LucyGoosey

There is NO "Harvard protocol" on head lice. There never was a Harvard protocol on head lice. This is the greatest myth there is on the management of head lice. If your school is following what they believed to be a Harvard protocol you may have an opportunity to right the record and encourage safer measures. "Because it's not about lice, it's about kids." http://www.headlice.org

Fear of reinfestation, and more. Here's a more balanced discussion on the subject from Boston public radio. We have to remember that pediculosis leads directly to the use of pesticides on kids. This makes it a public health issue worth our while. Those who want to say it is just a nuisance would be surprised at the FDA's adverse event data from even one exposure to a lice shampoo. http://commonhealth.wbur.org/2011/02/head-lice-etiquette-two/

All No Nit Policies are not written the same. Discussions like this demonstrate just how far the confusion goes. The No Nit Policy we know and respect is not about dismissal or treatment. It's about educating the community in advance about head lice and helping families learn how to screen and detect them as early as posible so they can send their kids to school lice and nit free. The statement (link below) is proactive --prevention based AND in spite of the bad press and misinformation ...it's also evidence-based. Sending kids home as the first step in managing head lice is reactive, treatment- based and promotes chaos and potential harm to kids who get treated again and again with products that never were and never will be 100% effective unless all the nits are removed. Your No Nit Policy may not resemble the standard No Nit Policy in any way. The No Nit Policy is about doing the best we can in an imperfect situation. Pediculosis is a communicable disease that requires a communicable disease prevention approach. Hope you will have a chance to read the No Nit Policy statement on headlice.org. It was written to help nurses as much as it was written to protect kids and families. It's an administrative policy not a treatment policy. It's a prevention policy not a punishment policy. You can download it from here as well. http://www.headlice.org/downloads/nonitpolicy.htm

Finally -- a journalist who has a brain, a heart and courage to see through the cow dung and tell it like it is. Pass it to others. http://healthnewsdigest.com/news/article_4723.shtml Tis' the Season... for Head Lice By Michael D. Shaw, Correspondent at Large - HealthNewsDigest.com Oct 30, 2006, 07:00 Email this article Printer friendly page 'TIS THE SEASON...FOR HEAD LICE (HealthNewsDigest.com).. Along with the glorious colors of the leaves turning in much of the country, and cooler temperatures, the arrival of autumn can often bring unwanted guests. I'm referring to head-scratching among school children, and that doesn't just mean that they might be asked a question by their teacher that seems to be difficult to answer. The head-scratching may be caused by that common parasite--Pediculus humorifice capitis--also known as the head louse. And, since no human host gets just one, they are better known by their plural form--head lice. Since head lice can be spread whenever there is direct contact of the head or hair with an infested individual, and via the sharing of personal articles such as hats, towels, brushes, and hair ties, it is not surprising that schools would be a fine place to catch these pests. These creatures do not have hind legs that would allow them to jump like fleas, and they don't have wings to fly, so they cannot of their own volition spread from one host to another. The good news is that lice are non-discriminatory; they make no distinction between race, class, or religion, despite the false beliefs of some who cling to the idea that any outbreak is solely a phenomenon of the poor or slovenly. The bad news is that, given our abuse of various medicines, lice now have an immunity to traditionally powerful forms of treatment. In fact, scientists believe that 80 percent of these insects can fight most over-the-counter lotions, including the chemicals permathrin and phenothrin. Treatment is only an option when active lice or viable eggs are visible. Itching of the scalp or the perception that something is crawling on the head do not warrant treatment for lice. Bear in mind that head lice are an annoyance, not a public health crisis. They rarely cause direct harm, and are not known to transmit infectious agents from person-to-person. However, since the head lice is closely related to Pediculus humorifice humorifice, the body louse, which does transmit such diseases as typhus, it is wise not to ignore the pathogenic possibilities of head lice. Head lice can cause itching or loss of sleep; the louse's saliva and feces may sensitize people to their bites, worsening the irritation and increasing the chance of secondary infection from excessive scratching. Another factor, only recently being publicized, derives from the well-intentioned but misguided use of caustic or toxic substances to eliminate the lice. Some products are available that are touted as being "natural," even if there is no accepted definition of this term. Of course, a less toxic treatment is preferable, but little data is available establishing efficacy. Indeed, efficacy of treatment will always be clouded by the determination and diligence of the parent, above and beyond the inherent factors of the treatment modality. The most effective treatment, and the least toxic, is the time-proven method of using a specialized comb to remove the lice, and their eggs (called "nits"). Check the website of the National Pediculosis Association ® for detailed information. http://www.headlice.org Thankfully, lice generally lack the potential to cause an epdidemic. According to the Harvard School of Public Health, the basic reproduction number (a measure that defines the number of secondary infections arising from an index case) is far lower for head lice than for infections due to cold or flu viruses. This opens up the topic of the so-called no-nits policies that are in place in many school districts. On the one hand, if a child is barred from school for having nits, the condition can be easily cleared up within a day or two. On the other hand, some authorities drift toward political correctness by condemning such policies only because they SEEM to hearken back to lice-related ethnic prejudices of the past. Moreover, they claim that such policies are ineffective, conveniently ignoring the extreme difficulty in obtaining meaningful data on human diseases, especially those whereby treatment efficacy is almost completely dependent on parent effort. Clearly, if there are no nits in the school, there will be no cases of head lice! Finally, I can't help but think that those against no-nits may harbor their own prejudices about putting public health into the hands of the public, and not esteemed authorities such as themselves. Lice are a nuisance, not a cause for panic, unless toxic remedies are brought to bear. Given enhanced means of communication, and the public's continuing interest in good health, we should be able to vastly reduce the incidence of this parasite. [email protected] Michael D. Shaw Exec VP Interscan Corporation [email protected] http://www.gasdetection.com http://www.HealthNewsDigest.com © Copyright by HealthNewsDigest.com

