Being Creative Increases Your Risk Of Schizophrenia By 90 Percent

From van Gogh and Beethoven to Darwin and Plath, the number of creative geniuses that have suffered from mental health issues has long sparked the debate – is there a tie between creativity and mental health? Well, according to a new study published in The British Journal of Psychiatry there is, as creatives are more likely to suffer from schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and depression than the rest of the population.

Previous research has often been limited due to issues like small samples sizes, however, this new study looked at the health records of the whole of Sweden – providing a sample of almost 4.5 million people. The researchers then took into account whether these people studied an artistic subject – like music or drama – at university.

Strangely enough, those with artsy degrees were 90 percent more likely to be hospitalized for schizophrenia than their less creative counterparts. The hospitalizations were most likely to happen at some point during their 30s.

What’s more, artists were 62 percent more likely to be admitted to hospital due to bipolar disorder and 39 percent more likely to go to hospital for depression. The researchers determined that it wasn’t simply the act of going to university that affected mental health, as those with law degrees did not have higher rates of these illnesses than the general population. Variables like IQ were also taken into account.

This is not the first study to find a link between mental health and creativity. For example, in 2010 brain scans revealed similarities between the thought pathways of schizophrenics and very creative people. Meanwhile, a 2015 study found that creative people have a raised risk of both schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. However, a 2012 study found that just writers are at a higher risk.

So why does this connection exist?

Well, it’s still not really clear. It could be that creative people are more likely to think deeply and be emotionally unstable, making them more vulnerable to conditions like depression. Meanwhile, bouts of productivity and high energy are linked to both creativity and bipolar disorder. Lead author James McCabe told New Scientistthat the genetics behind creativity might also influence mental health.

“Creativity often involves linking ideas or concepts in ways that other people wouldn’t think of,” he told New Scientist. “But that’s similar to how delusions work – for example, seeing a connection between the color of someone’s clothes and being part of an MI5 conspiracy.”

However, while creative people are naturally more likely to study art subjects, many creative people do not, so the new study is limited in that it used degree subject as the sole measure of creativity.

However, taking previous research into account too, there does appear to be some sort of link. Still, it’s important to remember that the rates of conditions like schizophrenia are still very low even among creative people, so if you are an artist yourself, there’s no need to worry.

[“Source-iflscience”]

Research Industry Leaders Eileen Campbell, Andrew Reid and Jennifer Reid Launch Reid Campbell Group and Announce First Two Holdings — Rival Technologies and Reach3 Insights

Image result for Research Industry Leaders Eileen Campbell, Andrew Reid and Jennifer Reid Launch Reid Campbell Group and Announce First Two Holdings -- Rival Technologies and Reach3 Insights

CHICAGO, June 19, 2018 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Eileen Campbell (former Global CEO of Millward Brown) and siblings Jennifer and Andrew Reid (Founder of Vision Critical) have partnered to create Reid Campbell Group, a new holding company that serves as a launch pad for innovation in consumer insights. The newly formed group also announces the launch of their first two companies; insight technology innovator, Rival Technologies and full-service research agency, Reach3 Insights. Reid Campbell Group, Rival Technologies and Reach3 Insights are poised to lead the next wave of market research innovation for the world’s top brands.

Using conversational, mobile-first techniques that consumers use in their everyday lives, Reid Campbell Group companies are particularly focused on integrating the opinions of young and multicultural consumers whose voices often go unheard in traditional market research.

“Research and insights are so fundamental to business success, yet the function is often saddled with a stodgy reputation because we’ve been a bit slow to evolve,” states Founding Partner & Executive Chair of Reid Campbell Group Eileen Campbell. “We need to reflect the rapidly changing communication methods consumers use today to deliver meaningful business results. We are determined to do just that.”

Reid Campbell Group’s first two companies set the tone for the changes to come. Rival Technologies, led by the Founder of Vision Critical and VC Labs, Andrew Reid, is North America’s first company to use conversational chat to gather valuable insights from our ‘Mobile First’ generation. Over time, this technology offers a more personal and consistent way to connect with customers than traditional “ask and answer” questionnaires.

