When American consumers purchase most products and services, they know up-front what the cost will be; clothing has price tags, grocery stores have shelf tags, and restaurant menus display their prices. But when it comes to health-care costs, consumers are left in the dark, unsure of how much their physician charges for services rendered and not knowing how much of those fees their insurance provider, if they have insurance at all, will cover. So how does a consumer know if they are getting the proper reimbursement?

The bottom line is: THEY DON’T, and a report out of U.S. Senator Jay Rockefeller’s Commerce Committee shows that this lack of transparency has forced Americans to pay billions of dollars for medical bills that should have been covered by their insurance. “People don’t know what they’re buying, what they’re getting, why they’re getting underpaid, why they’re being forced to pay more of the difference,” Senator Rockefeller said as he opened a hearing on underpayments to consumers on Wednesday.

Senator Rockefeller’s investigation revealed that roughly two-thirds of the health insurance companies in the U.S. have been using a faulty database to determine what the industry calls “usual and customary” reimbursement rates for doctors outside their insurance network. The flawed database is operated by Ingenix, the only commercial source of such data.

For more than ten years, Ingenix has gathered data from insurance companies to determine the typical cost for medical care received outside their networks. But investigators say insurers deliberately skewed data to underestimate the cost of services, driving up out-of-pocket expenses for patients. According to the Commerce Committee’s report, in one instance Aetna omitted the highest 20 percent of medical charges before sending data to Ingenix. Once at Ingenix, officials there “scrubbed” the figures again to further temper charges. “The result of this practice is that American consumers have paid billions of dollars for health care services that their insurance companies should have paid,” the report states.

Earlier this year, a probe by New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo found that calculations used by Ingenix to determine reimbursement rates produced numbers that were as much as 30 percent lower than actual market rates. Cuomo described it as “a scheme by health insurers to defraud consumers by manipulating reimbursement rates.” About a dozen New York insurers, including UnitedHealth, have already reached settlements with Cuomo, which consists of not only changing their practices but also funding the replacement of Ingenix with a new not-for-profit database.

At recent committee hearings, health care specialists testified to the underhanded practices insurers use to avoid responsibility and mislead consumers about benefits. One of those witnesses was Wendell Porter, who until early last year was vice president for corporate communications at CIGNA, and is now blowing the whistle. “What we have today, Mr. Chairman, is Wall Street-run health care that has proven itself an untrustworthy partner to its customers, to the doctors and hospitals who deliver care and to the state and federal governments that attempt to regulate it,” Potter said.

Potter told lawmakers that insurers deliberately use difficult language to confuse and mislead consumers about their benefits. “Insurers know that policyholders are so baffled by those notices they usually just ignore them or throw them away,” he said. “And that’s exactly the point. If they were more understandable, more consumers might realize that they are being ripped off.” Potter urged senators to pass the public health option proposed by President Obama, saying it would bring more transparency and quality to the health insurance industry. The idea is strongly opposed by Republicans and insurance industry executives, who say a public plan would drive private companies out of business.

Senator Rockefeller and other lawmakers are calling for more transparency, overall, in the health insurance industry. “Deceptive practices by insurance companies are not only misleading and widespread, they are absolutely unacceptable to me and I won’t give up the fight for consumers until we bring this to a stop forever,” Senator Rockefeller said in a statement. “We are at the very precipice of doing something or doing nothing or doing something poor or doing something really good in the national debate on health care reform. We have to do it right.”

In an effort to uncover the riddle that is AIDS-HIV, a team of Amearican and Canadian researchers may have discovered the hiding places for the virus. It seems that it has been lurking in immune cells, allowing the virus to elude current drug treatments. With the new data, scientists may have new leads for innovative treatments for AIDS-HIV.

The American and Canadian researchers with Oregon State University’s Vaccine and Gene Therapy Institute (VGTI) of Florida and the University of Montreal, have found what they believe is a more effective treatment and potentially even cure for AIDS-HIV, based on the discovery of the virus’ hiding places. They have determined using a combination approach of targeted chemotherapy, along with highly active anti-retroviral (HAART) treatments, similar to treatments used to treat leukemia, may not only destroy the viruses circulating within the body, but may also destroy those hiding in the body’s immune system’s cells.

