Archive for the ‘Male Genetics’ Category

KEY POINTS

Health experts have been baffled as to why there are people infected with COVID-19 and yet barely feel the infection while others suffer life-threatening symptoms even if healthy and young. Scientists are looking for answers in the genes of patients, trying to discover mutations that affect the immune response, hoping that it could help in coming up with new treatments.

Profile Of A Severe Case

During the early days of the pandemic, a general profile of a severe case of coronavirus infection started to emerge. They are older adults with pre-existing medical conditions and are likely to be male. As the virus continued to infect more people, a small fraction started to deviate from the general profile.

Health experts are starting to see around 5% of those infected are under the age of 50 and do not have any underlying health conditions. These are the group of patients that interest Dr. Jean-Laurent Casanova, a geneticist and head of the St. Giles Laboratory of Human Genetics of Infectious Diseases.

Dr. Casanova told the AFP it is possible for someone who joined a marathon in October 2019 to find himself in intensive care, ventilated and intubated in April 2020. He revealed his desire to know if these types of patients have rare genetic mutations that have been triggered by the coronavirus infection. The assumption is that these patients have genetic variations that are silent until the virus is encountered, the doctor said. coronavirus silent mutation in human body may be the one exploited by the virus Photo: TPHeinz - Pixabay

A Huge Global Effort

The geneticist co-founded the COVID Human Genetics Effort, a collaborative work that seeks to know more about the genome of severely-ill young patients in several countries worldwide. These include patients in Europe, Japan, Iran, China, and the United States.

Dr. Casanovas group is also studying those who did not get infected despite being exposed many times. He said their main goal is to know why some are sicker than others, a knowledge that the geneticist said might help them in their quest to develop anti-viral therapies.

Gene Mutations Have A Long History

Scientists have long known that gene mutations can make people more susceptible to an array of infectious diseases, ranging from influenza to viral encephalitis. These gene mutations can also offer protection sometimes.

In the 1990s, a group of researchers found out that some rare mutations of a single gene successfully protected people against HIV infection. This discovery led to a betterunderstanding of how the virus worked and eventually paved the way for scientists to develop new treatments.

View original post here:
Its In The Genes? Scientists Think Coronavirus Exploits Silent Hidden Mutations In The Body - International Business Times

The approval was based on a biomarker subgroup analysis of 387 patients with HRD-positive tumors from the Phase 3 PAOLA-1 trial, which showed that LYNPARZA in combination with bevacizumab reduced the risk of disease progression or death by 67% (HR 0.33 [95% CI, 0.25-0.45]). It improved progression-free survival (PFS) to a median of 37.2 months vs. 17.7 months with bevacizumab alone in patients with HRD-positive advanced ovarian cancer.

The most common adverse reactions (ARs) 10% in the overall trial population for PAOLA-1 when treated with LYNPARZA in combination with bevacizumab (N=535) and at a 5% frequency compared to bevacizumab alone (N=267) were fatigue (53% vs. 32%), nausea (53% vs. 22%), anemia (41% vs. 10%), lymphopenia (24% vs. 9%), vomiting (22% vs. 11%) and leukopenia (18% vs. 10%). Grade 3 or above ARs were anemia (17% vs. <1%), lymphopenia (7% vs. 1%), fatigue (5% vs. 2%), nausea (2% vs. 1%), leukopenia (2% vs. 2%) and vomiting (2% vs. 2%). Additional adverse reactions that occurred in 10% of patients receiving LYNPARZA in combination with bevacizumab irrespective of the frequency compared to bevacizumab alone were diarrhea (18%), neutropenia (18%), urinary tract infection (15%) and headache (14%). Fatal adverse reactions occurred in one patient due to concurrent pneumonia and aplastic anemia. Serious adverse reactions occurred in 31% of patients who received LYNPARZA in combination with bevacizumab. Serious adverse reactions in >5% of patients included hypertension (19%) and anemia (17%).

In addition, venous thromboembolic events occurred more commonly in patients receiving LYNPARZA in combination with bevacizumab (5%) than in those receiving bevacizumab alone (1.9%). ARs led to dose interruption in 54% of patients on LYNPARZA in combination with bevacizumab, while 41% of patients on LYNPARZA in combination with bevacizumab had a dose reduction. Discontinuation of treatment due to ARs occurred in 20% of patients on LYNPARZA in combination with bevacizumab.

Approximately one in two women with advanced ovarian cancer has an HRD-positive tumor. For patients with advanced ovarian cancer, the primary aim of first-line maintenance treatment is to delay disease progression for as long as possible.

Isabelle Ray-Coquard, principal investigator of the PAOLA-1 trial and medical oncologist, Centre Lon Brard and President of the GINECO group, said, Ovarian cancer is a devastating disease. The magnitude of benefit in HRD-positive patients in the PAOLA-1 trial is impactful. I look forward to seeing this translate into clinical practice.

Dave Frederickson, executive vice president, head of the oncology business unit, AstraZeneca, said, This approval represents another milestone for LYNPARZA in patients with ovarian cancer. The median progression-free survival of more than three years offers new hope for women to delay relapse in this difficult-to-treat disease. These results further establish that HRD-positive is a distinct subset of ovarian cancer and HRD testing is now a critical component of diagnosis and tailoring of treatment for women with advanced ovarian cancer.

Dr. Roy Baynes, senior vice president and head of global clinical development, chief medical officer, Merck Research Laboratories, said, Advances in understanding the role of biomarkers and PARP inhibition have fundamentally changed how physicians treat this aggressive type of cancer. Todays approval based on the PAOLA-1 trial highlights the importance of HRD testing at diagnosis to identify those who may benefit from LYNPARZA in combination with bevacizumab as a first-line maintenance treatment.

The full results from the Phase 3 PAOLA-1 trial were published inThe New England Journal of Medicine.

Regulatory reviews are currently underway in the European Union, Japan and other countries for LYNPARZA in combination with bevacizumab as a first-line maintenance treatment for patients with advanced ovarian cancer. As part of a broad development program, LYNPARZA is being assessed as a monotherapy and in combination across multiple tumor types.

IMPORTANT SAFETY INFORMATION

CONTRAINDICATIONS

There are no contraindications for LYNPARZA.

WARNINGS AND PRECAUTIONS

Myelodysplastic Syndrome/Acute Myeloid Leukemia (MDS/AML): Occurred in <1.5% of patients exposed to LYNPARZA monotherapy, and the majority of events had a fatal outcome. The duration of therapy in patients who developed secondary MDS/AML varied from <6 months to >2 years. All of these patients had previous chemotherapy with platinum agents and/or other DNA-damaging agents, including radiotherapy, and some also had a history of more than one primary malignancy or of bone marrow dysplasia.

Do not start LYNPARZA until patients have recovered from hematological toxicity caused by previous chemotherapy (Grade 1). Monitor complete blood count for cytopenia at baseline and monthly thereafter for clinically significant changes during treatment. For prolonged hematological toxicities, interrupt LYNPARZA and monitor blood count weekly until recovery.

If the levels have not recovered to Grade 1 or less after 4 weeks, refer the patient to a hematologist for further investigations, including bone marrow analysis and blood sample for cytogenetics. Discontinue LYNPARZA if MDS/AML is confirmed.

Pneumonitis: Occurred in <1% of patients exposed to LYNPARZA, and some cases were fatal. If patients present with new or worsening respiratory symptoms such as dyspnea, cough, and fever, or a radiological abnormality occurs, interrupt LYNPARZA treatment and initiate prompt investigation. Discontinue LYNPARZA if pneumonitis is confirmed and treat patient appropriately.

Embryo-Fetal Toxicity: Based on its mechanism of action and findings in animals, LYNPARZA can cause fetal harm. A pregnancy test is recommended for females of reproductive potential prior to initiating treatment.

Females

Advise females of reproductive potential of the potential risk to a fetus and to use effective contraception during treatment and for 6 months following the last dose.

Males

Advise male patients with female partners of reproductive potential or who are pregnant to use effective contraception during treatment and for 3 months following the last dose of LYNPARZA and to not donate sperm during this time.

ADVERSE REACTIONSFirst-Line Maintenance BRCAm Advanced Ovarian Cancer

Most common adverse reactions (Grades 1-4) in 10% of patients in clinical trials of LYNPARZA in the first-line maintenance setting for SOLO-1 were: nausea (77%), fatigue (67%), abdominal pain (45%), vomiting (40%), anemia (38%), diarrhea (37%), constipation (28%), upper respiratory tract infection/influenza/nasopharyngitis/bronchitis (28%), dysgeusia (26%), decreased appetite (20%), dizziness (20%), neutropenia (17%), dyspepsia (17%), dyspnea (15%), leukopenia (13%), UTI (13%), thrombocytopenia (11%), and stomatitis (11%).

Most common laboratory abnormalities (Grades 1-4) in 25% of patients in clinical trials of LYNPARZA in the first-line maintenance setting for SOLO-1 were: decrease in hemoglobin (87%), increase in mean corpuscular volume (87%), decrease in leukocytes (70%), decrease in lymphocytes (67%), decrease in absolute neutrophil count (51%), decrease in platelets (35%), and increase in serum creatinine (34%).

ADVERSE REACTIONSFirst-Line Maintenance Advanced Ovarian Cancer in Combination with Bevacizumab

Most common adverse reactions (Grades 1-4) in 10% of patients treated with LYNPARZA/bevacizumab compared to a 5% frequency for placebo/bevacizumab in the first-line maintenance setting for PAOLA-1 were: nausea (53%), fatigue (including asthenia) (53%), anemia (41%), lymphopenia (24%), vomiting (22%) and leukopenia (18%). In addition, the most common adverse reactions (10%) for patients receiving LYNPARZA/bevacizumab irrespective of the frequency compared with the placebo/bevacizumab arm were: diarrhea (18%), neutropenia (18%), urinary tract infection (15%), and headache (14%).

In addition, venous thromboembolic events occurred more commonly in patients receiving LYNPARZA/bevacizumab (5%) than in those receiving placebo/bevacizumab (1.9%).

Most common laboratory abnormalities (Grades 1-4) in 25% of patients for LYNPARZA in combination with bevacizumab in the first-line maintenance setting for PAOLA-1 were: decrease in hemoglobin (79%), decrease in lymphocytes (63%), increase in serum creatinine (61%), decrease in leukocytes (59%), decrease in absolute neutrophil count (35%), and decrease in platelets (35%).

ADVERSE REACTIONSMaintenance Recurrent Ovarian Cancer

Most common adverse reactions (Grades 1-4) in 20% of patients in clinical trials of LYNPARZA in the maintenance setting for SOLO-2 were: nausea (76%), fatigue (including asthenia) (66%), anemia (44%), vomiting (37%), nasopharyngitis/upper respiratory tract infection (URI)/influenza (36%), diarrhea (33%), arthralgia/myalgia (30%), dysgeusia (27%), headache (26%), decreased appetite (22%), and stomatitis (20%).

Study 19: nausea (71%), fatigue (including asthenia) (63%), vomiting (35%), diarrhea (28%), anemia (23%), respiratory tract infection (22%), constipation (22%), headache (21%), decreased appetite (21%), and dyspepsia (20%).

Most common laboratory abnormalities (Grades 1-4) in 25% of patients in clinical trials of LYNPARZA in the maintenance setting (SOLO-2/Study 19) were: increase in mean corpuscular volume (89%/82%), decrease in hemoglobin (83%/82%), decrease in leukocytes (69%/58%), decrease in lymphocytes (67%/52%), decrease in absolute neutrophil count (51%/47%), increase in serum creatinine (44%/45%), and decrease in platelets (42%/36%).

ADVERSE REACTIONSAdvanced gBRCAm Ovarian Cancer

Most common adverse reactions (Grades 1-4) in 20% of patients in clinical trials of LYNPARZA for advanced gBRCAm ovarian cancer after 3 or more lines of chemotherapy (pooled from 6 studies) were: fatigue/asthenia (66%), nausea (64%), vomiting (43%), anemia (34%), diarrhea (31%), nasopharyngitis/upper respiratory tract infection (URI) (26%), dyspepsia (25%), myalgia (22%), decreased appetite (22%), and arthralgia/musculoskeletal pain (21%).

Most common laboratory abnormalities (Grades 1-4) in 25% of patients in clinical trials of LYNPARZA for advanced gBRCAm ovarian cancer (pooled from 6 studies) were: decrease in hemoglobin (90%), mean corpuscular volume elevation (57%), decrease in lymphocytes (56%), increase in serum creatinine (30%), decrease in platelets (30%), and decrease in absolute neutrophil count (25%).

ADVERSE REACTIONSgBRCAm, HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer

Most common adverse reactions (Grades 1-4) in 20% of patients in OlympiAD were: nausea (58%), anemia (40%), fatigue (including asthenia) (37%), vomiting (30%), neutropenia (27%), respiratory tract infection (27%), leukopenia (25%), diarrhea (21%), and headache (20%).

Most common laboratory abnormalities (Grades 1-4) in 25% of patients in OlympiAD were: decrease in hemoglobin (82%), decrease in lymphocytes (73%), decrease in leukocytes (71%), increase in mean corpuscular volume (71%), decrease in absolute neutrophil count (46%), and decrease in platelets (33%).

ADVERSE REACTIONSFirst-Line Maintenance gBRCAm Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

Most common adverse reactions (Grades 1-4) in 10% of patients in clinical trials of LYNPARZA in the first-line maintenance setting for POLO were: fatigue (60%), nausea (45%), abdominal pain (34%), diarrhea (29%), anemia (27%), decreased appetite (25%), constipation (23%), vomiting (20%), back pain (19%), arthralgia (15%), rash (15%), thrombocytopenia (14%), dyspnea (13%), neutropenia (12%), nasopharyngitis (12%), dysgeusia (11%), and stomatitis (10%).

Most common laboratory abnormalities (Grades 1-4) in 25% of patients in clinical trials of LYNPARZA in the first-line maintenance setting for POLO were: increase in serum creatinine (99%), decrease in hemoglobin (86%), increase in mean corpuscular volume (71%), decrease in lymphocytes (61%), decrease in platelets (56%), decrease in leukocytes (50%), and decrease in absolute neutrophil count (25%).

DRUG INTERACTIONS

Anticancer Agents: Clinical studies of LYNPARZA in combination with other myelosuppressive anticancer agents, including DNA-damaging agents, indicate a potentiation and prolongation of myelosuppressive toxicity.

CYP3A Inhibitors: Avoid concomitant use of strong or moderate CYP3A inhibitors. If a strong or moderate CYP3A inhibitor must be co-administered, reduce the dose of LYNPARZA. Advise patients to avoid grapefruit, grapefruit juice, Seville oranges, and Seville orange juice during LYNPARZA treatment.

CYP3A Inducers: Avoid concomitant use of strong or moderate CYP3A inducers when using LYNPARZA. If a moderate inducer cannot be avoided, there is a potential for decreased efficacy of LYNPARZA.

USE IN SPECIFIC POPULATIONS

Lactation: No data are available regarding the presence of olaparib in human milk, its effects on the breastfed infant or on milk production. Because of the potential for serious adverse reactions in the breastfed infant, advise a lactating woman not to breastfeed during treatment with LYNPARZA and for 1 month after receiving the final dose.

Pediatric Use: The safety and efficacy of LYNPARZA have not been established in pediatric patients.

Hepatic Impairment: No adjustment to the starting dose is required in patients with mild or moderate hepatic impairment (Child-Pugh classification A and B). There are no data in patients with severe hepatic impairment (Child-Pugh classification C).

Renal Impairment: No dosage modification is recommended in patients with mild renal impairment (CLcr 51-80 mL/min estimated by Cockcroft-Gault). In patients with moderate renal impairment (CLcr 31-50 mL/min), reduce the dose of LYNPARZA to 200 mg twice daily. There are no data in patients with severe renal impairment or end-stage renal disease (CLcr 30 mL/min).

INDICATIONS

LYNPARZA is a poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor indicated:

First-Line Maintenance BRCAm Advanced Ovarian Cancer

For the maintenance treatment of adult patients with deleterious or suspected deleterious germline or somatic BRCA-mutated (gBRCAm or sBRCAm) advanced epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer who are in complete or partial response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Select patients for therapy based on an FDA-approved companion diagnostic for LYNPARZA.

