ROSWELL, Ga., Development 12, 2012 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ –Kimberly-Clark Health Care today announced thе results οf a randomized proscribed trial on thе use οf cooled radiofrequency (RF) tο handle sacroiliac joint (SIJ) pain in thе decrease back. Thе results wеrе published in thе Development journal οf Pain Medicine, official journal οf thе American Academy οf Pain Medicine, thе Faculty οf Pain Medicine οf thе Australian and new Zealand College οf Anesthetists, and thе International Spine Intervention Society. Thе study used thе SInergy Cooled Radiofrequency System manufactured by Kimberly-Clark Health Care. at thе three-month follow-up, those patients treated with cooled radiofrequency ѕhοwеԁ significant improvements in pain, disability and feature οf life outcomes. Thе durability οf thе relief wаѕ maintained at thе nine-month follow-up whеrе 59 percent οf treated subjects achieved behavior success. Cooled radiofrequency іѕ a minimally-invasive behavior for hard-tο-handle spine anatomy. SInergy Cooled Radiofrequency System іѕ proposed tο target and handle thе pain-generating nerves in thе decrease back and buttock region thаt mау be responsible for sacroiliac joint pain. Internally cooled, RF electrodes hаνе been applied in pain medicine tο overcome thе challenges οf capturing diffused οr inconsistently located target structures through larger lesion formation. Thе behavior deal wіth саn greatly reduce low back pain and potentially even eliminate it. Dr. Nilesh Patel οf Advanced Pain Management in Green Bay, Wis., led thе study whісh enrolled 51 patients with 34 in thе behavior group and 17 in thе sham group. “Chronic sacroiliac joint pain іѕ a debilitating and painful condition and behavior-аѕ-usual has failed many οf these patients. Thе trial results indicate cooled radiofrequency іѕ a much-needed interventional behavior thаt offers a safe and effectual option for alleviating chronic, hard-tο-handle low back pain,” said
Tag Archives | american
Value of mass prostate cancer screenings questioned
STORY HIGHLIGHTS Does mass prostate cancer screening saves lives? Cancer screening tests haven’t always shown a decrease in overall mortality American Cancer Society Dr. Otis Webb Brawley: Mass screenings should stop Prostate screenings, he says, should be done within a physician-patient relationship Editor’s note: CNN conditions expert Dr. Otis Webb Brawley is the chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society, a world-renowned cancer expert and a practicing oncologist. (CNN) — Q: The New England Journal of Medicine has published more information on prostate cancer screening. Why is it so controversial? A: Approximately 28,200 American men will die of prostate cancer in 2012. Among cancers, only lung cancer kills more men in the U.S. each year. This week’s issue of the New England Journal of Medicine has a follow-up evaluation of The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC), which analyzed data from 162,000 men. The ERSPC study concluded that screening reduced an individual’s relative risk of prostate cancer death by 21%. Many will quickly interpret this to mean that prostate screening with the blood test known as PSA saves lives. But the paper deserves a deeper examination, as the findings are not that simple. Prostate cancer screening has been common in the U.S. since the early 1990s. Mass prostate screening, where large numbers of men are encouraged to get the test at health fairs, shopping malls and community meetings has become a lucrative part of the business plan for many hospitals, clinics and medical practices. So it’s surprising to note that the 2009 ERSPC publication was the first well-designed clinical trial to even suggest that screening saves lives. The ERSPC reported a 21% decrease in relative risk of death in 2009. Put into perspective, a 21% decline in relative risk means that a man choosing screening goes from a lifetime risk of prostate cancer death of 3% to a lifetime risk
CDC unveils graphic smoking ads
STORY HIGHLIGHTS Campaign intended to educate Americans about the smoking habit’s dangers CDC says Big Tobacco spends more than $27 million per day in marketing Ex-smokers profiled include amputee, heart patient Washington (CNN) — Federal health officials on Thursday are unveiling a $54 million national media campaign to get smokers to quit and prevent anyone else, especially children, from starting. The campaign, called “Tips From Former Smokers,” is intended to educate Americans about the dangers of smoking through the stories and graphic pictures of ex-smokers who have suffered severe health consequences of tobacco use. The former smokers profiled have suffered ailments such as stroke-related paralysis, limb amputation, lung removal and heart attack. One breathes through a stoma, a surgically created hole in the neck through which a person who has undergone larynx or voice box surgery can breathe. “Hundreds of thousands of lives are lost each year due to smoking, and for every person who dies, 20 more Americans live with an illness caused by smoking,” Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said in a statement. “We cannot afford to continue watching the human and economic toll from tobacco rob our communities of parents and grandparents, aunts and uncles, friends and co-workers. We are committed to doing everything we can to help smokers quit and prevent young people from starting in the first place.” The ads are the brainchild of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Office on Smoking and Health. The agency says smoking remains the country’s leading cause of