Cheap Condoms for a Safer Sex Industry

  • Author: Health Informer
  • Filed under: Health News
  • Date: Oct 31,2008

Safe4now Foundation Allows Prostitutes to Prevent Aids or STD Infection

Though condom prices are decreasing rapidly all over the world, prostitutes and other women working in the sex industry still have to pay enormous costs to guarantee a safe working environment. Although HIV infections and sexual transmitted diseases (STD) remain a great risk in their line of work, survey shows that one in every five prostitutes is offering her services without using a condom. Therefore the Dutch Safe4now Foundation launches a new European campaign to distribute cheap condoms for the sex industry, allowing prostitutes to work safer, more pleasant and cheaper.

From now on this new brand of cheap and certified condoms is available in all of Europe. People can buy them anonymously on http://www.safe4now.eu, paying 10 euro for a package of 100 condoms. This price includes delivery costs, thus reducing the price of a condom to less than 10 cents. The Safe4now Foundation therefore claims to be the cheapest distributor of condoms in Europe. By launching this campaign the foundation hopes to increase the use of condoms in the sex industry and reduce the spread of the HIV virus or venereal diseases.

A study of the Dutch research centre for public health and environment (RIVM) shows that 7 percent of the prostitutes in large cities like Amsterdam and Rotterdam are infected by HIV. Because only 82 percent of the ladies use a condom on a regular basis, sometimes engaging unprotected intercourse with their clients, they still risk spreading HIV and STD. Among addicted prostitutes only 40 percent always uses a condom. An EU-funded project on 866 female prostitutes from European countries concluded that the lack of condom use was associated with HIV infections.

“As a foundation we try to support these women. By keeping our prices under ten cent per condom, by adding extra lubricant and by offering them the opportunity to order condoms anonymously through the Internet”, Bianca Boef of Safe4now says. “Although condoms are almost a primary necessity of life for them, they have to pay the same high price as private consumers. If they are obliged to order them through their bosses, they even have to pay more.”

More information: http://www.safe4now.eu


Sigma’s Imprint(TM) Methylated DNA Quantification Kit significantly simplifies the study of Global Methylation with results in half the time of current methods

Sigma-Aldrich introduced its Imprint(TM) Methylated DNA Quantification Kit (MDQ1) for epigenetic research http://www.sigma-aldrich.com/mdq1. The Methylated DNA Quantification Kit employs a familiar ELISA-like procedure, with no radioactivity or chromatography, to measure global methylation in less than four hours. The kits are effective with a DNA input as low as 5ng of fully methylated DNA and are arranged in a flexible 8-well assay strips format, allowing for high-throughput applications or manual analysis of DNA from cultured cells, tissues, plasma and other body fluid samples. Imprint MDQ technology will enable scientists to rapidly quantify the global methylation status of biological samples, providing insight into conditions that alter methylation status and facilitating advanced disease research.

The introduction of MDQ1 kits provides researchers with an alternative to currently available methods for quantifying global methylation, such as reverse phase HPLC, MALDI-TOF-MS, methylation sensitive restriction fingerprinting, DNA methyltransferase assays, immunohistostaining, and dot blots. MDQ1 kits include all necessary reagents, enabling laboratories to screen samples in-house rather than sending them to core facilities.

“Our Imprint Methylated DNA Quantification Kits offer complete and rapid solutions for the quantification of global DNA methylation,” said Tim Fleming, Director of Commercial Marketing at Sigma-Aldrich. “The addition of this exciting technology to our epigenetic research product suite reflects Sigma- Aldrich’s commitment to developing a robust platform of technologies to support the epigenetics research community.”

Sigma-Aldrich licensed its MDQ technology from the Epigentek Group. The Imprint Methylated DNA Quantification Kit complements Sigma Life Science’s epigenetic research portfolio, including the Imprint DNA Modification Kit and the Imprint ChIP Kit, as well as products for DNA purification, qPCR, sequencing and post-reaction clean-up.

“We are very excited by Sigma-Aldrich’s decision to partner with Epigentek in the epigenetic field,” said Adam Li, chief scientific officer at Epigentek. “This arrangement underscores Epigentek’s position in the epigenetic arena, strengthens our strategy and portfolio, and is expected to benefit both companies’ programs in developing new epigenetics technologies and products.”

To learn more about the Imprint Methylated DNA Quantification Kit, and Sigma-Aldrich’s epigenetics research product portfolio, visit http://www.sigma-aldrich.com/epigenetics.

Source: Sigma-Aldrich


Sanofi-aventis announced today that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved Apidra(R) (insulin glulisine [rDNA origin] injection) to improve glycemic control in children (4 years and older) with diabetes mellitus.

The approval of Apidra(R) for pediatric use is based upon FDA review of a 26-week, phase III, open-label, active control study of Apidra(R) in comparison with insulin lispro, in 572 children and adolescents (4 years and older) with type 1 diabetes.

