Determination to have a baby - one of the most important decisions in life. If ask future parents what they would like to have a child, immediately išgirstume: healthy. In reality - health - the most powerful foundation for all future baby's life, and therefore need to take care of this foundation is when the only idea of gaining the baby is born.
Of course, the best place to start a new life when both potential parents are in good health. It is advised to seek further, or do not have a family of inherited diseases, to draw attention to the damaging environmental factors.
Recently, environmental pollution has increased dramatically. Pollutants can harm the baby or even the future cause miscarriage. Reuters agency announced that the United States, the study of neonatal blood taken from the naval found more than 280 harmful substances. More than half of them can lead to cancer development, while others - some development problems. Maybe contamination in Lithuania as lower, but still contemplating pregnancy should be chosen as a more secure environment and to make safer food products. For example, pregnant women are advised to avoid tuna and other oily fish, because their oil often elevated mercury, lead and other heavy metals.
Avoid fertilization and extensively cultivated or near the street of fruit and vegetables.
Food must be wholesome and varied, so it seems that the refrigerator no longer semi-local.
That the future mother's organism to obtain all necessary materials, it is useful for pregnant women to take special vitamin and mineral complexes.
During pregnancy, one of the most serious problems faced by the age ≥ - anemia. In most cases it occurs in the second half of pregnancy, but everything should take care in advance. Choose foods rich in iron: the tongue, veal, other types of meat, beetroot, strawberry (in season), apples, etc. Prophylaxis may be used as iron salt preparations. Iron absorption improves if it contains the addition of ascorbic acid required and group B vitamins.
However, by protecting the health of:
• eat raw or inadequately heat-treated meat;
• Avoid raw eggs, raw fish dishes (eg sushi);
• Do not drink unpasteurized milk;
• eat moldy food, even if, for cleaning the mouse, the products seem to be quite good.
Other tips
Folic acid is necessary for a future child of nervous system development. It is for this reason, in preparation for pregnancy is recommended that they use (1 mg / day). If you plan to become pregnant over the age of 35 years of age or earlier the family had a kid born in birth defects, such as., Cracked spine, the recommended dose of folic acid is higher.
Of course, both parents need to quit, refuse to binge drinking. When planning a pregnancy, it is recommended not only to provide a healthy diet, avoid stress, but also check whether you suffer from some diseases, especially infections, such as., Toxoplasma, sexually transmitted diseases. Even better, if you do a special blood test to find out whether you have immunity to infections such as rubella or measles. Illness, it would seem, "not angry" children diseases during pregnancy can cause serious health risks to infants. If necessary, you can get vaccinated against rubella, but the vaccine is not recommended for pregnant sooner than three months. Some doctors recommend vaccination against mumps and (pig), hepatitis B, tetanus.
Although pregnant women are required to visit a dentist, the best dental health check prior to pregnancy. Yes pregnant women not only avoid the stress, but also the additional X-ray irradiation. If you are already pregnant, do not forget to tell your dentist. By the way, healthy teeth should take care of daddy and the future, because kissing is not only the exchange of saliva, but harmful microbes that can harm pregnant women teeth, which in this period and thus are more vulnerable.
Without first checking with your doctor, you can not take any medicines.
About electromagnetic fields on
During pregnancy, especially in the first trimester, it is necessary to avoid any factors that may cause miscarriage. Recommended for pregnant women to rest a lot, not overwork, to avoid electromagnetic field exposure. One of the biggest sources of electromagnetic field - the computer. A pregnant woman is recommended to reduce the work to a computer for up to 3 hours per day or, if possible, and more.
After research, found that those families which are very often used in electromagnetic field emitting devices (microwave oven, hairdryer, computers, and others), abortion is far more than such devices disuse families.
Waiting for the baby, prospective parents often look very much committed to their health and lifestyle. Remember that you do not folded sticks. Pregnancy - natural condition, it is necessary to take care of themselves, but the "glass enclosure" really unnecessary.
Contribute a better translation
Saturday 23 January 2010
Friday 22 January 2010
Nicotine in the blood
Nicotine - 1-methyl-2 (3-pyridyl) - Pyrrolidine - an organic compound, an alkaloid naturally found in tobacco plants - one of the strongest neurotic poison. Nicotine is synthesized Raknes and accumulated in leaves, resulting in them are found only significant concentration of nicotine. Physical properties: colorless, volatile, liquid, characteristic odor, brown in the air.
Effects
1. Carcinogenic effects. Nicotine affects other toxic chemicals found in tobacco smoke, a negative carcinogenic effects, by inhibiting the body's reaction to the potential destruction of tumor cells. Direct effect on healthy cells do not have a rollover cancer nicotine.
2nd Stimulation effect. Nicotine causes an influx of energy, helps with concentration, increases alertness, improves eye and hand coordination, memory, stimulates the sympathetic nervous system, coronary heart blood vessels to collapse. Nicotine stimulates the adrenal cortex, increases the adrenaline and noradrenalin Breakdown. As a consequence - increased heart beat, increased blood pressure, minutely soul is, cardiac work and oxygen consumption mmiokarde. Smokers break 10-20 heart beats per minute, so a year in smoking among human heart shake 5-10 million times more than non-smokers the human heart. Peripheral vascular BAI is rapidly absorbed and pulmonary capillary wedge within a few seconds to produce high concentrations in the brain. During the oral mucous membrane, nicotine is absorbed slowly and incomplete. After 6-8 hours nicotine levels by 75%. When a man strongly felt by withdrawal symptoms. (anxiety, tension, irritability, depression, volatile moods, fatigue, sleep disturbances, impaired concentrating, increased appetite, weight gain, perspiration, chills, headache, dizziness. - accessories). Increases your heart rate, blood pressure and decreases appetite. At high doses, causing vomiting and nausea. Adults lethal dose of nicotine - 40-60mg.
3rd Dependence. Causes nikotinizma - addiction to nicotine. (Lack of nicotine (withdrawal) symptoms include irritability, headache, anxiety, sleep disorders. Symptomatic 2-6 weeks, I felt 48-72 hours after the last dose of nicotine.) Nicotine inhaled into the lungs with tobacco smoke is low (about 10mg), but it is enough to cause addiction.
