Halitosis can be diagnosed by oneself (self diagnosis), but it is better diagnosed by a professional. There are some difficulties involved in diagnosis and accuracy of self diagnosis and it should be left to professionals.

Self diagnosis of halitosis:

Self diagnosis of bad breath may not be easy, because we are used to our own odor (acclimatized). There are several methods which can be used for self diagnosis of halitosis. One of the simple methods of self diagnosis is to ask close friend or family member (confidant). If your confidant confirms the diagnosis of it may also be possible to find out (by your confidant), whether bad breath originates in mouth or nose. Another method of self diagnosis of halitosis involves scraping of posterior part of tongue with a plastic spoon and to smell the remnants after drying. But accuracy of diagnosis is questionable. These days’ home tests are available which detect malodorous sulfur or polyamines. But multiple tests may be required because breath odor changes throughout the day. Furthermore, studies on home tests are not many to establish the usefulness of these tests.

Professional diagnosis of halitosis is generally done by professionals (usually dentists) in their clinics/laboratories. Some commonly used laboratory/clinical methods are by use of halimeter, beta-galactosidase test, gas chromatography and BANA test.

Halimeter for diagnosis of halitosis:

Halimeter is a portable device for detection of emission of sulfide (hydrogen sulfide) in exhaled air. Halimeter is an effective device in detecting halitosis. But it has some drawbacks such as it detects mainly hydrogen sulfide but can not detect other sulfides and other malodorous compounds, which may cause halitosis. Halimeter can also detect alcohol and alcohol should be avoided for at least 12 hours before using halimeter.

Beta-galactosidase test for diagnosis of halitosis:

Beta-galactosidase enzyme is present in saliva the level of which have close correlation with halitosis and determining the level can help in diagnosis of halitosis.

Gas chromatography for diagnosis of halitosis:

This is a portable machine for detecting three main volatile sulfur compounds (VSCs, hydrogen sulfide, dimethyl sulfide and methyl mercaptan), which are responsible for bad breath.

BANA test for diagnosis of halitosis:

This test detects enzyme levels in saliva that are raised in a patient with halitosis.

What is halitophobia?

This is an exaggerated concern about breath odor and approximately 25% of patients visiting dentists for halitosis suffer from halitophobia. These patients may have normal breath odor or a temporary and minor halitosis, but they are very worried about their breath odor and seek medical attention. This condition is also known as “delusional halitosis” and up to 1% of adult population may be suffering from halitophobia.

Image: FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Related posts:

What are the Causes of Halitosis?

Do You Suffer From Bad Breath? Do Not Ignore

How Gastritis is Diagnosed?

How Migraine is Diagnosed?

How Addison’s Disease Is Diagnosed?

Brush for Good Dental Health

All about Urea Breath Test

How Amenorrhea is diagnosed?

How Amenorrhea is diagnosed?

Enlarge Olivier Lantzendorffer/iStockphoto.com

How much longer could Junior really stay in there?

Olivier Lantzendorffer/iStockphoto.com

How much longer could Junior really stay in there?

Babies are lovely but altogether helpless creatures.

Wouldn't it be better if tiny humans were born able to walk, like horses, or generally were readier for the rigors of the world, like, say, chimps?

Among primates, human have the least developed brains at birth, at least when compared to adult human brains. If humans were born as far along on cognitive and neurological scales as rough and ready chimps are, though, human pregnancy would have to last at least twice as long. Eighteen months in the womb, anyone?

The prevailing explanation for why pregnancy doesn't last that long boils down to something called the "obstetrical dilemma." Humans walk upright. And the size and shape of our pelvises are constrained by our bipedal way of getting around in the world. If they got much bigger, mothers wouldn't walk as well. So babies' brains could only get so big and still fit through the birth canal, the conventional wisdom holds.

Now researchers at the University of Rhode Island, Harvard and the University of California, Berkeley, are questioning whether the theory is right. Instead of mechanical limits dictating how big a baby's head can get, they propose it's really about how much energy Mom can spare for the developing fetus.

 

"Mothers gestate a baby as long as they can metabolically," Holly Dunsworth, an assistant professor of anthropology at University of Rhode Island, tells Shots. She's the lead author of a paper advancing the metabolic hypothesis, an alternative explanation that's laid out in a paper being published online by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. (A link wasn't available as of late Tuesday.)

