Those startling results, published online Monday in the journal Pediatrics, are only an estimate. But several experts who reviewed the analysis said the methods and conclusions seem sound.

“The health care system has got to be aware that breast-feeding makes a profound difference,” said Dr. Ruth Lawrence, who heads the American Academy of Pediatrics‘ breast-feeding section.

The findings suggest that there are hundreds of deaths and many more costly illnesses each year from health problems that breast-feeding may help prevent. These include stomach viruses, ear infections, asthma, juvenile diabetes, Sudden Infant Death Syndrome and even childhood leukemia.

The magnitude of health benefits linked to breast-feeding is vastly underappreciated, said lead author Dr. Melissa Bartick, an internist and instructor at Harvard Medical School. Breast-feeding is sometimes considered a lifestyle choice, but Bartick calls it a public health issue.

TO CONTINUE READING THIS ARTICLE, CLICK THIS LINK FOR YAHOO! NEWS: Study: Breast-feeding would save lives, money – Yahoo! News.

The new policy represents a reversal not only of the current moratorium on any new oil drilling off most U.S. shores, but also of President Obama’s own support of the moratorium during the 2008 campaign.

And of course, the policy also revives the oft-heard 2008 McCain/Palin campaign rally cry, “Drill, baby, drill.”

Seizing upon the opportunity to create a highlight reel featuring Republicans rabidly chanting, “Drill, baby, drill,” we present to you this video: “Drill, Barack, Drill.”

TO CONTINUE READING THIS ARTICLE, CLICK THIS LINK FOR THE HUFFINGTON POST: Drill, Barack, Drill: Obama Reverses Position On Offshore Drilling VIDEO.

The move, which President Obama will announce Wednesday morning with Interior Secretary Ken Salazar at Andrews Air Force Base, ends a long-standing moratorium on oil and gas drilling along much of the East Coast, from Delaware to central Florida.

The new strategy also calls for oil and gas exploration in the eastern Gulf of Mexico, more than 125 miles from Florida’s coast, and in large areas in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas in the Arctic Ocean, north of Alaska, after the government conducts detailed studies, an administration official said.

The administration will bar exploration in Alaska’s Bristol Bay, officials said, which is home to critical wildlife habitat. Aides spoke of the plans on the condition of anonymity, to avoid preempting the president’s announcement.

TO CONTINUE READING THIS ARTICLE, CLICK THIS LINK FOR THE WASHINGTON POST: Obama to clear way for offshore drilling for oil and gas, including off Va. coast, sources say – washingtonpost.com.

Stacy Tessler Lindau and Natalia Gavrilova of the University of Chicago analyzed data about health and sexual activity collected by two nationally representative surveys. The surveys involved 3,032 adults aged 25 to 74 and 3,005 adults aged 57 to 85 between 1995 and 2006.

Men were more likely than women to be sexually active, report a good quality sex life and be interested in sex, the researchers said in a paper published online by a British medical journal called BMJ. Those gender differences increased with age and were greatest among those aged 75 to 85. In that group, nearly 39 percent of men but less than 17 percent of women were sexually active and nearly 71 percent of men and less than 51 percent of women who were sexually active reported having a good quality sex life.

TO CONTINUE READING THIS ARTICLE, CLICK THE LINK BELOW FOR THE WASHINGTON POST:

The Checkup – Maintaining a sex life.

The policy was designed 33 years ago to protect trade secrets in a highly competitive industry. But critics — including the Obama administration — say the secrecy has grown out of control, making it impossible for regulators to control potential dangers or for consumers to know which toxic substances they might be exposed to.

At a time of increasing public demand for more information about chemical exposure, pressure is building on lawmakers to make it more difficult for manufacturers to cloak their products in secrecy. Congress is set to rewrite chemical regulations this year for the first time in a generation.

Under the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act, manufacturers must report to the federal government new chemicals they intend to market. But the law exempts from public disclosure any information that could harm their bottom line.

Government officials, scientists and environmental groups say that manufacturers have exploited weaknesses in the law to claim secrecy for an ever-increasing number of chemicals. In the past several years, 95 percent of the notices for new chemicals sent to the government requested some secrecy, according to the Government Accountability Office. About 700 chemicals are introduced annually.

FOR CONTINUATION OF THIS ARTICLE, CLICK THIS LINK FOR THE WASHINGTON POST: Use of potentially harmful chemicals kept secret under law – washingtonpost.com.

