Thursday, October 31, 2013

NBC/WSJ poll: Obama approval sinks to new low

President Barack Obama’s approval rating has declined to an all-time low as public frustration with Washington and pessimism about the nation’s direction continue to grow, according to a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.

Just 42 percent approve of the president’s job performance, which is down five points from earlier this month. By comparison, 51 percent disapprove of his job in office -- tied for his all-time high.

Kevin Lamarque / Reuters
President Barack Obama speaks about health insurance at Faneuil Hall in Boston.

The NBC/WSJ pollsters argue that no single reason explains Obama’s lower poll standing. Rather, they attribute it to the accumulation of setbacks since the summer -- allegations of spying by the National Security Agency, the debate over Syria’s chemical weapons, the government shutdown and now intense scrutiny over the problems associated with the health care law’s federal website and its overall implementation.
 
Read the full poll here (.pdf)

Those events have combined to erase some of the advantage the president gained with polls showing most Americans blame congressional Republicans for the shutdown.

And for the first time in the survey, even Obama’s personal ratings are upside-down, with 41 percent viewing him a favorable light and 45 percent viewing him negatively.

“Personally and politically, the public’s assessment is two thumbs down,” says Democratic pollster Peter D. Hart, who conducted this survey with Republican pollster Bill McInturff.

Mad as hell as we’re not going to take it anymore’

But that two-thumbs-down assessment also applies to almost every other politician measured in the poll. Consider:
  • The public’s view of the Republican Party has reached another all-time low in the survey, with 22 percent seeing the GOP in a positive light and 53 percent viewing it negatively;
  • House Speaker John Boehner, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell remain unpopular;
  • Sixty-three percent of voters want to replace their own member of Congress, which is the highest percentage ever recorded on this question that dates back to 1992;
  • Seventy-four percent believe Congress is contributing to problems in Washington rather than solving them;
  • Only 22 percent think the nation is headed in the right direction;
  • And half of respondents (50 percent) think it’s likely that there will be another government shutdown.
Peter King explains why the president needs to stand with the NSA.


GOP pollster McInturff says that if the previous NBC/WSJ poll -- conducted during the shutdown -- sent shock waves hitting the Republican Party, this new poll is sending shock waves hitting everyone else.

“It feels like we’re in a Howard Beale moment,” adds Hart, referring to an often-quoted line from the 1976 movie “Network.”

“We’re mad as hell and we’re not going to take it anymore,” Hart paraphrases from that movie.

Measuring the shutdown’s aftermath

And the American public is particularly mad -- at everyone -- after the government shutdown.
By a 41 percent-to-21 percent margin, respondents say they have a less favorable impression of President Obama after the shutdown rather than a more favorable one.

Ditto congressional Tea Party Republicans (45 percent to 12 percent) and congressional Republicans (53 percent to 9 percent).

Read the full poll here (.pdf)
 
Still, more Americans blame congressional Republicans for the shutdown (38 percent) than Obama (23 percent), while 36 percent say they blame both sides equally.

But the poll also shows that the political gains that Democrats made during the shutdown have eroded somewhat.

Democrats have a four-point advantage among voters, 45 percent to 41 percent, on which party should control Congress after next year’s midterm elections. Yet that’s down from the eight-point edge, 47 percent to 39 percent, they held in the last NBC/WSJ poll.
President Barack Obama addresses the issues facing healthcare.gov Wednesday during a speech at Boston's Faneuil Hall.


And measuring the health care rollout

In addition, the health care law is slightly less popular than it was earlier this month, according to the poll.

Thirty-seven percent see it as a good idea, versus 47 percent who see it as a bad idea. That’s down from the 38 percent good idea, 43 percent bad idea in the previous survey.

But the public is divided over whether the problems associated with the health-care law’s federal website are a short-term issue than can be solved, or a long-term issue that signals deeper troubles.

