You would have only one option to stop the insanity.
from ScienceBlogs http://ift.tt/2f9b4b5
This Week in EPA Science
By Kacey Fitzpatrick
Still tired from waiting 108 years, plus extra innings and a 17-minute rain delay, for a World Series championship? While you rest up here’s a quick recap of the latest in EPA research—it’s a hit!
Ecosystem Markets Added to EPA’s EnviroAtlas
Ecosystem markets provide an innovative way to safeguard the goods and services people get from ecosystems, and EPA is thrilled to announce that maps of such markets are the latest major addition to our EnviroAtlas web tool. Read more in the blog Mapping Ecosystem Markets in EnviroAtlas: Providing Innovative Data and Tools to Inform Decision-Making.
EPA Lab Celebrates 50 Years of Research
EPA’s Western Ecology Division in Corvallis, Oregon recently celebrated the 50th anniversary of the dedication of the building. To commemorate the anniversary, the division opened the cornerstone and unsealed the time capsule to reflect on 50 years of research. Read more about the celebration in the blog EPA’s Western Ecology Division Reflects on 50 Years of Research.
Healthy Environments: A Shared Goal for Healthy Communities
This week at the 2016 American Public Health Association (APHA) Annual Meeting, EPA’s Dr. Tom Burke and APHA Executive Director Dr. Georges Benjamin signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between EPA’s Office of Research and Development (ORD) and APHA. Learn about the partnership in the blog Healthy Environments: A Shared Goal for Healthy Communities.
Pathfinder Innovation Project
The Pathfinder Innovation Project program is an internal competition for EPA scientists to receive time to explore their biggest ideas in environmental research. EPA’s Tamara Tal applied for the program to better understand whether the toxicity of environmental chemicals is modified by gut microbes. Learn about her team’s research project in the blog Pathfinder Innovation Project – Does the Microbiome Influence More than Just our Gut?
Scientists of the Corn
EPA is at the Oregon State University Vegetable Research Farm studying how nitrate moves from crops like corn into groundwater. The study will help explain how we can protect drinking water by planting crops between corn rows to keep the nitrogen in the field. Learn more about the study in the blog Scientists of the Corn.
About the Author: Kacey Fitzpatrick is a writer on the science communication team in EPA’s Office of Research and Development.
from The EPA Blog http://ift.tt/2e96dJR
By Kacey Fitzpatrick
Still tired from waiting 108 years, plus extra innings and a 17-minute rain delay, for a World Series championship? While you rest up here’s a quick recap of the latest in EPA research—it’s a hit!
Ecosystem Markets Added to EPA’s EnviroAtlas
Ecosystem markets provide an innovative way to safeguard the goods and services people get from ecosystems, and EPA is thrilled to announce that maps of such markets are the latest major addition to our EnviroAtlas web tool. Read more in the blog Mapping Ecosystem Markets in EnviroAtlas: Providing Innovative Data and Tools to Inform Decision-Making.
EPA Lab Celebrates 50 Years of Research
EPA’s Western Ecology Division in Corvallis, Oregon recently celebrated the 50th anniversary of the dedication of the building. To commemorate the anniversary, the division opened the cornerstone and unsealed the time capsule to reflect on 50 years of research. Read more about the celebration in the blog EPA’s Western Ecology Division Reflects on 50 Years of Research.
Healthy Environments: A Shared Goal for Healthy Communities
This week at the 2016 American Public Health Association (APHA) Annual Meeting, EPA’s Dr. Tom Burke and APHA Executive Director Dr. Georges Benjamin signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between EPA’s Office of Research and Development (ORD) and APHA. Learn about the partnership in the blog Healthy Environments: A Shared Goal for Healthy Communities.
Pathfinder Innovation Project
The Pathfinder Innovation Project program is an internal competition for EPA scientists to receive time to explore their biggest ideas in environmental research. EPA’s Tamara Tal applied for the program to better understand whether the toxicity of environmental chemicals is modified by gut microbes. Learn about her team’s research project in the blog Pathfinder Innovation Project – Does the Microbiome Influence More than Just our Gut?
Scientists of the Corn
EPA is at the Oregon State University Vegetable Research Farm studying how nitrate moves from crops like corn into groundwater. The study will help explain how we can protect drinking water by planting crops between corn rows to keep the nitrogen in the field. Learn more about the study in the blog Scientists of the Corn.
