Women with embarrassing medical problems are misdiagnosing themselves after consulting search engines.

They have bought the wrong medication after misdiagnosing themselves on the internet and one in ten has suffered unpleasant side effects as a result, research suggests.

Half of women have diagnosed themselves online and bought a treatment without checking with pharmacists if it is the correct product.

A similar proportion said they would seek to treat medical problems themselves before consulting doctors.

A quarter said they “dread” speaking to doctors.

The online world is just as bad as the offline world for misleading people with snakeoil potions.

The moral of the story is to make sure that you only deal with professionals who you can trust.

For medical news we suggest only using websites such as Health Direct which are regularly reviewed by independent experts:
This site complies with the HONcode standard for trustworthy health information: verify here.
Remember that Dr Google can’t do anything for you, except make you feel bad and paranoid

Dr Google can’t write prescriptions- nor even examine you verbally or in person.

Also, search engines can’t actually think- though they may be programmed very cleverly.

Common sense should prevail online as well as offline.

If your symptoms are bothering you that much, you should go to a qualified practitioner which in the case of medical issues is a GP.

The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has asked the Competition Commission to launch an investigation into the UK’s £5.5 billion private healthcare market.Following a public consultation in January, the OFT said that it suspected competition was being restricted.

It said it “continues to hold the view that the private healthcare market could work better for patients”.

The market is of growing importance due to an ageing population and improved medical outcomes, according to the OFT.

Among the concerns raised by the OFT are:

• a lack of information about the pricing and quality of services that would enable patients to compare healthcare providers
• the small number of healthcare providers and insurers nationally, which limits choice and competition
• practices that make it harder for new competitors to break into the market, such as loyalty payments to consultants.

The Competition Commission has the power to demand that firms change business practices and spin off specific business interests, if it deems these to be harmful to market competition.

The investigation could take up to two years to complete.

Homeopathic treatments funded by the NHS are “biologically implausible” and risk damaging patients’ health by discouraging them from getting proper treatment, a leading researcher has claimed.Edzard Ernst, Professor of Complementary Medicine at Exeter University, said homeopathic remedies had not been proven to work in clinical trials.

People who still maintain the treatments are effective are “ignoring or misrepresenting the best evidence available”, he added.

Homeopathy could even be dangerous because it is sometimes used instead of scientifically proven medical procedures such as immunisations, he added.

Prof Ernst, a former homeopathist, is an outspoken critic of unproven treatments provided on the NHS. He once labelled the Prince of Wales a “snake-oil salesman” because of his support for “unproven and disproved” medicine.

The NHS spends about £4 million a year on homeopathy, which is based on the theory that patients can be cured through exposure to a diluted form of the substance that caused their symptoms.

Writing in The Biologist magazine Prof Ernst, now a professor of complementary medicine, said this belief “Is in contrast with the laws of physics, chemistry and pharmacology. Homeopathy is thus biologically implausible.”

He said: “Homeopathy could be (and often is) used as an alternative to effective interventions. For example, the advice from homeopaths not to immunise has become a major cause of low vaccination rates.”

The strategy of using homeopathy as a placebo can only work if doctors hide the truth from their patients, he added.

Homeopathists insist that the form of treatment is not suited to the design of conventional clinical trials because they do not take into account the benefit that many patients have been shown to experience in observational studies.

They say that the method of administering extremely diluted substances works by triggering the body’s natural healing systems, which can lessen symptoms and lead to eventual cures.

Dr Mark Downs, Chief Executive of the Society of Biology, said: “The UK spends billions of pounds every year ensuring that the new and existing conventional medicines we take are effective, safe and fit for purpose.

“It makes no sense to allow other treatments available through public expenditure to be made available without application of the same rigorous standards. That is what is happening with homeopathic treatments. It needs to stop.”

Síle Lane of the Sense About Science campaign group added: “When a treatment like homeopathy is offered by the NHS, people will think the evidence for it has undergone the same level of scrutiny as conventional medicine.

“It misleads people into thinking there is something in it when there isn’t.”

