Babies With Pets Not Dogged by Colds: Study

HealthDay – 4 hrs ago MONDAY, July 9 (HealthDay News) -- Babies who live with dogs and cats during their first year of life may be less susceptible to respiratory infections, such as the common cold, according to new research.

The study of nearly 400 children found that dogs were especially protective, and the babies who lived with dogs during their first year were about one-third more likely to be healthy during their first year, compared to babies who didn't have a pet in the home. Babies with dogs in the home were 44 percent less likely to develop an ear infection, and 29 percent less likely to need antibiotics than their petless peers.

"Children who had dog contacts at home were healthier and had less frequent ear infections and needed fewer courses of antibiotics than children who had no dog contacts," said the study's lead author, Dr. Eija Bergroth, a pediatrician who worked at Kuopio University Hospital, in Finland, at the time of the study.

Bergroth also noted that "cat contacts did not seem to have as strong of an impact on infection frequency in multivariate analysis as the dog contacts."

Results of the study, released online July 9, will be published in the August print issue of Pediatrics.

Previous research on pets in the home has suggested that animals, and dogs in particular, may provide some protection against the development of asthma and allergies. But, other studies have found that household pets may increase the number of respiratory infections in children, according to background information in the study.

To get a better idea of the impact of pets on a child's health, Bergroth and her colleagues reviewed data from a study of 208 children whose mothers were recruited during their last trimester of pregnancy. The mothers were from rural areas in Austria, Finland, France, Germany and Switzerland.

The study also included data from 216 mothers living in rural or suburban areas in Finland, who gave birth at Kuopio University Hospital in Finland. After excluding children with incomplete information, researchers looked at data from 397 children overall.

During the first year of life, 72 percent of the children experienced a fever, 40 percent had an ear infection, 97 percent had a runny nose, 84 percent had a cough and 32 percent wheezed at some point. Almost half of the children were given antibiotics at least once during their first year of life, according to the study.

Sixty-two percent of the children had a dog, and 34 percent had a cat at some time during the study. But, at the end of the 11-month study, almost two-thirds of parents said they had no dog in the home, and three-quarters said they had no cat.

Overall, children who had some exposure to dogs or cats in the home were healthier than those who didn't. They had fewer weeks with cough, ear infections and runny noses, according to the study. They also needed fewer courses of antibiotics.

Exposure to cats also showed a protective effect, but it wasn't as strong as the effect from dog exposure.

Bergroth said it's not clear how dogs might offer protection against respiratory illnesses.

"One possible explanation might be that the dogs bring something inside the house -- dirt, soil -- that affects the immune maturation of the child, leading to more composed immunologic reactions to infectious agents later when the child comes in contact with viruses and bacteria," she said.

A U.S. expert said the explanation might not be so simple.

"Having pets may have some positive aspects. Pets may offer some protection against developing a propensity for infections or atopic diseases, but I think the development of the immune system is very complicated," said Dr. Jennifer Appleyard, chief of allergy and immunology at St. John Hospital and Medical Center, in Detroit.

"Parents shouldn't feel guilty about having or not having a pet when their child is young. If you want a pet, get a pet," she advised.

Bergroth said she wouldn't tell parents whether or not to get a pet, but that her study's findings suggest that there is "no reason to avoid animal contacts because of fear of infections, at least not respiratory infections." She added that if there's a family history of allergies, it's more difficult to make recommendations regarding pets, and that the decision must be made on a case-by-case basis.

More information

Learn more about potential health benefits from having a dog or cat from the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology.

