Apparently, the plaintiffs had argued that the iPod ear buds are designed to be placed deep in the ear canal, which increases the danger of hearing damage. They also said that iPods pose a danger because of their lack of volume meters or noise-isolating properties, despite being capable of producing sound as loud as 115 decibels.

The good news is the federal appeals court rejected this lawsuit because the plaintiffs failed to show that use of the iPod poses an unreasonable risk of noise-induced hearing loss.

Wait – noise-induced hearing loss? You mean music-induced hearing loss?

Hearing loss results from frequent exposure to loud noise, or in this case music. This subjects the hair cells in your ear to sustain more of that damage.

And while there are still continued reports on how personal music players (PMP’s) are increasing the risk for noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL, or maybe in some instances, music-induced hearing loss), there are some of the myths that have surfaced. In a May 26, 2009 issue in American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, there were 10 myths that have been discussed. I’ve listed on 3 that I think are more relevant than the rest:

MYTH 1: Personal music players are a primary reason for NIHL in children.

Although PMP use may be implicated in NIHL, it is unlikely that PMPs are the primary reason for the occurrence of notched high-frequency hearing loss configurations at young ages.

MYTH 3: Insert earphones are worse than other styles of earphones for your ears.

Some in-the-canal earphones that isolate the ear from background noise are actually used at lower listening levels than over-the-ear earphones that have lower maximum output because the users don’t have to ramp up the volume to hear over the ambient sound.

MYTH 10: Today’s PMP technology puts listeners at greater risk.

Perhaps the concern that current PMP technology is more “dangerous” is that their storage and power supply capacity far exceeds earlier technology, allowing a person to listen longer.

For more of those myths, read more here.

Do you lose most of your body heat through your head?

A more recent study confirms that there is nothing special about the head and heat loss. Any uncovered part of the body loses heat and will reduce the core body temperature proportionally. So, if it is cold outside, you should protect your body.

Eating at night makes you fat?

Some scientific studies seem to support this. In a study conducted in Sweden, they found out that the obese women eat more and their meals were shifted to the afternoon, evening or at night. But they didn’t conclude that eating more meals at night and getting obese causes one or the other; people gain weight because they take in more calories than they burn up.

Other studies found no link at all. For instance, a study again in Sweden did not show evidence that there is an association between obesity in Swedish men and eating at night.

There are studies, however, showing that skipping breakfast is more likely to result in weight gain than losing it. They attribute it to having breakfast skippers eating more during the rest of the day.

You can cure a hangover with…?

A systematic review of randomised trials evaluating medical interventions for preventing or treating hangovers found no effective interventions in either traditional or complementary medicine. You would know a lot of these; the scientific community may have a number of suggestions on how to cure this. But since the cause of a hangover is an excess of alcohol, then until we find a cure, the best way to avoid a hangover is not drink at all. (Is that even your option?)

You may also read: 6 Medical Myths Debunked for Christmas

Christmas is here!

I’m back home spending time with family and kids, and about to get busy in the kitchen! On my way home, I was reminded of my time as an intern when we incessantly talk about being on duty during the holidays – that there are more people going insane during this season; that kids are hyperactive; and that this is the season to gain weight.

But how much of those are true? Because while it makes sense that more people go insane during this season, there are still people going insane regardless of whatever season! Is there really a study conducted to support this?

This curiosity lead me to search for the answers on the net.

Anyway, this is what I found:

In a study published in 2008, the following festive medical myths have been debunked

* Sugar makes kids hyperactive.
* Suicides increase over the holidays.
* Poinsettias are toxic.
* You lose most of your body heat through your head.
* Eating at night makes you fat.
* You can cure a hangover with…

Let’s go through this briefly:

Sugar makes kids hyperactive

None of these studies, not even studies looking specifically at children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, could detect any differences in behaviour between the children who had sugar and those who did not. In fact, some parents perceive their kids as being hyperactive even though they haven’t been fed any sugar.

Suicides increase during the holidays

Now this is where studies differ.

In a study in Japan, they found that suicide rates are lowest in the days before a holiday and highest after a holiday. They attribute it to having more emotional and social support during the holidays.

On the other hand, a study in the US showed no difference in the rates of suicide before, during and after the holidays; but they did notice an increase in psychiatric visits before and after the holidays.

I guess it is safe to say that we can’t assume that there will be an increase of influx of the depressed and troubled during this season.

Poinsettias are toxic

In plain in simple terms, studies show that this is not true.

To be continued

• There were 85 percent more free radicals generated by the exposed sperm samples in both healthy and infertile specimens versus the control group, and
• A 6 percent decrease in antioxidants in the exposed samples, the chemicals that fight free-radical damage.

