header logo image


Page 1,085«..1020..1,0841,0851,0861,087..1,0901,100..»

Integrative Medicine: Trends and Beliefs – decodedscience.org

November 19th, 2016 11:42 pm

Ayurvedic Medicine has been practiced in India for thousands of years. Image by GaborfromHungary

How does Western medical philosophy combine with less-traditional medical beliefs? Thanks to multiculturalism, Integrative Medicine is becoming more mainstream among practitioners.

During the second half of the twentieth century, the concept of multiculturalism (i.e.- the coexistence of cultural and religious diversity) as a positive influence on society became widespread.

Westerners, in particular, began exploring many aspects of other cultures, and many developed an open-minded approach to adopting such cultural artifacts and practices as styles of music and fashion, yoga, meditation, and non-Western traditional medical systems.

With the expansion of globalization in the late twentieth century, non-Western medical practices such as Traditional Chinese Medicine started to enter the mainstream. Thus, in the late 1990s, the field of Integrative Medicine (also called Integrated Medicine)became established in the USA.

Integrative Medicineis based on the principle that no single medical system is perfect, and that combining elements of various medical systems in an intelligent and informed manner achieves and maintains better health.

CAM is the acronym for Complementary and Alternative Medicine. It is the most frequently used term in the USA to denote the combined use of Western (conventional) medicine with different medical systems.

The terms CAM and Integrative Medicine (or Integrated Medicine) express the most basic principle of this approach to health: that of using or integrating several medical systems in a complementary manner. Conventional Western medicine is not rejected, nor are alternative medical systems used uncritically.

The basic principles of Integrative Medicine include the beliefthat health and well-being are the most natural conditions, and that the human body has an inborn ability to heal itself. Practitioners believe that medical intervention should support and facilitate that ability. The most effective treatments, they say, are therefore those that are most natural and least invasive.

Doctors who practice various alternative medicine techniquesbelieve that medical caregiversshould individualize and personalize all treatment. There is a strong belief that no one-size-fits-all treatment exists for any medical condition or illness. Medical treatment should treat the person, rather than the disease, and therefore the doctor should base treatmenton the unique individual traits and needs of the patient.

Furthermore, both doctors of Western Medicine (MDs) and doctors of Oriental Medicine (OMDs) agree thata healthy diet and lifestyle maintains and supports good health, so the individual needs to take an active role in the prevention of illness.

Integrative Medicine holds that, since the mind andthe body are not separate entities, emotional and social factors influence ones health.

Whereas, in the past, people viewed the doctor as the only genuine medical authority, Integrative Medicine holdsthat the patient seeking help is the authentic expert on his/her own health, having lived inside his/her own body for a whole lifetime.

Supporters of Integrative Mediconetherefore consider thepatient and the medical professional as partners in the healing process. The role of the medical professional is to diagnose and recommend possible treatments, rather than to maintain that only one treatment is available or desirable. The patient thus has the ultimate control in deciding which treatment would be most appropriate and beneficial. This is known as patient empowerment.

Traditional Chinese Medicine takes the various meridians of the human body into account for health and massage. Image by KVDP

Throughout the 1990s, experts conducted research on the use of CAM/Integrative Medicine in the USA. One survey, published in theJournal of the American Medical Association, indicated that visits to alternative medicine practitioners increased from 427 million in 1990 to 629 million in 1997. This was greater than the number of visits to all US primary care physicians.

The Osher Center for Integrative Medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, provides the following information on the development of integrative medicine in the USA from 1992 to 2004:

In 1992, the Office of Alternative Medicine (OAM) was founded as part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Its annual budget was $2 million. In 1998, the OAM was renamed the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health(NCCIH). NCCIHs budget for research in 2005 was $121 million, reflecting the growing popularity and acceptance of CAM/Integrative Medicine.

In 2002, a survey of 31,000 American adults revealed that 38% 62% used CAM during the preceding year (depending on the types of treatmentsincluded in the definition of CAM).

Not only has the popularity of Integrative Medicine grown among patients, but the acceptance of various integrated medical practices has become widespreadamong Western medical professionals in recent years, as well. For example, in 2005, the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies recommended that health profession schools should incorporate information about CAM into the standard curriculum, so that licensed professionals would be able to advise their patients about it.

Integrative Medicine acknowledges that medicinemustbe based on scientific inquiry. Many non-Western medical systems have developed outside of a rigorous scientific context.

Nowadays, the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health(NCCIH) requires the testing of non-Western medical practices by Western research standards. This is meant to guarantee that non-Western medical treatments are both safe and effective.

The backbone of Western medicine is research thatprofessionalscan replicate and validate over and over again by objective standards.

Nowadays, the various medical traditions that comprise the field of Integrative Medicine are all being subjected to this kind of objective analysis. The results of current research will pave the way to greater integration of the various medical traditions in the future. In this way, doctors will tailor health practicesto meet the very specific needs of each individual patient.

Dr. Andrew Weill is a medical doctor, teacher, and writer of many books and articles on holistic health. He is the founder and director of the Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine at the University of Arizona, where he teaches. Weill defines Integrative Medicine as the intelligent combination of Western and alternative medicine He views it as the best of both worlds.

Brad Lemley sums up the philosophy of Integrative Medicinewhen he saysthat this approach to medicine cherry picks the best scientifically validated therapies that conventional Western and alternative medical systems have to offer.

When it comes to your health, shouldnt every person should have to right to choose and enjoy the best resourcesgathered and perfected throughout human history?

See the original post here:
Integrative Medicine: Trends and Beliefs - decodedscience.org

Read More...

Integrative Medicine – sciencenewsbooks.science

November 19th, 2016 11:42 pm

%PDF-1.4 % %PDF-1.4 % %PDF-1.4 % 3 0 obj <> /Annots [ 7 0 R 8 0 R 9 0 R ] /Contents 4 0 R>> endobj 4 0 obj <> stream xWKs6Wq`H7'NtlCH$!!}|HLrHi |v`R:?TB$>60{xm(dUywy`Q!l= 7Pgq_D>OZ$K[ D$} 1~o+V ^KQ|47'$3SJOp}dHhI"Xgu=wg! ;!b)zX#pk:_z(:T |"D@ma$ S! x1qQE &mxl<&~JuD|{?y~)}(Gs]8lOpL12 "GO *Hd)JLwpg,3QohQUSai?9|Hf`pP@Z2W!r8pxDO0%#sh/`?z,Br}M@1}>o+tibv-M ^HN9VMng9| d >]|-ixMrBvtQb]MX& YM?J ~KU4)zkI)dK1BR6R(U(%ag.rctW ur#;UU#dnjj3MM0P.uykcic@VLnde:8$9 #C>S0LLChPWYymZ1gOvaamSW``N1=/MY]`f,j-]kb5.E6Z^vMS(-c1$SL1fd:tLsc)0m-L hJ{8=)fxLw@k<&u*-GSv26.:Ym;_9bfqovO]'Y.ca 5*KSG]M$"g?#dZ8jh&p|%~> /Annots [ 10 0 R 11 0 R 12 0 R 13 0 R 14 0 R 15 0 R 16 0 R 17 0 R 18 0 R 19 0 R 20 0 R 21 0 R 22 0 R 23 0 R 24 0 R 25 0 R 26 0 R 27 0 R 28 0 R 29 0 R 30 0 R 31 0 R 32 0 R 33 0 R 34 0 R 35 0 R 36 0 R 37 0 R 38 0 R 39 0 R 40 0 R 41 0 R 42 0 R 43 0 R 44 0 R 45 0 R 46 0 R ] /Contents 6 0 R>> endobj 6 0 obj <> stream xY]s:}'f@X6oJZmZ^.<*R*6n`N,%uf6eS4'zmd|>f%Gq3O_5s[v0 I%dQ)UaXq8SQ_+.w(&q@$J"XHF?#^LpIdW~rnEwE;+.[+C[}tAnO)q ;CKHJi6~~MM-3G>f/{xq 4 I"i|c0QCz?/Hb 2~O9 l~=2c$qsC!y {+&$* zfoHSx"j=(i|8LP38fN6Vo/J8ZiY=5E1U<`?|SDfY%_ F`z Qw`HD$*zA| gW5^n!5N#c@=Cj%f2>[ejdk k8sh.G8- wM71LpsFf%$]{0a(EhZ)W=!c(xY^(kiQ+wM; .z%Bd W'ns|/bJiu6?!EJZ63s+Z^/]*q6j0p-WfUy9q 9b,J.W864zs(rG0Lq{9zVZ_7`!uP]MKx7)R`-6|,n`lD#A=f+eq|( d6,a,F^:U^Yf1.>IMjd}iVw oS~8>C?N5jl&/XxZ.|~~Pc WT0aJy[cXYd>N 7yj~: Iv2XgJ+k|G~CI)"z#3ik4-1R^cQsO:E'/srt+#gs_)`'Y?c+1c<_egmy4JccD;:?k4&Yml0MR*X#~$Z5#i1%iq]/VX) 4}U96 S?V'Gj&/ {(~[$p*3M Zc9j-tlI^GX3E4vT(%kJ?k6g&VD7 6]mn[o{mDL/vQ)r6{OKHt_YB$IXe!YronO3 endstream endobj 7 0 obj <http://coldiarrive.xyz/read-book/integrative-medicine.pdf) /NM (0001-0000) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 8 0 obj <http://coldiarrive.xyz/read-book/integrative-medicine.pdf) /NM (0001-0001) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 9 0 obj <http://coldiarrive.xyz/read-book/integrative-medicine.pdf) /NM (0001-0002) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 10 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/managing-corporate-information-systems-evolution-and-maintenance.pdf) /NM (0002-0000) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 11 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/holt-physics-concept-review-answers-magnets.pdf) /NM (0002-0001) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 12 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/clinical-kinesiology-anatomy-lab-manual-answers.pdf) /NM (0002-0002) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 13 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/new-methods-for-social-history.pdf) /NM (0002-0003) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 14 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/outlaw-swords-of-death-warrior-hero-designs-1825-45.pdf) /NM (0002-0004) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 15 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/signal-transduction-in-cancer-metastasis.pdf) /NM (0002-0005) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 16 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/a-tale-of-two-gardens.pdf) /NM (0002-0006) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 17 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/successful-schooling-1st-published.pdf) /NM (0002-0007) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 18 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/the-branches-of-the-gospel-of-john-the-reception-of-the-fourth-gospel-in-the-early-church.pdf) /NM (0002-0008) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 19 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/the-branches-of-the-gospel-of-john-the-reception-of-the-fourth-gospel-in-the-early-church.pdf) /NM (0002-0009) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 20 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/kotler-marketing-quiz-questions-and-answers-9th.pdf) /NM (0002-0010) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 21 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/secession-how-vermont-and-all-the-other-states-can-save-themselves-from-the-empire.pdf) /NM (0002-0011) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 22 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/secession-how-vermont-and-all-the-other-states-can-save-themselves-from-the-empire.pdf) /NM (0002-0012) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 23 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/aristotle-poetics-for-screenw.pdf) /NM (0002-0013) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 24 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/flocabulary-answer-keys.pdf) /NM (0002-0014) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 25 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/measurement-my-path-to-math.pdf) /NM (0002-0015) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 26 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/constitutionalism-and-dictatorship-pinochet-the-junta-and-the-1980-constitution.pdf) /NM (0002-0016) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 27 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/the-mackade-brothers-rafe-and-jared-the-return-of-rafe-mackadethe-pride-of-jared-mackade.pdf) /NM (0002-0017) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 28 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/the-mackade-brothers-rafe-and-jared-the-return-of-rafe-mackadethe-pride-of-jared-mackade.pdf) /NM (0002-0018) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 29 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/semantics-and-cognition-current-studies-in-linguistics.pdf) /NM (0002-0019) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 30 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/government-questions-and-answers-for-waec-2014-2015.pdf) /NM (0002-0020) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 31 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/plate-tectonics-glencoe-answer-key.pdf) /NM (0002-0021) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 32 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/facial-plastic-surgery-management-of-the-untoward-result.pdf) /NM (0002-0022) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 33 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/perspectives-on-school-at-seven-years-old.pdf) /NM (0002-0023) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 34 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/navigation-in-space-by-x-ray-pulsars-1st-edition.pdf) /NM (0002-0024) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 35 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/tomatoes-garlic-basil-the-simple-pleasures-of-growing-and-cooking-your-gardena.pdf) /NM (0002-0025) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 36 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/tomatoes-garlic-basil-the-simple-pleasures-of-growing-and-cooking-your-gardena.pdf) /NM (0002-0026) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 37 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/romans-study-questions-and-answers.pdf) /NM (0002-0027) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 38 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/moneyskillorg-answer-key.pdf) /NM (0002-0028) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 39 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/the-merchant-adventurers-of-england.pdf) /NM (0002-0029) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 40 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/out-of-your-mind-the-links-between-brain-and-body.pdf) /NM (0002-0030) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 41 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/nbme-15-answer-key.pdf) /NM (0002-0031) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 42 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/occupational-therapy-and-older-people-2nd-edition.pdf) /NM (0002-0032) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 43 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/state-of-the-world-oceans-1-ed-08.pdf) /NM (0002-0033) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 44 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/sardine-in-outer-space-5.pdf) /NM (0002-0034) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 45 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/goat-in-a-boat.pdf) /NM (0002-0035) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 46 0 obj <http://sciencenewsbooks.science/reading/healthcare-solution-for-billing-integration.pdf) /NM (0002-0036) /M (D:20161119234206) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 1 0 obj <> endobj 47 0 obj <> endobj 48 0 obj <> endobj 49 0 obj <> endobj 50 0 obj <> endobj 51 0 obj <> endobj 52 0 obj <> endobj 53 0 obj <> endobj 54 0 obj <> /Length 299>> stream HKaY,DL0&14 l4da:Dd1!d{/DY5'e/rXUy9(?.VBN,XQg{[XI 'IPXOj ]>dKLHLH,^"bBb%}&$Vq+ixcBbRN= d>)TH,W8`!1OUp!1F~m4~8]lBbKWM g endstream endobj 55 0 obj <> /Length 1770>> stream h[Gu%0#!"Ea H$Rx|HxD(^g3=]7zwwflM9uNz_3nA/n]x5A/uTE--I8,3cPJ)J l 7F B(%`,v[Z~?Ik-1 :m:Qon ` f 8x`9EQh7jJPo[AFCmh"7{-zOfZ[O${mg%|6a![[Zs'I)Qf=!q|t('%9+E~/QFdvvnvD!m/wnjJ?wllH*>tKhjQJGQ$I]kQQ~3B){g7^JQB>| `R=qN>eniZ8;ERJ|40m5FY{woK>!;W.8yj5 .S$niiBRJJ`0 BFQ*Js!D8[1(2W/uG-66IWqE.fRZ!Qi@;56W p9 /xIRniZ|ZRy^`;:G9QR?}S>+4fO>/}Eb]ncbmmV)3,,,{7n0xRY8/^$GQ()sniRJ0a(GeTrcB(y@)1tt~2W?8p!$%[1u^(ch)x-> /Length 230>> stream h `3icT@2! H4f&@# A7 @6%g{81]Wfy$yj~:'}yGxoT-7{1pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pSyO0{2A|a'L3_2z 7b;[Sc endstream endobj 57 0 obj <> /Length 13064>> stream xyu';_IwRCI]^//=r v?JrR[<[#(0H M$NwG @Pe5Z"T&_BrB*X+BQI6XZVN [B3? ?j6`bn!V0 b-.=B xyjT&:JW5[b.A?{| ]f0 /BkJLU %Ly=|@2)[FvOR4RbtbnoW!@?lrkwb _u5s=:RhMQ($bXJ%VQ[@ (CYEIlDR ) ZSEn|4|L(&eZ*rUs_po98%ETD`XeE(nH_#KStme+qE5h/M-Q!D( T0]JJBL+%C*5":6?1w~}1JJ*D*D`/Mg^^$tR%'U2 jfi/lD"Fv=w}:q|3ETG *u#2%F+WT8^_3N5sqBy&e"'%2 $0q!Ic%".h"NP1bQ {J|nX 1_|*iS5J i4!DF[ZqIzE;%L`$g;-3qRP}l;e(:d#RUQ )yJUtIxgz|kx9c7a:JUVJuH41P .GH[FHve%e%8^K2h%QU1 2Tz['7&CLr&uP%;uwl9BmeAXbI N!0jXQhEY~{l?fB JA #0jB] n"R>ER!XQD~X2,:'4`#LDIlc &U|%)SeBdW^ .cDlbZ7yp"&kTb]iKYa&Jcc0-Ot!!q3G8Nd!*aUhf51 +LDUTX#()TBn4f251*LT)P1WWKPg "Qa xh|% /A[q20p__tE5~7;J7(uHcq8+[uW|;|B?0IEZE$3( 0D~As7}> dF b!(QkD$@C(#req0 keVKoRP4LGS{kS;&HGU"nKF&'(4b$Yt,Z_m7|w.P2E'[ ib%J-ozl5VlD1a"YSO[CPBdodn|8NL0[PF$UCx{}l[oLYdsIYj6_DbQ-&h/N&m H"tblvJ,@"`D >`;ixR >"hamG?kSS5V3jjey WbP2IA q%bX@YQud8|_>Z '2fsEF}@`TL#VP l*BhP8DU2%!4"R"QaSqfCJ%*PvK `iw+4 "(iV@DM?RQa86s]bL-mTL~nxkbOe%(Jj 1QX/ R#32QlP0 W)DcU"Pqf$j e0ZkcQ-=0ps&O"hR^4m4Q-$DDSvaz2#v6ed AlQUAiV '<=iSh4kysV5%FVGg#77C-gow$;3ZdEub=+K%qEi|t>Qz@LiwY3g-RztYtgckjyov$UYc`2ESdz{7Z W@[MD$qmvfawRzNFj,d 1Y%GJj]n?%[o# AE* 7;nT9pS={~4y

Read the original here:
Integrative Medicine - sciencenewsbooks.science

Read More...

Integrative Medicine Clinic in Churchton, MD

November 19th, 2016 11:42 pm

Integrative Medical Approach

Integrative medicine places the patient at the center of a holistic approach to medical care. Patient's individual needs, risks, and goals are the main driving forces of any integrative therapy. Physicians practicing integrative medicine emphasize that treatment of every aspect of a person's health is crucial to the success of the healing process:

To request more information, please contact our Churchton integrative medicine clinic today! Call (410) 567-0667 or contact Annapolis Integrative Medicine Clinic online.

Integrative medicine is a multi-disciplinary approach that combines the scientific advances and a variety of effective therapies to treat disease.

Integrative medicine combines conventional and complementary treatment options to achieve optimal health for the patient. It is based on the research which demonstrates that the human body has an innate healing mechanism. Illness occurs when the regenerative processes in the body are disturbed, and the body can no longer keep itself healthy.

Integrative medicine emphasizes the use of the least invasive treatment options necessary to bring the body to a healthy state.

Integrative medicine physicians focus on health optimization and often combine a variety of methods to optimize their patients' health:

To request more information, please contact our Churchton integrative medicine clinic today! Call (410) 567-0667 or contact Annapolis Integrative Medicine Clinic online.

Read the original here:
Integrative Medicine Clinic in Churchton, MD

Read More...

