Author Archives: The Physiological Society

About The Physiological Society

The Physiological Society brings together over 3,500 scientists from over 60 countries. Since its foundation in 1876, its Members have made significant contributions to our knowledge of biological systems and the treatment of disease. We promote physiology and support those working in the field by organising world-class scientific meetings, offering grants for research, collaboration and international travel, and by publishing the latest developments in our leading scientific journals, The Journal of Physiology, Experimental Physiology and Physiological Reports.

Scientists and social media: Can you tweet your way to impact?

By Priya Mistry, Editorial Assistant, The Physiological Society, @Pri_Mis

Twitter has over 313 million active monthly users and Facebook has over 1.71 billion. Research has shown that social media can increase the number of journal article downloads . So why do some academics and research scientists still avoid these platforms?

Social media has become a global forum allowing people to share ideas, make new connections, and create new research paths at an international level. Can using social media actually affect the impact of research? If so, how can we measure its effect?

As a scientist in your field, it’s in your best interest to share your work and other related topics in your field. So how exactly can social media help you?

What is social media?

Social media platforms come in all shapes and sizes. How do you know which ones are right for you and your target audience? The most popular platforms are Facebook and Twitter, however, there are many, many others covering different niche areas and demands.

Online networking tools specifically for scientists include ResearchGate, Academia.edu and Mendeley, and these have millions of users. Reddit, a social news and discussion website, is so popular with scientists that Nature and PLOS have collaborated with them, allowing editors and authors from the journal to engage with verified accounts or ‘flairs’. The ‘subreddit’ r/Science has over 13 million subscribers, suggesting a demand for a more informal platform of science discussion.

Why should I engage?

You’re an academic, a professor, a PhD student, a science professional and you’ve been getting on fine without social media. So why should you engage online?

To network with peers

The community feel of online networking keeps you in touch with the latest scientific research and allows you to discuss and debate new ideas and developments at an international level. ‘Hashtags’ are a type of label used on social networks to categorize posts. During conferences, tweeting and following the conference hashtag can help you keep up with highlights.

For Public Engagement

We should communicate science to the public as it allows them to make informed decisions – issues around global warming and vaccines are examples of where this communication is important. 79% of the British public said they trust scientists to tell the truth, in contrast to 25% who trust journalists. Scientists have a responsibility not only to communicate their own research, but also to represent the scientific community, and engage the public to help them understand and appreciate science. Social media is an effective way to reach out to the general public and have a direct impact on them.

For Self-Promotion

You have put your blood, sweat and tears into creating a research paper that has just been accepted. You want your paper to be easily found, read, and ultimately cited. You are the best person to promote your article; you know the most about your research and the significance of it.

ResearchGate and Academia.edu are excellent ways to share your research with other academics. Sharing your work on Twitter and Facebook will help further your discoverability. While academic networking profiles and LinkedIn are useful tools to use as a ‘digital CV’, you also need to think about your digital footprint. If you Googled yourself, what would you find?

According to a recent survey by recruitment company Careerbuilder, in addition to looking at a CV or cover letter, 60% of employers use social networking sites to research candidates and 41% say they are less likely to interview job candidates if they are unable to find information about them online. Social media activity can be part of your digital profile. Showcasing your work and knowledge in this way can help you with recruitment and self-promotion, not to mention that it’s free!

How do I start?

Here are a few steps to help you get started:

  • Start off small: Create a profile, look at hashtags and browse what’s already available. Twitter is a good place to start. It’s quick and easy to set up and you only need to think of 140 characters for each tweet.
  • Follow your interests: Once you’ve set up an account, ‘follow’ or ‘add’ (depending on the platform you use) other accounts. You can follow your peers, your role models, relevant companies or institutions, and us (shameless plug )!
  • Engage: Only engage on social media when you feel comfortable. Some may find this easier than others, but don’t be discouraged if you find that your profile is looking a little bare or taking a while to get attention. Practice makes perfect!
  • Post optimally and consistently: The lifespan of a tweet is about 18-24 minutes – this means that your tweet is ‘pushed down’ the feed and is less likely to be viewed after this time. You should try to post at optimum times (mornings, lunch time and after work) and post consistently if you would like a bigger following.
  • Download the apps: Having social media apps on your phone means access to your profile is at your fingertips. This will make it easier to post from wherever you are.
  • Be yourself: Don’t be afraid to show your personality; giving your account a personal touch and sharing your interests can help distinguish you from countless other social media accounts
  • Have fun!

