Is popcorn giving you heart disease?

• 

Oh, great. Just when you were starting to get a handle on your BPA exposure, scientists uncover a new one you should worry about. 

It’s called perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)—a chemical found in things like nonstick cookware, food wrappers, furniture, and even raincoats—and it’s been linked to cardiovascular disease, according to a new study. 

The kicker? A full 98 percent of us have PFOA in our bloodstreams. (Protect your body’s most important muscle with these tips to Strengthen Your Heart in 30 Days.)

Researchers from West Virginia University (WVU) School of Public Health, Morgantown, looked at the health data of 1,200 Americans and compared their PFOA serum levels with the incidence of heart disease. The results: The greater the amounts of PFOA in the bloodstream, the greater the risk of cardiovascular disease—regardless of factors like age, race, smoking, BMI, diabetes, and even hypertension. While previous research has linked PFOA to cardiovascular disease in animals, this is the first to look at PFOA’s heart effect on humans.

Scary? You bet. But more research needs to be done to determine the specific relationship between PFOA and cardiovascular disease. 

“We can’t yet be certain that PFOA causes heart disease,” says lead study author Dr. Anoop Shankar, chair of the department of epidemiology in the WVU School of Public Health. “The two could be related in another way, like people with cardiovascular disease tending to retain more PFOA in their blood.” (Minimize your exposure to harsh chemicals with these 19 Bizarre Home Remedies That Really Work.)

Still, PFOA’s track record isn’t exactly reassuring. Health watchdogs like the Environmental Working Group—which annually puts out the Dirty Dozen Foods You Should Eat Organic—cite research that suggests PFOA may be a human carcinogen, and previous research has linked the chemical to chronic kidney disease and high cholesterol in children and adolescents. It’s also a significant source of global chemical emissions—so much so that the EPA partnered with major manufacturers like DuPont and 3M to form the 2010/2015 PFOA Stewardship Program, which plans to eliminate PFOAs from the manufacturers’ products by 2015.
 

Until then, you can minimize your exposure to the chemical by steering clear of two of the biggest sources: nonstick cookware and packaged foods like microwave popcorn. According to the FDA, many popcorn bags contain especially high levels of PFOAs. (Popcorn addict? Avoid chemicals, calories, and sodium with these tips to prepare the perfect bowl of popcorn at home.)
 

View the original article here

Tori Spelling drops 45 pounds after giving birth

Published April 17, 2013

FoxNews.com

• 

  Tori Spelling in 2011, left, and on the cover of US Weekly, right.Retuers/ US Weekly

Tori Spelling had a rough pregnancy with her fourth child, Finn.

The former “Beverly Hills 90201” star had to undergo emergency surgery after she gave birth, and at one point during her pregnancy she was on bed rest for several months.

Click here for photos of Spelling's bikini body 

So weight loss wasn’t the first thing on her mind after Finn was born. But Spelling, 39, said she has now lost all the baby weight—plus an additional 15 pounds.

In the latest issue of US Weekly, Spelling dished on her 45-pound weight loss.  

"The last thing on my mind was getting my body back," Spelling told the mag.

She explained due to her surgery she was barred from doing any situps or lunges to tone her stomach.

"I feel like I took off the weight safely, and I'm totally happy here," she said. "I think my stomach went back pretty well!"

Spelling is married to actor Dean McDermott.

Click here for more from US Weekly

Related Stories

Trisha Yearwood drops 30 pounds, shares her weight loss secrets

View the original article here

DIALING UP OUTRAGE: Program Bashed for Giving 'Obamaphones' to the Dead

WASHINGTON –  Dead people don’t need cell phones.

That’s the message Rep. Tim Griffin of Arkansas wants to send Congress, after he says a controversial government-backed program that helps provide phones to low-income Americans ended up sending mobiles to the dead relatives of his constituents. Griffin has introduced a bill that targets the phone hand-out program, which has ballooned into a fiscal headache for the government.

“This program demands reform,” Griffin told FoxNews.com on Monday. “There is a lot of waste in it and we need to be asking ourselves, ‘Where do we draw the line? Do we give everybody an iPad next? A computer? Is that the role the federal government should be playing?’”

Griffin said the story of dead relatives receiving cell phones was relayed to him by constituents. He added: “I’ve also gotten calls from people who say their employees were bragging about having 10 phones.”

The program in question provides limited phone service to people on government assistance. Ideally, Griffin says he would like to get rid of the program created in the mid-80s altogether, but he knows he lacks the support to kill it -- and instead is asking Congress to scale it back. Griffin’s plan would get rid of the cell phones and provide only landline service and phones. 

Started in 1985, the Lifeline program was created to make sure people with low income levels weren’t cut off from emergency services, job searches or communication with family members. The program is funded by charges that appear on the monthly bills of every wireless and landline phone customer in the country. The money goes into a Universal Service Fund that pulls its revenues from fees that show up on most telephone bills as the “federal universal service charge.” The fees range but can go up to $3.22 a month. 

The cost of the program has tripled to $2.2 billion in 2012 from $819 million in 2008. The risk of abuse has also risen.

“This program is completely ridiculous and it speaks to the point that we are careless with taxpayer dollars,” Griffin said. 

Though the program has spanned multiple administrations, some conservatives have recently nicknamed it the "Obamaphone" after a viral video in 2012 showed an Obama supporter touting the mobiles. 

Some, though, say it isn't feasible to limit the service. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 34 percent of American homes use only wireless telephones. The CDC also reports that nearly one of every six American homes received all or almost all of their calls on a wireless telephone despite also having a landline. 

Under the program, there have been reports of multiple phones going to one person, cell phones being sent to underage residents and perhaps most shocking – phones being sent to the deceased.

The free phone program is open to those who meet federal poverty guidelines, or are on food stamps, Medicaid or other federal assistance programs. Under the rules, only one Lifeline subscriber is allowed per household. However, a recent audit of the program by the Federal Communications Commission revealed that 41 percent of the nearly 6 million subscribers did not meet the requirements.

The FCC defended the program to FoxNews.com and says it has helped tens of millions of low-income Americans afford basic phone options. But even they admit the program has holes. Last year the agency tightened the rules for the program and required carriers to verify existing members were eligible. The agency estimated that 15 percent of its users would be weeded out under the new process. The FCC also said its new rules have eliminated more than 1.1 million duplicate subscriptions and saved $214 million in 2012.

On Feb. 13, the FCC Enforcement Bureau issued citations to 11 people with multiple Lifeline accounts. It was the first time the FCC has taken action against individual subscribers for violating the “one per household” rule.

And on Feb. 26, the commission announced that two wireless Lifeline providers agreed to payments totaling more than $1 million to end an investigation into whether the companies violated program rules in Oklahoma.

But for some like Griffin, it doesn’t matter. He sees the program as a handout and one that should not be footed by taxpayers.

“I understand the FCC is trying to rein the abuse and my first question is, ‘What took you so long?'" he said. “I hear people saying we need this and we need that as a society but is it really fair for the government – i.e. the taxpayers – to provide people with cell phones? I don’t think so.”

View the original article here