The spread of COVID-19 has created stress worldwide and continues to disrupt our day-to-day lives, making it very difficult to sustain healthy habits. Even as we seek to find a new normal, health care professionals and public figures continue to encourage us to “stay home” and “take time for yourself”. For those of us who find ourselves with some extra time on our hands, this can be a good opportunity to reflect on our mental and physical health. Ask yourself these questions:

• Do you exercise daily?
• Do you give your body the proper nutrients it needs? (and no mom, that doesn’t include )
• Do you average 7-9 hours of sleep every night?
• Are you able to effectively manage your day to day stress?

Our body operates as a cohesive and interconnected system.  If we do not manage ALL of these contributors to our health (exercise, nutrition, sleep, stress management), then the system (our mental and physical health) may fail.

Why is mindfulness an important place to start?

Over the past 20 years there has been a vast body of research linking emotional intelligence to positive physical and mental health outcomes. Emotional intelligence is defined as the ability to monitor feelings and emotions (your own and the emotions of others), to provide objective judgement, and to use this information as a guide for your thinking and actions (Salovey & Mayer, 1990). Some experts believe that emotional intelligence is the key to success for personal relationships, professional relationships, and the relationship you have with yourself (Goleman, 2006; Zinn, 2003). It has also been suggested that emotional intelligence is not an innate skill, and that we can use mindfulness practices, such as meditation, to train these competencies in order to improve our quality of life (Goleman, 2006).

An eye-opening study led by Richard Davidson and Jon Kabat-Zinn (2003) examined the benefits of practicing meditation in a business setting. After eight weeks of using meditation techniques, employees reported significantly lower levels of anxiety and stress. Additionally, when electrical activity was measured in the brains of participants, the meditation group showed a significant increase in left-side anterior brain activation (i.e., parts of the brain associated with positive emotion). They also developed more antibodies to a flu vaccine than employees who did not meditate, suggesting that in addition to the positive psychological effects, those who practiced mindfulness developed stronger immune responses. In my opinion, the most exciting takeaway from this research is that it may be possible to train our minds so that our bodies become stronger!

A Buddhist monk meditating with EEG for neuroscience research

Another study demonstrated that practiced Buddhist meditators are able to voluntarily regulate their brain activity to generate high-amplitude gamma brain waves, which have been linked to more effective memory, learning and perception (Lutz et al., 2004). Electroencephalogram (EEG) recordings were used to compare the brain activity of eight Buddhists who had been practicing meditation for 15-40 years to a group of ten healthy students who had been practicing meditation for one week prior to the study. The skilful meditators were able to sustain high-amplitude gamma brain waves and phase-synchrony (a measure linked to higher-level mental processes) during meditation and also displayed higher baseline gamma-wave activity than the student group, suggesting that mental training may induce both short- and long-term changes in the brain (Lutz et al., 2004).

Other studies have demonstrated the value of mindfulness-based stress reduction practices for medical students and health care professionals, including doctors, nurses, psychologists, social workers and physiotherapists (Shapiro et al., 1998; Jain et al., 2007; Shapiro et al., 2005). By comparing individuals who engaged in mindfulness meditation to those who did not, these studies variously showed that consistent mindfulness practice led to decreased psychological distress, lower stress levels, and less burnout. Another study assessing the self-care practices and well-being of mental health professionals found that a state of mindfulness was key in linking self-care to well-being (Richards et al., 2010). , the results of these studies could inform efforts to help workers stay healthy both mentally and physically as they courageously work through these difficult times.

Together these studies demonstrate the positive effects of mindfulness training after only a few weeks of practice. If mindfulness practices can provide benefits to corporate employees, Buddhists, students, and health care workers alike, then they can certainly be helpful to all of us. Let’s learn about these practices!

The simple practice of mindfulness

Hopefully at this point you’ve started to evaluate how you can do better with self-care, regardless of where you think you currently stand on the “healthy” scale. Now I’m going to explain two easy practices that you can try.

Breathing techniques – Bringing attention to breath is a simple and effective form of meditation (Tan, 2018). Try these simple steps:

1. Position yourself for meditation: begin by sitting comfortably. Sit in a position that enables you to be both relaxed and alert at the same time, whatever that means to you.
2. Take 3 deep breaths: take three slow deep breaths to inject both energy and relaxation into our practice.
3. Bring attention to what you are doing: breathe naturally and bring very gentle attention to your breath. You can bring attention to the nostrils, the abdomen, or the entire body of breath, whatever that means to you. Become aware of the in breath, the out breath and the space in between. If at any time you feel distracted by a sensation, thought or sound, just acknowledge it, experience it and gently let it go, then bring attention very gently back to your breath.

Practice this breathing technique for one minute. If you are able to hold you attention for longer, then you may lengthen the practice. This is about quality, not quantity, so if you feel you can’t sit still and focus for more than a few minutes, then try this exercise for 1 minute and build on it from there. And, because I like science, here is some evidence that shows what simple breathing practices can do for you. Valentine and Sweet (1999) compared long-term meditators, novice meditators (who were trained to focus on breath) and non-meditating controls on the Wilkins’ counting test which measures the ability to sustain attention. As expected, the long-term meditators displayed superior performance in sustained attention, but the more interesting finding was the difference between novice meditators and the control group. With short-term training designed to focus on breathing, the novice meditators greatly outperformed the controls in sustaining attention. This suggests that although long term meditation provides the best benefits, even simple short-term practices can give you an edge.

Journaling – This exercise only requires 3 minutes of your time (set a timer)! You will give yourself a prompt and spend 3 minutes writing whatever comes to mind. Try not to think about it too much, just let the words flow onto the paper. If you run out of things to write, just write, “I have run out of things to write” until the 3 minutes is up. You can create your own prompt or use one of the following: What I am feeling now is, I am aware that, What motivates me is, I am inspired by, Today my focus is, I wish, Others are, Love is, I am grateful for…

Once again, because I like science, Spera, Buhrfeind and Pennebaker (1994) conducted a study where laid-off professionals wrote about their feelings for twenty minutes every day for five consecutive days. These individuals found new jobs at a much faster rate than the non-writing control group. Another study found that an 8-week gratitude journaling intervention for elderly patients experiencing heart failure lead to positive physiological outcomes such as reduced inflammation (Redwine et al., 2016). Although this study used a 20-minute journaling period, it’s important to tailor these practices to you and how long you can sustain your attention. Whether that means 3 minutes, 10 minutes, or 20 minutes is up to you. That is the whole idea behind these practices: becoming more in tune with what works for you so that you can take the appropriate steps to improve your health.

