Categories
Cardiovascular
Diagnostics
Endocrinology
Health Insurance
Medical Devices
Mental Health
Nutrition
Oncology
Public Health
Sexual Health
Popular Articles
Burdock Root

Threat Of Beer Bellies And Man Boobs Scaring Men Into Moderation
Concerns about health and looks are driving thousands to cut back on booze
generic viagra online
What Is Post Traumatic Stress Disorder? What Is PTSD? What Causes PTSD?
PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder) is triggered by a traumatic event - it is a kind of anxiety. The sufferer of PTSD may have experienced or seen an event that caused extreme fear, shock and/or a feeling of helplessness. Most of us experience a brief period of difficulty adjusting and coping with traumatic events. However, we gradually get better with time and healthy coping methods. On the other hand, there are times when symptoms get worse and may last for several months, or years. This study explains how PTSD can surface two years after a traumatic event. Another study found that one in eight Lower Manhattan residents likely had PTSD two to three years after the 9/11 attacks.
News of the day
Ohio Supreme Court Restricts Mifepristone Use In State To Scope Of FDA's Approval Letter
In answering two certified questions from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, the Ohio State Supreme Court on July 1 declared that a state law regulating the use of mifepristone -- which is used in medication abortion -- bars physicians from prescribing it for off-label use, BNA reports. The court confirmed that doctors who use the drug to induce abortion must do so in compliance with the 49-day gestational limit included in FDA"s 2000 drug approval letter. Doctors also must prescribe the drug in accordance with the protocols and dosage indications included in its FDA-approved labeling.Interpretation of State Law in ContentionThe Ohio General Assembly in 2004 passed a law (Section 2919.123 (A)) that required any health care professional prescribing or dispensing mifepristone to comply with "all provisions of federal law that govern the use" of the drug. The law defines "federal law" as "any law, rule or regulation of the United States or any drug approval letter" from FDA "that governs or regulates the use of" mifepristone for inducing abortion. FDA"s approval letter states that the drug "is indicated for use in the termination of pregnancy (through 49 days" pregnancy) and has no other approved indication for use during pregnancy." In addition, the drug"s label states the recommended dosage and that its use requires three office visits by the patient. Planned Parenthood Southwest Ohio Region challenged the law in district court, arguing that neither FDA"s approval letter nor any other federal provision bans the off-label use of mifespristone to induce abortion beyond 49 days" gestation. The group also argued that the state law was unconstitutionally vague because it did not notify abortion providers in advance regarding which FDA documents were included in the state"s criminal law. In addition, Planned Parenthood said that prohibiting the evidence-based use of the drug would infringe on the rights of women, requiring them to take higher-than-necessary dosages of the drug or to undergo surgical abortions when a noninvasive alternative is available. The district court ruled in favor of Planned Parenthood, saying that the law was void because of vagueness. The state appealed the decision to the 6th Circuit, which then submitted two questions to the state Supreme Court seeking its interpretation of the law.The state Supreme Court ruled that FDA"s drug approval letter is included in the definition of "federal law" and that the state law is not ambiguous, according to BNA. The court said that because the drug approval letter incorporated FDA"s labeling text, Ohio physicians cannot prescribe or provide mifepristone to induce abortion outside of the stipulations of the drug approval letter and approved label. According to BNA, product liability law experts say the ruling will not have an impact outside of mifepristone or the state of Ohio.Case Returns to Appeals CourtRoger Evans of Planned Parenthood Federation of America said that he is not sure if the court"s decision helps or hurts the group"s case. Evans said that the district court declared the law unconstitutional based on an interpretation that the statute operates in the same way the state Supreme Court ruled it does. He noted that there are other possible interpretations of the law that would have solved the constitutional issues at the center of the litigation. However, because those issues were not resolved, the case now returns to the 6th Circuit, which will decide if the statute is constitutional based on the state Supreme Court"s interpretation. If the circuit court agrees with the district court that the statute is unconstitutionally vague, the state of Ohio could seek a U.S. Supreme Court review. If the circuit court finds that the statute is constitutional, the case likely will be sent back to the district court for resolution of some other issues in the case, according to BNA (BNA, 7/6).
Cardiovascular

Health Warning After Lancashire Workers Catch Legionnaires' Disease, UK

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has warned companies in Lancashire to ensure they carry out regular, simple checks to protect employees from Legionnaires" disease. The warning follows the prosecution of butchery processing company Kepak UK Ltd after two employees caught the disease at Kepak"s Carr Place premises on the Walton Summit Industrial Estate, Bamber Bridge, Preston. The company, which has its headquarters on Flanshaw Lane in Wakefield, was fined ÷£25,000 and ordered to pay ÷£20,000 in costs at Preston Crown Court on Monday 27 July. Kepak pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 by failing to protect its employees from the risk of contracting Legionnaires" disease. The court heard that the first case of Legionnaires" disease was diagnosed on 26 September 2006 in Boguslaw Plociennik, who was employed as a boner, and a second on 3 October 2006 in Zbigniew Rauk, who was employed as a packer. Following notification of the two cases, an outbreak committee was formed made up of HSE, South Ribble Borough Council"s Environmental Health Department, Central Lancashire Primary Care Trust, the Health Protection Unit and Lancashire Teaching Hospitals. Water samples were taken throughout the building and significant levels of legionella were found to be present at three locations: a pressure washer hose point, an apron wash shower point, and a pressure washer header tank. The tank was fed by hot and cold water and supplied water to three pressure washer hose points in and around the process area. Employees used the pressure washer system to clean away meat and fat debris in the various processing areas as and when required. While the investigation was taking place, Kepak closed the Carr Place site and the domestic water system was drained, pumped through, chlorinated and disinfected. Kepak has subsequently not reopened the site, which was one of two the company operated in the Preston area. HSE Principal Inspector Dorothy Shaw said: "Kepak failed to carry out simple checks on the hot and cold water system. As a result, many of its employees working at the site were potentially exposed to the legionella bacteria, and two individuals were made seriously ill. "Any system containing water at temperatures between 20 and 45 degrees Celsius, and which may release an aerosol during operation or maintenance, is at risk of exposure to legionella bacteria. "Legionnaires" disease is a potentially fatal illness and, had the correct procedures been in place, the outbreak at Kepak"s premises would not have occurred. Legionella bacteria can build up in purpose-built water systems and, if conditions are favourable, the bacteria can multiply, increasing the risk. "A risk assessment had been carried out in May 2001 which set out that simple and periodic checks should be carried out on Kepak"s domestic water system, and that the control measures should be monitored and reviewed. But this did not happen." Notes Section 2(1) of the Health & Safety at Work etc Act 1974 states: "It shall be the duty of every employer to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all his employees." HSE


Add your comment:
Name:
Site address: http://
Your message:
Enter today\\\\'s date, 2 digits
(spam protection):

© Copyright 2009