Tag: The Conversation

South African Scientists Make Breakthrough in Decoding Cancer’s Most Effective Survival Strategy

Scanning electron micrograph of just-divided HeLa cells. Zeiss Merlin HR-SEM. Credit: National Center for Microscopy and Imaging Research

Kevin Naidoo, University of Cape Town

In the intricate biology of the human body, organs such as the breast, the colon and the lungs are lined with a defensive barrier known as the epithelium. At the heart of this barrier sits a remarkable protein called Mucin-1 (MUC1). In a healthy body, MUC1 is like a sentinel.

It stands on the cell wall, draped in a complex “armour” of long chains of sugar molecules (carbohydrates), where it serves as a physical shield against bacteria, viruses and toxins. Crucially, it communicates with the immune system, telling our natural defences when the body is under threat.

But in the case of cancer, this guardian exchanges its sugar coat armour for shorter sugar chains and so turns into a traitor. It stops sending danger signals to the immune system and instead binds to the immune cells, creating an anti-inflammatory microenvironment that promotes tumours.

The team I lead at the Scientific Computing Research Unit at the University of Cape Town is home to computer modelling experts and experimental chemical biology research scientists. The molecular details of this MUC1 alteration, which contributes to the transformation of normal cells into tumour cells, were recently published in Nature Communications, and provide a new look at exactly how this process happens.

By developing a novel “test-tube” synthetic biology approach, we modelled and decoded the molecular assembly line reorganisation that allows cancer to “redecorate” MUC1, turning it from a protective shield into a cloak of invisibility. We used our own computational chemistry algorithms to map the exact sugar coating positions that create a tumour-promoting environment.

Understanding the location and nature of the MUC1 sugars that prevent the immune system from detecting tumours provides the foundation for our laboratory and others in the field to develop cancer vaccines, biomarkers and therapeutics.

This South African-led discovery represents a major leap forward in our ability to decode one of cancer’s most effective survival strategies.

The problem: a malignant makeover

In a normal cell, the sugar molecules attached to MUC1 are long and complex. The process of attaching sugars is called glycosylation. In cancer cells, however, this process goes haywire. The sugar molecules are often cut short or altered, creating “aberrant” structures like the Tn and sialyl-Tn (sTn) antigens. These are specific types of sugar-protein combinations that are tags for tumour cells.

These altered sugars do two dangerous things: they allow the tumour to evade detection by the immune system, and they actively trigger the process of turning a normal cell into a cancerous one.

Because MUC1 is found in so many different types of cancer, the US National Cancer Institute has ranked it as the most accesible target.

To stop the cascading effect of the MUC1 changes from normal to tumour cells, scientists first had to understand exactly how the “assembly line” breaks down.

The discovery: relocating the factory

Our research team set out to do something ambitious: recreate the transition from a healthy sugar coating to a cancerous one in a laboratory setting.

In normal cells, the enzymes that build these sugar chains (long molecules) live in a part of the cell called the Golgi apparatus, the cell’s “packaging and delivery centre”. We built an in vitro (test-tube) model to simulate what happens when these conditions change. We discovered that in tumour cells, the enzymes responsible for starting the sugar chains are relocated to another part of the cell, the endoplasmic reticulum, essentially the cell’s “factory floor”.

This relocation changes everything. Here, the enzymes are no longer inhibited by the usual cellular checks and balances. They take over the sugar sites on the MUC1 protein, creating the foundation for the cancerous Tn antigen.

To take the study even further, we used quantum chemistry. We simulated the behaviour of atoms and molecules at the most fundamental level to find out where these changes are most likely to happen. We identified a specific location on the MUC1 protein, known as the T13 site, which cancer enzymes prefer. This specific interaction is what drives the massive increase in the sTn antigen seen in malignant tumours.

Why this matters: from lab to patient

Understanding the “how” and the “where” of these sugar changes is the first step towards stopping them. The research didn’t stop at the test tube; the team is already looking at what this means for patients.

The next phase of the research, as detailed in a recent paper in Glycobiology, involves building a sophisticated “systems biology” computational model. A model can connect the changes in the MUC1 sugar coating to the behaviour of immune cells. For example, scientists found that when these cancerous sugars interact with macrophages (a type of white blood cell), they trigger the release of specific signals that tell the tumour to grow and spread.

We are refining these details for various types of cancer. We are comparing common forms of breast cancer with more aggressive, currently untreatable types to see if the “sugar code” differs between them.

By using this accurate, atomic-level data to build computer models of the entire biological system, we hope to identify new drugs that can block these signals. The goal is to move towards precision medicine: treatments that can strip away cancer’s sugar shield, allowing the patient’s own immune system to finally see and destroy the tumour.

Kevin Naidoo, Professor of Scientific Computing and Physical Chemistry, University of Cape Town

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

What Causes Depression? What We Know, Don’t Know and Suspect

Photo by Sydney Sims on Unsplash

Caroline Gurvich, Monash University; Eveline Mu, Monash University, and Jayashri Kulkarni, Monash University

Depression is a complex and deeply personal experience. While almost everyone has periods of sadness, low mood or grief, depression is different. Major depressive disorder is persistent, interferes with day-to-day activities, and can affect work, life and relationships.

One in five people will experience depression in their lifetime. Women are nearly twice as likely as men to develop it – a disparity that emerges around puberty and persists into adulthood.

But what causes it? The short answer is: many different things.

While there are various theories, we know brain chemistry, genes, hormones, stress, lifestyle and personality can all play a role. How these interact can vary greatly from one person to another.

An imbalance of brain chemicals?

The traditional “monoamine hypothesis” of depression was proposed more than half a century ago, in the 1950s. This theory suggests the root cause of depression is a deficiency in certain brain chemicals (or neurotransmitters) called monoamines – serotonin, dopamine and norepinephrine.

Several antidepressants have been developed based on this. They primarily work by increasing levels of monoamines such as serotonin.

However, it has become clear that the “chemical imbalance” explanation is an oversimplification.

Research over the past few decades has not found consistent evidence that individuals with depression always have lower levels of serotonin, or any single neurotransmitter.

And while antidepressants can increase serotonin levels within hours, improvements in mood typically take days or weeks to emerge. This delay suggests depression cannot be explained by neurotransmitter levels alone.

Current understanding recognises depression as a complex condition influenced by multiple interacting factors, including genetics, trauma, medications, diet, sleep patterns and social interactions.

