<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<recommendedContent xmlns="http://api.mspoke.com">
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_440"
                     title="Soft Drinks Linked to Pancreatic Cancer Risk (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.013"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/HematologyOncology/OtherCancers/tb/18354?impressionId=1265721113194"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Regular consumers of sugary soft drinks are at higher risk for pancreatic cancer than fruit juice drinkers or the general population, a new Singaporean study has found.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Chinese men and women living in Singapore who drank two or more soft drinks per week were 87% more likely to contract pancreatic cancer after the researchers adjusted for factors such as smoking (95% CI 1.10 to 3.15), according to the report published Feb. 8 in &lt;em&gt;Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers &amp;amp; Prevention.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;In this large prospective cohort of Chinese men and women in Singapore, those who reported regular soft drink consumption were at increased risk of pancreatic cancer when compared with those who largely abstained,&quot; Mark Pereira, PhD, of the School of Public Health at the University of Minnesota, and colleagues wrote. &quot;There was no association between consumption of juice and risk of pancreatic cancer.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;While pancreatic cancer is relatively rare, it is one of the most deadly cancers, with less than 5% of patients surviving five years after diagnosis. Although rates have generally plateaued in the U.S., they continue to climb in some Asian countries, including Singapore.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;This increase may reflect demographic and socioeconomic shifts as well as a transition towards a more westernized lifestyle and diet,&quot; the authors wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Research has shown that insulin promotes pancreatic cancer cell growth, and some researchers think sugary foods could result in blood sugar and insulin fluctuations that expose the pancreas to high concentrations of insulin.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;While fruit juices contain sugar, soft drinks are the major sources of added sugar in the U.S. diet and major contributors to hyperglycemia and hyperinsulinemia.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Pereira and colleagues followed 60,524 men and women who enrolled in the Singapore Chinese Health Study between April 1993 and December 1998 and were followed for 14 years.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;At enrollment, the participants completed a 146-question food frequency questionnaire, which contained three items related to soft drinks and juice. The questions asked the participants how much, if any, they drank of soft drinks such as Coca-Cola and 7-Up, orange juice, and other fruit and vegetable juices.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The dietary data was later cross-referenced with records from the Singapore Cancer Registry and the Singapore Registry of Births and Deaths, to determine which of the participants had died of pancreatic cancer and whether it might be related to their soft drink or juice consumption.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Overall, researchers found that 140 participants had contracted pancreatic cancer.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The results were largely consistent with three of four previous U.S. studies on the links between pancreatic cancer and soft drinks. Three of the U.S. studies found an association between soft drinks and cancer.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The author acknowledged that soft drink consumers are more likely than abstainers to participate in other unhealthy behaviors, including smoking and overeating, which makes it difficult to determine that soft drink consumption is an independent risk factor for pancreatic cancer.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For instance, smokers in their study were at higher risk for pancreatic cancer. &quot;We could not rule out the possibility of residual confounding by factors associated with the habit of drinking soft drinks or other unascertained factors such as waist circumference,&quot; they wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They also noted that the study was limited in statistical power because pancreatic cancer is rare, which limited the sample size of cancer cases. &quot;Also, because we were unable to collect repeated dietary measurements in this study, we were unable to account for changes in consumption of soft drinks and juices,&quot; they wrote, &quot;especially when the diagnosis of diabetes occurred after the baseline interview.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt; &lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was funded by the National Cancer Institute.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The authors reported no financial conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_433"
                     title="Household Routines Linked to Lower Childhood Obesity (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.013"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Pediatrics/Parenting/tb/18340?impressionId=1265721113194"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Want to protect your preschooler from obesity?&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Eat dinner as a family six or seven times a week, limit the time the child watches TV to less than two hours a day, and make sure he or she gets more than 10.5 hours of sleep a night.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Those three simple household routines are associated with an&lt;strong&gt; &lt;/strong&gt;almost 40% reduction in the risk of childhood obesity, according to Sarah Anderson, PhD, of Ohio State University College of Public Health in Columbus, and Robert Whitaker, MD, of Temple University in Philadelphia.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The association remained significant even in the face of other predictors of childhood obesity, such as maternal obesity or being in a single-parent family, the authors said in the March issue of &lt;em&gt;Pediatrics&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;I imagine people are going to want to know which of the routines is most important: Is it limited TV, is it dinner, is it adequate sleep?&quot; Anderson said in a statement.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;What this suggests is that you can&apos;t point to any one of these routines,&quot; she said. &quot;Each one appears to be associated with a lower risk of obesity, and having more of these routines appears to lower the risk further.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The findings are based on data collected in 2005 on 8,550 children born in the U.S. in 2001 who were part of the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Birth Cohort.