Friday, 18 November 2011

Myth that antibiotics cure coughs and colds still rife


Myth that antibiotics cure coughs and colds still rife


AntibioticsAntibiotics "will not cure viruses"

Related Stories

A quarter of people wrongly believe antibiotics work on most coughs and colds, a Health Protection Agency survey has found.
However antibiotics cannot treat viruses, which cause most respiratory tract infections.
The HPA poll of 1,800 people in England also found one in 10 people keep leftover antibiotics - and many would self-medicate next time they got ill.
A leading GP said antibiotics were not a "cure all".
The HPA's Dr Cliodna McNulty said self-medicating was unsafe and could fuel drug resistance.
Dr McNulty, head of primary care for the HPA, said: "The majority of people can treat themselves at home using over-the-counter medicines to relieve symptoms."
Of those polled, 500 had been prescribed antibiotics in the previous year, with 11% reporting they had leftovers and 6% saying they might take them if they had future infections.
Speaking on European Antibiotics Awareness Day, Dr McNulty said that while the numbers might appear small, they could translate into large numbers given that 30% of people take antibiotics every year.
She said: "There is evidence that the more antibiotics you have, the more likely you are to develop resistance. And you're also more likely to develop antibiotic-related diarrhoea."
But 70% were aware of the problem of antibiotic resistance in hospitals, and a similar number were aware that they or their family could be affected.
'Not a cure-all'
The HPA says health professionals must learn to resist demands from patients for treatments they know have little or no effect on coughs and colds. It found 97% of those questioned said that the last time they had asked their GP or nurse for an antibiotic, they were prescribed one.

TOP TIPS FROM THE HPA

  • Most coughs and colds get better on their own - antibiotics will not speed recovery
  • Talk to your GP about whether you need them
  • Coughing up phlegm on its own is not a reason to need an antibiotic - even if it is yellow
  • A sore throat plus runny nose with phlegm suggests the infection is less likely to respond to antibiotics
  • A high temperature, red throat and feeling really ill means you probably need an antibiotic
  • If you feel able to stop taking them early, you may well not have needed them
  • Always take all doses for as long as instructed
  • Never keep any leftovers - what's prescribed for one infection might not work for the next
  • GPs can give a delayed antibiotic prescription for you to take only if things get worse
  • In cases of severe illness, antibiotics can save lives
Dr McNulty added: "Despite many years of public health campaigns advising people that antibiotics don't work against coughs, colds and flu, our research results show that these myths prevail.
"We understand people feel very unwell with coughs, sore throats, flu and colds, but for the majority of people these symptoms are unpleasant but short-lived."
The Department of Health issued fresh guidance on antibiotic prescribing in hospitals on Friday, with doctors and nurses being urged to "think twice" before offering them to patients.
Dr Clare Gerada, chair of the Royal College of GPs, said: "Antibiotics are a wonderful thing when used properly, but they are not a cure-all for every condition, and should not be seen, or used, as such.
"The opposite is often true and, when used excessively or inappropriately, they can actually do more harm than good - reducing a patient's immunity to illnesses, or building up an immunity to antibiotics, both of which can have negative consequences for good health."
Writing in the Lancet medical journal, Prof Laura Piddock of the school of immunity and infection at the University of Birmingham warned there were global implications from the misuse of antibiotics, and drug companies' failures to develop new ones.
She warned: "The demise of antibacterial drug discovery brings the spectre of untreatable infections."

More on This Story

Related Stories

Thursday, 17 November 2011

Sea salt health claims 'flawed'



Sea salt health claims 'flawed'


Salt added to foodDon't add salt to your food, say health experts

Related Stories

Rock and sea salt is no different from ordinary table salt, despite claims it is natural and more healthy, say consumer groups.
Research for Which? and Consensus Action on Salt and Health found no difference in chemical content between regular salt and costly gourmet brands.
Manufacturers dispute the report saying it does not give the full picture.
Most UK adults eat too much salt, far above the recommended guideline of about a teaspoon a day.
Eating a diet high in salt is linked with high blood pressure, a risk factor for stroke, heart failure and heart disease.
The research analysed the chemical content of several gourmet brands of sea and rock salt, and compared this with ordinary table salt.

Start Quote

This report is not giving a full picture by not going into the other things in either sea salt or the additives in table salt”
David Lea-WilsonCo-owner of the Anglesey Salt Company
They say all contain almost 100% sodium chloride and are equally damaging to health in large quantities.
Celebrity chefs should not be encouraging people to sprinkle sea salt on food, the report claims, as you can get all the salt you need from a balanced diet.
Professor Graham MacGregor of the Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine is chairman of Consensus Action on Salt and Health (CASH).
He said it was "disgraceful" that chefs still encouraged people to use so much sea and rock salt.
He told the BBC: "The most important message is that you don't need to add a chemical [sodium chloride] to your food.
"Food without salt tastes much better. There's quite enough already present in fruit, vegetables, meat and fish."
Cheaper option
The report says brands claiming some salts are more natural and contain essential minerals are confusing the public.
An online survey of 1,358 members of Which? found around one in three admitted thinking that rock and sea salts were healthier than table salt.
Which? chief policy adviser Sue Davies said: "Many of us are trying to reduce the amount of salt in our diet, but our research shows that people are needlessly spending more money on 'premium' salt as they often believe it's healthier than traditional table salt.
"Given that most of the salt we eat is already in the food we buy, the cheapest - and healthiest - option would be to stop adding extra salt to food altogether.
"Which? is calling on food manufacturers to reduce the amount of salt in their foods, and we'll be monitoring their progress over the coming months."
David Lea-Wilson, co-owner of the Anglesey Sea Salt Company, which makes Halen Mon Pure White Sea Salt, disputed the research.
He told the BBC: "This report is not giving a full picture by not going into the other things in either sea salt or the additives in table salt."
Romi Alexander of So Natural, which supplies Himalayan Crystal Salt, said: "Table salt is a highly refined, processed white substance that's devoid of nutrients."

