Category Archives: Human Behavior

Gallup’s Top 10 US Findings of 2020 – Gallup Poll

Gallup polling closely followed the key historic events of 2020, namely a pandemic unlike the world had seen in nearly a century and the associated sharp economic downturn. At the same time, the nation witnessed some worrisome trends in public concern about race relations and a decline in Americans' mental health ratings.

Here are some of our top findings from these and related issues in 2020:

Impeachment and Economic Highs: The year began with a strong focus on President Donald Trump's Senate impeachment trial. Trump came out of the impeachment with an acquittal and a personal-best 49% approval rating. This coincided with a 20-year high in how Americans felt about the U.S. economy. As the year progressed, however, these sentiments would soon give way to some of the worst economic assessments seen in the United States since the Great Recession.

Confidence in Government to Handle the Virus: As the pandemic began to shut down normal life for most, Americans had a high level of confidence in the national government's ability to tackle the challenge. In fact, confidence was significantly higher in the government's ability to handle the coronavirus outbreak than what we had found for previous health scares this millennium. Yet, as the pandemic wore on, Americans' approval of President Donald Trump's response to it declined -- and they rated their state governors much more positively for communicating a clear plan of action in response to COVID-19 than they did both Trump and the CDC.

Social Distancing Skyrocketed: We saw rapid adoption of social distancing among Americans, including isolating themselves at home. Not only did this represent an unprecedented shift in human behavior within a short period, but it was also largely bipartisan, predating the political divisions that began to permeate almost all aspects of the pandemic in the months to follow.

Americans' Wellbeing and Confidence in U.S. Economy Plunged: Along with the adoption of social distancing and the associated shock to U.S. commerce, Americans' confidence in the economy fell sharply between March and April, logging the biggest one-month change Gallup has recorded. In April, the percentage of Americans rating their lives well enough to be considered thriving plummeted, and then partially recovered later in the year. Also, in a separate measure, Americans' mental health assessments were down year over year.

Race Relations and Policing Captured Americans' Focus in June: In the aftermath of the killing of George Floyd, the national focus shifted to policing reform and race relations. Americans' confidence in the police reached a historic low in 2020. More importantly, 19% of Black Americans expressed confidence in the police, a far cry from the 56% of White Americans holding this view. Concerns about race relations reached levels not seen since the 1960s.

Two-Decade Low in Crime Victimization: Despite record-low confidence in the police, protests and sporadic acts of violence, looting, and social unrest in some cities, the smallest percentages of Americans in 20 years reported being victims of personal or household crime.

Economic Ratings Improved by Election Day: While still in negative territory in October, Americans' view of the U.S. economy as measured by the Gallup Economic Confidence Index was improved compared with the sharply lower scores recorded in the spring. When combined with the low percentage of Americans naming the economy as the nation's top problem and the relatively high percentage approving of Trump's job performance on the economy, the national economy did not appear to be a major liability -- or asset -- for the president heading into the election. Trump's overall job approval rating at the time of the election was 46%. He went on to receive 47% of the popular vote.

The Ebb and Flow of Willingness to Get Vaccinated: After seeing Americans' willingness to receive a free, FDA-approved coronavirus vaccine drop from 66% in July to 50% in September, we found support rebounding to 63% in November -- shortly after news broke that one vaccine nearing approval was more than 90% effective at preventing COVID-19. The trend was marked with a significant partisan gap, reflecting different sensitivities around the need for and perceived safety of the vaccine.

U.S. Mood Sours as Year Ends: The national mood soured considerably as the year closed out. Assessments of the economic situation, as well as approval of leadership in the White House and Congress, declined as Trump continued to challenge the outcome of the election and leaders struggled to advance a second relief bill for the American public aimed at addressing some of the economic damage they incurred over the year.

Nurses Come Out on Top: As nurses, doctors and other medical professionals stepped up to be the true heroes of 2020, and teachers strived to educate America's youth facing unprecedented risks and challenges, Americans rated the ethics of nurses and grade-school teachers higher than ever before. Americans' confidence in the medical system and in public schools also showed rare double-digit increases this year.

Mohamed Younis is Gallup's Editor-in-Chief.

Access Crucial Data for Your Research

Search, examine, compare and export nearly a century of primary data.

Learn More about Access Crucial Data for Your Research

Subscribe to the Gallup News brief and real time alerts.Stay up to date with our latest insights.

Donald Trump edges out Barack Obama as most admired man, while Michelle Obama places ahead of Kamala Harris as most admired woman.

The public's mood has soured since November as President Trump's job approval rating has fallen four points to 39%. However, Joe Biden's transition approval is 65%.

Nurses top Gallup's annual Honesty and Ethics of Professions poll with their highest ethical rating to date. Medical doctors, pharmacists and grade-school teachers also rank highly, with record- or near-record-high scores.

What average Americans would say in a letter to their elected representatives.

December 30, 2020 Gallup https://news.gallup.com/opinion/gallup/328202/gallup-top-findings-2020.aspx Gallup World Headquarters, 901 F Street, Washington, D.C., 20001, U.S.A +1 202.715.3030

See the original post:
Gallup's Top 10 US Findings of 2020 - Gallup Poll

A 350,000-year-old turning point in human evolution found in Israel – Haaretz.com

A turning point in human evolution has been identified through reanalysis of a single stone tool found in Tabun Cave in northern Israel, from about 350,000 years ago. It had been used not to bash animals or butcher their carcasses but to abrade soft material, possibly animal hides, much earlier in human evolution than had been thought, say Ron Shimelmitz, Iris Groman-Yaroslavski, Mina Weinstein-Evron and Danny Rosenberg from the Zinman Institute of Archaeology at the University of Haifa.

Grinding and abrading (scraping) had only been thought to have developed much later, Shimelmitz explains to Haaretz. The entire engagement in this technology is much later, around 200,000 years ago, he says.

How Bibi pushed a 4th election and 3rd lockdown, and how we exposed his secret flights. LISTEN

>>Never miss an archaeology story. Sign up for free to our weekly newsletter

Yes, based on one tool, this discovery, reported in the Journal of Human Evolution, changes our thinking about part of our deep technological evolution.

Abrading stones abound in Africa and Europe starting about 200,000 years ago, from which point there was more frequent evidence of that technology, explains Shimelmitz, an expert in the evolution of technology. But it is also true that given that assumption, archaeologists hadnt necessarily been looking for such artifacts at earlier sites for one thing, theyre very hard to identify. You need to look for them, he adds.

You can fairly easily identify a knapped stone, especially the likes of arrowheads or spear points and especially when theyre made of flint a stone widely preferred because its so hard. They look quite unnatural. It is, conversely, not trivial to identify an abrading or grinding stone, which looks like a stone.

