http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/ Fri, 30 Jul 2010 09:33:48 -0400 MyBB http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=683 Thu, 29 Jul 2010 07:30:35 -0400 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=683 National Public Radio

The health effects of being overweight or obese are well documented. Extra pounds add extra risk for diabetes, heart disease and certain cancers, even among children. But new research also documents significant social and economic consequences of being overweight since high school.

Philippa Clarke, an epidemiologist at the University of Michigan, wanted to know what happens to people who've been overweight since adolescence. So, she used national data that tracked 5,000 high school graduates for two decades. She compared one group of 40-year-olds who were normal weight at high school graduation but gained weight gradually over time with another group of 40-year-olds who were chronically overweight since age 19.

Weight And Poverty

"We found that those people who were persistently overweight were more likely to not have gone on to have any further education beyond their high school [diploma]; to be receiving welfare or unemployment compensation at age 40 and to have no current partner," said Clarke.

Clarke says the chronically overweight were 50 percent more likely to be unemployed, on welfare and single. Her study didn't address why, but Clarke suggests these adults probably experienced discrimination as children that diminished their self-esteem and, in turn, their aspirations.

Weight Discrimination

Overweight children feel inferior and they tend not to aspire to such heights because they don't believe they deserve it.

Yale psychologist Kelly Brownell directs the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale University, where research, by Rebecca Puhl, has found overweight people are 26 times more likely to report discrimination than their normal-weight counterparts. And, Brownell says, overweight kids are far are more likely to report being teased.

"Teasing that comes directly from teachers in some cases, certainly from peers and even sometimes from their families. This gets internalized so overweight children feel inferior, feel like there's something defective with themselves and therefore they tend not to aspire. This isn't true in all cases, but a lot of them tend not to aspire to such heights because they don't believe they deserve it," he said.

Brownell says discrimination against overweight individuals has increased 66 percent over the past decade despite the fact that more adults are becoming overweight.

One of the reasons, Brownell says, may be that people think overweight adults have only themselves to blame. They should eat less and exercise more. But, he says blame is simply unreasonable, when it comes to children and weight, especially in low-income neighborhoods where markets are often inadequate and places to exercise are nearly nonexistent.

"The social climate and our toxic food environment is so disastrous that more and more people are having trouble resisting it," Brownell says. "That's really what's explaining the high prevalence of obesity. So it's unfair to put people in an environment where weight gain is a very strong possibility and then to blame them for having the problem."

Changing the environment is key to solving the problem.

Pediatrician Joe Thompson is a specialist in childhood obesity at the University of Arkansas College Of Medicine. Thompson is also director of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Center To Prevent Childhood Obesity. He says Arkansas has made inroads into the obesity problem by offering more healthful choices in school cafeterias and vending machines and that those efforts have paid off in the battle against obesity.

The rate of the epidemic has slowed nationwide and Arkansas has actually managed to stop the rate of increase among children, Thompson says.]]> National Public Radio

The health effects of being overweight or obese are well documented. Extra pounds add extra risk for diabetes, heart disease and certain cancers, even among children. But new research also documents significant social and economic consequences of being overweight since high school.

Philippa Clarke, an epidemiologist at the University of Michigan, wanted to know what happens to people who've been overweight since adolescence. So, she used national data that tracked 5,000 high school graduates for two decades. She compared one group of 40-year-olds who were normal weight at high school graduation but gained weight gradually over time with another group of 40-year-olds who were chronically overweight since age 19.

Weight And Poverty

"We found that those people who were persistently overweight were more likely to not have gone on to have any further education beyond their high school [diploma]; to be receiving welfare or unemployment compensation at age 40 and to have no current partner," said Clarke.

Clarke says the chronically overweight were 50 percent more likely to be unemployed, on welfare and single. Her study didn't address why, but Clarke suggests these adults probably experienced discrimination as children that diminished their self-esteem and, in turn, their aspirations.

Weight Discrimination

Overweight children feel inferior and they tend not to aspire to such heights because they don't believe they deserve it.

Yale psychologist Kelly Brownell directs the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale University, where research, by Rebecca Puhl, has found overweight people are 26 times more likely to report discrimination than their normal-weight counterparts. And, Brownell says, overweight kids are far are more likely to report being teased.

"Teasing that comes directly from teachers in some cases, certainly from peers and even sometimes from their families. This gets internalized so overweight children feel inferior, feel like there's something defective with themselves and therefore they tend not to aspire. This isn't true in all cases, but a lot of them tend not to aspire to such heights because they don't believe they deserve it," he said.

Brownell says discrimination against overweight individuals has increased 66 percent over the past decade despite the fact that more adults are becoming overweight.

One of the reasons, Brownell says, may be that people think overweight adults have only themselves to blame. They should eat less and exercise more. But, he says blame is simply unreasonable, when it comes to children and weight, especially in low-income neighborhoods where markets are often inadequate and places to exercise are nearly nonexistent.

"The social climate and our toxic food environment is so disastrous that more and more people are having trouble resisting it," Brownell says. "That's really what's explaining the high prevalence of obesity. So it's unfair to put people in an environment where weight gain is a very strong possibility and then to blame them for having the problem."

Changing the environment is key to solving the problem.

Pediatrician Joe Thompson is a specialist in childhood obesity at the University of Arkansas College Of Medicine. Thompson is also director of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Center To Prevent Childhood Obesity. He says Arkansas has made inroads into the obesity problem by offering more healthful choices in school cafeterias and vending machines and that those efforts have paid off in the battle against obesity.

The rate of the epidemic has slowed nationwide and Arkansas has actually managed to stop the rate of increase among children, Thompson says.]]> http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=682 Wed, 28 Jul 2010 19:05:43 -0400 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=682
Child psychiatrists say many of the children they treat suffer from insomnia in addition to their mental health disorders, according to a new study. The doctors use a wide variety of medications to help their young patients sleep, from over-the-counter antihistamines to antipsychotic medications, but there have not been definitive studies to show what works.

Dr. Judith Owens of Brown Medical School led a team that surveyed more than 6,000 members of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. The nearly 1,300 who responded said almost a third of their patients had significant difficulty falling asleep or staying asleep, and they advised about a quarter of them to use drugs to help them sleep. Overall almost all of the psychiatrists said they recommended at least one sleep drug over the course of a month.

Behavioral or psychiatric disorders often cause sleep problems in children, whether they have developmental delays, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, autism, or bipolar disorder. The medications some of these children take can also disrupt their sleep.

Sometimes child psychiatrists choose a psychiatric drug that also helps with sleep, such as a sedating antidepressant for a child with depression, the authors note in their paper, which is published in the journal Sleep Medicine.

No sleep medications have been approved for children by the US Food and Drug Administration, although doctors can prescribe them without specific approval. Behavioral therapies are commonly used in combination with medications.

"This is a very important clinical issue that is very stressful for families, and that clinicians are responding to by prescribing a variety of medications but without having a solid scientific basis to ensure that they are providing safe and effective medications for their patients,” Owens said in an interview in which she called for randomized clinical trials to find answers.

The study was funded by an unrestricted grant from Sanofi-Aventis, which makes the drug Ambien. The company had no role in the study’s design, conduct, or conclusions. It has sponsored a clinical trial of Ambien in children with ADHD. A 2009 paper published in the journal Pediatrics said the drug worked no better than placebo in children with ADHD.]]>
Child psychiatrists say many of the children they treat suffer from insomnia in addition to their mental health disorders, according to a new study. The doctors use a wide variety of medications to help their young patients sleep, from over-the-counter antihistamines to antipsychotic medications, but there have not been definitive studies to show what works.

Dr. Judith Owens of Brown Medical School led a team that surveyed more than 6,000 members of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. The nearly 1,300 who responded said almost a third of their patients had significant difficulty falling asleep or staying asleep, and they advised about a quarter of them to use drugs to help them sleep. Overall almost all of the psychiatrists said they recommended at least one sleep drug over the course of a month.

Behavioral or psychiatric disorders often cause sleep problems in children, whether they have developmental delays, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, autism, or bipolar disorder. The medications some of these children take can also disrupt their sleep.

Sometimes child psychiatrists choose a psychiatric drug that also helps with sleep, such as a sedating antidepressant for a child with depression, the authors note in their paper, which is published in the journal Sleep Medicine.

No sleep medications have been approved for children by the US Food and Drug Administration, although doctors can prescribe them without specific approval. Behavioral therapies are commonly used in combination with medications.

"This is a very important clinical issue that is very stressful for families, and that clinicians are responding to by prescribing a variety of medications but without having a solid scientific basis to ensure that they are providing safe and effective medications for their patients,” Owens said in an interview in which she called for randomized clinical trials to find answers.

The study was funded by an unrestricted grant from Sanofi-Aventis, which makes the drug Ambien. The company had no role in the study’s design, conduct, or conclusions. It has sponsored a clinical trial of Ambien in children with ADHD. A 2009 paper published in the journal Pediatrics said the drug worked no better than placebo in children with ADHD.]]> http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=681 Wed, 28 Jul 2010 07:22:34 -0400 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=681
FRIDAY, July 23, 2010 (HealthDay News) -- Teens with sunnier outlooks also tend to be healthier, a new study finds.

University of South Florida researchers found that teens' positive emotions and moods, as well as their satisfaction with life, may be more important than either anxiety or depression levels for predicting physical health.

The study included more than 400 American students in grades 6 to 8 at a suburban middle school. The participants provided information about their physical health and feelings about a number of things.

Overall, there appeared to be a strong link between good physical health and life satisfaction and recently feeling excited, strong and proud. Poorer health was associated with feeling lonelier, feeling more guilty, anxious and depressed, and being more likely to display negative behaviors.

