Amazon Holiday Deals

Showing posts with label United States. Show all posts
Showing posts with label United States. Show all posts

Friday, January 16, 2015

Do Good, Think Good, Feel Good

English: Broadway show billboards at the corne...
English: Broadway show billboards at the corner of 7th Avenue and West 47th Street in Times Square in New York City (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
I find this very New Age, and this is still the question I will pose: for you to think positive, where is that positive thought coming from? For you to feel good, so you emit good emotions, where is that good emotion coming from?
As C.S. Lewis said it, no matter how much good intention we have, if the ship we are driving is wayward, we will still bump and crash on other ships as wayward as ours. Such is our nature - unless it is changed - from within.
Read on....
-----


by TOM BRADY



The paths of charity, prosperity, business acumen and spiritual well-being may lead us to the intersection of happiness.

There is strong evidence that those who are generous when giving actually end up better off, Arthur C. Brooks wrote in The Times. He discovered this while working on a book on charitable donations.

“Psychologists, I learned, have long found that donating and volunteering bring a host of benefits to those who give,” Mr. Brooks wrote. “Researchers from Harvard University and the University of British Columbia confirmed that, in terms of quantifying ‘happiness,’ spending money on oneself barely moves the needle, but spending on others causes a significant increase.”

He and his wife put the research into practice, increasing financial support for their preferred causes, volunteering more and adopting a child. Psychologists say actions like these imbue us with “self-efficacy,” the belief that we can affect the outcome of any situation.

“When people give their time or money to a cause they believe in, they become problem solvers,” Mr. Brooks wrote. “Problem solvers are happier than by-standers and victims of circumstance.”

The company Alex and Ani does not claim that its products will make you a better person, but it does say its jewelry “inspires you to put good energy out into the world,” The Times reported.” And if you put good energy, good things will come back to you.”

Last year the company sold $ 230 million worth of Buddha Charm Bangles (limitless power, limitless good karma and wisdom), St. Anthony Charm Bangles (divine direction and soulful enlightenment) and other amulets.

The New Age principle of good energy, often called the law of attraction, is a central tenet of popular gurus who encourage people to do good.

John L. Modern, the author of “Secularism in Antebellum America,” told the Times that Alex and Ani’s approach is in line with a thriving, and particularly American, tradition in which the language of the occult, spiritualism and animal magnetism grew alongside the capitalist market revolution that began around 1830.

“You have crystal stuff in the New Age in the 1970s, the red-string kabbalah stuff,” Dr.Modern said, with plain red strings sold as Jewish bracelets, to ward off “the evil eye.” And in the 1950s, the famous psychoanalyst Wilhelm Reich built the “orgone accumulator,” an aluminum and glass box that he said could cure disabilities, even cancer, of those who got inside.

Many cultural institutions are learning to start thinking like capitalists since they can no longer depend on donations or government support. They need to develop ways to generate revenue beyond the café and bookstore.

“How do you break this cycle of charitable poverty?” Elizabeth Merritt, founding director of the Center for the future of Museums, asked in The Times. “How do you make a program self-sustainable, where you’re drawing a connection between people who value it and those willing to pay for it?”

You may be inspired to hold a sheepshearing festival, as the historic Gore Place, a governor’s house built in 1806 in Massachusetts, decided to do recently. Or host dinners featuring prominent chefs, as the Bronx Museum of Arts is now doing, while charging $250 to $300 a person.

But sometimes these efforts at “self-efficacy” encounter obstacles, as Susan Robertson, the executive director of Gore Place, pointed out when talking about its plan to raise vegetables and open a farm stand.

“Like any new venture, there are all of the unknowns,” Ms. Robertson told the Times. “You don’t know if the geese are going to come in and strip your pea fields in half an hour or you don’t know that you’re going to have an influx of rabbits and they’re going to eat up all your squash.”


Taken from TODAY Saturday Edition, April 5, 2014

Tuesday, February 12, 2013

Vitamins do not reduce men's risk of heart trouble: study

Fellowmen, take note!
-----

Posted: 06 November 2012


Bottles of Vitamins displayed at a US store. (AFP/Getty Images/Justin Sullivan)
WASHINGTON: Contrary to popular belief, daily use of vitamin supplements does not reduce risk of cardiovascular disease among men middle aged and older, a study released Monday says.