Integrative Medicine – coldincrease.gstlfdc.com

November 19th, 2016 11:42 pm

%PDF-1.4 % %PDF-1.4 % %PDF-1.4 % 3 0 obj <> /Annots [ 7 0 R 8 0 R 9 0 R ] /Contents 4 0 R>> endobj 4 0 obj <> stream xWn6}Wcd"E)omv$,YttqP[rY|X:sW`R:z/6_wH} `g xWj12Jk9{b7p~ 7W~sl3 QtiWE#^$>c0~cpaQse^@>*>tRU]i}zJV|5;G*B=KT 8dpp':Wytx+k xQcyzKCVg=PKP#tnT$,P(>"SUGj:!X_-xH3 qFqY%'|e-!Xq K;@-%cL#6Z*F|_0TH?z"OWg 4YRl L5<$-+kGY>e[hl+667h,:N=iG >)(] 6mx6#d0%c@yh3[A=Ukex+0+`T*x3Ma%8{]-u[? /{s#o/%U4D>yX,-i.jy[q|lnl0m$xb$^RbSAS*ma-hHl1>hq/N5qt!w, 2v*!-qZ]fa,<.tBtHT-uZ""EQ,}J>y]Hp~H1kDRjQg*mFmg!$0VKDb["EnL~e,$AYMZV2uYj]#L' L)| ,gM.Z!"e:j&>Je^F.q] ebmuLj?A 2ym D4I0C;DYy*LJYfrZk#CdH$bxSn73mymll{ [^Mp,4>k8F+Q#BQbh5-&d'q0;>Jr^#?v:rg_m!xrw?L~n A4gc'Wwp?WL>]~tvb endstream endobj 5 0 obj <> /Annots [ 10 0 R 11 0 R 12 0 R 13 0 R 14 0 R 15 0 R 16 0 R 17 0 R 18 0 R 19 0 R 20 0 R 21 0 R 22 0 R 23 0 R 24 0 R 25 0 R 26 0 R 27 0 R 28 0 R 29 0 R 30 0 R 31 0 R 32 0 R 33 0 R 34 0 R 35 0 R 36 0 R 37 0 R 38 0 R 39 0 R 40 0 R 41 0 R 42 0 R 43 0 R 44 0 R ] /Contents 6 0 R>> endobj 6 0 obj <> stream xYMs6WqavjrL I@I),Qv:L,Q>}o!P8Nd#OX@Q9O=G~jGp }]uyG-8!!)oW L3.w{F~@Pn$&.6p p+?6eE;+F;En&W`aTG6]a|^qotyy'in>(Psh2Y?,FC1YOocD@]n `XGw0 sC+vvs,esVw`C% "/a[&mhoBTp sRW| =H8uSF{G75W9/pzU QBQJ)]Up-Dpu-j8QJ1:.Pa0I^];LX+|`g3ya1*"K,ERepUV WuB Q!HQ/Z0,VmP!sAq>. )B,ypP1V Sr%T]a&x!*?IH}W)"I]lhD :VLA6KyH#V%:5R%NFq8OpGKFNwf /u).H44]Os%5:a.8^LXHrlh;]5nFh8.%>c; B,8 z3D4E{mWXxSOp',CL/R'Xk$cJCb6h'(^/ f/@gH'Nl,~ + _c$tq3&T0Z|{aY,pR2 }9Uza:QLg#|Ei%HF|VHIR]wa9/M-oyk A|t}ww@[f94G! k5H8NDE#=:i2~3:RZ!y'2|~e(http://reelzoa.xyz/read-book/integrative-medicine.pdf) /NM (0001-0000) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 8 0 obj <http://reelzoa.xyz/read-book/integrative-medicine.pdf) /NM (0001-0001) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 9 0 obj <http://reelzoa.xyz/read-book/integrative-medicine.pdf) /NM (0001-0002) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 10 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/tutankhamun-the-book-of-shadows.pdf) /NM (0002-0000) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 11 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/red-cross-lifeguard-written-test-answers.pdf) /NM (0002-0001) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 12 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/circles-geometry-answer-key.pdf) /NM (0002-0002) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 13 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/the-great-recession-and-developing-countries-economic-impact-and-growth-prospects.pdf) /NM (0002-0003) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 14 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/the-great-recession-and-developing-countries-economic-impact-and-growth-prospects.pdf) /NM (0002-0004) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 15 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/good-families-dont-just-happen.pdf) /NM (0002-0005) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 16 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/microcontroller-based-elevator.pdf) /NM (0002-0006) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 17 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/thurmond-permanently-sealed.pdf) /NM (0002-0007) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 18 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/identity-religion-and-values-implications-for-practitioners.pdf) /NM (0002-0008) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 19 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/the-drama-of-prince-arjuna-being-a-revaluation-of-the-central-theme-of-the-bhagavad-gita-1st-edition.pdf) /NM (0002-0009) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 20 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/the-drama-of-prince-arjuna-being-a-revaluation-of-the-central-theme-of-the-bhagavad-gita-1st-edition.pdf) /NM (0002-0010) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 21 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/technology-and-problem-based-learning.pdf) /NM (0002-0011) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 22 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/the-cautious-canine.pdf) /NM (0002-0012) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 23 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/ph-calculations-worksheet-answer-key.pdf) /NM (0002-0013) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 24 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/public-spaces-private-lives-democracy-beyond-911.pdf) /NM (0002-0014) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 25 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/factoring-worksheet-with-answer-key.pdf) /NM (0002-0015) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 26 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/cardiac-pacing-and-device-therapy.pdf) /NM (0002-0016) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 27 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/management-of-systems.pdf) /NM (0002-0017) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 28 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/the-werepuppy-on-holiday.pdf) /NM (0002-0018) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 29 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/why-translation-matters.pdf) /NM (0002-0019) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 30 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/freshwater-fishes-of-mexico.pdf) /NM (0002-0020) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 31 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/faith-and-practice-of-islam-three-thirteenth-century-sufi-texts.pdf) /NM (0002-0021) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 32 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/nightrise-the-gatekeepers.pdf) /NM (0002-0022) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 33 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/lesson-13-geometry-answers.pdf) /NM (0002-0023) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 34 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/august-2010-living-environment-regents-answer-key.pdf) /NM (0002-0024) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 35 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/unto-thee-1-grant.pdf) /NM (0002-0025) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 36 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/science-experiment-magnet.pdf) /NM (0002-0026) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 37 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/timeslips.pdf) /NM (0002-0027) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 38 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/earth-science-sol-practice-answers-2010.pdf) /NM (0002-0028) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 39 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/havisham.pdf) /NM (0002-0029) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 40 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/problem-solution-graphic-organizers.pdf) /NM (0002-0030) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 41 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/other-voices-other-vistas-china-india-japan-and-latin-america.pdf) /NM (0002-0031) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 42 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/language-proof-logic-solutions-chapter-8.pdf) /NM (0002-0032) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 43 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/quickbooks-2009-all-in-one-for-dummies.pdf) /NM (0002-0033) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 44 0 obj <http://coldincrease.gstlfdc.com/mydoc/how-much-is-a-million.pdf) /NM (0002-0034) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 1 0 obj <> endobj 45 0 obj <> endobj 46 0 obj <> endobj 47 0 obj <> endobj 48 0 obj <> endobj 49 0 obj <> endobj 50 0 obj <> endobj 51 0 obj <> endobj 52 0 obj <> /Length 299>> stream HKaY,DL0&14 l4da:Dd1!d{/DY5'e/rXUy9(?.VBN,XQg{[XI 'IPXOj ]>dKLHLH,^"bBb%}&$Vq+ixcBbRN= d>)TH,W8`!1OUp!1F~m4~8]lBbKWM g endstream endobj 53 0 obj <> /Length 1770>> stream h[Gu%0#!"Ea H$Rx|HxD(^g3=]7zwwflM9uNz_3nA/n]x5A/uTE--I8,3cPJ)J l 7F B(%`,v[Z~?Ik-1 :m:Qon ` f 8x`9EQh7jJPo[AFCmh"7{-zOfZ[O${mg%|6a![[Zs'I)Qf=!q|t('%9+E~/QFdvvnvD!m/wnjJ?wllH*>tKhjQJGQ$I]kQQ~3B){g7^JQB>| `R=qN>eniZ8;ERJ|40m5FY{woK>!;W.8yj5 .S$niiBRJJ`0 BFQ*Js!D8[1(2W/uG-66IWqE.fRZ!Qi@;56W p9 /xIRniZ|ZRy^`;:G9QR?}S>+4fO>/}Eb]ncbmmV)3,,,{7n0xRY8/^$GQ()sniRJ0a(GeTrcB(y@)1tt~2W?8p!$%[1u^(ch)x-> /Length 230>> stream h `3icT@2! H4f&@# A7 @6%g{81]Wfy$yj~:'}yGxoT-7{1pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pSyO0{2A|a'L3_2z 7b;[Sc endstream endobj 55 0 obj <> /Length 13064>> stream xyu';_IwRCI]^//=r v?JrR[<[#(0H M$NwG @Pe5Z"T&_BrB*X+BQI6XZVN [B3? ?j6`bn!V0 b-.=B xyjT&:JW5[b.A?{| ]f0 /BkJLU %Ly=|@2)[FvOR4RbtbnoW!@?lrkwb _u5s=:RhMQ($bXJ%VQ[@ (CYEIlDR ) ZSEn|4|L(&eZ*rUs_po98%ETD`XeE(nH_#KStme+qE5h/M-Q!D( T0]JJBL+%C*5":6?1w~}1JJ*D*D`/Mg^^$tR%'U2 jfi/lD"Fv=w}:q|3ETG *u#2%F+WT8^_3N5sqBy&e"'%2 $0q!Ic%".h"NP1bQ {J|nX 1_|*iS5J i4!DF[ZqIzE;%L`$g;-3qRP}l;e(:d#RUQ )yJUtIxgz|kx9c7a:JUVJuH41P .GH[FHve%e%8^K2h%QU1 2Tz['7&CLr&uP%;uwl9BmeAXbI N!0jXQhEY~{l?fB JA #0jB] n"R>ER!XQD~X2,:'4`#LDIlc &U|%)SeBdW^ .cDlbZ7yp"&kTb]iKYa&Jcc0-Ot!!q3G8Nd!*aUhf51 +LDUTX#()TBn4f251*LT)P1WWKPg "Qa xh|% /A[q20p__tE5~7;J7(uHcq8+[uW|;|B?0IEZE$3( 0D~As7}> dF b!(QkD$@C(#req0 keVKoRP4LGS{kS;&HGU"nKF&'(4b$Yt,Z_m7|w.P2E'[ ib%J-ozl5VlD1a"YSO[CPBdodn|8NL0[PF$UCx{}l[oLYdsIYj6_DbQ-&h/N&m H"tblvJ,@"`D >`;ixR >"hamG?kSS5V3jjey WbP2IA q%bX@YQud8|_>Z '2fsEF}@`TL#VP l*BhP8DU2%!4"R"QaSqfCJ%*PvK `iw+4 "(iV@DM?RQa86s]bL-mTL~nxkbOe%(Jj 1QX/ R#32QlP0 W)DcU"Pqf$j e0ZkcQ-=0ps&O"hR^4m4Q-$DDSvaz2#v6ed AlQUAiV '<=iSh4kysV5%FVGg#77C-gow$;3ZdEub=+K%qEi|t>Qz@LiwY3g-RztYtgckjyov$UYc`2ESdz{7Z W@[MD$qmvfawRzNFj,d 1Y%GJj]n?%[o# AE* 7;nT9pS={~4y

Visit link:
Integrative Medicine - coldincrease.gstlfdc.com

Read More...

Integrative Medicine – weather-cloud.net

November 19th, 2016 11:42 pm

%PDF-1.4 % %PDF-1.4 % %PDF-1.4 % 3 0 obj <> /Annots [ 7 0 R 8 0 R 9 0 R ] /Contents 4 0 R>> endobj 4 0 obj <> stream xWMs6Wq`"7'NtlkLI)B<]C"%3vt/< _ZuD|{:WyI-xLAgR`-)mQ6p,11 "G/|$;eI#bu3Gnpx&,61`IQ:5(AKz@]} pG(7S"!{6{}##>X4{ *v2& (+?@~$&/ti86 4/Nt[((<)3Z2s!GDo%!B^`ZcmrtCC 6o&8 q6'Zl6JSvE[-'x6]'_ Og9wCk] _sQ{ iMy?>F6> endstream endobj 5 0 obj <> /Annots [ 10 0 R 11 0 R 12 0 R 13 0 R 14 0 R 15 0 R 16 0 R 17 0 R 18 0 R 19 0 R 20 0 R 21 0 R 22 0 R 23 0 R 24 0 R 25 0 R 26 0 R 27 0 R 28 0 R 29 0 R 30 0 R 31 0 R 32 0 R 33 0 R 34 0 R 35 0 R 36 0 R 37 0 R 38 0 R 39 0 R 40 0 R 41 0 R 42 0 R 43 0 R ] /Contents 6 0 R>> endobj 6 0 obj <> stream xYr}WvE3lIb9R^`PV(tz"k[OyOxKeS4mItCgKz5w,b9pZv3_'{N O"Q,',bZD]UIoerUi}:MY@(hCO+J&_^*IdO~ %l~6D y >Nx r?Dp"7' qC^R8XDK98x2X;8c?02fO0/N,R$c#?.p ?$8+!?J1_N'Lk44SARMzWZ_ 3goDF$_J^_i_^oQ6Zi.6QzmUhjp_fn`v[=Zgy#YaTzX*A;Sz#T^;5Q9-)d [DIYBYfCF,F9seD4G>X ;.n5r;2YyPrG7]f:Uv~V%MEUpQxD}>TbSfOip5B>tRVAfbV5r<'E4/X y)wwMYbF=-FZ"f1>$j>;Dn$uF`-OwOTR'`QY>Nl!tZ]y76: 7* D.T{ z3*-`4Ped=jniKihI{N7t+V).S `(ki%"3iU0j4F=1 LKm%i![+#hon9bR`GY0:.3)@ DmqEs7C57 h }sPCacUMaDlMX=`|3oHV948qw?9ymV&w]69se 9^^y9}5!FEx(NAPlDjG$a~41J~Fil&F2ftZXkRl0mb]%@9RFL#C )f#u7J| n,d}B?w;MgZ=U#GKUY5xd"2l88kiDU|aSK[Js6[mBfy9ny0W}kBxfINg*]{1bE=8U&o7VDx(bI Y`tl8?( endstream endobj 7 0 obj <http://ytbeier.xyz/read-book/integrative-medicine.pdf) /NM (0001-0000) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 8 0 obj <http://ytbeier.xyz/read-book/integrative-medicine.pdf) /NM (0001-0001) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 9 0 obj <http://ytbeier.xyz/read-book/integrative-medicine.pdf) /NM (0001-0002) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 10 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/software-optimization-for-high-performance-computing-creating-faster-applications.pdf) /NM (0002-0000) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 11 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/lara-and-the-moon-colored-filly.pdf) /NM (0002-0001) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 12 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/biomechanics-and-esthetic-strategies-in-clinical-orthopedics-1st-edition.pdf) /NM (0002-0002) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 13 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/sphere-packings-lattices-and-groups-3rd-edition.pdf) /NM (0002-0003) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 14 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/interview-questions-and-answers-for-experienced-candidates-in-finance.pdf) /NM (0002-0004) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 15 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/university-physics-with-modern-solutions.pdf) /NM (0002-0005) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 16 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/one-is-a-snail-ten-is-a-crab.pdf) /NM (0002-0006) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 17 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/the-new-measures.pdf) /NM (0002-0007) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 18 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/ple-platoweb-answers-world-history-semester.pdf) /NM (0002-0008) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 19 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/sitzungsberichte-der-bayerischen-strafgerichte-zweiter-band.pdf) /NM (0002-0009) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 20 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/deformation-theory-of-algebras-and-structures-and-applications.pdf) /NM (0002-0010) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 21 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/fatal-women-of-romanticism.pdf) /NM (0002-0011) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 22 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/1999-ap-biology-test-answer-key.pdf) /NM (0002-0012) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 23 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/on-images-their-structure-and-content.pdf) /NM (0002-0013) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 24 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/shepherd-spy-tales-of-violence-and-intrigue-and-terrorist-sheep.pdf) /NM (0002-0014) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 25 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/answers-to-module-10-investing-on-everfi.pdf) /NM (0002-0015) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 26 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/true-funny-exam-answers.pdf) /NM (0002-0016) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 27 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/my-first-baby-animals-touch-and-feel.pdf) /NM (0002-0017) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 28 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/algebra-2-sol-practice-test-answers.pdf) /NM (0002-0018) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 29 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/the-first-moon-landing-graphic-library-graphic-history-series.pdf) /NM (0002-0019) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 30 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/africa-works-disorder-as-political-instrument-african-issues.pdf) /NM (0002-0020) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 31 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/the-soviet-experiment-russia-the-ussr-and-the-successor-states-2nd-edition.pdf) /NM (0002-0021) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 32 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/answer-key-the-protestant-reform-guided.pdf) /NM (0002-0022) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 33 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/ics-200-test-answers-2014.pdf) /NM (0002-0023) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 34 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/early-modern-women-in-conversation.pdf) /NM (0002-0024) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 35 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/answers-to-the-adventures-of-huckleberry.pdf) /NM (0002-0025) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 36 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/imaginez-supersite-answer-key.pdf) /NM (0002-0026) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 37 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/baby-shower-games-old-wives-tales-answers.pdf) /NM (0002-0027) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 38 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/advanced-java-questions-answers.pdf) /NM (0002-0028) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 39 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/the-works-of-archimedes-vol-1-the-two-books-on-the-sphere-and-the-cylinder-translation-and-comm.pdf) /NM (0002-0029) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 40 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/the-works-of-archimedes-vol-1-the-two-books-on-the-sphere-and-the-cylinder-translation-and-comm.pdf) /NM (0002-0030) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 41 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/fundamentals-of-corporate-taxation-answers.pdf) /NM (0002-0031) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 42 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/what-works-best-when-building-partner-capacity-and-under-what-circumstances.pdf) /NM (0002-0032) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 43 0 obj <http://weather-cloud.net/readpdf/development-cooperation-in-times-of-crisis.pdf) /NM (0002-0033) /M (D:20161119234208) /Border [0 0 0] /A <> >> endobj 1 0 obj <> endobj 44 0 obj <> endobj 45 0 obj <> endobj 46 0 obj <> endobj 47 0 obj <> endobj 48 0 obj <> endobj 49 0 obj <> endobj 50 0 obj <> endobj 51 0 obj <> /Length 299>> stream HKaY,DL0&14 l4da:Dd1!d{/DY5'e/rXUy9(?.VBN,XQg{[XI 'IPXOj ]>dKLHLH,^"bBb%}&$Vq+ixcBbRN= d>)TH,W8`!1OUp!1F~m4~8]lBbKWM g endstream endobj 52 0 obj <> /Length 1137>> stream hoU{gf[.-G@D# @` @L|@RJ$vwav-_5rv|sy]ZC>9g-G"F^v>P{;YnA.SzdYxE&pC{/@{:D~[Yo :$Y4yj1NnVG:zLGL?rKFYY*9Ek`iA5 ,Pq<64|qA U+XZhbRvBKn.;kf`t>,-@F.MW- G?p|rlhxE=(l_6ceoLx7"f!(Xfad ) 1Fi,-L1 +j$9]KN/=x0>c"8wsBG[>/#%"f(fy)&_r3T_=wa|Yub+D};|2RzKSk8z7JEEQ$gJbZwu;u(KSa3w~@)ZBWwB4s(XZb@W&M~w-7ZcRR6=XZb_V]XcYAw^FPe Y6=XZbx&RB8kw !xpR^s&,-L1:+LHBT7N?Z+2dfn0$ gL!81Y-/yG)tuoq45ifFWxkc,-Ln?@*5:8Zc%G6[V?h<"g{!KP9/4mMde!X S[T(r:kx`S[ZBk~Ke' DV^3dqKeB[Af_^XshVO8-?mNJlo?WSz^1eC;@9Q`iRUo93Q.7G N@Al<- endstream endobj 53 0 obj <> /Length 230>> stream h `3icT@2! H4f&@# A7 @6%g{81]Wfy$yj~:'}yGxoT-7{1pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pS7pSyO0{2A|a'L3_2z 7b;[Sc endstream endobj 54 0 obj <> /Length 13064>> stream xyu';_IwRCI]^//=r v?JrR[<[#(0H M$NwG @Pe5Z"T&_BrB*X+BQI6XZVN [B3? ?j6`bn!V0 b-.=B xyjT&:JW5[b.A?{| ]f0 /BkJLU %Ly=|@2)[FvOR4RbtbnoW!@?lrkwb _u5s=:RhMQ($bXJ%VQ[@ (CYEIlDR ) ZSEn|4|L(&eZ*rUs_po98%ETD`XeE(nH_#KStme+qE5h/M-Q!D( T0]JJBL+%C*5":6?1w~}1JJ*D*D`/Mg^^$tR%'U2 jfi/lD"Fv=w}:q|3ETG *u#2%F+WT8^_3N5sqBy&e"'%2 $0q!Ic%".h"NP1bQ {J|nX 1_|*iS5J i4!DF[ZqIzE;%L`$g;-3qRP}l;e(:d#RUQ )yJUtIxgz|kx9c7a:JUVJuH41P .GH[FHve%e%8^K2h%QU1 2Tz['7&CLr&uP%;uwl9BmeAXbI N!0jXQhEY~{l?fB JA #0jB] n"R>ER!XQD~X2,:'4`#LDIlc &U|%)SeBdW^ .cDlbZ7yp"&kTb]iKYa&Jcc0-Ot!!q3G8Nd!*aUhf51 +LDUTX#()TBn4f251*LT)P1WWKPg "Qa xh|% /A[q20p__tE5~7;J7(uHcq8+[uW|;|B?0IEZE$3( 0D~As7}> dF b!(QkD$@C(#req0 keVKoRP4LGS{kS;&HGU"nKF&'(4b$Yt,Z_m7|w.P2E'[ ib%J-ozl5VlD1a"YSO[CPBdodn|8NL0[PF$UCx{}l[oLYdsIYj6_DbQ-&h/N&m H"tblvJ,@"`D >`;ixR >"hamG?kSS5V3jjey WbP2IA q%bX@YQud8|_>Z '2fsEF}@`TL#VP l*BhP8DU2%!4"R"QaSqfCJ%*PvK `iw+4 "(iV@DM?RQa86s]bL-mTL~nxkbOe%(Jj 1QX/ R#32QlP0 W)DcU"Pqf$j e0ZkcQ-=0ps&O"hR^4m4Q-$DDSvaz2#v6ed AlQUAiV '<=iSh4kysV5%FVGg#77C-gow$;3ZdEub=+K%qEi|t>Qz@LiwY3g-RztYtgckjyov$UYc`2ESdz{7Z W@[MD$qmvfawRzNFj,d 1Y%GJj]n?%[o# AE* 7;nT9pS={~4y

Original post:
Integrative Medicine - weather-cloud.net

Read More...