Genetic factors can increase your risk

According to one 2021 review, around 30 to 50% of the risk someone will develop depression may be inherited.

No single “depression gene” has been found. But large studies have identified over 100 genetic risk markers on chromosomes.

The genetic risk of depression is also thought to be “polygenic”. This means multiple genetic variants (each carrying a small effect) interact and collectively contribute to someone’s genetic risk.

One important and longstanding research question has been whether there is a genetic reason women are more likely than men to develop depression.

In 2025, a large study revealed substantial overlap between men and women’s genetic risk. However, on average, women with depression tend to carry more of the genetic variants linked to depression.

This suggests that there may be a greater genetic risk for depression in women and perhaps a stronger environmental influence on depression risk in men.

Still, carrying a genetic risk does not mean someone will necessarily develop depression. The interplay between genetic and non-genetic factors is complex.

Hormones and biological sex

Hormones – the body’s chemical messengers – also play an important role in mood and wellbeing.

In women, estrogen and progesterone levels naturally fluctuate across different life stages, including the menstrual cycle, pregnancy, the period after childbirth and menopause.

Our 2025 review found some women are more sensitive to these normal hormonal shifts, and more vulnerable to mood disturbances.

For instance, in the premenstrual phase of their cycle, around 8% of women experience a severe depression, with intense mood swings and irritability, called premenstrual dysphoric disorder.

Similarly, the dramatic hormonal changes during pregnancy and after childbirth (combined with sleep loss and stress) can contribute to postnatal depression.

Later in life, fluctuating and falling estrogen levels during the menopause transition years may also increase the risk of developing depressive symptoms or intensify existing ones.

Hormonal contraceptives – which contain synthetic forms of estrogen and progesterone – have also been linked to mood changes and depression symptoms. In fact, these are some of the most common reasons women stop taking them.

These effects appear to depend on the specific type and amount of progesterone used in the formulation.

These findings show how hormones can act as biological triggers, and help explain why women are statistically more likely to experience depression at certain stages of life.

The effect of hormones on depression in men has predominantly focused on the protective role of testosterone, but findings remain inconclusive.

Stress is another important factor

Chronic or repeated stress can have lasting effects on both the brain and body.

When we experience stress, our bodies activate the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) axis, also known as the “stress-response system”. This helps us cope by maintaining balance in our body – what scientists call physiological homeostasis.

But when stress is constant or overwhelming, this system can become dysregulated. Stressful or traumatic experiences in childhood – such as neglect, abuse or severe adversity – can also disrupt the stress-response system.

As a result, we overproduce the stress hormone cortisol. High or persistent cortisol levels can alter the structure and functioning of key brain areas (the hippocampus and pre-frontal cortex) which are important for regulating mood and memory.

Cortisol can also trigger the release of inflammatory chemicals, which then cross into the brain or influence neural signals, leading to mood changes and depressive symptoms.

Importantly though, not everyone who experiences stressful life events becomes depressed.

Some people may be more vulnerable due to genetic factors, early life adversity or differences in brain chemistry. Others might cope with the same stress without developing depression or other conditions.

Does personality play a role?

Personality traits also influence how people respond to stress and may affect their risk of developing depression.

People who tend to experience anxiety, sadness and self-doubt are more likely to develop depressive symptoms, especially after stressful events. In contrast, traits such as resilience, optimism, and emotional stability seem to protect against depression.

This suggests that personality plays an important role in shaping both vulnerability and resilience to depression.

Lifestyle choices can help lower your risk

These include not smoking, limiting alcohol use, eating a balanced diet, staying physically active, getting enough sleep, maintaining a healthy body weight and having social supports.

Research shows these healthy habits and lifestyle factors can have a protective effect on mental health. They may even reduce the impact of genetic risk factors for depression.

There’s no single cause – and no universal treatment

Depression arises from a mix of factors – biological (genes and hormones), psychological (personality and thoughts) and social (stress and life events).

Treatment options are based on all of these factors, as well as considering how severe the depression is and whether a person has responded to previous treatments.

While science has made some progress in understanding depression, what underpins each person’s experience is unique.

Caroline Gurvich, Associate Professor and Clinical Neuropsychologist, Monash University; Eveline Mu, Research Fellow in Women’s Mental Health, Monash University, and Jayashri Kulkarni, Professor of Psychiatry, Monash University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Breakthrough Drug Nearly Doubles Survival with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

– an Oncologist Explains how Daraxonrasib Overcame an ‘Undruggable’ Disease

Pancreatic cancer. Credit: Scientific Animations CC BY-SA 4.0

Christopher Lieu, University of Colorado Anschutz

For a long time, the likelihood of surviving pancreatic cancer has been extremely low. For patients who were diagnosed with metastatic pancreatic cancer between 2015 and 2021, about 97% died within five years of their diagnosis.

Pancreatic cancer is so deadly in part because there are no effective screening tests, and it rarely causes noticeable symptoms in its earliest stages. By the time a patient experiences signs, such as jaundice – a yellowing of the skin – or abdominal pain, the cancer has often already spread to other organs.

As a gastrointestinal oncologist and researcher specialising in early-phase clinical trials, I have seen the critical need for more effective therapies for patients with pancreatic cancer. For decades, successfully targeting the central mechanism that causes the vast majority of pancreatic cancers was considered impossible.

However, that narrative is rapidly changing with a new drug that can shut down the key protein that drives pancreatic cancer, nearly doubling survival rates for patients with advanced stages of the disease.

‘Undruggable’ tumours

The standard treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer has historically relied on chemotherapy, potent drugs designed to kill rapidly dividing cells. While chemotherapy can slow the progression of the disease, its effectiveness is often limited by the ability of pancreatic cancer cells to develop resistance against these drugs.

Model of the 3D structure of KRAS, resembling a rough-looking blob with a molecule tucked inside
KRAS (blue) has been difficult for drugs to target. Fvasconcellos/Wikimedia Commons

Pancreatic cancer’s success lies in its genetics. More than 90% of pancreatic tumours are driven by mutations in a gene called KRAS. This gene codes for proteins that function as switches that turn cell growth on and off. When the KRAS gene is mutated, the switch becomes permanently stuck in the “on” position, commanding cancer cells to multiply endlessly.

For decades, scientists considered KRAS to be “undruggable.” The surface of the protein is exceptionally smooth, lacking the molecular pockets that standard drugs require to bind to and turn the switch off.

