Trinity scientists handed 4.8m to unravel mysteries of virus – The Times

A new Irish research project is hoping to work out why men are more affected by Covid-19 than women, why some people get more sick than others, and how long immunity lasts after recovery.

Researchers at Trinity College are hopeful of providing answers to these questions following a 4.8 million investment into the study of immunology of the coronavirus.

Simon Harris, the minister for higher education, innovation and science, announced the funding yesterday.

The research will be led by Professor Kingston Mills and Professor Aideen Long at the Trinity Biomedical Sciences Institute and Trinity Translational Medicine Institute.

It will try to understand why some people are more susceptible to Covid-19 than others.

The immunologists will develop, validate and deploy rapid antibody testing. This will seek

Link:
Trinity scientists handed 4.8m to unravel mysteries of virus - The Times

Tel Aviv University presents an analysis of reaction of human antibodies to coronavirus – Mirage News

A team of researchers from Tel Aviv University and the Sharon Hospital at the Rabin Medical Center, led by Prof. Motti Gerlic and Prof. Ariel Munitz of the Department of Microbiology and Clinical Immunology at TAUs Sackler School of Medicine, applied an innovative antibody test to about 70 COVID-19 patients at the Sharon Hospital. The researchers examined the development of antibodies targeting two different viral proteins in the patients bodies, and found that severely ill patients developed the antibodies at a faster rate than those with a mild case of the disease. In addition, antibodies of the type IgG were maintained in the blood of most patients throughout the study. This project has important implications for our understanding of the immune response to SARS-CoV-2, as well as future tracking of the effectiveness of vaccines and population surveys (serological tests).

The researchers found that antibodies of the type IgM, that usually develop at the early stages of viral contagions, developed early in this case only against the protein RBD the site at which the virus SARS-CoV-2 binds to human cells, and not against the viruss nuclear protein. We sampled the antibodies of about 70 COVID-19 patients at the Sharon Hospital, throughout the outbreak of the disease in Israel, says Prof. Munitz. Our first finding was that not all viral proteins generate a rapid immune response, but that antibodies targeting the RBD protein did develop very quickly once the symptoms appeared. This finding is quite significant, because it suggests that the test we used may be utilized as a diagnostic tool at different stages of the illness.

The second thing we noticed, which is even more interesting, is that patients defined as severely ill developed antibodies at a faster rate than mildly ill patients, but ultimately all patients exhibited a similar immune response, recounts Prof. Munitz. Patients with mild, moderate and severe COVID-19 all developed the same level of antibodies. This is important, because one might have thought that the severely ill became so sick because they did not develop a sufficient amount of antibodies, and were thus unable to combat the virus effectively. We assume that the fast development of antibodies in these patients indicates that their immune system is hyper-active, but this hypothesis requires further research.

We measured the levels of antibodies in the patients blood when they arrived at the hospital, during the period of hospitalization and after their release, explains Prof. Gerlic. We tried to understand whether the level of antibodies in their blood corresponded in any way to the severity of the illness, whether the antibodies developed in a similar way in all patients, and whether they remained in the blood for long periods of time a critical factor for the herd immunity we all wish to attain. We found that at later stages of the disease, about 50 days after the initial appearance of symptoms, a significant decline occurred in the presence of antibodies types IgM and IgA, regardless of the severity of the illness. In IgG-type antibodies, however, we observed only a slight decrease, even in mildly ill patients. IgG-type antibodies play an extremely important role in the immune response because they can neutralize the protein that binds the virus to human cells to enable contagion thereby preventing the virus from penetrating the cells. We have not yet examined how the antibody actually works, and we do not know whether or not it neutralizes the virus, but the facts that these antibodies are quickly produced in all patients, and stay in the blood for a long time, suggest that they provide some level of immunity. So far, we have found that IgG-type antibodies remain in the body for two months. We will continue to monitor the patients for another year, to find out how long the antibodies remain in their bodies hoping for the formation of an immunological memory.

In the new study the researchers from TAU used a new serological test developed in their laboratory. The IDFs Medical Corps has already used the serological test developed by Prof. Gerlic and Prof. Munitz to detect COVID-19 antibodies in the blood of IDF soldiers. Within the next few weeks the test will be sent to the Israels Ministry of Health for validation, so that it may be used in population surveys.

Alongside the interesting findings, says Prof. Munitz, we wanted to demonstrate that our method is valid and more effective than the prevalent test for antibodies targeting viral proteins. To this end we examined samples of antibodies from the blood of COVID-19 patients, alongside samples from 200 healthy participants, taken before November 2019. We proved that our test, based on the antibodies, was able to distinguish between those who were ill and those who were not at very high levels of sensitivity and specificity. One reason for this success is that we screen for three different antibodies: IgM that appears early and declines early, IgA found on mucous surfaces like the lungs, and IgG, which we intend to test in the long run, because it may possibly lead to immunity.

More:
Tel Aviv University presents an analysis of reaction of human antibodies to coronavirus - Mirage News

HBCU scientist working on COVID-19 antiviral – Tennessean

The top infectious disease expert in the United States has told House lawmakers its a question of when, not if the United States will have a vaccine for COVID-19. (June 23) AP Domestic

A scientist who previously developed an antiviral with potential to treat Zikais close to testing a similar drug to combat COVID-19.

Dr. Donald Alcendor, an associate professor of microbiology and immunology at Meharry Medical College, began working on the COVID-19 antiviral in April and anticipatesit is fourto sixweeks away from animal toxicity testing.

Should the antiviral meet expectations andproceedthroughfurther testing, he predicts that it may be FDA-approved and in use sometime next year.

With Zika, we saw the changes within infected cells in a matter of hours. To see something like that in a patient would be remarkable, Alcendor said.

Dr. Donald Alcendor, an associate professor of microbiology and immunology at Meharry Medical College.(Photo: Meharry Medical College)

The work is especially meaningful for Meharry Medical College, an HBCU founded in 1876 to train Black doctors and provide care for underserved African Americans, a community that, at the time, was often ignored by white doctors. African Americans have been disproportionately hit by the pandemic and remain one of the most at risk of contracting COVID-19.

"Infectious disease research is one of Meharrys strengths and we are excited to (be a) part of the global scientific effort to find a treatment for this virus," saidMeharry Medical College President and CEODr. James Hildreth."The devastating impact of COVID-19 on minorities makes this research especially relevant to Meharrys legacy and mission," he said in an emailed statement.

The antiviral is different from a vaccine in that it could treat those who have already contracted the novel coronavirus, which has killed more than 126,000 in the United States,according to the CDC.