It was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association and followed 14,641 men -- doctors working in the US -- whose average age was 64 at the start of the study in 1998 and monitored them for about 11 years.

Half of them, chosen at random, took multivitamins and the other half a placebo, said the authors. They called their study the most extensive ever done on the usefulness of multivitamins for prevention of chronic disease.

In the period under study, 2,757, or 18.8%, died of a cardiovascular event such as a heart attack or stroke. These included 1,345 taking vitamins and 1,412 taking the placebo.

The researchers from Harvard University concluded that taking multivitamins made no difference when it came to warding off cardiovascular illness or stroke.

The lower number of deaths among vitamin-takers was not statistically significant, they said.

In an accompanying editorial, Eva Lonn of McMaster University and Hamilton General Hospital in Ontario, Canada, wrote that "robust data from multiple trials clearly confirm that (cardiovascular disease) cannot be prevented or treated with vitamins."

"Nonetheless, many people with heart disease risk factors or previous CVD events lead sedentary lifestyles, eat processed or fast foods, continue to smoke, and stop taking lifesaving prescribed medications, but purchase and regularly use vitamins and other dietary supplements, in the hope that this approach will prevent a future myocardial infarction or stroke," she wrote.

"This distraction from effective CVD prevention is the main hazard of using vitamins and other unproven supplements," Lonn added.

- AFP/al


-----
Taken from ChannelNewsAsia.com; source article is below:
Vitamins do not reduce men's risk of heart trouble: study


Enhanced by Zemanta

Monday, December 19, 2011

One in five Americans has hearing loss

Perhaps this is genes-based... would yours be surviving the hard times?
Fathers, take note: your best half is more prone to this phenomenon.
-----

Posted: 15 November 2011


Hearing aid (AFP/William West)
WASHINGTON: About one in five Americans age 12 and over suffers from hearing loss in at least one ear that is severe enough to interfere with daily communication, US researchers said Monday.

The estimate is the first to cover the entire United States instead of select populations according to location or age, said the study authors from Johns Hopkins University.

"I couldn't find a simple number of how common hearing loss is in the US," said lead author Frank Lin, an assistant professor in the department of otolaryngology. "So we decided to develop our own."

The findings, published in the November 14 issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine, a publication of the Journal of the American Medical Association, are higher than previous estimates of 21 to 29 million people with hearing loss.

The researchers took data from the National Health and Nutritional Examination Surveys (NHANES), which has tracked Americans' health since 1971, and analyzed data from just over 7,000 hearing tests between 2001 and 2008.

Forty-eight million people, or 20.3 percent of people 12 and over in the United States, have hearing loss in at least one ear; while 30 million, or 12.7 percent of the population, has it in both ears, they found.

The researchers defined hearing loss as being unable to hear speech sounds of 25 decibels or less, which is the World Health Organization (WHO) definition for hearing loss.

Hearing loss becomes more frequent as people age, but the researchers found that it tended to happen less often in women than in men, and was also less frequent in blacks than whites.

Researchers are not sure why, but they suggested that the potential protective effects of the female hormone estrogen and the skin pigment melanin should be investigated as potential reasons.

According to the WHO, about 278 million people worldwide suffer from moderate to profound hearing impairment, or about four percent of the world population.

Hearing loss can be caused by a variety of factors, including infectious disease, loud noises, injury and simple aging. About half of all cases are preventable through prevention and early diagnosis, the WHO said.

-AFP/pn



Taken from ChannelNewsAsia.com; source article is below:
One in five Americans has hearing loss
Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday, November 24, 2011

Dud in bed but a dude at home for the Pill women

Posted: 12 October 2011

contraceptives
PARIS: Women who take the Pill tend to choose as partners men who are less attractive and worse in bed but a sounder bet for a long-term relationship, according to an unusual study published on Tuesday.

Probing the effect of contraceptive hormones on mating choice, researchers questioned 2,519 women in the United States, Czech Republic, Britain and Canada who had had at least one child.

The volunteers were asked to rate their relationship for general satisfaction and sexual pleasure and the attractiveness of their partner or, retrospectively, of their ex.

Oral contraception had been used by 1,005 women when they met their partner, while 1,514 had used no form of hormonal birth control at the first encounter.

"Our results show some positive and negative consequences of using the Pill when a woman meets her partner," said Craig Roberts of Stirling University, Scotland, who led the investigation.

