Embryonic Stem Cell Research

FROM CNN: President Obama is planning to sign an executive order Monday to overturn Bush-era policy that limited federal tax dollars for embryonic stem cell research, according to administration officials familiar with the deliberations.

Obama's move will be hailed by advocates for those suffering from a host of afflictions, ranging from diabetes to Parkinson's disease, who believe that an expansion of stem-cell research could boost medical progress toward eradicating the debilitating diseases.

But many conservatives object to the destruction of human embryos because they contend that it ends a human life.

The officials said the administration is planning a Monday event at the White House at which Obama will overturn the executive order signed by President George W. Bush in August 2001. It barred the National Institutes of Health from funding research on embryonic stem cells beyond using 60 cell lines that existed at that time. Tony Perkins of the conservative Family Research Council accused the White House of leaking the details Friday night so that the move gets little attention, declaring that it is "a slap in the face to Americans who believe in the dignity of all human life."

House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said, "Advancements in science and research have moved faster than the debates among politicians in Washington, D.C., and breakthroughs announced in recent years confirm the full potential of stem cell research can be realized without the destruction of living human embryos."

In addition to signing the executive order, Bush twice vetoed legislation -- in July 2006 and June 2007 -- that would have expanded federally funded embryonic stem cell research.

At the time, Bush also argued that scientific advances allowed researchers to conduct groundbreaking research without destroying human embryos. Bush's moves led to Democratic charges that he had put politics over science.

This is one of those topics I can't comment on. I do think it's important and would like to hear your thoughts!

-NewsAnchorMom Jen

Courts can't agree about Vaccines/Autism

The controversy continues! The courts can't seem to agree on whether vaccines can cause autism in some kids. This article spells out the contradictions.

FROM THE SPECTATOR: Several days ago, the US vaccine court awarded damages to a ten year-old child, Bailey Banks, who it said had developed acute brain damage involving autistic spectrum disorder as a result of his MMR vaccination.

This followed a judgment by the same court a few days previously in the ‘Cedillo’ case which threw out three test claims involving MMR on the grounds that that there was no proven link between the MMR vaccine and autism. The judges in that case said parents had been misled by doctors who were guilty of ‘gross medical misjudgment’ and had peddled ‘speculative and unpersuasive’ theories.

That judgment in turn followed another case in which the vaccine court said nine year-old Hanna Poling had developed autism as a result of a cocktail of nine vaccines administered simultaneously, including MMR, which had significantly aggravated an underlying mitochondrial disorder, which predisposed her to deficits in cellular energy metabolism, and manifested as a regressive encephalopathy with features of autism spectrum disorder.

In the Bailey Banks case, the ruling was unequivocal. It concluded from the evidence provided by a full neurological examination of the child 16 days after his MMR vaccination that the jab had caused Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis (ADEM) which in turn had led to Pervasive Developmental Delay, a disorder on the autistic spectrum.

Special Master Richard Abell wrote: The Court found, supra, that Bailey’s ADEM was both caused-in-fact and proximately caused by his vaccination. It is well-understood that the vaccination at issue can cause ADEM, and the Court found, based upon a full reading and hearing of the pertinent facts in this case, that it did actually cause the ADEM. Furthermore, Bailey’s ADEM was severe enough to cause lasting, residual damage, and retarded his developmental progress, which fits under the generalized heading of Pervasive Developmental Delay, or PDD.

The Court found that Bailey would not have suffered this delay but for the administration of the MMR vaccine, and that this chain of causation was not too remote, but was rather a proximate sequence of cause and effect leading inexorably from vaccination to Pervasive Developmental Delay. Therefore it had been successfully demonstrated that the MMR vaccine at issue actually caused the condition(s) from which Bailey suffered and continues to suffer.

