CDC on Thursday released its first-ever survey of breastfeeding practices at hospitals and birthing centers nationwide, which found that practices "unfriendly" to breastfeeding were common throughout the country, the AP/Google.com reports (Stobbe, AP/Google.com, 6/12). According to CQ HealthBeat, CDC endorses breastfeeding as a practice that provides optimal nutrition for infants and reduces the risk for infant and maternal morbidity and mortality.The study, published in CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, analyzes responses from a 2007 survey of 2,690 hospitals and birthing centers. CDC found that a substantial proportion engage in practices that interfere with successful breastfeeding, including limiting the duration of suckling and giving pacifiers to more than half of healthy, full-term breastfed infants. The survey also found that 70% of hospital and birthing centers provided women with infant formula samples upon leaving the hospital (Reichard, CQ HealthBeat, 6/12). In addition, about one-quarter of hospitals surveyed reported giving formula or some other supplement to more than half of healthy, full-term infants. Deborah Dee, a CDC epidemiologist and co-author of the report, said the practice is common even when mothers are able and willing to breastfeed.The study gave each facility a score of 0 to 100 for its breastfeeding practices. The average score was 63. According to the survey, states in New England and on the West Coast ranked the highest, and Southern states ranked the lowest. Vermont and New Hampshire topped the list, while Arkansas was at the bottom (AP/Google.com, 6/12). The study gave facilities scores on seven aspects of maternity care -- labor and delivery; breastfeeding assistance; mother-infant contact; postpartum feeding; breastfeeding support after hospital discharge; nurse and birth attendant training and education; and structural and organizational quality (CDC release, 6/12). CDC did not release scores for individual facilities (AP/Google.com, 6/12). The scores will be distributed to the facilities next month, and aggregate data will be shared with state health departments, the report said (CQ HealthBeat, 6/12).HHS' Healthy People 2010 objectives call for 75% of new mothers to initiate breastfeeding, 50% to continue for six months and 25% to continue for one year. The initiative also aims to have 40% of mothers breastfeed exclusively for three months and 17% to breastfeed exclusively for six months (CDC release, 6/12). Alaska, Montana, Oregon and Washington state are the only states that meet the guidelines, according to the report (CQ HealthBeat, 6/12). CommentsCDC's Dee said that the survey results are disappointing and that there is "a lot of room for improvement" (AP/Google.com, 6/12). Laurence Grummer-Strawn, chief of the nutrition branch of CDC's Division of Nutrition, Physical Activity and Obesity, said, "These findings underscore the importance of improving the way hospitals and birth centers provide assistance, encouragement and support for breastfeeding," adding, "We have a great deal of work to do to accomplish our national objectives related to breastfeeding, and birth facilities can make a huge contribution to this effort" (CDC release, 6/12).Cynthia Turner-Maffei, national coordinator for the Massachusetts-based Baby Friendly USA, said that she does not believe hospitals deliberately discourage breastfeeding but that "the formula industry is really deeply ingrained in our hospitals. People are being trained now to think about the pharmaceutical industry and their influence. They're not looking at formula companies in the same way" (May, Salt Lake Tribune, 6/13). Reprinted with kind permission from http://www.nationalpartnership.org. You can view the entire Daily Women's Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery here. The Daily Women's Health Policy Report is a free service of the National Partnership for Women & Families, published by The Advisory Board Company. © 2008 The Advisory Board Company. All rights reserved.
Article URL: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/111330.php
Main News Category: Women's Health / Gynecology
Also Appears In: Pediatrics / Children's Health, Nutrition / Diet,
Monday, June 16, 2008
More evidence that Americans are unaware of the danger of powdered infant formula
As the following article shows, many Americans are still in the dark as to the dangers of feeding infants powdered formulas.
