A blood test that can detect breast cancer decades before the disease develops could be available in five years, scientists have announced.The test could help doctors to identify women at high risk of the disease allowing them to take preventive medicines and switch to healthier lifestyles.

Researchers have identified a ‘genetic switch’, carried by one in five women, that doubles their risk of developing breast cancer.

Experts described the breakthrough by scientists at Imperial College London as “exciting” and said signs of the disease could be detected “many decades in advance”.

Dr James Flanagan, who led the new research, said the test could be available in five to ten years.

The ‘genetic switch’ is influenced by lifestyle factors such as alcohol, smoking, pollution, and hormones including HRT.

Carrying the genetic alterations increase a woman’s lifetime risk of developing breast cancer from one in eight in the general population to one in four.

These tiny genetic changes could be detected in blood samples years before symptoms of breast cancer developed.

Scientists analysed blood samples from 1,380 women of various ages, 640 of whom went on to develop breast cancer.

On average, the blood tests were carried out three years before diagnosis. In some cases they pre-dated the discovery of breast cancer by up to 11 years.

The results were especially clear in blood samples from women under the age of 60.

Around 49,000 people are diagnosed with breast cancer each year and almost 12,000 die annually in Britain.

The changes are also associated with lymphoma and leukaemia meaning the test could have implications in other cancers.

A strong association was found between molecular changes in a white blood cell gene called ATM and breast cancer risk.

Dr Flanagan said: ‘We are working towards prevention. If we can identify women at high risk of cancer we can work towards preventing it and could reduce the incidence of breast cancer quite dramatically.  We have found one marker, we need to work towards finding them all and then we will have a more useful test.”

The findings are published in the journal Cancer Research.

Baroness Delyth Morgan, chief executive of Breast Cancer Campaign, said: “Dr Flanagan’s research into epigenetics is so exciting because it suggests that there is every possibility the risk of developing breast cancer could be decided many decades in advance.

“By piecing together how this happens, we can look at ways of preventing the disease and detecting it earlier to give people the best possible chance of survival.”

Last month researchers announced that they had discovered that breast cancer was not a single disease but there were fact ten distinct genetic types.

This means that treatment can be tailored to the genetic profile of the specific type meaning drugs will work better, with fewer side effects.

From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/Blood-test-could-detect-breast-cancer-years-in-advance

The NHS risks becoming the “World Health Service” because even visitors to the country can claim free treatment, immigration campaigners warn.Ministers have confirmed that GPs do not need to ask prospective patients for ID or proof of address when registering them, raising fresh fears over “health tourism”.

It allows foreign nationals who arrive in England on a six month visitors visa to begin receiving health care immediately.

But the pressure group Migration Watch UK says that it could also mean illegal immigrants getting NHS treatment.

Sir Andrew Green, chairman of the organisation, said: “What this means is that someone getting off a plane with a valid visitors visa, is, in effect, able to access the GP services of the NHS without ever having paid a penny into the system. Over one and a half million such visas were issued last year.”

“And once registered with a GP it is, in practice, an easy step to potentially highly expensive and long term treatment – all at the expense of the UK taxpayer with little or no prospect of the beneficiaries ever being charged for it.”

He went on: “‘It is clearly not the job of doctors to act as an arm of the immigration service but there are clear and substantial risks of abuse in such a lax system and controls must be put in place.”

“The present situation is outrageous. Everyone knows the pressure the NHS is under and its ever increasing cost to the taxpayer. To allow such easy and potentially hugely expensive access without any entitlement must be stopped at once, otherwise the NHS risks becoming the ‘World Health Service’.”

The “lax” rules were confirmed in response to a parliamentary written question asked by Frank Field, the veteran Labour MP.

From: http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/

The number of patients forced to remain in hospital despite being fit enough to leave has increased by a quarter in under two years as councils struggle to find places for elderly people.New figures from the Department of Health show that the total number of days patients have been delayed in hospital has increased by 10 per cent in the last month.

The problem – often referred to as “bed blocking” – has increased 29 per cent when compared with figures from August 2010.

Patients are frequently delayed in hospital and cannot be discharged until suitable care has been arranged, either in a nursing home or in their own home, to aid their recovery.

Councils have faced significant cuts to their budgets and experts have previously warned there would be a knock-on effect on the NHS.

However, patients can also be delayed because they need to be transferred to other hospitals.

The figures show there were 71,450 delayed days in hospitals in March, up from 64,590 in February 2012 and 55,330 in August 2010. However, officials said it was not fair to compare summer figures with statistics from the winter period, when hospitals and councils are busier.

The cost of the delays to the taxpayer has now reached more than £18.5 million a month – around £600,000 every day. The total bill for delayed discharges since August 2010 is £324 million.

The Health Minister Simon Burns said: “No one should stay in hospital longer than they need to.  We know that there is always room for improvement when the NHS faces challenges from an ageing population and rising costs of new treatments.”

From: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/25pc-more-patients-forced-to-remain-in-hospital-beds

Strike action by health workers against the Government’s controversial public sector pension reforms could lead to delays in hospital tests and discharging of patients, employers have warned.Members of the Unite union working in the NHS are planning to join civil servants, Ministry of Defence civilian staff and Royal Fleet Auxiliary employees in strikes and other forms of action on May 10.

