Embryology

The Sperm Bank market to be under the gambit of growth curve in the next decade – Eurowire

on of sperms, donated by sperm donors, to the needy women, who, due to various reasons, such as, physiological problems, widow, age and others, are not able to achieve pregnancy. Sperm bank forms the formal contract with sperm donors, usually for the period of 6-24 months, during which he has to produce sperms and donate to the bank. Usually, monetary compensation will be offered to sperm donors. Although, a donor can donate his sperms for more than two years, but, due to laws and regulations of various countries and a potential threat of consanguinity, a contract is made for maximum two years only. A donor produces his sperms in a specialized room, called mens production room. From this, the semen fluid is washed, in order to extract the sperms from other materials present in the semen. In case of frozen storage, a cryoprotectant semen extender is added in the sample. Usually, around 20 vials can be extracted from one sample of semen, collected from a sperm donor. These vials are stored in cryogenically preserved condition, in the liquid nitrogen (N2) tanks. Usually, sperms are stored for the period of around 6 months. However, it can be stored for a longer period of time.

To remain ahead of your competitors, request for a sample[emailprotected]

https://www.persistencemarketresearch.com/samples/5330

The services offered by sperm bank includes provision of sperms, donors selection, guiding recipient for selection of donor, sex selection of baby, and sales of sperms. Although, sperm banks play a major role in the women who are not able to achieve pregnancy, due to some controversial issues, such as, use of sperms by lesbian couples and others, government healthcare bodies of various countries imposed strict regulations on the sperm bank. In the U.S., sperm banks are regulated by FDA, and treated as Human Cell or Human Tissue or Human Cell and Tissue (HCT/Ps), in the European Union, it is been regulated by EU Tissue Directive, whereas, in the U.K., it is regulated by Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority.

To receive extensive list of important regions, Request Methodology here @

https://www.persistencemarketresearch.com/methodology/5330

The global market for sperm banks is expected to increase in steady manner in the forecast period, due to market growth propellers, such as, increased prevalence of women miscarriage, technological innovations in the sperm storage industry, and growing awareness towards this type of pregnancy. Increased miscarriage rate is one of the major drivers that fuels market growth. According to the study report published by HopeXchange, out of 4.4 million pregnancies carried every year in the U.S., around 1 million pregnancies result into miscarriage. Similarly, due to growing concerns towards such pregnancy that achieved without sexual intercourse is also an important market growth propeller. On the other hand, various governmental regulations, negative mindset towards sperm banks and donor, high cost associated with the operating of sperm bank and limited spread across the various regions of the world are some of the major hurdles in the market growth.

Major players operating in the market includes Cryos International Sperm Bank, FairFax Cryobank, Androcryos, New England Cryogenic Center, Inc. and others.

You Can Request for TOC Here @https://www.persistencemarketresearch.com/toc/5330

Explore Extensive Coverage of PMR`s

Life Sciences & Transformational HealthLandscape

About us:

Persistence Market Research (PMR) is a third-platform research firm. Our research model is a unique collaboration of data analytics andmarket research methodologyto help businesses achieve optimal performance.

To support companies in overcoming complex business challenges, we follow a multi-disciplinary approach. At PMR, we unite various data streams from multi-dimensional sources. By deploying real-time data collection, big data, and customer experience analytics, we deliver business intelligence for organizations of all sizes.

Our client success stories feature a range of clients from Fortune 500 companies to fast-growing startups. PMRs collaborative environment is committed to building industry-specific solutions by transforming data from multiple streams into a strategic asset.

Contact us:

Naved BegPersistence Market ResearchAddress 305 Broadway, 7th Floor, New York City,NY 10007 United StatesU.S. Ph. +1-646-568-7751USA-Canada Toll-free +1 800-961-0353Sales[emailprotected]Websitehttps://www.persistencemarketresearch.com

More here:
The Sperm Bank market to be under the gambit of growth curve in the next decade - Eurowire

Embryology

Sperm Donor Sues Over Use Of His Sperm With LGBTQ And Single Parents – Above the Law

The United States receives considerable criticism over its lack of regulations when it comes to assisted reproductive technology, especially sperm donation. Asa small break from reflecting on our own flaws, today we focus on a peculiarcaserevealing that other countries, too, have issues.