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For the study, the 4-year-olds were considered to be obese if they were at or above the 95th percentile in weight for their age and sex.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Overall, the authors reported, 18% of children were obese by that measure.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers found that 14.5% of the children in the study lived in families where all three of the routines were observed, and 12.4% in families where none took place.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Among children exposed to all three, 14.3% were obese, compared with 24.5% among those exposed to none of the routines, they found.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In a multivariate analysis, children used to all three routines had an odds ratio for obesity of 0.63, compared with those who were exposed to none, the researchers found. (The 95% confidence interval was 0.46 to 0.87.)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Any two routines, again compared with none, had an odds ratio for obesity of 0.64, with a 95% confidence interval from 0.47 to 0.85.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;A similar pattern was seen for one routine compared with none, but in the multivariate analysis the benefit was no longer statistically significant.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;However, in a univariate analysis, any single routine, compared with none, reduced the odds of obesity by between 23% and 25%, the authors found, and the odds did not change much when the presence or absence of the other two was factored in.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;That finding suggests an &quot;independent association of each routine with obesity,&quot; the researchers wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The study is limited by elements of its design, the researchers said. The study was unable to account for differences in diet or physical activity, and the prevalence of the three routines was assessed by parent report, which might have introduced bias.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Information on types of foods served, how many people were present at dinner, concomitant television viewing along with the meal, advertising viewed on television, and quality of sleep was not available.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They also noted that the study is cross-sectional and can&apos;t be used to establish any causal relations between the three routines and obesity.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Nonetheless, they concluded, the three routines &quot;may be promising behavioral targets for counseling, given their association with obesity and their potential benefits beyond obesity prevention.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was supported by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The authors said they had no disclosures.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_432"
                     title="Short Needle May Short HBV Protection for Obese (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.013"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Pediatrics/Vaccines/tb/18348?impressionId=1265721113194"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Obese adolescents and young adults may not generate an adequate immune response to hepatitis B (HBV) vaccine because the needles used to vaccinate them are too short, a randomized study suggests.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Immunization with a 1.5-inch needle was associated with 80% higher anti-HBV titers than a 1.0-inch needle, researchers reported online in &lt;em&gt;Pediatrics.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The difference persisted in analyses performed to correct for imbalances in the study population.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;This supports the hypothesis that inadequate muscle penetration is responsible, at least in part, for lower immune response to HBV vaccine among obese adolescent and adult vaccine recipients,&quot; Amy Middleman, MD, of Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, and colleagues concluded.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Several studies have shown that adolescents and adults with a higher body mass index (BMI) have lower antibody titers after HBV vaccination. The observations have taken on new significance, given that an increasing number of vaccines target a population that has a rising BMI, the authors wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Researchers hypothesize that standard-length needles do not penetrate through the deltoid fat and into the muscle of obese adolescents and adults. Because of its less abundant blood supply, adipose tissue may delay antigen presentation to B and T cells responsible for immune response, the authors continued.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;To test the hypothesis, Middleman and colleagues conducted a randomized, clinical trial involving adolescents and adults ages 14 to 24 with no prior exposure to HBV vaccine. Eligibility criteria included weight &amp;gt;90 kg for female patients and &amp;gt;120 kg for male patients.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Patients were randomized to receive the HBV vaccine series with a standard one-inch needle or a 1.5-inch needle. Patients younger than 19 received 0.5-mL injections, and older patients received 1.0-mL injections.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Investigators used a standardized injection procedure: insertion of the needle at a 90&amp;#176; angle to the deltoid muscle, leaving 2 to 3 mm of needle visible between the skin and the hub.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Patients received three doses of vaccine at baseline, one month, and four months. Blood samples were obtained at baseline and two months after the final injection.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The two groups did not differ significantly with respect to median age (21), BMI (~40), deltoid skinfold (41 mm), triceps skinfold (~40 mm), days between vaccine doses one and three (~135), and days from third vaccine dose to titer assessment (65).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;At the end of the study, 24 patients had completed the immunization protocol, 10 in the one-inch group and 14 in the 1.5-inch group.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Patients vaccinated with a one-inch needle had a median antibody titer of 189.8 mIU/mL compared with 345.4 mIU/mL for patients vaccinated with the 1.5-inch needle (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.03).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The between-group difference remained significant in analyses that excluded an outlier from the 1.5-inch group (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.047) and that excluded the only two male patients in the study (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;=0.035).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;As we continue to experience high rates of obesity in the U.S. and throughout the world, additional evidence-based research on optimizing the effective delivery of immunizations to adolescents and young adults will be critical,&quot; the authors wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Following updated needle length recommendations will be a first step toward improving the health of our youth and young adults by preventing vaccine-preventable diseases.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The study was supported by federal grants and awards. GlaxoSmithKline provided the vaccine.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The authors had no disclosures.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_413"
