What does prevalence mean (more)

Prevalence means, how often something occurs, that is usually widely accepted. So if someone says how prevalent is it that dogs bark in your neighborhood, and you say all the time, (because it happens all the time). Then this would be a cor…

http://answers.ask.com/Reference/Dictionaries/what_does_prevalence_mean

Population that is affected with a particular disease at a given time. Call 1-800-2ChaCha from your cell for unlimited use!

http://www.chacha.com/question/what-does-prevalence-mean-%28more%29

Prevalence is a useful measure for chronic diseases and can be used in making health planning decisions; it is less useful for self-limited and rapidly fatal conditions.

http://www.hon.ch/OESO/free/Vol_5_Eso_Junction/Articles/art126.html

Related Questions Answered on Y!Answers

Do you think Michelle Obama’s campaign against childhood obesity is based on race?

Q: While the United States is 79.8% White (1), obesity rates are higher amongst minorities, specifically in Hispanics (62.1%) and Blacks (69.9T%) (2). In terms of childhood obesity, 22% of Hispanic children and 21% of Black children are overweight, compared to 16% of White children (3). Thus, obesity is more of a problem amongst Hispanics and Blacks all around. However, I have another reason for suggesting this, which was when she cited the need to help out the people in so called “food deserts.” (4) (A food desert is a community where there are no major grocery stores, so residents (allegedly) have no choice but to subside off of fast food and street deli food.) Guess where those communities are located. The inner cities. Guess which races live in the inner cities. I think that Michelle Obama prefers black people over whites. She sure likes to surround herself with them. If you look at the video of of her briefing, you’ll see that there are black people all around her. (http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/292017-3)I think her whole campaign is bullcrap. People don’t need the government to tell them how to feed their children, they don’t need a warning on a can of Pepsi telling them that it could make you fat (somebody actually mentions doing this in the video). What they COULD do is make food stamps like the WIC program. I worked as a cashier in a supermarket, and I can tell you with confidence that a lot of the people using food stamps were buying massive amounts of chips, soda, cookies, cake, ice cream, in other words, stuff that makes you fat. With WIC, beneficiaries can only buy specific items (wheat bread, milk, eggs, vegetables, beans, cheese). There are more people on food stamps than ever before (5), 35 million. There are an estimated 60 million overweight/obese Americans (6) combined with the fact that obesity is a has more prevalence amongst low income individuals (7)I mean, if food stamp recipients are going to be using our tax dollars, they might as well be using them to buy food that doesn’t increase their future dependence on government hand outs. Sources: (1) http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html(2) http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparebar.jsp?ind=91&cat=2(3) http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/1666927/race_is_factor_in_childhood_obesity/(4)http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thehumancondition/archive/2010/02/09/michelle-obama-s-childhood-obesity-plan-reaching-out-to-america-s-moms.aspx(5) http://www.mybudget360.com/35-million-americans-on-food-stamps-12-percent-of-us-population-on-food-stamps-highest-since-records-kept-in-1969/(6) http://www.getamericafit.org/statistics-obesity-in-america.html(7) http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080207163807.htm

A: (A food desert is a community where there are no major grocery stores, so residents (allegedly) have no choice but to subside off of fast food and street deli food.)Guess where those communities are located. The inner cities. Guess which races live in the inner cities. Yet, they can afford those 250$ sneakers and all the latest styles in fashion and the bling, to go with it. How is it that their deprived of food choices but not deprived of fashion choices?

Why is the population declining in Western European countries?

Q: More specifically, what are the social factors behind the population decline? Is it because of the economic burden of children and prevalence of contraceptives, or does it involve some other factor? Also, what are the consequences of a population decline in Europe? What will it mean for the future Western world?