4th Nicotine to enter the body enough to 7 seconds on the circulatory system achieve barrier brain and spread to the brain.
5th Nicotine raises dopamine smooth.
Pipe and cigar nicotine more than cigarettes, but their heavy smoke intensely irritating to respiratory tract, resulting in less smoke (including nicotine and inhalation. Cigarette smoke is lighter and less nicotine inhalation. A standard cigarette is about 20mg of nicotine. Part of nicotine break down from heat, part -- dissipates in the environment. into the body from falling on 2mg. lethal dose of the human body is 1 mg nicotine per kilogram of body weight.
Cigarettes with lower nicotine and tar yield is also harmful to humans. The organism tries to maintain a certain nicotine levels in the blood, so smoking "lighter" cigarettes, people include a deeper and more imbue carbon monoxide and other harmful substances.
Effects
1. Carcinogenic effects. Nicotine affects other toxic chemicals found in tobacco smoke, a negative carcinogenic effects, by inhibiting the body's reaction to the potential destruction of tumor cells. Direct effect on healthy cells do not have a rollover cancer nicotine.
2nd Stimulation effect. Nicotine causes an influx of energy, helps with concentration, increases alertness, improves eye and hand coordination, memory, stimulates the sympathetic nervous system, coronary heart blood vessels to collapse. Nicotine stimulates the adrenal cortex, increases the adrenaline and noradrenalin Breakdown. As a consequence - increased heart beat, increased blood pressure, minutely soul is, cardiac work and oxygen consumption mmiokarde. Smokers break 10-20 heart beats per minute, so a year in smoking among human heart shake 5-10 million times more than non-smokers the human heart. Peripheral vascular BAI is rapidly absorbed and pulmonary capillary wedge within a few seconds to produce high concentrations in the brain. During the oral mucous membrane, nicotine is absorbed slowly and incomplete. After 6-8 hours nicotine levels by 75%. When a man strongly felt by withdrawal symptoms. (anxiety, tension, irritability, depression, volatile moods, fatigue, sleep disturbances, impaired concentrating, increased appetite, weight gain, perspiration, chills, headache, dizziness. - accessories). Increases your heart rate, blood pressure and decreases appetite. At high doses, causing vomiting and nausea. Adults lethal dose of nicotine - 40-60mg.
3rd Dependence. Causes nikotinizma - addiction to nicotine. (Lack of nicotine (withdrawal) symptoms include irritability, headache, anxiety, sleep disorders. Symptomatic 2-6 weeks, I felt 48-72 hours after the last dose of nicotine.) Nicotine inhaled into the lungs with tobacco smoke is low (about 10mg), but it is enough to cause addiction.
4th Nicotine to enter the body enough to 7 seconds on the circulatory system achieve barrier brain and spread to the brain.
5th Nicotine raises dopamine smooth.
Pipe and cigar nicotine more than cigarettes, but their heavy smoke intensely irritating to respiratory tract, resulting in less smoke (including nicotine and inhalation. Cigarette smoke is lighter and less nicotine inhalation. A standard cigarette is about 20mg of nicotine. Part of nicotine break down from heat, part -- dissipates in the environment. into the body from falling on 2mg. lethal dose of the human body is 1 mg nicotine per kilogram of body weight.
Cigarettes with lower nicotine and tar yield is also harmful to humans. The organism tries to maintain a certain nicotine levels in the blood, so smoking "lighter" cigarettes, people include a deeper and more imbue carbon monoxide and other harmful substances.
Monday 18 January 2010
Nicotinell Fruit
Components:
Nicotine
Packaging:
blister N2
blister N12
blister N24
blister N36
blister N48
blister N60
blister N72
blister N96
1. WHAT IS nicotinell
Nicotinell gum piece is white and rectangular.
Nicotinell is packed in PVC / PVdC / aluminum blister packs of 2 or 12 pieces. Blister packed in cardboard boxes which can be 2, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72 or 96 pieces of rubber. It may not be available in all pack sizes.
Nicotinell is assigned a group of medicines which are used for smoking cessation.
2nd How does Nicotinell
Nicotinell contains nicotine, a substance which is one of the tobacco constituents. Nicotinell chewing gum, nicotine gradually released, which is absorbed in the oral mucosa. The nicotine substitute to reduce discomfort, often resulting from smoking cessation.
Nicotinell does not contain other harmful substances (tar, carbon monoxide) are released in conjunction with tobacco smoke.
3rd WHEN used Nicotinell
Nicotinell gum is used to facilitate the discomfort caused by years of smoking.
4th Before you use Nicotinell
Nicotinell do not take if:
- Are allergic to one of the Nicotinell ingredients;
- You do not smoke.
Before using Nicotinell gum should consult your doctor or pharmacist if:
- Have heart disease - heart attack, heart failure, cardiac angina, heart Prinzmetalio type of angina, a heart rhythm disorder;
- Stroke;
- Your high blood pressure;
- Your blood disorders;
- Have diabetes;
- Your upsurge in activity of the thyroid
- You have pheochromocytoma (adrenal upsurge in activity);
- Have kidney or liver disease;
- Have oesophagitis, mouth or throat inflammation, gastritis or gastric ulcer;
- Fructose intolerance;
- You are taking or have recently taken any other medicines, including those that have purchased without a prescription, because smoking cessation may need to adjust the dose of drugs
Patients wearing dentures, chewing gum, may lead to discomfort. In this case, it is recommended to use other forms of medicinal nicotine replacement therapy. Then talk to your doctor or pharmacist.
One Nicotinell 2 mg, Fruit, pieces of rubber is 0.2 g of sorbitol (E420). The energy value of - 1.0 kcal. One Nicotinell 2 mg, Fruit, pieces of rubber are 11.50 mg of sodium.
You should completely quit using Nicotinell.
Nicotinell gum vartojmas children and adults
Without a doctor's appointment, Nicotinell not to use children below 18 years of age.
Pregnancy and Lactation
You should try to quit smoking without nicotine replacement therapy. However, if you fail to quit smoking without nicotine replacement therapy, talk with your doctor.
