Biostatis could prevent death from traumatic injury

The health and future of every child and adolescent worldwide is under immediate threat from ecological degradation, climate change and exploitative marketing practices that push fast food, sugary drinks, alcohol and tobacco at children, said a new report on Wednesday.

No single country is adequately protecting children's health, their environment and their futures, according to the report by a commission of over 40 child and adolescent health experts from around the world.

The commission, convened by the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations children's agency, Unicef, and medical journal the Lancet, found that while the poorest countries need to do more to support their children's ability to live healthy lives, excessive carbon emissions --disproportionately from wealthier countries -- threaten the future of all children.

"Despite improvements in child and adolescent health over the past 20 years, progress has stalled, and is set to reverse," said former Prime Minister of New Zealand and Co-Chair of the Commission, Helen Clark.

"It has been estimated that around 250 million children under five years old in low- and middle-income countries are at risk of not reaching their developmental potential, based on proxy measures of stunting and poverty. But of even greater concern, every child worldwide now faces existential threats from climate change and commercial pressures," Clark said.

The report, titled "A Future for the World's Children?", includes a new global index of 180 countries, comparing performance on child flourishing and sustainability, with a proxy for greenhouse gas emissions, and equity, or income gaps.

India ranked 131 among the 180 countries in the index.

The index shows that children in Norway, the Republic of Korea, and the Netherlands have the best chance at survival and well-being, while children in the Central African Republic, Chad, Somalia, Niger and Mali face the worst odds.

However, when the authors took per capita CO2 emissions into account, the top countries trail behind: Norway ranked 156, the Republic of Korea 166, and the Netherlands 160.

Each of the three emits 210 per cent more CO2 per capita than their 2030 target.

The US, Australia, and Saudi Arabia are among the ten worst emitters.

If global warming exceeds 4 degree Celsius by the year 2100 in line with current projections, this would lead to devastating health consequences for children, due to rising ocean levels, heatwaves, proliferation of diseases like malaria and dengue, and malnutrition, said the report.

The only countries on track to beat CO2 emission per capita targets by 2030, while also performing fairly (within the top 70) on child flourishing measures are: Albania, Armenia, Grenada, Jordan, Moldova, Sri Lanka, Tunisia, Uruguay and Vietnam.

The report also revealed the distinct threat posed to children from harmful marketing. Evidence suggests that children in some countries see as many as 30,000 advertisements on television alone in a single year, while youth exposure to vaping (e-cigarettes) advertisements increased by more than 250 per cent in the US over two years, reaching more than 24 million young people.

Children's exposure to commercial marketing of junk food and sugary beverages is associated with purchase of unhealthy foods and overweight and obesity, linking predatory marketing to the alarming rise in childhood obesity, said the report.

The number of obese children and adolescents increased from 11 million in 1975 to 124 million in 2016 - an 11-fold increase, with dire individual and societal costs.

The deadly coronavirus that entered India while there was still nip in the air has beaten rising mercury, humid conditions, unique Indian genome and has entered monsoon season with more potency as fresh cases are only breaking all records in the country.

India recorded a single-day spike of record 24,850 new coronavirus cases on Sunday, taking its total tally to 6.73 lakh corona-positive cases.

Top Indian microbiologists were hopeful in March that after the 21-day lockdown, as summer approaches, the rise in temperature would play an important role in preventing the drastic spread of COVID-19 virus in India.

Several virologists hinted that by June this year, the impact of COVID-19 would be less than what it appeared in March-April.

The claims have fallen flat as the virus is mutating fast, becoming more potent than ever.

According to experts, the novel coronavirus is a new virus whose seasonality and response to hot humid weather was never fully understood.

"The theory was based on the fact that high temperatures can kill the virus as in sterilisation techniques used in healthcare. But these are controlled environment conditions. There are many other factors besides temperature, humidity which influence the transmission rate among humans," Dr Anu Gupta, Head, Microbiologist and Infection Control, Fortis Escorts Heart Institute, told IANS.

There is no built-up immunity to COVID-19 in humans.