Quackademic medicine at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer …

November 19th, 2016 11:42 pm

The Society for Integrative Oncology (SIO) doesnt like me much. I understand. I havent exactly been supportive of the groups mission or activities. So it wasnt surprising that SIO wrote letters trying to rebut a Perspectives article on integrative oncology that I published in Nature Reviews Cancer two years ago. What depressed me about that encounter was that one of the complaints the SIO had about my article was that it spent too much verbiage discussing homeopathy as one pseudoscientific treatment that integrative oncology integrates with science-based medicine and no one uses homeopathy. This led me to point out in my response that the SIO includes naturopaths as prominent members, including as co-authors of its guidelines for breast cancer supportive care. It also led me to point out that you cant have naturopathy without homeopathy because naturopathy schools teach homeopathy, which makes up a prominent section of the NPLEX, the test naturopaths have to take to be licensed in states that license them. It further depressed me that apparently the doctors in the SIO who responded to my article didnt realize that one of the naturopaths who was a co-author of the breast cancer guidelines was at the time actually running a clinical trial of homeopathy.

That incident, more than any other, convinced me that most integrative medicine MDs, even prominent ones and particularly ones who work with naturopaths, have no clue about the level of pseudoscience and quackery that theyve embraced. No clue at all. They realize at some level that homeopathy is complete and utter quackery, with no basis in science, which is why they reacted so badly to my discussion of homeopathy. (Ironically, the homeopathy discussion in the first submission of the paper was much shorter, but I was forced to expand it because of comments from one of the peer reviewers.) However, they do not realize that all naturopaths are trained in homeopathy, most naturopaths use it, and that naturopaths used many treatments equally quacky. Its not just naturopathy, either. Integrative medicine MDs have the same blind spot for traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), which they fail to recognize as a prescientific medical system based on religious and mystical beliefs that was in essence created by Chairman Mao through the integration of many Chinese folk medicine traditions because at the time Mao couldnt bring science-based medicine to enough of his people.

I relate that story not because this post is about naturopathy or TCM, but rather to set the stage for a point that I want to make, illustrating it with the Chief of the Integrative Medicine Service at one of the most prestigious cancer centers in the world, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC). On its website, there is an interview with Dr. Jun Mao, who is the Chief of the Integrative Medicine Service. Its an interview chock full of the sorts of fallacies and what Kimball Atwood used to call the weasel words of woo that have facilitated the infiltration of pseudoscience and quackery into halls of medical academia as hallowed as those of MSKCC.

The first question was simple, basically about whether Dr. Mao always envisioned his career bridging Eastern and Western medicine. Of course, I hate the whole Eastern medicine construct. I view it as a racist term because it implies that those inscrutable Asians are all holistic and natural, in contrast to those Western (and white) doctors, who are all scientific and reductionist. Be that as it may, heres Dr. Maos response:

Im always interested in the system as a whole, while paying attention to the parts. If you look at a human being in that way, you can see cancer in the context of the entire body. As I pursued Western medicine training, it felt like some of that was missing sometimes we focus so much on figuring out the exact parts of the body that we sort of forget the whole.

That led me to turn to Eastern medicine. Being the Chief of Integrative Medicine is my dream job. The goal is really to bring the best of conventional medicine together with therapeutics that originate from other cultures and traditions and apply scientific method to research them and eventually disseminate them into clinical practice. Ultimately, we want to allow cancer patients and their family members to have more tools available to them to deal with the physical, emotional, and spiritual impacts of cancer.

On the surface, this sounds reasonable, but you dont have to dig too deeply or analyze too hard to see the problems with this view. First:

Seeing the bodys system as a whole TCM.

Think about it. TCM is based on the idea that disease is a result of imbalance in the five elements and various other permutations. For instance, some diseases are due to imbalances between damp and dry, heat and cold, and various other opposites. In its basic concept, TCM resembles ancient Western medicine; i.e., the humoral theory of medicine in which disease was thought to be a result of imbalances in the four humors. Also, it does no good to see the whole system if the lense through which you see that system is basically a kaleidoscope of pseudoscience that distorts everything you look at. Thats what TCM does as a prescientific medical system.

Dr. Mao goes on:

My research in acupuncture has shown that when used for these women, it can help reduce joint pain, decrease hot flashes and anxiety, and improve sleep. By combining Eastern and Western approaches, we allow them to have the best symptom control, hopefully adhere to their lifesaving drugs, and improve their longevity.

Another way to think about it may be that conventional drugs are more about targeting the disease and integrative medicine focuses more on healing the whole person.

This, Im afraid, is utter and complete bullshit. Theres just no other accurate way to describe it. Unfortunately, it is the fallacy at the heart of so much rationalization of integrating quackery into medicine by advocates like Dr. Mao. Consider this aspect of TCM. TCM practitioners often use something they call tongue diagnosis. What this involves is looking at the tongue and making diagnoses. So whats the problem? After all, doctors look at the tongue all the time and can tell all sorts of things about the patient by doing so. Yes, that is true, but in TCM, tongue diagnosis functions a lot like reflexology, with different parts of the tongue thought to map to different organs and body parts. Also, TCM is based on prescientific vitalism, the idea that there is a life energy that flows through the body. After all, thats what acupuncture is supposed to be affecting, the flow of this life energy. Lets just put it this way. Basing treatment on pseudoscience and prescientific belief systems might be taking care of the whole patient, but it isnt taking care of the whole patient correctly. My retort to this argument is that you dont have to embrace pseudoscience and quackery to take care of the whole patient.

As for acupuncture, Dr. Mao is just plain wrong. It doesnt help above placebo for pain, hot flashes, or anything else. Its not as though I havent blogged about some of the very studies that Mao uses to support his belief in acupuncture.

Next up is my favorite: Whats the difference between alternative and integrative medicine? Dr. Maos happy to answer:

Unlike alternative medicine, integrative medicine focuses on using research to inform evidence-based practice of complementary therapies. Integrative medicine is also better integrated into patients treatment and survivorship care plans to help them adhere to conventional treatments while augmenting their symptom control and improving their quality of life through other means, such as yoga, acupuncture, or meditation.

As President of the Society for Integrative Oncology, I help lead our group to advocate for scientific research to understand both the safety and the efficacy of complementary therapies. Theres a continually emerging body of literature that suggests many of the therapeutics we use, such as massage, acupuncture, meditation, and yoga, have beneficial effects for psychological distress, insomnia, pain, and fatigue. And those are very common in cancer patients.

Alternative medicine often completely operates on empirical experience. In some contexts, there are people who take advantage of that and make unsubstantiated claims that some herbs or substance can cure cancer without scientific proof. And thats really why integrative medicine tries to separate itself from alternative medicine.

Sigh. Yes, practitioners of integrative medicine, especially the ones at quackademic medical centers, take great umbrage if you mention alternative medicine and imply that what they do is in any way like it. They pull themselves up and say something along the lines of, Oh, no, we dont do that. We use only evidence-based treatments. Then they go on about acupuncture, herbs that dont work, and other aspects of TCM, mixing it with potentially real evidence-based modalities like exercise or massage. It is basically the central message of integrative medicine, and unfortunately its effective, a large reason why integrative medicine has infiltrated institutions like MSKCC.

It is rather interesting, however, to see what Dr. Mao says about skeptics:

I think skepticism is a healthy thing. Just like for a lot of conventional cancer treatment, theres always skepticism, and that helps us to push the envelope more. Clinicians are always asking whether a therapy is working or whether its safe. I actually dont think we should have a blind acceptance of everything.

In terms of people being concerned about a placebo effect, its a really great question. I am very intrigued and actually studying that.

Think about placebo effect as a mind-body effect: If you actively engage your mind in wanting a specific outcome, you achieve the outcome. I think the way we are answering whether acupuncture or other types of therapies are better than placebo is by trying to understand the mechanisms underlying the pain, depression, anxiety, and distress that people are experiencing, whether a lot of that is driven by the mind-body effect.

Ugh. This borders on what I like to refer to as the central dogma of alternative medicine, which is that thinking makes it so. Its also combined with the fallback position that more and more advocates of integrative medicine have fallen back on as study after study have failed to find an effect due to their woo that is detectably different from placebo effects. That narrative is that, sure, something like acupuncture doesnt do anything detectably better than placebo, but its the placebo effect thats invoked thats healing. Add a dash of Cartesian dualism to that, with the hole invocation of mind-body effects, as though the mind were somehow separate from the body when it is not, and you have a recipe to thoroughly depress me reading such words coming from a high ranking faculty member of an institution like MSKCC.

Sadly, SIO and the integrative medicine service at MSKCC are just two examples of all too many. All over the USthe world, evenonce rigorously science-based institutions are embracing pseudoscience. Unfortunately, the reasons they give are the same all over the world and just as deluded.

Read the rest here:
Quackademic medicine at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer ...

Read More...

Preventive healthcare – Wikipedia

November 18th, 2016 12:44 pm

Preventive healthcare (alternately preventive medicine or prophylaxis) consists of measures taken for disease prevention, as opposed to disease treatment.[1] Just as health encompasses a variety of physical and mental states, so do disease and disability, which are affected by environmental factors, genetic predisposition, disease agents, and lifestyle choices. Health, disease, and disability are dynamic processes which begin before individuals realize they are affected. Disease prevention relies on anticipatory actions that can be categorized as primal, primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention.[1][2][3]

Each year, millions of people die of preventable deaths. A 2004 study showed that about half of all deaths in the United States in 2000 were due to preventable behaviors and exposures.[4] Leading causes included cardiovascular disease, chronic respiratory disease, unintentional injuries, diabetes, and certain infectious diseases.[4] This same study estimates that 400,000 people die each year in the United States due to poor diet and a sedentary lifestyle.[4] According to estimates made by the World Health Organization (WHO), about 55 million people died worldwide in 2011, two thirds of this group from non-communicable diseases, including cancer, diabetes, and chronic cardiovascular and lung diseases.[5] This is an increase from the year 2000, during which 60% of deaths were attributed to these diseases.[5] Preventive healthcare is especially important given the worldwide rise in prevalence of chronic diseases and deaths from these diseases.

There are many methods for prevention of disease. It is recommended that adults and children aim to visit their doctor for regular check-ups, even if they feel healthy, to perform disease screening, identify risk factors for disease, discuss tips for a healthy and balanced lifestyle, stay up to date with immunizations and boosters, and maintain a good relationship with a healthcare provider.[6] Some common disease screenings include checking for hypertension (high blood pressure), hyperglycemia (high blood sugar, a risk factor for diabetes mellitus), hypercholesterolemia (high blood cholesterol), screening for colon cancer, depression, HIV and other common types of sexually transmitted disease such as chlamydia, syphilis, and gonorrhea, mammography (to screen for breast cancer), colorectal cancer screening, a pap test (to check for cervical cancer), and screening for osteoporosis. Genetic testing can also be performed to screen for mutations that cause genetic disorders or predisposition to certain diseases such as breast or ovarian cancer.[6] However, these measures are not affordable for every individual and the cost effectiveness of preventive healthcare is still a topic of debate.[7][8]

Preventive healthcare strategies are described as taking place at the primal, primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention levels. In the 1940s, Hugh R. Leavell and E. Gurney Clark coined the term primary prevention. They worked at the Harvard and Columbia University Schools of Public Health, respectively, and later expanded the levels to include secondary and tertiary prevention.[9] Goldston (1987) notes that these levels might be better described as "prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation",[9] though the terms primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention are still in use today. The concept of primal prevention has been created much more recently, in relation to the new developments in molecular biology over the last fifty years,[10] more particularly in epigenetics, which point to the paramount importance of environmental conditions - both physical and affective - on the organism during its fetal and newborn life (or so-called primal life).[11]

A separate category of "health promotion" has recently been propounded. This health promotion par excellence is based on the 'new knowledge' in molecular biology, in particular on epigenetic knowledge, which points to how much affective - as well as physical - environment during fetal and newborn life may determine each and every aspect of adult health.[16][17][18] This new way of promoting health is now commonly called primal prevention.[19] It consists mainly in providing future parents with pertinent, unbiased information on primal health and supporting them during their child's primal period of life (i.e., "from conception to first anniversary" according to definition by the Primal Health Research Centre, London). This includes adequate parental leave[20] - ideally for both parents - with kin caregiving[21] and financial help where needed.

Primary prevention consists of traditional "health promotion" and "specific protection."[13] Health promotion activities are current, non-clinical life choices. For example, eating nutritious meals and exercising daily, that both prevent disease and create a sense of overall well-being. Preventing disease and creating overall well-being, prolongs our life expectancy.[13][1] Health-promotional activities do not target a specific disease or condition but rather promote health and well-being on a very general level.[1] On the other hand, specific protection targets a type or group of diseases and complements the goals of health promotion.[13] In the case of a sexually transmitted disease such as syphilis health promotion activities would include avoiding microorganisms by maintaining personal hygiene, routine check-up appointments with the doctor, general sex education, etc. whereas specific protective measures would be using prophylactics (such as condoms) during sex and avoiding sexual promiscuity.[1]

Food is very much the most basic tool in preventive health care. The 2011 National Health Interview Survey performed by the Centers for Disease Control was the first national survey to include questions about ability to pay for food. Difficulty with paying for food, medicine, or both is a problem facing 1 out of 3 Americans. If better food options were available through food banks, soup kitchens, and other resources for low-income people, obesity and the chronic conditions that come along with it would be better controlled [22] A "food desert" is an area with restricted access to healthy foods due to a lack of supermarkets within a reasonable distance. These are often low-income neighborhoods with the majority of residents lacking transportation .[23] There have been several grassroots movements in the past 20 years to encourage urban gardening, such as the GreenThumb organization in New York City. Urban gardening uses vacant lots to grow food for a neighborhood and is cultivated by the local residents.[24] Mobile fresh markets are another resource for residents in a "food desert", which are specially outfitted buses bringing affordable fresh fruits and vegetables to low-income neighborhoods. These programs often hold educational events as well such as cooking and nutrition guidance.[25] Programs such as these are helping to provide healthy, affordable foods to the people who need them the most.

Scientific advancements in genetics have significantly contributed to the knowledge of hereditary diseases and have facilitated great progress in specific protective measures in individuals who are carriers of a disease gene or have an increased predisposition to a specific disease. Genetic testing has allowed physicians to make quicker and more accurate diagnoses and has allowed for tailored treatments or personalized medicine.[1] Similarly, specific protective measures such as water purification, sewage treatment, and the development of personal hygienic routines (such as regular hand-washing) became mainstream upon the discovery of infectious disease agents such as bacteria. These discoveries have been instrumental in decreasing the rates of communicable diseases that are often spread in unsanitary conditions.[1]

Secondary prevention deals with latent diseases and attempts to prevent an asymptomatic disease from progressing to symptomatic disease.[13] Certain diseases can be classified as primary or secondary. This depends on definitions of what constitutes a disease, though, in general, primary prevention addresses the root cause of a disease or injury[13] whereas secondary prevention aims to detect and treat a disease early on.[26] Secondary prevention consists of "early diagnosis and prompt treatment" to contain the disease and prevent its spread to other individuals, and "disability limitation" to prevent potential future complications and disabilities from the disease.[1] For example, early diagnosis and prompt treatment for a syphilis patient would include a course of antibiotics to destroy the pathogen and screening and treatment of any infants born to syphilitic mothers. Disability limitation for syphilitic patients includes continued check-ups on the heart, cerebrospinal fluid, and central nervous system of patients to curb any damaging effects such as blindness or paralysis.[1]

Finally, tertiary prevention attempts to reduce the damage caused by symptomatic disease by focusing on mental, physical, and social rehabilitation. Unlike secondary prevention, which aims to prevent disability, the objective of tertiary prevention is to maximize the remaining capabilities and functions of an already disabled patient.[1] Goals of tertiary prevention include: preventing pain and damage, halting progression and complications from disease, and restoring the health and functions of the individuals affected by disease.[26] For syphilitic patients, rehabilitation includes measures to prevent complete disability from the disease, such as implementing work-place adjustments for the blind and paralyzed or providing counseling to restore normal daily functions to the greatest extent possible.[1]

The leading cause of death in the United States was tobacco. However, poor diet and lack of exercise may soon surpass tobacco as a leading cause of death. These behaviors are modifiable and public health and prevention efforts could make a difference to reduce these deaths.[4]

The leading causes of preventable death worldwide share similar trends to the United States. There are a few differences between the two, such as malnutrition, pollution, and unsafe sanitation, that reflect health disparities between the developing and developed world.[27]

In 2010, 7.6 million children died before reaching the age of 5. While this is a decrease from 9.6 million in the year 2000,[28] it is still far from the fourth Millennium Development Goal to decrease child mortality by two-thirds by the year 2015.[29] Of these deaths, about 64% were due to infection (including diarrhea, pneumonia, and malaria).[28] About 40% of these deaths occurred in neonates (children ages 128 days) due to pre-term birth complications.[29] The highest number of child deaths occurred in Africa and Southeast Asia.[28] In Africa, almost no progress has been made in reducing neonatal death since 1990.[29] India, Nigeria, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Pakistan, and China contributed to almost 50% of global child deaths in 2010. Targeting efforts in these countries is essential to reducing the global child death rate.[28]

Child mortality is caused by a variety of factors including poverty, environmental hazards, and lack of maternal education.[30] The World Health Organization created a list of interventions in the following table that were judged economically and operationally "feasible," based on the healthcare resources and infrastructure in 42 nations that contribute to 90% of all infant and child deaths. The table indicates how many infant and child deaths could have been prevented in the year 2000, assuming universal healthcare coverage.[30]

Obesity is a major risk factor for a wide variety of conditions including cardiovascular diseases, hypertension, certain cancers, and type 2 diabetes. In order to prevent obesity, it is recommended that individuals adhere to a consistent exercise regimen as well as a nutritious and balanced diet. A healthy individual should aim for acquiring 10% of their energy from proteins, 15-20% from fat, and over 50% from complex carbohydrates, while avoiding alcohol as well as foods high in fat, salt, and sugar. Sedentary adults should aim for at least half an hour of moderate-level daily physical activity and eventually increase to include at least 20 minutes of intense exercise, three times a week.[31]Preventive health care offers many benefits to those that chose to participate in taking an active role in the culture. The medical system in our society is geared toward curing acute symptoms of disease after the fact that they have brought us into the emergency room. An ongoing epidemic within American culture is the prevalence of obesity. Eating healthier and routinely exercising plays a huge role in reducing an individuals risk for type 2 diabetes. About 23.6 million people in the United States have diabetes. Of those, 17.9 million are diagnosed and 5.7 million are undiagnosed. Ninety to 95 percent of people with diabetes have type 2 diabetes. Diabetes is the main cause of kidney failure, limb amputation, and new-onset blindness in American adults.[32]

STIs are hugely common both in our history and in today's society. Such infections can cause a range of symptoms from harmless to potentially lethal. Due to the fact that it is difficult to self-diagnose during the early stage of some STIs, it is imperative that primary and secondary prevention methods are used. Condom and other barrier use prevents the transmission of many STIs. But, for others such as syphilis, condom use will only protect a user when the chancre (or syphilitic sore) is located on the penis or in the vagina. Unfortunately, chancres can be found not only on the external genitals but on the anus, in the vagina or rectum, and on the lips or inside the mouth.[33] Due to this, prevention should focus not only on condom use, but on abstinence, picking a safe and reliable partner, and on regular screenings.

