• Plasma, which is a component of blood, helps people with immune deficiencies
• It supplies patients with the antibodies their immune system doesn’t produce naturally
• By donating plasma, we give someone with Primary Immunodeficiency a chance to live a normal life

Tens of thousands of people with immune system deficiencies could benefit from plasma donations, but there is a drastic shortage of plasma, allergists say.

That means that many people who need plasma have to skip treatments or go without, which can be potentially fatal, they added.

“Plasma, which is one component of blood, is a bit of a miracle cure,” said Dr J. Allen Meadows, allergist and president of the American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology (ACAAI).

Highly vulnerable to infections

“Allergists around the country treat a condition called Primary Immunodeficiency with a therapy made from plasma. Primary Immunodeficiency is a group of inherited immune deficiencies that leave those affected unable to produce antibodies, making them highly vulnerable to infections,” Meadows explained in an ACAAI news release.

“Immune globulin (IG) infusions, made from plasma, give those with immune deficiencies the antibodies their immune system does not produce naturally. That helps protect them from infections,” he said.

Did you know:

• It takes 130 plasma donations or more per year to treat one patient with Primary Immunodeficiency. Ten to 40 donations make up a single dose of gamma globulin. There are 1 500 to 50 000 units of plasma in one batch.
• Plasma donations are not like blood donations, which are mostly used for surgery. The need for plasma is constant.
• It’s possible to get some plasma from a blood donation, but plasma-only donation gives about twice as much. You can donate plasma more often than whole blood.
• Donating plasma is safe.

“Plasma donation is a gift of life,” Meadows said. “When you donate plasma, you are giving a patient with Primary Immunodeficiency a chance to ward off infections and live a normal life.”

^{Image credit: iStock}

• People with inflammatory forms of arthritis aren’t more likely to be hospitalised as a result of Covid-19 
• Many with autoimmune diseases, however, take immunosuppressant drugs 
• A new study has found, though, that immunosuppressant therapy doesn’t increase one’s risk of being hospitalised due to Covid-19

People with lupus aren’t at increased risk of hospitalisation from Covid-19 due to steroidal medications they take to reduce immune system activity, a new study finds.

And a related study found that people with inflammatory forms of arthritis – such as rheumatoid arthritis – aren’t more likely to be hospitalised with Covid-19 than people without arthritis.

Both studies were led by researchers at NYU Grossman School of Medicine, in New York City.

Autoimmune diseases

The findings “should reassure most patients, especially those on immunosuppressant therapy, that they are at no greater risk of having to be admitted to hospital from Covid-19 than other lupus or arthritis patients,” Dr Ruth Fernandez-Ruiz, co-author of the studies, said in an NYU Langone news release.

“People with lupus or inflammatory arthritis have the same risk factors for getting seriously ill from Covid-19 as people without these disorders,” said Fernandez-Ruiz, a postdoctoral fellow in rheumatology.

Lupus and conditions like rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and spondyloarthritis are autoimmune diseases in which the immune system mistakenly attacks a person’s own tissues. This causes inflammation in the joints, skin, kidneys and other parts of the body.

The researchers found that lupus patients taking immune-suppressing medications – such as mycophenolate mofetil (CellCept) and azathioprine (Imuran) – had no greater risk of hospitalisation (15 out of 24) than lupus patients not using the medications (nine of 17).

Dangers of glucocorticoids

In addition, the Covid-19 hospitalisation rate for people with inflammatory arthritis (26%) was similar to that of New York City residents overall (25%).

Another finding was that patients taking biologic drugs for arthritis, such as adalimumab (Humira) and etanercept (Enbrel), or the antiviral hydroxychloroquine, had no greater or lower risk of Covid-19 hospitalisation than those not taking the drugs.

But patients who took steroids called glucocorticoids, even in mild doses, had a 10 times higher risk of Covid-19 hospitalisation than those who didn’t take steroids. Although the finding is statistically significant, the study’s small size may overestimate the actual risk, the researchers noted.

The studies were recently published online in the journal Arthritis and Rheumatology.

^{Image credit: Getty}

A man whose son shot his neighbour dead then fatally crashed his motorbike says mental-health services failed him.

People are drinking more during the pandemic and addiction services may not cope, experts warn.

In recent years, the Pine Island Glacier and the Thwaites Glacier on West Antarctica has been undergoing rapid changes, with potentially major consequences for rising sea levels. However, the processes that underlie these changes and their precise impact on the weakening of these ice sheets have not yet been fully charted.

