Monday, June 30, 2014




The researchers say that attractiveness may be a marker of good genes
The researchers say that attractiveness may be a marker of good genes

Attractive people are less likely to get tinnitus — and asthma, diabetes, and high blood pressure, according to new research.
The more physically attractive men and women are rated, the more unlikely they are to suffer from a wide range of health problems, from high cholesterol to depression.
They also feel healthier, have less time off work and are diagnosed with fewer physical and mental health conditions during their lifetime. 
These extraordinary findings by U.S. researchers are based on a study of 15,000 men and women aged 24 to 35 who have been followed since they were ten. 
It’s the biggest study yet to find links between attractiveness and good health, and the first to home in on a number of individual diseases.
The researchers, from the University of Cincinnati and other centres, point out that, until now, most studies have been on students. 
Their new research is based on interviews with a nationally representative sample of the U.S. population. 
And, unlike earlier studies, this is based on the researchers’ ratings of the participants’ physical attractiveness done face-to-face, rather than assessments based on pictures, drawings or videos. 
The researchers, whose work is being published in the journal Evolution And Human Behaviour, say that attractiveness may be a marker of good genes, which also signal good health, as well as increasing the likelihood of having healthy offspring.
The study involved face-to-face interviews and questionnaires, as well as an analysis of health data. 
The men and women were quizzed about whether they had been diagnosed with various conditions or suffered symptoms of them.  
Attractiveness rating was based on the assessment made by each interviewer after a 90-minute session. 
The men and women were put into five categories — very unattractive, unattractive, about average, attractive or very attractive.
There were direct links between attractiveness and a number of health conditions, and the more attractive the person was rated, the lower the risk of ill-health.
Both the men and women who were rated as very physically attractive were more positive about their own health and had fewer days off work due to illness
Both the men and women who were rated as very physically attractive were more positive about their own health and had fewer days off work due to illness
For each increase in the rating of physical attractiveness for men, there was a 13 per cent reduction in the likelihood of a diagnosis for high cholesterol, a 20 per cent drop in the risk of high blood pressure, a 15 per cent reduction in the probability of being diagnosed with depression, a 23 per cent decrease in the likelihood of an ADHD diagnosis, and a 21 per cent lower likelihood of stuttering.



Women who were rated as more attractive were 21 per cent less likely to be diagnosed with high blood pressure, 22 per cent less likely to have diabetes, 12 per cent less likely to be asthmatic, 17 per cent less likely to suffer from depression, 18 per cent less likely to receive an ADHD diagnosis, 18 per cent less likely to stutter and 13 per cent less likely to have tinnitus.
Both the men and women who were rated as very physically attractive were also more positive about their own health and had fewer days off work due to illness. 
They also had a reduced number of chronic disease diagnoses, of psychological disorders and of disease diagnoses overall.
The researchers suggest their findings support the theory that attractiveness is a marker of healthy genes.
 

Meanwhile, previous research from Newcastle University in 2012 suggests that children rated as physically unattractive had poorer health by the age of 50. 
Having a partner is known to have a beneficial impact on health, especially for men. According to the research, unattractive men were 7 per cent — and unattractive women 9 per cent — less  likely to have a partner than attractive individuals. 
Unattractive men also tend to have fewer children, and unattractive men and women are 4 per cent more likely to have no one with whom to discuss their problems.
Economist Dr Nils Braakmann, who led the study, said: ‘Ratings of physical attractiveness at age 11 influence health at age 50, even when considering a large variety of childhood conditions, with unattractive people generally faring worse. 
‘These results imply that individuals who are unattractive at an early age experience large welfare losses due to the way they’re treated by others.’
Women who were rated as more attractive were 12 per cent less likely to be asthmatic
Women who were rated as more attractive were 12 per cent less likely to be asthmatic
The fact that we rate certain features as more attractive may be driven by evolution — increasing the likelihood of having offspring. 
For instance, long legs in women could be a visual clue of fitness for childbirth, with research at Gdansk University in Poland suggesting that taller women have wider pelvises, allowing easier births and larger birth-weight babies. 
But Dr Viren Swami, reader in psychology at the University of Westminster, suggests there may be other, non-evolutionary explanations for links between health and beauty.
‘People think that “what is beautiful is good”, and we call this a halo effect,’ he says. 
‘Attractive people are perceived as having all kinds of wonderful, positive qualities, and seen as being happier, more popular, more successful, and so on. 
‘We also treat them more positively than less attractive people. 
'We give them more social space [e.g., more time and understanding to achieve a task] and we are more likely to help them. 
'This being the case, it’s quite possible that the health benefits of being attractive are the result of this better treatment. 
‘For example, attractive people are more likely to be hired, less likely to be fired, and receive a higher starting wage, so it’s possible that any health benefit is the result of their better occupational outcomes. 
‘Or, conversely, less attractive people may be less likely to use health-care services because they are concerned about being judged or stigmatised, as in the case of overweight or obese individuals, which obviously has a detrimental effect on their health. 
‘So, the health benefit may be an indirect outcome of better treatment in societies that value attractiveness. 
'I’m not suggesting the evolutionary perspective is incorrect, only that it’s not the full explanation.’


