The health benefits of dietary fibre

Background: Dietary fibre consists of non-digestible forms of carbohydrate, usually as polysaccharides that originate from plant-based foods. Over recent decades, our diet within Westernised societies has changed radically from that of our hominid ancestors, with implications for our co-evolved gut microbiota. This includes increased ingestion of ultra-processed foods that are typically impoverished of dietary fibre, and associated reduction in the intake of fibre-replete plant-based foods. Over recent decades, there has been a transformation in our understanding of the health benefits of dietary fibre. Objective: To explore the current medical literature on the health benefits of dietary fibre, with a focus on overall metabolic health. Data Sources: We performed a narrative review, based on relevant articles written in English from a PubMed search, using the terms ‘dietary fibre and metabolic health’. Results: In the Western world, our diets are impoverished of fibre. Dietary fibre intake associates with overall metabolic health (through key pathways that include insulin sensitivity) and a variety of other pathologies that include cardiovascular disease, colonic health, gut motility and risk for colorectal carcinoma. Dietary fibre intake also correlates with mortality. The gut microflora functions as an important mediator of the beneficial effects of dietary fibre, including the regulation of appetite, metabolic processes and chronic inflammatory pathways. Conclusions: Multiple factors contribute to our fibre-impoverished modern diet. Given the plethora of scientific evidence that corroborate the multiple and varied health benefits of dietary fibre, and the risks associated with a diet that lacks fibre, the optimization of fibre within our diets represents an important public health strategy to improve both metabolic and overall health. If implemented successfully, this strategy would likely result in substantial future health benefits for the population. View Full-Tex

Residential green space and air pollution are associated with brain activation in a social-stress paradigm

We examined the influence of three major environmental variables at the place of residence as potential moderating variables for neurofunctional activation during a social-stress paradigm. Data from functional magnetic resonance imaging of 42 male participants were linked to publicly accessible governmental databases providing information on amount of green space, air pollution, and noise pollution. We hypothesized that stress-related brain activation in regions important for emotion regulation were associated positively with green space and associated negatively with air pollution and noise pollution. A higher percentage of green space was associated with stronger parietal and insular activation during stress compared with that in the control condition. More air pollution was associated with weaker activation in the same (but also extended) brain regions. These findings may serve as an important reference for future studies in the emerging field of “neuro-urbanism” and emphasize the importance of environmental factors in urban planning

A framework for assessing and implementing the co-benefits of nature-based solutions in urban areas

To address challenges associated with climate resilience, health and well-being in urban areas, current policy platforms are shifting their focus from ecosystem-based to nature-based solutions (NBS), broadly defined as solutions to societal challenges that are inspired and supported by nature. NBS result in the provision of co-benefits, such as the improvement of place attractiveness, of health and quality of life, and creation of green jobs. Few frameworks exist for acknowledging and assessing the value of such co-benefits of NBS and to guide cross-sectoral project and policy design and implementation. In this paper, we firstly developed a holistic framework for assessing co-benefits (and costs) of NBS across elements of socio-cultural and socio-economic systems, biodiversity, ecosystems and climate. The framework was guided by a review of over 1700 documents from science and practice within and across 10 societal challenges relevant to cities globally. We found that NBS can have environmental, social and economic co-benefits and/or costs both within and across these 10 societal challenges. On that base, we develop and propose a seven-stage process for situating co-benefit assessment within policy and project implementation. The seven stages include: 1) identify problem or opportunity; 2) select and assess NBS and related actions; 3) design NBS implementation processes; 4) implement NBS; 5) frequently engage stakeholders and communicate co-benefits; 6) transfer and upscale NBS; and 7) monitor and evaluate co-benefits across all stages. We conclude that the developed framework together with the seven-stage co-benefit assessment process represent a valuable tool for guiding thinking and identifying the multiple values of NBS implementation

BRCA2 polymorphic stop codon K3326X and the risk of breast, prostate, and ovarian cancers

