societal issues – Page 2

Suicides and suicide attempts by poisoning rose sharply among children and teens during the pandemic | CNN

Post By Health brand safety-nsf death, brand safety-nsf health issues, brand safety-nsf other, brand safety-nsf sensitive, business, business and industry sectors, children, coronavirus, Coronavirus Pandemic, demographic groups, diseases and disorders, domestic alerts, domestic-coronavirus, domestic-health and science, economy and trade, epidemics and outbreaks, families and children, family members and relatives, health and medical, iab-business and finance, iab-diseases and conditions, iab-family and relationships, iab-industries, iab-infectious diseases, iab-lung and respiratory health, iab-medical health, iab-mental health, iab-parenting, iab-parenting teens, iab-pharmaceutical drugs, iab-pharmaceutical industry, Infectious Diseases, international alerts, international-coronavirus, international-health and science, life forms, mental health, microscopic life, pharmaceutical industry, pharmaceuticals, pharmaceuticals and prescription drugs, poisonings, population and demographics, Public health, respiratory diseases, societal issues, society, Suicide, teenagers, viruses

CNN
—

The rate of suspected suicides and suicide attempts by poisoning among young people rose sharply during the Covid-19 pandemic, a new study says. Among children 10 to 12 years old, the rate increased more than 70% from 2019 to 2021.

The analysis, published Thursday in the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, looked at what the National Poison Data System categorized as “suspected suicides” by self-poisoning for 2021 among people ages 10 to 19; the records included both suicide attempts and deaths by suicide.

The data showed that attempted suicides and suicides by poisoning increased 30% in 2021 compared with 2019, before the pandemic began.

Younger children, ages 10 to 12, had the biggest increase at 73%. For 13- to 15-year-olds, there was a 48.8% increase in suspected suicides and attempts by poisoning from 2019 to 2021. Girls seemed to be the most affected, with a 36.8% increase in suspected suicides and attempts by poisoning.

“I think the group that really surprised us was the 10- to 12-year-old age group, where we saw a 73% increase, and I can tell you that from my clinical practice, this is what we’re seeing also,” said study co-author Dr. Chris Holstege, professor of emergency medicine and pediatrics chief at the University of Virginia School of Medicine. “We’re seeing very young ages ages that I didn’t used to see attempting suicide by poisoning.

“It was pretty stunning from our perspective,” he said.

Twenty or so years ago, when he started working at the University of Virginia, he said, they rarely treated anyone ages 9 to 12 for suicide by poisoning. Now, it’s every week.

“This is an aberration that’s fairly new in our practice,” Holstege said.

The records showed that many of the children used medicines that would be commonly found around the house, including acetaminophen, ibuprofen and diphenhydramine, which is sold under brand names including Benadryl.

There was a 71% jump from 2019 to 2021 in attempts at suicide using acetaminophen alone, Holstege said.

The choice of over-the-counter medications is concerning because children typically have easy access to these products, and they often come in large quantities.

Holstege encourages caregivers to keep all medications in lock boxes, even the seemingly innocuous over-the-counter ones.

If a child overdoses on something like acetaminophen or diphenhydramine, Holstege encourages parents to bring their children into the hospital without delay, because the toxicity of the drug worsens over time. It’s also a good idea to call a poison center, a confidential resource that is available around the clock.

“We want to make sure that the children are taken care of in regards to their mental health but also in regards to the poisoning if there’s suspicion that they took an overdose,” he said.

There were limitations to the data used in the new study. It captured only the number of families or institutions that reached out to the poison control line; it cannot account for those who attempted suicide by means other than poison. It also can’t capture exactly how many children or families sought help from somewhere other than poison control, so the increase in suspected suicides could be higher.

The American Academy of Pediatrics has noted that the Covid-19 pandemic exacerbated existing mental health struggles that existed even. In 2021, the group called child and adolescent mental health a “national emergency.” Emergency room clinicians across the country have also said they’ve seen record numbers of children with mental health crises, including attempts at suicide.

In 2020, suicide was the second leading cause of death among children ages 10 to 14 and the third leading cause among those 15 to 24, according to the CDC.

Although the height of the pandemic is over, kids are still emotionally vulnerable, experts warn. Previous attempts at suicide have been found to be the “strongest predictor of subsequent death by suicide,” the study said.

“An urgent need exists to strengthen programs focused on identifying and supporting persons at risk for suicide, especially young persons,” the study said.

Research has shown that there is a significant shortage of trained professionals and treatment facilities that can address the number of children who need better mental health care. In August, the Biden administration announced a plan to make it easier for millions of kids to get access to mental and physical health services at school.

At home, experts said, families should constantly check in with children to see how they are doing emotionally. Caregivers also need to make sure they restrict access to “lethal means,” like keeping medicines – even over-the-counter items – away from children and keeping guns locked up.

Dr. Aron Janssen, vice chair of clinical affairs at the Pritzker Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Health at Lurie Children’s in Chicago, said he is not surprised to see the increase in suspected suicides, “but it doesn’t make it any less sad.”

Janssen, who did not work on the new report, called the increase “alarming.”

The rates of suicide attempts among kids had been increasing even prior to the pandemic, he said, “but this shows Covid really supercharged this as a phenomenon.

“We see a lot of kids who lost access to social supports increasingly isolated and really struggling to manage through day to day.”

Janssen said that he and his colleagues believe these suspected suicides coincide with increased rates of depression and anxiety and a sense of real dread about the future.

One of the biggest concerns is that “previous suicide attempts is the biggest predictor of later suicide completion,” he said. “We really want to follow these kids over time to better understand how to support them, to make sure that we’re doing everything within our power to help steer them away from future attempts.”

Janssen said it’s important to keep in mind that the vast majority of children survived even the worst of the pandemic and did quite well. There are treatments that work, and kids who can get connected to the appropriate care – including talk therapy and, in some cases, medication – can and do get better.

“We do see that. We do see improvement. We do see efficacy of our care,” Janssen said. “We just have to figure out how we can connect kids to care.”

Source link

#Suicides #suicide #attempts #poisoning #rose #sharply #among #children #teens #pandemic #CNN

A quarter of Americans live with polluted air, with people of color and those in Western states disproportionately affected, report says | CNN

Post By Health Accidents, Air Pollution, brand safety-nsf accidents and disasters, brand safety-nsf automotive negative, brand safety-nsf discrimination, brand safety-nsf health issues, brand safety-nsf oil negative, brand safety-nsf sensitive, business, business and industry sectors, california, California wildfires, Climate change, continents and regions, disasters and safety, discrimination, domestic alerts, domestic-climate crisis, domestic-health and science, domestic-us news, economy and trade, emissions, energy and environment, energy and utilities, environment and natural resources, environmental protection agency, environmental regulation and policy, environmentalism, fires, government organizations - us, iab-business and finance, iab-disasters, iab-environment, iab-industries, iab-power and energy industry, iab-science, international alerts, international-climate crisis, international-health and science, international-us news, minority and ethnic groups, natural disasters, North America, particulate matter, Pollution, racism and racial discrimination, societal issues, society, southwestern united states, the americas, United States, us federal departments and agencies, us government independent agencies, Wildfires

CNN
—

About 1 in 4 people in the United States – more than 119 million residents – live with air pollution that can hurt their health and shorten their lives, according to a new report from the American Lung Association. People of color are disproportionately affected, as are residents of Western cities.

Since President Richard Nixon signed the Clean Air Act in 1970, emissions of outdoor air pollutants have fallen 78%, according to the US Environmental Protection Agency. But Wednesday’s 2023 State of the Air report, which focuses on ozone and particle pollution, shows that millions put their health on the line every time they step outside.

To capture pollution levels at the county level, researchers analyzed data collected by the EPA’s Air Quality System, a repository of ambient air quality data from more than 10,000 monitors. They characterized the hourly average ozone concentration and the 24-hour average particle pollution concentration for 2019-21 at each monitoring site and factored in year-round pollution information from the EPA.

There were significant improvements in some areas. Generally, 17.6 million fewer people were breathing unhealthy air than in last year’s report, due largely to falling levels of ozone in some regions.

Ozone pollution is the main ingredient in smog. It comes from cars, power plants and refineries. Exposure to ozone can immediately exacerbate asthma symptoms, and people with long-term exposure to higher levels face a significantly higher risk of death from respiratory diseases than those who live with cleaner air.

Around 25% more counties got an A grade in the report for lower levels of ozone pollution. Some of that improvement can be attributed to the Clean Air Act, according to Katherine Pruitt, author of the report and the American Lung Association’s national senior director for policy.

Emission controls have helped, she said, as has the country’s continuing move away from its reliance on coal for its energy needs. Even something simple as the increase in the number of people who work from home has played a role.

“The Biden administration has set themselves a good, strong to do list of things that will help with environmental justice and climate protection,” Pruitt said. “They’re moving kind of slow, though. So we’d like them to pick up the pace.”

Despite the progress, not everyone was lucky enough to live in a county with good ozone levels. More than 100 million people live in counties that get an F for ozone smog, the report says.

Western and Southwestern cities are the most ozone-polluted, with 10 of the 25 most-polluted cities in California. New York, Chicago and Hartford, Connecticut, were the only three on that list east of the Mississippi River.

The five metropolitan areas with the worst ozone pollution are Los Angeles-Long Beach, California; Visalia, California; Bakersfield, California; Fresno-Madera-Hanford, California; and Phoenix-Mesa, Arizona.

Particle pollution, the other form of pollution tracked in the report, still seems to be a significant issue for the US.