Donating For Discounts

Neil Gaskell and his wife endured 14 years of trying to conceive before finding success with IVF in Australia. When the British couple moved back to the United Kingdom, they sought out additional fertility treatments, hoping to conceive a second child. Gaskells sperm must have caught the attention of someone at their IVF clinic because, after a first failed round of IVF, Gaskell was approached by the clinic to become a sperm donor and told his sperm had superman strength. In exchange, the clinic would reduce the fees for the couples next round of IVF to 1,200 from 3,500.

Wait. What?! In the United States, most donors are paid $50 to $100 per donation. By contrast, Gaskell was offered a discount of 2,300 throw in the exchange rate, and youre at about $3,000. Ironically, it is illegal to pay sperm donors in the United Kingdom more than their expenses. However, clinics are permitted to offer discounts on treatment in exchange for donations. Im not sure I understand the policy underpinnings of this system. If we are worried about money being coercive, offering discounts to couples in the especially vulnerable position of needing fertility treatment would seem even more coercive than the American system advertising to college kids who are looking to upgrade their ramen for a few nights. Maybe U.K. sperm clinics are desperate for good product?

But that isnt even one of the legal issue in this case.

Not For Same-Sex Couples

Gaskell agreed to donate in exchange for the discount. However, when donating, he specifically noted that he required that his donations not be given to same-sex couples. Gaskell made the clinic staff write that down. And he later explained that he also did not want his sperm going to single women, but didnt think he had to explicitly state that, since the clinic described his sperm as going to families (which, to him, evidently did not include single women).

Apparently, the clinic did not say something like oh you know what, we actually have all the sperm we need now so never mind. Instead, they didnt object. This was not an illegal requirement, after all, at that moment. However, a mere few months later, the Equality Act came into law inEngland, which prohibited discrimination against same-sex couples.

How Many Families?

Gaskell recounted how the clinic assured him that his donation would be used for only two or three families. And, anyway, the regulations prevented the donations from being used with more than 10 families. Spoiler alert: the clinic was really trying to really get its moneys worth from Gaskell.

Moreover, as frequently happens in these cases, the donors wishes were not exactly followed. An official audit of the clinic by the UKs fertility regulator the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority revealed that Gaskells sperm had helped three same-sex couples have five children, and three single women have four children. An additional four children were conceived with Gaskells sperm by heterosexual couples, resulting in a total of 13 children.

The clinic disclosed the findings to Gaskell. And Gaskell sued.

Not A Bigot

Gaskell has publicly explained his strenuous objections to his sperm being used to help same-sex couples, and that his lawsuit is not an indicator that he is homophobic or a bigot. He asserts that such accusations couldnt be further from the truth. (Oh?) He says: This wasnt about discriminating against same-sex couples but you cant argue with biology. It takes a man and a woman to create a child, and its my view that if children are being born with my sperm, they must have a mother and a father. After a four-year legal battle, the clinic recently settled with Gaskell, with Gaskell walking away with a five-figure out-of-court settlement.

(Non-)Informed Consent

I spoke with U.S. assisted reproductive technology legal expert Catherine Tucker on the case for perspective. She was more sympathetic to Gaskells cause. What we have here is the intersection of two important medico-legal concepts informed consent and nondiscrimination. Informed consent simply means that a patient knows what he or she is getting into when agreeing to donate a body part, whether it be sperm, eggs, blood, a uterus, or something else, and the patient voluntarily chooses to participate. A key component of informed consent, Tucker explained, is understanding what your bodily donation will be used for whether that be research, education/training, or for another patient. So here we have a situation where informed consent and nondiscrimination concepts conflict. And informed consent trumps nondiscrimination every time. With proper informed consent, this patient could have chosen not to participate in this arrangement.

I am hopeful that improvements in technology and, like, people will lead to less and less of these cases. Or, if nothing else, maybe the fear that all errors will be caught as a result of prolific home DNA testing will act as a strong-enough deterrent for strict self-regulation. In the meantime, lets hope that all of Gaskells kids have a better outlook on parenting than he does.

Ellen Trachman is the Managing Attorney ofTrachman Law Center, LLC, a Denver-based law firm specializing in assisted reproductive technology law, and co-host of the podcastI Want To Put A Baby In You. You can reach her atbabies@abovethelaw.com.