Because existing drugs haven’t been able to target this protein, treatment for pancreatic cancer has primarily relied on toxic drugs that act more like blunt instruments than precise tools. Chemotherapy attempts to control the disease through widespread cell destruction, causing significant collateral damage to healthy tissues that lead to side effects.

What is daraxonrasib?

A new drug called daraxonrasib offers a critical advance in treating metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Daraxonrasib is taken daily by mouth. Instead of binding to KRAS directly, it attaches to a molecule called cyclophilin A in cells that helps fold proteins into their final 3D structures. This protein complex is then able to bind to the active KRAS protein and shut down its ability to signal cancer cells to multiply.

The company developing the drug, Revolution Medicines, presented results on May 31, 2026, from its Phase 3 clinical trial of 500 patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer who had received prior treatment. Compared to standard chemotherapy, daraxonrasib nearly doubled overall survival from 6.7 months to 13.2 months after diagnosis. Overall, daraxonrasib reduced the risk of death for metastatic pancreatic cancer patients by 60%. https://www.youtube.com/embed/sIspXSWQn1w?wmode=transparent&start=0 Daraxonrasib nearly doubled survival for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer compared to chemotherapy.

The most common side effect is a prominent skin rash, which affected more than 86% of patients in the study. Patients also frequently dealt with stomatitis – painful swelling and sores inside the mouth – as well as diarrhoea, nausea and vomiting. However, patients taking daraxonrasib were far less likely to stop treatment due to severe side effects compared to chemotherapy, and they had improved quality of life with reduced pain.

Next steps for daraxonrasib

By successfully targeting the specific genetic mutation that drives the vast majority of pancreatic cancers, researchers have demonstrated that this “undruggable” disease is treatable with targeted therapy.

The immediate next step is regulatory review of the drug’s readiness for the clinic. With data now officially published, Revolution Medicines will use these findings to seek formal approval from the Food and Drug Administration and other global regulatory bodies.

Because advanced pancreatic cancer is notoriously difficult to treat, breakthrough therapies that demonstrate this kind of significant survival benefit are often granted expedited or priority review. When daroxonrasib becomes available to patients will depend on the review timeline. Should the drug obtain approval, it could be available in clinics within months.

For the broader landscape of drug development, this milestone represents a likely shift in pancreatic cancer treatment. I expect more clinical trials exploring combination therapies pairing KRAS inhibitors with other drugs to prevent tumours from developing resistance to treatment.

Should daraxonrasib succeed, it could help set the stage for more precise, personalised and effective treatments for pancreatic cancer in the years to come.

Christopher Lieu, Professor of Medical Oncology, University of Colorado Anschutz

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Why Africa – and the World – Remain Dangerously Unprepared for the Next Pandemic

Oyewale Tomori, Nigerian Academy of Science

As the news spread about the outbreak of Ebola in mid-May 2026, the World Health Organization (WHO) released a report about pandemics. The title was: A World on the Edge: Priorities for a Pandemic-Resilient Future.

The document was prepared by the WHO’s Global Preparedness Monitoring Board. It sets out why the world isn’t better prepared for pandemics a decade after Ebola exposed dangerous gaps. And six years after COVID-19 turned those gaps into a global catastrophe.

It adds that investment in pandemic preparedness has not kept pace with the rising risk of pandemics.

The Global Preparedness Monitoring Board is an independent monitoring and accountability body established in 2018 by the WHO and the World Bank. The aim was to strengthen preparedness for global health crises. It is composed of political leaders, agency principals and world-class experts. Its task is to provide assessments of global progress in building and sustaining the capacity to prevent, detect and respond to health emergencies.

The report was released during another Ebola epidemic. This time starting in the Democratic Republic of Congo. On 17 May the WHO declared the outbreak a public health emergency of international concern. This means that it is a risk to many countries through international spread and hence requires global coordinated efforts.

As a virologist and former global health administrator, I believe the monitoring board’s diagnosis and recommendations are vitally important for managing pandemics.

My first observation about the report is that its recommendations remain largely unimplemented by many countries. This is particularly true in Africa, where pandemics thrive and disease epidemics rage and ravage.

Africa needs to specially build trust in its own ability to prepare for and prevent disease outbreaks, and control them when they do occur.

To achieve this, and in line with the recommendations, Africa must sustain:

  • independent pandemic risk monitoring
  • health workforce capability and retention
  • equitable access to countermeasures such as vaccines
  • financing
  • political attention.

Independent pandemic risk monitoring

Using local resources and financing, African countries must own the solution to health through establishing data systems that uphold health sovereignty.

They must also ensure that data derived from surveillance, research and pathogen processing are securely managed and accountable to African institutions rather than foreign entities. Recent agreements with the US have brought this issue to the fore. Some were asking African countries to sign away their health data or prodigally release their precious pathogens in a barter exchange for donor funding.

But health data are an invaluable asset for public health, clinical management and research. They help countries identify diseases and develop vaccines and treatments.

What African countries should be doing instead is mobilising locally sourced counterpart funds. These should be used to create the local environment to support and enhance the capacity of indigenous scientists and researchers to develop innovations from national/natural pathogens for global benefits.

Two African health institutions should be at the centre of these endeavours: the WHO-Africa Region and the Africa Centers for Disease Control, an agency of the African Union. They must not compete, but collaborate and spearhead these efforts through centralised disease control and tracking scorecards.

Health workers

Fostering the well-being of health workforce results in growth, higher productivity, national pride and loyalty.

It also helps in long-term retention of health workers.

African countries need to prioritise capacity retention over capacity building. They must build and sustain a conducive work environment which involves physical workspace and psychological safety.

Availability of adequate resources is needed to function effectively and productively. This includes materials, laboratory facilities, supplies, reagents and consumables for a trained African health workforce and researchers.

Under such enabling conditions, the health workforce can focus on relevant and local health issues and find appropriate solutions to them.

Equitable access to countermeasures

Africa must not compromise on the ratification of international health pacts that guarantee fair technology transfer, intellectual property waivers, and robust regional manufacturing.

Countries must equally expand local production of laboratory diagnostic kits, vaccines and medical supplies as well as non-medical products. Such include gloves, personal protective equipment and masks.

This will reduce reliance on external donation and supply chains in and out of global crises.

Sustainable financing

The greater challenge for many African countries is the waste of available resources and spending on misplaced priorities.