Often hard to see, particle pollution is a mix of solid and liquid droplets that may come in the form of dirt, dust, soot or smoke. Coal- and natural gas-fired power plants create it, as do cars, agriculture, unpaved roads, construction sites and wildfires.

Particle pollution is so tiny – 1/20th of a width of a human hair – that it can travel past your body’s usual defenses.

Instead of being carried out when you exhale, it can get stuck in your lungs or go into your bloodstream. The particles cause irritation and inflammation and may lead to respiratory problems. Exposure can cause cancer, stroke or heart attack; it could also aggravate asthma, and it has even been associated with a higher risk of depression and anxiety, studies show.

The new report says the number of people living in counties with failing grades for daily spikes of particle pollution was the highest it has been in a decade. Nearly 64 million live with these kind of unhealthy spikes in counties that get failing grades.

One driver of the high amounts of particle pollution are the wildfires that have consumed hundreds of thousands of acres. In 2021 alone, there were 14,407 fires, many in the West, according to the National Interagency Fire Center. There used to be a wildfire season, experts say, but now they happen year-round.

Those fires are why the regions with the highest concentrations of air pollution are largely in the West.

When the American Lung Association started producing its report in 2004, 106 counties in 30 states got failing grades for daily spikes in particle pollution. Fewer than half were in eight states west of the Rocky Mountains. Today, 111 counties in 19 states got Fs for spikes in particle pollution, and all but eight counties are in the West, the report says.

Urban centers in the Rust Belt and the industrialized East had gotten the most failing grades in the early 2000s, but many have cleaned up and now get passing grades.

Bakersfield, California, displaced Fresno as the metropolitan area with the worst short-term particle pollution, but Fresno did not suddenly develop cleaner air. That city still had the most-polluted label for year-round particle pollution, tied with Visalia, in the agricultural San Joaquin Valley.

Los Angeles is still the city with the worst ozone pollution, according to the report, as it has been for all but one of the years included in the report.

California has some of the more progressive environmental legislation in the country, but the climate crisis has not been kind to the state, said Tarik Benmarhnia, an air pollution and wildfire researcher at the University of California, San Diego, who did not work on the new report.

“All these cities like Bakersfield and Visalia are in a valley near the forests that are seeing big fires. There’s also intense agricultural and industrial work there, so they unfortunately have all the worst conditions for air pollution,” Benmarhnia said.

There are some newcomers to the list of the 25 areas with the most particle pollution, including Denver and Fargo, North Dakota. Reno, Nevada; Yakima and Spokane, Washington; and Boise, Idaho; all made the worst list this year.

San Luis Obispo, California; Portland, Oregon; and Seattle and Bellingham, Washington; all moved off the list of worst 25 cities.

Residents in the cities ranked worst for particle pollution are living with more of it, the report says. In the top 25 cities with the worst air, the average number of days residents were exposed to high levels of fine particle pollution increased to a weighted average of 18.3, up from 16.5 in last year’s report.

East of the Mississippi, Pittsburgh and Lancaster, Pennsylvania, were the two worst metropolitan areas in the country, posting more days high in fine particle pollution in this year’s report.

Not everyone experiences pollution the same way in the US. Regardless of the region, communities of color bear the brunt of the problem.

Specifically, although people of color make up 41% of the overall US population, they are 54% of the nearly 120 million people living in counties with at least one failing grade for unhealthy air. And in the counties with the worst air quality, 72% of the 18 million residents are people of color, the report said.

Other research has also shown this trend. On maps that lay out areas with high levels of air pollution and where communities were redlined – areas where Black people were forced to live – they line up perfectly, Pruitt said.

“Then, the other aspect is, when you have a community of color that is a voluntary community, people aren’t forced to live there, those are communities that tend to have less of a voice, so decision makers place polluting sources in those communities because there’s not as much howling by people with power when they do. So those communities get the highways; they get the landfills; they get the fence lines,” she said.

There’s a myth that only poor communities live with disproportionate pollution levels, says Chris Tessum, a professor in the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department of the University of Illinois. Tessum, who was not involved in the new report, says race really is the determining factor.

“The thinking is that people with more money will buy better property, which has lower air pollution and that’s just the way of the world or whatever, but that’s just kind of emphatically not, not true,” he said.

Communities need to play a key role in making decisions to help clean air, Tessum said.

“People that have the power will use that power to benefit themselves and not the people that have been historically overburdened,” he said.

The new report says government and residents can make a difference. One suggestion is to leverage Inflation Reduction Act funding to help reduce emissions at ports and to invest in zero-emission heavy-duty vehicles and in infrastructure that would improve air quality monitoring.

States can also use the Clean Air Act authority to adopt the California zero-emissions standards for cars and trucks, the report says.

At the federal level, agencies must finalize stronger limits on air pollution to truly protect public health and advance environmental justice, the report says, including standards to move the country toward zero-emissions vehicles. The EPA also has to set stronger national standards for particle pollution and ozone, the researchers say.

Pruitt said she knows firsthand how better policies can work. She said growing up before the Clean Air Act, pollution was so high that she could see it every time she stepped outside. Today, the pollution is not nearly as visible.

“I’m in my mid-60s, and of course, air pollution was very tangible when I was young, but these days, thank goodness it isn’t. Most people don’t see it,” she said. Unless a person has a lung condition, they may not even feel it.

But just because you can’t see it or feel it doesn’t mean it’s not there. Pruitt encourages people to remember that no level of pollution is safe. The World Health Organization estimates that the combined effects of ambient air pollution and household air pollution are associated with 6.7 million premature deaths annually.

“People don’t really recognize that what they’re breathing is impacting their health,” Pruitt said.

Source link

#quarter #Americans #live #polluted #air #people #color #Western #states #disproportionately #affected #report #CNN

Texas abortion drug ruling could create ‘slippery slope’ for FDA approvals, drug research and patients, experts say | CNN

Post By Health abortion, Abortion rights, biology, Biotechnology, brand safety-nsf health issues, brand safety-nsf mature, brand safety-nsf other, brand safety-nsf products and consumers negative, brand safety-nsf sensitive, business, business and industry sectors, communicable disease control, continents and regions, decisions and rulings, domestic alerts, domestic-health and science, domestic-us news, economy and trade, government organizations - us, health and medical, iab-biological sciences, iab-biotech and biomedical industry, iab-business and finance, iab-diseases and conditions, iab-industries, iab-law, iab-medical health, iab-pharmaceutical drugs, iab-pharmaceutical industry, iab-reproductive health, iab-science, iab-sexual health, iab-vaccines, international alerts, international-health and science, international-us news, law and legal system, medical treatments and procedures, North America, pharmaceutical industry, pharmaceuticals, pharmaceuticals and prescription drugs, pharmaceuticals product development, Public health, science, sexual and reproductive health, societal issues, society, southwestern united states, texas, the americas, trial and procedure, United States, us department of health and human services, us federal departments and agencies, us food and drug administration, vaccination and immunization

CNN
—

What happened in one judge’s courtroom in Texas could have drastic effects for the United States’ entire drug approval process, experts warn.

US District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk’s ruling that suspended the US Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the medication abortion drug mifepristone was an unprecedented one, the first time a court has bypassed the federal system set up to determine what drugs should be allowed on the market.

Regardless of whether the ruling – or a part of it – is ultimately allowed to stand, legal scholars, scientists and drugmakers are concerned that the decision could start a trend of drugs being targeted in courts, creating a chilling effect on drug development in the US and hurting patients in the process.

Vaccines, including the Covid-19 shots, antidepressants and psychotropic medicines could be at risk, some said.

“Well, one does not want to be Chicken Little,” former FDA Commissioner Dr. Jane Henney said Wednesday, but “I can’t imagine that it wouldn’t have implications for other products.

“The approval process will be at risk, and it’s not just an approval process that patients rely on and providers rely on, it’s one that has been considered the gold standard, really, for the world,” said Henney, who was the head of the FDA when mifepristone was approved.

Since the dawn of the 20th century, the FDA has had the sole authority in the United States to regulate drugs. In 1906, the federal government created the agency to enforce the Pure Food and Drug Act, which was instituted to ensure that medicine, food and cosmetics were safe.

Over the years, that authority became more defined.

After elixir of sulfanilamide, a drug used to treat streptococcal infections, killed 107 people in 1937, Congress created the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Signed into law in 1938 by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, it required manufacturers to conduct pharmacological studies to prove that their drugs were safe before they could be sold or advertised. In 1962, drug manufacturers were also required to prove to the FDA that their products were effective.

Modern drug approval in the US is a careful and conscientious process. Before any drug goes to market, there are countless hours of research, the work and expertise of multiple scientists, and several layers of oversight for approval.

Until now, the courts have been deferential to the FDA’s process and have never overturned an FDA decision on the grounds that the agency misjudged the science, said William Schultz, a former deputy commissioner at the FDA and former general counsel for the Department of Health and Human Services.

“Any FDA drug approval involves hundreds of judgments by the agency. And if a court feels free just to kind of take a fresh look at each of those, there’s a chance that a court will find one of those FDA judgments wrong,” Schultz said in an online discussion Monday about the impact of the Texas court’s ruling that was hosted by Protect Our Care, an organization that advocates for equitable and affordable health care.

Hundreds of well-known biotech and pharmaceutical company leaders, concerned about the effects of Kacsmaryk’s ruling on other drug approvals, signed an open letter Monday in support of the FDA’s authority “to approve and regulate safe, effective medicines for every American.”

The letter also advocated a reversal of the mifepristone decision from a judge with “no scientific training,” saying it “set a precedent for diminishing FDA’s authority over drug approvals, and in so doing, creates uncertainty for the entire biopharma industry.”

