No lateral moves allowed between health systems: an illegal conspiracy in North Carolina--or the future of medicine that UCSD is aggressively seeking in California?

Is this the future in California if UCSD wins its poaching lawsuit against Dr. Paul Aisen regarding Aisen's decision to transfer his Alzheimer's study to USC? Is it unlawful restraint of trade? Science magazine reports on what happens when health systems collude to stop their employees from moving to other institutions.

“[L]ateral moves of faculty between Duke and UNC are not permitted.”
–UNC's chief of cardiothoracic imaging

An academic 'poaching' lawsuit from a scientist who didn’t move
By Beryl Lieff Benderly
Science
September 10, 2015

In August, we reported on the lawsuit brought by the University of California, San Diego (UCSD), against the University of Southern California (USC) in Los Angeles, in an effort to stop USC’s alleged attempt to bring a multimillion-dollar Alzheimer’s disease research project along with its new recruit, neuroscientist Paul Aisen, from UCSD to USC. We noted that though some observers view universities’ efforts to bring major researchers to their campuses from elsewhere as effective recruiting, others see it as harmful poaching.

In North Carolina, meanwhile, another scientist’s effort to move from Duke University in Durham to the University of North Carolina (UNC), Chapel Hill, has also resulted in a lawsuit, but for an entirely different reason. Danielle Seaman, an assistant professor of radiology at Duke, claims that “an illegal conspiracy” among Duke, UNC, and the two universities’ health systems not to raid each other’s talent barred her from consideration for an advertised opening at UNC, according to the complaint filed with the court.

Allegedly, the institutions’ goal was to “suppress the compensation of their employees,” according to the complaint. “Without the knowledge or consent of their employees, [Duke’s] senior administrators and deans entered into express agreements [with UNC] to eliminate or reduce competition … for skilled medical labor” by not “hir[ing] or attempt[ing] to hire” from each other. This deal, the complaint argues, constitutes an unlawful restraint of trade.

When UNC advertised a position in cardiothoracic imaging, the complaint claims, Seaman wrote to the division chief to express interest in applying. As quoted in the complaint, he wrote back saying “I agree that you would be a great fit. … Unfortunately, I just received confirmation today from the Dean’s office that lateral moves of faculty between Duke and UNC are not permitted. There is reasoning for this ‘guideline’ which was agreed upon between the deans of UNC and Duke a few years back. I hope you understand.” (Emphasis is in the original.) Seaman did not understand, so she wrote back to ask about this “reasoning.” The guideline arose, the division chief allegedly replied, “in response to an attempted recruitment by Duke a couple of years ago of the entire UNC bone marrow transplant team; UNC had to generate a large retention package to keep the team intact.” (Emphasis is in the original.)

The universities have not commented on the case, according to The Chronicle of Higher Education. Still, The Chronicle quotes a former senior vice president for public affairs and government relations at Duke as saying, “[i]n my time in the administration, there was a general practice that we did not recruit aggressively at the other institution, and vice versa. … It was based on thinking both institutions were better if each institution was strong.”

Seaman is represented by a North Carolina law firm and also by Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein (no relation to this reporter), the San Francisco-based legal powerhouse that won a $415 million settlement against tech giants Google, Apple, Intel, and Adobe for colluding to keep wages down by not hiring each other’s workers. Seaman’s complaint requests a jury trial and approval of the case as a class action “on behalf of a class of similarly situated individuals,” presumably the employees of Duke and UNC. Stay tuned for developments.

Beryl Lieff Benderly writes from Washington, D.C.

No lateral moves allowed between health systems: an illegal conspiracy in North Carolina--or the future of medicine that UCSD is aggressively seeking in California?

Is this the future in California if UCSD wins its poaching lawsuit against Dr. Paul Aisen regarding Aisen's decision to transfer his Alzheimer's study to USC? Is it unlawful restraint of trade? Science magazine reports on what happens when health systems collude to stop their employees from moving to other institutions.

“[L]ateral moves of faculty between Duke and UNC are not permitted.”
–UNC's chief of cardiothoracic imaging

An academic 'poaching' lawsuit from a scientist who didn’t move
By Beryl Lieff Benderly
Science
September 10, 2015

In August, we reported on the lawsuit brought by the University of California, San Diego (UCSD), against the University of Southern California (USC) in Los Angeles, in an effort to stop USC’s alleged attempt to bring a multimillion-dollar Alzheimer’s disease research project along with its new recruit, neuroscientist Paul Aisen, from UCSD to USC. We noted that though some observers view universities’ efforts to bring major researchers to their campuses from elsewhere as effective recruiting, others see it as harmful poaching.

