Most Recent Links
Follow us on Facebook and Twitter, or subscribe to our mailing list, to receive news updates. Learn more.
Jon Hamilton People who sustain a concussion or a more severe traumatic brain injury are likely to have sleep problems that continue for at least a year and a half. A study of 31 patients with this sort of brain injury found that 18 months afterward, they were still getting, on average, an hour more sleep each night than similar healthy people were getting. And despite the extra sleep, 67 percent showed signs of excessive daytime sleepiness. Only 19 percent of healthy people had that problem. Surprisingly, most of these concussed patients had no idea that their sleep patterns had changed. "If you ask them, they say they are fine," says Dr. Lukas Imbach, the study's first author and a senior physician at the University Hospital Zurich in Zurich. When Imbach confronts patients with their test results, "they are surprised," he says. The results, published Thursday in the online edition of the journal Neurology, suggest there could be a quiet epidemic of sleep disorders among people with traumatic brain injuries. The injuries are diagnosed in more than 2 million people a year in the United States. Common causes include falls, motor vehicle incidents and assaults. Previous studies have found that about half of all people who sustain sudden trauma to the brain experience sleep problems. But it has been unclear how long those problems persist. "Nobody actually had looked into that in detail," Imbach says. A sleep disorder detected 18 months after an injury will linger for at least two years, and probably much longer, the researchers say. © 2016 npr
People who've recovered from depression stave off relapses with mindfulness therapy as well as with antidepressants, a new review finds. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) is an eight-week group program that helps people become better observers of their own thoughts and emotions and to learn to distance themselves before ruminations spiral downwards. An international team of psychiatry researchers combined data from nine randomized trials of 1,258 patients total with recurrent depression to compare the mindfulness therapy to placebo, treatment as usual and other active treatments including antidepressants. People suffering from depression who received the mindfulness therapy were 31 per cent less likely to suffer a relapse during the next 60 weeks compared with those who did not receive it, Willem Kuyken of the University of Oxford, in England and his co-authors reported in a meta-analysis review in Wednesday's issue of the journal JAMA Psychiatry. "If you compare MBCT against antidepressant medication it basically holds its own, which means it provides protection on par with what people would get from continuing to take to take medications for one, two or three years after they've recovered from depression," said co-author Dr. Zindel Segal, a professor of psychology at the University of Toronto Scarborough. No one reported side-effects associated with participating in the therapy. ©2016 CBC/Radio-Canada.
By SABRINA TAVERNISE Taking a stance sharply at odds with most American public health officials, a major British medical organization urged smokers to switch to electronic cigarettes, saying they are the best hope in generations for people addicted to tobacco cigarettes to quit. The recommendation, laid out in a report published Thursday by the Royal College of Physicians, summarizes the growing body of science on e-cigarettes and finds that their benefits far outweigh the potential harms. It concludes resoundingly that, at least so far, the devices are helping people more than harming them, and that the worries about them — including that using them will lead young people to eventually start smoking traditional cigarettes — have not come to pass. “This is the first genuinely new way of helping people stop smoking that has come along in decades,” said John Britton, director of the U.K. Center for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies at the University of Nottingham, who led the committee that produced the report. E-cigarettes, he said, “have the potential to help half or more of all smokers get off cigarettes. That’s a huge health benefit, bigger than just about any medical intervention.” That conclusion is likely to be controversial in the United States, where arguments about e-cigarettes have jolted the traditionally low-key public health community. E-cigarettes deliver nicotine without the harmful tar and chemicals that cause cancer. Some public health experts see e-cigarettes as the first real chance in years for 40 million addicted Americans to quit. But others, including the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, have focused on the potential dangers of e-cigarettes, for example that they could extend smoking habits, that they could be a gateway to traditional cigarettes for children, or that their vapor could to turn out to have long-term health effects. © 2016 The New York Times Company
Keyword: Drug Abuse
Link ID: 22153 - Posted: 04.28.2016
Nicola Davis Benedict Cumberbatch’s deep and booming voice might have made him a hit among women, but a low pitch is more likely to have evolved to intimidate other men, new research suggests. When both heterosexual men and women were played recordings of male voices, the deeper tones were hailed by men as sounding more dominant. While the deeper voices were judged to be more attractive by female listeners, the effect was weaker, the researchers report. “If you look at what men’s traits look like they are designed for, they look much better designed for intimidating other males than for attracting females,” said David Puts of Pennsylvania State University, who led the study. Published in Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, the three-part study by an international team of scientists explored the links between voice pitch and mating systems, attractiveness and, for males only, perceived dominance. A formula for the perfect voice? Read more In the first leg of