Three Foundations Join Forces to Advance Obesity Prevention Efforts in Connecticut

If an ounce of prevention is truly worth a pound of cure, efforts in Connecticut may hold the key to turning around the nation’s obesity epidemic – especially among children. Connecticut has the 10th lowest adult obesity rate in the nation, according to a study released earlier this year. The state’s adult obesity rate is 26 percent, up from 16.0 percent in 2000 and from 10.4 percent in 1990.  That places Connecticut 42^nd among the 50 states.  The childhood obesity rate is 30 percent for 10-17 year olds, ranking 29^th among the states, and 15 percent for 2-4 year olds qualifying for federal nutrition assistance, the 12^th highest obesity rate in the country.  And that is where the focus of three Connecticut-based foundations will be, as they combine forces to award $194,884 in grants for obesity prevention projects in Connecticut.

The grants are being funded with contributions from the Children's Fund of Connecticut ($139,884), the Connecticut Health Foundation ($30,000), and Newman's Own Foundation ($25,000) and will be administered by CFC's non-profit subsidiary, the Child Health and Development Institute (CHDI).

Funded projects will inform and advance efforts to prevent obesity by improving early feeding practices for diverse socio-economic, racial, and ethnic groups across various early childhood settings.

"Childhood obesity is a wide-spread public health crisis disproportionately impacting racial and ethnic minorities and low-income children. Once obesity sets in it is very difficult to reverse; however, we are still searching for effective ways to prevent it," said Judith Meyers, President and CEO of the Children's Fund of Connecticut.

"New research on infant and toddler feeding practices shows promising results. These grants to improve infant and toddler feeding practices will help us learn more about what works so we can get ahead of the curve."

The competitive application process administered by CHDI yielded the following funded projects:

• Healthy Eating through Group Well Child Care: $59,904, Yale University

Under the direction of Marjorie Rosenthal, MD, MPH, the project examines the impact of embedding a healthy eating curriculum within group well child care, an evidenced-based model of primary care delivery at the Yale New Haven Hospital Primary Care Center. Expected outcomes include less rapid weight gain for infants in the first six months and improvement in mothers' weight over the first year of her child's life.

• Barriers to Participation in CACFP in CT: $64,998, UConn, Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity

Tatiana Andreyeva, PhD, Associate Professor at the UConn Rudd Center, will lead a study that documents and addresses barriers to participation in the federal Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) among Connecticut child care centers serving infants and toddlers from low-income families. Connecticut has one of the lowest CACFP participation rates in the nation. The project team will use surveys and stakeholder interviews to assess perceived and actual barriers to CACFP participation and assess outreach and recruitment strategies currently used in Connecticut to increase center enrollment in CACFP.

• Supporting Healthy Eating in Low-Income Toddlers: $64,982, UConn, Allied Health Sciences

Under the direction of Valerie B. Duffy, PhD, RD and Jennifer L. Harris, PhD, MBA, the project will develop and assess a coordinated communications program to deliver consistent messages to low-income parents in East Hartford about best practices for feeding toddlers (1-2 year olds). The messages will be delivered through pediatric clinics, WIC offices, and Family Resource centers in East Hartford. The project will coordinate infant feeding messages and promote responsive feeding across diverse populations and settings.

Funding is also supporting Connecticut Children's Medical Center's Office for Community Child Health to develop and disseminate training for pediatric primary care providers. The training will address key messages to educate parents about best practices in feeding infants and toddlers.

These projects represent the second cycle of funding from CFC in the early childhood obesity prevention arena. Since 2015, CFC has awarded more than $420,000 to advance early childhood obesity prevention.

The work of the first round of grantees helped CFC and CHDI identify public policies that contribute to obesity prevention, test the effectiveness of messages promoting obesity prevention in infants and toddlers, support breast feeding strategies for hospitals, and harness existing medical record data to identify early childhood obesity risks.

The current round of funding was informed by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's recently released Feeding Guidelines for Infants and Young Toddlers: A Responsive Parenting Approach, which highlights new areas of research and practice in obesity prevention.  The data-rich State of Obesity: Better Policies for a Healthier America, published earlier this year, was a project of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Trust for America’s Health.