The NHS Employers organisation said it had “serious concerns” that health trusts were not being given sufficient opportunity to plan for the day of action.

Director Dean Royles said: “Employers are telling us they have not yet received written notification on which staff will be asked to withdraw their labour with action scheduled to take place in less than two weeks.

“Unions must by law do this no later than seven days before a strike, but this is healthcare we are talking about. Employers are having to rely on patchy information from local representatives but this is not enough on which to take significant decisions about patient care.

“Of course the NHS will work hard and cope but we could be so much clearer to patients and maximise safety with written information from Unite. Even in a well planned strike, there will be distress and disruption to patients.

“This is bad enough but problems will be exacerbated with every day that passes without reliable information.”

The May 10 walkout will be the biggest day of action since last November’s stoppage by more than 1.5 million public sector employees.

Unite has suspended its industrial action by health workers in Scotland after the Holyrood Government agreed to fresh talks on the NHS pension scheme.

The union, which has 100,000 members in the health service, including 15,000 in Scotland, urged the Westminster Government to follow suit.

NHS diabetes care is ‘inadequate’ and some patients come to further harm due to poor care in hospital, a leading specialist says.Dr Gerry Rayman, national clinical lead for inpatient diabetes, warned many hospitals had no specialist diabetes nurse. He said many hospital patients had diabetes, and called the situation ‘quite alarming’.

Diabetes accounts for 11% of all NHS inpatient expenditure, and costs the service around £23.7 billion last year, a figure projected to increase to just under £40 billion by 2035.

Diabetes that is not controlled can cause many serious long-term problems

• Excess glucose (sugar) in the blood can damage the blood vessels, contributing to heart disease, strokes, kidney disease, impotence and nerve damage.
• Uncontrolled diabetes is the most common cause of blindness in people of working age.
• People with diabetes are also 15% more likely to have an amputation than people without the condition.

In Type 2 diabetes, not enough insulin is produced or the insulin that is made by the body does not work properly.

It tends to affect people as they get older and usually appears after the age of 40, but increasingly is seen in younger, overweight people. It accounts for 90% of all cases.

Type 1 diabetes, a condition which usually means insulin cannot be produced at all, is responsible for the other 10%.

Adrian Sanders, chair of the all-party parliamentary group for diabetes, claimed there was plenty of evidence out there to support Dr Rayman’s assessment.

He said the government was aware that a disproportionate number of people occupying hospital beds have diabetes, and their hospital stays are longer.

He said the government – and the last Labour administration – had encouraged more support for people with diabetes in primary care.

“That’s actually a very good policy for people whose condition doesn’t present complications or specialisms. And that’s why you need specialist care for those who present with specialist problems.”

Barbara Young, chief executive at Diabetes UK, said diabetes was a serious condition which could lead to devastating long term complications including blindness, kidney failure and amputations.

She said: “The tragedy is that for many people with diabetes, complications could have been avoided if the health checks were in place to spot any signs and if the appropriate care and treatment were applied.

“For example, up to 80% of amputation cases due to diabetes could be avoided if problems are identified early enough and treated appropriately.”

Prostate cancer symptoms are unfortunately difficult to spot in the early stages of growth.Only when the cancer has advanced will symptoms usually appear- which is a bad cancer sign and contributes to the approximately 10,000 deaths in the UK every year.

If you experience any of the following symptoms, you must see a medical professional immediately:

• the prescence of blood in urine and/ or semen
• pain or burning sensation when urinating
• erectile dysfunction (inability to have or sustain an erection)
• uncomfortable or painful ejaculation
• in the upper thighs, hips, or lower back, a frequent pain or stiffness
• a general pain in the prostate area
• a need to urinate frequently, especially at nighttime
• difficulty in urinating, both in starting or holding back
• interrupted or weak flow of urine

There are several Risk Factors associated with Prostate Cancer:

• Age – For men with over fifty years of age, prostate cancer is most common.
• Family history – It is also an important indicator. If you have a close male relative who has suffered or is suffering from the disease, you are twice as probable to be diagnosed with prostate cancer yourself.
• Nationality – Your nationality and racial genetics may also play a part. Studies show, for example, that African-Americans are most at risk, followed by Americans and Europeans. Asians (particularly those that live in the East and Southeast portions of the continent) are the least at risk.
• Lifestyle – Even though, the evidence in often conflicting, in the development of prostate cancer, an individual’s lifestyle, and diet may also play an important part.

At present, while prostate cancer is not an avoidable disease, it can be mitigated by alterations in a person’s food consumption and general way of life.

The most commonly employed method of testing for prostate cancer is a basic prostate exam.

It involves a physician inserting a gloved, lubricated finger into the rectum so that the physician can feel the prostate, which is located a few inches up from the rectum. A healthy prostate feels firm; if prostate cancer is present, the prostate may have hard spots on it.

For those who are squeamish towards this type of testing, an alternative method is sometimes used.

