logo
Drowning is the leading cause of death in young kids. Here's how to prevent it

Drowning is the leading cause of death in young kids. Here's how to prevent it

CNN24-05-2025

Warmer weather is finally here in the Northern Hemisphere, and with it, many pools and beaches are opening for the summer. That's great for families who want to spend time by the water, but it's also a good time to be reminded about the importance of water safety.
An estimated 4,000 fatal unintentional drownings happen every year in the United States — an average of 11 drowning deaths per day — according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Drowning is the leading cause of death in children ages 1 to 4, and after motor vehicle accidents, it is the second leading cause of death attributed to unintentional injuries among kids ages 5 to 14.
I wanted to speak more about water safety with CNN wellness expert Dr. Leana Wen. Wen is an emergency physician and adjunct associate professor at George Washington University who previously served as Baltimore's health commissioner. She is also the mother of two young children, and as someone who learned to swim as an adult, she is a passionate advocate for kids — and adults — learning to swim.
CNN: Who is most at risk of drowning, and under what circumstances?
Dr. Leana Wen: The CDC issued an important report in 2024 about unintentional drowning deaths in the United States. Death rates were significantly higher in 2020, 2021 and 2022 than in 2019, according to the agency. Moreover, the highest rates were seen in young children ages 1 to 4. Among children in this age group, 461 died by drowning in 2022, an increase of 28% from 2019.
The report also highlighted racial disparities, with higher rates of drowning deaths among individuals identified as non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native and as non-Hispanic Black or African American. Only 45% of all adults reported having had swim lessons, and those numbers were higher among White Americans (52%) than among Black (37%) and Hispanic (28%) Americans.
Racial disparities were also reported in a 2023 analysis from the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which found that African American children made up 21% of all drownings for kids younger than age 15 in which race and ethnicity are known. Among kids ages 5 to 14, 45% of drowning deaths occurred among African Americans.
The CPSC analysis also contained another key data point: The vast majority (80%) of pediatric drownings in which the setting is known occurred at a residence. This means that 4 in 5 kids who drowned died in their own backyard pool or that of a friend, neighbor or family member. Of these residential drownings, 91% occurred among kids younger than 7 years old.
CNN: Why do so many drownings happen in residential settings?
Wen: One major reason is the difference in supervision. Many public beaches and community pools hire lifeguards whose job is to watch out for the safety of everyone in or near the water. Private pools in people's yards often don't have someone designated for this purpose. Sometimes older children are supervising younger children but aren't always watching. Or adults may be supervising, but they are also busy with other tasks. In addition, some of those watching others may not know how to swim themselves.
There may also be a false sense of security in residential settings. People may think the pool is small or not that deep or there are a lot of people around, so what can happen? Keep in mind, though, that small kids can drown in just inches of water. Serious injury or death can happen within 30 seconds. Drownings are often silent because the victim is unable to call out for help.
CNN: How can parents and guardians prevent drownings in residential settings?
Wen: The single most important best practice is to never leave children unsupervised near a body of water. Even if they already know how to swim, even if they are wearing a flotation device, even if the pool is shallow or small, an accident could occur — and either you or another responsible adult should always be able to see your child. The supervising adult should be actively watching the child and not distracted by chores or their smartphone. That person also should not be under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