Once you get the hang of it, social media can be useful and quite enjoyable. You’ll find yourself constantly checking your profiles in no time!

  • Be responsible: Remember to be mindful of what you post and share. Opinions and discussion are welcome on these platforms, but posting provocative photos, discriminatory comments or negative remarks about a co-worker can affect your career.

How can I measure success?

As a scientist, you are hard-wired to track, analyse and evaluate anything you do. Luckily, tracking posts online is easier than you think. Links created via Kudos (an author service to help improve the reach of articles) can be easily tracked and analysed so you can see who’s been clicking and sharing your posts. Many publishers, including Wiley, have integrated Altmetrics onto their research papers, which gives articles a score based on popularity and the rank of the media on which it has been shared. The score can also be used to check how well your paper is doing on social media and you can find trending research by looking at articles with high Altmetrics scores. Twitter and Facebook analytics are another easy way to track the number of views and clicks your posts have received.

According to a study from the Journal of Medical Internet Research, articles which were highly tweeted about were 11 times more likely to be highly cited than those with no tweets. A paper from PLOS ONE has also shown that social media posts on a research article increase the number of people who view or download the paper, proving that social media can help to increase reach. In contrast, a study in Scientometrics showed a weak association between the number of times an article is tweeted and the number of citations. While tweeting may not be the cause of citations, Twitter can help predict which articles will be successful and can give you an idea on how well your article will do.

Conclusion

In this day and age of the internet, it’s difficult to keep your research distinctive, especially with around 2.5 million articles being published a year. Why not give your paper, and yourself, a boost by engaging online. Citations are not always the end goal and you can extend your impact beyond the papers you’ve published. Knowledge is only useful if shared!

Originally published in Physiology News 106, 32-34

Follow us:
Twitter: @ThePhySoc, @JPhysiol, @ExpPhysiol
Facebook: PhySoc, JPhysiol, ExpPhysiol

Stress in modern Britain: An update to the seminal 50 year old survey

StressInModernBritain

By Henry Lovett, Policy & Public Affairs Officer, The Physiological Society

In the 21st century, stress is all-pervasive. The Physiological Society has conducted a national survey in the vein of the seminal work of Holmes and Rahe in 1967[1] to ascertain how different stressful events, both positive and negative, affect people. In partnership with polling firm YouGov,[2] we surveyed over 2000 British adults and asked them to rate how stressful they find (or imagine they would find) 18 different life events. The results suggest some enlightening conclusions.

The overall ordering of the stressor events is given here, along with an average score (out of ten points) assigned to each one.

Rank Event Stress /10
1 Death of spouse/relative/friend 9.43
2 Imprisonment 9.15
3 Flood/fire damaging your home 8.89
4 Being seriously ill 8.52
5 Being fired 8.47
6 Separation/divorce 8.47
7 Identity theft 8.16
8 Unexpected money problems 7.39
9 Starting a new job 6.54
10 Planning a wedding 6.51
11 Arrival of first child 6.06
12 Commute delays 5.94
13 Terrorist threats 5.84
14 Losing smartphone 5.79
15 Moving to bigger house 5.77
16 Brexit 4.23
17 Going on holiday 3.99
18 Promotion/success at work 3.78

Perhaps most interestingly, for every single event, the reported stress experienced by men was lower than that by women. The average difference was 0.56 points. The biggest difference was in the stress caused by the threat of terrorism, which was 1.25 points higher for women. The smallest difference was for the arrival of a first child – a life-changing event for either sex! Of course, we cannot tell from these figures if the women responding do experience greater stress, or are simply more willing to report it; an age-old problem of this type of research.

Overall regional differences were small, with the average stress level across Great Britain varying only by 0.28 points. The most stressed area was Scotland, while the least stressed was the South East of England. The East of England was notably upset by delays in their commutes, while Londoners were most sanguine about going on holiday.

The results for some events point towards stress levels increasing with age, most strongly for long-term problems such as illness or imprisonment. Exceptions to this trend were the loss of a smartphone, which fits with the added difficulties this would cause to highly-connected younger generations, and the arrival of a first child. This was rated highest by those 25-34, who are likely to be the group experiencing this most recently.

