Keepingitreal

CT Scans Could Cause Thousands of Cancer Cases

Each year that today's scanners are used, 14,500 deaths could result, researchers say. When healthy people are exposed to the radiation, the imaging may create more problems than it solves.Widespread overuse of CT scans and variations in radiation doses caused by different machines -- operated by technicians following an array of procedures -- are subjecting patients to high radiation doses that will ultimately lead to tens of thousands of new cancer cases and deaths, researchers reported today.
Several recent studies have suggested that patients have been unnecessarily exposed to radiation from CTs or have received excessive amounts, but two new studies published Tuesday in the Archives of Internal Medicine are the first to quantify the extent of exposure and the related risks. Each year that current scanners are used, researchers reported, 14,500 deaths could result. In one study, researchers from UC San Francisco found that the same imaging procedure performed at different institutions -- or even on different machines at the same hospital -- can yield a 13-fold difference in radiation dose, potentially exposing some patients to inordinately high risk. While a normal CT scan of the chest is the equivalent of about 100 chest X-rays, the team found that some scanners were giving the equivalent of 440 conventional X-rays. The absolute risk may be small for any single patient, but the sheer number of CT scans -- more than 70 million per year, 23 times the number in 1980 -- will produce a sharp increase in cancers and deaths, experts said. "The articles in this issue make clear that there is far more radiation from medical CT scans than has been recognized previously," Dr. Rita F. Redberg of UC San Francisco, editor of the journal, wrote in an editorial accompanying the reports. Even many otherwise healthy patients are being subjected to the radiation, she said, because emergency rooms are often sending patients to the CT scanner before they see a doctor. Whole body scans of healthy patients looking for hidden tumors or other illnesses are also becoming more common, even though they rarely find anything wrong. The irony is that, by exposing healthy people to radiation, the scans may be creating more problems than they solve. CT scans, short for computed tomography, provide exceptionally clear views of internal organs by combining data from multiple X-ray images. But the price for that clarity is increased exposure to X-rays, which cause mutations in DNA that can lead to cancer. When the screening is used for diagnostic purposes, the benefits outweigh the risks, most experts agree, though the toll increasingly can't be ignored. SOURCE:LATIMES.COM

Swine Flu Death Toll at 10,000 Since April

Federal health officials said Thursday that almost 10,000 people had died of swine flu since April, a significant jump from mortality numbers released last month.A month ago, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that only about 4,000 had died.Officials also said 50 million Americans, or one sixth of the country, had caught the disease, and that 213,000 had been sick enough to be hospitalized.Several flu experts said they were not shocked by the sudden jump because the new figures come from a period of time that ended November 14, as this fall’s wave of swine flu cases was reaching its peak.The previous estimate of 4,000 deaths, issued last month, was only through mid-October. By next month, deaths should not have risen quite so abruptly because the fall wave is now tapering off and hospitals have fewer people in intensive care, experts said.“I’m not surprised,” said Lone Simonsen, an epidemiologist at George Washington University’s school of public health. “This includes most of the fall wave.”How many will ultimately die of swine flu will depend heavily on whether there is a third wave in January, as happened in the 1918 and 1957 pandemics, and on whether the virus changes to be more lethal or more drug-resistant.Predicting that “requires a crystal ball,” Dr. Simonsen added.Dr. Thomas R. Frieden, director of the C.D.C., said that about 85 million doses of swine flu vaccine are now available. Some states have so much that they are now asking everyone over six months to get vaccinated, not just high-risk individuals. There is “still a good window of opportunity” to get vaccinated, Dr. Frieden said, adding that he plans to get the nasal spray vaccine himself “in a few days.” Separate mutations making the flu more lethal and more drug-resistant have been spotted in many countries, but thus far only in small numbers of isolated cases. Michael T. Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, agreed that trying to guess how many will die by spring “is calling the score at half time.”

He was troubled by recent predictions that the pandemic would be the mildest on record. “So the C.D.C. says 50 million have been infected so far,” he said. “Another 50 million have been vaccinated. And maybe 20 million have got innate immunity because of their age. You do the math — that’s 120 million who are immune out of 320 million, so two-thirds of the population is still not immune. It’s amazing how many people are acting as if this is all wrapped up. The numbers could still go up dramatically.” SOURCE:NYTIMES.COM

Senate Votes to Open Health Care Debate

WASHINGTON — The Senate voted on Saturday to begin full debate on major health care legislation, propelling President Obama’s top domestic initiative over a crucial, preliminary hurdle in a formidable display of muscle-flexing by the Democratic majority.