In the poll, 37 percent say that the website woes are a short-term technical problem that can be fixed, while 31 percent believe they point to a longer-term issue with the law’s design that can’t be corrected.

Another 30 percent think it’s too soon to say.

In a separate question, 40 percent say they are less confident about the health-care law from what they recently have seen, heard or read about it; 9 percent are more confident; and 50 percent say there has been no change.

As Hart puts it, “The sign-up problems have hurt the president personally rather than hurt the law.”

The NBC/WSJ poll was conducted Oct. 25-28 of 800 adults (including 240 cell phone-only respondents), and it has an overall margin of error of plus-minus 3.5 percentage points. 

Kanye West tour postponed after 60-foot LED screen is damaged

Kanye West tour postponed after 60-foot LED screen is damaged

Just goes to show the talent is not with the entertainer, it's with the tech gadgets.

20 signs your thyroid isn't working right

20 signs your thyroid isn't working right

Check out this great MSN video - Wingsuit flight under arm of Christ statue in Rio de Janeiro

Check out this great MSN video - Wingsuit flight under arm of Christ statue in Rio de Janeiro

5 things we now know about Obamacare

5 things we now know about Obamacare

Tuesday, October 29, 2013

White House: President didn’t mislead on insurance promise

White House: President didn’t mislead on insurance promise

Check out this great MSN video - Honda makes amazing illusions

Check out this great MSN video - Honda makes amazing illusions

Top health exchange official apologizes for Obamacare website woes

 

Video: A senior Obama administration official will answer questions from the House Ways and Means Committee this week about the health care enrollment website. Representatives want to know what went wrong and whether the administration can be trusted to fix it.
 
The head of the agency running the troubled federal government health insurance website apologized for the website's problems Tuesday, promising once again that they would be fixed.

Members of the House Ways and Means Committee immediately lit into Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services administrator Marilyn Tavenner, demanding to know why Americans should trust that the troubled website, or even the entire health care law, will ever work.

“While the website can eventually be fixed, the widespread problems of Obamacare cannot,” panel chairman Dave Camp, a Michigan Republican, said in his opening statement. “These problems can’t be fixed through a tech surge.”

Tavenner apologized. “I want to apologize to you that the website has not worked as well as it should,” she said, and promised the administration is working on the site.

"This healthcare.gov site is fixable," she said.

But Texas Republican Kevin Brady asked Tavenner why the site wasn't ready sooner. "You have had nearly four years to get it ready," Brady said. "Why should the American people believe you now?"

Tavenner said technicians had added capacity to the website, and that experts were tackling glitches one by one. "That is the gradual improvement you will see over the next four weeks and that is why we are confident," she said.

Brady said he doubted government could ever manage something as complex as healthcare. "The flaw is not in the website," he said. "The flaw is in the law itself."

There was a little drama. Georgia Democrat John Lewis spoke passionately in favor of the law. "I happen to believe that healthcare is a right and not a privilege," Lewis said, thumping the desk in emphasis. "It is not just for the fortunate few but all citizens of America," he added. "The Affordable Care Act is working."

Camp also noted recent reports that tens of thousands of people have had their policies cancelled. "In fact, based on what little information the Administration has disclosed, it turns out that more people have received cancellation notices for their health care plans this month than have enrolled in the exchanges," Camp said.

"The widespread acknowledgement that the health care exchanges were not tested months in advance, as promised, is cause for concern. But the concerns don’t stop there. The Treasury Inspector General warned in August that it was not confident about the IRS’s ability to protect confidential taxpayer information or to prevent fraud, and neither am I," he said.

"No amount of website fixes can make right the President’s broken promises that health care costs will be lowered by $2,500 or that Americans will be able to keep the plan they have and like."
The White House says tens of thousands of policies issued to individuals are being cancelled because they don't meet the law's new tight requirements for coverage. Health industry experts told NBC News the White House should have known so many people would have to buy new policies, often pricier ones.
Tavenner said the policies being cancelled don't cover people properly. "Sometimes they thought they had coverage when they did not," she said. "Now some of them (the new policies) are moving to the new standards."

