Tag Archives: copyright

Some women can have orgasms during child birth, study suggests

When Elena Skoko gave birth to her daughter three years ago, she felt pain. But she also felt something else: waves of pleasure so ecstatic they compared to an orgasm. “I had this wavy sensation of blissful waves going through me,” said Skoko, a singer and author of “Memoirs of a Singing Birth” (lulu.com, 2012). Though childbirth is frequently spoken of in terms of pain and punishment, some women do experience what are known as orgasmic or ecstatic births. A new survey, available online May 3 in the journal Sexologies, finds that midwives report witnessing orgasms in about 0.3 percent of births. Anatomically, orgasmic birth is no surprise, said Barry Komisaruk, a professor of psychology at Rutgers University in New Jersey who studies orgasm. In fact, the intense stimulation of the vaginal canal in childbirth may work to block pain whether that stimulation is felt as sexual or not. [Awkward Anatomy: 10 Odd Facts About the Female Body] Orgasmic birth: Yes, really Anecdotal reports of orgasm during birth have long circulated in the natural childbirth community. These reports reached perhaps their widest audience yet in 2009 with the documentary “Orgasmic Birth: The Best-Kept Secret,” directed by childbirth educator Debra Pascali-Bonaro. People are often skeptical of the concept of pleasure during birth, Pascali-Bonaro told LiveScience. Some see the idea of sexual feelings during childbirth as unacceptable, she said. “People see 'birth' and 'orgasmic' together on paper, and it pushes all their buttons on sexuality,” Pascali-Bonaro said. In addition, she said, many women in America give birth in settings where they aren't able to move around freely because of fetal monitoring devices, where they have little labor support and where they aren't allowed water to drink in case of a C-section (food and beverages aren't permitted before surgery). All of these limitations make a pleasurable birth experience less likely and less imaginable for women who've had babies, she said. The new study, conducted by psychologist Thierry Postel of Blainville-sur-Mer, France, is among the first to try to put hard numbers on how many women experience moments of ecstasy in birth. Postel contacted 956 French midwives, asking them to complete an online questionnaire about orgasmic birth. He got 109 complete responses for midwives, who, combined, had assisted 206,000 births in their careers. Postel focused on midwives rather than doctors or nurses, because midwives witness many births firsthand and are reliable observers, he wrote. He also asked midwives to forward the surveys to recent mothers if they saw fit. The results “established the fact that obstetrical pleasure exists,” Postel wrote. Midwives reported 668 cases in which mothers told midwives they'd felt orgasmic sensations in birth. In another 868 cases, midwives said they'd seen mothers demonstrate signs of pleasure during childbirth. Finally, nine mothers completed questionnaires confirming they'd experienced an orgasm during birth. If anything, Pascali-Bonaro said, the survey likely underestimates the number of women who've experienced pleasure in birth by asking primarily midwives rather than mothers about their experiences. In one screening of her film, Pascali-Bonaro said an obstetrician stood up to say he'd never witnessed anything remotely orgasmic in his years of delivering babies. “Three rows behind him a woman jumped up and said, 'Doctor, I gave birth with you three years ago, and I had a very orgasmic birth, with an orgasm, but what makes you think I would tell you?'” Pascali-Bonaro said. The anatomy of orgasmic birth Skeptics of orgasmic birth abound “I've also heard that men can enjoy a similar experience by having an intimate encounter with a 20-ton press,” a commenter appropriately named “Skeptic” posted on a 2008 New York Times article about Pascali-Bonaro's movie. But research suggests that orgasm during birth comes down to simple anatomy. “It's stimulation of the birth canal, stimulation of the cervix, the vagina and the clitoris and uterine contractions,” Komisaruk told LiveScience. “A lot of women say during sexual orgasms uterine contractions feel pleasurable.” Every woman's anatomy is different, Komisaruk said, so some women may experience pleasure during childbirth while others feel only the pain. [5 Surprising Facts About Pain] “There are so many factors that could make the difference between a pleasurable response and a terribly stressful, aversive experience that you can't generalize it,” he said. “There's no reason to try to generalize. Different people have different pain thresholds. Different people have different attitudes. If a woman has a fear of sexuality, if she starts having a pleasurable sensation she may feel this is completely inappropriate psychologically, and that itself could be an aversive effect.” In other words: No pressure. “Our message is not at all that this should be a performance standard,” Pascali-Bonaro said. Rather, she said, her goal is to see women given the full range of options for birth and the support they need to experience moments of joy and bliss during the process. The science of pain and pleasure Whether or not orgasmic birth is in the cards, the anatomy involved brings good news for laboring women. Komisaruk and his colleagues have found that sexual stimulation and orgasm reduce sensitivity to pain. (Sex can even cure migraines, according to a March 2013 study.) In 1988, Komisaruk and his co-researchers published a study in the Journal of Sex Research that found when women stimulated their vaginas or clitorises, they became less sensitive to painful stimulation but not to other tactile stimulation. In 1990, the researchers followed up with a study that found women in labor had reduced pain sensitivity during labor compared with before and after. (The women in the study used Lamaze breathing techniques rather than drugs to control pain.)[Blossoming Body: 8 Odd Changes That Occur During Pregnancy] In rats, Komisaruk has found that vaginal stimulation blocks the release of a pain transmitter called Substance P right at the level of the spinal cord. In other words, the sensory neurons tasked with transmitting their message of “ouch!” to the central nervous system are stymied from the get-go. “It's an actual physiological, very primordial system of the genital system blocking pain input,” Komisaruk said. In addition, two regions of the brain that become active during orgasm, the anterior cingulate cortex and the insula, are also active during painful experiences. “There's something very intriguing going on between pain and pleasure,” said Komisaruk. Komisaruk holds a patent on the substance that blocks the pain in rats, called vasoactive intestinal peptide. A few pharmaceutical companies have shown interest, he said, but none have yet been willing to shell out the money it would take to test the substance for use as a pain medication in humans. Out of the laboratory and in the delivery room, clitoral and nipple stimulation provide pain relief for some women during labor, Pascali-Bonaro said. Some even use vibrators during labor to decrease pain. “It's such a culture where some women actually feel shamed that they have pleasure, because the expectation is pain,” Pascali-Bonaro said. “We have to change that.” For Skoko, who sang in order to get through her contractions, accepting sensuality into the birthing room was key. “The moment I realized my body is behaving sensually spontaneously and not obstructing that feeling, and just going with this feeling of my sensual body, my labor just went fast ahead,” said Skoko, who gave birth at the Yayasan Bumi Sehat natural birth center in Bali, Indonesia, where she lives part-time. “I had pain, but was not afraid of it, because I was dealing with it,” Skoko said. “It was fun, because I could laugh through it.” Copyright 2013 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.source : http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/06/03/yes-orgasms-during-birth-are-real-study-suggests/

