Three distinguished Columbia University Medical Center faculty have been elected to the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences this year.
Election to the Institute of Medicine (IOM) is one of the highest honors in the fields of medicine and health, and Columbia now has 49 members in this esteemed organization. The three CUMC faculty -- Kathryn Calame, Timothy Pedley and Carolyn Westhoff -- were among the 65 new IOM members announced Oct. 8, 2007, raising its total active IOM membership to 1,538.
"Columbia's new members were chosen through a highly selective process that recognizes individuals who have made significant contributions to advancing the medical science, health care, and public health fields," said Lee Goldman, M.D., executive vice president for health and biomedical sciences and dean of the faculties of health and medicine at Columbia University. "We are proud to have them in our midst."
Kathryn Calame, Ph.D., is professor of microbiology and of biochemistry & molecular biophysics at Columbia's College of Physicians and Surgeons. Dr. Calame studies gene regulation in the immune system, and her laboratory work focuses primarily on transcriptional regulation of lymphocyte development. A major focus of her current work is an unusual transcriptional repressor called Blimp-1 (B lymphocyte induced maturation protein). Her studies on Blimp-1 are revealing important aspects of regulation in both B and T cells.
Timothy A. Pedley, M.D., is the Henry and Lucy Moses Professor of Neurology, chairman of the Department of Neurology at P&S, and neurologist-in-chief at the Neurological Institute at New York-Presbyterian Hospital. Dr. Pedley's clinical and research interests are focused on epilepsy. His laboratory interests are in the role played by the ionic microenvironment in abnormal hippocampal and cortical excitability and in long-lasting changes in the hippocampus induced by repeated seizures.
Carolyn L. Westhoff, M.D., is professor of obstetrics and gynecology at P&S and professor of epidemiology and of population and family health at Columbia's Mailman School of Public Health. She studies the effect of obesity on contraceptive effectiveness and leads several research projects investigating contraception and the epidemiology of women's reproductive health. Most recently, Dr. Westhoff was the principal investigator of a clinical trial of a novel oral contraceptive initiation method known as Quick Start.
The Institute of Medicine is part of the National Academies, which also includes the National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and National Research Council. The IOM structure is unique in its role as both an honorific membership group and advisory organization. Members are expected to volunteer on study committees to serve as a national resource for independent, scientifically informed analysis and recommendations on issues related to human health.
Columbia University Medical Center provides international leadership in pre-clinical and clinical research, in medical and health sciences education, and in patient care. The medical center trains future leaders and includes the dedicated work of many physicians, scientists, public health professionals, nurses, and dentists at the College of Physicians & Surgeons, the Mailman School of Public Health, the School of Nursing, the College of Dental Medicine, the biomedical departments of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, and allied research centers and institutions. cumclumbia.edu/
Source: Alex Lyda
Columbia University Medical Center
вторник, 25 октября 2011 г.
вторник, 18 октября 2011 г.
Kaiser Daily Women's Health Policy Report Summarizes HPV Vaccine-Related Editorial, Opinion Pieces
CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, which drafts recommendations and schedules for the administration of vaccines in the U.S., last week unanimously voted to recommend that all girls ages 11 and 12 receive Merck's human papillomavirus vaccine Gardasil. FDA last month approved Gardasil -- which is given in three injections over six months and will cost $360 -- for sale and marketing to girls and women ages nine to 26. According to Merck, Gardasil in clinical trials has been shown to be 100% effective in preventing infection in women who do not already have HPV with strains 16 and 18, which together cause about 70% of cervical cancer cases, and about 99% effective in preventing HPV strains 6 and 11, which together with strains 16 and 18 cause about 90% of genital wart cases. Gardasil also protects against vaginal and vulvar cancers, two other gynecological cancers that are linked to HPV, according to a study presented in Atlanta at a meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. The ACIP recommendation also allows for girls as young as nine to receive the vaccine and recommends that girls and women ages 13 to 26 receive Gardasil. Although the vaccination should be given before a girl begins sexual activity, sexually active girls and women still should receive Gardasil, the recommendation says (Kaiser Daily Women's Health Policy Report, 6/30). The Washington Post and Atlanta Journal-Constitution recently published an editorial and opinion pieces related to Gardasil. Summaries appear below.
Editorial
Washington Post: Although there were "predictions" that some conservative groups would oppose recommending Gardasil for girls ages 11 and 12, the lack of "political controversy" possibly could be attributed to the "unquestioned worth" of the vaccine, which has no known side effects and is effective against four strains of HPV, a Post editorial says. Even though the vaccine cannot replace a "frank discussion of the dangers of sex," pediatricians should provide Gardasil to their female patients before the girls become sexually active, parents should allow their preteen girls to receive the shot and the vaccine should be as routine as other inoculations so that "9,700 fewer American women will be diagnosed with cancer each year," according to a Post editorial. Whether to mandate the vaccine for young girls will be determined by the states, and "local legislators probably will not consider it until after the first few years of widespread use," the editorial says, concluding, "By that time, its worth and safety may be so clear that state legislatures will experience the same welcome consensus" (Washington Post, 7/7).