In a separate statement, the biotech industry group BIO’s interim president and CEO, Rachel King, emphasized the “dangerous precedent” the decision sets.

“The preliminary ruling by a federal judge in Texas is an assault on science and the FDA’s long-standing role as the authority to make decisions on the safety and efficacy of medicines. For a court to invalidate the approval of a drug that was reviewed and approved more than two decades ago is without precedent. As legal scholars have noted, the courts do not have the medical expertise to make these types of scientific determinations,” King said.

The main lobbying group for the pharmaceutical industry, PhRMA, criticized Kacsmaryk’s ruling as undermining the regulatory process.

“PhRMA has serious concerns with any court substituting its opinion for the FDA’s expert approval decision-making,” said James C. Stansel, the association’s executive vice president, general counsel and corporate secretary. Stansel added that such a decision could have a “chilling effect on the research and development ecosystem.”

The pharmacutical sector is a huge part of the American economy. Of the world’s 25 largest phamacutical companies, 10 are based in the US, and most of the others have a large base of operations in the country.

Often, the US market is the first to get access to new drugs, but that could change if lawsuits undermine the regulatory integrity of the FDA process, said Susan Lee, partner in the law firm Goodwin’s Life Sciences group and Life Sciences Regulatory & Compliance practice, who works with companies to get drugs approved by the FDA.

“If there do tend to be more lawsuits like this, I wonder if there might be a little bit of a tendency to not always look at the US as the first market,” Lee said. “Some manufacturers may say ‘we’d rather go to Europe, where we’re not going to be sued on a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis.’ “

Lee also wonders whether manufacturers will abandon efforts to develop drugs that could be considered unappealing to some, such as those that help women’s health or work to prevent HIV.

“I think there are just certain sectors that are already kind of thinking about whether they might also have a target on their back. I’ve definitely heard that discussed,” Lee said.

The groups at the heart of the Texas case have not disclosed any further plans regarding lawsuits over medications, but experts say they are already hearing concern.

“I’ve already been getting questions from lawmakers and other people about ‘could the Covid vaccine be next?’ or other things that may have stigma around it,” said Dr. Kristyn Brandi, an ob/gyn and abortion provider in New Jersey and a spokesperson for the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

The Covid-19 vaccines have been thoroughly tested and found to be safe and effective, but they’re the subject of conspiracy theories and misunderstanding about how mRNA vaccines were tested. Beliefs that the vaccines were tested on recently harvested aborted fetal cells made some people decidedly anti-vaccine.

Dr. Lynn R. Goldman, professor and dean of the Milken Institute School of Public Health at George Washington University, is also concerned that mRNA vaccines could be targeted soon.

“There might be people who disagree with some of the technologies that are used by vaccine makers, like the mRNA vaccines, but feeling uncomfortable about a technology is not the same thing as identifying that there is risk,” she said in the Protect Our Care conversation.

Members of the LGBTQ+ community may also be vulnerable, experts say, as activists could target puberty blockers or hormones used in gender-affirming therapy.

“I don’t like to do slippery slope, but I’m also very worried about things like gender-affirming care, since there’s already been so many laws about that recently in other states,” Brandi said.

There is political pressure against other vaccines, antidepressants and psychotropic medicines, among others, former FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg and former Principal Deputy Commissioner Joshua Sharfstein wrote in an editorial published Thursday in the journal Science.

“If judges begin to dictate the terms of medication access, then others will seek to use ideology and influence to advance their agendas,” they warn.

Goldman said that any legal decision that could undermine the FDA drug approval process would ultimately hurt the doctors who prescribe them and the people who use them.

Doctors don’t have time to vet all the studies used to prove that a drug is safe and effective, so they rely on the FDA for this work, she said. Court interference could confuse this process.

“I think that this is, for doctors, an incredibly serious moment, because up to now, we have been able to trust that an approval by the FDA is a science-based decision and that we can say that if the FDA has approved a drug, that it is safe for us to use,” Goldman said.

A lack of confidence in the drug approval process will ultimately hurt people far beyond the most recent decision, Protect Our Care Chair Leslie Dach says.

“Confidence that the FDA can do its work is essential for clinicians and patients who depend on it in its decision-making for matters of life and death,” Dach said.

Source link

#Texas #abortion #drug #ruling #create #slippery #slope #FDA #approvals #drug #research #patients #experts #CNN

Clinics and doctors brace for more restrictions on women’s health care after court ruling on abortion drug | CNN

Post By Health abortion, Abortion rights, brand safety-nsf health issues, brand safety-nsf mature, brand safety-nsf other, brand safety-nsf sensitive, business, business and industry sectors, clinics and outpatient services, continents and regions, decisions and rulings, demographic groups, domestic alerts, domestic-health and science, domestic-us news, economy and trade, females (demographic group), health and health care (by demographic group), health and medical, Health Care, health care facilities, health care professionals, iab-business and finance, iab-diseases and conditions, iab-healthcare industry, iab-healthy living, iab-industries, iab-law, iab-medical health, iab-non-profit organizations, iab-pharmaceutical drugs, iab-pharmaceutical industry, iab-pregnancy, iab-reproductive health, iab-sexual health, iab-women's health, international alerts, international-health and science, international-us news, law and legal system, maternal and child health, medical fields and specialties, medical treatments and procedures, non-profit and ngo organizations, North America, obstetrics and gynecology, pharmaceutical industry, pharmaceuticals, pharmaceuticals and prescription drugs, physicians and surgeons, Planned Parenthood, population and demographics, pregnancy and childbirth, reproductive health clinics, sexual and reproductive health, societal issues, society, the americas, trial and procedure, United States, womens health

CNN
—

Less than a year after the US Supreme Court ended legal protection for abortions nationwide, clinics that provide reproductive health care across the United States are bracing for more restrictions on the care they provide to women.

If a judge’s ruling takes effect Friday, it may soon be illegal for doctors to prescribe mifepristone, the first in a two-drug regimen that can help women terminate a pregnancy at home – and that has other uses.

At Northeast Ohio Women’s Center, staffers are calling patients who expected to get medication abortions next week, telling them to change their plans.

“They’re scrambling to change their schedules to get in to see us earlier,” said Dr. David Burkons, the physician who runs the clinics.

About half of abortions in the US use mifepristone, which is sold under the brand name Mifeprex.

Mifeprex blocks the hormone progesterone, which effectively stops a pregnancy from continuing. For an abortion, women take mifepristone first, followed one or two days later by misoprostol, a drug that causes the uterus to contract, cramp and bleed, similar to a heavy period. It empties out the uterus, ending the pregnancy. It can be used up to 10 weeks of pregnancy.

But the uses of mifepristone go beyond abortion.

The drug helps soften and open the cervix, the neck of the uterus, and doctors depend on it to help when women are having a miscarriage and when a pregnancy needs to be terminated quickly if the life of the mother is at stake.

In certain situations, when a pregnancy has become too risky, time is of the essence, says Dr. Alison Edelman, who directs the division of Complex Family Planning at Oregon Health and Sciences University.

“The more expediently that we can have somebody not be pregnant, the better, and mifepristone helps us speed that process up and make it safer for patients,” she said.

Doctors also use mifepristone before procedures in which they need to go into the uterus, such as to remove bleeding polyps. Studies have shown that the drug helps reduce the amount of force needed to open the cervix and reduces the amount of blood loss associated with the procedure.

Studies also show that mifepristone has moderate to strong benefits for inducing labor and treating uterine fibroids and endometriosis, sometimes helping avoid surgery, according to the American Society of Health Systems Pharmacists.

It can be used to prevent bleeding between periods and to control hyperstimulation of the ovaries during in-vitro fertilization, the society said in a statement.

Doctors say they still have other ways to treat those problems, but when considering the needs of individual patients, they will be missing a valuable tool.

“We have our gold standard of what we provide – the safest, most effective regimen – and then if it’s not available, we use the next best one. And that’s what we would be left with,” Edelman said.

Mifepristone has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for 23 years, and it has been used by over 5 million women in the United States. FDA data shows that less than 1% of women who take it have significant adverse events. A CNN analysis of FDA data found that mifepristone was even less risky than some other common medications, including Viagra and penicillin.

Medication abortions have become an increasingly important option for women in states that restricted abortion access after the Supreme Court’s ruling last year that ended legal protections for abortions in every state. They are also sometimes the only kind of abortion many women can get in rural areas that have lost abortion providers.

This ease of access has also made the medication regimen a target for abortion opponents.

“They want to see a national ban, and this is in fact what they are going for in this case,” said Kristen Moore, director of the EMAA Project, a nonprofit that is seeking to make it easier to get abortion medications in the US.

What will happen next is far from settled. Appeals have been filed to stop the ruling in Texas from taking hold, and higher courts will have to weigh in.

Even if the court does take mifepristone off the market in the US, doctors say, they will still be able to provide medication abortions using misoprostol alone.

In fact, some abortion providers have been planning on using misoprostol by itself in case mifepristone is isn’t available.

Carafem, which provides telehealth abortion care, has been offering a misoprostol-only regimen since the Covid-19 pandemic began, Chief Operating Officer Melissa Grant says.

“In 2020, we started to use misoprostol alone as an option,” she said. Workers have since been tweaking the regimen and gathering data.

“We now feel confident that, even though we would much prefer to use both, that we can use misoprostol alone effectively and are ready to switch gears to have a higher percentage of our clients or even 100% of our colleagues use that option if necessary,” Grant said.

Still, some providers said it’s not ideal.