First-Line Maintenance HRD Positive Advanced Ovarian Cancer in Combination with Bevacizumab

In combination with bevacizumab for the maintenance treatment of adult patients with advanced epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer who are in complete or partial response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy and whose cancer is associated with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) positive status defined by either:

Select patients for therapy based on an FDA-approved companion diagnostic for LYNPARZA.

Maintenance Recurrent Ovarian Cancer

For the maintenance treatment of adult patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer, who are in complete or partial response to platinum-based chemotherapy.

Advanced gBRCAm Ovarian Cancer

For the treatment of adult patients with deleterious or suspected deleterious germline BRCA-mutated (gBRCAm) advanced ovarian cancer who have been treated with 3 or more prior lines of chemotherapy. Select patients for therapy based on an FDA-approved companion diagnostic for LYNPARZA.

gBRCAm HER2-Negative Metastatic Breast Cancer

For the treatment of adult patients with deleterious or suspected deleterious gBRCAm, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer who have been treated with chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant, or metastatic setting. Patients with hormone receptor (HR)-positive breast cancer should have been treated with a prior endocrine therapy or be considered inappropriate for endocrine therapy. Select patients for therapy based on an FDA-approved companion diagnostic for LYNPARZA.

First-Line Maintenance gBRCAm Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer

For the maintenance treatment of adult patients with deleterious or suspected deleterious gBRCAm metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma whose disease has not progressed on at least 16 weeks of a first-line platinum-based chemotherapy regimen. Select patients for therapy based on an FDA-approved companion diagnostic for LYNPARZA.

Please click here for complete Prescribing Information, including Patient Information (Medication Guide).

About PAOLA-1

PAOLA-1 is a double-blind Phase 3 trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of LYNPARZA in combination with standard-of-care bevacizumab vs. bevacizumab alone, as a first-line maintenance treatment for advanced FIGO Stage III-IV high grade serous or endometroid ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer patients who had a complete or partial response to first-line treatment with platinum-based chemotherapy and bevacizumab.

PAOLA-1 is an ENGOT (European Network of Gynaecological Oncological Trial groups) trial, sponsored by ARCAGY Research (Association de Recherche sur les CAncers dont GYncologiques) on behalf of GINECO (Groupe dInvestigateurs National des Etudes des Cancers Ovariens et du sein). ARCAGY-GINECO is an academic group specializing in clinical and translational research in patients cancers and a member of the GCIG (Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup).

In the U.S., eligible advanced ovarian cancer patients will be selected for therapy based on the FDA-approved myChoice HRD Plus, an HRD test designed to detect when a tumor has lost the ability to repair double-stranded DNA breaks. Myriad Genetics, Inc. owns and commercializes myChoice HRD Plus.

About LYNPARZA (olaparib)

LYNPARZA is a first-in-class PARP inhibitor and the first targeted treatment to potentially exploit DNA damage response (DDR) pathway deficiencies, such as BRCA mutations, to preferentially kill cancer cells. Inhibition of PARP with LYNPARZA leads to the trapping of PARP bound to DNA single-strand breaks, stalling of replication forks, their collapse and the generation of DNA double-strand breaks and cancer cell death. LYNPARZA is being tested in a range of tumor types with defects and dependencies in the DDR.

LYNPARZA, which is being jointly developed and commercialized by AstraZeneca and Merck, has a broad and advanced clinical trial development program, and AstraZeneca and Merck are working together to understand how it may affect multiple PARP-dependent tumors as a monotherapy and in combination across multiple cancer types.

About Ovarian Cancer

Ovarian cancer is the fifth most common cause of death from cancer in women in the United States. This year, it is estimated that more than 21,000 women will be diagnosed with ovarian cancer and nearly 14,000 women will die of this disease.

Women with ovarian cancer are often diagnosed with advanced disease, which has a five-year survival rate of about 48%. For newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer, the primary aim of treatment is to delay progression of the disease for as long as possible. BRCA1/2 mutations are found in approximately 22% of all ovarian cancers and approximately 50% of ovarian cancers are HRD-positive.

About Homologous Recombination Deficiency

HRD encompass a wide range of genetic abnormalities, including BRCA mutations, that can be detected using tests. As the BRCA gene drives DNA repair via homologous recombination, mutation of this gene leads to homologous recombination deficiency thereby interfering with normal cell DNA repair mechanisms. BRCA mutations are just one of many HRDs which confer sensitivity to PARP inhibitors including LYNPARZA.

About the AstraZeneca and Merck Strategic Oncology Collaboration

In July 2017, AstraZeneca and Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, US, known as MSD outside the United States and Canada, announced a global strategic oncology collaboration to co-develop and co-commercialize certain oncology products, including LYNPARZA, the worlds first PARP inhibitor, for multiple cancer types. Working together, the companies will develop these products in combination with other potential new medicines and as monotherapies. Independently, the companies will develop these oncology products in combination with their respective PD-L1 and PD-1 medicines.

Mercks Focus on Cancer

Our goal is to translate breakthrough science into innovative oncology medicines to help people with cancer worldwide. At Merck, the potential to bring new hope to people with cancer drives our purpose and supporting accessibility to our cancer medicines is our commitment. As part of our focus on cancer, Merck is committed to exploring the potential of immuno-oncology with one of the largest development programs in the industry across more than 30 tumor types. We also continue to strengthen our portfolio through strategic acquisitions and are prioritizing the development of several promising oncology candidates with the potential to improve the treatment of advanced cancers. For more information about our oncology clinical trials, visit http://www.merck.com/clinicaltrials.

About Merck

For more than 125 years, Merck, known as MSD outside of the United States and Canada, has been inventing for life, bringing forward medicines and vaccines for many of the worlds most challenging diseases in pursuit of our mission to save and improve lives. We demonstrate our commitment to patients and population health by increasing access to health care through far-reaching policies, programs and partnerships. Today, Merck continues to be at the forefront of research to prevent and treat diseases that threaten people and animals including cancer, infectious diseases such as HIV and Ebola, and emerging animal diseases as we aspire to be the premier research-intensive biopharmaceutical company in the world. For more information, visit http://www.merck.com and connect with us on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and LinkedIn.

Forward-Looking Statement of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, N.J., USA

This news release of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, N.J., USA (the company) includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of the safe harbor provisions of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements are based upon the current beliefs and expectations of the companys management and are subject to significant risks and uncertainties. There can be no guarantees with respect to pipeline products that the products will receive the necessary regulatory approvals or that they will prove to be commercially successful. If underlying assumptions prove inaccurate or risks or uncertainties materialize, actual results may differ materially from those set forth in the forward-looking statements.

Risks and uncertainties include but are not limited to, general industry conditions and competition; general economic factors, including interest rate and currency exchange rate fluctuations; the impact of the recent global outbreak of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19); the impact of pharmaceutical industry regulation and health care legislation in the United States and internationally; global trends toward health care cost containment; technological advances, new products and patents attained by competitors; challenges inherent in new product development, including obtaining regulatory approval; the companys ability to accurately predict future market conditions; manufacturing difficulties or delays; financial instability of international economies and sovereign risk; dependence on the effectiveness of the companys patents and other protections for innovative products; and the exposure to litigation, including patent litigation, and/or regulatory actions.

The company undertakes no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. Additional factors that could cause results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements can be found in the companys 2019 Annual Report on Form 10-K and the companys other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) available at the SECs Internet site (www.sec.gov).

View source version on businesswire.com: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20200508005523/en/

More here:
LYNPARZA (olaparib) Approved by FDA as First-Line Maintenance Treatment with Bevacizumab for HRD-Positive Advanced Ovarian Cancer - BioSpace

LONDON When the first cases of a new coronavirus started to appear in China last December, the disease seemed to be a particularly aggressive respiratory infection. An "urgent notice" that month from the Wuhan health commission warned of "successive cases of unknown pneumonia".

Respiratory symptoms are still the first signs that doctors look for in suspected Covid-19 cases: cough, shortness of breath and fever.

But, less than five months after it was first identified, this new coronavirus is managing to throw up a series of medical mysteries - from blood clots and strokes to digestive problems - that are confounding the scientific community.

From head to foot, Covid-19 causes a fiendish variety of symptoms. Some are relatively mild, such as loss of smell and taste or chilblain-like sores on toes. But others may be fatal, such as when what doctors call an immune storm destroys vital organs. The more this virus is studied, the more complex it appears to be. "Every day we're learning of new tricks that the virus plays," Imperial College London's professor of experimental medicine Peter Openshaw says. "It is remarkable to see a disease unfolding in front of our eyes with so many twists and turns."

The proliferation of complex symptoms is not just a challenge for doctors treating the disease, but also for health systems trying to adapt to the pandemic. In the early months, the focus was on getting hold of ventilators that could help patients with severe respiratory problems. But now hospitals are also scrambling for more kidney dialysis machines and anticoagulant drugs.

A single individual can suffer the disease in more than one form, Prof Openshaw adds. "There are accounts of people experiencing one symptom, for example coughing, appearing to recover or go into remission and then returning with a more serious systemic disease."

With the worldwide death toll from Covid-19 already nearing 260,000 and confirmed cases close to exceeding 3.7 million, according to Johns Hopkins University, scientists have mobilised at a speed and on a scale unprecedented in the history of medicine, in an effort to understand the myriad ways in which the virus affects the human body. They hope that their research will not only improve clinical care of patients but also help the development of drugs and vaccines.

The initial diagnosis was that it was a respiratory infection, like its sister diseases Sars and Mers which are also caused by coronaviruses.

Respiratory symptoms remain the most common manifestations of Covid-19 in patients who go to hospital, according to a study of almost 17,000 people admitted to 166 UK hospitals carried out by a research consortium from Imperial College and Liverpool and Edinburgh universities. About two-thirds of patients in the study - the largest of Covid-19 hospital patients outside China - were admitted suffering from respiratory symptoms, says Dr Annemarie Docherty of Edinburgh, the lead author of the paper. But that proportion may have been raised by the fact that they reflect the official case definition of Covid-19.

But two other clusters of symptoms also dominate hospital admissions: systemic musculoskeletal symptoms (muscle and joint pain and fatigue) and enteric symptoms (abdominal pain, vomiting and diarrhoea). Many patients suffer from several symptoms simultaneously.

How the immune system reacts to Covid-19 is key to the course of the disease in adults. People who have been suffering with mild to moderate symptoms for a week or so often seem to hit a critical point: usually their immune system gets the virus under full control and sets them on a path to full recovery - but sometimes it goes into overdrive, triggering systemic inflammation and in severe cases a "cytokine storm" that destroys tissues and whole organs.

Inflammation also helps to explain why obesity makes people more susceptible to severe Covid-19. Seventy-three per cent of coronavirus patients in UK intensive care units are overweight or obese, with a body mass index above 25. "Fat cells secrete chemicals that increase the body's inflammatory response," says Liverpool University's professor of child health Calum Semple.

Kidney damage has emerged as another of the most frequent serious consequences of Covid-19, with 23 per cent of patients in intensive care requiring renal support. As with other organs, it is uncertain to what extent the virus is directly attacking the kidneys or whether the harm results more from generalised overactivity of the immune system and consequent changes in the patient's blood circulation.

Cardiovascular disease is the most common pre-existing health condition in people who die of Covid-19, ahead of lung and respiratory disorders such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. And many patients without a previous history of heart trouble develop severe cardiac symptoms while they are in hospital.

"When we first heard about the coronavirus we expected people with lung and breathing problems to be most at risk but that has not been the case," says the British Heart Foundation's medical director Nilesh Samani. "We need to understand why the virus is causing so many problems outside the lungs - and cardiovascular complications in particular."

The exaggerated immune response to the virus sometimes causes abnormal blood clotting. If this thrombosis happens in the brain, it may trigger a stroke. Neurologists at University College London (UCL) studied six Covid-19 patients who suffered acute stroke as a result of a large arterial blockage - in five of the cases more than a week after suffering headache, cough and fever and in one patient before other symptoms appeared.

The UCL researchers found all six patients had markedly raised blood levels of a protein fragment called D-dimer associated with abnormal clotting. The findings suggest that early testing for D-dimer could enable doctors to prescribe blood-thinning drugs to people at risk, reducing the chance of stroke or harmful clotting elsewhere in the body. "Early use of anticoagulant drugs might be helpful but this needs to be balanced against their brain bleeding risk," says study leader David Werring.

STRAITS TIMES GRAPHICS

"This study is consistent with the growing evidence that people hospitalised with Covid-19 are at risk from blood clots in multiple locations: the lungs (causing pulmonary embolus), the brain (causing stroke) and the veins (causing DVT)," says professor of cardiovascular medicine Tim Chico at Sheffield University. "The risk of blood clots with Covid-19 appears to be even greater than the increased risk of blood clots seen in other severe illnesses."

The coronavirus also seems capable of attacking the brain and nervous system directly, as well as indirectly through abnormal blood clotting, though the evidence for acute symptoms of neural infection is limited. The effects may show up in the longer term as post-viral fatigue.

Neurons in the olfactory bulb, which transmits information from the nose to the brain, are apparently infected by the virus. Indeed, anosmia - loss of the sense of smell - is one of the most frequently reported symptoms of mild infection, affecting about half of patients and lasting for several weeks in some cases.

The good news for those who develop anosmia is that they are much less likely to become seriously ill with Covid-19. Dr Carol Yan and colleagues at the University of California San Diego (UCSD) reported last week that patients reporting loss of smell were 10 times less likely to be admitted to hospital for Covid-19 than those without loss of smell.

The UCSD researchers suggest that a relatively small dose of virus delivered to the upper airway, where it causes anosmia, may be less likely to overwhelm the host immune response. "This hypothesis is in essence the concept underlying live vaccinations, where low dosage and a distant site of inoculation generates an immune response without provoking a severe infection," they say.

The declining strength of the immune system with age is a partial explanation for the increasing incidence of Covid-19 in older people. PHOTO: AFP

Besides anosmia, the most frequently seen minor symptoms are rashes, pustules and blisters on the skin - including lesions like chilblains that dermatologists are calling "Covid toe".

The results from the study led by Imperial College, Liverpool and Edinburgh universities echo other findings that the disease is much more common in men - who make up 60 per cent of UK Covid-19 hospital admissions - and its severity rises markedly with advancing years (the median age of patients is 72). The strong associations with the male sex and old age are a particular feature of Covid-19 compared with other infectious illnesses.

Data from the UK Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre shows that men make up 71.5 per cent of patients whose disease becomes severe enough to require intensive care treatment. A comparable control group of patients critically ill with non-Covid viral pneumonia was just 54.3 per cent male.

"The reason behind this difference in Covid risk is unknown," says Dr James Gill, honorary clinical lecturer at Warwick Medical School. "There are several schools of thought on the matter, from the assumption that simply men don't look after their bodies as well, with higher levels of smoking, alcohol use, obesity and other deleterious health behaviours, through to immunological variations in genders. Women may have a more aggressive immune system, meaning a greater resilience to infections."

University of Oxford's professor of immunology Philip Goulder points out that several critical immune genes are located on the X chromosome - of which women have two copies and men one. "The immune response to coronavirus is therefore amplified in females," he says.

The declining strength of the immune system with age is also a partial explanation for the increasing incidence of the disease in older people, though it is not clear why this trend is more pronounced in Covid-19 than in many other viral infections.

Children are remarkably - but not completely - resistant to the disease. Just 3 per cent of UK hospital patients are under 18. Again no one knows quite why. But one answer may lie in the "keyhole" through which coronavirus enters human cells, known as the ACE2 receptor. In children these receptors have not developed to their full adult stage and therefore may not fit the "spike protein" that the virus uses to enter cells.

It is also possible that ACE2 develops more quickly in children's upper airways than their lower respiratory tract, allowing them to become infected - and thus able to transmit Covid-19 - without showing the same progression to severe symptoms.