According to study co-leader Dr. Rafick-Pierre Sekaly, “You have to target not the virus, but the cells in which the virus is hiding. And that I think it is a very different concept than what everybody has been pushing for. That clearly is a major finding that we have got to the table.” He added, “This would make it possible to destroy cells containing a virus while giving the immune system time to regenerate with healthy cells.”

Researchers for the newly released study honed in on T-cells or immune cells for their research. T-cells respond to viruses based on vaccines the body has received. If a virus enters the body when a person has already been vaccinated against that particular virus then T-cells launch a very direct attack. However, the T-cells also seem to be the perfect place for HIV to hide out. Dr. Jean-Pierre Routy, an infection and immunity researcher at the Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre in Montreal and a co-leader of the study said, “For the first time, this study proves that the HIV reservoirs are not due to a lack of potency of the antiretroviral drugs but to the virus hiding inside two different types of long-life CD4 memory immune cells.”

Research for more innovative treatments and cures for AIDS-HIV continue. Currently, drugs developed to treat the conditions have been able to keep AIDS-HIV to very low levels within the body, but they haven’t been able to eliminate the virus completely. Now, scientists have found their hiding places. A study to test the validity of the newly released study will start in September of this year. Dr. Sekaly says, he is “very optimistic” that researchers will be able to develop new drugs to target the hiding spots identified with their new research.

The study can be found online in the journal Nature Medicine.

Millions of people living in the United States have an increased risk of cancer, based on the neighborhoods where they live, according to the latest Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) report. Those living in California, New York and Oregon have the highest risk of cancer, caused from increased levels of toxic chemicals released by cars, factories, and other sources.

During the largest study of the United States air quality, the EPA’s National-Scale Air Assessment or NATA, it was determined those living around major cities, including New York and Los Angeles, had increased risks of cancer due to air pollution. However, the study found a couple of rural areas in Mississippi and Kentucky also had significantly higher risks of cancer, according to USA Today. The community with the highest risk was located outside of Los Angeles in Cerritos, California, in a neighborhood tucked between two freeways. Those living in this community have increased risks for cancer of 1,200 in every 1 million people, according to the EPA, compared to the national average of 36 in every 1 million people. The newly released study actually shows a decline from 41.5 in 1 million people, found in the 2002 EPA report that was based on 1999 pollutant data.

While there are several communities across the U.S. with increased risks of cancer due to air pollutions, there are also those which have low risks, based on their air quality. Kalawao County in Hawaii and Golden Valley County in Montana, according to the EPA’s report, have the least toxic air. Those with the lowest risk of cancer from air toxins were Coconino County, Arizona and Lyon County, Nevada. Dave Guinnup, a member of the EPA and leader of the team which performed the assessments for toxic air pollutants said, “Air toxic risks are local. They are a function of the sources nearest to you.” He added, “If you are out in the Rocky Mountains, you are going to be closer to 2 in a million. If you are in an industrial area with a lot of traffic, you are going to closer to 1100 in 1 million.”

The EPA established a baseline of any risks over 100-in-a million as unacceptable. However, based on the newly released data, there are millions of U.S. residents living with risks of developing cancer from air pollutants much higher than these baseline standards. The EPA’s report, NATA, consisted of county-by-county analysis of air pollution, covered 181 air toxics, with only 80 known by the EPA to be cancer-causing pollutants. The study determined 30 percent of all air pollutant cancer risks are from mobile emissions, 25 percent are from industry emissions and 45 percent are from “background toxics,” those with no known emission sources, such as tetrachloride.

