May 14, 2016

No Image

Mrs. Obama Saves The Cardigan: 'The Obama Effect' In Fashion

First Lady Michelle Obama wears her signature cardigan while dancing with performers from the television show So You Can Dance during the annual White House Easter Egg Roll on April 6, 2015.

First Lady Michelle Obama wears her signature cardigan while dancing with performers from the television show So You Can Dance during the annual White House Easter Egg Roll on April 6, 2015. Mark Wilson/Getty Images hide caption

toggle caption Mark Wilson/Getty Images

Ah, the cardigan: your granny’s cozy go-to used to be available year-round, but in limited quantities and colors. It was considered the sartorial equivalent of flossing: necessary, but not glamorous.

“The cardigan used to be something to keep you warm in the work place,” explains Teri Agins, who covered the fashion industry for the Wall Street Journal for years. “It was not really an accessory you left on—unless you wore it as part of a twin set.”

That look, sweater upon sweater, was considered too prim for a lot of young women. It was their mother’s look.

Enter Michelle Obama, and the game changed.

  • President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama walk along the Colonnade of the White House on Sept. 21, 2010. Michelle's fashion choices have influenced designers' profits.
    Hide caption

    President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama walk along the Colonnade of the White House on Sept. 21, 2010. Michelle’s fashion choices have influenced designers’ profits.
    Pete Souza/White House
  • Michelle poses with the co-hosts of The View on June 18, 2008. Her dress from White House/Black Market sold out completely after her appearance on the show.
    Hide caption

    Michelle poses with the co-hosts of The View on June 18, 2008. Her dress from White House/Black Market sold out completely after her appearance on the show.
    Steve Fenn/ABC via Getty Images
  • The Obamas hug after on day four of the Democratic National Convention in Denver on Aug. 28, 2008.
    Hide caption

    The Obamas hug after on day four of the Democratic National Convention in Denver on Aug. 28, 2008.
    Mark Wilson/Getty Images
  • Michelle poses with Sarah Brown, the wife of British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, at 10 Downing Street, in London, on April 1, 2009. Her sweater sold out later that day.
    Hide caption

    Michelle poses with Sarah Brown, the wife of British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, at 10 Downing Street, in London, on April 1, 2009. Her sweater sold out later that day.
    Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images
  • The First Lady and fashion designer Jason Wu stand next to the gown she wore to the inaugural balls at the Smithsonian Museum of American History on March 9, 2010 in Washington, D.C. Mrs. Obama continues a long tradition of first ladies who have donated their inaugural gown to be on display at the Smithsonian.
    Hide caption

    The First Lady and fashion designer Jason Wu stand next to the gown she wore to the inaugural balls at the Smithsonian Museum of American History on March 9, 2010 in Washington, D.C. Mrs. Obama continues a long tradition of first ladies who have donated their inaugural gown to be on display at the Smithsonian.
    Mark Wilson/Getty Images
  • Michelle Obama takes the stage during the Democratic National Convention on Sept. 4, 2012 in Charlotte, N.C.
    Hide caption

    Michelle Obama takes the stage during the Democratic National Convention on Sept. 4, 2012 in Charlotte, N.C.
    Win McNamee/Getty Images

“She wore cardigans with her sleeveless dresses, wore a lot of print dresses with solid cardigans,” Agins says. She even sometimes belted her sweaters to show off her trim waistline.

And she didn’t just wear the sweaters behind closed doors at 1600 Pennsylvania. For a March 2009 Vogue interview about her new job, she wore a papaya cashmere cardigan with a soft ruffled blouse. When the Obamas made their first official trip to England, she donned a jeweled cream silk cardigan over a pale green pencil skirt when she visited 10 Downing Street. The London-based international press noticed. IDTV described the effect this way: “Her upbeat ensemble stood out alongside the British Prime Minister’s wife’s navy outfit.”

That sweater, from mid-market retailer J. Crew, sold out within hours the same day photos of Mrs. O were released. The total cost of the sweater and skirt (also J. Crew) was $400.

