2013-05-23T05:44:35-04:00 Jason Tetro http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/author/index.php?author=jason-tetro Copyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for Jason Tetro Good old fashioned elbow grease. tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.3303423 2013-05-19T21:03:14-04:00 2013-05-19T23:57:46-04:00

Jason Tetro http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-tetro/
Unfortunately, the escape comes with its own challenges, namely that of infections.

All microbes require water and many of the pathogens that cause us grief find a very happy home in the same waters we use to keep ourselves cool and refreshed. Studies have explored the risks associated with taking a dip either at the beach or at swimming pools and fountains and to no surprise, there is an increase in the prevalence of gastrointestinal infections, primarily stomach aches and diarrhea. The main culprits are familiar to us including E. coli, Campylobacter, and norovirus -- and are easily linked to the always infamous fecal-oral route. It's a standard means of spread and despite the fact that it may bring up some rather disgusting mental images, happens more often than many might think.

To prove this, the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention released a study this week where they examined the microbiological quality of swimming pool filters. They looked at 161 samples and found that well over half of them had evidence of E. coli and other infectious agents including the parasitic infections Giardia and Cryptosporidium. The overall risk was dependent on the rate of pool disinfection and bather density, which is based on the practices of the pool owners. However, there was one well-known factor that pointed the finger on the bathers themselves: their hygiene.

The CDC mentions in the paper that while many people do their best to keep their nether regions clean, without a proper shower and soaping before heading into the water, there can be an average of 0.14 g of fecal matter lingering around; that number could be quite higher if the bather is already suffering from diarrhea. That small amount can be washed off in the water, contaminating the pool. Depending on the level of infection, billions of pathogens could end up in the water. The concentration would no doubt be diluted but in the case of norovirus, Campylobacter and E. coli O157:H7, where only a handful of organisms are needed to cause infection, the results could be disastrous.

There are obviously ways to decrease the chances for infection. The first is fairly obvious: don't swim if you are sick. Another reasonable piece of advice is to avoid drinking the water. If ingestion of microbes is prevented, so is the infection. The others require a little more diligence on the part of the bathers to help protect themselves and others. The above-mentioned pre-bathing shower is highly recommended for anyone heading into the waters, even if they contain high levels of chlorine or antimicrobial salts. Also, a shower after a visit to the water is a good way to prevent any lingering germs from getting onto fingers and eventually into the mouth.

Despite the relative simplicity of these rules, they are obviously not being followed. Back in 2008, the State of Utah attempted to find out just how much the public knew about safe swimming. Not surprisingly, most understood the need to stay out of the water when sick and to take those showers before and after. But those numbers were reduced significantly when the questions turned to the nature of the pools themselves. In particular, almost half of the nearly five hundred people taking part believed that the responsibility for the prevention of infection lied squarely on facility management. This suggested that the participants were less likely to assume responsibility and assume that any deviations from personal hygiene would be taken care of by the pool owners.

As a result of these studies and complications, the CDC has developed an entire website devoted to healthy swimming. Their hope is that people will take these recommendations and put them not only to memory, but also to practice. Unfortunately, even the Utah study admitted many of the participants were most likely contravening the rules, even though they knew them. Call it summer brain or rugged individualism, there is little doubt that many of your fellow swimmers will continue to eschew the rules and act as if the swimming pool or beach is their own personal paradise for the enjoying and the polluting.

Yet, there is hope. By understanding the risks and then adhering to these rules, everyone can avoid the consequences of infection and enjoy their swim. More importantly, we can also be assured that those who follow will also have fun and stay safe.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.3263327 2013-05-13T07:52:25-04:00 2013-05-13T07:52:33-04:00

Jason Tetro http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-tetro/ most of us will experience a sense of discomfort in the lower back . It can be acute, lasting only a few days to weeks, or chronic, lasting months or years. Depending on the severity, it could be little more than an annoyance or a completely debilitating condition. Medical professionals have been working for over 80 years to identify the causes of this ailment and find ways to improve the lives of those who suffer because of it. Most research has focused on physiological associations, but over the last few decades, other causes have been identified including cancer, changes in immune function, and diet.

Now there appears to be another culprit in the development of lower back pain: acne.

The main bacterium involved in the formation of acne is Proprionibacterium acnes; it is known for causing those unsightly bumps on the skin. Yet researchers have learned that the bacteria can also be found inside the body and over time spread internally where it can grow and cause chronic problems such as heart disease, brain abscesses, and prostate cancer. In 2005, P. acnes was found to be associated with chronic lower back pain after routine back surgery. This intriguing result started a search for the bacteria in other medical conditions, and soon sciatica and spinal disc inflammation were also added to the list.

With this information in hand, in 2008, a team out of the University of Southern Denmark led by Dr. Hanne B. Albert decided to take the infection angle as a given and treat a small group of lower back pain sufferers with antibiotics. The results were quite surprising: Over 60% of the patients showed improvement in their condition. The treatment also appeared to have long term effects, as there was no relapse of the condition after 14 months. The results suggested that bacterial infection might play a larger role than expected, and the team put together a clinical trial to determine the potential for this route of treatment.

Now, five years later, the answers from that trial are finally being revealed in a landmark paper in the European Spine Journal. The team investigated whether the use of antibiotics would either improve or cure the condition. A separate group of 90 individuals out of 162 were given antibiotics and then investigated for improvement in lower back pain after one year. There was a significant improvement in back pain in over half of those given antibiotics and of them, 30% no longer suffered after one year. In comparison, a control group, who received a placebo, saw minimal improvement and only a 6% resolution of all back pain complaints. While the results were not as impressive as expected, the use of antibiotics was helpful in the majority of cases.

Both studies by Dr. Albert offer hope that a new direction in lower back pain treatment may be possible. However, this does not mean that everyone who suffers from this ailment needs to be treated with medication. In almost all instances, the diagnosis of lower back pain had to be made after an MRI test; these were long term sufferers with literally no other options. In addition, 45% of those enlisted had undergone some form of lumbar surgery, which could have allowed the bacteria to enter the spinal cord. Yet despite these limitations, there was little doubt that antibiotics were effective.

There is definitely enough evidence to suggest medical professionals may soon have one more weapon in their arsenal against chronic lower back pain. However, the path towards antibiotic use may not be as easy as making a routine visit to the general practitioner as it is with other ailments. We currently live in an era of antimicrobial resistance and there is a push towards the use of less antibiotics -- and even then, only when needed. This stewardship is based on a number of thresholds that have to be met before an antibiotic is prescribed.

Thanks to the work of Dr. Albert, these criteria, including long-term ailment with little sign of improvement, prior MRI examination, medical history of surgery, and the presence of face and body acne, are now known. For those who have met these criteria, there may be benefit to using antibiotics -- and probiotics to prevent a transfer from lower back pain to lower intestinal diarrheal distress. For those who have yet to reach this brink of burden, more traditional routes are recommended, including heat and/or ice, anti-inflammatories, and, of course, rest.

