Note: Dr. Nimesh P. Nagarsheth, is a women's cancer surgeon practicing at Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York City and Englewood Hospital and Medical Center in Englewood, New Jersey. He's also a rock drummer in a new rock band started by six cancer surgeons to raise money and awareness to fight gynecologic cancers. It's called N.E.D., which stands for "no evidence of disease"--a good thing after cancer treatment. We asked him about the healing power music and about N.E.D. He replied:

October is Domestic Violence Awareness Month. You can wear purple ribbons to educate yourself and others about the horrors of inter-personal violence. But if you know a victim of domestic violence--and they're all around us--do you know how to help them share their story and get help?

Send them to Violence UnSilenced, a relatively new and somewhat unconventional website that gives excruciating voice to the survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault.

It's a simple thing you can do, but sometimes the simple things are the most profound.

Started by a Wisconsin woman, the website is a flood of sad and often brutal stories that oddly inspires as it educates. Tens of thousands of people each month read the stories of violence survived that Maggie Ginsberg-Schutz receives and posts weekly. Even if the authors are not yet able to extricate themselves completely from the violence that surrounds them, the readers are listening to the stories of survivors, not victims. It takes shocking courage and bravery to give voice to previous shame and silence, and it's in that awakening where the power lies.

Help a victim give voice to her anguish, guide her to appropriate help and elevate her to survivor - make it your mission next month. Even if you think you know no one who is affected, look around. I bet you'll find someone.

A good friend of eight years casually informed me over lunch one day how she'd gotten a permanent bump on her elbow: it was courtesy of her father after he'd thrown her into a plate glass window when she was in junior high school. She told me how he regularly threw her into brick walls, and down stairs. He kicked, punched, slapped, humiliated - even stuck safety pins into her and her brother's skin. This, from a father who had always been portrayed as a paragon of virtue and heroism. This, from a simple lunch discussion on a child abuse story in the news and a direct question from me. She eventually started therapy and is healing, even if in spurts and starts.

You see, domestic violence victims - and the larger class of violence and sexual assault victims - are all around you. They're in your workplace, at your church or temple, in your classroom, on your community web boards, on airplanes, next to you at lunch counters and in public restrooms, next door, maybe even in your own house. Victims of violence in all its forms - physical, mental, emotional, sexual, spiritual, inside and outside the home - are everywhere. You just have to open your eyes and ears and look and listen.

You just have to look and ask. It's simple, but it can be profound.

Low-carb diets can lead to weight loss, but are they healthy for the heart? Cardiologist Anthony Rosenzweig, MD, Director of Cardiovascular Research in Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School, was so convinced that they were heart-healthy that he used them himself to lose weight. But then his lab did some research that convinced him to find a healthier way. Here's his story:

    A few years ago, like many middle-aged Americans, I was experimenting with a low-carbohydrate diet. As a cardiologist, I knew that the few randomized controlled trials of this diet suggested that are effective ways to lose weight and, somewhat surprisingly - given how high in fat and cholesterol they sometimes are - had relatively little adverse effect on the usual markers of cardiovascular risk, such as serum cholesterol or CRP [a measurement of inflammation].  

Dr. Shi Yin Foo, a talented physician-scientist and cardiologist working in my laboratory, was taken aback by what I was eating at lunch. She'd ask how I could eat that way and would tell me about the last low-carb patient she'd admitted to the hospital with a heart attack. I'd point out that there were no controls for her observations, and that - as with the clinical studies - my own cholesterol and other markers remained unchanged.  

Of course, what we really wanted to know was what was happening to the blood vessels, and the risk of future heart attack or stroke on these diets. These questions are very difficult to address in clinical trials, and thus remains unanswered. Finally, I asked Shi Yin to do the mouse experiment - so that we could know what happens in the blood vessels and so I could eat in peace.

Fall is around the corner, schools are re-opening and fresh concerns about the H1N1 flu are
popping up. BeWell's Dr. Saralyn Mark has been working with NASA on preparing for the swine flu this fall; here's what she thinks is in store and some new HINI advice for pregnant women and children.


Saralyn Mark, MD
BeWell Expert

Associate Professor of Medicine adjunct
Yale and Georgetown University Schools of Medicine

Affiliate Professor
George Mason University School of Public Policy

Senior Medical Advisor
NASA
*The opinions expressed are the views of the author and not of NASA.

Talk about mixed messages for new moms. Research unequivocally supports breastfeeding over formula for the health of baby and mom, yet an estimated 3.5 million new moms leave the hospital with a bag full of formula swag--coupons for Similac, samples, bottles and nipples, all packaged in a swank diaper bag.

"Multiple randomized studies have shown that when moms get formula samples at discharge, they stop breastfeeding sooner," says Alison Stuebe, MD, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine. Many public and private groups are opposed to hospitals giving out samples of formulas, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the World Health Organization.

