iblog

Steve Robinson: A stomach virus that causes vomiting and diarrhoea is currently infecting more than 100,000 people in the UK each week, doctors have warned. They have urged infected people to remain at home for at least 48 hours after the symptoms of the illness – often called winter vomiting disease – have disappeared, in an attempt to stem the rate of new infections. The illness is caused by an infectious agent called a norovirus (or Norwalk Virus). Infection causes sudden and acute diarrhoea within just 12 hours, along with projectile vomiting. Flu-like symptoms can also occur, hence its nickname ‘Stomach Flu’. It is estimated that around a million people are infected with the stomach bug each year, but the Health Protection Agency have confirmed that the current wave of infections sweeping the nation is at its highest since 2002.

"Surgeries and hospitals have been swamped with people wanting advice. Wash your hands regularly so you don't infect anyone else and stay at home two days after the symptoms have gone.

The virus can be contracted by being in contact with infected people, surfaces, food or drink. Outbreaks are difficult to contain due to the low-level of immunity that the body establishes and the only form of containment is to disinfect surfaces and wash your hands regularly. Doctors have advised that, although the disease is not dangerous, sufferers should drink plenty of water to keep themselves hydrated, wash their hands to stop the disease spreading to others, and not return to work until 48 hours after symptoms have eased, as individuals may still infect others. Although official figures have suggested that 100,000 new cases are appearing each week – and that number may even rise further – it is likely that the real number of infections is far higher still, as most people do not report their illness. With potentially millions of people infected with this virus, the message that sufferers should stay at home seems like good advice, otherwise this will spread around offices even quicker. Although the condition is not serious, there is no real treatment apart from letting the illness take its course. Thankfully, if you are unlucky enough to catch the bug, it should relent within a day or so. Image: MorgueFile

Virgil: It's not a product from Apple, but perhaps the 'i' of the i-Snake is a homage to being yet another revolutionary gadget. The snake is a new surgical device hoping to decrease the amount of invasive surgery needed in hospitals; rather than cut people open, the long thin tube contains motors, sensors (the 'eyes' that surely also contribute to the moniker) and other imaging devices that will stand in for a surgeon's hands. The snake is more flexible, dextrous and precise than any implement previously used, and will make it possible to more safely conduct operations that previously required very invasive techniques. A team from Imperial College London has been granted 2.1 million pounds for the development of the i-Snake. They envisage the tool being used for heart bypass surgery, but also note that it could aid in any number of procedures, such as the diagnosis of problems in the guts and bowels. The ultimate aim for surgeons is to manage to conduct these procedures without any skin incisions at all. Such surgery can leave scars, keep patients in hospital far too long, and involve a much longer recovery time. Health Minister Lord Ara Dazi, who is on the development team, commented that:

"The unrivalled imaging and sensing capabilities coupled with the accessibility and sensitivity of i-Snake will enable more complex diagnostic and therapeutic procedures than are currently possible. The cost benefits that i-Snake will introduce include earlier, cheaper and less invasive treatment, faster recovery and procedure times and intangible benefits through an increase in patient care and quality of life."

All of these procedures are to be tested in a lab before they are to be used on any real patients. However despite this caution, the innovation of the device is no doubt only the beginning of a whole range of smarter and more flexible surgery tools that are bringing us closer to the idea of an operation no longer being dangerous. Dr Ted Bianco, director of the Wellcome Trust, comments: "Gone are the days when the surgeon's knife ruled in the operating theatre. The future of surgery is in smart devices like i-Snake."