]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.3204491 2013-05-03T12:33:34-04:00 2013-05-03T12:33:38-04:00

Jason Tetro http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-tetro/ a collection of sermons from a University of Oxford professor, John Hales, was published under the enigmatic title, "The Golden Remains of the ever memorable Mr. John Hales." Deep inside the 1688 third impression of the book -- it was a bestseller in its time -- a passage appears:

"Suppose ye unto your selves some such Man as Epictetus was, let him have all Graces that are, Piety, on excepted, let him wear out himself with Studies, pine himself with Temperance, keep his Hands clean from Corruption, his Heart from unchaste Desires."

The words were so strong that the term was adopted to describe a person who was right and just and caused no harm to others. In many sectors, this term is still preferred over its nasal counterpart.

One such group is the World Health Organization although their perspective on the meaning involves an entirely different sort of corruption.

On May 5th, the WHO will be celebrating its annual SAVE LIVES: Clean Your Hands day to mark its campaign to help save lives from infections in healthcare. The celebration is less of a party and more of a pledge whereby individuals, facilities and governments take on the responsibility to do their best to help improve patient safety and prevent an already unpleasant experience worse. The program is still not as widely known as John Hales' sermons were but the momentum is growing.

In 2013, there is a new twist to the campaign. Instead of solely focusing on health care, the WHO is hoping to spread the message to everyone to not only raise awareness, but also to help change the way we all look at hand hygiene and how important it is to our lives.

The WHO has reason for taking this approach. Back in 2010, a review of the burden of healthcare associated infections revealed that up to 15% of all patients suffer some type of infection as a result of care. That number varied from country to country but was still startling. By looking further into the reason for this problem, there was a clear association between infections and the rate of hand hygiene amongst healthcare workers. While the association between infections and having clean hands had been known there was little indication that it could have been this bad.

When the reasons for such poor adherence to hand hygiene were identified last year, there was little doubt that the problems were not due to lack of knowledge, but behaviour. To make the situation worse, that behaviour trumped any intervention -- there was simply a psychological barrier in place.

As anyone who has tried to change someone's behaviour knows, it cannot be done well through simple individual interventions. This has to be done through a mass movement. For the WHO, this meant getting the word out into the community and the public in the hopes that they would know about healthcare acquired infections, the link to hand hygiene and the push to adhere to John Hales' advice.

The efforts have been somewhat successful as public organizations from all the over the world at taking part. Their efforts will be centred on keeping the pressure on healthcare to ensure hand hygiene is kept at the forefront of the mindset and the action. The movement appears to be working as the doctors of tomorrow have heard the message and ascribing the importance of hand hygiene. Compliance is going up and infection rates in many areas are going down.

Yet, more can always be done, especially at home. After all, up to 80 per cent of infections can still be transmitted by the hands and in many cases of infections, such as MRSA, norovirus and influenza, most cases are secondary, that is, were caught from someone else. There's little doubt that here is a place for hand hygiene in the home and especially out in public.

If you also care about keeping your hands clean and keeping those around you free from a microbial corruption, then you too can play a role. Thankfully, unlike the requirements of healthcare institutions, the best way to show your support is not to take a pledge.

Rather, on May 5th, take a moment to wash your hands -- or use hand sanitizer -- and then tell someone about it. It may lead to a rather odd reaction but in the larger picture, not only will you be helping to spread the word but you'll also be helping to not spread the infections.

]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.3127654 2013-04-30T08:18:47-04:00 2013-04-30T08:40:42-04:00

Jason Tetro http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-tetro/ dropped significantly. One of the causes of this decline is the new reality of increasing gas prices; a trend that appears to have no end. This has sparked a revolution by both the American and Canadian governments to spur biofuels technology and attain a cleaner, safer - and hopefully less expensive gas supply.

For many microbiologists, this has turned into a windfall as they turn to germs to keep the momentum going.

The use of germs to produce biofuels has been in exploration since the mid-1990s but only in the last seven years has the concept - and the technology - taken off. The concept is quite simple: identify microbes that have the potential to create the precursors of gasoline and other fuels, grow them up in large quantities in large fermenters, and then collect the byproducts for future use. It's a technology that has been in place for other important products such as insulin and penicillin.

But while the process is fairly straightforward, finding the right organisms to perform the job is a more difficult task. The diversity of bacteria, fungi and algae is so great that the identification of one particular species or strain has been a challenge for many researchers. Over the years, widespread searches of the globe, from the oceans to grasslands to the depths of Antarctica have uncovered several microbes with the potential to develop biofuels. But a greater treasure trove of germs ready to take on the role of gas price droppers lies much closer to home and in a place most of us have either seen or smelled.

The cow rumen is known to house a vast array of environmental bacteria and fungi and many are very good producers of methane and at one time were considered to be a contributor to climate change. A number of scientists have since examined the microbial makeup of the bovine gastrointestinal tract and found that in addition to these methane producers, there were a host of germs that could produce the precursors for biofuels as well as hydrogen, a future fuel for cars.

Blog continues after slideshow



But cows are not alone in their ability to produce microbial biofuel engineers. Earlier this week, a group out of the University of California, Santa Barbara found that horses may be able to help human move without the need for a saddle.

The team, led by Dr. Michelle O'Malley found that the horse rumen is also a great place to look for fuel production. Moreover, she may have found a key to an even better, faster and cheaper process. While their research has only been shared at a scientific meeting the results have been quite dramatic. The main focus was a fungus that has the ability to degrade cellulose and produce simple sugars for the horse and also biofuel precursors, including hydrogen, as byproducts.

What makes this work so fascinating in comparison to other biofuels work is that the fungus best produces these byproducts in an environment that is void of oxygen. As most germs prefer to have an oxygen-rich environment, this trait of the fungus can enable a more pure culture development and an easier fermentation process without the worry of contamination. This could make the cost of production even cheaper. Also, considering the flammability of oxygen, any work in its absence would be considered safer.

The field of microbial biofuel production is a new one but its growth continues at a relatively fast pace. In the next decade, a new breed of microbial factories will undoubtedly surface in which the workers will not be humans or robots, but microscopic entities eating away at nutrients and pumping out useful molecules for fuel. But to all of us, the real hope of this work will be a streamlined process for the production of the commodities we so dearly need, and hopefully, lower gas prices.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.3080669 2013-04-15T00:00:02-04:00 2013-04-14T23:19:17-04:00

Jason Tetro http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-tetro/ academic courses and even graduate theses. His books are almost guaranteed to make the bestseller list but only a few have become legendary, sticking in the memories of those who have read his fictionalized passages and the curiosity of those who have yet to read his tomes.

