Health & Safety


Most of us have heard of distracted driving, but it appears cell phone use while walking – also known as distracted walking – is a growing danger.

More than 1,500 pedestrians were estimated to be treated in emergency rooms in 2010 for injuries related to using a cell phone while walking, according to a nationwide study by Ohio State University researchers.

The number of such injuries has more than doubled since 2005, even though the total number of pedestrian injuries dropped during that time, and researchers believe that the actual number of injured pedestrians is much higher than these results suggest.

Jack Nasar, co-author of the study and professor of city and regional planning at the Ohio State University, says:

If current trends continue, I wouldn’t be surprised if the number of injuries to pedestrians caused by cell phones doubles again between 2010 and 2015.

The role of cell phones in distracted driving injuries and deaths gets a lot of attention and rightly so, but we need to also consider the danger cell phone use poses to pedestrians.”

The study found that young people aged 16 to 25 were most likely to be injured as distracted pedestrians, and most were hurt while talking rather than texting.

Researchers examined data for seven years (from 2004 to 2010) involving injuries related to cell phone use for pedestrians in public areas (not at home).

A wide variety of injuries were reported including a 14-year-old boy who suffered chest and shoulder injuries after falling 6-8 feet off a bridge into a rock-strewn ditch while walking down a road talking on a cell phone.

The study appears in the August 2013 issue of the journal Accident Analysis and Prevention.

Claims Journal has more on this story.

Turns out using hands-free technologies to talk, text or send email while driving is not as safe as many people believe, according to a new study conducted by the University of Utah for the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety.

The research found that as mental workload and distractions increase, reaction time slows, brain function is compromised, drivers scan the road less and miss visual cues, potentially resulting in drivers not seeing items right in front of them including stop signs and pedestrians.

The report notes:

The assumption that if the eyes were on the road and the hands were on the steering wheel then voice-based interactions would be safe appears to be unwarranted. Simply put, hands-free does not mean risk-free.”

Researchers measured brainwaves, eye movement and other metrics to assess what happens to drivers’ mental workload when they attempt to do multiple things at once.

The results were used to rate the levels of mental distraction drivers experience while performing each of the tasks. The levels of mental distraction are represented on a scale, as follows:

– Tasks such as listening to the radio ranked as a category “1” level of distraction or a minimal risk.

– Talking on a cell phone, both handheld and hands-free, resulted in a “2” or a moderate risk.

– Listening and responding to in-vehicle, voice-activated email features increased mental workload and distraction levels of the drivers to a “3” rating or one of extensive risk.

Professor David Strayer, lead author of the study, says:

These new, speech-based technologies in the car can overload the driver’s attention and impair their ability to drive safely. An unintended consequence of trying to make driving safer – by moving to speech-to-text in-vehicle systems – may actually overload the driver and make them less safe.”

More on this story from NPR.

Check out I.I.I. facts and statistics on highway safety.

People living in areas most contaminated by the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant (NPP) disaster that occurred during Japan’s March 2011 earthquake and tsunami, have a higher risk of developing certain cancers, according to a report by the World Health Organization (WHO).

Around one-third of emergency workers are also estimated to have an increased risk of developing certain cancers, the report notes.

The WHO says the findings underline the need for long-term health monitoring of those who are at high risk.

Dr Maria Neira, WHO Director for Public Health and Environment, notes:

A breakdown of data, based on age, gender and proximity to the nuclear plant, does show a higher cancer risk for those located in the most contaminated parts. Outside these parts – even in locations inside Fukushima Prefecture – no observable increases in cancer incidence are expected.”

In addition to strengthening medical support and services, WHO says continued environmental monitoring, in particular of food and water supplies, backed by enforcement of existing regulations, is required to reduce potential radiation exposure in future.

As well as the direct health impact on the population, the WHO report notes that the psychosocial impact may have a consequence on health and well-being and that these should not be ignored as part of the overall response.

The first-ever analysis of the global health effects due to radiation exposure after the Fukushima nuclear power plant disaster also points out that for the general population inside and outside of Japan, the predicted risks are low and no observable increases in cancer rates above baseline rates are anticipated.

The report is the result of a two-year WHO-led process of analysis of estimated doses and their potential health implications.

With Thanksgiving less than a week away many of us are busy with shopping and food preparations for the Thanksgiving Day feast.

While there are lots of ways to prepare turkey, it has become popular to deep-fry the Thanksgiving bird. As more amateur cooks attempt this method, people are at risk for fryer related fires and injuries.

