A Canadian judge has acquitted four doctors and a US drug company of criminal negligence in a long-running tainted-blood scandal.
At least 20,000 people were infected with hepatitis C or HIV in the 1980s and 1990s before Canada used up-to-date blood screening practices.
At least 3,000 people are known to have died as a result of receiving tainted blood products.
The case is the first to stem from Canada's worst public health disaster.
The trial covered seven of the more than 1,000 people who were infected from an HIV-infected blood-clotting product made by US-based Armour Pharmaceutical.
A second trial will deal with the bulk of the deaths and the thousands infected with hepatitis C.
'Tragic events'
The defendants in the 18-month trial included Dr Roger Perrault, the former director of the Canadian Red Cross and two former Health Canada officials, Dr John Furesz and Dr Donald Boucher.
The US-based drug company Armour Pharmaceutical and one of its former vice-presidents, Dr Michael Rodell, were also on trial. 
The defendants were alleged to have failed to screen blood products and take adequate measures to prevent people infected with HIV and Aids from donating their blood.
A comprehensive blood screening system was in use in the United States in the late 1980s and early 1990s but was not adopted in Canada.
Ontario provincial Superior Court Justice Mary Lou Benotto said the events were "tragic, but to assign blame where none exists would compound the tragedy," the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation reported.
In July 2006, the Canadian government announced a C$1bn ($1.008bn) compensation package for thousands of people infected with hepatitis C from tainted blood.
The package included thousands of people left out of a previous compensation agreement.
In May that year, the Canadian Red Cross apologised to the thousands of Canadians infected as a result of the tainted blood.
The government withdrew charges of criminal negligence causing bodily harm against the charity in exchange for a guilty plea under the Food and Drugs Act.
Acquittals in Canada blood trial
Children 'recover' from TV harm
Toddlers who watch too much television are more likely to suffer later behavioural problems - but the damage can be reversed, say researchers.
The Johns Hopkins University experts found that under-fives who watched over two hours a day increased their risk.
However, young children who watched too much, but cut back by five years old, removed the risk, the study in the journal Pediatrics suggested.
A UK expert said the level of damage could depend on the individual child.
There is fierce debate over the effect of exposure to television on young children, with increasing evidence to suggest that watching substantial amounts can affect behaviour.
In the US, the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that children under two years old watch no television, with older children restricted to no more than two hours a day.
The study, from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, analysed data for 2,700 children, asking their parents about viewing habits and behaviour at two and five years old.
Bedroom television
One in five parents reported that their children watched two hours or more of television daily at both two and five.
This "sustained" exposure was linked to behavioural problems, while parents of children who had watched little television at two, and more than two hours at five were more likely to report problems with social skill development.
Having a television in the child's bedroom at five years old was linked to behavioural problems, poor social skills and also poor sleep.
However, children who watched more than two hours a day at two years old, but who had reduced their exposure by five, showed no increased risk of any of these problems.
Dr Cynthia Minkowitz, who led the study, said: "It is vital for clinicians to emphasise the importance of reducing television viewing in early childhood among those children with early use."
Dr Richard House, a lecturer in psychotherapy at Roehampton University, and a researcher into the effects of television in young children, said he was not convinced that children who cut back on television would be immune from harm.
He said: "Human behaviour is far more complex than these measures of behaviour and social skills - there may well be some more subtle form of harm that is undetected.
"Every child is different, and I'm very sceptical about the notion that it is appropriate to give families blanket recommendations about the amount of television their children should watch.
"Some children are extremely sensitive to the effects of television."
Peru blood banks face HIV crisis
Friday, 14 September 2007
Dozens of blood banks in Peru have been closed after at least four people were infected with the HIV virus through contaminated transfusions.
The government said all 240 of the country's facilities would be thoroughly screened, amid what is being described as a national emergency.
The patients were all infected at a hospital in the port city of Callao.
Officials insisted Peru's blood banks met international standards and urged people to continue giving blood.
"We do not want people to panic, what we have to do is be more careful, strengthen our care [of patients]," said Health Minister Carlos Vallejos.
Public alarm
The crisis was prompted after 44-year-old Judith Rivera contacted the media earlier this week to say she had been infected with HIV during a routine operation.
Mrs Rivera, a mother of four, said she was taking legal action to claim compensation.
"What is done is done, as they say, and a life has no price tag," she said during a news conference.
