You Snooze, You Lose: More Weekend Sleep Cuts Kids' Obesity Risk

well even better ! I'm sure parents would love that extra time in the morning instead of being waken up between 6 and 7 in the morning with energized kids saying" I'm hungry, I'm hungry". but interesting article. for the most part I'm all for it. even tho I'm not a kid i could use a nap right now.. I'm dead this morning.

Kids sleeping late on the weekends? Let ‘em — they're not being lazy; they're cutting their risk of obesity, according to new research published online today in the journal Pediatrics.

Ideally, parents should strive for a constant bedtime and wake time. But since that's not always realistic, it's good to know that children who catch up on sleep during weekends and vacations are better able to counteract the adverse effects of insufficient sleep during the week and reduce their risk of obesity. (More on Time.com: Study: Most Babies Sleep Through the Night (But Not Mine))

Researchers at the University of Chicago analyzed the sleep patterns and BMI of 308 children between the ages of 4 to 10, dividing them into nine groups and using wrist actigraphs for one week to determine when they were asleep. The group of children with normal sleep patterns had the lowest risk of obesity and metabolic complications.

On average, the children slept an average of eight hours each night, less than what they should be getting. Kids ages 5 to 8 should sleep 9 to 10 hours, but children — like adults in our society — are largely sleep-deprived. (More on Time.com: Why You Shouldn't Snuggle with Your Pooch in Bed)

“We tend to disrespect sleep,” says David Gozal, the lead author and chair of the pediatrics department at the University of Chicago. “We're not aware there's a very substantial price to pay for shortening the duration of sleep and for creating very irregular sleep schedules. Together, these create a much higher risk of obesity."

The worst combination? Irregular sleep and not enough of it. Those kids with the shortest, most irregular sleep had a 4.2-fold increased risk of obesity. When this group got more sleep on the weekends, their risk decreased to 2.8 fold — better but still nowhere near as good as the normal sleepers.

The obese kids in the study slept less time and more irregularly on weekends and were less likely to compensate on the weekends for not getting enough sleep on weekdays, which added up to metabolic problems. Short, irregular sleep increased the risk of inflammation, glucose sensitivity and resulted in a rise in lipids. (More on Time.com: Some Scientific Evidence For Beauty Sleep)

“The point is regularity,” says Gozal. “If you are a regular catch-up sleeper on the weekends, that can have a beneficial effect if you are a short sleeper during the week. But if you have irregular, short/long sleep during the week and you continue that during the weekend, that puts you at worse risk.”

There's plenty of buzz about childhood obesity but not much chatter about the importance of sleep, says Gozal. Educating families about the significance of sleep through public health campaigns that emphasize the link could breed healthier kids.

“The best thing to globally reduce the risk for obesity is to sleep long during the week and during the weekend and have regular sleep,” says Gozal.

Original Article.
BAYHO.com

Premenstrual Syndrome: Are Vitamin E and Fatty Acids the Answer

People joke about PMS, but for many women, premenstrual syndrome is no laughing matter. Lucky for them, a new study suggests that vitamin E and a mix of essential oils could spell relief.

"The negative effect of PMS on a woman's routine activities and quality of life may be significant, in addition to the repercussions on economic costs resulting predominantly from a reduction in productivity," lead researcher Dr. Edilberto Rocha Filho of the Federal University of Pernambuco in Brazil told The Scotsman.

In Dr. Filho's six-month study of 120 women, those given capsules containing two grams of vitamin E and a combination of essential oils including oleic acid, and linoleic acid, experienced significant relief from PMS symptoms. Side effects were insignificant.


Symptoms of PMS include breast tenderness, acne, bloating, weight gain, headaches, joint pain, food cravings, irritability, mood swings, crying spells, and depression. Taking ibuprofen, aspirin, or naproxen can help. So can exercising, getting enough sleep, and avoiding salt, caffeine, and alcohol.


As for the oils, Filho and his team are optimistic.

"Essential oil capsules can now be said to show much promise as a treatment," said Filho.

The study was published January 11 in Reproductive Health.


Original article.
BAyho.com

Like Family, Many Friends Share the Same Genes

GOODMORNING Bloggers!
well i saw this article and immediately thought to myself, " makes sense my best friend who Ive know since 2ND grade is basically like my sister" so hopefully this sweet and simple article keeps you interested and entertained.

Many of us have those friends we can count on for everything -- the ones we feel really connected to.

It turns out, that much like we are with family, we also may be "connected" to our friends through our genes, according to a study from the University of California, San Diego.

Dr. James Fowler, professor in the School of Medicine and the Division of Social Sciences at the University of California, San Diego, and his colleagues studied more than 3,000 pairs of friends. Fowler and his team compared the similarities of six genes thought to be associated with social behavior. What they found was that many friends share the same type of genes.