In recent years, cancer has become a global problem. Low and middle income countries share a majority of the cancer burden largely due to exposure to carcinogens resulting from industrialization and globalization.[34] However, primary prevention of cancer and knowledge of cancer risk factors can reduce over one third of all cancer cases. Primary prevention of cancer can also prevent other diseases, both communicable and non-communicable, that share common risk factors with cancer.[34]

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States and Europe and is a major cause of death in other countries.[35]Tobacco is an environmental carcinogen and the major underlying cause of lung cancer.[35] Between 25% and 40% of all cancer deaths and about 90% of lung cancer cases are associated with tobacco use. Other carcinogens include asbestos and radioactive materials.[36] Both smoking and second-hand exposure from other smokers can lead to lung cancer and eventually death.[35] Therefore, prevention of tobacco use is paramount to prevention of lung cancer.

Individual, community, and statewide interventions can prevent or cease tobacco use. 90% of adults in the US who have ever smoked did so prior to the age of 20. In-school prevention/educational programs, as well as counseling resources, can help prevent and cease adolescent smoking.[36] Other cessation techniques include group support programs, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), hypnosis, and self-motivated behavioral change. Studies have shown long term success rates (>1 year) of 20% for hypnosis and 10%-20% for group therapy.[36]

Cancer screening programs serve as effective sources of secondary prevention. The Mayo Clinic, Johns Hopkins, and Memorial Sloan-Kettering hospitals conducted annual x-ray screenings and sputum cytology tests and found that lung cancer was detected at higher rates, earlier stages, and had more favorable treatment outcomes, which supports widespread investment in such programs.[36]

Legislation can also affect smoking prevention and cessation. In 1992, Massachusetts (United States) voters passed a bill adding an extra 25 cent tax to each pack of cigarettes, despite intense lobbying and a $7.3 million spent by the tobacco industry to oppose this bill. Tax revenue goes toward tobacco education and control programs and has led to a decline of tobacco use in the state.[37]

Lung cancer and tobacco smoking are increasing worldwide, especially in China. China is responsible for about one-third of the global consumption and production of tobacco products.[38] Tobacco control policies have been ineffective as China is home to 350 million regular smokers and 750 million passive smokers and the annual death toll is over 1 million.[38] Recommended actions to reduce tobacco use include: decreasing tobacco supply, increasing tobacco taxes, widespread educational campaigns, decreasing advertising from the tobacco industry, and increasing tobacco cessation support resources.[38] In Wuhan, China, a 1998 school-based program, implemented an anti-tobacco curriculum for adolescents and reduced the number of regular smokers, though it did not significantly decrease the number of adolescents who initiated smoking. This program was therefore effective in secondary but not primary prevention and shows that school-based programs have the potential to reduce tobacco use.[39]

Skin cancer is the most common cancer in the United States.[40] The most lethal form of skin cancer, melanoma, leads to over 50,000 annual deaths in the United States.[40] Childhood prevention is particularly important because a significant portion of ultraviolet radiation exposure from the sun occurs during childhood and adolescence and can subsequently lead to skin cancer in adulthood. Furthermore, childhood prevention can lead to the development of healthy habits that continue to prevent cancer for a lifetime.[40]

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends several primary prevention methods including: limiting sun exposure between 10 AM and 4 PM, when the sun is strongest, wearing tighter-weave natural cotton clothing, wide-brim hats, and sunglasses as protective covers, using sunscreens that protect against both UV-A and UV-B rays, and avoiding tanning salons.[40] Sunscreen should be reapplied after sweating, exposure to water (through swimming for example) or after several hours of sun exposure.[40] Since skin cancer is very preventable, the CDC recommends school-level prevention programs including preventive curricula, family involvement, participation and support from the school's health services, and partnership with community, state, and national agencies and organizations to keep children away from excessive UV radiation exposure.[40]

Most skin cancer and sun protection data comes from Australia and the United States.[41] An international study reported that Australians tended to demonstrate higher knowledge of sun protection and skin cancer knowledge, compared to other countries.[41] Of children, adolescents, and adults, sunscreen was the most commonly used skin protection. However, many adolescents purposely used sunscreen with a low sun protection factor (SPF)in order to get a tan.[41] Various Australian studies have shown that many adults failed to use sunscreen correctly; many applied sunscreen well after their initial sun exposure and/or failed to reapply when necessary.[42][43][44] A 2002 case-control study in Brazil showed that only 3% of case participants and 11% of control participants used sunscreen with SPF >15.[45]

Cervical cancer ranks among the top three most common cancers among women in Latin America, sub-Saharan Africa, and parts of Asia. Cervical cytology screening aims to detect abnormal lesions in the cervix so that women can undergo treatment prior to the development of cancer. Given that high quality screening and follow-up care has been shown to reduce cervical cancer rates by up to 80%, most developed countries now encourage sexually active women to undergo a pap test every 35 years. Finland and Iceland have developed effective organized programs with routine monitoring and have managed to significantly reduce cervical cancer mortality while using fewer resources than unorganized, opportunistic programs such as those in the United States or Canada.[46]

In developing nations in Latin America, such as Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, and Cuba, both public and privately organized programs have offered women routine cytological screening since the 1970s. However, these efforts have not resulted in a significant change in cervical cancer incidence or mortality in these nations. This is likely due to low quality, inefficient testing. However, Puerto Rico, which has offered early screening since the 1960s, has witnessed an almost a 50% decline in cervical cancer incidence and almost a four-fold decrease in mortality between 1950 and 1990. Brazil, Peru, India, and several high-risk nations in sub-Saharan Africa which lack organized screening programs, have a high incidence of cervical cancer.[46]

Colorectal cancer (also called bowel cancer, colon cancer, or rectal cancer) is globally the second most common cancer in women and the third-most common in men,[47] and the fourth most common cause of cancer death after lung, stomach, and liver cancer,[48] having caused 715,000 deaths in 2010.[49]

It is also highly preventable; about 80 percent[50] of colorectal cancers begin as benign growths, commonly called polyps, which can be easily detected and removed during a colonoscopy. Other methods of screening for polyps and cancers include fecal occult blood testing. Lifestyle changes that may reduce the risk of colorectal cancer include increasing consumption of whole grains, fruits and vegetables, and reducing consumption of red meat (see Colorectal cancer).

Access to healthcare and preventive health services is unequal, as is the quality of care received. A study conducted by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)revealed health disparities in the United States. In the United States, elderly adults (>65 years old)received worse care and had less access to care than their younger counterparts. The same trends are seen when comparing all racial minorities (black, Hispanic, Asian) to white patients, and low-income people to high-income people.[51] Common barriers to accessing and utilizing healthcare resources included lack of income and education, language barriers, and lack of health insurance. Minorities were less likely than whites to possess health insurance, as were individuals who completed less education. These disparities made it more difficult for the disadvantaged groups to have regular access to a primary care provider, receive immunizations, or receive other types of medical care.[51] Additionally, uninsured people tend to not seek care until their diseases progress to chronic and serious states and they are also more likely to forgo necessary tests, treatments, and filling prescription medications.[52]

These sorts of disparities and barriers exist worldwide as well. Oftentimes there are decades of gaps in life expectancy between developing and developed countries. For example, Japan has an average life expectancy that is 36 years greater than that in Malawi.[53] Low-income countries also tend to have fewer physicians than high-income countries. In Nigeria and Myanmar, there are fewer than 4 physicians per 100,000 people while Norway and Switzerland have a ratio that is ten-fold higher.[53] Common barriers worldwide include lack of availability of health services and healthcare providers in the region, great physical distance between the home and health service facilities, high transportation costs, high treatment costs, and social norms and stigma toward accessing certain health services.[54]

Overview

There is no general consensus as to whether or not preventive healthcare measures are cost-effective, but they increase the quality of life dramatically. There are varying views on what constitutes a "good investment." Some argue that preventive health measures should save more money than they cost, when factoring in treatment costs in the absence of such measures. Others argue in favor of "good value" or conferring significant health benefits even if the measures do not save money[7][55] Furthermore, preventive health services are often described as one entity though they comprise a myriad of different services, each of which can individually lead to net costs, savings, or neither. Greater differentiation of these services is necessary to fully understand both the financial and health effects.[7]

A 2010 study reported that in the United States, vaccinating children, cessation of smoking, daily prophylactic use of aspirin, and screening of breast and colorectal cancers had the most potential to prevent premature death.[7] Preventive health measures that resulted in savings included vaccinating children and adults, smoking cessation, daily use of aspirin, and screening for issues with alcoholism, obesity, and vision failure.[7] These authors estimated that if usage of these services in the United States increased to 90% of the population, there would be net savings of $3.7 billion, which comprised only about -0.2% of the total 2006 United States healthcare expenditure.[7] Despite the potential for decreasing healthcare spending, utilization of healthcare resources in the United States still remains low, especially among Latinos and African-Americans.[56] Overall, preventive services are difficult to implement because healthcare providers have limited time with patients and must integrate a variety of preventive health measures from different sources.[56]

While these specific services bring about small net savings not every preventive health measure saves more than it costs. A 1970s study showed that preventing heart attacks by treating hypertension early on with drugs actually did not save money in the long run. The money saved by evading treatment from heart attack and stroke only amounted to about a quarter of the cost of the drugs.[57][58] Similarly, it was found that the cost of drugs or dietary changes to decrease high blood cholesterol exceeded the cost of subsequent heart disease treatment.[59][60] Due to these findings, some argue that rather than focusing healthcare reform efforts exclusively on preventive care, the interventions that bring about the highest level of health should be prioritized.[55]

Cohen et al. (2008) outline a few arguments made by skeptics of preventive healthcare. Many argue that preventive measures only cost less than future treatment when the proportion of the population that would become ill in the absence of prevention is fairly large.[8] The Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group conducted a 2012 study evaluating the costs and benefits (in quality-adjusted life-years or QALY's) of lifestyle changes versus taking the drug metformin. They found that neither method brought about financial savings, but were cost-effective nonetheless because they brought about an increase in QALY's.[61] In addition to scrutinizing costs, preventive healthcare skeptics also examine efficiency of interventions. They argue that while many treatments of existing diseases involve use of advanced equipment and technology, in some cases, this is a more efficient use of resources than attempts to prevent the disease.[8] Cohen et al. (2008) suggest that the preventive measures most worth exploring and investing in are those that could benefit a large portion of the population to bring about cumulative and widespread health benefits at a reasonable cost.[8]

Cost-Effectiveness of Childhood Obesity Interventions

There are at least four nationally implemented childhood obesity interventions in the United States: the Sugar-Sweetened Beverage excise tax (SSB), the TV AD program, active physical education (Active PE) policies, and early care and education (ECE) policies.[62] They each have similar goals of reducing childhood obesity. The effects of these interventions on BMI have been studied, and the cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) has led to a better understanding of projected cost reductions and improved health outcomes.[63][64] The Childhood Obesity Intervention Cost-Effectiveness Study (CHOICES) was conducted to evaluate and compare the CEA of these four interventions.[62]

Gortmaker, S.L. et al. (2015) states: "The four initial interventions were selected by the investigators to represent a broad range of nationally scalable strategies to reduce childhood obesity using a mix of both policy and programmatic strategies... 1. an excise tax of $0.01 per ounce of sweetened beverages, applied nationally and administered at the state level (SSB), 2. elimination of the tax deductibility of advertising costs of TV advertisements for "nutritionally poor" foods and beverages seen by children and adolescents (TV AD), 3. state policy requiring all public elementary schools in which physical education (PE) is currently provided to devote 50% of PE class time to moderate and vigorous physical activity (Active PE), and 4. state policy to make early child educational settings healthier by increasing physical activity, improving nutrition, and reducing screen time (ECE)."

The CHOICES found that SSB, TV AD, and ECE led to net cost savings. Both SSB and TV AD increased quality adjusted life years and produced yearly tax revenue of 12.5 billion US dollars and 80 million US dollars, respectively.

Some challenges with evaluating the effectiveness of child obesity interventions include:

The health economics of preventive care in the US

The cost-effectiveness of preventive care is highly debated topic. While some economists argue that preventive care is valuable and potentially cost savings, others believe it is an inefficient waste of resources.[68] Preventive care is mostly composed of annual doctors check-ups, annual immunization, and wellness programs.

The Affordable Care Act and Preventive Healthcare

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act also know as just the Affordable Care Act or Obamacare was passed and became law in the United States on March 23, 2010.[69] The finalized and newly ratified law was to address my issues in the U.S. healthcare system, which included expansion of coverage, insurance market reforms, better quality, and the forecast of efficiency and costs.[70] Under the insurance market reforms the act required that insurance companies no longer exclude people with pre-existing conditions, allow for children to be covered on their parents plan until the age of 26, expand appeals that dealt with reimbursement denials. The Affordable Care Act also banned the limited coverage imposed by health insurances and insurance companies were to include coverage for preventive health care services. [71] The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force has categorized and rated preventative health services as either A or B, as to which insurance companies must comply and present full coverage. Not only has the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force provided graded preventive health services that are appropriate for coverage they have also provided many recommendations to clinicians and insurers to promote better preventative care to ultimately provide better quality of care and lower the burden of costs. [72]

Health insurance and Preventive Care

Healthcare insurance companies are willing to pay for preventive care despite the fact that patients are not acutely sick in hope that it will prevent them from developing a chronic disease later on in life.[73] Today, health insurance plans offered through the Marketplace, mandated by the Affordable Care Act are required to provide certain preventive care services free of charge to patients. Section 2713 of the Affordable Care Act, specifies that all private Marketplace and all employer-sponsored private plans (except those grandfathered in) are required to cover preventive care services that are ranked A or B by the US Preventive Services Task Force free of charge to patients.[74][75] For example, UnitedHealthcare insurance company has published patient guidelines at the beginning of the year explaining their preventive care coverage.[76]

Evaluating Incremental Benefits of Preventive Care

Evaluating the incremental benefits of preventive care requires longer period of time when compared to acute ill patients. Inputs into the model such as, discounting rate and time horizon can have significant effects of the results. One controversial subject is use of 10-year time frame to assess cost effectiveness of diabetes preventive services by the Congressional Budget Office.[77]

The preventive care services mainly focuses on chronic disease,[78] the Congressional Budget Office has provided guidance that further research in the area of the economic impacts of obesity in the US before the CBO can estimate budgetary consequences. A bipartisan report published in May 2015, recognizes that the potential of the preventive care to improve patients health at individual and population levels while decreasing the healthcare expenditure.[79]

Read the original:
Preventive healthcare - Wikipedia

Read More...

Prevention of Measles, Rubella, Congenital Rubella …

November 18th, 2016 12:42 pm

Persons using assistive technology might not be able to fully access information in this file. For assistance, please send e-mail to: mmwrq@cdc.gov. Type 508 Accommodation and the title of the report in the subject line of e-mail.

Please note: An erratum has been published for this article. To view the erratum, please click here.

Huong Q. McLean, PhD1

Amy Parker Fiebelkorn, MSN2

Jonathan L. Temte, MD3

Gregory S. Wallace, MD2

1Marshfield Clinic Research Foundation, Marshfield, Wisconsin

2Division of Viral Diseases, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, CDC

3School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin

Corresponding preparer: Amy Parker Fiebelkorn, MSN, Division of Viral Diseases, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, CDC. Telephone: 404-639-8235; E-mail: aparker@cdc.gov.

Summary

This report is a compendium of all current recommendations for the prevention of measles, rubella, congenital rubella syndrome (CRS), and mumps. The report presents the recent revisions adopted by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) on October 24, 2012, and also summarizes all existing ACIP recommendations that have been published previously during 19982011 (CDC. Measles, mumps, and rubellavaccine use and strategies for elimination of measles, rubella, and congenital rubella syndrome and control of mumps: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices [ACIP]. MMWR 1998;47[No. RR-8]; CDC. Revised ACIP recommendation for avoiding pregnancy after receiving a rubella-containing vaccine. MMWR 2001;50:1117; CDC. Updated recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices [ACIP] for the control and elimination of mumps. MMWR 2006;55:62930; and, CDC. Immunization of health-care personnel: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). MMWR 2011;60[No. RR-7]).Currently, ACIP recommends 2 doses of MMR vaccine routinely for children with the first dose administered at age 12 through 15 months and the second dose administered at age 4 through 6 years before school entry. Two doses are recommended for adults at high risk for exposure and transmission (e.g., students attending colleges or other post-high school educational institutions, health-care personnel, and international travelers) and 1 dose for other adults aged 18 years. For prevention of rubella, 1 dose of MMR vaccine is recommended for persons aged 12 months.

At the October 24, 2012 meeting, ACIP adopted the following revisions, which are published here for the first time. These included:

As a compendium of all current recommendations for the prevention of measles, rubella, congenital rubella syndrome (CRS), and mumps, the information in this report is intended for use by clinicians as baseline guidance for scheduling of vaccinations for these conditions and considerations regarding vaccination of special populations. ACIP recommendations are reviewed periodically and are revised as indicated when new information becomes available.

