately, too many teens – as well as many adults – don’t realize this. They mistakenly think that after surgery the weight will melt away, along with all of their problems. But that’s simply not true.

Losing weight and keeping it off requires a willingness to make lifestyle changes and stick to them, whether you’re 20 pounds overweight or 200. So important is this message that doctors spend several months in advance of weight loss surgery evaluating teenage patients to determine whether they are good candidates.

Pre-surgical team effort increases safety and success

These doctors usually work as part of a team that may include dieticians, pediatricians, psychologists, nutritionists, social workers and exercise physiologists. The goal is to eliminate unrealistic expectations, explain the risks – both during surgery and afterwards, and emphasize the seriousness of the procedure.

But this isn’t all these medical team members attempt to accomplish in a relatively short period of time. They also need to ensure a teen is mature enough to make the necessary lifestyle modifications. They also evaluate a teen’s family to ensure the teen’s efforts will be encouraged and supported by other family members. They spell out what to expect after surgery. They also make sure everyone is fully aware of the financial implications of a procedure that is not always covered by insurance.

Teens have an important role to fulfill prior to surgery, too. Most are required to lose weight before their doctors will even schedule weight loss surgery. Doing so shows commitment on the patient’s part. It also convinces some patients to change their minds about undergoing surgery. These patients have realized that losing weight is possible as long as they are willing to make the effort. That realization encourages and motivates them to keep pursuing healthier habits.

And that is a good thing.