MDedge Emergency Medicine

Heat waves are getting hotter and becoming more frequent because of rising rates of air pollution, putting children’s health at risk, a wide-ranging new report finds.

An article in the New England Journal of Medicine reviews current research to take a sweeping inventory of how air pollution and climate change interact to adversely affect people’s health, especially that of kids. It examined the link between fossil fuel emissions and a variety of consequences of climate change – including extreme weather events; wildfires; vector-borne illnesses such as malaria, Zika, and Lyme disease; and heat waves, a topic at the forefront of many people’s minds.

This month, for example, record-high temperatures have been reported across the United States, affecting more than 100 million people and touching locations from the Gulf Coast to the Great Lakes, the Southwest, the mid-Atlantic, and the Midwest.

In Texas, Austin has already experienced an 8-day streak of temperatures above the 100° F mark in June, according to the Austin American-Statesman.

These patterns are an important reality to note, said Frederica Perera, DrPH, PhD, the article’s lead author. “My concern is that the threats are rising as temperature is rising,” Dr. Perera, a professor at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health, New York, told KHN. “Temperatures are rising because greenhouse gas emissions are rising, and that’s a great concern for everyone’s health – but especially the most vulnerable.”

Children fit into this category, wrote Dr. Perera and her coauthor, Kari Nadeau, MD, PhD, Naddisy Foundation Endowed Professor of Medicine and Pediatrics at Stanford (Calif.) University, because their ability to regulate temperature, known as thermoregulation, is not fully developed.

They are also more susceptible to heat-related stress because they’re smaller and need to drink and eat more frequently to stay healthy, said Dr. Perera. But because “young children are dependent on parents to provide, sometimes their needs go ignored,” she said.

The authors noted that heat-related illness is “a leading and increasing cause of death and illness among student athletes” in the United States. In addition, they cited studies suggesting that “the heat associated with climate change” takes a toll on the mental health of children and adolescents, as well as their ability to learn.

The review article pointed to previous research. that associated in utero exposure to heat waves with “increased risks of preterm birth or low birth weight; hyperthermia and death among infants; and heat stress, kidney disease, and other illnesses” among kids.

“Being pregnant is very physiologically demanding in itself, and then heat places additional stress on a pregnant woman,” said Dr. Robert Dubrow, a professor of epidemiology at Yale’s School of Public Health, New Haven, Conn., who was not associated with either study. “And the fetus can experience heat stress as well, which could result in adverse birth outcomes.”

And these heat-related risks are across-the-board greater for “low-income communities and communities of color,” wrote the authors of the new article.

Carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels have risen sharply in the past 70 years, according to the article. “Modeling indicates that some heat waves would be extraordinarily unlikely to occur in the absence of climate change,” it says.

The authors briefly outline solutions that they describe as “climate and environmental strategies” that “should also be seen as essential public health policy.” Beyond big-picture efforts to mitigate fossil fuel and greenhouse gas emissions, they offered various ways to protect children – steps they term “adaptation measures” – which included providing clean water to children and families facing drought or water contamination and creating shaded areas where children play, live, and go to school.

Separately, Austin-based research highlighted why this step could be meaningful.

Researchers tracked the physical activity levels and location of students ages 8 to 10 during recess at three elementary schools in 2019. They compared children’s activity at recess during two weeks in September, the hottest full month during the school year, to a cooler week in November. “We wanted to understand the impact of outdoor temperatures on children’s play in schoolyard environments,” said Dr. Kevin Lanza, the study’s lead investigator, to inform the design of “future school-based interventions for physical activity in the face of climate change.”

During the hotter periods, he said, “children engaged in less physical activity and sought shade.”

As temperatures continue to rise, he said, schools must be flexible in making sure students are getting the daily exercise they need. “Schools should consider adding shade, either by planting trees or installing artificial structures that cover spaces intended for physical activity,” said Dr. Lanza, an assistant professor at UTHealth School of Public Health, Austin, Tex. He also noted that school policies could be updated so that recesses are scheduled during cooler times of the day and moved inside during periods of extreme heat.

But the overall need to protect kids from scorching weather patterns requires action beyond such steps, Dr. Perera said, and more climate and clean air policies must be enacted.

“Governments have the responsibility to protect the population and especially those most vulnerable, which especially includes children,” Dr. Perera said. “Action must be done immediately because we’re absolutely heading in the wrong direction.”

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

Heat waves are getting hotter and becoming more frequent because of rising rates of air pollution, putting children’s health at risk, a wide-ranging new report finds.

An article in the New England Journal of Medicine reviews current research to take a sweeping inventory of how air pollution and climate change interact to adversely affect people’s health, especially that of kids. It examined the link between fossil fuel emissions and a variety of consequences of climate change – including extreme weather events; wildfires; vector-borne illnesses such as malaria, Zika, and Lyme disease; and heat waves, a topic at the forefront of many people’s minds.

This month, for example, record-high temperatures have been reported across the United States, affecting more than 100 million people and touching locations from the Gulf Coast to the Great Lakes, the Southwest, the mid-Atlantic, and the Midwest.

In Texas, Austin has already experienced an 8-day streak of temperatures above the 100° F mark in June, according to the Austin American-Statesman.

These patterns are an important reality to note, said Frederica Perera, DrPH, PhD, the article’s lead author. “My concern is that the threats are rising as temperature is rising,” Dr. Perera, a professor at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health, New York, told KHN. “Temperatures are rising because greenhouse gas emissions are rising, and that’s a great concern for everyone’s health – but especially the most vulnerable.”

Children fit into this category, wrote Dr. Perera and her coauthor, Kari Nadeau, MD, PhD, Naddisy Foundation Endowed Professor of Medicine and Pediatrics at Stanford (Calif.) University, because their ability to regulate temperature, known as thermoregulation, is not fully developed.

They are also more susceptible to heat-related stress because they’re smaller and need to drink and eat more frequently to stay healthy, said Dr. Perera. But because “young children are dependent on parents to provide, sometimes their needs go ignored,” she said.

The authors noted that heat-related illness is “a leading and increasing cause of death and illness among student athletes” in the United States. In addition, they cited studies suggesting that “the heat associated with climate change” takes a toll on the mental health of children and adolescents, as well as their ability to learn.

The review article pointed to previous research. that associated in utero exposure to heat waves with “increased risks of preterm birth or low birth weight; hyperthermia and death among infants; and heat stress, kidney disease, and other illnesses” among kids.

“Being pregnant is very physiologically demanding in itself, and then heat places additional stress on a pregnant woman,” said Dr. Robert Dubrow, a professor of epidemiology at Yale’s School of Public Health, New Haven, Conn., who was not associated with either study. “And the fetus can experience heat stress as well, which could result in adverse birth outcomes.”

And these heat-related risks are across-the-board greater for “low-income communities and communities of color,” wrote the authors of the new article.

Carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels have risen sharply in the past 70 years, according to the article. “Modeling indicates that some heat waves would be extraordinarily unlikely to occur in the absence of climate change,” it says.

The authors briefly outline solutions that they describe as “climate and environmental strategies” that “should also be seen as essential public health policy.” Beyond big-picture efforts to mitigate fossil fuel and greenhouse gas emissions, they offered various ways to protect children – steps they term “adaptation measures” – which included providing clean water to children and families facing drought or water contamination and creating shaded areas where children play, live, and go to school.

Separately, Austin-based research highlighted why this step could be meaningful.

Researchers tracked the physical activity levels and location of students ages 8 to 10 during recess at three elementary schools in 2019. They compared children’s activity at recess during two weeks in September, the hottest full month during the school year, to a cooler week in November. “We wanted to understand the impact of outdoor temperatures on children’s play in schoolyard environments,” said Dr. Kevin Lanza, the study’s lead investigator, to inform the design of “future school-based interventions for physical activity in the face of climate change.”

During the hotter periods, he said, “children engaged in less physical activity and sought shade.”

As temperatures continue to rise, he said, schools must be flexible in making sure students are getting the daily exercise they need. “Schools should consider adding shade, either by planting trees or installing artificial structures that cover spaces intended for physical activity,” said Dr. Lanza, an assistant professor at UTHealth School of Public Health, Austin, Tex. He also noted that school policies could be updated so that recesses are scheduled during cooler times of the day and moved inside during periods of extreme heat.

But the overall need to protect kids from scorching weather patterns requires action beyond such steps, Dr. Perera said, and more climate and clean air policies must be enacted.

“Governments have the responsibility to protect the population and especially those most vulnerable, which especially includes children,” Dr. Perera said. “Action must be done immediately because we’re absolutely heading in the wrong direction.”

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

Heat waves are getting hotter and becoming more frequent because of rising rates of air pollution, putting children’s health at risk, a wide-ranging new report finds.

An article in the New England Journal of Medicine reviews current research to take a sweeping inventory of how air pollution and climate change interact to adversely affect people’s health, especially that of kids. It examined the link between fossil fuel emissions and a variety of consequences of climate change – including extreme weather events; wildfires; vector-borne illnesses such as malaria, Zika, and Lyme disease; and heat waves, a topic at the forefront of many people’s minds.

This month, for example, record-high temperatures have been reported across the United States, affecting more than 100 million people and touching locations from the Gulf Coast to the Great Lakes, the Southwest, the mid-Atlantic, and the Midwest.

In Texas, Austin has already experienced an 8-day streak of temperatures above the 100° F mark in June, according to the Austin American-Statesman.

These patterns are an important reality to note, said Frederica Perera, DrPH, PhD, the article’s lead author. “My concern is that the threats are rising as temperature is rising,” Dr. Perera, a professor at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health, New York, told KHN. “Temperatures are rising because greenhouse gas emissions are rising, and that’s a great concern for everyone’s health – but especially the most vulnerable.”

Children fit into this category, wrote Dr. Perera and her coauthor, Kari Nadeau, MD, PhD, Naddisy Foundation Endowed Professor of Medicine and Pediatrics at Stanford (Calif.) University, because their ability to regulate temperature, known as thermoregulation, is not fully developed.

They are also more susceptible to heat-related stress because they’re smaller and need to drink and eat more frequently to stay healthy, said Dr. Perera. But because “young children are dependent on parents to provide, sometimes their needs go ignored,” she said.

The authors noted that heat-related illness is “a leading and increasing cause of death and illness among student athletes” in the United States. In addition, they cited studies suggesting that “the heat associated with climate change” takes a toll on the mental health of children and adolescents, as well as their ability to learn.

The review article pointed to previous research. that associated in utero exposure to heat waves with “increased risks of preterm birth or low birth weight; hyperthermia and death among infants; and heat stress, kidney disease, and other illnesses” among kids.

“Being pregnant is very physiologically demanding in itself, and then heat places additional stress on a pregnant woman,” said Dr. Robert Dubrow, a professor of epidemiology at Yale’s School of Public Health, New Haven, Conn., who was not associated with either study. “And the fetus can experience heat stress as well, which could result in adverse birth outcomes.”

And these heat-related risks are across-the-board greater for “low-income communities and communities of color,” wrote the authors of the new article.

Carbon dioxide emissions from burning fossil fuels have risen sharply in the past 70 years, according to the article. “Modeling indicates that some heat waves would be extraordinarily unlikely to occur in the absence of climate change,” it says.

The authors briefly outline solutions that they describe as “climate and environmental strategies” that “should also be seen as essential public health policy.” Beyond big-picture efforts to mitigate fossil fuel and greenhouse gas emissions, they offered various ways to protect children – steps they term “adaptation measures” – which included providing clean water to children and families facing drought or water contamination and creating shaded areas where children play, live, and go to school.