Read the rest here:
Sperm Donor Sues Over Use Of His Sperm With LGBTQ And Single Parents - Above the Law

Embryology

Disputes over when life begins may block cutting-edge reproductive technologies like mitochondrial replacement therapies – The Conversation US

The nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the U.S. Supreme Court has once again pushed the debate over when life begins into the headlines, which could have far-reaching effects on access to both current and emerging reproductive technologies. In 2006, Judge Barrett was one of the signatories on a newspaper ad sponsored by an anti-abortion group that not only believes life begins at fertilization but also hopes to criminalize discarding extra embryos created during in vitro fertilization.

As legal scholars, we are closely watching how jurisdictions regulate emerging reproductive technologies, including a set of techniques called mitochrondial replacement therapies which can prevent some heritable diseases. But because they use IVF methods, and some (but not all) of the techniques require discarding an embryo, law codifying the belief that life starts at fertilization could restrict access to mitochondrial replacement therapies and derail productive conversations about how to regulate them properly.

Last week, the medical journal Fertility & Sterility ran an editorial arguing that confirming Judge Barrett could result in restrictions not only on reproductive rights to contraception and abortion, but also on IVF. One concern is that future legal decisions could forbid IVF clinics from discarding extra embryos even ones unlikely to start a pregnancy or limit the number of embryos which can be formed. That could raise treatment costs or make efforts to start a healthy pregnancy with IVF much harder.

The nomination of Judge Barrett also comes just as new technologies look almost ready to help parents have children free of certain heritable diseases. Children can inherit mitochondrial diseases from their biological mother (and possibly their father) caused by dysfunctional mitochondria which generate energy molecules for the cell. These tiny structures in the cell carry their own special DNA; but those that carry mutations can cause disease. A new type of reproductive technology called mitochondrial replacement therapies offers the possibility of preventing children from inheriting these diseases.

Estimates suggest 1,000-4,000 children in the U.S. alone are born each year with a heritable mitochondrial disease.

These complex diseases can affect many different organs especially those with high energy needs like the brain, eyes or heart. There are no cures and few treatment options exist, so children often die in severe cases. Having a child with mitochondrial diseases can place huge emotional and financial tolls on families, with significant economic costs for health care systems.

With limited treatment options, some experts place more hope in preventing children from inheriting mitochondrial diseases altogether. Sometimes called three parent IVF, mitochondrial replacement therapies make this possible by replacing the unhealthy mitochondria in an egg cell or embryo with healthy ones from a donor woman. Using this technique, couples at high risk of having children with mitochondrial diseases can then have a healthy child who is biologically related to them.

Mitochondrial replacement therapies do, however, raise a few concerns. Health problems could arise from molecular mismatches between the parents nucleus and donor mitochondria or from a treated embryo reverting to an unhealthy state, though these risks are hypothetical for now. And female children born through mitochondrial replacement therapies could, theoretically, pass these conditions to their children.

Because mitochondria carry 37 of their own genes, children born from mitochondrial replacement therapies technically have DNA from three people the couple and the woman who donated her healthy mitochondria. The donor contributes a minuscule amount of DNA less than 1% but this does raise questions about their parenthood. Another concern is that swapping out mitochondria (and their DNA) in embryos makes for a slippery slope to designer babies, especially now that three births have occurred after gene editing.

These safety and ethical concerns call for policy to investigate and minimize risks, while answering questions like what the legal status of the third parent should be.

In 2015, the United Kingdom became the first jurisdiction in the world to expressly legalize and regulate mitochondrial replacement therapies, creating a system to license clinics for this service. This move came after an extensive public engagement process. Regulation is overseen by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, which governs all human fertility treatments and research within the U.K. Two other countries, Australia and Singapore, are considering legislative amendments to follow in the U.K.s footsteps.

While brand-new regulatory systems for mitochondrial replacement therapies may seem ideal, lessons learned from other emerging technologies suggest most countries probably wont adopt this approach since existing rules often apply already, though maybe not in an ideal way. The trick then becomes making sure existing rules can still cover concerns with the new technology. However, this reality has led to critics raising the alarm about unregulated mitochondrial replacement therapies, especially since medical tourism is already happening.

Even if most countries dont enact new laws, many already have rules which should apply to mitochondrial replacement therapies. For example, the U.S. wont need a new regulatory system if it removes its current ban on the technology. The Food and Drug Administration already plans on regulating mitochondrial replacement therapies with the same tools it uses for biologics, a broad category of medical products ranging from vaccines to gene therapy.