About the Author: Kacey Fitzpatrick is a writer on the science communication team in EPA’s Office of Research and Development.
from The EPA Blog http://ift.tt/2e96dJR
Daylight savings time worth the trouble?
Spring forward, fall back … why? Image via Shutterstock.com
2017 EarthSky Lunar Calendar pre-sale…is happening NOW!
By Laura Grant, Claremont McKenna College
Today the sun is shining during my commute home from work. But this weekend, public service announcements will remind us to “fall back,” ending daylight saving time (DST) by setting our clocks an hour earlier on Sunday, Nov. 6. On Nov. 7, many of us will commute home in the dark.
This semiannual ritual shifts our rhythms and temporarily makes us groggy at times when we normally feel alert. Moreover, many Americans are confused about why we spring forward to DST in March and fall back in November, and whether it is worth the trouble.
The practice of resetting clocks is not designed for farmers, whose plows follow the sun regardless of what time clocks say it is. Yet many people continue to believe that farmers benefit, including lawmakers during recent debates over changing California DST laws. Massachusetts is also studying whether to abandon DST.
Changing our clocks does not create extra daylight. DST simply shifts when the sun rises and sets relative to our society’s regular schedule and routines. The key question, then, is how people respond to this enforced shift in natural lighting. Most people have to be at work at a certain time – say, 8:30 a.m. – and if that time comes an hour earlier, they simply get up an hour earlier. The effect on society is another question, and there, the research shows DST is more burden than boon.
No energy savings
Benjamin Franklin was one of the first thinkers to endorse the idea of making better use of daylight. Although he lived well before the invention of light bulbs, Franklin observed that people who slept past sunrise wasted more candles later in the evening. He also whimsically suggested the first policy fixes to encourage energy conservation: firing cannons at dawn as public alarm clocks and fining homeowners who put up window shutters.
To this day, our laws equate daylight saving with energy conservation. However, recent research suggests that DST actually increases energy use.
Poster celebrating enactment of daylight saving time during World War I, 1917. Image via Library of Congress/Wikipedia
This is what I found in a study coauthored with Yale economist Matthew Kotchen. We used a policy change in Indiana to estimate DST effects on electricity consumption. Prior to 2007, most Indiana counties did not observe DST. By comparing households’ electricity demand before and after DST was adopted, month by month, we showed that DST had actually increased residential electricity demand in Indiana by 1 to 4 percent annually.
The largest effects occurred in the summer, when DST aligns our lives with the hottest part of the day, so people tend to use more air conditioning, and late fall, when we wake up in the dark and use more heating with no reduction in lighting needs.
Other studies corroborate these findings. Research in Australia and in the United States shows that DST does not decrease total energy use. However, it does smooth out peaks and valleys in energy demand throughout the day, as people at home use more electricity in the morning and less during the afternoon. Though people still use more electricity, shifting the timing reduces the average costs to deliver energy because not everyone demands it during typical peak usage periods.
Other outcomes are mixed
DST proponents also argue that changing times provides more hours for afternoon recreation and reduces crime rates. But time for recreation is a matter of preference. There is better evidence on crime rates: Fewer muggings and sexual assaults occur during DST months because fewer potential victims are out after dark.
So overall, the net benefits from these three durational effects of crime, recreation and energy use – that is, impacts that last for the duration of the time change – are murky.
Other consequences of DST are ephemeral. I think of them as bookend effects, since they occur at the beginning and end of DST.
When we “spring forward” in March we lose an hour, which comes disproportionately from resting hours rather than wakeful time. Therefore, many problems associated with springing forward stem from sleep deprivation. With less rest people make more mistakes, which appear to cause more traffic accidents and workplace injuries, lower workplace productivity due to cyberloafing and poorer stock market trading.
Even when we gain that hour back in the fall, we must readjust our routines over several days because the sun and our alarm clocks feel out of synchronization. Some impacts are serious: During bookend weeks, children in higher latitudes go to school in the dark, which increases the risk of pedestrian casualties. Dark commutes are so problematic for pedestrians that New York City is spending US$1.5 million on a related safety campaign. And heart attacks increase after the spring time shift – it is thought because of lack of sleep – but decrease to a lesser extent after the fall shift. Collectively, these bookend effects represent net costs and strong arguments against retaining DST.
Pick your own time zone?
Spurred by many of these arguments, several states are considering unilaterally discontinuing DST. The California State Legislature considered a bill this term that would have asked voters to decide whether or not to remain on Pacific Standard Time year-round (the measure was passed by the State Assembly but rejected by the Senate).
