Dust may have controlled ancient human civilization

When early humans began to travel out of Africa and spread into Eurasia over a hundred thousand years ago, a fertile region around the eastern Mediterranean Sea called the Levant served as a critical gateway between northern Africa and Eurasia. A new study, published in Geology, shows that the existence of that oasis depended almost entirely on something we almost never think about: dust.

Dr. Rivka Amit, at the Geological Survey of Israel, and her team initially set out with a simple question: why are some soils around the Mediterranean thin and why are some thick? Their investigation led them to discover not only that dust deposition played a critical role in forming thick soils in the Levant, but also that had the source of dust not changed 200,000 years ago, early humans might have had a much tougher time leaving Africa, and parts of the Fertile Crescent wouldn’t have been so hospitable for civilization to take root.

Thick soils tend to form in areas with wet, humid climates, and thin soils form in arid environments with lower weathering rates. But in the Mediterranean, where much of the bedrock is dissolvable carbonate, the opposite is true: wetter northern regions have thin, unproductive soils, and more arid southeastern regions have thick, productive soils. Some scientists have attributed these patterns to differences in the rates of erosion, driven by human activity. But for Amit, who has been studying the area for years, a high erosion rate alone didn’t make sense. She challenged the existing hypotheses, reasoning that another factor — dust input — likely plays a critical role when weathering rates are too slow to form soils from bedrock.

To assess the influence of dust on Mediterranean soils, Amit and her team needed to trace the dust back to its original source. They collected dust samples from soils in the region, as well as nearby and far-flung dust sources, and compared the samples’ grain size distribution. The team identified a key difference between areas with thin and thick soils: thin soils comprised only the finest grain sizes sourced from distant deserts like the Sahara, whereas the thicker, more productive soils had coarser dust called loess, sourced from the nearby Negev desert and its massive dune fields. The thick soils in the eastern Mediterranean formed 200,000 years ago when glaciers covered large swaths of land, grinding up bedrock and creating an abundance of fine-grained sediments. “The whole planet was a lot dustier,” Amit said, which allowed extensive dune fields like those in the Negev to build up, creating new sources of dust and ultimately, thicker soils in places like the Levant.

Amit, then, had her answer: regions with thin soils simply hadn’t received enough loess to form thick, agriculturally productive soils, whereas the southeastern Mediterranean had. “Erosion here is less important,” she said. “What’s important is whether you get an influx of coarse [dust] fractions. [Without that], you get thin, unproductive soils.”

Amit didn’t stop there. She now knew that the thickest soils had received a large flux of coarse dust, leading to the area’s designation as the “land of milk and honey” for its agricultural productivity. Her next question was, had it always been like this?

She was surprised at what they found. Looking below the loess in the soil profile, they found a dearth of fine-grained sediments. “What was [deposited] before the loess were very thin soils,” she said. “It was a big surprise… The landscape was totally different, so I’m not sure that people would [have chosen] this area to live in because it was a harsh environment and [an] almost bare landscape, without much soil.” Without the changing winds and formation of the Negev dune field, then, the fertile area that served as a passage for early humans may have been too difficult to pass through and survive.

In the modern Mediterranean, the soils aren’t accumulating any more. “The dust source is cut off,” Amit explained, since the glaciers retreated in the Holocene, “now we’re only reworking the old loess.” Even if there were a dust source, it would take tens of thousands of years to rebuild a soil there. That leaves these mountainous soils in a fragile state, and people living there must balance conservation and agricultural use. Employing responsible agricultural practices in the region, as terracing has been used for thousands of years, is critical for soil preservation if agriculture is to continue.

Share Button

A new approach to understanding the biology of wound healing

Our bodies frequently heal wounds, like a cut or a scrape, on their own. However patients with diabetes, vascular disease, and skin disorders, sometimes have difficulty healing. This can lead to chronic wounds, which can severely impact quality of life. The management of chronic wounds is a major cost to healthcare systems, with the U.S alone spending an estimated 10-20 billion dollars per year. Still, we know very little about why some wounds become chronic, making it hard to develop effective therapeutics to promote healing. New research from Jefferson describes a novel way to sample the cells found at wounds — using discarded wound dressings. This non-invasive approach opens a window into the cellular composition of wounds, and an opportunity to identify characteristics of wounds likely to heal versus those that become chronic, as well as inform the development of targeted therapies.

The study was published in Scientific Reports on September 15th.