Mexico got a bad reputation for having no rules after a child was born there via mitochondrial replacement therapies, but legal scholars have pointed out that Mexicos regulations on health research likely prohibit this use of mitochondrial replacement therapies. However, these rules werent triggered because doctors modified the embryos in the U.S., before sending them to Guadalajara for the treatment. Instead, the U.S. FDA intervened, informing the clinic that they had violated U.S. law in several ways.

In Greece, regulators already approved a clinical trial for mitochondrial replacement therapies using their existing rules for fertility treatments although the trial addresses the success of fertility treatments instead of preventing mitochondrial diseases. And in Ukraine, though the details are murky, health officials appear to have similarly approved a clinical trial for mitochondrial replacement therapies.

Reproductive technologies have allowed millions of families around the world to conceive healthy children over the last 42 years. For the first time, recent advances in mitochondrial replacement therapies could allow families who otherwise couldnt have a healthy child of their own to do so. But changes in law that restrict access to IVF could have profound social and medical impacts that would ripple across the country.

[Deep knowledge, daily. Sign up for The Conversations newsletter.]

Rather than making reproductive technologies like mitochondrial replacement therapies more difficult to access especially for those with a medical reason for doing so we believe regulators and governments should be looking for ways to provide individuals access to these technologies in a way that promotes safety and efficacy for everyone involved. That includes those living in the U.S. who wish to access mitochondrial replacement therapies in their own country.

See original here:
Disputes over when life begins may block cutting-edge reproductive technologies like mitochondrial replacement therapies - The Conversation US

Neuroscience

Rodent fathers suggest dopamine is key to an neuroscience of parenting – Massive Science

Dieting is notoriously difficult. Thanks in part to evolution, we love foods that are high in calories. Not only that, but once we have experienced the kind of high-calorie foods that surround us in the modern world, more nutritionally-balanced foods become much less attractive. But why?

To understand how the brain makes dieting so difficult, and high-calorie foods so tempting, the authors of a recent study turned to mice, where they could record and manipulate the activity of specific neurons involved in energy balance and reward. They asked how exposing mice to high-calorie foods affected their consumption of, and neural responses to, regular foods.

When researchers gave the mice access to both high-fat (HFD) and standard (SD) diets, mice completely stopped eating the SD almost immediately, and preferred the HFD. They then removed the HFD, and saw that mice still ate very little SD, and so lost substantial weight. This devaluation of regular food was so strong that even fasting mice presented with an SD ate very little they would only eat a lot if the HFD was available. Just experiencing the HFD for 24 hours was enough time to make the SD less tasty.

Suzanne Beaky

To see how HFD exposure affects the brains response to food, the scientists recorded the activity of AgRP neurons, a population of neurons that is active during hunger and controls energy balance, and midbrain dopamine neurons, which release dopamine as a signal of reward. Exposure to the HFD greatly reduced the response of both groups of neurons to the SD: afterward, these neurons would only respond strongly to the HFD. Regular food became less rewarding, and less satiating, than high-calorie food.

Under normal conditions, AgRP neurons would only respond to food when a mouse is hungry. But after HFD withdrawal (mimicking dieting), the AgRP neurons became so sensitive to HFD that they would respond even if the mouse was not hungry. This could explain why when we diet, high-calorie foods are so hard to resist these foods become rewarding even when we arent hungry.

This study suggests that exposure to a HFD alters the brains response to food so that only high-calorie foods are rewarding and satiating, while more nutritionally-balanced foods become less valuable. And, abstaining from high-fat foods might just make our brains' hunger centers responsive to these foods even when were not hungry, making it difficult to resist the urge to binge. Research on the circuits that regulate food intake will potentially lead to therapies that allow us to manipulate these biological urges and control the obesity epidemic.

View post:
Rodent fathers suggest dopamine is key to an neuroscience of parenting - Massive Science

Neuroscience

A Social Affective Neuroscience Model of Risk and Resilience in Adolescent Depression: Preliminary Evidence and Application to Sexual and Gender…

This article was originally published here

Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging. 2020 Aug 8:S2451-9022(20)30211-1. doi: 10.1016/j.bpsc.2020.07.020. Online ahead of print.