Health officials later revealed that three other patients had been infected with the virus after having blood transfusions at the same hospital - one of them a child aged 11 months.
The Washington-based Pan American Health Organization says its latest figures show that up to a quarter of the blood in Peru's banks is not properly screened.
In a further blow to the health system, officials also confirmed that 30 patients who attended a dialysis treatment centre had been infected with Hepatitis C.
The BBC's Dan Collyns, in Lima, says Peruvians are alarmed and are avoiding public hospitals.
He says the government's response to the crisis is unlikely to restore public confidence in the country's flagging health service.
Child mortality 'at record low'
Thursday, 13 September 2007
Fewer children under the age of five are dying, thanks to immunisation programmes and anti-malaria measures, the UN children's agency, Unicef, says.
Worldwide, the number of young children who died in 2006 dropped below 10 million for the first time, it said.
Measles vaccinations, mosquito nets and increased rates of breast-feeding were said to have contributed to the fall.
However, experts said most of the deaths were preventable and that more needed to be done.
The Unicef figures are based on government-conducted surveys in more than 50 countries in 2005 and 2006
Unicef said 9.7 million children under five died in 2006, down from almost 13 million in 1990.
The decline was particularly marked in Morocco, Vietnam and the Dominican Republic, where the number of children dying dropped by a third, Unicef said.
The Latin American and Caribbean region is on course to achieve the millennium development goal of reducing child mortality by two-thirds by 2015 - it registered 27 deaths on average for every 1,000 live births in 2006, compared with 55 in 1990.
The majority of deaths occurred in sub-Saharan Africa (4.8 million) and south Asia (3.1 million).
Rates were highest in west and central Africa, where HIV and Aids are prevalent.
The actual numbers of deaths in many parts of Africa rose, although mortality rates were lower.
Ann Veneman, Unicef's executive director, said that dropping below 10 million was an historic moment, but warned that most of the deaths were preventable.
"We know that lives can be saved when children have access to integrated, community-based health services, backed by a strong referral system," she said.
Peter Salama, Unicef's head of global health, called on the global community to invest another $5bn (£2.4bn) to help the UN achieve its millennium development goals.
Millions of deaths could be prevented using currently available health measures, Mr Salama said.
Among these were campaigns to increase childhood immunisations, the distribution of vitamin A supplements and mosquito nets treated with insecticides, drug treatments for children infected with HIV.
In sub-Saharan Africa, deaths from measles have been reduced by 75% due to increased vaccination coverage.
In Vietnam, child mortality dropped by about 40% after 30,000 people were trained as health workers and paid to treat people in their own villages, Unicef said.
Convincing mothers to exclusively breastfeed their children for the first six months of life was also important, the agency said. 
Cancer doubt remains over mobiles
Wednesday, 12 September 2007
The long-term cancer risk of mobile phone use cannot be ruled out, experts have concluded.
A major six-year research programme found a "hint" of a higher cancer risk.
But the UK Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research Programme (MTHRP) did rule out short-term adverse effects to brain and cell function.
Researchers are now expanding the programme to look at phone use over 10 years, and the specific impact on children, which has not been studied.
The MTHRP programme, funded by the government and communications industry, has carried out 23 separate studies into the health impact of mobile phones, masts and base stations.
Programme chairman Professor Lawrie Challis said it was now up to the government to offer advice.
The team found that there was a slight excess reporting of brain and acoustic neuroma (ear) cancers.
Researchers said this was on the borderline of statistical significance.
Professor Challis said that it was only responsible to do more research, citing the way smoking was not linked to lung cancer at first.
Time will tell
He said: "We can't rule out the possibility at this stage that cancer could appear in a few years' time.
"With smoking there was no link of any lung cancer until after ten years."
He said the problem during the study was that there had been very few people using mobile phones for over ten years.
Cancers do not normally appear until ten to 15 years after exposure.
But he said overall the evidence that mobiles did not pose a significant health risk was "pretty reassuring".
The team looked at factors affecting blood pressure, heart rate, and electrical hypersensitivity, which include symptoms such as headaches, dizziness and tingling.
They concluded there was no risk.
It was established following publication of an independent government-commissioned report into the safety of mobile phones in 2000.
The report, produced by a group led by Sir William Stewart, concluded that mobile phones did not appear to harm health - but recommended further research was carried out.