In addition, mental health indicators explained 30 percent of the differences in physical health ratings among the participants, according to the researchers. Four out of five of the mental health indicators were unique predictors of physical health.

The findings, recently published online in the journal Applied Research in Quality of Life, show the importance of emotional well-being on adolescents' physical health, the study authors said.]]>
FRIDAY, July 23, 2010 (HealthDay News) -- Teens with sunnier outlooks also tend to be healthier, a new study finds.

University of South Florida researchers found that teens' positive emotions and moods, as well as their satisfaction with life, may be more important than either anxiety or depression levels for predicting physical health.

The study included more than 400 American students in grades 6 to 8 at a suburban middle school. The participants provided information about their physical health and feelings about a number of things.

Overall, there appeared to be a strong link between good physical health and life satisfaction and recently feeling excited, strong and proud. Poorer health was associated with feeling lonelier, feeling more guilty, anxious and depressed, and being more likely to display negative behaviors.

In addition, mental health indicators explained 30 percent of the differences in physical health ratings among the participants, according to the researchers. Four out of five of the mental health indicators were unique predictors of physical health.

The findings, recently published online in the journal Applied Research in Quality of Life, show the importance of emotional well-being on adolescents' physical health, the study authors said.]]> http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=680 Fri, 23 Jul 2010 08:07:33 -0400 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=680
Parenting Challenge for the week: Have a conversation with your child about something he or she is interested in.]]>
Parenting Challenge for the week: Have a conversation with your child about something he or she is interested in.]]> http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=679 Fri, 23 Jul 2010 07:32:23 -0400 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=679
TIME, Wed Jul 21, 2010

Popular wisdom has long held that young children survive traumatic events better than adults do, in part because they suffer less. Being too young to understand fully the nature of what's happening around them - during war or natural disaster, for instance - they should bounce back with much more resilience.

But new research on child survivors of Hurricane Katrina and witnesses of the 9/11 terrorist attacks suggests otherwise. "There is increasing evidence that kids know what is going on if they are directly exposed and see something like planes crashing into the [World Trade Center] towers," says child psychologist Claude Chemtob of New York University, lead author of one of several new papers on children and disaster, published in a special section of the July and August issue of Child Development. (See the top 10 scientific discoveries of 2009.)

Together, the new studies show that young children and teens not only exhibit symptoms of posttraumatic stress and depression that are similar to those of adults, but that they may react more strongly to trauma because adults do. They also show that younger children and girls are more likely to develop symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) than boys and older kids.

In the first two studies, researchers analyzed the long-term effects on children and their parents of the 9/11 attacks. In one analysis, led by Chemtob, researchers followed 116 preschool children and their mothers in Lower Manhattan who had been directly exposed to the World Trade Center attacks. Interviews were conducted with the mothers and with the children's preschool teachers nearly three years after 9/11. (See pictures of the World Trade Center's destruction.)

Chemtob found that compared with children whose mothers did not report symptoms of PTSD or depression, those whose mothers were affected were three times more likely to be emotionally reactive - being clingy and quick to become upset - and seven times more likely to exhibit aggressive behavior three years after the traumatic events. "Kids are very attuned to their moms because moms send cues to their kids about what's safe and what's not. If Mom is less available and more focused on the fearful aspects of life, then she is not helping," Chemtob says. (Comment on this story.)

In contrast, a second study on 9/11 that looked at more than 400 children, aged 12 to 20, and their mothers, found that those who were directly exposed to the attacks - those who witnessed the planes hit the towers, for example - were only slightly more likely to suffer PTSD than children who did not directly experience the trauma, but were significantly more likely to be depressed. Only 4% of these children had PTSD 15 months after the attacks, but 12% were depressed.

Notably, this study, led by child-development researcher Elizabeth Gershoff of the University of Texas at Austin, mirrors the findings of a 2008 study that Chemtob conducted with the same group of children involved in his current paper. In the 2008 study, he also found that children who were directly exposed to the events of 9/11 - seeing dead or injured people, watching people jump out of a building or witnessing a tower collapse - were three times more likely to be depressed or anxious than those who were not directly exposed. "We have tended to say that young kids don't need help, but in fact they are very vulnerable," says Chemtob. (See pictures of an army town coping with PTSD.)

Chemtob's and Gershoff's conclusions are further supported by two other studies appearing in the current issue of Child Development on the child survivors of Hurricane Katrina. In the first study, a team of researchers from Louisiana State University (LSU) interviewed 387 public schoolchildren in St. Bernard Parish, one of the areas most devastated by Katrina, and found that young children were more profoundly affected than adolescents. Three years after the hurricane, children between the ages of 9 and 11 were four times more likely to show symptoms of PTSD than were teenagers between the ages of 15 and 18.

Although the study reported that behavioral problems among the study sample had decreased overall over time - with nearly half of the children showing no lasting signs of stress - more than 25% of the younger kids were still exhibiting significant symptoms of PTSD and depression, such as feeling sad or nervous and having trouble sleeping or concentrating.

It may be that older children had more emotional resources to call on, which made it easier for them to bounce back. "Whereas younger children are more dependent on their caretakers, adolescents can turn to their friends or others in the community," says Joy Osofsky, a child psychologist at LSU who co-authored the study. Indeed, the children who fared best post-Katrina were those whose schools were quickly rebuilt and who had supportive relationships, both at home and at school. (Read "Study Points at a Clear-Cut Way to Diagnose PTSD.")

Despite the age advantage, girls of any age were twice as likely as boys to have problems adapting after the disaster - an effect reported by both Osofsky's current research as well as several prior studies. One explanation, put forth by the second Katrina study in Child Development, is that girls may simply be more expressive of their feelings of stress than boys are, even if boys have the same emotions. In the study, which analyzed saliva samples from 62 boys and girls between the ages of 12 and 19 who had been relocated to camps after the hurricane, researchers found no significant difference in levels of salivary cortisol, a hormone associated with stress, between the genders.

Jacob Vigil, a psychologist at the University of New Mexico and lead author of the study, hypothesizes that the differences in the way boys and girls react to trauma may be due to social conditioning rather than actual physiological effects. It may also be possible that similar levels of stress hormones affect males and females differently.

Past studies have shown that PTSD is more likely to manifest itself in boys as concentration and behavioral problems, while girls tend to exhibit emotional reactions like guilt and anxiety. "Girls tend to internalize their problems, whereas boys are more likely to act out," says Gershoff. Other common symptoms of the disorder may include nightmares, upsetting thoughts about the past trauma, avoidance of reminders of the event and persistent worrying about more bad things happening.

Although there was no significant difference in the levels of cortisol in boys and girls in Vigil's study, he did note that cortisol levels in the traumatized population of kids living in relocation camps were lower on average than those of a control group. That suggests the Katrina survivors had lived with constant stress for so long that they had become almost inured to its effect - they became less reactive to relatively minor, day-to-day stressors. "It's like a rubber band that gets stretched too much. Folks who are not reactive to stress seem to have more stress in their life," notes Vigil. Low cortisol levels have been associated with depression in adults, and while depression is a separate condition from PTSD, they share many of the same symptoms such as trouble sleeping and concentrating.

Child advocates say that one way to minimize long-term PTSD in kids is to provide them with the same level of psychological support that is regularly offered to adults. "It is important that kids have access to mental-health services right after a disaster," says Gershoff. "We can't just assume that kids are going to get over it. They need someone who can help them cope," especially when their parents can't.]]>
TIME, Wed Jul 21, 2010

Popular wisdom has long held that young children survive traumatic events better than adults do, in part because they suffer less. Being too young to understand fully the nature of what's happening around them - during war or natural disaster, for instance - they should bounce back with much more resilience.

But new research on child survivors of Hurricane Katrina and witnesses of the 9/11 terrorist attacks suggests otherwise. "There is increasing evidence that kids know what is going on if they are directly exposed and see something like planes crashing into the [World Trade Center] towers," says child psychologist Claude Chemtob of New York University, lead author of one of several new papers on children and disaster, published in a special section of the July and August issue of Child Development. (See the top 10 scientific discoveries of 2009.)

Together, the new studies show that young children and teens not only exhibit symptoms of posttraumatic stress and depression that are similar to those of adults, but that they may react more strongly to trauma because adults do. They also show that younger children and girls are more likely to develop symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) than boys and older kids.

In the first two studies, researchers analyzed the long-term effects on children and their parents of the 9/11 attacks. In one analysis, led by Chemtob, researchers followed 116 preschool children and their mothers in Lower Manhattan who had been directly exposed to the World Trade Center attacks. Interviews were conducted with the mothers and with the children's preschool teachers nearly three years after 9/11. (See pictures of the World Trade Center's destruction.)

Chemtob found that compared with children whose mothers did not report symptoms of PTSD or depression, those whose mothers were affected were three times more likely to be emotionally reactive - being clingy and quick to become upset - and seven times more likely to exhibit aggressive behavior three years after the traumatic events. "Kids are very attuned to their moms because moms send cues to their kids about what's safe and what's not. If Mom is less available and more focused on the fearful aspects of life, then she is not helping," Chemtob says. (Comment on this story.)

In contrast, a second study on 9/11 that looked at more than 400 children, aged 12 to 20, and their mothers, found that those who were directly exposed to the attacks - those who witnessed the planes hit the towers, for example - were only slightly more likely to suffer PTSD than children who did not directly experience the trauma, but were significantly more likely to be depressed. Only 4% of these children had PTSD 15 months after the attacks, but 12% were depressed.

