Extra pounds, and attitudes about them, can affect doctor-patient relationships
Posted using ShareThis
Doctors can be fairly significant, one would think, in helping people combat obesity-related health problems. But a good working relationship usually begins with respect. And that might be a stumbling block.
In a new study, researchers at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine report on their questioning of 238 patients -- and their physicians -- from 14 medical offices about their encounters. The patients for whom doctors said they had little respect just happened to have higher body-mass index scores.
Here's the news release. The study is to appear in the November issue of the Journal of General Internal Medicine.
And here's a recent L.A. Times column from Dr. Valerie Ulene suggesting that doctors might be at least partly to blame for those weight problems: What the doc doesn't say: You're overweight
Plus, an article exploring the effect of a physician's excess weight on patients: Does a doctor's weight matter?
Apparently, attitudes about weight can affect both sides of the doctor-patient relationship.
-- Tami Dennis
Photo: Daniel Acker / Bloomberg
Wednesday, 28 October 2009
Extra pounds, and attitudes about them, can affect doctor-patient relationships
I am is serving as Head of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery at the department at prestigious Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, at Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh. I also serve as Hon Dean of the Faculty of Yoga and Life Sciences, S-Vyasa Bengluru, Karnataka, and Vice Chairman of American Academy of Yoga and Meditation, Memphis, USA.
Monday, 26 October 2009
Thought provoking quotes;
‘At first dreams seem impossible, then improbable, then inevitable.’
'If the loser keeps his smile, the winner will lose the thrill of victory.’
‘Never look down on anybody unless you are helping him up.’
‘Whenever you win in life, win as if you are used to it … And whenever you lose in life, lose as if you have enjoyed losing for a change.’
'If the loser keeps his smile, the winner will lose the thrill of victory.’
‘Never look down on anybody unless you are helping him up.’
‘Whenever you win in life, win as if you are used to it … And whenever you lose in life, lose as if you have enjoyed losing for a change.’
I am is serving as Head of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery at the department at prestigious Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, at Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh. I also serve as Hon Dean of the Faculty of Yoga and Life Sciences, S-Vyasa Bengluru, Karnataka, and Vice Chairman of American Academy of Yoga and Meditation, Memphis, USA.
Saturday, 10 October 2009
Ten most important winners in the history of Nobel Awards
1. Marie Curie
The leading light in a family that between them amassed a remarkable five Nobel Prizes in the fields of Chemistry and Physics. She became the first woman to win a Nobel Prize in 1903 when she was recognised, along with her husband Pierre and Antoine Henri Becquerel, with the Physics award for their research into radiation.
She later became the first person to receive two Nobel Prizes when she was given the Chemistry Prize in 1911 for her discovery of radium and polonium, and her further research into radium. She is among a select group of people to have won prizes in two different fields.
2. Martin Luther King Jr.
The American civil rights activist was the youngest person to be recognised by the Nobel foundation when he won the Peace Prize in 1964, at the age of 35, for his work to end racial discrimination through non-violent means.
Even after his death in 1968 King's legacy lived on, and his image is still used today as a symbol by human rights groups around the world.
3. Albert Einstein
Arguably the world's most famous scientist, Einstein was given the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1921 for his services to physics, especially his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect.
During his career he made significant contributions to the world of theoretical physics, among them his famous theories of relativity.
4. Francis Crick, James Watson and Maurice Wilkins
These three scientists were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1962for their discovery of the "double helix" structure of DNA nine years earlier.
The award was deemed controversial because of the death of Rosalind Franklin, a collaborator with Wilkins, four years earlier. Nobel foundation rules, which state the prizes cannot be given posthumously, meant her work was not recognised.
5. Jean-Paul Sartre
The French existentialist philosopher, writer and literary critic was the first person to turn down a Nobel Prize in 1964 when he declined the Prize for Literature.
Sartre is still recorded as the winner by the Nobel federation for his influential work which was "filled with the spirit of freedom and the quest for truth".
6. Sir Alexander Fleming
Sir Alexander shared the 1945 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine with Ernst Chain and Sir Howard Florey for the discovery of penicillin and its curative effect on infectious diseases.
The Scot made his discovery accidentally when he returned to his untidy laboratory from a holiday to discover a fungus had developed that destroyed the bacteria immediately surrounding it.
7. Hermann Muller
The American won the same prize as Fleming a year later, in 1946, for his discovery of the mutating effects of X-ray radiation.
His research and continued argument against nuclear war made him a figure of great political significance in later years as nuclear weapons became an increasingly controversial subject.
8. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
The Russian novelist and dissident, who spent time in a Soviet labour camp after writing letters that criticised the communist regime, received the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1970.
His most famous novels, The Gulag Archipelago and One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, for which he received the award, exposed the brutality of the Soviet Union's forced labour camps.
9. The International Committee of the Red Cross
The highest number of Nobel Prize wins goes to the International Committee of the Red Cross with three separate Nobel Peace Prizes.
In 1917 and 1944 the organisation was recognised for its work during the First and Second World Wars, and it was named as a winner again in 1963, along with the League of Red Cross Societies, to mark its 100th anniversary.