It also turns out from this ruling that the vaccine court had heard two previous cases where the Special Master had found that the MMR vaccine had caused Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis. In response to the Bailey Banks case, Dr. Bryan Jepson, an autism specialist at Thoughtful House where Andrew Wakefield now conducts research, said:
The contradictory rulings from the Vaccine Court regarding vaccines and autism demonstrate that we still don't have a definitive answer. We need to realize that the question of MMR’s potential contribution to autism remains under scientific debate. Ultimately, the correct answer will come through honest, transparent and rigorous scientific study, not from a court bench.

Is anyone else sick of this controversy. I just wish everyone would agree so it wouldn't be so confusing.

-NewsAnchorMom Jen

Special Needs Fair

If you have a child with special needs, you should go to the Dunlap Special Need Fair coming up next week! I have heard great things about it! Here's a note I got from the organizer this week!

The fair is next Tuesday evening, March 10, 2009. It will run from 5-8 p.m. It is free!
As of today, we have 76 organizations participating!

There is something for everyone there - we encourage families of special needs children to adults to come, teachers, therapists, etc. This is our 3rd annual. The first year we had about 20 organizations, last year about 50. It is not just for those in Dunlap. It's a community fair - everyone is welcome!!!!

Our website is www.specialneedsfair.org

-NewsAnchorMom Jen

Get Veggies with Cool Names!

From Yahoo News: Kids won't eat their vegetables? Rename them, scientists say. In a new study, 186 four-year-olds were given regular carrots and, on other lunch days, they were given the same vegetables renamed X-ray Vision Carrots. On the latter days, they ate nearly twice as many.


The study suggests the influence of these names might persist. Children continued to eat about 50 percent more carrots even on the days when they were no longer labeled as anything special.
The research, funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, was presented today at the annual meeting of the School Nutrition Association in Washington, DC.



"Cool names can make for cool foods," says lead author Brian Wansink of Cornell University. "Whether it be 'power peas' or 'dinosaur broccoli trees,' giving a food a fun name makes kids think it will be more fun to eat. And it seems to keep working - even the next day," Wansink said.



Similar results have been found with adults. A restaurant study showed that when the Seafood Filet was changed to Succulent Italian Seafood Filet, sales increased 28 percent and taste rating increased by 12 percent. "Same food, but different expectations, and a different experience," said Wansink, author of "Mindless Eating: Why We Eat More Than We Think."



The veggie study was conducted in pre-schools, but the researchers believe the same naming tricks can work with children at home. "I've been using this with my kids," said researcher Collin Payne, "Whatever sparks their imagination seems to spark their appetite."



Original Story: Kids Prefer Veggies With Cool NamesLiveScience.com chronicles the daily advances and innovations made in science and technology. We take on the misconceptions that often pop up around scientific discoveries and deliver short, provocative explanations with a certain wit and style.

I admit I don't have high hopes for this with my kids. We have tried calling broccoli "trees" and other things, but my kids still spit them out. However, I do think the names work for me. When something says garlic butter "food" I always choose that one even if it's a veggie I normally don't eat!

-NewsAnchorMom Jen

Holy Stinky Skunk

As you can imagine, yesterday was not the best day. I went in at 7:30am and started driving home around 9:45pm. I was trying to be optimistic so I was singing a fine little tune in my van and at the last second I see a little animal in the road. It was way too late to slow down, so I tightened my fists around the steering wheel until my knuckles turned white and braced my body. I was about to hit this poor little animal. Oh wait, what is that animal.

OH NO IT'S A SKUNK!

So I swerve a tiny bit and it goes through my front wheels. I breath a sigh of relief. About five seconds later I start smelling this unbelievably potent odor. I mean I was gagging and had to slow down and open my window in 10 degree weather. I pull up to the house and walk in the door. My husband about gags, "What is that smell?"

This skunk is still haunting me today. My son told me he would rather skate to school than get into the van. He rode the entire way with his little fingers pinching his nose.

I called detail shops and car washes. No one seems to know how to get rid of skunk odor. I put some useless air fresheners in the car and plan on a major car wash tomorrow.