Notably, this study, led by child-development researcher Elizabeth Gershoff of the University of Texas at Austin, mirrors the findings of a 2008 study that Chemtob conducted with the same group of children involved in his current paper. In the 2008 study, he also found that children who were directly exposed to the events of 9/11 - seeing dead or injured people, watching people jump out of a building or witnessing a tower collapse - were three times more likely to be depressed or anxious than those who were not directly exposed. "We have tended to say that young kids don't need help, but in fact they are very vulnerable," says Chemtob. (See pictures of an army town coping with PTSD.)

Chemtob's and Gershoff's conclusions are further supported by two other studies appearing in the current issue of Child Development on the child survivors of Hurricane Katrina. In the first study, a team of researchers from Louisiana State University (LSU) interviewed 387 public schoolchildren in St. Bernard Parish, one of the areas most devastated by Katrina, and found that young children were more profoundly affected than adolescents. Three years after the hurricane, children between the ages of 9 and 11 were four times more likely to show symptoms of PTSD than were teenagers between the ages of 15 and 18.

Although the study reported that behavioral problems among the study sample had decreased overall over time - with nearly half of the children showing no lasting signs of stress - more than 25% of the younger kids were still exhibiting significant symptoms of PTSD and depression, such as feeling sad or nervous and having trouble sleeping or concentrating.

It may be that older children had more emotional resources to call on, which made it easier for them to bounce back. "Whereas younger children are more dependent on their caretakers, adolescents can turn to their friends or others in the community," says Joy Osofsky, a child psychologist at LSU who co-authored the study. Indeed, the children who fared best post-Katrina were those whose schools were quickly rebuilt and who had supportive relationships, both at home and at school. (Read "Study Points at a Clear-Cut Way to Diagnose PTSD.")

Despite the age advantage, girls of any age were twice as likely as boys to have problems adapting after the disaster - an effect reported by both Osofsky's current research as well as several prior studies. One explanation, put forth by the second Katrina study in Child Development, is that girls may simply be more expressive of their feelings of stress than boys are, even if boys have the same emotions. In the study, which analyzed saliva samples from 62 boys and girls between the ages of 12 and 19 who had been relocated to camps after the hurricane, researchers found no significant difference in levels of salivary cortisol, a hormone associated with stress, between the genders.

Jacob Vigil, a psychologist at the University of New Mexico and lead author of the study, hypothesizes that the differences in the way boys and girls react to trauma may be due to social conditioning rather than actual physiological effects. It may also be possible that similar levels of stress hormones affect males and females differently.

Past studies have shown that PTSD is more likely to manifest itself in boys as concentration and behavioral problems, while girls tend to exhibit emotional reactions like guilt and anxiety. "Girls tend to internalize their problems, whereas boys are more likely to act out," says Gershoff. Other common symptoms of the disorder may include nightmares, upsetting thoughts about the past trauma, avoidance of reminders of the event and persistent worrying about more bad things happening.

Although there was no significant difference in the levels of cortisol in boys and girls in Vigil's study, he did note that cortisol levels in the traumatized population of kids living in relocation camps were lower on average than those of a control group. That suggests the Katrina survivors had lived with constant stress for so long that they had become almost inured to its effect - they became less reactive to relatively minor, day-to-day stressors. "It's like a rubber band that gets stretched too much. Folks who are not reactive to stress seem to have more stress in their life," notes Vigil. Low cortisol levels have been associated with depression in adults, and while depression is a separate condition from PTSD, they share many of the same symptoms such as trouble sleeping and concentrating.

Child advocates say that one way to minimize long-term PTSD in kids is to provide them with the same level of psychological support that is regularly offered to adults. "It is important that kids have access to mental-health services right after a disaster," says Gershoff. "We can't just assume that kids are going to get over it. They need someone who can help them cope," especially when their parents can't.]]> http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=678 Tue, 20 Jul 2010 07:47:48 -0400 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=678 McClatchy-Tribune, July 2010

Optimism- Good coaches and parents are constantly looking at the bright side, and display this optimistic attitude to young players. Developing optimistic athletes is essential and this development will often carry over beyond the playing field. Kids who lack confidence may still succeed but kids who are not optimistic rarely, if ever, succeed.

Patience and perspective - Now we are talking. Every adult believes in and practices these two concepts when it comes to youth sports except when their own child or team is involved. Suddenly, even the most rational and positive of parents get caught up in the moment and lose perspective and patience. No one can make their child a star player, only the child can do that. It is the child's time to play don't relive your playing days through your kids. It is not always the child star who ends up playing into and beyond high school, it is the player who continues to improve and enjoys playing the game.

Quit - The time comes for all athletes to decide whether it is time to stop playing. It is good to get their parents' and coaches' advice but ultimately the decision to stop playing should be the players'. The key ingredient to give up playing or not is the fun factor. If an athlete still enjoys playing, they should look for any and all opportunities to keep playing. This may mean finding a different team, league, level. A never-give-up attitude will lead to few regrets later in life and to success in many fields of pursuit.

Resiliency - If nothing else, kids who play sports learn to be resilient because of the failure which all athletes will encounter. Even the best players have to learn to deal with loss and failure.

Adults can help kids become resilient with positive words like the following when things don't go as desired:

"Hang in there"

"You will get them next time"

"Forget about it"

"You did your best, that's all anybody can expect"

Most importantly, parents show resiliency by their actions or inactions never showing disgust after a players performance is key. Head shakes, look aways or ignoring kids is never advised.

Success - In my mind, kids who give as close to 100 percent as possible are a success no matter what their results. However, this is only the case when parents and coaches recognize this and reward kids for their effort. Parents and coaches who are win-at-all-cost or statistically oriented do not give kids this "feeling of success" and often a kids self-esteem suffers because of this.

Trust - Trust is something that people earn over time and is vital in keeping a good coach/student relationship. Following are some things to additionally consider in developing an athletes trust in you, the coach.

- Study up or be quiet. Kids generally can recognize when someone does not know what they are talking about. Have the evidence on your side by doing some research if needed and don't demonstrate something if you are not very good at it.

- Give kids a little time to fail before correcting them. When someone expects perfection too soon they will get defensive and may want to quit practicing.

- Say a positive before a negative "I liked the way you did that, next time try this also."

- Address the action as much as possible that swing, throw catch, kick, instead of "you" did this wrong.

- The tenor of the voice used is the key. Saying things in an informative, nonemotional voice will go a long way to gain trust as opposed to a "listen to me or else" voice. If you notice your son or daughter gets upset when you tell them how to do something, then you are probably saying things in an accusing voice.

Understanding - The following are some good examples of mantras that youth teams should have. "I understand that just because a skill is easy for me or appears easy from the sidelines, does not mean it is easy for everyone." "I play to win, with the understanding that player development and fun are of equal importance." "I do my best to understand each player's personality so I can determine how to make them feel good about themselves and their play."

Variety - It is important that coaches and parents provide a variety of options to their kids at younger ages, so that one activity does not get boring or seem too important. Creating a love of sport and fun in sports is dependent on a wide variety of teaching methods. As kids age, they will begin to sort out which activities they enjoy the most.

Winning - I believe it is OK to play to win, even at ages as young as 8 years old. Does that mean a lot of emphasis should be put on winning? Of course not, but playing to win is a good message for kids to understand. When coaches do not play to win, they give the message that mediocrity is acceptable. For kids under the age of 12, though, much of a coach's goal should be to develop player's skills and kids having fun.

eXample - OK, I know I am cheating a little on this one, but I want to keep the streak going. Everyone knows how important it is for coaches and parents to lead by example. Just as important is that players also lead by example. When the better players have a "team" attitude and selfless attitude, this example spurs all team members to follow their lead.

Youth - Y is for "youth" sports and that is the point it should be all about our youth. Parents and coaches should not become the story.

Zeal - A synonym for zeal is enthusiasm and we all agree that enthusiasm from parents and coaches is necessary if they want their kids to enjoy sports. The problem comes in when we add the word over before zeal. Overzealous parents and coaches often take the fun out of sports for many young athletes. Signs of over-enthusiasm include bragging incessantly about one's kids sporting activities, placing too much emphasis on a child's games or development and giving false praise to kids. Usually this overemphasis is setting athletes and their parents up for a big letdown. Zeal is great, but over doing it will almost always lead to burn out.

Jack Perconte played 12 years of professional baseball. After retiring from professional baseball in 1987, Perconte opened a baseball training academy in Naperville, Ill. The hitting drills, mental training and coaching tips found in "The Making of a Hitter" (http://www.themakingofahitter.com) were culled from the 60,000 hitting lessons Perconte estimates he gave while operating the academy. He has also written "Raising an Athlete," and writes for the blog http://positiveparentinginsports.com]]> McClatchy-Tribune, July 2010

Optimism- Good coaches and parents are constantly looking at the bright side, and display this optimistic attitude to young players. Developing optimistic athletes is essential and this development will often carry over beyond the playing field. Kids who lack confidence may still succeed but kids who are not optimistic rarely, if ever, succeed.

Patience and perspective - Now we are talking. Every adult believes in and practices these two concepts when it comes to youth sports except when their own child or team is involved. Suddenly, even the most rational and positive of parents get caught up in the moment and lose perspective and patience. No one can make their child a star player, only the child can do that. It is the child's time to play don't relive your playing days through your kids. It is not always the child star who ends up playing into and beyond high school, it is the player who continues to improve and enjoys playing the game.

Quit - The time comes for all athletes to decide whether it is time to stop playing. It is good to get their parents' and coaches' advice but ultimately the decision to stop playing should be the players'. The key ingredient to give up playing or not is the fun factor. If an athlete still enjoys playing, they should look for any and all opportunities to keep playing. This may mean finding a different team, league, level. A never-give-up attitude will lead to few regrets later in life and to success in many fields of pursuit.

