U.S. Drinking Water Contamination Far Worse Than Previously Thought

Dark humor comedian George Carlin liked to say that he didn’t consider himself a good American if he didn’t let his food and water poison himself a bit every day. For real though, if you want at least some defense against the contamination, the people in the know recommend robust water filtration systems.

America is great again! Keep this version of America great 2020, don’t change it! Only over a hundred million people there drink contaminated water every day!

The contamination of US drinking water with manmade “forever chemicals” is far worse than previously estimated with some of the highest levels found in Miami, Philadelphia and New Orleans, said a report on Wednesday by an environmental watchdog group.

The chemicals, resistant to breaking down in the environment, are known as perfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS. Some have been linked to cancers, liver damage, low birth weight and other health problems.

The findings here by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) show the group’s previous estimate in 2018, based on unpublished US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) data, that 110 million Americans may be contaminated with PFAS, could be far too low.

“It’s nearly impossible to avoid contaminated drinking water from these chemicals,” said David Andrews, a senior scientist at EWG and co-author of the report.

The chemicals were used in products like Teflon and Scotchguard and in firefighting foam. Some are used in a variety of other products and industrial processes, and their replacements also pose risks.

Of tap water samples taken by EWG from 44 sites in 31 states and Washington DC, only one location, Meridian, Mississippi, which relies on 700ft (215m) deep wells, had no detectable PFAS. Only Seattle and Tuscaloosa, Alabama had levels below 1 part per trillion (PPT), the limit EWG recommends.

In addition, EWG found that on average six to seven PFAS compounds were found at the tested sites, and the effects on health of the mixtures are little understood. “Everyone’s really exposed to a toxic soup of these PFAS chemicals,” Andrews said.

In 34 places where EWG’s tests found PFAS, contamination had not been publicly reported by the EPA or state environmental agencies.

The EPA has known since at least 2001 about the problem of PFAS in drinking water but has so far failed to set an enforceable, nationwide legal limit. The EPA said early last year it would begin the process to set limits on two of the chemicals, PFOA and PFOS.

The EPA said it has helped states and communities address PFAS and that it is working to put limits on the two main chemicals but did not give a timeline.

In 2018 a draft report from an office of the US Department of Health and Human Services said the risk level for exposure to the chemicals should be up to 10 times lower than the 70 PPT threshold the EPA recommends. The White House and the EPA had tried to stop the report from being published.

How Toxic Chemicals Are Robbing Vulnerable Children of Millions of IQ Points

The crisis of contaminated water seen in Flint, Michigan is ongoing and terrible, but other related events of contamination are more common than people tend to think they are. America is a society with many protections for the most powerful, and not enough for the most vulnerable.

The chemicals we’ve long feared the most – heavy metals like lead and mercury – are less of a threat to kids’ developing brains than they were two decades ago. But two new menaces may be taking their place: pesticides and flame retardants.

According to new research from New York University, flame retardants resulted in a loss of 162 million IQ points among children in the US between 2001 and 2016.

The study, published Tuesday in the journal Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology, looked at the four chemicals known to impact the brain of a developing child most: lead, mercury, pesticides, and polybrominated diphenyl ethers (otherwise known as flame retardants).

Leo Trasande, a paediatrician and public-health researcher at NYU who co-authored the study, described these pollutants as “hit-and-run” chemicals: Once a child is exposed to them, there’s no reversing the damage.

“Kids’ brain development is exquisitely vulnerable,” Trasande told Business Insider. “If you disrupt, even with subtle effects, the way a child’s brain is wired, you can have permanent and lifelong consequences.”

The study found that lead cost US kids 78 million IQ points during the 15-year period studied, while pesticides caused a loss of nearly 27 million IQ points during those years. Mercury, meanwhile, caused a loss of 2.5 million IQ points.

Children’s’ lower IQs are costing the US trillions of dollars

The researchers found that among kids exposed to toxins from 2001 to to 2016, the proportion of IQ loss due to exposure to flame retardants and pesticides increased from 67 percent to 81 percent. Flame retardants can be found in household furniture and electronics, while pesticides can be consumed when they linger on produce.

“What we found was quite striking,” Trasande said.

“We know that there is no safe level of lead exposure. The same is true for methylmercury, pesticides, and flame retardants.”

