DECEMBER 15, 2008

Apparently I’m a little behind, but I recently learned that a few weeks ago, the Supreme Court of Canada decided to uphold the “one-person, one-fare” airline policy for persons “functionally disabled by obesity.” The policy entitles clinically obese people to occupy two seats if they cannot fit into just one, for the same price.  

Canada is the first, and only, country in the world to force its airlines to follow this type of policy, which actually surprises me. Considering that one in three Americans are obese, you’d expect that this issue would have already been addressed in our courts.  That said, just because there hasn’t been caselaw on it yet, doesn’t mean there hasn’t been talk of it.  In fact, this past summer, Newsweek ran an article that questioned whether or not “fat people” should have to pay more for their tickets, because a study concluded that the 10 pounds Americans gained on average during the 1990s required an additional 350 million gallons of fuel a year. 

As it stands, the U.S. spends $33 billion dollars a year on services for the obese, so the question is: as Americans steadily grow larger in size, what will our government do?  What should it do?  Will the courts interfere, forcing airlines to uphold the “one-person, one-fare’ policy, and eat the additional costs associated with it or will Americans be forced to downsize if they want to fly?   

[No Comments »] [TrackBack »]

DECEMBER 10, 2008

My name is Krissy and I’m a cyberchondriac.

In the 7th grade, my friend, Adrienne, went to the hospital for stomach pains and found out she had a tumor the size of a football lurking in her stomach. In college, another friend (who also happened to be in the same 7th grade class as Adrienne and me) got lymph node cancer that was detected only because she went to see her doctor for something completely unrelated. And as if this situation weren’t rare enough– having 2 friends who were diagnosed with cancer at young ages– yet another friend of mine (an active and healthy non-smoker) just found out she has stage 4 lung cancer that has spread to her brain. All of these experiences have caused me to be abnormally fearful of getting cancer (amongst other diseases), believing that it’s not so rare after all. It’s no wonder that I’ve turned into a “cyberchondriac.”

What exactly is a “cyberchondriac”? Well, it’s a new term that’s emerging as more and more people are turning to sites like WebMD to diagnose their own illnesses. The definition is an “individual who use[s] the Internet to gather information on health or healthcare, for themselves or people in their care.” I, like more than 160 million others, visit medical sites when I get the sniffles or have random aches and pains, and, admittedly, I usually end up diagnosing myself with some sort of rare disease or, worst of all, cancer.

Recently, in an attempt to conquer my fear of cancer, I decided to do some actual research on the risks associated with it. According to a November 26th article in The Washington Post, the pace at which Americans are getting cancer has actually begun to decline. Cancer deaths have also been on the decline that started in the early 90s. For the first time ever, both trend lines are dropping!  I was both shocked and relieved to learn this news; nowadays, I think most of us believe the risks for illnesses are much greater than they actually are (no thanks to media hype). However, hile I’m glad to know that cancer diagnoses are falling, I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t still a little fearful of the risk.

Regardless, New Year’s Resolution 2009: try to cut back on the self-diagnosing of ailments. After all, as much as I like to think I’m an expert in everything, I’m just not. I need to learn to leave the diagnosing to those who actually went to medical school!

[Comment(1) »] [TrackBack »]

DECEMBER 3, 2008

In the past few years, deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) has become a hot commodity, saturating the fashion, jewelry and art worlds.  Indeed, from microscopic blueprint to trendy household commodity, the image of the double helix has permeated the consumer consciousness - not without implicit social consequences.

“Spit parties” like the one recently organized by 23andMe have become the latest social-networking craze.  Hereditary blueprints are now being turned into personalized perfumes and colognes.  For a perfectly accurate, 21st-century self-portrait, you can even map your – or your pets’ – genetic coding in a one-of-a-kind work of art that resembles columns of blocks.  All you have to worry about is which material – canvas, sheet aluminum or photographic paper – will look best on your living room wall.

It’s easy to say that personalization and narcissism are the forces driving this trend, but I do not believe those are the only forces at play.  In a sense, DNA-related products have become, purposely or not, propaganda-like tools for the health and pharmaceutical industries.

For example, orchestrators of the Personal Genome Project cannot steal your DNA while you’re sleeping at night, nor can they make you submit a sample against your will.  But what they can do is position their products and services so tactfully in the marketplace, and into the consumer consciousness, that we may actually find ourselves wanting to upload a DNA sample to a public database.  “The Perfect Unique Gift Idea for the Person who has Everything!”  DNA11’s tagline almost sounds like a subliminal advertisement from Huxley’s Brave New World or Orwell’s 1984, doesn’t it? 

Let me be clear: I’m not saying that our current DNA craze is the result of a premeditated, nationwide conspiracy (I don’t want to get arrested, you know).  But the fact that de-ox-y-ri-bo-nu-cle-ic acid has successfully made its way into the pop-culture marketplace can only better serve those individuals who seek it – and satisfy those companies that crave it.

[No Comments »] [TrackBack »]

NOVEMBER 19, 2008

I was reading an publication from EPM Communications on consumer behavior and attitudes when I saw a statistic that made me unsure as to whether I should laugh out loud or cry. Here it is: A third of Americans (34%) exercise 100 or more days a year; 10% exercise 50-99 days a year; and 15% are opposed to regular exercise.

