I’ve learned lately that there are some advantages to working on a magazine covering life science technology and producing a daily newsletter filled with research news. Every now and then, I come across a story that directly impacts me or my family and inspires change. Case in point, I just learned that the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) updated its guidelines to help prevent sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS).

The original guidelines were released in 1992 as part of a "Back to Sleep" campaign by AAP and are attributed to reducing SIDS by 50%. However, sleep-related deaths from other causes (i.e. suffocation, entrapment, and asphyxia) have, unfortunately, increased.

The policy statement, “SIDS and Other Sleep-Related Infant Deaths: Expansion of Recommendations for a Safe Infant Sleeping Environment,” and an accompanying technical report, were presented Oct. 18, at the AAP National Conference & Exhibition in Boston and published in the November 2011 issue of Pediatrics (published online Oct. 18 and are available at http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2011/10/12/peds.2011-2284.full.pdf+html). Healthychildren.org, a Website run by AAP, provides some highlights:

• Breastfeeding is recommended and is associated with a reduced risk of SIDS.
• Infants should be immunized. Evidence suggests that immunization reduces the risk of SIDS by 50%.
• Bumper pads should not be used in cribs. There is no evidence that bumper pads prevent injuries, and there is a potential risk of suffocation, strangulation, or entrapment.

For those of you without small children, bumper pads are essentially pillows that form a barrier around the crib. The idea is that they form a soft barrier that prevents the the child from injuring itself on the frame of the crib. To be honest, they seem mostly decorative to me, and the potential hazards they pose are well known. Parents could already buy bumpers made out of mesh that are supposed to eliminate suffocation risks. I'll bet we see those being pushed hard next time we're in Buy Buy Baby.

Now I have to head home tonight and let my wife know that the bumpers in the crib have to go. I don’t think she’ll be surprised though. On this topic, she’s even more in the know than I am.

By Mary Sakacs

Have you ever been in a situation where you see someone you recognize but for some reason you can’t remember their name? It can be quite an awkward situation, and while you may greet them and be smiling on the outside, you’re intensely rummaging around your brain for a name—hoping they don’t realize that you have forgotten it. This is a common situation, but no one ever seems to wonder why it is that we can remember a face but not always a name.

At the University of Bristol, a study was completed that explained how people recognize faces better when we have familiar clues reminding us when we came across them in the past. Dr. Clea Warburton and Dr. Gareth Barker from the University’s School of Physiology and Pharmacology found that in order for someone to remember any type of object, including a person’s face, there are three areas of the brain that must work together to make that connection: perirhinal cortex, hippocampus, and the prefrontal cortex. The first region differentiates what objects are familiar to us and the ones that aren’t. The hippocampus focuses on recognizing familiar places and for navigation, and the prefrontal cortex is associated with higher brain functions that associate with our thoughts, actions, and objectives. Dr. Warburton and Dr. Barker concluded that only when all three of these brain regions are working together can we remember a specific object from an exact time.

Both doctors proceeded to find that our brain has two types of recognition memory. Object-in-place recognition memory is what they use to describe memory for where things are, while temporal order recognition describes when things happened. However, for the brain to remember both, the hippocampus and either the perirhinal cortex, or the medial prefrontal cortex must work together in order to remember objects and events in the proper order that they occurred. From this it is evident that all areas of the brain need to work collectively in order for memory to be correct and consistent. The researchers published these findings in the Journal of Neuroscience.

Findings such as these are very important for doctors because understanding how the brain works can be helpful in understanding different disorders, in this case memory disorders. Comprehending that all regions must work jointly to grasp all types of memories can be beneficial when treating people with memory disorders such as Alzheimer’s disease.

Mary Sakacs is a student at Fairleigh Dickinson University majoring in Communications studies. She is currently an editorial intern at Bioscience Technology.

By Mary Sakacs

Smoking cigarettes has been said to be one of the hardest habits to quit. But being that it is so harmful on the heart and lungs, many smokers are trying their best to put down the cigarette and improve their health. Unfortunately, the beginning of this process can be the hardest and individuals find themselves unhappy and longing for a puff. While many may assume that this feeling of discontent arises from the inability to indulge in their previous and regular activity researchers from the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health have found that this emotion is actually caused by an increase in a mood-related brain protein.

Senior Scientist Dr. Jeffrey Meyer used a brain imaging method, known as positron emission tomography, that helped him discover the protein he calls monoamine oxidase A (MAO-A).The way Meyer describes it, this protein consumes brain chemicals such as serotonin which helps maintain a normal mood.

By conducting a study on both smokers going through withdrawal and non-smokers, Meyer and his team determined that MAO-A levels in the brain increased by 25 per cent eight hours after withdrawal from tobacco smoking. These levels were higher than the levels of those un the group of non-smokers. Smokers with high brain MAO-A levels also stated that they had greater feelings of sadness. With the results from this observation, this study has also opened a window into perhaps why heavy smokers are at high risk for depression.

