Pet surgery beneficial for Humans?

Most of us have had a pet at some point in our lives. We love them, we care for them, and we even suffer when they’re sick or something bad happens to them. What if through helping them, we could find the cure to some rare diseases that both, humans and animals, share?

The Royal Veterinary’s College Queen Mother Hospital for Animals (QMHA), which is perhaps the most advanced facility of its kind in the world, treats up to 8,000 ‘patients’ per year from a wide variety of conditions. It’s no secret the procedures that take place in this hospital are too expensive for the average middle-class family, with some bills raising up to £3,000 or even twice as much, but apart from that fact, there’s a big reason why this is being considered by many specialists as an opportunity to study some diseases that are not that frequent on humans, but tend to happen more on animals, like some specific kinds of cancer, diabetes, or other conditions that humans and animals share due to similarities in their gene profiles.

Even though researchers have invested huge amounts of money on recreating these diseases on mice, and that has helped in some ways, it’s not as effective as studying the same disease taking place in a dog or a cat, as they respond to it in a much more similar way to what a human would react to it, that´s why this process looks promising, especially in the regenerative medicine –tissue and cell transplantation.

Some people may consider this as another example of animal testing, and it is in a way, but with the slight difference that there’s also a benefit for the “patient” and this only takes place with pets that are already suffering from a condition.

So, if there’s a chance to come up with a cure or a therapy for humans while helping sick animals to live for a couple of years, why shouldn’t we do it?

I’m very interested in reading your replies, so make sure you leave them on the comment section below.

And also, here's the link to the full article in case you want to read it.

How surgery for pets could save human lives

Don't yell at me, dad! I may be unhealthy when adult...

Spaking children seems to be a past-century thing ;however, there are parents that still think that the best way to make children behave well and be obedient is through violent punishment – yelling, spaking, slaping,  etc— 

However, the consequences of this sort of violence can be much more serious that thought. A recent study conducted by psychologists from Plymouth University's School of Psychology suggests that the stress caused in childhood by this sort of violence could lead to serious health issues later in life. 

250 healthy adults, 150 adults with asthma, 150 with heart disease, and 150 with cancer,  all of them from Saudi Arabia, were asked questions about their infancy and if they had been victims of physical or verbal abuse.

The results showed that people with heart disease were 20% more likely to have suffered from physical and/or verbal abuse when children, those with asthma were 60% more likely, and the ones with cancer were 70% more likely, compared to the adults who were healthy.

Although the results are quite clear and push us to believe that indeed violence in infancy had a strong influence in these ill people, there are experts such us Dr Andrea Danese, Clinical Lecturer in Child & Adolescent Psychiatry at the Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, who claim that this study is not 100% trustable since the evidence is based on testimonies of sick grown-ups, who may be more likely to report and unhappy infancy.

Furthermore, Prof David Spiegelhalter, Winton Professor Of The Public Understanding Of Risk at the University of Cambridge, said: “I would be very cautious about over-interpreting these results. For example, the healthy group are taken from administrators and nurses at the hospital treating the patients, and so are likely to differ in many ways from the ill people. The controls reported less beating and insulting as children, so maybe not being beaten encourages people to enter a caring profession, rather than protecting them from disease?”

To read The Telegraph's piece of news on this study, click here. 

To read the paper "The Impact of Violence on Children" by Dr Joy D. Osofsky, click here. 

Do you support the thesis that violence in early childhood could lead to the diseases mentioned? Or, do you think that the results of the study are being over-interpreted?

   

Chagas: The Unknown Death

Estimated incidence of Chagas disease in the Americas

It is known how insects can be vectors for terrible diseases. Yellow fever and malaria are evidence of that. But, have you have ever heard about Chagas disease?

Considered the “Aids of Latin America”, this disease is caused by Trypanosoma cruzi, a protozoan transmitted to humans by several insects. These insects bite a human to feed on its blood. Then, the human scratch the bite and that gets the T. cruzi into the person’s blood.  Chagas disease is so lethal because the protozoan attacks the nervous system, the digestive system and heart. In addition, symptoms for its chronic stage can only be seen after many years (about 10 to 20 years later). And, of course, the result will be always the same: death.