View the Original article

Babies in dog-owning families may be healthier: study

"background-image:url('http://l1.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/pbQ0rs6EiLHQh0mUQEEYfg--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Y2g9MjYwO2NyPTE7Y3c9NDUwO2R4PTA7ZHk9MDtmaT11bGNyb3A7aD0xMTA7cT04NTt3PTE5MA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/Reuters/2012-07-10T002719Z_1_CBRE869019N00_RTROPTP_2_BRITAIN.JPG');" width

View the Original article

5 Million 'Test Tube' Babies Born to Date

'modId':'mediasocialchromefriends','isPreLoad':0,'pageSize':12,'numFriends':null,'notificationCount':0,'property':'News','learnMorePath':'/activity-learn-more/','friendbarNotification':'0','friendbarRollup':'0','moduleConf':YAHOO.Media.Facebook.ModuleConf,'friendIdList':

View the Original article

Early full-term babies may face later school woes

Even for infants born full-term, a little more time in the womb may matter.

The extra time results in more brain development, and a study suggests perhaps better scores on academic tests, too.

Full-term is generally between 37 weeks and 41 weeks; newborns born before 37 weeks are called premature and are known to face increased chances for health and developmental problems.

The children in the study were all full-term, and the vast majority did fine on third-grade math and reading tests. The differences were small, but the study found that more kids born at 37 or 38 weeks did poorly than did kids born even a week or two later.

The researchers and other experts said the results suggest that the definition of prematurity should be reconsidered.

The findings also raise questions about hastening childbirth by scheduling cesarean deliveries for convenience

View the Original article

Philippines to vaccinate 700,000 babies

"A Filipino nurse injects an infant with a vaccine in Manila. Philippine President Benigno Aquino said Monday the government would vaccinate 700,000 babies this year to protect them from a virus that causes diarrhoea, a killer disease ravaging poor communities" title

View the Original article

Dose of zinc boosts recovery chances for sick babies

"Newborn babies lay in their beds in Germany in January 2012. A simple, cheap dose of zinc helps the recovery of newborns suffering from bacterial infections such as pneumonia and meningitis, according to an Indian study reported on Thursday in The Lancet. (AFP Photo/Waltraud Grubitzsch)" title

View the Original article

Excess maternal weight before and during pregnancy can result in larger babies

ScienceDaily (May 22, 2012) — Excess weight in pregnant women, both before pregnancy and gained during pregnancy, is the main predictor of whether mothers will have larger than average babies, which can result in increased risk of cesarean section or trauma during delivery, states a study published in CMAJ (Canadian Medical Association Journal).

See Also:Health & MedicinePregnancy and ChildbirthDiet and Weight LossInfant's HealthDiabetesFitnessGynecologyReferenceBirth weightBlood sugarDiabetic dietStillbirth

Women with diabetes in pregnancy or gestational diabetes are at increased risk of having a large-for-gestational-age baby. Called macrosomia, it is defined as an infant whose weight is above the 90th percentile of Canadian fetal growth curves, or more than 4 kg. Current clinical practice focuses on managing glucose levels in women with these conditions to reduce the risk of having larger babies. Recent studies have shown a link between maternal glucose levels in women without gestational diabetes and the risk of having a larger baby.

Proposed new criteria suggest lowering the glucose levels for diagnosing gestational diabetes to help identify women who might be at risk of having a large-for-gestational-age baby.

To determine the effects of a variety of maternal factors such as obesity, glucose levels and lipid levels on infant birth weight, researchers from Mount Sinai Hospital, The Hospital for Sick Children (SickKids), University of Toronto, and St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, conducted a study with 472 women -- 368 with normal glucose tolerance and 104 with impaired glucose tolerance.

They found that excess weight before pregnancy and the amount of weight gain during pregnancy were the strongest metabolic predictors of whether a woman would have a large-for-gestational-age baby. Elevated glucose levels had a relatively modest impact as did lipid levels.

"Gestational impaired glucose tolerance was not a significant independent predictor of having a large-for-gestational-age infant," writes Dr. Ravi Retnakaran, Mount Sinai Hospital, with coauthors. "Similarly, none of the lipid measures was independently associated with birth weight or large-for-gestational-age infant. These data suggest that maternal weight and its associated circulating factors have a greater impact on infant birth weight than do mild glucose intolerance and lipid levels in women without gestational diabetes."

