Both the House (H.R. 1) and Senate (S. 1) versions of the economic stimulus bill include funding for prevention of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections, with $355 million and $400 million provided respectively, the Washington Times reports. According to the Times, House Republicans on Wednesday began criticizing the inclusion of STI prevention funding in the $819 billion bill that is aimed at creating jobs and regenerating the economy. The National Republican Congressional Committee sent out e-mails Wednesday to freshman House Democrats urging them to voice their opinion on if the funding was a good way to spend economic-recovery money. The House bill passed Wednesday evening by a 244-188 vote, according to the Times.
The Times reports that both chambers of Congress are "engaging in a bidding war" over who can spend more on STI prevention in the stimulus bill, and the Senate is "not to be outdone" by the House. Wesley Denton, an aide to Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC), said, "Senate big spenders will never be underbid in wasting tax dollars," and added that he "[did not] want to know" how STI research would create jobs. The $400 million allotted in the Senate version would go to CDC "for the screening and prevention of [STIs], including HIV," according to the Times. Floor debate of the Senate bill is expected to begin next week.
Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), chair of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Health, said the provision is one of the significant achievements of the bill, which also includes $870 million to prepare for a pandemic influenza outbreak and $75 million for smoking cessation. According to the Times, lawmakers from both parties have criticized these inclusions in the stimulus bill, arguing that too many of the items will not provide enough short-term relief to boost the economy. Republicans in particular have said congressional Democrats are using the bill as a medium to get approval for projects that were stalled during the Bush administration and the period when Republicans held majority in Congress (Dinan, Washington Times, 1/29).
Advocates Criticize Removal of Family Planning Funds From Stimulus
Leaders of reproductive rights groups are "upset" by President Obama's push to have lawmakers remove a provision to allow states to expand eligibility for Medicaid family planning services from the House stimulus bill, with several organizations issuing statements to criticize the move, Politico reports. The provision, which was dropped from the bill, would have allowed states to bypass the federal waiver requirement normally needed to extend Medicaid family planning benefits to women who otherwise do not qualify for Medicaid. Cecile Richards, president of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, sent an e-mail to supporters on Wednesday calling Obama's action a "betrayal of millions of low-income women" that will "place an even greater burden on state budgets that are already strained to the breaking point." Kim Gandy, president of the National Organization for Women, said Obama "should have kept it in there, but in their political calculus they felt this was something that would pass Congress rather easily as a stand-alone measure and didn't think it was worth fighting for in the stimulus." Obama spokesperson Robert Gibbs said the president "believed that the policy of increased funding for family planning was the right one" but did not "believe that this bill was the vehicle to make that happen." Politico reports that the "political reality" is that Republicans opposed to the stimulus bill were using the family planning provision as a "too-perfect talking point ... to rally conservative opposition" to Obama's plan.
The reproductive rights leaders "stopped well short of blasting" Obama's administration over the funding removal, Politico reports. According to Politico, the groups "appear[ed] not to want to split" with Obama so early into his presidency, and leaders are "confident" that Obama will support the issues they care most about in the "long run." Gandy said, "We were definitely told that the Obama administration has a strong commitment to women's reproductive rights and family planning. This should not be seen as a lessening of that commitment, only as a change of the vehicle" (Gerstein/Lerer, Politico, 1/29).
Q&A on Family Planning Provision
Time on Thursday published a list of questions and answers about the family planning provision. The Q&A addresses what the provision would have done, whether it would have affected emergency contraception or abortion and how the provision would have saved money in the long run, among other topics (Sullivan, Time, 1/29).
Reprinted with kind permission from nationalpartnership. You can view the entire Daily Women's Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Women's Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company.
© 2009 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.
суббота, 25 февраля 2012 г.
суббота, 18 февраля 2012 г.
March Of Dimes Announces Prematurity Campaign Expansion At Surgeon General's Conference
The March of Dimes has extended its Prematurity Campaign by 10 years to 2020 and will work to address preterm birth globally. The expansion, announced at the Surgeon General's Conference on Prevention of Preterm Birth, supports the national action plan being created during the two-day conference here to address the growing crisis of preterm birth.