Camp also repeatedly asked Tavenner about how many people had actually enrolled in a health insurance plan. Tavenner stood firm, saying those numbers would not be ready until mid-November.

On Wednesday, Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius will appear before the House Energy and Commerce Committee. The administration says it's brought in a team of top technical experts and promises the site will be fixed by the end of November.

Obama administration knew millions could not keep their health insurance

Obama administration knew millions could not keep their health insurance

Sunday, October 27, 2013

Governors debate Obamacare’s troubled debut

Governors debate Obamacare’s troubled debut

Why we hate banks and cable companies

Why we hate banks and cable companies

Republican lawmakers rejected delay in Obamacare fee

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky

A proposal to delay a new $63 Obamacare fee was rejected by Republican senators who said the delay would favor labor unions.
 
WASHINGTON — Republicans in Congress don't usually fight for tax increases, especially ones that are part of President Barack Obama's health care law.

But GOP senators balked when Democrats proposed delaying a new temporary fee on everyone covered by health insurance.

So employers, insurance companies and other health plan sponsors are in line to pay $63 a person next year for everyone who has coverage. The temporary fee covers all workers, spouses and dependents covered by health insurance.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., proposed delaying the fee in recent budget talks with Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. McConnell and other Republican senators objected; the fee was left intact.

GOP senators complained the delay was basically a favor for labor unions, traditional Democratic allies that oppose the new fee.

"It's beyond ironic that the mantra from the president and the Democrats has been, 'There can't be any changes to Obamacare. After all, it's the law of the land,'" said Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa. "And then big labor comes along and wants a change and, lo and behold, there's got to be a change."

Related: Data center glitch is latest woe in Obamacare rollout

Related: Another month of fixes for health care website

Related: Health-conscious pastor leads Miss. Obamacare push

But also opposing the fee are large employers, traditional Republican allies, even though in many cases the fee probably will be passed on to workers.

"It's a sizable expense. For some of my employers it's millions of dollars a year, and we don't get anything from it," said Gretchen Young, senior vice president for health policy at the ERISA Industry Committee, a group that represents large employers on benefits issues. "It's definitely not solely a union issue."

Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md., said the proposed delay was meant to balance Republican demands for other changes to the health law. Republicans in Congress have been attacking the law since it was passed in 2010, and earlier this month, they forced a partial government shutdown over Obama's refusal to negotiate changes.

Cardin said he didn't want any changes in the law to be part of the deal for reopening the government and extending the country's ability to borrow. In the end, the only change was an income verification procedure for people applying for tax credits to help them purchase health insurance.

Related: Sebelius to face questioning on Obamacare website

Related: Health info won't be used to enforce immigration law

The temporary fee on people with health insurance is designed to raise $25 billion over the next three years.

The money will provide a cushion for insurers from the initial hard-to-predict costs of covering previously uninsured people with medical problems. Under the law, insurers will be forbidden, effective Jan. 1, 2014, to turn away applicants who are ill.

Insurance companies hit by unexpectedly high costs for insuring people with medical conditions will be able to tap the fund, which will be administered by the Department of Health and Human Services. The fund will mainly benefit companies participating in state-based health insurance exchanges.

The fee will total $12 billion in 2014, $8 billion in 2015 and $5 billion in 2016. That means the per-head assessment would be smaller each year, around $40 in 2015 instead of $63.

It is being assessed on all "major medical" insurance plans, including those provided by employers and those purchased individually by consumers. About 150 million workers, spouses and dependents are covered under employer-sponsored health plans.

Related: Vt. prepares for 1st US universal health care system

Large employers will pay the fee directly. That's because major companies are usually self-insured, with the health insurance company that workers deal with basically acting as an agent administering the plan.

Unions that operate multi-employer health plans also will pay the fee. More than 20 million union workers and family members are covered by such plans.

