<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
	<channel>
		<title>Nursing News</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Nursing continuing education online news.]]></description>
		<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 20:16:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>FeedCreator 1.7.3</generator>
		
		<item>
			<title>ANA Supports Nursing Home Healthcare Orders</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/413-nursingceussupportshomehealthcare</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/413-nursingceussupportshomehealthcare</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">The American Nurses Association (ANA) supports the federal Home Health Care Planning Improvement Act of 2011 (S.227), which has recently received an additional sponsor to the bill. The bill enables advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs), nurse practitioners (NPs), clinical nurse specialists (CNSs), certified nurse midwives (CNMs) and physician assistants (PAs) to order home healthcare services through the Medicare system. Currently, federal law prohibits these professionals from ordering services. The ANA notes that this prohibition causes delays and consequent additional expenses within the Medicare system. This also causes delays in moving patients from expensive institutional settings to less expensive, often preferable, home health care settings.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;">The bill is sponsored by Senator Susan Collins [R-ME] and is co-sponsored by Daniel Akaka [D-HI], Kent Conrad [D-ND], Daniel Inouye [D-HI], Tim Johnson [D-SD], Jeff Merkley [D-OR], John Reed [D-RI], and Ron Wyden [D-OR]. According to the US federal government, this bill revises limitations for “home health care services. Allows payment for home health services to Medicare beneficiaries by: (1) a nurse practitioner, (2) a clinical nurse specialist working in collaboration with a physician in accordance with state law, (3) a certified nurse-midwife, or (4) a physician assistant under a physician's supervision.” The bill has been referred to the Senate Finance Committee.</span></p>
<p><img alt="nursingceushome" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/nursingceushome.jpg" height="90" width="135" /></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 14 Jul 2011 03:00:54 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Nursing Shortages Dangerous – New Research</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/363-nursingshortagesdangerousnewresearch</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/363-nursingshortagesdangerousnewresearch</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">New research published in the <em>New England Journal of Medicine</em> concludes that nursing understaffing leads to higher patient mortality rates. A direct relationship between the ratio of nurses to patients is linked to patient safety and a lack of nurses results in deaths. An examination of nearly 200,000 nursing shifts showed that staffing of “RN’s below target levels” is directly and causally related to increased patient mortality.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;">Cost cutting techniques involve reducing the number of nurses in hospitals and medical clinics. The release of this data now links cost cutting techniques with increased death rates. Nearly a decade ago, another study linked the proper staffing of nurses to better patient outcomes. This follow-up study now highlights the dangers of nursing shortages.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><strong>The Results</strong><br />In one finding, understaffing of nurses leads to inappropriate and dangerous levels of patient transfers and discharges. The study also concludes that nursing shortages are directly linked to higher nursing shift turnover rates. The study concluded the risk of death increased 2% for patients exposed to shifts below target RN staffing levels. The average patient was exposed to 3 nursing shifts below target levels thereby creating a 6% higher risk of death. High turnovers of nursing shifts resulted in a 4% higher death rate. </span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"> </span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><strong>American Nurses Association</strong><br />The ANA (American Nurses Association) has commented on this finding by saying that policymakers need to focus on reimbursement systems that reward hospitals for proper nurse staffing levels. The ANA’s recommendations follow an emerging philosophy of creating monetary rewards for better patient outcomes rather than that from cost-per-patient profits. </span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="nursingceusmedicare" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/nursingceusmedicare.jpg" width="185" height="185" /><br /></span></p>
<p>Reference:<br />Nurse Staffing and Inpatient Hospital Mortality. Jack Needleman, Ph.D., Peter Buerhaus, Ph.D., R.N., V. Shane Pankratz, Ph.D., Cynthia L. Leibson, Ph.D., Susanna R. Stevens, M.S., and Marcelline Harris, Ph.D., R.N. N Engl J Med 2011; 364:1037-1045.</p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HCMI AdminServices</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 19 Mar 2011 01:17:08 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Flu Vaccines Banned in Japan</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/361-fluvaccinesbannedjapan</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/361-fluvaccinesbannedjapan</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare has pulled two ‘flu’ vaccines from the market in the wake of the deaths of several children. The two vaccines, Pfizer’s Prevenar and Sanofi-Aventis’ Act-HIB, are widely used in the USA to prevent influenzae type b. The vaccines are used to prevent influenza type b infections, which can be fatal if meningitis or pneumonia develop. A Japanese drug panel has since determined no causal connection between the vaccines and the death of the six infants who received the vaccines. Also, no defects in the vaccine batches were discovered. The vaccines remain banned in Japan pending further investigation. The Japanese drug panel, the Safety Countermeasure Committee and Vaccines Adverse Event Committee, has requested further information as to the safety of administering multiple vaccines simultaneously.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><strong>Risk Profile</strong><br />The vaccines in question generate billions of dollars of revenue every year for the manufacturers. While the vaccines provide protection, a concern remains as to the risk-benefit analysis of the vaccines. Once concern is that several of the children who died received a combination of other vaccines simultaneously including those for diptheria, pertussis, and tetanus. Multiple vaccines pose a potential drug interaction issue. This concern may lead to changes in vaccine schedules to minimize potential adverse effects. By definition, vaccines introduce toxins into the body in an effort to prevent future illness. At question is whether or not the introduction of the vaccine can be safely handled by the immune system of children who are very young, have received multiple vaccines, or who are immunocompromised. The Japanese investigation determined that there were no manufacturer defects in the vaccines at issue.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><strong>US Supreme Court</strong><br />This is a hot issue in light of a current pending vaccine case in the US Supreme Court, Bruesewitz v. Wyeth. In this case, the US Justice Department is siding with Pfizer pharmaceuticals to limit the liability of pharmaceutical manufacturers in cases of illnesses caused by vaccination. At issue is whether or not a pharmaceutical company is liable if they are aware of a better designed vaccine (one with fewer side effects) yet continue to use the less safe vaccination.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;">The federal Vaccine Court system provides compensation for vaccine injured persons from the money generated by a tax on vaccine manufacturers. In Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, the parents of Hannah Bruesewtiz were denied compensation in the Vaccine Court system and now seek the right to receive compensation through State court. Six month old Hannah received a DPT (diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus) vaccination and immediately suffered a series of 125 seizures over a period of 16 days. Now 18 years of age, Hannah cannot speak or care for herself as a result of her injuries. The vaccine used on Hannah has since been discontinued in favor of safer alternatives. Before the Supreme Court, attorneys for the Bruesewitz family argue that safer alternatives were available at the time Hannah received her vaccine and that the manufacturer had the responsibility of providing the safer alternative and at the very least had the responsibility of providing labeling noting that a safer alternative was available.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;">Justice Ginsburg showed deep concern in this case, “there were an unusual number of adverse reactions to the particular lot that this child's third vaccine came from, and that those adverse reactions were not disclosed to the doctors. And the doctors -- the child's doctor said if I had known about the unusual number of adverse reactions, I never would have used this vaccine.” Justice Breyer noted that the1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act legally protects drug companies from lawsuits due to unavoidable harm (such as side effects from vaccinations) but that the drug company lawyers in this case are now suggesting that they are also protected from avoidable harm lawsuits. Avoidable harm includes withholding information from the government and the public concerning safer vaccines and also not informing doctors and nurses of high incidences of reactions to particular batches of vaccines. The attorney for the drug company replied that if manufacturers were to be sued for avoidable harm they would be “driven from the market” and she reiterated her position that pharmaceutical manufacturers should only be held liable for manufacturing defects and warning claim issues. The drug company lawyer argued that pharmaceutical companies are not responsible for informing nurses, doctors, the pubilc, and the government if safer vaccines are available.</span></p>
<p><img alt="supremecourt" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/supremecourt.jpg" height="82" width="125" /></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HCMI AdminServices</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2011 16:53:40 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>California Blue Shield Hikes Health Insurance Rates</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/346-californiablueshieldhikeshealthinsurancerates</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/346-californiablueshieldhikeshealthinsurancerates</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<span style="color: #333333;">The US Dept. of Health &amp; Human Services (HHS) opposes a major health insurance rate hike by Blue Shield of California. HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius released this statement, “The people of California have a right to be concerned when they see this kind of rate increase month after month. We have reached out to California Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones and know he is doing everything in his power to help consumers. We stand ready to assist him and the people of California in any way that we can.” The HHS cites that the new healthcare law, The Affordable Care Act, will allow California more power to review the rate hike. Sebelius notes that it expands rate review programs, “oversight and transparency when insurers propose significant rate increases.”</span>
<p><span style="color: #333333;">California State law limits the power of the California Insurance Commissioner to control rate hikes by health insurance companies. Blue Shield plans to raise insurance rates approximately 35 percent in addition to two other recent rate hikes. In total, some Californians will see an increase of up to 60 percent in their health care premiums from 2010 to 2011.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #333333;">Blue Shield has released a statement that the rate hikes are unrelated to the Affordable Care Act. Blue Shield notes that the rate hikes in California are due to increased medical costs.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #333333;"><img alt="hhsnursingceus" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/hhsnursingceus.jpg" width="125" height="124" /></span></p>
<p><span style="color: #333333;"><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 08 Jan 2011 10:22:47 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>EPA lowers Fluoride in Water due to Health Hazards </title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/345-epafluoridewaterhealthhazards</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/345-epafluoridewaterhealthhazards</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<span style="color: #000000;"> </span><span style="color: #000000;">The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are lowering the recommended amount of fluoride recommended for drinking water from 0.7 – 1.2 mg per liter to 0.7 mg per liter. The change in policy is in response to new findings by the National Academies of Science (NAS) that excess fluoride in the diet can cause dental fluorosis and skeletal fluorosis.<sup>1</sup> The following is an excerpt from an EPA report:</span>
<p><span style="color: #000000;">“At low intake levels, fluoride has been shown to have therapeutic value in the prevention of dental caries; however, slightly higher levels, particularly in children during the period of enamel development can lead to dental fluorosis, a condition in which the enamel covering of the teeth fails to crystallize properly. Possible resulting problems include enamel defects ranging from barely discernable markings to brown stains and surface pitting. Prolonged high intake of fluoride, at any age, can result in skeletal fluorosis, a condition which may increase bone brittleness, and in a potential increase in risk of bone fracture. In high-dose cases, severe bone abnormalities can develop, crippling the affected individual.”<sup>2</sup></span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;">The HHS noted that access to fluoride has increased and that health and safety concerns prompted the change in policy. The HHS published, “Water is now one of several sources of fluoride. Other common sources include dental products such as toothpaste and mouth rinses, prescription fluoride supplements, and fluoride applied by dental professionals… This updated recommendation is based on recent EPA and HHS scientific assessments to balance the benefits of preventing tooth decay while limiting any unwanted health effects.”<sup>3</sup></span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;">Comprehensive evaluations of many patient case studies appear in EPA reports. One patient, for example, was cited as contracting severe dental and skeletal fluorosis due to the fact that he drank a lot of water because he lived in the dry climate of Arizona. The study reads, “He presented with neurological deficits and severe weakness in both legs. Fluorosis was confirmed in an extracted tooth in which fluoride content ranged from 614 to 5299 ppm, depending on the part of the tooth….The characteristic vertebral changes of skeletal fluorosis and severe osteophytosis were probably the basis for the patient’s neurological deficits…. the neurological symptoms are adequately explained by the marked narrowing of the sagittal diameter of the cervical and lumbar spinal cord and the vertebral osteophytosis secondary to fluorosis. Neurological deficits occurred as a manifestation of spinal cord and nerve root bony compression.”<sup>4</sup></span></p>
<span style="color: #000000;"> </span><span style="color: #808080;">[1] “Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of EPA’s Standards.” 2006 National Research Council (NRC) report.<br />[2] EPA, 820-R-10-017, “Fluoride: Dose-Response Analysis For Non-cancer Effects.” 1-08, p xiv.<br />[3] “HHS and EPA announce new scientific assessments and actions on fluoride.” US Dept. Health &amp; Human Services, news release, 1-7-2011.<br />[4] EPA, 820-R-10-017, “Fluoride: Dose-Response Analysis For Non-cancer Effects.” 1-08, p 15.</span>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="fluoridearizona" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/fluoridearizona.jpg" width="125" height="93" /></span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 08 Jan 2011 09:34:41 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>California Gov. Jerry Brown moves Energy &amp; Jobs</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/344-californiajerrybrownenergyjobs</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/344-californiajerrybrownenergyjobs</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<span style="color: #333333;"> </span><span style="color: #333333;">Governor Jerry Brown takes office in California and moves for clean energy jobs. Governor Brown notes, “Investments in clean energy produce two to three times as many jobs per dollar as gas, oil or coal.” He adds that clean energy investments prevent the outsourcing of energy jobs to other countries and reduces harmful air pollutants.</span>
<p><span style="color: #333333;"><span style="color: #008000;"><strong>Gov. Brown’s Plan</strong></span><br />Gov. Brown’s plan is divided into several tiers of renewable energy projects, which include solar, wind, small hydro, geothermal, and biomass. The first tier is to build 12,000 MWs of localized electricity generation. This focuses on onsite energy systems or systems near the area where the electricity is consumed. This cuts down on costs associated with energy transmission lines and environmental impact. Solar systems on roofs of warehouses, parking lot structures, schools, and commercial buildings can typically handle 2 MW solar systems. Larger public and private lands and solar panels alongside highways can typically handle 20 MW systems. Gov. Brown also notes that legislation to limit rates and protect consumers must accompany this part of the plan.<br /></span></p>
<p><span style="color: #333333;"><strong><span style="color: #008000;">Large Scale Production</span></strong><br />The second tier of Gov. Brown’s system is to build 8,000 MW of large-scale renewable energy production and associated transmission lines. He has several legislative solutions to focus on cutting red tape. Notably, he calls for a general plan with one, large environmental review. Gov. Brown has a fast track plan to cut California’s infamous ‘red tape’ beuracratic burden for new clean energy projects, which currently makes the average large scale project a 6 to 8 year ordeal. His plan will reduce that time to less than three years. Also, he plans to push for legislative standards to require a minimum of 33 percent renewable energy for the State of California.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #333333;"><span style="color: #008000;"><strong>Jobs</strong></span><br />Next, Gov. Brown plans to create 8,500 jobs by incentivizing the development of energy storage systems to offset peak energy demands. Also, he has a plan to increase the energy efficiency of buildings and appliances. Gov. Brown’s energy plan will also incentivize cogeneration. Cogeneration is combined heat and power projects, which makes use of excess heat or electricity generated by industrial and power plants.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #333333;">The  healthcare impact may be substantial if Gov. Brown can achieve his goal  of 20,000 new megawatts (MW) of renewable electricity by 2020. Reducing  air pollution will reduce asthma rates and other diseases and the  subsequent impact on the hospital system, nurses, nursing professionals,  doctors, acupuncturists, and many other healthcare professionals.</span></p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="color: #333333;"><img alt="jerrybrownnursingceusx1" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/jerrybrownnursingceusx1.jpg" width="120" height="130" /></span></p>
<p><span style="color: #333333;"><br /></span></p>