The National Health System in London and the UK Paediatric Intensive Care Society recently alerted doctors to a rise in the number of children suffering from "a multi-system inflammatory state" similar to toxic shock, which might result from the immune system overreacting to viral infection. Italian and US paediatricians have noticed a similar body-wide inflammatory syndrome in children.

This paediatric condition is rare but researchers are investigating, says Prof Semple. "Some respiratory viruses are associated with a systemic inflammatory response, typically two weeks after infection. But this could be a phenomenon of heightened awareness."

Research also shows that children are remarkably - but not completely - resistant to the disease. PHOTO: AFP

For Prof Openshaw, the mysteries of Covid-19 recall the early days of the HIV/Aids outbreak in the 1980s - except that this time, they are unfolding much more quickly. "We need the answers also to appear far faster than they did with HIV," he says.

A global research effort is on to discover human genetic factors that would help to explain why Covid-19 infection varies so much in its symptoms.

Although much of the variation results from environmental and lifestyle factors, scientists are convinced that genetics play a significant role too.

"Experience with other viruses shows that genetics can explain some of the different responses to infection," says Dr Mark Daly, director of the Institute for Molecular Medicine Finland in Helsinki, who is coordinating the global response through the Covid-19 Host Genetics Initiative.

For example, genetic mutations on the CCR5 protein, which HIV uses to enter human cells, make rare individuals resistant to Aids. Researchers may find comparable variations in the human ACE2 protein, entry point of the coronavirus, designated as Sars-Cov-2, that causes Covid-19.

The Covid programme has two overlapping components. One uses human genomes already obtained for other research purposes from volunteers through bodies such as UK Biobank and Genomics England - and looks for differences in DNA between participants who become ill with Covid-19 and those who do not.

The other part obtains the fresh genomes from Covid-19 patients, looking for variations that might explain why some experience only mild symptoms while others become severely ill.

Genomics England, a public body owned by the UK Department of Health and Social Care, is involved in both approaches. Dr Mark Caulfield, its chief scientist, says it is too early to have obtained any results. "But I am confident that reading whole genomes will help to identify variation that affects response to Covid-19 and to discover new therapies."

Prof Daly hopes the initiative will have tens of thousands of human genomes to analyse. "We particularly want to identify a subset of younger individuals with no comorbidities who have a severe response to Sars-Cov-2 infection," he says.

FINANCIAL TIMES

See the original post:
From blood clots to 'Covid toe': Experts confounded by series of medical mysteries - The Straits Times

In 2014, a sardonic tweet about the differences between mens and womens deodorant descriptors went viral. It read: Women's deodorant scents: rose, cotton, spring, meadow.

Mens: WINTER ICE, SHARKNADO, GLACIER PUNCH, ANTIFREEZE, GUN. The tweet, which was shared more than 24,000 times, inspired scores of similar, fabricated product names poking fun at the gendered way in which skincare and grooming products are typically marketed to men and women.

Read more: Coming Out As Trans Non-Binary To My Boss Taught Me A Lesson About Expecting More

Satire aside, anyone browsing the toiletries aisle cant help but be aware of the invisible barrier and, more often than not, the clearly marked signs separating the droves of baby-pink, pastel and powder-blue womens skincare products from the mostly monochromatic mens grooming choices, reassuring prospective purchasers that they are, in fact, suitable for men. Aside from the potentially harmful psychological effects of gender-specific marketing, the very real pink tax fosters another type of inequity in 2015, a study commissioned by the New York City Department of Consumer Affairs uncovered that, on average, personal-care products marketed to women will cost up to 13 per cent more than similar products targeted at men.

As we move towards more inclusive definitions of gender, is gendered skincare simply an antiquated (and sexist) marketing ploy or does it truly cater to the distinct needs of male and female skin compositions?

Read more: These Gender Neutral Salons Are A Pink Tax-Free Zone

Its no secret that industry insiders have known for a while now that gender in consumption is often nothing more than a social construct. Were conditioned from a young age to classify certain colours, toys and products as feminine, while we gradually learn to think of others as specifically masculine. Just think of the toys you giddily unwrapped before tucking into your Happy Meal as a child dolls for the girls, cars for the boys.

This phenomenon continues to inform our thinking well into adulthood, with men tending to be more concerned with maintaining a masculine identity and choosing to buy products that align themselves with that image; its even been shown that men purchase more in the presence of a strong-looking man. Such intelligence is invaluable for marketers determined to bolster their bottom line.

Marketing strategies and social conditioning notwithstanding, is mens skin really different enough to warrant an entirely separate skincare regimen? While its true that mens skin is between 20 and 25 per cent thicker than womens (as it contains more collagen and elastin) and it tends to produce more oil, the American Academy of Dermatology assures us that the basics of our daily skincare regime should be the same, regardless of gender. Instead of thinking of skin as either male or female, the most important factors to look out for when putting together an effective skincare routine are skin type (normal, sensitive, oily, dry or combination) and areas of concern think anti-ageing, blemishes, dark spots, and so on.

With consumers everywhere increasingly casting a critical eye on traditional beauty norms, the past few years have witnessed a sharp rise in gender-neutral skincare. Well-established brands and products that have long positioned themselves as neutral go-tos such as Australian heavyweight Aesop and ubiquitous unisex fragrances, including CK One, are now being joined by up-and-coming newcomers aiming to disrupt the gender-specific market.

Panacea, the K-Beauty-inspired skincare line, continues its hot streak in 2020. The brainchild of Korean-American co-founder Terry Lee, Panacea was conceived with the idea of introducing a gender-agnostic approach to skincare, while reducing the typical (and time-consuming) 10-step, K-Beauty approach to a mere three steps. The newest addition to the ever-expanding roster of universal pampering products is American Eagles in-house wellness and skincare line, Mood. This non-gendered range of hemp-derived CBD products includes everything from face oil and bath bombs to pillow mists.

Also looking to break down gender-specific beauty is Alll, which provides a personalised, DNA-based approach to skincare. Recent studies suggest our genetics account for 50 to 60 per cent of ageing, says Dr Elisabet Hagert, co-founder of Alll. This means how we age really is dependent on our genetic predispositions. Based on an in-depth DNA analysis, a bespoke skincare line is created, targeting individual concerns at a granular level regardless of gender.

As we progress into the new decade, were being spoiled for choice when it comes to skincare and grooming solutions with an emphasis on skin type and areas of concern, rather than gender. The only question that remains is this: with us men being fiercely brand loyal, will we be willing to leave our Sharknado-scented deodorants behind?

More from British Vogue:

Read more:
Is The Future Of Beauty Non-Binary? - British Vogue

Donald Trump has excelled at stand-out advice to head off major disasters. Anyone remember his sage exhortation for avoiding worldwide arboreal conflagrations? Yes, rake your forest floors. Last month he surpassed himself much more dangerously with an astonishing suggestion for curing COVID-19 victims - inject them with disinfectant.

As the world races to find answers to the disease, we are still deep in the realms of speculation. Some theories seem more feasible than others, but by comparison with the above, the smorgasbord of theories explored below should seem far less unlikely than they might otherwise appear.

The main COVID-19 risks

In the previous article to this one, several groups were mentioned as being at higher risk.

It's now become more well established that:

We also know that compared to viral pneumonia, higher levels of co-morbidities are involved amongst ICU COVID-19 patients, with high blood pressure, high BMI and diabetes featuring strongly. However, co-morbidities are not the whole answer to why certain people are worse affected.

A study of 28% of all UK hospitalised COVID-19 patients (16,749) found 47% had no documented comorbidity. Among the rest, the most common noted at admission were chronic cardiac disease (29%), uncomplicated diabetes (19%), chronic pulmonary disease excluding asthma (19%) and asthma (14%). (Hypertension was not one of the criteria searched on, but is often mentioned elsewhere.)

The tricky thing about all these associations with the disease is working out which of them actually tell us anything useful. It's very easy to look at each one in isolation and jump to conclusions. It's also difficult to separate differences between the rates of infection (differentiating exposure vs susceptibility), severe symptoms and mortality, which don't always match between groups.

Why are men harder hit?

Contrary to what their partners might suggest, it's not to do with differences in hand-washing. Men and women are equally likely to contract the virus. That's where equality ends. Men are in the majority to be hospitalised with COVID-19 (60%), and to end up in ICU (72%) and, once there, are less likely to survive (51% of the men died, while only 43% of the women did). In the ONS statistics, this translates to men accounting for nearly two thirds of COVID-19 related deaths in the 45-64 and 65-74 age groups. (The proportion lowers with increasing age, as there are more older women.)

An intriguing fact comes out of the Continuous Mortality Investigation's analysis of excess death rates. In week 17, for over 75s, men and women had pretty much the same percentage increase of death rates (+129% to +138%). But whilst younger men were also dying twice as fast as expected, for women rates were up by relatively lower rates: 73% vs expected amongst 45-64 year-olds and 59% if 65-74.

Thoughts so far about the role of testosterone and oestrogen have proved inconclusive, although the latter is being looked at more closely. Female immune systems certainly give general improved protection, producing higher levels of antibodies and preventing as much viral load and inflammation as suffered by men. One of the explanations offered is to do with the X-chromosome, of which female DNA has two. However, none of this explains why the male disadvantage is so pronounced for this type of infection compared to others.

Smoke and mirrors

One suggested explanation for the gender split has been that men more likely to be smokers than women and tend to smoke more heavily. This is especially true in China. However, conflicting data there makes a link look less likely than you'd guess. Although some smokers fared less well with severe symptoms, smokers were very much under-represented amongst patients.

In the UK, the link is also tenuous, as we have now have low numbers of smokers to start with and the ratio of male smokers to female is only 1.3 vs their ratio of arrival for COVID-19 in ICU, being 2.5.

The high rate of severe COVID-19 amongst Asian and Black ethnicities is also a confounder for smoking as a top risk factor. Smoking prevalence in these groups in the UK is about 2/3 of that for whites.

Even more surprisingly, whilst no-one's suggesting taking up smoking, a French study appeared to show that people who smoke are 80% less likely to catch COVID-19 than non-smokers of the same age and sex. This seems counter to other findings that smokers fare less well when it comes to worse symptoms and the fact that smokers have more ACE2 receptors, which are the route in that the virus uses.

A possible explanation is in the difference between incidence and severity. Inhalation of nitric oxide could help prevent infection, whereas once the virus manages to get a grip, the damage already done by smoking makes patients more vulnerable.

Genetics

The King's College Twins study team using the ZOE COVID-19 symptom study app, now with about three million UK users, found from analysing 2,633 twin users of the app that roughly half of the difference in symptoms between people can be explained by underlying variations in their genes, while the rest is due to other factors such as amount of viral exposure (viral load), underlying health conditions, environment and lifestyle.

This lends credence to the idea that genetic differences could explain part of the differences in severity of symptoms and in mortality between the sexes and different races.

The BAME concern

Concerns have been raised about the disproportionately high numbers of people of Black, Asian and mixed ethnicity (BAME) vs White COVID-19 patients. For example, ONS data just out shows Black males are 4.2 times more likely to die from a COVID-19-related death and Black females are 4.3 times more likely than White ethnicity males and females.

As you'd expect, wide differences within ethnic sub-groups exist, making analysis difficult.

Higher levels of diabetes among some groups has been thought to be one potential factor.

Early high level indications had suggested that case fatality rates are no worse than for Whites, after controlling for other factors. This suggested the main problem is exposure in the first place. This can be related to location, occupations in the front line whether in healthcare or service roles, and also factors to do with relative poverty and overcrowded housing.

However, the new ONS data counters that as the whole answer. Controlling for socio-economic background as well as age and sex, all groups, except for Chinese women, showed a higher risk than Whites, with Blacks still being at almost double the risk.

Solutions ruled out or being tested

Apart from those New Yorkers discovering ingestion of disinfectant results in internal burns, many other more plausible things have been tried and don't seem to help much or are being tested but results aren't out yet. Among the don't help list are:

Among the longshots being tested for symptomatic relief or immunity are:

Rays of hope

Despite the horrifying numbers we've been seeing, we can at least be heartened by the falls in case numbers of late and the speed at which researchers of all sorts are throwing light on the facts which will ultimately help us better defend ourselves against this horrible virus.

On a lighter note, we could find that Trump is right for once, when it comes to the benefits of sunlight. Not only is UV light a known disinfectant, but the race is on to determine the correlations between COVID-19 experience and exposure to the sun. It's hypothesized that benefits of sunlight on the skin - vitamin D and nitric oxide production - act to reduce vulnerability due to factors such as hypertension, obesity, blood clotting problems and immune dysfunction.

Release of lockdown into the sunny weather could be just what the doctor ordered.

Ruth Gilbert heads up insuringchange.co.uk

Read the original post:
COVID-19: Rays of hope amid the gloom - COVER

In 2014, a sardonic tweet about the differences between mens and womens deodorant descriptors went viral. It read: Women's deodorant scents: rose, cotton, spring, meadow. Mens: WINTER ICE, SHARKNADO, GLACIER PUNCH, ANTIFREEZE, GUN. The tweet, which was shared more than 24,000 times, inspired scores of similar, fabricated product names poking fun at the gendered way in which skincare and grooming products are typically marketed to men and women.

Satire aside, anyone browsing the toiletries aisle cant help but be aware of the invisible barrierand, more often than not, the clearly marked signsseparating the droves of baby-pink, pastel and powder-blue womens skincare products from the mostly monochromatic mens grooming choices, reassuring prospective purchasers that they are, in fact, suitable for men. Aside from the potentially harmful psychological effects of gender-specific marketing, the very real pink tax fosters another type of inequityin 2015, a study commissioned by the New York City Department of Consumer Affairs uncovered that, on average, personal-care products marketed to women will cost up to 13 per cent more than similar products targeted at men.

As we move towards more inclusive definitions of gender, is gendered skincare simply an antiquated (and sexist) marketing ploy or does it truly cater to the distinct needs of male and female skin compositions?

Its no secret that industry insiders have known for a while now that gender in consumption is often nothing more than a social construct. Were conditioned from a young age to classify certain colours, toys and products as feminine, while we gradually learn to think of others as specifically masculine. Just think of the toys you giddily unwrapped before tucking into your Happy Meal as a childdolls for the girls, cars for the boys.

This phenomenon continues to inform our thinking well into adulthood, with men tending to be more concerned with maintaining a masculine identity and choosing to buy products that align themselves with that image; its even been shown that men purchase more in the presence of a strong-looking man. Such intelligence is invaluable for marketers determined to bolster their bottom line.

Marketing strategies and social conditioning notwithstanding, is mens skin really different enough to warrant an entirely separate skincare regimen? While its true that mens skin is between 20 and 25 per cent thicker than womens (as it contains more collagen and elastin) and it tends to produce more oil, the American Academy of Dermatology assures us that the basics of our daily skincare regime should be the same, regardless of gender. Instead of thinking of skin as either male or female, the most important factors to look out for when putting together an effective skincare routine are skin type (normal, sensitive, oily, dry or combination) and areas of concernthink anti-ageing, blemishes, dark spots, and so on.

With consumers everywhere increasingly casting a critical eye on traditional beauty norms, the past few years have witnessed a sharp rise in gender-neutral skincare. Well-established brands and products that have long positioned themselves as neutral go-tos such as Australian heavyweight Aesop and ubiquitous unisex fragrances, including CK One, are now being joined by up-and-coming newcomers aiming to disrupt the gender-specific market.

Panacea, the K-Beauty-inspired skincare line, continues its hot streak in 2020. The brainchild of Korean-American co-founder Terry Lee, Panacea was conceived with the idea of introducing a gender-agnostic approach to skincare, while reducing the typical (and time-consuming) 10-step, K-Beauty approach to a mere three steps. The newest addition to the ever-expanding roster of universal pampering products is American Eagles in-house wellness and skincare line, Mood. This non-gendered range of hemp-derived CBD products includes everything from face oil and bath bombs to pillow mists.

Also looking to break down gender-specific beauty is Alll, which provides a personalised, DNA-based approach to skincare. Recent studies suggest our genetics account for 50 to 60 per cent of ageing, says Dr Elisabet Hagert, co-founder of Alll. This means how we age really is dependent on our genetic predispositions. Based on an in-depth DNA analysis, a bespoke skincare line is created, targeting individual concerns at a granular level regardless of gender.

