Senior Usage of E-Readers

0

Category : Technology

 

t

 

 

 

A wonderful present is the gift of reading.  Many seniors love to read but due to poor eyesight it can become very difficult.  Of course, there are magnifying glasses but many find them awkward. The iPad, Kindle, and a new wave of other tablets have been growing in popularity.  Some older adults are uncomfortable using the new technology, but others find it fascinating.  Here is an article discussing the benefit of enhanced reading using E-Readers.

 

 

DECEMBER 12, 2012, 5:00 AM

The Gift of Reading

By JUDITH GRAHAM

This is the year of the tablet, David Pogue of The Times has told us, and that may be good news for seniors who open holiday wrappings to find one tucked inside. They see better with tablets’ adjustable type size, new research shows. Reading becomes easier again.

This may seem obvious — find me someone over 40 who doesn’t see better when fonts are larger — but it’s the business of science to test our assumptions.

Dr. Daniel Roth, an eye specialist and clinical associate professor at the Robert Wood Johnson Medical School in New Brunswick, N.J., offered new evidence of tablets’ potential benefits last month at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Ophthalmology.

His findings, based on tests conducted with 66 adults age 50 and over: older people read faster (a mean reading speed of 128 words per minute) when using an iPad, compared to a newspaper with the same 10-point font size (114 words per minute).

When the font was increased to 18 points — easy to do on an iPad — reading speed increased to 137 words per minute.

“If you read more slowly, it’s tedious,” Dr. Roth said, explaining why reading speed is important. “If you can read more fluidly, it’s more comfortable.”

What makes the real difference, Dr. Roth theorizes, is tablets’ illuminated screen, which heightens contrast between words and the background on which they sit.

Contrast sensitivity — the visual ability to differentiate between foreground and background information — becomes poorer as we age, as does the ability to discriminate fine visual detail, notes Dr. Kevin Paterson, a psychologist at the University of Leicester, who recently published a separate study on why older people struggle to read fine print.

“There are several explanations for the loss of sensitivity to fine detail that occurs with older age,” Dr. Paterson explained in an e-mail. “This may be due to greater opacity of the fluid in the eye, which will scatter incoming light and reduce the quality of the projection of light onto the retina. It’s also hypothesized that changes in neural transmission affect the processing of fine visual detail.”

Combine these changes with a greater prevalence of eye conditions like macular degeneration and diabetic retinopathy in older adults, and you get millions of people who cannot easily do what they have done all their lives — read and stay connected to the world of ideas, imagination and human experience.

“The No. 1 complaint I get from older patients is that they love to read but can’t, and this really bothers them,” Dr. Roth said. The main option has been magnifying glasses, which many people find cumbersome and inconvenient.

Some words of caution are in order. First, Dr. Roth’s study has not been published yet; it was presented as a poster at the scientific meeting and publicized by the academy, but it has not yet gone through comprehensive, rigorous peer review.

Second, Dr. Roth’s study was completed before the newest wave of tablets from Microsoft, Google, Samsung and others became available. The doctor made no attempt to compare different products, with one exception. In the second part of his study, he compared results for the iPad with those for a Kindle. But it was not an apples to apples comparison, because the Kindle did not have a back-lit screen.

This section of his study involved 100 adults age 50 and older who read materials in a book, on an iPad and on the Kindle. Book readers recorded a mean reading speed of 187 words per minute when the font size was set at 12; Kindle readers clocked in at 196 words per minute and iPad readers at 224 words per minute at the same type size. Reading speed improved even more drastically for a subset of adults with the poorest vision.

Again, Apple’s product came out on top, but that should not be taken as evidence that it is superior to other tablets with back-lit screens and adjustable font sizes. Both the eye academy and Dr. Roth assert that they have no financial relationship with Apple. My attempts to get in touch with the company were not successful.

A final cautionary note should be sounded. Some older adults find digital technology baffling and simply do not feel comfortable using it. For them, a tablet may sit on a shelf and get little if any use.

Others, however, find the technology fascinating. If you want to see an example that went viral on YouTube, watch this video from 2010 of Virginia Campbell, then 99 years old, and today still going strong at the Mary’s Woods Retirement Community in Lake Oswego, Ore.

Ms. Campbell’s glaucoma made it difficult for her to read, and for her the iPad was a blessing, as she wrote in this tribute quoted in an article in The Oregonian newspaper:

To this technology-ninny it’s clear
In my compromised 100th year,
That to read and to write
Are again within sight
Of this Apple iPad pioneer

Caregivers might be delighted — as Ms. Campbell’s daughter was — by older relatives’ response to this new technology, a potential source of entertainment and engagement for those who can negotiate its demands. Or, they might find that old habits die hard and that their relatives continue to prefer a book or newspaper they can hold in their hands to one that appears on a screen.

 

View the original article at:

http://newoldage.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/12/the-gift-of-reading/#more-14050

Really?: Adding Milk to Tea Destroys its Antioxidants

0

Category : Health, News and Information

This article was selected on 09/17/12 by MOW staff from The New York Times Well Blogs. The original article was written by Anahad O’Connor  of The New York Times. The article can be found online at:  http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/17/really-adding-milk-to-tea-destroys-its-antioxidants/

Many of us add that little bit of milk to our tea. In doing so, do we blunt the beneficial effects of tea? According to studies, adding milk may reduce tea’s healthful properties. Here is an interesting little article about the topic.

