Search

There’s a serious ethical problem with some sunscreen testing methods – and you’re probably not aware of it

As summer approaches, we need to start remembering to slip on sun-protective clothing, slop on sunscreen, slap on a hat, seek shade where possible, and slide on sunglasses. When it comes to sunscreen, we all know we need to wear it to protect against the harmful effects of ultraviolet (UV) radiation, which can cause skin cancer. But what about the sun protection factor, known as the SPF rating, we see on our sunscreen bottles? It indicates the level of protection – but is it always what it says it is, and how is it actually tested? <h2>Risking human health for SPF testing</h2> While there have been some cases of <a href="https://www.tga.gov.au/news/news/sunscreen-testing-ama-laboratories-condition-listing">sunscreens not matching up to their SPF claims</a>, this is the exception and not the norm. In Australia, we can be comfortable knowing these products are tightly regulated to ensure they are safe and meet their claimed SPF rating, according to current SPF testing methods. However, problems arise when it comes to how sunscreens are tested for their SPF rating. Most people would not be aware that the SPF value on their sunscreen bottles is determined by testing on humans. Ultimately, this means we are risking people’s health to test how effective our sunscreens are – and we urgently need to change this. <h2>How is sunscreen SPF tested?</h2> Once a sunscreen formulation has been developed by a manufacturer it needs to go through testing to ensure it only contains approved ingredients, and ultimately, that it does what it says it does. All sunscreen products available in Australia are <a href="https://www.tga.gov.au/news/news/about-sunscreens">tested according to the Australian Standard to determine the SPF</a>. This is great and provides assurance of safety and quality for the consumer – but the problem is with how this testing is done. Currently, testing sunscreens on humans is the approved international standard to rate the UV protection level of a sunscreen. This testing involves volunteers wearing strictly defined amounts of sunscreen and being exposed to artificial solar <a href="https://www.arpansa.gov.au/understanding-radiation/what-is-radiation/non-ionising-radiation/ultraviolet-radiation">UV radiation</a>. Performance is measured by determining the time it takes for erythema or redness to occur. <a href="https://www.cancer.org.au/about-us/policy-and-advocacy/prevention-policy/national-cancer-prevention-policy/skin-cancer-statistics-and-issues/sunburn">This is, basically, sunburn</a>; based on this, an SPF rating is assigned. <h2>Why is human testing of SPF a problem?</h2> If sunscreens only contain approved ingredients we know are safe, is it really a problem they are tested on humans? Sadly, yes. Human testing involves exposing people to harmful UV radiation, which we know can cause skin and eye damage, <a href="https://www.arpansa.gov.au/understanding-radiation/radiation-sources/more-radiation-sources/sun-exposure">as well as being the leading cause of skin cancer</a>. This alone is <a href="https://www.phrp.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/PHRP3212205.pdf">unethical and unjustifiable</a>. There are also other issues associated with testing sunscreen on humans. For example, the <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/phpp.12095">use of erythema to determine sunscreen effectiveness is highly subjective</a>, and may differ from one person to another, even for those with the same <a href="https://www.arpansa.gov.au/sites/default/files/legacy/pubs/RadiationProtection/FitzpatrickSkinType.pdf">skin type</a>. This makes the reliability of such testing methods questionable. Further, testing is only done on a small number of people (a minimum of <a href="https://www.tga.gov.au/sites/default/files/australian-regulatory-guidelines-for-sunscreens.pdf">ten people is required in Australia</a>). This is great for exposing as few people as possible to harmful UV radiation to determine a product’s SPF rating – but not so great when it comes to inclusiveness. Testing such a small number of people is not representative. It does not include all skin types and leads to real <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ics.12333">challenges in achieving reproducible results</a> across different laboratories testing the same product. The testing itself is also very expensive. This adds to the already high cost of buying sunscreens, and potentially limits manufacturers from developing new and better products. These, along with many other issues, highlight the urgency for non-human (in vitro) testing methods of a sunscreen’s effectiveness to be developed. <h2>Human-free SPF testing technology is in development</h2> While efforts have been made to develop non-human testing methods, <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165993622002072">there remain several challenges</a>. <a href="https://www.karger.com/Article/Abstract/292777">These include</a> the materials used to simulate human skin (also known as substrates), difficulties in applying the sunscreen to these substrates, reproducibility of results, and ensuring that results are the same as what we see with human testing. However, scientists at <a href="https://www.rmit.edu.au/">RMIT University</a>, with support from the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (<a href="https://www.arpansa.gov.au/">ARPANSA</a>) and the <a href="https://www.cancervic.org.au/">Cancer Council Victoria</a>, are <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165993622002072">working on a solution to this problem</a>. So far, they have developed a prototype sensor that <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-06273-3">changes colour when exposed to UV radiation</a>. This <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-06273-3/figures/5">sensor</a> could be customised for human-free sunscreen testing, for example. Reliable in vitro testing methods will mean in the future, sunscreen manufacturers would be able to quickly make and test new and better sunscreens, without being limited by the time and cost constraints involved with human testing. So the next time you buy a bottle of sunscreen, look to purchase the highest-rated sunscreen of SPF 50+ – and know that work is underway on getting that rating classified in a more ethical way. Image credits: Getty Images This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/theres-a-serious-ethical-problem-with-some-sunscreen-testing-methods-and-youre-probably-not-aware-of-it-195359" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.

