Sean Eddy has his dream job: he is a group leader in computational genomics at the Janelia Farm Research Campus of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI), in Ashburn, Virginia. Yet, as he approaches his first cyclical review next year, he faces the prospect of being asked to leave if his work is not deemed worthy of the institute's mission.
Eddy was one of ten scientists who, aiming to energize their research and forge multidisciplinary ties, decided in 2006 to join a newly opened research institute with unconventional operating and funding models. Although he was once a tenured researcher at the Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, Missouri, Eddy is unruffled by the lack of tenure at Janelia. In July 2012, Eddy will undergo a review, required for all Janelia group leaders — there are now 26 — after their initial six years. If an external review panel finds his work deserving, he will be offered the chance to renew for five years. If his work doesn't measure up, he has to be out by July 2014. But the uncertainty of his future never keeps him up at night.
OCEAN/CORBIS
Eddy is “wonderfully stressed” about the review. “I like knowing they can kick me out to the street,” he says. But he isn't revealing a masochistic streak. Remove the security blanket of tenure, says Eddy, and he is driven to work harder, and to assess his research programme more frequently to make sure that it is still on the right track. Furthermore, he says, tenure, which is especially coveted in the United States, brings its own job-related anxieties. “If I'm tenured at Washington University or anywhere, they can't fire me, but they can put me in a closet and take away my space,” he says. “I prefer it this way — I think it's appropriate to have a little fire under you.”
Top model?
As Janelia reaches its fifth anniversary, its research and culture continue to draw notice, and the question of whether its approach is effective remains unanswered (see page 284). Its operating model was a head-turner in 2000, when the HHMI announced plans to create the research campus; and when Janelia opened in 2006, it sparked articles in the academic, scientific and mainstream press that noted its 'radical' departure from the conventional US academic approach (see Nature 443, 128–129; 2006).
But executive director Gerry Rubin, a former academic, emphasizes that Janelia's cyclical-review model is not new. It is based in large part on similar models at established institutes that offer fixed-term contracts with reviews and opportunities to renew, such as the Medical Research Council Laboratory of Molecular Biology (LMB) in Cambridge, UK, and the former basic-research model at Bell Laboratories in Murray Hill, New Jersey, which is now the research arm of French telecommunications company Alcatel-Lucent. Similar models at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, a biological sciences institute in New York, and the Carnegie Institution for Science, based in Washington DC, also helped to inspire Janelia. The European Molecular Biology Laboratory, which has five sites across Europe, offers rotating contracts too (see Nature 478, 547–548; 2011).
Scientists at Janelia and similar institutions don't baulk at giving up the comfort and protection of a longer-term job — and in many cases, tenure. On the contrary, they're eager to abandon the academic prototype in favour of a workplace culture in which research is the focus and high-risk, inventive projects are the norm. They are also generally less worried about grants, teaching, committee service and other off-the-bench activities. Indeed, despite the job security and intellectual freedom that tenure confers, it is hardly universally relevant or obligatory, argue administrators and some bench scientists. Limited-term, research-focused contracts, they say, sharpen research programmes by ensuring that scientists are actively involved in day-to-day experiments.
Still, only researchers with an appetite for high-risk work and a willingness to change institutions and lab environments should embrace such a model. Young scientists should also keep in mind that labs at these institutions tend to be far smaller than those in academia, which could create logistical problems if people leave. Researchers who enjoy teaching or the university setting are also more likely to find career satisfaction elsewhere.
Tenure time-out
From the start, Rubin felt sure that Janelia held promise. “We looked at the LMB and Bell and Cold Spring and Carnegie and we saw that you did not have to offer tenure to get the highest quality of scientists,” he says.
Tenure can be antithetical to good science, says Eric Betzig, a group leader in physics at Janelia, who spent six years at Bell. “The chase for tenure enforces a certain conservatism — you learn not to stick your neck out,” says Betzig. “Then, once you have it, it's possible to get stale. And it's small enough around here that we can't afford to have a bunch of stale people.”
Limited-contract institutions typically provide generous funding packages, with a salary for four to five years and enough money to buy equipment and supplies, and hire a postdoc and lab technician. The publish-or-perish imperative of academia is greatly reduced, because such institutions focus more on the researcher's overall scientific programme than on his or her publication rate.
M. STALEY/JANELIA FARM
At Janelia Farm Research Campus, scientists forgo tenure for short-term contracts and cutting-edge labs.
And, because few of these institutions, at least in the United States, offer classes for students, scientists working at them typically don't have to teach; instead, researchers spend a lot of time in the lab. At some facilities, such as Janelia and Bell, scientists have virtually no obligations outside their research; Janelia, in fact, requires its scientists to spend 75% of their time at the bench. Other organizations require a nominal level of non-research commitment, such as service on a committee. “The postdocs here are ticked off because the principal investigators are having so much fun,” says Eddy. “At Janelia, we're all saying, 'Yeah, I guess I should let the postdoc do an experiment'.” Harald Hess, a group leader doing high-resolution microscopy at Janelia, who also spent 11 years at Bell, says that there are few time-sinks to keep scientists away from the bench at either institution. Rubin agrees. “If you want to work in the lab with your own hands, you have to come here,” he says. “That's not going to happen at most academic institutions.”
In return for the right to concentrate so closely on their research, scientists tend to be reviewed on how innovative their programmes are, and on the likelihood of field-changing discoveries, rather than on more conventional metrics. “You may not succeed, and you may not have anything to show for your five or seven years,” says Karel Svoboda, a neurobiologist and biophysicist at Janelia who has worked at both Bell and Cold Spring Harbor. “But in this environment, you may still be viewed as successful, even if you don't have the big paper.”
Judgement day
Review committees at non-tenure institutions examine investigators' work at set intervals, usually every four or five years; researchers who don't make the cut generally have between six months and two years to find a new position. Panels can be internal, external or a combination of both. For example, when the first reviews start happening at Janelia, the committee will consist of about 20 scientists, half from the group that reviews HHMI-funded investigators at other institutions, and half from the field of the person being reviewed. The reviewees will give 45-minute presentations on their work to the full panel.
