For several years the media and public have focused on applying creams, receiving Botox, or having cosmetic surgery to make your skin appear healthier and shinier. Now many people have decided to step back to the food pyramid in order to achieve that healthy glow they have been trying to apply for years.

Researchers have discovered that your diet has a direct effect on the health of your skin. This shouldn’t come as a surprise considering your diet effects most aspects of your appearance, and animals with better diets showed healthier skin than their counterparts in trials. There is now a list of recommended foods for bringing back youth to your skins appearance. Some of these include foods high in:

Better than fish oil the old fashioned way.

• Vitamin A
• Vitamin B
• Vitamin C
• Vitamin E
• Omega-3
• Omega-6

In addition to these vitamins, you should also eat a lot of zinc rich foods. It is also recommended that you consume around eight glasses of water a day.

It is recommended to focus on eating foods that strengthen the capillaries in the face as a result of producing collagen. These include blueberries, guava, kiwi, oranges, strawberries, broccoli and sweet potatoes. Garlic and onions are ideal for keeping the skin smooth, while sesame seeds and apricots help improve your skin’s tone. B vitamins in beef, eggs, liver, cheese, and marmite are also great for your skin.

It is however, recommended to not smoke and cut down on tea, juice, and coffee consumption. These dietary changes will make your skin glow! Now, you will not glow like a star in the night skin, but you will have a healthier aura around you.

Also, do not expect an overnight miracle as this process can take several weeks to actually show an effect. So why not just go out and spend money on the lotions and creams that provide instant benefits and changes? That is a good question. Eating a lot of healthier foods is not only good for your skin, they are good for your body and mind. It seems like another diet has been developed to show even more benefits to people than the last diet released. It was once believed that there is a pill for everything; now it seems as though there is a diet for everything as well.

Earlier this month, a medical research team released information on a pilled called Flibanserin, which was aimed to treat depression in patients. The pill showed no effects on treating depression during the study tests. It did, however, have another effect on women who were involved in the trial. The pill has now been given the name “Female Viagra” because it has shown a significant increase in the sex drives of female patients who have previous reported having problems with wanting to perform. Some women have a problem achieving a healthy and happy sex life.

The Federal Drug Administration committee, which consists of both men and women, must decide if the potential risks and benefits of making this drug available are worth a public release. Others are hopeful that it will become available so that is will provide exactly that – a public release. Some researchers estimate that the drug will be released sometime within the year, but it is still not certain exactly when it will be available. All that has been reported is that several women who are taking the pill have shown significant increases in their sex drive within days of starting the pill. Some women even report dreaming about sex. Could this possibly result from taking the pill? Who knows, but I am sure it is not considered a negative side effect. Some of the negative side effects that have been reported are:

Girls won't see blue anymore

• Nausea
• Anxiety
• Upset Stomach
• Insomnia
• Dry mouth
• Dizziness
• Fatigue

After the release of Viagra for men in 1998, several women reportedly responded by asking for something to help them also. Flibanserin is on the verge of FDA approval and may become the first female Viagra, which has been estimated at around two billion dollars in sales in the United States alone. More than five thousand premenopausal women were involved in the study. These women were between the ages of eighteen and fifty years old and lived in the United States, Europe, and Canada. An increase of 100 mg. dosage daily has reportedly increased the sexual experiences of around 2.7 to 4.5 percent from the previous month.

With almost two thirds of Americans being overweight, losing weight, dieting and exercise are always a big topic. In this country we want a quick fix and most of us just don’t want to or don’t have time to put in the work required for long term weight loss. Or so we thought.

There is so much conflicting information in the media, it is hard to tell if something is a kooky next best thing or sound advice. The one thing that seems to be the standard coming from physicians is to lose weight slowly, at a rate of about a pound a week. Now, this is being questioned by a study that was published in the International Journal of Behavioral Medicine.

A group of scientists at the University of Florida asked 262 middle aged women to cut calories and institute more exercise in their routines over a period of 18 months. After the first month, women were put into three categories according to how fast they dropped weight. The results were shocking: The slow losers were the LEAST likely to drop 10% of their body weight over the 18 month period and the fast group was the most likely.

We have been told that if you lose weight fast, you will gain it back fast. But this study showed long term positive results from losing weight fast. This is really a novel idea that won’t be accepted by many, but is welcome news by dieters nationwide; who often times lose weight fast. There were several reasons touted for why this may have happened and they include the following:

• Seeing fast results reinforces new eating and fitness behavior
• Increased energy and mobility allow for more exercise
• Looking better reinforced the desire to keep going

There is definitely some merit to the fact that seeing results fast is a definite incentive to continue. If your weight loss is also based on health reasons, these positive and fast results could be a life affirming change. Remember fast weight loss can still be harmful if you are yo-yo dieting and continue to pack on the weight and then lose it again quickly. This can also lead to eating disorders. So make sure you’re losing weight for the right reasons; namely better health and you may have great success with quick weight loss.