Unhealthy Food Marketing Targets Hispanic Youth, UConn Researchers Find

Hispanic children and youth, particularly youth in Spanish-speaking households, visited food/beverage websites at higher rates than their non-Hispanic counterparts, despite fewer visits to the Internet overall, according to a research study published by University of Connecticut faculty members. “The frequency with which youth in Spanish-speaking households visited popular food and beverage websites compared with primarily English-speaking Hispanic youth raises further concerns due to the potential for these sites to reinforce preferences for an ‘‘American’’ diet among less acculturated youth, which could contribute to Hispanic youth’s worsening diet with greater acculturation,” Maia Hyary and Jennifer Harris point out in the inaugural issue of the journal Health Equity, published in September.

They stress that “Further research is needed to understand why Hispanic youth disproportionately visit food/beverage websites to help inform potential actions to reduce their exposure to unhealthy food marketing.”

The researchers warn that “given higher rates of obesity and diet-related diseases among Hispanic youth, food and beverage companies should not target marketing of unhealthy products to Hispanic youth online.”

Dr. Jennifer L. Harris is Director of Marketing Initiatives at the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity and Associate Professor in Allied Health Sciences at University of Connecticut. She leads a multidisciplinary team of researchers who study food marketing to children, adolescents, and parents, and how it impacts their diets and health. Maia Hyary is a PhD student at the Heller School for Social Policy and Management at Brandeis University and a former Rudd Center Research Associate.

Food and beverage companies often target marketing for nutrient-poor products such as candy, sugary drinks, snack foods, and fast-food restaurants to Hispanic audiences, including youth, the researchers state.  They cite previous research that has documented disproportionate exposure to unhealthy food marketing by Hispanic youth in their communities and on TV, but theirs is the first examination of the phenomenon on the internet.

Sites that were relatively more popular with Hispanic youth than with non-Hispanic youth included ChuckeCheese.com, HappyMeal.com, the Lunchables website, FrostedFlakes.com, and two Spanish language websites (ComidaKraft.com and McDonald’sMeEncanta.com). Among Hispanic children (under 12 years), ChuckECheese.com, FrootLoops.com, HappyMeal.com, TacoBell.com, LuckyCharms.com, and SubwayKids.com were relatively more popular.

Health Equity is a new peer-reviewed open access journal that “meets the urgent need for authoritative information about health disparities and health equity among vulnerable populations,” according to the publication’s website, “with the goal of providing optimal outcomes and ultimately health equity for all.” The journal intends to provide coverage ranging from translational research to prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and management of disease and illness, in order to serve as a primary resource for organizations and individuals who serve these populations at the community, state, regional, tribal, and national levels.

PHOTO:  Dr. Jennifer L. Harris, Maia Hyary

National Immunization Month Concludes as School Year Begins

National Immunization Awareness Month (NIAM) is an annual observance held in August to highlight the importance of vaccination for people of all ages, and communities throughout Connecticut are responding with local initiatives aimed at increasing public awareness and understanding. NIAM was established to encourage people of all ages to make sure they are up to date on the vaccines recommended for them. Communities nationwide – including in Connecticut - have continued to use the month each year to raise awareness about the important role vaccines play in preventing serious, sometimes deadly, diseases.

NPHIC, in collaboration with CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, developed information focusing on various age populations, including Babies and young children (July 31-August 6); Pregnant women (August 7-13); Adults (August 14-20); Preteen/Teen (August 21-27); Back to School (July/August).

Among the Connecticut communities participating through the end of the month are Bridgeport, Danbury, Hartford, Naugatuck Valley, New Britain, New Haven, Norwalk, Stamford, Torrington, Waterbury and West Haven.  In West Haven on Thursday, for example, there will be an information table at the West Haven Farmer’s Market.  That same day in New Haven, immunization coordinators will be on hand at the New Haven Health Department offices. Other communities have been utilizing social media, meeting with parents and students to assist with immunization information at the start of the school year, providing explanatory materials and making health department staff available for public information sessions.

The Connecticut Department of Public Health (DPH) explains that most vaccine-preventable diseases are caused by germs that are called viruses or bacteria. Vaccines to help prevent these diseases generally contain weakened or killed viruses or bacteria specific to the disease. Vaccines help your body recognize and fight these germs and protect you each time you come in contact with someone who is sick with any of these diseases.