Breast-feeding will not smoke or chew Nicotinell, because nicotine passes into breast milk. If you are attempting to quit smoking during lactation, Nicotinell should only be a doctor appointment.
Driving and using machines
Impact on ability to drive or operate machines when Nicotinell gum is used at recommended doses. However, it should consider the fact that smoking cessation may lead to behavioral changes.
5th How to use Nicotinell
Proper dosage is determined depending on how much you've previously rūkėte. Use of 4 mg Nicotinell gum if:
- Your dependence on nicotine is high or very high;
- You have previously failed to quit smoking using 2 mg gum;
- Threatened to start smoking again due to severe nicotine withdrawal symptoms.
The appropriate dose is selected in the following table:
Light and medium dependency on nicotine
Medium and heavy dependence on nicotine
Strong and very strong dependence on nicotine
Surūkoma less than 20 cigarettes per day
Surūkoma from 20 to 30 cigarettes per day
Surūkoma more than 30
cigarettes per day
The recommended low-dose (2 mg), Nicotinell Gum
Recommended small (2 mg) or high (4 mg) dose of Nicotinell Gum
The recommended high-dose (4 mg) Nicotinell Gum
If you take large doses of rubber significant adverse reactions, then it is recommended to use low doses of gum.
Instructions for use:
1.Vieną piece of chewing gum until the taste becomes sharp.
2.Palaikykite gum between gum and cheek.
3.Susilpnėjus taste again pakramtykite rubber.
4.Kartokite this procedure for about 30 minutes.
Dosage over 18 years of age:
Sukramtykite one piece of Nicotinell when you feel the desire to smoke. Nicotinell gum kramtykite every 1 - 2 hours. Usually sufficient 8 to 12 pieces per day. If you still feel the desire to smoke, you can still chew gum. Do not chew more than 25 pieces of 2 mg, and more than 15 pieces of 4 mg Nicotinell gum.
The duration of treatment is individual. On average, treatment lasts for 3 months. After 3 months should be gradually reduced sukramtomos Nicotinell gum content. The treatment ends when the day sukramtomi 1 to 2 pieces of Nicotinell. Nicotinell gum is not recommended for longer than 6 months. Some patients who had left smoking may continue treatment Nicotinell that again is not returned to smoking. If you are taking Nicotinell longer than 9 months, talk with your doctor or pharmacist.
Their recommendations can help you quit smoking.
Together with acid substances containing snacks, such as coffee or soda, may reduce nicotine absorption. The 15 minutes. against chewing gum, should avoid using these products.
What to do if sukramtėte more than the recommended Nicotinell
Nicotinell chewing too much gum, there are the same symptoms as surūkius too many cigarettes. In case of overdose nicotine normally seen weakness, sweating, salivation, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, loss of hearing or vision problems, headaches, heart rhythm disturbances, shortness of breath, blood circulation disorders.
Consult your doctor or pharmacist if you experience these symptoms.
If nicotine poisoning a child, contact your doctor immediately. Even small doses of nicotine are dangerous to the child's life.
6th What adverse reactions may cause nicotinell
Nicotinell Frequently observed adverse reactions include dizziness, headache and sleep sutrikimai.Tokie the symptoms of quitting because of reduced nicotine levels in the body. It may also occur: dry mouth, hiccups, nausea, vomiting, heartburn, salivation, mouth irritation, sore throat, facial pain as a result of intense gum kramtymo.Guma may stick to dentures or damage to dental fillings.
Less frequently gets fast heartbeat, rash, urticaria. Rare incidence of cardiac rhythm disorders, allergic reactions. These reactions, in some cases can be serious when there is swelling of the skin, swollen face or throat, blood pressure falls, there is shortness of breath.
If you have not mentioned or described in the above events, contact your doctor or pharmacist.
Nicotine
Packaging:
blister N2
blister N12
blister N24
blister N36
blister N48
blister N60
blister N72
blister N96
1. WHAT IS nicotinell
Nicotinell gum piece is white and rectangular.
Nicotinell is packed in PVC / PVdC / aluminum blister packs of 2 or 12 pieces. Blister packed in cardboard boxes which can be 2, 12, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72 or 96 pieces of rubber. It may not be available in all pack sizes.
Nicotinell is assigned a group of medicines which are used for smoking cessation.
2nd How does Nicotinell
Nicotinell contains nicotine, a substance which is one of the tobacco constituents. Nicotinell chewing gum, nicotine gradually released, which is absorbed in the oral mucosa. The nicotine substitute to reduce discomfort, often resulting from smoking cessation.
Nicotinell does not contain other harmful substances (tar, carbon monoxide) are released in conjunction with tobacco smoke.
3rd WHEN used Nicotinell
Nicotinell gum is used to facilitate the discomfort caused by years of smoking.
4th Before you use Nicotinell
Nicotinell do not take if:
- Are allergic to one of the Nicotinell ingredients;
- You do not smoke.
Before using Nicotinell gum should consult your doctor or pharmacist if:
- Have heart disease - heart attack, heart failure, cardiac angina, heart Prinzmetalio type of angina, a heart rhythm disorder;
- Stroke;
- Your high blood pressure;
- Your blood disorders;
- Have diabetes;
- Your upsurge in activity of the thyroid
- You have pheochromocytoma (adrenal upsurge in activity);
- Have kidney or liver disease;
- Have oesophagitis, mouth or throat inflammation, gastritis or gastric ulcer;
- Fructose intolerance;
- You are taking or have recently taken any other medicines, including those that have purchased without a prescription, because smoking cessation may need to adjust the dose of drugs
Patients wearing dentures, chewing gum, may lead to discomfort. In this case, it is recommended to use other forms of medicinal nicotine replacement therapy. Then talk to your doctor or pharmacist.
One Nicotinell 2 mg, Fruit, pieces of rubber is 0.2 g of sorbitol (E420). The energy value of - 1.0 kcal. One Nicotinell 2 mg, Fruit, pieces of rubber are 11.50 mg of sodium.
You should completely quit using Nicotinell.