Opposed to regular exercise? What?! Why would someone say that they are opposed to regular exercise? Do these people choose to ignore the fact that as much as 64% of the U.S. population is overweight? Being overweight has been identified as a cause of cancer, diabetes, heart problems, and sleep apnea, and has been found to reduce life expectancy. Why would someone identify themselves as being against exercising?

Maybe it’s because we hear so many conflicting headlines about just how bad it is to carry extra weight on our frames. One week we hear that it’s not as bad as we previously had thought… the next week we hear that a little extra weight may be good for our bone density numbers… a week later we hear that we should lose the weight in order to stay healthy and live long lives.

As a result, it seems that we are increasingly choosing to believe exactly what we want to believe and, therefore, dangerously ignoring the rest of the facts. Does hearing these vastly different perspectives on a daily basis provide exactly the excuse we need to be lazy? We like to believe that we have good genes, that we were athletes in high school and can get back into shape whenever we want.  We also believe that we are healthy because, even though the scale is showing us a number higher than we want to see, our blood pressure and cholesterol numbers are normal. As a society, we complain about health insurance costs but isn’t it our lack of self-control and/or denial contributing to the problem?

Perhaps we should all make the time to filter through the saturation of headlines and conflicting studies and educate ourselves on the risks associated with our unhealthy habits - individually, as well as for our nation as a whole. How’s that for a New Year’s resolution?

[No Comments »] [TrackBack »]

NOVEMBER 17, 2008

I’ll admit it - when it comes to health news, I tend to fixate on the negative instead of the positive.  I worry about the germs or the .0000001% chance that I’ll develop a disease from some chemical I’ve been exposed to, rather than celebrate all the advancements that have been made in medicine over the years.

However, recently, a few articles have forced me to focus on the positive.  First, there was an announcement about how targeting cancer treatments to a patient’s specific genes offers extraordinary hope for personalized cures.  Another study further proved that statins are a tremendously powerful shield against heart attack and stroke.  (A friend re-affirmed the importance of this news the other night by mentioning a leading heart surgeon they knew personally who raved about the life-saving ability of statins.)  Then there was the 60 Minutes story on someone who could use their brain to convey thoughts directly to  a computer.  And finally, a piece that profiled the Kanzius machine which - if clinical trials prove successful - will zap cancer cells all through your body without the need for drugs or surgery and without side effects.

All reasons to feel hopeful, right?  Yet it seems as a nation, we still seem to cling to ungrounded fears about risk and disease more than we celebrate medical breakthroughs.  Perhaps it’s because we’ve lost trust in institutions as a whole, the medical industry being no exception.  We feel we’ve been lied to, manipulated, and let down, so no information can be “good” or trusted.  We’re so saturated with conflicting information that we don’t know what to trust anymore, and that confusion paralyzes us and makes us fearful.

While I recognize this tendency in my own life, I am going to make an effort to change my habits.  We live in an era of unprecedented innovation in medicine - will you join me in being excited about it?

[No Comments »] [TrackBack »]

NOVEMBER 14, 2008

Today is World Diabetes Day – a day to draw attention to the grave threat posed by diabetes. Our boss Dan McGinn has kept a close eye on rising diabetes rates for several years and he often mentions it as one of the biggest threats facing the U.S. We thought it would be appropriate today to link to an article he wrote recently for our website:

I have spent my life engaging with people, trying to see what lies ahead, analyzing what matters to Americans and understanding risks and how we perceive them. It seems to me that we have lost sight of the things that should be of serious concern to us. We are continually bombarded with reasons to be afraid and things to look out for and have reached a saturation point. We no longer put our risks in perspective. What we need to be aware of is that the top risk factor for diabetes is obesity. One third of Americans are obese. Almost one in five children is overweight. Obesity is a problem that we can do something about. Experts say that half of Type 2 diabetes cases can be prevented. And half of today’s cases are still more than the total number of people who had diabetes twenty five years ago.

Go here to read Dan’s thoughts in their entirety.

[No Comments »] [TrackBack »]

OCTOBER 22, 2008

People seem to be most concerned about two things right now - the economy and the upcoming election.  But what many don’t realize is that both could be risky to their health.

For instance, did you know that there are more traffic-related deaths on presidential election days than on the day of the Super Bowl, according to a recent report in The Journal of the American Medical Association? Using a national database, the study counted the number of driving deaths on every presidential election day from 1976 to 2004.  An average of 158 people died in crashes each election day, compared with 134 crashes on the Tuesdays before.

Why? It is hard to say, but clearly there are more people on the road, and they may be distracted looking around to find their polling place.  This increase in car deaths could be even more significant in a heavy turnout year like this one. Researchers recommend that get-out-the-vote campaigners emphasize safe driving tips when urging people to vote.

Second, the ailing economy may be causing fewer visits to doctors.  A recent survey found that more than 80 million Americans - insured or not - are cutting back on their health care to save money. Another survey shows that young adults that have been hit the hardest. Nearly 70 percent say the downturn has made it more difficult in the last year to pay for medical expenses.

