• Health

8 Health Stories to Watch in 2012

1 minute read
By TIME Staff

Airport X-Ray Scanners

<br>If you flew on a plane this year, you were probably asked by an agent at airport security to assume the position — hands up, feet apart. Across the country, the U.S. government has installed full-body scanners, which are designed to generate detailed, three-dimensional contours of the body, so that security agents can more easily spot any weapons, from ceramic knives to explosives, that may be hiding under clothing and would be missed by metal detectors. Sounds like a good idea, but the problem lies in how the machines do their duty.<br><br><br><br>There are two types of scanners: millimeter-wave scanners, which use electromagnetic waves to generate images and are not thought to pose any health concerns; and backscatter X-ray scanners, which use carcinogenic radiation similar to that emitted by medical X-rays. In November, the European Commission <a href="http://healthland.time.com/2011/11/21/europe-bans-airport-x-ray-scanners-should-the-u-s-follow-suit/" target="_blank">banned backscatter machines</a> from all airports in member countries for reasons of health and safety, but they're still in use in the U.S.<br><br><br><br>Studies on the health effects of X-ray scanner exposure are confusing at best. The absolute amount of radiation emitted by a single scan is less than that of a medical X-ray, and even less than the amount a passenger would be exposed to from cosmic rays on a cross-country flight, according to the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), but the long-term risk of cumulative exposure from repeated trips through the scanner isn't known. The government assures travelers that the machines are safe, but if you’re concerned, you can ask the TSA agent whether the scanner uses X-rays, and if it does, opt for a physical pat-down instead.apark7

Head-Banging Sports

Derek Boogaard<br>After 2011, we’ll never be able to look at violent sports like football or ice hockey the same again. That’s because this year saw the release of study after study connecting repeated head collisions and concussions in athletes to the risk of brain damage down the line. Perhaps no single player better symbolized that connection than Derek Boogaard, a fearsome National Hockey League enforcer who committed suicide in 2011 after suffering years of concussions in hockey fights. Autopsies done on the 28-year-old Boogaard — the subject of a <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/04/sports/hockey/derek-boogaard-a-boy-learns-to-brawl.html?_r=1" target="_blank">magisterial series</a> in the New York<em> Times </em>— showed that he had the kind of brain damage usually seen in dementia patients at the end of life. Both football and hockey moved to improve player protection and penalize head hits, but the damage is far from over.bryanrwalsh

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' Recovery

<br>Doctors generally avoid using words like ‘miracle,’ but it’s hard to think of a more fitting way to describe Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords’ remarkable recovery from a gunshot to the head in in January. The attack left her in a coma, and when she awoke, she was forced to relearn how to talk, walk, think and function again — all of which she is doing with a single-minded determination. She attends rehabilitation in Houston daily, undergoing rigorous <a href="http://healthland.time.com/2011/06/13/what-gabrielle-giffords-can-expect-when-she-leaves-rehab/" target="_blank">physical and mental training</a>. Since the shooting, she has been back to Congress once, and <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/11/gabrielle-giffords-i-want-to-get-back-to-work/">says she wants to return to work</a>; she will have to decide by this coming May whether she will be able to return to her post. In the meantime, her days are full. Giffords has co-authored a book about her recovery with her husband, astronaut Mark Kelly, and was spotted having dinner and attending the symphony with him before the holidays.apark7

Cell Phones and Radiation Risk

<br>There are more than 5 billion cell phones in the world, and many of us spend our days glued to our devices, bathed in their fields of electromagnetic radiation. So you'd think it would be important to have absolute scientific certainty about whether cell phone use can contribute to the risk of brain cancer. Despite years of studies, however — including a World Health Organization <a href="http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2075133_2075127_2075168,00.html" target="_blank">review in May</a> — the answer <a href="http://healthland.time.com/2011/10/21/why-the-latest-study-on-cell-phone-use-and-brain-cancer-wont-be-the-last-word/">is still unclear</a>. The bulk of the research has shown <a href="http://healthland.time.com/2011/07/15/the-latest-volley-in-the-endless-cell-phone-cancer-war/">no clear method</a> for cell phones' weak radiation to lead to tumors, but there is enough outlying, epidemiological <a href="http://healthland.time.com/2011/06/01/cell-phones-how-precautionary-should-our-principles-be/">evidence</a> that <a href="http://healthland.time.com/2010/09/27/book-review-a-scientist-takes-a-hard-look-at-cell-phones-and-cancer-risk/">some experts</a> recommend using a wired headset, which can greatly reduce radiation exposure. For 5 billion people, <a href="http://healthland.time.com/2011/02/23/5-easy-ways-to-reduce-your-cell-phone-exposure/">safe is better than sorry</a>.bryanrwalsh