There are a series of steps that your body goes through to develop immunity through vaccination, the DPH website explains:

• a vaccine is given by a shot (influenza vaccine may be given by a nasal spray and rotavirus vaccine is given by mouth).
• over the next few weeks your body makes antibodies and memory cells against the weakened or dead germs in the vaccine.
• the antibodies can fight the real disease germs if you are exposed to the germs and they invade your body. The antibodies will help destroy the germs and you will not become ill.
• antibodies and memory cells stay on guard in your body for years after vaccination to safeguard you from the real disease germs.

The Connecticut Vaccine Program is Connecticut’s childhood vaccination program. It ensures all children in the state get the vaccinations they need, when they need them, to stay healthy. The state buys vaccine at the lowest possible price through a government contract, and gives the vaccines at no cost to clinics, private doctors, and other health care providers. These providers then vaccinate children without charging patients for the cost of the vaccine (health care providers may still charge an administration fee). Without this program, some insurance companies may not cover the full cost of vaccine, making it too expensive for some families.  There are hundreds of health care providers enrolled in the Connecticut Vaccine Program (CVP) throughout the state, according to the department.

Most vaccines are given to babies and young children, DPH points out, but “some are needed throughout your lifetime to make sure you stay protected. This protection is called immunity. Vaccines are an important and safe way to keep you healthy.”

Stamford Taking Strides to Respond to Student Mental Health Concerns; Research Recommendations Lead to Progress

Stamford Public Schools, acting on recommendations developed by the Child Health and Development Institute of Connecticut (CHDI), is making strides in addressing students mental health needs that may provide effective approaches for schools systems in Connecticut and nationwide that are looking to better address mental health issues, especially in light of increased public attention on issues from suicide prevention to trauma response. “While appreciating that the schools’ primary role is to educate children, many districts such as Stamford are increasingly seeking ways to address behavioral health concerns as an important way of supporting academic achievement, school climate and overall well-being,” said Dr. Jeana Bracey, Director of School Community Initiatives at CHDI.

Results reported in an Issue Brief published by CHDI highlight some of the measurable “improved outcomes” in Stamford Public Schools following an intensive study and systemic recommendations for what is described as a “trauma-informed model for school mental health”:

• Data from 76 Stamford students who completed specific programs in FY 17 and 31 students in FY 16, showed significant reductions in PTSD symptoms and problem severity symptoms.
• Feedback from parents and teachers indicate a decrease in the severity of behavioral concerns in the classrooms and at home.
• School personnel report important changes in culture and climate that reflect an understanding of trauma, how it impacts students, and how to better address students’ needs using supportive and restorative approaches, rather than punitive measures.

The review of Stamford’s mental health services and supports for K-12 students, initiated in 2014   following a series of student suicides and an increase in the number of students experiencing suicidal thoughts and hospitalization, included an examination of the behavioral health needs of students, as well as the districts’ strengths and areas of concern in addressing these needs.  The process included focus groups and interviews and led to recommendations for improving Stamford’s school-based and school-linked mental health services and supports in four priority areas initially:

• Ensuring Sufficient Clinical Staff Capacity
• Providing Professional Development in Mental Health
• Engaging in Mental Health Planning and Oversight
• Promoting Data Collection and Evaluation

In the 2 ½ years since CHDI began to work with Stamford, the local school district has expanded the number of evidence-based services for students from zero to four, implemented district-wide trauma and behavioral health training and supports for staff, and collaborated to build internal capacity and integrate community and state resources and services for students.

Overall, officials report positive feedback from parents, teachers and other school personnel to the changes, and their impact on students and the school communities.

The Issue Brief notes that “Lessons learned in Stamford can help guide other districts seeking to improve their mental health services and supports.”  Among the recommendations to achieve a system “that is more responsive to the needs of their students,” are a commitment from district administrators and school board members, a comprehensive needs assessment, an examination of public and private funding sources, a blending of school-based and community-based services, establishment of peer groups to support mental health staff, and creating small pilot projects that would provide information that would inform subsequent efforts.

In Stamford, CHDI assisted in training school social workers and psychologists to deliver Cognitive Behavioral Intervention for Trauma in Schools (CBITS), a school-based group intervention for grades 5-12, and its counterpart for younger elementary school children, Bounceback.  CBITS began in July 2015 and has been used in 46 schools across the state, reaching more than 800 students.  The results in Stamford mirrored those in other communities utilizing the approach; it has been shown to reduce PTSD and depression symptoms and psychosocial dysfunction in children who have experienced trauma.