disease and preventable death, resulting in more than 443,000 fatalities annually. More than 8 million Americans live with a smoking-related illness or conditions, according to the disease agency. The combination of public service announcements and paid advertising for television, radio, newspapers and magazines also spotlights the dangers of exposure to secondhand smoke. The ads will also be featured on billboards, in theaters and online — including on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. “Although they may be tough to watch, the ads show real people living with real, painful consequences from smoking,” said CDC Director Thomas R. Frieden. “There is sound evidence that supports the use of these types of hard-hitting images and messages to encourage smokers to quit, to keep children from ever beginning to smoke, and to drastically reduce the harm caused by tobacco.” See the CDC anti-smoking campaign print ad (PDF) The campaign includes eight television ads (one of them in Spanish), seven radio spots in 30- and 60-second versions, seven print ads and five billboard and bus stop ads. The campaign marks the first time the CDC has run a paid, comprehensive national anti-tobacco advertising effort. The primary target is smokers ages 18 to 54, but public health experts also said they hope it will dissuade children from adopting the habit. While we are not prepared to comment … discouraging smoking initiation and promoting quitting remain important.Philip Morris USA Last week the surgeon general released a report on youth smoking, leading Sebelius to declare: “Targeted marketing encourages more young people to take up this deadly addiction every day. This administration is committed to doing everything we can to prevent our children from using tobacco.” The agency said, “Targeted messages and images that portray smoking as an acceptable, appealing activity for young people are widespread, and advertising for tobacco products is prominent in retail stores and online.” The need for such a campaign is urgent, according to the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. “This media campaign is a smart investment that will reduce tobacco use, save lives and reduce tobacco-related health care costs,” Matthew L. Myers, president of the advocacy group. “The tobacco industry spends more than $1 million every hour on marketing that entices kids, discourages smokers from quitting and portrays its deadly and addictive products as normal and appealing. The CDC’s campaign will counter the industry’s marketing with the harsh truth about tobacco use, told by former smokers themselves.” The CDC said the tobacco industry spends more than $27 million a day on marketing to kids and others — about $10 billion a year. In two days, the industry spends about what the government has budgeted for the entire 12-week campaign. The industry denies that it markets to children. Tobacco giant Phillip Morris would not comment of the campaign, telling CNN: “Philip Morris USA agrees smoking is addictive and causes serious disease. While we are not prepared to comment on CDC’s anti-smoking campaign, preventing underage tobacco use, discouraging smoking initiation and promoting quitting remain important to reducing the harm from cigarette smoking. A complementary strategy, focused on the development of and appropriate communications about potentially lower risk tobacco products, may be one of the most meaningful actions that the Food and Drug Administration can take to reduce the health effects of smoking.” Not in dispute is the deadly impact smoking can have on health. About a third of the smoking-related deaths in the United States are linked to heart disease, according to the American Heart Association. The ads highlight a shocking but very realistic fate.Nancy Brown, American Heart Association “The ads highlight a shocking but very realistic fate that could await some current smokers if they continue their tobacco addiction,” said Nancy Brown, the association’s CEO. The ads note that smoking contributes to one in five strokes and increase the odds of having a heart attack. “The American Heart Association believes these graphic ads, coupled with vigorous tobacco control at the state level, will reach not only the adults who smoke, but also will break through to teens and discourage them from ever taking up this deadly habit,” she said. The American Cancer Society says nine of 10 smokers started before they turned 18. “Combating tobacco use requires a multipronged approach, including federal regulation of tobacco products, increased tobacco taxes, smoke-free workplaces and sustained investment in prevention and cessation now and beyond the end of the CDC campaign,” said Christopher W. Hansen, president of the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, in a statement. “This historic advertising campaign will help to combat Big Tobacco’s unscrupulous efforts to addict new users and prevent existing users from trying to quit.” Featured reader comments: Should smokers be targeted? The campaign begins less than a month after a federal mandate requiring tobacco companies to place graphic images on their products warning of the dangers of smoking was tossed out by a judge in Washington, who said the requirements were a violation of free speech. The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act passed in 2009 would have required nine written warnings such as “Cigarettes are addictive” and “Tobacco smoke causes harm to children.” Also included would have been alternating images of a corpse and smoke-infected lungs. CNN’s Caleb Hellerman contributed to this report.