The study also found that there is an economic cost to childhood brain damage: Trasande said that each individual IQ point is worth roughly 2 percent of a child’s lifetime economic productivity. So if a child could potentially make US$1 million over the course of their lifetime, they would lose US$20,000 for every IQ point lost.

“A kid’s brain power is the engine of our economy,” Trasande said.

“If a child comes back from school with one less IQ point, maybe mum or the parent might not notice. But if 100,000 children come back with one less IQ point, the entire economy notices.”

According to the researchers, IQ loss due to lead, mercury, flame retardants, and pesticide exposure combined cost the US around US$6 trillion from 2001 to 2016.

Regulations on flame retardants and pesticides are more lax than heavy metals

For decades, scientists have understood that exposure to lead and mercury can result in childhood brain damage. So many of the main hideouts for these chemicals – leaded gasoline, lead paint, and mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants – have been phased out.

As early as the 1970s, the Environmental Protection Agency required lead to be phased out of gasoline and paint (though lead paint can still be found in homes built before 1978).

The agency also set standards to reduce mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants in 2011, though some power plants still do not meet these requirements.

But there have been fewer efforts to regulate pesticides and flame retardants.

The EPA has banned around 37 pesticides, though more than 500 have been used in the US. Another 97 have been voluntarily withdrawn by pesticide manufacturers.

More than a dozen states have adopted legislation that restricts the use of flame retardants in products like furniture, carpeting, and children’s toys, but none of the chemicals are banned federally.

Ways to reduce kids’ exposure

Many factors can influence a kid’s exposure to a chemical, Transande said.

“The science has really evolved such that the dose is not the only thing that makes the poison,” he said. Other factors to consider could include the timing and frequency of exposure.

Trasande added that regulating all of these chemicals has a far lower long-term economic cost than the cost of kids’ lost IQ points due to exposure.

To minimise personal risk in one’s own home, Trasande suggested simple steps like opening windows so that dust laced with flame retardants can escape. He also suggested vacuuming frequently and using a wet mop to sop up chemicals on the floor.

In addition, parents should avoid mattresses and children’s toys that contain polyurethane foam (which often carries flame retardants).

Trasande also said households should avoid spraying pesticides on their lawns or backyards and recommended switching to organic foods (though organic produce can also contain pesticides).

“We’ve made less progress in phasing out or banning some of the pesticides of greatest concern,” Trasande said. “But there are steps we can take proactively as consumers.”

Major Benefits of Reducing Air Pollution

Air pollution has for many years been a major public health problem that doesn’t receive much attention despite its significant effects on the population. It has been estimated that the majority of people in the world are regularly breathing unclean air.

Reductions in air pollution yielded fast and dramatic impacts on health-outcomes, as well as decreases in all-cause morbidity, according to findings in “Health Benefits of Air Pollution Reduction,” new research published in the American Thoracic Society’s journal, Annals of the American Thoracic Society.

The study by the Environmental Committee of the Forum of International Respiratory Societies (FIRS) reviewed interventions that have reduced air pollution at its source. It looked for outcomes and time to achieve those outcomes in several settings, finding that the improvements in health were striking. Starting at week one of a ban on smoking in Ireland, for example, there was a 13 percent drop in all-cause mortality, a 26 percent reduction in ischemic heart disease, a 32 percent reduction in stroke, and a 38 percent reduction in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Interestingly, the greatest benefits in that case occurred among non-smokers.

“We knew there were benefits from pollution control, but the magnitude and relatively short time duration to accomplish them were impressive,” said lead author of the report, Dean Schraufnagel, MD, ATSF. “Our findings indicate almost immediate and substantial effects on health outcomes followed reduced exposure to air pollution. It’s critical that governments adopt and enforce WHO guidelines for air pollution immediately.”

In the United States, a 13-month closure of a steel mill in Utah resulted in reducing hospitalizations for pneumonia, pleurisy, bronchitis and asthma by half. School absenteeism decreased by 40 percent, and daily mortality fell by 16 percent for every 100 ?g/m3 PM10 (a pollutant) decrease. Women who were pregnant during the mill closing were less likely to have premature births.

A 17-day “transportation strategy,” in Atlanta, Georgia during the 1996 Olympic Games involved closing parts of the city to help athletes make it to their events on time, but also greatly decreased air pollution. In the following four weeks, children’s visits for asthma to clinics dropped by more than 40 percent and trips to emergency departments by 11 percent. Hospitalizations for asthma decreased by 19 percent. Similarly, when China imposed factory and travel restrictions for the Beijing Olympics, lung function improved within two months, with fewer asthma-related physician visits and less cardiovascular mortality.

