Sanford Health and Harvard Medical School have collaborated to bring information and education about personal genetics and research to classrooms and communities in Massachusetts and South Dakota.

One such program the two facilities have created is the Personal Genetics Education Project (pgEd), which offers workshops that bring awareness and create community understanding about development in genetics and how they affect health.

Lindsay Kortan, who teaches ninth-grade physical science at Yankton High School (YHS), jumped at the chance to learn more about genetics by attending the pgEd Genetics and Social Justice Summer Institute in Brockton, Massachusetts this summer.

A member of the South Dakota Science Teachers Association, Kortan is also a Sanford ambassador and has done research with the organization for several years. It was through this involvement that she was invited to attend the weeklong pgEd conference.

"The setup was them showing (the attendees) their lesson plans, allowing us to experience what type of content is in the lesson and what kind of discussions/questions we might have in the classroom," she explained. "It covered a wide range of things, everything from the eugenics movement to ethics in genetics testing to personal genetics testing."

As someone who developed a strong interest in genetics through her studies at the University of South Dakota, all of this was right up Kortans alley.

"(Genetics) was one of my favorite topics to teach in a biology classroom," she said.

Prior to coming to YHS, Kortan had taught grades 10-12 science biology, physiology, physics and chemistry in the Bon Homme school district for five years.

She admitted that introducing what she learned at the conference into her current class will be difficult, but plans to spread her newfound information in other ways.

"Ive shared my knowledge with some of the other teachers and offered to help them incorporate it into their classrooms if theyre interested," she said.

She plans to be part of next summers workshop in Sioux Falls, which will be hosted by Sanford PROMISE and pgEd.

"From an education perspective, the pgED information is great for teaching our kids those critical-thinking and difficult life-decision questions they might have to encounter in their lifetime, especially now with the way genetic testing and technology is advancing," she said. "Its getting more prevalent in making decisions, even down to doctors looking at your genetic code to know what drugs they should prescribe to you, or whether the drug will be effective or not. Its important for kids to know that information before they get into those critical situations where they have to make an (important) decision. The process of going through that critical thinking and seeing different viewpoints is always a good thing in the classroom.

"Im currently pregnant, so some of those genetic questions that you get asked because of pregnancy and fertility treatments (that) I received really brought it to a personal level for me."

Follow @ReillyBiel on Twitter.

Continued here:
YHS Teacher Attends Genetics Workshop - Yankton Daily Press

The latest trend in nutrition isn't a fad diet or newly discovered supplement; it's your DNA.

Unlocking the secrets of one's genetic code used to be confined to the laboratory, but increasingly, the big business of DNA is now going after your eating habits. Thanks to new research in a field of study called nutrigenomics, scientists are learning how variations in our genes determine how well our bodies metabolize certain foods and nutrients.

For example, people with a variation of the CYP1A2 gene metabolize caffeine more slowly, and are at an increased risk of heart attack and hypertension if they drink more than a couple of cups of coffee a day.

Companies like the genetic testing service 23andMe helped pave the way for genotyping the process of determining variations in a person's genes to go mainstream. The California-based company has genotyped more than 2 million customers, though their testing focuses on genetic health risks and ancestry reports.

Now, more and more genetics startups are getting into nutrition: looking at how information in your genes could help people decide the best food to eat to feel good and even lose weight.

Scientists from the University of Toronto launched biotechnology company Nutrigenomix in 2012. The company offers genotyping test kits that look at 45 genetic markers related to genes for issues like weight loss, heart health, and food intolerances. The test is designed to help medical professionals make recommendations for a person's intake of sodium, omega-3 fatty acids, vitamin C, and yes, caffeine.

Ahmed El-Sohemy, a professor of nutritional sciences at the University of Toronto and the founder of Nutrigenomix, points to research that shows the "one-size-fits-all model of nutritional guidance" is not the most effective way for people to eat healthily or lose weight.

"There's research now showing that people who get DNA-based dietary advice are more likely to follow recommendations. So not only are people getting more accurate dietary advice, but they are more likely to follow it," said El-Sohemy.

Nutrigenomix uses a saliva test ordered through healthcare professionals, and is available from more than 5,000 healthcare providers in 35 countries.

Now, there's a new kid on the block: Oakland-based personalized nutrition company Habit.

"We think we're going to disrupt the diet industry," Habit founder and CEO Neil Grimmer told NBC News. "When you think about moving from a one-size-fits-all approach to food to something that's highly personalized, it changes everything. It changes the way you shop. It changes the way you eat. And quite frankly, it even changes the way you think about your own health and well-being."

