Tag Archives: Seattle Children’s Hospital

Nationwide Children’s Hospital study: Antibiotics alone can be an effective treatment for children with appendicitis

20 Dec

The National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases provide facts about appendicitis:

Definition and Facts for Appendicitis

What is appendicitis?

Appendicitis is inflammation of your appendix.

How common is appendicitis?

In the United States, appendicitis is the most common cause of acute abdominal pain requiring surgery. Over 5% of the population develops appendicitis at some point.1

Who is more likely to develop appendicitis?

Appendicitis most commonly occurs in the teens and twenties but may occur at any age.1

What are the complications of appendicitis?

If appendicitis is not treated, it may lead to complications. The complications of a ruptured appendix are

  • peritonitis, which can be a dangerous condition. Peritonitis happens if your appendix bursts and infection spreads in your abdomen. If you have peritonitis, you may be very ill and have
    • ​​​​fever
    • nausea
    • severe tenderness in your abdomen
    • vomiting
  • ​an abscess of the appendix called an appendiceal abscess.​

1 Acute Abdomen and Surgical Gastroenterology. The Merk Manual website. http://www.merckmanuals.com/professional/gastrointestinal_disorders/acute_abdomen_and_surgical_gastroenterology/appendicitis.htmlExternal Link Disclaimer. Updated June, 2014. Assessed October 2014.                                 http://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/health-topics/digestive-diseases/appendicitis/Pages/definition-facts.aspx

Appendicitis can be a serious illness because of the complications.

Seattle Children’s Hospital describes appendicitis symptoms:

Symptoms of Appendicitis

It’s important to know the symptoms of appendicitis so you can get help quickly.

For children 2 years old and younger, the most common signs of appendicitis are pain in the lower belly, vomiting and swelling in the belly. An older child may first complain of pain near the belly button. Over time, the pain moves to the lower-right belly. In most cases, the pain doesn’t get better even if the child lies still. Movement usually makes the pain worse.

Your child may also have these symptoms:

  • Not wanting to eat
  • Feeling sick to their stomach
  • Vomiting
  • Diarrhea
  • Low-grade fever
  • Swollen or bloated belly

If the appendix bursts, your child may get a high fever because of the spreading infection.

If you think your child may have appendicitis, call your doctor or bring your child to our Emergency Department right away. Don’t give your child anything to eat or drink, including medicine for pain, unless your doctor tells you to. Appendicitis treatment usually includes surgery to remove the appendix.

Appendicitis Diagnosis

It can be hard to tell if appendicitis is the reason a child’s belly hurts. The doctor will ask for a detailed history of your child’s illness and examine your child’s belly, looking for tender spots. We might use a blood test or urine test — or take images of the inside of your child’s abdomen — to make sure we know exactly what is causing the symptoms.

We can often diagnose appendicitis using ultrasound. This saves children from being exposed to the radiation that goes along with X-rays or CT (computed tomography) scans.                                 http://www.seattlechildrens.org/medical-conditions/digestive-gastrointestinal-conditions/appendicitis-symptoms/

A Nationwide Children’s Hospital study concludes antibiotics alone can be an effective treatment for children with appendicitis.

Science Daily reported in Antibiotics alone can be a safe, effective treatment for children with appendicitis:

Using antibiotics alone to treat children with uncomplicated acute appendicitis is a reasonable alternative to surgery when chosen by the family. A study led by researchers at Nationwide Children’s Hospital found that three out of four children with uncomplicated appendicitis have been successfully treated with antibiotics alone at one year follow-up. Compared to urgent appendectomy, non-operative management was associated with less recovery time, lower health costs and no difference in the rate of complications at one year.

“Families who choose to treat their child’s appendicitis with antibiotics, even those who ended up with an appendectomy because the antibiotics didn’t work, have expressed that for them it was worth it to try antibiotics to avoid surgery,” said Peter C. Minneci, MD who led the study published online Dec. 16 in JAMA Surgery with Katherine J. Deans, MD. The pair are co-directors of the Center for Surgical Outcomes Research and principal investigators in the Center for Innovation in Pediatric Practice in The Research Institute at Nationwide Children’s. “These patients avoided the risks of surgery and anesthesia, and they quickly went back to their activities.”

“Surgery has long been the ‘gold standard’ of care for treating appendicitis because by removing the appendix we eliminate the chance that the appendicitis will ever come back,” said Dr. Deans. “However, early in our careers we noticed that patients with appendicitis who were placed on antibiotics overnight until their surgery the following morning felt better the next day. So, Pete and I asked ourselves: do they really need to have surgery?”

In the first study conducted and published in the United States examining non-operative management for appendicitis, they enrolled 102 patients age 7 to 17 who were diagnosed with uncomplicated acute appendicitis at Nationwide Children’s between October 2012 and October 2013. Participants had early/mild appendicitis, meaning that they experienced abdominal pain for no more than 48 hours; had a white blood cell count below 18,000; underwent an ultrasound or CT scan to rule out rupture and to verify that their appendix was 1.1 centimeter thick or smaller; and had no evidence of an abscess or fecalith, which is hard stone-like piece of stool.

Thirty-seven families chose antibiotics alone and 65 opted for surgery. Those patients in the non-operative group were admitted to the hospital and received IV antibiotics for at least 24 hours, followed by oral antibiotics after discharge for a total of 10 days. Among those patients, 95% showed improvement within 24 hours and were discharged without undergoing surgery. Rates of appendicitis-related medical care within 30 days were similar between the groups with two patients in the non-operative group readmitted within 30 days for an appendectomy. At one year after discharge, three out of four patients in the non-operative group did not have appendicitis again and have not undergone surgery.

Appendicitis, caused by a bacterial infection in the appendix, is the most common reason for emergency abdominal surgery in children, sending more than 70,000 young people to the operating room each year. Although many of these cases are severe and require surgery, there are a good number that would be candidates for treatment with antibiotics alone, Dr. Minneci said…

According to the study results, patients who were transferred to Nationwide Children’s from other institutions expressed concerns about the distance and time necessary to come back if the appendicitis recurred. These families opted for surgery more often. Patients whose families spoke primary languages other than English were more likely to choose antibiotics as a course of treatment due to cultural values to avoid surgery if at all possible….

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/12/151216134409.htm

Citation:

Antibiotics alone can be a safe, effective treatment for children with appendicitis

Date:      December 16, 2015

Source: Nationwide Children’s Hospital

Summary:

Using antibiotics alone to treat children with uncomplicated acute appendicitis is a reasonable alternative to surgery when chosen by the family. A new study has found that three out of four children with uncomplicated appendicitis have been successfully treated with antibiotics alone at one year follow-up. Compared to urgent appendectomy, non-operative management was associated with less recovery time, lower health costs and no difference in the rate of complications at one year.