High blood pressure linked to declining brain function

High blood pressure, particularly in the arteries that supply blood to the head and neck, may be linked with declining cognitive abilities, according to a new study from Australia. Researchers found that people with high blood pressure in the central arteries including the aorta, the largest artery in the human body, and the carotid arteries in the neck performed worse on tests of visual processing, and had slower thinking and poorer recognition abilities. Typically, blood pressure measurements are taken from the brachial artery in the arm, but looking at the health of the central arteries may be a more sensitive way to assess cognitive abilities, said study researcher Matthew Pase, of the Center for Human Psychopharmacology at Swinburne University in Melbourne. The central arteries directly control bloodflow to the brain. “If we can estimate the blood pressure in central arteries, we might be able to better predict cognitive function and cognitive decline,” Pase said. [10 Odd Facts About the Brain] Pase presented the findings here on May 24 at the annual meeting of the Association for Psychological Science. How it all works A beating heart pumps blood in spurts, but the central arteries are flexible, expanding and contracting to maintain steady bloodflow to the brain. As people age, the central arteries stiffen, and with less elasticity, the brain receives more high-pressure blood, which may damage cognition, Pase said. [7 Ways the Mind and Body Change With Age] In the study, Pase and his colleagues looked at whether associations between blood pressure and cognition were stronger for measurements taken in the arm, or the central arteries. The researchers examined 493 Australians between ages 20 and 82. The participants were mostly Caucasians, and all were nonsmokers with no history of stroke or dementia, Pase said. Study participants performed tasks to measure various types of cognition, such as visual processing, working memory, recognition abilities and processing speed. The researchers also took blood pressure measurements from the arm and central arteries. Blood pressure and cognition The researchers found that high brachial blood pressure was linked to worse performance on the visual processing test, but high central blood pressure correlated to worse performance across several tests, including visual processing, recognition and processing speed. “This suggests central blood pressure is a more sensitive predictor of cognitive aging,” Pase said. To expand upon these findings, Pase said he wants to look at whether reducing central blood pressure which can be done by quitting smoking, doing regular exercise or limiting salt intake might protect people against mental deterioration. The researchers will detail their results in an upcoming issue of the journal Psychological Science. Copyright 2013 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.source : http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/05/30/high-blood-pressure-linked-to-declining-brain-function/

