Please wait while we sign you in with LinkedIn.
This may take some time.
Please be patient and do not refresh the page.
(A new window from LinkedIn should open for you to authorize the B&T login. If you don't see this please check behind this window, and if it is still not there check your browser settings and turn off the pop-up blocker.)
See the article here:
Infographic: Anatomy Of A Successful Creative - B&T
Team Selection: Bold, but it worked
It was painfully clear after Saturdays defeat to Leeds United that the majority of our first choice players were in need of a rest and, with the opportunity to field a weakened team in the cup presented to Simon Grayson, he did just that.
Only Gabon international Didier Ndong retained his place in the Sunderland XI, and the ten changes that the manager made gave us a mixed bad in terms of individual performances. Grayson spoke pre-match about those playing taking their chances to keep their place and I think that in the cases of Bryan Oviedo, Lynden Gooch and Robbin Ruiter they did just that. On the flip side, Adam Matthews and Papy Djilobodji were incredibly poor and they wont have done themselves any favours.
That said, we won. So, all in all, the decision to make a raft of changes can only be considered a rousing success.
Verdict: Grayson had to take a gamble and make mass changes. We rode our luck for the most part but we won inside 90 minutes, which is the most important thing.
The Carlisle fan we spoke to in Fan Focus prior to the game suggested that theyd set up in an unorthodox system and it had me wondering before the game whether wed do the same in order to match their shape.
And we did, sort of. For the first time this season we lined up in a 5-3-2/3-1-4-2, with a back five consisting of Bryan Oviedo, Papy Djilobodji, John OShea, Adam Matthews and Donald Love.
The fluidity allowed Oviedo and Love to flourish - and both had very good games - but the same cannot be said about Djilobodji or Matthews, who struggled immensely and were continually dug out of the shit by the fantastic OShea, who marshaled our defence superbly. In fairness to Matthews he isnt a centre half and Im not entirely sure why he was playing, especially when someone like Tom Beadling or Michael Ledger would have really appreciated the opportunity to play for the first team in a position that theyre familiar with.
We looked good on the break and our energy in attack was useful. Joel Asoro found himself one on one with the Carlisle goalkeeper on two occasions but couldnt score - still, it was testament to the way that we set up in the game that he was even presented with the opportunity to get beyond the Carlisle defence with his pace and determination. On another day, we could have had another two or three goals.
Verdict: We looked uncomfortable in defence but in attack we were incredibly fluid - it was worth a try, but I expect well go back to a more traditional 4-2-2-2 on Saturday.
With the game tied at 1-1 and Carlisle firmly in the driving seat it was the introduction of our three substitutes that perhaps gave us the opportunity to re-affirm ourselves as the favourites for a win.
After Carlisles fortunate penalty they were all over us and it honestly felt as though we were going to concede a second imminently. Had it not been for Robbin Ruiter, we probably would have.
Grayson was forced into some quick thinking and he brought on Lamine Kone and James Vaughan, who battled hard and gave the spine of our side the solidity it needed in order to get through the rest of the game.
Then when Aiden McGeady was introduced it forced Carlisle to drop back ten yards or so, handing us the initiative to go and seek a second goal - and it worked.
Verdict: Kone and Vaughan were introduced when it was clearly needed and McGeady gave Carlisle something extra to think about. Nothing surprising but they helped us to win the game and hold our lead.
Grayson was keen to talk up the performance of Robbin Ruiter, who was fantastic between the sticks last night, and indicated that he now has a serious headache over which goalkeeper to select this coming Saturday at Barnsley.
He told the Sunderland Echo:
When he was required to make saves, he made them, and that's why we signed him after the trial period.
Hed done enough in training and in the two games he played for us to make that decision to sign him permanently. It gives us that competition for places that we needed.
I was pleased with him and I was pleased with quite a lot of the players that came in tonight and who haven't figured.
Thats what the players are required to do, they get paid to play and put on performances. A lot of them have done some decent things, weve obviously got to make improvements in certain areas but weve been asked a lot of questions tonight and ultimately we came through the game.
Ive not seen much more than what I expected of the players, I watch them every day in training, thats where I learn about them, how good they are and the deficiencies they have at times. Its nice to see that theyve stood firm and won a cup tie.
I have to say, I think that Graysons pep talk before the game about affording opportunities and ensuring that the players took their chance to stake a claim for a regular spot in the team was outstanding.
Quite a number of the ten players that were brought in for this cup tie upped their game considerably and it would be unfair if Grayson wasnt at least credited with a part in that.