When working towards a healthier lifestyle, it’s important to have as many tools in your (figurative) toolkit as possible so that you can handle any situation life throws at you, and evidence shows that these techniques can work!  But remember, knowing how to do something does not mean that you have mastered it. New skills must be practiced, and when you are training new habits, consistency is key. There’s no magic number for how many workouts to complete, how many cheat meals you’re allowed, or how many weeks you need to practice mediation for it to work. Practice, practice, practice!

To conclude, consider mindfulness as a new skill you can develop during this time of distancing and isolation. One minute of paying attention to your own needs might just turn a bad day into a good one. I wish everyone well during these challenging times. Stay healthy and stay you.

References

Davidson, R. J., Kabat-Zinn, J., Schumacher, J., Rosenkranz, M., Muller, D., Santorelli, S. F., … & Sheridan, J. F. (2003). Alterations in brain and immune function produced by mindfulness meditation. Psychosomatic medicine,Ěý65(4), 564-570.

Goleman, D. (2006). Emotional intelligence. Bantam.

Jain, S., Shapiro, S. L., Swanick, S., Roesch, S. C., Mills, P. J., Bell, I., & Schwartz, G. E. (2007). A randomized controlled trial of mindfulness meditation versus relaxation training: effects on distress, positive states of mind, rumination, and distraction. Annals of behavioral medicine,Ěý33(1), 11-21.

Kabat‐Zinn, J. (2003). Mindfulness‐based interventions in context: past, present, and future. Clinical psychology: Science and practice,Ěý10(2), 144-156.

Lutz, A., Greischar, L. L., Rawlings, N. B., Ricard, M., & Davidson, R. J. (2004). Long-term meditators self-induce high-amplitude gamma synchrony during mental practice. Proceedings of the national Academy of Sciences,Ěý101(46), 16369-16373.

Redwine, L., Henry, B. L., Pung, M. A., Wilson, K., Chinh, K., Knight, B., … & Mills, P. J. (2016). A pilot randomized study of a gratitude journaling intervention on HRV and inflammatory biomarkers in Stage B heart failure patients. Psychosomatic medicine,Ěý78(6), 667.

Richards, K., Campenni, C., & Muse-Burke, J. (2010). Self-care and well-being in mental health professionals: The mediating effects of self-awareness and mindfulness. Journal of Mental Health Counseling,Ěý32(3), 247-264.

Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, cognition and personality,Ěý9(3), 185-211.

Shapiro, S. L., Astin, J. A., Bishop, S. R., & Cordova, M. (2005). Mindfulness-based stress reduction for health care professionals: results from a randomized trial. International journal of stress management,Ěý12(2), 164.

Shapiro, S. L., Schwartz, G. E., & Bonner, G. (1998). Effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction on medical and premedical students. Journal of behavioral medicine,Ěý21(6), 581-599.

Spera, S. P., Buhrfeind, E. D., & Pennebaker, J. W. (1994). Expressive writing and coping with job loss. Academy of management journal,Ěý37(3), 722-733.

Tan, C. M. (2018). Search inside yourself. Bentang Pustaka.

Valentine, E. R., & Sweet, P. L. (1999). Meditation and attention: A comparison of the effects of concentrative and mindfulness meditation on sustained attention. Mental Health, Religion & Culture,Ěý2(1), 59-70.

Can having a pet improve your health? Ask any pet owner with a close relationship to their dog or cat and you’ll probably get a resounding “Yes!” Many researchers will also tell you that the scientific findings regarding the association between having pets and health look pretty positive. Links have been found between owning pets and multiple aspects of physical and mental well-being, including (Kramer, Mehmood, & Suen, 2019), better heart health (Mubanga et al., 2017), better sleep and exercise habits (Headey, Na, & Zheng, 2008), and less loneliness (Stanley, Conwell, Bowen, & Van Orden, 2013).

While the scientific literature on pets and health is promising, a closer look reveals that the story isn’t always consistent. Some studies have been unable to detect links between owning an pet and key health outcomes (Wright, Kritz-Silverstein, Morton, Wingard, & Barrett-Connor, 2007), and some researchers have even found that owning a pet can predict negative health outcomes (Koivusilta & Ojanlatva, 2006). Some of the inconsistencies can probably be traced back to variations in the way studies were conducted, but it might also be that different individuals and social groups experience pet ownership differently. In other words, there could be key social, psychological, and even biological factors that influence how much (or little) benefit people get out of sharing their lives with animals. The goal of our research was to move beyond just asking whether or not pets are good for our health, to focus instead on characteristics that might alter this relationship. For example, is a pet’s presence enough, or does the strength of the bond matter? Does having a supportive social network affect the way you feel about your pet? Do stressful life circumstances (like illness, homelessness, or poverty) change our relationships with animals and how important they are for our health?

At the same time as we try to better understand the psychosocial factors that contribute to the benefits of pet ownership, a growing body of research has converged on oxytocin (a hormone known for its role in stress reduction, bonding, and many other social behaviours) as a possible major biological player in our interactions with animals. Prior studies have shown that oxytocin levels in our body change in the presence of a friendly animal, particularly when it’s an animal we’ve bonded with (Handlin et al., 2011). Oxytocin appears to impact our brain and body’s stress response, potentially connecting positive social behaviours (like turning to a friend for help) to the reduction of distress (Heinrichs, Baumgartner, Kirschbaum, & Ehlert, 2003). Differences in genes that are responsible for oxytocin functioning appear to impact the way we relate to others on a social level, including how we pursue and respond to social support (Chen et al., 2011; Kim et al., 2010). If bonds with cats and dogs are similar to bonds with people, could genetic variation in our oxytocin system similarly affect human-animal relationships?