Chilean vinchuca (Triatoma infestans)

Believe it or not, Chile is hometown for this disease. It is transmitted by “vinchucas” (Triatoma infestans): insects which live mainly in rural areas. Chagas was considered eradicated in 2000. Nevertheless, in 2002 the Ministry of Health started a campaign to teach people how to prevent this deadly disease. This campaign was released in hospitals from rural areas because of the characteristics of the disease. However, experts have stated that this disease is not a “countryside illness” anymore, because vinchucas are adapting to live in urban areas. In fact, this statement is becoming stronger nowadays because of several cases detected in urban and pre-urban places.

Chagas is perhaps a disease which has not been studied enough, even though has deadly consequences. Should this disease remain so unknown? Do we need more studies about it? How can we take responsibility in order to prevent this disease? For more information check the links below:

- An article by the Daily Mail about Chagas disease in America.

- Wikipedia entry for Chagas disease

- A news report by American broadcast company Univision (Spanish language)

Would you like to take a sit?

This is the second OP . In this case we have chosen to talk about a topic that has a great deal of importance in our western society. Taking a rest, sitting down, or simply watching the televition for a too long period of time may be very hazzarous for our health. 

This OP, deals with 2 different ways of viewing the problem. A sciencetific posture, which by the analysis of lots of data available concludes that sedentarism is not harfull but a key factor that promotes heart problems in the future. In the other hand, a broadsheet posture on the topic, that states a more generalistic idea of the topic, a bit careless in details but very informative at the same time. 

We have chosen  this topic mainly because we live in a very sedentary society, and we should be aware of the negative consecuences this illness can bring to our life. We hope youl all enjoy our presentation. 

Click on:

Re: Here is the corrected address
Second OP, Eduardo and Felipe

By: Eduardo Báez and Felipe Guerra

Apes Also Get Our Diseases

A silverback gorilla

Many people opt for having monkeys as pets, and owners are sometimes worried about their animals transmitting many diseases to their families, such as tuberculosis and herpes-B negative.  But do we humans worry about the diseases we can transmit to monkeys?

This is the case of gorillas. Gorillas cannot be adopted as pets, but ecotourism–tourism involving travel to areas of natural or ecological interest–may be the reason why these animals get some human diseases. Scientists wrote in a journal of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that in two parks Africa, where humans have direct contact with many of the remaining mountain gorillas, that there has been an important increase in respiratory-disease outbreaks among the apes. The death of two gorillas in this park led to a deep study that showed that a human virus was directly associated with their deaths.

Human diseases can be easily
transmited to gorillas through
sneezing

Ecotourism seems to have some pros and cons. Scientists said that for gorillas’ conservation human proximity is essential, but at the same time it is important to minimize the transmission of respiratory pathogens from humans to great apes.

Ecotourism can be a lot of fun, but most humans are not aware of the risks that this activity may have for themselves and for the animals they visit. Anyway, ecotourism is not the only activity that may be dangerous for animals: when humans visit zoos, farms, etc., people can transmit human diseases to them too.

In only a few words, a simple human sneeze can kill a gorilla. Were you aware of this? How do you think that ecotourism can fight against this situation? 

Are we the owners of our bodies or not?

 Euthanasia means putting end to a life with the purpose of relieve the suffering of a person. Many people believe this to be one of the most unnatural act in existence, but should people be forced to live, or to stay alive, when suffering horrible pain? There has a debate going on this topic for years and the truth is that many countries haven’t reached an agreement.

 Sue Rodriguez has been a famous case: even a movie was based on her case. She was diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis in 1991 and fought hardly for her right to end her own life. ALS provokes muscle weakness and atrophy, which slowly causes in the patient the inability to do anything on their own, even breathing. Rodriguez presented and fought for her cause twice in the Supreme Court of Canada, claiming: “If I cannot give consent to my own death, whose body is this? Who owns my life?”. However, both times the Supreme Court ruled against her. In 1994, she committed suicide with the help of an anonymous doctor.