“Tonight we have the opportunity, the historic opportunity to reform health care once and for all,” said Senator Max Baucus, Democrat of Montana, and a chief architect of the legislation. “History is knocking on the door. Let’s open it. Let’s begin the debate.”

The 60-to-39 vote, along party lines, clears the way for weeks of rowdy floor proceedings that will begin after Thanksgiving and last through much of December. But even as the Democrats succeeded in uniting their caucus by winning over the last two holdouts, big disagreements remained, making final approval of the bill far from certain.

Two reluctant Democratic senators, Mary L. Landrieu of Louisiana and Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, warned that their support for a motion to open debate did not guarantee that they would ultimately vote for the bill. Their remarks echoed previous comments by several other senators, including Ben Nelson, Democrat of Nebraska, and Joseph I. Lieberman, independent of Connecticut.

Those comments made clear that more horse-trading lies ahead and that major changes might be required if the bill is to be approved. And it suggested that the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, who relied only on members aligned with his party to bring the bill to the floor, may yet have to sway one or more Republicans to his side to get the bill adopted.

The Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, said his party’s opposition would persist. “The battle has just begun,” he said.

In a rare ceremonial gesture reserved for major votes, senators cast their yeas and nays from their desks in the chamber, each one rising to voice his or her position. Senator George V. Voinovich, Republican of Ohio, was not present and did not vote. CONTINUE READING...

House opens debate on health care overhaul bill

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama's landmark health care overhaul moved toward a vote in the House Saturday after anti-abortion lawmakers won a chance to knock out language that would let federally subsidized health care plans cover abortions. Democratic leaders were hopeful they could pass the bill, giving Obama his biggest victory since last November's historic election, no matter how the abortion issue is decided. Obama planned a rare Saturday visit to Capitol Hill in an effort to cement a majority to pass legislation that is certain to be seen as a test of his presidency. The bill would cost more than $1 trillion over the next decade. It would provide health coverage to tens of millions of Americans who don't have it now, require most employers to offer it to their workers and prohibit insurance companies from denying coverage based on a person's medical history. "The status quo is unaffordable and unsustainable. Health care reform benefits all of us," said Rep. Allyson Schwartz, D-Pa., as debate opened on the House floor. Republicans were united in their opposition to the bill. "The American people need to understand this is about a government takeover of the whole health care system," said Rep. Paul Broun, R-Ga. The most contentious issue in the 10-year, $1.2 trillion House bill is a new government-run insurance plan that would be offered alongside private coverage within new purchasing marketplaces, or "exchanges," where individuals and small businesses could shop for and compare options. The abortion agreement was reached at midnight Friday after hours of intense negotiations brokered by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. Democratic Reps. Bart Stupak of Michigan, Brad Ellsworth of Indiana and other abortion opponents fought for and won an opportunity to insert tougher restrictions into the legislation during debate, despite fervent opposition from pro-choice liberals who are a driving force behind the overall bill. "We wish to maintain current law, which says no public funding for abortion," Stupak said. Federal law currently prohibits the use of federal funds to pay for abortions except in cases of rape, incest or situations in which the life of the mother is in danger. Left unresolved is whether individuals would be permitted to use their own funds to buy insurance coverage for the procedure in the federally backed insurance exchange envisioned under the legislation. CONTINUE READING...

