Tag: prevalence

Bioethics Blogs

How you’ll grow up, and how you’ll grow old

By Nathan Ahlgrim
Nathan Ahlgrim is a third year Ph.D. candidate in the Neuroscience Program at Emory. In his research, he studies how different brain regions interact to make certain memories stronger than others. In his own life, he strengthens his own brain power by hiking through the north Georgia mountains and reading highly technical science…fiction.

An ounce of prevention can only be worth a pound of cure if you know what to prevent in the first place. The solution to modifying disease onset can be fairly straightforward if the prevention techniques are rooted in lifestyle, such as maintaining a healthy diet and weight to prevent hypertension and type-II diabetes. However, disorders of the brain are more complicated – both to treat and to predict. The emerging science of preclinical detection of brain disorders was on display at Emory University during the April 28th symposium entitled, “The Use of Preclinical Biomarkers for Brain Diseases: A Neuroethical Dilemma.” Perspectives from ethicists, researchers conducting preclinical research, and participants or family members of those involved in clinical research were brought together over the course of the symposium. The diversity of panelists provided a holistic view of where preclinical research stands, and what must be considered as the field progresses.
Throughout the day, panelists discussed different ethical challenges of preclinical detection in the lens of three diseases: preclinical research and communicating risk in the context of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), interventions and treatment of preclinical patients in the context of schizophrenia, and the delivery of a preclinical diagnosis and stigma in the context of Alzheimer’s disease.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics News

Mother-child HIV transmission falls. Thailand example

From the early to mid-1990s, an epidemic wave of HIV-infected women and infants occurred. Heterosexual HIV transmission, as described in the Asian Epidemic Model, was the major mode of spread in Thailand, causing an increasing number of HIV-infected pregnant women a consequently raising Mother-child HIV transmission.

Mother-child HIV transmission

The early and concerted multi-sectoral response of Thai society reduced the prevalence of HIV infection in pregnant women from 2% in the mid-1990s to 0.6% in 2015 and mother-to-child transmission of HIV (MTCT) from an estimated 20-40% to 1.9%.  (see more HERE). For these reasons, has now been announced that this type of HIV transmission has been eradicated in Thailand, apparently making it the first Asian country to do so. The WHO considers that vertical transmission of HIV has been eliminated when the percentage of HIV-positive children is less than 2% ( Faculty of Medicine, Department of Paediatrics, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand – 2017 Feb 8).

See STD global report HERE

Photo 26 Doctors

 

La entrada Mother-child HIV transmission falls. Thailand example aparece primero en Bioethics Observatory.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics News

Patient’s own menstrual blood stem cells used to treat Asherman’s syndrome

Infertility treatment.”The best option for endometrial regeneration in patients with Asherman’s syndrome.”

Asherman’s syndrome is an acquired uterine abnormality characterised by the presence of intrauterine adhesions, and which clinically causes infertility, recurrent miscarriages and menstrual changes. Its prevalence ranges between 2% and 22% of infertile women.

Several surgical and medical treatments have been proposed, but outcomes have been unsatisfactory. Now, a study published in Human Reproduction has proposed treating the condition with adult stem cells obtained from the patient’s own menstrual blood.

To date, seven infertile women with Asherman’s syndrome have been treated. All patients were of reproductive age (33.7 ± 1.5 years) and had suffered infertility for 4.8 ± 1.2 years.

Menstrual blood stem cells. The blood stem cells obtained on day 2 of menstruation were transplanted to the uterus, followed by hormone stimulation.

Another successful cell therapy with no ethical difficulties

Endometrial thickening and return to its normal morphology were observed in all patients. One patient became pregnant spontaneously; four others underwent embryo transfer and two of these became pregnant.

The findings of this study suggest that transplantation of adult stem cells obtained from the patient’s own menstrual blood may be one of the best options for endometrial regeneration in patients with Asherman’s syndrome.

This practice — from a bioethical point of view — merits a favourable assessment, since adult stem cells are used which, as we know, present no ethical difficulties for use.

