Santempo

While the FDA rules for blood donation were revised twice in the last decade, one group — men who have sex with men (MSM) — continued to be turned away from donating. Now new, evidence-based FDA rules embraced by the American Red Cross will focus on individual risk rather than groupwide restrictions.

Medical experts consider the new rules safe based on extensive evidence. Let’s review the changes here.

The new blood donation rules: One set of questions

The May 2023 FDA guidelines recommend asking every potential blood donor the same screening questions. These questions ask about behavior that raises risk for HIV, which can be spread through a transfusion.

Blood donation is then allowed, or not, based on personal risk factors for HIV and other blood-borne diseases.

Questions for potential blood donors

Screening questions focus on the risk of recent HIV infection, which is more likely to be missed by routine testing than a longstanding infection.

The screening questions ask everyone — regardless of gender, sex, or sexual orientation — whether in the past three months they have

• had a new sexual partner and engaged in anal sex
• had more than one sexual partner and engaged in anal sex
• taken medicines to prevent HIV infection (such as pre-exposure prophylaxis, or PrEP)
• exchanged sex for pay or drugs, or used nonprescription injection drugs
• had sex with someone who has previously tested positive for HIV infection
• had sex with someone who exchanged sex for pay or drugs
• had sex with someone who used nonprescription injection drugs.

When is a waiting period recommended before giving blood?

• Answering no to all of these screening questions suggests a person has a low risk of having a recently acquired HIV infection. No waiting period is necessary.
• Answering yes to any of these screening questions raises concern that a potential donor might have an HIV infection. A three-month delay before giving blood is advised.

Does a waiting period before giving blood apply in other situations?

Yes:

• A three-month delay before giving blood is recommended after a blood transfusion; treatment for gonorrhea or syphilis; or after most body piercings or tattoos not done with single-use equipment. These are not new rules.
• A waiting period before giving blood is recommended for people who take medicines to prevent HIV infection, called PrEP (pre-exposure prophylaxis). PrEP might cause a test for HIV to be negative even if infection is present. The new guidelines recommend delaying blood donation until three months after the last use of PrEP pills, or a two-year delay after a person receives long-acting, injected PrEP.

Who cannot donate blood?

Anyone who has had a confirmed positive test for HIV infection or has taken medicines to treat HIV infection is permanently banned from donating blood. This rule is not new.

Why were previous rules more restrictive?

In 1983, soon after the HIV epidemic began in the US, researchers recognized that blood transfusions could spread the infection from blood donor to recipient. US guidelines banned men who had sex with men from giving blood. A lifetime prohibition was intended to limit the spread of HIV.

At that time, HIV and AIDS were more common in certain groups, not only among MSM, but also among people from Haiti and sub-Saharan Africa, and people with hemophilia. This led to blood donation bans for some of these people, as well.

A lot has changed in the world of HIV in the last several decades, especially the development of highly accurate testing and highly effective prevention and treatment. Still, the rules regarding blood donation were slow to change.

The ban from the 1980s for MSM remained in place until 2015. At that time, rules were changed to allow MSM to donate only if they attested to having had no sex with a man for 12 months. In 2020, the period of sexual abstinence was reduced, this time to three months.

Why are the blood donation guideline changes important?

• Removing unnecessary restrictions that apply only to certain groups is a step forward in reducing discrimination and stigma for people who wish to donate blood but were turned away in the past.
• The critical shortage in our blood supply has worsened since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. These revised rules are expected to significantly boost the number of blood donors.

The bottom line

Science and hard evidence should drive policy regarding blood donation as much as possible. Guidelines should not unnecessarily burden any particular group. These new guidelines represent progress in that regard.

Of course, these changes will be closely monitored to make sure the blood supply remains safe. My guess is that they’ll endure. And it wouldn’t surprise me if there is additional lifting of restrictions in the future.

About the Author

Robert H. Shmerling, MD, Senior Faculty Editor, Harvard Health Publishing; Editorial Advisory Board Member, Harvard Health Publishing

Dr. Robert H. Shmerling is the former clinical chief of the division of rheumatology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC), and is a current member of the corresponding faculty in medicine at Harvard Medical School. … See Full Bio View all posts by Robert H. Shmerling, MD

RSV, or respiratory syncytial virus, is a common virus that just causes cold symptoms for most people. But for very young babies, and for babies and young children with certain health problems, it can be very dangerous. A new immune-boosting therapy may help.

What complications can RSV cause?

RSV is the leading cause of bronchiolitis and pneumonia in children under a year. It can cause life-threatening problems with breathing, especially in children with heart or lung disease.

Which medications work against RSV?

There aren't any medications that treat RSV effectively. To prevent the illness, a medication called palivizumab (Synagis) can be given as a monthly shot to high-risk infants during RSV season. (While RSV is not always seasonal, many cases occur between late fall and early spring.)

But insurance companies only cover this medication for certain patients, using strict criteria. Its cost and the fact that it has to be given monthly have been barriers to its use.

How can the new RSV shot help?