In addition to city-wide polices, reducing air pollution within the home also led to health benefits. In Nigeria, families who had clean cook stoves that reduced indoor air pollution during a nine-month pregnancy term saw higher birthweights, greater gestational age at delivery, and less perinatal mortality.

The report also examines the impact of environmental policies economically. It highlights that 25 years after enactment of the Clean Air Act, the U.S. EPA estimated that the health benefits exceeded the cost by 32:1, saving 2 trillion dollars, and has been heralded as one of the most effective public health policies of all time in the United States. Emissions of the major pollutants (particulate matter [PM], sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds, and lead) were reduced by 73 percent between 1990 and 2015 while the U.S. gross domestic product grew by more than 250 percent.

Given these findings, Dr. Schraufnagel has hope. “Air pollution is largely an avoidable health risk that affects everyone. Urban growth, expanding industrialization, global warming, and new knowledge of the harm of air pollution raise the degree of urgency for pollution control and stress the consequences of inaction,” he says. “Fortunately, reducing air pollution can result in prompt and substantial health gains. Sweeping policies affecting a whole country can reduce all-cause mortality within weeks. Local programs, such as reducing traffic, have also promptly improved many health measures.”

Abortion Reversal — The Dangerous Practice You’ve Probably Never Heard Of

In the United States, many more laws have been implemented that restrict or ban a woman’s ability to have an abortion. Abortion reversal is a new technique that hasn’t undergone much medical testing since the one test on it showed significant harm to the women.

Several states now require women who seek medication abortions to be provided with dubious information that the procedure could be stopped, allowing a pregnancy to continue.

But when researchers attempted to carry out a legitimate study of whether these “abortion reversal” treatments were effective and safe, they had to stop almost immediately – because some of the women who participated in the study experienced dangerous hemorrhaging that sent them to the hospital.

By passing these abortion reversal laws, “states are encouraging women to participate in an unmonitored experiment,” Creinin said.

Creinin and his colleagues detailed their concerns in a commentary in the journal Contraception, and they will publish their study in January’s edition of Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Medication abortions, which are used up to 10 weeks into a pregnancy, consist of taking two pills in sequence. The first pill in the regimen, mifepristone, loosens the pregnancy’s attachment to the uterus. The second pill, misoprostol, forces the uterus to contract to push out the pregnancy. The pills must be taken consecutively to complete the abortion, and there’s a chance the pregnancy will continue if the second pill is not taken.

A total of 862,320 abortions were provided in clinical settings in 2017, according to the Guttmacher Institute, about 39 percent of which were medication abortions. Research has shown that using these drugs is a safe way to end a pregnancy.

Some antiabortion activists and legislators claim that not taking the second pill, or giving a woman high doses of the hormone progesterone after taking mifepristone, can help stop, or “reverse,” a medical abortion.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists firmly states that “claims regarding abortion ‘reversal’ treatment are not based on science and do not meet clinical standards” and say the purported studies that underpin these antiabortion arguments lack scientific rigor and ethics.

Despite this, the claims made in these discredited studies have worked their way to antiabortion lawmakers, who in turn have put them into abortion reversal legislation that was signed by governors in North Dakota, Idaho, Utah, South Dakota, Kentucky, NebraskaOklahoma and Arkansas. The laws are currently blocked or enjoined in Oklahoma and North Dakota.

Because reliable research on these treatments is nonexistent, earlier this year, Creinin and his colleagues designed a legitimate double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial that aimed to observe 40 volunteers who had already elected to have a surgical abortion.

Their goal was to see if giving progesterone to women who took the first pill in the prescribed regimen would effectively and safely halt an abortion.

After the women took the first pill in the abortion protocol, mifepristone, rather than take the second pill, misoprostol, they were either given a placebo or a dose of progesterone.

Researchers only enrolled 12 women before they had to stop the study.

Bleeding is normal during a medication abortion. But three of the women who enrolled in the UC-Davis study experienced far more serious bleeding than anyone could have anticipated when the second pill was not administered.