<p><span style="color: #333333;"> </span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2011 06:46:25 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Obama Signs 9/11 WTC Health &amp; Compensation Act</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/343-obamawtc911healthnyc</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/343-obamawtc911healthnyc</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">President Obama has signed the <strong>James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act (HR 847</strong>) while in Hawaii. The Whitehouse released that this new law “extends and expands eligibility for compensation under the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund.” The Department of Health and Human Services is charged with the responsibility of running the World Trade Center Health Program with the passage of the legislation. <br /><br />The law states that there will be “medical monitoring and treatment benefits to eligible emergency responders and recovery and cleanup workers” and “initial health evaluation, monitoring, and treatment benefits to residents and other building occupants and area workers in New York City who were directly impacted and adversely affected by such attacks.” This law extends benefits to survivors of the 911 attack on the World Trade Center in New York City. <br /><br />A committee has been established to advise on health related issues concerning survivors and responders. It is composed of 4 occupational physicians (at least 2 of whom have experience treating WTC rescue and recovery workers), 1 physician with expertise in pulmonary medicine, 2 environmental medicine or environmental health specialists, 2 WTC responders, 2 WTC survivors, an industrial hygienist, a toxicologist, an epidemiologist, and a mental health professional. </span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;">A Steering committee has been established to coordinate health evaluations, treatment programs, and monitoring. It is comprised of representatives from the Centers for Excellence (servicing WTC responders), firefighters, police, NYC employees, and recovery and cleanup workers (including healthcare professionals such as nurses and nursing practitioners) who responded to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The steering committee also has 3 representatives from New York City. One will be selected by the NYC police commissioner, another by the NYC health commissioner, and another by the mayor of New York City.</span></p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="obama911nursingceus" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/obama911nursingceus.jpg" width="120" height="119" /></span></p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"> </span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 03 Jan 2011 07:46:05 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Obama to Sign Food Safety Act</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/340-obamasignfoodsafetyact</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/340-obamasignfoodsafetyact</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<span style="color: #000000;">The Food Safety Modernization Act is expected to be signed into law by President Obama. This is the first major overhaul of United States food safety laws since 1938. The act gives the FDA new authority to recall tainted food. Under current law, the FDA can recommend a recall but it is ultimately the food companies who voluntarily recall suspect foods. The proposed law also gives additional protections for whistleblowers who report food manufacturing problems related to fraud. The Food Safety Modernization Act applies to the FDA, which affects approximately 80 percent of the food supply. Another 20 percent of the food supply is regulated by the Department of Agriculture and is unaffected by the proposed law. Included in the 20 percent of unaffected food products is all meat, poultry, and some egg related products. </span>
<p><strong><span style="color: #008000;">Contamination Oversight</span></strong><span style="color: #000000;"><br />One provision of the Food Safety Modernization Act is a new requirement for manufacturers and farmers to develop anti-contamination protocols. The act also gives the FDA authority to review food industry and farm internal records. Further, the act requires imported food to be certified as meeting US safety standards. The act also increases the frequency of safety inspections at industrial food processing plants. Under current provisions, the FDA inspects plants approximately once every ten years. Under the new proposed law, this will occur at least once every five years at high-risk facilities.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><strong><span style="color: #008000;">Politics of Food</span></strong><br />Sen. Harry Reid notes that 5,000 people die every year in the US due to food poisoning. He notes that the new act empowers the FDA to prevent outbreaks from contaminants such as E. Coli bacteria in the food supply. In an interesting twist, a provision to self-fund the act with user fees collected from food companies was removed from the House version before passage. Republican Rep. Jack Kingston, who has oversight authority of the FDA because he sits on the House appropriations subcommittee, objects to the new law citing that it is too expensive at a cost of $1.4 billion over a period of five years. Had the user fees been included in the proposed law, this issue would not exist. All three GOP lawmakers on the House appropriations subcommittee voted against the Food Safety Modernization Act.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><strong><span style="color: #008000;">Overview of Provisions</span></strong><br />The Food Safety Modernization Act provides for inspection of food production records, registration of food facilities, hazard analysis and risk-based preventive controls, performance standards, standards for produce safety, protection against intentional adulteration of foods, a national agriculture and food defense strategy, food and agriculture coordinating councils, building domestic capacity, sanitary transportation of food, food allergy and anaphylaxis management, and requirements for guidance relating to post harvest processing of raw oysters. Improvements in the capacity to detect and respond to food safety problems include targeting of inspection resources for domestic facilities, foreign facilities, and ports of entry; laboratory accreditation for analyses of foods, an integrated consortium of laboratory networks, enhancing tracking and tracing of food and recordkeeping, mandatory recall authority, administrative detention of food, decontamination and disposal standards and plans, improving the training and continuing education of State, local, territorial, and tribal food safety officials, enhancing food safety, and improving the reportable food registry. Improvements to imported food safety include a foreign supplier verification program, a voluntary qualified importer program, authority to require import certifications for food, prior notice of imported food shipments, building capacity of foreign governments with respect to food safety, inspection of foreign food facilities, accreditation of third-party auditors, foreign offices of the Food and Drug Administration, and controls to identify smuggled food. Other provisions include whistleblower protections and methods to determine budgetary effects.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><strong><span style="color: #008000;">The Votes</span></strong><br />The FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, HR 2751, passed in the House on June 9<sup>th</sup> and passed in the Senate with changes by voice vote on Dec. 19<sup>th</sup>. The act was cleared for the White House on Dec. 21<sup>st</sup>, 2010 when the House of Representatives agreed with the Senate’s changes by a vote of 215 Ayes, 144 Nays, and 74 Present/Not Voting. The Dec. 21<sup>st</sup> vote was 205 Democrats and 10 Republicans voting in favor of the measure. Opposing the food safety act were 8 Democrats and 136 Republicans.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="fdanursingceus2" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/fdanursingceus2.jpg" height="83" width="125" /></span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 26 Dec 2010 20:21:56 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>High Cholesterol Lowered with Red Yeast Rice: New Research</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/327-highcholesteroledyeastrice</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/327-highcholesteroledyeastrice</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<span style="color: #000000;"><span style="color: #000000;">New research published in the <em>American Journal of Cardiology</em> shows that red yeast rice is as effective in lowering cholesterol levels as statin drugs. The focus of the study compared red yeast rice (Hong Qu, Hong Mi, Chi Qu) with Pravastatin. The study concluded that “red yeast rice was tolerated as well as pravastatin and achieved a comparable reduction of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in a population previously intolerant to statins.” Patients taking pravastatin had a decrease of of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (‘bad’ cholesterol) of 27% and the red yeast rice group had a slightly better outcome with a 30% reduction. The study was conducted at the Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.<br /><br />The study gives a little history of red yeast rice use noting that sales of red yeast rice were approximately $20 million in the USA in 2008. Patients taking red yeast rice often sought this alternative herbal approach due to the side effects of statin drugs such as muscle pain. The study notes that, “in a previous placebo-controlled study, we demonstrated that 93% of subjects with a history of SAM were able to tolerate red yeast rice for 24 weeks without a recurrence of myalgia.”</span><br /><br /><br /><img alt="statinpravastatin" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/statinpravastatin.jpg" height="80" width="108" /><br /><br /><span style="color: #808080;"><em>References:<br /></em><br /><em>Halbert, French, Gordon, Farrar, Schmitz, Patti, Morris, Thompson, Rader, Becker; Tolerability of Red Yeast Rice (2,400 mg Twice Daily) Versus Pravastatin (20 mg Twice Daily) in Patients With Previous Statin Intolerance; American Journal of Cardiology, Volume 105, Issue 2, P. 198-204, 15 January 2010.<br /><br />Becker DJ, Gordon J, Halbert SC, French B, Morris PB, Rader DJ. Red yeast rice versus placebo in dyslipidemic, statin-intolerant patients enrolled in a therapeutic lifestyle program: a randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 2009;150:830–839.</em></span></span>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 2010 19:44:35 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>FDA bans Darvon and Darvocet on New Research</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/324-fdabansdarvon</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/324-fdabansdarvon</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">The FDA has pulled Darvon and the related brand Darvocet from the marketplace. In addition, the FDA ordered generic drug makers to discontinue making drugs containing propoxyphene - the active ingredient in Darvon. Britain outlawed Darvon in 2005 and the European Union outlawed Darvon in 2009. The FDA pulled the drug based on new research showing that it leads to heart arrhythmias. Other side effects such as increased suicidal rates and accidental overdoses were instrumental in the European Union’s banning of the drug. Propoxyphene is also noted for its high death rate associated with intake. The death rate for patients taking propoxyphene is 16 deaths per 100,000 prescriptions.  <br /><br />The initial requests to remove propoxyphene were submitted to the FDA in 1978. The FDA took no action at that time citing that the benefits of the drug outweighed its risks. In January 2009, the FDA voted 14 to 12 in committee to discontinue propoxyphene products in the marketplace. In July 2009, the FDA changed its decision and allowed propoxyphene to continue in the marketplace but with increased warning label requirements. <br /><br />The FDA notes that recent research shows that even when taking normal dosages of propoxyphene the drug causes “significant changes to electrical activity of the heart.” These changes show up in ECG (electrocardiogram) tests and propoxyphene is linked to a high risk rate for “serious abnormal heart rhythms.”</span></p>
<p> </p>
<p><img alt="darvonnursing" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/darvonnursing.jpg" width="108" height="80" /></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 21 Nov 2010 19:01:30 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>EPA Seeks to Raise Emissions &amp; Fuel Economy Standards</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/318-gopelectswardemsenvironment</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/318-gopelectswardemsenvironment</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #333333;">The EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) and the Department of Transportation (DOT) will phase in the first ever greenhouse gas and fuel efficiency standards for trucks and buses. The programs begins in 2014 and gradually increases fuel economy and emissions standards over several years. It is estimated to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 250 million metric tons and save 500 million barrels of oil over the lives of the vehicles manufactured in the first five years of the program. <br /><br />US Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood notes, “Through new fuel-efficiency standards for trucks and buses, we will not only reduce transportation’s environmental impact, we’ll reduce the cost of transporting freight.” He also commented that this is an example of benefiting consumers, business, and the environment simultaneously. The NHTSA and EPA note that a semi truck operator will save approximately $74,000 over the life of the vehicle as a result of higher mileage standards.<br /><br />The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), a division of DOT, proposes to increase mileage and emission standards for combination tractors, heavy-duty pickups and vans, and vocational vehicles. Manufacturers will use several types of technological solutions to meet the more stringent standards. Vehicles will get engine and transmission upgrades and will also have improved aerodynamics and tire rolling resistance. The total benefit to businesses and consumers in cost savings is estimated at $41 billion between 2014 and 2018. </span></p>
<p><span style="color: #333333;">Improvements in air quality and the impact on public health were not included in the estimates. Improved air quality as a result of stringent vehicle emissions standards reduces the health impact on Americans. Doctors, nurses, acupuncturists, and all health care professionals treat many disorders such as COPD, asthma, and cancer that are more prevalent with increased airborne carcinogens and pollutants. Reduced vehicle emissions and the associated improvements in air quality will ease the health impact of hydrocarbon related health hazards on hospitals and insurance costs. Moreover, better mileage for trucks and buses will ease financial burdens on businesses burdened by fuel costs.<br /><br /></span></p>
<p><span style="color: #333333;"><br /></span></p>
<p><img alt="epa_nurses2010" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/epa_nurses2010.jpg" height="101" width="120" /></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="color: #333333;"><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 31 Oct 2010 04:19:59 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Vaccine Injury Case Taken by Supreme Court</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/311-vaccineinjurysupremecourt</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/311-vaccineinjurysupremecourt</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><em><span style="color: #008000;"> </span></em><span style="color: #000000;">The 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, passed by Congress, holds that vaccine manufacturers cannot be held liable for injuries due to vaccine side effects except in cases of manufacturing defects and improper warning claims (marketing defects). That much is agreed by the plaintiff and the drug manufacturer in the case of <em>Bruesewitz v. Wyeth </em>before the Supreme Court. The Obama Administration, siding with the pharmaceutical industry in this lawsuit, was represented in the Supreme Court by Mr. Horvich, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice.<br /><br />What is in question is whether or not ‘design defect claims’ are submissible in State courts, outside of the Vaccine Court system set up by the federal government. Design defects are those inherent in the design of a product unlike manufacturing defects which are accidental production errors. At question is whether or not a pharmaceutical company is liable if they are aware of a better designed vaccination (one with fewer side effects) yet continue to use the less safe vaccination. The less safe vaccination is thereby defective by design.<br /><br />The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act expressly protects manufacturers from being sued in an effort to incentivize manufacturers to produce vaccines without fear of lawsuits. Congress has also created the federal Vaccine Court system to provide compensation for vaccine injured persons from the money generated by a tax on vaccine manufacturers.<br /><br />The parents of Hannah Bruesewtiz were denied compensation in the Vaccine Court system and now seek compensation through State court. Six month old Hannah received a DPT (diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus) vaccination and immediately suffered a series of 125 seizures over a period of 16 days. Now 18 years of age, Hannah cannot speak or care for herself as a result of her injuries. The vaccine used on Hannah has since been discontinued in favor of safer alternatives.<br /><br />Before the Supreme Court, attorneys for the Bruesewitz family argue that safer alternatives were available at the time Hannah received her vaccine and that the manufacturer had the responsibility of providing the safer alternative and at the very least had the responsibility of providing labeling noting that a safer alternative is available. Mr. Frederick, attorney for the plaintiff argues, “for many vaccines there is no safer alternative, and there could be no design defect claim. But for those instances in which there is a safer alternative, the burden under State law is for the manufacturer to act reasonably in pursuing the safer design, if that is available.” Mr. Frederick added that there will not be excessive lawsuits as a result of a verdict in favor of the Bruesewitz family since the Vaccine Court system already handles all cases except rare exceptions such as this. <br /><br />Justice Ginsburg showed deep concern when questioning Mr. Horvich of the Obama Administration, “there were an unusual number of adverse reactions to the particular lot that this child's third vaccine came from, and that those adverse reactions were not disclosed to the doctors. And the doctors -- the child's doctor said if I had known about the unusual number of adverse reactions, I never would have used this vaccine.”<br /><br /></span></p>
<h3><em><span style="color: #008000;">Chief Justice Roberts Agrees with Justice Sotomayor</span></em></h3>
<p><span style="color: #000000;">The Supreme Court Justices seemed concerned that design defects were disallowed as a reason to sue in the court system as a result of prior rulings in this case.  Justice Sotomayor asked pointedly of Ms. Sullivan, attorney for the pharmaceutical company Pfizer, Inc. (now owner of Wyeth), “Point me to the FDA regulations or law where the FDA, in giving a license to or permitting a new vaccine, actually looks at whether that vaccine is the most efficacious way with the least serious harm to the population. Is there a regulation that requires that judgment by them before they issue permission to market?” Ms. Sullivan replied, “There is not, Justice Sotomayor.” Justice Sotomayor responds, “All right. What is the motivation? If there is no -- there's no approval mechanism for the FDA to look at that issue, what is the motivation for manufacturers to voluntarily remove a drug that is causing harm to the public before the FDA acts? If they are completely immune under your reading of this preemption statute, what motivates them to act more quickly?” The drug company lawyer did not respond with an answer. Justice Sotomayor continued, “Could you please just answer that question? What is the motivation for the manufacturer to either continue the testing of their product and voluntarily stopping it if a better design has been found by someone else or even an inducement for them to find a better design if a competitor comes around? Because I don't see why they should stop until they have caused as many injuries as they need to before the FDA says stop.” Once again, Ms. Sullivan did not answer the question only to be probed by Chief Justice Roberts, “Before you get to that, I think your answer to Justice Sotomayor's question is: Nothing; the manufacturers have no reason to take the vaccine off the market until the FDA tells them to.” <br /><br /></span></p>
