Dirty laundry allows bed bugs to thrive: study

Agencies
October 1, 2017

London, Oct 1: Bed bugs are attracted to dirty laundry, say scientists who warn that leaving worn clothes exposed in sleeping areas - especially while staying in hotels - can facilitate the spread of the pests.

Bed bugs have recently undergone a global resurgence, which has been partly attributed to an increase in low cost international travel in the tourism industry.

One possible mechanism facilitating the global spread of bed bugs is that the insects find their way into clothing and luggage.

Researchers from the University of Sheffield in the UK conducted experiments in two identical, temperature-controlled rooms in which four tote bags of clothes were placed two containing soiled clothes, two with clean clothes in the presence of bed bugs.

In each run of the experiment, one room received an increase in concentration of carbon dioxide to simulate human breathing.

The scientists found that in the absence of a human host, bed bugs were twice as likely to aggregate on bags containing soiled clothes compared to bags containing clean clothes.

The study, published in the journal Scientific Reports, also found that in the room with increased concentrations of carbon dioxide, bed bugs were more likely to leave their refuge and initiate host-seeking behaviour.

Results from the research suggest that residual human odour on soiled clothes acts as an elicitor of host-seeking behaviour in bed bugs.

Consequently, dirty laundry left in an open suitcase, or left on the floor of an infested room may attract bed bugs.

"Bed bugs are a huge problem for hotel and homeowners, particularly in some of the world's biggest and busiest cities," said William Hentley from the University of Sheffield.

"Once a room is infested with bed bugs, they can be very difficult to get rid of, which can result in people having to dispose of clothes and furniture that can be really costly," said Hentley.

"Our study suggests that keeping dirty laundry in a sealed bag, particularly when staying in a hotel, could reduce the chances of people taking bed bugs home with them, which may reduce the spread of infestations," said Hentley.

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
May 10,2020

Washington D.C., May 9: Do the middle age feel much stressful now, and seems to have changed over time, if compared to the life in the 90s? Well, this recent study indicates that it might be true.

The study has signalled to the fact that life may become more stressful majorly for middle-aged people than it was in the 1990s. The researchers reached this analysis even before the novel coronavirus started sweeping the globe.

A team of researchers led by Penn State found that across all ages, there was a slight increase in daily stress in the 2010s compared to the 1990s. But when researchers restricted the sample to people between the ages of 45 and 64, there was a sharp increase in daily stress.

"On average, people reported about 2 percent more stressors in the 2010s compared to people in the past," said David M. Almeida, professor of human development and family studies at Penn State.

"That's around an additional week of stress a year. But what really surprised us is that people at mid-life reported a lot more stressors, about 19 percent more stress in 2010 than in 1990. And that translates to 64 more days of stress a year."

Almeida said the findings were part of a larger project aiming to discover whether health during the middle of Americans' lives has been changing over time.

"Certainly, when you talk to people, they seem to think that daily life is more hectic and less certain these days," Almeida said.

For the study, the researchers collected data from 1,499 adults in 1995 and 782 different adults in 2012.

Almeida said the goal was to study two cohorts of people who were the same age at the time the data was collected but born in different decades. All study participants were interviewed daily for eight consecutive days.

During each daily interview, the researchers asked the participants about their stressful experiences throughout the previous 24 hours.

They asked questions related to arguments with family or friends or feeling overwhelmed at home or work, so and so. The participants were also asked how severe their stress was and whether those stressors were likely to impact other areas of their lives.

"We were able to estimate not only how frequently people experienced stress, but also what those stressors mean to them," Almeida said.

"For example, did this stress affect their finances or their plans for the future. And by having these two cohorts of people, we were able to compare daily stress processes in 1990 with daily stress processes in 2010," Almeida added.

After analyzing the data, the researchers found that participants reported significantly more daily stress and lower well-being in the 2010s compared to the 1990s.

Additionally, participants reported a 27 percent increase in the belief that stress would affect their finances and a 17 percent increase in the belief that stress would affect their future plans.

Almeida said he was surprised not that people were more stressed now than in the 90s, but at the age group that was mainly affected.

"We thought that with economic uncertainty, life might be more stressful for younger adults. But we didn't see that. We saw more stress for people at mid-life," Almeida said.

"And maybe that's because they have children who are facing an uncertain job market while also responsible for their own parents. So it's this generational squeeze that's making stress more prevalent for people at mid-life," he concluded.

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
April 28,2020

As the world grapples with the impact of the novel coronavirus, daily interaction with the outside world --- public and retail spaces, restaurants, educational institutions, and even with each other has been and will continue to be reoriented prioritising personal hygiene and public health.

The sensibilities are building towards and leading to major changes in how the country's food service industry is expected to operate.

Based on a recent consumer survey by restaurant tech platform, Dineout, Indian diners are now ranking safety assurances and premier hygiene as top factors when it comes to choosing a restaurant to dine in.

The survey by Dineout conducted across 20 cities revealed that in a post-COVID-19 era, 81 per cent diners will prefer digital menus at restaurants, while 77 per cent of people will continue to want to dine out.

The survey found that 23 per cent people would prefer continuing with delivery/takeaway and online payment becomes the most preferred option with 60 per cent votes.
 
Diner's response to Contactless Dining:

 

Over 96 per cent demand better waitlist management
 
81 per cent consumers would rather scan a QR on their phone to place an order instead of handling physical menus or tablet-based digital menus.
 
After a dining experience, 60 per cent prefer seamless wallet-based digital payments over cash/cards 85 per cent would choose a digital valet over waiting in possibly contaminated public spaces and 84 per cent would prefer offering digital feedback over physical feedback collection.

 

What do people want to eat?
 
The report also revealed that most of India has been craving Pizza since the lockdown, except in Chennai, Hyderabad and Kolkata where their popular and indigenous Biryani recipes reign supreme. 
 
Which restaurants are diners waiting to go to?
 
77 per cent respondents claimed that they are waiting to dine out with friends and family once the lockdown is lifted.
 
Big Chill, Barbeque Nation and Social emerged as favourites in Delhi, while Mumbaikars picked Global Fusion, Poptates and Asia Kitchen. Bangaloreans miss going to pubs like Toit, Vapour and Barbeque Nation.
 
Aminia, Arsalan and Momo I Am emerge as the top picks in Kolkata.
 
Contrary to popular belief, Delhitties picked vegetarian over non-vegetarian food.
 
Bangaloreans and Lucknowis would rather have their drinks over food.
 
Besides the new parameters for restaurant selection, the factors deciding consumer delight have also seen a major overhaul as hygiene takes precedence. Consumers would prefer that the total number of reservations in a certain period be limited with the option to pre-select the seating, ample amounts of sanitisers at tables along with UV sanitised utensils whenever possible.
 
Hygiene ratings with detailed hygiene information, regular hygiene checks & usage of mask and disposable gloves by waiters are likely to be the new standard, with diners expecting service personnel to sanitise tables & chairs after every use.
 
Dineout recently unveiled the �contactless dining suite' to help restaurants survive and thrive in a post-COVID-19 world. The brand will also provide PPE Safety Kits to Restaurants to help ensure hygiene measures and is facilitating COVID free certification for restaurants through a licensed lab to ensure all microbiological tests are in place before restaurants restart post the lockdown.

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
March 15,2020

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.

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.