However, the authors point out that this particular piece of dolomite stood out among the tens of thousands of knapped stone tools found in Tabun Cave, located on the Mount Carmel range south of Haifa, from various periods of occupation. And they concluded that it wasnt just any chalky rock, but a tool, through microscopic use-wear analysis, including examination of the patterns on the cobbles surface, which were compared with known naturally weathered surfaces.

The importance of this technology [abradement] hadnt been on the table regarding the ancient world, Shimelmitz says. And why was the invention of abrading a crucial turning point? Because thats the way of humankind, he explains. To shape materials and our environment, to improve our adaptation to situations. The tools are external to our bodies and enable us to do things we couldnt do without them. Abradement is another significant technology within our possibility to adapt the environment. It appeared relatively late in human evolution; we thought very late; and now we show that its roots are deeper. We need to open our eyes wider.

Asked why, actually, abrading was so significant to our evolution, he brings the example of hides. You cant just skin an animal and comfortably wear its pelt. It is better to scrape off the fat and muscle remains, and soften the hide by abrading a precursor to proper tanning than to strut around garbed in decaying aurochs.

Does this mean the abrasion-stone of Tabun indicates there was a Middle Stone Age fashion? Not necessarily. The use-wear experiments conducted on the ground-breaking stone indicate that it was used on soft material (as opposed to bone, for instance), but not which soft material. It could have been hides used for clothing, or might not have been.

Great leaps forward

Usage of stone tools goes back at least 3.3 million years, well before modern humans were even a gleam in the eye of evolution. The first tools were large, crude hammers. Over the ages, as hominins gained sophistication, tool manufacture and use became more finely developed.

But throughout the period loosely known as the Early Stone Age, usage was confined to vertical motions: striking, battering and pounding, and then using knapped stones as knives as the researchers put it, applying a thin or narrow working edge of the stone tool.

In any case abradement, now known to have begun at least 350,000 years ago, is a precursor to a game-changer in human behavior and evolution: grinding grain.

Grinding grain comes much later, nearer the modern time and not the prehistoric time, Shimelmitz qualifies. Thats the end of the process. But this was a significant addition to the human tool chest. We note that mortars used possibly to grind grain have been found in Neolithic sites in Israel, from over 10,000 years ago.

The discovery of abrading in the Middle Pleistocene, which requires applying a wide working surface of the tool by means of sequential horizontal motions to modify or reduce the target surfaces of a materia,l rather than banging or stabbing at it, fits in with the bigger figure of huge strides among early hominin abilities to harness technology to shape their environment, the team explains.

Asked to elaborate, Shimelmitz points to two key behaviors that developed during that span one being a leap forward in the use of fire.

It remains an open question when fire was tamed in the sense that archaic humans could help themselves to a burning bush in order to roast their dinner and when our ancestors achieved control of fire, meaning they could ignite it at will. At sites dating to the Middle Pleistocene there is a giant step up in the discovery of purposely burned stuff, he say. One of those sites, by the way, is Tabun itself.

Another marked change in behavior is that during the Middle Pleistocene, hominins seem to have developed the concept of base camps, meaning a place they were leaving and coming back to every day (where they could curl up by their fire). Base camp and fire became a way of life during the Middle Stone Age, Shimelmitz says.

Asked if the upswing in intensity of occupation doesnt mean home, Shimelmitz agrees that one could see it that way. And this intensification also speaks to socialization and group structure. There is a reason early humans would return to their base camp every day. This was a period of intense change in the behavior of humankind, he sums up.

Israel has apparently been on the migration route for the human species for almost two million years. While solid evidence of hominin migration that far back is sparse, it has been demonstrated that the environmental conditions in the key region of the Negev desert were hospitable at the time, and hominin remains going back hundreds of thousands of years, as well as modern human remains, abound in this area. It begs qualifying that the study by Shimelmitz and his colleagues reevaluated previous discoveries at Tabun Cave, which had been used by hominins for hundreds of thousands of years, as of the early Stone Age. The cave was first explored by the famed British archaeologist Dorothy Garrod in the 1930s.

>>Never miss an archaeology story. Sign up for free to our weekly newsletter

At the end of the day, this is less a story about one rock found around 150,000 years earlier than had been expected, and more a story about what the artifact represents how deep abrading behavior, a totally different form of tool use, goes back in time.

Go here to see the original:
A 350,000-year-old turning point in human evolution found in Israel - Haaretz.com

Gut microbiota: How does it interact with the brain? – Medical News Today

Through studies in mice, researchers find evidence that having a healthful balance of gut microorganisms is important for good health.

Researchers from the Institut Pasteur, French National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS), and Inserm have found evidence that gut microbiota also plays a role in mood regulation and brain function.

Gut microbiota is the community of bacteria, fungi, and viruses that live in the digestive tract.

These findings in mice suggest that changes to gut bacterial communities may lead or contribute to depression. If humans have a similar mechanism, doctors might be able to use bacteria strains to treat mood disorders, such as depression.

A group of 16 researchers from several prominent French research institutions conducted the study, which appears in Nature Communications.

Studies have found that some people with depression experience dysbiosis, which is an imbalance or change in their intestinal microbiota.

Research conducted on rodents also shows that gut dysbiosis has associations with neurological changes linked with depression, such as:

Animal studies also show that gut microbiota helps regulate anxiety. It may also influence the development of neurological conditions caused by circuit dysfunctions, such as Parkinsons disease, Alzheimers disease, depression, and obsessive-compulsive disorder.

Researchers think this is because gut bacteria release metabolites, tiny bits of food broken down by digestion that influence brain function. Metabolites may impact mood regulation by acting on the endocannabinoid system.

The endocannabinoid system is a complex cell-signaling system consisting of lipid (fat)-based neurotransmitters and their receptors.

It is found throughout the body and plays a role in important aspects of health, such as immune and nervous system function and cellular communication in the nervous system. It also regulates emotions, moods, and stress responses by activation of the systems main receptor, CB1.

Previous research supports the idea that restoring gut microbial health may help treat depression. In animal studies, prebiotic treatment influenced emotional behavior. In human studies, prebiotic supplementation also improved mood in people with depression.

But despite educated theories, researchers still do not know precisely how gut bacteria impact brain function.

Researchers in the recent study set out to find the mechanisms linking gut microbiota and mood disorders. A team of researchers from some of these same French institutions published a report earlier this year, which found that stress-induced changes in gut microbiota reduced the efficacy of the antidepressant fluoxetine in mice.

In the study, researchers submitted genetically identical mice to unpredictable chronic mild stress (UCMS), a mouse model of stress-induced depression, for 8 weeks.

This treatment caused the mice to develop depressive-like behaviors, such as reduced eating, grooming, weight loss, and hippocampal neurogenesis. The hippocampus is responsible for learning and memory and is heavily affected by several psychiatric and neurological conditions.