Resiliency - If nothing else, kids who play sports learn to be resilient because of the failure which all athletes will encounter. Even the best players have to learn to deal with loss and failure.

Adults can help kids become resilient with positive words like the following when things don't go as desired:

"Hang in there"

"You will get them next time"

"Forget about it"

"You did your best, that's all anybody can expect"

Most importantly, parents show resiliency by their actions or inactions never showing disgust after a players performance is key. Head shakes, look aways or ignoring kids is never advised.

Success - In my mind, kids who give as close to 100 percent as possible are a success no matter what their results. However, this is only the case when parents and coaches recognize this and reward kids for their effort. Parents and coaches who are win-at-all-cost or statistically oriented do not give kids this "feeling of success" and often a kids self-esteem suffers because of this.

Trust - Trust is something that people earn over time and is vital in keeping a good coach/student relationship. Following are some things to additionally consider in developing an athletes trust in you, the coach.

- Study up or be quiet. Kids generally can recognize when someone does not know what they are talking about. Have the evidence on your side by doing some research if needed and don't demonstrate something if you are not very good at it.

- Give kids a little time to fail before correcting them. When someone expects perfection too soon they will get defensive and may want to quit practicing.

- Say a positive before a negative "I liked the way you did that, next time try this also."

- Address the action as much as possible that swing, throw catch, kick, instead of "you" did this wrong.

- The tenor of the voice used is the key. Saying things in an informative, nonemotional voice will go a long way to gain trust as opposed to a "listen to me or else" voice. If you notice your son or daughter gets upset when you tell them how to do something, then you are probably saying things in an accusing voice.

Understanding - The following are some good examples of mantras that youth teams should have. "I understand that just because a skill is easy for me or appears easy from the sidelines, does not mean it is easy for everyone." "I play to win, with the understanding that player development and fun are of equal importance." "I do my best to understand each player's personality so I can determine how to make them feel good about themselves and their play."

Variety - It is important that coaches and parents provide a variety of options to their kids at younger ages, so that one activity does not get boring or seem too important. Creating a love of sport and fun in sports is dependent on a wide variety of teaching methods. As kids age, they will begin to sort out which activities they enjoy the most.

Winning - I believe it is OK to play to win, even at ages as young as 8 years old. Does that mean a lot of emphasis should be put on winning? Of course not, but playing to win is a good message for kids to understand. When coaches do not play to win, they give the message that mediocrity is acceptable. For kids under the age of 12, though, much of a coach's goal should be to develop player's skills and kids having fun.

eXample - OK, I know I am cheating a little on this one, but I want to keep the streak going. Everyone knows how important it is for coaches and parents to lead by example. Just as important is that players also lead by example. When the better players have a "team" attitude and selfless attitude, this example spurs all team members to follow their lead.

Youth - Y is for "youth" sports and that is the point it should be all about our youth. Parents and coaches should not become the story.

Zeal - A synonym for zeal is enthusiasm and we all agree that enthusiasm from parents and coaches is necessary if they want their kids to enjoy sports. The problem comes in when we add the word over before zeal. Overzealous parents and coaches often take the fun out of sports for many young athletes. Signs of over-enthusiasm include bragging incessantly about one's kids sporting activities, placing too much emphasis on a child's games or development and giving false praise to kids. Usually this overemphasis is setting athletes and their parents up for a big letdown. Zeal is great, but over doing it will almost always lead to burn out.

Jack Perconte played 12 years of professional baseball. After retiring from professional baseball in 1987, Perconte opened a baseball training academy in Naperville, Ill. The hitting drills, mental training and coaching tips found in "The Making of a Hitter" (http://www.themakingofahitter.com) were culled from the 60,000 hitting lessons Perconte estimates he gave while operating the academy. He has also written "Raising an Athlete," and writes for the blog http://positiveparentinginsports.com]]> http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=677 Sun, 18 Jul 2010 11:33:07 -0400 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=677
~Joyce Maynard]]>
~Joyce Maynard]]> http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=676 Sun, 18 Jul 2010 11:19:07 -0400 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=676
By Steven Reinberg

THURSDAY, July 15, 2010 (HealthDay News) -- A study of 2-year-olds in Oregon finds that almost 20 percent watch more than the recommended two hours of television a day.

"The findings are pretty generalizable to the rest of the country," said study co-author Dr. John Oh, an epidemic intelligence service officer with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, working with Oregon Public Health.

Experts have warned that too much time in front of the TV could hamper a young child's mental development and raise the odds for obesity, and the new findings are "what many pediatricians know and have feared," said Dr. Gwen Wurm, an assistant professor of pediatrics at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine. She was not involved in the study.

According to guidelines from the American Academy of Pediatrics, children's TV time should be limited to no more than one or two hours a day of "quality programming," and TV sets should be kept out of their bedrooms.

However, Wurm said, "we know that many, many children are watching too much television. When TV becomes a major part of a child's life, there's a problem."

"That goes for anything that involves screen time," including computers and video games, she added. "Anything that involves a screen is really where the problem is at."

The study is published in the July 16 issue of the CDC's journal Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.

In the report, Oh and colleagues used data from the Oregon Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring Survey to determine the TV watching habits of 2-year-olds throughout the state.

They found that on an average day, 19.6 percent of 2-year-olds watched at least two hours of TV. Several factors were associated with the amount of TV these children watched.

For example, about 36 percent of black mothers reported their child watched at least two hours of TV a day, compared with just under 19 percent of white mothers. Also, children who had a TV placed in their room were more likely to watch a lot of TV (about 34 percent) than children without a TV in the room (16.3 percent), according to the report.

Being kept at home throughout the day mattered, too. Almost 23 percent of the children who went on fewer than four outings a week watched at least two hours of TV a day, compared with 14.5 percent of the children who went on frequent outings. Moreover, children who spent time in a child care center were less likely to watch a lot of TV (7.8 percent) than children who didn't (about 23 percent) or children who had other types of child care (18.6 percent), the researchers found.

Limiting the amount of TV children watch when very young may help reduce the amount of time they spend on media as they get older, the researchers said. Right now, the average school-age child spends 4.5 hours watching television each day and 7.5 hours using media overall, a recent Kaiser Family Foundation study found.

"Most parents, probably don't recognize that watching television in this age group has potential harms," Oh said. "There is no scientific evidence that shows that television and video viewing in children of this age has any educational benefit. Instead, there have been several studies that have shown that TV viewing at 2 years of age and younger can have negative impacts on learning, language and attention and it's also linked to childhood obesity."

Too much screen time can take a toll on a child's development, Wurm agreed.

"The more kids are spoken to, the better their language development," she said. "When children are engaged in the television, they are not being spoken to by adults. We know that cognitive development is linked to speech development, so children who don't learn to speak well, those are the kids who will not reach their cognitive potential."

The problem, Wurm said, is that TV can become a substitute for a "healthy interaction with adults and other humans. Parents often discount what they mean to their child. There is nothing a child likes more than sitting down and doing something with their parent."

In addition, because images on TV go by at lighting speed, it may be taking a toll on a child's ability to concentrate and may be partly responsible for the increase in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) among children, Wurm theorized.

And there's a potential physical cost of too much media in childhood -- obesity, due in part to the kind of foods children see advertised, Wurm said. "They advertise Apple Jacks not apples," she said.

The solution, according to Wurm, is simple: turn off the TV and spend more time with your kids, and get them outdoors more often.

"The more outside time your children have, the healthier they are going to be," she said.]]>
By Steven Reinberg

THURSDAY, July 15, 2010 (HealthDay News) -- A study of 2-year-olds in Oregon finds that almost 20 percent watch more than the recommended two hours of television a day.

"The findings are pretty generalizable to the rest of the country," said study co-author Dr. John Oh, an epidemic intelligence service officer with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, working with Oregon Public Health.

Experts have warned that too much time in front of the TV could hamper a young child's mental development and raise the odds for obesity, and the new findings are "what many pediatricians know and have feared," said Dr. Gwen Wurm, an assistant professor of pediatrics at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine. She was not involved in the study.

According to guidelines from the American Academy of Pediatrics, children's TV time should be limited to no more than one or two hours a day of "quality programming," and TV sets should be kept out of their bedrooms.

However, Wurm said, "we know that many, many children are watching too much television. When TV becomes a major part of a child's life, there's a problem."

"That goes for anything that involves screen time," including computers and video games, she added. "Anything that involves a screen is really where the problem is at."

The study is published in the July 16 issue of the CDC's journal Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.

In the report, Oh and colleagues used data from the Oregon Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring Survey to determine the TV watching habits of 2-year-olds throughout the state.

They found that on an average day, 19.6 percent of 2-year-olds watched at least two hours of TV. Several factors were associated with the amount of TV these children watched.

For example, about 36 percent of black mothers reported their child watched at least two hours of TV a day, compared with just under 19 percent of white mothers. Also, children who had a TV placed in their room were more likely to watch a lot of TV (about 34 percent) than children without a TV in the room (16.3 percent), according to the report.

Being kept at home throughout the day mattered, too. Almost 23 percent of the children who went on fewer than four outings a week watched at least two hours of TV a day, compared with 14.5 percent of the children who went on frequent outings. Moreover, children who spent time in a child care center were less likely to watch a lot of TV (7.8 percent) than children who didn't (about 23 percent) or children who had other types of child care (18.6 percent), the researchers found.

Limiting the amount of TV children watch when very young may help reduce the amount of time they spend on media as they get older, the researchers said. Right now, the average school-age child spends 4.5 hours watching television each day and 7.5 hours using media overall, a recent Kaiser Family Foundation study found.