Opinion Pieces
Maureen Downey, Atlanta Journal-Constitution: Though some social conservatives and abstinence-only advocates "reacted warily" to ACIP's recommendation that all girls ages 11 and 12 receive Gardasil, the response among conservatives "[f]ortunately ... was muted" because they understood that the vaccine would protect against cervical cancer and genital warts, Journal-Constitution editorial board member Downey writes in an opinion piece. "[G]iven how deadly cervical cancer is, the health benefits of widespread vaccination overwhelm other concerns," Downey concludes (Downey, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 7/7).
Linda Klepacki, Atlanta Journal-Constitution: Focus on the Family and its "allies" support ACIP's recommendation that all girls ages 11 and 12 be vaccinated but have voiced concern for the "rights of parents as the medical decision-makers for their children," Linda Klepacki, a sexual health analyst for Focus on the Family, writes in a Journal-Constitution opinion piece. "[D]eciding about a vaccine against a disease or infection that is sexually transmitted is not as clear-cut for parents as deciding about other immunizations," she writes, adding, "The one certain truth is that the HPV vaccine does not, in any circumstance, negate or substitute God's message of sexual abstinence until marriage and sexual faithfulness within marriage." Klepacki says, "Attempting to reduce the risk of a life-threatening disease solely by viewing teen sexual activity as a foregone conclusion -- the solution proffered by the HPV vaccine -- puts our children in the bull's-eye of heartache and ill health," concluding, "Government has no right to place them there" (Klepacki, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 7/7).
"Reprinted with permission from kaisernetwork. You can view the entire Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery at kaisernetwork/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork, a free service of The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation . © 2005 Advisory Board Company and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.
View drug information on Gardasil.
вторник, 11 октября 2011 г.
Sexist Men Earn More
A large new US study found that sexist men earned more, that is men with more traditional views on the work and home roles of women on average earned
higher salaries than men with more egalitarian views about gender roles. The study also found that women with a more egalitarian outlook did not earn much
more than women with more traditional views.
The research was the the work of Dr Timothy Judge, Matherly-McKethan Eminent Scholar at the Department of Management, Warrington College of Business,
University of Florida, and colleague Beth Livingston, a PhD candidate in the same department at the University of Florida, and is published in the September
issue of the Journal of Applied Psychology.
Judge said in a press statement that:
"More traditional people may be seeking to preserve the historical separation of work and domestic roles. Our results prove that is, in fact, the
case."
"This is happening even in today's work force where men and women are supposedly equal as far as participation," he added.
Judge and Livingston analyzed data from a nationally representative study of over 12,500 men and women who were interviewed four times during 1979 to 2005.
Their ages ranged from 14 to 22 at the start of the study, and 60 per cent of them stayed for the whole duration.
At each interview participants were asked about their views on gender roles at work and at home. The questions ranged from whether they thought a woman's
place was in the home, did working mothers increase juvenile delinquency, should the man be the main achiever outside the home, and should the woman be mainly
concerned with caring for home and family.
Previous studies have suggested that men hold more traditional views about gender roles than women, although the gap is closing.
The participants also answered a range of other questions about their circumstances, such as marital status, earnings, upbringing, religious background, education,
and work outside of the home.
Judge and Livingston were particularly interested in how the views of the participants were linked to their earnings. After taking into account job
complexity, how many hours they worked, and education, they found that male participants who had more traditional attitudes toward gender roles earned on
average about 8,500 dollars a year more than men with less traditional views.
Curiously for women the findings revealed the reverse; women with more traditional views earned an average of 1,500 dollars a year less than women with more
egalitarian views on gender roles.
Viewed from another angle, the data also showed that the earnings gap between husband and wife was eight times greater in married couples where both partners
held traditional views compared to married couples where both partners held egalitarian views.
Judge said the findings showed there was a significant link between attitudes to gender role and pay equity:
"When workers' attitudes become more traditional, women's earnings relative to men suffer greatly. When attitudes become more egalitarian, the pay gap nearly
disappears," he added.
Judge and Livingston found the results did not change much when they took account of possible influencers such as industry sector, occupation, number of
hours worked, and number of children.
"These results cannot be explained by the fact that, in traditional couples, women are less likely to work outside the home," said Judge.
He explained that regardless of potential influencing factors like working hours and whether women worked ouside the home or not, the results showed that
women holding traditional views were paid less than men with traditional views for comparable work.