MORE: Vaccines are not all created equal: Avariety of ways to stop COVID-19

There is currently no FDA-approved vaccine or antiviral. In May, hospitals were given emergency authorization by the FDA to administer Remdesivir, previously used to slow the replication of the Ebola virus and two other coronaviruses, SARS and MERS. But the drug is still being studied and the FDA said that, while some patients have seen a shortened recovery time, there is little known about its safety and effectiveness.

What we have is the only antiviral specific for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19), Alcendor said. All these other antivirals out there affect virus replication in general for many viruses. When something is specific, its likely to have less unintended consequences.

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

COVID-19 is spread through respiratory droplets that can be passed on when people sneeze, cough or talk. Once inside a cell, the virus uses an enzyme called a polymerase to begin making copies of itself. After replication, the virus causes inflammation in the lungs which can quickly lead to what Alcendor calls "the death point"or the moment when a patient must be placed on a ventilator because they can no longer breathe on their own.

The idea of Alcendors antiviral is to stop the polymerase from being made, thereby preventing replication and hopefully inflammation.

If Im able to circumvent that polymerase from doing its job, I stop everything downstream from happening, Alcendor said.

Dr. Donald Alcendor works in a lab at Meharry Medical College.(Photo: Meharry Medical College)

If testing goes according to plan, Alcendor will have a drug that can prevent viruses from replicating in a cell for three to fivedays. That means it could also be taken before infection and still work to stave off the virus.

EXPERTS: We're one-third of the way to a widely available coronavirus vaccine

The method is similar to his Zika antiviral approach, which he said shut down virus replication by 95 percent.

But Zika was primarily a threat to pregnant women and their babies and was transmitted by mosquitoes. With COVID-19, the stakes are much higher, he said.

To constantly, every day lose 1,000 people to this virus is something we cannot stand for, Alcendor said.

The work by Alcendor and his team is global but feelspersonal.

My home state of Louisiana is 32 percent African American. However, (53 percent)of the people dying of COVID-19 are African American, Alcendor said.

Our medical and research faculty and staff here stand hand in hand with colleagues around the world to say COVID-19 is not bigger than us and we want to do our part in all of this.

COVID-19 poses a significant threat to African Americans, who are at higherrisk of contracting the virus, largely due tosocial issues,health care access, and comorbidities such as diabetes and high blood pressure.

THE AMERICAN SOUTH: In the Deep South, COVID-19 reveals systemic issues hurting vulnerable black communities

This is an opportunity for Meharry to be in what I would call a spotlight thats been deserving for some time," Alcendor said."Our medical and research faculty and staff here stand hand in hand with colleagues around the world to say COVID-19 is not bigger than us and we want to do our part in all of this.

And though his antiviral may not be ready for hospital use until next year, Alcendor doesnt expect COVID-19 to disappear anytime soon. The benefit of his antiviral, he said, is that it takes less than two weeks to manufacture and can be easily adjusted if the virus continues to adapt. It also becomes more significant asfluseason looms in the fall and winter months.

I believe the disease will be with us for some time, he said. As scientists, weve been put on alert: Theres likely more of these viruses coming in the future. We have to have a plan of action that allows us to develop reagents that can work quickly and shut down infections very early so they dont develop into pandemics.

News tips? Questions? Call reporter Andrew Yawn at 985-285-7689 or email him at ayawn@gannett.com. Sign up for The American South newsletter.

Read or Share this story: https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/american-south/2020/07/02/covid-treatment-hbcu-scientist-working-coronavirus-antiviral/3276979001/

Continued here:
HBCU scientist working on COVID-19 antiviral - Tennessean

Lust for dominance defines anatomy of war – The Tribune India

Shelley Walia

Professor Emeritus, English & Cultural Studies, Panjab University

Never think that war, no matterhow necessary, nor how justified,is not a crime.

Ernest Hemingway

WRITING about World War I, famous war journalist and communist activist John Reed wrote in 1917: War means ugly mob madness, crucifying the truth tellers, choking the artists, sidetracking reforms, revolutions and the working of social forces. The legacy of violence, especially in the 20th century, is undoubtedly a history of human barbarism, plunder and suppression, torture and genocide, and above all, deception and lies. Indeed, there can be no legitimacy of war and any form of violent action is in itself wrong. War must be resisted because to use violence to end violence would be logically self-contradictory, argued Christopher Caudwell in 1938.

The one thing that enables the authorities to deceive the public, says eminent historian Howard Zinn, is to keep the public from thinking back to the history of war, the history of government deception, the history of media complicity. This statement could very well sum up the history of the pervasive and systematic Indo-China cross-border militancy smacking of war as an instrument of national policy. The frontline war journalists are kept at bay and (mis)information is all that the public is fed on. Understandably, the Chinese foreign policy is the villain at whose hands India faces a slippery situation, which if allowed to escalate, would boomerang on the already declining economy of the country. But there should be no self-righteousness when we are witnessing a moment of loathsome political and social turmoil in the country.

The Charter of the United Nations declares that peaceful coexistence is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all members. This in itself is a laudatory declaration. However, we are faced with a different reality at the crossroads of human nature and international politics, a reality of inequality which is elemental to it. The theory of equality embedded in the Charter misses a noteworthy fact of human nature: the fixation of world leaders with the passion for status which they feel entitled to enjoy on the international stage.

History abounds with examples of nations going to war merely for some damage to, or advancement of, position. The Falklands crisis arose out of Britains unshakable sense of self-esteem receiving a blow if the colony was not salvaged. Russia too could not tolerate any blemish on its status, and consequently took the anticipatory measure of an impulsive war with Germany. George Bush declared war on Iraq presumably to wipe out weapons of mass destruction but more plausibly to avenge the insult heaped on his father by Saddam Hussein.

War has seldom been a worthy initiative, waged for worthwhile causes. Its more likely to be read as a distraction from the socio-political or economic upheaval. Misguided with a fervent ideal of pseudo nationalism, it arouses an ethno-racist pride and delivers legitimacy to a faltering national leadership guarding personal vanity and enabling enhancement of power over the malleable subjects.

The defence of international standing may often supersede any other consideration, as is apparent in the Indo-Chinese territorial skirmishes over the last half a century. The display of military prowess serves as a sense of self-importance, security and economic gain in matters of determining international consequences relating to military dominance and economic hegemony. It is a key factor driving the world, in the words of Steven Pinker, towards the course of war and peace.

China and India today are poised across the borders in a state of belligerence common to nations which, in the words of Shakespeare, are jealous in honour, sudden and quick in quarrel. Ever since the humiliation of India in the 1962 invasion, the Chinese have persistently and periodically disturbed the peace and calm of the border with a periodic wrap on the knuckles of India, a rising power to be kept under check. Moreover, the Line of Actual Control remains obscure and thus susceptible to cross-border disputes if only to exhibit nothing but military arrogance or national assertion. The rugged ice-covered terrain of the border, indeed, has no value in actuality for the antagonists.

