Can Mindfulness Address Maladaptive Eating Behaviors? Why Traditional Diet Plans Fail and How New Mechanistic Insights May Lead to Novel Interventions

Emotional and other maladaptive eating behaviors develop in response to a diversity of triggers, from psychological stress to the endless external cues in our modern food environment. While the standard approach to food- and weight-related concerns has been weight-loss through dietary restriction, these interventions have produced little long-term benefit, and may be counterproductive. A growing understanding of the behavioral and neurobiological mechanisms that underpin habit formation may explain why this approach has largely failed, and pave the way for a new generation of non-pharmacologic interventions. Here, we first review how modern food environments interact with human biology to promote reward-related eating through associative learning, i.e., operant conditioning. We also review how operant conditioning (positive and negative reinforcement) cultivates habit-based reward-related eating, and how current diet paradigms may not directly target such eating. Further, we describe how mindfulness training that targets reward-based learning may constitute an appropriate intervention to rewire the learning process around eating. We conclude with examples that illustrate how teaching patients to tap into and act on intrinsic (e.g., enjoying healthy eating, not overeating, and self-compassion) rather than extrinsic reward mechanisms (e.g., weighing oneself), is a promising new direction in improving individuals\u27 relationship with food

Cocaine abuse as an immunological trigger in a case diagnosed with eales disease

Background: Eales disease is a clinical syndrome affecting the mid-peripheral retina with an idiopathic occlusive vasculitis and possible subsequent retinal neovascularization. The disease can develop into visually threatening complications. Case Presentation: We report the case of a 40-year-old Caucasian male with a history of cocaine abuse who presented with blurred vision in the left eye (LE). Fundus examination showed vitreous hemorrhages, peripheral sheathing of venous blood vessels, areas of retinal neovascularization in the LE, and peripheral occlusive phlebitis in the right eye. The full serologic panel was negative except for the heterozygous mutation of factor V Leiden. Clinical and biochemical parameters suggested a diagnosis of Eales disease. Therapy with dexamethasone, 1 mg per kg per day, tapered down slowly over 4 months, and peripheral laser photocoagulation allowed a regression of clinical signs and symptoms. Conclusion: This case shows an uncommon presentation of Eales disease associated with cocaine abuse. Both cocaine abuse and a thrombophilic pattern, as cofactors, might have sensitized the retinal microcirculation on the pathogenetic route to this retinal pathology. Furthermore, in view of this hypothesis, a thorough ocular and general medical history investigating drug abuse and coagulation disorders is recommended for ophthalmologists in such cases

COVID-19 Vaccination and Medical Liability: An International Perspective in 18 Countries

The COVID-19 vaccination has proven to be the most effective prevention measure, reducing deaths and hospitalizations and allowing, in combination with non-pharmacological interventions, the pandemic to be tackled. Although most of the adverse reactions to vaccination present mild symptoms and serious effects are very rare, they can be the cause of legal action against the healthcare workers (HCWs) who administered it. To highlight differences in the medical liability systems, we performed a search for the three most populous countries in each continent on vaccine injury compensation programs, new laws or policies to protect HCWs administering vaccinations introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic, and policies on mandatory vaccinations, on literature databases and institutional sites. We found that in seven countries the medical liability system is based on Common Law, while in eleven it is mainly based on Civil Law. Considering the application of specific laws to protect HCWs who vaccinate during the pandemic, only the USA and Canada provided immunity from liability. Among the countries we analyzed, fourteen have adopted compensation funds. From an international perspective, our results highlight that in eleven (61.1%) countries medical liability is mainly based on Civil Law, whilst in seven (38.9%) it is based on Common Law

Gap Junctions Are Involved in the Rescue of CFTR-Dependent Chloride Efflux by Amniotic Mesenchymal Stem Cells in Coculture with Cystic Fibrosis CFBE41o-Cells

We previously found that human amniotic mesenchymal stem cells (hAMSCs) in coculture with CF immortalised airway epithelial cells (CFBE41o-line, CFBE) on Transwell\uae filters acquired an epithelial phenotype and led to the expression of a mature and functional CFTR protein. In order to explore the role of gap junction-(GJ-) mediated intercellular communication (GJIC) in this rescue, cocultures (hAMSC: CFBE, 1: 5 ratio) were studied for the formation of GJIC, before and after silencing connexin 43 (Cx43), a major component of GJs. Functional GJs in cocultures were inhibited when the expression of the Cx43 protein was downregulated. Transfection of cocultures with siRNA against Cx43 resulted in the absence of specific CFTR signal on the apical membrane and reduction in the mature form of CFTR (band C), and in parallel, the CFTR-dependent chloride channel activity was significantly decreased. Cx43 downregulation determined also a decrease in transepithelial resistance and an increase in paracellular permeability as compared with control cocultures, implying that GJIC may regulate CFTR expression and function that in turn modulate airway epithelium tightness. These results indicate that GJIC is involved in the correction of CFTR chloride channel activity upon the acquisition of an epithelial phenotype by hAMSCs in coculture with CF cells

Impact of chronic liver disease upon admission on COVID-19 in-hospital mortality: Findings from COVOCA study

