Teenage pregnancy falling

Ellie Lee commented on a recent story reported on the BBC news web site on the reduction in proportion of teenage mothers in the UK. Ellie said “Teenage births were already at historically low levels, and the trajectory before the Teenage Pregnancy Strategy was already in a downwards direction,” She added that the strategy “should be much more controversial than it is”, she said, because “there was a push, through the strategy, of long-term contraceptives such as implants and injections. It was presented as improving the sexual and reproductive health of children but a teen needs to be able to have a choice-based discussion about what’s right for her. There are still negative attitudes towards teenage mothers and it is unwarranted. It is seen as a disaster, but there is no reason to suggest that they are any worse than any other mother.”

“Egg nobbles”

Darren Griffin was quoted in a recent story “Egg ‘nobbles’ can be used to create embryos, say scientists in fertility breakthrough.” “The authors have pulled off an impressive technical feat of getting preimplantation embryos from polar bodies rather than oocytes” he said. “The community will watch with interest how the work progresses. However, the current low success rate of generating embryos from polar bodies compared to the usual way using oocytes potentially could indicate underlying problems with the approach.”

Tensions in Abortion law

At a Knowledge Exchange Seminar on the 16 November 2016 concerning Abortion Policy and Law. Dr Lesley Hoggart, (Open University) and Prof Sally Sheldon presented a paper on Tensions in Abortion law and policy, and effects on women. This presentation focused on the tensions between the legal and policy framework for abortion, and women’s abortion experiences, throughout the UK. They reported on a mixed methods study into different aspects of young women’s experiences (aged 16-24) of one or more unintended pregnancies ending in abortion in England and Wales. They then drew on a recently completed study of the home use of abortion pills in Northern Ireland (and elsewhere), highlighting some of the ways in which the current law fails either to prevent abortion or to protect women’s health.  At a time when it is possible to end a pregnancy using pills that are readily available on line, the study assessed some of the challenges for effective regulation and posed some fundamental questions regarding the need for legal reform. Some of the results of Sally’s study appear in the most recent issue of Reproductive Health Matters (http://www.rhm-elsevier.com/article/S0968-8080(16)30034-9/fulltext)’

Objectification of women

Rachel Calogero (along with James Tyler and Catherine Adams from the US) recently published an article in the British Journal of Social Psychology on the objectification of women. They reported that women are sexually objectified when viewed and treated by others as mere objects. Previous research has examined the negative consequences of being the target of sexual objectification; however, limited attention has focused on the person doing the objectification. The focus of this study was thus is on the agent and how self-regulatory resources influence sexual objectification. Consistent with past evidence, they reasoned that people have a well-learned automatic response to objectify sexualized women, and as such, they expected objectifying a sexualized (vs. personalized) woman would deplete fewer regulatory resources than not objectifying her. Findings across three studies confirmed their expectations, demonstrating the extent to which people objectify a sexualized woman or not is influenced by the availability of regulatory resources, a case that until now has been absent from the literature. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjso.12157/abstract

“Three parent” babies and binge drinking

Darren Griffin commented on a story on the “First “three parent baby” born. He said: “This study heralds a new era in preimplantation genetics and represents a novel means for the treatment of families at risk of transmitting genetic disease. “With radical new treatments like this there are always challenging ethical issues, however, any concerns need to be balanced against the ramifications of not implementing such a technology when families are in need of it. The diseases to which this treatment is relevant are devastating and thus this treatment brings new hope to many families.”

Remarking on a recent study about drinking during pregnancy Darren, said: “The overwhelming message of this study is “steady as she goes. If you do drink while trying to have children, do it in moderation and don’t binge drink.”

Inaugural lecture double act in the Douglas-Sutton household

On 22nd January 2016 our very own Karen Douglas and Robbie Sutton (both Professors of Social Psychology) gave their inaugural lectures.  Being partners in both academia and in life Robbie and Karen entertained a packed KLT1 lecture theatre with essentially a double act punctuated by a “modest” amount of drinking and good cheer.

Karen kicked off proceedings with her work on the psychology of conspiracy theories.  Highlighting the area in general and its importance to society, she pointed out the key contributions of her work including research on the psychological processes associated with conspiracy belief, and the consequences of conspiracy theories for people’s political, health, and environmental decisions.

After a short refreshment break, Robbie’s talk addressed why we don’t live in a post-sexist age.  Robbie explored some the ultimate and timeless sources of sexism, such as women’s relatively scarce reproductive capacity (they can’t have as many children as men).  He then presented his studies on how benevolent sexism – the popular and apparently benign belief that women are morally superior – paradoxically restricts women’s autonomy and worsens their disadvantage.