From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/Homeopathy-biologically-implausible

A third of older people are at an increased risk of dying because they do not fully understand the instructions on medicine labels, a study has found.Researchers at University of College London asked almost 8,000 adults over 52 to take part in a test of how well they could read and understand a basic medicines label, for a mocked-up aspirin product.

It comprised of four simple comprehension-style questions, such as ‘What is the maximum number of days you may take this medicine?’ and ‘List three situations for which you should consult a doctor’. The answers were on the bottle’s label.

A third failed to answer all four questions correctly. One in eight got two or more answers wrong.

The academics then followed the health of the volunteers for five years, all of whom were part of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing project. Over that period 621 died.

They found those with poorer literacy – who got more answers wrong – were more likely to have died, the research published in the British Medical Journal found.

Specifically, 16 per cent of those who got two or more answers wrong died, nine per cent of those who got one wrong died, while only six per cent of those who answered all questions correctly did so.

Sophie Bostock, a research associate at UCL’s Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, said: “You can’t say the higher death rates are due to these people not reading medicines labels – the reasons for them dying early are complex – but poor literacy is certainly an indicator that they are more vulnerable.

“We do think there’s something specific about underlying literacy that has an impact on mortality.”

She noted that failing eyesight and dementia were not reasons for people being unable to read or comprehend the labels, and that the study was designed to examine fundamental literacy.

Despite poor literacy usually being a lifelong, intractable problem, she said there were ways to ensure such people lived longer, by targeting them with campaigns to make them understand their health problems better.

The team’s research chimes with recommendations made by Sir Michael Marmot, a Government advisor on health inequalities. He has said that improving children’s literacy is one of the most powerful ways of bettering public health.

Poor underlying literacy has long been known to be related with premature death, partly because those who fail to develop their reading skills at school are more likely to take up unhealthy habits like smoking and over-eating as adults.

However, there have been few attempts to quantify the scale of the problem or how it impacts on life expectancy.

From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/Misreading-medicine-labels-puts-elderly-at-risk-of-dying

Cooling the brains of people who have just had a stroke could have as dramatic effect on reducing deaths and long term disability as ‘clot-busting’ drugs new reserach has found.Reducing a patient’s body temperature to 35C induces a kind of hibernation in the brain that helps protect it from damage, pilot studies indicate.

The technique – which can involve introducing cold saline solution into the veins, and putting ice-packs on the body – is already used for patients with traumatic head injuries and for some babies hurt during birth.

Now academics across Europe are setting up a £9 million study, funded largely by the EU, to test the theory in 1,500 volunteers.

Dr Malcolm Macleod, head of experimental neuroscience at the Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences at Edinburgh University, said: “Our estimates are that hypothermia might improve the outcome for more than 40,000 Europeans every year.”

Pilot studies indicate at least seven or eight per cent of stroke patients will benefit from the cooling therapy, he said- similar to the proportion helped by thrombolysis.

Dr Macleod noted cooling appeared to work for up to six hours after the stroke, compared to about 4.5 hours for thrombolysism. He also said it could also be used in the vast majority of stroke patients, which is not the case for clot-busting drugs, which can only be used for about one in five.

He continued: “It’s a treatment that might in time be available to give in the back of ambulances.”

The larger study is needed to verify the pilot study results, he said.

Dr Clare Walton from The Stroke Association said: “Cooling is a particularly promising area of stroke research because we know body temperature often increases following a stroke and patients with very high temperatures tend to make poorer recoveries.

“We already know that cooling is effective in reducing the amount of brain damage in patients who have acquired brain injuries from accidents. We look forward to finding out whether it has the same positive effect in stroke patients.”

The bitter 14 month parliamentary battle over the NHS finally came to an end last night after the Government comfortably fended off a last desperate attempt by Labour to delay the health legislation.MPs have approved the last amendments to the Health and Social Care Bill – leaving the way clear for Royal Assent to be granted before Parliament starts its Easter recess next week.

The NHS shake-up has threatened to drive a wedge between the coalition partners ever since it was unveiled by Tory Health Secretary Andrew Lansley.

It is intended to give GPs greater control over NHS budgets, reduce bureaucracy, and increase patient choice.