Journal Reference:

  1. Peter C. Minneci, Justin B. Mahida, Daniel L. Lodwick, Jason P. Sulkowski, Kristine M. Nacion, Jennifer N. Cooper, Erica J. Ambeba, R. Lawrence Moss, Katherine J. Deans. Effectiveness of Patient Choice in Nonoperative vs Surgical Management of Pediatric Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis. JAMA Surgery, 2015; 1 DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2015.4534

Non-operative management of early, acute appendicitis in children: Is it safe and effective?

Jeff Armstrong,

Neil Merritt,

Sarah Jones,

Leslie Scott,

Andreana Bütter

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2014.02.071

Article Info

Publication History

Published Online: February 21, 2014Accepted: February 13, 2014Received: February 10, 2014

Purchase this article (PDF Included)

$31.50 USD (24 hour access)

Subscribe to this title

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to determine if early, acute appendicitis in children can be safely and effectively managed with antibiotics alone.

Methods

A retrospective review was performed of children (<18  yrs) treated non-operatively (NOM) for early, acute appendicitis since May 2012. These were compared to patients treated with appendectomy between January 2011 and October 2011 (OM). Inclusion criteria included: (a) symptoms <48 h, (b) localized peritonitis, and (c) ultrasound findings consistent with early, acute appendicitis.

Results

Twelve patients (66% female, mean age 12.2,SD = 4.2 yrs) were treated non-operatively, while 12 (50% female, mean age 12.5,SD = 3.2 yrs) were treated operatively. Two NOM children (16.7%) required initial appendectomy. One patient developed recurrent appendicitis requiring appendectomy 7 months post-discharge. Four other NOM patients returned with symptoms but did not require admission or surgery. Two OM patients (8.3%) had hospital visits and admissions related to surgical site infections. Mean length of stay (LOS) for the first visit was 1.5 days (SD = 1.0d) (NOM) vs. 1.3 days (SD = 0.5d) (OM) (p = 0.61). Including first and subsequent admissions, mean LOS was 1.8 days (SD = 1.1d) (NOM) vs. 1.7 days (SD = 1.5d) (OM) (p = 0.97).

Conclusion

Early acute appendicitis in appropriately selected children can be successfully treated non-operatively. Randomized trials with longer follow-up are required.

Key words:

Appendicitis, Non-operative management, Antibiotics

 

Here is the press release from Nationwide Children’s Hospital:

Antibiotics Alone Can Be a Safe, Effective Treatment for Children with Appendicitis

Columbus, OH – 12/16/2015

Using antibiotics alone to treat children with uncomplicated acute appendicitis is a reasonable alternative to surgery when chosen by the family. A study led by researchers at Nationwide Children’s Hospital found that three out of four children with uncomplicated appendicitis have been successfully treated with antibiotics alone at one year follow-up. Compared to urgent appendectomy, non-operative management was associated with less recovery time, lower health costs and no difference in the rate of complications at one year.

“Families who choose to treat their child’s appendicitis with antibiotics, even those who ended up with an appendectomy because the antibiotics didn’t work, have expressed that for them it was worth it to try antibiotics to avoid surgery,” said Peter C. Minneci, MD who led the study published online Dec. 16 in JAMA Surgery with Katherine J. Deans, MD. The pair are co-directors of the Center for Surgical Outcomes Research and principal investigators in the Center for Innovation in Pediatric Practice in The Research Institute at Nationwide Children’s. “These patients avoided the risks of surgery and anesthesia, and they quickly went back to their activities.”

“Surgery has long been the ‘gold standard’ of care for treating appendicitis because by removing the appendix we eliminate the chance that the appendicitis will ever come back,” said Dr. Deans. “However, early in our careers we noticed that patients with appendicitis who were placed on antibiotics overnight until their surgery the following morning felt better the next day. So, Pete and I asked ourselves: do they really need to have surgery?”

In the first study conducted and published in the United States examining non-operative management for appendicitis, they enrolled 102 patients age 7 to 17 who were diagnosed with uncomplicated acute appendicitis at Nationwide Children’s between October 2012 and March 2013. Participants had early/mild appendicitis, meaning that they experienced abdominal pain for no more than 48 hours; had a white blood cell count below 18,000; underwent an ultrasound or CT scan to rule out rupture and to verify that their appendix was 1.1 centimeter thick or smaller; and had no evidence of an abscess or fecalith, which is hard stone-like piece of stool.

Thirty-seven families chose antibiotics alone and 65 opted for surgery. Those patients in the non-operative group were admitted to the hospital and received IV antibiotics for at least 24 hours, followed by oral antibiotics after discharge for a total of 10 days. Among those patients, 95% showed improvement within 24 hours and were discharged without undergoing surgery. Rates of appendicitis-related medical care within 30 days were similar between the groups with two patients in the non-operative group readmitted within 30 days for an appendectomy. At one year after discharge, three out of four patients in the non-operative group did not have appendicitis again and have not undergone surgery.

Appendicitis, caused by a bacterial infection in the appendix, is the most common reason for emergency abdominal surgery in children, sending more than 70,000 young people to the operating room each year. Although many of these cases are severe and require surgery, there are a good number that would be candidates for treatment with antibiotics alone, Dr. Minneci said.

“We believe that the results of our study reflect the effectiveness of offering non-operative management to patients and their families in clinical practice. The patient choice design allows the patient and family’s preference to be aligned with their choice of therapy,” said Dr. Deans. “Most parents are concerned about having surgery, in general. They’re also very concerned about anesthesia. Some parents are very concerned about appendicitis coming back. It’s really a matter of aligning your preferences, your values, what you think is most important to you, with the treatment that is best for you and your family.”

For example, explained Dr. Minneci, if the family is so afraid of a recurrence that they visit the Emergency Department every time their child has abdominal pain, then their child will likely undergo increased imaging and eventually undergo an appendectomy. In that case, letting them choose an appendectomy upfront may be better for the child.

According to the study results, patients who were transferred to Nationwide Children’s from other institutions expressed concerns about the distance and time necessary to come back if the appendicitis recurred. These families opted for surgery more often. Patients whose families spoke primary languages other than English were more likely to choose antibiotics as a course of treatment due to cultural values to avoid surgery if at all possible.

Both researchers, who are also Assistant Professors of Surgery and Pediatrics in The Ohio State University College of Medicine, say further studies are needed to see if the results they saw in this study apply in other health systems, and emphasize that the perceptions of both patient-families and surgeons can impact the study results. Their intention is to follow all the children in this study as long as possible to see if those treated with non-operative management continue to thrive.

Click here to watch a video about one of our patients who benefited from antibiotics for appendicitis. 