“Studying wound healing in humans is very challenging, and we know very little about the process in humans,” says Andrew South, PhD, Associate Professor in the Department of Dermatology and Cutaneous Biology and one of the lead authors of the study. “What we do know is from animal studies, and animal skin and the way it heals is very different from human skin.”

Dr. South and his lab study a group of inherited skin diseases called epidermolysis bullosa (EB), where wound healing is severely impaired. Patients, often from birth, suffer from blisters and lesions that are slow to heal, and some become chronic. In a subset of patients, chronic wounds are at high risk of developing into aggressive skin cancer. At this time, it is very difficult to predict which wounds in a given patient will heal, and which won’t. Being able to sample the wounds is a key to understanding the mechanisms behind healing.

“Performing a biopsy to sample the cells in the wound would help us understand the differences between these wounds,” says Dr. South “But biopsy in these patients is extremely painful and could delay healing of the wound even further. On the other hand, collecting these bandages that are just going to be thrown away, it poses no harm to the patient, and can be applied to a variety of conditions where wounds don’t heal properly.”

The researchers, which included collaborators in Chile and Austria, collected and analyzed 133 discarded wound dressings from 51 EB patients. Both acute and chronic wounds were sampled, with acute defined as present for 21 days or less, and chronic as present for more than 3 months.

“Previous studies had used wound dressings or bandages to collect fluid and look at what proteins are in there,” says Dr. South. “But no one has actually looked at what cells are present. Applying the techniques our lab frequently uses, we were able to isolate viable or living cells from the dressings.”

The researchers recovered a large number of cells from the dressings, often in excess of a 100 million. The larger the wound, and the more time a dressing was on a wound, the more number of cells were recovered.

The researchers then characterized the cells to see what type of cells are present at the wound. They detected a variety of immune cells including lymphocytes, granulocytes or neutrophils, and monocytes or macrophages. When comparing dressings from acute and chronic wounds, they found a significantly higher number of neutrophils at chronic wound sites. Neutrophils are the first line of defense in our immune system, and when a wound starts to form, they’re the first ones to arrive at the scene.

“Previous findings from animal studies and protein analysis of human wound dressings had supported the idea that when neutrophils hang around longer than they should, that stalls the healing process and can lead to chronicity,” says Dr. South. “Our findings support that theory more definitively, by showing that chronic wounds are characterized by higher levels of neutrophils.”

These findings give more insight into wound healing, and could help develop therapies that promote the process; for instance, those that neutralize excess neutrophils, or recruit macrophages, the immune cells that begin the next stage in healing after neutrophils.

The researchers now plan to expand on their technique, by further analyzing the individual cells collected from the wound dressings, and the genetic material inside them. “Currently we’re working with colleagues in Santiago, Chile on collecting dressings from EB patients over a period of time,” says Dr. South. “This allows us to follow patients longitudinally, and observe a wound and how its cellular composition changes as it heals or doesn’t heal.”

The team hopes that this will reveal genetic markers that can predict healing or chronicity.

“This method of sampling could be an alternative to bothersome swabs or blood draws, which are especially hard to do in newborns,” says Dr. South. “Since we know EB can present at birth, this technique could give us really early insight into the how severe the disease might be.”

While the current study focuses on EB, Dr. South and his colleagues hope that this technique can be applied to a variety of other conditions, such as diabetic foot ulcers and vascular leg ulcers.

“The field of wound healing has been crying out for a better understanding of what drives a chronic wound,” says Dr. South. “This technique could be transformative, and eventually help patients live more comfortable and healthy lives.”

Share Button

Emotional Consent

Have you ever had the experience of someone venting their emotions onto you or roping you into an emotional conversation, and you never actually consented to sharing that kind of experience with them? How did that feel?

Did you ever feel used, abused, or drained by someone emotionally, especially someone who expected to be granted automatic access to your emotional resources? Did this encourage you to open your heart more to such people, or did you learn to keep your heart closed in such situations?

Just as you need physical consent for sharing physical intimacy with someone, consider that it’s also important to seek consent for engaging in emotional intimacy with someone. This includes something as basic as having an emotional conversation.

On the flip side, just as you may assert boundaries for physical intimacy, consider doing the same for emotional intimacy. Both are requests for your personal resources, and you have every right to deny someone access.

Just as no one is entitled to physical intimacy with you unless you consent to that, it’s wise to regard emotional intimacy in the same light.