On the East Coast, Massachusetts has commissioned research on the impacts of dropping DST and joining Canada’s Maritime provinces on Atlantic Time, which is one hour ahead of Eastern Standard Time. If this occurred, Massachusetts would be an hour ahead of all of its neighboring states during winter months, and travelers flying from Los Angeles to Boston would cross five time zones.
Countries observing daylight saving time (blue in Northern Hemisphere, orange in Southern Hemisphere). Light gray countries have abandoned DST; dark gray nations have never practiced it. Image via TimeZonesBoy/Wikipedia” target=”_blank”>TimeZonesBoy/Wikipedia
These proposals ignore a fundamental fact: Daylight saving time relies on coordination. If one state changes its clocks a week early, neighboring states will be out of sync.
Some states have good reason for diverging from the norm. Notably, Hawaii does not practice DST because it is much closer to the equator than the rest of the nation, so its daylight hours barely change throughout the year. Arizona is the sole contiguous state that abstains from DST, citing its extreme summer temperatures. Although this disparity causes confusion for western travelers, the state’s residents have not changed clocks’ times for over 40 years.
In my research on DST I have found that everyone has strong opinions about it. Many people welcome the shift to DST as a signal of spring. Others like the coordinated availability of daylight after work. Dissenters, including farmers, curse their loss of quiet morning hours.
When the evidence about costs and benefits is mixed but we need to make coordinated choices, how should we make DST decisions? When the California State Senate opted to stick with DST, one legislator stated, “I like daylight savings. I just like it.” But politicians’ whims are not a good basis for policy choices.
The strongest arguments support not only doing away with the switches but keeping the nation on daylight saving time year-round. Yet humans adapt. If we abandon the twice-yearly switch, we may eventually slide back into old routines and habits of sleeping in during daylight. Daylight saving time is the coordinated alarm to wake us up a bit earlier in the summer and get us out of work with more sunshine.
Laura Grant, Assistant Professor of Economics, Claremont McKenna College
Enjoying EarthSky? Sign up for our free daily newsletter today!
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
from EarthSky http://ift.tt/2f22zkd
Spring forward, fall back … why? Image via Shutterstock.com
2017 EarthSky Lunar Calendar pre-sale…is happening NOW!
By Laura Grant, Claremont McKenna College
Today the sun is shining during my commute home from work. But this weekend, public service announcements will remind us to “fall back,” ending daylight saving time (DST) by setting our clocks an hour earlier on Sunday, Nov. 6. On Nov. 7, many of us will commute home in the dark.
This semiannual ritual shifts our rhythms and temporarily makes us groggy at times when we normally feel alert. Moreover, many Americans are confused about why we spring forward to DST in March and fall back in November, and whether it is worth the trouble.
The practice of resetting clocks is not designed for farmers, whose plows follow the sun regardless of what time clocks say it is. Yet many people continue to believe that farmers benefit, including lawmakers during recent debates over changing California DST laws. Massachusetts is also studying whether to abandon DST.
Changing our clocks does not create extra daylight. DST simply shifts when the sun rises and sets relative to our society’s regular schedule and routines. The key question, then, is how people respond to this enforced shift in natural lighting. Most people have to be at work at a certain time – say, 8:30 a.m. – and if that time comes an hour earlier, they simply get up an hour earlier. The effect on society is another question, and there, the research shows DST is more burden than boon.
No energy savings
Benjamin Franklin was one of the first thinkers to endorse the idea of making better use of daylight. Although he lived well before the invention of light bulbs, Franklin observed that people who slept past sunrise wasted more candles later in the evening. He also whimsically suggested the first policy fixes to encourage energy conservation: firing cannons at dawn as public alarm clocks and fining homeowners who put up window shutters.
To this day, our laws equate daylight saving with energy conservation. However, recent research suggests that DST actually increases energy use.
Poster celebrating enactment of daylight saving time during World War I, 1917. Image via Library of Congress/Wikipedia
This is what I found in a study coauthored with Yale economist Matthew Kotchen. We used a policy change in Indiana to estimate DST effects on electricity consumption. Prior to 2007, most Indiana counties did not observe DST. By comparing households’ electricity demand before and after DST was adopted, month by month, we showed that DST had actually increased residential electricity demand in Indiana by 1 to 4 percent annually.
The largest effects occurred in the summer, when DST aligns our lives with the hottest part of the day, so people tend to use more air conditioning, and late fall, when we wake up in the dark and use more heating with no reduction in lighting needs.