His books also have a striking similarity to strains of the flu and how they affect public health.

Each year, the influenzavirus circles around the globe, infecting between five and 15% of the global population, causing millions to suffer from the classical symptoms of respiratory problems, fever, chills and aches.

Sadly, between 250,000 and 500,000 individuals die. These viruses, which usually take the names H1N1 or H3N2 are known as seasonal strains. They have a bestseller -- or best infecter -- status as they occupy our worries and the headlines for a short period of time, usually around the fall and winter months but then with the coming of summer, disappear from the public mindset.

Occasionally, a new strain emerges with an unexpected ferocity leading to unspeakable consequences. These iconic strains, more appropriately coined best killers, can lead to fear and even panic amongst the masses. The most renowned of these is the 1918 strain of influenza, the Spanish flu. This version of the virus led to between 20-50 million deaths and sent the entire world into a panic not seen since the days of the Black Plague, which was killing at a rate of 200 people per day. The effect on humanity was immense and was akin to turning the fiction of one of King's greatest works, The Stand, into reality.

More recently, the pandemic of 2009, caused by the ignobly named Swine Flu also took the world by storm although its effect was significantly less dramatic. While this strain kept the public worry high for over a year, when all the analysis was completed, it had done little more than a best-infecter. As such, it has all but disappeared from the public discussion while 1918 continues to spark engaging conversation -- at least amongst microbiologists.

Now a new set of flu strains have emerged, revolutionizing the way we look at these viruses. Rather than being one-time bestsellers or gaining that ever elusive legendary status, these strains have relatively little impact on public health yet somehow manage to sustain their prevalence in the public eye; they are best persisters. Like King's Carrie, which seems to pop up every decade and maintain its status as a book to be read and remembered, these particular strains become household names though they not as striking as their seasonal or pandemic counterparts.

The benchmark was H5N1, which appeared in Hong Kong in 1997 and led to 18 infections and 6 deaths. The virus was not only new, it was unexpected and caught the world by surprise. Thankfully, the virus could not be spread from person to person, making the likelihood of a killer pandemic unlikely.

Over the last 16 years, however, H5N1 has made sporadic appearances worldwide, killing only a handful of people at any given time. Yet each appearance brings back the media and the worry. While there is no reason for panic, the concern remains at a steady level as we wait to see whether this persister will eventually become a killer.

Now another new strain of influenza has emerged, H7N9, which at the moment is proving to be a potential best killer. The epidemic, which is centred in the eastern areas of China is continuing with dozens of confirmed cases, and about 20% perishing. The numbers are expected to rise as is the general panic in the public.

But this reaction may be far too premature and H7N9 may have a different fate. There are few indications that this strain will lead to a pandemic highlighted by the fact that there are no confirmed cases of human to human transmission, much like H5N1. Without this ability, there can be no pandemic. As we are seeing right now, there exists an opportunity for officials to work together to stop the tide before the situation gets worse. And it is exactly what they are doing with relative success. Within a month, the H7N9 epidemic may be a thing of the past.

However, that doesn't mean that H7N9 is gone for good. This virus also has all the markings of a best persister. Much like H5N1, infections appear to be linked to migratory birds . If this is the case, then the virus will most likely spread to Hong Kong and eventually to other countries including Vietnam, Indonesia and Egypt. The cases will most likely be sporadic and not lead to a large number of infections or deaths but because of its potential, it will occupy the headlines and citizen concern for years and maybe decades to come.

Much like any new offering from Stephen King, which requires time to determine its place in his legacy, the new H7N9 flu requires more than just a few weeks to determine its place in the historical records of infectious disease.

While at this time, the trend appears to be that of a best persister, things could change quite rapidly and we could be facing a new best-killer. However, one thing is certain: much like the New York Times Best Sellers list, which tracks and lists the literary hits of our time, we can always turn to the World Health Organization to help us better understand the impact of H7N9 or any other infectious disease breakout so that we are not only aware but also prepared for whatever possible horror novelty may come our way.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2988937 2013-04-01T12:00:00-04:00 2013-04-01T12:43:51-04:00

Jason Tetro http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-tetro/ infancy, adulthood , and even old age. Paralleling this increase in knowledge, however, has been the realization that foods are not produced equally and a risk exists for infection. In Canada and the United States the safety of food has become a priority and they remain vigilant to stay on top of any potential microbial threat.

There's no wonder that germs and food are considered to be as incompatible as oil and water.

One of the most problematic sources of trouble has been fresh produce. Unlike meats and other processed foods, which can be made safe through cooking, most fruits and vegetables are eaten in their natural raw state. The germs that happen to be on them are ingested with every bite and then make their way through the gut. Most of the times, there is little impact but in the cases where a pathogen might be lurking, the results can be disastrous.

In the last few years alone, there have been widespread outbreaks of infection due to the consumption of a number of fresh vegetables and fruits including lettuce, spinach, tomatoes, cantaloupes, and mangoes. What's worse is that this list is probably not as extensive as it should be; most foodborne infections are not reported and as a result go unnoticed.

However, there is a different perspective on germs and fresh produce that has been under the radar. From a collection of studies looking at the link between diet and the human microbiome there appears to be a benefit to eating raw produce -- a healthier and happier gut. The healthiest microbial populations come from individuals who eat a significant amount of vegetables and fruit.

Those who consistently eat high fat and sugar diets have higher numbers of bacteria known to cause inflammation and other downstream problems including obesity, diabetes, and other chronic diseases. The evidence is fairly clear that eating fruits and vegetables -- when safe -- lead to better overall health.

But until recently, there had been a question lingering about the actual source of the good bacteria. Were they normally in the gut and simply given a better opportunity to grow thanks to the nutrients coming from these natural foods? Or were the foods themselves acting as a source of these good germs?

The answer came earlier this week when Drs. Jonathan Leff and Noah Firer at the University of Colorado, Boulder, published a research article summarizing their work on determining the nature of bacteria on fruits and vegetables. They took eleven different fruit and vegetable products, including those known to be associated with outbreaks such as lettuce, spinach and tomatoes and identified the various bacteria on each. To make the findings even more interesting, they chose both conventionally grown as well as organically grown samples.

The results, while extensive and complex, revealed that the resident bacteria on these foods were for the most part the same as those found in the healthiest microbiomes. They also found that there was a difference between the conventional and organic farming methods -- although the differences were not as most organic farming supporters might expect. While there was a 64 per cent reduction in the number of potentially pathogenic bacteria known as Enterobacteriaceae there were fewer difference amongst other bacterial families.

This difference could provide support for organic farming as a means to minimize the risk of consumer infection. This has already been shown in animals where a shift to organic could lead to a reduction in potential pathogens and antibiotic resistance. However, these extrapolations need to be proven before they can be adopted.