La entrada Patient’s own menstrual blood stem cells used to treat Asherman’s syndrome aparece primero en Bioethics Observatory.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics Blogs

Eczema Relief: Probiotic Lotion Shows Early Promise

Caption: Scanning electron microscopic image of Staphylococcus aureus bacteria (orange).
Credit: CDC/Jeff Hageman, MHS

Over the years, people suffering from eczema have slathered their skin with lotions containing everything from avocado oil to zinc oxide. So, what about a lotion that features bacteria as the active ingredient? That might seem like the last thing a person with a skin problem would want to do, but it’s actually a very real possibility, based on new findings that build upon the growing realization that many microbes living in and on the human body—our microbiome—are essential for good health. The idea behind such a bacterial lotion is that good bugs can displace bad bugs.

Eczema is a noncontagious inflammatory skin condition characterized by a dry, itchy rash. It most commonly affects the cheeks, arms, and legs. Previous studies have suggested that the balance of microbes present on people with eczema is different than on those with healthy skin [1]. One major difference is a proliferation of a bad type of bacteria, called Staphylococcus aureus.

Recently, an NIH-funded research team found that healthy human skin harbors beneficial strains of Staphylococcus bacteria with the power to keep Staph aureus in check. To see if there might be a way to restore this natural balance artificially, the researchers created a lotion containing the protective bacteria and tested it on the arms of volunteers who had eczema [2]. Just 24 hours after one dose of the lotion was applied, the researchers found the volunteers’ skin had greatly reduced levels of Staph aureus.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics News

The Real Reasons Autism Rates Are Up in the U.S.

March 3, 2017

(Scientific American) – The prevalence of autism in the United States has risen steadily since researchers first began tracking it in 2000. The rise in the rate has sparked fears of an autism ‘epidemic.’ But experts say the bulk of the increase stems from a growing awareness of autism and changes to the condition’s diagnostic criteria. Here’s how researchers track autism’s prevalence and explain its apparent rise.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics Blogs

Dangerous Love and Anti-Love Drugs: Neuroethics & Public Health Problems

By Kelsey Drewry
Kelsey Drewry is a student in the Master of Arts in Bioethics program at the Emory University Center for Ethics where she works as a graduate assistant for the Healthcare Ethics Consortium. Her current research focuses on computational linguistic analysis of health narrative data, and the use of illness narrative for informing clinical practice of supportive care for patients with neurodegenerative disorders.
The half-priced heart-shaped boxes of chocolates lining grocery store shelves serve as an undeniable marker of the recent holiday. Replete with conceptions of idyllic romance, Valentine’s Day provides an opportunity to celebrate partnership, commitment, and love. However, for those experiencing heartbreak or unrequited love, Cupid may be a harbinger of suffering rather than giddy affection.

The transition from love to pain is an incredibly common experience, and one that is formative for many. The extent of character building in heartbreak and other negative affection experiences is bounded, though, by certain types of “dangerous love”. According to Brian Earp and colleagues, this classification might include domestic abuse, pedophilia, or even jealousy-induced homicide (Earp et al 2013). The suffering associated with these cases surpasses any beneficial emotional development, leading instead to potential enduring physical and psychological harms. Instances of “dangerous love” might become the targets for “drugs that manipulate brain systems at whim to enhance or diminish our love for one another” (Young 2009, 148), which seem to be a reasonable potential product of current trajectories of neuropharmocological research.
Image courtesy of Flikr

These “anti-love” drugs are certainly beneficently intended, and may indeed be of great value in some instances.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics News

Far from Over: STDs Have Made a Comeback

February 16, 2017

(Managed Care Magazine) – The CDC estimates that, at any given time, more than 100 million Americans have an STD. Roughly 20 million new cases occur each year, with half of those affecting young people between the ages of 15 and 24. In addition, one quarter of sexually active adolescent females have an STD. Blacks and men who have sex with men also tend to have a higher prevalence of STDs. The incidence is increasing. In 2015, the last year for which a full tally is available, more than 1.5 million new chlamydia cases were reported to the CDC, a 6% jump from 2014, according to the CDC’s Sexually Transmitted Disease Surveillance 2015 report. Gonorrhea cases reported to the federal agency climbed nearly 13%, to almost 400,000, while syphilis cases soared 19%, to almost 24,000.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics Blogs

Lupron: Déjà Vu All Over Again

Alice Dreger raises concerns about a pervasive pattern of non-evidence based assumptions driving practices in pediatric endocrinology.

