AHRQ Director Helps Consumers Navigate the Health Care System in a New Advice Column on the Web

AHRQ Director Helps Consumers Navigate the Health Care System in a New Advice Column on the Web

AHRQ Director Carolyn M. Clancy, M.D., offers advice to consumers in new, brief, easy-to-understand columns.  The columns will help consumers better navigate the health care system.  Select to read Dr. Clancy’s advice column on heart health.

Playtime helps bind generations

Playtime helps bind generations

 

A new study has confirmed an old adage: a family that plays together stays together.

From the February 14, 2011 Eureka news alert

(Concordia University) A new study has confirmed an old adage: A family that plays together stays together. Researchers from Concordia University and Wilfrid Laurier University examined the ways grandparents can maintain close ties with their adult grandchildren. True to the old maxim, recreation emerged as the glue sealing intergenerational bonds.

Montreal, February 14, 2010 – A new study has confirmed an old adage: A family that plays together stays together. Researchers from Concordia University and Wilfrid Laurier University examined the ways grandparents can maintain close ties with their adult grandchildren. True to the old maxim, recreation emerged as the glue sealing intergenerational bonds.

“Leisure is vital in the formation of bonds that last from generation to generation,” says lead author Shannon Hebblethwaite, a professor in Concordia University’s Department of Applied Human Sciences. “Shared leisure time allows grandchildren and their grandparents to establish common interests that, in turn, enable them to develop strong intergenerational relationships.”

Published in Family Relations: Interdisciplinary Journal of Applied Family Studies, the study builds on previous research that found healthy intergenerational connections help grandparents age better and feel more positively about life. “The study of intergenerational bonds in adult grandchildren is relatively new,” says Hebblethwaite. “Little attention has been paid to this relationship, yet grandparenting will become increasingly relevant as North America’s population ages.”

This new study is among the first to examine a cohort of grandchildren and their grandparents. “Most studies look into parenting, children or seniors. Few have examined how leisure contributes to the bonds between adult grandchildren and grandparents in the same family.”

Gardening with grandma

Sixteen retired or semiretired grandparents, aged 65 to 89, took part in the investigation as well as 14 grandchildren aged 18 to 24. Occasions that typically brought generations together included vacations, holiday celebrations, cooking, shopping and gardening.

Grandparents often use such get-togethers as opportunities to teach, mentor and pass on legacies. “They share family histories, personal experiences and life lessons,” says Hebblethwaite. “They pass on family values, traditions and stressed the importance of family cohesion.”

Although finding common interests between generations can pose a challenge – i.e. should Katy Perry or Elvis Presley be the soundtrack for a road trip? – participants stressed how joint activities allowed them to learn from each other. “One young man recalled his initial resistance to baking pies with his grandmother, but he ended up being a great chef,” observes Hebblethwaite.

Exchanging with youth can be a catalyst for discovery among seniors as well. “Some grandparents learned about email, video-conferencing or technology through their grandchildren to stay connected with them,” she says. “Sharing of knowledge during such leisure pursuits is what allows grandparents and grandchildren to develop strong bonds.”

Forging strong ties with the matriarch or patriarch of a clan is beneficial for grandchildren, too, and can sharpen their sense of empathy, says Hebblethwaite. “After being doted on as kids, adult grandchildren have an opportunity to shift that dynamic and give back to their grandparents.”

###

Partners in research:
This study was funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

About the study:
“Expressions of Generativity Through Family Leisure: Experiences of Grandparents and Adult Grandchildren,” published in Family Relations: Interdisciplinary Journal of Applied Family Studies, was authored by Shannon Hebblethwaite of Concordia University and Joan Norris of Wilfrid Laurier University.

Related links:

• Cited study: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2010.00637.x/abstract
• Concordia Department of Applied Human Sciences: http://ahsc.concordia.ca
• Concordia University: www.concordia.ca
• Wilfrid Laurier University: www.wlu.ca

Related article

Parents Have Stronger Relationship When Dad Plays With Kids

What Is Comparative Effectiveness Research?

What Is Comparative Effectiveness Research?

From the US AHRQ (Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality) Web page

Comparative effectiveness research is designed to inform health-care decisions by providing evidence on the effectiveness, benefits, and harms of different treatment options. The evidence is generated from research studies that compare drugs, medical devices, tests, surgeries, or ways to deliver health care.

