Diets high in fats, sugars and processed foods have been linked with slightly lower IQ in young children, a study has found.

A predominantly processed food diet at the age of three is directly associated with a lower IQ at the age of eight and a half, compared to children who eat a diet rich in fresh fruit and vegetables, according to a Bristol-based Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC), which is tracking the long-term health and well-being of around 14,000 children.

The scientists who carried out the study, published in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, emphasised however that they could not say for certain that processed foods are the cause of lower IQs as other factors such as social class and educational upbringing may be implicated.

Parents were asked to detail the types and frequency of the food and drink their children consumed when they were three, four, seven and eight and a half years old. A diet rich in processed food at aged three was linked with an IQ that was 1.67 points lower on the IQ scale, where a score of 100 is average intelligence. “This suggests that any cognitive/ behavioural effects relating to eating habits in early childhood may persist into later childhood, despite any subsequent changes to dietary intake,” the scientists said.

Children living in flats have 45% more exposure to tobacco smoke than those in detached houses, a US study says.

Researchers from Harvard and Rochester Universities say that is because the smoke seeps through walls and shared ventilation systems.

They tested cotinine levels in blood samples from 5,000 children across the US for the study in Pediatrics.

Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) said there was a “strong case” for making blocks of flats smoke free.

Researchers limited the sample in this study to children who live in a household where nobody smokes.

They looked for cotinine – a product of nicotine and a highly sensitive marker for tobacco – in the children’s blood.

The study found that 73% of the 5,000 children analysed were exposed to second-hand tobacco smoke.

Overall, researchers found that 84.5% of children who were living in blocks of flats had a cotinine level that indicated recent tobacco-smoke exposure, compared with 79.6% of children who were living in attached houses and 70.3% who were living in detached houses.

Smoke trail

Dr Jonathan Winickoff, study author and associate professor of paediatrics at Harvard Medical School, said: “If your neighbours are smoking then you are exposed if you live through the wall in a semi-detached house. In apartment buildings this effect is magnified. Smoke contaminates the whole building.”

“This study is the last link in the chain of evidence. It demonstrates the overwhelming need for smoke-free buildings,” he said.

He continued: “In years to come, people will shake their heads in disbelief that there was ever smoking in homes where children live, eat, sleep and breathe.”

Previous research has shown that passive smoking is a major cause of morbidity and mortality, even at low levels of exposure.

Karen Wilson, assistant professor of paediatrics at the University of Rochester Medical Centre, said:

“Parents try so hard to protect their children from dangers, such as tobacco smoke. It’s surprising to see these results and realise that too many parents have no control over whether their children are exposed to second-hand smoke in their own homes.”

Martin Dockrell, director of policy and research at the UK group ASH, said: “There is a strong case for social and private sector landlords designating some entire blocks as smoke-free to respect the choice and the health of the great majority of their tenants.”

source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-11969074

The blood vessels of obese teenagers look more like those found in middle-aged people, say Canadian researchers.

A study of 63 children, whose average age was 13, found signs of “stiffening” in the aorta – the largest artery in the body.

The British Columbia Children’s Hospital team said it was an early indicator of heart disease.

The British Heart Foundation described child obesity as a “ticking public health time bomb”.

One of the key changes in heart disease is the hardening of arteries supplying blood to the heart.

The rate of childhood obesity has rocketed in the last two decades and continues to increase, leading to fears that younger and younger people will fall prey to heart attacks and strokes, as well as other diseases such as Type 2 diabetes.

Measurements of the elasticity of the aorta were taken using ultrasound, which can help doctors work out how fast blood is flowing through the vessel.

However, when the results for the obese teenagers were compared with 55 children with normal weights, the differences were clear.

More worryingly, these findings were not echoed by similar differences in blood pressure, and blood cholesterol levels between the obese and normal weight children.

This suggests that cardiovascular problems which could threaten or even shorten life could be developing “silently” during childhood.

‘Stop the clock’

Dr Kevin Harris, one of the researchers presenting the research at the Canadian Cardiovascular Congress, said: “The systolic blood pressure was only marginally higher in these obese children – but aortic stiffness is associated with cardiovascular events and early death.”