__________________________________________

You’d think that the pediatric specialty that may have given cancer to women treated with estrogen because as girls they were ‘at risk’ of growing up tall might be pretty careful with other drugs. You’d think that it would be especially cautious about treating kids with hormone blockers because they are ‘at risk’ of growing up short.

Pediatric endocrinology, I’m talking to you.

Susan Cohen and Christine Cosgrove have done a fine job tracking the history of using estrogen to prevent tallness in girls, so I won’t review it here. But their work is inevitably brought to mind because of a report published last week in California Healthline by Christina Jewett.

Jewett relays mounting health concerns among women who were given the drug Lupron as girls to stop or slow down puberty. Some were treated as children specifically to try to get them to grow taller. Lupron may increase a child’s ultimate height by lengthening the span of years in which the long bones are growing.

Leuprolide

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved Lupron (leuprolide), a hormone-blocking agent, for the treatment of precocious puberty, endometriosis, and advanced prostate cancer. Last week, Denise Grady reported in the New York Times new oncology research which suggests it can prolong the lives of some men with prostate cancer.

But in all these uses, the drug is known sometimes to cause serious side effects. As one oncologist quoted in Grady’s article put it, the side effects are serious enough, “you’d better have some decent justification” to use it.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics Blogs

Is Neuromarketing Influencing Pathological Shopping Behavior?

By Elena Lopez
Elena Lopez is currently pursuing her BBA at Goizueta Business School and is also pursuing a degree in Neuroscience at Emory College of Arts & Sciences. She is involved in volunteer-related organizations that help those with limited resources and offer free consulting services, such as Volunteer Medical Interpretation Services and Emory Venture Strategic Partners. Elena developed a curiosity for neuroethics after attending the NBB Paris study abroad program and the 3rd international Neuroethics Network conference. She hopes to combine her passion for science and business in her future career goals.

Just over a month has passed since the biggest holiday shopping season of the year, and many Americans are already planning how they will financially recover from their overspending and failed budgeting plans. Financial sites like Forbes and the CNBC personal finance page have already come out with articles titled “Oops, you overspent on the holidays” and “Holiday spending hangover? Get your finances back on track” in an attempt to help consumers recover from financial losses. Months before the frenzy began, NBC reported that the National Retail Federation forecasted sales for November and December 2016 would increase 3.6% from last year to reach a whopping $800 billion dollars- with 90% of those sales consisting of online purchases (Weisbaum, 2016). With the growing presence of the digital component in sales and advertising, interactions between consumers and retailers can be tailored to the individual and offer greater shopping experiences. In the same NBC report, Deloitte stated that digital interactions likely influence two-thirds of every dollar spent (Weisbaum, 2016).

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.

Bioethics Blogs

Who Cares? A Discussion on Care from Edinburgh’s Centre for Medical Anthropology by Bridget Bradley

On 11th May 2016 the Students of Medical Anthropology (SoMA) at University of Edinburgh, the student group within Edinburgh’s Centre for Medical Anthropology (EdCMA) held their inaugural event, a symposium entitled ‘Who Cares?’

As early career scholars in medical anthropology working across a variety of health-related contexts, we (SoMA) realised that care as a theme was present in all our work. This prevalence pointed to the anthropological significance of the concept and spurred discussions about ‘how care is different’ within and across our fields. However, it also highlighted that the concept of ‘care’ seemed to lack clarity and definable parameters within larger anthropological discussions. These concerns inspired  SoMA’s first student-led symposium.  Reflecting on some ideas within the published debate on ‘Care in Practice,’ within this symposium, we similarly “…sought to ask a how-question: how is “care” being done? Which modes and modalities of “caring” may we trace in various practices? How can each of these, different as they are, shed light on and help to specify the others” (Mol 2010: 84). We sought to do this by focusing on fieldwork experiences and considering how people within our sites are using the term care, and importantly, how they are performing care and for which reasons.

But why should anthropologists care about care? What does the term offer? What do we really know about care and caregivers? In answer, these papers are presentations of our understandings of care within our fields and statements arguing for the importance of examining care.  They also aimed to instigate collective discussion about care as a concept and its role within society to “shed light on and help to specify” its parameters.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by these authors and blogs are theirs and do not necessarily represent that of the Bioethics Research Library and Kennedy Institute of Ethics or Georgetown University.