Carers Trust Scotland today is releasing research about the experiences of the pandemic among unpaid carers and carer service support workers across Scotland.More than 500 participants shared the challenges of caring, and supporting unpaid carers, throughout the pandemic.
The pandemic has been difficult for unpaid carers, with 90% of respondents stating they are spending more time caring and 82% saying they have had no respite since the beginning of the pandemic.
With lockdowns and restrictions, many unpaid carers have been unable to share the responsibilities with family and friends and many services have had to pause or reduce their input.
These challenges also impact those carer service workers supporting unpaid carers. As other services paused, 76% of carer support workers that participated found their workload increased. 65% say that their job role has changed, as delivery of support moved online.
Carer support workers highlighted the emotionally demanding calls from unpaid carers, and the challenges of taking these calls in a home working environment without the support of colleagues that you would have in an office.
Hannah Martin, Research and Engagement Officer for Carers Trust Scotland, said: “The pandemic has been a very challenging time for both unpaid carers and carer support workers.
“The challenges unpaid carers have faced, have directly impacted those supporting them. Through the lived experience of unpaid carers and carer support workers, this research illuminates those challenges throughout this unprecedented time.”
In addition to providing an evidence base of experiences, the research puts forward recommendations and suggestions to support carer services and staff as they move out of the crisis phase of the pandemic. This includes recognising and valuing the incredible contribution of unpaid carers, and carer support workers over the pandemic period.
World-leading researcher on unpaid carers’ rights and Carers Trust Ambassador, Professor Saul Becker, said: “During the pandemic, unpaid carers of all ages, have been spending more time caring and more people than ever before have taken on unpaid caring responsibilities while statutory and other support services have been reduced or not available.
“This has also added additional pressures on carer support services that have had to adapt their practices quickly and provide holistic support to unpaid carers during very challenging circumstances.
“I welcome this COVID-19 in Scotland impact report on unpaid carers and carer service workers and believe every effort should be made to support the implementation of the report recommendations and suggestions, which could further improve the lives of unpaid carers and recognise and value the vital role of carer support services.”
Mental Wellbeing and Social Care Minister Kevin Stewart, said: “Carers, and the services that support them have done a remarkable job in very difficult circumstances over this past year during the pandemic. I want to thank them for all their hard work and effort.
“During the pandemic, we have invested an additional £1.9 million in extra carer support via carer organisations. The Scottish Government continues to work closely with the Carers Trust and national care organisations to ensure that carers continue to receive the support and the services they rely on. We will continue to do so as we move into a new phase of the pandemic and society starts to open up.
“The Scottish Government is committed to establishing a National Care Service by the end of this parliament to oversee the delivery care, invest in better terms and conditions for the workforce and provide better support for unpaid carers.”
Jupiter’s clouds have water conditions that would allow Earth-like life to exist, but this isn’t possible in Venus’ clouds, according to the groundbreaking finding of new research led by a Queen’s University Belfast scientist.
For some decades, space exploration missions have looked for evidence of life beyond Earth where we know that large bodies of water, such as lakes or oceans, exist or have previously existed. However, the new research shows that it isn’t the quantity of water that matters for making life viable, but the effective concentration of water molecules – known as ‘water activity’.
The new study also found that research published by an independent team of scientists last year, claiming that the phosphine gas in Venus’ atmosphere indicates possible life in the sulphuric acid clouds of Venus, is not plausible.
Through this innovative research project, Dr John E. Hallsworth from the School of Biological Sciences at Queen’s and his team of international collaborators devised a method to determine the water activity of atmospheres of a planet. Using their approach to study the sulphuric acid clouds of Venus, the researchers found that the water activity was more than a hundred times below the lower limit at which life can exist on Earth.
The research also shows that Jupiter’s clouds have a high enough concentration of water, as well as the correct temperature, for life to exist there. The study has been published in Nature Astronomy.
Dr Hallsworth said: “Our research shows that the sulphuric acid clouds in Venus have too little water for active life to exist, based on what we know of life on Earth.