Health bill clears hurdle with support from Snowe

WASHINGTON — Historic legislation to expand U.S. health care and control costs won its first Republican supporter Tuesday and cleared a key Senate hurdle, a double-barreled triumph that propelled President Barack Obama's signature issue toward votes this fall in both houses of Congress."When history calls, history calls," said Maine Republican Olympia Snowe, whose declaration of support ended weeks of suspense and provided the only drama of a 14-9 vote in the Senate Finance Committee. With her decision, the 62-year-old lawmaker bucked her own leadership on the most high-profile issue of the year in Congress, and gave the drive to remake health care at least a hint of the bipartisanship that Obama seeks.At the White House, Obama called the events "a critical milestone" toward remaking the nation's health care system. He praised Snowe as well as Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., chairman of the committee, and declared, "We are going to get this done."There were fresh challenges. Within minutes of the vote, labor unions and large business organizations both demanded changes in the bill, which was an attempt at a middle-of-the-road measure fashioned by the committee under Baucus' leadership.Still, nearly nine months after the president pledged in his Inaugural Address to tackle health care, legislation to expand coverage to millions who lack it has now advanced further than President Bill Clinton's ill-fated effort more than a decade ago — or any other attempt in more than a generation. The next move in the Senate is up to Majority Leader Harry Reid, whose office said the full Senate would begin debate on the issue the week of Oct. 26. Nominally, Reid must first blend the bill that cleared during the day with a version that passed earlier in the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. But in reality, the majority leader — with the participation of the White House — has a virtual free hand in fashioning a measure to wind up gaining the 60 votes needed to overcome a threatened Republican filibuster."The bottom line here is we need a final bill, a merged bill, that gets 60 votes," Baucus said. "Our goal is to pass health care reform not just talk about it. "Reid's most politically sensitive decision revolves around proposals for the federal government to sell insurance in competition with private industry. The Senate bill approved in committee during the day omits the provision, while the one passed earlier includes it and many House Democrats support it as well. SOURCE

Why Americans Fear the Swine Flu Vaccine

The first doses of the "swine flu" vaccine arrived at American clinics on Monday. But the H1N1 virus is no more "swine" flu than most other strains of influenza, Michael Specter writes The New Yorker. The name emerged incidentally in an early report, even though the virus had never been found in pigs. "It was misleading because most strains of the influenza virus consist of genes from pigs, humans, and birds that have combined in a variety of ways," Specter writes. But misleading or not, the porky name has raised analogies to the 1976 "swine flu," which the government warned could kill millions but which never arrived. The association, abetted by a lull in publicity that opened the door for "the anti-vaccine, anti-government, and anti-science crowd," has since stymied the push to get Americans vaccinated against a very serious disease—a recent national poll found that only 40 percent of parents planned to get their child vaccinated against H1N1. Specter also finds Internet rumors, such as the unfounded myth that seasonal-flu shots increase susceptibilty to H1N1, to blame for "the spurious alarms spread by those who would make us fear vaccines more than the illnesses they prevent." Read original story in The New Yorker | Monday, Oct. 5, 2009

Doctors' suit: KFC grilled chicken a danger

(09-23) 16:05 PDT SAN FRANCISCO -- After losing its first battle against fast-food restaurants, a doctors group went back to court Wednesday and accused the KFC chain of selling grilled chicken with dangerous levels of a cancer-causing chemical.n a lawsuit in San Francisco Superior Court, the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine accused KFC of violating California's Proposition 65, which requires businesses to warn customers if they are being exposed to substances that cause cancer or birth defects. The chemical cited in the lawsuit, known as PhIP, is a byproduct of the grilling process and was added to the state's list of carcinogens in 1994. The doctors group said an independent laboratory found the substance in every one of 12 grilled chicken samples bought from six East Bay KFC restaurants in May. The suit seeks an order requiring customer warnings in all KFC restaurants in California and penalties to the state of as much as $2,500 a day for violations. The organization, which has 7,000 physician members, made the same arguments last year in a suit against other restaurants that sell grilled chicken. Burger King agreed to warn customers of the presence of PhIP, but other defendants, led by McDonald's, held their ground and won a ruling from a Los Angeles judge dismissing the case. The judge said a federal law that requires labeling of some chicken products prohibits California from imposing stricter standards under Prop. 65. The doctors group is appealing. The lawsuit faces another obstacle: The state attorney general's office, in response to a complaint from the physicians group, conducted its own study and concluded in 2006 that PhIP levels in cooked chicken were too low to require a Prop. 65 warning. The attorney general's position isn't binding on the courts, but KFC cited the conclusion in its comment on the suit. Company spokesman Rick Maynard said KFC's "Kentucky Grilled Chicken" product "meets or exceeds all federal and state regulations for food safety." The doctors organization, he added, "promotes a vegetarian agenda."  Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/09/23/BACP19R4MA.DTL&tsp=1#ixzz0RzVRZ29i

