©2012 An Inconvenient Woman. All Rights Reserved.

Elderly Women At Risk

A study conducted at the California Pacific Medical Center Research Institute indicated that elderly with low muscle density have a higher likelihood of being hospitalized than those with a more moderate ratio and suggests it may be a better predictor of the risk of hospitalization than muscle mass or size

New research suggests exercise programs designed to increase muscle density in the elderly could help reduce rates of disability and hospitalization. Researchers  studied 3,011 healthy U.S. residents, aged 70 to 80. During about a five-year span, more than 55 percent of them were hospitalized at least once. People most likely to be hospitalized were those who scored lowest on measures of physical function, such as walking speed, ability to stand up from a chair repeatedly, grip strength and leg strength.

In a study published in the current issue of the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, researchers also found that people with the least dense thigh muscles — meaning more fat than lean tissue — were more likely to be hospitalized than those with more dense thigh muscles.

“Our research suggests that we need to re-think the way we define sarcopenia, or age-related muscle loss,” study author Peggy Cawthon, a scientist with the California Pacific Medical Center Research Institute, said in a news release from the American Geriatrics Society. “Many definitions of sarcopenia today tend to focus on lean mass or muscle size. Our study shows that is looking at the wrong factors. We found that muscle strength or performance were much better ways of measuring function.”

The findings “suggest that interventions, such as physical exercise, that improve physical function could help keep more vulnerable seniors out of the hospital,” she said. “That would not only reduce disability but it would also reduce the huge economic burden associated with hospitalization of the elderly.”

One in five Americans older than 65 has sarcopenia. In 2000, the direct costs of treating the condition were more than $18.5 billion, according to background information in the news release.

The team analyzed more than 3,000 healthy seniors aged between 70 and 80 for an average of five years and looked at factors such as their walking speeds, ability to stand up repeatedly and leg strength. They found that the largest number of hospitalizations occurred among those with the least dense muscles.

Dr. Peggy Cawthon, the study’s lead author, says the findings are important because they suggest non-pharmacological and non-surgical approaches such as enhanced physical activity or moderate exercise may help keep vulnerable seniors out of hospital.

A high-protein diet or appropriate supplementation may also be useful for some seniors at risk of low muscle density.

Source for Additional Information:

Bone density and risk of hip fracture in men and women: cross sectional analysis

- ►bmj.com
CEDHD Laet, BA Hout, H Burger, A Hofman, … – British Medical Journal, 1997 – bmj.com
… BMJ 1997;315:221-225 (26 July) Papers. Bone density and risk of hip fracture
in men and women: cross sectional analysis. Chris EDH …

Forbes: Muscle Density Linked to Disability

More information

The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons has more about the physical effects of aging.

©2012 An Inconvenient Woman. All Rights Reserved.

“It’s a complex issue which needs to be thrashed out publicly. We’d encourage the key bodies involved to have that debate, to provide that information. Consumers want to know the facts.”

— Carol Bennett, the head of the Consumers Health Forum of Australia

The Australian government’s impending programme of vaccination against H1N1 flu has been criticised by some professional groups that have raised concerns about potential risks.

The Australian Infection Control Association this week warned the government against proceeding with the programme, saying that the planned use of multidose vials (used to vaccinate several people) posed a “significant potential risk to patient safety.”

The association’s president, Claire Boardman, said that use of multidose vials would contravene national infection control guidelines (www.safetyandquality.gov.au/internet/safety/publishing.nsf/Content/02A94EEE98D72244CA25740F00251B98/$File/NationalInfectionControlGuidelines.pdf) and that numerous adverse events related to their use had been well documented.

Ms Boardman said there was no justification for using multidose vials, as “the occurrence and distribution of H1N1 in 2009 within Australia does not constitute an emergency.”

She added, “We advise strongly against the use of multidose vials and do not support this mechanism for dissemination of the vaccine,” and warned that the “high risk of failure” of the pandemic vaccination campaign could compromise future programmes and also risked causing poor uptake of seasonal flu vaccination next year.

The association’s comments follow similar concerns raised by the Australasian Society of Infectious Diseases in a letter to the government’s chief medical officer, Jim Bishop, widely reported in the media (www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2008/s2662248.htm).

However, some experts involved in trials of an H1N1 vaccine being developed by the vaccine manufacturer CSL Limited believe that any potential risks are minimal and are being blown out of proportion.