"Most parents, probably don't recognize that watching television in this age group has potential harms," Oh said. "There is no scientific evidence that shows that television and video viewing in children of this age has any educational benefit. Instead, there have been several studies that have shown that TV viewing at 2 years of age and younger can have negative impacts on learning, language and attention and it's also linked to childhood obesity."

Too much screen time can take a toll on a child's development, Wurm agreed.

"The more kids are spoken to, the better their language development," she said. "When children are engaged in the television, they are not being spoken to by adults. We know that cognitive development is linked to speech development, so children who don't learn to speak well, those are the kids who will not reach their cognitive potential."

The problem, Wurm said, is that TV can become a substitute for a "healthy interaction with adults and other humans. Parents often discount what they mean to their child. There is nothing a child likes more than sitting down and doing something with their parent."

In addition, because images on TV go by at lighting speed, it may be taking a toll on a child's ability to concentrate and may be partly responsible for the increase in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) among children, Wurm theorized.

And there's a potential physical cost of too much media in childhood -- obesity, due in part to the kind of foods children see advertised, Wurm said. "They advertise Apple Jacks not apples," she said.

The solution, according to Wurm, is simple: turn off the TV and spend more time with your kids, and get them outdoors more often.

"The more outside time your children have, the healthier they are going to be," she said.]]> http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=674 Tue, 13 Jul 2010 11:01:34 -0400 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=674 Published: July 8, 2010 in the New York Times

The nation has failed to reach its 2010 health goal of reducing high school smoking to 16 percent, federal officials said Thursday in a report calling for a resurgence of antismoking advertising to counter the tobacco industry’s $12 billion marketing campaign.

“People are getting the image that it’s cool to use nicotine as a drug,” Terry F. Pechacek of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said in an interview. “We need to bring back our voice, our antismoking mass media campaign.”

The popularity of hookah bars and smokeless nicotine products, Mr. Pechacek said, are the modern equivalent of the banned Joe Camel cartoon in their appeal to youths. And some experts worry that the new health campaign against obesity — spearheaded by Michelle Obama from the White House — may be hampering donations to antitobacco campaigns as public health issues shift in emphasis and compete for funds.

“Over all, the antismoking countermessage has been lost,” Mr. Pechacek said as the C.D.C. released its biannual survey of more than 10,000 high school students, showing 19.5 percent of them are smokers.

High school smoking rates dipped significantly to 21.9 percent in 2003, from 34.8 percent in 1995, then progress stalled, he said.

One-third of high school smokers are expected to die prematurely of tobacco-related disease, said Mr. Pechacek, the associate director for science in the agency’s Office on Smoking and Health. With about four million students graduating from high school each year, the difference between the current rate and the “Healthy People 2010” goal set by the government 10 years ago amounts to an additional 140,000 student smokers and 46,000 premature deaths for each high school class nationally.

Separately, a New England Journal of Medicine commentary on Wednesday was titled “Don’t Forget Tobacco.”

“By assuming that the tobacco war has been won, we risk consigning millions of Americans to premature death,” Dr. Steven A. Schroeder, a professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, and Kenneth E. Warner, dean of the School of Public Health at the University of Michigan, wrote in the article.

“At a time when all eyes are focused on health care reform, escalating medical costs and childhood obesity, cigarette smoking remains by far the most common cause of preventable death and disability in the United States,” they added. “The prevalence of smoking in the United States hovers at 20 percent, more than eight million people are sick or disabled as a result of tobacco use, and smoking kills 450,000 Americans annually.”

Because of a lagging antismoking campaign, they said the total smoking rate in the nation was expected to decline only to 16 percent by 2020, and to stabilize at 13.5 percent after midcentury unless more was done to stop it.

Mr. Warner said financing for antismoking promotions had been lost from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, which has turned more toward childhood obesity, and the American Legacy Foundation, an antitobacco group created in the 1998 master settlement agreement between states and the tobacco industry.

Some public health experts say they are concerned that obesity campaigns have attracted more money and attention recently than programs against tobacco. And Mrs. Obama’s national campaign against childhood obesity is occurring at a time when President Obama has said he has found it difficult to quit smoking.

“I find it ironic, but I think it also points out the challenge, the addiction that smokers are faced with,” Mr. Warner said. “Those are the two pre-eminent public health issues of the day. What I regret is when we start posing obesity versus tobacco, rather than saying those issues are so important to public health, both of them, that they need to be elevated above the fray.”]]> Published: July 8, 2010 in the New York Times

The nation has failed to reach its 2010 health goal of reducing high school smoking to 16 percent, federal officials said Thursday in a report calling for a resurgence of antismoking advertising to counter the tobacco industry’s $12 billion marketing campaign.

“People are getting the image that it’s cool to use nicotine as a drug,” Terry F. Pechacek of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said in an interview. “We need to bring back our voice, our antismoking mass media campaign.”

The popularity of hookah bars and smokeless nicotine products, Mr. Pechacek said, are the modern equivalent of the banned Joe Camel cartoon in their appeal to youths. And some experts worry that the new health campaign against obesity — spearheaded by Michelle Obama from the White House — may be hampering donations to antitobacco campaigns as public health issues shift in emphasis and compete for funds.

“Over all, the antismoking countermessage has been lost,” Mr. Pechacek said as the C.D.C. released its biannual survey of more than 10,000 high school students, showing 19.5 percent of them are smokers.

High school smoking rates dipped significantly to 21.9 percent in 2003, from 34.8 percent in 1995, then progress stalled, he said.

One-third of high school smokers are expected to die prematurely of tobacco-related disease, said Mr. Pechacek, the associate director for science in the agency’s Office on Smoking and Health. With about four million students graduating from high school each year, the difference between the current rate and the “Healthy People 2010” goal set by the government 10 years ago amounts to an additional 140,000 student smokers and 46,000 premature deaths for each high school class nationally.

Separately, a New England Journal of Medicine commentary on Wednesday was titled “Don’t Forget Tobacco.”

“By assuming that the tobacco war has been won, we risk consigning millions of Americans to premature death,” Dr. Steven A. Schroeder, a professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, and Kenneth E. Warner, dean of the School of Public Health at the University of Michigan, wrote in the article.

“At a time when all eyes are focused on health care reform, escalating medical costs and childhood obesity, cigarette smoking remains by far the most common cause of preventable death and disability in the United States,” they added. “The prevalence of smoking in the United States hovers at 20 percent, more than eight million people are sick or disabled as a result of tobacco use, and smoking kills 450,000 Americans annually.”

Because of a lagging antismoking campaign, they said the total smoking rate in the nation was expected to decline only to 16 percent by 2020, and to stabilize at 13.5 percent after midcentury unless more was done to stop it.

Mr. Warner said financing for antismoking promotions had been lost from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, which has turned more toward childhood obesity, and the American Legacy Foundation, an antitobacco group created in the 1998 master settlement agreement between states and the tobacco industry.

Some public health experts say they are concerned that obesity campaigns have attracted more money and attention recently than programs against tobacco. And Mrs. Obama’s national campaign against childhood obesity is occurring at a time when President Obama has said he has found it difficult to quit smoking.

“I find it ironic, but I think it also points out the challenge, the addiction that smokers are faced with,” Mr. Warner said. “Those are the two pre-eminent public health issues of the day. What I regret is when we start posing obesity versus tobacco, rather than saying those issues are so important to public health, both of them, that they need to be elevated above the fray.”]]> http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=673 Mon, 12 Jul 2010 17:25:12 -0400 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=673
The results, published in the Journal of Pediatrics, may not sound surprising. However, few studies have looked at the relationship between children's weight and their diet patterns -- which are more complex than, for example, sugar or fat intake.

And while it is generally believed that sitting down to family dinner is good for kids, there has been little research evidence that doing so actually helps keep children slim.

For the new study, Greek researchers interviewed 1,138 children ages 9 to 13 about their diets and physical activities, and used that information to identify five general diet-and-lifestyle patterns across the group.

One was what they dubbed the "dinner, cooked meals and vegetables" pattern. Children with this pattern had a high intake of vegetables, regularly sat down to family dinner and typically had traditional "cooked" meals (hot or cold) for lunch and dinner, rather than sandwiches, snack foods or "breakfast-like" meals.

Kids who fell into that pattern generally had a lower body mass index, or BMI -- a standard measure of weight in relation to height used to gauge how fat or thin a person is. They also had smaller waistlines and less body fat than their peers who did not fit the diet pattern.

None of the other four diet-and-lifestyle patterns the researchers identified were associated with children's weight or body-fat levels.

Those patterns included an "unstructured eating, fast food/sugary foods and sedentary lifestyle" pattern, and "high fiber," "breakfast," and "exercise, fruits and vegetables" patterns.

It is not clear why those four categories failed to show a link to children's weight, while the family meal/vegetable pattern did, according to the researchers, led by Dr. Mary Yannakoulia of Harokopio University in Athens.

But, they write, the habits of sitting down to family dinner and having cooked meals could signify children who are closely sticking to the traditional Mediterranean diet -- one rich in vegetables, olive oil, whole grains and fish.

A key limitation of the study is that it assessed children at one time point. Only a study that follows children over time can show whether those who follow a family meal/vegetable-type pattern are less likely to become overweight.

However, Yannakoulia and her colleagues write, the findings suggest that such an eating pattern stands as a "potential preventive approach" to combating childhood obesity. They note that it is also a "non-restrictive" way of eating that most children can live with.]]>
The results, published in the Journal of Pediatrics, may not sound surprising. However, few studies have looked at the relationship between children's weight and their diet patterns -- which are more complex than, for example, sugar or fat intake.