Separately, Austin-based research highlighted why this step could be meaningful.

Researchers tracked the physical activity levels and location of students ages 8 to 10 during recess at three elementary schools in 2019. They compared children’s activity at recess during two weeks in September, the hottest full month during the school year, to a cooler week in November. “We wanted to understand the impact of outdoor temperatures on children’s play in schoolyard environments,” said Dr. Kevin Lanza, the study’s lead investigator, to inform the design of “future school-based interventions for physical activity in the face of climate change.”

During the hotter periods, he said, “children engaged in less physical activity and sought shade.”

As temperatures continue to rise, he said, schools must be flexible in making sure students are getting the daily exercise they need. “Schools should consider adding shade, either by planting trees or installing artificial structures that cover spaces intended for physical activity,” said Dr. Lanza, an assistant professor at UTHealth School of Public Health, Austin, Tex. He also noted that school policies could be updated so that recesses are scheduled during cooler times of the day and moved inside during periods of extreme heat.

But the overall need to protect kids from scorching weather patterns requires action beyond such steps, Dr. Perera said, and more climate and clean air policies must be enacted.

“Governments have the responsibility to protect the population and especially those most vulnerable, which especially includes children,” Dr. Perera said. “Action must be done immediately because we’re absolutely heading in the wrong direction.”

KHN (Kaiser Health News) is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues. Together with Policy Analysis and Polling, KHN is one of the three major operating programs at KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation). KFF is an endowed nonprofit organization providing information on health issues to the nation.

 The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved risankizumab-rzaa (Skyrizi, AbbVie) for a third indication – treatment of moderately to severely active Crohn’s disease in adults – making it the first specific anti–interleukin-23 monoclonal antibody indicated for Crohn’s disease.

The safety and efficacy of risankizumab in Crohn’s disease is supported by data from two induction clinical trials (ADVANCE and MOTIVATE) and one maintenance clinical trial (FORTIFY).

Results of the three studies were presented at the annual scientific meeting of the American College of Gastroenterology in 2021.

“In both the induction and maintenance clinical trials, a significantly greater number of adult patients saw few or no symptoms and a meaningful reduction of visible signs of intestinal inflammation, compared to placebo,” Marla Dubinsky, MD, gastroenterologist with the Mount Sinai Health System and codirector of the IBD Center at Mount Sinai, New York, said in a news release from AbbVie.

“This approval provides health care professionals with a greatly needed additional option for treating the disruptive symptoms of Crohn’s disease,” Dr. Dubinsky said.

For the treatment of Crohn’s disease, risankizumab is dosed at 600 mg administered by intravenous infusion over at least 1 hour at week 0, 4, and 8, followed by 360 mg self-administered by subcutaneous injection at week 12, and every 8 weeks thereafter.

Risankizumab is already approved in the United States for the treatment of adults with active psoriatic arthritis and moderate to severe plaque psoriasis.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

 The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved risankizumab-rzaa (Skyrizi, AbbVie) for a third indication – treatment of moderately to severely active Crohn’s disease in adults – making it the first specific anti–interleukin-23 monoclonal antibody indicated for Crohn’s disease.

The safety and efficacy of risankizumab in Crohn’s disease is supported by data from two induction clinical trials (ADVANCE and MOTIVATE) and one maintenance clinical trial (FORTIFY).

Results of the three studies were presented at the annual scientific meeting of the American College of Gastroenterology in 2021.

“In both the induction and maintenance clinical trials, a significantly greater number of adult patients saw few or no symptoms and a meaningful reduction of visible signs of intestinal inflammation, compared to placebo,” Marla Dubinsky, MD, gastroenterologist with the Mount Sinai Health System and codirector of the IBD Center at Mount Sinai, New York, said in a news release from AbbVie.

“This approval provides health care professionals with a greatly needed additional option for treating the disruptive symptoms of Crohn’s disease,” Dr. Dubinsky said.

For the treatment of Crohn’s disease, risankizumab is dosed at 600 mg administered by intravenous infusion over at least 1 hour at week 0, 4, and 8, followed by 360 mg self-administered by subcutaneous injection at week 12, and every 8 weeks thereafter.

Risankizumab is already approved in the United States for the treatment of adults with active psoriatic arthritis and moderate to severe plaque psoriasis.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

 The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved risankizumab-rzaa (Skyrizi, AbbVie) for a third indication – treatment of moderately to severely active Crohn’s disease in adults – making it the first specific anti–interleukin-23 monoclonal antibody indicated for Crohn’s disease.

The safety and efficacy of risankizumab in Crohn’s disease is supported by data from two induction clinical trials (ADVANCE and MOTIVATE) and one maintenance clinical trial (FORTIFY).

Results of the three studies were presented at the annual scientific meeting of the American College of Gastroenterology in 2021.

“In both the induction and maintenance clinical trials, a significantly greater number of adult patients saw few or no symptoms and a meaningful reduction of visible signs of intestinal inflammation, compared to placebo,” Marla Dubinsky, MD, gastroenterologist with the Mount Sinai Health System and codirector of the IBD Center at Mount Sinai, New York, said in a news release from AbbVie.

“This approval provides health care professionals with a greatly needed additional option for treating the disruptive symptoms of Crohn’s disease,” Dr. Dubinsky said.

For the treatment of Crohn’s disease, risankizumab is dosed at 600 mg administered by intravenous infusion over at least 1 hour at week 0, 4, and 8, followed by 360 mg self-administered by subcutaneous injection at week 12, and every 8 weeks thereafter.

Risankizumab is already approved in the United States for the treatment of adults with active psoriatic arthritis and moderate to severe plaque psoriasis.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

A Florida jury has awarded approximately $7.6 million to a former firefighter who lost the lower portion of his right leg after a doctor’s misdiagnosis, as a story in the Pensacola News Journal indicates.

In September 2016, the former firefighter visited a hospital-affiliated urgent care center after he developed an ache and a blue discoloration in his right leg. Prior to this, the story says, he had been “exposed to the waters of Pensacola Bay,” which might have caused the infection.

At the urgent care center, he was examined by a primary care physician, who diagnosed him with an ankle sprain. Instructed to ice and elevate his leg, the former firefighter was given crutches and sent home.

The following day, still in pain, he visited a local podiatrist, who “immediately suspected ... [the patient] was suffering from an ongoing aggressive bacterial infection.” The podiatrist then arranged for the patient to be seen at a nearby hospital emergency department. There, doctors diagnosed a “necrotizing bacterial infection that need[ed] to be aggressively treated with antibodies and the removal of dead tissue.”

But despite their best efforts to control the infection and remove the necrotized tissue, the doctors eventually had to amputate the patient’s right leg above the knee.

The former firefighter and his wife then sued the primary care physician and the hospital where the physician worked.

After an 8-day civil trial, the jury awarded the plaintiff and his wife $6,805,071 and $787,371, respectively.

“What happened to [my clients] should never have happened,” said the attorney representing the plaintiffs.

The hospital declined to comment to the Pensacola News Journal about the case.

The content contained in this article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reliance on any information provided in this article is solely at your own risk.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

A Florida jury has awarded approximately $7.6 million to a former firefighter who lost the lower portion of his right leg after a doctor’s misdiagnosis, as a story in the Pensacola News Journal indicates.

In September 2016, the former firefighter visited a hospital-affiliated urgent care center after he developed an ache and a blue discoloration in his right leg. Prior to this, the story says, he had been “exposed to the waters of Pensacola Bay,” which might have caused the infection.

At the urgent care center, he was examined by a primary care physician, who diagnosed him with an ankle sprain. Instructed to ice and elevate his leg, the former firefighter was given crutches and sent home.

The following day, still in pain, he visited a local podiatrist, who “immediately suspected ... [the patient] was suffering from an ongoing aggressive bacterial infection.” The podiatrist then arranged for the patient to be seen at a nearby hospital emergency department. There, doctors diagnosed a “necrotizing bacterial infection that need[ed] to be aggressively treated with antibodies and the removal of dead tissue.”

But despite their best efforts to control the infection and remove the necrotized tissue, the doctors eventually had to amputate the patient’s right leg above the knee.

The former firefighter and his wife then sued the primary care physician and the hospital where the physician worked.

After an 8-day civil trial, the jury awarded the plaintiff and his wife $6,805,071 and $787,371, respectively.

“What happened to [my clients] should never have happened,” said the attorney representing the plaintiffs.

The hospital declined to comment to the Pensacola News Journal about the case.

The content contained in this article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reliance on any information provided in this article is solely at your own risk.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

A Florida jury has awarded approximately $7.6 million to a former firefighter who lost the lower portion of his right leg after a doctor’s misdiagnosis, as a story in the Pensacola News Journal indicates.

In September 2016, the former firefighter visited a hospital-affiliated urgent care center after he developed an ache and a blue discoloration in his right leg. Prior to this, the story says, he had been “exposed to the waters of Pensacola Bay,” which might have caused the infection.

At the urgent care center, he was examined by a primary care physician, who diagnosed him with an ankle sprain. Instructed to ice and elevate his leg, the former firefighter was given crutches and sent home.

The following day, still in pain, he visited a local podiatrist, who “immediately suspected ... [the patient] was suffering from an ongoing aggressive bacterial infection.” The podiatrist then arranged for the patient to be seen at a nearby hospital emergency department. There, doctors diagnosed a “necrotizing bacterial infection that need[ed] to be aggressively treated with antibodies and the removal of dead tissue.”

But despite their best efforts to control the infection and remove the necrotized tissue, the doctors eventually had to amputate the patient’s right leg above the knee.

The former firefighter and his wife then sued the primary care physician and the hospital where the physician worked.

After an 8-day civil trial, the jury awarded the plaintiff and his wife $6,805,071 and $787,371, respectively.

“What happened to [my clients] should never have happened,” said the attorney representing the plaintiffs.

The hospital declined to comment to the Pensacola News Journal about the case.

The content contained in this article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reliance on any information provided in this article is solely at your own risk.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Simone Gold, MD, JD, a leader in the anti-vaccine movement and founder of noted anti-vaccine group America’s Frontline Doctors, has been sentenced to 2 months in prison for her role in the storming of the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.

In March, the former emergency room physician pleaded guilty to unlawfully and knowingly entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds. As a part of the plea agreement, additional charges of obstructing an official proceeding and intent to disrupt the orderly conduct of government business were dropped. Although she insisted at the time that her actions were peaceful, Dr. Gold did admit, according to news reports, that she witnessed the assault of a police officer while inside the building.

America’s Frontline Doctors is an organization noted for spreading misinformation about COVID-19 and promoting unproven and potentially dangerous drugs, including ivermectin, for treating the illness. The group issued a statement saying that while Dr. Gold did express regret for “being involved in a situation that later became unpredictable,” her sentence is an example of “selective prosecution.”

“Dr. Gold remains committed to her advocacy for physicians’ free speech,” the statement noted, adding that Dr. Gold has been targeted by attacks attempting to “cancel” her since July 2020, when the California Medical Board threatened to revoke her license for what the statement calls an “unfounded claim” that she was sharing dangerous disinformation.

According to Associated Press reporting, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper did not consider Dr. Gold’s anti-vaccine activity when determining the sentence. However, Judge Cooper did say that Dr. Gold was not a “casual bystander” on January 6 and criticized the organization for misleading its supporters into believing that her prosecution was a politically motivated violation of her free-speech rights.