Obama: I've every reason to get health care right

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama says he'll be held responsible for any problems once a health care overhaul becomes law, so he has every reason to get it right. "I have no interest in having a bill get passed that fails. That doesn't work," he told CBS' "60 Minutes" in an interview to air Sunday night. Heading to a rally Saturday in Minneapolis, the president used his weekly radio and Internet address to focus on government figures showing that nearly half of all Americans live without health insurance in a 10-year period. He said the situation will worsen without the changes he wants and that losing coverage can happen to anyone. "I intend to be president for a while and once this bill passes, I own it. And if people look and say, You know what? This hasn't reduced my costs. My premiums are still going up 25 percent, insurance companies are still jerking me around.' I'm the one who's going to be held responsible. So I have every incentive to get this right," he said in an excerpt of the CBS interview released Saturday. While the president cleared out of town, thousands of people marched along Pennsylvania Avenue to the Capitol to protest Obama's health care plan and what they say is out-of-control federal spending. A new Treasury Department analysis found that 48 percent of all people under age 65 go without health coverage at some point in a 10-year period. The data came from a study that tracked the insurance status of a sample of people from 1997-2006. The report also found that 57 percent of those under 21 will find themselves without insurance at some point during a span of 10 years and that more than one-third of Americans will be without coverage for a year or more. "I refuse to allow that future to happen," Obama said in his weekend message. "In the United States of America, no one should have to worry that they'll go without health insurance — not for one year, not for one month, not for one day. CONTINUE READING...

The Real Health Care Debate: The Health Insurance Industry - A Business That Profits by Screwing Its Customers!!!

Take just a moment to really think about the health insurance industry.What other industry maximizes its profit through a business model structured to screw its customers, let alone in a manner that puts its customers' health and even very lives at risk? (OK, OK--the tobacco industry, for one., but humor me.)

Those who argue against rebuilding the nation's health
insurance programs are doing a disservice to the well-being of all
American citizens, and in a very real sense, to the national security
of this country. After sponsoring untold billions of dollars spent
bailing out banks, investment banks, and automotive companies, it's time for the Obama Administration to focus on bailing out "we the people."

In spite of rhetorical and misleading hyperbole foisted on the American public by an insurance industry whose virtually unchecked monopoly over the adjudication of health care claims would be compromised, there is a legitimate argument in favor of increasing competition among insurers, and every American citizen stands to benefit.

Rather than kow-towing to the self-interested, self-promoting, self-ish
insurance industry, which today has a vested interest in maximizing its profit by rejecting legitimate medical claims, a public option would not only provide much needed competition, but would undoubtedly force private insurers to revisit their knee-jerk tendency to engage in zero-sum profitability, where every dollar of care that is denied converts automatically to a dollar of profit. Who among us, after all, hasn't had to endure a frustrating
and seemingly endless series of arguments with their health care insurer in order to get legitimate claims paid?

White appears ready to drop pubic option

Bowing to Republican pressure and an uneasy public, President Barack Obama's administration signaled Sunday it is ready to abandon the idea of giving Americans the option of government-run insurance as part of a new health care system.

Facing mounting opposition to the overhaul, administration officials left open the chance for a compromise with Republicans that would include health insurance cooperatives instead of a government-run plan. Such a concession probably would enrage Obama's liberal supporters but could deliver a much-needed victory on a top domestic priority opposed by GOP lawmakers.

Officials from both political parties reached across the aisle in an effort to find compromises on proposals they left behind when they returned to their districts for an August recess. Obama had wanted the government to run a health insurance organization to help cover the nation's almost 50 million uninsured, but didn't include it as one of his core principles of reform.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said that government alternative to private health insurance is "not the essential element" of the administration's health care overhaul. The White House would be open to co-ops, she said, a sign that Democrats want a compromise so they can declare a victory.

Under a proposal by Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., consumer-owned nonprofit cooperatives would sell insurance in competition with private industry, not unlike the way electric and agriculture co-ops operate, especially in rural states such as his own.

With $3 billion to $4 billion in initial support from the government, the co-ops would operate under a national structure with state affiliates, but independent of the government. They would be required to maintain the type of financial reserves that private companies are required to keep in case of unexpectedly high claims.

"I think there will be a competitor to private insurers," Sebelius said. "That's really the essential part, is you don't turn over the whole new marketplace to private insurance companies and trust them to do the right thing."

Obama's spokesman refused to say a public option was a make-or-break choice.

"What I am saying is the bottom line for this for the president is, what we have to have is choice and competition in the insurance market," White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Sunday.

