High‐performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) as a means of assessing the presence of uric acid in archeological human remains:Challenges and future directions

Objectives: This research aimed to replicate the Swinson, D., Snaith, J., Buckberry, J., & Brickley, M. (2010). High performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) in the investigation of gout in paleopathology. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology, 20, 135–143. https://doi.org/10.1002/oa.1009 method for detecting uric acid in archeological human remains to investigate gout in past populations and to improve the original High Performance Liquid Chromatography‐ultraviolet (HPLC‐UV) method by using HPLC‐mass spectrometry (HPLC‐MS), a more sensitive, compound‐specific detection method. Materials and Methods: We used reference samples of uric acid to create a dilution series to assess the limits of quantification and detection. Samples from individuals with and without gout lesions were taken from foot bones and ribs from the English cemeteries of Tanyard, Hickleton, Gloucester, and Lincoln. Results: We could not replicate the results of Swinson and colleagues using HPLC‐UV. Tests using a dilution series of uric acid showed HPLC‐MS was approximately 100× more sensitive than HPLC‐UV, with the additional benefit of being compound specific. A newly developed hydrophilic interaction chromatography (HILIC) method improved retention characteristics. Fourteen samples from eight individuals, five with skeletal lesions consistent with gout, were analyzed with the final method. None showed evidence of uric acid despite the newly developed method's improved sensitivity and specificity. Discussion: The lack of detectable uric acid extracted from these samples suggests that (1) urate crystals were not present in any of the bone samples, regardless of gout status; (2) urate crystals did not survive these specific archeological conditions; or (3) the concentration of uric acid in our bone extracts was low, and thus larger samples would be required

Structural violence and institutionalized individuals: A paleopathological perspective on a continuing issue

Past and present institutions (e.g., state and public hospitals, assisted living facilities, public nursing homes) have struggled with structural issues tied to patient care and neglect, which often manifests in the form of fracture trauma, and may explain why institutionalized individuals are at higher risk for this injury. Six hundred individuals from the Robert J. Terry Anatomical Collection born between 1822–1877 were examined to investigate hip fracture prevalence. Analysis of associated records and documentary data, including death, morgue, and census records, revealed that 36.3% (n = 218) of these individuals died in institutions such as the St. Louis State Hospital, City Infirmary, and Missouri State Hospital No. 4. Of the institutionalized individuals, 4.3% had evidence of hip fracture, significantly higher than the non-institutionalized (2.3%). Records revealed that many hip fractures were suffered around the time of death in state hospitals and were preventable, resulting from structural issues tied to understaffing and underfunding. Forensic and clinical literature, as well as current news media, indicate that structural violence in the forms of underfunding and understaffing continues to manifest as hip fractures harming institutionalized individuals today. This paper demonstrates how an anthropological perspective using paleopathological analysis sheds light on the chronicity and time depth of this issue, with the aim of driving public policy to entrench the equitable care of institutionalized people as a human right

Twenty-first century bioarchaeology: Taking stock and moving forward

This article presents outcomes from a Workshop entitled “Bioarchaeology: Taking Stock and Moving Forward,” which was held at Arizona State University (ASU) on March 6–8, 2020. Funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), the School of Human Evolution and Social Change (ASU), and the Center for Bioarchaeological Research (CBR, ASU), the Workshop's overall goal was to explore reasons why research proposals submitted by bioarchaeologists, both graduate students and established scholars, fared disproportionately poorly within recent NSF Anthropology Program competitions and to offer advice for increasing success. Therefore, this Workshop comprised 43 international scholars and four advanced graduate students with a history of successful grant acquisition, primarily from the United States. Ultimately, we focused on two related aims: (1) best practices for improving research designs and training and (2) evaluating topics of contemporary significance that reverberate through history and beyond as promising trajectories for bioarchaeological research. Among the former were contextual grounding, research question/hypothesis generation, statistical procedures appropriate for small samples and mixed qualitative/quantitative data, the salience of Bayesian methods, and training program content. Topical foci included ethics, social inequality, identity (including intersectionality), climate change, migration, violence, epidemic disease, adaptability/plasticity, the osteological paradox, and the developmental origins of health and disease. Given the profound changes required globally to address decolonization in the 21st century, this concern also entered many formal and informal discussions

Twenty-first century bioarchaeology: Taking stock and moving forward

This article presents outcomes from a Workshop entitled “Bioarchaeology: Taking Stock and Moving Forward,” which was held at Arizona State University (ASU) on March 6–8, 2020. Funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), the School of Human Evolution and Social Change (ASU), and the Center for Bioarchaeological Research (CBR, ASU), the Workshop's overall goal was to explore reasons why research proposals submitted by bioarchaeologists, both graduate students and established scholars, fared disproportionately poorly within recent NSF Anthropology Program competitions and to offer advice for increasing success. Therefore, this Workshop comprised 43 international scholars and four advanced graduate students with a history of successful grant acquisition, primarily from the United States. Ultimately, we focused on two related aims: (1) best practices for improving research designs and training and (2) evaluating topics of contemporary significance that reverberate through history and beyond as promising trajectories for bioarchaeological research. Among the former were contextual grounding, research question/hypothesis generation, statistical procedures appropriate for small samples and mixed qualitative/quantitative data, the salience of Bayesian methods, and training program content. Topical foci included ethics, social inequality, identity (including intersectionality), climate change, migration, violence, epidemic disease, adaptability/plasticity, the osteological paradox, and the developmental origins of health and disease. Given the profound changes required globally to address decolonization in the 21st century, this concern also entered many formal and informal discussions