“We have also found that the conditions of water and temperature within Jupiter’s clouds could allow microbial-type life to subsist, assuming that other requirements such as nutrients are present.
“This is a timely finding given that NASA and the European Space Agency just announced three missions to Venus in the coming years. One of these will take measurements of Venus’s atmosphere that we will be able to compare with our finding.”
Co-author of the report, an expert on physics and chemical biology of water, Dr Philip Ball, commented: “The search for extraterrestrial life has sometimes been a bit simplistic in its attitude to water.
“As our work shows, it’s not enough to say that liquid water equates with habitability. We’ve got to think too about how Earth-like organisms actually use it – which shows us that we then have to ask how much of the water is actually available for those biological uses.”
Co-author of the report, NASA-based planetary scientist Prof Christopher P. McKay, said: “We derive water activity of atmospheres without a model of any sort, based only on direct observations of pressure, temperature, and water concentration.”
Dr Hallsworth added: “We have also performed calculations for Mars and Earth and show that these calculations can be done for planets outside our solar system.
“While our research doesn’t claim that alien (microbial-type) life does exist on other planets in our solar system, it shows that if the water activity and other conditions are right, then such life could exist in places where we haven’t previously been looking.”
Co-authors of this paper include planetary scientist Christopher P. McKay (NASA Ames Research Center, CA, USA); atmosphere chemistry expert Thomas Koop (Bielefeld University, Germany); expert on physics and chemical biology of water Philip Ball (London, UK); biomolecular scientist Tiffany D. Dallas (Queen’s University Belfast); biophysics-of-lipid-membrane expert Marcus K. Dymond (University of Brighton, UK); theoretical physicist María-Paz Zorzano (Centro de Astrobiologia [CSIC-INTA], Spain); micrometeorology and aerosol expert Juergen Burkhardt (University of Bonn, Germany); expert on acid-tolerant microorganisms Olga V. Golyshina (Bangor University, UK); and atmospheric physicist and planetary scientist Javier Martín-Torres (University of Aberdeen, UK).
The research was funded by Research Councils UK (RCUK), Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) and Ministry of Science and Innovation.
The Stroke Association, the UK’s leading stroke charity, is announcing the top 10 priorities for stroke research, uncovered by a study involving stroke survivors, carers and health and social care professionals in stroke.
The charity’s new report – the first UK-wide project to map research priorities across the entire stroke care and treatment pathway – reveals where research can address the issues holding Stroke Association survivors back from rebuilding their lives after a devastating stroke.
John Watson, Director Scotland of the Stroke Association said: “One in five people will have a stroke in their lifetime. Stroke happens in the brain, the control centre for who we are and what we can do.
“Every stroke is unique because the brain is so complex and stroke can happen in any part of it. This means there are as many different impacts of stroke as there are stroke survivors, posing a huge challenge for research.
“According to the most recent figures from the UK Medical Research Council, only £30m of public and charity health research spending goes on stroke. This equates to less than £25 per stroke survivor per year compared to £161 per person living with cancer.
“Despite major breakthroughs over the last 10 years, we now know where there are significant blind spots in treatment and care. These are holding people back from rebuilding their lives. With the number of people having strokes set to rise – it’s estimated that the number of stroke survivors in Scotland could rise to almost 175,000 by 2035, [3]. We must act now and invest in the research that will make the biggest difference to the lives of people affected by stroke.”
Keen endurance athlete, Andrew (Andy) aged 48 from Perthshire had a stroke in 2019 – he knows only too well the burden of stroke and gaps in stroke research that matter to people affected by stroke.
Andy said: “Stroke research is important to me. There are many effects of stroke including fatigue and the psychological consequences of stroke that we should know more about.
“We need to involve people with lived experience of stroke in decisions around stroke priorities to inform researchers and funders about what really matters to us. We know what our difficulties are, and I believe further understanding of those difficulties is a good step towards finding treatments and solutions to enable people to live the best possible life they can.”