To explore these questions, we conducted a series of studies that combined survey measures (assessing emotional attachment to pets and facets of human health & well-being) with genetic analysis. By isolating DNA from saliva samples, we were able to look at small variations known as (or SNPs) in oxytocin-related genes and test for links between people’s genetics and their survey responses.

The research began in the fall of 2017 when we rented booth space at the Ottawa Pet Expo, a weekend event for pet enthusiasts. While there, we gathered survey responses and saliva samples from 100+ pet owners—mostly people with dogs and cats but a few with other types of animals. In a second study, we set up our booth at public locations around Ottawa and repeated this procedure; this time we also encouraged participation from non-pet owners as a comparison group. Finally, our third study took place at events organized by , an organization that provides free veterinary care for low-income, marginally housed community members in Ottawa. Gathering data from these different populations allowed us to look at how the role of pets might differ based on personal circumstances.

As soon as we began analyzing the data, the results challenged our assumptions. We had predicted that strong feelings of attachment towards a pet would be linked to improved mental well-being, but in fact an opposite pattern emerged – in all three groups, participants who were more strongly bonded to their animals were also more likely to report experiencing poorer well-being, including more symptoms of depression, loneliness, and lower feelings of social connection. Strong attachment to pets was also associated with being more likely to have a physical illness.

What could these results mean? While it’s possible that strong emotional ties with an animal directly negatively impact human well-being (perhaps because caring for a pet might strain time and financial resources), we believe that it’s more likely that when people are highly emotionally stressed (depressed, lonely, or socially isolated), they may be more likely to turn to their pets for comfort. Some evidence for this possibility exists in the form of research showing that many pet owners view their animals as unique and important sources of support, especially when they are strongly attached to their pet (Meehan, Massavelli, & Pachana, 2017). If people are turning to their pets as a way of coping with things like stress and loneliness, this could explain why animal relationships are often so important to people who are isolated or socially marginalized, like older adults and individuals who are homeless. In fact, in our own research, we found that participants who were living with poverty and housing insecurity were especially likely to say that they were highly attached to their pets.

We also found that a SNP of the oxytocin receptor gene was linked to owning a pet. Results from a large twin study released earlier this year suggested that a tendency towards having animals (in this case, dogs) might be (Fall, Kuja-Halkola, Dobney, Westgarth, & Magnusson, 2019), which makes this a particularly interesting finding. However, the relatively small number of participants in our own study means that this finding should be taken with a grain of salt; repeating this research with a larger group would be one way to check if the association is meaningful or not.

As with any study, it’s important to remember that lots of different factors might have affected the results, including when and where we gathered data, who was motivated to take part in the research, and how we chose to measure things like attachment and well-being. While our findings were unexpected, the takeaway from this research is not that we should ignore pets and their role in human health—these are important phenomena that need to be studied and explored, especially when pets seem to be so important to so many people. But as with research into any interesting human behaviour, the relationships between pet ownership, emotional bonds with animals, and health & well-being are bound to be complex. Learning more about these links will be challenging, but worthwhile.

References:

Chen, F. S., Kumsta, R., Dawans, B. v., Monakhov, M., Ebstein, R. P., & Heinrichs, M. (2011). Common oxytocin receptor gene (OXTR) polymorphism and social support interact to reduce stress in humans. PNAS USA, 108(50), 19937-19942.

Fall, T., Kuja-Halkola, R., Dobney, K., Westgarth, C., & Magnusson, P. (2019). Evidence of largegenetic influences on dog ownership in the Swedish twin registry has implications forunderstanding domestication and health associations. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 7554-7.

Handlin, L., Hydbring-Sandberg, E., Nilsson, A., Ejdebäck, M., Jansson, A., & Uvnäs-Moberg, K. (2011). Short-term interaction between dogs and their owners: Effects on oxytocin, cortisol, insulin and heart rate—An exploratory study. Anthrozoös, 24(3), 301-315.

Headey, B., Na, F., & Zheng, R. (2008). Pet dogs benefit owners’ health: A ‘natural experiment’ in  China. Social Indicators Research, 87(3), 481-493.

Heinrichs, M., Baumgartner, T., Kirschbaum, C., and Ehlert, U. (2003). Social support and oxytocin interact to suppress cortisol and subjective responses to psychosocial stress. Biological  Psychiatry, 54, 1389–1398.

Kim, H. S., Sherman, D. K., Sasaki, J. Y., Xu, J., Chu, T. Q., Ryu, C., . . . Taylor, S. E. (2010). Culture,Ěýdistress, and oxytocin receptor polymorphism (OXTR) interact to influence emotional support  seeking. PNAS USA, 107(36), 15717-15721.

Koivusilta, L. K., & Ojanlatva, A. (2006). To have or not to have a pet for better health? PloS One,Ěý1(1), e109.

Kramer, C. K., Mehmood, S., & Suen, R. S. (2019). Dog ownership and survival: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes.

Mubanga, M., Byberg, L., Nowak, C., Egenvall, A., Magnusson, P. K., Ingelsson, E., . . .  Institutionen för kirurgiska vetenskaper. (2017). Dog ownership and the risk of cardiovascular  disease and death – a nationwide cohort study. Scientific Reports, 7(1), 1-9.

Stanley, I. H., Conwell, Y., Bowen, C., & Van Orden, K. A. (2014). Pet ownership may attenuate loneliness among older adult primary care patients who live alone. Aging & Mental Health, 18(3), 394-399.

Wright, J. D., Kritz-Silverstein, D., Morton, D. J., Wingard, D. L., & Barrett-Connor, E. (2007). Pet ownership and blood pressure in old age. Epidemiology, 18(5), 613-618.

Water Conversations: Does living near water and greenness impact the mortality of Canadian urbanites? Findings from the Canadian Census Cohort

April 19, 2018 at 12:00 PM to 1:00 PM

The Global Water Institute presents the Water Conversations Series to introduce and share research involving water and health to facilitate conversations and collaboration between researchers, faculty and students.