The misoprostol-only regimen is slightly less effective than the one that uses both drugs, and it causes more cramping and bleeding, which can mean more complications.

“We’re more likely to see failures and therefore more likely to need surgical intervention after misoprostol alone,” said Dr. Erika Werner, chair of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Tufts Medical Center.

Still, doctors want women to know that medication abortions and miscarriage care will still be available even if mifepristone isn’t. And they hope that higher courts will intervene to keep this medication on pharmacy shelves.

“The clinicians would have to use these other options instead of choosing based on their own expertise, knowledge and judgment when rendering such care,” Dr. Iffath Hoskins, president of the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said Monday. “Frankly, as a clinician, I do not want to be in that position.”

Correction: This story has been updated to include the correct name of Tufts Medical Center.

Source link

#Clinics #doctors #brace #restrictions #womens #health #care #court #ruling #abortion #drug #CNN

Concerned about the courts, some states and universities are stockpiling abortion drugs | CNN

Post By Health abortion, Abortion rights, brand safety-nsf health issues, brand safety-nsf mature, brand safety-nsf other, brand safety-nsf products and consumers negative, brand safety-nsf sensitive, business, business and industry sectors, california, continents and regions, domestic alerts, domestic-health and science, domestic-us news, domestic-us politics, economy and trade, government and public administration, government bodies and offices, governors, heads of government, health and medical, iab-business and finance, iab-diseases and conditions, iab-healthcare industry, iab-industries, iab-law, iab-medical health, iab-non-profit organizations, iab-pharmaceutical drugs, iab-pharmaceutical industry, iab-politics, iab-reproductive health, iab-sexual health, international alerts, international-health and science, international-us news, international-us politics, Massachusetts, matthew kacsmaryk, medical treatments and procedures, new york (state), New York City, non-profit and ngo organizations, North America, northeastern united states, pharmaceutical industry, pharmaceuticals, pharmaceuticals and prescription drugs, Planned Parenthood, political figures - us, politics, sexual and reproductive health, societal issues, society, southwestern united states, the americas, United States

CNN
—

With an eye on the courts, a growing number of Democratic-led states are stockpiling the pills that can be used for a medication abortion, the most common form of the procedure in the US.

The officials want to be prepared, in case US District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk’s decision to suspend the US Food and Drug Administration’s approval of mifepristone goes through, so medication abortions would still be available in their states for some period of time. But they’re taking different approaches to the idea.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul announced Tuesday that her state’s Department of Health would buy 150,000 doses of misoprostol, the other of the two drugs typically used in a medication abortion.

Misoprostol can be used off-label for an abortion, without mifepristone, but patients often have to use more of it. It would not be covered by the court case, and if Kacsmaryk’s decision stands, the New York City’s Health Department tweeted, it will change to using this medication only.

“Medication abortion continues to be available at our Sexual Health Clinics and NYC Health + Hospitals locations. Should mifepristone become unavailable, we will continue to make medication abortion accessible to all in NYC by shifting to a misoprostol-only treatment regimen,” the tweet said.

The state says the 150,000 doses should represent a five-year supply of pills.

“Anti-choice extremists have shown that they are not stopping at overturning Roe, and they are working to entirely dismantle our country’s reproductive health care system, including medication abortion and contraception,” Hochul said. “New York will always be a safe harbor for abortion care, and I am taking action to protect abortion access in our State and continue to lead the nation in defending the right to reproductive autonomy.”

California is also stocking up on misoprostol.

“While California still believes Mifepristone is central to the preferred regimen for medication abortion, the State negotiated and purchased an emergency stockpile of Misoprostol in anticipation of Friday’s ruling by far-right federal judge Matthew Kacsmaryk to ensure that California remains a safe haven for safe, affordable, and accessible reproductive care,” Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office said in a release Monday.

California plans to purchase up to 2 million pills through CalRx, a state initiative set up to make drugs more affordable.

The governor’s office said the state now has more than 250,000 pills on hand, which it purchased for about $100,000.

California said it shared the terms of its purchase agreement with other members of the Reproductive Freedom Alliance, a nonpartisan coalition of 21 governors who are committed to protecting reproductive rights, and who might also be interested in taking such action.

Another member of that alliance, Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, announced last week that his state bought a three year-supply of mifepristone, the drug at the center of Kacsmaryk’s ruling.

Inslee directed the state Department of Corrections – which has a pharmacy license and is legally able to buy medications – to buy the drug last month, he said, and the shipment was delivered March 31. The University of Washington also purchased 10,000 doses.

Lawmakers are introducing a bill to authorize officials to distribute or sell the medication to licensed providers throughout the state.

“This Texas lawsuit is a clear and present danger to patients and providers all across the country. Washington will not sit by idly and risk the devastating consequences of inaction,” Inslee said. “Washington is a pro-choice state, and no Texas judge will order us otherwise.”

In the meantime, its attorney general, Bob Ferguson, is helping lead a multistate lawsuit to protect access to mifepristone.

On Friday, the same day Kacsmaryk’s ruling came down, a federal judge in Washington ordered the US not to make any changes that would restrict access to mifepristone in the territories that brought the lawsuit: 17 states and the District of Columbia.

On Monday, Massachusetts Gov. Maura T. Healey announced that at her request, the University of Massachusetts and health care providers have also taken action to stockpile doses of mifepristone.

The governor’s office said last week that the university bought about 15,000 doses of mifepristone, enough to cover the commonwealth for about a year, and the pills are expected to arrive this week. Local health care providers have agreed to buy more, and the government agreed to set aside $1 million to pay for those doses.

The Massachusetts governor also signed an executive order confirming protections for medication abortion under existing law.

“Here in Massachusetts, we are not going to let one extremist judge in Texas turn back the clock on this proven medication and restrict access to care in our state,” Healey said. “The action we are taking today protects access to mifepristone in Massachusetts and protects patients and providers from liability. In Massachusetts, we stand for civil rights and freedom. We will always protect access to reproductive health care, including medication abortion.”

Danco Laboratories, the manufacturer of the brand-name version of mifepristone, says that orders for the drug have increased substantially in recent months and are significantly higher than they were at this time last year.

Demand for mifepristone is up across all types of customers, including clinics, pharmacies and individual providers, said Abby Long, Danco’s director of public affairs. But Massachusetts is the only state that has requested an especially large number of pills from the company.

Maine Gov. Janet Mills, who called the Texas decision “reckless” and a “fundamental assault on women’s rights,” said Monday that her administration is evaluating its options, “including procuring mifepristone if needed, to protect access to medication abortion for Maine women.”

The Connecticut governor’s office said Wednesday that it is also monitoring the situation.

Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek’s office said in an email Wednesday that she has directed the Oregon Health Authority to “explore all available avenues for ensuring Oregon is prepared should Mifepristone become less available. That includes evaluating the supply of Mifepristone and Misoprostol and consulting with providers to better understand the potential impact on the provision of abortion and reproductive health care and what additional support might be necessary.”

Source link

#Concerned #courts #states #universities #stockpiling #abortion #drugs #CNN

How safe is the abortion pill compared with other common drugs | CNN

Post By Health abortion, Abortion rights, brand safety-nsf death, brand safety-nsf health issues, brand safety-nsf mature, brand safety-nsf other, brand safety-nsf products and consumers negative, brand safety-nsf sensitive, business, business and industry sectors, continents and regions, domestic alerts, domestic-health and science, domestic-us news, economy and trade, government organizations - us, health and health care (by demographic group), health and medical, iab-business and finance, iab-diseases and conditions, iab-healthy living, iab-industries, iab-medical health, iab-pharmaceutical drugs, iab-pharmaceutical industry, iab-pregnancy, iab-reproductive health, iab-sexual health, iab-women's health, international alerts, international-health and science, international-us news, maternal and child health, medical fields and specialties, medical treatments and procedures, North America, obstetrics and gynecology, pharmaceutical industry, pharmaceuticals, pharmaceuticals and prescription drugs, pregnancy and childbirth, sexual and reproductive health, societal issues, society, telehealth, the americas, United States, us department of health and human services, us federal departments and agencies, us food and drug administration, womens health

CNN
—

A federal judge in Texas ruled on Friday to suspend the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of mifepristone, the first drug in the medication abortion process, nationwide by the end of this week.

The judge sided with the coalition of anti-abortion national medical associations that filed the lawsuit. He argued that the FDA failed to adequately consider risks associated with the drug, including “the intense psychological trauma and post-traumatic stress women often experience from chemical abortion.”

However, data analyzed by CNN shows mifepristone is even safer than some common, low-risk prescription drugs, including penicillin and Viagra. There were five deaths associated with mifepristone use for every 1 million people in the US who have used the drug since its approval in 2000, according to the US Food and Drug Administration as of last summer. That’s a death rate of 0.0005%.

Comparatively, the risk of death by penicillin — a common antibiotic used to treat bacterial infections like pneumonia — is four times greater than it is for mifepristone, according to a study on life-threatening allergic reactions. Risk of death by taking Viagra — used to treat erectile dysfunction — is nearly 10 times greater, according to a study cited in the amicus brief filed by the FDA.

“[Mifepristone] has been used for over 20 years by over five million people with the capacity to become pregnant,” said Ushma Upadhyay, an associate professor in the department of obstetrics, gynecology and reproductive science at the University of California, San Francisco. “Its safety is very well established.”

The Justice Department, the FDA, and Danco — a manufacturer of mifepristone that intervened in the case — have already appealed the ruling.

Within hours of the decision in Texas, a federal judge in Washington state issued a conflicting ruling that the federal government must keep mifepristone available in the 17 Democrat-led states and the District of Columbia that had sued in a separate lawsuit.

