Today’s Woman health news:

Federal appeals judge stops Planned Parenthood injunction, allows women’s health law

AUSTIN, Texas — A federal appeals judge stepped into the fight over the Texas Women’s Health Program on Tuesday, saying he wanted to hear arguments on whether the state should be prevented from enforcing a law that bans Planned Parenthood from participating in the program.

Less than 24 hours after a federal judge in Austin ordered Texas not to enforce a rule banning clinics associated with abortion providers from receiving state funds, Fifth Circuit Appeals Judge Jerry Smith granted Texas an emergency stay lifting the Austin court’s order.

Smith gave attorneys representing the eight Planned Parenthood organizations involved in the suit until 5 p.m. on Tuesday to present their arguments.

“We are disappointed in the stay granted last night,” said Sarah Wheat, interim CEO of Planned Parenthood of Austin Family Planning. “When presented with both sides, the District Court agreed the rule was likely unconstitutional, and that implementation would cause a serious problem with health care access for Texas women.”

Stephanie Goodman, spokeswoman for the Texas Department of Health and Human Services said Tuesday that the order allows the agency to exclude the clinics from the program effective today. She said women having trouble locating a health care provider should contact the agency.

In court papers, the state’s attorneys argued that the state may ban groups from the Women’s Health Program that don’t agree with the state’s policies.

“Although Planned Parenthood shares some of the program’s goals — such as promoting women’s health and reducing unwanted pregnancies — it also contravenes the very purpose of the program by actively promoting elective abortion,” the attorneys said. “Planned Parenthood and its affiliates have every right to hold that belief and advocate for elective abortion, but they are not entitled to receive taxpayer subsidies from a government program that is designed to encourage preventative birth control and discourage abortion.”

The emergency stay is the latest development in a dispute over which criteria Texas can impose on a health care provider that participates in state-funded programs for the poor.

When Texas lawmakers renewed the Women’s Health Program last year, they made it clear they didn’t want any state funding to go to clinics affiliated with abortion providers, even if those clinics don’t provide abortions and are legally and financially separate from those that do. The state has already banned organizations that provide elective abortions from receiving state funds.

Earlier this year, Planned Parenthood filed a federal lawsuit saying the rule violates the group’s rights to freedom of speech and freedom of association. On Monday they celebrated a victory when Judge Lee Yeakel agreed that they had a case and ordered the state not to enforce the law until he could hold a trial.

The $40 million program provides health care to roughly 130,000 women who are poor and don’t have health insurance, but would otherwise not qualify for Medicaid, the health insurance program for the poor and disabled. The program provides basic check-ups, contraception and cancer screenings. Planned Parenthood officials say that 97 percent of the services they provide do not involve abortion.

The federal government funded 90 percent of the program, but cut funding last month because officials said the new rule violated federal law.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott has filed a federal lawsuit in Washington calling that decision a violation of state’s rights. Gov. Rick Perry ordered the state Department of Health and Human Services to find funds to continue the program. Allowing it to end would cost the state more that continuing it because it would lead to a spike in unplanned pregnancies.

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Site:http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/federal-appeals-judge-stops-planned-parenthood-injunction-allows-womens-health-law/2012/05/01/gIQALJZAuT_story.html

Health news:

U.S. health centers for poor, uninsured see ranks swell

(Reuters) – U.S. community health centers that cater to the poor and uninsured saw their patients’ ranks swell by nearly 18 percent from 2008 to 2011 as job loss left more Americans without health insurance, the Obama administration said on Tuesday.

A report released by the White House said 20 million Americans now receive healthcare services through 8,500 community health centers, up from 17 million four years ago.

“Those numbers really took a big jump,” Mary Wakefield, who heads the U.S. Health Resources and Services Administration, told reporters. “A lot of those folks were people who, when they lost their jobs early on, lost their coverage.”

The administration said health centers were able to accommodate larger numbers of patients because of funding provided by President Barack Obama’s embattled healthcare reform law and the administration’s earlier economic stimulus package.

The report, the latest in a series of government releases aimed at underscoring the value of healthcare reform, surfaced as the U.S. Supreme Court deliberates about the future of the law known as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Community health centers, which often serve low-income areas where there are few doctors or hospitals, provide a cornerstone for the law’s goal of expanding healthcare access to more than 30 million uninsured Americans.

The ranks of the uninsured, which equaled 1-in-4 Americans last year, pose major social and financial challenges for the $2.6 trillion U.S. healthcare system.

But the high court could overturn the reforms in a ruling expected next month, ending the administration’s plans to expand coverage and much of its support for community health centers.

The law also faces repeated election year calls for repeal from Republican politicians who call it government over-reach and a potential drag on the economy.

The administration also announced on Tuesday that it had awarded $728 million in grants for about 400 renovation and construction projects at community health centers. Officials said the funding would allow another 860,000 people to gain access to medical services.