As we progress into the new decade, were being spoiled for choice when it comes to skincare and grooming solutions with an emphasis on skin type and areas of concern, rather than gender. The only question that remains is this: with us men being fiercely brand loyal, will we be willing to leave our Sharknado-scented deodorants behind?

Is customisable skincare the future of the beauty industry?

A man explains why more men need to pay attention to skincare

Here is the original post:
Skin deep: Is the future of skincare gender neutral? - VOGUE India

Many cultures use the fruit and its juices as a traditional folk remedy to treat or prevent various ailments.

Modern research has linked pineapple juice and its compounds to health benefits, such as improved digestion and heart health, reduced inflammation, and perhaps even some protection against cancer. However, not all evidence has been conclusive.

Here are 7 science-based benefits of pineapple juice, based on the current research.

1. Rich in Nutrients

Pineapple juice provides a concentrated dose of various nutrients. One cup (240 mL) contains around:

• Calories: 132
• Protein: less than 1 gram
• Fat: less than 1 gram
• Carbs: 33 grams
• Sugars: 25 grams
• Fiber: less than 1 gram
• Manganese: 55% of the Daily Value (DV)
• Copper: 19% of the DV
• Vitamin B6: 15% of the DV
• Vitamin C: 14% of the DV
• Thiamine: 12% of the DV
• Folate: 11% of the DV
• Potassium: 7% of the DV
• Magnesium: 7% of the DV

Pineapple juice is particularly rich in manganese, copper, and vitamins B6 and C. These nutrients play an important role in bone health, immunity, wound healing, energy production, and tissue synthesis.

It also contains trace amounts of iron, calcium, phosphorus, zinc, choline, and vitamin K, as well as various B vitamins.

Summary

Pineapple juice is rich in a variety of vitamins and minerals. It's especially packed with manganese, copper, vitamin B6, and vitamin C all of which play important roles in the proper functioning of your body.

2. Contains Additional Beneficial Compounds

In addition to being rich in vitamins and minerals, pineapple juice is a good source of antioxidants, which are beneficial plant compounds that help keep your body healthy.

Antioxidants help neutralize unstable compounds known as free radicals, which can build up in your body due to factors like pollution, stress, or an unhealthy diet and cause cell damage.

Experts believe that the antioxidants in pineapple juice, particularly vitamin C, beta carotene, and various flavonoids, are in large part to thank for its potential beneficial effects.

Pineapple juice also contains bromelain, a group of enzymes linked to health benefits, such as reduced inflammation, improved digestion, and stronger immunity.

Summary

Pineapple juice is rich in antioxidants, which help protect your body from damage and disease. It also contains bromelain, a group of enzymes that may reduce inflammation, improve digestion, and boost immunity.

3. May Suppress Inflammation

Pineapple juice may help reduce inflammation, which is believed to be the root cause of many chronic diseases.

This may largely be due to its bromelain content. Some research suggests that this compound may be as effective as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) but with fewer side effects.

In Europe, bromelain is approved for use to reduce inflammation caused by trauma or surgery, as well as to treat surgical wounds or deep burns.

In addition, there's evidence that ingesting bromelain before surgery may help reduce the level of inflammation and pain caused by surgery.

Some studies further suggest that bromelain may help reduce pain and inflammation caused by a sports injury, rheumatoid arthritis, or osteoarthritis of the knee.

That said, research has yet to test the direct effects of pineapple juice on inflammation.

Therefore, it's unclear whether the bromelain intakes achieved through drinking small to moderate amounts of pineapple juice would provide the same anti-inflammatory benefits as those observed in these studies.

Summary

Pineapple juice contains bromelain, a group of enzymes that may help reduce inflammation caused by trauma, injuries, surgery, rheumatoid arthritis, or osteoarthritis. However, more juice-specific studies are needed.

4. May Boost Your Immunity

Pineapple juice may contribute to a stronger immune system.

Test-tube studies suggest that bromelain, a mixture of enzymes naturally found in pineapple juice, may activate the immune system.

Bromelain may also improve recovery from infections, such as pneumonia, sinusitis, and bronchitis, especially when used in combination with antibiotics.

However, most of these studies are dated, and none have examined the immunity-boosting effects of pineapple juice in humans. Therefore, more research is needed to confirm these results.

Summary

Some research suggests that pineapple juice may contribute to a stronger immune system. It may also help increase the effectiveness of antibiotics. However, more studies are needed before strong conclusions can be made.

5. May Help Your Digestion

The enzymes in pineapple juice function as proteases. Proteases help break down protein into smaller subunits, such as amino acids and small peptides, which can then be more easily absorbed in your gut.

Bromelain, a group of enzymes in pineapple juice, may particularly help improve digestion in people whose pancreas cannot make enough digestive enzymes a medical condition known as pancreatic insufficiency.

Animal research suggests that bromelain may also help protect your gut from harmful, diarrhea-causing bacteria, such as E. coli and V. cholera.

Moreover, according to some test-tube research, bromelain may help reduce gut inflammation in people with inflammatory bowel disorders, such as Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis.

That said, most studies have investigated the effect of concentrated doses of bromelain, rather than that of pineapple juice, and very few were conducted in humans. Therefore, more research is needed.

Summary

The bromelain in pineapple juice may aid digestion, guard against harmful, diarrhea-causing bacteria, and reduce inflammation in people with inflammatory bowel disorders. However, more research is needed.

6. May Promote Heart Health

The bromelain naturally found in pineapple juice may also benefit your heart.

Test-tube and animal studies suggest that bromelain may help reduce high blood pressure, prevent the formation of blood clots, and minimize the severity of angina pectoris and transient ischemic attacks two health conditions caused by heart disease.

However, the number of studies is limited, and none are specific to pineapple juice. Therefore, more research is needed before strong conclusions can be made.

Summary

Some research links the bromelain naturally found in pineapple juice to markers of improved heart health. However, more pineapple-juice-specific studies are needed.

7. May Help Fight Certain Types of Cancer

Pineapple juice may have potential cancer-fighting effects. Again, this is likely in large part due to its bromelain content.

Some studies suggest that bromelain may help prevent the formation of tumors, reduce their size, or even cause the death of cancerous cells.

However, these were test-tube studies using concentrated amounts of bromelain that were much higher than those you'd ingest from drinking a glass of pineapple juice. This makes it difficult to project their results to humans.

Therefore, more research is needed before strong conclusions can be made.

Summary

Test-tube studies suggest that concentrated amounts of bromelain may help protect against cancer. However, it's currently unclear whether pineapple juice offers similar benefits in humans.

Possible Precautions

Pineapple juice is generally considered safe for most people.

That said, bromelain, a group of enzymes naturally found in pineapple juice, may enhance the absorption of certain drugs, especially antibiotics and blood thinners.

As such, if you are taking medications, consult your physician or registered dietitian to make sure it's safe to consume pineapple juice.

This beverage's acidity may also trigger heartburn or reflux in some people. Specifically, those with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) may want to avoid consuming large amounts of this beverage.

Despite its potential benefits, it's important to remember that pineapple juice remains low in fiber yet high in sugar.

This means it's unlikely to fill you up as much as eating the same quantity of raw pineapple would. Therefore, it may promote weight gain in some people.

What's more, while drinking small amounts of juice has been linked to a lower risk of type 2 diabetes and heart disease, drinking more than 5 ounces (150 mL) per day may have the opposite effect.

Therefore, it's likely best to avoid drinking too much pineapple juice, and when you do, stick to 100% pure varieties that are free of added sugars.

Summary

Pineapple juice is low in fiber yet rich in sugar, and drinking too much may lead to weight gain or disease. This beverage may also interact with medications and trigger heartburn or reflux in some people.

The Bottom Line

Pineapple juice contains a variety of vitamins, minerals, and beneficial plant compounds that may protect you from disease.

Studies link this beverage to improved digestion, heart health, and immunity. Pineapple juice or its compounds may also help reduce inflammation and perhaps even offer some protection against certain types of cancer.

However, human studies are limited, and it's unclear whether the effects observed in test tubes or animals can be achieved by small daily intakes of pineapple juice.

Moreover, this beverage remains low in fiber and rich in sugar, so drinking large quantities each day is not recommended.

From Your Site Articles

Related Articles Around the Web

See more here:
Why COVID-19 Is Hitting Men Harder Than Women - EcoWatch

The Judges of Yolo County Superior Court prior to Dan Wolks appointment

Even before this week, Yolo Countys bench seemed out of step with the rest of the state. For the last 13 years, according to various media sources, Californias bench has become more diversemore women, more people of color. Not Yolo County.

Yolo County is moving in the opposite direction with 8 white men and two women, one of whom is Latina. That was before Tuesday when Governor Newsom made what appears to be the latest appointment based on political connections.

Dan Wolk as you know is the former Mayor of Davis, having served from 2014 to 2016. In both 2014 and 2016, he ran for State Assembly and lost, first to Bill Dodd and then to Cecilia Aguiar-Curry. His professional experience is a little over a decade working for the Solano County Counsels office.

He has limited trial experience and his chief qualifications appear to be the fact that his mother is a retired State Senator and his father is a retired Dean of the UC Davis Law School.

Dan Wolk appears to be the latest Yolo County appointment that is based more on who someone is than their qualifications to be judge. Thats not fair to Dan Wolk and this issue did not begin with Governor Gavin Newsomit is a trend.

And it is a problem for the diversity on the Yolo County bench, which now has 9 white men in a county where whites only make up 46 percent of the total population, according to 2019 census estimates.

Indeed, if you look at Governor Newsoms judicial appointments overall on Tuesday, people wanting diversity would applaud them.

In March of 2019 after Governor Jerry Brown stepped down, a survey found that for the 13th straight year, Californias judicial bench has grown more diverse, according to new data released by the Judicial Council.

Governor Browns appointments, including the nearly 200 appointments made in his final year in office: women accounted for more than half of those appointees, and 41 percent identified as non-white.

Governor Newsom continued that trend as last year, his first, he appointed a majority of women and nonwhites to the bench.

That continued on Tuesday.Governor Newsom appointed 14 people to the bench8 women and just two white males.

So why is Yolo County different than other counties?

A big part has to do with its location, roughly 15 minutes from the State Capitol on the other side of the Sacramento River.

It is a small county, but it is prominentthe home of UC Davis, a major law school and academic center. Davis also happens to be the home of a number of State Capitol employees and staffers.

The problem here is actually very clear, and it goes back to the last six governor appointments to the bench starting in 2008.

In 2008, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger appointed employment lawyer Samuel McAdam.In 2010, he appointed Dan Maguire, who was his deputy legal affairs secretary.

In 2012, Janene Beronio, one of the two women on the bench, was elected when retiring Judge Stephen Mock stepped down at the end of his term.

In 2015, Governor Brown appointed Sonia Corts, the first Latina to be judge in Yolo County.

In 2018, he appointed Tom Dyer and Peter Williams, both of whom were attorneys in his administration.

Now, in 2020, Governor Newsom appoints Dan Wolk, the former Mayor of Davis and the son of State Senator Lois Wolk.

While the 2018 appointees did not live in Yolo County, Sam McAdam, Dan Maguire, and Dan Wolk all live in Davis and Sonia Corts lived in Woodland.

A key question is why has Yolo County become the place where governors stick their legal counsel when they wish to award them with appointments?

Clearly, being near the capital is to Yolo Countys detriment. Clearly Yolo County lacks a deep bar association that is diverse. But we also know for a fact that there were very qualified women and women of color who have put their hats in the ring and got passed over in the last three appointments.

Is no one at the governors office paying attention to the bench in Yolo for ethnic make up?

One thing that has shifted in the last three appointmentsthe partisan make up of the bench. For a long time, not only was the bench white and male, but it was also disproportionately Republican. This is a heavily Democratic County, as two-thirds of the voters in 2016 voted for Hillary Clinton.

Now five of the 11 judges were appointed by DemocratsDave Rosenberg by Gray Davis in 2003, and the three most recent appointments by Jerry Brown with Dan Wolk by Gavin Newsom.

This isnt about whether or not Dan Wolk will be a good judge; he will be a judge, and hopefully he does well. This really isnt about him. It is about the process. The fact is that governors in recent years have done a good job of creating a much more diverse bench in California, and my only complaint is that when it comes to Yolo County, we have been shortchanged.

Nine white male judges in this era with 10 years of Democratic governors should not happen.

With all due respect to the last three appointments, Yolo County deserves better than to get a rash of political appointments with little regard to the overall lack of diversity of its bench.

Contrast that to San Francisco which in March elected three progressive women to its bench.It is hard to imagine two more different judicial environments, and given the notion of equal justice under the law and the fact that the vast majority of criminal defendants in Yolo County are black and browna disproportionate number, mind youit would seem that a bench more reflective of the population demographics would be fairer.

David M. Greenwald reporting

To sign up for our new newsletter Everyday Injustice https://tinyurl.com/yyultcf9

Link:
My View: Dan Wolk's Appointment to Judge Further Skews Yolo's Bench - The Peoples Vanguard of Davis

This essay first appeared on The MIT Reader on April 20, 2020

Across the world, many of us are imagining a possible rendezvous with Death. Some are turning to common addictions, such as alcohol and drugs. A study last week found that nearly 40 percent of remote-working New Yorkers are drinking while working, and one in five are stockpiling booze. Others arecoming together, figuratively speaking, to help those in great need. Still others are circling their wagons and loading up on more guns and ammo.

When circumstances jolt us from our routines, we grow unsettled and anxious. Some of us manage to resetsomehow grasping that business is not as usual, that time could be short. We manage to ask, What really matters now? For many, the answer is, help others.

Empathy and altruism are primordial human traits. When we wandered as foragers for 200,000 years, resources were iffy. So we smoothed out potentially fatal fluctuations by elaborating our instinct to share. But we didnt invent these circuits: A free rat, encountering a trapped rat, will make an effort to release it. And a rat, pulling a lever to obtain food pellets, will choose the lever that doesnt shock a stranger rat, even when that lever delivers two times less food. Thus neural circuits for empathy and altruism have likely been around since our last shared ancestor with rodentsnearly 100 million years.

Certain aspects of the neurobiology are clear. When we share our own resources to help a neighbor, they receive, besides practical aid, a pulse of dopamine from a core neural circuit that rewards every unexpected positive event. This neurochemical pulse evokes a pulse of good feeling, a momentary relief from seeking. Critically, this same circuit also rewards thegiver, thereby encouraging us to repeat that behavior in the iffy times to come. Living as we do now, this instinct to share has been little exercised. Multitudes in our cities have been lacking food and shelter, but they have been discounted as somehow undeserving. Otherwise, we would not have turned away for so long.

But now, suddenly,weare the needy, many desperate for sustenance and comfort. We encounter and welcome empathy and sharing, not just food and soap, but even our neighbors voices serenading us from their balconies. We recall such empathic, altruistic behaviors from earlier crises, such as urban blackouts, hurricanes, and floods. These behaviors provide dopamine beyond the givers and the receiversto all who share their emotionally uplifting stories. But what are we to make of the wagon-circlers? Whatisit with those people for whom sharing is neither a value nor a pleasure? They are numerous, so we should try to understand rather than write them off.

Empathy is a complex trait, like courage, or height. Traits are often partially inherited through our geneswith the degree of expression involving many genes with small effects. For height, for example, most people inherit roughly equal numbers of genes for short and for tall. Consequently, on the bell curve for height, they occupy the middlethey are average. Those who inherit more genes for short tend to be shorter than average, and those who inherit the opposite, more genes for tall, tend to be taller than average. When tall parents transmit abundant tall genes to their offspring, the occasional child may inherit 200 more genes for tall. If this child is male and well-fed, he may grow to seven and a half feet and play professional basketball. On the bell curve for height, he is far out on the tail.

Empathy has a substantial genetic contribution, about half as much as height, a group of researchers found in 2018. Inevitably, some individuals inherit more pro-empathy genes than average. Moreover, since they are likely to be born from empathic parents, such children will also witness empathic behaviors and be rewarded for performing them. Thus, learning and family values reinforce the pro-social neural circuitry. Such individuals are likely to become professional caregivers.