In the Q&A, in true reciprocal style, Karen was asked whether sexism came into conspiracy theories at all and Robbie whether conspiracy theories impacted on attitudes to sexism.

The Brexit conspiracy

The Brexit campaign was marked by many things, but one of them was conspiracy theories.  In one YouGov poll, 46 per cent of Leave voters agreed the referendum would be rigged; 28 per cent thought MI5 was already working on it. In another, the government had deliberately crashed the voter registration system to allow more time for Remain supporters to register. Yet another was that any Leave votes made in pencil would be erased, and converted to Remain votes. Daniel Jolley (Staffordshire University), Karen Douglas, Robbie Sutton and Aleksandra Cichocka recently conducted an study asking 400 people to what degree they subscribed to such theories, including one stating that major broadcasters were colluding with Remain by placing its propaganda on their websites. They discovered that the degree to which people accepted such theories outstripped almost all other factors as a predictor of their voting intentions. “Conspiracy theories can have potentially powerful consequences,” said Karen, noting that they tended to gain currency among people who feel disillusioned and powerless. “People turn to conspiracy theories to attempt to make sense of uncertain political and social events”, she said.

Neurobabble and Neuroparenting

Jan MacVarish in “Spiked Online” recently attacked Andrea Leadsom’s assertions about parenting. One of the many things Leadsom said that attracted the scorn of social media was her contention that tackling the issue of infant brain development, ‘from conception to age two’, would boost social mobility and create an economically dynamic Britain. She reportedly talked about how important it was to massage a baby’s brain. Jan asserts that, “despite the ridicule that came Leadsom’s way, such neurobabble is in fact already a routine part of English and Welsh maternity and early years care, and has been so for over 10 years The idea that the first three years of a child’s life represent a ‘window of opportunity’ for life-changing intervention is now very influential among policymakers. What she calls ‘neuroparenting’ – the idea that parents are architects of their children’s brains – now dominates the outlook of parent trainers. Talking about ‘the brain’ allows those involved in monitoring and instructing parents to position themselves less as bossy experts or, worse still, moralists, and more as neutral conveyors of scientific ‘facts’. They can therefore tell parents how to love and care for their babies using the pseudo-scientific language of evidence bases, synapses and oxytocin.”

Check out Jan’s book. Neuroparenting: The Expert Invasion of Family Life (Palgrave Macmillan) http://www.palgrave.com/gb/book/9781137547323 and blog DrJanMacvarish.com

Nonsensical surrogacy laws

Kirsty Horsey has demonstrated how UK surrogacy laws are out of date and have become’ nonsensical’. In an article in the Medical Law Review, she analysed cases that show current surrogacy law in the UK is ‘fraying at the edges’. Dr Horsey, a senior lecturer at the University’s Kent Law School, says the says the existing law fails to protect the best interests of children born to surrogates, the families created this way, and surrogates themselves. In the article, she examines a series of high-profile surrogacy cases decided in 2015 that serve to illustrate how the UK’s law on surrogacy – in particular its provisions regarding eligibility for Parental Orders – are no longer fit for purpose. Without a Parental Order, which the law says must be applied for within six months of birth, the intended parents cannot have legal parenthood transferred to them, and the surrogate remains the legal mother (usually with her spouse or partner being the child’s second legal parent). Consequences include the intended parents technically not having rights to decide on the life, education or medical care needs of the child and problems with succession and inheritance. She cites cases where the courts have circumvented what the law actually says should happen, including: payments to surrogates authorized despite the law suggesting they should not be; a same sex couple awarded care of a 15 month old despite the wishes of the legal mother; couples granted a Parental Order despite their children having been born years earlier, and single people being unable to apply for Parental Orders (though this specific point has since been declared incompatible with human rights legislation and the Government has promised to change it). These problems culminate in an evident inability of the law to protect the best interests of children born through surrogacy and indicate strongly a need for reform. Kirsty held a conference in London on Friday 6 May 2016 entitled Surrogacy in the 21st Century: Rethinking assumptions, reforming law, at the Friends House, Euston Road, where the architects of the existing law agreed reform of the law, which is more than 30 years old, is essential. In December 2016, papers from this conference – including by Baroness Mary Warnock and Professor Margot Brazier, the chairs of two previous government inquiries into surrogacy – were published in a special edition of the Journal of Medical Law and Ethics. Kirsty also worked with Peers to secure a House of Lords debate on surrogacy law reform, led by Baroness Liz Barker, on 14 December 2016.