According to State Farm claims data, more cooking fires occur on Thanksgiving than any other day of the year. In fact, grease and cooking-related claims more than double on Thanksgiving Day compared to an average day in November.

In an effort to reverse this trend State Farm last year teamed up with celebrity William Shatner to produce a short video that warns people about the dangers of improper turkey frying. The video went viral and as a result State Farm grease and cooking-related fire claims occurring on Thanksgiving Day were carved in half.

To get the safety message out in 2012, State Farm has launched a new version of the video called “Eat, Fry, Love: A Cautionary Remix” reminding us that you can get a “moister, tastier turkey” and be safe at the same time.

Here it is:

Food manufacturers are the target of a wave of new lawsuits filed by consumers who allege the companies are mislabeling their products and ingredients.

The New York Times reports that lawyers of Big Tobacco lawsuits searching for the next big payday are now taking aim against food manufacturers. Some 25 cases have been filed against industry players like ConAgra Foods, PepsiCo, Heinz, General Mills and Chobani.

According to the NYT article, the tobacco lawyers are moving particularly aggressively and seeking billions of dollars in damages. For example, they have asked a federal court in California to halt ConAgra’s sales of Pam cooking spray, Swiss Miss cocoa products and some Hunt’s canned tomatoes.

In response, the food companies say the suits are without merit, frivolous and being driven largely by the lawyers’ financial motivations.

The NYT writes that the lawyers are not the only ones who appear to be targeting the food industry. Recently, the Center for Science in the Public Interest has sued General Mills for using the term “natural” on its Nature Valley products.

A glance at the CSPI website reveals that Welch and Splenda Essentials are also facing deceptive health claims on their products.

It’s worth noting that Ferrero, the manufacturers of Nutella recently agreed to pay $3 million to settle a class action lawsuit over misleading advertising that claimed the chocolate-hazelnut spread was healthy.

In an earlier blog post, we noted the potential liability risk facing food manufacturers, advertising agencies and ingredient manufacturers to name a few from obesity-related tort actions.

But this new wave of lawsuits appears to be very specific. As the NYT says, the latest litigation
argues that food companies are violating specific rules about ingredients and labels and misleading consumers. This is why it’s so important that food companies comply with federal regulation.

At least one in five people is obese in every U.S. state, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Latest data from the CDC’s Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System show that obesity prevalence ranged from 20.7 percent in Colorado to a high of 34.9 percent in Mississippi in 2011. No state had a prevalence of obesity less than 20%.

Some 39 states had a prevalence of 25 percent or more and 12 of these states had a prevalence of 30 percent or more: Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, and West Virginia.

The South had the highest prevalence of obesity (29.5 percent), followed by the Midwest (29.0 percent), the Northeast (25.3 percent) and the West (24.3 percent).

Here’s the newly released CDC map showing obesity prevalence in each state in 2011:

Note: due to a new baseline established in 2011 for state obesity rates, the CDC cautions that estimates of obesity prevalence from 2011 forward cannot be compared to estimates from previous years.

A USA Today article notes that the CDC map is based on data in which people self-report their height and weight:

Because people tend to underreport their weight, the percentage of people who are obese is probably higher than the statistics indicate.”

A recent report from the Institute of Medicine (IOM) put the annual cost of treating obesity-related illness at $190.2 billion and said there was an urgent need to strengthen prevention efforts in the U.S.

Obesity now affects 17 percent of all children and adolescents in the United States, triple the rate from one generation ago, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

So the announcement by Walt Disney Co last week that it is banning junk food advertising on its television and radio programs for kids is a welcome move.

Disney’s new standards will apply to all food and beverage products advertised, sponsored, or promoted on Disney Channel, Disney XD, Disney Junior, Radio Disney and Disney-owned online destinations targeting families with younger children.

The nutrition guidelines are aligned to federal standards, promote fruit and vegetable consumption and call for limiting calories and reducing saturated fat, sodium, and sugar.

Though the rules won’t take effect until 2015, as a parent you have to applaud this effort.

First Lady Michelle Obama described the new initiative as a “game changer” for the health of our children, saying:

This is a major American company – a global brand – that is literally changing the way it does business so that our kids can lead healthier lives. With this new initiative, Disney is doing what no major media company has ever done before in the U.S. – and what I hope every company will do going forward. When it comes to the ads they show and the food they sell, they are asking themselves one simple question: “Is this good for our kids?”