"In the context of the current obesity epidemic, these data support the importance of targeting healthy body weight in young women as a strategy for reducing the risk of excessive fetal growth and infant macrosomia," conclude the authors. "Furthermore, these findings suggest that, in the care of overweight or obese women in pregnancy, closer monitoring of weight gain during pregnancy may be warranted."

In a related commentary, Dr. Edmond Ryan, University of Alberta, writes, "Recently proposed criteria

View the Original article

Fertility treatment babies prone to 'serious defects'

"http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/HdpswNJOXUlKe3SlaRgUug--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9ZmlsbDtoPTcwO3E9ODU7dz03MA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/afp.com/photo_1336216598253-1-0.jpg" width

View the Original article

Why underweight babies become obese: Study says disrupted hypothalamus is to blame

ScienceDaily (May 2, 2012) — It seems improbable that a baby born underweight would be prone to obesity, but it is well documented that these children tend to put on weight in youth if they're allowed free access to calories. Now, researchers believe they understand why this happens.

See Also:Health & MedicineObesityDiet and Weight LossInfant's HealthFitnessDiseases and ConditionsPregnancy and ChildbirthReferenceAppetiteBirth weightInfantNutrition and pregnancy

A new animal model study at UCLA has found that in low-birth-weight babies whose growth was restricted in the womb, the level of appetite-producing neuropeptides in the brain's hypothalamus -- the central control of the appetite -- is higher, resulting in a natural tendency among these children to consume more calories.

"Other studies have shown that neuronal processes that signal the brain to eat were wired differently in the hypothalamus if a hormonal gene, such as leptin, was missing," said the study's lead author, Dr. Sherin Devaskar, professor of pediatrics and executive chair of the department of pediatrics at Mattel Children's Hospital UCLA. "What we found is that appetite-producing genes in the hypothalamus are completely programmed toward eating more to make up for the relative decrease in nutrition while in the womb. So the natural tendency for a child born with low birth weight is to eat more and try to catch up in growth. But if this is not curbed, it can result in childhood obesity."

The findings appear in the June issue of the Journal of Neuroscience Research and are currently available online.

The study was undertaken in rodent models that mimicked small human babies. This was accomplished by reducing rodent mothers' intake of calories, which in turn led to the birth of small, low-birth-weight and growth-restricted babies. The rodent babies were then examined at an early age to see how much milk they consumed and to monitor their energy expenditure. In addition, the researchers examined the effect that being growth-restricted in the womb had on hypothalamic neuropeptides that control appetite when the babies were weaned.

The researchers observed that those neuropeptides that bring increased appetite with decreased energy expenditure were increased in the hypothalamus, while the neuropeptides that reduce appetite and increase energy expenditure were decreased. Therefore, the homeostatic balance of appetite-controlling neuropeptides was disrupted. The hypothalamus was poised to consume as many calories as were available, with no sense of satisfaction.

These findings expand on recent research published by Devaskar and colleagues in the June issue of the journal Diabetes, which found that if small babies are placed on a diet of moderately regulated calories during infancy, their propensity to become obese decreases. Because this was an early animal study, the UCLA researchers do not recommend that mothers of low-birth-weight infants start restricting their children's nutrition and suggest they consult with a pediatrician regarding any feeding questions.

About 10 percent of babies in the United States are born "small" -- defined as less than the 10th percentile by weight for a given gestation period. Some organizations define low birth weight as less than 2,500 grams -- or 5 pounds, 5 ounces -- at term.

Low birth weight can be caused by malnutrition due to a mother's homelessness or hunger or her desire not to gain too much weight during pregnancy. Additional causes include illness or infection, a reduction in placental blood, smoking, or use of alcohol or drugs during pregnancy.

Growth restriction before birth may cause lasting changes in genes in certain insulin-sensitive organs like the pancreas, liver and skeletal muscle. Before birth, these changes may help the malnourished fetus use all available nutrients. After birth, however, these changes may contribute to health problems such as obesity and diabetes.

