Health - Common painkillers can lead to hearing loss

Loud music or noise isn't the onlything that can damage your hearing.
A new study in men hints that popping over-the-counter painkillers
regularly can also lead to hearing loss, especially in younger men.
In the study, researchers found that men younger than age 50 who
regularly took acetaminophen more than two times a week had roughly
doublethe risk of hearing loss comparedto men who did not take
acetaminophen regularly. Acetaminophen is the active ingredient in
Tylenol and certain other pain relievers.
The researchers also found that men younger than age 50 who regularly
took ibuprofen (the main ingredient in Advil) or othernon-steroidal
anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) at least twice a week had a nearly
two-thirds higher risk of hearing loss than men who took NSAIDs less
often. Men who took aspirin twice a week had a one-third higher risk.
So should middle-aged men empty the medicine cabinet of these pain
relievers? Not necessarily, because each individual's actual, or
absolute, risk of hearing loss with these medicines is likely fairly
small.
The overall absolute risk of hearing loss in the population is 1
percent per year. Those who take an analgesic have an increased risk
beyond the 1 percent, Dr. Sharon G. Curhan, of Channing Laboratory and
Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston explained in an email to Reuters
Health.
"But if you consider that people continue to take the analgesic
foryears, then after 10 years the risk would be 10 percent in the
overall population and the risk in those taking an analgesic would be
proportionately higher," Curhan said.
"Even though these analgesics are available in the drugstore without a
prescription, they are still medications and there are potential side
effects," Curhan said.
"If individuals find a need to take these types of medications
regularly, they should consult with their health care professional in
order to discuss the risks and benefits and to explore possible
alternatives," she advised.
The findings, published in the American Journal of Medicine thismonth,
stem from nearly 27,000 men enrolled since 1986 in the Health
Professionals' Follow-Up Study. As part of the study, the men, who
were between 40 and 74 years old at the outset, provided information
on analgesic use, hearing loss and other relevant factors every 2
years for 18 years, during which time 3,488 men were diagnosed with
hearing loss.
In the group as a whole, the risk of hearing loss, after factoring out
relevant risk factors, was 12 percent higher in men who used aspirin
at least twice a week relative to men who used aspirin less than twice
a week. The risk was about 21 percent higher in those who used NSAIDs
or acetaminophen at least twice a week.
Among men younger than 50, therisk of hearing loss was higher by33
percent, 61 percent and 99 percent with twice weekly use of aspirin,
NSAIDs, and acetaminophen, respectively, compared to risks in men of
the same age who used these painkillers less often. For NSAIDs and
acetaminophen, the risk of hearing loss increased with longer duration
of use.
In contrast to the findings in younger men, regular aspirin use did
not increase the risk of hearing loss in men aged 60 and older, and
the ties between hearing loss and regular use of NSAIDs and
acetaminophen were weaker in the older men.
Curhan's team points out that very high doses of aspirin are well
known to have toxic effects on the ear. These effects include
reversible hearing loss and tinnitus (ringing in the ears). On the
other hand, low-dose aspirin has been reported to protect against
hearing loss caused by certain antibiotics and excessive noise.
Very high doses of NSAIDs are toxic to the ears of animals, and there
have been a few reports of very high doses of NSAIDs causinghearing
loss in humans.
In their study, the researchers didnot have information on dosages
taken by the men or why they were regularly using these medicines --
only how often they took them. They also did not have information on
lifetime exposure to loud noise, a common cause of hearing loss.
"Hearing loss is the most common sensory disorder in the US and
factors other than age and noise might influence the risk," the
researchers note in their report. Aspirin, acetaminophen and ibuprofen
are the three most commonly used drugs in the US and they could be
"one of the few preventable causes of hearing loss," Curhan said.

