Pages

Friday, May 3, 2013

Weekly paper in Hazard says Beshear should expand Medicaid

Gov. Steve Beshear should expand the Medicaid program for the poor under federal health reform to improve the health and welfare of Kentuckians, The Hazard Herald said in its editorial this week.

"We’re tired of reading report after report listing the health of Kentucky’s people at the bottom nationally," the weekly newspaper said. "That is especially the case in Eastern Kentucky, where here in Perry County we ranked as the 119th unhealthiest county out of 120, according to a recent study. In fact, the vast majority of the bottom 20 counties are here in Eastern Kentucky. There are many dire needs in our region of the state, from jobs to education to better access to health care. Here is one instance where our government, which the people fund, can opt to very possibly improve the lives of its citizens."

The federal government would pay the costs of expanding Medicaid to people in households with incomes up to 138 percent of the poverty level from 2014 through 2016. The state would pay 3 percent in 2017, rising to 10 percent in 2020. The editorial noted critics' warnings about costs, and a study predicting that expansion would increase the state's total Medicaid costs only 6.3 percent. "But, in truth, this is simply a monetary argument from interests on both sides of the debate," the paper said. "We feel the greatest interest belongs to the people of Kentucky. We feel the greatest priority should be placed on improving the health and welfare of our people." (Read more)
Gov. Steve Beshear should expand the Medicaid program for the poor under federal health reform to improve the health and welfare of Kentuckians, The Hazard Herald said in its editorial this week.

"We’re tired of reading report after report listing the health of Kentucky’s people at the bottom nationally," the weekly newspaper said. "That is especially the case in Eastern Kentucky, where here in Perry County we ranked as the 119th unhealthiest county out of 120, according to a recent study. In fact, the vast majority of the bottom 20 counties are here in Eastern Kentucky. There are many dire needs in our region of the state, from jobs to education to better access to health care. Here is one instance where our government, which the people fund, can opt to very possibly improve the lives of its citizens."

The federal government would pay the costs of expanding Medicaid to people in households with incomes up to 138 percent of the poverty level from 2014 through 2016. The state would pay 3 percent in 2017, rising to 10 percent in 2020. The editorial noted critics' warnings about costs, and a study predicting that expansion would increase the state's total Medicaid costs only 6.3 percent. "But, in truth, this is simply a monetary argument from interests on both sides of the debate," the paper said. "We feel the greatest interest belongs to the people of Kentucky. We feel the greatest priority should be placed on improving the health and welfare of our people." (Read more)
Read More


Thursday, May 2, 2013

Dreadful condition of Canadian hospitals and fraud drug cases



According to Natural News, the working status of Canadian hospitals, their hygienic condition, care and affection towards patients, all need a major change. The unhealthy conditions of these government run hospitals are forcing the nurses to not recommend their own hospitals to family members and friends. This fact has been reported in CBC news after a thorough research on this subject for some time now. There are not even enough staff members who are ready to work in such unhygienic conditions. Nearly 60 percent of the hospital staffs agreed to the fact that their hospitals do not have adequate working power, which in turn prevents them for working in an effective and safe manner.

Such condition is affecting the lives of common people to a great extent. The filthy condition of the hospitals, along with less number of man power, are making the lives of the patients and nurses quite difficult.

For more information regarding this topic, please log onto http://www.naturalnews.com/040119_socialized_medicine_patient_care_Canada.html

Over the last 40 years, the U.S.government has spent more than $200 billion trying to deal with the dreadful consequences associated with cancer, but without any positive result. Most doctors even fail to tell the reason behind unsuccessful medications. It has been proven in more ways than one, those patients who are suffering from cancer can be treated effectively with natural remedies, but still the question remains, why it has not been done yet?


According to Natural News, “drug war” is also another major reason behind negligence of health conditions. Legalization can easily cut the growing price of needful medications. But still, even after knowing it, the U.S. Secretary of State fails to take a positive step towards this point. It proves the inhuman nature of the U.S government.

To acquire more knowledge regarding this field, please log onto www.naturalnews.com/031256_war_on_drugs_fraud.html
Check out other Natural News blogs!
Around the world:
 
 
 
 
 
Current events and remedies!
 