Prosecutors accused Dr. Gold of trying to profit from her crime, according to AP reports, noting in a court filing that America’s Frontline Doctors has raised more than $430,000 for her defense. “It beggars belief that [Dr.] Gold could have incurred anywhere near $430,000 in costs for her criminal defense: After all, she pleaded guilty – in the face of indisputable evidence – without filing a single motion.”

In the past, Dr. Gold has worked at Providence St. Joseph Medical Center, Santa Monica, Calif., and Cedars-Sinai, Los Angeles. These institutions have disassociated themselves from her. Her medical license remains active, but she noted on her website that she “voluntarily refused” to renew her board certification last year “due to the unethical behavior of the medical boards.” Dr. Gold is also a licensed attorney, having earned a law degree in health policy analysis at Stanford Law School.

The AP reports that since her arrest, Dr. Gold has moved from California to Florida.

In addition to the prison time, Judge Cooper ordered Dr. Gold to pay a $9,500 fine, and she will be subject to 12 months of supervised release after completing her sentence, according to media reports. At press time, the U.S. Department of Justice has not released an official announcement on the sentencing.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Simone Gold, MD, JD, a leader in the anti-vaccine movement and founder of noted anti-vaccine group America’s Frontline Doctors, has been sentenced to 2 months in prison for her role in the storming of the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.

In March, the former emergency room physician pleaded guilty to unlawfully and knowingly entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds. As a part of the plea agreement, additional charges of obstructing an official proceeding and intent to disrupt the orderly conduct of government business were dropped. Although she insisted at the time that her actions were peaceful, Dr. Gold did admit, according to news reports, that she witnessed the assault of a police officer while inside the building.

America’s Frontline Doctors is an organization noted for spreading misinformation about COVID-19 and promoting unproven and potentially dangerous drugs, including ivermectin, for treating the illness. The group issued a statement saying that while Dr. Gold did express regret for “being involved in a situation that later became unpredictable,” her sentence is an example of “selective prosecution.”

“Dr. Gold remains committed to her advocacy for physicians’ free speech,” the statement noted, adding that Dr. Gold has been targeted by attacks attempting to “cancel” her since July 2020, when the California Medical Board threatened to revoke her license for what the statement calls an “unfounded claim” that she was sharing dangerous disinformation.

According to Associated Press reporting, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper did not consider Dr. Gold’s anti-vaccine activity when determining the sentence. However, Judge Cooper did say that Dr. Gold was not a “casual bystander” on January 6 and criticized the organization for misleading its supporters into believing that her prosecution was a politically motivated violation of her free-speech rights.

Prosecutors accused Dr. Gold of trying to profit from her crime, according to AP reports, noting in a court filing that America’s Frontline Doctors has raised more than $430,000 for her defense. “It beggars belief that [Dr.] Gold could have incurred anywhere near $430,000 in costs for her criminal defense: After all, she pleaded guilty – in the face of indisputable evidence – without filing a single motion.”

In the past, Dr. Gold has worked at Providence St. Joseph Medical Center, Santa Monica, Calif., and Cedars-Sinai, Los Angeles. These institutions have disassociated themselves from her. Her medical license remains active, but she noted on her website that she “voluntarily refused” to renew her board certification last year “due to the unethical behavior of the medical boards.” Dr. Gold is also a licensed attorney, having earned a law degree in health policy analysis at Stanford Law School.

The AP reports that since her arrest, Dr. Gold has moved from California to Florida.

In addition to the prison time, Judge Cooper ordered Dr. Gold to pay a $9,500 fine, and she will be subject to 12 months of supervised release after completing her sentence, according to media reports. At press time, the U.S. Department of Justice has not released an official announcement on the sentencing.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Simone Gold, MD, JD, a leader in the anti-vaccine movement and founder of noted anti-vaccine group America’s Frontline Doctors, has been sentenced to 2 months in prison for her role in the storming of the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.

In March, the former emergency room physician pleaded guilty to unlawfully and knowingly entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds. As a part of the plea agreement, additional charges of obstructing an official proceeding and intent to disrupt the orderly conduct of government business were dropped. Although she insisted at the time that her actions were peaceful, Dr. Gold did admit, according to news reports, that she witnessed the assault of a police officer while inside the building.

America’s Frontline Doctors is an organization noted for spreading misinformation about COVID-19 and promoting unproven and potentially dangerous drugs, including ivermectin, for treating the illness. The group issued a statement saying that while Dr. Gold did express regret for “being involved in a situation that later became unpredictable,” her sentence is an example of “selective prosecution.”

“Dr. Gold remains committed to her advocacy for physicians’ free speech,” the statement noted, adding that Dr. Gold has been targeted by attacks attempting to “cancel” her since July 2020, when the California Medical Board threatened to revoke her license for what the statement calls an “unfounded claim” that she was sharing dangerous disinformation.

According to Associated Press reporting, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper did not consider Dr. Gold’s anti-vaccine activity when determining the sentence. However, Judge Cooper did say that Dr. Gold was not a “casual bystander” on January 6 and criticized the organization for misleading its supporters into believing that her prosecution was a politically motivated violation of her free-speech rights.

Prosecutors accused Dr. Gold of trying to profit from her crime, according to AP reports, noting in a court filing that America’s Frontline Doctors has raised more than $430,000 for her defense. “It beggars belief that [Dr.] Gold could have incurred anywhere near $430,000 in costs for her criminal defense: After all, she pleaded guilty – in the face of indisputable evidence – without filing a single motion.”

In the past, Dr. Gold has worked at Providence St. Joseph Medical Center, Santa Monica, Calif., and Cedars-Sinai, Los Angeles. These institutions have disassociated themselves from her. Her medical license remains active, but she noted on her website that she “voluntarily refused” to renew her board certification last year “due to the unethical behavior of the medical boards.” Dr. Gold is also a licensed attorney, having earned a law degree in health policy analysis at Stanford Law School.

The AP reports that since her arrest, Dr. Gold has moved from California to Florida.

In addition to the prison time, Judge Cooper ordered Dr. Gold to pay a $9,500 fine, and she will be subject to 12 months of supervised release after completing her sentence, according to media reports. At press time, the U.S. Department of Justice has not released an official announcement on the sentencing.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Individuals with diabetes who experience COVID-19 are at increased risk for long COVID compared to individuals without diabetes, according to data from a literature review of seven studies.

Diabetes remains a risk factor for severe COVID-19, but whether it is a risk factor for postacute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC), also known as long COVID, remains unclear, Jessica L. Harding, PhD, of Emory University, said in a late-breaking poster session at the annual scientific sessions of the American Diabetes Association.

Long COVID is generally defined as “sequelae that extend beyond the 4 weeks after initial infection” and may include a range of symptoms that affect multiple organs, Dr. Harding said. A study conducted in January of 2022 suggested that type 2 diabetes was one of several strong risk factors for long COVID, she noted.

Dr. Harding and colleagues reviewed data from seven studies published from Jan. 1, 2020, to Jan. 27, 2022, on the risk of PASC in people with and without diabetes. The studies included patients with a minimum of 4 weeks’ follow-up after COVID-19 diagnosis. All seven studies had a longitudinal cohort design, and included adults from high-income countries, with study populations ranging from 104 to 4,182.

Across the studies, long COVID definitions varied, but included ongoing symptoms of fatigue, cough, and dyspnea, with follow-up periods of 4 weeks to 7 months.

Overall, three of the seven studies indicated that diabetes was a risk factor for long COVID (odds ratio [OR] greater than 4 for all) and four studies indicated that diabetes was not a risk factor for long COVID (OR, 0.5-2.2).

One of the three studies showing increased risk included 2,334 individuals hospitalized with COVID-19; of these about 5% had diabetes. The odds ratio for PASC for individuals with diabetes was 4.18. In another study of 209 persons with COVID-19, of whom 22% had diabetes, diabetes was significantly correlated with respiratory viral disease (meaning at least two respiratory symptoms). The third study showing an increased risk of long COVID in diabetes patients included 104 kidney transplant patients, of whom 20% had diabetes; the odds ratio for PASC was 4.42.

The findings were limited by several factors, including the relatively small number of studies and the heterogeneity of studies regarding definitions of long COVID, specific populations at risk, follow-up times, and risk adjustment, Dr. Harding noted.

More high-quality studies across multiple populations and settings are needed to determine if diabetes is indeed a risk factor for long COVID, she said.

In the meantime, “careful monitoring of people with diabetes for development of PASC may be advised,” Dr. Harding concluded.
 

Findings support need for screening

“Given the devastating impact of COVID on people with diabetes, it’s important to know what data has been accumulated on long COVID for future research and discoveries in this area,” Robert A. Gabbay, MD, chief science and medical officer for the American Diabetes Association, said in an interview. “The more information we have, the better we can understand the implications.”

Courtesy Joslin Diabetes Center

Dr. Gabbay said he was surprised by the current study findings. “We know very little on this subject, so yes, I am surprised to see just how significant the risk of long COVID for people with diabetes seems to be, but clearly, more research needs to be done to understand long COVID,” he emphasized.

The take-home message for clinicians is the importance of screening patients for PASC; also “ask your patients if they had COVID, to better understand any symptoms they might have that could be related to PACS,” he noted. 

“It is crucial that we confirm these results and then look at risk factors in people with diabetes that might explain who is at highest risk and ultimately understand the causes and potential cure,” Dr. Gabbay added.

The study was supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Dr. Harding and Dr. Gabbay had no financial conflicts to disclose.

Individuals with diabetes who experience COVID-19 are at increased risk for long COVID compared to individuals without diabetes, according to data from a literature review of seven studies.

Diabetes remains a risk factor for severe COVID-19, but whether it is a risk factor for postacute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC), also known as long COVID, remains unclear, Jessica L. Harding, PhD, of Emory University, said in a late-breaking poster session at the annual scientific sessions of the American Diabetes Association.

Long COVID is generally defined as “sequelae that extend beyond the 4 weeks after initial infection” and may include a range of symptoms that affect multiple organs, Dr. Harding said. A study conducted in January of 2022 suggested that type 2 diabetes was one of several strong risk factors for long COVID, she noted.

Dr. Harding and colleagues reviewed data from seven studies published from Jan. 1, 2020, to Jan. 27, 2022, on the risk of PASC in people with and without diabetes. The studies included patients with a minimum of 4 weeks’ follow-up after COVID-19 diagnosis. All seven studies had a longitudinal cohort design, and included adults from high-income countries, with study populations ranging from 104 to 4,182.

Across the studies, long COVID definitions varied, but included ongoing symptoms of fatigue, cough, and dyspnea, with follow-up periods of 4 weeks to 7 months.

Overall, three of the seven studies indicated that diabetes was a risk factor for long COVID (odds ratio [OR] greater than 4 for all) and four studies indicated that diabetes was not a risk factor for long COVID (OR, 0.5-2.2).

One of the three studies showing increased risk included 2,334 individuals hospitalized with COVID-19; of these about 5% had diabetes. The odds ratio for PASC for individuals with diabetes was 4.18. In another study of 209 persons with COVID-19, of whom 22% had diabetes, diabetes was significantly correlated with respiratory viral disease (meaning at least two respiratory symptoms). The third study showing an increased risk of long COVID in diabetes patients included 104 kidney transplant patients, of whom 20% had diabetes; the odds ratio for PASC was 4.42.

The findings were limited by several factors, including the relatively small number of studies and the heterogeneity of studies regarding definitions of long COVID, specific populations at risk, follow-up times, and risk adjustment, Dr. Harding noted.