Other studies corroborate these findings. Research in Australia and in the United States shows that DST does not decrease total energy use. However, it does smooth out peaks and valleys in energy demand throughout the day, as people at home use more electricity in the morning and less during the afternoon. Though people still use more electricity, shifting the timing reduces the average costs to deliver energy because not everyone demands it during typical peak usage periods.
Other outcomes are mixed
DST proponents also argue that changing times provides more hours for afternoon recreation and reduces crime rates. But time for recreation is a matter of preference. There is better evidence on crime rates: Fewer muggings and sexual assaults occur during DST months because fewer potential victims are out after dark.
So overall, the net benefits from these three durational effects of crime, recreation and energy use – that is, impacts that last for the duration of the time change – are murky.
Other consequences of DST are ephemeral. I think of them as bookend effects, since they occur at the beginning and end of DST.
When we “spring forward” in March we lose an hour, which comes disproportionately from resting hours rather than wakeful time. Therefore, many problems associated with springing forward stem from sleep deprivation. With less rest people make more mistakes, which appear to cause more traffic accidents and workplace injuries, lower workplace productivity due to cyberloafing and poorer stock market trading.
Even when we gain that hour back in the fall, we must readjust our routines over several days because the sun and our alarm clocks feel out of synchronization. Some impacts are serious: During bookend weeks, children in higher latitudes go to school in the dark, which increases the risk of pedestrian casualties. Dark commutes are so problematic for pedestrians that New York City is spending US$1.5 million on a related safety campaign. And heart attacks increase after the spring time shift – it is thought because of lack of sleep – but decrease to a lesser extent after the fall shift. Collectively, these bookend effects represent net costs and strong arguments against retaining DST.
Pick your own time zone?
Spurred by many of these arguments, several states are considering unilaterally discontinuing DST. The California State Legislature considered a bill this term that would have asked voters to decide whether or not to remain on Pacific Standard Time year-round (the measure was passed by the State Assembly but rejected by the Senate).
On the East Coast, Massachusetts has commissioned research on the impacts of dropping DST and joining Canada’s Maritime provinces on Atlantic Time, which is one hour ahead of Eastern Standard Time. If this occurred, Massachusetts would be an hour ahead of all of its neighboring states during winter months, and travelers flying from Los Angeles to Boston would cross five time zones.
Countries observing daylight saving time (blue in Northern Hemisphere, orange in Southern Hemisphere). Light gray countries have abandoned DST; dark gray nations have never practiced it. Image via TimeZonesBoy/Wikipedia” target=”_blank”>TimeZonesBoy/Wikipedia
These proposals ignore a fundamental fact: Daylight saving time relies on coordination. If one state changes its clocks a week early, neighboring states will be out of sync.
Some states have good reason for diverging from the norm. Notably, Hawaii does not practice DST because it is much closer to the equator than the rest of the nation, so its daylight hours barely change throughout the year. Arizona is the sole contiguous state that abstains from DST, citing its extreme summer temperatures. Although this disparity causes confusion for western travelers, the state’s residents have not changed clocks’ times for over 40 years.
In my research on DST I have found that everyone has strong opinions about it. Many people welcome the shift to DST as a signal of spring. Others like the coordinated availability of daylight after work. Dissenters, including farmers, curse their loss of quiet morning hours.
When the evidence about costs and benefits is mixed but we need to make coordinated choices, how should we make DST decisions? When the California State Senate opted to stick with DST, one legislator stated, “I like daylight savings. I just like it.” But politicians’ whims are not a good basis for policy choices.
The strongest arguments support not only doing away with the switches but keeping the nation on daylight saving time year-round. Yet humans adapt. If we abandon the twice-yearly switch, we may eventually slide back into old routines and habits of sleeping in during daylight. Daylight saving time is the coordinated alarm to wake us up a bit earlier in the summer and get us out of work with more sunshine.
Laura Grant, Assistant Professor of Economics, Claremont McKenna College
Enjoying EarthSky? Sign up for our free daily newsletter today!
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
from EarthSky http://ift.tt/2f22zkd
Friday Cephalopod: How to make a squid [Pharyngula]
How GPs can encourage weight loss in just 30 seconds
Is it okay to bring up someone’s weight?
This is a question that GPs face on a regular basis.
But recent headlines proclaiming that a “30-second chat can trigger weight loss” suggest that starting this type of conversation shouldn’t be a cause for worry.