If the Texas ruling is allowed to take effect this week, 40 million more women of reproductive age would lose access to medication abortion care around the country, according to data from abortion rights advocacy group NARAL Pro-Choice America. That’s in addition to the 24.5 million women of reproductive age living in states with abortion bans.

“The court’s disregard for well-established scientific facts in favor of speculative allegations and ideological assertions will cause harm to our patients and undermines the health of the nation,” said Dr. Jack Resneck, Jr., president of the American Medical Association, in a statement. “By rejecting medical facts, the court has intruded into the exam room and has intervened in decisions that belong to patients and physicians.”

Medication abortion has become the most common method for abortion, accounting for more than half of all US abortions in 2020, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

The growing popularity of medication abortion is largely because of its accessibility, said Abigail Aiken, associate professor at the University of Texas at Austin who leads a research group on medication abortion.

“It reduces the cost, it reduces barriers where people may not want to go to a clinic,” she said.

It is also a safer option than both procedural abortion or childbirth. The rate of major complications — like hemorrhages or infections — for medication abortions is about one-third of a percent, according to a 2015 study conducted by Upadhyay. That means out of more than 11,000 cases, 35 experienced any major complications.

The likelihood of serious complications via procedural abortion — performed second-trimester or later — is slightly higher than medication abortion at 0.41%, according to the same study. And childbirth by far comes with the highest risk, at 1.3%.

If access to mifepristone is cut off, abortion clinics and telehealth organizations could pivot to misoprostol-only abortions, Aiken told CNN. Although misoprostol-only abortions are used around the world, they are less effective, associated with a higher risk of serious complications and often more painful than the mifepristone and misoprostol combination, she said.

In the latest study of self-managed misoprostol-only medication abortions in the US, Johnson found misoprostol-only abortions to be a safe alternative, though less safe than using both pills. The study, published in February, analyzed data from online telehealth medication abortion provider Aid Access from 2020. Nearly 90% of 568 users reported completed abortions and 2% experienced serious complications using only misoprostol.

Mifepristone and misoprostol together is still considered the gold standard, Aiken told CNN. People who used the two-pill combination were less likely to experience serious complications than those who went with the misoprostol-only regimen.

“It’s clear people can use these medications, mifepristone and misoprostol, at home even without the help of a medical professional very safely,” said Aiken.

Because misoprostol is used to treat multiple ailments including stomach ulcers, it’s readily stocked in pharmacies and unlikely to be taken off the market anytime soon, Johnson told CNN.

However, a lesser-effective method means more people will likely have unsuccessful abortions.

“It’s possible that it might not work for some people, and it will prolong their abortions,” said Upadhyay. “Then by the time they get back to the clinic, they’re seeking abortion later in pregnancy.”

Before the ruling, 19 states already restricted telehealth abortion care, limiting access to medication abortion. Nearly half of US adults were unsure whether medication abortion was currently legal in their state as of late-January, according to a survey conducted by the Kaiser Family Foundation. Experts say that confusion will only be exacerbated.

“People are not going to be sure mifepristone or misoprostol in fact, is available. I think it’s going to be confusing,” said Aiken. “As people look around for options or feel unsure about their options, they may end up delaying [care].”

Source link

#safe #abortion #pill #compared #common #drugs #CNN

Celebrities may have helped shape anti-vaccine opinions during Covid-19 pandemic, study finds | CNN

Post By Health arts and entertainment, brand safety-nsf health issues, brand safety-nsf sensitive, Celebrities, celebrity and pop culture, communicable disease control, coronavirus, Coronavirus Pandemic, diseases and disorders, Disinformation, domestic alerts, domestic-business, domestic-coronavirus, domestic-entertainment, domestic-health and science, domestic-us politics, epidemics and outbreaks, health and medical, iab-computing, iab-diseases and conditions, iab-infectious diseases, iab-internet, iab-lung and respiratory health, iab-medical health, iab-politics, iab-pop culture, iab-social networking, iab-technology & computing, iab-vaccines, Infectious Diseases, international alerts, international-business, international-coronavirus, international-entertainment, international-health and science, international-us politics, internet and www, life forms, microscopic life, political figures - us, Public health, respiratory diseases, social media, societal issues, society, Technology, ted cruz, vaccination and immunization, viruses

CNN
—

Covid-19 vaccines are known to be safe and effective, and they’re available for free, but many Americans in the US refuse to get them – and a recent study suggests that celebrities may share some of the blame for people’s mistrust.

Celebrities have long tried to positively influence public health, studies show, but during the Covid-19 pandemic, they also seemed to have a large influence on spreading misinformation.

Decades ago, in the 1950s, people could see stars like Elvis Presley, Dick Van Dyke and Ella Fitzgerald in TV ads that encouraged polio vaccination. This celebrity influence boosted the country’s general vaccination efforts, and vaccination nearly eliminated the deadly disease.

In 2021, US officials used celebrities in TV ads to encourage more people to get vaccinated against Covid-19. Big names like lifestyle guru Martha Stewart, singer Charlie Puth and even Senate Minority Leader Mitchell McConnell showed up in spots that had billions of ad impressions.

The world isn’t restricted to only three TV networks any more, so celebrities like actress Hilary Duff, actor Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, singer Dolly Parton and even Big Bird also used their enormous presence on Instagram and Twitter to promote a pro Covid-19 vaccine message.

But social media also became a vehicle for celebrities to cast doubt about the safety and effectiveness of the vaccine and even to spread disinformation about Covid.

Their negative messages seemed to find an audience.

For their study, published in the journal BMJ Health & Care Informatics, researchers examined nearly 13 million tweets between January 2020 and March 2022 about Covid-19 and vaccines. They designed a natural language model to determine the sentiment of each tweet and compared them with tweets that also mentioned people in the public eye.

The stars they picked to analyze included people who had shared skepticism about the vaccines, who had Covid-related tweets that were identified as misinformation or who retweeted misinformation about Covid.

They included rapper Nicki Minaj, football player Aaron Rodgers, tennis player Novak Djokovic, singer Eric Clapton, Sen. Rand Paul, former President Donald Trump, Sen. Ted Cruz, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, TV host Tucker Carlson and commentator Joe Rogan.

The researchers found 45,255 tweets from 34,407 unique authors talking about Covid-19 vaccine-related issues. Those tweets generated a total of 16.32 million likes. The tweets from these influencers, overall, were more negative about the vaccine than positive, the study found. These tweets were specifically more related to antivaccine controversy, rather than news about vaccine development, the study said.

The highest number of negative comments was associated with Rodgers and Minaj. Clapton had “very few” positive tweets, the study said, and that may have had an influence, but he also caught flak for it from the public.

The most-liked tweet that mentioned Clapton and the vaccine said, “Strongly disagree with [EC] … take on Covid and the vaccine and disgusted by his previous white supremacist comments. But if you reference the death of his son to criticize him, you are an ignorant scumbag.”

Trump and Cruz were found to have the most substantial impact within this group, with combined likes totaling more than 122,000.

They too came in for criticism on the topic, with many users wondering whether these politicians were qualified to have opinions about the vaccines. The study said the most-liked tweet mentioning Cruz was, “I called Ted Cruz’s office asking to make an appointment to talk with the Senator about my blood pressure. They told me that the Senator was not qualified to give medical advice and that I should call my doctor. So I asked them to stop advising about vaccines.”

The most-liked tweet associated with Rogan was an antivaxx statement: “I love how the same people who don’t want us to listen to Joe Rogan, Aaron Rodgers about the covid vaccine, want us to listen to Big Bird & Elmo.”

Posts shared by news anchors and politicians seemed to have the most influence in terms of the most tweets and retweets, the study found.

“Our findings suggest that the presence of consistent patterns of emotional content co-occurring with messaging shared by those persons in the public eye that we’ve mentioned, influenced public opinion and largely stimulated online public discourse, for the at least over the course of the first two years of the Covid pandemic,” said study co-author Brianna White, a research coordinator in the Population Health Intelligence lab at the University of Tennessee Health Science Center – Oak Ridge National Laboratory Center for Biomedical Informatics.

“We also argue that obviously as the risk of severe negative health outcomes increase with the failure to comply with health protective behavior recommendations, that our findings suggest that polarized messages from societal elite may downplay those severe negative health outcome risks.”

The study doesn’t get into exactly why celebrity tweets would have such an impact on people’s attitudes about the vaccine. Dr. Ellen Selkie, who has conducted research on influence at the intersection of social media, celebrity and public health outcomes, said celebrities are influential because they attract a lot of attention.

“I think part of the influence that media have on behavior has to do with the amount of exposure. Just in general, the volume of content that is focused on a specific topic or on a specific sort of interpretation of that topic – in this case misinformation – the repeated exposure to any given thing is going to increase the likelihood that it’s going to have an effect,” said Selkie, who was not involved in the new research. She is an adolescent health pediatrician and researcher with UW Health Kids and an assistant professor of pediatrics at the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health.

Just as people listen to a friend’s thoughts, they’ll listen to a celebrity whom they tend to like or identify with because they trust their opinion.

“With fandoms, in terms of the relationship between musical artists and actors and their fans, there is this sort of mutual love that fans and artists have for each other, which sort of can approximate that sense that they’re looking out for each other,” Selkie said.

She said she would be interested to see research on the influence of celebrities who tweeted positive messages about the Covid-19 vaccine.

The authors of the study hope public health leaders will use the findings right away.

“We argue this threat to population health should create a sense of urgency and warrants public health response to identify, develop and implement innovative mitigation strategies,” the study says.