Review criteria vary, but institutions strive to ensure that their researchers' science is original and creative, and will have an impact. “We don't just count papers or citations, we make a judgement about whether people are doing something that's worth doing,” says Hugh Pelham, director of the LMB. Carnegie asks whether the reviewees are taking advantage of the opportunities provided by the institution, notes president Richard Meserve — in particular, that they are effectively using the time freed up by not having to teach or chase grants. Institutions may consider how much collaboration principal investigators have been involved in and how active they have been on committees; Rubin says he will also provide input on reviewees' performance as lab colleagues and mentors to junior scientists. At the LMB, Pelham and others who regularly interact with reviewees can step in and disagree with the panel's comments; Pelham can even override a recommendation to dismiss, if he thinks the reviewee is on the cusp of a big breakthrough.
At Janelia, investigators aren't allowed to seek external funding, so grant success is irrelevant in reviews. But this is not true everywhere: for example, Cold Spring Harbor does take grant success, and indeed publication rate, into account. Its internal review panel uses both to gauge whether investigators have developed independent research programmes and have the potential to become leaders in their fields. Ideally, the lab would like investigators who are renewed in their fourth-year reviews to earn enough external funding to support 80% of their work by their fifth year.
Meserve declines to reveal Carnegie's staff-retention rates, but says that “very few” of the scientists hired as permanent staff members have left in the past two cycles. Rubin expects about 80% retention at Janelia.
Risky business
E. GRINNELL/HARVARD UNIV.
Cherry Murray: "It was an incredibly highly competitive atmosphere."
A limited-contract system is not for the faint of heart. “There are risks,” says Sydney Brenner, a Nobel-prizewinning molecular biologist and senior resident fellow at Janelia, who was once a senior researcher at the LMB. He notes that doses of uncertainty are par for the course. “But if you're passionate enough about doing science, and you have confidence in yourself, you'll be willing to take them,” he adds.
The pressures of such models are clear. Working at Bell “was an incredibly highly competitive atmosphere”, says Cherry Murray, a physicist who spent 26 years at the lab in research and management positions, including research vice-president, and is now dean of the Harvard School of Engineering and Applied Sciences in Cambridge, Massachusetts. “You were given some leeway, say for a few years after your arrival, to build up your research programme,” she says. But those who consistently stayed in the bottom 10% after that — who weren't exploring imaginative, original ideas as assessed by their managers, and whose research never led to an invention or the possibility of one — were politely asked to leave. Evelyn Hu, an electrical engineer at Harvard who spent nine years as a Bell researcher, recalls a chilling prophecy from company management early on. “I remember attending an orientation for new hires and being told, 'Look to your right, look to your left — in five years, only one of you will be here',” she says.
Those willing to embrace the pressure may face other constraints. The small size of labs in limited-contract institutes can be inhibiting, says Chris Field, director of global ecology at Carnegie and a biologist and environmental Earth systems scientist at Stanford University in California, where he conducts his research but gets no financial or other benefits. “There are some people for whom Carnegie becomes a stage that's not the right size,” he says. “Some people find that as they move through their programme, they're more interested in building a bigger lab group.”
Those running small labs can risk losing a critical mass of personnel, says Douglas Koshland, a geneticist who spent a long time at Carnegie but accepted a tenured position at the University of California, Berkeley, last year. “If you have four people and two leave, then you've got two left, and that can be painful,” he says. But Koshland is still a proponent of small labs, pointing out that the same reduced lab size also enables principal investigators to actually do research, rather than just supervise a dozen or more junior researchers.
Jim Broach is a molecular biologist at Princeton University in New Jersey, but he began his career at Cold Spring Harbor. It was lack of teaching, not of tenure, that drove him into academia. “Postdocs aren't as eager to explore new ideas as graduate students,” he says, noting that Cold Spring Harbor does now have an on-campus graduate programme, the Watson School of Biological Sciences, founded in 1999. “Teaching benefits your research — you learn to formulate your questions more precisely and you learn how to organize and present your ideas in a very powerful way,” he says.
Soft landing
Being asked to leave a place such as Janelia does not usually spell disaster. Murray notes that any researcher who, voluntarily or otherwise, left Bell while she was there had no problem finding an industrial or tenured academic research position elsewhere. For some, that is a fair exchange. Joanna Aizenberg, a materials scientist at Harvard, spent nine years at Bell, where she loved her work. But when the company began to move away from a basic-research focus to concentrate more on applied, product-driven research, she decided to resign. Shortly after Aizenberg left the company in 2007, she accepted an offer at Harvard. “It's obviously wonderful to have tenure,” says Aizenberg, “and to think that whatever happens, I have it.”
At Janelia, group leaders who don't receive a renewal offer for a second term will get transitional funding of up to US$1 million a year for two years, a bonus that significantly boosts their recruitment value. Those who get a renewal offer but decide to leave anyway can take their HHMI investigator status, and they get the same transitional funding. “You show up with a really big cheque in your pocket — that's really valuable in academia,” says Tim Harris, director of the applied physics and instrumentation group at Janelia. At the LMB, those who are asked to leave are given a month's pay for each year they've worked at the Medical Research Council, up to a maximum of 21 months, and get about a year's notice before they actually have to leave. At Cold Spring Harbor, researchers are reviewed four years into their five-year contracts, so if they are asked to leave, they still have a year to find a job, and may have some money left over from their start-up packages. At Carnegie, departures are often based on mutual agreement. Scientists who go elsewhere receive a lump sum representing their unused annual leave.
Supporters of the short-term model note that tenured academic positions are tough to find — and, in any case, few jobs have long-term guarantees. “Having any job in research, especially now, is such a gift,” says Hess. He says researchers should focus on their innovations, rather than on how long their jobs will last. “For me, the reward has always been on the positive side — what's exciting, what's new, and to not be fear-driven about when my job might end,” he says. “It's really a blessing to have this kind of opportunity — where people pay you to do what you love doing.”
http://www.nature.com/naturejobs/science/articles/10.1038%2Fnj7373-433a?WT.ec_id=NATUREjobs-20111103
Friday, November 18, 2011
Monday, November 14, 2011
Mitochondria Can’t Be Cleared out When Damaged
ScienceDaily (Nov. 10, 2011) — Current thinking about Parkinson's disease is that it's a disorder of mitochondria, the energy-producing organelles inside cells, causing neurons in the brain's substantia nigra to die or become impaired. A study from Children's Hospital Boston now shows that genetic mutations causing a hereditary form of Parkinson's disease cause mitochondria to run amok inside the cell, leaving the cell without a brake to stop them.