ABSTRACT

Depression is a disorder of dysregulated affective and social functioning, with attenuated response to reward, heightened response to threat (perhaps especially social threat), excessive focus on negative aspects of the self, ineffective engagement with other people, and difficulty modulating all of these responses. Known risk factors provide a starting point for a model of developmental pathways to resilience, and we propose that the interplay of social threat experiences and neural social-affective systems is critical to those pathways. We describe a model of risk and resilience, review supporting evidence, and apply the model to sexual and gender minority adolescents, a population with high disparities in depression and unique social risk factors. This approach illustrates the fundamental role of a socially and developmentally informed clinical neuroscience model for understanding a population disproportionately affected by risk factors and psychopathology outcomes. We consider it a public health imperative to apply conceptual models to high-need populations to elucidate targets for effective interventions to promote healthy development and enhance resilience.

PMID:33097468 | DOI:10.1016/j.bpsc.2020.07.020

More:
A Social Affective Neuroscience Model of Risk and Resilience in Adolescent Depression: Preliminary Evidence and Application to Sexual and Gender...

Neuroscience

The neuroscience of Navratri – The New Indian Express

When Rishi Markandeya sat up in the valleys of Yamunotri composing the Puranas named after him, little did he realise that his epic representation of Chandi or Ma Durga would thousands of years later become one of the best handbooks for rewiring our brains and boosting positive psychology. You could say he was one of Indias first and greatest neuroscientist-psychologists.

In the Devi Mahatmya or Chandi Path, derived from chapters 81-93 in the Markandeya Purana, the scientist-sage describes an epic battle over nine nights when the supreme mother Adi Shakti or Parvati has to descend to the mortal dimension as Chandi or Durga to vanquish nine Asuric or dark demonic forces that hold humanity back from harmony and dharma.

In each stage of the epic battle, she takes on an aspect of the Universal Mother and becomes Maha Kali, Maha Lakshmi, and Maha Saraswati in turn, all to vanquish the Asuras and bring light back to humanity. And finally, after nine nights of intense battle, she returns victorious to the cosmic sea from where she came, waiting for darkness to befall humanity again.

Seen purely as a psychological narrative, the Chandi Path is an inner battle we all face every day in trying to live a spiritual, dharmic, and righteous life where Ma Durga comes once a year to cleanse and liberate us from the nine Asuric aspects of the Maha Maya or great illusion of life and our egos.

If we go deeper and look at the esoteric and neuroscientific significance behind this story, we realise that what he was describing is the difficulty we all face when trying to meditate or pray or live a good life. The state of divine nothingness of Turiya, the fourth state of consciousness, or Samadhi, requires us to be free of our egos and distractions.

This state is called activating the Default Mode Network (DMN) in neuroscience. Recent studies of deep meditators have shown that those who can activate this area, in particular affecting areas of the brain like the Anterior Cingulate and the Caudate Nucleus, the horn-shaped part of the brain that surrounds the pineal gland, and let us go deep into a no-thought, no-mind state that seems to rise above our normal states of consciousness beyond space, time, ego and attachments. In that state we experience divine bliss and harmony with everything.

Now, what gets in the way is a great battle that occurs internally along our spinal cord between the Parasympathetic Nervous System, which controls our feelings and emotions, and the Sympathetic Nervous System or the flight-fight network that harks back to our animal or reptilian origins.

Think Devas and Devis versus Asuras here. If these two can be brought into harmony then something magical happens as the full brain begins to function perfectly well and the DMN is activated and the whole system becomes balanced by the Central Nervous System within the spinal cord.

For those of you in the know, I am describing the Neuroscience of Kundalini Shakti and our Chakra system. We then are balanced again and become light as feathers. No chattering brain, no reptilian cravings, and no ego to hold us back.

In the great battle of Navratri, Maha Maya as Maha Kali first destroys the Asuras Madhu or honey and Kartavya, the housefly that sticks to everything. Both represent our Tamasic nature in the sexual organs, stomach, liver, kidneys, and adrenal glands, all the stuff that controls the 4 F's - Fear, Food, Flight and the unspoken F-Word.

Then Chandi as Maha Lakshmi destroys the shape-shifting Mahishasura who represents the vanity and power of the Rajasic nature in us. We want to control everything and we think we are in charge. Here the heart, stomach, and lungs dominate, and all the glands that release the feel-good hormones - dopamine, serotonin, and oxytocin - are released when this comes under our control. Maha Lakshmi brings bliss and harmony.

And then finally Ma Durga destroys the final six Asuras, which represent our over-analytical mind. First, she destroys Chanda and Munda - the chattering neocortex and the aimless organs that feed chemicals and information into it. Then she destroys Raktabija, the endless cycle of addiction and stupidity that keeps us making the same mistakes over and over again.

