The Perception of Lactose-Related Symptoms of Patients with Lactose Malabsorption.

Background: Dairy products are frequently considered responsible for post-prandial symptoms and are withdrawn from the diet, even against medical advice. We analysed the symptoms patients consider as lactose related; we also evaluated if psychological profile may affect the interpretation of the relationship between lactose and symptoms. Methods: In 268 patients undergoing lactose breath test, symptoms considered evoked by lactose intake were recorded and their severity measured. In the second part, symptom onset of 40 randomly selected patients was detected after both lactose and glucose breath test were blindly performed. Questionnaires evaluating anxiety, suggestibility and personality trait were administered. Key Results: Symptoms depending on functional gastrointestinal disorders or reflux disease were frequent in self-reported lactose-intolerant patients. In comparison with lactose malabsorption, these symptoms proved to be more frequent in patients with negative lactose breath test. The blinded administration of lactose and glucose demonstrated that a correct link between lactose intake and symptom onset was possible, only in 47.5% of the subjects, making this test inaccurate. None of the investigated psychological characteristics were different between patients with a nocebo response and patients not experiencing nocebo. Conclusions: Patients with self-reported lactose intolerance are frequently unaware about clinical presentation of this condition, and correct information is needed. The detection of symptom onset after lactose is an inaccurate test for lactose intolerance. Furthermore, the analysis of psychological characteristics of patients undergoing hydrogen breath test is not useful to select the subgroup at risk for a nocebo response. New strategies to diagnose lactose intolerance are mandatory.

Self-Reported Symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in a Nonhospitalized Population in Italy: Cross-Sectional Study of the EPICOVID19 Web-Based Survey.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the occurrence of symptoms resembling those of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in a large nonhospitalized population at the peak of the epidemic in Italy is of paramount importance; however, data are currently scarce. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to evaluate the association of self-reported symptoms with SARS-CoV-2 nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) test results in nonhospitalized individuals and to estimate the occurrence of symptoms associated with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in a larger nontested population. METHODS: EPICOVID19 is a self-administered cross-sectional voluntary web-based survey of adults throughout Italy who completed an anonymous questionnaire in the period of April 13 to 21, 2020. The associations between symptoms potentially related to SARS-CoV-2 infection and NPS results were calculated as adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% CIs by multiple logistic regression analysis controlling for age, sex, education, smoking habits, and number of comorbidities. Thereafter, for each symptom and for combinations of the symptoms, we calculated the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and areas under the curve (AUCs) in a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis to estimate the occurrence of COVID-19-like infection in the nontested population. RESULTS: A total of 171,310 people responded to the survey, of whom 102,543 (59.9%) were women; mean age 47.4 years. Out of the 4785 respondents with known NPS test results, 4392 were not hospitalized. Among the 4392 nonhospitalized respondents, those with positive NPS tests (856, 19.5%) most frequently reported myalgia (527, 61.6%), olfactory and taste disorders (507, 59.2%), cough (466, 54.4%), and fever (444, 51.9%), whereas 7.7% were asymptomatic. Multiple regression analysis showed that olfactory and taste disorders (aOR 10.3, 95% CI 8.4-12.7), fever (aOR 2.5, 95% CI 2.0-3.1), myalgia (aOR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2-1.8), and cough (aOR 1.3, 95% CI 1.0-1.6) were associated with NPS positivity. Having two to four of these symptoms increased the aOR from 7.4 (95% CI 5.6-9.7) to 35.5 (95% CI 24.6-52.2). The combination of the four symptoms showed an AUC of 0.810 (95% CI 0.795-0.825) in classifying positive NPS test results and then was applied to the nonhospitalized and nontested sample (n=165,782). We found that 7739 to 20,103 of these 165,782 respondents (4.4% to 12.1%) had experienced symptoms suggestive of COVID-19 infection. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that self-reported symptoms are reliable indicators of SARS-CoV-2 infection in a pandemic context. A nonnegligible number of symptomatic respondents (up to 12.1%) were undiagnosed and potentially contributed to the spread of the infection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04471701; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04471701.

Ever-present threats from information technology: the Cyber-Paranoia and Fear Scale.

Delusions involving technology, and specifically the internet, are increasingly common, and fear-reality statistics suggest computer-related fears are very widespread. These fears form a continuum from the widely understandable and realistic to the unrealistic, and frankly paranoid. The present study investigated the validity of this construct in a non-clinical population by constructing a novel self-report measure. The new Cyber-Paranoia and Fear Scale aims to measure the perception of information technology-related threats originating from or enabled by computers, smartphones, social networks, and digital surveillance. Psychometric properties of the new Cyber-Paranoia and Fear Scale are reported alongside an established measure of suspiciousness and paranoia in 181 participants including a sub-group of fifty information technology professionals. Exploratory factor analysis suggested the presence of two, related, dimensions that we term cyber-paranoia and cyber-fear. Both sub-scales were internally consistent and produced a normal distribution of scores. The relationships of the sub-scales with age, gender, trait paranoia, digital literacy, and digital inclusion are supportive of construct validity. The distinctiveness of 'cyber-paranoia' from general trait paranoia appears to mirror the clinical distinctiveness of 'internet' and other technology-fuelled delusions. Knowledge provision to increase technological proficiency and awareness may bring about a reduction in cyber-paranoia.

Self-reported post-exertional fatigue in Gulf War veterans: roles of autonomic testing.

To determine if objective evidence of autonomic dysfunction exists from a group of Gulf War veterans with self-reported post-exertional fatigue, we evaluated 16 Gulf War ill veterans and 12 Gulf War controls. Participants of the ill group had self- reported, unexplained chronic post-exertional fatigue and the illness symptoms had persisted for years until the current clinical study. The controls had no self-reported post-exertional fatigue either at the time of initial survey nor at the time of the current study. We intended to identify clinical autonomic disorders using autonomic and neurophysiologic testing in the clinical context. We compared the autonomic measures between the 2 groups on cardiovascular function at both baseline and head-up tilt, and sudomotor function. We identified 1 participant with orthostatic hypotension, 1 posture orthostatic tachycardia syndrome, 2 distal small fiber neuropathy, and 1 length dependent distal neuropathy affecting both large and small fiber in the ill group; whereas none of above definable diagnoses was noted in the controls. The ill group had a significantly higher baseline heart rate compared to controls. Compound autonomic scoring scale showed a significant higher score (95% CI of mean: 1.72-2.67) among ill group compared to controls (0.58-1.59). We conclude that objective autonomic testing is necessary for the evaluation of self-reported, unexplained post-exertional fatigue among some Gulf War veterans with multi-symptom illnesses. Our observation that ill veterans with self-reported post-exertional fatigue had objective autonomic measures that were worse than controls warrants validation in a larger clinical series.