the research, the scientists turned their attention to primates encompassing Old and New World monkeys, as well as humans and other apes, to explore differences in “fundamental frequency” between males and females of each species - the aspect of the voice that is perceived as pitch. After selecting 1721 recordings, they found large differences were more common in polygynous species - where males mate with more than one female - than monogamous ones. That, they say, could be because in polygynous species, competition between males is greater - hence a male with a lower-pitched voice deemed to be intimidating could have the edge in securing a mate. Intriguingly, the researchers found that among the apes humans showed the greatest difference in pitch between the sexes, suggesting our ancestors were not searching for “the one” but were polygynous - a situation Puts still believes to be the case. © 2016 Guardian News and Media Limited
by Bethany Brookshire Interviewing for a new job is filled with uncertainty, and that uncertainty fuels stress. There’s the uncertainty associated with preparing for the interview — what questions will they ask me? What should I put in my portfolio? And then there’s the ambiguity when you’re left to stew. Did I get the job? Or did someone else? Scientists have recently shown that these two types of uncertainty — the kind we can prepare for, and the kind we’re just stuck with — are not created equal. The uncertainty we can’t do anything about is more stressful than the one we can. The results help show exactly what in our lives freaks us out — and why. But the findings also show a positive side to the stress we feel when not knowing what’s ahead — the closer our stress levels reflect the real ambiguity in the world, the better we perform in it. “There is a bias in the public perception” against stress, says Claus Lamm, a cognitive neuroscientist at the University of Vienna in Austria. But stress “prepares us to deal with environmental challenges,” he notes, preparing us to fight or flee, and it keeps us paying attention to our surroundings. For decades, scientists have been trying to figure out just what makes us stressed and why. It turns out that unpredictability is a great stressor. Studies in the 1960s and 1970s showed that rats and humans who can’t predict a negative effect (such as a small shock) end up more frazzled than those who can predict when a zap is coming. In a 2006 study, people zapped with unpredictable electric shocks to the hand rated the pain as more unpleasant than when they knew what to expect. © Society for Science & the Public 2000 - 2016.
Link ID: 22151 - Posted: 04.27.2016
By ERICA GOODE PORTLAND, Ore. — The 911 caller had reported a man with a samurai sword, lunging at people on the waterfront. It was evening, and when the police arrived, they saw the man pacing the beach and called to him. He responded by throwing a rock at the embankment where they stood. They shouted to him from a sheriff’s boat; he threw another rock. They told him to drop the sword; he said he would kill them. He started to leave the beach, and after warning him, they shot him in the leg with a beanbag gun. He turned back, still carrying the four-foot blade. In another city — or in Portland itself not that long ago — the next step would almost certainly have been a direct confrontation and, had the man not put down the weapon, the use of lethal force. But the Portland Police Bureau, prodded in part by the 2012 findings of a Justice Department investigation, has spent years putting in place an intensive training program and protocols for how officers deal with people with mental illness. At a time when police behavior is under intense scrutiny — a series of fatal shootings by police officers have focused national attention on issues of race and mental illness — Portland’s approach has served as a model for other law enforcement agencies around the country. And on that Sunday last summer, the police here chose a different course. At 2:30 a.m., after spending hours trying to engage the man, the officers decided to “disengage,” and they withdrew, leaving the man on the beach. A search at daylight found no signs of him. People with mental illnesses are overrepresented among civilians involved in police shootings: Twenty-five percent or more of people fatally shot by the police have had a mental disorder, according to various analyses. © 2016 The New York Times Company
Link ID: 22150 - Posted: 04.27.2016
By Bret Stetka The multibillion-dollar supplement industry spews many dubious claims, but a new study suggests that some nutritional supplements, including omega-3 fatty acids and vitamin D, may boost the effectiveness of antidepressants. If so, the supplements might help relieve symptoms for the millions of people who don’t immediately respond to these drugs. The meta-analysis—published Tuesday in the American Journal of Psychiatry—reviewed the results of 40 clinical trials that evaluated the effects of taking nutritional supplements in conjunction with several major classes of antidepressants, including selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) and tricyclic antidepressants. It revealed that four supplements in particular upped the potency of the medications, compared with a placebo. The researchers, based at Harvard University and the University of Melbourne, found the strongest evidence for an omega-3 fish oil called eicosapentaenoic acid, or EPA. In general, people with depression who took an antidepressant drug and an omega-3 sourced from fish oil experienced a significant reduction in their symptoms as assessed by a the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, a common measure used by most of the studies in the review. The same was true, although to a lesser extent, for S-adenosylmethionine, methylfolate (a form of the B vitamin folic acid) and Vitamin D. A few isolated studies found some benefit from augmenting treatment with creatine, while adding zinc, vitamin C, the amino acid tryptophan and folic acid produced mixed results. The authors deemed all of these supplements relatively safe. © 2016 Scientific American,