More high-quality studies across multiple populations and settings are needed to determine if diabetes is indeed a risk factor for long COVID, she said.

In the meantime, “careful monitoring of people with diabetes for development of PASC may be advised,” Dr. Harding concluded.
 

Findings support need for screening

“Given the devastating impact of COVID on people with diabetes, it’s important to know what data has been accumulated on long COVID for future research and discoveries in this area,” Robert A. Gabbay, MD, chief science and medical officer for the American Diabetes Association, said in an interview. “The more information we have, the better we can understand the implications.”

Courtesy Joslin Diabetes Center

Dr. Gabbay said he was surprised by the current study findings. “We know very little on this subject, so yes, I am surprised to see just how significant the risk of long COVID for people with diabetes seems to be, but clearly, more research needs to be done to understand long COVID,” he emphasized.

The take-home message for clinicians is the importance of screening patients for PASC; also “ask your patients if they had COVID, to better understand any symptoms they might have that could be related to PACS,” he noted. 

“It is crucial that we confirm these results and then look at risk factors in people with diabetes that might explain who is at highest risk and ultimately understand the causes and potential cure,” Dr. Gabbay added.

The study was supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Dr. Harding and Dr. Gabbay had no financial conflicts to disclose.

Individuals with diabetes who experience COVID-19 are at increased risk for long COVID compared to individuals without diabetes, according to data from a literature review of seven studies.

Diabetes remains a risk factor for severe COVID-19, but whether it is a risk factor for postacute sequelae of COVID-19 (PASC), also known as long COVID, remains unclear, Jessica L. Harding, PhD, of Emory University, said in a late-breaking poster session at the annual scientific sessions of the American Diabetes Association.

Long COVID is generally defined as “sequelae that extend beyond the 4 weeks after initial infection” and may include a range of symptoms that affect multiple organs, Dr. Harding said. A study conducted in January of 2022 suggested that type 2 diabetes was one of several strong risk factors for long COVID, she noted.

Dr. Harding and colleagues reviewed data from seven studies published from Jan. 1, 2020, to Jan. 27, 2022, on the risk of PASC in people with and without diabetes. The studies included patients with a minimum of 4 weeks’ follow-up after COVID-19 diagnosis. All seven studies had a longitudinal cohort design, and included adults from high-income countries, with study populations ranging from 104 to 4,182.

Across the studies, long COVID definitions varied, but included ongoing symptoms of fatigue, cough, and dyspnea, with follow-up periods of 4 weeks to 7 months.

Overall, three of the seven studies indicated that diabetes was a risk factor for long COVID (odds ratio [OR] greater than 4 for all) and four studies indicated that diabetes was not a risk factor for long COVID (OR, 0.5-2.2).

One of the three studies showing increased risk included 2,334 individuals hospitalized with COVID-19; of these about 5% had diabetes. The odds ratio for PASC for individuals with diabetes was 4.18. In another study of 209 persons with COVID-19, of whom 22% had diabetes, diabetes was significantly correlated with respiratory viral disease (meaning at least two respiratory symptoms). The third study showing an increased risk of long COVID in diabetes patients included 104 kidney transplant patients, of whom 20% had diabetes; the odds ratio for PASC was 4.42.

The findings were limited by several factors, including the relatively small number of studies and the heterogeneity of studies regarding definitions of long COVID, specific populations at risk, follow-up times, and risk adjustment, Dr. Harding noted.

More high-quality studies across multiple populations and settings are needed to determine if diabetes is indeed a risk factor for long COVID, she said.

In the meantime, “careful monitoring of people with diabetes for development of PASC may be advised,” Dr. Harding concluded.
 

Findings support need for screening

“Given the devastating impact of COVID on people with diabetes, it’s important to know what data has been accumulated on long COVID for future research and discoveries in this area,” Robert A. Gabbay, MD, chief science and medical officer for the American Diabetes Association, said in an interview. “The more information we have, the better we can understand the implications.”

Courtesy Joslin Diabetes Center

Dr. Gabbay said he was surprised by the current study findings. “We know very little on this subject, so yes, I am surprised to see just how significant the risk of long COVID for people with diabetes seems to be, but clearly, more research needs to be done to understand long COVID,” he emphasized.

The take-home message for clinicians is the importance of screening patients for PASC; also “ask your patients if they had COVID, to better understand any symptoms they might have that could be related to PACS,” he noted. 

“It is crucial that we confirm these results and then look at risk factors in people with diabetes that might explain who is at highest risk and ultimately understand the causes and potential cure,” Dr. Gabbay added.

The study was supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Dr. Harding and Dr. Gabbay had no financial conflicts to disclose.

High levels of eosinophils had a protective effect for individuals who experienced acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, based on data from nearly 1,000 patients.

Several blood biomarkers are under investigation for links to acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD), which remains one of the top three causes of death worldwide, wrote Riuying Wang, MD, of Third Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, China, and colleagues.

“Numerous studies have shown the relationship between eosinophilia and clinical outcomes of patients with AECOPD. However, the evidence lacks consensus, and the research thresholds are controversial,” they said.

In a study published in Heart & Lung, the researchers reviewed data from 984 adults with AECOPD over a 3-year follow-up period. The mean age of the patients was 71 years, and 78% were men. The patients’ blood eosinophil levels were grouped into three categories: EOS < 2%, EOS from 2% to < 3%, and 3% or higher. The researchers examined the association between eosinophilia and various comorbidities, treatment, and mortality.

Eosinophilia occurred in 477 cases. The prevalence of eosinophilia in the three groups was 36.48%, 22.87%, and 48.48% respectively, with eosinophilia defined as eosinophil counts of at least 100 cells per microliter, according to the report in Heart & Lung.

An EOS of 2% or higher was associated with significantly fewer cases of complicated pulmonary heart disease and atrial fibrillation than the lower EOS group. Similarly, patients in the EOS group of 2% or higher were less likely to use ventilators and systemic glucocorticoids and those in the EOS less than 2% group had significantly heavier airflow limitation, higher D-dimer, higher burden of infectious inflammation, and higher prevalence of respiratory failure than the other groups.

In addition, significantly fewer deaths occurred during the study period among patients with EOS of 2% or higher, compared with the lower EOS group (P < .01). The findings suggest that “Eosinophils can be used as a prognostic indicator of mortality in AECOPD,” the researchers said.

The researchers also used the area under the curve to examine the predictive value of EOS. The ROC curve showed that the indicators of AUC 0.5 included chest CT imaging, osteoporosis, mental illness, dust exposure, and being a former smoker; however, “the predictive value of EOS by the ROC curve was unstable. Further validation in large samples is needed,” the researchers wrote in their discussion.

The study findings were limited by several factors including the retrospective design and use of data from a single center, the researchers noted. Other limitations included the relatively small sample size and a lack of data on some clinical features and performance metrics, as well as lack of evaluation of chest CT subtypes.

However, the results are consistent with previous studies on infection and antibiotics and reviewed the optimal threshold of AECOPD, the researchers wrote. Based on their findings, “Eosinophils can not only guide clinical treatment but also be used as an index to predict the clinical outcome and prognosis of AECOPD patients,” they concluded.

The study received no outside funding. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.

High levels of eosinophils had a protective effect for individuals who experienced acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, based on data from nearly 1,000 patients.

Several blood biomarkers are under investigation for links to acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD), which remains one of the top three causes of death worldwide, wrote Riuying Wang, MD, of Third Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, China, and colleagues.

“Numerous studies have shown the relationship between eosinophilia and clinical outcomes of patients with AECOPD. However, the evidence lacks consensus, and the research thresholds are controversial,” they said.

In a study published in Heart & Lung, the researchers reviewed data from 984 adults with AECOPD over a 3-year follow-up period. The mean age of the patients was 71 years, and 78% were men. The patients’ blood eosinophil levels were grouped into three categories: EOS < 2%, EOS from 2% to < 3%, and 3% or higher. The researchers examined the association between eosinophilia and various comorbidities, treatment, and mortality.

Eosinophilia occurred in 477 cases. The prevalence of eosinophilia in the three groups was 36.48%, 22.87%, and 48.48% respectively, with eosinophilia defined as eosinophil counts of at least 100 cells per microliter, according to the report in Heart & Lung.

An EOS of 2% or higher was associated with significantly fewer cases of complicated pulmonary heart disease and atrial fibrillation than the lower EOS group. Similarly, patients in the EOS group of 2% or higher were less likely to use ventilators and systemic glucocorticoids and those in the EOS less than 2% group had significantly heavier airflow limitation, higher D-dimer, higher burden of infectious inflammation, and higher prevalence of respiratory failure than the other groups.

In addition, significantly fewer deaths occurred during the study period among patients with EOS of 2% or higher, compared with the lower EOS group (P < .01). The findings suggest that “Eosinophils can be used as a prognostic indicator of mortality in AECOPD,” the researchers said.

The researchers also used the area under the curve to examine the predictive value of EOS. The ROC curve showed that the indicators of AUC 0.5 included chest CT imaging, osteoporosis, mental illness, dust exposure, and being a former smoker; however, “the predictive value of EOS by the ROC curve was unstable. Further validation in large samples is needed,” the researchers wrote in their discussion.

The study findings were limited by several factors including the retrospective design and use of data from a single center, the researchers noted. Other limitations included the relatively small sample size and a lack of data on some clinical features and performance metrics, as well as lack of evaluation of chest CT subtypes.

However, the results are consistent with previous studies on infection and antibiotics and reviewed the optimal threshold of AECOPD, the researchers wrote. Based on their findings, “Eosinophils can not only guide clinical treatment but also be used as an index to predict the clinical outcome and prognosis of AECOPD patients,” they concluded.

The study received no outside funding. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.

High levels of eosinophils had a protective effect for individuals who experienced acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, based on data from nearly 1,000 patients.

Several blood biomarkers are under investigation for links to acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD), which remains one of the top three causes of death worldwide, wrote Riuying Wang, MD, of Third Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, China, and colleagues.

“Numerous studies have shown the relationship between eosinophilia and clinical outcomes of patients with AECOPD. However, the evidence lacks consensus, and the research thresholds are controversial,” they said.

In a study published in Heart & Lung, the researchers reviewed data from 984 adults with AECOPD over a 3-year follow-up period. The mean age of the patients was 71 years, and 78% were men. The patients’ blood eosinophil levels were grouped into three categories: EOS < 2%, EOS from 2% to < 3%, and 3% or higher. The researchers examined the association between eosinophilia and various comorbidities, treatment, and mortality.

Eosinophilia occurred in 477 cases. The prevalence of eosinophilia in the three groups was 36.48%, 22.87%, and 48.48% respectively, with eosinophilia defined as eosinophil counts of at least 100 cells per microliter, according to the report in Heart & Lung.

An EOS of 2% or higher was associated with significantly fewer cases of complicated pulmonary heart disease and atrial fibrillation than the lower EOS group. Similarly, patients in the EOS group of 2% or higher were less likely to use ventilators and systemic glucocorticoids and those in the EOS less than 2% group had significantly heavier airflow limitation, higher D-dimer, higher burden of infectious inflammation, and higher prevalence of respiratory failure than the other groups.

In addition, significantly fewer deaths occurred during the study period among patients with EOS of 2% or higher, compared with the lower EOS group (P < .01). The findings suggest that “Eosinophils can be used as a prognostic indicator of mortality in AECOPD,” the researchers said.

The researchers also used the area under the curve to examine the predictive value of EOS. The ROC curve showed that the indicators of AUC 0.5 included chest CT imaging, osteoporosis, mental illness, dust exposure, and being a former smoker; however, “the predictive value of EOS by the ROC curve was unstable. Further validation in large samples is needed,” the researchers wrote in their discussion.