Researchers then transplanted fecal samples containing gut microbiota from control and UCMS-exposed mice into healthy mice. To serve as a control, mice that received fecal transplants were germ-free mice or received treatment with antibiotics for 6 days.

After 8 weeks, mice that received transplants from UCMS mice developed depression-like symptoms. The mice also experienced a reduction in the number of new brain stem cells and neurons in their hippocampus.

These findings show that transferring gut microbiota from stress-induced depressive mice to healthy mice induced depression-like behaviors.

Surprisingly, simply transferring the microbiota from an animal with mood disorders to an animal in good health was enough to bring about biochemical changes and confer depressive-like behaviors in the latter.

Pierre-Marie Lledo, head of the Perception and Memory Unit at the Institut Pasteur (CNRS/Institut Pasteur), joint last author of the study

To figure out how this occurred, researchers explored the possibility that UCMS-exposed microbiota may trigger depression by altering metabolism. They found that mice with UCMS microbiota had significantly reduced levels of certain fatty acids in their blood and brain.

The reduced fatty acids included monoacylglycerols (MAG), diacylglycerols (DAG), polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA), and linoleic acid. monoacylglycerols (MAG), diacylglycerols (DAG), polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA), and linoleic acid. Variations of two of these fatty acids, DAD and PUFA, are converted into endocannabinoids (eCB).

The researchers speculate that gut dysbiosis may cause these changes in fatty acid levels. Studies link the dysregulation of the endocannabinoid system and its central receptor, CB1, with depression in both UCMS-model mice and humans.

In the study, the researchers found that mice with UCMS microbiota had greatly reduced levels of eCBs in their hippocampus and blood. They also found that mice with UCMS microbiota had reduced levels of Lactobacillus bacteria.

The researchers were able to reduce the depressive impact of the UCMS microbiota by enhancing CB1 levels and giving the mice a strain of Lactobacillus bacteria orally.

These findings suggest that chronic stress, diet, and the gut microbiota contribute to the development of depression-like behaviors via the endocannabinoid system.

This discovery shows the role played by the gut microbiota in normal brain function, says Grard Eberl, Head of the Microenvironment and Immunity Unit (Institut Pasteur/Inserm) and joint last author of the study.

More specifically, imbalances in the gut bacterial community that reduce fatty acid levels vital to the endocannabinoid system and brain function seem to encourage the development of depression-like behaviors.

These findings mean certain bacteria could act as a natural antidepressant, treating mood disorders by restoring gut microbial health. And this is promising news, considering the slew of potential adverse side effects and relatively low efficacy rate of most current antidepressants.

To confirm their results, the researchers will need to test their findings in humans. The researchers say that new research will also need to explore whether changes to the gut microbiota impact other brain targets of the endocannabinoid system in the same way.

Read the original:
Gut microbiota: How does it interact with the brain? - Medical News Today

Produce For Better Health Foundation Commends US Departments of Agriculture and Health And Human Services For Releasing The Dietary Guidelines For…

The Produce for Better Health Foundation (PBH) commends the U.S. Departments of Agriculture (USDA) and Health and Human Services (HHS) for releasing the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020-2025 (DGA). This document is written for policymakers and health professionals and provides evidence-based recommendations for healthy eating patterns in the U.S. Importantly, the main message of the newly-released DGA is Make Every Bite Count. More than ever, the two food groups that desperately need this advice to be heeded are fruits and vegetables.

National food consumption data show fruits and vegetables are two of the top three food groups under consumed in the US.[1] The consumer-facing MyPlate depicts fruit and vegetable dietary guidance prominently on the plate with the recommendation to make half your plate fruits and vegetables.

Given PBHs commitment to advancing the role that all forms of fruits and vegetables fresh, frozen, canned, dried and 100% juice play in improving health and well-being, we commend the agencies for their dedication to completing the new DGAand continuing to keep fruits and vegetables at the forefront of dietary guidance, says Wendy Reinhardt Kapsak, MS, RDN, president and CEO for PBH. As a MyPlate National Strategic Partner and purpose-driven organization focused on improving produce consumption among all Americans, we fully support these recommendations and pledge to work collaboratively to promote fruits and vegetables first for happier, healthier lives, as most Americans still simply do not eat enough.

There is strong scientific evidence that healthy eating patterns are associated with positive health outcomes, and higher intakes of vegetables and fruit are consistentlyidentified as characteristics of healthy eating patterns.[2] Still, of the 2-3 cups of vegetables[3] and 1 to 2 cups of fruit per day[4] recommended for adults 19 and older, current intake in this population is just 1.6 and 0.9 cups of vegetables and fruits per day, respectively well below even the range minimums.1

A different way of putting it is this a whopping 9 out of 10 adults simply do not get enough.[5] Finally, and most concerning, these intake levels have not changed significantly since 2003-2004.1 Such flat and/or declining intake trends are very concerning to PBH as well as many other food system thought leaders.

In response, PBH called out Americas chronic consumption crisis and implored that new fruit and vegetable consumption behaviors become a national priority. More than 25 leading fruit and vegetable companies and organizations signed on to support PBH research aimed at improving consumption as of December 2020, with more expected to join the cause in 2021.

While the DGAarticulate science-based recommendations behind the health benefits of fruits and vegetables, consumption statistics as well as PBHs research has shown that these facts, or what people know, are simply not enough to motivate behavior change.

Its great the new DGA reinforce the important role fruits and vegetables play in health and well-being, yet people still arent eating them. Weve got to find a different way to make the planets favorite plants craveable, says Reinhardt Kapsak. PBHs consumer-facing Have A Plant Movement and corresponding digital ecosystem offer a new and different approach by tapping into how Americans feel about healthy eating and, most importantly, what they can do to create new fruit and vegetable habits. We call this PBHs KNOW-FEEL-DO Behavioral Framework.

The time is now for food system stakeholders to work together to translate science into guidance that connects Americans feelings about food with how the doing can be easy and fun. Now is the time to bring PBHs KNOW-FEEL-DO Behavioral Framework to life as subsequent, consumer-facing dietary guidance messaging is created for every life stage.

The DGA is the first set of guidelines that provide standards for healthy dietary patterns by life stage, from birth through older adulthood, including pregnant and lactating women.

PBH has remained steadfast in supporting the science showcasing the role that fruits and vegetables play in promoting both health and quality of life. In 2019, PBHs chief food and nutrition scientist, Taylor Wallace, PhD, CFS, FACN, provided written and oral comments on PBHs behalf, submitting research from the PBH-commissioned scientific review showing evidence that fruits and vegetables contribute to better health as well as improved life expectancy and quality. In August 2020, Wendy Reinhardt Kapsak, PBH president and CEO, submitted written and oral comments again, reinforcing the role fruits and vegetables play in healthy eating patterns for better health and happiness.

To download the full DGA, click here. For resources and tools to communicate with consumers, check out http://www.myplate.gov.