Link ID: 22149 - Posted: 04.27.2016
By Nicholas Bakalar Treating pregnant women for depression may benefit not just themselves but their babies as well. A study, in the May issue of Obstetrics & Gynecology, included 7,267 pregnant women, of whom 831 had symptoms of depression. After controlling for maternal age, race, income, body mass index and other health and behavioral characteristics, the researchers found that depressive symptoms were associated with a 27 percent increased relative risk of preterm birth (less than 37 weeks of gestation), an 82 percent increased risk of very preterm birth (less than 32 weeks of gestation), and a 28 percent increased risk of having a baby small for gestational age. They also found that among those who were treated with antidepressants for depression — about a fifth of those with the diagnosis — there was no association with increased risk for any of these problems. But they acknowledge that this group was quite small, which limits the power to draw conclusions. Still, the lead author, Dr. Kartik K. Venkatesh, a clinical fellow in obstetrics and gynecology at Harvard, said that it was important to screen mothers for depression, not only for their health but for that of their babies. “By screening early in pregnancy, you could identify those at higher risk and counsel them about the importance of treatment,” he said. “Treating these women for depression may have real benefits.” © 2016 The New York Times Company
Anna Nowogrodzki Prions, the misfolded proteins that are known for causing degenerative illnesses in animals and humans, may have been spotted for the first time in plants. Researchers led by Susan Lindquist, a biologist at the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research in Cambridge, Massachusetts, report that they have found a section of protein in thale cress (Arabidopsis) that behaves like a prion when it is inserted into yeast. In plants, the protein is called Luminidependens (LD), and it is normally involved in responding to daylight and controlling flowering time. When a part of the LD gene is inserted into yeast, it produces a protein that does not fold up normally, and which spreads this misfolded state to proteins around it in a domino effect that causes aggregates or clumps. Later generations of yeast cells inherit the effect: their versions of the protein also misfold. This does not mean that plants definitely have prion-like proteins, adds Lindquist — but she thinks that it is likely. “I’d be surprised if they weren’t there,” she says. To prove it, researchers would need to grind up a plant and see whether they could find a protein such as LD in several different folded states, as well as show that any potential prion caused a misfolding cascade when added to a test-tube of protein. Lindquist adds that because she's not a plant scientist — her focus is on using yeast to investigate prions — she hasn't tried these experiments. The study is reported on 25 April in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences1. © 2016 Nature Publishing Group
By Jordana Cepelewicz Everyone is familiar with the complaints of a hungry stomach. For years, scientists attributed the gnawing increase in appetite before a meal to ghrelin, a hormone which is secreted in the gut and circulates in the blood, playing a role in food intake and storage. Researchers have found that levels of ghrelin, dubbed the “hunger hormone,” peak before meals and recede after eating. Given its association with appetite, ghrelin is a tempting drug target for potential obesity treatments—but findings thus far have not lived up to expectations. Experiments that knock out the genes coding for ghrelin and its single receptor, GHSR (growth hormone secretagogue receptor), have been inconclusive: Remove the hormone or receptor, and rodents used in the experiments do not necessarily lose their drive to eat. Now a team of researchers at the French Institute of Health and Medical Research (INSERM) in Paris believe that scientists have had it wrong all along. In a study published this week in Science Signaling, they report that ghrelin does not enhance appetite in rats but rather increases weight gain and fat buildup. Unlike in earlier work, in the new study the researchers used a novel genetic method that kept the ghrelin receptor functional but modified it to have greater signaling in response to ghrelin—in other words, the receptor would enhance the hormone’s effects. The team then performed a series of experiments, first in isolated cells and then in rats. As expected, exposing ghrelin to modified receptors prompted a more potent response compared with the unaltered GHSR. © 2016 Scientific American
By Clare Wilson One day, you might be seeing in blue for 24 hours before you have an operation – to prevent organ damage. A study in mice suggests that exposure to blue light reduces a form of organ damage that is common during surgery. Reperfusion injury can happen when blood vessels are temporarily tied off during surgery, or when blocked arteries are surgically widened after a heart attack or stroke. Some damage is caused by a lack of oxygen, and further harm results when oxygen levels rebound, causing cells to become overactive, and triggering an attack by the immune system. But blue light seems to reduce this, in mice at least. Matthew Rosengart of the University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and his team have found that when mice are exposed to blue light for 24 hours before the blood supply to their liver or kidney is temporarily tied off, there is less reperfusion injury than if the mice are exposed to other types of light. “That’s pretty remarkable,” says Jack Pickard, a reperfusion researcher at University College London. Further tests showed that blue light seems to dampen down the sympathetic nervous system, which is involved in mammal stress responses. In turn, this reduced the activity of immune cells called neutrophils, which are involved in inflicting the damage of a reperfusion injury. © Copyright Reed Business Information Ltd.