More on This Story

Related Stories

Rice containing radioactive caesium found in Japan


Rice containing radioactive caesium found in Japan


A deserted field in the exclusion zone around the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plantThe rice came from an area outside the exclusion zone around Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant
Radioactive caesium has been detected above the safety level in rice for the first time in Japan since the nuclear crisis began at the Fukushima plant.
The sample came from a Fukushima city farm about 60km from the plant.
The government is considering banning shipments from the area it was found.
There have been a series of scares over radiation in food in Japan in recent months - in beef, mushrooms and green tea among other products - but never before in the country's staple, rice.
Now caesium in concentrations above the official safety limit has been detected in a sample from a farm in Fukushima city.
The rice was being prepared for market, but Chief Cabinet Secretary Osamu Fujimura said none had been sold.
The discovery highlights the difficulty of tracking the radiation which has been spread across eastern Japan by wind and rain.
Local governments in rural areas have set up testing centres to try to ensure contaminated products do not get into the food chain.
Last week the Tokyo Metropolitan Government also began testing samples bought at shops in the capital in an attempt to further reassure anxious members of the public.
Map

More on This Story

NHS: Crackdown on 'hidden waiting' ordered by ministers


NHS: Crackdown on 'hidden waiting' ordered by ministers

Hospital equipmentPatients should be seen within 18 weeks for non-emergency care in England

Related Stories

Ministers are ordering a crackdown on "hidden" waiting in the NHS in England.
Hospitals currently have to see non-urgent patients within 18 weeks but there are nearly 250,000 on lists who have waited for longer than this.
Ministers believe there is not enough incentive for these patients to be treated, meaning some are left "languishing" unnecessarily.
They are demanding NHS managers reduce the number of long waiters by about 50,000 by April.
The whole backlog is not being targeted as it is accepted that some patients wait longer than 18 weeks for justifiable reasons - perhaps because they have to lose weight before having surgery or for personal or work commitments.
There is particular concern within the government about some of the longest waits being seen. Among the 250,000 who have been waiting for longer than 18 weeks are just over 100,000 who have waited for more than six months and 20,000 waiting at least a year.

Analysis

The government's latest NHS initiative is being viewed with a certain degree of irony within the health service.
This was an administration that came to power promising to move away from what it said was the target culture created by Labour.
Within months of seizing the reins ministers announced the 18-week waiting time target was being relaxed.
But that is not how it feels now for those on the front-line.
When criticism of the government's reforms was at its peak in the early summer the prime minister reiterated his commitment to the 18-week limit. Managers were left in no doubt, there was to be no let up.
And now there is growing concern about long waiters, ministers have responded by introducing what is effectively a new target to tackle the perverse incentives of an existing target.
However, these figures should be seen in the context of the total size of the waiting list, which currently stands at 2.6 million for non-emergency care, such as knee and hip replacements.
Health Secretary Andrew Lansley has blamed the targets established by the Labour government which he said had created a perverse incentive whereby the NHS was free to leave patients "languishing" on waiting lists.
He said: "Because of Labour's perverse approach, the NHS actually had an incentive not to treat patients.
"The new approach we will take from next year will clamp down on this practice. We will reduce the number of patients on hidden waiting lists, ensuring everyone gets access to the treatment they need."
Jo Webber, deputy policy director of the NHS Confederation, said she welcomed what the government was trying to do.
"This indicator will shine a spotlight on one of the many aspects of patient waiting the government does not currently measure."

NHS waiting in numbers

  • There are currently 2.6 million patients on waiting lists for non-emergency treatment in England
  • Of those, nearly 250,000 have waited for longer than 18 weeks
  • Of which, just over 100,000 have waited for longer than six months and 20,000 for more than a year
  • The NHS sees about 300,000 in-patients a month and nearly 900,000 out-patients
But shadow health secretary Andy Burnham said the government was having to introduce these new rules because of Mr Lansley's failure to "get a grip" on waiting times.
And he added the government's overhaul of the NHS would just make matter worse as NHS hospitals would become distracted by competing with the private sector.
"This will take us straight back to bad old days of the Tory NHS, where patients are forced to choose between waiting longer or paying to go private."

He said there was some evidence the longest waits were actually going down.
And Professor John Appleby, of the King's Fund, a health think tank, questioned whether the current system was creating perverse incentives.
"If they really want to tackle the longest waits they could simply say that no patient should wait longer than a year before treatment begins," he added.

Wednesday, 16 November 2011

an essential part of health


With the nhs unable to take health and cleanliness as an essential part of health care it is essential to be involved in your own health ,cleanliness of the mind and body may involve change or modification to habits ......plenty for you to mull over !come to your own conclusions , get involved ! now you are aware ,                                    you are involved ,  

Featured post

More patients in Scotland given antidepressants

More patients in Scotland given antidepressants 13 October 2015   From the section Scotland Image copyright Thinkstock Image ca...