April’s speaker will be Dr. Paul Villeneuve from the Health Sciences Department at ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ Unversity, Affiliated Researcher at the CHAIM Centre.

´Ą˛ú˛őłŮ°ů˛šłŚłŮ:ĚýA number of epidemiological studies have shown that exposure to natural environments, such as green space, is associated with many health benefits. To date, few studies have looked at the potential link between living near water and mortality. We evaluated whether living near large, natural water features (e.g., lakes, rivers, coasts, “blue space”) as well as green space was associated with cause-specific mortality in a population-based cohort of non-immigrant, adults living in the 30 largest Canadian cities. Our cohort consisted of individuals who completed the mandatory 2001 Statistics Canada long-form census (1 in 5 households). These individuals were linked to the Canadian mortality database, and to annual income tax filings, through 2011. We estimated associations between living within 250 m of blue space and green space and several common causes of death. We adjusted models for many personal and contextual covariates, as well as for exposures to ambient air pollution. Our cohort included approximately 1¡3 million subjects at baseline, 106,180 of whom died from non-accidental causes during follow-up. There were slight differences in sociodemographic characteristics between individuals living by water and not, but model point estimates changed only slightly with the inclusion of a comprehensive set of confounding factors. We reduced risks of mortality in the range of 12-17% associated with living within 250 m of water compared to living further away, among all causes of death examined, except with external/accidental causes. Similar inverse associations were noted for measures of greenness. Our findings suggest that living near nature has important benefits to health, but further work is needed to better understand the drivers of this association

Please RSVP with the main contact,ĚýChristiane Mineau by email or by phone.

Learn more about Dr. Paul Villeneuve and the research he does at ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University here.

So who are these enterprising colleagues?

Our most recent presentation at the CHAIM Brown Bag Series featured Dr. Katie Gunnell who presented her interests in the relationship between psychological health and exercise. While originally trained in kinesiology on a path to physiotherapy, Gunnell found that, often, “people weren’t motivated to do the prescribed exercises. They wanted a cure, but weren’t willing to do the work—so why are some people motivated and others are not?” Gunnell gravitated towards motivational research, as well as further exploring the relations between physical activity and mental or psychological health.

While in a previous research position at Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute (CHEO-RI), Gunnell worked alongside physiologists and public health specialists to determine psychological effects of screen-time. “Youth are exposed to screens all the time. We need to gain more knowledge to bring attention to red flags so we can learn to use screens to our advantage as opposed to having them have negative impacts on our health.” Gunnell continues to examine the relations between screen-time and physical and mental health: is there bad vs. good screen time? How can quality indicators of screen-time be developed? What are the qualitative and quantitative components in screen time?  Having worked in interdisciplinary teams at the CHEO-RI, and throughout her educational career through Brock University, University of British Columbia, and University of Ottawa, Gunnell values the potential from collaboration of interdisciplinary teams in research, as well as in knowledge dissemination and translation. Still involved in knowledge dissemination at the CHEO-RI, Gunnell acknowledges the importance of “actively working with knowledge users” to inform, engage, and inspire healthy active living.

Similarly, Dr. Rachel Burns is interested in healthy behaviours and health outcomes. Burns came to ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ in July 2017 following a post-doc at McGill University, where she examined relations between mental health and diabetes. Using large observational data sets, Burns investigated how mental health influences well-being and overall health outcomes. Since starting at ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´, Burns has been working with big data sets to examine patterns related to depression and diabetes development over time. For example, she is currently exploring the differential implications of depressive symptoms over a long period of time compared to periodic, short periods of time, in relation to diabetes outcomes. Alongside this work, she is examining whether the well-being of one’s romantic partner might be implicated in the evolution of diabetes.

Burns first blended her interests of psychology and biology during her undergraduate degree at the University of Guelph. During her PhD studies at the University of Minnesota, she started to research the psychological processes that help people to maintain healthy behaviours overtime. “A big issue is that people start to engage in healthy behaviors, but shortly afterwards, they stop… so how can we help maintain these behaviours overtime?” One promising notion, she highlights, is the idea of habits; habits are automatic impulses to perform a behavior that are triggered by a stable cue in the environment and their enactment doesn’t require attention. Burns plans to explore habits in relation to physical activity. For example, she asks “Which type of people are most likely to develop strong habits for going to the [ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´] Athletic Centre?” Understanding habit formation and function could help people maintain healthy behaviors overtime. “If we understand these processes, we can leverage them over time… we can shape interventions for diabetes or heart disease and help people live healthier lives.”

Maintaining healthy behaviours and pursing health goals are also a primary interest of Dr. Marina Milyavskaya. Specifically, Milyavskaya considers why people are successful in pursuing certain goals, but not others, as well as how this translates to day-to-day goal pursuit. After an inspiring motivational psychology class during her undergrad at McGill, Milyavskaya knew she wanted to pursue a graduate degree that focused on goals and self-regulation. After completing a Clinical Psychology degree, she realized her stronger interests are in research, and sought a post-doc at the University of Toronto researching self-control and temptations.

In her research, Milyavskaya discovered that self-control didn’t seem to matter as much as temptation. “If the goal is to eat healthy, what matters is the frequency of exposure to temptations—so don’t have chocolate in the house!” Milyavskaya has been at ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ since July 2015, and uses methods from social cognition, personality psychology, ecological momentary assessment, and advanced statistical modelling to better understand the mechanisms of goal pursuit, as well as strategies and interventions that can be used to better attain personal goals. Milyavskaya embraces the translation of research to those who can use it, having previously written blog-style articles explaining her research findings to lay people. In addition, she highlights the importance for researchers within the University to know what research is happening across campus, and if there is potential for new collaborations. “The Brown Bag Series is trying to bring that community [of health researchers] together.”

The Brown Bag Series will run the second Friday of every month, and will invite health researcher speakers from across campus, their research partners, or potential partners conducting relevant research in the region. Anyone who is interested in health research across campus is invited to come.  And anyone interested in presenting a talk to get interdisciplinary feedback should get in touch with one of the organizers to get onto the schedule. Stay tuned at the CHAIM centre website and follow us on twitter to keep informed on the Brown Bag Series!