“Sanofi-aventis is committed to providing children with diabetes, as well as their families and healthcare providers, with safe and effective treatment options to help address the challenges associated with the condition and to help decrease the long-term risk for devastating complications of diabetes,” said Michelle Baron, MD, vice president, Metabolism Medical Unit, sanofi-aventis U.S. “We are pleased that the fast onset of action and mealtime dosing flexibility of Apidra(R) will now be available to children 4 years and older.”

Apidra(R) has a rapid onset and short duration of action and should normally be used in combination with a longer-acting or basal insulin. Apidra(R) can also be used in insulin infusion pump therapy for blood sugar control.

About the Study

The approval of Apidra(R) for pediatric use is based upon a 26-week, phase III, open-label, active control study of Apidra(R) in comparison with insulin lispro in 572 children and adolescents (4 – 17 years of age) with type 1 diabetes. Study patients received insulin glulisine or lispro 0-15 minutes premeal. These patients received concomitant treatment with insulin glargine once daily or NPH twice daily as basal insulin. The majority of the patients received insulin glargine as part of their basal-prandial regimen (69.7% and 72% in the Apidra(R) and insulin lispro treated groups, respectively).

The study compared the efficacy of Apidra(R) to insulin lispro in terms of change in glycohemoglobin (HBA1c), which is the amount of sugar bound to hemoglobin in the blood. The change in HBA1c from baseline to endpoint for Apidra(R) and insulin lispro were similar. The mean HBA1c change in the Apidra(R) population was +0.10% (+ or – 0.08) and +0.16% (+ or – 0.07) in the lispro group. The difference between the two treatments for this measure was -0.06%, or almost zero, with a 95% confidence interval of (-0.24; 0.12). HbA1c at baseline was 8.20% (+ or – 1.05) in the glulisine group and 8.17% (+ or – 1.02) in the lispro group, HbA1c at endpoint was 8.31% (+ or – 1.37) in the glulisine group and 8.37% (+ or – 1.32) in the lispro group. Postprandial glycemic control, as assessed by the self-monitored blood glucose values and blood glucose excursions, was similar in both treatment groups at endpoint.

No noteworthy differences existed between treatment groups in the number of study patients reporting hypoglycemia, which is the most common adverse reaction of insulin therapy. This included hypoglycemia reported as a serious adverse reaction, which occurred in 7.2 percent of study patients in the glulisine group and 8.1 percent of those in the lispro group.

About Diabetes

Diabetes is a chronic, widespread condition in which the body does not produce or properly use insulin, the hormone needed to transport glucose (sugar) from the blood into the cells of the body for energy. In type 1 diabetes, the immune system destroys the insulin-producing beta cells of the pancreas that regulate blood glucose. Since the pancreas can no longer produce insulin, people with type 1 diabetes require daily injections of insulin for their entire lives.

The International Diabetes Foundation estimates the global number of children 14 years of age and younger with type 1 diabetes to be 440,000, with 70,000 newly diagnosed cases each year. In the United States, type 1 diabetes is the most common type of diabetes in children, with approximately 176,500 people under 20 years of age affected by the disease. Approximately one out of every 400 to 600 American children and adolescents has type 1 diabetes.

About Apidra(R)

Apidra(R) is a rapid-acting insulin that can be administered using an insulin infusion pump, vial and syringe, the OptiClik(R) reusable insulin pen, or intravenously under proper medical supervision in a clinical setting. Apidra(R) works fast and offers flexible insulin dosing to help manage mealtime blood sugar levels. It should be administered within 15 minutes before or within 20 minutes after the start of a meal. Along with exercise, a basal insulin, and a proper meal plan, Apidra(R) is proven to help reduce A1C levels in adults and children (4 years and older) with type 1 diabetes and adults with type 2 diabetes.

Apidra(R) is from the maker of Lantus(R) (insulin glargine [rDNA origin] injection), the number one prescribed insulin.*

About Lantus(R)

Lantus(R) is indicated for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients 6 years and older with type 1 diabetes, or adult patients with type 2 diabetes who require basal (long-acting) insulin for the control of hyperglycemia. Lantus(R) is the only 24-hour insulin approved exclusively for use once a day. Most insulins have a “peak of action,” which refers to the time at which insulin reaches its maximum effect in the body. With Lantus(R), the insulin is released into the bloodstream at a relatively constant rate throughout the day and night; therefore it has no pronounced peak.

IMPORTANT SAFETY INFORMATION FOR APIDRA(R)

Apidra(R) is for adults and children (4 years and older) with type 1 diabetes and adults with type 2 diabetes for the control of high blood sugar. Apidra(R) should normally be used with a longer-acting insulin. Do not use Apidra(R) during a low blood sugar reaction (hypoglycemia) or if you are allergic to insulin glulisine.

Apidra(R) differs from regular human insulin by its rapid onset and shorter duration of action. When used as a mealtime insulin, Apidra(R) should be given within 15 minutes before or within 20 minutes after starting a meal. Due to the short duration of action of Apidra(R), patients also require a longer-acting insulin or insulin infusion pump therapy. Any change of insulin should be made cautiously and only under medical supervision. Tell your doctor about all other medicines and supplements you are taking. Glucose monitoring is recommended for all patients with diabetes.