Measles, rubella, and mumps are acute viral diseases that can cause serious disease and complications of disease but can be prevented with vaccination. Vaccines for prevention of measles, rubella, and mumps were licensed and recommended for use in the United States in the 1960s and 1970s. Because of successful vaccination programs, measles, rubella, congenital rubella syndrome (CRS), and mumps are now uncommon in the United States. However, recent outbreaks of measles (1) and mumps (2,3) have occurred from import-associated cases because these diseases are common in many other countries. Persons who are unvaccinated put themselves and others at risk for these diseases and related complications.

Two live attenuated vaccines are licensed and available in the United States to prevent measles, mumps, and rubella: MMR vaccine (measles, mumps, and rubella [M-M-R II, Merck & Co., Inc.]), which is indicated routinely for persons aged 12 months and infants aged 6 months who are traveling internationally and MMRV vaccine (measles, mumps, rubella, and varicella [ProQuad, Merck & Co., Inc.]) licensed for children aged 12 months through 12 years. For the purposes of this report, MMR vaccine will be used as a general term for measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination; however, age-appropriate use of either licensed vaccine formulation can be used to implement these vaccination recommendations.

For the prevention of measles, mumps, and rubella, vaccination is recommended for persons aged 12 months. For the prevention of measles and mumps, ACIP recommends 2 doses of MMR vaccine routinely for children with the first dose administered at age 12 through 15 months and the second dose administered at age 4 through 6 years before school entry. Two doses are recommended for adults at high risk for exposure and transmission (e.g., students attending colleges or other post-high school educational institutions, health-care personnel, and international travelers) and 1 dose for other adults aged 18 years. For prevention of rubella, 1 dose of MMR vaccine is recommended for persons aged 12 months. This report is a compendium of all current recommendations for the prevention of measles, rubella, congenital rubella syndrome (CRS), and mumps. The report presents the recent revisions adopted by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) on October 24, 2012, and also summarizes all existing ACIP recommendations that have been published previously during 19982011 (46). As a compendium of all current ACIP recommendations, the information in this report is intended for use by clinicians as guidance for scheduling of vaccinations for these conditions and considerations regarding vaccination of special populations.

Periodically, ACIP reviews available information to inform the development or revision of its vaccine recommendations. In May 2011, the ACIP measles, rubella, and mumps work group was formed to review and revise previously published vaccine recommendations. The work group held teleconference meetings monthly from May 2011 through October 2012. In addition to ACIP members, the work group included participants from the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP), the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), the American College Health Association, the Association of Immunization Managers, CDC, the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the National Advisory Committee on Immunization (Canada), the National Institute of Health (NIH), and other infectious disease experts (7).*

Issues reviewed and considered by the work group included epidemiology of measles, rubella, CRS, and mumps in the United States; use of MMR vaccine among persons with HIV infection, specifically, revaccination of persons with perinatal HIV infection who were vaccinated before effective antiretroviral therapy (ART); use of a third dose of MMR vaccine for mumps outbreak control; timing of vaccine doses; use of immune globulin (IG) for measles postexposure prophylaxis; and vaccine safety. Recommendation options were developed and discussed by the work group. When evidence was lacking, the recommendations incorporated expert opinion of the work group members. Proposed revisions and a draft statement were presented to ACIP (ACIP meeting October 2011; February and June 2012) and approved at the October 2012 ACIP meeting. ACIP meeting minutes, including declaration of ACIP member conflicts of interest, if any, are available at http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/meetings-info.html.

Measles (rubeola) is classified as a member of the genus Morbillivirus in the family Paramyxoviridae. Measles is a highly contagious rash illness that is transmitted from person to person by direct contact with respiratory droplets or airborne spread. After exposure, up to 90% of susceptible persons develop measles. The average incubation period for measles is 10 to 12 days from exposure to prodrome and 14 days from exposure to rash (range: 721 days). Persons with measles are infectious 4 days before through 4 days after rash onset. In the United States, from 1987 to 2000, the most commonly reported complications associated with measles infection were pneumonia (6%), otitis media (7%), and diarrhea (8%) (8). For every 1,000 reported measles cases in the United States, approximately one case of encephalitis and two to three deaths resulted (911). The risk for death from measles or its complications is greater for infants, young children, and adults than for older children and adolescents. In low to middle income countries where malnutrition is common, measles is often more severe and the case-fatality ratio can be as high as 25% (12). In addition, measles can be severe and prolonged among immunocompromised persons, particularly those who have leukemias, lymphomas, or HIV infection (1315). Among these persons, measles can occur without the typical rash and a patient can shed measles virus for several weeks after the acute illness (1618). However, a fatal measles case without rash also has been reported in an apparently immunocompetent person (19).

Pregnant women also might be at high risk for severe measles and complications; however, available evidence does not support an association between measles in pregnancy and congenital defects (20). Measles illness in pregnancy might be associated with increased rates of spontaneous abortion, premature labor and preterm delivery, and low birthweight among affected infants (2023).

A persistent measles virus infection can result in subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (SSPE), a rare and usually fatal neurologic degenerative disease. The risk for developing SSPE is 411 per 100,000 measles cases (24,25), but can be higher when measles occurs among children aged <2 years (25,26). Signs and symptoms of SSPE appear an average of 7 years after measles infection, but might appear decades later (27). Widespread use of measles vaccine has led to the virtual disappearance of SSPE in the United States, but imported cases still occur (28). Available epidemiologic and virologic data indicate that measles vaccine virus does not cause SSPE (27). Wild type measles virus nucleotide sequences have been detected consistently from persons with SSPE who have reported vaccination and no history of natural infection (24,2934).

Before implementation of the national measles vaccination program in 1963, measles occurred in epidemic cycles and virtually every person acquired measles before adulthood (an estimated 3 to 4 million persons acquired measles each year). Approximately 500,000 persons with measles were reported each year in the United States, of whom 500 persons died, 48,000 were hospitalized, and another 1,000 had permanent brain damage from measles encephalitis (28).

After the introduction of the 1-dose measles vaccination program, the number of reported measles cases decreased during the late 1960s and early 1970s to approximately 22,00075,000 cases per year (Figure 1) (35,36). Although measles incidence decreased substantially in all age groups, the greatest decrease occurred among children aged <10 years. During 1984 through 1988, an average of 3,750 cases was reported each year (37). However, measles outbreaks among school-aged children who had received 1 dose of measles vaccine prompted ACIP in 1989 to recommend that all children receive 2 doses of measles-containing vaccine, preferably as MMR vaccine (38,39). The second dose of measles-containing vaccine primarily was intended to induce immunity in the small percentage of persons who did not seroconvert after vaccination with the first dose of vaccine (primary vaccine failure).

During 1989 through 1991, a major resurgence of measles occurred in the United States. Approximately 55,000 cases and 120 measles-related deaths were reported. The resurgence was characterized by an increasing proportion of cases among unvaccinated preschool-aged children, particularly among those residing in urban areas (40,41). Efforts to increase vaccination coverage among preschool-aged children emphasized vaccination as close to the recommended age as possible. To improve access to ACIP-recommended vaccines, the Vaccines for Children program, a federally funded program that provides vaccines at no cost to eligible persons aged <19 years, was initiated in 1993 (42).

These efforts, combined with ongoing implementation of the 2-dose MMR vaccine recommendation, reduced reported measles cases to 309 in 1995 (43). During 1993, both epidemiologic and laboratory evidence suggested that transmission of indigenous measles had been interrupted in the United States (44,45).

The recommended measles vaccination schedule changed as knowledge of measles immunity increased and as the epidemiology of measles evolved within the United States. The recommended age for vaccination was 9 months in 1963, 12 months in 1965, and 15 months in 1967. In 1989, because of reported measles outbreaks among vaccinated school-aged children, ACIP and AAFP recommended 2 doses; with the first dose at age 15 months and the second dose at age 4 through 6 years, before school entry. In contrast, AAP had recommended administration of the second dose before middle school entry because outbreaks were occurring in older children, and to help reinforce the adolescent doctor's visit and counteract possible secondary vaccine failure (46). Since 1994, ages recommended by ACIP, AAFP, and AAP have been the same for the 2-dose MMR vaccine schedule; the first dose should be given to children aged 12 through 15 months and the second dose should be given to children aged 4 through 6 years (47).

Because of the success of the measles vaccination program in achieving and maintaining high 1-dose MMR vaccine coverage in preschool-aged children, high 2-dose MMR vaccine coverage in school-aged children, and improved measles control in the World Health Organization (WHO) Region of the Americas, measles was documented and verified as eliminated from the United States in 2000 (48). Elimination is defined as the absence of endemic transmission (i.e., interruption of continuous transmission lasting 12 months). In 2002, measles was declared eliminated from the WHO Region of the Americas (49).

Documenting and verifying the interruption of endemic transmission of the measles and rubella viruses in the Americas is ongoing in accordance with the Pan American Health Organization mandate of 2007 (http://www.paho.org/english/gov/csp/csp27.r2-e.pdf). An expert panel reviewed available data and unanimously agreed in December 2011 that measles elimination has been maintained in the United States (50,51). However, measles cases associated with importation of the virus from other countries continue to occur. From 2001 through 2011, a median of 63 measles cases (range: 37220) and four outbreaks, defined as three or more cases linked in time or place (range: 217), were reported each year in the United States. Of the 911 cases, a total of 372 (41%) cases were importations, 804 (88%) were associated with importations, and 225 (25%) involved hospitalization. Two deaths were reported. Among the 162 cases reported from 2004 through 2008 among unvaccinated U.S. residents eligible for vaccination, a total of 110 (68%) were known to have occurred in persons who declined vaccination because of a philosophical, religious, or personal objection (52).

Rubella (German measles) is classified as a Rubivirus in the Togaviridae family. Rubella is an illness transmitted through direct or droplet contact from nasopharyngeal secretions and is characterized by rash, low-grade fever, lymphadenopathy, and malaise. Symptoms are often mild and up to 50% of rubella infections are subclinical (53,54). However, among adults infected with rubella, transient arthralgia or arthritis occurs frequently, particularly among women (55). Other complications occur infrequently; thrombocytopenic purpura occurs in approximately one out of 3,000 cases and is more likely to involve children (56), and encephalitis occurs in approximately one out of 6,000 cases and is more likely to involve adults (57,58).

Rubella infection in pregnant women, especially during the first trimester, can result in miscarriages, stillbirths, and CRS, a constellation of birth defects that often includes cataracts, hearing loss, mental retardation, and congenital heart defects. In addition, infants with CRS frequently exhibit both intrauterine and postnatal growth retardation. Infants who are moderately or severely affected by CRS are readily recognizable at birth, but mild CRS (e.g., slight cardiac involvement or deafness) might not be detected for months or years after birth or not at all. The risk for congenital infection and defects is highest during the first 12 weeks of gestation (5962), and the risk for any defect decreases after the 12th week of gestation. Defects are rare when infection occurs after the 20th week (63). Subclinical maternal rubella infection also can cause congenital malformations. Fetal infection without clinical signs of CRS can occur during any stage of pregnancy.

Rubella reinfection can occur and has been reported after both wild type rubella infection and after receiving 1 dose of rubella vaccine. Asymptomatic maternal reinfection in pregnancy has been considered to present minimal risk to the fetus (congenital infection in <10%) (64), but several isolated reports have been made of fetal infection and CRS among infants born to mothers who had documented serologic evidence of rubella immunity before they became pregnant and had reinfection during the first 12 weeks of gestation (6468). CRS was not reported when reinfection occurred after 12 weeks gestation (6971).

Before licensure of live, attenuated rubella vaccines in the United States in 1969, rubella was common, and epidemics occurred every 6 to 9 years (72). Most rubella cases were among young children, with peak incidence among children aged 5 through 9 years (73). During the 1964 through 1965 rubella epidemic, an estimated 12.5 million rubella cases occurred in the United States, resulting in approximately 2,000 cases of encephalitis, 11,250 fetal deaths attributable to spontaneous or therapeutic abortions, 2,100 infants who were stillborn or died soon after birth, and 20,000 infants born with CRS (74).

After introduction of rubella vaccines in the United States in 1969, reported rubella cases declined 78%, from 57,686 in 1969 to 12,491 in 1976, and reported CRS cases declined by 69%, from 68 in 1970 to 23 in 1976 (Figure 2) (73). Rubella incidence declined in all age groups, but children aged <15 years experienced the greatest decline. Despite the declines, rubella outbreaks continued to occur among older adolescents and young adults and in settings where unvaccinated adults congregated. In 1977 and 1984, ACIP modified its recommendations to include vaccination of susceptible postpubertal females, adolescents, persons in military service, college students, and persons in certain work settings (75,76). The number of reported rubella cases decreased from 20,395 in 1977 to 225 in 1988, and CRS cases decreased from 29 in 1977 to 2 in 1988 (77).

During 1989 through 1991, a resurgence of rubella occurred, primarily because of outbreaks among unvaccinated adolescents and young adults who initially were not recommended for vaccination and in religious communities with low rubella vaccination coverage (77). As a result of the rubella outbreaks, two clusters of approximately 20 CRS cases occurred (78,79). Outbreaks during the mid-1990s occurred in settings where young adults congregated and involved unvaccinated persons who belonged to specific racial/ethnic groups (80). Further declines occurred as rubella vaccination efforts increased in other countries in the WHO Region of the Americas. From 2001 through 2004, reported rubella and CRS cases were at an all-time low, with an average of 14 reported rubella cases a year, four CRS cases, and one rubella outbreak (defined as three or more cases linked in time or place) (81).

In 2004, a panel convened by CDC reviewed available data and verified elimination of rubella in the United States (82). Rubella elimination is defined as the absence of endemic rubella transmission (i.e., continuous transmission lasting 12 months). From 2005 through 2011, a median of 11 rubella cases was reported each year in the United States (range: 418). In addition, two rubella outbreaks involving three cases, as well as four total CRS cases, were reported. Among the 67 rubella cases reported from 2005 through 2011, a total of 28 (42%) cases were known importations (83; CDC, unpublished data, 2012).

In 2010, on the basis of surveillance data, the Pan American Health Organization indicated that the WHO Region of the Americas had achieved the rubella and CRS elimination goals set in 2003 (84). Verification of maintenance of rubella elimination in the region is ongoing. However, an expert panel reviewed available data and unanimously agreed in December 2011 that rubella elimination has been maintained in the United States (50,51).

Mumps virus is a member of the genus Rubulavirus in the Paramyxoviridae family. Mumps is an acute viral infection characterized by fever and inflammation of the salivary glands. Parotitis is the most common manifestation, with onset an average of 16 to 18 days after exposure (range: 1225 days). In some studies, mumps symptoms were described as nonspecific or primarily respiratory; however, these reports based findings on serologic results taken every 6 or 12 months, making it difficult to prove whether the respiratory tract symptoms were caused by mumps virus infection or if the symptoms happened to occur at the same time as the mumps infection (85,86). In other studies conducted during the prevaccine era, 15%27% of infections were described as asymptomatic (85,87,88). In the vaccine era, it is difficult to estimate the number of asymptomatic infections because the way vaccine modifies clinical presentation is unclear and only clinical cases with parotitis, other salivary gland involvement, or mumps-related complications are notifiable. Serious complications can occur in the absence of parotitis (89,90). Results from an outbreak from 2009 through 2010 indicated that complications are lower in vaccinated patients than with unvaccinated patients (6); however, during an outbreak in 2006, vaccination status was not significantly associated with complications (91). Persons with mumps are most infectious around the time of parotitis onset (92). Complications of mumps infection can vary with age and sex.

In the prevaccine era, orchitis was reported in 12%66% of postpubertal males infected with mumps (93,94), compared with U.S. outbreaks in 2006 and 2009 through 2010 in the vaccine era, during which the range of rates of orchitis among postpubertal males was 3%10% (91,95,96). In 60%83% of males with mumps orchitis, only one testis is affected (87,90). Sterility from mumps orchitis, even bilateral orchitis, occurs infrequently (93).

In the prevaccine era among postpubertal women, oophoritis was reported in approximately 5% of postpubertal females affected with mumps (97,98). Mastitis was included in case reports (99,100) but also was described in a 19561957 outbreak as affecting 31% of postpubertal females (87). A significant association between prepubescent mumps in females and infertility has been reported; it has been suggested that oophoritis might have resulted in a disturbance of follicular maturation (101). In the vaccine era, among postpubertal females, the range of oophoritis rates was 1% (91,95,96) and the range of mastitis rates was 1% (91,95,96).

In the prevaccine era, pancreatitis was reported in 4% of 342 persons infected with mumps in one community during a 2-year period (85) and was described in case reports (102,103). Mumps also was a major cause of hearing loss among children in the prevaccine era, which could be sudden in onset, bilateral, or permanent hearing loss (104106). In the prevaccine era, clinical aseptic meningitis occurred in 0.02%10% of mumps cases and typically was mild (85,88,107109). However, in exceedingly rare cases, mumps meningoencephalitis can cause permanent sequelae, including severe ataxia (110). The incidence of mumps encephalitis ranged from one in 6,000 mumps cases (0.02%) (107) to one in 300 mumps cases (0.3%) in the prevaccine era (111). In the vaccine era, reported rates of pancreatitis, deafness, meningitis, and encephalitis were all <1% (91,95,96).

The average annual rate of hospitalization resulting from mumps during World War I was 55.8 per 1,000, which was exceeded only by the rates for influenza and gonorrhea (112). Mumps was a major cause of viral encephalitis, accounting for approximately 36% of encephalitis cases in 1967 (111). Death from mumps is exceedingly rare and is primarily caused by mumps-associated encephalitis (111). In the United States, from 1966 through 1971, two deaths occurred per 10,000 reported mumps cases (111). Among vaccinated persons, severe complications of mumps are uncommon but occur more frequently among adults than children. No mumps-related deaths were reported in the 2006 or the 20092010 U.S. outbreaks (91,95,96).

Among pregnant women with mumps during the first trimester, an increased rate of spontaneous abortion or intrauterine fetal death has been observed in some studies; however, no evidence indicates that mumps causes birth defects (87,113116).

Before the introduction of vaccine in 1967, mumps was a universal disease of childhood. Most children were infected by age 14 years, with peak incidence among children aged 5 through 9 years (117,118). Outbreaks among the military were common, especially during times of mobilization (119,120).

Reported cases of mumps decreased steadily after the introduction of live mumps vaccine in 1967 and the recommendation in 1977 for routine vaccination (Figure 3) (121). However, from 1986 through 1987, a resurgence of mumps occurred when a cohort not targeted for vaccination and spared from natural infection by declining disease rates entered high school and college, resulting in 20,638 reported cases (122,123). By the early 2000s, on average, fewer than 270 cases were reported annually; a decrease of approximately 99% from the 152,209 cases reported in 1968, and seasonal peaks were no longer present (124). In 2006, an outbreak of 6,584 cases occurred and was centered among highly 2-dose vaccinated college students in the Midwestern United States (91). Children began receiving 2 doses of mumps vaccine after implementation of a 2-dose measles vaccination policy using MMR vaccine in 1989 (39). Nonetheless, ACIP specified in 2006 that all children and adults in certain high risk groups, including students at post-high school educational institutions, health-care personnel, and international travelers, should receive 2 doses of mumps-containing vaccine (3). From 2009 through 2010, mumps outbreaks occurred in a religious community in the Northeastern United States with approximately 3,500 cases and in the U.S. territory of Guam with 505 cases reported. Similar to the 2006 mumps outbreak, most patients had received 2 doses of MMR vaccine and were exposed in densely congregate settings (88,94). In 2011, a university campus in California reported 29 cases of mumps, of which 22 (76%) occurred among persons previously vaccinated with the recommended 2 doses of MMR vaccine (5).