Kim Kardashian’s every outfit may be chronicled by photographers, too, but you don’t see sales of her cut-down-to-there dresses or super-shredded jeans selling out after those photos are published. Kardashian is a celebrity, but she does not move markets in the same way. Most celebrities don’t.

Michelle Obama does, and it’s often her more casual clothes that cause bottom lines and stocks to soar. There are even numbers that prove it: David Yermack, a professor of finance at NYU’s Stern School of Business actually tracked Mrs. O’s looks for about a year in a study that was published in the Harvard Business Review. How This First Lady Moves Markets looked at 189 outfits Mrs. O wore to public events from November 2008 through December 2009 and eyeballed 30 publicly traded stocks from the businesses whose brands the first lady wore. Yermack says the findings surprised even him:

“It was truly remarkable how much more effect Mrs. Obama had on the commercial fashion industry that almost any other celebrity you could find in any other commercial setting,” Yermack says. And it wasn’t just a freak blip on the graph: “This would be a very permanent thing,” Yermack emphasized. “The stocks would not go down the next day. So to put a number on it for just a generic company at a routine event, it was worth about $38 million to have Mrs. Obama wear your clothes.”

Hel-lo.

The brands tracked in the Yermack study yielded $2.7 billion in the cumulative appreciation of stock prices. While J. Crew had some of the biggest gains, clothes from Target, The Gap and Liz Claiborne also did well when Mrs. Obama wore them. As did high-end clothes from companies like LVMH—which owns Louis Vuitton and Givenchy, among others— and Saks Fifth Ave.

Markets can go up or down, professional fashion observers can praise or pan her, but Mrs. Obama herself has always downplayed her fashion savvy. She told ABC’s Robin Roberts in 2008 she felt there was some pressure to represent, since her clothes (like many first ladies’) were so closely scrutinized. “It’s hard,” she admitted to Roberts. “I’m kind of a tomboy-jock at heart—but I like to look nice.”

She has been widely praised for using clothes to reflect her personality and the occasion, but she hasn’t been perfect. Some people thought the red-and black Narcisco Rodriguez dress she wore in election night in Chicago was a risk that didn’t work. And there was a slight misstep on vacation the first year, when the Obamas visited a national park during a heat wave and the first lady exited Air Force One in shorts. (Sensible, but an apparent protocol no-no.) And some people, including the late Oscar de la Renta, thought a sweater — even, apparently, a very expensive one by Azzedine Alaia — was a little too casual to wear for drinks with Queen Elizabeth. He told Women’s Wear Daily, “You don’t … go to Buckingham Palace in a sweater.” He was also critical of her decision to wear an Alexander McQueen gown to a state dinner in 2011. (De la Renta later softened his stance on Michelle Obama’s choices, saying, “she’s a great example to American women today.”)

But when FLOTUS got it right, she really got it right: the full-skirted dresses in bright prints she’s worn since day one. The simple sheaths in jewel tones. The sleeveless dresses and blouses. The flats. Those looks translated into sales.

And the cardigan:

“The sweater business traditionally would not be doing well in a time like this,” says Marshall Cohen, who analyzes retail fashion for the market research firm NPD. “However, there are certain styles within the category that are doing well.”

And it’s probably not coincidental that Michelle Obama has glamorized this once-mundane staple. Her way of dressing has resonated with American women, says Robin Givhan, the Pulitzer Prize-winning fashion critic for the Washington Post.

“One of the really vital things that Michelle Obama has done, is she’s wearing real fashion,” says Givhan, who covered the first lady for her first year in the White House. Mrs. Obama’s decision to wear consciously un-corporate looks, Givhan says, “was her own use of fashion as a way of defining who she was going to be in the White House.”

Mrs. Obama was going to continue being what she had been—a working wife and mother, wearing what she liked, what was comfortable and what worked for her. In doing that, Givhan says, the first lady was not so much initiating change as reflecting how women around the country already had begun to change their own look—dresses instead of suits, sweaters instead of jackets, bare legs instead of pantyhose. Those choices struck a plangent note.