And then as Maha Saraswati, she destroys Dhumralochana, the Asura of foggy unclear thinking. And then as Ma Durga, she destroys Sumbha and Nisumbha, the final barrier of I and Mine; the last obstacle in your ego attachment - the "Me" and "My" identity, which relates to the prefrontal cortex.

Once all the Asuras are destroyed, we sing Ya Devi Sarva Bhuteshu! I praise Devi, the destroyer of all my dark egos. Now I am free! And then if we are lucky through deep meditation, singing, chanting, drumming, dancing, selfless giving, sharing, and loving we enter the DMN or the Turiya state, and we find clarity, bliss, harmony, and peace. The great battle is won. The Mother returns to thebase of your spine until she is needed again.

The nine nights of Navratri are the beginning of a great psychological and neuroscientific adventure into healing yourself of the mental blocks that cloak your life as ego attachments in the illusory Maha Maya that brings out Karma or the fruits of ignorant action. It is a wonderful path to becoming Karma-free and to dissolve into the non-dual DMN of the Universes infinite stillness, love, and bliss.

Ya Devi Sarva Bhuteshu!

(The writer is a globalconsciousness teacher, National Film Award-winning documentary filmmaker, TED speaker, digital media producer)

Visit link:
The neuroscience of Navratri - The New Indian Express

Neuroscience

COVID-19: BYU professor expresses her big concern of pandemic isolation – Deseret News

PROVO Heres some irony for you: The stress caused by isolating from the coronavirus increases your chances of catching the coronavirus.

Going outside can make you sick, then. But so can not going outside.

The issue behind this paradox is loneliness, a pandemic in its own right that is being more fully exposed and increased by the pandemic.

A number of studies conducted over the past several months suggest that there has been a 20% to 30% rise in loneliness due to COVID-19-mandated social distancing.

Although Julianne Holt-Lunstad would prefer calling it physical distancing instead.

We want to be physically distant but stay socially connected, she says.

Holt-Lunstad is an expert in the field of loneliness. She is a professor of psychology and neuroscience at Brigham Young University, where her research over the past decade has, among other things, helped quantify the significant damage loneliness can have on our physical health and, in turn, our lifespan.

The statistics say that a person who is chronically lonely has a 26% greater risk of dying. Thats roughly the same mortality forecast for someone who is clinically obese, drinks alcohol to excess, or smokes 15 cigarettes a day.

And loneliness isnt an isolated problem. Further studies show that an estimated third of U.S. adults age 45 and older report feeling lonely, while the percentage for younger social media-obsessed Americans may be even worse. (In one survey, 70% of young adults reported sometimes or always feeling alone.)

Professor Holt-Lunstad just finished participating in a virtual action forum with her colleagues at the Coalition to End Social Isolation and Loneliness, a national organization whose mission is spelled out in its title. She is the chairwoman of the groups Scientific Advisory Council and moderated a panel discussion at the event.

We talked about what we can do as individuals, as a community, as a larger society, that might have an impact on this critical issue, particularly at this important time, she says.

Its not difficult to make the case that the need to stay connected has never been greater, or more complicated, that it is now that were being told to stay apart.

If youre feeling alone in 2020, youre not alone.

Our bodies and our brain expect the proximity of others, says Holt-Lunstad. When we dont have that proximity, when we feel like we have to face everything on our own, it makes it all so much harder.

The professor cites a really interesting study that had participants rate the steepness of a hill they climbed while wearing a heavy backpack. What the researchers found was that not only did participants rate the hill steeper than it really was when they hiked it alone, but when they were in the presence of others they rated it as less steep.

Neuroscience evidence suggests that loneliness is a biological cue much like hunger and thirst. But in the current atmosphere where its seen as unpleasant to seek social connection, its as if were all incredibly thirsty but were being told the waters not safe to drink.

That dilemma, she says, spells out her biggest concern: How do we stay connected while at a distance?

On one hand, she worries that people will use my research as an excuse to disregard many of the safety precautions that have been recommended.

On the other hand, I worry that we will isolate even more.

The challenge is: how do we not put ourselves in a situation where we are trading one risk for another? How can we meet both goals?

She does see a possible silver lining among all these questions.

