Our brains in space|||||

Our brains in space: The next giant leap

Fifty-two years after the first lunar landing, NASA’s program Artemis prepares to land on the moon.It’s a major step towards future space explorations and Mars missions – one that’ll see women in deep space for the first time.

The technology being developed includes the next generation of rockets, space suits, lunar landers, and gateways for travel into deep space. However, we’re yet to solve one of the most fundamental aspects of long-duration space travel: how to keep our brains alive.

The human brain is a remarkable feat of physiological engineering. It has sensing systems, self-regulating mechanisms, valves, dampening features, adaptable form, and even a set of complex networks that developers of the most advanced AI can only dream of. Yet, we still know surprisingly little about the interactions and boundaries of these systems and how they respond to space travel.

In this article, I explore how mathematical modeling is improving our understanding of the brain, successfully predicting the existence of anatomical features no one’s identified before – with learnings for Mars missions and the diagnosis and treatment of conditions such as Alzheimer’s disease.

What happens to our brains in space?

The human body is adapted to operate with Earth’s gravity. In space, microgravity (reduced gravity) causes fluids in the body to shift. This is most noticeable in the brain, where microgravity increases fluid volume, putting pressure on the nervous tissue.

Having a rigid cranium is good news for many reasons, but holding excess fluid isn’t one of them. Luckily, the increased intracranial pressure isn’t high enough to be immediately fatal. Still, it can introduce chronic knock-on effects with long-term implications.

Immediate brain-related effects experienced by astronauts due to increased intracranial pressure and fluid movement in the inner ear include headaches, dizziness, nausea, temporary blurred vision, and disturbed perception and spatial awareness. During space flight, the brain’s vestibular (orientation) system adapts to the new environment, reducing some of the effects. But others persist or appear in different forms, such as sleep disturbances.

After returning to Earth, astronauts who’ve taken long-duration flights have had one or more of these effects:

  • visual impairment – ophthalmic changes due to excess pressure in the optic nerve
  • brain ‘swelling’ – changes in ventricles (fluid-filled cavities) and grey and white matter (brain tissue composed of nerve fibers and nerve cells)
  • pituitary gland shrinkage – downsizing of the hormone-secreting gland that helps regulate body functions, including blood pressure and kidney function.

There’s a correlation between longer-duration space flight and increased severity of post-flight effects. These effects can be present long after the mission ends, and some can cause irreversible damage, for example, visual impairment.

Why does this happen?

The brain is protected for changes in gravity by a surrounding fluid called cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), a non-permeable layer called dura mater where CSF is contained, and one-way valves called arachnoid villi on the dura mater where CSF exits.

CSF is responsible for compensating changes in pressure, such as those created by the arteries or changes in posture. It’s also involved in cellular waste removal from the brain during sleep, ‘cushioning’ the brain to prevent trauma, and maintaining the best possible environment for the brain, for example, optimizing ion concentration levels to prevent cell death.

Dura mater is the ‘sac’ that contains the CSF. It plays a pivotal role in ensuring CSF exits the cranial and spinal spaces in a controlled way through the arachnoid villi.

 

web_mathematical-modelling-our-brains-in-space-diagram-1

As gravity lessens, important events take place which exert pressure in the brain:

  • CSF in the cranium is no longer free to flow towards the spinal spaces. It concentrates mainly in the cranial space, increasing intracranial pressure.
  • The spinal dura mater, usually relaxed and undisturbed, becomes compressed by other fluids and nearby organs as they shift upwards.
  • Upward movement of the brain and spinal cord stem obstructs one of the main CSF exit routes, the superior sagittal sinus (SSS, composed of arachnoid villi). This prevents relief from increasing CSF pressure in the brain.

Gravity influences low-pressure systems most, so blood flow in the veins is affected, causing ‘pooling’ where blood accumulates because of poor circulation. This matters because cerebral veins lack valves, relying on CSF to ‘push’ venous blood forwards. There’s also movement of organs in the upper body and extracellular fluid, putting extra pressure on the spinal cavity and the veins in the head and neck. Other effects play a role in what’s known as ‘fluid shift. These include osmotic pressure changes (fluid motion between areas of different solute concentration levels), variation in heart rate and respiration, and changes to lymphatic dynamics (the movement of a fluid, known as lymph, from tissues and organs).

How do we model the brain?

Scientific efforts focus on three approaches:

  • microgravity testing – space mission and Zero-G flights with, for example, lower-body negative-pressure gravity suits, which aim to ‘pull’ fluid away from the upper body
  • on-Earth simulated testing – bed-tilt tests to measure physiological changes during bed rest
  • mathematical modeling.

Given the promise of mathematical modeling in predicting difficult-to-measure behaviors, such as epidemiological events like the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, it’s worth exploring further.

Modeling the brain and spinal cord in microgravity

As part of my research, I’m investigating the relationship between pressure fluctuations in the brain and spinal cord and their impact under different gravitational conditions.

Using mathematical modeling, I outline the relationship of a single arterial root vessel and its blood flow with the next generation of vessels. This root vessel branches into two vessels, and each of those to another two, and so on. Each generation carries information of the preceding vessel from which the rest of the parameters can be derived. The arterial branching continues until reaching the capillaries (tiny vessels where cellular nutrients and waste are exchanged), before converging again to complete the venous tree.

After the blood vessels are described, I add the CSF spaces in the cranium and spine. These spaces allow CSF to interact with the blood vessels, which I can study for behavior under different physiological and gravitational conditions

web_mathematical-modelling-our-brains-in-space-diagram-2-1

The model accounts for several key features of cerebral circulation, including autoregulation (the ability of blood vessels to expand and contract to metabolic demands and pressure changes), CSF exit routes (arachnoid villi), and gravitational components. As I add gravity to the model, I can test different postures, for example, lying flat on the back (supine).

By mathematical modeling, I successfully predicted the existence of anatomical features that had never before been identified – arachnoid villi in the spinal dura mater. These additional exit routes appear to be a crucial element to relieve CSF pressure under different gravitational conditions. The model showed that the cranial and spinal exit routes work together to keep CSF pressure fluctuations stable, ensuring undisturbed cerebral blood flow.

web_mathematical-modelling-our-brains-in-space-diagram-3

On Earth, standing allows CSF to shift downwards, lowering pressure inside the cranium, which causes the cranial exit route to close. The spinal exit route can work as the main exit route, but it also has to deal with increased pressure outside the spinal cavity, such as the interstitial fluid (fluid between cells) of surrounding organs. If the external pressure is greater, the spinal exit route closes, and the pressure inside the cranium increases until the cranial exit route opens again. A supine position allows exit through either the cranial or spinal routes.

In microgravity, the upward shift of fluid causes CSF pressure in the cranium to increase, whether standing or supine. This can be modeled using a bed-tilt test where the body is positioned at a negative angle. The spinal exit route closure intensifies CSF intracranial pressure because of increased pressure from other fluids and organs on the spinal cavity. The combined effect forces the cranial exit route to open to stabilize pressure fluctuations. However, recent research suggests the upward movement of the nervous tissue (brain and spinal cord) may block the main cranial exit route (the SSS). Blocking the SSS in the model leads to sustained intracranial pressure, resulting in irreversible consequences, which we see in space missions.

I also found that cerebral autoregulation plays a key role in overcoming gravitational changes in space and on Earth. Where autoregulation is absent or abnormal, constant blood isn’t delivered adequately to the brain, compromising oxygen to the brain. This can cause a range of conditions, including hypoxic events, where lack of oxygen leads to impaired or permanent nervous tissue damage.

All of this means that the brain, on its own, isn’t sufficiently adaptable to prevent tissue damage in microgravity environments. Sustained high intracranial pressure needs a path of least resistance to relieve the brain tissue of excess fluid. Extending space missions without fully understanding this behavior poses a significant risk.

The next stage of my modeling involves testing acute postural changes in combination with chronic physiological conditions, such as aging, to further analyze the effects I observed.

Why does this matter – and what can we do about it?

