Women's subsistence strategies predict fertility across cultures, but context matters

Data, Materials, and Software Availability. Anonymized CSV file data have been deposited in OSF (https://osf.io/8d9n2/?view_only=9e07c25 e06414f7a8d041e80e8539e5c) (49).Supporting Information is available online at: https://www.pnas.org/doi/suppl/10.1073/pnas.2318181121/suppl_file/pnas.2318181121.sapp.pdf .While it is commonly assumed that farmers have higher, and foragers lower, fertility compared to populations practicing other forms of subsistence, robust supportive evidence is lacking. We tested whether subsistence activities—incorporating market integration—are associated with fertility in 10,250 women from 27 small-scale societies and found considerable variation in fertility. This variation did not align with group-level subsistence typologies. Societies labeled as “farmers” did not have higher fertility than others, while “foragers” did not have lower fertility. However, at the individual level, we found strong evidence that fertility was positively associated with farming and moderate evidence of a negative relationship between foraging and fertility. Markers of market integration were strongly negatively correlated with fertility. Despite strong cross-cultural evidence, these relationships were not consistent in all populations, highlighting the importance of the socioecological context, which likely influences the diverse mechanisms driving the relationship between fertility and subsistence.A.E.P. received funding from the Medical Research Council MRC (grant no. MR/P014216/1). J.S. acknowledges Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse funding from the French National Research Agency (ANR) under the Investments for the Future (Investissements d’Avenir) program, grant ANR-17-EURE-0010. This material is based upon work supported while S.M. served at the National Science Foundation (NSF)

Scientific assessment of the use of sugars as cigarette tobacco ingredients: A review of published and other publicly available studies

Sugars, such as sucrose or invert sugar, have been used as tobacco ingredients in American-blend cigarettes to replenish the sugars lost during curing of the Burley component of the blended tobacco in order to maintain a balanced flavor. Chemical-analytical studies of the mainstream smoke of research cigarettes with various sugar application levels revealed that most of the smoke constituents determined did not show any sugar-related changes in yields (per mg nicotine), while ten constituents were found to either increase (formaldehyde, acrolein, 2-butanone, isoprene, benzene, toluene, benzo[k]fluoranthene) or decrease (4-aminobiphenyl, N-nitrosodimethylamine, N-nitrosonornicotine) in a statistically significant manner with increasing sugar application levels. Such constituent yields were modeled into constituent uptake distributions using simulations of nicotine uptake distributions generated on the basis of published nicotine biomonitoring data, which were multiplied by the constituent/nicotine ratios determined in the current analysis. These simulations revealed extensive overlaps for the constituent uptake distributions with and without sugar application. Moreover, the differences in smoke composition did not lead to relevant changes in the activity in in vitro or in vivo assays. The potential impact of using sugars as tobacco ingredients was further assessed in an indirect manner by comparing published data from markets with predominantly American-blend or Virginia-type (no added sugars) cigarettes. No relevant difference was found between these markets for smoking prevalence, intensity, some markers of dependence, nicotine uptake, or mortality from smoking-related lung cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. In conclusion, thorough examination of the data available suggests that the use of sugars as ingredients in cigarette tobacco does not increase the inherent risk and harm of cigarette smoking

Environmental Surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 in Two Restaurants from a Mid- scale City that Followed U.S. CDC Reopening Guidance

Since mask use and physical distancing are difficult to maintain when people dine indoors, restaurants are perceived as high risk for acquiring COVID-19. The air and environmental surfaces in two restaurants in a mid- scale city located in north central Florida that followed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reopening guidance were sampled three times from July 2020 to February 2021. Sixteen air samples were collected for 2 hours using air samplers, and 20 surface samples by using moistened swabs. The samples were analyzed by real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 genomic RNA. A total of ~550 patrons dined in the restaurants during our samplings. SARS-CoV-2 genomic RNA was not detected in any of the air samples. One of the 20 surface samples (5%) was positive. That sample had been collected from a plastic tablecloth immediately after guests left the restaurant. Virus was not isolated in cell cultures inoculated with aliquots of the RT-PCR-positive sample. The likelihood that patrons and staff acquire SARS-CoV-2 infections may be low in restaurants in a mid-scale city that adopt CDC restaurant reopening guidelines, such as operation at 50% capacity so that tables can be spaced at least 6 feet apart, establishment of adequate mechanical ventilation, use of a face covering except while eating or drinking, and implementation of disinfection measures