Bottom Line: I showed up to my new job today wreaking of skunk. Unreal!

-NewsAnchorMom Jen

T.V. won't make your baby smart!

My kids would not watch T.V. until they turned around 18 months. Then, it was all Thomas, all the time~with a little Elmo thrown in the mix! I know it's not good for my 2-year-old to watch much T.V., but I do let him in the mornings while I get ready. It's too stressful not to! How much T.V. do you let your kids watch?

From ABC: The next time you pass by a shelf full of videos claiming to be educationally stimulating for babies, you might want to think twice before pulling out your wallet.
A new study suggests that watching television won't improve a baby's language or cognitive skills, even if they watch several hours a day.

"TV, in and of itself, doesn't seem to have an influence on cognition at age 3," said the study's lead author, Marie Evans Schmidt, a research associate at the Center on Media and Child Health at Children's Hospital Boston.

Results of the study were published in the March issue of the journal Pediatrics. In 1999, the American Academy of Pediatrics began recommending that children under 2 years of age not have any screen time at all. But, more than two-thirds of American kids in the under-2 age group watch TV daily, and about 25 percent of those kids also have a TV in their bedrooms, according to background information in the study.

Almost 30 percent of parents responding to a recent survey said they felt TV or DVD viewing by children younger than 2 was educational and "good for the child's brain."
To assess whether or not TV has an effect -- positive or negative -- on babies' brain development, Schmidt and her colleagues included almost 900 children who were assessed at birth, six months of age, and then again at age 3. The researchers also asked the mothers to complete questionnaires on the baby's TV-viewing habits at six months, one year and two years. On average, the children watched 1.2 hours of TV a day.

After adjusting the data for numerous factors -- such as maternal age, income, education, marital status, whether there were siblings in the home, and duration of breast-feeding -- the researchers found that TV viewing wasn't associated with improvements in vocabulary testing or in visual motor abilities tests.

"I don't know why people think TV is good for babies. It's probably the way those products have been marketed," Schmidt said. "Although our study showed no evidence of harm, parents should be aware that infants watching TV may be at risk of obesity, sleep disturbances and possibly attention problems. We don't want this study to be viewed as a license for babies to watch TV because they won't be harmed. It might be that the effects don't show up until children are older."

Dr. Sara Hamel, a developmental behavioral pediatrician at Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh, called the new study "a very sound piece of research, and it looks to me like they did a good job of controlling the data for a number of variables that can influence child development, like parent education and income."

"This study answers a very specific question: For under 2s, does watching one hour or more of TV a day have an effect on cognitive outcomes? And, the answer is, no, being in front of the TV does not have an effect on some measures of language function and visual abilities," Hamel added.

A second study in the same issue of Pediatrics focused on whether or not adding violent-content labels to video games made those games more attractive to school-aged children and teens.

The warning labels had the opposite of their intended effect. Even for the youngest children in the study -- 7 to 8 years old -- a violent-content warning label made them want to play the game more, the U.S. and Dutch researchers found.

Here's what the American Academy of Pediatrics has to say about TV and toddlers.
SOURCES: Marie Evans Schmidt, Ph.D., research associate, Center on Media and Child Health, Children's Hospital Boston, and instructor, pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston; Sara Hamel, M.D., developmental behavioral pediatrician, Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh; March 2009, Pediatrics

-NewsAnchorMom Jen

NewsAnchorMom is still here!

I can't comment on the operating agreement between WEEK and WHOI, but here's the news release incase you are interested. NewsAnchorMom.com will continue to play a vital role.

(Peoria, IL) – March 2, 2009 – Granite Broadcasting Corporation and Barrington Broadcasting Group, LLC announced that, effective March 2, 2009, WEEK-TV and WHOI-TV will be operated jointly from the WEEK-TV studios in East Peoria, Illinois. Granite will operate both stations under a shared services agreement (SSA) with Barrington, owner of WHOI-TV.

