In a study published in the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society with 159 255 female participants from a variety of racial and ethnic backgrounds, higher levels of optimism were associated with longer lifespans and a greater likelihood of living past 90 years of age.
Investigators found that the link between optimism and longevity was evident across racial and ethnic groups, and that lifestyle factors accounted for nearly one-quarter of the optimism-lifespan association.
“Although optimism itself may be patterned by social structural factors, our findings suggest that the benefits of optimism for longevity may hold across racial and ethnic groups,” said lead author Hayami K. Koga, of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. “Optimism may be an important target of intervention for longevity across diverse groups.”
The whistle-blowing paediatrician Dr Tim de Maayer who spoke out about appalling conditions at Rahima Moosa Mother and Child Hospital (RMMCH) was suspended yesterday, apparently in a retaliatory move.
In the widely-read open letter appearing on the Daily Maverick, he spoke of the preventable tragedy of babies dying due to lack of resources. This came shortly after a viral video showed pregnant mothers sleeping on the floor.
Presciently, the Daily Maverick, which broke the story, stated that there were two options: act to change the situation for the better, or “shoot the messenger”. As the newspaper wryly noted as it broke the news on Friday, 10 June, the option of shooting the messenger has been taken.
Although there appeared to be an initial positive response, Dr Maayer gave notice on Thursday evening that he was not able to come into work on Friday as he was being placed on suspension. RMMCH doctors then contacted the Daily Maverick.
His suspension leaves the hospital without its only paediatric gastroenterologist, according to an anxious doctor who got in touch with the Daily Maverick late Thursday night. The news has spread like wildfire across social media, with other doctors quick to come to Dr de Maayer’s defence.
A petition on Change.org to reinstate the paediatrician is being circulated by ordinary citizens and clinicians including Professor Shabir Madhi, who has been vocal in his support of Dr de Maayer.
The Progressive Health Forum (PHF) called for the suspension of Dr de Maayer to be overturned.
“Dr de Maayer has been suspended on the grounds that he has a voice, a conscience and a professional ethic and being a committed public health clinician. This pattern of victimisation has been repeatedly applied to clinicians who dare call out inadequacies of the administration and negative impact on clinicians and on the lives of patients,” the PHF said in a statement.
Pregnant mothers have the ability to confer greater immunity to the vulnerable developing foetus with ‘super antibodies’. Now, a far-reaching study published in Nature provides a surprising explanation of how this actually works, and what it could mean for preventing death and disability from a wide range of infectious diseases.
The findings suggest the amped-up antibodies that expecting mothers produce could be mimicked to create new drugs to treat diseases as well as improved vaccines to prevent them.
“For many years, scientists believed that antibodies cannot get inside cells. They don’t have the necessary machinery. And so, infections caused by pathogens that live exclusively inside cells were thought to be invisible to antibody-based therapies,” said Sing Sing Way, MD. “Our findings show that pregnancy changes the structure of certain sugars attached to the antibodies, which allows them to protect babies from infection by a much wider range of pathogens.”
“The maternal-infant dyad is so special. It’s the intimate connection between a mother and her baby,” says John Erickson, MD, PhD, first-author of the study.
Drs Way and Erickson are both part of Cincinnati Children’s Center for Inflammation and Tolerance and the Perinatal Institute, which strives to improve outcomes for all pregnant women and their newborns.
Erickson continues, “This special connection starts when babies are in the womb and continues after birth. I love seeing the closeness between mothers and their babies in our newborn care units. This discovery paves the way for pioneering new therapies that can specifically target infections in pregnant mothers and newborns babies. I believe these findings also will have far-reaching implications for antibody-based therapies in other fields.”
How mothers make super antibodies The new study identifies the specific change in the sugar. During pregnancy, the “acetylated” form of sialic acid (one of the sugars attached to antibodies) shifts to the “deacetylated” form. This subtle molecular shift lets immunoglobulin G (IgG) take on an expanded protective role by stimulating immunity through receptors that respond specifically to deacetylated sugars.
“This change is the light switch that allows maternal antibodies to protect babies against infection inside cells,” Dr Way said.
“Mothers always seem to know best,” Dr Erickson added.
Revved-up antibodies can be produced in the lab The research team pinned down the key biochemical differences between antibodies in virgin mice compared to pregnant ones. They also identified the enzyme naturally expressed during pregnancy responsible for driving this transformation.