Simple vision test may predict IQ

A simple visual test is surprisingly accurate at predicting IQ, according to new research. The study, published May 23 in the journal Current Biology, found that people's ability to efficiently filter out visual information in the background and focus on the foreground is strongly linked to IQ. The findings could help scientists identify the brain processes responsible for intelligence. That doesn't mean snappy, efficient visual processing leads to smarts, said study co-author Duje Tadin, a neuroscientist at the University of Rochester in New York. Instead, common brain processes may underlie both intelligence and efficient visual processing. IQ hunting Since the 1800s, the forefathers of IQ testing, including Sir Francis Galton (who also pioneered the science of fingerprinting), suspected that highly intelligent people also have supersensory discrimination. But studies in the subsequent decades have found only a modest connection between IQ-test scores and peoples ability to quickly or accurately spot motion in images. Tadin and his colleagues were studying a separate question on visual perception in 12 participants when they found something striking: IQ seemed to be correlated strongly with performance on a visual task. The test asked users to spot the direction of motion on a series of black-and-white stripes on a screen. Sometimes, the lines formed inside a small central circle, and other times, they were large stripes that took up the entire screen. Participants also completed a short IQ test. [Watch Video of Motion and Test Your Smarts] The team noticed that people with higher IQs were good at spotting motion in the small circles, but terrible at detecting motion in the larger black-and-white stripes. Because they had looked at so few people, Tadin and his colleagues wondered if their results were a fluke. They repeated the experiment with 53 people, who also took a full IQ test. The ability to visually filter the motion strongly predicted IQ in fact, motion suppression (the ability to focus on the action and ignore background movements) was as predictive of total IQ as individual subsections of the IQ test itself. Relevant information As people walk, the background scenery is always changing, so efficient brains may be better at filtering out this irrelevant visual information. And that efficiency could be operating across a wide range of tasks, Tadin said. “What happens in brains of high-IQ people is, they're automatically processing motion of small moving objects efficiently, whereas they're suppressing the background,” Tadin said. The findings reshape the conventional view that quick thinking leads to smarts. “Speedy processing does matter, but it's only half the story. It's how you filter out things that are less relevant and focus your speedy resources on what is important,” Tadin said. Big variation The study reveals new insights into brain efficiency and smarts, said Kevin McGrew, director of the Institute for Applied Psychometrics and owner of www.themindhub.com. Even though the link between IQ and visual filtering was very strong, IQ tests won't be replaced by motion tracking anytime soon, said McGrew, who was not involved in the study. “Their task accounts for or explains about 50 percent of the IQ scores,” McGrew told LiveScience. “That is impressive in psychology, but it still means there is 50 percent of the scores that they're not explaining.” Copyright 2013 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.source : http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/05/24/simple-vision-test-predicts-iq/