However, in 2005 Sir William warned that mobile phone use by children should be limited as a precaution - and that under-eights should not use them at all.
There are now 70 million mobile phone handsets in the UK, and around 50 thousand masts.
Both emit radio signals and electromagnetic fields that can penetrate the human brain, and campaigners fear that this could seriously damage human health.
Lib Dem science spokesman Dr Evan Harris said the findings were "good news for the public", but it was only right more research was carried out.
"The current precautionary approach - involving limited restrictions on mast-siting relating to schools for example and advice about limiting use by young children - is reasonable and this research demonstrates that there is as yet no justification for a more restrictive approach."
Lewis buys 7% Bear Stearns stake
Tuesday, 11 September 2007
Billionaire British investor Joseph Lewis has spent about $860m (£424m) buying a 7% stake in struggling US investment bank Bear Stearns.
The move is seen as a major boost for Bear Stearns, which has been one of the firms most affected by the crisis in the US sub-prime mortgage sector.
Bear Stearns had to spend $1.6bn in June to bail out two of its funds exposed to sub-prime defaults.
The firm's then co-president Warren Spector resigned at the time.
Largest investor
Mr Lewis has bought the shares over the past two months through his Florida-based investment firm Tavistock, according to a filing to the US financial watchdog, the Securities and Exchange Commission.
It makes him Bear Stearns' largest individual investor.
The 16th richest British person according to this year's Sunday Times Rich List, he is worth an estimated £1.2bn.
Having made most of his fortune in the currency markets, the reclusive Mr Lewis now lives in the Bahamas.
His other investments include minority stakes in Tottenham Hotspur and Glasgow Rangers football clubs.
Record defaults
The US sub-prime mortgage sector concerns higher risk loans to people with poor credit histories or those on low incomes.
Higher mortgage rates over the past year have meant record levels of defaults in the industry.
The result has not only been significant financial difficulty for banks and investment firms heavily exposed to the sub-prime market, but also the recent stock market turmoil.
This is because of fears that the crunch in the sub-prime sector will spread to the wider loans market as banks become far more cautious about whom they lend to.
The situation has been exacerbated by the fact that sub-prime debt is often resold as part of a wider debt package, meaning that banks and investors are, as yet, unsure about how far the sub-prime downturn could spread.
As a result, banks are also holding back funds to cover any sub-prime liabilities they themselves may face.
Terminal patients as drug testers
Monday, 10 September 2007
Experts are debating whether terminally ill patients should have the right to try out new drugs that have not completed safety checks.
The US is currently considering allowing such a move.
Professor Emil Freireich of the University of Texas says patients should be allowed to judge the risks.
But US medical oncologist Dean Gesme told the British Medical Journal that to allow this could harm both individuals and science.
Human guinea pigs
In the US, the Food and Drug Administration has proposed expanding access to investigational drugs for patients with terminal illnesses after initial safety - phase I - trials but before final approval.
However, Dr Gesme, who works for the Minnesota Oncology Haematology Professional Association, points out that more than 90% of drugs entering phase I trials are found unacceptable.
And, of those approved, most provide incremental improvements rather than lifesaving treatments. 
The allure of promising new drugs continues to engender false hope, he says, which may delay approval and erode the clinical trials system by substituting clinical enthusiasm and wishful thinking for evidence based medicine.
"False hopes for unproved drugs can also erode the clinical trials system by substituting clinical enthusiasm and wishful thinking for evidence based medicine," he said.
And he questioned who would bear the costs of open access to partially tested drugs of unknown benefit.
But Professor Freireich, a professor of Special Medical Education Programs, rejects these arguments.
He believes permitting expanded access to experimental treatments for patients with limited life expectancy could actually accelerate drug development.
"When patients are offered compassionate use of an experimental drug, their doctors have to collect information as systematically as in the research protocol."
This data about use of the drug outside trial conditions would assist in drug development, he argues.
He points out that most cancer patients are deemed ineligible for drug trials beyond phase I testing - these tend to enlist the healthiest patients at the earliest point in their disease to give the highest probability of a positive outcome to fulfil regulatory requirements.
Patient choice
"It is tragic that regulatory bodies have created a circumstance where people have to live in an aura of hopelessness even though they have the will, the resources and the ability to expose themselves to the risk of participating in investigational studies and to enjoy the potential for benefit."