Two combination vaccines are licensed and available in the United States to prevent measles, rubella, and mumps: trivalent MMR vaccine (measles-mumps-rubella [M-M-R II, Merck & Co., Inc.]) and quadrivalent MMRV vaccine (measles-mumps-rubella-varicella [ProQuad, Merck & Co., Inc.]). The efficacy and effectiveness of each component of the MMR vaccine is described below. MMRV vaccine was licensed on the basis of noninferior immunogenicity of the antigenic components compared with simultaneous administration of MMR vaccine and varicella vaccine (125). Formal studies to evaluate the clinical efficacy of MMRV vaccine have not been performed; efficacy of MMRV vaccine was inferred from that of MMR vaccine and varicella vaccine on the basis of noninferior immunogenicity (126). Monovalent measles, rubella, and mumps vaccines and other vaccine combinations are no longer commercially available in the United States.

The measles component of the combination vaccines that are currently distributed in the United States was licensed in 1968 and contains the live Enders-Edmonston (formerly called "Moraten") vaccine strain. Enders-Edmonston vaccine strain is a further attenuated preparation of a previous vaccine strain (Edmonston B) that is grown in chick embryo cell culture. Because of increased efficacy and fewer adverse reactions, the vaccine containing the Enders-Edmonston vaccine strain replaced previous vaccines: inactivated Edmonston vaccine (available in the United States from 1963 through 1976), live attenuated vaccines containing the Edmonston B (available in the United States from 1963 through 1975), and Schwarz strain (available in the United States from 1965 through 1976).

Measles-containing vaccines produce a subclinical or mild, noncommunicable infection inducing both humoral and cellular immunity. Antibodies develop among approximately 96% of children vaccinated at age 12 months with a single dose of the Enders-Edmonston vaccine strain (Table 1) (127134). Almost all persons who do not respond to the measles component of the first dose of MMR vaccine at age 12 months respond to the second dose (135,136).

Data on early measles vaccination suggest that infants vaccinated at age 6 months might have an age-related delay in maturation of humoral immune response to measles vaccine, unrelated to passively transferred maternal antibody, compared with infants vaccinated at age 9 or 12 months (137,138). However, markers of cell-mediated immune response to measles vaccine were equivalent when infants were vaccinated at age 6, 9, and 12 months, regardless of presence of passive antibodies (139).

Although the cell-mediated immune response to the first dose of measles vaccine alone might not be protective, it might prime the humoral response to the second dose (140). Data indicate that revaccination of children first vaccinated as early as age 6 months will result in vaccine-induced immunity, although the response might be associated with a lower antibody titer than titers of children vaccinated at age 9 or 12 months (139).

One dose of measles-containing vaccine administered at age 12 months was approximately 94% effective in preventing measles (range: 39%98%) in studies conducted in the WHO Region of the Americas (141,142). Measles outbreaks among populations that have received 2 doses of measles-containing vaccine are uncommon. The effectiveness of 2 doses of measles-containing vaccine was 99% in two studies conducted in the United States and 67%, 85%94%, and 100% in three studies in Canada (142146). The range in 2-dose vaccine effectiveness in the Canadian studies can be attributed to extremely small numbers (i.e., in the study with a 2-dose vaccine effectiveness of 67%, one 2-dose vaccinated person with measles and one unvaccinated person with measles were reported [145]). This range of effectiveness also can be attributed to age at vaccination (i.e., the 85% vaccine effectiveness represented children vaccinated at age 12 months, whereas the 94% vaccine effectiveness represented children vaccinated at age 15 months [146]). Furthermore, two studies found the incremental effectiveness of 2 doses was 89% and 94%, compared with 1 dose of measles-containing vaccine (145,147). Similar estimates of vaccine effectiveness have been reported from Australia and Europe (Table 1) (141).

Both serologic and epidemiologic evidence indicate that measles-containing vaccines induce long lasting immunity in most persons (148). Approximately 95% of vaccinated persons examined 11 years after initial vaccination and 15 years after the second dose of MMR (containing the Enders-Edmonston strain) vaccine had detectable antibodies to measles (149152). In one study among 25 age-appropriately vaccinated children aged 4 through 6 years who had both low-level neutralizing antibodies and specific IgG antibodies by EIA before revaccination with MMR vaccine, 21 (84%) developed an anamnestic immune response upon revaccination; none developed IgM antibodies, indicating some level of immunity persisted (153).

The rubella component of the combination vaccines that are currently distributed in the United States was licensed in 1979 and contains the live Wistar RA 27/3 vaccine strain. The vaccine is prepared in human diploid cell culture and replaced previous vaccines (HPV-77 and Cendehill) because it induces a higher and more persistent antibody response and is associated with fewer adverse events (154158).

Rubella vaccination induces both humoral and cellular immunity. Approximately 95% of susceptible persons aged 12 months developed serologic evidence of immunity to rubella after vaccination with a single dose of rubella vaccine containing the RA 27/3 strain (Table 1) (127,154,157164). After a second dose of MMR vaccine, approximately 99% had detectable rubella antibody and approximately 60% had a fourfold increase in titer (165167).

Outbreaks of rubella in populations vaccinated with the rubella RA 27/3 vaccine strains are rare. Available studies demonstrate that vaccines containing the rubella RA 27/3 strain are approximately 97% effective in preventing clinical disease after a single dose (range: 94%100%) (Table 1) (168170).

Follow-up studies indicate that 1 dose of rubella vaccine can provide long lasting immunity. The majority of persons had detectable rubella antibodies up to 16 years after 1 dose of rubella-containing vaccine, but antibody levels decreased over time (165,171174). Although levels of vaccine-induced rubella antibodies might decrease over time, data from surveillance of rubella and CRS suggest that waning immunity with increased susceptibility to rubella disease does not occur. Among persons with 2 doses, approximately 91%100% had detectable antibodies 12 to 15 years after receiving the second dose (150,165).

The mumps component of the vaccine available in the United States contains the live attenuated mumps Jeryl-Lynn vaccine strain. It was developed using an isolate from a child with mumps and passaged in embryonated hens' eggs and chick embryo cell cultures (175). The vaccine produces a subclinical, noncommunicable infection with very few side effects.

Approximately 94% of infants and children develop detectable mumps antibodies after vaccination with MMR vaccine (range: 89%97%) (Table 1) (127,157,176184). However, vaccination induces relatively low levels of antibodies compared with natural infection (185,186). Among persons who received a second dose of MMR vaccine, most mounted a secondary immune response, approximately 50% had a fourfold increase in antibody titers, and the proportion with low or undetectable titers was significantly reduced from 20% before vaccination with a second dose to 4% at 6 months post vaccination (187189). Although antibody measurements are often used as a surrogate measure of immunity, no serologic tests are available for mumps that consistently and reliably predict immunity. The immune response to mumps vaccination probably involves both the humoral and cellular immune response, but no definitive correlates of protection have been identified.

Clinical studies conducted before vaccine licensure in approximately 7,000 children found a single dose of mumps vaccine to be approximately 95% effective in preventing mumps disease (186,190,191). However, vaccine effectiveness estimates have been lower in postlicensure studies. In the United States, mumps vaccine effectiveness has been estimated to be between 81% and 91% in junior high and high school settings (192197), and between 64% and 76% among household or close contacts for 1 dose of mumps-containing vaccine (196,198). Population and school-based studies conducted in Europe and Canada report comparable estimates for vaccine effectiveness (49%92%) (199210).

Fewer studies have been conducted to assess the effectiveness of 2 doses of mumps-containing vaccine. In the United States, outbreaks among populations with high 2-dose coverage found 2 doses of mumps-containing vaccine to be 80%92% effective in preventing clinical disease (198,211). In the 1988 through 1989 outbreak among junior high school students, the risk for mumps was five times higher for students who received 1 dose compared with students who received 2 doses (195). Population and school-based studies in Europe and Canada estimate 2 doses of mumps-containing vaccine to be 66%95% effective (Table 1) (201204,208210). Despite relatively high 2-dose vaccine effectiveness, high 2-dose vaccine coverage might not be sufficient to prevent all outbreaks (6,91,212).

Studies indicate that 1 dose of MMR vaccine can provide persistent antibodies to mumps. The majority of persons (70%99%) examined approximately 10 years after initial vaccination had detectable mumps antibodies (187189). In addition, 70% of adults who were vaccinated in childhood had T-lymphocyte immunity to mumps compared with 80% of adults who acquired natural infection in childhood (213). Similarly, in 2-dose recipients, mumps antibodies were detectable in the majority of persons (74%95%) followed over 12 years after receipt of a second dose of MMR vaccine, but antibody levels declined with time (150,187). Among vaccine recipients who do not have detectable mumps antibodies, mumps antigen-specific lymphoproliferative responses have been detected, but their role in protection against mumps disease is not clear (214,215).

For measles, evidence of the effectiveness of MMR or measles vaccine administered as postexposure prophylaxis is limited and mixed (216222). Effectiveness might depend on timing of vaccination and the nature of the exposure. If administered within 72 hours of initial measles exposure, MMR vaccine might provide some protection against infection or modify the clinical course of disease (216219,222).

Several published studies have compared attack rates among persons who received MMR or single antigen measles vaccine (without gamma globulin) as postexposure prophylaxis with those who remained unvaccinated after exposure to measles. Postexposure prophylaxis with MMR vaccine appears to be effective if the vaccine is administered within 3 days of exposure to measles in "limited" contact settings (e.g., schools, childcare, and medical offices) (218,222). Postexposure prophylaxis does not appear to be effective in settings with intense, prolonged, close contact, such as households and smaller childcare facilities, even when the dose is administered within 72 hours of rash onset, because persons in these settings are often exposed for long durations during the prodromal period when the index patient is infectious (219221). However, these household studies are limited by number of persons receiving post-exposure prophylaxis (i.e., less than 10 persons were given MMR vaccine as postexposure prophylaxis within 72 hours of rash onset in each of the cited studies) (219221). Revaccination within 72 hours of exposure of those who have received 1 dose before exposure also might prevent disease (223). For rubella and mumps, postexposure MMR vaccination has not been shown to prevent or alter the clinical severity of disease.

Data on use and effectiveness of a third dose of MMR vaccine for mumps outbreak control are limited. A study among a small number of seronegative college students who had 2 documented doses of MMR vaccine demonstrated that a third dose of MMR vaccine resulted in a rapid mumps virus IgG response. Of 17 participants, a total of 14 (82%) were IgG positive at 710 days after revaccination, suggesting that previously vaccinated persons administered a third dose of MMR vaccine had the capacity to mount a rapid anamnestic immune response that could possibly boost immunity to protective levels (224). In 2010, in collaboration with local health departments, CDC conducted two Institutional Review Board (IRB)-approved studies to evaluate the effect of a third dose of MMR vaccine during mumps outbreaks in highly vaccinated populations in Orange County, New York (>94% 2-dose coverage among 2,688 students attending private school in grades 6 through12) and Guam (95% 2-dose coverage among 3,364 students attending public primary and middle school in grades 4 through 8).

In Orange County, New York, a total of 1,755 (81%) eligible students in grades 6 through 12 (ages 11 through 17 years) in three schools received a third dose of MMR vaccine as part of the study (95). Overall attack rates declined 76% in the village after the intervention, with the greatest decline among those aged 11 through 17 years targeted for vaccination (with a significant decline of 96% postintervention compared with preintervention). The 96% decline in attack rates in this age group was significantly greater than the declines in other age groups that did not receive the third dose intervention (95). However, the intervention was conducted after the outbreak started to decline. Because of the high rate of vaccine uptake and small number of cases observed in the 2242 days after vaccination, the study could not directly evaluate the effectiveness of a third dose.

During a mumps outbreak in Guam in 2010, a total of 3,239 eligible children aged 9 through 14 years in seven schools were offered a third dose of MMR vaccine (96). Of the eligible children, 1,067 (33%) received a third dose of MMR vaccine. More than one incubation period after the third dose intervention, students who had 3 doses of MMR vaccine had a 2.6-fold lower mumps attack rate compared with students who had 2 doses of MMR vaccine (0.9 per 1,000 versus 2.4 per 1,000), but the difference was not statistically significant (Relative Risk [RR] = 0.40, 95% Confidence interval [CI] = 0.053.4, p = 0.67). The intervention was conducted after the outbreak started to decline and during the week before the end of the school year, which limited the ability to evaluate effectiveness of the intervention.

Data are insufficient to recommend for or against the use of a third dose of MMR vaccine for mumps outbreak control. CDC has issued guidance for consideration for use of a third dose in specifically identified target populations along with criteria for public health departments to consider for decision making (http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/surv-manual/chpt09-mumps.html).

Before the availability of effective ART, responses to MMR vaccine among persons with HIV infection were suboptimal. Although response to revaccination varied, it generally was poor (225,226). In addition, measles antibodies appear to decline more rapidly in children with HIV infection than in children without HIV infection (227,228).

Memory B cell counts and function appear to be normal in HIV-infected children who are started on effective ART early (aged <1 year), and responses to measles and rubella vaccination appear to be adequate. Measles antibody titers were higher in HIV-infected children who started effective ART early compared with HIV-infected children who started effective ART later in life (229). Likewise, vaccinated HIV-infected children who initiated effective ART before vaccination had rubella antibody responses similar to those observed in HIV-uninfected children (230).

Despite evidence of immune reconstitution, effective ART does not appear to reliably restore immunity from previous vaccinations. Perinatally HIV-infected youth who received MMR vaccine before effective ART might have increased susceptibility to measles, mumps, and rubella compared with HIV-exposed but uninfected persons. Approximately 45%65% of previously vaccinated HIV-infected children had detectable antibodies to measles after initiation of effective ART, 55%80% had detectable antibodies to rubella, and 52%59% had detectable antibodies to mumps (231235). However, revaccination with MMR vaccine after initiation of effective ART increased the proportion of HIV-infected children with detectable antibodies to measles, rubella, and mumps (64%90% for measles, 80%100% for rubella, and 78% for mumps) (230,234,236240). Although, data on duration of response to revaccination on effective ART are limited, the majority of children had detectable antibodies to measles (73%85%), rubella (79%), and mumps (61%) 14 years after revaccination (234,238,240).

The lyophilized live MMR vaccine and MMRV vaccine should be reconstituted and administered as recommended by the manufacturer (241,242). Both vaccines available in the United States should be administered subcutaneously. Although both vaccines must be protected from light, which might inactivate the vaccine viruses, the two vaccines have different storage requirements (Table 2). Administration of improperly stored vaccine might fail to provide protection against disease. The diluent can be stored in the refrigerator or at room temperature but should not be allowed to freeze.

MMR vaccine is supplied in lyophilized form and must be stored at 50C to 8C (58F to 46F) and protected from light at all times. The vaccine in the lyophilized form can be stored in the freezer. Reconstituted MMR vaccine should be used immediately or stored in a dark place at 2C to 8C (36F to 46F) for up to 8 hours and should not be frozen or exposed to freezing temperatures (241).

MMRV vaccine is supplied in a lyophilized frozen form that should be stored at 50C to -15C (58F to 5F) in a reliable freezer. Reconstituted vaccine can be stored at room temperature between 20C to 25C (68F to 77F), protected from light for up to 30 minutes. Reconstituted MMRV vaccine must be discarded if not used within 30 minutes and should not be frozen (242).

Before administering MMR or MMRV vaccine, providers should consult the package insert for precautions, warnings, and contraindications (241,242).

Contraindications for MMR and MMRV vaccines include history of anaphylactic reactions to neomycin, history of severe allergic reaction to any component of the vaccine, pregnancy, and immunosuppression.

History of anaphylactic reactions to neomycin. MMR and MMRV vaccine contain trace amounts of neomycin; therefore, persons who have experienced anaphylactic reactions to topically or systemically administered neomycin should not receive these vaccines. However, neomycin allergy usually manifests as a delayed type or cell-mediated immune response (i.e., a contact dermatitis) rather than as anaphylaxis. In persons who have such sensitivity, the adverse reaction to the neomycin in the vaccine is an erythematous, pruritic nodule or papule appearing 4872 hours after vaccination (243). A history of contact dermatitis to neomycin is not a contraindication to receiving MMR-containing vaccine.

History of severe allergic reaction to any component of the vaccine. MMR and MMRV vaccine should not be administered to persons who have experienced severe allergic reactions to a previous dose of measles-, mumps-, rubella-, or varicella (for MMRV vaccine)-containing vaccine or to a vaccine component. Although measles and mumps components of the vaccine are grown in chick embryo fibroblast tissue culture, allergy to egg is not a contraindication to vaccination. Among persons who are allergic to eggs, the risk for serious allergic reactions, such as anaphylaxis after administration of MMR vaccine, is exceedingly low (i.e., at least 99% of children with challenge-proved egg allergy can receive this vaccine in one subcutaneous dose without severe anaphylactic reactions [CI = 99%100%]) (244). Skin testing with vaccine is not predictive of allergic reaction to vaccination (244246). Therefore, skin testing is not required before administering MMR or MMRV vaccines to persons who are allergic to eggs. The rare serious allergic reactions after measles or mumps vaccination or MMR vaccination are not believed to be caused by egg antigens, but by other components of the vaccine (247249)

Pregnancy. MMR vaccines should not be administered to women known to be pregnant or attempting to become pregnant. Because of the theoretical risk to the fetus when the mother receives a live virus vaccine, women should be counseled to avoid becoming pregnant for 28 days after receipt of MMR vaccine (2). If the vaccine is inadvertently administered to a pregnant woman or a pregnancy occurs within 28 days of vaccination, she should be counseled about the theoretical risk to the fetus. The theoretical maximum risk for CRS after the administration of rubella RA 27/3 vaccine on the basis of the 95% CI of the binomial distribution with 144 observations in one study was estimated to be 2.6%, and the observed risk was 0% (250). Other reports have documented no cases of CRS among approximately 1,000 live-born infants of susceptible women who were vaccinated inadvertently with the rubella RA 27/3 vaccine while pregnant or just before conception (251257). Of these, approximately 100 women were known to be vaccinated within 1 week before to 4 weeks after conception (251,252), the period presumed to be the highest risk for viremia and fetal malformations. These figures are considerably lower than the 20% risk associated with wild rubella virus infection of mothers during the first trimester of pregnancy with wild rubella virus or the risk for non-CRS-induced congenital defects in pregnancy (250). Thus, MMR vaccination during pregnancy should not be considered an indication for termination of pregnancy.

MMR vaccine can be administered safely to children or other persons without evidence of immunity to measles, mumps, or rubella and who have pregnant household contacts to help protect these pregnant women from exposure to wild rubella virus. No reports of transmission of measles or mumps vaccine virus exist from vaccine recipients to susceptible contacts; although small amounts of rubella vaccine virus are detected in the noses or throats of most rubella susceptible persons 7 to 28 days post-vaccination, no documented confirmed cases of transmission of rubella vaccine virus have been reported.

Immunosuppression. MMR and MMRV vaccine should not be administered to 1) persons with primary or acquired immunodeficiency, including persons with immunosuppression associated with cellular immunodeficiencies, hypogammaglobulinemia, dysgammaglobulinemia and AIDS or severe immunosuppression associated with HIV infection; 2) persons with blood dyscrasias, leukemia, lymphomas of any type, or other malignant neoplasms affecting the bone marrow or lymphatic system; 3) persons who have a family history of congenital or hereditary immunodeficiency in first-degree relatives (e.g., parents and siblings), unless the immune competence of the potential vaccine recipient has been substantiated clinically or verified by a laboratory; or 4) persons receiving systemic immunosuppressive therapy, including corticosteroids 2 mg/kg of body weight or 20 mg/day of prednisone or equivalent for persons who weigh >10 kg, when administered for 2 weeks (258). Persons with HIV infection who do not have severe immunosuppression should receive MMR vaccine, but not MMRV vaccine (see subsection titled Persons with HIV Infection). Measles inclusion body encephalitis has been reported after administration of MMR vaccine to immunosuppressed persons, as well as after natural measles infection with wild type virus (see section titled Safety of MMR and MMRV Vaccines) (259261).