Over 1,400 people affected by stroke and professionals in stroke took part in the project, which was carried out in partnership with the James Lind Alliance (JLA), as well as individuals and organisations representing stroke patients, carers and professionals in stroke.
The Stroke Association is sharing the findings as part of its new report “Shaping Stroke Research to Rebuild Lives: The Stroke Priority Setting Partnership results for investment.”
The report sets the agenda for stroke research and identifies the areas that most urgently need investment. There are two lists of 10 priority areas: the first in stroke prevention and acute care, and the second in rehabilitation and long-term care, ranked in order of importance.
The top priorities in each list are:
Interventions to stop stroke. Stroke strikes every 5 minutes in the UK, but we know that most (80-90%) strokes are preventable [4]. We need increased investment in research so people can avoid the devastating effects of stroke in the first place.
Understanding of, and treatment for mental and emotional problems. Three quarters of stroke survivors experience a change in their mental health [5], we need research so that people can overcome significant effects such as anxiety and depression after stroke.
Dr Rubina Ahmed, Director of Research and Policy at the Stroke Association, said: “Charities like ours need to look for new ways to help stroke survivors with emotional, mental and communication problems.
“Establishing what research will make the biggest difference to stroke survivors and those caring for them is just the first step. Stroke research is severely underfunded. Just £1 in every £100 of public and charity spend in health research is on stroke and this just isn’t enough to solve the big and complex issues caused by stroke.
“The stroke funding crisis has been worsened by the coronavirus (Covid 19) pandemic, which has had a devastating impact on our income, halving the charity’s research budget. Stroke research is at risk, which means recoveries of people like Andy are at risk too. Your support can fund the research that will lead to breakthroughs in treatment and care. If you can, please donate so that we can make sure more stroke survivors can rebuild their lives after stroke.
“We would like to thank everyone who took part in this project: stroke survivors, their carers, professionals in stroke, the James Lind Alliance, the Steering Group members and our partners. By having your say for stroke, you have helped to shape stroke research to rebuild lives.”
Over the past 30 years the Stroke Association has played a crucial role in supporting stroke research in the UK. By establishing these priorities our charity can support the research that can make the biggest difference to the lives of people affected by stroke.
Find out how stroke research helps rebuild lives at stroke.org.uk/rebuildinglives or to donate, please visit: stroke.org.uk/saveresearch
To read the full list of priorities and the report visit: www.stroke.org.uk/psp
Research shows people with vision impairment lack support to gain quality education and employment
A study just published by the Vision Impairment Centre for Teaching and Research (VICTAR) at the University of Birmingham and Thomas Pocklington Trust (TPT) shows one in five people with vision impairment did not gain quality employment despite earning qualifications in line with the general population.
The study tracked 80 participants from England over a period of 11 years (from age 14 to 25) to improve understanding on why this population is vulnerable to becoming long term NEET (not in education, employment or training).
Many of the young people spoke positively about their experiences in school and achieved average or above average GCSE qualifications. But then faced a range of barriers when entering Further Education, Higher Education and ultimately the employment market.
Rachel Hewett, Birmingham Fellow at the Vision Impairment Centre for Teaching and Research School of Education, University of Birmingham said: “The research identified key challenges once the young people transitioned into Further Education (FE). Many young people found adjustments were not put in place in time and they had a lack of access to specialist support.
“Careers guidance often focused on keeping the young person in education, with limited support for transitioning into employment. This led to some of the participants ‘churning’ in the system.”
Many barriers were observed once the participants moved into Higher Education, such as an inaccessible application process for UCAS and Disabled Students’ Allowance (DSA), and inaccessible virtual learning environments and a failure from institutions to make reasonable adjustments.
This led to some of the cohort withdrawing from their courses, repeating modules or entire academic years, or leaving with a degree classification which they feel did not reflect their ability.
Several of the participants wished to pursue apprenticeships but were unable to identify suitable opportunities or access specialist support to help them consider alternative options.