And while it is generally believed that sitting down to family dinner is good for kids, there has been little research evidence that doing so actually helps keep children slim.

For the new study, Greek researchers interviewed 1,138 children ages 9 to 13 about their diets and physical activities, and used that information to identify five general diet-and-lifestyle patterns across the group.

One was what they dubbed the "dinner, cooked meals and vegetables" pattern. Children with this pattern had a high intake of vegetables, regularly sat down to family dinner and typically had traditional "cooked" meals (hot or cold) for lunch and dinner, rather than sandwiches, snack foods or "breakfast-like" meals.

Kids who fell into that pattern generally had a lower body mass index, or BMI -- a standard measure of weight in relation to height used to gauge how fat or thin a person is. They also had smaller waistlines and less body fat than their peers who did not fit the diet pattern.

None of the other four diet-and-lifestyle patterns the researchers identified were associated with children's weight or body-fat levels.

Those patterns included an "unstructured eating, fast food/sugary foods and sedentary lifestyle" pattern, and "high fiber," "breakfast," and "exercise, fruits and vegetables" patterns.

It is not clear why those four categories failed to show a link to children's weight, while the family meal/vegetable pattern did, according to the researchers, led by Dr. Mary Yannakoulia of Harokopio University in Athens.

But, they write, the habits of sitting down to family dinner and having cooked meals could signify children who are closely sticking to the traditional Mediterranean diet -- one rich in vegetables, olive oil, whole grains and fish.

A key limitation of the study is that it assessed children at one time point. Only a study that follows children over time can show whether those who follow a family meal/vegetable-type pattern are less likely to become overweight.

However, Yannakoulia and her colleagues write, the findings suggest that such an eating pattern stands as a "potential preventive approach" to combating childhood obesity. They note that it is also a "non-restrictive" way of eating that most children can live with.]]> http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=672 Mon, 12 Jul 2010 17:21:14 -0400 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=672
By Serena Gordon
FRIDAY, July 9, 2010 (HealthDay News) -- In an annual report gauging the health and well-being of America's children, a group of 22 federal agencies reports progress in some areas, preterm births and teen pregnancies in particular, but bad news in other areas, like the number of teens living in poverty.

"This report is a status update on how our nation's children are faring, and it represents large segments of the population," Dr. Alan E. Guttmacher, acting director of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, said during a press conference.

The report, titled America's Children In Brief: Key Indicators of Well-Being, 2010, was released July 9.

According to the report, in 2009 there were 74.5 million people under 18 years of age living in the United States. That number is up 2 million since 2000.

Seventy percent of those children lived in households with two parents, while 26 percent lived with just one parent. Four percent of the nation's children live without either parent.

One of the most positive findings from the study was a drop in the rate of preterm births.

"There was a decline in the number of preterm births, and the decline was seen in each of the three largest racial and ethnic groups," said Edward Sondik, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Health Statistics, during the press conference.

The preterm birth rate -- babies born before 37 weeks of gestation -- dropped from 12.7 percent in 2007 to 12.3 percent in 2008. This is the second straight decline after years of steadily increasing rates of preterm birth, according to the report.

According to Sondik, "the etiology of preterm birth is quite complex and it's hard to know for sure which factors are responsible for this dip."

Dr. Diane Ashton, deputy medical director for the March of Dimes, said some research suggests that a reduction in the number of elective Cesarean births done before 39 weeks of gestation may be at least part of the reason that preterm birth rates are going down.

"We're pleased that we're seeing a turn in preterm birth rates, and hope the trend continues," said Ashton. She recommended that women hoping to avoid preterm birth seek good preconception care and have regular medical care throughout pregnancy. In addition, she said, folic acid can help to prevent birth defects and may reduce the risk of preterm birth.

The report also found that the rate of teens giving birth has declined. In 2008, teens between 15 and 17 years old gave birth at a rate of 21.7 per 1,000 girls. In 2007, that number was 22.2 per 1,000, according to the report.

Other good news in the report included slight gains in test scores in reading and math for eighth graders, more kids completing high school and going to college, more children covered by health insurance, fewer children having untreated dental cavities and fewer children being exposed to secondhand smoke.

But, the news wasn't all good for the nation's youngsters.

"These data clearly show that the economy is affecting children," said Sondik.

In 2008, 22 percent of America's children lived in homes dubbed "food insecure," which means that there isn't always access to enough food in the home. That number was up from 17 percent in 2007.

Not surprisingly, the number of children living in homes where at least one parent was working full-time also decreased by 2 percent, and the number of children living in poverty rose from 18 percent to 19 percent from 2007 to 2008, according to the report.

"It's good that this snapshot of America's children shows that most indicators are positive," said Dr. Kenneth Bromberg, chairman of pediatrics at the Brooklyn Hospital Center in New York City. "It looks like child health right now is stable, but given what we know about the economy, I worry we'll have challenges in the next year or two."]]>
By Serena Gordon
FRIDAY, July 9, 2010 (HealthDay News) -- In an annual report gauging the health and well-being of America's children, a group of 22 federal agencies reports progress in some areas, preterm births and teen pregnancies in particular, but bad news in other areas, like the number of teens living in poverty.

"This report is a status update on how our nation's children are faring, and it represents large segments of the population," Dr. Alan E. Guttmacher, acting director of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, said during a press conference.

The report, titled America's Children In Brief: Key Indicators of Well-Being, 2010, was released July 9.

According to the report, in 2009 there were 74.5 million people under 18 years of age living in the United States. That number is up 2 million since 2000.

Seventy percent of those children lived in households with two parents, while 26 percent lived with just one parent. Four percent of the nation's children live without either parent.

One of the most positive findings from the study was a drop in the rate of preterm births.

"There was a decline in the number of preterm births, and the decline was seen in each of the three largest racial and ethnic groups," said Edward Sondik, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Health Statistics, during the press conference.

The preterm birth rate -- babies born before 37 weeks of gestation -- dropped from 12.7 percent in 2007 to 12.3 percent in 2008. This is the second straight decline after years of steadily increasing rates of preterm birth, according to the report.

According to Sondik, "the etiology of preterm birth is quite complex and it's hard to know for sure which factors are responsible for this dip."

Dr. Diane Ashton, deputy medical director for the March of Dimes, said some research suggests that a reduction in the number of elective Cesarean births done before 39 weeks of gestation may be at least part of the reason that preterm birth rates are going down.

"We're pleased that we're seeing a turn in preterm birth rates, and hope the trend continues," said Ashton. She recommended that women hoping to avoid preterm birth seek good preconception care and have regular medical care throughout pregnancy. In addition, she said, folic acid can help to prevent birth defects and may reduce the risk of preterm birth.

The report also found that the rate of teens giving birth has declined. In 2008, teens between 15 and 17 years old gave birth at a rate of 21.7 per 1,000 girls. In 2007, that number was 22.2 per 1,000, according to the report.

Other good news in the report included slight gains in test scores in reading and math for eighth graders, more kids completing high school and going to college, more children covered by health insurance, fewer children having untreated dental cavities and fewer children being exposed to secondhand smoke.

But, the news wasn't all good for the nation's youngsters.

"These data clearly show that the economy is affecting children," said Sondik.

In 2008, 22 percent of America's children lived in homes dubbed "food insecure," which means that there isn't always access to enough food in the home. That number was up from 17 percent in 2007.

Not surprisingly, the number of children living in homes where at least one parent was working full-time also decreased by 2 percent, and the number of children living in poverty rose from 18 percent to 19 percent from 2007 to 2008, according to the report.

"It's good that this snapshot of America's children shows that most indicators are positive," said Dr. Kenneth Bromberg, chairman of pediatrics at the Brooklyn Hospital Center in New York City. "It looks like child health right now is stable, but given what we know about the economy, I worry we'll have challenges in the next year or two."]]> http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=671 Mon, 12 Jul 2010 17:12:59 -0400 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=671
FRIDAY, July 9, 2010 (HealthDay News) -- For teenage girls, competing to win is linked to more depression and loneliness, and associated with fewer close friendships, the authors of a new study have found.

But competing to excel improves the well-being of both genders, the researchers said.

In fact, the study found that competition can be either good or bad for teens, depending on their gender and what they are trying to achieve.

Researchers defined "competing to win" as trying to dominate and outperform others, and "competing to excel" as performing well and surpassing personal goals.

U.S. researchers analyzed questionnaires completed by 110 high school seniors in Dallas, their best same-gender friends and their parents. The study found that teenage boys scored higher on "competing to win" than girls, and were much less likely to experience depression, loneliness or fewer close friendships as a result.

There were no gender differences for "competing to excel" scores. For both genders, competing to excel was associated with higher self-esteem and less depression, but it had little connection with social functioning.

"The overarching issue this study explored was whether competitiveness as a motivational orientation is good or bad for males and females," according to Dr. David Hibbard of California State University and Dr. Duane Buhrmester of the University of Texas at Dallas.

"The findings clarify, to some degree, western cultures' 'ambivalence' about competitiveness. The view that competitiveness is the road to emotional well-being is supported to the extent that one is talking about competing to improve oneself or excel. On the other hand, if one is talking about competing to win or show dominance over others, then females seem to pay a socio-emotional price," they concluded in their report.

The study findings were released online July 6 in advance of publication in an upcoming print issue of the journal Sex Roles.]]>
FRIDAY, July 9, 2010 (HealthDay News) -- For teenage girls, competing to win is linked to more depression and loneliness, and associated with fewer close friendships, the authors of a new study have found.

But competing to excel improves the well-being of both genders, the researchers said.

In fact, the study found that competition can be either good or bad for teens, depending on their gender and what they are trying to achieve.

