Children drinking non-cow milk little shorter than peers

Agencies
June 25, 2017

Jun 25: A new study suggests drinking non-cow milk- soy, almond or rice milks - is linked to shorter kids.cowmilk

The study, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, found that each daily cup of non-cow's milk consumed was associated with 0.4 centimeters (0.15 inches) lower height than average for a child's age.

"We found that children who are consuming non-cow's milk like rice, almond and soy milk tended to be a little bit shorter than children who consumed cow's milk," said Dr. Jonathon Maguire, the study's lead author and a pediatrician and researchers at St. Michael's Hospital in Toronto.

"For example, a 3-year-old child consuming three cups of non-cow's milk relative to cow's milk was on average 1.5 centimeters shorter."

That's over half an inch difference, which Maguire said is "not a tiny difference when you're 3 years old."

The study was a cross-section involving 5,034 healthy Canadian children ranging in age from two to six years old. The subjects were on average 38 months of age, with 51% being male, and were recruited from nine family and pediatric health-care practices from December 2008 to September 2015.

Of those participating, about five percent drank exclusively non-cow's milks, and about 84% drank only cow's milk; about eight percent drank both and about three precent drank neither.

Maguire said the most surprising finding was "that the amount children were shorter depended on how much they were consuming."

"It's not like if you're not consuming cow's milk, you're a little shorter," he said. "It's more like if you are consuming non-cow's milk, with each cup that a child consumes, that child on average appears to be a little bit smaller, a little shorter. That's a bit surprising."

Does it matter if a kid is half an inch shorter at the age of three? Does it correlate to height in adulthood?

"That's one remaining question. We don't know if the kids consuming non-cow's milk, maybe they catch up over time, or maybe they don't. Time's going to have to tell," he said.

"We do know in general as pediatricians that children who are on a certain percentile line in terms of height tend to stay on that line for the rest of their childhood and into adulthood."

The findings are sure to add fire to the ongoing debate about the benefits of cow's milk versus dairy alternatives.

Amy Joy Lanou, a professor of health and wellness at the University of North Carolina-Asheville who was not involved in the research, said she had several issues with the study, most notably why only milk consumption was considered.

"It's just odd to me why we wouldn't be looking at the overall diets of the children," Lanou said. "If they're making the claim that it's because it's the difference in the types of milk the kids are drinking, well, what else are they eating?"

Lanou, whose research has led her to believe that cow's milk is "not a necessary food," said she believes the study makes an improper leap by implying that taller means healthier.

"Taller children and heavier children are not necessarily healthier adults, or even healthier children," she said. "I think they're using height as a marker for health, and I'm not sure that's appropriate."

Connie Weaver, a professor of nutrition science at Purdue University who was also not involved in the study, said she found it interesting.

"This is the first study that I recall directly comparing cow milk with plant-based beverages for a physiological benefit," she wrote in an email. "We know that some of the plant beverages, almond especially, have lower protein contents so I have speculated that calcium absorption may be lower. This would suggest that cow's milk is superior."

However, she says, "A wrong message would be if people who do not consume cow's milk would decide to avoid the plant-based milks also."

The study suggests that one reason for the difference in height might be that plant-based milks do not stimulate insulin-like growth factor, or IGF, production as well as cow's milk does. Studies have found that adults with higher levels of certain IGFs have increased risks of reproductive cancers.

"Having less IGF may compromise height but that may lower risk of fracture -- and some cancers, too," Weaver said.

Overall, she would advise parents that "cow's milk may be the best option, but plant-based beverages provide many needed nutrients like protein, calcium, magnesium, potassium," which is far better than what most kids might prefer to drink.

Lanou would tell parents who are already giving plant-based milks to their children not to worry -- but to make sure their kids are getting enough protein from other sources throughout the day.

Maguire said he'd like to see soy, almond and rice milks more tightly regulated to bring the industry, in line with cow's milk.

"As a consumer and as a parent, you have to be pretty savvy when going to the grocery store to choose a non-cow's milk beverage that has similar nutritional value as cow's milk," he said. "Many of those beverages are marketed as being equivalent to cow's milk when they're not."

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
July 8,2020

Scientists have designed a “catch and kill” air filter which they say can trap the novel coronavirus and neutralise it instantly, an invention that may reduce the spread of COVID-19 in closed spaces such as schools, hospitals and health care facilities, as well as public transit environments like airplanes.

According to the study, published in the journal Materials Today Physics, the device killed 99.8 per cent of the novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, in a single pass through its filter. It said the device, made from commercially available nickel foam heated to 200 degrees Celsius, also killed 99.9 per cent of the spores of the deadly bacterium Bacillus anthracis which causes the anthrax disease.

“This filter could be useful in airports and in airplanes, in office buildings, schools, and cruise ships to stop the spread of COVID-19,” said Zhifeng Ren, a co-author of the study from the University of Houston (UH) in the US.

“Its ability to help control the spread of the virus could be very useful for society,” Ren added.

The researchers said they are also developing a desk-top model for the device which is capable of purifying the air in an office worker’s immediate surroundings. According to the scientists, since the virus can remain in the air for about three hours, a filter that could remove it quickly was a viable plan, and with businesses reopening across the world, they believe controlling the spread in air conditioned spaces was urgent.

The study noted that the novel coronavirus cannot survive temperatures above 70 degrees Celsius, so by making the filter temperature far hotter — about 200 degree Celsius, the researchers said they were able to kill the virus almost instantly.