This year, a new shot could make a big difference. It is called nirsevimab (Beyfortus). Like palivizumab, it is an antibody treatment — but unlike palivizumab, it will be available to all babies under 8 months of age, not just high-risk infants. Here's what to know:

• This is not a vaccine. Vaccines prod the body to make antibodies that help protect against an infection, while this shot works by giving the antibodies directly.
• These antibodies can prevent or lessen the severity of an RSV infection.
• Because the body isn't making its own antibodies the shot does wear off, but the good news is that just one shot can last five months. If given right at the beginning of RSV season, this essentially provides protection for the whole season.

Who can receive the new RSV shot?

One dose of nirsevimab is recommended for all babies under the age of 8 months as close to the start of RSV season as possible. Newborns can get it before they leave the birth hospital, and it can be given along with routine vaccinations.

The new shot is also recommended for children 8 to 19 months with conditions that put them at high risk of becoming very sick if they get RSV. These include

• prematurity
• chronic lung disease
• congenital heart disease
• weakened immune system
• cystic fibrosis
• neuromuscular disorders, or other disorders that make it hard for babies to swallow and clear mucus.

Infants and toddlers who get nirsevimab do not need to get monthly shots of palivizumab as well.

Because this is brand new, there may be some challenges with getting it to all the infants and toddlers that are eligible. Talk to your doctor if your baby or toddler would be eligible this season.

For more information, check out the press releases from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Academy of Pediatrics.

About the Author

Claire McCarthy, MD, Senior Faculty Editor, Harvard Health Publishing

Claire McCarthy, MD, is a primary care pediatrician at Boston Children’s Hospital, and an assistant professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School. In addition to being a senior faculty editor for Harvard Health Publishing, Dr. McCarthy … See Full Bio View all posts by Claire McCarthy, MD

If the first goal of a drug advertisement is to grab your attention, this ad for Entyvio (vedolizumab) works.

You see a young woman getting into her car, sitting in her work cubicle, sitting in a restaurant, and finally in the waiting room of her doctor’s office. But she’s not sitting on the seat of the car or on a chair; in every scene, she’s sitting on the lid of a toilet.

Strange, right?

Why all the toilets?

The voiceover provides a clue: “When you live with moderate or severe Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis, your day can be full of reminders of your condition. Never knowing, always wondering.” And there’s another hint: the woman keeps grimacing and clutching her belly.

But these clues may not be enough. What’s never explained in this ad is that abdominal pain and sudden diarrhea are among the most common symptoms of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis, conditions known collectively as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The “never knowing, always wondering” refers to the way people with these conditions often have unpredictable bouts of diarrhea and an urgent need to get to a restroom. And that’s why there are toilets everywhere.

What does this ad get right?

The ad provides useful information about:

• How this treatment works. Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis are two forms of IBD that cause inflammation of the intestinal tract. Given as an infusion every two months, vedolizumab works by blocking cells involved in that inflammation. The ad uses visually appealing animations and graphics to get these points across.
• Side effects. The FDA requires every drug ad to describe common and potentially serious side effects. For vedolizumab, possible side effects include infusion reactions, allergic reactions, liver problems, and an increased susceptibility to infection. The ad highlights an infection called PML, noting that it’s “a rare, serious, potentially fatal brain infection.”
• Benefits. The voiceover states that “in clinical trials, Entyvio helped many people achieve long-term relief and remission.”

What else do you need to know?

As with most drug ads, this ad doesn’t provide all the information that’s important to know about this medication, especially if you’re a person with IBD for whom this drug might be helpful.

For starters, the ad never explains that diarrhea and abdominal pain are among the most common symptoms of Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis. And while the ad focuses on frequent diarrhea, it never mentions more serious complications, such as

• bleeding, fistulas (abnormal connections between the intestines and other parts of the body), perforation of the bowel, and bowel blockage 
• an increased risk of colorectal cancer
• inflammation in other parts of the body, including joints and eyes.

The ad also omits:

• Explaining how moderate to severe Crohn’s and ulcerative colitis is defined. Generally, it would include people with either condition who have large areas of intestinal inflammation, deep ulcers in the walls of the intestines, or who have had surgery; and those who haven’t responded to other standard treatments.
• Other ways to treat Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis. Steroids, azathioprine, infliximab, ustekinumab, risankizumab, and other drugs are also options to treat these disorders. 
• The high cost of this drug (up to $52,000/year). For some, health insurance may cover much of this cost, and a discount program is mentioned at the end of the ad (though eligibility details are not provided). Still, for many people with IBD, the cost of expensive drugs like Entyvio is a major barrier to receiving optimal care.

Also troubling is the way the ad skims over two important points:

• Little information is provided about PML. The ad doesn’t even say what the letters stand for: progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy. PML is a virus that can infect the brain, often causing death or severe neurologic disease.
• What benefits does the drug deliver? Only one sentence speaks confidently about benefits, and no details are provided. How often people do taking this drug have at least some relief from their symptoms? How often do they experience remission of symptoms? And how long do these improvements last?

