Food-borne bacteria up miscarriage risk early in pregnancy

February 22, 2017

Feb 22: Listeria, a common food-borne bacterium, may pose a greater risk of miscarriage in the early stages of pregnancy than previously thought, says a study.

pregnancy“For many years, listeria has been associated with adverse outcomes in pregnancy, but particularly at the end of pregnancy,” said one of the researchers Ted Golos, Professor at University of Wisconsin-Madison in the US.

“What wasn’t known with much clarity before this study is that it appears it’s a severe risk factor in early pregnancy,” Golos said.

Pregnant women are warned to avoid many of the foods -- among them unpasteurised milk and soft cheese, raw sprouts, melon and deli meats not carefully handled -- that can harbour listeria, because the bacterium is known to cause miscarriage and still-birth, and spur premature labour.

But when it occurs, listeria infection in pregnancy may go unnoticed.

For the study, four pregnant rhesus macaques at the Wisconsin National Primate Research Centre were fed doses of the listeria comparable to what one might encounter in contaminated food.

None of the monkeys showed obvious signs of infection before their pregnancies came to abrupt ends, according to the results published in the journal mBio.

But in tissue samples taken after each monkey experienced intrauterine fetal death, the researchers found that listeria had invaded the placenta -- the connection between the mother-to-be and the foetus, which usually prevents transmission of bacteria -- as well as the endometrium, the lining of the uterus.

The researchers believe the inflammation caused by the maternal immune response to the fast-moving listeria also affects the placenta, keeping it from protecting the foetus.

The results suggest listeria (and perhaps other pathogens) may be the culprit in some miscarriages that usually go without diagnosed cause.

“There are effective antibiotics available. It is treatable,” said lead author of the study Bryce Wolfe, a graduate student at University of Wisconsin-Madison.

“The issue is that because it’s asymptomatic, the foetus may be infected by the time anyone realises the mother was infected,” Wolfe explained.

Comments

Wellspringivfs…
 - 
Thursday, 8 Feb 2018

Great post. Pregnant women are warned to avoid some foods such as unpasteurized milk, raw meat, and sprouts etc. because that may harbor listeria which may cause pregnancy complications such as miscarriage and stillbirth. http://www.wellspringivfsurrogacy.com/

Leesa
 - 
Thursday, 4 Jan 2018

Nice article. Listeria, a common food-borne bacterium increases the risk of miscarriage in early stages of pregnancy. It is important to follow the food safety measures. Listeria infection in pregnancy often goes unnoticed because of lack of awareness.  Expecting mothers should strictly avoid the food intake which contains listeria, as it may lead to miscarriage. To know more about pregnancy visit http://www.progenesisivf.com/

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 5,2020

Bergen, Mar 5: Divorce of parents may impact the academics of children negatively, suggests a new study.

According to the study, parental divorce is associated with a lower grade point average (GPA) among adolescents, with a stronger association seen in teens with more educated mothers.

The study was published in the journal PLOS ONE.

Children and adolescents with divorced or separated parents are known to do less well in school than adolescents with nondivorced parents and to be less well-adjusted, on average, across a spectrum of physical and mental health outcomes.

In the new study, researchers used data from the youth@hordaland study, a population-based survey of adolescents aged 16-19 conducted in the spring of 2012 in Hordaland County, Norway.

19,439 adolescents were invited to participate and 10,257 agreed; of those, 9,166 are included in the current study.

Overall, adolescents with divorced parents had a 0.3 point lower GPA (standard error 0.022, p<0.01) than their peers.

Controlling for parental education reduced the effect by 0.06 points to 0.240 (SE 0.021, p<0.01). This heterogeneity was predominantly driven by maternal education levels, the researchers found.

After controlling for paternal education and income measures, divorce was associated with a 0.120 point decrease in GPA among adolescents whose mothers had a secondary school education level; a 0.175 point decrease when mothers had a Bachelor's level education; and a 0.209 point decrease when mothers had a Master's or PhD level education (all estimates relative to adolescents with a mother who had a basic level of education, such as ISCED 0-2).

Due to the cross-sectional structure of the study, researchers could not investigate specific changes between pre- and post-divorce family life, and future studies are needed to investigate potential mechanisms (such as reduced parental monitoring or school-involvement) which might drive this finding.

Nonetheless, this study provides new evidence that the negative association between divorce and teens' GPA is especially strong in families with more educated mothers.

"Among Norwegian adolescents, parental divorce was hardly associated with GPA among youth whose parents have low educational qualifications. In contrast, among adolescents with educated or highly educated mothers, divorce was significantly associated with lower GPA," said the authors.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
International New York Times
July 7,2020

The coronavirus can stay aloft for hours in tiny droplets in stagnant air, infecting people as they inhale, mounting scientific evidence suggests.

This risk is highest in crowded indoor spaces with poor ventilation, and may help explain superspreading events reported in meatpacking plants, churches and restaurants.

It’s unclear how often the virus is spread via these tiny droplets, or aerosols, compared with larger droplets that are expelled when a sick person coughs or sneezes, or transmitted through contact with contaminated surfaces, said Linsey Marr, an aerosol expert at Virginia Tech.

Follow latest updates on the Covid-19 pandemic here

Aerosols are released even when a person without symptoms exhales, talks or sings, according to Marr and more than 200 other experts, who have outlined the evidence in an open letter to the World Health Organization.

What is clear, they said, is that people should consider minimizing time indoors with people outside their families. Schools, nursing homes and businesses should consider adding powerful new air filters and ultraviolet lights that can kill airborne viruses.

What does it mean for a virus to be airborne?