Further, the team successfully restored lost immune protection by supplying lab-grown supplies of the antibodies from healthy pregnant mice to pups born to mothers that were gene-edited to lack the ability to remove acetylation from antibodies to enhance protection.
Hundreds of monoclonal antibodies have been produced as potential treatments for various disorders, including COVID, with a variety of results.
Dr Way said this molecular alteration can be replicated to change how antibodies stimulate the immune system to fine-tune their effects. This potentially could lead to improved treatments for infections caused by other intracellular pathogens including HIV and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), a common virus that poses serious risks to infants.
Another reason to accelerate vaccine development “We’ve known for years the many far-reaching benefits of breastfeeding,” Dr Erickson said. “One major factor is the transfer of antibodies in breastmilk.”
The study shows that nursing mothers retain the molecular switch, passing through the antibodies to their newborns.
Additionally, Dr Way says the findings underscore the importance of receiving all available vaccines for women of reproductive age – as well as the need for researchers to develop even more vaccines against infections that which are especially prominent in women during pregnancy or in newborn babies.
“The immunity needs to exist within the mother for it to be transferred to her child,” Dr Way said. “Without natural exposures or immunity primed by vaccination, when that light switch flips during pregnancy, there’s no electricity behind it.”
Scanning Electron Micrograph image of a human T cell. Credit: NIH/NIAID
In a groundbreaking new study, scientists report training T cells to protect against SARS-CoV-2 even without an antibody response. This could open the way to more broadly effective vaccines.
Current vaccines prompt the creation of antibodies and immune cells that recognise the spike protein. However, these vaccines were developed using the spike protein from an older variant of SARS-CoV-2, reducing their effectiveness against newer variants. Researchers have found that immune cells called T cells tend to recognise parts of SARS-CoV-2 that don’t mutate rapidly. T cells coordinate the immune system’s response and kill cells that have been infected by the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
A vaccine that prompted the body to create more T cells against SARS-CoV-2 could help prevent disease caused by a wide range of variants. To explore this approach, a research team led by Dr Marulasiddappa Suresh from the University of Wisconsin studied two experimental vaccines that included compounds to specifically provoke a strong T-cell response in mice.
The team tested the vaccines’ ability to control infection and prevent severe disease caused by an earlier strain of SARS-CoV-2 as well as by the Beta variant, which is relatively resistant to antibodies raised against earlier strains.
When the researchers vaccinated the mice either either nasally or by injection, the animals developed T cells that could recognise the early SARS-CoV-2 strain and the Beta variant. The vaccines also caused the mice to develop antibodies that could neutralise the early strain. However, they failed to create antibodies that neutralised the Beta variant.
The mice were exposed to SARS-CoV-2 around 3 to 5 months after vaccination. Compared to the controls, vaccinated mice had very low levels of virus in their lungs and were protected against severe illness, which was true of infection with the Beta variant too. This showed that the vaccine provided protection against the Beta variant despite failing to produce effective antibodies against it.
To understand which T cells were providing this protection, the researchers selectively removed different types of T cells in vaccinated mice prior to infection. When they removed CD8 (killer) T cells, vaccinated mice remained well protected against the early strain, although not against the Beta variant. When they blocked CD4 T (helper) cells, levels of both the early strain and Beta variant in the lungs and severity of disease were substantially higher than in vaccinated mice that didn’t have their T cells removed.
These results suggest important roles for CD8 and CD4 T cells in controlling SARS-CoV-2 infection. Current mRNA vaccines do produce some T cells that recognize multiple variants. This may help account for part of the observed protection against severe disease from the Omicron variant. Future vaccines might be designed to specifically enhance this T cell response.
“I see the next generation of vaccines being able to provide immunity to current and future COVID variants by stimulating both broadly-neutralising antibodies and T cell immunity,” Dr Suresh predicted.
Tobacco companies waged a massive disinformation campaign to keep people consuming their products. There are parallels with today’s antivaxx movement. Even before the 1964 US Surgeon General’s report on tobacco, the tobacco industry was deflecting health concerns by featuring doctors in their advertising and actively courting the medical industry. This advert is from 1930.
In a perspective piece published in the New England Journal of Medicine, authors find a parallel between the tactics used in the ‘tobacco wars’ and vaccination efforts. In a seeming repeat of history, anti-vaccination groups are using the same tactics the tobacco industry used to defend their products and undermine trust in science, but the successful anti-tobacco campaign holds important lessons for turning the tide against misinformation and normalising vaccination.
