Cancer

December 4, 2019

As life expectancy and fertility rates decline, health politics more key than ever

Ohio, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and Indiana — if you’re obsessed with national politics, these states might register in your mind as key partisan battlegrounds. But if you’re focused on Americans’ health and well-being, these states — along with New Hampshire, Maine, Vermont, and West Virginia — may be causes for different and considerable concern: the nation’s plummeting life expectancy.

These states are flashing warning signs, racking up the greatest relative increases in death rates among young and middle-aged adults (New Hampshire, Maine, Vermont, West Virginia, and Ohio).

Excess deaths among Americans in their prime, that is individuals in the 25 to 64 age group who would live longer if mortality rates improved, also were highly concentrated geographically, with fully a third of them in just four states: Ohio, Pennsylvania, Kentucky and Indiana, experts say.

December 1, 2019

With new heat on THC and CBD use, will zeal for marijuana keep growing?

by Patrick A. Malone

Fans of marijuana and its related products may want to take careful note of developments regarding their health and safety effects.

Federal researchers are racing to trace thousands of cases of lung damage and dozens of deaths to so-called smokeless consumption of tetrahydrocannabinol or THC, the ingredient that produces the marijuana high. Other federal officials also are warning about cannabidiol or CBD — a derivative of marijuana or its cousin hemp — and its burgeoning and unapproved use in an array of products on the market.

To be sure, because blue-nose attitudes blocked rigorous research on marijuana and other drugs, medical scientists have been scrupulous in declining to make sweeping declarations about grass and its potential benefits or harms.

November 24, 2019

On vaping, gun violence, and health insurance, the big talk flows, but action, not so much

by Patrick A. Malone

When it comes to key health concerns of the American public, President Trump and his administration have offered evidence anew that whatever they say may not last to the next political moment, that inaction is its own powerful kind of action, and that what officials say they’re doing may be exactly the opposite.

This is not intended as partisan commentary. It reflects the turn of a few news cycles and how Trump and his officials have dealt with:

The outbreak of serious lung illnesses and deaths tied to vaping

October 27, 2019

As FDA warns of implant perils, new questions arise about 3D mammograms

by Patrick A. Malone

Angry women, anxious that officials were failing to protect their health, besieged a federal Food and Drug Administration hearing in the spring. That unusual outcry may have helped push regulators off their bureaucratic backsides, getting them finally to warn about risks of one of the most commonly used medical devices for women: breast implants.

But will a similar gender uprising be required to quash a rising and dubious medical testing of women, the so-called “3D mammogram?”

The FDA’s sudden, fast stepping on breast implants is occurring after years of inaction. Under new rules proposed by the agency, the devices’ packaging would be required to carry “boxed warnings,” the FDA’s most serious caution. The agency also would call on surgeons to step up their discussions with women about implant risks, including for rare cancers. As the Washington Post reported, doctors also would be told to tell patients:

October 1, 2019

Health care plagued by cases of a persistent pathology — unmitigated gall

by Patrick A. Malone

There seems to be a never-ending outbreak of a certain kind of pathology in the United States. Big Pharma has it and spreads it around, a lot. So, too, do public health figures. Let’s call this scourge what it is — unmitigated gall.

The problem with this nasty condition is that it afflicts the rest of us. Just consider how stomach-churning these shenanigans can be:

Penalties for bogus prescribing of ‘little red pills’ on elderly dementia patients

September 27, 2019

A toast to clear and simple advice: Parents, it’s just milk and water for the kids

by Patrick A. Malone

Milk and water — it’s that simple. That’s the latest and official recommendation for what children 5 and younger mostly should drink.

For parents, if any doubt persists, that advice comes from leading health authorities, including Healthy Eating Research, a nutrition advocacy group funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The group developed the kids’ drink guidelines with the backing of the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, the American Heart Association, and the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry.

The experts cautioned grown-ups about giving children sugary drinks, including, in a sure-to-be-contested suggestion, recommending a hard cap on fruit juices: for 100% juice, less than a cup a day.

September 24, 2019

Administration actions give us all plenty of reasons to not breathe easy

by Patrick A. Malone

Even as investigations deepened into the harms caused by vaping and e-cigarettes, the Trump Administration confounded those concerned with public health and the environment with rollbacks of legal ways to get vehicles to be cleaner and less polluting and of measures to ensure food safety, notably via changes in inspections of long problematic pork producers.

Voters in the 2020 elections may wish to take note of these and other mounting issues — including proliferating “skimpy” health insurance plans — in which the administration zigs and zags on policies that it promises are intended for the public good, despite considerable evidence to the contrary.

President Trump made public his administration’s decision to revoke federal approval of California setting industry-leading vehicle emission standard even as he fund-raised in the Golden State.

September 15, 2019

Trump administration now seeks to vaporize vaping, banning candy flavorings

by Patrick A. Malone

After standing to one side while vaping hooked a generation of young Americans on nicotine, the Trump Administration has now abruptly decided to try to vaporize youthful vaping by banning candy-like flavorings favored by e-cigarette users.

The president and Alex Azar, the chief of the Health and Human Services agency, announced the latest e-cigarette and vaping crackdown. It still must be defined in regulations, practices, and the financial support for the federal Food and Drug Administration to enforce it. FDA Commissioner Ned Sharpless and First Lady Melania Trump also participated in the Oval Office session.

The White House announcement came as public officials add daily to the toll of a sudden outbreak of reported deaths (at least a half dozen) and serious respiratory harms (hundreds of cases in three dozen or so states) blamed on vaping. Investigations continue as to the cause of the e-cigarette-related fatalities and injuries.

September 8, 2019

As deaths and lung damage cases rise, isn’t it clear that vaping is unhealthy?

by Patrick A. Malone

How well does Scott Gottlieb, the former federal Food and Drug Commissioner, sleep at night? Or does he even pause to think much about his role in opening the door to what has become a widening and lethal health menace: vaping and e-cigarettes?

The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has joined with respected specialists in public health and lung disorders to urge the public, most especially young Americans, to stop vaping and using e-cigarettes at least until authorities can sort out an outbreak of serious problems connected with the trendy practices involving inhaling of substances catalyzed by electric devices.

Vaping suddenly has been implicated in 450 cases in 33 states and it has been tied to at least five deaths. Dozens of young people have been hospitalized, some with significant and sustained lung damage requiring extensive medical treatment.

August 28, 2019

U.S. task force refines guidelines for women’s genetic cancer screening

by Patrick A. Malone

Many more women would benefit if their doctors took time to put them through a relatively easy screening using readily available questionnaires to determine if they might need further specialist assessment and a medical test for a genetic mutation linked to breast and other forms of cancer.

Women, however, should not routinely be subjected to the assessment, counseling, and testing for the BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 mutation, the influential U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has recommended, based on its blue-chip review of medical evidence. The task force gave the broad, routine approach its D grade, as in it should not be done.

The panel gave the careful and appropriate BRCA screenings its “B” grade, meaning they have moderate to significant benefits. The screening by primary care doctors is best suited for women with “a personal or family history of breast, ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal cancer or who have an ancestry associated with breast cancer susceptibility 1 and 2 (BRCA1/2) gene mutations.”