Tara Chattaway, Head of Education at TPT said: “It is evident that young people with vision impairment are not getting the support at transition periods in their lives. The lack of support, accessibility and inclusion can impact on the quality of education the young person receives and on then on their employment opportunities.
“We are calling on Government to bridge this gap and to ensure that the Skills and Post-16 Education Bill and their response to the impending SEND review truly supports the aspirations and learning needs of vision impaired students.”
At the end of the study 66% of the remaining participants were in some form of employment, 17% remained NEET, including seven young people who by the age of 25 had never experienced paid employment. Of particular concern is the lack of support available to help young people with vision impairment access employment once they become NEET, with several of the young people being actively discouraged by Jobcentre Plus staff to search for employment, in favour of long-term benefits.
The research did identify factors that drive positive outcomes for young people with vision impairment. They include:
Self-advocacy skills and a good understanding of their vision impairment and the adjustments they require.
A well developed and broad range of skills for accessing information.
Mobility and orientation skills, including skills for getting around in unfamiliar environments.
Tara added: “At TPT we understand the importance vision impaired students having the right access to materials, assistive technology and independence skills in order to thrive in education and to transition into employment. More must be done.”
The National Manufacturing Institute Scotland (NMIS) has announced the formation of a new network that brings together leading Scottish research and innovation, education, and training providers to help unlock manufacturing innovation and drive growth in the sector across the country.
Spanning the length and breadth of Scotland, the network is led by NMIS and includes Mountain Bike Centre of Scotland (MTBCOS), Scotland’s national centre for mountain biking innovation and excellence, based just outside Edinburgh, as a lead partner. Other partners include Energy Skills Partnership (ESP), and Tay Cities Engineering Partnership (TCEP).
The network will offer an easy means for manufacturing companies that work with individual partner organisations, to tap into the vast expertise across the entire network. Companies will also be able to access the capability partners’ own networks including the renowned High Value Manufacturing Catapult through NMIS.
Providing an open channel to share knowledge, capability, and ideas, the network is accessible to all organisations across the country that can contribute to creating a sustainable and vibrant future for the Scottish manufacturing and engineering community.
Expanding upon the ability of NMIS to address national and global manufacturing challenges and support the goal of making Scotland a global leader in advanced manufacturing, the announcement comes at a critical time as manufacturers across Scotland are recovering from the impact of COVID-19.
John Reid, National Manufacturing Institute Scotland CEO said: “The NMIS Capability Network makes it easier for companies in the Edinburgh and Lothians manufacturing and engineering community to tap into and benefit from world-class expertise and capability.
“This is a crucial moment in time as manufacturers seek to navigate complex situations such as the climate emergency and post pandemic recovery. Now is a time to refocus, embrace innovation and seize the opportunities that so often emerge from challenging times.
“Sitting at the cutting edge of manufacturing innovation, the network partners each have a fundamental part to play in developing tomorrow’s manufacturing workforce, improving productivity, and helping companies, and people, in our community prosper.”
Business Minister for Scottish Government, Ivan McKee said: “As we begin to make our way out of the Covid-19 pandemic and look to rebuild and grow Scotland’s economy, a vibrant and diverse manufacturing sector has never been more critical to long-term recovery and success.
“Our £75m investment in NMIS continues to deliver strong outcomes even during the challenging times we are facing now – from supporting the initial response to the pandemic to playing a key role in developing and delivering our Manufacturing Recovery Plan.
“We must utilise the experience, expertise and ingenuity of all of Scotland’s manufacturing industry to create the best conditions for the sector to thrive.
“The network is an essential part of our support across industry, academia and the public sector working to deliver greater, greener and fairer prosperity for manufacturers across all of Scotland.”
Professor Geraint Florida-James, lead academic at MTBCOS, added:“I am delighted that MTBCOS will be part of the NMIS Collaboration Network.
“MTBCOS has been supporting companies in the cycling industry since 2014. MTBCOS is a centre for open innovation and has an extensive partnerships network which allows companies access to national and international markets.
