All posts by Staff

Most men and women trim, clip, and cut their hair for aesthetic reasons. After all, a survey of 303 female students from Wayne State University found that the overwhelming majority (96%) remove their body hair. What’s more, a survey from Remington Products found that 71% of women prefer men to shave their back hair, 44% of women find it troublesome when this hair is left untouched, and that 40% women think men should shave their chests.

However, if you’re not careful, you may have to wind up getting rid of the hair on your head for a far, far grosser reason: so-called super-lice.
According to a new report, which was presented at the 250th National Meeting and Exposition of the American Chemical Society (ACS), the lice populations of at least 25 states have developed resistances to the over-the-counter treatments doctors and schools widely recommend.

“We are the first group to collect lice samples from a large number of populations across the U.S.,” said Kyong Yoon, Ph.D., who was one of the first to report the phenomenon in the U.S., in 2000. “What we found was that 104 out of the 109 lice populations we tested had high levels of gene mutations, which have been linked to resistance to pyrethroids.”

Fortunately, lice do not carry disease, according to health experts, which is just one of a myriad of different myths still perpetuated. Lice also do not live in the environment, either — just on heads. This means that there’s no need to wash a child’s clothes, sheets, and stuffed toys, as most think.

The most important myth to debunk is that lice are a sign of poor hygiene. Having lice does not mean a person is dirty. The irony of the situation is that it’s actually quite the opposite — the critters actually prefer clean hair. What’s more, since lice can only be spread from head-to-head contact, such as when two people lean together for a selfie, those with lice are often the ones who are popular and well-liked.

According to Yoon, lice can still be treated with a special fine-toothed comb. Unfortunately, though, combing out lice isn’t easy.

In 2010, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stated that one in three children were considered overweight. Now, the CDC has released a shocking new statistic, stating that one in six children in the United States are actually obese.

To combat this issue, New York legislators are now seeking to regulate the kids menus of fast food chains.

The bill, called the Healthy Happy Meals Bill, aims to set restrictions and regulations on the kids’ menus of fast food chains such as McDonald’s and Burger King. Under this bill, the restaurants would be mandated to provide a whole grain, a vegetable, a fruit, no more than 35% calories from fat, more more than 600 milligrams sodium, and no more than 10% calories from saturated fat or added sugar, for every meal served with a kid’s toy.

According to researchers from New York University, these regulations would help these young fast foodies consume as much as 9% fewer calories, 10% fewer calories from fat, and 10% less sodium.

While this decrease may seem paltry when it comes to combating America’s staggering rates of childhood obesity, even small nutritional changes could help to create a better picture of health for children across the country.

However, this potential bill should not be considered the cure to childhood obesity; rather, a small step of many towards a healthier generation of individuals.

After all, this isn’t the first time legislators have tried to solve America’s rapidly escalating obesity problem. Think back to the failed attempt of then-mayor Michael Bloomberg to ban oversized sodas in New York City, which was met with massive criticism and which ultimately failed.

In California, regulators attempted to regulate the healthiness of kid’s meals by setting regulations on meals distributed with toys. To get around it, fast food chains only marketed their toys differently.

While it seems that capitalism and the health of future generations at odds, perhaps the Healthy Happy Meal Bill will go through, marking an important change in the way convenience and health intersect in America.

Overdosing on marijuana may not be possible, but apparently the drug can still cause tragedy, according to recent events.

Last week a 69-year-old man, Sheldon Bare, and his 15-year-old grandson, Ryan Bare, were both fatally injured in an apartment fire in Altoona, PA, believed to be caused by a marijuana pipe.

Local NBC affiliate KHQ.com reported that the elder Bare had been smoking the pipe and left it in the living room. Improperly discarded cigarettes are known to be one of the leading causes of fire deaths in this country.

Proponents of recreational and medicinal marijuana use have long touted the statistical evidence that supports the notion weed is a relatively harmless drug. It may be possible to overdose on, but no one has ever been reported to up to this point in history.

In most cases, smokers may experience hunger or become tired, and over time they can develop a raspy cough. House fires, however, are a side effect that most don’t consider in a conversation about cannabis usage.

