Stress during pregnancy affects the size of baby

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.

Birmingham, Feb 7: According to a new study, social media users are more likely to eat healthy or junk food after getting influenced by their peer group.

The research published in the scientific journal 'Appetite' found that study participants ate an extra fifth of a portion of fruit and vegetables themselves for every portion they thought their social media peers ate. So, if they believed their friends got their 'five a day' of fruit and veg, they were likely to eat an extra portion themselves.

On the other hand, Facebook users were found to consume an extra portion of unhealthy snack foods and sugary drinks for every three portions they believed their online social circles did.
The findings suggested that people eat around a third more junk food if they think their friends also indulge in the same.

The Aston University researchers said the findings provide the first evidence to suggest our online social circles could be implicitly influencing our eating habits, with important implications for using 'nudge' techniques on social media to encourage healthy eating.

Researchers asked 369 university students to estimate the amount of fruit, vegetables, 'energy-dense snacks' and sugary drinks their Facebook peers consumed on a daily basis.

The information was cross-referenced with the participants' own actual eating habits and showed that those who felt their social circles 'approved' of eating junk food consumed significantly more themselves. Meanwhile, those who thought their friends ate a healthy diet ate more portions of fruit and veg. Their perceptions could have come from seeing friends' posts about the food and drink they consumed, or simply a general impression of their overall health.

There was no significant link between the participants' eating habits and their Body Mass Index (BMI), a standard measure of healthy weight, however. The researchers said the next stage of their work would track a participant group over time to see whether the influence of social media on eating habits had a longer-term impact on weight.

The most recent figures from the NHS's Health Survey for England showed that in 2018 only 28 percent of adults were eating the recommended five portions of fruit and vegetables per day. In Wales, this was 24 percent, in Scotland 22 percent and in Northern Ireland around 20 percent. Children and young people across the UK had even lower levels of fruit and veg consumption.

Aston University health psychology Ph.D. student Lily Hawkins, who led the study alongside supervisor Dr. Jason Thomas, said: "This study suggests we may be influenced by our social peers more than we realize when choosing certain foods. We seem to be subconsciously accounting for how others behave when making our own food choices. So if we believe our friends are eating plenty of fruit and veg we're more likely to eat fruit and veg ourselves. On the other hand, if we feel they're happy to consume lots of snacks and sugary drinks, it can give us a license to overeat foods that are bad for our health. The implication is that we can use social media as a tool to 'nudge' each other's eating behavior within friendship groups, and potentially use this knowledge as a tool for public health interventions."

"With children and young people spending a huge amount of time interacting with peers and influencers via social media, the important new findings from this study could help shape how we deliver interventions that help them adopt healthy eating habits from a young age and stick with them for life," said professor Claire Farrow.

A dietitian called Aisling Pigott further mentioned that "Research such as this demonstrates how we are influenced by online perceptions about how others eat. The promotion of positive health messages across social media, which are focused on promoting healthy choices and non-restrictive relationships with food and body, could nudge people into making positive decisions around the food they eat."

"We do have to be mindful of the importance of 'nudging' positive behaviors and not 'shaming' food choices on social media as a health intervention. We know that generating guilt around food is not particularly helpful when it comes to lifestyle change and maintenance," Aisling added.

Washington D.C., Jan 25: A new study conducted by a team of researchers reveals why individuals who have a history of early life adversity (ELA) are disproportionately prone to opioid addiction.

The study conducted examined how early adversities interact with factors such as increased access to opioids to directly influence brain development and function, causing a higher potential for opioid addiction.

The study was lead by UCI researchers and was published in Molecular Psychiatry.

Tallie Z. Baram, MD, PhD, the Danette Shepard Chair in Neurological Sciences at the UCI School of Medicine and one of the senior researchers for the study, was on the take that the widely known factor genetics that plays major role in addiction vulnerability, cannot be solely held responsible for the recent rise in opioid abuse.

To further clarify, the researchers simulated ELA in rats by limiting bedding and nesting materials during a short, postnatal period of time.

In female rats, this led to striking opioid addiction-like characteristics including an increased relapse- behaviour, for example.

As observed in addicted humans, the rats were willing to work very hard (pay a very high price) to obtain the drug.

Baram said: "Ultimately, we found that conditions during sensitive developmental periods can lead to vulnerability to the addictive effects of opioid drugs, especially in females, which is consistent with the prevalence of ELA in heroin-addicted women."

These findings can be used to highlight the importance given to sex differences in future ELA-related studies on opioid addiction, and in future prevention or intervention strategies being developed to address the growing opioid crisis.

The study conducted examined how early adversities interact with factors such as increased access to opioids to directly influence brain development and function, causing a higher potential for opioid addiction.

The study was lead by UCI researchers and was published in Molecular Psychiatry.

The study found that unpredictable, fragmented early life environments may lead to abnormal maturation of certain brain circuits, which profoundly impacts brain function and persists into adolescence and adulthood.

Tallie Z. Baram, MD, PhD, the Danette Shepard Chair in Neurological Sciences at the UCI School of Medicine and one of the senior researchers for the study, was on the take that the widely known factor genetics that plays major role in addiction vulnerability, cannot be solely held responsible for the recent rise in opioid abuse.

To further clarify, the researchers implanted ELA in rats by limiting bedding and nesting materials during a short, postnatal period of time.

In female rats, this led to striking opioid addiction-like characteristics including an increased relapse- behaviour, for example.

As observed in addicted humans, the rats were willing to work very hard (pay a very high price) to obtain the drug.

Baram said: "Ultimately, we found that conditions during sensitive developmental periods can lead to vulnerability to the addictive effects of opioid drugs, especially in females, which is consistent with the prevalence of ELA in heroin-addicted women."

These findings can be used to highlight the importance given to sex differences in future ELA-related studies on opioid addiction, and in future prevention or intervention strategies being developed to address the growing opioid crisis.