Recently, “Save the Children” published a report of their study on motherhood around the world. In the report they noted the money-making ability, physical condition, schooling, and overall welfare of women in 160 countries around the globe.

From this data, they made a list of the best and worst places to be a mother world wide. As the world becomes a smaller place and travel for women is safer than it’s ever been; this information is very insightful for women of the 20th century. It’s also good to know in what parts of the world we can lend our voices and funds to make things better for Moms.

Of course the United States was on top, right? Nope. The US ranked number 28 on the list, trailing far behind Australia, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, and Belgium, which were all in the top ten. Why did we fall so low on the list? Stingy maternity leave policies and a high rate of death in childbirth were the main reasons.

As a working mom I also know that the long work weeks and expectation to work through the pain, has contributed to many women feeling stressed out. Trying to construct a work life balance in the United States is still a struggled, despite what other nations might think.

Corporate America is also still predominantly run by males; many of which aren’t familiar with the struggles of new moms. So what country was ranked number 1 for Moms? Norway. Many wouldn’t think that a nation with its rugged terrain and cold weather could rank number one in this position, but they are truly on top, based on the aforementioned criteria of “Save the Children”.

So what countries fall at the bottom of the list and why? Niger, Chad, Yemen, Mali, and Sudan were among the bottom 10 with Afghanistan being the absolute worst. Some features that enabled a country to be granted a spot in the bottom ten were:

• Less birth control access
• Death during childbirth
• Birthing without a Skilled practitioner present
• Low pay scales in comparison to men’s
• Less educational access for women
• High child mortality rates

We have a way to go worldwide to empower women every where. Please do your part and help a woman in one of the nations on the bottom 10 list. You can do this by providing a loan to women business owners at such websites as www.kiva.com.

It seems that women in the United States are making more conscious decisions regarding child rearing, or at least when to give birth. Gone are the days when generations of uneducated, young women were having babies.

In years past women had to rely on their husbands for the financial support of themselves and their children. A new age has been ushered in during the last two decades featuring new moms that are college educated, over 35, and unmarried. But what was the landscape like 20 years ago?

• More teenage pregnancies
• Less new mothers over age 35
• More married mothers
• Less college educated mothers

What’s going on? Twenty years ago, teens were having 3% more babies than they are today. We can only speculate on the reasons. Possibly more young girls are focused more on their education and less on boys. Maybe they are better educated about sex or more emotionally empowered.

Also society as a whole in industrialized nations has accepted and promoted the education of young girls; to the growth and success of their nations. Most enlightened nations realize that holding down one sector of the nation is also not good for the nation as a whole.

More women are making education and career a priority over getting married and having children. The average American gets married much later in life, if at all. As it is no longer taboo to have a child out of wedlock, single career women can bring life into the world without embarrassment.

More than half of new mothers today have attended a college or university. There have been constants in American parenting, just like baseball and apple pie has been constant to our culture. The enjoyment of parenthood is still the top reason for having children and the two child family is still considered the norm by some.

Despite a weak economy, sales of US prescription drugs increased 5.1% to cross the $300 billion mark. The news by IMS, leading provider of such data, also indicated a rise in sales of specialty pharmaceutics which now accounts for almost 21 percent of overall prescription drug share. Still, the biggest surprise was stored by an incremental rise of cheap generic drugs which skyrocketed from 57% share last year to almost 75%.

The new trend in generic prescription drug may prove to be an eye opener for Pfizer and Bristol-Myers Squibb who sell best selling drugs such as Lipitor and Plavix. Consequently, it is estimated that by 2012, the popular inventions of these Pharma giants will face strict competition from cheap generic drugs.

Such indications are on the horizon as Lipid regulators which once were the highest dispensing drugs, fell to third position in US as its sales were hampered by generic cholesterol reducing prescription, available elsewhere. Whatever may be the case but one thing is for sure that competition inside prescription drug is proving a catalyst which continues to bolster sales, even in such financial crises.

This is both encouraging and sobering news for the industry and American economy as it shows telling facts about purchasing patterns in light of Obama’s health care reform. What is interesting about these statistics is that despite a hit to the economy, people are still spending on prescription drugs, even more than they did prior to the recession.

The noteworthy news, though, is that people are finding cheaper generics than the high-priced known brands. This is an important signal to drug companies that a free market economy can impact our health and drug habits.

The debate on taxing soda intake was ratcheted up further with a study that increasing a tax on the drinks may have little impact on their overall consumption. This theory is supported by research published in the Journal of Health Affairs, relying on the data collected from soda and sports drink consumption habits of 7,300 fifth graders from 40 US states.
Roland Sturm, a senior economist at Rand Corporation, was in charge of the study that also provided interesting evidence on the possible effects of high taxes. The results revealed that high tax was only a factor in families earning less than $25,000. Therefore, if an average family consumes seven cans of soda a week then less-earning families should drink one less, due to high tax. In average families, there was no evidence of less Soda consumption due to a higher tax.