The adult who's responsible must also know how to swim well enough so they are able to jump into the pool and save the child if necessary. An additional safety precaution is learning CPR and first aid for infants, children and adults, which you can do through the American Red Cross.
If you have a pool, be very careful before allowing others to use it. If your neighbors' children want to swim in your pool, a responsible adult must accompany them. Private swimming pools should all have childproof fencing around them. The fencing should enclose the pool, have a self-close latch out of the reach of children and be at least 4 feet high. This is required by law in most states.
CNN: What safety precautions should people take around natural bodies of water?
Wen: Always wear a properly fitted, US Coast Guard–approved life jacket when boating. Of all the people who drowned while boating in 2022, 85% were not wearing a life jacket, according to the CDC.
To be safe, swim in areas where a lifeguard is on duty. Always follow lifeguard guidance about safety conditions, and stay in the area designated for swimming.
CNN: What about teaching children how to swim — can that help with water safety?
Wen: Yes. Kids ages 1 to 4 who took part in formal swim lessons had an 88% lower risk of drowning, according to a study in JAMA Pediatrics. The goal here isn't necessarily to teach kids all the different strokes and get them to join a swim team; it's to impart basic lifesaving skills, such as treading water and floating on their back.
When you are in the water with your children, take every opportunity to remind them about water safety. Other tips include never swimming alone, always asking for permission before entering the water and never diving into unknown bodies of water headfirst. Young children should also be reminded not to reach for items in the pool, as they are at risk of falling in; they should always ask for help instead.
CNN: What about parents or guardians who don't know how to swim? Do you recommend that they also take swim lessons?
Wen: Yes. First, adults who don't know how to swim are more likely to have children who don't know how to swim. This was the case for me. My parents didn't swim, and I also never learned swimming growing up.
Second, it's hard for adults to properly supervise children swimming if they can't swim themselves. It was actually a terrifying experience with my own children that prompted me to learn to swim. My children were just 1 year and 3 years old one summer when my older kid pushed the younger one into the pool.
We were at our local community pool, and there was a lifeguard who immediately sprang into action. But I remember how terrified I felt — and how helpless. I enrolled my kids in swim lessons right away. I also found an instructor to teach me, too, because I realized I had to overcome my own fear of the water and learn basic water safety skills to protect my kids.
Learning how to swim as an adult is a humbling experience, especially for people like me who had to first start with overcoming fear. I began literally from zero. For weeks, I worked on just getting comfortable submerging my head underwater.
Eventually, I learned how to swim and now really enjoy being in the water. And I feel a lot more comfortable supervising my children when we are in private or community swimming spaces. I'm looking forward to our local pool opening for the summer and to spending time with my kids having a fun — and safe — time in the water.
Get inspired by a weekly roundup on living well, made simple. Sign up for CNN's Life, But Better newsletter for information and tools designed to improve your well-being.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Microcurrent Devices: Do They Work and Are They Worth It? We Asked Skin Experts
Microcurrent Devices: Do They Work and Are They Worth It? We Asked Skin Experts