One woman “was so scared she called an ambulance,” while another woman startled by the amount of blood “called 911 and crawled into her bathtub”, Creinin said. A third woman who went to the emergency room needed a transfusion. One of the women had received a placebo, while two others had taken the progesterone.

Creinin and his colleagues halted the study as soon as it became clear that they could not proceed safely.

“I feel really horrible that I couldn’t finish the study. I feel really horrible that the women … had to go through all this,” Creinin said. Because the study ended prematurely, the researchers could not establish any evidence that progesterone was an effective way to stop a medication abortion.

“What the results do show, though, is that there’s a very significant safety signal” when it comes to disrupting the approved medication abortion protocol, Creinin said.

In their upcoming paper in Obstetrics and Gynecology, the researchers warn that “patients in early pregnancy who use only mifepristone may be at high risk of significant hemorrhage.”

Medical experts are so concerned about abortion reversal laws that the American Medical Association joined a lawsuit against North Dakota’s abortion reversal law, which was blocked by a federal judge in September.

The North Dakota abortion reversal law, signed by Gov. Doug Burgum (R) in March, instructed health-care providers to tell a woman “that it may be possible to reverse the effects of an abortion-inducing drug if she changes her mind, but time is of the essence” and to provide a woman with literature on how to do this. The law fails to specify what that literature would include, or what such a treatment might entail.

Letting Students in Germany Start High School an Hour Later Showed Benefits

The teenage German students who took part in this were better rested and more alert for their academics. Teenagers generally need more sleep than adults and many find it difficult to go to sleep at earlier hours — there is clearly a significant benefit to having high schools start at later hours.

Society is in the midst of an epic sleep deprivation crisis, and some of the most affected people are teenagers, a broad body of sleep research shows.

Because of this, in recent decades researchers in the US and around the world have been investigating the potential benefits of starting the school day later. While initial results are promising, it’s still only early days for this field of research overall, given the limited number (and nature) of experiments conducted so far.

To date, most studies in this area have looked at the effects of making a static change in school start time (starting all classes for a group of students an hour later, for example). But what happens if you give kids a say in the matter, letting them choose what time they begin classes in the morning?

That’s what one high school in Germany did. Alsdorf high school (Gymnasium Alsdorf) in western Germany won an award for innovative teaching methods in 2013, and practises an educational system called the Dalton Plan, originally developed in the US.

The Dalton Plan calls for flexible teaching methods, tailored to students at a personal level, and helping children to learn at their own pace. Schools across the world use these principles, and for chronobiology researchers at Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, Alsdorf high school provided a unique chance to study how the system might be able to benefit sleep-deprived teenagers.

“We had the opportunity to study the effects of later school starting times when a high school in Germany decided to introduce flexible start times for their senior students,” the team, led by chronobiologist Till Roenneberg, explains in their paper.

“Instead of fixed starts at mostly 8 am, in this new flexible system, the senior students could decide whether to start at 8:00 am or at 8:50 am (referred to as ‘9 am’ herein for convenience) on a daily basis by attending or skipping the first period (a self-study period).”

For nine weeks in total in 2016, the researchers attempted to measure the effects of the system change on students in the 10th, 11th, and 12th grades.

While students in earlier grades still had to turn up for school at the standard time of 8 am, the older students were given the option of starting the day approximately one hour later for classes, in which case they had to make up the missed period (a self-study period) later in the week.

For the nine weeks (three prior to the system being introduced, and six weeks after the change), the researchers collected daily sleep diaries from the senior students taking part in the experiment, as well as collecting movement data from wrist-worn sleep monitor devices used by some of the students.

What the researchers found is that giving the students the ability to postpone their starting time even by only one hour gave them beneficial extra sleep time.

“In our study, virtually all participating students (97 percent) benefited from later start times, sleeping longer on schooldays with a ≥9 am-start – on average students gained one hour of sleep on those days,” the authors write.

“Importantly, not only was the overall benefit universal but also the magnitude of the benefit was similar across the important factors chronotype, gender, grade, and frequency of later starts.”

That’s an important finding, because even though it may seem obvious that students electing to attend school one hour later would get one hour more sleep, it’s also thought that later school times can encourage students to stay up later at night before school, negating the benefits of the sleep-in.

That didn’t happen here, though, with students on average sleeping 1.1 hours longer than they normally did on mornings where they attended classes later, increasing from 6.9 hours of sleep on average to 8 hours of sleep.