<h3><em><em><span style="color: #008000;">The Court is Stunned</span></em></em></h3>
<h3><em><em><span style="color: #008000;"> </span></em></em></h3>
<h3><span style="color: #000000;"> </span></h3>
<p><span style="color: #000000;">In the following argument, Justice Kennedy is concerned that the pharmaceutical company attorney asserts that the drug company need never inform the government of safer vaccines and that the consumer may not sue on the basis of the drug company </span><span style="color: #000000;">intentionally </span><span style="color: #000000;">withholding drug safety information. Justice Kennedy asked, “But if the manufacturer is slow or remiss or negligent or willful in not giving the information to the Government, there is nothing the injured person can do. There is still complete preemption, under your view?” The drug company attorney replied, “Of design defect claims, Justice Kennedy, but not of warning claims.”  Justice Kennedy replied, “The warning doesn't have to say, 'Warning: We could make something better if we wanted to'." The court then erupted in laughter. <br /></span></p>
<p> </p>
<h3><em><span style="color: #008000;">Avoidable Harm vs. Unavoidable Harm Protection</span></em></h3>
<h3><span style="color: #000000;"> </span></h3>
<p><span style="color: #000000;">Justice Breyer then noted that the1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act legally protects drug companies from lawsuits due to unavoidable harm (such as side effects from vaccinations) but that the drug company lawyers are now suggesting that they are also protected from avoidable harm lawsuits. Avoidable harm includes withholding information from the government and the public concerning safer vaccines and also not informing doctors and nurses of high incidences of reactions to particular batches of vaccines. The attorney for the drug company replied that if manufacturers were to be sued for avoidable harm they would be “driven from the market” and she reiterated her position that pharmaceutical manufacturers should only be held liable for manufacturing defects and warning claim issues.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="supremecourt" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/supremecourt.jpg" height="82" width="125" /></span></p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 17 Oct 2010 07:11:51 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Forced Health Insurance Refunds for North Carolina &amp; Colorado</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/307-forced-health-insurance-refunds-for-north-carolina-a-colorado</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/307-forced-health-insurance-refunds-for-north-carolina-a-colorado</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">Obama’s Affordable Care Act is forcing Blue Cross of North Carolina to refund an average of $700 per individual policy holder. Group plans are not affected by this refund. The total refund from Blue Cross is over $155 million. Overcharges were spotted by health insurance regulators in North Carolina who note that over 200,000 North Carolina residents are affected by the refund. The US Department of Health and Human Services has issued a statement that there may be a “bigger” issue concerning health insurance overcharges involved. <br /><br />Many states with Blue Cross and Blue Shield policies may be affected but careful oversight by state regulators will be necessary to spot the required refunds. The North Carolina Insurance Commissioner urges other state regulators to initiate probes into overcharges by insurance companies now that the new federal health reform law has been passed. He notes that a significant amount of resources were necessary to discover the now illegal overcharges. In related news, Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield of Colorado has agreed to refund $20 million to policy holders. The Colorado Division of Insurance prompted the refund because of complaints by policy holders. This affects approximately 90,000 Colorado policy holders and the complaints were in part due to Anthem’s raising of insurance rates three times within the last year. Colorado Insurance Commission Marcy Morrison explained that a probe into Anthem’s rate hikes was initiated when a spike occured in consumer complaints over rate increases. From July to November in 2009, only nine complaints were received. From December 2009 to March 2010, complaints skyrocketed to over 210 in number.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="healthinsurance" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/healthinsurance.jpg" width="200" height="147" /><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 21 Sep 2010 13:17:32 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Synthetic estrogen exposure found in store receipts</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/276-estrogen-exposure-found-in-store-receipts</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/276-estrogen-exposure-found-in-store-receipts</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">The Environmental Working Group has just released lab tests showing the synthetic estrogen BPA is found in high levels on cash register receipts. Bisphenol A (BPA) has been linked to cancer, abnormal reproductive system development, obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disorders and asthma. It also causes epigenetic changes meaning that the effects of BPA can be passed on to future generations. <br /></span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;">Health professionals and scientists have been trying to get BPAs banned from food packaging to prevent BPAs from leaching into infant formulas, canned foods, and beverages. This new discovery shows that major retailers are using BPA contaminated paper in their receipts including: McDonald’s, CVS, KFC, Whole Foods, Walmart, Safeway, and the US Postal Service. However, many receipts contain little or no BPAs such as those at Target, Starbucks, and Bank of America ATMs. BPAs can be directly absorbed through the skin into the bloodstream. <br /><br />The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) shows that over 90% of US citizens over the age of 6 have BPAs in th bloodstream. People working in retail have 30% more BPAs than the average US adult. This is approximately 7 million people. BPA-free receipts are available but are not required. In Japan, the Japan Paper Association eliminated the use of BPAs in paper by 2003. In Wisconsin, the largest thermal paper manufacturer, Appleton Papers, discontinued the use of BPAs in their papers.</span></p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="syntheticestrogen" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/syntheticestrogen.jpg" width="200" height="205" /><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jul 2010 17:08:14 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>EPA issues ozone warning for New England</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/273-epa-issues-ozone-warning-for-new-england</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/273-epa-issues-ozone-warning-for-new-england</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<h1>EPA Alert</h1>
<p>The EPA has issued a warning for residents of coastal Connecticut, the entire state of Rhode Island, and south coastal Massachusetts due to excessively “unhealthy air quality” predicted for July 24. For Massachusetts, this includes Cape Cod and the islands. EPA’s New England administrator, Curt Spalding, states that “EPA and the medical community suggest that people limit their strenuous outdoor activity.” Ground-level ozone is expected to exceed healthy limits which prompted the official warning by the EPA. Children and those with respiratory conditions are at the highest risk of damage due to elevated ozone levels. <br /><br /></p>
<h2>Medical Conditions</h2>
The EPA has just released information that New England has had 19 days in 2010 wherein ozone has reached unhealthy levels. EPA states that elevated ozone levels may lead to “serious breathing problems, aggravate asthma and other pre-existing lung diseases, and make people more susceptible to respiratory infection.” <br /><br />
<h3>Public Action Urged</h3>
The EPA notes that ground-level ozone is created by the interaction of volatile organic compounds and oxides of nitrogen with sunlight. The majority of this pollution is created by cars, trucks, buses and fossil fuel electric power plants. Other contributors include gasoline stations, prints shops, paints and cleaners, and lawn &amp; garden equipment. The EPA has requested that the public take action by using public transportation, car pooling, refueling cars at night to reduce escaping gasoline vapors coming into contact with sunlight, and avoiding the use of small gasoline engine equipment such as lawn mowers, chain saws, and leaf blowers.<br /><br />
<h4>Areas Hit Hardest</h4>
<p>Nearly all of the high ozone level days have occurred in July for New England. However, areas of Connecticut such as Cornwall, Danbury, and Middletown had elevated levels of ozone as early as May. Other areas getting hit by high ozone levels in May include Acadia NP (Cadillac Mountain) in Maine, the Ware area in Massachusetts, and Miller State Park in New Hampshire. Vermont has not had a single day of high ozone levels, Massachusetts has had 9 days exceeding healthy limits, and Connecticut tops the list with 17 days reaching hazardous levels to human health. The highest readings of ozone were recorded in Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts on July 4. For Massachusetts, Martha’s Vineyard exceeded healthy limits 5 times between June and July followed by Fairhaven at four times and East Milton, Truro, and Ware at two times. Areas of Connecticut exceeding healthy limits several times were Greenwich, Stratford, Westport, Danbury, Madison, and Middletown.</p>
<p><img title="New England Ozone Air Warning" alt="ozoneMassachusetts" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/ozoneMACT.jpg" height="150" width="225" /></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 12:36:16 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Michelle Obama: Cut  Health Insurance Deductibles &amp; Co-Pays</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/272-obamapreventativehealthcareceus</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/272-obamapreventativehealthcareceus</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">First Lady Michelle Obama, Dr. Jill Biden, and HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced a new preventative health care program wherein many medical services will be provided by insurance companies without a deductible, co-pay, or co-insurance. The estimated cost savings by initiating preventative healthcare is expected to exceed $100 billion per year. Over 100,000 deaths per year will be prevented by increasing access to “colorectal and breast cancer screening, flu vaccines, counseling to help them quit smoking, and regular aspirin use to prevent stroke,” according to Secretary Sebelius. As of September 23, 2010, new rules will force private health insurance plans to remove the extras fees such as deductibles and co-pays for preventative healthcare services on new health insurance plans. These rules are a direct result of the comprehensive helath care reform package that was recently signed into law by President Obama.<br /><br />Michelle Obama noted that “too many people aren’t getting the checkups and screenings they need to prevent cancer.” She adds that this reform will help lower costs and hold insurance companies accountable and “it will give our families the security that our insurance coverage will be there when we need it most.” Michelle Obama notes that healthcare reform “makes it illegal to drop your coverage when you get sick or to drop your children from a plan due to a preexisting condition” and that “the best way to control healthcare costs is to prevent people from getting sick.” She listed a few of the services that will no longer be subject to co-pays and deductibles on new private healthcare insurance plans: high blood pressure treatment, measuring BMI (body mass index), mammograms, colonoscopies, cervical screenings, childhood immunizations. Michelle Obama paid special attention to BMI measurements as a means to reduce childhood obesity noting that this health issue is urgently needing attention.</span></p>
<p> </p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jul 2010 15:33:43 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>BP Gulf Oil Spill Health Hazards</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/269-bpgulfoilspillhealthnursingceus5573</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/269-bpgulfoilspillhealthnursingceus5573</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">Workers helping to clean up the oil spill are at high risk due to direct exposure from chemicals and toxic vapors near areas where the oil plumes are surfacing. Chemical dispersants used by BP in the cleaning process pose health risks as do vapors such as benzene, one of the volatile hydrocarbons in oil. One concern is that BP is using Corexit 9500 as a chemical dispersant. It is toxic at 2.61 PPM (parts per million) and can go through a phase transition from liquid to gas and return to earth as toxic rain. It is estimated the BP has released over 1,000,000 gallons of dispersant. <br /><br /><strong>Crude Oil Exposure</strong><br />Blanca Laffron, a genetic toxicologist and her colleagues from the University of Coruña in Spain, notes that studies show that exposure to crude oil from coated birds and from cleaning rocks and beaches for under five days causes temporary DNA aberrations. However, workers exposed for several months contract permanent chromosomal DNA damage. Continuing education and research into long-term exposure will inform doctors and nursing professionals as to proper medical protocols for future healthcare.<br /><br /><strong>Government Warning</strong><br />The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have issued continuing educational warnings on air quality, food, water, and chemical dispersants. CDC warns that upon smelling gas or visibly spotting smoke from nearby fires one should “stay indoors, set your air conditioner to reuse indoor air, and avoid continuing physical activities that put extra demands on your lungs and heart.” CDC warns to avoid swimming, boating, and fishing near affected areas and to avoid contact with the oil spill dispersants which are used to break the oil slick into small droplets. <br /><br /><strong>Dispersant Controversy</strong><br />The EPA and the US Coast Guard have authorized BP for continuing use of dispersants at the underwater location of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. The EPA notes that smaller droplets formed by dispersants will biodegrade faster than untreated crude oil. The EPA has also released a directive for BP to “significantly scale back the overall use of dispersants” and to “analyze potential alternative dispersants for toxicity” to “determine whether a less toxic, more alternative dispersant existed in the quantities necessary to address this crisis.” EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson wrote to BP that she and Admiral Landry of the Coast Guard maintain that “...your response to the directive was insufficient. We believe the response lacked sufficient analysis and focused more on defending your initial decisions than on analyzing possible better options.” EPA is asking BP for continuing education and research into dispersant alternatives and BP maintains that Corexit 9500 is the best option.</span></p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="bpoilspillceus" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/bpoilspillceus.jpg" width="250" height="196" /><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2010 17:09:15 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>CDC Warns that MMRV Vaccine Doubles Seizure Risk</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/267-cdcmmrvaccinenursingceus</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/267-cdcmmrvaccinenursingceus</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">The CDC (Centers for Disease Control) reports that their ongoing study reveals that children who get an MMRV vaccine are “twice as likely to have a febrile seizure 7-10 days after getting the shot than children who get MMR and varicella vaccines (2 shots) at the same health care visit.” </span><span style="color: #000000;">These  concerns affect doctors and nurses concerning publich health and  education policies. </span><span style="color: #000000;">The MMRV shot is the measles-mumps-rubella-chickenpox combination vaccine and febrile means “relating to fever.” <br /><br /><strong>MMRV vs. MMR Safety</strong><br />The MMRV vaccine caused 77 febrile seizures out of a sample size of 63,000 children. That is a rate of approximately 1.2 children out of every 1,000 who will have seizures due to the vaccine. The study also looked at children who received the MMR vaccine and a separate V vaccine on the same day instead of the four-in-one combination vaccine. The MMR + V two-shot combination caused 174 febrile seizures out of a sample size of 376,000 children. This is approximately 1 child out of every 2,000 who experience this adverse side effect. The four-in-one MMRV has approximately doubled the chance that a child will have a febrile seizure compared with the two shot combination of MMR + V. </span><span style="color: #000000;">The CDC  also notes that “children who receive the MMR vaccine are more likely to  have febrile seizures 8-14 days after vaccination than children who are  not vaccinated at all.” </span><span style="color: #000000;"> </span><br /><span style="color: #000000;"><br />ProQuad is the trade name for the MMRV vaccine produced by Merk pharmaceuticals. It is licensed for use in children from the ages of 12 months to 12 years old. One in five children have the following side effects from the vaccine: soreness or swelling at the injection site, fever, and rash. The MMRV four-in-one combination shot has a higher incidence of fever and rash compared with using 2 separate shots (MMR + V) to achieve the same level of vaccination protection. The CDC notes that “febrile seizures cannot be prevented” due to the MMRV vaccine. <br /><strong><br />MMRV Side-Effects</strong><br />MMRV vaccine combines the attenuated MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) with the chickenpox vaccine (varicella). It is often given to children between 1 and 2 years of age. ProQuad side effects are rare but include allergic reactions, difficulty breathing and closing of the throat, hives, weakness, paleness, dizziness, a rapid heart beat, deafness, long-term seizures, coma, brain damage, febrile seizures, acute and chronic arthritis, and a temporarily low platelet count. <br /><br /><strong>MMR Vaccine Development</strong><br />The measles and mumps component of the vaccine are grown in hens’ eggs and from chicken embryo cell cultures. These strains of the virus are less virulent than those affecting human cells and are therefore called attenuated strains. The rubella (German measles) component of the vaccine is propagated using a cell line developed from human embryonic lung tissue originally from aborted human fetuses. <br /><br /><strong>Chickenpox-Only Vaccine</strong><br />The chickenpox component of the vaccine (varicella) contains live attenuated virus. In the US, 9.7 million doses of the chickenpox-only vaccine were distributed between 1995 and 1998. 