What I like about Grayson is that hes very personable in his words - he doesnt try to bullshit you and is very honest about his style of man-management, which is refreshing having suffered from the negativity of David Moyes for such a long period last season.
Verdict: Dot on. Grayson knows exactly how to motivate not only his first choice eleven, but the squad as a whole.
Read more here:
Grayson's Anatomy: How did the Sunderland manager rate after last night's win v Carlisle? - Roker Report (blog)
An Update on Merck after 2Q17: Keytruda, Januvia, and Janument PART 9 OF 11
In 2Q17, Mercks (MRK) Remicade generated revenues of around $208 million, which reflected an ~39% decline on a year-over-year (or YoY) basis and a 9% decline on a quarter-over-quarter basis. Merck commercializes Remicade in Europe, Russia, and Turkey.
In 1H17, Remicade generated revenues of around $437 million, which is a 37% decline YoY. Merck estimated that the foreign exchanges benefited the company by ~3% in both 2Q17 and 1H17. The company lost its market exclusivity in major European markets in 2015. Merck does not have market exclusivity for Remicade in any territories.
In July 2017, the FDA approved Mercks Renflexis, a biosimilar of Remicade (infliximab). Merck has launched the product in the US market. The regulatory approval and launch of Renflexis could boost Mercks Immunology segment.
In 2Q17, Mercks Simponi generated revenues of around $199 million, which reflected 8% growth on a quarter-over-quarter basis. In 2Q16, Simponi generated revenues of ~$199 million. In 1H17, Simponi generated revenues of ~$383 million, which represented an ~1% decline YoY. In 2Q17 and 1H17, unfavorable foreign exchange affected revenues by 3% and 4%, respectively.
Mercks peers in the immunology drugs market include AbbVie (ABBV), Amgen (AMGN), Biogen, Pfizer (PFE), and Roche. To read more about Mercks Immunology portfolio, please refer toInside Mercks Immunology Portfolio.
In 2Q17, Mercks Emend generated revenues of around $143 million, which reflects ~8% growth on a quarter-over-quarter basis. In 2Q16, Emend generated revenues of ~$143 million. The higher sales volume in Japan was primarily attributed to the revenue growth in the quarter, which was counterbalanced by a decline in sales volumes in the US market. In 1H17, Emend reported revenues of around $276 million, which is ~3% growth on a YoY basis.
In 2Q17, Temodar reported revenues of around $65 million, which is an 11% decline YoY and 2% growth on aquarter-over-quarter basis. To learn more about Mercks Emend and Temodar, please readHow Mercks Oncology Drugs Emend and Temodar Could Perform in 2017.
Merck comprises ~4.6% of the PowerShares Dynamic Pharmaceuticals Portfolio ETF (PJP).
See the original post:
A Look into Merck's Immunology and Oncology Portfolio - Market Realist
Photo: Julio Sosa
While Penn offers nearly 90 majors at the undergraduate level, some are more attractive than others at least on paper.
According to education site College Factual, some of the most popular majors at Penn are finance, business administration and management, economics, nursing and biology.
Wharton sophomore Victoria Sacchetti, who intends to concentrate in finance, was attracted to the program due to her interest in quantitative data.
I love being able to analyze stocks and see how the market is impacted by different things such as politics, she said.
She added that she thought the applicability of her field and the skill of finance professors in the Wharton School served to draw other students to the major.
College sophomore Julia Hines first became interested in economics during high school. Since arriving at Penn she said that she has grown to appreciate the versatility of the major.
I think many people are attracted to econ because it is such a marketable and applicable major, and econ graduates have a wide range of career options, she said.
Anne Duchene, an economics lecturer, also emphasized the marketability of an economics degree.
[Economics] teaches how to analyze, understand and think critically. Employers know that, she said. And that's why they express so much interest in economics majors so students know that the job opportunities are everywhere, not only in bank and consulting, but also in non for profit, government, etc.
Nursing, which may seem more like a degree, is in fact a major in Penn's School of Nursing, and one of the most popular ones. Other majors offered by the School of Nursing include nutrition, which is hosted in partnership with the College of Arts and Sciences, and Nursing and Health Care Management, which is offered as part of a dual-degree program with Wharton.
For Nursing sophomore Jessica Korducki, one of the most appealing aspects of the Nursing School is the accelerated style of the program. While many nursing programs in other schools require students to take foundational classes before applying to major in nursing, Penn allows you to take nursing courses even during freshman year.
