Americans are living longer than ever before, thanks in large part to NIH-supported research. But a new, heavily publicized study shows that recent gains in longevity aren’t being enjoyed equally in all corners of the United States. In fact, depending on where you live in this great country, life expectancy can vary more than 20 years—a surprisingly wide gap that has widened significantly in recent decades.
Researchers attribute this disturbing gap to a variety of social and economic influences, as well as differences in modifiable behavioral and lifestyle factors, such as obesity, inactivity, and tobacco use. The findings serve as a sobering reminder that, despite the considerable progress made possible by biomedical science, more research is needed to figure out better ways of addressing health disparities and improving life expectancy for all Americans.
In the new study published in JAMA Internal Medicine, a research team, partially funded by NIH, found that the average American baby born in 2014 can expect to live to about age 79 . That’s up from a national average of about 73 in 1980 and around 68 in 1950. However, babies born in 2014 in remote Oglala Lakota County, SD, home to the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, can expect to live only about 66 years. That’s in stark contrast to a child born about 400 miles away in Summit County, CO, where life expectancy at birth now exceeds age 86.
Tags: Alabama, alcohol, behavior, childhood mortality, Colorado, epidemiology, exercise, geographical disparities, health, health disparities, health metrics, inequalities, Kentucky, life expectancy, lifestyle, longevity, Mississippi, Native American Indian, North Dakota, obesity, Oglala Lakota County, Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, smoking, socioeconomics, South Dakota, Summit County, U.S. counties, West Virginia
Today, thanks to decades of educational efforts about the serious health consequences of inhaled tobacco, fewer young people than ever smoke cigarettes in the United States. So, it’s interesting that a growing of number of middle and high school kids are using e-cigarettes—electronic devices that vaporize flavored liquid that generally contains nicotine.
E-cigarettes come with their own health risks, including lung inflammation, asthma, and respiratory infections. But their supporters argue that “vaping,” as it’s often called, might provide an option that would help young people steer clear of traditional cigarettes and the attendant future risks of lung cancer, emphysema, heart disease, and other serious health conditions. Now, a new NIH-funded study finds that this is—pardon the pun—mostly a pipe dream.
Analyzing the self-reported smoking behaviors of thousands of schoolkids nationwide, researchers found no evidence that the availability of e-cigarettes has served to accelerate the decline in youth smoking. In fact, the researchers concluded the opposite: the popularity of e-cigarettes has led more kids—not fewer—to get hooked on nicotine, which meets all criteria for being an addictive substance.
Tags: addiction, adolescence, asthma, behavior, child health, cigarettes, e-cigarettes, electronic cigarettes, emphysema, health education, heart disease, high school, lung cancer, lung inflammation, middle school, National Youth Tobacco Survey, nicotine, pediatrics, respiratory infection, smoking, tobacco, vaping
Many Americans who’ve smoked cigarettes have been successful in their efforts to quit. But there’s some bad news for those who’ve settled for just cutting back: new evidence shows there’s no safe amount of smoking. One cigarette a day, or even less than that, still poses significant risks to your health.
A study conducted by NIH researchers of more than 290,000 adults between the ages of 59 and 82 found that those who reported smoking less than one cigarette per day, on average, for most of their lives were nine times more likely to die from lung cancer than those who never smoked. The outlook was even worse for those who smoked between one and 10 cigarettes a day. Compared to never-smokers, they faced a 12 times greater risk of dying from lung cancer and 1½ times greater risk of dying of cardiovascular disease.
Despite years of public health campaigns warning of the dangers of smoking when pregnant, many women are unaware of the risk or find themselves unable to quit. As a result, far too many babies are still being exposed in the womb to toxins that enter their mothers’ bloodstreams when they inhale cigarette smoke. Among the many infant and child health problems that have been linked to maternal smoking are premature birth, low birth weight, asthma, reduced lung function, sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), and cleft lip and/or palate.
Now, a large international study involving NIH-supported researchers provides a biological mechanism that may explain how exposure to cigarette toxins during fetal development can produce these health problems . That evidence centers on the impact of the toxins on the epigenome of the infant’s body tissues. The epigenome refers to chemical modifications of DNA (particularly methylation of cytosines), as well as proteins that bind to DNA and affect its function. The genome of an individual is the same in all cells of their body, but the epigenome determines whether genes are turned on or off in particular cells. The study found significant differences between the epigenetic patterns of babies born to women who smoked during pregnancy and those born to non-smokers, with many of the differences affecting genes known to play key roles in the development of the lungs, face, and nervous system.
Tags: asthma, babies, birth defects, cigarette toxins, cigarettes, cleft lip, cleft lip and palate, cleft palate, DNA methylation, epigenetics, epigenome, fetal development, genes, genomics, infants, low birth weight, lungs, maternal smoking, PACE, pregnancy, Pregnancy And Childhood Epigenetics consortium, premature birth, SIDS, smokers, smoking, tobacco
The hard truth is that heart disease is the #1 killer of American women. And it’s largely preventable. The Heart Truth® was started here at NIH’s National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute to raise awareness of these truths. You’re probably most familiar with the campaign through its February 1st fashion statement, which has arguably become a cultural icon: the red dress. The Red Dress® is a decade old this year. And, like heart disease, it doesn’t discriminate by gender. Everyone can wear red today. It’s a symbol of solidarity – and a reminder that we should each attend to our heart’s needs every day: by making healthful decisions like exercising more, quitting smoking, and maintaining a healthy weight and blood pressure.
For more information:
The Heart Truth: http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/educational/hearttruth/
Women and Heart Disease: http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/health-topics/topics/hdw/
Posted In: Health