The findings will be published in the early edition of the journal of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences later this week.

"There may be a partially genetic basis for friendship," Fowler told AOL Health. "This is the first step towards understanding the biology of 'chemistry' -- that feeling you have about a person that you will like or dislike. We may choose our friends not just because of the social features we consciously notice about them, but because of the biological features we unconsciously notice."

Researchers found that many friends share the DRD2 gene, which is associated with an outgoing personality and is also linked to alcoholism.

Another gene, the CYP2A6 gene, which is associated with "openness" was less likely to be shared by friends, however. These people were more likely to look for friends who had slightly different personalities than their own.

Dr. Irene Levine, a psychologist and professor of psychiatry at the New York University School of Medicine, and author of The Friendship Blog and "Best Friends Forever: Surviving a Breakup with Your Best Friend," surveyed more than 1,500 women online to find out what attracted them to their best friend. "Women often used the same term, 'we clicked,' to describe the indescribable," Levine told AOL Health.

"The choice of friends (or lovers) is influenced, of course, by personality -- which is shaped by a complex mix of genes and environment," she explains. "Two old adages ... seem to apply: 'Opposites attract' and 'Birds of a feather flock together.' Sometimes people are attracted by differences; other times, they are attracted by similarities that make them feel comfortable."

Dr. Margaret Gibbs, professor emeritus of psychology at Fairleigh Dickinson University in New Jersey, agreed. "I think it's interesting that the study found both sides of the popular aphorisms: 'Birds of a feather flock together' and 'Opposites attract,'" she told AOL Health. "I think those same principles work in our choices of friends. We feel comfortable with the familiar, but also seek balance and variety."

"Perhaps people vary as to whether they are more inclined to pick the familiar over the different, and, who knows, that inclination could be genetic, too," adds Gibbs.

Original Article.
BAYHO.COM

Year in Review: More Scrutiny of Dietary Supplements

Hello how was every one's holiday break?
hopefully well i know we all deserved a little vacation to spend with our families. With holidays comes some extra holiday weight and we are are back on track somehow with trying to get back in shape whether it be hitting the gym, dieting or taking a dietary supplement.


The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has been busy this year issuing statements and recalls regarding dietary supplements discovered to contain undeclared drug ingredients. Studies have shown that some supplements may increase potentially lethal risks to patients and contain varying amounts of active compounds between brands. And through all this, patients and doctors are not talking to each other about the use of dietary supplements.

So, where are we now?

Read this story on www.medpagetoday.com.

The FDA's latest statement largely concerned a major issue in the dietary supplement market -- that safety and efficacy standards are in the hands of manufacturers. As a result, pills, powders, and other products that contain drug or drug-like ingredients may be released and marketed as dietary supplements despite being drug products, the FDA statement said.

"These tainted products can cause serious adverse effects, including strokes, organ failure, and death," Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg, commissioner of the FDA, said in the statement.

The statement noted the FDA and supplement industry are working together to stem the flow of illegally marketed drug products sold under the veil of "dietary supplements," including weight-loss, body-building, and sexual enhancement products.

"Part of the difficulty in regulating dietary supplements is that [some companies] operate outside of the law and don't include manufacturer information on the label, so it can be impossible to contact someone and request a recall," an FDA spokesperson told MedPage Today.

"If you're thinking about taking a supplement, always talk to a healthcare provider first -- they know you best and what drugs you're taking," the spokesperson said.

But the poor communication is not entirely an industry-side faux pas, Jennifer Strohecker of the Intermountain Medical Center in Murray, Utah, told MedPage Today.

Original Article.
BAYHO.COM

Keeping Holiday Drinking in Check May Counter Cancer

Happy Holidays everyone! well this maybe a few weekends too late, especially since Ive just had about 4 Christmas parties in the last 2 weeks. haha well hopefully everyone enjoys their holiday breaks. I know i will!

SUNDAY, Dec. 19 (HealthDay News) -- Though holiday partying often includes alcohol consumption, cancer experts are urging partiers to partake moderately.

"Research shows that drinking even a small amount of alcohol increases your chances of developing cancer, including oral cancer, breast cancer and liver cancer," Clare McKindley, clinical dietician in the Cancer Prevention Center at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, said in a news release from the center.

"Researchers are still trying to learn more about how alcohol links to cancer," she added. "But convincing evidence does support the fact that heavy drinking damages cells and increases the risk for cancer development."

To reduce risk, experts say, drinkers can do a number of things. First, stick to the recommended serving size. A drink is defined as 12 ounces of beer, 5 ounces of wine or 1.5 ounces of liquor.

Women should have no more than one drink a day and men should have no more than two drinks a day, according to the U.S. National Cancer Institute.