Beauty & Style

Hollywood has got method acting all wrong, here’s what the process is really about

So-called method acting seems to be having a moment. <a href="https://www.nme.com/features/film-interviews/benedict-cumberbatch-interview-radiohead-the-power-of-the-dog-3097698">Benedict Cumberbatch and Kirsten Dunst</a> apparently didn’t speak to each other on the set of their new film, <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt10293406/">Power of the Dog</a>, to help them stay in character. While Lady Gaga is said to have spoken entirely with an Italian accent for nine months while working on her new film, <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11214590/">House of Gucci</a> – using it even when <a href="https://inews.co.uk/culture/film/lady-gaga-method-acting-house-of-gucci-extreme-accent-1308207">calling her mother</a>. Jared Leto is <a href="https://www.thewrap.com/jared-leto-method-acting-examples-movies/">also a fan</a>. While playing the Joker in <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1386697/">Suicide Squad</a>, Leto is said to have sent animal carcasses to his castmates. <a href="https://fabiosa.com/ctclb-rsvlk-auokh-pbimk-phnkz-this-is-extreme-matthew-mcconaughey-nearly-went-blind-as-a-result-of-dramatic-weight-for-a-film-role/">Matthew McConaughey</a>, meanwhile, lost so much weight he started to go blind for his role in <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0790636/">Dallas Buyers Club</a>. And <a href="https://faroutmagazine.co.uk/daniel-day-lewis-method-acting-in-my-left-foot/">Daniel Day-Lewis</a> demanded that production staff pushed him around in a wheelchair and spoon-fed him for his performance in <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097937/">My Left Foot</a>, where he played Christy Brown, a painter born with cerebral palsy. But not everyone is keen. Actor <a href="https://www.thethings.com/martin-freeman-jim-carres-method-acting-controversy-man-on-the-moon-hate/">Martin Freeman</a> recently called out Jim Carrey for his over-the-top antics during the filming of the 1999 film, <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0125664/">Man on the Moon</a>, which included “stuffing his pockets with smelly cheese and hanging out with Hell’s Angels”. Freeman said: “It was the most self-aggrandising, selfish, narcissistic fucking bollocks I have ever seen…You need to keep grounded in reality, and that’s not to say you don’t lose yourself in the time between ‘action’ and ‘cut’, but I think the rest of it is absolute pretentious nonsense”. <h2>What is method acting?</h2> While many actors may aim to fully “become” their character with the use of method acting it seems there is a serious misunderstanding of the term and what its founder actually had in mind. The originator of “the method” was US acting coach Lee Strasberg who crafted an acting technique in the 1930s that he claimed was based on the work of Konstantin Stanislavski, a Russian theatre practitioner. In his book <a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/A_Dream_of_Passion.html?id=jQPsAAAAMAAJ&redir_esc=y">A Dream of Passion</a>, Strasberg stated his belief that “the fundamental work of the actor – the training of his internal skills – is preceded by the development of the actor’s relaxation and concentration”. The goal of these exercises is to “free the expression of the actor” because “neuromuscular tension makes it difficult for thought, sensations, and emotions to be transmitted and properly experienced”. <iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/LRDPo0CHrko?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe> An exercise in a standard method based training session has the actor sit in a chair and put themselves into a highly relaxed state. They will then explore a memory from their past where they experienced very strong emotions. As the exercise proceeds, the actor describes what they were wearing, what the temperature of the place was like, and how it affected them until they feel the original emotion. Strasberg believed that this exercise created a path for actors to recreate the same emotion over and over, on-demand, with complete control since because it is a “remembered emotion” it will not be felt like a real emotion. It is not about what happened to the actor but rather “what he sees, hears, touches, tastes, smells, and what he is experiencing”. Essentially, the method actor will be “using his own reality to properly relate to that of the character in the scene”. In short, the actor should behave in a real manner, really performing an action or feeling an emotion rather than pretending to do so. At no point does Strasberg expect a method actor to carry this work outside of the theatre or sound stage, instead, they should be feeling real emotions and behaviours in the performance. <h2>Staying in character</h2> Where confusion seems to set in is with the notion that a method actor should “live the life of the character” full time. This paraphrasing derives from Stanislavski but is incomplete. What he said in his seminal acting text, <a href="https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/An_Actor_Prepares/Ihl5CgAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&printsec=frontcover">An Actor Prepares</a>, is: “In our art, you must live the part every moment you are playing it, and every time.” Which is to say, live the life of the character on stage. Neither he nor Strasberg ever said to go further than that. But, oddly, it’s what many people consider the method to be – immersing the self so deeply, that the actor is no longer “themselves” but this other person. It might be pedantic to say so, but this is not method acting. It is very much something else. It’s also worth, perhaps, being sceptical of many of the tales of actors immersing themselves so deeply. It makes a great story, but ask yourself if the actor is living the life of a character from 100 years ago, how do they get to the set each day? Do they still carry a smartphone? How do they do their shopping? Looking more deeply at the Cumberbatch story, <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/kirsten-dunst-benedict-cumberbatch-power-of-the-dog-b1963367.html">Dunst has confirmed</a> that they didn’t speak on set because the characters so despised each other. But she continued: “He’s so sweet. And he’s so British. Polite British, you know? I was like, ‘I can’t talk to you!… We didn’t talk at all during the filming unless we were out to dinner on a weekend, all together, or playing with our kids.” It seems then that they didn’t speak on set because they and their families were becoming such good friends, they didn’t want that to accidentally colour their performances. This has nothing to do with method acting.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/172568/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/eric-hetzler-1293767">Eric Hetzler</a>, Senior Lecturer, Department of Media and Performance, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-huddersfield-1226">University of Huddersfield</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/hollywood-has-got-method-acting-all-wrong-heres-what-the-process-is-really-about-172568">original article</a>. Image: Gorodenkoff/Shutterstock

Try this method for watering plants slowly

Sometimes we water plants while in a rush and due to this water can seep straight to the bottom without giving roots enough absorption time. If you haven't got time to water plants slowly, use ice cubes. The ice cubes will melt slowly into the soil, allowing water to trickle to the bottom and be absorbed properly by the root system. Republished with permission of <a href="http://www.handyman.net.au/try-method-watering-plants-slowly">Handyman Australia</a>.