A short introduction to intense sweetness:

Sweet tasting foods are rare in nature. Fruits and vegetables have some sweetness to them, but they’re also packed with lots of fiber, water, micronutrients and phytochemicals, and are nutritious and quite filling. Honey was hard to find for most of human history and even harder to harvest—it’s protected by an army of stinging warriors.

It’s only in our modern times that concentrated sweetness—in the form of table sugar—grew abundant, and with the invention of high-fructose corn syrup (made from subsidized corn) it became dirt cheap.

Who doesn’t love sweet tasting food? I’ll readily confess—I love chocolate and wish it was on the bottom, roomy part of the food pyramid.

Our preference for sweetness is most likely innate. Food marketers understood its seductive lure, so they started adding sugars to many foods and replaced plain water and milk with sweet drinks. And the consumption of refined sugar skyrocketed. Sweet foods sell!

Alas, too much sugar is a major factor underlying our obesity crisis. It can undermine normal satiety levels, motivating us to eat more than we need while stimulating food cravings. Too much sugar may also raise blood pressure and can elevate blood triglycerides levels (a risk factor for heart disease).

To our alleged rescue came artificial, non-caloric sweeteners, offering the same intense sweetness without the caloric price tag. There are several such products in the market, all FDA approved: Aspartame (NutraSweet, Equal), Sucralose (Splenda), Saccharin (Sweet’N Low) Acesulfame K (Sweet One) and Neotame.

FOR CONTINUATION OF THIS ARTICLE, CLICK THE LINK FOR YAHOO! Are artificial sweeteners a healthier option? on Shine.

I am joining them, to discuss the urgency of their efforts, the economic opportunities we can seize, and the tremendous role of subnational governments in climate-change mitigation.

Some pundits have described Copenhagen as the most important world summit since the end of the Second World War. And it has been suggested that without a binding international agreement, the fight against climate change is unwinnable.

Now, it certainly would be terrific if the world’s governments reached such an agreement. But as much as 80 percent of the necessary greenhouse-gas reductions will happen at the subnational level. So why should we focus all our faith and hope in international action?

Throughout the course of history, all great movements have been born at the grassroots level. The American independence movement, the civil-rights movement and the women’s suffrage movement were all begun by people who did not wait for others. Then they gained momentum and speed, and swept throughout our nation.

There is a lesson in this when discussing climate change. Even in the absence of national and international commitments, we must not ignore the tremendous movement that is already under way to solve our environmental and energy problems.

For example, states, provinces and cities have been busy passing their own laws and emission targets.

FOR CONTINUATION OF THIS ARTICLE, CLICK THE LINK FOR THE HUFFINGTON POST: Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger: Local Governments Can Lead Fight Against Climate Change.

But what about the roughly 160 million workers and their dependents who already have health insurance through an employer? For many people, the result of the long, angry health care debate in Washington may be little more than more of the same.

As President Obama once promised, “If you like your health plan, you can keep your health plan.”

That may be true even if you don’t like your health plan. And no one seems to agree on whether the legislation will do much to reduce workers’ continually rising out-of-pocket costs.

True, there is an important advantage for the working insured: more peace of mind for people who are worried about being laid off or would like to change jobs.

There are still many gaps to bridge between the House and Senate bills. But even before the House-Senate negotiations begin in January, both bills offer this assurance: If you lose your job or move to one that does not provide benefits, there should be better alternatives when shopping for your own coverage.

FOR CONTINUATION OF THIS ARTICLE, CLICK THIS LINK FOR MSNBC & THE NEW YORK TIMES: NYT: Few changes for millions in health bill – The New York Times- msnbc.com.

The House wrangled its version last month. While President Obama says the two proposals are 95% “identical,” that 5% difference has spurred some furious negotiations.

* The bill for the health care reform bill? The House version costs more than a trillion, while the Senate’s a tad cheaper at $871 billion.

* People with comfy incomes will have to pay more taxes to help pay for reform, if the House has its way. The Senate stays away from that, but adds a 10% tax on indoor tanning booths.

* Funding for abortion and a public option are two of the more heated controversies.

* A New York congresswoman wrote an op-ed tearing apart the Senate bill for, among other things, letting insurance companies keep enjoying their antitrust status.

Outlets like AP, Bloomberg, Newsweek, The New York Times, and the Kaiser Family Foundation have taken on the daunting task to compare the two versions. Below, three charts with an overview, key similarities, and key differences between the Senate and House proposals.

FOR CONTINUATION OF THIS STORY, CLICK THIS LINK FOR YAHOO! The Buzz Log – Medical Charts: The Senate vs. the House on Health Care Reform – Yahoo! Buzz.