Highlight HEALTH

With summer upon us in full force, many people are eager to get out and enjoy some time in the sun. However, prolonged ultraviolet (UV) light exposure poses a threat during summer months. Indeed, for an increasing number of U.S. adults, sunburns are becoming more and more common [1]. Although sunburn can be the immediate result of the sun’s UV rays, repeated overexposure can lead to wrinkles, discoloration and other signs of premature aging of the skin, as well as skin cancer.

Sunburn results when the amount of sun exposure exceeds the ability of melanin, the body’s protective pigment, to shield the skin. Using sunscreen regularly is one of the best ways to ensure protection from the sun and avoid skin damage. Sunscreen creates an effective barrier on the skin, absorbing or reflecting the sun’s UV radiation. With all the different sunscreens on the market, have you ever wondered how well your sunscreen works compared to other brands? A recent investigation by the Environmental Working Group (EWG), a non-profit advocacy organization that provides useful health resources to consumers, evaluated 1,620 brand-name sunscreens and found that 60% offer inadequate protection from the sun or contain ingredients with significant safety concerns.
Read the rest of this article …

According to a recent survey by the Pew Internet & American Life Project, 61% of adults look online for health information [1]. Surprisingly however, three-quarters of those searching don’t consistently check the source and date of the health reference they find [2]. Indeed, searching for health information online is dangerous and finding credible, up-to-date sources of health information can be a challenge.

Wikipedia is the Web’s most popular free online encyclopedia. If you’ve ever searched for health or medical content online, Wikipedia articles typically appear at or near the top of search engine results. Nevertheless, Wikipedia’s medical entries are prone to manipulation and are not reliable [3]. Moreover, in many cases you don’t know who has contributed content nor their background or expertise.

Wisdom of crowds is the new model for innovation on the Internet in which collective knowledge is thought to be superior to the intelligence of the few. Nevertheless, not all crowds are wise. Recent cases and new research suggests that crowdsourcing is only truly successful when it is focused on a specific task and when the most effective collaborators are involved [4].

Enter Medpedia.

The Medpedia Project is a long-term, worldwide initiative to develop an online collaborative source of health and medical information for medical professionals and the general public. A joint effort with Harvard Medical School, Stanford School of Medicine, Berkeley School of Public Health, University of Michigan Medical School and other global health organizations, the intent of Medpedia is to be a repository of up-to-date unbiased medical information, contributed and maintained by health experts around the world and freely available to the general public. Unlike Wikipedia, which allows anyone to modify pages, Medpedia content creators and editors are required to have an M.D., D.O. or Ph.D. in a biomedical field; each contributor has an author page detailing their qualifications and background.
Read the rest of this article …

Last week, President Barack Obama nominated physician and geneticist Francis Collins as the next Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) [1]. From 1993 — 2008, Dr. Collins was the first Director of the NIH’s National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI). He led the U.S. government’s Human Genome Project, which decoded the DNA sequence of 20,000 — 25,000 genes.

In the past, Collins’ research laboratory at the University of Michigan has identified a number of important genes, including those responsible for neurofibromatosis, cystic fibrosis, Huntington’s disease and genes for adult onset (type 2) diabetes. More recently, Collins has been a proponent of personalized medicine or genomic medicine, which leverages specific genetic knowledge for the delivery of effective healthcare. Medscape interviewed him about genomic research and personalized medicine two years ago, where he said that incorporating individualized medicine into the mainstream will necessitate a change in healthcare economics. As NIH Director he will undoubtedly have a voice in the ongoing healthcare reform debate in Washington.

In his announcement on Wednesday, President Obama said [1]:

The National Institutes of Health stands as a model when it comes to science and research. My administration is committed to promoting scientific integrity and pioneering scientific research and I am confident that Dr. Francis Collins will lead the NIH to achieve these goals. Dr. Collins is one of the top scientists in the world, and his groundbreaking work has changed the very ways we consider our health and examine disease. I look forward to working with him in the months and years ahead.

Read the rest of this article …

A new study published in the journal Archives of Internal Medicine finds that, on average, physicians fail to report clinically significant abnormal test results to patients – or fail to document that they had informed them – in one out of every fourteen cases [1]. In some practices, the failure-to-inform rate is as high as one in five abnormal results.

Researchers at Cornell University’s Weill Cornell Medical College analyzed 5,434 patient records from 23 physician practices across the country, selecting 11 blood tests and 3 screening tests (mammography, Papanicolaou smear and fecal occult blood) commonly performed in the outpatient setting. They consulted with physicians in the appropriate specialties to define a range of clinically significantly abnormal values for each test. For each abnormal result then identified, the scientists searched the patient’s medical record for 13 types of events that occurred in most cases within 90 days suggesting that the patient had been informed. These events included a note stating that the patient had been informed, a repeat of the abnormal test or if a consultation or procedure was performed.
Read the rest of this article …