Findings appear in the Nov. 11 issue of Cell.
Mitochondrial movement is often a good thing, especially in neurons, which need to get mitochondria to cells' periphery in order to fuel the axons and dendrites that send and receive signals. However, arresting this movement is equally important, says senior investigator Thomas Schwarz, PhD, of Children's F.M. Kirby Neurobiology Center, since it allows mitochondria to be quarantined and destroyed when they go bad.
"Mitochondria, when damaged, produce reactive oxygen species that are highly destructive, and can fuse with healthy mitochondria and contaminate them, too," Schwarz says. "It's the equivalent of an environmental disaster in the cell."
Studying neurons from fruit flies, rats and mice, as well as cultured human cells, Schwarz and colleagues provide the most detailed understanding to date of the effects of the gene mutations, which encode the proteins Parkin and PINK1. They demonstrate how these proteins interact with proteins responsible for mitochondrial movement -- in particular Miro, which literally hitches a molecular motor onto the organelle.
Normally, when mitochondria go bad, PINK1 tags Miro to be destroyed by Parkin and enzymes in the cell, the researchers showed. When Miro is destroyed, the motor detaches from the mitochondrion. The organelle, unable to move, can then be disposed of: The cell literally digests it.
But when either PINK1 or Parkin is mutated, this containment system fails, leaving the damaged mitochondria free to move about the cell, spewing toxic compounds and fusing to otherwise healthy mitochondria and introducing damaged components.
The study's findings are consistent with observed changes in mitochondrial distribution, transport and dynamics in other neurodegenerative diseases such as Huntington's disease, Alzheimer's disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (Lou Gehrig's disease), and Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease, the researchers note.
Although the team studied a rare hereditary form of Parkinson's, the findings may shed light on what's going on in the more common sporadic form of the disease, Schwarz says.
"Whether it's clearing out damaged mitochondria, or preventing mitochondrial damage, the common thread is that there's too much damage in mitochondria in a particular brain region," he says.
While Schwarz sees potential in gene therapy to restore normal PINK1 or Parkin to neurons, he is more interested in the possibility of helping neurons flush out bad mitochondria or make enough new, healthy mitochondria to keep them viable. "We may need to do both," he says.
The study was funded by the Ellison Medical Foundation, the Hartman Foundation for Parkinson's Research, the National Institutes of Health and a LSRF Novartis Fellowship. Xinnan Wang, PhD, of the F.M. Kirby Neurobiology Center at Children's, was first author.
Findings appear in the Nov. 11 issue of Cell.
Mitochondrial movement is often a good thing, especially in neurons, which need to get mitochondria to cells' periphery in order to fuel the axons and dendrites that send and receive signals. However, arresting this movement is equally important, says senior investigator Thomas Schwarz, PhD, of Children's F.M. Kirby Neurobiology Center, since it allows mitochondria to be quarantined and destroyed when they go bad.
"Mitochondria, when damaged, produce reactive oxygen species that are highly destructive, and can fuse with healthy mitochondria and contaminate them, too," Schwarz says. "It's the equivalent of an environmental disaster in the cell."
Studying neurons from fruit flies, rats and mice, as well as cultured human cells, Schwarz and colleagues provide the most detailed understanding to date of the effects of the gene mutations, which encode the proteins Parkin and PINK1. They demonstrate how these proteins interact with proteins responsible for mitochondrial movement -- in particular Miro, which literally hitches a molecular motor onto the organelle.
Normally, when mitochondria go bad, PINK1 tags Miro to be destroyed by Parkin and enzymes in the cell, the researchers showed. When Miro is destroyed, the motor detaches from the mitochondrion. The organelle, unable to move, can then be disposed of: The cell literally digests it.
But when either PINK1 or Parkin is mutated, this containment system fails, leaving the damaged mitochondria free to move about the cell, spewing toxic compounds and fusing to otherwise healthy mitochondria and introducing damaged components.
The study's findings are consistent with observed changes in mitochondrial distribution, transport and dynamics in other neurodegenerative diseases such as Huntington's disease, Alzheimer's disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (Lou Gehrig's disease), and Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease, the researchers note.
Although the team studied a rare hereditary form of Parkinson's, the findings may shed light on what's going on in the more common sporadic form of the disease, Schwarz says.
"Whether it's clearing out damaged mitochondria, or preventing mitochondrial damage, the common thread is that there's too much damage in mitochondria in a particular brain region," he says.
While Schwarz sees potential in gene therapy to restore normal PINK1 or Parkin to neurons, he is more interested in the possibility of helping neurons flush out bad mitochondria or make enough new, healthy mitochondria to keep them viable. "We may need to do both," he says.
The study was funded by the Ellison Medical Foundation, the Hartman Foundation for Parkinson's Research, the National Institutes of Health and a LSRF Novartis Fellowship. Xinnan Wang, PhD, of the F.M. Kirby Neurobiology Center at Children's, was first author.
Weird Cases Point Up Allergists' Weird World
BOSTON -- If there's a limit to the range of ways in which the human body can fail, medical science has yet to find it, and allergists may be more aware of that fact than clinicians in other specialties.
Poster presentations at the American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology's annual meeting here highlighted the bizarre and every-expanding number of substances that the immune system can regard as noxious, ranging from Mom's breast milk to a man's own semen.
Some of these case reports were the first ever to describe such allergies, according to the physicians presenting them. That raises the question of their importance to the allergist community -- what is the value of knowing about a possible allergy that most clinicians will never encounter in their entire careers?
John Oppenheimer, MD, who headed the ACAAI's abstract selection committee for the meeting, had a ready answer. "It may be one in a million, but if it's you [with the allergy], it's 100%," he told MedPage Today.
He also noted that allergies now recognized as common were initially noticed in a single patient, with latex allergy being an example.