Nearly 200 children a day undergo emergency appendectomies in the U.S., but a new study by researchers at Nationwide Children`s Hospital in Columbus, Ohio found surgery wasn`t always necessary. Experts were able to successfully treat the majority of children with uncomplicated appendicitis with antibiotics alone. – See more at: http://www.nch.multimedianewsroom.tv/story.php?id=1108&enter=#sthash.zp5AD7M0.dpuf

Nearly 200 children a day undergo emergency appendectomies in the U.S., but a new study by researchers at Nationwide Children`s Hospital found surgery was not always necessary. Experts were able to successfully treat the majority of children with uncomplicated appendicitis with antibiotics alone.

Full citation:

Minneci PC, Mahida JB, Lodwick, DL, Sulkowski JP, Nacion KM, Cooper JN, Ambeba, EJ, Moss RL, Deans KJ. The effectiveness of patient choice in non-operative versus surgical management of uncomplicated acute appendicitis. JAMA Surgery. 2015 Dec 16 [Epub ahead of print].

http://www.nationwidechildrens.org/news-room-articles/antibiotics-alone-can-be-a-safe-effective-treatment-for-children-with-appendicitis?contentid=150302

Moi blogs about education issues so the reader could be perplexed sometimes because moi often writes about other things like nutrition, families, and personal responsibility issues. Why? The reader might ask? Children will have the most success in school if they are ready to learn. Ready to learn includes proper nutrition for a healthy body and the optimum situation for children is a healthy family. Many of society’s problems would be lessened if the goal was a healthy child in a healthy family.

Resources:

Appendicitis                                                                                                                     http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMHT0022755/

Appendicitis in Children                                                                     http://kidshealth.org/parent/infections/stomach/appendicitis.html

Where information leads to Hope. ©

Dr. Wilda.com

Dr. Wilda says this about that ©

Blogs by Dr. Wilda:

COMMENTS FROM AN OLD FART©
http://drwildaoldfart.wordpress.com/

Dr. Wilda Reviews ©
http://drwildareviews.wordpress.com/

Dr. Wilda ©
https://drwilda.com/

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Yale University study: Athletes often endorse unhealthy food products

8 Oct

Moi wrote in Critical thinking skills for kids are crucial: The lure of Super bowl alcohol ads:
The issue is whether children in a “captive” environment have the maturity and critical thinking skills to evaluate the information contained in the ads. Advertising is about creating a desire for the product, pushing a lifestyle which might make an individual more prone to purchase products to create that lifestyle, and promoting an image which might make an individual more prone to purchase products in pursuit of that image. Many girls and women have unrealistic body image expectations which can lead to eating disorders in the pursuit of a “super model” image. What the glossy magazines don’t tell young women is the dysfunctional lives of many “super models” which may involve both eating disorders and substance abuse. The magazines don’t point out that many “glamour girls” are air-brushed or photo-shopped and that they spend hours on professional make-up and professional hairstyling in addition to having a personal trainer and stylist. Many boys look at the buff bodies of the men in the ads and don’t realize that some use body enhancing drugs. In other words, when presented with any advertising, people must make a determination what to believe. It is easy for children to get derailed because of peer pressure in an all too permissive society. Parents and schools must teach children critical thinking skills and point out often that the picture presented in advertising is often as close to reality as the bedtime fairy tail. Reality does not often involve perfection, there are warts.

See, Admongo
http://ftc.gov/bcp/edu/microsites/admongo/html-version.shtml
and How to Help a Child With Critical Thinking Skills
http://www.livestrong.com/article/178182-how-to-help-a-child-with-critical-thinking-skills/#ixzz2Jlv5L6HR
https://drwilda.com/tag/exposure-to-alcohol-advertisements-and-teenage-alcohol-related-problems/

Katy Bachman reported in the Adweek article, Study: Athletes Send Mixed Messages to Youth by Marketing Junk Food: LeBron James, Peyton Manning, Serena Williams are the worst offenders:

LeBron James, Peyton Manning and Serena Williams are tops in their sports and make great spokespeople for any marketer. But they are also at the top of a less-flattering ranker—endorsing junk food marketed to youth.
The NBA, NFL and WTA champs were the top three athlete endorsers promoting unhealthy foods in TV, radio, print and online ads reaching teens 12 to 17, according to a new study by the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale….
While the food and beverage industry has committed to advertise to children only food that meets specific nutrition criteria under the Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative, the self-regulation only applies to children under 12. The Yale study points out that once children reach a certain age, they quickly become a target….
“It’s as if the dollars blind them to the fact they are role models,” said Michael Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest.
Of the 512 brand endorsements associated with the top 100 athletes in the study, food and beverage brands represented the second-highest endorsement category for athletes at 23.8 percent, surpassed only by sporting goods and apparel at 28.3 percent.
Overall, the top 100 athletes endorsed 122 food and beverage brands. Sports beverages were the largest individual category endorsed by athletes, followed by soft drinks and fast food. Most of the 46 beverages endorsed by athletes received all of their calories from added sugar….http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising-branding/study-athletes-send-mixed-messages-youth-marketing-junk-food-152962

Here is the press release from Yale:

Unhealthy food marketed to youth through athlete endorsements
By Megan Orciari
October 7, 2013
Professional athletes are often paid large amounts of money to endorse commercial products. But the majority of the food and beverage brands endorsed by professional athletes are for unhealthy products like sports beverages, soft drinks, and fast food, according to a new study by the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale. The study appears in the November issue of Pediatrics.
Analyzing data collected in 2010 from Nielson and AdScope, an advertisement database, the study reveals that adolescents aged 12 to 17 viewed the most television ads for food endorsed by athletes. Previous research by public health advocates has criticized the use of athlete endorsements in food marketing campaigns for often promoting unhealthy food and sending mixed messages to youth about health, but this is the first study to examine the extent and reach of such marketing.
Researchers selected 100 professional athletes to study based on Businessweek’s 2010 Power 100 report, which ranked athletes according to their endorsement value and prominence in their sport. Information about each athlete’s endorsements was gathered from the Power 100 list and AdScope. Researchers then sorted the endorsements into categories: food/beverages, automotive, consumer goods, service providers, entertainment, finance, communications/office, sporting goods/apparel, retail, airline, and other. The nutritional quality of the foods featured in athlete-endorsement advertising was assessed, along with the marketing data.
Of the 512 brands associated with these athletes, food and beverage brands were the second largest category of endorsements behind sporting goods. “We found that LeBron James (NBA), Peyton Manning (NFL), and Serena Williams (tennis) had more food and beverage endorsements than any of the other athletes examined. Most of the athletes who endorsed food and beverages were from the NBA, followed by the NFL, and MLB,” said Marie Bragg, the study’s lead author and a doctoral candidate at Yale.
Sports beverages were the largest individual category of athlete endorsements, followed by soft drinks, and fast food. Most — 93% — of the 46 beverages being endorsed by athletes received all of their calories from added sugars.
Food and beverage advertisements associated with professional athletes had far-reaching exposure, with ads appearing nationally on television, the Internet, the radio, in newspapers, and magazines.
“The promotion of energy-dense, nutrient-poor products by some of the world’s most physically fit and well-known athletes is an ironic combination that sends mixed messages about diet and health,” said Bragg.
Bragg and co-authors assert that professional athletes should be aware of the health value of the products they are endorsing, and should use their status and celebrity to promote healthy messages to youth.
Other authors include Swati Yanamadala, Christina Roberto, and Jennifer L. Harris of the Rudd Center at Yale, and Kelly Brownell of Duke University.
The study was supported by grants from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Rudd Foundation.