"Also, asymptomatic people might be passing it to many others unknowingly. New viruses tend not to follow the seasonal trend in their first year," Gupta emphasized.

Globally, as several countries are now experiencing hot weather, the World Health Organization (WHO) reported a record hike in the number of coronavirus cases, with the total rising by 2,12,326 in 24 hours in the highest single-day increase since COVID-19 broke out.

So far over 11 million people worldwide have tested positive for the disease which has led to over 5,25,000 deaths, according to data from Johns Hopkins University. The US remained the worst-hit country with over 28 lakh cases, followed by Brazil with 15.8 lakh.

According to Sandeep Nayar, Senior Consultant and HOD, Respiratory Medicine, Allergy & Sleep Disorders, BLK Super Speciality Hospital in New Delhi, whether temperature plays a role in COVID-19 infection is highly debated.

One school of thought said in the tropical regions of South Asia, the virus might not thrive longer.

"On the other hand, another school of thought has found that novel Coronavirus can survive in a hot and humid environment and tropical climate does not make a difference to the virus. According to them, this is what distinguishes the novel coronavirus from other common viruses, which usually wane in hot weather," stressed Nayar.

Not much has been studied in the past and no definite treatment or vaccine is available to date.

"Every day, new properties and manifestation of the disease come up. As of now, the only way to prevent this monster is by taking appropriate precautions. Hand hygiene, social distancing, cough etiquette and face masks definitely reduce spread of COVID-19 infection," Nayar told IANS.

Not just top Indian health experts, even Indian-American scientists had this theory in mind that sunshine and summer may ebb the spread of the coronavirus.

Ravi Godse, Director of Discharge Planning, UPMC Shadyside Pennsylvania in the US told IANS in April: "In the summer, the humidity can go up as well, meaning more water drops in the air. If the air is saturated with water and somebody sneezes virus droplets into such air, it is likely that the droplets will fall to the ground quicker, making them less infectious. So the short answer is yes, summer/sunshine could be bettera.

According to Dr Puneet Khanna, Head of Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology, Manipal Hospital, Delhi, COVID-19 death rates are not too different in tropical countries but since the disease affected them late it was yet to show its peak in these areas.

"The virus can survive well in hot and humid countries and this is proven now," he stressed.

Should you let your babies "cry it out" or rush to their side? Researchers have found that leaving an infant to 'cry it out' from birth up to 18 months does not adversely affect their behaviour development or attachment.

The study, published in the Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, found that an infant's development and attachment to their parents is not affected by being left to "cry it out" and can actually decrease the amount of crying and duration.

"Only two previous studies nearly 50 or 20 years ago had investigated whether letting babies 'cry it out' affects babies' development. Our study documents contemporary parenting in the UK and the different approaches to crying used," said the study's researcher Ayten Bilgin from the University of Warwick in the UK.

For the study, the researchers followed 178 infants and their mums over 18 months and repeatedly assessed whether parents intervened immediately when a baby cried or let the baby let it cry out a few times or often.

They found that it made little difference to the baby’s development by 18 months.

The use of parent’s leaving their baby to ‘cry it out’ was assessed via maternal report at term, 3, 6 and 18 months and cry duration at term, 3 and 18 months.

Duration and frequency of fussing and crying was assessed at the same ages with the Crying Pattern Questionnaire.

According to the researchers, how sensitive the mother is in interaction with their baby was video-recorded and rated at 3 and 18 months of age.

Attachment was assessed at 18 months using a gold standard experimental procedure, the strange situation test, which assesses how securely an infant is attached to the major caregiver during separation and reunion episodes.

Behavioural development was assessed by direct observation in play with the mother and during assessment by a psychologist and a parent-report questionnaire at 18 months.

Researchers found that whether contemporary parents respond immediately or leave their infant to cry it out a few times to often makes no difference on the short - or longer term relationship with the mother or the infants behaviour.

This study shows that 2/3 of mum's parent intuitively and learn from their infant, meaning they intervene when they were just born immediately, but as they get older the mother waits a bit to see whether the baby can calm themselves, so babies learn self-regulation.