The bottom line

The ad ends with the young woman driving home after her doctor’s visit. She’s sitting on a regular seat for the first time. She glances at the rearview mirror and smiles at the toilet that’s been relegated to the back of the car. The message is clear: she’s better now and doesn’t have to worry about having to rush to the toilet since her doctor prescribed vedolizumab.

Of course, it doesn’t always work out this way in real life. Then again, drug ads aren’t intended to show real life. They’re intended to promote a product. That’s a good reason to maintain a healthy dose of skepticism about drug ads, and to rely instead on your doctor and other unbiased sources for your health information, such as the National Institutes of Health websites.

About the Author

Robert H. Shmerling, MD, Senior Faculty Editor, Harvard Health Publishing; Editorial Advisory Board Member, Harvard Health Publishing

Dr. Robert H. Shmerling is the former clinical chief of the division of rheumatology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC), and is a current member of the corresponding faculty in medicine at Harvard Medical School. … See Full Bio View all posts by Robert H. Shmerling, MD

When it comes to limiting side effects from radiation therapy, the name of the game is precision. Doctors want to treat the cancer while avoiding healthy tissues, and fortunately technological advances are making that increasingly possible.

One newer technique called stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) can focus precisely targeted beams of high-dose radiation on a tumor from almost any direction.

The entire course of therapy requires only five individual treatments over two weeks, making SBRT more convenient than earlier low-dose methods that require more visits to the clinic. The treatment relies on specialized types of medical imaging scans that allow doctors to visualize where cancer exists in the body.

Advances in technology

Recently, doctors have begun to integrate SBRT with imaging scans that can visualize a tumor's movements in real time. Simple acts such as breathing, swallowing, or digesting food can shift a tumor's position. But this new technique — which is called magnetic resonance–guided daily adaptive SBRT, or MRg-A-SBRT for short — continually adjusts for those motions, so that doctors can focus more precisely on their targets.

Now, a new study helps to confirm that MRg-A-SBRT has fewer side effects than a related method called CT-SBRT, which uses computed tomography for imaging.

According to the study's lead author, Dr. Jonathan Leeman, a radiation oncologist at Harvard-affiliated Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, MRg-A-SBRT offers several advantages over CT-SBRT: one is that doctors using it can adjust treatment plans to account for a tumor's daily motions (this is called adaptive planning). The technology collects multiple MRI images per second during a radiation procedure, thus ensuring accurate real-time targeting. And finally, MRI visualizes the prostate with better resolution.

Analysis of studies

During the new study, Dr. Leeman and his colleagues searched the medical literature for every published clinical trial so far evaluating SBRT for prostate cancer, either with MRI or CT guidance. (This type of study is called a systematic review.)

The team ultimately identified 29 clinical trials that monitored outcomes for a total of over 2,500 patients. Short-term data on side effects was collected for up to three months on average after the procedures were completed.

Leeman's team used statistical methods to pool results from the studies into combined datasets. They found that the MR-SBRT-treated patients had fewer side effects. Specifically, 5% to 33% of men treated with MR-SBRT had genitourinary side effects, compared to between 9% and 47% of men who had the CT-guided treatments. Similarly, the risk of gastrointestinal side effects in the MR-SBRT-treated men ranged from 0% to 8%, compared to between 2% and 23% among men whose treatments were guided by CT.

Conclusions and comments

The authors concluded that "technical advances in precision radiotherapy delivery afforded by MRg-A-SBRT translate to measurable clinical benefit" (i.e., better tolerated treatments). But precisely why the treatments were better tolerated remains unclear. Is it because MR-scanning has better resolution? Did adaptive planning (and real-time targeting) account for the lower risk of side effects, or can that be attributed to some combination of all these factors? Dr. Leeman says that adaptive planning is "likely the main differentiator," but he adds that further studies are needed to confirm where the benefits come from.

To place this important work in perspective, we reached out to the authors of the new paper, as well as Dr. Anthony Zietman and Dr. Nima Aghdam, two Harvard-affiliated radiation oncologists who are also on the editorial board of the Harvard Medical School Annual Report on Prostate Diseases. All these experts feel this new technology has very promising potential.

But both groups cautioned that as with all newly developed innovations, results from additional studies — including clinical trials that are currentlyongoing — will be needed before more widespread uptake of the technology is warranted. Dr. Marc B. Garnick, the Gorman Brothers Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, says he "agrees with this conservative, yet optimistic assessment."

About the Author

Charlie Schmidt, Editor, Harvard Medical School Annual Report on Prostate Diseases

Charlie Schmidt is an award-winning freelance science writer based in Portland, Maine. In addition to writing for Harvard Health Publishing, Charlie has written for Science magazine, the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Environmental Health Perspectives, … See Full Bio View all posts by Charlie Schmidt

About the Reviewer

Marc B. Garnick, MD, Editor in Chief, Harvard Medical School Annual Report on Prostate Diseases; Editorial Advisory Board Member, Harvard Health Publishing

Dr. Marc B. Garnick is an internationally renowned expert in medical oncology and urologic cancer. A clinical professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, he also maintains an active clinical practice at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical … See Full Bio View all posts by Marc B. Garnick, MD

The most common cause of chronic stomach pain in children isn’t anything you can find on a test or cure with a medicine. And that can make it very challenging to diagnose — and treat.