Nicotinell gum vartojmas children and adults
Without a doctor's appointment, Nicotinell not to use children below 18 years of age.
Pregnancy and Lactation
You should try to quit smoking without nicotine replacement therapy. However, if you fail to quit smoking without nicotine replacement therapy, talk with your doctor.
Breast-feeding will not smoke or chew Nicotinell, because nicotine passes into breast milk. If you are attempting to quit smoking during lactation, Nicotinell should only be a doctor appointment.
Driving and using machines
Impact on ability to drive or operate machines when Nicotinell gum is used at recommended doses. However, it should consider the fact that smoking cessation may lead to behavioral changes.
5th How to use Nicotinell
Proper dosage is determined depending on how much you've previously rūkėte. Use of 4 mg Nicotinell gum if:
- Your dependence on nicotine is high or very high;
- You have previously failed to quit smoking using 2 mg gum;
- Threatened to start smoking again due to severe nicotine withdrawal symptoms.
The appropriate dose is selected in the following table:
Light and medium dependency on nicotine
Medium and heavy dependence on nicotine
Strong and very strong dependence on nicotine
Surūkoma less than 20 cigarettes per day
Surūkoma from 20 to 30 cigarettes per day
Surūkoma more than 30
cigarettes per day
The recommended low-dose (2 mg), Nicotinell Gum
Recommended small (2 mg) or high (4 mg) dose of Nicotinell Gum
The recommended high-dose (4 mg) Nicotinell Gum
If you take large doses of rubber significant adverse reactions, then it is recommended to use low doses of gum.
Instructions for use:
1.Vieną piece of chewing gum until the taste becomes sharp.
2.Palaikykite gum between gum and cheek.
3.Susilpnėjus taste again pakramtykite rubber.
4.Kartokite this procedure for about 30 minutes.
Dosage over 18 years of age:
Sukramtykite one piece of Nicotinell when you feel the desire to smoke. Nicotinell gum kramtykite every 1 - 2 hours. Usually sufficient 8 to 12 pieces per day. If you still feel the desire to smoke, you can still chew gum. Do not chew more than 25 pieces of 2 mg, and more than 15 pieces of 4 mg Nicotinell gum.
The duration of treatment is individual. On average, treatment lasts for 3 months. After 3 months should be gradually reduced sukramtomos Nicotinell gum content. The treatment ends when the day sukramtomi 1 to 2 pieces of Nicotinell. Nicotinell gum is not recommended for longer than 6 months. Some patients who had left smoking may continue treatment Nicotinell that again is not returned to smoking. If you are taking Nicotinell longer than 9 months, talk with your doctor or pharmacist.
Their recommendations can help you quit smoking.
Together with acid substances containing snacks, such as coffee or soda, may reduce nicotine absorption. The 15 minutes. against chewing gum, should avoid using these products.
What to do if sukramtėte more than the recommended Nicotinell
Nicotinell chewing too much gum, there are the same symptoms as surūkius too many cigarettes. In case of overdose nicotine normally seen weakness, sweating, salivation, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, loss of hearing or vision problems, headaches, heart rhythm disturbances, shortness of breath, blood circulation disorders.
Consult your doctor or pharmacist if you experience these symptoms.
If nicotine poisoning a child, contact your doctor immediately. Even small doses of nicotine are dangerous to the child's life.
6th What adverse reactions may cause nicotinell
Nicotinell Frequently observed adverse reactions include dizziness, headache and sleep sutrikimai.Tokie the symptoms of quitting because of reduced nicotine levels in the body. It may also occur: dry mouth, hiccups, nausea, vomiting, heartburn, salivation, mouth irritation, sore throat, facial pain as a result of intense gum kramtymo.Guma may stick to dentures or damage to dental fillings.
Less frequently gets fast heartbeat, rash, urticaria. Rare incidence of cardiac rhythm disorders, allergic reactions. These reactions, in some cases can be serious when there is swelling of the skin, swollen face or throat, blood pressure falls, there is shortness of breath.
If you have not mentioned or described in the above events, contact your doctor or pharmacist.
Sunday 17 January 2010
Smoke during lactation
Probably sounds at least strange, if not sacrilegious - it is long established that smoking harms not only the fetus during pregnancy, but the baby during breastfeeding. But whether it is strongly urging mothers to stop smoking, nepastūmėjame they refuse ... Breast-feeding? Mothers of breast-feeding mišinukais replace the cigarettes, the other, in a spirit of great conscience graužatį, breast and fog .. Facts and helpful tips on the subject share the PI Breast Center on Zivile Baltrušaitienė.
Naked facts
Female smokers intend to breast-feed less often, and start feeding their infants are breast-feeding for less than non-smokers. Smoking mothers milk fat content is lower, their milk contains nicotine. Rukan mother harms the child spreading his environment of cigarette smoke - the baby inspired a large quantity of carbon dioxide, increase allergies and respiratory diseases. Studies have shown that maternal smoking is 20-35 percent. increases the child's respiratory diseases. Rūkančioms mothers are more common in breast abscesses (bulbs) and the milk duct inflammation.
However, despite these facts, studies show that the reasons why smokers mothers suckled their babies or are breast-feeding them briefly, is psychological rather than physiological. Some female smokers may breast-feed during lactation and long, as if denying smoking influence milk production. It has been shown that smoking adversely affects "milk run" reflex and decreases prolactin levels. But was it really the only way out is smoking mothers to stop breast-feeding?
Is it possible to reconcile?
Maybe sounds paradoxical, however, expert opinion, in most cases, infant is in their interests and Rukan ZINDANI mother than Rukan and nežindanti. This is because smoking is often not so detrimental to the nicotine content of the milk as a baby's inhalation of cigarette smoke. It is not surprising that a baby whose mother smoking and it is powered by a formula, are more vulnerable than those who received breast milk protection. Of course, you should keep in mind certain rules and clearly determine what is still more important - smoking or puppy's health. If klaustume, or is it better to smoke during breast-feeding or not, the answer is unambiguous - better not to smoke. However, if klaustume, or to stop breast-feeding for the sole reason that we can not stop smoking, the answer can not be unambiguous.