Home & Garden

Coping methods to help heal from loss

Although the experience of losing someone is a factor everyone will have to face one day, or may have already, it doesn’t mean we can escape the feeling that comes along with this loss. Loss takes on various shapes and forms, whether it is a relationship that has ended, a loved one moving away, someone dying or a transition of some sort. When a feeling of loss comes, it can cause an individual to feel confused, alone and initiate a grieving process that is hard to pull yourself out of. It is important when moving forward from loss and growing from it that one approaches methods to bounce back and have awareness, experts claim. Here are a few general laws to follow when dealing with loss so you can bounce back and be a better, stronger version of you. Acknowledge and accept your feelings <a href="http://www.health.harvard.edu/press_releases/type_d_personality">Research</a> shows many people who neglect their emotions in an unhealthy way tend to have more psychological and physiological problems. Emotions including anger, sadness, confusion, loneliness, fear and many others may come forward when you are hit with a loss. In moments like these it is important to find comfort and solace in support groups, friends, counsellors or ever a good book on the subject. Finding what works for you to help you deal with your emotions will allow you to heal and grow properly. Replace the negative feelings with positive ones Sit down and write a list of the good things that exist within your life and practice self-reflection. <a href="http://www.health.harvard.edu/press_releases/type_d_personality">Experts say</a> awareness of self is one of the best ways to learn more about yourself and grow accordingly. What are methods you can practice growing forward as an individual? Perhaps taking up activities such as yoga or reading self-help books could be the way you learn more about yourself and expand your mindset. Feel liberated and move forward When you lose something of value to you, whether that is a person, home, the feeling of comfort or a relationship, it can be important to understand and accept this loss. It is also important to modify your relationship with what you lose. Experts believe the way to do this is by forming a detachment towards what is causing the feeling of loss. Although this change may development may take time, you will know you are at a place to move forward when you are able to cherish the good moments and release the painful ones and cut the chord once and for all. How do you deal with loss? Let us know in the comments below.

Caring

My possessions spark joy: Will the KonMari decluttering method work for me?

Australia is the <a href="https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/environment/municipal-waste/indicator/english_89d5679a-en">sixth-largest</a> contributor of household waste per capita in the world. We spend more than <a href="http://www.tai.org.au/node/940">$A10.5 billion</a> annually on goods and services that are never or rarely used. One-quarter of Australians admit to throwing away clothing <a href="https://au.yougov.com/news/2017/12/06/fast-fashion/">after just one use</a>, while at the other end of the extreme, 5% of the population save unused items with such tenacity that their homes become <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3181962/">dangerously cluttered</a>. If unnecessary purchases come at such a profound cost, why do we make them? Why do we buy so much stuff? We acquire some possessions because of their perceived usefulness. We might buy a computer to complete work tasks, or a pressure cooker to make meal preparation easier. But consumer goods often have a psychological value that outweighs their functional value. This can drive us to acquire and keep things we could do without. Possessions can act as an extension of ourselves. They may remind us of our personal history, our connection to other people, and who we are or want to be. Wearing a uniform may convince us we are a different person. Keeping family photos may remind us that we are loved. A home library may reveal our appreciation for knowledge and enjoyment of reading. Acquiring and holding onto possessions can bring us comfort and emotional security. But these feelings cloud our judgement about how useful the objects are and prompt us to hang onto things we haven’t used in years. When this behaviour crosses over into hoarding disorder, we may notice: <ol> <li> a persistent difficulty discarding possessions, regardless of their actual value </li> <li> that this difficulty arises because we feel we need to save the items and/or avoid the distress associated with discarding them </li> <li> that our home has become so cluttered we cannot use it as intended. We might not be able to sit on our sofa, cook in our kitchen, sleep in our bed, or park our car in the garage </li> <li> the saving behaviour is impacting our quality of life. We might experience significant family strain or be embarrassed to invite others into our home. Our safety might be at risk, or we may have financial problems. These problems can contribute to workplace difficulties. </li> </ol> Will the KonMari method help? According to Japanese tidying consultant Marie Kondo, “everyone who completes the KonMari Method has successfully kept their house in order”. But while some aspects of the KonMari method are consistent with existing evidence, others may be inadvisable, particularly for those with clinical hoarding problems. Kondo suggests that before starting her process, people should visualise what they want their home to look like after decluttering. A similar clinical technique is used when treating hoarding disorder. Images of one’s ideal home can act as a powerful amplifier for positive emotions, thereby increasing motivation to discard and organise. Next, the KonMari Method involves organising by category rather than by location. Tidying should be done in a specific order. People should tackle clothing, books, paper, komono (kitchen, bathroom, garage, and miscellaneous), and then sentimental items. Organising begins with placing every item within a category on the floor. This suggestion has an evidence base. <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165032717327167?via%3Dihub">Our research</a> has shown people tend to discard more possessions when surrounded by clutter as opposed to being in a tidy environment. However, organising and categorising possessions in any context is challenging for people with hoarding disorder. Marie Kondo gives sage advice about whether to keep possessions we think we’ll use in the future. A focus on future utility is a common thinking trap, as many saved items are never used. She encourages us to think about the true purpose of possessions: wearing the shirt or reading the book. If we aren’t doing those things, we should give the item to someone who will. Another Kondo suggestion is to thank our possessions before we discard them. This is to recognise that an item has served its purpose. She believes this process will facilitate letting go. However, by thanking our items we might inadvertently increase their perceived humanness. Anthropomorphising inanimate objects increases the sentimental value and perceived utility of items, which increases object attachment. People who are dissatisfied with their interpersonal relationships are more prone to anthropomorphism and have more difficulty making decisions. This strategy may be particularly unhelpful for them. One of Kondo’s key messages is to discard any item that does not “spark joy”. But for someone with excessive emotional attachment to objects, focusing on one’s emotional reaction may not be helpful. People who hoard things experience intense positive emotions in response to many of their possessions, so this may not help them declutter. Think about how you get rid of things <a href="https://www.sustainability.vic.gov.au/About-us/Latest-news/2019/01/10/23/21/Urgent-advisory-for-Netflix-inspired-declutterers">Sustainability Victoria</a> recently urged Netflix-inspired declutterers to reduce, reuse, and recycle rather than just tossing unwanted items into landfill. Dumping everything into the op-shop or local charity bin is also problematic. Aussie charities are paying <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-10-04/charities-spending-millions-cleaning-up-fast-fashion-graveyard/10328758">A$13 million a year</a> to send unusable donations to landfill. Ultimately, we need to make more thoughtful decisions about both acquiring and discarding possessions. We need to buy less, buy used, and pass our possessions on to someone else when we have stopped using them for their intended purpose. Written by Melissa Norberg, Associate Professor in Psychology, Macquarie University and Jessica Grisham, Professor in Psychology, UNSW. Republished with permission of <a href="https://theconversation.com/get-headaches-heres-five-things-to-eat-or-avoid-76611">The Conversation</a>.