Beyond space exploration, understanding fluid movements in the brain and spinal cord is critically important to better diagnose and treat conditions such as Alzheimer’s disease, hydrocephalus (a life-changing and often fatal condition due to excess of CSF volume), spinal syringomyelia (a fluid-filled cyst disorder in the spine), stroke, and Multiple Sclerosis. Until we understand how these mechanisms can cause permanent damage, it’s vital to keep analyzing abnormal CSF-cerebrovascular behaviors under any gravitational conditions.

On whether we can go to Mars, it’s possible, but landing on Mars (roughly seven months of space travel each way) would increase the risk of developing long-term health conditions, and as the mission extends, so does the likelihood and seriousness of those risks.

However, by pursuing an understanding of those risks, we’ll understand our physiology better. What adaptations could be expected of the human brain under any gravitational condition? What can we learn from other mammals overcoming significant gravitational challenges, such as bats and giraffes? Can an understanding of human brain adaptations help us treat neurological or neurodegenerative conditions?

As we aim for ever more challenging space missions, mathematical modeling can help us characterize the boundaries of human physiology – and take the next giant leap in understanding our brains.


References
  • Kramer, L.A., Hasan, K.M., Stenger, M.B., Sargsyan, A., Laurie, S.S., Otto, C., Ploutz-Snyder, R.J., Marshall-Goebel, K., Riascos, R.F. and Macias, B.R., 2020. Intracranial effects of microgravity: a prospective longitudinal MRI study. Radiology295(3), pp.640-648.
  • Li, K., Guo, X., Jin, Z., Ouyang, X., Zeng, Y., Feng, J., Wang, Y., Yao, L. and Ma, L., 2015. Effect of simulated microgravity on human brain gray matter and white matter–evidence from MRI. PloS one10(8), p.e0135835.
  • Petersen, L.G., Lawley, J.S., Lilja‐Cyron, A., Petersen, J.C., Howden, E.J., Sarma, S., Cornwell 3rd, W.K., Zhang, R., Whitworth, L.A., Williams, M.A. and Juhler, M., 2019. Lower body negative pressure to safely reduce intracranial pressure. The Journal of physiology597(1), pp.237-248.
  • Roberts, D.R., Albrecht, M.H., Collins, H.R., Asemani, D., Chatterjee, A.R., Spampinato, M.V., Zhu, X., Chimowitz, M.I. and Antonucci, M.U., 2017. Effects of spaceflight on astronaut brain structure as indicated on MRI. New England Journal of Medicine377(18), pp.1746-1753.
  • Roberts, D.R., Asemani, D., Nietert, P.J., Eckert, M.A., Inglesby, D.C., Bloomberg, J.J., George, M.S. and Brown, T.R., 2019. Prolonged microgravity affects human brain structure and function. American Journal of Neuroradiology40(11), pp.1878-1885.
  • Sanchez-Cazares, K E 2018, ‘Mathematical Model of the Cerebral Circulation and Distribution of Cerebrospinal Fluid’, PhD thesis, Imperial College, London.
Noga Sella & Dan Mayhew discuss why people with dyslexia can make great innovators

Dyslexia Week: “We make great innovators”

Dyslexia Week takes place from October 4 to 10 this year and is centered on the theme of invisibility.

Dyslexia’s common, with one in ten people believed to have it – but because dyslexia itself isn’t visible, it’s not immediately obvious who does.

To raise awareness and bust the many myths about this learning difference, the British Dyslexia Association has asked people to share their experiences.

Senior Lab Technician Dan Mayhew and Consultant Physicist Noga Sella discuss the challenges of working from home with dyslexia, and why people with dyslexia can make great innovators.

How does dyslexia impact you?

Dan: I mainly have issues around written communication, so report writing can take longer, and my written work needs additional reviews. The lack of face-to-face interactions in the work-from-home age means written language has become more critical, making exchanges harder.

Noga: I lost my ways of communicating when we all started having to work from home because of the pandemic. Being able to speak to someone in person, and see their non-verbal communication, like facial expressions and gestures, are so helpful to me. Suddenly, everyone switched to using emails and messaging. Video calls are better than written messages, but then you’re up against unwritten protocols. For example, are you allowed to just call someone out of the blue, or do you have to set it up beforehand? It’s been hard finding a way to work with people all over again. I think the more you use video calling like you’re going over to someone’s desk, the better.

What encouraged you to study science?

Noga: When I was nine years old, I fell in love with space after visiting The Royal Observatory in Edinburgh. Yes, dyslexia makes learning harder, but reading and writing aren’t the only ways to learn. Immersive activities are a great way to get children with dyslexia into science, or any topic.

Dan: Both of my parents are involved in STEM subjects, but my main inspiration was visiting the Science Museum in London as a child and finding out Lego then was made from oil. The practical aspects of chemistry and a more ‘applied’ course at university really encouraged me to follow my science passion.

What do you enjoy about working in innovation?

Noga: I enjoy working in science within industry, as opposed to academia. In academia, there’s pressure to write fast and well. Industry lets me do my innovation without having to fight against my dyslexia as much. For example, I can put my graphs in PowerPoint and explain them verbally.

Dan: I love the ability to chuck out traditional ideas and come out with new products and services that can improve the daily lives of billions of people worldwide.

Why does innovation need (more) people with dyslexia?

Dan: People with dyslexia tend to be highly creative, think outside the box, have good pattern recognition, be picture thinkers, and see the bigger picture. All these traits are great for innovation.

Noga: Innovation needs diversity of all kinds. Diverse teams let you see things in different ways and catch things you might miss if everyone were to see things in the same way.

How can employers support people with dyslexia in the workplace?

Noga: Don’t take tools like spell check or searchability for granted. Twenty years ago, I wouldn’t have been able to search for something using a search term that had a spelling mistake in, so I couldn’t have been where I am now. Organizations can help by making sure people have access to the most up-to-date tools.

Dan: Things always start with education and awareness. We need to develop environments that adjust to the needs and skills of individuals.

Can you recommend any tips or tools you find helpful?

Dan: The writing assistant Grammarly is a bit of software that I find incredibly powerful. Also, being open and honest about your disability can be a real asset. I’ve found that being genuine to a potential employer about your disability builds trust.

Noga: My piece of advice would be that asking is better than presuming. Don’t be shy to talk to me about my dyslexia. It took me a while to feel comfortable discussing it, but now I’m happy to, especially if it helps a child with dyslexia realize that if one path doesn’t look possible, there are always others.


About dyslexia

The British Dyslexia Association defines dyslexia as a neurological and learning difference that impacts how people process information. It primarily affects reading and writing but can also have an influence on someone’s ability to absorb information and their organizational skills.

Dyslexia and science: Busting the myths

Dyslexia occurs across the range of intellectual abilities and many dyslexics show strength in reasoning and visual creativity. Biophysicist Jacques Dubochet, who picked up the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 2017, speaks openly about how dyslexia impacted his early education, as does molecular biologist Carol Greider, who won the Nobel Prize in Medicine in 2009. In an interview for The Yale Centre for Dyslexia & Creativity, she said, “Perhaps my ability to pull more information out of context and put together difficult ideas may have been affected by what I learned to do from dyslexia.”

What can everyone do to help?

As Dan and Noga say, change starts with awareness. The British Dyslexia Association’s website is a good source of information and offers advice on how to make life easier for employees and colleagues with dyslexia. Tips include:

  • Record meetings (rather than emailing a summary).
  • Give additional time to digest information, for example by sending materials in advance of a meeting.
  • Use different formats to convey information, such as diagrams and flowcharts.
  • Provide hard-copy resources on colored paper (find out which color helps the person read best).
  • Give verbal as well as written instructions.

References
The lockdown beauty trends here to stay

The lockdown beauty trends here to stay

Lockdowns, video calls and face coverings dramatically changed our relationship with beauty. Meanwhile, COVID-19 restrictions shook up how we bought cosmetics and skincare.

Jessica Platt, Associate Insights Researcher, examines how beauty habits changed and which are set to last.