He now plans research to see if these aortic changes can be reversed with improved diet and exercise.

Dr Beth Adamson, from the Canadian Heart and Stroke Foundation, said: “We must rethink the lifestyle standards we have accepted as a society to protect the future health of our kids.”

Obesity rates in the UK do not lag far behind those in Canada and the US, and the British Heart Foundation said it was equally concerned.

June Davison, a senior cardiac nurse, said: “Last year, figures showed more than a fifth of youngsters are obese or overweight when they start school – a shocking reality and a warning that we are sitting on a ticking public health time bomb.

“Obese children can become obese adults which can mean a whole host of health problems later in life including heart and circulatory disease, the UK’s biggest killer.

“We must try and stop the clock ticking by making it easier for families to make informed, healthier choices about the food they’re eating and the amount of physical activity they’re doing.”

source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-11607394

Children who spend longer than two hours a day in front of a computer or TV are more likely to suffer psychological difficulties than other youngsters, a UK study suggests.

Researchers said they also found that physical exercise did not make up for too much screen time.

The University of Bristol study, published in Pediatrics, involved more than 1,000 children aged about 10.

Its lead author said a two-hour screen limit per day was a sensible guideline.

Researchers measured the time children spent in front of a screen as well as their psychological well being using a questionnaire.

In addition, an activity monitor recorded both children’s sedentary time and moderate physical activity over seven consecutive days.

The questionnaires contained 20 questions covering five sections – emotional difficulties, conduct problems, hyperactivity or inattention, friendships and peer groups and problems relating to friends and peer groups.

The study found that those children who spent more than two hours per day watching TV or using a computer were at an increased risk of psychological difficulties.

This risk increased if they also failed to meet the guidelines on physical activity.

Peer problems

Those children who spent more time being sedentary, such as reading and doing homework, had better psychological scores overall, the study found.

Yet, contrary to what researchers predicted, those children who did more moderate physical activity fared better in certain psychological areas, including emotional and peer problems, but they fared worse in other areas related to behaviour, including hyperactivity.

Dr Angie Page, lead study author from the University of Bristol’s centre for exercise, nutrition and health sciences, said: “Whilst low levels of screen viewing may not be problematic, we cannot rely on physical activity to compensate for long hours of screen viewing.

“Watching TV or playing computer games for more than two hours a day is related to greater psychological difficulties irrespective of how active children are.”

The study says that those children who did fewer than 60 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity per day were at an increased risk of psychological difficulties if they spent more than two hours using a computer or watching TV.

This is consistent with other studies that show an enhanced negative effect for those children with both high screen-viewing and low physical activity levels, the study reports.

“Not all screen viewing is bad,” said Dr Page, “and at low levels physical activity may well compensate, but the two-hour limit is a good, sensible guideline for parents.”

There are currently no official screen-viewing guidelines in the UK.

The study, which forms part of the University of Bristol’s PEACH Project, was funded jointly by the National Prevention Research Initiative (NPRI) and the World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF).

Are you a parent? Are you worried about these findings? Send us your comments using the form below.

source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-11500084

Researchers have identified 76 “excess” deaths which occurred at four centres for paediatric heart surgery in England. Patients’ groups described the findings as “deeply alarming” and called for an investigation.

A report into death rates at all 11 of England’s paediatric heart surgery units reveals that Guy’s and St Thomas’ Trust in London had 24 excess deaths over an eight year period to 2008.

Leeds General Infirmary had 20 excess deaths over the same period, Glenfield Hospital in Leicester had 23 and the John Radcliffe hospital in Oxford had nine.

Leeds General Infirmary last night admitted to problems performing one type of open heart surgery on children. The death rate for the procedure was more than five times that of other units.

The report was submitted to an inquiry into children’s heart surgery at the the John Radcliffe where surgery remains suspended following an inquiry into a spate of recent baby deaths.

However, the findings about the other ten hospitals were kept secret until The Sunday Telegraphobtained them through Freedom of Information disclosures.

All the units are currently under review. In November, an NHS committee will name several surgical units earmarked for closures, while others will be expanded.

