To help prepare you for those first hours, days, and weeks of life, here's a head-to-toe guide to newborn health.
From: http://www.webmd.com/parenting/baby/infant-development-9/is-my-baby-normal?src=RSS_PUBLIC
Find information about health and nutrition from various and reliable sources all over the world, in just one site. World's latest headlines all in one place.
To help prepare you for those first hours, days, and weeks of life, here's a head-to-toe guide to newborn health.
For expert advice on how to lose baby weight the healthy way, WebMD turned to Elizabeth Ward, MS, RD; a dietitian; author of Expect the Best; mom of three daughters; and an expert in pregnancy, lactation and kids' nutrition.
Experts explain why toddlers need naps and share tips for getting toddlers to sleep.
Experts share tips for parents on how to handle the different personality types of toddlers.
We ask top child-raising experts about the pros and cons of using timeouts.
Need a vacation from "Are we there yet?" Try these expert tips.
Being sleepy and taking long naps during the day are both tied to higher odds of getting type 2 diabetes, a new review suggests. WebMD has the details.
They don't call them the "terrible twos" for nothing. Here are discipline tactics that help make life easier for you and your toddler.
WebMD explains common toddler sleep problems, how much sleep toddlers really need, and how to conquer bedtime with your toddler.
Even experienced moms may not know what to expect when they bring home newborn twins. Here’s some expert advice to help you adjust to doing double duty with your newborn twins.
How parents can fit exercise back into their lives and fight the tendency to become more sedentary.
Here are the top 10 mistakes new parents make in the first year. WebMD tells you what they are and how you can avoid them.
If your hectic lifestyle has got you down, WebMD's experts say relaxation techniques can bring you back into balance -- some in 5 minutes or less. Here's what to try.
Vraylar is an atypical antipsychotic taken once a day
If mom smokes, daughters are almost four times as likely to get hooked on cigarettes
Most Smokers Haven't Considered Quitting
Study also found continual exposure to secondhand smoke raised chances of developing disease
Recovery is faster when family is part of therapy, researchers find
Study shows ancient exercise improves physical ability in those with arthritis, heart failure, emphysema and breast cancer
Health costs decline if obese patients with type 2 get procedure soon after diagnosis, experts say
Study participants had far more sodium than the recommended daily limit
The most common type of non-invasive breast cancer is called ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Traditionally, DCIS is diagnosed when cancer cells seen under the microscope are localized only to the breast’s duct system but have not invaded surrounding tissue.
The standard treatment for DCIS is to remove the affected tissue, making sure that there are no cancer cells left within the breast (“clear margins”). That surgery might be a mastectomy or a lumpectomy, which may be followed with radiation therapy.
DCIS carries an excellent prognosis. That’s why this non-invasive cancer is also called “stage 0” breast cancer.
Last month, JAMA Oncology published a study that suggests the standard treatment may be too aggressive. Perhaps some women with DCIS would do just as well without lumpectomy or mastectomy. As expected, this has generated a lot of controversy and confusion.
The researchers studied more than 108,000 women who had been diagnosed with DCIS at some point during a 20-year period. They found that women who received a lumpectomy followed by radiation had a lower risk of cancer returning in the affected breast. But the addition of radiation did not change the ultimate rate of death due to breast cancer. Nor did performing a mastectomy instead of a lumpectomy.
This type of research is known as an observational study. Observational studies can show possible associations between therapies and outcomes. They don’t prove that one therapy is actually better.
Because this was an observational study, there are many questions about what could have affected the study outcomes. These include why each specific treatment was chosen for each patient, the accuracy of the DCIS diagnoses, whether each surgery truly had “clear margins,” and the quality of follow-up care, including regular mammograms to watch for the possible return of cancer.
In addition, this study didn’t document which patients, if any, also received hormonal therapy such as tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitors. These treatments can help prevent recurrence. For these reasons, it is hard to interpret these study data, and even harder to use that information when deciding how to treat any one woman with DCIS.
What this study does tell us is that not all DCIS is the same. In this study, approximately 500 patients died of breast cancer without ever having invasive cancer in the breast. This suggests that for some very small subset of women, distant or metastatic disease occurred despite treatment of DCIS — a concerning finding.
Also, death rates were higher for women diagnosed with DCIS before the age of 35, and for black women compared to non-Hispanic white women. This suggests that these women may need more aggressive intervention.
The good news: The study also reaffirmed the fact that overall, mortality associated with DCIS is exceedingly low. Fewer than 1% of patients in this 20-year study died from breast cancer.
Some media coverage of this study tended to leave the impression that DCIS doesn’t need to be treated. In fact, all patients in the study received some form of treatment. What the study does say is that none of the specific treatments the researchers compared against each other (lumpectomy with or without radiation or mastectomy) differed very much from one another with respect to ultimate survival.
Ongoing trials are looking at whether “watchful waiting” may be reasonable for certain women — that is to say, closely following low-risk patients (for example, those with small tumors or low- to intermediate-grade cancers) to determine if and when treatment is needed. However, we don’t have those results yet.
For some women, DCIS is a “precursor” to invasive breast cancer, but in many others, it may not progress. Yet right now, we don’t understand these cancers well enough, nor can we accurately predict the biological behavior of these abnormal cells for any given woman. More research is necessary to determine the specific optimal treatment for each individual woman diagnosed with DCIS.
Ultimately, decisions about the diagnosis and treatment of DCIS must be made by a woman and her doctor and must take into account certain risk factors (age and race among them), as well as that woman’s personal preferences in the face of the limitations of current scientific knowledge. I expect that results from ongoing and future research will soon allow physicians to better guide these difficult decisions. Fortunately, the bottom line for DCIS is that no matter what treatment is pursued, the outcomes are excellent for the majority of patients.
The post Untangling the non-invasive breast cancer controversy appeared first on Harvard Health Blog.