 To make it clear: Euthanasia refers to someone other than the patient ending the patient’s life, throughout painless ways. Assisted suicide happens when a person, suffering from an incurable disease, kills himself with the help of someone else and with the clear purpose of putting an end to his suffering.

 I think it’s not fair that we don’t have the possibility to end our lives if we are in extreme pain, every day, with no cure whatsoever. We are the owners of our bodies, we should decide if we want to keep living that kind of life.

 And let’s not forget that no one is forced to end his life if he doesn’t want to, but in cases like these, we should have the right to choose.

Are you a ciber allergic?

Headaches, vomit, nausea and loss of short term memory are only some of the symptoms caused by an unknown and modern affliction that has been disturbing people for some years now, and even though it has not been certified by the World Health Organization, it seems to be here to stay for a long time and turn into a XXI century disease.

The “Wi-Fi allergy”, as it is known, is explained by an electro sensitivity caused by a prolonged exposure to electromagnetic fields but as is has not been worldwide certified, people who suffer from this are restricted to treat only the symptoms and do not joy the medical facilities every ill person should. Some of the testimonies reflect that it starts by being affected by waves emanated from the wireless router, but after a long period of exposure even the TV or anything that’s plugged can cause a reaction such as the already named.

Other of the reasons why it has not been formally considered is because, according to experts’ opinions, this type of exposure reduces considerably the production of serotonin in the brain; serotonin is a natural anti-depressive, so its low production can cause tiredness and sometimes sadness, reason why this electro sensitivity can also be mistaken as stress or depression in some cases.

It is also important to say that this modern disease appears at any stage of life so you better start setting boundaries with your technological gadgets before is too late, don’t you think so?

Allopathic medicine v/s Natural Medicine: Which one is the best option?

The idea that traditional medicine, also known as allopathic medicine, is the best option to heal our illnesses has always existed. However, the World Health Organization estimates that 80% of the world’s population prefers herbal and natural treatments as their first health care option. This is, basically, because people do not trust conventional medicine and its secondary effects.

On one hand, it is true that allopathic medicine is often highly effective because is focused on specific dysfunctions that the human body may have. But, what about the side effects? Traditional medicine is based on invasive treatments that attack individual symptoms, but our body is not separated in systems: it is a whole. Most of the time, we cure one illness at the expense of another part of our body that, in the future, would be affected because of the treatments that we have already used.

On the other hand, alternative medicine cares not only about the problem, but also about the entire body. An herbalist may recommend you a mix of different herbs or roots, but that is not everything. Natural healing is about a lifestyle change that allows you to keep a health life. This may include diets, reflexology, yoga, massages or other natural treatments.

The most important things are, first, that all people are different and everyone needs a different treatment depending on the illness; and second, both types of healing have certain limitations, so the complementary use of both is recommended. The decision you have to make is: which one should be used over the other one? Would you prefer to use allopathic or natural medicine as your first health care option?

Are vaccines bad for our health?

Vaccines claim to be the solution to control diseases. The government forces people to use them under this assumption and claim they are safe, but can we know for sure they are unharmful and cannot damage our bodies?

The other day I was watching the TV Show “Law and Order svu” and the detectives dealt with a case of a mum that didn’t want her kid be vaccinated. She claimed vaccines could cause deformations, autism, brain damage and even death. I wanted to believe this, but as it is a TV Show I couldn’t rely just on that so I started to do my own research.

This is what I found out:

There are enough scientific evidences to prove that vaccines can be harmful to our bodies. In the article VACCINE CHILD ABUSE are named over a hundred diseases caused by this injection, being the most famous autism, Alzheimer and lupus.

Alan Phillips in his article “Vaccination Myths: Contradictionsbetween Medical Science and Immunization Policy” gives a number of reasons for which we shouldn’t vaccinate, being the most important that “vaccination is an unreliable means of preventing disease”.

Vaccines have proved to be effective, but like any other medication are not always infallible. They can damage our body, and authorities shouldn’t force people to use them. They have to tell citizens the pros and cons of using vaccines, and then it would be up to us whether we decide to use or not the injection.