Health - Small daily aspirin dose 'cuts cancer risk'

A small daily dose of aspirin - 75mg - substantially reduces death
rates from a range of common cancers, a study suggests.
Research at Oxford University andother centers found that it cut
overall cancer deaths by at least afifth.
The study, published in the Lancet, covered some 25,000 patients,
mostly from the UK.
Experts say the findings show aspirin's benefits often outweighed its
associated risk of causing bleeding.
Aspirin is already known to cut the risk of heart attack and stroke
among those at increased risk. But the protective effects against
cardiovascular disease are thought to be small for healthy adults, and
aspirin increases the risks of stomach and gut bleeds.
However, this latest research shows that when weighing up the risks
and benefits of taking aspirin, experts should also consider its
protective effect against cancer.
Those patients who were given aspirin had a 25% lower risk of death
from cancer during the trial period and a 10% reduction in death from
any cause compared to patients who were not given the drug.
Lasting protection
The treatment with aspirin lastedfor between four and eight years,but
long term-follow-up of around 12,500 patients showed the protective
effect continued for 20 years in both men and women.
Lead researcher Professor Peter Rothwell said the findings might well
underestimate the reductionin deaths that would result from
longer-term treatment with aspirin.
The risk of cancer death was reduced by 20% over 20 years.
Forindividual cancers the reduction was about 40% for bowel cancer,
30% for lung cancer, 10% for prostate cancer and 60% for oesophageal
cancer.
The reductions in pancreas, stomach and brain cancers were difficult
to quantify because of smaller numbers of deaths.
There was also not enough data to show an effect on breast or ovarian
cancer and the authors suggest this is because there were not enough
women in the trials. Large-scale studies investigating the effects on
thesecancers are under way.
Professor Rothwell said he was not urging healthy middle-aged adults
to immediately start taking aspirin, but said the evidence on cancer
"tips things towards it being well worth it". The benefit in cancer
reduction were found from a low daily doseof 75mg.
Professor Rothwell said the annual risk of major internal bleeding was
about 1 in 1,000 and aspirin roughly doubled that risk. But he said
the danger of major bleeding was "very low" in middle age but
increased dramatically after 75.
Sensible time to consider startingdaily aspirin use would be between
45-50, continuing for around 25 years, he said.
Cancer Research UK described theresults as "promising". But Ed Yong,
head of health information and evidence, said: "We encourage anyone
interested in taking aspirin on a regular basis to talk to their GP
first."
Professor Peter Elwood, an epidemiologist from Cardiff University, who
carried out some of the first studies into the effects of aspirin on
health, said individuals should make up their own minds:
"Aspirin should be thought of in the same context as lifestyle changes
such as diet and exercisewhich can help to preserve health."
Professor Elwood said taking aspirin at night and with calcium seemed
to enhance its effects. Hesuggested taking it with a glass of milk as
this could also reduce stomach irritation.

--

- - - - -

And Allah Knows the Best!

- - - - -

Published by :->
M NajimudeeN Bsc- INDIA

¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤

Dought & clear - Which should he give priority to – ‘Umrah or paying off his debt?