"When latex was first reported as an allergy, it was an abstract and it was forgotten for years. All of a sudden it became a signal when HIV came and this was a big issue. Having had that as a prior report allowed us to move forward," Oppenheimer said.
"What might be wacky today might be an epidemic tomorrow," he added.
With that in mind, here's a sample of some of the more unusual reports presented at this year's meeting.
Semen Allergy Explains Flu-Like Symptoms
Againdra Bewtra, MBBS, of Creighton University in Omaha, Neb., and colleagues described the case of a man who complained of head and body aches, accompanied by what he called "brain fog," within a day after ejaculation irrespective of the circumstances.
Bewtra's group had previously identified semen allergy in a series of female patients and, since there was no ready explanation of the man's symptoms, they tested him with a sample of his semen.
Skin prick testing with the sample yielded "mildly positive" results and a follow-up with intradermal testing showed a large reaction, the researchers reported.
They recommended that the man try prednisone and/or high doses of antihistamines before having sexual activity, but they did not indicate whether or not it worked.
Peanut Allergy in an Exclusively Breastfed Infant
Researchers at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor reported what they believed to be the first case of enterocolitis triggered by peanut allergy in an infant whose only exposure appeared to be breast milk from his mother.
The case involved a 7-month-old who would vomit copiously after breastfeeding, but only when his mother had recently eaten peanut products. As far as could be determined, the baby boy was exclusively breastfed and had never eaten any peanut products directly.
Patch testing indicated peanut sensitivity, although skin prick and serum IgE results were negative for peanut. Oral challenge testing was not performed.
When peanut products were eliminated from the mother's diet, the baby's symptoms disappeared, according to David Robertson, MD, MPH, and Matthew Greenhawt, MD.
Although development of peanut allergy in this way appeared unprecedented, the researchers noted that previous studies had shown that breast milk can contain peanut protein and that other types of food allergies have been induced in exclusively breastfed infants.
Another Way Alcohol Can Be Bad for You
Alcohol not only ruins the liver and causes accidents, it also can be an allergen, according to researchers at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in Bethesda, Md.
They described a case involving a 25-year-old woman who would develop hives on her back whenever she had alcoholic beverages, including wine, beer, and distilled spirits.
An oral challenge test at Walter Reed reproduced the syndrome, reported Wayne Wolverton, DO, and colleagues, and no recurrence was reported after they recommended strict avoidance.
The researchers said this was only the second reported case of systemic dermatitis attributed to ethanol allergy.
Anaphylaxis in an Allergy Clinic Worker
Needlesticks are hazardous even in the absence of contamination with infectious pathogens, according to another group of military doctors, who reported a case of anaphylaxis in a careless allergy clinic worker.
The worker was preparing syringes to be used for routine immunotherapy injections. She accidentally pricked herself with one containing Timothy grass allergens.
She was known to be mildly allergic to Timothy grass and had previously taken loratadine for it, but severe hypersensitivity had not been suspected.
Within five minutes of the needlestick, she developed a systemic reaction. It took five doses of epinephrine to bring her hypotension, tachycardia, and breathing difficulties under control, according to Capt. Michelle Bandino, MD, and Michael Tankersley, MD, of Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio.
Post hoc review disclosed that the worker was also taking a beta-blocker, which is known to increase the risk of severe allergic reactions in sensitive individuals.
The Lackland physicians suggested that healthcare workers be screened for such risk factors before being assigned to duties that could expose them to potential anaphylaxis triggers.
Pork-Cat Syndrome: No Longer the French Disease
An odd co-allergy to pork meat and to cats previously reported only in France has now been detected in the U.S., according to a report from researchers at the University of Virginia.
In a platform presentation at the ACAAI meeting, Jonathon Posthumus, MD, said his clinic had confirmed "pork-cat" syndrome in six patients.
The condition appears to involve cross-reactive sensitivity to serum albumin from pigs and cats. In the case of cats, the protein is contained in skin and saliva, so the exposure is similar to that responsible for the more common cat allergy related to the Fel d1 protein.
Objective testing in the six patients showed that they were sensitive to cat and pork serum albumins.
Posthumus said a complicating factor in diagnosing the condition was that patients reported that reactions were inconsistent following pork ingestion. However, albumin proteins can be broken down by heating, so that different cooking methods could explain the variability.
About That Runny Nose ...
Two case reports here described patients whose rhinitis turned out not to be allergic, but something potentially far more serious.
Both patients complained of runny noses that did not appear correlated with any known allergen, either temporally or in objective testing.
Finally, physicians examined the nasal discharge itself and found that it was not the normal type, but in fact was cerebrospinal fluid. Follow-up imaging exams revealed fistulas through which CSF was leaking into the nasosinus cavity.
The two reports offered different tips on how to distinguish the condition from allergic rhinitis.
Richard Harris, MD, in private practice in Beverly Hills, Calif., noted that CSF contains glucose whereas normal nasal secretions do not. He suggested that urinary glucose test strips meant for monitoring diabetic patients can be used to determine that a nasal discharge is likely to be CSF.
The other group, led by Rohit Divekar, MD, PhD, of the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston, said that cranial CT findings were reliably diagnostic.
"An empty sella is a robust radiographic marker and is almost universally present in this group of patients, but not in patients with nonspontaneous leaks," they indicated.
http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/ACAAI/29563?utm_source=WC&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Meeting_Roundup_ACAAI
Poster presentations at the American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology's annual meeting here highlighted the bizarre and every-expanding number of substances that the immune system can regard as noxious, ranging from Mom's breast milk to a man's own semen.
Some of these case reports were the first ever to describe such allergies, according to the physicians presenting them. That raises the question of their importance to the allergist community -- what is the value of knowing about a possible allergy that most clinicians will never encounter in their entire careers?
John Oppenheimer, MD, who headed the ACAAI's abstract selection committee for the meeting, had a ready answer. "It may be one in a million, but if it's you [with the allergy], it's 100%," he told MedPage Today.
He also noted that allergies now recognized as common were initially noticed in a single patient, with latex allergy being an example.
"When latex was first reported as an allergy, it was an abstract and it was forgotten for years. All of a sudden it became a signal when HIV came and this was a big issue. Having had that as a prior report allowed us to move forward," Oppenheimer said.