A new national study conducted by the Harvard School of Public Health Project on the Public and Biological Security finds that, in spite of a number of food safety incidents in recent years, most Americans remain confident that the food produced in the United States is safe. However, many have concerns about the safety of imported food produced in some other countries. They also do not have high levels of confidence in parts of the U.S. food safety system and some of the organizations involved. The poll found that a majority of Americans believe that the food produced in the U.S. is either very (37%) or somewhat (58%) safe. Only 4% thought US-produced foods were unsafe. When asked about foods available in the U.S. but produced in other countries, fewer than one in ten (6%) considered foods from Canada to be unsafe. In contrast, almost half of Americans (47%) thought food from Mexico was unsafe, and 56% thought this about food from China. Possibly responding to these concerns, about half (53%) of Americans reported at least sometimes looking for information about what countries foods come from when shopping for groceries. Although most American see U.S.-produced food as relatively safe, they do have some reservations about the groups involved in food production and provision. Majorities have only some or very little confidence in meat producers (58%) or restaurants (55%) to keep food safe, while substantial minorities say this about grocery stores (41%) and fruit and vegetable growers (39%).
In addition, Americans have some concerns about the government food inspection system: 52% have only some or very little confidence in the inspection system to keep food safe. "With growing globalization of the food supply, Americans are likely to worry more about the safety of the food they eat. At the moment, many are not confident that the system for protecting their food is working as well as it should," said Robert J. Blendon, professor of Health Policy and Political Analysis at the Harvard School of Public Health. Full topline results and Powerpoint charts are available online. Over a third of Americans (38%) worry about getting ill from the food they eat. Concern was greater among certain groups: Hispanics (55%) and African-Americans (46%) were more likely than whites (32%) to be worried, and women (45%) were more likely than men (30%). The poll also found high levels of awareness of the major food recalls that have occurred in recent years. Nine in ten Americans had heard about food being recalled in the last two years.* About eight in ten (82%) specifically remember the ground beef recall, 74% the spinach recall, and 55% the peanut butter recall. Of those who remembered at least one of these recalls, eight in ten (80%) avoided eating the food involved in the recall, about half (52%) contacted relatives or friends to make sure they knew about the recall, and 39% searched for further information about the recall. In addition to protecting themselves during food recalls, Americans take action to protect themselves from potentially unsafe food when eating out. Of the 59% of Americans who ever read restaurant inspection notices in their local newspapers, 88% reported they avoid those restaurants that have been cited for violations. At home, a majority of Americans (86%) attempt to reduce the risk from food-borne illness by often washing fruits and vegetables.
The poll, conducted before the recent FDA warning about the salmonella threat posed by some fresh tomatoes, found that a substantial proportion of Americans know what salmonella is and worry about it. About six in ten (62%) reported that they knew what salmonella was, and almost four in ten (37%) were worried that they or a family member might become ill from it in the next year. African-Americans (43%) and Hispanics (45%) were more likely than whites (32%) to be worried. Women (40%) were more likely to be worried than men (33%). "Even before the FDA issued the recent warning about fresh tomatoes contaminated with salmonella, a large number of Americans knew about the threat of salmonella to food safety and were specifically worried about it," said Blendon. "This indicates that the recent outbreak is likely to be of serious concern to many people." In addition, large numbers reported knowing about other specific types of food-borne illness: 62% said they knew what E. coli was, 58% mad cow, and 47% botulism. Almost four in ten (37%) were worried that they or a family member might become ill from E. coli in the next year, 27% about mad cow disease, and 20% about botulism. There was some confusion over the role that cooking food might play in protecting people from becoming sick from food-borne illnesses. While majorities knew that cooking food thoroughly would protect against salmonella (68%) and E. coli (61%), 41% of respondents incorrectly believed that cooking could protect against botulism, and a third that cooking could protect against mad cow (32%). Some aspects of the food system are perceived by Americans to be less safe than others. When asked about some of the places where they might get their food, strong majorities of Americans considered food to be at least somewhat risky if it came from street vendors and pushcarts (88%), buffet restaurants (76%), salad bars (74%) or fast food restaurants (72%), while food from school cafeterias (48%), home kitchens (44%), or farmer's markets (44%) were considered risky by the lowest number of Americans. As for particular foods that might pose safety concerns, those perceived by the largest numbers to be at least somewhat risky were raw fish or sushi (82%) and hamburgers cooked rare or medium rare (80%), while those perceived by the lowest numbers to be risky were raw fruits and vegetables (36%), bean or alfalfa sprouts (36%), milk and cheese products (35%), and infant formula (35%). "For many Americans, the outbreak of salmonella from tomatoes will be regarded as an unusual threat, because they generally do not see eating fruits and vegetables as risky," said Blendon.