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2675563/high-blood-pressure-asthma-research-says-looks-affect-risk-illness.html#ixzz36BNCw9kA 
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Sperm donations from men in their 40s are more likely to result in pregnancy, study finds

  • First major study to investigate the effect of male age on fertility conducted
  • British scientists found no difference in the rate of live babies born whether the man was in his 40s or 20s
  • Women were slightly more likely to have a baby if the sperm was donated by a middle-aged man rather than a younger donor
  • A quarter of sperm used in UK clinics comes from abroad, namely Denmark
  • Study carried out at Newcastle Fertility Centre found sperm quality rather than a man's age is key to conceiving
  • Experts said it could be down to the fact older donors are more likely to have families of their own and therefore a proven fertility track record





  • Women using donor sperm may be more likely to get pregnant if the man is aged 40 and older rather than younger, say British scientists.
    The first major study to investigate the effect of male age on fertility treatment using donor sperm found no difference in the rate of live babies born whether the man was in his 40s or 20s.
    In fact, women were slightly more likely to have a baby if the sperm was donated by a middle-aged man, probably because he’s already proved his fertility by having a family of his own.
    Current UK guidelines suggest men should not be accepted as donors over the age of 40, but experts say it may be time for a re-think to ease the growing shortage of sperm donors.
    The first major study to investigate the effect of male age on fertility at the Newcastle Fertility Centre at Life found it is sperm quality rather than a donor's age that matters when it comes to conception
    The first major study to investigate the effect of male age on fertility at the Newcastle Fertility Centre at Life found it is sperm quality rather than a donor's age that matters when it comes to conception

    At least one-quarter of donor sperm used in British fertility clinics comes from abroad, much of it from Denmark.
    The results of the study are to be reported tomorrow at the Annual Meeting of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) in Munich.
    The study looked at 40,000 treatment cycles involving donor sperm between 1991 and 2012 from the database held by the UK fertility watchdog, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA).
    The findings showed no significant differences in the rate of live babies born relative to the age of the sperm donor.
    For sperm donors aged under 20, the birth rate using IVF techniques was 28.3 per cent – rising to 30.4 per cent when the donors was aged 41-45 years.
     

    In donor insemination patients, the birth rate was 9.7 per cent with a donor aged under 20 and 12 per cent with a donor aged 41-45.
    Dr Meenakshi Choudhary, from the Newcastle Fertility Centre at Life, Newcastle upon Tyne, led the study with colleague Dr Navdeep Ghuman.
    Dr Choudhary said ‘No decline in live births was observed with the increasing age of men, that’s the take home message from a large national database.
    ‘It’s sperm quality rather than male age that matters.
    ‘Our study shows that we are good at selecting the right sperm donors with the right sperm quality – and that’s why we found no difference in live birth rate despite the increasing age of sperm donors.’
    Although the figures reveal a trend of women being slightly less likely to get pregnant using sperm from younger donors, this could be explained by the fact that they may not have proven fertility, she said.
    Older men wanting to donate sperm probably already have a family, said Dr Choudhary, a consultant in reproductive medicine and gynaecology.
    Researchers found women were slightly more likely to have a baby if the sperm was donated by a middle-aged man, probably because he¿s already proved his fertility by having a family of his own
    Researchers found women were slightly more likely to have a baby if the sperm was donated by a middle-aged man, probably because he¿s already proved his fertility by having a family of his own