"What might be wacky today might be an epidemic tomorrow," he added.
With that in mind, here's a sample of some of the more unusual reports presented at this year's meeting.
Semen Allergy Explains Flu-Like Symptoms
Againdra Bewtra, MBBS, of Creighton University in Omaha, Neb., and colleagues described the case of a man who complained of head and body aches, accompanied by what he called "brain fog," within a day after ejaculation irrespective of the circumstances.
Bewtra's group had previously identified semen allergy in a series of female patients and, since there was no ready explanation of the man's symptoms, they tested him with a sample of his semen.
Skin prick testing with the sample yielded "mildly positive" results and a follow-up with intradermal testing showed a large reaction, the researchers reported.
They recommended that the man try prednisone and/or high doses of antihistamines before having sexual activity, but they did not indicate whether or not it worked.
Peanut Allergy in an Exclusively Breastfed Infant
Researchers at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor reported what they believed to be the first case of enterocolitis triggered by peanut allergy in an infant whose only exposure appeared to be breast milk from his mother.
The case involved a 7-month-old who would vomit copiously after breastfeeding, but only when his mother had recently eaten peanut products. As far as could be determined, the baby boy was exclusively breastfed and had never eaten any peanut products directly.
Patch testing indicated peanut sensitivity, although skin prick and serum IgE results were negative for peanut. Oral challenge testing was not performed.
When peanut products were eliminated from the mother's diet, the baby's symptoms disappeared, according to David Robertson, MD, MPH, and Matthew Greenhawt, MD.
Although development of peanut allergy in this way appeared unprecedented, the researchers noted that previous studies had shown that breast milk can contain peanut protein and that other types of food allergies have been induced in exclusively breastfed infants.
Another Way Alcohol Can Be Bad for You
Alcohol not only ruins the liver and causes accidents, it also can be an allergen, according to researchers at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in Bethesda, Md.
They described a case involving a 25-year-old woman who would develop hives on her back whenever she had alcoholic beverages, including wine, beer, and distilled spirits.
An oral challenge test at Walter Reed reproduced the syndrome, reported Wayne Wolverton, DO, and colleagues, and no recurrence was reported after they recommended strict avoidance.
The researchers said this was only the second reported case of systemic dermatitis attributed to ethanol allergy.
Anaphylaxis in an Allergy Clinic Worker
Needlesticks are hazardous even in the absence of contamination with infectious pathogens, according to another group of military doctors, who reported a case of anaphylaxis in a careless allergy clinic worker.
The worker was preparing syringes to be used for routine immunotherapy injections. She accidentally pricked herself with one containing Timothy grass allergens.
She was known to be mildly allergic to Timothy grass and had previously taken loratadine for it, but severe hypersensitivity had not been suspected.
Within five minutes of the needlestick, she developed a systemic reaction. It took five doses of epinephrine to bring her hypotension, tachycardia, and breathing difficulties under control, according to Capt. Michelle Bandino, MD, and Michael Tankersley, MD, of Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio.
Post hoc review disclosed that the worker was also taking a beta-blocker, which is known to increase the risk of severe allergic reactions in sensitive individuals.
The Lackland physicians suggested that healthcare workers be screened for such risk factors before being assigned to duties that could expose them to potential anaphylaxis triggers.
Pork-Cat Syndrome: No Longer the French Disease
An odd co-allergy to pork meat and to cats previously reported only in France has now been detected in the U.S., according to a report from researchers at the University of Virginia.
In a platform presentation at the ACAAI meeting, Jonathon Posthumus, MD, said his clinic had confirmed "pork-cat" syndrome in six patients.
The condition appears to involve cross-reactive sensitivity to serum albumin from pigs and cats. In the case of cats, the protein is contained in skin and saliva, so the exposure is similar to that responsible for the more common cat allergy related to the Fel d1 protein.
Objective testing in the six patients showed that they were sensitive to cat and pork serum albumins.
Posthumus said a complicating factor in diagnosing the condition was that patients reported that reactions were inconsistent following pork ingestion. However, albumin proteins can be broken down by heating, so that different cooking methods could explain the variability.
About That Runny Nose ...
Two case reports here described patients whose rhinitis turned out not to be allergic, but something potentially far more serious.
Both patients complained of runny noses that did not appear correlated with any known allergen, either temporally or in objective testing.
Finally, physicians examined the nasal discharge itself and found that it was not the normal type, but in fact was cerebrospinal fluid. Follow-up imaging exams revealed fistulas through which CSF was leaking into the nasosinus cavity.
The two reports offered different tips on how to distinguish the condition from allergic rhinitis.
Richard Harris, MD, in private practice in Beverly Hills, Calif., noted that CSF contains glucose whereas normal nasal secretions do not. He suggested that urinary glucose test strips meant for monitoring diabetic patients can be used to determine that a nasal discharge is likely to be CSF.
The other group, led by Rohit Divekar, MD, PhD, of the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston, said that cranial CT findings were reliably diagnostic.
"An empty sella is a robust radiographic marker and is almost universally present in this group of patients, but not in patients with nonspontaneous leaks," they indicated.
http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/ACAAI/29563?utm_source=WC&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Meeting_Roundup_ACAAI
Friday, November 11, 2011
Food Sheath
Consciousness: What You Don't Know Might Kill You
Ever ask yourself, "Where does consciousness come from?" Or, "Can consciousness come from an absence of consciousness?" Albeit, not the subject of your everyday discourse, these are still interesting and relevant questions. When inquiring about consciousness a valid qualifying question might be, "What type of consciousness are we talking about?" For example, dreaming consciousness comes from the REM cycle. A medical coma consciousness comes from pharmaceutical drugs. Enlightenment consciousness comes from meditation or some other practiced ability to observe and focus attention. However, when it comes to your physical consciousness, such as how emotional and mentally astute you are and how healthy you are on a cellular level, the answer might surprise you.