A day before, Obama appeared to hedge his bets.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/08/16/national/w075037D49.DTL#ixzz0OOuBLAVK

Obama Officials: Taxes may rise to pay for Healthcare

Two of President Barack Obama's economic heavyweights said middle-class taxes might have to go up to pare budget deficits or to pay for the proposed overhaul of the nation's health care system.The tough talk from Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and National Economic Council Director Lawrence Summers on Sunday capped a week that brought rare good news for the economy: The worst recession in the United States since World War II could be on the verge of ending. Even so, officials appeared willing to extend unemployment benefits. Geithner and Summers both sidestepped questions on Obama's intentions about taxes. Geithner said the White House was not ready to rule out a tax hike to reduce the federal deficit; Summers said Obama's proposed health care overhaul needs funding from somewhere. "There is a lot that can happen over time," Summers said, adding that the administration believes "it is never a good idea to absolutely rule things out, no matter what." During his presidential campaign, Obama repeatedly pledged "you will not see any of your taxes increase one single dime." But the simple reality remains that his ambitious overhaul of how Americans receive health care — promised without increasing the federal deficit — must be paid for. "If we want an economy that's going to grow in the future, people have to understand we have to bring those deficits down. And it's going to be difficult, hard for us to do. And the path to that is through health care reform," Geithner said. "We're not at the point yet where we're going to make a judgment about what it's going to take." On Friday, a report detailed the economy dipped only slightly in the second quarter of this year — falling at a 1 percent annual pace, better than expected. The government report permitted optimism that the economic downturn is approaching its end. The president cautioned against instant turnaround, though. "Well as I've said, I think we maybe are beginning to see the end of the recession but it's still going to be some time before we are seeing companies hiring again, that's usually the last thing that happens," Obama said in an interview with Univision that aired on Sunday.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/08/02/national/w102746D39.DTL#ixzz0NJdl8TV9

Today's Papers: Pelosi: Health Bill "Will Win"

The New York Times, Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal's world-wide newsbox all lead with the health-care debate as Democratic leaders push to make progress on legislation before lawmakers leave Washington for the August recess. The NYT takes a look at the health insurance mandate and whether the subsidies currently in discussion would really be enough to help families with modest incomes obtain coverage. Those who could show financial hardship would be exempted from the requirement to carry insurance, but that could translate into a substantial number of people remaining unisnsured. The WP highlights House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's optimism that, despite the intraparty squabbling, the House will approve health care legislation, though she refused to commit to a timetable. The WSJ takes a look at the so-called Blue Dog Democrats, who continue to raise objections to the health legislation as one of its leaders said he doesn't expect the House will vote on a bill before Labor Day.

USA Today leads with news that the U.S. Agency for International Development has suspended a program to provide jobs to Iraqis due to evidence of fraud. The $644-million Community Stabilization Program has received much praise since it was launched in 2006, but there are claims that millions of dollars might have gone to insurgents and corrupt leaders as well as nonexistent projects. The Los Angeles Times leads locally but goes high with Sarah Palin officially stepping down as Alaska governor yesterday and handing power over to Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell. Standing with her husband and two of their daughters, Palin criticized those who questioned her decision to step down 18 months before the end of her term. "It should be so obvious to you," she said. "It is because I love Alaska this much, sir, that I feel that it is my duty to avoid the unproductive, typical politics-as-usual lame-duck session in one's last year in office."

To continue reading, click here.