She and her colleagues concluded that a human baby born at a chimp's level of development would require the average human birth canal to be about 3 centimeters bigger, an increase of a little more than an inch in diameter.

That's feasible, the researchers say. "We show that's within the range of variation now," Dunsworth says. "Those people with wider birth canals aren't walking any worse."

So what is the limiting factor? Apparently, it's how much energy Mom can divert from her own metabolism to the growth and maintenance of a fetus, the researchers say. We humans are able to crank up our metabolism to about twice its normal level and sustain that turbo mode for quite a while.

In fact, pregnant women's metabolism runs at twice the normal level by about the sixth month. By nine months, as the fetus's energy needs increase, the rate is pushing close to 2.1 times normal. And that's pretty much the limit. "Extending gestation even by a month would likely require metabolic investment beyond the mother's capacity," the researchers write.

What happens instead? Mom gives birth, and baby's growth rate slows (compared to its fetal self). Everybody's happy, though it must be said that there's a lot of coddling and many sleepless nights as the needy baby grows into a toddler.

One paper isn't likely to shove the obstetrical dilemma off the scientific stage overnight. But Dunsworth is confident the metabolic argument will hold up.

"Part of the older story is that the birth canal can't get any bigger," she says. "We've shown there's a much better explanation, and we've shown how hard it is to support the old explanation."

Halitosis can be diagnosed by oneself (self diagnosis), but it is better diagnosed by a professional. There are some difficulties involved in diagnosis and accuracy of self diagnosis and it should be left to professionals.

Self diagnosis of halitosis:

Self diagnosis of bad breath may not be easy, because we are used to our own odor (acclimatized). There are several methods which can be used for self diagnosis of halitosis. One of the simple methods of self diagnosis is to ask close friend or family member (confidant). If your confidant confirms the diagnosis of it may also be possible to find out (by your confidant), whether bad breath originates in mouth or nose. Another method of self diagnosis of halitosis involves scraping of posterior part of tongue with a plastic spoon and to smell the remnants after drying. But accuracy of diagnosis is questionable. These days’ home tests are available which detect malodorous sulfur or polyamines. But multiple tests may be required because breath odor changes throughout the day. Furthermore, studies on home tests are not many to establish the usefulness of these tests.

Professional diagnosis of halitosis is generally done by professionals (usually dentists) in their clinics/laboratories. Some commonly used laboratory/clinical methods are by use of halimeter, beta-galactosidase test, gas chromatography and BANA test.

Halimeter for diagnosis of halitosis:

Halimeter is a portable device for detection of emission of sulfide (hydrogen sulfide) in exhaled air. Halimeter is an effective device in detecting halitosis. But it has some drawbacks such as it detects mainly hydrogen sulfide but can not detect other sulfides and other malodorous compounds, which may cause halitosis. Halimeter can also detect alcohol and alcohol should be avoided for at least 12 hours before using halimeter.

Beta-galactosidase test for diagnosis of halitosis:

Beta-galactosidase enzyme is present in saliva the level of which have close correlation with halitosis and determining the level can help in diagnosis of halitosis.

Gas chromatography for diagnosis of halitosis:

This is a portable machine for detecting three main volatile sulfur compounds (VSCs, hydrogen sulfide, dimethyl sulfide and methyl mercaptan), which are responsible for bad breath.

BANA test for diagnosis of halitosis:

This test detects enzyme levels in saliva that are raised in a patient with halitosis.

What is halitophobia?

This is an exaggerated concern about breath odor and approximately 25% of patients visiting dentists for halitosis suffer from halitophobia. These patients may have normal breath odor or a temporary and minor halitosis, but they are very worried about their breath odor and seek medical attention. This condition is also known as “delusional halitosis” and up to 1% of adult population may be suffering from halitophobia.

Image: FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Related posts:

What are the Causes of Halitosis?

Do You Suffer From Bad Breath? Do Not Ignore

How Gastritis is Diagnosed?

How Migraine is Diagnosed?

How Addison’s Disease Is Diagnosed?

Brush for Good Dental Health

All about Urea Breath Test

How Amenorrhea is diagnosed?

How Amenorrhea is diagnosed?

Enlarge U.S. National Institute on Aging/Wikimedia Commons

A PET scan of the brain of a person with Alzheimer's disease.

U.S. National Institute on Aging/Wikimedia Commons

A PET scan of the brain of a person with Alzheimer's disease.