10. Sir Clive Granger
The Welsh economist won the 2003 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for his methods of analysing economic statistics, which revolutionised the way economists interpret financial data. His prize was shared with Robert Engle III.
The leading light in a family that between them amassed a remarkable five Nobel Prizes in the fields of Chemistry and Physics. She became the first woman to win a Nobel Prize in 1903 when she was recognised, along with her husband Pierre and Antoine Henri Becquerel, with the Physics award for their research into radiation.
She later became the first person to receive two Nobel Prizes when she was given the Chemistry Prize in 1911 for her discovery of radium and polonium, and her further research into radium. She is among a select group of people to have won prizes in two different fields.
2. Martin Luther King Jr.
The American civil rights activist was the youngest person to be recognised by the Nobel foundation when he won the Peace Prize in 1964, at the age of 35, for his work to end racial discrimination through non-violent means.
Even after his death in 1968 King's legacy lived on, and his image is still used today as a symbol by human rights groups around the world.
3. Albert Einstein
Arguably the world's most famous scientist, Einstein was given the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1921 for his services to physics, especially his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect.
During his career he made significant contributions to the world of theoretical physics, among them his famous theories of relativity.
4. Francis Crick, James Watson and Maurice Wilkins
These three scientists were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1962for their discovery of the "double helix" structure of DNA nine years earlier.
The award was deemed controversial because of the death of Rosalind Franklin, a collaborator with Wilkins, four years earlier. Nobel foundation rules, which state the prizes cannot be given posthumously, meant her work was not recognised.
5. Jean-Paul Sartre
The French existentialist philosopher, writer and literary critic was the first person to turn down a Nobel Prize in 1964 when he declined the Prize for Literature.
Sartre is still recorded as the winner by the Nobel federation for his influential work which was "filled with the spirit of freedom and the quest for truth".
6. Sir Alexander Fleming
Sir Alexander shared the 1945 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine with Ernst Chain and Sir Howard Florey for the discovery of penicillin and its curative effect on infectious diseases.
The Scot made his discovery accidentally when he returned to his untidy laboratory from a holiday to discover a fungus had developed that destroyed the bacteria immediately surrounding it.
7. Hermann Muller
The American won the same prize as Fleming a year later, in 1946, for his discovery of the mutating effects of X-ray radiation.
His research and continued argument against nuclear war made him a figure of great political significance in later years as nuclear weapons became an increasingly controversial subject.
8. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
The Russian novelist and dissident, who spent time in a Soviet labour camp after writing letters that criticised the communist regime, received the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1970.
His most famous novels, The Gulag Archipelago and One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, for which he received the award, exposed the brutality of the Soviet Union's forced labour camps.
9. The International Committee of the Red Cross
The highest number of Nobel Prize wins goes to the International Committee of the Red Cross with three separate Nobel Peace Prizes.
In 1917 and 1944 the organisation was recognised for its work during the First and Second World Wars, and it was named as a winner again in 1963, along with the League of Red Cross Societies, to mark its 100th anniversary.
10. Sir Clive Granger
The Welsh economist won the 2003 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for his methods of analysing economic statistics, which revolutionised the way economists interpret financial data. His prize was shared with Robert Engle III.
I am is serving as Head of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery at the department at prestigious Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, at Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh. I also serve as Hon Dean of the Faculty of Yoga and Life Sciences, S-Vyasa Bengluru, Karnataka, and Vice Chairman of American Academy of Yoga and Meditation, Memphis, USA.
Friday, 9 October 2009
Can Indians in India get a Nobel?
We’re all proud that Venkatraman Ramakrishnan has won this year’s Nobel prize for chemistry. But a questions that comes to everyones (probably only Indians) mind that why Indians have to flee India and work in a developed country for a pathbreaking discovery that puts them on the Nobel shortlist.
The first and the last time an Indian scientist won a Nobel prize while in India was when C V Raman won one in 1930. Since then, a lot of sewage has flowed down the Ganga. India ceased to be a colony. The new government of independent India laid much stress on nurturing science and technology in India.
Independence also stripped the government of the facile expedient of blaming the colonial government for failing to nurture Indian talent or build domestic institutions that would allow creative research to flourish. And we created a bureaucratic, sclerotic science and technology establishment, the apogee of whose achievement is a thermonuclear bomb that might or might not have been a dud.
Okay, that was uncharitable and undeserved. India has satellite and launch capabilities that are decent by any standards . Missiles and nuclear powered submarines shore up India’s strategic capability. All this is fine. But these are developments in technology and its application to a specific end. We are yet to see any great flourishing of basic research.
Very few institutions undertake that. Universities are, for the most part, teaching shops and examination conducting machines. Expanding the frontiers of knowledge is not a priority for Indian academia. Papers are published because that is how promotions are achieved. Very few of these papers are cited by other researchers around the world.
A sharp cleavage exists between teaching, done in universities, and research, housed in specialised state research outfits. Universities and research organisations do not interact. Faculty pay is at a steep discount to what comparable skills would fetch in industry, ensuring that very few of those who fill academic posts embody first rate talent.