For a virus to be airborne means that it can be carried through the air in a viable form. For most pathogens, this is a yes-no scenario. HIV, too delicate to survive outside the body, is not airborne. Measles is airborne, and dangerously so: It can survive in the air for up to two hours.

For the coronavirus, the definition has been more complicated. Experts agree that the virus does not travel long distances or remain viable outdoors. But evidence suggests it can traverse the length of a room and, in one set of experimental conditions, remain viable for perhaps three hours.

How are aerosols different from droplets?

Aerosols are droplets, droplets are aerosols — they do not differ except in size. Scientists sometimes refer to droplets fewer than 5 microns in diameter as aerosols. (By comparison, a red blood cell is about 5 microns in diameter; a human hair is about 50 microns wide.)

From the start of the pandemic, the WHO and other public health organizations have focused on the virus’s ability to spread through large droplets that are expelled when a symptomatic person coughs or sneezes.

These droplets are heavy, relatively speaking, and fall quickly to the floor or onto a surface that others might touch. This is why public health agencies have recommended maintaining a distance of at least 6 feet from others, and frequent hand washing.

But some experts have said for months that infected people also are releasing aerosols when they cough and sneeze. More important, they expel aerosols even when they breathe, talk or sing, especially with some exertion.

Scientists know now that people can spread the virus even in the absence of symptoms — without coughing or sneezing — and aerosols might explain that phenomenon.

Because aerosols are smaller, they contain much less virus than droplets do. But because they are lighter, they can linger in the air for hours, especially in the absence of fresh air. In a crowded indoor space, a single infected person can release enough aerosolized virus over time to infect many people, perhaps seeding a superspreader event.

For droplets to be responsible for that kind of spread, a single person would have to be within a few feet of all the other people, or to have contaminated an object that everyone else touched. All that seems unlikely to many experts: “I have to do too many mental gymnastics to explain those other routes of transmission compared to aerosol transmission, which is much simpler,” Marr said.

Can I stop worrying about physical distancing and washing my hands?

Physical distancing is still very important. The closer you are to an infected person, the more aerosols and droplets you may be exposed to. Washing your hands often is still a good idea.

What’s new is that those two things may not be enough. “We should be placing as much emphasis on masks and ventilation as we do with hand washing,” Marr said. “As far as we can tell, this is equally important, if not more important.”

Should I begin wearing a hospital-grade mask indoors? And how long is too long to stay indoors?

Health care workers may all need to wear N95 masks, which filter out most aerosols. At the moment, they are advised to do so only when engaged in certain medical procedures that are thought to produce aerosols.

For the rest of us, cloth face masks will still greatly reduce risk, as long as most people wear them. At home, when you’re with your own family or with roommates you know to be careful, masks are still not necessary. But it is a good idea to wear them in other indoor spaces, experts said.

As for how long is safe, that is frustratingly tough to answer. A lot depends on whether the room is too crowded to allow for a safe distance from others and whether there is fresh air circulating through the room.

What does airborne transmission mean for reopening schools and colleges?

This is a matter of intense debate. Many schools are poorly ventilated and are too poorly funded to invest in new filtration systems. “There is a huge vulnerability to infection transmission via aerosols in schools,” said Don Milton, an aerosol expert at the University of Maryland.

Most children younger than 12 seem to have only mild symptoms, if any, so elementary schools may get by. “So far, we don’t have evidence that elementary schools will be a problem, but the upper grades, I think, would be more likely to be a problem,” Milton said.

College dorms and classrooms are also cause for concern.

Milton said the government should think of long-term solutions for these problems. Having public schools closed “clogs up the whole economy, and it’s a major vulnerability,” he said.

“Until we understand how this is part of our national defense, and fund it appropriately, we’re going to remain extremely vulnerable to these kinds of biological threats.”

What are some things I can do to minimize the risks?

Do as much as you can outdoors. Despite the many photos of people at beaches, even a somewhat crowded beach, especially on a breezy day, is likely to be safer than a pub or an indoor restaurant with recycled air.

But even outdoors, wear a mask if you are likely to be close to others for an extended period.

When indoors, one simple thing people can do is to “open their windows and doors whenever possible,” Marr said. You can also upgrade the filters in your home air-conditioning systems, or adjust the settings to use more outdoor air rather than recirculated air.

Public buildings and businesses may want to invest in air purifiers and ultraviolet lights that can kill the virus. Despite their reputation, elevators may not be a big risk, Milton said, compared with public bathrooms or offices with stagnant air where you may spend a long time.

If none of those things are possible, try to minimize the time you spend in an indoor space, especially without a mask. The longer you spend inside, the greater the dose of virus you might inhale.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
February 6,2020

Researchers have found the rates of lung cancer are higher in young women than men.

The study, published in the journal Pediatrics, examined lung cancer rates in young adults in 40 countries across five continents and uncovered a trend of higher lung cancer rates in women compared with men in recent years.

The emerging trend was widespread, affecting countries across varied geographic locations and income levels.

The changes appeared to be driven by a rising rate of adenocarcinoma lung cancer among women, said the study researchers from University of Calgary in Canada.

Lung cancer rates have been higher among men than women because men started smoking in large numbers earlier and smoked at higher rates; however, recent studies have reported converging lung cancer incidence rates between sexes.

Among men, age specific lung cancer incidence rates generally decreased in all countries, while in women the rates varied across countries with the trends in most countries stable or declining, albeit at a slower pace compared to those in men.

For the findings, lung and bronchial cancer cases between 30-64 age group from 1993-2012 were extracted from cancer incidence in five continents.

The study found the higher emerging rates of lung cancer in young women compared to young men.

According to the researchers, future studies are needed to identify reasons for the elevated incidence of lung cancer among young women.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.