Obama on Today discusses his health care reform

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

No smoking: Historic vote could bring new limits

The Senate struck a historic blow against smoking in America Thursday, voting overwhelmingly to give regulators new power to limit nicotine in the cigarettes that kill nearly a half-million people a year, to drastically curtail ads that glorify tobacco and to ban flavored products aimed at spreading the habit to young people. President Barack Obama, who has spoken of his own struggle to quit smoking, said he was eager to sign the legislation, and the House planned a vote for Friday. Cigarette foes said the measure would not only cut deaths but reduce the $100 billion in annual health care costs linked to tobacco. Fierce opposition by the industry and tobacco-state lawmakers had prevented passage for years, along with veto threats by the George W. Bush White House. In the end, the nation's biggest tobacco company supported the measure, though rivals suggested that was because it could lock in Philip Morris' share of the market. Cigarette smoking kills about 400,000 people in the United States every year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. About 45 million U.S. adults are smokers, though the prevalence has fallen since the U.S. surgeon general's warning 45 years ago that tobacco causes lung cancer. The legislation, one of the most dramatic anti-smoking initiatives since the surgeon general's report, would give the Food and Drug Administration authority to regulate the content, marketing and advertising of cigarettes and other tobacco products. "This legislation represents the strongest action Congress has ever taken to reduce tobacco use, the leading preventable cause of death in the United States," declared Matthew Myers, president of Campaign for Tobacco-free Kids. The 79-17 Senate vote sent the measure back to the House, which in April passed a similar but not identical version. House acceptance of the Senate bill would send it directly to Obama, who said Thursday that final passage "will make history by giving the scientists and medical experts at the FDA the power to take sensible steps." "At any given moment, millions are struggling with their habit or worrying about loved ones who smoke," said Obama. His signature would then add tobacco to other huge, nationally important areas that have come under greater government supervision since his presidency began. Those include banking, housing and autos. Still to come, if Congress can agree: health care. CONTINUE READING...

Obama disappoints needle-exchange advocates

President Obama has called for repealing the ban on federal funding for anti-AIDS programs that supply clean needles to drug users. His drug policy director supported such a program when he was Seattle's police chief. And last week, Obama's nominee to head the Food and Drug Administration won praise in a Senate committee for her leadership on needle exchange.So advocates of the programs in the Bay Area and elsewhere were surprised and dismayed when Obama's budget for 2009-10 proposed to continue the funding prohibition that dates from the 1980s."We hoped that the president would seize the first opportunity for lifting federal restrictions on this life-saving prevention strategy," said Paola Barahona of Physicians for Human Rights. "Denying people at risk for HIV a proven prevention intervention is a denial of their basic human rights.""Without the federal funding, we're missing people that we could reach," said Laura Thomas, who heads the Drug Policy Alliance office in San Francisco and volunteers at a local needle-exchange program. "It's ridiculous that at this point in the epidemic, we're not looking to science in determining what we're funding."A similar view could be found on the White House Web site soon after Obama took office in January: "The president also supports lifting the federal ban on needle exchange, which could dramatically reduce rates of infection among drug users."That comment was erased from the site recently. But Bill Piper, national affairs director of the Drug Policy Alliance, said the removal appeared to be part of a housecleaning of statements from the transition period rather than a signal of a policy shift. CONTINUE READING...

Sound the Alarm? A Swine Flu Bind

For all that scientists have learned about influenza since the catastrophic pandemic of 1917-19, one thing has not changed: the predictably unpredictable nature of the viruses that cause it.The sudden detection of the new swine influenza virus, A(H1N1), occurred just as scientists were focusing wary eyes on behavioral changes observed in another virus, the A(H5N1) bird flustrain, in Egypt. Virologists have tracked the avian virus since its discovery in Hong Kong in 1997. The World Health Organization said over the weekend that the new swine flu virus had the potential to cause another pandemic, but that it had no way of knowing whether it actually would.The W.H.O. and public-health agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention find themselves in a delicate balance, obliged to provide information about potentially lethal diseases without causing panic. Although health officials have held exercises to prepare for pandemics and outbreaks caused by bioterrorism, they have yet to master the necessary communications skills. They are in a “damned if they do, damned if they don’t” situation.A decision about travel restrictions or advisories, for example, could affect trade and finances at a time of economic chaos. If the public health emergency declared by the W.H.O. and the Obama administration turns out to be a false alarm, officials will be ridiculed for unnecessarily worrying millions of people — perhaps even for creating fear to justify their budgets. If a pandemic materializes, some of the same critics are very likely to blame officials for failing to prevent it. History teaches that the influenza virus mutates to cause worldwide spread about twice a century, on average. But scientists have yet to figure out what causes the mutations, when they will occur and what makes certain viruses more lethal than others. CONTINUE READING....

