by Amy Burkholder
Medical News Producer

Dr. Sanjay Gupta is heading back to his roots -- to his home state of Michigan -- for live coverage of Tuesday's presidential primaries. From growing up, to his years of medical training in Michigan, he's seen the state's economy become decimated, and he believes what's happened has to do with health care:

- health insurance premiums that are too high

- companies that don't want to do business in Michigan because of the cost of covering employees

Health care is weighing on voters' minds this campaign season. But have you heard of a plan that meets your needs?

On Tuesday we'll take an in-depth look at the candidates' health care platforms: What do they propose? What would it cost? And what are you willing to pay to cover you and your family?

Plus, who's seduced by cheesy pizza, who likes turkey sandwiches, who munches on Nicorette and who considers coffee his greatest vice? We're dishing on some the candidates' health habits.

Finally, do you think being president leads to health, wealth and a long life? We're doing the math on life expectancy and the Oval Office.

Dr. Gupta will be live with John Roberts as American Morning spotlights the Michigan primary, putting health care center stage - and we want to hear from you: What health care questions do you have this election season?

Editor's Note: Medical news is a popular but sensitive subject rooted in science. We receive many comments on this blog each day; not all are posted. Our hope is that much will be learned from the sharing of useful information and personal experiences based on the medical and health topics of the blog. We encourage you to focus your comments on those medical and health topics and we appreciate your input. Thank you for your participation.

What exactly causes autism? That is a question I get as much as any other. Of course, there is no absolute answer, but a study caught my eye and I was wondering what you thought. The study, in the Archives of General Psychiatry (Full Study) examines cases of autism in California since 1999. In that year, as you may know, manufacturers began removing thimerosal - a mercury based preservative - from vaccines. The researchers reasoned that if mercury exposure was a major cause of autism, the number of children with autism should have dropped after thimerosal was removed. (Read more or Watch Video)

That didn't happen. From 2004 to 2007, when exposure to thimerosal dropped significantly for 3- to 5-year-olds, the autism rates continued to go up from 3 in 1,000 to 4 in 1,000. Small numbers, but they still point to an important trend. In investigating this story, we interviewed independent doctors not affiliated with the study and one said, "This very clearly shows autism did not arrive through a vaccine."

There are others, though, who say, "Not so fast." And, there are a couple of important points to make. First off, if you really trace the vaccine, you will find thimerosal wasn't completely off the shelves until 2002 or 2003 according to the National Vaccine Information Center. Also, this particular study doesn't include children under the age of 3, which is obviously an important age group, when it comes to the diagnosis of autism.

We do know that the signs of autism may include no pointing or babbling by the age of 12 months. Not a single word by 16 months and no brief phrases by 24 months. Also, loss of language or social skills may be an indicator. None of these are absolute by any means and are just flags to look for. Still, though, where do you come down on the cause of autism? Still worried about mercury? Any thoughts on whether the causes are environmental, genetic or both?

Editor's Note: Medical news is a popular but sensitive subject rooted in science. We receive many comments on this blog each day; not all are posted. Our hope is that much will be learned from the sharing of useful information and personal experiences based on the medical and health topics of the blog. We encourage you to focus your comments on those medical and health topics and we appreciate your input. Thank you for your participation.

I went to three funerals in 2007. Two were for cancer patients.

The first was back in June. Eight-year-old Tony Nata lost his battle with leukemia. I first met him when we were doing a story on the smallest cancer patients searching for treatment after Hurricane Katrina shut down Children's Hospital in New Orleans, where Tony was undergoing chemotherapy. I'll never forget the tears rolling down his face as he bravely and quietly underwent yet another medical exam. His family thought he had beaten cancer already, but it came back. And even though his sister Ali donated bone marrow, which put his cancer in remission for the second time, his reprieve didn't last. The cancer came back yet again, and this time little Tony couldn't fight it off.

The last funeral I went to in 2007 was just a few weeks ago, when everyone in CNN's Medical Unit said goodbye to a beloved colleague, Rhonda Grayson. She had beaten blood cancer almost two decades ago but then learned she had bladder cancer last January. She fought a good fight and never lost her optimistic outlook, but this was a battle she couldn't win. We're left with the memory of a wonderful friend with a gorgeous smile.

I've been covering medical news for eight years and counting and followed many cancer stories. I can't tell you how often I've produced segments on ways to lower the risk of getting cancer (lose weight, exercise, eat more fruits & vegetables). But like some of you, I don't necessarily follow the advice.

Tony's passing and Rhonda's declining health certainly had an impact on me. Cancer was on my mind all year long. Then in the fall, the World Cancer Research Fund released a report on cancer prevention. It reiterated a lot of what we already knew, but also had some new information. I don't know why it had more impact on me than previous reports but it did.

Some of the recommendations:
- reducing your salt intake (I'm a salt-a-holic)
- eating less than 18 ounces of red meat a week (that includes beef, pork, lamb & processed meats that have been cured or smoked or have chemicals preservatives)
- avoid gaining weight throughout adulthood (this may be one of the most important ways to protect against cancer, and something I haven't been able to do)
- exercise (60 minutes of moderate or 30 minutes of vigorous exercise daily)

Despite having a family history of several cancers, I've been lucky so far. And there's probably very little Rhonda or Tony could have done to prevent getting cancer - sometimes it's just in your genes. But I think knowing how these two people lost the cancer battle and the World Cancer Research Fund report once again spelling out what one can do reduce the risk of this dreaded disease finally made a light bulb turn on in my head.

So in 2008, I don't have any resolutions - instead, I'm going to try to practice what I preach. I'm going to stick to two to three servings of red meat per week. I will reach for the salt shaker as little as possible. I'll avoid some of my favorite "processed" salami and bacon, as best I can. I will try to finally start exercising on a regular basis and maybe even shed a few of the way too many pounds I've accumulated over the years. If I succeed, I'll have the added benefit of reducing my risk of heart disease and stroke (cardiovascular disease is the No. 1 cause of death in men and women in the U.S.).

Will you be changing any health habits to reduce your chance of getting cancer? Is cancer something that factors into your New Year's resolutions?

Editor's Note: Medical news is a popular but sensitive subject rooted in science. We receive many comments on this blog each day; not all are posted. Our hope is that much will be learned from the sharing of useful information and personal experiences based on the medical and health topics of the blog. We encourage you to focus your comments on those medical and health topics and we appreciate your input. Thank you for your participation.