Habit's home testing kit containing DNA cheek swabs, three finger-prick blood tests, and a special shake. The bloodwork is designed to show how your body metabolizes the huge amounts of carbohydrates, fats, and proteins in the shake. Chiara Sottile

At Habit, it's not just DNA data they're using to make diet recommendations. For $299, Habit sends customers an at-home test kit containing DNA cheek swabs, three finger-prick blood tests, and a "metabolic challenge shake loaded with 950 calories. Users take one blood test prior to drinking the shake, and two more timed blood pricks afterwards. The bloodwork is designed to show how your body metabolizes the huge amounts of carbohydrates, fats, and proteins in the shake.

"You layer in your blood work, your fasting blood work, and you layer in your metabolism, and all of a sudden you have a really clear picture of what's going on inside yourself," said Grimmer.

The Habit test kit also asks you to measure your waist circumference and provide information about your weight and activity level. Users send in the DNA swabs and blood sample testing cards sealed in a pre-paid envelope, and then get their results back a couple weeks later.

Health-conscious San Francisco resident Michelle Hillier was introduced to Habit through a friend. When she received her test results, she was surprised to learn she is a diet type Habit calls a "Range Seeker" meaning she should eat about 50 percent of her daily calories in carbohydrates, about 30 percent from fat, and 20 percent from protein.

"You hear so much about how you need so much protein, and I'm a pretty active person so I had been really upping my protein. And to find out that I'm supposed to have more carbs than anything else was really surprising to me," said Hillier, who is not affiliated with the company.

She also learned that she has genes that are impactful for lactose and caffeine sensitivity, something she had suspected. Like all Habit users get for the $299, after she received her test results, Hillier had a 25-minute phone consultation with a registered dietitian from the Habit team.

Michelle Hillier, pictured, learned she is a "Range Seeker," which means she should eat about 50 percent of her daily calories in carbohydrates, about 30 percent from fat, and 20 percent from protein. Chiara Sottile

The Habit test kit is now available nationally (except in New York, New Jersey, and Rhode Island, because of regulatory restrictions). In the San Francisco Bay Area, Habit users get an added perk: the company will cook you fresh meals in their Oakland kitchen based on your diet recommendations and deliver them to your door weekly.

Hillier receives about three dinners a week costing between $10 and $15 a meal and she can choose her meals with Habit's online dashboard.

For Hillier, the Habit meals have been a positive addition to her already healthy lifestyle, though she admits: "The shake was awful," referring to the metabolic challenge shake. "It was like drinking seven coffees, four avocados, and a scoop of ice cream," said Hillier with a laugh.

Blood pricks and a "Challenge Shake" that lives up to its name could be barriers for some people but, Hillier says, it was well worth it for her.

"I've noticed that my clothes are looser on my body, I feel better. I noticed that I have more energy, honestly, since I started doing the meal plans," said Hillier in an interview, noting she's lost about seven pounds since she started receiving the Habit meal plans in May.

Kristin Kirkpatrick is a registered dietitian at the Cleveland Clinic Wellness Institute, where they offer DNA testing kits from Nutrigenomix.

"Many of my patients have mentioned to me that it [nutrigenomics] has truly changed the way that they eat. But I don't think it's the first step. I think seeing a professional and going over what those important goals and barriers are is definitely what you want to do first, said Kirkpatrick in an interview with NBCs Jo Ling Kent.

As some urge potential consumers to do their homework and speak with their own healthcare professional before they take the plunge into their genetics, the market for DNA-based products is racing ahead. Just last month, Helix, a personal genomics company, launched the first online "marketplace."

Customers who have their genome sequenced with Helix get access to a slew of services from other emerging genomics companies ranging from Vinome,which aims to pick wine for you based on your genes, to EverlyWell, which offers food sensitivity and metabolism tests.

"People are very interested to go beyond the generalities that they've seen and get more specific to what's actually impacting their genes," said Kirkpatrick, though she warns this kind of testing "may not be ready for primetime."

The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics agrees, writing in a 2014 opinion paper that, "...the use of nutrigenetic testing to provide dietary advice is not ready for routine dietetics practice." In the same paper, the Academy did also characterize nutritional genomics as insightful into how diet and genes impact our phenotypes.

"I don't think it's going to answer every single question that you may have about your health and it's definitely not going to answer things that are very specific to health ailments that you may have," Kirkpatrick told NBC News.

"Will it put you in the right direction towards knowing what foods you need to increase? What foods perhaps you should have less of and what's the best source of protein or fat related to weight loss? Absolutely," Kirkpatrick continued.

By 2020, the genomics market is expected to generate a staggering $50 billion globally, and diagnostic tools, health tech, and wireless wearables are expected to boom from $2 billion to $150 billion globally, according to one analysis.