Swine Influenza (Flu)

Human cases of swine influenza A (H1N1) virus infection have been identified in the United States. Human cases of swine influenza A (H1N1) virus infection also have been identified internationally. The current U.S. case count is provided below. An investigation and response effort surrounding the outbreak of swine flu is ongoing.  CDC is working very closely with officials in states where human cases of swine influenza A (H1N1) have been identified, as well as with health officials in Mexico, Canada and the World Health Organization. This includes deploying staff domestically and internationally to provide guidance and technical support. CDC activated its Emergency Operations Center to coordinate the agency's response to this emerging health threat and yesterday the Secretary of the Department Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, declared a public health emergency in the United States. This will allow funds to be released to support the public health response. CDC's goals during this public health emergency are to reduce transmission and illness severity, and provide information to assist health care providers, public health officials and the public in addressing the challenges posed by this newly identified influenza virus. To this end, CDC has issued a number of interim guidance documents in the past 24 hours. In addition, CDC's Division of the Strategic National Stockpile (SNS) is releasing one-quarter of its antiviral drugs, personal protective equipment, and respiratory protection devices to help states respond to the outbreak. Laboratory testing has found the swine influenza A (H1N1) virus susceptible to the prescription antiviral drugs oseltamivir and zanamivir. This is a rapidly evolving situation and CDC will provide updated guidance and new information as it becomes available.

U.S. Human Cases of Swine Flu Infection
(As of April 27, 2009 1:00 PM ET)

State	# of laboratory confirmed cases
California	7 cases
Kansas	2 cases
New York City	28 cases
Ohio	1 case
Texas	2 cases
TOTAL COUNT	40 cases
International Human Cases of Swine Flu Infection See: World Health Organization

U.S. Declares Health Emergency

The U.S. declared a public health emergency Sunday to deal with the emerging new swine flu, much like the government does to prepare for approaching hurricanes.Officials reported 20 U.S. cases of swine flu in five states so far, with the latest in Ohio and New York. Unlike in Mexico where the same strain appears to be killing dozens of people, cases in the United State have been mild — and U.S. health authorities can't yet explain why."As we continue to look for cases, we are going to see a broader spectrum of disease," predicted Dr. Richard Besser, acting chief of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "We're going to see more severe disease in this country."At a White House news conference, Besser and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano sought to assure Americans that health officials are taking all appropriate steps to minimize the impact of the outbreak.Top among those is declaring the public health emergency. As part of that, Napolitano said roughly 12 million doses of the drug Tamiflu will be moved from a federal stockpile to places where states can quickly get their share if they decide they need it. Priority will be given to the five states with known cases so far: California, Texas, New York, Ohio and Kansas.Napolitano called the emergency declaration standard operating procedure — one was declared recently for the inauguration and for flooding. She urged people to think of it as a "declaration of emergency preparedness.""Really that's what we're doing right now. We're preparing in an environment where we really don't know ultimately what the size of seriousness of this outbreak is going to be." SOURCE:SFGATE.COM

Outsourced condom production could shut US factory

The last U.S.-based supplier of condoms for global HIV/AIDS prevention programs could be forced to shut its doors because the federal government sent the work to cheaper suppliers in Asia. The change came earlier this month as Congress dropped a requirement that the government buy American-made condoms when possible, with exceptions for price and availability. Congress traditionally has directed the U.S. Agency for International Development to use American suppliers for the hundreds of millions of condoms it sends into developing countries. The main supplier to benefit from that directive is Alatech Healthcare Products, a southeastern Alabama company with about 300 employees. Over the years, Alatech became the program's sole U.S. provider. USAID says Alatech has had problems filling orders, and there were complaints from the field about the quality of its condoms. Despite Congress' direction, the agency has gradually outsourced part of the work to companies in Asia that provide condoms for less than half of Alatech's price. Just after Congress omitted "buy American" language for the program in its latest spending bill, USAID quickly signed new contracts with three foreign suppliers and dropped Alatech altogether. The new contractors are in China, South Korea and Malaysia. "Our responsibility is to provide good stewardship for the taxpayers' dollars," said agency spokesman Harry Edwards. "That is what we are trying to do." Company President Larry Povlacs said Alatech provided durable condoms at USAID's request and was never asked to address any complaints about that style. He said USAID simply wanted the cheapest product without regard for his workers in Dothan and Eufaula, Ala. "I'm faced with telling people that I've worked with for 30 years that they may no longer have a job," Povlacs said. Gloria Steele, an assistant administrator at USAID, said Alatech's price of about 5 cents per condom versus 2 cents elsewhere wasn't competitive, even when using a preferential contracting advantage that agencies give domestic bidders. The work has traditionally been worth between $10 million to $20 million per year, Steele said, with annual production of about 400 million to 500 million condoms. SOURCE:SFGATE.COM

Coping with the HIV Virus

>