 
 
 
Hoaxes revealed:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 


According to Natural News, the working status of Canadian hospitals, their hygienic condition, care and affection towards patients, all need a major change. The unhealthy conditions of these government run hospitals are forcing the nurses to not recommend their own hospitals to family members and friends. This fact has been reported in CBC news after a thorough research on this subject for some time now. There are not even enough staff members who are ready to work in such unhygienic conditions. Nearly 60 percent of the hospital staffs agreed to the fact that their hospitals do not have adequate working power, which in turn prevents them for working in an effective and safe manner.

Such condition is affecting the lives of common people to a great extent. The filthy condition of the hospitals, along with less number of man power, are making the lives of the patients and nurses quite difficult.

For more information regarding this topic, please log onto http://www.naturalnews.com/040119_socialized_medicine_patient_care_Canada.html

Over the last 40 years, the U.S.government has spent more than $200 billion trying to deal with the dreadful consequences associated with cancer, but without any positive result. Most doctors even fail to tell the reason behind unsuccessful medications. It has been proven in more ways than one, those patients who are suffering from cancer can be treated effectively with natural remedies, but still the question remains, why it has not been done yet?


According to Natural News, “drug war” is also another major reason behind negligence of health conditions. Legalization can easily cut the growing price of needful medications. But still, even after knowing it, the U.S. Secretary of State fails to take a positive step towards this point. It proves the inhuman nature of the U.S government.

To acquire more knowledge regarding this field, please log onto www.naturalnews.com/031256_war_on_drugs_fraud.html
Check out other Natural News blogs!
Around the world:
 
 
 
 
 
Current events and remedies!
 
 
 
 
Hoaxes revealed:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
Read More


Is There a Orthopedic Conflict of Interest?


Do orthopedists fail to suggest early-intervention or alternative scoliosis treatments because of a conflict of interest?

Why do orthopedists discourage alternative scoliosis treatments even if patients show improvement from them?