Experts investigating a drug trial which almost killed six young volunteers at Northwick Park hospital in the UK in 2006 recommended some drugs may be best given to people who are already ill. In the UK, it is the job of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) to regulate medicines and medical devices.
An MHRA spokeswoman said: "Under the Medicines Act, what a doctor can do on an individual patient basis is import or prescribe unlicensed medicines if they deem that to be the best treatment for the patient."
Rabies 'could be gone in decade'
Saturday, 8 September 2007
Rabies could be wiped out across the world within a decade if sufficient vaccination programmes are carried out on domestic dogs, according to experts.
Edinburgh University's Royal Dick Vet School staff have carried out extensive research into the disease, which kills about 55,000 people per year.
If enough domestic dogs are vaccinated, worldwide the disease cycle could be broken leaving no threat to humans.
They hope village-based campaigns could reach 70% of the dog population.
The first World Rabies Day took place on Friday.
Edinburgh University staff are working with vaccine manufacturer Intervet on a programme to eradicate the disease in the Serengeti region of east Africa.
This follows work by the university which found all animals infected with rabies there had a variant of the disease that originated from the domestic dog.
Staff at the university's vet school have also been involved in setting up the Alliance for Rabies Control, a Scottish-based charity established to combat the disease.
They claim that in areas where there is a high prevalence of the disease, such as Africa and Asia, the need for vaccination schemes has often been overlooked, despite the fact this would cost less than other healthcare programmes.
Hospital visits
Vet school staff member Sarah Cleaveland, one of the alliance's board members, said: "Very few people in Western Europe will ever die from rabies, but for those affected in developing countries it can cause immeasurable suffering.
"Children are most at risk of being bitten by a rabid animal and in sub-Saharan Africa it can cost 40% of an annual income to pay for post-exposure vaccination and hospital visits.
"It's estimated that in Africa and Asia almost eight million people a year receive costly post-exposure prophylaxis, yet the cost to eradicate rabies is comparatively small compared to other healthcare programmes."
More than 45 countries across the world are holding events throughout September to raise awareness of the need to control the spread of the disease.
Depression leads to worst health
Friday, 7 September 2007
Depression is a more disabling condition than angina, arthritis, asthma and diabetes, World Health Organization research shows.
And those with depression plus a chronic illness, such as diabetes, fare particularly badly, the study of more than 245,000 people suggests.
Better treatment for depression would improve people's overall health, the researchers concluded in the Lancet.
Experts called for better funding for mental health services.
Dr Somnath Chatterji and colleagues asked people from 60 countries taking part in the World Health Survey a variety of questions about their health, such as how they sleep, how much pain they have, and whether they have any problems with memory or concentration.
Participants were also asked about how they manage with day-to-day tasks.
After taking into account factors such as poverty and other health conditions, the researchers found that depression had the largest effect on worsening health.
And people with depression who also had one or more chronic diseases had the worst health scores of all the diseases looked at or combinations of diseases.
Urgency
Dr Somnath Chatterji said: "The co-morbid state of depression incrementally worsens health compared with depression alone, with any of the chronic diseases alone, and with any combination of chronic diseases without depression.
"These results indicate the urgency of addressing depression as a public health priority to reduce disease burden and disability, and to improve the overall health of populations."
The team called on doctors around the world to be more alert in the diagnosis and treatment of the condition, noting that it is fairly easy to recognise and treat.
Marcus Roberts, head of policy at mental health charity Mind, said the impact of depression could be devastating on relationships, finances and physical health.
"The treatment of depression must be given equal footing to the treatment of other conditions.
"While treatments for most physical health problems are readily accessible, mental health treatments such as talking therapies are limited, with some patients waiting months or even years for their first appointment with a therapist."
He added that mental health was often overlooked in those with chronic health problems, as doctors focused on the physical symptoms.
'Vast sea of misery'
A spokesperson for the Department of Health said: "Seven million adults in England suffer from a common mental health problem such as anxiety, eating disorders and depression.
"We recognise that many of those with depression do not receive treatment at the moment, partly because they do not seek appropriate help.
"The government is committed to providing greater choice and access to timely and appropriate treatment options and is currently working to expand access to and choice of talking therapies in the NHS."
Marjorie Wallace, chief executive of the mental health charity SANE, said: "We now have yet more evidence, as if it were needed, of the destructive and life-threatening effects of depression, which this global study shows can be an even greater danger than many chronic physical conditions.