You may not have ever heard of functional abdominal pain. Yet it ranks as the most common cause of stomach pain lasting two months or more in children and teens.

What is functional abdominal pain?

The mind and the body are tightly connected in ways that we are still working to understand, and this is particularly true of the mind and the gastrointestinal tract. Stress — particularly chronic stress, depression, and anxiety — can lead to pain that is very real. Sometimes the pain is the only symptom of stress, especially in children who are high-achieving or tend to hide their emotions.

Sometimes the pain doesn’t start from stress but from an infection or other illness, and stays once the illness is gone or adds additional pain to the illness while it is being treated. Worry about the pain and its possible cause can make things worse. The nervous system of the gut can go into overdrive.

What are common symptoms of functional abdominal pain?

Children with functional abdominal pain can have mild symptoms that just show up occasionally, or they can have more severe symptoms that interfere with daily life. Along with stomachaches, they can have nausea, vomiting, constipation, or diarrhea — or some combination of all of them. They may have a poor appetite or complain of feeling full very quickly.

When should you contact your child’s doctor?

It’s important to check in with your doctor if your child is having chronic stomachaches. They should have a physical examination, and your doctor may want to do some testing, such as blood or stool tests, as there are many medical conditions that can cause chronic stomachaches.

It’s particularly important to call your doctor if your child

• is losing weight
• has blood in their stool
• has severe pain
• has fever, rashes, sore joints, or other signs of illness.

If your doctor finds that your child’s examination and tests are normal, and they aren’t losing weight, chances are that your child has functional abdominal pain.

For some families, getting this diagnosis sounds like the doctors are saying that it is all in the child’s head. But nothing could be further from the truth. It is very real pain — but it is not being caused by something dangerous, which is very good news.

How can you help a child diagnosed with functional abdominal pain?

There are many ways to help a child who has functional abdominal pain once the diagnosis is made. They include:

• Understanding and managing stressors in the child’s life, if there are any
• Medications recommended by your health care team can help with symptoms, such as laxatives for constipation
• Cognitive behavioral therapy, which is a kind of therapy that teaches strategies for managing pain, as well as managing any stress or sadness that can be contributing
• Meditation, yoga, and other ways for a child to relax and regulate how they react to their world
• For some children, a low-FODMAP diet can be helpful
• Probiotics, peppermint oil preparations, and some other supplements are sometimes used to help soothe and prevent pain.

Most children with functional abdominal pain can receive care from their pediatrician. Regular visits are a good idea, to check in to see how things are going and adjust any treatments. If things aren’t getting better, a referral to a gastroenterologist can be helpful.

Follow me on Twitter @drClaire

About the Author

Claire McCarthy, MD, Senior Faculty Editor, Harvard Health Publishing

Claire McCarthy, MD, is a primary care pediatrician at Boston Children’s Hospital, and an assistant professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School. In addition to being a senior faculty editor for Harvard Health Publishing, Dr. McCarthy … See Full Bio View all posts by Claire McCarthy, MD

Ever see ads for products that promise to supercharge immunity? Activate your body’s natural defenses? Support a healthy immune system while delivering a potent boost derived from nature’s hottest immune-enhancing ingredients?

While the words may change to reflect the latest trends, the claims certainly sound amazing. But do the multitude of products promoted as immune boosters actually work? What steps can we take to support the immune system? Both are important questions, especially in the wake of a deadly pandemic and as flu and cold season arrives.

IV drips, supplements, cleanses, and superfoods

The lineup of immune-boosting products and advice includes:

• Home intravenous (IV) drips. Want a health professional to come to your home with IV fluids containing various vitamins and supplements? That’s available in many US cities, and some companies claim their formula is designed to supercharge immunity. These on-demand IV treatments aren’t risk-free and can be quite expensive.
• Vitamins and supplements. Popular options include turmeric, milk thistle, and echinacea, often in combination with various vitamins. Hundreds of formulations are available.
• Superfoods and foods to avoid. If you search online for “foods to boost the immune system” you’ll see thousands of articles touting blueberries, broccoli, spinach, dark chocolate, and other foods to keep infections away. There’s also a list of foods to avoid, such as sugary drinks or highly processed meats, because they’re supposed to be bad for your immune system.
• Cleanses and detox treatments. No doubt you’ve seen pitches for cleanses and detox products intended to remove toxins from the body. Their marketing warns that the environment is full of harmful substances that get into the body through the air, water, and food, which we need to remove. Advocates suggest that, among other harmful effects, these often unnamed toxins make your immune system sluggish.

Are the heavily marketed IV drips, supplements, or detox products endorsed by the FDA?

No. In fact, the standard disclaimer on supplements’ claims of immune-boosting properties says: “This statement has not been evaluated by the FDA. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.”

Yet sellers are allowed to use phrases like “boosts immune function” and “supports immune health.” These terms have always seemed vague to me. More importantly, they’re confusing:

• Boosting immunity is what vaccinations do. They prime your immune system to help fight off a specific infectious organism (like the flu shot before each flu season).