About the Produce for Better Health FoundationProduce for Better Health Foundation (PBH), a nonprofit 501(c)(3), is the only national organization dedicated to helping consumers live happier, healthier lives by eating more fruits and vegetables, including fresh, frozen, canned, dried and 100% juice, every single day.

Since 1991, PBH has invested decades into developing trended insights on attitudes towards all forms of fruit and vegetable consumption, in addition to campaigns and partnerships with government, food industry stakeholders, health professionals and other thought leaders to collaborate, facilitate and advocate for increased intake. Campaigns included first, the 5-A-Day program, and then, the Fruits & Veggies More Matters public health initiative. While five fruits and vegetables each day is great advice, and more will always matter, PBHs new behavior-based call-to-action is Have A Plant. Rooted in behavioral science, PBHs transformative Have A Plant movement is an invitation that will inspire people with compelling reasons to believe in the powerful role fruits and vegetables can play to create happy, healthy and active lives.

Be sure to join the Have A Plant movement and get new recipes, snack hacks, meal ideas and other tips from chefs, registered dietitians, as well as food and wellness experts by visitingwww.fruitsandveggies.org. Follow us on Facebook@fruitsandveggies; on Twitter @fruits_veggies; on Instagram @fruitsandveggies; on Pinterest @fruits_veggies; and on LinkedIn atProduce for Better Health Foundation. And remember to #haveaplant.

PBH is also responsible for the Lead The Change Movement a multi-sector, multi-year initiative designed to maximize the power of PBHs unique thought leadership position, widespread influencer network, credible scientific and market research, and, most importantly, its innovative members and partners, to lead a call-to-action for addressing the global fruit and vegetable consumption crisis. The initiative includes research, thought leadership and communication platforms to ensure the Movement speaks with One Purpose, One Voice and One Call-to-Action. For more information about the Lead The Change Movement visit: http://www.fruitsandveggies.org/lead-the-change.

[1] Bowman SA, Clemens JC, Friday JE, Schroeder N, Shimizu M, LaCombRP, and Moshfegh AJ. Food Patterns Equivalents Intakes by Americans: What We Eat in America, NHANES 2003-2004 and 2015-2016. Food Surveys Research Group. Dietary Data Brief No. 20, November 2018

[2] U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and U.S. Department of Agriculture. 20152020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. 8th Edition. December 2015. Available at: http://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/2015/guidelines/.

[3] Daily Vegetable Table. ChooseMyPlate, http://www.choosemyplate.gov/eathealthy/vegetables.

[4] Daily Fruit Table. ChooseMyPlate, http://www.choosemyplate.gov/eathealthy/fruits.

[5] Lee-Kwan SH, Moore LV, Blanck HM, Harris DM, Galuska D. Disparities in State-Specific Adult Fruit and Vegetable Consumption United States, 2015. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2017;66:12411247

Read more:
Produce For Better Health Foundation Commends US Departments of Agriculture and Health And Human Services For Releasing The Dietary Guidelines For...

U.K. variant puts spotlight on immunocompromised patients’ role in the COVID-19 pandemic – Science Magazine

Shoppers wear face masks on Regent Street in London on 19 December, the day the U.K. government imposed new restrictions to curb a rapidly spreading new SARS-CoV-2 variant.

By Kai KupferschmidtDec. 23, 2020 , 2:30 PM

Sciences COVID-19 reporting is supported by the Pulitzer Center and the Heising-Simons Foundation.

In June, Ravindra Gupta, a virologist at the University of Cambridge, heard about a cancer patient who had come into a local hospital the month before with COVID-19 and was still shedding virus. The patient was being treated for a lymphoma that had relapsed and had been given rituximab, a drug that depletes antibody-producing B cells. That made it hard for him to shake the infection with SARS-CoV-2.

Gupta, who studies how resistance to HIV drugs arises, became interested in the case and helped treat the patient, who died in August, 101 days after his COVID-19 diagnosis, despite being given the antiviral drug remdesivir and two rounds of plasma from recovered patients, which containedantibodies against the virus. When Gupta studied genome sequences from the coronavirus that infected the patient, he discovered that SARS-CoV-2 had acquired several mutations that might have allowed it to elude the antibodies.

Now, his analysis, reported in a preprint on medRxiv earlier this month, has become a crucial puzzle piece for researchers trying to understand the importance of B.1.1.7, the new SARS-CoV-2 variant first found in the United Kingdom. That strain, which appears to spread faster than others, contains one of the mutations that Gupta found, and researchers believe B.1.1.7, too, may have originated in an immunocompromised patient who had a long-running infection. Its a perfectly logical and rational hypothesis, says infectious disease scientist Jeremy Farrar, director of the Wellcome Trust.

Scientists are still trying to figure out the effects of the mutations in B.1.1.7, whose emergence led the U.K. government to tighten coronavirus control measures and other countries in Europe to impose U.K. travel bans. But the new variant, along with research by Gupta and others, has also drawn attention to the potential role in COVID-19 of people with weakened immune systems. If they provide the virus with an opportunity to evolve lineages that spread faster, are more pathogenic, or elude vaccines, these chronic infections are not just dangerous for the patients, but might have the potential to alter the course of the pandemic.

Its still very unclear whether that is the case, but Farrar believes its important to ensure doctors take extra precautions when caring for such people: Until we know for sure, I think, treating those patients under pretty controlled conditions, as we would somebody who has drug resistant tuberculosis, actually makes sense.

Researchers concern mostly focuses on cancer patients being treated for chemotherapy and similar situations. We dont yet know about people who are immunocompromised because of HIV, for instance, Farrar says.

B.1.1.7 attracted scientists attention because it was linked to an outbreak in Englands Kent county that was growing faster than usual. Sequences showed that virus had accumulated a slew of mutations that together caused 17 amino acid changes in the virus proteins, eight of them in the crucial spike protein. Among them are at least three particularly concerning ones.

One is 69-70del, a deletion that Gupta also found in his Cambridge, U.K., patient whose virus seemed to evade the immune system. It leads to the loss of two amino acids in the spike protein. In lab experiments, Gupta found that lentivirus engineered to carry the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein with this deletion was twice as infectious.

The second is N501Y, a mutation that evolutionary biologist Jesse Bloom of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center has shown to increase how tightly the protein binds to the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor, its entry point into human cells. The mutation is also present in 501Y.V2, a variant discovered by researchers in South Africa who investigated rapidly growing outbreaks in three coastal provinces. We found that this lineage seems to be spreading much faster, says Tulio de Oliveira, a virologist at the University of KwaZulu-Natal whose work first alerted U.K. scientists to the importance of N501Y. Anytime you see the same mutation being independently selected multiple times, it increases the weight of evidence that that mutation is probably beneficial in some way for the virus, Bloom says.

