Objectives: To study mortality changes in Greece prior to and during the financial crisis.
Study design: Analysis of data by the Hellenic Statistical Authority (1955–2013).
Results: During the crisis, mortality increased from 9.76/1000 in 2009 to 10.52/1000 in 2012 and to 11.16/1000 in 2015, driven by an increase in the number of deaths and a decrease in the estimated population. The annual increase of the expected mortality accelerated during the crisis; in contrast, age-adjusted mortality continued to decrease up to 2014 and increased in 2015. The subpopulations that seemed to be affected more during the crisis were the elderly (especially those over 70 years), women, and citizens in southern Greece. The common denominator of all these subgroups was older age. Mortality due to heart diseases continued to decline at an accelerated pace, due to neoplasia continuing to increase at an accelerated pace and due to a reversal in the rate of stroke (from decline to increment).
Conclusions: The increment of crude mortality during the financial crisis in Greece should be attributed to the increase in deaths, only in part due to the aging population, the reduction in births, and the increase in emigration that contracted the population.
Idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) is a rare, heterogeneous disorder characterized by a strikingly high eosinophil count (>1,500 cells/µL), over a long period of time (>6 months), with end organ damage. We present a 60-year-old patient with idiopathic HES with isolated liver involvement, a rare systemic dis¬ease and a rare solid organ involvement. The patient had a thorough investigational work up until HES was established, including liver biopsy. He needed intensive immunosuppressive treatment at first with steroids, then with azathioprine in conjunction with a low dose of steroids. After 16 years of follow-up, the patient showed no evidence of liver dysfunction. To the best of our knowledge, this is the longest follow-up for a patient with HES-associated chronic hepatitis. Our observation suggests that, with appropriate treatment, liver involvement in HES may be well controlled without deterioration to advanced liver failure.
Background: United States (US) and European Union (EU) legislation attempts to counterbalance the presumed discrimination in pediatric drug treatment and development.
Methods: We analyzed the history of drug development, US/EU pediatric laws, and pediatric studies required by US/EU regulatory authorities and reviewed relevant literature.
Results: The US and EU definitions of a child are defined administratively (rather than physiologically) as being aged <17 years and <18 years, respectively. However, children mature physiologically well before their seventeenth or eighteenth birthdays. The semantic blur for these differing definitions may indicate certain conflicts of interest.
Conclusions: Pediatric healthcare today is better than ever. Regulatory-related requirements for “pediatric” studies focus on labeling. Most of these studies lack medical usefulness and may even harm pediatric patients through administration of placebo and/or substandard treatment, despite the resultant publications, networking, patent extensions, and strengthened regulatory standing. Clinicians, parents, and ethics committees should be aware of these issues. New rules are needed to determine new pharmaceutical dose estimates in prepubescent patients, and when/how to clinically confirm them. Internet-based structures to divulge this information should be established between drug developers, clinicians, and regulatory authorities. A prerequisite for the rational use of pharmaceuticals in children would be to correct the flawed concept that children are discriminated against in drug treatment and development, and to abandon separate pediatric drug approval processes.
Objective: To review current medical literature on the risks and potential benefits of e-cigarette use and its permissibility under Jewish law.
Methods: A survey of current medical literature about the risks and potential benefits of e-cigarette use, and a review of existing rabbinic literature regarding both combustible and e-cigarette products.
Results: E-cigarettes contain fewer harmful materials than do combustible cigarettes. However, they are not risk-free. Their skyrocketing use among youth is of concern, as e-cigarettes lead to nicotine addiction and are a gateway to combustible cigarettes. Preliminary data indicate that e-cigarettes increase the risk of myocardial infarction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and emphysema and are no more effective as aids to smoking cessation than US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved interventions with acceptable safety profiles. Few halakhic decisors have opined on the permissibility of e-cigarettes, but extrapolating from halakhic discussions regarding combustible cigarettes strongly suggests that they would prohibit e-cigarettes based on government warnings and preliminary data demonstrating increased risk of cardiovascular and respiratory diseases, at the least because of possible danger (safek sakana). Among youth and pregnant women, for whom e-cigarettes are particularly dangerous and for whom the government has administered explicit warnings, a Jewish legal prohibition should be absolute. There is a unique obligation to prevent youth from obtaining these products. Jewish law might also prohibit deriving benefit from the sale or advertisement of these products.
Conclusions: Extrapolating from rabbinic literature regarding combustible cigarettes, the preliminary data establishing the dangers of e-cigarettes and the government warnings against usage would render these products prohibited under Jewish law, especially for youth and pregnant women.
Objective: The World Health Organization’s (WHO) guidelines for cancer pain management were intentionally made simple in order to be widely implemented by all physicians treating cancer patients. Referrals to pain specialists are advised if pain does not improve within a short time. The present study examined whether or not a reasonable use of the WHO guideline was made by non-pain specialists prior to referral of patients with cancer-related pain to a pain clinic.
Methods: Cancer patients referred to a pain specialist completed several questionnaires including demographics, medical history, and cancer-related pain; the short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ); and the Short Form Health Survey SF-12. Data from referral letters and medical records were obtained. Treatments recommended by pain specialists were recorded and categorized as “unjustified” if they were within the WHO ladder framework, or “justified” if they included additional treatments.