The recent spat on the Ladakh border strikingly amounts to the theatre of cruelty reflecting the spectre of medieval barbarism experienced in tribal warfare, leaving Indian soldiers brutally bludgeoned by martial artists dropped near the border. Disturbing the status quo on the border with such bloodthirsty violation of the laws of war at a juncture when India remains vulnerable in a losing battle against the novel coronavirus, undeniably seems to be ethically unneighbourly. In an era of unprecedented militarisation, China, the global hyperpower, has increasingly embraced imperial aspirations with all its military and economic posturing. Empire, which essentially is undemocratic, threatens to define the relationship between China and the rest of the world with its ramifications felt in every successive military intervention.

Both India and China have arrogantly pushed ahead in constructing better strategic infrastructure with the intention to dominate the border through the deployment of heavy forces, and whimsically walking into disputed territories. The Chinese aggression could be another 1962 type of a lesson in subjugation. India has to tread lightly and guard its hard-won equilibrium. Complacency at this juncture would be disastrous.

In spite of the advancing trade relations with India, why has then China brought on this international crisis? Only one answer comes to mind: China would like to defend its dominance in the subcontinent in the context of Indias unremitting rise as a global power. If China needs to become a part of the international comity of nations, it will have to change its posture and stop being an interventionist military power dominating the economies of other countries. The systemic confiscation of land across the border, the policing of the South China Sea or the overrunning of Tibet in the past has further antagonised world opinion against it, especially in the wake of the Wuhan crisis.

The denunciation of the seemingly endless investment in military capacities, of the brutality of war is, therefore, central to the politics of peace and war. To react to the complexity of world affairs with military firepower or predatory economics rather than a realistic political response and diplomatic negotiations is not the solution. War, indeed, can never be the inescapable route to the settlement of differences. It can only signal a dark future at home and abroad.

See the article here:
Lust for dominance defines anatomy of war - The Tribune India

Institutionalized Youth and the Anatomy Lab in Twentieth Century Michigan – AAP News

In early January 1923, Harley Haynes, superintendent of Michigans Lapeer Home for the Feeble Minded and Epileptic (Lapeer Home), wrote to Rollo McCotter, University of Michigan Professor of Anatomy. He wrote to tell him that the body of Inez M., a girl who died at seven years, four months, and nine days of age, would soon arrive in Ann Arbor because her parents . . . could not furnish burial.1 Thus, as mandated by state Anatomic Law, her body would be delivered to the University of Michigan Medical School (UMMS) for the cost of $19.92 ($299.88 in 2020 dollars).2 There is no indication for Inez M. (or for any of the other children) that her parents consent was requested or that they were even informed.

That the UMMS was paying for bodies was not unusual. During the 19th century, the study of gross anatomy in US medical schools had become increasingly important. Historians have studied how and why those schools acquired bodies in general.3,4 However, the specific acquisition of childrens bodies has not been previously described. In this article, we briefly outline how one university program acquired childrens bodies. We suggest possible motivations for their use and consider areas for further scholarship.

Like many 19th-century medical schools, UMMS struggled to acquire bodies for anatomic dissection, sometimes resorting to graverobbing.5,6 In 1867, reflecting a national trend, the state of Michigan passed An Act to Authorize Dissection in Certain

Address correspondence to Joel D. Howell, MD, PhD, Department of Internal Medicine, North Campus Research Complex, 2800 Plymouth Rd, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2800. E-mail: jhowell{at}umich.edu

Read the original post:
Institutionalized Youth and the Anatomy Lab in Twentieth Century Michigan - AAP News

Mold Your Brain with Meditation: Mindfulness and Brain Anatomy – The Great Courses Daily News

ByPeter M. Vishton, PhD,William & MaryEdited by Kate Findley, The Great Courses DailyDuring regularly practiced meditation, the brain experiences significant activity that can be measured through before-and-after fMRI scans; the concentration of gray matter increases in several areas as neurons are produced and retained over time. Photo by fizkesMeditation and Brain Anatomy

With advancements in neuroscience research, we can now study the direct impact of meditation on the brain. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), researchers can not only measure brain activity, but also perform precise scans of your brain anatomy before and after meditation.

Observing brain activity helps us to measure the immediate effects of meditation on the brain. If you meditate on a regular basis for some period of weeks or months, though, does it change the anatomical structure of your brain? MRI brain scans indicate that it does.

One study comes from a team led by Britta Hlzel of Harvard Medical School. She and her colleagues recruited a group of 17 people who had signed up for a meditation course intended to help with stress reduction.

Additionally, they recruited 17 other people who didnt participate in the course. These control participants were drawn from people who wanted to take the course but couldnt because all the seats were full.

Before the course started, all of the participantsthe 17 meditation students and the 17 control participantsvisited an MRI facility. The researchers there conducted a high-resolution scan of each of the participants brain anatomy. The meditation participants then took their course.

The course consisted of eight meetings, two-and-a-half hours each, one meeting per week. In the sixth week of the course, the students met for a longer six-and-a-half hour session.

The program involved mindfulness training, where you engage in awareness of the experiences that youre having at that particular moment. As you sit quietly, relaxing with your eyes closed, you engage in a sequential scan of your own body.

Often, when youre first learning this, you might listen to an audio recording of an expert guiding your thought process. The teacher might first ask you to focus on your toes: to feel them, be aware of them, and relax them.

Next you move onto your feet, your lower legs, and so on. The body scan works through the whole body and then completes by encouraging you to be aware of your whole body at once.

Over this eight-week intervention, the participants reported engaging in about 23 hours of total meditation practice. This averages out to a little less than 30 minutes per day on average.

After this period, the researchers found increases in the gray matter concentration in several areas of the brain. If your brain has more gray matter, it has more neurons. This meditation practice caused the brains of the meditators to produce more neurons and retain more of them over time.

Additionally, the meditation showed a clear effect on the left hippocampus. The posterior cingulate cortex, the left temporo-parietal junction, and the cerebellum also showed these effects.

The hippocampus plays a role in a wide range of functions, ranging from memory to reasoning about how to navigate through the world. The hippocampus is a highly connected structure that seems to regulate a wide variety of processes throughout the brain. Theres an entire scientific journal devoted to the study of how the hippocampus functions, appropriately called Hippocampus.

The posterior cingulate cortex is another highly connected structure. Its often thought of as a part of the brains default networkthe area of the brain activated regardless of what youre doing, even when youre doing nothing at all.

Its associated with emotion regulation and the control of general arousal. This is one of those central control structures that seems to be involved in regulating a large collection of brain circuits.

The left temporo-parietal junction is heavily involved in our ability to parse and understand both written and spoken language. The better this region functions, the better youre able to reason about the things that you read and hear.