If you can not resist the habits ...
Harm both the mother and child is evident and proven. However, we agree that, although many mothers know this, not everyone is able to resist the behavior. And it does not matter - hide it or not. In this case, it is essential to know how to reduce this damage - if not for themselves, then at least our babies.
In particular, it should be noted, that never ought not to smoke in the room where the baby. Rukan mother should refrain from smoking before breast-feeding - better immediately after the power supply. It is also important surūkomų cigarette volume - if you smoke cigarettes more than 8 per day, you might want to think about the reduction or cessation of breast-feeding. Rukan and ZINDANI mother should focus more on your diet and consume twice the vitamin C content.
Research shows that mothers who stopped smoking during pregnancy and used the patch or chewing gum to help giving up smoking, did not interfere with their babies, because nicotine content of these instruments is about one-third of the normal quantity of cigarettes. However, an important condition for using the nicotine patch or gum is that the mother must not smoke at the same time - thus dangerously increase nicotine content.
It is interesting
Recent research shows that children of mothers who smoke more likely to have fertility problems than non-smokers. Theory to justify the number of mice in laboratory studies, they toxin injection, similar to those in the human body within the cigarette smoke. These female offspring of mice after onset of fertility problems due to changed activity of ovarian and male descendants to spend less time in ejaculation of semen, which may also affect their ability to fertilize. The highest risk of offspring smoking occurs when the mother smoke during pregnancy. However, scientists noticed that the smoke contained toxins affects the fruit, even in the earliest stages of pregnancy, until the future mother of the suspect yet changed its position.
Nursing mothers should avoid drugs such as cocaine or marijuana. Cocaine is excreted in breast milk at 6 hours after administration, and nursing infants may cause intoxication. THC - the active component of marijuana, and accumulate in breast milk will keep for more than one day after administration and is found in children's urine and faeces. Abuse of these and other drugs violates his mother's ability to take care of your baby.
Naked facts
Female smokers intend to breast-feed less often, and start feeding their infants are breast-feeding for less than non-smokers. Smoking mothers milk fat content is lower, their milk contains nicotine. Rukan mother harms the child spreading his environment of cigarette smoke - the baby inspired a large quantity of carbon dioxide, increase allergies and respiratory diseases. Studies have shown that maternal smoking is 20-35 percent. increases the child's respiratory diseases. Rūkančioms mothers are more common in breast abscesses (bulbs) and the milk duct inflammation.
However, despite these facts, studies show that the reasons why smokers mothers suckled their babies or are breast-feeding them briefly, is psychological rather than physiological. Some female smokers may breast-feed during lactation and long, as if denying smoking influence milk production. It has been shown that smoking adversely affects "milk run" reflex and decreases prolactin levels. But was it really the only way out is smoking mothers to stop breast-feeding?
Is it possible to reconcile?
Maybe sounds paradoxical, however, expert opinion, in most cases, infant is in their interests and Rukan ZINDANI mother than Rukan and nežindanti. This is because smoking is often not so detrimental to the nicotine content of the milk as a baby's inhalation of cigarette smoke. It is not surprising that a baby whose mother smoking and it is powered by a formula, are more vulnerable than those who received breast milk protection. Of course, you should keep in mind certain rules and clearly determine what is still more important - smoking or puppy's health. If klaustume, or is it better to smoke during breast-feeding or not, the answer is unambiguous - better not to smoke. However, if klaustume, or to stop breast-feeding for the sole reason that we can not stop smoking, the answer can not be unambiguous.
If you can not resist the habits ...
Harm both the mother and child is evident and proven. However, we agree that, although many mothers know this, not everyone is able to resist the behavior. And it does not matter - hide it or not. In this case, it is essential to know how to reduce this damage - if not for themselves, then at least our babies.
In particular, it should be noted, that never ought not to smoke in the room where the baby. Rukan mother should refrain from smoking before breast-feeding - better immediately after the power supply. It is also important surūkomų cigarette volume - if you smoke cigarettes more than 8 per day, you might want to think about the reduction or cessation of breast-feeding. Rukan and ZINDANI mother should focus more on your diet and consume twice the vitamin C content.
Research shows that mothers who stopped smoking during pregnancy and used the patch or chewing gum to help giving up smoking, did not interfere with their babies, because nicotine content of these instruments is about one-third of the normal quantity of cigarettes. However, an important condition for using the nicotine patch or gum is that the mother must not smoke at the same time - thus dangerously increase nicotine content.
It is interesting
Recent research shows that children of mothers who smoke more likely to have fertility problems than non-smokers. Theory to justify the number of mice in laboratory studies, they toxin injection, similar to those in the human body within the cigarette smoke. These female offspring of mice after onset of fertility problems due to changed activity of ovarian and male descendants to spend less time in ejaculation of semen, which may also affect their ability to fertilize. The highest risk of offspring smoking occurs when the mother smoke during pregnancy. However, scientists noticed that the smoke contained toxins affects the fruit, even in the earliest stages of pregnancy, until the future mother of the suspect yet changed its position.
Nursing mothers should avoid drugs such as cocaine or marijuana. Cocaine is excreted in breast milk at 6 hours after administration, and nursing infants may cause intoxication. THC - the active component of marijuana, and accumulate in breast milk will keep for more than one day after administration and is found in children's urine and faeces. Abuse of these and other drugs violates his mother's ability to take care of your baby.
Sunday 10 January 2010
How common is bladder cancer?
Bladder cancer is the seventh most common cancer in the UK.
In 2006 more than 10,200 people were diagnosed with bladder cancer in the UK, that’s around 28 people every day.
There are more than twice as many cases of bladder cancer in men than in women.
In the UK, bladder cancer is the eleventh most common cancer in women, with almost 3,000 new cases each year.
Bladder cancer is the fourth most common cancer in UK men, with around 7,300 new cases each year.
Eight in 10 cases of bladder cancer occur in people over the age of 65.
Worldwide, an estimated 356,600 new cases of bladder cancer are diagnosed each year.
Read more in-depth UK bladder cancer incidence statistics.