The Eastern sciences, such as Indian or Tibetan Ayurveda and Chinese medicine, have a very clear-cut and direct answer to this last aspect of consciousness. These ancient sources of wisdom say that the food you eat is the foundation upon which your emotional, mental and physical well-being is based upon. Ayurveda has a very succinct term for the physical body. It is referred to as the "Food Sheath." They call the physical body that because it requires a myriad of different types of food. It requires oxygen food, light food, physical "tactile" food, hydrating water food and solid alimentary food, all as sources of nourishment. The "Food Sheath" term eliminates all the "judgment" issues from the physical -- no charges about the butt being too big or small, no painful comparisons or emphasis on beauty of any kind. The body is simply the "Food Sheath."
The physical body or "Food Sheath" receives its quality of intelligence from the food you eat. We're not talking brain science or rocket surgery here. If you start your morning by drinking nothing but coffee and eating a donut, then you run around all day, some time in the afternoon you are going to start tanking. You will find it increasingly difficult to focus and concentrate. You will find yourself becoming more and more agitated and impatient when life's daily dose of obstacles smacks you right on your... food sheath. You may experience shaking of the extremities or a headache. You may find your mind easily distracted and unable to remember simple details: Where are my glasses, keys or cell phone?
As stated in age-old philosophy and co-opted by the high-tech world, "garbage in; garbage out." That's because a calorie is not a calorie. The quality of your energy comes directly from the quality of the food/fuel you take in. Now Ayurveda goes deeper with this understanding than may initially seem self-evident. For example, if you eat a lot of foods that have been grown to produce no seeds, such as some types of oranges or watermelon, over time, that could compromise your body's fertility. After all what are seeds? They are highly concentrated forms of fertility consciousness/energy. Bear in mind these types of food would have to be pervasive in your diet and you would have to be exposed to these fertility-sterilized forms of foods consistently for prolonged periods of time. It is unlikely anyone is going to eat that much seedless fruits with no diversity. But what if all crop seeds were sterile? Would that change the dynamics?
With that in mind, let's now look at a pervasive form of food that we have all been exposed to for a prolonged period of time: GMOs. Genetically modified food organisms. Even though GMOs are foods that have been genetically injected with extremely poisonous material, the FDA in its infinite wisdom has declared that these foods do not require any testing whatsoever. In fact, the FDA has never done any testing on them! Monsanto has been legally, genetically poisoning our food supply for decades. It's no surprise that wildlife such as migrating birds will not touch a single kernel of GMO corn when growing side by side a crop of non-GMO corn. In fact no animal, other than humans, when given a choice, will consume a GMO food.
These animals intuitively know what Ayurveda and Chinese Medicine teach: Food is your first wave of either medicine or poison. When you eat foods that are packed with Chi, life force energy, your mind, body and emotions are energized. When you eat foods that are packed with antioxidants, your immune system becomes stronger and empowered to destroy free radicals, because that is where the consciousness that directs the body comes from. Conversely, when you eat foods that have been genetically altered to contain chemicals that are designed to kill and destroy life, how can that have a positive affect on your energy?
In addition to the GMO nightmare, Monsanto has produced "terminator seeds." These are seeds especially designed to die after one crop. They carry a sterilized energy that does not allow another generation of plants to grow. Why? Money. The farmer has to go back to Monsanto each and every growing season for more seeds, so Monsanto's profits have increased accordingly. It is pure and simple greed, even though the planet destroying consequences of this greed are neither pure nor simple.
How can Monsanto get away with poisoning our food supply? You may find it interesting to know that many high level FDA people are former Monsanto employees. And, that's right; you guessed it. Incestuously many of the upper level Monsanto employees are former FDA staff. Well, maybe it isn't interesting. Pathetic may be closer to the truth. We have the best politicians money can buy.
Most people are unaware of these healing sciences that have survived scrutiny for thousand of years. What they have to say about the quality of consciousness that feeds your health or disease is still relevant in today's world. You need to look no further than cancers, both common and exotic, which are on the rise, or that the rate of obesity and insulin resistant disorders like diabetes have been increasing exponentially. Attention deficit disorders and autism cases seem omnipresent. Isn't it interesting that the expansion of all of these diseases happens to magically correspond to the ever-increasing presence of GMO's in the American diet.
If you are thinking, "Oh, but I'm not eating GMOs," think again. You probably are; you just don't know it. Since the FDA has declared that foods containing GMOs do not have to be labeled as such, you are not informed that the food you are consuming is toxic. If you are not eating organic foods exclusively, if you are eating or drinking anything with high fructose corn syrup (sodas, ketchup, fruit juices), corn, soybeans, cottonseed, sugar beets, canola oil, most fast food meals or pre-packaged processed foods from large food corporations, you are most likely eating GMOs. For more information please visit: http://www.nongmoshoppingguide.com/tips-for-avoiding-gmos.html.
What you may have become painfully aware of is that you are fatigued all the time. You may have noticed that you having a harder time concentrating or remembering things. You may have observed an increase in health issues or poor sleep. You may have sensed that the consciousness of the body is off in some way but have not yet connected all the dots. All of these are profound reasons to examine what you are consuming that is feeding the quality of consciousness that governs your human experience.
Socrates once commented, "The unexamined life is not worth living." If he were alive today, his consciousness cry might be, "The unexamined diet is not worth eating."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/vaishali/gmo-seeds-food_b_1031515.html
Ever ask yourself, "Where does consciousness come from?" Or, "Can consciousness come from an absence of consciousness?" Albeit, not the subject of your everyday discourse, these are still interesting and relevant questions. When inquiring about consciousness a valid qualifying question might be, "What type of consciousness are we talking about?" For example, dreaming consciousness comes from the REM cycle. A medical coma consciousness comes from pharmaceutical drugs. Enlightenment consciousness comes from meditation or some other practiced ability to observe and focus attention. However, when it comes to your physical consciousness, such as how emotional and mentally astute you are and how healthy you are on a cellular level, the answer might surprise you.
The Eastern sciences, such as Indian or Tibetan Ayurveda and Chinese medicine, have a very clear-cut and direct answer to this last aspect of consciousness. These ancient sources of wisdom say that the food you eat is the foundation upon which your emotional, mental and physical well-being is based upon. Ayurveda has a very succinct term for the physical body. It is referred to as the "Food Sheath." They call the physical body that because it requires a myriad of different types of food. It requires oxygen food, light food, physical "tactile" food, hydrating water food and solid alimentary food, all as sources of nourishment. The "Food Sheath" term eliminates all the "judgment" issues from the physical -- no charges about the butt being too big or small, no painful comparisons or emphasis on beauty of any kind. The body is simply the "Food Sheath."