Rushda: The Nintendo Wii is the most sought after present this Christmas, with stocks heavily running out by the hour and many distressed parents not able to secure one before the big day. Though like all novelty gadgets, the hype is often disproportionate to the product, but it is easy to see why the Wii is in so much demand. It marks a revolution in gaming as now players can feel truly involved in their games by being able to use the Wii in a variety of innovative ways. Whether you want to play tennis or bowl, fight or drive, all these things can be simulated with the Wii in more realistic ways than pressing buttons. Furthermore, an extra appeal is that the Wii has been marketed as an "active" console, with players no longer slumped motionless on the couch. Though this may be true to some extent, it is very important to take this claim with a pinch of salt and understand that the Nintendo Wii cannot replace other forms of more strenuous exercise. Young people are at particular risk from obesity and require at least an hour of exercise a day which cannot be taken from playing on the console. Indeed a new British Medical Journal study has found that in fact Wii players only use 2% more energy than players of other consoles. This may promote an "every little help" image, they admit, but it is wrong thinking that it is enough. As a spokesperson for the study said:

"These increases were of insufficient intensity to contribute towards recommendations for children's daily exercise. Although this figure is trivial it might contribute to weight management. New generation computer games stimulated positive activity behaviours - the children were on their feet and they moved in all directions. Given the current prevalence of childhood overweight and obesity, such positive behaviours should be encouraged."

The obesity crisis in Britain has hit children the worst, with more than a third of twelve year olds overweight. Whilst the Wii may provide more activity than conventional consoles, it is perhaps still more dangerous to believe, and let children believe, that playing games on the Wii is enough. Well, so much for childrens' hopeful dreams!

Jeanne: To many of us, a long lie-in is a luxury. As a university student, I regularly get by on four or five hours of sleep a night (and sadly that has nothing to do with partying the night away.) However, I’ve decided to rethink my sleep habits having come across recent research which points to the healing powers of sleep. Getting a good night’s rest is more important than I ever imagined. Here’s why sleep is so important. A good night’s sleep helps you to live longer. Sleep duration has declined from an average of eight hours during the early 1990s to about seven hours today. At the same time scientists have found that blood pressure has become a growing problem in the western world. Sure, people are now consuming fatty foods as never before, but the relationship between poor sleep patterns and the increasing incidence of high blood pressure holds true even after accounting for other causal factors. Sleep helps you look better. Well, we all know that, so why the need to elaborate? In any case, there are hundreds of creams and lotions which will help get rid of those nasty dark circles and bags under your eyes. However, researchers have found that dark circles are probably the least of your worries. People who receive insufficient sleep undergo the same changes in metabolism that humans experience as they age. So effectively, you’re making yourself look older by not getting that much-needed shut-eye. Sleep helps build a better brain. It goes without saying that we all feel a lot more alert after a good night’s sleep. However, sleep also improves your memory and problem-solving skills. Furthermore, lack of sleep can have similar effects on the brain as an evening of light boozing. If you’ve been up for seventeen hours straight, you’re likely to be as alert as someone who has a blood alcohol level of 0.05 percent. Sleep can help you lose a few pounds. For one thing, you won’t be tempted to scoff down ice cream at 1 am. However, inadequate sleep also lowers leptin levels. This is the hormone which instructs your body to ‘feel full.’ I doubt I’ll be compromising as much on sleep next term!

Jeanne: Here’s another troubling abortion-related issue in light of Kayleigh’s recent blog. Female foeticide has long been a problem in a number of Asian countries, especially India. However, researchers and social workers now believe that many UK Asians may be choosing to abort female foetuses rather than experience the ‘shame’ of having a female child. The study, carried out by Oxford University examined birth statistics within the Asian community between 1990 and 2005. It found that 1,500 girls are missing from national birth data in England and Wales. In addition, the proportion of sons born to Asian women has been steadily increasing since the 1970s. In 1970, statistics suggest that 103 British Asian boys were born for every 100 girls. Between 2000 and 2005, however, the ratio had increased to 114 boys for every 100 girls. The difference may appear small, indeed insignificant, but it is a trend which can only really be explained by female foeticide. Dr, Sylvie Dubec, who was responsible for undertaking this study has underlined the problem posed by sex-selective abortion:

"According to my calculation around 1,500 girls are missing... it's significant compared to the total number of births."