6,580 reports of adverse effects were reported and only 4% were determined to be serious side effects. About ⅔ of the side effects occurred in children under the age of 10. Rashes were the most commonly reported side effect. Serious side effects were rare but included encephalitis, ataxia, erythema multiforme, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, pneumonia, thrombocytopenia, seizures, neuropathy, and herpes zoster. <br /><br /><strong>Public Health Policy</strong><br />Public health policy weighs the risks of contracting measles, mumps, rubella, and chickenpox against the risks of adverse effects due to vaccinations. The CDC opines that the dangers of illness due contracting the live diseases is greater than the risk of side effects due to vaccinations. The FDA is responsible for approving the types of vaccines made available to the US public. Evidence suggests that separate vaccines for each disease may be safer than combination vaccines. In Japan, MMR vaccination has been discontinued and has been replaced with single vaccines for each disease. Many healthcare professionals in the US are concerned that if individual vaccines are made available that many children will not receive immunizations for all four diseases. Therefore, a combination vaccine ensures that children are protected from measles, mumps, rubella, and chickenpox simultaneously without any risk that they may not receive all of these shots individually. However, this also increases the risk of side effects due to the vaccination process. Nursing professionals and doctors can base their educational recommendations on balance between broader public health concerns and the individual health concerns of each patient.<br /></span></p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="vaccinenursingceus" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/vaccinenursingceus.jpg" height="150" width="150" /><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 03 Jul 2010 19:11:07 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>CPSC Recalls Baby Sling Carrier due to Infant Death</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/266-cpscrecallsbabyslingcarrierceus</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/266-cpscrecallsbabyslingcarrierceus</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">The CPSC (US Consumer Product Safety Commission), in cooperation with Sprout Stuff of Austin, Texas; has recalled 40 Sprout Stuff infant ring slings. The CPSC urges consumers to discontinue use of these slings since they pose a risk of suffocation to infants. A 10 day old boy in Texas died due to the use of this sling. Consumers can get a full refund for these slings from the company. They sold for about $35 to $45 from October 2006 to May 2007 and were sold directly from the manufacturer. The company is working to contact all purchasers. This recall follows on the heels of other major recalls for baby sling carriers. The CPSC previously recalled 1,200 Ellaroo Ring Sling baby carriers, 165 ZoloWear Infant Carriers/Slings, and approximately 100,000 Infantino SlingRider infant carriers. <br /><br />In general, infant baby slings present two suffocation dangers. Since babies cannot control their heads in the first few months of life due to weak musculature, the sling can press against the nose and mouth. This can lead to suffocation within one to two minutes. Also, the sling may rest the baby in a curled position with the chin bending toward the chest. In this scenario, airways are restricted and the baby cannot cry for help while slowly suffocating.<br /><br />The CPSC has also noted that improper use of even the best sling carriers for infants is dangerous. The US CPSC provides important instructions on proper use. The CPSC “recommends that parents and caregivers make sure the infant’s face is not covered and is visible at all times to the sling’s wearer. If nursing the baby (is) in a sling, change the baby’s position after feeding so the baby’s head is facing up and is clear of the sling and the mother’s body.” Frequent checking of the baby’s position is urged, especially after nursing. “CPSC has determined that a mandatory standard is needed for infant sling carriers. While a mandatory standard is being developed, CPSC staff is working with ASTM International to quickly develop an effective voluntary standard for slings. There currently are no safety standards for infant sling carriers.”<br /><br />Below is a photo of the Sprout Stuff sling that has been recalled and the other diagrams demonstrate proper and improper ways to use a baby sling. The diagrams are provided by the US Consumer Product Safety Commission.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="infantslingrecall" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/infantslingrecall.jpg" width="140" height="123" /></span></p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="babyslingRW" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/babyslingRW.jpg" width="200" height="166" /></span></p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="babyslingWW" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/babyslingWW.jpg" width="200" height="160" /></span></p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="babyslingW" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/babyslingW.jpg" width="150" height="243" /><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jul 2010 07:04:08 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>CPSC Recalls Sony VAIO Laptop Computers due to Burn Hazard</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/265-sonyvaiolaptoprecallceus</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/265-sonyvaiolaptoprecallceus</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">The US Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with Sony Electronics Inc. of San Diego, California; has recalled 233,000 Sony VAIO laptop computers due to the possibility of burn hazards. The computers may overheat and reports of units overheating resulting in deformed keyboards and casings prompted the recall. The overheating problem is caused by a malfunction of the computer’s internal temperature management system. These computers were sold from January 2010 to April 2010 at places such as: Best Buy, Sony Style, Costco, Frys, and Amazon.com . They came in many colors and are part of the VPCF11 and VPCCW2 series of notebook computers. Owners can check with Sony to see if their computer is part of the recall at telephone number 866-496-7669. These computers were manufactured in China and the United States, have VAIO clearly marked on the outside panel, and it is illegal to resell the affected units. The US CPSC urges consumers to discontinue using these units and to perform an update on the BIOS firmware to remedy this hazard. Consumers can call Sony or visit a Sony Style retail store for help with installing the update. This firmware update fixes the overheating problem in all of the affected computers. Instructions for the firmware update are available at <a target="_blank" title="Sony Firmware Fix" href="http://esupport.sony.com/US/f1cw2update">http://esupport.sony.com/US/f1cw2update</a> . To date, no injuries have been reported. However, both Sony and the US CPSC warm against using these computers until the firmware update has been performed.</span></p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="laptopsonyvaioceu" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/laptopsonyvaioceu.jpg" width="200" height="181" /><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jul 2010 06:39:21 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Blue Cross Blue Shield Hikes Insurance Rates in Michigan</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/258-blue-cross-blue-shieldhikesinsuranceratesmichigan</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/258-blue-cross-blue-shieldhikesinsuranceratesmichigan</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM) has asked permission for a rate hike of up to 15% for nearly 200,000 individual subscribers. Hikes for group subscribers will range from 8-12%. The premium increase must be approved by the Michigan Office of Financial and Insurance Regulation for it to take effect. BCBSM claims that they will lose over $50 million dollars without the hike.<br /><br />This may come as a surprise to many policy holders since Michigan’s insurance commissioner approved a 22% increase last year for both individual and group policy holders. Despite the increase, BCBSM claims to have lost nearly $100 million last year. Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox has questioned the loss claims since BCBSM increased its surplus by $528 million in 2009. That is profit on top of the already $2 billion surplus that the company holds. Cox has also questioned the purported losses because the State of Michigan gives the company $100 million in tax breaks every year to help control costs and prevent losses.<br /><br />Last year, Attorney General Cox asked Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan pointed questions about their finances. In a letter to BCBSM, Cox asked about bonuses and  salaries to board members, perks such as entertainment expenses, and the total value of the BCBSM art collection. Cox also asked for BCBSM to state the amount of funds transferred to affiliated companies. The Attorney General estimated the transfer of funds out of BCBSM to be over $450 million since 2005. Such a transfer would then show up as a loss for the company even though the funds are received by affiliates. This line of inquiry shows that the Michigan Attorney General suspects clever accounting techniques and financial manipulation to help show a loss for BCBSM. At the same time, Michigan Congressmen John D. Dingell and Sander Levin questioned Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan President and CEO Daniel J. Loepp about proposed rate hikes. The Congressmen asked questions concerning how much of the rate hikes will go towards paying benefits to subscribers, why the BCBSM massive surplus is not used to offset any losses, and what types of bonuses did employees making more than $500,000 per year receive. This line of inquiring was partially triggered by BCBSM paying enormous bonuses to executives  prior to announcing a reduction of its workforce, salary freezes, and rate hikes. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan CEO Leopp had a 23% increase in salary in 2009 to $1.12 million. However, his bonus pay has now dropped to approximately $650,000 down from last year’s $888,269.</span></p>
<p> </p>
<p><br /><img alt="insurancenursing" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/insurancenursing.jpg" width="200" height="150" /></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 23 May 2010 19:03:07 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>FDA Approves New Prostate Cancer Treatment</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/256-ceufdanewprostatecancer</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/256-ceufdanewprostatecancer</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">The FDA has just approved a new treatment for advanced prostate cancer. The FDA has approved Provenge, a cellular immunotherapy drug. It is the first drug approved by the FDA in its class. Provenge works by stimulating the body’s own immune system to attack the cancer. Skin cancer is the most common form of cancer amoung men in the U.S and prostate cancer is the second most common form. The National Cancer Institute reports that in 2009 approximately 27,000 men died from prostate cancer and 192,000 new cases were reported. <br /><br />Provenge is manufactured using the patient’s blood. Immune cells from the blood sample are processed to enhance their ability to fight cancer in a process known as leukapheresis. The cells are then re-administered to the patient intravenously in three doses. The FDA was prompted to approve this therapy following a study of 512 patients with advanced prostate cancer. Patients taking Provenge lived an average of 4 months longer than those who did not receive the treatment. Nearly every patient who received the Provenge therapy experienced adverse reactions including back pain, joint pain, chills, fatigue, fever, headache, nausea, or stroke. Provenge costs $93,000 for a total of three required dosages.</span></p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="vitamins" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/vitamins.jpg" width="175" height="116" /><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 23 May 2010 05:38:43 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Obama Taps Berwick for Medicare</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/250-medicareberwickobamaceus23149</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/250-medicareberwickobamaceus23149</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;"><strong>President Obama has nominated Donald Berwick to run Medicare and Medicaid.</strong> Dr. Berwick, M.D., M.P.P. is a Professor of Health Policy and Management at the Harvard School of Public Health, a pediatrician, President of the Institute for Healthcare Improvement (IHI), and a consultant in pediatrics to Massachusetts General Hospital. He is widely published on the topic of health care systems with a focus on improving access to quality medical care. His books include <em>Curing Health Care</em>, <em>New Rules: Regulation</em>, and <em>Markets and the Quality of American Health Care</em>. His scientific articles have been published in The Journal of the American Medical Association, The New England Journal of Medicine, The British Medical Journal, and many other prestigious medical periodicles. President Clinton appointed Dr. Berwick to serve on the Advisory Commission on Consumer Protection and Quality in the Healthcare Industry. He received his MD from Harvard Medical School and his MPP from the John F. Kennedy School of Government.<br /><br />Dr. Berwick is controversial for the statement, "...any health care funding plan that is just, equitable, civilized and humane must, must redistribute wealth from the richer among us to the poorer and the less fortunate. Excellent health care is, by definition, redistributional." Central medical ideas to the IHI and Dr. Berwick are no needless deaths, pain, or suffering; no waiting, no waste, and access to medical care for all. He has numerous awards and honors for his achievements in healthcare including the Heinz Award for Public Policy, the Award of Honor from the American Hospital Association, and the Alfred I. DuPont Award. Many of Dr. Berwicks’s achievements seek to not only improve the quality of medical care but also to improve the safety of the healthcare setting for both patients and healthcare workers.<br /></span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="nursingceusmedicare" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/nursingceusmedicare.jpg" width="185" height="185" /><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 15 May 2010 05:00:04 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Flu Vaccine Linked to Swine Flu (H1N1) Outbreaks</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/246-vaccinesswinefluh1n1outbreaks</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/246-vaccinesswinefluh1n1outbreaks</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">Seasonal flu vaccines have been linked to increased outbreaks of H1N1 (Swine Flu) in four different epidemiological studies. Serious questions have been raised concerning the biological interactions between influenza strains and vaccines. Patients who received the seasonal “flu shot” in 2008 and 2009 had a significant increase of developing H1N1. Both the seasonal flu and the pandemic H1N1 flu are due to strains of influenza virus and separate vaccinations are used to prevent each illness. These findings may impact recommendations by doctors and nurses for patients seeking medical information.<br /><br />An initial inquiry began after investigators noticed that the majority of people with illnesses characterized by fever and coughing had received the seasonal flu vaccine. The investigation was initiated to explain this phenomenon and looked at people receiving seasonal flu shots (TIV) and their subsequent outbreaks of H1N1. Four separate epidemiological studies were launched to study the cause and means of this phenomenon. The studies revealed that TIV vaccines were effective in reducing seasonal flu outbreaks but increased a person’s chances of getting the swine flu (H1N1). All four studies showed that those who received the seasonal flu vaccine had approximately twice the chance of developing the H1N1 swine flu. The study included researchers from the British Columbia Center for Disease Control (BCCDC) in Vancouver, the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg, Canada; and the Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion. <br /><br />A study published in PLoS medicine in April 2010 revealed the unexpected findings from the four epidemiological findings. The trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) was shown to have a counterproductive effect toward H1N1. Patients presenting with influenza syndromes were tested by a network of physicians for influenza virus with RT-PCR and an investigation of demographics, clinical outcomes, and vaccine status. Influenza-positive patients were then compared with influenza-negative patients. The results confirmed that TIV lowered the incidence of seasonal flu outbreaks when properly matched with circulating influenza strains in a given season. Alternately, mismatched vaccines did not have the same clinical benefits. However, even with adjustments for comorbidities, age, and geography; the seasonal flu vaccine (TIV) appeared as a risk factor for the swine flu for those under 50 years of age. The four studies conclude that recipients of the seasonal flu vaccine are approximately twice as likely to get the swine flu (H1N1). A causal link has not been established between TIV and H1N1 and investigators suggest further studies to explain this unexpected phenomenon. Both nurses and doctors will be better informed regarding patient recommendations once further study has been completed.<br /></span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="H1N1nursing" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/H1N1nursing.jpg" height="168" width="180" /><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2010 15:39:47 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>CPSC Recalls Millions of Baby Cribs</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/245-cpscrecallsmillionsbabycribs</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/245-cpscrecallsmillionsbabycribs</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">The US Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has announced a voluntary recall of baby cribs which pose strangulation and suffocation hazards. Approximately 635,000 baby cribs made by Dorel Asia have been recalled because the drop side hardware can fail and trap the infant in the opening between the drop side and the crib. A six month old child from Cedar Rapids, Iowa was entrapped and died due to strangulation thereby prompting this recall. Several other incidents were reported in which children received bruises and scratches as a result of entrapment. These cribs were sold at K-Mart, Wal-Mart, and Sears from January 2005 to December 2009 and sold for between $120 and $700. The CPSC has issued a warning to parents and caregivers. Tighten the hardware occasionally to make sure the crib is sturdy. Also, check any moving parts, especially drop sides, to ensure that they operate smoothly. The CPSC notes to check sides and corners such that there are no gaps that may entrap a child. Also, the CPSC strongly warns not to repair the sides of the crib, especially with duct tape, wire, or rope. In the past, other major recalls for cribs were issued by the CPSC including 985,000 Delta Enterprise drop side cribs. Also, 2.1 million Stork Craft drop side cribs, some under the Fisher-Price logo, have been recalled. Several issues have been noted such as broken claw attachment pieces and upside down installation of the drop side. The manufacturer will issue a repair kit for these cribs and users are urged to stop using these units. Stork Craft cribs are distributed in the USA and Canada and were sold at major retailers such as BJ’s Wholesale Club, J.C. Penney, K-mart, Sears, USA Baby, and Wal-Mart stores and online at Amazon.com, Babiesrus.com, Costco.com, Target.com, and Walmart.com . Many of these cribs have the terms storkcraft baby and storkling on the drop side teething rail. <br /><br />It is important to look for little gaps in which infants can get stuck by performing a careful inspection of the hardware. Importantly, children can slide in between the mattress area and the movable drop side of the crib. Make sure the children cannot slip into this area. This helps ensure safety for the child and peace of mind for caregivers and parents. The role of the CPSC is to oversee hazard identification, safety standards, compliance and enforcement, public outreach, and intergovernmental cooperation relating to consumer product-related injuries. The crib recall is voluntary with cooperation of the manufacturer. The manufacturer will issue fixes and consumers are urged to stop using the recalled cribs until replacement kits are installed. Contact the CPSC for further information to assist you with the recall.</span></p>