The third worrisome change is P681H, which alters the site where the spike protein has to be cleaved to enter human cells. It is one of the sites on spike where SARS-CoV-2 differs from SARS-CoV-1, the virus that caused the worldwide outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome in 2003, and the change there may allow it to spread more easily. This one is probably as important as N501Y, says Christian Drosten, a virologist at Charit University Hospital in Berlin.

So far, SARS-CoV-2 typically acquires only one to two mutations per month. And B.1.1.7 is back to this pace now, suggesting it doesnt mutate faster normally than other lineages. Thats why scientists believe it may have gone through a lengthy bout of evolution in a chronically infected patient who then transmitted the virus late in their infection. We know this is rare but it can happen, says World Health Organization epidemiologist Maria Van Kerkhove. Stephen Goldstein, a virologist at the University of Utah, agrees. Its simply too many mutations to have accumulated under normal evolutionary circumstances. It suggests an extended period of within-host evolution, he says.

People with a weakened immune system may give the virus this opportunity, as Guptas data show. More evidence comes from a paper published in The New England Journal of Medicine on 3 December that described an immunocompromised patient in Boston infected with SARS-CoV-2 for 154 days before he died. Again, the researchers found several mutations, including N501Y. It suggests that you can get relatively large numbers of mutations happening over a relatively short period of time within an individual patient, says William Hanage of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, one of the authors. (In patients who are infected for a few days and then clear the virus, there simply is not enough time for this, he says.) When such patients are given antibody treatments for COVID-19 late in their disease course, there may already be so many variants present that one of them is resistant, Goldstein says.

Its simply too many mutations to have accumulated under normal evolutionary circumstances. It suggests an extended period of within-host evolution.

The question is whether the mutations arising in such patients could also help the virus spread more rapidly. In research published a few years ago, Bloom showed some of the mutations that arose in influenza viruses in immunocompromised patients later spread globally. Its totally possible that whats happening in immunocompromised patients could foreshadow what happens in the future with the pandemic, Bloom says. But adaptations that help a virus outperform other viruses in a patient can also be very different from what a virus needs to better transmit from patient to patient, he says.

U.K. scientists and others were initially cautious about concluding that B.1.1.7s mutations made the virus better at spreading from person to person. But the new variant is rapidly replacing others, says Mge evik, an infectious disease specialist at the University of St.Andrews. We cant really rule out the possibility that seasonality and human behavior explain some of the increase, she says. But it certainly seems like there is something to do with this variant. Drosten says he was initially skeptical, but has become more convinced as well.

But exactly what impact each mutation has is much more difficult to assess than spotting them or showing theyre on the rise, says Seema Lakdawala, a biologist at the University of Pittsburgh. Animal experiments can help show an effect, but they have limitations. Hamsters already transmit SARS-CoV-2 virus rapidly, for instance, which could obscure any effect of the new variant. Ferrets transmit it less efficiently, so a difference may be more easily detectable, Lakdawala says. But does that really translate to humans? I doubt it. A definitive answer may be months off, she predicts.

One hypothesis that scientists are discussing is that the virus has increased how strongly it binds to the ACE2 receptor on human cells, and that this allows it to better infect children than before, expanding its playing field. But the evidence for that is very thin so far, evik says. Even if children turn out to make up a higher proportion of people infected with the new variant, that could be because the variant spread at a time when there was a lockdown but schools were open. Another hypothesis is that P681H helps the virus better infect cells higher up in the respiratory tract, from where it can spread more easily than from deep in the lungs, Drosten says.

One important question is whether the South African or U.K. lineage might lead to more severe disease or even evade vaccine-induced immunity. So far there is little reason to think so. Although some mutations have been shown to let the virus evade monoclonal antibodies, vaccines and natural infections both appear to lead to a broad immune response that targets many parts of the virus, says Shane Crotty of the La Jolla Institute for Immunology. It would be a real challenge for a virus to escape from that. The measles and polio viruses have never learned to escape the vaccines targeting them, he notes: Those are historical examples suggesting not to freak out.

At a press conference yesterday, BioNTech CEO Uur ahin pointed out that the U.K. variant differed in only nine out of more than 1270 amino acids of the spike protein encoded by the messenger RNA in the very effective COVID-19 vaccine his company developed together with Pfizer. Scientifically it is highly likely that the immune response by this vaccine also can deal with the new virus, he said. Experiments are underway that should confirm that in the first week of 2021, ahin added.

Sbastien Calvignac-Spencer, an evolutionary virologist at the Robert Koch Institute, says this marks the first time countries have taken such drastic actions as the U.K. lockdown and the travel bans based on genomic surveillance in combination with epidemiological data. Its pretty unprecedented at this scale, he says. But the question of how to react to disconcerting mutations in pathogens will crop up more often as genomic surveillance expands, he predicts. People are happy they prepared for a category 4 hurricane even if predictions turn out to be wrong and the storm is less severe, Calvignac-Spencer says. This is a bit the same, except that we have much less experience with genomic surveillance than we have with the weather forecast.

Although the rise of B.1.1.7 in the United Kingdom is troubling, Farrar says he is equally concerned about the other variant spreading quickly in South Africa and that has now been detected in two travelers in the United Kingdom as well. It includes two further mutations in the part of the spike protein that binds to its receptor on human cells, K417N and E484K. These could impact the binding of the virus to human cells and also its recognition by the immune system, Farrar says. These South African mutations I think are more worrying than the constellation of the British variant. South African hospitals are already struggling, he adds. Weve always asked, Why has sub-Saharan Africa escaped the pandemic to date? Answers have focused on the relative youth of the population and the climate. Maybe if you just increase transmission a bit, that is enough to get over these factors, Farrar says.

To Van Kerkhove, the arrival of B.1.1.7 shows how important it is to follow viral evolution closely. The United Kingdom has one of the most elaborate monitoring systems in the world, she says. My worry is: How much of this is happening globally, where we dont have sequencing capacity? Other countries should beef up their efforts, she says. And all countries should do what they can to minimize transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the months ahead, Van Kerkhove says. The more of this virus circulates, the more opportunity it will have to change, she says. Were playing a very dangerous game here.

Read more:
U.K. variant puts spotlight on immunocompromised patients' role in the COVID-19 pandemic - Science Magazine

The coronavirus is mutating. What does that mean for us? – Minneapolis Star Tribune

Just as vaccines begin to offer hope for a path out of the pandemic, officials in Britain on Saturday sounded an urgent alarm about what they called a highly contagious new variant of the coronavirus circulating in England.

Citing the rapid spread of the virus through London and surrounding areas, Prime Minister Boris Johnson imposed the country's most stringent lockdown since March.

"When the virus changes its method of attack, we must change our method of defense," he said.