Inevitably, as well, some individuals inherit fewer pro-empathy genes than average and tend to feel less empathy. Moreover, since low empathy children are likely born from low empathy parents, they are less likely to witness empathic behaviors or be rewarded for performing them. An analogy would be short parents spawning short children and then starving them.

But why, since we evolved brain circuits for empathy, should any of us be deficient for this trait? Why cant we all be above average? Apparently, because our species success gains from individuals on both sides of the bell curve. Obviously, we benefit from individuals with high empathysharers and carers. But we also benefit from high functioning individuals with low empathy. Three thousand years ago King David was an awesome leader even as he coldheartedly sent his lovers husband to die in battle.

Low empathy individualslets face ithave appeal, which is why they succeed as politicians and media stars. They appeal especially to those of below-average empathy, that is, half of the population. For those of low empathy it can be thrilling to watch a leader without scruples live so close to who he really is. Unconstrained by others needs or feelings, he seems free. Whereas, those imbued with strong empathy are condemned to search continually for a sweet spot between the call of their own needs and those of others. Ironically, the empathizers may spend years in therapy trying to liberate their inner sociopath.

Now, in the shadow of COVID, neuroscience and genetics reminds us that for every human trait, there is a distribution. As we proceed to our empathic sweet spots, we have no choice but to accept it.

Link:
COVID-19 and the Harsh Reality of Empathy Distribution - Scientific American

The novel coronavirus seems to be killing more men than women.

The trend was first noticed in China, experts say, and the higher COVID-19 death rate for men has since been documented in 33 countries, including Germany, Spain and South Korea. But experts dont know whats causing the gap. Is it biological, some quirk of cells and hormones? Is it the result of gendered behaviors that have more to do with sociology than sex chromosomes? Lets break down whats going on, because experts say mens risk level depends on what risks (and which men) youre talking about.

While men account for the majority of COVID-19 cases in some countries but a minority of cases in others, they consistently make up the majority of deaths. Out of 35 countries that have reported their COVID deaths in ways that break out victims by sex, 33 had a male-female death ratio greater than 1, meaning men who were confirmed to have the disease were more likely to die than women who were confirmed to have it, according to data compiled by Global Health 50/50, a independent health equity research organization based at University College London. So far, the mortality disadvantage for men is quite large, said Jennifer Dowd, a professor of demography and population health at the University of Oxford.

Share of COVID-19 patients who died, by gender

Numbers in this table come from different dates, depending on the country and how frequently it updates its publicly available data. Most of the data is dated to April 26-29, though a few countries numbers are from earlier in April. Chinas data is from Feb. 28 and Irans is from March 17.

Source: Global Health 50/50

This dynamic isnt new to medicine. Women have stronger adaptive immune responses and die less of infectious disease their entire lives, starting from infant mortality, Dowd said. In general, womens bodies kick out bacterial and viral invaders faster than mens do, and vaccines work better for women than for men.

To see why, look to hormones and genetics, said Sabra Klein, professor of microbiology and immunology at Johns Hopkins University. Sex hormones appear to play a role determining how well human bodies can fight off disease. In general, estrogens amp up the immune system, while androgens (like testosterone) and progesterone suppress it. Hormones have to interact with cells to do their jobs, Klein said, so cells have a lock and hormones have the key to get in. And, turns out, every immune cell in your body has these kinds of lock-and-key receptors.

Sex chromosomes also play a role. The X chromosome, for example, has 60 genes associated with immune function. Most biological males are born with one X chromosome, but those immune-boosting genes tend to be expressed more frequently in women, who generally have two X chromosomes, Klein said.

But if youre tempted to think those sex differences boil down to men are more likely to die from infectious disease, Klein cautioned that the generalization is not true across the board. Sex differentiation in influenza has been pretty well studied, she told me, and, in that case, womens more aggressive immune systems dont give us an advantage. Having too much of an inflammatory immune response to the flu can actually increase your risk of complications including acute respiratory distress syndrome, when the lungs tiny air sacs, called alveoli, are damaged and fill with fluid. Reproductive-age women do worse, not better, Klein said.

But while researchers know a decent amount about sex differences in influenza, the novel coronavirus is, yes, novel. Any research on it is a work in progress, proceeding without full data. That starts with basic documentation.

On April 28th, the United States had reported 57,318 deaths from the novel coronavirus, but only 31,586 of those deaths had been reported in ways that allowed Global Health 50/50 to break them down by sex. None of the researchers I spoke with knew why that data isnt getting reported. But without it, theyre left to a lot of guesswork and speculation. Its safe to assume that deaths in the U.S. are probably following the patterns seen in many other countries but we dont know for sure that thats true.

Then theres the fact that the variations in how this virus affects people probably isnt just about whats in their chromosomes or hormones. Its also about sociological gender the attitudes, stereotypes and norms that shape the ways people behave and the choices they make.

For example, a 2016 meta-analysis showed that women are about 50 percent more likely than men to start using non-pharmaceutical protective behaviors during a pandemic things like wearing face masks or avoiding public transit. Men, meanwhile, were about 12 percent more likely than women to sign up for vaccines, take antiviral medication, or use other pharmaceutical interventions. Those differences in behavior arent determined by biology, but they could help create variations in how a virus affects men and women.

Rosemary Morgan, a scientist at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health who studies how gender and sex interact with public health, thinks these kinds of effects are happening with COVID-19. But how and to what extent thats unknown. It also probably differs from country to country, thanks to the way gender norms also arent consistent everywhere you go.

Case in point: When data on sex disparities in COVID-19 deaths first began to come in from China, it wasnt clear that the differences in death rates there would mean other counties were going to experience the same thing. Thats because China has particularly gendered smoking habits, Dowd told me. In a 2010 study, 54 percent of Chinese men surveyed were current smokers. In contrast, the same study found that less than 3 percent of Chinese women currently smoked. Although sex differences in COVID-19 death rates have cropped up again in other countries, its likely that this gender disparity in smoking plays a role in why 64 percent of Chinas COVID-19 deaths have been among men even though men account for right around half of Chinas confirmed cases.

Gender norms may also influence the niches where women are getting the disease more than men, despite mens higher death rates. When the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention looked at the characteristics of health care workers who have contracted COVID-19, it found that 73 percent were women. Why are female health care workers getting infected at much higher rates? Part of it likely has to do with their higher odds of exposure.

Nurses jobs put them in close physical contact with patients who have COVID-19 and other infectious diseases, and more than 70 percent of nurses are women. Meanwhile, the personal protective equipment meant to help keep medical workers safe often isnt designed with women in mind. Gloves can be too large. Masks dont always fit womens faces with a tight seal. Gender dynamics could be putting a largely female workforce in harms way.

In the end, regardless of your sex or your gender the risks you face from COVID-19 are probably somewhat unique to you. But if we want to figure out just what, exactly, those risks are, were going to need more data.

See the original post here:
Why Are More Men Than Women Dying Of COVID-19? - FiveThirtyEight

Dr Winnie Njenga, a dermatologist at Kiambu Level 5 Hospital, answers some of the most frequently asked questions around skincare. Pick up skin protection tips, discover some of the common skin problems and learn what suspicious growths might mean.After I turned 30, I developed acne. I have never had to deal with that before. What can I do? How does one deal with adult acne?Adult acne is an interplay of factors, such as your skin type, inflammation and the hormonal milieu. Your dermatologist can assess your risk factors and advise on the best way forward. Remember treatment will vary from person to person. You also need to have your skincare and hair products assessed.I have skin tags; many of them. And I dont like them. Is there anything I can do to slow down their development?Many people develop skin tags. They can be removed by your dermatologist. I would recommend that you practice a healthy lifestyle with a good diet and regular exercise as obesity can make this worse.What are the most common skin problems you deal with?

For More of This and Other Stories, Grab Your Copy of the Standard Newspaper. Read Now

Do not miss out on the latest news. Join the Standard Digital Telegram channel HERE.

Read more from the original source:
Ask a doctor: Is there a treatment that reverses balding? - Standard Digital

Scientists are trying to tackle the lack of diversity seen in genomics research, but even ambitious efforts, like the NIHs All of Us program, often fall short, especially when it comes to the inclusion of Indigenous communities. This is one of the reasons why the Decolonize DNA Day conference is taking place on April 24th, one day before the National DNA Day.

Traditionally, National DNA Day is an annual celebration of the discovery of DNA's double helix structure (1953) and the completion of the Human Genome Project (2003).

I was having conversations with colleagues on what would it mean to decolonize DNA, says Krystal Tsosie, an Indigenous (Din/Navajo) PhD student at Vanderbilt University. As an Indigenous academic, we always talk about what it means to Indigenize and re-Indigenize different disciplines of academia that have been historically more white-centred or white-dominated... and what it would mean to remove the colonial lens.

In collaboration with Latrice Landry and Jerome de Groot, Tsosie co-organized the Decolonize DNA Day Twitter conference to help re-frame narratives around DNA. Each speaker will have an hour to tweet out their "talk" and lead conversations on various topics, including how DNA ancestry testing fuels anti-Indigeneity and how to utilize emerging technologies to decolonize precision medicine.

There is a divide between people who are doing the science or the academic work, and the people who we want to inform, says Tsosie. Twitter is a great way to bridge that divide.

The Decolonize DNA Day conference is simply one effort to Indigenize genomics. Tsosie is also a co-founder of the Native BioData Consortium, a non-profit organization consisting of researchers and Indigenous members of tribal communities, focused on increasing the understanding of Native American genomic issues.

We dont really see a heavy amount of Indigenous engagement in genetic studies, which then means that as precision medicine advances as a whole [] those innovations are not going to be applied to Indigenous people, says Tsosie. How do we get more Indigenous people engaged?

Some of the answers can be found in a recent Nature Reviews Genetics perspective, penned by Indigenous scientists and communities, including those from the Native BioData Consortium. The piece highlights the actions that genomics researchers can take to address issues of trust, accountability, and equity. Recommended actions include the need for early consultations, developing benefit-sharing agreements, and appropriately crediting community support in any academic publications.

By switching power dynamics, were hoping to get genomic researchers to work with us, instead of against us, says Tsosie.

Excerpt from:
Tinkering with brain proteins may add insulation back to damaged nerve cells - Massive Science

AUSTIN, Texas Astrophysicist Katherine Freese, astronomer John Kormendy and evolutionary biologist Mark Kirkpatrick of The University of Texas at Austin have been elected to the National Academy of Sciences. They join 120 new members recognized by the academy this year for distinguished and continuing achievements in original scientific research.

The National Academy of Sciences is the countrys most prestigious scientific organization, and election to membership in the academy is one of the highest honors that can be accorded a scientist in the United States.

I am exceedingly proud of these extraordinary colleagues and scientific leaders, said Paul Goldbart, dean of UT Austins College of Natural Sciences. Professors Freese, Kirkpatrick and Kormendy exemplify the excellence that we are fortunate to have in Natural Sciences at The University of Texas at Austin.

Freese, who holds the Jeff and Gail Kodosky Endowed Chair in Physics, works on a wide range of topics in theoretical cosmology and astroparticle physics. She has been working to identify the dark matter and dark energy that permeate the universe as well as to build a successful model for the early universe immediately after the Big Bang. She is author of the book The Cosmic Cocktail: Three Parts Dark Matter, published in June 2014. She received her Ph.D. in physics from the University of Chicago in 1984. She received an NSF Presidential Young Investigator Award (1990), a Simons Foundation Fellowship in Theoretical Physics (2012) and the Lilienfeld Prize from the American Physical Society (2019). Read a Q&A here.

Kirkpatrick is the T.S. Painter Centennial Professor in Genetics in the Department of Integrative Biology. Among his many accomplishments, he has helped explain how mating preferences drive the evolution of male traits and how sex chromosomes originate and evolve. He was previously elected as a fellow of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences (2008) and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (2016). He received a Ph.D. in zoology from the University of Washington in 1983. He is a member of the universitys Center for Computational Biology and Bioinformatics, Institute for Cellular and Molecular Biology, and Biodiversity Center.

Mark has long been known as one of the leaders in theoretical population genetics, that is, the formal and fundamental framework for understanding the evolutionary process, said Nancy Moran, a professor of integrative biology at UT Austin and fellow member of the National Academy of Sciences. He is continually contributing new insights into how organisms and their genes and genomes evolve. Hes also co-author on the most authoritative textbook in evolutionary biology, another indication of his breadth and of the high regard in which he is held in the field.

Kormendy is the Curtis T. Vaughan, Jr. Centennial Chair Emeritus in Astronomy. He studies the structure and dynamics of stars, gas and dark matter in galaxies, including supermassive black holes in galaxy centers and cosmological dark matter in galaxy halos. He received a Ph.D. in astronomy from the California Institute of Technology in 1976. He has been awarded the Gold Medal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada (1970), the Muhlmann Prize of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific (1988), a Humboldt Research Award of the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, Germany (2006), and External Membership in the Max-Planck-Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics in Garching-by-Munich, Germany (2012). Read more about his research here.

The election of these three brings the number of current faculty members from UT Austins College of Natural Sciences elected to the academy to 16.

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit institution established under a congressional charter signed by President Abraham Lincoln in 1863. It recognizes achievement in science by election to membership and with the National Academy of Engineering, National Academy of Medicine and National Research Council provides science, technology and health policy advice to the federal government and other organizations.

View a list of other members of the National Academies in the College of Natural Sciences.

Go here to read the rest:
Three UT Austin Faculty Elected to National Academy of Sciences - UT News | The University of Texas at Austin

All over the world in China, Italy, the United States and Australia many more men than women are dying from COVID-19.

Why? Is it genes, hormones, the immune system or behaviour that makes men more susceptible to the disease?

I see it as an interaction of all of these factors and it isnt unique to the SARS-Cov-2 virus the different response of men and women is typical of many diseases in many mammals.

In Italy and China deaths of men are more than double those of women. In New York city men constitute about 61% of patients who die. Australia is shaping up to have similar results, though here its mostly in the 70-79 and 80-89 age groups.

The number of COVID-19 deaths in Australia (last updated April 19, 2020).

Image: Australian Government, Department of Health

One major variable in severity of COVID-19 is age. But this cant explain the sex bias seen globally because the increased male fatality rate is the same in each age group from 30 to 90+. Women also live on average six years longer than men, so there are more elderly women than men in the vulnerable population.

The other major factor is the presence of chronic diseases, particularly heart disease, diabetes and cancer. These are all more common in men than women, which might account for some of the bias.

But then we must ask why men are more vulnerable to the diseases that put them at greater risk of COVID-19.

Men and women are biologically different

Men and women differ in their sex chromosomes and the genes that lie on them. Women have two copies of a mid-sized chromosome (called the X). Men have only a single X chromosome and a small Y chromosome that contains few genes.

One of these Y genes (SRY) directs the embryo to become male by kick-starting the development of testes in an XY embryo. The testes make male hormones and the hormones make the baby develop as a boy.

In the absence of SRY an ovary forms and makes female hormones.

Its the hormones that control most of the obvious visible differences between men and women genitals and breasts, hair and body type and have a large influence on behaviour.

The Y chromosome and hormones

The Y chromosome contains hardly any genes other than SRY but it is full of repetitive sequences (junk DNA).

Perhaps a toxic Y could lose its regulation during ageing. This might hasten ageing in men and render them more susceptible to the virus.

But a bigger problem for men is the male hormones unleashed by SRY action. Testosterone levels are implicated in many diseases, particularly heart disease, and may affect lifespan.

Men are also disadvantaged by their low levels of estrogen, which protects women from many diseases, including heart disease.

Male hormones also influence behaviour. Testosterone levels have been credited with major differences between men and women in risky behaviours such as smoking and drinking too much alcohol, as well as reluctance to heed health advice and to seek medical help.

The extreme differences in smoking rate between men and women in China (almost half the men smoke and only 2% of women) may help to account for their very high ratio of male deaths (more than double female). Not only is smoking a severe risk factor for any respiratory disease, but it also causes lung cancer, a further risk factor.