In late 2020 when the first COVID vaccines became available, the authors note that surveys indicated that about a third of US adults were keen to be vaccinated, 15% expressed strong resistance to vaccination (a proportion that has stayed fairly constant), and the remainder didn’t harbour strong ideological resistance. Now, about 27% of US adults now remain unvaccinated – and reaching this remainder is an important public health challenge.
The authors believe that the ‘tobacco wars’ can provide perspective. The tobacco industry fuelled preventable deaths by glamourising smoking, with almost 50% of US adults smoking cigarettes in the 1960s.
The current rate of about 12.5% is the result of decades of public health efforts to make tobacco use less socially acceptable. The first US Surgeon General’s report on smoking and health in 1964 was attacked by the tobacco industry. It was only until C. Everett Koop’s overwhelming report in 1986 that cemented tobacco use as a major preventable cause of cancer and death and highlighted the dangers of second-hand smoking.
Koop and others were vilified by the tobacco industry, which mounted a sustained campaign that cast doubts on the science, publicised misinformation, emphasised tobacco’s economic importance, and warned against restricting individual freedom. Industry leaders directly lied about knowing that nicotine was addictive and the lethal dangers of tobacco use. Indeed, from the 1920s to 1950s, in response to growing health concerns, the tobacco industry had actively courted doctors and influenced medical journals, widely reporting positive findings of studies that were deeply flawed. This may have only played into the hands of antivaxxers, creating a historical example of distrust in the medical system.
A 1940s advert showing how ‘doctors’ (probably actors) enjoyed Camel brand cigarettes. With the 1950 publication of studies showing the connection between cancer and tobacco, the public began to be suspicious and such campaigns featuring doctors ended by 1954.
While the focus of the debate was initially on smoking as an individual choice, two 1981 studies on nonsmoking wives of smokers vs nonsmokers revealed the dangers of secondhand smoke and shifted the discourse.
The US Congress has never enacted a federal smoking ban, but did grant the FDA limited authority to regulate tobacco in 2009, enabling restrictions on youth sales.
However, the broad-based effort from all levels of society that were important, discouraging smoking in public settings. This was supplemented by messaging from celebrities, taxation, and even a 1998 legal battle against the tobacco industry.
Efforts undertaken by the antivaccination movement, which is hardly new but is thriving during the COVID pandemic, bear many similarities to strategies used during the tobacco wars. Although not driven by a single industry but a collection of celebrities and social media groups, it sows mistrust in science and promotes conspiracy theories. Misinformation tactics are used that are strikingly similar to the tobacco industry’s, and this time Dr Antony Fauci is vilified instead of Koop.
There are big differences between tobacco control and vaccination; such as taking a long time for smoking interventions to reduce chronic diseases, whereas vaccinations usually reduce hospitalisations and severe illness within days or weeks.
The authors believe that success against antivaccination movement can draw on the tobacco wars’ lessons, illustrating COVID’s harm and the power of vaccines. Getting vaccinated and boosted should be the accepted social norm during a pandemic, they stress.
Drawing on similar efforts for anti-tobacco campaigns, vaccination campaigns using real patients in ICU who express regret over not being vaccinated. Unvaccinated people often assume they can be cared for if they get sick, so messages could also be included from healthcare works talking about the strain of the pandemic.
“There is an opportunity to mount a serious effort to provide accurate vaccination information using the same media channels on which people currently consume misinformation,” they wrote.
They also consider vaccine mandates which make being vaccinated a social norm such as wearing a seatbelt, and other regulations at the community and business level may be more effective.
They note that personal physicians play a key role, being the best way to transmit health information. But many people at risk of remaining unvaccinated have had negative experiences with health care, compounded by doctors spreading misinformation.
The authors note that the dangers of tobacco use were known to public health practitioners for years, but it took a well-funded concerted effort that emphasised the impact on others to achieve a change in behaviour. This is something that needs to be repeated for vaccinations.
“Freedom of choice remains; people can still smoke cigarettes and decline vaccinations. But the roadmap drawn by tobacco-control efforts shows that the public mindset can be tilted toward public health and social good. With vaccination, this work shouldn’t take decades; it needs to begin immediately.”