The cerebellum is a part of the brain located just above the spinal cord, underneath the cortex near the very back of the skull. This region is smaller than the cortex, but it contains about three-and-a-half times as many neurons. This is a densely packed, highly interconnected region of the brain that plays important roles when it comes to controlling bodily movements.

Overall, this study suggests that engaging in meditation practice on a regular basis, over the course of even a few weeks, can change your brain anatomy and boost the number of neurons in the brain. Participants rated their stress levels as significantly lower than the ratings from the non-participant control group after the intervention. Even if you arent experiencing issues with stress, meditation seems to function well for brain maintenance purposes.

Peter M. Vishton is Associate Professor of Psychology at William & Mary. He earned his PhD in Psychology and Cognitive Science from Cornell University. Before joining the faculty of William & Mary, he taught at Northwestern University and served as the program director for developmental and learning sciences at the National Science Foundation.

Read the original here:
Mold Your Brain with Meditation: Mindfulness and Brain Anatomy - The Great Courses Daily News

Grey’s Anatomy: What Happened To Alex (& Why He Left) – Screen Rant

Justin Chambers left Grey's Anatomy after 15 years, but what happened to his character, Alex Karev? Here's how the series wrote him out.

The latest character to leave Greys Anatomy was Alex Karev (Justin Chambers), which wasnt an easy departure... and it showed, as he left in an unconventional way and was given a very different ending than what fans were expecting - heres what happened to him. Greys Anatomy debuted on ABC in 2005, and even though it was originally a mid-season replacement, it was so well received it has been going for years, and its currently in its 16th season, with a 17th one already confirmed.

Greys Anatomy follows the same premise as any other medical drama: the ups and downs of surgical interns, residents, and attendings who do their best to balance their careers and personal lives. The series is set in Seattle, in the fictional Seattle Grace Mercy West Hospital (originally Seattle Grace Hospital), and is led by Meredith Grey (Ellen Pompeo). Over the course of more than 10 seasons, viewers have followed Meredith and colleagues on their journeys from interns to successful surgeons, with many of them going through some well-needed character development. Among those who began their journey next to Meredith as interns in season 1 is Alex Karev, one of the few original cast members who made it to season 16. Chambers left Greys Anatomy after 15 years, and it wasnt exactly the smoothest exit.

Related: Best TV Shows Of The Decade

Chambers announced he was leaving Greys Anatomy in January 2020 to pursue other acting roles, and by then, his final episode had already aired (My Shot, released in November 2019). While his departure might have seemed a bit rushed, the series actually prepared the ground a little bit for post-Alex life, though that doesnt mean it was done the right way. By the time he left, Alex was Chief of Surgery at Pacific Northwest General Hospital and got back together again with Jo (who he finally legally married). Halfway through season 16, the series began working on Alexs goodbye, beginning with him going to Iowa to help his mom, only to be later revealed by his mother that he hadnt been in Iowa at all. He told Jo he was going through something and stopped answering her calls, and she had a full breakdown. Greys Anatomy finally revealed what happened to Alex in the episode Leave a Light On, and it was all about Izzie Stevens (Katherine Heigl).

Through letters Alex sent to Jo, Meredith, Miranda Bailey, and Richard Webber, the audience learned what happened tohim and why he left so suddenly. As it turns out, he reached out to Izzie when Meredith was about to lose her license so she could help her, though it was also partially an excuse to call her. Alex then learned that Izzie used the embryos they froze years ago when she discovered she had cancer and is now a mother of twins. Alex went to meet his children, and as Izzie was living as a single mother (and working as a surgical oncologist), he decided to live with them and make sure the kids didnt grow up like he did (in a broken home, without a father), while also admitting that he had always loved Izzie.

The episode included scenes of Alex meeting the kids and his new life with Izzie and the twins, though neither Chambers nor Heigl returned for those scenes, with Chambers only lending his voice to read the letters. While some fans are happy Alex was given a proper ending, especially one next to Izzie, most are not satisfied with how the series handled it. By having Alex leave his wife all of a sudden (and after all they had gone through), they pretty much erased a big part of the character development he went through and that made him a fan-favorite, though he admitted on the letter that it was a very coward thing to do. Greys Anatomy hasnt exactly been the best at writing characters out, and Alex Karev is a good example of a rushed ending that not only hurt the one leaving but also those close to him.

Next: Grey's Anatomy: What Happened To Katherine Heigl's Izzie

The Witcher: Everything We Know About Geralt's Season 2 Role

Adrienne Tyler is a features writer for Screen Rant. She is an Audiovisual Communication graduate that wanted to be a filmmaker, but life had other plans (and it turned out great). Prior to Screen Rant, she wrote for Pop Wrapped, 4 Your Excitement (4YE), and D20Crit, where she was also a regular guest at Netfreaks podcast. She was also a contributor for FanSided's BamSmackPow and 1428 Elm. Adrienne is very into films and she enjoys a bit of everything: from superhero films, to heartbreaking dramas, to low-budget horror films. Every time she manages to commit to a TV show without getting bored, an angel gets its wings.

When she's not writing, you can find her trying to learn a new language, watching hockey (go Avs!... But also Caps and Leafs), or wondering what life would have been like had Pushing Daisies, Firefly, and Limitless not been cancelled. Breakfast food is life and coffee is what makes the world go round.

Guillermo del Toro said hi to her once. It was great.

"Vnligheten r ett sprk som de dva kan hra och de blinda kan se".

See the original post here:
Grey's Anatomy: What Happened To Alex (& Why He Left) - Screen Rant

‘Hamilton’: Why the Cast of the Disney+ Film Looks So Familiar – Showbiz Cheat Sheet

Now that its streaming on Disney+, viewers can finally watch the brilliance of Hamilton at home. The musical film features most of the original Broadway cast, including writer and producer Lin-Manuel Miranda.

But fans are finding lots of other familiar faces on the show that they just cant place. So, heres a quick breakdown of the Hamilton cast, and what else theyve been in.

Miranda is known for writing, composing, producing, and starring in Hamilton as the lead, but hes also been in a number of other popular projects over the years. He portrayed Jack in Disneys 2018 film, Mary Poppins Returns. And he plays the hot air balloon driver, Lee Scoresby in the HBO fantasy drama, His Dark Materials.

Miranda has also appeared on episodes of Brooklyn Nine-Nine, Fosse/Verdon. And back in 2013, he had a recurring role on the NBC medical drama, Do No Harm.

RELATED: Hamilton: Who Plays King George in the Disney+ Movie?

Aside from his Tony Award-winning performance as Aaron Burr in Hamilton, Leslie Odom Jr. has had an extensive TV career, with recurring roles on shows like CSI: Miami, Smash, Persons of Interest, and Law & Order: SVU. He was also featured on episodes of Gilmore Girls, Greys Anatomy, NCIS: Los Angeles, Supernatural, Gotham, and The Good Wife.