"I think this is the start of a highly personalized future," said Habit CEO Neil Grimmer. "What we really hope to do is actually dispel a lot of the myths, get rid of the fad diets and actually get something that's personal to you."

Michelle Hillier says her Habit "nutrition coach," a registered dietitian, also advised her that she should consider factors beyond just her test results.

"She said take the results with a grain of salt, because you have to first see how you feel when you eat this way. It's not meant to be the 'end all be all,' but it is a guide like anything else," said Hillier.

Read the original:
Trying to Find a Healthy Diet? Look to Your Genes - NBCNews.com

Action Points

Despite the existence of evidence-based guidelines supporting genetic testing for women with a history of breast and/or ovarian cancer, most of these women didn't get tested, according to researchers.

Based on an analysis of pooled data from three cancer control modules, fewer than one in five women with a history of breast or ovarian cancer meeting National Cancer Comprehensive Network (NCCN) criteria underwent testing, reported Christopher P. Childers, MD, of the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA in Los Angeles, and colleagues.

Up to 10% of breast and 15% of ovarian cancers can be linked to heritable gene mutations -- most commonly mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 -- which suggests that the identification of women with these mutations can direct both cancer treatment and surgical decision-making, they wrote in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

While the rates of genetic testing in newly diagnosed patients meeting NCCN criteria have been increasing, "there is likely a large cohort of breast and ovarian cancer survivors for whom testing was not offered, pursued, or even available," Childers' group wrote.

They used nationally representative samples from the 2005, 2010, and 2015 National Health Interview Surveys (NHIS). Eligible patients included women with a history of breast cancer and/or ovarian cancer who met certain NCCN eligibility criteria based on age of diagnosis and family history:

Outcomes included the percentage of eligible individuals who either discussed genetic testing with a health professional, were advised to undergo such testing, or actually underwent testing.

Of 47,218 women identified from the three surveys, 2.7% had breast cancer. Of those women, about 36% met one or more of the eligibility criteria, and of those, 29% discussed testing with a healthcare professional, 20.2% were advised to undergo testing, and 15.3% underwent testing.

Approximately 0.4% of the women in the survey had ovarian cancer. Of those, 15.1% discussed testing, 13.1% percent were advised to undergo testing, and just 10.5% underwent testing.

Based on the pooled sample, an estimated 1,471,279 women with a history of breast and/or ovarian cancer meet one or more of the eligibility criteria. The authors determined that within this population, the rate of genetic testing was 13.8% (95% CI 10.8% to 17%).

"Using only these five criteria, this generates a population-based estimate of unmet need of genetic testing for breast and ovarian cancer survivors between 1,212,334 and 1,312,381," they noted.

Furthermore over 70% of eligible patients with breast cancer and 80% of those with ovarian cancer haven't even discussed genetic testing with a health professional.

"Given the low testing rate and large impact of identifying a heritable mutation, aggressive solutions should be considered," Childers' group suggested. "These may include universal testing for women with breast and/or ovarian cancer or other select populations, directed patient education for self-referral, or modified direct-to-consumer testing."

The study had some limitations, including the fact that NHIS collects self-reported data only, and is not validated against the medical record. Also, recall bias in terms of "advising, discussing, and testing are all possible and are likely magnied as patients become more removed from their treatment," the authors noted.

In an accompanying editorial, Kevin S. Hughes, MD, of the Avon Comprehensive Breast Evaluation Center at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, lamented that while many new strategies involving genetic testing have been adopted and save lives, "we have yet to apply these strategies at the population level where their effect can be generalized beyond a small number of selected patients."

Hughes wrote that while some reports of the underutilization of genetic testing have been met by calls for more genetic counselors, "there is nowhere near the number of genetic counselors needed to take on population-level testing."

The problem is that too many mutation carriers are unaware of their status and could develop cancers that could have been prevented or discovered earlier, he stated, adding that healthcare professionals need to take certain steps that will increase the rate of detection of these mutations.

He suggested some steps that can be taken, such as abbreviating pretest counseling sessions to enable more patients to be seen by genetic counselors or educated clinics. "It is time to move to population-level screening for hereditary cancer susceptibility mutations. We have thought about this for 20 years. It might be time to take action," he wrote.

Childers disclosed funded from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Childers and co-authors disclosed no relevant relationships with industry.

Hughes disclosed relevant relationships with Hughes RiskApps, CRA Health, Myriad Genetics, Veritas Genetics, Focal Therapeutics, and Health Beacons.