An experimental drug that aimed to slow the development of plaques and help clear them from the brains of Alzheimer's patients failed in two late-stage studies conducted by Eli Lilly & Co., the company said today.

It's another setback in a field marked by failure. Earlier this month, Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson said they were dropping development of a similar experimental drug after big clinical studies showed it wasn't working. And two years ago, Lilly announced another Alzheimer's drug flunked late-stage clinical tests.

The latest disappointment involved Lilly's solanezumab, a drug given by IV every four weeks. The studies, involving more than 2,000 patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease, lasted a year and a half.

Patients who got the drug instead of a placebo were no better off on tests of memory and thinking. The same was true about tests on tasks of daily life.

 

After combining the results from both trials, Lilly said it found some reason to think there might be an effect from treatment for some patients.

"We recognize that the solanezumab studies did not meet their primary endpoints, but we are encouraged by the pooled data that appear to show a slowing of cognitive decline," said a statement from John C. Lechleiter, Ph.D., Lilly's chairman and CEO.

While acknowledging the disappointing outcome, the Alzheimer's Association said in a statement that the pooled data contained "new and encouraging information."

But the pooling of data by Lilly also drew skeptical responses. Sally Church, a drug industry consultant, tweeted that it's "truly despair" when drugmakers "raise unnecessary hope/hype for [patients] when they have a clearly failed trial."

Pieter Droppert, a colleague of Church's, rounded up some of the on-the-fly analysis, including comments from John LaMattina, formerly head of research at Pfizer, and Derek Lowe, a drug industry and science blogger. The upshot was negative.

Lilly plans to talk with regulators about what to do next. More details on the results, which were sparse today, will be presented at medical meetings in October.

Dental implants are considered the permanent solution to our oral problems. Success rate of dental implants is more than 95%, which shows that it is perfectly safe to undergo this procedure. It is a procedure of altering a tooth. Dental Implants are the manufactured devices and are placed by the dentist in upper/lower to support the substitute teeth. They are usually made up of titanium or any other material that is lightweight and is supported by human body. An implant gives a natural look and feel like a natural tooth. You will not even feel a thing after having dental implant and could easily chew and speak.

However, dental implants are not meant for everyone. One needs to have healthy oral to go through the procedure. Your dentist will make sure that you are ready for the procedure and will examine you first. He will take x-rays and molds of your teeth and you would be required to provide detail about the medicines you take whether they are prescribed or non-prescribed.

Dental implant is secured in the jawbone and after the surgery is completed, they will not be visible to anyone. They are placed in the upper or lower jaw and act as a bridge when the bone grows around it. In order to place them, the dentist would need to cut and lift a gum where implant is supposed to take place. Small hole is drilled in the jawbone at the exact location where implant is intended to be placed and dentist should be very careful while doing it. Once an implant has been place, it is left there to heal and integrate with the bone of jaw. The healing process usually takes place between six weeks to six months.

Implants are durable and can last lifetime without giving a feel or look of something, which does not belong. However, you need to take care of them just like the way you do with your natural teeth. You would be required to brush daily and properly and get regular dental checkups.
People usually wonder if they can have an implant of more than 1 tooth. The answer to this question is yes. If you are missing several teeth then you definitely can have a dental implant. However, you will not be required to have a separate implant for each. Single implant would be enough to support your teeth with the help of a bridge or denture.

Dental implants can be placed by any patient of any age. All they need to have is a healthy oral. However, the reasons for which patients are not suitable for dental implants are heavy smoking, excessive alcohol intake, periodontal gum disease, teeth grinder and immune-compromised individuals. If you do not have any of such problems then you certainly can have an implant.

Dental implants help their patients to increase confidence of smiling, talking and eating without any trouble. In other words, they give them everlasting comfort for the rest of their lives.

Author Bio:

This is a Guest Post By Sirangi Kalpana in her free time write a lots about dental implants.

Image: FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Related posts:

The Average Cost of Dental Implants

Suitability Factors for Patients Receiving Dental Implants

Dental Implant-Spreading Smiles

MRI and Implants and Foreign Bodies

When to Opt for Tooth Replacement?

Brush for Good Dental Health

Benefits Of Cosmetic Dentistry With An Experienced Dentist

Prevention of Dental Caries

Dental Caries: an Understanding

Benefits of Cosmetic Dentistry

Enlarge Alex Wong/Getty Images

Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., points to piles of the health care overhaul legislation during a markup hearing before the U.S. House Budget Committee last year in Washington, D.C.