“One of the greatest concerns regarding later school starts is that teenagers might be tempted to stay up even later in the evening either consciously or via delayed circadian rhythms from later exposure to advancing morning light,” the authors explain.

“In our study, however, there was no evidence that sleep onset times differed between ≥9 am-days and 8 am-days.”

What did surprise the researchers was how little the students opted to take advantage of the late start. Overall, the students only chose to start late 39 percent of the time, roughly two days out of five in terms of a regular school week.

Nonetheless, when students did start later, they rated themselves as enjoying higher-quality sleep, and survey responses at the end of the experiment suggested they felt less tired, could concentrate better during class, and felt an improved ability to study at home after school as well.

Of course, all of those outcomes are self-reported, as were other data in the study, such as things like naps, which may have been non-declared or under-reported – limitations that the researchers acknowledge.

At the same time, there are obviously some hugely important takeaways from the experiment, which suggest students like being given the choice of when they start school in the morning (in addition to simply getting more shut-eye).

“On days with a later start, students have the opportunity to sleep longer. This should reduce the accumulation of sleep debt during the week,” the authors conclude.

“In addition, especially important for practical applications, students prefer the flexible system and their subjective parameters are improved.”

The findings are reported in Sleep.

Study: 95 Percent of Baby Foods Have Toxic Chemicals That Lower Babies’ IQ

Human society is really in that bad of shape, where defenseless and innocent babies are exposed to toxic food that harms them.

A new study finds 95 percent of tested baby foods contain toxic chemicals that lower babies’ IQ, including arsenic and lead.

What it means for babies’ health: The chemicals found in baby food arsenic, lead, cadmium, and mercury are neurotoxins that can permanently alter the developing brain, erode IQ, and affect behavior.

Why baby foods contain these toxic heavy metals: These four harmful metals are found in all food not just baby food. They occur naturally or from pollution in the environment. Crops absorb them from soil and water, and they are even found in organic food. Their presence in baby food raises unique concern, because babies are more sensitive to the toxic impacts.

Link to the full study: https://www.healthybabyfood.org/sites/healthybabyfoods.org/files/2019-10/BabyFoodReport_FULLREPORT_ENGLISH_R5b.pdf

Two Hours of Nature a Week is Key for Well-Being and Health

A new reason for wanting to preserve natural environments. There are many people today that are struggling with too much stress and health problems, and some good doctors have started prescribing time in nature because the evidence more and more shows its effectiveness.

Spending at least two hours a week in nature may be a crucial threshold for promoting health and wellbeing, according to a new large-scale study.

Research led by the University of Exeter, published in Scientific Reports and funded by NIHR, found that people who spend at least 120 minutes in nature a week are significantly more likely to report good health and higher psychological wellbeing than those who don’t visit nature at all during an average week. However, no such benefits were found for people who visited natural settings such as town parks, woodlands, country parks and beaches for less than 120 minutes a week.

The study used data from nearly 20,000 people in England and found that it didn’t matter whether the 120 minutes was achieved in a single visit or over several shorter visits. It also found the 120 minute threshold applied to both men and women, to older and younger adults, across different occupational and ethnic groups, among those living in both rich and poor areas, and even among people with long term illnesses or disabilities.

Dr Mat White, of the University of Exeter Medical School, who led the study, said: “It’s well known that getting outdoors in nature can be good for people’s health and wellbeing but until now we’ve not been able to say how much is enough. The majority of nature visits in this research took place within just two miles of home so even visiting local urban greenspaces seems to be a good thing. Two hours a week is hopefully a realistic target for many people, especially given that it can be spread over an entire week to get the benefit.”

There is growing evidence that merely living in a greener neighbourhood can be good for health, for instance by reducing air pollution. The data for the current research came from Natural England’s Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment Survey, the world’s largest study collecting data on people’s weekly contact with the natural world.

Co-author of the research, Professor Terry Hartig of Uppsala University in Sweden said: “There are many reasons why spending time in nature may be good for health and wellbeing, including getting perspective on life circumstances, reducing stress, and enjoying quality time with friends and family. The current findings offer valuable support to health practitioners in making recommendations about spending time in nature to promote basic health and wellbeing, similar to guidelines for weekly physical.”

Gratitude in the Workplace Improves Employee Health

It turns out that making people feel valued goes a long way.

If you knew that expressing gratitude to a colleague would improve their life and yours, would you do it more often?