CNET

time16 minutes ago

  • CNET

Microcurrent Devices: Do They Work and Are They Worth It? We Asked Skin Experts

Over the past few years, many people have added a microcurrent device to their skin care regimen, hoping it will delay aging, produce collagen, sculpt facial muscles and improve skin texture. Many celebrities have even promoted the use of these devices in their own skin care routine videos. But do these at-home microcurrent devices from popular brands like NuFace, ZIIP, Therabody and Foreo actually work? And are they worth the cost? To learn more about whether a microcurrent device is worth adding to your collection of skin care tools, we reached out to dermatologists to find out the potential benefits, side effects and more. Do at-home microcurrent devices work? At-home microcurrent devices aren't cheap -- costing hundreds of dollars. If you're thinking about investing in one, you might be wondering whether they actually work. What do the experts say? "Yes, at-home microcurrent devices can provide noticeable benefits, though they're generally less powerful than professional-grade treatments," said Hannah Kopelman, a dermatologist at Kopelman Aesthetic Surgery. "These devices deliver low-level electrical currents designed to stimulate facial muscles and boost circulation. Over time, this can create a temporary lifting effect and provide mild improvement in skin tone." While the effectiveness of at-home microcurrent devices hasn't been thoroughly tested, some research studies show that they can provide real results. In a 2024 study, 56 people were instructed to use the Slendertone Face microcurrent device and 52 people were placed in a control group. After using the Slendertone Face device five days per week for 12 weeks, participants reported significantly better skin tone, radiance and fewer wrinkles compared to the control group. But before you start using an at-home microcurrent device, it's important to set realistic expectations. "At-home microcurrent devices can be a beneficial part of your skincare routine, but they work best for mild improvements and maintenance, rather than dramatic changes," said Kopelman. "For individuals looking for more immediate or pronounced results, professional treatments remain the gold standard." Wellness editor Anna Gragert's results using the NuFACE TRINITY+, before, during and after. Anna Gragert/CNET At-home microcurrent device benefits When you use an at-home microcurrent device consistently, it can have a wide range of benefits for your skin. "The main benefits include mild lifting and firming of the skin, improved circulation and enhanced lymphatic drainage, which can reduce puffiness. Some users also report that their skin looks more refreshed and radiant after consistent use," Kopelman said. For deeper wrinkles and significant sagging, however, Kopelman said these devices probably won't have the same effect as professional treatments or more invasive in-office procedures. While these at-home devices can be effective, the results aren't one-size-fits-all. According to Dr. Robyn Gmyrek, a dermatologist at New York-based UnionDerm, "The benefits of at-home microcurrent devices vary from person to person based on age, health status and behavioral choices, like sun exposure, smoking, diet and the specific device used." Like with most skin care treatments and procedures, you shouldn't expect results immediately. "With at-home devices, consistency is everything," Gmyrek said. "I recommend using a microcurrent device daily, or at least three to five times per week. Think of it like the gym -- if you don't continue to go, you will lose the benefits." Potential microcurrent device negative side effects Generally speaking, at-home microcurrent devices are safe when used as directed. And because the microcurrents are small, the treatments shouldn't be painful. Some side effects are possible, though. "Some people may experience mild redness or a tingling sensation during use but this is usually temporary. However, improper use -- like applying excessive pressure or using the device for longer than recommended -- can lead to skin irritation or muscle fatigue," said Kopelman. In the 2024 study referenced above, only a few participants experienced mild skin redness during their treatments. None of the participants had any other adverse reactions, suggesting that these devices are mostly safe. While there are dozens of at-home devices that deliver microcurrents, they're not all created equal. Each device works differently and has unique advantages and drawbacks. If you're in the market for an at-home microcurrent device, there are a few things you should look for, according to Gmyrek. She recommends buying a device with FDA clearance, multiple intensity levels and different functions, like the option to use LED light therapy. You should also look for a device that comes with or requires a conductive gel to properly transmit the microcurrent. Pick a device from a well-established brand with positive user and expert reviews. The ZIIP HALO with its Electric Complex Gel. Anna Gragert/CNET How to use an at-home microcurrent device Before using an at-home microcurrent device, read the manufacturer's instructions. Each device might be slightly different but here's a general overview of how these devices should be used: Wash your face: You should always start with clean, dry skin before using a microcurrent device. Apply conductive: Most microcurrent devices require a conductive gel that allows the device to glide over your face and helps deliver the current into the deeper layers of your skin. Select the intensity level: If your device has multiple intensity settings, select