Robert Booy, professor of paediatrics and child health at the Children’s Hospital, Westmead, Sydney, and the coauthor of a blog defending the vaccine’s safety (www.aussmc.org/ScienceBlog.php), told the BMJ: “There is considerable and emerging evidence for safety of multidose vials, especially in the hands of trained nurses. Being stalled by this controversy may make us a laughing stock to the rest of the world.”

CSL has repeatedly said that the multidose vials are safe.

But Peter Collignon, an infectious diseases physician and microbiologist at the Australian National University, said it was hard to see why Australia should abandon its usual practice of using mainly single dose, preloaded syringes.

“The only reason to use multidose vials is to save money or else because there is a rapidly evolving emergency with a high death rate,” Professor Collignon said. “Neither of these conditions is currently present in Australia. We passed the peak of this epidemic in most states in Australia in mid-July.“

However, Professor Bishop said that this view overlooked the possibility of another wave of infections before next winter.

“The World Health Organization has said this virus is unpredictable; past pandemics have told us that pandemics don’t run in seasons,” he said.

Professor Bishop said that multidose vials would be used in all H1N1 vaccination programmes that he knew of around the world and that they were also used in the United States for vaccination against seasonal flu. Vaccination providers would be trained in use of multidose vials to maximise infection control and minimise wastage.

“In order to get vaccines out in a reasonable quantity and logistically, the multidose vial has many advantages,” he said.

He said he expected that vaccine supplies would start to become available this week and that the vaccine would initially be given to high risk groups, with the eventual aim of having at least 40% of the population protected.

Julie Leask, a University of Sydney social scientist who researches public acceptance of vaccines, said that the poor image of swine flu vaccination among the public meant that there may be “underwhelming demand” and that “full transparency from the authorities” would be needed to ensure public confidence.

The public would need to know the data the government was using to assess the vaccine and the risks of swine flu in Australia and that systems for reporting adverse events were in place, she said.

Carol Bennett, the head of the Consumers Health Forum of Australia, said it was important that the potential benefits and risks of flu vaccination were openly discussed.

“It’s a complex issue which needs to be thrashed out publicly,” she said. “We’d encourage the key bodies involved to have that debate, to provide that information. Consumers want to know the facts.”

Free Article Reprinted with permission in the public interest

BMJ NEWS: Reported by Melissa Sweet, Sydney AU

Published 8 September 2009, doi:10.1136/bmj.b3656
Cite this as: BMJ 2009;339:b3656

©2012 An Inconvenient Woman. All Rights Reserved.

Any medication, from antidepressants to antihistamines, has the potential to make you ravenous or sluggish, or meddle with your metabolism. Here are the worst offenders and how to fight back.

Oprah online magazine has a great article about the side effects of some medications. Sara Reistad-Long discusses the side effect nobody thinks about until they look down and realize—hello!—they’ve gained 10, 20, 30 pounds. Yet almost any medication, from antidepressants to antihistamines, has the potential to make you ravenous or sluggish, or meddle with your metabolism. Here are the worst offenders and how to fight back.

Mired in depression and a vicious work dispute, Barbara Tunstall placed her hopes on the antidepressant Remeron. Her doctor warned that food cravings were a potential side effect of the drug, but the 45-year-old Maryland insurance specialist put such concerns aside—initially. Tunstall felt so much better on Remeron that she soon found the energy to resolve her work troubles. Then she realized that she was gaining weight at an alarming pace: Just six months into her treatment, she had put on 30 pounds.

Click here to read the whole article :
http://www.oprah.com/article/omagazine/200804_omag_medicine_weight

©2012 An Inconvenient Woman. All Rights Reserved.

With so much spit and fury churning around the Heath Care reform process, it is understandable that most Americans just want to tune out the debate. Every time I tune in, I’m reminded of cartoon images of swirling dust, fisticuffs, and scripted code for swear words. The various sides of the process seem more inclined to call each other pejoratives that have no place in a national discussion then reach a consensus. The founders of the Republic were inordinately protective of the right of vigorous public debate; I’m just not sure what they’d say about this particular public debate. Health Care reform, or Health Insurance reform depending on the poll-numbers of the day, is too important an issue to be left to the devises of a Congress being carpet bombed with special interest cash. There is a huge dichotomy about what is being said about the proposed reform initiative and what is actually written in H.R.3200 – America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009.