Smoking rates are lower and not as sex-biased in many other countries, so risky behaviour cant by itself explain the sex difference in COVID-19 deaths. Maybe sex chromosomes have other effects.

Two X chromosomes are better than one

The X chromosome bears more than 1,000 genes with functions in all sorts of things including routine metabolism, blood clotting and brain development.

The presence of two X chromosomes in XX females provides a buffer if a gene on one X is mutated.

XY males lack this X chromosome backup. Thats why boys suffer from many sex-linked diseases such as haemophilia (poor blood clotting).

The number of X chromosomes also has big effects on many metabolic characters that are separable from sex hormone effects, as studies of mice reveal.

Females not only have a double dose of many X genes, but they may also have the benefit of two different versions of each gene.

This X effect goes far to explain why males die at a higher rate than females at every age from birth.

And another man problem is the immune system.

Weve known for a long time that women have a stronger immune system than men. This is not all good, because it makes women more susceptible to autoimmune diseases such as lupus and multiple sclerosis.

But it gives women an advantage when it comes to susceptibility to viruses, as many studies in mice and humans show. This helps to explain why men are more susceptible to many viruses, including SARS and MERS.

There are at least 60 immune response genes on the X chromosome, and it seems that a higher dose and having two different versions of these gives women a broader spectrum of defences.

Sex differences in diseases the big picture

Sex differences in the frequency, severity and treatment efficacy for many diseases were pointed out long ago. COVID-19 is part of a larger pattern in which males lose out at every age.

This isnt just humans it is true of most mammals.

Are sex differences in disease susceptibility simply the by-catch of genetic and hormone differences? Or were they, like many other traits, selected differently in males and females because of differences in life strategy?

Its suggested that male mammals spread their genes by winning competitions for mates, hence hormone control of risky behaviour is a plus for men.

Its also suggested female mammals are selected for traits that enhance their ability to care for young, hence their stronger immune system. This made sense for most mammals through the ages.

So the sex bias in COVID-19 deaths is part of a much larger picture and a very much older picture of sex differences in genes, chromosomes and hormones that lead to very different responses to all sorts of disease, including COVID-19.

License and Republishing

World Economic Forum articles may be republished in accordance with our Terms of Use.

Written by

Jenny Graves, Distinguished Professor of Genetics, La Trobe University,

This article is published in collaboration with The Conversation.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.

Read the rest here:
Why is it that more men die from coronavirus than women? - World Economic Forum

One Australian study has reached a climax in deciding who experiences the best orgasm. I need a cigarette.

We dont need a formal study to know that the arousal process differs significantly for men and women but when it comes to the actual orgasm, whose experience is better? This age-old question is on everybodys lips at the moment, so we peeled back the cover on some global research from AsapSCIENCEto see if we could arouse a definitive answer as to Who has a better orgasm males or females?

What we immediately learned from our deep dive into the Big O was that there are many similarities in how those fireworks actually feel for men and women. For example, researchers asked college students of both genders to explain how an orgasm feels. After removing any words that specifically referred to genitalia, they were left with an orgy of very similar words, suggesting that males and females feel a very similar experience during their apogee. This may be because irrespective of whether you stand or sit to pee, an identical physiological process occurs in both genders in order for that climax to occur.

Another similarity is the ability of both men and women to enjoy multiple orgasms. Due to these little beauts typically lacking a refractory period, they have long been identified as womens only business; however, in recent times it has been discovered that men can also enjoy in these repeated pleasures. Historically, male orgasms were thought only to occur simultaneously with ejaculation, but research has confirmed that before or after ejaculation, men are capable of non-ejaculatory orgasms.

AsapSCIENCE also identified that post-O, both men and women experience a distinct feeling of drowsiness, which is attributed to a surge in the hormone called prolactin.

Now, interestingly, if you have a busy schedule planned post-coitus, then you may like to consider finishing yourself off because science has shown that four times the amount of that drowsy-inducing hormone is released after intercourse, compared to the amount released after an orgasm achieved via masturbation.

By now youre forgiven for thinking that perhaps males and females do have a similar experience when it comes to climactic fervour. However, lets now take a quick perve at the differences.

A national Australian study exploring heterosexual sex found that women tend to experience orgasms less often than men (69% versus 95% of all sexual encounters), but when they do get there, the actual climax itself goes for longer (20+ seconds for females versus 3 to 10 seconds for males).

Interestingly, the type of sex youre engaging in was also found to contribute to your climactic experience. For example, one study revealed that while the rate of orgasm among straight and gay men was similar, the rate of orgasm for women varied significantly by sexual orientation.

Straight women reportedly have around 12% fewer orgasms than gay women; 25% of who indicated they climaxed in 100% of instances. Whats more, 50% of gay women suggested they orgasmed in more than 75% of their sexual encounters. And if thats not enough to make you admire the tribe, lesbians were found to engage in sex for an average duration of 30 to 45 minutes, compared to a meagre 15 to 30 minutes of sexual activity by straight women.

Whether women will or wont get there was also found to be influenced by genetics, with one study involving twins suggesting that the genetic makeup of women can predict one-third of the likelihood of whether or not she will climax during sex.

Of course, when you think about it, men and women are physiologically designed to have similar experiences, and the orgasm is no exception. Being part of your partners orgasm typically enhances your own climactic experience, and this is no coincidence. We need to be able to understand and relate to each other, in order for emotional connections to occur.

So there you have it; the bare naked facts, all laid out. But who has the upper hand in the orgasm stakes?

From an evolutionary perspective, we are all designed to enjoy the moment, and physiologically speaking, the process to ensure an orgasm occurs is identical in both men and women.

The bottom line is, that while differences definitely exist for males and females during those OMG moments, these discrepancies are most likely due to individual factors such as psychology, anatomy and physiology. The best thing you can do to ensure your endings are always as happy as they can possibly be, is to know how best to please yourself, and then let your partner in on the secrets.

Read the original:
The Big O: Who has it better? - The Big Smoke Australia

Dr Winnie Njenga, a dermatologist at Kiambu Level 5 Hospital, answers some of the most frequently asked questions around skincare. Pick up skin protection tips, discover some of the common skin problems and learn what suspicious growths might mean.After I turned 30, I developed acne. I have never had to deal with that before. What can I do? How does one deal with adult acne?Adult acne is an interplay of factors, such as your skin type, inflammation and the hormonal milieu. Your dermatologist can assess your risk factors and advise on the best way forward. Remember treatment will vary from person to person. You also need to have your skincare and hair products assessed.I have skin tags; many of them. And I dont like them. Is there anything I can do to slow down their development? Many people develop skin tags. They can be removed by your dermatologist. I would recommend that you practice a healthy lifestyle with a good diet and regular exercise as obesity can make this worse.What are the most common skin problems you deal with?

For More of This and Other Stories, Grab Your Copy of the Standard Newspaper. Read Now

Do not miss out on the latest news. Join the Standard Digital Telegram channel HERE.

More here:
Ask a doctor: Is there a treatment that reverses balding? - The Standard

The Irish Cattle Breeding Federation (ICBF) has released data analysing the births from the dairy herd. There have been a number of interesting trends emerging with the analysis covering a five-year period from 2016 to 2020.

Firstly, one of the most notable trends is the decline in the use of Jersey genetics in the national dairy herd.

After several years of steady growth, there was a significant decline in 2019, resulting in a 17.3% reduction in the number of Jersey-bred calves born for the year-to-date. This clearly reflects the challenges associated with finding markets for lower-value Jersey male calves.

In spring 2019, some 41,000 Jersey-bred calves were born on Irish farms; however, this has fallen to just over 34,200 calves in 2020 and this is predicted to decrease further in spring 2021.

Secondly, the use of beef genetics in the dairy herd has increased by 7% from 2019 to 2020, and by just over 36% over the five-year period; this is welcome news for the beef industry.

As expected, both Aberdeen Angus and Hereford continue in first and second position respectively, accounting for 78% in total, but other beef breeds have witnessed growth albeit from a much lower base.

Leaving Angus and Hereford aside, Limousin-sired calves are placed in third position with some 37,923 calves on the ground to date an increase of 5% on 2019 levels.

The Belgian Blue breed is next with some 19,744 calves born up to April 16; this represents a jump of just under 4,000 calves or an increase of 25.4%.

Finally, the beef breed which increased the most was the Aubrac, with some 7,277 calves born on Irish dairy farms a 55.3% increase from 2019.

RELATED STORIES

See the rest here:
Jersey usage in the dairy herd declines by over 17% - Agriland

(Photo by John Korduner/Icon Sportswire)

With the 10th pick in the 2020 NFL Draft, the Cleveland Browns selected offensive tackle Jedrick Wills.

The Browns did not anticipate Wills slipping to No.10 and were thrilled to get him.

The #Browns had trade offers, but so far no trades: A tackle they didnt think was going to be here at No. 10 is available: #Bama OT Jedrick Wills. A mean, nasty tackle.

Ian Rapoport (@RapSheet) April 24, 2020

Wills is completing his junior year at the University of Alabama.

He becomes the 7th first-round offensive lineman drafted under Head Coach Nick Saban at Alabama.

Wills is a consistent performer who tallied 28 consecutive starts at Alabama.

At right tackle, his speed and athleticism were an asset to his QB Tua Tagovailoa.

Tua described Jedrick as the alpha male and the guy capable of making things happen on the field.

Cleveland #Browns new OT Jedrick Wills Jr. pic.twitter.com/VP8LCzQCJR

Everything Cleveland (@EverythingCLE_) April 24, 2020

The newest Cleveland Brown has a fascinating background.

Here are 3 things to know about him.

Though Jedrick Wills played football during his formative years, he always felt basketball was the sport he would ultimately succeed in playing.

He aspired to be a point guard.

As a sophomore at Lafayette High School, Wills broke a bone in his foot.

At that time, he made a decision to focus on football.

Measured at 6 5 and weighing 320 pounds, it seems Wills made the right choice.

His high school football coach, former Cincinnati Bengals linebacker Eric Shaw, agreed.

After making the All-State team in his junior and senior years of high school, Wills was invited to play in the Under Armour All-America Game.

This is a showcase game for the top high school senior football players in the country.

It is played in Florida each January.

Wills entertained offers from neighboring University of Kentucky, Notre Dame, Michigan, Tennessee, and Alabama.

He was conflicted because he really wanted to stay home and play football because he believed that is what most did who were born and raised in Kentucky.

The UK campus was only 5 minutes from his high school, and he went on 8 recruiting visits there until he reached a decision.

An encounter during his freshman year with a former top prospect from Kentucky, Damien Harris, stuck in his mind.

I knew Jed before we both got here, Harris said. We had a little bit of a relationship. Obviously when I committed here and ended up coming here and he was looking at coming here and hes looking at a bunch of other schools, I always kept in touch with him and see how he felt about our program and obviously tried to encourage him to come here. And fortunately enough, he did.

Its a bit of an unlikely pairing: Theyre the two highest-rated players from the state of Kentucky in the last decade, according to the 247Sports Composite ratings. They ended up playing together, but did so several hours from home.

It was pretty cool, Wills said. Being from Kentucky, theres not really too many people who go outside the state and go to like real big schools. Seeing he had that opportunity kind of opened up my eyes. I could see I had the chance to do the same thing.

Harris also had offers from many schools including UK.

At the time when the two met, Harris was committed to the University of Michigan but ultimately changed his mind and ended up playing for Nick Saban at Alabama.

The reason Jedrick Wills believed basketball was his sport is largely due to his genetics.

His father, Jedrick Wills Sr. is the assistant womans basketball coach at Lafayette High School.

Sivi Wills, his mother, played basketball at Eastern Kentucky.

Surprisingly his mother was influential in his decision to focus on football.

She recognized that the combination of his size and speed made him a force to reckon with on the football field.

Jedrick Wills was a no-brainer choice for the Cleveland Browns at #10.

He is an established right tackle known as a dog for his punishing tackles.

Wills will likely be asked to switch to left tackle with the express purpose of protecting Baker Mayfields blind side.

And the good news is that he will have future Hall of Fame help in doing so.

#Browns Kevin Stefanski said Joe Thomas will be a resource as Jedrick Wills makes switch to left tackle.

Scott Petrak ct (@ScottPetrak) April 24, 2020

Jedrick Wills will be a welcome addition to the Cleveland Browns this fall.

See the original post:
3 Things To Know About 1st Round Draft Pick Jedrick Wills - Browns Nation

It was noticeable from the initial outbreak in Wuhan that Covid-19 was killing more men than women. By February, data from China, which involved 44,672 confirmed cases of the respiratory disease, revealed the death rate for men was 2.8%, compared to 1.7% among women. For past respiratory epidemics, including Sars, Mers and the 1918 Spanish flu, men were also at significantly greater risk. But why?

Much of the reason for the Covid-19 disparity was put down to mens riskier behaviours around half of Chinese men are smokers, compared with just 3% of women, for instance. But as the coronavirus has spread globally, its proved deadlier to men everywhere that data exists (the UK and US notably and questionably do not collect sex-disaggregated data). Italy, for instance, has had a case fatality rate of 10.6% for men, versus 6% for women, whereas the sex disparity for smoking (now a known risk factor) is smaller there than China 28% of men and 19% of women smoke. In Spain, twice as many men as women have died. Smoking, then, is unlikely to account for all of the sex disparity in Covid-19 deaths.

Age and co-morbidity (pre-existing health conditions, including diabetes, cardiovascular disease or cancer) are the biggest risk factors, and that describes more older men than women. There may also be a sex difference in how people fight infection, due to immunological or hormonal differences oestrogen is shown to increase the antiviral response of immune cells.

If women are mounting a more effective immune response to Covid-19, it could be because many of the genes that regulate the immune system are encoded on the X chromosome. Everybody gets one X chromosome at conception from their mother. However, sex is determined (for the vast majority) by the chromosome received from their father: females get an additional X, whereas males do not (they receive a Y). According to The Better Half by American physician Sharon Moalem, having this second X chromosome gives women an immunological advantage. Every cell in a womans body has twice the number of X chromosomes as a mans, and so twice the number of genes that can be called upon to regulate her immune response, he says. Only one of the X chromosomes in each cell will be active at any time, but having that diversity of options gives women a better immunological toolbox to fight infections.

Moalem describes the possession of XX chromosomes as female genetic superiority. In the case of Covid-19, for instance, the virus uses its spike protein as a key to unlock a receptor protein on the outside of our human cells, called ACE-2, and gain entry. As the ACE-2 protein is on the X chromosome, men will have identical versions of ACE-2 on all their cells if the virus can unlock one, it can unlock all, he wrote recently in a Twitter thread. Women, though, have two different ACE-2 genes on their two X chromosomes, which may make it harder for the Covid-19 virus to break into all their cells, as it has to unlock two different proteins. Furthermore, once the ACE-2 is unlocked, it cannot perform its function, which, in the case of lung cells, is to clear fluid buildup during infection. So males, with all of their ACE-2 proteins affected, will suffer this more than females, he says. Moalem believes this may be the crucial advantage that XX-carrying women have over XY-carrying men in Covid-19 infection mortality.

Its an intriguing theory, and in his provocative book (written before the Covid-19 outbreak) Moalem expands the XX advantage to explain a whole range of life factors, from womens increased longevity to their lesser incidence of autism. It is incontrovertible that women are far less likely to suffer from X-linked genetic disorders, which include everything from Hunter syndrome to colour-blindness, because they usually have an unaffected X chromosome to fall back on. Indeed, in the case of colour vision, Moalem posits that having a second X chromosome can give some women a visual superpower, enabling them to see 100 times the usual colour range due to the extra diversity of receptors they carry on their multiple Xs.

It is striking that Moalem barely references environmental and social factors in a book about sex differences in health outcomes

However, the evidence for other of Moalems claims for the protective role of a second X chromosome, such as in autism spectrum disorders or behavioural traits, is less convincing. A broad range of genes play complex roles in the workings of the brain, and attributing a simple chromosomal relationship is brave. (It should be noted that Moalem authored the questionable The DNA Restart: Unlock Your Personal Genetic Code to Eat for Your Genes, Lose Weight, and Reverse Ageing in 2016.)