"Yet even in developed countries like our own, proper diagnosis and appropriate treatment can be patchy at best.
"A vast sea of misery could be avoided if this condition received the same attention and resources as Aids or cancer."
Back pain sufferers need to work
Friday, 7 September 2007
People with conditions such as back pain and arthritis need to stay in work as much as possible, a report says.
The Work Foundation says the evidence suggests that being able to work helps sufferers of musculoskeletal disorders recover more quickly.
Yet many GPs and employers wrongly believe a sufferer must be "100% well" before any return to work, it says.
Experts agreed, but warned people could do more harm than good unless their work situation was properly assessed.
Such conditions affect more than one million people in the UK and cost society £7.4 billion a year, the Work Foundation says.
It also estimates that they account for up to a third of all GP consultations and cause 9.5 million lost working days.
Around 400,000 people suffer from rheumatoid arthritis, a quarter of whom stop work within five years of diagnosis.
These and another 200 conditions affecting the spine, joints, muscles and tendons, collectively known as musculoskeletal disorders, are the biggest cause of work-related illness in the UK.
The foundation - an organisation which aims to find ways to boost both economic performance and quality of working life - says many sufferers are taking long periods of sick leave or quitting work altogether.
But it says the evidence suggests that people can benefit from going back to work as soon as possible.
GPs and employers need to focus on what people can do rather than what they cannot, the report said.
Changing attitudes
Senior researcher Michelle Mahdon said: "Stress hogs headlines, but in terms of people affected, musculoskeletal disorders are the bigger problem, affecting more than one million people a year - and, of course, their families.
"Work can be both cause and cure.
"It may cause or aggravate symptoms, but evidence is amassing that with the right support arrangements, work can also be part of the recovery by contributing to a person's self-esteem and sense of being productive.
"What urgently needs to change is the attitude of many GPs and employers that a sufferer must be 100% well before any return to work can be contemplated."
Dame Professor Carol Black, the government's National Director for Health and Work, said: "I hope that in time musculoskeletal disorders will become less relevant to work and working life.
"Until then, efforts to raise awareness of them must continue with ever greater urgency."
'Understand daily living'
Professor Alan Silman, medical director of the Arthritis Research Campaign, said that in appropriate cases a return to normal activities could lead to more rapid recovery, although fear of pain and lack of support from colleagues could make it daunting.
"However, work can be a major contributor to musculoskeletal problems through excessive loading, poor posture, repetitive movements and other mechanical causes," he added.
He said each person needed to be assessed individually to evaluate whether the work place environment could be modified to encourage return to work.
A spokesperson for Arthritis Care said: "This report highlights the need to boost GP understanding of daily living with such conditions - amazingly, addressing arthritis doesn't even feature on doctors' performance targets."
She said Arthritis Care provided training for employers and employees in working around conditions.
"Bosses can be more creative and flexible in helping people back to work."
Heart tests for at-risk families
Friday, 7 September 2007
Screening relatives of middle-aged heart attack sufferers would save lives, say experts.
Siblings and children of younger heart attack victims have a high risk of heart disease but are not routinely assessed, say researchers from Glasgow.
But identifying and treating key signs such as high blood pressure and cholesterol in family members could prevent 42% of premature heart attacks.
The research is published in the British Medical Journal.
Previous research has shown that compared with the general population, siblings of people who have a heart attack when still fairly young - under 55 years in men and 65 years in women - have double the risk of developing heart disease themselves.
Children and partners are also at increased risk because of inherited risk or because of lifestyle factors, such as smoking and diet.
Although several sets of guidelines have recommended screening relatives, this is rarely done in practice.
Preventable disease
Researchers from the University of Glasgow estimated that the 15,600 patients admitted for heart attack in 2004 in England and Wales had 32,000 siblings.
They calculated that 218 of those would have a heart attack within a year and 1,148 would have a heart attack within five years, but four in 10 of these were preventable.
Individuals' risk is assessed on the basis of lifestyle factors such as diet and smoking as well as weight, blood pressure and cholesterol.
Current recommendations are that anyone with a 20% 10-year risk of having a heart attack or stroke should receive preventive treatment, such as cholesterol-lowering drugs called statins.
Study leader, Professor Jill Pell, said one method would be to assess the whole adult population, but that would be a big undertaking.
