TV viewing linked to poor diabetes control in kidsNEW YORK (Reuters Health) — Children and teens with type 1 diabetes who spend a lot of time watching television are likely to have poor control of their blood glucose levels, according to new findings.“Patients with Type 1 diabetes are at higher risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD) than the general population, and long-term blood glucose control is a strong predictor for CVD in Type 1 diabetes,” Dr. Hanna D. Margeirsdottir, of Ullevaal University Hospital, Oslo, and colleagues explain in their report in the medical journal Diabetes Care.

“To our knowledge,” they note, “no studies have reported the influence of television watching on blood glucose control or CVD risk factors in children and adolescents with Type 1 diabetes.”

The researchers evaluated 538 children and adolescents, average age 13 years, from the eastern part of Norway who had had Type 1 diabetes for an average of about five years. The time spent watching television and time using a computer was obtained in interviews with the subjects or the parents of very young children.

The average A1C was 8.6 percent. This measurement is the amount of glycosylated haemoglobin in the blood in relation to the amount of normal haemoglobin, and reflects the degree to which blood glucose levels are controlled over the long term.

The investigators found that as the average number of hours spent in watching television increased, so did the participants’ A1C level, their body mass index or BMI, and the total amount of insulin they needed on a daily basis.

“Television viewing also has been found to be associated with snacking behaviour, and participants who spend more time watching television tend to follow an unhealthy eating pattern,” Margeirsdottir’s team points out.

“The combination of those factors — less physical activity, increased sedentary behaviour, less energy expenditure, and increased food and energy intake — could, at least in part, explain our finding,” they conclude.Hygiene at petting zoos not up to parNEW YORK (Reuters Health) — Petting zoos and their customers need to pay more attention to hygiene in order to prevent animal-transmitted infections, a Canadian study suggests.Researchers who sent observers to 36 petting zoos found that although most had some sort of facility for hand washing, less than one-third of patrons used them.

What’s more, parents often brought items into the zoos that could easily convey infection to young children — including baby bottles, “sippy” cups, pacifiers and infant toys.

For their part, petting zoos fell short in a number of hygiene areas, according to the study reported in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases. Several zoos featured animals that are high risk for transmitting infections, such as newborn calves and baby chicks.

Furthermore, nearly one-third of animals at the zoos showed signs of ill health, like skin lesions or diarrhoea.

When it came to promoting proper hygiene, the researchers found, fewer than half of the zoos had signs advising visitors to use the hand hygiene stations.

Animals at petting zoos can transmit a range of illness-causing germs, including E. coli and salmonella bacteria.

Petting zoos have been tied to outbreaks of intestinal illness caused by E. coli O157:H7, a type that is especially dangerous to children younger than five.

The new findings suggest that petting zoo operators and the public alike need more education on proper hygiene, the study authors conclude. “The most important factor is hand hygiene,” lead author Dr. J. Scott Weese, of the University of Guelph in Ontario, told Reuters Health.

Parents should make sure everyone in the family washes their hands after being in a petting zoo, even if they haven’t touched the animals.

Most zoos have facilities for this, but “it can’t hurt” to bring hand-sanitising gel along on the trip, Weese noted.

In addition, he said, baby bottles, cups or any other item that children put in their mouths have no place in the petting zoo.

The point is not to scare families away from these zoos, Weese and his colleagues note. All things considered, Weese said, a trip to the petting zoo can be considered a “low-risk” event.

Some zoos, though, would be best avoided, according to the researcher — namely, the sites that look poorly run or have clearly sick animals.

“If I came across a petting zoo that looked run-down, with no hand hygiene facilities, poor design, beat-up pens,” Weese said, “I wouldn’t take my family in.”