How lockdown changed beauty

Months of virtual meetings, dinner parties and quizzes made us ask whether our existing cosmetics could keep us looking camera-ready all day.

But while online with FaceTime, Teams and Zoom, in the physical world we stepped back, observing the social distancing rules, and hiding behind face coverings. It’s no surprise that these two extreme worlds ignited new consumer behavior:

We became beauty DIY experts

Hair and nail salons closed, yet hair and nails stubbornly continued to grow. While some of us embraced hair bands and visible roots, others took matters into their own hands.

Amazon reportedly achieved a 172% year-on-year increase in sales of hair coloring products for the four weeks ending April 11, 2020. Nail care sales increased by 218% in the same period.

Post-lockdown wait times for a cut and color suggest most consumers are eager to get back to the salon. However, some will continue to practice their newly honed (and money-saving) skills at home, presenting an opportunity for brands to expand into this category.

We tried independent brands

As online marketing replaced shelf presence, small indie brands found a (more) level playing field to compete for customer attention. It was no longer essential to have a large in-store presence to catch a browser’s eye. Instead, smaller companies could focus on sharing their message through social media and influencer marketing.

US-based medicated skincare brand Topicals is one such brand. Its Gen Z-focused packaging, website and social media presence drove momentum in a year when many small companies floundered. In August 2020, it announced a $2.6 million investment from investors, including Netflix CMO Bozoma Saint John.

We embraced self-care

In a time of uncertainty, people turned to self-care. This further expanded the definition of beauty as a category of products that nourish and support rather than mask perceived imperfections.

Despite specializing in products that deal with flaky and dry skin, Topicals firmly positions itself in the self-care (rather than medicinal) camp, with the strapline ‘Funner flare-ups’.

Pause Well-Aging, a US brand targeting menopausal skincare, is another example. Its website states, “Pause is more than just skincare. It’s a movement affirming that beauty gets better with age.” Instead of promoting the anti-aging properties traditionally touted on skincare packaging, it provides women with what they need to age well.

Also, a new need for hand cream arose as people sought to soothe dry hands caused by antibacterial sanitizers.

We braved online cosmetics shopping

Before the pandemic, in-store shopping accounted for around 85% of make-up purchases. Beauty shoppers, who never purchased products without a trial and in-person advice (including me), were forced to dabble in online shopping. We began the painstaking process of working out which foundation shade, lipstick color or eyeshadow palette would suit us without the help of a tester. Though beauty brands have been exploring augmented reality (AR) and artificial intelligence (AI) for some time, lockdown accelerated its adoption. The technologies enabled customers to try on products from the comfort and safety of home.

Augmented Reality

L’Oréal saw usage of its virtual make-up tools rise fivefold during 2020’s lockdowns. Its ‘Virtual Try On’ tool uses AR to enable its website visitors to try on its products, either live using a phone camera or by uploading a photo. A feature that might once have appeared gimmicky, this option has become an essential offer for customers to experiment with new looks.

Premium brands, including Bobbi Brown and Chanel, have similar web-based AR technology that provides insights into how make-up might look when worn.

These brands demonstrated that this feature appeals to a far wider audience than Gen Z and Millennials already familiar with Snapchat filters.

Artificial Intelligence

US beauty brand IL Makiage, which launched in the UK in May 2020, solves the color match problem with a 90-second quiz. It asks consumers to look at images of people with different skin shades and identify which one most closely matches their skin tone. Images are repeated and refined until the customer is deciding between subtle differences in skin tone. It also collects additional information, such as skin type (oily, dry, combination) and vein color.

Results are analyzed using machine learning technology from NeoWize Inc, the Israeli AI company that IL Makiage acquired in 2019. Potential customers are presented with the foundation that’s best suited for them, along with the accompanying concealer.

Following the quiz, all the products displayed on the home screen are shown in the color most suited to your skin tone, making it easy to fill up your shopping cart in a few clicks.

Innovating for success – what’s next for beauty brands?

The past 18 months have taught us that the world can change in a moment. They’ve also taught us the power of innovation and agility. The most nimble brands can gain first-mover advantage. We’ve seen online presence, e-commerce and smart tools reaching consumers in a different way to traditional retail experiences, which is the new normal for many. Having seen what can be achieved in exceptional circumstances, beauty brands should feel confident about embracing future change. For an industry specializing in makeovers, this shouldn’t pose a problem.


References
FemTech||

Realizing the potential of FemTech – your questions answered

In our webinar, Realizing the potential of FemTech, CDP’s Martha Hodgson and Jessica Platt gave their take on the principles of FemTech, and how forerunners are implementing them to succeed.

Here, Martha, Senior Insight & Strategy Consultant, and Jessica, Associate Insights Researcher, share more ideas, answering questions sparked by their presentation.

How important are digital security and data privacy in FemTech innovation?

Jessica: Digital security and data privacy are hugely important – so many FemTech products are linked to the internet and share information. They should be part of any design process from the start. Mishandling them can be costly. For example, a leading sex toy maker ran into trouble when their remote-controlled Bluetooth vibrator was found to be vulnerable to hackers who could take control of the product. They also shared data about the temperature of the vibrator with their parent company. As a result, they were ordered to make huge pay-outs to customers.

The Internet of Things poses challenges for internet products – how do you recommend we deal with them?

Jessica: Regulation and privacy are exciting areas because brands can become pioneers in these spaces. There’s a vast knowledge gap around women’s health, and the data FemTech collects should be used for research, but it must be done carefully. Transparency is key. Users should be empowered and told how their data will be used, stored, and shared – and not in pages of terms and conditions that most users accept without reading.

Your presentation highlighted that people have functional, social, and emotional needs – which are most important for FemTech to meet?

Martha: When you’re thinking about the importance of a need, consider the context. Also, you should know how well existing products are meeting that need. A highly important need might already be being met with a high level of satisfaction. Some exciting innovations have come from focusing on highly important needs that are being met with low levels of satisfaction – or needs of low importance that are being met with (overly) high levels of satisfaction. For example, budget airlines disrupted the travel industry by understanding that in-flight meals are of low importance to their customers on short-haul flights, so they strip them out to offer a low-price service. In FemTech, experienceis as important as the tangible product, or even more so. Therefore, think about current levels of satisfaction and explore needs being over- and under-served by existing solutions.

How can FemTech leverage existing technology?

Martha: A lot of amazing innovations are the result of transferable learnings. The answer isn’t always new technology. Sometimes, it comes from looking at a problem differently and seeing that you could reapply an existing solution to deliver a different value in a different context. So, take a step back from the technology. Understand that it’s a point-in-time solution to a problem. Then, take a solution-agnostic approach to the job you’re trying to do.

How can we deliver excitement when repurposing existing technology?

Martha: Experience is shaped by all five of our senses, so think about the sensorial experience when translating consumer needs into solutions. Also, be aware of pre-existing mental models – shaped by culture, environment, influencers and so on – and how far consumers are willing to stretch these. Take sanitary products. There are loads of new, exciting materials that are thinner, more flexible, and more absorbent than those used today. However, mental models around security and comfort might mean users won’t willingly go down these routes, even though they might provide a better solution. Excitement doesn’t just come from technology enablers but understanding the outcome as a series of sensory attributes and translating these into experiences.

There are many tech innovations around infertility, and it seems other areas are being ignored. Is this true? If so, why?

Jessica: FemTech Focus define FemTech as “Technology, services, and products that improve women, females, and girls’ health and wellness. This includes addressing challenges that solely, disproportionately, or differently affect them.” This is my starting point when thinking about FemTech, and it tells you how inclusive FemTech is – it’s not limited to fertility and menstruation, though a lot of attention has been focussed on these. There are opportunities around conditions that affect women differently. For example, heart attacks have different symptoms in women. This means women’s heart attacks are sometimes missed or treated later, resulting in worse outcomes. FemTech solutions that address heart health might help mitigate these adverse outcomes.

Why does only a small percentage of investment in digital health go to FemTech?