One interesting stressor was Brexit (with the given definition of “the process of leaving the European Union”). Though ranking low among all the stressors, Brexit had the greatest variety of responses given, shown by the highest standard deviation. Respondents aged 18-24 scored Brexit stress a point higher on average than those 55+. Those living in London and Scotland also scored Brexit a point higher on average than Wales and much of the rest of England. Most markedly, those respondents educated to higher degree level reported stress two points higher than people with only GCSEs or A-Levels, while undergraduate degree-holders were also more stressed, though more than a point lower than those with higher degrees. These trends correlate with the constituencies of the electorate most likely to vote Remain in the referendum, suggesting they are finding the Brexit process stressful while leavers are happier to let things play out.

Participants were also asked to fill in any other particularly stressful events which they felt the survey had missed out. The most common responses concerned driving: car breakdowns, suffering traffic, road rage, or being the passenger of a careless driver all featured. Another set of common response described caring responsibilities for aged, ill or disabled people.

Finally, to the person who responded: “Trying to enter an amateur radio contest when the ionospheric conditions are poor due to a coronal mass ejection, coupled with a neighbour’s plasma TV causing major interference on the 1.8 to 7 MHz bands.” All we can say is, we feel your pain.

[1] T Holmes and R Rahe, Journal of Psychosomatic Research. Vol. 11, pp. 213 to 218. Pergamon Press. 1967

[2] All figures, unless otherwise stated, are from YouGov Plc. Total sample size was 2078 adults. Fieldwork was undertaken between 22nd – 28th December 2016.  The survey was carried out online. The figures have been weighted and are representative of all GB adults (aged 18+).

Researcher Futures: Weathering the storms of career change

By Sarah Blackford

‘Your career is your responsibility, but there is a lot of support available to you’, declared plenary speaker Liz Elvidge, as she kicked off the day with a run-through of her own career path. A former postdoc herself, Liz is head of the Postdoc Development Centre at Imperial College, London and also chairs the BBSRC postdoctoral researchers sub-group committee. Does she have any regrets about moving out of research herself? Definitely not, and, she adds, she doesn’t know of anyone else who has left and would rather be back in academia. Having said that, Liz offered advice for both “leavers” and “remainers”: If you want to stay, your best chance to secure a tenure-track position is to apply for research fellowships, which will help you to gain independence; if you prefer to leave, then start applying for jobs, expand your network and work on your CV. Drawing on her experience of assisting postdocs, Liz listed the key behaviours for successfully transitioning out of academia: put your research skills to good use; be bold; be clear about what’s important; be willing to take a risk and always ask for advice.

Held on ‘Doris Day’, when storms and gusts of wind made for challenging travel conditions, we were pleased that all our speakers had made it to London to take part in the first career workshop for mid/senior postdocs, co-organised by Chrissy Stokes of The Physiological Society and myself from the Society for Experimental Biology. The one-day programme aimed to provide a series of talks, advice and interactive sessions to help our 26 mid/senior postdoc delegates to help themselves. With little support available for this group, the workshop had filled up within a few days of advertising, demonstrating a real need for this kind of careers event.

My own session, “Researching your potential”, followed on after Liz, giving the participants the opportunity to work together to identify their personal attributes and strengths. Using skills and values self-assessments and other reflective tools, the interactive nature of the session aimed to enhance self-awareness and to link this to career choice. The primary aim of this short session was to highlight to more advanced postdocs the myriad of factors which influence their career decisions, including career stage, personal preferences and connections, as well as those further away from our control such as socio-economic and political factors and, of course, the magic of luck!

IMG_0676After lunch, during which there was plenty of chatting and swapping stories, Kate Murray (acting director, Goldsmiths University of London) gave the delegates a whistle-stop tour of LinkedIn, and its crucial role in expanding networks and researching  new roles and employers when searching for non-academic careers. Entitled, “The power of networking and communication”, Kate also provided really useful advice about how to build collaborative relationships: first, by asking questions; then moving on to asking for advice and assistance; and finally reaching the level of advocacy and alliance, when you may even end up working together – as in the case of Kate and myself J. With the inclusion of an exercise in which postdocs were asked to identify their own networks, this session received excellent feedback and set the scene for the final hour-long panel discussion with our panellist: Lewis Halsey (Senior lecturer, Roehampton University), Liz Rylott (Senior postdoctoral fellow, York University), Sai Pathmanathan (Freelance science education consultant) and Jack Leeming (Editor, Naturejobs).

Speaking on the subject of enhancing your skills towards your next career move, the top tip from the panel was to focus on what you enjoy doing and to maximise the little time you have as a postdoc on developing your career to suit you. Talking to people, expanding personal networks and getting advice was also high on the list, including making use of social media. For those seeking an academic position, Lewis and Liz recommended Google Scholar and Researchgate, with members of the audience pitching in to praise the merits of using Twitter hashtags to access conference tweets. Jack’s advice was to think about your personal brand and the image you’re portraying, so select your words carefully for any profile you produce. Finally, freelance entrepreneur, Sai, left the postdocs with a great personal ‘motto’: the more you look for stuff, the more stuff will find you!