However, this is a trend that is likely to continue. In India, the perceived superiority of the male child is a widely held notion. Many British Asian women state that they abort female foetuses in order to avoid pressure back home. Speaking anonymously to the BBC, one lady described her thoughts on learning the sex of her baby:

"Unfortunately, it was another girl. My husband and I thought the burden would probably be too much and the pressure when I got back home. So we decided to terminate."

As a reflection of the extent of this problem, many British Asian women are willing to go back to their countries of origin simply to abort female foetuses. This is despite the fact that, officially at least, female foeticide has been illegal in India since 1980. However, during the last 25 years some seven million girls have been reported as ‘missing’ from Indian population statistics. Without government action, there is every chance that this sorry tale will be repeated in the UK as well.

Kayleigh: The BBC has discovered that women are still having back street abortions even though they were made legal over 40 years ago. A BBC undercover reporter posed as an illegal immigrant who was 6 weeks pregnant and went 'for help' to special Chinese herb shops in East London. One of the staff who worked at the Shanghai Herbal and Acupuncture Centre offered to help her. He said: "If you see the bleeding come out, that's fine, some people don't. I need to call another company, from China, [they will] deliver it to here, you understand?" He then sold her a drink for £40 so she would have a miscarriage. Currently in the UK, an abortion is only legal up to 24 weeks. Some desperate women, often teenagers and younger women, feel they have to turn to illegal abortions to get the help they need. Professional private abortions can cost between £350 and £750, so you can imagine it can be difficult for some to find this kind of money. Whilst I do not agree with illegal back street abortions, I do think the waiting list for abortions is far too long on the NHS and needs to be looked at. Abortion can be a traumatic experience for any woman to go through, and women shouldn't have to feel they have to turn away from their healthcare service in order to get one.

Kayleigh: Schools are failing to give diabetic children the help they need in the classroom, and are increasingly relying on parents to help. Research shows that a remarkable 70% of schools asked parents to come in and inject their child with insulin if the child could not do it themselves. Diabetic children are also missing out on school trips because of their condition, a research study by Diabetes UK found. The findings were released on World Diabetes Day. Douglas Smallwood, Chief Executive of Diabetes UK, said: "This research confirms what too many parents have been telling us - that children with diabetes get a raw deal at school. Every aspect of school life is important, whether it's access to the support needed to manage a child's diabetes and protect their long-term health, or crucial social elements like sports and trips." The survey also showed that school staff and teachers are not given the training they need to help diabetic children, and wouldn't know how to help them in an emergency situation. This is bad news because results from the National Diabetes Audit revealed that 83 % of children are not achieving recommended blood glucose levels, increasing their risk of developing serious complications of diabetes. Diabetic children may miss out on sport, school trips and extra curricular activities as staff do not have the training to handle situations that may arise. Most children with diabetes are around 10-14 years old, and suffer from type 1 diabetes, which means they need a daily insulin injection to balance their blood sugar levels. A new website has just been set up by Diabetes UK for teenagers to help and give them advice about their condition, called MyLife. Although I do not expect every teacher to be able to treat diabetic children, I do think there should be quite a few staff in each school who receive training to handle emergencies. I do not think it is fair for parents to come into school and give their child their daily injection, they should be able to go about their daily lives while their kids are at school knowing they are safe.