Jessica: FemTech is relatively new – there have only been a handful of billion-dollar exits. So, there’s still a long way to go to educate investors that FemTech is lucrative, and products and services designed to meet women’s needs aren’t niche. However, we’re on the cusp of a transformation in the way FemTech is funded.

Martha: Changing investors’ perceptions of FemTech needs us to think about how we communicate the opportunity. Industries must be able to see long-term commercial profit. The needs that FemTech addresses are stable and shared by 51% of the population – this helps explain the long-term gains that could be made through FemTech investment.

Is FemTech only about healthcare and sexual health?

Martha: Absolutely not. Take the sports industry. Women’s sport has been on a growth trajectory, and there are many examples of women-focused services and products thriving based on the ergonomics, size, and shape of women’s bodies. Women’s football-boot maker IDA Sports’ tagline is spot on: “You are not an afterthought”. Traditional category borders are blurring, which is opening exciting innovation opportunities, like FemTech. Seeing FemTech as an innovation philosophy lets you focus on the needs you can meet – rather than the sector label.

To continue the conversation, get in touch: womenshealth@cambridge-design.com

REFERENCES
Key to success in FemTech

The key to FemTech success? Forget about the tech

From contraception to catheters, at CDP we’ve successfully pioneered women’s health innovation for over a decade.

Now that increasing numbers of our clients are entering the $19bn¹ FemTech market, we’re in a strong position to share some powerful lessons from our established approach to inclusive design.

Refocus your lens

Fertility entrepreneur, Ida Tin, coined the term ‘FemTech’ in 2016 in a frustrated bid to explain her work to male investors. The resulting discussion revealed the breath-taking extent to which the marketplace is short-changing women.

Despite decades of progress in gender equality, product development (until very recently) has operated through a male lens. It wasn’t, for example, until 1993 that the US National Institute of Health made it obligatory to include women in government-funded health research. This lack of data has resulted in a significant knowledge gap in women’s health, meaning that female patients have missed out on critical advances in medical technology.

And it wasn’t just men’s bodies that were the default; it was also the male viewpoint. Take the launch of Apple Health in 2014. The much-anticipated app promised to monitor “all of your metrics that you’re most interested in”. Yet it omitted a menstrual cycle tracking function². This is arguably something of great interest to 50% of its users. It wasn’t until a year and a lot of media pressure later that developers added it in.

Fight assumption with insight

The Apple Health oversight could have been avoided by one simple step – asking women what they thought.

At CDP, we believe the key to design inclusivity lies in a strong front-end innovation (FEI) capability. FEI is the identification and activation of opportunities, and the translation of insights into product and service solutions. This is the function that feeds insight into strategy, design, and specification. Importantly, it can guide decisions made later in the product development cycle.

To put a woman’s needs at the center of a brief, teams must take research beyond quantitative surveys. A mere tick box won’t capture the emotional and social circumstances in which a product is used.

For example, could the tone and volume of the beep that a basal fertility thermometer emits first thing in the morning (when it must be used) be so grating that it results in lower levels of compliance?

We recommend in-depth qualitative interviews to understand people as part of a contextual system, rather than groups of personas. Categorizing a user as a “32-year-old soccer mom from California” fails to capture the nuances of when, where, and how a product is used. As an aside, it also turns out that women take a dim view of being pigeonholed, as a former boss of UK retail chain Marks & Spencer discovered when (to female shoppers’ outrage) he described its typical customer as “Mrs M&S”³.

Where possible, we engage in immersive, ethnographic methodologies – seeing people in their cultural setting, often at home – to uncover user needs. This extends to international travel to understand the cultural contexts that inform decision making in different markets.

Futureproof for regulation

As a young sector, it’s no surprise that there are grey areas when it comes to the regulation of FemTech.

This is slowly changing as FemTech creeps into the realm of (regulated) medical devices. In 2018, Natural Cycles was the first digital birth control app to receive clearance from the FDA; fertility pioneer Clue was the second in March 2021.

Somewhat shockingly, regulation for sex toys doesn’t extend beyond the electrical compliance required for a Bluetooth speaker, escaping more stringent scrutiny through a “novelty use” labelling loophole.

Again, this is set to change, with the ISO making progress towards new standards⁴. Until this is finalized, the regulation of medical devices provides a good clue as to what action is needed to futureproof FemTech.

On a recent sex toy project, CDP ensured that all materials were biocompatible, although no regulations required it. Not only was this the right thing in terms of reducing risk for the user, but also protected our client against potential changes in regulation.

Forget about the tech

It may sound counterintuitive, but at CDP we feel the best way to succeed in FemTech is to forget the tech…at first, anyway. This is where we often see both big corporates and startups trip up.

We recommend a “solution agnostic” approach to design – that’s to say starting with a user need and looking for the best way to fulfil it. This might involve tech; it might not. Even then, the “tech” might not necessarily be digital, which is often what comes to mind when we think of FemTech. Instead, it might focus on the device itself, the manufacturing process, choice of material, or service. Whatever the solution, this method establishes early on if there is a market and business case for a product.

The alternative is “tech for tech’s sake”: just because it’s possible to measure the veracity of the female orgasm doesn’t mean that women want this data, as a startup that claimed to “spot women’s orgasms” found out when it was widely lampooned in the media⁵.

On this, it’s worth noting that we don’t see FemTech as limited to the fields of sex or fertility. The same contextual and experiential empathy that goes into designing for these areas must also be applied to other issues that disproportionally impact women. For example, we recently worked on a minimally invasive breast cancer biopsy device. Our goal was not only to design an accurate medical tool but to consider the experiential needs of the female patient – something that is often ignored.

Consider user acceptance

You’ve established a user need and a great tech-driven solution, but will female consumers feel comfortable using it?

It’s important to consider whether women are culturally ready to adopt a tech-led solution, particularly if it involves intimate wearables or sensitive data.

For example, current technology is capable of analyzing menstrual flow, but are women willing to accept intimate electronics? Let’s remember that in some parts of the world, tampon usage is still taboo.

Baking the female experience into the design process will answer these questions early on.

Ditch the defaults

We’ve discussed reframing design to include females; however, the same principles apply to other areas of inclusivity, such as race, sexuality, disability, gender identity, and economics.

In FemTech, this means considering, for example, the male experience – a heterosexual couple trying for a baby may want the capability for the male to log into a fertility app as part of the shared experience.

Likewise, it means considering the affordability of a design for various socio-economic groups. An expensive pelvic floor trainer may be financially out of reach for many women, so is it possible to reduce costs with smarter manufacturing or a new business model?

Good design considers all perspectives. It’s time to ditch the defaults.

To continue the conversation, get in touch: womenshealth@cambridge-design.com


1 – The Global Femtech Market was valued at $19bn in 2019 and is expected to reach $60bn Billion by 2027, according to Emergen Research.
https://www.emergenresearch.com/industry-report/femtech-market
2 – https://techcrunch.com/2015/06/09/apple-stops-ignoring-womens-health-with-ios-9-healthkit-update-now-featuring-period-tracking/
3 – https://www.cityam.com/mrs-ms-steve-rowes-first-blunder/
4 – https://www.iso.org/committee/7647858/x/catalogue/p/0/u/1/w/0/d/0
5 – https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-53024123

DC to DC converter design

DC to DC converter design – Don’t blow your fuse (and other lessons)

With a vast range of off-the-shelf and feature-rich control ICs available, the selection and design of DC to DC converters is a superficially simple process.

But even with these highly integrated parts and design resources there are still many common pitfalls that can lead to Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) or thermal nightmares, blowing budgets, timescales, and the occasional fuse in the process.

I’ll share a few of the most common “gotchas” that electronics engineers will contend with early in their careers. We’ll dodge the complex calculations here, but there are excellent resources such as “The Art of Electronics” that can provide a deeper mathematical explanation of the issues at hand.

Medical device or arc furnace? Context is key

You wouldn’t use a trailer truck to commute to work, nor would you use the family car to ship potatoes to a supermarket. Both are vehicles but, clearly, they operate in different contexts so have different strengths and weaknesses.