• Immune support typically describes vitamins such as vitamin C, or other nutrients necessary for a healthy immune system. It’s true that a deficiency of vital nutrients can cause poor immune function. But that doesn’t mean a person with normal levels of nutrients can expect supplements to improve their immune system.

Can products marketed as immune boosters actually boost immunity?

Unless you have a deficiency in a key nutrient, such as vitamin C or zinc, the short answer is no.

That is, there’s no convincing evidence that any particular product meaningfully improves immune function in healthy people. For example, results of studies looking at various supplements for colds and other similar infections have been mixed at best. Even when taking a particular supplement was linked to reduced severity or duration of an infection like a cold, there’s no proof that the supplement boosted overall immune function.

This goes for individual foods as well. None has ever been shown to improve immune function on its own. It’s the overall quality of your diet, not individual foods, that matters most. A similar approach applies to advice on foods you should avoid, such as sugary drinks or highly processed meats: the best foods to avoid in support of your immune system are the same ones you should be limiting anyway.

How to get the most out of your immune system

It’s not a secret and it’s not a product. What’s good for your overall health is good for immune function. The best ways to keep your immune system at peak performance are:

• Eat well and follow a heart-healthy diet, such as the Mediterranean diet.
• Exercise regularly and maintain a healthy weight.
• Don’t smoke or vape.
• If you drink alcoholic beverages, drink only in moderation.
• Get plenty of sleep.
• Minimize stress.
• Get regular medical care, including routine vaccinations.
• Take measures to prevent infection such as frequent hand washing, avoiding people who might have a contagious illness, and wearing a mask when it’s recommended.

This list probably looks familiar. These measures have long been recommended for overall health, and can do a lot to help many of us.

Certain illnesses — HIV, some cancers, and autoimmune disorders — or their treatments can affect how well the immune system works. So some people may need additional help from medications and therapies, which could truly count as immune boosting.

The bottom line

Perhaps there will come a time when we’ll know how to boost immune function beyond following routine health measures. That’s simply not the case now. Until we know more, I wouldn’t rely on individual foods, detox programs, oral supplements, or on-demand IV drips to keep your immune system healthy, especially when there are far more reliable options.

About the Author

Robert H. Shmerling, MD, Senior Faculty Editor, Harvard Health Publishing; Editorial Advisory Board Member, Harvard Health Publishing

Dr. Robert H. Shmerling is the former clinical chief of the division of rheumatology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC), and is a current member of the corresponding faculty in medicine at Harvard Medical School. … See Full Bio View all posts by Robert H. Shmerling, MD

Just about everyone has met or seen someone who has a tic disorder. Many tic disorders are diagnosed during childhood. Less often, a tic disorder like Tourette syndrome is diagnosed in adulthood — as was the case for Scottish singer Lewis Capaldi.

What are tics?

Tics are very common, with as many as one in five children experiencing them at some point. They can be a motor tic, which is a sudden brief movement — like a shrug, finger tap, or grimace — or they can be a noise, such as a word, grunt, or throat clearing.

In some cases, the movements or noise can be more complex, such as an unusual way of walking, saying particular words, or echoing the words of others (echolalia). Tics are involuntary, although they can sometimes be suppressed.

Tics may be temporary or long-lasting: about a third will go away entirely, a third improve with time (sometimes with treatment, though it's often not needed), and a third are long-lasting.

What is Tourette syndrome?

If someone has both motor and vocal tics that last more than a year, starting in childhood, they are said to have Tourette syndrome (TS).

It’s hard to know exactly how common Tourette syndrome is, as many children go undiagnosed. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that one in 162 children has Tourette syndrome. TS is about four times more common in boys than girls.

What causes Tourette syndrome?

We don’t know exactly what causes TS. There are likely some genetic factors, but psychological and environmental factors play a role as well.

Many children with TS also have either attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) or obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD). Stress, fatigue, or excitement can make tics worse, as well. There has also recently been an increase in tic disorders — some meeting criteria for TS — among teens who have seen videos of others with tics on social media. These are called functional tic disorders.

What age is Tourette syndrome most likely to start?

TS usually begins between 2 and 15 years, with an average age of onset of 6 years, although in some cases it shows up later in the teen years. While TS usually gets better or completely resolves during adolescence and adulthood, it can be really tough for kids who have it. Having TS increases the risk of anxiety, school problems, sleep problems, mood disorders, and even suicide.

How is Tourette syndrome treated?

There is no cure for tics, but there are ways to make them more manageable and less frequent, which can make a big difference.

• CBIT. This approach involves training a person to recognize when the tics are going to happen and engaging a competing response that is more socially acceptable. It could be something like taking deep breaths, or substituting a different, more subtle movement for the disruptive one. This is called comprehensive behavioral intervention for tics, or CBIT. It can be very effective; the problem is that it can be difficult to find therapists trained in this form of treatment, and it is not always covered by insurance.
• Medications. If CBIT is not an option or not adequately helpful, medications are sometimes prescribed. Medication is usually not necessary, and is always a second choice behind behavioral therapy.