Citation:

Athlete Endorsements in Food Marketing
1. Marie A. Bragg, MS, MPhila,
2. Swati Yanamadala, BAb,
3. Christina A. Roberto, PhDa,c,
4. Jennifer L. Harris, MBA, PhDa, and
5. Kelly D. Brownell, PhDd
+ Author Affiliations
1. aRudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut;
2. bStanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California;
3. cDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts; and
4. dSanford School of Public Policy, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study quantified professional athletes’ endorsement of food and beverages, evaluated the nutritional quality of endorsed products, and determined the number of television commercial exposures of athlete-endorsement commercials for children, adolescents, and adults.
METHODS: One hundred professional athletes were selected on the basis of Bloomberg Businessweek’s 2010 Power 100 rankings, which ranks athletes according to their endorsement value and prominence in their sport. Endorsement information was gathered from the Power 100 list and the advertisement database AdScope. Endorsements were sorted into 11 endorsement categories (eg, food/beverages, sports apparel). The nutritional quality of the foods featured in athlete-endorsement advertisements was assessed by using a Nutrient Profiling Index, whereas beverages were evaluated on the basis of the percentage of calories from added sugar. Marketing data were collected from AdScope and Nielsen.
RESULTS: Of 512 brands endorsed by 100 different athletes, sporting goods/apparel represented the largest category (28.3%), followed by food/beverages (23.8%) and consumer goods (10.9%). Professional athletes in this sample were associated with 44 different food or beverage brands during 2010. Seventy-nine percent of the 62 food products in athlete-endorsed advertisements were energy-dense and nutrient-poor, and 93.4% of the 46 advertised beverages had 100% of calories from added sugar. Peyton Manning (professional American football player) and LeBron James (professional basketball player) had the most endorsements for energy-dense, nutrient-poor products. Adolescents saw the most television commercials that featured athlete endorsements of food.
CONCLUSIONS: Youth are exposed to professional athlete endorsements of food products that are energy-dense and nutrient-poor.

Our goal should be:

A Healthy Child In A Healthy Family Who Attends A Healthy School In A Healthy Neighborhood. ©

Related:

More school districts facing a financial crunch are considering school ads
https://drwilda.wordpress.com/2012/06/04/more-school-districts-facing-a-financial-crunch-are-considering-school-ads/

Should there be advertising in schools?
https://drwilda.wordpress.com/2011/11/10/should-there-be-advertising-in-schools/

Talking to your teen about risky behaviors
https://drwilda.wordpress.com/2012/06/07/talking-to-your-teen-about-risky-behaviors/

Television cannot substitute for quality childcare
https://drwilda.wordpress.com/2012/04/23/television-cannot-substitute-for-quality-childcare/

Where information leads to Hope. © Dr. Wilda.com

Dr. Wilda says this about that ©

Blogs by Dr. Wilda:

COMMENTS FROM AN OLD FART©
http://drwildaoldfart.wordpress.com/

Dr. Wilda Reviews ©
http://drwildareviews.wordpress.com/

Dr. Wilda ©
https://drwilda.com/

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Seattle Children’s Hospital study: Parental attitudes influence children’s media choices

24 Jun

 

Some one told moi a story about a woman who wanted to introduce her 12 year old son to culture. The way she set about the introduction was to buy tickets for the entire Ring by Wagner. Perhaps, her son thoroughly enjoyed the Ring. More likely, he probably developed a hatred for opera. About the time that school starts around the beginning of September, many arts organizations begin their season. It is good to introduce your child to all types of artistic endeavors, but one should chose wisely by looking for cues as to what the child’s interests are and having an awareness of content.

 

What Types of Rating Systems Exist?

 

 

The Federal Trade Commission  (FTC) maintains a system of ratings to guide families in making appropriate entertainment choices for their children. The system describes movie ratings, many other venues such as theaters may use the system to describe their content. The Movie Ratings are: 

 

General Audience.All ages admitted. This signifies that the film rated contains nothing most parents will consider offensive for even their youngest children to see or hear. Nudity, sex scenes, and scenes of drug use are absent; violence is minimal; snippets of dialogue may go beyond polite conversation but do not go beyond common everyday expressions.

Parental Guidance Suggested.Some material may not be suitable for children. This signifies that the film rated may contain some material parents might not like to expose to their young children – material that will clearly need to be examined or inquired about before children are allowed to attend the film. Explicit sex scenes and scenes of drug use are absent; nudity, if present, is seen only briefly, horror and violence do not exceed moderate levels.

Parents Strongly Cautioned.Some material may be inappropriate for children under 13. This signifies that the film rated may be inappropriate for pre-teens. Parents should be especially careful about letting their younger children attend. Rough or persistent violence is absent; sexually-oriented nudity is generally absent; some scenes of drug use may be seen; one use of the harsher sexually derived words may be heard.

Restricted-Under 17requires accompanying parent or adult guardian (age varies in some locations). This signifies that the rating board has concluded that the film rated contains some adult material. Parents are urged to learn more about the film before taking their children to see it. An R may be assigned due to, among other things, a film’s use of language, theme, violence, sex or its portrayal of drug use.

No One 17 and Under Admitted.This signifies that the rating board believes that most American parents would feel that the film is patently adult and that children age 17 and under should not be admitted to it. The film may contain explicit sex scenes, an accumulation of sexually-oriented language, or scenes of excessive violence. The NC-17 designation does not, however, signify that the rated film is obscene or pornographic.

 

 

Information about the rating system and the history of movie ratings can be found at Film Ratings

 

 

Often parents want to look at other rating systems for content and the Entertainment Ratings Software Board (ERSB) also has a rating system.

 

 

ESRB Rating Symbols

 

EARLY CHILDHOOD
Titles rated EC (Early Childhood) have content that may be suitable for ages 3 and older. Contains no material that parents would find inappropriate.

EVERYONE
Titles rated E (Everyone) have content that may be suitable for ages 6 and older. Titles in this category may contain minimal cartoon, fantasy or mild violence and/or infrequent use of mild language.

  

EVERYONE 10+
Titles rated E10+ (Everyone 10 and older) have content that may be suitable for ages 10 and older. Titles in this category may contain more cartoon, fantasy or mild violence, mild language and/or minimal suggestive themes.

