Truth: Having a period also means you need to sift through quite a few period myths to find out what’s true and what’s total BS. Getting pregnant on your period, for example, can totally happen, while syncing up with your friends is more of a numbers game than a seal of sisterhood.

One Q that gets asked again and again: Does your period stop in water?

So…does your period stop in water? Even just a little?

First, let it be known that water itself will never make your period disappear. “It doesn’t matter if you’re in water or on the top of a mountain or in a ditch, your period still comes,” says Dr Michele Haughton, an obstetric gynaecologist at Weill Cornell Medicine and NewYork-Presbyterian.

Basically, barring any medical problems like hormonal disorders that can make you skip periods, your uterus will keep on shedding its lining whether you dive into the ocean or not, says Dr Haughton. So, sorry, but spending a week in your bathtub isn’t an effective way to skip out on your monthly visit. Womp.

But getting into the water can make it seem like your period goes away. That’s all thanks to the pressure of the water surrounding your vagina—it can counteract the force of gravity that helps blood flow out of your body. There’s no biological magic going on here, it’s all physics. “When you’re in water there’s some opposite pressure happening,” says Dr Haughton.

READ MORE: Is There A Way To Make Your Period Come Faster?

Think back to your high school physics class for a sec: You may remember the word “buoyancy.” Buoyancy, also known as “upthrust,” is the upward force a liquid exerts to counter the weight of an object (this is part of the reason that certain things float and others don’t). “Water has way more resistance than air,” says Dr Haughton. “So water can counteract the blood flowing out of the vagina.”

Essentially, the water doesn’t make your period “stop,” but it can block the exit. If you’re planning to get into the bathtub or go swimming without using a tampon or menstrual cup, rest assured that there will be no red, bloody trail behind you, says Dr Haughton.

“Most women bleed only 60 millilitres (about three to four tablespoons) over five whole days,” says Dr Haughton. Even if you’re free-flowing into the pool for five hours, there’s no way that water is going to turn into the Red Sea with the amount of blood coming out of your body. Even a whole pool full of people on their periods wouldn’t give the water even the tiniest pink tinge.

And, while we’re on the subject of periods in water, there’s absolutely no chance that this tiny amount of menstrual blood will attract every shark in the ocean (or even just one of them), so let’s put that myth to rest right now. “Whenever I hear the shark myth I think, ‘How much do you people think you’re bleeding?’ It’s not like you’re waving around a bloody arm,” says Dr Haughton. (Yep, she tells it like it is.)

READ MORE: This Is The Reason Why You Fart More On Your Period

Well, does that mean I don’t need to wear tampons (or menstrual cups) in water?

Even if your period tends to be light, tampons and menstrual cups can save you when you exit the water. “The second you come out of the water your period will start flowing again,” says Dr Haughton. “And then you’ll have a nice stain on your bathing suit.”

They also come in handy if you tend to have a lot of blood clots (there’s no guarantee that water pressure will counteract an actual clot, versus drops of blood).

The bottom line: No, your period doesn’t magically stop in the water, but water pressure can prevent your flow from coming out. It’s still wise to use a tampon or menstrual cup.

^{This article was originally published on www.womenshealthsa.co.za}

^{Image credit: iStock}

If you’re popping dietary supplements in the hope of living longer, a large new study suggests you’d be better off investing that money in nutritious foods.

The research found that vitamins A and K, magnesium, zinc and copper were linked to a lower risk of death from heart disease or stroke, and an overall lower risk of dying during the average six years of follow-up. But these findings were true only when the nutrients came from foods, not from supplements.

No benefit for general population

Of more concern, the study found that taking at least 1 000 milligrams of calcium daily from supplements was associated with an increased risk of death. This was not true of calcium from food.

“Over half of the United States population takes supplements on a regular basis. But it’s pretty clear that supplement use has no benefit for the general population. Supplements are not a substitute for a healthy balanced diet,” said Dr Fang Fang Zhang, the study’s senior author.

“There’s a belief that supplements can improve and maintain health, but this study provides more evidence that there are no benefits,” added Zhang. She’s an associate professor at the Tufts University School of Nutrition Science and Policy in Boston.

Zhang said it wasn’t clear why nutrients from supplements didn’t provide the same benefits they do when they’re found in food.

“Supplement forms could just have different effects than the natural form. In food, the body can regulate and limit the absorption of nutrients. In supplements, the body doesn’t have the same regulatory impact,” she said.

Zhang did note that the population in this study was generally healthy, so the findings don’t necessarily apply to people who are deficient in certain nutrients.

Vitamin C most commonly used

The study included more than 27 000 US adults aged 20 or older. They answered questions about their dietary supplement use and their diets.