There can be little doubt that we should be aware of the risks that come with eating fresh fruits and vegetables as there appears to be no end to the outbreaks associated with them. However, the majority of these products are safe and there is no reason to eschew them out of fear of infection.

The human diet requires them to keep the body healthy and now it is clear that the gut needs them to keep the microbiome happy. While this may still not be enough to convince former President George H.W. Bush to eat his broccoli, hopefully it will help others to take a little more time in the produce section or for those looking at a locavore lifestyle, the local farmers market.

]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2944655 2013-03-24T14:14:59-04:00 2013-03-24T23:03:14-04:00

Jason Tetro http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-tetro/ one-fifth of the population is now classified as obese. The explosion in the prevalence of the disease, which is not only characterized by increase body mass but also higher risk for other chronic diseases such as diabetes, cancer, and cardiovascular disease, has both personal and economic consequences. In response, there has been a major focus in research to understand how this condition occurs and more importantly, how to prevent and possibly cure it.

Since the mid-2000s, part of that focus has involved the study of the role of germs in the development and prevention of massive weight gain.

In 2004, the first study to show a link between germs and obesity revealed a surprise: Obesity may not be entirely linked to increased food intake. When mice raised without exposure to germs in their intestines were introduced to the microbiome of normal mice, their weight gain exploded even though they didn't eat more food. A deeper look at the process revealed that certain microbes sent signals from the gut to the liver to start storing fat.

BLOG CONTINUES AFTER SLIDESHOW


While this was an apparent accusation of germs as the cause of weight gain, the tone was tempered based on historical perspective. In a world where food is scarce, this action of germs would be beneficial, but when food is readily available, the microbes don't know any better and perform the same actions, with obesity being an inadvertent consequence. The study suggested that both food intake and the presence of germs in the gut were responsible for weight gain.

A few years later, in 2008, the focus took a turn as other researchers found that obesity was linked to the immune system. The evidence suggested that the work of microbes sending signals to the liver caused inflammation in reaction to the production of fat. This would start a cycle in which the body would continue to store more fat and the inflammation would continue. While the germs may start the fat storage process, the inflammation took it to pathogenic levels.

This revelation opened the door to the investigation of certain microbial species that were known to prevent inflammation. By extrapolation, it was thought that these good germs could help to prevent and possibly resolve the disease. This sparked a hunt for the right microbes to help maintain a healthy body weight and keep inflammation at bay.

Over the last five years, these good bacteria have been identified, and to no one's surprise, most are already known as probiotics. When these bacteria are maintained in the gut, there appears to be -- at least in mice -- a reduction in the levels of inflammation and, as a consequence, a reduction in obesity. In humans, the data is sparse though there has been progress made in revealing that we too may benefit from these good germs.

But earlier this week, a group or researchers based out of the University of Maryland School of Medicine published an article that takes the concept of using germs to combat obesity to the extreme. Instead of using the usual probiotics, the research team investigated the use of the basis of an unappetizing childhood song: worms; or more specifically, a microscopic worm known as a nematode.

Today, nematodes are best known as a natural means to control insects, but in the field of health, they remain an enigma. There are a number of pathogenic worms that can cause burdensome infections with long term consequences. But in the same context of acne, where strain differences can mean the difference between a good and bad germ, several strains of these worms have shown to be beneficial to the human condition. Their magic is based on their ability to control inflammation to ensure that there is no hyperactivity. As a result, these worms have been used to help conditions such as asthma, chronic diarrhea, and inflammatory bowel disease.

The University of Maryland researchers' method was fairly simple: feed both healthy and obese mice a good strain of worm and look for any body weight changes. The results, however, revealed that unlike the study from 2004, which directly linked the gut microbes to the liver, the actual process of weight gain (and loss) required a middleman -- the immune system. When fed the worms, the mice lost weight, but the worms had no effect on the liver. Instead, as expected, the nematodes controlled inflammation; as a consequence, the liver halted the cycle of sending out the signals to store fat.

The data, while both interesting and very preliminary, suggests obesity might very well be an autoimmune condition caused by an imbalance in the microbiota of the gut. Germs, therefore, can be a help or hindrance depending on what resides in the gut and how it affects the immune system. Good germs will help to keep obesity down while bad germs could lead to increased weight gain even without eating more.

Over the coming years, inflammation will continue to be a major focus in obesity research, and options for controlling weight gain -- including probiotics, proper diet and exercise -- will continue to be recommended in the hopes of reversing the current trends. Our understanding of obesity continues to grow and soon we may fully understand how this morbid disease occurs. But even without a proper explanation, the work to stop this epidemic, whether it be germy, wormy or otherwise, will go on.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2896297 2013-03-17T23:10:57-04:00 2013-05-17T05:12:02-04:00

Jason Tetro http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-tetro/ adolescents and up to 5% of the adult population that suffer through them. More colloquially known today as zits, these blemishes have both plagued and perplexed us for centuries. Research has focused on these sudden and for the most part unwanted uprisings, yet only in the last few years has a true cause -- and potential cure -- been found.

Not surprisingly, germs play a distinct role.

The formation of acne is a complicated process and may involve several factors such as overproduction of hormones, an imbalance in the amount of oils on the skin, and even diet. But the actual trigger has been shown to be a bacterium known as Propionibacterium acnes. The bacterium is actually a part of our normal microflora but can overgrow in hair follicles when there is an overabundance of a specific type of molecule known as a triglyceride . The bacteria are then able to grow to large enough numbers to trigger the immune system.

When that fight initiates, the skin and surrounding areas become inflamed, the immediate surroundings are filled with bacteria fighting white blood cells, and the normal process of skin peeling is halted. The overall effect is a bump that continues to grow until the battle is won or the person decides that enough is enough and uses a combination of pressure and friction to push the mass out from under the skin, better known as popping the zit. The latter however is not a recommended choice as damage from the pop may then lead to scarring or worse, other skin infections.

With the cause and process of acne elucidated, there have been a number of solutions marketed to help prevent and also remedy the affliction. Most have been chemically based, however other more involved procedures have been explored including lasers and light therapy as well as chemical peels. Yet in the last few years, there has been a different approach to controlling acne through a natural process of using good germs to control bad ones.

There have been several studies looking at how probiotics can help improve the look and feel of the skin and hair. A rather unique paper looked at how mice appeared to have shinier fur after eating yogurt; another examined the relationship between the gut, brain, and skin health. In light of these studies and others, the cosmetics market has become inundated with products for the face and skin featuring an array of different probiotics. Yet a group of researchers based out of UCLA published an article in Nature last week that took the use of probiotics to an entirely different level.

In this study, the researchers took a closer look not at the usual species of good bacteria, but instead at the different types of P. acnes to see if there were any strains that could be used to help keep the skin safe. They found 10 different categories, known as ribotypes on the skin and of those, three stood out from the rest.