The same logic applies to switch-mode converters and controllers. A quick glance at the cover page of any switcher datasheet will often reveal potential use cases. This is not just marketing: if a switcher is intended for industrial machinery or large server farms, it is quite likely that its EMC performance faces different limits to those marketed at consumer or healthcare devices. For example, while higher noise limits in industrial settings liberate chip designers to focus more on power efficiency by maximizing switching speed and slew rate, this can also increase emissions.

Excessive switcher noise can lead to poor performance of analogue circuitry, and in severe cases can interfere with the function of nearby devices. So, while those efficiency figures might be tempting, using the switcher in a compact medical device could lead to months of work to achieve compliance in EMC test chambers.

Lesson: Use parts in the context for which they are designed. Parts targeted at industrial applications may lead to issues if used in consumer or medical devices.

The heat must go somewhere

So, you’ve found a very neat five-amp switcher with a 3x3mm footprint that is 90% efficient? Sounds perfect for your space-constrained, high-power design. Except you’ve just plugged it in, and it cuts out after ten seconds at load. This is less than ideal. The problem is that, even at 90% efficiency, the switching losses at 5A are enough to make a 3×3 chip quite toasty – so much so that the thermal cut-out is operating. You might have been fine if you had a large copper flood to take the heat away, but this is a space constrained design so of course you don’t.

Lesson: Always consider the thermal design of a high-power system. Even if a small switcher is electrically capable of high currents, it may require substantial heatsinking that wipes out any size or efficiency benefits.

Evaluation modules are there to help

Datasheets are an important resource for correctly integrating a switcher design into a larger electronic system, but they are also a company’s marketing collateral, and can mask certain “gotchas” in product performance.

They do not guarantee that your design or use-case will play nicely with the chosen parts. Evaluation modules (EVMs) provide a less theoretical way of confirming that a part is fit for purpose, and further provide a “best case” performance benchmark given exactly the right implementation.

Taking an EVM along when performing pre-compliance EMC tests is a quick way to confirm that the chosen part is not going to be an emissions nightmare in the final design, and similarly if the EVM overheats, your design probably will as well.

Lesson: Buy in an EVM for your chosen switcher part and perform a set of tests that represent the final use case. If you have problems at this stage, it’s fair to say you should pick a different part or modify your design to mitigate the issues.

Saturation current is not standardized

If your switcher’s primary inductor becomes saturated, the efficiency of the system will rapidly plummet, and it will likely lose regulation or overheat. Most switcher manufacturers helpfully include the necessary inductor current calculations to enable you to make the correct part choice; however, the inductor datasheets can themselves be misleading.

Saturation current is universally defined as the current at which inductance decreases by a certain percentage, but different manufacturers use different percentages. Wurth often take a 20% inductance drop to mean saturation, but other manufacturers may use a 50% or even 80% drop.

Careful consideration must be given to peak inductor current, not just expected output current. High efficiency switcher designs typically look to minimize switching time and thereby losses, but this inherently drives up peak inductor current (and also EMC emissions!)

Lesson: When specifying an inductor, check what inductance drop the saturation current parameter refers to. If 80%, then you need to design more current headroom into your system to maintain correct regulation. Pay attention to peak currents!

Switchers aren’t always best

Switchers are more efficient than linear regulators, so does that mean they should be used wherever possible? Not quite.

Look at the efficiency curves on the datasheet. See that bit where the efficiency curve falls off a cliff at low loads? If your mobile widget, for example, needs a 3V0 rail derived from a 3V7 LiPo, and spends most of its time in a micro-power sleep mode, your switcher will likely burn more power than an LDO in those periods when the load is not drawing much current. If you then add in inductor switching losses and quiescent current, you could end up throwing a lot more power away through trying to use an “efficient” switcher than by using an “inefficient” linear regulator.

Lesson: When designing power supplies for very low power devices, consider if a switcher is honestly the best option. Even low power optimized designs (such as Analog Devices Micropower ICs) may still yield worse results overall than a carefully specified LDO in a low power application, so a system level power budget analysis is a must.

Keep it (the high current path) simple

Switchers create circulating paths of rapidly switching high currents as part of normal operation. If you don’t carefully implement these paths, then the system is likely to radiate or couple excess noise to other parts of the system, causing yet more EMC issues.

If possible, design the converter on a single layer to avoid layer transitions by vias, and with short, low impedance paths between the diode, inductor, and capacitors on the output side, with similarly low impedance paths between the input capacitors and switch FET. The ground path between all these components should also be robust and low impedance. If using a four-layer board, placing a ground plane under the switcher can suppress coupling to other parts of the circuit, but make sure to follow layout guidelines for the particular part, as coupling between traces and ground can be relevant to operation and performance!

Lesson: Keep the entire switcher design compact, and keep the ground return path short and on the same layer if possible. Ground planes and careful splits can be useful for reducing coupling of the circulating currents into other parts of the system.


This is far from an exhaustive list of all possible design considerations for DC to DC converters, but hopefully it gives you some useful guidelines on what to look out for when embarking on a new power supply design, particularly for those at the start of their engineering career.

Here at CDP we employ a talented range of engineers across all disciplines who solve problems like these on a daily basis. If you are interested in joining our team, check out our vacancies in Cambridge, UK or Raleigh, N.C. USA.

If on the other hand you are experiencing these sorts of issues at your company, please do reach out to CDP to see how our business can help yours.

Ten ways to reduce E-waste in product development

Ten ways to reduce E-waste in product development

We all have that drawer – the graveyard for discarded electronics. What’s in yours? A cracked phone, an obsolete activity tracker, maybe an original iPod? You hang onto them, because it seems wrong to throw them away.
You’re right. Globally, 53.6 million metric tons of electronic waste, or E-waste, were generated in 2019 but only around one-fifth of this was recycled. Roughly half this pile comes from personal devices, which can be hard to round up from consumers.

Any product that includes some form of circuitry or electrical components is classed as electronic equipment. Once this product has been discarded without the intent to reuse, it falls under the category of E-waste.

The problem is not just environmental; in some cases it’s pragmatic. Many minerals in the products we throw away are difficult to obtain. The long-term consequences are serious. For example, a shortage of lithium or cobalt, both critical materials in electric vehicle batteries, could slam the brakes on our migration to greener transport.

As with most environmental issues, the solution to E-waste lies with government, industry, and the consumer. This article focuses on how product developers can play their part in helping to reduce e-waste.

Ten ways to reduce E-waste

1. Think modular

If devices become more modular, it becomes easier for the consumer or an engineer to perform repairs. It also makes it easier to break up devices at the end of their lives, a growing incentive if more industries become responsible for waste disposal.

Small product changes can make a significant impact, for example identifying which components tend to break first. Is there a way to make the component easily removable and replaceable? And if not, could it be designed to be more resilient?

2. Anticipate legislation

E-waste is a growing area of concern for governments, leading to a marked increase in the regulatory restrictions on disposal. This is noticeable in the electric car industry, where the EU and China have made manufacturers responsible for collecting and disposing of car batteries.

Both regulation and taxation are likely to increase. There is an opportunity for product developers to anticipate these factors when designing new products.

3. Respect the Right to Repair

A generation ago, mending your own possessions was a standard solution. Commonplace electrical repairs involved a loose wire or blown fuse. Today, electronic goods are much harder to fix, not helped by moving from screws to adhesive in assembly. You can no longer replace the battery in your phone and must go to a specialized repair shop for a damaged screen – think back to that drawer of retired electronics.

Product reviews now include ratings for ease of repair. France has introduced a law requiring an index of repairability which has encouraged manufacturers to offer online fixing guides. Other EU countries are rolling this out, including a requirement for manufacturers to ensure that spares are available for up to a decade. Sweden is also reducing the VAT rate on repairs and spare parts.

The ‘Right to Repair’ is a growing consumer rights issue. Designers can reduce E-waste by making it easy to mend common faults.