Both forms of intimacy can be wonderful and rewarding. They can also be draining. And they are both risky in some situations. Being physically intimate with someone isn’t 100% safe. Nor is sharing emotional intimacy.

You get to make the choice of whom you let in and when. People aren’t entitled to automatic access to your personal resources.

This includes when someone is feeling physically or emotionally needy or entitled.

Emotional Boundary Management

Watch out for manipulative patterns here as well. For instance, if someone labels you emotionally dismissive, it’s similar to being labeled sexually frigid. In both cases there’s an assertion of entitlement to your personal resources (physical or emotional) when consent isn’t willingly offered.

Such labels may be used in an attempt to coerce you into changing your attitude or behavior for the benefit (self-interest) of the person using the labels. Either way it’s a form of nonconsensual emotional manipulation, an attempt to control you when you don’t willingly consent. Don’t fall for it.

Just as you’re free to grant or not grant someone access to your body, you’re also free to decline access to your heart – and your mind for that matter, like when someone feels they’re entitled to free tech advice from you just because you know more about computers.

No one can assert the right to emotional validation from you any more than they can assert a right to have sex with you, regardless of how needy they feel. Someone can only be granted access to physical or emotional intimacy with you by your consent, and if you withhold that consent, then no means no.

What if you’re the one seeking physical or emotional intimacy with someone else? You can invite and offer that type of connection, but don’t assume that you’re entitled to it. Give the other person a chance to decline. Don’t be emotionally creepy or rapey.

If someone declines to grant such consent, you aren’t entitled to coerce or manipulate them into doing what you want. If you find such a relationship unsatisfying, you do have the option to disengage from the relationship and get your physical and emotional needs met elsewhere – with someone else who is willing and able to consent… or on your own.

Pre-consent is a valid option too, like with a relationship partner. Just as you may have an understanding for physical consent (so you don’t necessarily need to ask for it explicitly each time), you may have a similar arrangement for emotional consent. But someone can still choose to decline. You can still say no to an emotional discussion if you’re not feeling up to it. And you don’t have to permit someone to emotionally vent at you, even in a relationship. You can be emotionally intimate without ever going there, just as you can be physically intimate without ever wanting to explore certain kinks.

Maybe you have friends where you both feel it’s okay to unload on each other emotionally at times. But even in such situations, I think it’s good to check in and make sure it really is consensual. Some people may assume that emotional venting is okay at any time, but is that a valid assumption? Isn’t it wise to check if it really is okay with the other person? What if they’re emotionally tired or just not in a good state to listen? Be very careful about assuming consent if you aren’t certain you have it.

One reason I share this is because I’ve received a lot of emails over the years from people who feel emotionally drained by their relationship partners, friends, family, and co-workers. You may not see just how much venting drains other people who are subjected to it. They may do their best to listen and be compassionate, but that doesn’t mean they actually like it, and many would prefer not to be other people’s emotional teddy bear.

It’s up to you when you do or don’t grant consent for various forms of intimacy. Open your heart when you feel it’s wise to do so. You can make these decisions out of self-interest, generosity, kindness, or based on any other values that resonate with you.

Your body. Your heart. Your mind. Your rules.

Opening Your Heart

What do you consider worthwhile opportunities to share emotional intimacy with someone? When do you feel inclined to open your heart willingly? Pay attention to when these kinds of connections feel good to you.

Also pay attention to when it doesn’t feel good to open your heart. When have you done this and wished afterwards that you hadn’t? Where have you experienced regrets on this path? Have you ever emotionally invested in someone and felt punished for your efforts?

One pattern I’ve noticed is that it doesn’t feel good to open my heart with someone who’s stuck in entitlement, neediness, or a victim mindset. That’s just a massive turnoff, so I don’t open my heart in that direction much. I’ve done too much of that in the past, and it’s super draining. It feels like having my energy vamped away – energy I’d rather invest elsewhere.

On the flip side, I usually love opening my heart with someone when the invitation aligns with curiosity, passion, growth, or shared interests. I like it when someone just wants to explore how we might connect, and they aren’t coming from a place of neediness and attachment. Those kinds of connections are refreshing, and I often find them energizing and inspiring. This is usually how I connect with someone when we have an in-person meetup together, like I’ve been doing for many years (currently on pause due to the pandemic).

Sometimes I also feel good about opening my heart to someone who wants to connect on the basis of sadness, grief, loss, frustration, regret, or even anger. I usually don’t find it draining to engage with these emotions if the person has a growth mindset. It’s also good when a person invites me to engage with them on this level in a way that leaves me feeling okay to decline. Then I feel like I can make a conscious choice.