The study findings were limited by several factors including the retrospective design and use of data from a single center, the researchers noted. Other limitations included the relatively small sample size and a lack of data on some clinical features and performance metrics, as well as lack of evaluation of chest CT subtypes.

However, the results are consistent with previous studies on infection and antibiotics and reviewed the optimal threshold of AECOPD, the researchers wrote. Based on their findings, “Eosinophils can not only guide clinical treatment but also be used as an index to predict the clinical outcome and prognosis of AECOPD patients,” they concluded.

The study received no outside funding. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.

Ventricular arrhythmias more commonly occur on days when there are higher levels of air pollution, especially with fine particulate matter (PM), a new study suggests.

The investigators studied the relationship between air pollution and ventricular arrhythmias in Piacenza, Italy by examining 5-year data on patients who received an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD).

Thomas321/iStock/Getty Images Plus

They found a significant association between PM2.5 levels and ventricular arrhythmias, especially those treated with direct current shock. Moreover, higher levels of PM2.5 and PM10 were associated with increased risk of all ventricular arrhythmias.

“These data confirm that environmental pollution is not only a climate emergency but also a public health problem,” lead author Alessia Zanni, currently at Maggiore Hospital, Bologna, Italy, and previously at Piacenza Hospital, said in an interview.

“The study suggests that the survival of patients with heart disease is affected not only by pharmacological therapies and advances in cardiology, but also by the air that they breathe,” she said.

The results were presented at European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure 2022.
 

More ED visits

The World Health Organization estimates around 7 million people die every year from exposure to polluted air, “as 91% of the world’s population lives in areas where air contaminants exceed safety levels,” Dr. Zanni said. Furthermore, “air pollution has been defined as the fourth-highest ranking risk factor for mortality – more important than LDL cholesterol, obesity, physical activity, or alcohol use.”

She noted that Piacenza has “historically been very attentive to the issues of early defibrillation and cardiac arrest.” Her group had previously found a correlation between out-of-hospital cardiac arrests and air pollution in the general population.

Moreover, her group recently observed that ED visits for patients with ICDs “tended to cluster; on some special days, many patients with ICDs had cardiac arrhythmias, and during those days, air pollution levels were particularly high.”

Her group therefore decided to compare the concentration of air pollutants on days when patients suffered from an arrhythmia event versus pollution levels on days without an arrhythmia, she said.
 

Further piece in a complex puzzle

The researchers studied 146 patients with ICDs between January 2013 and December 2017, assigning exposures (short, mid, and long term) to these patients based on their residential addresses.

They extracted day-by-day urban PM10, PM2.5, CO, NO₂, and O₃ levels from the Environmental Protection Agency monitoring stations and then, using time-stratified case-crossover analysis methodology, they calculated the association of ventricular arrhythmia onset with 0- to 7-day moving averages of the various air pollutants prior to the event.

Patients had received their ICD to control cardiac dysfunction brought on by previous myocardial infarction (n = 93), genetic or inflammatory conditions (n = 53), secondary prevention after a lethal arrhythmia (n = 67), and primary prevention (n = 79).

Of the 440 ventricular arrhythmias recorded, 322 were treated with antitachycardia pacing, while the remaining 118 were treated with direct current shock.

The researchers found a significant association between PM2.5 levels and ventricular arrhythmia treated with shock, corresponding to a 15% increased risk or every additional 10mg/m³ (P < .019).

They also found that, when PM2.5 concentrations were elevated by 1 mg/m³ for an entire week, compared with average levels, there was a 2.4% higher likelihood of ventricular arrhythmias, regardless of the temperature, and when PM10 was 1 mg/m³ above average for a week, there was a 2.1% increased risk for arrhythmias (odds ratio, 1,024; 95% confidence interval, 1,009-1,040] and OR, 1,021; 95% CI, 1,009-1,033, respectively), Dr. Zanni reported.

“Since the majority of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest causes still remain unclear, our data add a further piece to the complex puzzle of cardiac arrest triggers,” Dr. Zanni commented. “We think that particulate matter can cause acute inflammation of the heart muscle and potentially act as a trigger for lethal cardiac arrhythmias.

“As these toxic particles are emitted from power plants, industries, and cars, we think that cardiovascular research should highlight these new findings to promote green projects among the general population, clarifying the risks to the health of the human being, and we think strategies to prevent air pollutant exposure in high-risk patients [with previous cardiac disease] should be developed,” she added.

Further, “we advise patients at risk, during days with high PM2.5 (> 35 mg/m³) and PM10 (> 50 mg/m³) to use a mask of the N95 type outdoors, to reduce time spent outdoors – particularly in traffic – and to improve home air filtration,” Dr. Zanni said.
 

Entering the mainstream

In a comment, Joel Kaufman, MD, MPH, professor of internal medicine and environmental health, University of Washington, Seattle, said the study “adds to a fairly substantial literature already on this topic of short-term exposure to air pollution.”

The evidence that air pollutants “can be a trigger of worsening of cardiovascular disease is fairly consistent at this time, and although the effect sizes are small, they are consistent,” said Dr. Kaufman, who was the chair of the writing group for the American Heart Association’s 2020 policy statement, “Guidance to Reduce Cardiovascular Burden of Ambient Air Pollutants.”

“The research into this issue has become clearer during the past 10 years but still is not in the mainstream of most cardiologists’ awareness. They tend to focus more on controlling cholesterol and performing procedures, etc., but there are modifiable risk factors like air pollution that are increasingly recognized as being part of the picture,” said Dr. Kaufman, who was not involved with the current study.

Dr. Zanni added: “It is important that politics work hand in hand with the scientific community in order to win the battle against global warming, which will reduce the number of cardiovascular deaths – the leading cause of death worldwide – as well as environmental integrity.”

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. Dr. Zanni and coauthors and Dr. Kaufman reported no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Ventricular arrhythmias more commonly occur on days when there are higher levels of air pollution, especially with fine particulate matter (PM), a new study suggests.

The investigators studied the relationship between air pollution and ventricular arrhythmias in Piacenza, Italy by examining 5-year data on patients who received an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD).

Thomas321/iStock/Getty Images Plus

They found a significant association between PM2.5 levels and ventricular arrhythmias, especially those treated with direct current shock. Moreover, higher levels of PM2.5 and PM10 were associated with increased risk of all ventricular arrhythmias.

“These data confirm that environmental pollution is not only a climate emergency but also a public health problem,” lead author Alessia Zanni, currently at Maggiore Hospital, Bologna, Italy, and previously at Piacenza Hospital, said in an interview.

“The study suggests that the survival of patients with heart disease is affected not only by pharmacological therapies and advances in cardiology, but also by the air that they breathe,” she said.

The results were presented at European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure 2022.
 

More ED visits

The World Health Organization estimates around 7 million people die every year from exposure to polluted air, “as 91% of the world’s population lives in areas where air contaminants exceed safety levels,” Dr. Zanni said. Furthermore, “air pollution has been defined as the fourth-highest ranking risk factor for mortality – more important than LDL cholesterol, obesity, physical activity, or alcohol use.”

She noted that Piacenza has “historically been very attentive to the issues of early defibrillation and cardiac arrest.” Her group had previously found a correlation between out-of-hospital cardiac arrests and air pollution in the general population.

Moreover, her group recently observed that ED visits for patients with ICDs “tended to cluster; on some special days, many patients with ICDs had cardiac arrhythmias, and during those days, air pollution levels were particularly high.”

Her group therefore decided to compare the concentration of air pollutants on days when patients suffered from an arrhythmia event versus pollution levels on days without an arrhythmia, she said.
 

Further piece in a complex puzzle

The researchers studied 146 patients with ICDs between January 2013 and December 2017, assigning exposures (short, mid, and long term) to these patients based on their residential addresses.

They extracted day-by-day urban PM10, PM2.5, CO, NO₂, and O₃ levels from the Environmental Protection Agency monitoring stations and then, using time-stratified case-crossover analysis methodology, they calculated the association of ventricular arrhythmia onset with 0- to 7-day moving averages of the various air pollutants prior to the event.

Patients had received their ICD to control cardiac dysfunction brought on by previous myocardial infarction (n = 93), genetic or inflammatory conditions (n = 53), secondary prevention after a lethal arrhythmia (n = 67), and primary prevention (n = 79).

Of the 440 ventricular arrhythmias recorded, 322 were treated with antitachycardia pacing, while the remaining 118 were treated with direct current shock.

The researchers found a significant association between PM2.5 levels and ventricular arrhythmia treated with shock, corresponding to a 15% increased risk or every additional 10mg/m³ (P < .019).

They also found that, when PM2.5 concentrations were elevated by 1 mg/m³ for an entire week, compared with average levels, there was a 2.4% higher likelihood of ventricular arrhythmias, regardless of the temperature, and when PM10 was 1 mg/m³ above average for a week, there was a 2.1% increased risk for arrhythmias (odds ratio, 1,024; 95% confidence interval, 1,009-1,040] and OR, 1,021; 95% CI, 1,009-1,033, respectively), Dr. Zanni reported.

“Since the majority of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest causes still remain unclear, our data add a further piece to the complex puzzle of cardiac arrest triggers,” Dr. Zanni commented. “We think that particulate matter can cause acute inflammation of the heart muscle and potentially act as a trigger for lethal cardiac arrhythmias.

“As these toxic particles are emitted from power plants, industries, and cars, we think that cardiovascular research should highlight these new findings to promote green projects among the general population, clarifying the risks to the health of the human being, and we think strategies to prevent air pollutant exposure in high-risk patients [with previous cardiac disease] should be developed,” she added.

Further, “we advise patients at risk, during days with high PM2.5 (> 35 mg/m³) and PM10 (> 50 mg/m³) to use a mask of the N95 type outdoors, to reduce time spent outdoors – particularly in traffic – and to improve home air filtration,” Dr. Zanni said.
 

Entering the mainstream

In a comment, Joel Kaufman, MD, MPH, professor of internal medicine and environmental health, University of Washington, Seattle, said the study “adds to a fairly substantial literature already on this topic of short-term exposure to air pollution.”

The evidence that air pollutants “can be a trigger of worsening of cardiovascular disease is fairly consistent at this time, and although the effect sizes are small, they are consistent,” said Dr. Kaufman, who was the chair of the writing group for the American Heart Association’s 2020 policy statement, “Guidance to Reduce Cardiovascular Burden of Ambient Air Pollutants.”

“The research into this issue has become clearer during the past 10 years but still is not in the mainstream of most cardiologists’ awareness. They tend to focus more on controlling cholesterol and performing procedures, etc., but there are modifiable risk factors like air pollution that are increasingly recognized as being part of the picture,” said Dr. Kaufman, who was not involved with the current study.

Dr. Zanni added: “It is important that politics work hand in hand with the scientific community in order to win the battle against global warming, which will reduce the number of cardiovascular deaths – the leading cause of death worldwide – as well as environmental integrity.”

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. Dr. Zanni and coauthors and Dr. Kaufman reported no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Ventricular arrhythmias more commonly occur on days when there are higher levels of air pollution, especially with fine particulate matter (PM), a new study suggests.

The investigators studied the relationship between air pollution and ventricular arrhythmias in Piacenza, Italy by examining 5-year data on patients who received an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD).

Thomas321/iStock/Getty Images Plus

They found a significant association between PM2.5 levels and ventricular arrhythmias, especially those treated with direct current shock. Moreover, higher levels of PM2.5 and PM10 were associated with increased risk of all ventricular arrhythmias.