Odom starred as Dr. Arbuthnot in the 2017 film, Murder on the Orient Express. And he played William Still in the 2019 Academy Award-nominated movie, Harriet.

For her performance as Angelica Schuyler in the Broadway production of Hamilton, Rene Elise Goldsberry picked up a Tony Award for Best Featured Actress in a Musical in 2016. But she actually started her TV career nearly 20 years prior.

She joined the cast of Ally McBeal in 1997, then landed recurring roles on shows like One Life to Live, The Good Wife, and Law & Order: SVU. Goldberry currently plays Quellcrist Falconer on Netflixs sci-fi series Altered Carbon.

For his performances as Marquis de Lafayette and Thomas Jefferson, Daveed Diggs picked up both a Grammy and a Tony Award in 2016. After Hamilton, the actor found recurring roles on Black-ish, Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt, Law & Order: SVU, and The Get Down.

Diggss recent film credits include Velvet Buzzsaw, Wonder, and Blindspotting. He currently plays the lead role of Andre Layton in the TNT series, Snowpiercer.

Before joining Hamilton as George Washington, Christopher Jackson was a seasoned Broadway star with productions like The Lion King and In The Heights under his belt. His TV credits include appearances on Oz, Nurse Jackie, and The Good Wife. And in 2019, he joined the cast of When They See Us as Peter Rivera.

Jackson currently portrays Chuck Palmer on the CBS drama, Bull.

After picking up a Tony nomination for her performance as Eliza in Hamilton, Phillipa Soo continued to pursue her Broadway career with productions like Amlie and The Parisian Woman. She doesnt have an extensive TV and film resume, but Soo has had small roles on shows like Here and Now, Smash, and The Code.

Before joining the cast of Hamilton as King George III, Jonathan Groff was a Tony Award-nominated actor. In 2006, he originated the role of Melchior Gabor in the Broadway rock musical Spring Awakening, and then went on to join his co-star Lea Michele on the Fox series, Glee.

And if Groffs voice sounds familiar, its probably because he voices Kristoff in Disneys Frozen film franchise. The actor currently stars as FBI profiler Holden Ford in the Netflix thriller, Mindhunter.

Along with portraying Maria Reynolds and Peggy Schuyler in Hamilton, Jasmine Cephas Jones has been featured in a variety of films and TV projects. She appeared in the 2018 film, Dog Days, and has a recurring role in the HBO comedy series, Mrs. Fletcher.

Known for playing dual roles in Hamilton as John Laurens and Philip Hamilton, Anthony Ramos has gone on to star in a number of television and film productions in the last few years. He appeared on episodes of Younger, Law & Order: SVU, and Will & Grace. And he also had a recurring role as Mars Blackmon on Spike Lees Netflix series, Shes Gotta Have It.

In 2018, Ramos played Ramon in the Academy Award-winning film, A Star Is Born, opposite Lady Gaga.

Aside from his roles as James Madison and Hercules Mulligan in Hamilton, Okieriete Onaodowan has been featured in a number of Broadway productions including Cyrano De Bergerac, Rocky, and Natasha, Pierre, and the Great Comet of 1812.

Onaodowan has appeared on a few TV shows as well, including Greys Anatomy, The Get Down, and Ballers. The actor currently plays Dean Miller on the ABC drama, Station 19.

Read the original here:
'Hamilton': Why the Cast of the Disney+ Film Looks So Familiar - Showbiz Cheat Sheet

The room of the dead: how a museum became a halfway house for bones and spirits – The Guardian

WARNING: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers are warned that the following article contains descriptions of deceased Indigenous persons.

An unnerving echo cracks the silence as the key turns the tumblers inside the heavy lock a brassy, rasping click, click before the door opens on to a pitch-black temporary ossuary for thousands of lost and restless dead.

The overhead fluorescents flicker on in this small space, perhaps no bigger than a cramped classroom, that is enclosed at the centre of a warehouse on Adelaides undulating industrial outskirts. White light illuminates seven bays of utilitarian, open wooden storage frames, each with five shelves. Every shelf is laden with boxes that are separated by slim shadows. Each box contains skeletal remains of people of all ages, mostly Indigenous Australians.

This halfway house for bones and spirits feels too small for all it harbours. For stored here in thousands of cardboard containers are the full or partial skeletal remains of 4,600 individuals and the millions of human experiences attached to them.

You wander past the shelves and glance at the boxes. The contents of a few are denoted in a neat calligraphic hand Femur, Jaw. Some bear a word or two scrawled in biro Skull, Ground Bone Human Rib, child, cranium, mandibles. Others are marked with only a place name Minlaton, Cape Elisabeth, Salt Creek or the name of a people such as the Kaurna, custodians of the country that became Adelaide and who feature disproportionately on the shelves.

Although youve been in this room before, you could never become accustomed to, let alone decrypt or articulate, its atmospherics. It is funereal and it is medical, and it is at once profoundly spiritual and culturally heretical. You feel the presence of many, many others around you in here and you want to know who these people are who were thieved of identity when they were rendered collectibles. This place is freighted with an emotional and physical a historical national and international enormity, an onerous moral weight, that almost defies language and comprehension.

There is little except your foreknowledge and a few blunt words on cardboard to remind you that these are all actually boxes of humans.

You look up. Thats when you see the visages of human faces peering through bubble wrap. They are copies of Indigenous peoples heads, some of them death masks, plaster moulds that served the voodoo sciences of phrenology and eugenics, and its guiding light of Darwinism. These heads peering through the plastic, looking down upon you from the top shelves close to the ceiling, give distinct if ghostly human shape to all that lies in the myriad cardboard coffins.

Understanding the experiences of some of the Aboriginal people whose remains are in these boxes the injustices and cruelties inflicted upon them in life and death is a dreadful and deeply distressing process, especially for Indigenous people.

As David Rathman, chair of the South Australian Museums Aboriginal Advisory Committee, says, The injustice of what happened the injustice that this collection of old people tells the story of is profoundly disturbing.

Shying away from these horrors not least at a time of renewed urgency to advance and protect the rights of Australian Indigenous people through the Black Lives Matter movement, and consistent with the call from Uluru for a national historical truth telling is not, however, the answer. Exposure to the light of harsh scrutiny is the antidote to historical silence and secreted truths.

So sadness competes with a fierce anger inside you. The bones of 4600 people in cardboard boxes, and all in one place Adelaide, which has long considered itself the most civilised of Australian cities because it largely escaped the foundational convict stain. Adelaide, with all its secrets. Where to begin?