<p><img alt="babycrib" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/babycrib.jpg" height="231" width="180" /></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 07 Apr 2010 23:42:15 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Obama Has EPA &amp; DOT Order New Car Economy</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/244-obamaepaordernew-carefficiency99342</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/244-obamaepaordernew-carefficiency99342</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">Under direction of the Obama administration, the EPA (US Environmental Protection Agency) and the DOT (Department of Transportation) have set new federal emission standards for passenger cars and light trucks. National greenhouse gas emissions have been established and tighter fuel economy requirements will affect 2012 through 2016 model-year vehicles. The EPA estimates that the improved mileage could save consumers up to $3,000 over the life of a vehicle. In balance, the Obama administration has released these new ecologically oriented standards on the heels of announcing the opening up of massive amounts of US terrain to offshore oil and gas exploration. <br /><br />The Transportation Secretary states that Americans will “save money at the pump while putting less pollution in the air” because of the new regulations. EPA administrator Lisa Jackson noted that this move combines economic opportunities with “environmental priorities.” In a new effort of collaboration and simplification, cars and light trucks will meet only one federal standard instead of having to meet three separate standards set by the State, DOT, and EPA.<br /><br />By 2016, a manufacturer’s fleet must average 34.1 mpg. This is achieved by requiring a 5% per year increase in fuel efficiency leading up to the 2016 standard. For cars and light trucks produced from 2012 to 2016 this is a reduction of 960 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions over the lifetime of the vehicles. The EPA notes this is the equivalent of taking 50 million cars and light trucks off the road in 2030. This also saves 1.8 billion barrels of oil. The Obama administration worked towards these cleaner air standards and increased fuel efficiency standards in a joint effort with automakers, the United Auto Workers, States, and many involved in the environmental community. <br /><br />These standards make substantial gains in air quality and may help prevent toxic brown clouds from appearing over cities while reducing dependency on oil. This may help to reduce respiratory illnesses in populations due to air pollution.  While these new emission standards are cleaner than they have ever been, they pale in comparison to zero emissions vehicles (ZEVs) which are already on American roads. ZEVs are vehicles that emit no tailpipe pollutants. This includes electric vehicles and vehicles powered by hydrogen fuel cells. Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles emit only water. It is safe to drink the water from the tailpipe! Rather than convert the entire fleet to zero emissions, the Obama administration has taken a moderate approach by requiring a slow shift to higher efficiency vehicles.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="autostandards" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/autostandards.jpg" height="180" width="180" /><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 05 Apr 2010 16:34:51 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Vitamins Linked to Breast Cancer</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/243-vitaminsbreastcancer20899</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/243-vitaminsbreastcancer20899</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">Multivitamin use is linked to an increased rate of breast cancer according to newly released information from the Division of Nutritional Epidemiology in Stockholm Sweden. A statistically significant increase in breast cancer was discovered in this multiyear study with a sample size of 35,329 participants. This adds to increasing concern over the safe use of vitamins. Prior, the National Cancer Institute (a division of the U.S. National Institute’s of Health) also concluded that beta-carotene supplements increase the risk of lung cancer. The National Cancer Institute reports that “contrary to earlier expectations, not only do beta-carotene supplements not prevent lung cancer in people at high risk for the disease, they appear to increase rates of the disease, particularly among smokers.” In another study, Dr. Slatore, MD of the University of Washington in Seattle notes that “increased intake of supplemental vitamin E was associated with a slightly increased risk of lung cancer." This conclusion was reached from a study with a sample size of 77,000 participants and was published in the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. On the other hand, many studies link healthy levels of vitamin D to significantly lowering the risk for breast, colon, and pancreatic cancer. <br /><br />Several factors are involved in healthy and safe vitamin supplementation. Concentration levels vary. Some vitamins offer extremely high dosages of particular nutrients with a ‘more is better’ approach. However, an excess of nutrients may be as dangerous as a deficiency. For example, iron supplements are helpful for those suffering from iron deficiency anemia but are toxic and perhaps deadly to those with a rare disorder known as hemochromatosis. Therefore, appropriate supplementation is dependent on the need for a vitamin. If someone already has healthy levels of a vitamin, adding more can be detrimental. <br /><br />Manufacturing quality varies amongst vitamin producers. The FDA’s GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe) category allows companies to add substances, including newly developed chemicals, into vitamins without the FDA’s approval or knowledge. Companies are not required to identify substances added to vitamins such that neither the consumer nor the FDA knows what ingredients are contained within vitamin supplements. Companies may add engineered nanomaterials (materials manipulated at the molecular level) and other substances into vitamins without notifying the FDA. Companies may make their own determination of whether or not a vitamin is GRAS and companies are not required to tell the FDA if the substance exists in their products or how the GRAS determination was made. A U.S. GAO (General Accountability Office) report states, “FDA does not know to what extent, or even whether, companies track evolving scientific information about their GRAS substances. FDA's approach to regulating nanotechnology allows engineered nanomaterials to enter the food supply as GRAS substances without FDA's knowledge.” Therefore, not all vitamins are equal and quality matters. Essentially, consumers need to know what undeclared substances are added to their vitamins, however, there are no labeling requirements to help consumers make that determination. Some vitamins are made from primarily organic food sources such as in the Standard Process brand. This company concentrates certified organic foods into vitamin pills thereby setting a high standard of safety for the industry. This is a professional brand and is available through doctors, nurses, acupuncturists, and other licensed medical professionals.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="vitamins" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/vitamins.jpg" height="116" width="175" /><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 19:00:21 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Nursing Jobs &amp; Education Shortage Continuing</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/242-nursingshortagefueledcontinuingeducation21549</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/242-nursingshortagefueledcontinuingeducation21549</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">The United States Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics has released its 2010-11 outlook for the nursing profession. The department notes that registered nurses  (RNs) constitute the largest healthcare occupation with a total of 2.6 million jobs in 2008. Approximately 60% of all nurses work in hospitals. Another 8% of jobs were in physician offices, 5% in home healthcare, 5% in nursing care facilities, and 3% in employment services. Job opportunities are rated as excellent regarding growth in the demand for nurses in the healthcare industry. Many employers are reporting shortfalls of nursing staff and are having difficulties attracting nurses to their facilities.</span><span style="color: #000000;"></span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;">Median  wages for RNs were approximately $62,500 in 2008. The highest 10% of  nurses earned an average of approximately $92,500. Nursing remains attractive because many employers offer flexible work schedules,  child care, educational benefits, and bonus programs. 21% of nurses are  union members. Looking to the future, an increase in educational  opportunities for students to train in the nursing profession is  essential to meet upcoming demand. Lack of available space for qualified  applicants at nursing schools persists and is fueling an increasing  shortage of filled nursing positions.</span><br /><span style="color: #000000;"><br />The numbers are staggering. In 2008 there were 2,618,700 nurses in the US. It is projected that there will be a need for 3,200,200 by 2018. That's a creation of 581,500 new nursing positions, a 22% increase. However, the rate of employment growth is not projected to be even across all nursing healthcare settings. Growth of nursing jobs in hospitals is expected to grow only 17% while growth in physician’s offices will grow at a 48% rate. This is attributed to the slow growth of inpatients (patients remaining in the hospital over 24 hours), earlier discharges, and an increase in outpatient procedures. Home healthcare services will grow at a rate of 33%, nursing care facilities at a 25% rate, and RN jobs in employment services at a 24% rate. An aging population combined with financial pressures on hospitals to release patients earlier will drive the growth rate of residential care facilities and home healthcare. A spike in job growth is anticipated for nurses providing care for the long-term rehabilitation of stroke and head injury patients and also patients suffering from Alzheimer’s disease.<br /><br />Nursing education is continuing to run into difficulties. A continuing increase in nursing education applicants has caused many nursing schools to reject qualified applicants due to a shortage of nursing faculty. An increase in availability in nursing schools and nursing continuing education programs could help meet the growing demand. Hospitals will also face difficulties in attracting nurses to their facilities. Although the growth in new nursing jobs at hospitals is expected to be only 17%, the high turnover rate of existing jobs will drive shortages. The largest shortages are expected in rural areas and inner city regions. An especially high demand is expected for advanced practice specialties in nursing: clinical nurse specialists, nurse practitioners, nurse-midwives, and nurse anesthetists. In many areas, nurses will represent a substantial percentage of primary care providers to the public.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="nursingbls2010" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/nursingbls2010.jpg" width="175" height="136" /><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 28 Mar 2010 18:32:47 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Obama’s Weight Loss Program &amp; Health Reform</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/241-michelleobamaweightlossprogram99924</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/241-michelleobamaweightlossprogram99924</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">President Barack Obama has released a memorandum outlining the importance of combating childhood obesity. In it, the President outlines strategies to address weight issues in the nation’s youth. Public outreach and the formation of a task force are central to this initiative. First Lady Michelle Obama takes a lead role in bringing national awareness concerning this epidemic through the <em>Let’s Move</em> organization. She works with public, nonprofit, and private sectors to support measures to address childhood obesity. <em>Let’s Move</em> also focuses on working with families and communities.<br /><br />Approximately 30% of children in the USA are overweight. This rate has doubled in young children and has tripled for adolescents since 1980. It is estimated that at least one third of today’s youth will suffer from diabetes and others will contract other obesity related illnesses including high blood pressure and heart disease. The presidential directive states that immediate action is required. As such, the directive focuses on preventing obesity related illnesses and consequential burdens on the nation’s healthcare system. </span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;">The  memorandum establishes a task force which focuses on parent nutritional  education, physical exercise, and affordable food options in schools and  communities.  The task force includes cabinet members such as the  Secretaries of the Interior, Agriculture, Health and Human Services, and  Education. The Assistant to the President and the Chief of Staff to the  First Lady are also included in the task force. The task force will  focus on federal responses to the obesity crisis as well as  nongovernmental actions that can be implemented. Special attention will  be given to healthy, affordable food; increased physical activity in  schools and communities, healthier food in schools, and informing  parents and caregivers concerning healthy choices. <em>Let’s Move</em> takes up  these initiatives and actively works to achieve these health related  goals. <br /></span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;">Building on this momentum, the new health reform law requires that chain restaurants and vending machines with more than 20 locations to label food calorie information. The  new health reform law, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,  signed recently by President Obama provides funding for a childhood  obesity reduction project. The health reform law identifies obesity  reduction as an important method to prevent illness. As such, obesity  related services take an important role in the Patient Protection and  Affordable Care Act and obesity related healthcare is cited multiple times in the 2,393 page law.<span style="color: #000000;"> </span></span><span style="color: #000000;">Educational  and counseling services as well as community funding for projects to end  obesity are included in the new law.</span><span style="color: #000000;"> </span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;">President Bill Clinton’s foundation, in conjunction with the American Heart Association, created the Alliance for a Healthier Generation which shares the same goals as the Obama initiative. Partnership for a Healthier America is a foundation newly formed to combine multiple nonpartisan efforts to fight obesity. This new foundation combines efforts with the Alliance for a Healthier Generation, The California Endowment, Kaiser Permanente, Nemours, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and the W.K. Kellogg Foundation. First Lady Michelle Obama serves as Honorary Chair and both a prominent Republican and a prominent Democrat will be named as Honorary Vice Chairs to underscore the organization’s nonpartisan position.<br /><br />The bipartisan and nonpartisan fitness initiatives and organizations of today starkly contrast the USDA’s (US Department of Agriculture) reclassification of ketchup as a vegetable during President Reagan’s term in office. This allowed school lunch programs to meet minimum standards required for federal reimbursements even if they replaced vegetables with a small amount of ketchup. Overnight, vegetables disappeared from school lunch programs and paper containers with a small helping of ketchup appeared on school cafeteria trays. Democratic politicians seized the opportunity to dramatize this USDA snafu, termed ketchupgate, by staging photo ops of democrats dining on nutritionally void meals that met the new lax standards. <em>Newsweek</em> magazine reported the story and the ketchup as a vegetable policy was subsequently abandoned.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="obamanutrition" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/obamanutrition.jpg" width="170" height="113" /><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 26 Mar 2010 04:18:41 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>FDA Suspends Vaccines Contaminated with Virus</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/239-fdavaccinescontaminatedvirus11902</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/239-fdavaccinescontaminatedvirus11902</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<span style="color: #000000;">The FDA recommends suspending the use of Rotarix vaccine which is manufactured by  the pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline. A US research team has detected viral contamination of the vaccine. This prompted the FDA warning to suspend usage of Rotarix in the USA until further notice. Rotarix is an oral vaccine given to infants to prevent rotavirus disease. Rotavirus can cause diarrhea and dehydration and is responsible for over 500,000 infant deaths annually worldwide. Countries with low incomes have the highest mortality rate. It is estimated that prior to rotavirus vaccination programs, over 50,000 hospitalizations occurred annually in the USA due to this disease. The FDA reports that dozens of deaths occurred in the USA annually prior to initiation of vaccination programs. <br /><br />The FDA notes that there is no evidence of a safety concern from the contaminated Rotarix vaccine. The suspension of its use is viewed as a preventative measure. The FDA will conduct research into the viral contamination issue to determine whether the PCV1 contaminant is an intact virus or merely DNA fragments. Additional recommendations concerning the vaccine will be made in about one to two months when the FDA is convening an expert panel to look into this issue. The FDA will report this information to patients, doctors, nurses, and the World Health Organization (WHO) as information surfaces. <br /><br />The Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention speculates that many countries will continue to use the Rotarix vaccine until further information becomes available. Citing dangers of rotavirus, the director anticipates that the vaccine warning will be weighed against the threat of the disease. In balance, he feels that many countries will risk the potential dangers of the vaccine to prevent rotavirus outbreaks. RotaTeq vaccine, manufactured by Merk pharmaceuticals, is not affected by this FDA warning. RotaTeq is also used to prevent rotavirus and no viral contamination has been discovered in this product.</span>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 24 Mar 2010 21:00:54 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>EPA Protects Dogs and Cats Using Flea &amp; Tick Pesticides</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/237-epadogscatsfleatickpesticides77429</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/237-epadogscatsfleatickpesticides77429</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">The EPA (US Environmental Protection Agency) is tightening controls over flea and tick “spot-on” pesticides for pets to prevent adverse reactions. Spot-on pesticides are liquids that are usually squeezed onto a dog or cat’s skin between the shoulder blades or on the back. The EPA is moving to require improved labeling to ensure that cats do not receive spot-on flea and tick pesticides intended for dogs and that smaller dogs do not receive spot-on dosages that are only appropriate for larger, heavier dogs. The EPA notes that using the improper type of spot-on product or an excessive dosage may lead to skin disorders, digestion issues, vomiting, diarrhea, and nervous system disorders such as trembling and seizures. Also at risk are pets that are weak, old, medicated, ill, pregnant or are nursing. In these circumstances, the FDA notes that pet owners are advised to consult with veterinarians concerning the application of flea and tick pesticides. <br /><br />The EPA states that “flea and tick products can be appropriate treatments for protecting pets and public health because fleas and ticks can transmit disease to animals and humans.” Dogs and cats exposed to fleas may suffer from hair loss, skin disorders such as dermatitis, anemia, and in some cases the pets may become seriously ill. Ticks may transmit serious bacterial infections such as Lyme’s disease to pets. Pets may also shed ticks in the home potentially exposing humans to Lyme’s disease and other dangerous infectious diseases such as Ehrlichiosis and Bebesia. Transmitted by tick bites, these infections require immediate medical attention to prevent potentially life-threatening illness. In balance, the EPA supports the use of flea and tick pesticides to prevent disease while urging pet owners to pay careful attention to their proper application in order to prevent adverse side-effects to animals.