  

TEEN
Titles rated T (Teen) have content that may be suitable for ages 13 and older. Titles in this category may contain violence, suggestive themes, crude humor, minimal blood, simulated gambling, and/or infrequent use of strong language.

 

MATURE
Titles rated M (Mature) have content that may be suitable for persons ages 17 and older. Titles in this category may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content and/or strong language.

  

ADULTS ONLY
Titles rated AO (Adults Only) have content that should only be played by persons 18 years and older. Titles in this category may include prolonged scenes of intense violence and/or graphic sexual content and nudity.

  

RATING PENDING
Titles listed as RP (Rating Pending) have been submitted to the ESRB and are awaiting final rating. (This symbol appears only in advertising prior to a game’s release.)

  

 

 

The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has a caution system and which is described at Parental Advisory

 

 

Mary Guiden reports in the Seattle Children’s Hospital study, Parent cultural attitudes, beliefs associated with child’s media viewing habits:

 

 

Differences in parental beliefs and attitudes regarding the effects of media on early childhood development may help explain the increasing racial/ethnic disparities in child media viewing/habits, according to a new study by Wanjiku Njoroge, MD, of Seattle Children’s Research Institute.

 

The findings support national research that preschool-aged children spend considerable time with media, a situation that brings both risks and benefits for cognitive and behavioral outcomes depending on what is watched and how it is watched. A 2006 Kaiser Family Foundation media study, for example, highlighted that ethnically/racially diverse children—specifically African American, Hispanic and Asian children—watch more television than non-Hispanic white children.

 

New study included almost 600 parents

 

A total of 596 parents of children ages three to five years completed demographic questionnaires, reported on attitudes regarding media’s risks and benefits to their children, and completed one-week media diaries in which they recorded all of the programs their children watched.

 

According to study results, children watched an average of 462 minutes of TV per week, with African American children watching more TV and DVDs per week than did children of other racial and ethnic backgrounds. The relationship between the child’s race/ethnicity and average weekly media time was no longer statistically significant, however, after controlling for socioeconomic status (parental educational attainment and reported annual family income).

 

Small study sample size may have affected results

 

“Once we took SES into account, some of the findings disappeared,” said Njoroge. “That could be due to the small numbers.” The makeup of the study sample was 409 non-Hispanic white, 41 African American, 49 Asian American/Pacific Islander/Hawaiian and 97 multiracial children. Despite this limitation, the research teams’ findings echo national survey results indicating that TV viewing differs across race/ethnicity and SES.

 

Significant differences were found between parents of ethnically/racially diverse children and parents of non-Hispanic white children regarding the perceived positive effects of TV viewing, even when parental education and family income were taken into account.

 

Future research needs larger samples of children from diverse backgrounds

 

“These findings point to an important relationship between parental attitudes and beliefs about child media use and time that could be useful for intervention,” said Njoroge. “Because of the strong relationship between SES and media exposure in our sample, future research with larger samples of children from diverse backgrounds is warranted to better understand the complexities of race/ethnicity, family SES, and parental beliefs and attitudes on child media exposure.”

 

Njoroge and colleagues have several follow-up studies in the works. “We know that media is an enduring presence in the lives of young children and families,” she said. “Therefore, we need to understand differences across parenting cultural styles, so that recommendations can be tailored to families regarding their young child’s media use.”

 

Dimitri Christakis, MD, MPH, a co-author on Njoroge’s study, released findings earlier this year about the importance of a “media diet” for children, with an emphasis on less violent programming and more educational and prosocial programs. Njoroge’s research is through the Center for Child Health, Behavior and Development at Seattle Children’s Research Institute. She is also an assistant professor of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences at the University of Washington.

 

Study co-authors, funding support

 

This study was supported by a grant from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (1 R01 HD 056506-01A2) and grant R01 HD 56506 from NICHD Research Supplements to Promote Diversity in Health-Related Research (PA-08-190, Media Impact on Preschool Behavior). Study co-authors include Laura Elenbaas, BA (University of Maryland); Michelle Garrison, PhD (Seattle Children’s Research Institute); and Mon Myaing, PhD (Seattle Children’s Research Institute). http://pulse.seattlechildrens.org/parent-cultural-attitudes-beliefs-associated-with-childs-media-viewing-habits/

 

What Types of Rating Systems Exist?

 

 

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) maintains a system of ratings to guide families in making appropriate entertainment choices for their children. The system describes movie ratings, many other venues such as theaters may use the system to describe their content. The Movie Ratings are: 

 

 

General Audience.All ages admitted. This signifies that the film rated contains nothing most parents will consider offensive for even their youngest children to see or hear. Nudity, sex scenes, and scenes of drug use are absent; violence is minimal; snippets of dialogue may go beyond polite conversation but do not go beyond common everyday expressions.

Parental Guidance Suggested.Some material may not be suitable for children. This signifies that the film rated may contain some material parents might not like to expose to their young children – material that will clearly need to be examined or inquired about before children are allowed to attend the film. Explicit sex scenes and scenes of drug use are absent; nudity, if present, is seen only briefly, horror and violence do not exceed moderate levels.

Parents Strongly Cautioned.Some material may be inappropriate for children under 13. This signifies that the film rated may be inappropriate for pre-teens. Parents should be especially careful about letting their younger children attend. Rough or persistent violence is absent; sexually-oriented nudity is generally absent; some scenes of drug use may be seen; one use of the harsher sexually derived words may be heard.

Restricted-Under 17requires accompanying parent or adult guardian (age varies in some locations). This signifies that the rating board has concluded that the film rated contains some adult material. Parents are urged to learn more about the film before taking their children to see it. An R may be assigned due to, among other things, a film’s use of language, theme, violence, sex or its portrayal of drug use.

No One 17 and Under Admitted.This signifies that the rating board believes that most American parents would feel that the film is patently adult and that children age 17 and under should not be admitted to it. The film may contain explicit sex scenes, an accumulation of sexually-oriented language, or scenes of excessive violence. The NC-17 designation does not, however, signify that the rated film is obscene or pornographic.

 

Information about the rating system and the history of movie ratings can be found at Film Ratings

 

 Often parents want to look at other rating systems for content and the Entertainment RatingsSoftware Board (ERSB) also has a rating system.

 

 

ESRB Rating Symbols

 

EARLY CHILDHOOD
Titles rated EC (Early Childhood) have content that may be suitable for ages 3 and older. Contains no material that parents would find inappropriate.

EVERYONE
Titles rated E (Everyone) have content that may be suitable for ages 6 and older. Titles in this category may contain minimal cartoon, fantasy or mild violence and/or infrequent use of mild language.

EVERYONE 10+
Titles rated E10+ (Everyone 10 and older) have content that may be suitable for ages 10 and older. Titles in this category may contain more cartoon, fantasy or mild violence, mild language and/or minimal suggestive themes.