When your freshman comes home from college this summer--and you happen to have a dog or a cat--don't be surprised if she starts sniffling and sneezing for the first time ever. Some call it the college phenomenon, others have dubbed it the Thanksgiving Effect...you send your child to college seemingly allergy free and she comes home allergic to the pet she grew up with.

What's going on?

The phenomenon was reported at the Congress of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology in Warsaw, Poland earlier this month. Though somewhat a mystery, it's thought that when you're exposed to dogs and cats--and other allergens--a couple of things happen. Your inflammatory system may become less responsive, and you also churn out IgG, a type of antibody that helps fight infections and plays a role in allergies, but does not trigger those classic allergic symptoms. IgG antibodies are thought to protect against allergies by eliminating the allergen from your body and keeping your inflammatory cells from becoming activated. Some people also develop IgE, the antibodies that trigger runny nose, itchy eyes and other allergic symptoms. But because of the protection offered by the IgG antibodies, IgE does not function efficiently enough to mount an allergic response.

But when a coed goes off to college, and is no longer exposed to the dog or cat allergens, levels of IgG slowly drop, the inflammatory system ramps up, and she begins to lose that protection. This isn't a problem while away at school and not exposed to the pet, but when she comes home, the system runs wild, the IgE gets in full swing, and the sneezing and itchy eyes commence.

Laurie Tarkan is a health reporter covering the Congress of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology in Warsaw, Poland. She writes for the New York Times and national magazines, and is the author of two books on pregnancy and infertility. She has recently launched her own allergy blog.

A hot topic of discussion at the international allergists conference in Warsaw, Poland, is how to combat the rise in allergies and asthma, and some are looking to breast milk for help. International experts agree that there's a critical window of development when children are susceptible to environmental factors that put them at risk for allergies and asthma. That period is from birth to three years old.  

Several studies presented found that women who exclusively breastfed for at last four months lowered their baby's risk of getting eczema. Since eczema is one of the first manifestations of allergies in infants and increases a child's risk of developing asthma later on, reducing eczema can have important lifelong implications.  One study from the Karolinska Institute in Sweden followed more than 4,000 newborn babies for eight years. Children who were exclusively breast fed for four months or more had about an 11 percent reduction in risk. When those who already had eczema during the time of breast feeding were excluded from the analysis (because with these allergic children, it couldn't be considered prevention), the risk of eczema at eight years of age was reduced by 27 percent. Children who were partially breast fed did not have these protective benefits.

Another path of eczema prevention relating to milk allergies may be the use of hydrolyzed formula, where the milk protein is broken down or "predigested." A study from Germany found that this type of formula reduced the risk of eczema, especially in high risk children.

Other interesting prevention studies surrounding children's diets were presented. One study from the University of Gothenberg in Sweden found that children who were introduced to fish before nine months of age had a decreased risk of chronic wheezing at age four, and a decreased risk of wheezing that had to be treated with coritcosteroids. It didn't seem to matter what type of fish they ate or how often they ate it. They also looked at exclusive breastfeeding and corroborated the results of the other Swedish study.  Breast is best!

Laurie Tarkan is a health reporter covering the Congress of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology in Warsaw, Poland. She writes for the New York Times and national magazines, and is the author of two books on pregnancy  and infertility.  She has recently launched her own allergy blog.

With allergies and asthma on the rise, many parents, especially those with young children who have a high risk of allergies, wonder whether owning a pet can raise their child's risk even more. At the Congress of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology in Warsaw, Poland, this week, world leaders in allergy are debating the same question, but they've taken the question one step further: They're also asking if having pets early in life can actually protect against allergies.

Here are some answers to your questions on both sides of the allergy debate.

Will owning a cat increase my child's risk of developing allergies?

The good news for pet lovers is that two meta analyses that were presented at the conference found that owning a pet in the first two years of life did not increase a child's risk of allergy or asthma.

However studies have found conflicting results, with some showing protection and others showing increased risk. Adnan Custovic, M.D., professor of allergy at the University of Manchester, in England, has been researching genetic predispositions to allergies.

There appear to be many factors that affect your risk of allergies--your phenotype (genetic profile), the age of exposure to allergens, how much exposure you get (the dander of five cats versus that of one cat) and even what other allergens are present, like dust mites and mold. "Some people may benefit from having a cat or dog, but some may be hurt," Custovic said.

What about the opposite? Could owning a cat actually protect my child from developing allergies?

Experts used to believe that early avoidance of all allergens was key, but solid studies have found that having a too-clean environment may help some people but hurt the majority of people. That's because being exposed to microbes and bacteria is thought to help in the normal development of the immune system.

When it comes to owning a cat, some studies suggests that exposure to allergens early in life can help you build up a tolerance to them. "The classic concept was to take away the cat, but in the last five years there's been a change in paradigm as we realized that eliminating exposure resulted in very little long lasting protection," says Ulrich Wahn, M.D., professor of pediatric allergy at the Charité University in Berlin.

So...should I get rid of my cat?