“The relationship with NMIS will allow MTBCOS access to an expanded repertoire of expertise and resources, which will be of huge benefit to the businesses we work with. We look forward to being an active member of this exciting network.”
“Manufacturing will play a central role in that recovery and through our participation in this new capability network we look forward to helping companies across Scotland to innovate, develop their workforces and to drive economic growth.”
The NMIS Capability Network includes CENSIS, Construction Scotland Innovation Centre, Energy Skills Partnership, Mountain Bike Centre of Scotland, the Scottish Institute for Remanufacturing, Scottish Research Partnership in Engineering, SeedPod, and Tay Cities Engineering Partnership.
A Which? snapshot investigation found ordering takeaways via food delivery apps was up to 44 per cent more expensive than going directly to the restaurant, while new research from the consumer champion also reveals that app users are sometimes struggling to get a satisfactory solution when something goes wrong with their order.
Which? researchers looked at the costs of ordering meals for between two to four people from five restaurants and cafes, both directly and on food delivery sites Deliveroo, UberEats and Just Eat. Across the five restaurants, ordering via a takeaway app proved 23 per cent (£7.14) more expensive on average than ordering directly from the restaurant.
Orders on Deliveroo were the most expensive overall, costing an average of 31 per cent (£9.91) more per order than ordering directly from the restaurant. UberEats orders cost an extra 25 per cent (£7.93), while JustEat orders were only 7 per cent (£1.56) more expensive.
JustEat did not deliver for one of the restaurants Which? looked at and on another, it applied a £7.30 discount. JustEat said it offers a price promise to help ensure customers do not pay more for food they order through its app compared to ordering via the restaurant’s online delivery service.
The most expensive order was a £43.94 Deliveroo takeaway from a burrito and taco restaurant, which cost 44 per cent (£12.29) more than ordering directly from the restaurant. Even before adding delivery and service charges, the cost of the food was 26 per cent (£8.30) more.
Prices on apps are generally set by restaurants. However, restaurants often increase the price of items when bought through the apps to cover the service fees that the apps charge them. Ordering directly from the restaurant also does not incur the delivery charges that ordering from a delivery app does.
Costs vary between apps, with each one charging different service and delivery fees.
For restaurants forced to close during national or regional lockdowns, the apps offered a lifeline to keep their businesses open. However, a number of the restaurants investigated told Which? they have had to raise their prices in the apps to account for the commissions of between 15-35 per cent they have to pay the delivery services.
The apps say their commissions are essential for running the service – for example, insurance, paying delivery riders, customer services and services offered to restaurants.
During the pandemic, people’s use of food delivery apps increased as consumers looked online for their weekly takeaway and grocery shop. But if customers are feeding a family, these higher prices can quickly pile up. Consumers may not be aware that they are paying these higher prices if they have not visited the restaurant themselves.
In Which?’s recent survey of more than 2,000 UK adults, more than half of people (56%) told the consumer champion they had used delivery apps for takeaways or groceries.
Around six in 10 people told Which? they used takeaway apps at least monthly pre-pandemic, compared with seven in 10 now. JustEat was the most widely used app, with two in five adults (39%) choosing it compared with a quarter (26%) for UberEats and one in five (20%) for Deliveroo.
This new research from the consumer champion also found that customers frequently have problems with orders and often find there is no way to effectively complain or put things right when this happens.
The most common issues with deliveries were late arrival, cold food and missing items. Others reported ruined items, as well as orders not turning up.
Six in 10 (59%) Deliveroo users surveyed told Which? they had a problem in the last 12 months, while more than half (53%) UberEats and JustEat (53%) customers reported having an issue with an order.
The most common resolution for UberEats customers was being offered a cash refund, but Deliveroo and JustEat users were more often offered credit or a voucher in the app. Some of these credits and vouchers come with expiry dates, and if consumers are not regular users, they could lose their money. JustEat said customers are asked to apply the credit to their account within 30 days, after which they are able to use it indefinitely.