    UK experts are concerned about acute shortages of donor sperm and eggs for couples desperate to start a family.
    A change in UK law in 2005 requiring donors to reveal their identities to any children born as a result when they reach 18 is blamed by some for long waiting lists.
    Demand for sperm has been fuelled by single women and women delaying motherhood, according to the HFEA.
    The HFEA’s code of practice recommends clinics don’t use sperm donors over 45, but guidelines for doctors suggest 40 as the cut-off point.
    The study included older men because the data goes back in time beyond recent guidelines.
    Dr Choudhary said the average age of sperm donors at her unit had risen from 26 years to 34 years since the lifting of anonymity.
    This meant worried women were asking whether their chances of getting pregnant would be harmed by using sperm from older donors, she said, but ‘it may be better’.

    'No decline in live births was observed with the increasing age of men, that’s the take home message from a large national database. It’s sperm quality rather than male age that matters'
    - Dr Meenakshi Choudhary, from the Newcastle Fertility Centre at Life

    It was her job to produce the data, and the HFEA as policy-maker could decide whether it should lead to a relaxation of the age limit, she added.
    However, Sarah Norcross, director of the Progress Educational Trust, said ‘Given the need for more sperm donors in the UK, perhaps it is time for the guidelines on sperm donation to be reviewed in light of this study, to consider extending the upper age limit.’
    There are doubts about using sperm from older donors because it has been linked to greater risk of miscarriage, pregnancy loss and birth defects.
    ‘Advanced paternal age has also been associated with long-term disorders in offspring. But the available evidence is limited’ said Dr Choudhary.
    Professor Allan Pacey, chair of the British Fertility Society, said the rise in such disorders is ‘very small but detectable’.
    ‘The study shows success rates from donor sperm up to the age of 45 are unaffected by age, but it does not answer the question about the health of the children’ he added.
    Prof Pacey, senior lecturer in reproduction and developmental medicine at the University of Sheffield, said ‘I think I would be worried about raising the age limit for sperm donors to 45 because of the possible effects on the health of children.’
    He said that for every 100 men who apply to be sperm donors, only about five are accepted. A quarter of all donated sperm used in clinics was imported from outside the UK.


    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2674888/Sperm-donations-men-40s-likely-result-pregnancy-study-finds.html#ixzz368zHMNGP 
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
     

    Friday, June 27, 2014

    Could the 'healthy' part of red wine be dangerous for unborn babies?

  • Resveratrol is a natural compound found in red grape skin
  • Has been hailed as a 'wonder chemical' in preventing heart disease 
  • But it may damage the pancreas of unborn babies, say U.S. researchers




  • The 'healthy' compound in red wine may damage the pancreas of an unborn child, say researchers
    The 'healthy' compound in red wine may damage the pancreas of an unborn child, say researchers
    The 'healthy' ingredient of red wine may damage unborn babies, researchers have warned.
    Resveratrol - a natural compound found in red grape skin - has been hailed as a 'wonder chemical' which does everything from reduce heart disease, help tackle obesity, improve memory and even prevent tooth cavities.
    But new research suggests it may damage the pancreas of unborn babies.
    The study, published in the journal FASEB, showed that resveratrol improved blood flow through the placenta of macaque monkeys and protected against harmful aspects of obesity - but injured the foetal pancreas.
    The authors believe the study has direct relevance to human health because of the widespread belief that red wine has health benefits and the fact it is readily availble over the counter as a supplement.
    Dr Kevin Grove, a diabetes, obesity and metabolism researcher at the University of Portland, Oregon, said: 'The important message in this study is that women should be very careful about what they consume while pregnant, and they should not take supplements, like resveratrol, without consulting with their doctors.
    'What might be good for the mother may not be good for the baby.'
    Dr Grove and his colleagues gave daily doses of resveratrol supplements to obese female macaque monkeys, fed a typical Western diet every day throughout their pregnancy.
    A second group of obese monkeys were not given the supplement and both sets were compared to lean monkeys fed a healthy low fat diet. 
    The animals were closely monitored for health complications and blood flow through the placenta was determined by ultrasound. 
    The researchers found definitive evidence of pancreatic abnormalities.
     