Possible side effects may include low blood sugar; injection site reactions, such as changes in fat tissue at the injection site; and allergic reactions, such as itching and rash. Less common, but potentially more serious or life-threatening, is generalized allergy to insulin, including anaphylactic reactions.

When used in a pump, do not mix Apidra(R) with any other insulin or liquid. If the pump or infusion set does not work right, you may not receive the right amount of insulin. Hypoglycemia, hyperglycemia, or ketosis can happen. Problems should be identified and corrected as quickly as possible.

For full prescribing information, please visit www.Apidra.com.

IMPORTANT SAFETY INFORMATION FOR LANTUS(R)

Prescription Lantus(R) is for adults with type 2 diabetes or adults and children (6 years and older) with type 1 diabetes who require long-acting insulin for the control of high blood sugar.

DO NOT DILUTE OR MIX LANTUS(R) WITH ANY OTHER INSULIN OR SOLUTION. It will not work as intended, and you may lose blood sugar control, which could be serious. Do not change your insulin without talking with your doctor. The syringe must not contain any other medication or residue. You should not use Lantus(R) if you are allergic to insulin. Lantus(R) is a long-acting insulin you inject just once a day, at the same time each day. You must test your blood sugar levels while using an insulin such as Lantus(R).

The most common side effect of insulin, including Lantus(R), is hypoglycemia, which may be serious. Other possible side effects may include injection site reactions, including changes in fat tissue at the injection site, and allergic reactions, including itching and rash. In rare cases, some allergic reactions may be life threatening. Tell your doctor about other medicines and supplements you are taking because they can change the way insulin works.

For full prescribing information, please visit www.Lantus.com.

* Based on TRx data from IMS Health, National Prescription AuditTM (Next Generation Prescription Methodology). Time period: May 2003 to April 2008.

Source: Sanofi-aventis


California Insurers are Behind the Curve with Consumer-Driven Health Plans

  • Author: Health Informer
  • Filed under: Health News
  • Date: Oct 30,2008

Insurers Still Seeking Right Price for Consumer-Driven Products, According to New Report from HealthLeaders-InterStudy

HealthLeaders-InterStudy, a leading provider of managed care market intelligence, reports that despite its trend-setter reputation, California is behind the curve in the consumer-driven health plan market, resulting in some sticker shock as insurers search for the right price for their products. According to the latest California Health Plan Analysis, fewer than 4 percent of California employees are covered by tax-advantaged, high-deductible products, also known as consumer-driven health plan products, which are increasing in popularity nationwide. According to one 2008 study, consumer-driven products represent about 5.2 percent of employer-sponsored health plans in California, compared to nearly 13 percent nationally.

“The strength of HMOs in California is one reason that uptake of consumer-driven plans has been slow,” said Chris Lewis, analyst with HealthLeaders-InterStudy. “Residents are familiar with HMOs and the predictable fees and copays associated with them. However, as prices of HMOs are increasing and catching up to PPO premiums, employers are looking for more choices and are becoming more educated about the health plan options out there.”

Insurers are meeting market demand by providing high-deductible plans to employers, but pricing of these consumer-driven plans has been a challenge. For example, Anthem Blue Cross hiked fees for one of its Lumenos plans by more than 32 percent in May 2008. According to Anthem Blue Cross officials, the price increase was necessary to respond to an expensive, and unanticipated, number of claims.

“Carriers had thought that with a high-deductible plan, consumer medical spending would be more moderate than it turned out to be,” noted Lewis. “As a result, some employers responded to high renewal rates by changing carriers, while others reverted back to the more traditional plan options. In response, insurers in California are striving to reach the delicate balance on price where they are attracting customers to their consumer-driven products, without having to ask for a huge increase a year later to cover an unanticipated spike in claims.”

Why Pharmaceutical Companies Need Health Plan Analysis

Health Plan Analysis identifies key health plan trends, which can be used by pharmaceutical companies to create comprehensive strategic plans and sales strategies at state and local levels. Updated quarterly, Health Plan Analysis provides a detailed look at plan design and financials, as well as information about mergers, legislation and other influencers driving healthcare in a particular region.

Source: HealthLeaders-InterStudy


10 Surprising Facts About Using Brain Training to Fight Dementia

  • Author: Health Informer
  • Filed under: Health News
  • Date: Oct 29,2008

It’s National Alzheimer’s Disease Awareness Month

‘Use it or lose it’ is a phrase originally coined to express the benefits of keeping physically fit, but it is equally valid when applied to brain fitness. Numerous studies have shown that regular brain training sessions — aptly referred to as neurobics in some circles — can help stave off dementia and even the symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease.

In honor of National Alzheimer’s Disease Awareness Month, brain fitness program developer Dakim, Inc., shares information about how to give your gray matter a good workout, why the right kind of exercise can fortify your mental capacities, and what research says about using brain calisthenics to defend yourself against memory loss.

1 Mental decline is not inevitable. In recent years researchers have found that adults can actually grow new brain cells, reversing a long-held belief that brainpower lost in the aging process cannot be regenerated.