Based on the new 2006 study, recently released by the EPA, we can see improvements to air quality, with the overall cancer risks to Americans decreasing to 36 in every 1 million people who are exposed to air toxins. However, it seems several areas within the United States still have significantly increased risks of cancer, based on the neighborhoods or areas where they live, depending on the proximity to automobile traffic or industries. John Walke, a senior attorney at the National Resources Defense Council said, “The implication for me is we still have a long way to go to reduce toxic air pollution to protect the public.” He added, “It still shows an unacceptable number of Americans being exposed to cancer risk solely attributed to air pollution on top of all the other risks from smoking and indoor air pollution and other risks.”

A few days after purchasing my plane ticket to Hawaii for next summer, I joined a local fitness center offering a deal at only $10 a month for unlimited workout privileges. It sounded like a good idea a few weeks ago before the Christmas cookies and the many feasts took over my appetite. I doubt I am alone in my thought process because with 2009 being ushered in, top resolutions year after year seem to be losing weight, ridding stress from your life, and getting in shape.

While yoga may still be incredibly popular in American culture, I have dabbled in Pilates but have not tried enough yoga practice to inspire or motivate myself into more. With my only experience of yoga being a few years ago inside a commercialized fitness center elbow to elbow with men and women, I was unable to see the instructor who darted back and forth between the corners of the room barking out positions from her headset. Unfortunately, I have not been back to yoga but recently found a Bikram yoga place—also known as “Hot Yoga,” a sect that involves practicing stretches of yoga done in a room with the temperature at 105 degrees with 40 percent humidity—near my home and have resolved to make yoga one of my New Year’s resolutions for 2009.

Yoga has been a trend for decades but it has been practiced in ancient cultures for centuries. The philosophy behind the method is that the spirit, mind, and body are all one and cannot be treated individually. This simple principal of yoga is traditionally part of Ayurvedic Indian medicine and the same idea is mimicked in Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM). As yoga gets further in-depth, there are more complex ideas to think about as part of a meditation of the body mind and soul.

In terms of a New Year’s resolution, physical exertion is determined by how much energy you put out in order to get it back. Yoga isn’t considered a cardio workout like the treadmill and it’s not bulking up your muscles like free weights, but because the entire body (including the all-important muscle inside the head) is working together to focus, balance and breathe to attain a higher inner peace.

A lot of people may find this type of workout extraneous or unnecessary because they workout to build up a sweat, to release stress, or exert energy in order to slim, tone, or bulk. However, yoga acts as a medicinal strengthening power, able to help your muscles stay long and lean and cleanse your body from the inside out. A yoga routine can increase your flexibility by using multiple positions that stretch and form most of the joints in your body. Yoga also lubricates those joints and muscles helping to secure them from pain and injury, keeping the body working in harmony. As part of its healing powers, yoga is recommended for those recovering from illness or surgeries because it is possibly the only activity that stimulates and massages the glands and all of the internal organs of the body.

When used as a detoxification agent, the practice of yoga can provide better blood circulation which helps to cleanse toxins and other unwanted particles out of your body, which in turn pumps up your energy, increases your awareness and alertness, and keeps you clean from the inside out providing general health.

For those who may still be apprehensive, yoga may seem trendy now, but this specific workout trend has lasted for a reason. Exercising your mind, soul, and body in one hour or less can transform your whole lifestyle and create a new appreciation for spirituality as well as the pressures of a healthy body. Since the results of yoga have proven and continued strongly throughout many cultures, it might be the year to give it a try. If enlightenment, a great body, and a better outlook for 2009 are what you’re looking for, make room in your busy schedule for a little bit of yoga and by 2010, you may just have to find a different set of resolutions.

A few weeks ago I was at a restaurant with a friend and although I was starving, I could not figure out what I wanted on the menu. As we started and stopped stories catching up in each other’s lives, my friend mentioned a vegetable dish that sounded good. I looked at the description on my menu and noted that it was gluten-free. My friend raised his eyebrows and proceeded to tell me just how ridiculous the new gluten-free diet craze is for those who do not need to cut gluten out of their life. After the health lecture, I got to thinking and stumbled upon new research that tells just how dangerous abstaining from gluten can be. So how bad is gluten-free for your body? A new study is aiming to answer that question.

