There is no new evidence to show foetuses feel pain in the womb before 24 weeks, and so no reason to challenge the abortion limit, UK doctors say. The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists' review said foetuses are "undeveloped and sedated". Brain connections are not fully formed, and the environment of the womb creates a state of induced sleep, like unconsciousness, they add. Anti-abortion campaigners are likely to challenge the reports.

The issue of whether a foetus of 24 weeks or below can feel pain had been raised in the debate over whether the current time limit for abortion should be reduced. An up-to-date analysis of evidence was recommended by MPs in a report from the Commons Science and Technology committee during the last parliament. They looked at the 1967 Abortion Act, which covers all parts of the UK apart from Northern Ireland. The Royal College's reviews of existing evidence examined whether or not a foetus can experience pain. It also tried to define what mental and physical abnormalities could result in a "serious handicap". Around 1% of abortions are carried out on these grounds. Such terminations can take place after 24 weeks.

In the past, campaigners concerned about the abortion law have argued that this has been interpreted too widely to include relatively minor disabilities. But the Royal College said in its second report that it would not be practical to try to produce a list of conditions that would constitute serious handicap because it was too difficult to predict the long-term impact of an abnormality on a child or on their family. Supporters of the current abortion law have welcomed this report, arguing that even within one condition there may be a wide range of severity.

Ann Furedi, chief executive of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), said taken together the two reports would provide a clear basis for difficult decisions. "Women and doctors need to be able to make informed decisions based on what science says, not what advocates, whether pro-choice or anti-choice, wish it said."

Those campaigning for further limits on abortion say these reports do not reflect the full debate on the issue

Josephine Quintavalle of the campaign group Comment on Reproductive Ethics said: "I think both reports tell us more about the RCOG's willing acceptance of late abortion than the reality of the scientific and ethical issues at stake."

In the last vote on abortion in Parliament in 2008, MPs rejected a proposal to reduce the time limit for abortion from 24 weeks.

Copyright BBC Health News Friday 25th June 2010 09:09

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/10403496.stm

If you want to negotiate a tough deal, make sure you are sitting on a hard chair, say US researchers. In a mock haggling scenario, those sat on soft chairs were more flexible in agreeing a price. The team also found candidates whose CVs were held on a heavy clipboard were seen as better qualified than those whose CVs were on a light one. It shows that the "tactile environment" is vital in decision making and behaviour, they report in Science.

Overall, through a series of experiments, they found that weight, texture, and hardness of inanimate objects unconsciously influence judgments about unrelated events and situations. It suggests that physical touch, which is the first of sense to develop, may be a scaffold upon which people build social judgments and decisions, the Harvard and Yale University researchers said.

In one test, participants were asked to arrange rough or smooth puzzle pieces before hearing a story about a social interaction. Those who worked with the rough puzzle were more likely to describe the interaction in the story as uncoordinated and harsh. In a second experiment, subjects handled either a soft blanket or a hard wooden block before being told a story about an interaction between a supervisor and an employee. The researchers found that those who touched the block judged the employee as more rigid and strict.

In the mock haggling scenario, individuals were seated in soft or hard chairs before engaging in a negotiation over the price of a car. Those in hard chairs were less flexible, showing less movement between successive offers.

Study author Christopher Nocera said first impressions are liable to be influenced by the tactile environment, and control over this environment may be especially important for negotiators and job seekers. "Touch remains perhaps the most underappreciated sense in behavioral research. "The use of 'tactile tactics' may represent a new frontier in social influence and communication."

Professor Cary Cooper, an expert in organisational psychology at Lancaster University Management School said the work builds on findings that tactile relationships are important in social interaction. "I can see that if people are sitting on a very comfy, relaxed couch being interviewed for a job they may not be as assertive and they may let their guard down. "It's also about the ambience you create as well, not just the objects around you and the best environment will depend on what you want to achieve."

Copyright BBC Health News Friday 25th June 2010

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/10408041.stm

American scientists say they have developed a vaccine which has prevented breast cancer from developing in mice. The researchers - whose findings are published in the journal, Nature Medicine - are now planning to conduct trials of the drug in humans. But they warn that it could be some years before the vaccine is widely available.

The immunologist who led the research says the vaccine targets a protein found in most breast tumours. Vincent Tuohy, from the Cleveland Clinic Lerner Research Institute, said: "We believe that this vaccine will someday be used to prevent breast cancer in adult women in the same way that vaccines have prevented many childhood diseases. "If it works in humans the way it works in mice, this will be monumental. We could eliminate breast cancer."

In the study, genetically cancer-prone mice were vaccinated - half with a vaccine containing á-lactalbumin and half with a vaccine that did not contain the antigen. None of the mice vaccinated with á-lactalbumin developed breast cancer, while all of the other mice did. The US has approved two cancer-prevention vaccines, one against cervical cancer and one against liver cancer. However, these vaccines target viruses - the human papillomavirus (HPV) and the Hepatitis B virus (HBV) - not cancer formation itself.

In terms of developing a preventive vaccine, cancer presents problems not posed by viruses - while viruses are recognised as foreign invaders by the immune system, cancer is not. Cancer is an over-development of the body's own cells. Trying to vaccinate against this cell over-growth would effectively be vaccinating against the recipient's own body, destroying healthy tissue.