Judge and Livingston also found that Northeastern city dwellers had the most egalitarian views about gender roles, as did people whose parents had both
worked outside the home. Younger people tended to have less traditional views, but these became more traditional as they got older; and the more
traditional views on gender roles were held mostly by married, religious people.
The researchers suggested further studies should investigate the relationships between happiness and attitudes to work among people with different views on
gender roles, because they suspect more money and happiness aren't necessarily coincidental for certain groups.
Judge and Livingston also suggested that these findings aren't just reflecting an economic phenomenon but a psychological one too.
"Our country's policies have been leaning toward gender equality for decades now," said Judge, "but, according to our study, traditional gender role views
continue to work against this goal."
A psychologist from Winchester University in the UK, Dr Magdalena Zawisza, proposed a number of explanations for the findings. She told BBC News that more
traditionally minded men could be more power-oriented, for instance toward money and in having a more submissive woman for a partner.
Another possible explanation, said Zawisza, was that employers were more likely to promote men who were the sole breadwinner, because their families only had
their income to depend on.
"Is the gap more than gender? A longitudinal analysis of gender, gender role orientation, and earnings."
Judge, Timothy A.; Livingston, Beth A.
Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol 93(5), Sep 2008, 994-1012.
DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.93.5.994
Click here for Article (PDF).
Source: journal abstract, APA, BBC News.
: Catharine Paddock, PhD
higher salaries than men with more egalitarian views about gender roles. The study also found that women with a more egalitarian outlook did not earn much
more than women with more traditional views.
The research was the the work of Dr Timothy Judge, Matherly-McKethan Eminent Scholar at the Department of Management, Warrington College of Business,
University of Florida, and colleague Beth Livingston, a PhD candidate in the same department at the University of Florida, and is published in the September
issue of the Journal of Applied Psychology.
Judge said in a press statement that:
"More traditional people may be seeking to preserve the historical separation of work and domestic roles. Our results prove that is, in fact, the
case."
"This is happening even in today's work force where men and women are supposedly equal as far as participation," he added.
Judge and Livingston analyzed data from a nationally representative study of over 12,500 men and women who were interviewed four times during 1979 to 2005.
Their ages ranged from 14 to 22 at the start of the study, and 60 per cent of them stayed for the whole duration.
At each interview participants were asked about their views on gender roles at work and at home. The questions ranged from whether they thought a woman's
place was in the home, did working mothers increase juvenile delinquency, should the man be the main achiever outside the home, and should the woman be mainly
concerned with caring for home and family.
Previous studies have suggested that men hold more traditional views about gender roles than women, although the gap is closing.
The participants also answered a range of other questions about their circumstances, such as marital status, earnings, upbringing, religious background, education,
and work outside of the home.
Judge and Livingston were particularly interested in how the views of the participants were linked to their earnings. After taking into account job
complexity, how many hours they worked, and education, they found that male participants who had more traditional attitudes toward gender roles earned on
average about 8,500 dollars a year more than men with less traditional views.
Curiously for women the findings revealed the reverse; women with more traditional views earned an average of 1,500 dollars a year less than women with more
egalitarian views on gender roles.
Viewed from another angle, the data also showed that the earnings gap between husband and wife was eight times greater in married couples where both partners
held traditional views compared to married couples where both partners held egalitarian views.
Judge said the findings showed there was a significant link between attitudes to gender role and pay equity:
"When workers' attitudes become more traditional, women's earnings relative to men suffer greatly. When attitudes become more egalitarian, the pay gap nearly
disappears," he added.
Judge and Livingston found the results did not change much when they took account of possible influencers such as industry sector, occupation, number of
hours worked, and number of children.
"These results cannot be explained by the fact that, in traditional couples, women are less likely to work outside the home," said Judge.
He explained that regardless of potential influencing factors like working hours and whether women worked ouside the home or not, the results showed that
women holding traditional views were paid less than men with traditional views for comparable work.
Judge and Livingston also found that Northeastern city dwellers had the most egalitarian views about gender roles, as did people whose parents had both
worked outside the home. Younger people tended to have less traditional views, but these became more traditional as they got older; and the more
traditional views on gender roles were held mostly by married, religious people.
The researchers suggested further studies should investigate the relationships between happiness and attitudes to work among people with different views on
gender roles, because they suspect more money and happiness aren't necessarily coincidental for certain groups.
Judge and Livingston also suggested that these findings aren't just reflecting an economic phenomenon but a psychological one too.
"Our country's policies have been leaning toward gender equality for decades now," said Judge, "but, according to our study, traditional gender role views
continue to work against this goal."
A psychologist from Winchester University in the UK, Dr Magdalena Zawisza, proposed a number of explanations for the findings. She told BBC News that more
traditionally minded men could be more power-oriented, for instance toward money and in having a more submissive woman for a partner.
Another possible explanation, said Zawisza, was that employers were more likely to promote men who were the sole breadwinner, because their families only had
their income to depend on.