To learn more about TS and how to manage it, you can visit the CDC page, the NIH page, or the website of the Tourette Association of America.

About the Author

Claire McCarthy, MD, Senior Faculty Editor, Harvard Health Publishing

Claire McCarthy, MD, is a primary care pediatrician at Boston Children’s Hospital, and an assistant professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School. In addition to being a senior faculty editor for Harvard Health Publishing, Dr. McCarthy … See Full Bio View all posts by Claire McCarthy, MD

Think of prostate cancer surgery and what likely comes to mind is a radical prostatectomy, which is an operation to remove the entire prostate gland along with the seminal vesicles that produce semen. However, men with localized prostate cancer — meaning cancer that is still confined to the prostate — have another surgical option.

Called focal therapy, this alternative procedure treats only the cancerous part of the prostate and leaves the rest of the gland intact. The aim is to remove “clinically significant” tumor tissue, cancer that would spread further if it wasn’t treated at all. While there is a small risk that some cancer may be left behind after treatment, focal therapy also has the benefit of minimizing risks for erectile dysfunction and urinary incontinence, which are both potential side effects of radical prostatectomy. And growing evidence shows it can be an effective strategy.

Last year, researchers reported that 1,379 men treated with focal therapy or radical prostatectomy had similar cancer outcomes after five years of follow-up. The men were 66 years old on average, and doctors treated them with a technique called high-intensity focused ultrasound, or HIFU. This approach destroys cancer by subjecting it to high-energy ultrasound waves that heat tumors to high temperatures.

Now, findings from the same research team show that focal therapy is also an effective option for older men with prostate cancer. During this newer study, researchers assessed outcomes for 649 men ages 70 and above who were treated at 11 sites in the United Kingdom. Two-thirds of the men had cancer with an intermediate risk of further spread, and the remaining third had more aggressive, high-risk prostate tumors that are more dangerous.

All the men were treated with HIFU or a different type of focal therapy, cryotherapy, that destroys cancer by freezing it. The primary goal of the study was to assess “failure-free survival,” whereby treated men avoid a prostate cancer death, or worsening disease leading to further interventions.

What the data reveals

After follow-up durations ranging up to five years, 96% of the men were still alive, and the overall failure-free survival rate was 82%. No differences in outcomes between HIFU- and cryotherapy-treated men were reported. The men with high-risk cancer had worse outcomes: their failure-free survival rate was 75%, compared to 86% among men with intermediate-risk disease.

But 88% of the high-risk men and 90% of the intermediate-risk men also avoided hormonal therapy, a treatment that — because of its side effects — most men don’t want. The authors concluded that focal therapy may be an acceptable treatment that controls prostate cancer in older men as well as radical prostatectomy does.

It’s important to note that complications from focal therapy are possible. For instance, a small percentage of men in the new study developed urinary tract infections, and some also wound up with urinary retention, a treatable condition that occurs when the bladder can’t empty completely. The authors didn’t assess functional outcomes after surgery, such as erectile dysfunction or urinary incontinence. But mounting evidence from other studies shows that long-term urinary incontinence after focal therapy is very rare.

The findings are encouraging, but Harvard experts emphasize that more evidence with focal therapy is still needed. “Despite promising results such as those reported in this and other studies, long-term outcomes (e.g., 10 to 15 years or more) following focal therapy must still be assessed to fully determine how this treatment option compares to radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy,” says Dr. Boris Gershman, aurologist at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and an assistant professor at Harvard Medical School focusing on prostate and bladder cancer. “Additional studies can also help us refine the types of prostate cancer that focal therapy is most appropriate for, and which types should be given therapies that treat the entire prostate gland.”

About the Author

Charlie Schmidt, Editor, Harvard Medical School Annual Report on Prostate Diseases

Charlie Schmidt is an award-winning freelance science writer based in Portland, Maine. In addition to writing for Harvard Health Publishing, Charlie has written for Science magazine, the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Environmental Health Perspectives, … See Full Bio View all posts by Charlie Schmidt

About the Reviewer

Marc B. Garnick, MD, Editor in Chief, Harvard Medical School Annual Report on Prostate Diseases; Editorial Advisory Board Member, Harvard Health Publishing

Dr. Marc B. Garnick is an internationally renowned expert in medical oncology and urologic cancer. A clinical professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, he also maintains an active clinical practice at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical … See Full Bio View all posts by Marc B. Garnick, MD

When you first learned the facts about pregnancy — from a parent, perhaps, or a friend — you probably didn’t learn that up to one in three ends in a miscarriage.

What causes miscarriage? How is it treated? And why is appropriate health care for miscarriage under scrutiny — and in some parts of the US, getting harder to find?

What is miscarriage?

Many people who come to us for care are excited and hopeful about building their families. It’s devastating when a hoped-for pregnancy ends early.

