Office for National Statistics analysis shows how countries compared in the first six months of the year

The change for those who test positive, or show symptoms, comes amid fears of a resurgence.

• Many people doubt if men can really be equally attracted to males and females 
• Men who identify as bisexual are often regarded with suspicion and face discrimination
•  A genital arousal test proved that a large number of men are aroused by both sexes

Is male bisexuality real? According to a new review, the answer is a definitive “yes.”

“The current study found very strong and consistent evidence that bisexual men do in fact tend to have bisexual arousal patterns,” noted study author J. Michael Bailey. “There is no longer reasonable doubt.”

Bailey is a psychology professor at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois. He and his colleagues came to their conclusion after poring over the findings of eight sexual orientation studies conducted between 2000 and 2019 at four different American, Canadian and British sites.

“There has long been a controversy whether men who identify as bisexual are actually bisexual. The bisexual men and many others believe that they are,” Bailey explained.

Viewed with suspicion

“However, some others – including some scientists and laypersons – have doubted this,” he noted. The reason: a belief that men who claim to be bisexual “are actually either heterosexual or homosexual, and that their claim to be bisexual is based on self-misunderstanding, perhaps due to social pressure not to admit exclusive homosexuality”.

Scepticism of female bisexuality – though not the focus of the latest investigation – has largely been more muted, Bailey noted.

But Caitlin Ryan, director of the Family Acceptance Project at San Francisco State University, suggests that the controversy surrounding male bisexuality has proved problematic for those who identify as such. (A 2016 study led by Bailey indicated that about 5% of men say they have “at least some attraction to both sexes”.)

“People who identify as bisexual – especially men – are often viewed with suspicion, and this includes a perception that they won’t commit to being gay,” she said. “They are often discriminated against and stigmatised.”

Against that backdrop, Bailey and his team decided to review sexual orientation research that had been completed at Northwestern University; the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health in Toronto; the University of Essex in Colchester, UK; and Cornell University in Ithaca, New York.

Genital arousal test

All told, the studies enlisted just over 600 men, with an average age of about 29. Two-thirds were white, 12% were Black and nearly 6% were Hispanic. All were genetically male at birth.

From the start, 178 of the men described themselves as “exclusively heterosexual”, while 102 said they were “mostly” straight, 139 said they were “exclusively homosexual”, and 70 said they were “mostly” gay.

The remaining 117 men said they were bisexual: 46 said they were bisexual but leaned straight; 37 said they were bisexual but leaned gay; and 34 said they were simply bisexual.

Those 117 men were therefore classified as falling in the “bisexual range” of the seven-point Kinsey scale, an orientation measure developed by the renowned 20th-century biologist Alfred Kinsey. That meant they registered as a 2, 3 or 4, with 0 meaning exclusively straight and 6 meaning exclusively gay.

All enrollees then participated in a genital arousal test. It involves placing a circumference gauge around the penis. This allows researchers to measure arousal patterns as participants view erotic video clips or still images involving either men or women. None of the studies involved mixed-gender stimulation.

In the end, Bailey and his colleagues excluded from their analysis about 100 participants who weren’t aroused by any of the erotic videos or photos.

Broader acceptance of bisexuality

But nearly 500 men were aroused. And when it came to being aroused, those who said they were bisexual did in fact register as 2, 3 and 4 on the Kinsey scale.

That did not necessarily mean that such men were equally attracted to both men and women. In fact, “our results suggest that even most men who say they are equally attracted to men and women have some preference for one or the other sex,” said Bailey.

But it did mean that bisexual men were more aroused by men than straight men, more aroused by women than gay men, and more evenly attracted to both genders than either straight or gay men.

Ryan was not involved in the review. But she suggested that the findings could be helpful in paving the way towards broader acceptance of bisexuality as a whole and bisexual men in particular.

“These findings are important, since research routinely shows higher mental health risks and experiences of rejection for bisexual youth and adults related to stigma,” she said.

Bailey and his colleagues reported their findings in the 20 July issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

^{Image credit: iStock}

Fears lockdown is not working as the Australian state reports its highest number of cases and deaths.

• There has been much debate over the years about the impact of coffee on human health 
• Caffeinated coffee, however, appears not to increase the risk of disease
• Moderation appears to be key, as caffeine is a stimulant and can make people jittery

Coffee has been tied to many potential health benefits, but people should drink it for pleasure, and not disease prevention.

That’s one of the main conclusions of a new research review. In it, researchers give an overview of the evidence on coffee and caffeine – the subjects of many health studies over the years.

“The impact of coffee consumption on health is important because there are few other dietary factors that so many people across the world are so frequently exposed to,” said Rob van Dam, the lead author on the review.

And overall, his team found, the news is good for coffee lovers: Caffeinated coffee does not appear to raise any disease risks, and is instead linked to lower odds of various diseases. And moderate doses of caffeine are generally safe for most people.

Pregnant women should be careful

“Moderate” is the key, however. Too much caffeine can disrupt sleep or make people jittery.

“The amount of caffeine that leads to unpleasant side effects varies greatly from person to person,” said van Dam, a professor at the National University of Singapore.