A new study by Portland State University researchers — business professor David Cadiz, psychology professor Cynthia Mohr, and Alicia Starkey, a recent Ph.D. graduate in psychology — together with Clemson State University professor Robert Sinclair, exhibits a positive relationship between expressed workplace gratitude, physical health and mental health.

The study, “Gratitude reception and physical health: Examining the mediating role of satisfaction with patient care in a sample of acute care nurses,” shows that being thanked more often at work predicted better sleep, fewer headaches and healthier eating, because it improved nurses’ work satisfaction.

Improving Self-Care in a Stressful Work Environment

The study involved a group of Oregon nurses, a profession that has a particularly high rate of burnout. Cadiz discusses the findings and how applying the research can have a significant impact on quality of life and job retention by preventing stress-related illnesses and disease.

“Nurses tend to have a thankless job. It’s very physical, and they’re often being screamed at by patients who are at their lowest. When nurses receive gratitude, it boosts them,” Cadiz explains.

“This type of study helps us understand how to keep nurses in the workforce in a healthy way. Nurses strongly align their profession with their identity and often look out for patients more than themselves. The gratitude matches up with their identity, gives them satisfaction in a job well done and ultimately increases self-care.”

Many people inherently connect their identity to their job and feelings of appreciation within their roles. Employers who understand and react to this can create positive social and economic change.

Gratitude is Good Business

From an organizational, policy and leadership perspective, Cadiz says that employers should create formal or informal opportunities for people to express gratitude. Including gratitude in a business plan is an essential step that many business leaders miss, and that omission can have financial consequences.

“Employees that receive positive feedback are healthier, and that can impact the bottom line,” adds Cadiz. “Preventing headaches and other stress-related symptoms means fewer sick days, and, in this case, cuts down the cost of replacement nurses and overtime pay.”

These small changes can have a dramatic fiscal impact over time, which can result in more staff, better pay rates and increased benefits.

The big takeaway — express gratitude when you see someone doing a good job. A positive feedback loop impacts you and those around you, and can ultimately shape a healthier and happier community.

Improving Well-Being By Having Attainable Goals

Human happiness generally is among the most important of initiatives, and this new research on achievements contributes to that cause.

Those who set realistic goals can hope for a higher level of well-being. The key for later satisfaction is whether the life goals are seen as attainable and what they mean to the person, as psychologists from the University of Basel report in a study with over 970 participants.

Wealth, community, health, meaningful work: life goals express a person’s character, as they determine behavior and the compass by which people are guided. It can therefore be assumed that goals can contribute substantially to how satisfied people are in life — or how dissatisfied if important goals are blocked and cannot be achieved.

A team of psychologists from the University of Basel conducted a detailed examination on how life goals are embedded in people’s lives across adult; the results are now published in the European Journal of Personality. The researchers used data from 973 people between 18 and 92 years old living in German-speaking parts of Switzerland; more than half of the participants were surveyed again after two and four years.

[…]

Life goals with predictive power

The findings of the study revealed that perceiving one’s personal goals as attainable is an indicator for later cognitive and affective well-being. This implies that people are most satisfied if they have a feeling of control and attainability. Interestingly, the importance of the goal was less relevant for later well-being than expected.

Life goals also hold predictive power for specific domains: Participants who set social-relation goals or health goals were more satisfied with their social relationships or their own health. The link between life goals and subsequent well-being appeared to be relatively independent of the age of the participants.

Younger people want status, older people want social engagement

What are the goals that people value the most in a respective age period? The goals that people value in a particular life stage depend on the development tasks that are present at this stage: the younger the participants were, the more they rated personal-growth, status, work and social-relation goals as important. The older the participants were, the more they rated social engagement and health as important.

“Many of our results confirmed theoretical assumptions from developmental psychology,” says lead author and PhD student Janina Bühler from the University of Basel’s Faculty of Psychology. Life goals were strongly determined by age: “If we examine, however, whether these goals contribute to well-being, age appears less relevant.” Hence, adults, whether old or young, are able to balance the importance and attainability of their goals.

Worse Air Pollution Found to Decrease Happiness Levels

Another reason that the world should convert to renewable, clean sources of power in the fight against climate change. Happiness is one of the most important things in life, and therefore it’d be good if the world’s political systems better prioritized the general happiness of people instead of largely prioritizing big business profits.