"The March of Dimes Prematurity Campaign has stimulated attention and action around the problem of premature birth, and this Surgeon General's Conference puts preterm birth on the national health care agenda," said Jennifer L. Howse, president of the March of Dimes. "As we refine our strategies and renew our commitment through our expanded campaign, we are confident we will continue to find solutions and improve the health of babies at home and globally."
A key element of the expanded campaign will be an annual report card that will grade the nation and each state on its preterm birth rate. The grade will be determined by comparing the preterm birth rate of the state and the nation to the Healthy People 2010 goal. The report card also will focus on key contributing factors to preterm birth, including federal and state policies related to improving access to health coverage for women of childbearing age and children. The first report card will be issued November 12, 2008, as part of March of Dimes Prematurity Awareness Day events.
More information about the campaign can be found at marchofdimes/prematurity.
The goal of the March of Dimes Prematurity Campaign, launched in 2003, is to reduce the U.S. preterm birth rate by 15 percent. The expanded campaign is expected to address three critical areas:
1. Accelerated funding for basic research in the United States and globally and to translate the findings into practices that will benefit women of childbearing age.
2. Expansion of direct services to NICU families to provide them with information - in English and Spanish - about what to expect in the NICU, a glossary of common medical terminology and conditions, and tested suggestions about how to parent in a NICU.
3. The creation of Community Intervention Programs, such as March of Dimes Healthy Babies are Worth the Wait®, which focuses attention on the challenges posed by late preterm deliveries.
The campaign's global strategy will include the first report on the scope and toll of premature birth worldwide as well as increased collaboration with scientists worldwide to accelerate progress.
Preterm birth (defined as birth before 37 completed weeks gestation) is a serious and costly health problem and is the leading cause of death in the first month of life. More than half a million babies - one out of every eight - are born too soon each year in the United States, a 20 percent increase since 1990. And, unfortunately, new statistics released last week by the National Center for Health Statistics showed only a slight decline in the nation's overall infant mortality rate or in the proportion of infants who died as a result of an early birth.
Babies who survive an early birth face serious lifelong health problems, including learning disabilities, cerebral palsy, blindness, hearing loss and other chronic conditions, including asthma. Even infants born just a few weeks too soon - known as late preterm birth - have a greater risk for respiratory distress syndrome (RDS), feeding difficulties, temperature instability (hypothermia), jaundice, delayed brain development and death.
The conference, convened by Acting Surgeon General Steven K. Galson, MD, MPH, RADM, USPHS, and the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, is being held June 16 and 17 in Rockville, Md.. Experts at the conference will generate an action agenda that will be used to guide the March of Dimes in advocating for expanded federal support for research, education and pilot testing of strategies to prevent preterm birth.
The March of Dimes is the leading nonprofit organization for pregnancy and baby health. With chapters nationwide and its premier event, March for Babies, the March of Dimes works to improve the health of babies by preventing birth defects, premature birth and infant mortality. For the latest resources and information, visit marchofdimes/ or nacersano/.
Source: Michele Kling
March of Dimes Foundation
"The March of Dimes Prematurity Campaign has stimulated attention and action around the problem of premature birth, and this Surgeon General's Conference puts preterm birth on the national health care agenda," said Jennifer L. Howse, president of the March of Dimes. "As we refine our strategies and renew our commitment through our expanded campaign, we are confident we will continue to find solutions and improve the health of babies at home and globally."
A key element of the expanded campaign will be an annual report card that will grade the nation and each state on its preterm birth rate. The grade will be determined by comparing the preterm birth rate of the state and the nation to the Healthy People 2010 goal. The report card also will focus on key contributing factors to preterm birth, including federal and state policies related to improving access to health coverage for women of childbearing age and children. The first report card will be issued November 12, 2008, as part of March of Dimes Prematurity Awareness Day events.
More information about the campaign can be found at marchofdimes/prematurity.
The goal of the March of Dimes Prematurity Campaign, launched in 2003, is to reduce the U.S. preterm birth rate by 15 percent. The expanded campaign is expected to address three critical areas:
1. Accelerated funding for basic research in the United States and globally and to translate the findings into practices that will benefit women of childbearing age.