Welcome back to school! Read our other stories on NSO including a map on where to hit the books once NSO is over and an investigation into what actually happens when students skip mandatory NSO events.
Wharton sophomore Rachel Trenne's said she intends to pursue a management concentration in Wharton because she appreciates the big picture aspect of businesses.
Being able to learn about all the different elements of business and how they impact overall decisions and strategy is really interesting to me, she said, adding that she thinks the management concentration is particularly appealing to qualitative thinkers.
For students in the College, biology is the most popular choice.
College sophomore Olivia Crocker said the biology major is particularly important for those, like herself, who are interested in scientific research. She works part time at a laboratory during the academic year and worked there full-time over the summer.
Biology professor Linda Robinson identified several other factors that contribute to the popularity of the major. These include a widespread general interest and aptitude in science and math, fascination with the natural world [and] cool new discoveries," as well as "the perception that there may be a good job market for those trained in Biology, including the medical field," she said.
Crocker said the major is also particularly popular among pre-med students, though she's personally not interested in hat path.
Im interested in cell biology because it is more related to the small-scale molecular interactions that form the basis of life, rather than more large scale, anatomical basis of life that I feel is more emphasized in the medical field," she said.
Read more from the original source:
Out of 89 majors, Economics and Biology are two of the most popular. - The Daily Pennsylvanian
In Las Vegas, on August 26, the unbeaten American boxer Floyd Mayweather Jr and the immensely popular Irishman Conor McGregor will face off in a boxing ring, where only striking with hands while standing is allowed. It would be just another boxing match, albeit a huge one, except that McGregor is not even a boxer. Instead, he holds the lightweight and welterweight titles in mixed martial arts (MMA), an emerging combat sport where striking and grappling with both hands and legs is allowed, both while standing and on the ground.
It is an unprecedented match-up and some people believe that McGregor, with his speed, athleticism and youth (he is 11 years younger than Mayweather) has a shot at doing something that 49 professional boxers before him have not been able to accomplish. But scientific evidence from the neuroscience of expertise, an emerging field investigating the brain functioning of experts, warns against betting on an MMA fighter even one as skilled as McGregor upsetting a boxer in a boxing match.
The neuroscience of expertise
The performances of experts often leave us speechless, wondering how it is humanly possible to pull off such feats. This is particularly the case in sports. Consider the serve in tennis. Once the ball is in the air, the brain needs time to process the ball's trajectory and prepare an appropriate course of action, but by the time the body actually executes the required movements in response to these mental processes, the racket will do no more than slice the air, as the ball will have already passed by.
This is the paradox of fast reaction sports such as tennis or boxing: it is only when the ball or the punch is in the air that we can tell with certainty what is going to happen, but by then it is far too late to react in time, even for the quickest humans. The expert brain adapts to this problem by "reading" the intention of the opponent. The positioning and movements of feet, knees, shoulders and the serving hand in tennis give away clues about the direction and power of a tennis serve.
Similarly, the positioning of feet, hips and shoulders provide enough information for the boxing brain to anticipate a punch well in advance. This anticipation power of experts is the reason why the very best practitioners can look like characters from The Matrix, giving the impression of having all the time in the world in an environment where split-second responses decide who wins and who loses.
Being fast and having good reflexes in general is certainly helpful in rapidly changing environments like sports. But no speed in this world will be enough if the brain hasn't experienced and stored tens of thousands of movement patterns, which can then be reactivated and used for reading the situation at hand.
Muhammad Ali vs Jim Brown
This is illustrated by another unofficial cross-discipline event that occurred 50 years ago between the legendary Muhammad Ali and Jim Brown, National Football League (NFL) legend. Jim Brown was a force of nature. He was incredibly quick, immensely powerful, and his extraordinary coordination and reflexes made him one of the greatest NFL players. In the mid 1960s, aged 30, Jim Brown was bored with the NFL and was pondering other ways of making a living. One of them was boxing, a sport where his immense quickness and sheer power would seem to be especially useful.
He persuaded his manager to organise a meeting with Muhammad Ali, at that time at the peak of his powers, who happened to be in London, where Jim Brown was shooting a film at that time. They met in Hyde Park, where Ali used to work out while preparing for the next bout. Ali tried to persuade Brown to give up on his dream of being a boxer. Brown maintained that he was as quick and as powerful as Ali, if not more so, and if boxing suited Ali, it should suit him too.