The study was carried out by Professor David Spiegelhalter, from the University of Cambridge, who led the statistics team at the Bristol Inquiry into dozens of needless baby deaths in the 1980s and 90s when the children’s cardiac unit at the city’s Royal Infirmary was dubbed “the killing fields”.

His research found that death rates were highest in Leicester, with 65 per cent more deaths than expected, followed by the Radcliffe, with 50 per cent “excess” deaths, and Leeds, with a rate of 43 per cent and Guy’s with a rate of 29 per cent.

Currently units only publish mortality rates for specific procedures.

Professor Spiegelhalter’s research is the first to both establish how many deaths were above the norm for each procedure, and to pool the figures to show the number of excess deaths and death rates at each unit.

Prof Spiegelhalter said: “I think it is very unfortunate that parents aren’t given access to these figures, it is fairly basic information. If I was a parent in that situation, I’d want it.”

He urged hospitals to probe the findings thoroughly. The professor said: “These are alerts, they raise questions. The trusts need to undertake further investigation to establish the reasons why.”

Katherine Murphy, from the Patients’ Association, described the findings as “deeply alarming” and urged the Government to investigate the issues exposed.

Cecilia Yardley, from The Children’s Heart Federation, an umbrella body of 22 specialist heart organisations, urged units “not to close ranks” in the wake of the findings.

She said: “We appreciate that rating the performance of surgical teams is complex, given that the children whom these statistics represent are often gravely ill.

“But the figures raise questions about what accounts for the range of outcomes,” she said.

Professor Spiegelhalter’s study also provided figures for the seven other paediatric surgery units in England.

Birmingham Children’s Hospital – which treated more cases than Guy’s Hospital over the same period – had 32 fewer deaths than would have been expected; Great Ormond Street had 20 fewer; and Alder Hey and Bristol Children’s Hospital each had eight fewer.

The Freeman Hospital in Newcastle, Southampton General Hospital and Brompton hospital all had results in line with expectations.

Dr Peter Belfield, the medical director of Leeds Teaching Hospitals Trust said the figures for its unit reflected problems performing one type of open heart surgery, called repair of Tetralogy of Fallot, which is the most common congenital heart problem.

Following efforts to “concentrate expertise” at the hospital, results from 2007 onwards were in line with other centres, he said.

Separate data discloses 13 deaths – six babies and seven children – between 2000 and 2008 at the unit following the procedure, a death rate of around 10 per cent, for an operation which had an average mortality rate of 2 per cent across the rest of the country.

Outcomes for other operations were in line with the rest of the country throughout the period.

A spokesman for Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust said its unit operated on particularly sick and young babies because the hospital operates a large programme to detect congenital heart defects before birth.

In addition, 17 per cent of cases were referred by other centres, because cases were particularly ill or complex.

Dr Kevin Harris, medical director of University Hospitals of Leicester Trust, said its unit ran the largest type of cardiac life support unit in the country, meaning the hospital took some extraordinarily ill children, who were more likely to die.

He said the results from 2006 onwards, where the trust’s mortality rates were closer to average, were “a real testament” to the cardiac team.

Paediatric cardiac surgery remains suspended at John Radcliffe Hospital, following the inquiry earlier this year into four deaths in 10 weeks, including Nathalie Lo, who died 23 days after her birth last November, following a heart operation.

In July, an NHS inquiry said there was no evidence of surgical failings in the particular cases, but criticised the way the small unit was run, and said surgery should not be allowed to continue unless major changes were made to the unit.

The NHS team responsible for specialist services said Dr Spiegelhalter’s figures showed improvement in the last two years of the period examined, from 2006 to 2008, and did not suggest “any immediate safety concerns”.

Dr Martin Ashton-Key, medical advisor for the NHS National Specialised Commissioning Team, said the data had “limited application” as a way to compare centres, because of the lack of risk adjustment, and the low volumes of procedures which could be directly compared.

Prof Bruce Keogh, NHS Medical Director said the data covering the period up till 2008 did “not reflect the current standard of practice which is now as good as anywhere in the world.”

source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8010997/More-than-70-children-may-have-died-needlessly-after-heart-surgery.html

Children should learn first aid skills to help friends who become dangerously drunk, the British Red Cross has said.