“The more we can mirror human conversations in our contact with customers, the more likely it is that they will provide deep and honest insights,” comments Founding Partner of Reid Campbell Group & CEO of Rival Technologies Andrew Reid.

Reach3 Insights is led by one of North America’s top consumer market researchers, former Ipsos and Vision Critical executive Matt Kleinschmit. Kleinschmit is known for designing and implementing strategic insight platforms for some of the world’s most formidable brands. Accelerated by Rival’s modern technology, Reach3 works on behalf of brands to capture ongoing insights using conversational and other immersive experiences, intelligent analytics and game-changing, storytelling deliverables.

“At the dawn of the millennium, marketing research moved online. In the 2000’s it evolved into online communities & interactive tools. We believe that we are now entering the 3rd wave of modern marketing research, characterized by agile, organic and immersive conversational insights captured at scale through the mediums used by the digital generation,” explains Reach3 Insights Founder & CEO Matt Kleinschmit.

Both Rival Technologies and Reach3 Insights launch with an impressive list of early adopter customers, including Warner Brothers and the NFL. Rival Technologies will continue to enhance their technology and platform to meet expanding client needs, with a full slate of additional enhancements in development. Reach3 Insights will continue to scale to meet the needs of global clients who are seeking more immersive and engaging insights solutions to drive business success.

About Reid Campbell Group
A unique holding company driven to reinvent the staid consumer insights industry, Reid Campbell Group represents the partnership of global insights icons Eileen Campbell (former Global CEO of Millward Brown) and siblings Jennifer and Andrew Reid (Founder and Former President of Vision Critical). The cornerstones of Reid Campbell Group are two companies; Rival Technologies and Reach3 Insights.

Andrew Reid serves as the CEO of Rival Technologies, rethinking research with voice, video, and chat solutions optimized for the ‘Mobile First’ generation. Reach3 Insights, led by one of North America’s top consumer market researchers and former Ipsos and Vision Critical executive, Matt Kleinschmit, is an insights-based consulting agency that leverages Rival’s proprietary technology and designs intelligent research methods to deliver insights at the scale and pace of 21st-century brands. For more information visit: www.reidcampbellgroup.com, www.rivaltech.com or www.reach3insights.com

[“Source-globenewswire”]

Amazon’s health-care ambitions shouldn’t be underestimated, says industry veteran

Gary Gottlieb, executive partner with Flare Capital Partners

Gary Gottlieb is in a prime spot to see how technology companies are shaking up health care.

A trained psychiatrist who previously ran Partners Healthcare in Boston, one of the largest hospitals in the country, Gottlieb is currently CEO of Partners in Health, which focuses on taking care of poor people around the world. He’s also an executive partner at venture firm Flare Capital Partners, working in an advisory role.

He pays close attention to how tech companies are jumping into the space where he has spent his career.

“Their excitement and interest in health care is wonderful,” said Gottleib, in an interview.

Gottlieb’s enthusiasm isn’t shared by many of his peers, who are skeptical of the types of moves that Apple and Amazon are plotting in the medical space, ranging from breakthrough medical devices to mail-order pharmacies.

On a recent earnings call, Walgreens CEO Stefano Pessina summed up this position, telling analysts that Amazon has many “opportunities around the world and in other categories, which are much, much simpler than health care.” In other words, Amazon will probably do a lot of other things before diving into the complex world of health care.

[“source=CNBC“]

Everything You Wear Is Athleisure

In 1997, a retail entrepreneur in British Columbia named Chip Wilson was having back problems. So, like millions of people around the world, he went to a yoga class. What struck Wilson most in his first session wasn’t the poses; it was the pants. He noticed that his yoga instructor was wearing some slinky dance attire, the sort of second skin that makes a fit person’s butt look terrific. Wilson felt inspired to mass-produce this vision of posterior pulchritude. The next year, he started a yoga design-and-fashion business and opened his first store in Vancouver. It was called Lululemon.