Devaskar said the next phase of research will look at an intervention to reverse the hypothalamic neuropeptide changes that cause the central control of appetite to be set too high.

The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health.

In addition to Devaskar, the study was conducted by a team of UCLA researchers that included Bo-Chul Shin, Yun Dai, Manikkavasagar Thamotharan and L. Caroline Gibson.

Share this story on Facebook, Twitter, and Google:

Other social bookmarking and sharing tools:

View the Original article

15 million of world's babies are born prematurely

"http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/raKdQGLY6CuVr1X2kchMKg--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9ZmlsbDtoPTcwO3B4b2ZmPTUwO3B5b2ZmPTA7cT04NTt3PTcw/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/ap_webfeeds/45babf3062a1800c0e0f6a70670069ae.jpg" width

View the Original article

One in 10 babies are born preterm each year: study

"Fifteen million babies, or one in 10 around the world are born premature every year, and 1.1 million of those infants die, according to a UN-sponsored report released Wednesday. (AFP Photo/Didier Pallages)" title

View the Original article

More Babies Today Have Irregular Head Shape: Expert

HealthDay – 16 hrs ago FRIDAY, April 27 (HealthDay News) -- The incidence of babies with irregular head shapes, such as a flattened section in the back of the skull, have increased in the United States since the Back to Sleep campaign was introduced in 1994 to prevent sudden infant death syndrome, an expert says.

"There's no doubt that as we as a country began putting babies to sleep on their backs, the incidence of

View the Original article

Triplets Owe Lives to Super Surrogate Who Birthed 15 Babies

"PHOTO: Brooke, Megan and Nicholas -- were delivered by gestational carrier Meredith Olafson in 1999. Megan is in remission undifferentiated embryonal sarcoma." title

View the Original article

New pregnancy risk for babies and moms: Overweight moms with moderately high blood sugar raise health risk

ScienceDaily (Apr. 11, 2012) — Pregnant women who are overweight with moderately elevated blood sugar never set off any alarms for their physicians. The big concern was for women who were obese or who had gestational diabetes because those conditions are known to cause a host of health risks to the mom and baby.

See Also:Health & MedicinePregnancy and ChildbirthObesityDiet and Weight LossDiabetesTeen HealthMenopauseReferenceBirth weightBlood sugarNutrition and pregnancyHyperglycemia

But a new study shows these women who are just above average for weight and blood sugar are at a higher risk of bad pregnancy outcomes than previously known. In fact, this group is at higher risk than pregnant women who are obese with normal blood sugar or pregnant women who have gestational diabetes and a normal weight.

"These are women who have not been on our radar because they don't have gestational diabetes and aren't obese, but our study shows if you are one step away from each of those, you carry some significant risks," said principle investigator Boyd Metzger, M.D., a professor of medicine-endocrinology at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine and a physician at Northwestern Memorial Hospital. "We need to address the combination of overweight and blood sugar of these women as urgently as we do for women who are obese or have gestational diabetes."

This group of women comprised about 6 percent of the total number of women in the study. Obese women made up 16 percent of the group and those with gestational diabetes accounted for 13.7 percent.

The study also found women who are both obese and have gestational diabetes are at a much higher risk of having an adverse pregnancy than women having only one of those conditions.

The paper, published in the April issue of Diabetes Care, is from the Hyperglycemia and Adverse Pregnancy Outcome (HAPO) Study and includes 23,316 women from nine countries.

One of the adverse outcomes for these mothers is having large babies, the result of fat accumulation. Large babies increase the risk of injury to the baby during vaginal delivery, increasing the likelihood of a Caesarean section.

The study found when the mothers are obese and have gestational diabetes, the babies weigh 340 grams more than babies of mothers with normal weight and blood sugar. When the mothers are overweight (but not obese) with above-average blood sugar levels, the babies weigh 214 grams more. Mothers of normal weight but with gestational diabetes have babies who weigh 164 grams more. And obese mothers with normal glucose levels have babies with an increased weight of 174 grams.