I have spent the past weeks researching H.R.3200. Aside from coming to the conclusion the bill could be sub-titled, ‘the lawyers perpetual employment act’, I came away concerned about how the intended legislation would be interpreted and regulated. Frankly, there are some sections that just don’t make sense. I’d love to know who actually wrote the H.R. 3200…I think those persons, known and unknown did more harm than good concerning health care reform.

The health care reform issues that concern me are how H.R. 3200 or other versions of health care reform plans being floated, would effect women’s access to health care and what, if any, constraints would be placed on the patient healthcare provider relationship. I want details about the continued availability of woman-centered services — women caring for other women. Will government managed health care be able to foster an environment were women who are the subject of care, and were treated as partners and active participants in their personal care.

How will information about contraception and gynecology (and in some cases, abortion), and education focused on women’s bodies and health beyond reproductive issues be handled? Is there something in this new process that will focus on helping women demystifying medical processes by empowering women through education; providing services that are women centered and accessible to a variety of women, and advocating for women and women’s health issues.

As I was following a supplemental research trail, I came across this 2007 Gender Society paper. It is an enlightening read and gives women a starting point in the current health debate — the complete paper is available for download click here.

Feminism And Profit In American Hospitals
The Corporate Construction of Women’s Health Centers
By Jan E. Thomas, Kenyon College And Mary K. Zimmerman, University Of Kansas

This paper provides a critical analysis of the evolution and impact of hospital-sponsored women’s health centers. Using original data gathered from interviews, participant observation, and content analysis of documents and brochures, the authors describe the development of four models of hospital-sponsored women’s health centers and illustrate three specific mechanisms of the co-optation process. They show how many elements of feminist Health care was used for the purpose of marketing and revenue production rather than for empowering women and transforming the delivery of care. Following Stratigaki’s notion of negative counter affect, the authors show how the key feminist concepts of women-centered care and empowerment ended up contradicting their original meaning and purpose. Rather than being the subject of care, women became the object of treatment and revenue production.

©2012 An Inconvenient Woman. All Rights Reserved.

“WOMEN constitute more than half the population in the United States. Yet our health-care system treats women’s health needs as if they are something outside the normal realm of services.”

In an OpEd article published in the Seattle Times, Tuesday, August 18, Elaine Rose, CEO of Planned Parenthood VOTES! Washington, stated,” Women are penalized in the U.S. health-care system because of their anatomy, paying 68 percent more out-of-pocket for care than men.”

In her article, “Get health-care reform right for women” Elaine Rose argues that health-care reform should carefully consider how to best meet women’s needs.

WOMEN constitute more than half the population in the United States. Yet our health-care system treats women’s health needs as if they are something outside the normal realm of services.

Women’s health care is in fact basic health care: annual gynecological exams; pap smears to screen for cervical cancer; breast-cancer screening, and birth control. Unfortunately, in our current health-care system, women are penalized simply because of their anatomy. On average, women of childbearing age pay 68 percent more out-of-pocket for their health care largely because of reproductive-health needs.

As our nation continues debating health-care reform, we need to make sure that we get it right for women. This generation of women — and our daughters and granddaughters — depends on it. Reproductive health care should not be separated out as something unusual. It is simply basic health care for women.

Internationally, it has long been established that offering reproductive-health services and information improves the health and well-being of women, families and entire communities. Why is it that here our elected officials still struggle to recognize the tremendous value of these services?

The public gets it. Polls have shown that 75 percent of all voters favor making it easier for women at all income levels to obtain contraceptives. Yet elected officials like Washington’s U.S. Reps. Dave Reichert, Doc Hastings and Cathy McMorris Rodgers voted this July in favor of an amendment that would have defunded Planned Parenthood and denied reproductive-health services to thousands of women in their districts and millions of women across the U.S. The funding at stake was federal Title X money, which provides essential, basic health services like contraception and cancer screening to the poorest women in our country.

While reproductive-health services are basic, like many health services, they deal with personal and private matters. Women depend on reproductive-health-care providers who are confidential, nonjudgmental and qualified to handle their specific concerns. For many women, a community reproductive-health-care clinic is their only contact with the health-care system. It’s where they get their birth control and also many primary-health-care needs met.

Research has shown that six out of 10 women who visit a reproductive-health-care clinic consider it their primary source of health care. Reproductive-health-care clinics — like Planned Parenthood — are essential community providers for millions of American women. Low-income women in particular rely on community clinics because they offer low-cost services using a sliding-fee scale.