Just as our physical resources are limited, our emotional resources are too, so it’s wise to manage them carefully, like investments.

As I’ve gotten better at making these consent-based decisions according to my personal boundaries and desires, I feel more emotionally strong and stable. I’ve become more receptive to emotional invitations from people and in directions that feel aligned to me.

Remember to practice good boundary management with your emotional space. You can save yourself a lot of grief by paying attention to your own feelings and honoring those. That’s perhaps the best guide I’ve found on this path. When you’re being emotionally manipulated, you can probably feel the misalignment between the person’s stated intentions and how you’re actually feeling in response.

Share Button

Health24.com | Rare ‘brain vein’ strokes are on the rise

  •  Cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT) is a rare kind of stroke that is, however, on the rise
  • CVT affects veins, rather than arteries in the brain
  • The incidence of CVT is higher in young women and African Americans

Most strokes strike when an artery in the brain suddenly becomes blocked, but new research shows a rarer cause of strokes is becoming more common.

It’s called cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT), and it happens when a vein in the brain is clogged. While CVT is estimated to cause less than 1% of all strokes, scientists discovered it is now more prevalent and affecting a different demographic than previously thought.

Study author Dr Fadar Otite and his colleagues pored over years of hospital records from New York and Florida to find out how many cases of CVT occurred in these states between 2006 and 2016. Otite is an assistant professor of neurology at SUNY Upstate Medical University in Syracuse, New York.

Most common in young women

Based on the data they analysed, the researchers estimated that the number of CVT cases in the United States rose from around 14 cases per million in 2006 to 20 cases per million in 2014.

“We still find that the incidence of CVT is less than 1% of all strokes, even across our study period, but the incidence increased by 70% over time,” Otite said. “In 2006, the proportion of all strokes that were CVT was 0.47%. At the end of our study, which was in 2016, that proportion increased to 0.80%.”

CVT causes blood clots to form in the veins of the brain. These veins drain blood that has already been used by brain cells, sending it back to the heart to be replenished with oxygen. If a clot forms in one of these veins, it may leak into the surrounding brain tissue and could cause a stroke, the researchers explained.

While CVT is still most common in young women – about two-thirds of all CVT hospitalisations included in the study were in females – the researchers found that the number of cases among this demographic did not increase over the 10-year study period. Instead, they saw increases in CVT among men and older women.

“Part of the message is that we agree that CVT is still more common in women, but because of the diverse clinical presentation of CVT, when other symptoms that may be attributable to CVT are present in other demographics, we should take them with more seriousness,” Otite said.

Higher in African Americans

Another major finding was that CVT incidence in African American people was significantly higher than in other races. But why that is the case remains unknown. “We have no clear explanation, because this is truly the first study to ever relate the incidence of CVT between races,” he added.

Several factors may put one at a higher risk of developing CVT, including pregnancy and taking hormonal birth control pills, which may be why it is more common in younger women, the researchers noted.

And many of the risk factors for CVT – like blood clotting disorders or medications that cause clotting, severe dehydration, infections of the ear, face or neck, head trauma, obesity and cancer – are somewhat different from the triggers typically associated with stroke.

It is important for clinicians to be aware of this rise in CVT incidence because the condition can easily be confused with something else, Otite said. Patients with CVT may have unspecific complaints such as headaches, blurry vision or seizures.

Around 3% of patients in a prior study who had CVT and went to the hospital were diagnosed with something else and sent home, according to Otite. “So, it’s important to recognise this from the start, because by the next time the clinical condition may be worse,” he said.

A specific treatment

CVT can be treated with medication to thin the blood and help prevent further clotting, which may not be prescribed if the condition isn’t properly diagnosed, he added.

Dr Jose Biller, chair of the neurology department at Loyola University Medical Center in Hines, Illinois, said the takeaway from this study is that more attention should be paid to CVT.

“I think that there should be an increased awareness of cerebral venous thrombosis because, by and large, when people think about stroke, they don’t think about it,” Biller said. “There should be an increasing level of awareness because this is a condition that has a specific treatment.”

The study was published online on 26 August in the journal Neurology.