In South Africa, a similar version of the virus has emerged, shares one of the mutations seen in the British variant, according to scientists who detected it. That virus has been found in up to 90% of the samples whose genetic sequences have been analyzed in South Africa since mid-November.

Scientists are worried about these variants but not surprised by them. Researchers have recorded thousands of tiny modifications in the genetic material of the coronavirus as it has hopscotched across the world.

Some variants become more common in a population simply by luck, not because the changes somehow supercharge the virus. But as it becomes more difficult for the pathogen to survive because of vaccinations and growing immunity in human populations researchers also expect the virus to gain useful mutations enabling it to spread more easily or to escape detection by the immune system.

"It's a real warning that we need to pay closer attention," said Jesse Bloom, an evolutionary biologist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle. "Certainly, these mutations are going to spread, and definitely, the scientific community, we need to monitor these mutations, and we need to characterize which ones have effects."

The British variant has about 20 mutations, including several that affect how the virus locks onto human cells and infects them. These mutations may allow the variant to replicate and transmit more efficiently, said Muge Cevik, an infectious disease expert at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland and a scientific adviser to the British government.

But the estimate of greater transmissibility British officials said the variant was as much as 70% more transmissible is based on modeling and has not been confirmed in lab experiments, Cevik added.

"Overall, I think we need to have a little bit more experimental data," she said. "We can't entirely rule out the fact that some of this transmissibility data might be related to human behavior."

In South Africa, too, scientists were quick to note that human behavior was driving the epidemic, not necessarily new mutations whose effect on transmissibility had yet to be quantified.

The British announcement also prompted concern that the virus might evolve to become resistant to the vaccines just now rolling out. The worries are focused on a pair of alterations in the viral genetic code that may make it less vulnerable to certain antibodies.

But several experts urged caution, saying it would take years not months for the virus to evolve enough to render the current vaccines impotent.

"No one should worry that there is going to be a single catastrophic mutation that suddenly renders all immunity and antibodies useless," Bloom said. "It is going to be a process that occurs over the time scale of multiple years and requires the accumulation of multiple viral mutations. It's not going to be like an on-off switch."

Like all viruses, the coronavirus is a shape-shifter. Some genetic changes are inconsequential, but some may give it an edge.

Scientists fear the latter possibility especially. The vaccination of millions of people may exert enormous pressure on the virus to become resistant to the immune response, setting back the global fight by years.

Already, there are small changes in the virus that have arisen independently multiple times across the world, suggesting the mutations are helpful to the pathogen. The mutation affecting antibody susceptibility technically called the 69-70 deletion, meaning there are missing letters in the genetic code has been seen at least three times: in Danish minks, in people in Britain and in an immune-suppressed patient who became much less sensitive to convalescent plasma.

"This thing's transmitting. It's acquiring. It's adapting all the time," said Dr. Ravindra Gupta, a virologist at the University of Cambridge who last week detailed the deletion's recurrent emergence and spread. "But people don't want to hear what we say, which is, this virus will mutate."

The new genetic deletion changes the spike protein on the surface of the coronavirus, which it needs to infect human cells. Variants of the virus with this deletion arose independently in Thailand and Germany in early 2020 and became prevalent in Denmark and England in August.

Scientists initially thought the new coronavirus was stable and unlikely to escape vaccine-induced immune response, said Dr. Deepti Gurdasani, a clinical public health researcher at Queen Mary University of London.

"But it's become very clear over the last several months that mutations can occur," she said. "As selection pressure increases with mass vaccination, I think these mutants will become more common."

Several recent papers have shown that the coronavirus can evolve to avoid recognition by a single monoclonal antibody, a mixture of two antibodies or even convalescent serum given to a specific individual.

Fortunately, the body's entire immune system is a much more formidable adversary.

The Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines induce an immune response only to the spike protein carried by the coronavirus on its surface. But each infected person produces a large, unique and complex repertoire of antibodies to this protein.

"The fact is that you have a thousand big guns pointed at the virus," said Kartik Chandran, a virus expert at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in New York. "No matter how the virus twists and weaves, it's not that easy to find a genetic solution that can really combat all these different antibody specificities, not to mention the other arms of the immune response."

In short: It will be very hard for the coronavirus to escape the body's defenses, despite the many variations it may adopt.

Escape from immunity requires that a virus accumulate a series of mutations, each allowing the pathogen to erode the effectiveness of the body's defenses. Some viruses, like influenza, amass those changes relatively quickly. But others, like the measles virus, collect hardly any of the alterations.

Even the influenza virus needs five to seven years to collect enough mutations to escape immune recognition entirely, Bloom noted. His lab Friday published a new report showing that common cold coronaviruses also evolve to escape immune detection but over many years.

The scale of the infections in this pandemic may be quickly generating diversity in the new coronavirus. Still, a vast majority of people worldwide have yet to be infected, and that has made scientists hopeful.

"It would be a little surprising to me if we were seeing active selection for immune escape," said Emma Hodcroft, a molecular public health researcher at the University of Bern in Switzerland.

"In a population that's still mostly naive, the virus just doesn't need to do that yet," she said. "But it's something we want to watch out for in the long term, especially as we start getting more people vaccinated."

Immunizing about 60% of a population within about a year and keeping the number of cases down while that happens will help minimize the chances of the virus mutating significantly, Hodcroft said.

Still, scientists will need to closely track the evolving virus to spot mutations that may give it an edge over vaccines.

Scientists routinely monitor mutations in flu viruses in order to update vaccines and should do the same for the coronavirus, said Trevor Bedford, an evolutionary biologist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle.

"You can imagine a process like exists for the flu vaccine, where you're swapping in these variants, and everyone's getting their yearly COVID shot," he said. "I think that's what generally will be necessary."

The good news is that the technology used in the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines is much easier to adjust and update than conventional vaccines. The new vaccines also generate a massive immune response, so the coronavirus may need many mutations over years before the vaccines must be tweaked, Bedford said.

In the meantime, he and other experts said, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other government agencies should set up a national system to link viral sequence databases with on-the-ground data like whether an infection occurred despite vaccination.

"These are useful pokes for scientists and governments to get systems in place now, before we might need them, especially as we start vaccinating people," Hodcroft said. "But the public should not necessarily be panicking."

Go here to see the original:
The coronavirus is mutating. What does that mean for us? - Minneapolis Star Tribune

What You Need to Know About the New Variant of COVID-19 – HealthDay News

TUESDAY, Dec. 22, 2020 (HealthDay News) -- For Americans who are worried about the new coronavirus variant that is circulating in Britain, experts in the United States urge everyone to stay calm.

So far, the new variant only seems to spread more easily, with no evidence of higher virulence (ability to cause harm), researchers at Northwestern Medicine in Chicago explained.

"There's no reason to get scared or panic, we just need to closely monitor this variant," said Dr. Ramon Lorenzo-Redondo, a scientist who studies COVID-19. Still, he predicted that it won't be long before the variant is detected in the United States.

