Relationship between body mass, lean mass, fat mass, and limb bone cross-sectional geometry: Implications for estimating body mass and physique from the skeleton.

OBJECTIVES: Estimating body mass from skeletal dimensions is widely practiced, but methods for estimating its components (lean and fat mass) are poorly developed. The ability to estimate these characteristics would offer new insights into the evolution of body composition and its variation relative to past and present health. This study investigates the potential of long bone cross-sectional properties as predictors of body, lean, and fat mass. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Humerus, femur and tibia midshaft cross-sectional properties were measured by peripheral quantitative computed tomography in sample of young adult women (n = 105) characterized by a range of activity levels. Body composition was estimated from bioimpedance analysis. RESULTS: Lean mass correlated most strongly with both upper and lower limb bone properties (r values up to 0.74), while fat mass showed weak correlations (r ≤ 0.29). Estimation equations generated from tibial midshaft properties indicated that lean mass could be estimated relatively reliably, with some improvement using logged data and including bone length in the models (minimum standard error of estimate = 8.9%). Body mass prediction was less reliable and fat mass only poorly predicted (standard errors of estimate ≥11.9% and >33%, respectively). DISCUSSION: Lean mass can be predicted more reliably than body mass from limb bone cross-sectional properties. The results highlight the potential for studying evolutionary trends in lean mass from skeletal remains, and have implications for understanding the relationship between bone morphology and body mass or composition

“Working the System”—British American Tobacco's Influence on the European Union Treaty and Its Implications for Policy: An Analysis of Internal Tobacco Industry Documents

Katherine Smith and colleagues investigate the ways in which British American Tobacco influenced the European Union Treaty so that new EU policies advance the interests of major corporations, including those that produce products damaging to health

Tephrochronology and its application: A review

Tephrochronology (from tephra, Gk ‘ashes’) is a unique stratigraphic method for linking, dating, and synchronizing geological, palaeoenvironmental, or archaeological sequences or events. As well as utilising the Law of Superposition, tephrochronology in practise requires tephra deposits to be characterized (or ‘fingerprinted’) using physical properties evident in the field together with those obtained from laboratory analyses. Such analyses include mineralogical examination (petrography) or geochemical analysis of glass shards or crystals using an electron microprobe or other analytical tools including laser-ablation-based mass spectrometry or the ion microprobe. The palaeoenvironmental or archaeological context in which a tephra occurs may also be useful for correlational purposes. Tephrochronology provides greatest utility when a numerical age obtained for a tephra or cryptotephra is transferrable from one site to another using stratigraphy and by comparing and matching inherent compositional features of the deposits with a high degree of likelihood. Used this way, tephrochronology is an age-equivalent dating method that provides an exceptionally precise volcanic-event stratigraphy. Such age transfers are valid because the primary tephra deposits from an eruption essentially have the same short-lived age everywhere they occur, forming isochrons very soon after the eruption (normally within a year). As well as providing isochrons for palaeoenvironmental and archaeological reconstructions, tephras through their geochemical analysis allow insight into volcanic and magmatic processes, and provide a comprehensive record of explosive volcanism and recurrence rates in the Quaternary (or earlier) that can be used to establish time-space relationships of relevance to volcanic hazard analysis. The basis and application of tephrochronology as a central stratigraphic and geochronological tool for Quaternary studies are presented and discussed in this review. Topics covered include principles of tephrochronology, defining isochrons, tephra nomenclature, mapping and correlating tephras from proximal to distal locations at metre- through to sub-millimetre-scale, cryptotephras, mineralogical and geochemical fingerprinting methods, numerical and statistical correlation techniques, and developments and applications in dating including the use of flexible depositional age-modelling techniques based on Bayesian statistics. Along with reference to wide-ranging examples and the identification of important recent advances in tephrochronology, such as the development of new geoanalytical approaches that enable individual small glass shards to be analysed near-routinely for major, trace, and rare-earth elements, potential problems such as miscorrelation, erroneous-age transfer, and tephra reworking and taphonomy (especially relating to cryptotephras) are also examined. Some of the challenges for future tephrochronological studies include refining geochemical analytical methods further, improving understanding of cryptotephra distribution and preservation patterns, improving age modelling including via new or enhanced radiometric or incremental techniques and Bayesian-derived models, evaluating and quantifying uncertainty in tephrochronology to a greater degree than at present, constructing comprehensive regional databases, and integrating tephrochronology with spatially referenced environmental and archaeometric data into 3-D reconstructions using GIS and geostatistics

Dimethyl fumarate in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) inhibits inflammasome-mediated inflammation and has been proposed as a treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. This randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing multiple treatments in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 (NCT04381936, ISRCTN50189673). In this assessment of DMF performed at 27 UK hospitals, adults were randomly allocated (1:1) to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus DMF. The primary outcome was clinical status on day 5 measured on a seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were time to sustained improvement in clinical status, time to discharge, day 5 peripheral blood oxygenation, day 5 C-reactive protein, and improvement in day 10 clinical status. Between 2 March 2021 and 18 November 2021, 713 patients were enroled in the DMF evaluation, of whom 356 were randomly allocated to receive usual care plus DMF, and 357 to usual care alone. 95% of patients received corticosteroids as part of routine care. There was no evidence of a beneficial effect of DMF on clinical status at day 5 (common odds ratio of unfavourable outcome 1.12; 95% CI 0.86-1.47; p = 0.40). There was no significant effect of DMF on any secondary outcome

Dimethyl fumarate in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) inhibits inflammasome-mediated inflammation and has been proposed as a treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. This randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing multiple treatments in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 (NCT04381936, ISRCTN50189673). In this assessment of DMF performed at 27 UK hospitals, adults were randomly allocated (1:1) to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus DMF. The primary outcome was clinical status on day 5 measured on a seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were time to sustained improvement in clinical status, time to discharge, day 5 peripheral blood oxygenation, day 5 C-reactive protein, and improvement in day 10 clinical status. Between 2 March 2021 and 18 November 2021, 713 patients were enroled in the DMF evaluation, of whom 356 were randomly allocated to receive usual care plus DMF, and 357 to usual care alone. 95% of patients received corticosteroids as part of routine care. There was no evidence of a beneficial effect of DMF on clinical status at day 5 (common odds ratio of unfavourable outcome 1.12; 95% CI 0.86-1.47; p = 0.40). There was no significant effect of DMF on any secondary outcome