<br /><br />In the majority of cases, adverse effects do not occur as a result of using spot-on products. However, the EPA’s analysis finds that improvements in packaging and labeling will significantly lower the risk of adverse side effects. Smaller dog breeds are at risk because they often receive dosages intended for larger dogs. In many cases, the EPA notes that consumers are applying spot-on dog products to cats thereby increasing the probability of adverse effects. The EPA adds that children are protected from exposure to spot-on pesticide treated pets based on dermal assessment reviews of exposures due to hugging and coming into contact with pesticide treated pets. Inhalation of spot-on pesticides remains a case-by-case exposure issue.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="dogscats" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/dogscats.jpg" width="160" height="123" /><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 08:10:22 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Obama's Health Insurance Covers California Children &amp; COBRA</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/236-californiahealthinsurancecoverage97245</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/236-californiahealthinsurancecoverage97245</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">A recent study at the University of California, Los Angeles, reveals that 8.2 million Californians are without health insurance. This is a 28% increase from the 6.4 million uninsured Californians in 2007. The UCLA Center for Health Policy Research study notes that approximately 2 million Californians lost health insurance coverage from 2008 to 2009 bringing the total to over 8 million uninsured. Currently, 25% of all California residents do not have health insurance. The study cites rising unemployment rates and health insurance premium increases as major contributing factors to this problem. The study was funded by the California Endowment and The California Wellness Foundation. The California Endowment is a private organization dedicated to improving health care coverage and health benefits. The California Wellness Foundation helps California citizens by providing grants for healthcare, health education, and disease prevention. <br /><br />The federal government eased the strain on recently unemployed workers by providing subsidies for health insurance coverage under COBRA through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). ARRA was signed into law by President Obama. This helps to maintain health insurance coverage for large numbers of unemployed workers. COBRA (Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985) is a law passed by the US Congress and signed by President Reagan. The law mandates that insurance companies give employees the option to continue health insurance coverage after leaving or losing employment. Despite the infusion of federal assistance through the ARRA, many cannot afford the COBRA health insurance premiums and lose their health insurance anyway. However, the UCLA study concluded the utilization of COBRA by laid-off employees doubled with the addition of the federal ARRA assistance. The federal subsidy to COBRA health insurance coverage made continuing health insurance coverage possible for large numbers of people. <br /><br />1.1 million children in California did not have health insurance in 2007 rising to 1.5 million children in 2009. The study noted that public coverage expanded to assist children thereby keeping the rate of uninsured children relatively low in comparison to adults. The Medi-Cal and Healthy Families programs provide what the study describes as a “substantial safety net” for children. Approximately one out of every three children in California receive their healthcare benefits through the Healthy Families or Medi-Cal programs. Due to lack of funds, the Healthy families program was forced to freeze enrollment. Governor Schwarzenegger is pushing for the elimination of the Healthy Families program and reducing Medi-Cal benefits to the minimum amount required by federal law. The UCLA study notes that “an immediate increase in federal support for the state’s Medi-Cal and Healthy Families programs would stabilize the health care safety net. In addition, national health care reform could help stabilize health insurance markets in the state and provide more, and more stable, opportunities for Californians to obtain affordable health insurance coverage.” <br /><br />The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), also known as “the Stimulus”, was passed into law by President Barack Obama on February 17, 2009 and provides the federal government with the means to increase federal health insurance subsidies to Californians. The Stimulus cut federal taxes and expands unemployment benefits, education spending, healthcare benefits, energy sector investments, and infrastructure development. The ARRA stimulus is intended to create jobs and promote investment during the current economic recession. This is Keynesian economics which argues that government spending can compensate for a drop in consumer spending during economic downturns. No Republicans in the US House of Representatives voted for the bill. Three Republican Senators voted for the ARRA. Although the bulk of the ARRA focuses on stabilizing and promoting economic development, it also includes limitations on executive compensation in banks receiving federal assistance. The ARRA provides tax cuts and expands healthcare spending. Medicaid received over $85 billion and COBRA received nearly $25 billion. ARRA expands medical care for the military and their families, funds prevention and wellness programs, contributes to the Veterans Health Administration, funds healthcare services on Indian reservations, promotes health related research at the NIH (National Institutes of Health), expands payments for Community Health Centers, and funds the development of health information technology.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="californiabear" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/californiabear.jpg" width="150" height="112" /><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 07:10:23 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>CPSC Cautions Infant Deaths Caused by Baby Sling Carriers</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/234-cpscinfantdeathsbabysling974</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/234-cpscinfantdeathsbabysling974</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">The CPSC (US Consumer Product Safety Commission) has identified 14 deaths associated with sling-style infant carriers. Three infants died in 2009 and 12 deaths involved babies under 4 months of age. The highest risk babies are those with low birth weight, were prematurely born, or babies experiencing breathing difficulties due to issues such as a common cold. The CPSC has issued official directions on the correct way to use a sling carrier such that babies will not suffocate. In addition, the CPSC has recalled 3 baby sling devices due to manufacturing issues.<br /><br />Infant baby slings present two suffocation dangers. Since babies cannot control their heads in the first few months of life due to weak musculature, the sling can press against the nose and mouth. This can lead to suffocation within one to two minutes. Also, the sling may rest the baby in a curled position with the chin bending toward the chest. In this scenario, airways are restricted and the baby cannot cry for help while slowly suffocating. <br /><br />The CPSC has issued simple steps to prevent these avoidable tragedies. The CPSC “recommends that parents and caregivers make sure the infant’s face is not covered and is visible at all times to the sling’s wearer. If nursing the baby (is) in a sling, change the baby’s position after feeding so the baby’s head is facing up and is clear of the sling and the mother’s body.” Frequent checking of the baby’s position is urged, especially after nursing.<br /><br />In related news, the CPSC in cooperation with Ellaroo LLC, has recalled 1,200 units of the Ellaroo Ring Sling baby carrier because the aluminum rings can bend or break. This may cause the fabric to slip through the rings and infants may fall out of the carrier. Manufactured in India, this recall is limited to lot numbers 03/07 and 07/04. The lot number can be found printed on the sling’s label. The CPSC, in cooperation with Infantino LLC, has recalled approximately 100,000 units of the Infantino SlingRider with item numbers: 141-210; 151-210; 151-528; and 151-534. Manufactured in China, Infantino has received 10 reports of the plastic adjustment sliders breaking. In eight cases, the the babies fell out of the carriers due to this issue. The CPSC, in cooperation with Zolowear Inc., announced a voluntary recall of ZoloWear Infant Carriers/Slings. Manufactured in the US, only 165 units were affected in the recall. One report of an issue related to the stitching that attaches the webbing to the carrier/sling prompted the recall. No one was injured and this recall was a preventative measure. <br /><br />Below is a diagram released by the CPSC displaying the correct method for resting a baby in a baby sling and four incorrect, and potentially dangerous, positions.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="babyslingRW" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/babyslingRW.jpg" width="200" height="166" /></span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="babyslingWW" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/babyslingWW.jpg" width="200" height="160" /></span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;"><img alt="babyslingW" src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/babyslingW.jpg" width="150" height="243" /><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 14 Mar 2010 19:18:15 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>FDA &amp; GAO Agree on Nanotechnology in Food Supply</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/233-fdaengineerednanomaterialsinusfoodsupply422118</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/233-fdaengineerednanomaterialsinusfoodsupply422118</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<span style="color: #000000;">In a report by the GAO (Government Accountability Office), the FDA allows spices, artifical flavors, vitamins, minerals, preservatives, trans fats in partially hydrogenated oils, and nanomaterials into the U.S. food supply without review or inspection. These substances and many other substances are categorized as GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe). The GRAS category allows companies to add substances, including newly developed chemicals, into foods without the FDA’s approval or knowledge. Companies are not required to identify nanomaterials and other GRAS substances added to food products such that neither the consumer nor the FDA knows what ingredients are contained within foods.The GAO urges the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) to strengthen its oversight of the U.S. food supply.<br /><br />Companies may add engineered nanomaterials (materials manipulated at the molecular level) and other GRAS substances into foods without notifying the FDA. Companies may make their own determination of whether or not a food is GRAS and are not required to tell the FDA if the substance exists or how the GRAS determination was made. The GAO notes that substances previously categorized as GRAS have been banned due to health hazards. The GAO report states, “FDA does not know to what extent, or even whether, companies track evolving scientific information about their GRAS substances. FDA's approach to regulating nanotechnology allows engineered nanomaterials to enter the food supply as GRAS substances without FDA's knowledge.” The GAO report also notes that all foods containing engineered nanomaterials are regulated in many countries including Canada and the European Union but not in the U.S. . <br /><br />Sodium cyclamate, an artificial sweetener, was a GRAS substance banned by the FDA. Sodium cyclamate was discovered by a graduate student at the University of Illinois when he was working on the synthesis of an anti-fever drug. The student’s cigarette came into contact with the cyclamate when he placed it on the lab bench. When he resumed smoking, the graduate student discovered that the cyclamate had a sweet taste from the flavor it imparted to his cigarette. Research connecting sodium cyclamate to cancer and testicular atrophy caused the FDA to pull sodium cyclamate from the market.   Although the FDA took action against sodium cyclamate, the GAO asserts that the FDA is unresponsive to most concerns from individuals and consumer groups concerning GRAS substances in the U.S. food supply. In 11 citizen petitions submitted to the FDA between 2004 and 2008, the FDA came to a decision on only one of these investigative complaints. <br /><br />The GAO recommends that the FDA develop a strategy to identify GRAS ingredients in foods and how companies determine GRAS status for their foods. The GAO also recommends that the FDA develop a strategy for reconsidering GRAS ingredients already present in the food supply and to develop an approach for handling engineered nanomaterials. The FDA agrees with the GAO findings and notes that they are beginning an internal deliberation regarding GRAS substances.</span>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 02:04:14 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>GOP Joins Dems to Breakup Insurance Monopolies</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/231-democratsrepublicanshealthcareinsurance</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/231-democratsrepublicanshealthcareinsurance</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">The US House of Representatives has passed the ‘Health Insurance Industry Fair Competition Act’ by a vote of 406 to 19. This legislation repeals antitrust protections enjoyed by the health insurance industry. This is an overwhelming majority vote supporting the repeal of longstanding antitrust exemptions for insurance companies and the bill has over 70 cosponsors. Representing the 5th district of Virginia, Congressman Tom Periello sponsored this bill to end monopoly protections for health insurance companies. <br /><br />The McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945 gave insurance companies exemption from antitrust laws allowing them to legally fix prices, collude with one another, and to divide market turf amongst themselves. Spokesmen from several branches of the insurance industry oppose this legislation with many asserting that it will not help to control rising healthcare costs. The Consumer Federation of America (CFA) estimates that this legislation will save Americans approximately $5 billion per year. President Obama favors repealing antitrust protections for insurance companies. <br /><br />In an interesting twist, the Senate has not stated whether or not it will consider this legislation despite its massive bipartisan support in the House. The ‘Health Insurance Industry Fair Competition Act’ (HR 4626) is only two pages of text in contrast to the enormous healthcare bill recently stalled in the US Senate. It seems the US House of Representatives has passed a simple, clean bill that anyone can read in a matter of minutes. A total of 253 Democrats voted in favor of the legislation joined by 153 Republicans. The only nays came from a small group of 19 Republicans. The act sailed through the House in merely two days providing easy passage. Surprisingly, the passage of this historic act has received muted attention by the press. <br /><br />Opinion polls consistently point to frustration amongst Americans over the lumbering and inefficient process of passing legislation marred by corruption from lobbyists. Equally unpopular are amendments loaded with pork that weigh down legislation and drive up costs. This act moved swiftly and lacks any costly amendments. As a test to the Federal process, should this bill move through the Senate it would represent a breakthrough of the gridlock that hampers the US government and fosters rewards for special interest groups over US citizens.<br /><br />The official US House of Representatives long title of this act is “To restore the application of the Federal antitrust laws to the business of health insurance to protect competition and consumers.” The exact text of the bill reads:<br /><br /> (a) Amendment to McCarran-Ferguson Act- Section 3 of the Act of March 9, 1945 (15 U.S.C. 1013), commonly known as the McCarran-Ferguson Act, is amended by adding at the end the following:<br /><br /> (c) Nothing contained in this Act shall modify, impair, or supersede the operation of any of the antitrust laws with respect to the business of health insurance. For purposes of the preceding sentence, the term `antitrust laws' has the meaning given it in subsection (a) of the first section of the Clayton Act, except that such term includes section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act to the extent that such section 5 applies to unfair methods of competition.'.<br /><br /> (b) Related Provision- For purposes of section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 45) to the extent such section applies to unfair methods of competition, section 3(c) of the McCarran-Ferguson Act shall apply with respect to the business of health insurance without regard to whether such business is carried on for profit, notwithstanding the definition of `Corporation' contained in section 4 of the Federal Trade Commission Act.</span></p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;">Learn more about healthcare and insurance issues affecting nurses, doctors, and patients at <a href="http://www.healthcmi.com/index.php?option=com_content&amp;view=frontpage&amp;Itemid=100001">HealthCMI Online, http://www.healthcmi.com . </a><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 08:04:20 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Macular Degeneration Avastin-Lucentis Controversy Ends</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/228-genentechmaculardegenerationavastinlucentis9118</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/228-genentechmaculardegenerationavastinlucentis9118</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">Wet age related macular degeneration (AMD) is treatable with Lucentis. Wet AMD causes vision loss due to abnormal blood vessel growth in the eye. The blood vessels bleed, leak, and cause scarring therefore severely damaging vision. The FDA has approved Lucentis (ranibizumab) for the treatment of wet AMD but many physicians favor Avastin (bevacizumab) because it is significantly less expensive and yet chemically similar. Both products are made by Genentech, the biotech pharmaceutical division of Roche. <br /><br />The use of Avastin for AMD is not approved by the FDA. This off-label (non-approved) use of Avastin generates significant controversy. According to Genentech, Lucentis is a superior treatment for AMD. Many doctors favor Avastin because it costs approximately $150 per treatment compared with that of Lucentis at $2,000 per treatment. The Lucentis-Avastin controversy will end in February 2011 with the completion of the National Eye Institutes’s (NEI) clinical trials that compare the two drugs for the treatment of wet AMD. The NEI study evaluates the safety and efficacy of both Lucentis and Avastin for the treatment of AMD.<br /><br />The final data collection of the study is occurring now even though the final conclusions will be officially released next year. This is a massive study chaired and directed by doctors from the Cleveland Clinic, University of Pennsylvania, and Duke University. Over 55 medical groups from California to Florida participate in this effort. This includes centers such as the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota; the Massachusetts Eye &amp; Ear Infirmary in Boston, the Duke University Eye Center in North Carolina, the University of Wisconsin, the West Coast Retina Medical Group in San Francisco, California; the University of California-Davis Medical Center in Sacramento, and the Retina-Vitreous Associates Medical Group in Beverly Hills, California to name a few. <br /><br />The study will determine whether or not Lucentis is safer and more effective for the treatment of wet AMD over Avastin. The financial stakes are high for the biotech giant Genentech whose profits from Lucentis over Avastin for the treatment of AMD are significant. More importantly, the study will determine what is the best course of treatment for patients looking to save their eyesight. The NEI study results have not been posted yet the information is vital for patients suffering from AMD. Looking forward, will doctors and participants from the clinical trials leak anecdotal information over the course of the next year? <br /><br />A separate study conducted by researchers from the Boston University School of Medicine and the VA Boston Healthcare System which appears in the American Journal of Ophthalmology concludes that there is no difference between Lucentis and Avastin for the treatment of AMD. This is hardly the final word. This study was only conducted on 20 subjects for a period of six months. At best, this study is inconclusive and on the downside this study may be inadvertently steering doctors away from using the best possible treatment for AMD. As a result of this preliminary investigation, many doctors have already concluded that there is no difference between Avastin and Lucentis. We are a year out from knowing the answer to the Lucentis-Avastin controversy. Look to February 2011 to learn the answer to this very important question that will ultimately help determine the best course of treatment for patients suffering from AMD. Once the NEI study is published in 2011, the pharmaceutical controversy is over and patients will benefit from this knowledge.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;">Learn more about nursing and medical continuing education news at HealthCMI by clicking<a href="http://www.healthcmi.com/index.php?option=com_content&amp;view=article&amp;id=131&amp;Itemid=100211"> Nursing Continuing Education Online.</a><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 19 Feb 2010 09:19:57 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>iPad Revolutionizes Online Continuing Education</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/227-ipadcontinuingeducation2276</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/227-ipadcontinuingeducation2276</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<h1 style="text-align: center;"></h1>