As a spiritual practice, yoga has been in existence for more than 2,500 years. But in strictly financial terms, Chip Wilson’s 1997 session may have been the most consequential yoga class in world history. In the past two decades, Lululemon has sparked a global fashion revolution, sometimes called “athleisure” or “activewear,” which has injected prodigious quantities of spandex into modern dress and blurred the lines between yoga-and-spin-class attire and normal street clothes. According to one survey, the share of upper-income teenagers who say that athleisure stores like Lululemon are their favorite apparel brands has grown by a factor of six in the past decade. (Incongruously, athleisure has grown in popularity among teens at the same time that American youth sport participation has declined significantly.)

As someone who doesn’t attend yoga or spin classes, my interest in athleisure doesn’t have much to do with practicality—or style. I’m a fairly boring jeans-and-button-up kind of guy. But for years, I’ve been wondering what athleisure’s rise says about modern culture and the way groups decide to embrace one idea and discard another. Yoga’s been around for millennia. Stretchy fabrics have been around for decades. So, what made athleisure take off so suddenly?

Deirdre Clemente has an answer. A fashion historian at the University of Nevada Las Vegas, she says athleisure is the culmination of three long-term trends. First, technological improvements to synthetic fiber have made products like spandex more flexible, durable, and washable than natural materials. Second, the modern fixation on healthy appearance has made yoga pants an effective vector for “conspicuous consumption,” Thorstein Veblen’s term for products that confer status—like “extremely healthy person”— upon their owners. Finally, the blurring of yoga-studio fashion and office attire snaps into the long decline of formality in American fashion.

“One hundred years ago, you would have day clothes for the street, dinner clothes for the restaurant, theater clothes, and so many genres of dress,” Clemente said. “Those barriers have come down. Athleisure is the ultimate breaking down of barriers.”

To Clemente, the athleisure story doesn’t begin in the late 20th century, with the birth of Lululemon. It begins in the late 19th century, a sort of Cambrian Explosion moment for basic fashion when sports changed the way young people dressed—both on the field and in the classroom.

In other words, when I asked Clemente to explain the sudden rise of athleisure, my request was one word too long. There is nothing sudden about the influence of sports on the way Americans dress. In fact, it is hardly an exaggeration to say that all modern fashion is athleisure.


The late 19th century was transformative for two reasons.

In 1892, the U.S. Rubber Company began producing shoes with rubber soles, and its target consumers were athletes. The friction of rubber offered superior grip for fin de siecle sportsmen in lawn sports and on tennis courts; hence, the name tennis shoe. (The long-standing alternative sneaker allegedly refers to the fact that rubber-soled shoes don’t click and clomp on hard surfaces, which allows their wearers to sneak up on people.) Although the popularity of tennis has been declining for decades, today almost all of the best-selling shoes in America are sneakers. Like yoga pants, tennis shoes are sportswear that have transcended their sport.

Around the same time as the invention of the rubber sole, intramural sports took off at American universities, Clemente told me. That meant more young men playing tennis, golf, polo, and croquet. But lacking the means or inclination to fill their wardrobe with non-sports clothes, many of these men simply kept their athletic attire on for class. Athleisure dropped the prefix and became, simply, leisure.

Let’s look at a couple of specific examples beyond tennis shoes: sport coats, polo shirts, and shorts. For each item, the influence of athletics sticks out like a popped collar.

The first sport coats were adopted by 19th-century Europeans and Britons who enjoyed hunting or horseback riding but found such activities difficult in a typical suit jacket. Young American students borrowed the style with a few tweaks, sometimes pairing sport coats with non-matching pants to play outdoor sports like golf.

What we call a “polo shirt” was originally known as a “tennis shirt.” In the 1920s, the Frenchman René Lacoste was a Grand Slam–champion tennis player who was dissatisfied with the era’s typical athletic garb, which featured long sleeves. To make it easier to scamper around the courts of France, he designed a short-sleeved cotton shirt that could be loosened by unbuttoning part-way down the front, with a starched collar that players could turn up to protect their necks against the sun. (Most recognizably, Lacoste, who was known as “the crocodile” on the court, emblazoned the left breast of the shirt with an image of his nickname.) The shirt was a hit. Other companies, like Brooks Brothers in the United Kingdom, adopted a similar design for polo players, who sought the same breathable shirt. When Ralph Lauren launched his clothing line in the 1970s, he put an image of a polo player on the breast pocket. Thus, a shirt designed for French tennis was co-opted for British polo and gobbled up by preppy Americans, who now use the term polo shirt to describe, without a second’s thought, an everyday article of clothing that is as athletic in its origins as “yoga pants.”