Researchers defined "competing to win" as trying to dominate and outperform others, and "competing to excel" as performing well and surpassing personal goals.

U.S. researchers analyzed questionnaires completed by 110 high school seniors in Dallas, their best same-gender friends and their parents. The study found that teenage boys scored higher on "competing to win" than girls, and were much less likely to experience depression, loneliness or fewer close friendships as a result.

There were no gender differences for "competing to excel" scores. For both genders, competing to excel was associated with higher self-esteem and less depression, but it had little connection with social functioning.

"The overarching issue this study explored was whether competitiveness as a motivational orientation is good or bad for males and females," according to Dr. David Hibbard of California State University and Dr. Duane Buhrmester of the University of Texas at Dallas.

"The findings clarify, to some degree, western cultures' 'ambivalence' about competitiveness. The view that competitiveness is the road to emotional well-being is supported to the extent that one is talking about competing to improve oneself or excel. On the other hand, if one is talking about competing to win or show dominance over others, then females seem to pay a socio-emotional price," they concluded in their report.

The study findings were released online July 6 in advance of publication in an upcoming print issue of the journal Sex Roles.]]> http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=670 Mon, 12 Jul 2010 08:30:54 -0400 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=670 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=667 Mon, 12 Jul 2010 07:31:48 -0400 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=667
It's just the excuse you need to set aside the housework or yardwork and go to the pool or the park!

Go ahead. Have fun!]]>
It's just the excuse you need to set aside the housework or yardwork and go to the pool or the park!

Go ahead. Have fun!]]> http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=665 Fri, 09 Jul 2010 07:28:19 -0400 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=665
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Children and teenagers who smoke marijuana may have a somewhat heightened risk of developing depression, a new study suggests -- though whether the drug itself is to blame is not clear.

Several studies have found an association between marijuana use and increased risks of depression and anxiety disorders, but some others have failed to confirm such a link. Moreover, it has been unclear whether marijuana use itself, or some other factor, accounts for the connection seen in some studies.

For the new study, published in the American Journal of Epidemiology, researchers used data collected from more than 50,000 adults in 17 countries taking part in a World Health Organization mental-health study.

Overall, the researchers found a modest association between marijuana smoking before the age of 17 and the odds of suffering depression later on. Across the countries, early marijuana use was linked to a 50 percent increase in the risk of developing a depression "spell" after age 17.

The connection remained when the researchers accounted for a number of other factors, including participants' self-reported recent marijuana use, smoking and drinking habits, and history of mental health problems like phobias and anxiety.

The strength of the marijuana-depression link did weaken, however, when the investigators factored in childhood conduct problems -- like skipping school, getting into fights and shoplifting.

The implication is that such conduct problems may "partially" explain the relationship between early pot smoking and later depression, lead researcher Dr. Ron de Graaf, of the Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction in Utrecht, told Reuters Health in an email.

Unfortunately, de Graaf said, he and his colleagues lacked information on conduct problems from study participants in certain countries -- including some of those nations where the connection between early pot use and depression was strongest, such as New Zealand and South Africa.

So the full extent to which childhood behavioral problems may explain the pot-depression link is not clear.

The study has other key limitations as well. One is that participants were surveyed at a single point rather than followed over time, which is the best way to gauge which came first -- the drug use or the depression.

Instead, the study participants were screened for depression "spells" -- persistent feelings of sadness and other symptoms, such as appetite changes and sleep problems, that lasted for at least two weeks -- then asked to recall when they had first started having such episodes.

Those who said they were 17 or older when their depression first hit were considered "cases." Across the countries, 9,647 participants met that definition and were compared with the 41,000-plus men and women who had no current or past depression.

Of the depression group, 9 percent said they had smoked marijuana before the age of 17, while the same was true of 7 percent of the comparison group. In general, men and women who said they had used pot before age 17 had a greater chance of having a depression episode at age 17 or later.

This type of study design cannot prove that marijuana itself contributed to the increased risk of depression. It may be, for instance, that young people who are vulnerable to developing depression or other mental health problems are also more likely to use marijuana.

Still, de Graaf said, it is possible that as with other substances, such as alcohol, children's and teenagers' still-developing brains may be more vulnerable to any direct toxic effects of marijuana use.

Some past studies have linked heavy marijuana use, particularly early in life, to an increased risk of schizophrenia-like psychosis.

"Early cannabis (marijuana) use may have important consequences for later mental health," de Graaf said. "We know now -- also from other studies -- that cannabis use is not without negative consequences."

More studies are still needed, however, according to de Graaf -- particularly ones that follow young people over time to see whether marijuana use does precede the development of mental health problems in some kids.]]>
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Children and teenagers who smoke marijuana may have a somewhat heightened risk of developing depression, a new study suggests -- though whether the drug itself is to blame is not clear.

Several studies have found an association between marijuana use and increased risks of depression and anxiety disorders, but some others have failed to confirm such a link. Moreover, it has been unclear whether marijuana use itself, or some other factor, accounts for the connection seen in some studies.

For the new study, published in the American Journal of Epidemiology, researchers used data collected from more than 50,000 adults in 17 countries taking part in a World Health Organization mental-health study.

Overall, the researchers found a modest association between marijuana smoking before the age of 17 and the odds of suffering depression later on. Across the countries, early marijuana use was linked to a 50 percent increase in the risk of developing a depression "spell" after age 17.

The connection remained when the researchers accounted for a number of other factors, including participants' self-reported recent marijuana use, smoking and drinking habits, and history of mental health problems like phobias and anxiety.

The strength of the marijuana-depression link did weaken, however, when the investigators factored in childhood conduct problems -- like skipping school, getting into fights and shoplifting.

The implication is that such conduct problems may "partially" explain the relationship between early pot smoking and later depression, lead researcher Dr. Ron de Graaf, of the Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction in Utrecht, told Reuters Health in an email.

Unfortunately, de Graaf said, he and his colleagues lacked information on conduct problems from study participants in certain countries -- including some of those nations where the connection between early pot use and depression was strongest, such as New Zealand and South Africa.

So the full extent to which childhood behavioral problems may explain the pot-depression link is not clear.

The study has other key limitations as well. One is that participants were surveyed at a single point rather than followed over time, which is the best way to gauge which came first -- the drug use or the depression.

Instead, the study participants were screened for depression "spells" -- persistent feelings of sadness and other symptoms, such as appetite changes and sleep problems, that lasted for at least two weeks -- then asked to recall when they had first started having such episodes.

Those who said they were 17 or older when their depression first hit were considered "cases." Across the countries, 9,647 participants met that definition and were compared with the 41,000-plus men and women who had no current or past depression.

Of the depression group, 9 percent said they had smoked marijuana before the age of 17, while the same was true of 7 percent of the comparison group. In general, men and women who said they had used pot before age 17 had a greater chance of having a depression episode at age 17 or later.

This type of study design cannot prove that marijuana itself contributed to the increased risk of depression. It may be, for instance, that young people who are vulnerable to developing depression or other mental health problems are also more likely to use marijuana.

Still, de Graaf said, it is possible that as with other substances, such as alcohol, children's and teenagers' still-developing brains may be more vulnerable to any direct toxic effects of marijuana use.

Some past studies have linked heavy marijuana use, particularly early in life, to an increased risk of schizophrenia-like psychosis.

"Early cannabis (marijuana) use may have important consequences for later mental health," de Graaf said. "We know now -- also from other studies -- that cannabis use is not without negative consequences."

More studies are still needed, however, according to de Graaf -- particularly ones that follow young people over time to see whether marijuana use does precede the development of mental health problems in some kids.]]> http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=664 Fri, 09 Jul 2010 07:24:40 -0400 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=664
Children who were rated higher in self-control at age 9 years were less likely to be overweight at age 15 years than their less well-controlled peers, investigators reported in a prospective, longitudinal study published in the July issue of the Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine. The relationship between weight and self-control remained significant even after controlling for a number of confounding variables. The authors suggested that greater impulse control and skill at delaying gratification helped the children maintain a healthy weight in adolescence.

The participants were 844 children taking part in the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development, a longitudinal study originally developed to examine the effects of child care on development. Each child's primary caregiver — usually the mother — and classroom teacher completed the Social Skills Rating System questionnaire when the child turned 9 years old. The questionnaire is an established instrument for evaluating positive child behaviors and is graded on a 3-point scale, with 0 being never and 2 being very often. Questions pertaining to self-control asked the respondents to rate the children on factors such as:

•keeps room/desk neat and clean without having to be reminded,
•controls temper when arguing with other children,
•finishes tasks within a reasonable amount of time, and
•ignores peer distractions when doing class work.
Height and weight were measured by nurse practitioners or pediatric endocrinologists when the children were 10 and 15 years old. Body mass index for each child was calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in square meters and converted into z scores specific to age and sex. Children with BMI z scores above the 85th percentile were considered overweight.

By that standard, approximately one third (262) of the children were overweight by age 15 years. Their mean self-control rating at age 9 years was 1.2 compared with a mean of 1.35 for the 582 normal-weight adolescents. On Poisson regression analysis, this translated into a relative risk of 0.74 that a more self-controlled child at age 9 years would be overweight by age 15 years (P < .001; 95% confidence interval, 0.56 - 0.98). This relationship persisted "even when controlling for age, sex, ethnicity, pubertal development, IQ, logarithm of income to needs ratio, maternal overweight status, and overweight status at 10 years of age," write the authors, led by Eli Tsukayama, MA, from the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. "Children who were rated 1 point higher on a 3-point self-control scale were 26% less likely to be overweight as adolescents." In addition to scoring lower on self-control, overweight children were more likely to be male, black, have lower IQs, have overweight mothers, and to come from a lower socioeconomic background.