“When Michelle Obama came along and made all these these things a matter of course,” Givhan says, “I think it validated a lot of things they were doing, and also validated things that they wanted to do but often felt they weren’t allowed to.”

Unlike style, fashion used to be restricted to a fairly small group: the young, the thin, the wealthy … and the white. Michelle Obama broadened the serious fashionista membership, says Teri Agins. And not just in dress size and economic status.

Besides Oprah, “we haven’t seen many middle-aged, brown-skinned women who have been celebrated for their beauty and style.”

And for decades, we haven’t seen women of any race or age who have been able to make cash registers ring simply by stepping out the front door.

Safe to say the fashion industry is going to miss this Obama Effect.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

The Week In Sports: Olympic Athletes And Doping

NPR’s Scott Simon talks with NPR’s Tom Goldman about doping among Olympic athletes. They also remember a young athlete who died this week.

Transcript

SCOTT SIMON, HOST:

And it’s time now for sports but no band this weekend. We’re going to pass over the NBA playoffs and baseball to talk about a couple of urgent issues and to mark a young life lost too soon. NPR sports correspondent Tom Goldman joins us. Tom, thanks for being with us.

TOM GOLDMAN, BYLINE: Hi, Scott, how are you?

SIMON: Fine, thanks. Let’s – let’s begin with doping. Reports this weekend of widespread doping by Russian athletes at the Olympics a couple of years ago in Sochi. What do we know?

GOLDMAN: We know that doping is the gift that keeps giving (laughter). We know that Russian athletes and officials are angrily denying these allegations that were laid out in a New York Times article this week. The Russian doctor, now living in the U.S. who ran the Olympic lab in Sochi, he detailed elaborate doping schemes, including mixing banned drugs with alcohol to help athletes absorb steriods faster. The men got whiskey; the women, vermouth. Urine sample bottles are supposed to be tamperproof, but allegedly they were opened. And urine with drugs was replaced with urine without. Allegedly dozens of athletes were involved, including at least 15 Olympic medal winners.

SIMON: You know – and what do you say to people who say it’s the Russian – it’s the Russian Olympic team? Of course they’re doping. This is a long tradition.

GOLDMAN: Yeah. It is a long tradition, a long history of sport in doping and even recent history. The Russian track and field athletes that are currently banned from international competition because of alleged state-sponsored doping – we’re going to find out soon whether that ban will extend to the Rio Olympics. And certainly the Sochi story doesn’t help their case.

SIMON: What about the Kenyan – the team of Kenyan runners? ‘Cause this was – this was a team – has been team with a lot of charisma and international appeal.

GOLDMAN: Yeah. Kenya’s been a dominant power in distance running for so many years but also it’s estimated about 40 Kenyan athletes have failed drug tests in the last five years. This week, the World Anti-Doping Agency declared Kenya is out of compliance with its anti-doping efforts. Still, yesterday, track and field’s international governing body announced it will not ban Kenya from the Rio Olympics. The IOC has a final say on Kenya’s participation.

SIMON: And, Tom, let me ask you about a young athlete, Donovan Hill, who died in Los Angeles this week at the age of 18 – an important story.

GOLDMAN: Yeah. A young man from southern California, paralyzed from the neck down playing football when he was 13, died this week after he went in for what was supposed to be minor surgery related to his condition. His story was important, Scott, because after his injury, caused by a headfirst tackle, he and his mom sued the youth football organization, Pop Warner, and Donovan’s coaches because the coaches allegedly didn’t teach proper tackling.

And when Donovan and his teammates said they were worried about tackling leading with the head, which is prohibited at all levels of football, the coaches allegedly told the players to stop complaining. The lawsuit was recently settled. Terms weren’t disclosed, but apparently an award was in the millions of dollars. And in fact, Donovan and his mom were going to start getting money just this week, the week he died. And they needed it. They didn’t have an accessible apartment, even an accessible bathroom. His mom would have to carry him.

SIMON: Tom, do you see for parents of youngsters who want to join a team or play a sport a lesson here that we ought to abstract?