Those who do, migrate to a few centres of excellence, leaving the bulk of Indian students to the tender mercies of mediocrity. Is it any wonder Indians have to flee India to win a Nobel prize?
Modified from ET Bureau
The first and the last time an Indian scientist won a Nobel prize while in India was when C V Raman won one in 1930. Since then, a lot of sewage has flowed down the Ganga. India ceased to be a colony. The new government of independent India laid much stress on nurturing science and technology in India.
Independence also stripped the government of the facile expedient of blaming the colonial government for failing to nurture Indian talent or build domestic institutions that would allow creative research to flourish. And we created a bureaucratic, sclerotic science and technology establishment, the apogee of whose achievement is a thermonuclear bomb that might or might not have been a dud.
Okay, that was uncharitable and undeserved. India has satellite and launch capabilities that are decent by any standards . Missiles and nuclear powered submarines shore up India’s strategic capability. All this is fine. But these are developments in technology and its application to a specific end. We are yet to see any great flourishing of basic research.
Very few institutions undertake that. Universities are, for the most part, teaching shops and examination conducting machines. Expanding the frontiers of knowledge is not a priority for Indian academia. Papers are published because that is how promotions are achieved. Very few of these papers are cited by other researchers around the world.
A sharp cleavage exists between teaching, done in universities, and research, housed in specialised state research outfits. Universities and research organisations do not interact. Faculty pay is at a steep discount to what comparable skills would fetch in industry, ensuring that very few of those who fill academic posts embody first rate talent.
Those who do, migrate to a few centres of excellence, leaving the bulk of Indian students to the tender mercies of mediocrity. Is it any wonder Indians have to flee India to win a Nobel prize?
Modified from ET Bureau
I am is serving as Head of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery at the department at prestigious Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, at Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh. I also serve as Hon Dean of the Faculty of Yoga and Life Sciences, S-Vyasa Bengluru, Karnataka, and Vice Chairman of American Academy of Yoga and Meditation, Memphis, USA.
Monday, 5 October 2009
In India, a child dies every 15 seconds- The numbers alone are bound to send shivers down your spine.
A child dies every 15 seconds in India due to neonatal diseases while 20 lakh children die before reaching their fifth birthday. Over four lakh newborns are dying every year within 24 hours of life in the country. Over 20% of the world’s child deaths occur in India, the largest number anywhere in the world.
One in three of all malnourished children in the world live in India. A child who has severe acute malnutrition is at least nine times more likely to die than a child who does not. Around 46% of children under three are underweight in India. Around 28% of child deaths are linked just to poor sanitation and unsafe drinking water.
These shocking figures are part of “Save the Children” latest report. One to be made public on Friday. The report, says that in most cases, the infections and conditions that are the direct cause of death within the first 28 days of a child’s life are preventable and treatable with proven low-cost interventions.
Globally, 8.8 million children die before reaching their fifth birthday. The report says there are a small number of diseases that directly cause more than 90% of deaths in under-fives. These are pneumonia, measles, diarrhoea, malaria, HIV and neonatal conditions that occur during pregnancy and during or immediately after birth. Severe infections, asphyxia and premature births cause 86% of newborn deaths.
Every child, no matter where or to whom they are born, has an equal right and deserves an equal chance to survive. And every one of us has a moral responsibility to act and act now, said Save the Children.
The report by Save The Children, estimates that globally, an additional $40 billion needs to be spent annually to dramatically reduce child and maternal mortality worldwide to achieve the millennium development goals. Please note that the World spends 2000 billion annually on military budget (50 times more than the required sum, out of which USA spends nearly half at 900 billion per annum).
God bless the world.
One in three of all malnourished children in the world live in India. A child who has severe acute malnutrition is at least nine times more likely to die than a child who does not. Around 46% of children under three are underweight in India. Around 28% of child deaths are linked just to poor sanitation and unsafe drinking water.
These shocking figures are part of “Save the Children” latest report. One to be made public on Friday. The report, says that in most cases, the infections and conditions that are the direct cause of death within the first 28 days of a child’s life are preventable and treatable with proven low-cost interventions.
Globally, 8.8 million children die before reaching their fifth birthday. The report says there are a small number of diseases that directly cause more than 90% of deaths in under-fives. These are pneumonia, measles, diarrhoea, malaria, HIV and neonatal conditions that occur during pregnancy and during or immediately after birth. Severe infections, asphyxia and premature births cause 86% of newborn deaths.
Every child, no matter where or to whom they are born, has an equal right and deserves an equal chance to survive. And every one of us has a moral responsibility to act and act now, said Save the Children.
The report by Save The Children, estimates that globally, an additional $40 billion needs to be spent annually to dramatically reduce child and maternal mortality worldwide to achieve the millennium development goals. Please note that the World spends 2000 billion annually on military budget (50 times more than the required sum, out of which USA spends nearly half at 900 billion per annum).
God bless the world.
I am is serving as Head of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery at the department at prestigious Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, at Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh. I also serve as Hon Dean of the Faculty of Yoga and Life Sciences, S-Vyasa Bengluru, Karnataka, and Vice Chairman of American Academy of Yoga and Meditation, Memphis, USA.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)