Mothers' perceptions of child weight status and the subsequent weight gain of their children : a population based longitudinal study

BACKGROUND: There is a plethora of cross sectional work on maternal perceptions of child weight status showing that mothers typically do not classify their overweight child as being overweight according to commonly used clinical criteria. Awareness of overweight in their child is regarded as an important prerequisite for mothers to initiate appropriate action. The gap in the literature is determining whether, if mothers do classify their overweight child's weight status correctly, this is associated with a positive outcome for the child's body mass index (BMI) at a later stage. OBJECTIVE: To explore longitudinal perceptions of child weight status from mothers of a contemporary population-based birth cohort (Gateshead Millennium Study) and relationships of these perceptions with future child weight gain. METHODS: Data collected in the same cohort at 7, 12 and 15 years of age: mothers' responses to two items concerning their child's body size; child's and mother's BMI; pubertal maturation; demographic information. RESULTS: Mothers' perceptions of whether their child was overweight did not change markedly over time. Child BMI was the only significant predictor of mothers' classification of overweight status, and it was only at the extreme end of the overweight range and in the obese range that mothers reliably described their child as overweight. Even when mothers did appropriately classify their child as overweight at an earlier stage, this was not related to relatively lower child BMI a few years later. CONCLUSIONS: Mothers tend to classify their child as overweight in only more extreme cases. It is an important finding that no beneficial impact was shown on later child BMI in overweight children whose mothers classified their child's weight status as overweight at an earlier stage.International Journal of Obesity accepted article preview online, 25 January 2017. doi:10.1038/ijo.2017.20

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1.

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field