Some extremists try to paint Planned Parenthood as strictly an abortion provider. While we are proud that we offer women needed access to safe, legal abortion services, it may surprise some people that abortion services make up only 3 percent of our services in Washington. Basic preventive health care like cancer screenings, contraceptives and annual exams make up 97 percent of the services we provide. We are a trusted, essential community provider to millions of Americans and more than 177,000 individuals in Washington.

It’s clear our health-care system is broken. Millions of Americans don’t have access to the health care they need. People are forced to use emergency rooms in desperation. Health-care costs are rising at an unsustainable rate for families and businesses alike. The U.S. is ranked 41st in the world for its maternal-mortality rates.

Congress and the Obama administration are engaged in a battle to change an entrenched American system. Let’s make sure that in the process of crafting a new way of getting health care to Americans, we don’t lose sight of the health-care needs of half our population. Women deserve direct and confidential access to their provider of choice. They deserve to have all their basic health-care needs met. Let’s get health-care reform right for women.

To read the complete article and the comments go to: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2009685309_guest19rose.htm

©2012 An Inconvenient Woman. All Rights Reserved.

I have noted the current health care debate that rages around us, through us and over us. Statistics and hypothesis are being flung at us by seething teams of political combatants, talking heads, and influential, special interest groups who have long since lost any sight of any middle ground and compromise. If the current course goes unchecked, the victors, be they blue or red will rule over the smoldering wreck of our Republic.

Listening to the many voices of the healthcare debate has reminded me of my paternal grandmother, Mimi. She would probably observe that the combatants are too busy counting coup (the winning of individual prestige during the larger battle) rather than working to secure the long-term well being of the People. Mimi was of Iroquois blood. A matriarchal society, the Iroquois honored women as the keepers of culture, responsible for defining the political, social, spiritual and economic norms of the tribe. The Iroquois are matrilineal, meaning descent, and therefore properties, are traced through the mother rather than through the father. According to Mimi, Iroquois women lead or participated in the tribe’s healing, spiritual and political ceremonies. The elder women nominated the male chiefs and other tribal leaders and made sure they fulfilled their responsibilities.

I find myself asking, “Who is representing the needs and concerns of the women of America?”

Perhaps it is time for wise women and their younger sisters to pull their attention back from the slogans emblazoned on signs and shouted from bullhorns and ask some questions that are not being addressed by either side of “heath care reform”.

Why are intelligent, accomplished women just compliantly submitting to the “medicalization” of their bodies?

Why don’t we question need for the pill, procedure or process?

Are women too intimidated to ask their health care professionals to explain the possible side effects or consequences of the suggested medical solution? Why are we afraid to ask for alternatives suggestions to replace the standard Big Pharma solution?

At the end of this health care legislative juggernaut will women have more of a voice concerning our bodies?

Will we have access to primary care doctors who understand that women are not small men and the health challenges we face are not by definition “women’s issues”?

Will women have the same access to tests and blood panel work as male patients?  Recent studies reveled when women and men presented with the same symptoms and concerns, tests are more likely to be ordered for a man than a woman. Women are more likely to receive a script for an antidepressant.

In the industrialized world, the mature woman can become invisible in plain site — voiceless in the cacophony of a 7/24/365-culture that no longer recognizes or understands the natural cycles of our lives.

Mature women are often alone within the confines teaming society — a society that offers no guidance, and certainly no acknowledgment of the natural cycles of womanhood. For many women, the only assistance comes in the form of pills and pity.

How much is a woman’s increased reliance on medical solutions a direct correlation to her increased isolation in a youth-oriented society that marginalizes mature women?

Readers of the Inconvenient Woman know that I feel the American health care system is, in many ways, broken. Women are being misdiagnosed, improperly medicated and subjected to unnecessary operations to fix ill-defined “female problems”. I have come to believe that physical and mental health has less to do with blindly ingesting Big Pharma’s latest wonder drug, and more to do with the conscious choice to change our lifestyle to include sound nutrition, some exercise and more sleep.

The health and wellbeing of our daughters, grand daughters, and ourselves is a relevant rational for activism. It is imperative that women be proactive in all aspects of our wellness. An Inconvenient Woman is one who insists on full disclosure of the known and probable side effects and interactions of any pharmaceutical prescribed by a health care professional. Education and the willingness to ask questions and demand answers is a start. Sadly, through lack of alternative information, women have become unwittingly complicit in the travesty we call modern medical treatment.