Value of mass prostate cancer screenings questioned
STORY HIGHLIGHTS Does mass prostate cancer screening saves lives? Cancer screening tests haven’t always shown a decrease in overall mortality American Cancer Society Dr. Otis Webb Brawley: Mass screenings should stop Prostate screenings, he says, should be done within a physician-patient relationship Editor’s note: CNN conditions expert Dr. Otis Webb Brawley is the chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society, a world-renowned cancer expert and a practicing oncologist. (CNN) — Q: The New England Journal of Medicine has published more information on prostate cancer screening. Why is it so controversial? A: Approximately 28,200 American men will die of prostate cancer in 2012. Among cancers, only lung cancer kills more men in the U.S. each year. This week’s issue of the New England Journal of Medicine has a follow-up evaluation of The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC), which analyzed data from 162,000 men. The ERSPC study concluded that screening reduced an individual’s relative risk of prostate cancer death by 21%. Many will quickly interpret this to mean that prostate screening with the blood test known as PSA saves lives. But the paper deserves a deeper examination, as the findings are not that simple. Prostate cancer screening has been common in the U.S. since the early 1990s. Mass prostate screening, where large numbers of men are encouraged to get the test at health fairs, shopping malls and community meetings has become a lucrative part of the business plan for many hospitals, clinics and medical practices. So it’s surprising to note that the 2009 ERSPC publication was the first well-designed clinical trial to even suggest that screening saves lives. The ERSPC reported a 21% decrease in relative risk of death in 2009. Put into perspective, a 21% decline in relative risk means that a man choosing screening goes from a lifetime risk of prostate cancer death of 3% to a lifetime risk of 2.4%. Here they found that 1,055 men would need to be screened to identify 37 men with prostate cancer and save one life. To be fair, not all accepted cancer screening tests have demonstrated a decrease in overall mortality. Trials have shown breast cancer mammography has met this standard, as has lung cancer screening using low dose spiral CT. I am aware of no cervical cancer or colorectal cancer screening studies showing a decrease in overall mortality, but many have shown a decrease in the incidence of disease. Reducing the number of people getting the cancer is another accepted benefit of screening. Q: Why do we need a new study of prostate cancer screenings? A: The purpose of a screening test is to save lives. A test is not necessarily successful in saving lives if it simply finds cancer. I believe it is not necessarily a successful test it finds disease earlier and leads to an increase in the number of people surviving five or 10 years after diagnosis. Screening is only successful if it decreases the number of people dying from the disease. Unfortunately this important point about screening is not widely understood beyond those with expertise in screening. Indeed, a recent study in the Annals of Internal Medicine suggests that this point is not appreciated by more the 75% of practicing physicians. The only way to truly determine if screening saves lives is through taking a large number of people at risk for the disease and randomly assigning half to get the experimental test on a regular basis over time and half to not get the test over the same period of time. The two groups are then watched to see if the number of deaths from the cancer and the all-causes mortality rate differs in the two groups. The double edge sword of cancer screening is that screening itself can cause harm. Prostate cancer screening can detect and diagnosis a cancer that would never have needed treatment. The subsequent unnecessary treatment can cause incontinence, sexual impotence and even death. Indeed studies show that about 1% of men undergoing prostate cancer surgery in the U.S. die due to the surgery. The European study investigators estimate that half of all the cancers they diagnosed fell into the category of those not needing treatment. Most men elected to have treatment. Q: So should I get screened, or not? A: In draft guidelines issued in the fall of 2012, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force noted that four studies published over the past 15 years have documented the harms of prostate cancer screening and only the ERSPC has suggested that screening leads to a mortality reduction. They use this as reasoning to recommend against prostate cancer screening. When one takes a hard look at the scientific data, the benefits of screening are not at all clear. Given the uncertainty, I believe: — Mass screenings should stop. — Screening should only be done within the physician-patient relationship. Doctors and the men they serve need to learn the true facts about screening. Only after understanding the known harms and potential benefits of screening should a man be encouraged to make a personal decision about screening. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of CNN or the American Cancer Society.