    Dr Gerald Weissmann, Editor-in-Chief of The FASEB Journal, said: 'We've known for a long time that resveratrol is pharmacologically active, and we're just now really beginning to understand the pros and cons of consuming high concentrations of this substance.
    'As we begin to establish a safety profile for resveratrol and other dietary supplements, findings like this should come as no surprise. 
    'There are always negative side effects when you eat, drink, take or do too much of anything.'
    Resveratrol is a natural compound found in red grape skin. It has been hailed as a 'wonder chemical' - but may be harmful to a foetus
    Resveratrol is a natural compound found in red grape skin. It has been hailed as a 'wonder chemical' - but may be harmful to a foetus

    Previous research has found that a glass of wine in the evening boosts a woman's chances of becoming pregnant quickly.
    Those who drink a moderate amount of red or white wine stand a better chance of conceiving within two months than women who prefer beer and spirits, or do not drink at all.
    Of nearly 30,000 pregnant women, researchers found half conceived in the first two months of trying, while 15 per cent had to wait at least a year.
    But those who regularly drank wine were almost a third less likely to wait more than a year. They stood 23 per cent less chance of waiting longer than two months before conceiving than teetotallers, or beer or spirit drinkers.
    Mette Juhl, of the Danish Epidemiology Science Centre, who led the research, said: 'It shows a link between fertility and wine drinking.
    'We don't know exactly why wine drinkers become pregnant quicker. It could be something in the wine, or, for example, that wine drinkers have healthier diets,' she added.


    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2672108/Could-healthy-red-wine-dangerous-unborn-babies.html#ixzz35r9VfgfZ 
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
     

    Confessions of an intimate terrorist: It's the buzzword for bullying husbands - but now researchers say WOMEN are the worst offenders. Here, one scary wife admits all

    As far as moments in my marriage go, it wasn’t one of the proudest. In fact, I still feel a flush of shame at the memory of throwing my plate of pasta at my husband Keith’s head — the arc of steaming sauce hurtling towards him as he leapt, just in time, out of the way.
    And I didn’t stop there. As he stood, stunned, a sorrowful strip of tagliatelle clinging to his shoulder, I then put the verbal boot in, just for good measure. ‘You’re a complete failure,’ I spat. ‘Just remind me again: what is the point of you?’
    I know. I’m a horrible wife. I wish I could pretend this was an isolated incident, but I’d be lying. 
    Scroll down for video
    Held hostage: The author admits being an intimate terrorist - how many other spouses can say the same?
    Held hostage: The author admits being an intimate terrorist - how many other spouses can say the same?

    There have been far too many occasions in my 15 years of marriage where something ugly and furious has risen in me — a wrath I can’t explain — and I have lobbed emotional hand grenades at my poor, long-suffering husband.
    It’s not even as if he deserves to be at the receiving end of such bile. He has never thrown crockery at me or raised a hand in anger, despite some serious provocation.
    He isn’t insulting, degrading or controlling. And yet I have been all of the above towards him.
     

    This lovely man — who stroked my hair as our four babies were born, who brings me coffee every morning without fail — is, I’m ashamed to say, hostage to my unforgivable behaviour.
    There’s even a term for it: intimate terrorism. Coined in the Nineties by American sociologist Michael P. Johnson to define an extreme form of controlling relationship, the phrase gained notoriety when TV cook Nigella Lawson used it to describe how her former husband, Charles Saatchi, sometimes treated her.
    Marriage: Shona Sibary and her husband Keith
    Marriage: Shona Sibary and her husband Keith