Gluten is a special protein that is found in some grains like rye, wheat, and barley along with many types of cereal and most kinds of bread. Recently a gluten-free diet has become a bit of a fad, like the anti-bread campaigns of a decade ago. Gluten helps bread rise before the baking process. Gluten also keeps loaves firm, elastic, and filled with starch so the bread retains its shape. Many vegetarians rely on gluten’s absorbent quality to take the place of meat in their diets because it fills you up.

However, gluten isn’t always good for everyone’s body. In the case of celiac disease, those who suffer from this cannot break down gluten the correct way and become ill. Therefore, the cure for now is to rid the body of gluten in exchange for relative health. The good news is that not all grains contain gluten, and examples of celiac-friendly meals are made with wild rice, quinoa, sunflower seeds, soybeans, oats, millet, buckwheat and corn, among others. Gluten-free products are often labeled as such because they have less than 1 percent gluten and even though most of the gluten can be taken out of wheat flour, it cannot be completely void of this protein.

Unfortunately a new study has shown that eating gluten-free may not be as healthy as some people think, affecting what is inside your stomach as well as other systems in your body. Published in the April 2009 edition of the British Journal of Nutrition, researchers followed 10 healthy volunteers and tracked their progress with a gluten-free diet over a period of time.

Performed by the Spanish National Research Council, the trial took place over one month where the participants each ate a gluten-free diet and had regular check-ups. When the experiment was over, the levels of “good bacteria” in the stomach were measured against the first batch they took prior to the diet change. The levels of helpful stomach bacteria were significantly reduced as well as a number of markers that decide immune health.

The possibility that the immune system could be compromised comes as a surprise, and with the growing popularity of gluten-free diets, this may be harder to control. Many people think weight loss is akin to cutting out necessities in their diets, but in reality following a strict diet cutting out anything major without the consent of a doctor usually results in poor health. There are many more tests to be done because this was a randomized small trial, but the preliminary results were less than positive.

Aside from the .5 to 1 percent of the adult population living with celiac disease, a gluten-free diet isn’t a good idea for weight management or as a detoxifying plan as your immune system and bacterial health could be at risk. Remember that the good bacterias (called probiotics, which are found in yogurt, among other things) residing in your stomach are helpful and necessary for digestion. So next time you find yourself starving and pouring through a menu and happen upon a gluten-free item, you may want to order a pizza instead and give thanks for your health. I know I will.

Scott Krueger, a freshman student at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), likely bore dreams of achieving academic glory and a long life of happiness and success. But those dreams were cut short when, in 1997, he died of alcohol poisoning with his blood-alcohol level at five times the drunken driving standards in that state. His fraternity brothers reported that he had multiple drinks within a short period of time—he was binge drinking.

However, Scott isn’t the only college student that has met their demise through industrial-strength guzzling. In 1995, 318 people ages 15 to 24 died from alcohol poisoning alone, many of them after a night binge at college. At the University of Virginia, a tradition called “Fourth-year Fifth,” which has seniors drinking a fifth of hard liquor at the final game of the football season, has killed 18 students since 1990. The long-term risks of college drinking practices are just as sobering. As many as 300,000 of today’s students will eventually die of alcohol-related causes such as drunk driving accidents, cirrhosis of the liver, heart disease, and various cancers.

But apparently the countless tragedies and alarming statistics have done nothing to curtail the habit. In fact, according to a new study from the U.S. National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, binge drinking among American college students is on the rise; as is its consequences. From 1999 to 2005, the percentage of students aged 18 to 24 who said they had binged on alcohol in the last month rose from 41.7 percent to nearly 45 percent; drunk driving proportions among this group increased from 26.5 percent to almost 29 percent and the number of drinking-related deaths went from 1,440 in 1998 to 1,825 in 2005, an increase of 3 percent. But the greatest increase was seen in death from unintentional poisoning, which nearly tripled between 1998 and 2005.