There are two ways that this evidence is found:

• Researchers look at all of the available evidence about the benefits and harms of each choice for different groups of people from existing clinical trials, clinical studies, and other research. These are called research reviews, because they are systematic reviews of existing evidence.
• Researchers conduct studies that generate new evidence of effectiveness or comparative effectiveness of a test, treatment, procedure, or health-care service.

Comparative effectiveness research requires the development, expansion, and use of a variety of data sources and methods to conduct timely and relevant research and disseminate the results in a form that is quickly usable by clinicians, patients, policymakers, and health plans and other payers. Seven steps are involved in conducting this research and in ensuring continued development of the research infrastructure to sustain and advance these efforts:

1. Identify new and emerging clinical interventions.
2. Review and synthesize current medical research.
3. Identify gaps between existing medical research and the needs of clinical practice.
4. Promote and generate new scientific evidence and analytic tools.
5. Train and develop clinical researchers.
6. Translate and disseminate research findings to diverse stakeholders.
7. Reach out to stakeholders via a citizens forum.

Common questions about comparative effectiveness research

Q: Why is comparative effectiveness research needed? What problem is it trying to solve?

• If you don’t get the best possible information about your treatment choices, you might not make an informed decision on what treatment is best for you.
• When you shop for a new car, phone or camera, you have lots of information about your choices. But when it comes to choosing the right medicine or the best health-care treatment, clear and dependable information can be very hard to find.
• It’s true that some treatments may not work for everyone, and that some treatments may work better for some people than others. This research can help identify the treatments that may work best for you.

Q: What are the practical benefits of comparative effectiveness research?

• You deserve the best and most objective information about treating your sickness or condition. With this research in hand, you and your doctor can work together to make the best possible treatment choices.
• For example, someone with high blood pressure might have more than a dozen medicines to choose from. Someone with heart disease might need to choose between having heart surgery or taking medicine to open a clogged artery. Reports on these topics and others include the pros and cons of all the options so that you and your doctor can make the best possible treatment decision for you or someone in your family.
• Every patient is different — different circumstances, different medical history, different values. These reports don’t tell you and your doctor which treatment to choose. Instead, they offer an important tool to help you and your doctor understand the facts about different treatments.

Related Content

Can I Trust This Information?

What Is the Research Process?

How are Comparative Effectiveness Reviews Conducted?

…and AHRQ Effective Health Care Program Links

Guides for Patients and Consumers include research reviews, research reports, and summary guides

Glossary of Terms

Personalization and Social Media Tools – These tools (as an email list)allow you to personalize your experience with the EHC Program Web site and share it with colleagues, family, and friends.

Related Articles

• Many new drugs did not have comparative effectiveness information available at time of FDA approval (eurekalert.org)
• The differences between comparative and clinical effectiveness (kevinmd.com)
• The Role of Data Mining in Cost Effectiveness Research (medicineandtechnology.com)
• The Newspeak of comparative effectiveness research (CER) (doctorrw.blogspot.com)
• CDISC Standards at Core of FDA Cross-study Clinical Trial Repository Project (prweb.com)
• National Library of Medicine Updates (aa47.wordpress.com)
• Shall I compare thee to another drug? (blogs.nature.com)

America’s Health a Mixed Bag: Report

America’s Health a Mixed Bag: Report
Life expectancy rates are up, but so are obesity levels, CDC says

From the February 16, 2011 Health Day news report

WEDNESDAY, Feb. 16 (HealthDay News) — U.S. officials on Wednesday released the annual state-of-the-nation’s health report and the news is mixed, with life expectancy rates on the rise but obesity levels still climbing.

On the positive side, life expectancy was up slightly in 2007, to 77.9 years from 76.8 years at the beginning of the decade.

And while women are still ahead of the game, gender and race gaps in longevity have narrowed, according to the report, compiled by the National Center for Health Statistics, part of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

“It’s encouraging that life expectancy continues to increase, although at a very small pace, but as we’re living longer we’re living longer with disease,” said Dr. Patrick Remington, associate dean for public health at the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health in Madison. “Years added to your life expectancy are years with disease.”