Keyword: Biological Rhythms
Link ID: 22145 - Posted: 04.26.2016
Yuki Noguchi Hey! Wake up! Need another cup of coffee? Join the club. Apparently about a third of Americans are sleep-deprived. And their employers are probably paying for it, too, in the form of mistakes, productivity loss, accidents and increased health insurance costs. A recent Robert Wood Johnson Foundation report found a third of Americans get less sleep than the recommended seven hours. Another survey by Accountemps, an accounting services firm, put that number at nearly 75 percent in March. Bill Driscoll, Accountemps' regional president in the greater Boston area, says some sleepy accountants even admitted it caused them to make costly mistakes. "One person deleted a project that took 1,000 hours to put together," Driscoll says. "Another person missed a decimal point on an estimated payment and the client overpaid by $1 million. Oops. William David Brown, a sleep psychologist at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical School and author of Sleeping Your Way To The Top, says Americans are sacrificing more and more sleep every year. Fatigue is cumulative, he says, and missing the equivalent of one night's sleep is like having a blood alcohol concentration of about .1 — above the legal limit to drive. "About a third of your employees in any big company are coming to work with an equivalent impairment level of being intoxicated," Brown says. © 2016 npr
By Matthew A. Scult My heart pounds as I sprint to the finish line. Thousands of spectators cheer as a sense of elation washes over me. I savor the feeling. But then, the image slowly fades away and my true surroundings come into focus. I am lying in a dark room with my head held firmly in place, inside an MRI scanner. While this might typically be unpleasant, I am a willing research study participant and am eagerly anticipating what comes next. I hold my breath as I stare at the bar on the computer screen representing my brain activity. Then the bar jumps. My fantasy of winning a race had caused the “motivation center” of my brain to surge with activity. I am participating in a study about neurofeedback, a diverse and fascinating area of research that combines neuroscience and technology to monitor and modulate brain activity in real time. My colleagues, Katie Dickerson and Jeff MacInnes, in the Adcock Lab at Duke University, are studying whether people can train themselves to increase brain activity in a tiny region of the brain called the VTA. Notably, the VTA is thought to be involved in motivation—the desire to get something that you want. For example, if I told you that by buying a lottery ticket you would be guaranteed to win $1,000,000, you would probably be very motivated to buy the ticket and would have a spike in brain activity in this region of your brain. But while studies have shown that motivation for external rewards (like money) activate the VTA, until now, we didn’t know whether people could internally generate a motivational state that would activate this brain region. To see if people can self-activate the VTA, my colleagues are using neurofeedback, which falls under the broader umbrella of biofeedback. © 2016 Scientific American
By ANDREW POLLACK In a confrontation between the hopes of desperate patients and clinical trial data, advisers to the Food and Drug Administration voted on Monday not to recommend approval of what would become the first drug for Duchenne muscular dystrophy. The negative votes came despite impassioned pleas from patients, parents and doctors who insisted that the drug, called eteplirsen, was prolonging the ability of boys with the disease to walk well beyond when they would normally be in wheelchairs. The problem was that the drug’s manufacturer, Sarepta Therapeutics, was trying to win approval based on a study involving only 12 patients without an adequate placebo control. The advisory panel voted 7 to 3, with three abstentions, that the clinical data did not meet the F.D.A. requirements for well controlled studies necessary for approval. However, some of the panel members had trouble reconciling the often compelling patient testimony with the F.D.A. legal requirements. “I was just basically torn between my mind and my heart,” said Richard P. Hoffmann, a pharmacist who was the consumer representative on the committee and who abstained. Dr. Bruce I. Ovbiagele, chairman of neurology at the Medical University of South Carolina, voted against approval but said, “Based on all I heard, the drug definitely works, but the question was framed differently.” On another question of whether the drug could qualify for so-called accelerated approval, a lower hurdle, the panel voted 7 to 6 against the drug. The F.D.A., which does not have to follow the advice of its advisory panels, is scheduled to decide whether to approve eteplirsen by May 26. © 2016 The New York Times Company