Of those who had a problem, more than half of Deliveroo customers (53%) and two in five JustEat (46%) and UberEats (42%) customers found it difficult to complain the last time something went wrong, according to Which?’s survey. Only around half of those who did complain were happy with how it was resolved.
Which? believes food delivery apps should make the responsibilities of the restaurant and app clearer so customers are not at risk of losing out if things go wrong. The consumer champion heard from many people across all of the food delivery apps who found it hard to speak to someone about their order and were passed between the delivery driver, the app and the restaurant.
If a customer is due a refund, consumer law is clear that they should get it in the same way they paid out originally, unless they agree otherwise. Customers do not have to accept credit or a voucher in the app if they paid with their own credit or debit card.
Adam French, Which? Consumer Rights Expert, said: “Next time you fancy a takeaway, you should be aware that the undoubted convenience offered by a delivery app comes with a hidden additional cost. If something goes wrong with your order, you might also find yourself caught between the restaurant and the app.
“Food delivery apps should do more to make the responsibilities of the restaurant and themselves clear so consumers are not caught between the two if there’s a problem with their order.
“If customers are owed a refund for a delivery which has gone wrong, they should remember they may be entitled to a cash refund under consumer law – they don’t have to accept credit or a voucher if it isn’t what they want.”
A Deliveroo spokesperson said:“Deliveroo always aims to offer our customers great value while also delivering sustainable growth for our restaurant partners. We encourage restaurants to set the same menu prices as they offer customers when dining in, and the commission we charge is then reinvested back into our business, paying for riders’ fees, customer services and upgrading our services for restaurants.
“We have a positive track record of helping our small restaurant partners throughout the pandemic and this will continue to be our priority as restaurants look towards a full reopening.”
A JustEat spokesperson said:“Just Eat is only successful if our restaurant partners are successful. We believe our commission rates are aligned with the value we provide to our partners and we have a track record of helping restaurants prosper.
“It’s really important to us that our customers have a positive experience when using Just Eat. Whenever we’re made aware of any customer experience that falls short of the high standards we hope to deliver, we will always investigate and take appropriate action to ensure we find a suitable solution.”
An Uber Eats spokeswoman said:“At Uber Eats, we are completely focused on ensuring that the best restaurants and the best selection of food is available to customers, delivered in an average time of less than 30 minutes.
“We have a dedicated customer service team to help customers who have issues with their orders, and we would encourage anyone who does have an issue to reach out in the Help section of the app.”
A Queen’s University Belfast research team is leading an international study on COVID-19 Antibody Response in Cystic Fibrosis (CAR-CF).
The study is to be carried out by a team of researchers from the university’s Wellcome-Wolfson Institute for Experimental Medicine (WWIEM). It will measure COVID-19 antibody levels in thousands of people with cystic fibrosis across 17 European countries and is funded by a $1.5m grant from the CF Foundation (US) over a two-year period.
The project will also run in Canada and the US, making the research the largest prospective study in cystic fibrosis (CF) to have been carried out to date.
The coronavirus pandemic has been a worrying time, but it has been particularly stressful for people with long-term conditions such as CF.
CF is a chronic condition that damages the lungs and leaves patients vulnerable to chest infections. There is currently little information about how COVID-19 has impacted people living with CF, however, they may be at particular risk from this new respiratory virus and the various strains.
Dr Damian Downey, Clinical Senior Lecturer in Respiratory Medicine from the WWIEM at Queen’s, and Director of the Northern Ireland Regional Adult CF Centre, who is leading the project, said: “Viral respiratory tract infections can be more severe in people with CF than the general population, with an increased risk of complications and a negative impact on lung function.
“This new research project will explore infection and vaccination rates in those with CF and link to important clinical information over time. We can then understand how COVID-19 has impacted this vulnerable population, how long the antibodies last and the risk of future infections.”
Dr Downey is the Director of the European CF Society Clinical Trials Network which involves 58 research centres in 17 countries. This network will oversee the project and the WWIEM at Queen’s University will be the central European laboratory that will analyse the research results.