“These data confirm that environmental pollution is not only a climate emergency but also a public health problem,” lead author Alessia Zanni, currently at Maggiore Hospital, Bologna, Italy, and previously at Piacenza Hospital, said in an interview.

“The study suggests that the survival of patients with heart disease is affected not only by pharmacological therapies and advances in cardiology, but also by the air that they breathe,” she said.

The results were presented at European Society of Cardiology Heart Failure 2022.
 

More ED visits

The World Health Organization estimates around 7 million people die every year from exposure to polluted air, “as 91% of the world’s population lives in areas where air contaminants exceed safety levels,” Dr. Zanni said. Furthermore, “air pollution has been defined as the fourth-highest ranking risk factor for mortality – more important than LDL cholesterol, obesity, physical activity, or alcohol use.”

She noted that Piacenza has “historically been very attentive to the issues of early defibrillation and cardiac arrest.” Her group had previously found a correlation between out-of-hospital cardiac arrests and air pollution in the general population.

Moreover, her group recently observed that ED visits for patients with ICDs “tended to cluster; on some special days, many patients with ICDs had cardiac arrhythmias, and during those days, air pollution levels were particularly high.”

Her group therefore decided to compare the concentration of air pollutants on days when patients suffered from an arrhythmia event versus pollution levels on days without an arrhythmia, she said.
 

Further piece in a complex puzzle

The researchers studied 146 patients with ICDs between January 2013 and December 2017, assigning exposures (short, mid, and long term) to these patients based on their residential addresses.

They extracted day-by-day urban PM10, PM2.5, CO, NO₂, and O₃ levels from the Environmental Protection Agency monitoring stations and then, using time-stratified case-crossover analysis methodology, they calculated the association of ventricular arrhythmia onset with 0- to 7-day moving averages of the various air pollutants prior to the event.

Patients had received their ICD to control cardiac dysfunction brought on by previous myocardial infarction (n = 93), genetic or inflammatory conditions (n = 53), secondary prevention after a lethal arrhythmia (n = 67), and primary prevention (n = 79).

Of the 440 ventricular arrhythmias recorded, 322 were treated with antitachycardia pacing, while the remaining 118 were treated with direct current shock.

The researchers found a significant association between PM2.5 levels and ventricular arrhythmia treated with shock, corresponding to a 15% increased risk or every additional 10mg/m³ (P < .019).

They also found that, when PM2.5 concentrations were elevated by 1 mg/m³ for an entire week, compared with average levels, there was a 2.4% higher likelihood of ventricular arrhythmias, regardless of the temperature, and when PM10 was 1 mg/m³ above average for a week, there was a 2.1% increased risk for arrhythmias (odds ratio, 1,024; 95% confidence interval, 1,009-1,040] and OR, 1,021; 95% CI, 1,009-1,033, respectively), Dr. Zanni reported.

“Since the majority of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest causes still remain unclear, our data add a further piece to the complex puzzle of cardiac arrest triggers,” Dr. Zanni commented. “We think that particulate matter can cause acute inflammation of the heart muscle and potentially act as a trigger for lethal cardiac arrhythmias.

“As these toxic particles are emitted from power plants, industries, and cars, we think that cardiovascular research should highlight these new findings to promote green projects among the general population, clarifying the risks to the health of the human being, and we think strategies to prevent air pollutant exposure in high-risk patients [with previous cardiac disease] should be developed,” she added.

Further, “we advise patients at risk, during days with high PM2.5 (> 35 mg/m³) and PM10 (> 50 mg/m³) to use a mask of the N95 type outdoors, to reduce time spent outdoors – particularly in traffic – and to improve home air filtration,” Dr. Zanni said.
 

Entering the mainstream

In a comment, Joel Kaufman, MD, MPH, professor of internal medicine and environmental health, University of Washington, Seattle, said the study “adds to a fairly substantial literature already on this topic of short-term exposure to air pollution.”

The evidence that air pollutants “can be a trigger of worsening of cardiovascular disease is fairly consistent at this time, and although the effect sizes are small, they are consistent,” said Dr. Kaufman, who was the chair of the writing group for the American Heart Association’s 2020 policy statement, “Guidance to Reduce Cardiovascular Burden of Ambient Air Pollutants.”

“The research into this issue has become clearer during the past 10 years but still is not in the mainstream of most cardiologists’ awareness. They tend to focus more on controlling cholesterol and performing procedures, etc., but there are modifiable risk factors like air pollution that are increasingly recognized as being part of the picture,” said Dr. Kaufman, who was not involved with the current study.

Dr. Zanni added: “It is important that politics work hand in hand with the scientific community in order to win the battle against global warming, which will reduce the number of cardiovascular deaths – the leading cause of death worldwide – as well as environmental integrity.”

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. Dr. Zanni and coauthors and Dr. Kaufman reported no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

A small blood sample and 24 hours might be all that’s needed to find out how strong the immune system is against a first or repeat coronavirus infections.

Scientists created a test that indirectly measures T-cell response – an important, long-term component of immunity that can last long after antibody levels fall off – to a challenge by the virus in whole blood.

The test mimics what can be done in a formal laboratory now but avoids some complicated steps and specialized training for lab personnel. This test, researchers said, is faster, can scale up to test many more people, and can be adapted to detect viral mutations as they emerge in the future.

The study explaining how all this works was published online in Nature Biotechnology.

The test, called dqTACT, could help predict the likelihood of “breakthrough” infections in people who are fully vaccinated and could help determine how frequently people who are immunocompromised might need to be revaccinated, the authors noted.

Infection with the coronavirus and other viruses can trigger a one-two punch from the immunity system – a fast antibody response followed by longer-lasting cellular immunity, including T cells, which “remember” the virus. Cellular immunity can trigger a quick response if the same virus ever shows up again.

The new test adds synthetic viral peptides – strings of amino acids that make up proteins – from the coronavirus to a blood sample. If there is no T-cell reaction within 24 hours, the test is negative. If the peptides trigger T cells, the test can measure the strength of the immune response.

The researchers validated the new test against traditional laboratory testing in 91 people, about half of whom never had COVID-19 and another half who were infected and recovered. The results matched well.

They also found the test predicted immune strength up to 8 months following a second dose of COVID-19 vaccine. Furthermore, T-cell response was greater among people who received two doses of a vaccine versus others who received only one immunization.

Studies are ongoing and designed to meet authorization requirements as part of future licensing from the Food and Drug Administration.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

A small blood sample and 24 hours might be all that’s needed to find out how strong the immune system is against a first or repeat coronavirus infections.

Scientists created a test that indirectly measures T-cell response – an important, long-term component of immunity that can last long after antibody levels fall off – to a challenge by the virus in whole blood.

The test mimics what can be done in a formal laboratory now but avoids some complicated steps and specialized training for lab personnel. This test, researchers said, is faster, can scale up to test many more people, and can be adapted to detect viral mutations as they emerge in the future.

The study explaining how all this works was published online in Nature Biotechnology.

The test, called dqTACT, could help predict the likelihood of “breakthrough” infections in people who are fully vaccinated and could help determine how frequently people who are immunocompromised might need to be revaccinated, the authors noted.

Infection with the coronavirus and other viruses can trigger a one-two punch from the immunity system – a fast antibody response followed by longer-lasting cellular immunity, including T cells, which “remember” the virus. Cellular immunity can trigger a quick response if the same virus ever shows up again.

The new test adds synthetic viral peptides – strings of amino acids that make up proteins – from the coronavirus to a blood sample. If there is no T-cell reaction within 24 hours, the test is negative. If the peptides trigger T cells, the test can measure the strength of the immune response.

The researchers validated the new test against traditional laboratory testing in 91 people, about half of whom never had COVID-19 and another half who were infected and recovered. The results matched well.

They also found the test predicted immune strength up to 8 months following a second dose of COVID-19 vaccine. Furthermore, T-cell response was greater among people who received two doses of a vaccine versus others who received only one immunization.

Studies are ongoing and designed to meet authorization requirements as part of future licensing from the Food and Drug Administration.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

A small blood sample and 24 hours might be all that’s needed to find out how strong the immune system is against a first or repeat coronavirus infections.

Scientists created a test that indirectly measures T-cell response – an important, long-term component of immunity that can last long after antibody levels fall off – to a challenge by the virus in whole blood.

The test mimics what can be done in a formal laboratory now but avoids some complicated steps and specialized training for lab personnel. This test, researchers said, is faster, can scale up to test many more people, and can be adapted to detect viral mutations as they emerge in the future.

The study explaining how all this works was published online in Nature Biotechnology.

The test, called dqTACT, could help predict the likelihood of “breakthrough” infections in people who are fully vaccinated and could help determine how frequently people who are immunocompromised might need to be revaccinated, the authors noted.

Infection with the coronavirus and other viruses can trigger a one-two punch from the immunity system – a fast antibody response followed by longer-lasting cellular immunity, including T cells, which “remember” the virus. Cellular immunity can trigger a quick response if the same virus ever shows up again.

The new test adds synthetic viral peptides – strings of amino acids that make up proteins – from the coronavirus to a blood sample. If there is no T-cell reaction within 24 hours, the test is negative. If the peptides trigger T cells, the test can measure the strength of the immune response.

The researchers validated the new test against traditional laboratory testing in 91 people, about half of whom never had COVID-19 and another half who were infected and recovered. The results matched well.

They also found the test predicted immune strength up to 8 months following a second dose of COVID-19 vaccine. Furthermore, T-cell response was greater among people who received two doses of a vaccine versus others who received only one immunization.

Studies are ongoing and designed to meet authorization requirements as part of future licensing from the Food and Drug Administration.

A version of this article first appeared on WebMD.com.

Your gut microbiome will thank you later

A healthy gut seems like the new catch-all to better overall health these days. Nutrition and diet culture has us drinking kombucha and ginger tea and coffee, but what if we told you that going to happy hour might also help?

In a recent double-blind study published in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 19 men were divided into two groups and asked to drink 11 ounces of alcoholic lager (5.2% by volume) or nonalcoholic lager with dinner for 4 weeks.

Beer? Yes. Beer.

Engin Akyurt/Pixabay

We humans have trillions of microorganisms running rampant through our digestive tracts. When they’re happy, we have a lower chance of developing heart disease and diabetes. You know what else has millions of happy microorganisms from fermentation? Beer. It also has polyphenols that can help the body’s tissues fight cancers, as well as heart disease and inflammation. So beer is looking a little more healthy now, isn’t it?

In the study, the researchers found that both the alcoholic- and nonalcoholic-lager groups had a boost in bacterial diversity in the gut and higher fecal alkaline phosphatase levels, which showed improved intestinal health. They acknowledged, however, that the nonalcoholic route would be safer and healthier for overall health.

So add a lager to the list of gut-healthy foods that you should be consuming. It may give the phrase “beer gut” a whole new meaning.
 

We’ve lost our minds, but at least we know how fast they’re going

The phrase “quantum consciousness” sounds like something out of a particularly cheesy episode of Star Trek: “Oh no, Captain, the quantum consciousness has invaded our computer, and the only way to drive it out is to reverse the polarity of a focused tachyon beam.”