One ribotype, denoted RT6, was associated with healthy skin whereas two others, RT4 and RT5, were heavily involved in the formation of acne. The researchers went on to show that RT6 contained specific elements, awkwardly named Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPRs), which are known to help the immune system fight off infections. Overall, the results suggested that an imbalance of RT4 and 5 might lead to higher incidences of acne while RT6 might be a prime candidate for topical use to help prevent blemishes.

The research is preliminary at best and there needs to be more work on the different ribotypes to learn whether or not acne can be prevented by a probiotic. The authors even state that there are many other factors involved that need to be taken into consideration. But to provide backing to this theory, another paper published last month in PLOS ONE has shown that P. acnes might be useful as a probiotic to prevent other skin infections such as Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).

Over the coming months and years, probiotic creams to improve the look of skin will undoubtedly grow in numbers and reputation. There will be the usual array of adopters and detractors who will either bring a clearer light to the picture or, as with other natural health products, muddy the waters such that no one knows where to turn. However, thanks in part to the Nature study, there is hope that in the not too distant future, medically proven treatments will become available to help those who suffer and perhaps put an end to acne forever.


]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2790423 2013-03-04T08:11:50-05:00 2013-05-04T05:12:01-04:00

Jason Tetro http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-tetro/ numismatists as the Canadian Mint officially stopped distribution of the one-cent coin, the penny. The staple of change purses had been retired and would soon head the path of the $1 and $2 bills. While the reaction from Canadians was mixed, there was a general consensus that the loss, while timely and cost-effective, was still a sad end to a 105-year era.

The moment was also a sombre day for those striving to improve public health.

While the penny's only contribution to an individual's health is presumed to be good luck, there is another rarely known property of the lowly coin. It is a rather effective antimicrobial and can help to keep those fingertips clean.

The active component of pennies is copper, which has the ability to kill certain bacteria, fungi and viruses through contact. The mechanism is relatively simple: copper is a toxic heavy metal and slowly degrades when put into contact with anything that is wet. When the metal is released into an unsuspecting microbe, the consequences can be dire. The ions cause significant stress on the makeup of the cell and over time, cause it to either break apart or simply give up the will to live. It won't make a surface -- or your skin -- sterile, but it can definitely help to keep the burden of bacteria low.

The effects were first discovered by the agricultural industry back in the 1940s and were soon implemented to help prevent microbial spoiling of plants and fruits. The use of a particular mix of copper and sulphur, better known as copper sulphate, is a regular part of the winemaking process and may also help prevent lameness in livestock caused by a condition known as footrot. But it wasn't until the turn of the millennium when the true antimicrobial value of copper -- and the penny -- became apparent.

Ten years ago, there was a concerted effort to identify novel ways to prevent the spread of infections in the hospital environment. Regular cleaning and disinfection was the norm but a group of researchers were more interested in looking at alternate, passive means to kill these sometimes deadly pathogens. By taking surfaces made primarily of copper, they tested whether they could kill bacteria such as the number one foodborne illness, Campylobacter, the always troublesome methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), the sometimes deadly Clostridium difficile and even the new antibiotic resistance bacteria known as Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae, more easily called CRE.

The results were promising in almost all cases and soon there was a push towards the use of copper surfaces in hospitals to help prevent against the transmission of infectious disease. The copper industry even sought and gained the approval from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to officially call such surfaces antimicrobial. The influence of copper has become so popular that there is now interest in using copper-impregnated fabrics and textiles to help reduce the potential for infection during daily life.

But alas, while the microbicidal wonders of cooper continue to flourish, there is little that can be done for the penny. While the potential to help prevent infections is now a given, there is simply no way to convince the Mint to bring back the penny on the grounds of improved health. Besides, despite all the news promoting copper, there is one unfortunate drawback that may kill the penny's chances altogether.

In all of the studies where copper surfaces demonstrate an ability to kill germs, the surface was always clean and pristine. In fact, the only way that copper has any significant effect is when the surface is cleaned regularly. For something as ubiquitous as the common penny, this realization is all but a death knell to any chances of making a comeback. While hospitals and other institutions have cleaning and disinfection staff to keep their copper active, there is no such mechanism to help the coin -- its time is therefore certainly over.

Yet there is a chance to hold onto not just the memory but also the benefits of the forsaken denomination. Rather than store the coins in piggy banks and cardboard rollers, one can take them and sew them into the pockets of your pants, coats, and other clothing item. When there is a moment of concern -- and a lack of proper handwashing facilities and/or hand sanitizer -- rub those fingers on the penny and know that at least in the short term, the level of germs on your skin may be lessened. When you wash them in the laundry later on, you'll know that your penny will get that cleaning needed to keep it effective.

Just remember to sew it in face up to keep with the superstition of good luck. After all, when dealing with germs, you can never have too much of that.

]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2755278 2013-02-25T00:00:19-05:00 2013-04-26T05:12:01-04:00

Jason Tetro http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-tetro/
Naturally, you can blame germs for this aggravation.

The main cause is a group of bacteria known for their ability to grow on hard surfaces, such as the enamel of the teeth, and slowly soften the matrix through the use of acids. The most common culprit is Streptococcus mutans.

The bacterium uses sugars to form lactic acid and a solid sugar byproduct, known as glucan, which helps the intruder hide from the mouth's cleaning and repairing tool, saliva. The lactic acid slowly breaks down the enamel and eventually forms a cavity. Other forms of these bacteria include the appropriately named Porphyromonas gingivalis, Actinomyces viscocus and the sister strain to S. mutans, Streptococcus sobrinus (literally Latin for sister).

The common belief is that these bacteria have caused us to gnash our teeth since the dawn of humankind. Yet a study released this past week from of the Australian Centre for Ancient DNA at The University of Adelaide in Australia suggests that this may not be the case.

In the paper, the team looked at 34 skeletal remains ranging in age from 400 to 7,500 years and investigated the microbiome of the dental plaque. They divided the nature of the subjects into categories based on the era they lived, including the Mesolithic Period, the Neolithic Period, the Bronze Age, Medieval Times and finally modern day.

The researchers had expected to see some differences in the microbial makeup of the mouth over time and they were not disappointed. For example, farmers from today had few differences than those from 7,500 years ago.

But there was one finding that took them by surprise. For some reason, that cavity causer, S. mutans, could not be found in samples prior to the Bronze Age. A closer look at the microbiome showed that the actual diversity of bacteria in the mouth dropped as time progressed. In essence, the mouth became less germy, yet there was a greater chance for disease.

The authors suggested that the cause for this appearance and increase in S. mutans and other pathogenic bacteria was the dawn of food processing, which saw the use of refined sugars and grains and the reduction of the overall diversity of nutrients. The bacteria would find a home in these sugar-rich products and eventually colonize and start to degrade tooth enamel.