To address this, governments must commit to sustained domestic investment in healthcare. At the same time they must use blended financing (involving both the public and private sectors) to close remaining gaps. Initiatives such as the African Epidemic Fund offer a practical model for building financial reserves for rapid, locally led responses. The fund, launched in 2025, is designed to mobilise funding to support preparedness and response efforts to combat public health threats on the continent. The African Epidemic Fund, though relatively new, must operate at the highest level of accountability. It must provide regular updates on contributions, projects supported and their impact on disease preparedness, prevention and control in Africa.

Sustained political attention

African leaders must keep pandemic preparedness high on the political agenda to ensure continuous resource allocation and accountability. The advocacy for preparedness must go beyond political campaign slogans. It must be driven by regional bodies like the African Union. Countries must then translate commitments into tangible national policies.

There can be no recess or holiday from pandemic preparedness.

African political leaders and elites, at the continental, national and sub-national levels, have crucial roles to play in achieving trusted community engagement and involvement for successful and reliable pandemic preparedness. Above all, there must be active community engagement and involvement.

Oyewale Tomori, Fellow, Nigerian Academy of Science

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Why Lithium is Still the Gold Standard in Treating Bipolar Disorder

Angel Soler Gollonet/Shutterstock

Julia E. Marquez Arrico, Universitat de Barcelona

According to recent data from the Global Bipolar Cohort, only 29% of people with bipolar disorder are prescribed lithium. Despite being the “gold standard” for treating this mental health condition, we often prioritise perceptions over scientific reality, and neglect the best available treatment.

Lithium is not some complex molecule synthesised in a state-of-the-art laboratory. It is just an element, the third in the periodic table, and ever since the Australian psychiatrist John Cade discovered its therapeutic properties in 1949, it has maintained a relevance that no other psychotropic drug has been able to match.

This longevity is not a relic of the past, but a reflection of its clinical robustness. Despite decades of research and the constant emergence of new drugs, no alternative has shown comparable efficacy in the long-term prevention of manic and depressive episodes in bipolar disorder.

According to a review published in 2024, lithium is still “the mainstay treatment of mood disorders in general and in bipolar disorder specifically”. It is also the benchmark against which all other treatment options are compared, both for stabilising mood and reducing the risk of relapse.

It is the only mood stabiliser with proven efficacy in treating mania and depression, as well as in preventing relapses. Furthermore, recent studies confirm that it may also have neuroprotective properties, from the modulation of cellular pathways involved in neural plasticity to potential effects in preventing mild cognitive impairment and dementia.

These characteristics explain why international guidelines still rank it as the first-line treatment for bipolar disorder. A consensus published in 2025 stated that it should be prescribed more frequently, contrary to the unfounded reservations that still persist in clinical practice.

Suicide reduction

Above all, there is one aspect that sets lithium apart from other psychopharmaceutical drugs: its ability to reduce the risk of suicide. No other medication has demonstrated such a consistently protective effect.

A 2024 review highlighted that, despite the methodological difficulties in studying this statistically rare event, the body of evidence from clinical trials, observational studies and meta-analyses all points in the same direction: lithium reduces mortality and suicide attempts.

This is likely due to its ability to reduce impulsivity, stabilise extreme mood swings and prevent depressive relapses, all of which create the moments of greatest risk.

Beyond episodic treatment

Current research is also looking into lithium’s ability to alter the course of bipolar disorder. Not only does it stop episodes, but it also protects the brain, and evidence suggests that, unlike some antipsychotics, it improves brain connectivity and preserves verbal fluency.

In fact, there is very interesting data suggesting that it could reduce the risk of dementia by up to 50%. Even residual levels in drinking water appear to have a protective effect at a population level. Lithium is, in short, a molecule with exceptional neuroprotective potential.

But the neuroprotective effects do not stop there. Recent studies also suggest that lithium stimulates the production of brain-derived neurotrophic factor, a protein essential for neuronal survival and growth that is often reduced in patients with bipolar disorder.

In other words, it doesn’t just prevent the brain from deteriorating – it actively helps it to heal.

Blood monitoring and ‘precision medicine’

It is often argued that the need for blood tests to monitor lithium levels (the optimal therapeutic range is 0.6-0.8 millimoles per litre) is an inconvenience. However, from a rigorous clinical perspective, this monitoring is a safeguard, not a risk. It is what allows the dose to be adjusted to the exact biology of each patient, a form of “precision medicine” that we were already practising long before the term became fashionable.

We should also remember that many commonly used medicines – from anticoagulants to immunosuppressants – require the same kind of laboratory monitoring, yet they are not considered dangerous for that reason.

What lithium management requires is not fear, but rigour. So why is it prescribed less often? The answer is complex. It is partly due to pressure from the pharmaceutical industry to promote new, patentable molecules – lithium, being a natural element, cannot be patented. There is also a degree of clinical reluctance due to its narrow therapeutic window – it needs to be carefully controlled to ensure a safe yet effective dose.

However, international guidelines are clear: lithium should be the first choice. We cannot overlook it in favour of less effective alternatives simply because they appear more modern. This kind of mistake should not influence clinical practice.

Newer is not always better

Good psychopharmacology is not a question of chasing the latest developments, but of using the most appropriate treatment for each individual at every stage of their illness.

Lithium has a proven track record that spans decades, across areas that no other mood stabiliser can address simultaneously. It controls manic and depressive episodes, prevents suicide, and provides active neuroprotection. Three areas, in one single drug.

This does not mean it is right for absolutely everyone. Good psychopharmacology should always push back against fads and dogma alike, but discarding lithium’s use without ever seriously considering it deprives patients of an option that is, according to the evidence, categorically the best therapeutic option.

Our challenge today is not to reinvent the wheel, but to understand how best to use the therapeutic tools we already have. A drug doesn’t become outdated just because time has passed; it becomes outdated when new evidence emerges and supersedes it. In the case of lithium, new evidence only confirms its value.

Julia E. Marquez Arrico, Professora Lectora, Universitat de Barcelona

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Iodine Deficiency Is Creeping Back. Vegans, Vegetarians and Pregnant Women Are Most at Risk

Credit: Pixabay CC0

José Miguel Soriano del Castillo, Universitat de València

Iodine deficiency is often seen as a problem of the past, but this isn’t entirely true. During the 20th century, the iodisation of salt became one of the most effective public health interventions for preventing conditions caused by a lack of this mineral, including goiter (enlargement of the thyroid gland) and preventable damage to neurological development.