A recent report by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) noted that 87 percent of food and beverage commercials seen by children ages 6-11 on TV advertise foods high in saturated fat, sugar, or sodium. Meanwhile, older children and adolescents consume more than 7.5 hours of media each day.

In an earlier report Obesity, Liability and Insurance the Insurance Information Institute (I.I.I.) flagged the potential liability risk facing food manufacturers, advertising agencies and ingredient manufacturers to name a few from obesity-related tort actions.

We note that Ferrero, the manufacturers of Nutella recently agreed to pay $3 million to settle a class action lawsuit over misleading advertising that claimed the chocolate-hazelnut spread was healthy.

And orange juice maker Tropicana is facing lawsuits over labeling its juice as “all natural” amid allegations that the company adds chemically engineered flavoring to its product.

Since the causes of obesity and overweight are varied and complex, it would be naïve to think that one company’s actions could solve the obesity epidemic.

However, given that media is embedded in our culture and the most frequently marketed foods and beverages are higher in added fats and sugars, any move to make the ads our children see more nutritious at the least will have a positive influence.

The IOM report put the annual cost of obesity-related illness in the U.S. at $190.2 billion. By comparison, the potential cost to Disney is a mere fraction of this amount.

Many dog owners do not consider the possibility that their friendly Fido could bite a friend, relative, or even a stranger. But dog bites do happen and irresponsible dog owners endanger others and their assets, according to the Insurance Information Institute (I.I.I.)

For example, State Farm, the largest writer of homeowners insurance in the U.S., paid out more than $109 million as a result of its nearly 3,800 dog bite claims in 2011.

The I.I.I. reports that dog bites accounted for more than one-third of all homeowners insurance liability claim dollars paid out in 2011, costing nearly $479 million.

An analysis of homeowners insurance data by the I.I.I. found that the average cost paid out to dog bite claims was $29,396 in 2011, up 12.3 percent from $26,166 in 2010. In fact, from 2003 to 2011, the cost of the average dog bite claim increased by 53.4 percent.

These increases can be attributed to higher medical costs as well as the size of settlements, judgments, and jury awards given to plaintiffs, which have risen well above the rate of inflation in recent years, according to the I.I.I.

Most standard homeowners insurance policies provide policyholders with anywhere from $100,000 to $300,000 in dog bite liability coverage. If the claim exceeds those limits, the dog owner is personally responsible for all damages above that amount, including legal expenses.

Most insurers will cover homeowners with dogs. However, once a dog has bitten someone, your insurance company may charge a higher premium or exclude the dog from coverage.

Of course, the best way to protect yourself is to prevent your dog from biting anyone in the first place.

Check out this I.I.I. video for tips on preventing dog bites:

Next week is National Dog Bite Prevention Week so now is a good time to review tips on how to be a responsible dog owner.

A new report from the Institute of Medicine (IOM) has much to say on the obesity epidemic in the United States and the urgent need to strengthen prevention efforts.

“Left unchecked, obesity’s effects on health, health care costs, and our productivity as a nation could become catastrophic,” the report said.

This infographic sums up the IOM’s key findings:

Earlier research from the Insurance Information Institute (I.I.I.) found that insurers and reinsurers are just one of many industries affected by the obesity issue.

 

How would you feel about conducting a business meeting while walking on a treadmill?

According to an article in the New York Times Sunday Business, “walking meetings” are becoming more common as companies look to keep their employees active and healthy during the work day.

Sitting for long periods is hazardous to your health, increasing the risk of diabetes, obesity, heart disease and some cancers.

While many employers already offer on-site gyms, or subsidized gym memberships, the NYT reports:

Now some employers are going a step further by aligning the ‘move while you work’ mandate with the corporate culture. They hope to improve their employees’ health and to lower medical costs in the process.”

The idea of taking shorter exercise breaks during the work day is not only practical but also effective.

The NYT cites a study conducted by the Mayo Clinic in 2007 that monitored the activities of 18 employees over a six month period. The employees were given access to treadmill desks and wireless headsets to promote walking while conducting meetings.

The study found the employees as a group lost more than 150 pounds and lowered their cholesterol and triglyceride levels.

You may be laughing, as many of the employees did when exercise was first introduced into their work day, but for those quoted in the NYT it appears the changes have led to better health and more energy at work.

Check out I.I.I. information on health insurance.

Next Page »