the one that is right for your skin at the time of use. Start low and gradually increase once you get used to the different settings. Glide the device over your face: Using light pressure, gently move the device across your face in an upward and outward motion. You can use the device on your jawline, cheekbones, forehead and the sides of your neck (make sure to avoid the thyroid in the center). Remove the gel from your face and device: Once you're finished, wash the gel off your face. Follow the manufacturer's instructions for cleaning the device -- generally, you can wipe off the gel with a soft, clean cloth. Then, you can continue with the next steps in your skin care routine. Repeat based on the manufacturer's recommendation: Most at-home microcurrent devices should only be used five times per week, for 3 to 5 minutes, but some devices can be used daily. Check the instructions to see how often your device should be used for optimal results. Best microcurrent devices To figure out which microcurrent devices are the best, CNET wellness editor Anna Gragert tested six devices over the course of two months. Based on price, modes, accessories, features, FDA clearance, cleaning instructions, app compatibility and the required conductive gel, she found the NuFACE TRINITY+ to be the best microcurrent device overall. The NuFACE TRINITY+ is priced at $395. It helps you track time with audible beeps, has helpful tutorials on its app and is easy to charge with its included stand. If you're looking for a device with more features, such as massage and LED light therapy, the $420 TheraFace Pro is recommended. This device can also cleanse the face. Hot and cold rings are sold separately but can be used with the device. The only potential downside is that app tutorials are on the longer side and would be better with voice instructions. Can you overdo it with a microcurrent device? At-home microcurrent devices aren't without risks and using them too often can do more harm than good. "Overuse can lead to inflammation in the skin, redness and swelling," said Gmyrek. If that happens, you should stop using the device immediately until your side effects resolve. "Using an at-home microcurrent device too frequently can also cause muscle fatigue, leaving the facial muscles feeling sore or overly tight. Sticking to the manufacturer's recommended usage schedule can help avoid this issue," added Kopelman. Before you start using an at-home microcurrent device, read the instructions on the frequency of use, which will vary by product. For example, the Foreo Bear is designed to be used every day. However, the NuFace Trinity Plus and SkinGym Microcurrent Wand should be used five times per week for 60 days, and then up to three times per week for maintenance. Don't be tempted to use the device more often than what's recommended. Experts agree that overusing won't provide better benefits or faster results. Plus, you could end up damaging your skin in the process. Who shouldn't use an at-home microcurrent device? Although at-home microcurrent devices are typically safe, not everyone is a good candidate. "Individuals with certain medical conditions, such as epilepsy, a pacemaker or other implanted electrical devices, should avoid using microcurrent devices, as the electrical currents could interfere with their function," said Kopelman. Microcurrent devices should also be avoided during pregnancy, unless it's cleared by a health care vs. at-home microcurrent devices Microcurrent is a popular offering at many medical spas and skin care clinics as a standalone treatment or an add-on to other services. According to experts, in-office treatments offer more bang for your buck. "Professional microcurrent devices used in clinical settings are much more powerful and can deliver a more significant, long-lasting lifting effect in a shorter period of time," said Kopelman. Additionally, professional treatments can be better personalized to your needs, potentially giving you better results faster. "Licensed professionals are also trained to adjust settings based on your skin's needs, which makes the treatment more customized," said Kopelman. "At-home devices, by contrast, are designed to be safe for general use, so they deliver lower current levels and require more frequent treatments to maintain results." At-home microcurrent devices aren't cheap, either. FDA-cleared devices can cost anywhere from $150 to upward of $400. Most devices also require a conductive gel, which is sold separately. However, at-home devices tend to be slightly cheaper than professional procedures. In-office microcurrent treatments often cost between $250 and $500 per session but it depends on various factors, including the type of treatment, length of treatment and your location. The bottom line At-home microcurrent devices can be a great addition to your skin care routine if you want to improve skin firmness, reduce puffiness and sculpt your face. But it's important to have realistic expectations about the results. While at-home devices do work, they aren't nearly as effective as professional treatments. If you're on the fence about getting an at-home microcurrent device, there are a few things you can consider. First, think about your skin goals. An at-home microcurrent device won't get rid of deep wrinkles and it's not an alternative to Botox, dermal fillers or skin lasers. You should also determine how often you will realistically use the device. Here's some advice from Gmyrek: "Be honest with yourself -- if you aren't going to use an at-home device consistently, don't bother spending the money on it. Instead, spend that money on in-office treatments that are more effective."