Background Italy has been the first Western country to be heavily affected by the spread of SARS-COV-2 infection and among the pioneers of the clinical management of pandemic. To improve the outcome, identification of patients at the highest risk seems mandatory. Objectives Aim of this study is to identify comorbidities and clinical conditions upon admission associated with in-hospital mortality in several COVID Centers in Campania Region (Italy). Methods COVOCA is a multicentre retrospective observational cohort study, which involved 18 COVID Centers throughout Campania Region, Italy. Data were collected from patients who completed their hospitalization between March-June 2020. The endpoint was in-hospital mortality, assessed either from data at discharge or death certificate, whilst all exposure variables were collected at hospital admission. Results Among 618 COVID-19 hospitalized patients included in the study, 143 in-hospital mortality events were recorded, with a cumulative incidence of about 23%. At multivariable logistic analysis, male sex (OR 2.63, 95%CI 1.42–4.90; p = 0.001), Chronic Liver Disease (OR 5.88, 95%CI 2.39–14.46; p<0.001) and malignancies (OR 2.62, 95%CI 1.21–5.68; p = 0.015) disclosed an independent association with a poor prognosis, Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) and Respiratory Severity Scale allowed to identify at higher mortality risk. Sensitivity analysis further enhanced these findings. Conclusion Mortality of patients hospitalized for COVID-19 appears strongly affected by both clinical conditions on admission and comorbidities. Originally, we observed a very poor outcome in subjects with a chronic liver disease, alongside with an increase of hepatic damage

DE-PASS Best Evidence Statement (BESt): Modifiable determinants of physical activity and sedentary behaviour in children and adolescents aged 5-19 years-a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction Physical activity among children and adolescents remains insufficient, despite the substantial efforts made by researchers and policymakers. Identifying and furthering our understanding of potential modifiable determinants of physical activity behaviour (PAB) and sedentary behaviour (SB) is crucial for the development of interventions that promote a shift from SB to PAB. The current protocol details the process through which a series of systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses (MAs) will be conducted to produce a best-evidence statement (BESt) and inform policymakers. The overall aim is to identify modifiable determinants that are associated with changes in PAB and SB in children and adolescents (aged 5-19 years) and to quantify their effect on, or association with, PAB/SB. Methods and analysis A search will be performed in MEDLINE, SportDiscus, Web of Science, PsychINFO and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled trials (CTs) that investigate the effect of interventions on PAB/SB and longitudinal studies that investigate the associations between modifiable determinants and PAB/SB at multiple time points will be sought. Risk of bias assessments will be performed using adapted versions of Cochrane's RoB V.2.0 and ROBINS-I tools for RCTs and CTs, respectively, and an adapted version of the National Institute of Health's tool for longitudinal studies. Data will be synthesised narratively and, where possible, MAs will be performed using frequentist and Bayesian statistics. Modifiable determinants will be discussed considering the settings in which they were investigated and the PAB/SB measurement methods used. Ethics and dissemination No ethical approval is needed as no primary data will be collected. The findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications and academic conferences where possible. The BESt will also be shared with policy makers within the DE-PASS consortium in the first instance. Systematic review registration CRD42021282874

Legal responsibility of vaccinating doctor

LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY OF VACCINATING DOCTOR. The legal responsibility of the vaccinating doctor is one of the central issues in the current setting of the Covid-19 pandemic. The aim of this statement is to outline the profiles of the medical legal liability, with a focus on the figure of the vaccinating physician, in criminal, civil, and disciplinary terms, based on the Italian legislation in force. The vaccinating doctor responds for his work in the field of vaccination in the same way as any other health service should perform (diagnostic, therapeutic, etc.). Helpful in this context is the adoption of the L. 76/2021; it was developed to find a balance between safeguarding the person privacy and greater guarantees for the doctor. This law introduces a criminal shield that can put a limit to litigation, curbing the phenomenon of so-called defensive medicine. The climate of uncertainty and fear of legal repercussions for the doctors, and the constant updating and redefinition of the indications of operability in the vaccination campaigns, underline the need to focus on the knowledge of the responsibilities and the safeguard of the vaccinating doctors. In addition to the regulatory cornerstones, the statement also addresses the issue of informed consent and the role of the occupational doctor as a central figure in the vaccination campaign in the workplace

DE-PASS Best Evidence Statement (BESt):modifiable determinants of physical activity and sedentary behaviour in children and adolescents aged 5–19 years–a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction: Physical activity among children and adolescents remains insufficient, despite the substantial efforts made by researchers and policymakers. Identifying and furthering our understanding of potential modifiable determinants of physical activity behaviour (PAB) and sedentary behaviour (SB) is crucial for the development of interventions that promote a shift from SB to PAB. The current protocol details the process through which a series of systematic literature reviews (SLRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) will be conducted to produce a best-evidence statement (BESt) and inform policy makers. The overall aim is to identify modifiable determinants that are associated with changes in PAB and SB in children and adolescents (aged 5-19 years) and to quantify their effect on, or association with, PAB/SB. Methods and analysis: A search will be performed in MEDLINE, SportDiscus, Web of Science, PsychINFO and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled trials (CTs) that investigate the effect of interventions on PAB/SB and longitudinal studies that investigate the associations between modifiable determinants and PAB/SB at multiple time points will be sought. Risk of bias assessments will be performed using adapted versions of Cochrane’s RoB 2.0 and ROBINS-I tools for RCTs and CTs, respectively, and an adapted version of the National Institute of Health’s tool for longitudinal studies. Data will be synthesised narratively and, where possible, MAs will be performed using frequentist and Bayesian statistics. Modifiable determinants will be discussed considering the settings in which they were investigated and the PAB/SB measurement methods used. Ethics and dissemination: No ethical approval is needed as no primary data will be collected. The findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed publications and academic conferences where possible. The BESt will also be shared with policy makers within the DE-PASS consortium in the first instance. Systematic review registration: CRD4202128287