A pregnant woman's higher blood sugar level and weight also can lead to higher insulin and lower blood sugar levels in a newborn. In turn, these effects may eventually trigger obesity and diabetes, perhaps as early as childhood.

"The big message from this is when you look at the impact of nutrition, metabolism and weight on pregnancy outcomes, every woman - on her first prenatal visit -- should get a prescription for a session with a dietician and an appropriate healthy eating plan for her pregnancy," said Metzger, also the Tom D. Spies Professor of Metabolism and Nutrition at Northwestern's Feinberg School. "This doesn't happen, but it should, and insurance companies should reimburse it."

The research is supported by the National Institutes of Health.

Share this story on Facebook, Twitter, and Google:

Other social bookmarking and sharing tools:

View the Original article

CDC: Nearly 1 in 4 babies born to unwed cohabitors

Health officials say nearly 1 in 4 babies are born to unmarried couples who are living together, a significant jump from a decade ago.

The government previously said more than 40 percent of births are to unwed mothers. But a report released Thursday offers new detail showing most unwed births occur in cohabiting couples.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study was based on face-to-face interviews with more than 22,000 men and women during 2006 through 2010.

About 23 percent of the reported births were to unmarried heterosexual couples who were living together when the child was born. That was up from 14 percent when a similar study was done in 2002. The CDC did not speculate on reasons for the increase.

___

Online:

CDC report: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs

View the Original article

Seeing double: 1 in 30 babies born in US is a twin

ScienceDaily (Apr. 2, 2012) — Women having children at older ages and the growing availability of fertility treatments has led to a marked increase in the birth of twins: In 2009, one in every 30 babies born in the United States was a twin compared with one in every 53 in 1980.

See Also:Health & MedicineFertilityPregnancy and ChildbirthInfant's HealthGynecologyDiseases and ConditionsWomen's HealthLiving WellReferenceMultiple birthTwinFertilityBreech birth

The findings, presented by Michigan State University's Barbara Luke this week at the 14th Congress of the International Society of Twin Studies in Florence, Italy, have important health implications, including greater morbidity and mortality risks and higher health care costs.

"Prior to 1980, the incidence of U.S. twin births was stable at about 2 percent of all births, but it has risen dramatically in the past three decades," said Luke, noting twin births increased for women of all ages, with the largest increases among women aged 30 and older. "Older maternal age accounts for about one-third of the rise, and two-thirds is due to the increased use of fertility treatments."

Those fertility-enhancing therapies include both assisted reproductive technologies and ovulation stimulation medications. About 12 percent of U.S. women have had fertility therapies.

"With multiple births though there are greater health risks," said Luke a researcher in the College of Human Medicine's Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. "Continued research is necessary to improve outcomes."

Luke, who first reported the numbers in a report with Joyce Martin of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, noted births for triplets and higher numbers also grew: one in every 651 babies in 2009 compared with one in 2,702 in 1980.

In other research presented at the conference, Luke reported early embryo loss is associated with the significantly increased likelihood of lowered birth weight for the surviving fetuses.

Previous findings have shown mothers using fertility treatments experience more adverse health outcomes than spontaneous-conception pregnancies. Luke and her team hypothesized the residual effects of fetal loss may impact the subsequent growth and birth weight of the surviving fetuses.

Share this story on Facebook, Twitter, and Google:

Other social bookmarking and sharing tools:

View the Original article

Doctor saves babies caught in Romania corruption

"background-image:url('http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/7zLzKdQiC05qVRkLzoxOIg--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Y2g9MTc0Mjtjcj0xO2N3PTI1MDA7ZHg9MDtkeT0wO2ZpPXVsY3JvcDtoPTEzMztxPTg1O3c9MTkw/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/ap_webfeeds/ac81f63110c167090b0f6a70670031f5.jpg');" width

View the Original article