Ren said the nickel foam met several key requirements. “It is porous, allowing the flow of air, and electrically conductive, which allowed it to be heated. It is also flexible,” the researchers noted in a statement.But they added that nickel foam also had low resistivity, making it difficult to raise the temperature high enough to quickly kill the virus.

The researchers said they solved this problem by folding the foam, connecting multiple compartments with electrical wires to increase the resistance high enough to raise the temperature as high as 250 degrees Celsius. By making the filter electrically heated, rather than heating it from an external source, they said the the amount of heat that escaped from the filter is minimised, allowing air conditioning to function with very low strain.

When the scientists built and tested a prototype for the relationship between voltage/current and temperature, they said it satisfies the requirements for conventional heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems, and could kill the coronavirus.

“This novel biodefense indoor air protection technology offers the first-in-line prevention against environmentally mediated transmission of airborne SARS-CoV-2, and will be on the forefront of technologies available to combat the current pandemic and any future airborne biothreats in indoor environments,” said Faisal Cheema, another co-author of the study from UH.

The researchers have called for a phased roll-out of the device, “beginning with high-priority venues, where essential workers are at elevated risk of exposure.” They believe the novel device will both improve safety for frontline workers in essential industries and allow nonessential workers to return to public work spaces.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 6,2020

Mar 6: The spread of the new coronavirus is shining the spotlight on a little-discussed gender split: men wash their hands after using the bathroom less than women, years of research and on-the-ground observations show.

Health officials around the world advise that deliberate, regular handwashing is one of the best weapons against the virus which causes a flu-like respiratory illness that can kill and has spread to around 80 countries.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's online fact sheet "Handwashing: A corporate activity," cites a 2009 study that finds "only 31% of men and 65% of women washed their hands" after using a public restroom.

Social media comments about men's handwashing lapses forced an august British institution to caution visitors about bathroom behaviour this week.

After author Sathnam Sanghera complained on Twitter about "grown," "educated" men in the British Library toilets not washing their hands, the library responded, putting up additional signs reminding patrons to wash their hands in men's and women's bathrooms.

Thanks to "visitor feedback," a spokesman told Reuters, "we have increased further the number of posters in public toilets so that visitors are reminded of the importance of good hygiene at exactly the point where they can wash their hands."

Men and women approach handwashing after using the restroom differently, according to multiple surveys and field studies.

"Women wash their hands significantly more often, use soap more often, and wash their hands somewhat longer than men," according to a 2013 Michigan State University field study conducted by research assistants who observed nearly 4,000 people in restrooms around East Lansing, Michigan.

The study found 14.6% of men did not wash their hands at all after using the bathroom and 35.1% wet their hands but did not use soap, compared to 7.1% and 15.1% of women, respectively.

"If you stand in the men's bathroom at work, and watch men leave, they mostly don't wash their hands if they used the urinal," said one New York City public relations executive, who did not want to be identified for fear of alienating his colleagues.

Since the virus's spread, he's seen an uptick in men's handwashing at work, he noted. "I, for the record, do wash my hands all the time," he added.

Female medical staff in critical care units "washed their hands significantly more often than did their male counterparts after patient contact," a 2001 study published in the American Journal of Infection Control found.

Middle-aged women with some college education had the highest level of knowledge about hand hygiene, a survey published in 2019 by BMC Public Health, an open access public health journal, found.

Early information about coronavirus infection in China shows that men may be more susceptible to the disease. Just over 58% of the more than 1,000 COVID-19 patients reported in China through Jan. 29, 2020, were male, research published in the New England Journal of Medicine shows.

Researchers have not linked the difference to hand hygiene.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
February 4,2020

Despite tremendous advances in treatment of congenital heart disease (CHD), a new global study shows that the chances for a child to survive a CHD diagnosis is significantly less in low-income countries.

The research revealed that nearly 12 million people are currently living with CHD globally, 18.7 per cent more than in 1990.

The findings, published in The Lancet, is drawn from the first comprehensive study of congenital heart disease across 195 countries, prepared using data from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries and Risk Factors Study 2017 (GBD).

"Previous congenital heart estimates came from few data sources, were geographically narrow and did not evaluate CHD throughout the life course," said the study authors from Children's National Hospital in the US.

This is the first time the GBD study data was used along with all available data sources and previous publications - making it the most comprehensive study on the congenital heart disease burden to date.

The study found a 34.5 per cent decline in deaths from congenital disease between 1990 to 2017. Nearly 70 per cent of deaths caused by CHD in 2017 (180,624) were in infants less than one year old.

Most CHD deaths occurred in countries within the low and low-middle socio-demographic index (SDI) quintiles.

Mortality rates get lower as a country's Socio-demographic Index (SDI) rises, the study said.

According to the researchers, birth prevalence of CHD was not related to a country's socio-demographic status, but overall prevalence was much lower in the poorest countries of the world.

This is because children in these countries do not have access to life saving surgical services, they added.

"In high income countries like the United States, we diagnose some heart conditions prenatally during the 20-week ultrasound," said Gerard Martin from Children's National Hospital who contributed to the study.

"For children born in middle- and low-income countries, these data draw stark attention to what we as cardiologists already knew from our own work in these countries -- the lack of diagnostic and treatment tools leads to lower survival rates for children born with CHD," said researcher Craig Sable.

"The UN has prioritised reduction of premature deaths from heart disease, but to meet the target of 'ending preventable deaths of newborns and children under 5 years of age,' health policy makers will need to develop specific accountability measures that address barriers and improve access to care and treatment," the authors wrote.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.