Karah Ladd

 

Really?: Adding Milk to Tea Destroys its Antioxidants”

THE FACTS

Next to water, tea is the most widely consumed beverage in the world. Chock-full of antioxidants, vitamins and other compounds, tea has been linked in a variety of studies to stronger immune function and reduced cell damage. Some research suggests tea may prevent cavities, improve blood sugar levels and perhaps provide cardiovascular benefits.

In many parts of the world, the custom is to serve tea with milk. But lately researchers have been surprised to find that adding milk may strip tea of some of its beneficial effects.

In a study published in The European Heart Journal, researchers had 16 healthy adults drink cups of freshly brewed black tea, black tea mixed with a small amount of skim milk, or boiled water. Then the scientists measured the effects on vascular function.

Compared with water, black tea “significantly improved” arterial function, the researchers found, “whereas addition of milk completely blunted the effects of tea.”

The scientists repeated similar tests in mice and found the same results, which they speculated may be a result of proteins in milk binding to and neutralizing antioxidants. “Milk,” the researchers wrote, “counteracts the favorable health effects of tea on vascular function.”

A study published this year looked at whether the effect was limited to dairy products. It was not: Proteins in soy milk had the same effect as regular milk on antioxidants in tea.

THE BOTTOM LINE

Adding milk to tea may reduce some of its healthful properties, studies show.

 

 

Get Up. Get Out. Don’t Sit.

0

Category : Health, News and Information

Two new studies find that too much sitting, especially in front of the television, is detrimental to health. Senior author of one study recommends: First, cut television time. Then look to the rest of your day.

This article was selected on 10/23/12 by MOW staff from The New York Times Well Blogs. The original article dated October 17, 2012 was written by Gretchen Reynolds of The New York Times.

The original article can be found at: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/17/get-up-get-out-dont-sit/

Karah Ladd

 

Just as we were all settling in front of the television to watch the baseball playoffs, two new studies about the perils of sitting have spoiled our viewing pleasure.

The research, published in separate medical journals this month, adds to a growing scientific consensus that the more time someone spends sitting, especially in front of the television, the shorter and less robust his or her life may be.

To reach that conclusion, the authors of one of the studies, published in the October issue of The British Journal of Sports Medicine, turned to data from the Australian Diabetes, Obesity and Lifestyle Study, a large, continuing survey of the health habits of almost 12,000 Australian adults.

Along with questions about general health, disease status, exercise regimens, smoking, diet and so on, the survey asked respondents how many hours per day in the previous week they had spent sitting in front of the television.

Watching television is not, of course, in and of itself hazardous, unless you doze off and accidentally slip from the couch onto a hard floor. But television viewing time is a useful, if somewhat imprecise, marker of how much someone is engaging in so-called sedentary behavior.

“People can answer a question like, ‘How much time did you spend watching TV yesterday?’ much better than a question like ‘How much time did you spend sitting yesterday?’ ” says Dr. J. Lennert Veerman, a senior research fellow at the University of Queensland, who led the new study.

Australians, as it turns out, watch lots of telly. According to the survey data, in 2008, the year that the researchers chose as their benchmark, Australian adults viewed a collective 9.8 billion hours of television.

Using complex actuarial tables and adjusting for smoking, waist circumference, dietary quality, exercise habits and other variables, the scientists were next able to isolate the specific effect that the hours of sitting seemed to be having on people’s life spans.

And the findings were sobering: Every single hour of television watched after the age of 25 reduces the viewer’s life expectancy by 21.8 minutes.

By comparison, smoking a single cigarette reduces life expectancy by about 11 minutes, the authors said.

Looking more broadly, they concluded that an adult who spends an average of six hours a day watching TV over the course of a lifetime can expect to live 4.8 years fewer than a person who does not watch TV.

Those results hold true, the authors point out, even for people who exercise regularly. It appears, Dr. Veerman says, that “a person who does a lot of exercise but watches six hours of TV” every night “might have a similar mortality risk as someone who does not exercise and watches no TV.”

These rather unnerving results jibe with those of another new study of sitting. Published on Monday in the journal Diabetologia, its authors reviewed data from 18 studies involving 794,577 people. Many of the studies measured full-day sitting time, covering not only hours whiled away in front of the television, but also time spent in a chair at work.

Together, those hours consumed a majority of a person’s life. “The average adult spends 50 to 70 percent of their time sitting,” the authors report.

The researchers then cross-referenced sitting time with health outcomes, and found that those people with the “highest sedentary behavior,” meaning those who sat the most, had a 112 percent increase in their relative risk of developing diabetes; a 147 percent increase in their risk for cardiovascular disease; and a 49 percent greater risk of dying prematurely — even if they regularly exercised.

“Many of us in modern society have jobs which involve sitting at a computer all day,” says Dr. Emma Wilmot, a research fellow at the University of Leicester in England, who led the study. “We might convince ourselves that we are not at risk of disease because we manage the recommended 30 minutes of exercise a day.”