<h1><span style="color: #000000;"> </span></h1>
<p><span style="color: #000000;">2-17-10: The iPad is a generational shift from the laptop computer to the handheld computer and will directly impact online continuing education courses. Mostly, the use of a laptop requires the user to be in an upright seated position whereas the iPad sports enhanced mobility similar to that of smart phones. The iPad allows users to shift from semi-mobile laptop computing to highly mobile handheld device computing thus opening up new possibilities to easily study continuing education courses on subways, at bus stops, at a park, in vehicle passenger seats, while waiting in a line, etc…. <br /><br />The iPad will increase mobile online continuing education usage far greater than other eReaders such as the Amazon Kindle and the Sony Reader Touch.  The Kindle text readout is a form of eInk that is visible in daylight without backlighting and has extremely long battery life. The iPad features only up to 10 hours of battery time and does not have the eInk advantages in daylight. However, sharper text resolution and improved ergonomics are major reasons for the inevitable success of the iPad in the eReader market.<br /><br />Online continuing education programs are provided in several ways including the eBook  format which is often purchased online then downloaded in the form of Adobe PDF files. The iPad supports high definition, full color text with images. This enhances courses delivered in the PDF format over the black and white readout of the Kindle. The iPad’s combination of color text, photos, and video allows for a greater diversity of course content and layout thereby making a more user friendly experience for learners.<br /><br />Online continuing education courses are also delivered through streaming media and downloadable video files, often in Apple’s Quicktime format. The Kindle and several other eReaders will falter in comparison to the iPad’s 3G and Wifi ability to deliver streaming video content. More than this, the iPad has an intuitive touch screen display allowing users to flip through eBook content in much the same way as turning the pages in a book. The iPad brings the tactile experience of opening and flipping through a book to the end user. A major factor in the adoption of the iPad into the continuing education marketplace is familiarity. The touch screen hand gestures used by the Macintosh computer mousepad, iPhone, and iPod touch devices are employed in iPad navigation. Millions of end users are already familiar with the ergonomics of Apple touch-screen hand gestures thereby making the cross-grade from the laptop to the iPad an intuitive process. <br /><br />More speculative is the likability factor of the iPad’s handheld usability. Apple’s intention is to have the iPad become as comfortable as holding a pad of paper, leafing through a newspaper, or reading a book. It is likely that the comfort level for end users will reach this goal based on the reasonable size, weight, and thinness of the iPad. More than this, the iPad is compatible with many existing online content delivery systems such that specialized programming and development is unnecessary. This makes the iPad an out-of-the-box educational solution for both end users and content providers. Moreover, it is probable that the popularity of the iPad will encourage publishers to provide more textbook titles in eBook format.<br /><br />The iPad requires no additional programming for educational providers using most learning management systems (LMSs). An LMS is the server side software used to host online schools and universities. LMSs allow students to register for courses, download course materials, take quizzes, receive certificates of completion, view grades, interact with other students and faculty, and view streaming video and media content. The LMSs of providers such as the Healthcare Medicine Institute (HealthCMI) and Lynda.com are compatible with the Apple Safari internet browser. Currently, the Safari browser functions on the iPad, iPhone, iPod Touch, Windows computers, and Mac computers. Learners at HealthCMI and Lynda.com will be right at home with the iPad and the downloadable materials and streaming media content will behave exactly the same way on the iPad as on desktop and laptop computers.<br /><br />The iPad can act as a virtual stack of books or as a streaming media portal for learners. Online educational environments will move beyond the laptop generation and find its way into the handheld environment. In other words, mobile usage can move from sitting to standing and moving. This puts the iPad in the same range of flexibility offered by books and newspapers and also makes access to continuing education online as ubiquitous as a Wifi or 3G connection to the internet.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;">Learn more about continuing education online at HealthCMI by clicking <a href="http://www.healthcmi.com/index.php?Itemid=100211">Nursing Continuing Education.</a><br /></span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2010 01:25:11 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>iPhone to Apple iPad- Mobile Continuing Education Expands</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/224-iphoneappletabletmobilece</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/224-iphoneappletabletmobilece</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p><span style="color: #000000;">1-25-2010: Apple’s iPhone is shining in areas not anticipated by continuing education providers. Online nursing continuing education and acupuncture continuing education courses at the Healthcare Medicine Institute (HealthCMI) were designed to function on Internet Explorer versions 6, 7, and 8 as well as Safari and Firefox for both Mac OSX and Windows PC users. HealthCMI developers were surprised to find out that some learners were accessing online courses with the iPhone. “The iPhone implementation required no planning or effort- it just works,” notes Allan Blake, HR Director for HealthCMI. He further notes, “We spent months getting our software to properly visualize IE (Internet Explorer) and yet the iPhone required no specialized programming or additional effort.” <br /><br />HealthCMI developers did not anticipate cellular mobile computing to interest continuing education learners due to the small size of the iPhone display. However, users can easily magnify and therefore read the PDF course materials on the iPhone and are able to wirelessly transfer the course materials to laptop and desktop computers with simple iPhone apps. Others simply login to <a href="http://www.healthcmi.com/index.php?option=com_content&amp;view=frontpage&amp;Itemid=100001">www.healthcmi.com</a> at a later date from their home computers and re-download the materials.<br /><br />The Apple tablet, the iPad, i</span><span style="color: #000000;">is now on the minds of HealthCMI developers. HealthCMI developers now expect Apple’s tablet to become a preferred mobile computing platform. Allan Blake  notes that the comfortable screen size coupled with high resolution and respectable dot pitch makes Apple’s new tablet a formidable mobile reading device. “It’s about the sharpness of the text,” notes Blake on the topic of reader preference and eye strain. “Learners will choose the Apple tablet based on ergonomics and reading comfort. They will experience less eye fatigue than other, less sharp, mobile devices and will therefore naturally gravitate to this technology.” Mr. Blake comments that he is expecting the tablet to be compatible with HealthCMI acupuncture and nursing continuing education online courses because it will be built on the Mac OSX operating system, the same system that both the Safari browser and the iPhone are built on.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: #000000;">About the Author: Adam White, L.Ac., Dipl.Ac. is an Acupuncture Continuing Education provider with the Healthcare Medicine Institute (HealthCMI). To learn more about medical news and medical continuing education visit <a href="http://www.healthcmi.com/index.php?option=com_content&amp;view=frontpage&amp;Itemid=100001">http://www.healthcmi.com </a>.</span></p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2010 12:19:50 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Green Manufacturing brings Health Benefits</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/214-greenmanufacturinghealthbenefits35423</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/214-greenmanufacturinghealthbenefits35423</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[1-01-2010, Soquel, CA: Poverty and environmental pollutants have a lot in common. Both contribute to adverse living conditions and ill health. The cure may be a prescription for green manufacturing jobs. There are no factories producing complete wind and solar systems in the USA. Major components for solar panels and wind turbines are assembled domestically but are manufactured oversees. In the wake of a job shortage and miles of rusting factories it seems logical for a national initiative to revive the domestic production of goods. <br /><br />This requires a massive retooling project combined with powerful incentives for industry to come home to Uncle Sam. Our dear uncle seems to be on an oversees cruise at the moment. Ipods are produced in Malaysia, iPhones in China, many LCD TVs from Korea, and the list continues. The former technologies were pioneered in the USA and are manufactured overseas for domestic distribution. We’ve even lost our last Levi’s jeans factory. Apple computer and Levi’s jeans are about as apple pie as it gets! Yet, these companies cannot compete if they utilize domestic production. So, with a burgeoning industry of solar and wind energy production - why not push to have production at home?<br /><br />Tax breaks and cheap loans are step number one. Current federal incentives often require mountains of bureaucratic paperwork for small and medium sized businesses to obtain loans.  This is an important area that needs to be streamlined. <br /><br />Tax breaks are not enough. The government needs to work with industry to immediately build enterprise zones filled with factories to produce solar panels and wind turbine components. This, coupled with a program to put a solar panel on every sunny roof and wind farms in every state, creates the demand for these products. Current subsidies bring the cost of installing solar in the home down 50% in many areas. Nonetheless, most people will have a hard time coming up with the net cost of approximately $15,000 for a solar system. The federal government and state governments need to bring this price into the $5,000 range to make solar a realistic investment for home owners. <br /><br />This is an investment and not an entitlement. Rebuilding the domestic manufacturing base creates wealth. If we plant a seed and grow corn we have created wealth. The government can incentivize industry to plant those seeds in domestic energy production to create wealth in our society. US steel and carbon fiber combined with American ingenuity can be tapped to create a wealth of green products needed to revive this economy, fight poverty, and provide for a healthier and self-sufficient society. The return on investment includes a reduction in healthcare costs associated with poverty and environmental pollutants. Another advantage to encouraging local solar energy production is solar’s independence from our aging national grid of power lines. <br /><br />The power grid issue prevents wind farms from reaching their full potential. Many wind farms are hampered in their ability to transmit power because they will overload the power grid if they activate 100% of their wind turbines. Additionally, the fragility of the grid weakens our national defense by putting local, state, and federal agencies at risk and destabilizes the ability of our communities to function after disasters such as earthquakes, hurricanes, floods, fires, and tornadoes. The power grid needs shovels in the ground now. It seems that the government has an opportunity for job creation that will yield quick dividends.<br /><br />Domestic manufacturing seems impossible in the face of cheap oversees wages in many factories without restraint from human rights protections and environmental &amp; safety standards. Conversely, some countries provide healthcare coverage for workers unlike US industry which is bootstrapped to health insurance costs. It is reasonable to only allow imports from factories meeting the same standards as the demands placed on their US competitors. <br /><br />The concept of federally mandating insurance coverage to employers is a well-intentioned yet unfunded mandate that has the potential to hurt the US production of goods. The disconnect with this approach is that jobs are tied to healthcare coverage. Healthcare costs often contribute to an industry moving oversees thereby reducing domestic jobs. Why do we want to burden the manufacturing base with healthcare costs if this may push jobs offshore? No jobs? This leads to poverty, malnutrition, and poor health.<br /><br />Extending Medicare coverage to all US citizens is one fix. Industry will be freed from healthcare costs. If big government seems too scary with the fears of outrageous tax hikes associated with national healthcare coverage then perhaps the addition of competition may help bring down the costs associated with healthcare. This requires the federal government to repeal anti-trust protections from insurance companies and to provide a public option with competitive pricing. Looking to Congress for a streamlined and efficient healthcare package? On this one, the lobbyists have scored the first touchdown. Right, left, center, whatever the political solution may be… until we, as a nation, pull together and provide some kind of comprehensive healthcare coverage to all US citizens without forcing the burden onto the manufacturing base - we will not see the type of job creation needed to move this economy forward.<br /><br />Green manufacturing is a great way to test our economic fortitude. The US must combine the knowledge base of US industry and universities with efficient financial structures to support the rebuilding of domestic factories for this to work. Are we to replace foreign oil with foreign wind turbines and solar panels? A sound domestic energy policy is one wherein the US can provide for its own power. Job creation, a cleaner environment, and a healthier populace are the rewards for this effort.<br /><br />To learn more about healthcare and continuing education issues visit the Healthcare Medicine Institute (HealthCMI) at <a href="http://www.healthcmi.com">http://www.healthcmi.com</a> .]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jan 2010 20:23:58 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Healthcare Reform Key Issues Unresolved</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/211-healthcare-reform23452341</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/211-healthcare-reform23452341</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>December 23, 2009, Capitola, CA: The healthcare reform bill has passed in the US Senate. However both the US House of Representatives and the US Senate bills have yet to address important details affecting patient care. Oversight concerning the determination of medical necessity as well as provider network inclusion issues have greatly affected medical reimbursement and patient access to care.  Many insurance companies reimburse medical expenses based upon a determination of medical necessity by the carrier’s claims department. In the absence of external oversight or regulation, the insurance carrier is free to deny care solely based upon their on private internal review. <br /><br />Another key issue not addressed is how provider networks create financial barriers to care. Many insurance carriers reimburse medical expenses at lower rates or refuse reimbursements for out-of-network providers. Medical practitioners may also be excluded from insurance company networks for a variety of reasons. Practitioners may be required to limit medical procedures for patients and the number of office visits as a precondition for inclusion in the insurance network. Medical practitioners may also be required to accept lower rates of reimbursement for services provided to patients as another precondition to network inclusion. Some medical networks charge medical practitioners a fee for inclusion in networks.</p>
<p>The patient’s right to choose their own medical practitioner is not federally guaranteed by law. Additionally, there is no guarantee an insurance company will pay for medical services and patients often have no way to determine what will be paid until after a claim is submitted and a response is generated the insurance company’s claims department. The federal government seeks to mandate health insurance coverage for all US citizens yet has not stipulated that insurance companies must reimburse patients for medical expenses nor is there language to address oversight of the determination of medical necessity. <br /><br />The determination of reimbursements is often based on what is termed as ‘usual and customary.’ Insurance companies have sole discretion over this aspect of reimbursement for general health insurance policies and may choose to exclude many procedures, office visits, and medical tests whether or not teams of doctors agree that such medical services are vital to the patient’s survival, recovery, or comfort. <br /><br />The US House of Representatives and the US Senate have not addressed these details which represent core issues affecting healthcare outcomes for patients. Until these unresolved issues are rectified, it is unclear whether or not US citizens with health insurance coverage will have adequate access to medical care.<br /><br /> <br /> About the Author: Adam White, L.Ac., Dipl.Ac. is an <a href="http://www.healthcmi.com/index.php?Itemid=100211">Acupuncture &amp; Nursing Continuing Education</a> provider with the Healthcare Medicine Institute (HealthCMI).  To learn more about medical news and medical continuing education visit <a href="http://www.healthcmi.com">http://www.healthcmi.com</a> .</p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 25 Dec 2009 05:35:34 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Palatal Myoclonus</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/150-palatalmyoclonusnursingceus2124987655454</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/150-palatalmyoclonusnursingceus2124987655454</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<h1 align="center">Palatal Myoclonus</h1>