Massimiliano De Deo, LNGS-INFN

When it comes to understanding such basic existential issues as the origin of consciousness, however, quantum mechanics wasn’t off the table. The theory of the quantum origin of consciousness dates back to the 1990s (thanks in part to noted physician Roger Penrose), and goes something like this: There are microtubules within neurons in the brain that are small enough and isolated enough from the warm, wet, and chaotic brain environment where quantum effects can briefly come into play. We’re talking miniscule fractions of a second here, but still, long enough for quantum calculations to take place in the form of system wavefunction collapse, courtesy of gravity.

To plunge even deeper into the rabbit hole of quantum mechanics, the reason Schrödinger’s cat doesn’t occur in real life is wavefunction collapse; the more massive a quantum system is, the more likely it is to collapse into one state or another (alive or dead, in the cat’s case). The quantum origin of consciousness, or Orch OR theory, holds that human consciousness arises from electrical oscillations within the neuronal microtubules caused by the computations stemming from the collapse of small quantum systems.

That is an awful lot of overly simplified explanation, especially considering the study that just came out essentially disproved it. Oops. The research, published in Physics of Life Reviews, is pretty simple. The researchers went to a lab deep underground to avoid interference from cosmic rays, and sat around for months, observing a chunk of germanium for signs of spontaneous radiation, attributable to the same sort of wavefunction collapse that is supposedly occurring in our brains. They found nothing out of the ordinary, pretty definitively disproving most of Orch OR theory.

The researchers were unwilling to completely dismiss the idea (this is quantum mechanics, after all, uncertainty kind of goes with the territory), but it does seem like we’ll have to search elsewhere for sources of human consciousness. Personally, we’re big fans of the cymbal-playing monkey.
 

Missing links: A real fish story

Dear LOTME:

Ear’s a question that’s been keeping me up at night. Is the human middle ear the result of top-secret government experiments involving alien technology, Abraham Lincoln, and the Illuminati?

Restless in Roswell

Dear Restless:

The paleoanthropologic community has been sorting through this mystery for decades, and fossils discovered in China over the past 20 years finally provide a much less conspiratorially satisfying answer.

IVPP

For some time now, experts in the field have believed that the bones of the human middle ear evolved from the spiracular gill of a fish. The spiracle is a small hole behind each eye that opens to the mouth in some fishes and was used to breathe air in the earliest, most primitive species. But how did we get from spiracle to ear?

The missing links come in the form of the cranial anatomy of Shuyu, a 438-million-year-old, fingernail-sized skull of a jawless fish, and the 419-million-year-old fossil of a completely preserved fish with gill filaments in the first branchial chamber.

“These fossils provided the first anatomical and fossil evidence for a vertebrate spiracle originating from fish gills,” senior author Gai Zhikun, PhD, of the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Beijing, said in a written statement.

In many ways, it seems, we are fish: “Many important structures of human beings can be traced back to our fish ancestors, such as our teeth, jaws, middle ears, etc,” added Zhu Min, PhD, also of the institute.

So, Restless, the next time you hear the soothing sounds of an angry mob storming the Capitol or you chew on a slab, slice, or chunk of mutant, laboratory-produced chicken in your favorite fast-food restaurant, be sure to thank Shuyu.
 

Can you lend me an ear?

If you thought locusts were only a nuisance, think again. They have their uses. If you take a locust’s ear and put it inside a robot, the robot will be able to hear and receive signals. Who knew?

850977/Pixabay

Researchers from Tel Aviv University in Israel showed the robot’s hearing abilities by giving clap signals that told the robot what to do: One clap means go forward, two claps mean move back. What do you think the robot would do if it heard the clap break from Cha Cha Slide?

“Our task was to replace the robot’s electronic microphone with a dead insect’s ear, use the ear’s ability to detect the electrical signals from the environment, in this case vibrations in the air, and, using a special chip, convert the insect input to that of the robot,” Ben M. Maoz, PhD, said in a statement from the university.

And how does a dead locust ear work in a robot? Well, Dr. Maoz explained: “My laboratory has developed a special device – Ear-on-a-Chip – that allows the ear to be kept alive throughout the experiment by supplying oxygen and food to the organ while allowing the electrical signals to be taken out of the locust’s ear and amplified and transmitted to the robot.”

The research won’t stop at hearing, he said, as the other four senses also will be taken into consideration. This could help us sense dangers in the future, such as earthquakes or diseases. We said it before and we’ll say it again: We’re rooting for you, science!

Your gut microbiome will thank you later

A healthy gut seems like the new catch-all to better overall health these days. Nutrition and diet culture has us drinking kombucha and ginger tea and coffee, but what if we told you that going to happy hour might also help?

In a recent double-blind study published in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 19 men were divided into two groups and asked to drink 11 ounces of alcoholic lager (5.2% by volume) or nonalcoholic lager with dinner for 4 weeks.

Beer? Yes. Beer.

Engin Akyurt/Pixabay

We humans have trillions of microorganisms running rampant through our digestive tracts. When they’re happy, we have a lower chance of developing heart disease and diabetes. You know what else has millions of happy microorganisms from fermentation? Beer. It also has polyphenols that can help the body’s tissues fight cancers, as well as heart disease and inflammation. So beer is looking a little more healthy now, isn’t it?

In the study, the researchers found that both the alcoholic- and nonalcoholic-lager groups had a boost in bacterial diversity in the gut and higher fecal alkaline phosphatase levels, which showed improved intestinal health. They acknowledged, however, that the nonalcoholic route would be safer and healthier for overall health.

So add a lager to the list of gut-healthy foods that you should be consuming. It may give the phrase “beer gut” a whole new meaning.
 

We’ve lost our minds, but at least we know how fast they’re going

The phrase “quantum consciousness” sounds like something out of a particularly cheesy episode of Star Trek: “Oh no, Captain, the quantum consciousness has invaded our computer, and the only way to drive it out is to reverse the polarity of a focused tachyon beam.”

Massimiliano De Deo, LNGS-INFN

When it comes to understanding such basic existential issues as the origin of consciousness, however, quantum mechanics wasn’t off the table. The theory of the quantum origin of consciousness dates back to the 1990s (thanks in part to noted physician Roger Penrose), and goes something like this: There are microtubules within neurons in the brain that are small enough and isolated enough from the warm, wet, and chaotic brain environment where quantum effects can briefly come into play. We’re talking miniscule fractions of a second here, but still, long enough for quantum calculations to take place in the form of system wavefunction collapse, courtesy of gravity.

To plunge even deeper into the rabbit hole of quantum mechanics, the reason Schrödinger’s cat doesn’t occur in real life is wavefunction collapse; the more massive a quantum system is, the more likely it is to collapse into one state or another (alive or dead, in the cat’s case). The quantum origin of consciousness, or Orch OR theory, holds that human consciousness arises from electrical oscillations within the neuronal microtubules caused by the computations stemming from the collapse of small quantum systems.

That is an awful lot of overly simplified explanation, especially considering the study that just came out essentially disproved it. Oops. The research, published in Physics of Life Reviews, is pretty simple. The researchers went to a lab deep underground to avoid interference from cosmic rays, and sat around for months, observing a chunk of germanium for signs of spontaneous radiation, attributable to the same sort of wavefunction collapse that is supposedly occurring in our brains. They found nothing out of the ordinary, pretty definitively disproving most of Orch OR theory.

The researchers were unwilling to completely dismiss the idea (this is quantum mechanics, after all, uncertainty kind of goes with the territory), but it does seem like we’ll have to search elsewhere for sources of human consciousness. Personally, we’re big fans of the cymbal-playing monkey.
 

Missing links: A real fish story

Dear LOTME:

Ear’s a question that’s been keeping me up at night. Is the human middle ear the result of top-secret government experiments involving alien technology, Abraham Lincoln, and the Illuminati?

Restless in Roswell

Dear Restless:

The paleoanthropologic community has been sorting through this mystery for decades, and fossils discovered in China over the past 20 years finally provide a much less conspiratorially satisfying answer.

IVPP

For some time now, experts in the field have believed that the bones of the human middle ear evolved from the spiracular gill of a fish. The spiracle is a small hole behind each eye that opens to the mouth in some fishes and was used to breathe air in the earliest, most primitive species. But how did we get from spiracle to ear?

The missing links come in the form of the cranial anatomy of Shuyu, a 438-million-year-old, fingernail-sized skull of a jawless fish, and the 419-million-year-old fossil of a completely preserved fish with gill filaments in the first branchial chamber.

“These fossils provided the first anatomical and fossil evidence for a vertebrate spiracle originating from fish gills,” senior author Gai Zhikun, PhD, of the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Beijing, said in a written statement.

In many ways, it seems, we are fish: “Many important structures of human beings can be traced back to our fish ancestors, such as our teeth, jaws, middle ears, etc,” added Zhu Min, PhD, also of the institute.

So, Restless, the next time you hear the soothing sounds of an angry mob storming the Capitol or you chew on a slab, slice, or chunk of mutant, laboratory-produced chicken in your favorite fast-food restaurant, be sure to thank Shuyu.
 

Can you lend me an ear?

If you thought locusts were only a nuisance, think again. They have their uses. If you take a locust’s ear and put it inside a robot, the robot will be able to hear and receive signals. Who knew?

850977/Pixabay

Researchers from Tel Aviv University in Israel showed the robot’s hearing abilities by giving clap signals that told the robot what to do: One clap means go forward, two claps mean move back. What do you think the robot would do if it heard the clap break from Cha Cha Slide?

“Our task was to replace the robot’s electronic microphone with a dead insect’s ear, use the ear’s ability to detect the electrical signals from the environment, in this case vibrations in the air, and, using a special chip, convert the insect input to that of the robot,” Ben M. Maoz, PhD, said in a statement from the university.

And how does a dead locust ear work in a robot? Well, Dr. Maoz explained: “My laboratory has developed a special device – Ear-on-a-Chip – that allows the ear to be kept alive throughout the experiment by supplying oxygen and food to the organ while allowing the electrical signals to be taken out of the locust’s ear and amplified and transmitted to the robot.”

The research won’t stop at hearing, he said, as the other four senses also will be taken into consideration. This could help us sense dangers in the future, such as earthquakes or diseases. We said it before and we’ll say it again: We’re rooting for you, science!

Your gut microbiome will thank you later

A healthy gut seems like the new catch-all to better overall health these days. Nutrition and diet culture has us drinking kombucha and ginger tea and coffee, but what if we told you that going to happy hour might also help?

In a recent double-blind study published in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 19 men were divided into two groups and asked to drink 11 ounces of alcoholic lager (5.2% by volume) or nonalcoholic lager with dinner for 4 weeks.

Beer? Yes. Beer.

Engin Akyurt/Pixabay

We humans have trillions of microorganisms running rampant through our digestive tracts. When they’re happy, we have a lower chance of developing heart disease and diabetes. You know what else has millions of happy microorganisms from fermentation? Beer. It also has polyphenols that can help the body’s tissues fight cancers, as well as heart disease and inflammation. So beer is looking a little more healthy now, isn’t it?

In the study, the researchers found that both the alcoholic- and nonalcoholic-lager groups had a boost in bacterial diversity in the gut and higher fecal alkaline phosphatase levels, which showed improved intestinal health. They acknowledged, however, that the nonalcoholic route would be safer and healthier for overall health.

So add a lager to the list of gut-healthy foods that you should be consuming. It may give the phrase “beer gut” a whole new meaning.
 

We’ve lost our minds, but at least we know how fast they’re going

The phrase “quantum consciousness” sounds like something out of a particularly cheesy episode of Star Trek: “Oh no, Captain, the quantum consciousness has invaded our computer, and the only way to drive it out is to reverse the polarity of a focused tachyon beam.”