2017-08-23T12:00:00-0400

Go here to read the rest:
Most Breast-Ovarian Ca Patients Miss Genetic Tests - MedPage Today

Virgil Abloh and Nike announce new design project "The 10," where the Off-White designer reconstructs ten iconic Nike models. During NYFW, Nike will introduce a space in partnership with Abloh to celebrate their collab. Get all the details and see what other initiatives Nike is pursuing during fashion week on WWD.com. #wwdfashion

Excerpt from:
DNA Kit Uses Genetics for Customized Skin Care Regimen - WWD

Human history is often something modern man only sees as through a glass, darkly. This is particularly the case when that history did not occur in the Mediterranean, the Nile Valley, India, or China, or when there is no written record on which scholars can rely. Exacerbating the disrupting effects of time on history can be when that history occurs in a region where extensive migration has disrupted whatever temporarily stable civilization happened to have taken root at that place at any particular time.

But humans leave traces of themselves in their history and a variety of such traces have been the source of reconstructions outside conventional sources. Luigi Cavalli-Sforza began the study of human population genetics as a way to understand this history in 1971 in The Genetics of Human Populations, and later extended these studies to include language and how it influences gene flow between human populations. More recent efforts to use genetics to reconstruct history include Deep Ancestry: The Landmark DNA Quest to Decipher Our Distant Past by Spencer Wells (National Geographic: 2006), and The Seven Daughters of Eve: The Science that Reveals our Genetic Ancestry by Brian Sykes (Carrol & Graf: 2002). And even more recently, genetic studies have illuminated the "fine structure" of human populations in England (see "Fine-structure Genetic Mapping of Human Population in Britain").

Two recent reports illustrate how genetics can inform history: the first, in the American Journal of Human Genetics entitled "Continuity and Admixture in the Last Five Millennia of Levantine History from Ancient Canaanite and Present-Day Lebanese Genome Sequences"; and a second in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, entitled "Genomic landscape of human diversity across Madagascar." In the first study, authors* from The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, University of Cambridge, University of Zurich, University of Otago, Bournemouth University, Lebanese American University, and Harvard University found evidence of genetic admixture over 5,000 years of a Canaanite population that has persisted in Lebanese populations into the modern era. This population is interesting for historians in view of the central location of the ancestral home of the Canaanites, the Levant, in the Fertile Crescent that ran from Egypt through Mesopotamia. The Canaanites also inhabited the Levant during the Bronze Age and provide a critical link between the Neolithic transition from hunter gatherer societies to agriculture. This group (known to the ancient Greeks as the Phoenicians) is also a link to the great early societies recognized through their historical writings and civilizations (including the Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, and Romans); if the Canaanites had any such texts or other writings they have not survived. In addition, the type of genetic analyses that have been done for European populations has not been done for descendants of inhabitants of the Levant from this historical period. This paper uses genetic comparisons between 99 modern day residents of Lebanon (specifically, from Sidon and the Lebanese interior) and ancient DNA (aDNA) from ~3,700 year old genomes from petrous bone of individuals interred in gravesites in Sidon. For aDNA, these analyses yielded 0.4-2.3-fold genomic DNA coverage and 53-264-fold mitochondrial DNA coverage, and also compared Y chromosome sequences with present-day Lebanese, two Canaanite males and samples from the 1000 Genomes Project. Over one million single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were used for comparison.

These results indicated that the Canaanite ancestry was an admixture of local Neolithic populations and migrants from Chalcolithic (Copper Age) Iran. The authors estimate from these linkage disequilibrium studies that this admixture occurred between 6,600 and 3,550 years ago, a date that is consistent with recorded mass migrations in the region during that time. Perhaps surprisingly, their results also show that the majority of the present-day Lebanese population has inherited most of their genomic DNA from these Canaanite ancestors. These researchers also found traces of Eurasian ancestry consistent with conquests by outside populations during the period from 3,750-2,170 years ago, as well as the expansion of Phoenician maritime trade network that extended during historical time to the Iberian Peninsula.

The second paper arose from genetic studies of an Asian/African admixture population on Mozambique. This group** from the University of Toulouse, INSERM, the University of Bordeaux, University of Indonesia, the Max Plank Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Institut genomique, Centre Nacional de Genotypage, University of Melbourne, and the Universite de la Rochelle, showed geographic stratification between ancestral African (mostly Bantu) and Asian (Austronesean) ancestors. Cultural, historical, linguistic, ethnographic, archeological, and genetic studies supports the conclusion that Madagascar residents have traits from both populations but the effects of settlement history are termed "contentious" by these authors. Various competing putative "founder" populations (including Arabic, Indian, Papuan, and/or Jewish populations as well as first settlers found only in legend, under names like "Vazimba," "Kimosy," and "Gola") have been posited as initial settlers. These researchers report an attempt to illuminate the ancestry of the Malagasy by a study of human genetics.