Even though skimping on health care can have serious consequences, it’s hard for folks in tough economic times to think long term. Unless a risk is imminent or high, we tend to roll the dice and hope for the best.  It is even more clear why this election is so focused on the need for health care reform in this country.

So, putting risk into perspective, it is important to be aware of how major events on the national stage can trickle down to impact us. We can then take steps to minimize the risks they may impose, like driving more carefully to the polls or sticking with our medical checkups even when our pocketbooks are tight. At least that gives us some control in this topsy-turvy world.

[No Comments »] [TrackBack »]

OCTOBER 8, 2008

As you might imagine, business travel doesn’t do much for my workout routine. I recently took my quest to stay fit online and finally found a site I’m excited about. When I discovered Gyminee about a week ago (thanks Somewhat Frank!), it caught my attention because it was free, simple, offered many levels of involvement, and most importantly, looked a lot like the social networks I’m already using.

Gyminee’s easy-to-navigate layout allows me to track my workouts, explore workout programs other people are trying, search for the perfect way to work my triceps, keep a nutrition log, and even join a fitness challenge (sorry - must login to view some links). But, even more important than the resources available on the site is the easily accessible community, which makes this site social. In addition to the forums and GymBuddies search function, the home page features a running feed of Gyminee user updates, perfect for when I’m lacking the motivation to move.

Of course, there are countless other programs and groups online to help me stay fit – several of my running friends swear by Nike+; I follow people who track their workouts via Twitter; and there also is a large community of bloggers focused on every facet of this topic.

But for me, Gyminee seems to make the most sense. After all, social networking is already helping me stay connected with friends, network with colleagues, and even increase my productivity at work — why shouldn’t it also help me stay fit?

[No Comments »] [TrackBack »]

SEPTEMBER 17, 2008

I think it’s safe to say that just about everyone has heard of McDonald’s.  However, if South Los Angeles has anything to say about it, fewer people will be familiar with the fast-food chain.

A New York Times article titled “Fast-Food Curb Meets with Ambivalence in South Los Angeles” explores a moratorium passed in Los Angeles in August on any new fast-food restaurant in a 32-square mile area south of Interstate 10.  In addition to banning fast food in the area, the city is also offering potential owners of new grocery stores and non-fast-food restaurants strong incentives to open in the area.  This offer may prove to be too good to pass up.

The article states, “The impetus for the ban was the area’s large number of fast-food chains, which account for 45 percent of all its restaurants, along with high rates of obesity and related health problems and small numbers of fresh-food outlets.”  Earlier this year, California became the very first state to ban trans fats in all restaurants and bakeries (following legislation in New York and other cities).

My stance on this issue actually surprises me.  Normally I would think that any business that has the funds and the willingness to open a new store should have the right to do so– this includes McDonald’s, KFC, Wendy’s, Taco Bell, etc.  In this particular case,  though, I feel that something should be done to stop the madness.  Of course, people will make the choice they want to make in the end.  If someone really feels the urge to go to Taco Bell for dinner, they most likely will drive to the other side of town to get a Mexican Pizza if they have to. 

I also believe that when given healthier alternatives, people will respond in a positive way and may be more willing to chose something that they realize is better for them, and close to home.  Sometimes convenience is everything.  After all, if that bag of cookies isn’t in the house, you may be less likely to eat them after dinner… right?

[No Comments »] [TrackBack »]

JULY 25, 2008

While skimming one of my favorite blogs, YumSugar, I learned that Monday was National Junk Food Day.  I didn’t even know that there was a day dedicated just to junk food, because it seems like every day is a junk food day for many Americans. “The number of people who are overweight or obese has sharply increased since the 1980s”, as have the sizes of our portions.  For example, when McDonald’s opened in 1955, the biggest soda available was 7 ounces.  Now a small is 16 ounces.

Plus, who can forget “Super Size Me” by Morgan Spurlock?  I know it made an impression on me… but sadly enough, I found myself in the mood for some McDonald’s food while I watched it.

The New York Times published a piece last December about McDonald’s restaurants in Seminole County, Florida who reward students with a Happy Meal from McDonald’s as a “food prize” in their “report card incentive” program.  This stirred up quite a bit of controversy.

A BBC News poll of 9,000 people found that although 40% of respondents blame food for obesity issues (over lack of exercise or genetics), our fast food habits aren’t slowing down at all — globally too.  Some analysts predict that 55% of McDonald’s earnings this year will come from outside the U.S.

It seems to me that as much as we love to complain about our health issues, we are unwilling to change our habits and do anything about it.  I love a juicy cheeseburger as much (if not more) than the next person, even though I realize that I probably shouldn’t eat one every single day.  Our culture still enjoys the rush that comes from eating.  Oddly, while we are often in control of most areas of our lives, we let food consumption spiral out of control, because we enjoy eating so much.

So, I’m sorry fast food restaurants, but I hope that we start eating less from your establishments and start getting healthier. It is possible to change; our portion sizes sure have!

[No Comments »] [TrackBack »]