Its survey of 2,500 11 to 16-year-olds found 10% had been left with a drunk friend who was sick, injured or unconscious and 14% said they had been in an alcohol-related emergency.

The Red Cross wants to promote a broad range of first aid skills, but says the effects of alcohol are a key concern.

The charity Drinkaware backed the call, but said parents needed to give advice.

Continue reading the main story
“
Start Quote

Ideally they should enjoy an alcohol-free childhood, so we wouldn’t expect them to know what to do”

Chris Sorek,
Drinkaware
Official figures show that there were more than 7,000 hospital admissions between 2006 and 2009 involving under-15s and alcohol.

Many youngsters told the survey that they drank – 23% of 11 to 16-year-olds said they have been drunk, while one in three 14 to 16-year-olds said they drank most weekends.

Many of those who said they had witnessed an alcohol-related emergency said they had panicked, or did not know what to do.

Almost half said they were worried about their friend choking on vomit or simply not waking up.

Curriculum
Joe Mulligan, from the British Red Cross, said: “We need to ensure that every young person, irrespective of whether they have been drinking, has the ability and confidence to cope in a crisis.”

The agency hopes new online training materials, including videos on YouTube, will reach children directly.

Its campaign, called Life – Live It, is also sending Red Cross trainers into schools and offering first aid packs to teachers.

Children can learn skills including the recovery position, to avoid someone choking on their own vomit, and resuscitation techniques.

Chris Sorek, from charity Drinkaware, said the findings reinforced the need for children of all ages to be educated about alcohol misuse.

“It’s not surprising that children under 16 don’t know how to deal with alcohol emergencies. Ideally they should enjoy an alcohol-free childhood, so we wouldn’t expect them to know what to do.

“But with the young people who drink alcohol drinking at very high levels, it’s important they are equipped with the tips they need to keep themselves and their friends safe.”

But he said that parents played a vital role in educating their children about the dangers of alcohol misuse.

First aid has been part of the school curriculum for two years, but the survey also found that only 5% of those surveyed had received first aid training at school.

As well as dealing with alcohol-related problems, the campaign aims to help teach children how to help people with asthma attacks, head injuries, choking and epileptic seizures.

source: www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-11266428

Many parents are incapable of giving their children the correct dose of liquid medicines, claim Australian researchers.

Using household spoons to measure them out could mean a potentially dangerous overdose, they say.

Children under five are at the highest risk of accidental overdose.

The study, presented in Lisbon, tested 97 adults and found 61% measured the wrong dose – 17% measured an overdose and 44% did not give enough.

Dr Rebekah Moles, from the University of Sydney, recruited 97 people visiting day-care centres catering for under-fives from the city.

Of these, 53 were mothers, seven were fathers and the rest were day care staff.

Continue reading the main story
“
Start Quote

We were surprised and concerned to find that some people thought that medicines must be safe because you can buy them without prescription.”

Dr Rebekah Moles
University of Sydney
The researchers quizzed the adults on a number of scenarios, asking them what they would do next.

For example they told the parent that their youngest child felt hot and irritable, but was still drinking, eating and playing.

Common over-the-counter medicines were made available, together with a selection of spoons and other dosing devices, and the volunteers chose at what point they would use a medicine, and measured out the dose themselves.

Dr Moles said: “Taking all the scenarios together, 61% of the participants would have given an incorrect dose, and only 75% were able to measure accurately what dose they intended to give.”

In total, 17% measured out an overdose of the drug, and 44% did not give enough.

“We found that 7% would give a medicine without taking their child’s temperature, and 46% would give medicine when the temperature was less than 38 degrees.”

In total, only 14% managed the scenario correctly.

Secret shoppers
Dr Moles said that almost half of the 119,000 calls received by the New South Wales Poisons Information Centre, which handles emergency calls from across Australia, concerned accidental overdose in children, with 15% needing hospitalisation.

The vast majority of the calls about children involved under-fives, she said.

Presenting her findings at the annual conference of the International Pharmaceutical Federation in Lisbon, she said: “We were surprised and concerned to find that some people thought that medicines must be safe because you can buy them without prescription.