2 You can build a ’savings account’ of extra neurons — known as a cognitive reserve — that can help offset those you lose as you age. A 2006 data analysis in the Public Library of Science’s PLoS One journal estimated that a mere 5 percent increase in the cognitive reserve has the potential to prevent one third of Alzheimer’s cases worldwide.

3 Frequent cognitive activity can reduce dementia risk up to 63%. That was the conclusion of the Bronx Aging study, which followed a group of 75- to 85-year-olds for many years. Those who participated frequently in activities such as reading, writing, doing crossword puzzles, playing a musical instrument, or playing board games or cards were 63% less likely to develop dementia than those with less lively cognitive calendars.

4 Brain training may slow Alzheimer’s effects. One oft-cited case is that of Richard Wetherill, a retired university lecturer and talented chess player who became concerned when he could see only five chess moves ahead instead of eight. Although neurologic tests were normal, an autopsy when he died soon after revealed advanced Alzheimer’s disease, suggesting that the condition had been kept in check by bolstering his brain with chess and other intellectual ‘push-ups.’

5 A short-term brain workout program is not enough. Many studies indicate that the benefits of cognitive training are lost if it is not done on a regular basis. Consistent, long-term mental stimulation appears to be the key to reducing the risk of memory loss and dementia.

6 If you don’t enjoy it, you will fail. That’s because you won’t stick with anything that’s too boring or too hard. Choose fun activities or brain fitness programs that self-adjust the level of challenge for different ability levels.

7 Cross-training counts. Focusing solely on bridge, sudoku or any other single activity will not exercise all of the cognitive domains considered necessary to keep brains agile. Combining activities that address areas such as short- and long-term memory, critical thinking, visuospatial orientation, calculation and language is a better strategy.

8 Teaching your old brain some new tricks can help. Learn a new language, take saxophone lessons, teach yourself how to use an iPod or iPhone — anything that flexes your mental muscles can contribute to building new brain circuits.

9 Even people with dementia may see improvements. In one case, a woman who had not spoken a word for a year suddenly resumed speaking after completing a Dakim [m]Power Cognitive Fitness System exercise containing piano music. Her first sentence: “I wish I had learned to play piano when I was a little girl.”

10 Physical exercise is brain exercise, too. Cardiovascular and strength training also boost brainpower by generating more blood flow to the brain, supplying oxygen and nutrients, and promoting the growth of new brain cells. In other words, aerobics and neurobics go hand in hand.

Source: Dakim, Inc.


The Truth About Stem Cell Science

U-M experts offer ‘Stem Cells 102′ to present facts to the citizens of Michigan about regulations, oversight and ethical issues surrounding the safety and benefits of stem cell research

University of Michigan experts are providing educational information to help Michigan citizens learn about the ethics, guidelines, and federal and state oversight that apply to all human stem cell research.

“Stem Cells 102,” highlighted in an online video available at www.umich.edu/stemcell, provides accurate answers to those who seek the facts concerning embryonic stem cell research.

Embryonic stem cell research is considered by most scientists to be a very promising avenue for finding new treatments for incurable ailments such as juvenile diabetes and Parkinson’s disease, to better understand inherited human disease, and to develop safer and more effective new drugs.

Embryonic stem cell lines are derived from discarded embryos that were created for fertility treatment, but are surplus or unsuitable for use in fertility treatment. However, Michigan is one of five states that have laws preventing the creation of new embryonic stem cell lines.

Through “Stem Cells 102,” U-M stem cell scientist Sean Morrison, Ph.D., and Michigan Medical School Professor David Gordon, M.D., provide specific information about current issues regarding stem cell research, to clarify the law and the state of regulation.

Morrison directs the Center for Stem Cell Biology at U-M’s Life Sciences Institute and is a faculty member at the U-M Medical School. Gordon directs the Center for Diversity & Career Development, and is a professor and associate dean at the Medical School.

1. Embryonic stem cell research is one of the most regulated areas of medical research.

Embryonic stem cell research is extensively regulated by the Food and Drug Administration, Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) that are created and operated in accordance with federal law, and by Embryonic Stem Cell Research Oversight Committees that operate pursuant to guidelines from the National Academy of Sciences and the International Society for Stem Cell research.

Federal law (45 C.F.R. part 46) governs human subject research, including any research in which stem cells would be tested on patients as well as any research in which patients would donate embryos for the derivation of stem cell lines. That means that IRBs must approve any stem cell research involving human subjects, including the consent documents used to derive the lines and the methods employed to conduct the research, to ensure that the scientific goals are ethical and beneficial.

2. Additional layers of oversight are present in all federally funded research universities such as the University of Michigan.

Embryonic Stem Cell Research Oversight Committees (ESCRO committees) were created at research institutions, under guidance from the National Academy of Sciences, to oversee all aspects of pluripotent stem cell research, including all research conducted in laboratory dishes, and all research conducted in patients. This also provides an additional layer of oversight, beyond that provided by IRBs as noted above, over the derivation of stem cell lines. ESCRO committee approval is therefore required for all experiments performed with embryonic stem cells. These oversight committees (IRB and ESCRO) are composed of scientists, physicians, ethicists, lawyers, and members of the community.