2. Expansion of direct services to NICU families to provide them with information - in English and Spanish - about what to expect in the NICU, a glossary of common medical terminology and conditions, and tested suggestions about how to parent in a NICU.
3. The creation of Community Intervention Programs, such as March of Dimes Healthy Babies are Worth the Wait®, which focuses attention on the challenges posed by late preterm deliveries.
The campaign's global strategy will include the first report on the scope and toll of premature birth worldwide as well as increased collaboration with scientists worldwide to accelerate progress.
Preterm birth (defined as birth before 37 completed weeks gestation) is a serious and costly health problem and is the leading cause of death in the first month of life. More than half a million babies - one out of every eight - are born too soon each year in the United States, a 20 percent increase since 1990. And, unfortunately, new statistics released last week by the National Center for Health Statistics showed only a slight decline in the nation's overall infant mortality rate or in the proportion of infants who died as a result of an early birth.
Babies who survive an early birth face serious lifelong health problems, including learning disabilities, cerebral palsy, blindness, hearing loss and other chronic conditions, including asthma. Even infants born just a few weeks too soon - known as late preterm birth - have a greater risk for respiratory distress syndrome (RDS), feeding difficulties, temperature instability (hypothermia), jaundice, delayed brain development and death.
The conference, convened by Acting Surgeon General Steven K. Galson, MD, MPH, RADM, USPHS, and the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, is being held June 16 and 17 in Rockville, Md.. Experts at the conference will generate an action agenda that will be used to guide the March of Dimes in advocating for expanded federal support for research, education and pilot testing of strategies to prevent preterm birth.
The March of Dimes is the leading nonprofit organization for pregnancy and baby health. With chapters nationwide and its premier event, March for Babies, the March of Dimes works to improve the health of babies by preventing birth defects, premature birth and infant mortality. For the latest resources and information, visit marchofdimes/ or nacersano/.
Source: Michele Kling
March of Dimes Foundation
суббота, 11 февраля 2012 г.
Cognitive Function Is Superior In Breast Cancer Patients Treated With Letrozole Versus Tamoxifen
New results show that postmenopausal women with breast cancer receiving adjuvant letrozole have better cognitive function than women being treated with tamoxifen. The data, from a recent meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), are drawn from a sub-study of the Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 trial.
The trial, which enrolled postmenopausal women surgically treated for early-stage, hormone-responsive breast cancer, found that letrozole was more effective at preventing recurrent disease (especially distant metastases) than tamoxifen.
Karen E. Ribi, PhD, with the International Breast Cancer Study Group in Bern, Switzerland, and her colleagues had theorized that because of the estrogen deprivation associated with aromatase inhibitors, patients who have received letrozole will have worse cognitive function than tamoxifen-treated patients.
"While cognitive function is recognized as a potential long-term side effect of adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer treatment, few studies have looked at the effect of adjuvant endocrine therapy on cognition," Dr. Ribi noted in her presentation. "What's more, those studies that have examined the effect of adjuvant endocrine therapy on cognition have produced conflicting results."
The primary endpoint of the sub-study was the composite score calculated from seven cognitive tasks. These included detection, identification, learning, memory, monitoring, shopping list, and shopping list delayed recall.
The analysis included 120 women enrolled in an institution with at least ten patients recruited to the parent protocol. All women had been in the trial for fewer than five years and were still taking their assigned endocrine treatment. None had developed recurrent breast cancer or a second malignancy.
Results showed that that while both groups had scores below age-standardized standardized norms of the CogState tasks, patients taking letrozole during the last three of five years of treatment had better cognitive function than those taking tamoxifen.
Dr. Ribi cautioned that potential study limitations include the lack of a true baseline assessment prior to the start of endocrine therapy and the lack of a longitudinal design to evaluate changes during treatment. Also, the sub-study's low accrual resulted in a revised analysis plan.
Finally, she said that future trials will evaluate the change in cognitive function from five years on endocrine treatment to one year after the completion of treatment. Plans are also underway to examine the impact of endocrine treatment on cognitive function in premenopausal women from baseline to one year on treatment.