Shorts were perhaps sportswear’s most popular offering, Clemente writes in Dress Casual, a history of early-20th-century American style. Shorts started as gym garb, adored by coeds and despised by their elders. In 1930, a group of newspaper editors at Dartmouth College organized a campus-wide Shorts Protest calling for men to “lounge forth to the supreme pleasure of complete leg freedom.” Readers were encouraged to “bring forth your treasured possession—be it tailored to fit or old flannels delegged.” They brought forth, alright. By mid-century, shorts on American men were nearly as ubiquitous as buzz cuts.


Sportswear has been equally revolutionary for women, who started from a far less comfortable place. Between European girdles and East Asian foot-binding rituals, women’s fashion history is strewn with grotesque attempts by male-dominated cultures to physically warp women’s bodies to meet unnatural definitions of beauty.

Through most of the 19th century, long dresses were the norm for female athletes on courts and fields. What really shook things up was the bicycle, which became a national craze in—naturally—the 1890s. It was difficult (and dangerous) for women to ride in a long skirt that could get caught in the spokes, which led to a demand for more sensical outfits for modern living.

Fashion companies gradually offered more “kinetic” outfits for young female athletes, including shorter skirts to go with button-down tops. Thus, the modern field-hockey uniform, with its gored skirts and polo shirts, became a common sight on women. More revolutionary were divided skirts, pantaloons, or even (gasp) shorts, which allowed women to safely churn their bike pedals. Still, the acceptance of feminine shorts was slow-coming. Even by the 1950s, Clemente finds that colleges such as Penn State tried to limit when and where shorts could be worn.

Sweatshirts also originated in collegiate male sports in the late 1800s and conquered the campus before becoming mainstream—all while cultural critics bemoaned their popularity among women. The first modern sweaters—as opposed to animal pelts worn for warmth and the like—were essentially sports jerseys worn by guys on the rowing or golf team to produce sweating and reduce weight (hence the word sweater.) Around campus, these young men—and, soon, young women—might wear “letterman’s sweaters” to signal their participation in a campus sport. But sweaters were simply too comfy to reserve for the golf course, and students started wearing them all over the place.

Like yoga pants a century later, the purpose of the sweater evolved. Originally, it was about demonstrating athletic participation, but it soon became more about showing appreciation for a generally active way of life. In 1939, Vogue magazine estimated that most college women owned up to 15 sweatshirts (in case you thought a dozen Lululemon leggings was overdoing it). Just about every scandalous thing students wore to the gym around the turn of the century became accepted casual wear by the middle of the century.

Not everybody appreciated the demise of formality. “Females who don track shorts and jerseys and run and jump in track meets are just wasting their time, and ours,” one Esquire columnist wrote in 1936. “They weren’t built for that sort of costume.” Nevertheless, in the past 80 years, shorts have gotten shorter and tighter, as advances in synthetic fibers have made them more elastic and more flexible.

The theme of the past century of Western fashion is this: We take clothes designed for activity, and we adapt them for inactivity. And that’s true beyond the world of sports. For decades, Levi Strauss jeans were worn mostly by men working in factories and farms; today, denim is for loungers. Wristwatches were pioneered in World War I to keep soldiers punctual; today, we embrace them as peacetime jewelry.

After I spoke with Deirdre Clemente, I opened my closet. I didn’t see a square inch of spandex in there. Instead I counted three polo shirts, four pairs of shorts, two pairs of jeans, five sweaters, four tennis shoes, and three sport coats. Athleisure isn’t the future of fashion. It’s the whole damn thing.

[“source=theatlantic.”]