Medical professionals say schools have gotten too political, citing ‘unscientific modes of thinking'
Medical professionals say schools have gotten too political, citing ‘unscientific modes of thinking'

Fox News

time22 minutes ago

  • Fox News

Medical professionals say schools have gotten too political, citing ‘unscientific modes of thinking'

Two medical professionals argued in a new report that "medical school has gotten too political," citing "unscientific modes of thinking." "Medical students are now immersed in the notion that undertaking political advocacy is as important as learning gross anatomy, physiology, and pharmacology," the authors wrote in The Chronicle of Higher Education. Sally Satel, a lecturer in psychiatry at Yale University School of Medicine, and Thomas S. Huddle, a professor at the University of Alabama at Birmingham's Heersink School of Medicine, cited several instances of political sentiments affecting the medical school industry. They noted that researchers are "promoting unscientific modes of thinking about group-based disparities in health access and status." "The University of Minnesota's Center for Antiracism Research for Health Equity decrees 'structural racism as a fundamental cause of health inequities,' despite the fact that this is at best an arguable thesis, not a fact. (The center was shut down last month.) The Kaiser Family Foundation states that health differentials 'stem from broader social and economic inequities,'" the authors write. Satel and Huddle pushed further by detailing an incident that occurred at the University of California, San Francisco, Medical Center. The institution not only called for a ceasefire in the Gaza war between Israel and Hamas, the authors wrote that staff chanted "intifada, intifada, long live intifada!" which "echoed into patients' rooms." The New York Times reported last summer that the protesters at the University of California, San Francisco, chanting "intifada" consisted of medical students and doctors. Such an incident lays out more deeply the consequences of medical schools prioritizing politics over instruction on professional imperatives, according to the authors. "These doctors were not putting patients first — if anything, they were offending and intimidating patients. They were putting their notion of social justice first," they wrote. The two medical professionals cite other instances where medical schools are steeped in politics, such as endorsing "racial reparations" and instituting "antiracism" training in order to qualify for a medical license in the wake of George Floyd's death. Satel and Huddle offer medical professionals "guidelines" for how to "responsibly" meet patients' needs while leveraging their "professional standing to effect change", including advocating for policies that "directly help patients and are rooted in professional expertise while ensuring that their advocacy does not interfere with their relationships with their colleagues, students, and patients." Satel, a practicing psychiatrist, told Fox News Digital that she is the medical director of a methadone clinic that represents a clinical setting. In response to Fox News Digital's request for comment, Huddle said that his "academic career has been as a clinician teaching how to care for patients while caring for them."

A ‘detox' after Covid vaccination? Experts say it's nonsense
A ‘detox' after Covid vaccination? Experts say it's nonsense