But alcohol misuse among college students doesn’t just affect the individual drinker; there are often consequences for other students, faculty members, the college and the community as a whole. Consider these statistics:

* More than 696,000 students between the ages of 18 and 24 are assaulted by another student who has been drinking.
* More than 97,000 students between the ages of 18 and 24 are victims of alcohol-related sexual assault or date rape.
* 400,000 students between the ages of 18 and 24 had unprotected sex and more than 100,000 students between the ages of 18 and 24 report having been too intoxicated to know if they consented to having sex.
* About 11 percent of college student drinkers report that they have damaged property while under the influence of alcohol.
* More than 25 percent of administrators from schools with relatively low drinking levels and over 50 percent from schools with high drinking levels say their campuses have a “moderate” or “major” problem with alcohol-related property damage.

But many experts say the problem often begins before college. Recently, a study presented at the 2009 meeting of the Society for Prevention Research in Washington, D.C. revealed that the earlier alcohol is introduced to a child, the greater the likelihood that he or she will binge drink in college. Moreover, “the greater number of drinks that a parent set as a limit for the teens, the more often they drank and got drunk in college,” said researcher Caitlin Abar of the Prevention Research and Methodology Center at Pennsylvania State University. On the other hand, whether the parents themselves drank appeared to have little effect on predicting their child’s behaviors toward teen alcohol use.

In 31 states, parents can legally serve alcohol to their underage children. And though U.S. teenagers drink less often than adults, they tend to drink more at a time—five drinks in a sitting, on average—according to lead researcher Ralph Hingson, director of the institute’s division of epidemiology and prevention research. “We as a society have a collective responsibility to try and change this culture of drinking at colleges and among young people,” he said.

A growing number of colleges and universities are addressing campus drinking problems by providing prevention education; expanding counseling services; and offering more alternatives, such as alcohol-free parties. Hingson said that a number of these interventions have been shown to work, but that some colleges are not implementing them. “The challenge for us is to make sure colleges understand what things are working,” he said. “We have to get them to expand screening and interventions to reach wider populations of students and work with communities.”

Hingson says efforts similar to those used to reduce smoking are needed to deal with the drinking problem among our youth. “We as a society have a collective responsibility to try and change this culture of drinking at colleges and among young people.” Dr. David L. Katz, director of the Prevention Research Center at Yale University School of Medicine, says for that to happen, society needs to take drinking among college students more seriously and the practice needs to be discouraged by those whose opinions matter the most—friends in their own peer group. “Options for bad judgment available to a college student are determined by society, and ours is decidedly ambivalent about alcohol,” Katz said. “Drinking to excess is often given favorable treatment in the media, and in social groups.”

At the same time, all of us must encourage college students to take personal responsibility for making healthy choices with the only lives they will ever have. Drinking to excess doesn’t need to be a rite of passage and driving under the influence isn’t a requirement for graduation.

Almost 18,000 cases of swine flu and 45 confirmed deaths have been reported within the U.S. As the swine flu runs its course, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius has reported that vaccines for swine flu are currently being tested in preparation for the possibility of an outbreak later this year. She stated that the government is making every effort to be prepared and is working with governors and health and school officials in case a major vaccination program is needed.

Sebelius said that currently the main focus is on the Southern Hemisphere where the flu season unfolds prior to the normal flu season for the U.S. She also noted that health officials are closely monitoring what occurs when swine flu virus intermingles with the common flu and that, thus far, the swine flu virus does not appear to be very dangerous. However, if a vaccine program is recommended, full production could begin in late summer to prepare for the start of the flu season in the Northern Hemisphere as winter approaches.

According to the Associated Press, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services placed a $289 million order for swine flu vaccine with European drug maker Novartis in May of this year. Novartis announced on June 12, 2009 that the first vaccine batch of H1N1 Swine flu vaccine has been produced much earlier than first projected. This is due to the fact that the vaccine was created in cells instead of using the typical egg-based method. The company said that this first batch is for evaluation and testing, and possibly for clinical trials, and also indicated that it could produce millions of doses of the vaccine weekly if the need arises.