The reports followed new research, part funded by Cancer Research UK, looking at the role GPs can play in discussing bodyweight with their patients. And the findings suggest that a chat might be just what the doctor ordered.
The study, published in The Lancet last week, found that 8 in 10 overweight or obese people thought it was appropriate and helpful for their GP to suggest that losing weight would be good for their health.
And just a 30 second chat, or a very brief intervention to give it its technical name, is all it takes for GPs to encourage people to shed some pounds.
What’s a brief intervention?
A ‘brief intervention’ is a technique that GPs often use to encourage people to think about their health. Take smoking, for example. A GP might ask a smoker questions with a view to encouraging them to stop. Or they might simply offer help with stopping. The patient’s reason for the original appointment doesn’t have to be smoking related, so the GP can bring it up out of the blue.
A brief intervention might take only 5 minutes. And a very brief intervention can take as little as 30 seconds.
This approach has already been shown to be effective in encouraging people to stop smoking, but what about encouraging people who are obese or overweight to lose weight?
Why is this important?
Obesity is the second biggest preventable cause of cancer after smoking, which we’ve blogged about recently.
And being overweight is linked to 13 different types of cancer.
At the moment it’s not clear whether losing weight will reduce your risk of cancer. The research is limited, but it does suggest this might be the case. As well as the possibility of reducing your risk of cancer, losing weight has a number of other great benefits, such as improving heart health.
Can a chat encourage weight loss?
This new study is the result of the BWeL (Brief intervention for weight loss) trial, which involved around 1800 obese people from 57 GP practices in England.
In designing this study, we were clear that whatever we asked GPs to do, we could only ask them to spend a few seconds doing it – Professor Paul Aveyard
They all had their height, weight and body mass index (BMI) recorded, and were randomly assigned to one of two groups. In the first group, the GP told the patient they would benefit from losing weight, and offered to refer them to a weight management group, like Slimming World. In the second group, the GP just told the patient they would benefit from losing some weight and left it at that.
It took 30 seconds or less for the GP to have either of these discussions – that’s the ‘very brief intervention’ part.
And according to Professor Paul Aveyard, who led the study and is a practising GP and Professor of Behavioural Medicine at the University of Oxford, the fact these are such short conversations is the key.
“In designing this study, we were clear that whatever we asked GPs to do, we could only ask them to spend a few seconds doing it,” he explains. “In our research, we tested whether a 30 second chat from the GP could motivate patients to take action on their weight, how patients felt about it, and whether this would lead to weight loss in the longer term.”
And the findings were encouraging. Patients in both groups lost weight. But those offered referral to a weight management programme lost on average 1.4kg more after 1 year than those who hadn’t been referred. This is despite the fact not all the patients who were offered a referral actually attended the programme.
This means even a short conversation between a GP and a patient about losing weight, which might involve referral to a weight loss programme, can be extremely effective.
Is it okay to chat about fat?
Now it gets really interesting. The researchers also wanted to know what the patients thought when the GPs brought up their weight as an issue given it can be a touchy topic.
I wasn’t offended when my GP discussed my weight with me. In fact, I’m glad he brought it up, as it’s something I hadn’t ever thought was an issue and I feel it has encouraged me to lose weight
– Jim, 70, who took part in the study
Aveyard explains: “Immediately after the consultation, we asked patients whether it was appropriate and helpful for GPs to bring up their weight in this way. The large majority said it was, and almost nobody thought it wasn’t.”
In fact, 8 in 10 people found that it was both ‘appropriate’ and ‘acceptable’ for GPs to suggest losing weight would be good for their health.
Jim, 70, is from Cirencester and was invited to take part in the BWeL trial after seeing his GP for an unrelated health problem.
“My GP brought up the topic of my weight during the consultation. He calculated my BMI and told me I was in the ‘obese’ category. I was really shocked because I hadn’t considered myself overweight before,” he says.
Jim was allocated to the group that was referred to a weight loss management programme, and lost 2 stone in 12 months.
“I wasn’t offended when my GP discussed my weight with me. In fact, I’m glad he brought it up, as it’s something I hadn’t ever thought was an issue and I feel it has encouraged me to lose weight, which I’m really happy about.”
What does this mean for GPs?
A study published in 2013 looked at the percentage of overweight and obese patients who had been told by a health professional they’d benefit from losing weight. And in that study just 4 in 10 people remembered having been told to lose weight.