Image credit:

Share Button

Health24.com | Catch prostate cancer early. It could save your life

  • Prostate cancer is the second most common type of cancer in American men
  • This kind of cancer usually grows slowly and doesn’t need aggressive treatment
  • Men over 55 should consider being screened for prostate cancer

About one in nine men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer, but experts say early detection can be a lifesaver.

“Prostate cancer that is detected early, typically while it is still within the prostate gland, has a better chance of being successfully treated,” explained Dr Alexander Kutikov, chief of the Division of Urologic Oncology at Fox Chase Cancer Center in Philadelphia.

“Some types of prostate cancer are aggressive. However, most cancers are quite slow-growing, and a significant portion can be monitored without aggressive treatment,” he said in a Fox Chase news release.

Men aged 55–69 should consider prostate cancer screening, the American Urological Association says.

No symptoms in early stages

“Much debate has centred around screening for prostate cancer. Given the risks and benefits of screening, not every man should be screened for prostate cancer,” Kutikov said. “Men should talk to their health care provider about their risk factors, options and preferences. Together, they can make a decision.”

In the early stages, prostate cancer usually causes no symptoms. More advanced prostate cancer may cause: difficulty urinating, including a slow or weak urinary stream or the need to urinate more often, especially at night; blood in urine or semen; pain or burning during urination; discomfort in the pelvic area; bone pain, or trouble getting an erection.

“Many of these symptoms can be caused by something other than prostate cancer. However, you should let your healthcare provider know if you show any signs so the cause may be determined and treated, if needed,” Kutikov said.

September is National Prostate Cancer Awareness month. Prostate cancer is the second most common type of cancer in American men, according to the American Cancer Society. It says there will be about 191 000 new prostate cancer cases and more than 33 000 prostate cancer deaths in the United States in 2020.

Risk factors for prostate cancer include: older age (about 60% of prostate cancers are diagnosed in men over 65); race/ethnicity (Black men and Caribbean men of African ancestry have higher prostate cancer rates than men of other races), and a family history of prostate cancer.

Image credit: iStock

Share Button

Health24.com | Hot asphalt releases a lot of pollution into the air

  • Asphalt heated by the sun contributes to air pollution
  • Paved surfaces and rooftops constitute a majority of the exposed surface of urban areas
  • The volatile organic compounds released by heated asphalt are harmful to humans and potentially carcinogenic

Asphalt baking in the summer sunshine is no fun for tender feet, but a new study suggests it’s not doing your lungs any favours either.

As it heats up, asphalt releases chemical compounds that contribute to air pollution. And its emissions double as its temperature increases from 104 to 140 degrees Fahrenheit (40 to 60 degrees Celsius), researchers found.

Sunlight plays a key role in these asphalt emissions, with even moderate levels of sunshine tripling the release of air pollutants, according to the study published on 2 September in the journal Science Advances.

The problem is likely to only grow worse as global warming increases, said lead researcher Drew Gentner, an associate professor of chemical and environmental engineering at the Yale School of Engineering and Applied Science, in New Haven, Connecticut.

Paved surfaces and rooftops

“Megacities are likely to see urban temperature increases driven by climate change and urban heat island effects, thus enhancing [asphalt’s] relative impact on urban air quality over time,” Gentner said. Urban heat islands are metropolitan areas that are a lot warmer than their rural surroundings because of human activity.

The United States typically goes through 27 million metric tons of petroleum-based liquid asphalt each year in paving, roofing and construction, the researchers said in background notes.

Paved surfaces and rooftops constitute a majority of the exposed surface of urban areas, they noted. At least 45% of urban areas are paved, and another 20% are covered by roofs.

In-use pavement usually gets as hot as between 117 and 153 degrees Fahrenheit (between 47 and 67 degrees Celsius) in the summer, while roofs can reach 167 degrees (75 degrees Celsius), the study authors said.

As the major contributors to air pollution get cut back – for example, through cleaner vehicle emissions – passive pollution sources like these will have a growing influence on the air we breathe, said Peter DeCarlo, an associate professor and air pollution expert with Johns Hopkins University, in Baltimore.

More volatile organic compounds

“In doing that reduction, we are discovering these new sources that are now playing a more prominent role in our air pollution issues,” DeCarlo said.

For the new study, Gentner and his colleagues gathered asphalt samples during road paving in New Haven and Pittsburgh, and from roofing products like asphalt shingles and sealant.

In the lab, the researchers exposed the samples to heat and sunlight in sealed chambers, and monitored the emissions coming off the asphalt.