How many people survive bladder cancer?Bladder cancer survival rates have improved in the last 30 years. Around 66% of men and 57% of women with bladder cancer survive the disease for at least five years after diagnosis.
Bladder cancer survival rates are higher for patients diagnosed at a younger age.
Read more in-depth UK bladder cancer survival statistics.
How many people die from bladder cancer?Bladder cancer is the eighth most common cause of cancer death in the UK.
Bladder cancer is responsible for the deaths of 4,900 people each year in the UK, that is around 95 people every week.
Almost nine in ten deaths from bladder cancer are in people over the age of 65.
The bladder cancer death rate in men has decreased by almost 30% in the last fifteen years.
Read more in-depth UK bladder cancer mortality statistics.
What are the main causes of bladder cancer?
Smoking cigarettes is the major preventable risk factor for bladder cancer.
Exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) during childhood may increase the risk of bladder cancer.
The risk of getting bladder cancer increases with age.
It is estimated that between 5 and 10% of male bladder cancer cases in Europe are caused by occupational exposure to certain chemicals - this proportion may be higher in countries with less regulated industrial processes.
People with a first-degree relative who has been diagnosed with bladder cancer have a higher risk of developing the disease.
High bladder cancer incidence rates in parts of Africa and the Middle East are caused by urinary schistomosiasis, a parasitic disease contracted from infected water which is endemic in these areas.
Sunday 3 January 2010
Secondhand Smoke: The Big Lie
On July 17, 1998, United States District Judge William L. Osteen vacated Chapters 1-6 of and the Appendices to EPA's Respiratory Health Effects of Passive Smoking: Lung Cancer and other Disorders, EPA/600/6-90/006F (December 1992).
Judge Osteen wrote, "In conducting the ETS Risk Assessment, disregarded information and made findings on selective information; did not disseminate significant epidemiologic information; deviated from its Risk Assessment Guidelines; failed to disclose important findings and reasoning; and left significant questions without answers. EPA's conduct left substantial holes in the administrative record. While so doing, produced limited evidence, then claimed the weight of the Agency's research evidence demonstrated ETS causes cancer."
The reason science enjoys such weight and credibility is that it has generally been structured so as to encourage a wide scrutiny of methods, data and findings, peer review and a healthy debate from all viewpoints. In the end, faulty data and fanciful theories are laid to rest, and truth emerges the winner. Usually.
Scientists, like everyone else, are subject to personal bias. They can set out to prove a pet theory, they can ignore data which contradicts a favored hypothesis, and they can read into data facts which simply aren't there. In addition, and perhaps more importantly, their employers can be biased. Employers can put pressure on researchers or even research firms to validate a preordained position or to produce a desired result. Not that they really have to, since it is much easier to hire or retain investigators who agree with them to begin with. And even that is not necessary, since the employer gets to write conclusions and recommendations. Scientists who dissent can effectively be buried simply by not publishing what they have to say.
In an open and honest world, all of this would amount to little, since all sides would have their say and we could count on disinterested observers to wade through the fancy and glean the facts. In the case of secondhand smoke, for example, it is near impossible to find anyone who is both disinterested and of sufficient standing to be heard. What we have instead is a war of credibility over conflicting interpretations of biased reports. What we have is politics.
On one side are anti-smokers and the EPA. On the other, smokers and the tobacco companies. At this moment, the antis and the EPA clearly have the upper hand, enjoying as they do a credibility which is just as clearly undeserved. No one is surprised that the tobacco companies have a financial agenda. The same people, on the other hand, express astonishment at the suggestion that the government might actually have a political agenda. Or at the fact that the government, too, is an employer, with more power than most to select and pressure the scientists it employs and to bury the ones that dissent. Nowhere is this power more abused than on the subject of ETS. Last year's EPA report on ETS, the cornerstone of the anti-smokers' arguments, is worse than just bad science.
It is corrupt.
Corrupt science has two salient characteristics. First, instead of starting with a hypothesis and data and deriving from that a conclusion, it does just the opposite: starting with a desired conclusion, it then selects data in order to support the hypothesis. Second, it stifles dissent by excluding dissenters from the process of review and by using ad hominem arguments to question their character and motives. The EPA is guilty on both counts.
Of the 30 studies on spousal smoking referred to in the EPA report, only 6 found any statistically significant association between ETS and cancer in nonsmokers married to smokers, and none found a strong relative risk. The studies actually used by the EPA were limited to 11 studies done in the United States. Using the EPA's own Guidelines for Carcenogenic Risk Assessment, none of these showed a statistically significant risk. These guidelines call for a 95% Confidence Interval. By lowering it to 90%, only one of the 11 studies showed a statistically significant risk. More importantly, the two largest and most recent studies, one of which was partially funded by the National Cancer Institute, were omitted from consideration altogether. Had these two been included, no statistically significant risk would have been found even after lowering the Confidence Interval to 90%. Even after violating its own guidelines, in other words, the EPA could still show no statistically significant risk without selecting data to fit its hypothesis. This cooked data is the EPA's only basis for declaring ETS to be a "Group A" carcinogen. ("Group A", incidentally, does not mean "extra deadly". It simply means "human".)
The EPA's studies on ETS operate under a "zero threshold" hypothesis, or the assumption that if huge quantities of something are dangerous, then microscopic quantities are dangerous also. The data they used, however, fails to bear this out: virtually all of the studies used either found no risk at all or a risk so weak that it would not be considered significant if applied to other subjects.
A "strong" risk is one with an "odds ratio" of 5 to 20 - reflecting an incidence of the problem five to twenty times higher in a group that was exposed to something than in a control group that wasn't. 5 in a population of 100,000, say, compared to 1. (Or 500 vs 100, or 5 in a million vs 1; since it is a ratio, it indicates nothing about the size of the risk itself. Only the relative risk.) A ratio of 1 indicates no risk at all. Odds ratios under 3 are usually considered so low as to be the possible result of random variation or margin of error. The odds ratio of contracting cancer from chlorinated tap water, for example, has been calculated by the EPA to be 1.5 - not enough to worry about, in other words. Yet the EPA used an odds ratio of 1.19 - considerably smaller than that of chlorinated tap water - to classify ETS as a human carcinogen.
