Healthy isn?t something you are or aren?t. It?s a hundred little things: eating a banana, walking in the park, putting a bandage on a boo-boo, playing tag, reading up on ways to keep you and your family well and safe. It?s a balance between living well and taking care, and you can start right where you are.
A blog by Christina Elston
Healthy isn't something you are or aren't. It's a hundred little things: eating a banana, walking in the park, putting a bandage on a boo-boo, playing tag, reading up on ways to keep you and your family well and safe. It's a balance between living well and taking care, and you can start right where you are.


Posts Tagged ‘radiation’

Frequent Dental X-rays Linked With Brain Tumor Risk

Wednesday, April 11th, 2012

For people with no dental problems, getting X-rays as part of routine dental checkups might not be a good idea. A new study firms up evidence of a link between frequent dental X-rays and non-cancerous brain tumors.

Meningioma is the most frequently reported primary brain tumor in the United States and, though not cancerous, can cause significant health problems. Dental X-rays are the most common source of exposure to ionizing radiation – a major risk factor for meningioma. Most previous studies of the tumors have focused on people exposed to high levels of radiation from atomic blasts or treatments for cancer or other medical conditions. Only a few studies have looked at lower-dose exposures from dental X-rays, and only in limited numbers of patients.

But this new research, published April 10 in the American Cancer Association journal Cancer, backs up the findings of those previous studies. Researchers looked at more than 1,400 patients from several states who had been diagnosed with meningioma – and more than 1,300 who had not – between 2006 and 2011. Those with brain tumors were more than twice as likely as those without to recall having ever had a bitewing X-ray. And patients who recalled having undergone panorex X-rays – which produce an image of both the upper and lower jaws and teeth – at a young age, on a yearly basis (or more often) were almost five times as likely to have meningioma.

The level of radiation in dental X-rays has declined over the years, but other types of medical imaging involving radiation are on the rise, the study’s authors note. And most of these new procedures expose patients to higher levels of radiation than dental X-rays do. The American Dental Association has also said that there’s little evidence to support using X-rays to search for dental problems in patients without symptoms, or for routinely X-raying patients at pre-set intervals.

“Although dental X-rays are an important tool in well selected patients,” the authors note, “efforts to moderate exposure … are likely to be of benefit to patients and healthcare providers alike.”

Animal Study Links Cell Phone Use In Pregnancy to Behavior Problems

Thursday, March 15th, 2012

Yet another study has emerged on the effects of cell phone radiation. Researchers at the Yale School of Medicine have found that exposing pregnant mice to radiofrequency radiation from cellular telephones impacted the behavior of their offspring.

The study’s authors are calling it the first experimental evidence that fetal exposure to cell phone radiation affects adult behavior. Prior cell phone research has focused mainly on the potential cancer risk that arises when body tissues absorb the radiation that the phones emit. Findings in that area have been inconsistent and several U.S. agencies – including the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control – maintain that current science doesn’t conclusively prove any cancer risk from cell phone use.

In the pregnancy study, scientists exposed mice to radiation from a muted, silenced cell phone placed on an active call for the entire 19 days of their pregnancy; a control group of mice were kept under the same conditions but with the phone deactivated. The mice gave birth and when their mouse pups grew up, those exposed to radiation as fetuses tended to be more hyperactive and had higher levels of anxiety and lower memory capacity. The researchers theorize that this is because the radiation changed development of the prefrontal cortex regions of mice’s brains – the part that regulates decision-making and moderates social behavior.

ADHD in human children is associated with changes in the same brain region, and the same changes in behavior that the mice experienced. The researchers theorize that the rise in ADHD and other behavior disorders could be partially due to the fact that babies are increasingly exposed to cell phone radiation in the womb.

But they emphasize that mice are not humans. Mice are born with less-developed brains than are human babies, and further experiments are needed in humans or non-human primates to see if the results might be similar.

The study results are published in the March 15, 2012, issue of Scientific Reports, a Nature publication.

Meanwhile, large studies in humans in the U.S. and Europe continue to explore possible long-term health effects of cell phone use. These include the COSMOS study, which launched in 2010 and will follow 250,000 adult cell phone users for 20 to 30 years.

More Observation Could Mean Fewer CT Scans In Kids With Head Injury

Monday, May 9th, 2011

ct-scanIf you’ve taken your child to the emergency department following a bump to the head, you’re there to get your child treated – and to make sure everything’s OK. CT (Computed Tomography) scans yield a lot of information, but also expose kids to radiation – not a good idea unless it’s necessary.

A study out today suggests that observation in the ER could cut down the need for, and use of, CT scans in kids with blunt head trauma, but still ensure that serious injuries are diagnosed. Researchers from Harvard and UC Davis looked at data on more than 42,000 children with minor blunt head trauma. They found that those who were observed before making a decision to order a CT scan were half as likely to have one as those who were not observed first.

Co-author Lise Nigrovic, M.D., Harvard professor and pediatric emergency medicine specialist at Children’s Hospital Boston, answered a few questions about the study:

What period of observation are we talking about here? Minutes? Hours? And what are clinicians looking for during this observation period?

During a period of monitored observation in the emergency department, clinicians watch a child with blunt head trauma for either progression or improvement of clinical symptoms such as headache, vomiting or altered mental status. Clinicians use the change of symptoms over time to decide whether to obtain a cranial CT.

We don't yet know precisely how long to observe children after blunt head trauma to be sure that all children with clinically important injury are diagnosed, and that will be the subject of future study. However, current practice guidelines for the management of head trauma suggest 4-6 hours from the time of injury.

Based on these findings, how much might implementing a policy of observation prior to making decisions about CT scans lower the number of scans kids receive each year in the U.S.?