“For example, one parent said to us that if Panadol (a paracetamol-based painkiller) is available over-the-counter, administering a double dose couldn’t do any harm.”

She said: “There is an urgent need to review the use of children’s over-the-counter medicines by parents.

“We are following up this research by using mystery shoppers to visit pharmacies and see what advice they are given when presenting similar scenarios.”

Neal Patel from the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain, said that it was important for parents to give their child the correct dose.

He said: “If parents are unsure about dosing for children they should always consult the packaging information or seek advice from their local pharmacist.”

“Medicines are always supplied in child-proof containers and parents can also help prevent accidental overdose by always keeping medicines out of the sight and reach of children”

Margaret Peycke, from the National Pharmacy Association, said: “Whether you are in Australia or the UK, medicines that are available to buy are safe if used correctly but there are some risks if they are not.

“The medicine should be administered carefully using the spoon or measuring device supplied, to ensure the child does not receive more or less than the recommended dose.

“Household spoons should not be used as a substitute as they do not measure amounts accurately unlike ones that come with the medicine.”

Research at John Moores University in Liverpool, also to be presented at a conference this week, concluded that it was feasible to produce “mini-tablets”, small enough for a younger child to swallow.

An inquiry into whether infant formula milk might be linked to breast growth in babies found no link, Chinese authorities announced today.

The investigation was ordered after some parents in Hubei complained their babies were growing breasts and one 1-year-old girl in Beijing had premature puberty after drinking formula milk made by Synutra International.

A Ministry of Health spokesman, Deng HaiHua said the investigation found that the hormone levels within the milk powder were within normal standards “(investigators) found nothing abnormal about the amount of hormones contained in milk powder from Synutra and other brands”.

According to Deng, food safety experts from China CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) tested 42 samples of Synutra dairy products and 31 dairy samples from other dairy companies.

One of the samples tested came from the milk residue drunk by one of the babies who had grown breasts – nothing unusual was detect.

The Health Ministry informs that tests revealed no exogenous sex hormones, such as estradiol and prolactin – hormones which stimulate the production of breast milk (lactation). Health care professionals have examined the three babies who had grown breasts and report that their premature developments were “not serious”.

Deng said there were no reports of premature development (premature puberty, precocious puberty) coming in which might indicated a change in statistical incidence.

The current premature development cases should be diagnosed as “minimal puberty”, often seen in baby boys up to 6 months of age and baby girls up to the age of 2 years, said Professor Wu Xueyan, an expert in endocrine research at the Peking Union Medical College Hospital. A “minimal puberty” caused by natural hormone secretion, Wu added.

Wu said:

The three infants did not show premature development of bones or height, and the growth of their breasts was within the normal ranges of minimal puberty.

Wu believes that the recent increases in cases of premature development are due to greater awareness in the Chinese population. More people are seeking medical advice, resulting in more cases being reported.

As the theme is currently in the headlines all over China, Wu believes more parents will be seeking medical advice, resulting in a rise in reported cases over the short term.

During the last few years there has been an increase in the number of reports concerning infant formula or milk powder in China. In 2008 melamine (a colourless crystalline compound used in making synthetic resins; 2,4,6-triamino-1,3,5-triazine. Formula: C3H6N6) was found in milk products produced by 22 different Chinese companies, leading to the illnesses or deaths of at least 300,000 Chinese children. Melamine had been added to alter test results for protein content.

Sources: China Daily, Synutra International, BBC.

If you, or someone in your family, smokes and you have children, then it is important to ensure that they are not the recipients of , which is classified as a known human (Group A) carcinogen by the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency. Secondhand smoke is scientifically correlated with a range of illnesses from asthma to cancer to heart disease, and it is even more damaging to children whose lungs and immune systems are still developing. Given the statistics, the less exposure your kids have, the better.