TEEN
Titles rated T (Teen) have content that may be suitable for ages 13 and older. Titles in this category may contain violence, suggestive themes, crude humor, minimal blood, simulated gambling, and/or infrequent use of strong language.

MATURE
Titles rated M (Mature) have content that may be suitable for persons ages 17 and older. Titles in this category may contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content and/or strong language.

ADULTS ONLY
Titles rated AO (Adults Only) have content that should only be played by persons 18 years and older. Titles in this category may include prolonged scenes of intense violence and/or graphic sexual content and nudity.

RATING PENDING
Titles listed as RP (Rating Pending) have been submitted to the ESRB and are awaiting final rating. (This symbol appears only in advertising prior to a game’s release.)

 

 

The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has a caution system and which is described at Parental Advisory

 

 

What Questions Should a Parent Ask a Venue About Content?

 

 

  1. Does a particular venue have a ratings system for content? 

 

  1. What is the model for the ratings system? Is it like film ratings or ESRB? 

 

  1. How descriptive is the rating system, does it give examples of the type of language or situation which might be problematic? 

 

  1. Where is the rating for each production listed? Is it in the descriptive brochure? Is this information on the web site? Are box office personnel familiar with the ratings? 

 

  1. If a family has concerns about a particular production, how should concerns be addressed to the venue if the family finds the production does not match the rating description? 

 

Families have different viewpoints about what is appropriate content for their child or children. Some families seek out a variety of experiences for their children while others are more restrained in what they feel is appropriate. All families need to ask questions about content to find what is appropriate for their child and their value system.

 

 

Where Information Leads to Hope ©     Dr. Wilda.com

 

Dr. Wilda says this about that ©

 

Blogs by Dr. Wilda:

 

COMMENTS FROM AN OLD FART©                           http://drwildaoldfart.wordpress.com/

 

Dr. Wilda Reviews ©                                                http://drwildareviews.wordpress.com/

 

Dr. Wilda ©                                                                             https://drwilda.com/

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

If kids must watch television, parents must be selective about programs children watch

20 Feb

Moi said this in Play is as important for children as technology:

Let’s make this short and sweet. Park your kid in front of the television and you will probably be raising an overweight idiot. Tara Parker-Pope has a great post at the New York Times blog. In the post, TV For Toddlers Linked With Later Problems Parker-Pope reports:

Toddlers who watch a lot of television were more likely to experience a range of problems by the fourth grade, including lower grades, poorer health and more problems with school bullies, a new study reports.

The study of more than 1,300 Canadian schoolchildren tracked the amount of television children were watching at the ages of about 2 and 5. The researchers then followed up on the children in fourth grade to assess academic performance, social issues and general health.

On average, the schoolchildren were watching about nine hours of television each week as toddlers. The total jumped to about 15 hours as they approached 5 years of age. The average level of television viewing shown in the study falls within recommended guidelines. However, 11 percent of the toddlers were exceeding two hours a day of television viewing.

For those children, each hour of extra TV exposure in early childhood was associated with a range of issues by the fourth grade, according to the report published in the May issue of The Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine. Compared with children who watched less television, those with more TV exposure participated less in class and had lower math grades. They suffered about 10 percent more bullying by classmates and were less likely to be physically active on weekends. They consumed about 10 percent more soft drinks and snacks and had body mass index scores that were about 5 percent higher than their peers.

Well duh, people. You probably already knew this. Guess why you have feet attached to your legs? So, you and the kids can walk around the neighborhood and the park. Better yet, why don’t you encourage your children to play.https://drwilda.com/2012/09/16/play-is-as-important-for-children-as-technology/

Seattle Children’s Hospital reports on a television study in the article, For children’s behavior, TV content as important as quantity:

Children imitate what they see on the screen, both good and bad behavior. This effect of television and video programming can be applied to positively impact children’s behavior according to a study published online in Pediatrics on Feb. 18. The study, “Modifying media content for preschool children: A randomized controlled trial,” was led by Dimitri Christakis, MD, MPH, director of the Center for Child Health, Behavior and Development at Seattle Children’s Research Institute.

Media diet study

Researchers in Seattle studied 565 families with children aged three to five years who spent at least some time watching TV or video content each week. Half of the families were randomly assigned to a “media diet” intervention while the other half, “the control group,” received a nutritional diet intervention designed to promote healthier eating habits. “For the media diet, we coached families on how to substitute prosocial and educational programs for violent ones,” said Christakis.

What is prosocial content?

Prosocial programming encourages children to be kind and to share, and portrays adults as dependable.

The intervention addressed all screen time (TV, DVDs and videos, computer, video games, handheld devices, etc.), but the primary focus was on TV and videos because this accounts for the vast majority of screen time in preschool-aged children.

How families followed a media diet

Families in both groups kept media diaries and provided details on the amount of time spent watching TV, videos and other types of screen time. The research team distributed monthly program guides and a sample DVD of prosocial content that would appeal to boys, girls and diverse populations. Families were also steered to Common Sense Media, which provides ratings for family movies, TV shows, websites and video games.

The intervention did not attempt to reduce the number of hours of screen time for the children, but it did encourage a positive media diet and co-viewing with parents. A case manager followed up with families regularly for 12 months. At six months and 12 months, the children in the media diet intervention group were spending significantly less time on violent programming than they did at the start of the study, compared to the control group.

Both the intervention and control groups increased viewing time slightly during the study, but the control group increased its minutes of violent content, while the intervention group increased its minutes of prosocial and educational content.

At six months, the children in the intervention group demonstrated significantly less aggression and more prosocial behavior compared to the control group, and the effect lasted throughout the 12 months. Christakis and team concluded that such an intervention can positively impact child behavior.

Content as important as quantity

“We often focus on how much kids watch and don’t focus enough on what they watch,” Christakis said. “While too many children watch too much TV, this study shows that content is as important as quantity.  It isn’t just about turning off the TV, it’s about changing the channel.”

Christakis said the public health description for a media diet is that it’s a harm reduction approach, similar to a needle exchange, condom distribution or a methadone clinic for heroin addicts. “The media diet reduces the risks associated with TV,” he said.

What about parents who didn’t take part in the study? “Parents could absolutely implement the media diet on their own,” said Christakis.