Mind

New method for purchasing flights set to be based on your wealth

Airlines are already able to use online data to vary the prices of a flight based on when a passenger books and how many searches they have done. Now, companies could customise their flight prices even more through a model called “dynamic pricing”, reported <a href="https://www.thesun.co.uk/travel/5693140/airlines-could-price-your-plane-ticket-based-on-how-rich-you-are-using-dynamic-pricing/" target="_blank">The Sun</a>. Dynamic pricing is used when an airline gleans personal information through internet cookies and customer account details to find out how much they earn, how old they are and the likelihood that they are taking a business trip. Airlines could even give a more expensive fare to customers who they think are richer, while those earning less could be given unique offers to entice them to book. John McBride, director of product management for PROs, a software provider for airlines such as Emirates and Lufthansa, said several airlines are now implementing this model. “A handful of large carriers [will] move toward dynamic pricing [in 2018],” he told <a href="http://www.travelweekly.com/Travel-News/Airline-News/Airlines-inching-closer-to-dynamic-pricing" target="_blank">Travel Weekly</a>. It is unconfirmed whether any Australian airlines will use this system. The Airline Tariff Publishing Company (ATPCO) is used by British Airways and KLM as a guide to price their fares, reported <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/news/dynamic-fare-pricing-airline-ticket-personalisation/" target="_blank">The Telegraph.</a> In 2015, ATPCO wrote a report on dynamic pricing, predicting that airlines would be price based on “who is asking”. Passengers may soon find that a search engine is offering a more expensive fare if it thinks you have a high-paying job. However, as it is early days for dynamic pricing, many are questioning if the system is legal or if it actually falls into discrimination. Richard Taylor from the UK’s Civil Aviation Authority told the Telegraph, “If a passenger believes this pricing model is discriminatory in some way, or breaches EU law, they would need to challenge it in a court of law. “A legal ruling would then ensue and be the basis for any follow-up enforcement action. “Passengers need to be made fully aware of what they are getting for their money.” Lufthansa told Sun Online Travel, “The Lufthansa Group takes data protection very seriously. Our fares are not calculated based on personal customer data.” What do you think of dynamic pricing? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

