Dried Plums May Help Shield You From Radiation

New research is indicating that dried plums could protect you from bone loss caused by ionizing radiation.

Radiation from the lower part of the electromagnetic spectrum surrounds us;we're practically bathing in it. Visible light, magnetic waves, radio waves, lasers – these are a pervasive, if invisible, part of all our lives.

At the higher, ultraviolet end of that spectrum dwell gamma rays, X-rays and other ionizing forms of radiation, and our cohabitation with these is not always as amicable. By definition, ionizing radiation packs enough energy to strip away electrons from other atoms. And although these forms of radiation certainly have their uses and roles in modern life, it all comes at a cost of some personal wear and tear. Not least among these concerns is bone loss.

Bone loss can lead to osteoporosis, a disease in which the bones become more fragile and more prone to breaking. It is estimated that osteoporosis is responsible for more than 8.9 million fractures worldwide each year.

"Bone loss caused by ionizing radiation is a potential health concern for those in occupations or in situations that expose them to radiation," explains Dr. Nancy Turner, who is the co-author of a new study conducted by the Department of Nutrition and Food Science at Texas A&M University. But she and her colleagues may have an answer, and it might already be in your kitchen cabinet.

The researchers discovered that dried plum was an effective agent for reducing radiation-related bone damage as well as preventing later bone loss induced by ionizing radiation.

"Dried plums contain biologically active components that may provide effective interventions for loss of structural integrity caused by radiotherapy or unavoidable exposure to space radiation incurred over long-duration spaceflight," Dr. Turner noted.

The study concluded that inclusion of dried plums in the diet may prevent the skeletal effects of radiation exposures either in space or here on Earth.

Good news for astronauts – and cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy, radiation workers and victims of nuclear accidents, among others.

Is Vaginal Seeding Safe?

The popularity of the vaginal seeding procedure has never been more popular, but exactly how safe is it? A recent discussion in the British Medical Journal casts a wary eye on the whole business.

Vaginal seeding refers to the procedure whereby a child born via a Cesarean section is swabbed shortly after birth with vaginal fluid. The intention is for the newborn to benefit from the vaginal microbiota.

Microbiota are the communities of microbes that colonize your body. These microbes actually outnumber your own cells 10 to 1. The key point here is that these complex communities are quite different from one body part to another. And characteristic differences in the microbiota are associated with various diseases. Studies have shown that early-life microbiota play a role in the developing immune system. Consequently, interest has been generated in the potential for manipulating our bodies' microbiota to promote health and treat disease.

The microbiota of the skin of a newborn baby born via Cesarean section most closely resembles that of the mother's skin. A vaginally-delivered baby, however, has skin microbiota that resembles the mother's vagina.

What's the difference? Nothing concrete, except that some studies have shown that babies delivered by Cesarean section have an increased risk of asthma, obesity, and autoimmune disease later in life. And we do know that our microbiota play a role in these conditions.

So, better safe than sorry, right? If the simple and inexpensive procedure of swabbing a newborn with Mom's vaginal fluid has even a slight chance of heading off some nasty ailments forty years later, why wouldn't you?

To start with, the vagina can carry pathogens that are neither screened for nor symptomatic in Mom, but can have serious effects on her child. For example, up to 30% of pregnant women are known to carry group B streptococcus, which is one of the most common causes of bacterial blood stream infections in babies. Other possible pathogens include the herpes simplex virus, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, and Chlamydia trachomatis. These last two can cause a form of neonatal conjunctivitis.

The authors of the British Medical Journal piece are of the opinion that “encouraging breastfeeding and avoiding unnecessary antibiotics may be much more important than worrying about transferring vaginal fluid on a swab." Given that we are many years away from the results of any kind of research that might conclude there is any concrete benefit, we'd had to agree.