-Article adapted by Medical News Today from original press release.----------------------------
Methodology This is the 27th in a series of studies by the Harvard School of Public Health Project on the Public and Biological Security. The study was designed and analyzed by researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH). The project director is Robert J. Blendon of the Harvard School of Public Health. The research team also includes Kathleen J. Weldon, John M. Benson, and Tami Buhr of the Harvard School of Public Health, and Melissa J. Herrmann of ICR/International Communications Research. Fieldwork was conducted via telephone for the Project by ICR/International Communications Research of Media (PA) between May 12 and June 1, 2008. The survey was conducted with a representative national sample of 1,509 adults age 18 and over, including oversamples of African Americans and Hispanics. Altogether 227 African Americans and 224 Hispanics were interviewed. In the overall results, these groups were weighted to their actual proportion of the total adult population. The margin of error for the total sample is plus or minus 2.9 percentage points. Possible sources of non-sampling error include non-response bias, as well as question wording and ordering effects. Non-response in telephone surveys produces some known biases in survey-derived estimates because participation tends to vary for different subgroups of the population. To compensate for these known biases, sample data are weighted to the most recent Census data available from the Current Population Survey for gender, age, race, education, region, and number of adults in the household. Other techniques, including random-digit dialing, replicate subsamples, callbacks staggered over times of day and days of the week, and systematic respondent selection within households, are used to ensure that the sample is representative. The Harvard School of Public Health Project on the Public and Biological Security is funded by a grant from the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO), which receives support from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. HSPH provides ASTHO and the CDC with technical assistance for public health communication by monitoring the response of the general public to public health threats. *This poll was conducted before the recent FDA warning regarding tomatoes. Source:
Robin Herman Harvard School of Public Health
Article URL: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/111093.php
A new national study conducted by the Harvard School of Public Health Project on the Public and Biological Security finds that, in spite of a number of food safety incidents in recent years, most Americans remain confident that the food produced in the United States is safe. However, many have concerns about the safety of imported food produced in some other countries. They also do not have high levels of confidence in parts of the U.S. food safety system and some of the organizations involved. The poll found that a majority of Americans believe that the food produced in the U.S. is either very (37%) or somewhat (58%) safe. Only 4% thought US-produced foods were unsafe. When asked about foods available in the U.S. but produced in other countries, fewer than one in ten (6%) considered foods from Canada to be unsafe. In contrast, almost half of Americans (47%) thought food from Mexico was unsafe, and 56% thought this about food from China. Possibly responding to these concerns, about half (53%) of Americans reported at least sometimes looking for information about what countries foods come from when shopping for groceries. Although most American see U.S.-produced food as relatively safe, they do have some reservations about the groups involved in food production and provision. Majorities have only some or very little confidence in meat producers (58%) or restaurants (55%) to keep food safe, while substantial minorities say this about grocery stores (41%) and fruit and vegetable growers (39%).
In addition, Americans have some concerns about the government food inspection system: 52% have only some or very little confidence in the inspection system to keep food safe. "With growing globalization of the food supply, Americans are likely to worry more about the safety of the food they eat. At the moment, many are not confident that the system for protecting their food is working as well as it should," said Robert J. Blendon, professor of Health Policy and Political Analysis at the Harvard School of Public Health. Full topline results and Powerpoint charts are available online. Over a third of Americans (38%) worry about getting ill from the food they eat. Concern was greater among certain groups: Hispanics (55%) and African-Americans (46%) were more likely than whites (32%) to be worried, and women (45%) were more likely than men (30%). The poll also found high levels of awareness of the major food recalls that have occurred in recent years. Nine in ten Americans had heard about food being recalled in the last two years.* About eight in ten (82%) specifically remember the ground beef recall, 74% the spinach recall, and 55% the peanut butter recall. Of those who remembered at least one of these recalls, eight in ten (80%) avoided eating the food involved in the recall, about half (52%) contacted relatives or friends to make sure they knew about the recall, and 39% searched for further information about the recall. In addition to protecting themselves during food recalls, Americans take action to protect themselves from potentially unsafe food when eating out. Of the 59% of Americans who ever read restaurant inspection notices in their local newspapers, 88% reported they avoid those restaurants that have been cited for violations. At home, a majority of Americans (86%) attempt to reduce the risk from food-borne illness by often washing fruits and vegetables.