Perhaps even more troubling, said experts, are climbing obesity rates, with two-thirds of adults now overweight or obese, up from 29.9 percent a decade ago. While obesity rates among 2- to 5-year-olds seem to be leveling off, rates among older children and teens are still increasing, the report showed.

“The overall trend for childhood obesity is upward, which is not a good sign for future obesity, diabetes, heart disease and cancer,” said Cheryl L. Perry, dean of the University of Texas School of Public Health Austin Regional Campus, part of the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston. “There may be some hope for the younger children, but it’s probably too soon to declare victory, since the 6- to 11-year-old rates also declined, but then increased substantially in the next wave.”

Other risk factors for chronic illnesses, including heart disease, aren’t looking too good, either.

“Obesity, diabetes and hypertension are really critical in terms of looking at the future health status of the U.S., and that news has not been good for a long time and it doesn’t look like it’s improving,” said Dr. Nancy Bennett, director of the University of Rochester Medical Center‘s Center for Community Health.

Heart disease and cancer remain the two leading killers, collectively accounting for nearly half of the 2.5 million deaths in the United States in 2007, 25 percent and 23 percent, respectively.

Among the report’s findings:

• Hypertension levels are on the rise, with 32.6 percent of the population suffering from high blood pressure in 2007-2008, as compared with 28.9 percent in 1999-2000.
• Twelve percent of U.S. adults are now diabetic, up from 8.5 percent in 1999.
• On the other hand, cholesterol levels are coming under control, probably because a quarter of U.S. adults aged 45 and over are now using the cholesterol-lowering drugs known as statins, a dramatic increase from just 2 percent in the 1988-1994 period. “The increase in statin use is pretty dramatic,” said Bernstein.
• Skyrocketing medical costs continue to be a problem, with more Americans than ever before delaying or simply foregoing medical care: 11 percent in 1997 to 15 percent in 2009. People skimping on prescription drugs went from 6 percent to 11 percent, and those missing out on needed dental care increased from 11 percent to 17 percent.
• More kids are moving to Medicaid (35 percent in 2009 versus 18 percent in 1999), and fewer are staying on private insurance. The good news is that fewer kids are uninsured: only 8 percent as compared with 12 percent a decade earlier.
• More children have skin allergies (10.7 percent, compared with 7.4 percent in the late 1990s), attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (9 percent versus 6.5 percent) and food allergies (4.6 percent, up from 3.4 percent).
• Americans do seem to be moving more, with 18.8 percent reporting exercising, a marginal uptick from 18.1 percent in 2008 and a bigger increase from 15.1 percent in 2000, but experts said it’s still not enough. “It’s pretty discouraging,” Bennett noted.
• According to a new special section in the report, one-quarter of deaths in both the under-65 and over-65 age groups took place at home in 2007, up from one-sixth in 1989. Still, most deaths occurred out of the home, 36 percent in hospitals (down from 49 percent), and 22 percent in nursing homes and other facilities.
• Infant mortality has declined 2 percent from 2000.
• Half of middle-aged and older Americans are now having regular colonoscopies, up from one-third in 2000.
• The smoking rate among adults has largely stabilized, at about 21 percent, while smoking among teens has essentially stalled since 2004, at about 20 percent.

SOURCES: Amy Bernstein, Sc.D., chief, analytic studies branch, National Center for Health Statistics, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Nancy Bennett, M.D., director, Center for Community Health, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, N.Y.; Cheryl L. Perry, Ph.D., professor and dean, University of Texas School of Public Health Austin Regional Campus; Patrick Remington, M.D., associate dean, public health, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison; Feb. 16, 2011, CDC’s Health, United States, 2010

To increase physical activity, focus on how, not why

To increase physical activity, focus on how, not why
Behavior strategies, such as self-monitoring and goals, motivate best, MU study finds

Vicki Conn is an associate dean for research and Potter-Brinton professor in the MU Sinclair School of Nursing.

From the February 17, 2011 Eureka News Alert

COLUMBIA, Mo. – Most people know that exercise is important to maintain and improve health; however, sedentary lifestyles and obesity rates are at all-time highs and have become major national issues. In a new study, University of Missouri researchers found that healthy adults who received interventions focused on behavior-changing strategies significantly increased their physical activity levels. Conversely, interventions based on cognitive approaches, which try to change knowledge and attitudes, did not improve physical activity.