Massimiliano De Deo, LNGS-INFN

When it comes to understanding such basic existential issues as the origin of consciousness, however, quantum mechanics wasn’t off the table. The theory of the quantum origin of consciousness dates back to the 1990s (thanks in part to noted physician Roger Penrose), and goes something like this: There are microtubules within neurons in the brain that are small enough and isolated enough from the warm, wet, and chaotic brain environment where quantum effects can briefly come into play. We’re talking miniscule fractions of a second here, but still, long enough for quantum calculations to take place in the form of system wavefunction collapse, courtesy of gravity.

To plunge even deeper into the rabbit hole of quantum mechanics, the reason Schrödinger’s cat doesn’t occur in real life is wavefunction collapse; the more massive a quantum system is, the more likely it is to collapse into one state or another (alive or dead, in the cat’s case). The quantum origin of consciousness, or Orch OR theory, holds that human consciousness arises from electrical oscillations within the neuronal microtubules caused by the computations stemming from the collapse of small quantum systems.

That is an awful lot of overly simplified explanation, especially considering the study that just came out essentially disproved it. Oops. The research, published in Physics of Life Reviews, is pretty simple. The researchers went to a lab deep underground to avoid interference from cosmic rays, and sat around for months, observing a chunk of germanium for signs of spontaneous radiation, attributable to the same sort of wavefunction collapse that is supposedly occurring in our brains. They found nothing out of the ordinary, pretty definitively disproving most of Orch OR theory.

The researchers were unwilling to completely dismiss the idea (this is quantum mechanics, after all, uncertainty kind of goes with the territory), but it does seem like we’ll have to search elsewhere for sources of human consciousness. Personally, we’re big fans of the cymbal-playing monkey.
 

Missing links: A real fish story

Dear LOTME:

Ear’s a question that’s been keeping me up at night. Is the human middle ear the result of top-secret government experiments involving alien technology, Abraham Lincoln, and the Illuminati?

Restless in Roswell

Dear Restless:

The paleoanthropologic community has been sorting through this mystery for decades, and fossils discovered in China over the past 20 years finally provide a much less conspiratorially satisfying answer.

IVPP

For some time now, experts in the field have believed that the bones of the human middle ear evolved from the spiracular gill of a fish. The spiracle is a small hole behind each eye that opens to the mouth in some fishes and was used to breathe air in the earliest, most primitive species. But how did we get from spiracle to ear?

The missing links come in the form of the cranial anatomy of Shuyu, a 438-million-year-old, fingernail-sized skull of a jawless fish, and the 419-million-year-old fossil of a completely preserved fish with gill filaments in the first branchial chamber.

“These fossils provided the first anatomical and fossil evidence for a vertebrate spiracle originating from fish gills,” senior author Gai Zhikun, PhD, of the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Beijing, said in a written statement.

In many ways, it seems, we are fish: “Many important structures of human beings can be traced back to our fish ancestors, such as our teeth, jaws, middle ears, etc,” added Zhu Min, PhD, also of the institute.

So, Restless, the next time you hear the soothing sounds of an angry mob storming the Capitol or you chew on a slab, slice, or chunk of mutant, laboratory-produced chicken in your favorite fast-food restaurant, be sure to thank Shuyu.
 

Can you lend me an ear?

If you thought locusts were only a nuisance, think again. They have their uses. If you take a locust’s ear and put it inside a robot, the robot will be able to hear and receive signals. Who knew?

850977/Pixabay

Researchers from Tel Aviv University in Israel showed the robot’s hearing abilities by giving clap signals that told the robot what to do: One clap means go forward, two claps mean move back. What do you think the robot would do if it heard the clap break from Cha Cha Slide?

“Our task was to replace the robot’s electronic microphone with a dead insect’s ear, use the ear’s ability to detect the electrical signals from the environment, in this case vibrations in the air, and, using a special chip, convert the insect input to that of the robot,” Ben M. Maoz, PhD, said in a statement from the university.

And how does a dead locust ear work in a robot? Well, Dr. Maoz explained: “My laboratory has developed a special device – Ear-on-a-Chip – that allows the ear to be kept alive throughout the experiment by supplying oxygen and food to the organ while allowing the electrical signals to be taken out of the locust’s ear and amplified and transmitted to the robot.”

The research won’t stop at hearing, he said, as the other four senses also will be taken into consideration. This could help us sense dangers in the future, such as earthquakes or diseases. We said it before and we’ll say it again: We’re rooting for you, science!

Poor sleep quality was linked to an increased risk of life-threatening exacerbations in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), according to a study reported online in the journal Sleep.

Researchers followed 1,647 patients with confirmed COPD who were enrolled in the Subpopulations and Intermediate Outcome Measures in COPD Study (SPIROMICS). SPIROMICS is a multicenter study funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the COPD Foundation and is designed to evaluate COPD subpopulations, outcomes, and biomarkers. All participants in the study were current or former smokers with confirmed COPD.

COPD exacerbations over a 3-year follow-up period were compared against reported sleep quality. The researchers used the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), a combination of seven sleep measures, including sleep duration, timing of sleep, and frequency of disturbances. The higher the score, the worse the quality of sleep.

Individuals who self-reported having poor-quality sleep had a 25%-95% higher risk of COPD exacerbations, compared with those who reported good-quality sleep, according to the results.

There was a significant association between PSQI score and total and mean exacerbations in the unadjusted analysis (incidence rate ratios, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.13) and the analysis adjusted for demographics, medical comorbidities, disease severity, medication usage, and socioeconomic environmental exposure (IRR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.03-1.13).

In addition, the PSQI score was independently associated with an increased risk of hospitalization, with a 7% increase in risk of hospitalization with each 1-point increase in PSQI, according to the researchers.
 

Surprising findings

These findings suggest that sleep quality may be a better predictor of flare-ups than the patient’s history of smoking, according to the researchers.

“Among those who already have COPD, knowing how they sleep at night will tell me much more about their risk of a flare-up than knowing whether they smoked for 40 versus 60 years. … That is very surprising and is not necessarily what I expected going into this study. Smoking is such a central process to COPD that I would have predicted it would be the more important predictor in the case of exacerbations,” said lead study author Aaron Baugh, MD, a practicing pulmonologist, and a clinical fellow at the University of California, San Francisco, in a National Institutes of Health press release on the study.

The study findings were applicable to all races and ethnicities studied, however the results may be particularly relevant to Black Americans, Dr. Baugh indicated, because past studies have shown that Black Americans tend to have poorer sleep quality than other races and ethnicities. With poorer sleep linked to worse COPD outcomes, the current study may help explain why Black Americans as a group tend to do worse when they have COPD, compared with other racial and ethnic groups, the researchers suggested.

The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health and the COPD Foundation. SPIROMICS was supported by NIH and the COPD Foundation as well as numerous pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. The authors reported no other financial disclosures.

Poor sleep quality was linked to an increased risk of life-threatening exacerbations in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), according to a study reported online in the journal Sleep.

Researchers followed 1,647 patients with confirmed COPD who were enrolled in the Subpopulations and Intermediate Outcome Measures in COPD Study (SPIROMICS). SPIROMICS is a multicenter study funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the COPD Foundation and is designed to evaluate COPD subpopulations, outcomes, and biomarkers. All participants in the study were current or former smokers with confirmed COPD.

COPD exacerbations over a 3-year follow-up period were compared against reported sleep quality. The researchers used the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), a combination of seven sleep measures, including sleep duration, timing of sleep, and frequency of disturbances. The higher the score, the worse the quality of sleep.

Individuals who self-reported having poor-quality sleep had a 25%-95% higher risk of COPD exacerbations, compared with those who reported good-quality sleep, according to the results.

There was a significant association between PSQI score and total and mean exacerbations in the unadjusted analysis (incidence rate ratios, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.13) and the analysis adjusted for demographics, medical comorbidities, disease severity, medication usage, and socioeconomic environmental exposure (IRR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.03-1.13).

In addition, the PSQI score was independently associated with an increased risk of hospitalization, with a 7% increase in risk of hospitalization with each 1-point increase in PSQI, according to the researchers.
 

Surprising findings

These findings suggest that sleep quality may be a better predictor of flare-ups than the patient’s history of smoking, according to the researchers.

“Among those who already have COPD, knowing how they sleep at night will tell me much more about their risk of a flare-up than knowing whether they smoked for 40 versus 60 years. … That is very surprising and is not necessarily what I expected going into this study. Smoking is such a central process to COPD that I would have predicted it would be the more important predictor in the case of exacerbations,” said lead study author Aaron Baugh, MD, a practicing pulmonologist, and a clinical fellow at the University of California, San Francisco, in a National Institutes of Health press release on the study.

The study findings were applicable to all races and ethnicities studied, however the results may be particularly relevant to Black Americans, Dr. Baugh indicated, because past studies have shown that Black Americans tend to have poorer sleep quality than other races and ethnicities. With poorer sleep linked to worse COPD outcomes, the current study may help explain why Black Americans as a group tend to do worse when they have COPD, compared with other racial and ethnic groups, the researchers suggested.

The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health and the COPD Foundation. SPIROMICS was supported by NIH and the COPD Foundation as well as numerous pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. The authors reported no other financial disclosures.

Poor sleep quality was linked to an increased risk of life-threatening exacerbations in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), according to a study reported online in the journal Sleep.

Researchers followed 1,647 patients with confirmed COPD who were enrolled in the Subpopulations and Intermediate Outcome Measures in COPD Study (SPIROMICS). SPIROMICS is a multicenter study funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the COPD Foundation and is designed to evaluate COPD subpopulations, outcomes, and biomarkers. All participants in the study were current or former smokers with confirmed COPD.

COPD exacerbations over a 3-year follow-up period were compared against reported sleep quality. The researchers used the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), a combination of seven sleep measures, including sleep duration, timing of sleep, and frequency of disturbances. The higher the score, the worse the quality of sleep.

Individuals who self-reported having poor-quality sleep had a 25%-95% higher risk of COPD exacerbations, compared with those who reported good-quality sleep, according to the results.

There was a significant association between PSQI score and total and mean exacerbations in the unadjusted analysis (incidence rate ratios, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-1.13) and the analysis adjusted for demographics, medical comorbidities, disease severity, medication usage, and socioeconomic environmental exposure (IRR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.03-1.13).

In addition, the PSQI score was independently associated with an increased risk of hospitalization, with a 7% increase in risk of hospitalization with each 1-point increase in PSQI, according to the researchers.
 

Surprising findings

These findings suggest that sleep quality may be a better predictor of flare-ups than the patient’s history of smoking, according to the researchers.

“Among those who already have COPD, knowing how they sleep at night will tell me much more about their risk of a flare-up than knowing whether they smoked for 40 versus 60 years. … That is very surprising and is not necessarily what I expected going into this study. Smoking is such a central process to COPD that I would have predicted it would be the more important predictor in the case of exacerbations,” said lead study author Aaron Baugh, MD, a practicing pulmonologist, and a clinical fellow at the University of California, San Francisco, in a National Institutes of Health press release on the study.

The study findings were applicable to all races and ethnicities studied, however the results may be particularly relevant to Black Americans, Dr. Baugh indicated, because past studies have shown that Black Americans tend to have poorer sleep quality than other races and ethnicities. With poorer sleep linked to worse COPD outcomes, the current study may help explain why Black Americans as a group tend to do worse when they have COPD, compared with other racial and ethnic groups, the researchers suggested.

The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health and the COPD Foundation. SPIROMICS was supported by NIH and the COPD Foundation as well as numerous pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. The authors reported no other financial disclosures.