In North Carolina, meanwhile, another scientist’s effort to move from Duke University in Durham to the University of North Carolina (UNC), Chapel Hill, has also resulted in a lawsuit, but for an entirely different reason. Danielle Seaman, an assistant professor of radiology at Duke, claims that “an illegal conspiracy” among Duke, UNC, and the two universities’ health systems not to raid each other’s talent barred her from consideration for an advertised opening at UNC, according to the complaint filed with the court.

Allegedly, the institutions’ goal was to “suppress the compensation of their employees,” according to the complaint. “Without the knowledge or consent of their employees, [Duke’s] senior administrators and deans entered into express agreements [with UNC] to eliminate or reduce competition … for skilled medical labor” by not “hir[ing] or attempt[ing] to hire” from each other. This deal, the complaint argues, constitutes an unlawful restraint of trade.

When UNC advertised a position in cardiothoracic imaging, the complaint claims, Seaman wrote to the division chief to express interest in applying. As quoted in the complaint, he wrote back saying “I agree that you would be a great fit. … Unfortunately, I just received confirmation today from the Dean’s office that lateral moves of faculty between Duke and UNC are not permitted. There is reasoning for this ‘guideline’ which was agreed upon between the deans of UNC and Duke a few years back. I hope you understand.” (Emphasis is in the original.) Seaman did not understand, so she wrote back to ask about this “reasoning.” The guideline arose, the division chief allegedly replied, “in response to an attempted recruitment by Duke a couple of years ago of the entire UNC bone marrow transplant team; UNC had to generate a large retention package to keep the team intact.” (Emphasis is in the original.)

The universities have not commented on the case, according to The Chronicle of Higher Education. Still, The Chronicle quotes a former senior vice president for public affairs and government relations at Duke as saying, “[i]n my time in the administration, there was a general practice that we did not recruit aggressively at the other institution, and vice versa. … It was based on thinking both institutions were better if each institution was strong.”

Seaman is represented by a North Carolina law firm and also by Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein (no relation to this reporter), the San Francisco-based legal powerhouse that won a $415 million settlement against tech giants Google, Apple, Intel, and Adobe for colluding to keep wages down by not hiring each other’s workers. Seaman’s complaint requests a jury trial and approval of the case as a class action “on behalf of a class of similarly situated individuals,” presumably the employees of Duke and UNC. Stay tuned for developments.

Beryl Lieff Benderly writes from Washington, D.C.

Does Healthy Living Raise Alzheimer's Risk? A New Theory Says Yes

Does Healthy Living Raise Alzheimer's Risk? A New Theory Says Yes
Melanie Haiken, Contributor
Forbes
9/07/2013

A new study published this week seems to suggest that modern practices of good health hygiene (i.e. avoiding germs) is linked with a higher risk of Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) and dementia. Put more ironically, living in a wealthy, developed, “first-world” country and being exposed to fewer bacteria and viruses appears to raise your risk of Alzheimer’s.

The study, published in Evolution, Medicine, and Public Health, found that industrialized countries with better sanitation and water

quality had significantly higher rates of Alzheimer’s and dementia than poorer countries where germs run rampant. Led by Molly Fox, researchers from Cambridge University analyzed data (age-adjusted) from the World Health Organization (WHO) and found that some of the wealthiest – and most hygienic – countries in the world, such as France, the UK, Switzerland, and Iceland, also had much higher rates of Alzheimer’s and dementia

The question the researchers asked was whether “differences in microbial diversity” – i.e. exposure to fewer germs – could explain “patterns of age-adjusted Alzheimer’s Disease rates between countries.” Their conclusion: “Hygiene is positively associated with AD risk.”...

Teenage drinking raises risk of early dementia, study suggests

Teenage drinking raises risk of early dementia, study suggests
Swedish study identifies heavy drinking as a teenager as the most serious of nine risk factors for young onset dementia
Denis Campbell, health correspondent
The Guardian
12 August 2013

Heavy drinking as a teenager is the single biggest risk factor for developing dementia unusually early, according to new research.

A study of almost 500,000 Swedish men identified "alcohol intoxication" as a late adolescent as the most serious of nine separate risk factors for young onset dementia (YOD) – that is, dementia before reaching 65.