Outside of inherited genetic disorders, such as haemophilia, most conditions are attributable to a range of factors, including cultural norms, behaviours and social and environmental aspects as well as a host of biological factors. For Covid-19, for instance, gender-based norms around smoking and hand-washing, collective or individualistic mindsets that affect compliance with social-distance requests, how polluted your city is, whether you are a caregiver, and poverty and nutrition level all play a part in determining your infection risk and disease outcome. And, as weve seen, a range of co-morbidities increase risk are they too made more likely by absence of a second X chromosome? In many cases, such as cancers and lung disease, Moalem believes so a fascinating theory that surely deserves more study.

It is striking, though, that Moalem barely references environmental and social factors in a book about sex differences in health outcomes. This is particularly problematic when discussing sex differences in the brain, given the history of prejudicial research in this area. Much as this reviewer enjoys the rare pleasure of being described as the stronger, better, and superior sex certainly it is a change from being described as the weaker sex, as women have throughout history it is nevertheless an uncomfortable valuation. Claims for significant innate cognitive or behavioural advantages between the sexes have largely been debunked in the past few years by a range of influential books and research, and while there are differences, in most cases these are at least as great between individuals of each sex as between the sexes.

This is, however, a book that openly champions women, and it is most enjoyable when giving centre stage to female scientists, who have been too often overlooked. Moalems point is that, just as womens discoveries have been ignored, so too has the importance of their second X chromosome. Even today, medical and pharmaceutical research overwhelmingly favours male subjects, blinding us to knowledge that could lead to breakthroughs, and disadvantaging women who suffer inappropriate treatments and dosing. As men continue to fill the Covid-19 morgues faster than women, Moalem is on a quest to draw the worlds attention to a chromosomal tool we might just need.

Originally posted here:
The Better Half: On the Genetic Superiority of Women review bold study of chromosomal advantage - The Guardian

In Global Male Breast Cancer Treatment Market Research Report, the study analysis was given on a worldwide scale, for instance, present and traditional Male Breast Cancer Treatment growth analysis, competitive analysis, and also the growth prospects of the central regions. The report gives an exhaustive investigation of this market provides an analysis of the industry trends in each of the sub-segments, from sales, revenue and consumption. A quantitative and qualitative analysis of the main players in Global and country level is introduced, from the perspective of sales, revenue and price.

Request a sample of Male Breast Cancer Treatment Market report @https://martresearch.com/contact/request-sample/2/45239

Snapshot:The global Male Breast Cancer Treatment market size is estimated at xxx million USD with a CAGR xx% from 2015-2019 and is expected to reach xxx Million USD in 2020 with a CAGR xx% from 2020 to 2025. The report begins from overview of Industry Chain structure, and describes industry environment, then analyses market size and forecast of Male Breast Cancer Treatment by product, region and application, in addition, this report introduces market competition situation among the vendors and company profile, besides, market price analysis and value chain features are covered in this report.

Product Type Coverage(Market Size & Forecast, Major Company of Product Type etc.):

MedicationChemotherapyOthers

Company Coverage(Company Profile, Sales Revenue, Price, Gross Margin, Main Products etc.):

PfizerRocheGlaxoSmithKlineSanofiNovartisBayerBristol-Myers SquibbEli LillyAstraZenecaTeva PharmaceuticalSun PharmaceuticalBioNumerik PharmaceuticalsSeattle GeneticsAccord Healthcare

Application Coverage(Market Size & Forecast, Different Demand Market by Region, Main Consumer Profile etc.):

HospitalsClinicsOthers

Region Coverage(Regional Production, Demand & Forecast by Countries etc.):

North America (U.S., Canada, Mexico)Europe (Germany, U.K., France, Italy, Russia, Spain etc.)Asia-Pacific (China, India, Japan, Southeast Asia etc.)South America (Brazil, Argentina etc.)Middle East & Africa (Saudi Arabia, South Africa etc.)

At the upcoming section, this report discusses industrial policy, economic environment, in addition cost structures of the industry. And this report encompasses the fundamental dynamics of the market which include drivers, opportunities, and challenges faced by the industry. Additionally, this report showed a keen market study of the main consumers, raw material manufacturers and distributors, etc.

Buy The Report @https://martresearch.com/paymentform/2/45239/Single_User

Major Point of TOC:

Table of Content1 Industry Overview2 Industry Environment (PEST Analysis)3 Male Breast Cancer Treatment Market by Type4 Major Companies List5 Market Competition6 Demand by End Market7 Region Operation8 Marketing & Price9 Research Conclusion

About us:Research is and will always be the key to success and growth for any industry. Most organizations invest a major chunk of their resources viz. time, money and manpower in research to achieve new breakthroughs in their businesses. The outcome might not always be as expected thereby arising the need for precise, factual and high-quality data backing your research. This is where MART RESEARCH steps in and caters its expertise in the domain of market research reports to industries across varied sectors.

Contact Us:

Mart Research[emailprotected]+1-857-300-1122

See original here:
Global Male Breast Cancer Treatment Market by Disease Overview, Trends, Symptoms, Etiology, Diagnostic Methods, Insight, Epidemiology, Drug &...

Scrolling through social media, reading your favorite magazine, or visiting popular websites exposes you to endless information about nutrition and health most of which is incorrect.

Even qualified health professionals, including doctors and dietitians, are to blame for spreading misinformation about nutrition to the public, adding to the confusion.

Here are 20 of the biggest myths related to nutrition, and why these antiquated beliefs need to be put to rest.

Though creating a calorie deficit by burning more energy than you take in is the most important factor when it comes to weight loss, its not the only thing that matters.

Relying solely on calorie intake doesnt account for the large number of variables that may prevent someone from losing weight, even when on a very low calorie diet.

For example, hormonal imbalances, health conditions like hypothyroidism, metabolic adaptations, the use of certain medications, and genetics are just some of the factors that may make weight loss harder for some people, even when theyre on a strict diet (1, 2).

This concept also fails to emphasize the importance of sustainability and diet quality for weight loss. Those following the calories in, calories out method typically concentrate solely on the calorie value of foods, not their nutrient value (3).

This can lead to choosing low calorie, nutrient-poor foods like rice cakes and egg whites over higher calorie, nutrient-dense foods like avocados and whole eggs, which isnt the best for overall health.

The calories in, calories out theory doesnt account for several variables that may prevent someone from losing weight. Many factors, such as genetics, medical conditions, and metabolic adaptations, make weight loss much harder for some.

Though this antiquated and incorrect theory is slowly being put to rest, many people still fear high fat foods and follow low fat diets in the hopes that cutting their fat intake will benefit their overall health.

Dietary fat is essential for optimal health. Plus, low fat diets have been linked to a greater risk of health issues, including metabolic syndrome, and may lead to an increase in insulin resistance and triglyceride levels, which are known risk factors for heart disease (4, 5).

Whats more, diets that are higher in fat have been proven just as effective or even more so than low fat diets when it comes to encouraging weight loss (6, 7).

Of course, extremes in either direction, whether it be a very low fat or very high fat diet, may harm your health, especially when diet quality is poor.

Many high fat foods are extremely nutritious and can help you maintain a healthy weight.

While it was once thought that eating breakfast was one of the most important factors in setting yourself up for a healthy day, research has shown that this might not be the case for most adults (8).

For instance, research indicates that forgoing breakfast may result in reduced calorie intake (9).

Moreover, partaking in intermittent fasting, during which breakfast is either skipped or consumed later in the day, has been linked to a plethora of benefits, including improved blood sugar control and reductions in inflammatory markers (10, 11, 12).

However, intermittent fasting can also be accomplished by consuming a regular breakfast then having your last meal earlier in the evening to maintain a fasting window of 1416 hours.

Keep in mind that this does not apply to growing children and teens or those with increased nutrient needs, such as pregnant women and those with certain health conditions, as skipping meals may lead to negative health effects in these populations (13, 14).

On the other hand, some evidence shows that eating breakfast and consuming more calories earlier in the day rather than at night, coupled with reduced meal frequency, may benefit health by reducing inflammation and body weight (15).

Regardless, if you enjoy breakfast, eat it. If youre not a breakfast person, dont feel the need to add it to your daily routine.

Eating breakfast is not necessary for everyone. Health benefits are associated with both eating breakfast and skipping it.

Eating small, frequent meals regularly throughout the day is a method used by many people to boost metabolism and weight loss.

However, if you are healthy, the frequency of your meals does not matter as long as you meet your energy needs.

That said, those with certain medical conditions, such as diabetes, coronary artery disease, and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), as well as those who are pregnant, may benefit from eating more frequent meals.

Eating frequent meals throughout the day is not the best way to promote weight loss. Research shows that a regular meal pattern may be best for health.

The rising interest in low calorie, low carb, sugar-free foods has led to an increase in products that contain non-nutritive sweeteners (NNS). While its clear that a diet high in added sugar significantly increases disease risk, intake of NNS can also lead to negative health outcomes.

For example, NNS intake may increase your risk of type 2 diabetes by leading to negative shifts in gut bacteria and promoting blood sugar dysregulation. Whats more, regular NNS intake is associated with overall unhealthy lifestyle patterns (16, 17).

Keep in mind that research in this area is ongoing, and future high quality studies are needed to confirm these potential links.

Non-nutritive sweeteners may lead to adverse health outcomes, such as an increased risk of type 2 diabetes and negative changes to gut bacteria.

Although macro coaches may lead you to believe that the ratio of macronutrients in your diet is all that matters when it comes to weight loss and overall health, this narrow-minded take on nutrition is missing the bigger picture.

While tweaking macro ratios can benefit health in many ways, the most important factor in any diet is the quality of the foods you eat.

Though it may be possible to lose weight by eating nothing but highly processed foods and protein shakes, focusing solely on macronutrients discounts how eating certain foods can either increase or decrease metabolic health, disease risk, lifespan, and vitality.

Although tweaking macro ratios can be helpful in some ways, the most important way to promote overall health is to follow a diet rich in whole, unprocessed foods, regardless of the macro ratio.

Often labeled as unhealthy by those in the nutrition world, white potatoes are restricted by many people wanting to lose weight or improve their overall health.

While eating too much of any food including white potatoes can lead to weight gain, these starchy tubers are highly nutritious and can be included as part of a healthy diet.

White potatoes are an excellent source of many nutrients, including potassium, vitamin C, and fiber.

Plus, theyre more filling than other carb sources like rice and pasta and can help you feel more satisfied after meals. Just remember to enjoy potatoes baked or roasted, not fried (18, 19).

White potatoes are a nutritious carb choice just be sure to enjoy them in more healthful ways, such as roasted or baked.

Take a trip to your local grocery store and youll find a variety of products labeled diet, light, low fat, and fat-free. While these products are tempting to those wanting to shed excess body fat, theyre typically an unhealthy choice.

Research has shown that many low fat and diet items contain much more added sugar and salt than their regular-fat counterparts. Its best to forgo these products and instead enjoy small amounts of foods like full fat yogurt, cheese, and nut butters (20, 21).

Low fat and diet foods are typically high in sugar and salt. Unaltered higher fat alternatives are often a healthier choice.

While focusing on consuming a nutrient-dense, well-rounded diet is the most essential component of health, supplements when used correctly and in the right form can be beneficial in many ways.

For many, especially those with health conditions like type 2 diabetes, as well as those who take common medications like statins, proton pump inhibitors, birth control, and antidiabetic medications, taking specific supplements can significantly affect their health (22, 23, 24).

For example, supplementing with magnesium and B vitamins has been shown to benefit those with type 2 diabetes by enhancing blood sugar and reducing heart disease risk factors and diabetes-related complications (25, 26).

Those on restrictive diets, people with genetic mutations like methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR), people over the age of 50, and pregnant or breastfeeding women are other examples of populations that may benefit from taking specific supplements.

Supplements are useful and often necessary in many populations. The use of common medications, age, and certain medical conditions are just some of the reasons why supplements may be needed for some people.

While reducing calorie intake can indeed boost weight loss, cutting calories too low can lead to metabolic adaptations and long-term health consequences.

Though going on a very low calorie diet will likely promote rapid weight loss in the short term, long-term adherence to very low calorie diets leads to a reduction in metabolic rate, increased feelings of hunger, and alterations in fullness hormones (27).

This makes long-term weight maintenance difficult.

This is why studies have shown that low calorie dieters rarely succeed in keeping excess weight off in the long term (27).

Very low calorie diets lead to metabolic adaptations that make long-term weight maintenance difficult.

Obesity is associated with many health conditions, including type 2 diabetes, heart disease, depression, certain cancers, and even early death (28, 29).

Still, reducing your disease risk does not mean you have to be skinny. Whats most important is consuming a nutritious diet and maintaining an active lifestyle, as these behaviors often improve your body weight and body fat percentage.

Though obesity increases your risk of disease, you dont have to be skinny to be healthy. Rather, maintaining a healthy body weight and body fat percent by consuming a nutritious diet and maintaining an active lifestyle is most important.

Many people are told to pop calcium supplements to keep their skeletal system healthy. However, current research has shown that supplementing with calcium may do more harm than good.

For example, some studies have linked calcium supplements to an increased risk of heart disease. Additionally, research shows that they dont reduce the risk of fracture or osteoporosis (30, 31).

If youre concerned about your calcium intake, its best to focus on dietary sources of calcium like full fat yogurt, sardines, beans, and seeds.

Although medical professionals commonly prescribe calcium supplements, current research shows that these supplements may do more harm than good.

Many people struggle with getting adequate dietary fiber, which is why fiber supplements are so popular. Although fiber supplements can benefit health by improving bowel movements and blood sugar control, they should not replace real food (32).

High fiber whole foods like vegetables, beans, and fruit contain nutrients and plant compounds that work synergistically to promote your health, and they cant be replaced by fiber supplements.

Fiber supplements should not be used as a replacement for nutritious, high fiber foods.

Certain juices and smoothies are highly nutritious. For example, a nutrient-dense smoothie or freshly made juice composed primarily of non-starchy vegetables can be a great way to increase your vitamin, mineral, and antioxidant intake.

Yet, its important to know that most juices and smoothies sold at stores are loaded with sugar and calories. When consumed in excess, they can promote weight gain and other health issues like tooth decay and blood sugar dysregulation (33, 34, 35).

Many store-bought juices and smoothies are packed with added sugar and calories.

Probiotics are amongst the most popular dietary supplements on the market. However, practitioners generally overprescribed them, and research has demonstrated that some people may not benefit from probiotics like others do (36).

Not only are some peoples digestive systems resistant to probiotic colonization, but introducing probiotics through supplements may lead to negative changes in their gut bacteria.

Plus, bacterial overgrowth in the small intestine related to probiotic use can lead to bloating, gas, and other adverse side effects (37).

Additionally, some studies show that probiotic treatment following a course of antibiotics may delay the natural reconstitution of normal gut bacteria (38).

Instead of being prescribed as a one-size-fits-all supplement, probiotics should be more personalized and only be used when a therapeutic benefit is likely.

Current research suggests that probiotic supplements may not benefit everyone and should not be prescribed as a one-size-fits-all supplement.

Dont be fooled by the dramatic before and after pictures used by supplement companies and stories of rapid weight loss attained with little to no effort.

Weight loss is not easy. It requires consistency, self-love, hard work, and patience. Plus, genetics and other factors make weight loss much harder for some than others.

If youre struggling to lose weight, youre not alone. The best thing to do is drown out the weight loss noise that youre exposed to every day and find a nourishing and sustainable dietary and activity pattern that works for you.

Weight loss is difficult for most people and requires consistency, self-love, hard work, and patience. Many factors may influence how easy it is for you to lose weight.

Theres no need to obsess over your calorie intake and track every morsel of food that passes your lips to lose weight.

Although food tracking can be a useful tool when trying to lose excess body fat, its not right for everyone.

Whats more, being overly preoccupied with food by tracking calories has been associated with an increased risk of disordered eating tendencies (39).