      The medical approach to scoliosis treatment is to watch and wait, brace and then operate. During the “wait and see” period Orthopedists generally do not advise patients of alternative treatment options and some even laugh or scoff at the slightest suggestion. Patients are made to feel absurd if they want to pursue proactive or preventative treatments during this pre-brace/pre-surgery period and instead are advised to just sit idly while their curves progress until bracing or surgery become “necessary”. Some parents choose to research treatment and opt to try alternative treatments anyway and upon re-evaluation by their doctor are told they are wasting their time! Parents are belittled and made to feel negligent and are even harassed by their orthopedist.
      If there are far less risks involved with alternative treatments, they are received while patients are in the “wait & see” period, and if these treatments show improvement to the patient’s scoliosis, then why is the medically community so against them?
      In Scoliosis and the Human Spine, a book written by Martha C. Hawes, Ph.D, Dr. Hawes (a research scientist  who herself has a large scoliosis) outlines what appears to be a “conflict of interest”. The conflict of interests center around the medical community’s lack of regard for an exercise based program of scoliosis care and correction.
      Martha C. Hawes, Ph.D, author and patient. 
      DO NOTHING
      There has been a tremendous movement in the country to screen for scoliosis. Why? So that it may be detected early in an attempt to intervene and treat before it progresses. But if the goal is early intervention, why are we “waiting”?
      “…we have the wherewithal to diagnose spinal deformity at a Cobb magnitude of ten degrees or less, before it progresses to a serious problem that may cause pain, deformity, psychological dysfunction, and pulmonary problems throughout the patient’s lifetime. But instead of making an effort to diagnose the underlying condition and take steps to stabilize or reverse the curvature at this relatively benign state (and despite longstanding basic and clinical research consistent with the hypothesis that this is entirely feasible), patients and parents formally are told to do NOTHING: Just keep coming in to an orthopedic surgeon’s office every few months for another X-ray, and wait to see if it gets worse.” (Martha Hawes PhD, Scoliosis and the Human Spine, 2010)
      DON’T TRY ANYTHING ELSE
      Not only are patients advised to do nothing, but they are also discouraged from seeking alternative treatments or just informed that there is nothing that they can do.
      “If individuals insist on searching out help on their own they are treated to condescension and insinuations that they are being irresponsible by trying ‘scientifically unproven’  treatments and refusing to accept the advice of professionals who know best (e.g. Keim 1987, Lonstein 1995a).”
      If scoliosis screening is not geared at finding the curvature in it’s early stages and treating it before it progresses, then what is the intent? To merely refer more patients to orthopedic surgeons?
      SCREENING LEADS to SURGERY
      Since screening has begun there has been an increase in the number of scoliosis surgeries performed. If the goal was to decrease the number of adolescents subjected to spinal fusion surgery, then why are said patients only referred to orthopedic surgeons?
      In our jurisdiction of New York, positive results of scoliosis screening can only be reported to pediatricians or orthopedists. By law, the schools nurses are prohibited from referring students to exercise based scoliosis care programs!
      Since screening has been mandated the average curve for which surgery is carried out decreased from a Cobb angle of 60 degrees to a Cobb angle of 42 degrees (Lonstein et al. 1987). This was done as a means to operate sooner rather than later under the assumption that moderate curves will inevitably become severe curves but, as Hawes points out, “there are a lot more moderate (42° curves) than severe (> 60° curves) curvatures in the population”.
      SURGEONS WOULD BE PUT OUT OF BUSINESS
      “…if proactive therapies were found to be effective, orthopedic surgeons would be put out of business of spinal fusion surgery because there would be no progression to levels where such intervention might be warranted.” (Hawes  2010)
      Why isn’t there more research on alternative treatments to scoliosis? Why don’t insurance companies cover these treatments?
      ORTHOPEDISTS LOVE TO DO SURGERY
      There are many upsides to performing spinal fusion surgery as opposed to other forms of surgery. Especially since, for many, the surgery is elective and most of the times the surgery is arguably “cosmetic”.
      “Orthopedists as a group relate the degree of satisfaction in their practice to the amount of surgery they get to do, and elective reconstructive surgery like spinal fusion (implanting rods in the spine for scoliosis) is at the top of the list: High-skill, high-tech, very costly, covered by insurance, and no need to get up in the middle of the night to to set messy fractures after car wrecks and suicide attempts (Clawson 2001, Heckman 2001).”
      SOME ORTHOPEDISTS ARE PAID TO DEVELOP TECHNIQUES & DEVICES FOR SCOLIOSIS SURGERY
      There is the added bonus of money and grants  received by selected “Leading” surgeons by the companies that supply the instrumentation they use during spinal surgery.
      “..some scoliosis surgeons receive royalties and research grants from the biomedical companies who make the ever-evolving array of spinal implantation devices (Shufflebarger, 2001).”
      What is an even more alarming is the rate at which these surgeries fail and require further medical intervention in the form of secondary surgical procedures, known amongst orthopedists as “salvage surgeries”. This surgery can hardly be called “elective” as patients experiencing extreme pain and impairment often are left with no alternative but to undergo further procedures.
      “What is more, the worst that can happen is that the surgery will fail (as it does, often), and additional costly, elective reconstructive surgery covered by insurance (or the personal savings of desperate parents) will be required. Such ‘salvage’ surgeries cost $100,000.00 or more.”  (Hawes 2010)
      TOO MANY SURGEONS
      Another major concern in the field of spinal fusion surgery is the large increase of orthopedic surgeons operating within the United States.
      “The ratio of orthopedist to U.S. population has increased, predictably, from 1 surgeon per 110,000 people in 1941 to 1:25,000 in 1980 to 1:15,150 in 1999 (Clawson 2001).  Surveys have shown that when the ratio increases to 1:15,000 or more, there is a significant increase in the number of operations being performed per 100,000 people, with concern that more elective surgery is being done than necessary.”  (Hawes 2010)
      The concern being that, in some regions, there is literally “not enough elective surgery to go around”. Shockingly, the author writes that spinal fusion surgery for teenagers with scoliosis was actually advertised on the radio in California in 2001.
      “An Appearance of conflict of interest does not necessarily mean a conflict exists, and the vast majority of scoliosis surgeons undoubtedly are conscientious souls with a compassionate interest in their patients’ welfare which overrides issues of personal gain. Indeed, leaders in the discipline have taken a strong stand in favor of the urgent need to establish and enforce clear ethical guidelines (Shufflebarger 2001).”
      This is not to say that orthopedists or orthopedic surgeons are to vilified for their practices.   As Dr. Hawes also points out, one of the greatest contributors to scoliosis research, the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS), is comprised of several hundred orthopedic surgeons. Not only do they conduct research to better understand and treat scoliosis, but in addition they report issues and dilemmas within the field of surgical intervention for scoliosis.
      DO SOMETHING!
      So if patients are instructed to “wait & see”, what alternative is there?
      Do your own research!
      Research your treatment options, read the scientific articles, check the blogs and forums, read the testimonials, talk with the patients and their parents. Do the work that the medical community won’t do for you.
      Become an “expert” in your own condition so you are prepared to discuss these topics.
      Take a proactive approach to your health care!
      Don’t be intimidated by your orthopedist.
      There may be a conflict of interest motivating their disapproval of alternative exercise based scoliosis care programs!