Prescription Drug Overdose Epidemic

<br>More Americans die from a drug overdose <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/drug-overdoses-kill-more-americans-car-accidents-cdc-170409026.html" target="_blank">than in car accidents</a>, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Over the past three decades, the number of drug poisoning deaths <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/drug-overdoses-kill-more-americans-car-accidents-cdc-170409026.html">has increased sixfold</a>, from about 6,000 deaths in 1980 to more than 36,500 deaths in 2008 — a rise fueled by a surge in prescription painkiller overdoses. The CDC <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/PainkillerOverdoses/">says</a> that deaths from prescription painkillers have reached "epidemic" levels over the past decade, now accounting for more overdose fatalities than heroin and cocaine combined.<br><br><br><br>A big part of the problem is nonmedical use of prescription painkillers like oxycodone and Vicodin: in 2010, about 12 million Americans aged 12 or older reported misusing prescription painkillers in the previous year. The CDC and the Obama administration suggest that <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/PainkillerOverdoses/">improving the way these powerful drugs are prescribed</a>, and <a href="http://healthland.time.com/2011/04/20/u-s-aims-to-reduce-overdose-deaths-but-will-the-new-plan-work/">enhancing prescription drug monitoring programs</a> can help prevent continued misuse of the medications and curb the overdose death rate. Healthland's Maia Szalavitz advocates for <a href="http://healthland.time.com/2011/11/02/are-doctors-really-to-blame-for-the-overdose-epidemic/">making a proven anti-overdose treatment more widely available</a>, rather than cracking down on all doctors who prescribe the drugs and endangering legitimate pain patients who need relief.ssong0648

E. Coli Outbreaks

<br>In June, a cluster of illnesses that included stomach cramps, bloody diarrhea and vomiting marked the start of the largest outbreak of <em>E. coli</em>-related illness in 2011. The <a href="http://healthland.time.com/2011/06/24/why-the-german-e-coli-outbreak-was-so-deadly/" target="_blank">outbreak was particularly worrisome</a> because the <em>E. coli</em> strain involved produced a nasty toxin, known as Shiga toxin, which can cause kidney failure. The first cases emerged in Germany and soon spread to other European nations and the U.S., ultimately affecting 852 people and leading to 32 deaths. The culprit turned out to be a contaminated batch of fenugreek seeds from Egypt that were used to grow sprouts.<br><br><br><br>Later in the year, separate outbreaks of <em>E. coli</em> O157 in <a href="http://healthland.time.com/2011/09/26/usda-recalls-40000-lbs-of-ground-beef/" target="_blank">ground beef</a> and romaine lettuce caused massive recalls of both products in the U.S. Do the outbreaks mean that our food supply is becoming more vulnerable to contamination? That’s hard to say. Our food safety system isn't perfect, but part of the reason for the seemingly frequent taintings is that our ability to detect cases of contamination has improved.apark7

Graphic Cigarette Warning Labels

<br>The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) <a href="http://healthland.time.com/2011/06/21/fda-unveils-final-cigarette-warning-labels/" target="_blank">unveiled nine proposed graphic warning labels</a> this year that the agency intends to print on cigarette packs starting in 2012. The labels, which would cover half the surface area of each pack of cigarettes, are reminiscent of some of the grim images used in anti-smoking ads by <a href="http://thetruth.com/">thetruth.com</a>, which relentlessly targets tobacco companies. So it was perhaps inevitable that in November, a federal judge <a href="http://healthland.time.com/2011/11/08/federal-judge-suspends-fdas-graphic-cigarette-warning-labels/">put the FDA's plan on hold</a>, noting, on behalf of cigarette makers, that the graphic warnings — showing the diseased lungs of a smoker, for instance, or a smoker with a tracheostomy lighting up — may violate the First Amendment. The images, said the judge, cross the line from providing mere information to pushing a biased, anti-smoking advocacy message, which breaches constitutional restrictions on compelling speech by the government in commercial arenas. In December, 24 attorneys general filed a friend of the court brief <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9RR0GFO1.htm">in support of the FDA</a>, saying the agency should be allowed to put the graphic labels on "lethal and addictive" tobacco products. The FDA maintains also that the benefit to the public in conveying the dangers of smoking outweighs tobacco companies' free speech rights. The agency remains hopeful that if its proposed images aren’t allowed, other equally powerful labeling will be.apark7

Proposed 'Energy Star' Nutrition Labels

<br>Nutrition and weight loss experts are always telling us to ‘read the label’ on the foods we eat, but you need a calculator and a degree in food science to understand what all the data mean. So the Institute of Medicine proposed this year a <a href="http://healthland.time.com/2011/10/21/u-s-panel-urges-energy-star-nutrition-ratings-for-food-labels/" target="_blank">new easier-to-understand labeling standard</a> that highlights key information: the amount of calories per serving, along with check marks indicating whether the product meets acceptable levels of sodium, added sugars and trans or saturated fats. A food with three checks, for instance, would meet all the requirements for being a relatively healthy choice. The system isn't perfect — a Diet Coke would get three checks for being low in salt, sugar and fat, while more nutritious 1% milk would get only two points because of its fat content — but it would be a good start for helping busy consumers glean the most important nutrition info at a glance.apark7

More Must-Reads from TIME

Contact us at letters@time.com