Try to avoid high-calorie drinks. Many popular alcoholic drinks are loaded with calories, especially those mixed with soda, fruit juice or cream. A one-cup serving of eggnog, a holiday staple, has about 340 calories. Being overweight or obese is also associated with an increased risk for cancer.

Researchers believe that it is the ethanol or alcohol in beer, wine and liquor that increases cancer risk. Check the ethanol percentage numbers on bottle labels and stay away from 100-proof liquor.

Also try non-alcoholic drinks. For example, for a "cocktail-like" beverage, try club soda and lime, McKindley suggested.

Original Article.
BAYHO.com

Soda Tax Could Lead to Slight Weight Loss

A SODA TAX?! really? I don't know what people are thinking and the fact that they use the whole excuse of could "lead to slight weight loss" i say BS. its just another tax and seriously i swear they are going to start to charge you to breath soon. Its soda people! either way as ridiculous as this is I'm middle class,and I'm positive it will only affect me when I have parties and HAVE to buy soda other then that i normally just drink water or tea,I'm sure lots of other people do the same. soda tax. OH and they say our country is overweight, which is probably true but for the most part .. you motivate yourself. a soda tax wont do it for you. what a JOKE!

Dec. 13, 2010 -- Increasing taxes on sweetened drinks, such as soda, could lead to modest weight loss at best, particularly among middle-income families, and could generate between $1.5 billion and $2.5 billion in annual revenue, according to a study.

Researchers led by Eric Finkelstein, PhD, associate professor of health services at Duke University Medical Center-National University of Singapore, found that a 20% tax on sugary drinks would result in weight loss of about 0.7 pounds per person over the course of a year and generate approximately $1.5 billion in tax revenue; a 40% hike in would lead to an average weight loss of 1.3 pounds per person per year and result in $2.5 billion in tax revenue, and cost the average household about $28 per year.

The findings, based on 2006 data and published in the Dec. 13/27 issue of Archives of Internal Medicine, support the argument for increasing the taxes of sugar-sweetened drinks as a means to help curb the obesity epidemic. The study was supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

"Although small, given the rising trend in obesity rates, especially among youth, any strategy that shows even modest weight loss should be considered," Finkelstein says in a prepared statement. "Extending the tax to restaurants and vending machines would generate more tax revenue and perhaps greater weight losses."

Although Finkelstein and his team found a so-called “soda tax” could lead to modest weight loss, their analysis showed that middle-income households were the most likely to feel the impact of the soda tax and to experience weight loss, whereas lower- and higher-income households would probably not experience as much weight loss. The findings are limited by the fact that the analysis only included beverages purchased in stores.

"Higher-income groups can afford to pay the tax so they are unaffected, and lower-income groups likely avoid the effects of the tax by purchasing generic versions, waiting for sales, buying in bulk, or by other cost-saving strategies," Finkelstein said. Moreover, "If they switch to other high-calorie drinks, the effects of the tax would be diluted."

Finkelstein and his team looked at a database of U.S. households that included information about the families’ food and beverage purchases over a one-year period. The database also included information about household demographics, as well as the brand, UPC codes, and calories (though not a breakdown of the nutritional content) of the groceries they bought. These store-bought purchases included sugary drinks, such as carbonated sodas and sports/energy drinks, and also fruit juice, skim milk, and whole milk.

Households were broken into four categories ranging from low- to high-income. Investigators used statistical techniques to calculate how any changes in the cost of sweetened drinks would affect household purchasing habits.

Finkelstein noted that subsidies supporting the production of corn -- the main ingredient in high-fructose corn syrup found in many sweetened drinks -- could also affect sweetened beverage consumption. “Removing the subsidies or implementing a tax that increases prices on products that contain this ingredient is justifiable,” he says.

According to the CDC, two-thirds of the U.S. population is overweight or obese. Obesity is a major risk factor for type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and some types of cancer. The authors note that obesity costs the U.S. an estimated $147 billion per year.

Original Article.
BAYHO.com

Thrill-Seeking Gene Can Lead to More Sex Partners

" I CHEATED ON YOU BECAUSE ITS IN MY GENES" hmm i wonder how many people are more likely to say that now? lol either way i still don't think that a thrill seeking gene can make a person cheat on someone who they love and care for. so yeah it might be something that you think,and the thought of wanting another person who isnt your SO might come into your head, but in the end you control what you do. don't think with the wrong head guys. if you know what i mean.. sorry long article.



John Coleman, a 22-year-old from Syracuse, N.Y., has been engaged for the last two years and cannot fathom having sex with anyone other than his girlfriend.

"I find cheating appalling," said Coleman. "There's got to be something going on in your head to cheat."

It turns out Coleman is right.

In what is being called a first of its kind study, researchers at Binghamton University, State University of New York (SUNY) have discovered that about half of all people have a gene that makes them more vulnerable to promiscuity and cheating.