Children who gain weight rapidly as they enter adolescence are at high risk for a host of medical problems in adulthood, so identifying risk factors is essential, the authors write. Behavioral factors such as self-control are particularly interesting because, unlike other risk factors, they have the potential for change.For example, children and parents alike can be taught to commit to making healthy choices by not keeping junk food at home, and children can be encouraged to plan ahead by having healthy snacks on hand when they know temptation may strike. As the authors write: "The capacity to resist immediate temptations to act in one's best long-term interests is among the most important developmental milestones in the social development of children."

The study sample was not nationally representative, so the findings may not be generalizable nationwide. The authors did not measure the children's knowledge of nutrition, which may have influenced their food choices, and as this was not a randomized controlled trial, there may have been a confounder associated with self-control at 9 years of age that may have resulted in weight differences at 15 years of age.

Nevertheless, people can be taught to make better choices when they eat, the authors maintained. They concluded, quoting from Dr. David Kessler's book, The End of Overeating: "the power to resist ultimately rests with us."]]>
Children who were rated higher in self-control at age 9 years were less likely to be overweight at age 15 years than their less well-controlled peers, investigators reported in a prospective, longitudinal study published in the July issue of the Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine. The relationship between weight and self-control remained significant even after controlling for a number of confounding variables. The authors suggested that greater impulse control and skill at delaying gratification helped the children maintain a healthy weight in adolescence.

The participants were 844 children taking part in the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development, a longitudinal study originally developed to examine the effects of child care on development. Each child's primary caregiver — usually the mother — and classroom teacher completed the Social Skills Rating System questionnaire when the child turned 9 years old. The questionnaire is an established instrument for evaluating positive child behaviors and is graded on a 3-point scale, with 0 being never and 2 being very often. Questions pertaining to self-control asked the respondents to rate the children on factors such as:

•keeps room/desk neat and clean without having to be reminded,
•controls temper when arguing with other children,
•finishes tasks within a reasonable amount of time, and
•ignores peer distractions when doing class work.
Height and weight were measured by nurse practitioners or pediatric endocrinologists when the children were 10 and 15 years old. Body mass index for each child was calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in square meters and converted into z scores specific to age and sex. Children with BMI z scores above the 85th percentile were considered overweight.

By that standard, approximately one third (262) of the children were overweight by age 15 years. Their mean self-control rating at age 9 years was 1.2 compared with a mean of 1.35 for the 582 normal-weight adolescents. On Poisson regression analysis, this translated into a relative risk of 0.74 that a more self-controlled child at age 9 years would be overweight by age 15 years (P < .001; 95% confidence interval, 0.56 - 0.98). This relationship persisted "even when controlling for age, sex, ethnicity, pubertal development, IQ, logarithm of income to needs ratio, maternal overweight status, and overweight status at 10 years of age," write the authors, led by Eli Tsukayama, MA, from the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. "Children who were rated 1 point higher on a 3-point self-control scale were 26% less likely to be overweight as adolescents." In addition to scoring lower on self-control, overweight children were more likely to be male, black, have lower IQs, have overweight mothers, and to come from a lower socioeconomic background.

Children who gain weight rapidly as they enter adolescence are at high risk for a host of medical problems in adulthood, so identifying risk factors is essential, the authors write. Behavioral factors such as self-control are particularly interesting because, unlike other risk factors, they have the potential for change.For example, children and parents alike can be taught to commit to making healthy choices by not keeping junk food at home, and children can be encouraged to plan ahead by having healthy snacks on hand when they know temptation may strike. As the authors write: "The capacity to resist immediate temptations to act in one's best long-term interests is among the most important developmental milestones in the social development of children."

The study sample was not nationally representative, so the findings may not be generalizable nationwide. The authors did not measure the children's knowledge of nutrition, which may have influenced their food choices, and as this was not a randomized controlled trial, there may have been a confounder associated with self-control at 9 years of age that may have resulted in weight differences at 15 years of age.

Nevertheless, people can be taught to make better choices when they eat, the authors maintained. They concluded, quoting from Dr. David Kessler's book, The End of Overeating: "the power to resist ultimately rests with us."]]> http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=663 Thu, 08 Jul 2010 01:20:19 -0400 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=663 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=662 Thu, 08 Jul 2010 01:16:59 -0400 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=662 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=661 Thu, 08 Jul 2010 01:12:12 -0400 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=661 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=660 Wed, 07 Jul 2010 07:54:58 -0400 http://forum.realparentsrealanswers.com/showthread.php?tid=660
The study is the latest of many to point out the ill effects of excessive screen time, whether at the computer or the television.

Researcher Edward Swing, a graduate student at Iowa State University, compared participants who watched TV or played video games less than two hours a day -- the recommendation from the American Academy of Pediatrics for children aged 2 and older -- to those who watched more.

"Those who exceeded the AAP recommendation were about 1.6 times to 2.2 times more likely to have greater than average attention problems," he said.

The middle schoolers he studied were a little less likely than the college students to have attention problems with excess TV and video game participation.

The study is published in the July issue of Pediatrics.

Swing and his colleagues looked at two age groups. They assessed more than 1,300 children in the third, fourth and fifth grades over a 13-month time period. They also looked at 210 college students for a one-time evaluation.

"The children were reporting their TV and video game use and the parents were also reporting TV and video game use," Swing said. "The teachers were reporting attention problems," he said of the middle school students.

Teachers reported if children had problems staying on task, paying attention, if they interrupted other children's work, or showed problems in other areas that reflected trouble with attention.

College students did self-reports on their attention problems.

Middle school students spent an average of 4.26 hours a day watching TV or playing video games, the team found, while older students spent 4.82 hours daily.

Previous studies have also linked screen time with attention problems.

"There may well be a relation between television viewing and attention problems," said Dr. David Elkind, professor emeritus of child development at Tufts University and author of The Power of Play.

But he had some caveats about the new study. "Teacher ratings of attention deficit have been shown in other studies not to be consistent over time," Elkind noted.

In response, Swing said they did have more than one teacher rating the children and that the ratings tended to be in agreement.

"This is an important finding," according to Dr. Dimitri Christakis, the George Adkins Professor of Pediatrics at the University of Washington in Seattle. He, too, has researched the topic.

"ADHD [attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder] is 10 times more common today than it was 20 years ago," he said. "Although it is clear that ADHD has a genetic basis, given that our genes have not changed appreciably in that timeframe, it is likely that there are environmental factors that are contributing to this rise." He and other experts suspect excessive media as a contributor.

"These media aren't going away," Christakis said. "We do have to find ways to manage them appropriately."

"Content matters," he said. His own research found that the faster-paced shows increased the risk of attention problems. Why? "You prime the mind to accept that pace. Real life doesn't happen fast enough to keep your attention."

Elkind also pointed out that, "it makes a difference what kind of show or computer games the child is playing." Shooting games, for instance, are different than problem-solving computer games.

The study should have accounted for these variables, he said.

Swing agreed, and added he hopes to study that next. Meanwhile, he said, the recommendation of less than two hours a day of screen time seems prudent.]]>
The study is the latest of many to point out the ill effects of excessive screen time, whether at the computer or the television.

Researcher Edward Swing, a graduate student at Iowa State University, compared participants who watched TV or played video games less than two hours a day -- the recommendation from the American Academy of Pediatrics for children aged 2 and older -- to those who watched more.

"Those who exceeded the AAP recommendation were about 1.6 times to 2.2 times more likely to have greater than average attention problems," he said.

The middle schoolers he studied were a little less likely than the college students to have attention problems with excess TV and video game participation.

The study is published in the July issue of Pediatrics.

Swing and his colleagues looked at two age groups. They assessed more than 1,300 children in the third, fourth and fifth grades over a 13-month time period. They also looked at 210 college students for a one-time evaluation.

"The children were reporting their TV and video game use and the parents were also reporting TV and video game use," Swing said. "The teachers were reporting attention problems," he said of the middle school students.

Teachers reported if children had problems staying on task, paying attention, if they interrupted other children's work, or showed problems in other areas that reflected trouble with attention.

College students did self-reports on their attention problems.

Middle school students spent an average of 4.26 hours a day watching TV or playing video games, the team found, while older students spent 4.82 hours daily.

Previous studies have also linked screen time with attention problems.

"There may well be a relation between television viewing and attention problems," said Dr. David Elkind, professor emeritus of child development at Tufts University and author of The Power of Play.

But he had some caveats about the new study. "Teacher ratings of attention deficit have been shown in other studies not to be consistent over time," Elkind noted.

In response, Swing said they did have more than one teacher rating the children and that the ratings tended to be in agreement.

"This is an important finding," according to Dr. Dimitri Christakis, the George Adkins Professor of Pediatrics at the University of Washington in Seattle. He, too, has researched the topic.

"ADHD [attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder] is 10 times more common today than it was 20 years ago," he said. "Although it is clear that ADHD has a genetic basis, given that our genes have not changed appreciably in that timeframe, it is likely that there are environmental factors that are contributing to this rise." He and other experts suspect excessive media as a contributor.

"These media aren't going away," Christakis said. "We do have to find ways to manage them appropriately."

"Content matters," he said. His own research found that the faster-paced shows increased the risk of attention problems. Why? "You prime the mind to accept that pace. Real life doesn't happen fast enough to keep your attention."

Elkind also pointed out that, "it makes a difference what kind of show or computer games the child is playing." Shooting games, for instance, are different than problem-solving computer games.

The study should have accounted for these variables, he said.

Swing agreed, and added he hopes to study that next. Meanwhile, he said, the recommendation of less than two hours a day of screen time seems prudent.]]>