Keep abreast of what your patients are currently seeing in the media with our round-up of popular news stories, available from WHF as abstracts with links to the full-text articles.

From the week of June 2, 2008:

Quitting Smoking is Contagious, Says Study

A recent article published in The New England Journal of Medicine posits that quitting smoking is contagious within social circles. Using 32 years worth of data obtained during the Framingham Heart Study, researchers searched for patterns in the smoking habits of the more than 12,000 study participants. The data showed that people are more likely to quit smoking when people within their social network give up the habit. According to the study, when a husband or wife quit smoking, the chance that their spouse would smoke fell by 67%, and when a friend quit, the chances of smoking among their close friends fell by 36%. The influence of a sibling quitting smoking made another sibling 25% less likely to smoke, and in small companies, a worker would reduce his or her colleagues’ chance of smoking by 34%. The closeness of the relationship, rather than geographical proximity, influenced whether people quit smoking. These findings show the influence of peers’ actions, as well as offer a group dynamic dimension to the act of quitting smoking. In the future, these findings may be useful in designing campaigns and programs to encourage and aid smokers to kick the habit.

Read the full story on timesonline.co.uk

Drug Labeling with Pregnancy in Mind

For women who regularly take prescription drugs, figuring out which medications are safe to take during pregnancy and while breastfeeding can be difficult. To date, drugs are classified by a letter (A, B, C, D, or X) which indicate their degree of safety. The current classification system can be confusing to consumers, and is inflexible. The US FDA has been working toward new drug-labeling guidelines that will clearly explain a drug’s potential risks and benefits to a pregnant or nursing woman and her child, and recently unveiled plans for the new system. Under this system, drug labels would be required to divulge a fetal risk summary; clinical considerations, which would include effects on a woman who takes the drug before she knows she is pregnant, proper dosing, and risks of non-treatment to mother and baby; and data on the use of the drug during pregnancy. The FDA is expected to approve the new guidelines within a year, after which drug makers will have to update their labels. Women with conditions such as diabetes or asthma that require regular medications should not discontinue treatment once they become pregnant without discussing it with their doctor.

Read the full story on washingtonpost.com

After Caesareans, Some See Higher Insurance Cost

After a woman gives birth by Caesarean section once, the odds increase that any future children she has will also be delivered by Caesarean. Due to a small risk of uterine rupture, a potentially fatal complication of vaginal delivery, many doctors and hospitals are forcing women who have delivered by Caesarean in the past to repeat the surgery for subsequent births. Because Caesareans are a more expensive procedure than vaginal birth, insurance companies are starting to take notice of the growing number of Caesareans (31.1% of all births in the US) performed each year. Insurance companies that provide health insurance policies to individuals are able to choose what people and what conditions they will cover, and base insurance prices on individuals’ medical history. With more people in the US taking freelance positions or jobs without benefits, the number of Americans seeking individual insurance policies has risen to approximately 18 million. Although practices vary by state and by company, some insurance companies now consider a past Caesarean as a pre-existing condition. Based on a woman’s birthing history, insurance companies are denying coverage to some individuals, or charging higher premiums. Women who have been denied coverage or forced to pay higher rates are outraged at what they consider discrimination by insurance companies.

Read the full story on nytimes.com

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome No Longer Seen as 'Yuppie Flu'

Since chronic fatigue syndrome was first identified in the US as a specific condition in the 1980s, skeptics have doubted the legitimacy of the disease. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) even diverted funds allocated by Congress for research on chronic fatigue syndrome to other programs. However, doctors and patients now generally agree that it is a real syndrome, with quantifiable symptoms. These symptoms include unexplained overwhelming fatigue, impaired memory and concentration, sore throat, tender lymph nodes, muscle pain, joint pain, headaches, disturbed sleeping patterns, and feelings of malaise after exertion. More women suffer from chronic fatigue syndrome than men. Advocates of the syndrome say the word “fatigue” is misleading, and does not accurately describe the condition. According to doctors who treat patients with chronic fatigue syndrome, their patients are just as impaired by their condition as patients with breast cancer, AIDS, or COPD. After the CDC’s diversion of funds was exposed in 1999, they put time and money into studying the disease, ad released studies that link chronic fatigue syndrome to genetic mutations and abnormalities in gene expression involved in key physiological processes. The CDC also sponsored a multi-million dollar campaign to raise awareness about the syndrome. With greater recognition of the legitimacy of chronic fatigue syndrome, coupled with the CDC’s focus on the condition, patients and doctors hope better treatment plans will be devised to help sufferers deal with their symptoms.

Read the full story on nytimes.com