Our networking reception at the end of the day was an extended affair due to the weather conditions, and a literal break down in the London transport system. However, despite these delays, we received 100% excellent/good feedback for the majority of the workshop, with some very useful comments on where we could improve for next time. All in all, it is safe to say the delegates were blown away by the day (but, luckily, not by storm Doris), so watch out for further career events of this nature, courtesy of the Physiological Society and Society for Experimental Biology.

Researcher Futures, a career workshop designed for mid/senior postdoctoral researchers, was held on 23rd February 2017 at Hodgkin Huxley House, London.

Let’s talk about stress

By Anastasia Stefanidou, Communications Officer, Biochemical Society

According to the UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE), in 2015/2016 stress accounted for 37% of all work-related ill health. It’s time for employers to support their staff and invest in giving people the techniques and guidance on how to cope with stressful situations.

To raise awareness of and encourage discussion around the issue, The Physiological Society held a “Under Pressure: Making sense of stress” panel discussion on Tuesday, 21 February 2017.

The Physiological Society is devoting all of 2017 to ‘Making Sense of Stress’ across all areas – events, outreach, education, policy, and communications – with the general aim of emphasizing the contribution, past and current, of physiology to our understanding of stress.

Geoff McDonald, leader of minds@work, chaired last week’s panel, which included Stafford Lightman, Director of the Henry Wellcome Laboratories for Integrative Neuroscience and Endocrinology at the University of Bristol and current President Elect of the British Neuroscience Association and Gail Kinman, Professor of Occupational Health Psychology and Director of the Research Centre for Applied Psychology at the University of Bedfordshire.

The mechanisms of stress

Hans Selye, known as “the father of stress,” noticed, as a medical student, that patients suffering from different diseases often exhibited identical signs and symptoms. They just “looked sick”. This observation may have been the first step in his recognition of the concept of stress.

Lightman opened the event presenting the mechanisms of stress. “Stress is perceived in the brain. You can’t have stress unless you perceive it. It’s something your body perceives as bad, and you need to adapt to it”, he said.

What happens to you when you’re stressed? When your brain perceives a stressor, it tells the inside of the adrenal gland to release adrenaline, and the outside to release glucocorticoids. This hormonal response is one way our body responds to stress.

Lightman also explained that we have evolved to respond to stress in a way that it is in our interest. In many situations, short term stress is good. For instance, stressful incidents increase our vigilance, activate our acute memory and increase heart rate, adrenaline and blood sugar.

image1
Physiological response to acute stress (credit: Stafford Lightman)

Prolonged stress, on the other hand, can cause all sorts of problems like depression, inability to feel pleasure in normally pleasurable activities (anhedonia), lack of sex drive, disrupted sleep, heart diseases, and metabolic syndromes like diabetes.

image2
Pathophysiological response to chronic stress (credit: Stafford Lightman)

In addition to these physiological mechanisms, your genes, your early life experiences, and your stresses as an adult greatly influence your susceptibility to stress.

The cost of work-related stress

Kinman then spoke about the costs of work-related stress and wellbeing in demanding professions.

The UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE) defines work-related stress as “the process that arises where work demands of various types and combinations exceed the person’s capacity and capability to cope.”

The statistics are alarming. The latest estimates from the Labour Force Survey (LFS) show that:

  • The UK lost 11.7 million working days due to this condition in 2015/16 (average of 23.9 days lost per case).
  • In 2015/16 stress accounted for 37% of all work-related ill health cases and 45% of all working days lost due to ill health.
  • Stress is more prevalent in public service industries, such as education; health and social care; and public administration and defence.
  • The main work factors cited by respondents as causing work-related stress, depression or anxiety (LFS) were workload pressures, including tight deadlines and too much responsibility and a lack of managerial support
  • Estimated financial burden is $221 million to $187 billion

What do we do now?

Everybody who needs help, has to be empowered to ask. It’s time to change our culture and help sufferers thrive in their workplace. Tackling work-related stress can bring benefit in many areas: reduced costs – of sick pay, sickness cover, overtime, and recruitment – and fewer days lost to sickness and absenteeism.