About Dr Kevin Lau


Dr Kevin Lau is a Singapore chiropractor and the founder of Health In Your Hands, a series of tools for Scoliosis prevention and treatment. The set includes his book Your Plan for Natural Scoliosis Prevention and Treatment, a companion Scoliosis Exercises for Prevention and Correction DVD and the innovative new iPhone application ScolioTrack. Dr Kevin Lau is a graduate in Doctor of Chiropractic from RMIT University in Melbourne Australia and Masters in Holistic Nutrition. He is a member of International Society On Scoliosis Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Treatment (SOSORT), the leading international society on conservative treatment of spinal deformities. In 2006 I was awarded the "Best Health-care Provider Awards" by the largest Newspaper publication in Singapore on October 18 2006 as well as being interviewed on Primetime Channel News Asia as well as other TV and Radio. For more information on Dr Kevin Lau, watch his interviews or get a free sneak peek of his book, go to:

Website - http://www.hiyh.info.
ScolioTrack Website - http://www.ScolioTrack.com.
Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/HealthInYourHands.
Youtube - http://www.youtube.com/user/DrKevinLau.
Twitter - http://www.Twitter.com/DrKevinLau.

Do orthopedists fail to suggest early-intervention or alternative scoliosis treatments because of a conflict of interest?

Why do orthopedists discourage alternative scoliosis treatments even if patients show improvement from them?


