Nutrition and its role in human evolution

Our understanding of human evolution has improved rapidly over recent decades, facilitated by large‐scale cataloguing of genomic variability amongst both modern and archaic humans. It seems clear that the evolution of the ancestors of chimpanzees and hominins separated 7–9 million years ago with some migration out of Africa by the earlier hominins; Homo sapiens slowly emerged as climate change resulted in drier, less forested African conditions. The African populations expanded and evolved in many different conditions with slow mutation and selection rates in the human genome, but with much more rapid mutation occurring in mitochondrial DNA. We now have evidence stretching back 300 000 years of humans in their current form, but there are clearly four very different large African language groups that correlate with population DNA differences. Then, about 50 000–100 000 years ago a small subset of modern humans also migrated out of Africa resulting in a persistent signature of more limited genetic diversity amongst non‐African populations. Hybridization with archaic hominins occurred around this time such that all non‐African modern humans possess some Neanderthal ancestry and Melanesian populations additionally possess some Denisovan ancestry. Human populations both within and outside Africa also adapted to diverse aspects of their local environment including altitude, climate, UV exposure, diet and pathogens, in some cases leaving clear signatures of patterns of genetic variation. Notable examples include haemoglobin changes conferring resistance to malaria, other immune changes and the skin adaptations favouring the synthesis of vitamin D. As humans migrated across Eurasia, further major mitochondrial changes occurred with some interbreeding with ancient hominins and the development of alcohol intolerance. More recently, an ability to retain lactase persistence into adulthood has evolved rapidly under the environmental stimulus of pastoralism with the ability to husband lactating ruminants. Increased amylase copy numbers seem to relate to the availability of starchy foods, whereas the capacity to desaturase and elongate monounsaturated fatty acids in different societies seems to be influenced by whether there is a lack of supply of readily available dietary sources of long‐chain polyunsaturated fatty acids. The process of human evolution includes genetic drift and adaptation to local environments, in part through changes in mitochondrial and nuclear DNA. These genetic changes may underlie susceptibilities to some modern human pathologies including folate‐responsive neural tube defects, diabetes, other age‐related pathologies and mental health disorders.     

Why are they reluctant to report? A study of the barriers to reporting to child welfare services among public dental healthcare personnel

This study is a national cross‐sectional survey, conducted in November 2014, of 366 dental hygienists and dentists who had suspected maltreatment but did not report it to Norwegian Child Welfare Services (CWS). The aims of the present paper are to identify the reasons why public dental healthcare professionals are reluctant to report suspected child maltreatment to CWS and to determine whether there are differences in the identified barriers according to socio‐demographic variables. The questionnaire was based on earlier studies and was adapted to fit the Norwegian context. The most frequently chosen reason for not reporting was “unsure of own assessment” (90.4%). Thirteen items pertaining to not reporting were factorised into three factors of barriers. These factors were “insufficient knowledge of child maltreatment and reporting”, “fear of the consequences for oneself and the dental clinic”, and “fear of the consequences for the patient and their family”. A t test revealed that public dental healthcare personnel who had not received training on maltreatment and reporting to CWS during their professional education scored significantly higher on the barrier “insufficient knowledge of child maltreatment and reporting” than did dental personnel who had received such training. Furthermore, dental personnel with more years of experience (11+) scored higher on this barrier than did dental personnel with less experience. No other significant differences in barriers were observed. Public dental healthcare personnel have a mandatory obligation to report to CWS if they suspect child maltreatment. Despite this obligation, the present study reveals that several barriers to reporting exist. This study underscores the importance of strengthening knowledge among dental hygienists and dentists about when and how to report, both during education and in clinical practice.