No more annual Pap smear: New guidelines released
Otis Brawley shares new guidelines on cervical cancer screenings from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. STORY HIGHLIGHTS In 2009, about 4,000 U.S. women died of cervix cancer New recommendations: Women under 21 should not be tested Combining the Pap test and HPV testing every 3 to 5 years is preferred for ages 30 and older Editor’s note: CNN conditions expert Dr. Otis Webb Brawley is the chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society, a world-renowned cancer expert and a practicing oncologist. (CNN) — Q: The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force is releasing new guidelines on cervical cancer screenings. What’s changed? A: In the 1930s, cervical cancer was the deadliest women’s cancer in America. At that time, it killed more women each year than breast or lung cancer. But over the past 80 years, there has been a tremendous decline in the death rate from cervical cancer because of improvements in treatment and screening. Today, death from cervical cancer is relatively rare in the U.S. In 2009, about 4,000 American women died of cancer of the cervix. A review of the medical history of these women showed that the overwhelming majority had never had cervical cancer screening, and most who did were screened more than 10 years before diagnosis. This week, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force is announcing new recommendations for Pap tests to screen women for cervical cancer. The American Cancer Society (ACS), the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology (ASCCP) and the American Society for Clinical Pathology (ASCP) have also teamed up to publish screening recommendations. Both the task force and the collaborative groups reviewed scientific literature and came to similar conclusions. Both sets of guidelines were published Wednesday. The USPSTF guidelines were published in the Annals of Internal Medicine. The ACS, ASCCP and ASCP guidelines were published jointly in CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, the Journal of Lower Genital Tract Disease and the American Journal of Clinical Pathology. It is hoped that these guidelines will lead to less confusion for health care providers and the public. The new guidelines advise women to reduce the number of tests they receive over their lifetime. This will ensure that women receive the benefits of testing while minimizing the risks. Most surprising of these recommendations is that women under age 21 should not be tested. But it makes sense — many sexually active women under 21 will develop a human papillomavirus infection, or HPV, which can lead to cervical cancer. If HPV is detected, it is usually treated. However, treatment can lead to cervical incompetence and miscarriage years later. And most infections that are not treated subside within nine months without residual effects. The task force has also recommended that women over 21 undergo a Pap test screening every three years, instead of annually. This, too, fits with what we know about this disease: HPV can take more than a decade to progress to cervical dysplasia or cancer. Now to the basics. The ACS-ASCCP-ASCP recommendations include these changes from the previous ACS guidelines: • All women should start screening at age 21. No longer is screening recommended three years after starting vaginal intercourse. • Women aged 21 to 29 should get a Pap test (conventional or liquid-based) every three years. The statement specifically recommends against annual Pap testing. The former guideline called for a conventional Pap test every year, or a liquid-based Pap test every two years, for this age group. • For women 30 and over, Pap tests should be done every three years. The guidelines recommend against annual or more frequent Pap testing for this age group. The previous guidelines said women 30 and over who have had three normal Pap tests in a row may be tested less often —
CDC unveils graphic anti-smoking ads
STORY HIGHLIGHTS Campaign intended to educate Americans about the smoking habit’s dangers CDC says Big Tobacco spends more than $27 million per day in marketing Ex-smokers profiled include amputee, heart patient Washington (CNN) — Federal health officials on Thursday are unveiling a $54 million national media campaign to get smokers to quit and prevent anyone else, especially children, from starting. The campaign, called “Tips From Former Smokers,” is intended to educate Americans about the dangers of smoking through the stories and graphic pictures of ex-smokers who have suffered severe health consequences of tobacco use. The former smokers profiled have suffered ailments such as stroke-related paralysis, limb amputation, lung removal and heart attack. One breathes through a stoma, a surgically created hole in the neck through which a person who has undergone larynx or voice box surgery can breathe. “Hundreds of thousands of lives are lost each year due to smoking, and for every person who dies, 20 more Americans live with an illness caused by smoking,” Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said in a statement. “We cannot afford to continue watching the human and economic toll from tobacco rob our communities of parents and grandparents, aunts and uncles, friends and co-workers. We are committed to doing everything we can to help smokers quit and prevent young people from starting in the first place.” The ads are the brainchild of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Office on Smoking and Health. The agency says smoking remains the country’s leading cause of disease and