Since taking part in the trial, I feel more comfortable addressing any issues related to patients’ weight and I’m more aware of the impact it can have in encouraging someone to lose weight
– Dr Paul Hodges, a GP who was involved in the study
It’s not easy to have these conversations. And there are certain challenges that may hold GPs back. Some of these include not having enough time, thinking that just a brief discussion won’t help, and worry about offending a patient.
Dr Paul Hodges is one of the GPs who was involved in the BWeL trial. He’s been working as a GP in Gloucester for 23 years, and feels that taking part in the study has changed his outlook.
“Since taking part in the trial, I feel more comfortable addressing any issues related to patients’ weight and I’m more aware of the impact it can have in encouraging someone to lose weight,” he says.
So this new study should be reassuring for GPs. It’s okay to bring up this sensitive subject. Even better, the discussion doesn’t have to take long, which is good news for GPs with a waiting room full of patients.
“It’s a quick conversation that’s a really important part of my role as a GP,” says Hodges. And one that he thinks GPs should be having more often with their patients, along the lines of advice on giving up smoking.
What does this mean for you?
When you see your GP, don’t be surprised if they bring up your weight. Some people, like Jim, might not even be aware they are overweight or obese.
A simple 30 second chat with your GP, which might involve pointing you in the direction of weight management services, could be the kick start you need to lose a few pounds. And if you’re concerned about your weight, don’t hesitate to mention it to your GP.
Keeping a healthy weight can reduce your risk of cancer and other health problems.
As Professor Aveyard says: “We all know we need to do something to improve our health, but sometimes a reminder from the GP and the offer of help can be just the thing we are looking for to get us going.”
Obesity is a complex problem that doesn’t have a simple solution so we need to work together with our GPs on this.
And the power of a 30 second chat shouldn’t be underestimated.
Jasmine Just is a health information officer at Cancer Research UK
from Cancer Research UK – Science blog http://ift.tt/2f1IGKe
Is it okay to bring up someone’s weight?
This is a question that GPs face on a regular basis.
But recent headlines proclaiming that a “30-second chat can trigger weight loss” suggest that starting this type of conversation shouldn’t be a cause for worry.
The reports followed new research, part funded by Cancer Research UK, looking at the role GPs can play in discussing bodyweight with their patients. And the findings suggest that a chat might be just what the doctor ordered.
The study, published in The Lancet last week, found that 8 in 10 overweight or obese people thought it was appropriate and helpful for their GP to suggest that losing weight would be good for their health.
And just a 30 second chat, or a very brief intervention to give it its technical name, is all it takes for GPs to encourage people to shed some pounds.
What’s a brief intervention?
A ‘brief intervention’ is a technique that GPs often use to encourage people to think about their health. Take smoking, for example. A GP might ask a smoker questions with a view to encouraging them to stop. Or they might simply offer help with stopping. The patient’s reason for the original appointment doesn’t have to be smoking related, so the GP can bring it up out of the blue.
A brief intervention might take only 5 minutes. And a very brief intervention can take as little as 30 seconds.
This approach has already been shown to be effective in encouraging people to stop smoking, but what about encouraging people who are obese or overweight to lose weight?
Why is this important?
Obesity is the second biggest preventable cause of cancer after smoking, which we’ve blogged about recently.
And being overweight is linked to 13 different types of cancer.
At the moment it’s not clear whether losing weight will reduce your risk of cancer. The research is limited, but it does suggest this might be the case. As well as the possibility of reducing your risk of cancer, losing weight has a number of other great benefits, such as improving heart health.
Can a chat encourage weight loss?
This new study is the result of the BWeL (Brief intervention for weight loss) trial, which involved around 1800 obese people from 57 GP practices in England.
In designing this study, we were clear that whatever we asked GPs to do, we could only ask them to spend a few seconds doing it – Professor Paul Aveyard
They all had their height, weight and body mass index (BMI) recorded, and were randomly assigned to one of two groups. In the first group, the GP told the patient they would benefit from losing weight, and offered to refer them to a weight management group, like Slimming World. In the second group, the GP just told the patient they would benefit from losing some weight and left it at that.
It took 30 seconds or less for the GP to have either of these discussions – that’s the ‘very brief intervention’ part.
And according to Professor Paul Aveyard, who led the study and is a practising GP and Professor of Behavioural Medicine at the University of Oxford, the fact these are such short conversations is the key.