Significantly, of the children who likely met the criteria for PTSD prior to treatment, approximately half of them no longer met the criteria for PTSD after 10 sessions of CBITS/Bounce Back.

The Child Health and Development Institute (CHDI)’s goal is to improve the health and well-being of Connecticut’s children by building stronger and more effective health and mental health systems that result in better outcomes for all children in Connecticut, especially the underserved.  The organization pursues these objectives with research, evaluation, training and technical assistance and support for demonstration projects that inform system change.

Best Run Cities in USA? Not in Connecticut, Study Finds

A new analysis of the best run among the 150 largest cities in America shows that Connecticut’s three largest fail to make the top half of the list, with Bridgeport coming closest. Bridgeport is ranked #77, New Haven is #122, and Hartford ranked #145. 

In order to determine the best- and worst-run cities in America, WalletHub’s analysts compared 150 of the most populated cities across six key categories: 1) Financial Stability, 2) Education, 3) Health, 4) Safety, 5) Economy and 6) Infrastructure & Pollution.

The top ten best run cities are: Nampa, ID; Provo, UT; Boise, ID; Missoula, MT; Lexington, KY; Las Cruces, NM; Billings, MT; Bismarck, ND; Fort Wayne, IN and Louisville, KY.

For each city, the analysts constructed a “Quality of City Services” score – comprising 33 key performance indicators grouped into six service categories – that was then measured against the city’s total per-capita budget.  The website evaluated those dimensions using 33 relevant metrics, with each graded on a 100-point scale, with a score of 100 representing the highest quality of service.

In the “financial stability” ranking, only four cities ranked lower than Hartford, which was #146.  New Haven was #143 and Bridgeport #128 in that category.  In the education ranking, New Haven was #115, just ahead of Bridgeport at #116 and Hartford at #121.

Bridgeport reached the top ten nationally in the “health” category, at #8.  Hartford was #42 and New Haven #56.  The cities were again bunched toward the bottom of the list of 150 cities in the “economy” category, with Bridgeport at #142, New Haven #143 and Hartford #146.

Connecticut largest cities fared better in the “infrastructure and pollution” category, with Hartford ranked #36, New Haven #60, and Bridgeport lagging at #115.

Report Outlines Responses to Opioid Emergency as Numbers Climb

It’s official.  The opioid crisis has grown from a national crisis to a national emergency.  That fact is plainly evident than in Connecticut. The national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates there are enough opioid prescriptions for every American adult to have their own bottle. Connecticut saw 729 deaths from drug overdoses two years ago, and 917 last year. Published reports suggest that the number is trending towards a thousand deaths in the state this year.

In 2012, Connecticut was ranked 50th in the nation in opioid deaths, with just 2 per 100,000 people.  By 2015, that number spiked 5-and-a-half times, and Connecticut's ranking climbed to 12th.The latest numbers from the Office of the Chief State's Medical Examiner show the trend continued in 2016, with a 21 percent increase in deaths involving opioids in a year.

According to the National Center for Health Statistics, the first three quarters of 2016 brought an average overdose death rate of 19.3 per 100,000 population — a rate that’s 17 percent higher than during the same period in 2015.  If 2016’s rate holds steady through the final quarter — data for it isn’t yet available — it is anticipated that more than 62,300 people will have died of overdoses in the United States in 2016. For Connecticut, however, last year’s numbers were more than 25 deaths per 100,000 - significantly higher than the national average.

A 28-page policy report produced this year by the Governing Institute found that Baltimore, Washington, Ohio, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania “serve as models for other states to jump start their efforts,” to respond to the opioid crises.

The addictive nature of opioids and overprescribing are fueling the epidemic, the Governing report explains, pointing out that “in the last 15 years, the number of opioids prescribed and sold in the U.S. has quadrupled, even though the amount of pain Americans report is the same.”

“The most important thing for policymakers to remember is this epidemic is a multi-faceted that requires multifaceted policy solutions,” the report, “A Crisis: A Practical Guide for Policymakers to Mitigate the Opioid Epidemic,” concluded.

A report released last week from a national commission led by New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie noted that number of deaths is approaching 142 each day from drug overdoses across the country – a death toll that is "equal to September 11th every three weeks," AP reported.