preventable death, resulting in more than 443,000 fatalities annually. More than 8 million Americans live with a smoking-related illness or conditions, according to the disease agency. The combination of public service announcements and paid advertising for television, radio, newspapers and magazines also spotlights the dangers of exposure to secondhand smoke. The ads will also be featured on billboards, in theaters and online — including on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. “Although they may be tough to watch, the ads show real people living with real, painful consequences from smoking,” said CDC Director Thomas R. Frieden. “There is sound evidence that supports the use of these types of hard-hitting images and messages to encourage smokers to quit, to keep children from ever beginning to smoke, and to drastically reduce the harm caused by tobacco.” See the CDC anti-smoking campaign print ad (PDF) The campaign includes eight television ads (one of them in Spanish), seven radio spots in 30- and 60-second versions, seven print ads and five billboard and bus stop ads. The campaign marks the first time the CDC has run a paid, comprehensive national anti-tobacco advertising effort. The primary target is smokers ages 18 to 54, but public health experts also said they hope it will dissuade children from adopting the habit. While we are not prepared to comment … discouraging smoking initiation and promoting quitting remain important.Philip Morris USA Last week the surgeon general released a report on youth smoking, leading Sebelius to declare: “Targeted marketing encourages more young people to take up this deadly addiction every day. This administration is committed to doing everything we can to prevent our children from using tobacco.” The agency said, “Targeted messages and images that portray smoking as an acceptable, appealing activity for young people are widespread, and advertising for tobacco products is prominent in retail stores and online.” The need for such a campaign is urgent, according to the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. “This media campaign is a smart investment that will reduce tobacco use, save lives and reduce tobacco-related health care costs,” Matthew L. Myers, president of the advocacy group. “The tobacco industry spends more than $1 million every hour on marketing that entices kids, discourages smokers from quitting and portrays its deadly and addictive products as normal and appealing. The CDC’s campaign will counter the industry’s marketing with the harsh truth about tobacco use, told by former smokers themselves.” The CDC said the tobacco industry spends more than $27 million a day on marketing to kids and others — about $10 billion a year. In two days, the industry spends about what the government has budgeted for the entire 12-week campaign. The industry denies that it markets to children. Tobacco giant Phillip Morris would not comment of the campaign, telling CNN: “Philip Morris USA agrees smoking is addictive and causes serious disease. While we are not prepared to comment on CDC’s anti-smoking campaign, preventing underage tobacco use, discouraging smoking initiation and promoting quitting remain important to reducing the harm from cigarette smoking. A complementary strategy, focused on the development of and appropriate communications about potentially lower risk tobacco products, may be one of the most meaningful actions that the Food and Drug Administration can take to reduce the health effects of smoking.” Not in dispute is the deadly impact smoking can have on health. About a third of the smoking-related deaths in the United States are linked to heart disease, according to the American Heart Association. The ads highlight a shocking but very realistic fate.Nancy Brown, American Heart Association “The ads highlight a shocking but very realistic fate that could await some current smokers if they continue their tobacco addiction,” said Nancy Brown, the association’s CEO. The ads note that smoking contributes to one in five strokes and increase the odds of having a heart attack. “The American Heart Association believes these graphic ads, coupled with vigorous tobacco control at the state level, will reach not only the adults who smoke, but also will break through to teens and discourage them from ever taking up this deadly habit,” she said. The American Cancer Society says nine of 10 smokers started before they turned 18. “Combating tobacco use requires a multipronged approach, including federal regulation of tobacco products, increased tobacco taxes, smoke-free workplaces and sustained investment in prevention and cessation now and beyond the end of the CDC campaign,” said Christopher W. Hansen, president of the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, in a statement. “This historic advertising campaign will help to combat Big Tobacco’s unscrupulous efforts to addict new users and prevent existing users from trying to quit.” Featured reader comments: Should smokers be targeted? The campaign begins less than a month after a federal mandate requiring tobacco companies to place graphic images on their products warning of the dangers of smoking was tossed out by a judge in Washington, who said the requirements were a violation of free speech. The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act passed in 2009 would have required nine written warnings such as “Cigarettes are addictive” and “Tobacco smoke causes harm to children.” Also included would have been alternating images of a corpse and smoke-infected lungs. CNN’s Caleb Hellerman contributed to this report.