A: Factors affecting the Population decline are:-Decrease in Crude Birth Rate(CBR),Crude Death Rate(CDR) and General Fertility Rate(GFT).Factors affecting CBR,CDR,GFR are:->Pre-natal policies and postnatal policies from government-after Industrial revolution in 19 th century and Technology Revolution in 20-21 centuries,there is trmendous progress in pre and post natal care in West European Countries(WEC). > Infantile mortality especially below one year of age is very,very low inWEC>Existing age-sex structure is favourable.>Availability of abortion services-though religious Institutions make a lot of noise,it has practically NIL effect >Social and religious beliefs – especially in relation to contraception and abortion-such objections are over-ruled >Female literacy levels -very high>Economic prosperity (although in theory when the economy is doing well families can afford to have more children in practice the higher the economic prosperity the lower the birth rate). >Typical age of marriage–gradually increasing in the last 150 years-the effect is seen now.But there appears to be serious introspection-god knows what would happen in the next 100 years!!!! >Pension availability–Aplenty

Does this Information that Oral Sex Causes Cancer Scare You?

Q: Oral sex linked to cancer: You must read this by Jessica Ashley, Shine staff, on Thu Oct 16, 2008 2:56pm PDT Read More from This Author » 215 Comments Post a Comment Report Abuse What you may have considered safer sex could be putting you at risk for cancer. Startling new information about the prevalence of throat tonsil cancers in people in their 30s and 40s is connecting the dots between oral sex, human papillomavirus (HPV) and oral cancer.This article and accompanying video explains why scientists are saying there is “absolutely” a connection between oral sex and cancer in people who are young, otherwise healthy, fit, nonsmokers who do not drink excessively. Recent findings derived from a longitudinal study are cited:Johns Hopkins researchers reported in a study published in February in the Journal of Clinical Oncology that between 1973 and 2004 the incidence of HPV-related oral cancers among people in their 40s nearly doubled. Today more than 34,000 people have oral cancer and 39 percent of those cases are related to HPV, according to data from the American Cancer Society.We know that HPV can be treated without leading to tumors. However, scientists also now know that the virus is passed by direct contact and doesn’t stray from the location where it is transmitted. While HPV does not get into the bloodstream, higher-risk strains of the virus contain proteins that make it impossible for healthy cells to repair themselves.Scientists are now investigating the possibility that HPV can be passed through saliva in simple acts of sharing a spoon or drink and how sexual orientation may or may not be a factor in this formula.In the meantime, we are being warned by the medical community about the upped risks of oral sex. Although men are 35% more likely to contract HPV-derived oral cancers, this is a significant health concern for women and girls.It’s no shock that researchers say the number one risk factor is a high number of sexual partners. It only takes an intimate moment with one infected partner to be exposed to HPV. And clearly, the more partners you have, the more opportunities there are for exposure.It’s this quote that brought this story home for me, said bluntly by a woman who is in remission from HPV-related oral cancer that was diagnosed when she was 38 years old:”People think the face of oral cancer is a 70-year-old man who’s been chewing tobacco and drinking whiskey all his life,” she said. “But the face of oral cancer now is — it’s me, a young woman, healthy, nonsmoking, fit.”This is most of us, right?The report comes at a critical time: Studies show more teens believe oral sex is safer than vaginal sex and last year’s news was flooded with stories of teenagers actively engaging in oral sex with multiple partners and in group settings. The HPV vaccine Gardasil, intended to protect young women from HPV-related cervical cancer, has been discussed from message boards to national media outlets as parents and doctors have debated whether it is worth the pain and cost. This means we not only need to be vigilant in our own sexual behaviors to protect ourselves from HPV and the possibility of throat and tonsil cancers, we also need to better educate young women about why oral sex they are engaging in early and often could have dire consequences later in life. I think we also need to be activists in supporting the development of an HPV vaccine for boys and more research about how this virus is raiding our bodies.As for ourselves, we could all probably get caught up in worrying about how our college years might lead to oral cancer today. Instead of that, I propose we start talking more honestly about how we can have fun, delight in the deliciousness of bodies, sex and intimacy and still keep ourselves healthy and safe. Or at least healthier and safer.

A: Considering just about everything causes cancer these days, like processed cheese, cellphones and mayonaise… I say no. I live my life & I don’t worry about it.