State medical examiner James Gill said in May that his office sees at least two or three overdose deaths a day, and as many as five or six.  The state budget crisis has kept the state’s Chief Medical Examiner’s Office from releasing quarterly data for this year, WTNH reported this month.

“There is no single spot on the continuum of interventions that is the magic bullet,” explained Ohio’s director of the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services in the Governing Institute report. “Really you just have to take it piece by piece.”

The  report noted that “Medicaid beneficiaries are prescribed opioids at twice the rate of the rest of the population, and research indicates they are at 3 to 6 times greater risk of a fatal overdose.”  The report also observed the impact of the epidemic on the nation’s prison population: Eighty percent of prisoners have a history of drug abuse; 50 percent are addicted to drugs; 60 to 80 percent of prisoners abusing drugs commit a new crime after release; and approximately 95 percent of addicted prisoners relapse when they’re released, according to National Association of Drug Court Professionals (NADCP) data.

In 2016, the Connecticut General Assembly passed a law that prohibits a prescribing practitioner authorized to prescribe an opioid drug from issuing a prescription for more than a seven-day supply to (1) a minor or (2) an adult for first-time outpatient use (PA 16-43).  That timeframe was tightened further under legislation signed into law last month.  The 2016 law included an exception if the prescriber, in his or her professional judgment, determines a longer prescription is necessary, OLR noted.

In June, Gov. Malloy signed a bill that has as a key component reducing the maximum opioid drug prescription for minors from seven to five days.  It was introduced by Malloy at the beginning of session and passed unanimously through the Senate and House. The bill also increases security on controlled substance prescriptions by requiring scheduled drugs to be prescribed only electronically, which officials believe will cut back on the potential for prescription forgeries.  And it requires increased data-sharing between state agencies regarding opioid abuse and overdose deaths.

Attorney General George Jepsen’s office recently announced it would be joining a multistate probe into the marketing practices of opioid drugmakers.  Jepsen did not specify any companies by name, citing “the ongoing and sensitive nature of the investigation.”

Connecticut law allows various health care providers to prescribe opioids and opioid antagonists within their professional scope of practice, including physicians, APRNs, dentists, nurse-midwives, optometrists, PAs, podiatrists, and veterinarians, according to the Office of Legislative Research. Pharmacists can prescribe opioid antagonists if they receive a special certification and training to do so.

Economic Insecurity Plagues More Than Half of Single Seniors in CT, Report Finds

More than half of single adults age 65 and older in Connecticut can’t afford food, housing or other basic necessities, based on their income.  The “economic insecurity” of that population ranks Connecticut the 13^th highest rate in the nation.  In the neighboring states of Massachusetts, New York, and Rhode Island, the situation is even worse.  Massachusetts, in fact, has the second highest rate in the nation. Nationwide, 53 percent of single older adults fall below the index’s target value.  In Connecticut, the percentage is 56.1 percent.

The report, Living Below the Line: Economic Insecurity and Older Americans Insecurity in the States 2016, was published by the Center for Social and Demographic Research on Aging Publications at the University of Massachusetts Boston’s Gerontology Institute.

According to the report’s analysis, only about 15 percent of older Connecticut residents living alone fall below the poverty line, but 56.1 percent don’t make enough to live on, and often do not qualify for public assistance, because of the relatively high cost of living in the state.  The gap, the report points out, is 40.8 percent of Connecticut’s single elderly, among the largest in the nation.   Only four states have a larger percentage of that population below the index rate but above the poverty rate, reflecting the substantial economic insecurity in the state among the single elderly population.

The states with the largest percentage of single older adults situated below the index are Mississippi, Massachusetts, New York, Vermont, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Louisiana, New Hampshire, Arkansas, Kentucky, Maine, and Hawaii.

The report notes that “Northeastern states at the top of the rankings are characterized first and foremost by high Elder Index values, reflecting the high cost of living in these locations, whereas Southern states at the top of the rankings are characterized predominantly by low incomes.”

In considering the economic insecurity of elderly couples, Connecticut fared better in the analysis, ranking 25^th, midway among the states.  Still, fully one-quarter (25%) of the state’s elderly couples were below the index level, although only 2.9 percent fell below the poverty rate for income.