The research also offered useful insight into the price of the tax and current opinion of the public on the imposition of high tax. It is well known that Americans are not friendly to any talk related to taxes, especially now with tea partiers riling up their base. The average tax was only 4 percent which varied between 0 and 7% among different States. Nevertheless, Strum and his fellows concluded that an 18% tax may prove to be effective in promoting safe soda consumption habits.

In spite of these figures, readers should be aware that a poll by Rasmussen Foundation rejects any such efforts on part of the government because 56% of adults view high tax on soda as negative. The American Beverage Association also vehemently oppose tax raise, pointing to popular public opinion and inconclusive evidence from scientific studies, such as one indicated above.

An article today on bnet.com shined a spotlight on the debate that high fructose corn syrup might be on a path to losing the fight. Derided for causing obesity and diabetes, HFCS can be found in almost every carbonated beverage and sweetener that we consume.

One of the most popular food books in the past decade, The Omnivore’s Dilemma, highlighted the dangers and chemical production of the product and how it has become such a pervasive staple in our diets. A Princeton study showed that rats that consumed HFCS put on significant more weight than those that consumed a similar caloric intake of regular table sugar.

The corn producers didn’t go down without a fight and launched a campaign to help defend their product’s image, even creating a series of canned commercials that aimed to defend HFCS.

Health advocates are arguing that the tide is turning with recent announcement that PepsiCo will no longer produce Gatorade with HFCS as an ingredient. Con Agra is removing the ingredient from Hunt’s ketchup and Kraft is getting it out of Wheat Thins. HFCS still pervades many products we consume on a daily basis, but these recent announcements are a good start.

Essentially the argument is that a tremendous amount of our food is becoming corn based, which has made corn production skyrocket. One of the by-products of processed corn is HFCS, and companies like ADM and Cargill have found ways to use this “waste” as a sweetener that is cheaper to produce than sugar. However, the product has been linked to debilitating health, a rise in obesity and diabetes – especially amongst children – and this can all lead to heart disease.

A scientific study conducted at University of Alabama sheds positive light on the intake of fat during morning breakfast. According to lead scientist Dr. Molly Bray, a fat rich diet actually helps to not only speed up normal metabolic functions but also digests carbohydrates, thus imparting more energy to human body.

Everyone has had those sluggish mornings where you are fighting the debate of how much you want to wake yourself up while balancing the amount of food and coffee you want to down. This will be nice to know that it’s not only beneficial to have a little bacon in the morning, but in fact it could be healthy. Granted, this is a big difference between having a small bite and indulging in the full breakfast buffet at the Circus Circus hotel and casino, but still, go for it.

Until now, most studies have focused on the type of food we eat but not on when to eat certain foods. The results from this new study revealed that normal intake of fat in morning is more helpful than eating fat rich diets during lunch or dinner. This basically means that foods that might be unhealthy and should be avoided during lunch or dinner would be encouraged to be consumed for breakfast.

Such a routine may help us to evade metabolic syndrome which is characterized by abdominal obesity, high triglycerides and other cardiovascular diseases. Taking into account the evidence, you may start to consume normal quantity of fat in the morning which will certainly help metabolize other foods, as well. After all, eating cereal may not be the perfect breakfast menu.

People under the age of eighteen could be banned from using indoor tanning beds, and a registry may begin to be used to regulate the use of tanning beds. This will happen if the FDA receives word from their panel that it convinced to review tanning bed classifications.

Ultraviolet lams used for tanning beds are now considered a class one medical device by the FDA. This means that they receive very few regulations. The FDA could make the lamps a class two or a class three which will mean that there would be more regulations. This could mean that minors may be banned from using tanning beds.

A few of the panel members thought that this was too harsh. They agreed with the possible restrictions, but thought it would be best if strong warnings were put in place, and parental consent was required.

Each year, over thirty million people chose to tan indoors, and over half of these people are women between the ages of sixteen and twenty nine, according to the Journal of American Dermatology.

If you use a tanning bed before you are thirty five years old, you are at an increased risk for melanoma, which is the most dangerous form of skin cancer.

Skin cancer is one of the few types of cancer for which a preventative option exists.

Tanning salon businesses, which are one of the many businesses that are struggling through this recession, are already suffering because of the new health care bill. This bill includes a ten percent tax of people who chose to tan indoors, and the motive behind this is to come up with over two billion dollars over a span of ten years which will help take care of the health overhaul.

The Indoor Tanning Association, which is a Washington based trade group, estimated that the new taxes would affect eighteen thousand businesses in the nation. This will in turn hurt the companies, and jeopardize thousands of people’s jobs.