These unions and large employers argue that they shouldn't have to pay the fee because they won't benefit from the fund.

The AFL-CIO passed a resolution at its convention this year calling for the fee to be repealed. Large employers are fighting the fee, too. But, Young noted, the political atmosphere in Congress, especially when it comes to the health care law, will make it difficult to win any changes.

"The Affordable Care Act is now kind of a third rail," said Young, referring to the law's formal name. "If it wasn't before, it is even more so now."

Associated Press writers Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar and Sam Hananel contributed to this report.

Thursday, October 24, 2013

Shackled and pregnant: Wis. case challenges 'fetal protection' law


Melissa Wanta / for NBC News
Alicia Beltran, 28, of Jackson, Wisc., went to a prenatal visit -- and ended up in handcuffs.

When Alicia Beltran was 12 weeks pregnant, she took herself to a health clinic about a mile from her home in Jackson, Wis., for a prenatal checkup. But what started as a routine visit ended with Beltran eventually handcuffed and shackled in government custody – and at the center of a first-of-its-kind federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a state’s fetal protection law.

On July 2, Beltran, 28, met with a physician’s assistant at West Bend Clinic at Saint Joseph’s Hospital in West Bend, Wis., for her prenatal visit. When asked to detail her medical history, Beltran admitted a past struggle with the painkiller Percocet. But that was all behind her, Beltran said: She had been taking Suboxone, a drug used to treat Percocet dependency. Lacking health insurance and unable to afford the medication, Beltran had used an acquaintance’s prescription and self-administered the drug in decreasing doses. She had taken her last dose a few days before her prenatal visit.
 
According to Beltran, the physician’s assistant recommended she renew her use of Suboxone under a doctor’s supervision. After Beltran declined, she said she was asked to take a drug test, which was negative for all substances except Suboxone. 
 
Two weeks later, a social worker visited Beltran at home and told her that she needed to continue Suboxone treatment under the care of a physician, said Beltran, who again declined. Two days later, Beltran found police officers at her home, who arrested and handcuffed her.

According to the police report, the officers took Beltran to a hospital, where she underwent a doctor’s exam. Her pregnancy was found to be healthy and normal, her lawyers say. Police then took her to Washington County Jail to await a hearing – hours later, she was led into a courtroom, handcuffed and shackled at the ankles, where a county judge ordered her to spend 90 days in a drug treatment center.

“Alicia had no idea she was giving information to the physician’s assistant that would ultimately be used against her in a court of law,” said Linda Vanden Heuvel of Germantown, Wis., one of Beltran’s attorneys. “She should not have to fear losing her liberty because she was pregnant and she was honest with her doctor.”

At the hearing, her lawyers say, the judge told Beltran that an attorney would not be provided for her at that time but that she could seek counsel for her next hearing in the case. And yet, a lawyer had been appointed to represent her fetus. “It’s wrong that an unborn child gets an attorney but Alicia Beltran, the mother of that unborn child did not,” said Vanden Heuvel.

Emails and phone calls to Family Court Commissioner Dolores Bomrad and her office were not returned. Assistant District Attorney of Washington County Mandy Schepper declined to comment on the case.

Melissa Wanta / for NBC News
Alicia Beltran, who was forced to spend more than two months in a drug treatment facility despite her insistence that she was not abusing drugs, talks with her attorney, Linda Vanden Heuvel of Germantown, Wis.


At the center of Beltran’s case is a 1997 Wisconsin law that grants courts authority over the fetus of any pregnant woman who “habitually lacks self-control” with drugs and alcohol “to a severe degree” such that there is “substantial risk” to the unborn child. Beltran’s lawyers argue that she was not using any controlled substances at the time of her arrest.

In a petition filed in U.S. District Court in Milwaukee -- the first federal challenge of an arrest of a pregnant woman under such a statute – her lawyers claim that Beltran’s constitutional rights were violated in numerous ways. The language of the Wisconsin statute is vague and lacking in medical terminology, they argue, leaving too much room for speculation. Further, they say the statute fails to guarantee due process, as well as violates other rights, including privacy and physical liberty.