These results showed common Bantu and Austronesian descent for the population with what the authors termed "limited" paternal contributions from Europe and Middle Eastern populations. The admixture of African and Austronesian populations occurred "recently" (i.e., over the past millennium) but was gender-biased and heterogeneous, which reflected for these researchers independent colonization by the two groups. The results also indicated that detectable genetic structure can be imposed on human populations over a relatively brief time (~ a few centuries).

Using a "grid-based approach" the researchers performed a high-resolution genetic diversity study that included maternal and paternal lineages as well as genome-wide data from 257 villages and over 2,700 Malagasy individuals. Maternal inheritance patterns were interrogated using mitochondrial DNA and patterns of paternity assayed using Y chromosomal sequences. Non-gender specific relationships were assessed through 2.5 million SNPs. Mitochondrial DNA analyses showed maternal inheritance from either African or East Asian origins (with one unique Madagascar variant termed M23) in roughly equal amounts, with no evidence of maternal gene flow from Europe or the Middle East. The M23 variant shows evidence of recent (within 900-1500 years) origin. Y chromosomal sequences, in contrast are much more prevalent from African origins (70.7% Africa:20.7% East Asia); the authors hypothesize that the remainder may reflect Muslim influences, with evidence of but little European ancestry.

Admixture assessments support Southeast Asian (Indonesian) and East African source populations for the Malagasy admixture. These results provide the frequency of the African component to be ~59%, the Asian component frequency to be ~37%, and the Western European component to have a frequency of about 4% (albeit with considerable variation, e.g., African ancestry can range from ~26% to almost 93%). Similar results were obtained when the frequency of chromosomal fragments shared with other populations were compared to the Malagasy population (finding the closest link to Asian populations from south Borneo, and excluding Indian, Somali, and Ethiopian populations, although the analysis was sensitive in one individual to detect French Basque ancestry). The split with ancestral Asian populations either occurred ~2,500 years ago or by slower divergence between ~2,000-3,000 years ago, while divergence with Bantu populations occurred more recently (~1,500 years ago).

There were also significant differences in geographic distribution between descendants of these ancestral populations. Maternal African lineages were found predominantly in north Madagascar, with material Asian lineages found in central and southern Madagascar (from mtDNA analyses). Paternal lineages were generally much lower overall for Asian descendants (~30% in central Madagascar) based on Y chromosome analyses. Genome-wide analyses showed "highlanders" had predominantly Asian ancestry (~65%) while coastal inhabitants had predominantly (~65%) African ancestry; these results depended greatly on the method of performing the analyses which affected the granularity of the geographic correlates. Finally, assessing admixture patterns indicated that the genetic results are consistent with single intermixing event (500-900 years ago) for all but one geographic area, which may have seen a first event 28 generations ago and a second one only 4 generations ago. These researchers also found evidence of at least one population bottleneck, where the number of individuals dropped to a few hundred people about 1,000-800 years ago.

These results are represented pictorially in the paper:

In view of the current political climate, the eloquent opening of the paper deserves attention:

Ancient long-distance voyaging between continents stimulates the imagination, raises questions about the circumstances surrounding such voyages, and reminds us that globalization is not a recent phenomenon. Moreover, populations which thereby come into contact can exchange genes, goods, ideas and technologies.

* Marc Haber, Claude Doumet-Serhal, Christiana Scheib, Yali Xue, Petr Danecek, Massimo Mezzavilla, Sonia Youhanna, Rui Martiniano, Javier Prado-Martinez, Micha Szpak, Elizabeth Matisoo-Smith, Holger Schutkowski, Richard Mikulski, Pierre Zalloua, Toomas Kivisild, Chris Tyler-Smith

** Denis Pierrona, Margit Heiskea, Harilanto Razafindrazakaa, Ignace Rakotob, Nelly Rabetokotanyb, Bodo Ravololomangab, Lucien M.-A. Rakotozafyb, Mireille Mialy Rakotomalalab, Michel Razafiarivonyb, Bako Rasoarifetrab, Miakabola Andriamampianina Raharijesyb, Lolona Razafindralambob, Ramilisoninab, Fulgence Fanonyb, Sendra Lejamblec, Olivier Thomasc, Ahmed Mohamed Abdallahc, Christophe Rocherc,, Amal Arachichec, Laure Tonasoa, Veronica Pereda-lotha, Stphanie Schiavinatoa, Nicolas Brucatoa, Francois-Xavier Ricauta, Pradiptajati Kusumaa,d,e, Herawati Sudoyod,e, Shengyu Nif, Anne Bolandg, Jean-Francois Deleuzeg, Philippe Beaujardh, Philippe Grangei, Sander Adelaarj, Mark Stonekingf, Jean-Aim Rakotoarisoab, Chantal Radimilahy, and Thierry Letelliera

Follow this link:
Using Genetics to Uncover Human History - JD Supra (press release)

A new study by UCLA researchers reveals the range of reactions from rejection to reinterpretation to acceptance after white nationalists learn that DNA ancestry test results indicate they may not be as white or European as they previously thought.