But while there was jubilation among Tory and Liberal Democrat ministers, opponents have warned that the problems are only just beginning.

RCN chief executive and general secretary Dr Peter Carter described the reforms as “deeply flawed”.

He said: “We have achieved some concessions which make the Bill a different piece of legislation from that which first appeared, but our real concerns about the future of the NHS have not been heeded.

“It is now our responsibility to patients to do everything we can to ensure that the health service runs as best as it can despite the massive upheaval that this Bill will bring.

“We intend to work with trusts, regulators and other bodies but our fear is that in the fullness of time this Bill will be a cause of significant regret.

“Perhaps most importantly we will be supporting nurses who are going to have to pick up the pieces and still deliver the best care they can for patients through this extremely difficult time of change.”

Furious opposition from professional bodies and Lib Dem activists led David Cameron and Nick Clegg to take the highly unusual step of “pausing” the legislation last year.

Despite accepting more than a thousand amendments – including limits on competition and private sector involvement – the Government has failed to win over many health workers.

Lib Dems embarrassed Mr Clegg at the party’s spring conference this month by again refusing to back the measures in a vote.

And there is speculation that the controversy could yet cost Mr Lansley his job in a reshuffle expected over the coming months.

When the Cabinet met yesterday, ministers from both parties banged the table to celebrate news that the reforms had finally cleared the House of Lords.

An emergency debate called by Labour had the potential to delay the Bill until an internal assessment of risks had been published.

Shadow health secretary Andy Burnham demanded that the Government publish the risk register, insisting: “People outside will struggle to understand how Members of this House could make such momentous decisions without having carefully considered all of the facts and all of the evidence.”

But Mr Lansley accused Labour of “political opportunism”, saying civil servants needed “safe space” in which to advise ministers.

The Commons defeated the motion by 328 to 246 – a majority of 82. No Lib Dem MPs sided with the opposition, with the most vocal critics choosing to abstain.

After the House agreed more than 370 amendments to formally pass the Bill later, Mr Burnham insisted the “fight will go on” and promised to repeal the measures if Labour returned to power.

“We have given this fight everything that we had,” he said. “All I can say is our fight will go on to protect and restore this party’s finest achievement.”

From: http://www.independent.co.uk/nhs-reforms-approved-by-parliament

More than 100,000 people in the UK suffering the “savage” effects of advanced Alzheimer’s disease could benefit from drug treatment to slow its progression. Scientists have shown for the first time that drugs used to slow the disease in its early stages also work when the condition is advanced, greatly extending the population who could be treated.

Advanced Alzheimer’s is marked by the progressive loss of cognitive skills and physical control and leaves individuals stripped of their dignity and personality.

The finding could double the number of patients currently on treatment from 50,000 to over 100,000 in the UK and extend treatment to millions more worldwide.

Only one in five of the 500,000 patients with Alzheimer’s in the UK, a third of whom have advanced disease, are currently receiving drug treatment because of a shortage of clinics to diagnose them.

Professor Robert Howard of the Institute of Psychiatry, Kings College, London, who led the study published in the New England Journal of Medicine, said: “For the first time we have robust and compelling evidence that treatment with these drugs can continue to help patients at the later, more severe stages of disease. Patients were better able to remember, understand, communicate and perform daily tasks for at least a year longer than those who stopped taking the drugs.”

The National Institute for Curbing Expenditure (NICE) came under fire when it initially refused to approve Donepezil, the commonest drug whose brand name is Aricept, and associated drugs on the ground that they were not cost effective. It said the drugs worked in 40 per cent of those treated. Later they were forced to review its decision and recommended the drugs in the early and moderate stages of the disease but not in the late stages.

Although Its current advice says the drugs should only be withdrawn when doctors consider they are no longer of benefit, the latest findings mean its default position – that the drugs do not work in the late stages of the disease – may now have to be reviewed.

Researchers led by Professor Howard  studied 295 patients with  severe Alzheimers over a year and found continued use of donepezil slowed the deterioration characteristic of the disease by one third, equivalent to four months of improved quality of life.