The World Health Organization (WHO) still views iodised salt as a safe and effective strategy, while UNICEF notes that it is the most widely used way of improving iodine intake worldwide.

However, the success of this simple measure means iodine has all but disappeared from public debate. And today, in several countries, signs of insufficient intake are once again being detected in certain groups, particularly in pregnant or breastfeeding women and people on restrictive or poorly planned diets.

What we are witnessing is not a dramatic resurgence of the most severe symptoms everywhere, but rather a silent risk of deficiency in contexts where vigilance has waned.

Iodine’s role in the body

Iodine is an essential micronutrient for the synthesis of thyroxine (T4) and triiodothyronine (T3), hormones that regulate metabolism, growth, and many physiological processes. Adequate intake during pregnancy and early childhood is particularly important for the normal development of the central nervous system and for the early stages of brain maturation.

In addition, the body’s needs increase during pregnancy and breastfeeding due to increased maternal production of thyroid hormones, greater renal excretion of iodine, and the transfer of this mineral to the fetus and the infant.

Why deficiency is on the rise again

The issue is not that people have stopped consuming salt, but rather that the type of salt they consume has changed, as have the sources of sodium in their diet. In recent years, iodised salt has been replaced in many households by “gourmet” or “natural” salts. These include sea salt, pink Himalayan salt, flaked salt and kosher salt, which are often perceived as more sophisticated or healthier, even though they are not always iodised.

In a way, iodised salt has an image problem. Compared to the culinary prestige of its trendy rivals, it has come to be viewed as something ordinary, outdated even.

Today, lot of our salt intake also comes from processed and ultraprocessed foods, meaning the use of iodised salt cannot be guaranteed. For this reason, the World Health Organization has called for coordination between policies that aim to reduce sodium intake and those that promote iodised salt.

The makeup of our diets has also changed a lot. Iodine is naturally present in all seafood, some dairy products and in eggs, though the quantity may vary from one region or food system to another. When a person reduces or cuts out several of these sources at once while not also consuming iodised salt or fortified foods, the risk of deficiency increases.

The result is that a basic, inexpensive, and effective micronutrient has fallen out of the spotlight just as certain groups are once again at risk of not getting enough iodine.

Plant-based diets

Vegetarian and vegan diets can be healthy, but they must take iodine into consideration. A 2023 review in the British Journal of Nutrition concluded that people following a plant-based diet, especially vegans, may find it hard to get the recommended amount of iodine from these foods alone.

This does not mean a plant-based diet is inherently lacking – and the solution is straightforward. Just as vitamin B12 is is commonly recommended for those who reduce their consumption of fish or dairy – or when people replace animal products with unfortified plant-based alternatives – so too should iodine.

Pregnancy and breastfeeding

Iodine deserves special attention during pregnancy. There is strong evidence that a severe deficiency of this micronutrient can affect fetal development and thyroid function, which is why many organisations use specific thresholds to assess iodine status in pregnant women. The US National Institutes of Health states that a urinary concentration of 150–249 micrograms per liter (μg/L) in pregnant women is considered adequate for the general population.

But there is a caveat to this. Concerns about mild or moderate deficiency are legitimate, but there is no conclusive evidence as to the cognitive benefits of supplementing all pregnant women who show a mild deficiency. Reviews and trials have indicated that there is plausible biological concern, and some studies suggest an association with poorer outcomes, but controlled experiments have not unanimously shown clear improvements in infant neurodevelopment.

Nevertheless, several scientific societies have adopted a cautious stance. The American Thyroid Association, for instance, states that women who are planning to conceive, pregnant or breastfeeding should receive 150 μg of iodine daily in prenatal or multivitamin supplements, usually in the form of potassium iodide, to help meet increased requirements.

Why ‘more salt’ is not the answer

Another important clarification is needed here. Advocating for iodised salt does not mean recommending a higher salt intake. The WHO maintains its recommendation to reduce sodium intake due to its link with high blood pressure and cardiovascular disease. In terms of public health, the solution is not “more salt”, but less – though the salt we do eat should be iodised.

In fact, the WHO itself has emphasised that reducing salt intake and fortifying salt with iodine are compatible, provided the concentration of the mineral is properly adjusted and salt used by the food industry is also fortified.

This point is key because it avoids two common pitfalls: turning the issue into a nostalgic defence of table salt, or the other extreme of assuming that any reduction in sodium intake will automatically solve all health problems without any nutritional consequences. But it is possible to strike a balance between preventing cardiovascular disease and iodine deficiency.

José Miguel Soriano del Castillo, Catedrático de Nutrición y Bromatología del Departamento de Medicina Preventiva y Salud Pública, Universitat de València

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Hantavirus in Africa: Why Climate Change, Rats and Weak Surveillance Are Worrying Scientists

Photo by Kanashi ZD on Unsplash

Wolfgang Preiser, Stellenbosch University; Carla Mavian, University of Florida; Cheryl Baxter, Stellenbosch University; Richard Lessells, University of KwaZulu-Natal, and Tulio de Oliveira, Stellenbosch University

Hantaviruses are not new. They have circulated for decades in rodent populations, particularly in rats and mice. Humans can become infected if they are bitten or scratched by a rodent or by inhaling aerosolised particles. These are tiny bits of rodent urine, faeces or saliva floating through the air that are contaminated by the virus.

There are many different hantaviruses but only one can spread from person to person: the Andes hantavirus from South America. This is the strain that recently killed several cruise ship passengers.

Infections between humans can be prevented by closely observing people who were exposed and isolating those who are sick. This limits the risk of further spread, as transmission generally requires close contact.

However, as an interdisciplinary group of scientists working on emerging infectious diseases, we argue that hantaviruses might pose a much bigger threat to African countries than currently known. We are concerned for three reasons.

Firstly, diagnostic testing capacity across much of the African continent remains limited. This is a real issue. In many rural settings, under-resourced diagnostic services may overlook sporadic cases. This may allow hantaviruses to spread without anyone noticing. Our medical expertise tells us that larger outbreaks are likely to be recognised eventually. But these delays in diagnosing the cases will slow down effective control measures.

Secondly, monitoring systems are lacking and likely to miss infections in wildlife and in human beings.

Thirdly, climate change and accelerating changes to the way land is used could increase the risk of spread of hantaviruses from animals to people. This is because global change may increase rodent populations and bring rats and mice into closer contact with humans.