"What we're suggesting is you could do that much more efficiently - you would get a much higher hit rate.
"For every 14 people admitted to hospital with a heart attack we could save one more," she said.
The team are now planning a pilot in Glasgow to assess the impact of such a screening programme in a busy city hospital.
Ellen Mason, heart nurse at the British Heart Foundation, said: "A clear system to invite close relatives of people with premature coronary heart disease for screening could play an important part in preventing heart attacks.
"While there are doctors and nurses in hospitals who encourage visiting relatives to go to their GP surgery to have their risk assessed, often this is not considered a high priority and doesn't happen.
She added: "For most people the risk of having a heart attack comes from habits such as smoking, lack of exercise, being overweight and having a diet too high in saturated fats."
Parents warned of additives link
Thursday, 6 September 2007
Parents have been warned of the effects of food additives on their children's behaviour after new research found a possible link to hyperactivity.
A Food Standards Agency (FSA) study of 300 random children found they behaved impulsively and lost concentration after a drink containing additives.
The FSA now says hyperactive children might benefit from fewer additives.
But experts said drugs rather than diet changes could improve behaviour more effectively in the most severe cases.
Dr Andrew Wadge, the FSA's chief scientist, said: "We have revised our advice to consumers: if a child shows signs of hyperactivity or ADHD then eliminating the colours used in the... study from their diet might have some beneficial effects."
He did say though there were many factors associated with hyperactivity including genes, being born prematurely, environment and upbringing.
The FAS has met representatives of the UK food industry to talk about the study's implications, but food safety campaigners say it has not gone far enough.
Emma Hockridge, of the Soil Association, said the FSA should be taking a leading role in addressing the issue by undertaking initiatives to prevent the development of hyperactive disorders, through new policies to limit food additives.
The Food Commission called on food manufacturers to voluntarily remove additives from their products.
A spokesman said: "These artificial colourings may brighten up processed foods and drinks but it appears they have the potential to play havoc with some children's behaviour."
Julian Hunt, from the Food and Drink Federation, said they accepted the FSA's advice but said the tests did not represent how additives were used normally.
"Manufacturers are very aware of consumer sensitivities about the use of additives in food and drink products. It is important to reassure consumers that the Southampton study does not suggest there is a safety issue with the use of these additives."
Behaviour check
This is not the first study to make a link between additives and hyperactive behaviour, but a wider age range of children were selected than in previous research, and not all had behavioural problems.
The Food Standards Agency paid for Southampton University researchers to examine whether giving additives to a group of ordinary three-year-olds and eight or nine-year-olds had any effect on their behaviour.
The children were randomly given one of three drinks, either a potent mix of colourings and additives, a drink that roughly matched the average daily additive intake of a child of their age, or a "placebo" drink which had no additives.
Their hyperactivity levels were measured before and after the drink was taken. Mix "A", with the high levels of additives, had a "significantly adverse" effect compared with the inactive placebo drink.
The older children showed some adverse effects after the second, less potent mix, although the response varied significantly from child to child.
Lead researcher Professor Jim Stevenson said the study, published in the Lancet, showed that certain mixtures of artificial food colours, alongside sodium benzoate, a preservative used in ice cream and confectionary, were linked to increases in hyperactivity.
He added: "However, parents should not think that simply taking these additives out of food will prevent hyperactive disorders.
"We know that many other influences are at work but this at least is one a child can avoid."
He said it was not possible to say which of the ingredients in the additives cocktail affected the children.
Between 5% and 10% of school-age children suffer some degree of ADHD - attention deficit hyperactivity disorder - researchers suggest, with symptoms such as impulsiveness, inability to concentrate and excessive activity.
More boys than girls are diagnosed with the condition, and children with ADHD can struggle academically, often behaving poorly in school.
Andrea Bilbow, from ADHD support group ADDISS, said most parents of children with ADHD had tried diet changes.
While more than half had reported some improvement, this tended to be modest when compared with the effect of medication, she said.
"In some respects the question of food additives is a little bit of a red herring.
"While in some cases, a poor diet could make ADHD even worse, a better diet is not going to make it much better," she said.
And Dr Paul Illing, of the Royal Society of Chemistry, raised questions about the validity of the study, saying extrapolating from the small study population to the general public was very difficult.
