Adopting a supervised, low-to-moderate intensity weight-lifting exercise program can be safe for women with a low-risk pregnancy, according to a University of Georgia media release. Despite decades of doctors’ reluctance to recommend weight training to pregnant women, a new University of Georgia study has found that a supervised, low-to-moderate intensity program is safe and beneficial. The research, published in the current edition of the Journal of Physical Activity and Health, measured progression in the amount of weight used, changes in resting blood pressure and potential adverse side effects in 32 pregnant women over a 12-week period. The group increased the amount of weight lifted in all of the exercises by an average of 36 percent over the 12-week period. After a total of 618 exercise sessions, none of the pregnant women in the study experienced a musculoskeletal injury. Thirteen incidents of potentially problematic symptoms were reported, all of which involved headache, pelvic pain and dizziness. Some pelvic pain can be expected in pregnant women with back pain, said researcher Patrick O’Connor. “The one thing you have to be a little careful about is dizziness,” he added. Rates of dizziness went down after the first few workouts, as the women learned to lift weights while maintaining proper breathing techniques for exercise, he said. One reason physicians have been reluctant to prescribe weight lifting to pregnant women is that they produce high amounts of a hormone called relaxin, which promotes connective tissue laxity, explained O’Connor. Increased laxity could be associated with orthopedic injury. O’Connor stated “I think that the appropriate conclusion of this study is that the adoption of a supervised, low-to-moderate intensity weight-lifting exercise program can be safe for women with a low-risk pregnancy.”

Canadian College of Naturopathic Medicine student Marnie LaPlante presented her research and led an interactive workshop on ‘Integration and patient centered medicine – its meaning and implications for a collaborative medicine’ at the National Health Sciences Students’ Association (NaHSSA) Conference recently. The theme of this year’s conference was Crossing the Bridges of Socioeconomic and Cultural Diversity in Healthcare and is an ongoing interprofessional collaborative initiative involving students, faculty and practitioners from University of Toronto and University of Ottawa medical schools, The Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College, and CCNM. Additional research from CCNM was on display from the work done investigating naturopathic medicine and Aboriginal health care delivery including qualitative research done on the satellite clinic at Anishnawbe Health Toronto.

The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) recently reported on a controversial battle in the organic food industry to keep Monsanto’s Genetically Engineered (GE) crops from contaminating the nation’s 25,000 organic farms and ranches. The OCA states that “A self-appointed cabal of the Organic Elite, spearheaded by Whole Foods Market, Organic Valley, and Stonyfield Farm, has decided it’s time to surrender to Monsanto.” Top executives from these companies have publicly admitted that they no longer oppose the mass commercialization of GE crops, such as Monsanto’s controversial Roundup Ready alfalfa, and are prepared to sit down and cut a deal for “coexistence” with Monsanto and USDA biotech leader Tom Vilsack. Organic farmers remain concerned that the massive planting of a GE perennial crop, alfalfa, will result in the spread of its GE genes and seeds, contaminating the alfalfa fed to organic animalsandpotentiallycrossingtonon-GE species through cross pollination.

TheConsortiumofAcademicHealthCenters for Integrative Medicine (CAHCIM) has chosen to highlight developments in integrative mental health. According to a recent notice to members, the CAHCIM executive committee approved establishment of a sub-group of the CAHCIM Clinical Working Group that focuses on integrative mental health care. The action was taken “in response to the unsatisfactory state of mental health care in the U.S. and other countries, and increasing public and research interest in integrative mental health care.” The new sub-group operates with 4 goals:
• systematically evaluating research evidence pertaining to non-conventional and integrative assessment and treatment approaches in mental health care
• recommending research priorities to the Consortium leadership
• developing resources for educating and training mental health professionals in integrative mental health care, and
• establishing best practice clinical guidelines in integrative mental health care for common psychiatric disorders. Important aspects of the group’s work in 2011 are expected to be developing an agenda on research priorities in integrative mental health and facilitating collaborative research efforts between different Consortium member institutions. Leaders include Ron Glick, MD and Kelsey Hippen.

A recent study out of Queensland University in Australia reports that complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has become increasingly popular in maternity care. Healthcareprofessionalsneedmoreevidence- based information about its use, according to Dr Adams, lead author and Executive Director of the Network of Researchers in the Public Health of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NORPHCAM). Adams says there is a need for greater respect and cooperation between conventional and alternative practitioners. The study reviewed 19 studies covering the views of more than 3,000 maternity professionals from Australia, Canada, the USA, UK, Germany, New Zealand and Israel. The review raised concern that most medical professionals have no CAM training and little understanding of the pharmacological nature of alternative therapies and their possible risks to pregnant women. The study was published in the most recent issue of the Journal of Advanced Nursing. Key findings from the most recent 2008 and 2009 studies include: * A survey of 343 midwives from Canada and New Zealand found that 72 per cent had recommended or offered CAM. The most common referrals were to homeopaths (51 per cent), acupuncturists (50 per cent), naturopathic doctors (48 per cent), chiropractors (36 per cent), massage therapists (31 per cent) and osteopaths (20 per cent).
8 A study of 401 American obstetricians found that 98 per cent routinely endorsed, provided or referred patients for at least one CAM treatment. Movement therapies topped the list at 86 per cent, followed by biofeedback and acupuncture (both 80%).
* All but one of the 381 obstetric departments who took part in a German survey said they offered at least one CAM therapy, with acupuncture (97 per cent), homeopathy (93 per cent) and aromatherapy (77 per cent) heading the list.

The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center has been awarded a grant to study whether xerostomia, a debilitating side effect caused by head and neck cancer radiation treatment, can be prevented when acupuncture is part of a patient’s treatment regimen. The $2.7 million grant from the National Cancer Institute (NCI) for the study of acupuncture in cancer was awarded to Lorenzo Cohen, Ph.D., professor in the Departments of General Oncology and Behavioral Science. The MD Anderson has offered acupuncture, when appropriate, to patients for pain or other cancer or treatment-related symptoms since 2004. This Phase III randomized clinical trial will enroll 300 head and neck cancer patients receiving radiation treatment at either Shanghai Cancer Center or MD Anderson. Those enrolled in the sister Shanghai center will have nasopharyngeal carcinoma, a malignancy much less common in the United States. Prior to undergoing radiation, patients will be randomized to receive either acupuncture (needles inserted at appropriate, selected points), sham acupuncture (real and placebo needles inserted at inactive points), or standard care. Subjective and objective assessments of xerostomia will be collected prior to, during and at the completion of therapy, as well at three, six and 12 months post-radiation.