Precautions for MMR and MMRV vaccines include recent (11 months) receipt of an antibody-containing blood product, concurrent moderate or severe illness with or without fever, history of thrombocytopenia or thrombocytopenic purpura, and tuberculin skin testing. If a tuberculin test is to be performed, it should be administered either any time before, simultaneously with, or at least 46 weeks after administration of MMR or MMRV vaccine. An additional precaution for MMRV vaccine includes persons with a personal or family history of seizures of any etiology.

Recent (11 months) receipt of antibody-containing blood product. Receipt of antibody-containing blood products (e.g., IG, whole blood, or packed red blood cells) might interfere with the serologic response to measles and rubella vaccine for variable periods, depending on the dose of IG administered (262). The effect of IG-containing preparations on the response to mumps vaccine is unknown.

MMR vaccine should be administered to persons who have received an IG preparation only after the recommended intervals have elapsed (258). However, postpartum administration of MMR vaccine to women who lack presumptive evidence of immunity to rubella should not be delayed because anti-Rho(D) IG (human) or any other blood product were received during the last trimester of pregnancy or at delivery. These women should be vaccinated immediately after delivery and tested at least 3 months later to ensure that they have presumptive evidence of immunity to rubella and measles.

Moderate or severe illness with or without fever. Vaccination of persons with concurrent moderate or severe illness, including untreated, active tuberculosis, should be deferred until they have recovered. This precaution avoids superimposing any adverse effects of the vaccine on the underlying illness or mistakenly attributing a manifestation of the underlying illness to the vaccine. The decision to vaccinate or postpone vaccination depends largely on the cause of the illness and the severity of symptoms. MMR vaccine can be administered to children who have mild illness, with or without low-grade fever, including mild upper respiratory infections, diarrhea, and otitis media. Data indicate that seroconversion is not affected by concurrent or recent mild illness (263265). Physicians should be alert to the vaccine-associated temperature elevations that might occur predominately in the second week after vaccination, especially with the first dose of MMRV vaccine.

Persons being treated for tuberculosis have not experienced exacerbations of the disease when vaccinated with MMR vaccine. Although no studies have been reported concerning the effect of MMR or MMRV vaccines on persons with untreated tuberculosis, a theoretical basis exists for concern that measles vaccine might exacerbate tuberculosis. Consequently, before administering MMR vaccine to persons with untreated active tuberculosis, initiating antituberculous therapy is advisable. Testing for latent tuberculosis infection is not a prerequisite for routine vaccination with MMR vaccine.

History of thrombocytopenia or thrombocytopenic purpura. Persons who have a history of thrombocytopenia or thrombocytopenic purpura might be at increased risk for developing clinically significant thrombocytopenia after MMR or MMRV vaccination. Persons with a history of thrombocytopenia have experienced recurrences after MMR vaccination (266,267), whereas others have not had a repeat episode after MMR vaccination (268270). In addition, persons who developed thrombocytopenia with a previous dose might develop thrombocytopenia with a subsequent dose of MMR vaccine (271,272). However, among 33 children who were admitted for idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura before receipt of a second dose of MMR vaccine, none had a recurrence within 6 weeks of the second MMR vaccine (273). Serologic evidence of immunity can be sought to determine whether or not an additional dose of MMR or MMRV vaccine is needed.

Tuberculin testing. MMR vaccine might interfere with the response to a tuberculin skin test, resulting in a temporary depression of tuberculin skin sensitivity (274276). Therefore, if a tuberculin skin test is to be performed, it should be administered either any time before, simultaneously with, or at least 46 weeks after MMR or MMRV vaccine. As with the tuberculin skin tests, live virus vaccines also might affect tuberculosis interferon-gamma release assay (IGRAs) test results. However, the effect of live virus vaccination on IGRAs has not been studied. Until additional information is available, IGRA testing in the context of live virus vaccine administration should be done either on the same day as vaccination with live-virus vaccine or 46 weeks after the administration of the live-virus vaccine.

Personal or family history of seizures of any etiology. A personal or family (i.e., sibling or parent) history of seizures of any etiology is a precaution for the first dose of MMRV but not MMR vaccination. Studies suggest that children who have a personal or family history of febrile seizures or family history of epilepsy are at increased risk for febrile seizures compared with children without such histories. In one study, the risk difference of febrile seizure within 14 days of MMR vaccination for children aged 15 to 17 months with a personal history of febrile seizures was 19.5 per 1,000 (CI = 16.1 23.6) and for siblings of children with a history of febrile seizures was four per 1,000 (CI = 2.95.4) compared with unvaccinated children of the same age (277). In another study, the match adjusted odds ratio for children with a family history of febrile seizures was 4.8 (CI = 1.318.6) compared with children without a family history of febrile seizures (278). For the first dose of measles vaccine, children with a personal or family history of seizures of any etiology generally should be vaccinated with MMR vaccine because the risks for using MMRV vaccine in this group of children generally outweigh the benefits.

MMR vaccine generally is well-tolerated and rarely associated with serious adverse events. MMR vaccine might cause fever (<15%), transient rashes (5%), transient lymphadenopathy (5% of children and 20% of adults), or parotitis (<1%) (160,163,279283). Febrile reactions usually occur 712 days after vaccination and generally last 12 days (280). The majority of persons with fever are otherwise asymptomatic. Four adverse events (i.e., coryza, cough, pharyngitis, and headache) after revaccination were found to be significantly lower with a second dose of MMR vaccine, and six adverse events (i.e., conjunctivitis, nausea, vomiting, lymphadenopathy, joint pain, and swollen jaw) had no significant change compared with the prevaccination baseline in school-aged children (284).

Expert committees at the Institute of Medicine (IOM) reviewed evidence concerning the causal relation between MMR vaccination and various adverse events (285289). Their causality was assessed on the basis of epidemiologic evidence derived from studies of populations, as well as mechanistic evidence derived primarily from biologic and clinical studies in animals and humans; risk was not quantified. IOM determined that evidence supports a causal relation between MMR vaccination and anaphylaxis, febrile seizures, thrombocytopenic purpura, transient arthralgia, and measles inclusion body encephalitis in persons with demonstrated immunodeficiencies.

Anaphylaxis. Immediate anaphylactic reactions after MMR vaccination are rare (1.814.4 per million doses) (290293). Although measles- and mumps-containing vaccines are grown in tissue from chick embryos, the rare serious allergic reactions after MMR vaccination are not believed to be caused by egg antigens but by other components of the vaccine, such as gelatin or neomycin (247249).

Febrile seizures. MMR vaccination might cause febrile seizures. The risk for such seizures is approximately one case for every 3,000 to 4,000 doses of MMR vaccine administered (294,295). Children with a personal or family history of febrile seizures or family history of epilepsy might be at increased risk for febrile seizures after MMR vaccination (277,278). The febrile seizures typically occur 614 days after vaccination and do not appear to be associated with any long-term sequelae (294297). An approximate twofold increased risk exists for febrile seizures among children aged 12 to 23 months who received the first dose of MMRV vaccine compared with children who received MMR and varicella vaccines separately. One additional febrile seizure occurred 5 through 12 days after vaccination per 2,300 to 2,600 children who received the first dose of MMRV vaccine compared with children who received the first dose of MMR and varicella vaccine separately but at the same visit (298,299). No increased risk for febrile seizures was observed after vaccination with MMRV vaccine in children aged 4 through 6 years (300). For additional details, see ACIP recommendations on the use of combination MMRV vaccine (126).

Thrombocytopenic purpura. Immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP), a disorder affecting blood platelet count, might be idiopathic or associated with a number of viral infections. ITP after receipt of live attenuated measles vaccine and wild type measles infections is usually self-limited and not life threatening; however, complications of ITP might include severe bleeding requiring blood transfusion (267,268,270). The risk for ITP increases during the 6 weeks after MMR vaccination, with one study estimating one case per 40,000 doses (270). The risk for thrombocytopenia after MMR vaccination is much less than after natural infection with rubella (one case per 3,000 infections) (56). On the basis of case reports, the risk for MMR vaccine-associated thrombocytopenia might be increased for persons who previously have had ITP (see Precautions).

Arthralgia and arthritis. Joint symptoms are associated with the rubella component of MMR vaccine (301). Among persons without rubella immunity who receive rubella-containing vaccine, arthralgia and transient arthritis occur more frequently among adults than children, and more frequently among postpubertal females than males (302,303). Acute arthralgia or arthritis are rare among children who receive RA 27/3 vaccine (160,303). In contrast, arthralgia develops among approximately 25% of nonimmune postpubertal females after vaccination with rubella RA 27/3 vaccine, and approximately 10% to 30% have acute arthritis-like signs and symptoms (154,160,282,301). Arthralgia or arthritis generally begin 13 weeks after vaccination, usually are mild and not incapacitating, lasts about 2 days, and rarely recur (160,301,303,304).

Measles inclusion body encephalitis. Measles inclusion body encephalitis is a complication of measles infection that occurs in young persons with defective cellular immunity from either congenital or acquired causes. The complications develop within 1 year after initial measles infection and the mortality rate is high. Three published reports in persons with immune deficiencies described measles inclusion body encephalitis after measles vaccination, documented by intranuclear inclusions corresponding to measles virus or the isolation of measles virus from the brain among vaccinated persons (259261,289). The time from vaccination to development of measles inclusion body encephalitis for these cases was 49 months, consistent with development of measles inclusion body encephalitis after infection with wild measles virus (305). In one case, the measles vaccine strain was identified (260).

Other possible adverse events. IOM concluded that the body of evidence favors rejection of a causal association between MMR vaccine and risk for autistic spectrum disorders (ASD), including autism, inflammatory bowel diseases, and type 1 diabetes mellitus. In addition, the available evidence was not adequate to accept or reject a causal relation between MMR vaccine and the following conditions: acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, afebrile seizures, brachial neuritis, chronic arthralgia, chronic arthritis, chronic fatigue syndrome, chronic inflammatory disseminated polyneuropathy, encephalopathy, fibromyalgia, Guillain-Barr syndrome, hearing loss, hepatitis, meningitis, multiple sclerosis, neuromyelitis optica, optic neuritis, transverse myelitis, opsoclonus myoclonus syndrome, or radiculoneuritis and other neuropathies.

Short-term safety of administration of a third dose of MMR vaccine was evaluated following vaccination clinics during two mumps outbreaks among 2,130 persons aged 9 through 21 years (96,306). Although these studies did not include a control group, few adverse events were reported after administration of a third dose of MMR vaccine (7% in Orange County, New York and 6% in Guam). The most commonly reported adverse events were pain, redness, or swelling at the injection site (2%4%); joint or muscle aches (2%3%); and dizziness or lightheadedness (2%). No serious adverse events were reported in either study.

HIV-infected persons are at increased risk for severe complications if infected with measles (16,307310), and several severe and fatal measles cases have been reported in HIV-infected children after vaccination, including progressive measles pneumonitis in a person with HIV infection and severe immunosuppression who received MMR vaccine (311), and several deaths after measles vaccination among persons with severe immunosuppression unrelated to HIV infection (312314). No serious or unusual adverse events have been reported after measles vaccination among persons with HIV infection who did not have evidence of severe immunosuppression (315320). Severe immunosuppression is defined as CD4+ T-lymphocyte percentages <15% at any age or CD4 count <200 lymphocytes/mm3 for persons aged >5 years (321,322). Furthermore, no serious adverse events have been reported in several studies in which MMR vaccine was administered to a small number of children on ART with histories of immunosuppression (231,233,238). MMR vaccine is not recommended for persons with HIV infection who have evidence of severe immunosuppression, and MMRV vaccine is not approved for use in any persons with HIV infection.

Clinically significant adverse events that arise after vaccination should be reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) at http://vaers.hhs.gov/esub/index. VAERS is a postmarketing safety surveillance program that collects information about adverse events (possible side effects) that occur after the administration of vaccines licensed for use in the United States.

Reports can be filed securely online, by mail, or by fax. A VAERS form can be downloaded from the VAERS website or requested by e-mail (info@vaers.org), telephone (800-822-7967), or fax (877-721-0366). Additional information on VAERS or vaccine safety is available at http://vaers.hhs.gov/about/index or by calling telephone 800-822-7967.

See original here:
Prevention of Measles, Rubella, Congenital Rubella ...

Read More...

Risks – Bone marrow transplant – Mayo Clinic

November 18th, 2016 12:41 pm

A bone marrow transplant poses many risks of complications, some potentially fatal.

The risk can depend on many factors, including the type of disease or condition, the type of transplant, and the age and health of the person receiving the transplant.

Although some people experience minimal problems with a bone marrow transplant, others may develop complications that may require treatment or hospitalization. Some complications could even be life-threatening.

Complications that can arise with a bone marrow transplant include:

Your doctor can explain your risk of complications from a bone marrow transplant. Together you can weigh the risks and benefits to decide whether a bone marrow transplant is right for you.

If you receive a transplant that uses stem cells from a donor (allogeneic transplant), you may be at risk of developing graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). This condition occurs when the donor stem cells that make up your new immune system see your body's tissues and organs as something foreign and attack them.

Many people who have an allogeneic transplant get GVHD at some point. The risk of GVHD is a bit greater if the stem cells come from an unrelated donor, but it can happen to anyone who gets a bone marrow transplant from a donor.

GVHD may happen at any time after your transplant. However, it's more common after your bone marrow has started to make healthy cells.

There are two kinds of GVHD: acute and chronic. Acute GVHD usually happens earlier, during the first months after your transplant. It typically affects your skin, digestive tract or liver. Chronic GVHD typically develops later and can affect many organs.

Chronic GVHD signs and symptoms include:

Oct. 13, 2016

Read more:
Risks - Bone marrow transplant - Mayo Clinic

Read More...

Transplantation of Hypoxia-preconditioned Mesenchymal Stem …

November 18th, 2016 12:41 pm

OBJECTIVES:

This study explored the novel strategy of hypoxic preconditioning of bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells before transplantation into the infarcted heart to promote their survival and therapeutic potential of mesenchymal stem cell transplantation after myocardial ischemia.

Mesenchymal stem cells from green fluorescent protein transgenic mice were cultured under normoxic or hypoxic (0.5% oxygen for 24 hours) conditions. Expression of growth factors and anti-apoptotic genes were examined by immunoblot. Normoxic or hypoxic stem cells were intramyocardially injected into the peri-infarct region of rats 30 minutes after permanent myocardial infarction. Death of mesenchymal stem cells was assessed in vitro and in vivo after transplantation. Angiogenesis, infarct size, and heart function were measured 6 weeks after transplantation.

Hypoxic preconditioning increased expression of pro-survival and pro-angiogenic factors including hypoxia-inducible factor 1, angiopoietin-1, vascular endothelial growth factor and its receptor, Flk-1, erythropoietin, Bcl-2, and Bcl-xL. Cell death of hypoxic stem cells and caspase-3 activation in these cells were significantly lower compared with that in normoxic stem cells both in vitro and in vivo. Transplantation of hypoxic versus normoxic mesenchymal stem cells after myocardial infarction resulted in an increase in angiogenesis, as well as enhanced morphologic and functional benefits of stem cell therapy.

Hypoxic preconditioning enhances the capacity of mesenchymal stem cells to repair infarcted myocardium, attributable to reduced cell death and apoptosis of implanted cells, increased angiogenesis/vascularization, and paracrine effects.

Go here to read the rest:
Transplantation of Hypoxia-preconditioned Mesenchymal Stem ...

Read More...

CD34 – Wikipedia

November 18th, 2016 12:41 pm

Hematopoietic progenitor cell antigen CD34 also known as CD34 antigen is a protein that in humans is encoded by the CD34 gene.[3][4][5]

CD34 is a cluster of differentiation first described independently by Civin et al. and Tindle et al.[6][7][8][9] in a cell surface glycoprotein and functions as a cell-cell adhesion factor. It may also mediate the attachment of stem cells to bone marrow extracellular matrix or directly to stromal cells.

The CD34 protein is a member of a family of single-pass transmembrane sialomucin proteins that show expression on early hematopoietic and vascular-associated tissue.[10] However, little is known about its exact function.[11]

CD34 is also an important adhesion molecule and is required for T cells to enter lymph nodes. It is expressed on lymph node endothelia, whereas the L-selectin to which it binds is on the T cell.[12][13] Conversely, under other circumstances CD34 has been shown to act as molecular "Teflon" and block mast cell, eosinophil and dendritic cell precursor adhesion, and to facilitate opening of vascular lumens.[14][15] Finally, recent data suggest CD34 may also play a more selective role in chemokine-dependent migration of eosinophils and dendritic cell precursors.[16][17] Regardless of its mode of action, under all circumstances CD34, and its relatives podocalyxin and endoglycan, facilitates cell migration.[10][16]

Cells expressing CD34 (CD34+ cell) are normally found in the umbilical cord and bone marrow as hematopoietic cells, a subset of mesenchymal stem cells, endothelial progenitor cells, endothelial cells of blood vessels but not lymphatics (except pleural lymphatics), mast cells, a sub-population dendritic cells (which are factor XIIIa-negative) in the interstitium and around the adnexa of dermis of skin, as well as cells in soft tissue tumors like DFSP, GIST, SFT, HPC, and to some degree in MPNSTs, etc. The presence of CD34 on non-hematopoietic cells in various tissues has been linked to progenitor and adult stem cell phenotypes.[18]

It is important to mention that Long-Term Hematopoietic Stem Cells [LT-HSCs] in mice and humans are the hematopoietic cells with the greatest self-renewal capacity.[citation needed] Human HSCs express CD34 marker.[citation needed]

CD34 is expressed in roughly 20% of murine hematopoietic stem cells,[19] and can be stimulated and reversed.[20]

CD34+ cells may be isolated from blood samples using immunomagnetic or immunofluorescent methods.

Antibodies are used to quantify and purify hematopoietic progenitor stem cells for research and for clinical bone marrow transplantation. However, counting CD34+ mononuclear cells may overestimate myeloid blasts in bone marrow smears due to hematogones (B lymphocyte precursors) and CD34+ megakaryocytes.

Cells observed as CD34+ and CD38- are of an undifferentiated, primitive form; i.e., they are multipotential hemopoietic stem cells. Thus, because of their CD34+ expression, such undifferentiated cells can be sorted out.

In tumors, CD34 is found in alveolar soft part sarcoma, preB-ALL (positive in 75%), AML (40%), AML-M7 (most), dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans, gastrointestinal stromal tumors, giant cell fibroblastoma, granulocytic sarcoma, Kaposis sarcoma, liposarcoma, malignant fibrous histiocytoma, malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors, mengingeal hemangiopericytomas, meningiomas, neurofibromas, schwannomas, and papillary thyroid carcinoma.

A negative CD34 may exclude Ewing's sarcoma/PNET, myofibrosarcoma of the breast, and inflammatory myofibroblastic tumors of the stomach.

Injection of CD34+ hematopoietic Stem Cells has been clinically applied to treat various diseases including Spinal Cord Injury,[21] Liver Cirrhosis[22] and Peripheral Vascular disease.[23] Research has shown that CD34+ cells are relatively more in men than in women in the reproductive age among Spinal Cord Injury victims.[24]

CD34 has been shown to interact with CRKL.[25] It also interacts with L-selectin, important in inflammation.

More:
CD34 - Wikipedia

Read More...

Stem Cell Therapy – Premier Stem Cell Institute

November 18th, 2016 12:41 pm

The Re-Brand Premier Regenerative Stem Cell and Wellness Centers, recently rebranded their business from Premier Stem Cell Institute, in response to expanding locations, technology, and treatments. This move reflects the growth and success this company has undergone recently and goals for the future.

PRSC and Wellness Centers President, Kandace Stolz said, This rebrand is the culmination of the years of work weve put into stem cell medicine. Were growing and healing more patients than we ever have before, this new name reflects those accomplishments and gives us room grow. We are so thrilled for this move and cant wait to do even more for our patients going forward.