According to Meyer, this mood change due to withdrawal explains how quitting cigarette smoking can be so difficult. He believes that a substance in cigarettes called Harman could be the reason for these changes. While a person smokes, harman attaches to MAO-A and once withdrawal begins, the MAO-A levels increase quickly in the brain.

This study has led to the task of searching for ways to prevent this mood swing for smokers attempting to quit. Some ideas that Meyer has come up with are finding a way to develop new methods and therapies to help control this symptom. a cigarette that can somewhat screen out harman, or lessen the amount of tryptophan in cigarettes because tryptophan becomes harman once it burns. Of course, medication can also be useful for this emotional withdrawal symptom but that will take additional research.

While this common side effect for heavy smokers who quit cigarettes may be an unfortunate aspect, the upside is that now researchers can develop new ideas on how to help control this symptom. And more importantly, we must consider that the consequences that come with continuing to smoke cigarettes are far worse than those that accompany quitting.

Mary Sakacs is a student at Fairleigh Dickinson University majoring in Communications studies. She is currently an editorial intern at Bioscience Technology.

By Mary Sakacs

Video and computer games are an extremely popular activity for both children and adults today. While gaming provides fun and entertainment for players, it can also cause problems. I can recall many times when I’d be sitting on the couch waiting to go out with my boyfriend and we would be hours late because he had to “get to the next level.” While it was quite irritating, I didn’t realize it could also be dangerous. Video game addiction studies are increasing, and the results that many show can be alarming.

Game overuse has been shown to interfere with users’ daily life, often cutting them off from social interaction and involvement in more important everyday events. While this result many face from playing video games can have a harmful effect on a person, a recent event shows that addiction to video games can also result in death.

AFP reported that Chris Staniforth, age 20, was killed by a pulmonary embolism (blockage of the main artery of the lung by a substance that has travelled from elsewhere in the body through the bloodstream) after sitting in the same position for hours playing on his X box. Staniforth had been offered to study at Game Design at Leicester University and according to his father, he would spend up to 12 hours playing X box!

Staniforth reportedly had no fundamental medical conditions to cause this blood clot and yet after a long session of video gaming, he collapsed. Medical experts who have researched Deep vein thrombosis, a blood clot that forms within a vein, say that it is evident that game players who spend countless hours playing video games with no break could be at high risk of being affected by this. Research has shown that gamers have collapsed from spending 15 hours in front of video games. And in 2005, a South Korean gamer died following his extreme three day marathon of game playing with no breaks in between!

The parents of Chris Staniforth have created a new campaign that raises awareness about the health risks of playing online computer games. Video game addiction is an addiction like any other. Young adults throughout the world play video games for long periods of time and many of them do not realize how dangerous this can be. Therefore, it’s important for players to be aware of the risks involved with game playing and for parents to monitor their children’s playing sessions in order to keep them our of harms way.

Mary Sakacs is a student at Fairleigh Dickinson University majoring in Communications studies. She is currently an editorial intern at Bioscience Technology.

By Mary Sakacs

Looking at things from a positive perspective has always been said to improve your attitude and help get you through the day with a smile on your face. My mother would always tell me that I am responsible for my happiness and having a negative outlook would only bring me a bad day, so I should think positive! I believed that optimism would make me a happier person, but I didn’t realize that it could also make me a healthier one.

According to a study reported in Stroke: Journal of the American Heart Association, possessing a positive attitude can lessen your chances of having a stroke. Eric Kim, a clinical psychology doctoral student from University of Michigan performed a study where he rated the optimism level on a 16-point scale of 6,044 adults over the age of 50. Results showed that for every point increase in optimism there was a 9 percent decrease in stroke risk over a two-year follow-up period. Kim gathered from this that those with a more optimistic outlook take more efficient steps in maintaining a healthy lifestyle than those with a less optimistic approach.

While there has been prior research that verified a positive manner corresponds with better heart health such as enhanced immune-system functioning, this study was the first to establish a link between optimism and strokes in particular.

Researchers examined stroke and psychological data from the Health and Retirement Study completed between 2006 and 2008 and calculated participant’s optimism levels with an instrument called Life Orientation Test-Revised. From this, researchers gained significant knowledge on the connection between optimism and stroke. They looked for any characteristics that could be responsible for resulting in stroke risk. Some, they concluded, were chronic illness, behavioral, biological, and psychological conditions.

From the results of this study, Kim believes that optimism does substantially have an affect on a person’s risk of stroke. So what is it about optimism that lessens the probability of having a stroke?

According to Kim, having a positive attitude is what leads us to perform proactive actions like taking vitamins, maintaining a healthy diet, and a physical lifestyle. Those who tend to have a more pessimistic outlook tend to not participate in such beneficial behaviors to keep them healthy. There has also been prior evidence proving that positive thinking could also have to do with a biological impact.

Whether it is our biological make-up that is most responsible for our mind-set or not, it’s probably best to try to wake up on the right side of the bed rather than the wrong.

Mary Sakacs is a student at Fairleigh Dickinson University majoring in Communications studies. She is currently an editorial intern at Bioscience Technology.