3. Private research in companies is also regulated.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates research done at private companies toward the development and testing of any medical product, and imposes similar regulations to ensure that such research is performed ethically. For this reason, companies generally establish their own in-house IRB committees to ensure that their research passes muster with the FDA.

Together, these mechanisms mean regulation of embryonic stem cell research, both at universities and at private companies, is extensive and comprehensive. Note as well that additional laws bearing restrictions on stem cell research are pending before Congress.

4. Current embryonic stem cell lines do not mirror the diversity in our society.

Currently, only certain embryonic stem cell lines, which were created on or before August 9, 2001, can be used for federally funded research. These embryonic stem cell lines do not reflect the diversity in American society. In fact, a surprisingly high fraction of the embryonic stem cell lines approved for use with federal funding arose from embryos obtained from a fertility clinic in Haifa, Israel.

This is key because one of the fundamental principles of clinical trials is that we test new medicines in a diverse patient population that mirrors the diversity in our society. For example, if we test new medicines only on people of a certain ethnic or racial makeup, there would be a risk that the medicines developed would not be as effective in other racial groups. This is because efficacy and side effects sometimes vary between racial or ethnic groups.

Another reason why diversity in clinical research is key is that some inherited diseases are more prevalent in some populations. Examples of such genetic illnesses include Tay-Sachs among Ashkenazi Jews and sickle cell anemia, which is found more often among people of African descent.

It is critical to enroll a diverse patient population so we have an opportunity to detect drugs that work for all ethnic groups. If embryonic stem cell research changes the future of medicine, we may be at risk of leaving certain groups out of that future by not studying embryonic stem cells from all ethnic backgrounds.

5. It is not true that stem cell research is unregulated or that unethical experiments could be conducted on patients.

A recent television ad compared stem cell research to the Tuskegee syphilis experiments, a tragic and universally condemned study conducted decades ago — before current federal laws on research involving humans were put in place. This comparison is utterly baseless and misleading. After the Tuskegee study was exposed to public scrutiny, the federal government put in place new research laws that explicitly prohibit unethical or harmful research. These laws require any stem cell research conducted in patients or in which patients donate embryos for the derivation of stem cell lines to be conducted ethically and safely under the oversight of IRBs or the FDA.

More information on stem cells can be found at www.umich.edu/stemcell and stemcells.nih.gov.

Additional resources:

Stem Cells 101: Five things you should know about stem cell research http://www2.med.umich.edu/prmc/media/newsroom/details.cfm?ID=696

Source: University of Michigan Health System and News and Information Services


Sanofi Pasteur, the vaccines division of sanofi-aventis Group, announced today that an investigational high-dose influenza vaccine demonstrated increased immune responses among adults 65 years of age and older compared with the standard influenza vaccine. The candidate high-dose intramuscular formulation of the influenza vaccine is being developed by sanofi pasteur.

The results were reported today at the 48th Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy (ICAAC)/Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) 46th annual meeting.

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the currently available inactivated influenza vaccine offers public health benefits in reducing influenza-related morbidity and mortality in older adults. Study authors explain, however, that as people age, the immune system tends to weaken. Older adults become not only more susceptible to infections, but also less responsive to vaccination. When infected with the influenza virus, they are less able to mount an immune response to neutralize the attack. “Development of an influenza vaccine that will provide an improved immune response in older adults is important because this population has the highest rates of complications from influenza including hospitalization and death,” said Ann R. Falsey, MD Associate Professor of Medicine, University of Rochester School of Medicine, Rochester, NY; Infectious Diseases Unit, Rochester General Hospital. Approximately 90 percent of the 36,000 average annual influenza-associated respiratory and circulatory related deaths occur among adults 65 years of age and older.

Study Results

The Phase III study of almost 4,000 people 65 years of age and older compared the high-dose influenza vaccine with the standard inactivated influenza vaccine formulated for the 2006-2007 season. The key finding is that the new high-dose vaccine increased the immune responses to all three influenza strains compared with standard vaccine in the study population. An important additional observation was that the increased immune response was also observed in the potentially more vulnerable subset of study participants who had no measurable circulating protective antibodies before receiving their annual influenza vaccine.

In the randomized double-blind study conducted at 30 centers throughout the United States, 2,575 people received the high-dose influenza vaccine and 1,262 received the standard influenza vaccine. The standard influenza vaccine contained 15 micrograms of hemagglutinin (HA) of each of three influenza strains, and the high-dose vaccine contained four times as much, 60 micrograms HA per strain. Both vaccines contained two influenza type A strains (H1N1 and H3N2) and one influenza type B strain.

After 28 days, investigators assessed serum hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) titers in study participants, a standard measurement of the immune response to influenza vaccination. HAI titers are thought by researchers to correlate with increased protection against illness after exposure to influenza. Statistically significant higher HAI titers against all three influenza virus strains were reported in those who received the high-dose vaccine compared with those who received the standard vaccine. Immunogenicity results met pre-defined criteria for overall superiority of the high-dose vaccine. Pre-defined criteria for overall superiority in the phase III study was based on geometric mean titers (GMT) and seroconversion, which is defined as either a rise in HAI titer from < 1:10 to greater than or equal to 1:40 post-vaccination or a greater than or equal to 4-fold increase in HAI titer post-vaccination from a pre-vaccination titer greater than or equal to 1:10.