Most older adults rely on Social Security benefits as a key component of their incomes, the report pointed out. The Social Security Administration estimates that Social Security benefits provide one-third of all income received by older adults, and that lower-income elders are especially reliant on Social Security. The UMass-Boston analysis indicated that on average, half of older adults who live below the Elder Index rely on Social Security for at least 90 percent of their incomes.  In Connecticut, that percentage is 46.9 percent of single older adults and 45.2 percent of older couples.

The report concluded that “many older adults who live alone do not have the means to live with economic security. These older adults are of special concern, and policy and programs that address the concerns of single or couple elders living on their own— congregate and home-delivered meals, transportation, falls prevention, employment and training—should also be of special concern to federal, state and local governments.”

Noting that “Elder Economic Insecurity Rates demonstrate that a large proportion of every state’s independent older adults lack incomes that would allow them to escape the threat of poverty, to remain independent, and to age in their own homes,” the analysis implored that “each state must learn to recognize the economic security gap and those who fall into it.”

Developed by the Gerontology Institute at the University of Massachusetts Boston and Wider Opportunities for Women, and maintained through a partnership with the National Council on Aging (NCOA), the Elder Index defines economic security as the income level at which elders are able to cover basic and necessary living expenses and age in their homes, without relying on benefit programs, loans or gifts.

No Chocolate Milk? Kids Get Used to Plain Milk, UConn Study Finds

There’s good news and bad news for chocolate milk advocates, depending upon which University of Connecticut research study you come across.  The studies don’t necessarily conflict, but provide differing points of view in the plain milk vs. chocolate milk debate. A new study by the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at the University of Connecticut has found that most students adjust to drinking plain milk after flavored milk is removed from school lunch menus.

Flavored milk served in the National School Lunch Program contains up to 10 grams of added sugar per serving, which is 40 percent of a child’s daily allowance of added sugar. Given the nation’s key public health target of limiting added sugars in children’s diets, flavored milk has come under scrutiny in the context of school nutrition, UConn Today recently reported.

The study, published in July in the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, measured plain milk selection and consumption in the years after flavored milk was removed in two schools. Key findings include:

• The first school year after flavored milk was removed, 51.5 percent of students selected milk and drank 4 ounces per carton, indicating school-wide per-student consumption of 2.1 ounces.
• Two years later, 72 percent of students selected milk and drank 3.4 ounces per carton, significantly increasing the school-wide per-student consumption to 2.5 ounces.
• Older students and boys consumed significantly more milk.
• The availability of 100 percent fruit juice at lunch was associated with a significant decrease in students selecting milk and lower milk consumption per carton throughout the years of the study. Both years, student selection and consumption of plain milk dropped significantly on days when 100 percent fruit juice was also available.

The study could have implications for school nutrition policy and efforts to reduce added sugars in children’s diets. The study was conducted in two elementary (K-8) schools in an urban New England school district during the 2010-2011 and 2012-2013 school years. Researchers assessed the selection and consumption of milk immediately after flavored milk was removed in the 2010-2011 school year, and two years later in the 2012-2013 school year.

“The decision to remove flavored milk has both nutritional benefits and potential costs. It is clearly an effective way to lower student intake of added sugars at lunch, and over time, the majority of students will switch to plain milk,” said Marlene Schwartz, professor of human development and family studies, director of the UConn Rudd Center, and lead author of the study. “However, there will always be some students who don’t like plain milk. The challenge is finding a way to meet their dietary needs by providing other nutrient-rich options at lunch.”

The study was funded by the Cornell Center for Behavioral Economics in Child Nutrition Programs and the Rudd Foundation.  In the conclusion to the study, the researchers note that “A school policy to remove flavored milk has potential public health benefits and costs—it is likely to decrease consumption of added sugars at lunch for all children, but it is also likely to decrease consumption of milk for some children and increase their risk of missing key nutrients.”

Seven years ago, another UConn researcher was touting the virtues of chocolate milk.  That study, centered in Professor Nancy R. Rodriguez’s lab, found that drinking a 16-ounce glass of fat-free chocolate milk after exercise gives the body essential proteins and carbohydrates that help refuel weary muscles better than a beverage containing carbohydrates alone.

Rodriguez, with joint appointments in the departments of kinesiology and allied health – and who serves, then and now, as UConn’s director of sports nutrition – advocated for the benefits of milk in relation to athletic performance since the late 1990’s. But the 2010 study believed to be the first study of its kind showing a direct correlation between consuming chocolate milk and improved muscle recovery after prolonged exercise.