By: Mary Sakacs

Why does one child have green eyes and the other have blue? It’s all in the genes. When we think about genetics, features like hair color, height, and facial appearance are usually what come to mind first. But genetics goes deeper than that. The genes we inherit from our family make-up a lot of who we are, and sometimes that’s not a good thing.

Every cell contains between 25,000 and 35,000 genes, but just one can have a negative affect on your life, and I don’t mean inheriting your mother’s obnoxious laugh. Due to certain faulty genes, children can be born with diseases or illnesses that they inherited from specific genes. Today, scientists are determined to uncover what genes cause such affects.

A recent breakthrough found in a study by the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, proved that a specific gene links to intellectual disability in those who may carry it. After observing five families with children who have intellectual disability, Senior Scientist John Vincent, PhD along with his colleague’s discovered defects on the gene, MAN1B1.

Vincent’s study was published in the July issue of the American Journal of Human Genetics. His study shows that all twelve children from these five families proved to have two copies of a defective MAN1B1 gene that they had inherited from each of their parents. While they were all composed of different types of mutations on the gene, the aftermath was the disability in each child’s case. This verifies that it was due to this gene that the child obtained the disability.

The cause of defective genes, according to Vincent, is how the enzyme manages the functioning of cells. The enzyme is supposed to manage the proteins created in cells and remove damaged ones in order to prevent them from being released into the body. However with the defective gene MAN1B1, this does not take place.

Originally the team had done a similar study on four families in Pakistan with whom many had intellectual disability. This first study was the beginning of the process in mapping possibly dangerous genes. By teaming up with the Max Planck Institute of Berlin, Germany and using next-generation sequencing, CAMH discovered the MAN1B1 gene.

In Iran, a similar study had been conducted by the Max Planck Institute. They were able to identify the MAN1B1 gene, and this was helpful to Vincent and his team.

Vincent reports that while this gene links to intellectual disability, it is probably not the only one out there. Therefore he will further continue studies in order to detect what other genes may be harmful.

While the search for faulty genes is still on, the real question is will scientists find a way from preventing these genes from corrupting functions in the human body, or find a way to repair them before they do?

Mary Sakacs is a student at Fairleigh Dickinson University majoring in Communications studies. She is currently an editorial intern at Bioscience Technology.

By Mary Sakacs

Mosquitoes are generally known as the sneaky pest that creeps up and bites, leaving you with an itchy bump on the surface of your skin. A nuisance to be sure, but in some areas of the world, they can be dangerous because the bugs carry malaria.

Malaria is an exceptionally harmful disease that causes infection within the red blood cells which can lead a human to endure headache, fever, and to coma or death. It is particularly prevalent in areas where mosquitoes are very widespread such as tropical regions. However, according to a recent article in The New York Times, a pill commonly used in Africa to prevent river blindness (a parasitic disease, caused by a roundworm that spreads from person to person), has been discovered to be the cure to killing mosquitoes.

Scientists declare that when a person ingests the pill and a mosquito later bites them, the mosquito will die. Imagine that!

The drug known as ivermectin may seem like a great way for protection from mosquitoes, yet there are some concerns. For one, it will only work effectively if nearly everyone in the area consumes the pills at the same time. Since the mosquito-killing effect fades out after a month, this can be difficult for villagers to organize. More importantly though, a study conducted in a few villages in Africa by The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene proved that the drug was only shortening the lives of the insect. Because the insects can only pass on malaria after getting it from humans first, they tend to already be on the older side, therefore shortening the carrier’s life is not particularly useful.

Scientists from Senegal and Colorado State University performed an experiment where they vacuumed mosquitoes off the walls of huts in three villages where people residing in them had taken ivermectin. They also repeated this step in three huts where the villagers had not. They then tested to see how many mosquitoes contained malaria parasites. The results showed that the ivermectin villages had almost 80 percent fewer mosquitoes carrying malaria. The drug was only shortening the lives of the insect. Brian D. Foy, a Colorado State mosquito expert, explained how this was not useful because only older insects transmit malaria, due to the fact that they must get it from humans first. Therefore, the pill may not be very helpful after all.

This seems a bit tricky, but you might as well take the pill just in case to provide some potential protection, right?

Maybe not. According to Dr. Lee Hall of the National Institutes of Health, ivermectin is not safe for some. He claims that the drug can be dangerous for people who are infected by a large amount of the rare West African worm known as loa loa. For those to carry the worm, ivermectin can be fatal.

Loa loa worms travel through the blood and to the lungs where they can die, leaving the person infected and potentially leading to coma or death. The only way to know if you have the worm is by getting your blood drawn and having it looked at by a doctor.

Clearly, ivermectin may seem like a great malaria protections solution by killing off its carrier. But further research is needed due to potential negative side effects. Unfortunately, there’s no absolute answer to whether the drug should be taken, but this discovery proves the power of off-label use of drugs. Who knows? Maybe there’s a pill out there for curing head aches that could also be a human time bomb for bees!

Mary Sakacs is a student at Fairleigh Dickinson University majoring in Communications studies. She is currently an editorial intern at Bioscience Technology.