In a post hoc analysis, study investigators also examined post-vaccination immune responses induced by the two vaccines among a subgroup of study participants with no protective antibodies (HAI titers less than 1:10 as measured by their pre-vaccination serum sample). This subset of the study population represents a group who may be at even higher risk for severe influenza disease and its associated complications. Among all study participants, 10 percent were seronegative for H1N1, 8 percent were seronegative for H3N2, and 21 percent were seronegative for the B strain. Twenty-eight days after vaccination, a higher percentage of the subgroup given the high-dose vaccine developed seroprotective HAI titers of 1:40 or greater to each of the three vaccine strains compared with those given the standard vaccine. In addition, mean HAI titers for all strains were higher in the seronegative individuals who received the high-dose vaccine compared with those who received the standard vaccine.

Source: sanofi pasteur


Rotavirus Infections Decline More than 70 Percent in Children in U.S.

  • Author: Health Informer
  • Filed under: Health News
  • Date: Oct 26,2008

Quest Diagnostics Health Trends(TM) Report shows declines vary widely by state

The largest study of rotavirus laboratory data developed since an oral rotavirus vaccine was introduced in the U.S. in early 2006 shows that cases of rotavirus infection have decreased significantly, suggesting the vaccine is preventing infection in infants and young children. The latest Quest Diagnostics Health Trends(TM) Report also provides evidence for the first time that cases of infection decreased in children up to the age of six, suggesting that herd immunity may have reduced rates of infection in children age two and over who were unlikely to have been vaccinated. However, the report shows that while cases of infection decreased nationally, rates varied by state, indicating possible geographic differences in use of the vaccine.

Rotavirus is the most common cause of severe, dehydrating gastroenteritis among infants and young children worldwide, and one of the leading causes of emergency department visits, physician visits and hospitalizations of children in the United States.

The findings were presented today by Jay M. Lieberman, M.D., medical director, infectious diseases, Quest Diagnostics Incorporated at the Joint Meeting of the 48th Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy (ICAAC) and the 46th Annual Meeting of the Infectious Disease Society of America (ISDA) in Washington, D.C. The Quest Diagnostics Health Trends(TM) Report is the largest assessment of rotavirus laboratory-test results since the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended routine vaccination in August 2006 for infants at 2, 4, and 6 months of age.

The analysis was performed on de-identified diagnostic test results from September 2003 through June 2008 from data of more than 132,000 patients in the Quest Diagnostics database.

The analysis showed a 76 percent reduction in positive test results during the most recent peak season, December 2007 through June 2008, compared to the three years before the rotavirus vaccine was available, December 2003 to June 2006. In addition, the positivity rate (the number of individuals who test positive in proportion to the total number of tests taken) decreased 70 percent during the study period.

“Our analysis suggests that the oral rotavirus vaccine has been highly effective at reducing the incidence of rotavirus. Our findings reinforce those from a preliminary report issued by the CDC earlier this year. Considering the toll this disease has traditionally taken on children and their families each year in the U.S., this is exciting and welcome news for physicians and parents,” said Dr. Lieberman. “Our report also may have important implications for public health efforts in developing parts of the world, where rotavirus tragically is a frequent cause of childhood death.”

Rotavirus causes severe acute gastroenteritis among infants and young children, often resulting in high fever, vomiting and diarrhea. Rotavirus accounts for more than half a million deaths of children under the age of five each year worldwide. In the U.S., the disease causes fewer deaths annually (an average of 20 to 60), but remains a substantial cause of morbidity, resulting in approximately 410,000 physician visits, 205,000 to 270,000 emergency department visits, and 55,000 to 70,000 hospitalizations. Rotavirus infection represents a significant drain on resources, with estimates of $1 billion in societal costs nationally. In the U.S. rotavirus activity follows a distinct winter-spring seasonal pattern.

Decline in Rotavirus Varies Among States

The analysis showed a reduction in rotavirus positivity rates in all 43 states and Puerto Rico that had submitted at least 100 lab specimens during the pre-vaccine period. Some states experienced greater declines than others, which likely reflect differences in vaccine uptake. The majority of states reduced the incidence of rotavirus, as indicated by positivity rates, by more than 60 percent. However, there was substantial variability, with states such as Delaware, North Carolina, and Alabama each experiencing declines of more than 95 percent, while in Washington, Nebraska, New Mexico, and Arizona, the declines were less than 35 percent.

“While our data does not provide insight into why rates of infection varied geographically, we know that multiple factors determine how quickly new vaccines are adopted by physicians, parents and public health agencies,” said Dr. Lieberman. “We suspect that much of the variability we see in our data is related to such differences in vaccine uptake. Our analysis suggests the need for further research into the factors influencing uptake and its implications for public health policy.”