(Free radicals are those rogue molecules that have been implicated in heart disease, cancer and numerous others human diseases—and to a reduction in sperm motility and viability.  Antioxidants, on the other hand, combat these free radicals.)

Although the study is convincing, more well-designed studies need to be conducted before these researchers can recommend altering your mobile phone habits.

For instance, men should bear in mind that anything that will increase the temperature in their testicles should be avoided or at least its exposure lessened. This includes laptops placed on laps, tub bath, toxins, and fumes.

It is also worth studying if there is significant changes with EMW’s emitted from cell phones at different distances; or whether there is dangerous emission when the phone is in silent or standby mode; or what the effects are when you are simply sending text messages.

Until such time, I know you guys have figured out what precaution to take.

Oh, an added tip though: The study suggests that anti-oxidants, such as Vitamin C and E, are beneficial. Anti-oxidants help reverse the oxidative process brought about by free radicals.

It won’t hurt to try though. You will get better and younger looking skin process.

Check out:

Part 1

Secure with your mobile?

Pop quiz: What’s one thing you can’t leave home without?

I don’t think I need to scan the web for poll answers to see that a lot of people can’t leave their home without their cell phones. I belong to this group. After all, it’s my only connection to my family, friends and work wherever I may be. I did wonder some years ago whether the amount my mobile phone usage can adversely affect my fertility. However, what I stumbled upon are studies on male fertility.

Such studies include:

• Investigators found a decrease in sperm motility in semen samples of men exposed to 900 MHz cell phone for 5 min (Erogul et al., 2006).
• In a similar pilot study, direct exposure of human semen samples to cellular phone radiation (in talking mode) decreased sperm motility and viability (Agarwal et al., 2008).
• Keeping cell phones close to waist has been found to decrease sperm concentration as compared to men not using cell phones at all or storing it elsewhere (Kilgallon and Simmons, 2005).

It makes sense after all that men have reasons to be concerned with their “future.” Cell phones emit radiofrequency radiation (RFR). The higher the frequency, the higher the energy, and the hotter it gets. So this leads to an increase in tissue or body temperature, leading to reversible disruption of spermatogenesis or the formation of sperms.

The truth is, though, the mechanism of action of electromagnetic wave (EMW) on spermatogenesis is unclear. It is also thought that in addition to increasing the tissue or body temperature, EMW may also cause damage by a “microwave” effect or thermal molecular effects.

To be continued.

Four Pacquiao Fans Die From Heart Attack While Watching Boxing Bout

Manila, Philippines (AHN) – Puerto Rican boxer Miguel Cotto is luckier than four fans of Manny Pacquiao despite losing his welterweight bout against the Filipino pugilist. The fans died from heart attack while watching the boxing bout on TV on Sunday.

In Butuan City, Concordio Paredes, 69, dropped dead while watching the second round of the Pacquiao-Cotto duel at an eatery.

In Batangas City, Cecilio Cabrera, 62, suffered a heart attack while watching the fight at a hotel. He was declared dead on arrival at a local hospital.

In Davao City, police officer Jose Paco, 59, finished watching the match before succumbing. He was also dead on arrival at a local hospital.

In Mabalacat, Pampanga, Abelardo Fernando, 70, suffered a heart attack after the seventh round. He was rushed to a hospital but was pronounced dead on arrival.

There were three other Pacquiao fans watching the fight in different parts of the Philippines when they suffered a cardiac arrest or stroke. But they all survived.

This can be explained by basic physiology. In an article in Scientific American, they asked Martin Samuels, chairman of neurology dept at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston if it’s possible to be scared to death.

The body has a natural protective mechanism called the fight-or-flight response. In the wild, when an animal is faced with a threatening situation, the autonomic (involuntary) nervous system responds by increasing heart rate, increasing blood flow to the muscles, dilating the pupils, and slowing digestion among other things. Adrenaline, a neurotransmitter which serve as a chemical messenger to various parts of the body, activate this fight-or-flight response.

When adrenaline lands on the cardiac muscle, it causes calcium channels in the muscle to open.

Calcium ions rush into the heart causing it to contract.

If there is a massive overwhelming storm of adrenaline, then calcium keeps pouring into the cells and the muscles jsut can’t relax.

There is this specially adapted system of muscle and nerve tissue in the heart—the sinoatrial (SA) node, the atrioventricular node, and the Purkinje fibers—which sets the rhythm of the heart. If this system is overwhelmed with adrenaline, the heart can go into abnormal rhythms that are not compatible with life. If one of those is triggered, you will drop dead.

In most cases, it’s probably ventricular fibrillation that causes these sudden deaths from fear. Ventricular fibrillation basically causes the ventricles (lower chambers of the heart) to vibrate in a way that hampers their ability to deliver blood to the body.