"Is the gap more than gender? A longitudinal analysis of gender, gender role orientation, and earnings."
Judge, Timothy A.; Livingston, Beth A.
Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol 93(5), Sep 2008, 994-1012.
DOI: 10.1037/0021-9010.93.5.994
Click here for Article (PDF).
Source: journal abstract, APA, BBC News.
: Catharine Paddock, PhD
вторник, 4 октября 2011 г.
Chicago Tribune Examines Increasing Impact Of HIV/AIDS In Rural Southern Communities
The Chicago Tribune on Monday examined the growing number of HIV/AIDS cases in rural Southern communities against a backdrop of limited resources, inadequate HIV/AIDS education efforts, tightening state budgets, and HIV/AIDS-associated stigma and discrimination. According to the Southern AIDS Coalition, about half of the 1.1 million HIV-positive people in the U.S. live in the South, where communities have "too few doctors, staggering poverty and a history of inadequate AIDS education programs," the Tribune reports.
Midwestern and Southern states receive the lowest amount of federal funding from CDC for public health programs, including HIV/AIDS efforts, according to a Trust for America's Health study. CDC reports that urban areas, particularly in the Northeast, continue to be most affected by AIDS, with 16.4 AIDS cases per 100,000 people in 2007, compared with 15.1 cases per 100,000 people in the South. However, the South has the greatest number of people living with AIDS and accounted for 46.4% of new cases in 2007, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation analysis of CDC data. President Obama's administration announced last week it will spend $45 million over five years on HIV/AIDS prevention and education through a TV and radio advertising campaign, transit signs and other efforts, the Tribune reports
Although changes to the distribution process for Ryan White Program funding in 2006 brought more funding to the South, health workers "still are catching up from years of underfunding and are struggling to provide the level of medical and support services to their primarily low-income patients as those in other regions receive," the Tribune reports. In addition, many HIV/AIDS patients in the South lack adequate housing, transportation and access to medication, the Tribune reports. "Some states have significantly less money to engage in disease prevention," Jeff Levi, executive director of TAH, said, adding that states will "have to make up the difference, which is hard to do in these economic times or there will be harsh outcomes." Michelle Ogle, director of the Northern Outreach Clinic in Henderson, N.C., said providing for low-income patients has become more difficult because the economic downturn has forced many uninsured patients to put medical needs on hold. Ogle said, "We are not just fighting HIV, we are fighting a culture," adding that many women in the South are "victims of poor education, low self-esteem" and do not "feel empowered" or "feel comfortable insisting that men use condoms" (Glanton, Chicago Tribune, 4/13).
Reprinted with kind permission from kaisernetwork. You can view the entire Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery at kaisernetwork/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork, a free service of The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.
© 2009 Advisory Board Company and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.
Midwestern and Southern states receive the lowest amount of federal funding from CDC for public health programs, including HIV/AIDS efforts, according to a Trust for America's Health study. CDC reports that urban areas, particularly in the Northeast, continue to be most affected by AIDS, with 16.4 AIDS cases per 100,000 people in 2007, compared with 15.1 cases per 100,000 people in the South. However, the South has the greatest number of people living with AIDS and accounted for 46.4% of new cases in 2007, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation analysis of CDC data. President Obama's administration announced last week it will spend $45 million over five years on HIV/AIDS prevention and education through a TV and radio advertising campaign, transit signs and other efforts, the Tribune reports
Although changes to the distribution process for Ryan White Program funding in 2006 brought more funding to the South, health workers "still are catching up from years of underfunding and are struggling to provide the level of medical and support services to their primarily low-income patients as those in other regions receive," the Tribune reports. In addition, many HIV/AIDS patients in the South lack adequate housing, transportation and access to medication, the Tribune reports. "Some states have significantly less money to engage in disease prevention," Jeff Levi, executive director of TAH, said, adding that states will "have to make up the difference, which is hard to do in these economic times or there will be harsh outcomes." Michelle Ogle, director of the Northern Outreach Clinic in Henderson, N.C., said providing for low-income patients has become more difficult because the economic downturn has forced many uninsured patients to put medical needs on hold. Ogle said, "We are not just fighting HIV, we are fighting a culture," adding that many women in the South are "victims of poor education, low self-esteem" and do not "feel empowered" or "feel comfortable insisting that men use condoms" (Glanton, Chicago Tribune, 4/13).
Reprinted with kind permission from kaisernetwork. You can view the entire Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report, search the archives, or sign up for email delivery at kaisernetwork/dailyreports/healthpolicy. The Kaiser Daily Health Policy Report is published for kaisernetwork, a free service of The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.
© 2009 Advisory Board Company and Kaiser Family Foundation. All rights reserved.
Подписаться на:
Комментарии (Atom)