I would like to perform 'Umra. I vowed hat if my salary increases I
will perform 'Umra. But I have debts to pay off. Is it permissible if
I go for 'Umra now, or must I wait until my debt is paid? May Allah
reward you!.
Praise be to Allaah.
The rights of other people take precedence over the obligation to
perform Hajj and 'Umrah, so it is not permissible for a Muslim to go
for Hajj or 'Umrah if there is someone asking for repayment of a loan
that he took from him. This is because Islam places a great emphasis
on protecting people's rights and is keen for the spirit of love and
friendship to remain among them, so that none of them will consume the
wealth of others or transgress against them.
Shaykh Ibn 'Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) was asked the
following question:
I owe money to a number of people. Can I go to Makkah to fast there
with my children, noting that I will be ableto share the cost of rent
with my children?
His answer was as follows:
I will ask you a question:is charity better, or the zakaah that is
obligatory? Zakaah is better.
Is a voluntary act better, or an obligatory one? The obligatory one is better.
Is it logical to start with the obligatory action before the voluntary
one, or vice versa? Reason dictates that I should start with the
obligatory action before the voluntary one. So it is not permissible
for a person to go to Makkah to do a voluntary 'Umrahwhen he is in
debt. A debt must be paid off, but is a voluntary 'Umrahobligatory? No
it is not. Even the obligatory Hajj is waived in the event ofdebt.
Religion is not based on emotions. Even the duty that Allaah has
enjoined upon His slaves, which is to go on Hajj to the Ka'bah and to
do 'Umrah, if a person is in debt, it is waived in his case, and he
will meet his Lord without sin. If a man is in debt and he does not do
Hajj and it issaid that he has not done the obligatory duty, we say
that the words "has not done theobligatory duty" are mistaken. Why is
this a mistake? Because there was no obligation upon him, and there is
no obligation upon him until now. Hajj is only anobligation for the
one who is free of debt.
Hence we say to this brother: Don't be hard on yourself, keep your
money, stay in your country, and save the money in order to pay off
your debt. Do not be like the one who built a castle and destroyed a
country.
We think that this brother has to stay in hisown country.
Yes, if it so happens that someone offers him money to cover all the
expenses and he says Do not give me even a single dirham – in that
case we say: If his travelling for 'Umrah willnot affect his work
through which he earns money, then he should go, because in this case
will it affect his creditor or not? No it will not.
If someone says to him, I know that you owe ten thousand riyals, and I
know that debt must be given precedence over voluntary acts of
worship, but come with me, you and your family,for free, there and
back – can he go with him? In this case we say: If he has a job and
his absence from work will cause him a loss in salary, then he should
not go. But if he does not have a job, and going with him will not
affect anything, then there is nothing wrong with him going with him.
It makes no difference whether the debt is due now or later. But if it
is deferred, and he knows that when the time comes he will be able to
pay it off, then it does not matter, like a man who owes money that is
due in two months time, for example, and he knows that when the time
comes he will be able to pay it off – in that case we say: Go, because
staying in his country will not make a difference to the creditor. End
quote.
Al-Liqa' al-Shahri (no. 33,question no. 4)
This has been discussed previously on our website in the answer
toquestion no. 11771 , 36868 and 36852 .
What you must do is wait until you have paid off the entire debt.
Then if what you did was a vow, you must fulfil it, because it is
obligatory to fulfil a vowto do an act of worship.
But it was merely an intention to do 'Umrah out of gratitude to
Allaah, without making avow, then in that case it is mustahabb to
fulfil thepromise to do 'Umrah, which is one of the greatest acts of
worship by means of which the Muslims draw close to their Lord.
And Allaah knows best.

Dought & clear - Should he issue papers for someone to show that he owns neglected land that belongs to the state?

There is some neglected land in a place that is remote from the city
that belongs to the state but no one is using it. Is it permissible to
issue papers showing that thisland belongs to some person so that he
can sell it and benefit from it?.
Praise be to Allaah.
Land that has no owner and does not serve and purpose– such as
watercourses, places where firewood is gathered, grazing land and
public amenities – may be taken possessionof by reviving it,
becausethe Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said:
"Whoever revives disused land, it becomes his." Narrated by Abu Dawood
(3073) and at-Tirmidhi (1378); classed as hasan by al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar
in Buloogh al-Maraam (897); he also mentionedother isnaads for this
hadeeth in al-Fath (5/19), then he said: There is some weakness in its
isnaads, but they strengthen one another. See also Irwa' al-Ghaleel
(5/553).
Reviving land may be done by building fences around it, digging a
wellin it and extracting water from it, or diverting a stream of water
to it.
It says in Zaad al-Mustaqni': The one who encloses disused land, or
digs a well in it and finds water, or brings water to it from aspring,
and the like, or diverts water away fromit in order to cultivate it,
has revived it. End quote. See also ash-Sharh al-Mumti' (10/329). If
this person has revived the land in the manner referred to above, it
is permissible to issue papers to him sothat he might take possession
of it.
But if he has not revived it, it is not permissible todo that, because
that involves lying, bearing false witness and consuming wealth
unlawfully.

--

- - - - -

And Allah Knows the Best!

- - - - -

Published by :->
M NajimudeeN Bsc- INDIA

¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