Background: The K3326X variant in BRCA2 (BRCA2*c.9976A>T; p.Lys3326*; rs11571833) has been found to be associated with small increased risks of breast cancer. However, it is not clear to what extent linkage disequilibrium with fully pathogenic mutations might account for this association. There is scant information about the effect of K3326X in other hormone-related cancers. Methods: Using weighted logistic regression, we analyzed data from the large iCOGS study including 76 637 cancer case patients and 83 796 control patients to estimate odds ratios (ORw) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for K3326X variant carriers in relation to breast, ovarian, and prostate cancer risks, with weights defined as probability of not having a pathogenic BRCA2 variant. Using Cox proportional hazards modeling, we also examined the associations of K3326X with breast and ovarian cancer risks among 7183 BRCA1 variant carriers. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: The K3326X variant was associated with breast (ORw = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.17 to 1.40, P = 5.9x10- 6) and invasive ovarian cancer (ORw = 1.26, 95% CI = 1.10 to 1.43, P = 3.8x10-3). These associations were stronger for serous ovarian cancer and for estrogen receptor–negative breast cancer (ORw = 1.46, 95% CI = 1.2 to 1.70, P = 3.4x10-5 and ORw = 1.50, 95% CI = 1.28 to 1.76, P = 4.1x10-5, respectively). For BRCA1 mutation carriers, there was a statistically significant inverse association of the K3326X variant with risk of ovarian cancer (HR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.22 to 0.84, P = .013) but no association with breast cancer. No association with prostate cancer was observed. Conclusions: Our study provides evidence that the K3326X variant is associated with risk of developing breast and ovarian cancers independent of other pathogenic variants in BRCA2. Further studies are needed to determine the biological mechanism of action responsible for these associations

Nature-Based Solutions to Climate Change Adaptation in Urban Areas—Linkages Between Science, Policy and Practice

This book brings together research findings and experiences from science, policy and practice to highlight and debate the importance of nature-based solutions to climate change adaptation in urban areas. Emphasis is given to the potential of nature-based approaches to create multiple-benefits for society.The expert contributions present recommendations for creating synergies between ongoing policy processes, scientific programmes and practical implementation of climate change and nature conservation measures in global urban areas

A social-ecological-technological systems framework for urban ecosystem services

As rates of urbanization and climatic change soar, decision-makers are increasingly challenged to provide innovative solutions that simultaneously address climate-change impacts and risks and inclusively ensure quality of life for urban residents. Cities have turned to nature-based solutions to help address these challenges. Nature-based solutions, through the provision of ecosystem services, can yield numerous benefits for people and address multiple challenges simultaneously. Yet, efforts to mainstream nature-based solutions are impaired by the complexity of the interacting social, ecological, and technological dimensions of urban systems. This complexity must be understood and managed to ensure ecosystem-service provisioning is effective, equitable, and resilient. Here, we provide a social-ecological-technological system (SETS) framework that builds on decades of urban ecosystem services research to better understand four core challenges associated with urban nature-based solutions: multi-functionality, systemic valuation, scale mismatch of ecosystem services, and inequity and injustice. The framework illustrates the importance of coordinating natural, technological, and socio-economic systems when designing, planning, and managing urban nature-based solutions to enable optimal social-ecological outcomes

A social-ecological-technological systems framework for urban ecosystem services

As rates of urbanization and climatic change soar, decision-makers are increasingly challenged to provide innovative solutions that simultaneously address climate change impacts and risks and inclusively ensure quality of life for urban residents. Cities have turned to nature-based solutions to help address these challenges. Nature-based solutions, through the provision of ecosystem services, can yield numerous benefits for people and address multiple challenges simultaneously. Yet, efforts to mainstream nature-based solutions are impaired by the complexity of the interacting social, ecological, and technological dimensions of urban systems. This complexity must be understood and managed to ensure ecosystem-service provisioning is effective, equitable, and resilient. Here, we provide a social-ecological-technological system (SETS) framework that builds on decades of urban ecosystem services research to better understand four core challenges associated with urban nature-based solutions: multi-functionality, systemic valuation, scale mismatch of ecosystem services, and inequity and injustice. The framework illustrates the importance of coordinating natural, technological, and socio-economic systems when designing, planning, and managing urban nature-based solutions to enable optimal social-ecological outcomes