      The medical approach to scoliosis treatment is to watch and wait, brace and then operate. During the “wait and see” period Orthopedists generally do not advise patients of alternative treatment options and some even laugh or scoff at the slightest suggestion. Patients are made to feel absurd if they want to pursue proactive or preventative treatments during this pre-brace/pre-surgery period and instead are advised to just sit idly while their curves progress until bracing or surgery become “necessary”. Some parents choose to research treatment and opt to try alternative treatments anyway and upon re-evaluation by their doctor are told they are wasting their time! Parents are belittled and made to feel negligent and are even harassed by their orthopedist.
      If there are far less risks involved with alternative treatments, they are received while patients are in the “wait & see” period, and if these treatments show improvement to the patient’s scoliosis, then why is the medically community so against them?
      In Scoliosis and the Human Spine, a book written by Martha C. Hawes, Ph.D, Dr. Hawes (a research scientist  who herself has a large scoliosis) outlines what appears to be a “conflict of interest”. The conflict of interests center around the medical community’s lack of regard for an exercise based program of scoliosis care and correction.
      Martha C. Hawes, Ph.D, author and patient. 
      DO NOTHING
      There has been a tremendous movement in the country to screen for scoliosis. Why? So that it may be detected early in an attempt to intervene and treat before it progresses. But if the goal is early intervention, why are we “waiting”?
      “…we have the wherewithal to diagnose spinal deformity at a Cobb magnitude of ten degrees or less, before it progresses to a serious problem that may cause pain, deformity, psychological dysfunction, and pulmonary problems throughout the patient’s lifetime. But instead of making an effort to diagnose the underlying condition and take steps to stabilize or reverse the curvature at this relatively benign state (and despite longstanding basic and clinical research consistent with the hypothesis that this is entirely feasible), patients and parents formally are told to do NOTHING: Just keep coming in to an orthopedic surgeon’s office every few months for another X-ray, and wait to see if it gets worse.” (Martha Hawes PhD, Scoliosis and the Human Spine, 2010)
      DON’T TRY ANYTHING ELSE
      Not only are patients advised to do nothing, but they are also discouraged from seeking alternative treatments or just informed that there is nothing that they can do.
      “If individuals insist on searching out help on their own they are treated to condescension and insinuations that they are being irresponsible by trying ‘scientifically unproven’  treatments and refusing to accept the advice of professionals who know best (e.g. Keim 1987, Lonstein 1995a).”
      If scoliosis screening is not geared at finding the curvature in it’s early stages and treating it before it progresses, then what is the intent? To merely refer more patients to orthopedic surgeons?
      SCREENING LEADS to SURGERY
      Since screening has begun there has been an increase in the number of scoliosis surgeries performed. If the goal was to decrease the number of adolescents subjected to spinal fusion surgery, then why are said patients only referred to orthopedic surgeons?
      In our jurisdiction of New York, positive results of scoliosis screening can only be reported to pediatricians or orthopedists. By law, the schools nurses are prohibited from referring students to exercise based scoliosis care programs!
      Since screening has been mandated the average curve for which surgery is carried out decreased from a Cobb angle of 60 degrees to a Cobb angle of 42 degrees (Lonstein et al. 1987). This was done as a means to operate sooner rather than later under the assumption that moderate curves will inevitably become severe curves but, as Hawes points out, “there are a lot more moderate (42° curves) than severe (> 60° curves) curvatures in the population”.
      SURGEONS WOULD BE PUT OUT OF BUSINESS
      “…if proactive therapies were found to be effective, orthopedic surgeons would be put out of business of spinal fusion surgery because there would be no progression to levels where such intervention might be warranted.” (Hawes  2010)
      Why isn’t there more research on alternative treatments to scoliosis? Why don’t insurance companies cover these treatments?
      ORTHOPEDISTS LOVE TO DO SURGERY
      There are many upsides to performing spinal fusion surgery as opposed to other forms of surgery. Especially since, for many, the surgery is elective and most of the times the surgery is arguably “cosmetic”.
      “Orthopedists as a group relate the degree of satisfaction in their practice to the amount of surgery they get to do, and elective reconstructive surgery like spinal fusion (implanting rods in the spine for scoliosis) is at the top of the list: High-skill, high-tech, very costly, covered by insurance, and no need to get up in the middle of the night to to set messy fractures after car wrecks and suicide attempts (Clawson 2001, Heckman 2001).”
      SOME ORTHOPEDISTS ARE PAID TO DEVELOP TECHNIQUES & DEVICES FOR SCOLIOSIS SURGERY
      There is the added bonus of money and grants  received by selected “Leading” surgeons by the companies that supply the instrumentation they use during spinal surgery.
      “..some scoliosis surgeons receive royalties and research grants from the biomedical companies who make the ever-evolving array of spinal implantation devices (Shufflebarger, 2001).”
      What is an even more alarming is the rate at which these surgeries fail and require further medical intervention in the form of secondary surgical procedures, known amongst orthopedists as “salvage surgeries”. This surgery can hardly be called “elective” as patients experiencing extreme pain and impairment often are left with no alternative but to undergo further procedures.
      “What is more, the worst that can happen is that the surgery will fail (as it does, often), and additional costly, elective reconstructive surgery covered by insurance (or the personal savings of desperate parents) will be required. Such ‘salvage’ surgeries cost $100,000.00 or more.”  (Hawes 2010)
      TOO MANY SURGEONS
      Another major concern in the field of spinal fusion surgery is the large increase of orthopedic surgeons operating within the United States.
      “The ratio of orthopedist to U.S. population has increased, predictably, from 1 surgeon per 110,000 people in 1941 to 1:25,000 in 1980 to 1:15,150 in 1999 (Clawson 2001).  Surveys have shown that when the ratio increases to 1:15,000 or more, there is a significant increase in the number of operations being performed per 100,000 people, with concern that more elective surgery is being done than necessary.”  (Hawes 2010)
      The concern being that, in some regions, there is literally “not enough elective surgery to go around”. Shockingly, the author writes that spinal fusion surgery for teenagers with scoliosis was actually advertised on the radio in California in 2001.
      “An Appearance of conflict of interest does not necessarily mean a conflict exists, and the vast majority of scoliosis surgeons undoubtedly are conscientious souls with a compassionate interest in their patients’ welfare which overrides issues of personal gain. Indeed, leaders in the discipline have taken a strong stand in favor of the urgent need to establish and enforce clear ethical guidelines (Shufflebarger 2001).”
      This is not to say that orthopedists or orthopedic surgeons are to vilified for their practices.   As Dr. Hawes also points out, one of the greatest contributors to scoliosis research, the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS), is comprised of several hundred orthopedic surgeons. Not only do they conduct research to better understand and treat scoliosis, but in addition they report issues and dilemmas within the field of surgical intervention for scoliosis.
      DO SOMETHING!
      So if patients are instructed to “wait & see”, what alternative is there?
      Do your own research!
      Research your treatment options, read the scientific articles, check the blogs and forums, read the testimonials, talk with the patients and their parents. Do the work that the medical community won’t do for you.
      Become an “expert” in your own condition so you are prepared to discuss these topics.
      Take a proactive approach to your health care!
      Don’t be intimidated by your orthopedist.
      There may be a conflict of interest motivating their disapproval of alternative exercise based scoliosis care programs!