Results showed that chocolate milk was as effective as the carbohydrate drink in replenishing the body’s stores of glycogen, a form of carbohydrate the body uses as fuel during intense or prolonged exercise. Rodriguez said at the time that the sugar from the chocolate syrup in the milk helps athletes replace depleted glycogen in their muscles to prepare them for their next workout.

Rodriguez subsequently served on the President’s Council on Fitness, Sports, and Nutrition (PCFSN), 2014-2017. She has been a Sports Nutritionist for the NFL’s Indianapolis Colts and has provided services to the NBA’s Chicago Bulls and Charlotte Bobcats, and the AHL’s Hartford Wolfpack.

The 2010 study was funded by the National Dairy Council and the National Fluid Milk Processor Promotion Board.

Danger in CT: Not Buckling Up in Rear Seat is Hazardous to Your (and Others) Health

Twenty-nine states require passengers riding in a vehicle’s rear seat to buckle up with a seat belt.  Connecticut is not among them. A new survey from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety highlights the common misperception that buckling up is optional – as well as the potential life-threatening hazards to rear and front seat passengers if those in the back seat opt not to buckle up.

"People who don't use safety belts might think their neglect won't hurt anyone else. That's not the case," indicates Jessica Jermakian, an IIHS senior research engineer and a co-author of the study. "In the rear seat a lap/shoulder belt is the primary means of protection in a frontal crash. Without it, bodies can hit hard surfaces or other people at full speed, leading to serious injuries.”

Among adults who admit to not always using safety belts in the back seat, 4 out of 5 surveyed say short trips or traveling by taxi or ride-hailing service are times they don't bother to use the belt.  Nearly 40 percent of people surveyed said they sometimes don't buckle up in the rear seat because there is no law requiring it. If there were such a law, 60 percent of respondents said it would convince them to use belts in the back seat. A greater percentage said they would be more likely to buckle up if the driver could get pulled over because someone in the back wasn't buckled.

Connecticut considered such a requirement in this year’s legislative session.  Urging legislators to approve the requirement, Julie Peters, Executive Director of the Brain Injury Alliance of Connecticut, said “In the event of a crash, unbelted back seat passengers become bullets, putting not only themselves, but everyone in the vehicle at risk. That's because unbelted back seat passengers continue to move at the same rate of speed as the vehicle they are riding in until they hit something -- the seat back, the dashboard, the windshield, the driver or another passenger. It's also not uncommon for unbelted passengers to be thrown from a vehicle and either crushed by that vehicle or another on the road.”

The new survey reveals that many rear-seat passengers don't think belts are necessary because they perceive the back seat to be safer than the front. This shows a clear misunderstanding about why belts are important, no matter where a person sits in a vehicle.

"For most adults, it's still as safe to ride in the back seat as the front seat, but not if you aren't buckled up," Jermakian said. "That applies to riding in an Uber, Lyft or other hired vehicle, too."

Except for New Hampshire, all states and the District of Columbia require adults in the front seat to use belts. All rear-seat passengers are covered by laws in 29 states and D.C. Of these laws, 20 carry primary enforcement, meaning a police officer can stop a driver solely for a belt-law violation. The rest are secondary, so an officer must have another reason to stop a vehicle before issuing a safety belt citation, the IIHS reported.

Rep. Mitch Bolinsky of Newtown, who advocated for passage of a Connecticut law this year, said in February that “Front seats have become much safer but that’s not the case in the back seat. Without the use of seat belts, we needlessly lose lives every year. Those souls should still be with their families.” He cited National Highway Transportation Safety Association (NHTSA) data that unbelted rear seat passengers are three times more likely to die than those who are buckled at the time of a serious impact.

AAA reported last year that three decades ago, Connecticut “moved ahead of the curve nationally with the passage of one of the nation’s first mandatory seat belt laws.”  AAA pointed that that estimates are that each year in Connecticut more than 120 adults are injured and approximately five adults die who were unbelted rear seat occupants. Dating back to 1995, AAA noted, that equates to close to 100 deaths and 2,500 injuries.  A survey of AAA members (AAA Allied Group and AAA Northeast) found that 7 in 10 members believe seat belts should be mandatory for back seat passengers, regardless of age.