Miscarriage is a catch-all term for a pregnancy loss before 20 weeks, counting from the first day of the last menstrual period. Miscarriage happens in as many as one in three pregnancies, although the risk gradually decreases as pregnancy progresses. By 20 weeks, it occurs in fewer than one in 100 pregnancies.

What causes miscarriage?

Usually, there is no obvious or single cause for miscarriage. Some factors raise risk, such as:

• Pregnancy at older ages. Chromosome abnormalities are a common cause of pregnancy loss. As people age, this risk rises.
• Autoimmune disorders. While many pregnant people with autoimmune disorders like lupus or Sjogren’s syndrome have successful pregnancies, their risk for pregnancy loss is higher.
• Certain illnesses. Diabetes or thyroid disease, if poorly controlled, can raise risk.
• Certain conditions in the uterus. Uterine fibroids, polyps, or malformations may contribute to miscarriage.
• Previous miscarriages. Having a miscarriage slightly increases risk for miscarriage in the next pregnancy. For instance, if a pregnant person’s risk of miscarriage is one in 10, it may increase to 1.5 in 10 after their first miscarriage, and four in 10 after having three miscarriages.
• Certain medicines. A developing pregnancy may be harmed by certain medicines. It’s safest to plan pregnancy and receive pre-pregnancy counseling if you have a chronic illness or condition.

How is miscarriage diagnosed?

Before ultrasounds in early pregnancy became widely available, many miscarriages were diagnosed based on symptoms like bleeding and cramping. Now, people may be diagnosed with a miscarriage or early pregnancy loss on a routine ultrasound before they notice any symptoms.

How is miscarriage treated?

Being able to choose the next step in treatment may help emotionally. When there are no complications and the miscarriage occurs during the first trimester (up to 13 weeks of pregnancy), the options are:

Take no action. Passing blood and pregnancy tissue often occurs at home naturally, without need for medications or a procedure. Within a week, 25% to 50% will pass pregnancy tissue; more than 80% of those who experience bleeding as a sign of miscarriage will pass the pregnancy tissue within two weeks.

What to know: This can be a safe option for some people, but not all. For example, heavy bleeding would not be safe for a person who has anemia (lower than normal red blood cell counts).

Take medication. The most effective option uses two medicines: mifepristone is taken first, followed by misoprostol. Using only misoprostol is a less effective option. The two-step combination is 90% successful in helping the body pass pregnancy tissue; taking misoprostol alone is 70% to 80% successful in doing so.

What to know: Bleeding and cramping typically start a few hours after taking misoprostol. If bleeding does not start, or there is pregnancy tissue still left in the uterus, a surgical procedure may be necessary: this happens in about one in 10 people using both medicines and one in four people who use only misoprostol.

Use a procedure. During dilation and curettage (D&C), the cervix is dilated (widened) so that instruments can be inserted into the uterus to remove the pregnancy tissue. This procedure is nearly 99% successful.

What to know: If someone is having life-threatening bleeding or has signs of infection, this is the safest option. This procedure is typically done in an operating room or surgery center. In some instances, it is offered in a doctor’s office.

If you have a miscarriage during the second trimester of pregnancy (after 13 weeks), discuss the safest and best plan with your doctor. Generally, second trimester miscarriages will require a procedure and cannot be managed at home.

Red flags: When to ask for help during a miscarriage

During the first 13 weeks of pregnancy: Contact your health care provider or go to the emergency department immediately if you experience

• heavy bleeding combined with dizziness, lightheadedness, or feeling faint
• fever above 100.4° F
• severe abdominal pain not relieved by over-the-counter pain medicine, such as acetaminophen (Tylenol) or ibuprofen (Motrin, Advil). Please note: ibuprofen is not recommended during pregnancy, but is safe to take if a miscarriage has been diagnosed.

After 13 weeks of pregnancy: Contact your health care provider or go to the emergency department immediately if you experience

• any symptoms listed above
• leakage of fluid (possibly your water may have broken)
• severe abdominal or back pain (similar to contractions).

How is care for miscarriages changing?

Unfortunately, political interference has had significant impact on safe, effective miscarriage care:

• Some states have banned a procedure used to treat second trimester miscarriage. Called dilation and evacuation (D&E), this removes pregnancy tissue through the cervix without making any incisions. A D&E can be lifesaving in instances when heavy bleeding or infection is complicating a miscarriage.
• Federal and state lawsuits, or laws banning or seeking to ban mifepristone for abortion care, directly limit access to a safe, effective drug approved for miscarriage care. This could affect miscarriage care nationwide.
• Many laws and lawsuits that interfere with miscarriage care offer an exception to save the life of a pregnant patient. However, miscarriage complications may develop unexpectedly and worsen quickly, making it hard to ensure that people will receive prompt care in life-threatening situations.
• States that ban or restrict abortion are less likely to have doctors trained to perform a full range of miscarriage care procedures. What’s more, clinicians in training, such as resident physicians and medical students, may never learn how to perform a potentially lifesaving procedure.

Ultimately, legislation or court rulings that ban or restrict abortion care will decrease the ability of doctors and nurses to provide the highest quality miscarriage care. We can help by asking our lawmakers not to pass laws that prevent people from being able to get reproductive health care, such as restricting medications and procedures for abortion and miscarriage care.