The physical body or "Food Sheath" receives its quality of intelligence from the food you eat. We're not talking brain science or rocket surgery here. If you start your morning by drinking nothing but coffee and eating a donut, then you run around all day, some time in the afternoon you are going to start tanking. You will find it increasingly difficult to focus and concentrate. You will find yourself becoming more and more agitated and impatient when life's daily dose of obstacles smacks you right on your... food sheath. You may experience shaking of the extremities or a headache. You may find your mind easily distracted and unable to remember simple details: Where are my glasses, keys or cell phone?
As stated in age-old philosophy and co-opted by the high-tech world, "garbage in; garbage out." That's because a calorie is not a calorie. The quality of your energy comes directly from the quality of the food/fuel you take in. Now Ayurveda goes deeper with this understanding than may initially seem self-evident. For example, if you eat a lot of foods that have been grown to produce no seeds, such as some types of oranges or watermelon, over time, that could compromise your body's fertility. After all what are seeds? They are highly concentrated forms of fertility consciousness/energy. Bear in mind these types of food would have to be pervasive in your diet and you would have to be exposed to these fertility-sterilized forms of foods consistently for prolonged periods of time. It is unlikely anyone is going to eat that much seedless fruits with no diversity. But what if all crop seeds were sterile? Would that change the dynamics?
With that in mind, let's now look at a pervasive form of food that we have all been exposed to for a prolonged period of time: GMOs. Genetically modified food organisms. Even though GMOs are foods that have been genetically injected with extremely poisonous material, the FDA in its infinite wisdom has declared that these foods do not require any testing whatsoever. In fact, the FDA has never done any testing on them! Monsanto has been legally, genetically poisoning our food supply for decades. It's no surprise that wildlife such as migrating birds will not touch a single kernel of GMO corn when growing side by side a crop of non-GMO corn. In fact no animal, other than humans, when given a choice, will consume a GMO food.
These animals intuitively know what Ayurveda and Chinese Medicine teach: Food is your first wave of either medicine or poison. When you eat foods that are packed with Chi, life force energy, your mind, body and emotions are energized. When you eat foods that are packed with antioxidants, your immune system becomes stronger and empowered to destroy free radicals, because that is where the consciousness that directs the body comes from. Conversely, when you eat foods that have been genetically altered to contain chemicals that are designed to kill and destroy life, how can that have a positive affect on your energy?
In addition to the GMO nightmare, Monsanto has produced "terminator seeds." These are seeds especially designed to die after one crop. They carry a sterilized energy that does not allow another generation of plants to grow. Why? Money. The farmer has to go back to Monsanto each and every growing season for more seeds, so Monsanto's profits have increased accordingly. It is pure and simple greed, even though the planet destroying consequences of this greed are neither pure nor simple.
How can Monsanto get away with poisoning our food supply? You may find it interesting to know that many high level FDA people are former Monsanto employees. And, that's right; you guessed it. Incestuously many of the upper level Monsanto employees are former FDA staff. Well, maybe it isn't interesting. Pathetic may be closer to the truth. We have the best politicians money can buy.
Most people are unaware of these healing sciences that have survived scrutiny for thousand of years. What they have to say about the quality of consciousness that feeds your health or disease is still relevant in today's world. You need to look no further than cancers, both common and exotic, which are on the rise, or that the rate of obesity and insulin resistant disorders like diabetes have been increasing exponentially. Attention deficit disorders and autism cases seem omnipresent. Isn't it interesting that the expansion of all of these diseases happens to magically correspond to the ever-increasing presence of GMO's in the American diet.
If you are thinking, "Oh, but I'm not eating GMOs," think again. You probably are; you just don't know it. Since the FDA has declared that foods containing GMOs do not have to be labeled as such, you are not informed that the food you are consuming is toxic. If you are not eating organic foods exclusively, if you are eating or drinking anything with high fructose corn syrup (sodas, ketchup, fruit juices), corn, soybeans, cottonseed, sugar beets, canola oil, most fast food meals or pre-packaged processed foods from large food corporations, you are most likely eating GMOs. For more information please visit: http://www.nongmoshoppingguide.com/tips-for-avoiding-gmos.html.
What you may have become painfully aware of is that you are fatigued all the time. You may have noticed that you having a harder time concentrating or remembering things. You may have observed an increase in health issues or poor sleep. You may have sensed that the consciousness of the body is off in some way but have not yet connected all the dots. All of these are profound reasons to examine what you are consuming that is feeding the quality of consciousness that governs your human experience.
Socrates once commented, "The unexamined life is not worth living." If he were alive today, his consciousness cry might be, "The unexamined diet is not worth eating."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/vaishali/gmo-seeds-food_b_1031515.html
AIDS-free generation
Hillary Clinton Says U.S. Aims to Wipe Out AIDS
WASHINGTON -- The United States will, for the first time, make it a policy goal to have an "AIDS-free generation" in the near future, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced.
The administration's new AIDS-free generation goal will focus on "combination prevention strategy," combining three interventions that have been proven to slow the spread of the disease: ending mother-to-child transmissions; expanding voluntary male circumcision; and making greater use of antiretroviral medications.
Scientist now have a better understanding of the virus that has infected 60 million people and killed nearly 30 million since the first case of HIV was reported in 1981. And that better understanding of a once-mysterious virus makes it an achievable goal to eradicate AIDS, Clinton said during an event at National Institutes of Health (NIH) on Tuesday.
"HIV may be with us well into the future, but the disease that it causes need not be," Clinton said.
She outlined the three main areas of focus for the government's AIDS-free generation plan.
Prevention of mother-to-child transmissions, which are responsible for one in seven new infections worldwide -- it's already a global goal of the President's Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) to eliminate new infections in babies by 2015
Increase rates of voluntary male circumcision -- the procedure has been shown to reduce the risk of female-to-male transmission by more than 60%
Use treatment to prevent new infections -- recent studies show that treating HIV-positive patients with anti-retroviral drugs helps reduce transmission of the virus to a non-infected partner by 96%
Clinton said the U.S. government would commit an additional $60 million beyond the $50 million it's already spent to explore which prevention tactics work best in sub-Saharan Africa, where AIDS is the leading cause of death.