CNN

time27 minutes ago

  • CNN

A ‘detox' after Covid vaccination? Experts say it's nonsense

Podcast host Meghan McCain, the former co-host of 'The View,' made headlines when she posted to social media recently in support of a 'detox' supplement to be taken after Covid-19 vaccination or infection. The 'detox' supplement McCain touted costs $89.99 and is one of several versions sold online. It make claims about its ability to 'break down spike protein and disrupt its function' and provide 'your body with unparalleled support for cellular defense and detoxification.' Vaccine experts say such claims are nonsense. 'There's nothing to detox from, because the vaccines themselves are not toxins,' said Dr. Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at the Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization at the University of Saskatchewan. 'They're not toxic and they're not harmful.' McCain's X post about the supplement has been deleted, but McCain's personalized discount code continued to work on the website of the supplement maker, The Wellness Company. Neither McCain's representatives nor The Wellness Company responded to a request for comment. McCain also posted this week about 'concerning data' about mRNA vaccines and said friends had experienced health problems after getting the Covid-19 shot. As part of the post, she shared a video that suggested material in the vaccines could stick around long-term and change a person's genome. Vaccine experts say that just isn't true. The messenger RNA in Covid-19 vaccines instructs cells in the body to make a certain piece of the virus' spike protein — the structure on the surface of the coronavirus. The mRNA vaccine is like a blueprint that the body uses to train the immune system to recognize the virus that causes Covid and protect against it, said Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University Medical Center. 'MRNA is only in there in minute amounts,' Schaffner said. 'The spike protein is metabolized. It's broken up by our own body very, very quickly. So it's not in a position to disseminate or be distributed throughout the body requiring some sort of 'detoxification.' 'It's simply not scientifically a valid concept.' Since mRNA is so short-lived, vaccine makers do make a modification that allows it to stick around a little longer than it would otherwise, Rasmussen said. 'But mRNA, even modified mRNA like in these vaccines, does not stay around forever,' Rasmussen said. 'It's still not a very stable molecule.' Rasmussen said she has also read that some believe the lipid nanoparticle used to get the mRNA into the cells lingers and is toxic. The lipid nanoparticle, Rasmussen said, 'also don't stick around forever.' She said they get broken down at about the same rate the mRNA does, 'or even maybe a little before.' Schaffner believes maybe some of the language scientists use to describe how mRNA vaccines work may be unhelpful. 'I wonder if the very name of the protein, this 'spike protein' just makes people uneasy,' Schaffner said. If scientists called it something like the 'key protein' — since it's like a key that goes into a lock in the cell, which enables the protein to get inside 'and then do its good work' — that 'might not have evoked quite as much anxiety,' Schaffner suggested. Rasmussen believes people would still misconstrue the science regardless, particularly with leaders in the Trump administration who have spent years undermining the safety of vaccines or have a history of promoting dubious supplements. 'A lot of this isn't misinformation, it's really disinformation because people who start this stuff know what they're doing,' Rasmussen said. Dr. Pieter Cohen, an associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, says the availability of vaccine 'detox' products speaks to a bigger problem with the way the United States manages dietary supplements. Unlike pharmaceuticals, which must be tested and approved before they go to market and then comply with strict regulations about how they can be marketed, the US Food and Drug Administration doesn't have the authority to approve dietary supplements before they are marketed. Fear or distrust of Covid-19 vaccines is an easy target for supplement makers, Cohen said. 'This is a perfect scenario for supplements to jump in to the rescue,' Cohen said. 'You manufacture a false health concern, and then you have the solution that you can settle with a supplement. It's really a perfect opportunity for supplement manufacturers to profit from. From something that doesn't even exist.' It's hard, he said, to even define what 'detoxing' from a Covid-19 vaccine would mean. 'Are you trying to wash away the effects that boosted immunity against Covid? Is that the goal? I think it's a very vague, moving sort of target,' Cohen said. 'Or is it more that there's some fear that the Covid vaccine causes more harm than the government's letting on. Then the idea is that you sell these supplements to prevent that mystery harm.' 'I think it's a health fear mongering approach and profiting by the fear,' Cohen added. No vaccine is perfect, the experts said, but the risk with the Covid vaccine is extremely small and the problems like a sore arm or a low-grade fever that some of his patients have experienced resolved quickly. 'That's not something that any supplement will help resolve faster,' Cohen said. Research has consistently shown that the mRNA Covid-19 vaccines are safe and effective, and millions of people have gotten them without serious incident. As of May, the FDA required Covid-19 vaccines from Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna to use expanded warning labels with more information about the risk of a rare heart condition after vaccination. Some studies have found that Covid-19 infection itself carries a higher risk of myocarditis or pericarditis than vaccination. Schaffner said if there were true problems with any of the Covid vaccines, the country's surveillance system would have caught it by now. That's what happened with the Johnson & Johnson Covid-19 vaccine: Surveillance identified a rare risk of a severe blood clotting syndrome, particularly among some women. The vaccine is no longer in use. 'The system works,' Schaffner said. 'These mRNA vaccines are safe, and that's been seen in millions and millions of patients.' What may be even more dangerous, experts say, is the disinformation surrounding vaccines that drives people to want to take a supplement to detox from them in the first place. 'This is a much bigger problem,' Rasmussen said. 'It's important to smack this disinformation down where we can. It's morally wrong and reprehensible.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store