“In designing this study, we were clear that whatever we asked GPs to do, we could only ask them to spend a few seconds doing it,” he explains. “In our research, we tested whether a 30 second chat from the GP could motivate patients to take action on their weight, how patients felt about it, and whether this would lead to weight loss in the longer term.”
And the findings were encouraging. Patients in both groups lost weight. But those offered referral to a weight management programme lost on average 1.4kg more after 1 year than those who hadn’t been referred. This is despite the fact not all the patients who were offered a referral actually attended the programme.
This means even a short conversation between a GP and a patient about losing weight, which might involve referral to a weight loss programme, can be extremely effective.
Is it okay to chat about fat?
Now it gets really interesting. The researchers also wanted to know what the patients thought when the GPs brought up their weight as an issue given it can be a touchy topic.
I wasn’t offended when my GP discussed my weight with me. In fact, I’m glad he brought it up, as it’s something I hadn’t ever thought was an issue and I feel it has encouraged me to lose weight
– Jim, 70, who took part in the study
Aveyard explains: “Immediately after the consultation, we asked patients whether it was appropriate and helpful for GPs to bring up their weight in this way. The large majority said it was, and almost nobody thought it wasn’t.”
In fact, 8 in 10 people found that it was both ‘appropriate’ and ‘acceptable’ for GPs to suggest losing weight would be good for their health.
Jim, 70, is from Cirencester and was invited to take part in the BWeL trial after seeing his GP for an unrelated health problem.
“My GP brought up the topic of my weight during the consultation. He calculated my BMI and told me I was in the ‘obese’ category. I was really shocked because I hadn’t considered myself overweight before,” he says.
Jim was allocated to the group that was referred to a weight loss management programme, and lost 2 stone in 12 months.
“I wasn’t offended when my GP discussed my weight with me. In fact, I’m glad he brought it up, as it’s something I hadn’t ever thought was an issue and I feel it has encouraged me to lose weight, which I’m really happy about.”
What does this mean for GPs?
A study published in 2013 looked at the percentage of overweight and obese patients who had been told by a health professional they’d benefit from losing weight. And in that study just 4 in 10 people remembered having been told to lose weight.
Since taking part in the trial, I feel more comfortable addressing any issues related to patients’ weight and I’m more aware of the impact it can have in encouraging someone to lose weight
– Dr Paul Hodges, a GP who was involved in the study
It’s not easy to have these conversations. And there are certain challenges that may hold GPs back. Some of these include not having enough time, thinking that just a brief discussion won’t help, and worry about offending a patient.
Dr Paul Hodges is one of the GPs who was involved in the BWeL trial. He’s been working as a GP in Gloucester for 23 years, and feels that taking part in the study has changed his outlook.
“Since taking part in the trial, I feel more comfortable addressing any issues related to patients’ weight and I’m more aware of the impact it can have in encouraging someone to lose weight,” he says.
So this new study should be reassuring for GPs. It’s okay to bring up this sensitive subject. Even better, the discussion doesn’t have to take long, which is good news for GPs with a waiting room full of patients.
“It’s a quick conversation that’s a really important part of my role as a GP,” says Hodges. And one that he thinks GPs should be having more often with their patients, along the lines of advice on giving up smoking.
What does this mean for you?
When you see your GP, don’t be surprised if they bring up your weight. Some people, like Jim, might not even be aware they are overweight or obese.
A simple 30 second chat with your GP, which might involve pointing you in the direction of weight management services, could be the kick start you need to lose a few pounds. And if you’re concerned about your weight, don’t hesitate to mention it to your GP.
Keeping a healthy weight can reduce your risk of cancer and other health problems.
As Professor Aveyard says: “We all know we need to do something to improve our health, but sometimes a reminder from the GP and the offer of help can be just the thing we are looking for to get us going.”
Obesity is a complex problem that doesn’t have a simple solution so we need to work together with our GPs on this.
And the power of a 30 second chat shouldn’t be underestimated.
Jasmine Just is a health information officer at Cancer Research UK
from Cancer Research UK – Science blog http://ift.tt/2f1IGKe
EPA Participates at the 3rd Annual Latino Medical Student Association (LMSA) Policy Summit in Washington DC
By Ana Rivera Lupiañez
As a proud Latina, working with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), I always look for opportunities to volunteer at activities that promote the Agency’s mission, particularly those initiatives aimed at protecting vulnerable populations.