4. Use recyclable materials

As materials and processing research have progressed, the range of options for easily recyclable electronics has increased. These vary from paper RFID tags and biodegradable PCB substrates to chemical methods for breaking down coatings which have traditionally complicated the recycling process. These are all options to keep in mind when starting a design.

5. Design for E-waste recycling early on

The E-waste recycling process has the potential to be very expensive, so designing with this in mind early on is vital. There is also the challenge of encouraging consumers to return their devices in the first place. It’s much more challenging to recycle post-consumer waste than materials still under the manufacturers’ control.

Material resources for electronic devices are becoming increasingly difficult to source and therefore more expensive. This highlights the benefits of setting up a ‘reverse supply chain’ in which waste products are returned to their suppliers for recycling, allowing manufacturers to extract reusable materials.

The electronics in many home appliances often only make up a tiny proportion of the product. If a more modular design is selected, it becomes far easier to separate the E-waste from the product for recycling.

6. Top the ratings

Concerns over “fast fashion” in the retail industry could easily translate into customers rejecting low-cost, short-lifetime electronic products.

A public rating system for electronics that includes ease of recycling and repair as two separate metrics would prompt brands to question their design choices. Are there other less toxic or less scarce materials that could be used instead? Are there different versions of the product with lower E-waste potential?

Eupedia, an online guide to the EU, recently combined four indices covering a range of sustainability factors to rank brands, including ratings for recycling and repair.

7. Question whether electronics are necessary

Recently, electronics with ever-increasing features have been incorporated into previously ‘dumb’ products. In many cases, this enables functionality that was previously unachievable. However, sometimes we can obtain the same advantages without electronics, leading to a lower-cost and more straightforward solution.

Designers should carefully consider the range of solutions available and weigh up the relative user benefits, costs, and environmental impacts to find the most appropriate one for their product. For a simple maximum temperature monitor, do electronics provide a unique additional benefit, or can a different type of innovation such as a chemically triggered color change give the same information to the user?

8. Partner with smart devices

The obvious way to reduce E-waste is to produce less in the first place, but is this realistic? One route is to design electronics-free devices made smart through combination with a phone app. This often allows for the same functionality with no extra electronic components. For example, in diagnostic healthcare, agriculture and food safety testing, a phone camera can read and analyze colored test strips.

9. Consider a more sustainable business model

Some companies, such as Rolls Royce jet engines, have pioneered a service business model, in which customers hire products and return them to the supplier after use. This allows the manufacturer to perform necessary repairs or replacements between hire periods. Under this model, the burden of recycling shifts back to the supplier, further encouraging them to design products with minimal E-waste.

10. Reduce material usage

Mobile phones have shrunk in size from a brick to a calculator. This has been made possible by the miniaturization of electronic components, printed circuits, and connectors. The amount of material contained within each device has reduced considerably, even though complexity has increased.

Moving from milling and other subtractive manufacturing technologies to molding and 3D printing has reduced waste. There are opportunities to mirror these changes in electronics. Instead of making a flat sheet of copper and then dissolving most of it to produce a printed circuit board, additive techniques such as printed electronics can lay down patterns of conductors and insulators only where they are needed.

Putting E-waste in context

Our customers want smaller, lighter, longer-lasting devices that are easy to recycle. We can take all these factors into account every time we create a new design.

Solutions to E-waste must be looked at in the unique context of a product’s market and usage.

If we follow rules such as the above, we will make the optimum use of our planet’s limited material resources, and lay the electronics graveyard drawer to rest.

Which improvements will you design into your next electronic product?  Want to discover more and connect with our sustainability experts?

Connect with CDP

For more on how to reduce e-waste through smarter product design and development, contact Cambridge Design Partnership.

Lateral flow testing at CDP

Lateral flow testing at CDP: A surprising result

When we modelled the use of lateral flow testing at CDP we discovered something surprising: there was a high chance we could test everyone every day without preventing a single transmission of COVID-19. This application of mathematical modelling and bioscience gave us powerful evidence on which to base our response, allowing us to direct our efforts where they will have maximum impact: improved ventilation and new air filtration installations in our offices, labs, and workshops.

In common with all businesses, CDP has been closely watching developments in practises, and technology to keep our people and community safe from COVID-19 infections, while maintaining business operations. In the UK, lateral flow tests (LFTs) have been rolled out in a variety of settings over the last few months. These tests have major benefits in that they are low cost, give a result in half an hour, and require no medical expertise to administer. When the use of these LFTs became a possibility here at CDP, our COVID-19 team began drawing up plans for the roll out.

The two key questions were “who to test” and “how often to test”

As a multidisciplinary business with diverse capabilities and specialisms, our people work in a variety of locations and patterns. Most of these working patterns and risk profiles don’t match those of the early adopters of these tests, such as those in clinical and educational settings. As a result, we built a team to analyze the available data and tailor our use of the tests for maximum impact in our particular case. The team was led by myself, a simulation scientist, and my colleague Richard Owen, our Senior Consultant Bioscientist. The team identified the latest bioscience data available on the parameters of COVID-19 and the LFTs, then developed a bespoke Monte Carlo model – used to predict the probability of different outcomes – to model potential infections across the business. We used the popular Anaconda python platform for scientific computing.

What are the key inputs?

COVID-19 infection timeline

A viral infection typically progresses through several stages: when a person first catches the infection, the virus multiplies until they become infectious and often continues to multiply causing symptoms before the immune system is able to fight back and eliminate the virus. LFTs can provide an “early warning” when virus levels start to increase, but before symptoms start.

‘Effective R’ within CDP

We’ve changed our working environment in a variety of ways to reduce transmission potential. If this was 100% effective then LFTs wouldn’t offer any benefit, but we all understand that the measures are instead designed to reduce the risk to the lowest reasonable level. While we have no evidence for transmission on-site, we’re aware of some cases, unfortunately, brought in from the outside community and so we applied a “reasonable worst case” estimate of transmission.

Background population case rate

Clearly more cases of COVID-19 circulating outside CDP would result in more infected people coming onto our site and identification of each one could potentially prevent further infection. We recognized that this value has changed rapidly so we investigated the benefit of LFTs in a variety of scenarios.

Sensitivity: if a person with COVID-19 takes an LFT, what is the chance that it will give an accurate, positive result?

This property of the LFTs on the market is very important. While they can be more than 90% sensitive for symptomatic people, those people should already have isolated and obtained a “gold-standard” PCR (lab) test. When used in asymptomatic populations with well-functioning immune systems, the sensitivity can be as low as 3%. Considering the population demographic in this study compared to our own, our model took a less pessimistic view of LFT performance and erred on the side of higher sensitivity.

Specificity: if a person without COVID-19 takes a lateral flow test, what is the chance that it will give an accurate, negative result?

The LFTs on the market are thought to have a specificity of around 99.5%. While 0.5% might sound low, current estimates are that only 0.1% of the population has COVID-19; therefore the 0.5% false positives actually make up significantly more people than the number that are really infected. This is the source of some controversy as it can cause unnecessary isolation when the case rate is low; however, this risk was not considered a significant problem for us at CDP as we took a “better safe than sorry” approach.

What did we learn from the model?

There are multiple measures for the success of a testing program. In our analysis we simply looked at the number of people becoming infected, and how much this could be reduced by a variety of regimes. We ran the model many times with differing input values to evaluate the impact of testing regimes and understand the sensitivity of our results to the various inputs, which are either uncertain estimates or subject to change over time. In a result that surprised us all, we discovered that in our specific situation the benefit of LFTs is actually very small. Of course, the keywords here are “our specific situation” – by tailoring our model to CDP we gained maximum value for our own decision. However, this model is inherently not a generalized result and is not a valid evidence base for decisions in other contexts. There was a high chance that we could test everyone, every day (totaling thousands of tests) without preventing a single transmission of COVID-19.

What was the outcome?