Known as a prostate cancer PSA level test, blood is taken from the patient and screened for prostate-specific-antigen levels.

Prostate-specific-antigens are present in all men, but those with prostate cancer often have a heightened level of the antigen.

Alternatively men with the BRCA1 gene have a one in 11 chance of developing prostate cancer by the age of 65, it was found.

Other tests such as X-rays and bone scans may also be useful in detecting the cancer and determining the extent to which it has spread.

Global efforts to cut the number of deaths from measles have fallen short of World Health Organization (WHO) targets.
An analysis published in the Lancet said deaths had fallen by 74% between 2000 and 2010, but the target was 90%.

Outbreaks in Africa and delays in vaccination programmes in India have stalled progress, researchers say.

A new campaign to tackle the disease has been launched, which will combine measles and rubella jabs.

In 2000 there were 535,300 deaths from measles. This fell to 139,300 deaths in 2010, according to the analysis.

The Measles and Rubella Initiative, a collaboration of international organisations including the WHO, said the decline in measles deaths was strong up to 2007, but measures “faltered” in 2008 and 2009.

This lead to outbreaks in Africa, Asia and even Europe.

Africa and India accounted for a combined total 79% of all deaths from measles between 2000 and 2010.

Measles is a highly infectious viral illness:

• Causes a fever, coughing and distinctive red-brown spots on the skin
• Contracted by breathing in tiny droplets created when an infected person coughs or sneezes
• Possible complications include pneumonia, ear and eye infections, and croup
• Serious complications include inflammation of the brain (encephalitis), which can be fatal
• Infection during pregnancy can cause miscarriage, premature labour or low birth weights

The next target is a 95% drop in deaths from their 2000 levels by 2015.

The new campaign will see the introduction of a vaccine for both measles and rubella.

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.

Fears are being raised that new 5p and 10p coins which are being introduced into circulation could cause skin problems.The coins are made from steel but plated in nickel, replacing the current cupro-nickel version which contains 75% copper and 25% nickel.

Dermatologists told the British Medical Journal the move could cause problems for people who have nickel allergies, including some people with eczema.

But the Royal Mint said the change would not have an adverse impact.

The new coins, which come into circulation in the next few months, are being introduced because of the rising cost of copper.

The Treasury believes it could save £10 million a year, although millions more have been spent changing vending machines and parking meters as the new coins are slightly thicker, causing anger among councils and industry.

Up to 10% of the population, predominantly women, are thought to be affected by nickel allergy.

The latest controversy has been raised by dermatologists from St John’s Institute of Dermatology in London and the Royal Hallamshire Hospital in Sheffield.

The authors warned that there had been no health assessment of the new coinage.

In comparison in Sweden its central bank, the Swedish Riksbank, has recently concluded that nickel-plated coins “pose unacceptable risks to health”, the BMJ reported.

In a letter to the BMJ, the dermatologists said there was the potential for more skin problems, which could have financial implications for the NHS.

They said: “Considerable evidence supports these concerns, which have not been assessed by the Treasury or Royal Mint.”

They have called for Sir John Beddington, the government’s chief scientific adviser, to look into the matter.

Planned births at home and in midwifery units are more cost-effective than giving birth in hospital, particularly for women who have given birth before University of Oxford research concludes.The research, in the British Medical Journal, compared the costs of giving birth in different places and the health outcomes for mother and baby.

More than 60,000 low-risk women in England were studied over two years.

The Royal College of Midwives says all women should receive one-to-one care.

For women having their first baby, however, planned home birth was more risky for the baby but still the most cost effective option.

The study used data from the Birthplace in England national study to calculate the cost, and health effects, of women at low-risk of complications giving birth.

It looked at planned births in obstetric units, midwifery units located in the same hospital as an obstetric unit, free-standing midwifery units not in a hospital and at home.

The study takes into account all NHS costs associated with the birth itself – such as midwifery care during labour and immediately after the birth, the cost of pain relief in hospital, and the cost of any stay in hospital or neonatal unit immediately after the birth, either by the mother or the baby.

The costs for planned home and midwifery unit births take account of any hospital care a woman may receive if she is transferred into hospital during labour or after the birth.

But the costs do not include any longer term costs, for example the life-long cost of caring for babies who suffer serious birth injuries.

The study found that the average cost per low-risk woman planning birth at the start of labour was £1,631 for an obstetric unit, compared with £1,067 at home.

When the researchers analysed women who had already given birth or who had no complicating conditions, the cost differences between planned places of birth narrowed.

The authors of the study conclude that giving women the opportunity to give birth at home or in a midwifery unit saves the NHS money and is safe for baby and mother, resulting in fewer expensive interventions.

AVERAGE COST OF BIRTH

• £1,066 – births planned at home
• £1,435 – births in freestanding midwifery units
• £1,461 – births in midwifery units alongside hospitals
• £1,631 – births in hospital obstetric unitsSource: BMJ study

The study found that individual care at home is cheaper than a planned hospital birth because hospital overheads tend to be higher and women who plan birth in an obstetric unit tend to have more interventions, such as caesarean section, which are expensive.