Two cups of milk a day enough for kids

NEW YORK: Two cups of cow's milk per day may be enough for most kids to have the recommended amount of vitamin D in their blood while maintaining a healthy iron level, suggests a new study.

"One of the common questions I get from parents when their kids become toddlers is, ‘how much milk should they be drinking?' But we didn't have a good answer," said Dr. Jonathon Maguire, the study's lead author from Toronto's TARGet Kids! Collaboration.

One reason for the confusion, according to the researchers, is the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommends children between 2 and 8 years old drink two cups of milk per day, but in another guideline, the organization also says children need supplemental vitamin D if they drink less than four cups per day.

The researchers write in the journal Pediatrics that previous studies showed cow's milk increases the amount of vitamin D in a child's blood while also reducing iron levels. Iron, which the body can get from meats and beans, is important for developing brains and protecting against anemia.

Vitamin D, which is naturally produced in the body during sun exposure, helps the body absorb calcium and prevents the bone-softening disease rickets. People also get the vitamin by eating fortified foods, such as milk and fatty fish.

Maguire, a pediatrician at Toronto's St. Michael's Hospital, and his colleagues surveyed the parents of 1,311 children, who were between 2 and 5 years old and at pediatricians' offices in the Toronto area between December 2008 and December 2010. They also took blood samples from the children.

The researchers found one cup (250 milliliters) of milk was tied to a 5 nanomoles per liter (nmol/L) increase of vitamin D in the children's blood, and a small decrease in iron levels.

The Canadian Pediatric Society suggests children maintain a vitamin D level in their blood of at least 75 nmol/L. On average, the children were drinking just under two cups of milk per day, and were exceeding their recommended vitamin D level.

The researchers concluded that two glasses of cow's milk per day is enough to keep most kids at the suggested vitamin D levels while also maintaining a healthy amount of iron.

SUPPLEMENTS AND OTHER SOURCES

That's not a blanket suggestion for all children, however.

Maguire and his colleagues say darker skinned children may need 3 to 4 cups of milk per day during the winter, when their bodies produce less vitamin D naturally from sun exposure.

Maguire told Reuters Health that the findings seem consistent with previous recommendations.

"I don't think there is too much cause for concern. I think this is probably old news for some parents," he said.

Patsy Brannon, a professor of nutritional sciences at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, said the finding of 2 cups of milk is consistent with the U.S. Department of Agriculture's recommendation for two and three year olds, but said older children need 2.5 cups.

Also, she points out, the U.S. Institutes of Medicine and AAP recommend a vitamin D level in children of at least 50 nmol/L, which is lower than the Canadian society's suggestion.

Currently, the AAP recommends infants, children and teens get 400 international units (IU) of vitamin D per day. The average cup of milk has about 100 IU of vitamin D.

Brannon recommends taking a daily vitamin D supplement to reach that recommendation, but adds that people can also get the vitamin from fortified cereals, grains and other foods.

"There are other sources of vitamin D in the diet besides what comes from milk. We have to be concerned about excessive milk consumption in this age group," she said. (Reuters)

READMORE:http://www.thenews.com.pk/article-80354

Men's cancer risk

Men look set to have a one in two chance of developing cancer in their lifetime, UK experts predict.

The increase to 50 out of 100, up from the current 44 in 100 chance, is largely down to people living longer - age is the biggest cancer risk factor, says Cancer Research UK.

The cancers set to increase the most in men within the next 15 years are bowel, prostate and skin (melanoma).

But more will survive cancer, thanks to better screening and treatments.

Medical advances mean cancer survival has already doubled in the past 40 years.

Continue reading the main story

“Start Quo

And with more research, experts believe outcomes could continue to improve.

Projections

The team from the Wolfson Institute of Preventative Medicine at Queen Mary, University of London, and Cancer Research UK reached their figures by looking at past cancer incidence and mortality rates and projected population data for the UK.