A "sparring session" ensued, where Ali asked Brown to hit him as hard as possible. The problem was that Ali was never to be found at the spot where he had been standing a moment earlier. According to the legendary promoter Bob Arum, after about 30 seconds of swinging and missing by Brown, Ali pulled off one of his lightning quick one-two combinations and stopped Brown momentarily in his tracks. At that moment, Brown, visibly winded, clocked the situation and simply said: "OK, I get the point."
Don't expect McGregor to be so totally embarrassed, as Brown was. After all, MMA includes aspects of boxing and McGregor has had experience with the sport, unlike Brown. Still, that experience is limited because boxing is just a part of the MMA skill set (not to mention embedded in a context where one needs to employ leg strikes and takedowns). One can be certain that McGregor's brain has stored vastly fewer kinematic boxing patterns than the brain of a person who has boxed all their life, such as Mayweather Jr.
Mayweather Jr may be 40, he may have ring rust after being absent from the ring for almost two years, and McGregor is not only 11 years his junior but also possibly faster and stronger; but everything we know about the way experts' brains work tells us that the smart money is on Mayweather Jr recording a convincing win.
Explore further: How to stop boxing deaths and brain injury with a simple rule
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
Continued here:
Mayweather will beat McGregor, neuroscience predicts - Phys.Org
Kirkland, Wash.-based EvergreenHealth opened its Neuroscience, Spine & Orthopedic Institute on the main campus, according to Kirkland Reporter.
Here are five things to know:
1. The new institute encompasses four levels of the health system's DeYoung Pavilion.
2. To construct the institute, the health system also built two new floors, which will hold the musculoskeletal and orthopedic practices. The construction was a part of EvergreenHealth's 10-year Master Facility Plan.
3. The new floors house 51 exam rooms, two imaging centers, three procedural rooms and six pre- and postoperation rooms.
4. The Neuroscience, Spine & Orthopedic Institute offers orthopedics, spine surgery, physiatry, podiatry, neurosurgery and pain management.
5. Patients will now have access to in-clinic evaluation and diagnostic care, imaging, minimally invasive procedures, surgical consultations and rehabilitation in one location.
More articles on practice management:Menorah Medical Center acquires 3 physicians to form orthopedic clinic: 5 things to know Washington University School of Medicine new spinal cord injury clinical trial site: 7 takeawaysStudy: Obesity alone shouldn't determine TJR candidates
See the original post:
EvergreenHealth unveils Neuroscience, Spine & Orthopedic Institute: 5 things to know - Becker's Orthopedic & Spine
The brain is as beautiful as it is complex. Throughout the centuries scientists have attempted to glean understanding from the brain based on its anatomy. Since Santiago Ramn y Cajals detailed drawings at the turn of the 20th Century, neuroscientists of the modern era have been zooming in on the brain to unlock its secrets. Recent improvements in imaging technologies, greater access to microscopes and specialist software have culminated in the cutting-edge imaging currently being performed on brains and brain tissue across the world.1. Recreating the retina: drawing it by hand
Line drawing of the retina. Ramn y Cajal. Wellcome Images.The neuroanatomist and father of modern neuroscience, Santiago Ramn y Cajal looked at brain tissue stained using the Golgi Stain method under his microscope. He then drew what he saw, producing beautiful reconstructions of neurons such as the line drawing of the retina above.
2. Recreating the retina: from electron micrographs
Connectome of the mouse retina. Max Planck Society
Nowadays, whole sections of the retina have been reconstructed in unprecedented three-dimensional detail. In 2013 Helmstaedter et al. published their paper on the connectomic reconstruction of the inner plexiform layer in the mouse retina. The group used a lot of manpower to manually reconstruct the neurons in a small section of the mouse retina by tracing projections through electron micrograph sections.Related:From Cajal to now
3. Antibody-labelling lights up the brainBy using primary antibodies to target a protein of interest, neuroscientists can then use a fluorescent secondary antibody against the primary to increase the fluorescence signal, producing pretty yet insightful images. Such as the following...
Confocal micrograph image of the adult mouse hippocampus, with immunofluorescent staining for perineuronal nets. Blue = DAPI (cell nuclei), green = parvalbumin interneurons, red = wisteria floribunda agglutinin (WFA; commonly used to label perineuronal nets). Credit Adam Ramsaran, The Hospital for Sick Children (Toronto, ON).
Confocal micrograph of the anterior region of the developing zebrafish brain.Some of the neurons (shown in green) express the green fluorescent protein (GFP) under the control of specific gene expression. Axons, tracts and neuropils have been labeled using antibodies that mark tubulin (in red) and synaptic vesicles (in blue). Credit: Monica Folgueira and Steve Wilson, Wellcome Images.