CDC unveils graphic smoking ads
STORY HIGHLIGHTS Campaign intended to educate Americans about the smoking habit’s dangers CDC says Big Tobacco spends more than $27 million per day in marketing Ex-smokers profiled include amputee, heart patient Washington (CNN) — Federal health officials on Thursday are unveiling a $54 million national media campaign to get smokers to quit and prevent anyone else, especially children, from starting. The campaign, called “Tips From Former Smokers,” is intended to educate Americans about the dangers of smoking through the stories and graphic pictures of ex-smokers who have suffered severe health consequences of tobacco use. The former smokers profiled have suffered ailments such as stroke-related paralysis, limb amputation, lung removal and heart attack. One breathes through a stoma, a surgically created hole in the neck through which a person who has undergone larynx or voice box surgery can breathe. “Hundreds of thousands of lives are lost each year due to smoking, and for every person who dies, 20 more Americans live with an illness caused by smoking,” Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said in a statement. “We cannot afford to continue watching the human and economic toll from tobacco rob our communities of parents and grandparents, aunts and uncles, friends and co-workers. We are committed to doing everything we can to help smokers quit and prevent young people from starting in the first place.” The ads are the brainchild of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Office on Smoking and Health. The agency says smoking remains the country’s leading cause of disease and preventable death, resulting in more than 443,000 fatalities annually. More than 8 million Americans live with a smoking-related illness or conditions, according to the disease agency. The combination of public service announcements and paid advertising for television, radio, newspapers and magazines also spotlights the dangers of exposure to secondhand smoke. The ads will also be featured on billboards, in theaters and online — including on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. “Although they may be tough to watch, the ads show real people living with real, painful consequences from smoking,” said CDC Director Thomas R. Frieden. “There is sound evidence that supports the use of these types of hard-hitting images and messages to encourage smokers to quit, to keep children from ever beginning to smoke, and to drastically reduce the harm caused by tobacco.” See the CDC anti-smoking campaign print ad (PDF) The campaign includes eight television ads (one of them in Spanish), seven radio spots in 30- and 60-second versions, seven print ads and five billboard and bus stop ads. The campaign marks the first time the CDC has run a paid, comprehensive national anti-tobacco advertising effort. The primary target is smokers ages 18 to 54, but public health experts also said they hope it will dissuade children from adopting the habit. While we are not prepared to comment … discouraging smoking initiation and promoting quitting remain important.Philip Morris USA Last week the surgeon general released a report on youth smoking, leading Sebelius to declare: “Targeted marketing encourages more young people to take up this deadly addiction every day. This administration is committed to doing everything we can to prevent our children from using tobacco.” The agency said, “Targeted messages and images that portray smoking as an acceptable, appealing activity for young people are widespread, and advertising for tobacco products is prominent in retail stores and online.” The need for such a campaign is urgent, according to the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. “This media campaign is a smart investment that will reduce tobacco use, save lives and reduce tobacco-related health care costs,” Matthew L. Myers, president of the advocacy group. “The tobacco industry spends more than $1 million every hour on marketing that entices kids, discourages smokers from quitting and portrays its deadly and addictive products as normal and appealing. The CDC’s campaign will counter the industry’s marketing with the harsh truth about tobacco use, told by former smokers themselves.” The CDC said the tobacco industry spends more than $27 million a day on marketing to kids and others — about $10 billion a year. In two days, the industry spends about what the government has budgeted for the entire 12-week campaign. The industry denies that it markets to children. Tobacco giant Phillip Morris would not comment of the campaign, telling CNN: “Philip Morris USA agrees smoking is addictive and causes serious disease. While we are not prepared to comment on CDC’s anti-smoking campaign, preventing underage tobacco use, discouraging smoking initiation and promoting quitting remain important to reducing the harm from cigarette smoking. A complementary strategy, focused on the development of and appropriate communications about potentially lower risk tobacco products, may be one of the most meaningful actions that the Food and Drug Administration can take to reduce the health effects of smoking.” Not in dispute is the deadly impact smoking can have on health. About a third of the smoking-related deaths in the United States are linked to heart disease, according to the American Heart Association. The ads highlight a shocking but very realistic fate.Nancy Brown, American Heart Association “The ads highlight a shocking but very realistic fate that could await some current smokers if they continue their tobacco addiction,” said Nancy Brown, the association’s CEO. The ads note that smoking contributes to one in five strokes and increase the odds of having a heart attack. “The American Heart Association believes these graphic ads, coupled with vigorous tobacco control at the state level, will reach not only the adults who smoke, but also will break through to teens and discourage them from ever taking up this deadly habit,” she said. The American Cancer Society says nine of 10 smokers started before they turned 18. “Combating tobacco use requires a multipronged approach, including federal regulation of tobacco products, increased tobacco taxes, smoke-free workplaces and sustained investment in prevention and cessation now and beyond the end of the CDC campaign,” said Christopher W. Hansen, president of the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, in a statement. “This historic advertising campaign will help to combat Big Tobacco’s unscrupulous efforts to addict new users and prevent existing users from trying to quit.” Featured reader comments: Should smokers be targeted? The campaign begins less than a month after a federal mandate requiring tobacco companies to place graphic images on their products warning of the dangers of smoking was tossed out by a judge in Washington, who said the requirements were a violation of free speech. The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act passed in 2009 would have required nine written warnings such as “Cigarettes are addictive” and “Tobacco smoke causes harm to children.” Also included would have been alternating images of a corpse and smoke-infected lungs. CNN’s Caleb Hellerman contributed to this report.