Jill Stein
Jill Stein is a Paris-based freelance medical writer.
jillstein03(at)gmail
The trial, which enrolled postmenopausal women surgically treated for early-stage, hormone-responsive breast cancer, found that letrozole was more effective at preventing recurrent disease (especially distant metastases) than tamoxifen.
Karen E. Ribi, PhD, with the International Breast Cancer Study Group in Bern, Switzerland, and her colleagues had theorized that because of the estrogen deprivation associated with aromatase inhibitors, patients who have received letrozole will have worse cognitive function than tamoxifen-treated patients.
"While cognitive function is recognized as a potential long-term side effect of adjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer treatment, few studies have looked at the effect of adjuvant endocrine therapy on cognition," Dr. Ribi noted in her presentation. "What's more, those studies that have examined the effect of adjuvant endocrine therapy on cognition have produced conflicting results."
The primary endpoint of the sub-study was the composite score calculated from seven cognitive tasks. These included detection, identification, learning, memory, monitoring, shopping list, and shopping list delayed recall.
The analysis included 120 women enrolled in an institution with at least ten patients recruited to the parent protocol. All women had been in the trial for fewer than five years and were still taking their assigned endocrine treatment. None had developed recurrent breast cancer or a second malignancy.
Results showed that that while both groups had scores below age-standardized standardized norms of the CogState tasks, patients taking letrozole during the last three of five years of treatment had better cognitive function than those taking tamoxifen.
Dr. Ribi cautioned that potential study limitations include the lack of a true baseline assessment prior to the start of endocrine therapy and the lack of a longitudinal design to evaluate changes during treatment. Also, the sub-study's low accrual resulted in a revised analysis plan.
Finally, she said that future trials will evaluate the change in cognitive function from five years on endocrine treatment to one year after the completion of treatment. Plans are also underway to examine the impact of endocrine treatment on cognitive function in premenopausal women from baseline to one year on treatment.
Jill Stein
Jill Stein is a Paris-based freelance medical writer.
jillstein03(at)gmail
суббота, 4 февраля 2012 г.
Calcium may protect women from cancer
U of MN research shows calcium can help prevent colorectal cancer -
A University of Minnesota Cancer Center study found that women consuming more than 800 milligrams of calcium each day reduced
their risk of colorectal cancer by as much as 26 to 46 percent. A 26 percent reduction in risk of colorectal cancer occurred
regardless of whether the calcium intake was from diet or supplement. Among women who consumed high levels of calcium from
both diet and supplements, the risk reduction was almost double that observed for calcium from either source by itself.
The results of the study appear in this month's Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention journal. Andrew Flood, Ph.D.,
epidemiologist with the University of Minnesota Cancer Center and School of Public Health, led the study in collaboration
with the National Cancer Institute (NCI).
The study involved 45,354 women in the United States who did not have a history of colorectal cancer. The women were
categorized into groups according to information they provided about their diets and lifestyles. The women averaged 61.9
years of age upon entering the study and they were followed in the study for an average of 8.5 years. This study began in
1987 and closed in 1997. During that time, 482 women in the study developed colorectal cancer.
"It is especially notable that the risk reduction was present regardless of the source of the calcium, and that
simultaneously consuming high levels of calcium from both diet and supplements further reduced risk," Flood said. "These
observations suggest that it was the calcium per se, and not merely dairy products or some other variable that accounted for
the reduction in risk."
The findings provide further evidence in a growing body of research that indicates a link between calcium and prevention of
colorectal cancer. This study is good news for women because they comprise about half of the approximately 150,000 people in
the United States diagnosed annually with colorectal cancer. The cancer ranks as the second leading cause of cancer death,
and the risk of contracting it increases with age.
Flood notes that more research needs to be done to understand why and how calcium provides protection against colorectal
cancer in some women.
"We really don't know at this point," Flood said. "There are currently two main theories. One is that calcium has the ability
to neutralize secondary bile acids that are produced during the digestion of fat and are highly irritating to the cells in
the lining of the colon. The evidence in support of this theory is not very strong.
"An alternate theory is that calcium has a direct impact on a whole series of biochemical pathways within the cells that line
the colon and rectum. These pathways play important roles in regulating how these cells grow and mature and thus, can be
important components of the cancer process."
