Health24.com | Flu, pneumonia vaccines save lives of heart failure patients

  • A study found that heart failure patients who had received flu and pneumonia vaccines had a lower risk of in-hospital death 
  • It is a known fact that respiratory infections make heart failure worse 
  • Despite that, very few heart failure patients receive these immunisations

Flu and pneumonia vaccines lead to fewer hospital deaths among heart failure patients, a new study finds.

“Our study provides further impetus for annual immunisations in patients with heart failure. Despite advice to do so, uptake remains low,” said study author Dr Karthik Gonuguntla, of the University of Connecticut.

In heart failure, your heart can’t pump blood as well as it should. This leads to fluid buildup in the lungs that causes shortness of breath, coughing and reduced quality of life.

Lower in-hospital death rate

Respiratory infections like pneumonia and the flu make heart failure worse, so annual vaccinations are recommended for patients. However, few studies have compared outcomes among heart failure patients who have and haven’t received these vaccinations.

In this study, the researchers looked at nearly three million heart failure patients, average age 70, in the United States who were hospitalised between 2010 and 2014. Only 1.4% of the patients had received the flu vaccine and just 1.4% had received the pneumonia vaccine.

Rates of in-hospital death were much lower among patients who received the flu and pneumonia vaccines (just over 1% for each) than among those who didn’t receive either vaccine (almost 4%), the researchers found.

The study findings were released on Friday and scheduled for presentation at the European Society of Cardiology virtual annual meeting.

Pandemic changed perceptions

“Pneumonia and flu vaccines are vital to preventing these respiratory infections and protecting patients with heart failure. Although many people have rejected common and safe vaccines before Covid-19, I am optimistic that the pandemic has changed perceptions about the role of immunisations in safeguarding our health,” Gonuguntla said in a society news release.

Serious reactions to flu and pneumonia vaccinations are rare, occur within a few hours and can be treated, he said.

Studies presented at meetings should be considered preliminary until peer-reviewed for publication in a medical journal.

Image credit: iStock

Share Button

Health24.com | Being a jerk not a recipe for getting ahead at work

  • A study found that disagreeableness did not give people an advantage in the competition for power
  • Organisations may allow ‘jerks’ to gain power at the same rate as anyone else
  • However, selfish, deceitful and aggressive people tend to be held back by poor relationships with others

Being a selfish jerk won’t pave a path to success, new research suggests.

The study involved hundreds of participants who completed personality assessments when they were undergraduates or MBA students at three universities.

The researchers checked in with the same people about 14 years later to find out how well they’d done in their careers, and their co-workers were asked about the participants’ workplace behaviour.

In general, people who were selfish, deceitful and aggressive weren’t more likely to have attained positions of authority than those who were generous, trustworthy and pleasant, according to the study published on 31 August in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Poor relationships with others

“I was surprised by the consistency of the findings. No matter the individual or the context, disagreeableness did not give people an advantage in the competition for power – even in more cutthroat, ‘dog-eat-dog’ organisational cultures,” said study co-author Cameron Anderson, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley’s School of Business.

The findings don’t mean that jerks don’t attain high positions, but rather that they don’t get there faster than others, Anderson said.

Any advantage that someone may get from being selfish, deceitful and aggressive is offset by their poor relationships with others, according to the study authors.

The researchers also found that extroverts were the most likely to have advanced in their organisations due to their sociability, energy and assertiveness, something found in previous research.

“The bad news here is that organisations do place disagreeable individuals in charge just as often as agreeable people. In other words, they allow jerks to gain power at the same rate as anyone else, even though jerks in power can do serious damage to the organisation,” Anderson explained.

A strong set of alliances

“My advice to managers would be to pay attention to agreeableness as an important qualification for positions of power and leadership,” he said in a university news release. “Prior research is clear: agreeable people in power produce better outcomes.”

Anderson noted that the findings don’t shed light on whether being a jerk helps or hurts in politics, because the power dynamics are different than in business. However, there are some likely parallels.

“Having a strong set of alliances is generally important to power in all areas of life,” Anderson said. “Disagreeable politicians might have more difficulty maintaining necessary alliances because of their toxic behaviour.”