The asphalt samples tended to produce more volatile organic compounds as they got hot, especially when exposed to sunlight, the investigators found.

Emissions doubled when the asphalt surface temperature increased from 104 to 140 degrees Fahrenheit (40 to 60 degrees Celsius) – temperatures that “occur in hot summertime conditions in many locations”, Gentner said. They then climbed by an average of 70% for every additional increase of 68 degrees Fahrenheit (20 degrees Celsius), the findings showed.

Potentially carcinogenic

“Temperature and solar radiation are key environmental factors that influence emissions, since they influence the evaporation and emission pathways related to solar exposure,” Gentner said.

On their own, volatile organic compounds are harmful to humans and potentially carcinogenic, according to the US National Institutes of Health.

They also contribute to urban smog, which forms when sunlight bakes volatile organic compounds combined with nitrogen oxides, DeCarlo explained.

“Summertime is when we have our biggest air pollution problems in urban areas,” DeCarlo said. “That’s when we have high ozone, it’s when we have the highest particulate matter, so this as a source of particulate matter is just another potential problem.”

Asphalt probably contributes most to air pollution when it’s freshly laid, DeCarlo added.

‘Cool pavement’ technology

During the paving process, asphalt is heated to as much as 248 to 320 degrees Fahrenheit (120 to 160 degrees Celius), the researchers said.

“If you’ve ever been around people laying asphalt, you smell it. It’s clear something is getting into the air when that happens,” DeCarlo said. But asphalt likely continues to emit air pollutants even after it’s aged, when sunlight bakes the material, he noted.

Switching to concrete for paving would help reduce emissions, he said, but concrete is not an ideal paving material in all locales.

Another possible solution might be the application of “cool pavement” technology, where coloured sealants are applied to paved surfaces so they reflect more solar energy and become less likely to heat up, Gentner said.

Emissions might also vary with different asphalt application methods and different formulations of the paving product, Gentner suggested.

Image credit: iStock

NEXT ON HEALTH24X

Share Button

Coronavirus: NHS staff off work due to testing shortages, say bosses

Hospital bosses warn that a lack of coronavirus tests for workers is putting services at risk.

Share Button

Health24.com | Donating plasma helps fight immune disorder

  • 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

Share Button

Health24.com | Covid-19 ills no greater for those with lupus, rheumatoid arthritis

  • 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

Share Button

Do Nice Zombies Make Worthwhile Friends?

Some people have asked me why I don’t engage with Trump supporters, try to understand them better, invite deep conversations with them, or something along those lines. I think it’s a valid question, and the answer is simple: I don’t see any real potential in such relationships. For me they all land somewhere on a scale that spans from dumb to dumber to dumbest.

It’s not the people that are the issue per se, but the behavior pattern of supporting Trump during this time is so rotten to the core that I don’t see anything redeeming there. There’s no hint of depth, value, or worthwhile discovery. To the extent that I’ve engaged with such people over the past few years, the result has been various degrees of being creeped out.

Some people have said, “But some of them are nice people.” I disagree. In order to frame such people as nice, I have to stretch the definition of nice way too far for it to work. At best I’ll end up with some version of “nice and dumb” or “a nice moron” or “a really nice pile of crap.” I can’t really think of anyone as nice once they’ve been Trumpified. The Trumpification of anyone trumps any niceness, rendering it far removed from anything nice.

Imagine the nicest person you know being bitten by a zombie and turned. Will you still regard them as nice while they try to eat your brain? Does the nice zombie label really work? No, all zombies are zombies. The closest they get to nice is when they’ve been rendered mostly harmless, such as by having their lower jaws removed, so they can’t bite you. It never really makes sense to see them as nice.

Really the closest I can get to labeling such people as nice is to go with mostly harmless, which does indeed apply pretty well to some. But that’s still a pretty crappy connection offer.

When an offer is so horrendously bad, I find it best to say a blanket no to it. Toss those cards in the muck, and let’s see the next hand.

Does this mean if I went earnestly digging for nuggets of goodness among Trump supporters that I wouldn’t find anything worthwhile at all? No, I’m not saying that. Maybe there is something decent in there, but there’s just such a huge mountain of excrement, falsehoods, and ignorance to dig through that a few diamond shards aren’t gonna cut it. The stench is too repulsive to engage with.

One reason I’ve leaned in this direction is that I explored other possibilities first, and nothing quite felt aligned till I thought, Hmmm… what would happen if I took the evil exit here and just declared the whole lot of them to be a stinky pile of excrement?