More than half reported using at least one supplement, and more than one-third used a multivitamin. Supplement users were more likely to be female, white and have higher levels of education and income. They were also more likely to eat a healthy diet and be physically active.

Vitamin C was the most commonly used supplement, followed by vitamin E, calcium and vitamin D, according to the report.

So is it time to clear out the cabinets and toss all of your supplements?

Zhang said if you’re healthy, supplements aren’t recommended. But if you’ve been diagnosed as deficient in a certain nutrient, don’t stop taking it without talking to your doctor, she advised.

Samantha Heller is a registered dietitian at NYU Langone Health who wasn’t involved in the study.

A very delicate balance

“No single nutrient is going to solve our health issues. But there are times where supplementation with vitamins or minerals is necessary and important,” said Heller.

For example, people who are living a vegan lifestyle may come up short on vitamin B12, vitamin D and omega-3 fatty acids, she explained. And she said that vitamin D insufficiency is a global problem, though there’s no consensus among health experts as to how much vitamin D people should take.

“Supplements can be helpful when necessary, but there are people who feel that if a little is good, more is better. Our bodies work at maintaining a very delicate balance, and taking too much of any one nutrient can knock that balance off,” Heller said.

The bottom line, according to both experts, is that everyone should get most vitamins and minerals from foods.

“No single supplement can include all of the amazing plant compounds contained in fruits and vegetables, legumes, nuts and seeds, and whole grains,” Heller said. “The nutrients in foods work synergistically to help keep us healthy and fight disease.”

The study findings were published online in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

^{Image credit: iStock}

If the cacophony of children screaming and throwing tiny plastic balls everywhere hasn’t prompted you to forgo ball pits, a new study may just send you scurrying for the door.

The research found that ball pits in physical therapy clinics – and undoubtedly in public ball pits, too – were awash in microbes, some potentially quite dangerous.

Compromised immunity

The study team found 31 bacterial species and one species of yeast. Some of those bugs are responsible for pink eye, urinary tract infections, bloodstream infections, heart inflammation and more.

“Be aware of this if you take your child to a physical therapy clinic, especially if the child has a compromised immune system,” said senior study author Dobrusia Bialonska, assistant professor of environmental microbiology at the University of North Georgia.

“You might consider asking for no treatment in the ball pit. We definitely showed that there are things on the balls that can potentially hurt a child who is immune-compromised,” she said.

Does that mean all kids need to steer clear of ball pits in fast food restaurants or other play spaces?

No, Bialonska said.

“We’re talking about paediatric physical therapy patients that may have some immune problems and may be more fragile. If kids are healthy, let them go and play. It may help build their immune system,” she said.

But kids should wash their hands when they jump out of the pit, especially if they’re going to eat after playing, Bialonska quickly added.

Microbes everywhere where humans are present

Ball pits became popular in the 1980s when they began popping up in commercial restaurant chains across the United States. But these play areas are often contaminated with visible dirt, vomit, urine and faeces, researchers said. Numerous bacteria had already been identified in ball pits, but researchers wanted to learn how those used for physical therapy for children might compare.

The study team collected samples from six ball pits in Georgia physical therapy clinics. They randomly selected nine to 15 balls from each location, then swabbed the whole surface of each ball to find any microbes.

There were microorganisms on all of the balls, though some had very few. The researchers said it’s not unusual or concerning to see microbes anywhere humans are present. There should be concern when there are a lot of microbes, however.

Researchers noted a significant variation in the extent of microbial contamination from clinic to clinic. That suggests a need to develop guidelines for cleaning the balls and the pit area when they are used for physical therapy in potentially vulnerable kids, researchers said.

Bialonska said there are no standards or directions for cleaning these areas. She said someone had used a commercial washing machine to clean the balls. Others have tried using ultraviolet light to disinfect the balls.

Dr Maryann Buetti-Sgouros, chair of paediatrics at Northern Westchester Hospital in Mount Kisco, NewYork, was not involved with the research, but reviewed the study.

Part of our normal flora

“Common sense has to dictate how you address risks as a parent,” she said. “If there’s somewhere germy, what will you do to decrease the risk? A little bit of germs isn’t awful. Carry antibiotic wipes.”

Another expert agreed.

“Many of the microbes isolated are part of our normal flora,” said Dr Salman Khan, an infectious disease physician at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City.

“However, some of these have the potential to cause disease in patients with immunocompromising conditions and open wounds.”

Buetti-Sgouros said she doesn’t think ball pits are inherently worse than other places where kids play, but the balls cannot be sterilised between uses and are going to get covered in bacteria.