Exposure to large amounts of this misinformation can have a lasting impact and work against the public’s best interest when it comes to their health.

“As populations grow to trust the influential nature of celebrity activity on social platforms, followers are disarmed and open to persuasion when faced with false information, creating opportunities for dissemination and rapid spread of misinformation and disinformation,” the study says.

Source link

#Celebrities #helped #shape #antivaccine #opinions #Covid19 #pandemic #study #finds #CNN

Only 5.7% of US doctors are Black, and experts warn the shortage harms public health | CNN

Post By Health african americans, brand safety-nsf discrimination, brand safety-nsf health issues, brand safety-nsf sensitive, business, business and industry sectors, continents and regions, curricula, demographic groups, discrimination, diversity, domestic alerts, domestic-business, domestic-health and science, domestic-us news, economy and trade, education, education systems and institutions, graduate and professional schools, health and health care (by demographic group), health and medical, Health Care, health care professionals, higher education, human resources and personnel management, iab-business, iab-business and finance, iab-college education, iab-education, iab-education industry, iab-healthcare industry, iab-healthy living, iab-human resources, iab-industries, iab-medical health, iab-pharmaceutical drugs, iab-pharmaceutical industry, iab-postgraduate education, iab-professional school, iab-women's health, internal medicine, international alerts, international-business, international-health and science, international-us news, labor and employment, medical education, medical fields and specialties, minority and ethnic groups, North America, obstetrics and gynecology, pharmaceutical industry, pharmaceuticals, pharmaceuticals and prescription drugs, physicians and surgeons, population and demographics, Public health, racism and racial discrimination, societal issues, society, students and student life, the americas, United States, womens health, workers and professionals, workplace diversity

CNN
—

When being truly honest with herself, Seun Adebagbo says, she can describe what drove her to go to medical school in a single word: self-preservation.

Adebagbo, who was born in Nigeria and grew up in Boston, said that as a child, she often saw tensions between certain aspects of Western medicine and beliefs within Nigerian culture. She yearned to have the expertise to bridge those worlds and help translate medical information while combating misinformation – for her loved ones and for herself.

“I wanted to go into medicine because I felt like, ‘Who better to mediate that tension than someone like me, who knows what it’s like to exist in both?’ ” said Adebagbo, 26, who graduated from Stanford University and is now a third-year medical school student in Massachusetts.

“The deeper I got into my medical education, the more I realized, if I’m in the system, I know how it works. I not only know the science, but I also know how the system works,” she said of how in many Black and brown communities, there can be limited access to care and resources within the medical system.

This has enabled Adebagbo to connect with patients of color in her rotations. She recognizes that their encounters with her are brief, she said, and so she tries to empower them to advocate for themselves in the health system.

“I know what to ask for on the patient side if I’m worried about something for myself. But then also, for my parents and my family,” Adebagbo said. “Because the way you have to move in the system as a Black person is very different, especially if you’re coming from a background where you don’t have family members that are doctors, you don’t know anyone in your periphery that went into medicine.”

Seun Adebagbo presenting her poster presentation as a first author at an international symposium and annual meeting of the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.

Only about 5.7% of physicians in the United States identify as Black or African American, according to the the latest data from the Association of American Medical Colleges. This statistic does not reflect the communities they serve, as an estimated 12% of the US population is Black or African American.

And while the proportion of Black physicians in the US has risen over the past 120 years, some research shows, it’s still extremely low.

One reason why the percentage of US doctors who are Black remains far below that of the US population that is Black can be traced to how Black people have been “historically excluded from medicine” and the “institutional and systemic racism in our society,” said Michael Dill, the Association of American Medical Colleges’ director of workforce studies.

“And it occurs over the course of what I think of as the trajectory to becoming a physician,” Dill said. At young ages, exposure to the sciences, science education resources, mentors and role models all make it more likely that a child could become a doctor – but such exposures and resources sometimes are disproportionately not as accessible in the Black community.

“We can improve our admissions to medical school, make them more holistic, try to remove bias from that, but that’s still not going to solve the problem,” Dill said.

“We need to look at which schools produce the most medical students and figure out how we improve the representation of Black students in those schools,” he said. “That requires going back to pre-college – high school, middle school, elementary school, kindergarten, pre-K – we need to do better in all of those places in order to elevate the overall trajectory to becoming a physician and make it more likely that we will get more Black doctors in the long run.”

Many US medical schools have a history of not admitting non-Whites. The first Black American to hold a medical degree, Dr. James McCune Smith, had to enroll at the University of Glasgow Medical School in Scotland.

Smith received his MD in 1837, returned to New York City and went on to become the first Black person to own and operate a pharmacy in the United States, and to be published in US medical journals.

A few decades later, in 1900, 1.3% of physicians were Black, compared with 11.6% of the US population, according to a study published in the Journal of General Internal Medicine in 2021.

Around that time, seven medical schools were established specifically for Black students between 1868 and 1904, according to Duke University’s Medical Center Library & Archives. But by 1923, only two of those schools remained: Howard University Medical School in Washington and Meharry Medical School in Nashville.

In 1940, only 2.8% of physicians were Black, but 9.7% of the US population was Black; by 2018, 5.4% of physicians were Black, but 12.8% of the population was Black.

“The more surprising thing to me was for Black men,” said Dr. Dan Ly, an author of the study in the Journal of General Internal Medicine and assistant professor of medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles.

Data on only Black men who were physicians over the years showed that they represented 1.3% of the physician workforce in 1900, “because all physicians were pretty much men in the past,” Ly said. Black men represented 2.7% of the physician workforce in 1940 and 2.6% in 2018.

“That’s 80 years of no improvement,” Ly said. “So the increase in the percent of physicians who were Black over the past 80 years has been the entrance of Black women in the physician workforce.”

Over more than four decades between 1978 and 2019, the proportion of medical school enrollees who identify as Black, Hispanic or members of other underrepresented groups has stayed “well below” the proportions that each group represented in the general US population, according to a 2021 report in The New England Journal of Medicine.

Diversity in some medical schools also was affected in states with bans on affirmative action programs, according to a study published last year in the Annals of Internal Medicine. That study included data on 21 public medical schools across eight states with affirmative action bans from 1985 to 2019: Arizona, California, Florida, Michigan, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas and Washington.

The study found that the percentage of enrolled students from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups was on average about 15% in the year before the bans were implemented but fell more than a third by five years after the bans.

Now, the United States is reckoning with medicine’s history of racism.

In 2008, the American Medical Association, the nation’s largest organization of physicians, issued an apology for its history of discriminatory policies toward Black doctors, including those that effectively restricted the association’s membership to Whites. In 2021, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention declared racism a “serious public health threat.”

One encouraging datapoint says that the number of Black or African American first-year medical school students increased 21% between the academic years of 2020 and 2021, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges, which Dill said shows promise for the future.

“Does the fact that it’s higher in medical school mean that eventually we will have a higher percentage of physicians who are Black? The answer is yes,” he said.

“We will see the change occur slowly over time,” he said. “So, that means the percentage of the youngest physicians that are Black will grow appreciably, but the percentage of all physicians who are Black will rise much more slowly, since new physicians are only a small percentage of the entire workforce.”

But some medical school students could leave their career track along the way. A paper published last year in JAMA Internal Medicine found that among a cohort of more than 33,000 students, those who identified as an underrepresented race or ethnicity in medicine – such as Black or Hispanic – were more likely to withdraw from or be forced out of school.

Among White students, 2.3% left medical school in the academic years of 2014-15 and 2015-16, compared with 5.2% of Hispanic students, 5.7% of Black students and 11% of American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander students, the study found.

The researchers wrote in the study that “the findings highlight a need to retain students from marginalized groups in medical school.”

During her surgical rotation in medical school, Adebagbo said, she saw no Black surgeons at the hospital. While having more physicians and faculty of color in mentorship roles can help retain young Black medical school students like herself, she calls on non-Black doctors and faculty to create a positive, clinical learning environment, giving the same support and feedback to Black students as they may provide to non-Black students – which she argues will make a difference.

“Despite the discomfort that may arise on the giver of feedback’s side, it’s necessary for the growth and development of students. You’re hurting that student from becoming a better student on that rotation, not giving them that situational awareness that they need,” she said. “That’s what ends up happening with students of color. No one tells them, and it seems as if it’s a pattern, then by the end of the rotation, it becomes, ‘Well, you’ve made so many mistakes, so we should just dismiss you [for resident trainees] or we can’t give you honors or high pass [for medical students].’ “

Seun Adebagbo, right, with the site director (second from left) and two peers on her last day of her surgery rotation.

Adebagbo says she had one site director, a White male physician, during her surgery rotation who genuinely cared, listened and wanted to see her grow as a person and physician.

“He has been the first site director who has legit listened to me, my experiences navigating third year as a Black woman and tried to understand and put it in perspective – a privilege I’m not afforded often,” Adebagbo said. “He made making mistakes, growing and learning from them a safe and non-traumatizing experience. Not everyone may understand the depths of what I’m saying, but those who do will understand why I was so grateful for that experience.”

But not all attending physicians are like her “mentor,” as she calls him.

For Dr. David Howard, one question haunted his thoughts in medical school.

During those strenuous days at Johns Hopkins University, when all-night study sessions and grueling examinations were the norm, his mind whispered: Where do I fit?

Howard, now a 43-year-old ob/gyn in New Jersey, reflects with pride – and candor – on the day in 2009 when he completed his doctoral degrees, becoming both an MD and a PhD.

At the time, “I felt like I didn’t fit,” Howard said. “I’m sure I’m not the only person who has thought those thoughts.”

