Beauty Wellness Collective

That morning cup of coffee? It’s not enough to tackle sleep deprivation
Maybe try sleeping more next time
Caffeine is a fast-acting stimulant that works on the central nervous system. It can increase blood pressure and heart rate, boost energy levels, and improve overall mood. Coffee accounts for 54% of caffeine consumption in the world, while tea accounts for another 43%. A normal dose is about 50 mg to 200 milligrams.

We can experience the effects of caffeine right after consuming it, and the effects will continue to last for as long as the caffeine remains in your body. According to the US Academy of Sleep Medicine, caffeine’s half-life is up to 5 hours. However, many people see it as a magical cure against sleep deprivation — and that it is not.
Now, researchers from Michigan State University’s Sleep and Learning Lab looked at how effective caffeine was in counteracting the negative effects of sleep deprivation on cognition. They assessed the impact of caffeine after a night of sleep deprivation, asking 275 participants to complete a set of tasks, from simple to difficult ones.

Participants were randomly assigned to either stay awake overnight in the lab or sleep at home. In the morning, those who slept returned to the lab, and all participants consumed a capsule that contained either 200 mg of caffeine or a placebo. After an absorption period, all participants completed simple and complex attention tasks.

The researchers found that sleep deprivation impaired performance on both types of tasks and that having caffeine helped people successfully achieve the easier task. However, caffeine had a limited effect on performance on the complex tasks, which he participants had to be do in a specific order without skipping or repeating steps.

“Caffeine may improve the ability to stay awake and attend to a task, but it doesn’t do much to prevent the sort of procedural errors that can cause things like medical mistakes and car accidents,” Kimberly Fenn, lead author, explained the findings in a statement. “Caffeine increases energy and reduces sleepiness but it absolutely does not replace a full night of sleep.”

Fenn and her team highlighted that while people may fell that they can tackle sleep deprivation with caffeine, their performance on higher-level tasks will likely be affected – as seen in the study. This is why sleep deprivation can be dangerous. Lacking adequate sleep affects cognition, alters mood and can take a toll on immunity, they added.

That’s why it’s important to consider other ways to naturally increase your energy levels without caffeine. Some of the following options can help: drinking more water, eating lots of plant-based food, which may provide energy, exercising daily, but not too close to bedtime, avoiding long daytime naps and getting at least 7 hours of sleep — preferably 8 or more.

This is probably not the last time we’ve heard of bat viruses
We still don't know where SARS-CoV-2 came from -- but bats are a major virus reservoir in general.
When SARS-CoV-2 first hit the spotlight in early 2020, since before a pandemic was even declared, researchers suspected that the virus may have originated in bats. The other likely source are pangolins. A recent 2021 study also found evidence that the virus was circulating in bats and pangolins, but until clear smoking gun evidence is found, the source of the pandemic will remain a mystery and we won’t know for sure exactly where the virus originated from.

But whether or not this new coronavirus emerged from bats or not, several other dangerous viruses made the jump from bats to humans — and it’s very possible that in the future, more will make the jump.
A recent study found that the key is their ability to limit inflammation. When bats have an infection, they don’t react to it in a way that does damage. For species like humans, the inflammatory response can help fight the infection, but it can also cause damage to the body. Bats’ immune systems can keep viruses under control without inflammation.

“Bats’ natural ability to dampen inflammation caused by stress and infection may be a key mechanism underlying their long lifespans and unique viral reservoir status,” said Dr. Matae Ahn, first author of the study and an MD-PhD candidate of the Emerging Infectious Diseases (EID) Programme at Duke-NUS Medical School.

But other animals aren’t as strong, and if they get exposed to the viruses, they’re ill-equipped to deal with such powerful viruses. Not all viruses can readily make the leap from one species to another — but those that can are often devastating.

“Bats appear to be capable of limiting excessive or inappropriate virus-induced inflammation, which often leads to severe diseases in other infected animals and people,” said Professor Wang Lin-Fa, Director of Duke-NUS’ EID Programme and senior author of the study. “Our finding may provide lessons for controlling human infectious diseases by shifting the focus from the traditional specific anti-pathogen approach to the broader anti-disease approach successfully adopted by bats.”

Because of the way they can handle viruses, bats also act as a sort of training camp for viruses. A separate study on bat cells found that their strong immune response can drive viruses to greater virulence. It’s like an arms race between two armies (the bats and their viruses), with each of them getting stronger and stronger. If a third party (say, another species) is brought into the fray — one that hasn’t been a part of the arms race — they’ll likely be severely outgunned.

Type O- blood may have a protective effect against COVID-19
Type O- blood may offer a slight protective effect against infection with the coronavirus. But the vaccine is still your best ally.
Researchers at the University of Toronto assessed the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, as well as the severity of COVID-19 illness or death of 225,556 patients who had their ABO blood group assessed between January 2007 and December 2019, and who were subsequently tested for SARS-CoV-2 between January 15 and June 30, 2020.

After accounting for common comorbidities (cardiac disease, chronic kidney disease, anemia, cancer, asthma, etc.), age, and other relevant characteristics, the researchers compiled an adjusted relative risk for each blood group.
According to the results, the O- blood group had a 2.1% risk of becoming infected with SARS-CoV-2, the lowest unadjusted probability out of all blood groups. The highest unadjusted probability of infection was 4.2% among the B+ blood group. There was also a lower risk for severe COVID-19 illness or death associated with type O blood group versus all others.

No safety in blood types
However, this doesn’t mean that people with O- blood are immune to the coronavirus — it’s just that they may be slightly less likely to get infected. As such, those with O- blood should still get vaccinated against COVID-19 and take all the necessary precautions.

HPV vaccines are more effective than we assumed, for longer
This is the kind of surprise I like.
Current vaccine mixes can protect for longer against more strains of HPV (human papillomavirus) than currently believed, according to new research. HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection in the world, and it can cause cancer in women. Many countries around the world have thus set up vaccination programs in place against HPV.
Researchers at the German Cancer Research Center, Karolinska Institutet, and Tampere University report that our HPV vaccines are more effective than we assumed. Certain mixes of vaccine serum can immunize patients against strains other than those intended, as well, while also immunizing them for longer. While HPV infections can clear out on their own, they can become chronic and cause cancer in women.

The HPV family comprises more than 200 known strains, 13 of which are classified as high-risk (of causing cancer). Types 16 and 18 being the most threatening, causing around 70% of all cases of cervical cancer. Other strains can be more benign, with types 6 and 11, for example, causing harmless ge***al warts. Today, vaccines against HPV are bivalent (HPV types 16 and 18) or quadrivalent (HPV types 6, 11, 16, and 18).
The same but better
Over two studies, the researchers behind this discovery performed independent comparisons of direct and cross-protecting antibody responses, including for antibodies that protect against both vaccine HPV types and HPV types not covered by different national vaccine programs. Cross-protection refers to the mechanism by which vaccines against certain strains of HPV can immunize a patient from other strains as well, although we don’t yet have a clear idea of which vaccines these are or how reliably they can cross-immunize individuals.

The team followed 3,000 women from Finland who were vaccinated between 2002 and 2004 (they were all aged 16-17 at the time), monitoring the protection levels conferred by their (bi- and quadrivalent) vaccines over time. Samples of the serum used were also collected and held over 12 years following their use from the Finnish Maternity Cohort Biobank. The serological analyses included antibodies to 16 different HPV types.