Let common sense dictate

If you’re taking a child for physical therapy where there is a ball pit, she suggested asking how the balls are sterilised. “In this study, one of the clinics didn’t have as much bacteria. What were they doing differently?” she said.

Buetti-Sgouros also pointed out that injuries are a concern at ball pits and other kid play areas, such as those with multiple indoor trampolines.

“Again, let common sense dictate. But, I’d rather see kids outside where there’s ventilation and air,” she said.

The study was recently published in the American Journal of Infection Control.

^{Image credit: iStock}

Legalized medical pot may be a boon to older Americans, boosting their health and ability to work, a new study finds.

“Research [on medical marijuana] has largely ignored older adults even though they experience the highest rates of medical issues that could be treated with medical marijuana,” said co-author Lauren Hersch Nicholas. She’s an assistant professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore.

Excellent health reported

Her team analysed responses of more than 100 000 adults, 51 and older, who took part in the 1992–2012 Health and Retirement Study. The survey looked at health and job market situations among older Americans.

In states that legalised medical marijuana, there was a 4.8% decrease in reported pain for conditions that qualified for pot treatment (cancer, arthritis, glaucoma and pain), compared to states without medical marijuana. Similarly, 6.6% more seniors reported very good or excellent health in states with medical pot.

At the time of the analysis, 20 states had medical marijuana laws in place. By the end of 2018, 33 states and Washington, D.C. allowed medical use of marijuana.

The study also linked medical marijuana legalisation to increases in full-time jobs among older Americans.

Among those who qualified for medical marijuana, full-time work increased 7.3%, compared with a 5% increase among the entire study sample.

Effect on labour force participation

This suggests that any decline in productivity resulting from medical marijuana use is outweighed by an increased ability to work, according to the authors. However, the study only showed an association and not a cause-and-effect link between pain, work rates and medical marijuana.

“Our study is important because of the limited availability of clinical trial data on the effects of medical marijuana,” Nicholas said in a Hopkins news release.

“These findings underscore the close relationship between health policy and labour supply within older adults,” Nicholas said. “When we’re doing policy evaluations, we have to think not only about whether the policy is changing health outcomes, but also whether it does it in a way that supports labour force participation.”

The study found no evidence that medical marijuana legalisation was associated with changes in daily activities such as getting dressed, going to the bathroom or walking.

The US National Institute on Aging funded the study. The findings are in the spring issue of the Journal of Policy Analysis and Management.

^{Image credit: iStock}

Pregnant women who work at least two night shifts in a week may increase their risk of miscarriage in the next seven days, a new European study finds.

Danish researchers led by Dr Luise Moelenberg Begtrup, from the Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine at Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg Hospital in Copenhagen, analysed data on nearly 23 000 pregnant women to learn how night work might affect the odds of miscarriage between the fourth and 22nd week of pregnancy.

Risk rises with number of night shifts

After the eighth week, women who had worked two or more night shifts in the previous week had a 32% higher risk of miscarriage than those who had not worked any nights, the study found.

And the risk rose with the number of night shifts worked in a week and also by the number of consecutive ones, according to the study published online in the journal Occupational & Environmental Medicine.

The researchers said it’s possible that exposure to light at night disrupts a woman’s body clock and reduces the release of melatonin.

Implications for occupational health regulations

Melatonin has been shown to play an important role in a successful pregnancy, possibly by maintaining function of the placenta.

The study has limitations, the authors added. Because it was an observational study, it can’t prove working night shifts caused an increased risk of miscarriage. In addition, data on miscarriages, especially early ones, were incomplete.

But 14% of women in Europe work at night at least once a month, so the findings are important for working mothers-to-be, their employers, physicians and midwives, according to the authors.

“Moreover, the results could have implications for national occupational health regulations,” they said.

^{Image credit: iStock}

Gene silencing drugs spared patients from the crippling pain caused by porphyria, in a clinical trial.

Time For Care saved the equivalent of 1.23m GP appointments last year and is now being expanded.

Gillette is the latest company to support the body positive movement, and they're doing so in a big way. On April 3, the shaving brand shared a photo to their Twitter feed of model and blogger Anna O’Brien in a bikini. The tweet was captioned, “Go out there and slay the day,” and showed the model standing on the beach with a smile on her face. 

But in typical internet fashion, there were plenty of negative comments in response. Online trolls criticized Gillette’s choice to feature O’Brien, writing comments about how they believed the company was promoting an “unhealthy” body type. 

“Please stop. Promoting this is dangerous. Being unhealthy is not a good thing,” one user wrote.

A handful of other critical comments followed the tweet—but there were plenty of tweets in support of the company’s post. 