Hospital mobile bans 'must stay'
Thursday, 6 September 2007
Evidence that mobile phones can interfere with vital intensive care equipment has been strengthened.
More than half the hospital ventilators tested by Dutch researchers stopped working properly when a mobile was switched on nearby.
The government has said current bans on the use of mobile phones in hospitals can be relaxed.
But the Critical Care journal study suggests it would be folly to do this in high dependency areas.
A total of 61 different medical devices were tested, and the majority could be affected by the presence of a mobile.
In particular, nine intensive care ventilators were checked, and seven of these could be "influenced" by mobiles.
Of these, six were described by the researchers as "hazardous", involving a direct physical influence on the patient.
Critical care monitors were also vulnerable, with seven out of 13 disrupted by mobile signals, while three out of seven syringe pumps were affected.
Other devices which suffered problems were dialysis machines, external pacemaker machines, feeding pumps and even air humidifiers.
Close range threat
"3G" mobiles were less likely to cause problems compared with second generation mobiles, and while, on average, the mobile had to be only a few centimetres away to interfere with the device, one "hazardous" incident happened at a distance of three metres.
The researchers wrote: "The policy to keep mobile phones one metre from the critical care bedside seems warranted."
In the UK, the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) advises that mobiles should be kept out of areas with sensitive medical equipment.
A spokesman said: "We recommend that mobile phones are not used in critical care areas such as intensive therapy units (ITU), special care baby units (SCBU) or where patients are attached to complex devices, as any effect on such equipment could be extremely detrimental to patient care."
Ban reversed
Concerns over this issue led many trusts in the UK to issue blanket bans on mobile use in hospitals, but patient groups and many doctors have been campaigning for this to be reversed.
Earlier this year, junior Health Minister Andy Burnham said that hospitals could relax these rules.
Many trusts have now done this, although some have kept the ban over fears that patient privacy could be breached by the latest camera phones.
The British Medical Association has maintained that there is no significant evidence linking mobiles to problems with medical devices, and said that patients would benefit from doctors being able to communicate better with colleagues while on the wards.
A spokesman said: "If new evidence comes out, we will look at it, but doctors say that it can be very useful to them to make and receive work-related calls this way."
Mentally ill 'suffering neglect'
Mentally ill people in the developing world are being badly neglected, according to a study published in the Lancet medical journal.
The authors say mental illness makes up about 14% of global disease, more than cancer or heart disease.
Up to 800,000 people commit suicide each year, mostly in poorer countries.
Despite this, the authors say, 90% of sufferers in developing countries receive no care - and in some cases are chained to trees or kept in cages.
Health officials call for new strategies and more money for treatment of the mentally ill in the developing world in a special series published by the Lancet.
They warn that as more people suffer from mental problems as a result of war, poverty and disease, unless widespread treatment becomes available, poor countries will be further handicapped in the future.
The study says that in poor rural communities, families living in poverty cope the best they can with mentally ill relatives, but are often unable to afford medication or specialised care.
In some countries, it adds, mental illness was seen as a stigma.
'Stark choice'
The report also stresses the impact of mental health on other health conditions.
t says poor mental health makes people more prone to other health problems - and then they are also less likely to get the medical help, social support and treatment they need.
Their dependents may suffer too, it adds, citing evidence from India and Pakistan that mothers who are depressed are more likely to have a malnourished child.
Nirmala Srinivasan, head of Action For Mental Illness, a lobby group based in Bangalore, India, told the Associated Press news agency that only 7% to 8% of an estimated 40 million to 50 million people in India who were victims of some form of mental illness - schizophrenia, depression, obsessive compulsive disorder, anxiety - got proper treatment.
The study acknowledges that many poorer countries are often presented with a stark choice when it comes to the treatment of mental patients, given the scarcity of resources.
But many of the experts say basic mental health services can be provided cheaply and simply, especially if they are made part of general healthcare.
Women 'choosier' over partners
Men look for beauty, while women go for wealth when it comes to assessing future partners, researchers say.
An Indiana University team looked at the behaviour of 46 people taking part in a speed-dating session.
They found that the men were more likely to go for the more attractive women, while women opted for those who could give the best financial security.
Men were also likely to want to date more women, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences reported.
Speed-dating is becoming an increasingly popular way for singles to meet, involving scores of mini-dates whereby couples get a few minutes to get to know each other.