On the heels of the announcement by Novartis, Protein Sciences Corporation (PSC), a privately held biopharmaceutical company based in Meriden, Connecticut, announced that it has begun manufacturing a vaccine to protect humans against the H1N1 swine flu. PSC estimates production of at least 100,000 doses per week if needed. The vaccine, known as PanBlok, is being made with the use of PSC’s proprietary baculovirus and insect cell manufacturing technology. Once produced, the vaccine will undergo quality tests that could last for up to one month, and will then be ready for use in clinical trials as well as in vaccines for those countries that grant regulatory clearance.

PSC’s Chairman, President and CEO, Daniel D. Adams said, “We are in the process of transferring our proprietary manufacturing technology to facilities in other countries and we are setting up a foundation to ensure vaccine availability for U.N.-member countries consistent with the commitment we made to the World Health Organization and the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland on May 19, 2009.” He also noted, “Using our proprietary technology, licensees could be producing vaccine in as little as two to three weeks if they are currently working with insect cells, and in a few months if they are now producing monoclonal antibodies.”

Due to the rapid widespread outbreak of the H1N1 swine flu virus, the World Health Organization has recently declared the first flu pandemic since 1968. The virus ran rampant through North America, Australia, South America, Europe and even regions beyond. However, since the onset of the outbreak in April, U.S. health officials have reported that for the most part, infections have been mild with most people recovering fairly quickly. In addition, testing has shown that the H1N1 swine flu virus continues to be susceptible to both Tamiflu and Relenza, two common antiviral drugs

In a statement, Dr. Pascal James Imperato, a former New York City health commissioner and dean of public health at the State University of New York’s Downstate Medical Center, said, “A World Health Organization level 6, which in effect states that H1N1 infections are now worldwide in distribution, is simply a declaration of the extent of geographic spread, and not a statement of severity of the clinical disease.” He also acknowledged, “The disease remains relatively mild in most people. A positive consequence of this declaration is that it empowers countries to move forward with vaccine production.”

Meanwhile, scientists from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) will be monitoring the swine flu virus for possible mutations and antiviral medication resistance that could cause the disease to become more widespread.

Expecting a child is one of the most exciting times in a person’s life, and most often prospective parents want to know the gender of the baby as soon as possible. Now it will be possible to find out if they are carrying a girl or a boy as early as 10 weeks after conception, according to the makers of the new over-the-counter gender prediction test.

IntelliGender, the Plano, Texas creator of the new “Boy or Girl Gender Prediction Test,” says that the scientists have been able to isolate certain hormones that when combined with a “proprietary mix of chemicals” react differently depending on if the mother is carrying a girl or boy. The new test claims that within ten minutes of taking the urine-based test that the mother will be able to tell her baby’s gender. The urine specimen will turn green if the gender is male, and it will turn orange if the gender is female. However, IntelliGender would not say what exact chemicals or hormones the test uses because of a patent that is still pending.

IntelliGender co-founder, Rebecca Griffin, stated, “Most parents have a great degree of curiosity to find out if they’re having a boy or girl, an it can be so excruciating to wait until the 20-week sonogram to find out. But the test was never meant to be a diagnostic tool. We don’t claim to 100 percent accuracy.” In fact, on the company’s website it specifically states not to jump and paint the room blue or pink until the expectant mother confirms the results with her physician. The company said, “We specifically state to all our consumers that they shouldn’t make any emotional or financial steps until the results are confirmed via sonogram.” According to the latest IntelliGender report, the gender predictor tests boasts a 78 to 80 percent rate of accuracy.

So why are all of the expectant parents so eager to find out whether they are having a boy or a girl a few months early? According to Jennifer Parks, who is the co-director of Loyola University Chicago’s Programs in Health Care Ethics, said “When a parent can visualize the sex of their baby and confirm they have that little person inside of them, it suddenly becomes real to them. They often feel a stronger connection. So, it’s not surprising parents would want this test.” However, some people have said that the issue could get dicey if the findings of the test led to a decision about whether or not to continue with the pregnancy. For instance, say that a woman already has tree daughters and wants to get pregnant one last time to try for a boy. If she takes the new test at ten weeks, and it shows it is not the gender she wants, she may make a decision to terminate the pregnancy and try again. Not everyone in America is pro-choice or pro-life. A lot of Americans today tend to hang out somewhere in the middle. When an expectant mother is at ten weeks, most Americans tend to see it as the earliest embryo which is very different than the more developed fetus.