In cases like Beltran’s, “the woman loses pretty much every constitutional right we associate with personhood,” said Lynn Paltrow, executive director of the National Advocates for Pregnant Women and a co-counsel in Beltran’s case.

Experts say that criminal prosecutions of pregnant women, as well as forced drug or psychiatric treatment, have been on the rise in recent years in cases of suspected substance abuse, especially as some states adopt laws granting rights, or “personhood,” to fetuses.

National Advocates for Pregnant Women released a study this year showing that from 1973-2005, 413 pregnant women in 44 states were arrested or forced into treatment. Since 2005, there were an additional 300 cases. But these statistics are likely a substantial undercount, Paltrow said, since many of the proceedings happen behind closed doors.

As of this year, 17 states consider substance abuse during pregnancy to be child abuse under child-welfare statutes, according to a report by the Guttmacher Institute. Three of those states, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and South Dakota, allow pregnant women to be forced into mental health or substance abuse treatment facilities.

Other states have applied criminal charges such as delivery of drugs to a minor or fetal homicide under the same circumstances. And at least 38 states have “feticide” laws on the books, which define fetuses as persons in homicide or manslaughter cases. While these laws are often applied to cases involving violence against pregnant women, they have also been used to prosecute expectant mothers accused of killing a viable fetus.
 
Supporters of these laws say they are intended to protect unborn children. “Child abuse is child abuse, whether it’s in the womb or out of it,” said Jennifer Mason, communication director for Personhood USA, a non-profit organization seeking personhood status for fetuses. Advocates of fetal personhood claimed a victory in January when the Alabama Supreme Court upheld the inclusion of unborn children in that state’s child endangerment statute.

Some experts argue that prosecuting pregnant women can ultimately put fetuses at risk, especially when healthcare providers and social workers are the ones reporting women to authorities. There is evidence indicating that women who fear criminal charges or other state intervention are less likely to seek medical care or be honest with their doctors, said Kenneth De Ville, a medical humanities professor at East Carolina University in Greenville, N.C., who published a study on the Wisconsin law. “Prenatal care is really the best thing you can do to enhance fetal health,” he said. “And you’re driving women away from prenatal care.”

The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has argued that women who seek prenatal care should not be exposed to criminal or civil penalties and calls for expanded and affordable alcohol and drug treatment services for pregnant women.

Mason said she agrees that women should be given professional treatment before state intervention, but that when there is clear evidence of fetal harm, criminal charges are often appropriate. “It’s a very fine line. The medical professional has to be aware of what puts babies in danger,” she said. “I do not think a pregnant woman’s freedoms should be taken away, but child abuse cases are child abuse cases and have to be treated the same way as a newborn in the home.”

For Beltran, the consequences of her case have hit hard. Her family struggled to visit her regularly during her stint at Casa Clare Women’s Facility in Appleton, Wis., a two-hour drive from her home. After being away from work for an extended period, Beltran lost her job in the food service industry, according to her lawyers. She was released earlier this month, but with the case still open, she is still at risk of being taken into custody or ordered into further treatment, Paltrow said.

Beltran was scheduled for a trial in a Washington County court on Oct. 29. If she is found guilty under the Wisconsin law, the court could order her into counseling, supervision by a social service agency, or mandatory drug treatment, and could terminate her parental rights once her child is born. But the trial has been removed from the court calendar -- county witnesses were unavailable on the given date, and a judge recused himself for being familiar with the witnesses, Beltran’s lawyers said -- and no new date has been set.

“[Beltran’s] happy about this baby and having a child, but she doesn’t know what’s going to happen,” Vanden Heuvel said. She added that in a recent conversation, Beltran, who is due in mid-January, told her, “This is my first pregnancy ever, and I just haven’t been able to enjoy it.”
 

