Created by: Medical Billing and Coding Online

Blood type may affect stroke risk


Your blood type might affect your risk for stroke. People with AB and women with B were a little more likely to suffer one than people with O blood — the most common type, a study found.

USA Today
Nov. 2011

The research can't prove such a link. But it fits with other work tying A, B and AB to more risk of blood clots in the legs and heart attacks. Blood type O also has been tied to an increased risk of bleeding, which implies less chance of clots, the cause of most strokes.

"There's increasing evidence that blood type might influence risk of chronic disease," said one of the study leaders, Dr. JoAnn Manson, chief of preventive medicine at Harvard's Brigham and Women's Hospital.

"It's not at the level where we want to alarm people and we want to make that clear. But it's one more element of risk that people would want to know about," and it could give them one more reason to keep blood pressure and cholesterol in line, she said.

The study, led by Brigham's Dr. Lu Qi, was presented Wednesday at an American Heart Association conference. It involved 90,000 men and women in two observational health studies that have gone on for more than 20 years.

Looking at the 2,901 strokes that have occurred and taking into account other things that can cause them, such as high blood pressure, researchers found:

• Men and women with AB had a 26 percent increased risk of stroke compared to those with type O.
• Women but not men with B blood had a 15 percent greater risk compared to those with O.

What's the explanation?

Blood type depends on proteins on the surface of red blood cells. A pattern of immune system responses forms early in life based on them. Certain blood types may make red cells more likely to clump together and stick to the lining of blood vessels, setting the stage for a blood clot, Manson said.

"You can't change it, and we don't know if it's the blood type per se or other genes that track with it" that actually confers risk, said Dr. Larry Goldstein, director of Duke University's stroke center.

"There are other things that are more important" than blood type for stroke risk, such as smoking, drinking too much and exercising too little, he said.

About 45 percent of whites, 51 percent of blacks, 57 percent of Hispanics and 40 percent of Asians have blood type O, according to the American Red Cross. Such people are called "universal donors" because their blood can safely be used for transfusions to any other blood type.

• AB blood type is the least common type, present in 4 percent of whites and blacks, 2 percent of Hispanics and 7 percent of Asians.
• 
  
• B is second least common overall, in 11 percent of whites, 19 percent of blacks, 10 percent of Hispanics and 25 percent of Asians.
• 
  
• A is in 40 percent of whites, 26 percent of blacks, 31 percent of Hispanics and 28 percent of Asians.

Source:
http://yourlife.usatoday.com/health/story/2011-11-16/Blood-type-may-affect-stroke-risk-study-finds/51245948/1
_____________________

10 Fashion Habits That Exacerbate Pain


Pain from rheumatoid arthritis can be hard to deal with on its own, but some fashion choices can make the pain even worse. Here are a few of the biggest pain culprits.

Big bags

Some handbags really qualify as carry-on luggage or tote bags. Why do women need to tote around so much stuff?

Heavy bags

Put your purse on a diet. Some people carry brushes, makeup, notepads, mirrors, energy bars, water bottles, pacifiers, phones, and money (well, maybe just plastic). Have you weighed your purse lately?

Spouse asking you to carry things

For goodness sake, your purse is heavy enough without carrying everyone else's stuff too! If you read about the history of purses, you will find that men used to carry purses. How did women end up with the heavy load? The answer is fashion.

Small bags with skinny straps

Even the small ones with the really skinny straps might be digging you into a painful hole. Some women have indentation along their shoulders from straps.

Purse strap on one shoulder

Even if a purse is well designed to fit comfortably over the shoulder, it could still be causing discomfort because the owner only wears her purse strap over one particular shoulder. We are all creatures of habit. Sometimes that repetition can lead to enough muscle and joint asymmetry to cause pain.

Using the same purse

Pain from purses can include neck pain, shoulder pain, thoracic outlet pain, arm pain and even hand pain. Variation can be a good thing. Different purse, different shoulder, no purse, fanny pack, and backpack are all various ways to break up a cycle of pain caused by a purse.