The premise makes perfect sense as there has been a longtime belief that the change in our overall diet has led to an increase in oral diseases as well as many other chronic problems .

But one doesn't need to have a historical perspective to realize this loss of diversity. Recent analyses of the oral microbiological ecology of women and children have revealed that there is a reduction in diversity with increased risk for cavities. A diet that is filled with sugar is almost always going to lead to the growth of harmful bacteria and a reduction or elimination of those that are helpful.

Thankfully, while our ancestors had to rely on sticks and leaves to keep their mouths fresh, we have an entire industry devoted to the maintenance of our oral health. We have toothbrushes, toothpaste, dental floss, and other creative oral health ideas all designed to help us cope with the fact that our diets have become as pathogenic to our teeth as the bacteria that cause the cavities. Yet while we may spend hundreds if not thousands of dollars to keep our teeth white and shining, there may be a better and more natural option to help our teeth survive: force the bad germs to compete with the good.

Back in 1981, a group out of the Department of Microbiology and Institute of Dental Research at the University of Alabama in Birmingham published a study that showed the bacterium Lactobacillus casei could somehow stop the effects of S. mutans in the mouth and even help to prevent cavities.

The study was somewhat odd as lactobacilli, which turn sugars into that enamel eating lactic acid, were considered to be harmful. But this study suggested that perhaps some of these lactobacilli were more capable of using the sugars in the mouth without causing injury and at the same time, keeping the bad bacteria at bay.

The work was barely noticed by most but some researchers did follow up and eventually found that certain lactobacilli could indeed help to keep the mouth healthy. Not surprisingly, these same bacteria, including Lactobacillus rhamnosus, Lactobacillus acidophilus and Lactobacillus fermentum, were all found to help the mouth fight off dental problems. If any of these names sound familiar, it's because they are also collectively better known as probiotics. At the moment, the jury is still out on whether probiotic-containing foods such as yogurts and fermented foods can ultimately prevent cavities but there is hope that a modification of the diet to include these helpful bacteria could eventually lead to a better smile.

Ultimately, there is no way to prevent the necessary visit to the dentist as oral health is paramount. However, over the coming years, there may be novel ways - both medically and naturally - to help our teeth in between those visits. Perhaps one day, we may no longer need to fear the dreaded cavity conundrum and instead, sit back, relax and welcome the words we all love to hear...

"No cavities!"

]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2707358 2013-02-18T08:56:41-05:00 2013-04-20T05:12:01-04:00

Jason Tetro http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-tetro/
Should they have a natural or caesarean birth and afterwards, should they breastfeed or use formula?

The scientific literature has focused on this debate though the results have been less than helpful. There has been a recorded reduction in the rate of natural births over the years as well as a drop in breastfeeding. In turn, numerous attempts to increase those numbers have been shared ranging from objective reviews to thinly disguised promotions. Yet none of these studies or a plethora of others have conclusively shown a benefit of one over the other. In fact, some studies have shown that caesarean may actually be beneficial for mothers and that formula with an appropriate formula with micronutrients may indeed help the infant stay healthy.

The debate has been at a standstill for quite some time yet thanks to a relatively new branch of science, there may be a means to resolve the disquiet. Unlike traditional routes such as psychological, physiological and social research, this one focuses not on the human being but rather the beings that live inside it.

Germs and more importantly, their diversity.

The body is comprised of a highly diverse population of bacteria and that in healthy individuals and thanks to the Human Microbiome Project we now know that this variety doesn't shift significantly. But in August of this past year, a study from a group based out of Cornell University put that stability to the test in infants as well as pregnant women. They discovered that in women, during the third trimester and lasting until shortly after pregnancy, this diversity is radically altered. The changes were presumably due to a number of physiological changes that occur during that time. But the development of this diverse populace, which is shared with the infant, may have a secondary purpose.

The introduction of such a variety of bacteria offers the burgeoning immune system of the infant to decide which germs are friendly and which are foes. This form of immunological training may then help to prevent problems in the future, including overreactions such as asthma and other chronic diseases.

What was perhaps most interesting was that in healthy children, by the time they reached four years of age, they had the same diversity as their mothers before pregnancy. This cyclical nature of microbiome diversity suggested that for best health, infants needed to be exposed to a large variety of germs.

Last week, a new study from a collaboration of Canadian scientists led by Dr. Anita Kozyrskyj at the University of Alberta has offered more evidence to the debate. However, based on their findings, the debate may finally be settled, at least in Canada.

The team examined the gut microbiota of 24 infants at four months of age in order to perform a look-see into the state of the growing infant. Once the bacterial strains were identified, the researchers went back to determine if there were any differences between mode of delivery and infant diet.

In terms of mode of delivery, the results were not altogether surprising. There was a noticeable albeit small increase in microbial diversity in those born vaginally compared to elective caesarean sections. In both forms of delivery, the majority of bacteria found were no different than what might be found in the normal healthy gut including such well-known names as Bifidobacteria and Streptococcus.

The only real difference between the two was found in the levels of the sometimes pathogenic bacteria, E. coli, Shigella and Bacteroides. Unlike what might be expected, these levels were all higher in infants delivered vaginally. While this might suggest that vaginal birth presents more risk, there was no indication that these strains were at all pathogenic and instead were part of the normal microbial flora of the mother.

The differences were even less prominent when the results were compared to feeding habits. In almost all cases, there was little to no difference between breastfeeding and the use of formula. In fact, there was less diversity in infants who were exclusively breastfed. The only marked difference was the reduction of the presence of the pathogen C. difficile in breastfed children. This result, however, would be expected as the bacterium is primarily an environmental pathogen and would not be expected to be found on the breast or in breast milk.

In the entire context of both infant delivery and feeding, the study revealed little advantage to any means chosen. In fact, the results suggest that in the developed world, where proper medical care and formula of a high nutritional value exist, there really is no debate to be had. The medical community has essentially learned how to mimic the natural state and ensure that the child will grow up healthy whether the route followed is traditional or modern.

So, does this signal an end to the debate? Not likely.

While this study may offer some resolution to the debate here in Canada, the reality is that the majority of the world does not enjoy the advanced medical and nutritional care offered here. There is little doubt that in areas where women and children's healthcare is poor, there is a risk of improper colonization with harmful pathogens during non-vaginal delivery and also malnutrition in absence of breastfeeding or safe alternatives. In these environments, there should be little doubt that the ways of the ancients should be the preferred choice today.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2658104 2013-02-11T00:00:56-05:00 2013-04-12T05:12:01-04:00

Jason Tetro http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-tetro/ billions of dollars spent each year to treat infections can overburden the budget of any healthcare institution and the pocketbooks of anyone without appropriate health insurance.