<h2 align="center">Nursing Continuing Education Online</h2>
<p> </p>
<p>Palatal myoclonus is a spasmodic action of the palatal muscles which are located on the roof of the mouth. This often results in a clicking noise that can be heard both by the patient and people nearby.  Lesions of the central tegmental tract are often involved.  Once important and effective treatment is acupuncture to alleviate this disorder.</p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2009 21:47:25 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Nursing Safety: Antibiotic Reistance to Bacteria</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/72-nursingantibioticreistance23359865</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/72-nursingantibioticreistance23359865</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<span style="color: #000000;">The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently released a study noting that more American deaths occur each year due to MRSA, an antibiotic-resistant bacterium, than due to the AIDS virus.  The Committee to Reduce Infection Deaths calculates that more than 100,000 Americans die annually due to hospital acquired infections.  Statistical reporting does vary.  The National Institutes of Health (NIH) estimates that 90,000 people in the US die annually due to hospital acquired infections.  This statistic was noted in an an April 2006 report from the NIH division, The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. The NIH also notes in this report that this number rose from 13,300 deaths annually in 1992 to 90,000 in 2006.  The NIH also notes that approximately 2,000,000 patients in the US get an infection in hospitals annually.  Tracking suggests that this number is rising.  Experts note that hospitals provide more procedures such as joint replacements and transplants which increase the risk of infections and push the trend upward.  Also, an increasing amount of hospital patients suffer from immunosuppression due to cancer and AIDS which also contribute to the increased risk of cross infection.  For 2008, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Service  has stated that Medicare will no longer reimburse hospital bills for care relating to hospital acquired infections.  It is expected that this will cause hospitals to fund greater resources towards improved staffing and equipment for disinfection, MSRA screening, and isolation rooms. <br /><br /> Another challenge is the natural process of bacterial antibiotic resistance.  Bacteria acquire genes conferring antibiotic resistance by spontaneous DNA mutation, transformation, and a DNA transfer process carried by a plasmid (a small circle of DNA that can jump from one bacteria to another).  The FDA notes that there are many factors involved in the increasing use of antibiotics which, in turn, promote the natural process of bacterial resistance to antibiotics.  For example, the FDA cites that an increased use of day-care facilities for children corresponds to a doubling of the amount of doctor visits for ear infections (and antibiotic use) between 1975 and 1990.  The FDA notes that the antibiotic resistance trend is also partially due to immunocompromised patients living longer, increased chemotherapy and transplant recipients, routine antibiotic prescriptions, and homelessness.  Interestingly, the FDA notes that doctors are pressured by patients to prescribe antibiotics in cases where they may not be necessary.  The FDA is also investigating whether or not the use of antibiotics in food animals can lead to human diseases.</span>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2008 14:13:56 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Nursing Continuing Education Colitis</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/123-nursingcontinuingeducationcolitiscrohns12998889676554</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/123-nursingcontinuingeducationcolitiscrohns12998889676554</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<h1 align="center">Nursing Continuing Education FYI</h1>
<h2 align="center">Focus: Ulcertative Colitis and Crohn's Disease</h2>
<p> </p>
<p>Chronic inflammatory disease of the large bowel is divided into two major entities-nonspecific ulcerative colitis &amp; Crohn's disease  of the large bowel (regional enteritis, granulomatous colitis).  Both involve abdominal pain, diarrhea, and rectal bleeding.  Crohn’s disease is  one-fifth as common as ulcerative colitis in the US. <br /> <br /> Crohn's disease is a nonspecific chronic transmural inflammatory dz that most commonly affects the distal ileum and colon but may also occur in any part of the GI tract from the mouth to the anus and perianal area.  Chemicals and low-fiber diets of industrialized nations facilitate this onset of this disease.  It occurs more commonly in Jewish people of Eastern European descdent and has familial tendencies.  Most cases begin before age 40 and have peak incidence in the 20's.<br /> <br /> The earliest macroscopic lesions of Crohn’s disease appear to be tiny focal "aphthoid" ulcerations of the mucosa, usually with underlying nodules of lymphoid tissue.  The inflammation may regress or progress to involve all layers of the intestinal wall.<br /> <br /> The transmural inflammation, deep ulcerations, edema, and fibrosis are responsible for obstruction, deep sinus tracts and fistulas and mesenteric abscesses.  Chronic diarrhea associated with abdominal pain, fever, anorexia, weight loss, and a right lower quadrant mass or fullness are the most common presenting features.  However, many patients are first seen with an "acute abdomen" simulating acute appendicitis or intestinal obstruction. <br /> <br /> Ulcerative colitis, however, is usually a series of attacks of bloody diarrhea varying in intensity and duration interspersed with asymptomatic intervals.  Onset of an attack may be acute and fulminant with  sudden violent diarrhea, high fever, signs of peritonitis and profound toxemia.<br /> <br /> Psychological aspects of ulcerative colitis play a secondary role in attack onset.  The initial pathologic lesion is confined to the mucosal layer and consists of abscess formation in the crypts, as opposed to Crohn’s disease, which involves the entire thickness of the bowel wall.  Ulcerative colitis reveals a friable and intensely inflamed mucosa with exudate. Usually, the rectosigmoid area of the colon is involved.  The disease may extend from this area but always in a continuous fashion, in contrast with Crohn’s disease, which tends to skip.  Ulcerative colitis patients  may have narrowing of the bowel lumen as a result of fibrosis, which is generally mild compared to Crohn’s disase.  Age onset differs.  Ulcerative colitis peaks at 15-30 years and also 50-70 years of age.</p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 09:20:44 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Nursing Continuing Education Peptic Ulcers</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/122-nursingcontinuingeducationpepticulcers234233248877</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/122-nursingcontinuingeducationpepticulcers234233248877</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<h1 align="center">Nursing Continuing Education Courses Online</h1>
<h1 align="center">Foucs: Peptic Ulcers</h1>
<p> </p>
<p>HealthCMI brings special FYI information on common questions in nursing continuing education and medicine.</p>
<p><strong><br /> Peptic ulcers</strong> are circumscribed breaks in the continuity of mucosa, extending below the epithelium.  Strictly speaking, breaks in the mucosa not extending below are called erosions, although they are often referred to as ulcers.  Chronic ulcers have scar tissue at the base.  Peptic ulcers can be located in any part of the gastrointestinal tract exposed to the acid-pepsin gastric juice, including the esophagus, stomach, duodenum and after gastroenterostomy, the jejunum.  Although the peptic digestive activity of the gastric juice is an important etiologic factor, there is evidence that this is only one of many factors in its pathogenesis.  Both cortisone and aspirin produce  qualitative changes in the gastric mucus which may facilitate its degradation by pepsin.  <br /> <br /> Aspirin, alcohol, bile salts, and other substances injurious to the gastric mucosa alter the permeability of the epithelial barrier, which allows back diffusion of hydrochloric acid with resultant injury to underlying tissues, especially blood vessels.  Histamine is liberated, which stimulates further acid and pepsin secretion and increased capillary permeability to proteins. The mucosa becomes edematous, and large amounts of plasma proteins may be lost.  The mucosal capillaries may be damaged, resulting in interstitial hemorrhage and bleeding. Severe stress, especially chronic, is another major cause of gastric ulcers.  Overall, acidity is the major pathogenic factor, so that a malfunction of Brunner's glands, which produce a mucoid secretion that neutralizes the acid chyme, would lead to ulceration.  If normal tissue resistance defense systems like this are overwhelmed- ulcer.  Also important to tissue resistance is vascular supply, proper epithelial regeneration - normally replaced every 3 days. HealthCMI will feature food cures for nursing continuing education online courses on this topic- coming soon!</p>
<p>Other causes:  Indomethacin, phenylbutazone, and corticosteroids, also- caffeine.  Associated diseases:  Liver cirrhosis, chronic pancreatitis, chronic lung dz, hyperparathyroidism, and Zollinger-Ellison syndrome.  In addition, bile reflux from abnormal pyloric sphincter function disrupts the mucosal barrier. <br /> <br /> CLINIC:  upper abdominal pain usually 2 hours after a meal and is relieved by foods and antacids; sometimes pain in the middle of the night (duodenal ulcer), and weight loss (gastric ulcer).</p>
<p>COMPLICATIONS:  intractability, hemorrhage, perforation, and pyloric obstruction. Some ulcers are malignant, others may lead to iron-deficiency anemia, shock in the case of bleeding.  Perforation may lead to chemical peritonitis and therefore intense pain, a fear of moving and breathing, and a rigid abdomen.  If the pancreas is involved, pain may radiate to the back.  Obstruction may lead to anorexia, nausea, and bloating after eating and weight loss; also, sever pain and vomiting.  <br /> <br /> STRESS ULCER:  Brain injury, shock, sepsis, burns and drugs</p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 00:34:55 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Hospital Nutrition Nursing</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/112-hospitalnutritionnursing234234982345</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/112-hospitalnutritionnursing234234982345</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<h1 align="center">Nursing Continuing Education and Nutrition</h1>
<h2 align="center"></h2>
<p align="center"><img src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/hospital_nursing.jpg" alt="hospital_nursing.jpg" style="margin: 5px; width: 425px; height: 282px;" title="hospital_nursing.jpg" align="middle" width="425" height="282" /></p>
<p> </p>
<h2></h2>
<h2>Highlight on Food</h2>
<p> </p>
<p>Food delivers the staple nutrition required to maintain health and a proper diet also speeds recovery from illness.  It follows that hospitals need to focus on quality foods for patients, staff, and for the public.  Under a holistic model of health, the hospital setting is an opportunity to provide quality food for its health benefits and to set an example to the community for healthy eating.  One strong example of a quality food delivery system in the hospital setting is Sutter Maternity and Surgery Center in Santa Cruz, California.  This 30 bed not-for-profit hospital serves fresh locally grown and certified organic foods.  Patients can order meals in a similar fashion to food service in quality hotels.  In addition, the fresh organic foods are available in the food cafeteria for the general public and staff.  The process is accomplished with Sutter’s model of purchasing food directly from a farm.  By contrast, the food courts in many hospitals provide fast-foods that provide profits but miss the mark in terms of healthy eating.</p>
<p>For a link to the <a href="http://www.fda.gov/" target="_blank">US FDA Click Here</a> .</p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2008 05:19:15 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Nursing job burnout</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/111-nursingjobburnoutratio23423432</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/111-nursingjobburnoutratio23423432</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<h1 align="center">Nursing Continuing Education Courses</h1>
<h2 align="center">Nurse to Patient Ratio Issues</h2>
<div align="center"></div>
<h2 align="center">Job Burnout and Quality Patient Care</h2>
<p align="center"><img src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/nursing_education_ancc.jpg" alt="nursing_education_ancc.jpg" style="margin: 5px; width: 350px; height: 232px;" title="nursing_education_ancc.jpg" align="middle" width="350" height="232" /></p>
<p>HealthCMI will feature important nursing continuing education courses on quality of life factors for nurses.  Nursing continuing education will focus on important roles that nurses can empower themselves with in the working environment.  Look forward to nursing continuing education online at HealthCMI!</p>
<p>In one of the most interesting studies concerning the nursing profession (JAMA. 2002 Oct 23-30;288(16):1987-93), important results were tabulated concerning nurse to patient ratios.  Research articles are often dry.  Not this one.  The opening description of the abstract notes, “The worsening hospital nurse shortage and recent California legislation mandating minimum hospital patient-to-nurse ratios demand an understanding of how nurse staffing levels affect patient outcomes and nurse retention in hospital practice.”  The research was conducted by the Center for Health Outcomes and Policy Research, School of Nursing, University of Pennsylvania.  The results showed, “each additional patient per nurse was associated with a 7% increase in the likelihood of dying within 30 days of admission and a 7% increase in the odds of failure-to-rescue. After adjusting for nurse and hospital characteristics, each additional patient per nurse was associated with a 23% increase in the odds of burnout and a 15% increase in the odds of job dissatisfaction.”  The study was conclusive that the mortality rate for surgical patients is higher with fewer nurses per patient and job burnout for nurses increases as well.</p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 20:03:48 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Nursing Continuing Education Employment</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/108-nursingcontinuingeducationemploymentjobs12398765345</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/108-nursingcontinuingeducationemploymentjobs12398765345</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[<h1 align="center">Nursing Employment Figures</h1>
<p align="center"><img src="http://www.healthcmi.com/images/stories/nursing_job.jpg" alt="nursing_job.jpg" style="margin: 5px; width: 360px; height: 271px;" title="nursing_job.jpg" align="middle" width="360" height="271" /></p>
<p align="center"> </p>
<p>Registered nurses represent the largest number of healthcare providers in the United States.  There are 2.5 million nurses and over 50 percent of them work in the hospital setting.  The educational preparation for a career in nursing may include a bachelor’s degree, an associate degree, or a diploma from a dedicated nursing program.  There is an increasing demand for nurses in the US and over a 500,000 new nursing positions are expected to be created by the year 2015.  <br /> <br /> Registered nurses (RN’s) work with both patients and the general public in an effort to educate people about treatment paths for medical conditions.  Nurses treat patients, perform and analyze diagnostic tests, and administer medications.  Nurses also perform record keeping responsibilities and work with patient rehabilitation.  Very importantly, nurses provide emotional support to patients and their families.  <br /> <br /> Nurses are essentially on the “front lines” of medicine.  They may be responsible for reviewing and explaining issues concerning post-operative recovery, dietetics, and for helping patients to understand their responsibilities regarding recovery from illness and also how to maintain wellness.  Many nurses operate in a public health capacity in an effort to education the public concerning the signs and symptoms regarding disease processes.  Other efforts include working at immunization clinics, physical therapy centers, blood drives, and the operation of important medical equipment for diagnostic, analytic, and treatment purposes.  <br /> <br /> Nurses provide an important role in monitoring and administering medications including the checking of dosages.  Other nurses may be charged with administering intravenous (IV) fluids including pharmacological agents and blood.  Nurses may also oversee and manage nursing aids.  Nurses with advanced certifications may have the power to prescribe medications.<br /> <br /> Specialization in nursing takes several directions.  Many nurses perform perioperative procedures for work in operating rooms and act as assistants to surgeons.  Other nurses manage long term cases of illness involving the careful monitoring of lifestyle, medications, and follow-up visits.  Nursing specialties can be quite specific to a particular demographic, organ, or disease type.  There are several major categories of nursing specialties.  They include perioperative nurses, rehabilitation nurses, long-term care nurses, ambulatory care nurses, emergency nurses, hospice care nurses, infusion nurses, home health care nurses, transport nurses, critical care nurses, palliative care nurses, radiology nurses, perianesthesia nurses, mental healthcare nurses, transplant nurses, and more.  The income for nurses ranges from approximately $40,000 to over $80,000.</p>]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 12 Apr 2008 07:15:05 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>California Nurses and Nursing Education</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/71-californianursesnursingeducation2123446</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/71-californianursesnursingeducation2123446</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[The University of California, San Francisco's Center for California Health Workforce Studies, notes that nursing school graduates have increased 73 percent during the last five years.  In California, nurses average a 9.6 hour workday and 45 percent of nurses in California are over 50 years old according to the Board of Registered Nurses.  The average nurse in California is estimated at a salary of approximately $73,500.]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 25 Nov 2007 03:53:28 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Nursing and Home Health Care</title>
			<link>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/69-nursinghomehealthcare763212123</link>
			<guid>http://www.healthcmi.com/nursingceus/69-nursinghomehealthcare763212123</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[The ANA (American Nurses Association) has issued a new publication featuring the importance of home health care.  The publication, <span style="font-weight: bold; font-style: italic">Home Health Nursing: Scope and Standards of Practice</span>, covers the issues of working in home health care in the private home, assisted living, and personal care facilities.  A special focus is given to community health nursing and its relation to the treatment of acute and chronic illness.  The book is 92 pages and retails for $16.95 but is only $13.45 for ANA members.<br />]]></description>
		<dc:creator>HealthCMi CEUs Online</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 24 Nov 2007 12:46:24 +0000</pubDate>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
