Your Health and Your Blogging

7 04 2008

I opened up my email this morning and saw this story about bloggers who are blogging themselves to death. “Two weeks ago in North Lauderdale, Fla., funeral services were held for Russell Shaw, a prolific blogger on technology subjects who died at 60 of a heart attack. In December, another tech blogger, Marc Orchant, died at 50 of a massive coronary. A third, Om Malik, 41, survived a heart attack in December.”

I was disturbed at this trend in how we are becoming such a slave to the PC and Internet that we are willing to die for our work. Not only that but die at an early age. This got me thinking about what other trends in health are on the rise over just the course of a decade or so. According to National Center for Health Statistics,and National Vital Statistics Reports between 1999 and 2001 the leading six causes of death due to diet and inactivity were heart disease,cancer, stroke,diabetes,kidney disease, and hypertension.Further in a 2000assessment people who led sedentary lives had 23.2 days in a 30 day time period where they felt healthy. They reported 3.9 days out of the month were they felt sad, blue or depressed and 8.1 days having trouble sleeping.”Other bloggers complain of weight loss or gain, sleep disorders, exhaustion and other maladies born of the nonstop strain of producing for a news and information cycle that is as always-on as the Internet.” These numbersdefinitely support on some level the New York post’s information regarding blogging till you drop.

I looked into some other statistics and what I found was just more confirmation that our sedentary lifestyles are not helping us but hurting us instead. In the most recent study I could find from the CDC I found this:

The percentage of adults who spent most of their day sitting increased from 36.8% in 2000 to 39.9% in 2005. A similar increase was seen among both men and women, adults aged 25 years and over, and non-Hispanic white adults. Overall, the percentage of adults who spent most of their day standing or walking decreased between 2000 and 2005. A similar decrease was seen among adults aged 65 years and over and non-Hispanic white adults.


Kansas Jumped from 5% reporting unhealthy days of more than 14 days to 9% from 1993 to 2006

Kansas also jumped from 6.5% to 9.1% reporting mentally unhealthy days of more than 14 days to 1993 to 2006

Overall in Kansas there has been an increase of 4 days to 5.4 days of being physically or mentally unhealthy.

Between 1998 and 2006 Kansas reported fair or poor self rated health initially in 1993 of 12.0 to 17.3 in 2006

These numbers are from

Health, United States an annual report on trends in health statistics.


On the plus side smoking has decreased for men and women nationally with smoking by men at 50% in 1965 to just under 30% in 2005 and just over 30% in women to about 20% within the same time frame. Even smoking by pregnant mothers declined from 20% in 1995 to 10% in 2005

Between 1999 to 2004 adults between 18 and 44 eat 1 to 3 meals out at a rate of just over 50% while they eat 4 or more meals out about 35% of the time

Overweight including obese has risen from 45% to 70% for the 20 to 74 yr old age group between 1960 to 2004

Arthritis/musculoskeletal, heart/circulatory, mental illness, diabetes are the top 4 conditions reported between 2004 to 2005 that cause activity limitations

Last but not least Antidepressant use by men increase from about 3% between 1988 to 1994 to about 7% between 1992 to 2002 and by women from about 4% between 1988 to 1994 to about 13% between 1999 to 2002

So you can see some pretty disturbing trends here. I love to blog and at the moment I am not getting paid huge bucks to blog, but I can’t see running my health into the ground to get a jump on the competition. I am in bed no later than 12:30 each night with the rare exception that I am working on a design, I keep healthy foods around to snack on like whole wheat bread for peanut butter and jelly sandwich’s , carrots, grapes, bananas, yogurt, skim milk, diet soda just to name a few. I make sure I get at least 30 min of fairly intense activity about every other day. At the moment that is taking the form of house work and playing out doors with my kid. I too am on antidepressants so I really have to work at keeping my body in good shape so the antidepressants can properly do there job.

You can see why now is it is crucial to focus on preventative health measures instead of treatment. Because in the case of the bloggers who blogged themselves ragged their deaths could have been prevented if in fact their sedentary lifestyles contributed to the cause of their deaths, in which reading this article it appears that it did.

Like what you see, please subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!Have a Great Day!



Children with Adult Diabetes

13 07 2007

Children With “Adult” Diabetes?

Here’s a scary result of the increase in childhood obesity: A new study confirms that it’s been accompanied by a spike in the number of children diagnosed with type 2 — or adult onset — diabetes around the globe. In fact, some 45 percent of teens with diabetes now have type 2. Unlike type 1, which is caused by an inherited disorder where the pancreas doesn’t make enough insulin, in type 2 diabetes the body becomes desensitized to insulin. Both types are serious, chronic illnesses that dramatically increase the risk of other problems (like kidney failure or heart disease). So beware!

What can parents do to protect their children? Fight back against the two primary causes of type 2 diabetes — a sedentary lifestyle and excess weight! But don’t ever put your child on a diet by yourself. If you’re concerned about the risk of diabetes, the best place to start is with a visit to the doctor for professional advice!



For Diabetics on Avandia this is a MUST Read.

2 06 2007

Glaxo, Top Ad Spender, Didn’t Publicize Diabetes Drug’s Risks

By Andrea Gerlin

June 1 (Bloomberg) — GlaxoSmithKline Plc was the drug industry’s top advertiser last year, promoting its asthma and diabetes treatments to patients and doctors. Information the company didn’t make well known is now drawing more attention.

London-based Glaxo knew its Avandia diabetes pill posed a risk for heart and circulatory complications as early as 1999, when the medicine won U.S. approval. The cardiovascular concern wasn’t widely disseminated until May 21 when a Cleveland Clinic Foundation analysis reported that Avandia may cause a 43 percent higher risk of heart attacks than other drugs.