But, she says, we “are still at risk if we sit all day.”

Why a seemingly blameless activity like sitting should be detrimental to health, even for those of us who work out, is not fully understood, although it is assiduously being studied at many labs.

One partial explanation, however, is obvious. “The most striking feature of prolonged sitting is the absence of skeletal muscle contractions, particularly in the very large muscles of the lower limbs,” says David W. Dunstan, a professor at the Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute in Australia, senior author of the Australian study, and a pioneer in the study of sedentary behavior.

When muscles don’t contract, they require less fuel, and the surplus, in the form of blood sugar, accumulates in the bloodstream, contributing to diabetes risk and other health concerns.

Thankfully, excessive sitting is theoretically easy to combat. First, cut TV time. “The evidence indicates that four hours per day is in the ‘risky’ category,” Dr. Dunstan says, “while less than two hours per day is in the lower-risk group.”

Then look to the rest of your day. When Dr. Wilmot asked a group of volunteers recently to reduce their daily sitting time by an hour, “they came up with lots of ideas,” she says, including “putting the garbage bin on the other side of the office, standing during coffee breaks and telephone calls, having standing meetings, standing on the bus.”

But don’t, she emphasizes, cease exercising. “There is absolutely no doubt that exercise is beneficial for health,” she says. It just may not, by itself, be sufficient for health.

If you exercise for 30 minutes a day, she says, “take time to reflect on your activity levels for the remaining 23.5 hours,” and aim to “be active, sit less.”

Really? Some Plants Can Filter Airborne Chemicals

1

Category : Community, Health, News and Information

It turns out that household plants do more than beautify our homes, they can filter pollutants from indoor air. This article specifies some plants that are most effective.

This article was selected on 9/17/12 by MOW staff from The New York Times online publication.  Original article dated September 4, 2012 was written by Anahad O’Connor of The New York Times.

The original article at be found at:

 

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/03/really-some-plants-can-filter-airborne-chemicals/

Karah Ladd

THE FACTS

According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the levels of air pollutants inside homes can far exceed the levels outside, thanks to household cleaning products, central heating and cooling systems, and other indoor sources. But scientists have found that certain plants can scrub your home of airborne chemicals, albeit gradually.

In addition to figuring out how to land a car-size rover on Mars, scientists at NASA have investigated ways to rid spacecraft of airborne pollutants, some of them common offenders in American homes as well. The agency found that at least 15 common indoor plants could filter — to one degree or another — pollutants like the carcinogens benzene, trichloroethylene and formaldehyde.

Formaldehyde is commonly found in drapes, glues and coating products. Benzene is a component of paint supplies and tobacco smoke, and trichloroethylene is used in adhesives, spot removers and other household products.

According to NASA research, some of the plants most effective at cleaning these compounds from the air are devil’s ivy, peace lilies, Pleomele, gerbera daisies and Sansevieria trifasciata, commonly called snake plant. Two other plants, the ficus and Japanese aralia, are also effective.

A good rule of thumb is to have one plant for roughly every 100 square feet of living space, said Dr. Clifford W. Bassett, an allergist at New York University School of Medicine.

“We spend a lot of time with our patients talking about things like pets, humidifiers and air purifiers,” he said, “but this is a way to naturally clean the air.”

THE BOTTOM LINE

Studies show that a number of popular household plants can remove common pollutants from indoor air

Did you enjoy this post?  If so, like us on Facebook and check out the Meals on Wheels daily blog.

Losing a Sense Can Rewire the Brain

0

Category : Health, News and Information

Losing one sense can cause the brain to be rewired.  Researchers learned this in studying the blind.  Recently, they studied the deaf and found a similar phenomenon. This article originally appeared in The New York Times on August 6th 2012.

Karah

 

 

 

 

 

Really? The Brain Gets Rewired if One of the Senses Is Lost

By ANAHAD O’CONNOR

 
THE FACTSCertain regions of the human brain are dedicated to the various senses. The visual cortex handles vision, for example, while the auditory cortex processes sound.

But what happens if one of the senses is lost? Do the neurons in the auditory cortex of a deaf person atrophy and go to waste, for instance, or are they put to work processing vision and other senses?

In studies, scientists have shown that when one sense is lost, the corresponding brain region can be recruited for other tasks. Researchers learned this primarily by studying the blind. Brain imaging studies have found that blind subjects can locate sounds using both the auditory cortex and the occipital lobe, the brain’s visual processing center.

But recently a similar phenomenon was discovered in the deaf. In a study financed by the National Institutes of Health and published in The Journal of Neuroscience, researchers recruited 13 deaf volunteers and a dozen volunteers with normal hearing and looked at what happened in their brains when touch and vision responses were stimulated. They found that both senses were processed in Heschl’s gyrus, where the auditory cortex is situated, suggesting that this part of the brain had been dedicated to other senses.

Other studies have shown that structural changes in the auditory cortex are noticeable in the brains of deaf children from a very early age.

THE BOTTOM LINE

Losing one sense can cause the brain to become rewired.

 
 

Our Community Bloggers