Those with a certain variant of the dopamine receptor D4 polymorphism -- or DRD4 gene -- "were more likely to have a history of uncommitted sex, including one-night stands and acts of infidelity," according to lead investigator Justin Garcia.

DRD4 is the "thrill-seeking" gene, also responsible for alcohol and gambling addictions. The gene can influence the brain's chemistry and subsequently, an individual's behavior.

The desire to cheat or sleep around seems to originate in the brain's pleasure and reward center, where the "rush" of dopamine motivates those who are vulnerable, the researchers say.

In the study, Garcia instructed 181 student volunteers at SUNY to take an anonymous survey on their previous sexual behavior, asking them questions like how many sex partners they had and if they had ever been unfaithful.

He then tested their DNA by oral rinsing with a special mouthwash -- a buccal wash -- and genotyped the DRD4.

His team discovered that there is a variation in the thrill-seeking gene and those with much longer alleles are more prone to, well, getting prone. (An allele is part of the gene's DNA sequence responsible for different traits such as eye color or curly hair.)

Those with at least one 7-repeat allele reported a higher rate of promiscuity -- that is admitting to a "one-night stand." The same group had a 50 percent increase in instances of sexual cheating.

"It turns out everyone has got the gene," said Garcia, who is a doctoral fellow in the laboratory of evolutionary anthropology and health at SUNY Binghamton. "Just as height varies, the amount of information in the gene varies. In those who have more, their alleles are longer and they are more prone to thrill-seeking."

"It's inheritable, too," he said. "If your parents have it, you have it."

When the brain is stimulated -- drinking alcohol, jumping from planes, having sex -- it releases dopamine, the pleasure response hormone.

"It's rewarding and makes us excited and gives us pleasure," said Garcia. "But the people with the DRD4 gene need more stimuli to feel satiated. Some of say 'wow,' that was a rush after jumping out of a plane. Others ask, 'When is the plane going back up?'"

But not everyone is convinced a roving eye is rooted in DNA.

"Certain people are vulnerable to affairs, but in the end, it's about personal choice," said Jenn Berman, a psychologist and host of "The Love and Sex Show" on Cosmo Radio. "And it depends on how well-developed their impulse control is."

Still, the study could have some interesting implications.

Armed with that kind of data, John Coleman said he might be inclined to test his fiance and himself as well.

"It's like getting tested for STDs," he said. "It's the ultimate form of honesty, really," he said.

But Garcia said the gene for risk also might have an evolutionary advantage, beyond producing more children.

The gene evolved about 30,000 to 50,000 years ago when humans were moving out of Africa.

"Having some individuals who have wanderlust and want to see what's on the other side mountain. It's important for new places to live. But it's also risk-taking. Sometimes, going to the other side of the mountain means that something eats you. There is a cost and a benefit."

Some of the implications of this study might be "huge," and not just in the bedroom. "The big question is what happens in drug rehab if you have a long allele and others don't? They might have different treatments."


The study also strongly suggests that sex drive and thrill can function independently of love.
That might be the case with Emma, a 20-year-old student from University of Southern Florida, who just broken up with her boyfriend after a two-year monogamous relationship.

She wanted to try something different, so she slept with three men in one month. Two were encounters with guys she had been friends with and another was a fling that transformed into a longer relationship.

"I'd never done anything like that before," said Emma, who did not want to reveal her last name. "It was something so new to me."

She said it's not in her personality to take risks. Defying college stereotypes, Emma's never touched alcohol and has only smoked marijuana once.

And now that she is in a committed relationship, Emma is certain she won't be unfaithful.

Upbringing, experience and culture may actually wield more influence than the risk-taking gene, according to Susan Quilliam, a noted British psychologist and author of the updated "Joy of Sex

"We are learning more and more about genes implicated in behaviors," she said. "Every time a genetic study comes out, responsible scientists also stress that we have choice -- nature and nurture," she said.

"Not everyone with the gene is promiscuous and not everyone who is promiscuous will have that gene."

And can't risk-taking be a good thing?

"Sometimes that overlaps with creativity, with entrepreneurship and wanting to push the boundaries," she said. "In relationships that can be exciting and fulfilling and help the whole couple move into new areas."

So should a woman have her boyfriend tested before accepting his marriage proposal?

"By the time she meets him, unless he is very young, his track record will prove whether he has acted on his infidelity gene or not," said Quilliam. "If he has been unfaithful in the past, he is likely to do it in the future."

Maureen Finn, a 19-year-old television, film and radio major at Syracuse University, agrees.

"I mean if you meet a guy at a party and he's making out with three other girls, that's a hint," she said. "If you're disrespecting me, something tells me you're not going to respect me enough to be faithful."

Original Article.
BAYHO.com