Abortion is illegal

Sally Sheldon was recently quoted in the media highlighting a broad issue in UK law: The pint is that abortion isn’t actually legal in any part of the UK. The abortions performed every year are happening because they fall under specific criteria that have been decriminalized. This status quo means that many women beyond Northern Ireland are faced with difficult and often distressing circumstances when they seek to have a pregnancy terminated.  “Abortion is illegal in this country and it’s not just a technicality,” said Sally. She went on “most people living in England, Wales and Scotland – where women can terminate pregnancies up to the 24th week – are unaware of the legal ambiguity.”

“Too posh to push?”

In a Daily Mail article about caesarean sections Ellie Lee was quoted as saying: ‘Pregnant women are increasingly portrayed as posing a risk to their foetus as a result of their behaviour, age, diet and lifestyle.‘ It results in a form of sexism in which women are viewed in terms of their capacity to produce a baby rather than a person in her own right.’  The NICE guidelines that all women can have a caesarean were controversial when they were issued in 2011, with some experts criticising them for allowing the procedure for mothers deemed to be ‘too posh to push’.

Alien parakeets

Parakeets are listed among the top 100 worst alien species and this issue is now being taken more seriously in the UK. Some observers however think it is already too late, like grey squirrels, their beachhead has become too strong and too widespread. The latest initiative is an 18 country parrot monitoring scheme, run by Jim Groombridge. According to Jim, rose-ringed parakeets are now listed among the top 100 worst alien species in Europe. Since the 1970s, they have rapidly established in over 100 cities across the continent and beyond. They pose problems in both urban and rural areas including potential to transmit diseases to livestock and humans, competition with native wildlife and, increasingly, as an agricultural pest.

Gene editing

Darren Griffin Weighed into the debate on gene editing, welcoming the go-ahead from the fertility regulator the Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority (HFEA), for UK scientists to genetically modify human embryos. He said: ‘The ruling by the HFEA is a triumph for common sense. While it is certain that the prospect of gene editing in human embryos raised a series of ethical issues and challenges, the problem has been dealt with in a balanced manner. ‘It is clear that the potential benefits of the work proposed far outweigh the foreseen risks. It is an example how the UK leads the world not only in the science behind research into early human development but also the social science used to regulate and monitor it.’

Recent MSc in Reproductive Medicine graduate Anna Vassiliou won the “best poster” prize in the Health Services Laboratories (HSL) annual research and innovations symposium in November this year. The event is held to showcase the advances made throughout all disciplines over the past 12 months, whilst also highlighting where the company can move forward in the future. Speakers included Dr Alexi Baidoshvili of LabPON based in the Netherlands, Professor Martin Widschwendter, Head of the Department of Women’s Cancer at UCL and Dr Sheryl Homa, consultant clinical lead for Andrology at The Doctors Laboratory and honorary Senior Lecturer at the University of Kent.

Throughout the day, the poster competition was held at the venue, allowing staff, researchers and scientists at HSL and its partners to present their work. Anna won the prize along with Catherine Martin with their poster titled ‘Validation of a test measuring oxidation-reduction potential to determine oxidative stress in human semen’.

Competition judge Wendy Leversuch said “Anna and Catherine’s work was chosen due to a clear and well-presented posted demonstrating innovative research in the field of Andrology resulting in a positive impact to the laboratory and patient.”

It was a good week for Anna as she also won the course prize for her MSc on the day that she graduated.

Anna (right) receiving her prize at HSL

CHOTS (Centre for the History of the Sciences) and CiSOR joined forces in October to put on the Canterbury Festival’s only 18-rated event.  The event was curated by Filippo Guizetti, one of our Science Communication masters students, who invited Dr Jesse Olszynko-Gryn from the University of Cambridge to show some of the medical films he has been studying as part of his research project Gestation to Reproduction.

What we saw was both visually and scientifically extraordinary.

Movie-makers began experimenting with special effects as soon as cameras were invented, and one result of this was the pioneering use of stop-motion to capture biological-time events.  We began with a 1924 down-the-microscope film of a developing axolotl, from single cell to early embryo.  Amphibians were a popular choice for early developmental biology, and this film, Gestation of the Ovum, was at the cutting edge of research as well as of visualisation – likely shown only to university students.  In a nice visual continuity (as Geraldine Travers astutely pointed out), the film finished with a bean-shaped embryo – the exact same shape as the seed whose growth formed the topic of the next speeded-motion epic, Peas and Cues (1930).  This film was for popular consumption, part of the first wave of natural history film making.  In it, the swirling, curling plants grew like Jugendstil illustrations; they flowered, fruited and died – and in a Groundhog Day moment, began again.