                     title="ICAO: In Obesity, Fat Legs Better than Fat Middles (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.013"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/PrimaryCare/Obesity/tb/18322?impressionId=1265721113194"
                     
      Having less abdominal fat but more leg fat may play a role in maintaining metabolic health in obese women, but not in heavy men, researchers found.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;Metabolically healthy obese women had significantly more leg fat compared with metabolically unfit women, and smaller waist circumference (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.05), Sarah Appleton, a postgraduate student at the University of Adelaide in Australia, and colleagues reported at the International Congress on Abdominal Obesity in Hong Kong.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;When there&apos;s no significant differences in total body fat, the high levels of leg fat but low levels of central fat &quot;makes you think this is a protective factor against developing metabolic complications of their obesity, including diabetes,&quot; Appleton told &lt;em&gt;MedPage Today&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Smaller studies have shown that metabolically healthy obese patients have less visceral fat compared with insulin-resistant obese patients, suggesting these may be protective factors that limit the development of metabolic disease.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;On the other hand, normal-weight patients with cardiometabolic risk factors, who are labeled as &quot;metabolically obese,&quot; have higher abdominal adiposity compared with metabolically healthy normal-weight patients. They&apos;re also at increased risk for diabetes and heart disease.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;To examine the relationship, the researchers conducted dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scans of body composition in 1,604 patients who were over age 50 and participated in the North West Adelaide Health Study. They were stratified in four categories: metabolically obese normal-weight, metabolically healthy normal weight, metabolically healthy obese, and metabolically unfit obese.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Metabolic obesity was defined by having two or more metabolic risk factors including high triglycerides, low HDL cholesterol, high blood pressure, high fasting plasma glucose, or diabetes.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers also measured waist circumference.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They found that among normal-weight women, the metabolically obese had significantly more total fat and more trunk fat compared with those who were metabolically healthy (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.05). There were no differences in waist circumference or lean mass.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Among obese women, the metabolically healthy had no significant differences in total body fat, compared with the metabolically unfit. But they had significantly more leg fat, a smaller waist circumference, and the same amounts of lean mass.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;We would have expected to see that metabolically healthy obese ladies would have more leg fat, but also more lean mass and less central fat, since this combination is protective against developing diabetes,&quot; Appleton said, &quot;but we didn&apos;t see that related to lean mass, which was surprising.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Normal-weight men who had metabolic problems had significantly more total fat and trunk (chest and abdominal) fat than metabolically healthy ones, but no differences in lean mass.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;And for obese men, there were no significant differences between the metabolically fit and unfit, which &quot;was a surprise,&quot; Appleton said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Men generally have much less fat and more lean mass,&quot; she added. &quot;Women are the other way around, so maybe it&apos;s not so surprising to see these effects specifically in women.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers did find that among all overweight patients, both male and female, metabolic health was associated with significantly lower waist circumference.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;We know specifically that fat around the abdomen is dangerous because it can drain into your blood very easily and have direct effects on organs including the liver and pancreas,&quot; Appleton said. &quot;The theory is that distribution of fat and maybe an alternative inflammatory profile protects obese ladies from developing the metabolic consequences you&apos;d expect to see in people who are obese.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Appleton said the study may have implications for clinical practice, adding that physicians should assess both BMI and waist circumference to determine disease risk. Moreover, physicians &quot;need to focus on healthy weight loss in a way that protects lean mass but also reduces dangerous fat deposits including central adiposity.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It also goes to show that &quot;just because somebody looks thin,&quot; Appleton added, &quot;doesn&apos;t mean they&apos;re healthy.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The researchers reported no conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
    <recommendedItem id="20100101_19_405"
                     title="Difficult Childhood Lingers in the Mind (CME/CE)"
                     score="0.012"
                     href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/Psychiatry/GeneralPsychiatry/tb/18312?impressionId=1265721113194"
                     