Community health centers are nonprofit groups that serve patients with low incomes, including people with no insurance, limited English proficiency, migrant and seasonal farm workers, the homeless and people living in public housing.

All told, the Obama administration has now allocated $1.5 billion to support major construction and renovation projects at community health centers.

The ranks of health center patients are expected to grow by another 1.3 million people over the next two years, the White House report said.

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/01/us-usa-healthcare-centers-idUSBRE8401JL20120501

Feel free to share with all of your friends!

Today’s Fitness news:

Rupert Murdoch Hasn’t Failed His Fitness Test Yet

On Tuesday morning in London, the House of Commons Committee on Culture, Media, and Sport released a 121-page report on phone hacking, which among other findings concluded that News Corp. (NWS) Chief Executive Officer Rupert Murdoch “is not a fit person to exercise the stewardship of a major international company.”

The committee’s knock on Murdoch’s ownership fitness quickly made headlines around the planet. But in the end, the real world consequences of the committee’s verdict are largely nonexistent. When it comes to passing the ownership fitness test in Britain, there is only one set of judges that truly matter: the regulators at Ofcom.

Officials at Ofcom regulate competition among the U.K.’s communications industry. It’s the officials at Ofcom who must decide whether Murdoch remains in compliance with legislation requiring any person holding a broadcasting license to remain “fit and proper to do so.” So it’s the officials at Ofcom, in short, who ultimately hold sway over News Corp.’s continued 39 percent ownership of the lucrative British Sky Broadcasting pay-TV network.

Since last year, Ofcom regulators have been looking into Murdoch’s ownership fitness. As of yet, they have not rendered a judgment.

On Tuesday morning, Ofcom released a statement that was quickly gobbled up by the press: “We note the publication of the Culture, Media, and Sport Committee report, which we are reading with interest. Ofcom has a duty under the Broadcasting Acts 1990 and 1996 to be satisfied that any person holding a broadcasting license is, and remains, fit and proper to do so. Ofcom is continuing to assess the evidence that may assist it in discharging these duties. As part of this we are considering the Committee report.”

Translation: For the time being, News Corp. may carry on as usual.

Likewise, what constitutes “fit and proper” behavior—or lack thereof—remains a guessing game. The 1990 and 1996 laws did not specifically define the requirements of fitness, and Ofcom has to date published no in-depth guidance regarding its interpretation. Ofcom does not publicly reveal instances in which it has rejected applications for broadcast licenses. But since the regulator’s advent in 2003, Ofcom has revoked an existing license only once: Earlier this year, Ofcom pulled the license of Iranian state broadcaster Press TV.

source:http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-05-01/rupert-murdoch-hasnt-failed-his-fitness-test-yet

The Health Officials in Allentown Pa clarifies new gas drilling laws will help patients out for more of this story:

Pa. health official clarifies new gas drilling law

ALLENTOWN, Pa. (AP) — Pennsylvania‘s top health official has assured doctors that a new gas-drilling law will allow them to talk to their patients about proprietary chemicals used in the hydraulic fracturing process — and share the information with public health agencies and regulatory bodies as they see fit.

More than two months after the Pennsylvania Medical Society first expressed its concerns, Health Secretary Dr. Eli Avila clarified a provision of the new law that requires doctors to sign a nondisclosure agreement in return for access to secret information on fracking chemicals. A Senate Democrat who is trying to kill the confidentiality requirement said Avila’s assurances are meaningless because they do not reflect what the law actually says.

The Associated Press reported last week that doctors — including the medical society’s president — worried the confidentiality provision was too vague, and that it could limit research into the public health impacts of gas drilling and doctors’ ability to diagnose and treat patients exposed to carcinogens and other toxic substances in fracking chemicals. Some likened it to a gag order.

A day after the AP report, House Speaker Sam Smith called the doctors’ assertions about the chemical disclosure provision “outrageous” and “irresponsible.” Smith pointed out that it was pushed by environmental groups and replicates language used on the federal level for decades.

Avila said the law is meant to give doctors explicit access to information off-limits to the general public. In an April 17 letter to the medical society’s president, Dr. Marilyn Heine, he also clarified the extent to which doctors can share with others.

“Inherent in (physicians’) right to receive this information is the ability to share the information with the patient, with other physicians, and providers including specialists assisting and involved with the care of the patient. Further, reporting and information sharing with public health and regulatory agencies such as the Department of Health is necessary and permitted,” Avila wrote. “In short, the information can be utilized in whatever manner is necessary to respond to the ‘medical needs asserted’ by the health care professional.”

Heine, who had been critical of the law for weeks, reversed course after getting Avila’s letter.

In a prepared statement, Heine said she is “gratified by the strong public assurances” from Smith and Avila, and that she applauds the Corbett administration and lawmakers for “their concern for public safety.”