Simple vision test may predicts IQ

A simple visual test is surprisingly accurate at predicting IQ, according to new research. The study, published May 23 in the journal Current Biology, found that people's ability to efficiently filter out visual information in the background and focus on the foreground is strongly linked to IQ. The findings could help scientists identify the brain processes responsible for intelligence. That doesn't mean snappy, efficient visual processing leads to smarts, said study co-author Duje Tadin, a neuroscientist at the University of Rochester in New York. Instead, common brain processes may underlie both intelligence and efficient visual processing. IQ hunting Since the 1800s, the forefathers ofIQ testing, including Sir Francis Galton (who also pioneered the science of fingerprinting), suspected that highly intelligent people also have supersensory discrimination. But studies in the subsequent decades have found only a modest connection between IQ-test scores and peoples ability to quickly or accurately spot motion in images. Tadin and his colleagues were studying a separate question on visual perception in 12 participants when they found something striking: IQ seemed to be correlated strongly with performance on a visual task. The test asked users to spot the direction of motion on a series of black-and-white stripes on a screen. Sometimes, the lines formed inside a small central circle, and other times, they were large stripes that took up the entire screen. Participants also completed a short IQ test. [Watch Video of Motion and Test Your Smarts] The team noticed that people with higher IQs were good at spotting motion in the small circles, but terrible at detecting motion in the larger black-and-white stripes. Because they had looked at so few people, Tadin and his colleagues wondered if their results were a fluke. They repeated the experiment with 53 people, who also took a full IQ test. The ability to visually filter the motion strongly predicted IQ in fact, motion suppression (the ability to focus on the action and ignore background movements) was as predictive of total IQ as individual subsections of the IQ test itself. Relevant information As people walk, the background scenery is always changing, so efficient brains may be better at filtering out this irrelevant visual information. And that efficiency could be operating across a wide range of tasks, Tadin said. “What happens in brains of high-IQ people is, they're automatically processing motion of small moving objects efficiently, whereas they're suppressing the background,” Tadin said. The findings reshape the conventional view that quick thinking leads to smarts. “Speedy processing does matter, but it's only half the story. It's how you filter out things that are less relevant and focus your speedy resources on what is important,” Tadin said. Big variation The study reveals new insights into brain efficiency and smarts, said Kevin McGrew, director of the Institute for Applied Psychometrics and owner of www.themindhub.com. Even though the link between IQ and visual filtering was very strong, IQ tests won't be replaced by motion tracking anytime soon, said McGrew, who was not involved in the study. “Their task accounts for or explains about 50 percent of the IQ scores,” McGrew told LiveScience. “That is impressive in psychology, but it still means there is 50 percent of the scores that they're not explaining.” Copyright 2013 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.source : http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/05/24/simple-vision-test-predicts-iq/