The evidence isn't strong enough yet to recommend for or against having pets, so there's no reason to get rid of your cat -- unless your child has already been diagnosed with cat allergies.

Laurie Tarkan is a health reporter covering the Congress of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology in Warsaw, Poland. She writes for the New York Times and national magazines, and is the author of two books on pregnancy and infertility. She has recently launched her own allergy blog. 

 

Lori Hope, author of Let Me Live: 20 Things People with Cancer Want You To Know, was a guest on the TODAY show's series on cancer and blogged for Health Beat on 5 Things to Say--and 5 NOT to stay--to Your Friend With Cancer.  This is from her blog, what helps. what hurts. what heals:

For John, with love, gratitude, and always hope

Because this blog is about hope - it is intended to inspire hope and promote healing - I try to stay away from news that stings. Yet the third verb in this blog's name is "hurts", so how can I neglect to address a part of life that is as real as birth?

We are a fast food nation. Consumed by convenience. Trapped by omnipresent cheap food.  Plagued by widespread excess weight and obesity, most alarmingly among our kids. Racked by epidemic levels of type 2 diabetes, now showing up even in children.

Food Inc., the new documentary film opening in New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco this Friday, June 12, offers chilling insights into the dilemma of eating low cost but high-calorie, sugar-laden foods from an increasingly monolithic food industry. We witness a Latino family--with a diabetic father--struggle to eat healthy foods. Problem is they just can't afford to.  And we see a high percentage of high school students raise their hands to indicate how many have one, two, or more family members with diabetes.

The CDC estimates that 1 in 3 Americans born after 2000 will contract early onset, or childhood diabetes.  Among African Americans and Latinos, the rate will be 1 in 2.  Comparable numbers exist for Type 2 diabetes, with an alarming rate of children now developing what had been the adult-onset version of this epidemic.  The consequences are well documented: blindness, amputations, kidney dialysis, heart disease and early death.

Food Inc, the upcoming documentary movie opening this Friday is already developing a pre-open buzz. It has disturbing information that can frighten you and revelations of sinister collusion that may outrage you but nothing in this film may move you as much as the story of Kevin Kowalcyk.  In 2001, a healthy two-year old ate a hamburger and died twelve days later. Diagnosis: E. coli O157:H7, the pathogenic form of the normally benign E. coli bacteria found in the gut. Source: the tainted hamburger meat.  Result: his mother, Barbara Kowalcyk, and grandmother, Pat Buck, have devoted their lives to advocate for safer food.
    
Foodborne illnesses such as E. coli 0157:H7 and salmonella sicken an estimated 76 million Americans each year; 325,000 get hospitalized; and 5000 die, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Many are children.
 
Food Inc. posits that factory farming, ever seeking cost-saving efficiency, is the major culprit.  As recent headlines dramatically reveal, E coli 0157:H7 is often spread by fecal matter, both at slaughterhouses and from farm run-off into the water and onto nearby agricultural crops.

Ever wonder where your food comes from?  Especially fast food?  What the animals have been eating?  Their antibiotics?  How they've been handled, or manhandled?  Which pesticides get used on crops?  How about genetically modified crops? And how all this affects your health?  Then have I got a film for you: FOOD INC.  

Robert Kenner's thought-provoking, sometimes shocking documentary on industrialized food and factory farms tackles all these big, messy questions in neat chapters, investigating cows, pigs, chickens, corn, and soybeans.

Hi, All. I'm Lori Hope, and I'll be on "The Today Show" this Monday, June 8, sharing advice about how to support people with cancer, based on the research I conducted for my book, Help Me Live: 20 Things People with Cancer Want You to Know, the myriad responses of my readers, and my personal experience as a cancer survivor.

Thought I'd share a few tips with you here. For more info, check out my website, blog, or book. And please let me know if you have other tips to share. Thanks!

What NOT to say to your friend with cancer 

1. "You poor thing, I feel so sorry for you." People with cancer need compassion, not pity. Pity implies hierarchy, while compassion puts you on the same level.
2. "What's your prognosis?" Prognosis is a medical term and it makes most people with cancer think about how long they might survive. Even if they're positive thinkers, they may not want to think about how long doctors indicate they're going to live.
3. "Let me know if there's anything I can do to help." This might seem like a helpful statement. But according to my research, that statement is one of the least helpful. When people have cancer they may feel so overwhelmed that they can't focus on what they need. Offer something specific -- run an errand, give a foot rub, weed their garden.
4. "My aunt [or anyone] died of breast cancer." Tell positive stories, never scary stories, about other people who have had cancer. More than anything, people with cancer need hope, and horror stories dash hope.
5. "At least they caught it early [or "at least" anything]." Your friend needs to know you're acknowledging his pain and taking it seriously. If you say, "At least you don't have to go through chemo..." or something similar, you minimize what he's going through. He may discover what's good about his situation himself, but doesn't want to hear it from you.
   

NEXT: 5 Things You SHOULD Say to Your Friend with Cancer