They predict that by 2027 some 416,000 UK people are expected to be diagnosed with cancer compared with about 324,000 diagnosed in 2010.

For men, the figure will be more than 221,000, up from 164,000 in 2010.

And there will be more than 194,000 women diagnosed with cancer in 2027 compared with 160,000 in 2010 - which would mean a woman's lifetime odds of developing cancer would be 44 in 100, up from 40 in 100.

Dr Harpal Kumar of Cancer Research UK said the figures provided a glimpse into the future and what challenges lie ahead.

A pressing task is to find an effective way to screen for prostate cancer.

Not all cancer in the prostate is aggressive or life-threatening - some people live with the condition for a lifetime without any problems.

But doctors still have no reliable test that can spot which of these tumours are safe to leave alone.

Another challenge is getting men to turn up for cancer screening even when a good test for it does exist, says Alan White, chairman of the Men's Health Forum and professor of men's health at Leeds Metropolitan University.

For example, although men tend to be at greater risk of developing bowel cancer than women, relatively fewer men than women go for screening for this cancer, says Prof White.

"It's desperately important that men take up any opportunity to go for cancer screening that they can.

"Some men are fatalistic about cancer and screening. But screening does make a difference. If cancers are spotted earlier they are easier to treat.

"We also know that men who discuss screening with their doctor or their partner are more likely to take up the offer."

He said it was important for people to realise that there is a lot we can do ourselves to lower our own cancer risk, including limiting how much alcohol you drink, giving up smoking, getting enough exercise and eating a healthy diet.

Experts estimate that about four in every 10 cases of cancer could be avoided in this way.

In England, screening is available for bowel, breast and cervical (neck of the womb) cancer.

Men can also request medical tests (a prostate specific antigen blood test) if they are concerned about prostate cancer, although these checks are less than perfect.

READMORE:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-20770922

Antibiotics 'ineffective for coughs'

Antibiotics are ineffective in treating patients with persistent coughs caused by mild chest infections, the Lancet journal reports.

About 2,000 patients across 12 European countries filled in an 'illness' diary.

The study found that the severity and duration of symptoms in patients treated with antibiotics were no different to those given a placebo.

But experts caution that if pneumonia is suspected, antibiotics should still be used due to the disease's severity.

Prof Paul Little from the University of Southampton, who led the research, said: "Using the antibiotic amoxicillin to treat respiratory infections in patients not suspected of having pneumonia is not likely to help and could be harmful.

Continue reading the main story

“

"Overuse of antibiotics, dominated by primary care prescribing, particularly when they are ineffective, can lead to the development of resistance and have side effects like diarrhoea, rash and vomiting.

"Our results show that people get better on their own. But given that a small number of patients will benefit from antibiotics the challenge remains to identify these individuals."

Previous research into whether or not antibiotics are beneficial in the treatment of chest infections, where symptoms include shortness of breath, weakness, high fever, coughing and fatigue, have produced conflicting results- particularly in older people where chest infections can lead to further complications.

This study randomly divided patients into two groups - one received the antibiotic and the other was given a placebo, an inert treatment in the form of a sugar pill, three times a day for seven days.

The study found little difference in the severity and duration of symptoms reported between groups. This was also true for older patients - those aged 60 years or over - who made up nearly a third of the study.

And those taking antibiotics were reported to have more side effects including nausea, rash and diarrhoea than those given the placebo.

Drug resistance

Chest infections are one of the most common problems patients go to their GP about.

Dr Nick Hopkinson, a member of the British Lung Foundation, thought the study was helpful back-up when patients ask them for antibiotics.

He said: "Some patients with mild chest infections will ask for a prescription - this study can help GPs suggest it may not be the best thing for them.

"Most mild chest infections will settle by themselves with no need for antibiotics - as they are mainly caused by viruses. Those with mild infections are told to come back if symptoms don't get better.

"This study is encouraging and supports what GPs are already doing."