In January 2017, Prime Minister Theresa May announced a package of measures that aim to transform mental health support in the UK at each stage of a person’s life, including in workplaces, schools, and the community. This mental health reform is an opportunity to tackle the stigma associated with mental health.

Last week, #FuturePRoof published a report exploring the mental health of public relations professionals. The report included the following recommendations for employers:

  • Make mental health and wellbeing a management issue within your management team
  • Company policies and procedures should cover sickness due to mental health. Provide clear signposting and training to all employees and managers on policies and procedures
  • Where resources do not exist within an organization, access external support. Small organizations should consider retaining specialized support

Stress in the workplace is an epidemic. However, the normalisation of speaking up about mental health is slowly shifting attitudes and workplace culture. There’s no single solution but education and empathy go a long way in helping to tackle the issue. Make sure you help your co-workers by listening, being empathetic, and making sure they know they aren’t alone.

Geoff McDonald quoted Alexander den Heijer, who said, “When a flower doesn’t bloom, you fix the environment in which it grows, not the flower.” With some understanding of the physiology of stress under our belts, it’s now up to all of us to influence the government! Everyone, do your part!

Read original post here

The Society leads learned societies’ input to TEF development

By Henry Lovett, Policy and Public Affairs Officer, The Physiological Society

The Physiological Society has worked on higher education policy for many years. The key issue in this area is the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF), designed to improve teaching quality and give students more information when selecting their course.

The TEF is being developed in iterations, with attention focused at the moment on how to split its assessment down to subject level. The Department for Education (DfE) is developing this with input from many sector representatives, including Universities UK (UUK).

The Society convened a meeting with UUK and representatives from the Royal Society of Chemistry, the Royal Society of Biology, the Academy of Medical Sciences, the Royal Academy of Engineering, the Royal Statistical Society and the Institute of Physics. This gave the opportunity for a wide range of views from the STEM sector to be aired and ideas for the future TEF to be discussed in detail.

The first phase of discussion covered the operation of the current institutional-level TEF. This is the first version of TEF to base its awards on metrics, covering the areas of teaching quality, learning environment, and student outcomes. There is general acceptance that these high level themes are appropriate, but much less satisfaction with the specific metrics chosen within them. The benchmarking process to set institutional targets is also contentious. The metrics are supplemented by a written submission, but it is acknowledged that the main element of the result is the metric scores. Exceed enough benchmarks and a gold award is given; fall below enough and you rate bronze. Given this is the case, there is a disturbing lack of trust in the National Student Survey and its reporting on student satisfaction. Similarly, the Destination of Leavers from HE (DLHE) survey only gives a snapshot six months after graduation, at which point many graduates have not yet entered their careers or made significant decisions.

The Society has long focused on the reward and recognition of teaching in HE. All participants agreed that the TEF as it stands does not touch on the status of teaching within universities, even though a good way to increase teaching quality would be to encourage and reward those staff members who focus on teaching. The trend in reality is towards increasing casualisation of teaching, including the use of zero-hours contracts and other non-permanent arrangements for teaching. A better appreciation of teaching staff by the TEF would be likely to help it achieve its original goals.

The conversation then moved on to proposals to increase the specificity of the TEF, moving to subject-level assessment. Current plans envision a blend of subject- and institution-level factors being combined to produce an overall score. Awards may potentially be given to institutions and departments separately. It is proving difficult to define the correct scale to identify a “subject”. Proposals exist for a TEF which combines certain schools and courses into units of assessment, but these may not be universally accepted. An alternative under consideration is an assessment of how much departments deviate (above or below) from the overall quality rating of the entire institution. The model used by Athena SWAN for department and institutional awards was discussed and is being evaluated.

The participants considered the meeting to be very successful, and the UUK representatives were pleased to receive a different viewpoint to that from the heads of institutions. The Society hopes to convene this group again and continue working to make the TEF as effective as possible.

If you have any comments or would like further detail, please contact policy@physoc.org.

The physiology of stress

By Jessica Suter, Undergraduate of The Open University and Events Manager for Eaton Park Science Day

Stress is a popular word in our society and is thought to be the biggest contributor to workplace sickness and depression. But what exactly is it?

Living in the human zoo, we are constantly exposed to stressors, especially those deemed unnecessary on a survival level such as consumerism and the pursuit of happiness. Stress is usually linked to just the mind – anger, upset and irrationalities – but it actually affects our entire body (HSE, 2016).