High heels
High-heeled shoes cause so many problems like bunions, knee and back pain. The misalignment caused by anything over a one-inched heel places stress on all the parts from toe to head.

Flip Flops

Without good support from shoes, the tires of our lives, you are greatly increasing your risk of injury to the feet, ankles, knees and low back.

Toning shoes

Well, the shoe companies fooled millions with claims that these shoes toned your legs and butt while you walk. Not only do these claims prove false, but the toning shoes actually cause painful injuries.

Bras

Bras in general can be painful for people with chronic pain. Some features that might be helpful include, a front-hook closure, a "vanishing back" which has no seams, hems or stitching and is made out of a soft, stretchy fabric, and underwire that doesn't poke.

Source:
http://www.healthcentral.com/rheumatoid-arthritis/cf/slideshows/10-fashion-habits-that-exacerbate-pain/heavy-bags/?ap=825
_____________________

Millions of Americans oppose SOPA and PIPA because these bills would censor the Internet and slow economic growth in the U.S.

Two bills before Congress, known as the Protect IP Act (PIPA) in the Senate and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the House, would censor the Web and impose harmful regulations on American business. Millions of Internet users and entrepreneurs already oppose SOPA and PIPA.

The Senate will begin voting on January 24th. Please let them know how you feel. Sign this petition urging Congress to vote NO on PIPA and SOPA before it is too late.

https://www.google.com/landing/takeaction/sopa-pipa/

STOP SOPA

http://news2umedia.blogspot.com/2011_12_01_archive.html#55969514831571283
http://onecandleinthedark.blogspot.com
http://www.cbsyousuck.com
http://www.justart.net

A rapidly growing community

Opposition to the Protect IP Act (PIPA) and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) grows with each day. This brief list is just a sampling of businesses. Visit the Center for Democracy and Technology’s list for a more complete look at the individuals, organizations, experts and legislators that know how bad this legislation could be.

American Express Company AOL Boing Boing BuzzFeed CloudFlare Copyblogger ConsumerBell Creative Commons Curse Daily Kos deviantART Discover Disqus DreamHost Dyn eBay Embedly Engine Advocacy ESET Etsy Facebook Fantagraphics foursquare Gandi Google GreenHostIt HostGator Hover I Can Has Cheezburger? IndieGoGo Internet Archive Irregular Times Jive Software Kaspersky Lab _______________________

Kickstarter LinkedIn MetaFilter Mozilla Name.com Namecheap OpenDNS O’Reilly Radar Pastebin.com PayPal Quora Rackspace Reddit ReferralCanday Riot Games ServInt Scribd Teachers Pay Teachers Techdirt Torrentfreak Tucows Tumblr Twitter Ubu Web Uservoice Vimeo Webs, Inc. Wikipedia WordPress Yahoo! Y Combinator Zopim Zynga Game Network

The Very Real Danger of Genetically Modified Foods

by Ari LeVaux

theAtlantic.com 

Chinese researchers have found small pieces of ribonucleic acid (RNA) in the blood and organs of humans who eat rice. The Nanjing University-based team showed that this genetic material will bind to proteins in human liver cells and influence the uptake of cholesterol from the blood.

The type of RNA in question is called microRNA, due to its small size. MicroRNAs have been studied extensively since their discovery ten years ago, and have been linked to human diseases including cancer, Alzheimer's, and diabetes. The Chinese research provides the first example of ingested plant microRNA surviving digestion and influencing human cell function.

Should the research survive scientific scrutiny, it could prove a game changer in many fields. It would mean that we're eating not just vitamins, protein, and fuel, but information as well.

The Chinese RNA study threatens to blast a major hole in Monsanto's claim. It means that DNA can code for microRNA, which can, in fact, be hazardous.