Image credit: Shutterstock

NEXT ON HEALTH24X

Share Button

Gene-edited babies: Current techniques not safe, say experts

A committee to look into the issue was set up after the first gene-edited babies were born in 2018.

Share Button

Fragile Objections

Suppose you’re sitting in a Toastmasters meeting where members are practicing their speaking skills. Suppose there are about 20 members in the room, which would be pretty typical for a Toastmasters club.

Now suppose you hear a fellow member give a speech that you find objectionable, and it bothers you to hear such words spoken within your club. The topic is permitted within the club though.

What do you do?

Do you stay quiet and keep your thoughts and feelings to yourself?

Do you voice your objections to the speaker privately?

Do you privately share your concerns with some other members about the speech or the speaker?

Do you stand up during the meeting and voice your objections in front of all the members, including the speaker?

Do you sign up to give a speech, so you can disagree with the first speech?

Do you call for a vote to kick the member out?

Do you switch to a different Toastmasters club?

Do you quit Toastmasters altogether?

How you handle this depends on your personality and how you frame the situation. Your response depends on the meaning you assign.

Some assignments of meaning will cause you to have a more fragile relationship with your club, with its members, or with Toastmasters. Other meanings will give you enough resilience to maintain a long-term connection to your club or the organization.

Here’s a very fragile assignment of meaning:

What that speaker shared is totally out of line and should never be heard in this or any other Toastmasters club. If I stay in this club (or in Toastmasters), it means I’m personally condoning what this speaker said. I cannot stomach that.

That framing is pretty inflexible. It frames you into a corner, giving you few options. This sort of framing is incongruent with a long-term membership in Toastmasters.

Here’s a more resilient and flexible assignment of meaning:

A Toastmasters meeting is a growth-oriented practice space. Toastmasters is where members go to learn and build their skills. We don’t expect perfection there. We expect and even encourage mistakes. It’s expected that some members will share disagreeable ideas. It can even be good to have our viewpoints challenged sometimes. Variety can be nice.

If you’re in Toastmasters long enough, there’s a good chance you’ll encounter an objectionable speech or speaker. If you want a more resilient relationship with Toastmasters, it’s important to take these situations in stride. If you get worked up over them, you’ll have a more fragile relationship with Toastmasters, and sooner or later you’ll find a reason to ring the bell and quit.

From the outside looking in, the difference between these frames is pretty striking. You may look at the first frame and think that of course it’s not going to work long-term if someone adopts that frame. The second frame provides way more flexibility.

Here’s a key point: You always have a choice of framing. You can lean towards resilient frames, or you can choose fragile frames. By choosing a fragile frame, you increase the likelihood that you’re going to have to ring the bell and quit eventually. With the first framing above, quitting Toastmasters becomes pretty much inevitable; it’s just a matter of time.

So consider that by adopting such a fragile frame, you’re really choosing ring the bell and quit as well. Using a fragile frame is a way of inviting the final straw moment to present itself, often before you can identify a viable final straw event.

Why do this fragility dance then? Why pick a fragile meaning when it leads to such a predictable outcome?

One reason is that people often prefer a final straw objection. It provides a neat and tidy justification for a sometimes complex decision.

Like any growth-oriented space, Toastmasters is uncomfortable at times. You invite some risk when you show up. You may feel anxious at a meeting. You may face embarrassment. Now and then you may leave a meeting not feeling good about how you did. You may feel envious of peers who seem to be progressing faster than you.

It’s hard to keep showing up and facing that discomfort. It’s also hard to say that you’re leaving because you no longer want to deal with that discomfort.

Truthfully there are lots of reasons that people may choose a fragile frame. A common reason is to speed up the arrival of a final straw moment, so quitting can be justified without having to offer up a reason like, “It’s too uncomfortable” or “I felt too anxious” or even “My heart is calling me in a different direction.”

The downside of using fragile objections is that other people often won’t buy into them. While you may feel they’re solid enough reasons to explain your bell ringing, it’s fairly easy for many people to see them as self-created justifications, just as easily as you can spot the fragility of the first frame above. People will generally let you off the hook when you produce your fragile objection, but they’ll also likely conclude that it wasn’t your real reason for ringing the bell.