by Laura Sanders Some researchers believe that when memories are called to mind, they enter a fragile, wobbly state during which they are vulnerable to being weakened or changed. One way to erode old memories is to learn something new just after recalling the older memory, scientists reported in 2003 (SN: 10/11/2003, p. 228). But that result itself is wobbly, scientists report April 25 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. In an attempt to replicate the original finding, experimental psychologist Tom Hardwicke of University College London and colleagues didn’t see any memory alterations in people who learned a new sequence of finger taps shortly after recalling an old sequence. Nor did the researchers turn up signs of this memory interference in other tests. The new study focused specifically on new learning, but the findings cast suspicion on the legitimacy of other ways to interfere with people’s memories, Hardwicke says. Approaches such as brain stimulation or drugs might also be flawed, the researchers argue. © Society for Science & the Public 2000 - 2016
Keyword: Learning & Memory
Link ID: 22141 - Posted: 04.26.2016
Richard A. Friedman DRUG companies are eager to tell you about their newest medicines. Turn on your TV or go online and there’s a new drug — with a hefty price tag — for whatever ails you, from antidepressants to painkillers to remedies for erectile dysfunction. The pharmaceutical industry spends lavishly to get your attention: In 2014, drug makers poured $4.5 billion into so-called direct-to-consumer advertising, a 30 percent increase over two years. Drug makers claim they are educating the public with their ads, providing information that will help you make better choices about your medical care. So in the spirit of education, let’s consider a recent online ad for Latuda, a new antipsychotic medication. A young woman rides a bike off into the sun as we are told that Latuda has been shown to be effective for many people with bipolar depression, followed by that staccato recitation of potential side effects that most viewers tune out. Here’s what a helpful prescription drug label could look like, with facts that are now out of reach. These are question marks because, although many clinical trial results are published, they are difficult to find and compare. Rules should mandate that all studies are accessible. Note the same high cost for a four-fold range of Latuda doses. Often the lowest dose is just as effective; some low-dose consumers realize they can save money by ordering the higher-dose units and splitting them into pieces. The ideal label would have statistics on how many people have serious side effects. Data are not included for these drugs because they may take years to emerge, if ever. Other drugs have well-known side effects. Fair enough. But the ad omits something that most consumers would like to know: There are many older and cheaper treatments that are just as effective. In fact, Latuda is one of 10 “second generation” antipsychotic medications, many available in generic forms, that essentially work the same way. Of course, the goal of drug companies is not to educate, but to sell products. We could ban the ads, as almost every other country does, and which I’d strongly support. But such a campaign in the United States would face fierce legislative and legal challenges. Instead, let’s help the drug companies make their ads truly educational. © 2016 The New York Times Company
It was December 2012 when the country learned about the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School, that left 20 children dead at the hands of 20-year-old shooter Adam Lanza. After the shock and the initial grief came questions about how it could have happened and why. Reports that Adam Lanza may have had some form of undiagnosed mental illness surfaced. The tragedy drove Liza Long to write a blog post on that same day, titled "I Am Adam Lanza's Mother." She wasn't Lanza's mom, but she was raising a child with a mental disorder. Her 13-year-old son had violent rages on a regular basis. He was in and out of juvenile detention. He had threatened to kill her. She detailed all this in her essay that took off online. Now, four years later, her son is speaking out too. This week on For The Record: a mother, a son and life on the edge of bipolar disorder. Eric Walton, Liza Long's son, is now a 16-year-old high school sophomore in Boise, Idaho. After a series of misdiagnoses, he's been diagnosed with bipolar disorder. But four years ago, he didn't know much about his condition. "I knew that there were times when I would have rages, didn't like them. I knew that I wanted them to stop," Walton says. Except he felt a loss of control in those moments. He describes the onset of these rages as a "blackout" of sorts. "I would start getting angry," he says. "Then it's like being trapped inside a box inside your own head. It was like a television on the wall that shows you what you're seeing. You can feel everything, but you no longer have the video game controller to control your own body." Walton's mom says when Eric would get into those states, "he would express a lot of suicidal thoughts, and hearing him just say, 'I want to die, I just want to end it.'" Then, two days before the Newtown shooting, Eric Walton had another episode. © 2016 npr