Three Northwestern experts -- Lorenzo-Redondo, a research assistant professor in infectious diseases; Dr. Michael Ison, a professor of infectious diseases; and Dr. Marc Sala, an assistant professor of pulmonary and critical care -- answer some key questions people might have about the new variant.

How soon before this variant makes it to the U.S.?

"The variant might already be present here and observed soon," Lorenzo-Redondo said. "That's due to the number of patients that have been infected by this variant, the increase observed in November and the high connectivity between the U.S. and the U.K. It has already been detected in other countries."

Sala noted that "the time frame of the variant's [spread] depends entirely on human behavior, including government-imposed travel restrictions."

What is known about the variant's contagiousness and virulence?

"Right now, we know this variant has increased rapidly in the U.K. and accounts for a high proportion of new cases there," Lorenzo-Redondo said. This suggests a higher transmission rate, but this and other viral properties need to be confirmed in the lab. Meanwhile, the first analyses don't suggest increased virulence, only increased transmission, he added.

For the most part, Sala agreed. "Epidemiologic and modeling data suggests it is more transmissible and indeed appears to be outcompeting the other COVID-19 variants," he said. "It does not seem to cause more severe illness. However, this is all very preliminary and lacks experimental confirmation."

Can a variant limit the effectiveness of the vaccine? "These mutations do not seem to impact vaccine efficacy, but they need to be fully characterized," Lorenzo-Redondo said. "Theoretically, new mutations can impact vaccine efficacy as in other viruses, but the low mutation rate of this virus compared to others like flu or HIV-1 makes this more difficult," he explained.

"However, it is possible that if the vaccine starts to be deployed and is effective, we could observe changes in the virus to adapt and escape from the immune response promoted by the vaccine," he cautioned. "But again, the low mutation rate makes the adaptation of this virus to a vaccine less likely."

How common are variants of viruses and do they generally impact effectiveness of vaccines or treatments?

"Sometimes variants can have great impacts on vaccines or treatments. That's why it is so important to keep monitoring the variants circulating, to detect any possible mutation that could make vaccination or treatment less effective," Lorenzo-Redondo explained. But, "this virus seems to be adapting to spread as much as possible and, so far, all mutations seem to be increasing transmission, not virulence. That's probably because there is no evolutionary advantage for this virus to increase virulence."

What is a variant?

Ison explained that "variants occur when there is a change in the genetic material of the virus that results in a change in proteins the virus makes. In this case, there were a few changes related to the spike protein. These have changed the spike, but [the] changes are not predicted to change the efficacy of the vaccine."

Still, studies are ongoing to understand the impact of the variant, Ison noted.

How does the discovery of the variant impact our social distancing behaviors?

"This variant spreads the same way as the previous ones," Lorenzo-Redondo said. "Therefore, the safe behavior measures must remain the same. This variant shows we can't relax our social precautions." He added that with such high numbers of infections around the world, spikes in the virus will keep happening.

Ison stressed that people should still focus on not traveling, wearing a mask, maintaining social distance and hand hygiene.

According to Lorenzo-Redondo, "Because the virus keeps changing continuously, the greater the number of infected people, the more chances the virus gets to get better at infecting us."

More information

Visit the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for more on the coronavirus pandemic.

SOURCE: Northwestern Medicine, news release, Dec. 22, 2020

Here is the original post:
What You Need to Know About the New Variant of COVID-19 - HealthDay News

Study: Women Who Begin Annual Mammograms At Age 40 Are Healthier Than Other Women in Their 40s – Pharmacy Times

Study: Women Who Begin Annual Mammograms At Age 40 Are Healthier Than Other Women in Their 40s

The value of mammograms at age 40 has been debated, with just about 35% of women beginning at that age. According to MIT, mammograms for women in their 40s catch relatively few cases of breast cancer, often generate positive results, and produce some cases of unnecessary treatment. Because of these concerns, the US Preventive Services Task Force recommended in 2009 that women start regular mammogram screening at age 50 years, not 40.

The study authors noted, however, that simply changing age recommendations is not an optimal way to make breast cancer screening policies without other interventions. Given that women who opt in to testing in their 40s are relatively healthier, changing the age guidelines has a relatively limited impact. On the other hand, if mammogram screenings reached more women from ages 40 to 49, the authors said those tests would likely detect more cases per screening than they currently do.

Debates over when to recommend screening are missing a key point, said economist and co-author Amy Finkelstein, PhD, in a prepared statement. There are arguments about what the costs and benefits are of screening women at a certain age, but these tend to overlook the fact that those who follow the recommendations differ from the rest of the population. This makes the problem more complicated. You cant just forget human behavior and human selection when designing recommended health care policies.

The authors said targeting screening to high-risk groups who are less compliant with recommendations could be more effective than general age-based recommendations. Health insurance data show than about 90% of mammograms for middle-aged women are negative, 9.7% are false positives, and just 0.7% are authentically positive, and previous studies have found limited benefits for women ages 40 to 49.

To further investigate the problem, the investigators used a clinical model of breast cancer disease progression in the absence of treatment, which had been developed by medical researchers. They used multiple sources of data to approximate the overall incidence of breast cancer in the entire population, including individuals who are not screened.

In total, they found that 10% of women who start having mammograms before age 40 have a relatively high positive test rate of 0.84%, potentially because they experience symptoms leading to the mammogram. In contrast, just 0.56% of the women who started getting mammograms at age 40 test positive, and the number of late-stage cases among them decreases by 6 percentage points compared to people who get screened before age 40.

The team also considered women who do not get mammograms even when they are recommended above age 40. Compared to this group, compliers are also more likely to get other forms of preventive care, including flu shots and cervical cancer screenings, and have fewer emergency room visits for any reason. Although they said it is more difficult to assess the incidence of breast cancer among noncompliers, the clinicians model suggests that the risk among these unscreened women is likely higher than it is among compliers.

Based on these findings, the study authors said screenings should be targeted to higher-risk groups, potentially based on factors such as the age of mothers at first birth or genetic markers. However, they still noted that age-based guidance can hold value, and other methods require further research.

When you make age-based recommendations, it looks like the people who are most likely to follow them are the ones for whom its least beneficialwhich doesnt mean its not beneficial, but those are not the people you most want to target, Finkelstein concluded.

REFERENCECan mammogram screening be more effective? [news release]. MIT; December 17, 2020. Accessed December 18, 2020.https://news.mit.edu/2020/mammogram-age-guidance-1217

See the original post here:
Study: Women Who Begin Annual Mammograms At Age 40 Are Healthier Than Other Women in Their 40s - Pharmacy Times

Coronavirus: Heres how our brains track where we and others go – Hindustan Times

As COVID cases rise, physically distancing yourself from other people has never been more important. Now a new University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) study reveals how your brain navigates places and monitors someone else in the same location. Published December 23 in Nature, the findings suggest that our brains generate a common code to mark where other people are in relation to ourselves.