The same theme, namely the endless cycle of life and death, framed a 1944 film about the life of cats.  Presenting possibly the first ever LOLcats, this film, made in a New York apartment, featured intimate footage, lovingly cut to create a warm and anthropomorphic narrative about feline parenthood.  Reproduction began with a lascivious lick shared between ‘he’ and ‘she’ – and no sooner were the kittens scrambling about the floor, than it began again.

More responsible parenthood was on offer in Childbirth as an Athletic Feat (1939) which advised women on how to prepare for labour with a series of exercises demonstrated by an infuriatingly elegant ballerina, notwithstanding her advanced stage of pregnancy.  This regimented (though well intentioned) vision of human reproduction was contrasted by the final film of the evening, Stan Brakhage’s Window Water Baby Moving (1959) chronicling the labour of his then-wife, Jane Wodening.  This was the least ‘scientific’ film we saw; it aspired to be nothing but art.  The camera lingered over Wodening’s body made strange by pregnancy, and the unflinching shots of her pelvic area as the baby emerges are challenging for some to watch without squeamishness.  Towards the end of the film, we realise that some of the camerawork has been done by Wodening herself; a powerful feminist gesture.  Her body was at once as automatic as the twirling, geotropic peas, and as human as a painting by Caravaggio.  A true meeting of science and art.

The whole event was enhanced by the wonderful improvisations of the ensemble Bog Bodies.  Rather than accompanying the films, like a pianist in a Chaplin film, they created a parallel work of art that was a meditation on the science and the humanity that was on show.

Here is a list of what we watched, and where you can find it online:

1. Gestation of the Ovum (Friedrich Kopsch, Germany, 1924), 9 min. SILENT. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxFFX3h_SNQ
2. Peas and Cues (Mary Field, 1930), 9 min. SOUND. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7za10Kd1IQ
3. Childbirth as an Athletic Feat (Kathleen Vaughan, UK, 1939), 8 min. SILENT. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9wRBWDxReY
4. The Private Life of a Cat (Alexander Hammid, US, 1944), 22 min. SILENT. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmYYzcMIozY
5. Growing Girls (Winifred Holmes, UK, 1949), 12 min. SOUND. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97cYt0b02oI
6. Window Water Baby Moving (Stan Brakhage, US, 1959), 12 min. SILENT. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNhjD1Z0jSo

A commentary on the latest CISoR cross-disciplinary event held on 19/10/16 by Phil Ward, Deputy Director of Research Services

Whilst funders are increasingly pushing for interdisciplinary research, actually making it happen is a tough challenge. At the University of Kent we were established to break down the barriers between disciplines – to be ‘a community where different disciplines mix up,’ to quote the first Vice Chancellor, Geoffrey Templeman. I’ve written in the past about the difficulty of reaching ‘beyond the safety of the silo’, and what we’ve done to try and help the process, such as through sandpits.

Ultimately though it is up to the academics to reach across the disciplinary boundaries, to look at what others are doing, and to recognise the ways in which their work can inform, broaden and deepen your own – and vice versa. I’ve followed very closely how Prof Darren Griffin (Biosciences) and Prof Sally Sheldon (KLS) have established the CISoR and recently went, for the first time, to one of their events. Entitled ‘Sex, Lives and Conspiracy,’ it brought together colleagues from across the University, and was an opportunity to learn about a very diverse range of research going on in all three faculties.

I came to the event late: I was showing visitors from the British Academy around the campus, and thought that they would be interested in eavesdropping on this conversation. And how: you could see their eyes light up at fizzing, crackling mix of papers that were presented, from the creative clash of Dorothy Lehane working with colleagues in biomedical science and crafting poetic responses to their life and work, to the psychological determinants of conspiracy theorists, to the ‘biography’ of the 1967 Abortion Act.

Altogether there were eleven speakers, and between them they represented a huge variety of research. Interestingly, for a centre led by a Professor of Genetics, there was less ‘hard science’, and more explorations of the effects that such science had had on society and culture. Thus, for instance, Jan McVarish explored questions of evidence and trust in the fertility sector, and the implications for concepts of ‘informed consent.’ Becki Gould, who works in the London Women’s Clinic, relayed stories of patients who were undergoing a revolutionary new IVF technique. Extending an exploratory thread further, David Ayers, from the School of English, gave a fascinating insight into the way that intimacy and birth control were represented in the novels and newspapers of the first half of the twentieth century.