Thestudy,When Genetics Challenges a Racists Identity: Genetic Ancestry Testing Among White Nationalists, is the work of UCLA researchersAaron Panofskyand Joan Donovan, who presented their findings at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association held Aug. 14, 2017, in Montreal, Canada.

Upon receiving genetic evidence of non-white or non-European ancestry, those posting online expend considerable energy to repair identities by rejecting or reinterpreting genetic ancestry testing results, said the researchers, who studied discussion threads on the topic posted on the white nationalist online forum Stormfront.

UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs

Aaron Panofsky

In their study, Donovan and Panofsky, an associate professor with appointments in Public Policy at UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs, the Institute for Society and Genetics, and Sociology, looked at more than 3,000 posts in 70 discussion threads on topics related to test reveals. These included posts by individuals who revealed results of non-white/non-European ancestry on Stormfront, a website that requires members to be white or European with non-Jewish ancestry. Responses also included the comments on those test results.

Panofsky and Donovan, a postdoctoral fellow at the Institute for Society and Genetics, report that while ancestry tests promote the capacity to reveal ones genetic ties to ethnic groups, ancient populations and historical migrations, and even famous historical figures this opportunity to know thyself can come with significant risks.

Panofsky points out that based on white nationalists responses to genetic information upon learning their test results, there is no reason to believe that they would give up their racial ideology, and, more importantly, that genetic information cannot be relied on to change the views of white nationalists.

In addition, Panofsky said that, as a group, white nationalists appear to have a combination of sophisticated and unsophisticated methods of interpreting the data from statistical and genetic viewpoints, as well as on their own historical reasoning or reinterpretation.

In this framework, the repair strategy is not to reject scientific or historical knowledge, but to educate oneself to understand the construction of [genetic test] results and to explain those results in alternate terms, the researchers conclude.

In parsing responses to genetic ancestry test results posted on Stormfront, Panofsky and Donovan created a decision tree consisting of good news responses, or confirmation of white identity, or bad news, revealing results of non-white or non-European ancestry.

Good news served a confirming purpose and was well-received, but bad news elicited responses of rejection of the test results. Alternatives to the rejected responses included championing traditional methods, citing family history or using a mirror test, whereby individuals evaluated their outward appearance as a gauge of racial identity.

Many of the responses to bad news are about how to repair the damage, rather than latching onto the ideology of Stormfront, Panofsky said. Even though they have that idea of purity, they help people explain away or dismiss the result.

The researchers also found that some who reject unfavorable genetic test results interpret them as the product of companies with an anti-white bias, or Jewish ownership invested in sowing racial doubt and confusion among whites. They also attribute a small percentage of non-white or non-European markers as being part of a multicultural conspiracy, according to the study.

Another way the posters dealt with bad news, Panofsky and Donovan reported, was to discount indications of non-white ancestry as a statistical error or noise to engage in scientific reinterpretation of the results.

The findings also indicate that white nationalists are using genetic ancestry test results to rethink the boundaries of whiteness. Panofsky and Donovan point out that a great deal of discussion on Stormfront focuses on what are the genetic markers of legitimate whiteness or European-ness, and how to think about white nationalism in an era of genetic ancestry testing.

Read the rest here:
Study reveals white nationalists' reactions when genetics test results challenge their identity - UCLA Newsroom

August 23, 2017 - By Stan Paul - A new study by UCLA researchers reveals the range of reactions from rejection to reinterpretation to acceptance after white nationalists learn that DNA ancestry test results indicate they may not be as white or European as they previously thought.

Thestudy,When Genetics Challenges a Racists Identity: Genetic Ancestry Testing Among White Nationalists, is the work of UCLA researchersAaron Panofskyand Joan Donovan, who presented their findings at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association held Aug. 14, 2017, in Montreal, Canada.

Upon receiving genetic evidence of non-white or non-European ancestry, those posting online expend considerable energy to repair identities by rejecting or reinterpreting genetic ancestry testing results, said the researchers, who studied discussion threads on the topic posted on the white nationalist online forum Stormfront.