CDC unveils graphic smoking ads
CDC unveils graphic anti-smoking ads STORY HIGHLIGHTS “Tips from former smokers” intended to educate Americans about the habit’s dangers CDC says Big Tobacco spends more than $27 million per day in marketing Ex-smokers profiled include amputatee, heart patient Washington (CNN) — Federal health officials are unveiling Thursday a $54 million national media campaign to get smokers to quit and prevent anyone else, especially children, from starting. The campaign, called “Tips From Former Smokers,” is intended to educate Americans about the dangers of smoking through the stories and graphic pictures of ex-smokers who have suffered severe health consequences of tobacco use. The former smokers profiled have suffered ailments like stroke-related paralysis, limb amputation, lung removal and heart attack. One breathes through a stoma, a surgically created hole in the neck through which a person who has undergone larynx or voice box surgery can breathe. The ads are the brainchild of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Office on Smoking and Health. The agency says smoking remains the country’s leading cause of disease and preventable death, resulting in more than 443,000 fatalities annually. More than 8 million Americans live with a smoking-related illness or conditions, according to the disease agency. The combination of public service announcements and paid advertising for television, radio, newspapers and magazines, also spotlights the dangers of exposure to secondhand smoke. The ads will also be featured on billboards, in theaters and online–including on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. See the CDC anti-smoking campaign print ad (PDF) The campaign includes eight television ads (one of them in Spanish); seven radio spots in 30- and 60-second versions; seven print ads and five billboard and bus stop ads. The campaign marks the first time the CDC has run a paid, comprehensive national anti-tobacco advertising effort. The primary target
Value of mass prostate cancer screenings questioned
STORY HIGHLIGHTS Does mass prostate cancer screening saves lives? Cancer screening tests haven’t always shown a decrease in overall mortality American Cancer Society Dr. Otis Webb Brawley: Mass screenings should stop Prostate screenings, he says, should be done within a physician-patient relationship Editor’s note: CNN conditions expert Dr. Otis Webb Brawley is the chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society, a world-renowned cancer expert and a practicing oncologist. (CNN) — Q: The New England Journal of Medicine has published more information on prostate cancer screening. Why is it so controversial? A: Approximately 28,200 American men will die of prostate cancer in 2012. Among cancers, only lung cancer kills more men in the U.S. each year. This week’s issue of the New England Journal of Medicine has a follow-up evaluation of The European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC), which analyzed data from 162,000 men. The ERSPC study concluded that screening reduced an individual’s relative risk of prostate cancer death by 21%. Many will quickly interpret this to mean that prostate screening with the blood test known as PSA saves lives. But the paper deserves a deeper examination, as the findings are not that simple. Prostate cancer screening has been common in the U.S. since the early 1990s. Mass prostate screening, where large numbers of men are encouraged to get the test at health fairs, shopping malls and community meetings has become a lucrative part of the business plan for many hospitals, clinics and medical practices. So it’s surprising to note that the 2009 ERSPC publication was the first well-designed clinical trial to even suggest that screening saves lives. The ERSPC reported a 21% decrease in relative risk of death in 2009. Put into perspective, a 21% decline in relative risk means that a man choosing screening goes from a lifetime risk of prostate cancer death of 3% to a lifetime risk of 2.4%. Here they found that 1,055 men would need to be screened to identify 37 men with prostate cancer and save one life. To be fair, not all accepted cancer screening tests have demonstrated a decrease in overall mortality. Trials have shown breast cancer mammography has met this standard, as has lung cancer screening using low dose spiral CT. I am aware of no cervical cancer or colorectal cancer screening studies showing a decrease in overall mortality, but many have shown a decrease in the incidence of disease. Reducing the number of people getting the cancer is another accepted benefit of screening. Q: Why do we need a new study of prostate cancer screenings? A: The purpose of a screening test is to save lives. A test is not necessarily successful in saving lives if it simply finds cancer. I believe it is not necessarily a successful test it finds disease earlier and leads to an increase in the number of people surviving five or 10 years after diagnosis. Screening is only successful if it decreases the number of people dying from the disease. Unfortunately this important point about screening is not widely understood beyond those with expertise in screening. Indeed, a recent study in the Annals of Internal Medicine suggests that this point is not appreciated by more the 75% of practicing physicians. The only way to truly determine if screening saves lives is through taking a large number of people at risk for the disease and randomly assigning half to get the experimental test on a regular basis over time and half to not get the test over the same period of time. The two groups are then watched to see if the number of deaths from the cancer and the all-causes mortality rate differs in the two groups. The double edge sword of cancer screening is that screening itself can cause harm. Prostate cancer screening can detect and diagnosis a cancer that would never have needed treatment. The subsequent unnecessary treatment can cause incontinence, sexual impotence and even death. Indeed studies show that about 1% of men undergoing prostate cancer surgery in the U.S. die due to the surgery. The European study investigators estimate that half of all the cancers they diagnosed fell into the category of those not needing treatment. Most men elected to have treatment. Q: So should I get screened, or not? A: In draft guidelines issued in the fall of 2012, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force noted that four studies published over the past 15 years have documented the harms of prostate cancer screening and only the ERSPC has suggested that screening leads to a mortality reduction. They use this as reasoning to recommend against prostate cancer screening. When one takes a hard look at the scientific data, the benefits of screening are not at all clear. Given the uncertainty, I believe: — Mass screenings should stop. — Screening should only be done within the physician-patient relationship. Doctors and the men they serve need to learn the true facts about screening. Only after understanding the known harms and potential benefits of screening should a man be encouraged to make a personal decision about screening. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of CNN or the American Cancer Society.