For example, modelling studies in the Americas found broad zones with enzootic circulation (where an animal community always carries a certain disease). This is because many rodent species tend to live across a wide variety of environments where humans are also found. As human and rodent populations increase, the likelihood of encounters also increases. Some rodent species flourish in habitats shaped by humans or even in buildings. This poses a high risk for transmission of pathogens.

As a typical zoonosis (animal disease that spreads to humans), hantaviruses must be seen as a One Health issue. One Health is an approach that understands and takes into account the close connection between human, animal and ecosystem health. Hantaviruses cannot simply be seen as a clinical management or infection control issue.

It is really important that African governments set up better monitoring of wildlife so that they can detect when and where animal viruses like this are likely to spill over into the human population. This will help stop larger outbreaks of hantavirus, which can be deadly.

Weak surveillance may be allowing hantaviruses to spread unnoticed

In Africa, scientists have discovered several hantaviruses, including Sangassou virus in Guinea in small mammal species, such as rodents. More recently, hantaviruses were found in shrews and bats too – not just in rats and mice as previously thought.

The fact that hantaviruses may circulate in a much wider range of animals and environments than scientists originally realised makes their ecology and potential spillover risk into humans more complex.

One of the current problems facing Africa is that there hasn’t been enough research into the ecology of hantaviruses and which animals host them. There are very few genetic sequences available that would allow scientists to analyse interactions between viruses and hosts and the possible risk this poses to humans.

Combined with limited monitoring of the disease, Africa is experiencing a hantavirus surveillance gap. This gap needs to be closed because hantavirus infections and disease may be more widespread than many health systems assume.

Climate change and land use

Climate and land-use change influence rodent populations which host hantaviruses, and increase human-rodent contact. Hantavirus boomed in the US between 1993 and 1995 because El Niño brought very heavy rains and warmer winters, which led to a bumper crop in seeds that rodents eat. This improved nutrition led to a massive increase in rodent numbers. Outbreaks elsewhere have likewise been linked to weather phenomena.

More rodents means more of them seeking food and shelter in the vicinity of humans. More competition for resources leads to more aggressive behaviour between animals and biting transmits the virus. Because El Niño episodes are predicted to become more frequent and intense in future, hantaviruses are likely to affect African countries more and more.

In Africa, land-use change is likely to play an increasingly important role in hantavirus ecology and emergence, as was the case with Lassa fever (another virus spread by rodents) in Nigeria and Guinea. Deforestation, agricultural expansion, mining activities, road construction and urban growth are transforming natural habitats across many regions of the continent. These environmental changes can force populations of rodents, shrews and bats to move into farms, villages, peri-urban settings and water sources used by people.

When humans expand into previously undisturbed habitats in search of land, food, or economic opportunity, this also creates a new opportunity (known as an ecological interface) where hantaviruses and other zoonotic pathogens may circulate more easily between wildlife reservoirs and humans.

What needs to happen next

When people and wildlife come into close contact, viruses like Andes can jump from animals and begin transmitting between humans. Hantaviruses can cause severe human disease and this is likely far more widespread than currently recognised.

Fortunately, the risk of Andes hantavirus spreading beyond the cruise ship passengers and crew and their close contacts is small. But Sars coronavirus and monkeypox virus are recent examples that some zoonotic viruses have the potential to spread rapidly and widely among humans.

Virological and ecological studies of wildlife reservoirs and surveillance of possible hantavirus infection and disease in humans in endemic regions are needed. This requires specialised diagnostic tools combined with samples from rodents in areas where humans have disturbed their habitat and have since experienced unexplained febrile illness (acute high fevers).

Once there is firm evidence of human disease, scientists and medical professionals will be able to argue for the widespread use of diagnostic tests. The results of these tests will determine how much of a threat the virus poses to human health.

Genetic sequencing and data-sharing partnerships can then help connect animal, environmental and human signals into a clearer picture of risk.

The greatest gap currently may be the failure to identify where, how, and under which environmental conditions spillover events occur before outbreaks emerge.

Strengthening surveillance to identify high-risk interfaces, emerging transmission zones, and drivers of spillover is therefore essential to anticipate potentially pathogenic African hantaviruses before larger outbreaks occur.

PhD candidate Maambele Khosa co-authored this article.

Wolfgang Preiser, Head: Division of Medical Virology, Stellenbosch University; Carla Mavian, Assistant Professor, University of Florida; Cheryl Baxter, Head Scientific Research Support, Stellenbosch University; Richard Lessells, Senior Lecturer, University of KwaZulu-Natal, and Tulio de Oliveira, Director of the Centre for Epidemic Response and Innovation (CERI) at Stellenbosch University and the KwaZulu-Natal Research Innovation and Sequencing Plaform (KRISP)., Stellenbosch University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Does 432Hz Tuning Improve your Wellbeing? A Music Psychologist Unpacks the Evidence

Photo by morefun_boy on Unsplash

Sandra Garrido, University of Sydney

If you scroll through social media for long enough, you’ll probably find videos claiming that listening to songs tuned to “A 432Hz” can provide an amazing sense of calmness or healing.

It’s even claimed that listening to music tuned to this frequency can align your internal frequencies to those of the universe. It’s an alluring idea – that simply listening to music tuned in a specific way could improve your health.

But does it have any scientific basis?

An ancient idea

Firstly, what does it even mean if songs are tuned to A 432Hz?

Hertz (or Hz) is a measurement of frequency, or the number of times sound waves vibrate per second. Sounds are transmitted as waves through the air which hit our eardrums to create the sensation of hearing. The more quickly those sound waves are vibrating, the higher the pitch of the note.

In standard concert tuning, the note A above middle C is tuned to 440Hz. A 432Hz tuning simply means the pitch of that A and all the other notes in the music are tuned a little lower than normal.

Some argue 432Hz is closer to natural harmonic frequencies than 440Hz and that using this tuning is therefore better for wellbeing.

The idea that sounds or music can heal or even align us with the cosmos is not new. Long before social media, the ancient Greeks linked sound to the frequencies of the universe. Pythagoras proposed musical notes were governed by simple numerical ratios, the same ratios he believed underpinned the cosmos itself.

Later, medieval and Renaissance thinkers built on these ideas with the concept of “music of the spheres” – the idea that sound could be used to align us with the vibrations of the planets in a kind of cosmic harmony that influenced human emotions and wellbeing.

No magical effect

Although the concept of cosmic alignment is intriguing, there’s little scientific support for the idea that specific frequencies have any magical effect on wellbeing.