The poll, conducted before the recent FDA warning about the salmonella threat posed by some fresh tomatoes, found that a substantial proportion of Americans know what salmonella is and worry about it. About six in ten (62%) reported that they knew what salmonella was, and almost four in ten (37%) were worried that they or a family member might become ill from it in the next year. African-Americans (43%) and Hispanics (45%) were more likely than whites (32%) to be worried. Women (40%) were more likely to be worried than men (33%). "Even before the FDA issued the recent warning about fresh tomatoes contaminated with salmonella, a large number of Americans knew about the threat of salmonella to food safety and were specifically worried about it," said Blendon. "This indicates that the recent outbreak is likely to be of serious concern to many people." In addition, large numbers reported knowing about other specific types of food-borne illness: 62% said they knew what E. coli was, 58% mad cow, and 47% botulism. Almost four in ten (37%) were worried that they or a family member might become ill from E. coli in the next year, 27% about mad cow disease, and 20% about botulism. There was some confusion over the role that cooking food might play in protecting people from becoming sick from food-borne illnesses. While majorities knew that cooking food thoroughly would protect against salmonella (68%) and E. coli (61%), 41% of respondents incorrectly believed that cooking could protect against botulism, and a third that cooking could protect against mad cow (32%). Some aspects of the food system are perceived by Americans to be less safe than others. When asked about some of the places where they might get their food, strong majorities of Americans considered food to be at least somewhat risky if it came from street vendors and pushcarts (88%), buffet restaurants (76%), salad bars (74%) or fast food restaurants (72%), while food from school cafeterias (48%), home kitchens (44%), or farmer's markets (44%) were considered risky by the lowest number of Americans. As for particular foods that might pose safety concerns, those perceived by the largest numbers to be at least somewhat risky were raw fish or sushi (82%) and hamburgers cooked rare or medium rare (80%), while those perceived by the lowest numbers to be risky were raw fruits and vegetables (36%), bean or alfalfa sprouts (36%), milk and cheese products (35%), and infant formula (35%). "For many Americans, the outbreak of salmonella from tomatoes will be regarded as an unusual threat, because they generally do not see eating fruits and vegetables as risky," said Blendon.
-Article adapted by Medical News Today from original press release.----------------------------
Methodology This is the 27th in a series of studies by the Harvard School of Public Health Project on the Public and Biological Security. The study was designed and analyzed by researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH). The project director is Robert J. Blendon of the Harvard School of Public Health. The research team also includes Kathleen J. Weldon, John M. Benson, and Tami Buhr of the Harvard School of Public Health, and Melissa J. Herrmann of ICR/International Communications Research. Fieldwork was conducted via telephone for the Project by ICR/International Communications Research of Media (PA) between May 12 and June 1, 2008. The survey was conducted with a representative national sample of 1,509 adults age 18 and over, including oversamples of African Americans and Hispanics. Altogether 227 African Americans and 224 Hispanics were interviewed. In the overall results, these groups were weighted to their actual proportion of the total adult population. The margin of error for the total sample is plus or minus 2.9 percentage points. Possible sources of non-sampling error include non-response bias, as well as question wording and ordering effects. Non-response in telephone surveys produces some known biases in survey-derived estimates because participation tends to vary for different subgroups of the population. To compensate for these known biases, sample data are weighted to the most recent Census data available from the Current Population Survey for gender, age, race, education, region, and number of adults in the household. Other techniques, including random-digit dialing, replicate subsamples, callbacks staggered over times of day and days of the week, and systematic respondent selection within households, are used to ensure that the sample is representative. The Harvard School of Public Health Project on the Public and Biological Security is funded by a grant from the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO), which receives support from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. HSPH provides ASTHO and the CDC with technical assistance for public health communication by monitoring the response of the general public to public health threats. *This poll was conducted before the recent FDA warning regarding tomatoes. Source:
Robin Herman Harvard School of Public Health
Article URL: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/111093.php
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)