Related Resources:

By Anna Tomczak, Department of Health Sciences, ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University

Although the saying “sleep is for the weak” was a common theme throughout high school and university, sleep has become more of a luxury – something we always want and can never get enough of. This is especially true considering that Canadians’ quality of sleep has been on the decline for the last couple of decades (Canadian Medical Association, 2012). It is no wonder then, that people take their sleep seriously – so when something disrupts their sleep, such as a neighbor’s loud dog, a snoring partner, or perhaps some noise from wind turbines, they get frustrated and may start complaining. Sometimes these complaints are valid; however, at other times they may be pointing a finger in the wrong direction.

The recent increase in wind turbine farms has generated a lot of controversy in communities where they have been built. Many residents are worried over the possible effects the wind turbines will have on their health, including sleep. It is quite evident that noise can disrupt sleep and studies have shown that sleep loss is implicated in several negative health outcomes. A lack of sleep has been shown to increase the risk of obesity, workplace injuries, and is a risk factor for a number of health conditions including stress, cardiovascular disease, and stroke. It is for this reason that the World Health Organization (WHO) has created guidelines for community noise. These guidelines recommend that indoor sound levels should not exceed 30 dBA of continuous noise, and that the outdoor levels of noise should average no more than 40 dBA (WHO, 1999). Effectively, outdoor noise levels should be no higher than noise levels in a quiet office (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Decibel levels of familiar sounds.
Gerrig, R. J., Zimbardo, P. G., Campbell, A. J., Cumming, S. R., & Wilkes, F. J. (2011). Psychology and life. Pearson Higher Education AU

Since wind turbine farms are fairly recent, very few studies have looked at the relationship between wind turbine noise and sleep disturbance. Undertaking studies in the vicinity of wind turbine farms can be challenging given that typically, there are relatively few individuals who live close to them. However, given that wind turbine farms are increasingly common, and anticipated to start producing larger and larger amounts of energy, it is important to study their impacts on our health. The few studies that have looked at the effects that wind turbines had on sleep quality relied on participants to report their own sleeping patterns. These subjective interpretations of sleep may be biased in several important ways. Individuals may not be able to accurately recollect sleeping patterns. For example, individuals with insomnia often report much worse quality of sleep than what actually occurred (Dittoni et al., 2013). Self-reported measures of sleeping patterns may also be influenced by individuals’ perceptions of the impacts that the wind turbines may have on their health. This may be an important source of bias, and several studies have shown that individuals often have a tendency to over-report certain types of outcomes if they are aware and concerned about a nearby potential health hazard. To overcome this bias, studies often try to use both subjective and objective measures of sleep quality to obtain a more accurate estimate of the association between noise and sleep quality. Objective measures of sleep quality are more challenging to obtain as they require the use of monitoring devices. Health Canada recently reported on findings from their epidemiological study examining the impacts of wind turbine noise on a number of health outcomes including sleep quality. To our knowledge it is the only study to report on these associations between wind turbine noise and both subjective and objective measures of sleep.

Assessing Sleep Quality and Wind Turbine Noise

The Health Canada study included a total of 1238 participants, between the ages of 18-79 years, who lived between 0.25 and 11.22 kilometers away from an operational wind turbine in southwestern Ontario and Prince Edward Island. In order to minimize bias stemming from any previous misconceptions residents may have had on wind turbines, the study did not focus on wind turbines alone, and was more broadly referred to as the Community Noise and Health Study. Data collection took place through in-person interviews, during which participants filled out questionnaires on noise annoyance, health effects, quality of life, sleep quality, perceived stress, lifestyle behaviours and prevalence of chronic disease. Participants sleep patterns were measured in two ways. The first, a self-reported method, measured sleep disturbance using a widely used series of questions referred to as the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). In order to obtain a longer term measure of sleep quality, participants were asked to describe their level of sleep disturbance over the last year. The second method was objective in nature and used an Actiwatch2™ to measure sleep patterns of a sub-group of participants over a seven night period. This type of device is based on movement and can measure timing and duration of sleep, as well as awakenings. This enables it to provide a more accurate and reliable measure of sleep disruption when compared to self-report measures.

The study estimated participants exposure to wind turbine noise by placing sound pressure receptors near the wind turbines that were located in their communities. Outdoor sound pressure levels were estimated from receptors located near 315 wind turbines in southwestern Ontario and 84 in PEI. The investigators were then able to estimate the wind turbine noise in the homes of these participants by applying models that took into account the distance between the home and the wind turbine and measured noise.

Is Wind Turbine Noise Too Loud?

Using the receptors found near the wind turbines, the study found that the majority of dwellings fell below the WHO recommended outdoor night time sound pressure levels (40 dB). On this basis, the findings suggest that noise from the wind turbines is unlikely to cause sleep disturbance. The average bedroom noise level among those who indicated they kept their windows open was 32 dB, which is close to the 30 dBA indoor threshold in the WHO’s Guidelines for Community Noise. With windows closed however, indoor wind turbine noise levels remain below 26 dB – low enough to avoid any sleep disturbance. Only 19% of dwellings exceeded the 40 dB limit, reaching a maximum of 46 dB – 6 dB above the recommended annual average nighttime limit.

Does Wind Turbine Noise Affect Our Sleep?

The Health Canada study evaluated the association between wind turbine noise and sleep by using several measures of sleep disturbance. The findings are compelling given that they found no association between wind turbine noise and of the different sleep measures. They did, however, find that sleep quality was affected by a number of other factors.

The first measure of sleep looked at sleep efficiency (having trouble initiating and maintaining sleep) and although it was found to be associated with being male, having less than high school education, being obese and drinking 3-4 cups of coffee a day, no significant associations with exposure to wind turbine noise were observed.

Individuals who were 65+ years of age, obese, or did not have asthma were more likely to take longer to transition from being awake to being asleep (sleep latency). Sleep latency was not associated with wind turbine noise.