"Such women may, on average, be less satisfied with the sexual aspects of their relationship but more so with non-sexual aspects. Overall, women who met their partner on the Pill had longer relationships -- by two years on average -- and were less likely to separate."

Roberts suspects the Pill skews the sub-conscious "chemistry" by which a woman makes a mating choice.

Previously, he found that using oral contraceptives altered women's preferences for men's body odour.

When they didn't take the Pill, women were subjected to the strong hormonal swings of the menstrual cycle.

During ovulation, they unwittingly preferred the smell of men who were genetically dissimilar.

The evolutionary explanation for this is that babies that are born from genetically dissimilar couples tend to be healthier and have a better chance of survival.

But when women took the Pill, they preferred the smell of genetically similar men, Roberts found in this earlier research.

This was because the normal hormonal swings of the menstrual cycle evened out under the effect of the contraception.

The hormone levels typically reflected the non-fertile phase of the menstrual cycle, when women "are more attracted to men who appear more caring and reliable -- good dads," said Roberts.

Although such men are a better choice for long-term partnerships, the risk of a relationship breakdown is still there.

"Women who used oral contraception when they met their partner tended to find him less attractive, engaged in compliant sex and rejected sexual advances more frequently as the relationship progressed, and were more likely to initiate separation if it occurred," the study notes bleakly.

The new research gives an important statistical push to the theory of sexual chemistry but also raises a dilemma.

Should a woman go for Mr. Hunk or Mr. Nice?

To women who are mistrustful of what their body is telling them, going off the Pill and using a condom could help provide the answer, suggests Roberts.

"Choosing a non-hormonal barrier method of contraception for a few months before getting married might be one way for a woman to check or reassure herself that she's still attracted to her partner," he says.

The volunteers for the study were recruited through personal contact, social networking sites and advertising on pregnancy and parenthood forum websites. Of the 2,519 women, 1,761 women were still in a relationship with the biological father of their first child.

-AFP/vl



Taken from ChannelNewsAsia.com; source article is below:
Dud in bed but a dude at home for the Pill women

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

Healthy men "don't need prostate screening"

Posted: 08 October 2011


Prostate cancer
WASHINGTON: Routine screening for prostate cancer does not help save the lives of healthy men and often triggers the need for more tests and treatments, a US government health panel said Friday.

The US Preventive Services Task Force's draft recommendations, which will be open to public comment on Tuesday, are likely to face a push back from advocates of the PSA blood test as well as from drug makers and doctors who benefit from the now-lucrative screening industry.

Based on the results of five clinical trials, the recommendation to avoid a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test -- which measures the level of the protein in the blood -- applies to healthy men of all ages without suspicious symptoms.

But it could have an especially dramatic impact on the care for men aged 50 and older, who are routinely administered the PSA test.

"The low specificity of the PSA test coupled with its inability to distinguish indolent from aggressive tumours means that a substantial number of men are being over diagnosed with prostate cancer," the task force said.

"If any benefit does exist, it is very small after 10 years," it added, citing two major trials in Europe and the United States on the value of PSA testing.

The task force also found no evidence that other forms of screening, such as an ultrasound or digital rectal exam or ultrasound, are effective. It did not examine whether testing was beneficial to men who have already been treated for the disease or who show suspicious symptoms.

One million men who had had the PSA test and would otherwise not have been treated got surgery, radiation therapy or a combination of both between 1986 and 2005, the task force said.

It pointed to evidence suggesting that up to five in 1,000 men will die within a month of prostate cancer surgery and between 10 and 70 in 1,000 men will suffer from serious complications.

"Radiotherapy and surgery result in adverse effects," the task force added, noting that 200 to 300 in 1,000 men treated with such therapies have urinary incontinence or impotence.

An estimated 217,730 men in the United States were diagnosed with prostate cancer and 32,050 died last year of the second most common form of cancer in men after skin cancer.

But the task force noted that most men with the cancer only have "microscopic, well-differentiated lesions that are unlikely to be of clinical importance."

- AFP/wk


Taken from ChannelNewsAsia.com; source article is below:


Enhanced by Zemanta

Sunday, September 4, 2011

Liver cancer linked to male sex hormones: HK study

Now, if this is true, is this hereditary?
-----

Posted: 21 July 2011

People crossing a road in Hong Kong
HONG KONG: Hong Kong researchers have found that men are more likely to develop liver cancer due to a type of gene which is linked to male sex hormones.

