July 2011

lighting up a cigarette

istockphoto

Time reports on how U.S. Drug Enforcement’s Administration (DEA) ruled on Friday that marijuana has “no accepted medical use” and should therefore remain illegal under federal law — regardless of conflicting state legislation allowing medical marijuana and despite hundreds of studies and centuries of medical practice attesting to the drug’s benefits.

The judgment came in response to a 2002 petition by supporters of medical marijuana, which called on the government to reclassify cannabis, which is currently a Schedule I drug — like heroin, illegal for all uses — and to place it in Schedule III, IV or V, which would allow for common medical uses.

The DEA ruled that marijuana has “no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States,” has a “high potential for abuse,” and “lacks an acceptable level of safety for use even under medical supervision.”

Curious? Continue Reading:

Source: Time

In Defense of Antidepressants

Peter D. Kramer clinical professor of psychiatry at Brown University opines in The New York Times in defense of Antidepressants .

In terms of perception, these are hard times for antidepressants. A number of articles have suggested that the drugs are no more effective than placebos.

Last month brought an especially high-profile debunking. In an essay in The New York Review of Books, Marcia Angell, former editor in chief of The New England Journal of Medicine, favorably entertained the premise that “psychoactive drugs are useless.” Earlier, a USA Today piece about a study done by the psychologist Robert DeRubeis had the headline, “Antidepressant lift may be all in your head,” and shortly after, a Newsweek cover piece discussed research by the psychologist Irving Kirsch arguing that the drugs were no more effective than a placebo.

Could this be true? Could drugs that are ingested by one in 10 Americans each year, drugs that have changed the way that mental illness is treated, really be a hoax, a mistake or a concept gone wrong? link to continue reading the article

Source: New York Times

Gym time recommended for babies

Child on trampoline

istockphoto

I remember as a child playing outside, building forts,skipping, climbing trees, playing hopscotch… Happy carefree days… no computers, no Xbox – gasp- no TV. I walked half a mile to elementary school every day. How did I survive? Am I giving my age away? You can bet your bottom booty I am.

A growing body of research is showing the importance of the first few years of life for future health. Only 30% of children are estimated to get the recommended amount of exercise,and childhood obesity is growing. According to the NHS National Obesity Observatory, 23% of children aged four to five are obese or overweight.

In Britain, new government guidelines will be issued this week by Professor Dame Sally Davies, chief medical officer for England. These guidelines recommend that children under the age of five should take a minimum of three hours of exercise a day.They will say that “children under five should spend as little time as possible being restrained or sitting still except when they are sleeping”.

Babies should take part in swimming sessions and stretching and playing on “baby gym” activity mats, according to the guidance by the government’s chief medical officers. Toddlers should walk for at least 15 minutes of any routine journey, such as to and from nursery, they say. The advice, the first to target under-fives, comes amid growing concern about levels of childhood obesity and new research linking a lack of physical activity with poor brain development and social interaction.

Source: The Times

Binge eating may be a high all its own

bingeing woman

istockphoto

It seems  that the subject binge eating is newsworthy today! Take a close look at the picture…. doesn’t it just capture the essence of the irresistible desire to eat? Does she look like she’s high on cake?

The body’s natural marijuana-like chemicals may be the reason why people find it hard to  resist fat, and eat only one potato chip or one french fry, U.S. researchers say.

Daniele Piomelli and Nicholas DiPatrizio of the University of California, Irvine, and colleagues found the fat in these foods trigger a biological mechanism that likely drives gluttonous behavior. The research team discovered that when rats tasted something fatty, cells in their upper gut started producing endocannabinoids — natural marijuana-like chemicals in the body — but sugars and proteins did not have the effect.

When the tongue tastes fat in food it generate a signal that travels first to the brain and then through a nerve bundle called the vagus to the intestines, where the signal stimulates production of endocannabinoids, which initiates a surge in cell signaling that prompts the wanton intake of fatty foods, Piomelli explains.

This initiates the release of digestive chemicals linked to hunger and satiety that compel people to eat more, the study says.

Piomelli says, from an evolutionary standpoint, there’s a compelling need for animals to consume fats, which are scarce in nature but crucial for cell functioning. However, in today’s world, fats are readily available and the innate drive to eat fatty foods leads to obesity, diabetes and cancer.

The findings are published in the online edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Read more

Source:University of California, Irvine