But pathogens only make up a fraction of the diversity of germs on Earth and a number of environmental germs have been examined for their financial and environmental benefit. For the most part, these germs are unknown, kept away from the science spotlight, and gaining little to no appreciation for the work that they do.

That changed last week when the laboratory of Dr. Nathan Magarvey at McMaster University in Hamilton found that a particular bacterium known as Delftia acidovorans (meaning acid devouring bacteria from the city of Delft in Holland where it was discovered) not only could be found growing in gold deposits, but was actually mining the gold and using it as a place to reside.

In essence, the bacteria were creating a house made of gold. Magarvey also showed that the accumulation of gold was performed by a single molecule, delftibactin, which could one day be mass produced. Should this happen, these bacteria may improve the efficiency of gold mining and more importantly, increase the range of places where mining can be performed, including the oceans.

The concept of microbial mining, also known as bioleaching, may only now be making headlines; yet the process has been ongoing for decades.

Some four decades ago, a group out of the University of Southern California found that a group of bacteria known as the thiobacilli (meaning sulfur loving bacteria) could be used to break down the complex nature of oil shale to liberate the oily residue easing both collection and processing. Their work, while gaining little public attention, led to a number of other groups investigating how bacteria could be used to increase mining profit margins.

One major success has come in the copper mining industry. In this case, the bacterium, Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans (meaning a bacterium that uses sulfur to make an acid that oxidizes iron) was found in the slag of copper mines and appeared to help release copper from rock.

Initially, the bacteria were used to help recover copper from discarded circuit boards however there was simply no denying the benefit of upscaling bacterial production to general mining operations. The bacteria were quickly adopted and their use spread worldwide. Today, bacterial bioleaching is involved in some 10 per cent of the world's copper production.

While bacterial assisted production of commodities is easily recognized as a help to our economy, there is another way bacteria help us to maintain lower costs although in this case, the target isn't money, it's the environment. Germs are nature's degraders and over the last half-century, a number of species have been found to not only enjoy biological material, but also man-made chemicals including pesticides, plastics, and toxins such as mercury.

But perhaps the most important revelation came exactly 40 years ago when a group out of the University of Alberta in Edmonton found that bacteria could degrade crude oil. The discovery sparked an era of research into how bacteria could be used to clean up oil spills and other less publically favourable consequences of oil drilling.

Most of the work was done quietly with private funding but that all changed in 1989 with the Exxon Valdez spill in Prince William Sound, Alaska. The spill was so dramatic that it led to news headlines worldwide and sparked condemnation of the entire oil industry. There was no choice to investigate bioremediation.

The efforts were so successful that the bacteria were eating up as much as 1 per cent of the spill per day. After the Exxon Valdez, germs were used to help re-mediate spills from the Russian tanker Nakhodka and the most recent Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. The use of germs has become so popular that no oil environmental management system is complete without some reference to bioremediation to keep costs down and success rates high.

In the future, germs will play an even greater role in our economy and not solely in the role of villain. Thanks to decades of research by basic microbiologists who rarely are garnered public attention, the financial benefits of bacteria and fungi will be maximized to help enrich our commodity supplies and help keep the environment clean.

The results won't be seen for some time but we can expect that our vacations will be safer from the threat of environmental contamination and perhaps more close to home, the cost for that golden Valentine's Day gift for your sweetheart might actually be affordable.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2611333 2013-02-04T08:45:04-05:00 2013-04-06T05:12:01-04:00

Jason Tetro http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-tetro/
There exists another mental activity that we can undertake during this time: we can guess what germs are living deep inside these floating entities.

It's been known for some time that germs can be found in the atmosphere and they have made clouds a happy home. Despite the rather harsh realities of germ-killing ultraviolet radiation, freezing temperatures, and those horrific free radicals that we keep hearing about in advertisements promoting anti-wrinkle creams, germs have figured out a variety of ways to survive and thrive. But more important than how they survive is the question of which germs are surviving and whether they pose a threat to our health. Over the last decade, a number of researchers have taken on the task of identifying whether or not there are pathogens in our atmosphere.

BLOG CONTINUES AFTER SLIDESHOW



The latest of these studies came out last week from a group out of the Georgia Institute of Technology and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, better known as NASA. The team flew at an altitude of about 10 km, considered officially as the upper troposphere, over several areas of the United States and the Atlantic Ocean during both calm times and also during Hurricanes Earl and Karl. They expected to find some evidence of pathogens as they are known to be contained in the upper atmosphere air of desert dust clouds. They were not disappointed; they found fecal bacteria, including common names as Escherichia and Streptococcus, in over half of their samples. What came as a surprise was the rather significant percentage of these fecal germs in several of their samples. There was little doubt that when it comes to the clouds, their white nature may be deceptive as to their content.

Finding fecal bacteria in the air may be somewhat disturbing but the levels found in these higher altitudes pale in comparison to what we can find in the air closer to the surface. Back in 2007, the air from Chicago, Detroit and Cleveland were sampled for their germy composition and the results were rather shocking. Over the summer months, the bacterial diversity was strong with soil and vegetation making up most of the population. But when the seasons changed and the snow covered these bacteria, one type of bacteria ruled the air: canine fecal bacteria. Or, if you wish, dog poop.

While the explanations for these findings were understandable, including a high dog population in the area and the inferred problem of an improper poop-and-scoop policy leaving the feces to stay outdoors, the reality in addition to the cold air, there was some warm feces in every breath.

In addition to canine fecal matter, there are also human pathogens in the air. Back in 2003, a similar sampling was performed in Austin and San Antonio to identify if there were any threats in the air -- remembering that this was shortly after the 9/11 attacks and also the anthrax attack of 2001. They found evidence of anthrax and other possible bioweapons including botulism and the lesser known but rather vicious Arcobacter although none at concentrations worth causing alarm. But they also found evidence of the number one foodborne pathogen in the United States, Campylobacter at concentrations that could potentially be problematic. Again, there was no need for alarm bells but the study did point out that when it comes to air, the threat may always be there.

Yet the biggest risk to your airborne health is not in the upper troposphere or even in the local dog park, it's in the home and more specifically, the bathroom. The toilet is an undeniable addition to improved sanitation but many people forget that in most cases, there are two lids. The bottommost one is usually put down during but the top lid needs to be put down right before the flush. If not, the rush of aerosols emerging from the water is no different than the turbulent rise of seawater encountered during a hurricane. As a result, those fecal germs that had left your body are given an opportunity to return either through inhalation or through deposition on everything including towels, grooming products and of course, the toothbrush.

Although the risk may be low, there have been studies that show that a lidless flush could mean a higher incidence of C. difficile and norovirus.

While a lidded flush may be easy to adapt to, there are some who quite simply relish watching the toilet whirlpool during a flush and may have an issue with using the lid. For these individuals, the best suggestion might be to head outside and enjoy a little cloud watching. It's just as fun, just as germy yet won't put you at any risk.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2563754 2013-01-28T11:07:57-05:00 2013-03-30T05:12:01-04:00

Jason Tetro http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-tetro/ -40ºC in some places and given the city of Ottawa the dubious distinction of being the coldest capital in the world.