Results: Seventy-three patients (44 women, 29 men) aged 55 years (range, 25–85) participated in the study. Their pain lasted for a mean of 6 (1–192) months. Mean pain intensity scores on a 0–10 numerical rating scale were 7 (2–10) at rest and 8 (3–10) upon movement. Most patients complied with their referring physician’s recommendations and consumed opioids. Adverse events were frequent. No significant correlation was found between the WHO analgesic medication step used and mean pain levels reported. There were 63 patient referrals (85%) categorized as “unjustified,” whereas only 11 patients (15%) required “justified” interventions.
Conclusions: These findings imply that analgesic treatment within the WHO framework was not reasonably utilized by non-pain specialists before referring patients to pain clinics.
Background: The use of electric bicycles (E-bikes) has dramatically increased over the last decade. E-bikes offer an inexpensive, alternative form of transport, but also pose a new public health challenge in terms of safety and injury prevention.
Objective: The aim of this study was to describe the epidemiology and severity of E-bike related injuries among children treated in the emergency department (ED) and to compare these to manual bicycle related injuries.
Methods: A retrospective observational study of all pediatric patients presenting to the ED between December 2014 and November 2015 with an injury related to E-bike or manual bicycle use. Data including demographics, diagnosis, injury severity score (ISS), and outcome were compared.
Results: A total of 196 cyclist injuries presented to the ED; 85 related to E-bike use and 111 to manual bicycle riders. The mean age of E-bikers was 13.7 years (7.5–16 years) and of manual bicycle riders was 9.9 years (3–16 years). Injuries to the head and the extremities were common in both groups. E-bikers had significantly more intra-abdominal organ injury (P=0.047). Injury severity scores were low overall, but injuries of higher severity (ISS>9) only occurred among the E-bikers.
Conclusions: Pediatric E-bike injuries tend to be more severe than those sustained during manual bicycle riding. Further research into bicycle and other road and pavement users could lead to enhanced regulation regarding E-bike usage.
Objective: The aim of the present study was to determine and compare the expression pattern and localization of nestin, in an attempt to explore its role in oral carcinogenesis.
Methods: Western blot and immunohistochemistry analysis were performed to study the expression pattern of nestin in normal mucosa, leukoplakia, and oral squamous cell carcinoma samples. Nestin expres¬sion was evaluated in the keratinocytes and blood vessels of all the samples and compared with various clinico-pathological parameters.
Results: Nestin expression was increased in samples of leukoplakia and oral squamous cell carcinoma when compared with normal mucosa. Among leukoplakia samples, the expression was increased in cases without dysplasia compared to cases with dysplastic features. In cases of oral squamous cell carcinoma, the expression of nestin was found to be decreased with the loss of differentiation. Neoangiogenesis status determined by nestin expression showed an increasing expression from normal mucosa through leuko-plakia, to oral squamous cell carcinoma.
Conclusion: This study has two major findings: 1) identification of nestin as an effective indicator of neo-angiogenesis, and 2) nestin may be used as a marker in predicting the early changes in oral carcinogenesis.
To the Editor,
I am writing in response to Dr Sharon Galper Grossman’s recent fascinating article, “Vape Gods and Judaism—E-cigarettes and Jewish Law.”1 The author extrapolates from rabbinic literature regard-ing combustible cigarettes and suggests that the preliminary data establishing the dangers of e-cigarettes, and the government warnings against usage, would render these products prohibited under Jewish law, especially for youth and pregnant women.
United States (US) and European Union (EU) laws attempt to counterbalance the presumed discrimination of children in drug treatment and drug development. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-rewarded pediatric studies with antidepressants triggered in 2004 an FDA black-box warning of suicidality in young patients. Fewer antidepressants were prescribed, and the number of completed suicides of young persons increased. The dilemma between this warning and the need to adequately treat young depressed patients remains unsolved. We analyzed the history of drug development, the evolving view of diseases in young patients, US/EU pediatric laws, and pediatric studies triggered by FDA/European Medicines Agency (EMA) in depression and other diseases on the background of developmental pharmacology; financial, institutional, and other interests; and the literature. The FDA/EMA define children administratively, not physio¬logically, as <17 (FDA)/<18 years old (EMA). But young persons mature physiologically well before their 17th/18th birthday. Depression occurs in young persons, has special characteristics, but is not fundamentally different from adult depression. Young persons are not another species. Regulatory requirements for “pediatric” studies focus on “pediatric” labels. Many “pediatric” studies, including those in depression, lacked and lack medical sense and harm patients by placebo treatment although effective drugs exist. The FDA has partially abandoned separate “pediatric” efficacy studies, but not in psychiatry. Clinicians, parents, institutional review boards, and ethics committees should become aware of questionable “pediatric” studies, should re-evaluate ongoing ones, consider to suspend them, and to reject new ones. The concept of separate “pediatric” drug approval needs to be abandoned.
To the Editor,
I thank Rabbi Spitz for his thoughtful analysis. However, I humbly disagree with his conclusion that it is premature to classify e-cigarettes as “downright prohibited.”