    Until now, experts have largely agreed it is men who are almost always responsible for these acts of threat, intimidation and violence in a relationship. But new research seems to have turned this accepted view on its head.
    Recent work by psychologists at the University of Cumbria has concluded that women are ‘significantly’ more likely to be verbally and physically aggressive to men than the other way around.
    However, to know I am not alone in treating my husband this way does not make me feel any better.
    I often wonder why marriage has not only brought out the very worst in me, but also turned me into an occasional monster. Before walking down the aisle, I truly believed the platitude about love ‘completing’ you.
    Naively, I assumed that becoming a wife would magically turn me into a better person.
    But it hasn’t. On the contrary, I often hate how I’ve become around Keith. Just the other day, we were having yet another argument about who does what around the house — the perpetual marital dispute.
    So far, so normal. But I took it one step further and told him that he is the only husband I know who can’t successfully juggle a career with family life. This was a lie designed to hit him where it hurts most.
    Worst still, it was blatant intimidation. One of my regular weapons of choice is to try to somehow diminish my husband’s efforts by comparing them to those of other men he knows and respects.
    On this occasion, Keith quite rightly pointed out that I was bullying him and went to leave the room. But I wasn’t finished. ‘You’re a grown man,’ I screamed at his retreating back. ‘Man up and get over it.’
    I haven’t always been like this. In fact, I always swore I would never become the kind of controlling harridan who forces their cowering husband to seek solace in a shed at the bottom of the garden.
    Keith doesn’t have a shed, but he does retreat, increasingly, to the golf course. Who can blame him? Well, me, actually. I often use his absence at the weekends to manipulate him.
    Yes, you can escape to play 18 holes. Just be damn sure that the next time we’re having a row I’ll be slinging it right back in your face.
    You might wonder what drives me to behave in such a way or if there is some hidden reason for the inexcusable hurt I cause.
    Happy family: Author Shona Sibary at home with her children Florence, Annie, Monty and Dolly
    Happy family: Author Shona Sibary at home with her children Florence, Annie, Monty and Dolly

    I have a theory, but it won’t be a popular one. The reality is that the roles in my relationship — like so many modern marriages — are not clearly defined. I earn money and I also match up the odd socks.
    I clear out gutters, but I read bedtime stories, too. In fact, so busy is my husband in his job as a sales consultant that I make most of the major decisions at home.

    SO ARE YOU AN INTIMATE TERRORIST?