About Dr Kevin Lau


Dr Kevin Lau is a Singapore chiropractor and the founder of Health In Your Hands, a series of tools for Scoliosis prevention and treatment. The set includes his book Your Plan for Natural Scoliosis Prevention and Treatment, a companion Scoliosis Exercises for Prevention and Correction DVD and the innovative new iPhone application ScolioTrack. Dr Kevin Lau is a graduate in Doctor of Chiropractic from RMIT University in Melbourne Australia and Masters in Holistic Nutrition. He is a member of International Society On Scoliosis Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Treatment (SOSORT), the leading international society on conservative treatment of spinal deformities. In 2006 I was awarded the "Best Health-care Provider Awards" by the largest Newspaper publication in Singapore on October 18 2006 as well as being interviewed on Primetime Channel News Asia as well as other TV and Radio. For more information on Dr Kevin Lau, watch his interviews or get a free sneak peek of his book, go to:

Website - http://www.hiyh.info.
ScolioTrack Website - http://www.ScolioTrack.com.
Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/HealthInYourHands.
Youtube - http://www.youtube.com/user/DrKevinLau.
Twitter - http://www.Twitter.com/DrKevinLau.
Read More


Tuesday, April 30, 2013

Biomarkers for feline lymphoma

Taylor SS, Dodkin S, Papasouliotis K, et al. Serum thymidine kinase activity in clinically healthy and diseased cats: a potential biomarker for lymphoma. J Feline Med Surg. 2013; 15: 142-7

Researchers at the University of Bristol, UK and collaborators investigated the utility of serum thymidine kinase-1 (sTK1) as a biomarker for feline lymphoma. Thymidine kinase-1 is a cytoplasmic salvage enzyme involved in phosphorylation of deoxythymidine to deoxythymidine monophosphate, one of the key steps in the synthesis of DNA and thereby in cell division and proliferation. Its action is markedly increased only during the DNA synthesis phase (S-phase) of the cell cycle. This association with DNA synthesis and correlation with cell proliferation is particularly high in hematopoietic malignancies like feline lymphoma. The aim of this study was to determine a reference level for sTK1 in clinically healthy cats and then to evaluate the potential use of sTK1 as a biomarker for feline lymphoma by comparing levels in cats with lymphoma, inflammatory disease, and non-hematopoietic neoplasia (NHPN).

Forty-nine serum samples were collected from clinically healthy cats and sTK1 activity was determined using a radioenzyme technique which has a linear measurement range of 1-100 U/l. Based on these healthy cats, a reference interval of sTK1 < 5.5 U/l was established. The lymphoma group comprised 33 cats with a median age of 9 years, the inflammatory disease group comprised 55 cats with a median age of 7 years, and the NHPN group comprised of 34 cats with a median age of 10 years. Stringent criteria were used for inclusion in each group. The majority of cats in each group were non-pedigree cats. Cats in the lymphoma group had significantly higher mean sTK1 activity level (17.5 U/l) than clinically healthy cats (2.2 U/l), cats with inflammatory disease (3.4 U/l), or cats with NHPN (4.3 U/l). However, the lymphoma group showed a wide variability in the sTK1 activity (<1 to >100 U/l) and a receiver-operator curve (ROC) revealed a low sensitivity for this test. The researchers suggest a cut-off point of 8.9 U/l based on the ROC is highly suggestive of a lymphoma diagnosis, while there is a low predictability for cats with low sTK1 values. In addition, the number of cats in the study was too low to draw conclusions regarding lymphoma anatomical location and sTK1 activity. [GO]