By THE EDITORIAL BOARD At the urging of Mexico, Guatemala and Colombia, world leaders met at the United Nations in a special session last week to discuss saner ways to fight the drug trade. They did not get very far toward a shift in approach. Nonetheless, there was a consensus that investing in health care, addiction treatment and alternatives to incarceration would do more to end the drug trade than relying primarily on prohibition and criminalization. “A war that has been fought for more than 40 years has not been won,” President Juan Manuel Santos of Colombia said in an interview. “When you do something for 40 years and it doesn’t work, you need to change it.” Mr. Santos and the presidents of Mexico and Guatemala argue that the war on drugs, which has been largely directed under terms set by the United States, has had devastating effects on their countries, which are hubs of the cocaine, marijuana and heroin trade. “When two elephants fight, the grass always suffers the most,” President Jimmy Morales of Guatemala said, referring to the drug cartels and American law enforcement agencies. Since 2014, the three governments and like-minded allies have sought to lay the groundwork for changes to the current approach, which is grounded in three international drug accords adopted between the early 1960s and 1988. Those treaties, which required that signatories outlaw the trade and possession of controlled substances — including marijuana — were conceived at a time when international leaders saw law enforcement as the most effective way to curb drug production and consumption. Unfortunately, several countries with considerable diplomatic clout, including China and Russia, maintain that criminalization should remain the cornerstone of the fight against drugs. © 2016 The New York Times Company
Keyword: Drug Abuse
Link ID: 22138 - Posted: 04.25.2016
By Tulip Mazumdar Most people suffering with eating disorders in Japan are not receiving any medical or psychological support, according to doctors. The Japan Society for Eating Disorders claims the health system is failing hundreds of thousands of sufferers. It also says the pressure on girls, in particular, to be thin has "gone too far". The government says it's trying to set up more services and has tried to discover the extent of the problem. "I hated being chubby when I was a kid," says Motoko - who is using a different name to hide her identity. "The other kids bullied me so I always wanted to change." Motoko was 16 years old when her eating disorder started. She would severely limit how much she ate and then started exercising excessively. By the time she was 19, Motoko was dangerously underweight. She says her parents didn't know how to help her. "They were negative about my illness," she says. "When I tried to see my doctor, they told me not to. "My mother felt responsible, perhaps my father blamed her too." Fear of 'wasting food' Motoko's story is a familiar one. Stigma around eating disorders - for both sufferers and their families - prevent many people from coming forward. "They see actions such as binging on food and then vomiting (bulimia) as shameful," says clinical psychiatrist Dr Aya Nishizono-Maher, a member of The Japan Society for Eating Disorders. "They feel they have to hide it. Parents may think they are wasting food so that might stop them seeking help." After more than 10 years, Motoko finally started getting the help she needed and she now attends one of the few eating disorder community support groups which receives money from the government. © 2016 BBC.
Keyword: Anorexia & Bulimia
Link ID: 22137 - Posted: 04.25.2016
By Leonard Sax, M.D., Ph.D Why is it that girls tend to be more anxious than boys? It may start with how they feel about how they look. Some research has shown that in adolescence, girls tend to become more dissatisfied with their bodies, whereas boys tend to become more satisfied with their bodies. Another factor has to do with differences in how girls and boys use social media. A girl is much more likely than a boy to post a photo of herself wearing a swimsuit, while the boy is more likely to post a photo where the emphasis is on something he has done rather than on how he looks. If you don’t like Jake’s selfie showing off his big trophy, he may not care. But if you don’t like Sonya’s photo of herself wearing her bikini, she’s more likely to take it personally. Imagine another girl sitting in her bedroom, alone. She’s scrolling through other girls’ Instagram and Snapchat feeds. She sees Sonya showing off her new bikini; Sonya looks awesome. She sees Madison at a party, having a blast. She sees Vanessa with her adorable new puppy. And she thinks: I’m just sitting here in my bedroom, not doing anything. My life sucks. Boys are at lower risk for the toxic effects of social media than girls are, for at least three reasons. First, boys are less likely to be heavily invested in what you think of their selfies. “Does this swimsuit make me look fat?” is a question asked by girls more often than by boys. Second, boys tend to overestimate how interesting their own life is. Third, the average boy is likely to spend more time playing video games than Photoshopping his selfie for Instagram. And in video games, unlike social media, everybody truly can be a winner, eventually. If you play Grand Theft Auto or Call of Duty long enough, you will, sooner or later, complete all the missions, if you just keep at it. © 2016 The New York Times Company