Any strong positive or negative emotions such as happiness or sadness can lead to fatal heart rhythms.. There are people who have died in intercourse or in religious passion. A study in Germany found an increase of sudden cardiac deaths on the days that the German soccer team was playing in the World Cup.

So in this case, sudden cardiac deaths on days that Manny Pacquiao is fighting is comprehensible.

Studies show

In 2002, Mirick, Davis and Thomas conducted a study on Antiperspirant Use and the Risk of Breast Cancer. Finding show that:
• There is no evidence that the subjects who reported the use of a blade razor for underarm hair removal were at an increased risk for breast cancer from antiperspirant use.[11]
• No evidence also that the subjects who reported that applying antiperspirants within 1 hour of shaving with a blade razor were at an increased risk for breast cancer.

However, this study did not fully address the intensity of underarm hygiene habits. So in 2003, Mc Grath looked into the frequency of underarm hygiene habits within a (cohort) of breast cancer survivors within their age of diagnosis. Results show that:
• The mean age which breast cancer was diagnosed was earlier for those groups with maximum usage of underarm cosmetics. Those who use it less or never use it had breast cancer diagnosed at a later age. [4]
• Combined habits (shaving and underarm cosmetics usage) were also necessary. If done separately, there was no significant association with an earlier age of diagnosis.[4]

As you can see, these studies do not agree 100% on their results. There have been other studies that have been done since. In Iraq, Fakri et.al. (2006) have conducted a study where they have determined that the use of antiperspirants have no association with risk of developing breast cancer. In fact, it was family history and oral contraceptive use which they found to have a stronger association with breast cancer. This only goes to show that we have yet to conduct more studies on this subject before we can conclude on whether or not underarm cosmetics play a major role in the development of breast cancer.

I therefore conclude…
…that there is no conclusion yet. More extensive research is needed to investigate the long-term effects of the applicaiton of these underarm cosmetic products over an entire lifetime and on a global population of men and women.

Until such time, there are no alternative suggestions yet on how you would take care of your pits the way that you do right now.

Myth: still plausible.
Akalain mo.

Part 1

Part 2

On location – the Upper Outer Quadrant of the Left Breast

It’s a known fact that the most common location of breast cancer is on the upper outer quadrant of the left breast. That’s the area adjacent to your underarm. Several explanations have been offered to shed light on why this is. The accepted one is that  this region contains the greatest proportion of epithelial target tissue, but evidence for this seems to be largely anecdotal . [9]

An alternative explanation is that it is this area that is adjacent to where underarm cosmetics are applied. These products are not washed off or not washed off thoroughly, and with frequent application leads to build up on the skin. This may simply penetrate the skin without invoking any major physiological carrier, such as blood and lymph.[2]

Another set of clinical observations suggest that this can be attributed to more epithelial cells on the left side of the breast owing to the preferential blood supply on the left side of the body during intrauterine cardiac development.   [10]

However, a simpler but equally plausible explanation could be that since a greater majority of the population are right-handed, then there is greater application of these chemicals to the left underarm area. Unfortunately, there is no study available at this time to prove this.

Underarm Cosmetics And The Development Of Breast Cysts [3]
Breast cysts, although mostly benign, are significant because their presence can be indicative of cancer to come. Strangely enough, the upper outer quadrant of the breast is also shown to be the common site for these benign conditions.

Breast cysts are thought to be formed from the blockage of breast ducts. Because antiperspirants block sweat ducts and breasts are modified sweat glands, then breast ducts may act similarly to sweat ducts. Thus, it is possible that breast cyst may also arise from the use of antiperspirants. In addition, application of underarm cosmetics may not always precisely fall on the underarm, but also to the adjacent breast  areas, so there is no reason to believe that antiperspirants should not act the same way on these adjacent breast areas.

However, we can only conclude its relation after extensive clinical studies have been made.

But what have studies taught us so far when we put two and two together? In other words, what has been done to prove or disprove the association of underarm cosmetics application and the development of breast cancer?

To be concluded.

Part 1

Part 2

To understand this fully, let’s start with what we know so far about breast cancer.

There is an increasing incidence of breast cancer

Long-term increases in breast cancer have been observed throughout the globe over the past three decades and is no longer considered a disease confined to Western or affluent societies

Epidemiological studies show that:
•    90% of breast cancer are environmental in origin.

•    The occurrence is also linked to genetics. Breast cancer susceptible genes (BRCA1 & BRCA2) are identified. When these genes lose funtion, these account for 5-10% of breast cancer . However,the mechanism of susceptibility remains unknown.

•    The main identified factors are hormonal and linked to lifetime exposure to estrogen.[1]

•    Diet, smoking and alcohol can also exert influences [1].