Ultimately fragile objections are a crutch. This crutch begins with the adoption of a fragile frame. A key personal growth challenge is to graduate from needing to use fragile frames that inevitably lead to fragile objections. If you’re going to ring the bell, can you learn to do that without needing to engineer any justification for it.

In any area of life, you can ring the bell and quit without having to explain or justify your actions. You can quit Toastmasters at any time and for any reason, for instance. You can quit your job today just because you decide it’s time.

I think another reason people use fragile objections is that it’s a less scary way to transition. Some decisions involve a lot of uncertainty, and it isn’t perfectly clear which way to go. To decide without a fragile objection, you need to trust reality or your intuition a lot more. You also have to accept that a big decision involves risk. If it feels like you have little or no choice in the matter, it takes some of the pressure off and makes you feel less responsible for the choice and its outcome.

So one solution I’ll provide is this: Be willing to be wrong. Be willing to make mistakes. Be willing to sit in the muck of bad outcomes that resulted from your decisions.

Consider that this life is much like a Toastmasters meeting. It’s a growth-oriented space where you learn by doing. You will make mistakes. You will make some decisions that leave you shaking your head afterwards. And that’s okay. It’s part of the reason you’re here.

You do not need to engineer fragile objections to ease the burden of those decisions by artificially narrowing your options. You can choose flexible frames that give you lots of options, and you can still make decisions even when facing a minefield of risk. Now and then you’ll choose wrong. Celebrate that you’re free to do that because that is an incredible gift.

Share Button

Peculiar planetary system architecture around three Orion stars explained

The discovery that our galaxy is teeming with exoplanets has also revealed the vast diversity of planetary systems out there and raised questions about the processes that shaped them. New work published in Science by an international team including Carnegie’s Jaehan Bae could explain the architecture of multi-star systems in which planets are separated by wide gaps and do not orbit on the same plane as their host star’s equatorial center.

“In our Solar System, the eight planets and many other minor objects orbit in a flat plane around the Sun; but in some distant systems, planets orbit on an incline — sometimes a very steep one,” Bae explained. “Understanding the origins of extremely oblique orbital angles such as these could help reveal details about the planetary formation process.”

Stars are born in nurseries of gas and dust called molecular clouds — often forming in small groups of two or three. These young stars are surrounded by rotating disks of leftover material, which accretes to form baby planets. The disk’s structure will determine the distribution of the planets that form from it, but much about this process remains unknown.

Led by University of Exeter’s Stefan Kraus, the team found the first direct evidence confirming the theoretical prediction that gravitational interactions between the members of multi-star systems can warp or break their disks, resulting in misaligned rings surrounding the stellar hosts.

Over a period of 11 years, the researchers made observations of the the GW Orionis triple-star system, located just over 1,300 light-years away in the Orion constellation. Their work was accomplished using the European Southern Observatory’s Very Large Telescope and the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array — a radio telescope made up of 66 antennas.

“Our images reveal an extreme case where the disk is not flat at all, but is warped and has a misaligned ring that has broken away from the disk,” Kraus said.

Their findings were tested by simulations, which demonstrated that the observed disorder in the orbits of the three stars could have caused the disk to fracture into the distinct rings.

“We predict that many planets on oblique, wide-separation orbits will be discovered in future planet imaging campaigns,” said co-author Alexander Kreplin, also of the University of Exeter.

Bae concluded: “This system is a great example of how theory and observing can inform each other. I’m excited to see what we learn about this system and others like it with additional study.”

Story Source:

Materials provided by Carnegie Institution for Science. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Share Button

Hearing loss in naked mole-rats is an advantage, not a hardship

If naked mole-rats were human, they would be prescribed hearing aids. With six mutations in genes associated with hearing, naked mole-rats can barely hear the constant squeaking they use to communicate with one another. This hearing loss, which is strange for such social, vocal animals, is an adaptive, beneficial trait, according to new findings published in the journal Current Biology.

Naked mole-rats are East African hairless mammals that are bald and wrinkly with buck teeth. They live in underground colonies and their social structure resembles that of bees — there are soldiers, workers and a queen. A lot of cooperation is required for a mole-rat colony to function. Naked mole-rats need to decide where to dig, how to defend the colony, and how to convey the location of food sources, and much of this is accomplished by vocal communication.