Monday, October 14, 2013

How do I know if I’ve got food poisoning or the stomach flu?

How do I know if I’ve got food poisoning or the stomach flu?

Report: NSA collecting millions of contact lists

A sign outside the National Security Administration campus in Fort Meade, Md.
WASHINGTON — The National Security Agency has been sifting through millions of contact lists from personal email and instant messaging accounts around the world — including those of Americans — in its effort to find possible links to terrorism or other criminal activity, according to a published report.

The Washington Post reported late Monday that the spy agency intercepts hundreds of thousands of email address books every day from private accounts on Yahoo, Gmail, Facebook and Hotmail that move though global data links. The NSA also collects about a half million buddy lists from live chat services and email accounts.

The Post said it learned about the collection tactics from secret documents provided by NSA leaker Edward Snowden and confirmed by senior intelligence officials. It was the latest revelation of the spy agency's practices to be disclosed by Snowden, the former NSA systems analyst who fled the U.S. and now resides in Russia.

The newspaper said the NSA analyzes the contacts to map relationships and connections among various foreign intelligence targets. During a typical day last year, the NSA's Special Source Operations branch collected more than 440,000 email address books, the Post said. That would correspond to a rate of more than 250 million a year.

Related: Brazilian president cancels US visit over NSA spying

A spokesman for the national intelligence director's office, which oversees the NSA, told the Post that the agency was seeking intelligence on valid targets and was not interested in personal information from ordinary Americans.

Spokesman Shawn Turner said the NSA was guided by rules that require the agency to "minimize the acquisition, use and dissemination" of information that identifies U.S. citizens or permanent residents.

While the collection was taking place overseas, the Post said it encompassed the contact lists of many American users. The spy agency obtains the contact lists through secret arrangements with foreign telecommunications companies or other services that control Internet traffic, the Post reported.

Earlier this year, Snowden gave documents to the Post and Britain's Guardian newspaper disclosing U.S. surveillance programs that collect vast amounts of phone records and online data in the name of foreign intelligence, often sweeping up information on American citizens.

The collection of contact lists in bulk would be illegal if done in the United States, but the Post said the agency can get around that restriction by intercepting lists from access points around the world.

The newspaper quoted a senior intelligence official as saying NSA analysts may not search or distribute information from the contacts database unless they can "make the case that something in there is a valid foreign intelligence target in and of itself."

NSA reportedly collecting millions of email address books and IM contact lists worldwide


New Gmail
The Washington Post has just published another revealing scoop about the National Security Agency. The paper is reporting that the NSA is currently collecting contact lists from email and instant message services from users worldwide — and Americans are among those whose data is being harvested.
 
The revelations come courtesy of senior intelligence officials and documents provided by Edward Snowden. The program is said to feed off of email address books and buddy lists that are transmitted by various online services when users sign on, write a message, or sync their computers or mobile devices to one another. Instead of targeting individual users, the lists are described as being collected en masse, in the hopes of letting the NSA map out and discover relationships between various players. A similar NSA program mapping the social ties and relationships of Americans was revealed last month.
 
Nearly 700,000 email address books collected in one day
According to an internal PowerPoint presentation reviewed by the Post, one day last year the NSA collected nearly 700,000 email address books from the likes of Yahoo (444,743), Facebook (82,857), and Gmail (33,697), amongst other services. The presentation also specified that on a given day around 500,000 buddy lists from chat services were collected, as well as inbox displays from web-based email services; the latter can include contact information as well as the first few lines of emails themselves in certain cases.
 
The program relies on agreements with foreign telecom companies and foreign intelligence services that oversee facilities that handle major internet switches. While the collection itself doesn't occur on US soil, anonymous intelligence officials told the Post that the contact information from Americans was indeed collected in the large sweeps.
 