•    However, these only confer a small increased risk and the main causative agents of breast cancer remain unaccounted for.[2]

The Supposed Mechanism of Action – The Scientific Version
First off, we have to remember this piece of information from Darbre in 2003. He explains that there are two steps to cause breast cancer:

1) DNA damage, and

2) promotion of growth of these damaged cells.

Incorporating this with what we know so far about what underarm hygiene habits can do to bring about breast cancer, we have the following:

•    Underarm cosmetics are frequently applied and placed on an area near the breast. They are not rinsed off or not rinsed off thoroughly, which allows accummulation of it over time.

•    The extent to which these toxins penetrate the skin remains unknown.

•    Aluminum occurs principally as aluminum chlorhydrate and the aluminum-zirconium chlorhydrate glycine complexes  It is added to form a plug on the top of the sweat duct, preventing the escape of sweat onto the body surface. However, there is evidence that aluminum can bind to DNA and can cause changes in them which also may result to DNA damage.

•    DNA damage could also occur, according to one other theory, through “axillary acid rain” from the accumulation of sweat as a result of antiperspirant action. Because our bodies normally excretes toxins through sweat, then these toxins accumulate in breast tissue. The lower pH of some aluminum salts combined with the microbial action on sweat results in an acidic underarm environment. (This may explain, at least in part, why world breast cancer incidence is lower in countries with different cultural habits or less disposable income for western axillary hygience practices or in areas with less media exposure, as in some rural areas.) [5]  [7] [8]

•    The deodorant components are to prevent the development of body odors through its anti-microbial properties. By killing bacteria, it masks, modifies or prevent the generation of odor.

•    To increase the shelf-life of these products, preservatives are added, especially to stick, roll-on, and cream formations to prevent the growth of microbes or fungi in the containers. The alkyl esters of p-hydroxybenzoic acid, or parabens, have been widely used because of their high antimicrobial activity. (On a side note, the aerosol formats are less dependent on preservatives because they do not come into direct contact with the bacteria on the skin surface).

•    There is now evidence that parabens can mimic the action of estrogen. Why is this significant? It has been established that risk factors for breast cancer include lifetime exposure to estrogens or those with estrogenic properties. Many pollutant chemicals can mimic the action of estrogen, and due to its lipophilic (literally means it “loves fat”) nature, they are stored in breast fat. Thus, explains the evidence that shows that parabens can also stimulate the growth of estrogen-dependent human breast cancer cells in culture.

•   In other words, aluminum can cause DNA damage, and parabens can promote the growth of these damaged cells.

•    However, although parabens can be detected in human breast material through chromatography and mass spectrometry, the source of parabens cannot be identified because we are exposed to parabens through many thousands of food, pharmaceutical and cosmetic products.

To be continued.

To view Part 1, go here.

I have received this forwarded message a number of times since I was a medical student.

Here’s a shocker!

BREAST CANCER PREVENTION – not just for women

Men don’t forget to tell mom, cousins, etc. Deodorants non-antiperspirants) are very hard to find but there are a few out there.

I just got information from a health seminar that I would like to share. The leading cause of breast cancer is the use of anti-perspirant.

Yes, ANTI-PERSPIRANT. Most of the products out there are an anti-perspirant/deodorant combination so go home and check your labels.

Deodorant is fine, anti-perspirant is not. Here’s why:

The human body has a few areas that it uses to purge toxins; behind the knees, behind the ears, groin area, and armpits. The toxins are purged in the form of perspiration.

Anti-perspirant, as the name clearly indicates, prevents you from perspiring, thereby inhibiting the body from purging toxins from below the armpits. These toxins do not just magically disappear. Instead, the body deposits them in the lymph nodes below the arms since it cannot sweat them out.

This causes a high concentration of toxins and leads to cell mutations: a.k.a. CANCER.

Nearly all breast cancer tumors occur in the upper outside quadrant of the breast area. This is precisely where the lymph nodes are located.

Additionally, men are less likely (but not completely exempt) to develop breast cancer prompted by anti-perspirant usage because most of the anti-perspirant product is caught in their hair and is not directly applied to the skin. Women who apply anti-perspirant right after shaving increase the risk further because shaving causes almost imperceptible nicks in the skin which give the chemicals entrance into the body from the armpit area.

PLEASE pass this along to anyone you care about. Breast Cancer is becoming frighteningly common. This awareness may save lives. If you are skeptical about these findings, I urge you to do some research for yourself. You will arrive at the same conclusions, I assure you.

Thank you.

For years I would immediately dismiss it as a hoax as I have not found an explanation nor clue from my textbooks. But then, I never really made any effort to research on it. There have been studies conducted since then I surmise, so I might as well give this email a chance and see if any of the lastest research can enlighten this myth.

To be continued