That knowledge could deepen our understanding of cross-species communication, co-evolution, and predator-prey relationships. It could illuminate new mechanisms for some metabolic disorders and perhaps explain how some herbal medicines function. And it reveals a pathway by which genetically modified (GM) foods might influence human health.

Monsanto's website states, "There is no need for, or value in testing the safety of GM foods in humans." This viewpoint, while good for business, is built on an understanding of genetics circa 1950. It follows what's called the "Central Dogma" (PDF) of genetics, which postulates a one-way chain of command between DNA and the cells DNA governs.

The Central Dogma resembles the process of ordering a pizza. The DNA knows what kind of pizza it wants, and orders it. The RNA is the order slip, which communicates the specifics of the pizza to the cook. The finished and delivered pizza is analogous to the protein that DNA codes for.

We've known for years that the Central Dogma, though basically correct, is overly simplistic. For example: Pieces of microRNA that don't code for anything, pizza or otherwise, can travel among cells and influence their activities in many other ways. So while the DNA is ordering pizza, it's also bombarding the pizzeria with unrelated RNA messages that can cancel a cheese delivery, pay the dishwasher nine million dollars, or email the secret sauce recipe to WikiLeaks.

Monsanto's claim that human toxicology tests are unwarranted is based on the doctrine of "substantial equivalence." This term is used around the world as the basis of regulations designed to facilitate the rapid commercialization of genetically engineered foods, by sparing them from extensive safety testing.

According to substantial equivalence, comparisons between GM and non-GM crops need only investigate the end products of DNA translation: the pizza, as it were. "There is no need to test the safety of DNA introduced into GM crops. DNA (and resulting RNA) is present in almost all foods," Monsanto's website reads. "DNA is non-toxic and the presence of DNA, in and of itself, presents no hazard."

The Chinese RNA study threatens to blast a major hole in that claim. It means that DNA can code for microRNA, which can, in fact, be hazardous.

"So long as the introduced protein is determined to be safe, food from GM crops determined to be substantially equivalent is not expected to pose any health risks," Monsanto's website goes on. In other words, as long as the pizza is OK, the introduced DNA doesn't pose a problem.

Chen-Yu Zhang, the lead researcher on the Chinese RNA study, has made no comment regarding the implications of his work for the debate over the safety of GM food. Nonetheless, his discoveries give shape to concerns about substantial equivalence that have been raised for years.

In 1999, a group of scientists wrote a now-landmark letter titled "Beyond Substantial Equivalence" to the prestigious journal Nature. In the letter, Erik Millstone et. al. called substantial equivalence "a pseudo-scientific concept" that is "inherently anti-scientific because it was created primarily to provide an excuse for not requiring biochemical or toxicological tests."

To these charges, Monsanto responded: "The concept of substantial equivalence was elaborated by international scientific and regulatory experts convened by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in 1991, well before any biotechnology products were ready for market.

This response is less a rebuttal than a testimonial to Monsanto's marketing prowess. Establishing the concept of substantial equivalence worldwide was a prerequisite to the global commercialization of GM crops. It created a legal framework for selling GM foods anywhere in the world that substantial equivalence was accepted. By the time substantial equivalence was adopted, Monsanto had already developed numerous GM crops and was actively grooming them for market.

The OECD's 34 member nations could be described as largely rich, white, developed, and sympathetic to big business. The group's current mission is to spread economic development to the rest of the world. And while that mission has yet to be accomplished, OECD has helped Monsanto spread substantial equivalence to the rest of the world, selling a lot of GM seed along the way.

The news that we're ingesting information as well as physical material should force the biotech industry to confront the possibility that new DNA can have dangerous implications far beyond the products it codes for. Can we count on the biotech industry to accept the notion that more testing is necessary? Not if such action is perceived as a threat to the bottom line.

Source:
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/01/the-very-real-danger-of-genetically-modified-foods/251051/
____________________________