Travel Tips

4 unhealthy relaxation methods we’re all guilty of

When it comes to relaxing not all vices were created equal. For instance after a trying day if you like to unwind with a nice hot bath or if you like to switch off by spending hours in the garden, you're doing it right. If, however, you’re more inclined reach for the wine or hit the shops and spend too much money, you may have formed a bad habit. Either way, don't be too hard on yourself as we’re all guilty of at least one of the things on this list from time to time. While self-soothing is a natural response to stress, it’s important that you try and self-soothe with a relaxation method that is a healthy habit. Here are four unhealthy ways of self-soothing that you should keep in check and try and replace with something else - at least most of the time. 1. Reaching for the wine a little too often While there’s nothing quite like a glass or two of wine at the end of a busy week, if you find you reach for the bottle after every hectic day - and you have hectic days most days - you might want to rethink your relaxation method. As alcohol interferes with a good night’s sleep, too, you might find you get into a vicious cycle and don't feel well rested each day after a few wines the night before. 2. Retail therapy Many a people love a spot of shopping. And while there’s nothing wrong with treating yourself to something new on occasion, when shopping becomes your go to way of self-soothing, you could be in for trouble - and so might your bank balance. Furthermore, using “retail therapy” to self-soothe is only a quick fix and the feeling good isn't likely to last. In fact, if you’re shopping and you can't really afford it or you don't really need the things, you could find it makes you feel worse. 3. Eating your emotions It’s not uncommon to turn to food in a moment of crisis. From a young age many of us have been conditioned that if you're feeling a little down - i.e. if you were crying when you were younger - a little treat will fix it. What’s bad about this scenario is eating your emotions tends to lead to unnecessary overeating when you’re feeling blue. Rather than eating your emotions away, why not try walking or talking them away. Next time you want to reach for the chocolate, reach for your sneakers or the phone and walk and talk it out with one of your closest friends instead. 4. Locking yourself away With all the negative things going on in the world, from time to time it definitely sounds like a good idea to lock yourself away from the world and hide under your duvet in front of the television. Unfortunately as the old saying goes - you can’t run away from your problems. And hiding away and burying your head in the sand is only going to make things worse and detach you from the world. For a surefire way to turn your frown upside down when you can’t face the world, try volunteering - whether it be reading to children at a library or helping out at a community garden, it’s a great way to take your mind off things and do something that will make you feel good.