Dogs bring swarm of bacteria into your home

Your loyal pooch may be bringing a whole world of bacteria into your home but don't panic. Research suggests that exposure to a wide variety of microbes may be good for us. A new study reveals that homes with dogs have greater bacterial diversity than canine-free dwellings. Dog-related diversity is particularly high on television screens and pillowcases, the researchers found. “When you bring a dog into your house, you are not just bringing a dog, you are also introducing a suite of dog-associated [microbe] taxa directly into your home environment, some of which may have direct or indirect effects on human health,” the researchers wrote today (May 22) in the journal PLOS ONE. [5 Wacky Things That Are Good For You] Microbes around us The microbes in our environment are the subject of increased interest by scientists, thanks to studies revealing how intertwined human lives are with those of the single-celled. Skin microbes, for example, may be key for warding off disease. And the load of microbes living in the human gut may influence everything from immunity to obesity. North Carolina State University biologist Rob Dunn and his colleagues wanted to step back from the body to better understand the microbes in our environment at large. They gave 40 families a home-sampling kit and asked them to swab down nine locations in their houses: a kitchen cutting board, a kitchen counter, a refrigerator shelf, a toilet seat, a pillowcase, a television screen, the main door's exterior handle and the upper trim on both an interior door and on an exterior door. The researchers then examined the microbial DNA from the swabs to detect different families of microscopic tenants living on these surfaces. All told, the 40 homes harbored 7,726 different types of bacteria. The most common were Proteobacteria, Firmicutes and Actinobacteria, all families containing a wide range of species. Types of bacteria tended to differ by location: Kitchen environments (cutting boards, counters and shelves) had similar colonies from home to home, as did frequently touched surfaces (toilet seats, pillowcases, door handles) and rarely cleaned surfaces (door trims and television screens). “This makes sense,” Dunn said in a statement. “Humans have been living in houses for thousands of years, which is sufficient time for organisms to adapt to living in particular parts of houses. We know, for example, that there is a species that only lives in hot-water heaters. We deposit these bacterial hitchhikers in different ways in different places, and they thrive or fail depending on their adaptations.” Bacteria related to human skin were found most frequently on pillowcases and toilet seats as were bacteria commonly found in human feces. Bacteria from leaves and produce were found most often on door trims and also on kitchen surfaces. Bacteria from the soil were found across the home, but were most common on the exterior door trim, the researchers found. Doggie diversity Dunn and his colleagues next looked for variables that would alter bacterial communities from home to home, such as the presence of cats, children, carpet and other factors. The only one they found that made any difference was whether or not the family had a pet dog. Pillowcases and TV screens of dog-owning families had 42 percent and 52 percent more microbial groups, respectively, than pillowcases and TV screens of non-dog-owning families. This extra diversity, unsurprisingly, was made up largely of bacteria known to live on dog fur. (Other factors, such as the level of humidity in a home, could also influence microbe diversity, the researchers wrote, but they were unable to measure those factors in this study.) Dog owners shouldn't ship Fido off to the countryside for fear of nasty bacteria, though. In fact, the family pet may be a boon to health. Previous studies have found that pregnant women who live in homes with dogs are less likely to have children with allergies. Scientists speculate that the reason might be an exposure to greater numbers of microbes that keeps the immune system from turning on the body. “Our study provides evidence to robustly support this assumption,” Dunn and his colleagues wrote. The researchers are planning to process samples from a total of 1,300 homes across the United States to look for geographic differences in microbial roommates. Copyright 2013 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.source : http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/05/23/dogs-bring-swarm-bacteria-into-your-home/

Sleep-deprived teen drivers more likely to crash

Too little sleep increases the risk of car crashes for young drivers, a new study confirms. In the study, drivers ages 17 to 24 who reported sleeping six or fewer hours per night were about 20 percent more likely to be involved in a car crash over a two-year period, compared with those who slept more than six hours a night. Car crashes among the sleep-deprived were more likely to occur between 8 p.m. and 6 a.m. than at other hours. The findings held even after the researchers took into account factors that affect people's risk of a car crash, such as age, the number of driving hours per week, risky driving behavior such as speeding and a history of car crashes. Sleep deprivation is known to be a risk factor for car crashes it's estimated that drowsy driving is responsible for 20 percent of all car crashes in the United States, the researchers say. However, most studies to date have not focused on young people. Young drivers should be a focus of education efforts to prevent drowsy driving “because this group experiences more impairment in alertness, mood and physical performance compared with older age groups with similar sleep deprivation,” the researchers said. The new study involved more than 19,000 young, newly licensed drivers living in New South Wales, Australia, who answered questions about their sleep habits, including how many hours they slept on weeknights and weekends. Researchers then tracked the participants for two years, and obtained police reports to document car crashes. Among drivers who reported getting six or fewer hours of sleep a night, 9.4 percent were involved in a crash, compared with 6.9 percent of those who reported more than six hours of sleep a night. The new findings “may help increase awareness of the impact of reduced sleep hours on crash risk and highlight subgroups of young drivers and times of day for targeted intervention,” the researchers write in the May 20 issue of the journal JAMA Pediatrics. The researchers noted that participants were only asked about their sleep habits once during the study, and the exact number of hours participants slept on the day before they were involved in a crash is not known. Follow Rachael Rettner @RachaelRettner. Follow MyHealthNewsDaily @MyHealth_MHND, Facebook & Google+. Originally published on LiveScience.Copyright 2013 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.source : http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/05/21/sleep-deprived-teen-drivers-more-likely-to-crash/