Cosmetologists lose their license if they have infested person or any sign of an infestation in their shop. Child Protective Services see any sign of chronic lice as critera for neglect, military says head lice and body lice capable of carrying disease and they shave heads and impregnate uniforms (not always a good thing), prisons check for lice when inmates "admitted" to facility but schools and kids? How do you teach the importance of hygiene to children when the school nurse says it's okay to keep lice eggs in their hair?

Lice are resistant to the treatments. Using them no benefit. We need a prevention-focused approach rather than treatment-focused approach. Only ones who benefit from using treatments lice are resistant to are the companies and their paid consultants. Don't think anybody believes sending a kid home for 2 nits is logical. Remove them when you find them and then ....the kid doesn't have them anymore. Everybody wins.

http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/webwatch/2006/04/lice_arent_nice.html

How is it that so many school nurses are all of a sudden willing to let down the guard for head lice? Truth is there are also many others who aren't. Don't get the rationale for it really. What about basic hygiene? Leaving nits is leaving lice to hatch. ??!! http://www.headlice.org/news/2006/050206_headliceWin.html

Collembola found in scrapings from individuals diagnosed with delusory parasitosis 07/12/04, Needham, MA - Each year, thousands of Americans complain to their physicians about itching, stinging, biting and crawling sensations on or under their skin. Many believe they have head lice or scabies, though they are often referred to psychiatrists or prescribed anti-psychotic medications. Now, a new clinical study indicates that many of these people do have something in their skin: Collembola, also known as springtails. Ninety percent of those who participated in the study were found to have Collembola, which are ubiquitous in nature and minute in size, according to the study conducted under the auspices of the National Pediculosis Association (NPA) in Needham, Mass., and the Oklahoma State Department of Health. The findings are reported in the new edition of the Journal of the New York Entomological Association, headquartered at the American Museum of Natural History. All of the study participants had been diagnosed with delusory parasitosis, a presumed psychiatric condition among people who believe they are infested with an insect or parasite. But the new findings bolster the contention of many patients that they "actually have something crawling on or under their skin and are not delusional," said the journal article. Categorized as hexapods, with six legs, antennas, and no wings, Collembola feed on algae, fungi, bacteria and decaying matter. During the past few years, 1,500 people have contacted the NPA to report the crawling sensations and related symptoms. The study focused on 20 of these people -- and skin scrapings revealed that all but two of them had Collembola. Researchers used special imaging techniques to discover the Collembola, which are extremely well hidden and easy to miss. "Collembola as a common denominator in people diagnosed with delusory parasitosis calls for more research to better understand the relationship between Collembola and humans and the critical need to help those who suffer with this condition," said NPA president Deborah Altschuler, one of six researchers who authored the article. "We believe the study breaks the century-old logjam that the sensations of crawling, stinging, and biting are only imagined." Collembola predominately dwell in soil and litter, preferring wet or damp surroundings. They sometimes congregate in large numbers under leaky kitchen or bathroom sinks, swimming pools or in the soil of potted plants. Little is known about the health effects of Collembola, or how to prevent or treat them as a problem for human skin. The NPA encourages medical professionals, sufferers or anyone with information on these or similar symptoms to share information by visiting the NPA's Reporting Registry. Reprints of the article are available from the NPA and can be requested via the registry. Besides Altschuler, authors of the article included Oklahoma State Health Commissioner Michael Crutcher, Romania-based researchers Neculai Dulceanu, and Cristina Terinte, Beth Cervantes of NPA and Louis Sorkin of the American Museum of Natural History. COLLEMBOLA (SPRINGTAILS) (ARTHROPODA: HEXAPODA: ENTOGNATHA) FOUND IN SCRAPINGS FROM INDIVIDUALS DIAGNOSED WITH DELUSORY PARASITOSIS Issn: 0028-7199 Journal: Journal of the New York Entomological Society Volume: 112 Issue: 1 Pages: 87-95 Authors: Altschuler, Deborah Z., Crutcher, Michael, Dulceanu, Neculai, Cervantes, Beth A., Terinte, Cristina, Sorkin, Louis N. DOI: 10.1043/0028-7199(2004)1122.0.CO;2 eum of Natural History in New York.

When it comes to head lice control, the National Association of School Nurses appears to have loyalty to product manufacturers in spite of it all. http://www.headlice.org/news/2004/pr041304.htm

Thank you! This picture worth a zillion words. BTW -- Whazzup with the google ads for lice products that come up on the side of the discusion board? Talk about lousy.

Actually lice a pretty serious issue for kids who are shampooed with pesticides by parents who weren't warned about the risks. Thing is -- there are lots of reports from nurses who've been permanently disabled from using the stuff too. Not sure how Jesse's mom would feel about your question but maybe reading about her experience will help shed some light. http://www.headlice.org/jesseproject/jesseproject.htm

NY State proposes legislation banning the sale, use, and prescription of Lindane Assemblyman Harvey Weisenberg introduces bill that would prohibit any lice or scabies treatment product from containing the pesticide Lindane. Once lindane is gone (YAHOO!) NY nurses need to help keep the pesticide malathion from replacing it. Nurses not immune from the adverse events from these pesticides. Aside from unfortunately being directed to use them as parents on their own kids -- ER nurses, nursing home nurses and pediatric nurses get exposed to lice and "treat" themselves too. A lot of the time it is done out of fear or hopeful (but not founded) prevention. The planet and the humans who try to live on it much better off without lindane and without malathion! http://www.headlice.org/news/2004/ny-lindane.htm "Future will depend upon our wisdom not to replace one poison with another." National Pediculosis Association

Huge issue for everyone -- not just residents. Scabies is often the first thing that comes to mind without ruling out other culprits or extensive troubleshooting. As others have already warned -- going forward the elimite + atarax puts them at even greater risk. No room for guesswork. Residents (as well as staffers that treat out of fear without warnings for their particular vulnerabilities such as ?pregnant ?asthma, s/p chemo? ) -- become prime candidates for adverse events when all this is followed with more heavy artillery. Say no to lindane or Ivermectin either of which is bad bad news. Bacterial stuff might be picked up by doing some cultures from the skin. Itching is one thing. Anybody complaining of biting or crawling? In addition to questions already posted....Any water leaks in the place? Sewage backup/problem? Mold? Monthy exteriminator services? Visiting pets? Window sills loaded with leaves or...bird nests?