Herd Immunity Benefits Nonvaccinated Children

The analysis showed that the sharpest decline in positive rotavirus test results, approximately 83 percent, occurred in children younger than 12 months of age, the age group most likely to have been vaccinated. However, the analysis also showed a dramatic decline in positive test results in older children (ranging from 67 to 75 percent), including children ages two to six. Because children older than two years of age in the U.S. are unlikely to have been vaccinated, these data suggest a herd immunity phenomenon, which occurs when enough individuals are vaccinated so as to reduce transmission of a virus, thereby providing some protection to unvaccinated individuals.

“Herd immunity is a significant favorable outcome of a successful vaccination program because it means that even unvaccinated individuals may be benefiting from widespread use of a vaccine,” said Dr. Lieberman. “Our analysis provides evidence for the first time that unvaccinated children may also be reaping the benefits of the rotavirus vaccine. Herd immunity is particularly valuable to newborns and other young infants who have not yet started or completed their vaccine series.”

Study Methodology

The Quest Diagnostics Health Trends(TM) Report, “Decline in Rotavirus Cases in the U.S. After Licensure of a Live, Oral Rotavirus Vaccine,” is based on an analysis of more than 132,000 rotavirus antigen detection test results (by antigen-capture enzyme immunoassay, or EIA) performed from December to June at all Quest Diagnostics regional laboratories, during the period of December 2003 to June 2008. The results were extracted from the Quest Diagnostics Information Data Warehouse (IDW), the largest private database of clinical laboratory tests results in the United States. IDW contains information on all clinical test results reported by Quest Diagnostics laboratories in the United States, and includes data from all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. The database includes information on the ordering physician, patient, tests ordered, and results reported, and data are handled in a HIPAA-compliant manner. The study utilized only de-identified testing data that did not contain any patient- or physician-identifiable health information.

In the study, the pre-vaccine period was defined as the three seasons before vaccine* licensure (December through June 2003-2004, 2004-2005, and 2005-2006). The post-vaccine period was defined as the most recent peak season, December 2007 through June 2008. (The December 2006-June 2007 season was a “transition” year, with limited vaccine use in young infants in the months immediately after the vaccine became available.) In the pre-vaccine period, Quest Diagnostics performed an average of 27,625 tests for rotavirus annually, of which 7,162 (26 percent) were positive. By contrast, of the 21,873 tests conducted by Quest Diagnostics in the post-vaccine period, only 1,703 (7.8 percent) were positive – a 76.2 percent reduction in the total number of positive tests (p<0.001). Declines in the number of positive test results during the post-vaccine period were seen in all age groups (ranging from 67.3 percent to 83.2 percent), including children over the age of two. The greatest decline was among children less than 12 months old.

The rate of test positivity decreased from an average of 26 percent during the pre-vaccine period to 7.8 percent in the post-vaccine period, representing a 70.0 percent reduction (p<0.001). Positivity rates declined across age groups (59.0 percent to 76.4 percent), including children over two, with the greatest decline among children less than 12 months old.

* Rotavirus vaccine, live, oral, pentavalent (RotaTeq(R), Merck & Co., Inc., Whitehouse Station, New Jersey)

Source: Quest Diagnostics


Finding a Flu Shot Just Got Easier

  • Author: Health Informer
  • Filed under: Health News
  • Date: Oct 26,2008

Free Online Search Lists Over 35,000 Flu Shot Clinics

Last year, fewer than 25 percent of children ages 6 to 23 months were fully immunized for the flu during the flu season. Since asthma and allergy patients already have chronic respiratory problems, the risks associated with getting the flu can be greater for them.

So the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America (AAFA) is making it easier for the 20 million Americans with asthma and the 50 million with allergies to find flu shot clinics with a free “Flu Shot Finder” at www.aafa.org.

The flu is a serious and potentially deadly viral infection that spreads easily and is a major concern, especially for people with other chronic respiratory diseases. Each year, the flu causes approximately 20,000 hospitalizations and nearly 100 deaths in American children under age 5. Annual flu shots are highly recommended for anyone with underlying medical conditions such as asthma.

The Foundation’s Flu Shot Finder is a simple online zip code search that links to a database of more than 35,000 flu clinic locations nationwide. The Flu Shot Finder returns a list of clinic names, dates, times, addresses and phone numbers to help consumers find the most convenient location and schedule a visit. The Flu Shot Finder Web page also provides links to helpful information about influenza; flu shot guidelines from the CDC and more.

“Flu symptoms can cause more trouble for people with chronic respiratory conditions,” says Angel Waldron, a spokesperson for AAFA. “When you’ve already got a chronic disease like asthma, a severe flu could make it worse.” For more free information about AAFA, asthma or influenza, visit www.aafa.org, or call 1-800-7-ASTHMA.

Source: The Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America


Survey Shows Americans Crave Easier Ways to Eat Healthfully

  • Author: Health Informer
  • Filed under: Health News
  • Date: Oct 25,2008

Choosing More Nutrient-Rich Foods Makes Eating Well Practical and Enjoyable

The U.S. is at a crossroads when it comes to nutrition advice. For decades, Americans have heard a lot about what not to eat, and much less about nutrient-rich foods to enjoy when building a healthy diet. Various stamps, stars and seals on food packaging labels also tend to focus on what foods don’t contain — like fat, sugar and salt — rather than the valuable nutrients consumers should look for.