Sheldon Bare was a disabled Vietnam War veteran. His sister, Holly Spatafora, believed that he suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) as a result of the things he witnessed during the conflict. She claims that her brother probably turned to marijuana as a way to self-medicate.

“The man that came home was no longer my brother,” Spatafora said. “He was just never happy again. He was one of the walking wounded.”

Firefighters and first-responders were quick to the scene around 3:30 a.m. when the call was made, but sadly it was to late.

Local Fire Chief Tim Hileman summarized the mix of emotions telling local CBS affiliate WTAJ, “These people really do put themselves out to try to help, and unfortunately, the outcome’s not always what we want.”

When most people hear the term malpractice, the first thing they tend to think of is medical. That makes sense considering it is one of the most common and potentially serious versions. According to the Journal of the American Medical Association, approximately 225,000 deaths occur annually from medical malpractice.

There are, however, other types of malpractice, though most times they are not quite as serious as life and death. Unless, of course, it’s a person’s lifetime of liberty that’s in question. Some would argue that holds a similar level of importance, and such are the stakes in a recent case stemming from a murder conspiracy verdict.

The News-Herald.com in Ohio reported Tuesday that Kevin Knoefel, the man convicted of manipulating his teenage foster daughter to kill his wife with a knife in 2012, is suing his defense lawyers from that case for legal malpractice.

“Attorneys need to be held to a higher standard of professionalism, and they have to be held to a higher standard when it hurts the client,” said Joseph Patituce, the attorney Knoefel hired to represent him in this case.

According to the News-Herald, points of contention Knoefel is claiming in the lawsuit include:

• His lead lawyer in the case, Michael Connick, lied to him about his experience (and lack thereof) with murder cases,
• the legal team never hired an investigator as promised,
• and multiple attorneys charged him for the same work, but Connick was really the only person who worked on the case.

The suit also states that Connick’s “unprofessional behavior angered the judge to Kevin Knoefel’s detriment.”

The court records go on to state that, “During the criminal trial, Defendant Connick did not display the proper degree of skill required by a criminal defense attorney in a murder case.”

In addition to objecting to his own question, Connick is also accused of “unprofessional behavior [that] angered the trial judge” at Knoefel’s sentencing.

Losing a life based on medical negligence, or accidental missteps is always a tragedy. But a man that’s sentenced to life in prison, as is the case here, also has the right to ensure he got a fair and just trial. Whether you’re a lawyer or the person hiring one, legal malpractice is a real thing and should not be taken lightly.

Scientists are working together to create a universal flu vaccination that can protect against multiple strains of the virus. On average, between 5-20% of Americans come down with the flu at least once a year. With this new vaccine, doctors are hoping that the vaccine will eliminate the necessity for the yearly flu shot.
The vaccine has been tested on mice, ferrets, and monkeys infected with different types of flu. The Guardian reports that so far, the vaccine seems to have worked, and many test subjects have seen reduced symptoms.
Current flu vaccinations target the top of a molecule known as haemagglutinin (HA.) Seasonal flu vaccines are designed to fight against specific strains of the virus that scientists believe will be the greatest threat. However, HA molecules are known to mutate quickly, rendering the vaccinations ineffective.
This is what happened to last winter’s flu vaccination, which was created in 2013. One of the most common circulating strains, known as H3N2, had a fast-paced mutation, making it difficult for the vaccination to do its job. The Independent reports that as a result, only 3% of those who were injected were protected from the virus, as opposed to the typical 50% rate.
The new vaccine, which is being studied by two separate research teams, targets the “stem” of the HA molecule, rather than the top. They believe that the HA stem is very similar across different strains of flu, and is less likely to mutate.
”This is an exciting development,” says Sarah Gilbert, a professor of vaccinology at Oxford University. “But the new vaccines now need to be tested in clinical trials to see how well they work in humans. This will be the next stage of research, which will take several years. So we are still some way from having better flu vaccines for humans.”
As of now, doctors estimate that it will take another three to five years to carry out further vaccination development before the vaccine can be tested on human volunteers.

The rise of sexually transmitted diseases (STD) within the United States is a huge cause for concern. Recent statistics report that there are 20 million new cases of STDs each year, originating from only eight strains of bacteria and viruses.