As with the other dimensions of sleep, wind turbine noise had no impact on total sleep time. Shorter sleep time was associated with factors such as physical pain, being diagnosed with a sleeping disorder and having a stand-alone air conditioning unit in the bedroom.

Wake time after sleep onset tended to be longer for those who were not employed, had a lower education level, had bedroom located in basement, being a former smoker, and not taking sleep medication at least once a week. Once again, wind turbine noise had no effect on sleep.

The last sleep factor looked at was how often individuals would wake after having fallen asleep. As with total sleep time, the main factors associated with the rate of awakening were physical pain, drinking 3-4 cups of coffee and being single.

So what’s the Problem?

These findings suggest that the noise created by wind turbines does not have a significant impact on our quality of sleep. However the findings from this study are being met with skepticism. Why is this issue still so controversial? Seeing as research is still relatively new in relation to the health effects of wind turbines, some elements may still not be fully explained. Although this study was one of the first to take into consideration both subjective and objective measures of sleep, it had other limitations. Because it focused on the long-term effects of wind turbine noise on sleep quality, the estimates of wind turbine noise was based on an average generated over a period of time, and was not estimate of noise exposure that occurred on the same night participants’ sleeping characteristics were being measured. Future studies that measure noise exposure and sleep on the same night may yield more clues about subtle impacts that were not detected in this study. The study did, however, find that it is not necessarily the noise but rather was the annoyance with the blinking lights on wind turbines used to signal low flying airplanes, which might affect sleep quality. Either way, the study does suggest that long term measures of wind turbine noise are not related to several measures of sleep quality. However, we are still at an early stage of understanding the impacts that wind turbines might have on our sleeping patterns and overall health. For now though, next time you wake up from a bad sleep, remember that the neighbour’s barking dog is probably more at fault than the wind turbine down the street.

Based on:

Michaud, D. et al. (2016). Impacts of wind turbine noise on self-reported and objective measures of sleep. Sleep, 39, 91 – 109.

Note: Several other papers from this Health Canada led study are expected to be published later in 2016, and these papers will focus on various health endpoints.

An eider nest is surveyed near Cape Dorset by a team of hunters and researchers from Environment Canada and ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University studying the effects of disease and predation on nesting birds.

By Jennifer Provencher, Department of Biology, ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University

A striking step forward in environmental protection policy was the creation of the Minamata Convention signed by 128 countries in 2013. As of April 2015, ten countries had ratified the convention. The Convention aims to limit the release of mercury into the environment. Although mercury is naturally found in the environment, it is also released by a number of industrial processes. Methyl mercury is a known neurotoxin that affects animal development and reproduction. The most extreme example of mercury poisoning for humans is from Minamata, Japan (where the convention’s name comes from). The people of Minamata were exposed to mercury through industrial wastewater from a nearby chemical factory in the mid-1950s. The mercury released into the sea bioaccumulated in the shellfish and fish in the area, which were main food staples for the local residents. Feeding on this seafood resulted in acute mercury poisoning, causing a severe neurological disorder among humans now known as Minamata disease.

Although the Minamata Convention is potentially a huge win for environmental protection, there is much work to be done. First, there is the task of ratification by each participating country, which must alter their national legislations to align with the Minamata Convention. Once all the new legislation is in place, countries must then have programs and enforcement in place to ensure that stakeholders are compliant with the policies on release and disposal of mercury. And there is still the task of designing and implementing monitoring programs to evaluate whether the steps put into place are in fact having the desired effect of reducing mercury in the environment and in wildlife. One stage for this environmental play is the Canadian Arctic.

In the Canadian Arctic, mercury in many habitats and species has been studied, with samples from water and plankton through intermediates in the food chain up to polar bears and humans. Some of the most extensive data sets on mercury are available for animals in the Canadian Arctic, which allows researchers to study how mercury is changing in the environment over time. Seabirds have been particularly useful as study species for researchers who are interested in the effects of mercury, and the overall trends of mercury in northern ecosystems. Environment Canada researchers and its National Wildlife Specimen Bank, located on ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University’s campus, have played an important supporting role in this research. Several marine birds have shown that mercury levels in the Canadian Arctic have increased since the 1970s, and continue to rise in some areas (^{Riget et al.; Science of the Total Environment doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.05.002}). A recent study looking at specimens dating back to the 1800s show that some bird species that are high in the Arctic food chain are experiencing a 45 fold increase in mercury over the last century (^{Bond et al. 2015; The Royal Society 10.1098/rspb.2015.0032}). This increase contrasts with decreases seen in persistent organic pollutants in seabird tissues following policy measures over a much shorter time frame: from the 1970s to present (^{Braune et al. 2010; Interdisciplinary Studies in Environmental Chemistry}).

Hunters return to home with eider ducks after a day of spring hunting. Samples are taken from the birds to study parasites and contaminants, and then the Hunter and Trapper Association distributes the meat among the community.

Studying and measuring mercury in marine birds each year socio-cultural perspectives. Marine birds are an integral part of both traditional culture and modern practices in northern Canada. Their eggs are collected for food during the breeding season and duck and goose down is a valuable insulating material that continues to be collected today by many for both personal use and commercial sales. Marine birds are also hunted for their meat, and their skins are used for household items such as slippers, bowls and jackets. Currently, there are many concerns in the north including rising food costs, sustainability, healthy food choices, and the need to better integrate traditional knowledge with science for ensuring viability of harvested populations. It is hard to argue with the value of marine birds as traditional foods: they are after all free range, organic, sustainable, locally grown, locally harvested, healthy to eat and grounded in cultural practices. Marine birds continue to have very low levels of mercury making birds like geese and ducks (along with caribou and other country foods) great sources of healthy, local nutrition. It is perhaps not happenstance that they are also used as ‘sample sentinels’ for studies on possible changes in pollutant levels of importance to human health.

An eider skin basket made by the Fur Production and Design class at the Nunavut Arctic College in Iqaluit as part of their annual wildlife workshop.