Now researchers at MIT have discovered that air pollution in China’s cities may be contributing to low levels of happiness amongst the country’s urban population.

In a paper published in the journal Nature Human Behaviour, a research team led by Siqi Zheng, the Samuel Tak Lee Associate Professor in MIT’s Department of Urban Studies and Planning and Center for Real Estate, and the Faculty Director of MIT China Future City Lab, reveals that higher levels of pollution are associated with a decrease in people’s happiness levels.

The paper also includes co-first author Jianghao Wang of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Matthew Kahn of the University of Southern California, Cong Sun of the Shanghai University of Finance and Economics, and Xiaonan Zhang of Tsinghua University in Beijing.

Despite an annual economic growth rate of 8 percent, satisfaction levels amongst China’s urban population have not risen as much as would be expected.

Alongside inadequate public services, soaring house prices, and concerns over food safety, air pollution — caused by the country’s industrialization, coal burning, and increasing use of cars — has had a significant impact on quality of life in urban areas.

Research has previously shown that air pollution is damaging to health, cognitive performance, labor productivity, and educational outcomes. But air pollution also has a broader impact on people’s social lives and behavior, according to Zheng.

To avoid high levels of air pollution, for example, people may move to cleaner cities or green buildings, buy protective equipment such as face masks and air purifiers, and spend less time outdoors.

“Pollution also has an emotional cost,” Zheng says. “People are unhappy, and that means they may make irrational decisions.”

On polluted days, people have been shown to be more likely to engage in impulsive and risky behavior that they may later regret, possibly as a result of short-term depression and anxiety, according to Zheng.

“So we wanted to explore a broader range of effects of air pollution on people’s daily lives in highly polluted Chinese cities,” she says.

To this end, the researchers used real-time data from social media to track how changing daily pollution levels impact people’s happiness in 144 Chinese cities.

In the past, happiness levels have typically been measured using questionnaires. However, such surveys provide only a single snapshot; people’s responses tend to reflect their overall feeling of well-being, rather than their happiness on particular days.

“Social media gives a real-time measure of people’s happiness levels and also provides a huge amount of data, across a lot of different cities,” Zheng says.

The researchers used information on urban levels of ultrafine particulate matter — PM 2.5 concentration — from the daily air quality readings released by China’s Ministry of Environmental Protection. Airborne particulate matter has become the primary air pollutant in Chinese cities in recent years, and PM 2.5 particles, which measure less than 2.5 microns in diameter, are particularly dangerous to people’s lungs.

To measure daily happiness levels for each city, the team applied a machine-learning algorithm to analyze the 210 million geotagged tweets from China’s largest microblogging platform, Sina Weibo.

The tweets cover a period from March to November 2014. For each tweet, the researchers applied the machine-trained sentiment analysis algorithm to measure the sentiment of the post. They then calculated the median value for that city and day, the so-called expressed happiness index, ranging from 0 to 100, with 0 indicating a very negative mood, and 100 a very positive one.

Finally, the researchers merged this index with the daily PM2.5 concentration and weather data.

They found a significantly negative correlation between pollution and happiness levels. What’s more, women were more sensitive to higher pollution levels than men, as were those on higher incomes.

When the researchers looked at the type of cities that the tweets originated from, they found that people from the very cleanest and very dirtiest cities were the most severely affected by pollution levels.

Drug Price Gouging in Generics

General info on prescription drugs and generic drug price gouging.

Martin Shkreli managed to make himself a household name a few years back. His claim to fame stemmed from the decision by Turing Pharmaceuticals, a company he founded and controlled, to acquire the rights to produce Daraprim. He then raised the price of the drug by 5,000 percent.

This was very bad news for the people who were dependent on the drug. Daraprim is an anti-parasitic drug that is often taken by people with AIDS to keep them from getting opportunistic infections. People with AIDS who are being successfully treated with Daraprim are not going to want to experiment with alternatives.

Daraprim was already a 60-year-old drug at the time Turing acquired it and had long been available as a generic. This meant that other manufacturers could in principle come into the market and compete with Turing’s inflated price.

Shkreli made the bet that no other drug company would take advantage of this opportunity, because even for a generic drug, there are still substantial costs for entry. Since the market for Daraprim was small, a new entrant would be unlikely to recover these costs if Turing pushed the price back down somewhere near its original level. While Daraprim was his biggest “success,” Shkreli was trying this strategy with a number of other drugs before the Justice Department put him out of business with unrelated charges of securities fraud.