In one study from 2019, researchers played movie soundtracks tuned to 440 Hz to participants on one day and to 432 Hz on another day, finding that after listening to the 432 Hz tunings participants had slightly decreased heart rate and blood pressure. However, the study was limited by a very small sample and non-randomisation of participants, making it difficult to separate true frequency effects from expectancy or general relaxation responses.

Modern research suggests the effects of sound or music on wellbeing are less about any single special frequency, and more about how we perceive and interpret sound.

Some have theorised the use of frequencies that correspond to specific brainwave patterns such as delta waves (0.5–4Hz, associated with deep sleep), or alpha waves (8–12Hz, associated with relaxed wakefulness), can make the brain synchronise to those frequencies and achieve a relaxed state.

However, research in support of this theory is inconclusive. One study from 2017 found no changes in electrical activity in the brain after hearing such frequencies presented as binaural beats.

Binaural beats themselves are another form of sound that many claim can have miraculous effects on wellbeing. When two slightly different frequencies are played separately into each ear, the brain perceives a rhythmic pulse at a rate equal to the difference between the two frequencies. This is called a binaural beat.

There is some evidence that our physiological systems (such as breathing and heart rate) synchronise to any beat that we hear. This can help lower our levels of arousal or alertness.

That’s why most of us tend to be attracted to slower, calmer sounding music when we want to relax, for example, since the slower beat helps slow our breathing and heart rate and make us feel sleepier or calmer.

Focusing on your own response

Does that mean binaural beats have any special therapeutic effect? Not really.

A recent study found binaural beats can increase relaxation and alter brain activity. But crucially, similar effects were also observed with other types of moving or spatialised sounds. The authors concluded the benefits were likely driven by general auditory features rather than the binaural beats themselves.

It all comes down to individual preferences and perceptions. For example, binaural beats are frequently associated with meditation or mantras. And it could be this association which enhances the supposed wellbeing effects of binaural beats for some people.

Similarly with music tuned to A 432Hz.

Our brains tend to interpret sounds as expressions of emotional states. When humans are relaxed, our voices are usually lower in pitch than when we are excited or agitated.

Thus, notes of a lower pitch are sometimes perceived as more relaxing than notes that are higher pitched. Again, this doesn’t mean there is anything special or magical about 432Hz tunings – just that for many people, lower pitched notes seem calmer. The same effect could be achieved by listening to other music or frequencies with a lower pitch.

So while 432Hz might sound soothing to some ears, it’s not a shortcut to cosmic alignment. Rather than thinking about the numbers, focus on really becoming aware of your own response. Notice how different sounds make you feel, what slows your breathing, eases your body, or lifts your mood.

When it comes to wellbeing, what works is what works for you.

Sandra Garrido, Senior Research Fellow, School of Psychology, University of Sydney

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

No Need to Sign up for Gym: Even Small Movements Have Health Benefits – Research

Photo by RDNE Stock project

Merling Phaswana, University of the Witwatersrand and Philippe Gradidge, University of the Witwatersrand

South Africa is facing an alarming increase in non-communicable diseases and related mortality. According to Statistics South Africa, deaths due to non-communicable diseases such as type 2 diabetes and hypertension increased by over 58% between 1997 and 2018.

The crisis of overweight and obesity in the country adds to the risk of these diseases. Nearly 40% of the adult population is overweight. Although physical activity can help prevent and manage many non-communicable diseases, 47% of adults do not engage in any physical activity. Most people struggle to meet the World Health Organization’s recommended 150-300 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic physical activity per week.

A significant part of the challenge is that people have adopted an “all or nothing” approach to physical activity. The perception is that one has to participate in structured workouts, such as gym sessions, running, or cycling.

Instead, research has shown that even brief, low-intensity movements can yield measurable physical and mental health benefits. Even everyday tasks count. New evidence shows that short movement bouts of less than five minutes can have positive health implications.

As researchers in exercise science and sports medicine we have observed that physical activity is particularly low in South Africa. Only 19.8% of adults meet the WHO’s guideline, against the global average of 73%.

Our study of 62 office-based workers at the University of the Witwatersrand also showed the short-term health impact of height-adjustable, sit-to-stand desks. Our intervention reduced prolonged sitting and slightly improved indicators such as body mass index and blood pressure. Given South Africa’s high burden of obesity and sedentary lifestyles among office workers, these improvements are encouraging and support global health messaging that even modest increases in daily movement can positively influence health.

These findings were the springboard for the “Mzansi, what’s your move?” campaign at the university. We want to encourage staff and students to move more by showing how simple actions add up to physical activity. The campaign is supported by a series of comics and murals on campuses.

Here, we highlight some of the actions that we used in our campaign to encourage everyone to get moving. These are daily tasks that may seem mundane but count as physical activity, while reflecting people’s realities.

Housework

Many people do not consider housework a form of physical activity. But tasks like sweeping, mopping or vacuuming require sustained movement and engage multiple muscle groups.

Scrubbing floors, washing windows and cleaning bathrooms involve movements such as squatting and stretching. Working in the garden can strengthen muscles too.

As part of our campaign, we’ve developed comic strips that highlight movements that can be done at home and in the community. We emphasise how all family members can move in ways that fit their lifestyles and physical abilities.

Active commuting

Walking or cycling to work or school contribute significantly to daily physical activity. Studies have shown that active commuting is associated with lower body fat, reduced blood pressure, and improved mental well-being.

Including movement into daily travel routines is a practical way to accumulate physical activity without setting time aside. Walking briskly to a train station, cycling a few kilometres to work, or taking a longer walking route to drop off children at school accumulates over time. Even seemingly small changes, such as getting off the bus one stop early or taking the stairs instead of the elevator, produce measurable health benefits over weeks and months.

However, achieving the full benefits of active commuting is complex and it relies on cities building and maintaining road infrastructure. In South Africa, safety is a legitimate concern for all road users. A 2024 Statistics South Africa report shows that more pedestrians than car occupants died in road crashes in 2007, 2013, and 2019. Another safety concern relates to the country’s high crime rates. People may be reluctant to walk, even in their own neighbourhoods.

These challenges are not insurmountable. For starters, people should consider people moving in groups, joining walking and running clubs.

Beyond what individuals can do, municipalities can do something about green spaces. This includes ensuring that parks are safe to walk in and are clean. Broken pavements and bicycle lanes need to be maintained in all neighbourhoods.