To put the study results in perspective, Flood says consuming a diet rich in calcium - one that provides at least 800 mg per
day, which is actually lower than the current recommended daily allowance of 1,200 mg per day--is a safe and effective way
for women to help guard themselves against colorectal cancer.
As for the benefit of calcium for men, he said, "The results of this study are consistent with other studies that show
calcium reduces risk of colorectal cancer in both women and men. A note of caution for men, however, is that dairy foods, the
primary source of calcium in the U.S. diet, have been linked in some studies to increased risk of prostate cancer."
More about the study
The 45,354 women in this study were selected from the Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project (BCDDP), which was a
breast cancer screening program conducted jointly by NCI and the American Cancer Society between 1973-1980.
The women initially completed a 62-item questionnaire that assessed their usual daily diet, lifestyle habits and patterns,
and use of over-the-counter nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medicines. A separate series of questions asked about their intake
of calcium from supplements, whether multivitamins or calcium-specific.
The information received was used to categorize the women into five equally sized groups. The groups were ranked in order of
increasing calcium intake, based on the dietary practices the women reported at the start of the study.
-- Women in the lowest group consumed less than 412.3 mg of calcium from diet each day.
-- Compared to the low-consuming group, women in the four higher groups (412.4-528.9 mg/d; 529.0-656.2 mg/d; 656.3-830.9
mg/d; and greater than 830.9 mg/d) all showed reduced risk of developing colorectal cancer over the course of the study.
-- Women in the highest group of dietary calcium intake - greater than 830 mg/d - had a 26 percent lower risk of developing
colorectal cancer compared to women in the lowest group.
The women also were divided into groups based on their intake of calcium from supplements. Women who reported consuming 800
mg/d of calcium from supplements had a 24 percent lower risk of developing colorectal cancer than women who took no calcium
from supplements. The researchers further found that high intake of calcium from both diet and supplements reduced risk even
more than calcium from either source alone. Women who consumed more than 412.4 mg/d of calcium from diet and also consumed
more than 800 mg/d from supplements had a 46 percent lower risk of colorectal cancer than women who consumed less than 412
mg/d from diet and less than 800 mg/d from supplements.
This study was funded by NCI. In addition to Andrew Flood, researchers on the study were Ulrike Peters, Fred Hutchinson
Cancer Center, Seattle; and Nilanjan Chatterjee, James Lacy, Jr., Catherine Schairer and Arthur Schatzkin, all with NCI in
Bethesda, MD
The Cancer Center at the University of Minnesota is a National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center.
Awarded more than $80 million in peer-reviewed grants during fiscal year 2003, the Cancer Center conducts cancer research
that advances knowledge and enhances care. The center also engages community outreach and public education efforts addressing
cancer. To learn more about cancer, visit the University of Minnesota Cancer Center Web site at cancer.umn.edu. For cancer questions, call the Cancer Center
information line at 1-888-CANCER MN (1-888-226-2376) or 612-624-2620 in the metro area.
Mary Lawson - mlawsonumn.edu
University of Minnesota
A University of Minnesota Cancer Center study found that women consuming more than 800 milligrams of calcium each day reduced
their risk of colorectal cancer by as much as 26 to 46 percent. A 26 percent reduction in risk of colorectal cancer occurred
regardless of whether the calcium intake was from diet or supplement. Among women who consumed high levels of calcium from
both diet and supplements, the risk reduction was almost double that observed for calcium from either source by itself.
The results of the study appear in this month's Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention journal. Andrew Flood, Ph.D.,
epidemiologist with the University of Minnesota Cancer Center and School of Public Health, led the study in collaboration
with the National Cancer Institute (NCI).
The study involved 45,354 women in the United States who did not have a history of colorectal cancer. The women were
categorized into groups according to information they provided about their diets and lifestyles. The women averaged 61.9
years of age upon entering the study and they were followed in the study for an average of 8.5 years. This study began in
1987 and closed in 1997. During that time, 482 women in the study developed colorectal cancer.