A potential response of river fish to environmental changes is to colonize new habitats. But what happens when dams and weirs restrict their movement? And are native and alien species similarly affected? Researchers from the Leibniz-Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries (IGB) and the Spanish University of Girona (UdG) have addressed these questions in a recent study.

New research at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis helps illuminate a surprising mind-body connection. In mice, the researchers found that immune cells surrounding the brain produce a molecule that is then absorbed by neurons in the brain, where it appears to be necessary for normal behavior.

• Face masks may be invaluable in the fight against Covid-19, but they can make it difficult for people who stutter to communicate with others.
• Stutterers have a difficult time if other people cannot see their mouths
• This makes solid masks – required in public during the coronavirus pandemic – a problem
• To solve the problem, stutterers can e.g. indicate that they stutter, or wear a clear mask

About three million people in the United States stutter, according to the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA). The use of face masks in public is likely to continue for months or even longer.

Solid face masks can lead to misunderstandings because they hide your mouth. Many people who stutter experience long, silent pauses (blocks) in their speech. Often, the only way a listener realises that someone is having a block is by looking at their face.

Reducing the risk of problems

If you stutter, the person you’re talking to may not realise you’re experiencing a block if you’re wearing a mask. This could lead that person to talk over you, move on, or misinterpret what may seem like a non-response, according to the association.

This type of situation can be especially serious if you are trying to communicate with healthcare providers, first responders or police.

To reduce the risk of problems, the ASHA offers the following advice:

• Tell people you stutter. You can say this at the beginning of a conversation or carry a printed card. That way, people know to give you extra time if you need it. It also can help remove some pressure if you’re anticipating speech difficulties.
• Wear a clear mask. Practice conversations at home. Check online support groups for suggestions. If you’re working with a speech-language pathologist, ask for suggestions about modifying your speech therapy techniques.
• If the roles are reversed and you’re talking to someone with a stutter who’s masked up, be patient. Don’t try to finish their thought or speak for them, the speech and hearing experts say.
• If you don’t understand what the other person is saying, say so. Be open to other ways of communicating, such as reading a written message.

^{Image credit: iStock}

• Many people believe that smoking just a few cigarettes a day is relatively harmless
• A study found that ‘social smokers’ are much more likely to die of lung disease and lung cancer than nonsmokers
• The conclusion, therefore, is that cutting down on smoking is no substitute for quitting

Even light smokers are much more likely to die of lung disease or lung cancer than nonsmokers, a new study warns.

“Everyone knows that smoking is bad for you, but it’s easy to assume that if you only smoke a little, the risks won’t be too high,” said study co-leader Pallavi Balte, of Columbia University Irving Medical Center, in New York City.

The new study shows how wrong that thinking can be. It included nearly 19 000 people in the United States, average age 61, who were followed for an average of 17 years. During that time, nearly 650 died of lung disease (such as emphysema) and 560 died of lung cancer.

Heavy smokers fared worst

Among nonsmokers, less than 2% died from lung disease and less than 1% died from lung cancer. But among social smokers (fewer than 10 cigarettes a day), those numbers were over 3% and close to 5%, respectively.

Not surprisingly, heavy smokers (more than 20 cigarettes a day) fared worst, with more than 10% dying from lung disease and about 13% from lung cancer, the study found.

After accounting for other potential factors – such as age, sex, race, level of education and body weight – the researchers concluded that social smokers were 2.5 times more likely to die of lung disease and 8.6 times more likely to die of lung cancer than nonsmokers.

Social smokers had around half the rate of death from lung disease compared to heavy smokers, but their rate of lung cancer death was two-thirds that of heavy smokers, according to the study.

The results were scheduled for presentation at a virtual meeting of the European Respiratory Society. Data and conclusions presented at meetings should be considered preliminary until peer-reviewed.

Social smoking disproportionately harmful

The findings show that cutting down on smoking is no substitute for quitting, the researchers concluded.

“Previous research suggests that people are cutting down on smoking. For example, in the USA, the proportion of smokers smoking less than 10 cigarettes per day has increased from 16% to 27%,” Balte said in a society news release.

“You might think that if you only smoke a few cigarettes a day you are avoiding most of the risk. But our findings suggest that social smoking is disproportionately harmful,” Balte said.

If you don’t want to die of lung cancer or respiratory disease, the best action is to quit completely, she added.

^{Image credit: iStock}