Researchers at the Chinese University of Hong Kong said a study conducted since 2008 found more than 70 percent of patients with liver cancer produced high levels of a gene called cell cycle-related kinase (CCRK).

The study said the gene, one out of more than 17,000 in the human body, is directly controlled and activated by the receptor protein of the male sex hormone, or androgen.

"This study has a potential clinical impact as it depicts the correlation between androgen receptor and liver cancer development," university vice chancellor Joseph Sung and research team leader Mok Hing-yiu said.

"It also provides an explanation on why men have a higher risk of liver cancer than women," they added in a joint statement posted on the university's website.

Researchers examined risk factors such as smoking, alcohol consumption and occupation to explain the gender disparity but none could fully explain the difference.

The study has used mouse models and found either lowering the level or blocking the androgen-receptor-CCRK pathway could significantly reduce the tumour growth rate.

Liver cancer is the third deadliest type of cancer in the world after lung and colon cancer and there is currently no effective treatment.

Men are three times more likely to develop liver cancer than women in Hong Kong, said the study, whereas in certain areas in China and Japan men are seven times more likely to develop it.

Around 40 percent of liver cancer is diagnosed at an advanced stage, with that proportion reaching 80 percent in Asia and sub-Saharan Africa.

In the United States more than 19,000 people are diagnosed annually with liver cancer, and some 17,000 die each year of the disease.

- AFP/al



Taken from ChannelNewsAsia.com; source article is below:
Liver cancer linked to male sex hormones: HK study


Enhanced by Zemanta

Sunday, May 15, 2011

Does Circumcision Have Health Benefits?

This is another article taken in its entirety. Read with discretion.
-----

Michelle Bryner, Life's Little Mysteries Contributor
29 April 2011

The debate over surgically removing an infant's penis foreskin has continued over the years, with proponents touting circumcision's health benefits, and opponents arguing against what they say is the barbaric nature of the procedure. An anticircumcision group in San Francisco is the latest to join the fray, pushing for a ban on the practice.

Circumcision proponents, however, argue against the proposal, citing the procedure's history as a religious ritual, as well as its sexual health benefits -- some research suggests that circumcision helps prevent the spread of HIV.

Plenty of research has been conducted on both sides of the debate, so which point of view does the science favor?

An ancient tradition

Circumcision started as a ritual act by the Egyptians as far back as 2500 B.C. and later by Jewish people. They did it to mark a boy's passage into manhood, some believe. Other proposed reasons include: as a marking to distinguish those of higher social status; as a male "menstruation," or sign of the onset of puberty; and as a way to discourage masturbation.

Since then, however, people of many faiths began following suit: Circumcision is now the most common surgery performed on males in the United States. In a survey by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) during the period 1999 to 2004, 79 percent of men reported that they were circumcised.

Circumcision is widely believed to prevent diseases, such as HIV, and there is some evidence that it reduces the risk of male-to-female HIV transfer. The proposed mechanism is that circumcision removes what are called Langerhans cells in the foreskin, which are more susceptible to HIV infection. Langerhans cells are equipped with special receptors that may allow HIV access into the body. 
Three studies published in 2009 in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews revealed that circumcised men were 54 percent less likely to get HIV than uncircumcised men. The trials included more than 11,000 men in South Africa, Uganda and Kenya between 2002 and 2006. 

The practice may also protect women from contracting the virus that causes AIDS. A review of past medical files of more than 300 Uganda couples, in which the man was HIV positive and the woman wasn't, showed circumcision reduced the likelihood that the female partner would become infected by 30 percent. That study was presented in 2006 at the Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections.

While HIV prevention is becoming a well-supported argument for circumcision in developing countries, it is not as strong of an argument for the United States.

"A number of important differences from sub-Saharan African settings where the three male circumcision trials were conducted must be considered in determining the possible role for male circumcision in HIV prevention in the United States," according to a report published by the CDC. The report goes on to say that, "studies to date have demonstrated efficacy only for penile-vaginal sex, the predominant mode of HIV transmission in Africa, whereas the predominant mode of sexual HIV transmission in the United States is by penile-anal sex among [men who have sex with men]."