RELATED: This Plus-Size Influencer's Stunning Bikini Post Is the Body Positivity Inspiration You Need

“Crazy how so many of you in this thread are her doctor! She has a right to exist in her body at any goddamn stage and she shouldn’t have to hide it until you’re comfortable with it. Unbelievable the level of cruelty in this thread,” a Twitter user wrote. Another wrote supported the post, noting that health and worth don't go hand in hand. 

Eventually, Gillette stepped in and responded to the comments on the site. “Venus is committed to representing beautiful women of all shapes, sizes, and skin types because ALL types of beautiful skin deserve to be shown,” the razor brand said in a tweet. “We love Anna because she lives out loud and loves her skin no matter how the ‘rules’ say she should display it.”

Their inclusive response racked up over 8,000 likes and 500 retweets. In a statement given to TODAY Style, Gillette further responded to the controversy, noting that the post was created to help represent women of all shapes and sizes.  

"Anna O'Brien is a body positive advocate and influencer and has an inspiring platform of self-love," said My Anh Nghiem, a spokesperson for Gillette's parent company, Procter & Gamble. "She is not a paid partner of Venus nor was the image created at the brand’s request. We simply asked to share this photo of her as part of our efforts to represent more women and their stories on our platform."

O'Brien has not yet commented on the controversy, but she did share a cryptic Instagram photo a few days after the original photo was posted. "So much has happened in the last 5 days,” she in her caption. “The only thing I have to say is, I’m ok.”

RELATED: 7 Times Tess Holliday Was Our Body Positivity Queen

World Health Organization says Ebola outbreak in Democratic Republic of Congo will become an emergency without more support.

Amid growing concern about the safety of e-cigarettes, more American adults now believe vaping is just as dangerous as smoking cigarettes.

Between 2012 and 2017, the number of people who considered e-cigarettes less harmful than tobacco cigarettes dropped significantly, according to an analysis of two surveys.

In one, the percentage fell 16 points – from 51 to 35%. In the other, the difference was smaller but still significant, dropping from 39 to 34% over the period.

These changes in attitude, “may deter some adult smokers from switching to e-cigarettes,” said lead researcher Jidong Huang. He’s associate professor of health management and policy at Georgia State University in Atlanta. The study findings were published online in JAMA Network Open.

Stanton Glantz, director of the Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education at the University of California, San Francisco, said public perception is moving in the right direction.

“The more we learn about e-cigarettes, the more dangerous they look,” Glantz said. He noted that research has linked vaping with increased risk for heart attacks, strokes, respiratory disease and, possibly, cancer.

The belief that e-cigarettes are safer is looking less true every day, said Glantz, who wrote an editorial that accompanied the study.

Cause for concern

“The fact that the public is perceiving that e-cigarettes are more dangerous over time is, in fact, an accurate perception,” he said. “The idea that e-cigarettes are harmless is fading away, which is a good thing.”

Over the study period, the percentage of American adults who viewed e-cigarettes as harmful rose, Huang’s team found.

In 2012, 46% of respondents to the Health Information National Trends Surveys said e-cigarettes were as harmful as regular cigarettes, and that number rose to 56% in 2017. Over the same period, the number who considered e-cigarettes more harmful than regular cigarettes jumped from 3% to 10%.

Results were similar among participants in the Tobacco Products and Risk Perceptions Surveys. The percentage who considered e-cigarettes as bad as regular cigarettes rose from 12% in 2012 to 36% in 2017, and those who considered them more harmful rose from 1% to 4%.

But researchers also found cause for concern. Though e-cigarettes have been around for more than a decade, one-quarter of American adults were still unsure in 2017 how health risks for the two compared.

“The results of our study underscore the urgent need for accurate communication of the scientific evidence on the health risks of e-cigarettes to the American public,” Huang said.

Vapour contains toxins

Erika Sward, assistant vice president for national advocacy at the American Lung Association, said it is foolish for tobacco companies to compare the safety of e-cigarettes to regular cigarettes. “Cigarettes are the most deadly consumer product on the market,” she said.

But the myth persists that e-cigarettes are safe and a pathway to quitting, Sward said.

“The narrative that e-cigarette companies have been pushing since 2009 that these are a safer alternative, that they may help you quit, has been in the Big Tobacco playbook going back to the 1950s,” she said.

Sward said there is “no safe and effective e-cigarette in terms of helping people quit.” The vapour in e-cigarettes contains toxins and carcinogens that are unsafe, she noted.

“There is no safe tobacco product, including e-cigarettes,” Sward said. “E-cigarettes only continue your nicotine addiction and expose you to dangerous chemicals. It’s just another marketing technique from Big Tobacco.”

Sward suggested that smokers who want to quit look instead to treatments that the US Food and Drug Administration has found to be safe and effective.

^{Image credit: iStock}