Not finding the link you just posted. Help needed to find it. RealityNursing sounds great to me. Doesn't mean have to start from the very beginning -- just means putting a stop to supporting the status quo. Telling the adminstrators that the gig is up. The Allnurses activism section has ability to get ball rolling with an on line petition. The big nonprofits have become banks. Here's an example: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2003-11-28-aarp-grows_x.htm "It's important for people to know what you stand for. It's more important to let people know what you won't stand for." Anonymous

It is shameful. Can you imagine what would happen if nurses took back their profession and started their own new nonprofit with a mission to be medically and morally ethical? No pharmaceutical b.s. -- just about nurses and nursing. Powerful option there for the taking. Internet can make it happen -- no fancy tropical destinations in the wintertime or exhibit halls for everyone to sell their b.s. -- plain and simple, no need for parmaceutical dollars ------- just use the magnificent freedom (note the letters that spell "free") that the web provides to advocate without selling out. Too cool. Allnurses.com is testimony to the power of having a voice! If I'm not mistaken we do still live in America.

Agree totally!! Nurses need PR help big time but it needs to reflect and involve the grass roots nurses -- the ones in the trenches -- rather than the "professional organizations" that are supposed to represent the nurses but don't. Many organizations sell out their members in favor of the pharmaceutical company $$$ and product promotions that fund the poh lit'l not for profit's annual meetings and yogurt bars. In the end everybody loses ....everybody but the pharmaceutical companies.