As for medical complications, a review of 52 relevant studies from 21 countries found circumcision of infants by trained professionals rarely showed adverse health outcomes. For instance, the researchers found that among those under age 1, there was just a 1.5 percent average risk of minor adverse events such as excessive bleeding, swelling and infection. Severe complications were very rare, the study found, which was published in 2010 in the journal BMC Urology. However, risk of both minor and severe complications went up when inexperienced providers did the circumcisions.

Despite the benefits of circumcision and a lack of strong evidence showing negative side effects, the debate continues as opponents look for ways to outlaw the practice.

Put it to a vote?

A proposal to ban circumcisions in San Francisco has moved forward as proponents of the ban delivered more than 12,000 signatures to the Department of Elections this week. If the petition has enough valid signatures from registered voters, the ban will appear on the ballot in the November election. The ban would make circumcision of any male under the age of 18 a misdemeanor and carry with it a fine of up to $1,000 and jail time of up to one year.

According to Reuters reports, Lloyd Schofield, the leader of the proposal, says circumcision is "excruciatingly painful and permanently damaging surgery that's forced on men when they're at their weakest and most vulnerable."

The CDC disagrees that the procedure is painful. "Data has shown that with anesthesia, the majority of infants have no objective pain reaction," Scott Bryan, a spokesperson for the CDC, told Life's Little Mysteries.

The banning of circumcision may be an extreme measure, especially given the fact that the procedure is not mandatory. There are also still many unanswered questions on both sides of the argument. We'll have to wait until November to see how the debate actually plays out.

Follow Life's Little Mysteries on Twitter @LLMysteries.
This story was provided by Life's Little Mysteries, a sister site to LiveScience.

-----

Taken from livescience.com; source article is below:
Does Circumcision Have Health Benefits?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday, October 28, 2010

Men with prostate cancer at higher colon cancer risk: study

And this is one more thing that men should be watching out for.
-----

WASHINGTON - Men who have prostate cancer have a higher risk of developing colon cancer than men who do not have prostate cancer, US researchers said on Tuesday.

Researchers at the University at Buffalo (UB) in New York state found in a study of more than 2,000 men that patients diagnosed with prostate cancer had significantly more abnormal colon polyps, known as adenomas, and advanced adenomas than men without prostate cancer.

Most colon cancers begin as adenomas, the researchers said as they presented the findings of their study at the annual meeting of the American College of Gastroenterology in San Antonio, Texas.

"Our study is the first to show that men with prostate cancer are at increased risk of developing colon cancer," said report author Ognian Pomakov, an assistant professor at UB's department of medicine.

Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in American men, only behind lung cancer. Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer diagnosed in men and women in the United States.

The researchers reviewed the patient records, colonoscopy reports and pathology reports, as well as data on the prevalence of adenomas, advanced adenomas, cancerous adenomas and their location within the colon, in 2,011 men who had colonoscopies at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Buffalo.

When the researchers compared the colonoscopy results from 188 men diagnosed with prostate cancer with the rest of the patients, they found that the prostate cancer patients had significantly higher prevalence of abnormal polyps and advanced adenomas compared to the rest of the study sample.

Forty-eight per cent of prostate cancer patients had adenomas, compared to 30.8 per cent of the men without prostate cancer. More than 15 per cent of
prostate cancer patients had advanced adenomas compared to 10 per cent of the men without prostate cancer.

Pomakov stressed the importance of men who have been diagnosed with prostate cancer having routine screening for colon cancer and called for larger studies to be done to determine if screening for colorectal cancer should begin earlier for prostate cancer patients than the currently recommended age of 50.

- CNA/al


From ChannelNewsAsia.com; source article is below:
Men with prostate cancer at higher colon cancer risk: study
-----



Enhanced by Zemanta

Sunday, September 19, 2010

Mass screening for prostate of little value?

Mass screening for prostate brings few benefits

PARIS: Mass screening of men for prostate cancer has little impact on the toll from the disease and carries a risk of over-treatment, according to a review published by the British Medical Journal (BMJ) on Wednesday.

University of Florida professor Philipp Dahm looked at the outcome of six trials in which populations of men were tested either using a digital rectal examination or a blood test for an antigen linked to prostate cancer, or were untested.

Screening had negligible effect on the death toll from this disease or indeed on overall mortality.

"Our findings suggest that the expected impact in absolute terms would be modest at best," according to the paper.