From the 1860s and well into the 20th century, Adelaides tight government, medical, bureaucratic, academic and museological elite customarily stole and swapped the remains of thousands of mostly Indigenous individuals. Through a range of personal relationships between establishment individuals connected to the University of Adelaide medical school, the South Australian Museum, the morgue, the asylum, the Aborigines Protection Board and Adelaide Hospital, thousands of bodies were stolen, collected and traded locally, nationally and internationally.

They included skeletons stolen in their hundreds from ancient burial grounds. Others were collected upon request by frontier workers and police who either came across the dead or killed the living so as to make them collectable. Its no coincidence some of the skulls in the collection bear bullet holes.

Others who died on the streets, in institutions like the insane asylum, the hospital and hospices for the elderly, were anatomised (a euphemism for defleshed), and their intact heads, skulls and skeletons turned into collection items.

Ngarrindjeri man Major Moogy Sumner works closely with the museum on returning the remains to country.

The 4,600 odd people who are here dont even measure up to the many, many more who remain overseas, says Sumner.

I think it will be our grandchildren or great grandchildren who will bring the last of them home. And yet they took so many thousands of them over there in just a few years in their sailing ships. It seems funny they went over in the ships and theyre coming back home in the 747. You know something? I reckon if you dug up the old [Adelaide] cemeteries where the black people were buried and opened up the coffins you wouldnt find one body in there. Not one.

What attitudes, what prevailing racial philosophy, could have allowed this to happen? And who were the men for they were all men responsible?

***

This may shock South Australians whove long prided themselves that their colony and its capital, Adelaide was established amid some neat transferral of British civility, rendering it absent of the convict stain, the uncivil barbarity, of other Australian colonies. But the truth is that many families who invested vast wealth in the mercantile, financial and cultural establishment of Adelaide did so with the proceeds of slavery. Among many others, they include the families of George Fife Angas, Isaac Currie, John Samuel August and Jacob Montefiore, all of whom profited from family ownership of dark-skinned people and from the (millions of dollars-worth, in todays currency, of) compensation they received from the British government after the Slavery Abolition Act of 1833.

However, its the pioneering Stirling family that matters most here. Edward Stirling member of the South Australian parliament and father of the SA constitution, pastoralist and director of the colonys bank arrived about 1839 with the silver spoon of 1,000 bequeathed to him by his father, Archibald, a Jamaican slaveholder. His money, courtesy of investment in new colonial opportunities, chiefly pastoralism, multiplied.

His son Edward Charles Stirling, on the back of the familys expanding pastoral riches, followed him into the colonial parliament. But it was as an Adelaide Hospital surgeon, professor of physiology at Adelaide University and director of the South Australian Museum for 28 years until 1912, that he helped amass the museums collection of dead Aboriginal people.

He was an anthropologist and ethnologist with an intense fascination for Aboriginal people. He collected remains personally on numerous field trips and commissioned many others to do so. Among those who supplied the SAM with remains (many of which were traded with overseas institutions for other collectibles) was sub-inspector Paul Foelsche of the SA Mounted Police.

According to outback justice historian Tony Roberts, the man who masterminded more massacres in [what became] the [Northern] Territory [after separating from South Australia in 1911] than anyone else was Inspector Foelsche. A former soldier, he was cunning, devious and merciless with Aboriginals Some considered him an expert on Aboriginals, not knowing that the skulls he studied were not merely collected by him.

We will get to the story of one of the men Foelsche collected Manialucum whose skull and jawbone ended up in one of the cardboard boxes in this Adelaide room of the dead. But first back to EC Stirling who together with Dr William Lennox Cleland, the superintendent at Parkside Lunatic Asylum (and lecturer in insanity at Adelaide University medical school), Dr William Ramsey Smith, the South Australia anatomy inspector (or coroner) and Archibald Watson, professor of anatomy at the university was responsible for sending dozens of sets of Aboriginal remains to overseas collecting and teaching institutions, including Edinburgh University.

As a legislator, Stirling wrote South Australias 1884 Anatomy Act. It stipulated that anyone without family who died in a public institution and who did not express reservation about being anatomised, could be transferred post-mortem to the university medical school for dissection. This meant an inordinate number of vagrants, many Aboriginal, and Indigenous people visiting from the regions, who died in Adelaide, had their bodies snatched and defleshed.

Between November 1899 and August 1903 alone Cleland authorised the removal of 71 bodies from the asylum morgue to the universitys medical school. After students dissected the bodies, the skulls, soft tissue and preserved heads of some were exported to overseas medical schools and institutions. Others were kept in the medical schools museum. Some were given to the state museum. Most of those that were sent overseas have been returned to Australia where, if they have not been returned to country, are now stored in the SAMs room of the dead.

Anna Russo, the museums Aboriginal heritage and repatriation manager, explains while gesturing to several square shelf metres of boxes: These here are all from the anatomy school collected probably before 1936 and were put together as part of the medical school museum. Theyre mainly skulls, theyre mainly from burial sites These are things that people have donated to the anatomy school Theyve come out of graves. Theyve still got the dirt [on them]. But there are others here too because they had access to the corpses that were coming from the hospitals, the destitute asylum, the mental asylum, and the old age home. When those people died the Anatomy Act allowed those bodies to come through the university if they had no family. If they were from the regions, I dont think they really bothered checking that much. They were doing facial casting too there are death masks and there are skulls. So thats all just the anatomy school.

If you had no family, were in the asylum, the hospital or a hospice, you effectively had to opt out if you didnt want to be dissected and face the further prospect of your remains being collected, gifted or traded. For Aboriginal people, many of whom spoke no English or only as a secondary language, this was impossible.

Russo has been piecing together the evidence of how this worked in practice. It is disturbing, confronting material to work through.

She cites the experience of Aboriginal man Harry Cox, who died on 8 January 1907 at the asylum, his body delivered to the anatomy school the next morning.

In a note on the anatomy school file, Cleland wrote: The said Harry Cox did not to the best of my knowledge, information or belief express his desire either in writing any time during his life or verbally during his illness that his body after death might not undergo an anatomical examination.

The mans body was supposed to be buried on 30 May 1907. But it wasnt; his remains ended up in a German institution until 2013, when they were repatriated to the museum in Adelaide (which keeps all South Australian remains ahead of return to country) as part of a national repatriation protocol.

After a long trial in 1893 during which it was evident he spoke no English and could not understand proceedings or give evidence, another Aboriginal man charged with murder was admitted to the asylum at Her Majestys Pleasure. He died there a decade later. Cressida Fforde recounts in her book, Collecting the Dead, how, on the day the man died, Cleland requested pro-forma permission from the colonial chief secretary for the body to be anatomised on the grounds that his skeleton is of great scientific value and ought not to be lost. He comes from the McDonnell Ranges and is a Governors pleasure man having committed murder.