Shkreli’s days of price gouging in the generic drug world may be over, but he established a model that other ambitious entrepreneurs are likely to follow. Close to 40 percent of generic drugs have only a single manufacturer. This is partly a result of the failure of anti-trust policy to stem a wave of mergers in the industry. It is also a result of the fact that many drugs simply have very limited markets where it is difficult to support multiple producers.

Most generic producers have not tried to follow the Shkreli model and jack up prices of drugs that people need for their health or even their lives, but some have. The soaring price of insulin is one important example, EpiPen, the asthma injector, is another. Both involve well-known treatments that have long been used, but the limited number of suppliers has allowed for huge price increases in recent years.

This is the context for the public drug-manufacturing corporation being proposed in a bill by Senator Elizabeth Warren and Representative Jan Schakowsky. The idea is that the federal government should create manufacturing capacity (which could be privately licensed) that would allow it to quickly enter a market to compete with the next Martin Shkreli.

If a company tries to jack up its prices by an extraordinary amount, it would find itself soon competing with a government manufacturer that is selling the same drug for the cost of production, plus a normal profit. This is a great strategy, since simply the existence of this capacity should be sufficient to discourage the next Shkreli.

There will be little money in jacking up the price of a drug by 5,000 percent if it quickly results in the disappearance of their market. This should encourage the generic industry to keep its prices in line.

It is important to note a key difference between the generic industry and brand industry. The brand pharmaceutical companies, like Pfizer and Merck, could argue that they need high prices to pay for research. These companies hugely exaggerate their research costs and downplay the extent to which high profits just mean more money for shareholders, but they actually do research.

By contrast, the generic industry is not researching new drugs. They are manufacturing drugs that have been developed by others. In this sense they can be thought of like a company that manufacturers paper plates or shovels. They need a normal profit to stay in business, nothing more.

For this reason, the Warren-Schakowsky proposal is very much the right type of remedy for excessive prices in the generic drug industry. At the same time, we have to recognize that generic drugs are the smaller part of the problem with high drug prices.

Although generics account for almost 90 percent of prescriptions, they account for only a bit more than a quarter of spending on prescription drugs. The story of drugs costing tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars a year is almost entirely a story of brand drugs with high prices as a result of patent monopolies or related protections.

This will require a larger fix, likely along the same lines, with the government paying for research and allowing new drugs to be sold as generics. But the Warren-Schakowsky bill is a huge first step in bringing drug costs down and ensuring that people will not find themselves suddenly at the mercy of the next Martin Shkreli.

Mental Health Diagnoses Among U.S. Children and Youth Continue to Rise at Alarming Rates

It follows the trend of mental health disorder rates rising globally. This isn’t progress — it shows that, whatever the newest low unemployment numbers in the “booming” economy are, there is an undercurrent of something gone seriously wrong in our societies.

The number of children and adolescents visiting the nation’s emergency departments due to mental health concerns continued to rise at an alarming rate from 2012 through 2016, with mental health diagnoses for non-Latino blacks outpacing such diagnoses among youth of other racial/ethnic groups, according to a retrospective cross-sectional study presented during the American Academy of Pediatrics National Conference & Exhibition.

“Access to mental health services among children can be difficult, and data suggest that it can be even more challenging for minority children compared with non-minority youths,” says Monika K. Goyal, M.D., MSCE, assistant division chief and director of research in the Division of Emergency Medicine at Children’s National Health System and the study’s senior author. “Our findings underscore the importance of improving access to outpatient mental health resources as well as expanding capacity within the nation’s emergency departments to respond to this unmet need.”

An estimated 17.1 million U.S. children are affected by a psychiatric disorder, making mental health disorders among the most common pediatric illnesses. Roughly 2 to 5 percent of all emergency department visits by children are related to mental health concerns. The research team hypothesized that within that group, there might be higher numbers of minority children visiting emergency departments seeking mental health services.

To investigate this hypothesis, they examined Pediatric Health Information System data, which aggregates deidentified information from patient encounters at more than 45 children’s hospitals around the nation. Their analyses showed that in 2012, 50.4 emergency department visits per 100,000 children were for mental health-related concerns. By 2016, that figure had grown to 78.5 emergency department visits per 100,000 children.