“Naked mole-rats are constantly chirping and squeaking,” said Thomas Park, professor of biological sciences and neuroscience at the University of Illinois Chicago and one of the lead authors on the paper.

Park has been studying naked mole-rats for decades and has described some of their odd traits, such as their ability to thrive under conditions of low oxygen underground and their high tolerance for pain.

“We were curious about their hearing since they are so vocal, but research had suggested that their hearing is actually quite bad,” Park said.

Park and colleagues tested the hearing of mole-rats using technology similar to that used for testing human hearing. They performed an auditory brain stem response test, during which electrodes placed on the scalp pick up signals indicative of sound being processed in the brain. The researchers found the signals were weak, confirming naked mole-rats have poor hearing. In fact, “their hearing is so bad that they would be candidates for hearing aids if they were people,” Park said.

Once the hearing loss was confirmed, Park and colleagues turned to the mole-rats’ genetics and found six mutations in genes associated with hearing loss in humans.

“The fact that there were so many of these mutations strongly suggests that these mutations were selected for because they are adaptive in some way,” Park explained.

The researchers also found the naked mole-rats lacked cochlear amplification, a process by which specialized cells in the inner ear help amplify sound signals before those signals are sent to the brain. Cochlear amplification is aided by cells called outer hair cells, which are located in the inner ear. Without proper functioning of these cells, sounds are severely dampened.

“If the naked mole-rats didn’t have these mutations, the constant noise they produce could actually kill the hair cells responsible for hearing,” Park said.

Hair cells receive auditory vibrations and send signals to the brain where they are interpreted as sound. Really loud sounds actually kill hair cells, which, unlike other types of cells, can’t regenerate. Park said this is why hearing loss in most mammals is progressive.

“Because the naked mole-rats lack functional cochlear amplification, the sounds they hear don’t ever get up to a level where they are lethal to hair cells, and so the naked mole-rats can withstand this constant cacophony without going totally deaf,” Park said. “They are the only mammals we know of that lack cochlear amplification.”

The new findings suggest that mole rats may be a good animal model to investigate hearing loss in humans.

Story Source:

Materials provided by University of Illinois at Chicago. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Share Button

Radiologists find chest X-rays highly predictive of COVID-19

A team of LSU Health New Orleans radiologists investigated the usefulness of chest x-rays in COVID-19 and found they could aid in a rapid diagnosis of the disease, especially in areas with limited testing capacity or delayed test results. Their findings are published in Radiology: Cardiothoracic Imaging, available here.

“In mid to late March of this year, when COVID-19 cases were spiking in New Orleans, we recognized an unusual pattern on chest x-rays that seemed to correlate with COVID positivity,” notes David Smith, MD, Associate Professor of Clinical Radiology at LSU Health New Orleans School of Medicine. The radiologists conducted a retrospective study of nearly 400 persons under investigation (PUI) for COVID-19 in New Orleans. They reviewed the patients’ chest X-rays along with concurrent reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) virus tests. Using well-documented COVID-19 imaging patterns, two experienced radiologists categorized each chest x-ray as characteristic, nonspecific, or negative in appearance for COVID-19. The radiologists found a characteristic chest x-ray appearance is highly specific (96.6%) and has a high positive predictive value of 83.8% for SARS-CoV-2 infection in the setting of pandemic.

“The presence of patchy and/or confluent, band-like ground glass opacity or consolidation in a peripheral and mid-to-lower lung zone distribution on a chest radiograph is highly suggestive of SARS-CoV-2 infection and should be used in conjunction with clinical judgment to make a diagnosis,” says Bradley Spieler MD, Associate Professor of Diagnostic Radiology and Vice Chairman of Research in the Department of Radiology at LSU Health New Orleans School of Medicine.