Under the terms of the agreement, Granite will continue to operate WEEK-TV and provide advertising, sales, promotion, administrative services and selected programming to WHOI-TV. This arrangement between Granite and Barrington will create a better and more efficient operation, which will enhance these outstanding local television stations. A similar arrangement provides that Barrington will provide advertising, sales, promotion, administrative services and selected programming to Granite’s Syracuse, New York station, WTVH-TV.

In making this announcement, Granite Broadcasting’s Chief Executive Officer Don Cornwell said, “This arrangement is an important step in the implementation of Granite’s strategic vision to capitalize on our core strength of operating leading local stations in the nation’s mid-size markets. It provides opportunities for substantial operating efficiencies by allowing us to use our existing infrastructure to expand the breadth of local news and services provided to the viewers of Central Illinois, while enhancing the revenue and profitability of both stations.”

Barrington Chief Executive Officer Jim Yager stated, “We are delighted to be working with a forward-thinking company like Granite. Together, our companies and stations will focus our combined resources on making these great stations more efficient, becoming even better community citizens and, at the same time, providing measurable benefits for our viewers.”
Under the terms of the SSA, Granite and Barrington expect to realize a number of expense efficiencies through the combining of resources and the reduction of some staff positions. Affected employees will receive a generous severance package and extensive job placement assistance will be offered at company expense.

One of the chief advantages of operating WEEK and WHOI under a shared services agreement will be the ability to offer local and national news, as well as programming of community interest in new and varied time periods, giving viewers greater opportunity to watch at their convenience. The Granite and Barrington plan will fully develop this opportunity, offering local newscasts expanded in both breadth and amount. Specifically, the stations will provide newscasts in time periods not currently programmed with local news and extend local news to other time periods, allowing viewers more access to Central Illinois reports and information.

Another Granite objective is to improve the emergency weather forecasting and daily forecasting by bringing the latest and best technology to both stations. New programs focusing on all important medical issues and franchise segments highlighting critical issues of public service will also be added to the stations in the next few weeks.

In addition, community charitable organizations presently on either WEEK or WHOI will receive increased exposure using the power of the two stations working together. One example is WEEK’s highly successful Buddy Check and Prostate Awareness programs. Also, the St. Jude Telethon, now in its 35th year on WEEK, will air on both stations. Another is the 25 Women In Leadership program. WHOI’s One Class at a Time, Relay for Life and special programs for the Peoria Zoo, along with numerous other community programs will continue. The stations will now concentrate on these highly popular outreach campaigns to further drive the focus on those deserving of recognition within the community.

Other plans include production of town hall meetings and a variety of community forums on WEEK and WHOI stations at different times, so viewers have greater access to information of local relevance. Granite also will expand its policy of sponsoring political debates and offering free airtime to candidates in every national election on both of the stations.

Granite operates in geographically diverse markets reaching over 6.0 percent of the nation's television households. The Company's station portfolio consists of four NBC affiliates, one ABC affiliate, one CBS affiliate, one major market MyNetwork TV affiliate and one major market independent station. The NBC affiliates are KSEE-TV, Fresno-Visalia, California, WEEK-TV, Peoria-Bloomington, Illinois, WISE-TV, Ft. Wayne, Indiana and KBJR-TV, Duluth, Minnesota and Superior, Wisconsin. The ABC affiliate is WKBW-TV, Buffalo, New York, The CBS affiliates are WTVH-TV, Syracuse, New York and WBNG-TV, Binghamton, New York. The MyNetwork affiliate is WMYD-TV, Detroit, Michigan and the independent station is KOFY-TV in San Francisco, California.