My hope is that what we are going through will help people recognize just how important our relationships are, not only for our emotional well-being but for our physical well-being, she says. The pandemic has given everyone a small glimpse into what its like for a small percentage of the population that was already chronically isolated, that was already homebound. Hopefully we can not only gain greater empathy, but recognize the urgency for solutions.

Link:
COVID-19: BYU professor expresses her big concern of pandemic isolation - Deseret News

Neuroscience

How to stay socially connected as lockdown returns – according to science – The Conversation UK

After a fairly relaxed summer, more and more places are bringing back tighter restrictions in response to rising COVID-19 cases, with some even returning to full or near-full lockdowns.

We all know that social distancing makes sense: the fewer people we meet (and the further away from them we stay), the less likely we are to get ill or to spread the virus. But sticking to social distancing is hard. And the longer we do it, the harder it seems to get.

Recent findings from social neuroscience may offer some insights on how we can nonetheless stay socially connected. Hopefully, this will help us cope better if only just a little.

Being socially connected to others makes us feel safe and cared for, and this feeling affects our body and brain. We worry less about potential dangers and feel less stressed, sleep better, have lower heart rate and blood pressure, our baseline energy requirement is lower, and our immune system works more efficiently. We are also less prone to depression.

This is because when calculating the available cognitive and bodily resources, our brain naturally takes our nearest social surroundings the people we interact with into account. It treats social and metabolic resources almost interchangeably. If we can count on other people to support us in times of need, our own resources can either be preserved or dedicated to other issues, as if they were literally increased.

Recent social neuroscience findings suggest that these beneficial effects have a lot to do with becoming synchronised with others, by paying attention to or thinking about the same thing at the same time and to have the ability to react to one another instantly.

We usually do this through physical touch, eye contact, talking to each other, sharing our emotions, and following each others behaviour such as bodily gestures. We call this bio-behavioural synchrony.

There is growing evidence that being in synchrony with others increases cooperation, social connection and positive thoughts about others, and also lifts our spirits. It can also ease our pain, reduce stress and boost our resilience our ability to stay positive and healthy despite facing adversity.

This means we should embrace virtual interaction for our work meetings, quick chats and socially distanced workouts, quizzes or movie nights. It wont be the same as before, but we can still get some of this feeling of synchrony with others that is so important for us.

Whats more, recent insights reveal that virtual interactions can stimulate comparable bodily and brain responses to those from real-world interactions. For example, making eye contact with someone over a video call has similar effects, physiologically and psychologically, as a real interaction involving eye contact.

There is also evidence that brain areas related to social reward and mind-reading show stronger activation during a live online social interaction than when watching the same interaction content as a recorded video. Hearing a loved ones voice may even be enough to decrease the stress hormone cortisol and increase the social bonding hormone oxytocin - but you dont get this reaction from just reading a text from the same person.

Other research even shows that imagining a loved ones presence (with the help of a photo) when anticipating or feeling pain significantly decreases brain activity related to pain, as well as your subjective experience of it very much as if the loved one was with you holding your hand.

Social connection is a strongly subjective, inner experience. We can have a thousand friends but still feel lonely. It is not physical, objective social isolation that makes our body and mind ill, but our perceived social isolation or loneliness.

One way to maintain or even create a stronger sense of social connection from within is to be kind and compassionate towards and help others. There is ample evidence that by acting prosocially in this way, we become happier and healthier by ourselves.

This is because generating a compassionate attitude from within is associated with activation of positive emotion- and reward-related brain regions and hormonal pathways. We can even put ourselves in this state by being on our own and simply wishing others well and good health through meditation. In this sense, we can literally help ourselves by helping others.

We also shouldnt be afraid of reaching out to others, to follow our natural tendency to let others know that we are not fine and need support. Almost always, somebody will respond, because we are not only made to shout out if we need help (using our innate attachment system), but we are also made for helping others if they need it (using our innate caregiving system.

Although the virtual space can be hostile sometimes, it has recently shown to also be full of compassion and social warmth. And the same appears to hold true when reaching out in a more old-fashioned, analogue way.

The field of positive psychology says that we have a unique ability to learn optimism in the face of adversity, and that we should build upon our propensity for getting through periods of trauma with a developed sense of personal growth and an increased inner-strength. Social neuroscience has shown us that we can do it best if we do it together.