Mind

Common method of measuring blood pressure is often inaccurate

James Sharman is a Professor of Medical Research and Deputy Director, Menzies Institute for Medical Research at the University of Tasmania. The most common method of measuring blood pressure is often inaccurate, a new study has found. This could mean people at risk of serious conditions such as heart disease are missing diagnosis and potentially life-saving treatment. The so-called “cuff method” involves strapping an inflatable cuff over the upper arm to temporarily cut off the blood supply; then calculating the blood pressure once the cuff is relaxed. In our study, published in the <a href="http://www.onlinejacc.org/content/70/5/572?sso=1&sso_redirect_count=1&access_token=">Journal of the American College of Cardiology</a>, we found the method, which is more than a century old, is inaccurate when monitoring people with mid-range blood pressure. This is the range <a href="http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(10)62036-3/abstract">most common</a> among people worldwide. <a href="http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/111/5/697.long">Accurate measurement</a> of blood pressure is regarded among the most important of all medical tests. A misdiagnosis of low blood pressure can be a missed opportunity for lowering a person’s risk of cardiovascular disease, which often presents as a stroke, heart attack or kidney disease. A misdiagnosis of high blood pressure, on the other hand, could lead to people being prescribed unnecessary medication. What is blood pressure? Blood pressure is the force exerted in the large arteries – vessels that carry blood away from the heart – with every heartbeat. Blood pressure measurement provides a high (systolic) and a low (diastolic) value. The high value represents the peak pressure during heart contraction; the low value represents the pressure during heart relaxation. Healthy levels of blood pressure are typically <a href="https://www.heartfoundation.org.au/images/uploads/publications/PRO-167_Hypertension-guideline-2016_WEB.pdf">less than 120/80 mmHg</a> (the 120 mmHg is systolic, and 80 mmHg diastolic). <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673602119118?via%3Dihub">Decades of research</a> clearly tell us if a person’s blood pressure is raised they are at higher risk of cardiovascular disease. The higher the blood pressure, the higher the risk. About one in three adults <a href="https://www.heartfoundation.org.au/about-us/what-we-do/heart-disease-in-australia/high-blood-pressure-statistics">have high blood pressure</a>. <a href="http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/195419">Lifestyle factors</a> such as regular exercise, normal body weight and healthy dietary choices, as well as <a href="http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(15)01225-8/abstract">medications</a>, can lower blood pressure and prevent cardiovascular disease. Although there are many factors to consider when assessing if someone has high blood pressure, the conventional threshold at which doctors might consider giving medication to lower pressure is 140/90 mmHg. How is blood pressure measured? The method to measure blood pressure is based on a technique <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1543468/">invented in 1896</a>, then refined in 1905, but the basic principal has remained virtually unchanged. A broad cuff is placed over the upper arm and inflated until the main artery in the arm is completely occluded and blood flow is stopped. The cuff is then slowly deflated until blood flow returns into the lower arm. A series of signals can then be measured that represent the systolic and diastolic blood pressure. These are measured by either listening with a stethoscope or, more often, using <a href="http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/111/5/697.long">automated</a> devices. Our study It’s uncertain whether cuff blood pressure accurately measures the pressure in the arteries of the arm or the major artery just outside the heart, called the aorta. This is important as <a href="https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article-abstract/11/2/138/503539/Nitroglycerin-has-more-favourable-effects-on-left?redirectedFrom=PDF">blood pressure readings can be different</a> in these two spots – a potential difference of 25 mmHg or more. The central aorta blood pressure is a <a href="https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/31/15/1865/690304/Prediction-of-cardiovascular-events-and-all-cause">better