Those who took a second drug, memantine, in combination, did even better.

Professor Clive Ballard, director of research at the Alzheimer’s Society, which funded the study with the Medical Research Council, said the drug was not a cure but significantly relieved the symptoms: “If I had Alzheimers disease or my relative did I would want them to have [the combination].”

Donepezil came off patent in February and its cost has  plummeted. It is now priced at around 80 pence a day compared with £2.50 a day for the patented drug, Professor Ballard said. The next stage of the research would be to examine the cost effectiveness of the drug based on the reduced cost.

Professor Nick Fox of the Institute of Neurology, University College, London, said dementia cost Britain £20 billion a year and one third of the population would be affected at some point in their lives.

“We desperately need therapies that will slow the disease at a stage when we have most to retain. This is a savage disease with a self sustaining momentum of its own.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/alzheimers-treatment-in-late-stages-of-disease-does-slow-progression-7544408.html

Recent research has investigated the human digestion system and found that the contents of the alimentary canal may be a matter of life or death.Your digestive system is home to roughly 100 trillion microbes – about 10 times the number of cells in the major organs.

A team co-led by Prof Jeroen Raes of the Flemish Institute of Biotechnology has discovered that we all have one of three basic ecosystems of bugs in our guts – but strangely, the type for each person is unrelated to their race, native country or diet.

They label these “enterotypes” the “bacteriodes”, “prevotella” and “ruminococcus”, to reflect the species of bug that dominate in each.

People with a bacteriodes ecosystem, for example, have a bias towards bacteria that get most of their energy from carbohydrates and proteins.

This revelation has prompted much interest, because it could explain differences in our ability to digest food.

A few years ago, Prof Jeffrey Gordon’s team at Washington University School of Medicine found that the intestines of obese people contain a slightly different repertoire of microbes when compared with slim people. In the Flemish study, researchers found a similar correlation between obesity and the abundance of bacteria that extract energy rapidly from food.

Prof Jeremy Nicholson, of Imperial College London, doubts that the latest find is of huge biological significance, since the three enterotypes probably have similar roles and capabilities. Yet he believes that one day, it might be possible to engineer enterotypes, which could be used (for example) to boost the number of calories extracted from poor diets by children in developing countries.

The human gut contains about 1,500 bacterial species, so tinkering with their ecology in a controlled way may be tricky. Although there are products that claim to manipulate bacteria, such as prebiotics, which fuel certain microbes, and probiotics (such as yogurts) that contain live bacteria, we still understand too little to do this reliably.

Yet recognition of the importance of the microbiome is growing.

It has already been linked to our understanding of obesity, allergies, diabetes and cancer – and in the past few days, a study has appeared by Prof John Baker at the Medical College of Wisconsin in Milwaukee that suggests that the types and levels of bacteria in a person’s gut may be used to predict the likelihood of their having a heart attack, too.

The find, Prof Baker believes, “is a revolutionary milestone” in the prevention and treatment of such attacks.

As part of his experiments, he and his colleagues induced heart attacks in three separate groups of rats.

The first was fed a standard diet. The second was given the antibiotic vancomycin and the third fed a probiotic supplement containing Lactobacillus plantarum, a bacterium that suppresses the production of a hormone called leptin, which is linked to appetite and metabolism.

It turned out that the group treated with the antibiotic also showed decreased levels of leptin – and that the two groups with lower leptin levels suffered less serious heart attacks, and recovered from them better. “We may not be ready to prescribe yogurt to prevent heart attacks, but this research does give us a much better understanding of how the microbiome affects our response to injury,” says Dr Gerald Weissmann, editor-in-chief of the journal in which the study appeared.

Prof Jeremy Pearson, associate medical director at the British Heart Foundation, stresses that more research will be required to show whether the dramatic changes in inflammatory molecules seen in the rats would apply to humans, too. But few doubt that, in the not too distant future, we will get dramatic new insights into our health by studying the shadow world of our microbial passengers.