The makers of the new gender prediction test say that they “categorically disagree” with the idea that their test may prompt an increase in this type of sex-selection abortion. Griffin stated, “I can’t even fathom someone making a decision about whether to terminate a pregnancy based on a test informing them they may have a boy or girl.

IntelliGender stated that out of all of the email inquiries they have received, only two have inquired about using this test as a vehicle for a sex-selection process. The anti-abortion groups, who are already concerned about women opting to keep their infants based on eye and hair color, are now worried about the gender-selection too.

Anthony Lauinger, who is the vice president of National Right to Life, stated that there is a problem is some countries where baby boys are greatly preferred for cultural reasons and aborting baby girls is a very common practice. While the test in now available for sale in 11 different countries, IntelliGender does not allow the test to be sold in China or India.

Griffin stated, “All of our retailers have to strictly adhere to that policy. If they don’t, we would pull our product immediately from their shelves.” Since the year 2006, more than 50,000 of the tests have sold online in the United States alone. Last month, the U.S. drugstore chains Walgreens and CVS, began to sell the gender predictor test in their stores for $34.95.

In the ongoing debate between what many to believe are stoners and squares lies a well-known medicinal plant that has been used for centuries: Marijuana. Some lovingly call it Mary Jane, others call it by its scientific name, cannabis, and still more call it any number of synonyms including hash, buds, grass, reefer, herb, and hemp, among others. Whatever you call it, pot has a huge following on both sides of the debate, and in the medical community in particular, because supporters of legalization and those who are against it have strong opinions.

Pro arguments have included claims like “Our President has admitted using it, so you should be, too” to medical claims that in small doses it may be able to help Alzheimer’s patients and that it is beneficial to cancer patients and treating a whole host of disorders. Anti arguments claim the drug will become more dangerous with today’s youth if legalized and since it seems to not be as healthy as it claims, weed could do more harm than good. Especially with California in the news battling over the little green plants, if you don’t know where you stand, take a look at the growing positives and negatives before making your decision.

The United States actually seems to be behind the curve in this fight. Some countries have already partially legalized it (or certain aspects of using/selling/acquiring it): Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Chile, Colombia, Croatia, Czech Republic, Germany, India (legal because of religious beliefs), Iran, Republic of Macedonia, Mexico, Netherlands, Pakistan, Peru, Portugal, Russia, Spain, Uruguay, and Venezuela. For most of these countries it is still illegal but decriminalized for possession of small amounts or growth under specific terms, and punishment is more lenient in most marijuana cases.

With marijuana being lumped into the decades-long “war on drugs” supporters say marijuana is only as harmful, if not less, than the addictive and currently legal drugs—nicotine and alcohol. With the addition of “medical cannabis” being prescribed in doctors’ offices around the country, pot seems to be a calm-inducing wonder drug that isn’t doing anything but easing people’s pain and making everyone a little happier (and in some cases hungrier). Some supporters argue that while the spread of weed may be large at first, it is no different than other countries practice of lowering the drinking age and the “rebel” appeal will eventually wear off.

On the other side of the coin, marijuana is seen as a gateway drug, leading into harsher illegal substances like cocaine, methamphetamines, or heroin, and the large percentage of teens and young adults who are often experimenting with the drug are at risk for becoming lifelong users, with many fearing that its popularity will spread. Anti-legalization supporters also lean toward the idea that pot is unhealthy for your body when smoked or used often—including high risk for men to develop testicular cancer and it may be harder to get a transplant because of a clinical dependence and body deterioration. Medical marijuana should be used sparingly—an old report done by the National Institute of Drug Abuse says that marijuana contains 50 to 70 percent more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than cigarette or cigar smoke, but studies since have proved mixed results leaving confusion in the medical community.