Implement a media diet in your home: Dr. Christakis’ tips for parents

• Keep a media diary to make sure you’re aware of the TV and movies your child is watching
• Choose less violent and more prosocial content for your kids to watch, via sites like Common Sense Media
• Watch TV and movies with your children, so that you’re more aware of the content

Resources:

Promoting health early child development: An update and research agenda from the Christakis Lab, January 2013
New study links violent videos to sleep problems in preschool children, August 2012, Pediatrics
Infant brains more engaged when playing with interactive toys: Study, July 2012, Journal of Pediatrics
Powerpuff Girls vs. Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood: Media impact on early childhood development, January 2012, TEDxRainier http://pulse.seattlechildrens.org/for-childrens-behavior-tv-content-as-important-as-quantity/

See, Study: Changing the Channel Could Lessen Bad Influence of TV http://www.educationnews.org/parenting/study-changing-the-channel-could-lessen-bad-influence-of-tv/

Citation:

Modifying Media Content for Preschool Children: A Randomized Controlled Trial

  1. Dimitri A. Christakis, MD, MPHa,b,
  2. Michelle M. Garrison, PhDa,c,
  3. Todd Herrenkohl, PhDd,
  4. Kevin Haggerty, MSWd,
  5. Frederick P. Rivara, MD, MPHa,b,
  6. Chuan Zhou, PhDa,b, and
  7. Kimberly Liekweg, BAa

+ Author Affiliations

  1. aCenter for Child Health, Behavior, and Development, Seattle Children’s Research Institute, Seattle, Washington; and
  2. Departments of bPediatrics and
  3. cHealth Services, and
  4. dSchool of Social Work, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although previous studies have revealed that preschool-aged children imitate both aggression and prosocial behaviors on screen, there have been few population-based studies designed to reduce aggression in preschool-aged children by modifying what they watch.

METHODS: We devised a media diet intervention wherein parents were assisted in substituting high quality prosocial and educational programming for aggression-laden programming without trying to reduce total screen time. We conducted a randomized controlled trial of 565 parents of preschool-aged children ages 3 to 5 years recruited from community pediatric practices. Outcomes were derived from the Social Competence and Behavior Evaluation at 6 and 12 months.

RESULTS: At 6 months, the overall mean Social Competence and Behavior Evaluation score was 2.11 points better (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.78–3.44) in the intervention group as compared with the controls, and similar effects were observed for the externalizing subscale (0.68 [95% CI: 0.06–1.30]) and the social competence subscale (1.04 [95% CI: 0.34–1.74]). The effect for the internalizing subscale was in a positive direction but was not statistically significant (0.42 [95% CI: −0.14 to 0.99]). Although the effect sizes did not noticeably decay at 12 months, the effect on the externalizing subscale was no longer statistically significant (P = .05). In a stratified analysis of the effect on the overall scores, low-income boys appeared to derive the greatest benefit (6.48 [95% CI: 1.60–11.37]).

CONCLUSIONS: An intervention to reduce exposure to screen violence and increase exposure to prosocial programming can positively impact child behavior.

Published online February 18, 2013

(doi: 10.1542/peds.2012-1493)

  1. » Abstract

  2. Full Text (PDF)

In Television cannot substitute for quality childcare, moi wrote:

Sarah D. Sparks reports in the Education Week article, Is Television the New Secondhand Smoke?

Prior research suggests background television can have a “chronic disruptive impact on very young children’s behavior.” Studies have linked background television to less focused play among toddlers, poorer parent-child interaction, and interference with older students’ ability to do homework.

“For every minute of television to which children are directly exposed, there are an
additional 3 minutes of indirect exposure, making background exposure a much greater
proportion of time in a young child’s day,” the study noted.

“Considering the accumulating evidence regarding the impact that background television exposure has on young children, we were rather floored about the sheer scale of children’s exposure with just under 4 hours of exposure each day,” Lapierre said in a statement on the study. Lapierre and his fellow researchers recommended that parents, teachers and early childcare providers turn off televisions when no one is watching a particular program and that parents prevent children from keeping a television in their rooms.

It’s easy to think about this as just one more alarm about how our modern media environment is ruining our kids. Yet the more interesting take-away from this field of research is how critical it is for children to learn actively and socially. Children learn from adults speaking to, with and around them, and from actively engaging with their world.

Anything that limits or distracts from that active interaction can be a problem, but not an insurmountable one. For example, researchers at the University of Washington’s Learning in Formal and Informal Environments, or LIFE, Center, is doing some fascinating work on the potential benefits of interactive media. There’s also been some interesting work on using video conferencing to read with children. http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/inside-school-research/2012/04/is_television_the_new_secondha.html?intc=es

If watching television is not an appropriate activity for toddlers, then what are appropriate activities? The University of Illinois Extension has a good list of Age-Based Activities For Toddlers

See, How to Have a Happier, Healthier, Smarter Baby

Parents must interact with their children and read to them. Television is not a parental substitute. https://drwilda.com/2012/04/23/television-cannot-substitute-for-quality-childcare/

Related:

Study: Children subject to four hours background television daily                                                                              https://drwilda.com/2012/10/02/study-children-subject-to-fours-background-television-daily/

Common Sense Media report: Media choices at home affect school performance                                                               https://drwilda.com/2012/11/01/common-sense-media-report-media-choices-at-home-affect-school-performance/

Where information leads to Hope. ©                 Dr. Wilda.com

Dr. Wilda says this about that ©

Blogs by Dr. Wilda:

COMMENTS FROM AN OLD FART©                          http://drwildaoldfart.wordpress.com/

Dr. Wilda Reviews ©                                                 http://drwildareviews.wordpress.com/

Dr. Wilda ©                                                                                      https://drwilda.com/

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Critical thinking skills for kids are crucial: The lure of Superbowl alcohol ads

2 Feb

Here’s today’s COMMENT FROM AN OLD FART: Aside from the action on the field at the Superbowl, many folks tune into the game because of the half-time show and the over-the-top commercials. Critical thinking skills are lacking in many adults. Chldren not only may lack critical thinking skills, but may make poor choices because of their lack of maturity. Yolanda Evans, MD, MPH writes in the Seattle Children’s Hospital article, Alcohol Ads and Teen Drinking:

A recent article in the journal Pediatrics looked at 4,000 students in 7th grade and asked about alcohol use and alcohol ads on TV. They surveyed the teens through 10th grade. Though the number of teens participating decreased over time, they found some scary results. For both boys and girls, increasing exposure to alcohol ads over time and liking what they saw was associated with more alcohol use from 7th to 10th grade.  They also assessed alcohol related problems, like trouble with school, and found a significant association among boys and ads.

These results show that ads can affect behavior. So what can a parent do?

  1. limit screen time and exposure to mature subject matter. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends limiting screen time to 2 hours a day. This helps decrease exposure, but also encourages teens to do something active with their time.

  2. Use the ads as an opportunity to talk about drug use. Let teens know that what they see in these ads is not reality. Talk about the dangers of alcohol. Short term effects include difficulty in school, possible alcohol poisoning, increased risk taking and long term include health problems like liver and heart disease.

  3. Set limits and talk about consequences before you need them. See our posts on the ‘free phone call‘ and ‘ground rules.’ Talk with your teen about expectations of their behavior and let them help decide on consequences if they break the rules.