(Right) Aaron Panofsky - Credit: UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs

In their study, Donovan and Panofsky, an associate professor with appointments in Public Policy at UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs, the Institute for Society and Genetics, and Sociology, looked at more than 3,000 posts in 70 discussion threads on topics related to test reveals. These included posts by individuals who revealed results of non-white/non-European ancestry on Stormfront, a website that requires members to be white or European with non-Jewish ancestry. Responses also included the comments on those test results.

Panofsky and Donovan, a postdoctoral fellow at the Institute for Society and Genetics, report that while ancestry tests promote the capacity to reveal ones genetic ties to ethnic groups, ancient populations and historical migrations, and even famous historical figures this opportunity to know thyself can come with significant risks.

Panofsky points out that based on white nationalists responses to genetic information upon learning their test results, there is no reason to believe that they would give up their racial ideology, and, more importantly, that genetic information cannot be relied on to change the views of white nationalists.

In addition, Panofsky said that, as a group, white nationalists appear to have a combination of sophisticated and unsophisticated methods of interpreting the data from statistical and genetic viewpoints, as well as on their own historical reasoning or reinterpretation.

In this framework, the repair strategy is not to reject scientific or historical knowledge, but to educate oneself to understand the construction of [genetic test] results and to explain those results in alternate terms, the researchers conclude.

In parsing responses to genetic ancestry test results posted on Stormfront, Panofsky and Donovan created a decision tree consisting of good news responses, or confirmation of white identity, or bad news, revealing results of non-white or non-European ancestry.

Good news served a confirming purpose and was well-received, but bad news elicited responses of rejection of the test results. Alternatives to the rejected responses included championing traditional methods, citing family history or using a mirror test, whereby individuals evaluated their outward appearance as a gauge of racial identity.

Many of the responses to bad news are about how to repair the damage, rather than latching onto the ideology of Stormfront, Panofsky said. Even though they have that idea of purity, they help people explain away or dismiss the result.

The researchers also found that some who reject unfavorable genetic test results interpret them as the product of companies with an anti-white bias, or Jewish ownership invested in sowing racial doubt and confusion among whites. They also attribute a small percentage of non-white or non-European markers as being part of a multicultural conspiracy, according to the study.

Another way the posters dealt with bad news, Panofsky and Donovan reported, was to discount indications of non-white ancestry as a statistical error or noise to engage in scientific reinterpretation of the results.

The findings also indicate that white nationalists are using genetic ancestry test results to rethink the boundaries of whiteness. Panofsky and Donovan point out that a great deal of discussion on Stormfront focuses on what are the genetic markers of legitimate whiteness or European-ness, and how to think about white nationalism in an era of genetic ancestry testing.Source: UCLA

Go here to see the original:
UCLA Researchers Study Reveals White Nationalists' Reactions When Genetics Test Results Challenge Their Identity - Sierra Sun Times

For some, the hardest part of hitting the gym is lacing up their shoes. But for others, its the actual exercise that makes working out so excruciating. The labored breathing, sore muscles, and sweat dripping into your eyes can be a high or just one step above torture depending on which type of person you are. A new study aimed to determine what accounts for these differences, and it turns out your genetics might be to blame for how much you dread going for a run.

The British Psychological Societys Research Digest reports on a study at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam in the Netherlands, which enlisted 115 pairs of identical twins, 111 pairs of non-identical twins, 35 siblings related to the twins and 6 sibling pairs not from families with twins. Everyone rode an exercise bike for 20 minutes and completed a 20-minute run, both at a comfortable pace. Researchers monitored breathing to ensure the workouts were low intensity, and a warm up and cool down accompanied the routines. Subjects also completed a second short ride on the exercise bike that was more vigorous.

The siblings completed assessments while exercising, answering how they felt while working out, how much effort they put in, and whether they were energetic, lively, jittery or tense. Additionally, participants were interviewed about how often they exercised and to what intensity. Using the responses, researchers determined the participants psychological state during physical activity.

Then, scientists looked at the data to determine whether identical twins, who also have identical genes, had similar responses to exercising compared to fraternal twins and non-twin siblings. This allowed them to theorizehow much genetics actually played a role in someone's mental state during physical fitness. They concluded that genetics could account for up to 37 percent of the differences in the way people experienced exercise. Unsurprisingly, people who enjoyed fitness were prone to doing it more. However, its important to note that the study doesnt show a cause and effect relationship.

While this new research indicates that somemay not be born to love fitness, theres no denying that we should still do it. Aside from helping maintain weight, working out can lift your mood, reduce stress and anxiety, strengthen bones and and reduce risk of certain diseases.