One of the largest and most recent studies of ETS is the Brownson study, partially funded by the National Cancer Institute. This study found odds ratios varying from .7 in non-smoking spouses of smokers exposed for fewer than 40 years, to 1.3 in those exposed for over 40 years. .7 is a negative correlation, meaning that those exposed to ETS for less than 40 years experienced fewer cancers than the control group. Since the implication that ETS actually protected those subjects from cancer is biologically implausible, the only other conclusion that can be drawn is that the study's margin of error, caused by random variation, is .3 or higher. This means that the 1.3 figure is equally suspect. The total risk for all groups averages out to exactly 1, or no risk at all.
The Brownson study was available to the EPA, but was not used in its report. Had it been included, the conclusions would have had to have been revised downwards to show no risk.
Though the EPA claims a "19% increase in risk", the actual order of magnitude is less than intimidating. Even if the odds ratio of 1.19 is eventually found to be accurate and not the result of random variation, what this would mean is that instead of the 6 lung cancers per year normally expected in a population of 100,000, we might find 7. Put another way, the average lifetime risk of dying from exposure to ETS (as opposed to eventually dying of something else) would be about 1 in 700. Furthermore, the risk (if real) is concentrated among the non-smoking spouses of smokers exposed to ETS (a heavier exposure than that found elsewhere) for upwards of 40 years, and cannot be extrapolated to include the general population. By way of comparison, the December, 1989 study by the Department of Transportation estimated the probability of contracting cancer from the cosmic radiation at cruising altitude as being some 2,000 times greater than the risk posed by ETS while on the aircraft. The question is, is this sufficient grounds to justify the subjugation of 50 million people? Before you answer, consider this: driving across town to your favorite restaurant entails a risk many times higher - 17 to be exact - than inhaling any secondhand smoke once you get there. If you include the risks associated with the food and drink you are likely to consume there, that multiple rises to over 450. And if you choose one of the many non-smoking restaurants provided by a free market, you get no exposure at all.
A look at the people who worked on this study explains this twisted methodology. Leading anti-smokers pervade both the EPA and the Science Advisory Board responsible for reviewing its analysis, and some of the work was contracted to the founder of a prominent anti-smoking group. It should come as no surprise that the EPA's Workplace Policy Guide was written well before the ETS risk study was completed.
The underlying philosophy at work here is that the end justifies the means; that since a smoke-free society is deemed to be a worthy goal, manipulation of data and even lies are permissible in achieving it. The EPA official responsible for the report admitted in "Science" magazine (7/31/92) that "she and her colleagues had engaged in some fancy statistical footwork" in order to arrive at the indictment of ETS. The opinions of dissenting EPA scientists were ignored, and references to works not in accordance with the EPA position were omitted from the bibliography of the report. Finally, those gainsayers who actually manage to make themselves heard are refuted not with data and reason but with character assassination.
Corrupt scientists have always been eager to ride the bandwagon of popular opinion. Early in this century, Russian scientists drew diagrams purporting to show that the skulls of Jews were smaller than average, reflecting a smaller brain and therefore a lowered intelligence and moral sense. This "justified" the pogroms. In our own country, studies claiming a lower IQ among African Americans (referred to in the studies as "Negroes") "justified" segregation. The damage done by these studies took decades to undo, while millions suffered. Both conclusions share an insidious and horrifying circularity: if the subject of the slur has the temerity to question the evidence, the response is "You can't believe him, he's stupid. Look: my charts prove it!" And that is exactly what is being repeated today. Using corrupt science, the EPA has manufactured a conclusion which states, in effect, that smokers and the tobacco companies are killing 3,000 Americans each year and are by implication morally corrupt. When anyone disagrees, the anti-smokers have the perfect counter argument: "You can't believe them, they're morally corrupt. Look: the EPA report proves it!"
"Political science" has taken on a whole new meaning.
Judge Osteen wrote, "In conducting the ETS Risk Assessment, disregarded information and made findings on selective information; did not disseminate significant epidemiologic information; deviated from its Risk Assessment Guidelines; failed to disclose important findings and reasoning; and left significant questions without answers. EPA's conduct left substantial holes in the administrative record. While so doing, produced limited evidence, then claimed the weight of the Agency's research evidence demonstrated ETS causes cancer."
The reason science enjoys such weight and credibility is that it has generally been structured so as to encourage a wide scrutiny of methods, data and findings, peer review and a healthy debate from all viewpoints. In the end, faulty data and fanciful theories are laid to rest, and truth emerges the winner. Usually.
Scientists, like everyone else, are subject to personal bias. They can set out to prove a pet theory, they can ignore data which contradicts a favored hypothesis, and they can read into data facts which simply aren't there. In addition, and perhaps more importantly, their employers can be biased. Employers can put pressure on researchers or even research firms to validate a preordained position or to produce a desired result. Not that they really have to, since it is much easier to hire or retain investigators who agree with them to begin with. And even that is not necessary, since the employer gets to write conclusions and recommendations. Scientists who dissent can effectively be buried simply by not publishing what they have to say.
In an open and honest world, all of this would amount to little, since all sides would have their say and we could count on disinterested observers to wade through the fancy and glean the facts. In the case of secondhand smoke, for example, it is near impossible to find anyone who is both disinterested and of sufficient standing to be heard. What we have instead is a war of credibility over conflicting interpretations of biased reports. What we have is politics.
On one side are anti-smokers and the EPA. On the other, smokers and the tobacco companies. At this moment, the antis and the EPA clearly have the upper hand, enjoying as they do a credibility which is just as clearly undeserved. No one is surprised that the tobacco companies have a financial agenda. The same people, on the other hand, express astonishment at the suggestion that the government might actually have a political agenda. Or at the fact that the government, too, is an employer, with more power than most to select and pressure the scientists it employs and to bury the ones that dissent. Nowhere is this power more abused than on the subject of ETS. Last year's EPA report on ETS, the cornerstone of the anti-smokers' arguments, is worse than just bad science.
It is corrupt.