Incidental movements

Incidental movements refer to small bouts of activity that occur throughout the day. Integrating these movements into everyday life can yield significant health benefits, especially in office contexts, where many people sit for extended periods. Employers can try nudging staff, for example to use the stairs instead of elevators, with simple posters or painted footprints. Another way to encourage physical activity is to centralise shared equipment (printers, bins, water stations) so that staff walk short distances.

Micro-breaks also provide opportunities for informal movements. Stretching during meetings or after long sitting periods, standing discussions instead of seated ones, and walking meetings for small groups all contribute to the physical activity of employees.

In 2024, we investigated the short-term impact of physical activity interventions such as high-intensity interval training and moderate-intensity continuous training on 43 labourers at the University of the Witwatersrand. The number of participants in this study was small, but the findings show that our intervention reduced indicators such as waist circumference, body mass index, blood glucose and blood pressure, and improved physical fitness.

Way forward

People don’t need a gym membership or a strict workout schedule to get moving. Simple, everyday activities all add up to meaningful physical activity. Small movements help to reduce the risks of chronic diseases, strengthen muscles, boost mental wellbeing, and counteract the harmful effects of prolonged sitting.

These “movement snacks” make exercise accessible, manageable and sustainable, particularly for people who find structured workouts intimidating or time-consuming.

Merling Phaswana, Senior Lecturer, University of the Witwatersrand and Philippe Gradidge, Professor, University of the Witwatersrand

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Is It Anxiety or OCD? 2 Psychology Experts Explain the Difference

Photo by Joice Kelly on Unsplash

Emily Upton, UNSW Sydney; Black Dog Institute and Kayla Steele, UNSW Sydney

Anxiety itself is not a mental illness. It’s a normal, adaptive emotion that helps us respond to perceived threats.

Anxiety is the automatic reaction that makes you jump back when you think you’ve seen a snake while bushwalking – before realising it’s a stick.

It’s also (inconveniently) the sweaty palms and shaky voice you notice before a presentation or a first date, or the circling thoughts that keep you awake at 3am.

Most of us have ways to cope with anxious thoughts and feelings that can give us more of a sense of control. This could be checking and double-checking we’ve got the room right for our presentation, or seeking reassurance from someone we love.

But when might these behaviours fit a diagnosis of an anxiety disorder? And when could they actually be a sign of obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD)?

As clinical psychologists, we find these questions come up a lot, perhaps spurred by a recent surge of interest in OCD on social media. So what’s the difference between anxiety and OCD? And how are they treated?

Social media is full of content ‘diagnosing’ OCD and explaining how it’s different to anxiety. TikTok

When is anxiety something more serious?

“Normal” anxiety can become an anxiety disorder when fears or worry are persistent, intense and start interfering with everyday life.

About one in three people will experience an anxiety disorder at some point in their lifetime.

Among the most common are social anxiety disorder (fear in social situations), panic disorder (frequent panic attacks, and fears you’ll have another) and generalised anxiety disorder (persistent and excessive worry).

These disorders have slightly different symptoms. But all share excessive and persistent fear or worry that causes distress or leads people to avoid important parts of life including work, study or social activities.

So, what about OCD?

Although OCD involves anxiety, it is actually considered a separate disorder in the diagnostic manual used by mental health professionals.

It is possible to have both – around half to three-quarters of individuals with OCD also meet criteria for one or more anxiety disorders as well.

OCD involves obsessions, compulsions, or both. These cause significant distress or interfere with daily functioning.

Obsessions are intrusive, unwanted thoughts, images or urges. This could mean an intense fear your food is contaminated, suddenly visualising hurting someone, or a feeling that keeps entering your mind that you’ve made a serious mistake.

Compulsions are the repetitive behaviours (or mental rituals) people feel driven to perform to ease that distress, such as checking, repeating phrases, excessive hand-washing or seeking reassurance.

Many of us will occasionally experience unwanted thoughts or go back to check the oven is actually off. Keeping things tidy or being particular about routines can simply be habits that don’t cause distress.

But what makes OCD different is its severity and impact.

If obsessions or compulsions take up large amounts of time, cause you significant distress, or interfere with daily life, it may be a sign of OCD.

You can’t “spot” OCD from behaviour alone. OCD can also be invisible because many compulsions happen mentally, such as repeating phrases or counting. People with OCD may also try to hide their symptoms out of shame.

Are OCD and anxiety treated differently?

While anxiety disorders and OCD share some similarities, including repetitive distressing thoughts, the patterns and beliefs driving them are different. This means the way they’re treated will also differ.

Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is one of the most effective treatments for both anxiety disorders and OCD.

For OCD, treatment often involves a specialised form of CBT called exposure and response prevention (ERP). It involves gradually facing situations that trigger distressing thoughts while resisting the urge to perform compulsions.

For example, someone with contamination fears might gradually reduce the number of times they wash their hands before eating. Over time, people learn the feared outcome does not occur, that they can tolerate their discomfort without the ritual, and that the anxiety passes on its own.

Treatment for anxiety disorders focuses on the specific fear. For generalised anxiety, for example, it involves understanding patterns of worry, challenging beliefs that keep worries going, and developing more helpful ways to respond to problems, such as brainstorming solutions and taking small actions.

Antidepressant medication (particularly selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors, or SSRIs) can be an effective component of treatment for both anxiety disorders and OCD. A combined treatment approach of medication (SSRIs) and therapy (CBT) often leads to the best treatment outcomes, especially for severe OCD.

A final note

While it’s great mental health is being discussed more openly online and stigma is reducing, social media can also blur the line between personal experience and evidence-based information.

If something you’ve seen online has sparked curiosity about your mental health, the best next step is to talk with a qualified professional who can help you understand what you’re experiencing and what support might help.

For more information and resources about anxiety and OCD, visit the Black Dog Institute or Beyond Blue, and ReachOut or Headspace for young people.

There are lots of evidence-based online treatment programs for anxiety disorders and OCD you can access for free or low-cost, such as This Way Up, MyNewWay or Mindspot.

There are also online treatments for kids and teens with OCD and anxiety.

You can also ask your GP about a Mental Health Care Plan for Medicare-rebated psychology sessions.

Emily Upton, PhD Candidate in Psychology, UNSW Sydney; Black Dog Institute and Kayla Steele, Postdoctoral Research Fellow and Clinical Psychologist, UNSW Sydney

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.