Confocal micrograph of hippocampal interneurons that express serotonin receptors (green) co-labeledin red for calretinin, and counterstained with DAPI (blue), a marker of cell nuclei. Credit: Margaret I. Davis
4. Speeding up labeling
Antibody labeling and imaging in Drosophila melanogaster brains can take up to a week. In this image, genetically encoded chemical tags have been expressed in neurons of interest. It takes just 15 minutes to stain for these tags with their substrates. Credit: Ben Sutcliffe, Jefferis lab. MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology.
5. Deeper insights into the brain
Your browser does not support HTML5 video.
YFP mouse brain section. The 720m z stack is color coded for depth, such that red cells are deepest in the tissue and the blue cells shallowest. Credit Dr. Mark Lessard, The Jackson Laboratory, Bar Harbor, Maine, USA.
Multiphoton imaging systems, such as Leica's SP8multiphoton confocal system (used to capture the video above), use longer and less-damaging wavelength beams of light to excite fluorescent proteins deeper in tissue, enabling neuroscientists to see complete structures in intact tissue.
6. CLARITY: See through brains
Despite improvements in imaging systems, such as multiphoton laser scanning microscopes, the brain tissue itself hinders imaging, by causing light to scatter.In 2013, Chung et al. published their seminal paper on their hydrogel method, CLARITY, which makes brain tissue transparent, reducing the scattering of light, affording structural and molecular interrogation of the whole intact brain.
7. Live imaging in the brain
Multiphoton image of microglia (GFP, green) and cerebral blood vessels (Texas-red dextran, red) in a living, anesthetized transgenic mouse. Harris A. Gelbard, 2009 Olympus BioScapes Digital Imaging Competition.
8. Imaging Activity With Genetically Encoded Calcium Indicators
This video from the Sur labshows In vivo imaging of visual cortex neurons expressing the genetically encoded calcium indicator GCamp6 responding to a moving grating (top right corner).
9. A Look Inside the Head With Magnetic Resonance Imaging
This video from the Human Connectome Projectexplains how Principal Diffusion Direction uses colors to map out the different directions that water molecules diffuse through the brain's white matter. This data is then used to reconstruct 3D representations of the white matter tracts in the brain.
View original post here:
Imaging the Brain in the Era of Modern Neuroscience - Technology Networks
Eli Lilly will use Topas Therapeutics antigen-specific tolerance induction platform to develop new treatments, with an initial focus on external antigens believed to induce inflammation and/or autoimmune disease, Topas said today.
The companies have signed a multiyear research and option agreement whose value was not disclosed.
Topas did say, however, that it will receive from Lilly R&D funding and payments tied to unspecified future success of compounds to be in-licensed by Lilly. The pharma giant has been granted an option for all candidates produced under the collaboration for in-licensing and further development, while Topas has agreed to conduct preclinical proof-of-principle studies with Lilly to generate the drug candidates.
Topas says its platform is designed to induce antigen-specific immune tolerance by harnessing the liver's natural immunology capabilities. Through the platform, peptide-loaded nanoparticles are selectively targeted toward liver sinusoidal endothelial cells (LSECs), where tolerance against bloodborne antigens is induced by the generation of peptide-specific regulatory T cells.
We expect this work to support the value of our approach in inducing tolerance also against external antigens, Timm Jessen, Ph.D., CEO of Topas Therapeutics, said in a statement. Additionally, the interest from such an important pharmaceutical company in our technology, we believe, supports the strong commercial potential of our work.
Based in Hamburg, Germany, Topas was spun out of Evotec last year to develop nanoparticle-based therapeutics for immunological disorders. Evotec joined Epidarex Capital, EMBL Ventures, and Gimv in raising 14 million ($16.5 million) in Series A financing for the new company, with proceeds intended to expand and accelerate the platform and advance treatment candidates for multiple autoimmune and inflammatory indications.
See more here:
Lilly to Use Topas Platform in Immunology Collaboration - Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News
Michigan State University researcher Kevin Haudek is the lead investigator of a three-year, $485,000 National Science Foundation that develops learning progressions and evaluates principle-based reasoning in undergraduate physiology students.
Principle-based reasoning is a practice of mind used by scientists to approach problems and constrain the boundaries of problems.
We believe that using such principles will help students think more like a scientist, said Haudek, an assistant professor in the MSU Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology in the College of Natural Science.
When students are able to demonstrate principle-based reasoning, they are capable of accurately predicting outcomes to disturbances of a system. Too often, the reliance on rote memorization rather than principle-based reasoning to solve problems, leads to context-bound thinking that fails to build robust understandings, which limits students ability to excel in the sciences.