Roger Highfield is the director of external affairs at the National Museum of Science and Industry

From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/Yogurt-that-might-stop-a-heart-attack

Amputation rates for diabetes patients are 10 times higher in some parts of England than in others, according to a study highlighting the postcode lottery in diabetic care.Researchers say the figures highlight the importance of ensuring the right specialist care.

The findings coincide with an NHS report putting the annual cost of diabetes-related amputations at £120m.

The study Variation in the recorded incidence of amputation of the lower limb in England, published in the journal Diabetologia, compared lower leg amputation rates for local health trusts (PCTs) across England over three years.

The paper concluded that, compared with the general population, people with diabetes were over 20 times more likely to have an amputation.

It reports a huge variation in the rates of both major (above the ankle) and minor amputations for patients with diabetes – including Types 1 and 2.

For major amputations these range from just over two each year for every 10,000 patients to 22.

In England every year there are about 6,000 diabetes-related amputations.

One of the main authors, Prof William Jeffcoate, a consultant diabetologist at Nottingham City Hospital, is wary of pinning blame on the areas with the highest amputation rates, though he says the variations are “shocking”.

He thinks the problem lies in the way services are organised.

“Foot disease is very complicated and a single professional hasn’t necessarily got the skills to manage every aspect of it.

“And that’s why I believe that only if you can gather a multi-disciplinary team and make sure that people have rapid access to assessment by such a team, it’s only in that way that we think you can provide the best service.”

Many hospitals in England still do not have these teams – which also include podiatrists, surgeons and specialist nurses.

Prof Jeffcoate says a lot of health staff are not trained to recognise the risks of foot disease.

“Maybe it’s just that people don’t like feet. Maybe it’s related to the fact that footcare tends to occur in an older population. But for whatever reason doctors and nurses have also never had specialist training in foot disease and so it means that they don’t necessarily have the skills to assess a new condition when it arises.”

The findings complement previous research suggesting that up to 80% of diabetes-related amputations could be avoided.

They also coincide with new figures on the annual cost of foot ulcers and amputations in England, published in a report by NHS Diabetes.

Its overall estimate is £650 million per year, including £120 million per year for amputations. The paper also highlights additional costs to patients and carers through lost working days and reduced mobility.

The report author, Marion Kerr, says the savings from specialist footcare teams – by reducing amputations – are six or seven times greater than the costs of setting them up.

“We believe that if the NHS were to spend to save – to introduce teams of this kind – not only would they transform the lives of many patients, but actually save money in the process.”

A doctor found guilty of serious professional misconduct over the MMR controversy has won his High Court appeal against being struck off.Prof John Walker-Smith carried out research with Dr Andrew Wakefield (pictured above) claiming there was a link between autism and the combined jab for measles, mumps and rubella.

The study caused a fall in vaccination rates, but was later discredited.

The judge quashed a GMC finding of professional misconduct.

Mr Justice Mitting called for changes in the way General Medical Council fitness to practise panel hearings are conducted in the future saying: “It would be a misfortune if this were to happen again.”

Prof Walker-Smith, who retired in 2001, said: “I am extremely pleased with the outcome of my appeal.

“There has been a great burden on me and my family since the allegations were first made in 2004 and throughout the hearing that ran from 2007 to 2010. I am relieved that this matter is now over.”

The former head of department at the Royal Free Hospital in north London lost his licence to practice in May 2010, along with Dr Andrew Wakefield.

A GMC panel found both guilty of misconduct over the way research into autism and bowel disease was conducted.

A third doctor, Prof Simon Murch, then a junior consultant in the department, was cleared.

The disciplinary case against the doctors centred on how they conducted their work.

The judge said the GMC panel failed to address whether Prof Walker-Smith had been doing research or simply investigating symptoms to help treat children. There had been “inadequate and superficial reasoning and, in a number of instances, a wrong conclusion”, he said.

The GMC said reforms to disciplinary hearings were being considered.

Chief executive Niall Dickson added: “Today’s ruling does not however reopen the debate about the MMR vaccine and autism.

“As Mr Justice Mitting observed in his judgement, ‘There is now no respectable body of opinion which supports (Dr Wakefield’s) hypothesis, that MMR vaccine and autism/enterocolitis are causally linked’.