  4. Check out our previous post on how to talk to your teen about drugs and alcohol for tips.

  5. If you’re worried your teen has a problem with alcohol or other drugs, talk with your teen’s health care provider. http://teenology101.seattlechildrens.org/alcohol-ads-and-teen-drinking/

Citation:

Exposure to Alcohol Advertisements and Teenage Alcohol-Related Problems

  1. Jerry L. Grenard, PhDa,
  2. Clyde W. Dent, PhDb, and
  3. Alan W. Stacy, PhDa

+ Author Affiliations

  1. aSchool of Community and Global Health, Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, California; and
  2. bOffice of Disease Prevention and Epidemiology, Oregon Department of Human Services, Portland, Oregon
    Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study used prospective data to test the hypothesis that exposure to alcohol advertising contributes to an increase in underage drinking and that an increase in underage drinking then leads to problems associated with drinking alcohol.

METHODS: A total of 3890 students were surveyed once per year across 4 years from the 7th through the 10th grades. Assessments included several measures of exposure to alcohol advertising, alcohol use, problems related to alcohol use, and a range of covariates, such as age, drinking by peers, drinking by close adults, playing sports, general TV watching, acculturation, parents’ jobs, and parents’ education.

RESULTS: Structural equation modeling of alcohol consumption showed that exposure to alcohol ads and/or liking of those ads in seventh grade were predictive of the latent growth factors for alcohol use (past 30 days and past 6 months) after controlling for covariates. In addition, there was a significant total effect for boys and a significant mediated effect for girls of exposure to alcohol ads and liking of those ads in 7th grade through latent growth factors for alcohol use on alcohol-related problems in 10th grade.

CONCLUSIONS: Younger adolescents appear to be susceptible to the persuasive messages contained in alcohol commercials broadcast on TV, which sometimes results in a positive affective reaction to the ads. Alcohol ad exposure and the affective reaction to those ads influence some youth to drink more and experience drinking-related problems later in adolescence.

Published online January 28, 2013 Pediatrics Vol. 131 No. 2 February 1, 2013
pp. e369 -e379
(doi: 10.1542/peds.2012-1480)

  1. » Abstract

  2. Full Text

  3. Full Text (PDF)

Moi wrote in Johns Hopkins University study: Advertising affects alcohol use by children:

Moi discussed alcohol use among teens in Seattle Children’s Institute study: Supportive middle school teachers affect a kid’s alcohol use:

Substance abuse is a serious problem for many young people. The Centers for Disease Control provide statistics about underage drinking in the Fact Sheet: Underage Drinking:

Underage Drinking

Alcohol use by persons under age 21 years is a major public health problem.1 Alcohol is the most commonly used and abused drug among youth in the United States, more than tobacco and illicit drugs. Although drinking by persons under the age of 21 is illegal, people aged 12 to 20 years drink 11% of all alcohol consumed in the United States.2 More than 90% of this alcohol is consumed in the form of binge drinks.2 On average, underage drinkers consume more drinks per drinking occasion than adult drinkers.3 In 2008, there were approximately 190,000 emergency rooms visits by persons under age 21 for injuries and other conditions linked to alcohol.4

Drinking Levels among Youth

The 2009 Youth Risk Behavior Survey5 found that among high school students, during the past 30 days

  • 42% drank some amount of alcohol.

  • 24% binge drank.

  • 10% drove after drinking alcohol.

  • 28% rode with a driver who had been drinking alcohol.

Other national surveys indicate

  • In 2008 the National Survey on Drug Use and HealthExternal Web Site Icon reported that 28% of youth aged 12 to 20 years drink alcohol and 19% reported binge drinking.6

  • In 2009, the Monitoring the Future SurveyExternal Web Site Icon reported that 37% of 8th graders and 72% of 12th graders had tried alcohol, and 15% of 8th graders and 44% of 12th graders drank during the past month.7

Consequences of Underage Drinking

Youth who drink alcohol1, 3, 8 are more likely to experience

  • School problems, such as higher absence and poor or failing grades.

  • Social problems, such as fighting and lack of participation in youth activities.

  • Legal problems, such as arrest for driving or physically hurting someone while drunk.

  • Physical problems, such as hangovers or illnesses.

  • Unwanted, unplanned, and unprotected sexual activity.

  • Disruption of normal growth and sexual development.

  • Physical and sexual assault.

  • Higher risk for suicide and homicide.

  • Alcohol-related car crashes and other unintentional injuries, such as burns, falls, and drowning.

  • Memory problems.

  • Abuse of other drugs.

  • Changes in brain development that may have life-long effects.

  • Death from alcohol poisoning.

In general, the risk of youth experiencing these problems is greater for those who binge drink than for those who do not binge drink.8

Youth who start drinking before age 15 years are five times more likely to develop alcohol dependence or abuse later in life than those who begin drinking at or after age 21 years.9, 10 http://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/underage-drinking.htm

See, Alcohol Use Among Adolescents and Young  Adults http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh27-1/79-86.htm

https://drwilda.com/2012/08/11/johns-hopkins-university-study-advertising-affects-alcohol-use-by-children/

The issue is whether children in a “captive” environment have the maturity and critical thinking skills to evaluate the information contained in the ads. Advertising is about creating a desire for the product, pushing a lifestyle which might make an individual more prone to purchase products to create that lifestyle, and promoting an image which might make an individual more prone to purchase products in pursuit of that image. Many girls and women have unrealistic body image expectations which can lead to eating disorders in the pursuit of a “super model” image. What the glossy magazines don’t tell young women is the dysfunctional lives of many “super models” which may involve both eating disorders and substance abuse. The magazines don’t point out that many “glamor girls” are air-brushed or photo-shopped and that they spend hours on professional make-up and professional hairstyling in addition to having a personal trainer and stylist. Many boys look at the buff bodies of the men in the ads and don’t realize that some use body enhancing drugs. In other words, when presented with any advertising, people must make a determination what to believe. It is easy for children to get derailed because of peer pressure in an all too permissive society. Parents and schools must teach children critical thinking skills and point out often that the picture presented in advertising is often as close to reality as the bedtime fairy tail. Reality does not often involve perfection, there are warts.

See, Admongo http://ftc.gov/bcp/edu/microsites/admongo/html-version.shtml

and How to Help a Child With Critical Thinking Skills http://www.livestrong.com/article/178182-how-to-help-a-child-with-critical-thinking-skills/#ixzz2Jlv5L6HR

Where information leads to Hope. ©                 Dr. Wilda.com

Dr. Wilda says this about that ©

Blogs by Dr. Wilda:

COMMENTS FROM AN OLD FART©                           http://drwildaoldfart.wordpress.com/

Dr. Wilda Reviews ©                                                  http://drwildareviews.wordpress.com/

Dr. Wilda ©                                                                                                         https://drwilda.com/

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,