Not my kid: Most parents unaware teen is using study drugs

Many parents are not aware that their teenage children abuse “study drugs,” a new poll suggests. In the poll, just 1 percent of parents said their teenage children had taken drugs such as Adderall or Ritalin without a prescription. That is much lower than the percentage of teens that surveys suggest are using the drugs. For example, a 2012 study of high schoolers found that about 10 percent of sophomores and 12 percent of seniors said they had used the drugs without a prescription. The new finding highlights the growing issue of stimulant drug abuse, or when teens take stimulant medication (or “study drugs”) to help them study for a test or stay awake to do homework. Such medications are prescribed for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Teens without the condition may fake symptoms in order to get a prescription, or obtain the drugs from friends. The new findings, from the C.S. Mott Children's Hospital National Poll on Children's Health, examined parents' awareness of the issue, surveying parents of U.S. children ages 13 to 17. About 11 percent of parents said their teens had been prescribed stimulant medication for ADHD. Among parents of children who were not prescribed ADHD medications, 1 percent said their teens had used these drugs for study purposes. About 4 percent said they didn't know if their teen had abused these drugs, and 95 percent said their teens had never abused the drugs. This disconnect between teen drug abuse and parents' awareness of drug abuse may be in part due to the fact that study drugs have more subtle effects than drugs such as heroin and cocaine, allowing teens to more easily hide their drug use, the researchers said. About half of parents polled said they were very concerned about teens in their communities abusing study drugs. And more than three-quarters supported school policies aimed at stopping this type of drug abuse, such as rules that would require children with prescription ADHD medications to keep the pills in a secure place like the school nurse's office. The findings “underscore the need for greater communication among public health officials, schools, parents, and teens regarding this issue,” the researchers said. Follow Rachael Rettner @RachaelRettner. Follow MyHealthNewsDaily @MyHealth_MHND, Facebook & Google+. Originally published on LiveScience.Copyright 2013 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.source : http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/05/20/not-my-kid-most-parents-unaware-teen-is-using-study-drugs/

Majority of pools are contaminated by poop, CDC says

There's poop in public pools, according to a new report. Researchers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found genetic material from E. coli bacteria in 58 percent of public pools they tested during the summer of 2012. This shows that “swimmers frequently introduced fecal material into pools,” which could spread germs to other people, the researchers wrote in their report. E. coli bacteria are normally found in the human gut and feces. They also found genetic material from bacteria called Pseudomonas aeruginosa, whichcan cause skin rashes and ear infections, in 59 percent of pools. The fecal material in pools comes from swimmers not showering before getting into the water, and from incidents of defecation in pools, according to the report. The average person has 0.14 grams of fecal material on their “perianal surface” that can rinse into a pool if a person doesn't shower first, according to the report. The Pseudomonas aeruginosabacteria in the pools may have come from the natural environment, or from swimmers, the researchers said. There were no samples that showed E. coli O157:H7, a toxin-producing E. coli strain that causes illness. Two parasites, Cryptosporidium and Giardia, which also spread through feces and cause diarrhea, were found in less than 2 percent of samples. The study included 161 pools in the Atlanta area, and the researchers noted their findings may not apply to all pools, but said there is no reason to think that contamination or swimmer hygiene practices differ between pools in the study and those in the rest of the country. The researchers collected samples of water from the pools' filters, and looked for the genetic material of specific bacteria. “Chlorine and other disinfectants dont kill germs instantly,” said Michele Hlavsa, chief of CDCs Healthy Swimming Program. Its important that swimmers shower before getting in a pool, not swallow the water they swim in, and avoid swimming when they have diarrhea, she said. The CDC also recommends that parents of young children take children on a bathroom break every hour, or check diapers every 30 to 60 minutes. Diapers should be changed in a diaper-changing area, not near the poolside, the CDC says. Copyright 2013 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.source : http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/05/16/poop-prevalent-in-public-pools-cdc-says/