Although tracking calories may help some people lose weight, its not necessary for everyone and may lead to disordered eating tendencies.

Cholesterol-rich foods have gotten a bad rap thanks to misconceptions about how dietary cholesterol affects heart health.

While some people are more sensitive to dietary cholesterol than others, overall, nutrient-dense, cholesterol-rich foods can be included in a healthy diet (40).

In fact, including cholesterol-rich, nutritious foods like eggs and full fat yogurt in your diet may boost health by enhancing feelings of fullness and providing important nutrients that other foods lack (41, 42, 43).

High cholesterol foods like eggs and full fat yogurt are highly nutritious. Although genetic factors make some people more sensitive to dietary cholesterol, for most people, high cholesterol foods can be included as part of a healthy diet.

Many people assume that eating disorders and disordered eating tendencies only affect women. In reality, adolescent and adult men are also at risk.

Whats more, over 30% of adolescent men in the United States report body dissatisfaction and the use of unhealthy methods to attain their ideal body type (44).

Its important to note that eating disorders present differently in men than women, and theyre more prevalent in adolescent and young adult men who are gay or bisexual, highlighting the need for eating disorder treatments that are better adapted to the male population (44, 45).

Eating disorders affect both men and women. However, eating disorders present differently in men than women, highlighting the need for eating disorder treatments that are better adapted to the male population.

Just as fat has been blamed for promoting weight gain and heart disease, carbs have been shunned by many people over fears that consuming this macronutrient will cause obesity, diabetes, and other adverse health effects.

In reality, eating a moderate amount of nutritious carbs that are high in fiber, vitamins, and minerals like starchy root vegetables, ancient grains, and legumes will likely benefit your health not harm it.

For example, dietary patterns that contain a balanced mix of high fiber carbs mainly from produce, healthy fats, and proteins, such as the Mediterranean diet, have been associated with a reduced risk of obesity, diabetes, certain cancers, and heart disease (46, 47).

However, carb-rich foods like cakes, cookies, sweetened beverages, and white bread should be restricted, as these foods can increase weight gain and disease risk when eaten in excess. As you can see, food quality is the main predictor of disease risk (48).

Including healthy carb choices in your diet wont make you gain weight. However, following unhealthy eating patters and overindulging in carb-rich sugary foods will lead to weight gain.

The nutrition world is rife with misinformation, leading to public confusion, mistrust of health professionals, and poor dietary choices.

This, coupled with the fact that nutrition science is constantly changing, makes it no wonder that most people have a warped view of what constitutes a healthy diet.

Although these nutrition myths are likely here to stay, educating yourself by separating fact from fiction when it comes to nutrition can help you feel more empowered to develop a nutritious and sustainable dietary pattern that works for your individual needs.

Visit link:
The Top 20 Biggest Nutrition Myths - Healthline

Ligers (the offspring of a female tiger mixed with a male lion) or tigons (a female lion plus a male tiger) are unnatural crossbreeds that dont exist in the wild. They have no conservation value and usually suffer from health problems because of the inbreeding. As noted by National Geographic, the number of ligers and white tigers seen in the docuseries were examples of problematic overbreeding. Whatsmore, because ligers and tigons arent pure tigers, theyre not protected by endangered species regulations.

This is a problem because there is truly no regulatory body on the care, treatment, or management of tigers in captivity, and these privately bred tigers are considered generic tigers by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Cancellare said. As a result, they are currently exempt from the captive-bred wildlife registration program under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. There is talk of changing this exemption, thankfully, but until then, it means it's still really easy to get and breed tigers.

In general, Guynup said the overbreeding leads to poor care and living conditions for the captive tigers. She said issues have included rodent-infested enclosures, animals living in putrid standing water, uncared for injuries and illnesses, and inadequate food. The tiger cubs can legally only be used for petting until theyre about 12 weeks old, according to the U.S. Agriculture Department. That short window of time for petting also becomes an incentive for overbreeding. After that, they become too dangerous.

It presents a public safety issue because big cats are powerful predators who retain their natural instincts, Block said. They can and do injure and kill people, and they take every opportunity to escape. There have been many dangerous incidents involving privately owned big cats. Wild animals do not belong in captivity.

So, how can you know if a sanctuary is legit or just a roadside zoo using buzz words? It comes down to the venues goals.

A legitimate wildlife sanctuary or rescue center does not breed, buy, sell, offer any public contact with or take animals off-site for exhibition, Block said. Tigers and other wild animals have unique and complex needs. Providing decades of appropriate care requires substantial resources.

Additionally, tigers at sanctuaries are provided with proper nutrition and vet care. The animals at these facilities are also kept for life.

As Guynup puts it, venues accredited by the Big Cat Sanctuary Alliance the Global Federation of Animals meet the criteria for a true sanctuary. You can check a facilitys certifications for yourself by visiting their respective lists of sanctuaries or members. To qualify as a member of the Big Cat Sanctuary Alliance, establishments have to provide lifelong care for abused, neglected, unwanted, impounded, abandoned, orphaned, or displaced wild cats. The Global Federation of Animals requirements are even more extensive: Standards are spelled out depending on the breed but include specifications regarding the quality of the applicants enclosure, sanitation, temperature control, nutrition, veterinary care, and more.

Tiger Kings Carole Baskins Big Cat Rescue is certified by both groups, but that isnt mentioned throughout the series. Unlike the roadside zoos Baskins place is pitted against, Big Cat Rescue is a legitimate sanctuary, according to National Geographic and the Washington Post.

Read the rest here:
Tiger Sanctuaries and Roadside Zoos: The History You Wont See in Tiger King - Teen Vogue

MANHASSET, N.Y.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Analyzing the electronic health records (EHR) of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients hospitalized at New York States largest health system, a team of researchers uncovered several comorbidities as a key factor in the acuity of the disease, according to a report in The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).

The Northwell Health COVID-19 Research Consortium, with support from the Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research, described the clinical course and outcomes of 5,700 Northwell patients hospitalized with COVID-19 the largest hospitalized patient cohort to date from the United States between March 1 and April 4.

The Northwell Health Covid-19 Research Consortiums findings, published today in JAMA, demonstrate that hypertension (57 percent), obesity (41 percent) and diabetes (34 percent) were the most common comorbidities in the COVID-19 patients studied. Patients with diabetes were more likely to have received invasive mechanical ventilation, received treatment in the intensive care unit (ICU) or developed acute kidney disease.

Of the 2,634 hospitalized patients for whom outcomes were known, 14 percent were treated in the ICU, 12 percent received invasive mechanical ventilation and 3 percent were treated with kidney replacement therapy. Twenty one percent passed away while 88 percent of individuals receiving mechanical ventilation died. To read the JAMA paper for which Safiya Richardson, MD, MPH, assistant professor at the Feinstein Institutes, is the first author click here.

New York has become the epicenter of this epidemic. Clinicians, scientists, statisticians and laboratory professionals are working tirelessly to provide best care and comfort to the thousands of COVID-19 patients in our Northwell hospitals, said Karina W. Davidson, PhD, MASc, professor and senior vice president at the Feinstein Institutes. Through our consortium, we will share our clinical and scientific insights as we evolve the ways to care for and treat COVID-19 patients.

The majority of patients in the study were male, and the median age of all patients being treated was 63 years old. At triage, about of third of all patients (1,734) presented with a fever, 986 had a high respiratory rate and 1,584 patients received supplemental oxygen. On average, patients were discharged after four days. The mortality rates were higher for male patients than female at every adult 10-year age interval.

The data were collected from the enterprise electronic health record reporting database and also consisted of patient demographic information, home medications, triage visits, initial laboratory tests, initial electrocardiogram results, diagnoses during the hospital course, inpatient medications, treatments (including invasive mechanical ventilation and kidney replacement therapy), and outcomes (including length of stay, discharge, readmission, and mortality).

Dr. Davidson and the Northwell Consortium research team provide a crucial early insight into the front line response to the COVID-19 outbreak in New York, said Kevin J. Tracey, MD, president and CEO of the Feinstein Institutes. These observational studies and other randomized clinical trial results from the Feinstein Institutes will improve the care for others confronting Covid outbreaks.

Research conducted at the Feinstein Institutes would not be possible without philanthropic support. In this most challenging moment in health care, we rely on supporters to provide resources for physicians and scientists to better understand COVID-19 and conduct research that benefit our patients. To support our research efforts, please click here.

About the Feinstein Institutes

The Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research is the research arm of Northwell Health, the largest health care provider and private employer in New York State. Home to 50 research labs, 2,500 clinical research studies and 5,000 researchers and staff, the Feinstein Institutes raises the standard of medical innovation through its five institutes of behavioral science, bioelectronic medicine, cancer, health innovations and outcomes, and molecular medicine. We make breakthroughs in genetics, oncology, brain research, mental health, autoimmunity, and are the global scientific leader in bioelectronic medicine a new field of science that has the potential to revolutionize medicine. For more information about how we produce knowledge to cure disease, visit feinstein.northwell.edu.

About Northwell Health

Northwell Health is New York States largest health care provider and private employer, with 23 hospitals, about 750 outpatient facilities and more than 13,600 affiliated physicians. We care for over two million people annually in the New York metro area and beyond, thanks to philanthropic support from our communities. Our 70,000 employees 16,000-plus nurses and 4,000 employed doctors, including members of Northwell Health Physician Partners are working to change health care for the better. Were making breakthroughs in medicine at the Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research. We're training the next generation of medical professionals at the visionary Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell and the Hofstra Northwell School of Graduate Nursing and Physician Assistant Studies. For information on our more than 100 medical specialties, visit Northwell.edu and follow us @NorthwellHealth on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and LinkedIn.

See the article here:
Largest COVID-19 Study of Hospitalized Patients in US Links Comorbidities to Acuity - Business Wire

Theres been quite a lot in the news lately about men, women and their theoretically different and some have theorised womens superior approaches to leadership.

Some have even gone so far as to declare women the winners in the COVID 19 leadership stakes. An article in Forbes last week declared, What Do Countries with the Best Coronavirus Response Have in Common? Women Leaders.

Also last week, Tanja Kovac, the CEO of Gender Equity Victoria, highlighted on Linked In that of the 10 nations that have successfully flatted the curve, women lead 40 percent of them. This, despite the fact that women lead just 8 percent of UN recognised nation states. Save lives, elect women, Kovac declared.

Kovac is not the only one to have made such bold claims about womans supposed superior leadership qualities.

Last year, former US President Barack Obama told guests at an event in Singapore that, If more women were put in charge, there would be less war, kids would be better taken care of and there would be a general improvement in living standards and outcomes.

Theres also been a lot in the news lately about how men are the losers in the coronavirus pandemic, at least in terms of their likelihood of acquiring the virus and dying as a result of it. (Who is carrying the heavier load of the response, as well as the economic and social fallout of the pandemic thats debatable.)

This past weekend, The Ages Good Weekend prominently featured an article entitled, X marks the spot: why the weaker sex wins every stage of life. The article featured an interview with Canadian physician and scientist Dr. Sharon Moalem, who claims in her new book, The Better Half, that women live longer, have stronger immune systems, fewer developmental disabilities and higher cancer survival rates than men because of the extra X in every female cell.

I have to admit, after decades of hearing about everything thats supposedly wrong with women, including an ever expanding list of all the things we need to fix about them, particularly in the world of work and leadership, I have found it rather novel to read a number of articles in such short succession suggesting that in many ways women are better than men.

Have women finally won the so-called battle of the sexes? Some are certainly calling it. Game over. But I say, not so fast.

Generally speaking, I am not a huge fan of biologically deterministic theories about the sexes, in particular when it comes to leadership. While tempting, these tropes men are from Mars, women are bending the curve on Venus can, and often are, used as sticks to beat women with.

In that regard, I am in fierce agreement with Arwa Mahdawi, who wrote in The Guardian at the time of Obamas comments: Obamas sweeping statements about women arent just facile, theyre supremely unhelpful. They reinforce the myth that women and men are innately different; that women are biologically programmed to be more cooperative and compassionate than men. Were not. Were just socially conditioned to be people-pleasers. And, from day one, wereheld to higher standardsthan men; boys will be boys but girls are expected to be angels.

To my mind its not that women are necessarily better than men, and certainly not because they are gifted with superior genetics, though they are undeniably different. Its that we have a real problem with stereotypically male styles of leadership, which we, as a culture, have traditionally held up as the gold standard of leadership.

To quote Professor Higgins in My Fair Lady, Why cant a woman be more like a man, I suggest we challenge Professor Higgins and ask if that would really be a good thing. Weve spent decades trying to make women in leadership behave in ways our culture associates with masculinity and rewards, despite significant evidence that it is, Ill go ahead and use the word, toxic.

To illustrate that point, the Harvard Business Review recently featured the research of Jennifer Berdahl, Peter Glick and Marianne Cooper, sociologists and leadership experts who surveyed thousands of workers in the US and Canada and found that four stereotypical masculine norms which together define masculine contest culture (show no weakness, strength and stamina, put work first and dog eat dog ruthlessness) emerged as highly correlated with each other and with organisational dysfunction.

This pressure shifts the focus from accomplishing the organizations mission to proving ones masculinity, the authors wrote. The result is endless mines bigger than yours contests.

For an object lesson in that, I give you recent events in the US: Donald Trump, of course, but also some of his male colleagues in the various governors mansions, including the Democrat New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, who has been at the centre of the epidemic.

Rebecca Traister put it best in her essay for The Cut when she declared, Enough with the Dick Swinging.

These men have media cockfights, while people die, Traister wrote. Its not funny, its not hot. Its a travesty. And it tells us everything about power: how its distributed, how its communicated. How its understood. And how its mismanaged to tragic and malignant effect.

Im all for emotionally intelligent, and quite frankly collaborative and competent, leadership. I just hope that, as a culture, we can move away from the belief that such qualities are the sole preserve of a single sex. Diversity simply leads to better decisions. Full stop. Well all be better off when we value and reward these qualities in all leaders.

Kristine Ziwica is a regular contributor. She tweets @KZiwica

Here is the original post:
Are women better leaders than men? It's really not the point - Women's Agenda

But ProfGilbert maintainsthat she never meant to become a vaccine specialist.

I actually came to Oxford to work on a human genetics project, she told a newspaper. That highlighted the role of a particular type of immune response in protection against malaria and so the next thing to move on to was to make a vaccine that would work through that type of immune response - and thats how I got into vaccines.

One can't help but feel thankful she did. With worldwide coronavirus cases topping two million, and economists predicting a financial crash from extended periods of lockdown,the race to develop a vaccine is urgent.It is thought that 60-70 per centof people need to be immune to the virus in order to stop it spreading.

Can it be achieved?

As ever, ProfGilbert remained measured when discussing this. She has said in the media that "nobody can give any guarantees, nobody can promise its going to work and nobody can give you a definite date, but we have to do all we can as fast as we can.

She is also breath of fresh air in the science research industry, which still remains male dominated. According to the Women in Science and Engineering (Wise) campaigns latest analysis,women in science professional roles now make up to 45.7 per cent of the workforce. However, worldwide, less than 30 per cent of the worlds researchers are women.

Plus, the gender pay gap for UK scientists has widened. According to the the2019 edition of the annual salary survey carried out byNew Scientistand science recruitment specialists SRG, the average female scientist or engineer now earns 35,600, while the average for men is 45,800 a 22 per cent difference.

Although the gender balance is closing in, historically women at the forefront of pioneering research haven't got a fair deal.Katherine Johnson, the American mathematician who contributed calculations to the Apollo 11 mission, was overlooked for years in her vital role. Last year, Rosalind Franklin, the scientist who helped discover DNA but was overshadowed by her female colleagues, was finally granted recognition after a space robot was named after her.

But with the well-being of society - quite literally - in her hands, it seems fitting that Prof Gilbert should be honoured for her efforts far sooner. The Jenner Institute, where the coronavirus vaccine is being trialed, is named after Edward Jenner who helped develop a vaccination against Smallpox. Perhaps Gilberttoo could one day see an institute named after her.

Follow this link:
Meet Sarah Gilbert, the female scientist leading Oxford vaccine team - and about to make history - Telegraph.co.uk