“The focus needs to shift from increasing knowledge about the benefits of exercise to discussing strategies to change behaviors and increase activity levels,” said Vicki Conn, associate dean for research and Potter-Brinton professor in the MU Sinclair School of Nursing. “The common approach is to try and change people’s attitudes or beliefs about exercise and why it’s important, but that information isn’t motivating. We can’t ‘think’ ourselves into being more active.”

Behavior strategies include feedback, goal setting, self-monitoring, exercise prescription and stimulus or cues. Self-monitoring, any method where participants record and track their activity over time, appears to significantly increase awareness and provide motivation for improvement, Conn said.

“Health care providers should ask patients about their exercise habits and help them set specific, manageable goals,” Conn said. “Ask them to try different strategies, such as tracking their progress, scheduling exercise on their phones or calendars, or placing their pedometers by their clothes. Discuss rewards for accomplishing goals.”

The study, featured in the American Journal of Public Health, incorporated data from 358 reports and 99,011 participants. The researchers identified behavioral strategies were most effective in increasing physical activity among healthy adults. Successful interventions were delivered face-to-face instead of mediated (i.e. via telephone, mail, etc.) and targeted individuals instead of communities.

“The thought of exercise may be overwhelming, but slowly increasing activity by just 10 minutes a day adds up weekly and is enough to provide health benefits,” Conn said. “Even small increases in physical activity will enhance protection against chronic illnesses, including heart disease and diabetes. Preventing or delaying chronic disease will reduce complications, health care costs and overall burden.”

Previously, Conn completed a meta-analysis of interventions for chronically ill patients and found similar results. Conn found that interventions were similarly effective regardless of gender, age, ethnicity and socioeconomic status.

The study, “Interventions to increase physical activity among healthy adults: Meta-analysis of outcomes,” is featured in this month’s issue of the American Journal of Public Health. Conn’s research is funded by a more than $1 million grant from the National Institutes of Health.

 

**For suggestions on how to get this article for free or at low cost, click here

 

 

Promise of genomics research needs a realistic view

Promise of genomics research needs a realistic view

This is James P. Evans, M.D., Ph.D., of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

From the February 17, 2011 Eureka news alert

In the ten years since the human genetic code was mapped, expectations among scientists, health care industry, policy makers, and the public have remained high concerning the promise of genomics research for improving health.

But a new commentary by four internationally prominent genetic medicine and bioethics experts cautions against the dangers of inflated expectations – an unsustainable genomic bubble – and it offers ways to avoid it while still realizing “the true – and considerable – promise of the genomic revolution.”

“This commentary is an attempt to bring some balance to the hopes and claims that swirl around the issue of genomic medicine. It is a cautionary essay that tries to extol the real and formidable potential of genomic medicine but also attempts to counter what we see as exaggerated claims, said lead author medical geneticist James P. Evans, MD, PhD, Bryson Distinguished Professor of Genetics and Medicine at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center.

“Our fear is that if we are uncritical and naïve in our enthusiasm for these exciting technologies we risk both diversion of precious resources and premature implementation which could hurt patients – as well as a backlash which will hurt our field,” Evans warns.

The commentary appears in the February 18, 2011 issue of the journal Science. Co-authors with Evans are Eric M. Meslin, PhD, director, Center for Bioethics, Indiana University, Indianapolis; Theresa M. Marteau, PhD, FMedSci, professor of health psychology, Kings College, London, UK; and Timothy Caulfield, LL.M., F.R.S.C., Canada Research Chair in Health Law & Policy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta.

“Breathtaking” is how the authors describe the progress already made in genomic research. But, they caution, the considerable promise of genomics must be evaluated through a realistic lens. Advances in individualized medicine, or pharmacogenetics for example, still require the importance of human behavior in health outcomes: the most powerful predictor of a drug’s efficacy depends less on genetics than whether the patient takes the drug.

Among the reasons they cite making genomics the persistent recipient of “hyperbole” and inflated expectations, some are tied to impatience for practical applications, market forces and unbridled (but uncritical) enthusiasm. The news media also is named for “playing an obvious role in the creation of unrealistic hopes.”