On the face of it, there was little binding these threads together, and it would be a tough quiz night question that tried to link Shakespeare and grammar schools, impact bias and behavioural genetics. However, I was impressed by the recurring issues. and the ways in which they (reproduction, conspiracy and so forth) were dealt with by different academic disciplines.

There was an opportunity to explore these further in the coffee break, and in the drinks reception that followed. And that, ultimately, was key to the success of the day: it got people talking, informally, animatedly, about the common threads that weaved through the diverse research landscape. Often it is at the edge of disciplines where the discoveries happen, in the hinterland where perspectives change and the unexpected is more likely to be encountered; where nothing is taken for granted. Darren suggested that further workshops and symposia might use some of these themes, some of these threads, to explore the common landscape further. In so doing he is returning the University to its interdisciplinary roots, and through these ensuring its future development, strength and success.

The Centre for the History of the Sciences is running the 2016 Science in Public conference this week, held at the University of Kent from the 13th – 15th July. Further details can be found here.

You’re mid-sentence when your companion whips out their smart phone and starts tapping away. Your words hang in the air as your friend disappears into the digital world. You feel invisible. You have been ‘phubbed’.

Etiquette would dictate that ‘phubbing’ – snubbing someone while you concentrate on your phone – is incredibly rude. But with the rise of the smart phone, ‘phubbing’ has become so common that it’s now considered normal.

Researchers at the University of Kent in the UK have been investigating ‘phubbing’. They say that there are three factors that cause people to reach for their phone; internet addiction, fear of missing out (FOMO) and a lack of self-control.

Karen Douglas, psychology professor and co-author of the study says that while humans have always experienced issues around self-control, smart-phone use has exacerbated it.

“Being constantly connected via smartphones and the internet generally means that information is available to people all the time, so there is more to know and potentially more to miss out on than before these technologies existed,” she says.

Another factor that has caused ‘phubbing’ to become normal is that when we are ‘phubbed’ we are more likely to go on and ‘phub’ someone else. We go from ‘phubee’ to ‘phubber’.

In other words, we are caught in a vicious cycle of ‘phubbing’ behaviour. And the more we see people whipping out their phones in social situations the more we accept it.

Douglas notes that while smart phone addiction is the most proximal explanation for ‘phubbing’ its constant reinforcement is a huge problem.

“People ‘phub’, are ‘phubbed’, then ‘phub’ even more. So a behaviour that is potentially detrimental to human communication has become self-perpetuating,” she says.

There is, however, a backlash to the anti-social trend.

‘Anti-phubbers’ can download posters, stage ‘phubbing’ interventions or name and shame a ‘phubber’ via the website stopphubbing.com, started by 23-year-old Australian graduate student Alex Haigh in 2013.

Psychologist Jocelyn Brewer says we need to develop ‘nettiquette’ in our peer and friendship groups.

“We really need to work on developing emotional intelligence and soft skills, rather than expecting software to do the work for us.”

Taken from the Sydney Morning Herald (10/06/16)

Chotpitayasunondh, V., & Douglas, K.M. (in press).  How “phubbing” becomes the norm: The antecedents and consequences of snubbing via smartphone. Computers in Human Behavior.

Karen Douglas and Co-investigator Robbie Sutton have been awarded over £56,000 from the Economic and Social Research Council to ask “Why do people adopt conspiracy theories, how are they communicated, and what are their risks?

In their multi-disciplinary work, they will explore perspectives from psychology, information engineering, political science, and sociology. Co-investigators also include Aleksandra Cichocka, Jim Ang and Farzin Deravi

Academics from The Universities of Kent, Nottingham and Christ Church University together with industrial leaders held a mini-symposium on the topic of agricultural animal reproduction on Friday, 15 April, at Discovery Park in Sandwich. 

It was the first event hosted by the Canterbury Christ Church University since the launch of its Life Sciences Industry Liaison Lab at the business park in March. University scientists joined together with industrialists from Illumina, JSR Genetics, Topigs Norsvin and IVF Biosciences to explore the importance of collaborative research as part of ongoing CISoR initiatives in non-human reproduction.  Three BBSRC grant applications have arisen from the collaboration.

https://www.canterbury.ac.uk/news-centre/university-news/2016/life-sciences-host-animal-ivf-event-at-discovery-park.aspx