    By JOHN ARCHER, professor of psychology at the University of Central Lancashire
    This week, I co-authored a report that found women were more likely to be verbally and physically aggressive to men than the other way around. 
    This is known by some as intimate terrorism, though I prefer to use the term ‘intimate partner violence’.
    But how do you know if you are guilty of intimate terrorism? Whether it’s plate throwing and tantrums or more subtle criticism and controlling behaviour, here are some of the signs:
    YOU SHOUT
    Shouting is the first step towards intimate partner violence. It can have a detrimental effect on a relationship relatively quickly. 
    Physical aggression hardly ever occurs without a preceding verbal argument — one partner says something hurtful or critical and the other has a go back at them. So watch out for shouting.
    YOU GET PHYSICAL
    Aggression towards a partner might be low level to start with, but progress to slapping and then punching or even kicking. My research shows many women are guilty of lower-level aggression. Many men won’t hit a woman, even in self-defence. But those who do, including the so-called intimate terrorists, are more likely to cause injuries that require medical attention.
    YOU ‘LOSE IT’  WITH STRANGERS
    This is one of the main signs of intimate terrorism. Those who are aggressive to their partners are usually violent outside the relationship as well. Perhaps you suffer road rage,  get prickly with people in queues or lose your temper with waiters. 
    YOU TRY TO CONTROL YOUR PARTNER
    The intimate terrorist gets jealous very easily. So perhaps you always want to know where your partner is going. If the suspicions escalate you may start going through a partner’s pockets, checking their texts, reading their emails and monitoring their Facebook account. You may even try to control when they see family and friends. Financial control is also a habit of the intimate terrorist.
    YOU TAKE IT OUT ON THE DOG
    The intimate terrorist is guilty of all sorts of vindictive behaviour. This can include hurting the family pet, especially if it is dear to your partner. It can also involve trying to make children part of an argument in the hope the other parent comes off badly.
    YOU’RE GETTING WORSE
    The survey used in my research included questions on threatening to use a weapon on a partner. Worryingly, many men and women admitted to this.Plate throwing may occur more often than we would care to admit, but repeated and escalating physical aggression is characteristic of the intimate terrorist.
    Relationship experts agree that the blurring of roles within marriage is one of the reasons behind the ever rising divorce rates. As women feel less secure and safe, they seek control in other areas.
    Women have always been verbally more controlling than men because they lack not just physical power but earning power, too.
    We’ve had to learn, from an early age, that words are our best weapon. We can use language to manipulate and be cruel. It’s the one thing we have over men.
    In my defence, I have only once resorted to direct physical violence when, in a moment of utter fury, I kicked Keith hard in bed because he had the temerity to fall asleep during one of my epic rants.
    I have slammed doors a whisker from his nose on many occasions, but he has never retaliated. Not once.
    Were he ever to lash out, he would face widespread condemnation. Yet, as a member of the so-called ‘weaker’ sex, I can continue my threatening and aggressive behaviour unchecked.
    It will probably come as no surprise to anyone that on the one occasion, before we married, that Keith was unfaithful to me, he chose a complete drip of a girl called Lucy.
    They met at Singapore airport — he was on his way to Sydney for a work trip — and the airline managed to lose all of Lucy’s luggage. She wept at the baggage reclaim, a vulnerable damsel in distress, and he couldn’t resist leaping, knight in shining business suit, to her aid — and into her hotel bed.
    Later, when he tried to explain why he had slept with her, the only explanation he could come up with was that ‘she was vulnerable’.
    I should have picked up on that then because I know my marriage would be a lot happier if I was that kind of soft woman and made him feel more in control, more of a man.
    I wish I could, in the same way, make him feel like such a man. But the truth is that, over time, he has become a mouse in our marriage and I know I’m entirely to blame.
    It’s not that I’m a nagging wife or, God forbid, a needy one. Perhaps if I wept and pouted a little more my husband might not feel so diminished or, as he often tells me, intimidated by my words and actions.
    Just the other day he accused me, yet again, of bullying because I demanded, a bit more vocally this time (it was the third round of asking), for him to please, ‘before I draw my bloody pension’, fix the light above the oven.
    Perhaps it’s my tone. Or the fact I don’t bat my eyelids. Probably there are many wives out there who are rolling their eyes and silently sympathising with me. After all, not all of us can perfect the feminine wiles of Scarlett O’Hara to get what we want from our man.
    But I know I always take things a step too far. It’s not that I don’t pander to Keith, but I am also, on occasions, scathing and critical.
    He talks really, really slowly — it’s just his way — and I have been known to gesture a ‘hurry up’ motion with my hands to get him to the end of the sentence.
    Several times I have even left the room while he is mid-sentence for fear of flying into a frustrated rage if I stand there a moment longer.
    There’s no denying I’m the ‘baddie’ in our marriage, brandishing my emotional strength and verbal articulacy like a Kalashnikov. I’m the bully and Keith’s the victim. Our roles are so clearly defined that I can’t put down my weapon and he can’t stop feeling emasculated. It’s become our ‘normal’, even though — I know that people will find this difficult to believe — we love each other very much.
    Perhaps Katharine Hepburn had it right when she famously said: ‘Sometimes I wonder if men and women really suit each other. Perhaps they should live next door and just visit now and then.’

    HOW TO CONTROL YOUR INNER HARRIDAN

    Psychologist and psychotherapist CORINNE SWEET says: INTIMATE terrorism involves one partner dominating and the other being submissive. If you are the dominant aggressor, you won’t necessarily even know. 
    Your behaviour will seem normal to you. Perhaps you blame the other person for your mood because you feel that  they are the one being argumentative. However, the controlling and aggressive behaviour typical of intimate  terrorism may be a sign that you are incredibly insecure.
    There are various ways to take control of this negative pattern. The crucial thing is to remove yourself quickly from a potential confrontation. People get their antlers locked in these situations, so you just have to say ‘I need a break’ or ‘Time out’.
    If you’re feeling rage boiling up, I suggest doing something physical. Go for a walk, a run or a swim. I rush out and prune the hedge or mow the lawn. You can get a cushion or pillow and pummel it — you need to put the anger into something that can’t be hurt. Get the children’s cricket bats or tennis rackets and when everyone’s out of the way, just whack a big cushion and let it out. 
    Even vacuuming or washing the windows should work. Do something that’s practical and physical — channel the energy that way. Or put a record on and just do some really mad dancing.
    Seeking professional help is a must in the most serious cases. Leaving things as they are could spell disaster as both of you end up trapped in a toxic relationship.


    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2671590/Confessions-intimate-terrorist-Its-buzzword-bullying-husbands-researchers-say-WOMEN-worst-offenders-Here-one-scary-wife-admits-all.html#ixzz35r95Am1c 
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook