408-854-1883 starts at $30 per hr home care

Affordable in home care | starts at $28 per hr

Metabolism Myths

It’s time you know the burning truths about your metabolism. (Credit: Corbis/C.J. Burton/Yahoo)

Most of us know the basic formula for weight loss: If calories out exceed calories in, the pounds will fall off. But what sounds so simple can actually be a bit complicated when you consider the “calories out” half of the equation.

Obviously, physical activity — whether a workout at the gym or simply walking up stairs — requires energy. But our bodies also use calories to keep the lights on — our heart needs energy to pump, and our lungs need energy to enable us to breathe. This is called our “resting metabolic rate,” and along with the calories we burn through exercise and digesting food, it makes up what most of us refer to simply as our “metabolism.”

Your resting metabolic rate is responsible for about 60 percent of the calories you burn. As a result, “it’s really the main target of both substantiated and unsubstantiated weight loss [strategies],” says Jonathan Mike, PhD, an exercise scientist and strength coach. Yet most of us don’t really know how our metabolism even works — we simply characterize our internal engine as “fast” or “slow,” and if it’s slow, we want to speed it up. The result? We eagerly buy into mainstream myths about metabolism that may do more harm than good.

Myth #1: Breakfast is the most important meal of the day because it wakes up your metabolism.

We’ve all heard it before: A substantial breakfast is the key to waking up a sluggish metabolism after a night of sleep. But a giant plate of eggs and bacon may not be all it’s cracked up to be: In a 2014 study in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, dieters who ate breakfast lost no more weight than breakfast-skippers did.

In fact, downing a big breakfast may actually be a bad thing: It may delay your body’s shift from parasympathetic mode — the rest-and-restore half of your nervous system — to the more metabolically active sympathetic mode, says Roy Martina, MD, author of Sleep Your Fat Away. “During the night, the nervous system is in parasympathetic mode,” he explains. “That’s where we digest food and restore our body.” If you start your day with a big breakfast, you divert your body’s attention back to digestion and rest — and as a result, the calories you consume are more likely to be directed to your fat reserves, he says.

His advice? Don’t eat first thing after waking up if you’re not hungry. “Postpone breakfast as long as you can,” Martina tells Yahoo Health. “The reason for that is this: We can store unlimited amounts of fat, but we can only store a certain amount of sugar in our body.” So if you delay consuming carbs, your body will burn through its sugar reserves — then move on to torching fat. Of course, if you’re famished come 7 a.m., you should eat, but try to keep it light. “Just eat enough that you feel OK,” advises Martina.

Myth #2: You need to eat every three hours to boost your metabolism.

You can blame bodybuilders for the six-meals-a-day gospel. “Bodybuilders eat 5,000 calories a day — and most aren’t going to have three meals of 1,500 calories each,” says Mike. “They’ll typically break it up.”

For serious weightlifters — and the rare people who have naturally revved-up metabolisms, who Martina calls “fast burners” — grazing all day makes sense. But for the rest of us — who eat, say, 2,000 calories a day — there’s no metabolic motivation for spreading our calories out over six meals.

Need proof? In a British Journal of Nutrition study, when overweight dieters ate either three or six meals a day, with the same total number of calories, they lost the same amount of weight. “Smaller, more frequent meals do not speed metabolism, compared to the same total calories and macronutrients consumed in larger, less-frequent meals,” Mike says.

Plus, if you’re eating multiple times a day, you may end up overeating, allowing your mini meals to turn into full-size ones, says Michael Jensen, MD, an endocrinologist and professor of medicine at the Mayo Clinic.

Myth #3: Skipping meals reduces your metabolism.

If you don’t eat dinner, will your metabolism take a nosedive? Probably not. In order for your body’s burn to plummet, you need to restrict your calories to the point that you feel deprived, says Martina. And one missed meal isn’t enough to create a serious energy deficit — it’s only when you follow a low-calorie diet for a long time that your body goes into starvation mode, forcing it to use energy more efficiently (i.e. to burn fewer calories), he says. “Skipping one meal will never do that.”

Of course, if you skip a meal, your body won’t experience the small metabolic boost that occurs after eating — but any drop in your burn rate will be so small that it’d be “difficult to detect,” says Jensen. So why are chronic meal-skippers often overweight? “Skipping a meal might make you overly hungry, so you overeat at your next meal,” Jensen says. In other words, it’s a matter of subsequent meal size — not metabolism.

Myth #4: Overweight people have a slow metabolism, and skinny people have a fast one.

It seems obvious: The fatter you are, the more sluggish your metabolism, right? “As a rule, that’s actually not true,” says Jensen. In fact, he adds, “there are as many skinny people as overweight people with low metabolisms.” Sure, there areslim people with lightning-fast metabolisms. “They cannot sit down for a long time — they’re kind of hyperactive,” Martina says. “They burn so much energy that they can eat much more and get away with it.” But more often, slim folks are simply in tune with their bodies — they eat only what they need, and nothing more. If they do overeat at one meal, they tend to naturally compensate at the next one, preventing them from gaining weight.

And, the truth is, body weight is actually a pretty poor predictor of metabolism — body composition (i.e. how much muscle you have, versus fat) is much more important. “If you have two people, both 180 pounds, and one has 20 pounds of fat and one has 50 pounds of fat, the person with less fat, i.e. more muscle, is going to burn more calories,” says Jensen.

As a general rule, however, overweight people — especially those with some amount of muscle — torch more calories per day than skinny folks, since bigger bodies require more calories for everyday functioning. So why are heavy people still carrying extra baggage if they burn so much energy? Simple: Overweight people may unknowingly consume way more calories than they torch. “Your typical normal-weight person underestimates how much they’ve taken in that day by 20 to 30 percent. Obese people will typically underestimate by as much as 50 percent,” says Jensen. “Someone with a serious weight problem may truly believe they’re taking in a very limited amount of food.”

Related: 5 Vegetables That Make You Fat

Myth #5: Some people must eat fewer than 1,000 calories a day to lose weight.

Unless you have a sluggish thyroid, you probably don’t need to drop down to the 1,000-calorie mark in order to lose weight, says Martina. In fact, “the only people I’ve seen who burn that little are people with long-standing anorexia, who weigh about 70 or 80 pounds,” Jensen says. So why do some dieters insist severe calorie-cutting is the only way to move the scale? Because they expect rapid results. “You’d probably lose weight if you cut back to 1,200 or 1,400 calories, but it wouldn’t be quick and it wouldn’t be consistent,” he says. Read: Your weight will drop even if don’t crash diet — but the number on the scale may stay the same for days at a time, leading you to believe the diet isn’t working.

Myth #6: Yo-yo dieting will destroy your metabolism.

Constantly gaining and losing has been linked to a number of health problems (including some serious ones, likeendometrial cancer). But ruining your body’s ability to burn calories isn’t one of them. Although it may create temporary metabolic drops, “yo-yo dieting won’t permanently wreck your metabolism,” says Mike. Case in point: In a 2013 study in the journal Metabolism, researchers found that severe weight cyclers — people who’d lost 20-plus pounds on three or more occasions — were able to lose weight, shed body fat, and gain lean muscle just as easily as people with fewer fluctuations.

So why do yo-yo’ers find losing weight to be such a struggle? “They’ve lost and gained, lost and gained, and each time, they give up sooner,” says Jensen. “Since they always regain, it seems harder each time, and they give up easier each time.” Read: Each time they try to diet, they feel frustrated faster — and assume their lack of weight loss is because their metabolism has stalled out.

Myth #7: You have no control over your metabolism.

Yes, there’s a genetic component to your body’s burning power. “Even if you match up people with the same amount of lean tissue, you have some who burn 400, 500 calories less,” says Jensen. “And that seems to be heritable.” But that doesn’t mean you’re locked into your metabolic rate for life, says Martina. “You can change your metabolism — for example, by packing more muscle onto your frame.”

In fact, gaining muscle through resistance training is one of the best ways to offset the small decline in metabolism that naturally occurs with age, says Mike. “Typically, from age 30 to about age 80, you lose about 15 percent of your muscle mass,” he says. “You can offset that if you start lifting. The earlier you start, the better off you’re going to be as you get older.”

Myth #8: The right diet — lots of green tea and chili peppers! — will boost your metabolism.

As much as we’d all like to believe the right foods can work a metabolic miracle, the calorie-burning jolt some foods provide isn’t enough to affect your weight, says Jensen. “If I was eating nothing but chili peppers, I might not eat that much — because my mouth would be hot all the time,” he jokes. “But you’re not going to lose weight because of the metabolism effect.”

As Mike explains, metabolism-revving foods really only boost your burn by 4 to 5 percent — and for a very brief time. “You might see a slight increase [in metabolism], but it’s mainly due to a slight elevation in body temperature and sympathetic nervous system activity,” he says.

Medical Device Design Control Implementation Summary List

1.      Identify Total Design Control Requirement
Review of specific design control requirements, determine their source and identify implementation methods.

·         Design Control

·         US – Food Drug and Cosmetics Act & 21 CFR Part 820

·         EU – Medical Device Directive (MDD) & EN ISO 13485:2012

·         Canada – Canadian Medical Device Regulations (CMDR) & ISO 13485:2003

·         Conformity Assessment Paths

·         US – Premarket Submissions

·         EU – MDD Annex II Technical Files & Design Dossiers

·         Canada – Medical Device License

·         Identify Total Design Control Requirements

2.      Developing a Project Plan
Analysis of a small example project, identify stages and develop a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) and a Gantt chart for the project.

·         Planning Stages

·         Interfaces

·         Project Management Techniques

·         Action List

·         Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)

·         Gantt Chart

·         Critical Path Method (CPM)

·         Program Evaluation and Review Technique (PERT)

·         Developing the Design History File (DHF)

3.      Developing and Resolving Input Requirements
Develop a set of design inputs for an example product and use the results to identify missing, incomplete or ambiguous requirements.

·         Requirements for the Procedure

·         Resolving design input issues (incomplete, ambiguous, or conflicting requirements)

·         Identifying the design input requirements

·         Performance

·         Functional

·         Safety

·         Regulatory

·         Market

·         Starting a trace matrix

·         Developing and Resolving Input Requirements

4.      Design Output Completeness
Review design outputs for an example product and identify essential requirements, acceptance criteria and gaps in the requirements.

·         Requirements for the Procedure

·         Total finished design output

·         The device

·         Packaging and labeling

·         Device Master Record (DMR)

·         Acceptance criteria

·         Essential product characteristics

·         Continuing the trace matrix

5.      Identifying and Resolving Problems
Design reviews systematically, and examine a design to evaluate its adequacy and capability with the intent to identify problems. Participants critique a design review to determine if it is sufficient.

·         Requirements for the Procedure

·         What needs to be covered

·         Who needs to attend

·         How to document results

·         Integrating risk management

·         Design Review at each Stage

·         Creating and Closing Action Items

·         Identifying and Resolving Problems

6.      Design Verification Methods
Examine paired design inputs and design outputs and determine the best tool for design verification. In some cases the analysis is extended to look specific aspects of the tools.

·         Requirements for the Procedure

·         Design Verification Tools

·         Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA)

·         Fault Tree Analysis (FTA)

·         Inspections and Tests

·         Document Review

·         Alternate Calculations

·         Similar Designs

·         The sample size question

·         Continuing the trace matrix

·         Exercise – Design Verification Methods

7.      Examining a Design Validation Plan
Critique a design validation that starts with user needs and intended uses. The plan uses production equivalents and simulated use conditions.

·         Requirements for the Procedure

·         Initial Products or Equivalents

·         Defined conditions or simulation

·         Software Validation

·         Risk Management (ISO 14971:2007)

·         Usability Engineering

·         Continuing the trace matrix

·         Examining a Design Validation Plan

8. Determining When a Process Must be Validated
Some production processes require process validation, while others do not. You’ll determine analyze processes transferred to production and document whether they require process validation.

·         Requirements for the Procedure

·         Process Controls, 820.70(a)

·         Purchasing Data, 820.50(b)

·         Process Validation, 820.75

·         Determining When a Process Must be Validated

9. Classify Changes as a Design Change or a Production Process Change.

QSIT informs the FDA Investigator that Production and Process Changes could be Design Changes. This exercise gives attendees an opportunity to classify changes and provides insight into the decisions to make in the QMS.

  • Requirements for the Procedure
  • Design change interrelationships — the five important considerations
  • When a production change is a design change
  • Does the design change create a new Device Identifier?
  • Does the design change require an updated 510(k)?
  • Does the design change impact the Risk Management File?
  • Is the design change an enhancement or a recall?
  • The design change flow chart shows the picture

Design change records

Classify changes as a design change or a production process change

The ‘elder orphans’ of the Baby Boom generation by Carina Storrs

(CNN)Recently a 76-year-old man known as HB, whose health had been deteriorating, tried to take his own life and was admitted to North Shore University Hospital on Long Island.

Doctors decided that HB would not be able to go back to living by himself because of his condition and complications while in the hospital. With his only family across the country and no social support in the area, the man was placed, possibly permanently, in a nursing home.

The experience of HB is not unusual. His story is a case study of the problem of “elder orphans.” These seniors are single or widowed; they have no children, at least in the area, and no support system. And they find themselves alone with no one to help care for them when they need it.

Although the problem of elder orphans has been known for a while, new researchsuggests just how bad it is. About 22% of Americans 65 years and older are in danger of becoming, or already are, in this situation. As of 2012, there were 43 million people over 65 in the U.S., up from 35 million in 2002.

Dr. Maria Torroella Carney, who is chief of geriatric and palliative medicine at North Shore-LIJ Health System, treated HB. She estimates that nearly a quarter of all elderly Americans could be orphans based on articles that have been published in medical and nursing journals looking at the prevalence of childless or friendless elders at the local level. She presented the findings at the American Geriatrics Society’s annual meeting May 15-17.

The outlook for the future is not any brighter. Based on 2012 U.S. Census data, about one third of Americans age 45 to 63 are single, and in a position to become orphans as they age.

“This is something I’ve dealt with over the years,” Carney said. “This population is likely going to increase and we don’t understand them well enough.”

“I wanted to bring awareness, like a call to action, to state and federal governments,” Carney said. She hopes that the current research will spur the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and other agencies, to determine the actual prevalence of this vulnerable population.

Dr. Kenneth Brummel-Smith, professor of geriatrics at the Florida State University College of Medicine, agrees that the number of elder orphans will probably rise as Baby Boomers, the generation born between 1946 and 1964, age. The oldest Baby Boomersturned 65 in 2011; the youngest are projected to require health care through about 2060.

There have been very few studies looking at why so many members of the so-called “Silver Tsunami” are at risk of becoming elder orphans, Carney said.

The decision to remain childless is probably contributing. “My generation was one of the first that elected not to have children,” said Dr. Joyce Varner, professor and director of the Adult-Geron Primacy Care NP track program at the University of South Alabama, which teaches nurse practitioners how to provide primary care, especially for the elderly.

“I began to see this problem in the 1990s as a nurse practitioner,” Varner said. “I see a lot of sadness and regret on the part of the elderly people who decided not to have children,” she said. “A lot of fear. ‘How are we going to get care? Is there going to be anyone with me at the end of life?'”

Based on her own research, Varner estimates that about 60% of nursing home residents do not have regular visitors.

Varner calls the new study “wonderful, strictly from the standpoint of making people more aware of the problem.”

“I am going to be an elder orphan, too,” said Varner, who is 59 years old. She and her husband have decided not to have children, although they have prepared financially and built up a network of friends, both in their age group and younger, to help them when they need it. She advises people to do the same if they can.

Carney hopes that her research, along with leading to a better idea of the prevalence of elder orphans, will get experts talking about new programs that could be created to support these elders, as well as caregivers and their families.

It is estimated that by 2030 about 5.3 million seniors will be living in nursing homes, which include hospital, rehabilitation and hospice facilities. That is up from about 1.3 million Americans in 2012. Varner worries that there may not be enough nursing homes and assisted-living facilities for all the people who need one.

Brummel-Smith thinks that part of the answer could be to bring caregivers into the homes of elder orphans. For example, Money Follows the Person is a Medicaid-funded program that helps younger adults with disabilities stay in the home; it could also help elder orphans, he said.

Carney thinks that crises such as the one that HB experienced could be prevented if seniors, and their health care providers, relatives and friends, established connections with support programs and facilities in the area. “If we had known he was an elder orphan, we could have intervened earlier,” she said.

————-

Connie’s comments: Contact Connie at motherhealth@gmail.com if you need a bay area caregiver or care home facility for seniors or text at 408-854-1883

Dear Bill Gates, Do you know that we can derive purified water from the atmosphere

From AVAVA systems, we now have a water purifier available for all residential homes. No need to convert waster water into drinking water. AVAVA water system purifies and convert atmospheric water into drinking water.

Contact Connie Dello Buono , CEO of Green Research Institute at motherhealth@gmail.com or conniedbuono@gmail.com 408-854-1883

water supply and purification using atmosphere from avava systems and GRI connie 4088541883

Coffee in moderation increases sex hormones?

Coffee, that morning elixir, may give us an early jump-start to the day, but numerous studies have shown that it also may be protective against type 2 diabetes. Yet no one has really understood why.

Now, researchers at UCLA have discovered a possible molecular mechanism behind coffee`s protective effect. A protein called sex hormone–binding globulin (SHBG) regulates the biological activity of the body`s sex hormones, testosterone and estrogen, which have long been thought to play a role in the development of type 2 diabetes. And coffee consumption, it turns out, increases plasma levels of SHBG.

Reporting with colleagues in the current edition of the journal Diabetes, first author Atsushi Goto, a UCLA doctoral student in epidemiology, and Dr. Simin Liu, a professor of epidemiology and medicine with joint appointments at the UCLA School of Public Health and the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, show that women who drink at least four cups of coffee a day are less than half as likely to develop diabetes as non-coffee drinkers.

When the findings were adjusted for levels of SHBG, the researchers said, that protective effect disappeared.

The American Diabetes Association estimates that nearly 24 million children and adults in the U.S. — nearly 8 percent of the population — have diabetes. Type 2 diabetes is the most common form of the disease and accounts for about 90 to 95 percent of these cases.

Early studies have consistently shown that an “inverse association” exists between coffee consumption and risk for type 2 diabetes, Liu said. That is, the greater the consumption of coffee, the lesser the risk of diabetes. It was thought that coffee may improve the body`s tolerance to glucose by increasing metabolism or improving its tolerance to insulin.

“But exactly how is elusive,” said Liu, “although we now know that this protein, SHBG, is critical as an early target for assessing the risk and prevention of the onset of diabetes.”

Earlier work by Liu and his colleagues published in the New England Journal of Medicine had identified two mutations in the gene coding for SHBG and their effect on the risk of developing type 2 diabetes; one increases risk while the other decreases it, depending on the levels of SHBG in the blood.

A large body of clinical studies has implicated the important role of sex hormones in the development of type 2 diabetes, and it`s known that SHBG not only regulates the sex hormones that are biologically active but may also bind to receptors in a variety of cells, directly mediating the signaling of sex hormones.

“That genetic evidence significantly advanced the field,” said Goto, “because it indicated that SHBG may indeed play a causal role in affecting risk for type 2 diabetes.”

“It seems that SHBG in the blood does reflect a genetic susceptibility to developing type 2 diabetes,” Liu said. “But we now further show that this protein can be influenced by dietary factors such as coffee intake in affecting diabetes risk — the lower the levels of SHBG, the greater the risk beyond any known diabetes risk factors.”

For the study, the researchers identified 359 new diabetes cases matched by age and race with 359 apparently healthy controls selected from among nearly 40,000 women enrolled in the Women`s Health Study, a large-scale cardiovascular trial originally designed to evaluate the benefits and risks of low-dose aspirin and vitamin E in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and cancer.

They found that women who drank four cups of caffeinated coffee each day had significantly higher levels of SHBG than did non-drinkers and were 56 percent less likely to develop diabetes than were non-drinkers. And those who also carried the protective copy of the SHBG gene appeared to benefit the most from coffee consumption.

When the investigators controlled for blood SHBG levels, the decrease in risk associated with coffee consumption was not significant. This suggests that it is SHBG that mediates the decrease in risk of developing type 2 diabetes, Liu said.

And there`s bad news for decaf lovers. “Consumption of decaffeinated coffee was not significantly associated with SHBG levels, nor diabetes risk,” Goto said. “So you probably have to go for the octane!”

Read more: http://www.diabetescare.net/article/title/why-coffee-protects-against-type-2-diabetes#ixzz3a1zwIUDe

12-hour routine to up your metabolism by Jessica Migala

Ready to become a lean, mean calorie-burning machine? Getting your metabolism into tip-top shape will help your body burn more calories throughout the day, making it easier to lose weight or maintain it—and you can speed things up in just one day. Read on for your hour-by-hour plan.

 6 or 7 am: Get outside

Wake up, sunshine! Getting exposure to light in the morning will not only help you wake up, but may help keep you slim, suggests research from Northwestern University. Happily, bright light (the sun is the best) sets your body clock, a key player in regulating every system of your body, including a speedy—or sluggish—metabolism.

 7:30 am: Turn up the intensity

If you’re going to the gym, you might as well get as much out of it as you can, right? Research has shown that a vigorous workout can help you burn almost 200 calories more in the 14 hours after the session, according to a small 2011 study. Later studies show a smaller afterburn during intense interval workouts (about 60 additional calories in the hour after exercise), but that can still make a big difference over time. Don’t have time for a lengthy workout? Alternate 60 seconds of fast running, biking, or on the elliptical with a 60 second rest period, and repeat for 25 minutes, suggests the American College of Sports Medicine, and you’ll still torch calories after you leave the gym. (Here are 3 more quick calorie-burning interval workouts to try.)

8:30 am: Add protein

If your breakfast is a bagel with cream cheese or a muffin and coffee, you may want to make a switch to higher protein eats. When overweight young adult women ate a higher protein breakfast (one that contained around 30 grams of protein, versus one that contained around 12 grams), they had better glycemic control throughout the entire day, reports research in the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition. Go for eggs and Greek yogurt, which are both protein powerhouses.

9 am: Switch to tea

You might be hooked on java, but the other brew (tea, that is) has been shown to help your body burn about 100 additional calories over the course of the day, and torch more fat compared to a placebo, reveals a 2011 meta analysis. It may be the combo of both the catechins (healthful antioxidants) in tea and caffeine that revs metabolism. (Check out these 10 clever ways to use matcha tea.)

10 am: Stand while you take the call

Skip taking a seat and get on your feet! Young adults who did work while sitting versus standing burned more calories, shows a 2012 study in the Journal of Physical Activity & Health. At rest, they burned 1.02 calories per minute, compared to 1.36 calories per minute while standing. To put that into perspective, an hour of on-your-feet phone calls burns 82 calories versus 61 sitting. Sure, it doesn’t sound like much, but added up over the course of the day, it matters.

12 pm: Skip the diet soda ; Napping does a body good.

It may have zero calories, but drinking artificially sweetened beverages may negatively affect the body’s normal metabolic response to sugar, notes a study in Trends in Endocrinology & Metabolism. Not everyone agrees, but diet drinks have been linked with weight gain and metabolic syndrome, a cluster of risk factors that increase heart disease and diabetes risk, including high blood sugar and increased belly fat. (Take a look at exactly what diet soda’s doing to your body with this infographic.)

3 pm: Nibble on chocolate

That’s not license to maul the candy bowl on your coworker’s desk, but it won’t hurt to grab a couple of squares of good-quality dark chocolate. In a study by Swiss and German researchers, participants ate about 1.5 ounces of dark chocolate daily for two weeks. Compared to a control group, those who ate the sweets had lower stress hormone levels and a more regulated metabolism. Why? Stress can cause sputtery fat burning engines. It may be the chemicals in cocoa, like flavonoids, that play a role in regulating metabolism.

5 pm: Have a laugh

The day is just about over, lighten up a little, will ya? Find that hilarious colleague of yours to walk out the door with or call up your pal who makes you chuckle. Laughing is like a workout—as few as 10 minutes of giggles helps you burn 10 to 20% more calories than when you’re stone-faced. That’s enough to torch 10 to 40 calories. It may not sound like a lot, but think about what you get out of it: Research also shows that laughing can help keep your heart healthy.

8 pm: Bust stress

No matter what simmers you down—a good book, a celeb magazine, sex, watching a three-minute clip of dogs being cute, savasana on your floor—do it. According to 2014 research, women who were more stressed had a slower metabolism and burned less fat after eating compared to those who were stress-free—a difference of about 100 calories. Ultimately, the researchers note, frazzled living could promote weight gain.

9 pm: Wind down

Your to-do list might still be calling, but it’s time to prep your body and mind for bed. That’s because skimping on sleep makes a mess of your metabolism, suggests a small 2012 study in the American Journal of Physiology. Adults who slept for nine hours had healthier metabolisms, fewer cravings for sweet and salty fare, and less hunger compared to those who shorted their sleep to four hours.

Do not self diagnose using google, some doctors said

What do you think? Email motherhealth@gmail.com some of your stories.

Here are comments from some of the readers:

  • What is wrong with looking up what might be wrong and then asking your doctor this is not self-diagnosing but being aware of what might be wrong and then asking your doctor? In fifteen minutes which is the average most doctors give you why not ask clear questions. The day of the doctor god is gone they are not better in proactive analysis than the patient.
  • Have had better results with herbs from google than crazy drugs I got from my doctor , some of side effects nearly killed me , have had much results with natural herbs I found from google thanks
  • A GOOD Doctor will encourage you to take charge of your health and ask questions, a scared Doctor doesn’t want you getting information that can tell you how to heal yourself with non-pharmaceutical means. Or doing “their job” that they spent time and money going to school for.
  • If it didn’t take so long to see a specialist we wouldn’t be so anxious. I have waited months and have not received even an appointment date. GP just offers more dangerous painkillers. Can’t blame us for trying to help ourselves.
  • Someone needs to create a diagnosis machine. We can’t be that far off.
  • Cannot prescribe many drugs when we can treat our selves by using research. Less drugs less money for doctors and the drug companies. Think about it. granny Barb
  • If google is right 75% of the time it probably does about as well as a physician
  • they need to make an internet doctor, this can’t be stopped unless they do