While this snap may appear to be an aberration of a normal winter, there are suggestions that this could be a trend over the coming years. It's an unfortunate part of living in a changing world where warmer air over Greenland is causing a shift in the jet stream plunging cold Arctic air our way. We may hope that this might not happen again for years but there is a sense that this is something that could be recurrent well into the future.

While we may have little enjoyment from this forecast, in terms of germs and pests, this may actually be good news. Much like humans, bacteria, several viruses, insects such as mosquitoes, and mites all hate the cold. But while for us the freezing temperatures may mean a host of inconveniences, for these creatures, the cold is a matter of life and death.

The key to survival of any organism on earth is water; we all need it. When the temperature drops below zero, the tendency of that water to freeze makes living much harder. While many microorganisms and pests have means to survive temperatures just below that mark if the temperature drops to below -15ºC, the consequences are dire.

The process of death by the cold is actually pretty simple. Initially, the water that is not held in cells freezes, forming a nucleus of ice. As that nucleus grows, it both pushes against the cells causing damage as well as making the water inside the cells flush out in the hopes of preventing further ice crystal formation. This dehydrates the cells and eventually, they die.

For bacteria and viruses, that's the end, but for larger pests, such as insects, the ice formation causes a cascade of tissue damage and eventually a lack of blood flow. Soon, the entire body is nothing more than a large crystal of ice. It's not a pleasant way to die by any means. In the case of mosquitoes, if the cold snap is long enough, the population will be significantly reduced and the following summer will be far less problematic. Considering the troubles encountered last year with the West Nile Virus in the US and Canada, this cold is exactly what the public health officials ordered.

There are a few ways to take advantage of the cold weather to make life a little better. Putting those hard to wash bed covers out in this cold for a few hours will help to remove any dust mites and/or stinky bacteria but for something a little more resilient like a bedbug, a few days to a week may be needed.

Clothes can also be effectively cleaned by putting them out into the cold. In one dramatic example, a University of Alberta student had worn the same pair of jeans for months using only his freezer and a Ziploc bag to keep them from becoming overgrown with bacteria and their malodorous byproducts. There is one side effect, however, in that the clothes will be fairly stiff and may need a few minutes in the dryer to warm them up and loosen the fibres. Yet, this means of "cleaning" using cold weather is a nice way to take advantage of the temperatures and save on energy as well.

There is one final advantage to the cold weather: a better immune system. During the winter, the amount of sun seen is significantly lower than the summer and this could lead to reduced levels of Vitamin D, which is known to play an important role in keeping the immune system functioning normally. While supplementation is a key part of keeping Vitamin D levels up during the winter, there is nothing like the benefit of exposure to the sun when it's around to keep those levels high.

There's little doubt that these minor advantages will replace the rather antagonistic thoughts many have towards the cold. Yet with the potential for more freezing temperatures looming not only in the weeks but also the years ahead, there are really only two ways to look at what is to come. We can either get used to it or, we can find the positives and make it a little less unbearable.

]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2513379 2013-01-19T22:32:23-05:00 2013-03-21T05:12:01-04:00

Jason Tetro http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-tetro/
Of course, this had nothing to do with cycling.

The 2012-2013 influenza virus season has shocked North America with its early start and high numbers of both cases as well as deaths. In the United States, the percentage of deaths attributed to flu and pneumonia has reached over the epidemic level of 7.1 per cent and continues to rise. Forty-eight of the 50 States are registering widespread activity and most of Canada has at least localized activity with the most populated regions suffering from one of the worst seasons in a decade.

Yet for microbiologists, this has been a rather "healthy" flu season, but not one that should instill any panic. Moreover, the surge of concern and panic is somewhat unwarranted, especially considering the world knew almost eight months ago that this was coming.

Influenzavirus has a traditionally seasonal profile that offers those of us in North America a distinct advantage. The virus first affects the Southern Hemisphere during their winter season, our summer. During that time, the rate of infections, the hospitalizations, the rate of spread and unfortunately, the number of deaths provide more than just a clue as to what we should expect in the subsequent winter season.

In the case of this year's flu season, data from Australia mimics exactly what we are experiencing now. The season started early and was aggressive. About two-thirds of the cases were due to an H3N2 virus, close to a third of cases were found to be influenza B and a handful of cases were the swine flu, also known as H1N1pdm. The season started early and showed an aggression not seen since the 2003-2004 season. The number of deaths also showed epidemic rates. The rate of vaccine uptake was just over half and there were some shortages in areas of the country.

What perhaps is even more unfortunate is that the warnings were actually sent out to the public, as early as September of 2012. Back then, the CDC was already warning the public that the upcoming flu season, based on the fact that what had happened "down under" was going to be significant and could lead to significant burden not only on health but also on life itself. Yet few heeded the warnings until well into December when the epidemic was in full swing.

Over the coming months, the flu will eventually decline and by the spring, the worry and concern will be gone for yet another year. Yet many will look back at this time and wonder why there was so little attention paid leading up to the start of the season and then why there was such a panic in the first few weeks of this month. Several excuses will be proffered, including a lack of interest on the part of the public and the "Crying Wolf" theory due to the disparity between the relatively benign impact of the 2009 pandemic flu and the perceived overzealous response; but perhaps the real reason stems from the fact that in the context of history, influenza has become less of a threat than ever before.

A simple exploration of the last century of influenza records in the United States reveal that the number of deaths attributed to this virus has dropped dramatically. Even at the height of the 1918 pandemic, one of the worst seen in history, the number of deaths were about 350 cases for every 100,000 people. That's less than one-tenth of one per cent of the population. During the next half-century, the numbers never reached higher than 100 deaths per 100,000. Today, those numbers are less than 1 per 100,000. That is one of the reasons mortality is now considered to be a measure of all deaths as opposed to a fraction of the current population.

But even if it's not a significant killer, influenza still represents a large burden in a different manner. In today's world of 24/7 connectivity and the necessities of work and home life, the concept of having to suffer between 10 days and three weeks with an illness is anathema. From an economic perspective, the loss of productivity equals close to $100 billion dollars in the US. These two points alone suggest that even though the life or death worry may be gone, there still exists good reason to be concerned and also to be prepared.

Perhaps this year's flu "shock" will prime us to be a little more vigilant in the future. Perhaps we'll pay more attention to hygiene, especially hand hygiene; seek out the flu shot in October, when there are no lines instead of January when the lines are long; and do our best to not panic should the numbers be a little higher than normal, and more importantly, not to ignore the flu should the season be mild.

SEE: The 10 things you need to know about norovirus:

]]>