Heine later told the AP that “the lines of communication are open” between the medical society and state leaders on the issue.

State Sen. Daylin Leach, a Democrat from Montgomery County, questioned the medical society’s sudden change of heart and said the law remains unacceptably ambiguous. He introduced legislation this week that would eliminate the requirement that doctors sign a confidentiality agreement in return for companies’ trade secrets.

“The problem is Dr. Avila’s statement is not binding on anybody,” Leach said. “He has no legal authority to issue statements that are binding on a court in any way.”

The new law, the most sweeping update to Pennsylvania’s oil and gas law in a quarter century, took effect last weekend. It includes a new “impact fee” on gas drillers, stronger environmental protections, and online public disclosure of chemicals used in fracking, the technique that uses water, sand and chemicals to stimulate gas production in deep shale deposits. The public disclosure requirement includes an exemption for chemical formulas claimed to be proprietary, but gives doctors the right to obtain secret information to treat sick patients.

Adam M. Finkel, who directs the University of Pennsylvania’s Program on Regulation, had previously called the bill “an ominous piece of work.” He said Avila’s comments are “a big step in the right direction” and that he believes the Health Department will issue guidelines based on the letter to the medical society. But he said Avila didn’t answer all questions about the bill, such as whether a doctor could alert the general public about a health threat.

Avila, meanwhile, remained mum on the loss of up to $2 million in new Health Department funding.

The AP reported last week on last-minute negotiations that stripped money for research on the public health impacts of gas drilling. The money, to have come from the impact fee in Act 13, would have paid for a first-of-its-kind statewide health registry to track people with illnesses potentially related to drilling. Avila said last summer that a registry was his top priority, and public health advocates say more study is needed.

Avila’s statement to the medical society did not address the loss of the money. A Health Department spokeswoman said Avila was unavailable to comment Thursday.

Associated Press writer Kevin Begos in Pittsburgh contributed to this story.

Copyright © 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

I’m not sure if this is a good thing or not but we can only let time tell.

Can Chores help to prevent Alzheimer’s? That really interests me accordent to this read it does… check it out:Prevent Alzheimer’s?

By Amanda Gardner

In recent years, several studies have found that older people are less likely to develop Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia if they engage in vigorous exercise, such as jogging, swimming, or brisk walking.

People who are too frail or out of shape to hit the pool or treadmill shouldn’t despair, however. According to a new study, even mundane, low-key tasks like gardening, cooking, and washing dishes can lower the risk of Alzheimer’s if they’re performed often enough.

The study, which was published this week in the journal Neurology, included 716 dementia-free men and women in their 70s and 80s. Compared to the most active people, those with the lowest levels of overall physical activity had more than double the risk of going on to develop Alzheimer’s disease. Greater physical activity was also associated with a slower rate of aging-related memory and cognitive decline.

“This suggests that people in their 80s who can’t participate in formal exercise still get a benefit by leading a more active lifestyle,” says lead author Aron S. Buchman, MD, associate professor of neurological sciences at Rush University Medical Center, in Chicago. “You don’t have to get a membership in the local YMCA. If you walk up some more steps, stand up and do the dishes more, you stand to benefit because it’s incremental and adds up over the course of a full day.”

Related links:

• 25 Signs and Symptoms of Alzheimer’s Disease
• 7 Ways to Protect Your Memory
• More Evidence that Exercise is Key to Brain Health

Most previous research on physical activity and dementia risk has relied on questionnaires that ask participants to remember how much exercise they got in recent days—a potentially iffy method with people of any age, let alone older adults whose memory may be waning. The new study, by contrast, is among the first to use an objective measure of physical activity.

All of the participants wore a motion-sensitive, wristwatch-like device 24 hours a day for up to 10 days. These devices, known as actigraphs, have been shown to provide an accurate snapshot of a person’s total everyday activity, including mild activity. “It doesn’t make a difference if you’re chopping onions, or walking up and down stairs, or on an exercise machine,” Buchman says.

Over the next four years, the participants underwent annual cognitive tests and were asked to report how often they engaged in physical activities such as gardening, walking, and swimming, as well as social and brain-stimulating activities. (The researchers took all of these activities into account, along with other variables such as age, sex, education, overall health, depression, and genetic factors.)

Roughly 10% of the participants received an Alzheimer’s diagnosis during the follow-up period. The higher a person’s activity level, the lower his or her risk of Alzheimer’s tended to be. The participants who were least active at the beginning of the study—those with actigraph readings in the bottom 10th percentile—were 2.3 times more likely to receive a diagnosis than those in the 90th percentile.

Link: http://news.health.com/2012/04/18/physical-activity-alzheimers/

This is very interesting news maybe I should use this and share with others this!  Be sure to share it with your friend by facebook, twitter and google +.