Premier Regenerative Stem Cell and Wellness Centers will continue to partner with the NFL Alumni Association and treat current and former professional athletes. PRSC remains dedicated to studying stem cell treatment by collecting and tracking data to further stem cell progress and maximize results for all patients. PRSCs commitment to being a leader in stem cell and regenerative medicine is unwavering and will continue to innovate and learn to heal and improve the quality of life for all patients.

About Premier Regenerative Stem Cell and Wellness Centers: PRSC is the leading research and treatment facility in Colorado, providing innovative medicine and therapies for those in pain by harnessing the bodys own natural healing power of stem cells. As team of cutting-edge medical experts, PRSC is dedicated to treating patients by using their own stem cells to heal, improve quality of life, and battle the acute pain of chronic illnesses. Premier Regenerative Stem Cell and Wellness Center locations include Loveland Colorado, Dallas Texas, St. Louis, Missouri, and Jacksonville, Florida. PRSC has plans to expand to other major cities across the United States in the near future.

See the rest here:
Stem Cell Therapy - Premier Stem Cell Institute

Read More...

Population Reference Bureau (PRB)

November 17th, 2016 3:43 am

Regions / Countries

Select Country Afghanistan Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia-Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Channel Islands Chile China Hong Kong, SAR Macao, SAR Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, Dem. Rep. of Costa Rica Cote d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Timor-Leste Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, North Korea, South Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Laos Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macedonia Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Federated States of Micronesia Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russia Rwanda Samoa Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa Spain Sri Lanka St. Kitts-Nevis St. Lucia St. Vincent & the Grenadines Sudan Suriname Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Togo Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe

Continue reading here:
Population Reference Bureau (PRB)

Read More...

Genetically Modified Organisms – European Commission

November 17th, 2016 3:41 am

Food and feed generally originates from plants and animals grown and bred by humans for several thousand years. Over time, those plants and animals with the most desirable characteristics were chosen for breeding the next generations of food and feed. This was, for example, the case for plants with an increased resistance to environmental pressures such as diseases or with an increased yield.

These desirable characteristics appeared through naturally occurring variations in the genetic make-up of those plants and animals. In recent times, it has become possible to modify the genetic make-up of living cells and organisms using techniques of modern biotechnology called gene technology. The genetic material is modified artificially to give it a new property (e.g. a plant's resistance to a disease, insect or drought, a plant's tolerance to a herbicide, improving a food's quality or nutritional value, increased yield).

Such organisms are called "genetically modified organisms" (GMOs). Food and feed which contain or consist of such GMOs, or are produced from GMOs, are called "genetically modified (GM) food or feed".

Read this article:
Genetically Modified Organisms - European Commission

Read More...

Dr. Geeta Shroff’s Stem Cell Technology | Healthcare Hacks

November 15th, 2016 11:45 pm

About Dr. Geeta Shroff and her technology

Dr. Geeta Shroff is an infertility expert located in Delhi, India, and the first individual in the world to develop an infinite number of pure human embryonic stem cell lines from using just one donated embryo. The single donated embryo originated from an IVF donor, which negates the debate over destroying numerous embryos for therapy.

Her partnering physician and anesthesiologist is Dr. Ashish Verma. The two have been working together since before the discovery of this technology in 1999. They have recently filed a patent with the World Intellectual Property Organization, covering over 126 countries including India and the United States.

Every day we hear of treatments around the world using stem cells (fetal, umbilical cord, adult, nasal, rats, etc.). Dr. Geeta Shroff has developed the only purely human embryonic stem cell lines that do not show any immune reaction in the body. Embryonic stem cells do not have any antigenic proteins on their surface and therefore do not require immunosuppressant drugs to combat rejection.

Importantly, despite the theoretical risks of human embryonic stem cells, no side effects have been reported from her therapy. Dr. Geeta Shroff practices under the guise of the Indian Health Council, which allows her to conduct clinical trials on incurable or terminal patients. She operates out of two hospitals in Delhi, India, which have ISO certifications (International Organization for Standardization) and BCI certifications (awarded by a British independent agency). Her lab is in compliance with Good Manufacturing Practice and Good Labratory Practice.

Scientific explanation of this technology

The following text was extracted from an article by Dr. Laurance Johnston Ph.D. "Embryonic Stem Cell Therapy" was published on the Healing Therapies website.

Basically, after an egg is fertilized, an embryo is formed, which then splits into a two cells. In Stem Cell Now (2006), author Christopher Scott compares the process to dividing a soap bubble with a knife, creating two smaller bubbles within the confines of the original. Cut again, and it becomes four bubbles or a four-cell embryo. This division goes on, successively creating 8, 16, 32, 64, 128-cell embryo, the total volume changing little.

Between four and six days, the cells rearrange into two layers: an outer layer that will develop into placental and amniotic tissue and a few dozen cells called the inner-cell mass (ICM) which turns into everything else. Now labeled a blastocyst, the embryo is about 0.1-mm across or the size of the period at the end of this sentence.

As the cells continue to develop, they increasingly lose their omnipotent nature. After about two weeks, the ICM starts to organize into three specific layers that become our various tissues: 1) ectodermal layer (developing into nerve, skin, etc), 2) mesodermal (turning into blood, muscle, bone, etc), and 3) endodermal (differentiating into the gut, liver, pancreas, bladder, etc.).

To obtain ESCs, the ICM cells are isolated before they start turning into these layers, and grown in culture. The culturing technology has only recently emerged and requires sophisticated methodology and skill. For example, scientists have had to grow the cells on a layer of animal cells to provide nutrients and the signals needed to keep the cells from further differentiating.

In this regard, Shroffs breakthrough is that she has grown ESCs without using any animal products, including these feeder cells. By keeping the cells purely human in nature, she makes them more amenable to transplantation. The cells from her mother culture are further adapted or primed to create daughter cultures targeting specific disorders. Hence, a more specialized cell line will be used to treat individuals with SCI, stroke, diabetes, etc.

According to Dr. Shroff, the transplanted cells will home into the tissue where they are needed, to begin regeneration. Thus, even when introduced by more remote intravenous or intramuscular routes, the cells' physiological affinity for the target tissue will cause them to migrate where they are needed.

The Potential

It can be said that the complete effect of human embryonic stem cells transplanted into a patient closely resembles the time frame of the human embryos development. This includes nine months of gestation, and then the growth of a newborn baby after delivery up until five years of age where the nervous system reaches its full potential. Although often response in patients is seen immediately after transplantation, the embryonic stem cells continue their developmental process as per their pre-programmed time frame.

This human embryonic stem cell treatment has been used in a number of conditions in clinical trials on patients from all over the world at Dr. Geeta Shroffs clinics. All have shown improvement of some kind. Some of these conditions include Diabetes, spinal cord injury, Parkinsons, Multiple Sclerosis, ALS, Chronic Lyme Disease, cerebral palsy, autism, etc. Patients with complete spinal injuries as old as 16 years are seeing dramatic results such as regaining bowel and bladder control and function in their legs; Diabetics are weaning off their insulin or have been able to withdraw from medication completely; and neurodegenerative disease patients with brain lesions are seeing reversals.

*Some of this information has been used with permission from Amanda Boxtel's blog, Awakenings.

To read more....

Here's a Global Post Article on Dr. Shroff and Amy's treatment.

For related information, please read Stem Cell Cheat Sheet.

For an interview with Dr. Ashish from the clinic, read Stem Cell Curiosity: Answers From India.

Amy answers frequently asked questions about her India treatment.

Here is the original post:
Dr. Geeta Shroff's Stem Cell Technology | Healthcare Hacks

Read More...

Stem Cell Therapy for COPD | Mexico Stem Cell Therapy

November 15th, 2016 11:45 pm

The increasing trend of smoking and air pollution has affected human health badly; more and more people are succumbing to diseases of airways and lungs. Air pollution and smoking are commonly present in every country especially in industrialized centers. Significant numbers of people complaining of chronic cough, breathlessness and repeated chest infections are diagnosed having airway or lung disease. When we go behind the causes of such complaints, bronchial asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease come on the top. COPD is especially dangerous because it gradually causes lung damage and results in respiratory failure and heat failure.

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease is actually a disease of lung as well as airways. It is caused by chronic irritation of airways (by smoking, dust, air pollution) that sets an inflammatory response resulting in narrowing of airways and damage to the lungs. The suffers complain of cough with sputum, shortness of breath, wheezing and in advance stages body swelling due to heart failure. It is a terrifying fact that around 200 million people worldwide are suffering from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or COPD and approximately 3 million deaths annually are attributed to this deadly disease. With so much disease burden worldwide, COPD stands among the major health problems. The question arises is there some curative treatment for COPD or not?

Previously available treatments for COPD have their only limitations and complications; they dont have curative potential rather they only improve the situation for some times. Conventional medical therapy is not effective at restoring lung function while on the other hand heart lung transplantation (an option for patients which advanced COPD and respiratory failure/heart failure) is not available to each patient due to higher cost, higher mortality and limited number of donors. This necessitates an innovative treatment of COPD; a treatment which is both curative and safely available to every patient. Such a treatment for COPD is stem cell therapy.

Stem cell therapy stands high on the list as a definite and curative treatment with potential availability for almost every person. It has passed through stages of animal experimentation and clinical trials on humans to be declared a safe treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD), emphysema, chronic bronchitis, pulmonary fibrosis and interstitial lung disease. Many countries of the world have tested stem cell therapy for cure or remission of COPD patients.

Stem cells, as we know, have the potential to differentiate into different types of cells including cells present in the lungs. When we inject stem cells in a patient with COPD and administer some specific type of factors that help cell differentiation and growth, they reach at the site of damaged cells and replace them. Stem cells take the function of damaged cells and help in healing the injury and setting off the fire of destruction. Lung function is improved gradually after stem cell transplantation and patient gets his complaints allayed in matter of months. Stem cell therapy has several advantages over heart/lung transplant and these include:

Mexico Stem Cell Therapy is among the top rated places in the world for stem cell transplantation. Our hospitals especially are registered for this purpose and comply with the guidelines of safety and standard. Latest technology and experienced stem cell physicians make the therapy happen in a very pleasant and successful environment. Patients around the world enjoy these facilities and a high standard of care.

We offer stem cell therapy for a number of diseases including lung-related diseases, such as COPD, pulmonary fibrosis, chronic bronchitis, emphysema and interstitial lung disease.

The best regenerative medicine option will be based on your medical history and health condition. Remember, the sooner you get treatment the better the results.

If you would like to find out more about treatment options, contact our patient coordinators today at (855) 768-7247. We work with you and your pulmonologist to improve your condition.

Updated Dec 29, 2015

See the original post here:
Stem Cell Therapy for COPD | Mexico Stem Cell Therapy

Read More...

Regenerative Medicine | The Future of Plastic Surgery …

November 15th, 2016 11:45 pm

Regenerative medicine is the science of replacing, engineering or regenerating human cells, tissues or organs to restore or establish normal form and function. This broadly encompasses the use of cells, tissues, drugs, synthetic biomaterials, and devices to help patients heal more effectively from trauma, cancer therapy, other disease processes, and birth anomalies. Regenerative medicine therapies can have goals of both healing damaged tissues and forming new tissue.

While many clinicians and scientists across all fields of medicine have been involved in regenerative medicine research and clinical advances over the last two decades, plastic surgeons have been especially instrumental in moving new therapies into the clinical arena and having a leadership role in new scientific discoveries.

Areas of ongoing research and clinical care:

Burn care: Plastic surgeons have been pioneers in the use of protein scaffolds to generate the dermal layer, or innermost layer of the skin, following burn injury.

Nerve regeneration: Plastic surgeons, in the practice of hand and upper extremity surgery, as well as lower extremity surgery, are forging new paths in the science of regenerating nerves and restoring optimal function after nerve injury. These therapies involve the use of special growth factors to stimulate nerve healing, as well as special biomaterials to serve as guides to direct the growth of nerve fibers.

Breast reconstruction: Breast reconstruction is a vital part of cancer therapy for many women. Plastic surgeons are achieving better outcomes through the use of decellularized tissue scaffolds to regenerate new tissue layers over implants in breast cancer survivors.

Wound care: Complex wounds that are difficult to heal represent a major focus for tissue engineering and regenerative medicine strategies. Skin substitutes, composed of living cells grown in a laboratory, are used to heal these types of wounds. Additionally, growth factors are being explored for improving wound healing. One of the most significant breakthroughs in regenerative therapy for wound healing has been the use of negative pressure devices. Discovered by a plastic surgeon, these devices use negative pressure and micro-mechanical forces to stimulate wound healing.

Fat grafting and adipose stem cell therapy: A significant advance in surgical regenerative medicine has been the development and refinement of techniques to transfer fat tissue in a minimally invasive manner. This allows the regeneration of fat tissue in other parts of the body, using a patient's own extra fat tissue. This technique is revolutionizing many reconstructive procedures, including breast reconstruction. Importantly, fat tissue is an important source of adult mesenchymal stem cells. Discovered by plastic surgeons, adipose derived stem cells, are easy to isolate from fat tissue, and hold tremendous promise for treating many disorders across the body.

Scar treatment: Plastic surgeons are experts in the biology of scar formation and the molecular signals that impact healing. Regenerative therapies are being developed using energy-based devices, such as laser and intense pulsed light, to improve the healing of scars.

Hand and face transplantation: The ultimate in "Tissue replacement therapy," hand and face transplantation represents a life-restoring therapy for patients with severe trauma or other disease processes that result in loss of the hands or face. Most people aren't aware of this fact, but the very first successful human organ transplant was performed by a plastic surgeon. Dr. Joseph Murray performed the first kidney transplant in 1954. Plastic surgeons have been building up on his legacy in developing this new field of hand and face transplantation. This field also blends elements of cell therapy in order to control the immune response and reduce the need for toxic immunosuppressive drugs.

Bioprosthetic interfaces connecting humans and machine: This very interesting area of regenerative practice is directed at methods of connecting severed nerve endings with powered artificial limbs. This often involves "rerouting" the severed nerve endings to different muscles so that sensors over the skin can detect the signals and transmit them to a computer that controls the artificial limb.

Bone regeneration: For patients suffering extensive face or a limb trauma, large segments of bone may be missing. Plastic surgeons are using calcium based scaffolds and biomaterials derived from bone to form new bone tissue for reconstructive purposes.

"Custom made tissue flaps." For deformities that involve complex structures such as a major part of the nose, plastic surgeons are engineering new replacement parts at another site on the body. In a process called "flap prefabrication," the structure is assembled using tissue grafts and then transferred to the deformity after healing.

Generation of new skin by tissue expansion: Another technique pioneered by plastic surgeons is the use of gradual expansion of implanted balloon devices to generate new skin tissue that can cover a deformity. This technique is revolutionizing breast reconstruction and the treatment of many birth anomalies.

See original here:
Regenerative Medicine | The Future of Plastic Surgery ...

Read More...

Aegean Regenerative Medicine by Dr. Angelo Tellis

November 15th, 2016 11:45 pm

Dr. Angelo Tellis Regenerative Medicine Specialist

Regenerative Medicine is an exciting new field of medicine that helps the body renew itself by using powerful natural agents like Platelet Rich Plasma and adult stem cells. It is much less invasive than surgery, which can often lead to even more tissue damage. It is all natural without placing any foreign substances in the body and has much less risk and downtime compared to surgery. Aegean Regenerative Medicine specializes in two different types of services including orthopedic and cosmetic procedures.

Orthopedic:Healing agents are delivered directly to the site of tissue injury. This restarts and maximizes the healing process in a natural way. New cartilage is formed, tendons and ligaments are repaired, and joints are restored.

Cosmetic:Tumescent Liposuction is performed for shaping and sculpting areas of the body while collecting adipose tissue rich in stem cells (Liposculpting). Stem cell rich adipose tissue can be combined with Platelet Rich Plasma to naturally enhance or augment other areas of the body (breasts, buttocks, hands, face, etc.) where desired (Lipotransfer).

Aegean Regenerative Medicine is available at Crystal Coast Pain Management offices located in New Bern, Morehead City and Jacksonville, North Carolina. Call 252-636-0300 to schedule a consultation with Dr. Tellis and explore your natural options.

Advantages Tumescent liposuction and breast enhancement in one procedure. All natural- nothing artificial is used. Safe and gentle procedure. Enhancement looks and feels like natural breasts. Future breast feeding not affected. Rapid recovery. Permanent, selective treatment of problem areas with smooth, even results. Virtually no scarring at insertion sites. Significantly reduced risk of complications. Comfortable outpatient procedure. Less bleeding, bruising and swelling.

Three locations to serve you Aegean Regenerative Medicine is located in Morehead City, New Bern, and Jacksonville, NC and operates under the Crystal Coast Pain Management system and supporting providers .

Original post:
Aegean Regenerative Medicine by Dr. Angelo Tellis

Read More...

UT Southwestern, Dallas, Texas – UTSW Medicine (Patient …

November 15th, 2016 11:44 pm

We Are Magnet

UT Southwestern has achieved Magnet designation, the highest honor bestowed by the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC).

We've brought the leading-edge therapies and world-class care of UT Southwestern to Richardson/Plano, Las Colinas, and the Park Cities.

Clinical Center at Las Colinas The Las Colinas Obstetrics/Gynecology Clinic is a full-service practice, treating the full range of obstetric and gynecologic conditions.

Clinical Center at Park Cities The Clinical Center at Park Cities features cardiology, general internal medicine, obstetric/gynecologic, and rheumatology services.

Clinical Center at Richardson/Plano The Clinical Center at Richardson/Plano features behavioral health, cancer, neurology, obstetric/gynecologic, primary care, sports medicine, and urology services.

UT Southwestern Medical Center is honored frequently for the quality of our care and the significance of our discoveries. Some of our recent awards include the Press Ganey Beacon of Excellence Award for patient satisfaction and the National Research Consultants' Five Star National Excellence Award.

Read more from the original source:
UT Southwestern, Dallas, Texas - UTSW Medicine (Patient ...

Read More...

Molecular Genetics Service – Great Ormond Street Hospital …

November 15th, 2016 11:44 pm

Diagnostic, carrier and predictive testing is offered for a comprehensive range of single gene disorders as well as a DNA banking service whereby samples can be forwardedto external laboratories for approved requests providing funding is available.

A complete list oftesting services offeredis providedon this web site see:

Molecular Genetics Tests

or is available to download as a service pack:

Click here to download the price list for NHS patients

It is the responsibility of the patient's clinician to request a laboratory service/test and to ensure that all samples are correctly labelled and request forms completed to a minimum standard.

Consent is not required for DNA storage. It is the responsibility of the clinician to obtain consent before requesting a genetic test.

Click here for a copy of our Test Request Form

Click here for a copy of the Delay-Seizure (EIEE)panel proforma

Click here for a copy of the Hearing Loss panel proforma

Click here for a copy of the Immunodeficiency (PID/SCID)panel proforma

Click here for a copy of the Inflammatory Bowel Disease panel proforma

Click here for information about new NIPD tests

5ml venous blood in plastic EDTA bottles (>1ml from neonates)

Sample must be labelled with:

Tissue type and date of biopsy should be clearly documented on the referral information.

In the case of twins, special attention must be given to the identity of each sample.

Minimum criteria:

The Association for Clinical Genetic Science (ACGS)guidelines recommend at least two pieces of identifying information on every sample tube.

Find out more

Find out more

Find out more

See original here:
Molecular Genetics Service - Great Ormond Street Hospital ...

Read More...

Page 1,085«..1020..1,0841,0851,0861,087..1,0901,100..»


2025 © StemCell Therapy is proudly powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) Comments (RSS) | Violinesth by Patrick