A recent poll of California residents says that 56 percent of residents would support the legalization, which is exactly what The Control, Regulate and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010 would offer. The act would decriminalize recreational use of pot for adults over the age of 21, up to one ounce, as well as the right to grow 25 square-foot plots on private land as long as it’s not for public sale or distribution.

With local policy-makers and Congress opening up their minds a little bit, Representative Dennis Kucinich said recently in a telephone interview, “We need to come at this from a point of science and research and not from mythologies or fears.” People who are “pro-pot” tend to come from a scientific and economic standpoint urging the government to take note of the billions spent by law enforcement cracking down on marijuana use that can be drastically changed with looser rules. It is estimated that over $7 billion is spent each year by U.S. law enforcement agencies on marijuana alone.

On the flip side, people seem to take an ethical response concerned with the future and what social consequences could result from allowing marijuana to be used recreationally like alcohol at age 21, not to mention questioning the ability to control it among teenagers. One of these concerned citizens, president of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, Russell Laine says, “We’re opposed to legalization or decriminalization of marijuana. We think it’s the wrong message to send our youth.”

With 95 million Americans over age 12 having used marijuana at least one time and 14 million having used it within the last month, the National Survey of Drug Use and Health reports that pot is the most used illegal drug in the country. Being a natural health journalist, it is hard to ignore the cultures that have used cannabis as a healing agent for centuries without huge medical, ethical, or criminal repercussions, but in terms of allowing it purely for leisurely use, it may soon be up to you, the voters: to pass or not to pass?

If you are one of the millions of Americans who currently suffer from psoriasis, you may have an increased risk of heart attack, stroke, or blockages in the legs, arms and groin, according to new research. Those who suffer with psoriasis, an irritating skin condition, which is also associated with atherosclerosis, a disease of the blood vessels signaled by plaque buildup, might also have an increased risk of dying.

Psoriasis, a condition that causes raised, silvery plaque-looking skin, affects around 7 million Americans. Several previously released studies have indicated a link between psoriasis and several other systemic, inflammatory diseases. Now, a new study published in the June issue of the Archives of Dermatology, indicates a greater risk of strokes, heart conditions and blockages for psoriasis sufferers.

Researchers for the new study evaluated heart rates, vascular diseases, Peripheral Artery Disease (PAD) and death in 3,236 patients who were suffering with psoriasis and 2,500 patients who did not suffer from the skin condition. The group suffering from psoriasis was a few years older on average and consisted of more male patients, compared to the control group. The psoriasis group also consisted of more smokers, diabetics, and hypertensive patients. However, researchers adjusted for the differences. The study found those with psoriasis were twice as likely, as those not suffering from the condition, to have been diagnosed with heart disease, stroke-related vascular disease, or PAD. Nearly double the number of patients who were suffering from psoriasis died during the study, compared to those who did not suffer with the skin condition.

According to study author Dr. Robert S. Kirsner, a Stiefel Laboratories professor and vice chairman with the University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine, “Psoriasis is a systemic inflammatory disease similar to rheumatoid arthritis [and] the same inflammatory cytokine profile that is thought to cause psoriasis has been also shown to cause cardiovascular disease.” He feels the underlying link between the conditions is inflammation. Dr. Kirsner says, “Psoriasis is not just a skin disease, but rather a disease that appears to have diffuse manifestations throughout the body.” Even though researchers are not sure if aggressively treating psoriasis can help to prevent heart conditions, stroke or PAD, there is some indication it may.

There is a need for more research, to better clarify the link between psoriasis and cardiovascular disease, but Dr. Kirsner says, “Patients with psoriasis and clinicians caring for patients with psoriasis should be aware of this association and take appropriate action to limit risk of developing these diseases.” Those who suffer from psoriasis should have regular check ups and screenings for diabetes, high blood pressure, cholesterol-levels and other links to heart conditions and stroke.