indicator of the pressure</a> experienced by organs, such as the heart and brain, so it is more clinically relevant. The possibility of big blood pressure differences between the arm and the aorta could result in <a href="http://hyper.ahajournals.org/content/early/2013/09/23/HYPERTENSIONAHA.113.02001">very different clinical decisions</a> on diagnosis and treatment. So it is important to resolve the uncertainty as to what cuff blood pressure actually measures. We retrieved data from studies from the 1950s until now that compared cuff blood pressure of more than 2,500 people with that of the gold standard method, called invasive blood pressure. Here, a catheter that measures pressure is inserted inside the artery either at the arm (same site as the cuff) or at the aorta. Readings from this method were used as a reference and compared with those of the cuff method to determine the accuracy of cuff measurements. <img width="446" height="368" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/files/174623/width754/file-20170620-9968-fzg7i8.png" style="display: block; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"/> What did we find? Cuff blood pressure had reasonable accuracy compared with the reference standard, at either the arm or aorta, among people with low cuff blood pressure (lower than 120/80 mmHg) and high cuff blood pressure (the same or higher than 160/100 mmHg). These people are at the extreme ends of the blood pressure risk spectrum. We found the accuracy when compared to invasive blood pressure was up to 80%. But for the rest of the population with blood pressure in the middle range – systolic 120 to 159, and diastolic 80 to 99 mmHg – accuracy compared with invasive blood pressure at the arm or the aorta was quite low: only 50% to 57%. Why is this important? If people have their blood pressure measured using the cuff method and the values are either low (under 120/80 mmHg) or high (over 160/100 mmHg), we can have reasonable confidence the values are a good representation of the true (invasive) blood pressure. But for people whose blood pressure is in the <a href="http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(10)62036-3/abstract">most common mid-range</a> of 120 to 160 mmHg systolic or 80 to 100 mmHg diastolic, there is much less certainty as to whether the cuff blood pressure is truly representative of the actual blood pressure. Our findings do not mean people should stop taking their medication or stop having their blood pressure measured using the cuff device. While this study reveals accuracy issues, the <a href="http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(15)01225-8/abstract">evidence from many</a> <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673603147393?via%3Dihub">large clinical trials</a> <a href="http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(14)61212-5/abstract">clearly shows</a> taking medication to lower blood pressure from high levels reduces the chances of stroke, heart attack and vascular disease. Cuff blood pressure measurements are still useful, but we could help more people if we could measure blood pressure more accurately. The problem is that some people in the mid blood pressure range may fall through the diagnosis cracks. Until the accuracy standards of pressure-measuring devices are improved, the best available confirmation of blood pressure levels comes from an average of many repeated measures over time. This is better than one or two measures, as is often the way in busy daily clinical practice, and was closest to the method examined in this study. People can have repeated measures of blood pressure undertaken in consultation with their general practitioners or at specialist centres. These can include <a href="http://www.racgp.org.au/afp/2016/januaryfebruary/how-to-measure-home-blood-pressure-recommendations-for-healthcare-professionals-and-patients/">self-measured home</a> blood pressure, <a href="http://aabpmc.org/attachments/Head_J_Hypertens_2012.pdf">24-hour ambulatory</a> blood pressure and <a href="http://hyper.ahajournals.org/content/55/2/195.long">automated unobserved</a> blood pressure. Written by James Sharman. First appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-most-used-method-of-measuring-blood-pressure-is-often-inaccurate-study-finds-79041">The Conversation.</a> <img width="1" height="1" src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/77988/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-advanced" alt="The Conversation"/>