According to recent statistics, the total number of working days lost due to stress in 2015/2016 alone was 11.7 million (HSE, 2016) with a strong association found between unemployment and suicide (NHS Behind the Headlines, 2015). As well as affecting mental health, stress is also linked to chronic pain, a condition that affects just under 28 million adults in the UK (Fayaz. A, et.al., 2016).

Stress is defined as a physiological or biological response to a stressor. The stress response system is a common pathway across organisms, which is designed to temporarily assign energy currency from areas of the body considered useless in a stressful situation to other areas in the body that are beneficial for survival.

Whilst such components are considered an adaptation, when exposed to chronic stress (where the body is exposed to long periods of stress psychologically and/or physiologically) these components can cause all kinds of life-effecting issues such as high blood pressure, decreased immune function, or fertility issues.

There have been numerous studies considering how stress plays a part in debilitating conditions of the body and mind focusing on the physiological pathways of the stress response, such as the HPA, sympathetic nervous system, amygdala, and hypothalamus. What does the future hold for us humans living in a crowded and highly-pressured society?

Some experts focus on a need for pharmacologic interventions, whilst others look for longer term solutions such as psychotherapy. One interesting piece of research I have come across focuses on the idea that encouraging an understanding of stress, coping methods, and the impacts on health within individuals will advance the treatment of stress (Segerstrom. S et.al., 2012).

The Physiological Society’s annual theme ‘Making Sense of Stress’ is looking to contribute toward public engagement and education about the effects of stress, and research across the globe looking to alleviate chronic stress and its related ailments.

banners-making-sense-of-stress-event

Tune in as we go LIVE this Tuesday, 21 February at 18:00 GMT, (or in person if you’re in London) for a panel and discussion chaired by Geoff McDonald, former Global VP of Human Resources at Unilever and one of the leaders of minds@work, and featuring neuroscientist Professor Stafford Lightman and occupational psychologist Professor Gail Kinman.

References:

Fayaz, A., Croft, P., Langford, R. M., Donaldson, L. J. and Jones, G. T. (2016) ‘Prevalence of chronic pain in the UK: a systematic review and meta-analysis of population studies.’, BMJ open, British Medical Journal Publishing Group, vol. 6, no. 6, p. e010364 [Online]. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27324708 (Accessed 29 November 2016).

Health and Safety Executive (2016) ‘Statistics – Work-related stress, anxiety and depression statistics in Great Britain (GB)’, HSE [Online]. Available at: http://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/causdis/stress/ (Accessed 29 November 2016).

McLannahan, H. (2004) “Chapter 3: Stress” SK277 Book 4: Life’s Challenges,  in The Open University. (eds), Plymouth, Latimer Trend and Company Ltd, pp. 79-113

NHS Choices (2015) ‘Unemployment and job insecurity linked to increased risk of suicide – Health News – NHS Choices’, Department of Health [Online]. Available at: http://www.nhs.uk/news/2015/02February/Pages/Unemployment-linked-to-increased-risk-of-suicide.aspx (Accessed 29 November 2016).

Segerstrom, S. C. and O’Connor, D. B. (2012) ‘Stress, health and illness: Four challenges for the future’, Psychology & Health, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 128–140 [Online]. Available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08870446.2012.659516 (Accessed 29 November 2016).

In 2017, we are ‘Making Sense of Stress’ #YearOfStress

By Julia Turan, Communications Manager, The Physiological Society

‘Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom.’ -Viktor Frankl

On the third day of 2017, several hundred people gathered on a panoramic hill in Budapest to let out a collective scream. The event’s Facebook page cited how awful 2016 was, and that people had loads of pent up stress (1).

giphy

By now, everyone has shared his or her two cents about how to approach the stressful 2017 ahead. Just a few weeks ago, The Lancet reported a possible physiological mechanism for linking emotional stress to increased risk of heart disease.

Here at The Physiological Society, we are all about studying normal function or disease in living systems. Living systems can be human or animal. While we toss around the word stress, coined only around 50 years ago by Hans Selye, on the daily, there isn’t a definition that everyone agrees on.

Our stress response system is ubiquitous in the body, there are individual differences, responsiveness to stress changes over time, and the amount of influence of genes vs. environment is unclear.

This is why we are devoting all of 2017 to ‘Making Sense of Stress.’ Check here regularly for our growing list of activities across all areas of our work: events, outreach, education, policy, communications, and our journals. Contact us here to get involved.

yearofstress2017banner_colour1

(1) Science hasn’t actually shown yelling to be helpful for stress reduction, contrary to the bold claims of primal scream therapy in the 60s and 70s.