GOLDMAN: I think so. Not all coaches, youth coaches, are certified or trained properly. Donovan’s coaches admitted they weren’t. Pop Warner offers training for coaches. But according to ESPN’s “Outside The Lines,” which ran a number of stories about Donovan, the national Pop Warner offices didn’t check whether or not coaches complete any training. Part of this young man’s legacy is for parents and players. Make sure an organization or a team or coaches who promise safety actually deliver on that promise.

SIMON: NPR sports correspondent Tom Goldman, thanks so much.

GOLDMAN: You’re welcome, Scott.

Copyright © 2016 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc., an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)


No Image

Reviving Memory With An Electrical Current

DBS for Alzheimers

Credit: Lily Padula for NPR

Last year, in an operating room at the University of Toronto, a 63-year-old women with Alzheimer’s disease experienced something she hadn’t for 55 years: a memory of her 8-year-old self playing with her siblings on their family farm in Scotland.

The woman is a patient of Dr. Andres Lozano, a neurosurgeon who is among a growing number of researchers studying the potential of deep brain stimulation to treat Alzheimer’s and other forms of dementia. If the approach pans out, it could provide options for patients with fading cognition and retrieve vanished memories.

Right now, deep brain stimulation is used primarily to treat Parkinson’s disease and tremor, for which it’s approved by the Food and Drug Administration. DBS involves delivering electrical impulses to specific areas of the brain through implanted electrodes. The technique is also approved for obsessive-compulsive disorder and is being looked at for a number of other brain disorders, including depression, chronic pain and, as in Lozano’s work, dementia.

In 2008, Lozano’s group published a study in which an obese patient was treated with deep brain stimulation of the hypothalamus. Though no bigger than a pea, the hypothalamus is a crucial bit of brain involved in appetite regulation and other bodily essentials such as temperature control, sleep and circadian rhythms. It seemed like a reasonable target in trying to suppress excessive hunger. To the researcher’s surprise, following stimulation the patient reported a sensation of deja vu. He also perceived feeling 20 years younger and recalled a memory of being in a park with friends, including an old girlfriend. With increasing voltages, his memories became more vivid, including remembering their clothes.

Using a 3-dimensional brain mapping technique called standardized low-resolution brain electromagnetic tomography, or sLORETA, Lozano’s group uncovered an explanation for the unexpected findings. They found that stimulating the hypothalamus was in turn driving increased brain activity in the hippocampus, a key cog in the brain’s memory circuitry. As Alzheimer’s progresses, not only does the hypothalamus atrophy, but electrical communication between neurons in the region also gradually becomes impaired.

That our memories — so entwined with our personalities and senses of self — might be so vulnerable to a brown out is, existentially speaking, rather alarming. There’s something palpably dehumanizing about reducing our past selves to the exchange of electricity between neurons, and also about retrieving memories by hot-wiring the brain.

Yet the prospect of the latter is undeniably intriguing. Given that Alzheimer’s affects 1 in 9 people over the age of 65 and that current therapies are in many patients dismally ineffective, Lozano felt all but obligated to dig further. His group launched a test in six patients and published the results in the Annals of Neurology in 2010.

The study included patients with mild and severe disease who received stimulation in the fornix continuously for 1 year. “The fornix is like the highway leading into the hippocampus,” explains Lozano. “It’s easier to stimulate than the hippocampus itself and crucial to memory function.” As expected those with more severe disease continued to mentally deteriorate, however it appeared that in those with mild disease, cognitive decline slowed with stimulation.

Next, Lozano launched a randomized trial involving 42 patients from the US and Canada, all of whom had electrodes implanted in the fornix on both sides of the brain. In half the patients the stimulation was turned on right away. In the other half the stimulation wasn’t turned on for a year, though they didn’t know it.

Preliminary results, published in December 2015 in the Journal of Neurosurgery, were mixed but encouraging.

Given that so few people have had electrical stimulation applied to memory circuits, perhaps the most significant finding was that both the surgery itself and DBS of the fornix appear safe. No serious long-term neurological side effects were seen in either patient group, supporting future research in the field.