Researchers led by Prof Peter Nordstrom, of Sweden's Umea University, examined the records of 488,484 men conscripted into military service in the country at an average age of 18 between 1969 and 1979, 487 of whom were later diagnosed with YOD at an average age of 54.

About 800,000 people in the UK have dementia, of whom more than 17,000 developed it before they turned 65, according to the Alzheimer's Society. Two-thirds of sufferers are women and a third are men.

Other "late adolescent risk factors" identified by the researchers included stroke, use of amtopsychotic drugs, depression, father's dementia, drugs intoxication other than alcohol, low cognitive function at conscription, low height at conscription and high systolic blood pressure at conscription. Together the nine factors accounted for 68% of the 487 YOD cases found at follow-up.

Men with at least two of the nine risk factors, and who fell in the lowest third of the study participants for overall cognitive function, had a 20-fold increased risk of developing YOD, the researchers found.

"We are a long way off knowing exactly why some people develop dementia and others don't. However, what this study shows once again is that many of the things we are beginning to identify as risk factors are controllable", said Jess Smith, a research officer at the Alzheimer's Society. "Kicking excessive teenage drinking or drug habits into touch and treating conditions such as depression early could be key to reducing your risk of dementia in later life."

How to save billions on Alzheimer's care? Fully fund early childhood education

Unwisely, the sequester is hitting early childhood education. Head Start has been forced to cut back its programs. Our children will pay in the future.

Keys to preventing Alzheimer's disease
Karen Weintraub
USA TODAY
July 20, 2013

...Even in early childhood, we may be able to lay the groundwork for a healthy brain decades later.

Studies consistently find that people with more education are less likely to develop Alzheimer's. "Sometimes I think the best way to prevent Alzheimer's is fully fund early childhood education," said Arnold, a psychiatrist and neurologist...

Being bilingual delays Alzheimer's

Keep Sharp, Master More Languages, Delay Alzheimer's
Medical News Today
18 Feb 2011

A new study shows that bilingual patients did not contract Alzheimer's, the worst phase of dementia until five years later than their monolingual compadres. Mastering a second language can pump up your brain in ways that seem to delay getting Alzheimer's disease later on.

Ellen Bialystok, a psychology professor at York University in Toronto discussed this phenomenon at the AAAS conference in Washington D.C. this week. Once annually, AAAS sponsors an international conference-four days of symposia, lectures, seminars, workshops, and poster sessions that cover every area of science, technology, and education. Nearly 1,000 scientists present new and exciting multidisciplinary research and developments to nearly 8,000 attendees who will participate in the meeting and network with colleagues.

Until recently, much of the study of bilingualism has centered on babies, as scientists wondered why simply speaking to infants in two languages allows them to learn both in the time it takes most babies to learn one. Their brains seem to become more flexible, better able to multitask. As they grow up, their brains show better executive control, a system key to higher functioning as Bialystok puts it, "the most important part of your mind."

Bialystok took the time to study 450 Alzheimer's patients, all of whom showed the same degree of impairment at the time of diagnosis. Half were bilingual, and the rest monolingual.

The bilingual patients had Alzheimer's symptoms and were diagnosed between four and five years later than the patients who spoke only one language, she told the annual meeting's attendees this week. Her work supports an earlier study from other researchers that also found a protective effect.

When a person knows two languages, they are essentially turned on all the time, but the brain learns to inhibit the one you don't need, keeping your brain at a level of constant activity.

At the University of Maryland, scientists are studying how to identify adults who would be good candidates to master a new language, and then what types of training are best. Having a pretty strong executive control system, like the lifelong bilinguals have, is among the good predictive factors, said Amy Weinberg, deputy director of the university's Center for Advanced Study of Language.

Caring for someone with dementia could cause dementia
Health
USU research shows chronic stress may be the cause.
By Heather May
The Salt Lake Tribune
05/05/2010

Spouses who care for partners with dementia are six times more likely to develop the disorder too, compared to healthy elderly couples, according to a Utah study.

It's possible that the incredible stress of watching their partner deteriorate, as well as taking care of their physical and emotional needs, impairs the brain of the caring spouse, according to the study. There may also be something in the couple's shared environment -- their diet and exercise patterns, or chemical exposures -- that explains the shared disease.

Past studies have linked dementia caregiving to depression, physical and cognitive problems and death. This study, published Wednesday in the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society , is thought to be the first to look at the link with developing dementia...