Corrupt science has two salient characteristics. First, instead of starting with a hypothesis and data and deriving from that a conclusion, it does just the opposite: starting with a desired conclusion, it then selects data in order to support the hypothesis. Second, it stifles dissent by excluding dissenters from the process of review and by using ad hominem arguments to question their character and motives. The EPA is guilty on both counts.
Of the 30 studies on spousal smoking referred to in the EPA report, only 6 found any statistically significant association between ETS and cancer in nonsmokers married to smokers, and none found a strong relative risk. The studies actually used by the EPA were limited to 11 studies done in the United States. Using the EPA's own Guidelines for Carcenogenic Risk Assessment, none of these showed a statistically significant risk. These guidelines call for a 95% Confidence Interval. By lowering it to 90%, only one of the 11 studies showed a statistically significant risk. More importantly, the two largest and most recent studies, one of which was partially funded by the National Cancer Institute, were omitted from consideration altogether. Had these two been included, no statistically significant risk would have been found even after lowering the Confidence Interval to 90%. Even after violating its own guidelines, in other words, the EPA could still show no statistically significant risk without selecting data to fit its hypothesis. This cooked data is the EPA's only basis for declaring ETS to be a "Group A" carcinogen. ("Group A", incidentally, does not mean "extra deadly". It simply means "human".)
The EPA's studies on ETS operate under a "zero threshold" hypothesis, or the assumption that if huge quantities of something are dangerous, then microscopic quantities are dangerous also. The data they used, however, fails to bear this out: virtually all of the studies used either found no risk at all or a risk so weak that it would not be considered significant if applied to other subjects.
A "strong" risk is one with an "odds ratio" of 5 to 20 - reflecting an incidence of the problem five to twenty times higher in a group that was exposed to something than in a control group that wasn't. 5 in a population of 100,000, say, compared to 1. (Or 500 vs 100, or 5 in a million vs 1; since it is a ratio, it indicates nothing about the size of the risk itself. Only the relative risk.) A ratio of 1 indicates no risk at all. Odds ratios under 3 are usually considered so low as to be the possible result of random variation or margin of error. The odds ratio of contracting cancer from chlorinated tap water, for example, has been calculated by the EPA to be 1.5 - not enough to worry about, in other words. Yet the EPA used an odds ratio of 1.19 - considerably smaller than that of chlorinated tap water - to classify ETS as a human carcinogen.
One of the largest and most recent studies of ETS is the Brownson study, partially funded by the National Cancer Institute. This study found odds ratios varying from .7 in non-smoking spouses of smokers exposed for fewer than 40 years, to 1.3 in those exposed for over 40 years. .7 is a negative correlation, meaning that those exposed to ETS for less than 40 years experienced fewer cancers than the control group. Since the implication that ETS actually protected those subjects from cancer is biologically implausible, the only other conclusion that can be drawn is that the study's margin of error, caused by random variation, is .3 or higher. This means that the 1.3 figure is equally suspect. The total risk for all groups averages out to exactly 1, or no risk at all.
The Brownson study was available to the EPA, but was not used in its report. Had it been included, the conclusions would have had to have been revised downwards to show no risk.
Though the EPA claims a "19% increase in risk", the actual order of magnitude is less than intimidating. Even if the odds ratio of 1.19 is eventually found to be accurate and not the result of random variation, what this would mean is that instead of the 6 lung cancers per year normally expected in a population of 100,000, we might find 7. Put another way, the average lifetime risk of dying from exposure to ETS (as opposed to eventually dying of something else) would be about 1 in 700. Furthermore, the risk (if real) is concentrated among the non-smoking spouses of smokers exposed to ETS (a heavier exposure than that found elsewhere) for upwards of 40 years, and cannot be extrapolated to include the general population. By way of comparison, the December, 1989 study by the Department of Transportation estimated the probability of contracting cancer from the cosmic radiation at cruising altitude as being some 2,000 times greater than the risk posed by ETS while on the aircraft. The question is, is this sufficient grounds to justify the subjugation of 50 million people? Before you answer, consider this: driving across town to your favorite restaurant entails a risk many times higher - 17 to be exact - than inhaling any secondhand smoke once you get there. If you include the risks associated with the food and drink you are likely to consume there, that multiple rises to over 450. And if you choose one of the many non-smoking restaurants provided by a free market, you get no exposure at all.
A look at the people who worked on this study explains this twisted methodology. Leading anti-smokers pervade both the EPA and the Science Advisory Board responsible for reviewing its analysis, and some of the work was contracted to the founder of a prominent anti-smoking group. It should come as no surprise that the EPA's Workplace Policy Guide was written well before the ETS risk study was completed.
The underlying philosophy at work here is that the end justifies the means; that since a smoke-free society is deemed to be a worthy goal, manipulation of data and even lies are permissible in achieving it. The EPA official responsible for the report admitted in "Science" magazine (7/31/92) that "she and her colleagues had engaged in some fancy statistical footwork" in order to arrive at the indictment of ETS. The opinions of dissenting EPA scientists were ignored, and references to works not in accordance with the EPA position were omitted from the bibliography of the report. Finally, those gainsayers who actually manage to make themselves heard are refuted not with data and reason but with character assassination.
Corrupt scientists have always been eager to ride the bandwagon of popular opinion. Early in this century, Russian scientists drew diagrams purporting to show that the skulls of Jews were smaller than average, reflecting a smaller brain and therefore a lowered intelligence and moral sense. This "justified" the pogroms. In our own country, studies claiming a lower IQ among African Americans (referred to in the studies as "Negroes") "justified" segregation. The damage done by these studies took decades to undo, while millions suffered. Both conclusions share an insidious and horrifying circularity: if the subject of the slur has the temerity to question the evidence, the response is "You can't believe him, he's stupid. Look: my charts prove it!" And that is exactly what is being repeated today. Using corrupt science, the EPA has manufactured a conclusion which states, in effect, that smokers and the tobacco companies are killing 3,000 Americans each year and are by implication morally corrupt. When anyone disagrees, the anti-smokers have the perfect counter argument: "You can't believe them, they're morally corrupt. Look: the EPA report proves it!"
"Political science" has taken on a whole new meaning.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)