Howard was one of very few men in the obstetrics and gynecology specialty, where most providers were women – and he is Black. He saw very few peers who looked like him and extremely few faculty in leadership positions who looked like him.

“When you’re going through a really difficult training program, it makes a big difference if there are people like you in the leadership positions,” he said, adding that this contributes to the disproportionate number of Black medical school students and residents who decide to leave the profession or are “not treated equally” when they may make a mistake.

Early on in his career, Howard shifted his thinking from “Where do I fit?” to “How do I fit?”

He even authored a paper in 2017, published in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, about this self-reflection.

“Only slightly different semantically, the second question shifts focus away from the ‘where’ that implies an existing location. Instead, ‘how’ requires me to illustrate my relationship with existing labels and systems, rather than within them, allowing a multitude of answers to my question of ‘how do I fit?’ ” Howard wrote.

“Despite the challenges and realities of the medical field today, I fit wherever and however I can, actively shaping my space and resisting the assumptions that first prompted me to ask where I fit,” he said. “To finally answer my question: I don’t fit, but I am here anyway.”

The United States has made “some progress” with diversity in both clinical medicine and research – but diversity in medicine is still not at the point where it needs to be, said Dr. Dan Barouch, a professor at Harvard Medical School and director of the Center for Virology and Vaccine Research at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, who has been an advocate for diversity and inclusion.

That point, essentially, would be where diversity in the physician workforce reflects the diversity in their patient population.

“It’s particularly important to have a diverse physician workforce to aptly serve the patients,” Barouch said. “We want to increase diversity in academia as well, but it’s particularly important for doctors, because having a diverse workforce is critical for the best patient encounters, and to build trust.”

Service to patients and patient trust are both among the cornerstones critical to the status of public health, according to researchers.

One example of broken trust between physicians and Black patients happened in the 1930s, when the US Public Health Service and the Tuskegee Institute launched an unethical study in which researchers let syphilis progress in Black men without treating them for the disease. The study ended in 1972.

Among Black men, “there were declines in health utilization, increases in medical mistrust and subsequent increases in mortality for about the 10- to 15-year period following the disclosure event,” when the true nature of the study was exposed in 1972, said Dr. Marcella Alsan, an infectious disease physician and professor of public policy at Harvard Kennedy School.

Yet research suggests that when Black physicians are treating Black patients, that trust can be rebuilt.

For instance, the impact is so significant that having Black physicians care for Black patients could shrink the difference in cardiovascular deaths among White versus Black patients by 19%, according to a paper written by Alsan while she was attending Stanford University, along with colleagues Dr. Owen Garrick and Grant Graziani. It was published in 2019 in the American Economic Review.

That research was conducted in the fall and winter of 2017 and 2018 in Oakland, California, where 637 Black men were randomly assigned to visit either a Black or a non-Black male doctor. The visits included discussions and evaluations of blood pressure, body mass index, cholesterol levels and diabetes, as well as flu vaccinations.

The researchers found that, when the patients and doctors had the opportunity to meet in person, the patients assigned to a Black doctor were more likely to demand preventive health care services, especially services that were invasive, such as flu shots or diabetes screenings that involve drawing blood.

“We saw a dramatic increase in their likelihood of getting preventive care when they engage with Black physicians,” said Garrick, who now serves as chief medical officer of CVS Health’s clinical trial services, working to raise awareness of how more diverse groups of patients are needed to participate in clinical research.

Initially, “it didn’t look like there was a strong preference for Black doctors versus non-Black doctors. It was only when people actually had a chance to communicate with their physicians, talk about ‘Why should I be getting these preventative care services?’ ” Alsan said.

The researchers analyzed their findings to estimate that if Black men were more likely to undergo preventive health measures when they see a Black doctor, having more Black doctors could significantly improve the health and life expectancy of Black Americans.

The nation’s shortage of Black physicians is concerning, experts warn, as it contributes to some of the disproportionate effects that infectious diseases, chronic diseases and other medical ailments have on communities of color. This in itself poses public health risks.

For example, in the United States, Black newborns die at three times the rate of White newborns, but a study published in 2020 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that Black infants are more likely to survive if they are being treated by a Black physician.

Black men and Black women are also about six to 14.5 times as likely to die of HIV than White men and White women, partly due to having less access to effective antiretroviral therapies. But Black people with HIV got such therapies significantly later when they saw White providers, compared with Black patients who saw Black providers and White patients who saw White providers in a study published in 2004 in the Journal of General Internal Medicine.

And when Black patients receive care from Black doctors, those visits tend to be longer and have higher ratings of patients feeling satisfied, according to a separate study of more than 200 adults seeing 31 physicians, published in 2003 in the journal Annals of Internal Medicine.

“There’s plenty of evidence, and other research has shown that the more the workforce in a health care setting really reflects the community it serves, the more open the patient population is to recommendations and instructions from their doctor,” said Dr. Mahshid Abir, an emergency physician and a senior physician policy researcher at the RAND Corp., a nonpartisan research institution.

But it can be rare to find health systems in which the diversity of the workforce reflects the diversity of the patients.

During her 15-year career as an emergency physician, Abir said, she has worked in many emergency departments across the United States – in the Northeast, South and Midwest – and in each place, the diversity of the health care workforce did not mirror the patient populations.

This lack of diversity in medicine is “not talked about enough,” Abir said.

“The research that’s been conducted has shown that it makes a difference in how well patients do, how healthy they are, how long they live,” she said. “Especially at this juncture in history in the United States, where social justice is in the forefront, this is one of the most actionable places where we can make a difference.”

Source link

#doctors #Black #experts #warn #shortage #harms #public #health #CNN

A childbirth myth is spreading on TikTok. Doctors say the truth is different | CNN

Post By Health abortion, Abortion rights, brand safety-nsf death, brand safety-nsf health issues, brand safety-nsf mature, brand safety-nsf other, brand safety-nsf sensitive, business, business and industry sectors, children, Companies, Death and dying, demographic groups, domestic alerts, domestic-business, domestic-health and science, economy and trade, families and children, family members and relatives, health and health care (by demographic group), health and medical, Health Care, health care policy and law, health insurance, iab-bereavement, iab-business and finance, iab-diseases and conditions, iab-family and relationships, iab-health insurance, iab-healthcare industry, iab-healthy living, iab-industries, iab-insurance, iab-law, iab-medical health, iab-parenting, iab-parenting babies and toddlers, iab-personal finance, iab-pregnancy, iab-reproductive health, iab-sexual health, iab-women's health, infants and toddlers, Insurance, international alerts, international-business, international-health and science, law and legal system, living wills, maternal and child health, medical fields and specialties, medical treatments and procedures, obstetrics and gynecology, population and demographics, pregnancy and childbirth, sexual and reproductive health, societal issues, society, tiktok, womens health

CNN
—

Ashley Martinez has four sons and is pregnant with the daughter she’s wanted for years.

Last month, she posted a video online imploring doctors to prioritize her life, not the life of her unborn baby, if complications arise when she is in labor and it comes down to that choice.

The San Antonio, Texas, resident is due in May and is one of a number of pregnant people who have recently posted “living will” videos on TikTok.

Martinez had an emergency C-section during her last pregnancy after her umbilical cord came out before her baby, a rare but dangerous condition known as an umbilical cord prolapse that can deprive a baby of vital blood flow and oxygen.

Martinez described her last delivery as terrifying. Eight months after the Supreme Court reversed Roe v. Wade, ending a constitutional right to abortion, she said she worries about what would happen if she faced similar challenges again.

Since the ruling in June, a number of US states have criminalized abortions, leading to some fears that doctors would prioritize the life of the unborn child during a medical emergency.

Martinez lost her mother to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma at a young age, and the thought of her children going through a similar tragedy terrifies her.

“Having to go into another delivery where I’m going to have a C-section, it’s scary for me,” said the 29-year-old. “My fourth pregnancy was my only C-section. I’ve always thought about not being here for my kids just because of what I went through growing up without my mom.”

More than a dozen US states have banned or severely restricted access to abortions following the Supreme Court’s decision eight months ago. The abortion bans have led to legal chaos as advocates take the fight to courtrooms.

Even so, several ob/gyns told CNN that a hard choice between saving a mother and baby’s lives at childbirth, like the one outlined in the TikTok videos, is highly unlikely.

This trend on TikTok has sparked a flurry of dueling videos among pregnant women and other people. Some have posted videos telling doctors in such situations to prioritize their unborn babies first, and criticizing those who expressed a different view.

Martinez concedes that her mother, who died at 25, would likely have chosen to save her child first if she could.

“My mother, she didn’t have a choice, you know?” Martinez said. “The message that I want to send is just basically nobody is wrong or right in this situation. In both situations, it is a hard decision to pick your children over your unborn baby.”

In Texas, where Martinez lives, abortions are banned at all stages of pregnancy – unless there’s a life-threatening medical emergency.

Dr. Franziska Haydanek, an ob/gyn in Rochester, New York, who shares medical advice on TikTok, said she’s noticed many “living will” videos in recent months.

In most of the videos, a woman appears alongside a written message saying something like, “If there are complications during childbirth, save me before the baby.” Some people, including Martinez, reference their children in their decision and even show them in the video.

One was posted by Tuscany Gunter, 22, a woman whose baby is due in April. Abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy is illegal in her home state of North Carolina, and Gunter told CNN she filmed her message in solidarity with others who said they would choose themselves first.

“I wanted to make it known where I stand and to stand up with other women who are getting bashed online for saying they would rather be saved first over their baby,” said Gunter, who lives in Fayetteville.