The dead man, Cleland again wrote, did not to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief, express his desire either in writing or at any time during his life, or verbally that his body after death might not undergo anatomical examination.

Cleland received permission five days later. But the body had already been delivered to Watson at the anatomy school after the coroner, William Ramsay Smith, determined there was no need for an autopsy and that the dead man could, instead, be immediately buried. Cleland had intended the skeleton for the museum, given what he determined was its rarity. But instead Ramsay Smith sent it to DJ Cunningham, his anatomy teacher at his alma mater, Edinburgh University, to which Ramsay Smith despatched over decades dozens of full Aboriginal skeletons, skulls and preserved heads most of which have since been returned to Adelaide.

It is a compelling though not incidental digression to learn that Clelands son JB Cleland (esteemed professor of pathology at Adelaide University, microbiologist, naturalist and eugenicist who grew up at Parkside and later became deputy chair of the state Aborigines Protection Board) was a leading assimilationist of his era, and a collector of remains who obsessively tested the blood of Indigenous and mixed-race Aboriginal people. He wrote that we could absorb [Indigenous people] by marriage without fear of introducing a low type of mentality.

JB Cleland once wrote: I am essentially a naturalist & like Darwin also a collector.

The Cleland name is honoured by the Cleland Wildlife Park and, ironically for a man who advocated Indigenous children be removed from their parents, an Adelaide kindergarten.

The University of Adelaide medical school opened in 1885. By 1887 the word was rife among Aboriginal people in colonial care what stood to become of them after death. In January 1887 Ted Hamilton, the South Australian protector of Aborigines (whose job it was to supposedly protect Indigenous people from cruelty, oppression and injustice) recorded the death of Indigenous man Dan Angie. Terrified that he would be cut up if he died, Angie jumped from a window at the hospital where he was a patient, badly injuring himself in the eight-metre fall. He was returned to the hospital after police found him the next day sleeping near the river. He died a few days later after his transferral to the asylum.

Hamilton wrote: When I saw him at the Hospital, he said something about some persons having told him of the stories that the Doctors at the Hospital would cut his body to pieces which appears to have frightened him.

The museums collection rapidly grew. It regularly advertised for donations of Aboriginal remains, while Stirling himself canvassed from those he thought might be able to help.

Russo refers to correspondence from Stirling to the family of a private collector who had recently died. The mans daughter wrote back, referring to the skull of an Aboriginal woman her father had dug up.

The female skull, my father got himself. The lubra was known to my mother and father. She used to help my mother with the rough work about the house. Ive often heard my mother and father speak of Betty as a very supreme black, reads the daughters response to Stirling.

Russo says: That is just one of the many terrible stories we are dealing with here. To me this letter strongly illustrates the societal attitudes that pervaded in Adelaide at that time. Thats the way this town was.

Ramsay Smith personally stole skulls from burial grounds on Hindmarsh Island. Many hundreds of full skeletons and skulls, meanwhile, were displaced from traditional cemeteries as the South Australian colony expanded and displaced the Kaurna. An estimated 3,000 of the 4,600 people whose remains are held by the museum were originally buried within 100km of Adelaide.

When Ramsay Smith died in 1937, more than a hundred human skulls, mostly those of Aboriginal people, were found in his home. Ramsay Smiths activities had scandalised the pathology community in Adelaide.

Tommy Walker, a Ngarrindjeri man, was fondly known around the streets and parks of Adelaide in the late 19th century. So much so that upon his 1901 death, Adelaides stock exchange paid for his funeral. But little of Poltpalingada, as he was also known, made the grave; Ramsay Smith snatched his body and cut him up, leaving just a few portions of soft tissue in the coffin. Ramsay Smith then sent Poltpalingadas skeleton to Edinburgh.

Poltpalingadas fate sparked a public inquiry in 1903. It revealed sordid details about the illicit trade in body parts that flourished in Ramsay Smiths morgue. Aboriginal bodies were in particular demand. Parcels of human tissue were delivered to collectors. A morgue assistant recounted heads in kerosene tins in the yard outside the morgue.

The case shook and stirred civilised Adelaide. Ramsay Smith, exonerated by the public inquiry, resumed his duties and the body snatching continued, as evidenced by the case of Yawarrawarrka man, Bokalie, his body stolen upon death in 1905 after spending 11 years in the asylum. Ramsay Smith sent Bokalies preserved head to Cunningham at the Edinburgh medical school.

I recently found an article by Cunningham in a medical journal that is accompanied by photographs of Bokalies head. In the article Cunningham compares Bokalies ear to that of primates.

In 1911 the state dictated that human remains displaced by civil works (the vast majority were Aboriginal) would be stored at the museum. The collection grew even bigger.

At least six of the skulls in the collection have bullet holes. Only one of their stories is known that of Manialucum, brought to the museum by the infamous frontier policeman, Paul Foelsche. In 1889 two men held Manialucum as he knelt while the white buffalo hunter Rodney Spencer twice shot him with a revolver once in the back, once in the head. Spencer, originally sentenced to hang after his conviction for murder, was released after a decade in prison and following considerable community outcry at the severity of his sentence.

Manialucum had apparently stolen some rice from Spencer. Its unclear how Foelsche came to have his head.

The museums head of humanities, John Carty, stands at the entrance of the room where all of the bodies are stored. He folds his arms across his chest, casts his eyes towards the floor. Like Anna Russo, hes been in this room too many times.

If you are not overwhelmed by this, theres something wrong with you. Youve switched off your empathy. Youve checked out and youre allowing yourself to switch into that modality that allowed these people to be collected and put in boxes, which is to think of them as things or specimens or resources for science other than somebodys brother or sister or mother or dad, he says.

You never walk in here and dont feel unsettled. Ive really felt for Anna [Russo] actually in the process of doing the [recent] audit [of all of the remains in the collection]. Shes often been down here by herself. We have to have check-ins at the end of the day to talk about what shes finding and to talk about what its like to work in a place like this. Because its just overwhelming on a human scale.

There was a time, Carty says, when Aboriginal people in Adelaide were terrified their bodies would be snatched.

Every Aboriginal person in Adelaide had this view that once you died in a hospital or other institution there was a very serious risk that doctors were going to take their bodies and cut them up after they died. And there was a good reason for that fear.

Carty who has shaken up the museums collection protocols and overhauled its outdated repatriation policy since taking the job a few years ago contemplates the slavery connection to establishment Adelaide.

Its the same mentality as that which pervaded the medical fraternity here that black people are a resource, you know, dead or alive either a slave you can use for your financial benefit or a data set you can build your career on. This happened because scientists saw Aboriginal people as less than themselves, as a resource to study and as a diminishing resource so they have to bring that resource here for the betterment of white peoples knowledge, he says.