In 2003, when President George W. Bush signed the PEPFAR legislation, only 50,000 people in sub-Saharan Africa were receiving anti-retroviral drugs. Today, more than five million sub-Saharan Africans receive the drugs, along with another one million people in other regions of the world. Most of those drugs are paid for by the U.S., either through PEPFAR or through the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria.
Speaking with MedPage Today after Clinton's speech, Anthony Fauci, MD, director of the NIH's National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said he thought an AIDS-free generation was an achievable goal, especially in light of the relatively recent findings from the HPTN 052 trial that, in heterosexual discordant couples, if the HIV-positive partner is treated with antiretrovirals it "remarkably diminishes" the likelihood of infecting the HIV-negative partner.
"Within a reasonable amount of time, we could have an AIDS-free generation," he said.
Another physician in the audience, Thomas Quinn, MD, director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Global Health, said that science achieved a "home run" with the HPTN 052 trial, but the challenge is convincing policymakers to fund scientifically-proven interventions. But Clinton's message convinced him that at least one policymaker is sure that ramping up the nation's effort to combat HIV is something that needs to be done.
"Science here has led to a policy change," he said.
By Emily P. Walker, Washington Correspondent, MedPage Today
Published: November 09, 2011
WASHINGTON -- The United States will, for the first time, make it a policy goal to have an "AIDS-free generation" in the near future, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced.
The administration's new AIDS-free generation goal will focus on "combination prevention strategy," combining three interventions that have been proven to slow the spread of the disease: ending mother-to-child transmissions; expanding voluntary male circumcision; and making greater use of antiretroviral medications.
Scientist now have a better understanding of the virus that has infected 60 million people and killed nearly 30 million since the first case of HIV was reported in 1981. And that better understanding of a once-mysterious virus makes it an achievable goal to eradicate AIDS, Clinton said during an event at National Institutes of Health (NIH) on Tuesday.
"HIV may be with us well into the future, but the disease that it causes need not be," Clinton said.
She outlined the three main areas of focus for the government's AIDS-free generation plan.
Prevention of mother-to-child transmissions, which are responsible for one in seven new infections worldwide -- it's already a global goal of the President's Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) to eliminate new infections in babies by 2015
Increase rates of voluntary male circumcision -- the procedure has been shown to reduce the risk of female-to-male transmission by more than 60%
Use treatment to prevent new infections -- recent studies show that treating HIV-positive patients with anti-retroviral drugs helps reduce transmission of the virus to a non-infected partner by 96%
Clinton said the U.S. government would commit an additional $60 million beyond the $50 million it's already spent to explore which prevention tactics work best in sub-Saharan Africa, where AIDS is the leading cause of death.
In 2003, when President George W. Bush signed the PEPFAR legislation, only 50,000 people in sub-Saharan Africa were receiving anti-retroviral drugs. Today, more than five million sub-Saharan Africans receive the drugs, along with another one million people in other regions of the world. Most of those drugs are paid for by the U.S., either through PEPFAR or through the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria.
Speaking with MedPage Today after Clinton's speech, Anthony Fauci, MD, director of the NIH's National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said he thought an AIDS-free generation was an achievable goal, especially in light of the relatively recent findings from the HPTN 052 trial that, in heterosexual discordant couples, if the HIV-positive partner is treated with antiretrovirals it "remarkably diminishes" the likelihood of infecting the HIV-negative partner.
"Within a reasonable amount of time, we could have an AIDS-free generation," he said.
Another physician in the audience, Thomas Quinn, MD, director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Global Health, said that science achieved a "home run" with the HPTN 052 trial, but the challenge is convincing policymakers to fund scientifically-proven interventions. But Clinton's message convinced him that at least one policymaker is sure that ramping up the nation's effort to combat HIV is something that needs to be done.
"Science here has led to a policy change," he said.
By Emily P. Walker, Washington Correspondent, MedPage Today
Published: November 09, 2011
Sunday, November 6, 2011
Ten tips on getting recruited abroad
At the recent Naturejobs Career Expo in London, Michael Schneider from Imperial College London spoke about how to maximise your chances of getting recruited overseas. Schneider, currently director of Imperial's British Heart Foundation Centre of Research Excellence, studied at Harvard, the University of Pennsylvania, and Duke, followed by research training at the US National Institutes of Health (NIH). In our final follow-up to the Expo we present a summary of his advice - if you have any tips to share, please add them below.
If you're at an early stage of your science career, be aware that a strong academic record is not enough to secure a position abroad. "Posts go to those with something more [than excellent qualifications]," says Schneider.
Early research experience is the key discriminator - and it should be sustained or unusually intensive.
If you're still studying, find high-impact summer and winter research opportunities - examples that Schneider highlighted include the Erasmus student exchange programme in Europe and the Cold Spring Harbor Undergraduate Research Program (URP) in the United States.
You'll need to make personal contacts with overseas scientists - and email is generally the best way to make initial speculative enquiries with overseas labs.
Don't focus exclusively on the usual suspects - in the United States for example, Schneider says there are at least a dozen universities where mentors are as good as at prestigious institutes such as Harvard, MIT, University of California and Stanford - but there is less competition because they are less well-known.
Try to have complete research 'stories' - and be aware that for this reason completing a three-year PhD can put you at a disadvantage against those whose PhDs typically last longer, such as in the United States.
Fund yourself if possible.
Carefully check the eligibility criteria of funding opportunities - for example the US NIH only offers postdoc fellowships to US citizens, with one exception, says Schneider - the Pathway to Independence Award (K99-R00) is open to overseas applicants.
When considering a career move, vertical promotion - where you move up within the same institution - can be counter-productive, says Schneider: "Research funders typically prefer to see relocation as proof of independence."
When considering who to apply to, make sure you check where your potential superior publishes, and also where their trainees have gone afterwards.
http://blogs.nature.com/naturejobs/2011/11/02/ten-tips-on-getting-recruited-abroad?WT.ec_id=NATUREjobs-20111103
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)