Read the original:
How to stay socially connected as lockdown returns - according to science - The Conversation UK

Neuroscience

A Virtual Twist on Tradition: Founders Day Will Feature Visual Contests, Messages – University of Texas at Dallas

From left: Cecil Green, Erik Jonsson and Eugene McDermott displayed the dedication plaque for the Founders Building. On Oct. 29, 1964, the Founders Building, the first permanent structure at The University of Texas at Dallas, was dedicated.

UT Dallas campuswide celebration of Founders Day will look a little different this year. The day that honors the Universitys three founders will be delivered in a virtual format and will include online contests and giveaways.

The University community is invited to participate in a photo mosaic in place of the traditional group photo. The first 600 people who send photo submissions will receive this years commemorative Founders Day T-shirt. All photo submissions will be entered into a drawing for a limited edition Temoc statue as well. Celebrations this year will also include an Instagram Reels challenge.

Capture your best Whoosh video on Instagram Reels for a chance to win a UT Dallas swag bag.

Thursday, Oct. 29, marks the 56th anniversary of the date the Founders Building was dedicated in 1964. It is also the day the University celebrates the vision and legacy of its founders: Eugene McDermott, Erik Jonsson and Cecil Green. The area where UT Dallas first building stands was originally surrounded by acres of cotton fields and undeveloped land, and it served as the central facility of the Graduate Research Center of the Southwest, a private research institution that in 1969 became UT Dallas.

Founders McDermott, Jonsson and Green established the center because they wanted to retain and cultivate the engineering talent at their firm, Texas Instruments Inc. They had witnessed bright young people moving out of the region to pursue advanced education elsewhere and aimed to create an institution that would foster learning, further research and attract the most influential minds of the day.

Founders Day virtual events also will include the story of the founders as told by three students: Yushra Rashid, a neuroscience senior, Green Fellow and student ambassador; Ayala Ben David, a chemistry senior and Green Fellow; and Patrick Nnoromele, neuroscience senior, Eugene McDermott Scholar and student ambassador.

There also will be a message called You Are the Founders Vision from UT Dallas President Richard C. Bensonand University vice presidents and deans. Both videos will be available on the Founders Day website.

We are pleased to present Founders Day as a virtual event this year and again celebrate this important tradition, said Kyle Edgington PhD13, vice president for development and alumni relations. We are excited to honor these founders, who laid the groundwork to create educational opportunities and train more scientists and researchers to serve not only the state, but the country and the world.

The first 600 people who submit photos will be emailed directly about where they can select their shirt size and schedule a pickup time.

The winner of the Instagram Reels challenge will be announced via social media the afternoon of Founders Day and contacted with instructions on collecting the prize. The contests are open to faculty, staff, students and alumni.

Go here to see the original:
A Virtual Twist on Tradition: Founders Day Will Feature Visual Contests, Messages - University of Texas at Dallas

Immunology

UW jumps two spots to No. 8 in US News Best Global Universities ranking | UW News – UW News

Administrative affairs | Education | For UW employees | Health and medicine | Honors and awards | News releases | Population Health | Public Health | Research | Science | Social science | UW and the community

October 20, 2020

The University of Washington moved up two spots to No. 8 on theU.S. News & World Reports Best Global Universities rankings, released Tuesday. The UW maintained its No. 2 ranking among U.S. public institutions.

We are proud to be consistently recognized for the excellence and impact of our scholarship across so many subjects, UW President Ana Mari Cauce said. Its especially gratifying to see the work of outstanding programs like infectious diseases and immunology listed among the very best in the world at a time when we need discovery and innovation in these areas more than ever.

U.S. News also ranked several subjects, and the UW landed in the top 10 in 10 subject areas, including infectious diseases (No. 6) and computer science (No. 9) joining the top 10 since last years rankings were released. The UW also moved up to No. 6 from No. 10 in immunology.

The ranking methodology which is based on Web of Science data and metrics provided by Clarivate Analytics InCites weighs factors that measure a universitys global and regional research reputation and academic research performance. For the overall rankings, this includes bibliometric indicators such as publications, citations and international collaboration.

The overall Best Global Universities ranking, now in its sixth year, encompasses the top 1,500 institutions spread across 81 countries, up from 75 countries last year, according to a press release from U.S. News.American universities make up eight of the top 10 spots.

Here are all of the top 10 UW rankings in U.S. News subject rankings:

The rest is here:
UW jumps two spots to No. 8 in US News Best Global Universities ranking | UW News - UW News