A similar review, begun in 2005 by Glaxo, found that Avandia raised the risk of reduced blood flow to the heart, including heart attacks, by 31 percent. The company gave the review to U.S. regulators and put it on its Web site last year amid more than 2,000 studies. Glaxo says the heart-risk studies, including its own, are flawed and it isn’t obligated, or legally required, to highlight every study done on its drugs.

“Why would you publicize it?,” Glaxo Chief Executive Officer Jean-Pierre Garnier told reporters at the company’s annual meeting May 23 in London. “We don’t publicize every submission we make to the Food and Drug Administration.”

Glaxo, the world’s second-largest drugmaker after New York- based Pfizer Inc., spent $849 million on consumer advertising last year, the most of any pharmaceutical company, according to Nielsen Monitor Plus, a unit of New York-based Nielsen Media Research Inc.

Shares Decline

The Cleveland Clinic report released in the New England Journal of Medicine has caused Glaxo shares to decline 11.5 percent since then, cutting 8.91 billion pounds ($17.6 billion) from the company’s market value. Glaxo shares fell 18 pence, 1.5 percent, to 1310 pence in London yesterday.

Avandia generated $3 billion for Glaxo last year, or 7 percent of total sales, and at least $12 billion since 1999. Analysts had estimated sales of $4 billion in 2007. The medicine helps the body better use insulin to lower high blood sugar, which in excessive amounts can cause complications such as heart disease, and kidney and eye damage.

By 2005, the drugmaker had spent almost $200 million on advertisements advising U.S. consumers to ask their doctors about Avandia, its second best-selling product. Advertising included warnings contained in prescribing information, such as “Avandia may cause fluid retention or swelling, which can make some heart problems worse or lead to heart failure,” from a 2005 television commercial.

“It’s fair to say that from early on there have always been a few events of cardiovascular nature,” Glaxo Chief Medical Officer Ron Krall said May 21.

Call for Research

As far back as April 1999, executives of SmithKline Beecham Plc, which a year later merged with GlaxoWellcome Plc to become GlaxoSmithKline Plc, told the FDA that Avandia caused “minimal” cardiovascular side effects and “mild to moderate” fluid buildup. Fluid in the lungs or bloodstream can increase the heart’s workload.

The agency cleared the drug for sale the next month. Some advisory committee members called for more research on potential complications.

In February 2001, after the drug was on the market, Glaxo agreed to an FDA request to change the drug’s prescribing label to warn doctors that Avandia, like other drugs in its class, can cause fluid retention.

Company sales representatives who knew the risks “denied their existence” three months later in oral presentations at the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists’ meeting in San Antonio, Texas, FDA officials noted in a July 2001 letter to Glaxo.

FDA Criticism

The FDA told Glaxo in that letter that its marketers should stop denying or minimizing the increased risk of “heart failure or other cardiovascular adverse events” in patients taking the drug with insulin, according to the FDA’s Web site. The agency criticized Glaxo for continuing to “engage in false or misleading promotion of Avandia.”

Analysts at Citigroup Inc. and Morgan Stanley had noted possible cardiovascular side effects in notes to investors last year.

“The key issue in addition to at least equivalent efficacy of Avandia to metformin and glyburide is cardiovascular safety,” Citigroup analysts wrote in a Nov. 23 report.

The next month, as results of a large-scale, company-funded trial were published, Glaxo executives said the overall risk of death, heart attack and stroke with Avandia was similar to other diabetes medicines.

Diabetes researcher Rury Holman of Oxford University in the U.K., an investigator in the $100 million company study, known as ADOPT, said in a Dec. 3 interview that the results would cause concern.

`We Can’t Deny’

“These people are early diagnosis, they haven’t got complications,” Holman said. “The fact that we’re seeing these cardiovascular effects in them, we can’t deny that. The concern when these data come out is you’ve got relatively healthy patients and still there’s a little bit of a signal.”

Earlier this year, cardiologist Steven Nissen and co- researcher Kathy Wolski of the Cleveland Clinic found Glaxo’s own analysis of Avandia studies while scouring the company’s Web site. The two uncovered the analysis after failing to gain the company’s cooperation for their review, Nissen said in an interview May 23.

“I just built this piece by piece until I had enough,” Nissen said. “Then I stumble upon the company’s own meta analysis deeply buried on their Web site, and it shows the same thing. It was a eureka moment for sure.”

The company’s failure to place as much emphasis on Avandia’s risks as it placed on the drug’s benefits may hurt it because of possible legal liability, Morgan Stanley analysts led by Andrew Baum said May 21 in a note. Avandia is facing competition from newer treatments, and reports of a heart risk may hurt sales by as much as 50 percent, analysts estimate.

GlaxoSmithKline’s “robust defense of Avandia safety and their conduct comes with a high risk if evidence of poor disclosure subsequently emerges,” Baum wrote.

To contact the reporters on this story: Andrea Gerlin in London at agerlin@bloomberg.net Michelle Fay Cortez in Minneapolis at mcortez@bloomberg.net

———————————————————————————————

I would like to hear from you on this as to what your thoughts are. Do drug companies have a responsibility to fully disclose all of the risks involved with their medications? Should they face legal ramifications for not disclosing all of the potential risks and side effects?Do you think Glaxo really did give full disclosure or that it was according to them adequate?

I did a bit of research for a class last semester on drug companies and pricing and I found some interesting things about Glaxo’s competitor Pfizer as well. That is a whole other blog though.







Close
E-mail It