Researchers said speed-dating offered a good model to analyse the factors people take into account when choosing partners as it offered a "microcosm" of daily life.
During the research, participants were asked what they were looking for. The most common response was to find someone who was like themselves.
But once the speed-dating sessions began, participants began conforming to set patterns, according to the analysis of questionnaires filled in.
The report said men sought the more attractive women and the women were drawn to material wealth and security.
Furthermore, while men on average wanted to see every second woman again, the women wanted to meet only a third of men.
Choosing
Lead researcher Peter Todd said the study showed the public reverted to type when choosing a mate.
"While humans may pride themselves on being highly evolved, most still behave like the stereotypical Neanderthals when it comes to choosing a mate.
"Evolutionary theories in psychology suggest that men and women should trade off different traits in each other and when we look at the actual choices people make, this is what we find evidence for."
Dr Glenn Wilson, a relationships expert at the Institute of Psychiatry in London, added: "It is well known that men select women for fairly superficial reasons, whereas women think much more about the long-term and the qualities and resources needed to bring up children.
"Men will often find themselves falling into relationships by default after starting off looking for sexual adventure."
Gene 'controls body fat levels'
A single gene can keep in check the tendency to pile on fat, scientists have shown.
The University of Texas team manipulated the gene, called adipose, to alter the amount of fat tissue laid down by fruit flies, worms and mice.
If the same effect could be achieved in humans, which also carry the gene, it is hoped it could lead to new ways to fight obesity and diabetes.
The study is published in the journal Cell Metabolism.
Lead researcher Dr Jonathan Graff said: "From worms to mammals, this gene controls fat formation.
"It could explain why so many people struggle to lose weight, and suggests an entirely new direction for developing medical treatments that address the current epidemic of diabetes and obesity.
"Maybe if you could affect this gene, even just a little bit, you might have a beneficial effect on fat."
The adipose gene was discovered in fat fruit flies more than 50 years ago, but scientists had not pinned down its exact role.
The Texas team used several methods to turn the gene on and off at different stages of the animals' lives and in various parts of their bodies.
Their work suggested that the gene acts as a high-level master switch that tells the body whether to accumulate or burn fat.
Health impact
Mice with experimentally increased adipose activity ate as much or more than normal mice.
However, they were leaner, had diabetes-resistant fat cells, and were better able to control insulin and blood-sugar metabolism.
In contrast, animals with reduced adipose activity were fatter and less healthy, and had diabetes.
The researchers also showed that gene activity could be turned up or down, not just on or off.
Dr Graff said this increased the potential to manipulate its effect to treat obesity.
The next step will be to probe further the exact mechanisms by which the gene exerts its control.
Dr David Haslam, clinical director of the National Obesity Forum, warned that it could take many years to develop genetic treatments for obesity.
In the meantime, he said, the only way to tackle the problem effectively was to encourage people to eat healthily and take exercise.
"I don't want patients coming to me saying: 'It's not what I eat, it's all in my genes'," he said.
"Don't give my patients another excuse to be victims."
Why rock and roll stars die young
They say rock and pop stars live life in the fast lane and now researchers have proved it.
A Liverpool John Moores University study of 1,050 US and European artists found they are twice as likely to die early than the rest of the population.
In all, 100 stars died between 1956 and 2005 with US stars dying at 42 on average and those from Europe at 35.
Drug and alcohol problems accounted for one in four deaths, the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health said.
It comes after singer Amy Winehouse hit the headlines recently over what her family has called a drug addiction.
Researchers said the findings - in particular about substance abuse - should be looked at seriously by the music industry.
They said this was important as the artists had an influence on others with one in 10 children in the UK aspiring to be a pop star.
'Excessive behaviour'
Lead researcher Professor Mark Bellis said: "Public health consideration needs to be given to preventing music icons promoting health-damaging behaviour among their emulators and fans.
"Stars could do more to actively promote positive health messages, but these need to be backed up by example."
Paul Stokes, news editor of the NME music magazine, added: "The problem is that rock stars often spend the first years of their careers struggling to get by and then get everything really quickly.
"There is no control mechanism and with a culture which often lauds excessive behaviour that spells problems."
Records industry group BPI said: "A very small minority do encounter problems, which due to their fame and success are played out in the media and given a greater prominence than those of young people in other walks of life.
"Record labels always seek to support the minority of artists who experience difficulties of this kind."