No matter which side of the current health care debate you favor, I ask you to be an Inconvenient Women. Inconvenient Women come in all shades of Blue, Red and Purple and each of us must commit to taking a more proactive stance concerning our health. We want to encourage all women and girls to become Inconvenient Women:

Ask Questions, Demand Answers, Verify Answers with an Independent Source, and Make Informed Decisions.

©2012 An Inconvenient Woman. All Rights Reserved.

An amazing thing has happened over the past several years. I have become a woman of certain age.  A woman who has been blessed to live long enough and experienced enough to claim my crone mantel. I find that I have ceased to give a good ‘God Bless’ about what other people think of my opinions, or me. I feel freed from the fetters of societal acceptance. I have, through this Blog, my books, classes and my other writings reclaimed my voice.

“When the Grandmothers speak the earth will be healed.”

— Hopi Tribal Prophecy

As defined by modern society’s scorn-filled, condescension for old women, “Crone” became a cringe-worthy word…associated with dreadful images, illness and infirmity. The true meaning of crone can be found in the tradition of the ‘Triple Goddess”, depicting the three stages of a woman’s development…birth — innocent and virginal; maiden — wife and mother, and finally, elder — wise-woman and crone. In agrarian, Goddess cultures, older women, were widely recognized for their wisdom, knowledge and spirituality. The women of these cultures became known as crones or hags, words that originally meant “wise one” and revered elder.

I, and others of like mind, choose to call our selves “crones”, to reclaim a title that we have lost, and to raise consciousness around issues of aging. I view the appellation of crone not as defined by modern dictionaries, but rather as the fulfillment of female life experiences and wisdom. Our youth-orientated society often marginalizes mature women, leaving many women resentful of their younger sisters. Rather than mourn the passing of our youth as our ‘crone years’ beckon, women should revel in our experiences and acknowledge the confidence and wisdom gifted to us by those years. Acknowledging and valuing the wisdom of our elders, learning from their lives is the true intergenerational gift, and the very essence of our human experience. For countless generations, Native Americans have empowered elder women by recognizing them as persons of wisdom and knowledge. As women who have traversed the mid-life passage, we have the ability to mentor those who follow.

©2012 An Inconvenient Woman. All Rights Reserved.

You choose how you react to situations

You choose how people will affect your mood

You choose to be in a good mood or bad mood

It’s your choice how you live your life

I have learned that every day you have the choice
to either enjoy your life or to hate it

The only thing that is truly yours —

That no one can control or take from you —

Is your Attitude

So if you can take care of that,

Everything else in life becomes much easier

Today I choose an attitude of deep appreciation for every situation and person in my life.

©2012 An Inconvenient Woman. All Rights Reserved.

In our last Blog we talked about the “likelihood of a woman being misdiagnosed” during the average “HMO-Office-Visit” Today we want to talk about how just a little more exercise during the week can yield BIG health benefits and help keep you out of your health care provider’s office.

I am the first to admit that exercise is not something that comes naturally to a desk-bound techie like me. For years I joked that my fingers were very svelte. Thanks to my writing partner Leslie Botha, I finally realized that I HAD to change my sedentary life style, if I wanted to stay out of the American Health Care System. I could sit on my delicately, rounded dierrer and ingest pills for high blood pressure, and keep gaining weight; or get off said-dierrer and take responsibility for my wellness.

You Got to Move-It! Move-It!

Exercise has a profound effect on hormones, including those involved in the menstrual cycle. Women who exercise experience less anger and depression. Exercise also reduces stress, which worsens PMS symptoms. Women, especially those who experience PMS, are encouraged to exercise regularly, 20-45 minutes, 3 times a week.

One of my girl friends took up belly-dancing and is having a blast, and improving her wellbeing. Another friend took up Salsa dancing at the local “Y” has boogied her way down several sizes, but more importantly, is no longer suffering from PMS. I started out just taking walks, increasing the speed and distance, now I’m swimming laps. I find that my time in the pool just makes me happy.
Am I sore the next day…sometimes.
Am I feeling better this month than last? Yes.
Has my blood pressure dropped? Yes!
Is it worth leaving my beloved computer a few hours a week? ABSOLUTELY!

Find an activity you enjoy and go do it. Don’t approach exercise as penance for ‘deserts past.’ Look at it as an opportunity to do something that is fun and provides an opportunity to change up your day and be pro-active in your own wellness.

Next blog well deal with the “N-Word” NUTRITION!

©2012 An Inconvenient Woman. All Rights Reserved.