Steps

1. Stop smoking. If you or anyone else in your home smokes, the most effective way to prevent harm to the kids is to quit (or persuade the resident smoker to quit) as soon as possible. It is a hard habit to break but look at just some of the benefits you get for stopping:
   • Healthier kids, less respiratory illness (and fewer medical bills) for you and for them,
   • Clean home environment, no yellowing paintwork, no odors.
   • Cleaner, healthier teeth & gums, which can save you from having work done at the dentist.
   • Cleaner upholstery, curtains, and mirrors.
   • No cost of cigarettes.
   • No chance of household fire from a cigarette or of cigarette burns.
2. Smoke outdoors. Make it a rule to never smoke inside the home, even in the middle of winter. Indoor smoke builds up and anyone in proximity to that smoke is a target of the carcinogenic chemicals and respiratory irritants cigarette smoke contains. The chemical particles also fall onto the household furniture, upholstery and walls, and continue to emit potentially damaging chemicals long after the cigarette is extinguished, not to mention the stale odor of tobacco smoke. But, standing on your driveway and lighting up will be bad for people who pass by, and smoke in the yard can easily go over walls and fences. However, smoking outdoors is always the best choice, because the smoke will naturally disappear much faster outdoors than indoors. Smoking in your home is similar to smoking in a car with the windows rolled up, except that the effects are more instant in a car rather than more long term in a home.
3. Never smoke in the car. It is never okay to smoke in a car when you have kids, even when your kids are not in the car with you, because the smoke residue lingers and off-gases whenever the kids are in the car. Rolling down a window helps some, but can blow the smoke directly into your kids’ faces.
4. Ask guests to light up outdoors. It is your home and you have a right to a smoke-free environment. Be polite but firm and let the guests know that because of the kids, there is a strict “no indoor smoking” policy in place.
5. Keep the kids away from public places where smoking is concentrated. If you do not live in an area with laws banning smoking in restaurants, find the restaurants that voluntarily ban smoking when you take your kids out to eat. This also applies to concerts, shows, entertainment places, and anywhere that smokers feel comfortable lighting up. Be aware that even where smoking is banned indoors, many places still permit smoking on outdoor patios. Keep the kids away from tables of smokers or take them indoors.
6. Ask babysitters not to smoke. This can be difficult, especially if you are asking grandparents or friends to babysit, but you must be firm for the sake of your children’s health.
7. Make alternative arrangements. If you work or follow hobbies in a place that permits smoking, and you need to take your child there for any amount of time, make sure that your child is not exposed to the smoke of others in this environment. If you cannot manage this, make alternative arrangements.

Tips

• Air fresheners only mask the scent of cigarette smoke – they do not remove it. Filters suck up the odor, but all the harmful chemicals will still be lingering, undetectable but still harmful.
• Remember what secondhand smoke exposes children to. Would you allow your children to consume or inhale arsenic, lead, mercury, DDT, acetone, ammonia, formaldehyde, cyanide, or carbon monoxide? These are the chemicals found in secondhand smoke. They may not be visible, but they are there. When inhaled even in small amounts on a regular basis, they can cause significant damage to a developing body. Secondhand smoke causes 3,400 cases of lung cancer each year and 22,000 to 70,000 heart disease in adult non-smokers in the US each year (American Lung Association).
• If you slipped and smoked in your car or indoors, vacuum thoroughly and clean out the car or the room by wiping down furniture, car upholstery, etc. and leave the windows wide open to let in fresh air. Empty all ashtrays and put the garbage bag outside. The amount of extra cleaning effort might help to convince you that it is just easier not to smoke in the first place.
• Change the air filter in your car if you smoke in it. They will contain the smoke smell and make it worse when you turn on your heat or A/C.

Warnings

• The surgeon general states that there is NO safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke. Short exposures to second hand smoke can cause blood platelets to become stickier, damage the lining of blood vessels, decrease coronary flow velocity reserves, and reduce heart rate variability, potentially increasing the risk of heart attack (American Lung Association).
• Kids exposed to cigarette smoke can get severe bronchial and other respiratory illnesses, and have an increased exposure to carcinogens, which can trigger cancer. Young bodies are far more vulnerable to cell mutation triggered by secondhand smoke as they are growing. But, that does not make adults completely immune to secondhand smoke either.
• Cigarette smoke contains around 4000 chemicals, a number of which are known carcinogens.

source:www.healthexpertadvice.org/advice/Childhood-Health/Protect-Your-Kids-from-Secondhand-Smoke-133.htm

US researchers writing in a leading journal concluded that a new form of pelleted tobacco product that in some cases looks like candy could poison children and lure young people into nicotine addiction.

