Meningitis B vaccine gets European licence

But isn’t there already a vaccine for meningitis? Yes, there are many vaccinations against bacterial meningitis however a vaccine for meningitis B has not been available. Until now...

The ‘Bexsero’ vaccine is the first to cover meningococcal B meningitis

To begin with here are some facts and figures about meningitis B in particular:

• About 1870 people contract the infection each year and one in ten die as a result
• However around a quarter of all survivors are left with life altering side effects such as brain damage or limb loss
• This is caused by inflammation of the cell membranes of cells in the brain and spinal cord caused by the bacterial infection.

Secondly some more information about the ‘Bexsero’ vaccine itself:

• Developing a vaccine against meningitis B has been particularly challenging as it is caused by thousands of subtly different strains of bacteria. This consequently makes it very difficult to find a single jab that could cover them all.
• As a result the genetic structures of the varying strains were analysed in search of a common shared feature which could be targeted
• The product is a jab likely to be effective against 73% of the different variations of meningitis B

Finally when (and even if) the vaccine will be introduced in the UK is unknown, however now the vaccine has obtained a licence a decision may be made to introduce the vaccine into the childhood vaccination schedule in the UK. Meningitis Trust feel it should be introduced as quickly as possible but we will have to wait and see what happens

(Source: NHS Choices)

Clever bacteria

I plan to write very briefly this week as I am in the middle of exams and should be revising! I hope everyone else’s exams have/are going well.

Infectious bacteria have for the first time been caught performing "biological alchemy" to transform parts of a host body into those more suited to their purposes, by a team in Edinburgh.

The study showed leprosy-causing bacteria turning nerve cells into stem cells and muscle cells.

Essentially these bacteria are transforming nerve cells, which are static, into something which is more valuable to them. These stem cells can then be grown and transported around the body. 

Furthermore as these stem cells are “self” they can reach their desired location undetected by the immune system.

It is hoped that findings such as these could lead to new ways of developing stem cells in humans and/or improve the treatment of bacterial disease. However views on the clinical relevance of these findings are mixed.

Nonetheless the finding is very interesting and shows just how complex the interactions between humans and bacteria can be! You can read the full article here…

(Alchemy: The medieval forerunner of chemistry, based on the supposed transformation of matter, esp. that of base metals into gold.)

The Social Care Question

Evidence suggests around three quarters of us will need some form of support in our old age, combine this statistic with the fact that our population is “ageing” and it is clear that care of the elderly is a very important issue.

Unlike NHS care, such help and support is not free - there is simply not enough money for it to be free..

So, how much should such care cost an individual? And how is it/how should it be regulated?
Well, essentially that is 'the social care question'...! The degree of care needed (part time/full time), savings and the availability of care home spaces/carers are all considered. To see a more interesting and detailed breakdown of how the system works click here (Source: BBC)

For one in 10 people these care costs could amount to more than £100,000 over a lifetime. Costs like these mean that some people are forced to sell their homes or use up their life savings to pay for help in their old age.

The government’s intention is to cap the costs - at £75,000 - however this is more than double the £35,000 suggested cap based on careful consideration and calculation by an independent commission two years ago.

Although still a considerable amount, it is believed that at £35,000 people would engage and begin to plan for old age however at £75,000 there is a danger that the public might not do so as the figure is simply too high and they’re better off running the risk of not investing.

If people began to invest the insurance industry would follow suit, developing policies knowing that any catastrophic costs would be covered by the government.

To conclude, the economics is over my head in truth but I think the problem in question is very simple - how are we going to provide care and support for the elderly in the future? The current government hopes to address this growing problem and I am interested to see what their final suggestions will be. It is thought that a plan will be mapped out properly in the next month.

Tackling unhealthy eating

In my previous post I mentioned that the coalition government will target ‘unhealthy habits’ in this new year to try and improve health nationally and this would consequently lead to treatment savings within the NHS.

This is something which has featured in the news this week (week one of the new year!), the ‘unhealthy habit’ being unhealthy eating, one of the main causes of obesity. “Obesity costs the NHS £5bn each year and the latest figures from the Department of Health show that the number of children who are overweight or obese doubles during their time at primary school.”

‘Healthy’ food can often be the more expensive option and therefore access to such food in certain areas or certain families can be difficult and limited. As a result certain food firms are involved in a recent scheme by ‘Change4Life’ and offers on their food products will be available at more than 1000 Asda, Aldi and Co-Operative food stores across the UK.

Although a “responsibility deal” is currently in place (as well as schemes such as Change4life) and has managed to improve food content and labelling, a labour representative has asked whether a legal limit on the amount of fat, sugar and salt should be established. Especially in foods aimed at children given the statistic above for example. Essentially, is the current voluntary approach doing enough to regulate what our food contains or is it time for the introduction of legislation?

Here are five potential food 'targets' that could be affected by such legislation if it were introduced:

1.) Breakfast cereals - reduce sugar content

2.) Fruit juice - not pure fruit juice but the ones which are not pure fruit juice and can have large           amounts of sugar added

3.) Ready meals - stop the addition of too much salt in certain brands

4.) Crisps - reduce salt levels

5.) Biscuits, cookies and cakes - rethink with regards to fat levels

To give a more detailed example, the party says measures could include a 30% cap on sugar content in cereals aimed at children – significantly lower than in several well-known brands.

To give an example of legislation elsewhere, in French schools all food and drink is controlled, following the introduction of these measures studies have shown that the number of overweight children have decreased from 18.1% in 2000 to 15.5% in 2007. How telling is this statistic? Is the decrease really that significant and what changes have occurred since 2007...

Finally a few thoughts on the idea, for example is such a scheme realistically controllable? Would legislation have its desired effect, just because the healthy food is more readily available does not mean it will be purchased by families and would the products be affordable for all families? Could the money be invested elsewhere, perhaps education or accessible exercise facilities? Compulsory education on healthy eating with examples of which meals are 'healthy' in all secondary schools in the UK?

Source: BBC Health News