Guidelines: No annual Pap smear
By Otis Brawley, Special to CNN updated 5:02 PM EDT, Wed March 14, 2012 Otis Brawley shares new guidelines on cervical cancer screenings from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. STORY HIGHLIGHTS In 2009, about 4,000 U.S. women died of cervix cancer New recommendations: Women under 21 should not be tested Combining the Pap test and HPV testing every 3 to 5 years is preferred for ages 30 and older Editor’s note: CNN conditions expert Dr. Otis Webb Brawley is the chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society, a world-renowned cancer expert and a practicing oncologist. (CNN) — Q: The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force is releasing new guidelines on cervical cancer screenings. What’s changed? A: In the 1930s, cervical cancer was the deadliest women’s cancer in America. At that time, it killed more women each year than breast or lung cancer. But over the past 80 years, there has been a tremendous decline in the death rate from cervical cancer because of improvements in treatment and screening. Today, death from cervical cancer is relatively rare in the U.S. In 2009, about 4,000 American women died of cancer of the cervix. A review of the medical history of these women showed that the overwhelming majority had never had cervical cancer screening, and most who did were screened more than 10 years before diagnosis. This week, the Preventive Services Task Force is announcing new recommendations for Pap tests to screen women for cervical cancer. The American Cancer Society (ACS), the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology (ASCCP) and the American Society for Clinical Pathology (ASCP) have also teamed up to publish screening recommendations. Both the task force and the collaborative groups reviewed scientific literature and came to similar conclusions. It is hoped that these guidelines will lead to less confusion for health care providers and the public. The new guidelines advise women to reduce the number of tests they receive over their lifetime. This will ensure that women receive the benefits of testing while minimizing the risks. Most surprising of these recommendations is that women under age 21 should not be tested. But it makes sense — many sexually active women under 21 will develop a human papillomavirus infection, or HPV, which can lead to cervical cancer. If HPV is detected, it is usually treated. However, treatment can lead to cervical incompetence and miscarriage years later. And most infections that are not treated subside within nine months without residual effects. The task force has also recommended that women over 21 undergo a Pap test screening every three years, instead of annually. This, too, fits with what we know about this disease: HPV can take more than a decade to progress to cervical dysplasia or cancer. Now to the basics. The ACS-ASCCP-ASCP recommendations include these changes from the previous ACS guidelines: • All women should start screening at age 21. No longer is screening recommended three years after starting vaginal intercourse. • Women aged 21 to 29 should get a Pap test (conventional or liquid-based) every three years. The statement specifically recommends against annual Pap testing. The former guideline called for a conventional Pap test every year, or a liquid-based Pap test every two years, for this age group. • For women 30 and over, Pap tests should be done every three years. The guidelines recommend against annual or more frequent Pap testing for this age group. The previous guidelines said women 30 and over who have had three normal Pap tests in a row may be tested less often — every two to three years. • Combining the Pap test with HPV testing every three to five years is the preferred strategy for women aged 30 and older. • Screening is not recommended for women 65 or older who have had three or more normal Pap tests in a row and no abnormal Pap test results in the past 10 years, or who have had two or more negative HPV tests in the past 10 years. Additional recommendations are also included in the proposed guidelines: • Women who have a normal Pap result and a positive HPV test result should repeat both tests or receive a gene test called genotyping that determines if they