Now, a new survey sponsored by the Nutrient Rich Foods Coalition (NRFC) finds that Americans are more confused than ever about healthy eating. And a recent report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office adds to many other voices calling for a unified food labeling system to help convey clear, consistent advice to consumers about the nutritional quality of foods.(1)

According to the survey, 54 percent of Americans are overwhelmed by the information and advice they receive on what to eat and what to avoid, and 61 percent are interested in learning about the beneficial nutrients found in foods and beverages, not just the amount of fat, sugar and salt a food contains.

“It’s clear that Americans are confused about healthy eating and are looking for a simple, sound approach to build a healthy diet and live well,” notes Adam Drewnowski, Ph.D., director of the nutritional sciences program at the University of Washington Center for Obesity Research. “We need to help people embrace and enjoy food — not fear it, or be confused by it. We can do that by focusing more on nutrient-rich foods.”

The NRFC encourages people to restore balance to their diets in this way, and supports the Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2005, which encourages choosing more nutrient-dense foods. Nutrient-dense foods are defined as those that “provide substantial amounts of vitamins and minerals and relatively few calories.”(2)

Eating the nutrient-rich way means considering the total nutrient package of a food or beverage: Looking at how many beneficial nutrients it contains, such as vitamins, protein and fiber, as well as the amount of fat, sugar and salt. Nutrient-rich foods include foods from all five food groups: milk, fruits, vegetables, grains, and meat and beans.

The survey found that 78 percent of Americans agree they would like a simple, practical tool that would help them build a healthy diet based on getting the most nutrients from the foods they choose. Drewnowski agrees: “Following this approach to eating allows people to choose foods they enjoy that provide key nutrients important to overall health.”

“The nutrient-rich foods approach can be applied to individual food choices, meals and the overall day to develop a lifetime of healthy eating. It’s not a specific diet plan, but a general shift in the way people can think about food,” notes NRFC spokesperson Mary Abbott Hess, LHD, MS, RD, LD, FADA.

Hess shares the following tips for easily applying the nutrient-rich foods approach to everyday meals:

  • Savor the first few bites of any dish. Top foods with chopped nuts or reduced-fat shredded sharp cheese to get crunch, flavor and nutrients in every bite.
  • Spend a few minutes to cut and bag veggies to increase nutrients in the diet of every family member. Try some ready-to-eat favorites like red, green or yellow peppers, broccoli or cauliflower flowerets, carrots, celery sticks, cucumber, snap peas or whole radishes. Keep cut vegetables handy to use as mid-afternoon snacks, side dishes, lunch box additions or as a quick nibble while waiting for dinner.
  • Serve meals that pack multiple nutrient-rich foods into one dish, like hearty, broth-based soups that’s full of colorful vegetables, beans, lean meat, or chill with a dollop of low-fat yogurt on top. Serve these with whole grain breads or rolls.

For more tools, tips and tactics to follow the nutrient-rich foods approach and take the guesswork out of healthy eating, visit http://www.nutrientrichfoods.org/. The site offers recipes, meal ideas, a supermarket shopping list and science-based resources to help people build and enjoy a nutrient-rich lifestyle.

About the Survey

This study was conducted by Ipsos Public Affairs, a global survey-based market research company, on behalf of the Nutrient Rich Foods Coalition (NRFC) on September 9-12, 2008. Margin of error is +3.1.

Participants surveyed: 1,019 adults from all regions of the United States participated in the survey. Survey respondents were 48 percent male and 52 percent female, and the majority of participants were between ages 25 and 64.

About the Nutrient Rich Foods Coalition

The Nutrient Rich Foods Coalition is a partnership dedicated to helping people build healthier diets by showing them how to get more nutrition from their calories. It brings together leading scientific researchers, health professionals, communications experts and representatives of each of the five basic MyPyramid food groups. For more information about the Nutrient Rich Foods approach, visit http://www.nutrientrichfoods.org/.

The following food organizations are members of the Nutrient Rich Foods Coalition: California Avocado Commission, California Kiwifruit Commission, California Strawberry Commission, Egg Nutrition Center, Florida Department of Citrus, Grain Foods Foundation, The Beef Checkoff Program through the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, National Dairy Council, National Pork Board, U.S. Potato Board, Wheat Foods Council, and the Wild Blueberry Association of North America. In addition, the Nutrient Rich Foods Coalition includes experts who comprise a Scientific Advisory Committee and Consumer Communications and Nutrition Behavior Advisory Committee.

(1) United States Government Accountability Office. Food Labeling: FDA Needs to Better Leverage Resources, Improve Oversight, and Effectively Use Available Data to Help Consumers Select Healthy Foods. Report to the Chair, Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives. 2008. Accessed at: http://www.gao.gov/.

(2) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and U.S. Department of Agriculture. Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2005. 6th Edition, Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, January 2005.

Source: Nutrient Rich Foods Coalition