With this notable rise in STD prevalence, non-profit organizations like Planned Parenthood are becoming increasingly important, and health officials are doing everything they can to protect and educate the masses on the harmful effects of STDs.

But according to recent reports, humans aren’t the only species at risk of becoming infected by sexually transmitted diseases. It turns out that koalas, the cuddly, eucalyptus-munching tree bears, are the animal species most direly at risk.

According to MTV, koalas are catching chlamydia like crazy. The epidemic is so severe, in fact, that the world’s population of koalas is in danger.

Chlamydia is a sexually transmitted disease that spreads through sexual contact, and through birth. In humans, chlamydia can be successfully treated using antibiotics. But without the proper treatment, chlamydia can be a serious infection that can lead to serious complications such as infertility.

Because of this, The Verge reports that nearly half of the infected female koala population has been rendered infertile.

And for the female koalas with chlamydia who remain fertile, the infection is being spread to their offspring during suckling.

And koalas aren’t the only animals suffering. According to MTV no species is safe, from lady bugs to horses.

Unfortunately, there’s no means of proliferating education and preventative measures to species that just don’t speak English. If you’re a human, you can easily educate yourself or undergo preventative measures such as abstinence or the use of condoms.

Yet researchers are working hard to find means to preventing these diseases from spreading. For koalas, this would mean a chlamydia vaccine that would halt the transference of chlamydia from one animal to the next.

Any dedicated Shakespeare scholar will likely recognize the Bard’s mentions of thinking up “new-found methods and compounds strange” thanks to “invention in a noted weed” in Sonnet 76.

But to this day, few people probably suspected this “noted weed” referred to the most noted weed of all: marijuana.

Newly-published findings from South African researcher Francis Thackeray and his team from the University of the Witwatersrand show the results of analyzing 24 tobacco pipe fragments from Shakespeare’s hometown of Stratford-upon-Avon.

Eight of these pipes tested positive for cannabis residue; four of the cannabis-positive pipe fragments came from Shakespeare’s own garden.

According to the Seattle P-I, Thackeray’s team used an advanced, non-invasive testing technique called gas chromatography mass spectrometry to analyze the residue on these pipe fragments. The findings led the researchers to conclude that Shakespeare was, in fact, a marijuana user during his famed literary career.

Thackeray himself actually got the idea for his research after reading the references to a “noted weed” in Sonnet 76.

“I had actually begun the project by reading all of Shakespeare’s sonnets,” Thackeray added.

In addition to the marijuana traces, scientists also found “unquestionable” evidence of Peruvian cocaine on two pipes from the Stratford-upon-Avon area; however, neither of these pipes were found on Shakespeare’s property like the cannabis pipes were.

Those who used this cocaine were probably consuming a product that had few, if any, similarities to the cocaine we know today, the stimulating effects of which can last anywhere from 15 minutes to an hour. USA Today reports that this cocaine likely came to England after Sir Francis Drake’s return from his 1597 visit to Peru.

Given the experimental nature of Elizabethan medicine, it’s not surprising to learn that 17th-century Englishmen and women used drugs like marijuana and cocaine. For Shakespeare, it’s entirely possible that he enjoyed marijuana for its mind-stimulating properties, which would undoubtedly have helped his creativity, Thackeray explained.

“We were delighted to find indications of cannabis,” Thackeray said. “We can’t be sure that the pipes which we analyzed were those of Shakespeare, but they were from his garden, and they were dated to the early 17th century.”

When most people purchase a home security system, they expect to get just that: security.

However, a new scam is targeting these very homeowners nationwide, threatening to take away the security they seek.

According to a July 30 WCPO article, police departments across the country, along with the home security company ADT, have reported an upswing in these scams — and thousands of Americans will have been victimized by the end of the year.

Scammers go door to door, telling the homeowner they’re there to upgrade the home’s security system, claiming they work for the security company.

“They’re knocking on our customers’ doors, saying they are either with ADT or saying other lies like ADT went out of business, or that their company bought ADT,” said David Bleisch, ADT’s corporate attorney.

If their plan works, the scammers are able to convince the homeowner to make a deposit — or even a multi-year contract — with an alarm company that may not even exist, only to never be heard from again. In other cases, scammers will actually tamper with the existing security system and dismantle its alarm to make a later break-in possible, Consumer Reports reported.