We both verified that each small “cog in the machine” was behaving as expected and validated that the results of the whole model matched reality (we already had a historic dataset for what COVID-19 transmission looked like without lateral flow testing). We also further explored uncertainty in the driving factors, to assure ourselves that the remaining uncertainly in the inputs would not substantially change the outputs. Following this process, the non-intuitive result allowed us to confidently redeploy our efforts onto alternative COVID-fighting initiatives. Following the evolving scientific knowledge, we’ve improved the ventilation of our offices, labs and workshops and installed air filtration to reduce the potential for airborne viruses to move between people.

We inevitably enter investigations with preconceptions, but by applying science to the big decisions we’re able to confidently manage our choices and prioritize our resources to keep ourselves and others safe in this weird world. By combining our expertise in both mathematical modelling and bioscience, we created a team that is more powerful than the sum of its parts, demonstrating the power of mathematical modelling in making decisions.

|||

Women in innovation: Science and Engineering

Women play a crucial role in innovation and business success at CDP. We’re proud of the critical contribution made by our women colleagues, who lead in diverse areas of innovation including design, research, science, technology, engineering, and human factors.

In this second instalment of our Women in Innovation series, three of our STEM professionals discuss women, leadership, and their role in science and engineering. Caroline Zakrzewski, Alejandra Sánchez and María FM Balson reflect on their work and their career journeys. They aim to share a positive message and empower the next generation of women and girls in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics). We believe their experiences and journeys can help and inspire many others.


Caroline Zakrzewski

Drug Delivery Devices Scientist

How did you become a scientist?

I always knew that I would be a scientist. It wasn’t clear to me immediately what that looked like, but I also knew that I wanted to help people and improve the quality of their lives – to make a lasting difference. I spent some time in hospital as an adolescent and that experience inspired me to focus on healthcare. I embarked on a master’s degree in chemistry and the synthetic organic chemistry that provided a foundation to many traditional drugs. Having started out analyzing drugs that came out of devices, I then got distracted by the devices themselves – how they worked and how they were made. After a while I backed up what I was learning at work with a master’s degree in pharmaceutical engineering that looked at drug and device manufacture in an industrial setting. It’s one of the great things about science that the tools you are given to harness and focus your curiosity can be applied to so many different areas – you don’t need to decide your whole career at the outset. I’ve had many different jobs that I’ve loved, including this one, and that feeling when I see the devices that I’ve helped to design, test, industrialize, and manufacture on the market and in the hands of real patients never gets old.

How does being a scientist help you make sense of the world?

Science is around us every day, helping with our understanding of the world, from flat pack furniture construction to the perfect recipe for banana bread. In the last year, the healthcare sector has made the news more than ever before as we’ve seen population statistics, data modelling, diagnostic devices, and vaccine development becoming front page news. This has been fascinating for me and it’s helped me to be objective about the current situation, but in equal measure it’s frustrating as much of the media fails to understand the details of what they’re reporting.

Does the world need more women in science?

Yes. I’m a great believer in the power of diversity and representation to drive effective innovation. At CDP we use the experiences of our colleagues across different markets – healthcare, consumer, and industry, to generate solutions to the issues our clients bring to us. Women make up half of the population and it’s important that their voices are considered in product development and particularly in healthcare at all levels. With the benefit to the user foremost in our minds, diverse inputs provide a more widely applicable and robust solution. Without this, healthcare needs of major groups, such as women, are side-lined and left wanting. If you want to make a difference to people’s lives, to find solutions to problems that you see in the world and to be part of a great team doing the same, then science has a career for you.


Alejandra Sánchez

Associate Biomedical Engineer

How did you become a scientist?

I think science chose me. Somehow, I was driven by different events to the point where I find myself today. At least I didn’t have a “conscious plan” to be where I am, but I can definitely say I’ve had decisive role models along the way – family and teachers – that have inspired me, stimulating my curiosity and passion for biology and innovation. Science gives me a deeper understanding of everyday life. It also represents the key element that steers my knowledge into engineered solutions that can ultimately be part of a marketed product in somebody’s hands. I think the best feeling is knowing that my work makes a difference. I also believe science breaks borders and boundaries, you can work in any country you want, the language of science gives you the ability to further understand people from different cultures and backgrounds. This opens so many doors!

Is work/life balance important for gender equality?

Work/life balance is still one of the many unanswered questions regarding gender equality. In my experience – including roles in Argentina and the UK – I’ve always been part of a warm and supportive workforce and life balance hasn’t been a personal issue. However, I’m aware that many leadership positions are not seen as attractive to women, for a number of reasons. For some, the nature of those roles is simply incompatible with non-professional responsibilities, such as caring for children or elderly relatives, which historically have been seen as female responsibilities. Nowadays, these personal responsibilities are better shared among men and women; however, I do think this should be properly addressed if we’re serious about achieving gender equality.

How can we foster the next generation of women leaders in science?

Education is the key. Diversity of thought provides space for creativity and innovation; this is what we need at all levels, from board and senior level executives on down, to better understand a problem and tackle it for optimal results. I’d love to see a greater promotion of inspirational women in STEM to much wider audiences. Everyone in a STEM class at school should be taught of the outstanding women that made a difference in these fields, thus encouraging young girls into following this incredible path. We should also get more companies into schools to show how creative and exciting the industry is and capture young minds.

How can women and girls start a career in science/STEM? Why is this important for the world?

STEM careers are often referred to as the jobs of the future, responsible for driving innovation, inclusive growth, and sustainable development. However, gender disparity in this space remains alarming. Until recently, different myths have been spread by word of mouth and even in academia, arguing first that women were biologically less capable and now that they’re simply less interested in STEM. I’m happy to say that both have been proven wrong, by scholars at Harvard University (for more information access the study and the science article from Slate), and that there is nothing about STEM that precludes female participation. Understanding how crucial it is to take part in STEM fields now, will allow us to take action and play a part in building our tomorrow.


María FM Balson

Consultant Biomedical Engineer

How did you become an engineer?

I’m extremely lucky: I’ve had a broad education, parents who fed and encouraged my curiosity, and excellent teachers. I have always loved languages, philosophy, and the sciences. If I could, I would study everything. I cannot, so I chose engineering.

I really like that von Kármán quote: “Scientists study the world as it is, engineers create the world that never has been”. I love that idea and, honestly, I think I won the lottery. In my job, I get to be a scientist whenever I encounter a new problem – I have to learn as much as I can about it, as quickly as possible – and then I put on my (metaphorical) engineering hat and work with extremely talented people to solve that problem.

I’m particularly interested in applying engineering principles to the solution of problems in biology and medicine, whether that is designing medical devices, modelling healthcare interventions, or improving access to contraception. Also, I have a terrible soft spot for Excel and Python, so if those are involved, even better.

What do you think of the assumptions and stereotypes connected to women in engineering?

Professor Tim Minshall sums it up really well in this TED talk: too often, when people think of engineering, they think “men, hammers, spanners, boots”. This, while sometimes true, is a very narrow and outdated view of engineering, which is a rich and evolving field as broad and diverse as any academic discipline. At its heart, engineering is the application of scientific principles to the solution of problems in any and all areas of life, from feeding the world’s growing population to reversing climate change.

Now, more than ever, we need STEM professionals. We need a larger and more diverse talent pool. We need to attract more women and minorities, then train them and retain them. This is a complex endeavour, and requires work on many fronts. One of these is outreach: engaging with the wider community to change their perception of science and engineering, from “hard, boring, and not for me” to “exciting, accessible, and world-changing”. I’m heartened to see all the great outreach that happens in Cambridge, coming from both the University and the local technology firms. I urge all STEM professionals to get involved in these types of activities and to continue expanding their reach into underserved areas. It’s not always easy and can be disheartening at times, but it really is worth it.

What can we do to empower women in STEM?

What a great question, and how difficult to answer! The first thing, as ever, is recognizing that there is an issue and that it needs to be fixed: we need more STEM talent urgently, we need a more diverse workforce, and there are barriers preventing women and other underrepresented groups from joining and advancing in the profession.

Many people (often men, but not always) are unaware of the extent of the issue and cost of ignoring it – they do not realize that inequality is holding us all back. It leads to missed opportunities and carries a very real social and economic cost. Therefore, the first step is education: educating ourselves and others on the value of diversity and the importance of working towards an equitable workplace and society.

