Baby teeth used for radiation studies

St. Louis -- U.S. researchers say thousands of baby teeth collected around St. Louis in the 1950s and '60s will be used to study radiation exposure.

Scientists said the teeth were collected as part of a study on the radioactive fallout from nuclear bomb tests, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported.

The newspaper said the findings played a roll a 1963 ban on atmospheric tests of nuclear weapons.

The New York-based Radiation and Public Health Project said researchers will identify 200 healthy tooth donors and 100 tooth donors who later developed cancer. The baby teeth will be tested for the radioactive chemical strontium 90, which is found in bomb fallout and nuclear reactors, the Post-Dispatch said.

Children Healthcare Varies Greatly by State

The Commonwealth Fund, a private foundation that seeks to promote better health care for all Americans, has reported that in the United States both quality and access to health care for children varies greatly by state.

At the top of the list are Iowa, Vermont, Maine, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire. The bottom states are Arizona, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Jersey, Nevada and Texas, which provide poor health care to children.One of the conclusions of the in-depth report is that the State Children's health Insurance program, better known as SCHIP, should be immediately reauthorized.

The Bush administration and Democrats in Congress are at odds about changes in the federal program, which eventually led to it being temporarily extended as it was until next year.Also, the importance of the "medical home" was underlined, which is a family's primary health care provider.The Commonwealth Fund also provided some numbers which show the near-criminal negligence in caring for children in the bottom states.

It appears that if they would be up to the standards set by the top performers, 4.6 million more children would have health insurance and 11.8 million more children would get their recommended yearly medical and dental check-ups. Also, 800,000 more children would be up-to-date on their vaccines.

Protecting from harmful rays

Are sunscreens safe? Which ones do you recommend that will protect my skin from the sun and not cause other issues?
— Bettina E., New York, N.Y.Getting a little sunshine is important for helping our bodies generate Vitamin D, an important supplement for strong bones, and for regulating our levels of serotonin and tryptamine, neurotransmitters that keep our moods and sleep/wake cycles in order.

Like anything, though, too much sun can cause health issues, from sunburns to skin cancer. For those of us who spend more time in the sun than doctors recommend — they say to stay indoors between 11 a.m. and 3 p.m. on sunny days to be safe — sunscreens can be lifesavers.

Getting too much sun is bad because of ultraviolet radiation, 90 percent of which comes in the form ofUltraviolet A (UVA) rays that are not absorbed by the ozone layer and penetrate deep into our skin.Ultraviolet B (UVB) rays make up the rest. These rays are partially absorbed by the ozone layer (which makes preserving the ozone layer crucial for our health), and because they don’t penetrate our skin as deeply, can cause those lobster-red sunburns.
Both types of UV rays are thought to cause skin cancer.

Yet, while most sunscreens block out at least some UVB radiation, many don’t screen UVA rays at all, making their use risky. According to the non-profit Environmental Working Group (EWG), by far most of the commercially available sunscreens do not provide adequate protection against the sun’s harmful UV radiation and may also contain chemicals with questionable safety records.

In all, 84 percent of the 831 sunscreens EWG tested did not pass health and environmental muster. Many contained potentially harmful chemicals like Benzophenone, homosalate and octyl methoxycinnamate (also called octinoxate), which are known to mimic naturally occurring bodily hormones and can thus throw the body’s systems out of whack.
Some also contained Padimate-0 and parsol 1789 (also known as avobenzone), which are suspected of causing DNA damage when exposed to sunlight. Furthermore, EWG found that more than half the sunscreens on the market make questionable product claims about longevity, water resistance and UV protection.

As a result, EWG has called on the Food and Drug Administration to establish standards for labeling so consumers have a better idea of what they may be buying. In the meantime, consumers looking to find out how their preferred brand stacks up can check out EWG’s online Skin Deep database, which compares thousands of health and beauty products against environmental and human health standards.

The good news is that many companies are now introducing safer sunscreens crafted from plant- and mineral-based ingredients and without chemical additives. Some of the best, according to Skin Deep, are Alba Botanica Sun’s Fragrance-Free Mineral Sunscreen, Avalon Baby’s Sunscreen SPF 18, Badger’s SPF 30 Sunscreen, Burt’s Bees’ Chemical-Free Sunscreen SPF 15, California Baby’s SPF 30, Juice Beauty’s Green Apple SPF 15 Moisturizer, and Kabana’s Green Screen SPF 15.

Technorati Profile