A University of Birmingham-led study of over a thousand dental professionals has shown their increased occupational risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection during the first wave of the pandemic in the UK.
The observational cohort study, published today (3 June 2021), in the Journal of Dental Research, involved 1,507 Midland dental care practitioners. Blood samples were taken from the cohort at the start of the study in June 2020 to measure their levels of antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19.
The team found 16.3% of study participants – which included dentists, dental nurses and dental hygienists – had SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, compared to just 6% of the general population at the time. Meanwhile, the percentage of dental practice receptionists, who have no direct patient contact, with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies was comparable to the general population, supporting the hypothesis that occupational risk arose from close exposure to patients.
The study also found ethnicity was also a significant risk factor for infection, with 35% of Black participants and 18.8% of Asian participants having SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, compared to 14.3% of white participants.
Blood samples were taken from participants three months later, in September 2020, when dental practices in England had re-opened with enhanced PPE and infection control measures in place, and once again in January 2021, six months after the start of the study, during the second wave of the pandemic when healthcare workers were being vaccinated.
The results showed that of those who had previous COVID-19 infection, over 70% continued to have SARS-CoV-2 antibodies both at three months and six months later, and they were at a 75% reduced risk of re-infection with the virus.
The study also demonstrated the immunological impact of COVID-19 vaccination, with 97.7% of those without previous infection developing an antibody response at least 12 days after their first Pfizer vaccine. In those with evidence of previous infection, the antibody response was more rapid and higher in magnitude after a single dose of the Pfizer vaccine.
Furthermore, none of the cohort with a level of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies greater than 147.6 IU/ml in their blood tested positive for COVID-19 throughout the six-month period from the first to the final blood tests.
First author Dr Adrian Shields, of the University of Birmingham’s Institute of Immunology and Immunotherapy, said: “Understanding what an antibody test result means to an individual with respect to their risk of infection is essential to controlling the pandemic.
“Our study has taken the first steps in defining the level of antibody in a persons’ blood necessary to protect them from infection for six months. Furthermore, by comparing the antibody levels we have found in dentists to those contained in widely available reference material produced by the World Health Organization, we hope the protective level we found can be easily confirmed and compared by other laboratories.”
Corresponding author Professor Thomas Dietrich, of the University of Birmingham’s School of Dentistry, adds: “Critically, only 5.3% of the cohort developed an antibody response that exceeded this threshold of 147.6 IU/ml following the first wave of the UK pandemic.
“This suggests that natural infection alone is unlikely to generate meaningful, durable herd immunity.”
Co-corresponding author Iain Chapple, Professor of Periodontology at the University of Birmingham and Consultant in Restorative Dentistry at Birmingham Community Healthcare Trust, adds: “Dental professionals are thought to be at high risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 because they routinely operate within patients’ aerodigestive tract and regularly carry out aerosol-generating procedures that result in the production of airborne particles.
“Through our research, we have clearly shown that dental professionals were at increased occupational risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2 prior to the new PHE guidance on PPE. The occupational health measures that have been put in place in general dental practice as a consequence of COVID-19 appear to remove that increased risk, however, this will need to be thoroughly investigated to see if they have successfully interrupted transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory viruses.”
Co-corresponding author Professor Alex Richter, also of the University of Birmingham, said: “This is the first time the occupational risk of exposure to a potentially fatal respiratory virus has been studied in a large dental cohort.
“It is important that we now progress our research to ensure we have an understanding of how people are protected from re-infection with COVID-19 following natural infection and vaccination.
“The nature and duration of immunity in these cohorts will be critical to understand as the COVID-19 pandemic progresses, particularly with respect to the efficacy of vaccination strategies -single-dose, multiple-doses, vaccine combinations – and in relation to novel viral variants of concern.”
Lothian MSP Miles Briggs is encouraging Edinburgh residents to get involved with Covid-19 vaccination trials.