There are other reasons why we should be ‘keeping an eye’ on mercury in Arctic marine birds. The story of mercury cycling in the environment is much more complex than can be captured by a single international agreement. Mercury levels in northern Canada are not influenced by North American emissions, but have the potential to be greatly influenced by those from Asia. Even with the Minamata Convention in place, emissions from some regions in Asia are not predicted to slow for decades, and even when they do, it may take decades to cease increasing levels in Arctic ecosystems (^{Provencher et al. 2014; Environmental Reviews dx.doi.org/10.1139/er-2013-0072}). One only has to go to smog-filled streets of Beijing to see how distant the Canadian Arctic is. Additionally, warming trends in the north that are causing the melting of glaciers and permafrost may be releasing large quantities of mercury into the environment. The low productivity of the Arctic may also make top-level predators susceptible to bioaccumulating more mercury than their counterparts in ecosystems with higher productivity . Thus, arctic marine birds in Canada may be particularly at risk from increasing Hg levels associated with long-term Hg deposition patterns and changing climatic conditions.

Schematic of how a system with low productivity with slow growing biota may lead to exacerbated mercury burdens in top predatorsas compared with more productive, faster growing systems

Canada still needs to ratify the Minamata Convention and research is needed to continue to monitor mercury in marine birds and northern ecosystems. Through these studies, we can help determine if any policies put in place are leading to the desired outcomes (a reduction in environmental mercury). These studies also will help us understand both the acute and sub-lethal effects of mercury on organisms. This research can continue to contribute to other conversations around human health and sustainability in the Arctic, and be used to engage northern students in science, building capacity and helping people make informed decisions (^{Provencher et al. 2013; Arctic}). So although legislators have succeeded with an international agreement on mercury, it is the continued work on mercury and marine birds that has the potential to help inform and evaluate policies and also to shape education, health and culture.

Based on Provencher, J.F., Mallory, M.L., Braune, B.M., Forbes, M.R., Gilchrist, H.G., 2014. Mercury and marine birds in Arctic Canada: effects, current trends and why we should be paying closer attention. Environmental Reviews 22, 244-255.

By Kim Matheson, Department of Health Sciences, ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University

Like many health researchers who are committed to having an impact on human behavior in order to prevent illness, I saw the ‘Nudge’ phenomena as a welcome revelation. And so when a colleague of mine presented a paper at a recent symposium, I, like many others in the room, visibly cringed when he commented that such techniques are paternalistic strategies that assume that people are incapable of making the right decision for themselves.

The thinking behind this assertion is well-stated in a published article by Mols et al. (2014). Certainly not everyone will agree with their thinking, and they make it clear that there are times when a simple nudge is sufficient and necessary to change behaviors. But there are many times when it might not be. Perhaps the motives underlying the behavior are sufficiently complex, and the ‘anti-behavior’ is more aligned with individuals’ goals. Perhaps change occurs when the nudged choice is salient, but disappears when it is not. Perhaps the idea that someone else thought they knew better than me, and tried to trick me into doing something different is sufficiently offensive that I purposely choose otherwise.

So what is a nudge strategy? In effect, a nudge involves a slight push for people to behave in the ‘right’ direction, and is accomplished by making it easier for them to do so. This is accomplished by covertly making certain behavioral choices easier to act on. A simple example is getting children to eat more fruit instead of junk food by putting fruit at the front end of the cafeteria food line. There are many such simple actions where alterations of the environmental, social, or policy conditions, can achieve compliance. The idea is that people aren’t really thinking about what they are doing, or they don’t know how to make good decisions, and so we create the conditions for them to act correctly without having to think.

Not surprisingly, put this way, there are numerous ethical questions raised. Such factors are manipulated all the time for corporate interests – but when such manipulations are directed towards the citizenry by governments or public agencies, this has the capacity to undermine trust, openness, and transparency. It is a paternalistic approach that many would question, as it suggests that even if we knew the evidence supporting the correctness of the behavioral choice, government does not view us as capable of making such a decision on our own. It raises questions regarding what other behaviors might ‘big brother’ like us to engage in that might not be in our collective interests?

So how do we engage citizens so that they make behavioral choices that are in their own and the collective interests? The most recent issue where we see the need to ask this question concerns the vaccination of children against the measles. With recent outbreaks in regions of North America and Europe, real questions have been raised about parents who do not keep their children’s vaccinations up-to-date, if they vaccinate their children at all. As a result, we are seeing the return of diseases that we thought were all but eradicated.

Many accusations have been hurled at anti-vax and vaccine-hesitant parents, ranging from their ignorance for believing data that has been proven to be erroneous (i.e., link to autism), to frightening them into thinking that their own child could become ill and die, to ostracizing and marginalizing them for rendering more vulnerable others in the population susceptible to the illness. What has become clear is that this kind of derogating, blaming, and shaming are more likely to entrench vaccine resistant parents than to encourage behavioral change.

So would a ‘nudge’ in the right direction work in this instance. I haven’t done the research, but it is highly unlikely in most cases. Maybe for the parents who just haven’t gotten around to getting their child vaccinated, setting up vaccine clinics in locations they’re likely to frequent, hence diminishing environmental barriers, might mean that when they and their child are meandering past, they will get their child vaccinated.

But for many other parents, the decision reflects a conscious and thoughtful effort to protect their child. They don’t trust the information they get from the media, they see scientific evidence for what constitutes healthy and unhealthy behaviors and products change on a regular basis (e.g., whether vitamins are good or bad for you; whether you should or should not be consuming fats, dark chocolate, coffee or red wine….). Who trusts government? Or pharma? They may trust the information they get from their doctor, but they might not see their doctor as holding the same values as they themselves – she or he does, afterall, represent the ‘medical establishment’.

Parents trust other like-minded parents. Other people who want the very best for their own children, who want them to be safe and healthy. This isn’t about nudge – indeed, nudge would be an insult, suggesting that they don’t know how to behave thoughtfully about their children. This is about being good parents who value the health of their child, and want to do the best thing. But they have yet to hear from people that they trust, who hold the same criteria to evaluate what is right or wrong, and who can provide them with behavioral alternatives in which they can participate.