Next comes the difficult task of untangling the problem: gender inequality is a very complex issue, deeply tied into cultural expectations, societal norms and economic incentives. And it’s a vicious circle: inequality breeds inequality. For example, women earn less than men on average, so they are more likely to take extended leave for childcare than male partners (to minimize lost earnings) and so they miss out on experience, raises, and promotion, which then widens the income gap even further.

Thankfully, a lot of great research has been done into the roots and ramifications of the problem, as well as concrete steps we can all take to address it. I hope to explore some of these in a future blog, but for now, I’ll leave you with a book recommendation: Women Don’t Ask, by Linda Babcock and Sara Laschever.

If you missed the first blog in our Women in Innovation series, you can find that here.

Incisive action: Cutting the carbon footprint in surgery|

Incisive action: Cutting the carbon footprint in surgery

Hear us out: the pandemic has stretched world health services to their limits, but it may also be paving the way toward a greener future for healthcare.

When thinking of healthcare today, you probably picture the huge pressures on overworked healthcare staff and the scramble for hospital beds. What you may not have thought about is that hospitals in many countries have adopted innovation that inadvertently introduced ‘greener’ treatment. For example, the need to perform ‘virtual’ consultations has reduced patient travel to and from practices. In April 2020; within weeks of COVID-19 hitting the UK, 71% of all GP visits were remote, compared to 25% in April 2019.

A single operation can have the same carbon footprint as driving 2,273 miles in an average sized gas-powered car.

Before COVID-19, the UK’s National Health Service (NHS) produced 27 million tons of CO2 equivalent annually, which accounted for 5% of all UK carbon emissions. To combat this, in October 2020 the UK government announced plans for a greener NHS: net zero carbon emissions directly from the NHS by 2040, and its supply chain by 2045.

In the context of COVID-19, this is an ambitious goal even if we were able to sustain the kind of CO2 emission drops witnessed during lockdowns. The forced shutdown of elective surgery may have reduced hospital carbon footprints, but this has been at the expense of patient care and can’t continue. Further ahead, the NHS will be caring for an increasingly ageing population, putting demands on provisions which will lead to increasing energy and resource consumption.

The operating theater has extensive electricity needs, powering equipment, heating, ventilation, and air conditioning, and is three to six times more energy-intensive than the rest of the hospital. This electricity reliance coupled with anesthetic gas and the need for single-use equipment has a significant carbon footprint. Chantelle Rizan, a Fellow of the Centre for Sustainable Healthcare and currently undertaking a PhD to identify carbon hotspots in surgery, found that a single operation can have the same carbon footprint as driving 2,273 miles in an average sized gas-powered car.

So, aside from upgrading hospital buildings and moving to renewable energy supplies, the UK government must explore ways to make surgical practice more sustainable in order to hit the NHS net zero targets. This won’t be easy.

Virtual clinics have helped with triage (deciding severity and service allocation) and surgical follow-ups, but it’s difficult to plan surgery without examining the patients face-to-face. Any changes must avoid extra red tape and be economically viable for healthcare services. Advances may have trade-offs between short-term losses (retraining) and long-term gains (reducing hospital stays or complications). Most importantly of all, sterility must be maintained at all costs. Here’s a new mantra to repeat: green only if clean.

We’ve recently been exploring the challenges facing surgical providers in embracing sustainable change. In our ‘Circularity in Context’ article we considered circularity filters to ensure future products and services become carbon neutral. This philosophy of circularity, maintaining the value invested in materials and products, has applications in healthcare but may also come into conflict with other imperatives, such as sterility.

Before joining CDP I spent time working closely with orthopedic surgeons, observing procedures in the operating theater first hand, showing me where improvements could be found. Innovating in the surgical space is a complex and nuanced area, where first-hand knowledge of the sector is key. Surrounded by a team of engineers, designers, researchers, and healthcare-savvy innovators at CDP, we’ve applied the filters for circularity to identify areas in which circular approaches could provide significant advantages.

Short-term wins

There are many ways to reduce the cradle-to-grave carbon impact of surgical equipment, while engaging clinicians and being financially attractive to health service procurement. Layer upon layer of plastics and non-renewables are used in sterile packaging for implantable devices. If we can’t fully move away from these packaging conventions because of safety and transportation requirements, can we source materials from low-emission supply chains and use local production and assembly for more efficient, less carbon intensive shipping and distribution?

Delivering care with convenience and guaranteed sterility has tended to result in single-use equipment, but we are seeing signs of returning to reusable equipment which is reprocessed between uses. Reprocessing patient drapes, laparotomy pads and intravascular catheters are being used to reduce waste so long as sterility and accuracy can be maintained and improved cleaning cycles reduce energy and water usage. Reprocessing of instruments has been driven more by cost concerns rather than sustainability, but this hints at the potential economic benefits of reprocessing beyond complex instruments. This could be further bolstered if the hospital can receive reimbursement for reprocessing an instrument instead of purchasing a new one.

There will always be cases where single-use equipment is a necessity for sterility or convenience, or where a Life Cycle Analysis shows this to be the most environmentally friendly approach. We can still streamline these sets so that rarely used kit is not disposed of even when it hasn’t been used, as is often the case once a set is opened in theater.

Long-term innovation

Given the need to develop better treatments and the burden of evidence needed to establish safety and efficacy for devices and systems, the healthcare industry can perhaps be forgiven for not having led in the sustainability space. Healthcare requirements are a barrier, as materials must be well understood and de-risked for a specific healthcare scenario before they can be used, but this should not stunt long-term innovation.

One way that future technology could reduce surgical waste is by harnessing fluid-resistant materials, improving the efficacy and safety of personal protective equipment. Going further, incineration techniques could be completely transformed by advances in energy recovery processes: being able to create large amounts of heat or electricity to feed back to the hospitals efficiently and at a larger scale than currently performed.

An emerging technology that promises radical change in surgical training is extended reality – simulating virtual environments or even overlaying them with real environments to enhance the experience. Extended reality expands access to expert training while streamlining the associated hospital footfall and travel. Virtual reality headsets are allowing trainees to view, practice, and learn surgical procedures, reducing the hours needed to be spent in surgical theaters.

The advent of very low latency wireless technologies, including 5G, could allow us to push virtual care even further. Even when surgeons are in a different country and time zone to the patient altogether, mixed reality could allow expert surgeons to offer real-time assistance and robotically assisted surgery systems could enable entirely remote surgery. This reduces travel but more excitingly it widens the opportunity for patients to receive specialist care wherever they live.

Societal filters: rapid recovery and reduced complications

There’s a risk we limit our understanding of surgical carbon footprint to manufacturing, electricity usage, and disposal. But we must consider the trickier question: how can we reduce the burden of the patient on the healthcare system through improved outcomes and reduced complications? One study found that anti-reflux surgery on the NHS could, despite having a high initial financial and carbon cost, be more carbon-efficient than ongoing medical treatment by the 9th post-operative year (and cost-efficient by the 14th year).

One tool in the arsenal is less invasive procedures. These require more specialized training and increase procedure complexity, particularly during early adoption, but they can drastically reduce patient recovery times and pressure on hospital beds. Less invasive procedures can also reduce the number of rehabilitation trips required for physiotherapy and occupational therapy.

Innovations that reduce follow-ups should be pursued and anything that reduces post-surgical complications or provides more durable treatment is likely to drive better overall sustainability. For example, improving surgical wound closure systems could help reduce infection rates, one of the leading causes of hospital readmission following surgery (3% of patients die as a consequence). The medical device industry can also deploy digital health tools to improve medication compliance, to introduce disease prevention strategies and to stimulate rehabilitation, all of which will lead to better outcomes from surgery and minimize unnecessary procedures, in turn reducing the carbon footprint.

At the heart of innovation is the need to understand the user. Following my experiences with surgical professionals in the operating theater, it’s great to be part of an innovation team at CDP that actively pursues “green” solutions while being respectful of the vital work that surgeons do.