Kayleigh: Women who have had one too many after a night out are ending up in hospital with burst bladders, according to the British Medical Journal. The problem occurs when women drink too much and don't realise their bladder is too full, which then causes it to rupture. Previously it had only reportedly happened to men, but now it is effecting women more and more as increasing numbers take up binge drinking. Mr Mohantha Dooldeniya is a surgeon at Pinderfields Hospital. He has seen 3 women in the past year who have suffered from a burst bladder. He says the reason why the bladder burst is because the bladder was full with urine but the person didn't realise they needed the toilet because of the numbing effects of the alcohol they had drunk. He said: "In women, the feeling was because they have a short urethra they are more likely to leak than rupture. A minor trauma, such as a fall, can increase the risk the bladder will burst." This isn't the only problem associated with binge drinking. According to TheSite.org, if you binge drink on a regular basis you could suffer from heart problems later in life. There's also your liver to think about. If battered by too much drink, the liver could develop a disease called cirrhosis. Alcohol also affects your skin too, as it makes you dehydrated and, therefore, it doesn't get the vital nutrients it needs. Alcohol related health problems are also taking its toll on the NHS and it is costing them up to £3 billion a year. This is all well and good, it has certainly put me off drinking too much, but i can't seem to keep away from the toilet when i'm drinking so i don't think i have to worry about this happening to me too much! The problem is the label of a binge drinker, if you have more than a few glasses of wine you are labelled a binge drinker, but the fact is, everyone is different and can handle different amounts. I can certainly handle a lot more when i now than when i first started drinking, but i wouldn't call myself a binge drinker!

Rushda: A huge international study based on lifestyle has recently found that body weight and eating habits strongly influence the risk of developing cancer. The new advice given by The World Cancer Research Fund, based on the "biggest study ever", is that even if you are not overweight you could significantly lower your cancer risk by slimming down even more, and furthermore they also advise tough nutritional measures such as cutting out all bacon and ham from the diet altogether. Before this study, the advice was always to stick to a moderate diet and stay within the healthy weight range (i.e. a Body Mass Index of between 18.5 and 25). However, experts now say that the closer you are to the lower end of the healthy spectrum, the better. Indeed, everyone should try and become as thin as possible without being underweight. Though there is still much research to be done into the causes of cancer, it is important that everyone realises how much their lifestyle can affect their risk. Though only a third of all cancers are due to lifestyle conditions, following simple health advice could cut three million new cases of cancer across the world a year. As Professor Wiseman from the research group says:

"Cancer is not a fate, it is a matter of risk, and you can adjust those risks by how you behave. It is very important that people feel that they are in control of what they do."

A more comprehensive list of advice is given below: 1. Reduce red meat consumption. 2. Drink less alcohol. 3. Avoid all processed meats - including bacon, ham, salami, etc. 4. Avoid fizzy drinks. 5. Stay as thin as possible without becoming underweight. 6. Exercise every day. 7. Breastfeed children. Subsequent to the results of the study, many have protested that the radical advice given by scientists is progressively becoming more and more difficult to manage and hence quite ridiculous. However, it is clear that the evidence given is not simply a case of "scaremongering" but supported by compelling reasons. Indeed the experts say that their new list is simply recommendations rather than commandments. And personally, most of the recommendations seem very reasonable if not also obvious. Whether anyone acts on it is a different matter, but it makes sense that a healthy diet will always promote a healthier lifestyle - and hence reduce the risk of fatal disease.

Rushda: It's official: organic food really is better than non-organic food. A new study funded by the European Union has found startling differences between the nutritional content of the two types. The study which cost £12m and lasted four years is the biggest ever study into organic foods and it has found that not only is organic food "more nutritious" than ordinary produce but eating it may actually lengthen people's lives. It is hoped that these results will finally settle the long debate over whether organic food really is what government calls "a lifestyle choice" or actually something scientifically shown to be better for you. The research found that organic fruits and vegetables contain as much as 40% more antioxidants than ordinary food. Antioxidants have long been known to protect against killer diseases such as cancer and heart disease. Not only that but they also have higher levels of important minerals such as iron and zinc. In fact, head researcher on the project Professor Carlo Leifert said that the difference was so great that eating organic would even compensate for not eating the five recommended portions of fruits and vegetables a day. He says:

"If you have just 20% more antioxidants and you can’t get your kids to do five a day, then you might just be okay with four a day."

Furthermore, the study has also found that even in milk, the antioxidants from organic herds were up to 90% higher than milk from ordinary herds. These results show that the government was most likely wrong when it claimed that there was no significant effect of having organic foods. Now the Food Standards Agency has confirmed that it is reviewing the above evidence before considering changing its official advice to consumers.