It’s an especially concerning trend, considering the fact that 41% of Americans now say they would prefer to purchase a brand new home over an existing one — and a good deal of these people will be outfitting their new homes with security systems.

And when the highest number of household break-ins take place in July and August, it’s especially important to be vigilant against potential home security scams.

Bleisch advised homeowners to never let someone into their house until the individual reveals his or her name and employer, and then to call one’s security company to verify the person’s identity. If the company representative doesn’t know the person at the door, it may well be a scammer.

“Before you let them into the house, make sure you know who you are dealing with,” Bleisch said.

A recent court ruling in Florida has dealt a potentially devastating blow to the state’s current cap on damages paid out in medical malpractice lawsuits.

According to the Washington Times, the 4th District Court of Appeal ruled that caps on certain medical malpractice damages don’t apply in cases involving personal injury.

Under this ruling, the state law’s current limits on pain-and-suffering damages — otherwise called non-economic damages — are considered unconstitutional.

“(The) caps are unconstitutional not only in wrongful death actions, but also in personal injury suits as they violate equal protection,” the 14-page decision reads. “Whereas the caps on non-economic damages in (the section of state law) fully compensate those individuals with non-economic damages in an amount that falls below the caps, injured parties with non-economic damages in excess of the caps are not fully compensated.”

For plaintiff Susan Kalitan, who left her 2008 surgery for carpal-tunnel syndrome with a perforated esophagus that became infected and required chest and neck surgery, the decision is welcome news. The jury awarded Kalitan $4.7 million in damages, about $4 million of which are non-economic damages, CBS Miami reported.

The court’s decision follows a similar ruling made last year in the state Supreme Court, in which limits on non-economic damages in wrongful-death cases were rejected.

Across the country, medical malpractice lawsuits paid out approximately $3.6 billion in 2013 alone. In Florida, under the medical-malpractice law that then-Gov. Jeb Bush passed in 2003, the maximum medical malpractice payout is set at $500,000.

With this decision, Florida’s medical malpractice caps are at risk of being shot down in even more courts across the state. Attorney Crane Johnstone of Fort Lauderdale’s Schlesinger Law Offices told the Washington Times that this ruling could pave the way for similar cases seeking to overturn the medical malpractice damages cap. At the same time, the 4th District Court of Appeal’s decision could be appealed to the Florida Supreme Court, as well.

For parts of the country, summer means figuring out how to keep up with rapid grass growth without mowing the lawn every single weekend (grass should never be cut by more than a third in a single mowing). But that’s not the problem in California.

In the midst of a crippling drought, authorities in the state have adopted even more restrictions on turf intended to cut water usage. New office buildings will be allowed to have virtually no grass, and new homes may have only a quarter of the total lot’s acreage covered in grass (exceptions will be made for new construction that uses recycled toilet or shower water for landscaping). Rocks, shrubs and less thirsty plants, such as jasmine, are encouraged instead.

Some people say that even these steps don’t go far enough, and that the entire concept of emerald lawns in the Golden State must be abandoned. “We are a state prone to drought that should move away from the ideal of every home having a lawn that is watered with precious drinking water,” Tracy Quinn, a policy analyst for the Natural Resources Defense Council, told NBC San Diego this month.

Disagreements over lawn watering — and seeming inequality in enforcement of restrictions on lawn watering — have even led to ugly confrontations among neighbors.

One such outburst took place on online bulletin board Nextdoor this month when Michael Feliciano of Curtis Park (a Sacramento neighborhood) began criticizing two of his neighbors for planting new sod, also asserting that several others couldn’t possibly be keeping their lawns as green as they were while also complying with city water restrictions.

“The possibility that we could run out of water is very real, and yet, there are those among us who seem to believe that they are entitled to ignore water restrictions, in the name of their beloved green lawns,” he wrote.

Fellow residents soon responded, generating almost 150 replies in just a few days. Some quite literally defended their turf, while others seconded Feliciano’s comments and further castigated people with green lawns.

This so-called lawn shaming isn’t an isolated incident, either. As of July 15, neighbor reports and city patrols in Sacramento had lodged 26% more complaints about water violations than they had at the same time last year.