Miles Briggs said: “Phase 3 of Valneva Covid-19 vaccination trials are pivotal for getting the new vaccinations into production.
“Two thirds of adults have had their first dose of a vaccine and a third their first dose, but booster doses will likely be required later in the year.
“The distribution of vaccines to other countries across Europe and globally will also be important, with most countries being behind Scotland and the UK in their vaccine rollout.
“I would encourage anyone over 18 who is interested in being involved with the Valneva vaccine trial to sign up at ukcovid19study.com”
In January 2021 we started commercial manufacturing of our COVID-19 vaccine at our site in Livingston, which is a globally qualified manufacturing site for viral vaccines.
The #Valneva vaccine being manufactured in Livingston is the only inactivated #COVID19 vaccine in development in Europe and it’s now being trialled in #Edinburgh.
To find out about the #vaccine and getting vaccinated, take a look at: ukcovid19study.com
As we roll out existing #COVID19 vaccines, experts are working on new ones & boosters to protect us over time. Crucially, volunteers are still needed for trials.
To find out about the Valneva #vaccine trial, taking place in Edinburgh, visit: ukcovid19study.com
With clear evidence that we must act now to protect, create and restore UK woods and trees, the Woodland Trust is inviting applications for research projects that will address its priority areas within the next two years.
The 2021 Spring Research Grant Call will award funding of £5,000 – £20,000 for projects that align to the Trust’s recently published State of the UK’s Woods and Trees report. The report highlighted a barrage of compounding threats that pose catastrophic consequences for the country’s woods and trees.
Woodland Trust head of conservation outcomes and evidence Dr Hazel Jackson said:“Scientific evidence underpins all the Woodland Trust’s conservation activities. We are constantly looking for effective, credible solutions to deal with the challenges facing trees and woods in the UK.
“The warning signs in our recent State of the UK’s Woods and Trees report are loud and clear. If we don’t tackle the threats facing our woods and trees, we will severely damage the UK’s ability to address the climate and nature crises. Our wildlife havens are suffering, and we are storing up problems for future generations.
“Knowledge is the key to ensuring we can engage people and inspire support, as well as develop and advocate strong, effective conservation techniques and we hope to see a range of strong applications to further enhance the evidence that feeds directly into our practice as well as our policy.”
The Trust particularly encourages applications from minority groups and early career researchers to increase the diversity of scientists in the conservation sector so they can gain experience in leading applied research projects and working with a practitioner non-government organisation.
Themes the Trust is looking for research to address are as follows:
Woodland extent, condition, and wildlife value
Projects are expected to illustrate how new and existing methodologies can be used to monitor the wildlife value of UK trees and woods and assess ecological condition. We are particularly interested in gaining new insights into the extent, condition, and wildlife value of ancient woodland, trees outside of woods, wood pasture and parkland, ancient and veteran trees, urban trees and community woodlands.
Benefits for people
Woods and trees benefit people in a whole host of ways including flood risk management, pollination, carbon sequestration and storage, recreation, public health and the cultural, spiritual and intrinsic values we place on them. Proposals examining how these benefits can be promoted at the site and landscape scale and the relative trade-offs when different objectives are prioritised, are encouraged under this theme.
Threats and drivers of change
Proposals under this theme should aim to inform protection of new and existing woods and trees from the huge array of threats, enhancing resilience and ecological integrity at site and landscape scale.
Restoration, creation and management
This theme aims to improve and refine practical conservation delivery by focusing on the development of novel, efficient and cost-effective approaches. Research topics in this theme may include intervention trials to provide evidence for the effectiveness of management or restoration.
It may include research into innovative techniques and methods for creating new native woodland for different objectives. This includes effectiveness for biodiversity and people but also the economics and cost-effectiveness of different approaches.
Landscape scale research
The Trust is particularly interested in applied, interdisciplinary research projects addressing issues with landscape-scale significance. It will encourage research which integrates woods and trees across other appropriate aspects of conservation, and other land uses that traditionally do not feature trees and integration into society more widely.