      &lt;p&gt;Adversities faced in childhood have effects on mental health far into the future, researchers affirmed.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Mental illness in adulthood was increasingly likely the more traumas faced in childhood, Ronald C. Kessler, PhD, of Harvard, and colleagues reported in the February issue of the &lt;em&gt;Archives of General Psychiatry&lt;/em&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Childhood difficulties potentially explained 32.4% of all the psychiatric disorders examined, they said, based on analyses of the National Comorbidity Survey Replication.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Adversities relating to family dysfunction  --  substance-abusing parents, sexual or physical abuse in the home, neglect, etc.  --  appeared to have the strongest link to onset and persistence of psychiatric disorders, they reported.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;These findings match folk wisdom and decades of research into the negative effects of child maltreatment, commented John McGrath, MD, PhD, of the Queensland Centre for Mental Health Research in Wacol, Australia, and colleagues in an accompanying editorial.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But the lack of specificity between certain exposures to particular mental health outcomes  --  such as the death of one&apos;s mother leading to depression  --  was notable, the editorialists said.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;Thus, childhood trauma upsets the orderly psychological and biological cascades of development, leaving the affected individual at increased risk of a wide range of adverse mental health outcomes,&quot; they wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Rather than continue to rehash the epidemiology, it&apos;s time to focus on prevention and intervention, McGrath&apos;s group emphasized.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;It is unrealistic to think that we could protect all children from all adversities, but can we identify factors that bolster resilience and focus our efforts on the most vulnerable subgroups?&quot; they asked.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers examined joint associations of 12 retrospectively reported childhood adversities with lifetime incidence of disorders meeting Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) criteria in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication I, a cross-sectional survey of a nationally-representative sample of adults in 9,282 American households.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Among the respondents, 53.4% reported at least one childhood adversity, most commonly parental divorce (17.5%), family violence (14.0%), family economic problems (10.6%), and parental mental illness (10.3%).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;These adversities were all individually and significantly linked to first onset of psychiatric disorders with odds ratios of 1.5 to 1.9 for dysfunctional family factors (physical abuse, sexual abuse, neglect, parental mental illness, parental substance abuse, parental criminality, or family violence) and 1.0 to 1.5 for other factors like life-threatening childhood physical illness, extreme poverty, parental divorce, or loss of or separation from parents.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Despite some apparent but not significantly meaningful variation in type of adversity with type of psychiatric disorder, the researchers said they could rule out that all types were the same for future mental health risk (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.001).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Problems tended to cluster, though. Among people who faced one adversity in childhood, 51.2% to 95.1% faced others as well, depending on the adversity.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Risk of mental illness rose with number of issues faced in childhood from an odds ratio of 1.3 for one up to 3.4 for six and 3.2 for seven or more adversities.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;This subadditive pattern has important implications for intervention because it means that prevention or amelioration of only a single childhood adversity in youths exposed to many childhood adversities is unlikely to have important preventive effects,&quot; the researchers wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Overall, childhood adversities were projected to account for 44.6% of childhood-onset disorders, 32.0% of adolescent-onset disorders, and 28.6% of adult-onset disorders.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers also looked at persistence through the second part of the National Comorbidity Survey Replication which went beyond just core diagnostic assessment in 5,692 respondents.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In a complex multivariate interactive analysis, childhood adversity from dysfunctional family factors appeared significantly linked to persistence in a given year (&lt;em&gt;P&lt;/em&gt;&amp;lt;0.001) whereas the number of factors was not significant.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;These significant factors were parental mental illness, physical abuse, sexual abuse, and neglect, but they carried modest effects individually with odds ratios of 1.2.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But in one simulation, not being exposed to childhood trauma would only increase the time since the most recent episode of psychiatric illness by 1.6%, suggesting &quot;quite modest&quot; substantive importance in determining persistence.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&quot;These results indirectly suggest that the public health implications of childhood adversities are greater for primary than for secondary prevention because the associations of childhood adversities with disorder onset are much stronger than the associations with persistence,&quot; Kessler&apos;s group wrote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The researchers cautioned that recall bias may have limited their study such that the results could be considered an &quot;upper bound&quot; for the real association and that the study could not prove causality.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;float:left;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-color:#8dabbc;font-family:arial;font-size:12px;background-color:#DBE9F2;padding:5px;&quot;&gt;&lt;p&gt;The National Comorbidity Survey Replication is supported by a grant from the National Institute of Mental Health with supplemental support from the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and the John W. Alden Trust.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The analyses were supported by a grant from the NIMH; the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation; the Pfizer Foundation; grants from the U.S. Public Health Service; an award from the Fogarty International Center; the Pan American Health Organization; Eli Lilly; Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical; GlaxoSmithKline; and Bristol-Myers Squibb.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Kessler reported financial conflicts of interest with GlaxoSmithKline, Kaiser Permanente, Pfizer, sanofi-aventis, Shire Pharmaceuticals, Wyeth-Ayerst, Eli Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Johnson &amp;amp; Johnson Pharmaceuticals, and Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The editorialists reported no conflicts of interest.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;div style=&quot;clear:both;&quot;&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
    </recommendedItem>
</recommendedContent>