At heart I’m an explorer, and I’m willing to keep trying different approaches to life to see what works best for me.

Am I saying that you have to use my approach too? Not at all. I think you should find your own path here, and if your approach is different from mine, I celebrate that difference. Don’t clone my approach. Find your own path to alignment through this. But do keep asking if what you’re doing is working well for you, and if not, be willing to change your approach repeatedly till reality seems to affirm your choice.

I noticed that when I was more tolerant of Trump supporters, their presence in this reality kept bugging me. I kept thinking, Are millions of people really this dumb? Seriously, WTF…

And 30,000+ lies later, that attitude starts wearing thin.

It’s easier to deal with a pile of shit when you see it as just a pile of shit and not as a pile of shit that might have some gold or diamonds in it. It’s the feeling that maybe it’s worth digging through that stench that causes problems. Interestingly, this stems from a scarcity mentality, right?

Do you see that? Why deal with Trump supporters socially at all, even if you think they may have some redeeming qualities? Why deal with the smell? What you’re missing is that in a different social direction, there are way more gold and diamonds that aren’t covered in shit. You just need an abundance mindset to see them.

A Trump supporter isn’t going to be a good social match for me by any stretch of the imagination. The smell is always going to be an issue, and the gold and diamonds they may offer socially will never compensate for the smell. So as I see it, it’s a sensible response to just call this a “hell no!” all around.

Once I realized that engaging with Trump supporters had to be a hell no for me, it did feel a bit extreme at first, but I’ve since gotten used to it. And the more I’ve gotten used to it, the more a different direction of social abundance started opening up to me.

I’ve been seeing a gradual increase in positive results from this mindset, which is why I continue to double-down on it. By saying no to the stenchiest stench of the social realm, reality no longer has to simulate this kind of nonsense in my close-up presence, so it can devote more resources to expanding the aspects of life that resonate with me. Consequently, I’ve seen more opening and expansion in directions that feel aligned and intelligent.

It was like I said to reality: Stop wasting resources simulating the dreadfully dumb and stinky. Reassign those resources to more aligned connections, opportunities, and invitations – anything that smells good.

And that’s been working well indeed.

As a simple recent example, yesterday I just loved the livestreamed script reading of The Princess Bride, which was also a fundraiser for the Wisconsin Democratic Party (as I mentioned in yesterday’s post). That was a superb treat! There were more than 100,000 people on the call.

I think that’s the first time in my life I’ve made a political contribution, and I was happy to finally lose my political donation virginity. I love how this invite showed up in the form it did – a chance to engage in a fun way with my all-time favorite movie and many of its cast members. That was an easy yes.

It was great to see actors standing tall against the current Trumpian nonsense too. I felt a stronger sense of oneness from that, like we’re all in this together, pushing back against a zombie horde of 30,000 lies. It’s time to shift this reality in a more positive direction. It was really wonderful to see so many comments coming in from people who are similarly aligned with creating a positive future.

By saying a firm no to 100% pure crap and the people who are wallowing in it, I see beautiful doors opening in the part of reality that isn’t crap.

I felt tremendous respect and admiration for Cary Elwes for making the event happen – one actor stepping up to bring us together in this way.

Lately I’ve been experiencing a rising sense of hope and optimism. I’m feeling better and better about the direction this reality is going.

This is common when we step up our boundary management. Say a really bigger no to the misaligned and stop engaging with it. This doesn’t mean denying the existence of the misaligned. It means acknowledging: I see that you exist – and that you really are a pile of shit that doesn’t belong anywhere near me!

When you see a pile of crap on the sidewalk, do you feel inclined to talk to it and see if you might improve your relationship with it? Or is the sight and smell enough of a turnoff for you to simply call it as you see it and step around it, or shovel it off to the side, so no one else steps in it?

Now there is a nonzero chance that some crap contains gold or diamonds. Is that enough for you to go digging into it each time?

When I label the shit as shit, I needn’t give it as much attention, which frees my attention to focus on legitimate sources of social gold. Engaging with the real gold is fun and rewarding and way less stinky.

So my preferred approach to dealing with Trump supporters isn’t to engage with them – I have zero interest in subjecting myself to the vapid nonsense they spout. I prefer to marginalize the hell out of them. Squeeze them to the borders of my reality, so I barely notice them anymore. Send them back to the simulator to repurpose as something more useful, like fresh spatulas.

Share Button