"It is especially notable that the risk reduction was present regardless of the source of the calcium, and that
simultaneously consuming high levels of calcium from both diet and supplements further reduced risk," Flood said. "These
observations suggest that it was the calcium per se, and not merely dairy products or some other variable that accounted for
the reduction in risk."
The findings provide further evidence in a growing body of research that indicates a link between calcium and prevention of
colorectal cancer. This study is good news for women because they comprise about half of the approximately 150,000 people in
the United States diagnosed annually with colorectal cancer. The cancer ranks as the second leading cause of cancer death,
and the risk of contracting it increases with age.
Flood notes that more research needs to be done to understand why and how calcium provides protection against colorectal
cancer in some women.
"We really don't know at this point," Flood said. "There are currently two main theories. One is that calcium has the ability
to neutralize secondary bile acids that are produced during the digestion of fat and are highly irritating to the cells in
the lining of the colon. The evidence in support of this theory is not very strong.
"An alternate theory is that calcium has a direct impact on a whole series of biochemical pathways within the cells that line
the colon and rectum. These pathways play important roles in regulating how these cells grow and mature and thus, can be
important components of the cancer process."
To put the study results in perspective, Flood says consuming a diet rich in calcium - one that provides at least 800 mg per
day, which is actually lower than the current recommended daily allowance of 1,200 mg per day--is a safe and effective way
for women to help guard themselves against colorectal cancer.
As for the benefit of calcium for men, he said, "The results of this study are consistent with other studies that show
calcium reduces risk of colorectal cancer in both women and men. A note of caution for men, however, is that dairy foods, the
primary source of calcium in the U.S. diet, have been linked in some studies to increased risk of prostate cancer."
More about the study
The 45,354 women in this study were selected from the Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project (BCDDP), which was a
breast cancer screening program conducted jointly by NCI and the American Cancer Society between 1973-1980.
The women initially completed a 62-item questionnaire that assessed their usual daily diet, lifestyle habits and patterns,
and use of over-the-counter nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medicines. A separate series of questions asked about their intake
of calcium from supplements, whether multivitamins or calcium-specific.
The information received was used to categorize the women into five equally sized groups. The groups were ranked in order of
increasing calcium intake, based on the dietary practices the women reported at the start of the study.
-- Women in the lowest group consumed less than 412.3 mg of calcium from diet each day.
-- Compared to the low-consuming group, women in the four higher groups (412.4-528.9 mg/d; 529.0-656.2 mg/d; 656.3-830.9
mg/d; and greater than 830.9 mg/d) all showed reduced risk of developing colorectal cancer over the course of the study.
-- Women in the highest group of dietary calcium intake - greater than 830 mg/d - had a 26 percent lower risk of developing
colorectal cancer compared to women in the lowest group.
The women also were divided into groups based on their intake of calcium from supplements. Women who reported consuming 800
mg/d of calcium from supplements had a 24 percent lower risk of developing colorectal cancer than women who took no calcium
from supplements. The researchers further found that high intake of calcium from both diet and supplements reduced risk even
more than calcium from either source alone. Women who consumed more than 412.4 mg/d of calcium from diet and also consumed
more than 800 mg/d from supplements had a 46 percent lower risk of colorectal cancer than women who consumed less than 412
mg/d from diet and less than 800 mg/d from supplements.
This study was funded by NCI. In addition to Andrew Flood, researchers on the study were Ulrike Peters, Fred Hutchinson
Cancer Center, Seattle; and Nilanjan Chatterjee, James Lacy, Jr., Catherine Schairer and Arthur Schatzkin, all with NCI in
Bethesda, MD
The Cancer Center at the University of Minnesota is a National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center.
Awarded more than $80 million in peer-reviewed grants during fiscal year 2003, the Cancer Center conducts cancer research
that advances knowledge and enhances care. The center also engages community outreach and public education efforts addressing
cancer. To learn more about cancer, visit the University of Minnesota Cancer Center Web site at cancer.umn.edu. For cancer questions, call the Cancer Center
information line at 1-888-CANCER MN (1-888-226-2376) or 612-624-2620 in the metro area.
Mary Lawson - mlawsonumn.edu
University of Minnesota
Подписаться на:
Комментарии (Atom)