You can read about the study, by researchers from the Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Northern Ohio Poison Control Center and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), online in the 19 April ahead of print issue of Pediatrics.

Last year, RJ Reynolds, one the biggest tobacco companies in the US, started market testing a new pelleted product made with finely ground tobacco flavoured with mint or cinnamon that dissolves in the mouth like breath mints.
The product, called Camel Orbs, contains 1 mg of nicotine per pellet, which is about the same as that contained in the average nicotine lozenge marketed to people trying to quit smoking.

However, according to a CNN news report, Orbs, and other products in the range, Camel Strips (0.6 mg nicotine per strip) and Sticks (3.1 mg nicotine per strip) appear to be a new trend in the tobacco industry to create smokeless nicotine products that people can use in places where it is no longer legal to smoke, like bars and restaurants.

1 mg of nicotine is enough to make a small child feel nausea and vomit, said the researchers, who in their background information stressed that one of the biggest causes of poisoning that leads to calls to poison control centers throughout the US is babies and children swallowing tobacco products. The figures for 2007 show over 6,700 reported cases of tobacco-related poisoning among children aged 5 and under.

A poison control center in Portland, Oregon has already reported a case where a three-year old ingested an Orbs pellet. The center is in a region where the tobacco product is being test marketed.

Lead author and director of the Tobacco Control Research Program at HSPH, Professor Gregory Connolly, told the media that the introduction of these new products could be disastrous for public health, particularly for infants and adolescents.

Connolly said that while the product might be described as a “tobacco” product, to a four-year old child it looks like candy.

“Nicotine is a highly addictive drug and to make it look like a piece of candy is recklessly playing with the health of children,” said Connolly.

The researchers also noted that intentional use of smokeless tobacco products among adolescents went up 6 per cent per year from 2002 to 2006.

For the study the researchers worked out how much nicotine, based on median body weight, children would have to ingest to experience symptoms of poisoning:

• A one-year old child could get mild to moderate symptoms of poisoning from 8 to 14 Orbs, 14 Strips or 3 Sticks, while ingesting 10 to 17 Orbs, 17 Strips or 3 to 4 Sticks, could cause severe poisoning and death.
• A four-year old child could get mild to moderate symptoms of poisoning from 13 to 21 Orbs, 14 Strips or 4 Sticks, while ingesting 16 to 27 Orbs, 27 Strips or 5 Sticks, could cause severe poisoning and death.

The manufacturer argues that the packaging is child resistant, but the researchers said that adults could leave them lying around opened, and that this together, with their appealing candy-like appearance and flavoring, increases the chances that children will ingest them.

In an interview reported by CNN, Reynolds spokesman David Howard, said he didn’t think Camel Orbs looked “at all” like Tic Tac mints.

Howard stressed that the product was marketed to adults and came in child-resistant containers, and said it was unfair to criticize a product because of its flavoring, and pointed to smoking cessation aids like Nicogum. Besides, nearly every household has products that can poison children, such as cleaning products, medicines, health and beauty products, he said.

But that is not the point, commented one expert, who said children will be influenced by the behavior of the adults they observe.

Dr Jonathan P Winickoff, a Harvard medical professor and chairman of the American Academy of Pediatrics Tobacco Consortium, told CNN that, the last time he checked, he didn’t see adults going around “drinking toilet bowl cleanser in front of their kids”.

Winickoff also commented that accidental poisoning of young children was no the only cause for concern, intentional use by kids and teenagers was likely to be another public health problem from introduction of dissolvable nicotine products.

He said teenagers will look at the products and think they are harmless, and not realize they are exposing their brains to nicotine and priming themselves to become nicotine addicts.

“If teens ended up using smokeless product because they are attracted to candy flavors and they end up getting addicted to nicotine, the public health benefit of smokeless tobacco is neutralized,” said Winickoff, who was not involved in the study.

source: www.medicalnewstoday.com