The Governors Highway Safety Association issued a report in 2015, "Unbuckled In Back," analyzing the difference in highway fatalities between states that require rear seat passengers to buckle up and those that do not, the Hartford Courant reported.  At a Connecticut legislative hearing that year, the paper noted, state Transportation Commissioner James Redeker said that everyone in a passenger vehicle should buckle up, saying statistics show "people become projectiles because they're not strapped in a safety device."

Legislation has been introduced annually in recent years in Connecticut to require use of seat belts in the back seat.  Earlier this year, state Public Health Commissioner testified in support (HB6054 and HB6269), stressing that “adult seat belt use is the single most effective way to save lives and reduce injuries in crashes.”

Safety belts are credited with having saved 13,941 lives during 2015, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates. If everyone buckled up, an additional 2,800 deaths could have been prevented, the data indicated. More than half of the people who die in passenger vehicle crashes in the U.S. each year are unbelted.

IIHS surveyed adults 18 and older by cellphone and landline nationwide between June and August 2016. Of the 1,172 respondents who said they had ridden in the back seat of a vehicle during the preceding six months, 72 percent said they always use their belt in the back seat, while 91 percent said they always use their belt when seated in front. This is in line with the 2015 nationwide observed belt use of 75 percent for adult rear-seat occupants and 89 percent for drivers and front-seat passengers.

https://youtu.be/bdW_3oQFO0c

Ana Grace Project Establishes Partnership, New Home at CCSU

The Ana Grace Project (AGP), established to promote love, community, and connection in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, has a new home at Central Connecticut State University (CCSU) in New Britain. A pilot partnership between the AGP and CCSU establishes a new base of operations for the Ana Grace Project, in addition to the blending of resources, services, and expertise, officials of both organizations have announced.

Nelba Márquez-Greene was a CCSU adjunct faculty member in 2012 when her daughter Ana Grace was killed at Sandy Hook, along with 19 other first-graders and six educators. She established The Ana Grace Project to honor her daughter’s memory and, as its executive director, she will oversee the CCSU-AGP partnership.

In announcing the partnership, CCSU President Zulma Toro said, “This arrangement will enrich our longstanding commitment to serving our communities as well as deepen our commitment to being a University of compassion. We are happy to welcome Nelba Márquez-Greene back to the CCSU family.”

“I’m looking forward to the amazing things we can do together,” says Márquez-Greene. “CCSU already has an extraordinary depth and breadth of talented, skilled people. We'll add another layer of support and love available to all.”  She is a clinical fellow of the American Association of Marriage and Family Therapy and has experience in private practice, as well as academic and community mental health settings. For a time she served as coordinator for Klingberg Family Therapy Center’s outpatient child and adolescent psychiatric clinic.

“By partnering with CCSU, we’ll be able to expand our vision of ensuring every student in Connecticut has access to healthy relationships and tools of self-regulation – setting them up for life long success,” Márquez-Greene explains.

Also expected is the continuation and expansion of AGP’s “Love Wins: Finish the Race” initiative hosted at CCSU for the past two years. Several hundred New Britain school children spend a day on campus with CCSU student volunteers for a taste of the college experience with the hope, says Márquez-Greene, of “instilling the belief that there is a world of possibilities awaiting them.”

Márquez-Greene will also work with the School of Education & Professional Studies to establish a Center for Social & Emotional Learning to provide education, training, and research to the campus, community, and state. Other expected collaborations include the training of CCSU undergraduate and graduate students in the Marriage & Family Therapy, Psychology, and Counseling programs in the use of social-emotional curriculum in the classroom.

Her husband, Jimmy Greene, is Coordinator of Jazz Studies and Assistant Professor of Music at Western Connecticut State University, another of the four state universities in the Connecticut State Colleges and Universities (CSCU) system.

Greene teaches applied jazz saxophone, jazz history, jazz pedagogy, jazz improvisation, jazz theory, jazz arranging, conducts the jazz orchestra and was awarded a 2013 Outstanding Faculty Award for his efforts. A native of Hartford, Greene is considered one of the most respected saxophonists of his generation since his graduation from the Hartt School of Music in 1997. His most recent recording, Beautiful Life (Mack Avenue) is a celebration of the life of his daughter. The album features touching performances by giants like Pat Metheny, Christian McBride, Kenny Barron and Kurt Elling amongst many others.