Related blog posts:
Alimentary lymphoma in cats (Feb. 2013)
Lomustine for treatment of feline lymphoma (Dec. 2012)

More on cat health:
Winn Feline Foundation Library
Find us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Join us on Google+
Taylor SS, Dodkin S, Papasouliotis K, et al. Serum thymidine kinase activity in clinically healthy and diseased cats: a potential biomarker for lymphoma. J Feline Med Surg. 2013; 15: 142-7

Researchers at the University of Bristol, UK and collaborators investigated the utility of serum thymidine kinase-1 (sTK1) as a biomarker for feline lymphoma. Thymidine kinase-1 is a cytoplasmic salvage enzyme involved in phosphorylation of deoxythymidine to deoxythymidine monophosphate, one of the key steps in the synthesis of DNA and thereby in cell division and proliferation. Its action is markedly increased only during the DNA synthesis phase (S-phase) of the cell cycle. This association with DNA synthesis and correlation with cell proliferation is particularly high in hematopoietic malignancies like feline lymphoma. The aim of this study was to determine a reference level for sTK1 in clinically healthy cats and then to evaluate the potential use of sTK1 as a biomarker for feline lymphoma by comparing levels in cats with lymphoma, inflammatory disease, and non-hematopoietic neoplasia (NHPN).

Forty-nine serum samples were collected from clinically healthy cats and sTK1 activity was determined using a radioenzyme technique which has a linear measurement range of 1-100 U/l. Based on these healthy cats, a reference interval of sTK1 < 5.5 U/l was established. The lymphoma group comprised 33 cats with a median age of 9 years, the inflammatory disease group comprised 55 cats with a median age of 7 years, and the NHPN group comprised of 34 cats with a median age of 10 years. Stringent criteria were used for inclusion in each group. The majority of cats in each group were non-pedigree cats. Cats in the lymphoma group had significantly higher mean sTK1 activity level (17.5 U/l) than clinically healthy cats (2.2 U/l), cats with inflammatory disease (3.4 U/l), or cats with NHPN (4.3 U/l). However, the lymphoma group showed a wide variability in the sTK1 activity (<1 to >100 U/l) and a receiver-operator curve (ROC) revealed a low sensitivity for this test. The researchers suggest a cut-off point of 8.9 U/l based on the ROC is highly suggestive of a lymphoma diagnosis, while there is a low predictability for cats with low sTK1 values. In addition, the number of cats in the study was too low to draw conclusions regarding lymphoma anatomical location and sTK1 activity. [GO]

Related blog posts:
Alimentary lymphoma in cats (Feb. 2013)
Lomustine for treatment of feline lymphoma (Dec. 2012)

More on cat health:
Winn Feline Foundation Library
Find us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Join us on Google+
Read More


Monday, April 29, 2013

Bankruptcy filing by mental-health agency is a loser for Kentucky, where such services can be scarce and little used

By Molly Burchett
Kentucky Health News

The decision of Seven Counties Services Inc. to file bankruptcy to avoid paying into the Kentucky Employee Retirement System has created a "no win" situation for the state, and the issue may add yet another obstacle for Kentuckians to get the mental health care they need.

Louisville-based Seven Counties is one of the state's largest mental-health agencies, serving more than 30,000 adults and children with mental-health services, alcohol and drug-abuse treatment, developmental-disabilities services and preventive programs, according to its website.

And while Kentucky's mental-health system has received an F grade for its funding, the state pension system needs agencies like Seven Counties to pay in more because the system is just 27 percent funded. "Employers will have to ante up around 38 percent of annual payroll, compared with the 23 percent now required," Mike Wynn notes in The Courier-Journal.

Kentucky's need for mental health services is much greater than the supply, and an estimated 1.7 million Kentuckians live in areas designated as a "mental health professional shortage area," which means almost 40 percent of Kentucky residents lack proper access to such professionals, says a report by the Kaiser Family Foundation. About 24 percent of residents' mental-health care needs are under-served, and this situation could be worsened by federal health reform, which will expand mental-health and substance-abuse treatment benefits to more Kentuckians without adding to the number of providers.

Bankruptcy for Seven Counties is a lose-lose proposition: It could close its doors in 2014 and stop providing services to 30,000 Kentuckians or, if the bankruptcy goes through, the state's retirement system wouldn't get anticipated agency payments into the system, reports Ryan Alessi of cn|2, a news service of the Time Warner and Insight cable-TV companies.