Barrington Broadcasting was formed in 2003 to acquire and operate television stations in smaller markets across the United States. Barrington currently owns, operates, or supports the operations of twenty three network affiliated television stations. Barrington is owned and controlled by Pilot Group, with management as its partner. Pilot Group is a non-traditional private investment firm founded in 2003 by a group of operating executives who actively help its management partners achieve their goals.
Click here for the official news release.
For more information, contact:Sandy Novotny(212) 490-2065

-NewsAnchorMom Jen

Breastfeeding Raises I.Q. Levels

Dr. Michael Kramer from the Montreal Children's Hospital did this breastfeeding study that I think you will find interesting. I would love to hear your thoughts!

Conclusion: These results, based on the largest randomized trial ever conducted in the area of human lactation,provide strong evidence that prolonged and exclusive breastfeeding improves children’s cognitive development.

Among the most consistently reported benefits of breastfeeding in developed country settings have been higher results on IQ tests and other measures of cognitive development among children and adults who had been breastfed compared with those who were formula-fed. A meta-analysis by Anderson et al1 in 1999 reported consistent IQ differences favoring breastfed over formula-fed infants, with most differences in the 2- to 5-point range.

Most of the studies included in the meta-analysis were observational in design and were carried out in subjects who were born healthy and at term, although a larger difference of 8 points was reported by Lucas et al2 in follow-up of a randomized trial in pre-term infants. Several of these studies demonstrated a clear dose-response relationship, with larger differences associated with longer durations of breastfeeding. With 1 recent notable exception,3 studies published since the meta-analysis have been entirely consistent with these results and conclusions. Despite the robustness of the reported findings, many observers remain unconvinced about the cognitive benefits of breastfeeding. As mentioned earlier, the evidence is based almost entirely on observational studies. The beneficial effect of breastfeeding is unlikely to be explained by the higher socioeconomic status of breastfeeding mothers because most studies have controlled sta- tistically for socioeconomic differences.

Some of the studies have even controlled for maternal IQ, with most studies reporting an attenuated but persistent and significant effect. On the other hand, the benefits are likely to be confounded by other, more subtle differences in the mother’s behavior or her interaction with the infant. These differences are extremely difficult to measure and virtually impossible to control for in observational studies. The solution to these methodological problems is a randomized controlled trial, but randomization to breast- feeding vs artificial feeding is infeasible and probably unethical. It is, however, both feasible and ethical to randomize the participants to a breastfeeding promotion intervention. One strategy would be to promote breastfeeding initiation, but most women decide whether to breastfeed early in or even before pregnancy and such a strategy is therefore difficult with regard to both timing and logistics. An alternative and more feasible strategy is to promote breastfeeding exclusivity and duration among those mothers who have already decided to initiate breastfeeding, with analysis by intention to treat.

Studies showing long-term epigenetic behavioral effects of licking and grooming by mother rats of their pups25 suggest that the physical and/or emotional act of breastfeeding might also lead to permanent physiologic changes that accelerate neurocognitive development. Finally, it is possible that the increased frequency and duration of maternal-infant contact implicit in breastfeeding vs bottle-feeding could increase verbal interaction between mother and infant, which might also have a stimulatory effect on cognitive development. Irrespective of the mechanism, our experimental results confirm the cognitive benefits of prolonged and exclusive breastfeeding reported in observational studies.

Although breastfeeding initiation rates have increased substantially during the last 30 years, much less progress has been achieved in increasing the exclusivity and duration of breastfeeding. Because protection against infections in developed country settings does not have the life-and-death implications for infant and child health that it does in less-developed settings, cognitive benefits may be among the most important advantages for breastfed infants in industrialized societies. The consistency of our findings based on a randomized trial with those reported in previous observational studies should prove helpful in encouraging further public health efforts to promote, protect, and support breastfeeding.

Correspondence: Michael S. Kramer, MD, The Montreal Children’s Hospital, 2300 Tupper St (Les Tourelles), Montreal, QC H3H 1P3, Canada (michael.kramer@mcgill.ca).

-NewsAnchorMom Jen