“As a mother to three young children, I cannot dump the emotional trauma of losing their mother on them as children and expect them to cope. While I would be crushed to lose a baby, I need to think of my other living children as well … And I know the baby that passed would be safe without ever having to experience any pain or sadness.”

Another woman, Leslie Tovar of Portland, Oregon, said that even though her state has no legal restrictions on abortion, she posted her video because she feared doctors would prioritize saving her unborn child to avoid legal ramifications in the post-Roe v. Wade era.

“I have two other kids at home who need mom. I can’t bear the thought of my two young boys ages 6 and 4 without their mom,” she said.

All three women said they’ve had these conversations with their partners, who agreed they should be saved first.

Of her husband, Tovar said, “His exact words were, ‘We could always have another baby later in life but there is never replacing the mother of my boys, I couldn’t do this without you.’”

It’s true that complications occasionally come up during a pregnancy that lead doctors to recommend delivery to save the mother’s life, medical experts said.

If this is done before a fetus is viable – under 24 weeks – the chances of the baby’s survival are low, said Dr. Elizabeth Langen, a maternal-fetal medicine physician at the University of Michigan Von Voigtlander Women’s Hospital.

Roe v. Wade’s reversal did make terminating such pregnancies more complicated, Langen and Haydanek say.

In cases involving a baby that’s not viable, it could mean that even when the baby is unlikely to survive and the mom’s health is at risk, the priority will be on saving the baby due to fear of legal ramifications, Langen said.

But both doctors say these scenarios don’t occur during the birth of a viable baby. In that instance, Roe v. Wade is “less involved,” Haydanek said.

“We do everything in our efforts to save both (mother and baby),” she said. “I can’t think of a time where the medical team has had to make a decision about who to save in a viable laboring patient. It’s just not a real scenario in modern medicine – just one we are seeing played out on TV.”

Hospitals have enough resources – obstetrics and neonatal intensive care unit teams, for example – to meet the needs of both the mother and the baby, Haydanek and Langen said.

“We’re usually doing our best to take care of both the mom and the baby. And there’s very rarely a circumstance where we will do something to harm the mom in order to have the benefit of the baby,” added Langen.

“If mom’s health is deteriorating, ultimately, she’s not going to be able to support baby’s wellbeing,” Langen said. “And so generally, what we encourage folks to do is really support mom’s health, because that’s in the best interest of both mother and baby.”

Abortion rights demonstrators hold signs outside the US Supreme Court in Washington after the court overturned Roe v. Wade in June 2022.

Both doctors said it’s important for patients to talk to their health care providers about their medical concerns and share their “living will” wishes with loved ones in case there are complications during labor that require partners to make medical decisions.

However, those decisions will not involve doctors asking your partner whose life should come first, they said.

“Before getting in a fight with your partner about who they choose to save, know that there isn’t a situation where we will ask them that,” said Haydanek, who has called the TikTok trend “horribly anxiety inducing.”

She said it’s come up so many times in recent months that she made her own TikTok video to reassure expectant parents.

“Please don’t feel like you have to make this choice,” she says in the video. “I know firsthand how much anxiety there can be in pregnancy … but it’s just not a situation that you’re gonna find yourself in.”

Source link

#childbirth #myth #spreading #TikTok #Doctors #truth #CNN

Bullying doesn’t look like it used to. Experts share how to fix it | CNN

Post By Health brand safety-nsf death, brand safety-nsf health issues, brand safety-nsf other, brand safety-nsf sensitive, brand safety-nsf violence, bullying, children, demographic groups, domestic alerts, domestic-health and science, families and children, family members and relatives, health and medical, iab-diseases and conditions, iab-family and relationships, iab-medical health, iab-mental health, iab-parenting, iab-parenting teens, international alerts, international-health and science, mental health, population and demographics, sex and gender, societal issues, society, Suicide, teenagers, violence in society

Editor’s Note: If you or someone you know is struggling with suicidal thoughts or mental health matters, please call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 988 (or 800-273-8255) to connect with a trained counselor or visit the NSPL site.

CNN
—

Every generation has tales of bullying, but perhaps today’s adults are not as familiar with what it means now for a kid to be bullied.

Physical bullying — like confrontations involving hitting or shoving — actually showed very little association with a risk for mental distress, according to a new study.

“For adults doing this research, you kind of assume that bullying consists of being stuffed in a locker and beaten up on the playground,” said lead study author John Rovers, professor and John R. Ellis Distinguished Chair in Pharmacy Practice at Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa. “We found out that that really has remarkably little effect.”

Researchers took data from the 2018 Iowa Youth Survey of sixth, eighth and 11th graders to see whether there was an association between bullying and mental health and suicidal ideation, according to the study published Wednesday in the journal PLOS ONE.

The results showed different forms of bullying did have an impact on feelings of sadness or hopelessness or thoughts of suicide — but that they did not impact students equally.

Identity bullying, which includes bullying based on sexual orientation or gender identity as well as sexual jokes, was correlated with significant feelings of distress or suicide attempts, the study said.

Cyberbullying and social bullying — leaving someone out or turning peers against them — followed identity bullying on degree of impact.

The study is limited in that the sample did not include a high level of racial and religious diversity, but it does show “a theme very consistent with recent surveys as well as what I’m seeing in my clinical practice,” said child and adolescent psychiatrist Dr. Neha Chaudhary, chief medical officer at BeMe Health who is in the faculty at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School. Chaudhary was not involved in the research.

The teachers and school administrators surveyed were worried most about physical bullying, however, according to the study.

“This is a good learning for schools and families as they think about anti-bullying initiatives and how to talk to young people about the effects of bullying,” Chaudhary said.

It makes sense that identity would be a particularly painful form of bullying.

“Identity is so incredibly important for kids and teens as they develop, and not being able to be themselves without fear of judgement or bullying from others is not only isolating, it can significantly alter their confidence, peace of mind, and ability to see a future for themselves that’s free of pain,” Chaudhary said in an email. “People just want to be themselves, and be loved for who they are.”

The survey data reviewed by the study team revealed a troubling statistic when it came to the state of adolescent mental health.

“About 70,000 students responded to this survey. Five percent of them had attempted suicide in the last year,” Rovers said. “That’s 3,500 kids.”

And this week’s results of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s biannual Youth Risk Behavior Survey showed mental distress among teens is getting worse.

In rates that “increased dramatically” over the past decade, most high school girls (57%) felt persistently sad or hopeless in 2021, double the rate for teen boys (29%), according to the CDC. Nearly 1 in 3 teen girls seriously considered attempting suicide.

Most LGBTQ students (52%) have also recently experienced poor mental health, and more than 1 in 5 attempted suicide in the past year, the CDC survey showed.

Solutions that address adolescent mental health may come from families and schools working together — not in focusing on what the kids themselves can change, Rovers said.

“Blaming this on some 9-year-old kid is not right,” he added.

When it comes to bullying, there are three types of players: the bully, the victim and the child that is both being bullied and bullying others, Rovers said.

All three need support, said Dr. Hina Talib, adolescent medicine specialist at the Atria Institute in New York and associate professor of clinical pediatrics at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York City.

“Bullying is such a pattern of behavior that causes harm to the victim of the bully, the children that might just be witnessing the bullying happening and even to the bully themselves,” said Talib, who was not involved in the research.

Rarely is a child exerting power over others just for its own sake, Talib added.

While caregivers may have the first reaction to punish their child when they hear they are bullying others, it is important to probe a little deeper into what is going on with them, she said.

“There are likely reasons there that are causing them to act out in this way,” Talib explained. “Underneath that, I think it’s important to see that their child is hurting also.”

She recommended coming to them with the mindset of “this is not acceptable behavior, and this is why, and I’m here to help you through it,” Talib said.

“The bully can and should be helped as well,” she added. “There’s almost always more to it.”

There are many ideas about what motivates bullying behavior, but one could be that kids are emulating how they see the adults in their lives resolve conflict, Rovers said. These adolescents might learn that violence is a way to protect themselves.

For children that are being bullied, they may not always be direct in telling the adults in their lives what is wrong, Talib said.

Instead of hearing about cruel words or isolating actions, families might first see stress, anxiety, depression, stomachaches and avoiding school, she said.

She recommended being attentive to your child and their individual behaviors and stepping in when you see a change. That could mean asking directly, having their pediatrician speak to them about it privately or even coming to them indirectly.

A helpful way in could be to ask about their friends’ experiences.

Say something like: “There was an interesting research report about bullying, and it made me think about bullying. It made me interested in if your friends were bullied or if you ever witnessed a bullying situation,” Talib said.

If you do find that your child is the victim of bullying, Talib said it’s a good idea to get in contact with the school and the other family to develop an action plan together.

Source link

#Bullying #doesnt #Experts #share #fix #CNN

Zittrex Store

Cart

Cart

Tag: societal issues

Suicides and suicide attempts by poisoning rose sharply among children and teens during the pandemic | CNN

A quarter of Americans live with polluted air, with people of color and those in Western states disproportionately affected, report says | CNN

Texas abortion drug ruling could create ‘slippery slope’ for FDA approvals, drug research and patients, experts say | CNN

Clinics and doctors brace for more restrictions on women’s health care after court ruling on abortion drug | CNN

Concerned about the courts, some states and universities are stockpiling abortion drugs | CNN

How safe is the abortion pill compared with other common drugs | CNN

Only 5.7% of US doctors are Black, and experts warn the shortage harms public health | CNN

A childbirth myth is spreading on TikTok. Doctors say the truth is different | CNN

Bullying doesn’t look like it used to. Experts share how to fix it | CNN