On October 22, I volunteered to participate at the third annual Latino Medical Student Association (LMSA) Policy Summit. The conference, for medical students nationwide, was sponsored by the Association of American Medical Colleges in Washington D.C. The goal of the policy summit was to provide students with tools to become involved in health policy processes in order to address and improve health disparities facing the Latino community.
Kathy Sykes, Senior Advisor for Aging and Public Health of EPA’s Office of Research and Development, gave a presentation on the agency’s efforts toward “Closing the Gap on Hispanic Health Care Disparities”. Students were very impressed to learn about EPA’s involvement in developing environmental health policy regulations aimed at improving health disparities faced by the Latino population.
After the workshop sessions, the students had the opportunity to stop by the exhibitors’ booths to ask questions and gather informational brochures. I joined Kathy Sykes (Office of Research and Development), and Melissa Vargas (Office of Public Engagement) to staff our booth. Medical students were delighted to receive copies of EPA’s Recognition and Management of Pesticide Poisonings: 6th Edition manual. The manual is an excellent tool for healthcare providers and serves as a quick reference resource for the best toxicology and treatment information for patients with pesticide exposures.
It was very rewarding to see many students, particularly those hailing from agricultural areas of California and Texas, very interested in the recent revisions to EPA’s Agricultural Worker Protection Standard (WPS). The WPS is aimed at reducing the risk of pesticide poisoning and injury among agricultural workers and pesticide handlers. The revised WPS puts in place stronger protections for the nation’s two million agricultural workers and their families working on farms, forests, nurseries, and greenhouses, and will afford farmworkers similar health protections to those already afforded to workers in other industries.
The enthusiasm on the faces of these young students and their eagerness to serve the vulnerable and underrepresented minorities represents a promising step forward toward closing the gap on Hispanic health care disparities. They would certainly make any Latina mother proud! I’m very hopeful that these young students will continue working to improve the health and environment of Hispanics throughout our nation.
About the author: Ana Rivera Lupiáñez is an Environmental Protection Specialist with the Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pesticides Programs, Field and External Affairs Division, Certification and Worker Protection Branch in Washington, D. C.
from The EPA Blog http://ift.tt/2fCpCnT
By Ana Rivera Lupiañez
As a proud Latina, working with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), I always look for opportunities to volunteer at activities that promote the Agency’s mission, particularly those initiatives aimed at protecting vulnerable populations.
On October 22, I volunteered to participate at the third annual Latino Medical Student Association (LMSA) Policy Summit. The conference, for medical students nationwide, was sponsored by the Association of American Medical Colleges in Washington D.C. The goal of the policy summit was to provide students with tools to become involved in health policy processes in order to address and improve health disparities facing the Latino community.
Kathy Sykes, Senior Advisor for Aging and Public Health of EPA’s Office of Research and Development, gave a presentation on the agency’s efforts toward “Closing the Gap on Hispanic Health Care Disparities”. Students were very impressed to learn about EPA’s involvement in developing environmental health policy regulations aimed at improving health disparities faced by the Latino population.
After the workshop sessions, the students had the opportunity to stop by the exhibitors’ booths to ask questions and gather informational brochures. I joined Kathy Sykes (Office of Research and Development), and Melissa Vargas (Office of Public Engagement) to staff our booth. Medical students were delighted to receive copies of EPA’s Recognition and Management of Pesticide Poisonings: 6th Edition manual. The manual is an excellent tool for healthcare providers and serves as a quick reference resource for the best toxicology and treatment information for patients with pesticide exposures.
It was very rewarding to see many students, particularly those hailing from agricultural areas of California and Texas, very interested in the recent revisions to EPA’s Agricultural Worker Protection Standard (WPS). The WPS is aimed at reducing the risk of pesticide poisoning and injury among agricultural workers and pesticide handlers. The revised WPS puts in place stronger protections for the nation’s two million agricultural workers and their families working on farms, forests, nurseries, and greenhouses, and will afford farmworkers similar health protections to those already afforded to workers in other industries.
The enthusiasm on the faces of these young students and their eagerness to serve the vulnerable and underrepresented minorities represents a promising step forward toward closing the gap on Hispanic health care disparities. They would certainly make any Latina mother proud! I’m very hopeful that these young students will continue working to improve the health and environment of Hispanics throughout our nation.
About the author: Ana Rivera Lupiáñez is an Environmental Protection Specialist with the Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pesticides Programs, Field and External Affairs Division, Certification and Worker Protection Branch in Washington, D. C.
from The EPA Blog http://ift.tt/2fCpCnT
Inscription à :
Commentaires (Atom)