About the Authors

Sara Neill, MD, MPH, Contributor

Dr. Sara Neill is a physician-researcher in the department of obstetrics & gynecology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School. She completed a fellowship in complex family planning at Brigham and Women's Hospital, and … See Full Bio View all posts by Sara Neill, MD, MPH

Scott Shainker, DO, MS, Contributor

Scott Shainker, D.O, M.S., is a maternal-fetal medicine specialist in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (BIDMC). He is also a member of the faculty in the Department of Obstetrics, … See Full Bio View all posts by Scott Shainker, DO, MS

As a kid, I spent many Saturdays romping around my Florida neighborhood imitating Colonel Steve Austin, better known as The Six Million Dollar Man to avid TV watchers in the 1970s.

The popular show featured a bionic man — half human and half machine — who could jump from three-story buildings, leap over six-foot-high walls, and bolt into a full 60-mile-per-hour sprint. Naturally, these actions occurred in slow motion with an iconic vibrating electronic sound effect.

My own bionic moves involved jumping to pluck oranges from tree branches, hopping over anthills, and leaping across narrow ditches while humming that distinctive sound. I didn’t realize it, but this imitation game taught me the foundations of plyometrics — the popular training routine now used by top athletes to boost strength, power, and agility.

What are plyometrics?

Plyometric training involves short, intense bursts of activity that target fast-twitch muscle fibers in the lower body. These fibers help generate explosive power that increases speed and jumping height.

“Plyometrics are used by competitive athletes who rely on quick, powerful movements, like those in basketball, volleyball, baseball, tennis, and track and field,” says Thomas Newman, lead performance specialist with Harvard-affiliated Mass General Brigham Center for Sports Performance and Research. Plyometrics also can help improve coordination, agility, and flexibility, and offer an excellent heart-pumping workout.

Who can safely try plyometrics?

There are many kinds of plyometric exercises. Most people are familiar with gym plyometrics where people jump onto the top of boxes or over hurdles.

But these are advanced moves and should only be attempted with the assistance of a trainer once you have developed some skills and muscle strength.

Keep in mind that even the beginner plyometrics described in this post can be challenging. If you have had any joint issues, especially in your knees, back, or hips, or any trouble with balance, check with your doctor before doing any plyometric training.

How to maximize effort while minimizing risk of injury

• Choose a surface with some give. A thick, firm mat (not a thin yoga mat); well-padded, carpeted wood floor; or grass or dirt outside are good choices that absorb some of the impact as you land. Do not jump on tile, concrete, or asphalt surfaces.
• Aim for just a few inches off the floor to start. The higher you jump, the greater your impact on landing.
• Bend your legs when you land. Don’t lock your knees.
• Land softly, and avoid landing only on your heels or the balls of your feet.

Three simple plyometric exercises

Here are three beginner-level exercises to jump-start your plyometric training. (Humming the bionic man sound is optional.)

Side jumps

Stand tall with your feet together. Shift your weight onto your right foot and leap as far as possible to your left, landing with your left foot followed by your right one. Repeat, hopping to your right. That’s one rep.

• You can hold your arms in front of you or let them swing naturally.
• Try not to hunch or round your shoulders forward as you jump.
• To make this exercise easier, hop a shorter distance to the side and stay closer to the floor.

Do five to 15 reps to complete one set. Do one to three sets, resting between each set.

Jump rope

Jumping rope is an effective plyometric exercise because it emphasizes short, quick ground contact time. It also measures coordination and repeated jump height as you clear the rope.

• Begin with two minutes of jumping rope, then increase the time or add extra sets.
• Break it up into 10- to 30-second segments if two minutes is too difficult.
• If your feet get tangled, pause until you regain your balance and then continue.

An easier option is to go through the motions of jumping rope but without the rope.

Forward hops

Stand tall with your feet together. Bend your knees and jump forward one to two feet. Turn your body around and jump back to the starting position to complete one rep.

• Let your arms swing naturally during the hop.
• To make this exercise easier, hop a shorter distance and stay closer to the floor.
• If you want more of a challenge, hop farther and higher. As this becomes easier to do, try hopping over small hurdles. Begin with something like a stick and then increase the height, such as with books of various thicknesses.

Do five to 10 hops to complete one set. Do one to three sets, resting between each set.

About the Author

Matthew Solan, Executive Editor, Harvard Men's Health Watch

Matthew Solan is the executive editor of Harvard Men’s Health Watch. He previously served as executive editor for UCLA Health’s Healthy Years and as a contributor to Duke Medicine’s Health News and Weill Cornell Medical College’s … See Full Bio View all posts by Matthew Solan

About the Reviewer

Howard E. LeWine, MD, Chief Medical Editor, Harvard Health Publishing

Dr. Howard LeWine is a practicing internist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, Chief Medical Editor at Harvard Health Publishing, and editor in chief of Harvard Men’s Health Watch. See Full Bio View all posts by Howard E. LeWine, MD