The project is a cross-disciplinary collaboration between MSU researchers Joyce Parker in the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, John Merrill in the Department of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, Mark Urban-Lurain in the CREATE for STEM Institute at MSU and researchers at the University of Washington.
The grant proposes to create the first learning progression in undergraduate physiology focusing on flux and mass balances core concepts.
Our learning progression will guide the creation of assessments instructors can use to determine where their students are along the spectrum of understanding, Haudek said.
When designing assessments, researchers and instructors must choose between constructed response and multiple-choice formats. Haudek noted the project will focus on the development of CR assessments and the evaluation of these assessments using computerized scoring methods.
We believe CR assessments have certain advantages, which is why wed like to develop these types of assessment items and framed in a whole new content area, he said.
Another aim of the grant is to begin to gather information about national trends in student learning of physiology during two and four-year programs.
The results of this aim may indicate that some gaps or plateaus of improvement might exist over the course of a curricular program, Haudek said.
Haudek and his colleagues are hopeful the project will positively impact a variety of science-based programs since physiology intersects with so many other degrees and career paths.
Although the project is not structured for the purpose of specifically addressing issues related to curricular gaps, Haudek said, one outcome of the study may be that some departments and programs become more self-reflective in the way students understanding of course content is evaluated, thus prompting changes in instruction, courses and or programs."
SOURCE: MSU Today
Go here to read the rest:
NSF grant supports project to improve undergraduate physiology curriculum - WSYM-TV
Its not every day you can stumble into a tent on Eastern Avenue and learn how to improve your sex life. Luckily for us, sex therapist and media personality, Tanya Koens, laid bare the juicy deets on what makes sex fun, freeing and fulfilling last week. Tanya kicked off the University of Sydney Unions Radical Sex and Consent Week with a bang (pun certainly intended).
Ive never seen a room of USyd students more attentive than during Tanyas overview of the different male and female erogenous zones. Let me tell you, the list aint short. In fact, there are 40 parts on a female body that can cause orgasm. 40! I thought mastering one was challenging enough
What I found most striking from Tanyas talk was that it takes men and women the same amount of time to orgasm when masturbating in fact, just like the title of Justin Timberlake and Madonnas delectable 2008 pop collaboration, it only takes four minutes. I dont think they were talking about masturbating, but its a coincidence I just cant ignore.
However, despite the mutual four minutes it takes to climax while doin it solo, in partnered sex its a very different story. To reach orgasm with someone else, it typically takes males five and a half minutes compared to the 17 minutes for females.
Im no Einstein, but thats a pretty notable gap. So if women are physiologically capable of reaching orgasm as quickly as men, why is it that it takes us ladies so much longer to climax when were with a partner? According to Tanya, there a multitude of reasons.
For women, desire and arousal are wholly controlled by the brain, which controls the rest of our body. When women are with a partner, it can take more time to relax and trigger arousal in the brain, and thus blood flow in the vagina and other erogenous zones. Although this can be impacted by things like stress, nervousness, self-esteem issues, past experiences, and physical impairment (to name a few), it still takes women a little more time to become fully aroused in the absence of these factors.
As our personal sexpert suggested, whats important is that we take things nice and slow. Take time to touch each others entire bodies before going straight for the bullseye. After all, why rush to dessert when you can have a multi-course degustation?
Of equal importance, Tanya re-iterated what youve probably already heard several times before: communication is key. Making an effort to talk to your partner and find out what they like can go a long way. Before getting physical, connect with each other mentally first by using your words, she says. Who knew it was that simple?
On top of this gender imbalance in the time it takes to orgasm, when it comes to hook-up sex, the stats are even more divided. On average, a mere 4 per cent of women orgasm compared to a whopping 85 per cent of men. The rate of orgasm increases with the number of hook-ups between the pair, presumably because both parties get to know each other better. Clearly, communication and comfort have a lot to do with reaching the big O.
As alarming as this orgasm gap is, fear not! Tanya reminded us that reaching orgasm isnt the be all and end all of good sex. Dont make sex outcome focussed, she advised. Sex is about the journey, not the destination. That goes for everyone: so long as youre having fun, thats all that really matters in the end!
Content note: Some Rad Sex coverage uses language that reinforces the gender binary to reflect the content of reviewed events.Honiunderstands that this does not represent the identities of all our readers.
Here is the original post:
Review: The physiology of pleasure - Honi Soit