Categories
Weight Loss Exercise

Household Mold Causes Childhood Asthma?




Three specific species of mold were more common in the homes of babies who later developed asthma. The finding highlights the importance of preventing water damage and mold growth in households with infants.

 Penicillium variabile, one of the mold species most associated with asthma.Image by David Gregory and Debbie Marshall, Wellcome Images. All rights reserved by Wellcome Images.

Childhood Asthma

Household MoldMore than 6 million children in the U.S. have asthma. Genes are known to play a role, and so does the home environment. Childhood asthma has been linked to indoor mold growing in a child’s home as a result of moisture problems such as water leaks.

The connection between mold and asthma, however, is complicated and not fully understood. Asthma is often associated with allergies, and molds spread by releasing tiny spores into the air, which can cause allergic reactions.

A team led by Dr. Tiina Reponen of the University of Cincinnati has been investigating the relationship between mold and childhood asthma. Between 2001 and 2003, they collected dust samples from 289 homes with infants who were an average of 8 months old. At age 7, the kids had allergy skin tests and tests for asthma.

The study was funded by NIH’s National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Testing for Mold and Asthma

The researchers analyzed the original samples of house dust for concentrations of 36 different species of mold. The molds are on the Environmental Relative Moldiness Index, or ERMI, which was developed by the EPA to measure how moldy a house is.

In the August 2012 edition of the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, the team reported that 69 of the children (24%) had developed asthma. The ERMI score of a baby’s home predicted whether the child would have asthma at age 7. ERMI values range from about -10 to 20. For a 10-point increase in ERMI, a child’s risk of asthma increased 80%.

Three particular species of mold were most associated with asthma:Aspergillus ochraceusAspergillus unguis and Penicillium variabile.

Read more at NIS Research Matters

No related content found.

Related Blogs

  • Related Blogs on Allergy Skin Tests
  • Related Blogs on Childhood Asthma
Categories
Weight Loss Exercise

Using Copper to Cut Down on Hospital Infections?



Early results from a comprehensive multi-site clinical trial demonstrated that the use of antimicrobial copper surfaces in intensive care unit rooms resulted in a 97 percent reduction of bacteria that cause hospital acquired infections.  This particular study also found a 40 percent reduction in the risk of acquiring an infection. Study results are to be submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for review and approval.

Antimicrobial Copper Study

Using Copper to Cut Down on Hospital Infections?

Antimicrobial Copper Study

Initial study results were presented at the World Health Organization’s 1st International Conference on Prevention and Infection Control (ICPIC) in Geneva, Switzerland on July 1, 2011.

The study, funded by the U.S. Department of Defense, was designed to determine the efficacy of antimicrobial copper in reducing the level of pathogens in hospital rooms, and whether such a reduction would translate into a lower risk of infection.

Researchers at the three hospitals involved in the trial, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, the Medical University of South Carolina, and the Ralph H. Johnson VA Medical Center, both in Charleston, replaced commonly touched items, such as bed rails, overbed tray tables, nurse call buttons and IV poles, with antimicrobial copper versions.

Results of  Antimicrobial Copper Study

The reduction rate demonstrated on antimicrobial copper surfaces is the same as that achieved by “terminal” cleaning, the regimen conducted after each patient vacates a room.

Dr. Michael Schmidt, Professor and Vice Chairman of Microbiology and Immunology at MUSC, who presented the results at ICPIC, said, “Bacteria present on ICU room surfaces are probably responsible for up to 80 percent of patient infections, demonstrating how critical it is to keep hospitals clean. The copper objects used in the clinical trial lowered microbial levels and supplemented cleaning protocols.”

Hospital patients have a 1:20 chance of developing an infection, and those who do have a 1:20 chance of dying as a result. The CDC estimates that in the U.S., hospital acquired infections kill 100,000 people and cost $45 billion annually.

Independent laboratory testing has demonstrated that when cleaned regularly, antimicrobial copper products kill greater than 99.9% of the following bacteria within two hours of exposure:  MRSA, VRE, Staphylococcus aureus, Enterobacter aerogenes, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and E. coli O157:H7.  For a complete listing of approved EPA public health claims for antimicrobial copper, please visit www.antimicrobialcopper.com. Clinical trial results are preliminary and under review; claims related to clinical trials have not been approved or reviewed by the U.S. EPA. Because many factors contribute to the risk of infection, individual results may vary.

Related Blogs

  • Related Blogs on Copper Surfaces
Categories
Weight Loss Exercise

Using Copper to Cut Down on Hospital Infections? | Antimicrobial Copper Study



Early results from a comprehensive multi-site clinical trial demonstrated that the use of antimicrobial copper surfaces in intensive care unit rooms resulted in a 97 percent reduction of bacteria that cause hospital acquired infections.  This particular study also found a 40 percent reduction in the risk of acquiring an infection. Study results are to be submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for review and approval.

Antimicrobial Copper Study

Using Copper to Cut Down on Hospital Infections?

Antimicrobial Copper Study

Initial study results were presented at the World Health Organization’s 1st International Conference on Prevention and Infection Control (ICPIC) in Geneva, Switzerland on July 1, 2011.

The study, funded by the U.S. Department of Defense, was designed to determine the efficacy of antimicrobial copper in reducing the level of pathogens in hospital rooms, and whether such a reduction would translate into a lower risk of infection.

Researchers at the three hospitals involved in the trial, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, the Medical University of South Carolina, and the Ralph H. Johnson VA Medical Center, both in Charleston, replaced commonly touched items, such as bed rails, overbed tray tables, nurse call buttons and IV poles, with antimicrobial copper versions.

Results of  Antimicrobial Copper Study

The reduction rate demonstrated on antimicrobial copper surfaces is the same as that achieved by “terminal” cleaning, the regimen conducted after each patient vacates a room.

Dr. Michael Schmidt, Professor and Vice Chairman of Microbiology and Immunology at MUSC, who presented the results at ICPIC, said, “Bacteria present on ICU room surfaces are probably responsible for up to 80 percent of patient infections, demonstrating how critical it is to keep hospitals clean. The copper objects used in the clinical trial lowered microbial levels and supplemented cleaning protocols.”

Hospital patients have a 1:20 chance of developing an infection, and those who do have a 1:20 chance of dying as a result. The CDC estimates that in the U.S., hospital acquired infections kill 100,000 people and cost $45 billion annually.

Independent laboratory testing has demonstrated that when cleaned regularly, antimicrobial copper products kill greater than 99.9% of the following bacteria within two hours of exposure:  MRSA, VRE, Staphylococcus aureus, Enterobacter aerogenes, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and E. coli O157:H7.  For a complete listing of approved EPA public health claims for antimicrobial copper, please visit www.antimicrobialcopper.com. Clinical trial results are preliminary and under review; claims related to clinical trials have not been approved or reviewed by the U.S. EPA. Because many factors contribute to the risk of infection, individual results may vary.