Recent studies suggest that approximately half of children with blunt head trauma presenting to U.S. emergency departments undergo head CT scans. In our study, patients who were observed by their treating clinicians prior to CT decision-making had approximately half the CT rate of those children who were not observed after adjusting for markers of head injury severity.

What is a child’s risk from the radiation exposure in a CT scan? And is there greater cause for concern because we're talking about scanning the heads/brains of children vs. adults?

A single CT scan exposes a child to ionizing radiation, which we now know increases the lifetime risk of a lethal [cancer] malignancy. Although experts disagree as to the exact magnitude of this risk, the youngest children are at the greatest risk because their tissues are the most radiosensitive and they have a longer time for a malignancy to develop.

Nigrovic says that while head trauma is common in children, most of those who visit the ER do not have traumatic brain injuries. So it’s reasonable to take the time to monitor them first and reserve CT scans for those who truly do appear to have significant injuries. Further work, she says, will determine exactly how long children need to be observed so that significant head injuries aren’t missed, and how this might impact the amount of time families spend in the ER – and crowding in emergency departments.

Her study was published online today, and appears in the June edition of Pediatrics.

Kids and Cancer: Proton Therapy Shows Promise Long-Term

Tuesday, April 5th, 2011

matthew_closeupWhen her 5-year-old son Matthew had a seizure around 3 a.m. one morning about four years ago, Denise Rager’s first thought was epilepsy. Her oldest son has it, but not Matthew.

Paramedics came to the house and took Matthew to Loma Linda University Medical Center, where he was diagnosed with a brain tumor. The doctors called it a “malignant glioma,” but Rager says this is a pretty vague diagnosis. “It’s like saying, ‘I have shoes,’ but you don’t know what kind of shoes. Are they tennis shoes? Are they pumps? Matthew’s tumor was so unique they didn’t know how to classify it,” she explains.

Nonetheless, Matthew’s surgery to remove the large tumor (11 centimeters by 7 centimeters) at Loma Linda was a success. Radiation treatment was the next step, and the Rager family had to decide what to do. Read on …

Medical Imaging – Gently

Wednesday, January 5th, 2011

xrayAmid the flap about radiation exposure from the new imaging devices at airport security checkpoints, a more common source gets a lot less attention. U.S. kids now receive an average of seven medical imaging tests that expose them to radiation by the time they are 18 years old, a study released this week by the University of Michigan suggests.

The study’s authors are quick to stress, however, that these tests are often necessary. “These tests are still an important part of medical care, and we’re definitely not saying that they shouldn’t be done,” says study co-author Adam L. Dorfman, M.D., a professor of radiology at U-M Medical School. Instead, Dorfman and others advocate a more thoughtful approach to medical imaging.

Dorfman says that radiation exposure is a concern in children for two main reasons: First, the cells in children’s bodies are dividing more rapidly than those in adults, leaving more chance for radiation to create anomalies. Second, radiation exposure accumulates over a lifetime, and the health problems it creates (i.e. cancer) aren’t likely to arise for decades. “If you’re 2, you have a lot more time for those problems to show up,” Dorfman says.

But whether it’s a chest x-ray to scan the lungs of a child with a serious cough, or a CT scan of the head after a bicycle accident, there’s a good chance most parents will find themselves taking their child in for an imaging test that involves radiation at some point. To make sure your child gets the care she needs while keeping her radiation exposure to a minimum, Dorfman suggests asking the following questions if your child is referred for an imaging test:

  • Is there a clear medical benefit to this test? In other words, if it does show something, will that change how the child is treated?
  • Do you use the lowest amount of radiation possible?
  • Is there any kind of test that doesn’t use radiation that would be a reasonable alternative? Sometimes an ultrasound or MRI will do the trick.

Dorfman also suggests checking out ImageGently.org, a site from The Alliance for Radiation Safety In Pediatric Imaging. It features information and resources for both parents and professionals, and even offers a handy printable Medical Imaging Record you can keep for your child, so you can track all your child’s tests in one place. Parents, Dorfman says, are key in helping keep children’s imaging radiation exposure as low as possible. “Advocate for your children,” he urges. “Be involved in your children’s care and ask those questions.”

One-Fifth Of Women Miss Life-Saving Radiation After Mastectomy

Wednesday, February 11th, 2009

MMD, Suzanne Copsey

Many women faced with a breast cancer diagnosis choose mastectomy over lumpectomy believing they can then skip follow-up radiation treatment. “That is not always the case, and patients choosing one surgery over another hoping to avoid radiation need to be aware of this,” says Reshma Jagsi, M.D., of the University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center.

Jagsi (at right above) recently led a study that found many women who undergo mastectomy, in fact, miss this potentially life-saving treatment even when they meet clearly established guidelines that should recommend it. According to BreastCancer.org, these are the guidelines:

  • The cancer is 5 centimeters or larger (one lump or a series of lumps together).
  • The cancer had invaded the lymph channels and blood vessels in the breast.
  • The removed tissue has a positive margin of resection.
  • Four or more lymph nodes were involved or, for pre-menopausal women, at least one lymph node was involved.
  • The cancer had invaded the skin (with locally advanced or inflammatory breast cancer).

The Web site states that about 20% to 30% of women who have mastectomy fall within these guidelines, and that radiation could help reduce their risk of recurrence by up to 70%.

But when Jagsi and fellow researchers looked at 396 women who had mastectomies, they found that 19% of women who met these guidelines didn’t receive radiation. And the most common reason participants in the study, published online in the journal Cancer and scheduled for the March 15 print edition, said they didn’t choose radiation was that their doctors didn’t recommend it.

The American cancer society says that 184,450 women in the U.S. will be diagnosed with breast cancer this year, and 40,930 will die from the disease.

Learn more about the study …

Learn more about radiation guidelines …