He suggested people pay attention to whether caffeine seems to affect their ability to fall asleep or lead to “agitation or anxiety”. If it does, van Dam said, “they can adapt their level of intake or timing of intake during the day.”

That’s the advice for most adults. Pregnant women, however, should be particularly careful about caffeine intake. Based on the evidence, van Dam’s team said, they should limit themselves to no more than 200 milligrams of caffeine a day.

That’s roughly the amount in 12 ounces of coffee.

For non-pregnant people, van Dam said that up to five 8-ounce cups of coffee a day may be fine, depending on a person’s caffeine tolerance.

Much back-and-forth

Lauri Wright is chair of nutrition and dietetics at the University of North Florida, and a spokesperson for the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.

“There’s been so much back-and-forth over the years about whether caffeine is good or bad,” said Wright, who was not involved in the review. “So it’s good to come back to the evidence.”

In general, studies show that despite caffeine’s bad reputation as a stimulant, caffeinated coffee does not seem to raise the risk of developing high blood pressure – or worsen existing blood pressure problems.

In fact, coffee consumption has been linked to lower risks of developing heart disease, as well as other serious conditions. The list includes type 2 diabetes, certain cancers, Parkinson’s disease, liver disease and gallstones, according to the review.

None of those studies, however, proves that coffee – or caffeine – is responsible for the lower risks, Wright said. She agreed with the report’s conclusion that people should not rely on java to prevent any diseases.

“But coffee and caffeine can be part of a healthy lifestyle,” Wright said.

Energy drinks the exception

There is a question over whether filtered coffee (from a drip coffee maker, for instance) is healthier than unfiltered. The latter includes espresso, boiled coffee and coffee made by French press, for example.

According to van Dam, research shows that unfiltered coffee can raise blood cholesterol levels.

Wright, however, said, “What you put into the coffee is what really matters, rather than whether it’s filtered or unfiltered.” That is, avoid loading that coffee cup with sugar and cream.

“Some of these coffee drinks people buy are more like milkshakes,” Wright said.

There are other sources of dietary caffeine, including tea, sodas and chocolate. For the most part, though, they contain low amounts, Wright said.

Two exceptions, she noted, are energy drinks and “shots”, which can contain as much or more caffeine than a cup of coffee. High intake of those beverages can cause spikes in blood pressure and heart palpitations, according to the review.

Caffeine can also interact with certain medications. If people have questions about their medications, Wright said, they can talk to their pharmacist.

The review was published on 23 July in the New England Journal of Medicine.

^{Image credit: iStock}

The public are being consulted on how to avoid community divisions opening up in the months ahead.

• Researchers designed an experiment to compare dogs’ and pigs’ ability to solve problems
• When the problem became unsolvable, dogs were more likely to turn to humans for help
• In contrast, pigs were more persistent than dogs in trying to solve the task without human help

You might say this is a tale about sheer pig-headedness.

Hungarian researchers wondered how two popular family pets – dogs and miniature pigs – would compare when confronted with a problem to solve.

Turns out pigs are more likely than dogs to find a solution on their own, while dogs are more apt to seek out human help.

Miniature versions of the domestic pig are popular pets whose social place in human households is similar to that of dogs, according to the team at Eötvös Loránd University in Budapest. To learn more, the researchers launched the “Family Pig Project” in 2017.

‘Unsolvable task paradigm’

“The animals are raised in a similar environment as family dogs, providing the basis for unique comparative investigations between the two species,” said principal investigator Attila Andics.

From an early age, dogs look at humans when trying to solve a problem in order to establish joint attention and initiate interactive communication. Would other pets would do the same?

“We used the so-called ‘unsolvable task paradigm’, where the animal first faces a problem that he can solve, in our case an easy-to-open box with food inside,” said doctoral student Paula Pérez. “After some trials, the problem becomes unsolvable because the box is securely closed.”

When the box was empty, pigs and dogs reacted similarly, said research fellow Linda Gerencsér. But when the box had food inside, opening it became a challenge that pigs and dogs tackled in different and distinctive ways.

“Pigs were faster than dogs already in solving the task and getting the reward, perhaps due to their better manipulative capacities. Then, when the task became unsolvable, dogs turned to the humans more than before,” she said.

Dogs more dependent and cooperative

In contrast, pigs were more persistent than dogs in trying to solve the task without human help, which may “reflect their predisposition to solve problems independently”, Gerencsér said.

The findings were recently published in the journal Animal Cognition.

Pérez said the study suggests pigs and dogs have similar capacities for communicating with people.

“However,” she added, “species-specific predispositions might be responsible for the found differences. Dogs are naturally more dependent on and cooperative with humans. This explains their unique success in interacting with us.”

^{Image credit:}

One in three children are poisoned by lead that can cause their health irreversible harm, research finds.

As sea ice in the Arctic retreats further and melts faster every decade, scientists are racing to understand the vulnerabilities of one of the world’s most remote and unforgiving places. A study appearing July 29 in the journal Heliyon details the changes that occurred in the Arctic in September of 2018, a year when nearly 10 million kilometers of sea ice were lost over the course of the summer. Their findings give an overview at different timescales of how sea ice has receded over the 40 years of the satellite era and show how the summer’s extensive decline is linked to global atmospheric processes as far south as the tropics.