Overprescribing of antibiotics can lead to bacterial infection resistance.

Dr Michael Moore, from the Royal College of General Practitioners, who also co-authored the study, said: "It is important that GPs are clear when they should and should not prescribe antibiotics to patients to reduce the emergence of bacterial resistance in the community.

"This study backs the approach taken in the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines that patients who present with acute lower respiratory tract infection where pneumonia is not suspected can be reassured by their GP that they will recover without antibiotics and that the illness is likely to last about three weeks in total whether or not they have a prescription."

The European study, which included Belgium, England, France and Germany, took place between November 2007 and April 2010.

It looked at 2,061 patients who had a persistent cough lasting more than 28 days and where a chest infection, like bronchitis, was suspected.

Those thought to have pneumonia were excluded from the study due to the severity of the disease if not treated promptly.

Participants completed a daily diary for the duration of their illness and rated the the severity of their symptoms including cough, shortness of breath, chest pain, and blocked or runny nose.

READMORE:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-20767470

Some foods risk genetic colon cancer

Among people who have a genetic susceptibility to colon cancer, those whose diets are heavy in junk food have an even higher risk, according to a new study.

"These patients have this very high risk because of this (genetic) mutation they have, but it might be that they could reduce the number of (tumors) by having a more healthy lifestyle," said Akke Botma, the lead author of the study.

Botma's study is just the first to find a link between certain foods and a higher colon cancer risk in this group, and it can't prove that the diet is to blame.

All of the people in the study had Lynch syndrome, a genetic disorder that predisposes people to cancer at younger ages and that affects up to one in 660 people.

In Western countries, colorectal and endometrial cancers are the dominant cancers to turn up in people with the syndrome, while in Asia it's mostly stomach cancer, Botma said.

Up to 70 percent of people with Lynch syndrome will develop colon cancer. Among people without Lynch syndrome, such cancers are thought to be influenced by diet, particularly alcohol and red and processed meat, the authors note in their study, published in the journal Cancer.

Botma and her colleagues at Wageningen University in the Netherlands contacted 486 people with Lynch syndrome from a national database of families with inherited risks for cancer.

At the beginning of the study they surveyed the participants about what they ate, and they ranked each person on whether he ate low, medium or high amounts of foods within four dietary categories.

The food groups included one that was dominated by fruits, vegetables and whole grains; another that was high in meat and coffee; a third dietary group that resembled a Mediterranean diet - fish, leafy greens, pasta, sauces and wine; and a fourth group that was heavy on fried snacks, fast food and diet soda.

Botma and her colleagues found that, over 20 months of follow up, 56 of the participants -- or 12 percent -- screened positive for tumors in the colon, a precursor to cancer.

Of the four dietary groupings, only the junk food category showed any link with a different risk for developing colon tumors.

Of the 160 people who scored low on the junk food diet, 17 developed tumors, while 18 out of the 160 people who ate the most junk food developed tumors.

The numbers initially seemed similar, but after taking into account smoking and other risk factors, the researchers determined that those in the high junk food group were twice as likely to develop colon tumors.

HOW TO MANAGE RISKS?

"It's hard to say why" junk food is linked with a greater risk for these tumors, said Dr. Mala Pande, an instructor at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston who was not involved in the research.

She said some researchers have suggested that high fat might have something to do with it, but it's impossible to conclude that from this study.

Although the findings are too preliminary to be used in making dietary recommendations to people with Lynch Syndrome, the study was valuable in launching research into the possible role of certain foods on cancer risk, said Christopher Amos, a professor at the Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth College.

"People with Lynch Syndrome are at higher risk, and we'd really like to know how to manage their risks better," Amos, who was not part of the study, told Reuters Health.

Certain foods have been shown to be linked with different types of cancer, but many of those studies contradict each other and sow confusion. (Reuters)

READMORE:http://www.thenews.com.pk/article-80082