Prostate cancer is the commonest non-skin cancer among men worldwide and, after lung tumours, is the second biggest cause of death from cancer among men in the United States. Most cases occur among men aged in their sixties.

Many countries have routine screening programmes for men in their middle age, but this policy is controversial.

One of the problems is that the so-called PSA antigen test, now 20 years old, cannot distinguish between low-risk tumours and aggressive lesions that are often fatal.

Antigen levels can also fluctuate according to the individual and may be skewed by prostate inflammation.

As a result, experts looking at systematic screening have squabbled over whether the benefit of detecting men in danger outweighs the potential harm of over-diagnosing and over-treating men who are healthy.

In a separate study published by the BMJ, researchers found that the level of antigen, as found among men at the age of 60, strongly identified those most at risk.

This would curb the need for repetitive PSA testing among those who were least vulnerable, say its authors.

Others who should be closely monitored are young men with a family history of prostate cancer or who have a relatively high level of PSA in their initial test.

- AFP/de


From ChannelNewsAsia.com; source article is below: Mass screening for prostate brings few benefits
-----



Enhanced by Zemanta

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

STD afflicts 1 in 4 US teenage girls

The Red ribbon is a symbol for solidarity with...Image via Wikipedia
This is now a sad fact, where promiscuity is taking its toll, and not on the adults, but on the teens. When science says, "nothing can happen without a cause," it has a basis for that premise.

The recent study on US teenage girls yielded just that: where there is 'free sex', there is free transmission of diseases; while it is said that 'the exercise of freedom makes us freer', it is the precedent act that makes us bolder to try again, and again, and again.

When the conscience is seared, and continuously seared, there comes a time when it already keeps mum and dies within us - until we realize the wrong that we have done.

A study reveals the seared conscience of the youth in the US, and other countries have the same social problem: where promiscuity rules, AIDS and other similar sexual diseases follow suit.

Here's is the report from AFP, lifted from ChannelNewsAsia.com:


1 in 4 teenaged US girls has sexually-transmitted disease: study


A healthcare worker prepares to draw blood to test for sexually transmitted diseases
CHICAGO - One in four teenaged girls in the United States has been infected with at least one sexually transmitted disease, according to a study released Tuesday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The first study to examine the combined national prevalence of common STDs among adolescent women in the United States estimates that at least 3.2 million teens aged 14 to 19 are currently infected.

Since the study only tested for the four most common sexually transmitted diseases, it is possible that the total prevalence among US teens is greater than the study's rate of 26 percent, the authors warned.

"Today's data demonstrate the significant health risk STDs pose to millions of young women in this country every year," said Kevin Fenton, director of the CDC's National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD and TB Prevention.

"Given that the health effects of STDs for women -- from infertility to cervical cancer -- are particularly severe, STD screening, vaccination and other prevention strategies for sexually active women are among our highest public health priorities."

Half of the 838 girls who participated in the study reported ever having sex and of those, 40 percent were infected with an STD.

African American girls were particularly at risk: 48 percent of all African American girls were infected with an STD compared to 20 percent of white teens tested.

The most common STD overall was human papillomavirus, or HPV, with an infection rate of 18.3 percent.

Chlamydia was discovered in 3.9 percent of the teens, trichomoniasis in 2.5 percent and herpes in 1.9 percent.

Infections rate rose to 50 percent among girls with three or more partners while 20 percent of those who had only had sex with one person had been infected.

"High STD infection rates among young women, particularly young African-American women, are clear signs that we must continue developing ways to reach those most at risk," said John Douglas, director of the CDC's Division of STD Prevention.

"STD screening and early treatment can prevent some of the most devastating effects of untreated STDs."

The CDC recommends HPV vaccination for all girls and women between the age of 11 and 26 and annual Chlamydia screening for sexually active women under the age of 25.

While most HPV infections will clear on their own, some will persist and can cause cervical cancer.

Two other studies released Tuesday found inadequate screening of high-risk teens.

The first study found that just 27 percent of young women seeking emergency contraception were screened for chlamydia or gonorrhea.

The second study revealed that only 38 percent of young women receiving contraceptive services associated with unprotected sex such as pregnancy tests were offered STD testing, counseling or treatment. - AFP/fa


Lifted from ChannelNewsAsia.com; source article is below:
1 in 4 teenaged US girls has sexually-transmitted disease: study
-----

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]