We studied how our brain reacts when we navigate a physical space -- first alone and then with others, said senior author Nanthia Suthana, the Ruth and Raymond Stotter Chair in Neurosurgery and an assistant professor of neurosurgery and psychiatry at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA and Jane and Terry Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior.

Our results imply that our brains create a universal signature to put ourselves in someone elses shoes, added Suthana, whose laboratory studies how the brain forms and recalls memories.

Suthana and her colleagues observed epilepsy patients whose brains had been surgically implanted earlier with electrodes to control their seizures. The electrodes resided in the medial temporal lobe, the brain centre linked to memory and suspected to regulate navigation, much like a GPS device.

Earlier studies have shown that low-frequency brain waves by neurons in the medial temporal lobe help rodents keep track of where they are as they navigate a new place, said first author Matthias Stangl, a postdoctoral scholar in Suthanas lab. We wanted to investigate this idea in people -- and test whether they could also monitor others near them -- but were hampered by existing technology.

Using a $3.3 million award from the National Institutes of Healths BRAIN Initiative, Suthanas lab invented a special backpack containing the computer that wirelessly connects to brain electrodes. This enabled her to study research subjects as they moved freely instead of lying still in a brain scanner or hooked up to a recording device.

In this experiment, each patient wore the backpack and was instructed to explore an empty room, find a hidden spot and remember it for future searches. While they walked, the backpack recorded their brain waves, eye movements and paths through the room in real-time.

As the participants searched the room, their brain waves flowed in a distinctive pattern, suggesting that each persons brain had mapped out the walls and other boundaries. Interestingly, the patients brain waves also flowed in a similar manner when they sat in a corner of the room and watched someone else approach the location of the hidden spot.

The finding implies that our brains produce the same pattern to track where we and other people are in a shared environment.

Why is this important?

Everyday activities require us to constantly navigate around other people in the same place, said Suthana, who is also an assistant professor of psychology at UCLAs College of Letters and Science and of bioengineering at the Henry Samueli School of Engineering. Consider choosing the shortest airport security line, searching for a space in a crowded parking lot or avoiding bumping into someone on the dance floor.

In a secondary finding, the UCLA team discovered that what we pay attention to may influence how our brains map out a location. For example, the patients brain waves flowed stronger when they searched for the hidden spot -- or witnessed another person approaches the location -- than when they simply explored the room.

Our results support the idea that, under certain mental states, this pattern of brain waves may help us recognize boundaries, said Stangl. In this case, it was when people were focused on a goal and hunting for something.

Future studies will explore how peoples brain patterns react in more complex social situations, including outside the laboratory. The UCLA team has made the backpack available to other researchers to accelerate discoveries about the brain and brain disorders.

Coauthors included Uros Topalovic, Cory Inman, Sonja Hiller, Diane Villaroman, Zahra Aghajan, Dawn Eliashiv and Itzhak Fried, all from UCLA; Leonardo Christov-Moore from USC; Nicholas Hasulak from NeuroPace Inc; Vikram Rao from UCSF and Casey Halpern from the Stanford University School of Medicine.

The study was supported with funding from the NIHs Brain Initiative, McKnight Foundation and Keck Foundation.

(This story has been published from a wire agency feed without modifications to the text. Only the headline has been changed. )

Follow more stories on Facebook and Twitter

Read more:
Coronavirus: Heres how our brains track where we and others go - Hindustan Times

Jensen: Shocked, shocked to find hypocrisy in humans – Chattanooga Times Free Press

No precise estimate is available, but after watching an excess of cable television programming lately, I would say at least 40% of current news shows are composed of what I call "Hypocrisy Watch." Someone somewhere has failed to live up to their moral code and an intrepid reporter is there to say, "Gotcha."

One day it's the governor of California sitting maskless at a fancy restaurant with people from multiple households close together, when he's told his constituents to do none of those things. Then it's the mayor of Austin, Texas, posting a warning on Facebook against travel as he was vacationing in Cabo San Lucas, Mexico. D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser traveled to Delaware to attend a Joe Biden rally, and Maryland dining even got some free publicity when a photo of Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney eating at the Chesapeake Inn Restaurant was posted on social media in late August.

As journalism, this is cheap stuff. It used to be your transgression had to be pretty serious to warrant big headlines and excited, on-the-street TV stand-ups. The local minister getting caught in an affair? An oncologist sneaking a cigarette down the hall? A Weight Watchers counselor with love handles? No, no, no. Breathless coverage was reserved for famous people who truly abused their position, like televangelist Kenneth Copeland, who begs for money for his ministry but gave his wife a $200,000 Lamborghini SUV and owns three private jets.

But the COVID-19 pandemic appears to have changed all that. A lot of folks deeply resent stay-at-home orders, lockdowns, restrictions, suggestions, whatever you want to call them, and they are looking for villains. Find anyone preaching restrictions but not following them? Well, for many, that's a deal-breaker. Why should I have to take coronavirus precautions when fill in name here doesn't do that?

I'm not here to defend any of this behavior. But I also have to be honest and recognize that I'm human. I have tried to do the right thing during the pandemic. I don't do in-person restaurant dining. I wear a mask where it's appropriate. But am I perfect? Should I have visited a Delaware beach in October with my spouse? Do I replace my mask frequently enough? Should I have invited the neighbors to sit on my front porch? Is that enough?

I've been pondering this since the weekend, when word came out that Dr. Deborah Birx, coordinator of the White House coronavirus response, was revealed to have visited a Delaware beach resort, too. Only she did it the day after Thanksgiving with three generations from two households, and it seems to be something of a pattern. As The Associated Press reported, she also regularly visits her home in Potomac, where her parents and daughter live. This is not ax murdering, but it doesn't exactly square with best COVID-19 practices either. And so, she's getting blasted on social media.

Is Dr. Birx the greatest public health practitioner on the planet? This I don't know. I have heard quite a few doctors say she should have been much more outspoken months ago when President Donald Trump was making some misleading and harmful statements about the coronavirus and its prospects for disappearing. Still, I just can't get that worked up by the thought she counseled one set of behaviors for all Americans and then chose a slightly different one for herself. She made some wrong choices. It's what we humans do at times. It doesn't mean the rest of us should give up on doing our best to slow the spread of a virus that has taken hundreds of thousands of lives in this country. What I'd prefer to see is a little less holier-than-thou pontification unless, of course, it extends to billionaire media barons like Rupert Murdoch getting a COVID-19 shot while misinformation about the vaccine is spread on his TV network. That I would probably enjoy.

The Baltimore Sun

See the article here:
Jensen: Shocked, shocked to find hypocrisy in humans - Chattanooga Times Free Press