“These forces act together to produce a kind of “cycle of hype” that drive overly optimistic representations of the research,” said co-author Timothy Caulfield.

In their short-list of recommendations for avoiding inflation of the “genomic bubble, Evans and co-authors offer the following: (1) reevaluate funding priorities to stress behavioral and social science research aimed at behavior change for improving health; (2) foster a realistic understanding “of the incremental nature of science and the need for statistical rigor,” within the scientific community and that the media make more responsible claims for genomic research; (3) maintain a focus on developing high-quality evidence before integrating good ideas into medical practice.

“By highlighting the risks of continuing to promise results from genomic science, we were hoping to draw attention to a more sustainable approach to reaping the benefits from genomic science,” said co-author Eric Meslin.

The authors assert their belief that the current age of genomics will provide great benefits to human health “Ours is not a call to gut existing research or too-rigidly tie funding to degree of disease burden … The pursuit of our common goal – improved human health – demands that we take a hard look at disease causation and order our priorities accordingly.”

 

Related Web sites and articles

The Genomic Revolution (exhibit by the American Museum of Natural History) is an online Web site with videos

(US) Human Genome Project Information

The Genomic Revolution: Unveiling the Unity of Life [online book]

Genome Revolution FOCUS (a Duke University Library Guide)

Genomic Links (online resources for professionals, teachers, and all)

 

 

 

IOM and NAE launch collegiate challenge aimed at solving health problems

IOM and NAE launch collegiate challenge aimed at solving health problems
Through creative technology development

From the February 17, 2011 Eureka News Alert

(National Academy of Sciences) “Go Viral to Improve Health: IOM-NAE Health Data Collegiate Challenge” was launched today by the Institute of Medicine and National Academy of Engineering to promote interaction among future health professionals, engineers, and scientists and to spur interest in harnessing new technologies and data to solve vexing health issues.

WASHINGTON — “Go Viral to Improve Health: IOM-NAE Health Data Collegiate Challenge” was launched today by the Institute of Medicine and National Academy of Engineering to promote interaction among future health professionals, engineers, and scientists and to spur interest in harnessing new technologies and data to solve vexing health issues. The challenge calls on university and college students studying engineering, computer science, and health disciplines to work in interdisciplinary teams to transform health data into new mobile apps, online tools or games, or other innovative products that can improve health at the community level.

The first place team will receive a $3,000 prize and the opportunity to demonstrate their product during the plenary session of the annual Community Health Data Initiative Forum on June 9, 2011. The second and third place teams will receive awards of $2,000 and $1,000 respectively, and both will have the chance to display their winning technologies in the exhibit hall at this national gathering of software engineers, developers, and health leaders. All winning teams will be reimbursed for up to $1,000 of their travel costs to the forum.

Participating teams must develop a web-based or mobile product that tackles a health issue in a creative way and encourages people in a community to interact with one another. The launch of the challenge coincides with the debut of the Health Indicators Warehouse, a vast collection of health data and indicator sets made available by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Teams must tap this online warehouse to create their interactive technologies. Entries will be judged on how well they integrate health data from the warehouse and other information sources as well as their creativity, design, usability, and potential for the product to make an impact on the health issue selected by the team.

Both undergraduate and graduate students may compete. Teams must consist of a minimum of two and up to five individuals and include at least one member pursuing a degree in engineering or computer science and at least one member pursuing a degree toward a career in any of the health professions. The submission deadline is April 27, 2011. A detailed description of “Go Viral to Improve Health: IOM-NAE Health Data Collegiate Challenge” can be found at IOM website and NAE website and on Facebook. Questions can be directed to goviral@nas.edu.

“The IOM-NAE Health Data Collegiate Challenge seeks to tap the creativity and skills of the nation’s brightest young minds because we believe they have the ability to harness health data in novel ways that will make a healthy difference to their communities and to the nation as a whole,” said IOM President Harvey V. Fineberg. “This challenge provides a unique chance to showcase the innovation that can result from interdisciplinary collaboration and also an opportunity for students to gain experience and skills that we hope they will carry into their careers.”