Thankfully, it is possible to actually enjoy physical activity. Health reports that the most important thing is to take up an activity you actually like (and yes, there is bound to be something). "Too often I see people who sign up to do something like running, even though they know they hate running," Shavise Glascoe, exercise physiologist at the Johns Hopkins Weight Management Center, explained to the magazine. Even non-vigorous activities like walking your dog or dancing in your room count as exercise.

Finding a workout buddy is an easy way to instantly make jogging, walking or lifting weights more interesting. A study from 2013 found that people who worked out with a spouse, friend or family member reported more enjoyment than doing it alone. If the activity took place around nature, people reported even more enjoyment and better moods. So, stop reading this, grab a buddy and hit your nearest walking trail.

Read the original post:
Genetics, Not Laziness, Might Be Why You Hate Exercising - Medical Daily

Oxford Genetics will expand its bioproduction services in the UK and target the US market through an office in Boston after receiving a 7.5m ($9.6m) investment.

The investment comes from existing investor Mercia Technologies PLC, and Invesco Perpetual and will help the bioprocessing support firm expand its global presence and increase its DNA, protein, viral and cell line service offerings.

The UK extension adds another floor in its building in Oxford which will be fitted out to increase capacity across the firms entire service offering, allowing the segregation of material flow and the isolation of individual projects, a spokesperson from Oxford Genetics told us.

This will allow us to continue to exceed regulatory requirements and provide quality assurance for our clients. We will also add more analytical, purification and process development equipment, for instance small scale bioreactors, to enable us to fully support our clients from research up to the point of GMP bioproduction.

The 6,000 sq ft extension is expected to be ready by November, and will include cell line engineering capabilities, viral vector production and purification suites, high-throughput robotic screening systems and process development facilities.

The US expansion, meanwhile, will see the firm open an office in Boston to target the large US market.

A US office is integral because it is the single largest market for our technologies and services, we were told. There has been a significant increase in the demand for our viral expression systems and cell line development for virus production.

The firm, founded in 2011, licenses its technology platforms on a non-exclusive basis to all biopharma and according to the spokesperson has had tremendous interest from firms looking for bioproduction optimisation solutions.

We have already begun to sign licenses and collaboration deals. The latter agreements are particularly interesting since they are allowing our collaborators accelerated access to some of our virus production platform technologies, which will fully mature over the next 18 months.

In the past year, Oxford Genetics has benefitted from several funding projects including a 1.6m and 1m, both from Innovate UK, to explore computational and synthetic biology approaches for optimising mammalian biomanufacturing processes, and to overcome the inefficient and costly scale-up of viral vector production, respectively.

Read the rest here:
Oxford Genetics secures investment; expands UK facility and eyes US market - BioPharma-Reporter.com

The opening of Hendrix Genetics in Grand Island on Aug. 15 is an excellent example of the power of markets supplemented by appropriate government policy.

Feeding a growing world population now estimated to be 7.5 billion provides both a challenge and an opportunity as food producers endeavor to meet the growing demand for food. For Hendrix Genetics this demand represents opportunity as it is a world leader in turkey, layer and trout breeding as well as a major player in swine, salmon and guinea fowl production.

The numbers connected with Hendrix Genetics are impressive. They currently have 25 percent of the United States egg hatchery market and the new hatchery in Grand Island will serve 10 percent of the U.S. market. With good science and management, poultry production is an excellent way to provide quality food for both domestic and world markets.

Hendrix Genetics was willing and able to create the Grand Island plant because essential markets were available to meet their needs. After a nationwide search they determined that Grand Island was an excellent location. It provided needed isolation that was essential for the required biosecurity. In our area they found infrastructure for transportation needs, access to willing, affordable and capable labor and area producers to build and manage outlying barns as well as to provide feed.

For each component in the production process, prices, profits and wages had to be sufficient to bring together all the resources necessary to open and operate the plant.

Government policies had to align with needs of Hendrix Genetics and our community gave them an excellent invitation to grow our economy. The work of the Grand Island Area Economic Development Corporation was very important and we would add necessary and effective. Government and private enterprise had an effective partnership.

Also to be noted is that Hendrix Genetics is based in Holland and joins other industries in our community that are based in other countries such as New Holland-Italy and JBS-Brazil. Global interdependence is a reality and a plus for all those ready and willing to participate in the global economy.

America first may be effective political rhetoric in some parts of our country, but it is not good long term economic policy. Free trade and open borders will serve us better, particularly the food producers in the Midwest who are willing and able to feed the growing world population and rely on world markets.

This confluence of markets has added an $18 million investment to the city of Grand Island, more than 40 permanent jobs and an economic infusion estimated at $40 million.

See the article here:
Hendrix Genetics is an economic 'win-win' for GI - Grand Island Independent