Enough to make the blood boil JAMES REYNOLDS ENVIRONMENT CORRESPONDENT "Aong with 150 others, from politicians and journalists to leaders of environmental NGOs and lobby groups, I volunteered to have my blood tested for three groups of dangerous chemicals, including PCBs, organochlorine pesticides and PBDEs, or flame-retardants." Seriously hazardous chemicals can be found in the tissue of nearly every person alive. It is a frightening thought, but exposure to such toxic substances has been linked to a higher incidence in several cancers, reproductive complications, a continuing decline in fertility rates and birth defects. Like the majority of people, I was unaware of the levels of these chemicals circulating in my bloodstream, so when the opportunity to find out about them came along, I seized it. Along with 150 others, from politicians and journalists to leaders of environmental NGOs and lobby groups, I volunteered to have my blood tested for three groups of dangerous chemicals, including PCBs, organochlorine pesticides and PBDEs, or flame-retardants. The biomonitoring survey, which is the largest exercise the UK has seen in biomonitoring in over two decades, is part of a chemicals and health campaign set up by the environmental organisation WWF. It seeks to discover the extent of volunteers' contamination with the sort of chemicals and toxic substances that, largely without consumers' knowledge, are routinely sprayed on crops and food, added to paints and home-decorating products, and used in everything from furniture and carports to computers and televisions. In June, at the time the samples were taken, I did not imagine the analysis would turn up any particular nasties. For the first 18 years of my life, from 1972, I lived in a village on the fringes of the countryside near the industrial town of Warrington, in Cheshire. Although in my early years the claimed health benefits of switching to organic food had yet to made, my parents were aware that agriculture was largely chemical-dependent, and our supermarket fruit and vegetables were always washed before being eaten. I have since continued in the same vein of my upbringing, avoiding the expensive switch to organic, but conscious that supermarket fruit and vegetables may have residues of agricultural chemicals and should therefore be washed before eating. I am also a carnivore, and although I am not unhappy if I do not get a daily dose of something's cooked flesh, I eat a lot of what is likely to be intensively farmed chicken and, particularly, fish. In short, as far as what I put into my body is concerned, I think I'm pretty healthy - but not perfect. But external influences, or the impact of a person's surrounding domestic, work and leisure environment, can also affect their degree of toxicity. Since leaving home for university 13 years ago, I have lived in the comparatively polluted atmospheres of major cities, but I have never worked in any business close to the chemical industry. My test results came back last week, detailing my exposure to 77 chemicals, along with the collective minimum, maximum and median of the other volunteers. When the full results are published in full later this month, they will reveal that not one of the 150 participants had clean blood. One fortunate individual showed detectable levels of only nine of the 77 substances measured. I had 19, and this was below average compared with a maximum of 49 and a median of 27. All of the results for the chemicals found are given in "ng/g lipid" - which stands for nanograms of chemical per gram of fat tested. Put simply, this reveals how many thousand-millionths of a gram of chemical were found for every gram of my fat tested. It sounds negligible, but there is a catch. Virtually nothing is known about the long-term effects on human health of these chemicals, in any quantity. Many of them were first made when manufacturers had no legal requirement to carry out any safety tests, and none has been tested on humans. Add this to the fact that no-one knows which of these chemicals may react together, and things start to get scary. In addition, the 77 chemicals tested are merely the tip of the iceberg. There are 100,000 synthetic, man-made ones in the environment, with 30,000 of those traded freely in the EU. If a perfect