“The trove of health data made available by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services provides a wonderful opportunity for creative young people to design the next ‘viral app’ — one that can improve personal health and extend lives,” said NAE President Charles M. Vest. “‘Advancing Health Informatics‘ was one of 14 Grand Challenges for Engineering identified by the NAE as game-changers in the 21st century, and the interdisciplinary collaboration being encouraged between the fields of engineering and health by this challenge is a key to meeting that goal.”

 

###

The Institute of Medicine and National Academy of Engineering along with the National Academy of Sciences and National Research Council make up the National Academies. They are private, nonprofit institutions that provide science, technology, and health policy advice under a congressional charter. For more information, visit http://national-academies.org.

 

The green machine: Algae clean wastewater, convert to biodiesel

The green machine: Algae clean wastewater, convert to biodiesel

Professor Jeff Lodge and graduate student Eric Lannan explore algae as a biodiesel fuel.

From a February 17 2011 Eureka news alert

(Rochester Institute of Technology) Researchers at RIT are developing biodiesel from microalgae grown in wastewater. The project is doubly “green” because algae consume nitrates and phosphates and reduce bacteria and toxins in the water. The end result: clean wastewater and stock for a promising biofuel.

RIT researchers take algae out of the lab

Let algae do the dirty work.

Researchers at Rochester Institute of Technology are developing biodiesel from microalgae grown in wastewater. The project is doubly “green” because algae consume nitrates and phosphates and reduce bacteria and toxins in the water. The end result: clean wastewater and stock for a promising biofuel.

The purified wastewater can be channeled back into receiving bodies of water at treatment plants, while the biodiesel can fuel buses, construction vehicles and farm equipment. Algae could replace diesel’s telltale black puffs of exhaust with cleaner emissions low in the sulfur and particulates that accompany fossil fuels.

Algae have a lot of advantages. They are cheaper and faster to grow than corn, which requires nutrient-rich soil, fertilizer and insecticide. Factor in the fuel used to harvest and transport corn and ethanol starts to look complicated.

In contrast, algae are much simpler organisms. They use photosynthesis to convert sunlight into energy. They need only water—ponds or tanks to grow in—sunlight and carbon dioxide.

“Algae—as a renewable feedstock—grow a lot quicker than crops of corn or soybeans,” says Eric Lannan, who is working on his master’s degree in mechanical engineering at RIT. “We can start a new batch of algae about every seven days. It’s a more continuous source that could offset 50 percent of our total gas use for equipment that uses diesel.”

Cold weather is an issue for biodiesel fuels.

“The one big drawback is that biodiesel does freeze at a higher temperature,” says Jeff Lodge, associate professor of biological sciences at RIT. “It doesn’t matter what kind of diesel fuel you have, if it gets too cold, the engine’s not starting. It gels up. It’s possible to blend various types of biodiesel—algae derived with soybeans or some other type—to generate a biodiesel with a more favorable pour point that flows easily.”

Lannan’s graduate research in biofuels led him to Lodge’s biology lab. With the help of chemistry major Emily Young, they isolated and extracted valuable fats, or lipids, algae produce and yielded tiny amounts of a golden-colored biodiesel. They are growing the alga strain Scenedesmus, a single-cell organism, using wastewater from the Frank E. Van Lare Wastewater Treatment Plant in Irondequoit, N.Y.

“It’s key to what we’re doing here,” Lodge says. “Algae will take out all the ammonia—99 percent—88 percent of the nitrate and 99 percent of the phosphate from the wastewater — all those nutrients you worry about dumping into the receiving water. In three to five days, pathogens are gone. We’ve got data to show that the coliform counts are dramatically reduced below the level that’s allowed to go out into Lake Ontario.”

Lodge and Lannan ramped up their algae production from 30 gallons of wastewater in a lab at RIT to 100 gallons in a 4-foot-by-7-foot long tank at Environmental Energy Technologies, an RIT spinoff. Lannan’s graduate thesis advisor Ali Ogut, professor of mechanical engineering, is the company’s president and CTO. In the spring, the researchers will build a mobile greenhouse at the Irondequoit wastewater treatment plant and scale up production to as much as 1,000 gallons of wastewater.

Northern Biodiesel, located in Wayne County, will purify the lipids from the algae and convert them into biodiesel for the RIT researchers.