Caitlin Palframan, of charity Breakthrough Breast Cancer, said: "This research could have important implications for how we might prevent breast cancer in the future. "However, this is an early stage study, and we look forward to seeing the results of large-scale clinical trials to find out if this vaccine would be safe and effective in humans." She added there were already steps women could take to reduce the risk of breast cancer, including reducing alcohol consumption, maintaining a healthy weight and taking regular exercise.

Cancer Research UK's professor of oncology, Robert Hawkins, said: "This very early study describes an interesting approach to the prevention of breast cancer. "It will be several years before this vaccine can be tested fully to assess its safety and effectiveness as a way to stop the disease developing in women."

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in the UK, affecting more than 45,500 women every year.

Copyright BBC News Thursday June 3rd 2010 09:36

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8714085.stm

The more TV a toddler watches, the higher the likelihood they will do badly at school and have poor health at the age of 10, researchers warn. The study of 1,300 children by Michigan and Montreal universities found negative effects on older children rose with every hour of toddler TV. Performance at school was worse, while consumption of junk foods was higher.

UK experts said parents could allow young children to watch "some" high quality TV. The study, part of the Quebec Longitudinal Study of Child Development Main Exposure, asked parents how much TV their children watched at 29 months (two years and five months) and 53 months (four years and five months). On average, the two-year-olds watched just under nine hours of TV per week, while for four-year-olds the average was just under 15 hours. But 11% of the two-year-olds and 23% of four-year-olds watched more than the recommended maximum of two hours of TV a day.

When the children were revisited at the age of 10, teachers were asked to assess the children's academic performance, behaviour and health, while body mass index (BMI) was measured at 10 years old. Higher levels of TV viewing at two was linked to a lower level of engagement in the classroom and poor achievement in maths. Researchers also found a decrease in general physical activity but an increase in the consumption of soft drinks and in BMI (body mass index).

'Common sense'

Dr Linda Pagani, of the University of Montreal, who led the research which was published in the journal Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, said: "Early childhood is a critical period for brain development and formation of behaviour. "High levels of TV consumption during this period can lead to future unhealthy habits. Common sense would suggest that television exposure replaces time that could be spent engaging in other developmentally enriching activities and tasks that foster cognitive, behavioural and motor development."

And she added: "Although we expected the impact of early TV viewing to disappear after seven and a half years of childhood, the fact that negative outcomes remained is quite daunting. Our findings make a compelling public health argument against excessive TV viewing in early childhood."

The UK's National Literacy Trust campaigns to raise awareness of how to police a toddler's viewing. It said that until research demonstrated that children under two might benefit from TV, parents should, "limit exposure and encourage other one-to-one language-enhancing activities that centre on talk at mealtime, bath time, shared reading and imaginative play". But it added: "Encourage exposure to some high-quality, age-appropriate educational television for children aged two to five."

'Radical'

British Psychological Society member Dr Aric Sigman has carried out his own research, which highlighted concerns over young children watching too much TV. He said: "My recommendation to the government five years ago, and even as recently as three years ago, that they merely issue general guidelines on the amount of TV that children watch and the age at which they start was considered radical and controversial.

"Yet a growing body of evidence is now causing governments and health authorities elsewhere to do just that, and we need to as well. This is yet another study reinforcing the need for our society to finally accept that quite aside from good or bad parenting, children's daily screen time is a major independent health issue."

© BBC Health News – Monday 3rd May 2010

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8654963.stm

Making fruit look good holds the key to getting children to eat more of it, a study suggests. In tests, when offered the same amount and types of fruit, children ate far more if it was made fun and attractive, the journal Appetite reports.

The researchers, who studied nearly 100 pupils in the Netherlands and Belgium, say parents and schools should follow this example. However, they said food presentations needed to remain innovative. In the study of children aged four to seven, apples, strawberries and seedless grapes were put on offer, but presented in different ways.

Seduction secrets

Given the choice, the children plumped for these fruits more readily when they were made into a hedgehog - skewered with colourful cocktail sticks that were pierced into a watermelon. The same cubed fruits did little for the children's palates when they were simply offered on a white dish. Children ate nearly twice as much of the "fun" fruit, even though they said they understood that both fruit options - hedgehog and plain dish - should taste the same.

The researchers suggest supermarkets could also capitalise on the findings to make fruit more appealing for children and their parents alike. Attractive packaging and "perhaps adding a little toy, like the toy that comes with a Happy Meal, to the packaging could make this kind of snack even more appealing", they told the journal.

But Esther Jansen and her colleagues warn that "fun" fruit presentations might soon lose their appeal with children if they were used too many times. "It is probably necessary for parents and food producers to remain innovative," they said.

Dr Laura Wyness of the British Nutrition Foundation said: "It is advisable to try to make food as appetising as possible. "How food looks probably does have quite an influence, especially for kids who are getting used to different types of food." She said some children were fussy eaters and this could be challenging for parents.

"Another technique is to try to hide vegetables and fruits in other foods like sauces," she said. And for parents who do not have the time to make elaborate fruit faces and flowers from carrots and radishes, there are simpler ways to make foods interesting, such as cutting it into triangles, squares or strips.

© BBC Health News – Wednesday 5th May 2010

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8659807.stm