“The only two paths this can go is we could stay in KERS until we have given them our last nickel, which is a year (or) year-and-a-half from now … (and) we close the doors and go out of business and KERS gets no more money because we’re out of business,” Dr. Tony Zipple, president of Seven Counties, told Alessi.

In addition to funding problems for mental-health services, many people with mental-health issues don't seek treatment because of its stigma, said Sheila Schuster, executive director of the Kentucky Mental Health Coalition, in a recent opinion piece sent to Kentucky newspapers.  Shuster calls on elected leaders to increase funding of mental health services and highlights the prevalence of mental health illness.

"At least one-fourth of us will experience a behavioral health issues (mental illness or substance use disorder) in a given year," Schuster writes. That number, and the number of people needing treatment, will continue to grow, she says.

Schuster also writes about the societal impact of not treating mental illness: "Depression is rated as the #1 cause of disability in this country, and is a leading cause of absenteeism and decreased productivity in the work force." Because some people avoid treatment due to stigma, they may self-medicate with drugs or alcohol, and "the effects of stigma and failure to treat the whole person can have catastrophic results," she writes.

In addition to calling for more mental health funding, Schuster asks all Kentuckians to get educated about mental illness so that its stigma can be erased. Click here to read more from Schuster about mental health and resources for help. For a PDF of her op-ed, click here; for a text version, here.

By Molly Burchett
Kentucky Health News

The decision of Seven Counties Services Inc. to file bankruptcy to avoid paying into the Kentucky Employee Retirement System has created a "no win" situation for the state, and the issue may add yet another obstacle for Kentuckians to get the mental health care they need.

Louisville-based Seven Counties is one of the state's largest mental-health agencies, serving more than 30,000 adults and children with mental-health services, alcohol and drug-abuse treatment, developmental-disabilities services and preventive programs, according to its website.

And while Kentucky's mental-health system has received an F grade for its funding, the state pension system needs agencies like Seven Counties to pay in more because the system is just 27 percent funded. "Employers will have to ante up around 38 percent of annual payroll, compared with the 23 percent now required," Mike Wynn notes in The Courier-Journal.

Kentucky's need for mental health services is much greater than the supply, and an estimated 1.7 million Kentuckians live in areas designated as a "mental health professional shortage area," which means almost 40 percent of Kentucky residents lack proper access to such professionals, says a report by the Kaiser Family Foundation. About 24 percent of residents' mental-health care needs are under-served, and this situation could be worsened by federal health reform, which will expand mental-health and substance-abuse treatment benefits to more Kentuckians without adding to the number of providers.

Bankruptcy for Seven Counties is a lose-lose proposition: It could close its doors in 2014 and stop providing services to 30,000 Kentuckians or, if the bankruptcy goes through, the state's retirement system wouldn't get anticipated agency payments into the system, reports Ryan Alessi of cn|2, a news service of the Time Warner and Insight cable-TV companies.

“The only two paths this can go is we could stay in KERS until we have given them our last nickel, which is a year (or) year-and-a-half from now … (and) we close the doors and go out of business and KERS gets no more money because we’re out of business,” Dr. Tony Zipple, president of Seven Counties, told Alessi.

In addition to funding problems for mental-health services, many people with mental-health issues don't seek treatment because of its stigma, said Sheila Schuster, executive director of the Kentucky Mental Health Coalition, in a recent opinion piece sent to Kentucky newspapers.  Shuster calls on elected leaders to increase funding of mental health services and highlights the prevalence of mental health illness.

"At least one-fourth of us will experience a behavioral health issues (mental illness or substance use disorder) in a given year," Schuster writes. That number, and the number of people needing treatment, will continue to grow, she says.

Schuster also writes about the societal impact of not treating mental illness: "Depression is rated as the #1 cause of disability in this country, and is a leading cause of absenteeism and decreased productivity in the work force." Because some people avoid treatment due to stigma, they may self-medicate with drugs or alcohol, and "the effects of stigma and failure to treat the whole person can have catastrophic results," she writes.

In addition to calling for more mental health funding, Schuster asks all Kentuckians to get educated about mental illness so that its stigma can be erased. Click here to read more from Schuster about mental health and resources for help. For a PDF of her op-ed, click here; for a text version, here.

Read More