In terms of efficacy, however, after one year there were no significant differences in cognition between the groups, as measured by two scales commonly used to measure Alzheimer’s disease symptoms, the ADAS-Cog and CDR-SB. Alzheimer’s tends to progress slowly and reversing or slowing the neurodegeneration associated with condition may take time to become noticeable. Lozano’s final results won’t be reported until four years out.

More intriguing for now were comparisons of glucose utilization. Glucose is our brains’ primary fuel. The degree to which glucose is burned is a commonly used measure of brain activity. Patients with Alzheimer’s typically have reduced glucose activity in their brains, as well as, again, shrinking memory circuits. The older patients in Lozano’s study who had stimulation turned on exhibited markedly increased glucose use in the brain’s memory regions. Not only that, the hippocampus of some study patients who received DBS actually increased in size.

Reversing withering hippocampi by encouraging the growth of new neurons is seen as a holy grail in Alzheimer’s research, and Lozano’s finding is supported by a recent animal study demonstrating that DBS in rats causes the release of growth factors that induce neuronal growth in the hippocampus.

Lozano acknowledges that retrieving childhood memories, which he says has occurred in about one-third of his patents — requires lofty voltages that he would be uncomfortable sending patients home on. Yet he’s encouraged by the early findings that suggest the procedure is safe. “We also know that in patients who receive stimulation there is an increase in glucose utilization in memory areas of the brain,” he says, a finding that could mean there’s a way to overcome some of the damage from Alzheimer’s.

Evidence supporting DBS in dementia is emerging from other research groups as well. A 2012 study published in the New England Journal of Medicine reported that in seven patients receiving DBS to a brain region called the entorhinal cortex, spatial memory improved – meaning they could more easily remember the locations of newly learned landmarks. The entorhinal cortex works in concert with the hippocampus to solidify memories.

A group at the University of Cologne in Germany is instead focusing on delivering DBS to a part of the brain called the nucleus basalis of Meynert, another region in which impaired neuron function is thought to contribute to Alzheimer’s. Last year they published a study in Molecular Psychiatry in which four of six patients either remained cognitively stable or improved in response to DBS, as measured by the ADAS-cog. Like in Lozano’s study no serious side effects were seen.

Despite the mounting evidence for DBS, not everyone is convinced.

Referring to Lozano’s second clinical study, Dr. Nader Pouratian, a neurosurgeon and DBS researcher at UCLA, comments, “The recent deep brain stimulation trial for Alzheimer’s disease clearly demonstrates the safety of this approach for trying to treat the progression of disease. Unfortunately, [the findings] suggest that the therapy may not be as robust as initially proposed.”

However he acknowledges Lozano’s results suggest that DBS to the fornix might be promising for a subgroup of patients, those being older people with less severe disease.

“The most promising areas are likely the fornix or the entorhinal area,” he says. “But I believe further studies are necessary to better elucidate the efficacy of this treatment before proceeding to a larger scale randomized trial.”

In a 2008 episode of the medical television drama House, the show’s main character Dr. Gregory House survives a bus crash that leaves his memory murky. In an attempt to remember the medical history of a fellow collision victim – and inspired by Lozano’s initial paper — House voluntarily undergoes deep brain stimulation. Following the procedure the grouchy TV doctor’s memory returns. As is customary on the show, he cracks the case.

DBS for treatment of Alzheimer’s and other dementias is a field in its infancy. Unlike on TV, in all likelihood it won’t be widely used anytime soon to retrieve specific memories. “Even though House did this, we’re not doing it yet,” cautions Lozano.

Yet the fact that the therapy can in some people rescue recollections – albeit random ones – and possibly induce new neuron growth in memory regions of the brain seems reason enough to pursue it further.

“We’re hoping to use electricity to drive activity in areas of the brain involved in memory and cognition,” says Lozano. “We want to turn these brain networks back on.”

Bret Stetka is a writer based in New York and an editorial director at Medscape. His work has appeared in Wired, Scientific American and on The Atlantic.com. He graduated from University of Virginia School of Medicine in 2005. He’s also on Twitter: @BretStetka.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)