“The chest radiograph, while low in sensitivity, can indicate COVID-19 in patients whose radiographs exhibit characteristic COVID-19 findings, when used in concert with clinical factors,” adds John-Paul Grenier, MD, an LSU Health New Orleans Radiology Resident. “While not a substitute for RT-PCR virus tests or Chest CT, radiographs could provide a rapid, cost-effective diagnosis of COVID-19 in a subset of infected patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. The utility of this technique is described in the context of known disadvantages of RT-PCR, considered the gold standard in COVID-19 diagnosis, and Chest CT, which is currently not recommended for COVID-19 diagnosis. “

“This discovery is useful to aid in diagnosis in the setting of pandemic spread of COVID-19, especially when adequate testing is lacking,” says Dr. Smith.

“We believe this work has great potential to aid all health care providers in the fight against COVID-19,” concludes Dr. Spieler.

Catherine Batte, MS, from the Department of Physics and Astronomy at Louisiana State University, also collaborated on the study.

“The COVID-19 pandemic has been especially tough on the people of New Orleans,” declares Dr. Grenier. “We hope that the insights we’ve gained from studying this disease in our community can be used to help other communities across the globe.”

Story Source:

Materials provided by Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Share Button

Coronavirus: Testing boss ‘very sorry’ for shortages

Some people are being asked to travel hundreds of miles for tests as labs struggle to keep up.

Share Button

Health24.com | Smartwatch EKGs quickly deliver crucial heart data

  • EKG readings from a smartwatch were found to be nearly as accurate as standard EKGs
  • EKGs are critical to establish if a patient with chest pain has had a heart attack
  • Smartwatch EKGs could speed up diagnosis and treatment when time is of the essence

Could a smartwatch app save a heart attack patient’s life? Quite possibly, according to Italian researchers.

They found that electrocardiograph (EKG) readings from a smartwatch were nearly as accurate as standard EKGs among patients with suspected heart attacks.

“A [standard] electrocardiograph is not always readily available,” said study author Dr Ciro Indolfi. “[So] the ability to identify an ongoing heart attack quickly and easily thanks to the use of a simple smartphone could be of great help in certain situations in reducing the negative consequences of a heart attack.”

Indolfi is director of cardiovascular research at Magna Graecia University in Catanzaro, Italy.

FDA-approved for atrial fibrillation

An EKG is a graphic representation of the heart’s electrical activity. Indolfi noted that these readouts are critical for establishing whether a patient with chest pain has had a heart attack. It can also quickly identify specific causes.

To see whether smartphone electrocardiograms actually work, researchers assessed EKG reliability among 81 patients who sought care for a likely heart attack at one clinic between April 2019 and January 2020. Two-thirds were men (average age: 61).

All received a standard “12-lead” EKG, which uses 12 electrodes at different spots on the chest and limbs to produce a reading.

Patients also had an EKG using the Apple Watch Series 4. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved the smartwatch’s built-in EKG tool as a reliable way to detect the serious heartbeat irregularity known as atrial fibrillation.

Instead of 12 electrode leads, the smartwatch is equipped with sensors designed to form a single electrode lead. As a workaround, researchers successively placed the watch in nine spots on each patient’s body to generate multiple readings. The readings were then uploaded to an Apple iPhone.

Watch doesn’t generate diagnosis

For comparison purposes, 19 men and women who were not suspected of having experienced a heart attack also had standard and smartwatch EKGs.

Watch-generated EKGs were 94% accurate when it came to correctly identifying and distinguishing between various types of heart attacks, according to Indolfi. The watch also correctly noted that no heart attack had taken place in more than nine out of 10 healthy patients.

The watch does not generate a diagnosis; the EKG readings need to be interpreted by a doctor. But the findings suggest that “with the Apple Watch it is possible to perform a nine-lead EKG with an almost similar reliability as the standard EKG,” Indolfi said.

That’s important, he added, because the faster post-heart attack treatments are administered, the better the outcome. That’s especially true, Indolfi said, among patients who experience a very severe form of heart attack known as a STEMI (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction).

Such patients can do well after insertion of a stent or a balloon (coronary angioplasty) to widen a blocked artery, Indolfi noted. But that procedure only “reduces mortality if it is performed promptly”, meaning administering an EKG within 10 minutes and then, treatment within two hours.

Faster diagnosis and treatment

Dr Gregg Fonarow, director of the Ahmanson-University of California, Los Angeles Cardiomyopathy Center, welcomed the findings with cautious optimism.