When health problems are complex, and people are consciously making behavioral choices, health researchers and practitioners need to respect this, and not assume that people are too ignorant to make the right decisions. We need to ask questions. What are their objectives? Which social groups are they looking to in order to determine behavioral options? Which options are consistent with the personal and collective values they espouse, and how can they act on these options? Our best strategy for influencing people to change their behaviors on issues that they care about is to be transparent, respect the social identities that their actions reflect (e.g., being a good parent), identify who they are prepared to listen to in order to evaluate their options, and work together to find ways that allow them to express who they are, and to do the best thing for everyone.

Based on Mols, F., Haslam, S.A., Jetten, J., & Steffens, N. (2014). Why nudge is not enough: A social identity critique of government by stealth. European Journal of Political Research. DOI: 10.1111/1475-6765.12073

Header image courtesy of SOMMAI at FreeDigitalPhotos.net
Fruit image courtesy of xedos4 at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

by David McMullin, Department of Chemistry, ĐÓ°ÉÔ­´´ University

One of the most fascinating aspects of fungi is their ability to synthesize an array of structurally diverse, often potently bio-active compounds known as secondary metabolites. This phenomenon can be exemplified by Sir Alexander Fleming’s discovery of penicillin from an indoor Penicillium species, or our exploitation of these chemicals as pharmaceuticals including the cholesterol lowering statins. There is a growing body of evidence from large population studies that demonstrates individuals living or working in damp and mouldy buildings are at an increased risk of developing allergies and respiratory symptoms, including asthma.

Modern buildings are designed to be more energy efficient with lower ventilation rates compared to the buildings constructed 40 years ago. Many of the commonly used building materials today, including particle board and paper-faced gypsum wallboard, will become water saturated with much less water as opposed to wood and traditional plaster. This unwanted water indoors can originate from daily routine activities such as cooking and showering, undetected leaks or flooding. When the amount of water vapor in a building exceeds the buildings ability to remove it, it is absorbed by the building materials. When these building materials become damp, mould growth occurs. This is of particular importance to individuals from industrialized countries, including Canada, as we spend the majority of our time indoors

The specific fungi, or moulds that are found on damp building materials is related to ‘how damp”, the amount of time they remain damp and “nutrients” of the particular building material. As different commonly used building materials have their own unique combination of available water, nutrients and chemistry, it is not surprising that specific moulds are associated with certain materials. While the overall species diversity of fungi is considered great, the number of species found indoors is fairly small. Interestingly, as similar building materials are used in industrialized countries, the distributions of some of the more common moulds in temperate environments are also very similar.

Gypsum board is often used to construct interior walls and ceilings; however, when it becomes damp it promotes the growth of numerous moulds. The most commonly identified indoor mould, Penicillium rubens, is illustrated and is the species where the antibiotic penicillin was originally discovered from.

Since the changes in construction practices for buildings and homes in the 1970’s, evidence from large epidemiological studies conducted in multiple countries has shown that indoor exposures to dampness and moulds are associated with an increased risk for respiratory symptoms, asthma, bronchitis, respiratory infections and other non-specific symptoms. For example, the inflammatory disease asthma is commonly associated with a genetic predisposition known as atopy. However, individuals working or inhabiting a damp, mouldy building are at an increased risk for developing asthma. As a genetic predisposition and an allergy cannot explain this disease pattern, it suggests that there is a toxic effect. The production of toxic fungal secondary metabolites may explain why individuals are developing (non-atopic) asthma and other respiratory symptoms. As many of these secondary metabolites are not volatile, it additionally indicates that the exposures we experience are due to the inhalation of mould spores and mycelial fragments which harbor these biologically active chemicals.

To ask the question, “how do toxic secondary metabolites produced by moulds alter human lung biology?”, information on the identity of the moulds found indoors and the preparation of the toxic chemicals they produce are first required. During my graduate studies in Professor David Miller´s group, mould samples were collected from across Canada representing some of the most commonly identified fungi indoors. The goal of my research project was to purify the dominant secondary metabolites produced by these moulds so they could be tested for biological activity in relevant toxicological experiments. This type of work is necessary as one cannot typically go to the store and purchase these chemicals, you have to isolate them from nature yourself. The unambiguous confirmation of specific secondary metabolites from a particular species can often help fungal taxonomists, as the production of these chemicals is typically consistent within a particular species.

What I found investigating the secondary metabolites produced by some of the most frequently identified fungi in damp buildings ranged from the confirmation of potently toxic compounds known to be produced by certain species to the identification of new-to-science chemicals. Growing liters upon liters of fungi in liquid can be messy, stinky work…but it is a lot of fun. So, after extracting all of those liters of fungal culture, isolating the secondary metabolites and identifying the structures by various spectroscopic methods; I was left with a collection of fungal metabolites produced by the actual moulds found growing in Canadian buildings and homes.

Chemical diversity of the secondary metabolites produced by moulds found in damp buildings. Many of these toxic compounds have been studied for their inflammatory properties in relevant toxicological experiments.

A broad consensus has been reached by national (e.g., Health Canada) and international (e.g., World Health Organization) agencies on the impact of mould and dampness in buildings. With these pure metabolites, we can contribute to an understanding of the role they play in the documented health effects of those working or living in damp and mouldy buildings. At the very low exposures that could be experienced by the human lung indoors, induction of pro-inflammatory genes, acute inflammation and histopathological disruptions have been observed in relevant models by fungal metabolites, including many of the metabolites isolated during my graduate research. While there are some differences between various models, all results indicate that the compounds present on mould spores that we are exposed to in damp buildings are potently pro-inflammatory. The physiological mechanism of inflammation and immuno-modulatory effects caused by these fungal metabolites are still poorly understood in lung cells. These types of experiments have revealed that these toxins modulate genes involved in asthma at concentrations experienced in damp and mouldy buildings by the human lung. A concerted effort on this important human health research will contribute to a more comprehensive understanding for non-atopic asthma and other documented adverse health effects associated with indoor mould exposures in humans.

For more information, please see:

Miller JD and McMullin DR (2014) Fungal secondary metabolites as harmful indoor air contaminants: 10 years on. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 98: 9953-9966.

Top image courtesy of Kookkai_nak at FreeDigitalPhotos.net