Americans could have their address books collected without ever leaving US soil
The Post points out that the NSA hasn't been given direct authorization by Congress or the FISA court for the broad collection of contact lists, and that it would in fact be illegal if the agency did so within the United States. Utilizing overseas collection points gets the NSA around those restrictions, according to the report. One official is quoted as saying that when data is collected from those particular locations, "the assumption is you're not a US person." However, the issue isn't quite that simple: companies like Google use servers around the world to provide consistent service, meaning a user in California could have their data be sent through one of the international collection points the NSA is pulling from without ever leaving the United States themselves. NSA analysts are only able to search or share the contacts database, according to one official, if they can make the case that information contained within is a "valid foreign intelligence target in and of itself."
 
Given that the data is captured while in transit, companies like Google and Yahoo don't need to be notified when information from their respective services is captured. The Post also notes the large discrepancy between data collected from Yahoo versus other online services, speculating that the company's relatively late adoption of default SSL encryption may be partially to blame.
 
The mass collection of address books and contact lists has actually lead to a large storage problem due to an issue everyday users are all too familiar with: spam. According to the documents, databases have been filled up with data from such enormous amounts of spam that the NSA has had to put out "emergency detasking" orders at times to prevent itself form being overrun. A page posted from the NSA Intellipedia — essentially a wiki for the NSA — describes some ways in which the agency tries to deal with the issue.

The 5 exercise machines you should never use at the gym

The 5 exercise machines you should never use at the gym

Why your sex life is lagging

6 reasons for a lackluster libido
By Nina Elias
 
Image courtesy of Prevention
 
Whether you've been married for half a century or dating for a few months, a partner's lagging sex drive can shake any relationship. And while there are a number of reasons your libido may have gone MIA (more on that in a bit), new research makes a troubling connection between a man's erectile issues and his heart health.

An Australian study of more than 95,000 middle-aged men found a direct link between erectile dysfunction and heart disease, a link that persisted even among men with no history of cardiovascular problems. According to the study, the risk of heart disease and premature death increases with the severity of a man's ED--minor erectile difficulties could signal a relatively mild heart issue, while severe erectile dysfunction ups a man's risk of coronary artery disease by 60%.

"Rather than causing heart disease, erectile dysfunction is more likely to be a symptom or signal of underlying 'silent' heart disease," says lead study author Emily Banks, PhD, a professor of epidemiology and public health at Australian National University. And the advice is unequovical: "For men who are having problems getting or maintaining an erection, it means taking action by seeing a health professional and asking for a heart check."

If you're the one struggling with sexual issues, on the other hand, your low libido could also be a sign of an underlying health issue. Talk to your doctor to see if any of these five conditions could be at play:

Diabetes: Uncontrolled blood sugar levels can lead to low sex drive and sexual discomfort, including increased vaginal dryness and recurrent yeast infections in women. In fact, women taking insulin are twice as likely to report problems with lubrication and orgasm compared to non-diabetic ladies.

Menopause: The natural dip in estrogen that accompanies menopause can make sex uncomfortable for women. If you're experiencing vaginal dryness during or just before menopause, ask your doctor to check hormone levels and make a lubricant suggestion.

Underactive thyroid: It slows down metabolism, causes hair loss, and can throw a wrench in a healthy sex life. If you find yourself too tired for anything, including sex, an underactive thyroid might be to blame. Your risk for thyroid problems increases with age, so have your doctor test your levels.

Depression: Depression alone can cause a decreased interest in sex, but common antidepressants used to treat depression can also put a damper on sex drive. In fact, a lessened interest in sex is one reason people stop taking their antidepressants, says Ron Rosenberg, MD, an OB-GYN and psychiatrist at William Beaumont Hospital in Royal Oak, MI. Ask your doctor about switching to an antidepressant that has fewer side effects.

More: Smart Ways To Increase Your Sex Drive

Low testosterone: It's the hormone that fuels sexual desire and enhances pleasure in both women and men. And if your body isn't producing enough of it, you could be experiencing low levels of sensation, a slow response to your partner's come-ons, and an overall lagging sex drive.