“This new feasibility study shows that a smartwatch could be used to obtain multiple leads of an EKG,” he said, underscoring the “high level [of] agreement” between smartwatch and standard readings.

Fonarow said more follow-up work will be needed to confirm the findings.

But he agreed that smartwatch EKGs could ultimately prove very helpful in speeding up diagnosis and treatment in situations where time is of the essence, including heart attacks in setting where standard EKGs are not available.

The findings were published in the online edition of JAMA Cardiology.

Image credit: Shutterstock

NEXT ON HEALTH24X

Share Button

Health24.com | Mom-to-be’s flu shot doesn’t raise autism risk

  • Many studies have shown that flu shots during pregnancy are safe and won’t increase the risk of autism in babies
  • Getting the flu is riskier than a flu vaccination
  • A flu shot may also reduce the burden on healthcare systems, freeing up resources during a possible Covid-19 resurgence

Pregnant women are understandably worried about everything that goes into their bodies. But here’s one worry they can cross off that list: flu shots.

A large, new study has confirmed that an expectant woman’s flu shot doesn’t increase the risk of autism in her child. And that’s true even if the vaccine is given during the first trimester of pregnancy, the Swedish study found.

“The flu vaccine is safe during pregnancy. This study, as well as many others, have consistently shown that flu vaccine is safe,” noted vaccine expert Dr Paul Offit. He’s director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, and was not involved in the current research.

Developmental disorders

What can put mom and baby at risk is getting the flu.

“Pregnant women have a sevenfold increase of being hospitalised with pneumonia if they get the flu,” Offit said. And women who get the flu during pregnancy also have an increased risk of delivering their baby early, according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

Autism spectrum disorders are developmental disorders that affect communication and behaviour. Children with autism have varying degrees of impaired communication and social skills and they may engage in repetitive behaviours, the researchers said. These disorders are thought to stem from both hereditary and environmental factors.

The researchers – led by Dr Jonas Ludvigsson from the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm – used data from national Swedish health registers. They looked at information on babies born between October 2009 and September 2010.

During that time, nearly 40 000 infants were born to women who received a flu vaccine. The vaccine was specifically for the H1N1 (swine flu) strain. The children were compared to more than 29 000 infants whose mothers didn’t get a vaccine.

Flu vaccines safe in pregnancy

After a follow-up of almost seven years, the researchers saw no significant difference in the rates of autism spectrum disorders among the children. Results were similar for flu vaccines given in the first trimester of pregnancy.

Ludvigsson said that research like this is even more critical right now. “Anticipating a vaccine against Covid-19, millions of pregnant women are likely to be offered such a vaccination. While our research group did not study Covid-19 vaccine effects, our research on H1N1 vaccination adds to the current knowledge about vaccines, pregnancy and offspring disease in general,” he said in an institute statement.

The new study was published in the Annals of Internal Medicine. Funding was provided by the Swedish Research Council and the Swedish Council for Working Life and Social Research.

Anders Hviid, a professor of pharmacoepidemiology from the Statens Serum Institut and University of Copenhagen in Denmark, said, “The current evidence supports that flu vaccines are safe to use in pregnancy and that they provide protection against a potentially serious infectious disease for both mother and child.” He wrote an editorial accompanying the study.

“This year, a flu shot will not only provide protection during pregnancy for mother and child and protection in early infancy due to transfer of maternal antibodies, but may also reduce the burden on our healthcare systems freeing up resources, if needed, during a possible autumn and winter Covid-19 resurgence,” said Hviid.

Concerned and vigilant

He added that because of the potential benefits, it’s “somewhat disheartening that influenza vaccination in pregnancy is not embraced to a greater degree”.

Hviid said it’s understandable to be concerned and vigilant during pregnancy. “I hope that the many studies supporting the safety of vaccines and their benefits can help overcome any reservations,” he said.

Offit agreed that with the Covid-19 pandemic, it’s even more important to get a flu vaccine.

“To protect themselves and their unborn child, pregnant women should get the flu shot,” Offit advised, adding, “And get it as soon as possible.”

Image credit: iStock

Share Button