Alex Wong/Getty Images

Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., points to piles of the health care overhaul legislation during a markup hearing before the U.S. House Budget Committee last year in Washington, D.C.

The addition of Rep. Paul Ryan to the GOP ticket is certain to elevate health care as a campaign issue this fall. Most of the debate is likely to be about Medicare and Ryan's controversial plan to transform the popular program for the elderly and disabled.

But some of the attention is likely to focus on Medicaid, the health care program for those with low incomes, as well.

Medicaid â€" not Medicare â€" is actually the nation's largest health insurance program, covering some 60 million Americans with very limited incomes. But you'd be excused for not knowing that, because Medicaid doesn't get nearly as much attention as Medicare does.

That may be changing, however. The Supreme Court earlier this summer put the program in the news when it ruled that the Medicaid expansion in the 2010 health care law must be optional for states.

 

That's given more ammunition to Republicans, including presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who want to offer states far more responsibility for Medicaid.

"The state is the best place to determine what is the best way to help those poor," Romney said in a health care speech at the University of Michigan in 2011. "And so I would therefore block grant to the states' Medicaid funds, and say to the states, 'You now use these monies as you feel appropriate to care for your own poor.' "

Only there's a catch, said President Obama in a speech to Associated Press editors in April. Under the Republican congressional budget Romney has endorsed, Medicaid funding would not only be turned back to the states â€" it also would be cut substantially.

"They would have to be running these programs in the face of the largest cut to Medicaid that has ever been proposed," he said, "a cut that, according to one nonpartisan group, would take away health care from about 19 million Americans."

Among those, he said, would be "someone's grandparents who, without Medicaid, won't be able to afford nursing home care. ... Many are poor children. Some are middle-class families who have children with autism or Down syndrome. Some are kids with disabilities so severe that they require 24-hour care. These are the people who count on Medicaid."

But Republicans on Capitol Hill counter that Medicaid doesn't work very well.

"Medicaid is breaking the bank," said Rep. Tim Huelskamp, R-Kan., at a news conference last month.

Huelskamp was speaking in support of a House bill that would transform Medicaid from its current status â€" as an unlimited entitlement program whose costs are shared between the federal and state governments â€" to a limited block grant to each state.

"[Medicaid is] actually probably the worst care system that we have in the entire country," he said.

There's a reason Huelskamp and others make that claim. Over the years, many studies have shown that people with Medicaid coverage do worse than people with other health insurance coverage or people with no coverage at all.

But Medicaid researchers say those studies don't portray Medicaid accurately.

Katherine Baicker, a professor at the Harvard School of Public Health and a former economic adviser to President George W. Bush, says a lot of the studies haven't been able to control for the fact that people who get Medicaid tend to be in worse health than people who don't.

"It's not that Medicaid is causing the health outcomes to be bad; it's that people with more health needs â€" or potentially more serious health conditions â€" are the ones who more likely successfully sign up for Medicaid," she said in an interview.

But now that's changing. Last year, Baicker was part of a unique study that took place in Oregon. That state held a lottery for low-income adults to see who would gain Medicaid coverage and who wouldn't. That gave researchers a chance to make apples-to-apples comparisons on how Medicaid actually affects enrollees' health.

Its findings were almost uniformly positive.

"We found that gaining access to Medicaid increased health care use â€" and that was preventive care, doctor's office visits, but also hospitalizations," she said. "It dramatically reduced financial strain, such as lowering the likelihood of having a bad debt sent to collection, by 25 percent."

People who got Medicaid were also more likely to report being in better health as a result.

Baicker is also a co-author of a study out just last month in the New England Journal of Medicine. It compared three states that expanded Medicaid to low-income adults with three neighboring states that didn't. It wasn't as scientifically rigorous as the Oregon study, but it had a much larger study group.

"We found, in fact, that states that expanded Medicaid to that group of adults, relative to states that didn't, had substantially lower mortality," she said, meaning people who got Medicaid coverage were less likely to die than people who didn't.

The New England Journal of Medicine study couldn't tell if Medicaid was the reason for the lower mortality or not. But it does refute other studies suggesting that Medicaid is bad for people's overall health. And it's likely to serve as still more fodder as the political debate over Medicaid heats up this fall.