The thing is, all of this was happening not so long ago. Its peoples grandfathers who were doing this to peoples grandfathers. Thats why its going to be hard for people to reconcile that people in great positions of power in the establishment who intersected with the history of this museum, were responsible for this terrible thing.

The first major reform Carty introduced to the museum after his arrival in 2016 was an overhaul of its policies on repatriation, and collecting and displaying human remains.

The museum had an antiquated decades-old policy on repatriation (basically one that can easily be interpreted as saying that it was all too hard) and arbitrary protocols on the display of remains.

The chair of the museums Aboriginal Advisory Committee, David Rathman, says: When you look at these remains, one of the questions I pose when I run workshops is, Who are the beneficiaries of colonisation? With these remains, who were the beneficiaries of the scientific experimentation? Youll see no monuments to tribal leaders in this museum but youll see plenty of monuments along North Terrace out there [the main monumental/cultural showcase of Adelaide with its statuary tributes to leading colonial figures] to all the so-called leaders of the community.

So, 1987 was the last time this museum looked at its policy on human remains and the museum is a place of relics. That policy is a legacy of that. Our primary concern now is to make sure that they [the remains] get back where they have come from. The vast majority come from within 100km of Adelaide. And we hold about half of the national collections of [ancestral] human remains here. So, it is the responsibility of the museum to return these remains to country where that is possible.

But that could take another generation. There are enormous practical difficulties, often involving by-laws on the burial of human remains, when it comes to interring so many bodies.

Carty says: You can also imagine the trauma of returning hundreds of bodies to certain communities. There are enormous hurdles practical, emotional and spiritual. But we have a responsibility to do this everyone in Adelaide has a responsibility to help right this wrong.

Ideally all of the remains would be returned to country. But a number of impediments a lack of funding, the impossibility of matching some remains to a specific part of the country and people stand in the way.

The state, however, and the major institutions that were responsible for amassing the huge Indigenous remains collection in the first place which is to say the government, the museum and the university are now collectively taking responsibility for righting this egregious historical wrong. The South Australian premier, Steven Marshall also the minister for Aboriginal affairs has been supportive of the museums new push to return the remains to country and his increased funding in accordance with his engagement on the painful repatriation issue.

The state government is working through potential changes to its Burial and Cremation Act to make it easier for Aboriginal people to rebury ancestors where and when they need to.

Meanwhile, the University of Adelaide acknowledges its own immense responsibility and the culpability of its former eminent medical scientists, and has accordingly funded a repatriation position at the museum for a Kaurna person to help return remains to country about Adelaide.

Ultimately, many will never be returned to country. Perhaps the closest they will come is repatriation to a state of provenance. Keeping places will need to be established in each state and territory.

Meanwhile, there are moves to bury or rebury large numbers of remains (where provenanced) of some Indigenous people in the museum collection on public land some of which is held by cemetery trusts.

The South Australian Museum director, Brian Oldman, says the actions of the museum to repatriate the old people demands honesty and openness.

The South Australian Museum is fully committed to reconciliation and part of this process is to address the abhorrent practice of removing ancestors from country, he says. Museums, including the one I currently direct, can only start to atone for those actions and address the pain of Aboriginal people if museums fully acknowledge the painful truths found in their history. What we must do is work with Aboriginal communities to start to heal the wounds of the past.

Anna Russo turns the key in that heavy lock and switches off the fluorescent lights. Darkness envelops the 4,600 dead people and their unsettled spirits. For now they remain trapped in all of these neatly stacked cardboard boxes in this room of the dead on the outskirts of genteel Adelaide.

Read the rest here:
The room of the dead: how a museum became a halfway house for bones and spirits - The Guardian

The Relationship Coach: Wear curiosity and compassion to change behavior – Longmont Times-Call

If you wish to grow in any area of life, learning how to bring curiosity and compassion into your thoughts opens the door for transformation.

When we make a conscious choice to view things with curiosity and compassion, we are better able to see the why behind the why. When we uncover what is actually driving the behavior, we can begin to change.

This works in our own behaviors, as well as in relating to others.

Lets look at how this might work on a personal level. You have a behavior that you dislike. Perhaps you frequently lose your temper and say hurtful things to your spouse or child. You tell yourself you are going to be more patient, and yet again, you snap. Here is where we want to pay attention. Most of us then move into judgment or justification. Judgement: I lost it again. Im a horrible father. Im just like my dad. Whats wrong with me, why cant I control myself? Or justification: She always pushes my buttons. I work hard and deserve to let off some steam. They need to toughen up. They had it coming. Im only human.

The problem with both of these reactions is they make us defensive and typically lead to unproductive feelings of guilt or anger. They shut the door for further learning and so the opportunity to transform the behavior is lost.

Whereas, if we were to respond to our unwanted behavior with curiosity and compassion, we create room for growth. This might look like: I wonder why I just lost my temper? What happened today that made me feel so irritated? What do I need that Im not asking for? Who am I really angry at? Where am I feeling overwhelmed?This reaction allows for exploration and solutions. We begin to uncover why we are behaving in such a way, and when we get to the root of the problem, we can fix it.

Asking compassionately is key because it calms our defenses and allows us to feel safe enough to be honest.

We can apply the curiosity and compassion principle to our relationships as well. Lets imagine your teenager gets home and is in a mood. You calmly remind them they still need to take out the trash and youre met with an eye roll and a rude, I know! At this moment, we have the option to choose judgment: What is your problem? Youre ungrateful and lazy. How dare you speak to me that way. I dont ask you to do much around here, you should have a better attitude! We could feel completely justified as the parent to react in this way. However, that would close to the door to any deeper communication that might uncover what is really going on with our child. Curiosity and compassion might look like: You seem upset, is something bothering you? I wonder why me reminding you about the trash made you so angry? Are you feeling overwhelmed? What do you need right now? This makes your teen feel safe and connected and allows them to soften and let you in. Or at the very least, they might take out the trash without further aggression.

Developing the habit of responding with curiosity and compassion toward ourselves first, and then others, creates an open space where we can be honest and uncover the driving force behind the unwanted behavior. When we simply judge or justify the behavior, we are either shaming ourselves or someone else, and where there is shame, there is no room for growth.

I like to think of it as wearing my curiosity and compassion hat. When I sense myself moving into judgment or justification, I imagine pulling out a deerstalker cap and placing it on my head. This allows me to slow down, shift my perspective, and discover where the change truly needs to take place.

Rebecca Stark is a mastery certified health and life coach. She is the owner of Rebecca Stark Coaching. You can contact her at 720-412-6148 or visit rebeccastarkcoaching.com. If you have questions you would like answered in this article, please submit to rebeccastarkcoaching@gmail.com

Visit link:
The Relationship Coach: Wear curiosity and compassion to change behavior - Longmont Times-Call