Retirement Life

Dirtiest items in your home (and how to clean them)

You scrub the toilet bowl meticulously, wipe down your kitchen bench every evening and vacuum the carpet with precision. But some of the dirtiest items in your home may be the ones you don't often think of cleaning. Here is a list of some of the filthiest items in your home with a few tips on how to clean them: Cleaning equipment How often do you clean your cleaning utensils? If your answer was not often enough, you're not alone. Sponges, cloths and scrub brushes are responsible for wiping up the biggest messes in your home, and these utensils are often one of the most germ-infested areas, with their damp material being a breeding ground for mould. To keep clean, be sure to rinse the utensil in hot water, wring out and leave to dry on a rack after every use and launder them every couple of days or when they start to smell. Most importantly, be sure to toss out sponges, cloths or rags every few weeks. Doorknobs Whenever we move into a different room of the house, we transfer any of the germs on our hands to the various doorknobs we touch. If left unclean, this results in the doorknob becoming one of the filthiest items in the house. To clean, use a cloth and hot, soapy water to wipe down, either weekly or as needed. Kitchen sink drain The drain of your kitchen is filled with bacteria, with germ growth encouraged thanks to the combination of food scraps and moisture. Many experts believe the average kitchen sink is actually dirtier than your toilet seat. To ensure your drain is as germ free as possible, pour a cup of baking soda down the drain, followed by a cup of vinegar, finish by letting the mixture sit for a minute and then pour a kettle of boiling water down the drain. Use this inexpensive and eco-friendly cleaning method at least once a week and your drain should be in pristine condition. Electronics The average person uses the electronic devices in their home numerous times in a day, resulting in a large amount of bacteria building up on your remotes and keyboards. For example, the Wall Street Journal found the average mobile phone has up to 30,000 colony-forming units of bacteria. To ensure these devices are kept as clean as possible, swab your remote, keyboard, mouse and your mobile phone (including its cover), once a week with a well wrung-out disinfectant wipe. Base of the toilet We all make sure to scrub the toilet seat and bowl. However, many people forget to clean the base of the toilet and surrounding floor, which, is surprisingly one of the filthiest areas of the bathroom (particularly if you have small children or men in the house). To keep this area clean, be sure to wipe down the base whenever you clean the toilet and mop the surrounding floor at least once a week. First appeared on <a href="http://www.stuff.co.nz/">Stuff.co.nz. </a> Related links: <a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/lifestyle/home-garden/2016/12/8-new-uses-for-household-items/">8 uses for household items you’d never thought of</a> <a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/lifestyle/home-garden/2016/12/things-you-didnt-know-you-could-recycle/">5 kitchen items you didn’t know that you could recycle</a> <a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/lifestyle/home-garden/2016/12/20-household-items-with-cleaning-powers/">20 things around your home with surprising cleaning powers</a>

Home & Garden

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Entertainment

Property

Information

Keep up to date