test were available, it would probably prove I am home to hundreds, possibly thousands, of synthetic and toxic chemical compounds, the majority of which come under the umbrella of persistent bioaccumulative endocrine disrupters. This means that they do not break down readily in the environment and therefore remain at large for many years once released, that they have the property of building up in living things in progressively greater quantities, and that they can interfere with the normal functioning of the hormone system of both humans and wildlife. Icontain 11 of the 42 PCBs tested for in the survey, although all at levels lower than the median of the volunteers. Considering that I was born after their manufacture was prohibited in 1970 and because of the very fact that they build up in the environment, I am rather alarmed by this. However, according to Dr Asma Khan, a London consultant hired by WWF to advise on test results, I shouldn't be. Prior to being banned, PCBs were so ubiquitous you would be hard pushed to find anyone in industrial countries without detectable levels in their blood. They are highest in animals high up the food chain, with the main dietary sources being fish (especially those caught in contaminated lakes or rivers), fish oils, meat and dairy products. I am without doubt still being exposed to WWF's second target set of substances, organochlorine pesticides, which includes DDT, DDE, Lindane and HCBs. No matter how furiously I scrub my vegetables, I will be unable to erase chemical traces in certain food-stuffs, although I was found to contain only three of the 12 tested for, again all at lower levels than the group median. Developed and in widespread use in the 1960s and used widely to control agricultural pests, as well as human and farm-animal diseases, many have now been banned in the UK after they were belatedly found to be highly persistent in the environment and cause long-term toxic effects in wildlife. Certain populations of birds of prey were devastated due to DDT causing their egg-shells to thin and break. DDT from the mother can enter her unborn baby through the placenta. DDT has been found in amniotic fluid, human placentas, foetuses and umbilical cord blood. DDT has been measured in human milk, so nursing infants are also exposed to it. In most cases, however, the benefits of breast-feeding outweigh any risks from exposure to DDT in the mother's milk. Most worrying of all the tests was the exposure to flame-retardants, or polybrominated diphenyl ethers, PBDEs. These are used extensively in textiles and plastics, and are commonly employed in polyurethane foam for furniture and upholstery to mitigate domestic fire risk. Having purchased a new sofa a year ago, I was not surprised to learn that this was the area where I was most contaminated. Although only five of the 23 tested for were found to be present, every one found was at concentrations significantly above the average. There is a theory that these chemicals escape from materials and enter our bodies via our skin or lungs, so just by sitting on my new sofa, I am prolonging my contamination. Some scientists are also concerned that PBDEs may enter food from packaging. The list of potential harmful effects is similar to that of PCBs, but less is known about them. Sadly, save for living in a Luddite world where all technological advances are outlawed, a PBDE-free existence will forever remain a fantasy. I am not at all surprised that I am host to chemicals about which little is known of their consequences to human health. I am, however, angry that I have no freedom of choice in the matter. Source: http://www.news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1257142003

Just got another unsolicited mailing for CME credit opportunity. When you read the fine print you see all the authors of the danged thing work for the product manufacturers. DUH -- guess what products they recommend? Beginning to think they are all like this -- Yet we can get credit for reading the propaganda. I don't get it. Does anybody know of any rules to protect against it? Searched internet but didn't find much on protecting against it. Hard copy spamming of my time, my desk and my brain -- credits needed or not.

Culture for the particular area of skin/scalp may give clues?